newspolitics

Trump's Dangerous War Games

Pod Save America·Feb 27, 2026·1:20:45

About this Episode

The White House debates going to extreme lengths to get the American public to stomach a war with Iran, while Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth tries to force Anthropic into letting him use their AI model to operate autonomous murder drones. Jon and Dan react with horror and then discuss the rest of the news, including the administration's new fraud-focused message, the draft executive order that the administration may use to declare a national emergency before the midterms, and a new report that Trump's Justice Department removed some documents from the Epstein files that accused the President of sexually abusing a minor. Then, Tommy talks to an organizer in Arizona about Vote Save America's effort to recruit people like you to run in down-ballot races in the Grand Canyon State and all over the country.

For a closed-captioned version of this episode, click here. For a transcript of this episode, please email [email protected] and include the name of the podcast.

Hosts & Guests

Pod Save America

Host

Transcript

Today's presenting sponsor is Simply Safe Home Security.

Are you getting away anywhere warm this winter?

Well, February might mean a getaway for some.

It's prime time for burglars.

Simply safe.

Keeps your home safe while you're often

enjoying a break from the winter.

And it's great and it helps stop threats

before they even have a chance to break in.

Even if you're on a burglar cruise.

Right, sure.

What?

Cruise for burglars.

Traditional security systems only take action

if you're someone is already broken.

And that's too late.

Simply Safe's active guard outdoor protection

can help protect you from break ins

before they happen.

If someone's lurking around or acting suspiciously,

those agents can see and talk to them in real time.

Activated spotlights and even contact the police

all before they have a chance to get inside your home.

No long-term contractor cancellation fees

monitoring plans start affordably at around $1 per day,

60-day satisfaction guarantee, or your money back

named Best Home Security Systems

by US News and World Report, five years in row ranked number one.

And customer service among home security providers

by Newsweek and US Daily.

Today, I set up Simply Safe.

That was my experience.

Really great customer support, really reliable.

The app was great, setting up was easy, I recommend it.

And right now our listeners get 50% off their new

Simply Safe system with professional monitoring

and their first month free at simplysafe.com slash crooked

that simplysafe.com slash crooked.

There's no safe, like Simply Safe.

Dear McDonald's, your breakfast menu, fire.

Tens across the board.

I could be happy with anything,

even though I ordered the same thing every time.

Thanks for not judging me.

I'll try something new next time.

Maybe.

Score a two for five dollar deal

in a sausage McMuffin with egg and more.

Limited time only price and participation

may vary cannot be combined with any other offer

single item at regular price.

Ba da ba ba ba.

Welcome to Podsave America.

I'm John Favre.

I'm Dan Pfeiffer.

On today's show we'll talk about the White House's

big post state of the Union messaging push,

starring JD Vance and a hysterical Stephen Miller.

We've also got new details about the administration's

strategy to use Americans as bait to sell their war

with Iran.

We'll also talk about the huge news

that the Justice Department made a few Epstein files

disappear that included allegations

of sexual abuse against Donald Trump.

And we'll get into why Pete Hegseth is threatening

an AI company unless they let the government

use their products for unmanned weapons

and mass surveillance.

Then as Democrats get some good midterm news,

Tommy talks to Shelley Jackson,

an organizer with Insta Tudot,

one of the organizations that votesave America

is partnering with to recruit people just like you

to run in down ballot races in Arizona,

not just like you Dan because you don't live in Arizona.

Yeah, I would be a bad Arizona.

I'd be a bad candidate generally,

but particularly at a state which I don't have eligibility.

It's not what Chris Coons thinks, he's worried.

Reminder before we start,

if you want even more Podsave America, more politics,

more laughs with all your favorite crooked hosts,

please consider becoming a friend of the Pods subscriber.

You'll get our new extra episode of Podsave America

called Podsave America Only Friends.

I believe love it and Tommy,

Helmet Only Friends this week.

You'll also get other subscriber only shows

like Polar Coaster with this guy right here, Dan Fiverr.

Yes.

And access to all of our excellent sub-stack newsletters

like Podsave America Open Tabs

and ad-free episodes of all your favorite crooked pods.

And you also get to feel good

about supporting an independent pro-democracy media outlet

that isn't under control of the elephants.

That's which, there are a few in far between these days.

But more on that later, yes.

Yeah, right as we started recording,

we found out the news that Netflix has given up

because Paramount made a bigger offer.

And so now Warner Brothers Discovery

is gonna be owned by Paramount.

The elephants got another one.

Which means, which means Barry Weiss

is in the situation room.

But it also means that you should subscribe

to be a friend of the pod subscriber

crooked.com slash friends

to our pro-democracy independent media company

not owned by David Ellison

and not run by Barry Weiss

and not under the thumb of Donald Trump.

All right, let's get to the news.

We're all still tired from Trump's nearly two-hour state

of the union address.

And the president must be too,

since the White House sent out their

newly minted frauds are JD Vance

to amplify the speech instead of Trump.

The VP announced on Wednesday

that the federal government would unilaterally cut off

259 million dollars in Medicaid funding

for the people of Minnesota

as collective punishment

for some individuals supposedly committing fraud.

Vance then traveled to Wisconsin on Thursday

to keep pushing the fraud message

while charming voters with his signature charisma.

Let's take a listen.

When you go to the polls in November,

I don't want you to just think about

all the great things that we've accomplished,

all the great things that we've talked about.

I don't want you just to think about

no taxes on tips and lower gas prices.

I want you to think,

who is gonna protect my money from fraudsters?

The job of your government is not to open your borders

and allow fraudsters to come in and take advantage of you.

The job of your government is to shut the border

and shut off the fraud.

Kelly said that I'm the coolest vice president

in American history, and I said,

Kelly, that is a low standard.

That is a very low bar,

but I do think that I clear that bar,

but I think that-

No, no, you did not, not even close.

Did not clear the bar.

I have a lot to say,

I don't have to say it today,

but at some point about why JD Vance

is an absolutely misrule presidential candidate,

and the Democrats just spend the next two years

making sure that everyone understands

what a fucking gooper he is.

I mean, I don't think we have to work too hard at that.

I don't think anyone needs a message memo

or anything like that.

I think we just need to make sure everyone sees him.

Right, but we have-

We have JD Vance.

We have to show people JD Vance.

We have to,

do you really have to meme if I am,

because he is a walking meme?

JD Vance meme is actually cooler than the JD Vance himself,

but it's just,

like he makes Rhonda Santos look smooth.

Also, leading with his chin a bit there on,

you wanna think about who let the fraudsters in.

I don't know, there's a couple in the White House.

The one or two?

There's some-

The president has actually been convicted of fraud.

Many, many times, yes.

He's been convicted of fraud.

He has been accused of fraud.

Many fraudsters in the administration.

He's part of the fraudster.

JD Vance himself is a fraud.

JD Vance is also a fraud.

Donald Trump is actually just stealing taxpayer money himself,

just suing his own government

and then deciding in favor of himself,

both in the, he's gonna try this with the IRS,

he's trying this with the DOJ,

so he's stealing some money,

he's pardoning some fraudsters.

Lots of people who built a lot of Americans,

out of a lot of money,

now will not have to pay restitution

because they got a pardon from Donald Trump

because they paid for it.

Fraudsters.

It does seem like they are gearing up

to make this whole election about fraud.

What do you make of that?

Are we just, are we taking this too lightly?

I don't really know, John.

I would say, in preparation for this pop,

which I was going to take dilly seriously,

I went back and read the State of the Union

because I couldn't watch it again.

Ooh.

It is less coherent in written form by far.

And the fraud section is particularly incoherent.

It starts with Somalia, ghost in Minnesota,

quick pivot to a tragic story about a car accident,

then a new policy proposal on commercial licenses

for undocumented people.

And that's the whole thing.

That's the narrative, that's the message.

Well, it does show that they are,

they're really trying hard to combine

the anti-immigrant agenda with, or conflate,

not combine with fraud, right?

And so they know that people don't like their tax dollars

being wasted, particularly on government programs

that aren't going to people who actually deserve them.

And who deserves them less than murderous immigrants

who are here illegally?

Yeah, I mean, I guess I kind of sort of understand

what might possibly resemble a strategy here,

which is to basically take Ronald Reagan's

welfare queen strategy of the 80s

and then marry it with immigration.

But it's not to mean that I particularly coherent way.

And it's not, most people don't really know

what they're talking about.

Those are things that are not necessarily connected

to each other.

It's more sort of like, and you can really see this

when you read the speech.

It is just a series of comments on viral stories

in the right-wing media,

stitched into a speech,

masquerading as something of a message.

And this is one of them, right?

They're fascinated by it.

Nick Shirley was at the state of the union, I believe.

The guy who originally had the reporting,

and I'm doing air quotes for the audio listeners

about this.

And so I don't, this is I get,

they don't have a particularly strong hand to play.

This, I don't think this is a better

than the other things they're doing,

but I think this is probably something that JD Vance

once, I think that's what Trump gave it to him.

