Loading summary
Transcript47 lines
- [00:01]
A
Look at him, eating whatever he wants, never gaining a pound. Well, I'm stuck with the boring special and can't lose an ounce. How's your lunch, man? Amazing. Yours? So good. Oh, I'm so happy for you. Cool, buddy.
- [00:14]
B
Weight loss isn't fair, but Mochi Health is the affordable GLP1 source that can fix your frustration with food.
- [00:21]
A
So same time next week? No. Definitely.
- [00:24]
B
And your friends. Learn more@joinmochi.com Mochi members have access to licensed physicians and nutritionists. Results may vary. Welcome back to the Tara Palmieri Show. Americans are waking up all over the country and they're wondering, are we at war? The administration says that this was a quick, targeted operation in Venezuela, decisive and over. But if that's true, then why does it already feel like the beginning of something very messy? I mean, President Trump has already warned that he's considering more military operations in Venezuela. There are so many outstanding issues like who's actually in charge on the ground. Is it going to be Pete Hegseth and Marco Rubio? What happens after Maduro? And are we about to inherit another expensive foreign crisis that most Americans never signed up for? To cut through the confusion, I sat down with Brett Bruin, who served as a US Diplomat in Venezuela. He explains why regime change is the easy part and why the aftermath could pull the US Deeper than anyone is admitting. This conversation is about what comes after the headlines and whether Venezuela is about to become America's next unsolved problem. Take a listen here.
- [01:40]
C
This episode is brought to you by Progressive Insurance. Fiscally responsible financial geniuses, monetary magicians. These are things people say about drivers who switch their car insurance to Progressive and save hundreds. Visit progressive.com to see if you could save Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and affiliates. Potential savings will vary. Not available in all states or situations.
- [02:05]
B
Thank you, Brett, for joining the show. This is Brett Bruin. He's the president of Global Situation Room. He's an adjunct professor of crisis communications at Georgetown. He served as director of global engagement in Obama's White House. And. And he started a career in diplomacy back in 2003 and was actually a US diplomat in Venezuela, which is exactly why we have him on the show because I think we're all trying to figure out what is going on right now. Has the US Just entered Venezuela? Are we now controlling this? Are we at war? You know, everyone knows obviously that Maduro is a monster, but are we really trying to nation build again when we know that this country does not have the best history in terms of succeeding in nation building? But There are so many dynamics to get into. Brett, when you heard that this had happened early in the morning this weekend, that Maduro was captured with his wife while they were asleep, brought to the US for arraignment, what were you thinking?
- [03:11]
A
First was surprise. This wasn't on my bingo card. I thought Trump was going to do something similar to what we saw in the first term against Bashar al Assad, lob some missiles over same thing in Iran this summer and call it a day. You get to look tough, you get to say that you did something. But clearly, and I think this is a combination of Marco Rubio and Stephen Miller, who saw an opportunity to design a plan in which you could one, take out the leader both of this regime, but also, as we've heard a lot of ad nauseam in the last few days, the leader of a drug trafficking network. And I think that it's important that we talk about it in terms of trafficking because Venezuela doesn't actually produce much in the way of cocaine or other drugs. But it is a waypoint. It is a way primarily getting to Europe. But we'll leave that to the side for the moment. Tara, what I think for those trying to make sense of the various versions of why we did this, you have one version according to Marco Rubio, which is essentially, look, we got the best of both worlds. We were able to get rid of Maduro. We now have someone who in theory is going to cooperate on drug trafficking, is going to cooperate on returning certain oil rights to American firms, maybe. Even though Trump last night seemed to downplay the importance of political prisoners, human rights, democracy and all of that, that's not at the top of his agenda. So essentially, rather than taking over Venezuela, we can hold the sword of Damocles over Delsey Rodriguez, who is the interim leader, and say, do what we want. Otherwise, as Trump somewhat in artfully said over the weekend, we're going to come after you. And in the interim, we're going to hold this spigot quite tightly on the southern Caribbean region where a lot of these oil tankers will be trying to get out, trying to ship primarily to China.
