Loading summary
Transcript86 lines
- [00:00]
Progressive Insurance Announcer
You're listening to this podcast, so I know you've got a curious mind. Here's a helpful fact you may not know yet. Drivers who switch and save with Progressive save over $900 on average. Pop over to progressive.com, answer some questions and you'll get a quick quote with discounts that are easy to come by. In fact, 99% of their auto customers earn at least one discount. Visit progressive.com and see if you can enjoy a little cash back. Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and affiliates. National average 12 month savings of $946 by new customers surveyed who saved with Progressive between June 2024 and May 2025. Potential savings will vary.
- [00:39]
Tara Palmeri
Welcome back to the Tara Palmieri Show. Democrats have a problem in Maine where they could have easily picked up a seat against the incumbent Republican Senator Susan Collins. But their candidates are just so weak. They have a primary coming up next week and Graham Platner, who is the front runner, is only leading her by 4 percentage points. And now the New York Times has a new expose out she showing that not only does he have a Nazi tattoo, but he also has a history of being psychologically and possibly physically abusive with women. I mean, he was already, you know, sexting outside of his marriage, something that they have admitted to. But now it shows that he had a drinking problem and really showed poor character when it came to the women around him. These are the allegations against him. He denied at least one of them, but he admits that he's has a drinking problem and he's a work in progress. I think he said he was a vegetable. That's growing very weird. But, you know, voters, they may be open to forgiving him. Right. Even though a lot of these indiscretions apparently happened quite recently. But what about the party? They have this new character. He's an oyster shucker from Maine. He's beefy, he's a serviceman. He's not your typical Democrat running, certainly not the person that they were they were backing originally Janet mills, who's almost 79 years old and the party liked her. Chuck Schumer liked her. No, this was a different kind of edgy character that they've been looking for, someone who captivated the audience. But he has a lot of character liabilities. And if you are running, you know, on accountability and character as a contrast to President Trump, can Democrats really seed the moral high ground in this situation, you know, the way that Republicans have just in the name of winning? Take a listen to my conversation with Charlie Sykes of to the contrary. We Break down all of the angles on this. Plus, we discuss the 60 Minutes massacre at CBS under Barry Weiss. We also talk about President Trump appointing acting attorney general to the job. What will the confirmation hearings be like? What kind of questions is he going to face? We also talk about the White House Correspondents association to actually do the dinner again and in late July. What are they thinking? Do they just want to be human pinatas forever, including at this dinner? I get into all of that and more. Take a listen here.
- [03:07]
Charlie Sykes
And joining me this weekend to go through all of this, Tara Palmieri from the Red Letter Substack, one of the hardest working journalists that we have out there. And we've talked before about the Epstein files and a variety of other things. Okay. So anyway, first of all, welcome back to the podcast. Appreciate it.
- [03:25]
Tara Palmeri
Thanks so much for having me. Charlie, it's always a pleasure. I love reading your newsletter and I just give such fresh insights. So thanks for keeping it real.
- [03:35]
Charlie Sykes
Well, I hope so. It's hard to stay fresh these days. But I want to get to Todd Blanche and what it means that he might go through a confirmation process. You had a very, very interesting piece about your reaction to Donald Trump going off on Kaitlan Collins earlier this week, which again, is the kind of thing that unfortunately we tend to normalize. But we have to start with the Democratic dilemma that they face with Graham Platner, who is their candidate up in Maine. Look, there's two things, and I wrote about this in my newsletter yesterday. Democrats are not gonna be able to take control of the Senate probably without winning in Maine. This is a crucial seat. It's a winnable seat because Democrats have been winning the presidential cycles again and again. Susan Collins has survived up until now, but she seemed like the most vulnerable Republican incumbent. So, number one, Democrats have to win Maine. Number two, Graham Platner seems like a massive risk at this point. And you saw this story in the New York Times yesterday where they talked about in extensive conversations, three women who had been romantically involved with Mr. Platner offered a far more complicated assessment, describing volatile and toxic relationships that were unsettlingly and at times emotionally wrenching. And this would include that in one case even physically threatening, he drank regularly. I mean, he drank heavily and was regularly unfaithful. Now, in itself, not perhaps disqualifying, but this comes after the revelations about the sexting the Nazi tattoo. So give me your sense where we're at right now on all of this, because this election is so crucial and, and we're getting one story after another about Graham Platner. What should Democrats do? What are they doing?
- [05:23]
Tara Palmeri
It's not just the ex girlfriends who say that his behavior is problematic. I mean, his wife had to come out and openly acknowledge that he was unfaithful. He was sexting with another woman. There's talks about his drinking problems, just this sort of erratic behavior. One of the ex girlfriends said that he was borderline physically abusive.
- [05:47]
Charlie Sykes
Quite.
