Jon Favreau (2:23)

On today's show, Donald Trump fires Kristi Noem like a dog who she shot. We'll dig into the congressional hearings that finally brought her down and talk about why Pam Bondi will be in the hot seat next. We'll also discuss the latest with Trump's war in Iran and why some Democrats aren't ruling out funding it. Then Dan talks to our friend Jonathan Martin, senior political columnist at Politico, about Tuesday night's primary results and Republican heading into the midterms. And finally, I'll tell you why RFK Jr can take this delicious oversized vat of caffeine and chemicals out of my cold, dead hands.

Dan Pfeiffer (3:03)

I got a lot of questions for you on this topic. Just be prepared.

Jon Favreau (3:09)

I'm ready with answers.

Dan Pfeiffer (3:10)

Dan I have no doubt. I have no doubt.

Jon Favreau (3:12)

This is my second Dunkin Coffee of the day. I did this just for the prop.

Dan Pfeiffer (3:17)

Just note that every morning through some format, John complains about how little sleep he gets. These two things are unrelated. Let's go on.

Jon Favreau (3:25)

Okay, sure. Anyway, before we go on, please consider becoming a subscriber if you're not already, so that you don't miss out on all the grade A content we're churning out for our Friends of the Pod subscribers. Get our new extra episode of Pod Save America now called Pod Save America. Only friends. Other subscriber only shows like Polarcoaster with Dan Pfeiffer. Dan, what'd you guys talk about this week?

Dan Pfeiffer (3:47)

Caroline and I did a deep dive on the primaries this past week, especially on Texas and what it means to the Democratic Party going forward. And we looked at the public opinion on Iran and what it tells us about where politics may be going in a time of war.

Jon Favreau (4:00)

Awesome. So check out. You can get Polar Coaster with Dan Pfeiffer. You also get access to our growing excellent list of substack newsletters like Pod Save America. Open tabs. Also subscribe to messagebox crooked.com yeswedan for

Dan Pfeiffer (4:15)

20% off what special deal for Pod Save America listeners. The many, many of you who listen to this podcast every week but have yet to subscribe to message box crooked.com yesmedan 20% off.

Jon Favreau (4:27)

There you go. And if you become a Friends of Pod subscriber, you also get ad free episodes. Skip all the ads. Well, now you don't have to skip them because they won't even be in your feed of all your favorite Crooked pods, including this one. And and if you become a subscriber you get to feel good about supporting one of the greatest independent pro democracy media outlets in the world. How's that?

Dan Pfeiffer (4:50)

Who could fact check that?

Jon Favreau (4:51)

No one. And we don't employ fact checkers. So that's great. I'm just kidding. I'm just kidding. We all do the fact checking. Anyway, head to crooked.com friends and please subscribe today. All right, let's start with the big news of the moment. Kristi Noem has been deported from the Department of Homeland Security on along with her top advisor and reported fuck buddy, Corey Lewandowski.

Dan Pfeiffer (5:16)

Oh, man.

Jon Favreau (5:17)

Trump announced that he's nominating Oklahoma Senator Mark Wayne Mullen, former MMA fighter, to replace her and that Noem will become, quote, special envoy for the Shield of the Americas, our new security initiative in the Western Hemisphere. We are announcing on Saturday in Doral, Florida. I thank Christy for her service at In Quotations Homeland. If you're wondering what finally led to Noem's firing, let's start with a fun compilation from her dual appearances before the Senate and House Judiciary Committees this week.

Sponsor/Ad Voice (5:55)

Have you had sexual relations with Corey Lewandowski? Mr. Chairman, I am shocked that we're going down and peddling tabloid garbage.

Dan Pfeiffer (6:04)

I know you said it's garbage and

Jonathan Martin (6:06)

it may be, but I really think you need to say the word into

Jon Favreau (6:08)

the record so that you can clear that up.

Sponsor/Ad Voice (6:10)

I think the ridiculousness of this and the tabloids that you are quoting and referencing are insane. And this has been so that's a no thing that I've refuted.

Jonathan Martin (6:18)

Is that a no?

Sponsor/Ad Voice (6:19)

And I continue to do that.

Jonathan Martin (6:20)

So it's a no.

Sponsor/Ad Voice (6:21)

We used a 737. I've been on it once. But it is being used by other administration officials and it is used for command and control flights.

Jonathan Martin (6:30)

What kind of deportee justifies being flown out of the country in a luxury jet with a bedroom and accommodations like this?

Sponsor/Ad Voice (6:39)

A 14 month old dog is basically

Dan Pfeiffer (6:41)

a teenager in dog years.

Sponsor/Ad Voice (6:43)

You decided to kill that dog because you have not invested the appropriate time in training. And then you have the audacity to go into a book and say it's a leadership lesson about tough choices. Those are bad decisions made in the heat of the moment, not unlike what happened up in Minneapolis.

Sponsor/Ad Voice (7:02)

I just asked if you had anything

Jon Favreau (7:04)

you wanted to say to the parents

Sponsor/Ad Voice (7:05)

or to the family of Renee Goode after you called them domestic terrorists.

Sponsor/Ad Voice (7:10)

Imagine what they have gone through in the loss of their son and the loss of their family members.

Sponsor/Ad Voice (7:14)

But how about specifically calling them domestic terrorists without any evidence of that, Sir,

Sponsor/Ad Voice (7:21)

Ma', am, I did not call him a domestic terrorist. I said it appeared to be an incident of.

Sponsor/Ad Voice (7:28)

I think the parents saw it for what it was.

Jon Favreau (7:31)

I don't know about you, Dan. I think she nailed it.

Dan Pfeiffer (7:33)

I mean, just top notch performance all the way around.

Jon Favreau (7:36)

Wow.

Dan Pfeiffer (7:38)

I mean, we've heard all those clips. We've even talked about them on YouTube. But just every time it just, it really hits.

Jon Favreau (7:47)

And that's just. I mean, it would have been. We would have been here for an hour. We could have played so many more. It was hard to pick.

Dan Pfeiffer (7:53)

Yeah.

Jon Favreau (7:54)

And yet of all those, the straw that really broke the camel's back, like the one that she probably shot also was this exchange with Republican Senator John Kennedy of Louisiana. Republican Senator, let's play.

Jonathan Martin (8:10)

How do you square that concern for

Dan Pfeiffer (8:15)

waste, which I share

Sponsor/Ad Voice (8:19)

with the fact

Jonathan Martin (8:19)

that you have spent $220 million running television advertisements that feature you prominently?

Sponsor/Ad Voice (8:34)

Sir, the President tasked me with getting the message out to the country and to other countries where we were seeing the invasion come from. That has been extremely effective. Ask you to run these advertisements, is that right? We had that conversation, yes. Before I was put in this position and sworn in and confirmed. And since then as well.

Jonathan Martin (8:55)

Okay.

Sponsor/Ad Voice (8:55)

Did you, did you bid out those, those service contracts? Yes, they did. They went out to a competitive bid and career officials at the department chose who would do those advertising commercials.

Jonathan Martin (9:09)

My research shows that you did not bid them out. That you, you pick. In fact, one of the people you

Sponsor/Ad Voice (9:16)

picked, the strategy group.

Jonathan Martin (9:19)

I'm sorry, Safe America Media was a company formed 11 days before you picked them. And that the strategy group got most of the money.

Sponsor/Ad Voice (9:31)

And the head of that is married

Jonathan Martin (9:36)

to your former spokesperson.

Jon Favreau (9:39)

That would be Trisha McLaughlin who we have spoken about before on this program once or twice and maybe I've tweeted about a few times as well. That's her husband who got the contract. Sorry, the subcontract cause. The real cause. He had no connection to the firm who got the real contract. Because that firm was created just 11 days before it got the contract in what was, I'm sure, a competitive bidding process.

Dan Pfeiffer (10:07)

Yes. Usually the government likes to give money to recently formed shell corporations.

Jon Favreau (10:14)

Now if you happen to miss a these ads that Kristi Noem used $220 million of your. Your hard earned tax dollars to create and air. Here's one that apparently set Trump off.

Sponsor/Ad Voice (10:29)

Why do I love these wide open spaces? They remind me of why our forefathers came here. Not just for its beauty, but for the freedom only America Provides. I'm Kristi Noem.

Jon Favreau (10:40)

What. What does that have to do with anything?

Dan Pfeiffer (10:44)

Yeah, I mean, having watched, I saw that ad many, many times during football games and other sporting events, but just watching it here in this context, it's very clear that it does. Like the whole point was to tell people to self support, like that was the idea. I don't think there's a lot of evidence that television advertising is a good way to convince people to do that. But even this ad does not actually tell them to do that. No, it's just a political ad for

Jon Favreau (11:08)

her in her home state where she wants to probably, maybe reportedly run for Sen. In front of Mount Rushmore on a fucking horse, who she probably then shot. So I don't know if everyone caught the moment in her exchange with Senator Kennedy, who could use some caffeine himself. I was a little slow where that really ended it for her, which is when he was like, did you talk to Trump about these ads? And she said yes. And he's like, oh, Trump approved these ads? She said yes. So apparently Trump did not, or at least Trump says he did not approve these ads. And when Trump heard about that from Senator Kennedy, who then called him and asked him if what Christino had said was correct, and Trump said no. And then Trump got so angry that he called Reuters and told them, I never knew anything about this. And then today, Thursday, that was it. That was it for Christine Ohm. Are you surprised that this is what finally did her in after all that we've talked about, about everything that Kristi Noem has fucked up in her tenure as Homeland Security Secretary?

Dan Pfeiffer (12:15)

In a normal country with a normal president, the murder of and smearing of to American citizens by the Department of Homeland Security would be the fireable offense.

Jon Favreau (12:23)

Yeah. The kidnappings, rendering people to a foreign tortured dungeon, just incompetence and chaos all over the place. Yeah, a lot of it. A lot of stuff to do.

Dan Pfeiffer (12:32)

All the cruelty and then the incompetence, even in executing the cruel missions, like complete shit show all around. But in Trump's world, it is corruption and graph that does not involve Tim. And so that is what bothers me. And I will say, watching this, Lovett and I did a YouTube rap response on this after the Senate hearing. And Kennedy does masterfully walk her into the trap. Yes, he like sets it up, talks about the ads, gets her to say it. She kind of like implies yes, but doesn't say yes. And then he follows up and asks, and then when she kind of sort of says yes, the Next time. Then he's like, oh, really? I find that surprising. I can't imagine the President or Russ Vogt, the head of OMB, signing off on $200 million of ads to improve your name ID. And in that moment, it felt like her days were probably always numbered, but particularly numbered there because everyone can see the trap happening. And she walked right into it.

Jon Favreau (13:28)

Yeah. And it's not only corruption that doesn't involve him, it's corruption that she blamed

Dan Pfeiffer (13:35)

on him and leveraged him for. Like he's in those ads, right? Like he's in those ads in a way that seems. But he's second. He's second fit on that ad. He's not the top of the movie poster for these ads.

Jon Favreau (13:47)

But like, say you say she, she was lying. She didn't ask Trump about the ads. She did the ads. The ads pissed him off. He was annoyed about the ads. What you do in Trump world is you fall on the sword and you say, oh, no, I just did that on my own. And then he probably keeps you at that point because he doesn't mind having a bunch of fuck ups around him. He does mind having people around him who then point the finger at him. That's like, that is the only rule in the Trump world. You do not blame Donald Trump for anything. Donald Trump is perfect in every way. Donald Trump can do no wrong.

Dan Pfeiffer (14:21)

But the thing with Christy Noem is, and it's really like this is the key to explain everything, is that she is particularly dumb.

Jon Favreau (14:28)

Oh, yeah. She didn't mean to. She didn't like, think she was blaming him.

Dan Pfeiffer (14:32)

She thinks the exact moment of the moment she thinks she's giving her, she's like, there's this incredible lack of self awareness and how she has done everything. No sense of how she's actually being perceived by anyone else. And it's like every person in that room, every person watching on TV as it's happening, is watching Kennedy march her into this trap. And the only person who doesn't see what's coming is Christino.