- [05:31]
B
Got it. And you know, you were just saying basically what we're trying to do is bully Maduro's successor, someone who was essentially appointed by him, who is a political operative within his government, to now be on our side after years and years of resistance. I mean, is this a futile attempt? I know she put out a statement last night seeming to say, we'll work with the United States. Maybe she doesn't want the same, you know, fate as Maduro. But is this a long term, is this a long term solution? Do you think she could be sort of a, a client in, in some ways of the US and, and I know that there's been some reporting that Trump didn't want to give Machado, who was the rightful opposition winner of an election. Right. This role as leader of the country because according to the Washington Post, he was jealous that she got the Nobel Peace Prize and he did not. And he felt that she should have handed it over to him. And if she did, he would have appointed her leader of Venezuela, if that was even a possible thing. But I mean, what do you think? Is this a, is this going to be a stable alliance? Or once she realizes she's got control, she may take the temperature and see that people actually don't want to work with Trump and his administration?
- [06:45]
A
Well, first she has got to try and stabilize her own position. And so that's why essentially you saw her walking out of both sides of the over the weekend. Because in the Chavista movement, the political regime that has governed Venezuela for the last 26 years, you have a constellation of power centers. Delsey Rodriguez is just one of those centers of power. There are others. Dios D. Cabello, who's an even badder dude, is head of the national assembly, somebody who also very involved in drug trafficking. You've got Jorge Rodriguez as Minister of Interior, who's actually Delsu's brother. Then you've got Vladimir Padrino, who's the Minister of Defence. Now, he obviously has a lot to answer for because the US Was able to come in relatively unscathed and walk off with the leader of the country. But right now she's trying to stabilize her political situation there. Do I think that this is a long term solution? No. And you're hearing from the Trump administration that they sort of see this as an interim period where she can de facto rule Venezuela while some of their issues are worked out. But Tara, you know, one of the things that struck me as a recovering diplomat effort was put into the military preparation. I mean, they literally built this facility where you had Maduro and his wife sleeping and meticulously practiced it. We have not seemingly done the same level of homework on preparing the political side of this. And so that past, we have gotten ourselves into all sorts of trouble. Look, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya. Like there are lots of examples where taking over a country is easy. The hard work then starts on how do you stabilize it, how do you rebuild it. And I've Heard nothing from the Trump folks about how they plan to do that. And it doesn't help that Trump is threatening now to colonize or to attack other countries. Colombia, Cuba, even Greenland, maybe. We're still looking at Canada.
- [09:07]
B
Come on. So Mexico. He said that last night. Seriously.
- [09:14]
A
And that's undermine the support. It's going to undermine our relations with them. And it's not just like a theoretical, oh, gosh, you know, we're not going to exchange pleasantries in a diplomatic sense. China, Russia, Iran are all going to go into these countries and say, hey, do you want some of those Shahad drones that you've seen working so well over in Ukraine? Do you want to allow us access to your intelligence, military, security apparatus in a way that you haven't before? And all of that, I think, leads to a really, really precarious, problematic predicament for the US we are inviting in China, we're inviting in Russia to our own hemisphere. So, look, I think you can separate these two things. One, yes, Maduro was a terrible, brutal ruler. It is good that he is sitting in a Brooklyn jail right now. But we also have to look strategically at the stability and the security interest that we have in the region. So Trump needs to shut up about, you know, his designs on all of these other countries.
- [10:22]
B
Yeah. You know, something that you texted me on Saturday really struck me. You said my if. If my time in Venezuela taught me one thing, is there's no one center of power in either the regime or opposition. The notion that we will run this unwieldy country is pretty naive. What do you mean by that? There's no one center of power.
- [10:42]
A
So on both sides, both in terms of the regime, as you know, I kind of painted this picture a somewhat colorful cast of characters that are all jockeying for power. And look, when we get down, even into the drug trade, they all sort of get to divvy up amongst themselves. And Delsey was not as involved in the drug trade from what I have heard. And so why she is seemingly more palatable than some of these other folks, but the opposition equally. And it's why it was so surprising that Trump was willing to throw Maria Karina Machado under the bus, because she had, in a way that I had not seen in my time in Venezuela or since, helped to rally what is also a very disparate coalition of opposition figures. So you throw her out. You throw Edmundo Gonzalez, who won last summer's election, according to most observers. And what do you have? You don't have a democratic opposition that can start to develop. And I understand the pragmatic reasons why Rubio is saying, look, we can't just fly Edmundo Gonzalez and Maria Karina Machado to Caracas and say, okay, you guys govern it now. They don't have the support within the military. And so that's why you saw this sort of interim solution, but by throwing them out and, you know, whether it's Trump taking umbrage of the fact that she got the Nobel Peace Prize before he did, I mean, it's just dumb diplomacy. And it is going to put us into a very dangerous situation with Venezuela.
