B (21:48)

The FBI director tell you about the shooter.

A (21:51)

What do we know?

B (21:52)

What we know at this point in time is that he was a member of this Michigan community, that he is a veteran of our United States Armed Forces. He serves in the United States Marine Corps in Iraq. His family is cooperating with the FBI and so they are currently trying to dig in and get to the bottom of why he committed there's just this heinous act of violence. It's unfathomable. And as the President rightfully put in his true social yesterday, this appears to be yet another targeted attack on Christians and the Trump administration.

A (22:26)

Notice how she says we have no idea of the motive at this time, but it seems like the motive was to attack Christians. When she says this appears to be a targeted attack on Christians, she is speaking to motive. But at the same time she says let's not assume anything about motive. What she means is don't assume anything about motive if it points to being a right winger, but assume that the motive was targeting Christians if that points to it being a left winger is.

B (22:52)

Fully committed to not only investigating these crimes, but prosecuting them to the fullest extent of the law, but also working very hard to prevent them to see if there's red flag flags. The FBI is going to treat those as public safety emergencies and investigate them to try to prevent such violence from taking place in our country.

A (23:12)

So she's checking all of the boxes. She's talking about the individual without mentioning any of the right wing credentials, any of the right wing social media history, the Trump lawn sign, the Trump T shirt, the anti vax, the anti Gretchen Whitmer. She doesn't mention any sort of check box. Number one has been checked by Caroline Levitt. What a good job she's doing. Right. Number two, while saying we need to wait for motive. If you're going to assume anything that that's not good for Trump. On motive, she says it seems pretty clear that this was an individual targeting Christians. I believe the shooter was also a Christian, not a Mormon, but a Christian. And so if this is religious violence, it's Christian on Christian violence in that sense. And then also, also the bigger picture of never acknowledging the gun aspect to this, they will ultimately end up with whatever this guy's political beliefs, whatever this guy's religious beliefs, this is simply a lone nut job. That is all that this is. They then get on to the issue of the government shutdown. Now, the other day I heard two older ladies talking about this at a coffee shop and I was disturbed by what they said. I'm going to tell you in a moment. Here is Caroline Levitt starting to sort of say, hey, Demi, it's Democrats that are going to shut down the government. Take a listen to this is the.

B (24:40)

Overwhelming majority of the American public wants to keep the government open. I mean, it's not even close. Democrats and Republicans, independents across the country want the government funded because they want our military and our troops to be paid. They want, they want TSA agents and Border Patrol to be paid. They want food assistance programs for women and children and impoverished communities to continue going out the door. All of that will come to an end if Democrats vote against this clean CR that Republicans are proposing. And might I just add, Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries are on the record multiple, multiple times in their past political lives stating that they too believe a government shutdown is bad. In fact, I quote Chuck Schumer just last year in 2024 said a shutdown would mean chaos and pain and needless heartache for the American people. Well, we hope that Chuck Schumer and the Democrats won't cause chaos and pain and heartache. We want our country to continue to be funded. We want our government to be open so we can continue doing the business of the American people.

A (25:43)

Now this, of course, would be yet an exhaustingly, yet another Republican shutdown. When you control the White House, when you control the Senate, when you control the House, how are you blaming Democrats for The shutdown. It doesn't make any sense. Now, what's interesting is that the shutdowns are more about who gets blamed. And this has been the case for a long time. We've covered these chronic government shutdowns in the United States for a very long time. The other day, I was at a coffee shop, and I'm sitting there quietly typing, typing, typing, doing my work, and there's two ladies, probably in their, you know, upper 60s, early 70s, talking. And I hear that they're talking about politics. I hear that they're talking about news. They both go, I'm not a Republican. No, neither am I. But, but, but, but, but, but. Right. It's sort of that conversation. And then one of the women goes, and now Democrats are going to shut down the government. Now, it occurred to me to go over and say, excuse me, ladies, how are you? I just happened to overhear that you were saying Democrats might be shutting down the government. I'm just curious, given that Donald Trump is in the White House and Republicans control the Senate and Republicans control the House. I'm just thinking out loud here. I'm curious, how did you come to the conclusion that Democrats are going to be the ones shutting down the government? I didn't do that. And when I mentioned this to producer Pat on the bonus show, he said, yeah, I would not have gotten myself involved in that conversation. And that was my instinct. I just looked right back down and went back to typing with my pause on the. On. On my laptop. But it reminded me that reality, that perception is reality, rather, and that a lot of this entire shutdown game is who gets the blame at the end of the day. And they are working really hard to make it so that it is Democrats who are blamed. Finally, finally, Caroline Levitt going back to the shooting and saying, there's just so much that we don't know about the shooting. But the FBI is so awesome. Just like they got Charlie Kirk shooter, which, of course, the guy turned himself in.

B (27:45)

And they are trying to understand more about this, how premeditated it was, how much planning went into it, whether he left a note. All of those questions have yet to be answered, but certainly will be answered by, by the FBI. I think the American people in your audience can be assured, look at the great work that the FBI did in light of or in the hours and days following the assassination attempt or assassination, I'm sorry, on Charlie Kirk's rights in.

