Decency and Dave Chappelle. Plus, Should Former Trump Allies Be Embraced?

Summary

Higher Learning with Van Lathan and Rachel Lindsay – Episode Summary

Episode Title: Decency and Dave Chappelle. Plus, Should Former Trump Allies Be Embraced?
Release Date: April 17, 2026
Guests: Michael Tubbs (former mayor of Stockton, CA, candidate for California Lieutenant Governor)
Episode Focus: Discussion of decency and controversy in comedy and politics — the Dave Chappelle NPR interview, the case of influencer Ashley Janay, whether former Trump allies should be "embraced" by the left, and an in-depth interview with Michael Tubbs.

---

Episode Theme Overview

Van and Rachel dive deep into the complexities of public discourse, personal decency, and forgiveness in American politics and Black culture. The show is built on recent controversies involving comedian Dave Chappelle, the tragic death of influencer Ashley Janay, and Representative Ilhan Omar's comments suggesting Democrats make room for former Trump allies. The episode culminates with a substantive, policy-focused interview with Michael Tubbs, exploring affordable housing and the workings of state government.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Celebrating Life and Birthdays (00:00–04:00)

• The show opens with Van’s birthday, some playful banter about their attitudes toward birthdays, and how the practice of reflection differs between Van and Rachel.
• Van shares, “I love to celebrate life. Not my particular birthday, but I love to celebrate life … so many of the people I grew up with aren’t [here].” (01:45)
• Discussion of personal growth, new hobbies (Van’s cinematography class), and taking time off from existential worry.

---

2. The Death of Ashley Janay: Media Discourse and Decency (07:47–15:19)

• Donnie recaps the developing story: influencer Ashley Janay dies on a trip to Tanzania; circumstances are suspicious, with her fiancé Joe McCann under scrutiny but not charged.
• Rachel critiques the way people online frame such tragedies, urging respect and focus on justice for the victim:

  “The only way we should discuss these stories … is getting answers for the family … true justice would be her coming back, and that’s not gonna happen.” (10:04)

• Van laments society’s “low vibrational bullshit conversations” and lack of compassion in public discourse.
• Notable moment: Both hosts highlight the need for empathy and caution against speculation and performative commentary on social media.

---

3. Dave Chappelle’s NPR Interview & the Weaponization of Comedy (15:19–38:13)

The Chappelle Republican Joke Controversy

• Chappelle claims Republicans weaponized his jokes about transgender people for anti-trans messaging, which was never his intention.

  “I did resent that the Republican Party ran on transgender jokes. I felt like they were doing a weaponized version of what I was doing. It’s not what I was doing.” — Dave Chappelle (15:42)

• Chappelle recounts an incident with Rep. Lauren Boebert, who politicized a photo with him.

Performing in Saudi Arabia: Ethics and Hypocrisy

• Chappelle addresses criticism for performing in Saudi Arabia after Jamal Khashoggi’s assassination:

  “All these … Saudis finance tons of movies … None of these things were an issue until I went there. … As soon as a Black man can make money off the plantation, they try to tell you the money is dirty.” — Dave Chappelle (17:28)

• Chappelle critiques the double standard and hypocrisy of U.S. institutions that also do business with repressive regimes.

Hosts’ Debate on Decency and Consequences

• Rachel: “You have the right to make those choices … but at the same time, people can choose to be upset about it … These are the consequences.” (19:15–22:28)
• Van reflects on Chappelle and Bill Burr’s reputations for being “decent, not perfect,” and how decency — not infallibility — is what draws audiences.

  “Decent actually allows you to be wrong. …” (29:03)

• They critically examine the impact of standup comedy in the modern, hyperconnected world, the weaponization of material, and the shifting responsibilities of comedians.
• Rachel: “Your jokes are more impactful and can reach that kid that you’re talking about who feels imprisoned by the jokes or the person who takes those jokes and uses it to weaponize it against them.” (33:42)
• Both hosts agree: Standups must reconcile their art with the reality that their acts can have unintended but real social consequences — especially as divisive rhetoric is picked up by bad actors.

---

Timestamps for Featured Chappelle Discussions

• Chappelle on Republican weaponization: (15:42–16:48)
• Chappelle on Riyadh Comedy Festival & “dirty” money: (17:27–18:50)
• Hosts debate comic responsibility and decency: (22:28–38:13)

---

4. Ilhan Omar and Should Former Trump Allies Be Welcomed? (39:58–68:07)

• Rep. Ilhan Omar tells Pod Save America that Democrats should be open to working with Trump’s former allies, citing recent high-profile conservative turncoats like Marjorie Taylor Greene, Candace Owens, and Tucker Carlson.

  “The fact that they have gotten off the sycophant train and are saying, ‘We trusted the wrong person, we are sorry’ … I think is an important thing for us to put our arms around and say yes. Now, let’s figure out how we save our country from the disaster that this man is creating.” — Ilhan Omar (40:20)

• Rachel forcefully disagrees, refusing to “coddle” figures like Marjorie Taylor Greene who have directly attacked Omar and others in the past:

  “This is why people become outraged by the Democratic response. Why do we always have to be the good guy?” (44:27)

• Van counters that the left fails when it refuses to seize opportunities for realignment, distinguishing between comrades and associates:

  “The easiest way to lose is to not accept a win.” (49:04)
  “If you are rejecting MAGA because of Palestine … does this mean that you have a fundamental belief in the dignity of people, in the human rights of people? … Somebody’s got to do that work.” (51:32–55:32)

• The pair debate whether the motives of high-profile MAGA defectors are trustworthy; Rachel insists most are acting out of self-interest, not out of a true moral shift.
• Van argues that intentions ultimately matter less than whether you can “move them and leverage them to do” the right thing — especially with a political system failing ordinary people.
• Both ultimately agree that rebuking Trumpism is necessary, but Rachel maintains skepticism about genuine conversion.

---

Timestamps for the Trump-ally Debate

• Ilhan Omar interview and initial reactions: (39:58–44:58)
• Rachel’s “no grace” position: (43:27–47:38)
• Van on political pragmatism and coalition-building: (48:14–55:32)
• Rachel articulates deep mistrust of motives: (55:32–66:39)
• Van: “Someone has to interrogate and explore” former MAGA figures: (66:39–68:07)

---

5. Quick Hits & Pop Culture Sidebar (68:07–81:22)

• Amusing segment: Fox News host Pete Hegseth quotes the “Ezekiel 25:17” speech from Pulp Fiction at a Pentagon prayer service, which Van argues is emblematic of the “mockery” of Christian faith by Trumpist politics.

  “I, in reality, for real, 100% think that Donald Trump is the Antichrist.” — Van (72:37)

• Rachel discusses social media turning negative, the recent pile-on against actress Tamera Mowry, and how public figures can be bullied off platforms for things even their spouses say.

  “You don’t have to agree with Tamara or her husband … but to bully somebody off social media … it’s like—is. Well, I know it’s not right.” (79:16)

---

6. Michael Tubbs Interview: California's Future, Housing, and Economic Justice (81:38–end)

Who is Michael Tubbs?

• Former mayor of Stockton, CA, now running for California’s Lieutenant Governor.
• Known for pushing pilot universal basic income programs and other progressive policies.

What Does a Lieutenant Governor Actually Do? (82:22–84:08)

• Sits on university boards (UC, CSU, Community Colleges)
• On State Lands Commission (oversees use, development, and conservation of public lands)
• Acts as governor when the governor is absent
• Can use the office as a “bully pulpit” to put issues directly to voters (e.g., Gavin Newsom did with marijuana legalization)

Housing Crisis & Policy Solutions

• Tubbs pushes for aggressive building (especially on state lands), regulatory reform (“cutting permitting time from six months to 30 days”), and common-sense rent caps.

  “For the land the state of California owns … we should be building housing on it. That’s one policy fix that can be done today.” (94:34)

• Brings personal experience to the issue:

  “I’ve been homeless. I’ve lived in a hotel, a Motel 6, for two weeks as a kid. … it’s not theoretical.” (96:22)

Fighting Corporate Power & Private Equity

• Committed to banning private equity from hoarding residential properties; supports vacancy taxes; wants to re-center California’s economy on working people, not billionaires or corporations.

Data Dividend & Universal Basic Income

• Proposes that Californians be paid for the value of their digital data as part of the state’s economic future — “our oil is data, our oil is tech.” (103:25)
• Aims to pilot basic income, referencing Stockton’s successful experiment.

Lessons from Losing Re-election (127:44–131:46)

• Loss clarified what he’s willing to “lose for”: government for everyone, no poverty, anti-white supremacy.
• “If you cool with everybody, you’re cool with nobody, because you’re not going to get anything done.” — Michael Tubbs (121:26)
• The status quo “has a lot of friends;” bold leadership will provoke backlash, and leaders can’t afford to be passive about their successes.

Notable Quotes from Tubbs

• “The inability to do everything is not an excuse to do nothing.” (119:53)
• “Be careful whispering your successes. If you do, your failures will sound like screams.” — Van Lathan, on the importance of communicating wins (131:48)

---

Memorable Quotes

• “Decent actually allows you to be wrong … and your decency can be appealed to, to where you’ll come back and be like, all right, let’s talk about this.” — Van (29:03)
• “Your jokes are more impactful and can reach that kid that you’re talking about who feels imprisoned by the jokes or the person who takes those jokes and uses it to weaponize it against them.” — Rachel (33:42)
• “The easiest way to lose is to not accept a win.” — Van (49:04)
• “I, in reality, for real, 100% think that Donald Trump is the Antichrist.” — Van (72:37)
• “If you cool with everybody, you’re cool with nobody, because you’re not going to get anything done.” — Michael Tubbs (121:26)

---

Quick Reference – Timestamps for Major Segments

• Birthday reflections & personal growth: 00:00–04:00
• Ashley Janay tragedy & online “discourse”: 07:47–15:19
• Chappelle trans joke controversy: 15:19–22:28
• Chappelle in Saudi—money/politics: 17:12–19:15
• Comic responsibility & decency: 22:28–38:13
• Ilhan Omar: Should ex-Trumpers be welcomed? 39:58–68:07
• Pulp Fiction prayer / Trump as Antichrist: 68:07–77:43
• Tamera Mowry threads backlash: 77:44–81:22
• Michael Tubbs interview: 81:38–end

---

Tone and Style

The episode blends sharply analytical, sometimes philosophical conversation (particularly on decency, comedy, and politics) with candid personal anecdotes and the dynamic chemistry between Van and Rachel. It’s honest, at times vulnerable, and always direct — with Van’s seriousness and Rachel’s humor playing off each other seamlessly. The Tubbs interview is energetic, policy-wonkish, and pragmatic, but also personal.

---

For New Listeners

This episode is a rich snapshot of the Higher Learning style: fearless cultural critique; nuanced, sometimes sparring debates; and deep dives with thought leaders (like Tubbs) who bring both receipts and first-person urgency to the issues. The hosts don’t shy away from calling out hypocrisy, wrestling with questions of intent versus impact, and pushing each other into honest, sometimes uncomfortable, places.

---

[End of Summary]

Transcript

[A]

Foreign. Yo, yo, yo, Thought warriors, What is up? Higher learning is on. It's zai Van Lathen Jr. And it's

[B]

me, Rachel and Lindsay. Boy, you have a pep in your step this morning. I wonder why.

[C]

It's my birthday, guys.

[B]

It's his birthday. Happy birthday. Happy birthday, Van.

[C]

Happy birthday.

[A]

It's very special.

[B]

I feel like you're really enjoying your birthday. This, you know, you don't like. I feel like when we're like, oh, it's Van's birthday. He's like, ah, let's just move on. I like that you're taking it all in.

[A]

It's fine with me. I don't care about it anymore.

[B]

See, see, I'm sorry I brought it up. I triggered it. You care. You care. We care. The thought warriors care. We are so happy to celebrate you today. They care. Another year. I'm sorry, I literally just triggered. You were actually in a positive mood and I just triggered this. Cause you know what happened?

[A]

Look at my glasses.

[B]

You love to be cynical. You love to be a contrarian.

[A]

I love to be cynical.

[B]

And then for a moment, the other side came out. Cause there's the other side and you caught yourself and you're trying to go back to it. Just be happy. Just celebrate your birthday. It's your birthday.

[A]

So we got a show.

[B]

It's your birthday.

[A]

We got Michael Tubbs on the show today.

[B]

1, 2, 3. Happy birthday to ya. Happy birthday to you. Happy birthday. Happy birthday, Eva, Donnie, Joy, everybody.

[A]

Thank you, guys. Thank you for the birthday wishes. In all seriousness, I love birthdays now.

[B]

Yay.

[A]

Because you like. I love birthdays. Not my particular birthday, but I love to celebrate life. Celebrate life. I see a lot of people celebrating life. They celebrate life. They do special things to celebrate life. It's important to celebrate life. There's so many terrible things happening everywhere. Everyone that can hear my voice, I am happy to be in community and energetic conversation with you every time we do this podcast. So, yeah, I appreciate that I'm still here. So many of the people that I grew up with aren't. So many of the men that I've loved over the course of my life, my uncles and all, so many of them aren't. So I'm happy to be here and hoping to be here for a lot longer and do a lot more. So I appreciate my family here for shouting me out. I appreciate the talk about it. Thank you, guys.

[B]

Kalika's here. Kalika. Came in, woke up this morning, came in.

[A]

Kalika. So I appreciate all of you guys and Everything that's going on.

[B]

Are you a person who reflects on your birthday?

[A]

No.

[B]

Why do I try?

[A]

Not in any way, shape, or form.

[B]

You said what?

[A]

Not in any way, shape or form. No, not really.

[B]

I'm definitely one who just sits back and I'm thinking about the past year, thinking about where I want to go in the next. Next year. Maybe. Maybe you will tonight.

[A]

You know what? I don't think you know why that hasn't happened to me on my birthday.

[B]

Because you do it every day.

[A]

Well, I'm like, I have a different sort of existential crisis. You know, basically every day. Like you just said, like, per week, I think about, can I accomplish the things that I want to accomplish? Can I do it? I got cinematography class on Tuesday nights.

[B]

How's that going?

[A]

It's going great, except I'm terrible. I'm so untalented at picture composition and taking pictures and doing all of that stuff right now. I'm so bad at it. It's so inciting.

[C]

Good.

[A]

It's exciting because most things in my life right now that I've been doing, I'm pretty good at them. But this I'm terrible at right now. I don't have the eye for it, so. But just to understand that, like, I just want to have as. I want to max out on my ability. I want to be the best version of myself possible. That's why I've been listening to the podcast, noticing that in the past, I was not a good podcaster. It's a good talker, not a good podcaster. That's why I'm trying to become better, trying to get better. The January crash out.

