Loading summary
Transcript46 lines
- [00:00]
Oracle Representative
Tariff and trade policies are dynamic, supply chains squeezed and cash flow tighter than ever. You need total visibility from global shipments to tariff impacts to real time cash flow. That's NetSuite by Oracle, your AI powered business management suite. Trusted by over 41,000 businesses. NetSuite brings accounting, financial management, inventory, HR into OneSuite to help you know what's stuck, what it's costing you, and how to pivot fast. If your revenues are at least in the seven figures, download the free ebook Navigating Global Trade 3 Insights for Leaders at netsuite.com Tech with the Redfin app.
- [00:38]
Redfin Representative
You'Ll know the moment your next place hits the market. Whether you're looking to buy your dream home or rent a sweet apartment, give Redfin your Gotta have it wish list of property features and you'll receive real time notifications tailored just for you, ready to see it up close and personal. Scheduling a tour is just a tap away. Don't wait to find your perfect match. Download the Redfin app and start searching today.
- [01:02]
AllTrails Representative
We all belong outside. We're drawn to nature. Whether it's the recorded sounds of the ocean we doze off to or the succulents that adorn our homes, nature makes all of our lives, well, better. Despite all this, we often go about our busy lives removed from it, but the outdoors is closer than we realize. With alltrails, you can discover trails nearby and explore confidently with offline maps and on trail navigation. Download the free app today.
- [01:45]
Charlie Sykes
Welcome to the to the Contrary podcast. I'm Charlie Sykes, joined by a very special guest, Maine Senator Angus King, an independent from Maine. Two term Governor of Maine. That's right. Two terms, right, Senator? Two terms, yeah. And you've been in the United states Senate since 2012 as an independent. I want to talk about that. Hey, before we get started though, I want to ask you about Margaret Chase Smith. This is one of those three or four degrees of separation. My father was William Proxmire's biographer. William Proxmire took Joe McCarthy's seat in Wisconsin, and 75 years ago, Maine Senator Margaret Chase Smith stood up on the floor of the senate to denounce McCarthyism. And I guess the question is, is it conceivable that any member of the Senate would do that today? Any Republican members of the Senate?
- [02:38]
Angus King
Charlie? I'm afraid it's unlikely that someone would stand up and go against their party to the extent that Margaret did. It was an extraordinary speech and if you read it, it could have been written last week. It talks about the techniques of McCarthy and how. And she made the point that being opposed to communism wasn't a bad thing. It was the way he was doing it. And right now, my problem with President Trump is not necessarily his agenda, although I disagree with most of it. It's the way he's going about it and basically pulling all power into his hands. But the. The short answer to your question is it hasn't happened yet. And it was an incredibly courageous act by Margaret chase Smith. And McCarthy primaried her. You know, that's the threat today. It will primary you. McCarthy primaried her in 54. And she crushed the opposition, the fellow that he put up against her. But it was one of the great speeches of the 20th century. And I got to know her later. I did a documentary for the local PBS station and really spent a pretty fair amount of time with her, and she told me some great stories. One was on her way to make the speech, she got into the little trolley at the Russell Building to go to the Capitol, and there, sitting on the seat next to her was Joe McCarthy.
- [04:04]
Charlie Sykes
Great.
- [04:04]
Angus King
And he looked at her and said, margaret, you look awfully serious. What are you up to? And she said, I'm going to make a speech, Joe, and you're not going to like it. And then when she got to the Senate chamber, she had her aide, Bill Lewis, up in the press gallery with copies of the speech. But she told me this. She told Bill Lewis not to start handing out the copies of the speech until she started speaking because she was afraid she was going to lose her nerve.
- [04:33]
Charlie Sykes
Really?