I think that's why he's here.

I don't think he, maybe he thinks it's good for the Republicans,

but I think he thinks it's probably good for himself

because the Minnesota fraud, immigrant fraud,

like bullshit narrative they spend,

is a thing that excites the right-wing media people

and the, and like the far right podcasters

and magnet types that JD Vance is trying to persuade

to be on his side in a presidential race.

So I think that's kind of how we got here.

Yeah, because I was gonna say,

I think the fatal flaw on their plan is,

they're forgetting that they're the ones in power,

the control, the White House in Congress.

And so if there are people who are worried

that they are, their tax dollars are being wasted,

and that's why they can't afford anything,

instead of just making speeches about it,

ostensibly they would have the power to make sure

that people's tax dollars are actually being used properly

and that people can afford things.

I mean, theoretically, I guess.

It's not Joe Biden and the White House anymore

that I'm running against him.

They are the ones who, they've had a year now.

Later, JD Vance said to the pool,

like I think he said something like some of the stuff,

some of these economic policies,

just takes a while to work through the system.

I heard him say, somewhat was it,

someone said the other day,

some Republican that once the plants are built

and the people start working,

then we'll see the golden age.

Once the plants are built, what are they building?

JD Vance said to the pool,

some of this is that the policies we've already put in place

take a little bit of time to work their way through the system.

Is the current the ditch, John?

That's just some start with the current the ditch.

That was our midterm message in 2010.

Did not work.

We lost 63 seats.

Did not work.

You know, I never liked to car in the ditch

and I didn't know that Obama didn't know that I didn't like it,

but then he wrote in his book that I looked at him

like I hated it.

And I was like, I guess I did not have a good poker face

on that one.

But also, it was terrible.

And it got longer with every speech

because it was a very elaborate metaphor,

which with every speech, there'd be a new element

of how the car got in the ditch,

how the car was getting in the ditch,

how dirty the ditch was.

By the way, in case you guys missed this part back in 2010,

the Republicans are the ones who drove the car into the ditch.

And now, and we're trying to get the car out of the ditch.

It's not out yet because our policy is getting time.

Right, but we want to put the car in drive

to get out of the ditch

and the Republicans want to put it in the R

to go back into the ditch.

That was where he lost me,

because that was a,

that was a time-dash old Evan by classic to the DNR.

That's a,

that's been said by one million Democratic politicians

at Jefferson Jackson, he dinners for 50 years.

Not our greatest moment.

We should probably add this part out of the podcast, honestly.

No, no, I think we should keep it in.

I think, well, JD Vance had something similar today,

which is he's like,

Democrats talking about affordability is like,

you know, the arsonist talk,

the arsonist complaining burned down the house,

or something like some dumb shit like that.

So anyway,

bad cliches, bipartisan.

Why do you think they're having Vance out there

doing this instead of Trump?

This is really a great question

because normally the president goes out

the day after the state of the union

does a bunch of events,

you know, waths and travel for the whole week

of the state of the union back in, you know,

in a different media state travel for two weeks.

It's just Donald Trump loves attention.

Like I'm sort of mystified in this.

He loves attention.

You're guaranteed to get attention

to the day after the state of the union.

My only guess is he's tired.

Tired and busy planning a war maybe.

Yeah, either we are,

we are undertaking at least one

and maybe two wars in the coming days.

Yeah, it could be that.

I don't think that's it.

It could be some of the more,

because I don't think he has.

Some of the bigger war mongers in the administration

are like happy to get JD Vance out of there

because JD Vance in some instances

doesn't, isn't as quick to go to war.

So you think they sent him into Milwaukee

so that they can bomb around faster?

That's a good thing.

Who knows?

Hit crazier things of hat.

No, no, I'm not saying you're wrong,

but he's, you know, he's in a signal chat.

So he could, well, he could respond.

That's true.

Well, it's not like he's making the decision

in those signal chats anyway.

No, he is.

He speaks until Stephen Miller tells him to stop speaking.

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.

Oh, yeah, I don't know.

Maybe he's tired.

Maybe he just doesn't give a shit.

Or maybe that speech was so long.

Even Donald Trump is sick of hearing Donald Trump talk.

I mean, that would be something.

That would be something.

As for the state of the union itself,

we don't have final numbers yet,

but it looks like ratings were down from last year,

about 12%.

Regardless, the White House and some Republicans

are excitedly telling reporters the speech was a home run

that will reverberate through November.

Here's two representative headlines,

one from Politico,

the so-to moment that Republicans hope saves the midterms.

Wow.

And here's, this is one from the Washington Post.

Republicans think they laid an immigration trap

ahead of the midterms.

These headlines are referring, of course,

to this moment now captured

in a Republican super PAC at.

You agree with this statement?

Then stand up and show your support.

The first duty of the American government

is to protect American citizens, not illegal aliens.

Cheers.

These people are crazy.

You got us, ended with the old Republicans are for you.

Democrats are for them.

They're reprising the 2024 message, you know.

So we were, I know I was,

a rather cavalier about this moment

when we did our post-State of the Union response pod.

Were we too cavalier?

Is this the magic bullet that's gonna save the midterms

for the Republicans?

I'm actually more cavalier today

than I was on Tuesday night.

More cavalier.

After having seen that ad,

it shows why the idea that this is some moment

that is going to shape the midterms is idiotic.

It is pure stenography from reporters

talking to Republican operatives.

It doesn't translate into an ad, that ad sucks.

It's not really clear what's happening.

No one knows the context for it.

And even if they did, it would not matter that much

because this is not Donald Trump of 2024.

This is Donald Trump of 2026

when his immigration approval rating is 12 to 15 points

underwater.

He is not the efficacy of a message

is intrinsically tied to the credibility of the messenger.

And Trump and their Republicans

no longer have credibility on immigration.

Democrats don't either.

Like now we're almost basically tied

between with Trump on who you trust in immigration.

But that's a gigantic win for us

compared to previous years.

And so this is not going to matter in any way,

shape or form.

I don't care.

It is a dumb person's idea of a clever idea.

And it is just like it's not, it's really not a thing.

Yeah, I was trying to think about it just to sort of,

I really tried for your research.

I did too.

Well, and a few people, I, a few people were like,

oh, was it smart?

Asked me genuinely.

Like, was it smart that he did that

or was it weird that the Democrats didn't stand up?

And again, it's like, like you said,

maybe it makes people, some people I guess think,

well, what are Democrats up to?

I don't know about that.

It does not help Donald Trump at all.

It does not, because that's not what people are angry

about ice.

Again, he did not say ice once during the whole speech.

It wasn't a, it wasn't a stand up

and show your support for ice, that's for sure.

I also think that most people see,

I think you can see through the obvious setup here.

I mean, even the, if you agree with this statement,

stand up and show your support.

Like, yeah.

So, you know, Democratic president could have been like,

if you agree with this statement,

stand up and show your support.

The first duty of the American government

is to protect American citizens,

not Jeffrey Epstein and Donald Trump.

Oh, Republicans didn't stand.

I mean, actually, that would have been a good idea.

That's good.

You know, Republicans wouldn't stand for it.

They wouldn't be able to stand, right?

No, I mean, it, and then what will we,

what will we be led to believe

that they want to protect pedophiles?

I mean, wait till you put it in a, maybe you'll get your ad.

Also, it's like, of course, the Democrats didn't stand.

Of course, they weren't going to stand for a bunch of shit.

He tried to arrest several of them in the audience.

What are we doing?

This is not a normal state of the union.

You're not going to stand for this shit.

It's, it's the whole thing.

The conversation around is stupid.

It is, it really is Republicans desperately trying

to spin something, spin a finite win

in this really incoherent speech

that was terrible politics in every other way,

shape or form.

And some credulous reporters kind of like giving them

a place to err their last hopes and dreams for the midterms.

Of course, the government's first priority

is to protect American citizens.

Obviously, it's the highest priority

of the American government.

Obviously, we know that.

This government hasn't even done that.

It killed two Americans.

Exactly.

In the service of trying to go after undocumented people,

it killed, it sort of quasi the service

of trying to do that.

It shot and killed two Americans in the street

and then lied about it.

It has illegally detained.

The government has illegally detained

at least 170 American citizens.

Those are just the ones we know about.

And that was as of October of 2025.

And that was, so that was before Minnesota.

It's probably a lot more now.

So they have locked up American citizens in jail illegally

for weeks at a time in horrifying conditions

killed two American citizens.

Yeah, I don't think their priority

is protecting American citizens.

And I don't think people believe it either.

Here's another related headline

that I want to ask you about, Dan, from The Daily Beast.

Stephen Miller melts down in eight-hour Twitter beef

with John Favreau.

My question to you is, do you feel pride, shame, or pity?

I want to talk to you about this.

I think I don't want this to come across

as an intervention, because it's not yet.

I don't want it to come across as me being critical

if you could say I'm not.

