← Deadline: White House
Deadline: White House
“The first known land attack”
00:42:21
Nicolle Wallace on the escalation of tension between the U.S. and the Maduro regime after reports of a CIA drone strike on a port facility in Venezuela last week. This attack would be the first known land attack in the country, a stunning turn after multiple Pentagon ordered boat strikes in the Caribbean.
Loading summary
Transcript96 lines
- [00:00]
A
Deadline White House is brought to you by Progressive where drivers who save by switching save nearly $750 on average. Plus auto customers qualify for an average of 7 discounts. Quote now@progressive.com to see if you could save Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and affiliates national average 12 month savings of $744 by new customers surveyed who save with Progressive between June 2022 and May 2023. Potential savings will vary. Discounts not available in all states and situations.
- [00:31]
B
New Year new gear, thousands of fresh active styles are at Nordstrom Rack stores now. Save on top brands like Nike, Puma and free people starting at just $35.
- [00:42]
A
How did I not know Rack has Adidas?
- [00:44]
C
Cause there's always something new.
- [00:46]
B
Plus, join the Nordy Club to shop new arrivals first. Unlock exclusive discounts and more. Great brands, great prices. That's why you rack. Hi there everyone. It's now four o'clock in New York. After months of Donald Trump threatening to escalate the military campaign against Venezuela and Nicolas Maduro's government there, brand new reporting confirms that the United States of America has carried out the first known land attack there. CNN was first to report on the strike. It was later confirmed by the New York Times. From that New York Times report, quote, the CIA conducted a drone strike on a port facility in Venezuela last week. That's according to people briefed on the operation. A development that suggests an aggressive new phase of the Trump administration's pressure campaign against the Maduro government has begun. The strike was on a dock where U.S. officials believe trend Aragua, a Venezuelan gang was storing narcotics and potentially preparing to move the drugs onto boats. People said no one was on the dock at the time and no one was killed. But the strike is the first known American operation inside Venezuela. The reporting on the attack gives more detail to what Donald Trump has already talked about very publicly. Now, typically CIA operations are shrouded in secrecy by design. But here's what Trump had to say publicly about the strike on Venezuelan land.
- [02:16]
A
Yesterday there was a major explosion in the dock area where they load the boats up with drugs. They load the boats up with drugs. So we hit all the boats and now we hit the area. It's the implementation area. That's where they implement and that is no longer around.
- [02:36]
D
Okay?
- [02:37]
B
Trump previously authorized the CIA to conduct operations in Venezuela, but there are major concerns now about whether lawmakers were notified of the attack, given that it appears to be inching us closer to war. War, of course, is something only Congress can authorize. Here is what Senator Reuben Gallego had to say about news of the strike, quote, we cannot start 2026 leapwalking into another illegal war. Let's be clear about what is happening. This is a regime change operation in Venezuela that Congress never authorized. The strike follows weeks of escalation by the Trump administration in the region with the US Military's seizure of oil tankers and the continued strikes on alleged drug boats. The U.S. southern Command announced yesterday that it had carried out the 30th known strike on a vessel since early September, claiming that it was traveling on a known narco trafficking route in the eastern Pacific. Two men were killed in the strike, bringing the total death toll from the Pentagon's campaign to at least 107 people. That is where we start today with some of our favorite reporters and friends. Staff writer for the Atlantic, Nancy Youssef is here. She covers national security and the Defense Department. Also joining us, former deputy national security advisor to President Obama contributor Ben Rhodes is here. Plus, retired U.S. marine Corps Lieutenant Colonel Amy McGrath is here. She's also a candidate for the open Senate seat in Kentucky. And joining me at the table for the hour, former undersecretary of state for public diplomacy and public affairs during the Obama administration planning political analyst Rick Stengels here. Ben Rose, I'm gonna start with you because you have called this the most undercovered, underreported story and you've been covering it for many, many months. And here we are, the first known attack, land attack in Venezuela, really telegraphed by Donald Trump before anybody else.
- [04:29]
A
Well, yeah, and I think what we've seen, Nicole, is we've been on a pathway of escalation for months now. And it never made any sense that this was about drug trafficking alone because Venezuela is not a main of drugs being trafficked into the United States. It's certainly not a source of fentanyl being trafficked in the United States. This has always felt like a regime change operation against Nicolas Maduro. Suzy Wall said as much in that much publicized interview where she said that she thought that Maduro was going to, quote, cry uncle because of these boat strikes that flies in the face of everything we know about Maduro. But I think what's so extraordinary about this is we've now seized tankers, we've now blown up boats, we're now blowing up things in Venezuela. There is absolutely no legal basis for this to be happening. That may be one reason why it's the CIA carrying out these land strikes instead of the US Military. And look, the reality is the American people have not been told why we're doing this. What the end game is, what happens when Maduro is gone, why we've chosen to replace the government in Venezuela at this time. This is a truly lawless situation that is on a pathway to escalation. The reason I think it's been undercovered is if it was just boat strikes, well, that would be bad enough given that there's no legal basis for this and we don't know exactly who we're blowing out of the water. But the reality is it's never felt like it was going to end there. And all of this feels like we're just being pulled like quicksand into another regime change war, which is exactly the opposite of what Donald Trump promised the people who voted for him with no idea of why we're doing it or where it's all going or certainly what the legal basis is for it.
