Donald Trump’s recent primetime speech was a poorly structured, factually baseless attack on election security, recycling long-disproven conspiracy theories about Chinese voter data access, voting machine vulnerabilities, and foreign interference. No credible evidence supports claims that votes were altered or that election systems were compromised. The speech was widely criticized for its incoherence, lack of evidence, and apparent intent to sow doubt in public trust. Behind the speech, multiple red flags emerged: a high-ranking teleprompter operator was reportedly making over $100,000 from betting on Trump’s speeches, and the vice president requested taxpayer-funded helicopter rides for his son’s golf lessons—actions seen as emblematic of undue privilege and corruption. Additionally, Trump’s media company is now selling real-time access to his statements to Wall Street, creating a pay-to-know advantage that undermines democratic transparency. These practices, combined with a lack of factual grounding, suggest a deliberate effort to exploit public anxiety rather than address real issues. The speech also failed to gain traction with media coverage, as major networks declined to broadcast it, citing lack of newsworthiness. Critics argue that Trump’s focus on election fraud distracts from pressing economic and social issues like inflation and wildfires. Despite the absence of factual support, the speech reflects a broader political strategy of stoking fear and division. Meanwhile, political figures like JD Vance struggled to navigate complex political terrain, appearing awkward and ineffective during interviews. The episode underscores the need for accountability in government operations and highlights how misinformation can erode public trust. A more constructive approach to immigration and national security—one focused on reform, training, and constitutional integrity—was advocated by Michigan Senate candidate Dr. Abdul El Sayed, who emphasized that immigration enforcement does not require paramilitary forces like ICE. The discussion reinforces the importance of honest, evidence-based political discourse in a democratic society.
Today's presenting sponsor is SimplySafe Home Security. July means vacations, long weekends, and beach days, and while you're out having fun, you want the peace of mind that comes with knowing your home is protected. That's why SimplySafe covers the exterior blind spots, ensuring you have the strongest first-line of defense when your attention is elsewhere. With SimplySafe, you can customize your system to fit your needs. It's more than just a security camera. It's a comprehensive system of sensors, indoor and outdoor cameras, and 24/7 professional monitoring. The app-guided setup is simple, and there is no drilling required, so you can install an arm-your-system in under an hour. There's no long-term contracts or cancellation fees. Monitoring plans started around a dollar, a day. I set up a SimplySafe system. You can very easily customize it. Setting it up was really easy, really intuitive, really simple, and took no time at all. Then you have the peace of mind of a great app and reliable customer service. We want you to experience the peace of mind of Real Home Security, which is why we've partnered to SimplySafe to offer an exclusive discount to our listeners. Right now, you can get 50% off your new system by visiting SimplySafe.com/Cricket. That's half off at SimplySafe.com/Cricket. There is no safe like SimplySafe. Welcome to PlotSafe America. I'm John Favre. I'm Jan Pfeiffer. On today's show, Donald Trump unloads recycled election conspiracies in an impossible-to-follow primetime address. His teleprompter operator was apparently making money betting on his speeches. His media company is selling Wall Street access to his truths, and his vice president is demanding taxpayer-funded helicopter rides for his kid's golf lesson. We'll dig into those stories. Plus, JD Vance's attempt to win back Joe Rogan and Pete Higgseth's obsession. With Testosterone, then Alex Wagner talks to Michigan Senate candidate Abdul El Sayed about the intense primary in that state that's heading into the final home stretch. Speaking of Alex, we're always adding new perks for Friends of the Pod, and now subscribers can listen to Alex Wagner's Runaway Country ad-free. Welcome to the ad-free group of pods, Alex Wagner. Let's see Intercircle, if you will. And to everyone else, if you haven't subscribed already, now you get Alex's pod. But ad-free, as well as this one, as well as pods of the world, and offline, and love it or leave it, and all your favorite crooked pods. And you get subscriber-only shows like Polar Coaster with this guy that I'm doing the pod with right here. Which never had ads. Which never had ads because it's subscriber-only. Pods of America-only friends. You get, and you get to be supporting independent media. So when Donald Trump screams at Brendan Carr to pull everyone's license, can't do that with us. Cause we don't have a broadcast license. Cool. Yes. Silver lining. That's what I think. Cricket.com/Friends, if you want to subscribe. All right. Let's get to Trump's big primetime address, which he built as really big news. Really big news. It doesn't get bigger. It's so big that we are recording this at 7 p.m. on Thursday night, because we wanted to bring you our analysis of the speech, which is why we're here late, because it was so big. Just like a table of nine people at CNN. Dozens of 2020 election deniers got called to the White House for a top secret preview. Ohio Senator Bernie Moreno said it would be the most important presidential address since the Cuban Missile Crisis. And at 9 p.m. Eastern on Thursday night, this is what we got, though this might be news to you unless you're a Fox or CBS viewers, since those are the only networks that carried it live. CBS really only did like half the speech, and then they sort of like gave context around it. But anyway, here's what you missed. Tonight, I'm announcing the immediate declassification and release of critical intelligence, revealing shocking vulnerabilities in our election infrastructure. This evidence shows that the election system we have dangerously exposes and really exposes like levels never thought possible to hack in exploitation and foreign interference just as disturbingly this vital information has for many years been covered up and hidden from you. They wanted to just make you sound like your president wasn't so hot when actually your president has done a great job. Recently, we found significant numbers of burn bags, members of the deep state, very, very famous group of people, many cases. They did not not want and they just didn't want it. They fought like hell not to have a Donald Trump to win in a rare move, NBC and ABC fake news are both said that they would not cover this speech. They knew what it was about. They and others in the media are part of a plot. They want to continue this fraud for whatever reason. They want to keep it going, addressing this crisis of election security demands that Congress must pass the Safe America Act. Wow. So that was something. You know, in our meeting before the speech earlier this week, you said it would probably just be a bunch of rambling, nothing that no one would pay attention to and think about more than 24, 48 hours afterwards and I kind of think you nailed it, Dan. Well, I had to get one right eventually. Let's get to Trump's actual claims, which honestly, I mean, we played that supercut, but it was hard to follow. We followed this stuff for like 10 years and also like before the speech, when we were waiting around in the office to record tonight, I was like going back and reading things about the 2020 election and what had been debunked just so I could prepare for this and still it was hard to follow. That in that stuff wasn't even really helpful. You didn't even have being an expert in the conspiracy theories up to this point. Was that helpful? Or new ish conspiracy theories? Let's go through his actual claims. Starting in 2020, China allegedly acquired 220 million U.S. voter files and the deep state hid this from Trump. Now all the documents that the White House released also confirm what the intelligence agencies and the government found back in 2020 when Trump was president. It's not a single vote was changed and also the voter files, voter information, voter registration information is public in most states. You can just get the information so anyone can get it. The idea that our names and addresses are somewhere sitting in China. They're also sitting out there on the internet. Anyone can get it. Every campaign has it. It didn't require any hacking or any nefarious moves to get it. What do they want to do with it? Are their intentions good? Probably not. But Trump tried to make it sound much scarier than it actually was. Our voting machines are vulnerable, didn't really give a lot of evidence for that. That was all recycled stuff that the intelligence agency had said. There's potential for vulnerabilities and some electronic voting machines, but nothing has happened and other nefarious actors and other countries may have been looking at ways to hack into or interfere with voting machines, but no one has done it. There's no news there. There was a random episode in Michigan in 2020 where a bunch of suspicious voter registration forms were flagged to the police and then nothing happened and no votes were changed and no people were registered and I guess it was never prosecuted and now Trump wants that prosecuted. The thing about that is, this has happened in the past, it actually happened on a race I worked on many, many years ago where people were doing voter registration drive and they just filled out the forms in order to get paid, which is fraud, but it's not voter fraud because the people who got registered, if they either don't exist or if they do exist, they don't know their registered so they don't vote. Yeah. It's an old one. It's been public. That was anything new. DHS apparently found a bunch of non-citizens registered to vote, but didn't find any non-citizens who did vote. Also, it can't really be verified who knows what the non-citizens registering to vote are. We haven't seen those documents yet. And then, big one, there was some election meddling, there were some votes changed in Venezuela by Nicholas Maduro. Someone's got to get that Maduro guy. That guy should be serving time. One of the revelations tonight was that Nicholas Maduro meddled in Venezuela's elections and somehow that ended up in Donald Trump's prime time address at a time when we are at war with Iran. The straightest closed inflation is high. People are struggling. There's wildfire smoke that is making some half the cities in the Northeast and the Midwest unbreedable. But you can't let us not get explosive diarrhea. That's forgot about that. Right. There's a lettuce explosive diarrhea. And yet, the president went out tonight to talk about random, recycled voter conspiracy election fraud, conspiracy theories and let us know that Nicholas Maduro meddled in his own elections and that the Chinese have access to the vote.
