← The Majority Report with Sam Seder
The Majority Report with Sam Seder
3604 - War With Venezuela?; Zohran On Fox News; How The US Legalized Corruption w/ David Sirota
01:35:59
It's Emmajority Report Thursday on the Majority Report On today's show: Trump openly admits to authorizing covert CIA actions in Venezuela at a White House press conference. On an episode of Triggered with Don, Jr. in February of 2025, Recent Nobel...
Loading summary
Transcript317 lines
- [00:00]
Emma Vigeland
You are listening to a free version of the Majority Report. Support this show@jointhemajorityreport.com and get an extra hour of content daily.
- [00:13]
Sam Cedar
The Majority Report with Sam Cedar.
- [00:18]
Emma Vigeland
It is Thursday, October 16, 2025. My name is Emma Vigeland in for Sam Cedar and this is the five time award winning Majority Report. We are broadcasting live steps from the industrially ravaged Gowanus Canal in the heartland of America, downtown Brooklyn, usa. On the program today, David Sirota will be with us to talk about his new book, Master the Hidden Plot to Legalize Corruption in America. Also on the program, Trump is installed stalling loyalists into the IRS criminal division, making it easier to target liberal groups. This is expressly illegal, by the way, part of what Nixon got in trouble for. Trump also confirmed that the US Is conducting covert actions in Venezuela, making them not so covert. The US Also bombed another boat, the fifth time they've done this, off the Venezuelan coast, trying to goad Maduro into a conflict as a pretext to regime change. And Trump declines to rule out bombing the country today. Or I guess it was yesterday, maybe into today. But the Supreme Court is hearing a case out of Louisiana. I highlighted this maybe two weeks ago. A hugely important case that could destroy the Voting Rights act and cost Democrats over a dozen seats in the South. The White House is doubling its bailout to Argentina. And Trump's billionaire friends investments $40 billion now. Meanwhile, 75% of Americans say monthly household costs have increased from last year, per a Harris Guardian poll. Israel continues breaching the ceasefire. At least three Palestinians were killed by Israel over the past 24 hours. Explosive robots remain in Gaza. The family of one of the Israeli hostages whose body was just returned to them, confirms that he was killed by the IDF bombing. Trump proposes a bailout for struggling farmers that he caught. The the struggle that he caused with the tariffs. It's in the middle of harvest season right now, but that would require the government to reopen. Pennsylvania Democrats have begun to organize a primary challenge to John Fetterman in 2028. Capitol Police are launching an investigation after an American flag with a swastika on it was found displayed in Ohio Republican Representative Dave Taylor's office.
- [03:21]
David Sirota
He's just a kid.
- [03:26]
Emma Vigeland
This is the the week of all of the Republicans revealing themselves to be Nazis, which is kind of every week. And lastly, the New York City mayoral debate is tonight. Folks, get your popcorn. All this and more on today's Majority Report. Welcome to the show, everybody. It's an M. Majority Report Thursday. Hello, Matt. Hello, Brian. Excited to talk to our friend David Sirota about his book in a little bit. But as always, we have a lot of news to get to. Even though the first I am er of the day is trying to troll me. Emma, what do you think has a better chance of happening? Cuomo beating Momdani or the Rangers scoring a goal at the Garden this year? You are the second to troll me. Brian, as a Boston fan with his Red Sox hat on had already beat you to the punch. Okay. Yeah. The Rangers are in a rebuilding period and they traded away a lot of skill. This is what's going to happen. I'm not happy with the team.
- [04:29]
David Sirota
But.
- [04:30]
Emma Vigeland
That'S the most important thing. We had to get to top of the show. Top of the show, Haley says, is this year's Nobel Peace Prize winner still praising Trump's bombing of her fellow citizens. That is gonna be where we start the show today. Because on Truth Social yesterday, Trump basically boasted again, posting that he had extrajudicially murdered more people off of the coast of Venezuela. This is the fifth boat that he has bombed. The death toll is now 27 in total. Also, there were US Air Force B52 bombers were tracked in international airspace yesterday off the coast of Venezuela. I mean, major escalation. Major escalation. An attempt to get Maduro to respond because he's not doing so so far. That's why they keep ramping up their actions.
- [05:32]
Matt Binder
I mean, this is already a war. They're blowing boats out of the water.
- [05:37]
Emma Vigeland
It's criminal. And the New York Times reported yesterday that Trump, the Trump administration, had secretly authorized the CIA to conduct covert actions in Venezuela. And that felt like a deliberate leak when I read it, you know, to the Times, okay, it's not covert if they're leaking it. But it didn't even need to be a leak because Trump just admits we're doing something secret in front of a microphone at the White House yesterday.
- [06:09]
David Sirota
Why did you authorize the CIA to go into Venezuela? And is there more information you can share about these strikes on the alleged.
- [06:17]
Sam Cedar
Well, I can't do that. I authorized for two reasons, really. Number one, they have emptied their prisons into the United States of America. They came in through the well, they came in through the border. They came in because we had an open border policy. And as soon as I heard that, I said, a lot of these countries, they're not the only country, but they're the worst abuser.
- [06:38]
David Sirota
Does the CIA have authority to take out Maduro?
- [06:41]
Sam Cedar
Oh, I don't want to answer a question like that. That's a ridiculous question for me to be given. Not really a ridiculous question, but wouldn't it be a ridiculous question for me to answer? But I think Venezuela is feeling heat, but I think a lot of other countries are feeling heat too. We're not going to let this country, our country, be ruined because other people want to drop, as you say, their worst. They have given us their worst, as.
- [07:05]
Emma Vigeland
You say right now. That's. As you say, buddy. Venezuelan immigrants in this country are coming here because of United States policy. Policy that Trump and the Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, who's a major player in this, have championed for decades, regime changes.
- [07:26]
Matt Binder
They tried it under Trump source term.
- [07:28]
Emma Vigeland
And now they're escalating those tactics. He's using drug trafficking here, obviously without any finesse.
- [07:37]
Matt Binder
Sentinel does not come from Venezuela. That's a lie.
- [07:40]
Emma Vigeland
No, it's a lie. And he's using it as a pretext to regime change and he's not doing it in a very artful way. And we should be clear too, Marco Rubio, this is as foundational to his career as anything. The Secretary of State since he joined the Senate, I think like around 15, 14 years ago, he has been arguably the leading champion of sanctions against Venezuela, which immiserates the population. It is a tactic to hurt the people of Venezuela economically, to put pressure on them to overthrow their government. And it has been an abject failure. It's been a failure in the context of Iran too, and other places that the sanctions regime has targeted.
- [08:32]
Matt Binder
It massively contributed to the problem that they're all lighting everyone's hair on fire with regards to say, people fleeing certain countries, like, yeah, they're fleeing Venezuela. You destroy a country's major export economy and yeah, there's some disruption to the society that spills over into other ones. And guess what, the Pentagon and the ICE folks at the top, they knew that and they knew it would justify more action on their part. It's a self licking ice cream cone, as Sam says.
- [09:00]
Emma Vigeland
Yeah, that's, that's right. And that's why there were hundreds of thousands of Venezuelan immigrants who came into this country on temporary protected status because they had to flee because of the policies that we have implemented in our hemisphere and, or in our backyard rather. And in 2019, people may forget this, that Rubio tweeted out a side by side photo of bloody Muammar Gaddafi either before or after he was brutally, I mean, killed. You can look up how that happened. It was very, very violent, the manner in which he was killed. And he tweeted out a photo of that with a side by side of Maduro, basically implying we're going to kill you. And he was one of the leading figures to recognize Guaido as the leader of Venezuela and trying to whip up support across other countries in Latin America to recognize that even though he was just not. You can. Maduro's anti democratic tactics are a problem. But for the most part there has been scant evidence to show the amount of like what the United States is alleging in terms of how he's so repressive of the popular will. He's continuously gotten elected and they've been trying this for decades.
- [10:28]
Matt Binder
Yeah, I mean, and what's the solution to somebody who is rigging election? It's not overthrow and dislike and installing some puppet figurehead. Like we run the world like it's 1950 still. Like we have to engage the wider community of states of governments and they might have some input on how to deal with that too. Like not every Latin American or Central American government loves Maduro, but it's what. But let's just start using the Pentagon to shoot boats, shoot like boats out of the water around it. Because we want to invade it and have another colossal calamity because of the.
- [11:05]
Emma Vigeland
Oil, by the way. And they are upset that Venezuela has state control of their resources in that way and there is a desire to exploit that by American capitalists. And to Matt's point, none of this was effective. The opposition to Maduro is probably a lot more fractured than it was five years ago, 10 years ago. And that's in part because the United States hand in this is so heavy and so obvious and they're making it so abundantly clear that they are behind people like this. This is Maria Karina Machado. You might know her as the recent Nobel Peace Prize winner on Don Jr show joke in February. Just this is the new Guaido, the new figure that. And by the way, not new. I mean Rubio hosted her in the United States previously and they've had a relationship. She's been a figure for really like 20 years, connected to the US government, connected to NGOs. You know, I'll read a part of this Nation article that lays it out in just a second, but here she is in February. Just to give you a sense of the kind of person that they're trying.
- [12:23]
Matt Binder
To install, I'm triggered with Trump Jr.
- [12:27]
David Sirota
Forget about Saudi Arabia, forget about the Saudis.
- [12:30]
Emma Vigeland
I mean we have more oil. I mean infinite potential.
- [12:36]
David Sirota
And we're going to open markets, we're.
- [12:39]
Emma Vigeland
Going to kick off the government from the oil sector.
- [12:43]
David Sirota
We are going to privatize all our industry.
- [12:46]
Emma Vigeland
Venezuela has huge resources, oil, gas, minerals, land, technology. And as you said before, we have.
- [12:54]
David Sirota
A strategic location, you know, hours from the United States. So we're going to do this right. We know what we have to do. And American companies are super strategic position to invest. This country Venezuela is going to be.
- [13:11]
Emma Vigeland
The brightest opportunity for investment of American companies, of good people that are going.