[B]

The January crash out. It's usually the crash. You know, when we have to. Family meeting, a crash out. We always learn. We get better from it. Well, good. Then I'm glad. Then take a day off where you don't have to think about these things. Like you said, we're taking today off. We're just gonna just be. Step into my world.

[A]

What's your world?

[B]

Just be.

[A]

Just be.

[B]

Just be. I'm not always that way, but just

[A]

be at the party, you know?

[B]

That's why I'm considering Coachella again this weekend.

[A]

Just be it ain't nothing.

[B]

Come with me. I could find. No, I'm not gonna.

[A]

I'm really gonna Coachella. I'm not going to Coachella.

[B]

I'm not dust. Come on.

[A]

How you deal with the dust?

[B]

It wasn't. I went Saturday, Sunday. It wasn't like that.

[A]

Yeah, not a lot of dust.

[B]

It Wasn't. Friday was bad.

[A]

Friday was bad with dust. It's super bloom out there. It's killing me with the. With the allergies and stuff. So it's tough. Everything's very tough. But we got Michael Tubbs on the show today. He's running for lieutenant governor of California.

[B]

Yeah. I'm excited to have him back on the show.

[A]

Join us later. We've talked to him. We've talked to him. We've talked to his wife. Yeah, We've talked to. Are they the first family of higher learning?

[B]

Maybe it could be the first husband, wife. Yeah.

[A]

Who else? Who else would it be?

[B]

Nobody.

[A]

Cause if we got Sterling K. Brown, then it could be Ryan and Sterling. Ryan and Sterling. Sterling turned me down for an interview.

[B]

I knew it. I knew you were. I was like, please move the conversation forward.

[A]

He turned me down.

[B]

Not for higher learning.

[A]

Nope. I tried to get him to come on Black television history podcast, a different podcast than I'm doing.

[B]

Is that happening yet?

[A]

It hasn't happened yet. I've been working on it for a long time.

[B]

So you can still get him.

[A]

No, it's not. He already said no. And then he proceeded to do a whole bunch of other interviews. I didn't take it personally at all.

[C]

Okay.

[B]

Are we sure?

[A]

I had Ryan on. We didn't talk about it. Still. N.K.

[C]

brown.

[A]

Thank you to Court, who connected me with Sterling. Sterling K. Brown. He couldn't do it because he was gearing up doing press for Paradise.

[B]

Okay.

[A]

Yeah. Paradise is a fantastic show. I'm a big Sterling K. Brown fan. Even though he told me to fuck off, he didn't. Still. Still love you, Sterling K. Brown. You're still the man to me. I had your lady on. We talked all about you and all that. I didn't bring it up once, Did I bring it up once? Family.

[B]

But here we are.

[A]

It's my birthday. I get to gripe.

[B]

You're right. Honestly, you're right. I love that energy. You do whatever the fuck you want

[C]

to do today, Gripe.

[B]

You want to storm out, you want to crash out, Crash out.

[A]

I got other gripes.

[B]

You want to be. What else do you want to take up for your toxic friends? Do it. It's your birthday. You can do it. It's a shock. You want to interrupt me today, you do it. It is your birthday.

[A]

No, no, I don't want to do that.

[B]

You are the birthday. Oh, he doesn't know that. He doesn't get that. You see? You know, I'll be tapped in with Gen Z. I Get that.

[A]

What did she say?

[B]

You are the birthday.

[A]

I don't want to even know what it means. What does that mean? I don't even want to know what it means.

[B]

I get you, Jay.

[A]

I don't want to know what it means.

[B]

I tapped it.

[A]

I want to know what it means.

[B]

It's the new thing that they're doing on TikTok. Did you know about one in three people with plaque psoriasis may also develop psoriatic arthritis which causes joint pain, stiffness and swelling. Does this sound like you listen to what it sounds like to be a million miles away? Trymphy Guselcomab taken by injection is a prescription medicine for adults with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis who may benefit from taking injections or pills or phototherapy. And for adults with active psoriatic arthritis, serious allergic reactions and increased risk of infections and liver problems may occur. Before treatment, your doctor should check you for infections and tuberculosis. Tell your doctor if you have an

[C]

infection, flu like symptoms or if you

[B]

need a vaccine, imagine being a million miles away. Explore what's possible. Ask your doctor about Trimfire. Tap this ad to learn more about Trimfire, including important safety information.

[A]

The playoffs are here and you can predict the action all the way to the finals with FanDuel Predict. Predict the spread, total points and even the game winner.

[B]

Sign up and get a $25 bonus

[A]

offered by FanDuel Prediction Markets LLC. Registered Futures Commission merchant. 18 plus bonus is non withdrawable and expires 7 days after receipt. Trading derivatives involve significant risk and may not be suitable for all investors. Manage your activity with our consumer protection tool. Restrictions apply. See [e-mail] predict bonus offer terms. All right, let's start off with this terrible, disgusting story that's out of Tanzania. There's more information about the way or there's more information. There's more speculation. There's more happening surrounding the death of influencer Ashley Janay. Donnie?

[C]

Yeah, we hit on this a little bit. In the last show, Ashley Janay traveled

[A]

to Tanzania with her boyfriend Joe McCann,

[C]

who proposed on that trip. Tanzanian authorities reported McCann told them that Janae had died by hanging herself in the room at the resort. No official cause of death has been confirmed by law enforcement. Investigators say that they are currently holding McCann's passport until autopsy results are complete. And they had previously told local media that he wasn't suspected of wrongdoing.

[A]

Yeah, so when we left off before, it looked like authorities had cleared him. Now it seems as if they have held his passport so they can do their investigation.

[B]

Yeah. Which is exactly what they should be doing.

[C]

Right.

[B]

I watched an interview with the family, and they were talking to TMZ, actually, and they were saying that, you know, Donnie Ernie said they hadn't heard from. He called them 11 hours after it happened, but then didn't. But talked about her being stable and in the hospital before it was actually told what happened to her then. They have not heard from medical or from the police. This is the family. They have not heard from him since, and the family hasn't. And, you know, the dad spoke about. Of course, she was questioned about, you know, whether or not she had mental health issues, which the family said no. This was a trip of a lifetime for her. There was nothing that they ever saw. Both her parents said that that would think that would lead them to believe that she would take her own life. It's a devastating story.

[C]

Yeah, it's terrible.

[B]

It's. You know, I mean, and we were talking about this off mic. To me, this is being. We know this is being talked about so many ways on the Internet. There's only one way to talk about this. Somebody died.

[A]

Right?

[B]

A life was lost. Somebody lost a friend, a daughter, a cousin, whatever. Whatever Ashley was to so many people. That is the only way we should discuss these stories. We shouldn't be. It's so disgusting. Like, I understand if you want to talk about a bigger issue about the safety of women traveling overseas, the safety of women, particularly of color, black women traveling to foreign places. I understand that. But the people who are so quick to rush to social media or on a microphone to say something provocative, to say something, to go viral, to say something, you know, controversial in order to be first. It just speaks to who we are as a society. A life was lost, and the only thing we should be talking about is getting answers for the family, because we know that true justice would be her coming back, and that's not gonna happen. That's the only way we should be talking about it. Yeah.

[A]

You know, we've talked about this in different regards in terms of, like, how you. How you. How you talk about or deal with people, you know, after they've passed away or if you have opinions about them or whatever. I just don't. I don't understand it. I don't understand. Like, when we talk about recipes that are lost, one recipe that used to be one of the most important ones was, like, someone was gone from this earth forever, never to return. You know, you took a moment to contextualize that person's life and consider the Pain of their family. Consider the pain of the people that love them. And that was. You put that before what feelings you had. You just put that before them. I'm not asking everybody. Obviously, there are people that do different levels of harm and all of that stuff. I'm not lecturing anyone. You guys have your own energetic circumstances to consider and your own karmic consequences to navigate. That is on you. Do whatever. But in this situation, is this really another reason to argue Is this really another reason to have the same type of battles and endeavor into the same type of low vibrational bullshit conversations that we always have, that I engage into, that I indulge into, calling myself out? Another reason to do that right now, if in fact, someone was disrespectful on Twitter or whatever, is that punishable by death?

[B]

Right?

[A]

Is that the death penalty for that? Is that kind of the deal there? Is that how that's working? So I don't know. To me, when I look at this, what I think of is not necessarily even a cautionary tale. I think of this profound tragedy with someone who was accepting a wedding proposal one day and then the next day.

[B]

How about celebrating life? It was her birthday.

[A]

Celebrating life and is dead. What happened? And this gentleman, and his name is not. What's his name? Give me his name, Joe. Because we talk a lot about her name, but we're not really Joe McCann. What's his name?

[B]

Joe McCann.

[A]

Joe McCann. So Joe McCann. There it is right there. It's in the story. Sorry about that, jay. So Joe McCann has a profound task ahead of him to prove to the world that he is not involved in the death of his fiance. Which, I mean, I'm not trying to indict him or send him to the gulag, but, like, this looks bad. This looks weird. This looks like something else happened. And there's just. There's timeline issues. There's issues of, like, how these two people were, like, how close they were or what was going on before they had to be put in separate rooms. All of this stuff. This looks like something fucked up also.

[B]

You know, clearly, I guess he was trying to leave the country because they're saying that they're holding his passport. If this is. If you didn't do it, why are you not so concerned in trying to find answers like the family is about who did? This is somebody that you proposed to, you were celebrating, you were planning to spend your life with. Why are you trying to get away so fast rather than trying to get answers as well as to what happened to somebody so close to you that died. That as well, is very suspicious.

[C]

Right.

[B]

Well, why are you not communicating with her family?

[A]

He had called them.

[B]

He called them, but he did not call them to tell her she died.

[A]

Well, he called them to tell them she was in the hospital. You're right.

[B]

11 hours. He did not. They learned that from the hotel.

[A]

Wow. Like I said, though, if we continue to cover the story, it'll be conversations with either her parents or with people around. But covering the discourse that's surrounding this is. We've done this before around similar situations. I feel like we've been measured on it. But covering the discourse that's around this, it just feels, at this point, just.

[B]

It's dark.

[A]

Yeah. It's just fucked up. All right, Donnie. Dave Chappelle interview on npr. Really interesting stuff, Donnie. Yeah, let's switch gears. He did an interview with NPR where

[C]

he talked about a range of things. Specifically, though, he did accuse Republicans of weaponizing his transgender jokes to support anti anti trans political messaging, something he says was never the intention.

[A]

And I did resent that the Republican Party ran on transgender jokes. You know, I felt like they were doing a weaponized version of what I was doing. I didn't. I didn't. It's not what I was doing. I'll give you an example. This is before I learned the phrase. I respectfully declined. And I was on Capitol Hill, and everybody ran up to take pictures with me from every congressional office. And I just take pictures with whoever asked. I didn't ask how they voted, what their voting record is. And everyone at first was like, CBC people. And then here comes Lauren Boebert, and she said, can I get a picture? And I'd already taken 40 pictures. I didn't want to say no in front of everybody, but I didn't know the phrase. I respectfully declined, so I just took the picture. And then she posts a picture before I could even get from there to the show. And says something to the effect of just two people that knew that it's just too generous. She instantly, like, weaponized it or politicized it. So I got to the arena and I lit her ass up for doing that. And she should never do that. Person like me.

[C]

Now she knows what's up.

[A]

Yeah, you do whatever the fuck you're doing. Excuse my language. You do whatever it is you do, but don't get me out of the splash zone. He also talked about blowback from the Riyadh Comedy Festival. I want to play that one, too, so we can talk about things in that Totality, Donnie. I didn't feel wrong being up there.

[C]

Yeah, I know. We were talking about the comedy festival in 2025. You did get a lot of fall.

[A]

You did get a lot of.

[C]

I don't know what you. Pushback or criticism for going among other people. Okay. The intelligence, US Intelligence did make it clear that they believe that the Saudis killed Jamal Khashoggi and the embassy in Turkey.

[B]

And know you.

[C]

You knew that when you went, right?

[A]

Oh, absolutely.

[C]

Now, I tell you, you had no qualms. I won't say that.

[A]

They asked me to go years before that, and I said no for that very reason. Since that time, the United States government does business with the Saudis. Netflix does business with Saudis. Everyone. Saudis finance tons of movies. All these. I know. I see them financing boxing matches and all these things. And none of these things were an issue until I went there. Now, why is that as soon as a black man can make money off the plantation, they try to tell you that the money is dirty? Well, okay, I'll go home and spend the money with actual slave owners on it. Where is this clean money you're talking about?

[C]

But you said you hesitated for years to go. There are years you didn't go.

[B]

So what made the difference for you?

[A]

Time. Time and circumstance. Time. And the wheels of commerce kept turning. You know, if you want to be that pure about money, then stop driving your car, stop eating, don't use your cell phone. Everything is tethered to something that's just terrible. He goes on to talk about the fact that this is part of how Dave Chappelle helps heal communities or how he is in alignment with them is to go places that are either controversial or going through a tough time and bring the community together.

[B]

I thought it was a really good interview.

[A]

It was fantastic.

[B]

She's such a good interviewer. At the same time, and the reason he did NPR also is cause he was sitting in the space where he had bought the land and put a building up to save. Well, he said he doesn't think he saved it. He says the radio station probably would have been funded some other way, but a radio station that meant so much to him and his community and it was their way to connect to.

[A]

Yeah, WYSO and Yellow Springs, Ohio.

