← The Rubin Report
The Rubin Report
An Insider's Prediction for Trump's Unexpected Moves in His Final Term | Sean Spicer
00:30:54
Loading summary
Transcript62 lines
- [00:00]
A
So I think there's two parts to this. One is I have made a strong there's three parts. One is I've made a strong case that Trump needs to codify a lot of this stuff. What has been done by executive order can be undone by executive order. They codified some things in the big beautiful bill, but they need to lock in a lot of these wins so they can't be undone. That's number one. Number two, on a personal level, if you have screwed Trump over in the final two years, Katie barred the door, baby, because he's coming. And then number three is I think that there's got to be an aspects and a transition to, to what comes next. And I believe that right now that's J.D. vance's to lose.
- [00:45]
B
I'm Dave Rubin, and joining me today is former White House press secretary, now turned podcaster extraordinaire, and author of the new bestselling book Trump 2.0 the Revolution that Will Permanently Transform Americ. My friend Sean Spicer, welcome back to the Ruby Report. It is nice to be with you. And I must say, my friend, in an age of panic ins and in an age of doom sloppers and terrible maxers and all the rest of it, your book is rather refreshing because it gets to the core of what I've been trying to explain to people, which I actually think most of America and certainly most of MAGA understands, which is that Trump is doing a lot of good stuff. And some of it takes a little time and some of it's unorthodox. But the basic premise for the book is that this was the plan in essence, maybe it was slightly delayed, but he's doing the things he set out to do. So maybe why don't we start by rewinding for the period, the rather short period that you were press secretary. Did you think he had the plan? Because you kind of get into when you think it sort of came together.
- [01:59]
A
I think that there's a big difference between the approach in Trump 1.0 and Trump 2.0. He had a plan, but he didn't necessarily understand all of the players on the field and all the assets. And the point that I make in Trump 2.0 is that when he had four years out of office and the pace that you're going at at the White House, it's just like day boom, boom, boom. You never have time to think. And and so when he had four years out of office, he said, well, if I get back, here's how I'm going to do this differently, more effectively. Here's who could be better on my team, who's. Who's not. It's like having a, you know, the time in off season that a team has where they, we need a new pitcher, we need a new catcher, we need to have some new plays. They had time to think. And I. The basic premise of Trump 2.0 is to make the point that so many of the things that are happening could not have happened had they not had a pause to say, how do we do this better, more effectively? And it's not one's good or one's bad. In Trump 1.0, I think we did some pretty historic things, but to be blunt, we were flying, you know, by the seat of our pants most days. And I kind of make the point through the book, all these different things. Maha never would exist without Trump 2.0, the tariff structure, you know, how he's approaching NATO. I posted some photos the other day. I mean, when we went to Brussels In Trump 1.0, it was like, Are you gonna reaffirm the Article 5 commitment now? He's like, hey, screw you, pay up. And. And so. But he would have never had time to think. And so it's not. I spoke to the President about this and I was like, we're not trying to say one's good or one's bad. It's just you finally like, all this, the stuff about the reflecting pool and the fountains and the decorating the Oval Office, you would have never had time to say, hey, if I get a second shot at this, how will I do this differently?
- [03:53]
B
How much of the sort of leveled up Trump now is purely on the staffing side in that he has people who are. Well, you just mentioned Maha. You know, he was able to bring in this wide tent, Tulsi, who's just stepped away, but this group of people that you would have never thought would have been there then have become part of this thing. So how much of it is just purely a staffing issue and a wide tent variety of ideas, that kind of thing?
- [04:20]
A
Great question. It's a huge part. I mean, I go through this. Let me just throw a couple. I mean, you mentioned HHS. Do you think in Trump 1.0 we would ever brought a pro choice Democrat in to lead hhs?
- [04:32]
B
No, no, never. Of course, never.
- [04:35]
A
And think about, like, I use this example. Do you realize that, like, when we chose Jim Mattis to be Defense Secretary, he had known President Trump for approximately one hour. Rex Tillerson, the Secretary of State, knew him for about an Hour, Right? Those are people that you contrast them. Now. Like, think about even my successor, Caroline Levitt, she was in Trump 1.0. She was on the campaign. Susie Wiles, known him 11 years. Steven Cheung, the comms director, he was on the campaign in 2015, there in 2016, worked with him. And then, I mean, I knew Trump pretty well, but not like, we weren't besties. And it's just the relationship that so many of these key positions, the contrast between the relationship and the understanding of the agenda. I mean, we had guys. Dave, writing. You remember this Anonymous, like in the New York Times, about how, like, I get to go to senior staff things and then I subvert the will of the American people. Now everybody gets the joke. You're there to advance the. I always tell people I love watching Cabinet meetings. It's like, you can't hide. It's a report card. You know, he's like, Lee Sheldon, what are we doing on the epa? And you don't get to go, like, pass, like, Right. Whereas, you know, last time, it just. There's a much different sense of the people are on the team and rowing in the right direction.
