← The Briefing with Jen Psaki
The Briefing with Jen Psaki
Trump cashes in on crypto side-hustle as rich-get-richer budget comes into focus
01:22:54
Jen Psaki reports on how Donald Trump still used the trappings of the presidency during his "personal time" at a dinner for big-money purchasers of his cryptocurrency, and shares dramatic new visuals of how much the new Republican budget bill benefits wealthy Americans over the poor.
Loading summary
Transcript113 lines
- [00:00]
Jen Psaki
Welcome to Birch Lane where you can find a fresh take on classic furniture and decor. Every piece is handpicked and crafted to last for years to come. At Birch Lane you can explore everything from outdoor sets to living room furniture and everything in between and get fast free shipping it's classic style for joyful living.
- [00:19]
OnDeck Representative
Shop now@birchlane.com Building a business may feel like a big jump, but on deck small business loans can help keep you afloat. With lines of credit up to $100,000 and term loans up to 200,000 DOL, OnDeck lets you choose the loan that's right for your business. As a top rated online small business lender, OnDeck's team of loan advisors can help you find the right business loan to fit your needs. Visit ondeck.com for more information. Depending on certain loan attributes, your business loan may be issued by Ondeck or Celtibank. Ondeck does not lend in North Dakota. All loans and amounts subject to lender approval.
- [00:53]
Jen Psaki
Happy Memorial Day weekend to everyone at home. Thanks for being here with us. We're going to be here for two hours tonight. We have a lot to get through, lots of news to go through, so strap in. I guess if you're sitting on your couch catching up on the news first, I want to take a moment, though to talk about a bit about something important and that's something hopefully you're all experiencing right now. Personal time. Hopefully this holiday weekend you're able to take some of your own personal time to reflect or be with family or friends or barbecuing or going to the pool or whatever you may be doing. If you have kids like me, personal time is very hard to come by. I certainly cherish it. However, there is at least one person who is generally not afforded the privilege of personal time, and that person is the President of the United States. No matter who they are. And before you feel bad for any moment, this is what presidents sign up for. All of them. There are no on or off buttons for national crises or the all encompassing responsibility of the presidency. And there are also importantly, no on or off buttons for when you need to follow the law. But for some reason, the Trump administration thinks there's an off button, especially when it comes to President Trump's money making after hours side hustles. I mean, yesterday when NBC News correspondent Garrett Hake asked to see a list of those invited to Trump's very private crypto dinner where he honored the top 220 investors who funneled money into his family's meme coin White House Press Secretary Caroline Levitt said that no disclosure was necessary, none at all, because President Trump was, quote, attending in his personal time. Really? So then why is there reporting today that the official presidential seal was used at this very personal timey event? If this dinner, which has already raised questions about potential room for bribery, was really held on Trump's personal dime and not the taxpayer's dime, why put on display the literal symbol of the public office Trump holds? You can see it right there on the screen. We even shined a little light on it there for you. Certainly there are a lot of people who were not happy with the President rubbing shoulders with a Chinese billionaire and over 200 others with largely foreign digital wallets, myself included, probably all of you watching right now. I mean, this is how the New York Times put it. The dinner at which Trump gave remarks was an extraordinary moment in which the President leveraged his position to make money for his own crypto business and for his Virginia Golf club. Now, late today, the Times got its hands on the guest list, which included crypto billionaires from around the world, former basketball player Lamar Odom, and a lawyer who worked for Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, among many. Interesting crowd, I guess. And those people, on average, spent $1.7 million each. Each for a seat and an opportunity to shape U.S. policy in their own interests. $1.7 million. Now, I should note that is roughly 500 times the individual donation limit for federal elections. You can see the numbers there, but somehow this is kosher, I guess, according to the Trump administration. I mean, plenty of protesters. Also, you can see them there stood outside of Trump's Virginia golf course where the event was being held. Repeatedly and loudly chanting. We hear them say, America is not for sale. America is not for sale. Meanwhile, the guests of honor were served this Trump special. You can see it on the screen there. Not sure I'd spend over a million bucks to eat that, but to each his own. And because there was so little transparency, it is unclear when the meme coin dinner ended and presumably when Trump switched from being on his personal time to, I guess, being the president again. We do know, though, that that just after 7am this morning, when Trump was back on the clock officially in some capacity, he used the power of his office to threaten the EU with new 50% tariffs and also threaten yet another American company with tariffs. This time, the target was Apple. In a post on his social media site, Trump threatened the tech giant with a 25% tariff if Apple does not start producing iPhones in the United States. If you prefer Android phones. And think you lucked out. Think again on that one. Because today Trump said the 25% tariff would apply to companies like Samsung. Now, I'm not sure if Trump knows that some experts estimate that a made in America iPhone could cost triple the price it is now. Or maybe he doesn't care because he already has one. And what I'm about to play for you here is not from the show Veep at all. It is something that actually happened in the Oval Office today. But we don't want to have Canada making that cars. We want to make our cars. It's a phone call. Do you mind? Mr. President, are you considering stopping other universities from taking foreign students? It's a different Congressman. They're all congratulating us. Is that an iPhone, sir? Yeah, it's lucky. It is lucky. It is. That was literally today after he threatened the tariffs that will make phones much more expensive for everybody else. Look, it's clear the Trump's agenda is not all that concerned with growing income inequality and the cost of living in this country. I mean, every day that's pretty clear. Trump's actions and the Republican budget bill we've been talking about a lot over the last couple days kind of tells us everything we need to know on that front. Just look at this chart from ge Eliot Morris on Substack. It outlines the rate of change in household income that would come as a result of the Republican budget bill that was passed in the House yesterday. And this is pretty startling. I mean, the poorest 10% of Americans represented on the left side in the red, you can see them in the red show a negative increase. Their household incomes are estimated to be reduced by 2% in just two years. Now, the further right you go on the chart, that's the one you can see very well. The more wealth those Americans have. For example, for the richest 10%, their income will increase by 4% in two years. And believe it or not, this is just one very small piece of that chart. See, look at what happens to the top 0.1% on the far right if we scroll up a bit and just how far up it goes, up and up and up. We couldn't even fit it in the initial screen. Disparity here is undeniably stark. I mean, under the Trump and Republican budget, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. That's about the summary of what this is. And oh, yeah, how about some random tariffs that will raise prices on everything you buy while we're at it starting Safdan Esbaradvormamoorty he's the former deputy director of the National Economic Council, somebody who knows a lot about all of these issues. Let me just start here with the tariffs just because they happen today. And I think we're all trying to make sense of them. I mean, speaking to reporters today, Trump said, quote, sometimes the country will eat it, sometimes Walmart will eat it. I don't want the consumer to pay. I mean, no one wants the consumers to pay. But explain why that is just not reality based.
- [07:56]
Safdan Esbaradvormamoorty
Look, the consumers are going to pay in the vast majority of cases. In fact, Walmart itself said that consumers are going to ultimately be eating the cost of most of these tariffs. So you're talking about a very significant increase in the costs that these companies are facing. He announced today he wanted to do a 50% tariff on the European Union. This comes on the heels of an even larger tariff on China. If you impose those costs on companies, the options that they have are either to not import that good, which is how you end up with shortages of goods that we need in the United States, or they try to pass along the cost to consumers on the back end. And that means a 25, 30% increase in some of the costs that people are facing for everyday products. You know, there's a report out about how much it would affect young parents of young children who need strollers, diapers. All of these goods are going to be going up by 25, 30% because of the China tariffs. And it's on top, as you said, of the impact of this GOP budget bill, which is also going to put the hammer to lower income and middle income families.
- [08:53]
Jen Psaki
I want to get to that because there's a lot. We were just talking about this before we came in air. There's a lot been a lot of focus on the cost of phones. Everybody has a phone of some sort. There's estimates out there, they could go up to three times if they're built in the United States. What about these EU tariffs? If he puts them in place, what kind of things would be impacted? What should Americans expect their costs would go up on?
- [09:15]
Safdan Esbaradvormamoorty
Yeah, it's interesting. If you look at the top 10 imports that we get from the European Union, it's a lot of what we would call intermediate goods. It's things that American companies need to use to build something else in the United States. Chemical products, machinery that American manufacturers use to then build auto parts here in the United States, for example. And so ironically, the tariff on the EU by raising the prices of intermediate goods that American manufacturers need is going to make American manufacturing less competitive because it means that all these companies that are relying on these goods are going to face higher costs. That means that what they try to produce is going to be more expensive compared to a German company or a Brazilian company. So the intended beneficiary of all of this supposedly is American manufacturing. But the combined effect of all of these tariffs is actually going to be hurting American manufacturing. And you see that when you actually talk to American manufacturers.
- [10:04]
Jen Psaki
You were making this point. We were just talking about this, about the impacts of the Medicaid cuts. And the number that's been out there about the impacts of people who could lose health care is about 13.7 million. There's a couple of different reasons for that. Sometimes that's 1 in 25Americans. By the way, for mathematicians, you're better at math than me. For people who think this doesn't impact them, they won't see the impact of this. Explain how massive these cuts could be on people.
