← The Jim Acosta Show
The Jim Acosta Show
Trump "dictator" talk with John Avlon and Dave Aronberg on the bombshell new witness to testify before Congress on Epstein Files.
01:03:22
Loading summary
Transcript177 lines
- [00:00]
A
Foreign. Hey, everybody. Welcome to the Jim Acosta Show. And it's another day that ends in wine and Trump's assault on American democracy. Today he even said a lot of people in America want a dictator. So there it is, out in the open, everybody. My big guest today. There he is, my old pal John Avalon, my old partner in crime from my old place. John, great to see you. How are you?
- [00:27]
B
I'm doing great, man. I'm doing great. I was thinking back to some of our early campaign trips together to South Carolina for a primary, probably 2012, maybe even before.
- [00:36]
A
Oh, my gosh, that's a long time ago. Are we that old?
- [00:40]
B
I, you know, I refuse to accept it. You know, you've, you've got, you know, you're either, you're Cuban descent, I've got some Greek genes going on. I don't know.
- [00:49]
A
There you go. Very good. He's got his joiner die mug there. He's feeling very, very revolutionary. I remember when it was the, the Trump people who thought it was fashionable to say it's 1776 all over again. I don't know, maybe folks who care about democracy need to say it's 1776 all over again, John. I mean, you wrote this amazing substack today was kind of one of the reasons why I wanted to get you going. But, you know, there's a lot going on. I mean, the National Guard carrying weapons now in Washington, D.C. that's been authorized. That has begun. I was going up and down 14th street, which is a popular spot here in D.C. over the weekend, and, you know, they had national gu soldiers stationed outside of Diplomat, of all places. I, you know, our baguettes are safe, ladies and gentlemen. We don't need the National Guard here. But it is, it is something different, John, when you see National Guard troops carrying weapons in the nation's capital for really no goddamn reason. I mean, yes, there's crime in D.C. there are crime in lots of cities, also a lot of cities in red states. But I want to jump into your substack in just a moment, but your thoughts. You called it a Doom Scrolls summer. That folks are in a Doom scroll summer right now, but there's some real serious stuff going on. Your thoughts?
- [02:02]
B
I think it's incredibly serious. And I think armed troops in the streets of our capital is, Is, is, is. Is a leading indicator. The reason I call it Doomskull Summer is because I think we're. We're all caught between our lives as we've known them, and yet the knowledge sometimes that people are trying to force into the periphery of their vision that things are changing in dange our democracy. And I think armed troops in the Capitol is a perfect image of that. You know, D.C. has crime, but crime is actually down. This is not an emergency. This is a show of force. And this is about acclimating people to what would have previously been unacceptable. And what if a Democratic president do it? Constitutional conservatives would be up in arms. But the ways in which hyper partisanship, which is a hell of a drug, causes people to flip their positions, to put principles aside in the pursuit of partisan power is truly dangerous. It's something the founders warned about. And we should reclaim the flag. We should reclaim American history because we need it now, frankly, more than ever.
- [03:08]
A
Yeah, I mean, I think we are heading towards maybe a bit of our own 1776 moment. I mean, you know, people can say, oh, that sounds hyperbolic. I mean, you write this in your substack, John. It says, I am defiantly optimistic by nature, but this will go nowhere good. In the short run, we will see a compounding of polarization. We will see combined with accelerated distrust of the ideas and ideals which have been the foundation of American exceptionalism. We can talk about the feedback loop of our politics, nurture our respective grievances and use them as narcotics to ignore the larger principles under assault. But know this, our autocratic adversaries. I think that's very important that you said that our autocratic adversaries are encouraged by, by democracies, division and dysfunction. And John, to that point, listen to something that Trump said earlier today. He was talking about dictators and he said, you know, maybe folks want a dictator in this country. Let's listen to that.
- [04:02]
C
As you all know, Chicago's a killing field right now. And they don't acknowledge it. And they say we don't need him. Freedom. Freedom. He's a dictator. He's a dictator. A lot of people are saying maybe we like a dictator. I don't like a dictator. I'm not a dictator. I'm a man with great common sense.
- [04:20]
A
And I'm a smart person, a very stable genius. John.
- [04:25]
B
Yes, as always. Some people are saying that. Some people are saying we ought to have a dictator. Look, America was founded on a rejection of a king of dictator that is fundamental to our democracy. But I think part of what we got to wake the hell up about is a reminder that democracy has not been history's norm. Far from it. Right. I mean, even I'm writing a book now on Teddy Roosevelt and his farewell address. I wrote A book on Washington's farewell address earlier on, his man in the arena speech. And he gives it in Paris in 1910. And at that time, the United States and Paris were the only two major nations to not have kings. They were constitutional republics. And so this re. Acclimation, the ways in which I believe the struggle of our times is democracy versus autocracy. But the autocrats have tried to undermine our democracy, something Washington and the founders warned about foreign powers trying to interfere in our domestic politics. They want to reduce people's faith in our democracy. And when folks start putting party over principle, they play into those hands. You see this sense of, well, maybe democracy is optional, maybe it's been discredited. See, we're divisive and dysfunctional. That's always the autocrat's pitch, right? That, you know, anarchy is the quickest path to tyranny. And that's because that's a pretext often that autocrats use to try to gain power. And we need to really rediscover and straighten our civic backbone right now. And we can do it by directly building on and associating ourselves with those founding principles. Patriotic thing to do. It's important that we are the patriots in this. And I think there are going to be a lot of moments, including Ken Burns documentary coming out in September about the American Revolution, for people to reconnect to our history, not in the spirit of cynicism or having fallen from great heights, but as a way of redoubling our commitment to that ideal. Defiantly optimistic in the face of all the difficulties we're facing. Because they're freaking real.
- [06:23]
A
Yeah, there's no question about. I mean, he, he, the FBI, the doj, they raided John Bolton's place. Was it last Friday? Today he was, he was talking about maybe going after Chris Christie. I mean, this is serious stuff. And he's talking about going after Chris Christie on, on Bridgegate, of all things. So he's just, he's just going. He's just going to go after whatever he thinks is hanging fruit and cook up a rationale to raid somebody's place. And when he was talking about in the Oval Office earlier today, he was saying, oh, well, my place was raided. Mar A Lago is rated. So this is the revenge and retribution toward.
- [06:58]
B
Of course it is. And it's what he promised. It was part of the stakes of the last election, which is why I left our former news organization to run for Congress, because I didn't want to talk about it on tv. I thought the stakes were so high. For our country. We've done ourselves a great disservice in the eyes of history by rewarding someone who tried to overthrow an election, led to an assault on our Capitol. And now he's doing exactly what was totally predictable, which, in effect, he promised, which is going on a revenge bender. And that's totally characteristic of him. You talk to people who served in the first Trump administration. He's a man motivated primarily of grievance. But now, with the Supreme Court having removed some of the guardrails around presidents in the past, he feels totally unencumbered to do what dictators around the world do. This is Third world sort of banana republic stuff. And I wish I saw more Republicans speaking up on principle, but instead, they seem to have discarded everything. They've spent most of the last several decades plural, you know, warning about whether it's Milton Friedman or the importance of rooting yourself in the Constitution. Owning the libs is the only sort of animating force that seems to unite it. But that's no basis for a government, and it's incredibly dangerous for our democracy in particular right now.