- [06:01]
B
Well, and Ben, the opposition isn't simply people who are in an opposing political party. I mean, there's deep opposition inside the Republican Party. Here's Senator Rand Paul.
- [06:18]
A
He's become more interested in regime change in Venezuela because of the prodding of the Secretary of State and others who have aggressively wanted regime change. Regime change, unfortunately, doesn't always work out. Look, I don't have. I have no like for Maduro. I wrote a book called the Case Against Socialism about how bad things are in Venezuela. So I wish and hope for better government down there, but you don't know what you get. It could be the drug cartels take over, could be that other generals take over. But the bottom line is the people there need to fight for their liberty, and it really isn't the job of America. I mean, the president also said, well, be careful, Colombia, you could be next. I mean, if we're going to go and topple regime after regime in South America, there's no amount of money that can be printed to pay for that. And I don't think that the lives should be without a vote by Congress and the people approving of this. That's what our Constitution intended.
- [07:11]
B
So we have the limits of the Constitution. We also have Trump suggesting that an entire new region is in play. He said yesterday that he is interested in, quote, knocking Iran down, knocking the hell out of them. So it sounds like Trump, who ran on focusing on problems and concerns of people here at home, is much more focused on, in his own words, Iran and Venezuela.
- [07:42]
A
No, that's right. And look, if you look at this and what he said about Latin America, I mean, Rand Paul is right. He has threatened to topple the Venezuelan government that he's now bombing. He's threatened to take back the Panama Canal. He's threatened to bomb Colombia because he doesn't like the leftist leader there. He's threatened to take strikes into Mexico. And what you see is a President Donald Trump who promised to end the so called forever war, right, the war on terror in the Middle east and North Africa. And look, I think there's a lot of bipartisan support for that, particularly among the American electorate. I will say, at least the American Congress long ago, too long ago, voted to enter that war. What he's done is he's brought the war on terror into this hemisphere. It's the same apparatus, right? It's drone strikes, it's special operations. I would be surprised if we didn't have special operators on the ground in Venezuela right now. It's CIA covert activities. He's just brought this massive infrastructure of the war on terror and turned it into, I guess he's calling it a war on drugs, but it's really just a war on whoever Donald Trump doesn't like in the Western hemisphere. Now, part of what is so baffling about this is what is the constituency for this in the United States? Sure, Marco Rubio is part of a group of people, obviously who have problems with the Venezuelan Cuban government. There's oil in Venezuela, but there's no broad mandate or constituency for this kind of war. And part of what worries me, Nicole, is we have to look Trump through the authoritarian prism we have seen in other places, including in Russia, right, where Putin was losing popularity when he launched the war in Ukraine. Sometimes when you've got a leader with autocratic tendencies and things aren't going well for them at home, they turn to foreign policy, they turn to wars. And we could be entering a pretty dangerous phase of this Trump presidency if we're going to start bombing Venezuela and we might start bombing Iran again. And we, you know, who knows, we'll start hearing about Panama and Greenland again. I think we have to take all that very seriously. The one thing I do know is it's not what Trump's voters wanted, it's not what they voted for, it's not what the American people want. And it will do nothing to deal with the affordability crisis in this country. And so I think we're really going to be dealing with a gap between public opinion and what Donald Trump is doing.
- [09:49]
B
Nancy. It is, it's offensive to the seriousness of it to compare it to Wag the Dog, but it is quite literally, you know, the plot of a comedy slash dramedy about an ailing, failing president. But I don't think Trump has enough sense of irony to be doing it for those reasons. But I wonder if you can just take us through what has been reported, what is known to be happening on the ground and in the region in Venezuela. Yeah.
- [10:21]
E
So what we have right now are at least 11 US ships, 15,000 troops around the region positioned there, and most notably the USS Gerald Ford, the aircraft carrier, and its accompanying ships. And what we've seen is a buildup also of aircraft and other military assets. What's interesting, though, is when you look at those assets, you can't determine what the military objectives are based on their configuration. There are too many troops that the objective is to go after Drudge boats and do these sort of strikes that we've seen over the Christmas holiday in Venezuela. It's the wrong configuration if you're going after oil tankers because there aren't enough Coast Guard ships and personnel to go aboard these ships and determine whether they are indeed sanctioned ships or not. And it's not enough troops if the objective is regime change a la sort of Iraq, where we're going, in a way, enforcably removing the Maduro regime. And so what we've seen is the administration toggle between these different policy goals, but the military configuration is not designed for any one of them and has limitations for trying to achieve any of those three.