- [05:47]
Tara Palmeri
Grabbing her arm, shoving her against a wall. It just seems like a lot of these women have stories that really reflect a man who is not a person of high character. Now, he says he's a work in progress. I think he called himself a vegetable that's growing. But we know there are thousands of comments on Reddit, and some of them are deeply disturbing when it comes to rape. Accusing women of almost deserving it for being under the influence of alcohol and. And simply regretting who they slept with, because that, to him, is the definition of rape. And then you add in the Nazi tattoo, which he says he had no idea what it meant. But then these girlfriends say that he actually bragged that he used a German word, totenkampf, meaning like, this is my ideology and this is my worldview, and it is a bit disturbing. He's changing his stories. He is acting, quite frankly, like a politician already. Right. In the way that he's handling it. He is apologizing, which we never get from President Trump. But this is a bigger story than Graham Platner. Okay, so he defeats Janet Mills, who was the favorite among the Democratic establishment. Fine. He's an outsider. He's an oyster shucker farmer. It's cool. He's got tattoos, he's young. He. He's not Susan Collins, who's an older person, who is, frankly, at the end of her career and has admitted that she has some health issues. Right. This is a chance for the Democrats to offer a more, I guess you could say, machismo, masculine, hetero type of male that the Republican Party has sort of owned that identity. Right. And then you have Graham Platner, a former, I believe he was a serviceman in the very least. I don't know what his rank was, but he's got tats, he's cool, he's rugged, he's a bit edgy. That's what they need right now.
- [07:42]
Charlie Sykes
The problem is that's what they say.
- [07:44]
Tara Palmeri
Yeah, exactly. Here's the thing. If you want to run an election on character, accountability, integrity, it's very difficult to stand behind Graham Platner, especially as you use your ammo. Against President Trump for the way he treats women. And I think the way you treat women is a window into your integrity and the way that your character. And really, I think when I see this, are Democrats so obsessed with winning that they're willing to look past his character flaws in the same way that Republicans have? And does that basically put them on the same playing field, essentially?
- [08:21]
Charlie Sykes
Well, this does feel very, very familiar for those of us that went through this back in 2016, you know, for people who are. I actually was talking to somebody this morning and I said, you know, for, for 10 years, people have been asking, why do Republicans accept this? Why do they look the other way of all this misconduct? And I said, well, maybe we're about to have a teachable moment, because once you convince yourself that the other side is so evil, is so dangerous that everything's an existential threat, that you're willing to say, okay, Donald Trump's a crook, he's a boor. You know, he's, he may even be a rapist, but he's our guy and it's so important not to let the other guys win. You're going to see many of the same arguments. Now, you mentioned that Graham Platner has apologized, but also he is flatly denying some of these allegations. And again, this is an interesting moment for Democrats who have up until now been believed the women embrace the MeToo movement, and of course, the whole Epstein file issue of the treatment of women. And so Graham Platner understands he's got a really big problem. He goes on Chris Hayes's show on Ms. Now on Thursday, I want to play this because Hayes walks through the allegations against him and listen to his flat out denial. He's basically saying that this woman in the case, Lindsey Fifield, is just lying about him. Let's play that.
- [09:31]
Interviewer
You know, there's some serious stuff there I want to go through with you, and I think voters have a right to know about it. And I want to start with what Ms. Fifield says about being rough is the term the times were. And I'm going to just read you the account so you have it. This is from the Times. Mr. Plattner could be rough with her, Ms. Fifield said, particularly when they were drinking, leaving her shaken and sometimes afraid. In the interviews, she grappled with how to process her experiences. She was quick to note, he never hit me. He never punched me. She said he regularly grabbed her by the shoulders, sometimes hard enough to leave marks. On one occasion, yanked her out of a cab by her wrist after an argument in which she wanted to stay in the car. During one argument, she recalled, he twisted her arm behind her back, shoved her into a bedroom, and held the door closed from the other side so she couldn't get out, telling her to remain there until she was calm. Eventually, Ms. Fifield said, she fell asleep and left the next morning. It hurt, she said. But she added, it didn't cause any injury. It didn't break my arm. Did that happen? 72% of Better Help members report a significant reduction in symptoms within 12 weeks. That's
- [10:30]
Charlie Sykes
no, he said.
- [10:31]
Interviewer
But, she added, it didn't cause any injury. It didn't break my arm. Did that happen?
- [10:38]
Graham Platner
No, it did not. There are some allegations in this piece that I just want to be kind of unequivocal about are simply not true. Anything alleging physicality, anything alleging that I knew what my tattoo was. These are the statements of someone who's politically motivated.
- [10:56]
Interviewer
You did not grab her by the wrist. You did not put your hands on her shoulders. You did not push her into a room that you closed the door on. She's. She's lying about that, is what you're saying?
- [11:05]
Graham Platner
Yes. That is not true.
- [11:07]
Charlie Sykes
Terry, your reaction to that says that she's lying.
- [11:11]
Tara Palmeri
I mean, what else is he going to say? I mean, what he has said in the past is I've gone through a really difficult period of time. A lot of these women recall that he was a drinker, that he was going through PTSD after returning from his service, and we know that he was actually, you know, getting psychiatric help through the military. Yeah, but there are demons here. Demons for sure. And no one is perfect. But the fact that there are so many accounts and that he's been pretty open about his struggles with alcohol is concerning.