A (28:11)

The days and hours. Within minutes, Cash Patel tweeting out, we've got the suspect in custody, which by the way wasn't true and ultimately the suspect turned himself in. If that doesn't give you confidence, then I don't know what will. Fox News entered a panic to try to hide the Mormon church shooters love for Donald Trump. This is another example of how the absence of information is its own form of bias. We call it bias by omission. Here is a report from Fox News. They're telling us a lot of stuff about the shooter, but do they say this was a pro Trump guy? They do not. Do they say this was a pro Charlie Kirk guy? They do not. Do they speculate wildly? They did with the Charlie Kirk shooter. They do not. Listen to what's missing here.

C (29:04)

The shooter identified as 40 year old Thomas Jacob Sanford from Michigan. He was killed in a shootout with officers just minutes later. Officials say there's no connection between him and the church. The FBI is now leading this investigation. They're going to go through his first phone records and try to find a motive. Now, what we do know about this shooter, he was a Marine and served from 2004 to 2008 with deployment to Iraq. His military job specialty was organizational automotive mechanic and vehicle recovery operator. And it's worth noting that just a month ago we were standing in front of another church, the Annunciation Church in Minneapolis, reporting on another church shooting. Shooting. In that case, two young children died. And guys, here we are yet again, another church shooting.

A (29:53)

Wow, what an interesting report. The guy was a mechanic. He knows how to fix. She should have just gone on about that. This is an individual extremely familiar with carburetors as well as tires. And he knew how to fix transmissions. The shooter also had an intimate knowledge of spark plugs. The shooter was very well versed on adjuvants to gasoline and when they should or shouldn't be used for cleaning a gas tank. But missing from this, first of all, missing is the wild speculation that we saw with Charlie Kirk shooter. Right? The shooter was trans. Wait, no, no, no, no, no, no. The bullets were transgender. No, no, no, no. The roommate or love interest of the shooter was trans or maybe thinking about transitioning. None of that. But also missing is the history of pro Trump social media posts, the images wearing pro Trump paraphernalia, the Trump Pence sign on his lawn. Right. So this is how you cover it up. You go, we just, I mean, he was a mechanic and he was depressed, deployed and he believed that matte paint was a great innovation in the automotive industry. But none of the actual information that we have. A perfect example, a perfect example of the biased job that corporate media is able to do. Donald Trump finds himself scrambling for friendly voices as his own former White House lawyer, Ty Cobb. Yeah, this is. This is. The guy is just pounding Trump relentlessly. Ty Cobb was once Donald Trump's White House counsel. Ty Cobb is really his name, and this is really his facial hair, both of which are remarkable. And he went on CBS's Face the Nation and just completely torches Donald Trump.

D (31:51)

Well, I think if you go to 30,000ft, what you see is a lot of moving parts, but simple themes. The simple themes are rewriting history.

E (31:59)

History.

D (32:00)

Trump wants to rewrite history so that, you know, the next generation may not know that he incited a violent insurrection, refused to peacefully transfer the power of the presidency after losing an election, stole classified documents and showed them to friends and guests at Mar A Lago, and that he was a criminal. I mean, he's a convicted felon. Anybody involved in those events that offended him, they're in real danger. So you have the rewriting history stuff. You know, the U.S. attorney that he appointed, his personal lawyer, Lindsey Halligan, you know, her role previously in the administration was, you know, trying to eliminate the theory that, you know, America had slaves at the Smithsonian. She was there to, you know, whitewash the. The Smithsonian and paint America. Paint America is something that, that it isn't. I mean, America needs to learn from the mistakes and lessons that we've had. And one of the biggest mistakes that, that America ever had was reelecting President Trump.

A (33:13)