Jon Favreau (14:56)

Even Corey Lewandowski probably saw what was happening. You know who probably didn't see what was happening? Her husband, because he famously is not seeing what's happening, but was sitting right behind her the whole time while they were asking if she ever had sex with Corey Lewandowski. And then she didn't say no because she was under oath.

Dan Pfeiffer (15:16)

And there's been a lot of like, blowback to this in some places online. Like, is she being shamed? Like, what does her personal life matter? But here's the thing, and this is.

Jon Favreau (15:25)

It's a fucking sleeping with a subordinate. Of course your personal life matters in that situation. It matters for anyone in any job.

Dan Pfeiffer (15:31)

And it's not like he was a subordinate and then they just fell into love through the shared passion for mass deportation. He was her boyfriend. She hired him at taxpayer dollars, gave him an incredibly sketchy job that allowed him.

Jon Favreau (15:47)

And a gun.

Dan Pfeiffer (15:48)

And a gun. Well, he never got the gun. Right. He just got the badge.

Jon Favreau (15:51)

He just got the gun.

Dan Pfeiffer (15:51)

I thought he just got the badge.

Jon Favreau (15:53)

Oh, there's some dispute there. But anyway, either way.

Dan Pfeiffer (15:55)

But gives him this incredibly sketchy job that allows him to circumvent all ethics and security clearances to just. Or all of his ethics requirements and

Jon Favreau (16:05)

gives him full run to brandish his gun on the back of the plane.

Dan Pfeiffer (16:09)

Are you using air quotes for a gun?

Jon Favreau (16:11)

Yeah.

Dan Pfeiffer (16:11)

Okay, Just checking.

Jon Favreau (16:13)

I meant penis.

Dan Pfeiffer (16:18)

Okay, good. Good stuff. And so it's like. It is quite relevant here. Like, he had basically all the reporting shows he's the. He basically was running the department, making all the decisions. Everything came through him.

Jon Favreau (16:29)

Some of the reporting now since the firing was announced points out that, yes, the hearings were like the final straw, but, you know, it's. Did. They said, according. Well, this is what the White House is trying to say now, but that, like, Trump started souring on her around the Preddy and good killings and her going out and calling them domestic terrorists again, not because Trump thinks that she was wrong to do that, but that it caused the White House all this trouble and all this political trouble. And all the stories about the corruption and the Lewandowski affair apparently bothered Trump as well, which we saw in. The. Right. About. In the Wall Street Journal story about the two of them. So I do think it was a number of things that sort of built up to this for him, which in the same way that, like, if Pam Bondi gets fired at some point, we're gonna be like, well, there's a whole bunch of things that led up to whatever she finally does that gets her fired, if that happens. So Mark Wayne Mullen, Oklahoma senator, who, by the way, also after Alex Preddy was murdered, said that he was there to cause, you know, maximum violence or something. Yeah, that he was there to cause maximum violence or terrorism or whatever. He said something very similar to what Noem said. And Miller, do you think he gets confirmed pretty easily? And how would you advise Democrats to handle his confirmation hearing?

Dan Pfeiffer (17:50)

I presume it's not gonna be hard to get 50 Republicans to vote for him. Maybe they're gonna get.

Jon Favreau (17:55)

And John Fetterman, who already said he and John.

Dan Pfeiffer (17:57)

Right, and John Fetterman. So you only need 49. Which means if she wants it, Susan Collins can take a pass on this and separate herself from it, even though that's not gonna solve her political problems on ice. And she's the one who writes the ICE funding bills. I think Democrats. So, yeah, I mean, look, they confirmed a Fox News host to be the head of the Pentagon and an anti vax guy who put a dead bear in the back of his car to be in charge of Health and Human Services. So anything is possible here. I think for Democrats, we should use this as an opportunity to highlight there are high profile confirmation hearings, there'll be the vote here, there'll be debate around it, reporting around it. Use it to highlight all of our arguments against ICE and everything Trump is doing and the problems with how they've handled things. And it can. Everything from what happened in Minnesota to the detention centers to the U.S. citizens and legal residents who have been detained, some cases for weeks at a time, just across the board. The mass surveillance used or the surveillance techniques and the facial recognition used to track protesters and things like that. Here's a chance to raise the salience of something we should be making a strong argument about. And then every single person apparently not named John Fetterman should vote against this person. Because here's the one thing I can promise you, I don't I give two fucks about Senate collegiality because you used to slowly work out next to this person on the treadmill at the Senate gym, which is how we ended up. Marco Rubio ended up getting 99 votes. There's just no way that you're gonna feel good one month from now, two months from now, three months from now for voting for Donald Trump's DHS secretary.

Jon Favreau (19:31)

100%. I mean, it is, it is absolutely insane to vote for this man.

Dan Pfeiffer (19:35)

And I assume, I've heard. I would be shocked if anyone other than John Fetterman voted for him. Honestly.

Jon Favreau (19:40)

Me too. Me too. And I would be like, I think you could see Collins and Murkowski perhaps not vote for him as well. But even someone like Tillis, who really doesn't like Noam and was calling for her resignation. I bet Tillis votes for.

Dan Pfeiffer (19:53)

Well, yeah, this is, in his eyes, an improvement. He got what he wanted.

Jon Favreau (19:56)

But I agree with you that that's the focus. I would also focus on one or two issues. I would try not to do like a whole smorgasbord of things with Mullen. Like, you want a story coming out of that? Like, I would focus on the murders of Alex Preddy and Renee Goode. And as a way to talk about sort of the constitutional rights of all Americans and legal residents being violated by ICE and people and the violence that they're committing and the horrible conditions. Like, I would try to narrow in on that and, you know, try to get answers from him on both things that the administration is hiding from us and that hasn't been forthcoming about, like, are we getting an independent investigation into these murders, what's happening in some of these detention centers? But also, like, you know, put him on record making promises that he will, you know, then break, but at least have him on record saying under oath, saying that he'll do certain things or he'll uphold certain rights.

Dan Pfeiffer (20:51)

It used to be you could use these hearings to extract promises, right, from people to release certain reports or certain things. But he won't need a single Democratic vote, not from anyone other than Fetterman. And so even if you ask for it, he's not going to say yes because he doesn't need your vote.

Jon Favreau (21:06)

Now, I don't think that he is somehow a better person than Noam or is going to have like a run, a kindler, gentler dhs. But I do wonder if they will use the transition and the new. The fact that there's a new secretary to do some window dressing on DHS to try to make it seem like Mullen is righting the ship. But what do you think? Like, do you expect DHS to look any different under Mark Wayne Mullen than it has under Christine Ohm?

Dan Pfeiffer (21:37)

I think there's a chance it'll look less chaotic and stupid just the way DHS was run under Christine Oma. Corey Lewandowski was insane. Like, when you read the stories about how they ran the department, Corey Lewandowski approving every single contract for everything, like over $1,000. Just like insanity. I think that it will be a more effective department in terms of probably executing on what Donald Trump wants because it won't have Kristi Noem at the top, but it will not be a better department in the way in which we want it to be a better department. Although the thing I would say is that Donald Trump doesn't really understand why Kristi Noem failed so bad. Like, yes, she was a particularly stupid, particularly inexperienced, unqualified person for this job and he picked her because he thought she was good on tv. He's making the same mistake with Mark Wayne Mullen. Mark Wayne Mullen ran a plumbing business before he entered politics, which is totally fine. Like we probably want more plumbers in Congress. But he has no actual expertise in any of the issues that DHS does. He's not even on the committee in the Senate. And he also doesn't have makes him

Jon Favreau (22:40)

like the rest of the Cabinet secretaries.

Dan Pfeiffer (22:41)

Right, Right. And he also doesn't have any management experience either. Right. And that is a beast of a department to manage. And he and Trump picked him because he thought he's good on Fox News. So it is the same. He's committing the same sin again. Maybe it'll turn out better this time. But he doesn't understand why the first choice went so poorly.

Jon Favreau (22:58)

And again, Stephen Miller's still the boss. Yeah. Boss of Pete Hegseth, boss of Pam Bondi, boss of Kristi Noem. And now Mark wayne Mullen and J.D.

Dan Pfeiffer (23:07)

vance.

Jon Favreau (23:07)

Also boss of Penny and J.D. vance. Right. I mean, he didn't really have a boss anyway because he doesn't do anything except shitpost. Foreign.

Sponsor/Ad Voice (23:22)

Is brought to you by Bilt. No one likes paying rent, but Bilt makes it feel a little better. Bilt is the loyalty program for renters that rewards you monthly with points and exclusive benefits in your neighborhood. Let me explain. With Bilt, every rent payment earns you points that can be used towards flights, hotels, Lyft rides, Amazon.com purchases, and so much more. And here's something to get really excited about. Now built members can earn points on mortgage payments for the first time. That means you can get rewarded wherever you live and unlock exclusive benefits from more than 45,000 restaurants, fitness studios, pharmacies, and other neighborhood partners. Personally, I'd review my points for there's great options like fitness classes. They've got a travel portal if you want to go on a vacation. You can just pick up stuff on Amazon. You can get Lyft rides. There's also gift cards at tons and tons of brands, so there's a ton of options. It's simple. Paying rent is better with Bilt. And right now, owning a home can be better with Bilt too. Earn rewards and get something back wherever you live. Join the loyalty program for renters at joinbilt.com crooked that's J-O-I-N-B-I-L-T.com crooked make sure to use our URL so they know we sent you.

Sponsor/Ad Voice (24:24)

This podcast is sponsored by Squarespace. Squarespace is the all in one website platform designed to elevate your online presence and drive your success. Squarespace provides all the tools you need to remote and get paid for your services in one platform. Whether you offer consultations, events or other experiences, Squarespace can help you grow your business. Create a professional website to showcase your offerings and attract clients. No matter where you start, your website is flexible to what you need with intuitive drag and drop editing, beautiful styling options, unrivaled visual design effects on brand, AI content, and more ways to list what you offer. No experience required. Make smarter business decisions with Squarespace's intuitive built in analytics tools. Review website traffic, learn where to focus engagement and track revenue from bookings, invoices or product sales. All from one place. Squarespace Domains makes it easy to find the best name for your business at one fair, all inclusive price. No hidden fees or add ons required. Every Squarespace domain comes with advanced privacy and security tools included to ensure your domains remain online and protected. Head to squarespace.com for a free trial and when you're ready to Launch, go to squarespace.com crooked to save 10% off your first purchase of a website or domain. That's squarespace.com crooked

Jon Favreau (25:33)

okay, so Christine I'm getting shit canned only briefly Stole the spotlight from the biggest story in the world right now. Trump's new war in the Middle east, which has become a global crisis that spread all the way from the Indian Ocean, where the US Sunk an Iranian navy ship near India, to Turkey, where NATO forces shot down an Iranian missile. More than 1300 people have died so far, mostly in Iran, but also in Lebanon. Israel and all the other Gulf nations that have been hitting missiles have rained down on not just military targets, but embassies. Airports, hotels, hospitals, schools, travel and commerce in the region is at a standstill. Oil prices keep surging, causing markets to tank. Thousands of Americans are still stranded in the Middle east trying to get home. And of course, six American soldiers have died in a war for which Trump and Republicans have offered no time limit, no price tag, no exit plan, and no coherent answers about what the goals are, why we attacked, or even whether the war is actually a war. Let's listen to the cascade of bullshit from the administration from and Republicans from just the last few days. We knew that there was going to

Jonathan Martin (26:47)

be an Israeli action.

Jon Favreau (26:48)

We knew that that would precipitate an attack against American forces, and we knew that if we didn't preemptively go after them before they launched those attacks, we would suffer higher casualties.

Sponsor/Ad Voice (26:58)

Yesterday you told us that Israel was going to strike Iran and that that's

Dan Pfeiffer (27:03)

why we needed to get Involved today,

Sponsor/Ad Voice (27:04)

the president said that no, Iran was going to get.

Jon Favreau (27:07)

Yeah, your statement is false. So that's not what he.