- [11:47]
Charlie Sykes
I think it's possible to say, okay, you know, everybody has flaws, and clearly he's working through some issues, but do you work through that issues on in the United States Senate? Do you work through those issues during a campaign in which the stakes are so. Are so high? And look, I mean, I'm willing to cut him some slack about, you know, things that he might have posted when he was drinking 14 years ago. But he's got a recency problem. Many of these allegations are very recent, within the last year or two. And quite frankly, I don't know. I mean, look, you know, the Democrats could, in fact, choose to do exactly what Republicans have done and said, you know, winning is more important than anything else. But I think there's a price to be paid for ceding the moral ground. Moral High ground when it comes to character and your attitudes toward the abuse of women. And the fact is that there's so much. And of course, what we don't know is whether there's more drip, drip, drip on the way.
- [12:41]
Tara Palmeri
Yeah. And Charlie, I was. I don't want to use the word amused, but there's this Facebook group called are we dating the same guy? Okay. My cousin told me about this. She's about a year older than me and she loves this site. She's single in New York City and this and that. So she will go on it. I can't even. I don't even have the time to look at what this is all about. But apparently someone posted about him and that's concerning. Like, I know that people say, oh, marriages aren't perfect, people are unfaithful, but in the beginning of a relationship, in the beginning of a marriage, that this is what's happening, that there are so many women that they've created a post online trying to figure out if you're actually available. I mean, that's like almost a sociopathic level. I've always found that from the men that I've perused it a little bit, I'm like, wow, you literally have to be a sociopath if that many women can post on this on Facebook, wondering if you are in fact faithful to one person or another.
- [13:50]
Charlie Sykes
So there's a couple of complications in the latest New York Times story, which we ought to acknowledge. I mean, number one, that Lindsey Fifeld, who is kind of the main character, is a well known conservative activist. She has ties to conservative organizations. Doesn't mean that she's not telling the truth, but people have seized upon that to say this is why her credibility should be questioned. New York Times admits they didn't verify her allegations of violence. But as I think you're pointing out here, though, there were other women. There's two other women who were quoted in the New York Times. And then there's just so much other stuff. It's just, there's so messy.
- [14:26]
Tara Palmeri
He is messy. I wouldn't leave him with my kids if I had kids. He's a messy guy.
- [14:32]
Charlie Sykes
Well, see, but you know, I remember, you know, 10 years ago, people were saying, well, Donald Trump, I'm not hiring a pastor, I'm not hiring a babysitter. Yeah, I wouldn't hire him to walk my dogs. But. But at least he's not Hillary Clinton release. He's not Kamala Harris.
- [14:46]
Tara Palmeri
I don't know about that. I do think about the people that I'm voting for? Do they have integrity? Would I trust them with my vote, with representing me? I mean, ultimately, I want to believe that the people who are working for me because we pay their salaries are doing the best job they can possibly do. Why are we settling for less? We're Americans. This is not what we do.
- [15:09]
Charlie Sykes
Well, now, I agree with you. But after next Tuesday, understand that there will be a lot of people who are going to regard that as hopelessly naive because, you know, having principles and caring about character is a luxury, except if you're in this Flight 93 existential election. And the only thing that's important is getting control of the Senate. Now, I would turn this around. You and I are having this conversation on Friday. People are listening to it on Saturday. The primary is actually not until Tuesday. And I think that they have until sometime in July if they ever were to replace Platner. And so I guess I would turn around saying, if you do believe that this is an existential crisis, why would you risk it on Graham Platner if you have any alternative whatsoever? And just going back to Maine, all the Democrat has to do is get the same people that voted for Joe Biden and Kamala Harris to vote for their Senate candidate and they win easily. This should be an easy picking. And yet there are people who are going to be committed to the Graham Platner, and I'm afraid that we're all going to get dumber during this period.
- [16:11]
Tara Palmeri
I mean, this is exactly what happened in California, and I do not believe that. I mean, Eric Swalwell was a party favorite, right? I mean, he was an establishment favorite, and they knew that he was problematic. Everybody knew that he was problematic, right? Not to the extent that we've learned that there are allegations of abuse at this level. But he's a problematic person. Why are so many problematic people attracted to politics? That's another question I've always thought to myself, like, it's actually something that has always drawn me to wanting to be a reporter. Maybe there's like a part of me that, like, if I wasn't a journalist, I would be a detective or I'd be a cop or something like that. But I just feel like, why are so many problematic people wanting more power and feeling like they have the. When they look in the mirror, they see a person who can represent others. I don't understand that.
- [17:02]
Charlie Sykes
Well, it is an interesting question, especially like who is invited, who is attracted to politics right now, given what you have to go through, you know that you have to have a strong Ego. It attracts narcissists. It attracts people who want power, who want influence, who want control over others, who will use the office to benefit themselves either financially or sexually in a variety of ways. But it is an interesting question how. You know, because these stories, you keep saying, like, you know, how horny is Congress? I mean, what is going on there? You know, have we turned our political world into some, you know, you know, huge, you know, frat house of some?
