← The David Frum Show
The David Frum Show
The Atlantic Interview: Amy Klobuchar
00:24:17
A senator tries to write a gun law that everyone wants
Loading summary
Transcript124 lines
- [00:00]
A
An official message from Medicare.
- [00:02]
B
I'm saving money on my Medicare prescriptions. Maybe you can save, too. See if you qualify for Medicare's extra help. It pays.
- [00:09]
A
To find out, go to ssa.gov extrahelp paid for by the US Department of Health and Human Services. Welcome to the Atlantic Interview. I'm Jeffrey Goldberg, the editor in chief of the Atlantic. Today we're going to the US Capitol to see how Senator Amy Klobuchar is surviving in Donald Trump's Washington.
- [00:27]
B
Well, it's so great to have you here with your Atlantic podcast to give you a little more product placement.
- [00:33]
A
We're not even reading. Being in the minority in the Senate is not Amy Klobuchar's idea of a good time. It's not anyone's idea of a good time, actually. But she's been trying to squeak out little victories on gun control and other issues, and she's been very active in talking about the Russia investigation. She's also someone who finds her name on short lists of possible Democratic candidates for president. You have as good a chance as any as being president in 2020. So let's just talk about that. You don't want to talk about that.
- [01:00]
B
Because I am focused on Minnesota, and I think we have a lot.
- [01:04]
A
Minnesota is very. I've been to Minnesota, as you know.
- [01:06]
B
If you haven't noticed, we have major gun legislation. We have dreamers that we want to make sure aren't deported. So there's a lot going on. First of all, what happens years from now?
- [01:15]
A
First of all, Minnesota is a very placid place. You know, I know that because I visited.
- [01:19]
B
It's the Bold North. I guess you didn't hear our super.
- [01:21]
A
The Bold North.
- [01:22]
B
Yeah, it's Bold North. That's what we call ourselves, the B.O. north.
- [01:25]
A
And second, you're in the minority, so there's not a lot that you can do in the Senate anyway.
- [01:29]
B
They need us to pass almost anything.
- [01:31]
A
Oh, that is true.
- [01:32]
B
Except the taxes.
- [01:33]
A
Let's do. We'll just call this the Lawyers, Guns and Money podcast. But let's start with guns. So you were pretty surprised when Donald Trump started talking about gun control.
- [01:47]
C
I'm the biggest fan of the Second Amendment. Many of you are. I'm a big fan of the nra, but I had lunch with them with Wayne and Chris and David on Sunday and said, it's time. We gotta stop this nonsense. It's time.
- [02:04]
A
Can you take us to that moment in that meeting? Because that was pretty extraordinary, right?
- [02:10]
B
Well, I was sitting right across from him next to the vice president and Congressman Scott.
- [02:14]
A
Vice President did not look happy in that meeting.
- [02:16]
B
Well, I was sitting next to him, so I couldn't see his image.
- [02:19]
A
No peripheral vision.
- [02:20]
B
Although he did pitch in on something that is one of many solutions and things that are good, which is in Indiana, where you can something called the red alerts, which are extreme behavior protective orders, where actually family members, people can call and get a court order and make sure someone doesn't have guns. So it's one idea out there that's actually, I think, one of the good ones.
- [02:42]
A
The focus is to literally give families and give local law enforcement additional tools.
- [02:48]
C
If an individual is reported to be.
- [02:51]
A
A potential danger to themselves or others, allow due process. So no one's rights are trampled. But the ability to go to court, obtain an order and then collect not only the firearms, but any weapons in the position, or like take the firearms.
- [03:06]
C
First and then go to court.
- [03:08]
B
Okay. So besides that, I was, I would say I was surprised that he wasn't just saying that he was for background checks, which I somewhat expected because he'd said it before, but that he was so emphatic about it. And he said the words universal background check. He said he wanted a big comprehensive.
- [03:25]
C
Bill, but it would be nice if we could add everything onto it and maybe you change the title. All right, the US Background check Bill or whatever. But your bill is really good and really important, having to do with a certain aspect. But maybe we could make it much more comprehensive and have one bill instead of 15 different bills that nobody knows what's happening if we can get.
- [03:46]
B
He said he took on members of his own party and said, no, we not going to have concealed carrying the bill. You know why?
- [03:52]
C
Because you're afraid of the nra. Right?
- [03:56]
B
We're not going to do things like that. And he was pretty clear, not just once, twice, but about 10 times that he wanted the Manchin Toomey bill.