And, well, of course, tag hobbies completely correct. But this is not what you usually hear from Trump lawyers. He says, flat out, the major mistake of reelecting Trump, okay, this is not about, oh, Iraq was a big mistake. Vietnam, subprime mortgages, Citizens United, killing the Fairness Doctrine. The biggest mistake was Trump got four more years. And this is the guy who defended Donald Trump. Think about how far someone has to fall for their own lawyer to go on tv. Lawyers who usually don't. This is the opposite of what lawyers do. He goes on TV and he says, the country would have been so much better off if the guy I worked for wasn't in power. Again, it's not Partizan sniping. This is someone who knows how Trump operates, and he says, this is the mistake of a lifetime. Now, what set off Ty Cobb this time? It's Trump's obsession with indicting James Comey. Trump has now orchestrated the indictment of James Comey as a political enemy. And Ty Cobb says, this is extraordinarily concerning, and it is extraordinarily Disturbing in terms of how the United States is supposed to operate. And so the kicker kind of here is that Ty Cobb does believe the Comey case is going to implode before trial because Trump meddled so obviously in it and so publicly. And we've read this from other legal analysts as well, which is no judge could possibly allow this case to go forward, given that James Comey can't possibly get a fair trial. Now, Ty Cobb doesn't sugarcoat it. He says it's unconstitutional. He says it's authoritarian. He says the prosecution is dead in the water. I hope he's right about that last thing. But importantly, if Rachel Maddow said it, we might go, okay, well, it's Rachel Maddow. This is not an MSNBC guest. This is Trump's former lawyer spelling it out for the country. And so now Trump is scrambling his own legal team from years past, is saying the big mistake, the mistake was indicting James Comey. The big mistake was reelecting Donald Trump. You've got legal scholars on the left and right of the political spectrum saying this is a bogus indictment of James Comey. And even Fox News analysts are saying there's really nothing here. But Trump is pushing and he's pushing and he's pushing. And in trying to rewrite history, that's what this is all about. Trump, somewhere in that head of his, believes that if he can get James Comey convicted, it will rewrite all the history of the TRUMP Russia collusion, 2016, all of it. But what he's ultimately doing is reminding every American every day why reelecting him was a big mistake. Good for Ty Cobb for being willing to say it. I don't know that everybody's listening to Ty Cobb right now. I'm sure the MAGA people have written him off. But this is another of the dozens of reasons why putting this guy back in office was such a terrible idea. We're going to have more on this on our our podcast. Remember that you can get my daily one hour podcast for free. It's on Spotify, it's on Apple podcasts. It's everywhere that podcasts exist. Every time you Google your name, you will probably find dozens of sites that expose your personal information. This can include phone number, home address, family details. It's just sitting there waiting to be scraped or abused. Incogni is a privacy service. They go after these sites on your behalf. They contact the data brokers. They demand your data be removed, which the brokers are legally required to do. Incogni will automatically remove your information from hundreds of the biggest and most notorious data broker sites. But you're not just limited to those. You can use Incogni's custom removal. And if you find your info on a website outside of Incogni's default list, team at Incogni will work to get that information removed. This is how you protect yourself and your family from identity theft, financial scams, harassment, even AI powered profiling by ad companies. And Incogni's data removal process is the only one verified independently by Deloitte. This gives them a unique level of credibility. Try Incogni risk free and get 60% off when you go to incogni.com/pacman and use the code PACMAN. The link is in the description it is great to welcome to the program today. Rahm Emanuel, former US Ambassador to Japan, former Chicago mayor, former Obama White House chief of staff, a whole number of credentials and many extremely relevant to our conversation today. I really appreciate your time here.

E (37:54)

Thank you. I appreciate being with you.

A (37:56)

You know, the reason I think the timing of this is perfect. This may not sound perfect to you, but my audience right now, I believe, is as skeptical of and adversarial to the Democratic establishment as I ever remember it being. And it comes not out of like an interpersonal hostility, but it comes from a desire to say, hey, here is a direction that makes sense. Here's a direction that will help us win. We need to win in order to achieve power and make policy. Great. Now you are out there. You tested a message in Iowa. It's an interesting message I want to hear about. There are reports you're thinking about 2028, but at the same time, when we think about, you know, the Democratic establishment, certainly if you're not in the middle of it, you're on the periphery of it. And so I kind of want to hear a little bit from you about what's your view of what you think the Democratic Party needs right now? Because there are some in my audience who thinks it needs to be a totally new direction.

E (38:59)

Well, so let's try to unpack all 20 of those questions exactly.

A (39:04)

Yes, please.

E (39:05)

In a very Talmudic way. Okay. One is, this is my take. So let's dial all the way back and then work our way forward.

A (39:15)

Yep.

E (39:16)

At least in 2024. Start there. When for the bulk of the country, not just Democrats, but for the bulk of the country, they are hanging on by their fingernails, their backs against the wall, they can't, their children can't afford a mortgage or they can't Afford a mortgage. There's no health care or retirement security. You're using your 401k to backstop your paycheck, not to save for your retirement. You're one illness away from not only bankruptcy or Chapter 11, but it used to be that, you know, you got a second opinion was a doctor. Today it's an insurance executive selling you. You can't get that medication or that surgery or that whatever the doctors prescribe. They say no. That's where they start. They don't say, let's see how we can do this. They start with no. So all of that is where the, the American people are. And one caveat, side note. It's interesting to me that, you know, people in the top 10% income are now 50% of the consumer spend. The rest of the country's in the equivalence of a recession and have been. And we're off on a set of secondary cultural issues that are not only not primary to the voters, but they look like they're primary to us. So that's, to me, the dynamic. And that's why I believe, getting back to the fundamentals that the American dream used to strive for, today, it's a struggle to attain people. Our kids are. I could tell you this. I mean, kids are making three times what their parents made when they started, but they could buy a home today. They're living in the basement and they made more than their parents do. And I just say this one fact I saw over the weekend that was just shocking to me, but not shocking, but it was stark. In 19, 50% of the folks under 30 were either were married and had a home. Today, it's 12%. It's too hard economically to either get married, buy a home, or do both. Now go all the way back. And this is on both parties, but also Democrats. I think there are four critical moments that set the stage in the last 25 years. I think it's relevant to where we are. So it's not just one election. We decide as a country based on a set of lies to take a war to Iraq, lost thousands of young Americans in the promise of their lives and spent a trillion dollars. And the only one that won that war between the United States and Iraq was China. Five years later, the banks and insurance companies get bailed out and America and the American public lose their homes.

A (41:57)

But that was a bailout you supported, right?

E (41:59)

No. Well, we'll come back to that. It's a fair question. I want to come back. Let me just get through the four peaks. Okay?

A (42:04)

Okay.

