Loading summary
Transcript94 lines
- [00:01]
Charlie Sykes
Psoriatic arthritis symptoms can be unpredictable.
- [00:04]
Harry Littman
I had joint pain and I couldn't.
- [00:06]
Charlie Sykes
Move like I used to. I needed relief. I got Cosentyx.
- [00:12]
Harry Littman
It helped me move better.
- [00:14]
Commercial Voice
Cosentyx Secukinumab is prescribed for people 2 years of age and older with active psoriatic arthritis. Don't use if you're allergic to Cosentyx. Before starting, get checked for tuberculosis. An increased risk of infections and lowered ability to fight them may occur. Like tuberculosis or other serious bacterial, fungal or viral infections. Some were fatal. Tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms like fevers, sweats, chills, muscle aches or cough, had a vaccine or planned to or if inflammatory bowel disease symptoms develop or worsen, serious allergic reactions and severe eczema like skin reactions may occur. Learn more at 1-844-COSENTIX or cosentix.com.
- [00:55]
Charlie Sykes
Ask your traumatologist about Cosentyx.
- [01:00]
Harry Littman
Hey Ryan Reynolds here wishing you a.
- [01:02]
Commercial Voice
Very happy half off holiday because right now Mint Mobile is offering you the gift of 50% off unlimited.
- [01:09]
Harry Littman
To be clear, that's half price, not half the service. Mint is still premium unlimited wireless for a great price. So that means a half day.
- [01:20]
Commercial Voice
Yeah, give it a try@mintmobile.com Switch upfront.
- [01:23]
Charlie Sykes
Payment $45 for three month plan equivalent to 15 per month required new customer offer for first three months only. Speed slow after 35 gigabytes of network's busy taxes and fees extra.
- [01:29]
Michelle Bernstein
See mintmobile.com hi I'm Darina, co founder of Quo. You might know us as OpenPhone. My dad is a business owner and growing up he always kept his ringtone super loud so he'd never miss a customer call. That stuck with me. When we started Quo, our mission was to help businesses not just stay in touch, but make every customer feel valued no matter when they might call. QUO gives your team business phone numbers to call and text on your phone or computer. Your calls, messages and contacts live in one workspace so your team can stay fully aligned and reply faster. And with our AI agent answering 24. Seven, you'll really never miss a customer. Over 90,000 businesses use quo. Get 20% off@quo.com business that's quote.com business and we can port your existing numbers over for free. Quo no missed calls, no missed customers.
- [02:28]
Charlie Sykes
Welcome back to the to the Contrary podcast. I'm Charlie Sykes. We are coming off an incredibly grim weekend. The more you think about it. The massacre of Jews in Australia in Los Angeles, apparently a domestic terror attack was was foiled that's the good news. But then we have the shooting at Brown that left two students dead. And of course we have the legendary director Rob Reiner and his wife who were murdered in an answer to the question there is any bottom to Donald Trump? No, there's not. So we have a lot to talk about today. And joining us on today's podcast, our good friend Harry Littman from Talking Feds. Harry, there's just so many things to talk about. Should we, I just feel the need to talk about Donald Trump's reaction to the murder of Rob Reiner. Do you want to start there?
- [03:28]
Harry Littman
You know, why don't we. Because it's just so stunning. You think about often a, what could he be thinking? But B, is there anyone who even who supports him for policy that couldn't be repulsed by it? I mean, I think, you know, a psychiatrist would have a field day and you could diagnose sort of narcissistic personality disorder from it alone.
- [03:53]
Charlie Sykes
Yeah, yeah. This is, this is the Donald J. Trump social media bleed after, after Rob Reiner and his wife were found dead. And by the way, since then, it turns out that this has nothing to do with politics whatsoever. Apparently it is a terrible, you know, family, family tragedy. Their, their son has been arrested in cases. By the way, I want to put this in context. Remember a few months ago all the MAGA influencers were saying that if you did not respond respectfully, respectfully to the murder of Charlie Kirk, then you were the worst person in the world. Remember all of that rhetoric about, you know, how dare you, you know, take a cheap shot or anything. I wonder where those voices are today. In any case, Donald J. Trump, the President of the United States, posted this yesterday at 9:51am A very sad thing happened last night in Hollywood. Rob Reiner, a tortured and struggling but once very talented movie director and comedy star, has passed away together with his wife Michelle reported due to the anger he caused others through his massive, unyielding and incurable affliction with a mind crippling disease known as now all in caps Trump Derangement Syndrome, sometimes referred to as tds. He was known to have driven people crazy all caps by his raging obsession of with President Donald J. Trump. With his obvious paranoia reaching new heights as the Trump administration surpassed all goals and expectations of greatness along with the golden age of America upon us perhaps like never before. May Rob and Michel rest in peace. Okay, Harry. The fact that he would dunk on this, that he would troll before getting any information, and there's nothing about that that's accurate, that this was, I don't know. Do you think some MAGA fan did it? Again, no politics. But what goes through the mind of Donald Trump and what goes through the mind of his supporters, his Christian supporters, his traditional value supporters, the ones who were shocked and horrified by the reaction to Charlie Kirk's murder? How do they process the fact that this is coming from the President of the United States?