voter file data that we do too. - I mean, a couple of just key points here, I just want to hone in on. First, you said it, I'm going to say it again, it's very important. No one has presented any evidence that votes were changed. - Including the Trump administration. - This time around. - They could not find that. - They did it, they did it. - Last time around they did that too. - This time around as well. - They cannot do it. The second thing here is that they, China apparently acquired public information. Don't love it, but nothing you can really do about it when you make a public. Next, the idea, to the extent that there's allegations, although this is very much a speed by the intelligence community, that China was going to be involved in some sort of misinformation campaign. They were going to try to get involved with like higher journalist or media influencers or build bots or all of that. All of the things that Russia did on Trump's behalf in 2016 to be noted. No, not a ton of evidence that they actually did it, but that they thought about doing it. But we also know that in every election, foreign intelligence agencies try to interfere in our elections. Russia tries it, Iran has tried it. The Chinese have apparently tried it. Nothing new there. No evidence had actually changed any votes. I think the most important thing here is, if there were huge gaps in our election security infrastructure that allowed China to penetrate, to do these things that Trump claims they did do, the person who was in charge at that time should be held accountable. And that was some Donald Trump. No, careful on that. Because he got ahead of that tonight by basically saying that everyone that this was all uncovered. And this was all known in 2020, but it was all the deep state. And the deep state hit it for a while. So this is like, it's going to go after him. That's my next point. His big complaint, recent a lot of time here, is that the people who worked for him didn't tell him things. Right. Well, it seems like a management problem. And I would also point out that the guy who is the director of national intelligence, who would have been overseeing the people were hiding things from Donald Trump as a main name, John Radcliffe. Has he been ashamed out of public life? No, he's Donald Trump picked him to be his director of the CIA. Look, these people, these are not incompetent public servants. These are victims of a deep state plot, Dan, no matter who you're talking about, there's always a deep state operative, responsible for pulling the wool over their eyes. And then also, if you were someone who is deeply concerned about our election security going forward, would you have gutted many of the agencies and eliminated much of the funding that goes towards election security? Because that's what Donald Trump and Elon Musk did do. One thing that's funny is, as everyone is reading all, you can go to WhiteHouse.gov to look at all these docs that they're really, that they declassified and released. Is everyone's looking at the docs? They're not really matching the president's claims in the speech. John has stopped his own documents, his own documents. Samstein picked up this one here. Docs released by Trump tonight confirmed Russia tried to spread claims Biden was engaged in criminal activity vis-a-vis Burisma and that it advanced those narratives with US officials and planned a high profile corruption scandal at the peak of the 2020 presidential campaign. You might remember that that scandal turned out to be the subject of Donald Trump's first impeachment. Yeah, his perfect phone called Isolansky. So that stuff's out there now. There was a lot of stuff just about Russia in the docs that Russia tried to interfere on behalf of Donald Trump. They put all that out there, too. Fuck an idiot, man. Yeah, it's so stupid. And apparently there was an administration official told MSNOW before the speech, because this was a speech that was cooked up by the way by John Solomon, the pretend journalist, who then has become a special government employee and also Bill Pulti. And an administration official told MSNOW flatly that the intelligence doesn't show what Pulti and Solomon claim. Quote, the intelligence just doesn't say what you want it to say. I'm sorry. [LAUGHS] So they just-- they cooked up some stuff for the president to say in his speech and get all mad and please him, please grandpa, who's getting old and grumpy and wants to talk about election conspiracies, and then they just threw that in the speech, and then they put it a bunch of docs that don't really say any of that. Cool. What a great use to everyone's time. What a great use of everyone's time. What's your level of alarm after listening? Because on one hand, it's all stupid, and they didn't really prove anything, and they didn't even make up any good story. They didn't even put it a good lie. On the other hand, it's clear that his intention is to so doubt among Americans in the sanctity of our elections. And clearly, as sure as the sun comes up, is going to cry foul if Republicans lose the midterms. I mean, this is a man who cried foul in an election he won in 2016. So it's like, you didn't need a speech or declassifying a bunch of documents for that, but sure. I think we should be very vigilant, because Donald Trump is going to try to interfere in these elections. Like we know that, that is obvious. I think he is less power to do so than he believes, and we'll have Democrats fear. These elections are run by the states, states aside, how they're run, how the votes are counted, how they're certified, those things are written in law. The courts to date have been very skeptical of any of these Trump efforts across the board from 2020 all the way through here, but he's going to try and we should be vigilant. I am no more worried after this speech I was before. This was just stupid. This doesn't, I think people thought he was going to, there was reporting early on, he was just going to declare that John Assoff and Raphael Warnock were illegitimate senators. I don't know what power he has to do that, but or that he would call for the seizing of something or the confiscation of this thing. He didn't, none of that. He just vomited a bunch of things. It didn't make a lot of sense in a very tired monotone voice that was felt aggrieved the whole time and then moved back. - Burn bags. Burn bags. - Yeah, I mean it was, we can get into the performance level of this, but it was, I mean, I would actually, he may need to talk to Pete Hicks, I thought I can sum of that tea. (laughing) - Yelling about the burn, I couldn't follow that one either. Something about Obama and burn bags. - We knew about these burn bags was the thing. I was trying to remember this 'cause we've actually talked about it because this is the cashier's health thing. - I think these are the cashier's health burn bags. - It's so hard to keep all these episodes. - I know, it's our literally our job is to keep these things straight and we can understand what the fuck he was saying. Like what would a normal American think of this? - Before, I mean, we should talk about the FCC threat, the networks who didn't cover my speech, my election fraud speech where I spout conspiracies are now gonna lose their license. They should lose their license. Is that a real threat? - I mean, I think it's a thing that Trump really would like to see happen and I'm sure Brendan Carr will try to do some things. I don't think he really has the ability to do that. Just to make this very clear, it is not unusual for networks not to air speeches. If the topic of the national televised arrest is not sufficiently newsworthy, this happened with Obama. None of the networks covered Obama's 2014 speech about immigration. We're just gonna announce immigration next executive action where there actually was news in it but they all thought it was too political to cover. In 2022, you will remember the Joe Biden speech from democracy that he gave. None of the networks covered that one either 'cause they thought it was too political and newsworthy, this was very political and not newsworthy. And then when you add on top of it, and it was funny to watching Fox's coverage because Fox is so afraid of getting another three-quarters of a billion dollar lawsuit like they did in the Dominion suit. And so they were just so, they promoted the speech while I was talking about what was in the speech and then after the speech they had to repeatedly say, Fox can't verify these claims. Like the lawyers were really all up in Brett Baer's ass, which was amusing to watch. So it's not like they can, the networks are well within the rights to not cover this and it's not unusual and it's not Trump to raise this syndrome or anything like this is a speech that did not merit that level of coverage. Even if the things he were gonna say were not possibly litigious wise. (upbeat music) This podcast is sponsored by Squarespace. Squarespace is the all-in-one website platform designed to elevate your online presence and drive your success. Squarespace provides you all the tools you need to promote and get paid for your services in one platform, whether you offer consultations, event or other experiences. Squarespace can help you grow your business. Squarespace offers a complete library and professionally designed and award-winning website templates with options for every use and category. No matter where you start, your website is flexible to what you need with intuitive drag and drop editing, beautiful styling options, unrivaled visual effects, on brand AI content and more ways to list what you offer, no experience required. Squarespace domains makes it easy to find the best name for your business at one fair, all inclusive price, no hidden fees or add-ons required. Every Squarespace domain comes with advanced privacy and security tools included to ensure your domain remains online and protected. Plus, Squarespace provides everything you need to bring more of your dream to life, whether that means building a website or adding a professional email service. Head to squarespace.com for a free trial and when you're ready to launch, go to squarespace.com/cricod to save 10% off your first purchase of a website or domain. That's squarespace.com/cricod. - PodSafe America is brought to you by Zipper Cruder. I'm always looking for ways to save time. - Shampoo and conditioner. - Oh yeah, that's great. Or just never deal with conditioner. - Three in one. - Three in one. - How do you say that? - Yeah, whenever there's a three in one, it's like, what's going on in that bottle? - I don't know. - What's going on in that bottle? - Yeah, there's like sequence itself anyway. We all have our own time saving hacks for everyday life, but if you're a business owner, how can you save time higher?