- [08:11]
A
Yeah, we just saw a viewer comment saying, you know, he's just throwing out whatever he can and see. Sees what sticks. I think that's part of it. I think, you know, I was sort of tempted to write off a lot of this stuff as, oh, you know, these are distractions from the Epstein files and so on. But it's all heading in one direction. It's all heading in the direction of authoritarianism. It's all heading in the direction of autocracy. John. And the thing that concerns me is, you know, he is sort of wearing down our outrage sensors, and he's conditioning young people in this country to accept, oh, that it's okay to just send the FBI or have the FBI go out and raid the home of one of your political opponents. Just not how we do things in this country. But the thing that you touched on, I think, is so very. And I do want to talk about your run for Congress, if you don't mind me asking a little bit about it.
- [09:02]
B
No.
- [09:02]
A
Second or two. But you did touch on, I think, what is the ultimate problem here. And we're going to see this play out in about a week or so when Republicans in Congress get back to Washington. I mean, we talk about profiles and courage and profiles and cowardice. It's not. This is not even cowardice. This is. This is just subjugation. This is just, you know, raising the white flag. They. There's just nothing. There's no balls, there's no spine. There's, there's nothing. They're just, they're like slaves to him.
- [09:35]
B
What has happened, it is the self castration of Congress in a way that, that the Founders never imagined. Right. When Madison puts together our system, its ambition must be made to counteract ambition. It's checks and balances. He never imagined that a whole constitutional branch of government, a co. Equal branch, would, would effectively give away its power. And I think it speaks to the enduring power of fear and greed, those old biblical enemies that have come galloping back and that Trump knows how to use those levers very effectively. But it's worse than coward. They're not victims. They're willing enablers out of fear of losing a closed partisan primary, out of greed for power. Just the fear of being cast out from your in group. And what kills me is that when you get people who declare, who decide they're not going to run again because they're going to lose a closed partisan primary, they could have run as an independent and shown some spine. Hopefully more people will do that, particularly on the Republican side of the aisle. But then they're not totally liberated. They end up voting for things that, you know, and just, just enabling the, the autocratic shift when that's the reason, their stated reason for leaving. So it is a dangerous time. We've seen no spine, no backbone. Certainly Democrats got to get their own house in order. But, but, but this is, this is it. You know, when we read history and we look back and we say, how could that happen? Well, yeah, now we know. And that's up to us. We have a special responsibility because it's happening in real time on our watch to counteract that.
- [11:17]
A
Yeah. And John, I wonder if it's even worse than this. I wonder if the Republican Party has mutated into an autocratic or authoritarian party. And yes, a lot of it is because of spinelessness and because, you know, they, you know, they've been castrated. They're sort of like that character reek from. Is it reek? Is that what it was from Game of Thrones?
- [11:39]
B
Never been a gig. Game of Thrones. My wife is more of a Game of Thrones person than I am, so I'll defer to her on that.
- [11:46]
A
We need a Houveland to fact check that. But yeah, no, I mean, but I wonder if part of it is that they have, I think, perhaps become entranced with the idea of being an autocratic country and they would rather have a permanent minority rule in this country. I mean, just Just today, Trump said that the Justice Department plans to sue California over their attempt to redraw the state's congressional maps because the Republicans are doing in Texas, you know, California followed suit. And, and to me, you know, how can that be okay? Like you're just going to read, you're just, we're just going to allow the Republican states to redraw their maps. And I don't see any of these members of Congress stopping. And I wonder if it's because they have become autocrats.
- [12:36]
B
Well, I, I, some of them you certainly have seen. I mean, let, let's look. You know, I'm a history nerd. So let's pull back for a second, right? I mean, please, the party labels are not the point, right? So when, when the Republican Party is founded in the late 1850s and Lincoln is this first successful candidate in 1860, and I wrote a book called Lincoln and the Fight for Peace where I got into some of this, it's a moderate progressive party dedicated to stopping the expansion of slavery. Right. And it is, the Democrats at the time were conservative populists and they were, by the way, like a breakaway third party at that particular time. The conservative populists tend to have sort of over our country's history, a gravitational pull towards a blood and soil version of nationalism, which is different than patriotism, Right. It's rooted in states rights, tribal identities, racial rights, you know, and, and it's inherently exclusionary. The Republican Party of Lincoln then, you know, becomes the Republican Party of Theodore Roosevelt. It's very big business oriented, but it's still, and Roosevelt is very much a progressive, he's a patriotic progressive towards the end of his career.
- [13:48]
A
Right.
- [13:49]
B
And then, you know, you've got the, the Eisenhower mid century, you've got the ideas and ideals of Herbert Hoover, which, you know, bias alert because of my bride. And even through Reagan, you have the modern conservative movement and it's very focused on free ideas and free people. Right. And it's about expanding that vision of freedom and democracy around the world. It's about free markets, Milton Friedman, free trade. This is the opposite of that. And the fact that so many folks who've been brought up with this kind of catechism have abandoned it so quickly to fall in line with Donald Trump because he has such a hold on the base, I think does betray something that has gone terribly wrong within the conservative populist base of the Republican Party. That it is a blood and soil nationalism as well as sort of an impulse to own the libs that's being aided by algorithms, in many cases, and decreasing faith in democracy. So it's a total flip in terms of what it meant, you know, not that long ago if you were taking folks their word and being a, you know, a constitutional conservative. Now, if you look at the backlash to Obama, and you remember my book Wing Nuts around, based on my reporting, it was clear that the backlash to Obama, you know, you go interview people at those early rallies, was not actually about taxes or the deficit or the debt. It was about national identity and the ways that folks felt threatened. And, you know, that was true in my reporting and the interviews and a lot of subsequent surveys. So I think we're reaping what they have sown. And. But it does lead to say, let's. Let's. Let's rig a map. Right. We don't like the demographic trends. Let's rig the maps and then. And then try to sue people who respond in kind. It's very, very dangerous. And it will only lead to more polarization. And, you know, my belief is that hyper partisanship and polarization is the great danger to democracy. It always has been. And we're on a very dangerous path.
- [15:53]
A
Yeah. There's no question about it. And when I talk to particularly college student groups, that sort of thing, the thing, the number one thing that they're worried about is hyper partisanship and polarization.
- [16:04]
B
Good.