- [05:56]
B
Do you know if there was ever a moment after the loss that he thought of not getting back involved? Because people don't really remember. There was a period where his stock did kind of drop. A lot of people thought it was time to move on. As you know, I supported DeSantis in the primary. I'm thrilled that Trump is the president. I'm thrilled that DeSantis is the gov. But there was a period where it was like, maybe he should move on or he can't do it again or he'll never. My main concern, and you just sort of addressed this, was that he would never get the right people around him. And he completely proved me wrong on that. I have no problem admitting it.
- [06:30]
A
It's a really good question, and I'll tell you why. Because I don't think Donald Trump will ever admit something like that. So you'll never know. I mean, I can tell you what I think, which is I do think that he questioned whether or not to run again and whether there would be the support. And slowly that sort of materialized. The indictment and the raid are what sealed it. And people were like, oh, my God, they really are coming after this guy. But absent that, I don't know, maybe that was the straw that broke the camel's back. And it kind of got a lot of people on the MAGA side to go, holy smokes. But I think it's a great question. And it's something that's very similar to during the 2015 campaign. People would say all the time, do you guys really think he can win? And I'm one of these guys. I buy a lottery ticket, Dave, and think I'm gonna win. That's just. I'm not kidding. When I go to Cumberland Farms on the street here and I buy the ticket, I'm always like, what will I spend that money on? So that's just my head. But when people ask me, did Trump. I think he thought he would win, but he won't ever admit that he didn't think so. And I don't know that he'd ever admit that he didn't want to run. I think it's a fascinating question, and I do think the indictments and the raid sealed the deal.
- [07:44]
B
Yeah. So that's actually what I was gonna ask you next. In some sense, you feel like they pushed him into it. That had that not happened, he might have. Again, I know he won't admit it, but he might have just kind of gone off into the pasture and let it be. But they kind of pushed him back in. The more I try to get out, the more they suck me back in.
- [08:01]
A
Exactly. This is very Godfather. I think that what, if anything, maybe he thought all along he would do it. But I think what it did do is reveal the deep breath and depth of support that still existed and that was willing to fight for him. So maybe it pushed him over the top. Maybe it reinforced a thought again, I don't know. But I will say that for a lot of us, when we saw what was happening, it was like, oh, my God, this is real. Like, these guys literally are weaponizing things to go after the guy.
- [08:38]
B
Okay, so let's talk about the second term, what he's done and what you think he wants to do. So, first off, you know, we're a year and a half in basically to term two at the end. I think we should talk a little bit about the midterms. Cause if they don't go well, he basically has five months left, which would be, I think, just a disaster for the country. But how would you grade what he's done so far? And does it all sort of jive with where you thought we would be at at this?
- [09:03]
A
Take that in reverse order. I think we're much further ahead than we ever. Than I ever fathomed. I think, to be honest with you, the biggest issue that I think this administration faces is the dog has caught the car in a lot of cases. So border security, massive. The president has without. I mean, like, love him or hate him, that guy did it exactly what he said he was gonna do. That border is sealed.
- [09:26]
B
Border.