I'm genuinely inquisitive.

I just want to say that the photo of me

and the piece, the caption is,

John Favreau got embroiled in an eight-hour social media spat

with Stephen Miller.

Not a great look for the host of offline.

No, now it's, as I tried to tell you,

you need to start telling people

that offline's title is ironic at this point.

Always has been, always has been.

Yeah, and it didn't start that way.

You were genuinely concerned about people being online

and the product of doing that podcast for years

was being more online, but here's the thing.

We were in the White House.

I once told Barack Obama

that you had the most common sense of anyone on his team.

And that if we brought an idea to you,

because sometimes an idea would form in meetings.

And the end execution of that is always a speech.

And then, and then like me, or Axelrod,

or David Pluff, we'd go to your office

and we would say, John, here's the idea.

And you would always be mad that someone

that signed a speech, I'll talk to you about it,

which was a very fair point on your part.

But if you thought the idea was crazy,

I would really question whether,

like I was like, oh, that's a good, that's like a good check.

And I generally think you have excellent judgment.

So, what is going on here?

I feel great about this one.

I'm just in general.

Let's, like you were, you wake up in the morning

and you're on a mission for Twitter fights

with certain people.

And I know you are because you're tagging them.

Like, you don't have to tag them.

No, okay, sometimes I do.

I did not tag him at all on this.

You caught no tag in this case.

Yeah, quote, tweeted him.

It was about the topic that we're discussing now.

And specifically because he tweeted,

and this was, he tweeted on the night of the state

of the union, that the seated Democrats

and the operative line here is,

it was a moment that chills to the bone,

which will live for a thousand years.

Yeah, I mean, that's an incident.

So that is, yeah.

So it's like, okay, if you're good.

So I, as we all heard that night,

thought that the whole thing is a little bit ridiculous.

And so I quoted to you that and said,

I think it's genuinely funny how hard they're all trying

to make this a thing.

Not even, and like I just used Miller

because he was the most ridiculous one.

And then, you know, then he replied to me Wednesday

in the afternoon and said, you know,

Democrats leapt, clapped, hollered, and cheered

for raising taxes, but their legs, hands, and voices

froze and icy contempt as they glowered

at the parents of slain children.

She like, that's what he said back to me.

Then it just, you know, like when he tweets back,

oh, what do you think I'm just gonna leave it there?

Steve, no, no, I ain't, I ain't saying.

The most powerful government official,

more powerful than any of the cabinet members tweets at me.

What am I supposed to just sit there?

And he's also the most repulsive.

If he was out there running, if he was the face

of the midterms, I think we would all be quite happy.

Is that your strategy to make

on the face of the midterms?

To use your Twitter account to do it?

Have I not said on this podcast

that if John Trump loses the midterms,

that it's going to be the fault of Stephen Miller?

No, no, no, no, no, no.

Which was such a great point

that you then made it a message box?

I credit you for it.

You know, you did, I know you did.

But so yeah, that was, that is my strategy.

And look, I think when I told him, I told him, I found him,

he thought that I found the whole thing funny.

And I told him, I found him hilarious.

And then he told me that I was a textbook sociopath,

which is, you know, again, leading with the chin.

And then he asked if I have any, if I grieve,

he asked if you grieve for the families

and you said, oh yeah, one more for your family.

He said, John, one more time,

do you grieve for these families?

And I told him, I certainly have sympathy for his.

Yeah, I just, how did you feel like

in general, at the end of these Twitter battles,

do you feel fulfilled, happy?

Do you feel like you accomplished a goal?

Like, cause I think you have a goal here.

Yeah, my goal was to, well, he didn't,

he has not responded because I asked him.

I said, I grieve for anyone who's lost anyone.

Like, of course I do, because I'm not a fucking

textbook sociopath.

And why hasn't the president called the families of Alex?

It was a great tweet.

Or Renee, good.

We were in a meeting together.

I was sitting in the meeting.

You were on your phone typing a tweet.

I was on my phone looking at Twitter

and I saw your tweet, sorry,

press the America production team.

But I get, let me ask this other question

because many people have asked me this

because people bring up your Twitter fights to me a lot.

It's true, sure.

How does your wife feel about this?

Not as great.

Yeah, that was the question.

That was the question.

Because my wife is not married to you,

but likes you a lot,

but she does not feel great about it either.

No, Emily thought it was, I got home.

I sent her the whole exchange ahead of time

as I was on my, before I got in the car to go home.

And then when I got home, she's like,

first of all, a little nervous again,

another fight with Stephen Miller.

I don't know if I liked this that much.

She's like, but I did laugh pretty hard at the sympathy

for his family.

It looks so good.

Okay.

There are some that I, like, whatever,

I forget what we were fighting over.

I fought with Megan Kelly about something a couple months ago.

That's why I left the Megan Kelly.

And I left that one.

I'm just like, what was the use of that?

Cause it's like, who cares?

It's Megan Kelly.

But so that kind of shit,

I'm like, yeah, any fight that I've ever gotten

in with JD Vance or Stephen Miller, feel great afterwards.

Okay.

And look, if you were finding personal fulfillment here,

and you end this happy, because like time is not a renewal.

Other right wing influencers, you should,

you should stop me, not so much, not great.

High ranking white house officials.

I mean, as long as you feel fulfilled,

then I am okay with this because everyone needs a hobby.

And if this is your,

I wouldn't say it was this fulfilling as like,

then going home and hanging out with my family.

Of course not.

And I was finally going to bed early for one night.

You know, those, those things were much more fulfilling.

Generally, you do these Twitter fights on work hours here.

And I don't like, you're not doing

from the zoo with your children.

So I think that's, that's a positive.

If that starts, we should have another,

we'll have another on camera intervention here.

Anyway, still waiting for Stephen's response.

When is the president going to call?

Because I thought he grieves for American citizens.

And I thought that the government's first role

is to protect American citizens,

but apparently it is not.

[♪ OUTRO MUSIC PLAYING [♪

Positive America is brought to you by NutriFull.

Real change doesn't come from some big flashy moment.

It comes from your routines you commit to.

It's the small things you do every day

that quietly add up over time.

That's the idea behind NutriFull.

Built around a simple consistent

approach to hair health that works from within

and delivers visible results over time, not overnight.

NutriFull is the number one dermatologist

recommended hair growth supplement brand.

And it's the number one hair growth supplement brand

personally used by dermatologists.

NutriFull's hair growth supplements are peer reviewed,

NSF certified for sport and clinically tested

to measure improvements in hair growth, quality, and strength.

It's not a one size fits all approach.

NutriFull offers multiple formulas for men and women tailored

to different life stages, like postpartum or menopause

and lifestyle factors, such as a plant-based diet.

So you get support, it's actually right for you.

I'm taking it. It's great.

Nice. Basically, look, I've obviously done everything

possible to maintain having hair at the stage

where the doctors are about to hold my hand and say,

be with your family.

We've done everything there is.

From now on, it's just between you and God.

But the NutriFull's helping.

I do, I am noticing a difference.

That's great.

Adding NutriFull to your daily routine is easy.

Order online, no prescription needed

with automated deliveries and free shipping to keep you on track.

Plus with the NutriFull subscription,

you can save up to 20% and get added perks like free

headspace membership to support your hair health journey.

Let your hair become one less thing taking up space

in your head and see thicker, stronger, faster growing hair,

with less shedding and just three to six months with NutriFull.

For a limited time, NutriFull is offering our listeners

$10 off your first month subscription and free shipping.

When you visit NutriFull.com, enter the promo code

Crooked, that's NutriFull.com spelled N-U-T-R-A-F-O-L.

promo code Crooked.

Pots of America brought you by Z-Biotics pre alcohol.

Tired of sacrificing your next day for a good night out.

I used to have to pick one or the other,

but with Z-Biotics pre alcohol, it's changed the game.

Now you can enjoy a night out and still wake up feeling

like yourself.

So you're hearing this after.

We went to Australia in New Zealand.

Well, I'm recording this before in a different era

when I just put some Z-Biotics literally in my bag this morning

because I knew that, listen, we're on the road.

You have a drink during the show.

That's right.

Keep it loose.

And so I brought some Z-Biotics for us.

God have it.

Z-Biotics pre alcohol probiotic drink is the world's first

genetically engineered probiotic that was invented

by PhD scientists to tackle rough mornings after drinking.

Here's how it works.

When you drink alcohol gets converted into a toxic byproduct

in the gut, it's a buildup of this byproduct,

not dehydration that's the blame for rough days after drinking.

Pre alcohol produces an enzyme to break this byproduct down.

Just remember to make pre alcohol your first drink

of the night drink responsibly

and you'll feel your best tomorrow.

I'm just thinking like I have these shots that are not alcohol.

Then I have a bag of white powder that's creatine.

It looks like drugs.

I have a Adderall.

I like, I'm telling you, like my bag looks like I'm a much

more interesting person.