Dan Pfeiffer (27:09)

I was asked very specifically, were you there yesterday?

Jonathan Martin (27:11)

Yes.

Dan Pfeiffer (27:11)

I asked.

Sponsor/Ad Voice (27:11)

Question is, we forced your hand to launch these strikes against Iran.

Dan Pfeiffer (27:16)

No, I might have forced their hand. You see, we were having negotiations with these lunatics, and it was my opinion that they were going to attack first. If we didn't do it first, they would have done it to Israel. They have declared war on us.

Sponsor/Ad Voice (27:31)

We're not at war right now.

Dan Pfeiffer (27:33)

You can see this is war.

Jon Favreau (27:34)

We haven't declared war.

Jonathan Martin (27:35)

They declared war on us, but we haven't.

Dan Pfeiffer (27:37)

Secretary Hex, we haven't declared.

Sponsor/Ad Voice (27:39)

Now, you said they called it.

Dan Pfeiffer (27:41)

They called it war. What I was saying.

Jon Favreau (27:43)

Okay, well, that was a misspell.

Jonathan Martin (27:44)

We're doing very well on.

Dan Pfeiffer (27:47)

On the war front, to put it mildly. I would say. Somebody said, on a scale of 10, where would you rate it? I said about a 15. I guess the worst case would be

Jonathan Martin (27:55)

we do this and then somebody takes

Dan Pfeiffer (27:57)

over who's as bad as the previous person. Right. That could happen. Jesus Christ, that could happen.

Jon Favreau (28:05)

So clear as day. We attacked Iran because Israel was going to attack Iran, but also because Iran was going to attack Israel, but also because Iran was going to attack us, but also we're not at war. But also the war is going well, but also we may just end up with an Iranian regime that's even worse than before. That all makes sense to you. Dan, how are you feeling about all this?

Dan Pfeiffer (28:27)

Not great, I'd say. I mean, it is like, in some ways, it's not surprising that Donald Trump, who has never read a briefing, paid attention in a briefing, has any sense of world history, military strategy. The Middle east would get this wrong at every opportunity. Like, he's a knucklehead. We know that. But the fact that no one else in the administration. Marco Rubio, Pete Hegseth. I was going to say they're not a security advisor, but that's also. Marco Rubio can explain why we're there, what we're doing, what happens next, what victory looks like is something bigger than a communications problem. It's not that they lack a message, it's that they don't have a strategy. There's no plan. They did not think this through. The military had a plan to blow things up, and they have clearly done that quite successfully. But that's the full extent of the plan. There is no actual idea. Like, it really is. One day it's regime change, the next day it's not regime change. Today, Donald Trump told Axios that he wanted to have a hand in picking the next ayatollah. And he does not like the leading candidate right now.

Jon Favreau (29:31)

So we need a great ayatollah. I'm gonna have the best ayatollah in there. It's going to be. You wouldn't believe the ayatollahs I'm looking at.

Dan Pfeiffer (29:39)

Yeah, he's. He was. He wants an Iranian Delsey is basically what he's saying. Referring to.

Jon Favreau (29:43)

He's talking about picking an ayatollah like it's the fucking curtains for his ballroom.

Dan Pfeiffer (29:46)

Yeah, but it's. We're not in charge there. We don't, we don't have control of it. Like, what? And then something.

Jon Favreau (29:52)

I don't want to take our advice after we are raining down missiles and bombs on them.

Dan Pfeiffer (29:58)

It's like one day we're. We're going to arm the Iraqi. The Kurds in Iraq to come over, invade the next day. We're telling people to do like, there's just no plan. And it really, like, this is. Was always the nightmare scenario with Trump as president was that he would just like stumble ass backwards into war. And that is exactly what's happened here. There was like. And also, just for what it's worth, he said he had a feeling they were going to attack us.

Jon Favreau (30:23)

Just a feeling.

Dan Pfeiffer (30:24)

But that the.

Jon Favreau (30:26)

You gotta trust your instinct on these things. I think that country might attack us. Let's invade.

Dan Pfeiffer (30:31)

But it is a lie. Bigger than any of the lies told by George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld in the run up to the last Iraq war. It's just it, like they're just lying all the time to hide the fact that they have no idea what the fuck they're doing in a war in the Middle east that is causing chaos, stranding American citizens, having troops die, and spiking oil prices all at the same time.

Jon Favreau (30:56)

To one of the most. To be charitable to the administration, which

Dan Pfeiffer (31:01)

we do on this podcast, which we love to do.

Jon Favreau (31:03)

You know, maybe the most coherent explanation was given by Rubio at one point.

Dan Pfeiffer (31:09)

Yes.

Jon Favreau (31:10)

He's sort of gone back and forth on a.

Dan Pfeiffer (31:12)

You know what they say about broken clocks. Right?

Jonathan Martin (31:14)

Right.

Jon Favreau (31:14)

Yeah. He's tried out a few different rationales as well, but basically he's saying, okay, so we know that Iran wanted to develop a nuclear weapon. Of course we obliterated their nuclear sites, but not really. They've already tried to rebuild. At one point, Trump says they were two weeks. That's crazy. That's a lie. No one thinks that. Someone else says, maybe they're a year away, so that's shifting, whatever. But anyway, let's say Iran still wants to build a nuclear weapon. So then Rubio says, well, they want to build a nuclear weapon. They're also churning out all of these ballistic missiles and conventional weapons so that they basically can put up a shield around their country so that no one can attack them for trying to build a nuclear weapon, so that they can build their nuclear weapon in peace while they have this. All these missiles to protect themselves from when we try to bomb them, to stop them from creating a nuclear weapon. So, and that is the. So that's the most charitable rationale. And it is still fucking bonkers that we.

Dan Pfeiffer (32:16)

It still makes no sense.

Jon Favreau (32:17)

It makes no sense. Like, so you're going to have. You're going to have so many ballistic missiles and conventional weapons that that's going to stop the United States and potentially other NATO allies or other countries around the world from attacking. Like, which we already did once before we bombed the nuclear sites. So what the fuck are you talking about? Like, and if that is the rationale, then when do we know. When do we know that we have destroyed enough missiles in a country of 90 million people where probably most of the regime, except for, you know, the dozen or so senior leaders that we've killed already, is still intact? What's the plan there? And look, I saw in Financial Times there was, like, an Israeli official that went on background and was basically like, look, if there's a new regime, great. If not, whatever. If it's a worse regime, if it's a better regime, that's fine. If it's just chaos, if it's civil war, if the Kurds come in, any kind of chaos is good with us because it will degrade their ability to develop a nuclear weapon or at least take their focus and attention off that for a while. That was the plan from the Israeli official.

Dan Pfeiffer (33:30)

That's what we want, is a giant failed state of 92 million people in the middle of the Middle East.

Jon Favreau (33:35)

We're just gonna sow chaos. How long it will last, what it will lead to, we don't know. We can't say. But, you know, it seems like what Trump wants to do in his mind is in a couple weeks or apparently Central Command said they're asking for military officials to come help them out at Central Command through September of this year, it said in Politico. But anyway, so a couple weeks, months, whatever it is, and then Trump declares victory. We're done. We did it. We. Look, look, we obliterated their nuclear sites. We got rid of all of their ballistic missiles or we got rid of enough of them and then we're, we're gone, we're done. We win. And the bet then is that the chaos and the killing and the repression and everything else we unleash in the Middle east because of this just won't be the focus of our attention anymore once the bombing stops. That seems like that's his bet.

Dan Pfeiffer (34:28)

I mean, that is a potential short term political solution to a problem that's much bigger than politics. Yeah, like think about what you've unleashed in the Middle east under all those scenarios.

Jon Favreau (34:42)

Well, and also Trump's probably like, eh, I won't be around by the time it bites us in the ass again, I'll be out of office.

Dan Pfeiffer (34:49)

I apologize. I can't remember who said this. I heard someone say that it was a Middle east scholar of some kind was saying that like there are whole generations of Iranians who were coming up who wanted a more modern Iran who really didn't have antipathy towards the United States. That was from a different generation. And now they all will because we've been blowing up their homes for five days now.

Jon Favreau (35:12)

We bombed a school, a girls school. We killed 175 people, mostly little girls. Originally thought maybe it was an Israeli missile. Now the New York Times just has a new piece, put it together and think that it's in all likelihood it was a US attack that did it. So that's something that we did. Medical centers, hospitals bombed, just killing people left and right. And then also the destruction that's happened in all these other Gulf countries. For what? For what?

Dan Pfeiffer (35:41)

Because so we know we can answer that question.

Jon Favreau (35:44)

So we killed the 86 year old supreme leader who may now be replaced by his son, even though Trump doesn't like the son. Maybe they'll kill the son, who knows? Then there'll be someone else. Like what? The idea that we are going to bomb and kill these people into submission and that is going to create a peaceful Middle east is just, it's fucking insane and not borne out by any evidence throughout any of history.

Dan Pfeiffer (36:11)

Yeah, it's just it, like you just. They can't answer like two follow up questions on this where it's like, oh, we want regime change. Well, how's that gonna happen? Who's gonna be in charge? What kind of regime is this gonna be? Are we gonna do anything to ensure that it's a regime? Is it a democracy? I mean, Trump did say in one of his, you know, 19 random phone calls with reporters who happened to call him that he wanted freedom for the Iranian people was his first thing he said.

Jon Favreau (36:37)

He definitely doesn't want that.

Dan Pfeiffer (36:38)

They care about that for sure.

Jon Favreau (36:40)

For sure. They are probably hoping that they can get and I forget where I was reading this, but there's like basically, you know, two factions in Iran in the regime and one is, you know, we repress our people at home and then also we're very aggressive outwardly to the rest of the world. And the other is we have a detente with the rest of the world and we still repress the hell out of other people at home. Right. And Trump clearly doesn't care about the Iranian people at all. He clearly doesn't care if the violence and repression continues there. What he hopes is that maybe he'll find a regime that's corrupt enough to do a deal with the west, with the United States, and they can go on doing whatever they want to the Iranian people at home. That's his probably best scenario. Now even that's not something that you can just fucking plan out. That's just hope. Hopefully that's where everything lands. We don't know. We don't know. On Tuesday show we played Trump responding to the first American casualties in the war with quote, that's the way it is. Likely be more. Pete Hegseth was arguably even more callous and offensive on Wednesday when he scolded the press for hurting the President's political standing by reporting on the deaths of American troops. Here's what he said, followed by Caroline Levitt's angry defense of Hegseth during her briefing.

Jonathan Martin (37:59)

This is what the fake news misses.

Dan Pfeiffer (38:02)

We've taken control of Iran's airspace and

Jonathan Martin (38:04)

waterways without boots on the ground.

Dan Pfeiffer (38:08)

We control their fate.

Jonathan Martin (38:10)

But when a few drones get through

Dan Pfeiffer (38:12)

or tragic things happen, it's front page news.

Sponsor/Ad Voice (38:16)

I get it.

Jonathan Martin (38:17)

The press only wants to make the president look bad. But try for once to report the

Sponsor/Ad Voice (38:22)

reality was complaining that it was front page news about these six service members who were killed. That's not what the secretary said, Caitlin. And that's not what the secretary meant and you know it. You know you are being disingenuous. There is not. We've never had a Secretary of defense who cares. More tragic things happen. It's front page news. I, I get it. The press only wants to make the president look bad. But you know, we can debts of US service members under every president. The press does only want to make the president look bad. That's a fact. Especially you. No, listen to me. Especially you and especially cnn.

Jon Favreau (38:54)

Good for Kaitlan Collins. So I don't want to give political advice to the White House here, but I'm not sure the most effective response to Americans dying in the Middle east is going to be, but think about all the American soldiers who weren't killed, which is basically what he wants the press to report. You don't talk about any of the good stuff. You just talk about an errant drone or tragic things happening. I mean, what the fuck?

Dan Pfeiffer (39:23)

Yeah, it's sick.

Jon Favreau (39:24)

How do they not see that, though? That wasn't Hegseth off the cuff. Hegseth was reading a statement.