- [13:18]
David Sirota
To make a lot of money. I love playing the game called capital.
- [13:23]
Emma Vigeland
Thank you. Thank you so much. I love how explicit that was. That's the one thing about the Trump era is he's going up and praising Miriam Adelson for the money she's and showing it's a transaction. I gave her Golan Heights. And you have people like this like back in the day. If you're Talking about the 1950s, Matt, there was a little bit more plausible deniability. But now you just got to go on the nepo.
- [13:51]
Matt Binder
We're going to be so rich.
- [13:52]
David Sirota
Yeah, no FOIA is required.
- [13:54]
Emma Vigeland
Exactly.
- [13:55]
Matt Binder
I mean this is exactly Iran. Iran, you know, the country that Trump bombed earlier this year that we have to apparently be so preoccupied with because of our ally, the genocidal Israel has a big problem with them. Why? How did they become the way that they are? Yeah, this exact same shit.
- [14:13]
Emma Vigeland
By the way, speaking of Israel, this is a part of this piece in the Nation that if you want more familiarity with this figure, Machado, it's by Gabriel Hetland. In the Nation. Machado is openly aligned with far right figures in Latin America and beyond, including Brazil's JR Bolsonaro, Argentina's Javier Milei and Israel's Benjamin Netanyahu. Machado even penned a letter to Netanyahu in 2018 asking for Israel's help in forcefully overthrowing Maduro fascists.
- [14:45]
Sam Cedar
Wonder why he thought that would be.
- [14:47]
David Sirota
A good guy to go to.
- [14:48]
Emma Vigeland
I mean Israel. If I wanted to do some really shady espionage, I think Israel would be my number one call.
- [14:56]
Matt Binder
It's easy mode. It's like if you're a politician, you run for office. Well, do I play this on hard or do I play this on easy? If I'm playing on easy, make a call to APAC and you got just an extra. It's like in a video game when you get like those ads, $100,000 in the bank at the start.
- [15:12]
Emma Vigeland
Machado's political career began in 2002 when she co founded Sumate, an NGO with the explicit mission statement of recalling former Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez from Power research shows that the National Endowment for Democracy and USAID provided immense financial support for Sumate. Any pretense that Machados supported peaceful change alone was rendered moot by her support of the 2002 coup against Chavez, with Machados signing the notorious Carmona Decree, dissolving Venezuela's Congress, constitution, and Supreme Court for democracy. So that just gives you a sense, over the next two decades, she's been a supporter of regime change in a bunch of different contexts as well.
- [15:58]
Matt Binder
And so, yeah, Iraq, is that a democracy now?
- [16:01]
Emma Vigeland
Right.
- [16:01]
Matt Binder
Like, there's figures like Machado, I mean, I can't remember his name was codenamed Curveball. I remember. I forget what the guy's name is. Do you remember that? But, like, just feeding intelligence and then, like, I'm going to be in charge of this country because America's guns are going to put me there.
- [16:15]
David Sirota
And how does that work out right now?
- [16:18]
Emma Vigeland
Yeah, unfortunately for the Trump administration, there is, like, a rich understanding in Venezuela and in different countries. Like, you see how. How popular Claudia Sheinbaum is in Mexico, and, like, she regularly rails against neoliberalism and, like, interference in that way. And that's not even, you know, the country like Guatemala or other nations that have very much their politics centered around, like, with that history in mind of the United States interference and capitalist interference. And just to remind people that these are human beings. This is a local report from CNC3 News Network in Trinidad and Tobago. And the Trump administration keeps calling these boats that they're extrajudicially bombing narco terrorists. Not according to this local news report. We'll just play the first minute of this.
- [17:21]
Interviewer (Martha MacCallum)
Two men, believed to be Trinbegonians, were killed in the latest US Drone strike of Venezuelan waters. And now a Las Cuevas family is demanding answers.
- [17:31]
David Sirota
They say Chad Joseph wasn't a trafficker, just a young man trying to come home. Jensen Levent went to the fishing village to speak with the family.
- [17:40]
Matt Binder
Like most of the men gathered here at the Las Cuevas fishing depot, Chad Joseph was a fisherman.
- [17:45]
Sam Cedar
Both his relatives and residents are denying.
- [17:48]
Matt Binder
Strenuously that he was involved in drug trafficking. They say his killing was unjust.
- [17:54]
David Sirota
When Prime Minister Kamala Prasad Bisesa said.
- [17:56]
Matt Binder
The United States should kill alleged drug dealers violently, no citizen was listed among the dead.
- [18:02]
David Sirota
On the U.S. s fifth airstrike, Trinidadians char Joseph and another man, identified only.
- [18:08]
Matt Binder
As Samarou, were among six people killed on Tuesday. Taking the number of alleged narco traffickers killed by the US since September 2 to 27, Joseph's grandfather Cornell Clementine, who denied his grandson was a drug trafficker.
- [18:22]
Emma Vigeland
Yes. So they interview the family. It's. It's more of just, this guy was a fisherman. This is the same story with the first boat, the second boat, a third boat. I mean, they're just knowingly murdering people. And they know this. They know this. I mean, these kinds of actions. Right. Like the Bay of Pigs, they were trying to be secretive about it. Or on Contra, they're trying to be secretive about it. They're so crude and stupid, but they're also so bloody and willing to go anywhere. And that is what's horrifying about this situation. Let's turn quickly now to, you know.
- [19:10]
Matt Binder
Actually, sorry, I got. I found a thing I was looking for here. This is a Rand Paul. I don't normally like to play Rand Paul stuff, but on this issue, I'll take it. Here is him laying out the sort of math here, and based on how likely it is, and I would say 100%. But this is just. This is from a libertarian's perspective, I think it's worth putting on here. This is on Newsmax.
- [19:32]
Sam Cedar
I think blowing up speedboats in the Caribbean, though, isn't necessarily the answer. About 25% of the time that the Coast Guard boards a vessel in the Caribbean looking for drugs, about 25% of the time, the boat that's boarded doesn't have drugs. So we've blown up four boats. Statistically speaking, what are the odds that one of the boats didn't have drugs? We haven't heard the names of who these drug dealers are. How do you know for certain who they are before you kill them? So I'm not in favor of the current policy. I'm in favor of the continued policy.
- [20:05]
Emma Vigeland
There you go.
- [20:06]
Sam Cedar
Addiction of drugs, which is that we do search ships, but.
- [20:10]
Matt Binder
Yes, sir, exactly.
- [20:11]
Emma Vigeland
Yes.
- [20:11]
Matt Binder
Search the boats.
- [20:12]
Emma Vigeland
Process, process.
- [20:14]
Matt Binder
I mean, and this is. This is the entire sort of fascist playbook right now. Like, why aren't we doing due process for undocumented folks? Because J.D. vance got an argument with, like, people like Zagi Jelani on Twitter saying, there's no time for that. We just got to start caging people. There's no time for searching boats. We just got to start blowing them up. And you know what? Who cares? Because the missile makers, they get a lot of money for it. The cage makers, they get a lot of money for it. Everyone's making money. Is it making anybody less safe? Is it. Is it actually making people more safe? Yeah. Or even, like, I mean, yeah, safe from Fentanyl of course not. It's just a lie for fascists to make money for war and cage industries.
- [20:59]
Emma Vigeland
Absolutely. For a little bit more fun in this first hour, so let's turn to Zoramdani's appearance on Fox News yesterday. This was just such a phenomenal performance by him. I know we keep singing his praises but this is important beyond in my view, the context of the city that we all live in here. Because he's been providing a blueprint for many Democrats in terms of their answers on a variety of different issues. Not just about the blanket affordability which is what Hakeem Jeffries wants to, you know, kind of narrowly focus on, but not even like affordability about what Democrats will do. It's more just like we have to address affordability this time. Zorin is very specific. He treats the voters like they're adults and he explains everything to them and how he's going to do it and what he's going to do for New Yorkers is comes up in this interview in the second part. But this is how it opened. Didn't realize this cuz it was clipped separately but Brian watched it live like a sicko. You're really getting on board on my level here. And you mentioned that this was how they opened it in the segment. Then they went to break and came back.
- [22:24]
Matt Binder
This is start with the most important thing.
- [22:26]
Emma Vigeland
Yeah. You want to guess where Fox News went with this brown guy? You must be an anti Semite. This is just a part of the 5 minute piece of this like around 20 minute interview where they press somebody running for a mayoral race that does not involve foreign policy about his views on, you guessed it, Hamas.
- [22:50]
Sam Cedar
That's where you give credit.
- [22:51]
Interviewer (Martha MacCallum)
So you've denounced Israel and the United States for the response to the slaughter on October the seventh. In fact, at times you've called it a lasting stain the response. And at times you have left October 7th out of your statements completely around this issue right now. You just talked about Israelis killing some Palestinians, but Hamas is killing Palestinians within Gaza.
- [23:16]
Emma Vigeland
Can you pause this? All right.
- [23:17]
Matt Binder
Yeah. This needs a little bit of contextualization.
- [23:19]
Emma Vigeland
Hamas is yes, killing Palestinians within Gaza. It is horrible that this like hellscape is created this amount of chaos. The Palestinians that they're currently executing according to reports are the people who collaborated with Israel. The gangs that Israel funded to style gangs. Yeah. To attack Palestinians who were trying to access aid. Now any response to what about October 7th? Should be and there's a viral video of a guy at a protest doing this. What about October 8th. What about October 9th? October 10th. And by the way, you could say that doubly right, because we've been two. We're two years into this genocide. That's the response. But. But that's the context.
- [24:06]
Matt Binder
We also have to say the most important thing you can see from those, again, horrible images of people who horrifically collaborated with an apartheid regime. Allegedly no due process, again, because this entire region is just basically anthill bombed by Israel anytime it wants to. But Hamas is still in power. So this entire two years that we've seen a fucking genocide with our bombs because the whole reason was because it needs to get rid of Hamas. It was never actually about that. And everybody knew it wasn't about that. Anthony Blinken, General David Petraeus knew that actually Hamas was going to be there whenever this ended. Because you can't bomb groups like this out of existence.