- [04:06]
C
Add that to this bill. That would be great, Diane, if you could add what you have also, and I think you can into the bill.
- [04:13]
B
And I did it with Republicans.
- [04:15]
C
We're going to get it passed. We're going to get it passed.
- [04:17]
B
And so we are taking him on that and taking and running with it.
- [04:21]
A
He's not the model of consistency, though. So do you expect this to hold?
- [04:25]
B
Well, that's the issue. Do you get the same person Thursday that you got Tuesday? And certainly the people that were in the room with him on immigration and the dream, the minute I got back, they said, ah, this happened to us. I Think one of the differences here is the country is very, very, very focused and understands what a background check is. What he did, I think on dreamers was unbelievable bad. He said he wanted to do this, and then the day before when we already had, we had eight Republican votes and would have gotten five, six more. And then he pulled the rug out from under us. That was bad. The partisan divide over immigration recently had appeared to narrow. President Trump stunned Republicans by reaching a deal with Democratic leaders to protect so called dreamers last month. But that agreement may be in jeopardy now that the White House has spelled out. But in this case, with 17 kids that have been killed and their teachers, to have to say something like that to the nation. I want a strong background check bill. To say those words and then to not follow through and not work to get it done. I think that would be a very, very bad thing.
- [05:36]
A
But we live in an unbelievable political time in which the President himself is remarkably inconsistent. So, I mean, this, we're talking now, this is going to air in a few days. I mean, there's no guarantee of anything.
- [05:49]
B
Oh, no, I'm not being a Pollyanna about this. I'm just saying we're going to take his words and we're going to push it and push it and push it with our colleagues when he basically was poking at them for being afraid of the nra. Okay, well, that means he's got to stand up to them on this issue. It doesn't mean he doesn't like hunters. I'm a big hunter state. I look at every proposal and say, does this hurt my Uncle Dick and his deer stand? And none of these proposals are called Dick's Sporting Goods. That is good.
- [06:19]
A
He should be so lucky.
- [06:23]
B
These proposals, common sense things like the background checks, like the closing the terrorist loophole, like doing something on domestic violence, like promoting the state approach about extreme behavior. Protective orders, you know, I think those are extreme risk protective orders. I think that those could be a package, things like that.
- [06:44]
A
Can you answer two questions. One, how often have you hunted? And two, what do your many Republican friends up here think about Trump's performance yesterday on these gun questions?
- [06:55]
B
Well, I'll get to the hunting. I have shot a gun several times.
- [06:59]
A
But you're not one of Minnesota's greatest hunters.
- [07:01]
B
No, no, no, I have not.
- [07:03]
A
I just assume. Everybody who lives there, I think, assume. If you're in politics, don't you have to go kill a deer or something just to prove something?
- [07:08]
B
Some people do that to show off. But then sometimes that looks like they're just showing off. So I tend not to believe that. But I have had been very strongly supportive of conservation. I support the Second Amendment. I just always note that Justice Scalia and his opinion about the Second Amendment applying to individuals made it very clear you can have common sense safety rules.
- [07:31]
C
So yes, there are some limitations that can be imposed. What they are will depend on what the, what the society understood were reasonable limitations.
- [07:40]
A
At the time, there were certain location limitations.
- [07:42]
B
And that just hasn't happened. We haven't done anything. And this is our moment. And I think this movement is so much bigger than us with these kids out there pushing for doing something on assault weapons, pushing for background checks.
- [07:54]
A
But doesn't the NRA always win?
- [07:56]
B
I think it's different this time. The moms, like they were so heartfelt and I know a lot of those moms and I met with the ones from Sandy Hook. But this time when you have them joined by these kids, boys and girls, who basically were able to be the same generation that moved gay marriage, the same generation that got Barack Obama elected, it just has a different feeling. And it has a feeling of being a movement that's bigger than any filibuster or anything. Some NRA funded congressman says in Washington.
- [08:28]
A
D.C. come back to those NRA funded congressmen and senators. Your colleagues, when they heard about Donald Trump's performance, are they just flummoxed? Are they bewildered? Are they befuddled?
- [08:38]
B
I think they looked. Well, first of all, the ones in the room looked like they were kind of awkward about the whole thing. Then when we got back there, I think they were pretty surprised. I think a number of them have said it. They knew he was out there in background checks. I just didn't think that he would be so aggressive in terms of saying, come on, come around. Well, he's going to have to do that more than just in one hour with the TV cameras on. He's going to have to be out there pushing them and pushing them if he really wants to get this done.