E (42:06)

China 2012 they decide that America is not a strategic competitor, a strategic adversary and we leave, you know, Battle Creek to battle Beijing all by themselves. And then fourth and finally we say a Covid, everything gets disrupted. We tell the American people, follow the science and it's pretty clear. Like by way of example, schools can be open and we refuse to do it. And the parents get really familiar with what's happening or not happening in their kids education. Two parts to your first question, to that last question. One, when the country was on the cliff of a massive depression, did I support tarp? Yes, the bailout. That's why I also, when I was chief of staff to President Obama, advocated for Old Testament justice and that we should do financial and insurance reform first before healthcare because I thought the country needed that Old Testament justice. See, not only fixing the banks, fixing the financial system so people don't get robbed of the American dream. I did one to stop the depression. The other one I thought was the right type of reform. President made a decision which I think is what you make in judgment, which is the battle between if you don't start healthcare today, you lose the time. Not a wrong decision legislatively. I was making an argument about the American people. They wanted to see somebody in the top echelon, especially banks, et cetera, get held accountable. In fact, I tell you, I wrote a memo to the president, I said, look, if you do health care reform, the one thing I know from the Clinton years, the healthcare industry has to sit on this side of the table with you. If you do financial reform and banking reform, Old Testament justice, the banking executives and the insurance executives are sitting on the other side of the table. And the American people need to see you fighting for them against somebody that got bailed out while they lost their home. So that is what I did and I don't make any amendments. One was we're adorable. Everybody realized we were doorstep away like Nancy Pelosi from a mat. Not a recession, a depression. And it was going to be a depression. And then I advocated six months later for a massive reform that I thought should be primary in that effort. So that's kind of, those are I think four pills and lead the Democrats, especially towards the end, and Washington, where the public has no trust and confidence in the establishment because in those four kind of peaks and there may be a fifth, there may be four, three. And I'm. But those are to me my analysis of what's wrong and why the American dream has to be front and center to restoring the connection of the Democratic Party. With the public, but also to stabilizing our country. I don't think it's an accident. David, and I'll close on this. Is that the moment the American dream, totally over the arc of 30 years, becomes unaffordable and inaccessible? Yeah, exactly. When our democracy becomes unstable, people have lost confidence. So that's my short five minute.

A (45:19)

Well, I mean, to that point, I mean, I think this might be useful because we can kind of really get into what the disconnect is, because you've said, you've made criticisms of the Democratic Party. You've said that there's toxic elements to it, that the average working class person doesn't see the party and say, this is obviously better for me. We, we know that in some circumstances, like 2020, saying the people in power are so bad, you should vote for us works. It worked for Biden in the sense that it did get him elected. Trump's mishandling of COVID was certainly a part of that. Ok, so you can sometimes run on that negative partizanship. But I think one of the problems in 2024 and the exit polls kind of bear this out, is when people said, okay, I'm not doing awesome under Trump, but when I listen to Kamala Harris talk about a deduction or was it a tax credit for expenses when I start a new business, it didn't get through that. Like, listen, when I hear Bernie talk, for all of Bernie's faults, when I hear Bernie talk, it seems that priority one is actually speaking to the plight of the average person. What I wonder is, is whoever ultimately runs in 2028, maybe you will, maybe you won't. We've had Governor Newsom on Governor Shapiro, Governor Whitmer. There's a lot of people in this pretty deep bench right now that may run. It seems that the first visceral reaction from voters who are skeptical of Trump. I'm not talking about the MAGA people, but people who go, Trump's not great, but what am I voting for? There has to be some clear articulation of, ah, here are the four things economically that, that are clearly for the working class, that whoever is offering. I don't, I couldn't tell you, as someone who interviews Democrats every week, I couldn't really tell you what those things are like. Do those need to be made clear?

E (47:06)

Yeah, the short answer is yes, but let me dial. Take one example of one thing and then another thing.

A (47:12)

Yeah.

E (47:13)

So one thing about this, we just got a report card last week on our schools. We're at a 30 year low in reading and math scores.

A (47:26)

Yes.

E (47:28)