- [09:26]
A
Border sealed. And it was a major issue. And the problem in politics, frankly, is sometimes when you solve somebody's problem, they go, all right, what's next? What do you got for me? They don't give you the credit you deserve. What the president did to secure our nation and seal our border. I don't. It's amazing. And frankly, I think my biggest gripe is they need to go out and sell it more. Big, beautiful bill. No taps and tip. No tax on overtime. No tax on Social Security. Again, I think Trump accounts. I don't think people fully appreciate how revolutionary these Trump accounts are going to be. The ability for younger Americans to create generational wealth in a way that has never been done. I went to the launch of them, and I'm not a big. Like, that's not my thing. Like, I'm not a financial wizard. And I was like, I get this, and this is massive. And what I love about it is there's no government involved, Meaning it's not like Social Security, where you're basically stealing people's money and then putting it in a trust fund with an iou. This is real. I look at what he's done with NATO to level the playing field, what he's done with trade. Maha, again, I think I cannot tell you. I have become the biggest Maha convert and fan. As somebody who's dealt with health issues and wellness issues my whole life, to finally be like, my God, like, it's the government that's been lying the whole time. I think the president deserves so much credit, and Bobby Kennedy in particular, for what they've done to create transparency in our health and wellness space. We will be a better, healthier country and people and society because of what they've done. Not to mandate things. And that's the big difference between what. What some people in the past have tried to do, but to create transparency and awareness as to what the government's doing and what Big Food, big Ag, Big Pharma are doing. So I think that they have done unbelievably more than I ever thought. And then again, you look at culturally, this is something. And I know your wheelhouse big. I've been a big fan of your book and your evolution and your story. But what the president in the first term did was basically say, I'm going to leave culture alone. He never went to the Kennedy center once. Never went. Never had the reception for the Kennedy Center Honors. Right. And I say all this because this time he was like, you know what? I'm going to, like, emcee the Kennedy Center Honors. I'm going to get involved and name myself on the board. The idea of looking at culture.
- [11:45]
B
Bill Barr is about to get the Kennedy Center Award. And, you know, they've had a very complex relationship, to say the least.
- [11:50]
A
I just. My whole point this is that, like, the. The idea. I know it's not a big thing, like, the esthetic aspects of this, but, like, the idea that you're taking on fountains and beautifying DC May seem simplistic, but the idea of this president saying, I'm going to take on these tasks and make the country beautiful and take on America, too, I just. I actually am in awe of it, to be honest with you.
- [12:16]
B
And where do you think the war shakes out on this?
- [12:20]
A
So let me just back up on a second. One of the things that's interesting is when people ask me about what's going on in Iran, in the war, I say to them very simply, you do realize there is no political upside to going to war. None. Like, no one's gonna go, thank God we went to war, right?
- [12:37]
B
Short of the regime maybe just collapsing.
- [12:39]
A
But even that, if the regime falls and we get to make it a 51st state, no one will give him credit, meaning there's no political. He did it because, and this is the important thing, there was only political downside, which we're seeing a lot of. President Trump, I think, acted in Iran because he was in the best interest of keeping America safe. He understood that they posed an existential threat to our safety, to the region's safety, to Israel's safety. And he did the right thing. And we will be a safer country and a safer world because of his actions. And why I say the beginning part, Dave, is because he didn't do it for politics. He didn't do it to say, God, I'm going to. My. My poll numbers will go up. I'll get some political benefit. He did it because it was the right thing. That all being said, if we can get some kind of deal and get us being safer, then that's good, right? But then if. If the strait can get open, more commercial vessels start flowing, and gas prices not just continue to go down, they went down 14 cents in the last week. Politically, I think we will do fine in the midterms. And that's what matters. Because as you point out, if you saw Trump 1.0 the movie you'll see that Democrats take over. It becomes impeachment and investigation season.
- [13:52]
B
Yeah, I mean, so that's what I've been saying on the show, that if the Democrats take over, it's over. That the next day everyone, every sane American will go, man, we really dropped the ball on that one. Because it's not just that they'll impeach him, it's that every Republican will then see blood in the water and start going at after him and trying to, you know, hollow out the carcass and everything else. So you do feel a little more, a little more positive about the midterms? Cause I kind of do. And I know that's very much an outlier position right now.
- [14:23]
A
This is a card I keep at my desk every day. These are the nine Senate races. Okay? Republicans, there are nine competitive Senate races. Alaska, Maine, North Carolina, Ohio, Iowa, Texas. Those are Republican, current incumbent holds or open Republican side. And then three Dems, New Hampshire, Georgia and Michigan. There are nine Senate races. We have a 53 seat majority, technically a fourth because if it's a tie JD race it. Democrats have to have three that they have to hold and Republicans have the additional six. If you go through them right now, they can't win. Okay. And I just take that, I mean like go through each one of these.
- [15:00]
B
Right. And hopefully Platner implodes.
- [15:02]
A
All I'll tell you is I think there's a scenario where Republicans pick up a seat in Michigan if El Said is the thing. But also there's a potential they could lose one or two in any of those cases they still maintain a majority. So that's good. You get.
- [15:15]
B
So that's, that's Senate side, but that's a little cleaner. Maybe that's.