- [24:46]
Emma Vigeland
It's the only governing structure.
- [24:47]
Matt Binder
Guess what? They're still there.
- [24:48]
Emma Vigeland
Yep.
- [24:48]
Matt Binder
And so now what?
- [24:49]
David Sirota
It's like the Taliban.
- [24:50]
Emma Vigeland
And Trump is admitting it too. Trump is saying it's actually a good thing we're giving them temporary policing power over the area because they're the only group with the capability to do it. Because despite like all of the fear mongering about this, they are a governing structure there in an open air concentration camp.
- [25:06]
Matt Binder
The way to end these cycles of violence is very clearly demonstrated in history. Ireland is one example. The imperialists have to negotiate with who they call terrorists.
- [25:17]
David Sirota
That has to happen.
- [25:19]
Matt Binder
And it could have happened after October 7th. What Anthony Blinken said on October 8th, there needs to be a ceasefire and hostage exchange. There was plenty of hostages in Israel, Palestinian Palestinians held in cages in Israel on October 6th. That could have been very easily used and that would have exchanged and that would have sort of helped us along to this two state solution that so many people act like they want to see. But that would have legitimized Hamas as a diplomatic body. That would have given Gaza and Palestinians more sort of, that starts the process that Israel doesn't want to see. They don't want to see what happened with Ireland. They don't want to see any of that. They want to conquer every piece of land that is there from the river to the sea. They're explicit about this all the time.
- [26:07]
David Sirota
Yep.
- [26:12]
Matt Binder
Forgot we had a clip to play.
- [26:15]
Interviewer (Martha MacCallum)
They have not returned the bodies that they promised to return. Including two Americans.
- [26:19]
David Sirota
Yeah.
- [26:19]
Matt Binder
They're under rubble because Israel bombed everything.
- [26:23]
Interviewer (Martha MacCallum)
Itae Chan and Omar Nutra, whose families we have interviewed over these months. So what is your response to what Hamas is doing now.
- [26:31]
Sam Cedar
I think those are bodies and remains that should absolutely be returned. And I think that I have no issue with critiquing Hamas or the Israeli government because my critiques all come from a place of universal human rights. And my focus, however, is right here in New York City and transforming the most expensive city in America into one that's affordable for each and every New Yorker.
- [26:48]
Emma Vigeland
But.
- [26:48]
Interviewer (Martha MacCallum)
Okay, and I want to get to that. Absolutely. But do you believe that Hamas should lay down their weapons and leave the leadership in Gaza?
- [26:56]
Sam Cedar
I believe that any future here in New York City is one that we have to make sure that's affordable for all as it pertains to Israel and Palestine, that we have to ensure that there is peace and that is the future that we have to fight for.
- [27:07]
Interviewer (Martha MacCallum)
But you won't say that Hamas should lay down their arms and give up leadership in Gaza.
- [27:10]
Sam Cedar
I don't really have opinions about the future of Hamas and Israel beyond the question of justice and safety and the fact that anything has to abide by international law. And that applies to Hamas, that applies to the Israeli military, applies to anyone you could ask me about.
- [27:23]
Emma Vigeland
Okay, all right, move on, move on, move on. That was great. And he's provided the blueprint there. And in terms of talking about what eventually has to happen is the end of the apartheid in a one state reality from the river to the sea, with Palestinians and Israelis in the same protectorate territory, whatever that is the only solution here, like in South Africa, it has to be racial and ethnic integration. And he had previously been asked this question in the primary cycle about do you believe that Israel has the right to exist as a Jewish state? And he says, I believe that Israel has a right to exist as a.
- [28:02]
Matt Binder
State with equal rights.
- [28:03]
Emma Vigeland
As a state with equal rights. Exactly. And that's exactly how every Democrat going forward, if they are not an AIPAC shill, should be responding to this.
- [28:12]
Sam Cedar
All four of them.
- [28:13]
Matt Binder
Yeah. Because if you say, I mean, and even John Kerry had this contradiction out when he was Secretary of State, you can either be a Jewish state or a democratic state. You cannot be both. And liberal Zionists have a decision to make. And the decision is a pretty, I think, severe one. Are you for democracy or are you for ethnostates? And for whatever reasoning you have behind support in ethnostates? And the answer that we have to have is if you are for ethnostates, you join the ethnostate party and go vote for Republicans.
- [28:40]
Emma Vigeland
Absolutely. Because it's of actually quite urgent importance to have that Democrats Change course immediately and absorb and embrace this answer, because there is a continuing active genocide that we're still finding out how many hundreds of thousands are dead in Gaza right now in Gaza, where they're trying to reduce the population size through genocide of Palestinians, to foreclose that opportunity to make sure they're a demographic majority even in the outcome that we're talking about. And then they're trying to ethnically cleanse the West Bank. So this is a, this is a matter of urgency. But now to New York City, because that's where he's actually running, Even though Martha MacCallum was a little bit slow to that, it seems here is what part should we do here? We can't. I, of course, like myself, I'm constantly pulling over, pulling things that I find awesome. But let's do the part where he redirects the how will you pay for it? Question, part one here, because he actually kind of wins her over by the end of this question. And this is another way that Democrats should think about responding to this stuff of how will you pay for it? There are plenty of resources for there is an abundance of resources and funds, if you will.
- [30:01]
Interviewer (Martha MacCallum)
They would love to have free health care and free buses and all these things. But the question is, how do you pay for it? The city's already in debt. The governor says no to new taxes. Like Margaret Thatcher said, you know, socialism is great until you run out of everyone else's money, other people's money.
- [30:15]
Sam Cedar
Well, what Andrew Cuomo said is that if he had $959 million, he'd give it to Elon Musk in tax credits, because that's exactly what he did. And I bring that up to you to say that it's often a question of whether you have the willingness to spend that money to benefit working class people, not where that money is in the first.
- [30:30]
Interviewer (Martha MacCallum)
What would you cut? What would you draw from to do it?
- [30:32]
Sam Cedar
I don't think we have to cut. I've spoken about raising taxes on the wealthiest. And frankly, this is, this is an issue that we have here in New York City. And frankly, even across this country, when I've spoken to Trump voters right here in New York City, Hillside Avenue in Queensland, Fordham Road in the Bronx, they've told me it was cost of living that drove them to vote for Donald Trump. They've told me it was a promise of a lower actual, whether it be cheaper groceries, whether it be childcare, whether it be rent. And what we're seeing time and time again is we're more focused on the question of billionaires and the most profitable corporations than we are on people who can't even afford to make ends meet in the city.
- [31:06]
Interviewer (Martha MacCallum)
Well, we know affordability is an issue, and I think that all.
- [31:10]
Emma Vigeland
Yeah.
- [31:11]
Interviewer (Martha MacCallum)
Are getting to an understanding of that. And I think that you've done a lot actually to bring attention to that.
- [31:16]
Emma Vigeland
I appreciate that. I'm sorry, can we just play the. I interjected because I had forgotten.
- [31:21]
David Sirota
He did the.
- [31:22]
Emma Vigeland
I appreciate it. Just go back five seconds. Because he's his.
- [31:25]
Matt Binder
Did he hypnotize.
- [31:28]
Emma Vigeland
By the end of this interview, it was like she started asking him about soccer. He's just. The charm is. And just like the common sense of what he's advocating for is undeniable. Just watch this part.
- [31:41]
Interviewer (Martha MacCallum)
Well, we know affordability is an issue, and I think that all politicians are getting to an understanding of that. And I think that you've done a lot, actually, to bring people's attention to that issue. Let's take a look at the free buses.
- [31:54]
David Sirota
Okay. Okay.
- [31:55]
Emma Vigeland
So. Because I know that part was great. And then this part where he addresses Trump directly is the thing that's really making the rounds. Another incredibly smart move to top. First of all, to look like the fighter against Trump. This is part two, to look like the fighter here against Donald Trump. Understanding that a Fox News interview with Zoran is going to excite Democratic partisans and tying Andrew Cuomo to Trump and looking like the fighter people want for Donald Trump in this moment is so potent in his pivot to a general election audience and is artfully done.
- [32:37]
Matt Binder
This is when I knew he was going to win the primary was when he went to Cuomo on that debate stage and says, unlike you, Andrew, I didn't like, sue women for their gynecological records.
- [32:45]
Emma Vigeland
Yeah.
- [32:46]
Matt Binder
That is the type of go for the juggling jugular sort of politicking that progressives need. And, you know, frankly, I think, like, Bernie can't really model because he's such a team player.
- [32:57]
Emma Vigeland
Right.
- [32:57]
Matt Binder
But we need people who are willing to do that.
- [32:59]
Emma Vigeland
Well, Tim Walls is the number one example, and that was the campaign. I mean, the Harrison Walls campaign. But when he was calling J.D. vance weird and then immediately abandoned that because he wanted to look more conciliatory in the VP debate. That was one of the many, like, bullet wounds in that campaign that caused the slow bleed out. But here he never let your foot off the gas with these fascists. Never. Here's Zoran acting like a leader looking.
- [33:26]
Sam Cedar
To take these buses.
- [33:27]
Interviewer (Martha MacCallum)
I know that you're turning 34 on Saturday. And I want to talk about your qualifications. You know, some say you have never run a business in. I'm curious. And President Trump said that you never worked a day in your life. I went. You worked as an assemblyman and you've had other positions in the government.
- [33:46]
Emma Vigeland
But. Can you pause just for one sec? I'm sorry, I just got to say, like, it's actually, I want all of my public servants to not have any corrupting influence by the private sector.
- [33:55]
Sam Cedar
But yeah, also, that is a job.
- [33:58]
David Sirota
Yeah.
- [33:58]
Emma Vigeland
It's actually a tough job where you don't get paid that much.
- [34:03]
Matt Binder
Also, who's a rapper.