- [16:05]
A
And, you know, that gives me some hope for the future. The problem is, in the meantime, you have some folks who are just simply swept up in this MAGA movement, and a lot of them probably have been turned off since the 2024 election. I suspect that that's the case, but I don't know if.
- [16:24]
B
Certainly independence.
- [16:25]
A
Yeah, certainly independence. Yeah.
- [16:26]
B
I mean, you know, that's something hopeful for people to hold on to. And I think the great danger is, is that there's a concerted attempt to make the public square so indecent that no normal person wants to get involved. Right. And that just seeds the ground to the crazies. And, you know, politics follows the lines of physics so that you get equal and opposite reactions. But I don't want to get into the one hand and the other, you know, because we got asymmetric polarization in this country. What we're seeing right now is an unprecedented power grab. It is destroying guardrails and democratic norms very intentionally. And I.
- [17:00]
A
And they're talking about. John, they're talking about. He is talking about sending more National Guard to other cities. Baltimore, Chicago. He was saying some nutty stuff earlier today in the Oval Office where He was saying, well, all of the, all of the cities with the worst crime are in, are in blue states. That's just, first of all, that's just, it's not true. And I, you know, I've been saying on this show, you know, the, I remember when I used to be at the White House and I would say fact check not true if I fact check false. And we would fact check him, and the fact checker at the Washington Post would say half true. You know, that's, I'm sort of over this idea that we should fact check him all the time because he's just completely full of shit and he's just going to lie constantly and there's just.
- [17:40]
B
30,000 lies in the first term according to.
- [17:44]
A
Yeah, and my sense of it is, is that right now what we just need is a concerted effort to stop him from trying to turn this into a dictatorship and from becoming an autocrat. And I think he is pursuing, I think he's doing that. I, I, that's my read on it.
- [18:01]
B
Look, I mean, it's not, but, but, you know, I think it's, I appreciate the caveat. There was one man's opinion, but on the other hand, you know, that this was part of the stakes of the last election. Right. I, I, you know, they kept quoting approvingly Viktor Orban.
- [18:17]
A
Yes.
- [18:17]
B
You know, in the Republican National Convention, they quoted Victor Orban and it was like, you know, it barely made a ripple. But like they're telling you when people.
- [18:24]
A
Tell you, and Trump did a, I'll be a dictator on day one.
- [18:27]
B
On day one. And they're very clearly pursuing kind of an Orban agenda. This is someone they have admired, someone they have elevated, and they are pursuing that particular playbook. And so that's what we're dealing with. And that's one of the reasons why I say, when they sort of overwhelm us with the onslaught, it's important to take a step back and say, connect these dots and you'll see we're going no place good. And if you are enabling it, if you're excusing it, you are, you own it. Right. You're responsible for it. And the reason I've been focused in, you know, in this podcast, I do a podcast for the Bulwark called How to Fix It. It's just about solutions, you know, and usually bipartisan center solutions, because that's where I'm coming from. But we knew we do need to be talking more about solutions. We do need to be talking more about concrete things because if it's just we need to be warning, but we can't be whinging. Right. We need to be actually saying there's a different way, there's a better way. And recognize, though, that we're dealing with something uniquely dangerous in that we don't have a lot of precedent for.
- [19:29]
A
Well, no, that's true. And I, and I, and speaking of how to fix things, I want to talk about your run for Congress, if that's okay, because, you know, I thought it was terrific that you went out there and did it and it took a lot of guts and especially to try to win in a traditionally Republican district or a district that's been pretty Republican for a long time. And, and you didn't, you didn't win. But I thought it was just a very courageous thing that you did. And it is something that I would like to see a lot more of. But the question that I have, John, were you welcomed with open arms in the Democratic Party? And are, are, do you see, is there enough of that? Because we would say, oh, we need fresh candidates, we need new people to go out there. And I say this all the time on my show. We need fresh legs and, and fresh ideas, fresh faces and so on. But I, you know, then there are folks who say, well, the Democratic Party doesn't want that. They want to run the party. People. And people have been waiting to turn or the same incumbent over and over again, no matter how old they are.
- [20:25]
B
You know, so, so my experience was very different and very good in that regard. First of all, I loved running. I got energy from it. I, I did get in because I felt I didn't want to talk about it on tv. I felt the stakes were too high and I wanted to do what I could to help. And that meant, you know, trying to flip the seat, which is, you know, sort of a, a reddish purple. Right?
- [20:46]
A
Yeah.
- [20:46]
B
And, and you know, I felt, you know, it's where we could, we could do the most good. Some Democrats tried to discourage me by saying that there was a former party nominee, a woman who was decidedly to my left, who would be sort of the primitive favorite in the primary and was a self funder. She had trailed the Biden, Biden in 2020 by, you know, just shy of 10 points. It was 8 points. And so I said that's, that's just a recipe for losing. I'm going to run into the breach and look as a journalist, as an independent, for many years I'd worked for Rudy Giuliani when he was mayor back when he was saying during 9 11, that helped me with some people and hurt me with others. But we ended up winning the primary by 40 points.
- [21:37]
A
Wow.
- [21:37]
B
I mean, a huge margin. And so I did feel absolutely embraced. I think the biggest challenge was then you need to sort of start from zero in the fundraising. Trump ended up outperforming polls by, I mean, we thought Kamala was up 1 in the district. In the two week pre election poll, Trump ended up winning the district by 12. We ran ahead of the top of the ticket. One more Democratic votes, but one more votes than any Democrat in our district's history. Actually had more votes out of here in the first district than any district in New York state. But it was just a tough cycle. Independence and undecideds broke hard for Trump. So Even though we won 8% of Republicans, it was a really, really tough cycle. Huge erosion from Biden's numbers in 2020. And I think that's about a lot of things. There's a lot of learnings.
- [22:23]
A
I was going to say, what did you see? Was it the affordability? Was it inflation? Was it.
- [22:29]
B
Those two things are directly connected, right? I mean, the campaign hammered home to me even more than before that. I think the fundamental issue is the middle class squeeze that's been going on for decades. People are frustrated and pissed off that they can work hard, play by the rules and not get ahead. And inflation is insult to injury in that. So one of the core slogans of my campaign was rebuild the middle. And what I'd say is like, it's not a coincidence that we hollowed out the middle of our politics at the same time we hollowed out the middle of our economy. Those two things are connected. So we got to rebuild the middle of our economy to rebuild the middle of our politics. I do think that Democrats and polling, you know, would say, look, I mean, Roe v. Wade just got taken away. That should be a hugely galvanizing issue in a district that's, you know, 80% pro choice or more. But, you know, there's real frustration with a porous border, with the migrant crisis. And for a lot of folks, it's rooted just in a sense of fairness. You know, that the companies that are breaking the rules and undercutting, you know, that, it just didn't seem fair. It didn't seem fair. When I knock on doors, I'd hear this a lot. You know, why. Why are the migrants getting the debit cards? And I'm struggling to keep my head above water. I think it was about, it's the economy Stupid. It's about rebuilding the middle class and doing that in a really concrete way. But look, I thought Trump had the worst clothes I'd ever seen. I thought Kamala Harris kicked his ass in the debate, unlike anything I've ever seen. And it didn't matter. At the end of the day. No. And I do think. But there are a lot of learnings. I think the catalyst analysis, the election is really interesting. Democrats got to do a better job reconnecting with independent voters. That's why I think the fact that Trump is tanking with independents is really significant.