- [15:18]
A
So that, that's. But that's huge because you know, that's your nominations. Then you go to the House side. Two seat majority. Currently we've picked up about 12 seats net in redistricting. We've got an 800 to 200 million dollars advantage in money. And when you're spreading 800 million dollars, I mean I honestly when I was at the RNC for six years going into an election season, if we had 50, 60 million in the bank, that was a big year. Right now the Republican side, Super PAC, NRCC, RNC combined are about 850. Right. Dems all in are at about 2, 220. So that amount of money spread around 2530 districts. Right. So right now when you look at again the house to 18 to take the majority I think conservatively, by my math, I got Republicans at about 212. Some handicappers have it higher, closer to 215. Some have it down as low as 207. I've got us at about 212 solid seats. That's six short of the majority. There's 16 to 18 tossed up seats. Again, do the math. Republicans need to pick up six of the. On a conservative side, 16 competitive seats, that's about a third. So I think that Republicans have a very decent chance of maintaining the majority in the House. It's not gonna be pretty. It's not gonna be easy, but I don't think it's not what the pundits are doing. When you hear a pundit say, historically speaking, that may be the biggest stupid thing, it's like saying, well, on the third, every three Tuesdays it rains. There's nothing that based in fact in that. And so again, I actually go race by race, look at them, analyze them, and my numbers match. I mean, again, there's three or four prognosticators, the cook port inside elections. I think Larry Sabato's a joke, but whatever. But again, I'm right in there with them all. And if you do the math, again, low end 211, Republicans take high end about 215. So they need anywhere between seven and three seats to keep the majority. That's not tough.
- [17:19]
B
I love that you carry that with you. And I have a chart. I just scribble on things mostly. So that's very impressive. I like that. And I like that you broke it down, Graham. You know, I do often say on the show because it is a fact that 70% of the time the incumbent president's party loses in the midterms. But I kind of leave it at that. I get your point.
- [17:36]
A
Right.
- [17:37]
B
That doesn't, in and of itself, it doesn't prove anything.
- [17:40]
A
Right, Right. I ran the incumbent protection area at the NRCC in 2000 where we picked up seats when President Bush was in office. So I've actually done that job. And I know what it's like. And part of it is having the incumbents, the guys that are currently in office, have the financial resources and the mechanics to run a campaign. So again, you look at a seat like Mike Lawler in New York, great campaign. He's running really well. He's raised a ton of money. His opponent's a joke. So there's another one of those swing seats that I think we'll maintain because Mike's a great candidate and his opponent's a joke. So, but the problem is, is that unless you want to go through that, which most of these people on cable news don't, then you're not going to see the math that actually matters to maintain a majority.
- [18:24]
B
Let me ask you this. Do you think it also helps because I made an argument on the show over the last couple days that watching the LA mayoral race, which now goes to the runoff and the gubernatorial race going to run off, I think that really helps Trump no matter what, because it keeps the focus on the crazy lefties, it keeps the focus on Spencer Pratt kind of sane, crazy lefty policies, homeless drug use, blah, blah, blah. And it does. And state Steve Hilton basically kind of saying, extremely well spoken, nice accent, and it's not that Becerra is such a lunatic, but it's just like we all know what's happening with Cali. So to me, to extend Cali and LA specifically towards the midterms, I think that optics wise is very good, actually.
- [19:04]
A
Well, it keeps it in play. I mean, not in play in play. But I mean, my point is it's in the dialogue, right?
- [19:09]
B
It's just. Yeah, it's just in the narrative there, which is helpful.
- [19:12]
A
But I'll be honest with you, I mean, I would have loved. I know this is Republican, you know, it'll get me burned at the stake. I would have liked to have seen Steyer and Becerra run off because they would have stier. Steyer would have spent about 200 million of his own money tearing the bark out of Becerra every day. I wish I could say, look, California,
- [19:31]
B
but obviously you would want Hilton to be the governor, right?
- [19:34]
A
God, yeah.
- [19:35]
B
But look, of course.
- [19:36]
A
But here's the deal. I've been doing this. I ran my first race in 2000 in 1993. This is not like. I know when Spencer Pratt, I think he's fantastic. I love his videos, I love his message. But la, you know this, you left there 75% Democrat, very heavy minorities. It's just unless, like it's one thing to do viral videos and get second place, it's another thing to get 50 plus one. Karen Bass last night got about 36%. She only needs 14 more points in with a. With the hardcore base that she has, it's just a very tough road for both. Again, I don't. I'd love to win either one, but.
- [20:14]
B
Right. I just, I just think the optics of an
- [20:18]
A
right, it takes media attention away, it keeps us going. If that had, if it was Karen Bass versus Rahman, we wouldn't be having this conversation and, and, but Spencer Pratt will keep this going and will make them focused time and attention that otherwise could be spent somewhere else.