- [10:30]
Safdan Esbaradvormamoorty
Yeah, it's a devastating cut. And the way that they're imposing these cuts really matters because what they're saying is we're going to impose harder work requirements on people on Medicaid, meaning if you're not bringing in income from a job, you're going to lose your Medicaid. Well, think about that for a second. Imagine that we have an economic downturn, maybe caused by tariffs. The unemployment rate goes up to 5, 6, 7% through no fault of your own. You lose your job because companies are doing layoffs. All of a sudden you lose your health care access too, because you can't get Medicaid. You try your best to find a job, but you can't do it. The other thing is that these are paperwork requirements that are very onerous. And we've seen that in the past when states have tried to do these types of requirements. The vast majority of people who lose their benefits are eligible, meaning that they should have qualified for it, but they just didn't fill out the paperwork. Right. They didn't submit it exactly on time. They didn't have the right attachment to show exactly what their income was. So you're really kicking 13 million people off of their health insur, many of whom should have qualified for this. And at the same time, as you put up on that chart handing out what turns out to be a $450,000 average annual tax cut to somebody in the top 0.1%. It's just the priorities are completely backwards.
- [11:41]
Jen Psaki
I expect we have a long road ahead here, and I Hope you will come back and keep talking to us about it as we try to break through all the policy wonky important pieces of the details. Thank you so much for joining me. I really appreciate it. I want to continue this conversation with Rob Sand. He is the only Democrat who holds statewide office in the de red state of Iowa. He's state auditor. He's looking to make a move into another statewide office and he recently announced his run for governor. It's great to see you. Thank you for joining me on Friday, Friday evening of Memorial Day. We've just been here talking about tariff threats. This time it was Apple. He's Trump has already been threatening retailers like Walmart not to raise prices because of his tariffs tariff policy. There's lots and lots of impacts on every state here. But I know you've thought a lot about the impact of these tariffs on people in Iowa. So give us kind of a scattershot of how these impact people or could impact people in your state. Sure.
- [12:37]
Rob Sand
I think this is deeply important. I'm a born and raised Iowan from Decorah in northeast Iowa, a town of about 7,000 people. Anyone watching can go to robsand.com to learn more about me. But these tariffs are going to be tough for Iowa in particular. And one of the biggest reasons is if you want to hit United States with tariffs, we export agricultural products and most of them come from Iowa. And so our growers and producers in the state of Iowa are going to have a really tough time with this because we typically have a strong export relationship to China for pork, for corn, for soybeans. And if you look at what they did in the first Trump administration, the Chinese literally went to Peru and built one of the biggest, the biggest agricultural export port in the world from scratch so that they could ship Brazilian agricultural products. Instead of going all the way down around South America, they could just take them over to Peru and ship them direct to China from there. Basically, last time they built a spigot. This time they just have to turn it on. It's going to be tough in Iowa.
- [13:49]
Jen Psaki
The agricultural impact. There was a lot of talk of a about this several weeks ago and then it sort of died down a little bit. So while you're here, I just want to ask you more about this because Iowa farmers, can't tell me if I'm getting this right, have entered the spring planting season and there's a lot of uncertainty. Right. About how to plan for this. Right. How to plan for where they can sell their crops. What does that mean in terms of how they're planning for how to make a living and what their year end income is going to look like.
- [14:20]
Rob Sand
But it's a great question. And everything is up in the air, which is incredibly frustrating. What they want almost more than anything else is self determination. Right. They want to be able to say, this is what I'm going to plant, this is when I'm going to plant it, this is when I'm going to harvest and this is what I'm looking to sell it for. And when you have these totally unpredictable markets, it's hard to do any of that because you feel like you're not going to sink or swim based on your own decision making. You're going to sink or swim based on what a whole bunch of other people are doing. And it's already hard enough to try to do this as a living dealing with the weather. But now you've got to deal with the weather of people's tempers in Washington and in China. I just, that's it's no way for farmers in the state of Iowa and growers and producers to actually try to make a living.
- [15:12]
Jen Psaki
I want to ask you about another piece of legislation. I was just talking about it with Bharat, that I know will impact, if it's, if it's signed into law, enormously the people of Iowa. I mean, according to the Kaiser Family foundation, more than 86,000 Iowans would lose Medicaid coverage and 56,000 Iowans would lose health insurance in the current version of the big beautiful bill, as it's being called. Yet every member of Iowa's congressional delegation voted for the bill. How are Iowans responding? I know this has been only a couple of days, but you're out there talking to people.
- [15:45]
Rob Sand
Yeah, I think people are incredibly frustrated. I think this is one of the tremendous problems of our time, honestly, whether it's in Iowa or elsewhere. It's the question of whether or not you're doing public service or you're doing politics. And if you're focused on public service, the way I like to put it is you're thinking more about how to make a place not redder or bluer, but better and truer. It's not a question of which party's in control. It's not a question of what your party boss wants you to do. It's what's actually good for your constituents. And I'll point out I do 100 town halls every year. Most of Iowa's congressional delegation hasn't been doing any of them in person. I go even to conservative groups. I went and spoke to a conservative group in northwest Iowa a little more than a month ago. Again, robsand.com if you want to learn more about my background. But these are folks who want to talk to their representatives in their democracy and yet some of the folks that represent them in Congress won't even come and meet with them and then they go and turn around and take votes like this, which Jen, 700,000 Iowans are on this program. And honestly, my faith is a tremendous motivator of most of what I do. I can't imagine looking at the amount of people out there that are struggling to get by and deciding to cut support for struggling people in order to sort of pay for tax cuts for the wealthiest. It makes no sense to me, not if you're looking at it in terms of public service.
- [17:19]
Jen Psaki
That's a pretty good summary of it. Sounds like you're going to be visiting all those 99 counties as you're running for governor. I hope you'll come come back and talk to us more about it. Rob Stan, thank you so much for joining me. Coming up, we're going to talk about how Harvard took a stand against Trump and Harvard won. Another law firm stands up to Trump and that law firm won. The retribution campaign might be picking up steam, but at the same time, lots of spines are starting to stiffen. That's a good thing. Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson is currently fighting back against an investigation by Trump's DOJ. And he joins me. Just say 90 cents, 90 seconds.
- [17:57]
OnDeck Representative
Building a business may feel like a big jump, but on deck, small business loans can help keep you afloat. With lines of credit up to $100,000 and term loans up to $250,000, OnDeck lets you choose the loan that's right for your business. As a top rated online small business lender, OnDeck's team of loan advisors can help you find the right business loan to fit your needs. Visit ondeck.com for more information. Depending on certain loan attributes, your business loan may be issued by Ondeck or Celtibank. Ondeck does not lend in North Dakota. All loans and amounts subject to lender approval.
- [18:28]
Jen Psaki
Busy work weeks can leave you feeling drained. Prolon's five day nutrition program rejuvenates you at the cellular level with boxes labeled by day so you know exactly what to eat. Developed at USC's Longevity Institute, Prolon supports biological age reduction, metabolism, skin health and fat loss when combined with proper exercise and nutrition. Get 15% off plus a dollar bonus gift when you subscribe@prolonlife.com PandoraProMo these statements have not been evaluated by the FDA. Products are not intended to diagnose, treat or prevent disease. See site for details. Want to pull off the season's freshest trends? You just need the right shoes. That's where designer shoe Warehouse comes in. Loving wide leg jeans. Pair them with sleek low profile sneakers. Obsessed with the sheer trend. Try with mesh flats, feeling boho comfy sandals. Nail the whole free spirited thing. Find on trend shoes from the brands you love like Birkenstock, Nike, Adidas and more at dsw. Okay. Today, a federal judge blocked an attempt by Donald Trump's Department of Homeland Security to revoke Harvard University's ability to enroll foreign students. Now, DHS had not only barred Harvard from admitting international students, it also ordered current foreign born students to transfer or lose their legal status. The judge's decision came only hours after Harvard sued the Trump administration, saying the move would have caused the nation's oldest university immediate and irreparable injury. And this is just the latest in the Trump administration's assault on higher education and specifically Harvard University. In an April letter, the administration laid out to the school a list of demands in order to maintain its financial relationship with the federal government. These demands included Harvard implementing what the Trump administration calls merit based hiring and admissions reform and eliminating any and all diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives and programs. Of course, this back and forth with Harvard is just one of the many examples of how the Trump administration is dead set on punishing anyone who doesn't fall in line with their war against dei. I mean, this week the Civil Rights Division at Trump's DOJ announced that it would be investigating the City of Chicago after the city's mayor, Brandon Johnson, touted hiring black officials in his administration, something many, many elected officials have done for many, many years. In a letter to the mayor, Trump's assistant AG at the Civil Rights Division wrote, quote, the DOJ is opening an investigation to determine whether the City of Chicago is engaged in a pattern or practice of discrimination based on race. Yes, that's right. The Civil Rights Division, which has historically worked to combat discrimination facing minority groups, is now investigating whether Chicago is engaged in a pattern or practice of discrimination based on race because its mayor celebrated its office's diversity. Can't make it up and it's crazy. Joining me now is Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson. Mayor Johnson, it's great to see you and what a week you've had, and I've loved watching how you have fought back against it. I want to just start by it feels to me, and we were talking about this among our team today, like the attacks on Harvard, this new investigation into your city, there's a lot of other examples are part of a broader strategy from this administration. I mean, what do you think?