Really, I'm just a late-stage capitalist millennial

with a lot of things in and out to keep the system running,

including Z-Biotics.

We love Z-Biotics.

We genuinely do, true.

If you're ready to try it, go to zbiotics.com slash crooked

and you'll get 15% off your first order.

When you use crooked at checkout, plus it's backed

by a 100% money back guarantee.

So there's no risk.

Subscriptions are also available for maximum consistency.

Remember to head to zbiotics.com slash crooked

and use the code crooked at checkout for 15% off.

All right, let's turn to a lighter topic.

The peace president's next war.

I take a topic then your Twitter fights

with a fucking loser.

Yeah, what is that?

What is that?

It's war.

It's war, Dan.

Real estate bozos, Steve Whitcoff and Jared Kushner

met with Iranian officials in Geneva on Thursday

to negotiate a new nuclear deal

and possibly stave off military intervention,

spoiler alert, didn't go well.

No agreement was reached after the first day

of negotiations.

This comes after Politico reported that the administration

is toying with the idea of having Israel

not the US military launched the first strike

against Iran.

Why?

Here's what a source familiar with the discussions

told Politico.

Quote, there's thinking in and around the administration

that the politics are a lot better

if the Israelis go first and alone

and the Iranians retaliate against us

and give us more reason to take action.

I don't know.

What do you make of the White House wanting to use

American lives as bait to sell the rest of the country

on a war with Iran?

It seems like it should be a gigantic scandal

that they would like to do this.

It seems like it should be a big deal.

It's not.

There's a lot happening today.

It's not even make the A-block of this podcast.

It came after literally, it came after an online feud you had.

About the state of the union.

It was an offshoot.

I understand.

There's a reason it fell to where it did in the lineup.

But it does speak to how impossible this war is

to sell to the American people that they cannot do it

in any sort of normal way.

It's why they're not even trying to do it.

So that they're so desperate for a rationale for a war

that the neocons of which Trump has now one of them

apparently have wanted for decades and decades and decades.

They're so desperate for that for to create a pretext

for this war that they are one of the ideas on the whiteboard

is let's get it some Americans killed

so that Americans will be mad and want to go to war with Iran.

It seems bad.

Let's, yeah, I mean, let's let Israel go first.

So because, again, with the Israeli government,

very popular here, let's hope the Israeli government go first

and then Iran will retaliate

and what maybe hit an American military base, I guess,

and we're hoping that our defenses will hold

and no one will get hurt.

But who knows?

Because maybe if an American service member is killed

or wounded, then American people will be like,

well, Iran attacked us and killed Americans.

And so now we have to attack Iran.

And honestly, the worst part of it is I could see it working.

I don't think it would work.

I really, I really don't.

I think that the Trump people think the American people

are much are stupid and they're not.

Israel attacks Iran and then Iran attacks an American base.

I do not think the American people are then want to sign up

for a protracted war in the Middle East.

I certainly hope not.

I was, I talked to about this earlier,

but I think I can't remember which podcast I said this on,

but you know, the polling was at like 20% of American support

and any kind of action against Iran.

We talked about this in an actual private conversation

that wasn't recorded.

There we go.

It was wild.

But then the CBS poll that dropped the day

of the State of the Union asked it with,

would you support military action in Iran

to prevent them from getting a nuclear weapon?

And when you add a nuclear weapon, then it was 47% approve,

53% disapprove.

So you can start, you basically you can just start seeing

their house of lies that they're building this case on.

You know, ballistic missiles that may reach the United States soon

and oh, now what if Iran attacks America as a retaliation for Israel?

Oh, now what if there's a nuclear weapon

and they're a week away?

Like they're just, you know, they're,

it's all the greatest hits from Iraq without any of the effort, really.

But you know, everything's gotten dumber since then somehow

and the information environment's gotten a lot more awful.

But the American people have gotten a lot more skeptical

of foreign interventions.

And that question in the CBS poll,

I think in people's minds is a military strike

like midnight hammer, whatever we call it, the other thing.

Not an actual protracted conflict that could cost American lives,

could lead to attacks on the homeland or on Americans abroad,

could lead, likely lead to a giant spike in oil prices

and just general chaos in the world.

And just remember, this is a president at 38% approval

who is underwater on every single issue,

including national security and foreign policy,

who may launch an ISIS into a war,

he has not explained to a single person why it's happening.

And so I think, I just think there's,

people do not want to go to war

and really don't want Donald Trump to take him to war.

Yeah, that's true.

All right, I'm holding out hope.

Holding out hope.

Although, I mean, I guess hope for public opinion.

I mean, by the time you're listening to this,

by the time you listen to this,

it is quite possible that the strike happened

because the gating issue was they were going to get through

these talks on Thursday recordings,

on Thursday the talks are over.

So at any point something could happen,

it would be, I would not be surprised if it happened

over the weekend or overnight.

We don't know.

Yeah.

So House Democrats are also planning to hold a war power's

resolution vote next week that would force the president

to seek congressional authorization before carrying out

any military strikes in Iran.

Democrats already have the support of Thomas Massey,

the sponsor of the bill with Rocana.

And on Thursday morning, Representative Warren Davidson

or Republican from Ohio threatened to support the resolution

if the White House didn't brief Congress

on its justification for the war.

The White House unsurprisingly is already whipping votes

to defeat the resolution.

And I think we Democrats have already lost

at least Josh Gottheimer

and Jared Mosquitz, I think,

on this one.

So, you know, I don't think we have the votes currently,

but I don't know.

What do you think?

Do you think Democrats,

there's a chance the Democrats can get enough votes

to pass this thing?

I don't know.

I think it's hard for Republicans to vote

to him in the president on an ash security issue.

So we'll say,

I do, you guys got to rant about this on Tuesday.

I would like to reclaim my time for a second.

Please.

Yes, go.

What Jared Mosquitz and Josh Gottheimer are doing here

is disgusting.

Even if you believe against all evidence

that Iran is an imminent threat to the United States

that demands military action,

the idea that you would let this president,

this corrupt 10-pot dictator surrounded by Yahoo's,

including a military commanded by a Fox news host.

Who's drunk?

Probably.

Maybe.

Wage war in Iran without going to Congress,

and you would give up your responsibility,

your power to try to influence how that war would take place

because you want to show yourself to be tough on Iran

or friendly with Israel or whatever else is just,

it is immoral,

it's unpatriotic,

it is truly, truly disgusting.

Like, you can disagree about the merits of military action in Iran.

You cannot credibly argue that Donald Trump,

without Congress on his own,

should unilaterally launch a war with Iran.

That is in same position for a Democrat.

Like, I think striking Iran in a war is insane.

Yes.

But like, let's say that you just genuinely believe

it's the right thing to do, right?

Well, then like, what are you afraid of taking it to Congress,

where you work,

where you have been elected to represent people,

and having the debate there,

and making a decision as a Congress,

as the Constitution intended.

Yeah.

All of that war power resolution is doing a saying,

Donald Trump has to come to Congress first.

There is not,

there is not an imminent threat here.

And if there was,

then the president has the Powered Act,

but there is not one.

We know this because Donald Trump told us,

quite recently,

that they obliterated the nuclear program in Iran.

And you can, I mean, you know,

I yelled about this before,

but you can tell that it's bullshit

from the line in Godheimer's statement

that it's like, you know,

this doing this would show weakness.

What are we in fucking 2003 here?

Yes. I mean,

it's also like,

Josh, you were there.

You were there.

We went through this.

He was on the Kerry campaign with me.

We went through John Kerry voting for the fucking war in Iraq.

Everyone gave president Bush the authorization for the same reasons.

We don't want to,

we don't want to him in the president.

We want to give him the authorization for war.

I mean, they, they,

this isn't even that.

This is like,

if you want to vote to authorize the war,

I think that is an insane position,

but that is a vote that is you putting your name in and saying,

I support this.

I, I'm giving my power from a co-equal branch

to authorize this military conflict

to try to block

the vote from ever happening.

To somehow burn us sure

National Security Bonafide is disgusting.

It's insane. I do not understand it.

Well, Dan, good news.

Sometime in the near future,

our government's wars of choice

may not require humans to fight them.

I talked about this on offline last week,

but the Department of Defense

is threatening Amphropic

because the AI company won't let the government use Claude,

their AI model,

for mass surveillance on Americans

or for firing weapons

without human involvement.

Axios reported on Wednesday

that the Pentagon has taken its first steps

toward designating Amphropic

a, quote, supply chain risk,

which would mean that no company

that works with the Department of Defense

could also work with Amphropic.

The Pentagon typically reserves

the supply chain risk penalty for companies

that are based in like countries

that are US adversaries,

like China's Huawei,

even more alarming.

Elon Musk's XAI signed to deal

with the Department of Defense this week

that agreed to the standard Amphropic rejected,

so the government's murderous surveillance drones

may someday run on GROC.

An anthropic and a statement

right as we were starting to record

said that they are in good conscience

cannot agree to this,

and so they're holding strong.