- [24:16]
A
Yeah. But you look at the polling and it shows that as a brand, the Democratic Party is not doing well right now. It's.
- [24:24]
B
That's the thing. That's the thing.
- [24:25]
A
And they're not capitalizing because they're perceived as not fighting hard enough. And there are members who will say, well, I'm fighting my ass off. And there are some, some real spirited folks out there in the party. But the perception is, as a whole, the party is just sort of milquetoast and not doing enough.
- [24:41]
B
And that's not necessarily my read, although that's part of it. People want a fighter, that's for sure. And I'm a, I'm a, you know, fighting, you know, fighting centrist. Right. You know, which, you know, this is a matter of conviction for me, which.
- [24:54]
A
I know it's that Greek blood you were mentioning there.
- [24:57]
B
There you go. But, but, you know, it's, it's, it's what I've always believed, like, we are going to need to find a way to reunite as a nation. And you need to do that from position of strength, not weakness. That means willing to take, you know, to take on the fight and get in the fight. But, but I do think that, you know, the brand damage for the Democratic Party is deeper than that. Obviously, Biden's age hurt, even though I thought he was an effective, consequential president. I think the inability to implement a lot of the things that were done is something, you know, you could quibble with the phrase the abundance agenda, but the idea of making sure that we streamlining regulation so we can actually get things done so democracy can deliver for people in ways that they can see and feel. We can get back building again. I think that matters. I think identity politics has been huge, has been really destructive to the Democratic Party. It didn't help. I mean, Donald Trump gained ground in communities of color, so a lot of the tiptoeing around for fear of offending didn't actually help. Democrats because it made them seem inauthentic and it didn't resonate in a common sense way. So I think there's plenty of reassessment. I strongly believe the, the center left should be a position of strength that we play offense on, not simply defend a stale status quo. I think that's another problem.
- [26:09]
A
Yeah.
- [26:10]
B
But I'm concerned about, about the, the feedback loop we're in. But there's no question that's what's coming from the fate of the federal government and the way that the center right is for the most part folded to Donald Trump is a disgrace and a danger.
- [26:24]
A
Yeah. And these independents, you know, they may sort of float back and forth is my sense of it. And they, and they're going to decide these, these upcoming election cycles and the Democrats better get their, their A game going because, you know, we could end up in a situation where Trump is able to claw these five congressional seats in his column and it, it could be really tough in this next.
- [26:51]
B
It's not just those five. Yeah. I mean, the brand, to your point, the brand should, Democratic brand should be benefiting from Trump cratering.
- [26:59]
A
It should.
- [26:59]
B
It's not. So that's a real warning sign. There needs to be, you know, and this isn't about hiring, you know, multi billion dollar consultants to figure out how you can talk to young men like that shouldn't be necessary. Right.
- [27:09]
A
You know. Yeah.
- [27:10]
B
You know, play offense, reach out, figure out, you know, how you can win over the reasonable edge of the opposition while keeping the base fired up. It is about two things, authenticity and affordability. That's, you know, that's, I think that's, that's one of the few common ground lessons of, of Momdani's victory. But look what Abigail Spanberger and Mikey Sherrill, you know, I think those folks should be the face of the Democratic Party in this cycle in 25.
- [27:34]
A
Yeah.
- [27:35]
B
Not just, you know, the other debates sucking up all the oxygen, but I.
- [27:39]
A
Think they will be there. I will say, though, in Virginia because I, I'm in the D.C. market.
- [27:43]
B
Tell me.
- [27:44]
A
Spanberger is already starting to run negative ads aimed at Winsome Sears. There's some initial polling that shows that that race is a little tighter than the Democrats would like. And I, you know, I don't, I, I would be shocked. Absolutely. Because Winsome Sears is a total nut and she's just totally far off, you know, the deep end in terms of being far right. But the fact that the Democrats are having to have a battle here tells me something I might Be sure. I don't think we'll have that kind of trouble in New Jersey.
- [28:14]
B
No. Pay closer attention to New Jersey.
- [28:17]
A
Interesting.
- [28:17]
B
Murphy had a very close reelection. He shouldn't have. Trump made his biggest per capita gains in New York and New Jersey. I'm talking like in some congressional districts, a 20 point swing.
- [28:27]
A
Yeah.
- [28:27]
B
So Jersey is not, you know, don't sleep on any of these races.
- [28:31]
A
Yeah.
- [28:32]
B
I'm just making the point that I think, you know, Mike, Sheryl Spamberger haven't gotten nearly the attention that Mamdani did.
- [28:38]
A
And he really should.
- [28:39]
B
He want to close partisan Democratic primary with less than 10% of the vote. And, but, but understanding, isn't it also.
- [28:48]
A
I don't mean to interrupt, but isn't it also that Democrats are, and I try to give people pep talks and say, you know, you got to fight for this man. You can't, you can't, you can't take this lion down. This guy putting the National Guard with weapons in, in the nation's. I can't take that line down. I think people are deflated. I think people are dejected. I think they feel defeated. I think they are still in a daze, you know, a little bit, a little bit punchy with guys in there.
- [29:19]
B
We did something that in the eyes of history will be civically incomprehensible.
- [29:26]
A
Yes.
- [29:26]
B
If that's not unforgivable. Right. I was, I was nerding out on, you know, Ryan Holiday's books are great. I read them a lot, the stoicism books and the, you know, in the Ancient Greek Roots of Democracy coming up a little bit in the research I'm doing for, for my current book. And there was an ancient Greek Athenian leader named Solon who was sort of tasked in a time of deep division because the economic divisions also are great dangers to any republic or democracy or any country over time. And the one thing he forgave in sort of a spate of reconciliation and rewriting the city states constitution, the one thing he wouldn't forgive was people who tried to overthrow the government. Those are the only folks who didn't.
- [30:10]
A
Yes.
- [30:11]
B
Who didn't get to come back. And so we did something truly, I think, dangerous and I understand why people are dazed. I thought it was a moral impossibility that Donald Trump would win more votes than he did.
- [30:24]
A
That's right.