- [06:08]
Harry Littman
Can you imagine? Right. I mean, it's not simply that he would say it, that he would think it. You know, his, his impulse is that somehow this is like everything else in the country, all about him. You have to imagine somehow, you know, the moon landing, the fall of the Berlin Wall, it's all got a Trump, Trump centric story. But, but, and, and let's just say, you know, that I've given up on the first thing trying to psychoanalyze them, but I'm often think, think about the. Everything I need to know, I learned in kindergarten. And you see that sign about just basic decency, as in humanity. And every single precept, he just, excuse the expression, like pisses all over every day. But the, the absolute tastelessness of this after such a tragedy and the suggestion that somehow it is not just all about him, but this is what people get who are opposed to him politically. One can't imagine Charlie, but you know, we've tried hard to really give the due to people who have voted for him and understand and take on some of it. But trying to have that mindset with this, what cognitive dissonance must it mean that this is the leader of the free world, the person who at times of national tragedy, brings us together and making it not just about Trump, but grievances about Trump. So it's breathtakingly false, of course, but also in breathtakingly bad, ugly taste. It's just so debased.
- [07:55]
Charlie Sykes
Tragedies can bring out the best in people, but they also can bring out the absolute worst. With Donald Trump, every time there's an incident like this, it feels like we're just opening up and we're being able to see into his soul, or what used to be his soul. By the way, this is what Chuck Todd said on Chris Liz's podcast yesterday when he was asked about this. He said he did not mince any words. He said, look, Trump is the scumbag. He's the person that a lot of America, you know, you hear, right? I don't like that guy. I don't want him around my kids, but I want him as president. There is this group of voters who want that. But then there are moments like today, when you realize just how much we've lost as Americans. When you have somebody who's incapable of empathy. He's broken. We could sit here and trash him. What a horrible person. I just think he's a broken person. And I agree with that. But to your point, it's a broken country that supports him. If they do.
- [08:51]
Harry Littman
It really feels that way. And it's just like a deep embarrassment. It's just a day, you know, it's a day of mourning where it feels like the world is coming apart for the reasons you said. But now it becomes a day of, like, embarrassment and shame to be an American. Here's our leader, the front facing person to the whole world, and this is what he says. And by the way, I just want to mention it seems like he's touched many, many lives. Rob, Rob, Rob Reiner.
- [09:23]
Charlie Sykes
Yeah.
- [09:23]
Harry Littman
Small point. Which is he was, he was such a mensch about, you know, we had this fledgling podcast and he invited us to his house to tape it. The first thing I thought about when I heard, which is, I can't believe anybody could get into that house. I wonder if it's, you know, somebody he knew, but did a few sidebars for, etc, just, just to be a, you know, to kind of give a, a little shot in the arm for, for a small pie. And I'm learning from different peers of mine, he did that again and again in a, you know, pretty quiet way. And I'll just. There's more to be said about him. But we all, you know, I, I think it's almost modeling to spend too much time, but also a man who went from, you know, kind of supporting actor, funny guy to a really eminent director who made, you know, movies that really captured the national city. Right. And so it's even worse in a way, what Trump is saying, but I just want to take one half beat to, you know, note the menshee genius that he was.
- [10:33]
Charlie Sykes
Well, and he was a very, very thoughtful, very passionate, very committed opponent of what Trump was doing to the country. He was also very, very outspoken about anti Semitism. And by the way, we also got that remark, reminder how deadly antisemitism can be, that these words and these ideas have real consequences. You know, the story out of Australia is just so heartbreaking. It's so outrageous. It's heartbreaking in and of itself. But when you read, you know, for example, what David Frum wrote in the Atlantic about all the warnings that they had, all of the Indications that things were becoming toxic. If there's any good news at all, it is that in Australia, unlike in the United States, they will do something. They will tighten their gun laws. There will be a response, which are.
- [11:16]
Harry Littman
Already pretty tight, by the way. Next off, right?
- [11:18]
Charlie Sykes
Yeah. Whereas in the wake of the shooting at Brown, you know, that nothing will be done, you know, that there is no possibility that we will ever do anything about the guns except prosecute the.
- [11:30]
Harry Littman
You know, when they find the shooter, which I think they will. But, yeah, just Australia. One of the things that Rob Reiner actually did a sidebar for talking feds on had to do with anti Semitism in America. I think will replay some of it. But I, you know, I just gotta say, there's so many different directions this takes us in, Charlie. But one of them is, you know, when a country like Australia that you think of as sort of, you know, forward leaning and progressive succumbs to this cancer, that every time it rears its head, it's a sign of some kind of national decay. It really is tragic. And it was so purposeful. Right. This was a actual gathering of Jews for a holiday. So, you know, somebody. It was. It's a blatant kind of anti Semitism thing.
- [12:19]
Charlie Sykes
Yeah. Well, just one brief comment on, on the, on the Brown shooting. Somebody leaked the name of a young man who was a person of interest, whose name is all over the media. He's apparently from Cedarburg, Wisconsin, which. Cedarburg, Wisconsin is like two minutes from where I am right now. I probably am in Cedarburg pretty much every single day. And this young man who was a decorated veteran, you know, where does he go to get his reputation back? You know, the, the incompetence of some of these people that would release that kind of. Or allow that kind of information to get out is, of course, heartbreaking. But let's wait for more of the facts to come out.