Dan, is this what people voted for

for murderous surveillance drones?

It can be commanded by Pete Higgseth.

No, I think this will be voted for.

I mean, this should be honestly one of the biggest stories

in the country because it tells us two things.

One, it speaks to all of the massive ethical

and policy dilemmas that come with

the very rapid emergence of AI.

It also reveals that the Department of Defense,

because I will call it that,

not the Department of War,

under Donald Trump,

would like the power to do mass domestic surveillance.

And then just on top of that,

at the same time, this story comes out

that what they want,

the Department of Defense argues,

we want anthropics to let us do everything

we're legally allowed to do.

They're only two rules from anthropic here.

No mass domestic surveillance

and no autonomous weapons

that don't involve humans

actually be the ones who make decisions.

The latter is technically legal,

although quite irresponsible

and I'll get to why it's even more dangerous in a second.

But mass domestic surveillance,

not legal,

and why do they want that?

There should be some follow-up questions on that.

Well, I'm sure it's only going to be

mass domestic surveillance

if they go to the Pfizer courts

and then they get the war.

Of course.

Article three courts

and they get the warrants properly

because that's how they've been doing things

in the Trump administration.

And that's also not mass.

Those are individual individuals.

Although obviously the Bush administration

did do it with metadata at a very high level

and that continued for many years after that.

But the other thing is there's this study

that came out the other day

where they were having all of the AI models

play war games against each other.

And the big takeaway was

AI models are very quick to use

tackling nuclear weapons

and war games.

Yeah, I mean,

because they're not in a hinder

by the moral forms of it.

And it is a way,

like it is the fastest way to domination.

And this is like the big takeaways

that this is what they do.

And now we want to give them the keys

to the arsenal.

Like it just,

it is insane.

Also just on this.

It's not just Pete Hexat

that's such a fucking moron

in the meeting

with the CEO of Anthropic

the other day.

He threatened him with two things

when they refused.

One was what you mentioned,

blacklist and the supply list.

The other one

is that they were used

to defense production act

who sees control

of Anthropics AI model.

Now those things

are in complete conflict

with each other.

If you are subject

to a defense production author

is act acquisition.

It's because what you have

is so essential

national security.

The government needs it right now.

And the other one

and the blacklisting

is that you're so dangerous

that no one

who does business

that you can be in contact

with the government.

Yeah.

Yeah, I don't know that,

I don't know that consistency

is that what they're going to know.

No.

But it's just like this,

like this is the future

we are living in.

And like I don't think

any of these AI companies

are covered in glory.

You know, Anthropic

to their I would say

limited to their credit

in this instance.

But Anthropic exists

and I just read an incredible

book about this called

Emperor of AI.

Anthropics, which is about

open AI.

But Anthropics exists

because the CEO

and the heads of Anthropic

and that team

left open AI

because they thought

Sam Altman was

abandoning the original

mission of open AI,

which was too

guard against risk.

Now, they've also

commercialized

and running a $380 billion

company right now.

But there are a lot

of other people who are going

to do, like,

Elon fucking must

who are going to do

the things in Anthropic.

Well, this is too.

I know.

And we were talking about this.

Like, you could,

I mean, Anthropic

could be the best actors ever.

Right?

Just in a pretend scenario

that they're only

out there.

They're not having care

as much about

making money

and they're only there

for good.

Just the people who gave

them $380 billion.

Probably the hope they

care about.

Right.

But I'm saying, like,

just for the sake of argument.

Yeah.

The problem is, like,

we're in a very competitive

environment and a

free market system.

And there's going to be

other companies.

And there's going to end, like,

whether they're US

companies or bad actors overseas

and foreign companies.

Whatever they may be,

someone's going to

figure out a way to do this,

which is why you can't

just fucking make a bet

on it, which this administration

is not doing.

Like, there is, there is

no scenario here where it is

not absolutely necessary

to regulate

artificial intelligence.

There's just no scenario.

And with statutor,

with statutes,

with legislation.

Like, yes.

The administration

whose current philosophy

is no regulations at all

and they're trying

to ban regulations

at the state level.

But Congress needs to get

involved here.

And that is dangerous

because most of them

are still using their

AOL accounts.

But, like, just you need,

like, the fact that AI

cannot do mass surveillance

and automated weapons

should be in law.

Like, that's something

that should be in law

and written in a way

that prevents it.

So it's not up to the

goodwill of CEOs

of billion multi-

billion dollar companies

to hold the line against this.

And the only,

the only sliver of good news here

is that they can't,

they can't automatically

fire the weapons yet.

They're not,

that is, they don't

have that capability yet.

I think they don't have

the mass surveillance capability

yet either.

But they're, you know,

they're all pretty close.

But they are using

AI to go through intelligence

and do decision-making

matrixes.

God knows when Elon Musk

get the XAI on there.

But, you know,

that's sure that could be

greenlit by Donald Trump

any day now.

Yeah, well, it's too busy

making sure that AI can

undress images

of random people online.

So that's what he's focused on.

Post-Ave America has brought

to you by Stamps.com.

It is staggering

that this, this very day,

many small business owners

are still making post office runs

or are stuck

with expensive postage meter

at Leases.

It's 2026, not 1926.

I'm male in ship.

That's right.

How you want the Stamps.com?

Pre-social security

are who are the poorest people

on our country, the elderly?

Yeah, at that time.

Our stock market crashes.

That's how you want the stamps.com.

Pre-social security are who are the poorest people in our country, the elderly at that time.

Our stock market crashes are Bitcoin now.

With stamps.com, you can send from your computer or phone 24-7.

No long lines, no low supplies, open anytime.

Print postage on demand.

You get up to 90% off carrier rates like FedEx, UPS, and USPS.

Schedule carrier pickups right from your door and get carrier compliant labels every time.

No errors, no rejected mail, no wasted trips.

It's perfect for your business.

Then certified mail get document tracking and confirmed delivery and analytics to make

sure you know exactly what you sent and spent.

For almost 30 years, millions of customers have relied on stamps.com to make mailing and

shipping faster and so simple.

Look, if you're a small business owner, getting stamps.com just makes sense.

I cannot believe people are still wasting time going to the post office, dealing with shipping.

It's a pain.

Stamps.com is a great solution.

It's simple.

You'll save money.

You'll save time.

Everything about it will work for you.

Now you can try stamps.com risk-free for 60 days.

Go to stamps.com and use the code PSA to get 60 days risk-free.

60 days give you plenty of time to see exactly how much time and money you're saving on every

shipment.

That's stamps.com, code PSA, stamps.com, code PSA.

This episode is sponsored by BetterHelp.

The cards and flowers are gone.

But the pressure to have your love life figured out will remain, whether you're in partnership

or navigating life on your own, or maybe you're in some sort of newfangled arrangement where

there's multiple people and a lot of complicated feelings, polycule, that you have to constantly

explain why it's so good.

It's normal to feel a bit of a post-holiday emotional hangover, working with a therapist

can help you cut through the societal expectations and find a path that feels authentic to you.

Like the expectations I just put on you, like the judges row by just put on to talk about

your polycule therapy can help you identify what's weighing your relationships down and find

ways to brighten them.

And also, by the way, they can just be a way where you can work through some stuff.

Because you know, things can be great, but then you notice that little edge that trickles

in.

You know?

And you're like, let's nip that in the bud.

BetterHelp's quality therapist work according to a strict code of conduct and are fully licensed

in the US.

BetterHelp does the initial matching work for you so you can focus on your therapy goals.

A short question here helps identify your needs and preferences and their 12-plus years

of experience in industry leading match or film and rate means they typically get it right

the first time if you aren't happy with your match switch through different therapists

at any time from their tailored wrecks with over 30,000 therapists.

BetterHelp is the world's largest online therapy platform, having served over 6 million

people globally and it works with an average rating of 4.9 out of five for a live session

based on over 1.7 million client reviews.

PSA.

All right.

We should also talk about the latest developments in the Epstein's again.

What a pod this is.

Honestly, now I'm sort of regretting spending seven to eight minutes on your Twitter

habits.

I'm sorry.

Apologize to the listeners, which is in the news today because the House Oversight Committee

took a field trip to Chapacua, New York for a closed-door deposition with Hillary Clinton.

Bills is scheduled for Friday.

Hillary said she had no memory of meeting Epstein, no knowledge of his crimes and briefly

pause the deposition at one point after Lauren Bobert snapped a pick and leaked it to

Benny Johnson because of course Hillary later came out and told the press the same thing

that she said in her statement, but that also towards the end of the deposition, they

started asking her about UFOs and pizza gate.

That's how the Republicans were using their time in Chapacua stay tuned tomorrow for part

two with Bill Clinton.

The much bigger Epstein news this week is that Trump's Justice Department appears to

have removed FBI notes from three interviews that agents conducted in 2019 with a woman

who accused Jeffrey Epstein and Donald Trump of sexually abusing her in 1983 when she

was just 13 years old.