- [30:25]
B
And so we have to deal with that. And for me, the galvanizing thing is, and I've written a lot about this and I've been, I'm going to stay very focused on this, we need to be. We need to be animating people with a positive ideal, not just opposition. So it was not just solutions. I think we need to be focused on how we are going to strengthen American democracy for the 21st century in a whole of government effort. It's political reforms, it's economic reforms, it's cultural, you know, reform. We need to really think about how we reunite our nation and restore the guardrails around our democracy and to take the energy around the 250 and not simply despair that we did. The, you know, elect reelected Donald Trump. But what we. What are we going to redeem from this? Because you can't give up on our country. You can't give up on our kids. We got to do a better job. So we got to find great animating goals to rally right around.
- [31:12]
A
Totally. We're gonna have to dig deep. There's no question.
- [31:14]
B
Yeah, man.
- [31:15]
A
John, it's great to see you. Let's keep doing this. I have a feeling you and I could just keep talking for hours here.
- [31:20]
B
But we can nerd out for a long time. Country's worth it anyway. It's always a pleasure.
- [31:25]
A
Best luck on the TR Book. I love that you're writing about Teddy Roosevelt.
- [31:29]
B
It's a pleasure.
- [31:30]
A
Yeah, you're gonna have a blast doing that. And still America's youngest president, right?
- [31:35]
B
He's still ascended the presidency at 42.
- [31:38]
A
42 years old.
- [31:39]
B
Yeah, it was like two years after. Four years after he charges up San Juan Hill. Very crowded hours in his life, but can't wait to get a human.
- [31:49]
A
Can't wait to.
- [31:50]
B
All right, man.
- [31:51]
A
Good to see you, John. Hey, thanks so much. Really appreciate it. All right, great. John Avalon, student of history, student of our politics, and somebody who, I think, gosh, would have just made a huge difference in the halls of Congress. We don't always elect the best people. We don't always send our best, because if we did, we would have sent a John Avalon up to Capitol Hill. And I think he would. You know, I'd love to see him give that another go. All right, I want to turn next to talking about the Epstein files, because, doggone it, we are not going to forget about these damn Epstein files until they're released. And I want to bring in Dave Ehrenberg, our pal, Dave Ehrenberg. I. Dave, great to see. I haven't seen you in such a long time. It was just, what, Saturday night?
- [32:35]
D
You know, Jim, it was great seeing you there. I don't know if the audience realizes what an amazing sense of Humor you have, how occasionally you'll throw the F bomb. I know you do it more here on. On your sub stack than on when you were on cnn, but, yeah, I love Jim Acosta Unleashed. It's your best version of Jim Acosta.
- [32:52]
A
I mean, Dave, I mean, you know, I. I wouldn't drop somebody F bombs if things weren't so crazy right now. So that's the issue. But it's great to see you. We were just. I was just having a great conversation with terrific guy, John Avalon, buddy of mine from my old days. But, Dave, I do want to talk to you about a couple of things. First of all, I mean, we. I want to talk about the Epstein files and the Maxwell deposit or what was it? A. Not really a deposition, but it was an interview that she gave to Todd Blanche that was released, the transcript and the audio. And so I. I was able to touch on it somewhat last Friday because it came down in time for me to do it on my show. But the more I thought about it over the weekend, the more I thought, Trump must be in a jam with these Epstein files. There's something in there they don't like. That Maxwell thing came across as just totally not credible. The fact that she would say to Todd Blanche, it's so extraordinary that Donald Trump has become the president, and so on. What was your sense of that? And where do you think this thing is heading?
- [33:55]
D
The interview with Ghislaine Maxwell was so unusual because first off, you never have the number two person at the Department of Justice interview anyone, especially a convicted human trafficker.
- [34:07]
A
Right.
- [34:08]
D
It's, like, impossible. If you really wanted to get information, you would send down a line prosecutor, someone who's well versed, someone like Marine Comey. That would be a person to send down.
- [34:21]
A
There you go.
- [34:22]
D
But she was fired. Right, so. But they could have sent out others who worked on the cases, but instead they sent down the number two person who was President Trump's former personal defense lawyer, because they wanted exoneration for Donald Trump. That's why this whole thing existed.
- [34:38]
A
That's why it happened. Yeah.
- [34:39]
D
And Ghislaine Maxwell read the room and gave them what they wanted, which is not only an exoneration. I'd never seen him do anything inappropriate, but also I've always found be such an admirable, perfect gentleman, and I just admire him so much. Yeah.
- [34:52]
A
Give me a break. Nobody thinks that about Donald Trump, not even the people who like him. I mean, give me a break. A gentleman.
- [35:00]
D
She wants that pardon.
- [35:02]
B
She wants that pardon.
- [35:03]
D
She may get It, I mean, she may get it.
- [35:05]
A
Isn't that something?
- [35:07]
D
It's amazing. Where's the, where are those QAnon folks now who are obsessed with child sex trafficking? What's going to happen if and when Ghillaine Maxwell gets a pardon? I suspect they'll say nothing but. Right.
- [35:19]
A
Maybe it was never about, you know, maybe it was never about child sex trafficking for the QAnon people. Maybe it was just about. And the people on the far right and, and people like Cash Patel and so on who were saying they wanted to release the Epstein files. Maybe it was just about as much as humanly possible, drive up as much hatred of Democrats as they possibly can. They're just so bad that they must be child molesters and pedophiles and sex traffickers and so on. Maybe it has nothing to do with getting to the bottom of this because, I mean, here you have somebody who is a convicted sex trafficker and Trump moves her to a minimum security prison after she gives this, this, this interview to Todd Blanche. It's totally ridiculous. And they, and apparently they turned over the Epstein files the DOJ did to the House Oversight Committee. What was it, last Friday? And I was just looking at this story over the weekend, Dave. Robert Garcia, who is the ranking Democrat on the committee, has said that of the files the committee had received, only 3%. 3% contained new information. The remaining 97% of the pages he said had previously been released by the Justice Department, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, or the Palm Beach County State Attorney's Office. David. Which I think is the office that you once held. I guess, first of all, I mean, we should ask you about that a little bit. But I mean, your sense of the fact that Robert Garcia is saying there ain't much new here of what they've turned over so far.
- [36:49]
D
Yeah. So the Trump administration has been trying to placate the right wing MAGA base by giving them piecemeal stuff. Well, we're gonna seek the grand jury transcripts, but even if they were released, and they were never going to be released, but even if they were, it would just be a redacted version of something that didn't even move the needle. And then they said, well, we're going to have this meeting with Ghislaine Maxwell. But nothing in there provides any insight other than her statement that Donald Trump didn't do anything inappropriate. By the way, there's never really any evidence that Donald Trump engaged any criminal activity on this, which is why I never understood why he just doesn't say release the files, right. It's like the COVID up going on. Yeah. I don't get it.
- [37:38]
A
Why is that?
- [37:39]
D
What makes you and others believe like wow, is there really something in there? Because he, he's just released the files but he doesn't want the public to believe he had anything to do with Epson. He wants to change history and say I, I barely knew the guy. He's the coffee boy. You know, he's like, like that's what.