And nobody in the position of power and responsibility. President, Governor's Association. I've said a word. You know everybody's position on Cracker Barrel. You know people's position on windmills. No, but you laugh, but think about it. Yeah, I know what I look, whatever. I got good raised in politics, not just at my home, but as a father of three. And if you think at the kitchen table, it's only paying bills, that people aren't talking about their kids, schools, they're not talking about their social media, they're not talking about their friends. You haven't been to a kitchen table. You think about it, but you've never been there. Now we as a party focus on one child's pronoun and the other 30 kids can't tell you what a pronoun is. We tell you that Abraham likes San Francisco. We're going to take Abraham Lincoln's name off a school. And we don't tell you the fact that the kids don't know why Abraham. The school is named after Abraham Lincoln and what he did as a giant. As a president, we have focused on whether you can wash your hands at that bathroom or take a shower at this locker room or change your clothes. But we haven't talked about access to those places, bathrooms and locker rooms, but what about classroom excellence? And we're silent. And now all of a sudden people and more and more are going either to private schools or quote unquote, home schools. I hate that term because every child's homeschooled. And the Democratic party, which has historically had a 15 point advantage on education, is MIA now. I ran for mayor to fix a public school system so I could put myself through this. I inherited a system that William Bennett, Secretary of Education called the single worst in America. I walked out. Sean Reardon from Stanford called it the single best. And a whole report on reading mask graduation. One example we took graduation from 56% to 83%. Now I personally think, and I've laid out in detail, I did it yesterday, the other day in Iowa, but I'm writing a piece. I've done it in different pieces in Washington Post. I think I owe the voters what I would do. Get your elementary education K through 8 or pre K through 8, back to the fundamentals. The Mississippi miracle is a roadmap. They have done extraordinary things on reading. Alabama's done extraordinary things on growths and math. They're bucking the trend. Get back to the fundamentals. Time on those subjects, teacher training on those Subjects get away from all the woke stuff that came out and phonetic science, etc. Now high school needs to be fundamentally reformed. If K through 80s get back to fundamentals, high school hasn't changed in 100 years and the economy has three things very quickly. One, you get a B average in high school, make community college free. That's what we did in Chicago. First city to do it, took on the educational biopsy to do it. Number two, we had got to 49 plus percent that got college credit in high school. So they proved to themselves they could do it. They saved money when they went to college, but they actually in a school system like Chicago, since they were the first in their family to do college credit, they gave themselves confidence so they knew they could handle the next step. And third, probably most significantly, the first city and only city and no state's ever replicated. And we hired a lot of college career counselors to do this. To get your high school diploma, we made it a requirement that you had to produce a letter of acceptance from a college. A community college, a branch of the armed forces are vocational. Every child, not just David's and Rom's children. I don't know if you have children.

A (51:03)

I do.

E (51:04)

I have three. Two are in the armed forces and one isn't. But does national security work? Every child, not just the Emanuel children, will have a plan the day they're done walking and getting their diploma. We fundamentally reformed the high school years. To me, that's a piece of this. The core. That is more than a piece. It is. You're not going to compete against China. You are not going to compete against Japan, Korea. Pick a country of yourself. If only a third of the children know how to read and do math, it's just not going to happen. And you can't.

A (51:40)

I think that's true.

E (51:41)

Let me, let me. Hold on. Let me just finish one thought. You can't be a party that espouses equity as a core value and be complicit or complacent with academic failure. And then lastly. But I started this when we were on the other, the core crux. And this is a 30 year evaporation. It's going to take us a long time together. Is making the American dream affordable and accessible. That to me is the North Star. That's the point of the despair. That is what it is. The other pieces fill in and back fill that quarter.

A (52:21)

You know, I agree with just about everything you just said on this issue.

E (52:25)

There's no way. There is no way a father of A child or children did not agree.

A (52:31)

Certainly. Certainly. But I think, and this is where I think I want to hear from my audience. As you, as they hear you talk about this, does that sound to them like what they want to hear from the Democratic Party right now?

E (52:46)

Or.

A (52:46)

I mean, you know, to the earlier question you started with, which was the woke stuff. And I think the reason that the economic stuff has such primacy and reigns so supreme is that if there is this, well, I don't like the woke stuff. And then pronouns. And here's what I'm getting from Trump. If there's an economic message where people go, hold on a second, here are the four things that I am understanding are going to be done. If this individual or if this party takes control of the house, for example, or if a governor takes control of the state, it's going to be on housing. We're going to get costs down by building way more supply. And here's how I'm going to do it on health care. But just, just to finish my thought here, I'm, I'm wondering if a really solid economic policy that makes people go, it's so obvious that this is what's good for the average person, that the woke stuff takes a back seat. Isn't that a better strategy? Maybe.

E (53:43)

Well, let me say one thing. What's the best strategy? Is to be honest. Forget your tactical analysis. I love you. It's your show. So I should just shut up and say, thanks for having me? No, you know what? I wanted to be an early childhood educator at a different point in my life. To me, this is core, and I fundamentally believe that if we're not doing what we need to do for our kids, this is not worth going through all the brain damage.

A (54:12)

No, I'm with you.

E (54:13)

So wait a second. Wait, wait. Half time here. Here's my attitude. You don't like it, that's fine by me. I'm going to tell you what I really believe in. If you don't want to. I'm not. My heart's not going to be broken. Okay, here's. Nobody's going to erase my Wikipedia page. I don't really care.

A (54:30)

Right.

E (54:30)

I think in education, if you're President of the United States, given we have one president, eliminating the Department of Education, but spoke up on Cracker Barrel, but didn't say reading and math scores. So if you're not, you don't want a president to do this. Here's my breaking news. Don't vote for me, because it is really important to me. So I'm not interested in. So if you don't think an education of a child or what's going on in schools and you don't think the crisis that was the nation's report card is a wake up call, I'm not your guy and that's okay by me.

A (55:00)

No. Yeah. And I don't know, and I don't know if you're saying this rhetorically or if you're saying it about me because this. That's not my view.

E (55:06)

Certainly I'm saying. Yeah, I'm not. It's your show. I mean actually better than that. I'm being nice to you.

D (55:11)

But I'm saying.

E (55:12)

But my generically. My point is you said look, it's got to be economic. My view is this is like a misnomer. And this gets. My parents don't just sit at a kitchen table paying bills.

A (55:24)

Right.