- [09:06]
A
Let's change subjects sort of to the Russia investigation. Do you think that the President of the United States is an unwitting or witting agent of Russian interests?
- [09:17]
B
I never make as a former prosecutor bold statements like this until I see all the facts. But I will say that people in his campaign were clearly involved with Russia. Whether it is the chairman of his campaign, Paul Manafort, who's now been indicted, his adviser Papadopoulos, whether it is Gates. I mean, a number of these people, Flynn, have pled guilty or have some very serious charges against them. And when you look at that indictment against the 13 Russians, it really gives you a map of what Russia was doing.
- [09:49]
C
This US Indictment said that Russian nationals, some of whom have now been indicted, posed as American citizens. They organized at rallies on the streets of the United States on very controversial, divisive political issues. They bought political adverts that supported one candidate over the other in the election campaign.
- [10:11]
B
And what his own six intelligence advisers, including the head of the CIA and the head of the National Intelligence, his national intelligence director, have affirmatively said that Russia is going to get bolder if we don't do something about it. Tonight, a unanimous warning from the heads of all six US Intelligence agencies. Russia is at it again.
- [10:33]
A
Yes, we have seen Russian activity and intentions to have an impact on the next election cycle here. I agree with Director Pompeo.
- [10:40]
C
As do I.
- [10:41]
B
So I think that there was a clear relationship going on between some of the people on his campaign. And only this investigation is going to tell us to what extent can you.
- [10:50]
A
Have collusion without collusion, which is to say, does this have to be a formal relationship in order to call it collusion? Or do you think that it's bad enough that he seems to be acting on behalf of or at least protecting Russia from the sort of things that his intelligence.
- [11:08]
B
These are two things. I mean, Mueller and those investigators are going to be determining what the facts are and how they match to the law and whether it's actual collusion under the law and who, in fact, did it. All right, but the second piece of it is really a policy matter, and I wouldn't use the word collusion for it. I would use the word. You know, if we're going to make America be strong, we don't want someone like Vladimir Putin pushing us or around.
- [11:30]
A
Is there a homespun Minnesota. Is there a homespun Minnesota expression for what he's doing? Something that you'd say at the State fair.
- [11:37]
B
Fox guarding the hen house.
- [11:39]
A
Not just Minnesota.
- [11:40]
B
Okay. All right. So you want. Oh, you want something about cheese curds. Exactly. Or hot pots.
- [11:45]
A
Isn't hot pots a big thing?
- [11:47]
B
Hot dish.
- [11:48]
A
Oh, sorry, sorry.
- [11:49]
B
Hot dish.
- [11:50]
A
Hot pots.
- [11:51]
B
Yeah. Like, you don't share your hot dish with someone that's trying to do you in. You know, that's kind of not a very good phrase.
- [11:56]
A
No, that's pretty good.
- [11:57]
B
Yeah. That's good. Yeah. Yeah. Okay.
- [11:59]
A
Possible campaign slogan right there.
- [12:01]
B
Yeah, there you go. Okay. But back to this. Is that just given what we're dealing with with Putin and what Republicans and Democrats who've been involved in military national intelligence have said, you do not embolden him by when he does this really bad stuff and when he's breaking into our election infrastructure. Basically lawmakers. The Russians were aggressive and relentless trying to target not only entities like the Democratic National Committee, but election related network 21 states in Illinois alone. The attackers were hitting five times per second, 24 hours a day by all accounts. And his own intelligence people hacking into 21 states. When he is breaking into emails, you don't then say, well, we got these sanctions that were supported by 98 of 100 senators. So I think I'll just kind of wait on those and just kind of kick the can down the road. I don't think that works.
- [12:58]
A
So what do you think? What's underneath this then? What's the story underneath the story?
- [13:04]
B
And remember during the campaign, the things he said that Putin was stronger than Obama, all those kinds of things. I don't know. I think he just has, seems to have some affection for Vladimir Putin. That's been clear when you, every time he sees him. So I don't know all the facts behind it personally. I can only evaluate it as a US Senator who believes that we need to keep America strong. And I don't think we keep America strong when we just close our eyes when someone's basically cyber attacked us. And this is the new warfare and they see it this way. It's a new warfare to disrupt our election at the very least, to influence our election at the most. And we have to get our act together. That's why we've got the infrastructure. Election infrastructure bill, Senator Lankford and I do. 3% of the cost of one aircraft carrier would greatly help our states to strengthen their election equipment.
- [13:56]
A
So you're an intelligence expert. What do you think Russia wants?