- [34:04]
Emma Vigeland
Yeah.
- [34:04]
Matt Binder
And it comes from show business stablemates with Trump.
- [34:07]
Emma Vigeland
Right. Well, I mean, I'm not even joking that his rap like, like, that's. He's so, he has the gift of gab and he's really quick on his.
- [34:15]
Matt Binder
Feet and the production of that is impressive.
- [34:18]
Emma Vigeland
Right. But anyway, like that.
- [34:20]
Matt Binder
I listened to it.
- [34:21]
Emma Vigeland
But, but you see how like a pro capitalist kind of bent they want you to be in the, in the.
- [34:26]
David Sirota
To run a community.
- [34:27]
Matt Binder
Why didn't your dad.
- [34:28]
Emma Vigeland
Yeah.
- [34:28]
Matt Binder
Why weren't you born into real estate like our president.
- [34:32]
Interviewer (Martha MacCallum)
From your life experience to run the largest city in the country?
- [34:38]
Sam Cedar
You know, I want to take this moment because you spoke about President Trump and he may be watching right now. And I just want to speak directly to the president, which is that I will not be a mayor like Mayor Adams, who will call you to figure out how to stay out of jail. I won't be a disgraced governor like Andrew Cuomo who will call you to ask how to win this election. I can do those things on my own. I will, however, be a mayor who is ready to speak at any time to lower the cost of living. That's the way that I'm going to lead the city. That's the partnership I want to build, not only with Washington, D.C. but anyone across this country. I think it's important because too often the focus on the needs of working class Americans, working class New Yorkers are put to the side as we talk more and more about the very kinds of corrupt politicians like Andrew Cuomo that delivered us into this kind of crisis.
- [35:20]
Interviewer (Martha MacCallum)
So the question I asked you was what specifically in your background?
- [35:24]
Emma Vigeland
That's good. Very well done. Very well done. So excited for the debate tonight. But other Democrats take notes. This is what works. And it's not just crazy commie New York City. He was able to basically charm Martha MacCallum by the end of this. Don't be Afraid of making a case.
- [35:44]
David Sirota
Affordability resonates with her because she's gonna get fired for smiling.
- [35:48]
Emma Vigeland
I know. I mean, and what was funny in watching it in full is like she'll. You see her being charmed by the end of questions, but then she comes back with another like out of nowhere right wing framing question is in her ear, like do not give him an inch, blah blah, blah, blah blah. So that's, that was my read on it. Great job, Zoran. In a moment we're going to be talking to David Sirota. But first a word from one of our sponsors. Sometimes searching for the right doctor is like a complex Mad Libs game. You remember Mad Libs. I had a great time with that.
- [36:22]
Matt Binder
There's like a two month period where I thought it was the funniest thing in the.
- [36:25]
Emma Vigeland
Oh my gosh. If anyone's ever been to camp, Mad Libs and camp go together like PB and J. But that's a bit of an aside. You need a blank specialist who takes your blank insurance, who is in within blank miles of you, who doesn't have a blank month wait to get in for an appointment and actually makes you feel blank. Well, ZocDoc makes it easy to fill in those blanks to help you find the right doctor for your specific needs. ZocDoc is a free app and website where you can search and compare high quality in network doctors and instantly click to book an appointment. You can book in network appointments with doctors across every specialty from mental health to dental health, primary care to urgent care, etc. You can filter for doctors who take your insurance who are located nearby and are a good fit for the medical needs that you have. Once you find the right doctor, you can see their actual appointment openings. Choose a time slot that works for you and click to instantly book appointments made through Zocdoc. Also happen fast, typically within 24 to 72 hours of booking. You can even score same day appointments. Zocdoc is how I found my dentist who I really really like. It's hard to find the dentist that you like. Also just if you need something in urgent care, you're feeling sick. Zocdoc as they mention, you can just go on the website and even get a same day appointment and I calling the doctor's office and the back and forth with that is the bane of my existence. And Zocdoc takes that out of the equation and you finally have like an interface where you can see a calendar and see the availability of these doctors. It is a game changer I would like to thank ZOCDOC for sponsoring today's episode. Stop putting off those doctor's appointments and go to Zocdoc.com majority to find and instantly book a top rated doctor today. That's Zocdoc.com Majority Zocdoc.com Majority link down below in the video and episode descriptions. And@majority fm, go to zocdoc.com majority and download the ZocDoc app to sign up for free and book a top rated doctor. All right, quick break. And when we come back, we'll be joined by David Sirota.
- [38:52]
David Sirota
It's it.
- [39:56]
Emma Vigeland
We are back. And we are joined now by David Sirota, a friend of the show, founder of the Lever, a former speechwriter for Bernie Sanders and co author of the new book which he co wrote with Jared Jakang Mayer, the Hidden Plot to Legalize Corruption in America. David, thanks so much for coming on the show today.
- [40:16]
David Sirota
Thank you. Thanks so much for having me.
- [40:18]
Emma Vigeland
Of course. So I love your book. I love the subject matter, the fact that you start at the 1970s really in terms of tracing political corruption in this country, it's like the perfect place to start because of those court cases really laying the foundation for Citizens United. And just like chronologically, that's where corruption really in this modern form began to take hold. Let's start at the beginning, the 1970s. What happened there that got the ball rolling on the legalized corruption racket that we have in this country?
- [41:02]
David Sirota
So I think people might hear the subtitle of the book, the Hidden Plot, and say, well, I already know about all the corruption that's happening happened. I know how it, how it happened. And let me just say, and ask people to trust me that you, you don't know how, how this plot unfolded because it was all secret. But the, but the beauty is in the, in the 1970s is they wrote it all down, right? Like, like it reminds me of the movie the Big Short where he says, you know, they're confessing. And he goes, no, no, they're not confessing. They're bragging. They wrote down exactly what they were going to do and how they were going to do it. And so for folks who wonder how they've woken up in this corruption dystopia that we're living in, it was a specific plot by specific people with a specific set of goals. And it does start in the early 1970s. I think people obviously remember Watergate. They remember it as a break in. I think they don't remember it for what it was at its core, which was the first dark money scandal in modern American history, where bags of cash were being flown into Richard Nixon's campaign, some of it directly from major corporations seeking favors from Richard Nixon's administration. That money, a lot of that money ended up funding the break in. And this was a moment when we were supposed to get this corruption under control because it, you know, blew out into, into the open, into the Watergate hearings, et cetera, et cetera.
- [42:37]
Emma Vigeland
And then Jimmy Carter gets elected, right, as kind of a backlash to that.
- [42:42]
David Sirota
Yeah, exactly. And Congress passes the Federal Election Campaign act, which are the basic campaign contribution limits, disclosure laws. So this was supposed to be the triumph over corruption. But as we report in our book, this was also the moment where the master plan was really hatched. And it started with a memo that I think a lot of people have heard of called the Powell Memo. It was written by a tobacco industry lawyer named Lewis Powell, who was serving on the board of Philip Morris at a time, by the way, that Philip Morris was trying to prevent regulation and prevent people from knowing the link between cancer and smoking. And Powell, who's very upset in specific with Ralph Nader because Ralph Nader is having a lot of success with campaign finance reform, cracking down on corporate abuse. And he writes this memo that is this call to arms for corporate America saying essentially corporate America, billionaires, oligarchs, need to invest heavily in American politics, in American media to protect the free market system from this supposed assault of I guess the do gooders who are trying to, you know, root out corruption, who are making the government do things that the public wants but isn't necessarily good for the people in power. Now moving forward from that, a few months later, Lewis Powell gets a call from Richard Nixon to put him on the Supreme Court. So suddenly Lewis Powell is in a position to execute his own Powell memo. And we found this amazing, you have to see it to believe it. This amazing vinyl record of the Philip Morris send off party for Louis Palf to the Supreme Court where they give him judicial robes emblazoned with tobacco industry logos. They super excited that their guy is going to be on the Supreme Court. And here's the kicker. Within a few years, Lewis Powell engineers a radical Supreme Court ruling that for the first time says money in politics is not influence, it's not vote buying, it's not corruption. Money in politics is constitutionally protected speech. And soon after that, Powell works behind the scenes at the court to hijack a case. And we have all these documents from, with his handwritten scrawls in the margins where he is hijacking another case to then extend those constitutional rights to spend in elections to corporations. The Bellotti ruling becomes the foundation of Citizens United, which is written by the immediate successor to Lewis Powell on the court, Anthony Kennedy. This is all part of one large plan. Now, you may wonder, you may ask, well, what's the goal of the plan, right, like why they want to deregulate campaign finance, why did they want to limit the enforceability of anti corruption laws? And I think it comes down to in a functioning one person, one vote democracy, the powers that be were having trouble getting what they wanted because the public was demanding action from government on basic things like environmental laws, better access to health care and the like. And so what they understood was they would have to rig the political system to make money, essentially make $1, 1 vote, turn the democracy into something more responsive to money than to people.
- [46:20]
Emma Vigeland
Can you flesh out a little bit more of some of those Supreme Court decisions and like the different pieces of them, you know, what comes to mind here is, you know, Virginia pharmacy. Buckley, you mentioned Bellotti, but that trifecta of Supreme Court decisions is why we have Citizens United to this day.