- [04:35]
Angus King
Absolutely. And then she, of course, went through with the speech. And as I say, it was one of the. One of the great speeches of the 20th century. It took a while for everybody else to catch up with what McCarthy was up to, but she was the first person to speak out. Here's another little bit of historical background. She was in the Congress through World War II. She ran for the Senate in 1948 against four men, two former governors. But in that campaign in 1948, there was circulated in Maine something she called the smear sheet. And it was an anonymous sheet linking her with a Communist member of the House of Representatives. And it purported to align their voting records. And of course, it was on things like voting to adjourn, it wasn't substantive. So she'd experienced an early phase of the anti Communism hysteria of the late 40s and early 50s, and I believe that influenced her determination to make that speech.
- [05:39]
Charlie Sykes
Well, and also it's worth remembering that very few Senate speeches are talked about or remembered 75 years later and in her courage, standing up and she was a Republican, denouncing a fellow Republican for the anti Communism ought to be a symbol of what you can do in political courage. But that's also part of an era in which politicians, officeholders, actually cared about things like the Constitution. That's what I wanted to talk to you because you're sounding the alarm and we should dive into the nerdiness right away because I know you often will cite what James Madison wrote in Federalist 51, where he said ambition must be made to counteract ambition, and basically describing why you would have a balance of power between the branches of government, checks and balances. So I guess the question, and this keeps coming up over and over again, and I know you've been talking about this, why Congress has been so willing to cede power to the executive branch, why we now live in a, in a constant, sort of almost feels like a post constitutional moment. And you can disagree with me, where all the power is aggregated in the presidency. So I guess the question is, is this a usurpation of power or an abdication of power by Congress?
- [07:01]
Angus King
I think that's an absolutely great way to frame the question, and I think it's both. Charlie. It's certainly the president is usurping power of the purse, power to make legislation. By the way, an executive order is not a law. Just listen, make that clear from the beginning. But clearly Congress has not done what Madison expected, which was to protect its own prerogatives. The reason was Madison and Washington and the early framers didn't contemplate political parties. They didn't like them. You can read the Federalist Papers, read Washington's farewell Address, they talk about the danger of faction. And of course, it didn't take long. It was Adams and Jefferson where the two parties really began. But what we've got now is almost like a parliamentary system where the executive controls the legislature and they're of the same party and they're going to do whatever the President says. And that's a fundamental violation of the structure of the Constitution, which was put there to protect us, to protect. And this is what I keep telling my friends, you may like what Trump is doing now, but you're not going to like it when he turns on you using this power that you've abdicated. The other line from Madison, the other thing that he said was in the 47th Federalist where he said the accumulation in one set of hands of the legislative, judicial and executive power is the perfect definition of Tyranny. He used the word tyranny. And that should hit us pretty hard. And that's really what worries me, Charlie. That's where we're headed.
- [08:51]
Charlie Sykes
So, but explain to me though why members of the US Senate and the US Congress would be willing to give up this power. I mean, James Madison said, look, people are going to be jealous of their power. I mean, United States Senators are not potted plants. They have the ability to, you know, to really stymie anything that they find really objectionable. And a lot of what's happening right now is happening because senators have decided they're simply going to roll over, that they see their job as serving the executive. How did that happen?
- [09:25]
Angus King
Well, I don't know. I mean, you're a student of American politics. I never recall a time when a public official, when a president had the sort of almost cult like control over the followers and what these folks are being told. And this is very interesting that we're having this discussion this week because prior to this week what they were being told is if you buck the administration, you will be primaried and Musk will pay for it. Now, I don't know after this week whether that second part of it is, is still valid, but that's a pretty heavy duty threat. And I hesitate to say this, Charlie, but there's also physical security going on in the background. People are worried, fear about an angry person that's a big supporter and you know, has a gun. And that's a very uncomfortable thing to say. But threats against member, members of Congress have gone up exponentially in the last two or three years. And so. But mostly it's political. Mostly it's, my colleagues are worried about a primary and they rationalize by saying, well, the courts are going to take care of it or, you know, it'll sort of blow over and it'll be okay. You know, it's just, I don't think they're focused on how serious this is as a constitutional breach and what the implications are. They think this politics as usual. King is saying what he does because he's against Trump and this is an attack on Trump. It's an attack on what Trump is doing and what it means to our country. To go back to Madison, you put legislative and executive power and avoid the strictures of the courts and you're in a dangerous place. History cries out to us. Concentrated power in one set of hands is dangerous. And that's what I'm trying to get across.