While there's Zipper Cruder, Zipper Cruder has new, powerful matching technology that quickly lets you see the most interested qualified candidates first. So you can save time by meeting the right people faster. Candidates can tell you in their own words by they're interested in your job. No wonder Zipper Cruder is the number one rated hiring site based on G2. Look, hiring is one of the hardest things you have to do at a business. Everything comes down to making sure you have the right people. It could take so much time, it's so important to get it right, and Zipper Cruder helps you do that. That's time and meet great candidates sooner. With Zipper Cruder, four out of five employers who post on Zipper Cruder, get a quality candidate within the first day, try it for free at zippercruder.com/cricket. That's zippercruder.com/cricket, meet your match on Zipper Cruder. So Republicans had some thoughts on this whole thing. Before the speech, Politico helpfully captures three different outlooks here. First the doomers, like the anonymous former Trump administration official who said, quote, "The people I talk to are scared, shitless. This is about what it will do to their midterm chances." Next is the, what can I do? I'm just a simple member of Congress cohort represented here by Senator John Kennedy, quote, "When moms and dads lie down to sleep at night and can't, what are they mostly worried about? I would say cost of living, but he's the president, and he can talk about whatever he wants." Finally, freaks like Steve Bannon said that the, quote, "Revelations in the speech, quote, will be the exact tonic the mega grassroots base need to fire them up, to remind them of what they're really fighting for in these crucial November elections." Dan, who's right? I don't think Steve Bannon is right. Like is, picture this, is there a group of January sixers who live in swing districts who are just like tapped out on Trump or just waiting for this, waiting for a call to arms to go vote, you know, for Mike Lawler in New York, I don't think so. I think that is, quote, from Steve Bannon. All the blood has been squeezed from the stone. There is just nothing. There's nothing. Like, what do you, I totally agree, like, I just don't understand how this gets anyone motivated, especially since it's so hard to fucking follow. It's just, yeah, it's so stupid. And the bigger political issue here, and the reason why that first group of scared-shales people are correct is, it's not just the crazy things he said. It's what he chose to talk about. We are in a world where this is an election entirely about affordable, large majorities of people, including Trump voters and people thinking about voting for Republicans in this midterm, think that Trump is not spending enough time focusing on learned people's costs. So what does he do? He has a nationally televised address to talk about declassified intelligence that's unintelligible about a six-year-old election. Yeah. Like, it's just your waving a sign that says, I do not care about you, I do not care about your problems, I care about me and my problems. And that is bad for Republicans. Yeah. I don't think it's going to fly. I mean, unless they combine, as we get closer to the election, they'll probably do the communists and socialists are trying to steal the election to take over America so they can, you know, so there can be sharia law and they can take all your property and it'll be something like that. Like, the left is scary. Yeah, that'll happen. The left is scary. Yeah. And the way they're going to win is to steal the election. And so that's why you have to be vigilant. But that wasn't even the gist of this question. No. The speech was for what I can tell it was China tried to steal an election in the past and then a bunch of people in the government didn't tell me about it. Vote for Republican. Like, it's not a good message. Yeah. That's about right. All right. Well, that's enough of that. Trump had the added challenge of delivering that speech tonight with a, with a new teleprompter operator. And that's because his former prompter guy, Gabrielle Perez was placed on unpaid leave Thursday morning. After it was reported that Perez made more than $100,000 on Kalshi, placing bets on words that would appear in the president's speeches. Kalshi apparently flagged Perez's trades back in March. The same month, the White House published a memo warning staffers against trading on prediction markets and eventually referred his case to the commodity futures trading commission, which is conducting an investigation. Think of how rich we could have gotten if Kalshi was around 20 years ago. Is that your first takeaway on this missed opportunity? I mean, we're talking about a teleprompter and knowing about a speech. Yeah, of course, that's what I'm going to think about. I mean, that was your chance. Perez, who often makes, this is from the ABC story that broke the news, Perez, who often makes final edits to Trump's speeches, including changes from Trump himself. Oh my God. Kill a teleprompter operator who was making the final changes to the speech. That's terrifying to me. Backed out of Bet's mid speech when Trump went off script, he was live hedging the Atlas. This is very inside baseball, but the thing that was most stunning about this is the teleprompter operator has the rank of deputy assistant to the president. I know. I saw you, which makes him essentially the diplomatic rank of an ambassador in one of the highest paid people in the White House. Yeah. That's a lot of money. Yeah. Usually, think about this way, the deputy director of the NEC has that same rank. The deputy communications director may have that rank, doesn't always have that rank. The, you know, just very, very high level people make huge decisions have the same rank as Trump's favorite teleprompter guy. And that's your taxpayer money going to pay this guy. And that wasn't enough for him because he was making $100,000 extra off-calshi. I have a question, why only $100,000? Yeah. I mean, this guy, he had all the goods. This guy could have just, maybe, maybe it's just Trump went off script so much that he couldn't, he was, he was, he was, he was, how many bets he had in the mood. I mean, this is also, it's like, talk about the multitasking. You're operating the prompter. You're doing that. You're watching that. But also, now he's going off scripts. And now you got to, you get on with the other, you have your phone in your other hand. You're on Calche. You're trying to change the bet. No, you're not changing the bet. You're changing the speech. Right. That's true. Yes. Oh my God, ahead of tonight's address, Calche Traders, it's just a little fun fact to side note here. Already wagered more than, earlier today, they had already wagered more than $800,000 on whether Trump says words like, "Hormuz" or "Rig Delection". He did a, he did an accomplishments topper. Boy, I did it. It's about how horrible everything was before he became president. Now how wonderful everything is and go to TrumpRx and here's your Trump accounts. He gave three websites. The best part was, this is so funny, but he says, and if you want to read the documents, you can go to whitehouse.gov. Again, that's whitehouse.gov. It's like, yeah, yeah, you've never heard of that one. I mean, this is very, I mean, this, obviously, he's a boomer, but this is a pre, essentially pre-google way of doing this, which is people just Google it now, you don't really have to do the website. But, yeah, that was his, his, his accomplishments list was part like he likes to show that he's a winner and take care of everything, but you could have told it was also like the consultants and the political people or the Suzywiles, wherever it is, like, you got to talk about this, this pulls well. You got to talk about this, you got to talk about this and, you know, you can talk about all your election conspiracies as long as you do this list at the top, you know. That's. Well, this is the third website he did. Whitehouse.gov. TrumpRx, and you think he did one other one, didn't he? The Trump accounts. The Trump accounts. Yes. Yeah, Trump accounts for all your kids. So believe it or not, the telepromp dropperator, that's just one of three corruptates we have for you from the last 48 hours. Hopefully we could ever get that corruptate sting we've been asking for for years, or whatever someday. On Thursday, the Trump Media and Technology Group, the company that owns Truth Social, announced that it will sell Wall Street banks and investors, quote, "a direct, licensed, real-time feed of the platform's most market-moving truths," including, of course, Donald Trump's. In other words, the president's family company is now charging Wall Street for early-ish access to the market-moving statements of the president who will then profit. Why don't they just start asking the Treasury to print money for the Trumps? I don't know why we're going through all of these schemes and this and that, and everything is so complicated. Just go to Scott Besson and ask him to start print money, put in your pocket, walk away. This is truly one of the most wildly corrupt things that has ever happened, and that's saying a lot. I don't know. That's saying a lot, but just think about this. A truth is a presidential statement. We laugh at it because they go out on this stupid fucking platform that no one pays any attention to. Well, it's funny because the platform is so bad, and it's such a poor product and badly designed that it's so slow that basically the fix to make it like Twitter is something now that Wall Street has to pay for. Well, they basically, they're going, they're going, "think of it this way. I'm going to dumb this down for people." This would be like if Wall Street was paying the president to get a presidential statement before or the rest of the people so that they could make instantaneous trades off of that information. The example, president announces a new ceasefire with Iran. You can use that to buy oil features. He says the end of the ceasefire, you can sell your oil features faster than anyone else because you have paid money to the president to get access to that market-moving information before everyone else in this country. It's not like everyone, it's not like it's a pay-to-play thing where it's open to everyone. It's not like Twitter, Pro versus Twitter or whatever the fuck it is where you can just pay more and now your tweets will come faster. It's only available to banks and investors. Yes. Yes. This is your getting information on your terminal before the public, and in this day and age with the way trades are made, five seconds is worth millions and millions of dollars.