- [12:59]
Harry Littman
I just want to say one quick thing about that, Charlie, because. And we saw this before, like an anthrax and Stephen Hayfield, and it is the reason why the Department of Justice is enjoined from talking about prosecutions before they bring them. And it has been not just honored in the breach, but just completely eviscerated this rule. And there's really good reasons, both to protect an investigation, but also to protect the reputation of people who are innocent until proven guilty. And it seems sometimes that the strategy of this administration is actually to bring charges they know will fail just in order to do the improper of completely dirtying up somebody's Reputation and make them.
- [13:49]
Charlie Sykes
Oh, absolutely, yeah.
- [13:50]
Harry Littman
Think about Letitia James, Jim Comey, all the people.
- [13:53]
Charlie Sykes
Well, and obviously you're seeing that they're going to be weaponizing that. You know that the eight page memo that I talked about last week got some coverage that Pam Bondi put out where they're creating a list of domestic extremists and terrorists. Now, there are domestic extremists and terrorists. Saw that with the bomb plot in la. But they are casting such a wide net, anyone who basically is to the left of MAGA has the possibility of ending up on that list. And again, you don't need to be charged with anything. You just need to have the federal government say you're being investigated. And Gary Kasparov has made this point that, again, you don't need to throw people into jail. You just spread that reputational fear and donors dry up. People don't want to get involved. They don't want to speak out 100%.
- [14:43]
Harry Littman
Look, that's been, in some ways the story of Trump 2.0 is all the damage he can do to universities and law firms and media without doing, you know, actually taking them to court or trying to prosecute them. And this, you know, in particular is it just has this kind of reputational hit. And by the way, it's not anyone to the left of maga. The way one way you can get on it is by using the word fascist to describe.
- [15:17]
Charlie Sykes
Right.
- [15:18]
Harry Littman
Any members of the administrative. Now, we have, I think, been very, as commentators, been very sort of careful and cautious. Just so for credibility, I think, not to go to analogies of Mussolini or Hitler, but they are there. And the major point is it's just straight up First Amendment, totally credible kind of discussion to have. And so it's not like, where are you on the political spectrum? It's that you would dare have what is clearly First Amendment protected speech. And yeah, that's what we're going to find. Assuming the courts come through. It doesn't matter because he still brings on inconvenience, expense, calumny to people, you know, who are just, you know, are not able to live their lives. And it's just the complete going after the tyranny toward dissent. It's just a way of trying to undermine normal, straightforward dissent. We've never even had that in some of our worst periods.
- [16:19]
Charlie Sykes
No, we haven't. We've come awfully close. You know, the Supreme Court has been pretty good on First Amendment issues. But let's talk about the Supreme Court and where we're at, because I have to say it is very hard to keep track of all of this. We're all waiting still on the big tariff ruling but last week was, was, was one of the more I don't distressing moments when it appeared likely to most observers I think you would would agree that the, that the court is, is about to dramatically expand presidential power by allowing him to fire at will members of what used to be considered independent agencies. So talk to me about that and how you read that particular it certainly seems as if this court is pretty much all in on that unitary executive theory.
- [17:09]
Harry Littman
Is that your read or six of them are. Well I got two or three quick points to make and we could talk about this for maybe you'll come to talking Feds and do it but point one, that's right the so called Humphreys executor case. It's dead something that generations of law students have studied and with it 90% but not all of so called independent agencies whose independence consists merely of some buffer between raw political firing by a president. Just that you need some reason as opposed to no reason. But third point is they, you could say they're all in on the unitary executive theory but if you were all in on that theory you would have to apply it for example to the Fed and you saw the court casting about, you know, other than a couple of them give me some limiting principle. Why do you need a limiting principle if you believe in the unitary executive? That's just the way it goes. You need a limiting principle because you understand that with presidents like Trump having them willy nilly just be able to replace say the head of the Fed or the Nuclear Regulatory Commission etc. Is a recipe for not just bad policy but like potential disaster. But if that's really what the you know, Constitution put in put in place. So it is. And then just one.
- [18:37]
Charlie Sykes
Let me ask you about that. Let me just ask you about that though. So is there a. Do you think that they will be able to do a carve out? I mean it sounds like you think that they would like to have a carve out for the Fed but if they're at all consistent they won't so they, they will have destroyed the independence of the Fed which will have consequences.