- [46:43]
David Sirota
Absolutely. So Buckley v. Valeo was about those original post Watergate campaign finance reforms, and those reforms aimed to cap spending in elections, cap donations, et cetera, et cetera. And the Supreme Court in ruling that overall total spending caps in elections were unconstitutional, based that on this radical theory, and by the way, a radical theory championed originally by none other than John Bolton, who was on the legal team. I mean, the Master Plan cinematic universe is a very small universe of recurring characters. So the Supreme Court, to get to the idea that you can't cap spending in elections, came to the idea that money in politics is constitutionally protected speech. And so therefore it is not. You can't limit it. And from there, Bellotti was about whether a banking company in Massachusetts would be allowed to spend in an election about a ballot measure to raise taxes on millionaires. The bank goes to the court and says, we want to be able to spend out of our corporate treasury money to influence how this ballot measure turns out. Lewis Powell, it's kind of crazy. Justice Brennan was going to write a very narrow ruling in support of the bank, but very narrowly. And then Brennan, in the process of considering the case, says, and we have the memos here, says, basically, I'm actually getting on the opposing side. This is wrong. I've looked at this case, now I think it's actually wrong. And the case is about to go down. And Powell then cobbles together, sort of saves the loss for his own side, cobbles together a narrow ruling. He ends up writing the ruling, essentially saying that corporations are essentially people who have access to those same constitutional rights to spend as much as they want. Citizens United, of course, builds on this and goes even further and says independent expenditures, even those by corporations, are not corruption and do not create the appearance of corruption because of this legal fiction that, for instance, Super PACs are independent of candidates. I mean, they want you to believe, right, that if somebody's running for the Senate and there's a super pac, that's all it's doing is spending to elect that person to the Senate. Some CEO from a company dumps $10 million into the super PAC. Somehow that super PAC donation can't be corrupting of the Senate candidate. The Senate candidate's not gonna owe that CEO anything. What? Because the super PAC is supposedly, on paper, independent. I mean, these are the. That have created the architecture of corruption.
- [49:39]
Emma Vigeland
Well, so, I mean, just. I get dorky about this, but I just like laying it out like this. It's basically, Buckley says money is an expression of speech. Then you have bilati, which basically kind of affirms the corporate right to speech. And then Citizens United in 2010 says, oh, independent expenditures, as long as they are, as you just lay out, independent, unlimited. And this is where you look at the charts about dark money in our elections, Right? Why we are in this situation today is, I would argue, you know, we end, and I'm sure you would agree, David, the rollback of our rights in the war on terror and Iraq, and that's what Trump is capitalizing on here domestically. But in terms of the. The corruption piece, that is the story. It's the 2010 line going exponentially up with dark money where there's no traceability. So the dark money piece, can you explain that to people and why the Citizens United decision and the decisions subsequently, too, paved the way for this money to have zero transparency as well, right?
- [50:47]
David Sirota
So super PACs, independent groups, 501C4s and the like, they don't have to disclose all of their donations. You can have groups donating to other groups that are supposed to political committees that are supposed to disclose, but all you see is the dark money groups. You know, 200, $100 million donation. You don't get to actually see who is donating because there's no national federal disclosure law on the books, even though it's worth mentioning, even though the Citizens United decision itself says look, disclosure is actually fine. The point is, is that we haven't put in place a disclosure system because. Because the donors who control politics, obviously, they don't want a disclosure system.
- [51:36]
Emma Vigeland
Like, it's like tips are appreciated. Tips are appreciated, but not required. Disclosures. Appreciated but not required.
- [51:43]
David Sirota
Exactly. And there's this whole other concurrent line of cases that has to be mentioned, which is about actually out and out bribery.
- [51:52]
Brandon
Right.
- [51:53]
David Sirota
I mean, there's campaign contributions and the access and the influence that buys. Then there's like literally like cash in envelopes or gifts to politicians in exchange for various things. There's a line of cases that started with the Bob McDonald case, remember Bob McDonald, the former Republican governor of Virginia? Cases about Ferraris and Rolexes and a donor giving him and his wife all these, like, lavish gifts and getting and then being granted, like, special access to his officials in his gubernatorial administration. The Supreme Court rules, they overturn his conviction. They overturned his conviction, narrowing the definition of what an official act is to essentially make it harder and harder to prosecute outright bribery. And this case then becomes the Chris Christie Bridgegate convictions that get overturned, the Andrew Cuomo Associates cases that get overturned. So there's a lot of these anti bribery law cases that are whittling down the enforceability of bribery. And you now have a case at the Supreme Court, an appeal at the Supreme Court. I mean, if you can believe this, this is so Orwellian. Where. Remember the story of Donald Trump reportedly soliciting a billion dollars from oil donors in exchange for promises of favors to the oil industry?
- [53:11]
Emma Vigeland
Yep.
- [53:12]
David Sirota
This appeal at the court now cites that scenario as not as this is the kind of thing that needs to be prosecuted. It cites it as proof that pay to play culture is now so pervasive that the court should not allow it to be considered prosecutable because that would criminalize what we now consider to be normal politics. You're criminalizing politics. I mean, that's where we are right now. That sounds crazy. I mean, we just had a Supreme Court ruling last year about the Indiana mayor.
- [53:50]
Brandon
Right.
- [53:50]
David Sirota
The Indiana mayor gives a contract to a local government contractor. The contractor soon after gives that mayor a $10,000 payment. The mayor gets prosecuted on bribery charges. The Supreme Court intervenes to overturn the conviction, saying that that sequence of events means that the money wasn't a bribe, it was a permissible gratuity. I mean, this is where we are when it comes to corruption.
- [54:19]
Emma Vigeland
It's amazing because you just see how like, gosh, we use the phrase facts on the ground. Right. Israel would use it to create their facts on the ground. But this is almost a corruption version of that where it's like, we've allowed this, so it must be legal. We can't reverse course now. This is how our politics has oriented itself.
- [54:43]
David Sirota
Right. And JD Vance this Sunday on the, on the Sunday shows, when he was asked about this is how it works in practice, right. J.D. vance was asked about Tom Homan, the border czar, reportedly being given a paper bag full of $50,000 of cash caught in an FBI sting in exchange for allegedly promises of delivering favors to the, to the, to what he perceived to be the donor if he became a government official. J.D. vance's answer was extremely important. He said, and I'm paraphrasing here, but he said something to the effect of he didn't deny the facts. He said, you know, there was no evidence of illegal behavior or illegal conduct. And if you take J.D. vance literally, I read it to be, look, the Supreme Court just said it's not really clear what bribery even is anymore. Right. So it's not even clear what's prosecutable. And it's worth adding, of course, the Supreme Court is handing down these decisions, narrowing the definition of bribery, making it harder to prosecute bribery at a time when some of the justices themselves are accepting lavish gifts from billionaires with business before the court. So they have an interest in making it harder and harder to prosecute bribery. And it's worth mentioning one other thing about Vance. Vance right now himself is spearheading a case that is at the Supreme Court that is designed to eliminate whatever was left of basic campaign finance laws after Citizens United. That sounds like an exaggeration, but his case is literally in court right now that aims to eliminate the restrictions on essentially parties passing donor money directly to candidates to get around existing campaign finance laws. Basically, advance gets what he wants, parties will end up being could end up up being pass through conduits where big donors can just funnel as much money as they want, huge contributions, much bigger than are allowed now, directly into the coffers of candidates who can then reward them with legislative favors.
- [56:55]
Emma Vigeland
On the other end, my, my question would be why bother like this? The Trump regime and the campaign like openly collaborates with their super pac. I forget, I don't even and I can't remember the specifics of the stories off the top of my head. But like, they've been caught doing this repeatedly and they're not the only ones. I mean, Democrats do this too. Why bother creating a situation where cash can go directly into bank account. I mean, they're raking. Maybe it's because they want to, like keep it for, I don't know, their own purposes or whatever. More control over it. It just feels like a hat on a hat.
- [57:32]
David Sirota
Yeah, it's a great, it's a great question. I read it to be that you're right. There's no pretense anymore. There's no pretending anymore. I think they want to have it all. Like, why I put it the other way. Why not try to destroy what's, you have the court, you have the presidency, you've got the apparatus of government. Why not try to get it all, even if it's only icing on the cake. And I think that's essentially their attitude. And here's the craziest part of all the political side of this, because Democrats have not made nearly as strong an anti corruption argument as they probably need to make. The latest poll shows that the voters trust Republicans more on combating corruption than they do the Democrats. And if that doesn't scare you enough, let's remember that in 2016, Donald Trump, the last poll before that election showed Donald Trump losing to Democrats on every issue except for corruption. It's the same. They have, the Republicans have a similarly sized lead right now on the issue of who do you trust to fight corruption. So this is a huge problem for the Democrats. And I would say it's, I mean, I mean, it's crazy. Donald Trump is trusted by anyone on the issue of corruption. But I think it speaks to the fact that, that anti corruption has not been a central plank and focus of Democrats in their messaging or in their party policy. And they are paying the price for it. And we're all paying the price for that.
- [59:11]
Emma Vigeland
That's what the AIPAC tag is a stand in for, right? Where it's like something that people can easily understand. This is a corrupting body and that's why there's this fight over that issue in particular. And it's becoming toxic to the brand because it's a stand in for what you're saying. It's filling a vacuum and a lack of Democratic fortitude and messaging on this front. And just to flesh that out a little bit more, David, because it's so remarkable, Trump in 2016, I guess it would be obvious to me why that was the portrayal because he was co opting some of Bernie's messaging after that race. Like, he's right. Hillary Clinton is bought. I've been in those rooms. I cut those checks. I know the system and I don't need the system. So, so that argument, it was obvious on the, in terms of like the facts of his history that that's not the case. But I could see why voters felt that way. Right now he's openly doing pay to play stuff like Qatar plane crypto businesses, infusing that into the government. It's, it's insane that Democrats can't make that case now.