dollars. A second is worth millions of dollars. I was trying to think, is there a law? Is it just a thing that presidents shouldn't be doing? Is it in that category? Or is there some kind of regulation? I mean, I don't know. Yeah, it's the abuse of power. I guess yeah. It's a high crime and a misdemeanor. I was going to say that the core of the problem lies in the fact that the president's market-moving statements aren't first released by the White House, but by the president on his own private media platform. Yes. That is the core of the issue. Yes. That it goes out on truth social first and then the federal government, which is supposed to be responsive to the people. Then they put the truth out a couple seconds after Trump does it on Trump bleeds. There are some obvious things the founders missed. This is one that I understand why they didn't foresee happening. Finally, the secret service is apparently fed up with the vice president's travel demands, which last week included a request to fly his son to a golf lesson aboard Marine 2, that is the VP's military helicopter, which would have cost taxpayers up to $25,000 per hour around that, though the trip was scrapped due to high winds, but such requests have become so common that the vice president's security detail are reportedly now exchanging stickers and challenge coins among themselves that read Bobcat OTR's Survivors Club, Bobcat being Vance's secret service code name. OTR is an off the record, so it's like a movement that's not planned in advance or that's not announced to the public in advance. Fun update to this. After MSNOW broke the story, Vance canceled another planned helicopter ride for his son's golf lesson. John, where his son's golf lessons? Are they in Philadelphia? How do I kiddie yet? Oh, they're on the other side of town. You remember when Marine 1 used to take Malia and Sasha to school every day, right? Yes, yes. That was the thing that happened. They just did hop on the helicopter. That is what the fuck? I've said this before, but I work for politician 1's who did something that was so fucking stupid that one of our advisors said that is an A+ answer to the public say one more question of how to lose a presidential election. This is that. You were getting taxpayer funded helicopter lessons for your son's golf lessons? It's not even like baseball game, boy scouts, charity work. It's fucking golf lessons. Boy, are we a long way away from my hillbilly allergy, huh? What would Mima and Papa say about this? Up from your bootstraps, right into the helicopter. I mean, it is like he is so fucking lucky that that trip was canceled by the wind. But then he just, it was canceled by the wind. But then he planned another one and then canceled another one because of the story. It is, you know, it wasn't like, oh, close call. Let's charge your head. It's stunning in it. And just beyond this specific one, you imagine the secret services in charge are the trumps and the vanses. That's their job. And out of that, the biggest asshole is JD Vance. You're a more demanding, worse boss than Donald Trump. How fucking high in mighty is JD Vance going to get when someone asks me about this and what he's going to do some kind of how dare you talk about my chill. Like he's going to, I just, I imagine that's what we're going to get from him. I can't wait for me to do an emergency pie because I'm going to have so much to fucking say about it's going to be so bad. He's going to, he is right now watching footage of Richard Nixon's checker speech to try to do this and he's going to fuck it up. I'm, I'm, I'm even too, too young to, I mean, obviously, I am too. I was in 1958 or something. I was in 1958. Look, look, look, look, I learned about the checker speech at some point in life and it is a piece of information that has now gone out of my head. Pots of America is brought to you by Willie's. How does Willie's fit into your routine? I'm going to have some Willie's tonight. It's Friday. I'm not leaving the house. I got no plans. Nothing, Willie, Willie. It's you and Willie. It's me and I am spending my night, date night with Willie Nelson at the V-Tore household. I'm going to put Willie next to me on the couch with a little bottle. Willie's is a premium THC infused social tonic crafted by the legendary Willie Nelson. It is a low calorie, low sugar alcohol alternative that actually works, delivering a fast acting euphoric social buzz without the regrets that come with alcohol. Willie's social tonic come in 5 milligram and 10 milligram doses with a best in class flavor experience. So smooth and so balanced, you barely realize you're drinking a THC product at all. That is true. You can enjoy the tonics as a shot, sip it over ice or mix it into your favorite mocktail. I like the poor mind. It's like a spin drift or something with the levels. Willie's is not that fear-addable. You ate too much of in college. Each bottle of Willie's is third-party lab tested for accurate dosage so you can trust and customize your experience. Willie's unique blend of THC, CBD, CBG and LTH, delivers a feeling of calm, clarity, euphoria and relaxation. One shot of Willie's helps you relax, unwind and de-stress, perfect for taking the edge off at the end of a long day. Willie ships directly to your doorstep in 40 plus states and is sold out three times in the first six months with over 300,000 happy customers. So order now at drinkwillys.com and use the code Cricut for 20% off your first order, plus free shipping on orders over $95 and live like a legend. Pots of America is brought to you by our place. Our place makes beautiful, high-performance kitchenware designed to make home cooking simpler and more enjoyable. Everything is designed to be multifunctional. So you're not crowding your kitchen with pans and appliances that can only perform one task. Since day one, our place's cookware has been made without forever chemicals and it's always third-party tested to meet global safety standards. The always-pan is their most iconic product for a reason. It's a 10-in-1 non-toxic ceramic non-stick that replaces multiple pieces of cookware. Eggs glide out too easily. It heats beautifully and it works for everything from weeknight dinners to quick breakfast. Love it. I have an always-pan on my desk. I'm excited to take home. Yeah, it looks really cool. I don't know. You want to use non-stick, but then you read about it and it makes you feel bad about using non-stick, but the ceramic non-sticks are safe and great. I wouldn't use anything but ceramic non-stick personally. That's where I'm at. So excited to try it. Mixed megs for the kids over the weekend. It's easy to clean. It's like 10 functions. You can put a lid on it, like, you know, fry some boil, bake, roast, serve, like it does everything. You can go in the oven up to 450 degrees. So very excited to try this bad boy out. Upgrade your kitchen with our place today. Visit from our place.com/cricket and use code Cricut for 10% off site-wide. That's F-R-O-M-O-U-R-P-L-A-C-E dot com slash C-R-O-O-K-E-D and use code Cricut for 10% off site-wide. With a 100-day trial, you can try it completely risk-free. Speaking of JD Vance's travel, he did make the trip to Austin this week to sit down with Joe Rogan for nearly three hours because nothing else is going on. It was pure awkwardness sprinkled with occasional attempts at political maneuvering. Here are some of the highlights. If people want to say we mishandle the Epstein release, guilty. We didn't. Especially the communications of it. What do you think should have been done? I think that we should have just dropped everything at the very beginning. So what is going on with Iran, where it seems like the president keeps saying that a deal has been reached. Negotiations have been successful. And then it all falls apart. And we start bombing them again. Yeah. So how long do we have here? Because there's not much time. If it was your call, would you have done exactly the same thing? Well, what did the president said publicly that JD was less enthusiastic about it? I think it was the exact phrase that he used. I mean, my attitude towards this man, as you know, is the vice president, I'm not a public commentator. Like my job is to give the best advice I can to the president of the United States. Republicans still fundamentally have a cool problem. The thing I couldn't get over Biden is just bad staff work, man. The way that he ate ice cream. I mean, it's like, we could bring some of the stuff up, but it's like they would get him eating ice cream in the most ridiculous, suggestive way imaginable. What? Suggesting what? It's right here. What is he thinking about when he sees Joe Biden eating ice cream? Sex. He thinks about sex. He thinks about sex. It's a cardinal rule of this podcast that we do not kinkshame. We've always believed that. No bullshit. No kinkshaming. But I would say it's weird that JD Vance watches Joe Biden eat ice cream. Anything that suggests it. That's weird. We can we can bring this up. We can bring this up. What are you talking about? He's so awkward. So here's one review from the Daily Wires Ben Shapiro. I tuned into Joe Rogan yesterday and heard Bernie Sanders economics, Barack Obama's foreign policy and Rokhan's conspiracy theories. And then I realized JD Vance was talking. I want to candidate in 2028 who doesn't mirror the Democrats and who can win. Mr. VP, this is not the way. So Vance tried to tiptoe away from Trump on Epstein in Iran. He also did the Jeffrey Epstein had connections to Mossad and the highest levels of intelligence, CIA, Mossad, all that kind of stuff. So do you think it worked? And what does it tell you about how Vance sees the 28 race? It did not work. Also, how excited is Rokhan would be on that list? Definitely tweeted that out. huge win for him. Also sounds like a pretty good candidate to me. Obama's foreign policy, Bernie's economics, and where's take on the Epstein files? Well, he's taking the Epstein files are pretty good. Yeah, they are good. It's not going great for him. And he is trying to tiptoe through a minefield, but he is very clumsy, and he's not very good at it. And that is his problem. I'm not here to give JD pants political advice, but you really have to pick a side, and he's trying to be all things to all people. He's trying to be Trump's most loyal soldier to the mega people. He's trying to be Joe, he's supposed to get it with Joe Rogan about Epstein, and then, and he wants to be the anti-workout, anti-workout. You can't do all those things without this. And even if you could, he's not clever enough to pull it off. Yeah, maybe some political genius could pull that off, but he is not that. He is not deaf enough to do that. He is awkward. He is uncomfortable. He doesn't. He can't really do it. Like even in this, when you watch the, I didn't watch all of this, obviously, because I have self-respect, but I have watched a lot of the Rogan Manson review. Throughout the whole thing, he's trying to like be like, you know, Joe, I get, you get it. And so he goes to this thing where he brings up the MMA fighter at the White House, saving Michelle Obama as a man. And he thinks Joe Rogan is going to be on a side, because what he wants to say to people that Joe Rogan is, these fucking woke liberals trying to cancel jokes. They don't even get comedy. He's just a laugh and move on. And even Joe Rogan was like, I don't know, man, the White House wasn't a great idea. It's the White House. I don't know why you'd make that joke. And he's just like, he just can never get there. He just can't. He can't read other people. Yeah, he's very low ego for a politician. You can tell with interviews, because he doesn't know he's always uncomfortable with the audience with the interviewer, because he's trying to read what's going to make them laugh or nod or whatever. And he doesn't know. He is a little bit of Al Gore running for president in 2000. You're like overthinking everything you're doing. And it's, and you can't, and you're missing the connection. People, you see it with crowds too. Well, the other parallel there is going to be like Gore's relationship to Clinton and how Gore tried to separate himself a little bit from Clinton. And that was a hard thing to do. Yeah. And Bill Clinton is not Donald Trump. And Bill Clinton did not take that well, either. He did not. But it was also, and despite his scandal at the time, still popular. And Donald Trump is unlikely to be. I don't think Donald Trump's appropriated me in the 60s, like Bill Clinton's was. Not going to be popular, but also not going to be like, hey, JD, if you need to criticize me, don't worry. Go for it. Yeah. Yeah. No, I suspect not. So that's going to be tricky for him. All right. Last thing before we get to Alex's conversation with Abdul, it's been an extremely busy week in politics. So you could be forgiven if you missed this major announcement from Secretary of War, Pete Higgs. Today, I'm authorizing a new screening program for testosterone deficiency for our service members, ensuring you have the right testosterone levels to operate at your absolute best, because it's well established science that as we age, testosterone