- [11:36]
Charlie Sykes
So. But there's a short term problem and a long Term problem. I mean, the short term problem, Trumpism is obviously the emergency, but this accretion of power in the executive is not a new phenomenon. That's not strictly a partisan issue. Right. I mean, we've had warnings about the imperial presidency for decades now, and it does seem as if parties only really become concerned about the imperial presidency when the other guy is there. So, yes, I mean, Trump has run roughshod over constitutional guardrails, but there have been Democratic presidents as well. And I guess the question I want to ask you on the historical level is that are we in a cycle, sort of a vortex, where, you know, as one party becomes more aggressive in the use and abuse of executive power, that creates a precedent then for the next guy to ratchet it up as well?
- [12:31]
Angus King
I think that's accurate. However, I think where we are now is qualitatively different. Some of my. When I'm talking to my Republican friends, they say, well, Biden tried to get rid of student loans unconstitutionally. Okay, that, you know, that's jaywalking compared to what we're seeing now, where you're destroying entire congressionally created agencies by executive order. And the attacks on the First Amendment, on the law firms. Nothing like this has ever really happened before. But I think you're right. I mean, there's been a gradual accretion of power in the executive over the years. And you're also right that a lot of it is Congress advocating. Perfect example is the war power, the Constitution. They had a great debate in August of 1787 about how to handle the war power. And some people said, well, you know, it should be in the president. And others said, no, we don't want him to be like the King of England, starting wars on his own account and that kind of thing. So they compromised, made the president the commander in chief, but left the declaration of war in the hands of Congress. Well, you know, when Congress Last Declared War, 1942. So this is a case where Congress has abdicated its power, and it's a little bit of both. But I do think clearly prior presidents have tried to usurp congressional power in various ways, But I don't think anything like what we're seeing now has happened in our history.
- [14:05]
Charlie Sykes
No. And they've abdicated the war powers. You've talked about the power to regulate trade, the power of the purse, the integrity of the laws, and I know you've talked about this as kind of a crisis in civics education, is that we need to sort of go back to kind of the basic, why was The Constitution set up the way it is. What are these American values? But I guess going back to it as an admirer of the Constitution and the great experiment, whether or not we're now seeing some of the flaws, including the fact that so many of these guardrails turned out to be based on kind of an honor principle, right. The belief that only honorable men and women would be in the executive. The pardon power, which has almost no limitation whatsoever. I mean, talk to me about that. I mean, I think the Constitution is a great document, but right now we're seeing, you know, I think some of the vulnerabilities that there is that weakness in.
- [15:03]
Angus King
Well, I think you're absolutely right. And again, I hate to keep citing the Federalists, but Hamilton, there's a lot of talk about virtuous leadership and the essential quality of maintaining the system is leaders of character and respect and those kinds of things. I'm not sure they contemplated where we are. I mean, interestingly, the electoral college, which was set up initially as a kind of council of elders to choose the best person as president. That was the concept the framers. The only part of the Constitution which was publicly elected is the House. The Senate was elected by state legislatures. The President was elected by this, what was intended to be a council of elders of people to select the best person. That never worked that way. And of course now it's entirely a political creature. But you're right, I mean you can't, I don't know how you write a document that doesn't in some way depend upon the character of the people who are doing the work. And the independence of the courts is a very powerful and important part of the, of the document which we're seeing now on a day to day basis. The question is how will the administration react? So far they haven't been very anxious to abide by the decisions of the court. The classic example is the guy in El Salvador. He's still there. U.S. supreme Court unanimously said facilitate bringing him back and we haven't done a damn thing. And that's worrisome because if the courts aren't going to be able to make this defense, you know, I'm not sure where we go. Are you aware that by the way, there's a provision tucked into the reconciliation bill in the House that basically says that the courts can enforce contempt orders against members of the administration? I mean, I am aware of that.