- [37:55]
A
Dave, the timeline is, right? The timeline is, is that they went to him in May. Apparently they had started going through it. They went to him in May and they said you mentioned multiple times in the Epstein files. Then they released that Memo was a July 7th saying nothing to see here. You know, we're just going to move on now, no big deal. And then all, all hell broke loose. And you know it says to me they told him something in May that must have freaked him out. I mean but prove me wrong. Release the damn files. What's going on here? We need to see the mentions of Donald Trump in those files. That has to be publicly, publicly released or else we're just never going to get over this.
- [38:37]
D
Well, I think for example the birthday card, he, Russ was told about it and didn't want that out there. And then when it did leak out there, he's suing the Wall Street Journal. But now Comers committee is sending a subpoena to, to people who have the card, I guess the estate. And so the, the file, the birthday file. And when GL Max was asked specifically whether Trump had a card in that birthday file, she said she didn't remember.
- [39:04]
A
So remember I saw that part.
- [39:06]
D
Yes, she's trying to protect him on that. And again putting a birthday card in the file was body. It was a little, little naughty. But it's not illegal and so doesn't necessarily prove anything.
- [39:18]
A
But he does say something about wonderful secrets or something like that right there.
- [39:22]
D
Enigmas and stuff. Right, right. So. So that, that gets back to now comer subpoenas of the files. Getting the files from doj it now appears is that the commerce community does not have the entire file. They just have stuff that was given to him that was already been given to the public that the public already had plus maybe 3% something very small in addition. So there's still stuff out there that they don't have that the public does not have. And that's why this story won't go away because Trump's base was promised an Epstein list. There is no Epstein list. But they Were promised that they were promised the Epstein files. There is a file. They haven't gotten it. And they were promised that there would be names of Democratic elites. Bill Clinton, Bill Gates, Larry Summers, who committed child sex trafficking. This would be Pizzagate before there was ever Pizzagate. This is a prequel to Pizzagate. And in reality none of that stuff exists except for the Epstein files. It's not a Democratic cabal. And Trump now is stuck because he's hoist by his own petard. There's a metaphor, Shakespeare from Shakespeare where he's not releasing it because he's concerned what's in it. But the public, the base is saying you promised us and now you're saying nothing to see here.
- [40:36]
A
Yeah. Oh, what a tangled web we weave. But Dave, let's ask you about. So you were the state attorney for Palm Beach County. Did you ever have any dealings with this case? Just for. Folks at home are wondering, well, what, you know, what, what, what happened under Dave's watch when he was there? What does he know about it? I mean, I, I, I would, I would suspect not a whole hell of a lot because you came along a little later. But what, what can you say?
- [41:02]
D
I was a state senator during the time this was all going on. I got elected to this position, a state, well, this position, I, I, I left the job of state attorney in January, but I got elected in November of 2012. And the Epstein deal, the non prosecution agreement occurred in 2008. So.
- [41:22]
A
Right, right, right.
- [41:22]
D
I, I had nothing to do with any of it. But later on the, there was a local newspaper who sued me to get the grand jury transcripts and I had to tell them, go to the court because I don't have them. I don't have them. And so that was the most I got brought into this. We released everything we had to the public, which is why you see it in the Epstein files. Everything we had was released. So I don't have any special inside knowledge except I do know both Barry Krishner and Alex Acosta. And now Alex Acosta is going to be testifying voluntarily in, I think it's September 18th. It's, it's around there on, in front of Comer's committee.
- [42:05]
A
Oh. So they have brought, they, they have decided to bring him in.
- [42:07]
D
That is the breaking news that Akasa has agreed. Now they didn't send him a subpoena.
- [42:12]
A
Interesting. They sent him, I have to remind people, no relation.
- [42:16]
D
Oh, oh my gosh, that's right.
- [42:18]
A
I say this often, no relation. But anyway, please go ahead.
- [42:21]
D
Yes, I wouldn't be surprised based on a lack of competence if you got the subpoena instead of Alex Acosta. And if you did, I hope you'll show up. Please.
- [42:31]
A
If they want to have me appear and testify, I'll be happy to share my thoughts on all sorts of things.
- [42:37]
D
That would be the most must see TV ever. Oh, my gosh.
- [42:41]
A
I would have a few things to say. Just. We'll just put it that way.
- [42:44]
D
Well.
- [42:45]
A
Oh, you're right. This was one hour ago. Politico reported the former Labor Secretary Alex Acosta will be interviewed in the House Epstein probe. You're absolutely right. Dave, thank you for breaking that news for us, because I did not see that and because folks were wondering, well, it was Alex Acosta when he was the U.S. attorney. Right. Or working in the U.S. attorney's office, who cut that sweetheart deal for Epstein initially. And everybody was like, what the hell is this? Anyway.
- [43:09]
D
Yes. So I can tell you what I. What I do know based on, you know, I'm here in Palm Beach County. I know the players. Or I did know. I haven't spoken at Alex Acosta in years. But here's what I know. So when Barry Krish was state attorney, he had put this case, this investigation through a grand jury. And according to sources within the office, they had trouble getting participation. The. The underage girls did not want to participate. There were some who did. And there's a lot of controversy about how the prosecutors treated them. And in my mind, mistakes were made by the prosecution. Mistakes were made. But keep in mind that back then, we're living in a different time when if you were an underage individual who were engaging in sex acts for money, under the law, you were seen as a prostitute, a criminal. And that's why he was eventually charged with solicitation of prostitution. In reality, as we know today, they are victims. They should not be criminalized. They are victims.
- [44:09]
A
Right.
- [44:09]
D
But back then, the law had not changed. The law has changed since then. And the way we think about it is different. What was, to me most interesting is that the feds came in and were unsatisfied with the way that the state was handling it, so they took it away. And that's where Alex Acosta's U.S. attorney entered into a deal with Epstein to give him. And, well, actually to give him this. This deal where he pled guilty to state crimes. I don't know if I've ever seen. Yeah, I've never seen a federal prosecutor settle a case by a plea deal involving state crimes, not federal crimes. Right. You Will, you will plead guilty to state crimes and.
- [44:48]
A
Yeah. Why would that happen?
- [44:49]
D
I've never heard. I don't know. But the worst part is. Not even that, Jim. The worst part is that they gave immunity to all co conspirators known and unknown. So anyone in the future that were involved in this, you get immunity. Wow, I've never heard that. And they didn't tell the victims. So the victims, there's a federal law that requires the victims to be notified and they were not. And so that's why the whole thing stunk. Now today, Ghislaine Maxwell is before the Supreme Court saying, reverse my conviction because I got immunity. And quite frankly, it's not a bad argument for her because she could pull this off. You think she could? Because the Southern District of Florida gave her immunity. Now the argument against that is you weren't part of the agreement. How do you get immunity when you weren't even part of the investigation at the time? You were, you weren't named, at least in the investigation, you were named in the deal. But here's the better argument. The, the Fed, the, the prosecutors are saying, yeah, that deal was from the Southern district of Florida. We're in the Southern district of New York now. You, we, we're not part of that deal. So whether that argument holds play before the Supreme Court, we'll see. She has a decent shot of winning her appeal.