Dan Pfeiffer (39:31)

Here's how that is. Because to be Trump, to work for Trump, to be a Trump super fan, is to only be able to see the world through Trump's eyes, to view everything in the context of how it affects Donald Trump. Is it good for Donald Trump? Is it bad for Donald Trump? And that disease is so prevalent that it even applies to the death of American troops who serve under Pete Hegseth. He is the Secretary of Defense, and he can only see the death of troops who died in part because they did a very poor job of planning for this war. Yes, because they were in a. By reports, they were in a unarmored, unfortified trailer as attacks were being launched. Attacks that we chose. We picked the timing of them. We chose when they would be, and they left the troops out there. But the only way you can see it is as something that is bad for Trump, not what's bad for these families. Not for the people, the families and young kids here. Yeah, but what's bad for Donald Trump? And that's it. And that's all that matters. That's all they can think of. And it's honestly perverse, we should note

Jon Favreau (40:36)

that the reason Trump has unilaterally taken this country to war is because Republicans in Congress and now a few Democrats have voted to let him in the Senate. Republicans this week blocked a vote on a War Powers act resolution that would have stopped Trump's military action in Iran unless Congress explicitly authorized it. John Fetterman was the only Democrat to vote with the Republicans and Rand Paul was the only Republican to vote with the Democrats in the House. Only four Democrats voted against the resolution. And it did, of course, fail.

Dan Pfeiffer (41:09)

And none of the two that we screamed about last week, I was gonna

Jon Favreau (41:12)

say Jared Moskowitz and Josh Gottheimer changed their minds. Good for them.

Dan Pfeiffer (41:17)

And Moskowitz said a really, I thought, long, thoughtful statement about why he did it.

Jon Favreau (41:21)

He did. And I haven't gotten anything, Josh.

Dan Pfeiffer (41:24)

No. But yes, everyone has the right to change their mind. And if you do so and you explain it, kudos to them.

Jon Favreau (41:31)

But these aren't the last votes Congress will likely face on the war. Trump officials have said that they're probably going to send what's known as an emergency supplemental funding request to Congress, AKA give us more money for the war, reportedly with a price tag of $50 billion with a B. This is after Congress already approved nearly $1 trillion in defense spending since Trump took office last year. And if that makes you angry, get ready for the lead of this Politico story about the extra war funding. Quote, some Democrats aren't ruling out voting for a multi billion dollar military infusion, setting up a potential internal clash in the weeks ahead. You want to tee off on this one, Dan?

Dan Pfeiffer (42:18)

I do. This is an illegal regime change war of choice being conducted by a corrupt tin pot dictator who is unable or unwilling to explain to us why we're in this war, what we're doing, or what victory looks like. The idea that we would give him funding to pay for this war, to do that would be to take every last bit of power and influence that the Congress has to hand it to the President. This is the only check available to this president that we could possibly do. And to see that would be to validate every criticism fair and unfair that people have had about Democrats since Trump was elected. It would be a truly insane thing to do.

Jon Favreau (43:09)

Yeah, I think, I mean, I am going to give Democrats here the benefit of the doubt and that maybe they're just thinking through things. Maybe they didn't want to go on the record, although they did talk to the reporters about this.

Dan Pfeiffer (43:24)

Some of them went on the record.

Jon Favreau (43:25)

Some of them went on the record. Yeah. And maybe they'll change their mind, just like Jared Moskowitz and Josh Gothemeur changed their mind. So maybe they'll come around. But I do think voting for funding on this war would be perhaps the most catastrophic vote of your career. I really do. And so I've heard of people, you know, so it's people on the Armed Services Committee, Democrats on the Armed Services Committee, I guess, that were the focus of this Politico piece. They have Alyssa Slotkin, which I was surprised about, on record saying she's like, well, you know, I'm thinking about it, but we're in it now. You know, I don't like this war, but we're in it. Some version of that. And I'VE seen people say, well, you know, during Iraq, a lot of Democrats voted for supplemental funding bills because they wanted to make sure that even though they hated the war and they were opposed to the war in Iraq and they wanted the war in Iraq to end, that you can't just leave the troops in the field without armor or without the funding they need because that puts troops in danger. And like, first of all, back then, I always found that argument a little, you know, the idea that a vote in the Congress is suddenly they're going to run out of money. And, you know, but at least then the troops were in battle, they were on the ground in Iraq. Hundreds and hundreds of thousands of American troops. Right. And so you could make an argument that you can't just withdraw all at once immediately, and you need some extra funding. I get it. Right. We don't have to.

Dan Pfeiffer (44:53)

Also, there's a bigger point here than that.

Jon Favreau (44:54)

That's what I'm saying. The bigger point here is like, this is just money to keep bombing Iran, which Donald Trump can stop any second he wants, leaving no American soldier at risk at all.

Dan Pfeiffer (45:07)

But I think there's an even bigger point than that, which is that was an authorized war. Congress. There was a process which Congress. President asked for authorization, the Congress gave it to him. They shouldn't have, but they did. It was a war that was a military action approved by the CU? N Security Council. This war has no domestic legal framework at all. Is an illegal war, Violation of international

Jon Favreau (45:29)

law, violation of domestic law against the Constitution, no clear rationale. President who's a fucking criminal. Like, what are we doing?

Dan Pfeiffer (45:37)

Yeah, it's just like, you can. We can argue, and I'll take that criticism that even, even Barack Obama's in the Senate shouldn't have voted for some of these. But these are. These are apples and fucking oranges. These are two different situations. This is a war of choice. And it's not even. They can't even. The whole process is so fucked up that they have to stop themselves from saying the word war. Cause to do so is to admit to the illegality of what they're doing. The choice should be, if you want money for this war, come try to get authorization for it. We're not gonna fund any legal war that you could end any day you're choosing.

Jon Favreau (46:11)

So it's like you're asking us to. First of all, you got a trillion dollars over the last year at the Pentagon. You're now asking us to pony up another $50 billion at a time when people can't Afford groceries, a home, their healthcare, so that Donald Trump and Bibi Netanyahu can keep dropping bombs on a country of 90 million people because they think that's how you bring about peace in the Middle East. What the fuck are we talking about? How do you even consider voting for that?

Dan Pfeiffer (46:43)

I believe in the end, the overwhelming majority of Democrats will vote against this. John Fetterman obviously will. Maybe one or two others will. I certainly hope not. I plan to yell about that at every platform available to me if they do that, because it is truly insane. And it should be. The Democratic leadership should not be trying to manage the caucus here. They should be lobbying members to vote against this. It should be the position of the Democratic Party, the House, in the Senate, that we are not going to vote for this for the reasons we just laid out. And if other. If people do it, that. That can happen. We are always going to have members. They have Rand Paul, we have John Fetterman. But this. You were. If these. If it feels like two voters, that the Democratic Party, the Democratic leadership, is okay with this, then that is catastrophic, even for the people who voted against it.

Jon Favreau (47:37)

Yeah, because I just. It's. It's bad enough if you're like a John Fetterman who supported the war and is going to vote to fund it in as well. I mean, that. That, to me is insane anyway.

Dan Pfeiffer (47:48)

It's ideological. It's insane, but it's.

Jon Favreau (47:50)

Ideologically, yeah, it's coherent. The idea that someone who, like all the rest of the Democrats have said it's an illegal war, that they oppose that you would say, this illegal war, now that we're in it, I must vote to just fund it with taxpayer dollars. That it's. It is. It's also just weak. You know, that maybe that's like the least of the problems, but it just makes you look so fucking weak.

Dan Pfeiffer (48:15)

I am going to believe that in the end, Alyssa Slatin is going to vote against us.

Jon Favreau (48:19)

That's why I can't. Like, if you just wanted to, you know, if political reporter caught you in the hall and you weren't ready to say anything, whatever, that's fine.

Dan Pfeiffer (48:26)

This kind of happened to Gallego on cnn, it seems.

Jon Favreau (48:28)

Well, and it was very. I was. I thought it was weird because Gallego's answer was, well, at least half of the funding would have to come from the other countries in the Gulf because we're not paying. But I'm like, why are the other countries. The other countries in the Gulf didn't ask for this fucking war either. And now they're getting hit. Yeah.

Dan Pfeiffer (48:41)

Then he tweeted that he was definitely not voting for it. So I saw that he clarified that.

Jon Favreau (48:44)

Yeah, no, no, which is good. But I'm just like, what's everyone doing here? It's a no. It's a no.

Dan Pfeiffer (48:49)

So this thing is costing a billion dollars a day.

Jon Favreau (48:51)

A billion dollars a day.

Dan Pfeiffer (48:52)

If this is going that $50 billion is not going to get you that far.

Sponsor/Ad Voice (49:03)

Ponte of America is brought to you by Quince A thoughtfully built wardrobe comes down to pieces that mix well and last. That's where Quinn shines. Premium fabrics, considered designs and everyday essentials that feel effortless to wear and dependable even as the seasons change. Quinn says the everyday essentials I love with the quality that lasts Lightweight cashmere sweaters, short sleeve Mongolian cashmere polos, linen bottoms and shorts, tees and 100% Pima cotton and European jersey linen. These are the versatile pieces that make a wardrobe actually work season to season. Quinn's works directly with top factories and cuts out the middlemen. You're not paying for brand markup or fancy retail stores, just quality clothing. The cashmere is 100% Mongolian, the same stuff luxury brands use. The Pima cotton is long staple, which means it stays soft and doesn't pill. The European jersey linen is breathable and lightweight. Everything is built to hold up to regular wear and still looks good. Their clothing is rated between 4.5 and 5 stars by thousands of people wearing it every day, and they only partner with factories that meet rigorous standards for craftsmanship and ethical production. I've ordered tons of stuff from Quint's. They've got great essentials like workout shirts. I bought some people gifts from Quints, some beautiful sweaters for Christmas. They've got basics like some underwear. Everything you want and more just at better prices. Stop over complicating your wardrobe. You don't need a closet full of options. You need a few pieces that actually work right now. Go to quince.com crooked for free shipping and 365 day returns. That's a full year to build your wardrobe and love it. Now available in Canada too. Don't keep settling for clothes that go at last. Go to Q U I n c e.com qriket for free shipping and 365 day returns. Quince.com crooked work moves fast.

Sponsor/Ad Voice (50:39)

From emails and reports to proposals and updates. You're expected to think clearly, write confidently and get it right the first time. And every message counts. That's where Grammarly comes in. It gives you everything you need to think, write, and finish in one place or anywhere you type and text. You'll never have to switch tools or tabs. Grammarly's AI agents are built for how you work and where you work so you can find the right words, adjust your tone, and predict how your message might land before you hit send. Your ideas will get a boost while still sounding natural, credible, and just the way you want. For nearly 17 years, Grammarly has been the standard for responsible AI. It's the premier writing tool that 93% of users trust to get more work done in a world of generic AI. Don't sound like everyone else. With Grammarly, you never will. Download Grammarly for free@Grammarly.com that's Grammarly.com

Jon Favreau (51:40)

so obviously, as we said, Hegseth and Gnome are doing all the heavy lifting this week when it comes to Cabinet members embarrassing the White House and themselves. But Pam Bondi, she's out there saying, hey, don't forget about me. Due to popular demand, she'll now be doing an encore performance of last month's congressional testimony. And by popular demand, we mean that five Republicans on the Oversight Committee voted with all the Democrats to subpoena Bondi for her handling of the Epstein files, notably the 50,000 documents DOJ has reportedly withheld, including those related to unverified claims of sexual misconduct against a minor by Epstein and Trump himself. The New York Times and other outlets also reported on Wednesday that DOJ has been forced to abandon the case they were reportedly trying to build against Joe Biden and his top aides for their use of the presidential auto pen. Everything is so fucking stupid. Since federal prosecutors in Jeanine Pirro's D.C. office couldn't find any evidence of a crime. Oh no. Shit. The Times also just reported that Lindsey Halligan, the Trump defense attorney he appointed to indict Jim Comey and Tish James, after all the other real prosecutors refused, is now under investigation by the Florida Bar association for the nakedly political prosecution she attempted and could potentially lose her law license. Bondi's DOJ Just Crushing It Dan let's start with the subpoena. I'm actually a little surprised we're getting another round of of Bondi hearings.