- [17:02]
Charlie Sykes
And well, holy smokes, I mean, how can that possibly pass constitutional muster? What do you think? I mean, Constitution grants.
- [17:14]
Angus King
The Constitution grants Congress considerable Power over the Article 3 courts. And I would hope that it couldn't, but it would eviscerate what power the courts have. I mean, you know, famously, the courts don't have an army or a police force. And the contempt process is one of the few sort of guardrails that they have. And it's unbelievable to me that that's in the. That's in this bill that's come over to the Senate. Another good example of what you're talking about is the trade policy. Commerce among nations is the third clause of Article 1, Section 8. Trade policy is expressly delegated to Congress. Now, here's where abdication and usurpation meet. Congress delegated to the president policy over tariff in emergencies. And of course, this president has declared emergencies where none exist or wherever he thinks he can call it something, an emergency. And so he's taken over the unilateral power to determine the trade policy of the United States, which thus far ain't working out. Very well.
- [18:25]
Charlie Sykes
No. So, I mean, what. This is not intended as a trick question, but what is the most shocking thing that's happened so far? Is it the attack on the law firms? Is it the attack on the courts? Is it the where? I think part of the problem is that we're all trying to figure out where do you look, what is on fire in this emergency. What alarms you the most?
- [18:52]
Angus King
Well, it's hard to prioritize because I think it's all serious. To me, probably the most serious overall is the restructuring of the federal government without involving Congress, which is entrusted with making policy. And the absolute failure of this president to honor the fundamental responsibility in Article 2, which is to take care that the laws be faithfully executed. It doesn't say take care that the laws he agrees with be faithfully executed. And to be just arbitrarily saying, you know, we're not going to do this. We had the experience in man where our governor got crosswise with him on this trans athletes issue and they started cutting off funds to Maine and a whole, you know, agriculture and university. That's not. My colleagues should worry about that. If we're being governed by vengeance, I think that was pretty chilling. The law firm thing, what he's doing with the university, universities with research. All of those things are add together and what you have is, as I say, a qualitatively different attack on the constitutional structure.
- [20:18]
Charlie Sykes
So are we headed toward a constitutional crisis? Are we in a constitutional crisis?
- [20:24]
Angus King
I think we're in one. I think we're definitely in one. And there are only three real guardrails at the end. Charlie. One is the courts, and they're holding up their end pretty well right now, although it's I almost said the jury is still out when talking about the courts, but we don't know yet to what extent they'll be able to enforce their orders and to what extent the, the president will obey the court's orders. Of course he says he will obey them, but he hasn't done anything about Mr. Garcia down in El Salvador, where they had a unanimous order. Do you know how hard it is to get a unanimous order out of the Supreme Court? So the courts are one bulwark and they're pretty well holding up their end. The Congress is the second bulwark and it's not holding up its end virtually not at all. And I keep waiting for my colleagues to say this is it, enough is enough. So far that hasn't happened. But there are little shoots. For example, there's a bipartisan bill to reclaim the trade power back to Congress. And we've come very close on some, you know, recalling some of those trade issues. There was some sharp questioning today in the Armed Services Committee about why don't we have a budget and what's the, what are the long term plans of the and those came from Republicans, from the administration. So I think there are some stirrings, I think, but not to the extent that there should be. And again, this isn't about policy or politics or elections. It's about the fundamental viability of the constitutional structure, which is there for a reason. I mean, you and I learned about checks and balances in the sixth grade, and it's become sort of a cliche, checks and balances. But checks and balances are the heart of the Constitution, to keep power out of one set of hands. It's because history tells us and the framers understood implicitly that that was dangerous. All power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
- [22:40]
Charlie Sykes
Well, I do think that one of the things, and I think this is the point you're making also, is that we had grown complacent. We had taken many of these things for granted. And now not just a matter of resistance, but a matter of relearning many of these principles, right? I mean, Americans really kind of thought they were immune from history, from the kinds of things that had happened to other societies.