- [12:22]
B
Yeah, it's interesting too. Like, you know, obviously the president, Marco Rubio, they talk a lot about drug smuggling. And you know, they say this about a lot of countries, right? They're trying to stop drug smuggling through Mexico, which they've suggested they could invade Colombia, Venezuela. But is it really about drug smuggling specifically in Venezuela, or is this about oil? And, and you know, when I think about oil, and I know some friends that work for oil companies too, like major oil companies, and they don't want to invest in regions that are, that are insecure, especially with, you know, politically unsecure. They don't know what they're going to get. So what? So they know that Trump is going to, what do you say, reimburse them for their investment. That's only for a four year term. What? You don't invest for only four years, you're investing for decades. You don't know what the future administrations are going to bring. I mean, is it reasonable to think that they can just go in and into countries, raid them for oil or whatever their resources are, and take control and just see them as sort of client states?
- [13:25]
A
So really quick version of the history of oil companies in Venezuela. Early part of the 19th century, Venezuela was ruled by a dictator who essentially provided very open concessions to a lot of oil companies, mostly American oil companies. In the 1970s, those oil companies went along with what was a democratically elected government's plan to exercise more control over their own natural resources sources. Now, when I was in Venezuela under Chavez, Chavez was trying to nationalize some of these oil fields and it ended up with a number of them getting kicked out. And there were court cases. And that's essentially the gripe that Trump has. He's like, our oil companies got kicked out and so we should essentially be able to come back and take over this sector. One thing that's a major problem, and it's been mentioned a few times, the production of oil in Venezuela has fallen by two thirds. So we're not actually seeing what was once, what still is the largest reserves of oil in the world has really diminished in its capacity. And you don't bring that capacity back online. I'm not an oil engineer, but I spent a lot of time in Venezuela looking at these issues. You don't bring that capacity back online overnight. It is going to take time. And so Trump's notion of, like, we're just going to turn the spigot on these pipes and all of a sudden oil's going to flow and cash is going to be coming back to the United States is just a fallacy. You've got to make that investment. And, you know, there are oil companies, but as you said, they're going to be looking at the stability of the situation. And Trump threatening left, right, and center, both actors within Venezuela, regional actors, creates an uncertain and somewhat unstable situation for them. So how much do they want to invest? And that's where I think he really gets it wrong on this notion of we can deal with the democracy, the rule of law, the human rights things later. No oil companies, other investors want to see that a country is going to be stable, it is going to be secure to ensure that their investment is protected, because these things do take time. You know, the other part to understand is Venezuelan oil is really, really heavy. You know, there's different kinds of oil, and the US Is one of the only countries that actually has the ability to refine it. So we don't even have to, like we did in other parts of the world, like Iraq, try to edge our way in there like this oil has in the past and would in the future come through our refineries. And so we stand to benefit without all of this bulldozing and this bluster about how the oil is our inherent right. So I think Trump is really playing his cards poorly here. I think there will be some collateral consequences. And it's interesting, Tara, to see whether or not the White House and the State Department try to clean up this Mess on Aisle 5, or, in fact, whether we're going to go down this path that Trump's suggesting he wants to pursue.
- [16:49]
B
Yeah. I also want to talk about the people of Venezuela, and I think we're kind of losing them a bit in this story. Right. I think a lot of people are really happy to, to hear even Democrats have to admit that Maduro was a monster and that we hope that a regime change will be better for the people. I mean, is that realistic? I know that they have suffered with famine in the past, I mean, with some terrible bouts of famine where people lost on average 20 pounds in a year, what can we expect? I mean, is this going to be a better situation for the Venezuelan people?
- [17:20]
A
People not clear yet. And as you rightly point out, the humanitarian. The health situation in Venezuela is pretty dire. It has been for a number of years. It goes up and down. But you've had tens of millions of Venezuelans who have fled this country on foot in some cases. That's why we had so many Venezuelan refugees in the U.S. now, obviously, Kristi Noem wants to send them all back to Venezuela. You know, the, the challenge, I think, is we aren't accompanying this humanitarian crisis with the level of aid, with the level of support that we normally would in the past. And I know Rubio loves to talk about, well, we've made, you know, international aid more efficient. I mean, they're talking about a drop in the bucket in a lot of these situations compared to the kind of robust resources that you need for a country of Venezuela's size. I mean, this is a massive undertaking. And if Trump truly believes that we are running Venezuela, then he's going to have to deal with health issues, he's going to have to deal with the nutrition issues. And, oh, by the way, after 26 years of Chavismo, a lot of the infrastructure, and I don't just mean physical infrastructure, I mean, even, you know, some of the, the people infrastructure is just not there. And it's why it took us so long in places like Afghanistan and Iraq to try to train, to do the capacity development. So, you know, I think Trump has opened this hornet's nest and we're going to see. But, you know, Tara, from a political standpoint here in the US this just does not seem like a winning issue. You know, folks are worried about their own food prices, they're worried about health care, they're worried about, you know, all of these issues. And Trump seems to want to pursue these foreign forays in search of glory and of this elusive Nobel Peace Prize. And I don't think he's bringing the, you know, American people along with him. I mean, the polls that I've seen have been pretty abysmal for, you know, support, albeit that, you know, we can recognize and applaud the extraordinary military tactical operation that was undertaken.