Dan Pfeiffer (53:07)

I was assuming these were closed door depositions.

Jon Favreau (53:14)

You think so that was that was that.

Dan Pfeiffer (53:16)

My assumption was it was this was similar to the Hillary booklet. Now we'll probably see video of it, but it was similar similar process.

Jon Favreau (53:22)

But what would what do you think the focus is? Is it. Is it just these most recent files that came down, including The Trump stuff, because.

Dan Pfeiffer (53:30)

Yeah, I think it is the file. Why the files haven't been released. I think it's chain of custody on the files. I think now she's going to be in a position where she's also going to ask questions about Ghislaine Maxwell ending up at the country club. So the whole process about which they came to be, the release was compelled and what was not. And I think there is something here, and it's sort of a consistent thread between what happened in Nome with John Kennedy. What's happening here to Pam Bondi is there are. I'm not saying Republicans are breaking with Trump. They are not. But they are finding place. They are desperately looking for places to show some measure of independence. And in this case, Nancy Mace actually surprised them by this was like they didn't know this was coming. And then they were just like forced to make a decision, which I think is probably pretty hard for these Republicans to make a decision on the spot. But there is something about where they are trying to find places to where Trump's weakness is now becoming more manifest in how they respond to his Cabinet secretaries, at least.

Jon Favreau (54:32)

Yeah, yeah. You know, on all the rest, the failing to, you know, bring an indictment or even a case against Biden, Lindsey Halligan, the other failures of them trying to indict people, the grand jury failures. Like, on one hand, it'd be fun to see Bondi go the way of Kristi Noem. On the other. I do think that the fact that her incompetence has led to such an epic losing streak for Trump's political revenge tour that, I don't know, maybe we might be better off if he keeps Bondi at doj. I don't know. What do you think there.

Dan Pfeiffer (55:06)

Yeah, there's. There's no good person he's putting in. He's not. He's not putting. Appointing someone who's not going to do bullshit political vengeance investigations like, that's not.

Jon Favreau (55:16)

I'd rather. I'd rather. I don't want someone more effective.

Dan Pfeiffer (55:19)

Yeah. I'm not sure that any person could effectively do what Trump wants. He is, at the end of the day, he's asking his attorney general to prosecute people for crimes they did not commit and in some cases, for things that are not actually crimes.

Jon Favreau (55:31)

Yeah. His problem is the juries and the judges, really.

Dan Pfeiffer (55:34)

Yeah. That's what is stopping it. And the problem is Trump not the person. I think she's particularly bad at her job if she stays or. Who cares? I don't really care. If she stays or goes. Because as we see with this Mark Wayne Mullen situation, you're just going to get someone who shares Trump's odious views and is maybe slightly more effective at implementing those odious views.

Jon Favreau (55:53)

Right. And is still reporting to Stephen Miller, essentially. So somehow Tuesday night's primaries already feel like ancient history. It's Thursday afternoon as we're recording this, but we haven't had the chance to talk about the results on this show in Texas. Maga World has already started previewing how they're gonna go after James Talarico, who beat Jasmine Crockett. This includes resurfacing Tall Rico's old tweets. It's always the old tweets that get you about Black Lives Matter, where he said that racism is a virus that white people spread everywhere we go. And a video from 2021 on the Texas House floor where Talarico said God is non binary. He also talked about how there's technically six genders. There's a whole bunch of them, whole bunch of tweets, whole bunch of. What do you make of the attack so far? How do you handle them if you're Talarico?

Dan Pfeiffer (56:43)

They don't actually worry me that much. Every Democrat's gonna face some version of this. I think Talarico is predictable.

Jon Favreau (56:49)

If you were alive between 2017 and

Dan Pfeiffer (56:51)

2021, it had access to the Internet. Every Republican has a similar.

Jon Favreau (56:55)

It's like a lot of Democrats should just try to take a mulligan on

Dan Pfeiffer (56:57)

all and every Republican. Like the things Republicans have tweeted about January 6th and a bunch of other stuff. Also problematic. I think Talariko handles it the way he's handled his whole campaign, which is don't hide from it, take it head on, be out there all the time, always be communicating, go into unfriendly territory to talk about it, take questions about it, go on right wing radio, go on Christian radio. Do you know, do that jubilee debate again. Do things where you're just like, the worst thing you can do is just is abandon the strategy that got you the nomination, which was to be sort of someone who was always available, omnipresent, and just stick with that. He won this nomination, but he's still an underdog in the Senate race. And so he's got to always play. He's got to embrace risk and do things and just be out there and talk about it. I really don't think it's that hard because he is someone who is going to be very hard to paint as a radical if People get exposed to him because he comes off as such like a, like a down to earth, common sense, conciliatory person. It is honestly an advantage Obama always had was they would paint him as this like radical Muslim who's coming to like implement Sharia law in your neighborhood. Then you like see him on TV and he just seems like a pretty normal guy. And I think Talarico has that same asset in this race.

Jon Favreau (58:17)

I do think the added challenge Tall Rico faces that someone like a Zoran Mumdani or maybe is he in Texas or a Graham Platner. Right. You know, doesn't face as much as that. He's in Texas and in a smaller state or city or somewhere like that, you can sort of pierce people's perceptions of you by just meeting them in person. And in Texas, you know, you can meet a lot of people in Texas. But it's going to be ads that do it at some point and it's

Dan Pfeiffer (58:46)

going to be, it is going to be what he's been doing, which is organic social content. I think a little bit in this race, although he did not win, I think a little bit about our old friend Jason Kander and he was someone, they tried to paint him as a giant radical in his Missouri Senate race in 2016, but he doesn't come off that way. And you know, if you can, in Talarico, I think is particularly skilled at finding high profile ways for people to see him. And I do think the way he talks about his faith is very, is inoculation against some of these attacks.

Jon Favreau (59:16)

I also think him saying, which he does quite often, that what most people care about is making a living trying to afford things and the right uses these attacks to divide us. I think that is both true and the right political message. I don't think you can just say, oh well, I'm not going to focus on any of that other stuff and just ignore it completely. Because I think, and I think we've learned this over the last several years, like there has to. And however you want to describe, however he wants to describe his views on trans issues or racism or whatever it may be, he should do it and he should do it on his terms and he should do it confidently. But like you still have to, you have to answer people's questions on this kind of stuff and you should do it on your terms and not only lean on, well, people actually don't care about this. They only care about cost of living stuff because while true, they still do want to know if they have questions about like well, what did you say? What did you mean by that? Like, you need to have some kind

Dan Pfeiffer (60:22)

of answer there in a red state in particular, but in kind of in politics general, you have to reach a threshold of acceptability culturally. Right. Is this person, do they seem like they have my values? They have someone I would trust, someone just like there is a level at which are they like me? Can I relate to them? And if you ignore the critiques that go right at that strength of yours, then you leave yourself quite vulnerable.

Jon Favreau (60:45)

Yes, I agree. Let's talk about who Tellarico's opponent will be. Incumbent John Cornyn and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton are headed for a May runoff. But things got interesting on Wednesday when Trump announced that he'd make an endorsement quote, soon and demanded that the non endorsed candidate drop out. Reports say Trump is expected to endorse Cornyn. And on Thursday morning, Paxton announced that he would, quote, consider dropping out, but only if Senate leadership agreed to ditch the filibuster in order to pass Trump's voter ID law, the SAVE Act. Paxton also called Cornyn a coward and said that, quote, no one has been more loyal to Donald Trump than me. What do you think of that strategy by Paxton?

Dan Pfeiffer (61:27)

I think he's. I talked to Jonathan Martin about this a lot, which you're going to hear shortly, but it seems like he is trying to maybe find a fig leaf to get something out of dropping out if he feels like he has to. I mean, I think the assumption is, is that if whoever Trump endorses will win this primary. I'm not entirely sure that's accurate, but everyone seems to believe that and they're probably, it would probably be very hard for Paxton to raise money. If Trump says, I'm endorsing Cornyn and I want Paxton to drop out and Paxton does not drop out, that's probably a challenge. You know, I don't know. I don't think that, you know, I guess the grand fear here is the Senate takes him up on the software and passes the SAVE Act. That would be pretty bad for the world, but I would be surprised.

Jon Favreau (62:10)

I don't think Thune has, I don't

Dan Pfeiffer (62:11)

think he has the votes for it. Yeah, I think, I think he, I

Jon Favreau (62:14)

wonder if then Paxton wants to say. Because what he's hoping is that Trump then says, oh God, this Thune. And Corn is just like Thune. They're establishment guys who've been in leadership and they won't do this for me. And maybe because I'm sure that there's part of Trump that really wants to endorse Paxton or at least not endorse Cornyn. And so I'm sure, you know, I think he's probably playing the best hand he has here, Paxton, but I don't know if it's gonna work.

Dan Pfeiffer (62:39)

Yeah, I mean like what Trump says is what matters here. And if Trump doesn't endorse then. Because Trump clearly does not want to endorse John Cornyn. It's not entirely clear why, but he and I talked to J Mort about this. But I mean he's the incumbent senator. He could have endorsed him at any point and he hasn't. And so there is something there that's preventing it. But in the end, I think he's going to be convinced that Cornyn is the better shot to beat Talarico.

Jon Favreau (63:04)

Right. One more piece of election news in the Senate. On Wednesday, just before the filing deadline, Montana Republican Senator Steve Daines announced that he would not seek reelection, clearing the way for late entrant Kurt Almi, who currently serves as U.S. attorney for the District of Montana, a role he also held in Trump's first term. Trump quickly endorsed Almi on Truth Social, calling him, quote, exceptional. CNN's Manu Raju reported on Thursday that Dain's last minute switcheroo was intended to keep Democrats from fielding a top tier candidate like former Montana Senator Jon Tester, and that Trump and Senate Republican leaders were aware of the strategy. Pretty, pretty shocking that this happened last minute and no one expected Daines to not run again. What do you think about this whole thing?

Dan Pfeiffer (63:52)

It is crooked as hell as it was when a House Democrat did this a while back. And it does. It's both screwing any other Republican who want to run for the C. But issue point out Democrats opportunity to run a potentially more high profile candidate for it. There is something states to try to fix this because this is now going to become a real trend. It's yet another way in which democracy is getting curtailed in this country. It should be the incumbent has to like an incumbent like I saw someone tweet out this idea but there should be a rule or a law that is if you like. And obviously there has to be state laws but the incumbent has to make their decision first and then the filing deadline comes after that. Right. So it's like there's like two weeks between when the incumbent says I'm in or I'm not and then when there's two weeks after that in which other people could decide to run based on it. Because this is like this is really going to be something that happens a lot in politics now as a way to. For the party establishment to avoid messy primaries. Because that's what this was. The Chewy Garcia thing was Chewy Garcia working something out with his chief of staff to ensure his chief of staff got to run and essentially win. Because it's the same time here, within seconds of the announcement, the entire Montana political establishment and the White House endorsed the guy. Yeah, yeah.

Jon Favreau (65:12)

So shady. I mean, I am interested in. So there's a couple Democrats running the Democratic side. They haven't raised much money at all. They're not like big names. Again, the big names would have been like Tester or former Governor Brian Schweitzer or Steve Bullock. But there is the former president of the University of Montana, Seth Bodnar. He's also a former Army Green Beret and a Rhodes Scholar. He has filed to run as an independent. And Tester had apparently said some nice things about him. And I don't know. I don't know too much more than that, but I'm kind of interested if it's gonna. If it could possibly shape up to be like a Dan Osborne in Nebraska situation, where maybe because he's got such broad name recognition in Montana, if he has more Democratic leaning positions, which I don't know, or even if he's more centrist, that would be a lot better than a Trump Republican running. And I don't know. Be interesting to watch.