- [14:00]
B
I think they want to be dominant. I think that they want to disrupt America. I think they want to push us down. I thought it was interesting this week I met with some experts on Cuba and as the US has pulled back on Cuba, Russia is filling the void. They've been helping them financially. They've been doing other things.
- [14:16]
A
Back to the future.
- [14:17]
B
I literally couldn't believe it. I thought they were going to say it was China. They said it was Russia and this is, you know, including our former counselor there. So that's what we're seeing. And I think, I'm sure they're having. This is like, well, they're right next to us, 90 miles from our shore.
- [14:34]
A
So Mitt Romney was right. Remember that whole episode With Obama, Mitt Romney was right.
- [14:39]
B
What did he say exactly?
- [14:40]
A
Russia. You know, remember that whole line, russia is the enemy. And Obama said, oh, Mitt, a few months ago, when you were asked, what's the biggest geopolitical threat facing America, you said Russia, not Al Qaeda. You said, Russia in the 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back because the Cold War has been over for 20 years. The Cold War call, they want the 80s call. They want your Cold War policy back.
- [15:02]
B
But then after Obama was in for eight years, I think he really realized that there had been a sea change when you saw what he did with this election. And he said that that's why at the end of his last. One of his last acts was to put these sanctions in effect and kick out a bunch of Russian diplomats and close down two compounds.
- [15:20]
A
He could have done more, though.
- [15:21]
B
President Obama has given 35 Russian diplomats until noon on Sunday to leave the country and hit Moscow with tough sanctions. The president saying, every American should be alarmed by Russia's cyber attack and harassment of U.S. officials. In retrospect, there should have been a lot more done. But we are where we are right now. And where we are right now is that we are only something like 250 some days away from the next election. And we have not. We have 40 states that haven't updated their election equipment for 10 years. We've got $1.4 billion that was spent on social media in the last election, projected to be 3 to 4 billion with no rules of the road in place, which means, not just Russ, that any foreign power could start putting things on 10,000 people's Facebook pages in Ohio and change an election without any trace of it, really. No ad disclosed, no disclaimers on the ads. It's an outrageous situation.
- [16:18]
A
Facebook really bad or really, really bad?
- [16:22]
B
I think that they need to take responsibility, which they have in some ways. They've come forward with the facts. That's always the first thing. My dad was an aa. You always admit you have a problem first. Okay. They admitted they have a problem. They have taken some measures to try to fix it. Like say we should disclaimers on our candidate ads. We're going to require those. But if they really wanted to take responsibility for it, they would be supporting our bill, the Honest Ads act, to apply these rules across the board to not just candidate ads, but what were. 90% of the rubles were spent on were issue ads. And that's everything from energy ads to ads about issues of federal legislative, national importance. The exact standard we Use for radio, print, and for tv. And when I asked them, well, why can't you figure out those ads so you can put them online so everyone can see them, they said, well, it's really hard to do.
- [17:14]
A
And then Facebook said this to you?
- [17:16]
B
Yeah, all the companies have. And I said, well, wait a minute. My radio station in Thief River Falls, Minnesota, can figure out how to do it. I think you can, too. You're just gonna have to hire more people, and then it's gonna hurt your profits a little bit. And that's how it is, because you have become a media company. You're a cool media company. Everyone loves posting on it. I do. But this is no longer about res. They are literally trying to disrupt our democracy. And if someone once said it was like they created a product that has no alarms or locks on the doors, and then they act surprised that the burglar got in.
- [17:54]
A
Can you answer this question? Can democracy survive social media?
- [17:58]
B
I think so.
- [17:59]
A
Can you answer it in a tweet?
- [18:01]
B
Are you acting for a short answer on your podcast?
- [18:04]
A
No. No. I know that you have important senatorial business to do.
- [18:06]
B
I feel like. I feel a little. Okay, so.
- [18:08]
A
No, no, no. Yeah, you're not. You're playing the corners a little bit.
- [18:12]
B
But the FC, in some ways, has thrived because of social media. It's allowed candidates to get on there and get their message out there in a different way. But I think there is a dark, dark side, and that's what we're seeing. And it's incumbent on these companies with the most brilliant minds working for them, some of the most successful companies in America, to get their act.
- [18:29]
A
Is it incumbent upon people like you to legislate this?
- [18:31]
B
Of course it is. But I'm having trouble getting more Republicans on it, except for my friend Senator McCain, because basically, I get there's a number of people on the other side that want all this dark money spent on the Internet with no trace of it.