[B]

So that's why they were in that space. And he was doing this interview with npr. I found it very interesting, particularly hearing his point of view to some of the criticism that he had received. We've seen him talk about the backlash for his transgender jokes many a time. And even within this interview, which I encourage everybody to look at, he even says, you know, she's like, are you exhausted by talking about it? Are you sick of it? Or something like that? She says. And he says, well, I don't want to be dismissive to people that feel a certain way about the jokes. I don't want to be insensitive to them feeling hurt by what I said. But then he goes on to talk about it. Here's the thing. I mean, he's not wrong that most things are connected to dirty money or to bad interest. He's not wrong in saying, well, the government takes money from the Saudis and there are these sporting events, and, you know, I'm doing. I'm a part of this as well. He's not wrong in saying any of those things. The thing, though, is you are making a personal choice. You're making a choice that for whatever reason, you decide to do it. And with choices come consequences. So just as you have the right to go and do what you want and make money in that way and use that platform how you want to, within that interview, he talks about how so many young comedians came to him and said, I can't believe you challenged the authority here, and you can just talk so freely like that. And he felt like it inspired them in certain ways. That's your choice to do that. But at the same time, people can choose to be upset about it for the fact of what the Saudis have done in regards to murdering journalists, to the policies within their country, to the fact that you, Dave Chappelle, can come over there as an American and make the these jokes and then leave. We still are left with policies that don't allow us to move so freely. Now, maybe it creates a movement and then they do something to, I don't know, change the government in some way. Who knows? But it was just interesting to hear him talk and maybe not bring that part in. I understand he was giving his point of view, but at the same time, people can react the way that they want to. And in regards to the Republicans and what he was saying about them weaponizing his transgender jokes, it's like, again, that's a consequence of the choice you made. You made that joke. You have the right to do that, and then people will take that the way that they want to. Of course, the Republicans use that as a part of their political platform. When do the Republicans ever play fair? Why would they give consideration to the fact that you're doing this? As somebody who's a liberal, as somebody who's doing this as part of their art comedy? Why would they ever give any. Any deference to that? They're gonna use it for their own benefit. That's what they do. Which is why he told that Lauren Boebert story about how she politicized a picture with them when his intentions were not that. It's just what happens. So in this interview, I felt like he was saying, these are my choices. This is why I'm doing it. And the other side of it is. And people have a right to criticize it and to be offended by it and to weaponize it.

[C]

Right.

[A]

So I watched the whole interview and I was struck just at my affection for Dave Chappelle. Always am. Because I can tell in the interview that whether I agree or disagree, that Dave Chappelle is completely committed to every belief that forms in his head and then comes out of his mouth, which is probably why he's such a. A commanding and effective communicator. There's a couple of things there that can only really be sort of. They can only be distilled through kind of conversation. Right. And particularly if we talk about 3 odd comedy festival, which his note about or his. His feelings about there being a tremendous amount of hypocrisy on people's relationship with the Saudis is like, there's no way to. Yeah, there's no way. Right. But I will say one thing about it is every single time there was these different business interests who decided to work with the Saudis or whatever, every single time there was a conversation, Liv golf conversation, flag football fanatics, whatever was going on, it's a huge conversation. The WWE conversation. Boxing, boxing. There was always boxing. Actually less so.

[B]

That's interesting.

[A]

Boxing less. And that was here like boxing less. So just because this understanding of boxing, that's such a dirty game. Like boxing is a dirty game. Right. And boxing is also not a league. So there are promoters that are putting this on. So it's almost like with a boxing situation, whereas Netflix might be making this decision, whereas the network that's putting it on might be making this decision. It almost seems like it's two individual fighters and promoters that are making these decisions to go over here. So I think people don't have a real expectation for boxing.

[B]

That's a good point. I will say, though, they did it here. And I did not realize who was putting it on.

[A]

Riyadh season.

[B]

Yeah. And I went. Cause I don't follow boxing like that. And I went. Cause I was invited. And when I get there, they're on stage, like they're speaking, and I was

[A]

like, you talking about Turkey? Turkey Al Shay, like the guy who.

[B]

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. And I was like, oh. It was like. I didn't. I didn't even realize what I was attending. You know what I mean? So anyway, sorry.

[A]

No, no, no, no, no, no. So I'm not in any way excusing the boxing, because I've watched it and all of that other stuff.

[B]

They're very much so a part of it. I think that's what was shocking. It was like they did a whole speech and an introduction before the fight even started.

[A]

And I think the LIV Golf. I think the LIV Golf thing. And look, this is a part of a. A grander sort of money coming out of some of the Gulf nations over there. Once again, I'm not in any way trying to, like, criticize anybody's culture or whatever, but particularly with Saudi Arabia and some of these other places, they realize that they're going to have to diversify their economies moving forward. Because the way to continue to be a player in world culture is not just to have all the oil, because that is a finite resource. It's going to last for a while, but it's a finite resource. But diversifying your economy now and being the playground of the Western world or being a real cultural force, because you have all of this cash, you have all these sovereign wealth funds and stuff like that you can invest tons of tons of money in and buy a lot of influence and buy a lot of different things that Americans love and the Western world loves and, like, display that stuff. They do soccer, all of that stuff. There's sports washing a lot of stuff, and they're culture washing a lot of stuff. To become a part of Western society and to have access to that economy, all of that to say that, yeah, there's considerations to be made. When you're dealing with a government that's as repressive as the Saudi government is, there's considerations to be made. We also. It feels a particularly inconvenient time to tell everybody else how shitty they are. Particularly inconvenient time for us to do that.

[C]

Right?

[A]

And it was always an inconvenient time. Right. The interesting question as it relates to Riyadh, though, was when she brought up a lot of people, if you guys remember, you two won't play Sun City. Back in the day, when a lot of places wouldn't go play. South Africa wouldn't play because of apartheid. He says, I wouldn't play Sun City, but I would Play Soweto. How do you know the difference? Like when he played the Riyadh Comedy Festival, how do you know that you're not playing Sun City and you're playing Soweto? Yeah, how do you know the difference? And that makes a lot of sense. His explanation makes a lot of sense. But I guess my question is, do you know for sure you didn't play Sun City?

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

You know, if that's even a consideration.

[C]

Right.

[A]

Because that question is so brilliant. Because she goes, well, obviously there's some things that are so obviously wrong that you go, I want no parts of that. And by the way, he has a right to say, any place where black people are living in this repressive, brutal segregation is someplace that I can't step. And everybody has a right to decide which parts of these things are no go's and which parts of these things really mean something to them and where the line is. Now, if you're judging by the. If you're going by the injustice anywhere as an injustice everywhere thing, then you know, there's a lot of considerations to be made. Like you're talking on the phone made by slave labor and all of that stuff. It's just really not any way to be pure in the world.

[B]

Right.

[A]

But if you say that there are considerations to be made, then I think it's for people who believe in you. It's a fair question to ask what those considerations are. And so that is kind of what I mean. So you would have played Soweto. How do you know you. How do you know you didn't play Sun City? How do you know it was Soweto? Like, what, what, what is that determination like for you? If you even care to explain as far as the, the, the. The trans issue and what, how he talked about it, you know, he believes he feels the way he feels, and he believes it like he believes that he's up there making jokes and that he was making jokes about what he felt like was a relevant cultural issue, which is the trans debate. But I think there's still something that Dave, and to a degree, Bill Burr, who has come under a live fire because of playing the Riyadh Comedy Festival. There's something that I don't think they understand about the way we viewed them. I don't think anybody ever thought either one of these guys was a perfect guy.

[B]

Sure.

[A]

But you know, what we feel about them, and I don't know why it comes across with these two guys particularly, we have a feeling that they are decent. Not perfect, but decent. And here's the interesting thing about being decent. Decent actually allows you to be wrong. Like, you can. Like, it's like, if you are a decent person, just decent, not per. Not good. You're not a fucking, you know, a nun, or you're not, like, dripping impurity and, you know, just, like, light and all of that. But if you're decent, you can be wrong and you can be fucked up, and your decency can be appealed to, to where you'll come back and be like, all right, let's talk about this. Let's have this conversation. And for some reason, Bill, Dave and some other guys, when you would look at them, you're like, that is a decent human being. That is somebody that has this ability

[C]

to talk

[A]

colorfully and emotionally about issues to where you go, you know what? I'm not saying that that nigga up there has never done anything wrong or that he won't do anything wrong, but. But there seems to be something more, and that is why audiences feel so drawn to them. And this issue has just been such a. Particularly taking Bill Burr out of it, this issue has just been such a gigantic blind spot for Chappelle in that regard, for me, because legitimately, and I know everyone gets so fucking because I'm barely decent. Barely decent. Just trying, right? But all we're trying to do is protect people. That's it. It's not. Oh, oh. It almost. It starts to fuck with me. It's not like a. Nobody's trying to tell nobody that they can't have fun or that nobody wants to laugh at jokes. I make jokes. All we trying to do is protect people. Like, all we are literally trying to do. We just trying to have a conversation about whether or not it's okay to protect people. Like, my mind is so fatalistic that I think about, like, you know, some kid somewhere that doesn't. And then, like, they're suicidal, they got kicked out of their house, or, like, something so terrible happened. Like, is it okay if we have a conversation about that kid's protection? Or does that make you a lame? Or does like. Like this as earnest as could possibly be? I'm not trying. I swear to God, I'm not trying to be holier than thou. I'm not in any way. My shit is all fucked up. But I'm saying is, does that conversation make you a lame? Does that conversation about, yo, I don't want to be party to anything that takes the one life that somebody has to lead and makes society a prison for them? Like, is it okay to talk about that.

[B]

Well, it should be, right?

[A]

This is not coming from judgment. This is not coming from me trying to look down on nobody. This is coming from me saying, yo, look at what happened. They took the jokes and they thought you were with them.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

So isn't that something that we can kind of talk about?

[B]

Or even if they didn't think it, you said something close enough that they could use to further their own cause. And I think that, like, when Dave is talking in this, he's saying, you know, he talks about the headlines, and he's like, the headlines, they turned into a thing. And, you know, the way the headlines read didn't really reflect. You know, he's like, reading it is different from being there.

[A]

He's right.

[B]

And yes, but I felt the same watching it than if I read it, to be honest with you. But, yeah, like, to a point, I get it. If you're sitting in a festival, yeah, it might hit different hearing that joke in person, but to me, it has the same impact. And so to your point, yeah, we should be able to have these conversations, and we should be able to question it, and they should understand that that's a part of it. I understand that you, as a comedian, and he pretty much explains this, you can't think about everything. You may not necessarily have those intentions in making the joke. You feel like you can't do what you do if you think about every single thing in the way that you're describing it. However, you have to realize, though, that people, we live in a society now, Maybe this didn't exist to such a grand scale back in the day because we all weren't connected. We all didn't have access in so many ways where we had platforms and microphones or whatever it may be. There wasn't this thirst to say something, to grab ahold of something and make content out of it immediately to go viral or to be controversial. But that is the society we live in now. So your jokes are more impactful and can reach that kid that you're talking about who feels imprisoned by the jokes or the person who takes those jokes and uses it to weaponize it against them. That is the reality we live in. And the question becomes, do you change your comedy? And she kind of said this to fit the reality we're in, or do you hold true to the comedy you were raised in? It's a question we're allowed to litigate, and it's not judgmental, but it's just a part of the conversation because that's in anything Right. As things change and you have to adapt to them. Look at the entertainment industry, just in general. That's a conversation that we're allowed to have. How do you move forward in this world where. With comedy.

[C]

Yeah.

[A]

I mean, look, this is the way I feel. I love standup comics. I love the medium. I love the way they communicate. I love all of it. And I don't want stand up comics to be too much in their head.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

Cause I don't want to be too much in my head. Right. I don't want to. We are holding Dave Chappelle and a select few other comics to a different standard. But. But I will say this, though. I will say this. Part of the reason why we're holding them to a different standard is because that's the standard that they set for themselves. Like, I was just thinking. No, I'm thinking so with Bill Burr in particular. Bill Burr came out one time and said that he criticized Beyonce or other people like that, Mariah Carey, whomever it was, for performing for Gaddafi's children or performing for Gaddafi or whatever the fuck it was. He said that. So he said that there was a place that I wouldn't go. Love Bill Burr. Think Bill Burr is amazing. Love Bill Burr. I think the way he's kind of dealt with the backlash to the Riyadh Comedy Festival is legitimately destroying his reputation. It's legitimately destroying his reputation. It's just a reality. Okay. Love Bill Burr, though. Wish that there was a little bit more introspection that could happen regarding how people are responding to that, particularly his audience and like, what's happening over there and stuff like that. With Chappelle, we saw Chappelle set limits. Set limits about what he thought was not just harmful for him, but harmful, period. So I guess what people are really having a conversation with him about is about what he thinks is harmful. And by the way, he has the right to be like, I don't think that this meets that level. I don't think that this, for whatever reason, what I'm doing in this regard. I don't think that it meets the level of harm or the threshold for harm that some of the stuff that I walked away from Comedy Central on, I don't think it's the same or it doesn't hit me the same. That's fine. He can believe that, he can think that, but there has to be able to be a conversation about it because there's a whole political movement in this country that has boiled down their freedom. Their freedom is the right to degrade other people. And that's a fact. Their freedom, we're not talking about the freedom to make off color jokes. When you in a comedy show, you're supposed to do two things as a consumer. You're supposed to laugh and feel a little uncomfortable. The comic is supposed to be able to say a joke and hear groans and be like, that's too much for y'. All. That's how stand up comedy, the best end of comedy works for me.

[C]

Right.

[A]

No problem with that. But just know that an entire side of this country, their freedom is the right to put you down or back in your place. That's what they. And I in no way want to be a part. I don't want to be Party two. I don't want to be the steroids or the peds for them. Like, I don't want to be that. Like, my freedom isn't somebody else's domination. My freedom isn't somebody else's dehumanization. My freedom is, to me, to be shared with other people to make them more human. And you know, we probably spend way too much time on this. But the one thing coming away from this interview, Dave Chappelle is brilliant. Dave Chappelle does not think that he's doing harm. But it still seems like in this particular issue, the Riyadh thing aside, because there's just so many types of just, there's just, they're wrapped up in everything. But particularly on this issue, there's a blind spot here. Like, there's a blind spot here. There's a blind spot here. And it's not without cost. There's cost. There's a cost to this blind spot.

[B]

This episode is brought to you by Comcast Business. Hey, thought warriors. Are you a small business owner introducing a new standard for small business? The Total Solutions Advantage only from Comcast Business. A first ever combination of the largest, fastest fire powered network gig speeds with equipment and security included plus a five year price lock. Learn more and get started with a great offer as low as $60 per month at ComcastBusiness.com ends June 1, 2026. Restrictions apply for new customers with 300 Mbps Internet and security edge. One year agreement. EcoBill and autopay required.

[A]

This episode is brought to you by Boar's Head. What if we told you the taste of deep fried turkey is now available at your local deli? Well, Boar's Head just did that. Bursting with flavor, perfectly seasoned with that indulgent taste that usually means planning your whole day around it. Presenting the fryer's turkey breast only from Boar's Head, a backyard tradition now available behind the counter. Visit your local deli today. Discover the craftsmanship behind every bite. Boar's Head. Committed to craft since 1905, this episode

[B]

is brought to you by. Prime Obsession is in session. And this summer, Prime Originals have everything you want. Steamy romances, irresistible love stories, and the book to screen favorites you've already read twice off campus. Elle every year after the Love Hypothesis, Sterling point and more slow burns, second chances, chemistry you can feel through the screen. Your next obsession is waiting. Watch only on Prime. Taxes and fees extra.