Dan Pfeiffer (66:07)

There's some interesting stuff happening in Montana too, because Ryan Zinke, who. Who was Trump's Interior Secretary and had to resign for some sort of corruption scandal that I can't remember what was at this point. He returned to Congress, but he just announced his retirement too. And that is a district that Trump won by 11. I think it's 11. And it's in the zone of the kind of state seats that might be competitive with the right candidate in this political environment.

Jon Favreau (66:33)

Didn't we win Montana in 08? No, no. We came close.

Dan Pfeiffer (66:37)

We lost by three, I think.

Jon Favreau (66:39)

Yeah. I remember thinking that Montana.

Dan Pfeiffer (66:41)

There was a big debate at the end about whether we were gonna compete in Montana. And we just ultimately decided the juice was not worth the squeeze because it was.

Jon Favreau (66:50)

Cause it's only, what, three electoral votes?

Dan Pfeiffer (66:52)

I think it's four.

Jon Favreau (66:54)

Okay. Yeah, well, something like that. But it was. The reason I bring this up is. Cause Montana is not as deep, deep red as you might think for where it is. Of all those states out there, it is one where you always think, like, someday maybe. Right number of people move to Montana. Could it be something? So, yeah, I don't think it's. I think if you had a really strong candidate there. Clearly we just had Jon Tester. Senator. You know, it's a shot. All right. One last thing we had to get to. And this one is. This is personal. RFK Jr last week at one of his Eat Real Food rallies, he previewed a crackdown on a beloved staple of many Americans diets. Here's some of what he said. And here's some of the reaction from my brethren.

Jonathan Martin (67:40)

We're going to ask Dunkin Donuts and Starbucks show us the safety data that

Dan Pfeiffer (67:46)

show that it's okay for a teenage girl drink an iced coffee with 115

Jonathan Martin (67:52)

grams of sugar in it.

Dan Pfeiffer (67:54)

I don't think they're gonna be able to do it.

Sponsor/Ad Voice (67:56)

Bostonians seem to have a clear message about changing their favorite orders.

Dan Pfeiffer (68:01)

Don't try.

Jonathan Martin (68:01)

It is not the promise and the

Dan Pfeiffer (68:04)

beauty of the freedom we get in America to get however much fucking sugar you want in your Dunkin's Iced coffee.

Jon Favreau (68:12)

The guy that snorted coke off a

Jonathan Martin (68:14)

toilet is trying to take my Dunkin

Jon Favreau (68:16)

and I'm not gonna let him.

Jonathan Martin (68:17)

Bobby baby must have done a few more lines.

Jon Favreau (68:20)

Cause he's crazy if he thinks me

Jonathan Martin (68:22)

and the rest of the nutjobs who live here are gonna let him take the only joy most of us miserable mass holes have left rfk. Sleep with one eye open, bitch.

Jon Favreau (68:36)

I love Boston. It's the best. What the fuck come for my fucking. Duncan.

Dan Pfeiffer (68:44)

Do you know what's the only drug more powerful than sugar?

Jon Favreau (68:46)

What?

Dan Pfeiffer (68:47)

Polarization. Because here's the thing. He's not wrong.

Jon Favreau (68:54)

He is wrong.

Dan Pfeiffer (68:55)

He's not wrong.

Jon Favreau (68:57)

He's wrong in this way. You should know. You should be able to know when you walk into Dunkin if you order one of the more ridiculous fucking things on that menu. Exactly how much sugar you're getting. I think that's totally fair. And they also, by the way, put the calorie counts up there.

Dan Pfeiffer (69:14)

You know who did that? You know who did that?

Jon Favreau (69:16)

Yeah. Michelle Obama did that.

Dan Pfeiffer (69:18)

Yes.

Jon Favreau (69:19)

Which I always. I think it's good. I think giving people more information, more transparent. Forcing companies to be transparent about what they're putting in their products is a good thing. And then you give people the choice. Because guess what? This. This right here.

Dan Pfeiffer (69:35)

What it's. Talk to me about what's in that cup right now.

Jon Favreau (69:37)

Oh, yeah. Oh, I will. This is an iced coffee. There's a splash of half and half in here. Maybe a little more than a splash.

Dan Pfeiffer (69:45)

It's Quite a shade of a cru for to be just a splash.

Jon Favreau (69:51)

It's a Dunkin splash, which is a little heavier than your Starbucks splash. And it's got five pumps of sugar free vanilla. Sugar free. Oh, see RFK approved coffee and a couple Splendas. A couple Splendus. So again, so wait, wait, you have four. How much sugar am I having? No sugar. How many chemicals? How much chemicals am I having? Because I'm having sugar free. All kinds of whatever, sucralose, whatever the fuck lose it's called. Lots of it. Lots of it. Which is how I like it.

Dan Pfeiffer (70:19)

Okay. All right. I would say I'm glad you're on board with the calorie counts. I'm concerned about your coffee order just in general as I'm as concerned about your health.

Jon Favreau (70:28)

Yeah.

Dan Pfeiffer (70:29)

You know, and I do think and like the, the quasi serious part of this wholly unserious part of this podcast is like, you know, we're probably gonna look back on sugar and ultra processed foods as like the nicotine of the cigarettes of our time. And this is like, it's this stuff that has always been RFKJR's gateway to the anti vaccine lunacy is like, that stuff makes sense to people.

Jon Favreau (70:54)

I will say when we were in Australia, New Zealand for nine or 10 days, you would think that when you were traveling, you're like, oh, well, I was traveling. And so my whole routine is out of whack. And I didn't feel great. Cause I'm eating on the road. I felt better on the road than when I came back and started eating the shit that we have in this country.

Dan Pfeiffer (71:19)

And I saw what you ate and drank in Australia and I'm impressed.

Jon Favreau (71:21)

I ate some. We ate great in Australia. It was like good.

Dan Pfeiffer (71:25)

We ate a lot in Australia.

Jon Favreau (71:26)

We did eat a lot. But like I also think it's part, you know, you, you're in a house, there's snacks everywhere, people. It's just, it's a lot. It's a lot. But I, I'm, I'm with RFK on the processed foods for sure. I, I'm just also all about choice and I'm especially, you know, I'm especially into my Duncan.

Dan Pfeiffer (71:41)

So look, if this is going to turn people against rfk, I'll take it.

Jon Favreau (71:45)

Yeah, that's fine. Look, he's wrong about everything. This is another thing he's wrong about. So go back to your toilet seats. All right. When we come back, dan's interview with POLITICO's senior political columnist Jonathan Martin.

Sponsor/Ad Voice (72:08)

Pod Save America is brought to you by hims. HIMS can't help you fold a fitted sheet, but it can help you with your performance in bed. Take control of ED with personalized treatments made with doctor trusted ingredients prescribed by licensed providers. 100% online through HIMS, you can access personalized prescription treatment options for ED if prescribed. HIMSS offers access to ED treatment options ranging from personalized products to trusted generics that cost 95% less than brand names if prescribed. You shouldn't have to go out of your way to feel like yourself. HIMSS brings expert care straight to you with 100% online access to personalized treatments that put your goals first. And the goal? It's to be able to fold a fitted sheet without being so angry, without being so frustrated by the sheet.

Dan Pfeiffer (72:51)

You're frustrated because of the sheet.

Sponsor/Ad Voice (72:53)

This isn't one size fits all care that forgets you're in the waiting room. It's your health and goals. Put first with real medical providers making sure you get what you need to get results. Think of HIMSS as your digital front door that gets you back to your old self with simple 100% online access to trusted treatments for ED and more all in one place. To get simple online access to personalized affordable care for ED, weight loss and more, visit hims.com crooked that's hims.com crooked for your free online visit hims.com crooked featured products include compounded drug products which the FDA does not approve or verify for safety, effectiveness or quality. Prescription required. See website for details, restrictions and important safety information. Actual price will depend on product and subscription plan.

Jon Favreau (73:36)

Coffee Genius here. Most people see a busy cafe, but I see precision at every step thanks to Genius.

Dan Pfeiffer (73:42)

From global payments transactions, instant inventory, precise operations in sync.

Jon Favreau (73:49)

Absolutely genius.

Sponsor/Ad Voice (73:51)

From sold out crowds worldwide to managing the morning rush, genius keeps operations running smoothly. One Portado, flawless pour, perfectly timed. Just beautiful big league reliability for any business. That's genius.

Dan Pfeiffer (74:07)

Joining me now is the chief political columnist for Politico and the host of the forthcoming series on the Road with Jonathan Martin. Jonathan Martin. How are you, buddy?

Jonathan Martin (74:16)

Dan Pfeiffer. Hey, buddy. Thank you.

Dan Pfeiffer (74:18)

It's been a long time. I was just thinking today that I think the first time you and I Met was in 2004 when I was working for Dashiell and you were covering Senate races for National Journal.

Jonathan Martin (74:28)

Yeah, exactly. You were a Dashiell guy and you and I talked about this. But there should be a political 30 for 30. Well, just period. But there really should be one for those 02 and 04 back to back epic South Dakota Senate races. It's just a crime that we don't have a documentary about those two races. And I don't know, maybe that could

Dan Pfeiffer (74:49)

be your next series.

Jonathan Martin (74:51)

Maybe in our next life we can start the political 30 for 30. Exactly.

Dan Pfeiffer (74:54)

That's right. Okay. All right. Now, one thing I've known about you over the years is that you cover races based in part on the quality of barbecue where those races are taking place. So I know you have been in Texas and North Carolina covering the primaries that happened this past week. Let's start with Texas, where James Talarico won the Democratic nomination. Republicans are now headed to a what could be a quite nasty, if it continues runoff between incumbent Senator John Cornyn and Ken Paxton.

Jonathan Martin (75:22)

Right.

Dan Pfeiffer (75:23)

This thing seems to be moving very fast here in the runoff. Trump is thinking of an endorsement. He just did an interview with Politico, I believe, where he said, where he heard that Paxton said he was staying in no matter what Trump said. That could cause him to endorse Cornyn because he wants whoever he does not endorse to drop out. Paxton then said this morning that he would drop out if the Senate Republicans dropped the filibuster to pass the SAVE Act. What are you hearing about what's going on here in Texas on the Republican side?

Jonathan Martin (75:51)

I mean, talk about fast moving events, as they say in the news business. But also a sort of neat encapsulation, Dan, for the sort of internal GOP politics of the Trump era where it's really one man's decree more than anything else. And that's the way he wants it. I was in South Texas with Senator Cornyn and I wrote my column from there. And the lead of my column was basically here's this almost 40 year career as a judge, state AG and senator. Pretty distinguished. And Dan, his entire fate rests in the hands of Trumpus Augustus in the Coliseum doing the thumbs up or the thumbs down. It's a hell of a way to live your life as a senator who, by the way, it's like most incumbent senators of their own party, get the endorsement of their president. That's pretty typical in American politics. The fact that he's had to work for this tells you everything about this moment that we're in. But as for the present, all signs point to Trump endorsing Cornyn. Trump's top lieutenants from the 24 Campaign are working for Senator Cornyn. That's Chris Lacivita and Tony Fabrizio. They're very close to Susie Wiles, who of course is Trump's chief of staff. And now that Paxton is sort of dragging his feet about whether he drop out, Dan, that's just gonna, I think, ensure that Trump doesn't, in fact, endorse Cornyn. What does that do? Well, it's a sigh of relief for Senate Republicans. It probably means that they'll have to spend less money on the Texas race. And if they have to give Paxton some face saving pledge to a vote on the SAVE act, they'll probably do it. But you can't make that up. Like, Ken Paxton is looking for some thin read, some fig leaf here to drop out of the race. And I'll do it if they vote on a voter ID bill or they drop the filibuster for a voter ID bill, which is all just sort of a charade for. He just needs a cover, right?

Dan Pfeiffer (77:43)

Here's the question. What did Cornyn do? Like, why? Like, I'm sort of unfamiliar. I don't really understand why. What was Cornyn's mortal sin against the MAGA movement? Yeah, yeah, it's a great question.