- [22:00]
Brandon Johnson
Well, thanks for having me, Jen. And you're absolutely right. This administration is working overtime to work to intimidate the people of Chicago and, quite frankly, the people of our country. I'm very proud that I have a group of incredibly talented, highly qualified, diverse Chicagoans who represent my administration. We have the most talented, diverse administration in the history of Chicago. In fact, my administration clearly reflects the country, while the president's administration reflects the country club. There's a fundamental disagreement around how we should approach these critical times that we're living in. And our approach is to ensure that the interests of working people are front and center. That's what my administration reflects, and that's what the people of this country want to see in administrations across this country.
- [22:56]
Jen Psaki
No question about it. There have been so many studies, and I think, and almost anyone's personal experience is that the more diverse the table is and the advising is, the better the conversation and the decision making is. That's not how they see things. Now, in response to the investigation, I kind of love this. You said that the DOJ should actually be investigating the Trump administration. You've paid very close attention to this. Clearly you just referenced it. But talk to me a little bit more about what you've seen in their hiring practices. You referenced country clubs. Clearly, they do not celebrate diversity. They do the opposite. But what else have you seen?
- [23:30]
Brandon Johnson
Well, you would be hard pressed to find someone in the Trump administration that is actually qualified or actually have the skill that is necessary and the background to actually represent the interest of the American people. So when you think about the Department of Education, not qualified. When you think about Health and Human Services, unqualified. Look, the bottom line is this, is that the people of the city of Chicago elected me to speak to their interests. And that's why I've worked to put together and assemble a deeply connected administration that is not only qualified, but reflects the values of the people of Chicago. And we're seeing the great results. Violence is down in the city of Chicago, over 20%. Homicides are down, shootings are down, robberies are down, while at the same time, we're building more affordable homes. 4000 in the first two years of my administration. 1800 under construction. Right now, we're expanding mental and behavioral health care services. And we are actually emboldening our young people through youth employment. And so there's a direct result to the investments that we're making and the violence that continues to go down in the city of Chicago. And that is something that we have had to disrupt decades of disinvestment. It's unfortunate that this administration has demonstrated a great deal of animus towards the interests of working people. But we won't be intimidated in Chicago.
- [25:00]
Jen Psaki
We've been talking a lot this week because it's so important for people to understand all the details of it about the budget bill that just passed. And one of the things I read today or saw today from local news in Chicago is that the snap cuts that the House passed could drive up demand. And this is true of a lot of cities, but could drive up demand, specifically at Chicago area food banks, which is such a devastating impact of this. Talk to me about how you're preparing and how your city is preparing for that.
- [25:31]
Brandon Johnson
Well, as I indicated before, I've made it my purpose to ensure that we are investing in all of our communities throughout the city of Chicago. We have a Build Better Together investment bond that is ensuring that we are providing support for families to be able to afford to live in the city of Chicago. We are investing in our public investment mental and behavioral health care services. But we're also making sure that there are real economic opportunities for families to earn a decent living here. Look, this is my main goal as mayor of the city of Chicago, is to build the safest, most affordable big city in America. And we're doing that. And the fact that this president's actions have demonstrated an incredible deal of hostility towards what's sensible about the evolution of our democracy. It's why as a country, we have to collectively fight back. Working people are struggling all over this country and this is the time for our generation to actually beat back the tyranny of Trump.
- [26:30]
Jen Psaki
Mayor Brandon Johnson, thank you so much for joining me this evening. I really appreciate it. Coming up, I'm going to talk to. Thank you so much. I'm going to talk to a member of Congress who has been calling out the Trump meme COIN scan since January, long before the dinner happened. And after we saw last night, it's pretty clear he was onto something. We're back after a very quick break.
- [26:54]
OnDeck Representative
Building a business may feel like a big jump, but on deck, small business loans can help keep you afloat with lines of credit up to $100,000 and term loans up to 250,000. On deck lets you choose the loan that's right for your business as a top rated online small business business lender, OnDeck's team of loan advisors can help you find the right business loan to fit your needs. Visit ondeck.com for more information. Depending on certain loan attributes, your business loan may be issued by Ondeck or Celtibank. Ondeck does not lend in North Dakota. All loans and amounts subject to lender approval.
- [27:25]
Jen Psaki
Busy work weeks can leave you feeling drained. Prolon's five day nutrition program rejuvenates you at the cellular level with boxes labeled by day so you know exactly what to eat. Developed at USC's Longevity Institute, Prolon supports biological age reduction, metabolism, skin health and fat loss when combined with proper exc exercise and Nutrition. Get 15% off plus a $40 bonus gift when you subscribe at prolonlife.com PandoraProMo these statements have not been evaluated by the FDA. Products are not intended to diagnose, treat or prevent disease. See site for details. Want to pull off the season's freshest trends? You just need the right shoes. That's where designer Shoe Warehouse comes in. Loving wide leg jeans. Pair them with sleek low profile sneakers. Obsessed with the sheer trend? Try it with mesh flats, Feeling Boho comfy sandals. Nail the whole free spirited thing. Find on trend shoes from the brands you love like Birkenstock, Nike, Adidas and more at DSW. Donald Trump had been in office all of two days on January 22nd of this year when two Democrats had already begun holding his feet to the fire over his launch of a personal cryptocurrency. Which has of course led us to this meme coin debacle we're currently in. Representative Jake Auchincloss and Senator Elizabeth Warren wrote to the Treasury Department at the time, warning that anyone, including the leaders of hostile nations, can covertly buy these coins, raising the specter of uninhibited and untraceable foreign influence over the President of the United States. All while President Trump's supporters are left to shoulder the risk of investing in Trump Coin. After Trump spoke last night at a dinner he hosted for 220 Top Trump coin investors, most of whom had foreign crypto wallets, it's not hard to see why they wanted answers and accountability. The New York Times reports that Trump told attendees he was, quote, honored to be working on helping everybody here. The Times also reports that several of the dinner guests said that they attended the event with the explicit intent of influencing Mr. Trump and U.S. financial regulations. So yeah, maybe Senator Warren and Congressman Auchincloss were onto something. Joining me now is Democratic Congressman Jake Auchincloss of Massachusetts. It's great to see you. I started out by talking about how you and Senator Warren sent that letter months ago. It was clear where this is headed. You were concerned right away. I'm sure you're still looking for a lot of answers. Has this been worse than you thought when you started asking about those questions? And what more do you want to know now?
- [30:03]
Jake Auchincloss
Jen, good evening. Thanks for having me on. It's about as much of a corrupt catastrophe as I feared. Knowing this guy, the list of people who are at that dinner is very concerning, including a Chinese billionaire with strong and deep ties to the Chinese Communist Party. But honestly, Jen, what's more concerning are the people who weren't at that dinner. Because the value of buying a meme coin that enriches the President is that you can be anonymous. So what I'm most concerned about is not these individuals who wanted to hobnob with the President, it's the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, it's the Chinese Communist Party's top echelons, it's the Kremlin, it's the Venezuelans, it's the Turks. It is well placed and wealthy individuals and hostile governments who own a major share of the President's net worth and who are gonna use it covertly and at a time and a place of their choosing to buy influence in American foreign policy.
- [31:04]
Jen Psaki
I think this is such an important point because to your point, I mean, we don't know all the people who even attended the dinner. The New York Times has done some reporting on it. They put out some names. There's, you know, Justin sun was under investigation by the SEC until he bought millions of dollars in Memecoin. But there are thousands and tens of thousands of other people who have also bought Trump's meme coin. And it is. Those are people we may never know. Talk to me a little bit more about when you say they could kind of hold this over his head, what you mean by that and how that could all go down.
- [31:40]
Jake Auchincloss
So the way that these coins work in a crypto wallet works is you purchase the meme coins and, and the only person in the world that can prove and knows that you own those coins is you yourself with the cryptographic key. And that means that you can remain anonymous for as long as you want. But when the time comes where you want to demonstrate your ownership and your equity in the President, you can show him the crypto wallet and proof of ownership. And it's totally audit tight. I mean, you can guarantee that you own it. And that provides this ability to have a one on one conversation with the president that says, listen, you know, Congress doesn't know, the SEC doesn't know, the press doesn't know, but you and I know that I have 7% of your family's net worth. And what I need now is for you to sell me these F16s. What I need now is for you to lift these sanctions on the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps. What I need now is for us to negotiate about the Donbas in a different way. Right. And I think all of our viewers understand that Donald Trump is an inherently transactional individual and he's always going to put his family's financial interests ahead of the country's.