levels often naturally drop. This initiative, it's not about artificial enhancement. It's about restoring and optimizing your natural capabilities, protecting your longevity, and ensuring you have the biological foundation required to sustain the fight. So if you visit high T department of war.com, you can get 20% off your next testosterone treatment by using the code Pete at checkout. We are like three minutes away from Pete Higgs, offering penis enhancements to trust service members. It's so, what? That was fucking nuts. He's so down some weird rabbit hole born if his own insecurities. I was looking into this because I was weird at this conference. Is your ageing? Because I'm aging. No, my tea is fine. Don't worry. That's what everyone says. It's an IT podcaster. It's too late. I was like, is this just a random maha thing? It is. But there was some report a couple years ago, and this was a thing in Congress where long deployments can sometimes reduce testosterone levels in military. So you take, as usual, a kernel of something, and then you turn it into this. All these doctors are like, no, of course you don't screen for this unless someone's having symptoms, and then you look at it, and then also test out. The idea that you're just going to test everyone once a year, testosterone levels can jump just based on the hour of the day and age. It's a weird thing to do. Also, if you do have lower testosterone, apparently the first move isn't always just hormonal replacement therapy, which is what Pete Higgs said is offering. Some doctor was like, you could just go to a bed earlier and drink less because apparently, excessive alcohol consumption can reduce testosterone. So I don't know, but maybe a little close to home for Pete. Yeah, I think Pete maybe was doing a levels on research. I thought what was good for was good for the gander. So testosterone testing is now mandatory if you're over 30 in the military, but the flu shot is optional. Did they bring the flu shot back? It's optional. It's optional. Yeah, who's to say? If you want the flu shot, great. If not, whatever. You're getting your tea screen. It's important on the flu shot because it's not like the largest flu pandemic in world history started at a military base. Wow. Just look. It's another reminder that hiring the weekend anchor from Fox News to run the military was a sub-optimal choice. Gender affirming care. We're running the military. Gender affirming care for our troops. Great job Pete. Who what a thunk from Pete Hanks up. Well, it comes for them all eventually. All right, Dan. That's all for the news. When we come back, Abdul El Sayed. Pots of America is brought to you by Tommy John. Summer can be rough on the body. Public transport is a sauna. Your walk to work feels medically unsafe. And sometimes it feels like there's not enough air conditioning in the world to save you. But there's a big difference between enduring summer sweating every now and then and being an identifiably sweaty guy. Yeah, yeah, you don't want to be out of your brand. Meet air underwear. Your heatwave approved upgrade for all day comfort. Air underwear is perfect under light summer fabrics. No visible lines guaranteed. Our lightest underwear yet designed with micro perforations for max airflow all summer long. So you stay cool, dry and significantly less swamp like from the very first layer. Air is built to keep your base layer breathable lightweight and barely there. So you're not dealing with trapped heat, sweat build up or that uncomfortable to warm all day feeling incredibly breathable, incredibly durable. The lightest underwear you'll ever wear over 30 million parasol means there are thousands of guys out there who are more comfortable than you right now. So don't suffer this summer. I love Tommy John. Air is a summer essential go to Tommy john.com today and save 25% on your first order with the code crooked. Comfort perfected. Just use code crooked. Check out and upgrade your essentials today. Tommy john.com go today, save 25% with code crooked. Hi everyone, Alex Wagner here. I just wrapped up a great conversation with Michigan Senate candidate, Dr. Abdul Al Sayed. A couple things I just wanted to know. We were originally going to host a debate with all three Senate candidates, but we ran into last minute scheduling issues, not surprising, and then Mallory McMorrow dropped out of the race. So with the August 4th primary, less than TikTok three weeks away, we decided to proceed with individual conversations and interviews. We have of course invited Abdul's opponent, Congresswoman Haley Stevens to come on the show, and we are hoping that she will say yes. Once again, please come on the show, Congresswoman Haley Stevens, we'd love to have a conversation. Also, as many of you know, Abdul used to host a podcast here on Crooked and John, John and Tommy are supporting him in the race and have contributed to his campaign. Dan was supporting Mallory McMorrow. Everybody had a dog in that fight, but me? I'm Switzerland. I'm I'm neutral territory, which is why I had the pleasure of doing the interview with Abdul and you can see I did not pull any punches. Nor did he, not that it was bloody. So with all that throat clearing and housekeeping out of the way, give it a listen. Here's my conversation with Michigan Senate candidate, Dr. Abdul El Sayed. Joining me now is Dr. Abdul El Sayed. I started this conversation offline saying I wanted to call you Doc, but I'll just call you Abdul because you've given me permission. Thanks for joining me today. Honored, honored to be here. Like as you know, there is a live conversation about whether or not I am actually a doctor despite having spent a lot of time in grad school earning both a PhD and MD. So like I just prefer Abdul. It's unambiguous. But then even then people are probably like, but his whole name is Abdrahman. So I don't know. I mean, just casually dropping PhD and doc, you know, doctor in there is something my mother wishes that I could have done. I never will. So thanks for doing the work for both of us. Well, hey, you know, I for children of immigrants everywhere. Also, all that means is like, you're ruining it for the rest of us. No, I wasted away my 20s and here's the other side of it. Like, I'm unemployed and I ask everybody I know for money. So like, look how that's an app on me. Just trying to get a job here, folks. Okay, I just want to caveat this. I want to time stamp our conversation because we leave and news hurricane hell. We are recording this on Wednesday when you had a very rare open slot in your campaign. So thank you for doing that.
and just go forth with that knowledge, everybody who's listening and watching to this. Our chummy light-hearted conversation is now going to take a pivot for the very serious, because, well, we live in 2026. - Yeah, that part. - Yeah, right, real talk. I wanna start with ice. On Monday, ice officer shot and killed a 25-year-old legal resident of this country, Joanne Sebastian Guerrero. They shot him in front of his wife and daughter. That was about a week after killing 52-year-old father of three Lorenzo Salgado-Arajo in Houston. You are running on abolishing ice. And on one hand, the polling shows that public opinion has moved pretty dramatically on this issue. It is a strong one for Democrats. On the other hand, it is about 50-50 overall. And we really just haven't seen continued national outcry and protest and mobilizations after the murders of Alex, Fredi, and Renee Nicole Good. Ice is still capturing 2,000 people a day. What is your message to the other 50 out there who might be a little reticent/hesitant about abolishing ice? - We can have a safe and secure border. We can enforce immigration policy, but we don't have to do it while shredding our constitution to the interests of Stephen Miller and Donald Trump. And maybe it's just that I ran government agencies. There are not that many people who run for senate who've actually worked in the bowels of government. And anybody who's ever run a government agency will tell you that once you have a culture of impunity set in, it's almost impossible to take that out. You can't reform it, you can't retrain it. And for most of our existence as a country, we've been able to enforce immigration policy without having to have ice. Ice is, what, 25 years old, not even? We don't have to have this. And let's also understand what ice has become. Ice is not about immigration. Ice is not about the southern border. Think about the places where ice has been the loudest. We're talking about Chicago in Minneapolis. Ice is about normalizing paramilitary force in contra position to the constitutional order itself. So I think we can win a future where we have a coherent, thoughtful, peaceful, immigration approach. But that doesn't start with ice. That starts with a pathway to citizenship and protecting our southern border and enforcing policy without tearing apart the basic constitutional rights that people are losing left and right. When they're shooting people in the streets, it should tell you that this is not about the thing they tell you. It's about, it hasn't been under Donald Trump. And frankly, we should have known that after the first Trump administration. But the last point I'll make on this, Alex, is that as Democrats, we have to decide that we actually want to be in the business of persuasion. And I think too often we're afraid of issues that they tell us we're going to lose on. And we don't do the work of actually having the conversation. That's persuasive. They tell us the same thing about health care. They tell us this about immigration. They tell us this about so many issues that we could win the argument on if we had the courage to have it. And I'm just not willing to do this without having the courage to have it. Help me understand, though, practically what that means. So you're talking about peaceful immigration policy. Is there immigration enforcement? And who does it if it's not? Yes. I mean, before we ever had ice, we had INS. But the point here is that you can't enforce immigration policy to the breaking of all of the other laws, including our constitution itself. Like when they're trying to pursue warrantless policy where they don't actually have to get a warrant to enter your home, to pursue immigration detention, what that tells you is that this is actually about lawlessness, not law enforcement. And so there's an approach here where you abolish ice. You fire the people who've been hired without the right vetting or training. You start again with a very particular kind of force with high training where you are enforcing at the edge of cases that really are about somebody who has come and broken our actual laws, rather than blanket enforcement that is supposed to be loud and in your face, specifically, to weaponize the idea of immigration against a political party or a political movement. Like that really is what this is about. If you think about Donald Trump, you think about Stephen Miller, you think about JD Vance, the thing that they want to tell you is that immigrants are bad. It's the same reason that they are trying to get people to move abroad when they're applying for permanent residency in a green card. This is not about immigration enforcement. This is about immigration itself. And I'm so sorry, I happened to believe that immigration has been a very, very good thing for this country, not just 'cause it's been a good thing for people like me, it's been a good thing for this country. We in this country, we're struggling to build public policy that gets people to want to have kids. And if you believe in capitalism, then you should know that capitalism only works because the economy grows. And part of the reason the economy grows is because we've immigrated our way out of this problem. The problem here, though, is that these same people who are trying to weaponize ICE against the idea of immigration itself don't also want to pass policies like, I don't know, paid family leave and free childcare and free healthcare and investing in housing so people could actually imagine having kids. So all of that is to say, we actually have to win the fight around immigration itself. Immigration is a good thing. And that ICE is against the constitution itself. Like we have to go and have that conversation. We really can enforce that policy if we thought from scratch about what the immigration system is supposed to look like. But again, we're not willing to have nuanced conversations 'cause we're so afraid of our own shadows. - Yeah, I mean, reaffirming that immigration is a good thing seems like the big work ahead of us given how vilified immigrants have been. And then making the case a permanent residency for people who've been here illegally for sometimes decades. That's a big shift in sort of the way America writ large thinks about immigrants and immigration. - But Alex, I'll tell you this, right? I've been up and down my state now and I live in one of those states that everybody says, oh, well, you can't possibly win the state of Michigan talking about immigration. I'm sorry, but like, you know, Michiganers are open-minded and