- [17:39]
Tara Palmeri
It is. I mean, when you. I don't know if you've ever, like, been a congressional reporter, but if you're ever on the Hill, like, I lived in Washington. I covered politics there for a while, but it is a frat house. I mean, it actually was sort of similar in European politics when I was living in Brussels as well, because they all go to this place called Strasbourg on the border of France and Germany for their plenary. But there's something about these men who are hopped up on power, have all of these young staffers working for them, lobbyists kissing their butt, like, taking them out to dinners. They have these expense accounts. They stay in nice hotels and. Or they. Or in the case of, you know, American members, they stay in their apartments. Some of them bunk up and dorm together because they don't make that much money. But there are a lot of personalities, perks to the job, right? You basically never pay for a single bill yourself. And they go out. They're not around their families, and they go out and they get drinks. And they are being idealized. And they're around young, idealistic, some often attractive people, women. And they take advantage of that power. Part of the reason they may be attracted to these jobs is for that reason alone, is they want to be worshiped. It's really funny. One of my girlfriends said to me yesterday, and it kind of took me off guard. Cause she was like, what are you trying to build here with the red letter? Like, what are you trying to do with your. With the Tara Palmeri show? Like, what do you want your legacy to be? And I was like, legacy? Like, I don't think. Stay up thinking about my legacy. I'm just trying to survive every single day. But then I was like, you know, these are people who literally think about their legacy all the time. Like, they look at monuments and think their faces should be on them.
- [19:13]
Charlie Sykes
Well, certainly, if it's. If it's Donald Trump. Okay, just one last comment on all of this. That this is. What's happening in Maine is, you know, multiple warning signs for Democrats. And I certainly understand, you know, the, you know, the establishment went with Janet Mills, who's the incumbent Democrat, who's, by the way, still on the ballot on Tuesday. I mean, there's a possibility. It's a very, very slim possibility, but she's like, I think, 79 years old. And at some point, you would think that in places like California and Maine, there are a lot of Democrats. Why is it so hard to come up with a normal, you know, candidate who does not have these demons and this kind of baggage, who is, you know, not necessarily in. In their 70s? And it's. It is a question.
- [19:56]
Tara Palmeri
Are.
- [19:56]
Charlie Sykes
Are normies now being repelled from politics? I mean, do they not want to run? Why is it so hard to come up with good candidates?
- [20:04]
Tara Palmeri
Here's my theory, and I could be completely wrong, but, like, you either have to be such an outsider that you can utilize the Internet and the algorithms to break through, right? And you have to be so different than the status quo that you get attention just for that, Right? Maybe like you. You have a shtick, and that's your thing. You're a branded character. People like that. You're relatable, whatever it is, you have that. That charisma that not a lot of politicians have. So you can break through that way. I think you see that a lot with El Said in Michigan. Right. He's leading right now. We had him on our show recently, but. So that's what Graham Platner has. He's cool.
- [20:40]
Charlie Sykes
I worry about him, too.
- [20:41]
Tara Palmeri
Shocker. But then you. Or you have to have the establishment behind you in party politics, and you have to have people there that are supporting you, the party, you know, the state party, Schumer, etc. Hakeem, you've got to have that establishment, and they don't like anything that is risky or anyone that they don't know. And politics is a patronage system, essentially. So that is what it is. And so it doesn't really offer a lot of oxygen for new people because they haven't done their time and they haven't done their space. So the only new entrants that can break through have to come in, like, guns blazing. And people that are packing guns aren't always the ones you want necessarily in the job. And I think that's the way to. I think like anyone else is gonna be. It's gonna have a hard time. You know, it's just hard. Like, I've seen some people trying to break through, and they try to create fake controversies just to break through. Like that guy James Fishback in Florida, who's running for governor. I mean, he literally creates a controversy every single day so the algorithm will acknowledge him. And it worked. He went up 15% in the polls. Like, some polls show him just, like, right behind Byron Donaldson. The guy is an open racist. Calls him a DEI candidate, openly talks about how, like, Haitian immigrants have, you know, ruined Florida. He's a really, really divisive character, but those divisive comments give him more media time. So it's like, this is the algorithmic candidate. They know how to play it. They know how to keep the attention and spotlight on them. And everybody else is often an establishment candidate that is backed by the, by the party. So they don't really have to do that. So where is that person who's, like, reasonable? I don't know, Charlie.
- [22:20]
Charlie Sykes
Where are they living their lives, spending time with their families, doing their business? You know, they're like, yeah, doing that. Okay, so speaking of charisma, now, this is a terrible segue. So this week, Donald Trump says that he's going to nominate Todd Blanche to be the permanent Attorney General. Completely not surprising, but also interesting because, you know, we had had all of that buzz about Republicans who were, you know, being skeptical of Donald Trump and, you know, who were, you know, in that nothing left to lose phase. But so Todd Blanche, who, you know, knee deep in the Epstein file, cover up the author of the slush fund responsible for the indictment of James Comey over seashells. I mean, this is a guy who has won the job by showing a willingness to do absolutely everything for Donald Trump. So, you know, Todd Blanche, you've gotten up in his face. So give me your sense of the, that Donald Trump has chosen this moment to challenge Senate Republicans. I want you to confirm this guy.