- [19:41]
B
Yeah, it's interesting. Trump, of course, says we're going to make Venezuela great again. And when he was speaking about it to reporters for 37 minutes on Sunday night as he returned from the winter White House, he said this is how it's going to go. You know, fix up the oil and the country, and then we're gonna have elections. But I'm wondering what happens in the vacuum in the meantime. Anything can happen, right?
- [20:05]
A
It can. And look, what happens in vacuums, as I've seen in other countries, is you will have someone fill it. And right now, the drug traffickers, those who are the baddest of the bad in, you know, human rights abusers and repressive leaders, are the ones still in power in Venezuela. Now, we have this agreement with Delsey Rodriguez that may or may not end up, at least on a superficial level, holding. But I don't see any comprehensive plans by which Venezuela is going to turn a corner here, and it is going to become a permissive environment for investment, for democracy, for a humanitarian revival. And so Trump likes to do a lot of this stuff off the cuff, but I think he's finding himself, in the case of Venezuela, with a situation that is Iraq esque.
- [21:10]
B
Wow.
- [21:12]
A
And we, having spent a year out on a forward operating base outside of Tikrid and tried firsthand to work on some of these really challenging issues, it is in the best of times, with even some fairly well designed plans, a very, very tough thing to do. And on top of that, something to understand about Venezuela is geographically, it is extremely diverse and extremely difficult. Southeast of Venezuela, which is part of the Amazon region, rainforest, it's extraordinarily dense. There are native groups in the Amazonas, as they call it, that have not had human contact outside of their own group. You have the Andean mountains. You know, something that's really interesting that didn't get a lot of attention over the weekend was how difficult it was. Helicopters had to come in at sea level. And then you have the Avila Mountain, which is looming at 10,000ft over Caracas. They had to go up it, and then they had immediately come straight down into the center of Caracas. And where Maduro was is a military base called Fuerteventura, and it's on the western side of the center of Caracas. So if you can imagine these American military special operations officers, you're coming over the Avila Mountain and down into this valley, which is the center of the largest city in Venezuela, into sort of the heart of the beast, if you will. I mean, it was an impressive operation, but that's just one example of one operation that is so difficult. And in Afghanistan, we've seen how terrain can make these things even harder. And what's important to perhaps take account of is that the Shavistas have been planning for decades for this resistance movement on the notion the whole political movement was built upon the idea of being a counter imperial force. Lots of different groups, bands that, you know, are ostensibly operating at the direction of the hierarchy of this political movement. But if Trump comes in, he's like, right, you know, it's all mine. I get to, you know, control it. We could well see a situation in which these groups start to disperse, as they did in the middle part of the last century, into the mountains, into the Amazon basin, and then we're back into a insurgency situation. Bad for oil. Look, again, you know, oil fields, big targets. So Trump has opened up this Pandora's box. I don't think he has a strong sense of what's inside of it or how difficult it will be to sort through it.
- [24:07]
B
Yeah. So they really don't understand the not only complex power structures within Venezuela, but even just the terrain and the. The most simple topography and how that would impact, you know, guerrilla warfare if that were to come. And, I mean, who would they support in that warfare? The existing regime. Unclear.
- [24:25]
A
Right. Well, and then you bring into the picture what has happened, what is happening in Colombia. So you see Trump now going after the leader of Colombia, who is a leftist politician, but, you know, in there are all of these groups that had ostensibly signed a peace agreement with President Santos in Colombia, who'd agreed to lay down their arms. And yet, if Trump is now going after both Venezuela and Colombia, and you have these movements of insurgents, drugs, traffickers, I mean, it is terror. I don't want to be alarmist and overstated, but is a very combustible situation that could, you know, quickly go back to the kinds of both drug wars, the kinds of political insurgency that we saw during the Cold War.