[A]

Ilhan Omar this is interesting. I want to know what you guys are going to think about this.

[B]

Donnie all hands on deck on this one.

[C]

Yeah.

[A]

Everyone. Yeah.

[C]

The representative from Minnesota, she, she did an interview with Pod Save America and she said that Democrats should be more open minded about working with Trump's allies. Let's hear from the representative.

[B]

The thing that has been very fascinating, especially about Marjorie and Candace, is that they are not just coming out like the other ones that you'd mentioned, where they're saying this action is wrong, right? They're saying, I am done with you. I think that we should give them credit for that. The fact that they've had this wake up call to finally seeing this con man, this corrupt, chaotic man for what he is. The fact that they understand that he never really had any principles outside of uplifting his ego. The fact that they have gotten off the sycophant train and are saying, we trusted the wrong person, we are sorry for that. And we need all of you to wake up to the fact that you've also trusted the wrong person. I think is an important thing for us to put our arms around and say yes, then now let's figure out how do we save our country from the disaster that this man is creating.

[A]

Kids, first. You guys like Bernard Jade so there's a. For people out there that don't know, there's a group of far right, huge podcasters that have just straight up broke with Trump. Straight up broke with Trump. Alex Jones, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Candace Owen, Tucker Carlson. These are some of the most popular. I would argue they are the most popular. They are the most popular. Megyn Kelly they are the most popular conservative influencers, conservative podcast voices, and they have broke with the president. Should that be something that is nurtured by the left? Jade BERNARD

[B]

I think it's a nuanced answer for me at least, because what was their reasoning for breaking that, breaking that off, being former allies and Kind of moving over to a different side, a different mindset. Cause a lot of things are rooted in much deeper, deeper things than solely what politics or what laws or whatever Trump's doing. So I think, for me, at least, I think grace can be given. But to what extent and for what purpose, I think matters more.

[A]

That's my answer, Bernard. Bernard doesn't fucking care.

[B]

That can be your answer, Bernard.

[A]

Yeah, but maybe you don't give a fuck, Bernard.

[C]

To me, it's just a conspiracy theory.

[B]

Oh, no, no, One of them. Okay, back to Get Bernard off the mic. Not a conspiracy theory.

[A]

Get Bernard off the mic. Bernard, chill. Hey, fix the sentence on the camera dog.

[B]

Such a Gen Z answer. Way to represent.

[A]

Hell, no.

[B]

Way to represent. It's a no for me. It's pretty. I feel like we talked about this in regard to somebody else.

[A]

We have talked about it. We're gonna continue to talk about it.

[B]

And especially coming from her right where I wanna be clear. It's a no for me. It's a fuck no for me. I don't like this. I'm very disappointed in her, in particular by saying this. Marjorie Taylor Greene has called you a foreign agent, a terrorist sympathizer. She put a resolution up to censure her. She said that she should be deported. She also said that she should retake her oath in Congress because she did not use a Bible. And so she questioned her legitimacy based on her own. On her religious issues, or made it a religious issue, I should say. And you want. And this is the problem. This is why people become outraged by the Democratic response. Why do we always have to be the good guy? Why do we always have to be nice? Why do we always have to say, you know what, let's just give that person grace. She literally said, wrap our arms around them. No. Good for you. First off, she uses Marjorie Taylor Greene and Candace Owens, who I believe we've talked about Marjorie Taylor Greene. I don't know to what extent we've talked about Candace Owens, but to me, the only reason that they are speaking out is because Trump did not support them in the way that they wanted to be supported. I would say that for Candace.

[A]

It's not true of Candace.

[B]

When he was running, when he was running the first time, he used Candace a lot. He did not use her this last election.

[A]

Yeah, this is different for her. Like for Marjorie Taylor Greene, that's definitely true for Candace Owens.

[B]

Yes, we know she wanted higher office, but I do believe that Candace Owens wanted to be used in a certain way by the Trump administration that they were using other people who had smaller platforms than her, who weren't as well versed. I mean, she's a great speaker. You can't deny that as her. And she was pushed to the side. I believe that. That's my belief. I'm not saying that she doesn't stand in some of the things that she believes in. I do. But I think that her motivation, at least her initial motivation for turning on Trump is because he did not treat her the same. That's just my belief. Maybe it's a conspiracy theory, Bernard, but the idea that just because they. Now we're supposed to forget the damage that was done, we're supposed to forget that Marjorie Taylor Greene still brags about the fact that she voted was the congressperson who was most aligned with Trump in voting on his policies. This is who this woman is. She's upset, she's vengeful in what she's doing. I don't trust it. I don't believe it. Which is why I'll give credit to what Bernard is saying in regards to a conspiracy theory. We cannot move aside, move past this, and just say, let's give them grace and wrap their arms around them because they're just now saying the right thing. Is there a trust there? Do you believe that they are committed to the things that they are saying, or are they just being reactive because it's popular? It's gonna get them more clicks and views. They're just trying to have a back and forth and get engagement on their social media, or they're being vengeful because they're upset because the President didn't support them in the way that they did. There is a lack of trust here with these people, and I don't think that that requires us to coddle them and baby them. Have we not done that too long? It's why in two years Trump's been able to do what he's done. Because we always try to be the good guy. Why are we trying to always be nice? It has not worked for us. Look at where we are right now. And I'm not saying that we should just, like, burn everything up and not acknowledge the fact that they are saying things in line with what the Democrats have been saying, but it does not call for us to coddle them. I'm so disappointed in her saying this. And she's been on the Breakfast Club and she didn't walk it back, but she kind of comes back a little bit in regards to the coddling and in regards to aww.

[A]

Happy birthday. Thank you, Bill.

[B]

She kind of. She's on the Breakfast Club, and she kind of tries. She doesn't take it back, but she kind of is like, no, that's not what I'm saying. But you did, and that's the headline. And I don't want it to seem like we're. Democrats are easily fooled, that a Republican can say one thing and then they're able to convince you that they've changed. That's not the case. And it's gotta be more than just being upset with Trump about the war. It's gotta be more than that. You gotta show the action has to show that you are actually changing the way that you feel about Trump's policies and the Trump administration. Not one statement.

[A]

I don't think we've ever disagreed more. And I will say something at the beginning. Rach is right. Don't get on my ass about this, y'. All. I really don't have.

[B]

It's his birthday.

[A]

I don't really have. I don't have the patience for it. Okay? Rach is right. Rach is right. But let me tell you why we disagree, why I disagree with you. I think we're talking about two different things. And I think maybe Rep. Omar is talking about. I think we're talking about two different things, okay? I think on the left, a lot of times when we talk about people that we fuck with, we talk about comrades. There's a difference between a comrade and an ally. To me, a comrade is somebody that I actually use a word that's not like an ally.

[B]

Okay?

[A]

An associate. I think the right knows how to have political associations. The left knows how to have comrades. And I think the reason why that's true is because there are two different battles that are being fought. The battle on the left, to me is a humanistic battle, a battle about how you limit harm, how you elevate people and how you protect people. And the battle on the right is about power. And so since the battle on the right is about power, who you will power over, how you exploit someone or how you keep them under your thumb, anyone that will help you do that, you're good. Anyone that will help you consolidate power, that'll help you lock people out of that, you're good with them. Because it doesn't matter whether or not they really love you, whether or not they really trust you, whether or not they're really part of your movement, they are helping you to such a fundamentally important end for you, like this generational fucking grab, this generational fucking Royalty, almost. I don't even know the right word. This ability to wield power over people that is intractable and never changes. Anybody that'll help you do that, cool. Come over here. Don't matter with us or with people on the left. You have to trust people. You feel like you have to be able to be comrades with them because the fight feels existential. Right? I personally feel like right now that is why the left loses. The left loses because the easiest way to lose is to not accept a win. And I've just seen people like all over the place not be able to accept a win. To be able to be like, hey, there's an opportunity here, there's a win here. What you're saying about some of these people also because I watch this stuff is actually, in my opinion, fundamentally incorrect. Like there's been a metamorphosis. I can't say as much for Candace. There's been a metamorphosis for all of these people. And it started with, I'm not sure about this. This is difficult to defend. Ah, this is not. Then at the end it's like, I can't do it. For most of the people that you're talking about that exist in this cohort,

[B]

surely I'm only talking about two.

[A]

Okay, but for most of the people that you're talking about that exist in this cohort, like there has been a metamorphosis of everything. It goes. We're talking about. Not necessarily I don't agree on the war or not necessarily I don't agree on Gaza. Not necessarily I don't agree. We're talking about the criticism of. This guy is a con man. Yeah, I was conned. You were conned. This entire movement was a conversation. This guy is a con man. Are there fundamental political disagreements that still exist with most of those people? Yes, there are. But there is an opportunity here, and I realize people are not going to agree with me. There is an opportunity here to actually parse apart just what those disagreements are in a really robust way and build something, not something new, but something that is potentially a little bit more people based, that is not oriented around the corporate Democrat versus Republican style of American governance. Now in this, there is racism, there is sexism, there is anti trans stuff. There is the worst of the worst. And you hear it all of the time. The question is if there is some type of conversation. The question is if there is some type of understanding that a rejection of MAGA means that there could be something else. Tell you what I mean. If you are rejecting MAGA because of Palestine? If you are rejecting MAGA because of Iran, does this mean that you have a fundamental belief in the dignity of people, in the human rights of people? Okay, if you have that fundamental belief, if you believe that, if that's the reason why you believe that. Can we also talk about health care? Can we also talk about affordability? Can we also talk about, like race relations and systemic issues and violence that exist here? Are you actually open to a conversation about how some of the issues that exist over there are mirrored in American domestic policy? Is this an entryway into having a conversation that might develop and change your worldview? Somebody's got to do that work. And I'm just. I know it doesn't feel good. It feels bad, it feels terrible with all of these things being said. Donald Trump says things all the time about people, and then people come back and they accept President Trump. The only difference is no one changes, nothing changes. So, like, you don't. Donald Trump will curse you out and say that, like your father worked for the KKK or did, whatever he does, all kinds of stuff. But there's never a worldview change that brings you to him. You just go along with the bullshit that he's talking about. If you're telling me right now, right now, that these people who were raised in the conservative political muck, the descendants of the worst neocons, some of the worst ideas ever, can say that American adventuring and war making overseas is bad, that ICE overreaches are too far, that affordability is what we should be talking about, that how does anything that we're doing around the world, how does it help us that President Trump is a con man, that the Epstein files, which are, in my estimation, an indictment of the power class of this country, how they've operated with impunity and no type of oversight or recourse. If you can tell me that all of those things can create a framework by which to explore an America that works better for the average American. Somebody's gotta take the chance.

[B]

Okay, so first off, I will. When I was talking about my response to what the congresswoman was saying, I accept what they say. I don't believe that it's. We should coddle them. Okay, I'm not gonna say like, I don't care what you say. Great. If you wanna agree with what we've been saying, it's kind of like a duh, great. Say that to your audience. Totally accept it. I'm not gonna criticize what you're saying. I'm glad you finally got There. We've talked about that with other people. Here's be my question to you. You said it. You said, now I don't listen to Megan Kelly, Alex Jones, Tucker Carlson, all of that. Listen to it all. You listen to that. You said it. Racism, sexism, Homophobic, xenophobic. Okay.

[C]

Mm.

[B]

My question to you would be, what is it that is motivating these people that you're listening to to criticize the Trump. The Trump administration? And the reason I'm asking you that is because you're correct. If those people are criticizing the very things, issues that you said, and if you could have a conversation with them and get them to all come together in order to help the average person, I agree with you. That would be wonderful. But it's the things I just named. And so I ask you, why is it that they're actually being critical? Is it because it makes America look weak and it's a power thing? Is it because you don't like the money that we're in debt and you don't like that extra money is being spent on foreign affairs? Is it because it's affecting your stocks and securities? Is it because it's big business? Is it because. If that's what I believe it to be, I don't believe that their intent is humanity, which is. I know is what you're saying. I don't think that they're fighting against the Trump administration because they want to better the average person, because they want to better people and lower socioeconomic with those type of statuses. I don't think that's it. I think at their intent, at their core, we're talking Tucker Carlson. I don't think that he's still. That he doesn't believe in the great replacement theory anymore. I don't think that some of these people aren't still homophobic, transphobic, xenophobic, racist, sexist. I don't think that they're not these things. If you want to talk about ice, I think that they just don't like the way that it looks. I don't think that they actually necessarily care about it. I think they think it makes the. The right look bad or conservatives look bad, or MAGA look bad, or Trump, the person they voted for look bad, and it's gonna hurt them in the primaries coming up. I don't think their intent is good. If it was, I would totally agree with you. I don't trust. And this is what I goes back to, which is why I don't believe in coddling. I don't believe in giving grace. I don't trust that these people have good intentions in the way that they're disagreeing with the Trump administration. And nothing has shown me anything different.

[A]

You know what this is really about in regards to me? That's all very well said. I don't think the left has good intentions. I'm not here to argue for it, but just listen. I don't think that the left has good intentions. There's no way, so there's no way to argue that in any way that the Democrats and the Republicans are the same. When you do that, you're a fool to me. And one of the reasons why you can't make that argument is because the power base of the Democratic Party is made up of a lot of black people, which means that even cosmetically, they can't be anti black. They can't. They can't be anti black. I believe that the power base of the Republican Party is anti black, and I grew up nestled in the breast of it. And I believe that there are anti black ideas that orient those parties. So there are fundamental differences, however, in the actual effect of things. I am past the point of caring about legitimately, like what's in somebody's heart. I care about what I can move them and leverage them to do, because these problems are getting worse. They're getting worse. And when we have the right leadership, they only seem to get incrementally better. Better in very small ways. I give people credit for what they tried to do. I really do. I really do. I give people credit for what they tried to do. I give people credit for their intentions. But what I need now is for two things, and these are very important. Number one, an understanding of the Maga Khan job that's happened in the last 10 years of American political life. Just an understanding that all of that was a lie. An understanding that all of the grotesque of what you believe can be manipulated and then used to make you look like a fool. So anyone who says all of those things were manipulated and made to make me look like a fool, I'm like, okay, let me tell you why your ideas are bad. That's an entry point for me to have a conversation. Right? That's an entry point for me to talk. Right. Number two, I need people broadly, broadly to understand that there isn't much that you can get out of the political system that we are in right now.

[B]

Very true.