they're good-hearted. Donald Trump sold this lie to us that the reason that the economy's not working is because an immigrant took your job. The reason that you're out of healthcare is 'cause an immigrant took your healthcare. The reason you're out of home is 'cause an immigrant's living in your home, that was the whole, they're eating the cats, they're eating the dogs. - Yeah. - And the problem with it is that we're so busy running away that we forget that we too have mouths that we can use to be talking about what the real problem is. If you're out of a job, it's 'cause some corporations trying to figure out how to automate your job right now. If you're out of a home, it's because we have not invested in housing for a very long time because the banking industry ran a muck and then collapse the entire housing infrastructure and then we stopped the building housing. If you're out of healthcare, well, it's 'cause a huge corporation is figured out how to buy up all the hospitals in your location and then squeeze the money out of them and then shut down the ones that are not making them money. These all have answers and if you're not advancing the answers to the actual problems and you have nothing to say about those actual problems, what you're basically saying is, well, his answer is the best available one. And then we wonder why we're losing. Now, why are we not talking about corporations? Why are we not talking about how unlivable it is? Well, it's because too often Democrats take money from the exact same corporations that are part of the problem. And so we've got to get serious about actually thinking about how we advance an argument about what's wrong and how we fix it. And when we do that, I actually think we can have winning arguments about immigration too. But you can't leave his argument sitting there without advancing an alternative argument that's not a Trump bad. Yes, of course, Trump bad, Trump heinous. But why are you good? That really is the question we have to answer. OK, on that same topic, areas where Democrats have-- it feels like the rug pulled out from under them by Republicans. I want to talk about police and law enforcement. There's a whole lot of back and forth and without getting into the minutiae, the idea of defunding the police, right? You told Detroit News that you never, ever called for defunding. CNN then uncovered old statements from, I think, 2021 and 2020, where you did affirmatively say, we do need to defund the police, though you were clear that you didn't mean completely defund. Then you also deleted a lot of old posts and old tweets, maybe old news, but it does beg the question, what is your actual position on whether or not police departments get too much funding? So look, in the interim, worked in Wayne County. And in that role, I worked very closely with law enforcement. And of course, when you get life experience, you get a lot more nuance about how things actually work. I'm going to venture this idea that it shouldn't really be that controversial, that everybody really just wants to get home safe at night and stay safe at home. And the question we should ask is, how do we design a system that does that? Right now, our current system is, anytime there's any sort of social unrest, we answer that question with somebody with a gun. And that has led to a lot of harmful circumstances, and it isn't always efficient to stopping the thing that we actually want. So what I think is that we need more investment in recruitment, retention, and retirement for law enforcement. We need those things. Why? Because too often, the people who work in law enforcement in urban communities don't come from those communities. And that's partly because the people in those communities don't believe that they can have a good life in those jobs. And so I would rather have people from those communities who say, hey, I'm here to keep my neighbors safe rather than I'm policing against this whole community. But on the other side, we need a lot more investment in the things that actually keep people safe. It's not always a person with the gun. It might also be behavioral health response. It might be preventing violence through community violence intervention programs. And I think we need those things too. And then there's the question of the poverty that tends to drive all of it. How are we investing in public services, public schools, public wellness? Those are things that we need too. So rather than start with this one question about defund or not defund and play into, again, the same unknown.
nuanced cynical approach to politics that Republicans want to play, how about we talk about what we want to build? So look, I get why now everybody's sort of dragging this out, but I've tried to be nuanced about what I mean, even when I use that word, but I do think it's important for us again to go and win the argument. And I'll tell you, I've been up and down the state. You go to communities in the rural parts of my state and you say those things. Most heads are like, yeah, actually, that's kind of what we want. So let's do that. You know, in the context of a podcast interview, right, there's space and time and bandwidth to talk about the nuances, but unfortunately politics right now is a caricature of itself, but also makes a caricature out of candidates. And the reality is that Donald Trump won your state by, I believe, a point and a half at the same time that Alyssa Slugkin won her seat by about a third of a point. And I sort of wonder, extrapolating from your complex answers to issues that I think really trigger the right and are easily packaged to stoke fear among swing voters and independents, are you of the mindset that you need to win over people who voted for Trump? And more broadly, folks in the middle or for you, is this a turnout election? I think there's a third way here, he's using that word. Yeah, be careful, dude. You're running as a Democrat. Okay, let's step back for a second, right? I want us to think about what Donald Trump teaches us if there's anything to learn from his experience. You're right, politics turns people into a character. Donald Trump in theory should be the easiest person to character and yet he won elections. But you know what he did? He went everywhere and said the same things everywhere. And Democrats play this defensive style of politics. We're so concerned about what they're going to say about us, that we forget the fact that we too have mouths and voices and ideas that we could be advancing anywhere in everywhere. And I think if we do those things and we're faster about defining ourselves and defining others, that we can win both the kinds of voters who voted for people like Donald Trump and also those folks who have sat out for a very long time. And the reason I believe that is because, you know, our internal polling shows me up pretty substantially despite the fact that outside spending has hit $50 million in my race, $50 million. Now, if it was all about what people are going to say about you or what they're going to say about your opponent, I shouldn't have a prayer and hell in this race. And yet, what we've done is politics the old fashioned way. I go everywhere. I talk to everyone. I do not shy away from booking these conversations or any conversation because I know what I believe and I'm willing to talk about it. And when people actually, you give them the opportunity to listen and nuance, people are really smart. And so I just reject the idea that I'm going to be turned into a character and the way that I reject it is to make sure that you have heard me and that I've put myself anywhere, whether that's a town hall in your local community or on the radio or on a TV spot or campaigning with us on Pyker. Oh, God forbid. Or listen and talking to you here on Pots of America. And the last thing I'll tell you is this, right? So I'm proving out that this tactic can work just like Donald Trump did ironically. But also the last thing I'll tell you is this. The real divide in our politics is not around some left right spectrum. Like are you a Democrat or a Republican or right wing or left wing or blue or red, and that there are these people in the middle who walk around wondering where they sit on the left right spectrum. Most of the time people are like, yo, I can't afford my healthcare and steak is so goddamn expensive. And I'm really, really worried about the quality of my kids school. What are you going to do about that? And so I don't play the game where I hue to a particular set of talking points. I try to talk out what I think we need to do and be completely honest. And I stand up around these, you know, third rails, you're not allowed to touch in politics. You know, every time I, and we haven't got into it, I'm sure it's on your question set. But like Israel, I'm like, look, the question about Israel isn't about the theoretical right to exist of a country that exists. The question about Israel is, do they have a right to our tax dollars? Because I live in a community here in Michigan where there are places not too far from where I live where the median income is $14,000 a year. And those people send their kids to schools that haven't changed for 50 years. They can't afford basic infrastructure like it's like you're traveling on gravel roads in the middle of a city. And then you want to tell me that the best use of my tax dollars is to send them somewhere else. And you know, when you say that and then people hit you on it, people are just like, yeah, I actually agree with what he's saying. And I'm not so interested in a theoretical question about the right of a country to exist. I'm wondering what you're going to do with my tax dollars and why you're sending them there when I could be using them here. With all due respect, I mean, the question of whether Israel should exist or not is essential when you're answering whether a U.S. tax dollar should go towards protecting that right to exist. And it's sort of raised, let me just ask you the question, because I mean, I think you've made it a zero sum game between like funding for, for example, schools and aid to Israel. The US budget is large. And there's a question about, you know, to what degree Congress should prioritize spending on Israel, which gets at the central question for I think a lot of Jews in this country and a lot of Jews in your state is, you know, the Jewish identity and Jewish statehood is essential to them. And they may think the war is a genocide in Gaza and they may completely disagree with Phoebe Netanyahu, but their Jewish identity is as essential to them as their American identity. So I wonder when you are thinking about those people and they may support you. How do you help them understand where Israel exists on your list of priorities? Is it immoral to support Israel at this point or is there some other, is there some other avenue? Look, I grew up, I was really grateful to grow up in a community with a large Jewish community, 40% Jewish, I had the privilege of being welcomed to shul and being welcomed to satire and going to bar and botmets was growing up. I learned a lot about the Jewish faith. I learned so much about the Jewish contribution to American culture and society and I will do everything I can to protect Jewish Americans in this country from anti-Semitism. I also, in as much as I love the Jewish people and Jewish culture, I love and revere Palestinians and Palestinian culture. And most importantly, I love and revere the people I am running to serve here in Michigan. So the idea that Michigan tax dollars should be sent to a foreign government that wants to foreclose on Palestinian rights to peace, dignity and self-determination, which I hold equal to Jewish rights to peace, dignity and self-determination. But the idea that aren't money is being sent to a government that wants to foreclose on one community's right to self-determination and being misused away from solving the needs of the people I'm actually serving is a pretty crazy thing. And in setting up this question about about Israel's right to exist, you rightly point to the idea of whether or not there is American intervention that ought to be spent to enforce that. And I think the vast majority of Americans would say whatever you think about Israel's right to exist, our tax dollars should not be used for the interests of a foreign government when they need to be used for the interests of the people living in our community on its own. So I believe in equal rights to peace, dignity and self-determination for Palestinians and Jewish Israelis alike. But I also understand that in an era where people ask you how you're going to pay for that when you want to give people health care or how you're going to pay for that when you want to give people good schools, it's pretty crazy to be sending our money over there when it could be used over here. So no funding to ensure the survival or future of the Jewish state. I turn that back around on you, Alex, and say, why is it our responsibility to ensure that? I'm just asking because I think. No, I mean, but like, but why is it? Why is it understanding? I think. But hear me out. Hear me out. Hear me