- [23:27]
Tara Palmeri
I mean, I, I wasn't sure after that performance this week because when asked whose idea was this $1.8 billion slush fund, the anti weaponization fund, he said, this is something that President Trump has been talking about for a while, because I felt that whoever was, who's. Whoever was blamed for that would take the fallout. And President Trump doesn't like to be blamed for unpopular policy ideas. So I was like, is he really going to get confirmed after that? I thought, Trump doesn't care about the Epstein files. That's not, you know, he cares in the sense that it nags on him and he has to answer questions. But no one who's associated with Epstein will ever take the fall for that, because once that domino falls, it hits him next. That's why Howard Lutnick will have his job as Commerce Secretary forever, even if he's doing the worst job ever. And I think ultimately he would never. I think with Pam Bondi, yeah, he was unhappy with how she handled the Epstein files, but he was ultimately even more unhappy with the fact that she didn't go after his political enemies. Whereas Todd Blanche, guns blazing, was ready to go. Right. He was a little bit smoother than Bondi. I do think that in front of Congress, it was a different. It was the Appropriations Committee. They're not quite as theatrical as what
- [24:43]
Charlie Sykes
we saw, but the fund is so obviously cor. And even Republicans recognized, I mean, I guess that was, it was the timing. We had a Republican revolt in the Senate and actually shut down the reconciliation bill, which they eventually passed because they were so appalled at this notion, this deal, which is not just the slush fund, but also grants Trump and his family immunity forever from IRS audits. I mean, and that stands. And by the way, I'm not sure that the slush fund is not going to come back as well. So at this moment, which where Todd Blanch is like the most deplorable, the most egregious, the, the biggest suck up ever, that's when Donald Trump chooses to basically kind of give a middle finger to the Senate saying, I'm going to, I'm going to make you. I'm going to make you swallow this one. So, yeah, I mean, do you think the Senate will confirm this guy? What do you think?
- [25:32]
Tara Palmeri
I don't know, because they're holding US Attorneys up right now. And Trump has made a lot of enemies. He's, you know, basically you've got some of them retiring in the YOLO phase. You've also got ones that he has
- [25:45]
Charlie Sykes
primaried out like, you know, Tillis, Cassidy, Cornyn. Yeah, you still have COLLINS, Murkowski, Mitch
- [25:53]
Tara Palmeri
McConnell is even had them, the votes. You don't have the margins to act like that, you know, and so he could be acting Attorney General forever. There's always a loophole. So it's not like the end of the world for him because that's what they do. I mean, even Biden, I think he had an acting housing secretary, HUD secretary for his entire term, the end of his term, at least. So this is, I guess, listen, he was his personal attorney. I was shocked to hear that he made tens of millions of dollars from MAGA Inc. Which is just another slush fund, too, to take out Trump's political enemies, run by his, you know, run by his former campaign manager, Chris Laceda, kind of A big deal.
- [26:38]
Charlie Sykes
That was an interesting story that got almost no attention.
- [26:41]
Tara Palmeri
Yeah, I thought that was really interesting. You know, Madeline Dean, she showed up with a document that actually some of the survivors raised to me that names four co conspirators in the Epstein files. And like, it's all redacted, the whole thing. And it lays out in 86 pages, like, it's a very comprehensive story about Jeffrey Epstein and what he had done. And it was created by Jeff Berman, who was the U.S. attorney in 2019 who was prosecuting Epstein. Why is it all redacted? If we're talking, why are the co conspirators, why are their names redacted? There's no reason for that. That's not national security. They aren't listening. And so it's like there were so many things in this hearing, but it was so long. And I feel like a lot of the Republicans wasted a lot of time. But he did ultimately back down from the anti weaponization fund. I don't think he took enough of a grilling on Epstein. And I guess Trump thought he passed and probably just felt like, you know what, let's just give him the Attorney General job. When I saw him at the French ambassador's residence, though, and I asked him about Jay Clayton, who is the U.S. attorney in New York now, who worked for Leon Black, in the sense that Leon Black appointed him to replace him when he left the private equity firm he started called Apollo, because he had spent $300 million in services with Jeffrey Epstein Accounting services that ended up actually just being ways to pay off women, like giving him money to pay off women and other state laundering type of things. He appointed Jay Clinton to replace him, and then he stayed on, obviously, and had a ship and was a shareholder. And so I'm like, how can this man be in charge of future Epstein investigations when he benefited financially to the tune of more than $1.5 million in this role at Apollo?
- [28:35]
Charlie Sykes
Well, see this. Yeah. See then this is what we talked about that in the last podcast. And I think this is what makes this decision by Trump so interesting because the Epstein file story has kind of not been getting traction lately. If you have confirmation, hear for Todd Blanche. It brings it back, or certainly gives the opportunity to ask questions like that, to talk about, you know, his weird, you know, back and forth with Ghislaine Maxwell, you know, how he's handled the, you know, how he's handled the redaction of Epstein. So I actually see this as, yes, a reward for Todd Blanche, but also really a Challenge to the Senate. Donald Trump is really angry at the Republican Senate leadership for not doing what he wanted. I mean, they actually cut out the money for his ballroom. And so this is kind of a middle finger to them to say, all right, I'm gonna force you for an up or down vote. Because that's tough to be a Republican senator to vote against the President's choice. And yet he's given him. It's, It's. You know, Donald Trump likes that. He likes saying, how big a shit sandwich can I make you eat? You know, how much? How much can I make you do? And this is like basically saying, all right, you either eat this or you defy me, and we'll see what happens. Although a lot of these guys have nothing left to lose anymore. Do they?