- [25:25]
B
Wow. Wow. That is. That is a lot to take in. Wow. I do want to ask you about the idea that, you know, Trump says, we're going to run Venezuela. Right. We're going to be the ones. And he's pointing to Pete Hegseth, and he's pointing to Marco Rubio, who is Secretary of State, National Security Councilor, and also I think he runs the National Archives in addition to that. So he's got three jobs. Is that even possible for the Secretary of War and the State Department, the Secretary of State and nsc, to run a country?
- [26:00]
A
Well, and I think this is why you saw Rubio try to do a bit of a judo move on that and say, no, I'm not actually going to run Venezuela. I'm just on the policy side here. And hopefully Rubio can impress upon Trump that both for his own interest, as well as the US Running Venezuela is not a good idea. Now, there's also some reporting out there, as I'm sure you've seen, that Stephen Miller may be tasked with running Venezuela. And, you know, setting aside, oh, my gosh, you know, Steven's predilection for aggressive tactics here in the US I don't think those kinds of tactics will go over well in a Latin American, in a Venezuelan context. And so we're left in this situation with more questions than answers. And all the while, I think.
- [27:03]
C
We'Re.
- [27:03]
A
Losing the opportunity that was presented by this extraordinary military operation. If we had followed up the military operation with, right, we took out Maduro, here are the three things that you have to do. You have to take care of the drug traffickers. You have to ensure that the opposition can come, can participate in political activity, and within two years, we want to see elections. That would have been a reasonable expectation. And I don't think Rubio's wrong in saying we have economic pressure, we have military pressure, we have political pressure, we can apply. So try that out. But Trump now has basically, you know, for lack of a better word, or to quote Pete Tegseth, he's effed it up. And now we're grappling with, okay, what are we trying to do in Venezuela? What is he trying to do in all of these other countries? And how do we ensure that we are able to not screw up this moment? Because if we do, it could make our own security situation, our own economic situation a whole heck of a lot worse.
- [28:21]
B
Yeah. I want to talk to you about the Don Row Doctrine, which is the Monroe Doctrine, which President Trump has adopted and which it seems that he is embracing. The idea of carving up the world into spheres of influence, and, you know, that we now control North America and any areas around it. Give China, basically Asia and Russia, whatever's around it. I mean, what do you think about this idea of the Monroe Doctrine and the fact that we basically control everything? Is it sustainable in the 21st century?
- [28:56]
A
Well, let's start with the idea that there was a reason why, you know, it was mothballed to the trash bin of history. We advanced from a period in which colonial powers had spheres of influence over the world, and we did so because, one, we realized that it wasn't actually good for global security and stability. What happens when spheres rub up against one another? You get the friction, right?
- [29:29]
B
It will ultimately be friction. It'll just be a little further away Right. Well, I don't know. Or closer, if you think about it. They'll be touching each other.
- [29:38]
A
Yeah. Yes. Yes and no. In the sense, you know, when I talk about post Americanism, it. Essentially what Trump is doing is he's taking the US Role as a guarantor of security and stability in the world, saying, no, we don't want to do that anymore. We're going to have the Americas as our. As my sphere of influence.
- [29:58]
B
Right.
- [29:59]
A
Okay. But here's the challenge. I'm not sure that, one, we can actually exercise control over our whole hemisphere. Two, are we then saying that, you know, Asia, the Pacific is China's sphere of influence?
- [30:17]
B
Right.
- [30:18]
A
I don't know.
- [30:18]
B
Taiwan?
- [30:20]
A
Yeah. I don't know that. Japan, I don't know that. Australia, even India go along with that. Does Europe become Russia's sphere of influence?
- [30:30]
B
And so I think Russia could argue they want. They want Asia. I mean, they're. They're part of Asia.