- [60:19]
David Sirota
It's absolutely insane. And I do think you're right that Trump, trump, like John McCain before him in 2000, I'm old enough to remember that John McCain was singed by the Keating Five scandal, which was a huge scandal of its time of influence peddling scandal. A donor comes to a bunch of senators, asks them to push off this regulator. John McCain was part of it. John McCain, singed by that corruption scandal, ends up citing that corruption scandal as reason why he's pushing campaign finance reform. He runs a 2000 campaign, almost unbelievably, at a certain point gets close to winning the Republic nomination for president in 2000, talking about the systemic corruption. Not just the Democrats are corrupt, the whole system is corrupt. And I have experience seeing it, which gave him a lot of authenticity. And I think Trump did kind of the same thing in 2016. And I think, I actually think even now that because Trump isn't trying to hide it, he's not playing a cutesy game like, oh, I'm like Mr. Clean here. The fact that there is no pretense almost makes him seem, dare I say, like honest, like he's a pathological liar in his specific statements. But he's not trying to hide that he believes government is a fundamentally transactional enterprise. Right? I mean, he's not trying to hide that at all. And in certain cases he's bragging. And I think it's not that I think the public likes that. I just think the public says, look, he's not BSing me, right? Like he is who he is. And the Democrats, they're sort of sometimes talking about specific Trump corruption scandals, but they're not willing to be self critical of themselves, their party, the whole system, in the way John McCain was. So the Democrats, if and when in rare occasions they talk about corruption, it doesn't come off as it's authentic. It comes off as hyper partisan, purely anti Trump. And I was watching, you know, Jon Ossoff, the senator from Georgia, he was on Pod Save America recently and he actually said something that I'm guessing ticked off a lot of their liberal listeners and viewers because Ossoff said, and I'm Paraphrasing here, something to the effect of, look, the real problem in politics is billionaire and corporate money, and we can get rid of Trump, but that's still gonna be the central problem. And I say that might have ticked off some of those liberal listeners and viewers because the Democratic Party is selling the idea that all we gotta do is get rid of Trump and everything will go and we can all go back to brunch, everything's gonna be fine. Right. Ossoff was actually saying, listen, Trump is a symptom. The real problem is essentially oligarchy. And I think more of that, more of admitting to that, is what is going to not only combat MAGA and Trump, but will reinvigorate a real opposition party here.
- [63:17]
Emma Vigeland
Ossoff is shrewd and it is interesting, though, because he would know this better than anybody, given that he voted for that horrible genius act, the crypto bill, because he was worried about 2026 and crypto money in his race and getting Sherrod browned, basically. And we can have a debate about whether or not that was good politics or not, but can we talk about that for a. Sure, go ahead.
- [63:39]
David Sirota
Something really important here.
- [63:40]
Emma Vigeland
Yeah, yeah.
- [63:41]
David Sirota
So you're totally right. That is exactly how I looked at Jon Ossoff becoming One of the 16 or 18 Democratic senators suddenly voting with the crypto industry. And I think it's an important thing to understand about how corruption works day to day in American politics. We believe corruption works. You know, money goes in, favors come out, and a lot of corruption happens that way. Way. But there's an entirely other side of corruption that works without money actually being directly transacted. So crypto is the example. The crypto industry spends a lot of money in the 2024 election in a high profile way to target what it calls its, you know, its big critics, its targets. Katie Porter spends a lot of money in California to take her out in the Democratic primary. And the point of that spending, in my mind, is not just for the crypto industry to take out one or two or five or ten of its critics. It's to send a message to everybody else in American politics up and down the ballot that if you get in our way, you may be the next Katie Porter or the next Sherrod Brown that we take out. And so what that does is that creates then a sort of no money is transacted in the next Congress, not yet, but you're still gonna get lots of new voters. The crypto industry is for its side because all the senators are afraid of Becoming spent against. I had a senator tell me, put it this way, he said, listen, I can come up with a piece of legislation that takes on a powerful industry. And I'm not just. The problem is I'm not just risking me getting spent into the ground in my reelection campaign, but all that industry has to do is pull out its wallet and shake its wallet at all of my colleagues in the Senate to keep them off of my bill, keep them from co sponsoring my bill, keep them from voting for my bill. So at a certain point, the money doesn't even have to be, have to move, it just has to be shown.
- [65:44]
Emma Vigeland
Right, Right. It's the chilling effect that it creates and that's why it needs to be systemic. Systemic change on this front. Legislation across the board. You know, you have a bit more hope in the book towards the end, right, about somewhat of like steps forward on this front. You know, my husband was, was joking with me watching that, that amazing interview with Cory Booker on, on I've had it. And how, you know, he's, he'll tout 75% or something. He says of My donations are for $25 or less. It's like, okay, but what percentage of the money that you raise? Right? Like, like, like, like there can be big checks that are cash and then we're not even talking about the super PAC money. And, and my husband was like, why did all of these corporate Democrats now like adopt the Bernie small dollar donation thing in this like, cynical way? And then, and it's always a little bit like off, because they can't say I'm only raising money from this, but they'll gesture towards it. That's the lesson that they took. You know, it's, it's just interesting to me to see Democrats at least like co op some of the rhetoric. I don't take corporate PAC money is the other thing they'll say. But okay, there's something you're also concealing, but there has been improvement in this area, right? Even like the embrace of candidates like Graham Platner and people wanting more of that. And you write about how Biden embraced the DISCLOSE Act. Can you speak a little bit about that and how that was a bit of an improvement for Democrats and a good thing in Biden's presidency, even if it didn't get passed.
- [67:27]
David Sirota
So to my mind, the way out of this, first of all, let's be clear. There are no instant solutions. So let's just disabuse ourselves of the idea that this is going to change immediately, overnight. But I Do think there are three avenues that are quite hopeful. I mean, I'm not naive, right? But these are the. To my mind, having studied this, these are the three avenues where I think we can actually make some progress. So the DISCLOSE act is the legislation that would require basic disclosure of dark money spending at a federal law requiring that. Sheldon Whitehouse has been a big champion of it. You mentioned President Biden came out and actually gave a speech saying it needs to be passed. So putting the, you know, the actual White House behind it as the leader of the party, that is a good thing. A version of it passed at the ballot in Arizona. Not exactly a super blue state, a swing state, passed by 70%. Okay, so this is a wildly popular sort of nonpartisan idea that we should at least know who is spending in our elections. And again, this is playing within the legal confines of Citizens United. So this is not like pie in the sky stuff where we know automatically the Supreme Court's going to say no. The Citizens United decision actually has this whole write up about how disclosure laws should be robust and are fine. So that's one avenue. The next avenue I think that's really actually exciting is that this whole idea that corporations are people and thus entitled to free speech, rights to spend in an unlimited way to buy elections, that whole idea is predicated on state incorporation laws. So. Right. So the court says, okay, states, under their incorporation laws, they treat corporations as the same as people, and therefore we have to operate from that. In Montana, luminaries from both parties are pushing a ballot measure. It says, well, if that's the case, then can't we go back to doing what we used to do, which is changing our incorporation laws and saying that we grant corporations this, this, and this power, but we don't grant them this, this, and this power. We used to do that as a country all the time, that states granted corporate charters. And anybody who studies the law knows that corporations are artificial entities created by states. That is like, technically what a corporation is. So human beings have rights, Corporations have powers. It's an important distinction. And so what they're proposing to do in this Montana ballot measure that should be on the ballot in 2026 is say corporations have all the same powers that they've had, except for one power, they can't spend in elections. Now, people may be hearing this and saying, well, you know, okay, fine, like, some company's gonna go, you know, reincorporate in Delaware and then, like, you know, come back into Montana. But here's the thing. Every state's corporate Code says that out of state corporations have to play by the same rules as the corporations in states inside the state. So the point is that Montana can't solve the problem for Colorado, can't solve the problem for New York or California, but Montana, if it passes that measure, can solve the problem or begin solving part of the problem inside of Montana. And so other. Here's the thing, they're going to the ballot for that in Montana because their Republican governor and legislature would never pass it. But blue states right now could pass the same thing. And I want to be clear, I don't think it's a cure all. Like billionaires would still be able to individually spend money. This is about corporation spending, corporate spending. But billionaires would be forced to spend their money through official political committees which require disclosure.
- [71:28]
Brandon
Right.
- [71:29]
David Sirota
Because this would apply to nonprofits as well. So I think there's something really important and innovative going on. Yes. Would there be a Supreme Court challenge to this? Yes. But the Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that state incorporation laws are what determine what powers corporations have. For the Supreme Court, I'm not putting a passport, but for the Supreme Court to try to like, you know, thread a needle and undermine something like this, you know, they would have to really dismantle parts of corporate law that I'm not quite sure the Supreme Court wants to dismantle. Right. So.
- [72:07]
Emma Vigeland
Right. And they've also made, I mean the case law makes the distinction clearly that there is a difference between citizenship and so called legal personhood. The legal personhood that is applied for corporation, they, you know, applied with the motivated reasoning that you talk about, but it was applied and they talk about it as a useful legal fiction which creates oxygen or the ability for lawyers to make the case to the Supreme Court that if it's a, it's basically a vehicle for these cases to be heard or whatever, then the, the legal fiction that their rights can be abridged in a way like there is a roadmap.
- [72:47]
David Sirota
I go back to the idea, the distinction between rights and powers.
- [72:51]
Emma Vigeland
Yeah.
- [72:51]
David Sirota
We as human beings under the Constitution have rights. Corporations are granted powers. They are artificial entities. And to get into the weeds about it for one sec here, it makes sense. A corporation gets things that we as human beings do not. Corporations get limited liability. If they go bankrupt. If they break the law, the people who are running them in many cases are shielded from themselves personally going bankrupt, at least under. Under the law. Right. The point is, is that states extend that special privilege and they used to in exchange for we're going to grant you some powers, but not other powers. And this, and again, this used to be relatively routine, you know, 100 years ago, and states never gave up that power. So to me, that is, that is really exciting. Now the final thing that I think is really exciting and although I think it's not well understood, take a look at the New York City mayor's race. Okay. Zoran Mamdani, he wins the primary, matching funds. The front runner. Yeah, exactly. He's the front runner. But what I worry about is that people, how did Zoran Mandani do this? He's a great candidate. He's got so much charisma, he's got such a powerful message. And his, his videos are so slick and well produced. All that's true. But I would say this. None of that matters, or very little of it matters if he didn't have competitive resources to make sure enough voters saw those other positive factors. And that gets to New York City's public financing system. In New York City is one of, I think it's 26 cities and a couple of states has a system of public financing where a candidate can run for office and have some of their small donations matched at a multiple level. You know, for every dollar, he gets seven or eight dollars of in small dollar donations. Right. And what that means in practice is a candidate can run for office raising small dollar money and ultimately get enough through the matching system, enough resources to run a competitive campaign, not to outspend their opponents, but at least to be competitive. And it gives candidates like Mamdani a way to run for office without having to rely on private donations that come with the expectation of legislative favors. Now, you mentioned Graham Platner and some of the other Senate candidates who were kind of nationalizing their races, becoming kind of national celebrities to tap into national grassroots donors. I think, I think in this election and under this current system, that's the best you can hope for. But that is not an answer to the current system. Because for every one candidate who can become a national celebrity because they happen to be running for an office that people perceive to be a national super important office, I mean, I would challenge the idea that U.S. senate races are more important than governor's races are more important. But that's the perception.