- [18:56]
Harry Littman
Huge consequences in my. And actually do I think they will. I think they will have a carve out. Why do I think they will. I have no it's that five votes. It's literally I think you're gonna have interesting an intellectually incoherent opinion that just says well we're not talking about the Fed today. It's inexorable logic. I mean, it's a little bit, Charlie, like the overruling of Roe v. Wade that if you read that opinion, has to lead to the overruling of same sex marriage. But they just shy away for whatever mixture of, you know, political reasons and trying to preserve their own capital. But it says volumes. The unitary executive theory is hugely controversial. This is its apotheosis. But, you know, if you mean it, you mean it. And so I think there'll be a carve out, but it won't be coherent. I just want to make one final point about the Supreme Court, which is the thing we're really, this is bad and it will have consequences going forward. The eye that I try to, you know, the ball I try to keep my eye on, though, is whether they'll do anything that could somehow green light Trump's obvious efforts to just take control of the elections or have, in essence, emergency powers that he could go to town with. And we have now, it's been a frigging month since there were supplementary briefings submitted at their order, at the court's order in this Illinois v. Trump case that absolutely poses this issue. I need these emergency powers. And it doesn't matter if it's all Alice in Wonderland and there's no rebellion and there's no. And we can still get it done with regular forces if the court greenlights that. I think the emergency power, the deference it's given him to call emergency and do all kinds of mischief is huge. From the day they took that emergency petition, I've called it the big moment for the court so far. And it's just nail biting as well as striking that rather than process this in the three, four days they've been doing in this shadow docket way there, it's been literally a month. There is some kind of internal fight going on in the court, but that is even more. It's a, it's a big bad case, the one you just mentioned, but we knew it was happening. This is in genuine uncertainty given the briefing schedule that they, the supplemental briefs they ordered up. And I think it's as big an opinion as we've had from them in Trump 2.0.
- [21:41]
Charlie Sykes
Okay, just very briefly, I asked David French about this on the podcast the other day. He predicted that the court will strike down the tariff power. Where do you come down on all of that? My skepticism is, I mean, the logic seems very clear that if they are consistent, they will strike it down on the other hand, these justices have been very, very squeamish about making too big of a mess. And of course, it would be incredibly messy if the government had to refund a lot of those tariffs. So, I mean, where do you. What are you expecting from the court?
- [22:11]
Harry Littman
Yeah, so. So, with all respect to David French, a lawyer himself, he was actually, it's on our podcast that we just published this morning. So this is a tough one. I often, I know a lot of commentators shy away. I'll make predictions if I have them. For instance, the one I just made, this is. This is what I call a gun to the head. I can see it go in either way, but if you put a gun to my head, I disag with David. You have a really respectable court of appeals that's a specialist in these kinds of things, saying, this is a tax by any other name. And taxation is such a cornerstone power of Congress that I think they'd have to tie themselves in knots somehow to. This is a situation in which the constitutional lines are clear in a way, as they are, like in the US Attorney situation. Taxing. That's Congress. So the only question is really, can. Can Trump just play this Alice in Wonderland or Wellian game of saying, looks like a tax, quacks like a tax, smells like a. But it's not a tax, and therefore, I can do it. And I. I think that will be a bridge too far. And gun to the head again, I. I say they. They rebuff him.
- [23:31]
Charlie Sykes
Okay. No, you don't disagree with David French because he thinks the same thing. He thinks. He thinks they will. My.
- [23:36]
Harry Littman
Oh, and that they'll rebuff.
- [23:37]
Charlie Sykes
Yeah, no, no, it was my. It was my qualm. It was my qualm about the messiness. So I. You're.
- [23:42]
Harry Littman
You're.
- [23:43]
Charlie Sykes
You two. You two actually agree.
- [23:45]
Harry Littman
So we agree.
- [23:46]
Charlie Sykes
Okay, I want to just clarify something, because I get all kinds of questions about this. You know, Trump has been, you know, increasingly aggressive in his use of the pardon power. I mean, he's throwing them out. Just, I mean, like. Like Skittles, you know, corrupt, you know, crypto czars, drug kingpins, what, whatever. And every once in a while, people will say, well, can something be done about that? Can we reform that power? Can we do something about it? And at least my understanding is, no, this was a fundamental mistake by the Founding Fathers, who had too much faith in the executive and Congress and the American electorate. We're kind of stuck with all of that. But it is, you know, he has made it absolutely Clear that he will use this without any limits whatsoever. Is there any prospect at all that this could be limited?
- [24:33]
Harry Littman
Okay, so practically no. But look, when the history of Trump is written, I think there will be no area of greater corruption and we're talking going back to Trump 1.0 than his use of the pardon power. And there was a incandescent bright line that existed before the immunity opinion. Think about a pardon. Right you here, do you. Did you bring the bag with the million dollars? Oh great. Here's the pardon paper for you. And what he's done in some of these ways really is I think fits the elements of a crime. And the court didn't say you can't commit a crime, just that he can't be prosecuted for it. And fits bribery and theft of honest services and of course again and again and again is absolutely paradigmatic impeachable offenses. But there was such a line and the Supreme Court eviscerated it. And it's one of the, you know, what was. There's so much that's wrong and distorting about that immunity opinion. But the core point is they basically say you can't think about a president's motives for acting. And of course somebody's motives is. Well, that's what they basically said.
- [25:53]
Charlie Sykes
Yeah, right.