- [32:48]
Jen Psaki
No question about it. There's also reasons why there are limitations on who can contribute to political campaigns and how much. And this sort of falls way out of the scope of that. Let me ask you also about, I mean, there have been some proposals, Monet, I know you supported to kind of put some limitations and requirements and restrictions around what we're seeing here and what the Trump administration's abuses. It seems like a no brainer for people to support, but it's really being led by Democrats. Have you, do you have any confidence that there will be enough Republicans who come to the table who want to see accountability in place here?
- [33:26]
Jake Auchincloss
There's legislation in the Senate right now that is trying to put regulation in place around stablecoins, which is one type of crypto. And there have been good attempts by Democrats to put some guardrails around presidential use of meme coins in there. I don't know where Republicans are going to land on that. But candidly, Jen, it actually shouldn't be necessary because the Constitution itself is quite clear on this with the domestic and foreign emoluments clauses. The president can't be bribed. It's illegal, it's unconstitutional, and it shouldn't require another law to make that plain to Republicans.
- [34:02]
Jen Psaki
No question about it. It's again, one of those cases where his administration is testing the system in a way that the system and the laws aren't entirely prepared for in any other. And I was speaking with your colleague Dan Goldman about this last night. In any other scenario, with almost any other attorney general, there'd be an investigation here, to state the obvious from the Justice Department. In all likelihood, you know, you can't entirely predict it, but there, there probably would be. Are there other levers of power? You've thought about this a lot from states, from outside organizations otherwise that you think could be more active here to hold this administration accountable on this particular issue.
- [34:43]
Jake Auchincloss
One would hope that the SEC as an independent agency would pursue this without fear or favor. I think you and I both probably are not holding our breath on seeing that type of political courage from anywhere within the administration, given his behavior and who he's appointing to these roles. Ultimately, it's going to be on Democrats in Congress to raise public awareness and then public pressure on the president, not just on the corruption, which is evident and eye watering, but also on tying the corruption to the higher cost of living that we are seeing. Americans are watching their 401s over the last 90 days and it's been a roller coaster because of his incoherent tariff policy. Well, he's not worried about people's 401ks. He's worried about his own meme coins. And while Americans are worried about about their retirement security, he's having dinner with a bunch of meme coin investors for his own net worth. And that's the connection that we're going to have to make more, I think, more compelling to the American public.
- [35:39]
Jen Psaki
Congressman Jake Auchincloss, thank you so much for joining me on Memorial Day Eve weekend. I really appreciate it. And coming up, just when we thought the crisis inside our intelligence agencies couldn't get any worse, the crisis inside our intelligence agencies just got worse. Former CIA Director John Brennan is standing by, and he joins me next.
- [36:08]
John Brennan
It's clearly a signal to tell analysts throughout the intelligence community, you tell the truth, you provide objective analysis as you're supposed to be doing, you are running the risk of getting fired.
- [36:19]
Jen Psaki
That was former CIA Director John Brennan on my colleague Nicole Wallace's show just last week. Now, the blockbuster story he was reacting to at the time was the news that Trump Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard had fired intelligence officials for putting out an intelligence report that contradicted Trump. As former CIA Director Brennan put it last week, they were fired for telling the truth. Back in March, Trump invoked the Alien Enemies act to deport Venezuelan immigrants without due process, of course. And his justification at the time, as I'm sure you remember, for invoking the act, was his claim that America was being, quote, unquote, invaded by Venezuela, invaded specifically by members of the Trende Aragua gang at the direction of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro. It turns out, though, that as you all know, that is not true. That's false. The intelligence report these analysts were fired over stated that the Venezuelan gang Trende Aragua was not controlled by or in cahoots With Venezuela's president, US Intelligence agents reported the actual truth, the truth that contradicted Trump and were fired for it. That on its own was, of course, a jaw dropping revelation. And that is where the story stood last week when former CIA Director John Brennan commented on it. But now the story has gotten even darker. This week, the New York Times reported that even before Trump Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard fired the agents who published a truthful report, her chief of staff had ordered intelligence analysts to rewrite that truthful report so it could not be, quote, used against Trump. So not only is the Trump administration firing intelligence agencies for telling the truth, they are also pressuring them to be at least, the very least less than truthful. Joining me now is former CIA Director John Brennan. It's great to see you. And I know you've been following this closely. And as somebody who grew up and had rose to the top of the intelligence community, I can only imagine how outraged you feel as you see all of the developments. But I just have to ask you about this latest one. I mean, what do you make of this reporting that the chief of staff for the Director of National Intelligence was pressuring intelligence analysts who are not political at all, they're just doing their job. They're providing the analysis, pressuring them to rewrite their findings to be more in line with what Trump wanted?
- [38:32]
John Brennan
Well, Janice, worrisome on so many levels. First of all, the integrity and objectivity of the intelligence community's analysis is a solemn obligation of all analysts to make sure that there's going to be no politicization of that analysis and that intelligence. And it's quite clear from the reporting has come out that the direction that was coming from Tulsi Gabbard's chief of staff, Joe Kent, to try to manipulate the analysis so that it would, in fact, conform with what the Trump administration has done on Venezuela. And it's because these analysts resisted that interference as a reason why they were fired. But also this individual, Joe Kent, has been nominated to be the director of the National Counterterrorism Center. I was the first director of the National Counterterrorism Center. And it's critically important that the leader of that center really makes sure that all analysis that comes out of it is going to adhere to those requirements of objectivity and integrity. And this individual clearly is a partisan individual who wanted to reshape the analysis again so that it wouldn't be used to undercut either Gabbard or Donald Trump. And again, it's just so contrary to Everything that intelligence analysts throughout their careers, throughout their training have been taught at.
- [39:56]
Jen Psaki
Any level puts them all in an incredibly untenable position. I wanted to ask you, too, about some news that just broke a few hours ago, and we've seen reporting about this for the last couple of weeks. NBC News is reporting that at least half of the National Security Council has been fired or put on leave. And a lot of the explanation you hear from people is, well, Trump doesn't rely on a policy team, so he doesn't need a policy process. And I always say. But that's the whole process of having cabinet agencies and cabinet members debate and suss things out and consider things. It's also the implementation mechanism. But help us understand, you've sat on the NSC just how big of a deal, bringing it down from 350, 400 to whatever size it is now and firing 100 people on a Friday afternoon.
- [40:45]
John Brennan
Well, Jen, I think the aim and the purpose is very similar to what they're trying to do with the intelligence analysis. They don't want to have anything, again that's going to contradict Donald Trump. And as you well know, the National Security Council staff is the staff responsible for debating the various policy issues and exploring options, the pros and cons, to make sure that there is going to be an interagency process and discussion that is going to be able to surface the most advisable path that US Policy should go down. But if Donald Trump decides these policies, irrespective and without any input, I can see why they wanted to remove individuals within that National Security Council staff, because that is the place where you're going to have options discussed. This is where you may, in fact, raise issues that's, going to, again, be contrary to what Donald Trump's brothers and decisions are. So, again, I think it just demonstrates that they don't want any independence of thought within the national security community. They want to make the decisions top down. And it's clear that, you know, after Donald Trump makes these decisions, they just want to have supporting documentation to again undergird his decisions. Again, irrespective of the analytic strength of any of those decisions, as you know.
- [42:05]
Jen Psaki
Incredibly well, because you've worked with all of them. I mean, there are people on the NSC working on issues that may not be front and center for the president at any given period of time, because they're working in different bureaus, working on different things around the world. It's being reported that staffers were only given a half an hour's notice between when they were told they were being put on leave and when they had to exit the building. And they're again, the points of contact when it's working through the interagency. Can you help us understand, I mean, why could the sudden, the sudden nature of this seems concerning and destructive on its own, but what do you think?
- [42:39]
John Brennan
I think it's very concerning. And, you know, Marco Rubio, who is Secretary of State and National Security advisors, supposedly had blessed this to say decision. And again, this is a way to constrain whatever type of intelligence as well as discussion needs to take place. The NSC staff is supposed to orchestrate that interagency process. But I think from all accounts, there's really no interagency process right now. It's just this group of folks up at the top who are moving forward with the decisions that Donald Trump is making, again, without the appropriate input. So, again, this is just antithetical to all of those processes and all the administrations before it that relied heavily on the National Security Council staff in order to make sure that they tee up the options and the pros and cons of those policy courses.