- [76:04]
Emma Vigeland
Can I just interject really quick, David, just to say that like it's because why you're drawing this distinction? It's very important. In New York City, the matching funds only apply to, in city donations. You had to verify your address. Right. So it. But that system doesn't exist. In Maine. So a guy like Platner has to get a national audience where Zoron didn't have to because he just had to appeal to people within the city.
- [76:27]
David Sirota
Exactly. So I'm not obviously like, I think the way Graham Platner is doing it and the way some of these other King, you know, Abdul in Michigan, et cetera, et cetera, they're doing it the right way under the current system because they don't have a matching fund, a public financing system available to them. But what I'm saying is that people shouldn't look at the way Graham Platner or Abdul El Sayed are raising money as the solution, as the long term solution to this problem. Because again, for every one of those candidates, there are 10, 20, 30, 50 candidates running down ballot that can never nationalize, they can never become celebrities. Right. And so what happens is that down the ballot, oligarch money has actually more power because it's harder to raise lots of grassroots money enough to become competitive. So a public financing system that says if you do, to any candidate of any party, any ideology, if you qualify, you get access to a competitive amount of resources, that is the way to really break the stranglehold here. And again, I go back to Citizens United, like Citizens United and the Supreme Court have said that public financing systems of elections are fine. They do not create, in the Supreme Court's view, constitutional problems. So those three areas are real active and live ways to start breaking this, this hammerlock of money in our politics. And for people listening, what I would encourage them to do, because I know corruption feels like this impossible problem. If you're sitting there in a blue state or a blue city, ask your local city council person, hey, do we have a public financing system of elections? What can we do to get the ball rolling on that? Hey, my state legislator, we're in a blue state with a Democratic governor. Can we just pass what Montana is doing? You will be surprised the more local you go. You will be surprised at how much more agency you may have with a relatively few number of people. If you're trying to call your senator, if you're trying to call your governor and you're one or two or five or 10 people, maybe you're going to get ignored. If you're calling your city council council person, if you're calling your state legislator, like you're going to get more attention. And our screens are sort of designed to tell us not to focus on that, Right? We all have our screens. We want to focus on national politics and it's exciting and we forget the potential agency and power that we have right here in our local communities where this battle really is unfolding as well.
- [79:10]
Emma Vigeland
Lastly, David, just because I wanted that we have some viewer questions, Alex B. Writes in saying Ask David about SCOTUS teeing up a case to completely destroy the Voting Rights act and watch red states draw themselves. 19 more House seats covered this last week and headlined it today. But that's arguments were heard yesterday might be extending into today. This is a little bit kind of a partner piece to your research for this.
- [79:37]
David Sirota
I know all about it. Yep.
- [79:38]
Emma Vigeland
But it's very important, obviously.
- [79:40]
David Sirota
Yeah. And I want to, I think we have to see it all as one large master plan. I want to go back to what we were discussing about the Powell memo. Right. Democracy is becoming a problem. This is the thesis of the Powell memo. It's getting the government to do things that we, the elite corporate power oligarchs, don't want. And this is the central problem. Democracy is the problem. A government responding to the people is the central problem. According essentially, that's the message of the Powell memo. And to my mind, there are really three pillars of this and it explains the three pillars. There's we have to deregulate the campaign finance system and weaken anti bribery laws so we can basically buy elections. We can rig that part of the democracy. We have to allow for our side when it gets power, to rig the maps, to rig the playing field, to rig the, you know, the terms of the game to make small d democratic expression harder and representation harder to happen. That's the gerrymandering piece that we're seeing right now. And then of course there's the other piece which is we have to make it harder for democratic, small d democratic institutions to hold corporations accountable in their direct relationship with corporations. I'm talking about unions, right. We have to go after unions. We have to allow for gerrymandering and the rigging of the rules. And we have to deregulate the campaign finance system to allow for buying of elections. It's the iron triangle of the assault on democracy. I hear people say Donald Trump is the crisis of democracy. I see Donald Trump as the culmination, the expression of the crisis of democracy. But if you're worried about the democracy crisis, let me introduce you to the master plan that's never before seen the light of day until our book is coming out with all these documents published, this master plan that has allowed for the buying of elections up and down the ballot for the last 20, 30, 40 years. Like this. We are in the culmination of the master plan that created the democracy crisis. This is not something new. It is not something sudden. It is the climax of it.
- [82:06]
Emma Vigeland
Very well done. Bringing Master Plan back in. It's seamlessly working that in. It's. It's great.
- [82:14]
David Sirota
I mean, it was like two years of work on this book. I mean, really like it. I said, I really mean, I've been. I've been about to turn 50. I've been working in politics for media for 30 years. This is truly the most important journalism project I've worked on because it really has surfaced information that we kind of. I think people sort of theorized it was there, but we didn't really know it was there. To see them write it down, it's not just important for history. I want to leave people with this idea that if we can understand that what's going on is part of a deliberate master plan executed by specific people with a specific goal. What it means is it's not a natural human evolution. It's not a force of nature. Right. It means that it can be reversed. It can be rolled back. It was created by humans. It can be reversed. This is not some divine force here. This is like we have to have our own organizing, our own plans to reinvigorate the democracy. I mean, imagine what they felt like back in. It's 1971, Ralph Naders winning all sorts of fights in Congress. They were a tiny minority that were putting. Were throwing ideas against the wall. They probably seemed like totally unrealistic, but they worked at it for decades and decades. I'm not taking inspiration from them, but it's only to say, like, they could have been demoralized and checked out too, but they, they actually figured out a plan, they stuck to it and they made it happen. And in some ways that should be a reminder to all of us.
- [83:53]
Emma Vigeland
Absolutely. And if you're saying, you know, this is like you've done some great investigative work in the past, Major made your name on it. So that's high Prior makes people should check out the book even more if that's what you're saying. Master Plan is what it's called. The Hidden Plot to Legalize corruption in America. David Sirota, always, as always, check out the lever as well. Thank you so much for your time today. Really appreciate it.
- [84:20]
David Sirota
And thanks to you. And I want to add one last thing. Part of what Powell writes about is the infiltration of media. And I will say that one of the things we've obviously seen that Culminate Barry Weiss, the, you know, the Ellisons, the billionaire part of the one other thing that I am hopeful about is that the reinvigoration of real independent media is something that is extremely important right now. And you are one of the outlets that is part of that movement. And so for everybody listening here right now, I don't care whether you support the lever, the Majority Report, any other independent media, just support independent media because it is all a part of unwinding this master plan.
- [85:05]
Emma Vigeland
Absolutely. Yeah. Thank you so much, David. Really appreciate your time today. And we will put a link to Master Plan down wherever people are listening to or watching this and at Majority fm. Good to talk to you, buddy. Thank you.
- [85:18]
David Sirota
Thanks so much.
- [85:19]
Emma Vigeland
All right. Of course with that we are going to wrap up the first part of the program, head into the fun half. I just saw we went a little bit over but when we start talking about things like corporate personhood, that gets me going. And David is always just a great resource on that kind of thing. As David mentioned, this show relies on your support. Jointhemajorityreport.com if you can support us, you can IM the show. We'll often read your IMs on air. We get a lot. We have a lot today as well. Matt, what's happening on Left Reckoning?
- [86:00]
Matt Binder
Yeah, Left Reckoning. We had a show on Tuesday night, Alex Skopik talking about Javier Malay in Argentina and what was at that time a $20 billion bail extended to the Libertarian from Uncle Sam now is at 40 billion. And Hartsell Gray who is running for Congress in the Let me make sure it changed. Missouri's 4th district, which stretches all the way from Kansas City to Columbia, a huge square of a district. So he's going to be running in some rural areas. This is gerrymandering stuff. So hopefully he can surprise people down there. So check that out. Patreon.com reckoning do it.
- [86:41]
Emma Vigeland
And now we, I believe have our friends Brandon and Binder.
- [86:46]
David Sirota
Whoa.
- [86:48]
Emma Vigeland
Hey guys.
- [86:48]
Brandon
That's right. Hey, I'm doing great.
- [86:51]
Emma Vigeland
Hey, glad to see you all. I'm happy to see you. Glad to see you. That's not a phrase. What's happening on the discourse, Brandon?
- [87:01]
Brandon
Oh, so if you hadn't noticed, we are in the march up to Halloween. So along with the news, we've been delving into the anti Halloween propaganda because you know, with all the conspiracy theories rolling around out there, anti vaxxerism, Charlie Kirk, thick neck stuff like it's sometimes nice to go back to the basics and see just some good old fashioned Satanic panic.
- [87:28]
David Sirota
Where.
- [87:28]
Brandon
Where are we with, like, poison candy? Where are we with, like, human sacrifices? So we've been doing that. And also, yeah, we've been like, really? I think, documenting Candace Owens's descent until into madness after the death of her best friend. So like, that's also been, you know, a little bit jarring.
- [87:49]
Emma Vigeland
So I was like, did Brandon freeze? Yeah.
- [87:53]
Matt Binder
She's not doing well.
- [87:54]
Emma Vigeland
Yeah, no, maybe.
- [87:55]
Brandon
I think she's doing really well, you know, ratings. Ratings wise. But, you know, sometimes that's not what's best for us emotionally. But yes, feel free to come over for. To join the discourse on YouTube, the discourse on Twitch and, you know, like, and celebrate the spooky season.