- [29:57]
Tara Palmeri
Yeah, that's old. And like, it just doesn't matter.
- [30:00]
Charlie Sykes
I think they were defeated.
- [30:02]
Tara Palmeri
Yeah. Or defeated. I agree with you. Although he's pretty daft at handling this stuff. He just gaslights. I mean, that's what he did to Blanche. Yeah. Blanche. And like. Yeah, he just gaslights. He's. He's like, you don't know what you're talking about. I don't. You don't know what you're talking about. Like, that's. That's his go to.
- [30:21]
Charlie Sykes
Well, we'll see.
- [30:23]
Tara Palmeri
I know it'll be interesting. I mean, senators are usually a little better at the cross examination. I always, like. I mean, I think it's good to have a few really good, like, former prosecutors there who can actually keep a line of questioning going and truly get down to the heart of it. And the other thing is, I think Grace Meng in that hearing said that he wasn't under oath, which is crazy. Why are any of these people testifying in Congress?
- [30:53]
Charlie Sykes
That's malpract.
- [30:54]
Tara Palmeri
Under oath.
- [30:54]
Charlie Sykes
Yeah. That is malpractice.
- [30:57]
Tara Palmeri
Why are they even allowing that? That's insanity.
- [31:00]
Charlie Sykes
Well, it's also just a indication of how unserious members of Congress are about exercising the power that they actually have now. They have pushed back. I mean, there have been these moments where it looked like they were cracking, but I think that that's going to be the real test. Is the Republican Senate resistance for real or just for show? Just, you know, self stroking. We'll see. With Todd Blanche, I was troubled, and maybe there's something I don't understand about it, that they did not vote to ban the slush fund. I mean. No. Explicitly do it. Because you know what? If you do not drive a stake through the heart of that slush fund. You're going to get the slush fund. Donald Trump will find a way to get billions of dollars into the hands of his cronies one way or the other. And you know, there have been reports about work, workaround, so I don't trust them. Okay. So another story that I wanted either
- [31:55]
Tara Palmeri
Charlie wouldn't put it well.
- [31:57]
Charlie Sykes
Okay. So that, that should be a massive tell right there. The fact that he would not put it in writing. Of course, the case might be re. Has been reopened by the judge. So, you know, there is that, by the way, just sort of like a complete digression. Speaking of judges and everything. You know, one of my favorite stories I think of the next couple of weeks is going to be the, apparently they are going to take Donald Trump's name off the Kennedy Center. I mean, do you think, I mean, the general counsel issued the order to remove Donald Trump's name from the Kennedy center and from all of the other stuff, do you think they're actually going to do that?
- [32:39]
Tara Palmeri
I don't know. I mean, like, it's true that you can only get your, like to have your name on a national monument, you have to go through congressional, like, it has to be passed into law. Like, there has to be congressional approval.
- [32:52]
Charlie Sykes
Amazing.
- [32:53]
Tara Palmeri
And you can't just like slap your name on anything. This isn't like his real estate empire where he just brands things. I mean, even then you have a licensing agreement, like, you have an agreement with the person who owns the building that you will put your name on it unless you buy that building flat out. And he's not buying the building. The taxpayers own a piece of it. So therefore, he has to create almost a licensing agreement with the taxpayers by way of Congress. And he hasn't done that. So. Yeah, sorry, sorry. But it will be, it'll make for some really funny footage, Charlie, watching people up there on like, ladders taking his name down.
- [33:28]
Charlie Sykes
I will pay for the livestream of that. Okay, so there are three interesting media stories this week that I wanted to ask you about as a media person, including what's been going on at CBS and the White House Correspondents Dinner, deciding that they are going to do it again. And then Donald Trump will still be there. They're the guest of honor. But, you know, as you know, I like to push back against normalizing something. Donald Trump has been insulting female reporters on a regular basis. This week he lashed out at Caitlin Collins, cnn, who asked him about the slush fund. And I know you have some thoughts about that.
- [34:04]
Tara Palmeri
Yeah. So he's Obsessed with the fact that Caitlin doesn't smile. It's a very weird thing. I think he's like, obsessed with her, frankly. But men, none of the men in that room were smiling. Why would you be smiling when you're asking someone who is the President of the United States, who is a civil servant, a question, an accountability question about a slush fund that he created, like, Mr. President, are we gonna keep this less fund? You know, what does he expect? This is what he expects. He thinks, and he wishes that it was the 1960s, when America was great again and women were not in the Oval Office asking him questions. They did not have the type of power to hold him to account. He was a beauty pageant owner, a modeling judge, contestant. He was their boss. He was a celebrity. Could grab him by the, you know what, like, that is the role that President Trump is used to. And even the women that he elevates around him, like Susie Wiles, the Chief of staff, and the various women in his cabinet, they're all sycophants. They're. Yes, women. They are not challenging him. So when Caitlin challenges him and she's not walking around in a bikini like a beauty pageant contestant, it really blows his effing mind. I don't know how else to say it. This is not the world that he was raised in, and this is not the place he wants to bring the world back to. You know, she's a woman with agency. She's independent, she has power there. And it drives him furious. It makes her furious.