[A]

There's not much you can get out of it. What you can get out of it is an understanding of how to change it. That's the best thing that you can get out of it, is an understanding of what needs to be done differently. Because right now, things are so fucked up that as we talk right now, MAGA is as unpopular as it's ever been. But that is not resulting in a rise in popularity for the Democrats.

[B]

Correct.

[A]

It's not. It's not like people call it a seesaw. It's not like maga's going down and Democrats are going up. People are going, well, these guys clearly don't know what the fuck they're doing. And these other guys, we can see that they don't know what the fuck that they're doing. As far as coddling is concerned, when she says, no one can be coddled that we can agree on, I'm not gonna roll out a red carpet for you because you stop being Satan. Right? I'm not gonna do that. But what I will say is, like, when she says, put your arms around these people, I don't take that to mean necessarily coddling them. I take that to mean that if people are willing to rebuke and reject this specific political experiment, which we have said is fascism, which we have said, is this different type of. Even Republicans, I hear people say, oh, my.

[C]

Huh?

[B]

Do those people that you. You mentioned, do they call it fascism?

[A]

No, they don't. They don't. They wouldn't. They wouldn't use the word. But the people to the left of me call Joe Biden a fascist. So, like, I'm not making any excuses for any of that. What I'm saying is, if they are rejecting this version of American politics and seem to be embracing something that is a little bit less incendiary than this, then we need to have a conversation about whether or not we can reform things.

[B]

I'm all for the conversation.

[A]

And so from. And so I want, like, I want people to understand that we've talked so deeply about the capture that the right has over the voices and all of that. Those same people, with those millions and millions of millions of people are listening, are now regularly rebuking the president. That is a good thing. Do they agree with you on everything? No, they don't. Do you have fundamental disagreements on things that. That, to me, are material to your life? Yes. Yes.

[B]

Okay.

[A]

But the first thing that has to happen for there to be some type of return to an American ideal, to where we could at least fight in a more. In a more inspiring way, effective way, is this part of it, MAGA part, the Trump part. They have to go. And not only do they have to go. But it has to be a smear. It literally has to be a smear. When I say go, I don't just mean Trump, I mean Trump. I mean Vance. I mean anyone who refuses in any way to rebuke what they've taken part in.

[B]

Exactly.

[A]

So look, like Kamala Harris last year went around with Liz Cheney. Does anyone have any clue who the fuck Dick Cheney was? That's fucking Darth Vader.

[B]

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

[A]

So like, so like to me it's, I don't know, I just don't see how what she's saying isn't right.

[B]

Well, we can agree to disagree on that. I do love what you said though about MAGA is as unpopular as it's ever been and that has not increased support for the Democrats. And I think if like a Democratic politician was listening to this right now, that should like weigh on you. That's very, it's a simple statement, but I feel like it's very profound because it's not a victory that people are upset with maga. The victory would be if they actually are moving away from it. And I'm so glad you said that. It's not about just Trump. I've said this before when we've talked about Andrew Schultz and the way he talks now. I said, great, good for you. But what I wanna hear you do is also criticize the person who's probably going to run for vice president. I mean, who's probably gonna run for president in the next term. Is it just Trump or are you upset with the entire administration? Everybody who's allowed this to happen? It's not just taking the top off, it's getting the root of it. And that's what I fear with the people that you name. You're upset with what's happening now and it's easy to be like, well, that was just Trump, he's a maniac. This next person will be more level headed and logical about it. And the only last thing I'll say is you talked about intention. I agree. A conversation should happen and we should try to figure out how we can accomplish on certain things. We said it before, I don't know if it was butcher or what, but it's like we should just focus on a couple of things that if you're over here and you're over here, I know I'm not gonna convince you, but what is it that we can meet on in the middle? But I don't think that intention, like you said, you're not care, you don't care about what people feel about the heart. When I say intention, I'm talking about a mental state. It's a mindset. And my thing is the people that maybe might be outspoken about the Trump administration are outspoken, but their intention, their mindset is still deeply rooted in problematic things that hurt so many people that aren't white like them.

[A]

So there's no way to disagree with that. I'll say two things. There's one thing I disagree, and we move on. One thing I disagree with Reb Omar about. She said we should. No, Everybody has different jobs. Nobody has to do this. It's not your job to do this. It's not your job to. It's not your job at all. But what I will say is, though, is that questioning, interrogating this and exploring people who have rebuked MAGA in a real way, somebody's gotta do it. Like, somebody has to do it specifically on issues where lives hang in the balance. Like, where if you're saying, hey, we shouldn't be engaged in an active genocide in Gaza, that legitimately is about people's lives. I know you don't like somebody for what they said, but that legitimately. That's legitimately about people's faces being burned off and hospitals being bombed and schools being bombed. That's legitimately about somebody's life. I'm not asking anyone to sacrifice their life and how things are in their country for somebody's life on the other side of the world. I'm not saying that at all. But what I'm saying about is we have to take those types of rebukes and those types of opportunities seriously. But I'm not saying you have to do it. I'm not saying that. Somebody listening right now. If you want to be like, fuck them forever, I'm cool. But she a politician, so she got

[C]

to figure it out.

[A]

All right, we got to go. Look, we get to Michael Tubbs, but I gotta say something before we do, so. Pete Hetseth. All right, Pete Hegseth. Yeah, Kecseth. I don't know if he was drunk when he did this. He quoted a Pulp Fiction fake Bible verse at a Pentagon service. You see this?

[B]

I've never seen Pulp Fiction, but okay, shh. Just come on, come on, come on. I did not see this, though, to answer your question, But I just wanted to set a standard here. I just wanted expectations.

[A]

So the prayer is. Cesar 25:17. Pause with me, please. I apologize again to the audience because I can't do this every time. This one I will not accept.

[B]

I knew I didn't want you to ask me, so I was like, let me just. Cause you're gonna be like. Remember that part? And I'm gonna be like, no. So let me just get. Let's just get it out of the way.

[A]

For my birthday, I would like you to watch Pulp Fiction.

[B]

I'll watch it tonight.

[A]

I will. No, no, no, no. Cause you and Kalika got a birthday coming up. I will arrange a screening of Pulp Fiction. I will rent out a movie theater.

[B]

Do it with what you're doing with Sean and the movie night thing.

[A]

Unwrapping the real situation. Shout out to Sean. Shout out to the whole crew. Right? Sean Dickerson. You know, I would say coolest white boy in the world, but I don't feel like I can say that anymore. Because you never fucking know. But Sean is the man. But that's not. That's not acceptable. Okay. As a friend, there are certain things that you have said to me that aren't acceptable.

[B]

Absolutely.

[A]

Yeah. So that. But this one we have to change. But you are familiar with.

[B]

I am familiar with.

[A]

And I will rain down with. Great.

[B]

I'm not.

[A]

Those women. State the laws.

[B]

No, but.

[A]

Oh, Lord, I got. Sorry, Jules.

[B]

Next week I will be able to do all of this. So.

[A]

You don't know Jules. You don't know Jules Winfield. Look at the big brain on bread.

[B]

Is that Samuel L. Jackson's character?

[C]

Yeah.

[A]

May I have.

[B]

That was a good impression.

[A]

To wash down this tasty burger. That's that Hawaiian burger joint.

[B]

I'd like to see the movie. You're telling me too much.

[A]

You never saw.

[B]

I'm very excited.

[A]

You never. You don't know who Tony Rockahara is.

[B]

Is that John Travolta? The hands. Close up. Give him a close up on the hands.

[C]

All right.

[B]

This is why I'm never gonna be on Big Picture or rewatchables.

[A]

This is full fiction.

[C]

It's like.

[B]

Okay, I know. It's a great movie.

[A]

Oh, it's a great movie. No, it's like a.

[C]

It's the. You know.

[A]

Let me ask you.

[B]

One of my dad's favorites. I think he really likes it.

[A]

I bet he does. Let me ask you a question. Does this place look like dead storage to you?

[B]

I don't know what that is.

[A]

It's tough. Okay, let's go run the thing. So the prayer is Cesar 25:17.

[C]

And it reads, and pray with me, please.

[B]

Is that what he said?

[A]

The path of the down aviator is

[C]

beset on all sides by the iniquities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

[A]

Blessed is he who, in the name of camaraderie and duty, shepherd the lost

[C]

through the valley of darkness, for he

[A]

is truly his brother's keeper and the

[C]

finder of lost children.

[A]

And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to capture and destroy my brother. And you will know my call sign,

[C]

those who Sandy one.

[A]

When I lay my vengeance upon. And you will know my name is the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon thee. Okay, so part of that Tarantino wrote. So a lot of that, the most compelling parts of it are not actually in the Bible. Well, actually in the Bible is I will execute great vengeance upon them with furious rebukes. And they shall know that I am the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon them. The rest of that comes from Tarantino. He read that shit like he was out the Bible and prayed over people with it.

[B]

What chap? He didn't say Ezekiel.

[A]

He said Caesar or something else.

[B]

That's not a book in the Bible.

[A]

I don't know.

[C]

Combat Search and Rescue. He's.

[B]

Okay, I was gonna say from that group.

[A]

Yeah, the quote from Combat Search and Rescue. Right.

[B]

Okay. So they. Do they use this quote that they

[A]

got from Pulp Fiction. That they got from Pulp Fiction. Okay.

[B]

What a joke.

[A]

I have a thought here. I have a thought. I'm serious about this, okay? I, in reality, for real, 100% think that Donald Trump is the Antichrist.

[B]

It's crossed my mind.

[A]

No, I'm for real. Real quick. Let me tell you what I mean by this. So I believe in the predictive power of human beings, okay? I once saw a video by a futurist, and the futurist guy. I think I've talked about this before. The futurist guy said, one day there's going to be a device inside of your hand where you're gonna be able to do all your banking, you're gonna be able to do all. Take all your pictures, do all your stuff. And that device is gonna. You'll be able to send money all across the thing. It's like 1950 something, right? And he basically predicted that the iPhone would exist because human beings have the ability not just to look at their current circumstances, but to look at the way the world is moving and predict the occurrence of something. The question is whether or not the ability to do that comes from a cultural intelligence or whether or not it's divine. So when the Bible actually predicts that there will be an Antichrist, there are two ways to look at it. One way is to look at it is that God told man that this person was coming and to go out and warn man about it. But another way to look at it is that someone, a group of people, could see. There's more communication than we've ever had. Like, people are getting together, we're traveling, nations are coming together, cultures are clashing. And as that happens and connectivity builds, that there will be an incentive for one person to come along and rewrite scripture to deify themselves. And in that deification, use it to go around the world, capture power and bring great ruin to people and mock what you already believe to be divine. Right. So that happens in the Bible. That happens in the Bible when there's discussion of the Antichrist. The only place that faith comes in to me is whether or not you believe that that is coming from God. Because I certainly believe that men could sit around and go, watch out for someone like this. Watch out for somebody coming like this. There is no possible way to watch what trump Hegseth and the rest of these people. They are mocking gods. They're mocking Allah. They're mocking the Christian God. They are rewriting and retelling stories and things to put themselves in those positions. And they're doing it to gain power and to make people rebuke the faith that they have, rebuke the morals that they have to go towards their morals. And that, I am sorry, is what that figure was supposed to do. That figure was supposed to laugh at God. That figure was supposed to mock God. That figure was supposed to make men angry and mean and subtract humanity from them. That figure was supposed to be someone that came along and was so incredibly destabilizing that the world couldn't recover. And when I look at Hexith praying over people with something from fucking Pulp Fiction, which I love as a movie, but in no way, shape or form, in any way, should anybody have their head bowed as Jules's fucking narrative before he executes two people in a Hollywood apartment is red. Like, that's nuts. And when you go back and look at the shit that I learned in churches and it was party to that is what they told me to watch out for.

[B]

Yeah, they did.

[A]

I'm being for real. I'm not preaching to nobody. But that's the thing, more than any of the rest of this stuff that they said, hey, somebody's going to come along and do that and make a mockery of it and make it seem silly and make it less important, but more Importantly, use it to go and shed blood and spread evil across everywhere. I'm sorry, man. I still got too much Christian boy in it. Not for me to be like, y'. All. Y' all see what the fuck is happening? He think he, Jesus and his apostles think that they can take shit from the movies that they like and read it over people. It was motherfuckers in that bitch bowing their head for Jules Winfield. Like, I was, what the shit is happening?

[B]

I was looking up the biblical signs of the Antichrist. People have said this before about Trump. I was looking up the signs, and you can make an argument for every single one of them. Every single one of them. But I was particularly looking at the 666 of it all, which, you know, of course, they say 666 doesn't necessarily mean the actual number. It could mean something else. But then I was like, oh, wait, his birthday's in June. That's a six. What's the date? What's the year? Only two sixes. I thought we had him. I thought we had them. It's tough. Before we go, I just wanna say, y' all leave Tamera Mowry alone.

[C]

Oh, shit.

[B]

I just have to say this. See, this is. Y' all know I love threads and for a couple of reasons. One, I missed the beginning of Twitter. I was never a part of that conversation to see it started. I joined it eight years after it was in, and by then it was done. I'm at the start of threads. I love the conversation. I love talking to people I don't know. I love seeing the think pieces that come out. And one of the things I'd always say is it feels very positive. It feels like the anti Twitter, they have turned Twitter. I mean, they have turned threads into Twitter the way they have attacked Tamera Mowry gets on threads and she says, hey, guys, I'm new here. They unleashed the beast, to use another anti biblicalized term. They ripped her to shreds about her husband, his beliefs, things that she said. The fact that Bet wished Tia a happy birthday and not Tamera, things she said on the real. Like all this stuff. And I. And they bullied her off. Now I do believe she is back on and her husband got on there and said some stuff as well. But, like, you don't have to agree with Tamara or her husband to. And like, you could just walk away, right? I don't agree with some of these. With. With. Not some of them. I don't agree with anything her husband says. And I'm not Gonna go off and attack him. I'm not. I see what you're making bigger to read out. I'm not.