E (55:25)

I knew how many times. And it's not just the kitchen table. It's when you're up at bed and you're at night before you're going to turn the light off. You are talking about, I would guarantee you almost 70% of that conversation is your children. You are talking about the schools, the new principal, the they cut the arts education or there's no after school programs. You know, the traffic to get to them. You're talking about their friends, you're talking about what they're doing on social media or not. You know, how come you can't get them to focus. That is the bulk of what goes on at our homes. And again I say this, I haven't made a decision. But if education is secondary to you, I want you to know it's primary to me. And maybe I'm not the right guy for you. That's okay. I'm not. My feelings aren't going to be hurt. Now I happen to think it's head and tails of the same coin about the American dream. You're not. And now again, not every child's going to go to college. That's why I made community college branch of the armed forces or vocational school as equal in value as a college education. Some people want to just argue for free college. Now I did free community college if you got a B average, first city to ever do it. I happen to believe since we also had the largest junior ROTC program in the country and I sponsored more students that the armed forces great not only sense of public service but also a great education. And it's proven to be a great melting pot. One of the last ones left in The United States. I also believe and if you want to become a plumber or electrician or a carpenter, which is why we expanded in Chicago, every one of the building trades training facilities, that too is an education. But what I do know, our responsibility as those of us that believe and serve in public life does not end when you get a diploma in high school is make sure that you have a plan that's executable the day after. Not just my children. My children would be fine. They come from two parent home loving, caring and have been able to provide for them the most important step, as my father used to say, which is your child's education. That's not true across the board and therefore we got to do the investments that are necessary so every child can, in a period of time where you earn what you learn, has a chance to do that. And we're going to give them the resources and the foundations and the structure to do that so they aren't literally left on the. As our great secretary of state used to say, I don't want them to graduate from the university of the sidewalk. I want them to graduate from somewhere else where they have what they need to navigate the future and succeed at it.

A (58:08)

Last thing I want to ask you, and I know you've got to run.

E (58:11)

You really don't want to get down the educational argument. I just, it's something I care deeply about.

A (58:16)

No, I agree with you on the education. I'm thinking of winning in 2020, 2028. That's.

E (58:20)

And I think that's.

A (58:21)

And you think it's good. That's totally a respectable position.

E (58:23)

And here's the other thing, David, you may say. Oh, forget the woke the. I agree with you. Not only Democrats, the publics. Want to forget it.

A (58:30)

Yeah.

E (58:31)

Want to forget it. But don't think that it's not a sticky issue from a branding political perspective.

A (58:36)

Agreed. Completely. Ok. Yeah, sorry. Okay. Here's my, my final question too. And you can take it might be a very short answer, it might not. If we think about 2028.

E (58:44)

Yeah.

A (58:45)

There's different spots sort of being eked out on the political spectrum. For example, I believe if Governor Newsom and Governor Shapiro run, they are basically targeting the same segment of the Democratic electorate. Just my opinion. I could be right. I could be wrong.

E (59:01)

Sure.

A (59:01)

If AOC runs, she occupies a different spot. Buttigieg, I believe up against New Smyr Shapiro can't win because he lacks support from certain groups while competing for roughly the same. So we're kind of getting a sense of the spectrum of candidates that there might be. As you look at the Democratic Party right now, where do you see the self on the spectrum? Are you closer to aoc? Are you more of a Governor Newsom? I don't think Kamala Harris should run, for example, from a strategic perspective, although I think she's very competent. Are you more aligned with her? Where do you place yourself in the party right now?

E (59:39)

I mean, you're asking it that. So one, here's how I think as I just kind of answered, it's consistent, which is I think there's a big appetite, thirst for candor, authenticity and strength. And if you look at my whole career in public life and there's good things and bad things and people will disagree, nobody ever walks away. And you are going to never going to walk away from this meeting and say, well, I don't know where he stood on education. It wasn't clear. I told you. And I'm going to tell you what I think. You're going to lift the foot up, you're going to pull, check the oil, pull the spark plugs. Second in every all part of my career, whether it was taking the first city and any entity to sue the pharmaceutical industry over opiates in 2014 before any attorney general did it by three years, the one that President Clinton turned to and said, take on the NRA for the assault weapon ban the Brady Bill, make it law of the land. I got the call and I took the ball. I was the one that was responsible for negotiate and take on the insurance company and create the Children's Health insurance program. So 10 million children had no health care. Got one that made this argument, lost it. We should take on the banks and the insurance companies. We got the Dodd Frank legislation, but I wanted to make it primary and in my own time here as mayor, not just pharmaceutical industry, took on the tobacco industry and gave 90,000 children free eye and dental care that they never had before because we raised taxes on tobacco companies and plowed it into our children's health care. I think you're picking up the theme. As a son of a pediatrician, I know you thought something else, but as a son of a pediatrician, I believe in the health and well being of our children. And that's primary. But everything I've done over my life is take on powerful interests that have held a chokehold on the system, broke it and made progress. Now, if you're looking for perfection, ain't your man.

A (61:35)

No, no. There is no perfection. But that's right. I think a lot of people are going to say, david, I don't think he answered your question.

E (61:41)

Well, I'm giving you, I'm giving you, I think. Let me do this. Since we're on the eve of Yom Kippur, maybe it's the question. No, I'm joking.

A (61:49)

Is like I should atone for the question.