Jonathan Martin (77:54)

And I wrestled with this too, when I was down there. It's like, look, Bill Cassidy, the senator from Louisiana, he did something, something right? It's clear as day. He voted to impeach Trump in February of 2021. Like, okay, I understand that from a political standpoint, but you're right. Like, what is Cornyn said? Like, what's his. His fireable offense, if you will. I actually asked him that question. I said, like, senator, do you have a fireable offense? And there's really not one. Now, what folks on the right in Texas will point to is the bipartisan deal they did after Uvalde, which was a fairly modest set of gun control regulations, but it was pretty small beer. And I think the bigger issue is he's just not maga. He doesn't come off as maga. He's a Bushy. Everybody in Texas knows it, and he doesn't really fake it that well. And so I think it's more just he's not where the party is today, sort of tonally and culturally, and therefore he's got to go now, where it gets complicated. Dan, is that Trump himself, isn't that maga, Right? I mean, Trump is MAGA when it's convenient for him, but he really wants to figure out and determine what MAGA is. And this is why people like MTG have had this sort of loss of faith, Dan, because Trump himself is, like, conveniently maga, right? And so, you know, they can coax Trump to be for corn in here. It looks like Trump is gonna side with the traditional wing of the Republican Party.

Dan Pfeiffer (79:19)

You know, in some of these other races where Trump got involved in 2022, they were sort of like fake MAGA candidates. He made MAGA like Herschel Wal Walker, Dr. Oz. Ken Paxton is MAGA through and through. He is sort of canary in the coal mine on a lot of issues that become cause celebs on Fox News or right wing media. Is there any potential consequence to him for sort of. For picking the Bushy, the establishment guy over at a time when there's division on the Iran war, there's division on the Epstein files, etc.

Jonathan Martin (79:53)

So I think it's at the margins, but the margins matter in midterms. Like nobody knows that better than you. I mean, look, he's going to alienate, I think, very online, extremely ideological figures who come from that Bannon Tucker MTG wing where they actually believe in this stuff. When it comes to a policy agenda that is very different from the traditional wing of the party, I don't know how big that is. I think the bulk of the party is with Trump on whatever Trump decides he wants to do, whether that's politics or policy. But yeah, I mean, I think there's definitely a faction. I don't know if it's 15% or 30% of the party base, but it's real and those folks matter. And if they stay home in November, that's devastating because if you don't get that crowd out and you're a Republican, there's nowhere to make up for it.

Dan Pfeiffer (80:45)

You know, based on what you said about how the Republicans think if Cornyn's the nominee, they'll spend less money. Is it is from what you're hearing from the Senate Republican types, is their assumption that this is a safe state if Cornyn's the nominee, I don't agree with that. I'm gonna stipulate that.

Jonathan Martin (80:58)

But yeah, yeah, no, it's that Cornyn is not gonna alienate the center right suburban indie or Republican woman, especially in a way that Paxton would and that we can basically spend less money. I think you're right that it's still a ball game. I think it favors the Republicans more heavily, but they can't go to sleep on it because obviously Talarico is going to have a ton of cash. It's a good cycle for Dems in Texas, obviously is changing, but I just think it makes it a lot easier for the Republicans given the nature of

Dan Pfeiffer (81:34)

Cornyn versus Paxton and looking at the general election.

Jonathan Martin (81:38)

The.

Dan Pfeiffer (81:38)

You know, one of the things that I think was notable in Talarico's victory was his performance with Latino voters. Not just in his margins with over Crockett, but the number of votes he got out of the wall. Votes. Yeah, right. That he got out of the Rio Grande Valley. Like that has to like. And I think this is particularly important in Texas, not just because the size Latino vote, but the entire principle underlying their redistricting was that there was this shift among Latino voters. And it seems like there's at least real evidence of a snapback in Texas, if not nationally.

Jonathan Martin (82:12)

Look, I think there is a modest realignment along education and class lines among all working class voters, no matter their ethnicity. But this assumption that suddenly the working class Hispanic had become MAGA is totally unfounded. They were voting in a one off election against Joe Biden and Kamala Harris and frankly against, against inflation and open borders. They weren't voting for the MAGA party and embracing Donald Trump as their political icon. It was a momentary vote. And I think that the redraw in Texas that you allude to made, made a mistake because they assumed those voters were theirs and they were just leasing them for one cycle. And I was there with Cornyn. I spent some time down there with a Democrat running for a House seat named, named Bobby Polito, who's this Tejano singer who's like an icon in the Valley. And you know, he's running in a state that's drawn for a Republican. But I think he's got a better than even chance to win in part because of his personal fame, but also in part because what you mentioned, that snapback, there's a real backlash against ICE among Hispanic voters. And these by the way, are center and center, right. Hispanic voters. I mean, your listeners should know this. Like if you're Hispanic on the south, the Rio Grande Valley, you're pretty middle of the road, if not right. And they're up for voting for Republican. They're just not going to do it in this environment. And you give them the right kind of Democrat and they'll vote for a Democrat. And we saw that. To your point, just the raw votes in those counties along the Rio Grande, the amount of folks voting in the Democratic primary exceeding the number of votes Kamala Harris got in a general election

Dan Pfeiffer (83:52)

and sometimes by a factor of two or three.

Jon Favreau (83:54)

Three.

Dan Pfeiffer (83:54)

I mean, it's just wild.

Jonathan Martin (83:56)

I mean, you just don't see that kind of turnout in a primary compared to a general election. That tells you everything about the amount of energy with Democrats broadly. And the fact that ancestral Hispanic Democrats who may have moved to Trump temporarily in 24 or even 20 are coming back to the Democratic Party.

Dan Pfeiffer (84:13)

There are a couple other interesting races down ballot in Texas. You mentioned Bobby Polito. That's an interesting one. Another one that I just wanted your take on, as someone who knows, hears a lot from what the Republicans are saying, is what happened to Dan Crenshaw. So Dan Crenshaw, you know, was elected in 2018, Navy Seal, you know, lost an eye in combat, was a real star of the Republican Party. You couldn't turn on TV without seeing him. I think probably in 2020, 2022, maybe 24 people thought he was, you know, the future of the party in some ways. And he just got absolutely clobbered in his primary by a candidate endorsed by Ted Cruz. Like, like what was his sin against the MAGA world or the Trump world?

Jonathan Martin (84:51)

Well, let me just say before talking about the actual race, it has sort of karma type vibes that remind me of Elise Stefanik, too, which is these younger Republicans who everybody knows they're not really Trumpy and they reinvent themselves to accommodate where the party is and then it just ultimately leaves them going nowhere. And so there is something that is, you know, there's some poetic justice there in terms of these folks who are faking it in public life. But in terms of Crenshaw's race, a few things happened. You mentioned the redraw of the House map. That really hurt him because that's a choice they made.

Dan Pfeiffer (85:30)

They chose to hurt him. Right?

Jonathan Martin (85:32)

Yeah. We're getting greedy. We're going to grab some more House seats and we're going to make assumptions about Hispanic voters staying with us. And we're going to make some other assumptions too, about the nature of our incumbent House members. And by the way, Dan, you know this. There's no House member likes their seat being redrawn. I don't care what their party. They hate it because they have to meet new voters. Right. And it's a pain. But the Texas Republicans, they saluted Trump and they went along with this redraw. In the case of Crenshaw, he gets tons of new voters he doesn't know in the state rep challenging him is running a seat that includes a big overlap of his current state House district. And then he gets a big, big infusion of money from a donor who doesn't like Crenshaw into a super pac, which these days could mean a lot. You add the Ted Cruz factor in and then Trump doesn't really get involved for Crenshaw and it adds up to a pretty decisive loss.

Dan Pfeiffer (86:27)

Let's switch to North Carolina here, which also has good barbecue. And you've been covering that race as well.

Jonathan Martin (86:31)

Yeah. You know from Carolina, Dan. Exactly.

Dan Pfeiffer (86:33)

Yeah, that's right. There was, they had their primary on Tuesday. There wasn't that much interesting on the primary ballot. But what was interesting was the turnout among Democrats. Even though Roy Cooper did not have an actual ballot. There was not a big statewide race like there was in Texas. What are you hearing from North Carolina?

Jonathan Martin (86:53)

Look, I think Democrats path to 50 starts in Maine, but it goes to North Carolina.

Dan Pfeiffer (86:59)

Yeah, there's no path without 50. There's no way without North Carolina. No path.

Sponsor/Ad Voice (87:03)

That's right.

Jonathan Martin (87:03)

And so, I mean, I think Maine is their top target for obvious regions we can go into. But I think number two in a pretty close second is North Carolina. You've got a two term former governor, 100% name ID was very popular. He's like a small town lawyer type Democrat. And it's uncontested in the primary. And yeah, it was so striking looking at the raw votes in both parties, neither party had a real primary for its Senate seat on the Republican side or Democratic side. And Democrats had significantly more raw votes showing up. Now that's in part because they had a little bit more down ballot action in some House races. But still it tells you where the energy is this cycle. Now, it's not easy. Look, this map is tough for Democrats. The environment is good, but the map is difficult. You know, you have to beat Susan Collins, which you haven't done in 30 years that you've been in office. You haven't won a federal race in North Carolina, Dan. And since you guys won there in 08 and brought Kay Hagan along with you, and then you have to go to Ohio, which has turned so Trumpy for the last three cycles. And those are your three best seats.

Sponsor/Ad Voice (88:05)

Right.

Jonathan Martin (88:06)

So it's a tough cycle. But boy, I think Cooper may be the best recruit in America this year and he's running against somebody, the former RNC chair who's just not that well known like a former governor is. So if you're ever going to win North Carolina in a federal race, besides having Obama on top of the ticket, it's going to be this year.

Dan Pfeiffer (88:25)

Yeah, this, it's, I mean the Whatley choice is going to be, it's going to be interesting how that plays out in the end if Cooper wins to just pick the random RNC chair. Trump's RNC chair for that role.

Jonathan Martin (88:36)

He's a Trump proxy. Right. It's just like nominating, you know, the idea was Laura Trump, his daughter in law, was going to run and she didn't want to do it. And so they found Whatley as a way to forestall a primary end up. There's no primary, but I just, you know, it's just not a fair fight against the former governor. Now that said, structurally, it's still a hard state for Democrats. Right. I mean you just look at, you look at 16, 20 and 24, so much money, so much effort and they couldn't carry the state. So.

Dan Pfeiffer (89:05)

Yeah. I mean. And have basically got the same vote share every single time. You know.

Jonathan Martin (89:10)

That's exactly right. You put so much effort in and you get to the top of the mountain and you're almost at the peak and you're like 48.3 and you just can't get there. Right.

Dan Pfeiffer (89:18)

Yeah. And it's, you know, this is the, I guess one of the questions we'll have and I think Democrats got to think this through is you see this like Democratic turnout's going to be through the roof. We see that, sure. Thus far for Republicans, there's been kind of mixed signals on this. Right. Like even at 18 Democrat turnouts through the roof, Republican turnout was also pretty high. You know, like there was high turnout in Texas, but the fact that there were more Democratic. But that was a, the most expensive primary in history and turnout usually follows money. So like notable that Democrat and there are just more Republican voters than Democratic voters. So notable you got more Democrats voting. Exactly. The question will be whether it's smart

Jonathan Martin (89:54)

to bring up 2018 though, because that's the first Trump midterm and his first term. And it's analogous to this year in terms of the massive energy. And even with that energy, you still lose what four Democratic incumbents. Claire McCaskill, Heidi Heitkamp, Joe Dobbs.

Dan Pfeiffer (90:10)

You had the 2012 cycle where last time Obama was on the. Yeah.

Jonathan Martin (90:15)

Which by the way, this is a longer conversation. But 2012 was really the last sort of I call BC versus AD and that's like the last election in the before times, you know, I mean, starting after that, everything changes in American politics. Anyways, great cycle, you get a huge House pickup, take back the House and like you're losing all these purple to red state senate Democrats. And so I just raised that as a cautionary warning because even in a big, big, you know, cycle where Democrats have anti Trump energy, it's still hard Structurally, for the party to win some of these senators.