- [18:44]
A
Are you ascribing ill motive to your colleagues?
- [18:47]
B
Yeah. Yes.
- [18:50]
A
Caught me short with that. Good work. Good work. I want to talk about Minnesota, and I want to talk about the people in Minnesota who voted for and still support Donald Trump. I want you to explain the phenomenon. I mean, just use people, you know, what is attractive about him to them? And what does your party. Why is your party having difficulty communicating with a very large subset of Minnesota's population and other states?
- [19:22]
B
Well, I understand this because these are people that I've worked for and worked with.
- [19:28]
A
You got family members who support Trump?
- [19:30]
B
No, but These are people. Right before the election, I was up in a bar up in Virginia, Minnesota, and talked to the bar bartender, out of work, steelworker and a woman and her husband was out of work, too. And she was telling me she was going to vote for Trump because she felt there wasn't, that people weren't standing up for her. Now, since then, actually, oddly, because of work we did with the Obama administration, at the end, those minds are up and running again. And so I think they're in politics when there's gridlock and things aren't getting done. And when someone comes out there and says, I'm going to shake things up, I'm going to change things, I'm going to do something about your prescription drug prices, which hasn't happened, by the way. I'm going to build beautiful infrastructure all across this country which people care about. Roads and bridges and ways to get to work. That hasn't happened. I'm going to help you with broadband. Hasn't happened. So those kinds of things. When people hear that, I don't blame them because they're sick and tired of all the fighting. They want to see someone step above and get some things done. My issue is that a lot of the things that have gotten done have not helped those people as much. And when I also look at them, I don't see just a Trump voter. I see someone that our party should be helping more.
- [20:42]
A
Well, what failed then in the Democratic side?
- [20:46]
B
What failed? We left. This was not in any of the Senate races, but the presidential campaign was kind of focused on all and the above all over the country, and we left the Midwest behind. I always like to tell the story how my husband was once left behind at the gas station by his parents because there were six boys and he was the middle one and he was always the good one. And they got in the station wagon and drove away and forgot he was there, wasn't there.
- [21:12]
A
And yet he managed to get through law school all by himself.
- [21:15]
B
But we cannot leave the Midwest behind at the gas station this time. And it was Chris Christie who once said, whoa, whoa, whoa, I remember that name. Don't just go where it's comfortable, you go where it's uncomfortable. So that's why I visited.
- [21:29]
A
Well, he certainly did that, didn't he?
- [21:31]
B
All right, okay, very funny. But I meant it in a good way. And I visit all 87 of our counties every single year. And I get talked to Democrats, Republicans, Independents, gun owners, non gun owners. And I think it's really important to listen. And then you go back and you do some things. Sometimes they buck your party. I worked to build a bridge to Wisconsin that is a beautiful bridge that everyone loves now, but at the time it was controversial.
- [21:54]
A
You used the word beautiful more since Donald Trump became president.
- [21:57]
B
I just. It is truly the most beautiful bridge. You'll have to go see it.
- [22:00]
A
Then you'll see what I do. Last question. If you were to post one hot dish recipe on the dark Facebook, which dark Russian supporting Facebook? Which one?
- [22:11]
B
It is my award winning recipe, the Taconite tater tot hot dish, which refers to northern Minnesota where my grandpa was a miner. That's iron ore mining. And so what it is, it's a combination. All hot dishes have soups, so it has various mushroom soups, those things. But it has tater tots in it, of course. But the real special thing about it is that has pepper jack cheese and it was the number one linked the thing that people most opened up as a link on our CBS affiliate in Minnesota the year I put it out. And it was declared by many people who wrote us from southern Minnesota as too spicy because they are new. But it was mostly southern Minnesota and the Twin Cities in northern Minnesota thought it was just fine. So I just recently during the super bowl had many people send me pictures of it as they made it. So you might want to check it out. Taconite Tater tot hot dish Minnesota, where.
- [23:12]
A
Mayonnaise is a spice. Thank you very much for being on the Atlantic interview. Bye.
- [23:17]
B
Okay, bye.
- [23:20]
A
The Atlantic interview is produced by Diana Douglas and Kevin Townsend with production help from Kim Lau and Abella Fayed. If you like this podcast, subscribe and rate us. If you don't like this podcast, please send me your spiciest version of Taconite Tater tot hot dish. That's not something that people from New York eat or even actually can pronounce. I'm Jeffrey Goldberg, the editor in chief of the Atlantic, and I'll see you next week.