- [30:37]
A
Yeah. I just think it's. It is an outdated notion for a way that the world work when we weren't so interconnected. And, you know, we've got trade issues that come up. If, you know, we all of a sudden are exerting the Don Row doctrine over the Americas, then trade becomes much more complicated, both within the Americas and then outside. And so he hasn't really thought this through. And what we're seeing are attempts by Rubio, attempts by some Republicans like Lindsey Graham to try to spin it in a somewhat constructive direction. And meanwhile, look, I think Trump has this notion that somehow by doing all of this, he will glorify himself. First and foremost, we understand that that's like the primary objective. Secondly, that he will be able to simply pass on these edicts. Colombia, you're going to do that. Cuba, you're going to do that. Greenland, do that. And it isn't the way that the world works anymore. And what we're starting to see, Terry, as we go into this second year of the Trump presidency, yes, he blustered and bulldozed his way onto the scene once again. But now we're starting to see the things boomerang back on him. And you're going to see more and more of these alternative structures that are built up around. I mean, even talking to folks in Canada, they're saying, look, we can't trust you guys anymore. So we're going to create our own economic, our own security, our own health structures. Because what you guys have proven with Trump is that you're not reliable. And we need to figure out something Else. And so the US Then is cut out of all of these other systems of operating. And we know that the Trump administration doesn't like working in multilateral organizations like the World Health Organization. I mean, I remember during the pandemic, I think I was on Fox News and we were talking about Trump's decision to pull us out of the World Health Organization. And it's like, okay, you don't like the World Health Organization? I think a lot of people acknowledge it's got issues, but in the middle of a pandemic, that's kind of like pulling yourself out of the fire station saying, no, we don't want to cooperate with our neighbors anymore on fighting a fire.
- [33:15]
B
Yeah, that's crazy. Yeah. Well, Brett, I know we're coming up on time, so any last thoughts which we be looking for forward? Where does this, where do we go from here?
- [33:27]
A
Look, I think the first thing to keep your eye on is whether or not Trump starts to walk back some of these other claims that we heard last night. If he does, if, you know, we go back to this notion that, you know, the US Is essentially pursuing this somewhat pragmatic path in Venezuela. Yes, we're going to try to keep some pressure on Cuba, on Colombia and other countries. But if he continues to talk about or take action towards taking over a country like Greenland, I think all bets are off in terms of what that could entail. And you've started to hear, like, from the Danish prime minister that, you know, they Europe stands ready. I don't think they will abide by Trump simply waltzing into Greenland and claiming it for, you know, the glory of the United States.
- [34:26]
B
Yeah.
- [34:27]
A
You know, that's a scenario that let's keep an eye on what ends up happening in the next, know, few days and weeks toward Trump's plans around that, because if he's serious, then we've got some serious problems.
- [34:41]
B
All right, Brett, thanks so much for your time. Please keep me posted if you're hearing anything or you've got any thoughts. Love to have you back on as this develops. Everyone, stay tuned. I'll be putting out a piece later. I've been hearing, you know, from Republicans who obviously were on the Hill, who were not so happy about this unilateral decision, that President Trump basically went into a country without speaking with Congress, basically declaring war without, without passing it through Congress and even his own party unsure of what to do or think about it all. I mean, they've sort of gotten, I think, whipped up in the success of the actual mission. And, and that's kept everyone in line. But I could probably see in the coming weeks if things don't seem stay as you know, if, if things don't go as well, if they continue to do military strikes and they aren't as clean, we lose men, which we didn't. Great. Thankfully that you're going to start hearing members of Congress, even from the Republican Party, saying, hey, what are we doing here? We didn't sign up for this. All right, thanks everybody and thank you, Brett. Have a good day.
- [35:54]
A
Have a good day.
- [35:55]
B
Bye. That was another episode of the Tower Palmieri Show. Thanks so much for tuning in. If you like this show, please follow subscribe, Rate It Share it with all your friends. Leave a comment about what you want to hear more about. Always interested in hearing from you. If you like my reporting, head to Tara Palmeri.com that's T A R A P A L-M-E-R-I.com you can sign up for my newsletter, the Red Letter. It's how you can get my exclusive reporting straight to your inbox. And by becoming a paid subscriber, you can support my independent journalism. I want to thank my producer Eric Abenate, I want to thank Abby Baker, who does my socials and research, Adam Stewart on the graphics, and my manager Dan Rosen. See you again soon.
- [36:40]
D
This podcast is supported by Midi Health. Are you in midlife? Feeling dismissed, unheard or just plain tired of the old healthcare system? You're not alone. In fact, even today, 75% of women seeking care for menopause and perimenopause issues are left entirely untreated. But it's time for a change. It's time for MITI. MITI's not just a health care provider. It's a women's telehealth clinic. Founded and supported by world class leaders in women's health. Their clinicians provide one on one face to face consultations where they truly listen to your unique needs. They offer a full range of holistic, data driven solutions that isn't one size fits all care. This is care uniquely tailored for you. At Mitti, you will find that their mission is clear to help all women thrive in midlife, giving them access to the health care they deserve. Because they believe midlife isn't the middle at all. It is the beginning of your second act. Ready to feel your best and write your second act script? Visit joinmitty.com today to book your personalized insurance covered virtual visit. That's joinmitty.com the Care Women deserve.