- [46:01]
A
That's wild. And so when they, when Alex Costa had the sweetheart deal and said you can be, you know, held on state charges or convicted on state charges. So that didn't have anything to do with you at that time?
- [46:15]
D
Correct. I was, I wasn't even in the office for another four or five years.
- [46:19]
A
Yeah. So did you get a chance to review that and say what the hell is this? Or it was just, it was done. There was nothing you do about it.
- [46:25]
D
Oh, it was done. Imagine that. You know, I was in a different role altogether in government. And then I came in five years later in my. Took over in January 2013 and this wasn't even an issue. It was already done. This whole thing was done. And then the articles, the Miami Herald came out and it reignited.
- [46:44]
A
Brown started doing those stories. Yeah.
- [46:46]
D
And then people said, all right, Dave, now go ahead and go back and prosecute Jeffrey Epstein for state crimes now. Or, you know, and I said, he has a non prosecution agreement. He's got immunity now, like Maxwell. I, I can't.
- [47:00]
A
So Alex Acosta really should be grilled. Again, no relation. He really should be grilled on the sweetheart deal that he gave it Jeffrey Epstein and, and be asked why, why did that happen?
- [47:13]
D
There was an investigation afterwards, the Department of Justice investigated and they found that he messed up, that he exercised poor judgment, but nothing criminal. And that's why where people say, well, he got paid off. No, I, I have, I haven't seen any evidence of that. I, I don't know the answer.
- [47:29]
A
But Dave, the thing that disturbs me is and because I was there when Alex Custer was made the Labor Secretary, I was at the White House when Trump made this announcement. And as a matter of fact, that day, I think I've told this story before, Trump said to everybody in the room, oh, we made sure that he wasn't related to Jim. Like he literally said that at this event. You can go back, there's must be a trans script of this somewhere. So this has always stuck in my mind and it always made me wonder why in the hell was he made.
- [47:56]
D
The labor secretary, Marco Rubio, I think was friends with him and pushed him. He was. Yes, yes.
- [48:04]
A
So, but strange, you know, well, Als.
- [48:07]
D
Acosta, before this thing blew up, enjoyed a, a good reputation. He was the U.S. attorney, he's a Harvard law guy. And he also was the president or the, the dean of the FIU law school. He had worked in government. He wasn't seen as a big partisan. And then this whole thing blew up. And like, hold on, you're the guy who made the deal. Explain it. And then he did a press conference blaming it on Barry Krisher. Barry Krisher blamed it on him. And then, and then Alison Costa resigned. We haven't heard from him in years. So this will be very interesting. Notice he's not being subpoenaed by Comer's committee. He's going to appear voluntarily.
- [48:45]
A
Yeah, but this has the potential for being one of the bombshell. It. Will he testify in front of the cameras, I wonder. That's like they haven't been doing these in front of the cameras, have they? They've been. Bill Barr was behind closed doors, if I, if I'm not mistaken, the other day.
- [48:59]
D
So, yeah, I would hope this won't be before the cameras. I didn't mind that Bill Barr's behind. What is he going to tell us? I mean, we already know what he thinks. Right. But I hope this one is nationally televised live. I think that's because everyone wants to know this. And I do think that the Comer committee did not care to have him testify, but it was because of public pressure.
- [49:18]
A
Yes.
- [49:18]
D
That compelled them to do this.
- [49:19]
A
People were Saying, why aren't you talking to Alex Acosta? How can you do a thorough investigation? And the omission says something too, to me. It says, well, why was he left out of this? They know that he was a key player. And, you know, this was the reason why he had to resign. I mean, it completely nuts. Dave, just to, just to switch gears a little bit, and I don't know what your thoughts are, so forgive me for asking you something just completely out of left field, but your thoughts on Trump sending these troops into these Democratic cities the way he has been. I mean, he was even today talking like a dictator. He was saying, well, some people would like to have a dictator in this country. You and I haven't had a conversation about some of this stuff in a long time. But your, your thoughts from a legal constitutional standpoint about what we're seeing unfold in this country right now, what stands out to you? What concerns you?
- [50:15]
D
Well, it's hard for Democrats to go around saying that we shouldn't get tougher on crime. This is a playing field that Trump wants to fight.
- [50:26]
A
Yep.
- [50:27]
D
Right. So we have to be careful of that. What the better answer is we should fund the police.
- [50:33]
A
Yes.
- [50:33]
D
And that gets right. And that reverses the whole defund the police garbage that we fell into, which was ridiculous, which killed the Democrats. We fund the police instead of the federal government having to Bigfoot us. And it also telling that he's only doing this in Democratic strongholds. There are places, in fact, red states, red communities, where crime rates are much higher than in D.C. that's right. Right. So I think we want to be able to frame it correctly, that this is partisan and political. And if you want to do something about this, you'll do it the right way. We'll support the police. Also, it doesn't hurt to remind people that if Trump claims he's for law and order and the police. January 6. January 6. January 6. And then the pardon. So you just.
- [51:14]
A
Yeah, they get pissed if you throw a sandwich at a federal officer, but you can beat the out of them at the Capitol and get a pardon.
- [51:19]
D
You know, exactly.
- [51:21]
A
That's exactly the game they're playing right now.
- [51:23]
D
That Subway sandwich. We don't know how stale the bread was.
- [51:27]
A
That's true. It was a club sandwich, as I said that day. I think so.
- [51:30]
D
I'm sorry to laugh, but I mean, that's like it's, it is nuts now. That's why it's important. When you and I were in D.C. i did see the federal troops and they Cannot engage in law enforcement. That violates the Posse Comitatus Act.
- [51:45]
B
Right.
- [51:45]
D
They can assist. And so as long as they're assisting, it is not illegal. He can do this. That's the thing. Again, we have to realize in D.C. he can also do it. What he did in California, the courts upheld that. As long as they're assisting, he doesn't. You know, it used to be you have to go right through the governor. The courts are starting to get a little squirrely on that. But interesting, if the governor says, no, you didn't go through the governor, then it makes it hard. You can go through the courts then to try to figure it out. But right now, the federal courts cited allowing him. Yeah. The Ninth Circuit, not a conservative circuit, sided with Trump when it came to the, the National Guard in California, federalizing the National Guard. So it's not clear that what he's doing yet is illegal. Although you gotta watch, because if they start enforcing local laws, like do the police work instead of the police, that would be illegal.