Dan Pfeiffer (90:50)

It's easier though in a wavier to beat an incumbent than to defend an incumbent.

Jonathan Martin (90:55)

Yeah, right.

Dan Pfeiffer (90:57)

That's what we like what we have going for us.

Jonathan Martin (90:58)

If you were playing defense in 18

Dan Pfeiffer (91:00)

and offense, and now, like you point out, there is no path to 50 doesn't require winning at least two seats that in states that Trump won by more than 10 points, like there are some unique political circumstances in those states that make it potentially feasible either quality of recruit like Sherrod Brown or Mary Pattola in Alaska, or just sort of states that have. Probably the longest shot of those four is Iowa, but it's a state that Trump has essentially waged economic war on with his tariffs and the soybean stuff. But yeah, it is a hard path. The question is whether Trump is gonna get 18 turnout or something like Democrats gotten 14, which is that like lame duck second term turnout where. Cause it's not, you're not just, it's not a dress rehearsal for the forthcoming presidential election. It's just like, ugh, you know, and that's, that's the difference between having like picking up those seats and not picking up those seats is my guess.

Jonathan Martin (91:56)

You make an important point though, about how 14, you're playing defense now, you're playing offense. I mean, it's a silver lining to a pretty damn gloomy cloud, which is the Democrats have lost so much ground the Senate in red America, that now they're, they're not.

Dan Pfeiffer (92:10)

We're on offense everywhere in red America.

Jonathan Martin (92:11)

Left. Yeah, there's nowhere left. There's played offense now. But yeah, I mean, like the jokes that I make is when you're a Democrat and you're looking at the possible taking back the senate and your 51st seat is Alaska, Texas or Iowa, you know, it's not ideal.

Dan Pfeiffer (92:28)

You wouldn't, you wouldn't draw that in a lab.

Jonathan Martin (92:29)

Let's talk a little bit about Manhattan.

Dan Pfeiffer (92:31)

Yeah, let's talk a little bit about the, the broader midterm landscape here. The first two and a half months of this year have been insane from a news perspective. We had a war in Venezuela, tariffs, what happened in Minnesota, but now we have an ongoing war with Iran. What are you hearing from maybe people on both sides of the aisle about the potential impact of this, how nervous they are, particularly maybe the Republicans are about this being added to the docket?

Jon Favreau (93:04)

Ah.

Jonathan Martin (93:05)

I mean, everybody is holding their breath because the expectation among Republicans is that this is closer to Venezuela. And it's just a different part of the world with far different circumstances. And I think Trump got emboldened by the success of Venezuela. But Dan, it was so clean that I think it led him to think he could just keep doing that. And you just grabbed the joystick again. He'd do it for somewhere else. And it's not the same. So the question I have is, how long does this go? Is it really weeks, which is what you hear from the Republicans now, or is it months? And if it is months, boy, I just think that takes a toll politically. If the Iranians can keep lobbying drones and missiles in response, and we're losing American service members week after week, I think that just adds to the burden and the Republicans have in an already tough cycle. And I just don't think that there's a rally around the flag ethos in this. It's just times have changed. It's a preemptive war. They haven't made any kind of a public campaign. The Bush folks went to the UN Went to the Congress. Months long public campaign. The war went south. Obviously, you know that better than anybody, given what happened in 06 and 08 and Obama's rise, but they did something on the front end to at least sell it. There's none of that. So I think if this thing doesn't go well, it creates a huge political burden for the Republicans in an already tough cycle. I just don't know if that's going to be the case, because you and I can't sit here and guess as to what's going to happen in the next 10 days, two weeks. So I think we have to wait and see how this unfolds. How interested is Trump? How much does he sustain this campaign? Does he declare victory, Dan, in three, four days? You know, it's. It's sort of difficult to, to grasp, but he has started a war, which is easy, but it's really hard to end a war, you know.

Dan Pfeiffer (95:03)

So, yeah, there's like a couple of moments here, right? There's, like, what's happening right now. There's. If more troops die and there's the. It seems like we're spending a billion dollars a day on this. They're. The Congress is probably gonna have to vote on a supplemental. That is going to be a moment. I mean, I've seen some internal Democratic polling that suggests that spending billions of dollars on this war at the same time you cut a trillion dollars in Medicaid is not a particularly popular stance for these Republicans. But. So then that's going to line up with some of this, is A weird cycle because you really have no incumbents, right? You have Collins and you have Ossoff and everything else is essentially, I guess on the Democratic, you have Ossoff and then I guess you have Sullivan and Houston. But the rest of it is just like how much those votes will matter will be interesting. And then you're right if this thing ends in a few weeks.

Jonathan Martin (95:58)

But you mentioned the lack of incumbents. And I think that's vital to understanding this cycle because in a place like North Carolina, it's not like it's Thom Tillis up for reelection. Right. It just, it changes the equation. And the same thing in Iowa. Now in Iowa, you know, you could argue if you're a Republican, it's actually better to have a new face there than it is to have, have Joni Ernst to, you know, speaking of having to fake it on maga. But you know, this is so salient. Ohio, who's the incumbent senator? Most of your listeners don't know. He gets no attention. His name is John Hustead. He's the former lieutenant governor. He's an appointee who took, who took the, the van seat that was vacated. And you know, when you're an appointee senator, historically you're in really weak political shape. Now, he's run statewide before, but still that's a disadvantage. We haven't even mentioned Florida here. Florida is so forgotten politically. But there's an appointee in Florida as well, Ashley Moody, who's got, you know, very light name ID statewide. And it's just, it's so different from a two or three term incumbent senator when you have these appointees. Now, I think Florida is still tough for Democrats, but this is a wave year. The governor and Senate races there are getting no attention, but they probably should

Dan Pfeiffer (97:10)

get more, I think, well, I generally am of the view that Democrats have we like I spend most of my life worrying about the 2032 redrawn electoral map. And so like I said, that's why I worry a lot about Texas and Florida, because if we can't become competitive in those states, we're pretty screwed as a party.

Jon Favreau (97:26)

Totally.

Dan Pfeiffer (97:27)

If you're, if you're losing a net 14 votes between California, New York, Texas and Florida, we're in pretty big trouble. But that's either here nor there. Let me ask you a little bit.

Jonathan Martin (97:36)

But this is an important point though, because for all the energy against Trump, and I understand the bigger challenge is 2030 and can you compete structurally for a majority in the U.S. senate without adding Puerto Rico and D.C. and right now, the answer is maybe you can get 51, but that's really about it. And then how are you going to keep a House majority if the shift in population is moving from blue to red America? Those are the more sobering questions for Democrats going forward. Right?

Dan Pfeiffer (98:09)

Yeah. I mean, one of my fears is, I have two fears. One is that is the map itself shifting and us not thinking about that, not thinking long term in the investments you have to make to take some of these places that are not competitive now and make them competitive. And the other one is that Democrats will make the same mistake we did in 2022, which is to do very well in 26. Think everything is, all the problems are solved and move on because the bigger structural problems don't come into play until the less engaged voters get involved.

Jonathan Martin (98:37)

And we haven't mentioned this yet, but I mentioned the House and Senate. But also, if you have a huge shift in population from blue to red America, that changes the electoral College. And, and as you alluded to, 2032 becomes harder. Forget the blue wall. That's not enough anymore. If you're not competitive in Florida and Texas by 2032, you're creating a huge challenge for yourself and holding the White House.

Dan Pfeiffer (99:00)

Yeah. You basically have to draw an inside straight every year to win. That's the only way to do it.

Jonathan Martin (99:04)

Right.

Dan Pfeiffer (99:04)

Let's end here with, I want to figure out how you convinced your employers to do what everyone wants, which is to pay to send you to places around the country to eat really, really good food. So talk to me about on the Road with Jonathan Martin.

Jonathan Martin (99:20)

Well, thanks, Dan. So over the years, friends, colleagues, sources have always asked me, like, hey, I'm going to New Orleans, I'm going to Denver, I'm going to Boston. Where should I eat? You know, what should I do? What should, you know, where should I stay? And you and I have had these conversations over the years, and it's like, you know, I'm happy to share ideas. So I said, like, I should actually find a way to and to make this into something fun. And this is a sobering moment in politics, but you got to find a way to also have a good time. So I'm starting this, this road show called on the Road. And the idea is basically evoke three things. Food, politics, and place. And by place, I mean history, culture, identity, sort of localism, you know, the things that aren't part of the Starbucks, TGI Fridays, America. And so I started this week in Arkansas with Sarah Huckabee Sanders at a barbecue joint. I'M going to do Governor's Dan for the first season and the hope is kind of like one part Anthony Bourdain, one part Nerdy Almanac of American politics stuff you and I have been doing for the last few minutes here, but also really capture these places and localities and let folks sit in on a conversation. Kind of like the the Lunch with the FT feature. If folks ever list or you know, you know, read the Saturday ft, they have that Lunch with feature where you can sort of like eavesdrop on the lunch. I want to have that, but with cameras there rolling to capture these conversations about politics and food and history and all that stuff. So we're starting with governors. It's going to be fun. First season and this fall, you know, happens to be football, so season two is going to be even better, I think.

Dan Pfeiffer (100:59)

Where, when is, when does it start and how can people get it?

Jonathan Martin (101:02)

Dan it starts this coming week. You can catch it wherever you get podcasts, but this is also a video series, so it's going to air on YouTube as well. And the idea is we would love folks to watch it on YouTube, but if you don't want to see me with like barbecue stains on my shirt, no offense taken, you can just crank it up as a, as a podcast and listen to it when you're driving or working out or jogging or whatever you want. It's on the road with Jonathan Martin. It's got to start this coming week and you can catch it wherever you get your podcast or on YouTube.

Dan Pfeiffer (101:32)

Awesome. J Mart, good to talk to you, man. We'll talk to you again later soon.

Jonathan Martin (101:35)

Thanks, Dan. Good to see you.

Jon Favreau (101:41)

That's our show for today. Thanks to Jonathan Martin for coming on. Tommy and I will be back on Sunday with a conversation with Governor Gavin Newsom.

Dan Pfeiffer (101:48)

Bye everyone.

Jon Favreau (101:51)

If you if you want to listen to Pod Save America ad free and get access to exclusive podcasts, go to crooked.com friends to subscribe on Supercast, Substack, YouTube or Apple Podcasts. Also, please consider leaving us a review that helps boost this episode and everything we do here at Crooked. Pod Save America is a Crooked Media production. Our producer is Saul Rubin. Our associate producer is Farah Safari. Austin Fisher is our senior producer. Reed Churlin is our executive editor. Adrian Hill is our head of the news and politics. The show is mixed and edited by Andrew Chadwick. Jordan Kanter is our sound engineer with audio support from Kyle Seglin and Charlotte Landis. Matt de Groat is our head of production. Naomi Sengel is our executive assistant. Thanks to our digital team Elijah Cohn, Haley Jones, Ben Hefcoat, Mia Kelman, Kiril Pelaviev, David Toles, and Ryan Young. Our production staff is proudly unionized with the Writers Guild of America East.

Jonathan Martin (102:51)

Carvana is so easy. Just a click and we've got ourselves a car. See so many cars.

Sponsor/Ad Voice (102:57)

That's a clicktastic inventory.

Dan Pfeiffer (102:59)

And check out the financing options payments to fit our budget.

Jon Favreau (103:02)

I mean, that's Clickonomics101.

Jonathan Martin (103:05)

Delivery to our door.

Sponsor/Ad Voice (103:06)

Just a hop, skip and a click away. And no better feeling than when everything just clicks. Buy your car today on Carvana. Delivery fees may Apply Being a nurse means being focused on others, on what someone else needs to get through to feel better, to get the job done. At Post University, our advanced nursing degree programs are focused on what you need to succeed need with 100% online classes on your schedule and monthly start dates that are ready when you are so you can go from RN to bsn, BSN to msn, even MSN to dnp. Ready to move your nursing career forward. Apply now@post.edu.