- [88:13]
Emma Vigeland
All right, do it.
- [88:15]
David Sirota
You're gonna be in the mood for Halloween, Brandon. I want to go watch a scary movie right now. Geez.
- [88:20]
Brandon
Well, if. Just know that if you watch a scary movie, you're opening yourself up to demonic possession.
- [88:26]
Emma Vigeland
Right?
- [88:26]
David Sirota
I know that every time I watch one. Right. That's why I watch them, actually. I cross my fingers hoping for it.
- [88:31]
Matt Binder
I love that those comments are getting more. More prominent in chat sections and not less in 2025 that people are thinking like, oh, if I watch the Ring, I'm actually going to get followed by a demon. It's.
- [88:44]
Emma Vigeland
It speaks to the lack of demon haunted world media literacy in a variety of different contexts.
- [88:52]
Brandon
I think if you. If you ever want to challenge your understanding of the world, you should watch my stream and delve into the madness that is modern American culture. And I want to tell you, a lot of people cannot tell fact from fiction. It's. It's scary to admit it, but a lot of people, they watch the Ring and they say to themselves, this is a thing that happened. And it could happen to me too.
- [89:18]
Emma Vigeland
You never know. Bender, what's happening on your shows and newsletter?
- [89:23]
David Sirota
Just go to YouTube.com Matt Bender, hit that subscribe button and tune into Leftist mafia tonight at 8:30pm Him.
- [89:32]
Emma Vigeland
Do it. Yes. How's. How's the little one? Father 3.
- [89:37]
David Sirota
She's. She's. She's doing good. Everyone's. Everyone's doing really good. They're all getting excited for Halloween on the way. Speaking of, speaking of demons, this past weekend, they finally got around to watching K Pop Demon Hunters, and all they've been doing is singing the songs this whole week. So look, even. Even demons are even infiltrating the youth of America now. That's how. That's.
- [90:01]
Emma Vigeland
Yeah, it's probably just a communism vehicle. I mean, have we ever thought about that? That's why Trump's slapping all these tariffs on any movies or TV shows produced outside the United States. Right? They even.
- [90:13]
David Sirota
They even speak a bit Korean. A bit of Korean in the movie when they sing the songs. I mean, oh, no, this is that outside influence. This is a globalism at work, folks.
- [90:23]
Matt Binder
What Brandon said about, you know, if you want to take test your sanity, you should check into my stream reminded me of this clip of.
- [90:30]
Emma Vigeland
Oh, yes.
- [90:31]
Matt Binder
Of Brett Weinstein where a listener wanted him to listen to a podcast called the Telepathy Tapes that reported to prove the existence of, like, secret mind powers.
- [90:44]
Emma Vigeland
I thought. I thought Sam was gonna cry.
- [90:46]
David Sirota
I think about this every day, and.
- [90:48]
Matt Binder
Brett is like, I don't trust myself to not go insane with how forceful I'm going to find that argument.
- [90:58]
David Sirota
I'm sure these telepathy tapes are fascinating. What I don't know what to do with is if these telepathy tapes suggest that everything I think is true about the universe is wrong, does that mean that everything that I think about the universe is wrong? Or does that mean somebody would like me to do that? Because, you know, I've been a pain in the ass, a puppet master. So, you know, where am I going to end up if these telepathy tapes really upend everything I think I know? And the answer is, well, I'm. Then I'm in a position of having to uncomfortably question what they are.
- [91:37]
Matt Binder
His wife losing patience.
- [91:39]
Emma Vigeland
She's like, are you done with this anxiety?
- [91:42]
David Sirota
She literally responds with, I think you'll be all right.
- [91:44]
Matt Binder
Yeah, I think you could be. I think you'd watch it.
- [91:46]
Emma Vigeland
The power of the podcast. Oh, Brandon, we lost your audio. It's gone.
- [91:55]
Matt Binder
Telepathy Tapes, you'll have to rejoin.
- [91:58]
Emma Vigeland
Yes, Brandon.
- [91:59]
David Sirota
Well, we'll head.
- [92:00]
Emma Vigeland
We'll head into the fun half. That's our teaser. Get Brandon's take on why Bret Weinstein having a psychotic break and being so mentally weak that he can't listen to a podcast without having his whole worldview described.
- [92:14]
Matt Binder
That's the type of person I want hosting a show that I look to. To interpret the world for me.
- [92:20]
Emma Vigeland
See you in the fun.
- [92:21]
David Sirota
Okay, Emma, please.
- [92:22]
Emma Vigeland
Well, I just. I feel that my voice is sorely lacking on the Majority report.
- [92:27]
David Sirota
Wait, look, Sam is unpopular. I do deserve a vacation at Disney World, so, ladies and gentlemen, it is my pleasure to welcome Emma to the show.
- [92:35]
Emma Vigeland
It is Thursday.
- [92:37]
Matt Binder
Thank you, boys.
- [92:40]
Sam Cedar
No, no, no, I'm, I'm, I'm going to pause you right there.
- [92:42]
David Sirota
Wait, what?
- [92:43]
Sam Cedar
You can't encourage Emma to live like.
- [92:45]
David Sirota
This and I'll tell you why.
- [92:47]
Sam Cedar
Who was offered a tour? Sushi and poker with the boys. Tour, sushi and poker with boys. Who was offered a tour, Sushi and poker with boys.
- [92:58]
Matt Binder
What?
- [92:58]
Sam Cedar
Twerk sushi and poker.
- [93:01]
Emma Vigeland
Tim's upset.
- [93:01]
Sam Cedar
Twerk, sushi and poker Por. Boys was offered twerk sushi and that's what we call biz. Twerk, sushi and bulker. Or three boys.
- [93:11]
Emma Vigeland
Right. Twerk, sushi and we're going to get demonetized.
- [93:15]
David Sirota
I just think that what you did to Tim Pool was mean free speech.
- [93:20]
Sam Cedar
That's not what we're about here. Look at how sad he's become now. You shouldn't even talk about it because I think you're responsible.
- [93:27]
Emma Vigeland
I probably am in a certain way. But let's get to the meltdown here.
- [93:32]
Sam Cedar
Sushi and poker with the boys.
- [93:34]
Emma Vigeland
Oh, my God.
- [93:34]
Matt Binder
Wow.
- [93:35]
David Sirota
Sushi. I'm sorry.
- [93:36]
Sam Cedar
I'm losing my mind. Someone's offered a tour.
- [93:38]
David Sirota
Yeah.
- [93:38]
Sam Cedar
Sushi and poker with the boys. Sushi and poker.
- [93:45]
David Sirota
I think I'm like a little kid.
- [93:46]
Emma Vigeland
I think I'm like a little kid.
- [93:47]
Sam Cedar
I think I'm like a kid.
- [93:48]
Matt Binder
I think I'm like a little kid.
- [93:49]
Sam Cedar
I think I'm like a little kid.
- [93:50]
David Sirota
Add this debate 7,000 times.
- [93:59]
Sam Cedar
I'm not trying to be a dick right now, but, like, I absolutely think the US should be providing me with a wife and kids.
- [94:06]
Emma Vigeland
That's not what we're talking about here.
- [94:11]
Sam Cedar
It's not a fun job.
- [94:12]
Emma Vigeland
That's a real thing.
- [94:13]
Sam Cedar
That's real thing.
- [94:14]
David Sirota
Real thing.
- [94:15]
Sam Cedar
Willy Wonka.
- [94:16]
David Sirota
That's a real thing.
- [94:17]
Sam Cedar
That's a real. That's a real thing.
- [94:21]
Emma Vigeland
Real thing.
- [94:22]
Sam Cedar
That's a real thing. Ladies and gentlemen, Joe Rogan has done it again. That's a real thing.
- [94:32]
Brandon
I think he might be blowing it out of proportion.
- [94:33]
Emma Vigeland
Real thing.
- [94:36]
David Sirota
That's a real thing. That's poker. Let's go, Joey.
- [94:40]
Sam Cedar
Sushi and poker.
- [94:42]
David Sirota
Take it easy.
- [94:43]
Sam Cedar
Sushi and poker. Things have really gotten out of hands. Sushi and poker with boys. Delusional sushi. You don't have a clue as to what's going on live YouTube.
- [94:54]
Emma Vigeland
Sam has the weight of the world on his shoulders. Sam doesn't want to do this show anymore.
- [94:59]
Sam Cedar
Anymore.
- [95:00]
Emma Vigeland
It was so much easier when the majority report was just you.
- [95:05]
Sam Cedar
Let's change the subject through.
- [95:07]
David Sirota
Rangers and Nicks are doing great now. Shut up.
- [95:09]
Emma Vigeland
Don't want people saying reckless things on your program.
- [95:12]
David Sirota
That's one of the most, most difficult parts about this show.
- [95:14]
Emma Vigeland
This is the Pro Killing Podcast.
- [95:16]
Sam Cedar
I'm thinking maybe it's time we bury the hatchet.
- [95:19]
Emma Vigeland
Left his best trump.
- [95:20]
David Sirota
Violet Twerk.
- [95:21]
Sam Cedar
Don't be foolish and don't tweet at me. And don't.
- [95:24]
David Sirota
The way Emma has all of these people love it.
- [95:27]
Emma Vigeland
That's where my heart is. So I wrote my honors thesis about it.
- [95:32]
David Sirota
She wrote an honest thesis.
- [95:36]
Sam Cedar
I guess I should hand the main.
- [95:37]
David Sirota
Mic to you now.
- [95:38]
Sam Cedar
You are to the right of the unforeign policy.
- [95:40]
Emma Vigeland
We already fund Israel, dude. Are you against us?
- [95:43]
Sam Cedar
That's a tougher question.
- [95:43]
David Sirota
I have an answer to incredible theme song.
- [95:51]
Emma Vigeland
I bumbler.
- [95:52]
Sam Cedar
Emma Viglin.
- [95:52]
David Sirota
Absolutely one of my favorite people, actually. Not just in the game, like, period.