- [35:35]
Charlie Sykes
So this is not new about Donald Trump, but I guess it also raises the question about the rest of the media, the other people in the room.
- [35:43]
Tara Palmeri
Yeah.
- [35:44]
Charlie Sykes
Nobody ever stands up, nobody ever pushes back, says, you know, you can't call that woman piggy. Or, you know, I'm sorry, that was really disrespectful. None of that. And I keep thinking about the White House court.
- [35:56]
Tara Palmeri
Mr. President, why did you think it was appropriate to call that woman piggy? Mr. President, why did you think it was appropriate to say that Caitlin is smiling when in fact all of the other people in the room are not smiling? Mr. President, why do you think she has hatred in her eyes? What is it? Why do you care if she has hatred or whatever she's feeling? She's a professional woman. Are you okay with professional women asking, you know, asking you questions?
- [36:22]
Charlie Sykes
We know the answer. Yeah.
- [36:24]
Tara Palmeri
Yeah. That is the most. And honestly, that would be the most illuminating question you could ever ask him. Frankly, it really would be. Cuz you would get into his psychology and then you would understand what he's saying when he says, make America great again.
- [36:39]
Charlie Sykes
So I can't help but think about that decision by the White House Correspondent's Dinner to reschedule and to still have him as the guest of honor, given everything that's going on, his attacks on the media, his attacks on. You know, we could run. Run through all. All of this. I mean, I. I thought it was a horrible idea in the first place to invite him.
- [37:02]
Tara Palmeri
I. I had a ticket. I turned it down. I was like, I'm good.
- [37:04]
Charlie Sykes
Yeah, you. You did. But, yeah, nothings at some point. I mean, there are a lot of really good journalists who are doing really good journalism right now, but this just seems tone deaf to be having this event this summer with the President. Am I being too hard on the White House correspondence?
- [37:27]
Tara Palmeri
No, it's weird. I mean, I love Waja, but she works at cbs, and, like, we know that Bari Weiss is, like, is really trying. I'm not sure that Barry Weiss has any influence on this because Waja is the President, and she should be, you know, independent from her boss, which I believe she is. But they are a bunch of human pinatas, essentially, when they walk into that Oval Office, he beats them up with his attacks. And frankly, what you don't hear and what was happening during the first. What you don't hear now, but you did hear during the first administration, is that they are actively locking reporters out. If they don't like their questioning, if they don't like a story they reported, they're blocking them from pool. I mean, they tried to basically ruin the business model of the Associated Press, which requires access as a wire company. And they are being incredibly vindictive. And all the owners of these media companies, they have zero. Like, they're just concerned about the bottom line right now, and they don't want to lose their FCC licenses, and so they're not sticking up for their reporters anymore. You can't be a reporter and not have the backing of your news agency. I don't even know why they're in there. I mean, frankly. I mean, I was a White House correspondent for ABC and for Politico, and before I joined abc, where you have to physically be there because it's sort of a performance. You know, asking the question is a performance that goes into the package. And being in front of the White House shows proximity, even if nothing happened inside that day. But I found that you get way more stories outside of the White House like it's an onion, like, no one's no one ever comes to you as a Sarah, hey, let me tell you what's really happening on the White House grounds. Are you joking? That never happens. But if you wanna go to the bar across the street, off the record, that's where you get the real story. So while I appreciate like some of the stagecraft and the, you know, the back and forth and the jousting and sometimes you get some answers, but very rarely does anything anyone says ever make any news. Except Trump, actually, because he just says crazy shit just to make news and make news really blurry and scary all the time and just trying to get people to turn out to now as part of his, I guess, some sort of massive media manipulation. I don't think it's really that valuable anymore. And so I'm actually overrated, like, at this time in my life, I'm not in there being like smacked around and then dealing with some corporate bosses who are just like, is she getting enough access?
- [40:00]
Charlie Sykes
So you're probably also happy that you don't work for Barry Weiss at cbs. You mentioned Barry Weiss's name. This has been an extraordinary week where you take 60 minutes, you've fired their major correspondents, the executive producer, and then Scott Pelley stands up and lets the new guy have it. Give me your sense, because, I mean, look, I can't. Other than the Ellison's need to curry favor with Donald Trump, the ongoing destruction of the CBS brand at the hands of Barry Weiss is kind of breathtaking. But what is your take on that?
- [40:39]
Tara Palmeri
I. God, it's bad. I mean, you can't repair a reputation built over so many years either that can't be repaired overnight. It doesn't stand for anything. That's the problem. CBS stands for nothing right now. And what, like, what are you as a brand? If you stand for nothing, you're nothing. And so the. And it's really like the thing that even though CBS had the lowest ratings when it came to the morning show and the evening show, and they still do, it was 60 Minutes. That was the crown jewel. That was the thing.
- [41:15]
Charlie Sykes
It was.