out. Why is that the essential frame from which we work? Like, why is it assumed that the United States ought to be in the business of backstopping a foreign government? Like, I'm just saying, like, I don't want ill will for Jewish Israeli people at all. I really don't. I just want equal rights to peace, dignity, self-determination for all people. But the notion that somehow our tax dollars ought to secure the interests of a foreign government. Like, this is the United States and our own kids don't have good schools, and you're telling me that that should be a primary concern over there. Like, imagine we said the same thing about any other country, any other one. Like, my family's from Egypt, okay? Like, would it be crazy if somebody was asking me like, hey, do you think Egypt has the right to exist? People like Egypt exists. I'm like, well, if somebody wanted to change the nature of Egypt, do you think the United States should be spending all of its money to make sure or any of its money to make sure that that happens? People like, I don't know what, that seems like a different country's issue. But like, I'm just saying that, like, you can both say that Israel exists, but it doesn't have a right to my tax dollars. And it is not our responsibility as American taxpayers to take money away from kids who don't have good schools and give it to a country to buy bombs and tanks. Like, the idea that that our conversation even questions that is itself a big question we should be asking, like, why is this the frame of the debate? I think APAC affiliated super PACs have spent about $15 million so far to defeat you 30, okay? I'm wrong. Sorry, updated stats. And your opponent, Hailey Stevens, is their preferred candidate. You've called her a sort of Trojan horse for the pro-Israel agenda. You've accused her of failing the moral war shock test by not calling what's happening in Gaza, the atrocities, a genocide. Okay. Here's my question. There's only one Democrat that's going to win this if she wins our unit campaign for her. I'm going to make sure that my Rogers never sees me inside of the U.S. Senate. But like, here-- So that's yes. That's the important question. Here's the important question. I'm going to campaign against my Rogers for sure. And look, I've already said that, like, I'm committed to making sure Democrats win in Republicans lose. Do you want her campaigning for you if you're the nominee? But here's the bigger question. I just want to go back to this point that you made, because it's just a really, really important one.
You rightly pointed to the reason why the frame of the debate is always about the theoretical right to exist of a country and where we put our money because if you say what I just said, which I think the vast majority of Americans, I'll be like, yeah, that's just conventional wisdom that we should be more worried about people in our own country than the existence of another country, if you say what I said, there is one super PAC that's going to spend tens of millions of dollars to annihilate your political existence. I mean, that's why most politicians sit in this political consensus that says that you cannot touch the third rail of Israel. Meanwhile, people in their own communities are like, why not when my own kid goes to a school that looks like it did 50 years ago. And so that exactly is it, is that you have a particular super PAC that has become the biggest spender in our whole race, 30 million dollars to try to put my head on a pike to show every Democrat that thou shalt not say the conventional wisdom that maybe the interests of kids in our own country matters more than whether or not we think about the theoretical right to exist of another country. Do you feel like there's some opportunity to work with Trump on this? I know I just bear it. Before you respond, let me just remind people, I mean, it's Donald Trump, right? But you know, this is someone who is increasingly at odds with Prime Minister Netanyahu, even though he also bare hugs him from time to time and is effectively fought a war with him for him. But they now have divergent interests in terms of the war in Iran. And I'm old enough to remember when Donald Trump called BB Netanyahu fucking crazy. That's a quote. I was like four weeks ago. Exactly. So is there, I mean, is there an opportunity for Democrats to try and take advantage of that opportunity and move the needle using Trump on Israel? So I'll tell you this, I'm less concerned about Trump in himself and more concerned about voters in Michigan who Trump lied to. And I can't tell you the number of people who've come up to me at town halls and been like, I voted for Trump three times and I'm voting for you. I'm like, why? And the answer is usually two things. Number one, you really want me to have health care. I really want you have health care. Number two, it's, you really want to keep my money here. So we're running a pretty simple campaign, money out of politics, money in your pocket, Medicare for all. And the thing about democracy is if you can win the debate, you can win voters over, you can win the conversation, you can start to change public policy. So look, I think Donald Trump has been burnt by the Israeli government. And he's feeling the burn right now. He got duped into fighting a war that Donald, frankly, BB Netanyahu has been trying to find an idiot big enough to fight for the better part of 40 years. He finally found the dumbass who would do it. And now Trump's in the situation where he's like, damn, I'm trapped. All for what? So Israel could try to annex Southern Lebanon. You know, who wins out of this war? And certainly not the American public, not even Donald Trump. I mean, maybe the, the Iranian regime who now figured out how to control the flow of the world's energy supply. And certainly BB Netanyahu, who is annihilated Southern Lebanon. So I think there's an opportunity here to prove out that people in this country are sick and tired of being told what we can do from a foreign policy standpoint by a foreign government. And to point to the obvious policy failure that has us paying $5 gas here in Michigan to get to a point in our politics that actually says, look, maybe this is not the right approach here. And maybe we could actually have a politics for our people by our people. And in the interest of our people, right? But you are, you are not running to be, you know, the mayor, right? You're not running to be an executive. You are running to be in the Senate, which is an increasingly dysfunctional body where the term is six years. And if you have the majority, it's going to be a slim one. And you're going to have to work with people like Mary Paltola and Roy Cooper, who were backed by Chuck Schumer and are much more in the central swing of democratic politics. How do you think about making common cause with them? If it's, you know, if it's a new democratic majority, how are you going to work with the people that come from a pretty different ideology than you? Yeah, you know, I think part of the reason there's so much attention being paid to this particular race is because Michigan is unique, not only is it the greatest state in the country hands down way better than Ohio, who produced Ramaswami and JD Vance, like bad records for Ohio. God bless you, Sherrod Brown, but you're doing the Lord's work. Okay. Oh, hi, oh, digs. I'm, I, I, I take, I'm not involved in this. I just want to say for everybody in Ohio that's listening. That's all on doc. It's all on me. I'll take it. I can't stand Ohio. But I'll tell you, I'll tell you this. The reason people are paying attention is because a lot of folks have often said that a politics that really centers in on the needs of everyday people can't win outside of, you know, these, these, these, these democratic bastions like New York. And the point that I'm often making to folks is that people need to same things wherever you are in this country and the politics that delivers on getting money out so that we can finally put money back in people's pockets by like standing with unions and keeping our money here and taxing billionaires their wealth and standing up to, to big corporate monopolies and oligopolis. That, that kind of politics it can win anywhere. And so in winning the race itself, we are shifting the conversation about the kind of politics we can have nationwide. And so look, I'm looking forward to working with folks like Roy Cooper and Mary Peltola and, um, and, and building strong relationships. But I also think that they operate from a standpoint based on a flawed set of assumptions that I'm trying to append in this race. I know that we can deliver from Michiganders if we actually get corporations out of our politics and start standing with the people. I know that Medicare for all is broadly popular. If you're willing to reject the influence of big pharma and big insurance corporations in trying to dominate what we can possibly talk about, I know that keeping money here rather than supporting a foreign government over there is broadly popular. And I want to prove it out. And when, when we do in this race, I want to be able to have conversations with folks and think, Hey, look, we did this in Michigan. I think you can do it too. And I think we can actually build a politics that actually get stuff done because here's the problem with it. Look at my own race. DTE, our local utility, Blue Cross Blue Shield, our local health insurance, big tech, APAC, they're funding both my democratic opponent and my Republican one. So if either of them win, guess who wins? Big tech wins, Blue Cross Blue Shield wins, APAC wins, DTE wins. And we're all out here being like, well, the, the body is so dysfunctional. We never get stuff done. Well, because we never really have a contrast that's about getting stuff done because guess what, either way, the corporate lobbyist is showing up with the same bill. And then, and then they tell you, Oh, look, you have a bipartisan opportunity to get legislation done in bipartisan because corporations have bought off both parties. And then you patch yourself on the back for being bipartisan to do the thing that helps the corporation and not the people you, you, you got elected to serve. And I think we have an opportunity here to actually win the debate and then actually start doing things that deliver for people because none of us got into this work. Like, this is just shit job. I just want to be clear. Like, it's just a shit way to live your life. None of us got into this because, you know, you don't want to deliver for people. And the hardest part for me is like, I carry people's stories with me. I mean, I trained as a doctor. And I learned how to listen to people in pain, but people bring you their stories, hoping that you can help. And I know, I know, I know, I know for every single person in public service, like you're doing this because you really want to help those people. But the system has rigged it. So it's almost impossible to do. What if we actually took it on in one? So that's the conversation I'm hoping to have with the 99 other senators in the country. I think some of them will go better than others. But I think we can prove out that we can actually win on our morals. If we can do that here in Michigan. Now here's the hard part. They're spending a shit ton of money, right? To stop is $50 million already come in 50 million, we're being outspent eight to one. And yet, you know, we're still leading the conversation. So it's got to be people coming together around a politics that is of the people by the people and for the people standing up to the power of the corporations who are keeping us from having the things that we need and deserve. I have two quick questions. I know we're going to make a long questions if you want. Okay. You talk about taking power. You talk about democratic control. The president this week is focused on election interference, not his own, which is measurable, but on alleged intellectual election interference. All of this is a bid to distort, if not steal the results of the 2026 midterms. Are you worried about a peaceful transfer of power? Is there something Democrats should be doing that they're not doing? If the if in fact they win the both houses one or both houses of Congress, are you worried about a peaceful transfer of power? And is there something Democrats should be doing that they're not doing? I am I'm really worried about it. Donald Trump understands the stakes of this and he basically told the Republicans as much he said, if they win, I'm going to be impeached. There is nothing about that man that is about the dignity of his office. It is entirely about self-preservation and self-enrichment. That's how he's used to the office. He understands that our winning is this single biggest threat and he's acting accordingly. Now the problem that we so often has is that we don't actually meet the demand with the right level of urgency. I think it's incumbent on all of us to be narrating exactly what's happening. Look, here's what he's doing. Here's why he's mobilizing ice. Here's where they're buying detention facilities. Here's what he said he wants to do.