- [20:33]
B
So since we're not doing the panic in version of this, but I do want to talk about the panic ins at some point. But since we're doing the kind of positive version of all of this. So let's say it goes well. House remains, Senate remains. Trump's feeling good. What do you think? An unencumbered two years left having been through all of the stuff that we already discussed, Trump looks like.
- [20:58]
A
So I think there's two parts to this. One is I have made a strong. Well, there's three parts. One is I made a strong case that Trump needs to codify a lot of this stuff. What has been done by executive order can be undone by executive order. They codified a some things in the big beautiful bill, but they need to lock in a lot of these wins so they can't be undone. That's number one. Number two, on a personal level, if you have screwed Trump over in the final two years, Katie barred the door, baby, because he's coming. And then number three is I think that there's gotta be an aspects and a transition to what comes next. And I believe that right now that's J.D. vance's to lose.
- [21:36]
B
And do you think like he'll ramp up deportations? Do you think, what do you think of the other kind of politics, policy, things like to me it seems right now it's not, I don't even know if deportations have actually slowed down, but it seems like he's picking his fights right now where it seems to me day after a midterm that goes well, it's all just like let's roll there.
- [21:58]
A
I think each one of the aspects, again, as I joked about loving cabinet meetings, I think they look at each one of those folks and say let's find two or three things inside your wheelhouse that you're going to make sure get done hands down. And again, I'll go back to Bobby. I think that what's going on in HHS and when they look to reform and go after making sure that big pharma, big food, big Ag are held accountable each area. I mean I'm a big fan of what Pete Hegseth has done to reform and align our war fighting capabilities. And so you're going to see a lot more of that. There's not going to be one thing. I actually think that you look at each one and go, they're gonna make sure that they lock in something in each area. I'd love to see. And this is me personally. Cause I don't think they'll do it. I want Doge to come back, man. I think J.D. vance is doing a great job starting the dialogue on fraud. But I find it offensive as a taxpayer to be told, work harder, send more, and we're gonna piss this money away. I wish, I think Elon was the right guy to some extent. Cause he had the access to go in and do things. But maybe a little bit more of a bedside manner would be helpful to achieve some of these things. Because I gotta be honest, the idea that we have a limestone mine in Pennsylvania that has a pulley system to
- [23:14]
B
send records down the elevator.
- [23:16]
A
Yeah, I mean, I think, yeah, it's just to me, like, we need to make the government more efficient, more accountable. And so I don't know. But I will tell you, I think that if he show, if Trump, if the first two years have been a preview, like, what we're gonna see in the last two will be spectacular.
- [23:39]
B
So let me ask you about the panic ins and the doomsdayers and the people that are constantly talking about from the right, quote, unquote, right perspective. I'm not even sure they're on the right anymore. The guys, the Tuckers and the Megyn Kellys, et cetera, et cetera, who are constantly going after Trump now, trying, I think, trying to break maga. I honestly believe Tucker will be a Democrat and support a Democrat nominee in 20. Meghan may do it too, but she's a she, I think is the most shapeshifter out of all of them at this point. What do you make of what they are doing? And do you think it's making a dent in Trump's support? I mean, everyone that's watching this knows Trump's last 118 endorsements. He won all 118. So for all of these people that are screaming about Thomas Massie, it's like that would have been the craziest outlier for him to call Trump a pedophile and then win the election.
- [24:29]
A
So the funny part about this is the why is what fascinates me that you're asking. I don't get it. Because one of the things that I. The media loves to use this phrase without evidence. Okay, so they'll write a story. Trump said this without evidence. But I would love to ask these people, when I listen to some of the clips, and to be honest with you, I don't listen to any of those people. I just Don't, I just don't have time. But what I've seen in the clips is I'm always like, I don't get it. Like they make broad, sweeping statements and then I'm like, okay, back it up. Tell me what, what is it specifically? Cuz I just can list off again, I've got some qualms on procedural issues, but I think what Trump has done in NATO, what he has done in our healthcare, what he has done on trade and taxes, foreign policy, like, tell me what don't you like maybe the tax.
- [25:16]
B
Well, it seems, well, I would say for Megan and Tucker, let's just say it's the war, it would be the most broad way. But even if you were a hundred, to me, if you were 100% against his position on the war and you felt it was an utter failure, if you just looked at some of the other wins that you've talked about that might supersede it, but even that, okay, so is your goal that you will, you would prefer a Democrat to be president?