E (61:52)

Yeah. Here's the thing. Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, you can go through the history. I actually do think beyond ideological, which is what you're asking, where you sit on the spectrum.

A (62:04)

Yes.

E (62:04)

There's also a stylistic point and that is as valuable for a guy who ran from Hope, Arkansas, or believe in Hope. That wasn't a policy but was something. So I'm going to give you honesty, I'm going to give you authenticity and I'm going to give you strength taken on powerful. You're going to either like it and I'm very comfortable if you don't.

A (62:24)

Well, it sort of sounds like Rahm Emanuel maybe is running in 2028. I think the conversation is an interesting one. I think it's going to be arguably the most interesting primary certainly of my adult life. Whether you run or not, I will say.

E (62:38)

Let me say that. Yeah, let me say this for a party that thought they had no choice last time, you're going to have one flavors.

A (62:44)

This time there will be. There will be. Rahm Emanuel, really good to talk to you. I appreciate your time today.

E (62:51)

Thank you. Man.

A (62:53)

Fall is here. The nights are getting cooler. It's cozier. Hot baked goods feel like a great treat. And our sponsor, Wild Grain is the first bake from frozen subscription box for artisanal breads, pastries and pastas. Everything bakes in 25 minutes or less. No prep, no cleanup. Customizable boxes, they can do gluten free, they can do plant based and right now they've got some limited time. Fall items Apple cider donuts. I grew up with these in New England. Pumpkin cinnamon biscuits. Love them. The donuts just come out perfectly like a nice little crisp edge, warm spiced center. Biscuits are flaky and sweet, made the whole kitchen smell like a bakery. Wild Grain uses slow fermentation, which means their breads are richer in nutrients than that which you get at the store. You can really taste the difference and the fermentation process can even be helpful for digestion. For a limited time. Get $30 off your first box, plus free croissants in every box when you start your subscription at wild grain.com/pacman. The link is in the description. Donald Trump is going to have to do it again, he's going to have to bail out farmers because of the very tariffs that he put in place. Now, last week, Donald Trump openly admitted what we've all known for a very long time. His trade war is crushing American farmers. Corn and soybean prices are down. Costs for fertilizer and equipment are up. Markets like China, which used to buy 60% of South Dakota soybeans, are now shut off. And so in comes John Thune, senator from South Dakota, and he goes, we are looking at solutions. And if you read between the lines, we all know the solution will be Trump giving taxpayer money to farmers to try to fix the problem he created with the tariffs. Who could have predicted it? Who could have predicted it?

B (65:02)

Why should American taxpayers bail out farmers.

A (65:05)

Who are hurting because of the president's tariff policies?

F (65:10)

Well, look, I think that the farmers and I represent a lot of them, and they want nothing more than open markets.

A (65:17)

There are markets and nothing says open markets like tariffs and then bailouts to fix the problem the tariffs caused right.

F (65:24)

Now that aren't open to some of our commodities. As a consequence of that, there, we've got a big harvest coming in here in some South Dakota corn and soybeans and no place to go with it.

A (65:32)

Now, I'm so sorry to interrupt again. When he says we've got markets that are not open to us, why aren't they open? They're not open because of the blanket tariffs that Trump put in place, the guy he supports.

F (65:47)

So what the President has said is, I'm going to support and I'm going to help our farmers. And so we're all we are looking at. I'm a member of the Senate Ag Committee, have been for some time, and we, and we're looking at potential solutions to make sure that we can help support farmers until some of those markets come back. I think part of it is that the President's trying to achieve with his trade policy, reciprocity with countries that have been taking advantage of us for a long time. And I think most of us support that. I think a lot of our farmers support that. They are anxious. They want to see markets opened up. And so I have. When I speak to the President and his team about this, I always reiterate the importance of keeping agriculture culture front and center when you're negotiating trade deals. But at the end of the day, our farmers are probably going to need some financial assistance this year. And a lot of the revenue coming in off the tariffs is what they would use to provide that.

A (66:33)