- [52:39]
A
Yeah. Well, Dave, always a pleasure to talk to you. Always enjoy doing this. Great seeing at Glenn Kirschner's event in D.C. the other night. That was a lot of fun. And yes, I was, I was, that was more my Vegas act, I guess you could say, the other night at the event. But always enjoy seeing you and what you have to do.
- [52:58]
D
Say thank you, Jim. I really enjoyed it. And I gotta tell your audience that you were the best speaker. You were hilarious. And afterwards, people were talking about you and. But they found out that you had left early. So I don't know if your ears were burning. You had other things to do. But everyone's like, wanted to talk about Jim Acosta.
- [53:14]
A
Oh, that's so kind. No, no, no. I, I, I, I did have to leave a little early that evening. You know, it's a little busy these days. You know, there's a lot going on in D.C. but I hope folks didn't mind that too much. But, Dave, great to see you, as always. Thanks so much. And let's keep talking. Maybe we should reconvene when this Alex Acosta things happens, because that's wild.
- [53:35]
D
I'd love to come back on Jim. Let's do it.
- [53:37]
A
All right, great. Great to see you. Dave Ehrenberg, thanks so much. Really appreciate it. Good stuff. Yeah, I, I mean, you know, that, that was terrific. Okay, so for my EP, Matt, when we put this up on YouTube, this, you know, we now know what the headline is. Alex, you know, Alex Acosta is going to testify. No, Relation. Just kidding, folks. Listen, I, I spent part of the weekend and shoot, you know what, I should have sent my pictures over to Matt so we can pop them up. But over the weekend, I took a lot of pictures of these National Guard troops going up and down 14 3, which is one of the main entertainment districts in Washington, D.C. for folks who aren't familiar with it. A lot of famous restaurants are there, a lot of fancy restaurants, a lot of regular restaurants, lots of bars and whatever. And as, as Dave was saying, you know, okay, I, I guess this is legal. We do have some video. The other, I have, I have some video from the other day. Here it is. There are some National Guard guys, some hot dogs. Yeah. I asked them how they were doing. Welcome to D.C. national Mall. And listen, we love our troops. I, I, I, you know, I'm not going to sit there and, and I'm not going to throw a Subway sandwich at anybody. And I, I'm not going to say we don't support the troops because they're walking up and down the street here in Washington, D.C. we support the troops. I support the troops. I don't support Donald Trump turning the nation's capital into a police state. I don't support Donald Trump wanting to send the National Guard into Chicago and Baltimore. You know, earlier today he was, and I don't even want to play the video, he's so full of telling people, oh, all the crime, if you look at the top cities with crime, it's, it's Democratic cities. That's actually not true. That is, that is, that is actually false. But as I've said, and I'm going to say it again here, to get into a fact check war with a pathological liar is just, it's about as effective as pissing into the wind. And I don't need to do it. We know he's lying. We know he's a liar and we know he's out of control. And the question becomes, we're coming up on Labor Day weekend. And shortly after that, Republican lawmakers, all the lawmakers will be coming back to Washington up on Capitol Hill. And the Republicans are going to get an a gander at what Donald Trump has been up to this summer, turning the nation's capital into a police state into the district of Trumplandia. And it's got to stop. And the Republicans need to ask themselves, because, you know, you can redistrict yourselves until the cows come home. Just have a ball with that. Keep doing that. Accountability is coming. The midterms are coming. And I'll be damned if I'm going to raise the white flag at this point and say, oh, there's no way the Democrats are going to win back to Congress. I think there's a chance they win back the House and possibly the Senate at this point because Trump is going to be so unpopular and he's going to have to put National Guard troops outside of polling stations and ice and so on to scare the shit out of people so they don't vote, and they're still going to vote anyway. And when that accountability comes, we're going to start to get to the bottom of this. He was saying earlier today, you know, we should play that one more time. If Matt is, is, can play it of Trump talking about being a dictator. If we, as you all know, Chicago.
- [57:24]
C
Is a killing field right now. And they don't acknowledge it, and they say we don't need them. Freedom.
- [57:30]
D
Freedom.
- [57:31]
C
He's a dictator. He's a dictator. A lot of people are saying, maybe we like a dictator. I don't like a dictator. I'm not a dictator. I'm a man with great common sense, and I'm a smart person.
- [57:46]
A
He's, he's openly saying that people in this country want a dictator. Who wants a dictator? Who among us in this country wants a dictator? Nobody is saying that, but he gave away the game there. He told on himself. Donald Trump, you told on yourself right there. You want to be the dictator. You want to push us around. And maybe that's the message that Democrats need to seize upon here in the coming days. We're not going to be pushed around. We're not going to be bullied by you. Nobody wants a dictator in this country. What he said right there absolutely gave away what is going on inside his mind right now. He thinks like a dictator and he's acting like a dictator. And I will say to the, to the people who are in charge of the National Guard at the state level, they need to remind their soldiers, they need to remind their troops that they are, they are here to protect the Constitution of the United States. They're here to serve the people of the United States. They are not here to serve Donald Trump. They're not here to serve a dictator. They're here to protect us. That Constitution still means something in this country. The reason, the reason why we are a country is because we rejected the idea of a king. We rejected the idea of a dictator. Donald Trump says, oh, a lot of us would like to have a dictator. No, nobody is saying that except you. And now we know now. We know you said it when you were running for president that you would be a dictator on day one. You still have it on your mind. You still have this dictator fetish, this, this dictator curiosity. It's we the people, as the viewer just said there. It's we the people. And let me tell you something, we the people are going to stop you. We the people are not going to be pushed around. We the people are not going to be bullied by a wannabe dictator. My thanks to Dave Aronberg. My thanks to John Avalon. Really appreciate everybody for watching. I do want to brag on the show real quick before we go. Our episode with Heather Cox Richardson is approaching about 500, 000 viewers. If you add up substack and YouTube, we got about 350, 000 viewers on YouTube. If you want to support this show, become a subscriber. And if you're watching this on substack also, we, we want to make you a subscriber, but we hit a lot of subscriptions over the weekend and, and I believe on Substack we're well over a hundred thousand viewers on. On Substack, which is just terrific. And so this is. Be sure to describe it matters. It shows that you support independent media. Folks, you are not going to find our friends in the corporate media telling Donald Trump that we're not going to take his lying down. We're not going to take his. His dictator lying down. That only happens on independent media. And you know, Dave was, you know, our friend Dave Ehrenberg was saying, oh, you know, Jimmy, use colorful language. You're damn right I do. Because the moment calls for it. So keep on subscribing. Keep on supporting the show. Keep on supporting shows like ours. Keep on supporting independent media. We are here to hold this administration accountable. We are here to say what needs to be said. We're not going to be pushed around by a wannabe dictator. We're not going to be bullied by a wannabe dictator. It's about we the people. And with that, thanks everybody for watching. Still reporting from Washington, I'm Jim Acosta. Have a good evening. Good night. Thanks.