- [23:02]
Angus King
You're absolutely right. We, we have a short sense of history. We think history is what happened yesterday and tomorrow will be just like it. What we don't realize is that what we have here is an anomaly in world history. The norm is kings, pharaohs, emperors, czars, presidents for life. That's the norm. What we have is a 250 year experiment that's, as I say, quite unusual and fragile. Just in our lifetimes, Charlie, we've seen countries go from democracies to authoritarian before our eyes. Hungary, Turkey, you know, others. And Russia. I mean, Russia had a flirtation with democracy in the 1990s, and now it's, they've got a new czar. So that's what I think Americans don't realize is that. And my colleagues, this is what I'm trying to get. This ain't politics as usual. This isn't just, you know, the Democrats attacking Trump. This is a fundamental question about how we're going to be governed and going forward, are we going to have one man rule? And that's what's at stake here. And that's why I think we, you're absolutely right. We think it's, you know, what we have that we just completely take for granted. What my fear is that we're not going to realize how precious it is until it's gone.
- [24:35]
Charlie Sykes
Is there a red line that you think is coming up that your colleagues will say, okay, thus far, no further? Is there anything. I'm very skeptical that there is one for Republicans in the Senate. But you work with them on a daily basis.
- [24:53]
Angus King
I can't think of a particular red line, but I do. Well, here's an interesting one. There's a lot of undercurrent in the Senate now about Ukraine.
- [25:04]
Charlie Sykes
Yes.
- [25:04]
Angus King
And supporting Ukraine. And I think if this president, you know, gives Ukraine away to Putin, there'll be a, there'll be some real, there'll be some very strong bipartisan backlash. But I keep waiting for that red line and so far I haven't seen it. The other piece, Charlie, is I said there were three bulwarks and I talked about the courts in the Congress. The third is the people. And as the depredations of this administration start to hit home in the countryside and the local, you know, people who say, well, I voted for him, but I didn't vote for this, start to provide feedback to their representatives and senators, I think that's the ultimate support, the ultimate protection is the people. But of course, there isn't an election for 18 months and the question is getting from here to there. And I, I'm very worried about where we might be by the time that, I mean, we've gone. I think you'd agree we've gone pretty far toward authoritarianism in barely six months, far and fast, another year is concerning.
- [26:24]
Charlie Sykes
Yeah, we haven't seen the end. So in the few minutes we have left, I just want to comment on something that, you know, we just celebrated the anniversary of D Day, June 6, and, you know, a lot of bloviating about, you know, the courage of D Day and everything. The point that I hope that people remember historically is that America was not alone. America first did not mean America alone. That on D Day, we had American troops, we had British troops, we had Canadian troops, troops from Australia, from Belgium, the Czechs, French, Greek troops, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Rhodesia, now Zimbabwe. And so in many ways, D Day was the great repudiation of the first America First. And yet now we're in the process of alienating those allies. You know, you cannot talk about D Day without talking about the fact that America used to have allies who trusted us.
- [27:22]
Angus King
Well, for the past dozen years, Charlie, I've served on armed services and intelligence, and I've come to realize that our principal asymmetric advantage in the world is allies. We have more allies and stronger allies than anybody else. China has customers. We have allies. And to be systematically poking the eye of our allies is. It makes no sense from a geopolitical point of view. It makes no sense from the point of view of the country. Let me tell you something that I've heard just in the last few days. I've talked to several main businesses who have subsidiaries or associate businesses over in Europe. They're losing business because the customers over there say they don't want to do business with an American business.
- [28:10]
Charlie Sykes
Yeah.