- [25:37]
A
And that's, that's. See, this is exactly what you're, what you're asking is that. Yeah, tell me there. I've been in politics 30 years, as I said, I did my first campaign, 1993, 94, Contract with America. There's been no candidate that I've not worked for or seen that I'm 100% in agreement with. None. So what is it like when I hear these people say that they've got a problem is maybe you don't like the war? Is it the war itself? Do you want Iran to have a nuclear weapon? Do you think it's okay that one out of every three days Iran or its proxies has killed a US Service member. Is that okay? Is it what they've done? And again, with respect to Israel, I get some of the issues that exist. I think there's always a healthy policy discussion. But do you not want a democracy in the Middle east that is, I mean, like, tell me what, like I never hear the exact critique articulated in a way that I can get my hands around. Cause I'm like, what is it that you don't like? Because, okay, I get some people like, I personally, on a political level, I think they should have waited till after the election to go after Iran. But you don't get to pick the time and place when they're vulnerable. When we get to do it, the president has to act. You know, the funny thing is I was watching a seal, former Navy seal, that was on the Bin Laden raid. And they were talking about how Obama had waited an extra night because he didn't want to bomb on the night of the White House Correspondents Dinner. And they missed. I mean, you go when you're told to go because you can have the highest, you know, prospect of success. And so, like, I just don't get the argument. We've listened Trump. If Trump is guilty of anything, it's doing what he said he'd do, which is to make us a safer place in a safer country. And I know most people in America are used to politicians blowing smoke up their butt, not doing it and making a bunch of excuses, so maybe that's what they really wanted, is just some more bs. But, you know, I just. The broader point is I don't like when these guys are out there crapping on it because to your point, you're not getting a Bill Clinton Democrat, Right? These people, El Said, Hakeem Jeffries, aoc They're nuts. They're full on nuts. And they will take our country to an extreme nutty place, and they will lie to get us there. By the way, look at Abigail Spanberger. I mean, they will say, the thing that's so fascinating to me about the whole Graham Platner thing is over and over again in interview after interview, every one of them says, yeah, but you know what? If we can win that seat? Yep, who cares? And that's where I go. Do you guys realize what you're supporting right now is a party that will do anything to get into power and take us further to the left? And I don't know how anybody with a sane that's got any degree of sanity thinks that that's a good idea.
- [28:28]
B
Do you think there's anything that brings the Democrats back at this point? Do you think there's any sort of reconstitution of the spirit of John F. Kennedy Jr. Or that Bill Maher can come in and smack somebody around and go, you guys aren't Democrats anymore. Or do you think there's anything left?
- [28:49]
A
I don't. And I'll tell you why. Because I think there's people that I know that are Democrats that are exactly as you.
- [28:57]
B
Yes, everyone's aunt. Everyone has an aunt.
- [28:59]
A
The problem is, is that the base of their party is so gone that they have to say crazy stuff if they want to stay in power. And frankly, that's what this all comes down to, is the pursuit of power. And they'll say whatever they have to say. I mean, I'm fascinated by some of the comments that these people make, but they don't. This is not about sort of principle anymore. They don't believe that if you put any of these normal people into a room and said, do you believe the father? And they'd say, well, probably not, but. But I have to say it because I need to advance. I mean, look, just in the past little while, Hakeem Jeffries basically threw Debbie Wasserman Schultz under the bus down in Florida because she's gonna be in a district with five black other Democrats. And, well, we gotta let her go, because that doesn't fit our. I mean, they'll sell out themselves. They don't care.
- [30:00]
B
Right. And right. That's the thing. Like, eventually, Hakeem, it'll come for you, too, because you try not. You pretend not to be a complete lun. Lordy, lordy Spicer. You still got it.
- [30:11]
A
Thanks, man.
- [30:12]
B
You're a. You're an insider and an outsider. That's why I like you. How does that sound?
- [30:17]
A
There's a Washington Post headline that I love, and it says, the outside guy. It's about Trump. It said, the outside guys inside man. So maybe that's it.
- [30:26]
B
It works. It works. All right. It was good to see you, my friend. And we will link to the book Trump 2.0, the Revolution that Will Permanently Transform America. We'll link to it right down below.
- [30:34]
A
Thank you.
- [30:36]
B
On June 11, the Rubin report will be live at the Fillmore Miami beach, with Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, Adam Corolla, Jillian Michaels, and little old me. Seats are limited and going fast, so if you've been watching the show and want to experience it live, scan the QR code right over here and grab your tickets. I'll see you there.