- [43:27]
Jen Psaki
John Brennan, thank you for staying up with us. Not up with us, but thank you for being with us on Friday night. I really appreciate it. Thanks for joining us. We have another full hour of live coverage coming up. Former FBI Director Jane James Comey is standing by. Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal is standing by. And Chastain Buttigieg is going to join me as well to talk about his book and all sorts of things. We have so much more to get to tonight. Don't go anywhere. We've been talking a lot about Donald Trump's retribution campaign, his attacks on law firms, his attacks on universities, his attacks on the media, and on and on and on. It is, in so many ways the whole purpose of his administration. Well, the targets of Donald Trump's revenge tour happen to be faring awfully well in court today. Just hours after Harvard sued the Trump administration for trying to revoke its ability to enroll international students, a federal judge blocked the administration from moving ahead with that plan. And hours after that ruling, a different federal judge struck down Trump's executive order targeting the law firm Jenner and Block. Man, it's almost like standing up to the bully is the right strategy. It is the right strategy. Former FBI Director James Comey is the target of another Trump revenge effort, and he's going to join me here at the table after a very quick break. We'll be right back. Okay. We all know that Donald Trump has long been obsessed with the idea of revenge and retribution. I mean, other than tariffs, he has probably talked about revenge and retribution more than anything else during his entire time in public life. I would have wiped the floor with the guys that weren't loyal, which I will now do, which is great.
- [45:25]
Jake Auchincloss
You know, I love getting even with people.
- [45:27]
Jen Psaki
I am your retribution. I am your retribution. There has to be retribution.
- [45:31]
Jake Auchincloss
There must be retribution.
- [45:33]
Jen Psaki
So maybe something should be thought about, you know, a little bit of retribution. Well, now that he's back in office, every single day seems to be a new stop on President Trump's revenge tour. I mean, just in the last 24 hours, Trump announced that he was blocking Harvard University from being able to enroll any international students, putting the fate of nearly 7,000 students in jeopardy. Harvard sued, and federal judge put that order on hold. But it comes after Trump already announced his plans to try and strip Harvard of its tax exempt status. Officially, the administration claims this is all somehow about policing, antisemitism and going after dei. But every time. Which isn't good either. The last part. But every time Trump brings this up on his own, he says absolutely nothing about either of those things. In fact, he makes it very clear that one of the things he is really bugged about is the fact that Harvard hired two former Democratic mayors he doesn't like. Can you imagine the money we pay Harvard? They hire de Blasio, the worst mayor in the history of New York, and they hire the woman from Chicago who was a disaster. What's going on with Harvard really scamming the public and hiring people like de Blasio and Lori Lightfoot?
- [46:48]
Chastin Buttigieg
No, more.
- [46:50]
Jen Psaki
Certainly two of the worst mayors in the history of our country. And Harvard is just one of the institutions Trump is targeting for retribution simply because he doesn't like him. There's also the media. I mean, just last night, Reuters reported that Trump's FCC is going after the watchdog group Media Matters over their coverage of Elon Musk. He's also targeted news organizations like CBS and ABC News over coverage that bothered him from those networks. And he tried to kick the Associated Press out of the White House Press Bowl. Remember, just because they won't call the Gulf of Mexico the Gulf of America. His DOJ is targeting a top Democratic fundraising operation. He's also punishing law firms who represent his opponents. And just today, a federal judge struck down Trump's order against one of those firms, saying it is unconstitutional. But of course, Trump isn't just targeting institutions and law firms. He is doing a lot of that but he's also targeting individual people. Since taking office again, Trump has threatened a number of his critics. Just last week, he even suggested he wanted to investigate Bruce Springsteen, Beyonce, Oprah, and Bono over their endorsements of Kamala Harris. And those probably aren't serious threats. They certainly don't have any legal basis. But that obviously hasn't stopped him before. So, honestly, who can say for sure what's serious and what's not in his mind? Because Trump has already launched investigations into several other rivals on equally thin grounds. People like Chris Krebs, the former head of US Cybersecurity who Trump ordered the DOJ to investigate just because he said the 2020 election wasn't stolen, which it wasn't. There's also Miles Taylor, the former Trump official who wrote an anonymous op ed criticizing Trump. Trump has ordered the DOJ to investigate him as well. The Justice Department is Prosecuting Democratic Congresswoman LaMonica McIver for allegedly assaulting law enforcement, trying to conduct oversight of an ICE detention center. And just this week, the DOJ announced another investigation into Trump rival and former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo over his handling of COVID And then, of course, there's James Comey, the former FBI director who has long been the target of Trump's ire. By now, you've probably seen this relatively benign social media post from Comey, A photo of seashells he came across on the beach spelling out 8647. The Trump administration deemed that post a threat against Trump's life. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard called for Comey to be jailed over it. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem dispatched Secret Service agents to interview Comey about the alleged threat. Look, the good news is that when institutions push back against Trump's threats, in many cases, they win. They've been winning lately. Harvard pushed back today, and they won. So far, four law firms have pushed back against him, and those four law firms are undefeated against him in court. But for these individual people, getting targeted and investigated by the President of the United States is no small thing. So how should they react when Trump uses the power of his office to go after his opponents like this? Well, I have just the person to ask. Joining me now is former FBI Director James Comey. He's the author of a brand new novel, His Third FDR Drive. And we'll talk about that, too. It's great to see you. Let me just start by asking you. I mean, I mentioned you've talked about this controversy over the social media post. I mentioned it you willingly met with, with Secret Service officials. Is it over now? Have they told you it's over? Or do you expect they're gonna try to continue it and try to keep investigating you in some capacity?
- [50:17]
Chastin Buttigieg
I expect it'll go away, cuz there's nothing there. And then Trump will wake up in the middle of the night. True thing, or whatever it's called about me, because he's obsessed in some weird way. But for me, the people you listed are people who haven't been through it before like I have. Unfortunately, I have lots of experience with it. Take a Chris Krebs. That's a guy you've never heard of being targeted by an executive order of the President saying you shall be investigated. That's life altering.
- [50:41]
Jen Psaki
What should they. I don't know. If you've been in touch with Chris Krebs or any of these people, what should they be doing? There are people who are even less famous than Chris Krebs and Miles Taylor who will be targeted. What should they do when they're targeted?
- [50:54]
Chastin Buttigieg
Probably two things I learned to do with these kind of threats at the same time that seem contradictory. First, see it clearly. Understand that there really is a threat. Second, don't let it overwhelm you. Don't give them that. Don't let it freak you out and dominate your life. Take prudent steps, but don't give. Part of the roar of Trump is to freak out his victims, the people he targets. So don't give them that. But also don't neglect the threat. Protect yourself.
- [51:20]
Jen Psaki
You're promoting a book, which we'll talk about that. And you've had to respond to these questions about the seashell, but you could choose to not be out there publicly and talking about these issues. Why have you chosen to be out there?
- [51:34]
Chastin Buttigieg
I was actually, I'm embarrassed to say, trying to withdraw a little bit, especially since last November. Be a grandfather, be an author. Wear T shirts and jeans all the time. And the reason I'm dressed in my old uniform is to remind myself that's the coward's way. You must stand up and speak. Everyone who can speak, I can speak about the rule of law especially, needs to be out there because there are real serious threats. And the only thing that's necessary for them to triumph is for good men and women to be silent.
- [52:02]
Jen Psaki
One of the challenges, there's many right now, but one of the challenges I've found is that there are so many things happening every single day. Sometimes you lose the thread on different stories that are important to focus on and talk about. And since you are the former FBI director, I wanted to ask you about some of the things going on there. I mean, Kash Patel, I think was. Was quite a choice is one diplomatic way of saying it. He's reportedly been spending a lot of time in Vegas and other places, which I saw you say recently. Maybe that's a good thing. What do you make of the job he's doing so far and what concerns you the most about it?
- [52:36]
Chastin Buttigieg
Hard to tell for sure from the outside. Obviously you start with the fact that the guy has literally nothing in his entire adult life that prepares him for this role. And, and so that's deeply concerning to start with. In a way, I kind of feel a little bit sorry for the guy. He's barked at the FBI nonsense for years and now he not only caught the car, he's got to drive the car. And so that is a daunting task for him. I hope he lets the career people do their jobs, but they've already forced out a bunch of good career people and sent a chill through the organization. I hear they're moving lots of resources. I don't know how they're doing that given that the. The FBI has long decided how to deploy its resources with a process that ranks the threats and puts resources against the threats with terrorism and counterintelligence at the top of that stack. And if you're going to make a change, you have to go ask Congress in my experience, because they make the law. So I'm a little confused when I hear announcements about moving thousands of people here or changing priorities there.
- [53:32]
Jen Psaki
We don't know. There's not a lot of transparency into what exactly is happening. That's right. To your point. I mean, Patel and his number two, Dan Bongino have recently come under fire from MAGA world, I guess you could call it, for exposing the so called deep state plots. I mean, I guess they haven't done enough in their view is why they've come under fire. It seems like that might be influence from the. It's hard to know, but what do you make of that? Because he was in many ways the choice of the MAGA world and now they seem to be a little mad at him.
- [54:03]
Chastin Buttigieg
Well, because he's found himself now in a reality based world where statements have to be under oath in front of judges and there's severe consequences for lying. Not the case with a podcast. And so that's what I meant when I say he has to drive the car now, of course he's going to disappoint the people he gave that nonsense to for years. Because the FBI Newsflash is not a left wing cabal of deep staters. It's a fundamentally honest group of people trying to figure out what's true. He now sees that he has to say that. And the people who follow him are going to find that very disappointing.