- [11:32]
B
What does it mean to you that they're publicly talking about CIA operations on land while this illogical assemblage of troops are in the region?
- [11:50]
E
I think we have to ask whether the objections we've heard in Congress, the opposition we've heard through polling from the American public, is the administration trying to come up with a way to increasingly engage in Venezuela in a way that doesn't trigger concerns for me personally. Up until this point, I was looking for a major US Military operation towards Venezuela. And what this latest strike has me wondering is if instead we're going to see a sort of Mission Creek where you see, see one strike, then another strike, this time against a dock that could be supporting alleged drug traffickers, the next one against a potential military target for someone for a part of the government supporting the Maduro government. So I think we have to watch whether these strikes are designed to work within the objections we've heard from the American public and on Capitol Hill about an escalating war in Venezuela, that rather the American public become used to these occasional strikes, and that in doing so, we unintentionally sort of mission creep our way to a bigger conflict.
- [12:50]
B
Yeah. I mean, Amy, this would be again, another what the belief are they doing if the lives of the men and women of the military weren't on the line? Right. He has moved the men and women of the military into the region, either as a prop or to stage them for something that is unknown and unauthorized. What are your thoughts at this moment?
- [13:13]
D
Well, look, we all want to stop drug trafficking, but the American people deserve actual, real solutions, right? Not reckless airstrikes. And why is this reckless? For lots of the reasons that your other guest just said. It's a dangerous escalation this time inside Venezuela. And we just attacked a sovereign country and it barely made the news. 100 people have already been executed. And it really puts our military in a bad spot. Right, because there is no clear objective. We've heard three different things, right? Susie Wiles says it's regime change. We've got the Secretary of War saying it's about narcotics. We've got the President all over the map. So there's no clear objective. And then as was stated by Ben earlier, there's no authorization from Congress. And that makes us. It puts the military in this sort of legal purgatory, okay, where they're striking without any authorization to do so by our Constitution. And also it's a terrible message to the world as well. What kind of message does it send to Vladimir Putin, to China? Well, they can just declare anybody a terrorist and go after them, too. I mean, what are we doing here? It's just un American, you know, Amy.
- [14:36]
B
13 minutes into this, Rick brings up the lack of any legal rationale, any legal pretext for the strikes which have ended the lives of 170 people. There is no precedent for addressing the flow of illegal drugs into this country with summary executions of alleged drug traffickers without any evidence being produced to them or to us as the people in whose name the strikes are being carried out. And I just want to read the quote that a couple of people have referenced from Susie Wiles. These are Susie Wiles own words as reported by vanity fair in 11 sit down on the Record interview she did with Chris Wiffle. Susie Wiles, quote, he Donald Trump wants to keep on blowing boats up until Maduro cries uncle and people way smarter than me on that say he will, end quote. I know they've gutted intel, but I don't think real intel products and gathering has described Maduro in that way in the past. And again, I don't have any access to that. It may be the case now that they have evidence to believe that Maduro will cry uncle, but that is not the conventional wisdom.
- [15:45]
C
Yeah. What's funny, Nicole, is that they violate these public laws in public, like sending troops into states illegally. And then when they're supposed to do something clandestine, like bombing someplace around the world, Trump announces it, you know, from the White House or Mar a Lago, because he can't keep a secret. Part of it is just incompetence. You know, you mentioned Susie Wiles. She knows Trump's intent, so they want to find some legal rationale to allow them to do it.
- [16:14]
B
But what was, what is his intent, though? What is.
- [16:16]
C
I think it is regime change. I think it's, you know, there's some grievance. They indicted him during Trump's first term. Marco Rubio wants to get him out of power as well. I think he also just likes to be on the front page in a way. And some of it is also this kind of authoritarian bullying. Monroe Doctrine, like, we're the hegemon in the Western Hemisphere. We can do whatever we want. We can blow boats up, we can send missiles into your country, and you can't do anything about it. I mean, that's an authoritarian thing. That is a, you know, part of abuse of American history. You know, John Adams said, we don't go off in search of monsters to destroy. That's exactly what he's doing, Nancy.
- [16:56]
B
I mean, let me come back to you on this. They have now had months to reverse engineer something along the lines of what Rick Stengel is articulating, if it were about drugs. They've had months now to manufacture a drug plan for Mexico and China to counter fentanyl, which is the most lethal drug and the most abundant supply and the two most prolific suppliers of it. Why haven't they done that?