There you go. There you go look at so what he's essentially trying to argue here. Understand the insanity of this. Trump's tariffs, which are attacks on Americans, have hurt farmers so badly that now we are going to have to use some of the tariff money paid ultimately by working class people whose cost of stuff has gone up. We're going to have to bail people out with that very tariff money. And by the way, this was completely predictable since it happened during the first term with farmers as well, use tariff revenue to bail farmers out because the tariffs are hurting them. In other words, you break it and then you have the taxpayers who are paying the tariffs try to fix it. And Democrats, of course, are pointing to the obvious in this case, which is the simplest solution is drop the tariffs. That would mean, of course, admitting that the entire strategy was a failure. So instead, Donald Trump is saying, we're going to have temporary pain. It's going to be a little difficult for a while, but over the long term, it's going to be great. Farmers are going, we're just sitting on our, our product here. We're sitting on our harvest. And so maybe on a rally stage, it sounds good, it'll be a little difficult, but we're going to win, win, win. But farmers are paying higher prices for the things they need as inputs. Tariffs are passed on to consumers. And then now all of a sudden, you have Republicans admitting the tariffs are having consequences. He's still saying it's good. He's still saying he supports Trump, but he's saying temporarily the tariffs are a problem here. Now, are they going to be able to spin this as a plan to rebuild the middle class? Because it seems really difficult to make that case. And I don't even know that there's really any, any strategy here. I don't think that this was okay. We're going to put the tariffs in place. The farmers will get crushed. We'll give the tariff money to the farmers. I don't think that they thought about that, because if they had, they would have gone, wait a second, this is circular. Why are we doing this? To begin with, I believe that this is damage control from the inevitable and to us, predictable damage that this tariff policy is doing. And every Trump policy kind of circles back to the same point, which is Trump says, here are the people I'm going to champion. These are the most important people. And then all of a sudden he goes, I've got to figure out how to take from somebody else to help these people, because they're actually getting completely and totally crushed. So I expect that most Republican senators in the House. It'll be different. It already has been different. I expect most Republican senators are going to continue arguing that this policy is great, big picture. And the funniest and most pathetic thing about it is they say they're all about the free market. Tariffs are not free market. Bailouts are not free market. None of it is free market. But they claim that at some point we're going to get to that free market thanks to what they're doing. It's pathetic. Donald Trump's condition, whatever it is, seems to be getting worse. And this latest installment is beyond belief. Donald Trump posted a fake AI generated video of himself promising every American access to a magical healing pod known as a med bed. Me D D bed, like medical bed. This is popular in Kuhnen circles. And the idea here is that this is. It's really out of sci fi. Maybe at some point this will exist. It doesn't. The idea is you get put in this med bed, it's almost like a hyperbaric chamber and it just fixes you up. It can even regrow limbs in some version of this. The clip was made to look like a Fox News segment hosted by Lara Trump. It showed Trump saying every American will soon have their own med bed card. He says these will be in new hospitals. The best doctors will be running them. This was totally fake and phony. It was on Trump's Truth social feedback for about 12 hours. Look at this.

B (70:24)

Breaking now, President Donald J. Trump has announced a historic new health care system, the launch of America's first med bed hospitals, and a national med bed card for every citizen.

D (70:35)

Every American will soon receive their own med bed card. With it, you'll have guaranteed access to our new hospitals, led by the top doctors in the nation, equipped with the most advanced.

A (70:46)

Advanced Sounds pretty good, huh?

D (70:48)

Technology in the world. These facilities are safe, modern and designed to restore every citizen to full health and strength. This is the beginning of a new era in American health care.

B (71:00)

In this first phase, only a limited number of med bed cards will be released. Registration details will be announced.

A (71:07)

Very soon, very soon. It's going to be limited. Limited. And maybe there's money. I don't know. Who knows? So, okay, what is a med bed? I. If you've never fallen down the Q and on rabbit hole. These are futuristic pods that can cure any disease, reverse aging, and even regrow a lost limb. Believers in these say that the government has reverse engineered alien technology after retrieving UFOs. They conspired to keep that secret from the public, but they've developed these med beds. And depending on, you know, like with a lot of these things, there's different flavors of the conspiracy theory in some of these. The elites already have the med beds and that's how they are being kept young and vital. Some versions say assassinated people or long dead. People like John F. Kennedy are alive because they're hooked up to these. Others say Trump has the power to release these at any time. And of course, if this sounds like science fiction, it's because it is. Companies have been trying to cash in on this. There are med bed generators that some have sold for as much as $11,000. The idea is that it emits the same sort of all encompassing healing power of a med bed in some kind of simple way. And they're really being sold to desperate people now. I don't think I have to tell you that they don't work. Families have filed complaints. They say my loved one died waiting for the deliver delivery of the device. Device and or waiting for the device to deliver the cure that was promised. And what makes Trump's post so disturbing is that this is AI generated crap. Trump reposted it. It stayed up for 12 hours, which makes me wonder, is this something Trump knew was not real? And then he put it up there to help someone, I don't even know who, and then it was taken down. He deleted the clip. Ultimately, it went out to 10 million followers. It validated everything the Kuhnen people believe. And I don't think the video is the creepiest part necessarily. It's like the content is really the creepy thing. And what's funny is a Trump speaks in coherent sentences. That immediately made me suspicious. Is this really Donald Trump? By the way, the AI voice isn't perfect anyway, but there's a bigger story here and I'm researching this for my forthcoming book, which I'll have more to say about at some point. The way in which AI getting better. This one was not so good. Like, it doesn't sound like Trump, it just doesn't sound like Trump. But the fact that this already looked so real, we are going to be dealing with fabricated presidential statements. They are going to go mainstream. It's going to take 10 to 12 hours, as it did in this case, for some of them to be pulled down. And of course, this was part of a broader posting spree for Trump where he posted, you know, AI drawings of himself firing Jerome Powell and rants about Hollywood actors. And of course, any other president doing this would immediately spark a debate about fitness for office, but it's Trump. It's another weekend meltdown. Middle of the night meltdown, and he's pushing med beds. This is just pathetic. Terrifying and completely disgusting. We've got a phenomenal bonus show for you today. Eric Adams is out of the New York City mayoral. Is it just that he realized he can't win, or is it part of some coordinated effort to attack Zoran Mamdani? The Missouri governor has signed a new Republican favoring map. Oh, boy. And why are friends teaming up to buy homes? Very interesting stories, all of them on today's bonus show. Sign up@join pacman.com I'll see you then. I'll be back tomorrow, too.