- [54:36]
Jen Psaki
One of the other trends we've seen is you mentioned this is a dismantling. A dismantling. Some of it we see publicly, some of it we just hear about. One of the things we've seen recently is the dismantling of the Office of Public Integrity, which historically, typically, if people are going to from the part of the Justice Department, it's a part of the Justice Department to make sure prosecutions of lawmakers aren't political. What do you make of the dismantling of that? It's been they've cut staff, they've tried to cut their role. What does that mean? What should people understand about it?
- [55:05]
Chastin Buttigieg
Well, these are the people who through decades and decades have seen every kind of case. And so they're there to make sure that the work, no matter who's in charge in the White House, no matter who the attorney general is, that the work is done consistently with previous practice and consistent with the law. I know Republicans these days aren't big in thinking about principle or precedent. They're going to be deeply sorry that that disappears because someday there will be a Democratic president and there'll be investigations of Republican officeholders. If I'm them, I sure would want these career people in place making sure that it's done in the right way. Look, I've long thought that you could shrink the size of some of the Department of Justice headquarters units, but this is like burning down the house and then standing in front of the pile of ashes and saying, yeah, we really did need to retile the guest bath. Right. This is destroying the place at a cost that's going to take years and years to rebuild.
- [56:00]
Jen Psaki
What does that rebuilding look like? I mean, we're only a couple of months in, so it's almost hard to know what it would look like. But at this point, you're talking about dismantling the Office of Public Integrity. FBI field offices may or may not have been underfunded and dismantled. What does the rebuilding look like?
- [56:18]
Chastin Buttigieg
It'll take principled leadership that in a transparent, logical way figures out what resources need to be where it'll happen quickly. The good news is we're going to go through three plus years of real pain. Innocent people are going to be hurt, forced out of these organizations. Dumber decisions are going to be made because the talent drained away. But it'll come back very quickly and be rebuilt very quickly. These characters are not going to change the Department of Justice or the FBI in any fundamental way. You don't change culture by shouting at it or cursing it. You maintain an organization by bringing in talented people. They'll come back.
- [56:54]
Jen Psaki
Trump's budget bill, which passed the first step this week, as you well know, has many more steps to go, but it would allocate huge sums of money to immigration enforcement. Some experts say it would make I the biggest law enforcement agency in the country by funding it bigger than the FBI. What do you think about that?
- [57:14]
Chastin Buttigieg
I sure hope they're keeping their eye on the top threats on the FBI stack that they're keeping their eye on the terrorism threat, cyber threat, also the counterintelligence threat. Those things are not going to go away no matter how much you talk about immigration enforcement. And God help us if we lose sight of those.
- [57:30]
Jen Psaki
We're going to take a very quick thank you for staying with me for another block. We're talking about your book. Lots more things. I have more questions. We'll be right back. We are back with former FBI Director James Comey. So this is your third book that you've written. What a fun process. I think you've told me you enjoy writing fiction. It's fiction, but it centers around a right wing influencer who directs his followers to commit violence, which feels it's not exactly topical in this moment, but it feels like something we've been talking about for several years. What inspired you? Is there a specific moment or person that inspired you to write about that storyline?
- [58:17]
Chastin Buttigieg
Well, it's been a feature of my work, especially at the FBI, and I'm trying to write stuff that grips people but is also real. And this is a threat we've been dealing with since the Islamic State came on the scene in 2014 and was using the Internet to reach troubled people and move them to violence. Well, that threat has now gotten much larger because podcasts are everywhere and it's a tool of people in white identity extremism trying to motivate young men especially to move towards violence because they're being replaced, they're being attacked, America's under assault. This is a real feature of the FBI's work and so I thought it would make an a good setting for a crime novel.
- [58:55]
Jen Psaki
I remember well because I was at the State Department in the earlier days of ISIS or when it became really front and center. And there were so many different efforts to fight back on the kind of social media aspect of recruitment and kind of building this network. Do you think the federal government, we're in a unique time now, but do you think there's been enough progress made in that regard as, from what you've seen?
- [59:20]
Chastin Buttigieg
No. We haven't figured out how to deal with a threat that is essentially a devil sitting on a troubled person's shoulder, literally whispering in their ear all day long. You are maligned, you are picked on, you need to fight back, you need to stand up, you need to take action that moves people in dangerous ways. And so it's an important thing today. I hope the FBI is focused on it, because it's after the obscenity that is the pardon of the January 7th defendants. I can't imagine that a lot of people are clamoring to work domestic terrorism at the FBI right now.
- [59:51]
Jen Psaki
No. And it's such an important, important part of what they should be doing. The question of when speech becomes a crime is central to your book, too, and it is very topical. It has been for years. How do you think about that issue?
- [60:07]
Chastin Buttigieg
Well, there's an important line. We must protect speech. We must protect even upsetting speech, offensive speech. But there is a point at which the line, when it's clearly out of bounds, where someone is commanding someone to act in a violent way, directing someone to act in a violent way. And so what enforcers need to do is find the clear, out of bounds conduct, so you don't chill speech, but you also punish really bad people. And so it's not as hard as you might think. As long as you stay away from the gray areas, areas, there's plenty to work that's out of bounds.
- [60:40]
Jen Psaki
Do you think there's a. I mean, one of the things that is happening now is that the Trump administration is, of course, testing the system in ways it hasn't been tested before in the law enforcement sense. Do you think there are laws that should be put in place that would help better manage this that aren't in place now? I mean, are we equipped, Is the law enforcement system and the legal system equipped to deal with what we're seeing now?
- [61:04]
Chastin Buttigieg
Probably there could be changes at the margins, but in the main, we have the tools. There are cultural impediments to doing this work. Let's say you work in the FBI, you know that one of the two political parties is, let me put it nicely, white supremacist adjacent at a minimum. And so why would you Want to throw your career on that side of the line and be summoned to Capitol Hill to be asked, why are you pursuing these innocent groups? And so we have a call, cultural impediment to working it effectively that should get more attention than it does.
- [61:35]
Jen Psaki
You dedicated this book to the men and women of the sdny. Tell me more about that.
- [61:40]
Chastin Buttigieg
Well, it's where I began my career and where I was the U.S. attorney and I have a child who works there now. It is a remarkable group of people, some of whom are Democrats, some of whom are Republicans. But you would never know that, because the great sin in that office is to be political. It's all about what is true, what is true, what can we prove, what cases should we bring given that, and that is under threat in this Trump administration.
- [62:06]
Jen Psaki
You've watched a lot of institutions you love be gutted, be targeted, be threatened. The STNY is one of them. In recent months, what has that been like to watch?
- [62:16]
Chastin Buttigieg
Very painful. And I saw, we all saw really talented people resign on principle, be put on leave and investigated to try and intimidate them to both deal with a particular case. The Trump administration wanted to cut this corrupt bargain with the mayor of New York over a case, but also to send a chilling message. Sdny, you're nothing special. Don't you go trying to step out from our political program. And that's a very concerning message for anyone to send, but especially at that jewel.
- [62:46]
Jen Psaki
James Comey, thank you for being here. Your new book has been Scene from Our Shared Alma Mater in it. So that's something any William and Mary graduates or students out there can look for in the book, too. FDR Drive is out and it can be purchased anywhere you buy books. Thank you so much for being here.
- [63:02]
Chastin Buttigieg
Great to be with you.
- [63:04]
Jen Psaki
Coming up, Republicans prepare to go home and explain to their constituents why they voted for massive cuts to Medicaid. To be a fly on the wall for that. And fair warning, the attack ads are urged already up on the air. Congressman Pramila Jayapal is standing by and she joins me to talk about all of it when we come back. So with all of this kind of depressing stuff, there's an important thing to remember. Right now, Democrats only need a net gain of three seats to flip and gain control of the House next November. Only three seats. It's a long time away, I acknowledge. But right now, already Democrats are turning Republicans, so called one big beautiful bill into one big, beautiful opportunity to call out Republicans in vulnerable districts. Republicans who voted for massive cuts to programs like Medicaid to pay for tax cuts for millionaires. Case in point, an ad against Colorado Republican Congressman Gabe Evans, part of a six figure ad ad buy by one nonprofit aligned with a Democratic super pac. Take a look. Gabe Evans was sent to Washington to cut costs. Instead, Evans just cast the deciding vote to set up cuts threatening health care for nearly 80 million Americans. To cut another big check to billionaires. Cutting Medicaid and making health care more expensive so billionaires can pay less. Threatening health care for 37 million kids and kicking seniors out of nursing homes just to make billionaires like Elon Musk even richer. It's time to send Gabe Evans a message. Stand up for us, not billionaires. And I think we can expect that message to be repeated in Republican district after Republican district. Joining me now is Democratic Congressman Pramila Jayapal of Washington. Among many titles, she's senior rep of the Democratic Caucus as well as a member of the Budget Committee. What a week. And I want it. We've been trying to pull apart and talk about all the specifics in this bill so people understand them. And I want to do that with you, too. I just wanted to start since I just played that ad. I mean, the midterms are a very long way away. I've already acknowledged that there's a lot to run against. But these cuts to Medicaid and health care and food stamps that are a core part of this budget bill feels like a central argument. Do you think it's set up to be a central argument for Democrats next year?