We know this because the DOJ did release the FBI's initial interview with the woman where

she only accused Epstein of abusing her in that initial interview and because they released

a summary of the allegations against Trump that just happened to be in an FBI presentation

about the Epstein files from last summer, allegations that were also referenced in an evidence

list that prosecutors provided to Galein Maxwell's attorneys, which was also released on

the DOJ website.

The existence of those two documents reveals that there were these three interviews that

the FBI conducted with the woman where she had made allegations against Donald Trump, but

the notes for those three interviews have disappeared from the website.

This was first reported by the journalist Roger Salenberger and then confirmed by NPR and

other outlets.

On Wednesday, the Justice Department said it would take another look to see if any documents

were improperly tagged and will release anything they find that falls under the requirements

of the law.

On Thursday, oversight chairman James Comer said the committee would be looking into it

as well.

What do you think, Dan?

It's just sort of stunning.

What are the odds that the documents would be mislaped would be the ones that included

allegations about Donald Trump, just like what are the odds?

What are the odds?

I mean, also what are the odds that they are still incompetent enough to leave a couple

documents in there that reveal the existence of these allegations?

We are dealing with criminals.

We are not dealing with criminal geniuses.

This is the thing that people said about the Epstein files, which is it's very possible

or real that Pambotani, Kashmatel, some other person who works for Trump could go in there

and take out the Trump stuff.

People kind of said, that's crazy.

That's conspiracy theory.

It's like this is these guys lie and cheat in every way, shape, or form and they did

it here.

They're just really bad at it, but if they were slightly better, if they had like third

grade competency and criminality, then like no one would ever know this happened.

Yeah.

And the documents are currently not, we don't know where they are.

I don't think the oversight ranking member, Congressman Garcia, went to go find them,

hasn't seen them yet, like have they been destroyed?

Like these are fair questions to ask.

Yeah, it also seems like this one is not going away because you assume that the victim

is out there, the person who made the allegations.

She also made the allegations against the Epstein that were more substantiated than the

allegations against Donald Trump.

We should say, of course, they're unsubstantiated so far, but like you may have to imagine

she's out there.

Her lawyers are out there.

People who know her out there.

People who conducted the interviews are out there.

People who, yeah, the FBI agents are probably out there.

Right.

So it's like, I don't think this is, I don't think this is the last we've heard of this

one.

It speaks to the volume of insane news in Trump's presidency that we have talked about

a war with Iran.

We have talked about a, the Fox News host defense secretary trying to use killer robots.

And now we are talking about a potential, like the Department of Justice going illegally.

This is illegal, what they did if this was done intentionally, illegal, it violates

the law.

That was passed requiring disclosure of the records went into illegally, hide, steal,

or destroy records that implicate Donald Trump in a child sex trafficking ring.

Like that, that is what it is.

Like one of those allegations are real or not, we don't know, but the cover up, the attempt

to protect him from those allegations is a massive, massive scandal.

Also one that, like this was known, the NPR story hit the day of the State of the Union.

Because we first talked about this on Jimmy Killalive because there was a, there was a question

about the Epstein files.

And so we brought it up there too, but like, it's wild that then the state, the whole

state of the Union happens and we're just like, okay, that's so true of like so many

other things.

Like, I mean, there's just, there's just a different world with a different president

of the different media environment where this is all we've talked about for a year and

a half now.

Every single day.

Yeah.

It is wild that way.

I mean, it's still in the news.

I mean, it is a gigantic scandal, like you said, but it is one of the few stories that

we, has sustained itself for all these months.

Yeah.

This all kicked off last summer, really.

Yeah.

For sure.

So I know we've talked about Trump's plans to steal the midterms quite a bit recently,

but there's a new development on that front.

We should also mention the Washington Post reports that quote, pro-Trump activists who say

they are in coordination with the White House are circulating a 17 page draft executive

order that claims China interfered in the 2020 election as a basis to declare a national

emergency that would unlock extraordinary presidential power over voting.

So that's fun.

One lawyer who's pushing the EO told the post, it would empower Trump to ban male ballots

and voting machines among other things.

So they're going to use this fake finding that China interfered in 2020 to justify national

emergency to justify taking the power to run elections away from the states, which

is, of course, constitutionally mandated.

How real do you think this is and what's your gut on how the court might respond?

There are definitely lunatics outside the White House working on this.

There are definitely lunatics inside the White House who are helping them do this.

Whether Trump signs it or not or actually comes out open question, I really struggle to

see what the legal basis for any of this is.

As you mentioned, it's in the constitution.

They are ironically enough relying on the same statute that the tariffs were used for,

the emergency power statute, which has no specific discussion of elections or any of these

things.

There is no statutory power the president has, even in an emergency over elections.

And there is no evidence of foreign involvement.

This is based entirely on an intelligence report that Beijing considered, but then decided

not to get involved in the 2020 election.

That's it.

And also the remedy for Beijing considering, but deciding not to get involved in the 2020

election is to ban the male ballots and voting machines.

And the 2020 elections.

There is some weird thing about how they were like one of the conspiracy theories is they

are going to make driver's licenses, fraudulent driver's licenses for people to vote by

male.

But the point is it makes no sense.

I can't imagine like, you know, I don't put a ton of faith in the judiciary in the Supreme

Court, but this seems quite like if you thought their interpretation of the law on the

tariffs was absurd, this is like 10,000 times more absurd than that.

I agree with you.

And if I were a conspiracy minded myself, I might say that one of the reasons that Trump

flew off the fucking handle with that Supreme Court decision, why he was so angry at the

Supreme Court and said such crazy shit like they've betrayed their families and their

disloyal audioshirt is because someone told them that that six three majority in that

case is probably what you'd get in a case where he tried to declare a national emergency

and take over the elections.

Yeah, that seems possible.

If I was conspiracy minded, I would also think about that.

But you're right that like even if that's wasn't going through Trump's mind, I do think

that the reasoning, if you look at that case, the reasoning that Roberts and Barrett and

the Liberals signed on to and Gorsuch and the Liberals all signed on to is like, it

is.

It's like you can do major questions, doctrine, you can use president, like there's

just, you can't, you can't, you serve Congress's power that is prescribed explicitly in the

constitution with a fucking executive order just because you say there's a national emergency.

Like, it's literally the exact same thing, right?

It's the same reason.

The power to emissor elections, in this case, states you're taking power from the states,

which is explicitly designated in the constitution.

You can't do that.

You can do it with a law.

You can't do it with an executive order, just like the tariffs.

Like I think this is, like what is more to sort about this is the mentality that links

to which this administration is willing to consider to try to avoid the, what they believe

to be a significant ass whipping coming in November.

Yeah, you can see why it's, yeah, you can see why rigging the election feels important

to them because here's Mike Johnson on Tuesday threatening us with a good time.

If we lost the midterms, heaven forbid, if we lost the majority in the house, it would

be the end of the Trump presidency in a real effect.

So we've got to keep it hell, yeah, it would be.

If that is not in a D-triple C fundraising video right now, I mean, and not do not text

me with it.

Do not text me there.

I do.

If I get a fucking text, I'm going to say stop.

So do not text me with a D-triple C, but if you put it in a usual pre-roll, that's

pretty good.

How to fucking Republicans pitch every dumb reporter in DC that the moment of the Democrats

sitting in the state of the union, it's going to save the midterms and then they got

the ad out already and they got all the stories about the bullshit ad that's terrible anyway

and all that.

And like Mike Johnson says that and we can't, we can't make something of that.

Yeah, yeah, I mean, anyway, we also have a new Washington Post ABC news, Ipsos poll

that found a 14 point enthusiasm gap working in Democrats favor for the midterms.

79% of Democrats said they were certain they would vote in the midterms, only 65% of Republicans

said the same thing.

That said, the generic ballot in this one is only a two point Democratic lead, didn't

love that part.

But what do you think is going on here, or do I have to wait till the next episode of

Polar Coaster because I am a subscriber, which you can be to at crooked.com slash friends.

Actually, Jenna, I hate to do this to you, but you have to wait till the next message box

to come out, which you can be a subscriber to at crooked.com slash yes we did.

There we go.

Well, I think I'm not worried about the generic ballot in here.

The generic ballot average is about six or seven, depending on which site you look at.

But this is a, the post reveals what is obvious in the electoral data we've seen so far

this year.

Democrats are incredibly fired up, Republicans are depressed, and swing voters are looking

for Democrats like that.

That is what we saw in that special election in Texas.

And if you don't want to believe a post ABC, Ipsos poll, just look at what's happening

in Texas right now in the early vote.

So there's a day or two left in early voting.

As of Wednesday night, the, in the Democratic primary, they have cat early votes cast

or 163% of what they were in the 2022 election, Democratic primary.

Now you may say to yourself, I don't remember a particularly competitive Democratic election

in 2022 in Texas, I don't either.