- [17:22]
E
Well, actually, in doing this, you could argue that these strikes make going after drugs harder. We've heard from the leaders in Mexico and Brazil raised concerns about these strikes and the instability that they could potentially bring to the region. And Mexico is a key partner if the true objective is to go after fentanyl because of their role in the production of it and transfer of it. And so what we've heard from a region is actually concerned that these strikes go counter to the stated mission of going after drugs, rather than seeing this as part of a broader plan to really combat drug trafficking.
- [17:57]
B
Nancy, what is your sense of what happens next?
- [18:01]
E
Well, I know this, in light of this conversation, this sounds strange, but in some ways, if the goal is regime change. That might be the easiest in this because what happens the day after? What does it look like in Venezuela after who's governing? You'll have potentially a lot of factions, farc, eln, supporters of the Maduro government, within the military fighting for control. And so I think long term the question becomes what comes after if the goal is indeed regime change? And short term, I think you will see when Congress comes back, an ongoing conversation about whether this is being executed in a way that is legally sound for the Hill and greater calls for explanations about what the objectives are, because we are increasingly hearing frustrations from both sides of the aisle, from the American public, a cry for some clear stated articulation of what the US Is aiming to do with these strikes.
- [18:56]
B
It's a good point. I mean, in nine years, we haven't heard the kind of rebukes for sort of the White House driven military policy that we've heard over this campaign. Nancy Youssef, thank you for starting us off. Everyone else sticks around. Much more on this story. Also ahead for us, more and more artists are canceling planned performances at the Kennedy center protesting Donald Trump's takeover of the board. And the renaming of the Kennedy center will continue to follow that story. And later in the broadcast, how retribution has taken center stage in Donald Trump's second term as president over the past year. We'll look at whether it's enough to finally bring some of his most loyal followers to pump the brakes and say no more in the new year. All those stories and more when Deadline White House continues after a quick break. Don't go anywhere.
- [19:44]
A
Your phone is your lifeline. Calling your kid to say goodnight, waiting on a job callback or just sending a meme to your best friend. When it's been that kind of day, wherever life takes you, the TextNow app.
- [19:54]
B
Keeps you connected for free.
- [19:56]
A
Get a real phone number, unlimited talk and text and 5G data for your favorite apps, all for $0 a month. No fixed contracts, no hidden fees, no panic when bills pile up. Just phone service that's there when it matters most. TextNow, we've got your back. Download TextNow in your app Store today. Wireless plans require the purchase of a SIM card. Visit textnow.com for terms and conditions.
- [20:15]
D
Tyler Redick here from 2311 Racing.
- [20:17]
A
And Bubba Wallace.
- [20:18]
D
You know what's the worst part of a race?
- [20:20]
B
A rain delay.
- [20:21]
A
Sitting around waiting for the track to dry is dull.
- [20:25]
D
But instead of waiting, we hang out.
- [20:26]
A
With Chumba Casino, Social casino, slots, bingo, solitaire. Plenty of fun to keep us Entertained.
- [20:32]
D
So why let a rain delay slow you down?
- [20:35]
A
Play now@chumbacasino.com let's Chumba.
- [20:39]
B
No purchase necessary.
- [20:40]
A
VGW Group voidware prohibited by law. CTC's 21 plus sponsored by Jumba Casino. TikTok for Business is helping owners like you reach new customers every day.
- [20:49]
B
We saw up to a 10x return on our TikTok shop ads a few years ago. I started sharing my love for fashion.
- [20:55]
E
On social media, and Willow Boutique was born.
- [20:57]
B
We're not just a place to shop.
- [20:59]
E
We've really become a community. TikTok allows us to find more people.
- [21:03]
B
To have that great experience. I cannot imagine my business without TikTok.
- [21:07]
E
It's completely changed my life, and I could not be happier.
- [21:10]
A
Head over to get started.TikTok.com tiktokapps Now I hear that Iran is trying to.
- [21:19]
B
Build up again, and if they are.
- [21:20]
A
We'Re gonna have to knock them down.
- [21:22]
B
We'll knock them down. We'll knock the hell out of them.
- [21:24]
A
But hopeful. Hopefully that's not happening. I heard Iran wants to make a deal. If they want to make a deal, that's much smarter.
- [21:31]
B
Ben, I know we've become numb to his sort of idiotic incoherence, but if you were an adversary or an ally, what did you hear there?