- [28:11]
Angus King
Holy smoke. Think of that. What that's done to our reputation and what that will do. I mean, that's sort of. It's hard to measure something like that. But I was amazed. One of my friends told me that they lost a major account in Germany because the customer didn't want to do business with a company that had a parent in America. So you're absolutely right. D Day was a good example of the importance of allies. And you've got to remember this term, America First. It has echoes of the late 30s, when America first was essentially a pro Nazi and, you know, keeping out of the war was Lindbergh. And when I first heard the President say it in his first inaugural, it sort of sent a shiver, and I wondered, does he know the origin of that term?
- [29:03]
Charlie Sykes
Who knows?
- [29:05]
Angus King
It can't be. We can't go it alone, and we're giving up our advantage if we try to go it alone.
- [29:12]
Charlie Sykes
No. In fact, if the America Firsters had their way, we would not have been there on D Day, right? We would have been isolationists.
- [29:18]
Angus King
We.
- [29:19]
Charlie Sykes
We would have been Fortress America. Senator Angus King, thank you so much for joining me and for your time this morning. I appreciate it very much.
- [29:26]
Angus King
Charlie, great to talk to you and thanks for the work you're doing. And we've just got to keep sounding the alarm, man.
- [29:33]
Charlie Sykes
And it is alarming. That's why we do this podcast. Because more than ever, it is important to remind ourselves that we are not the crazy ones. Thanks.
- [29:42]
Angus King
Thank you.
- [29:55]
Redfin Representative
With the Redfin app, you'll know the moment your next place hits the market. Whether you're looking to buy your dream home or rent a sweet apartment, Give Redfin your gotta have it wish list of property features and you'll receive real time notifications tailored just for you. Ready to see it up close and personal. Scheduling a tour is just a tap away. Don't wait to find your perfect match. Download the Redfin app and start searching.
- [30:20]
Oracle Representative
Today, tariff and trade policies are dynamic, supply chains squeezed and cash flow tighter than ever. You need total visibility from global shipments to tariff impacts to real time cash flow. That's NetSuite by Oracle, your AI powered business management suite. Trusted by over 41,000 businesses, NetSuite brings accounting, financial management, inventory, HR into OneSuite to help you know what's stuck, what it's costing you, and how to pivot fast if your revenues are at least in the seven figures. Download the free ebook Navigating Global 3 Insights for Leaders at netsuite.com Tech.
- [31:01]
AllTrails Representative
Every idea starts with a problem. Warby Parker's was simple. Glasses are too expensive, so they set out to change that. By designing glasses in house and selling directly to customers, they're able to offer prescription eyewear that's expertly crafted and unexpectedly affordable. Warby Parker glasses are made from premium materials like impact resistant polycarbonate and custom acetate, and they start at just $95 including prescription lenses. Get glasses made from the good stuff. Stop by a Warby Parker store near you.
- [31:32]
Paige
This is Paige, the co host of Giggly Squad. I use Uber Eats for everything and I feel like people forget that you can truly order anything, especially living in New York City. It's why I love it. You can get Chinese food at any time of night, but it's not just for food. I order from CVS all the time. I'm always ordering from the grocery store. If a friend stops over, I have to order champagne. I also have this thing that whenever I travel, if I'm ever in a hotel room, I never feel like I'm missing something because I'll just Just Uber Eats it. The amount of times I've had to Uber eats hair items like hairspray, deodorant, you name it, I've ordered it. On UberEats, you can get grocery alcohol everyday essentials in addition to restaurants and food you love. So in other words, get Almost anything with UberEats. Order now for alcohol, you must be legal drinking age. Please enjoy responsibly. Product availability varies by region. See app for details.
- [32:32]
Redfin Representative
Hi, it's Danny Pellegrino from Everything Iconic, and I couldn't help but wonder, when is the official and Just like that podcast coming back? Well, it's back, baby. And Just like that is back on Max. And so is the official podcast. Each week on and Just like that, the Writers Room join writer, director and executive producer Michael Patrick King as he unpacks every episode after it airs on Max. Listen to and Just like that, the Writers Room on Max or wherever you get your podcasts.