- [65:29]
Pramila Jayapal
Absolutely, Jen. I mean, you know how critically important it is to lower costs for the American people. That's what Donald Trump said he was going to do on day one. That was the economic message that drove his victory, in my opinion. People believed that that was what was going to happen. Not only have his indiscriminate tariffs increased cost, but now you're going to increase costs again by cutting people out of health care, cutting people off of food assistance. There are so many things in this bill, those two being sort of the most immediate economic impacts that people will feel and raising prices for everybody across a range of things, all so that you can give a $5 trillion tax break to billionaires like Elon Musk. I don't think that's a message that is politically smart, obviously. I think it's morally bankrupt. But I also don't think it's politically smart. And I think these Republicans are already hearing it. And I'm not sure why they would take a vote like that in the House when I think it's linked directly to losing their elections next midterm.
- [66:39]
Jen Psaki
I think that we played a bunch of clips of a number of Republicans who voted for the bill saying they would not cut Medicaid. And I'm sure those are going to appear in ads across the country as well. There are also pieces of this, this bill that, and it's a thousand pages. Everybody's just dug through it over the last couple of days that I don't think have gotten enough attention. I want to talk to you about some of them. I mean, for example, the bill hurts trans Americans by targeting gender affirming care for all ages. That is also, of course, an attack on health care. But can you talk about the impact of that part of the legislation? Because it's incredibly devastating and it just hasn't. Because of the massive Medicaid cuts, it probably hasn't received as much attention as it warrants.
- [67:20]
Pramila Jayapal
Well, and it was changed at the last minute. I mean, here's the thing. These people voted on a bill that had all these changes, many of which people didn't even read. And we still don't know the budgetary impacts or the numbers of people. But this was one of the changes. Originally the bill had, you know, cutting trans care, gender affirming care in just for kids under 18. And then one of the last minute changes that they made was to extend it to all adults not being able to be covered on Medicaid. By that, I mean, it is, it is so cruel, Jen. I mean, we're talking about a population that is tiny, tiny, tiny. And Republicans have been particularly bullying trans kids. But this is an attack on health care for all people. And remember that a lot of gender affirming care is the same care that, you know, other people are getting. I mean, it's very, very similar. A lot of the pieces of gender affirming care. And so it's an attack on all kinds of medical care for, for everybody. And certainly trans people are a big part of the attack.
- [68:30]
Jen Psaki
This bill now goes to the Senate. That's the next step. I suspect they'll try to change some things. At least there's a lot of senators who are saying that. But one of the big parts of the bill that some Senate Republicans at least are questioning is the cuts to the green energy tax credits. That by and large, I mean, they help a lot of people, but they really do help a lot of red states, which is, I suspect, why some of these Senate Republicans are speaking out about them. Talk to me a little bit about you're so familiar with the details of this. You're in a lot of applicable committees about the impact of those cuts because they actually are a very large chunk of money of the cuts as well.
- [69:06]
Pramila Jayapal
Well, that's right. And there's sort of two things that we should watch in the Senate. One is which cuts do they actually take back? And the green energy tax credits. This is out of the Inflation Reduction Act. Many of those tax credits went to red states. And so those are the states, those are the senators that are saying, wait a second, we've got big projects that are being funded, jobs that are being created. That money is coming directly into our state's economy. We don't want to lose that. And you're right, that is a big portion of there are also obviously the cuts to Medicaid are very deep and much deeper even than what it had been because what they did is they moved up the date of when these cuts are going to apply through all the bureaucratic requirements. And so I think we're going to see the estimate was at least 14 million or almost 14 million Americans would get kicked off of health care. I think it's going to be much bigger than that. But then I would also say, Jen, that there's a section of policy in this bill that nobody has really dug into that will have to go through the Senate parliamentarian because as you know, there's not supposed to be policy in here. But my concern, and I have always said that we should have gotten rid of the filibuster when we had control because we would have used it to pass higher minimum wage. We would have used it for getting money out of politics or expanding the Voting Rights act, things that are really necessary. What they are doing now is they are going to continue using it to make sure that they make those tax cuts for the billionaires permanent and to do policy changes. If they don't listen to the parliamentarian. They have things in here like overturning the Flores Agreement, which essentially allows for kids to be detained, immigrant kids to be detained indefinitely. They have a provision in here that my state insurance company commissioner was talking to me about that prohibits states from regulating AI in their own state. So there are a number of policy pieces that are in here, including around immigration more broadly, but in a number of different areas. And given what they just did with the CRA in essentially bypassing the parliamentarian in opposing California's efforts to move to electric vehicles in California, they clearly are willing to do this again. And they've already said that in terms of the tax cuts. And Jen, if I have a minute, I would just say look at the tax cut section. It is crazy. They're trying to talk about breadcrumbs for working people. I mean, the bottom 20% of Americans will get a $90 tax cut. This was the last bill that we had, so it wasn't the final. But probably even worse than that, the top 1 of 1% of billionaires will get $398,000. There's a billion, $100 billion just for millionaires, 100 millionaires to get tax cuts of something like $98,000 each. So I think when they say that there are going to be tax cuts for working people, ask them how much. Ask them what percentage is going to the bottom 90% and what percentage is going to the top 10%. And then you see exactly where the bill is stacked is just once again, it's for Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, all those billionaires out there who I guess are going to buy another luxury yacht or luxury plane while other people are going to be cut off of two bucks a day for a meal.
- [72:46]
Jen Psaki
Jen, there are some stunning charts we've been trying to show them. Economists out there keep producing them. We'll keep showing them. Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal, thank you so much. I really appreciate you joining me. And coming up, we're going to talk about Trump's new Social Security administration administrator. I'm sorry, who literally had to Google his own job. I'm not making it up. Don't take my word for it. We've got the absolutely bonkers audio to prove it. We'll play it for you next. Right now, if you have an issue with your Social Security and call the Social Security Administration to ask about it, this is who picks up. How can I help you today? Can I speak to an agent to better serve you? Please briefly explain the reason for your call. How can I help you today?
- [73:46]
Jake Auchincloss
I didn't get a check in April.
- [73:50]
Jen Psaki
The 2025 Cost of Living Adjustment, or COLA for Social Security and Supplemental Security Income or SSI beneficiaries is 2.5%. The standard Medicare Part B premium is $185 per month. If you're finished, feel free to hang up. Otherwise, how can I help you today? That's enough to make you crazy. I mean, that was Social Security's new artificial intelligence chatbot. It is not particularly intelligent. It seems so. A week ago, a reporter from the Washington Post called the Social Security hotline. That's what you just heard with the very basic issue she didn't get a check. She wanted to speak to an agent. This is something lots of people are experiencing. The reporter wanted to know how long it would take for the chatbot to help with that very simple issue. I didn't get a check in April and I want to speak to an agent. You can get Social Security retirement benefits and work at the same time. Say agent for additional assistance. If you're finished, feel free to hang up. Otherwise, how can I help you today? Agent for FAFSA service. Please say the reason for your call. How can I help you today? I didn't get my April check and I want to speak to an agent. The 2025 cost of living adjustment, or COLA. I mean, that is maddening. And not only does Social Security already use that AI chatbot for its national phone number, it's planning to roll out that automated chatbot to all of its field offices by this summer. Ever since Trump and Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency infiltrated the Social Security Administration, the agency has gotten much, much worse. I mean, that's not the only thing the AI chatbot. The website keeps crashing. The wait times have skyrocketed for months. Now, all across the country, Social Security recipients are dealing with an unbelievable amount of chaos and confusion. But rather than focusing on those ideas, DOGE has been firing workers by the thousands, pushing thousands more to retire, and devoting tons of resources to hunt for almost completely non existent fraud. Case in point, I mean, last week the publication Nexgov obtained internal Social Security documents showing how DOGE went looking for phone specific fraud and found almost none. And I literally mean almost none. To be exact, Doge used a new anti fraud tool on 110,000 claims made over the phone. 110,000. And only found two that might potentially be fraudulent. Two. But that anti fraud tool slowed retirement claim processing by 25% across the board. Great job, guys. Good job on that one. Now, Social Security just got a new leader. A new Commissioner of Social Security. Frank Bisignano was sworn into the role just a week and a half ago. And I wish I could tell you that Commissioner Bisignano was just the man for the job. I wish I could tell you that he definitely knows what he is doing and we'll just turn this whole thing around. But yesterday, ABC News obtained audio of Commissioner Bisignano telling his staff about when he first got offered his new gig. So take a listen to that. Yeah, phone call. And it's about Social Security. And I'm really.