- [21:41]
A
The problem with this is, you know, the last time they were trying to make a deal with Iran, they bombed them in the middle of the negotiation. Then Trump said he obliterated their nuclear program. If that was the case, then a few months later, he wouldn't be threatening to bomb them again. Right. And so what you hear is you have no idea where he's coming from on any given day on this. Does he want a deal? Does he want a war? What is this all about? And I think that's what's so concerning, is that when you look at, you know, the use of military action against Iran, another big country, we should be clear to Nicole, like, he has bombed this year. Iran, Venezuela, and Nigeria, those are not countries that we had gone to war with, bombed before. These are big countries, you know, And I think that the unpredictability here, look, it's not just. It's not like unpredictability in service, some strategy. It's just pure unpredictability. And so I think if you're other countries, what you're hearing is there are no rules anymore. Like, there's no basis, the legal basis that you need to go to war. There was no legal basis for bombing Iran earlier this year. There's no legal basis for bombing Venezuela. There's no clear sense of what's the strategy. Is the strategy with Iran related to its nuclear program and trying to get a deal, or is it some kind of regime change strategy? You just don't know. And that's very dangerous because what that does is it encourages the tendencies and other leaders, whether it's Putin or whether it's Xi Jinping or whomever it is, to just solve problems outside of any basis of international law might makes right basis. And I think it's going to lead to a lot more instability.
- [23:16]
B
Yeah. I mean, Amy, and I guess the political difference here is in 1.0, it was incoherence in service of an ideology. Whether you I disagreed with it, but it was America First. It was make America great again. And so it was incoherence, it was bombast, but it was in service of something not just comprehensible, even if it was objectionable, but it was something for which he had a mandate. Right. Like his supporters voted for America First. This is incoherence in service of, as Ben Rhodes just said, bombing big countries, at least three of them that we know of.
- [23:52]
D
Yeah, it's definitely not America first at all. And here's what's going on. The cost to Americans right now with this affordability crisis that this president and the Republicans in power said that they would lower, they would lower costs for Americans. They're actually higher right now. And meanwhile, the president is off in his administration making things worse on a global stage with global chaos, starting wars that Americans don't want to be involved. I know no person in Kentucky who voted for Trump who said, you know, I really want to go to war against Venezuela. You know, that's just not. That's not what's on people's mind. And our country already has a history of stumbling into wars under false pretenses. I fought in one of those. So it's really important that before any further attacks, the American people, whether it's in Iran or in Nigeria or in Venezuela, the American people deserve the president. That makes the case for war. Not on Twitter, not on X, not on a Friday night talk show, but to Congress and to the American people. He has not done so. And Congress must vote on these uses of military force around the world. That is their responsibility. These Republicans in power, they don't take their responsibility. They're not doing it. And so Trump is unilaterally dragging us into conflicts around the world that the American people do not support.
- [25:29]
B
And the thing that doesn't make any Sense, I obviously worked for an administration that led us into those wars, but I also worked for an administration that suffered the political consequences for doing so. I know what it is like to work in a White House at 36%. And what it is like in normal times is that members of your own party have no problem saying and doing what Rand Paul did. They had different names when George Bush was present. They were named Chuck Hagel and John McCain. And it went on and on and on and on. And I wonder if you have any theories on whether the new year will usher in more political gravity, whether people will understand that a president, 36%, taking the country into wars for which there's no legal predicate or any rationale articulated to the American people is a political death spiral for your party.
- [26:21]
C
Well, as you were talking, Nicole, the war I thought about is the Vietnam War that we did stumble into. The Gulf of Tonkin incident was a kind of a made up thing that we used as a predicate to wage war there. But we just, we kept doing things to get ourselves involved. Like the boy who threw his hat over the fence that, you know, forcing us to invade. We have a terrible history of that. We have a terrible history of that in Latin America and South America as well. And I think what's so disturbing and about the clip you showed in the beginning is, you know, he just believes what people tell him. Like when Bibi says, oh, Iran is arming up again, or the Secretary of State.
- [27:01]
B
Well, he kind of believes it, right? Because he's, because he goes, so obviously came after meeting with Bibi and he says, I hear Iran is trying to build up again what Bibi told him. And he says, if they are like, if Bibi's telling the truth, we're going to knock him down, we're going to attack again. He says, we'll knock him down. We'll knock the hell out of him. But he's not sure. So then he goes, but hopefully that's not what's happening. Like, hopefully, hopefully. What I just heard is not true. I actually heard they want to make a deal. If they want to make a deal. That's much more. I think what is being revealed is what happens when you've gutted the intelligence capability.
- [27:35]
C
Well, and what any other president would have done is the president of Israel tells me X, after he leaves, I go back to my director of CIA, hey, you know, Bibi told me X. Is that true? You look into that? I mean, he never, or a normal.
- [27:51]
B
President like, has been brief before meeting with Bibi and they say, you know what? Look, we have intel that shows that is not true.
- [27:57]
C
Yes, well, that, I mean, that would never happen. But I mean, but the fact that he, I mean, from the beginning, in the first term, when he met with Putin and he believed Putin over the intelligence service, I mean, all these muscles still exist. I mean, we have pretty, we have good information about what Iran is doing. He doesn't ask the CIA what Iran is doing.
- [28:17]
B
Ben, how do you tell the story of how sleeping abnormal this all is?