- [41:16]
Tara Palmeri
It was the thing that essentially kept that entire news organization alive. Because at the end of the day, that was. It is one of the rare shows on linear television that people would go to to watch appointment viewing. And you've hit the height of your career as a 60 Minutes correspondent. So what she's doing is just like literally hacking away at the crown jewel of a news organization that's clearly on its dying last legs. And so who is she gonna replace them with? Like, that's gonna be something to watch, right?
- [41:49]
Charlie Sykes
Well, you can't rebuild that either. I mean, you can't take something that's been around for 60 years that has developed this, basically destroy the entire DNA, and then what, have this guy with no broadcast management experience come in and reinvent this to basically redo it. You know, you have inherited this incredible thing. There are a lot of things in linear television that are broken, a lot of things at CBS that could be made better. This was not one of them. And so, you know, I know there was some criticism of Scott Pelley for being performative. And why did he do that? Well, I think Scott Pelley realized that with the firings the week before that it was over, that they had decided to insertify 60 minutes and you and you and someone needed to speak out as opposed to go along and get along or assume that whatever is broadcast as 60 minutes next fall will actually be 60 minutes as opposed to the insidified version.
- [42:46]
Tara Palmeri
Yeah, of course. Listen, like, Scott Pelly saw the writing on the wall. He was not long for this 60 Minutes situation. And it's much smarter if he's developing a brand, maybe on substack with us. Yeah, he is seen as someone openly defying his corporate bosses and speaking out in favor of journalism. So, like, I also think strategically, Scott Pelly did the right thing. Other people who maybe are hoping and that they have a chance of staying and keeping that paycheck, I mean, they all, like most of them, live in New York City. New York City is not a cheap place to live. The industry is shrinking. It is not expanding right now. The only place it's expanding is where we are in independent media, thanks to actual listeners who are keeping us around. But, yeah, I mean, this is a time of reckoning, and it is. It is. We're seeing, though, a lot of really great accountability journalism, though, in the independent space. And I feel encouraged by that, you know, but I'm hopeful that there are a few people, like beacons on me in independent media who can claim credibly they're not backed by anyone with interests who are unafraid to challenge authority and can create products that do break through. Like, that is my hope, because I think we still need journalism no matter what.
- [44:16]
Charlie Sykes
Well, and this is the key, I think, you know, for people who are criticizing, Scott Pelley is like, you know, he could have done this in private. He could have gone quietly. He could have kept collecting the paycheck. But this is the moment that requires people to speak truth to power in that particular way, you know, to be to aggressively let people know what is happening, what the stakes are, call out the people with the power. What power? You know, compared to Donald Trump and the Ellisons and Barry Weiss, what power does even the best paid correspondent have, unless to speak out and use. Use their position to say journalism matters. This is a threat. This is what is going on. This is not just about this show. This is about, you know, political oligarchical. Oligarchical destruction of independent journalism. I thought it was important. You know, you're right that I think he's establishing his brand, but also think it's important to kind of model the fact that you don't have to simply just, you know, bend the knee and go along with all this or pretend that it's just part of the transition of the media. I mean, I read some people who are saying things like, well, yes, you know, linear media obviously does need to change. You know, there clearly changes in the audience. But what's happening is CBS is not that story, and you have to understand exactly what the story is and why it's important for everybody. So I'm glad that he did what he did, even if it cost him his job.
- [45:43]
Tara Palmeri
Right? Yeah, it needed to be said.
- [45:48]
Charlie Sykes
It did.
- [45:49]
Tara Palmeri
Yeah, it needed to be said, as
- [45:51]
Charlie Sykes
do so many others, which is why I'm so glad that you took the time to be with us this morning. I appreciate it very much, Tara.
- [45:58]
Tara Palmeri
Yeah, this was really fun, Charlie. I mean, fun, but I don't. Yeah, it's good to just, like, kind of think about what happened this week so much. It was. It's really quite. Really. It was a whirlwind. But it is every week, right?
- [46:14]
Charlie Sykes
It is every week is why we do this every week, because we have to keep reminding ourselves, as you know, that we are not the crazy ones.
- [46:23]
Tara Palmeri
That was another episode of the Terror Palmeri show with Charlie Sykes. He had me on as a guest. It was great. If you want to support my independent journalism, please hit that subscribe button. Follow like rate. Leave a comment. You know, helps the algorithm. That's what we need to keep people learning more and more about our work and what we're doing here. You can go to tarapaulmieri.com and you get my exclusive reporting straight to your inbox. By doing that, it's also a way to sign up for my independent journalism. Support independent journalism, make sure that we still have truth tellers out there. I want to thank my producer, Abby Baker, who's also playing the role of editor today. Booker socials. She's doing it all. While we have Dan Schiffmacher out, I want to thank Dan Rosen, my manager, and Adam Stewart, who does my graphics. See you again soon.
- [47:15]
Shopify Announcer
Starting a business can seem like a daunting task unless you have a partner like Shopify. They have the tools you need to start and grow your business. From designing a website to marketing to selling and beyond, Shopify can help with everything you need. There's a reason millions of companies like Mattel, Heinz and Allbirds continue to trust and use them. With Shopify on your side, turn your big business idea into Sign up for your $1 per month trial@shopify.com specialoffer.