- [77:18]
Jake Auchincloss
I'm really not. I swear I'm not looking for a job. And I'm like, well, what am I going to do?
- [77:24]
Jen Psaki
So I'm Googling Social Security, you know.
- [77:27]
Jake Auchincloss
One of my great skills. I'm one of the great Googlers on the East Coast.
- [77:31]
Jen Psaki
I'm like, what the heck's the Commissioner of Social Security? What the heck is the Commissioner of Social Security? Was his last question, as he's telling the story of learning he was going to be exactly that. You are now the Commissioner of Social Security, sir. You are it. And for all our sakes, I hope Google is giving you lots of good answers on how to fix your agency, since you're the Googler guy, I guess. Coming up, Justin Buttigieg is going to join me live. We'll be right back. I was just talking about this with Congressman, but I wanted to go into more details here because in the early morning hours of debate over Trump's so called big beautiful bill before it passed the House, as right wingers threatened to derail the whole bill, Republicans snuck in a last minute change that they hoped would win them over. And that change, removing the word minor from one provision of the bill, a provision banning Medicaid from covering gender affirming health care. Now in doing so, Republicans expanded the ban to affect transgender people of all ages. This would upend health care for hundreds of thousands of trans Americans. Health care that saves lives. But it isn't just the trans community that Trump and the Republican Party are targeting and isn't just in Washington State legislatures across the country are advancing a record breaking number of anti LGBTQ bills. In 2020, there were 87 proposed bills aimed at attacking LGBTQ people. Five months into 2025, that number has already skyrocketed to well over 500. Needless to say, could be a frightening time to be LGBTQ in America right now. And it is in times like these that stories of LGBTQ love and joy in particular are more important than ever. Joining us now is Chastin Buttigieg, who's married to a guy named Pete and whose new book, Papa's Coming Home captures a whole lot of both love and joy. Inspired by his and Pete's own family, Papa's Coming Home tells the story of two kids as they scramble to prepare the perfect homecoming for their papa, who has been away on a trip. And spoiler alert, there's lots of chocolate cake involved in this story. Who doesn't love chocolate cake? So I wanted to congratulations on the book, first of all. And I want to talk about that. The rights attack and I started talking. I started with this because I think it's always important to remind people. I mean, the rights attack on LGBTQ people isn't just about legislation. It's also their rhetoric that aims to demonize LGBTQ people and their families. That's. We see it. It's in legislatures, it's in what comes out of their mouths. It's an incredibly tough message to hear. If you're a young person who's just trying to become comfortable with who they are, or a child whose family includes two moms or two dads or any combination, was that a factor, what you're seeing out there in your decision to write this book right now?
- [80:28]
J
It wasn't really. I won't say that it isn't a scary time, I think, in our country. I just wanted to write a book, book that looks like our family. I think books are like windows and mirrors. They're an opportunity to either see yourself reflected on the page of the story or an opportunity to maybe peer into a different person's life or a different perspective. So this book for our family is a mirror. My kids get to see a family that looks just like theirs in the book. It's also a great tool for every other family. And at the core of the story, it's just a story of unconditional love. The papa comes home from. From his trip. The kids think he'll have missed all this stuff, and he tells them, hey, the best part about coming home is you. It's unconditional love over material things.
- [81:11]
Jen Psaki
Many books. One of the things that was striking to me is in many books geared towards the LGBTQ community, which this is geared towards many, many people who have kids, just anybody, really. But many are grounded in the message that lots of families are different. It's okay to be different. That's a baseline of the message. But in this book, having two dads isn't the point of the book. It's treated just as kind of part of the story that's part of the family. Talk to me about why that was important. It sounds like it was a reflection of your family, but you didn't want to make it so central that that was the central thing. That was the takeaway. Yeah.
- [81:44]
J
I mean, certain parts of it are certainly fictionalized. I don't bake seven tiered chocolate cakes before I go pick somebody up at the airport. But, you know, it's just important to have sweet stories. I mean, as a parent, you know, know you read a million books to your kids at bedtime, and I just Wanted one story with a family that looked like ours. It wasn't important for me to have difference up front. I think when we're able to see ourselves in the story, rather than the story say, hey, you should see yourself in this because you are different. It just provides us an opportunity to normalize families like ours. And I think this is a modern American family and every kid in America deserves to see themselves on the page of a book. Many families take different structures and shapes and this is just one example of a different type of family.
- [82:29]
Jen Psaki
I know kids are not easily impressed. I've talked to your husband about how your kids are not impressed with him either. Particularly how have they reacted to the book? Do they know you? Do they think it's cool? Do they have a favorite part of the book?
- [82:43]
J
They do. Well, they love the picture of the dog licking the frosting off the counter. And Pete told me a really sweet story when, when he was driving the kids to school and I was out on book tour. He said, did you know that dad is.
- [82:58]
Jen Psaki
Going, you're breaking up a little bit. Keep going.
- [83:01]
J
And Gus, our son, said, oops. And Gus asked if I was going to bring the story home. So I think they, they take great pride and ownership of the story.
- [83:11]
Jen Psaki
I like that, I like that they, they, they make it about them, which I think is a very normal thing to do as kids. Were there any. You said it's sort of fiction too, but it reflects your family. Were there any specific homecomings or personal family moments that really you drew from for inspiration? I mean, would you actually let your twins bake a seven layer cake? I know you don't, but would you let them do it?
- [83:36]
J
I mean, it's certainly fun to try. I love the hug at the end of the book. That's the best part about coming home. I just came home from a tour today and isn't it the best feeling in the world when your kid sees you come home and shouts your name and just wraps their arms around you? And that's what this book captures. That feeling of waiting and anticipating.
- [83:59]
Jen Psaki
Someone.
- [83:59]
J
You love to come home and that great feeling of finally being able to.
- [84:06]
Jen Psaki
Them there's nothing better. My kids are a little older than you, than yours are, so I have to sort of like force that on them a little bit more. But you're still in the stage where you really embrace that. At its core, this book is really about unconditional love. It's such a great message for all kids to hear. Every family is different, which is a beautiful thing. What do you hope people who read it with their kids take away.
- [84:33]
J
Yeah. I think in this season of politics, I know things can seem kind of dark and scary out there, but one of the most important jobs we have as advocates or public people is to love our kids, to remind them that they are loved. You know, I grew up in northern Michigan at a certain time when it felt like the world wasn't built for kids like me.
- [84:51]
Jen Psaki
Me.
- [84:51]
J
And I always knew my parents loved me, but I thought that love was conditional. I thought that once they found out who the real chasten was, that I would lose that love. And I think it's really important from a young age we have conversations with our kids to remind them that our love for them is unconditional, that we will love them just the same. And so one of the best things I can do right now, especially amidst the chaos and the darkness, is to focus on being a good dad, because that fills my soul. It reminds me of why we do what we do. And isn't it our most important job in the world to show up for our kids and build a better world for them?
- [85:27]
Jen Psaki
Nothing more grounding than that, even on the worst day, which is true. Chess and Buttigieg, congratulations on your book. Thank you so much for joining me. I really appreciate it.
- [85:35]
J
Thanks for celebrating. Joy, good to see you.
- [85:37]
Jen Psaki
Absolutely. And coming up, another update on a story we've been following very closely. The White House doesn't want you to see transcripts of Donald Trump, Trump's public remarks. But don't you worry, we've got you covered. We'll be right back. We've talked lately about the so called most transparent White House, as they call themselves, wiping their website of basically all of Donald Trump's public remarks. But we've got you covered if you want documents. The American Presidency project has nearly 170,000 records by its count. If you want transcripts, there's Factspace, which has many of Trump's speeches. It was started by a Virginia husband and wife and now operated by news site CQ Roll Call. Hundreds of thousands of government data sets are now archived at places like the data.gov archive or the Data Resource Project. Trump's true social posts, which the site warns could be deleted at any time, are archived by an anti Trump nonprofit at Trump's Trust. And for archives related to Trump and more, there's the Internet Archive, a nonprofit that seeks to save as much of the Internet as possible. I'm sure that gives you plenty to do this long weekend, maybe with a hot dog or hamburger, whatever floats your boat. That does it for me tonight. I hope you have a great weekend.
- [86:55]
Safdan Esbaradvormamoorty
Hey, everybody.
- [86:55]
Jake Auchincloss
Conan o' Brien here with an ad about my podcast. Conan o' Brien needs a friend. I've had so many fantastic conversations with people I truly admire.
- [87:04]
Safdan Esbaradvormamoorty
People like Michelle Obama, Bruce Springsteen, Maya Rudolph, Tom Hanks.
- [87:09]
Jake Auchincloss
New episodes are out every Monday, and.
- [87:11]
Safdan Esbaradvormamoorty
We have a really good time.
- [87:12]
Jake Auchincloss
So subscribe and listen wherever you get your podcasts.