- [28:26]
A
Well, first of all, I just want to make one point about the intelligence, because let's remember, he said before he bombed last time that they were building it up. Then Tulsi Gabbard, the dni, said they weren't. Then he chastised her. Then he bombs the Iranian nuclear program. He says it was obliterated. The Defense Intelligence Agency puts out a report saying it wasn't, and then he fires the head of the Defense Intelligence Agency. Right. So you're right, Nicole. He is gutting the intelligence apparatus United States, because he only wants the intelligence apparatus United States to tell him exactly what he wants to hear, which is another characteristic of authoritarian politics. Look, I think for Americans, it's very simple. We have an affordability crisis in this country. And Americans know intuitively that wars like this end badly. And this is not what he was elected to do. We do not need to be at war in Iran. We do not need to be at war in Venezuela. We do not need to be in war in Nigeria. It's a very simple point. This is lawless. It's unnecessary, and it risks getting us back into the quagmires that Americans elected Donald Trump in part to end, and it does nothing to solve. This is an election year next year. And Amy knows this better than any of us. It's going to be about affordability. It's not going to be about whether Iran is building up or whether Nicolas Maduro is a bad guy or what Trump is posting on Truth Social about Christians in Nigeria. Right? Not that those aren't problems, but they're not the problems that the American people want the president to be solving here. So the simple point is just he was elected to deal with affordability, not to go bomb all these other countries. Now, there's a secondary point that this is lawless. This is against the Constitution, and there needs to be a reaffirmation of checks and balances in this country. And I think we will start to see some of that next year for the point you made, Nicole, not because the Republicans have a lot of courage. I gave up on that a long time ago. It's because they can read the political tea leaves too. And they know there's going to be a life after Trump, there's going to be an America after Trump, and they're going to have to start to think about their own political skins. And I think that's the thing that is going to start to really close in on Donald Trump.
- [30:27]
B
Yeah, it is amazing. Like the trio of betrayals. A betrayal on the promises over Epstein, a betrayal over the promises over the economy, and a betrayal over the promises of no forever wars. It's really the ads write themselves. Amy, thank you for being here to be part of these conversations. Ben and Rick, stick around a little bit longer after the break. For us, the new Trump branded and again potentially illegally renamed Trump Kennedy center is continuing to lose scheduled performances. We'll have much more on that story next.
- [31:03]
A
Congress may have clawed back funding for public media, but public radio's mission to serve you and your community will not waver as the NPR network enters a new chapter. Your support is critical. Visit donate.NPR.org Sometimes life will get you stressed out. Lucky you can always count on Text Now. Free Talk. Free text. Free 5G and they'll never shut you off. Cause like I said, it's free. Text Now's got your back nationwide. No long term contracts, but all they're.
- [31:34]
B
Nervous about losing service.
- [31:36]
A
TextNow's got your back.
- [31:37]
B
That's their sense of purpose.
- [31:38]
A
No matter what comes next, you've got Free Talk and text with the TextNow app. Wireless plans require the purchase of a SIM card. Visit textnow.com for terms and conditions. TikTok for Business is helping owners like you reach new customers every day.
- [31:52]
B
We saw up to a 10x return on our TikTok shop ads. A few years ago, I started sharing.
- [31:57]
E
My love for fashion on social media and Willow Boutique was born.
- [32:01]
B
We're not just a place to shop.
- [32:02]
E
We've really become a community. TikTok allows us to find more people.
- [32:07]
B
To have that great experience. I cannot imagine my business without TikTok.
- [32:11]
E
It's completely changed my life and I.
- [32:13]
B
Could not be happier.
- [32:14]
A
Head over to get started.TikTok.com TikTok ads.
- [32:21]
B
Some terribly tragic and sad news to share with all of you. Tatiana Schlossberg has died. She was 35 years old. She is the daughter of American diplomat Caroline Kennedy. She's the granddaughter of former President John F. Kennedy. The family disclosed her passing today in a social media post. Writing this quote Our beautiful Tatiana passed away this morning. She will always be in our hearts. In November, Schlossberg authored an essay in the New Yorker titled A Battle with My Blood. She disclosed that she was losing a battle with a rare form of leukemia, which she was diagnosed with immediately after she gave birth to her daughter in May of last year. A member of the next generation of the Kennedy family, she spoke out bravely and publicly against the Trump administration, most notably and pointedly against her cousin, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. For his role in spreading misinformation and conspiracy theories as the top official in charge of public health. The news of her death today comes as we continue to watch more and more artists and cultural leaders cancel events at the Kennedy Center. That's, of course, an historic memorial honoring her grandfather, President John F. Kennedy. Donald Trump slapped his name onto it. The latest artist includes a New York dance company who yesterday pulled out of scheduled performances in April. The head of the company, David Verone, said it would lose $40,000 by pulling out and added, quote, it is financially devastating but morally exhilarating. We're back with Ben and Rick. Ben, I understood that you knew Tatiana and you lost a friend.