[A]

I'm not gonna read it. I'm just saying this nigga wild Tamara,

[B]

it is a choice for Tamera. Well, he used to work for Fox. He used to be an Asian. I think he worked for Fox. But it is Tamera's choice if she married this man. But for her to get on there and y' all throw everything in her face like, I feel I wrote. I go, hey, girl. That's what I wrote. She said, hey, welcome. I said, hey, girl. That's what I wrote in her post. People were like, is this your friend? Why are you. I said, oh, my God. I just. I can't say hey back. Like, we got. We got to stop. Like, people are. And then what happens is the pile on, right? One person may have said, hey, what are your thoughts on this? Or may have brought it up. And then everybody piles on. Because they want to be cool. They want to say something funny. They're taking the low hanging fruit. Guys, you don't have to like her. Just keep scrolling. Right? But to bully somebody off social media for stuff that their husband did or. Because, you know, she's very religious and you know, she doesn't really. She's not really outspoken on what she believes, but she's like, guilty by association. It's like, is. Well, I know it's not right. I was about to pose a question, but we gotta go. Just. My whole thing is, leave her alone. Leave her alone. She says, hey, you don't like it? Keep on scrolling.

[A]

Real shit like. And some of y' all just put your arms around her.

[B]

But she didn't say these things. I'm gonna let you have it. Cause it's your birthday. Fine, whatever. Way to bring it full circle. Way to bring it full circle. I didn't ask for you to coddle her. I said keep scrolling.

[A]

This episode is brought to you by Whole Foods Market. Spring is here, so celebrate it with fresh, juicy seasonal produce and some very tasty limited time flavors. New Whole Foods Market. Peach apricot rose Italian soda. Perfect for a picnic or brunch, as is their trending mango Yuzu Chantilly cake. But if you're on the go, new 365 Strawberry Pretzels make a great sweet snack.

[C]

That sounds delicious.

[A]

Get savings with yellow sale signs storewide and everyday. Low prices on 365 brand items.

[C]

Enjoy the fresh flavors of spring.

[A]

Save at Whole Foods Market. Leave her alone. She a nice lady whatever is like

[B]

stripper poles ass and see cities. It's a lot. But I do want to go to the show.

[A]

That voice you hear is Rachel Lindsay. She's talking to Michael Tubbs about the fact that she wants to go back to Coachella. Yet again, we have Michael Tubbs joining us on Higher Learning. Former mayor of Stockton, California, running for lieutenant governor. Thank you for joining us on Higher Learning. It's election season. You're the first lieutenant governor candidate that we've had on.

[C]

I appreciate you. Thank you.

[A]

Of course, you know, this is home for you. First of all, before I get into anything else, so many people know you politically. They know what you've done for Stockton. They know what you stand for. Talked about it. You were and continue to be a rising star in American politics. Before you get into any of that and your plans as lieutenant governor, what the fuck does a lieutenant governor do?

[B]

That was gonna be my first question.

[A]

Okay, before we get into any of that, like, you're running for this, shout out to my man Garland Gilchrist up there in Michigan. He was a lieutenant governor for a long time. Had conversations, meals with him.

[C]

What does a lieutenant governor.it's a question everyone asks. Right. Even when I told my family I was running, my family was like, but, okay, is that like vice governor? Is that you're a lieutenant, you're going to the Army. And in California, the lieutenant governor essentially sits on the uc, CSU and community college boards. So when we think of sort of the higher education system, but also the land they own and the way that they could build housing for students and workers, the lieutenant governor can actually influence that. Lieutenant governor is also on the State Lands Commission, which is one of three people that determines how we use our public lands. Whether it's protecting our coastlines from offshore drilling or whether it's figuring out which of our state lands can be used for renewable energy or, again, to build more housing, the lieutenant governor is one of three people that decides if that commission allows that to happen. The lieutenant governor is also the acting governor when the governor is gone or if the governor has to resign or for whatever reason. If the governor is not able to be governor, the lieutenant governor immediately has to step in and be governor. And then lastly, the lieutenant governor is just a huge bully pulpit. California is like 40 million people, and the lieutenant governor, you run separately from the governor. So you're out making your case to 40 million people, building your coalition, building your team of support. So you just have an incredible groundswell of folks that you're in relationship with. To actually put things on the ballot. So, for example, when Gavin Newsom was lieutenant governor, he pushed for marijuana legalization as lieutenant governor and put it on the ballot, which is why California became the first state to legalize marijuana. So there's a room for creativity and things like that as well in the job.

[B]

Okay, so it's kind of like vice president to the president. Is that like. Because I guess the way you like

[C]

a vice governor, it's like vice president. I think the only difference is that you don't run with the governor, though. That's the only difference.

[B]

So then I guess my question would be, you know, you talked about what Gavin Newsom did when he was lieutenant governor. So do you have the opportunity to make policy or influence policy? And how closely do you work with the governor? I know you said y' all do things separately, but how aligned do you have to be?

[C]

Yeah, well, ideally, I'll be sort of glove in hand with the next governor because there's so much that has to be done in California. But even if that's not the case, as lieutenant governor, you could partner with the legislature to introduce legislation. You can testify on bills, you can put things on the ballot. We mentioned Stockton stuff. I'm still obsessed with this idea of a guaranteed income or now a data dividend or how do we own our data and make sure that we're profitable. As AI companies become more profitable, the lieutenant Governor could make that happen through the ballot initiative process. So there's a bunch of tools at the disposal. And I think to your point, Van, why so many people don't know about the role is that traditionally it just hasn't been used. Traditionally, it's been like a parking spot for folks to wait. But just given all the challenges in California, there's no time for a parking spot. We actually have to make it go. And that's why I'm excited about running, because I think there's. I know there's a lot that can be done in that role that directly addresses affordability issues in the lack of housing in the state. That immediately addresses sort of the lack of economic opportunity and support for entrepreneurs or small business folks. And Lieutenant governor actually has a platform and the tools to make things happen and show people that it does matter who you elect.

[A]

How. How can the Lieutenant Governor do that?

[C]

So as a regent on the UC CSU and Community College Board, you're able to put things before the board to do things like build more housing for students and workers. The UC CSU community college systems also Spend billions of dollars and there's procurement policies that have to be followed. So you can, like I did in Stockton, make sure that our communities are ready and we help them build capacities. They can compete for the contracts to do the catering or the janitorial or provide the plates or all the things university spends money on, which is like literally billions of dollars circulating that some people are getting access to. But a lot of folks, particularly folks who look like us, aren't. Not because we don't have the businesses, but we don't know or we don't have the capacity or we don't have the insurance. And the lieutenant governor can help folks do that. On the state Lands Commission, the lieutenant governor is one of three again, to build more housing on state land where it makes sense. And then lastly, given the fact that California is just so big with so many issues, the next governor is going to be focused on budget deficits and fighting Trump and all those things, which means lieutenant governors have to pick up some of that work because one person's not going to be able to solve all these challenges. So when we think about the fact that California is tied with Louisiana for the highest poverty rate in the United States, I want to work on that. I want to attack that. And again, it's through leveraging the positions I hold, but also just the relationships I have with influencers and folks to help get the word out with folks in different elected offices to help build a coalition that can introduce legislation and put things on the ballot and just begin the process of making California move and not talk as much. But actually, let's start getting more stuff done.

[B]

You mentioned lieutenant governor. That role being a parking spot, are you referencing because people use it to park there so they can move on to governor. And then I would follow up, I would love for you to answer that and then follow up with why now? Especially because the governor's race and we can get into it seems to be quite chaotic.

[C]

Well, historically, folks have thought of the lieutenant governor's race as a parking spot, either to run for governor or for some other office. And that's historically what the office has been used for. But I think that the best way to get promoted to a new office is to do good in the office you have. You actually have to do something and people see what you can do and like, hey, we want you to do something else. So I'm very motivated to do like show like, hey, with this office, look at all that we have done. So when I'm term out, there's an opportunity to do something else if the voters agree. And then why Lieutenant Governor? For me, I'm obsessed with higher education. I'm the first one in my family to go to college. When I was mayor of Stockton, I raised over $20 million. Now every young person in Stockton can go to college for free. And I've just seen what even folks say, college isn't for everyone. I've seen what college has done for me. So I want to give everyone at least opportunity or a shop where they could actually choose and it's not chosen for them. So that I think that much like the role of mayor of Stockton, there's so much that's been underutilized and it's not the fault of the position, it's the person in the position. And you guys talk about this a lot in your podcast and just in your day to day that there's such a definition where folks don't know that government could actually do anything but harm, but bomb, but take, but plunder. It's like we need to show people that no, it does matter who's in office because we can then build more housing so students aren't sleeping in their cars, so faculty aren't sleeping in their cars. So that's why Windsor ultimate Lieutenant Governor felt like the right opportunity to take what I did in Stockton and expand it statewide. And also just to learn Sacramento, to learn the state, to learn what works and what doesn't work. So that if there is an opportunity to run for an office later, I come in prepared and ready on day one and don't have to spend two years figuring out where the bathrooms are or figuring out how to make things work.

[A]

So part of it is an incubator to a higher office.

[C]

Yeah, well, because I can't be lieutenant governor forever. So at max, I have eight years. I'm 35 years old, so I'll be 43. And hopefully after those eight years, there'll be an opportunity to do something else. But I'm very clear that to do something else I have to actually do something with this job. Particularly because folks are tired, folks are stressed, folks are leaving. People talk about people leaving the state, but if you look at the data, the people leaving the state aren't just billionaires. They're people making 80k, 70k, teachers, nurses, Uber drivers. And they're going to red states where they can afford to buy a house. They're going to Texas, they're going to Florida, they're going to Georgia. And I think that if California doesn't deliver in the next Eight years our state's gonna look very different politically. Cause folks are gonna say, well look, we keep voting for the same thing and the same promises, but nothing's changing but just the cost of living and I can't afford. So I am clear eyed and motivated to actually get stuff done and know that it's gonna take like I did in Stockton, making people mad.

[A]

Everyone agrees in California about what the problems are, the fact that the cost of living is too high, people can't afford homes, but no one seems to agree about what the solutions are. What are the solutions?

[C]

Yeah, I'm a nerd, so I like data guide my solutions. And we know for housing that it's multi leveled, but the first one is supply. We just don't have enough housing. And we don't have enough housing in California because a we allow NIMBYs and sort of local jurisdictions tell people what a NIMBY is. Oh, NIMBYs are not in my backyard. So it's those people on Nextdoor and on Facebook, anytime there's an apartment or anytime anything is done to build, it's like no, we can't do it. So it's that. And it's interesting because every city has to produce a report called a housing element where they say this is how many houses we need for our city. Yet very few cities meet the goal they say they need to make on their housing element. So I think we have to be more aggressive with cities that aren't meeting their own goals and say, well look, if you're not meeting your housing goals, you don't get funding for housing, you don't get funding for homelessness, you don't get incentives in all these state programs. So number one, we just have to build more. Number two, part of the issue is like permit and regulatory, like it just takes too long to pull a permit. There's all these CEQA things you have to go through, et cetera. And that's why this last session I was the expert witness on the two most controversial bills on the housing. One was to allow for Transit Oriented Development. So like if you are near the metro lines or near other public transit zones that you're able just to build multi level, multifamily housing. And then number two was to change CEQA reform. So CEQA is like this environmental law that's well intentioned but it's been used a lot to slow, delay, enforce concessions and just elongate time. So we were able to pass both of them. The CEQA bill, what it did is that it allows for Projects that have already been gone through a secret process through the general plan not to go through it again. So all that to say there's a bunch of nitty gritty things around permitting

[A]

a little abundance based deregulation in there. Yeah, yeah.

[C]

And that's why I've been endorsed by the Abundance Network and the YIMBY groups and also with Tenant rights group, because I think there also has to be a conversation with, while we build housing, which we know will take time, we can't keep charging rent that's out of line with inflation. So we do have to have common sense rent caps. It's not like you can't make no money, but it's like you can't keep pricing people out of homes because then we all have to pay when they're homeless or when they're evicted or when they're couch surfing. So I think it's a supply issue, it's a deregulatory issue. And then in the short term we have to cap rents at a rate that people can afford to pay. And then lastly, I'm sorry, I'm nerding out here, but lastly, we have to also look at other ways of building housing, modular housing, prefab housing, factory built housing. Like all those things have to be on the table because we're in a crisis. But the biggest thing is we have to just have a real commitment to building. And again, to build, you're gonna have to get a conversation with the environmentalists, with the YIMBYs, with the NIMBYs, with the building trades, with the carpenters, and understand we're not all gonna agree on every single thing, but we do all agree on the need to build housing. But I argue it takes leadership to force the question, to force an answer, to force a conflict necessary to build. And I think I'm well positioned to do it because we have the support of CAL Environmental voters, the environmentalists. We have support of the Abundance folks, we have support of the yimbys, we have the support of the Working Families Party and ACE Action and Intended Rights Group. So we have the support of all the people around the table. It's gonna be my job to say, like, look y', all, we have to build and we have to build now. We have to build fast. And, and doing so, we'll actually all be better positioned to fight for the other things we need to fight for.

[B]

Everything you're saying sounds great. And if you live in California, I think why people get frustrated and I know you're aware of this, it just feels like We've been talking about housing forever, and everyone runs on housing in all the offices within the state. And it just seems like nothing really happens. So what's one fix that that's actually realistic and not just a talking point that people run on?

[C]

Well, let me. Because I think the best way to prove it, because in California, everyone does talk, is just like receipts. So when I was mayor of Stockton, I ended the golf course subsidy of a million dollars. Pissed off all the golfers. I didn't know Stockton had to use that money to create an affordable housing trust. Created a lot of controversy. When I was mayor of Stockton, we were the first city in the state to partner with the governor to use surplus state land to build housing. So now there's housing in Downtown Stockton. If 100 units of affordable housing and 150 units of affordable housing, that did not exist only because I said, yes, we actually want to build housing in downtown using state surplus land. And then I say, when I was mayor of Stockton, we took permitting time from six months to 30 days, and we cut fees, particularly for affordable housing project and say, you know what? All the public facilities facility fees we charge as a city, we won't charge it for the next three years because we need to build more housing and help you build. I brought the building trades and developers together to figure out how do we come to an agreement to build, an agreement around labor standards. We don't have to do this per project. So I have receipts. And this is before everybody's talking about housing. It's like 2018. And to answer your question, one quick fix, besides the work we did in the legislature last year is to just build housing on the land the state owns. Because so much of it is a push and pull with local jurisdictions, local city councils, local planning departments. But for the land the state of California owns, the land that we control, the permitting on the land we control the lease on, whether it's university land, whether it's state lands, et cetera, we should be building housing on it. So that's one policy fix that can be done today. And we've already begun to start to do it, but part of it's just adding the urgency. And to answer your question further, I think the biggest difference between me and some of the others is that it's personal. Like, I've been homeless. Like, I've been in a shelter. I've lived in a hotel, a Motel 6, for two weeks as a kid. So it's not theoretical. It's not like something I read in the Ezra Klein Piece. It's like, no, like, we actually have to build housing. I remember when my mom was 26 and she was able to buy her first home making $40,000 a year. The home was $150,000 in South Stockton, like a 3% interest rate. And I remember going. We would drive by it every week as they were building it. And just the pride and the stability and how our lives changed because we finally had a home that we weren't moving anymore. We were going to be settled here. I had a place to do my homework. I had a place to do my college applications, to apply to Stanford. So those memories just give me the urgency to say, look, take the heat, take the conflict, but let's actually do something. Because it's not theoretical. There's a lot of people, our entire generation that's locked out of. I'll be quiet after this. But there's also a generational fairness piece. I've been up and down the state talking to people, and I love hearing from elders who bought their first home for like $200,000 or $300,000 that's worth like a million now or 1.5 million. And how they're able to do it with one job. How they do it as a postal worker or as a bus driver or my grandfather, a UFC butcher. UFCW butcher at Safeway and a veteran. And how that's just not possible for anyone under 40 in California, whether you go to Stanford or not. Like, you just don't have enough money to buy housing. And seeing how they've been able to use that equity to invest in their grandchildren, to invest in their children, how we're locking out a whole generation and a whole generation that looks different than the generation that owns all the homes. A whole generation that's brown and black and yellow, and it just feels like, no, if it worked then, it has to work now. And I think that sort of mindset and mentality is why I'll be different.