- [25:54]
Harry Littman
And somebody's motive, Charlie. That's what we apply to every basic moral judgment. You know, you, you do something, you shoot someone in self defense versus you shooting in cold blood and murder. So for some reason that, that most basic, if anything more important for a president notion of why they did something has been taken off the table and that means what really were in place, limits to the pardon power have just been swept away now. So what would have to happen? It would have to be a constitutional amendment. I want to say about the pardon power that unlike say some other things that are really, really gored us in the Trump era, like the electoral college, like the two senator bur those were things put in the Constitution as a kind of raw compromise without some deep thought. The pardon power is different. It should be an element of a pro of a modern justice system. But it's so clear, so clear that it's about and we had all these regulations and officers of doom that he's just wiped out somebody who's convicted righteously and does their time and then comes to to have a, you know, do rehabilitate themselves in society. That's why you have pardons. And it's an overall feature of I think a good comprehensive justice system. But he has again and Again, done it at the very beginning for people who then of course, what do they do? The January 6th offender, they come out of the box and say I'm a patriot and I was unfairly. Everything that makes them the absolute poster children for not getting a pardon is that's the way he's used it. So he's used it in criminal ways, except the court has cut us off. He's used it in ways that are, you know, never been used before and that are antithetical to the in power and should have sharp political consequences. And you talk he has distributed the skittles, but as he's doing, say in the military setting, the skittles only go one way, which is itself another crime would be to do pardons based on something that government can never do, based on the viewpoint of the, you know, in for, for. It's a violation of the First Amendment to ignore some people and give up because they're on your political side. So it's, it' really, you know, the political blocks have gone away. Imagine like, you know, Mark Rich, if that's not too ancient history or, you know, they've been controversial pardons or Nixon. So and so part of it is a symptom of the, you know, acquiescent and totally supine Senate and Congress. But, but a big part of it is the Supreme Court decision.
- [28:55]
Charlie Sykes
Well, the good news, if there is any here is there's a new Economist YouGov poll that was taken earlier this month showing that the is not buying this. In fact, the numbers are actually disastrous for Trump. 67% of respondents in this YouGov poll disapproved of the commutation of the sentence of David Gentile, who'd been convicted of $1.6 billion in financial fraud after serving two weeks of a seven year prison sentence. So 67% disapproved, 66% disapproved of the pardon of the Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernandez, who was convicted of drug trafficking and sentenced to 45 years in prison. 66% approve of the disapprove of the pardon of Democratic Texas Representative Henry Cuellar and his wife, who'd been charged with accepting $600,000 in bribes. The approval numbers are 11%, 13% and 15%. Those are just the hardcore. So this is not a political plus for Trump and I'm guessing that we have three years of this that he's going to be promising pardons and he's going to be handing them out on a regular basis and will probably escalate the More he becomes a lame duck president, I think we'll probably see even more. What do you think?
- [30:11]
Harry Littman
Like candy, right? Think about Ghislaine Maxwell as he's leaving. Just a couple points. First on the Honduran ex president. It's not only the incredible sort of irony and hypocrisy of pardoning him as we're bombing, you know, small time drug vessels off the Caribbean, but it also, it, it really shows what's bad about that whole operation. This is what you do with this is crimes you extradite according to an extradition provision, you put them on trial for and you give them due process guarantees, etc. That's what, that's what this is. When people, even if what the administration are saying is right, are flooding the, those are drug dealers and you use criminal law for that, you don't blow them out of the water without any sort of due process. So I mean that, that really brings that point home. But second, I just want to say the 66, 67% really consistent. Right. What is. It also puts me in mind of that's the number also that disapprove of Trump's handling of the economy. And it's always supposedly been this signature issue. As long as he can convince his MAGA faithful that he's the guy for economy, they'll overlook everything else. Well, guess what? He's not just losing them. But I think it's significant. I don't think there's ever been a big groundswell of we love what he's doing on pardons or we love what he's doing here, but people haven't focused on it. I think what's happening in general is not just a decline in numbers, but it's actually hitting home a little. Jesus. Where, you know, this is supposed to be a democracy. Here's what he said about Reiner or here's what he's doing in Venezuela. In other words, I think that the fairly, more than fairly, the extremely low numbers on things that people cared about and elected him for is now bleeding into the sorts of things that, you know, fuddy duddies like you and me have been screaming about for months because they go right to rule of law, democracy issues, et cetera. But I think, I think, I hope it's kind of coming home. Like what is he doing to the soul of this country in addition to the price of milk?
- [32:28]
Charlie Sykes
Well, this is a good segue to talk about what's going on in the Caribbean with the blowing up the boats, the extrajudicial killings, you had an interesting piece with the headline 21 Gun Salute for Admiral Alvin Halsey. So talk to me about that. He, of course was the commander who resigned, apparently at least everything we're seeing because he was deeply troubled about what, what was going on, what Secretary of War Crimes Pete Hegseth was ordering him to do. So talk to me a little bit about the admiral and why, why the 21 gun salute?
- [33:01]
Harry Littman
Yeah, and it's so, yeah, it's so admirable what he did. He actually, remember he announced his retirement. Such a class act as he, they didn't just leave. He gave some time to get things in order and Friday was actually his last official day. But look, he did impeccably what you would want someone at his level to do. He had really principled doubts about the law that is supposedly justifying these sorties. We can talk about this if you want, Charlie, after. But let me just say it's 100% clear that it's dubious. 100% clear. He's. He floated them quietly to his commanding officer. And, and it's true, you could call it a resignation of principle, but it's also been widely reported that Hegses said, you get in line with this, it is my way or the highway. So that's a little bit like a constructive discharge. Right?