- [34:02]
A
Yeah, I knew Tatiana. And actually the way I knew her is not just because she was Caroline Kennedy's daughter, even though I worked with Caroline in the Obama administration. It's because she was a really first rate climate change journalist. She wrote for the New York Times. She wrote a book called Inconspicuous Consumption. I, I did a project with her on looking at ways in which people could, on their own, contribute to the fight against climate change. I think she would want to be remembered as someone who was not just from this illustrious family, but who did work and really carved out her own identity as a writer and as a journalist and then of course, as a mother. And, you know, look, I mean, to connect these stories, like, she comes the best side of that family and she very much represents it. Are people that want to serve other people. And Tatiana was like that as a climate change journalist. She didn't just kind of write about the science. She wrote about what people could do about how people could have agency in their lives, which, if you think about it, is very much in keeping with what her grandfather did, which is inspire people to serve and to try to find some way to make a difference in something they cared about. That's why her loss is so tragic, and that's why the kind of desecration of this memorial to her family, not just to her grandfather, but really to the best side of the Kennedy family is so tragic because Donald Trump represents the opposite of that. But I think today, it's obviously a horrific, tragic day. We knew it was coming. She told the world it was coming. But I think we have to remember her as a person in full who really made her own mark and her own contribution and her own legacy, which will live on, frankly, after the Trump letters are taken off the wall of that memorial.
- [35:46]
B
We had that conversation in the break, you and I, Rick Stengel, that the public is craving public service, the old fashioned kind. And she embodied that with her work, but also with her final fight, her final battle. Taking these final precious months and writing about it and talking about it and talking about why her cousin would harm people like her.
- [36:14]
C
Yes. I mean, first condolences to the family. I mean, they've had a level of Greek tragedy in modern times that's unequaled. I've known Caroline for a million years, not just working with her at the State Department. She's a magnificent person. But one of the things that Tatiana demonstrated is a profile and courage. As her dad famously wrote that even as she was dying, even as she was diagnosed with this incredibly rare disease, she a wanted the public to learn about it and benefit from that. And then she took that platform in the New Yorker to attack RFK Jr. For undermining the health of the American public, for giving in to conspiracy theories. And so that in itself, her piece itself was a form of public service, a form of heroic public service. And I agree with you. I think people are looking for that, looking for that in the most traditional way. Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country. That is something that we haven't seen in our politics, that I think people are yearning for it.
- [37:16]
B
Yeah. All right, after the break, we'll turn to the other part of the Kennedy story, the Kennedy center, where a comedian and former south park writer said he saw all of this coming. We'll show you what he did next. Well, Donald Trump and the leaders he installed at the Kennedy center may have slapped his name on the physical building in Washington, D.C. it has not been as easy to change the name online. We'll explain. Washington Post is reporting that the domain name trumpkennedycenter.org is taken. Toby Morton, a comedian who formerly wrote for south park and has a history of buying political domains and turning them into satire websites, told the Washington Post that all year he followed news of Trump's planned takeover of the institution. How the president purged many of its existing board Members replaced them with Trump loyalists and announced plans to personally host the Kennedy center honors. And in August, he snapped up the rights to both Trump KennedyCenter.org and Trump Kennedy Center.com we're back with Ben and Rick. It would be terrible if everybody watching right now went online and checked what's under those URLs. It is worth the visit. Ben Rhodes.
- [38:41]
A
Yeah, I mean, look, sometimes the easiest way to deal with an autocrat is to make fun of him. That's certainly deserved in this case. Everything about this is ridiculous. His claim that he didn't know that this honor was going to be bestowed on him by his hand picked collection of, of board members, including Fox News hosts. You know, but the thing is, it's serious because the Kennedy center is kind of the supposed to be kind of beating heart of the arts in this country. And you know, he's making a mockery of it. And what's kind of ridiculous about it, too, is that his, it seems to be more about revenge. Like this is a kind of retribution, right? Like this community, the arts community in this country does not care much for Donald Trump in his first term. Some of the Kennedy center honorees didn't want to be associated with Trump. And so because of that, in a fit of peak, you know, he has to put his name on this building and he has to kind of, you know, put this whole institution in a giant hole. And again, to connect it to like John F. Kennedy is on that building because he brought the arts to Washington. Right. Because he saw as part of the United States that he wanted to cultivate was one that was rich in the arts and valued the arts. And nobody believes that Donald Trump values the arts here. So like everything else, there's a bit of the absurd and a bit of the tragic in this at the same time.
- [40:06]
B
Yeah, I mean, let's stick with the tragic. I mean, it is one of the most potent forms of soft power, right? One of our most effective exports, the arts. It's also true that until very recently, we've been a beacon for artists wishing to defect, right. Ballerinas from, and ballet dancers, male and female, from autocratic countries, other performers, other athletes. We are now purging the most accomplished and beloved artists in our own country. We are banishing them from a center devoted to the highest level of their crafts by Donald Trump's autocratic moves.