[A]

One more question on housing. Are you prepared to fight corporate power on this? Are you prepared to go to war with private equity? Places like that that are consolidating because they're market forces that are driving up housing prices as well?

[C]

Yeah, 100%. I am all in favor and been on record being on favor from banning private equity, from buying up properties and just holding them, like properties are not for profit. I mean, that sounds dumb. Housing isn't just solely for profit. Housing's for human and for shelter that we shouldn't have. So in favor of all federal and State legislation that would tackle that issue as well.

[A]

Give me an example, give me an example of the way that. Because a lot of the things that. A lot of things that I hear, particularly in California, first of all, some of the NIMBYs that we're talking about are people that simply want to maintain the value of their homes or they want their housing prices to keep going up. They legitimately don't want to live next to poor people. But some other things we're talking about are the consolidation of homes for very specific purposes to lock people out of that. Right. California for some people is now not viewed as a place for working people. It's viewed for place for celebrities and people who can afford to buy some of the most lavish, expensive properties in the entire world. To make it a place for working people, you have to fight a cultural battle, but then you also have to fight a battle against corporate power that dominates California. Right. When you hear about businesses leaving, like to your point, when people leave California, you don't hear about all this. We're losing the working people of California. You hear we're losing Tesla. Oh my God, we're losing. Oh my God, look. What like in and out, left, like that's what you hear. And when that type of talk happens, that's a cultural priority set about what matters to people and what should matter to people. How do we reorient that in a fight with corporate power to recenter working people and their ability to buy homes?

[C]

Yeah, well, absolutely. I think that's why I'm so thankful to be endorsed by the Working Families Party. And it's really, as I did in the previous question, centering the fact that, no, when we're talking about people leaving California, it's not just billionaires. And the majority of people leaving aren't billionaires per capita. It's working people who make this state work that are leaving. And they're leaving because they can't afford homes here. Which is I think, to the previous question why I'm confident we'll get more done on housing. But a big part of that is fighting corporate power, not just in housing, but when we think about the issues with ice, a lot of that's driven by corporate profit and private prisons. When we think about just a corrosive impact of money and politics in general in California, because it is all Democrats in the power in the legislature and all the statewide offices, the fight is really about does government work for working people? Does government work for a couple corporations, a couple companies and everyone else is going to be a Serf. So absolutely, that. That's the core, I think, of the battle in California. And I think California needs leaders who A, are clear about what that battle is, but B, have the dexterity to know how to actually not just talk about it, not just flame throw, but figure out how do you move the levers of policy to get power back on the side of working people. As it pertains to housing, I think a big part of it is fighting and banning the consolidation of private equity companies from hoarding up properties. I think it's having vacancy taxes on properties that have been sitting there for so long. I think it's looking at what's been done in New York recently in terms of raising taxes on folks who have multiple homes and they don't live in the state.

[A]

I love. Donnie talked about that today.

[C]

Yeah, I be studying people to see who I can steal from. And I was like, that's a good one. So I think it's gonna take stuff like that and then also being able to report back to the people because everything's not gonna be solved overnight. So it's like, give people some wins. Like, look, we're in this big fight, but today this is the win we have and this is where we're going tomorrow. So no, that's gonna be a big part of. That's been a big part of the campaign thus far in terms of some of the folks I'm running against. And I think it'll be a big part after I win of the fight

[B]

going forward, I gotta say. I mean, obviously, you know, you've been here before, we're fans. But I love the, the personal aspect you bring into the policies that you want to implement. But I also love the education that you want to bring to it because you go to the polls, you vote, you see a bunch of names you don't really understand, you know what, what you're doing. At times, most people aren't reading the pamphlet, you know, like, they vote straight ticket. And I just love that you want to educate. Like the first question we have, what do you do that you want people to understand what can be done? I just want to say, I just want. I love that so much. And you did so much in Stockton and you made national headlines for what you did and at making history in that office with being the youngest mayor at the time, I don't know if you still are. Okay, but what's one thing that you did in Stockton, one idea or one policy that you think you could scale statewide as lieutenant governor?

[C]

Yeah, man, that's a. A hard question. We did so much. I am obsessed with the fact that poverty is the biggest example of wasted human potential we allow in our society, in our state. I think it's the crux of a lot of the issues we talk about. I know it's not because people aren't working hard, it's not because people are lazy, it's not because people aren't talented. The policy will have to be a national policy. But I do think in California we can continue to do more around this idea of guaranteed income. I think the way to do it is through a data dividend. The fact that we all produce this data that makes companies very profitable, that drives advertising revenue, that drives a lot of this nation nations in the world economy and that we all should own a piece of that and that piece should come with some value. I think in doing so, everyone then has a stake in the success of companies. Everyone has an equity stake and a piece of ownership and California can lead on that. There's been talks about like in Alaska they have a permanent dividend based off of fund that's driven by their oil and natural gas revenue. In California, I think our oil is data, I think our oil is tech. Long answer, but some sort of data dividend, some sort of use of basic income, some way for us to capture some of the value we create that makes these companies so profitable. Based off our data would be something California has to, I think pilot and has to get right first. Because in the next 10 years this country is going to be grappling with what does the economy, what does work, what does the future look like with AI? What are people going to do to be able to in a time now where folks can afford to live? What are folks going to do when there's less entry level jobs potentially? What are folks going to do when the jobs they had for a while no longer exist or don't exist in the same way? So California has to lead on that and I think as lieutenant governor that'll be top priority. In addition to all the housing stuff we talked about.

[A]

So a couple of things there. Number one, how do you. Stockton being a case study and there have been other places where UBI has worked. Fantastic. It's obviously a good policy. How do you fight the American cultural aversion to that? How do you fight the fact that if you don't work then you don't eat gas, cash or ass? Like how do you fight the belief like the California university system essentially became a for profit institution because people in the 60s decided, I don't wanna pay for the education of my neighbors. That doesn't make me better.

[C]

After they got theirs.

[A]

After they got theirs, I don't wanna pay for the education of my neighbors. How do you fight the American cultural stigma around someone getting money for nothing, Man?

[C]

Supposed to be punching these answers, but these are long, good questions. So required.

[A]

Nigga, this is your interview.

[C]

But they require thought, they require thoughtful answer.

[A]

Go for it. Yeah, well,

[C]

I believe that part of the work is that it's a big narrative fight and it has to be like an actual cultural strategy in addition to a political one. And what that means is when I started the guaranteed income program in Stockton, I foolishly thought that, of course people have questions. It hasn't been done yet. But once we have data, I ain't got to argue no more. Because, like the data now we've replicated that same. I have a website called guaranteedincomeworks.com where we have 30 studies of pilots across this country of different size durations that show the same things, that it actually works. It helps people, yet they're still the same conversation. I think part of it is educating people that the issue isn't that people aren't working. We actually have a whole term for it in our language. We talk about the working poor all the time, the working homeless, but it's like, where are they working for if they can't afford things? So we have to put to bed that rest. Number two, the largest group of people who don't work in our society that aren't poor are children. Because we still have child labor laws, at least in some states, and that's a good thing. So I think it's getting people to reframe. Number three, in going around the country at different communities who've done guaranteed income, part of it is that there's this belief that they get everything and no one sees me and I'm struggling and I don't qualify for anything. But they get everything, whoever they is. So it's getting people to see how this is a program for them, because folks are selfish. It's not about helping your neighbor. It's about helping you and your family and your kids. And as we saw during the pandemic, 90% of families got those child tax credit checks, people making $0 and people making up to $150,000. And everyone was happy. No one gave their checks back. No one burned their checks. People were like storming the Capitol. Yeah, everyone was kind of cool with their little check. So I think it's showing, making arguments to people that are very selfish. It's about you, your family that costs you and the fact that you can't afford things. And I also believe, given where projections are, the economy will go in the next 10 to 20 years with artificial intelligence, that more people are open to the idea, like, hey, I might need a floor, I might need a cushion, I might need something given all the disruptions that are going to happen. But it's a constant fight. But I think it's the same fight when we talk about health care. I think it's the same fight when we talk about the right of women to choose. It's the same fight when we talk about immigration and ice. It's the same fight when we talk about criminal justice reform in this country. We continue to have a battle about who the government should work for and whether non white men are fully human. And I think the job of leadership is to have that fight every single day and to push policies that help everyone, including white men, just not exclusively for white men, which I think is the rub that we have to fight.

[B]

You mentioned a little bit earlier that you have eight years in this office and if things don't change in eight years, people are gonna become say, well, why am I voting for the same thing? And nothing's changing. Do you see, Is that what you see happening right now with the governor's race in California as it feels very wide open, very chaotic. I would love for you to comment on that. And then also, like, what kind of governor do you think California needs? And do you see that person in the race?

[C]

Yeah, well, I'll to the last question first. Like, California has like an embarrassment of riches. It's the fourth Florida economy in the world. It has culture, agriculture, technology, sports. Like everything in the world is in California. We have the natural resources, the beaches we have. Like, it's no excuse for us to be tied with Louisiana for the highest poverty rate. No excuse for us to not be affordable.

[A]

Stop speaking on us, huh? No, no, no, no, no.

[C]

No shade to Louisiana but California, we position ourselves that we're so enlightened that we're all Democratic and we're having same outcomes as Louisiana. Like, at least Louisiana is not trying to say helping everybody. You know what I'm saying?

[B]

I was wondering when he was going to hit him. That's the second time you said it. It's the truth.

[C]

Also, there's no, there's, it makes no sense that. Miss, other states, including states like Mississippi and Alabama, are doing better than us in terms of gang student gains and reading post Covid. And that's really a leadership issue. So I think the next governor of California has to be laser focused on solving California problems. I tell people all the time that, yes, Donald Trump's a problem, he's bad, we should fight him and resist him. But Donald Trump didn't cause California's issues. So we can't just fight Donald Trump. Our whole identity can't be, we're anti Trump. What are we for? The next governor has to be for a California that works for working people, a California that does what it says it's going to do. So if we raise $24 billion on homelessness, we should be able to track how that $24 billion on homelessness was spent. I think the next governor has to be willing to take some risks to get in some fights, but not just fights against Donald Trump, but the fights we have to have in California are with each other. It's with our. We got to build this housing, so we have to get this project over the line. We have to get it done. Then I think the next governor has to have the ability to see all of California. I live in LA now, but I'm from Stockton, I'm from the Central Valley. And folks in that part of the state, which is one of the few parts of the state that's actually still somewhat affordable, the only parts of the states where population is growing, the youngest parts of the state, needs a governor that knows that they're just as important as Oakland, as San Francisco, as Los Angeles. I think there's a lot of options in the governor's race for sure. I'm doing my research now because I know a lot of the candidates personally. And my decision is going to be based off not just who has rhetoric, but who has receipts. Like, what did you do in government or out of government? What did you do on these issues you claim you want to do something about, number one and number two, who are your enemies? Because if everyone likes you, if there's not anyone that can't stand you and you in politics, that means you ain't did nothing. That means you ain't argue with no one, you ain't disagree with no one, you ain't made waves, and the only way we're gonna be able to eat in California is we're gonna have to break eggs. So I'm looking at your receipts and who doesn't like you? Like, who is motivated to make sure you don't win? And that will help me decide, okay, this person is Actually gonna be a great governing partner.

[A]

Who's funding you? If I follow the money, where's it gonna go?

[C]

Not enough people, honestly, but a bunch of folks you have, I think my terms of my large donor.

[A]

I want you to tell me, because I can just go to open.

[C]

Yeah, I'm telling you. My largest donors are folks like Steve Phillips, a progressive activist who funded Stacey Abrams College Jefferson, Liz Simons, Quinn Delaney, Wayne Jordan, like progressive, big donors. My boy Evan Spiegel from Snapchat, who I met in college, who's one of my good friends. We have a bunch of people I met just on the trail. So like good, dim donors, we have my best friend Cameron Henry, who gives 250amonth.

[A]

I guess the real question is how discerning are you about where your money's coming from?

[C]

Oh, yeah. So I don't take APAC money. I don't take oil, gas, tobacco money. I don't take firearms money. I got in the race.

[A]

What's the most controversial money that you do take?

[C]

I think I've taken money from people. When I was mayor of Stockton, I let KIPP schools operate in Stockton, not just power schools. So some of those KIPP charter school people have donated to my campaign. But yeah, when I got into the race, the police unions immediately gave my opponent max out checks. Like the same day I was like, I just announced,

[A]

hey, bro, Tubbs in the race here go 5 million, something like that.

[C]

His 32,969. So, yeah, so that's the most controversial. Folks who've given me money are probably the folks who support kids having options for good schools and communities. Maybe they don't have many, which I don't think is a bad thing.