- [33:59]
Charlie Sykes
He might have been fired.
- [34:00]
Harry Littman
Yeah. You know, you. Yeah, it's sort of like if you don't like it, get out of it. And this is 60 year old man, African American man who goes from ROTC in Morehouse to a 37 year career and he's now just 60, a four star admiral. That's effectively the highest rank in the whole Navy. He has the rest of his career to so influence policy and be such an important figure and he just gives it up out of principle. And you know, I think whistleblowers are important in a lawless administration like this. But he did it in such a, a classy way, just quietly didn't come out and trash Hex Seth. He did what, you know, the honorable thing is or used to be what, you know, before the Trump administration, just, you know, quietly stand down because he couldn't personally stomach or fathom being forced to participate in this. Not just lawless, but murderous. Right. If it's lawless, you know, we're just killing innocent people off the coast of the Caribbean. And I was so impressed with, you know, there have been some people been forced into vocal dissent and good for them, but the class act of this guy giving up so much without a peep I just thought, and it's in such contrast to a guy like Hegseth who, who is like Foghorn Leghorn so loud and you know, beating his chest and showing his tattoos and being wrong headed about it, he's saying we're to keep doing these things, etc. That the, that the absolute diametrical opposition was so clear. So it just seemed to me that, you know, we, because of how he did it, we hadn't really focused so much on him. And this was his day, his last day at work. So I really wanted to, you know, say, say why he exemplifies the best of American military power.
- [36:00]
Charlie Sykes
You know, I think it's very, very important that we acknowledge when there are these rare acts of cour. Principle or when somebody has not gone along because, you know, right now all of the incentives are to keep your head down, go along, avoid the controversy. So, speaking of which, what do you make of the continued. Apparently they haven't realized that going after Mark Kelly, an American hero, a sitting US Senator, is a very bad idea. They, you know, the Navy has come up with a report about how he could be disciplined. They could call him back in theory and court martial him. This strike, most of the time we were talking about the policy of intimidation, making people fear, and often it will be effective. This strikes me as just the wrong fight for the Trump administration. Are they really going to pursue legal action against a sitting United States senator, a former astronaut, a former fighter pilot decorated for his service to the country, who recorded a video basically stating the law as it exists? Are they really going to do that?
- [37:13]
Harry Littman
So the short answer I think is no. But as to having picked the wrong fight, we had a one on one with him just last week. We published it Thursday. And he is completely uncouth, as you say. He knows he represents the real military spirit and the real military might. And he's just, without being at all bombastic about it, he just, you know, thinks of this as a joke. It is a joke on a few ways. It's actually, I had a substack about this. There is a constitutional violation here. It's their investigating, investigating him for what's plainly viewpoint discrimination. That's the First Amendment violation. But he's been completely vindicated by, of course, in his anodyne statement with five others saying, by the way, you don't have to violate illegal orders. We find out just yesterday there have been people who were saying, oh, do I do this and what happens to me? And you know, the torture memo example is not that Imagine people who were ordered to torture based on. Well, the lawyers say it's okay after 9, 11. You know, it's a terrible position to put a service member in. Anyway, this addition idea, which is what they've said, right, And Trump actually citing the death penalty, et cetera, is, is a total non starter and something. I think what they're, what they're suggesting is Kelly, because of his long distinguished service, actually could be pulled back technically into the military system and court martialed. But people don't quite realize is that's a pretty honest, solid system itself. It's not on the take from the government. And I actually think if they tried it, their own military would reject them. But, but let's say they won't try it, Charlie, because it is crazy. Again, calling a sitting US Senator who cites the law and what could go wrong directly in the DoD manual. Here's the paradox time for when you don't blow people away says that and no more, and calling it sedition, calling, calling, you know, making him out to be the, you know, actually endangering the US Mission when it's the exact opposite. It is of a piece with things like, you know, when we've lost our minds before as a country, say World War I. I don't know if you have have like looked at this, but you know, everyone, I have nuts. And we had to say freedom fries, not French fries, and, and liberty sausages, not frankfurters. It's a total black eye. We recognize it as such. So, yes, they, they won't bring sedition charges and the, and the military won't try to court martial him. But just the notion of how they're doing it and the disrespect for law, constitutional norms, the gravity, even if you thought it was legit, of blowing people out of, you know, it is so like nasty and tawdry and jingoistic and Defense Secretary, I'm sorry, War Secretary Pete Hegseth is the absolute embodiment of this.