- [40:48]
C
And I think Kennedy and Jacqueline Kennedy got the idea of culture as soft power. That was something that was the beginning of the rise of kind of American hegemony in Movies and television where we didn't necessarily have to send singers and dancers over to Europe. People were watching American television shows. In fact, looking at the building, I remember when I was in the State Department and went to visit the US Embassy in India, the story was that it was designed by Edward Durrell Stone. And when Jackie Kennedy saw it, she loved it. And then when her husband was assassinated, she decided to have hire him to make the Kennedy Center. And it looks very much like it. You know, the dark side of this is that autocrats name buildings after themselves during their lifetimes while they're in power. Patriots have buildings named after them after they left power. And Trump foisting his name on this is both revenge, as Ben said, but it's also envy. Right? He looks at John and Jackie Kennedy as the epitome of grace and style, something he and his wife can't be. So what does he do? He puts his name, he stamps his name on something. That's the legacy of all that elegance and style. That's the horrible thing. But I have to say I've also been enheartened and emboldened by the fact that all of these musicians and dance people are risking their own livelihoods to do something that is morally right. Like that beautiful phrase like this hurts my income, but I feel great.
- [42:23]
B
Morally exhilarated.
- [42:24]
C
Yes, it is exhilarating. And this kind of protest is the kind of thing that will save us.
- [42:29]
B
You know, Ben, it is another unexpected story of where the resistance is coming from. Right. It's not coming from the most powerful elite Democratic aligned law firms. They went down to Washington and capitulated to Donald Trump. Or even the most prestigious universities long associated with liberal ideas and thought. It's coming from artists who can barely afford to turn down a $40,000 gig.
- [42:53]
A
You and Rick said it exactly right. In the sense this is a shameful moment for all the people that have capitulated who have resources that these artists don't have. Right? Big law firms, big tech, big university endowments. We've seen them fold one after another because they were worried about their bottom line. Now you've got like dancers who are standing up to Donald Trump. And look, artists set that tone. Our artists stand for sets of values. And I have to imagine that these won't be the last ones will fuse to go along with this. And at the end of the day, I totally agree with Rick about how the Kennedy kind of spirit infuses that building. And it's what a lot of people around the world admire about the United States. Right. This is a place where you're free to criticize those in power through the arts. That is fundamental to who we are. But it also means that the Kennedy center is not really just about the Kennedys or certainly Donald Trump. It's a national institution. It's about the American people. It's about American arts. And that's why it hosts all kinds of different arts in that building. It's more than a building. It's supposed to be the kind of beating heart of the arts in this country. And I think we should take heart from that resistance. And hopefully it spreads not just through the artistic community, which is dealing with its own set of crises here as some Trump friendly oligarchs try to buy up a lot of the media in this country. But hopefully it's contagious.
- [44:16]
B
I feel like this is a conversation that we must continue into the new year as Donald Trump continues to lose his grip on his own base. Right. He's at 36%, which is deeply unpopular, which makes all the capitulators look like they made a very, very bad bet. Ben Rhodes, Rick Stengle, thank you so much. Happy New Year to both of you. Many more conversations to be had in the year ahead. After the break, Democrats are calling on a key member of the Trump administration to explain what they knew about the Jeffrey Epstein files. We'll bring you that update next. Funny thing about 11 sit down interviews. Senate Democrats are now demanding to know what White House Chief of Staff Suzy Wiles could have possibly meant when she told Vanity Fair she has read, quote, the Epstein file and that Trump is, quote, in the file, was on Epstein's plane and is, quote, on the manifest. Just one of the numerous shocking claims Susie Wiles made in that series of 11 on the record interviews. But this one seems to actually have some fallout. Ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee Dick Durbin and Senator Sheldon Whitehouse sent a letter last week asking Susie Wiles this quote, please be kind enough to explain when and where and under what authority you gained access to the material. They're also asking if the material in the file she supposedly reviewed have been presented to a grand jury. They have given Susie Wiles A January 6th deadline on that request. We'll keep you updated if we learn anything more about it after the break. How retribution has infected every single corner of the second Trump administration. That and a whole lot more when deadline White House continues after a quick break. Don't go anywhere. Not sure if you have the experience to start your dream job. Good news these days, it's the skills that count.
- [46:10]
A
Udemy can help you get those in demand. Skills?
- [46:13]
B
Want to be an AI mastermind? Learn with us. Game Developer. We've got you covered. AWS Certified Cloud Practitioner. We can help you prep. You'll learn from real world experts who.
- [46:25]
A
Love what they do so that you can learn what you do.
- [46:27]
B
Go to udemy.com for the skills to get you started and get set for your dream job.