But here's what I will tell you, there is an incredibly contested Republican primary

happening right now, which has had tens of millions of dollars spent in the air.

I think there's been, there might have been a hundred million dollars spent in that race

already.

And Democrats have cast in Texas, a state down on Trump won by almost 14 points.

Democrats have cast 140,000 more early votes than Republicans as of Wednesday.

How many do you think some of that is just behavior like Democrats vote early in Republicans

down there?

Maybe, but the Republicans are also trailing their pace from the, so you can look at this

because the comparison of 2022 is instructive, right?

Right.

So you can compare now to 2022, Democrats are doing well, the Republicans are not, you

can compare Democrats Republicans right now, Democrats are doing better, but either Democrats

do better, it's a state with more Republicans.

So they should be doing better and they are not.

So Democrats are fired up.

Like we know Republicans are more same day, voters all of that, but there is plenty of evidence

that Democrats are very, very fired up and that is good news.

Too big to rig.

That's what we got to do.

Just got to have more people, more people voting.

So it's too hard to declare national emergency and take the voting machines.

Sure.

Yeah, that makes sense.

You said that always right.

I've said you said this.

We need the voting machines to be so full of ballots that little cash pretel can't carry

them out of the, out of the, uh, full county.

Yeah, we did say that.

Yes.

Right.

Again, I forget what I say off, off miking on.

All right.

Speaking of the midterms, when we come back from the break, you'll hear Tommy's conversation

with Shelley Jackson about why we need to feel the Democrat in every down ballot race, especially

in states like Arizona, where we need to build more electoral power.

We'll be right back.

Potsy of America is brought to you by uplift desk.

John Tommy and I have uplift desks in our office and we genuinely love them.

We are moving up and down all day.

Sometimes we're sitting sometimes for standing, you got to change your vibe.

Nice.

Because the other ones you slouch all day long and you feel terrible.

And now there's the all new uplift V3 standing desk, which transforms your desk into

a productivity engine.

And the V3 combines the best of uplift's V2 and V2 commercial into one smarter, stronger

frame.

This thing, you know, it'll, it'll send you up into the ceiling panels if you're not

careful.

That's how quickly we're rising these days.

I don't know what they've done between V2 and V3.

I guess I have V2.

I think it's great.

Yeah.

It's like an AI model.

It's just exploding in progress.

Yeah.

A lot of, a lot of extra tokens now.

Redesign feet and steel reinforcements make this the most stable standing desk yet.

Assemble and minutes, no stress, no mass, the new flex mount, cable manager comes in

every desk to keep cords hidden and tidy, upgrade everything, speed, stability, ergonomics

and design, ultimate customization options with the most extensive range of desktop styles

and accessories in the industry.

We genuinely do have them and love them.

They've totally made working at our desk better like all the time.

I would say that we all sit after a lunch.

You got to be low after lunch, but then you get back up.

You got a movie.

You got to change your vibe.

You sound like Joe Biden there.

Get back up.

Yeah.

Get back up.

Yeah, he would not do all of this standing desk.

I don't think.

Kinda double the space and unlock your full potential with the new uplift V3 standing desk.

Go to upliftdesk.com slash PSA.

And use our code PSA to get four free accessories.

Free same-day shipping, free returns, and an industry reading 15 year warranty that

covers your entire desk plus an extra discount off your entire order.

That's UPLTYFT DESK dot com slash PSA for this exclusive offer.

It's only available through our link upliftdesk.com slash PSA.

is doing absolutely essential work in Arizona, recruiting,

and supporting candidates for office.

Shelley Jackson, welcome to Paz de America.

Thank you so much for having me.

I'm so grateful to be here.

We are grateful to you for the work you're doing.

So you have a lot to talk about.

You ran for school board and you flipped a seat

when you were 24.

We need more people like you.

Now you run an organization called Instatuto,

which is doing recruiting, training,

ongoing support for people who want to run for office

or who organize around really important issues.

Instatuto is also a key partner, I should say,

for our friends over at Vote Save America,

who launched this first of its kind,

Candid Recruitment Pilot Program,

to get candidates to run for down ballot races

in Arizona, North Carolina, and Texas.

Now, the filing deadlines in Texas and North Carolina

have already passed, but in Arizona,

I believe you have until March 23rd,

if you want to run for office.

So go to votesafeamerica.com slash run,

if you want to learn more.

Also, I think the filing deadline

is not yet passed in about half of the country.

So if you're listening and you're inspired

to take the plunge, check out your deadline in your state.

But let's start with Instatuto.

What are the gaps that you guys are filling

to help candidates run for office

and then more importantly to be successful once they win?

Yeah, I love this question.

And yes, also shout out to the Vote Save America team

and the pipeline fund has been so incredible

to have this partnership here in Arizona.

A lot of the times when candidates are running for office

and probably all across the country as well,

they're doing it with very little support.

They're going in, maybe excited to help their community

but don't know where to start

and end up missing a lot of gaps along the way.

But aside from like the logistical pieces

of running for office for women, for people of color,

there's also these pieces around funding, right?

Having a support system that are also super essential

to making sure a candidate can win

and that they also have the morale they need

to move things along the way.

And so at Instatuto, we do a couple of things.

We help identify candidates.

So we are always on the search

and we're always looking to find new people

who want to get involved.

And sometimes just tapping people on the shoulder is needed.

A lot of the times people don't even see themselves

as someone who can make change and even for myself.

Let me tell you, I did not have on my bingo card

that I was thinking of on for office, someone asked me

and then they asked me again and again.

And so being able to have someone actually tap you

on the shoulder is super essential.

So that's one of the things that we do

is we just straight up ask people.

And then after that, we are supporting them with training,

making sure they have the skills needed to run,

making sure that we're also talking through with them.

How are you thinking about your finances?

If you're on a for school board, you don't get paid.

If you're on a for the state legislator,

I believe the most they make is about 27,000.

And that's a really hard job, right?

So we have the conversations

and we provide the resources for people

to make informed decisions.

And then once they get into office,

we also have a co-governance fellowship.

And this really helps support the now elected,

thinking through what does it look like to govern?

What does it look like to do this job well?

And what does it look like to do it with community

to make sure that we're also not moving on our own

and being harmful once we get into office?

That's great.

So turning point USA is also based in Arizona.

Folks probably heard of it.

It's the organization started by Charlie Kirk.

It funds a ton of grassroots youth activism

to bring people into the MAGA movement.

Obviously, I disagree politically with them

on everything, but I am very impressed

by the work they have done.

What kind of support do you think turning point

is providing on the republic inside

that Democrats are missing on the progressive side?

Ooh, I love this question.

Also, cringing at the fact that they started in Arizona.

Don't love that, but you know what?

One thing I think that they are doing

that we can think about more on our side

is creating low barriers of entry.

I think a lot of the times on our side,

we start to do purity tests.

We start to create these really high bars

just for people to get involved.

And sometimes we just end up pushing people away

instead of inviting them in.

And I do think at turning point, they are on campuses.

They are all over and they're welcoming any and everyone.

And then once they get into the door, I think they push them.

I think they share this ideology and this narrative

that they have.

And the more people are there, the more they start to adopt it.

But I think sometimes on our side, we forget about that

or we expect people to be at a certain place right away.

And that's just not where most people are.

That is such a good point about the barrier to entry.

Because in a lot of ways, the barrier to entry

for a turning point event is like going to a big event

that feels like a party where you're everyone is welcome.

And they bring you in this giant funnel.

And then eventually, they could try to get you

to run for office or be an activist or whatever it might be.

Now, Arizona is a really important swing state

in every single election.

One would like to think that National Democrats,

the National Democratic Party, maybe big donors

are just chucking resources at you guys.

Is that happening?

Do you hear from the DNC, Super PACs, anybody?

You know what?

This year is actually really interesting in Arizona

when it comes to the funds.

Because this will be the first year, I think,

in about 14 years that we haven't had,

we won't have a Senate race, right?

So for the last few cycles,

we've had a really big top of the ticket race

that has been helpful to garnering support.

We know that when we get big funds like that,

it really helps other candidates that are down ballot as well.

But this year, we don't have a Senate race

or anything like that.

So I think we are already starting to see some differences.

The money is not flowing in the way that it has in the past.

I'm still trying to hold out hope that it is coming

and it is on its way because, as you know,

we have other races that are still important here in our state.

Yeah, absolutely.

So back to you, you ran, when you were 24,

you ran for school board, you flipped a seat.

What you said, you had to be asked and asked,

and that's again, I mean, what made you want to run for office?

And what did you learn from that experience

that might inspire or just inform listeners

who are thinking about doing the same thing?

Yes, so you know what?

I'm someone who never thought I was gonna be in politics

and social justice, so I definitely never thought

I was gonna run for office, so we can just start there.

I'd never saw myself like that.

I grew up thinking I was going to be a nurse

because my grandma was a nurse.

I wanted to be just like her.

And I got to my senior year of high school

and realized that I like taking care of her.