- [40:33]
Charlie Sykes
So somebody actually said, you know, maybe we should think about it. If you're trying to explain this to somebody, because we've been talking about blowing the boats up and everything. Imagine if you had Seal Team 6 rappelling down from helicopters onto the boat, you know, seizing the cocaine. And then with the men standing there with their hands over their heads, the commander said, shoot them, kill them, kill them all. How is that actually substantively different than what we're talking about doing with the missiles? So is it less of a crime if you kill them from a jet as opposed to shooting them in the head, you know, in person. So people really want to understand what we did, you know, actually ordering the killing, even if they've committed a crime, if they, you know, can be interdicted. Okay. By the way, speaking of, we were talking about the president using words like sedition and hang them and everything. I know you probably because you have a life. I know, Harry, you have a life. I have a life. Sometimes I didn't actually watch the Barry Weiss CBS Town hall with with Erica Kirk. I did write a piece yesterday saying where's Melissa Hortman's town hall? She was the speaker of the former speaker of the House in Minnesota who was assassinated. But anyway, there was a young man there who asked her because she's there to talk about, you know, faith and grief and political rhetoric and everything. Will you condemn the violent rhetoric of Donald Trump, the most powerful and influential person on earth? And he specifically said, you know, Trump accusing the six Democrats, including Senator Kelly, of seditious behavior punishable by debt, death, reposting, hang them. George Washington would. So you know, he asked her, would you condemn this? And the answer was basically no. She wouldn't say his name. She would not condemn him. Which I think was one of those revealing moments. Now let me ask you about something else you wrote.
- [42:27]
Harry Littman
A little known fact. I've known her forever. I went to Friday night Shabbat dinner with because her father's a friend of mine like you know, countless times. And yeah, I, she. So you know, I haven't followed it that closely, but it does seem as if she's, you know, you're my Barry White herself as homeless. But I don't know if she's really homeless. There have been some times where her, her mandatory policy has seemed to lean Trump a lot. But you know, I certainly respected her when she was a young woman growing up.
- [43:00]
Charlie Sykes
I did too.
- [43:01]
Harry Littman
Go ahead.
- [43:01]
Charlie Sykes
I actually did. I actually did. And she and I were on a TV show together. Okay.
- [43:05]
Harry Littman
So you know, her, her woke crusade, etc. I don't. Well, one quick thing on your is it, is it any different? It's no different. If we're not at war, then it's just blowing. But then it's murder. Either an extrajudicial coin if we are at war or homicide and are we at war? There's gonna, and there's an OLC memo that's gonna try to make that argument and I think it's gonna be really weak. And then we're gonna scandal like the torture memos. And by the way. Speaking of which, no less a personage than John Yoo, the author of Torture Memos, come out and said, this seems like complete illegitimate.
- [43:46]
Charlie Sykes
When John Yoo says, that seems kind of harsh to me, you know, and the.
- [43:51]
Harry Littman
If that's. If he's right, John Yoo says, well, he said. He said this is not justified or possibly justified. And if that's right, then you're exactly right, Charlie. You could just blow them away or drop the bomb from above.
- [44:07]
Charlie Sykes
So one of the things that I try and that I struggle with, and I know you do as well, is like, what is same old, same old and what is new? And you had a very interesting piece about Trump's alternative reality government. You point out, look, the daily bullshit has been something that has been a feature. I think we've almost gotten used to the fact that he lies like most people breathe. But then you wrote this. You're detecting an escalation. In the last few weeks, Trump and his administration seem to have broken through the lying speed of light, emerging into a whole new universe of bullshit from the daily diet of blatant lies, fibs and fabrications. They've taken up occupancy in a stratosphere of crazy, as if arriving through a wormhole from the other side of the universe, they now are regularly peddling assertions that boggle the mind and leave commentators speechless, provoking a what planet are from kind of response. So, again, if people are thinking, you know, this has really gotten bad. It's like, it's. You're not the crazy ones. You are detecting that. In fact, they've decided that it doesn't matter. There's no accountability. We will just throw bullshit and spaghetti against the walls. I mean, just talk to me a little bit about that, because one wouldn't have thought that they could have gotten more bullshitty than they are. But what's going on, do you think?
- [45:31]
Harry Littman
But, yeah, well, you know, no bottom. As you started this, our whole conversation by saying, yeah, it's really, you know, I was just struck by this and, you know, maybe it will change, but administrations press their points, make tenuous arguments. But I had seen a series of things, including back to back on one on with Kaitlan Collins on cnn, whom, by the way, that very day, he, you know, like, talk about everything I need to know. I learned in kindergarten. He's totally like, defamed her. And oh, and then second deadline, White House Nicole Wallace, who were just. Who heard things and literally, you saw them like, you know, they. It really was like, what plan? How do I begin with these assertions that up is down. You know, perfectly Orwellian assertions that nobody could. And so there's a. I think there's a way.
- [46:29]
Charlie Sykes
Well, like you go through them. Yeah. The Halligan fantasy. The illusory exculpation of Pete Hegseth when he was exculpated from. No, he wasn't. The signal gate. Total exoneration, which wasn't there. The hepatitis B reversal. The morally distinguishable bomber.
- [46:47]
Harry Littman
You go.
- [46:48]
Charlie Sykes
The fantasy economy. The FIFA Peace Prize. I mean, it really does feel. What planet are they from?
- [46:55]
Harry Littman
Right. And are they trying somehow to do just take out a. A piece so much out of the cosmos that maybe they'll hope for some middle ground or. But I. It really is a different kind of. It's a. It's an. A consummate shamelessness to just look you right in the eye and not just push tilt, but just say absolute fiction. And that's the administration of the United States of America and the President of the United States. That's the times we find ourselves in. Right.
- [47:30]
Charlie Sykes
Stunning gaslighting nation. And on that cheery note, Harry Lippman, thank you so much for joining me. I appreciate it so much.