[A]

Right. I mean, school choice, we can go down a whole rabbit hole on that. But you don't want to talk to a Marxist about that. But like a complete, complete pivot right here. When I came out to California, when I came out to Los Angeles, it was to be in the industry that I'm currently in, was also to do other things. And I looked at, and still look at Los Angeles as being a mystical, magical, beautiful place, because this is the place where the movies are made. This is the place where you can walk down and see stars on the ground. This is the place to where you can go into a coffee shop on the west side or anywhere and you can see somebody saying, interior coffee shop right now with all of the amazing, beautiful people I know that really make this city what it is, that make LA particularly what it is. That Make California what it is. And none of those people are in those coffee shops. They're places in South Los Angeles and South Central Los Angeles, East Los Angeles, all of those places like that. But a core tenant of this town, to me is the fact that magic and movies are made here and they're not as much as they used to be. Is it important to you and should it be important to make sure that we can make magic in California, in Los Angeles in the future? Because it's bleeding the town and a

[C]

lot of people are being affected 100%. And as Angelino, I get this a lot when I'm doing house parties or in interviews and just interacting with people who are part of the industry, whether they're on set or design or I'm talking grips, lighting, set dressing.

[A]

I'm not talking about people that like, yeah, yeah, yeah. I'm talking about workers, people.

[C]

And I've learned so much about how the fact that the environment in California oftentimes doesn't make it pencil out. So folks are having to go to Australia or having to go to Louisiana. My good friend was Mayor of Shreveport, Adrian Perkins, who did some things with 50 Cent and like, so I get it to Louisiana and to other places in this country, to the other LA,

[A]

the other LA, the other LA,.

[C]

To.

[A]

That's your comms guy right here,

[C]

the other LA, because they're able to afford to do that. So, no, I think the lieutenant Governor particularly, being I'm the only person in my race and maybe if the governor's race, most of the governor's people are from LA or Orange County, I'll be potentially the only person in the lieutenant Governor or governor's seat from LA who sleeps in la, who has family in la. So a big part of that job will be championing LA and LA issues. So. Absolutely. I've actually been working with the state's Go Biz office now about figuring out what's the incentive structure where the fee, like, what can we do to make it a. Give us a fighting chance that the magic can still be made in la. So I'm looking forward to working with the mayor and with the governor to figure out what are the tools we have at our disposal, what are the things we can do to just make it possible for magics to be made in la, Because I think that's important. And I will also add to that. I was talking with one of my other friends who's an actor, and he was telling me that he's so glad he came to LA 20 years ago and not now, because he was coming out. He said there's no way for a starving artist to become an artist in la. You're just gonna stay starving. Cause you can't afford housing, you can't afford to eat, you can't afford anything. He talked about how he was able to work at target for 30 hours a week and was able to get healthcare through that, and that allowed him to still go to go sees and still do interviews. And he talked about how he laments that we're probably missing out on the next generation of cultural shapers, next generations of podcast hosts and thought leaders, because they just can't afford to come here and be part of the magic, because now the magic is too expensive. So I also think, in addition to the Hollywood incentives and things is making sure that those folks who do those jobs can also afford to live in LA and live comfortably in LA and at least have a roof over their head and enough money to get something to eat and be able to afford

[B]

their health care as voters. Are we overestimating what the government can do or underestimating it?

[A]

Both.

[C]

And I say both because we overestimate. I think in the time, the way our government is structured with federalism and the different levels of government you have city government and county government and state government and all of these boards and commissions, that there's no magical ruler, there's no Moses, there's no messiah or king or queen queen that's going to come and clean up all this mess.

[A]

You ain't see the picture. You're not wrong. You're wrong about that. I clearly saw a picture.

[C]

He was a doctor.

[A]

He said, no, I clearly saw a picture. Don't tell me what I saw. I clearly saw a photograph of Jesus. He in Washington.

[C]

He said he was being a doctor. That's what. That's what the President said. Did you see what Iran posted back?

[A]

I saw, yes.

[B]

Yes.

[C]

Anyway, I was, okay, okay, their social media team's not playing. But what was the question?

[B]

The question was, are they overestimating under. And you said both.

[C]

So I think overestimating in that it takes time and it takes sort of a coordinated effort amongst different branches of government. But I think underestimating, because as my team gets tired of me saying this, but the inability to do everything is not an excuse to do nothing. I think oftentimes we let our elected officials get away with not doing anything but just talking to us and making us feel good and going to the chicken dinners and doing the wobble at the Juneteenth. Bar and stuff like that. It's okay, you can't do everything, but what did you actually do? And I do think part of it, what you said earlier, is about education, it's about knowing what's possible. But I think it's also this nihilism, I think just given, and I don't blame, like, just given the last decade, nationally and everywhere, folks are just like, does it matter? Like, my life has not gotten better, my life has gotten harder. But I think for me, the saving grace is that we've seen how much bad can happen in a short amount of time. We're in hella wars, inflation is up, gas is on a crazy level. Taking away healthcare, like just. I didn't even know we could be this bad. I'm like shooting shocked at the speed of that. So I think we're underestimating the fact that we can do that much bad, we can do that much good as well. But I think it takes us having more of a willingness, again, not just to fight Donald Trump, which we have to do, but also fight our own leaders in terms of folks who say they're with us, folks who say they care about us, folks who say they see our communities and saying, okay, but what are you actually doing? Because, and this is why I'm good at politics and this is why I'm bad at politics. But I'm very clear, everyone can't be your friend, everybody can't be. You serve everyone, but everyone can't be part of the team. There's some people, because politics is about resources, it's about allocation, it's about power. There's some people that are going to be upset with how you choose to allocate resources, with how you choose, who you choose, prioritize and how you use power. So if you cool with everybody, you're cool with nobody, because you're not going to get anything done. And you serve everyone. You work in the best interest of people, but in doing so, you have to have folks who are like, this is not our guy, or this is not our girl. I think we have to demand that clarity from our leaders who don't like you. That's what I want to know.

[A]

I heard you talk a little bit about AI. This is actually my last question. I am actually less convinced that AI will cause significant disruptions in the workforce moving forward just because I'm not so sure that I'm completely convinced about the merit of the technology separate argument. What I do know, though, is that AI is economically destabilizing because of the Resources that it takes up, that it harvests from a state, that it harvests from people, that it harvests from communities. How in a position of power in California would you make sure that there are no overreaches in terms of data centers, in terms of state money, whatever, going to these massive AI companies so they can build out, do all kinds of stuff, use up tremendous amounts of water resources, fuck the grid up, do all of that stuff so that they can play a Ponzi scheme game at the top of the economy for themselves, you know, Absolutely.

[C]

I think starts with just first principles like polluters pay. So just like an oil company, just like any company has an adverse impact on the environment, there should be reparations made. There should be a payment for that in like a regulatory environment that allows for consequences. Number two, I think we have to. One of my good friends is Justin Pearson in Memphis, and I've been watching the work he's been doing with the community around the adverse impact of data centers on the health of the black folks who are not in Louisiana, but in Tennessee. Thank you. At this point. So I think in California, we have to be just as vigilant then. Number three, going back to what I said earlier, I think we all have to stand to benefit. If there's going to be massive investments that shouldn't just be a couple people who get wealthy off of technology that profits off our collective water, our collective land and our collective data, that we all should have some ownership of that. But then we also have to have common sense AI regulations, particularly as it pertains to. To harms that we know can happen with kids, with folks with mental illnesses, et cetera. So as Lieutenant Governor, one of the things I'm excited about doing is bringing together AI folks, labor folks, ethicists and moral philosophers, labor and working people, to figure out in California how do we make sure that technology works for us and we don't work for technology? How do you make sure that humans are centered in technology? Everything we do, and how do we make sure that we're balanced in our approach, that we're not sold this sack of dreams that never comes true. But we also don't leave on the table any of the good that can happen, even the ways that this technology can make life better. But I don't think it's just going to happen. To your point, I think it's going to take actual tough conversations. I think it's going to take actual rules. It's going to have to take actual. Also a commitment to revisiting because it's going to be iterative with anything new, we don't have the answer right now. It's going to be a series of answers.

[A]

We'll even have the question.

[C]

But I think those answers have to be guided by foundational values that A, technology has to work for humans, we do not work for technology. B, any harms to the environment have to be mitigated. And if they still happen, there has to be some sort of repayment or some sort of way to make everyone whole. And that three, there has to be some level of public ownership of. It's almost like a utility, if you will. I think we missed a boat on social media and Google and stuff in that they were built off public investments in research, but the public didn't get the monetary benefits of Google being worth a trillion dollars or of all the companies that came after it. So I think we have to learn from that. And again, sound like a broken record, but just making sure we all have a piece of ownership in the technology as well. I think those three things are a start, but then as things are moving and if disruption does happen, there's going to have to be another conversation about, okay, we're not just going to. A thousand dollars a month is not going to be enough for people who are making 120k a year. So what's the strategy? What's the plan? How do you make sure these folks are made whole? So, yeah, it's going to be a messy, messy, messy conversation, a needed conversation. But I would also say it has to be done right here in California because the federal government for the next two years is not going to be able to do anything serious that's going to help all of us. So California actually has to be a leader, has to be out front, and that's really set the tone. And the fact that all these companies are headquartered here makes me excited that we can do that.

[B]

Last question for me, and I want to end on an inspirational note. And I'm saying that because of how I'm about to ask this question, I'll do my best. You run for mayor, you make history. You do implement so many things that benefit Stockton, where you're from, and then you run for reelection and you lose that race. What did that loss teach you about voters that success didn't?

[C]

Yeah, well, first of all, thank you for the question. And what I learned, particularly in losing, is that oftentimes it's easy to talk about what you're willing to win for what you're willing to be successful. For what you're willing to be praised for. But a separate question is like, what are you willing to lose for? And what I'm so thankful for that loss is that I'm very clear about what I'm willing to lose for. I'm very clear that if it's. Everyone says no, but I believe it's a yes. What that yes is for me, I'm very clear that I'm willing to lose for a government that works for everyone. I'm willing to lose for this idea that in a country, in a state with so much no one should have nothing. I'm willing to lose for this idea that white supremacy just has no place in a civilized society. I'm willing to lose for the idea that we should not have poverty. And I didn't have that clarity before because I always won, so I never had to think about. And it's important because when you're in leadership, you have to sacrifice, which is different than being in politics. And I think that's the difference too. In losing, I learned that I'm more of a leader than a politician, meaning that politics is a means to an end, but it's not the end and of itself. And also what I learned from losing is that all the things I started in Stockton since I've lost, have scaled more. When I lost, we were the only city doing guaranteed income. Now there's over 100 pilots happening nationwide that I've helped start when I lost. We were one of the first communities to do the Advanced Peace Violence Reduction Program. And now you have mayors across the state country seeing significant declines in homicides and shootings, doing the same stuff we did in Stockton, not locking people up, but just really unlocking opportunity. So I think the loss gave me the ability to recognize that I could take the worst that happens and come out stronger. I think for the voters of California, that's important because the next four to eight years will require a fighter. It's going to require someone who's fearless. But I'm not scared of losing. I lost and my life got better. I got three kids, beautiful house in la. I've done so many incredible things. I've met so many incredible people, have been able to work on myself. So, yeah, I think voters should be excited to have a leader who is literally fearless. My only fear is that nothing changes. My only fear is that we lose. Course. And I also learned about voters is that it's not enough to do a thing like you have to tell people what you did and you can't be Too busy to communicate. I'm just, like, tired. I'm like, it's Covid. It's Black Lives Matter. It's a lot happening to have my first child. So I didn't have time to pause and say, hey, y', all, this is all the stuff we doing, and this

[A]

is why it matters.

[C]

I'm just like, we just gonna do it. They'll figure it out. I was like, no, no, no. You gotta connect the dots for people. And then lastly, I also learned that the status quo has a lot of friends, so when you're doing something to change it, you should expect backlash. It sounds so basic. But I didn't know, because when I ran for city council at 21, I was the top vote getter. I got 62% of the vote. When I ran for mayor, the first black mayor in the city's history, youngest in this country. I won with 72% of the vote. So I had never, like. And talking like. I talk now, like, I did not get elected and changed.

[B]

Yeah.

[C]

So I was shocked, actually. I'm like, but wait, y' all voted for, like, this is me. I've never. And I just learned that, no. When you shake up the status quo and when you actually know how to use power to get things done and to do things that people thought was impossible, you have to anticipate that people are going to be mad, and you have to build the reinforcements. And I didn't do that. I thought my work would speak for itself. But now in this world, you got to speak for you. You got to have people speaking for you. You got to be speaking all the time. So I don't know if that was inspirational.

[B]

No, that was fantastic.

[A]

Be careful whispering your successes. Yeah, no, you got you guys. If you do, your failures will sound like screams. So just, you know, that's be. Get out here and tell these people what the fuck happened or anything.

[C]

Got you. That's what I'm doing. That's the thing for you all.

[A]

We're obviously gonna plan a trip and get you down to Baton Rouge because there's something inside of your soul.

[C]

You know, New Orleans is my favorite city.

[A]

I don't.

[B]

He didn't say Baton Rouge. He didn't say Baton Rouge.

[C]

I don't know.

[A]

And I love lsu. Nah, you don't love nothing. I was so mad when Flo J didn't get. When the warriors, when they. When the trader. You were getting at me a couple times. Getting at me, and I don't know what the deal was. The only thing I'VE ever done is sing your praises. I did the stocking on my mind thing with hbo. I did the whole thing. It's like, yo, hey, man, we gotta make sure that we don't. We're not like the dumb niggas in Louisiana because have you guys heard about the water in Louisiana? We can't be tied with Louisiana. I'm like, what Michael on right now.

[C]

Let me tell you how much I love Louisiana.

[A]

I want to hear it.

[C]

I love Charboy oysters.

[A]

Okay. Yeah, Okay.

[C]

I love the culture.

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

There's some of my people, like Adrienne Perkins, the former mayor of Shreveport, one of my best friends, my biggest mentor in life, Jan Barker Alexander. She from Baton Rouge. She went to Southern. She was my mentor.

[A]

Boy, that you just held up the

[C]

three that's like, look, y', all, I'm

[A]

trying Southern that yard. Next time say she from that yard. Okay. Anyway, Michael Tubbs, you guys, obviously one of our bright shining voices. Michael Tubbs4ca.com is the website you could do do way worse than spending an afternoon looking into this young man, looking into what he's done and making the decision about whether or not you want to support them. But we will continue to support them here on higher learning. Thank you for joining us.

[C]

Thank you, guys.

[A]

All right, taking caps off with do not stop learning. I'm Van Lathan Jr.

[B]

I'm Rachel.

[A]

Thank you to everyone with for the birthday stuff. Thank you to everybody.

[B]

Happy birthday, Van. We all love you here.

[C]

Very special.

[B]

I'm Rachel and Lindsay. Bye, guys. Some follow the noise.

[A]

Bloomberg follows the money.

[B]

Whether it's the funds fueling AI or crypto's trillion dollar swings, there's a money side to every story. Get the money side of the story.

[A]

Subscribe [e-mail].