I don't think I would actually like taking care

of other people.

Yeah, that's fair.

Yeah, I get that.

So I was in this crossroads, but I had a dance teacher

who was like, look, Shelley, you've danced your entire life.

Why don't you become a dance teacher?

And I said, sounds like a plan.

Sure.

I went to school for dance and dance education.

And during that time, I actually had the opportunity

to teach dance all over Arizona,

working with an organization.

And that was really eye opening for me

and was my entry point to really critically thinking

about systems and resources.

And I started to wonder why when I'm in Scottsdale

or when I'm in Chandler, like these students get X, Y, and Z,

but when I'm on the south side in the neighborhood,

I grew up in we actually don't have as much

as many accesses to after school programs or the arts

or these other essential pieces that I was seeing

in other places.

And so that had already kind of like opened up my mind.

And that's how I started to get into organizing.

I was really lucky that a former teacher of mine

at the time was now a state representative.

And he had posted on Facebook one day,

I'm looking for young black organizers to get involved.

And I was like, I don't know what that means,

but I'm there and I started organizing on all the things.

And so to fast forward, 2020 comes around.

It's the pandemic.

Candidates all over are struggling to get on the ballot,

because in order to get on the ballot,

you have to get signatures.

A lot of the time people get signatures

by standing outside of a grocery store, right?

Asking, can you sign this thing or knocking on someone's door,

but people didn't have the ability to do that

because everyone was staying inside.

So then we end up getting to a place in my district in Roosevelt

where we had three open seats,

but only one person had actually made it on the ballot,

which was just wild.

So in that situation, people can now

start to run as a right in.

And I didn't think anything of it.

I was watching what was happening,

and I was hoping for the best,

but what ended up happening was mega folks in our neighborhood

said, hey, this is an easy way for us to be on this district.

So they started running as right in candidates.

And at the time, they were the only ones.

So we were going to end up in a place

where we now had a majority mega district.

And people started calling me,

and I was ignoring their calls, because I had a feeling.

I had a feeling what they were going to ask.

And then I started to answer.

And folks kept saying, hey, we're in this moment.

We need you.

You're from here.

You taught in the district, right?

You have an education background.

And I said no.

And I said no for a couple of weeks.

And it really got to a point where I was like,

am I going to be OK?

Well, whatever happened if I'm not there.

Am I going to be OK with students missing out

on more resources?

Am I going to be OK with this ideology being pushed?

That's also going to show our black and brown students

that they don't belong in their own neighborhood?

And then I said no, I'm not OK with that.

And I finally ended up saying yes.

So I'm really grateful that people kept pushing me.

And we were able to do really great things two years

and I became the board president.

So I spent my last two years actually leading the district

and working on the ground with really great people.

But it was hard to see myself in that position

because I had never thought of it for myself.

To your point, I was also 24 years old.

And I did hear a lot of rhetoric around, well,

young people can't do this, right?

Or we need more qualified people.

But I'm lucky that I had finally

got to a place of, no, me being young

is exactly why I am qualified, right?

These are actually things that make me ready.

They're not barriers to doing the work.

That's an amazing story.

I mean, yeah, I'm sure you've noticed

that a lot of the elected Democrats are super old.

They a lot of them pay lip service

to the idea of this next generation of leaders.

But it's not clear they're doing much about it.

What kind of things do you think

are keeping young people from running

and like what do they need to get over those hurdles

and take the plunge like you did?

Yeah, you know what?

I think that a lot of it is apathy.

I think if you're a young person

and you're looking at what's happening,

you're kind of like, well, this is just how things are.

And this is how things have been in a really long time.

And so that that may be a reason why folks

don't even want to get involved,

let alone running for office.

I think something that young folks should remember

is that if we see things as they are, as not working,

it's because we're not at the table.

Because the people who have been in office

are the ones continuing to make the rules

and the conditions show that it's not changing

material conditions for everyday people.

The conditions show that cost the living continues to rise

and that they need fresh voices, fresh people

who are ready to provide a different perspective

and like really shake things up.

What I hope is that young people start to see

their apathy as like a superpower.

I don't think apathy actually has to mean we do nothing, right?

I don't think apathy means that we kind of just sit

and watch things go.

I think it's actually a nudge towards like I'm not feeling it

in an order to be able to have a different outcome.

I actually have to do something and investigate

what is that something?

Is it running for office?

Is it organizing, is it joining a protest?

That's great, I love it.

Last question for you.

So you've done all this work sort of finding these candidates

recruiting them, training them, helping them succeed

when they get there.

Are there any like stories or people you've met

that really inspired you or that I don't know,

maybe open your eyes that like about how different someone

could be for running or like just like the range of places

people are coming from to run for office

because of your organization.

Yeah, so many amazing people that are coming up.

One person that I wanna highlight that's not from this season,

if you will, but has just won a city council seat.

Her name is Anna.

I love it this season.

This season on running for office.

Exactly, exactly.

I think a lot about Anna Hernandez.

She is someone who first ran for a state senate seat

and a very democratic district, but she had an incumbent

who had been there for a really long time,

but he was very status quo.

He wasn't getting things done.

He wasn't holding the line on different issues

and she came in and everyone said that she had no chance

of winning and she won and she won by a lot.

And while she was there, she let the charge

against the abortion fight that we were having

in the state of Arizona and was able to make

a ton of different change.

And now she's at the city council fighting

and she is someone who is loud.

She's like super authentic.

She brings her family everywhere

and I think it is just so beautiful to see

and I think so against status quo.

So I mentioned her a lot,

but someone I actually wanna highlight

who's from the VSA program.

She took the pipeline.

She heard you all on the podcast and she said,

right on.

Oh, I'm interested, her name is Caitlin

and she is from New York now living in Arizona

and has an education background

and was watching what we're seeing

across the country on authoritarianism

and the attacks on democracy,

hurt the podcast and was like,

well, maybe I can do something about it.

She reached out to our team.

We had several conversations with her

and she shared with us more about the district

she was living in.

She's in a school district where they have a pointed

a lot of seats, so that's a fun fact, right?

People don't know that when there's not a seat,

like let's say a seat goes uncontested

or someone steps down from the seat,

then someone else appoints that seat.

And Arizona, specifically in Maricopa County,

we have a county superintendent, her name is Shelly Boggs.

I don't claim her a different Shelly.

It's spelled with a...

Okay, my name is Laura.

Yeah, mine is spelled with a E1,

but Shelly Boggs has been appointing

mega folks to school boards all across the state.

And so now she's in a district that's actually very blue,

but a good chunk of her school board members

representing her are mega red.

And so once she heard the podcast and talked to us,

she actually decided, yeah, I can do this.

And I can change my district and I can put students first

and now she's running for office

and we're really excited about her.

God, I love that story.

That is such a great story.

And in your point about them,

appointing people to these seats if no one runs

is why we have to run people everywhere in every election

all the time, especially this year

when thinkers cross things might go well.

So again, if you're in Arizona,

you still have until March 23rd,

if you want to register, go to votesaveamerica.com,

slash run.

Shelly, where can people learn more about Instituto

or Chip and help you guys out?

Oh, that's a great question.

So folks can go to instituto.io

to both donate and learn more about our trainings.

Everything is on that website.

And from there, let's talk.

Let's figure out how we can get you running

and support you along the way.

Well, Shelly, thank you for the work you're doing.

Thanks for doing the show.

And I hope to talk to you again soon.

Thank you so much.

Appreciate it.

Thank you so much.

That's our show for today.

Thanks to Shelly Jackson for coming on.

If you're interested in running in Arizona,

head to votesaveamerica.com slash run

to get more info.

I'll be back in the feed on Sunday

with a conversation with Maine Senate candidate,

Graham Platner.

Bye, everyone.

If you want to listen to Potsave America,

add free and get access to exclusive podcasts.

Go to Cricket.com slash friends to subscribe

on supercast, substack, YouTube, or Apple podcasts.

Also, please consider leaving us a review

that helps boost this episode

and everything we do here at Cricket.

Potsave America is a cricket media production.

Our producer is Saul Rubin.

Our associate producer is Farah Safari.

Austin Fisher is our senior producer.

Reed Churlin is our executive editor.

Adrian Hill is our head of news and politics.

The show is mixed and edited by Andrew Chadwick.

Jordan Cantor is our sound engineer

with audio support from Kyle Seglon and Charlotte Landis.

Matt DeGroat is our head of production.

Naomi Sengel is our executive assistant.

Thanks to our digital team,

Elijah Cohn, Hayley Jones, Ben Hefkoat,

Mia Kelman, Carol Pelaviv, David Tolls, and Ryan Young.

Our production staff is proudly unionized

with the writer's Guild of America, East.

Trump's Dangerous War Games

About this Episode

Hosts & Guests

More from Pod Save America

Taxing Cory Booker's Patience

Bondi Gets the Boot

SHOCKING GOP Plan to Fund War with Health Care Cuts

When Life Gives You Don Lemon