- [47:37]
Harry Littman
You know, rough time and weekend, but Charlie, always great talking to you and bringing some light, at least of knowledge onto these dark days.
- [47:46]
Charlie Sykes
Well, I also think that this conversation has met our mission statement of reminding people, people that we are not the crazy ones. Thank you. True.
- [48:12]
Harry Littman
Hey, you want to pay just 10 bucks for your phone service at Boost Mobile? Just 10 bucks for your phone service at Boost Mobile? Yeah, I totally do. Yeah, I totally do.
- [48:26]
Charlie Sykes
This holiday, the best gift is for you. Pay just $10 a month for the first two months, then $25 a month forever. With unlimited data, talk and text offer. Valid@boostmobile.com after your first two months, you'll pay $25 a month unless you go online or call to cancel. Requires autopay. Psoriatic arthritis symptoms can be unpredictable.
- [48:46]
Harry Littman
I had joint pain and I couldn't.
- [48:48]
Charlie Sykes
Move like I used to. I needed relief. I got Cosentyx.
- [48:54]
Harry Littman
It helped me move better.
- [48:56]
Commercial Voice
Cosentix Secukenumab is prescribed for people 2 years of age and older with active psoriatic arthritis. Don't use if you're allergic to Cosentyx before starting, get checked for tuberculosis. An increased risk of infections and lowered ability to fight them may occur like tuberculosis or other serious, serious bacterial, fungal or viral infections. Some were fatal. Tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms like fevers, sweats, chills muscle aches or cough had a vaccine or planned to or if inflammatory bowel disease symptoms develop or worsen serious allergic reactions and severe eczema like skin reactions may occur. Learn more at 1-844-COSENTYX or cosentix.
- [49:37]
Charlie Sykes
Ask your rheumatologist about Cosentyx.
- [49:47]
Michelle Bernstein
Mic check 12 Are we recording? Hi, I'm Michelle Bernstein, an award winning chef, restaurateur and mom. I have a lot on my plate including my psoriatic arthritis symptoms. That's why I was prescribed. It helps me move better.
- [50:05]
Commercial Voice
Cosentyx Secukenumab is prescribed for people 2 years of age and older with active psoriatic arthritis. Don't use if you're allergic to Cosentyx before starting. Get checked for tuberculosis. An increased risk of infections and lowered ability to fight them may occur like tuberculosis or other serious bacterial, fungal or viral infections. Some were fatal. Tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms like fevers, sweats, chills, muscle aches or cold cough had a vaccine or planned to or if inflammatory bowel disease symptoms develop or worsen serious allergic reactions and severe eczema like skin reactions may occur. Learn more at 1-844-cosentyx or cosentyx.com Ask.
- [50:42]
Michelle Bernstein
Your rheumatologist about Cosentyx.
- [50:46]
Commercial Voice
Hey Ryan Reynolds here for Mint Mobile.
- [50:48]
Harry Littman
You know one of the perks about.
- [50:50]
Commercial Voice
Having four kids that you know about is actually getting a direct line to the big man up north. And this year he wants you to know the best gift that you can give someone is the gift of Mint Mobile's Unlimited Wireless for $15 a month. Now you don't even need to wrap it. Give it a try@mintmobile.com Switch upfront payment.
- [51:08]
Charlie Sykes
Of $45 for three month plan equivalent to $15 per month required new customer offer for first three months only. Speed slow after 35 gigabytes if network's busy, taxes and fees extra. See mintmobile.com. Psoriatic arthritis symptoms can be unpredictable.
- [51:25]
Harry Littman
I had joint pain and I couldn't.
- [51:27]
Charlie Sykes
Move like I used to. I needed relief. I got Cosentyx.
- [51:33]
Harry Littman
It helped me move better.
- [51:35]
Commercial Voice
Cosentyx Secukenumab is prescribed for people 2 years of age and older with active psoriatic arthritis. Don't use if you're allergic to Cosentyx before starting. Get checked for tuberculosis and an increased risk of infections and lowered ability to fight them may occur like tuberculosis or other serious bacterial, fungal or viral infections. Some were fatal. Tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms like fevers, sweats, chills, muscle aches or cough had a vaccine or planned to, or if inflammatory bowel disease symptoms develop or worsen, serious allergic reactions and severe eczema like skin reactions may occur. Learn more at 1-844-COSENTIX or cosentix.com.
- [52:17]
Charlie Sykes
Ask your rheumatologist about cosentics. Hi, this is Joe from Vanta. In today's digital world, compliance regulations are changing constantly and earning customer trust has never mattered more. Vanta helps companies get compliant fast and stay secure with the most advanced AI automation and continuous monitoring out there. So whether you're a startup going for your first SoC2 or ISO 27001 or a growing enterprise managing vendor risk, Vanta makes it quick, easy and scalable. And I'm not just saying that because I work here. Get started@vanta.com curious about how AI is changing the way we work and lead?
- [52:53]
Harry Littman
Check out the you can with AI.
- [52:55]
Commercial Voice
Podcast from KPMG, hosted by Nathaniel Whittemore of the AI Daily Brief, Bold Ideas, Real Impact. Listen now at www.kpmg.usaipodcasts.