Here's where he's sending election interferers, and here's what they say they're going to do. We need to be very, very clear about that. And then we need to mobilize people past it. The way to make the elections unrigable is to overwhelm them with the power of a message that gets people out to actually win. Like we can't keep winning these razor-thin elections anymore when they want to steal them because razor-thin elections are way easier to steal. And so people talk about like, are you going to win the middle, are you going to bring people out? We don't have a choice, but they do both. We've got to win people who are disaffected by him, and we've got to win the people who've been disaffected by the political process itself. We've got to win in massive waves. That is the way we protect our democracy. That is the way we take back power, hold him accountable. And finally, finally, get the kind of democratic process back that allows people's actual will to reflect in government. When you talk about people's will being reflected in government, I would assume that means also having people that represent different generations of people, different generations of Americans. There's been a lot of criticism about the gerontocracy, the aged seniority in democratic and Republican ranks, but especially in Republican, well, I won't even say especially in Democratic and Republican ranks. Do you think Mitch McConnell was alive? I mean, do you think he owes the public, do you think he owes voters a video? I don't have the data to be able to answer. Do you think he owes voters a video? Do you think the photo of an unhealthily- I just say that photo is unconvincing, but let's step back. The idea that politicians should die in office is crazy. Let's not be the pot calling the kettle black. We had our whole Dianne finestein situation too. I just think that it's important to have- Well, I think people would say Joe Biden, this is the case number one of someone perhaps being too old for office, but anyway. That part. That point. But, I mean, we just, just this week, we're dealing with one person who passed away and another who like we don't know if he passed away. And so I just think that like we do need to reinvigorate our politics. I think that that's going to naturally happen with time, but I also think that part of the problem right now is that the way that we do politics makes it so that it is too easy to accumulate and hold power once you've already gotten it. And part of that is a filibuster. Part of that is campaign finance law. Part of that is the role that's played by like television and media. I just think we're not actually having a robust debate about who we are and who we want to be that reflects a whole half of the voters. And so part of what we've tried to do in our campaign is rather than talk down to young people. I'm 41. So I don't even know what that means. You're young. I'm particularly young. We're going to count you as young. But Alex, I'm the oldest I've ever been. So all of all of that is to say that like part of the way that you engage young people to bring them back to the process is to actually ask them what they want for the future that they have the highest taken and to center them in the campaign and to make policy around what it is that they say they want. So when we focus in on affordability of housing, when we focus in on education affordability when we focus in on AI, this is about reflecting the need and the urgent fears of young people in our society who are saying, look, I just took a $60,000 plus loan for the opportunity to have a job that an AI looks like it's about to take what the fuck do I do. And if we don't have an answer for them, then we're not serious about governing. It's interesting. I was talking to some folks and they're like, well, you know, this AI thing, I think it's overblown. I'm like, not if you're under 30. And this is the first era in which you have a, the people who are the most afraid of a new technology are the youngest people, most of the time the people who are the earliest adopters and who like it the most are young. But like it's because young people both use AI and understand the danger of AI. And so, you know, we've put AI front and center. We have an AI for democracy plan, which is about putting democracy ahead of AI and making sure that at least 50% of the board representation of every AI hyperscaler is democratically selected. And we're doing that because I take seriously that young people are going to have to live in the world that we legislate in. And that means centering them in these campaigns. And I think once we do that and young people make a habit of it, I think we're going to start to see a lot more turnover. Will there be a day when the 41 year old actually feels old in the US Senate, TBD on that one? I'll be 42 by that point, but I'll let you know. Okay. Keep us posted. Doc. I will. Dr. Abdul-Alsaid, it is a pleasure speaking with you. Thank you for entertaining my numerous questions. We will be following the race very, very, very carefully. Good luck out there. Thank you. And look, if for folks who want to get involved, go to abuelforcented.com. I hope you'll trip us off five bucks or ten bucks or we're phone making. This is an opportunity. It's literally the money versus the money in this race. So I hope that folks will listen and we'll get involved. Alex, thank you for a really thoughtful conversation. I'm really grateful for it. And I'm looking forward to the next one, okay? Definitely. That's our show for today. Thanks to Abdul for coming on. Dan will be back on the feed on Sunday with a conversation with Run for Some Things, Amanda Lippman. Dan, what'd you guys talk about? I made it and I had a great conversation about what's happened to Democratic Party right now. Where are they? You can go from here. And the really inspiring story she's hearing from the hundred thousand people who have signed up to run for office since Trump was elected in 2024. If you want to be inspired, you just talk to Amanda Lippman. It works every time. Alright, everyone. Have a good weekend. Bye everyone. Pods in America is a crooked media production. Our show is produced by Austin Fisher, Saul Rubin, McKenna Roberts, and Ferris Safari with Reed Jerlin, Elijah Cohn, and Adrian Hill. Our team includes Matt DeGroat, Ben Heffkoat, Jordan Cantor, Charlotte Landis, David Tolls, Mia Kelman, Ryan Young, and Naomi Single. Our staff is probably unionized with the writer's Guild of America East.
Podcast Summary
Key Points:
Donald Trump delivered a highly chaotic and incoherent primetime speech filled with recycled election conspiracy theories, lacking credible evidence and failing to prove any actual election fraud.
The speech included false claims about Chinese access to voter data, vulnerabilities in voting machines, and foreign interference, all of which have been debunked and contradicted by public records and official findings.
Key figures in the administration, including a top teleprompter operator and VP’s travel requests, raised serious concerns about corruption, transparency, and misuse of taxpayer funds, revealing deep systemic issues in the Trump administration’s operations.
Summary:
Donald Trump’s recent primetime speech was a poorly structured, factually baseless attack on election security, recycling long-disproven conspiracy theories about Chinese voter data access, voting machine vulnerabilities, and foreign interference. No credible evidence supports claims that votes were altered or that election systems were compromised. The speech was widely criticized for its incoherence, lack of evidence, and apparent intent to sow doubt in public trust.
Behind the speech, multiple red flags emerged: a high-ranking teleprompter operator was reportedly making over $100,000 from betting on Trump’s speeches, and the vice president requested taxpayer-funded helicopter rides for his son’s golf lessons—actions seen as emblematic of undue privilege and corruption. Additionally, Trump’s media company is now selling real-time access to his statements to Wall Street, creating a pay-to-know advantage that undermines democratic transparency. These practices, combined with a lack of factual grounding, suggest a deliberate effort to exploit public anxiety rather than address real issues.
The speech also failed to gain traction with media coverage, as major networks declined to broadcast it, citing lack of newsworthiness. Critics argue that Trump’s focus on election fraud distracts from pressing economic and social issues like inflation and wildfires. Despite the absence of factual support, the speech reflects a broader political strategy of stoking fear and division.
Meanwhile, political figures like JD Vance struggled to navigate complex political terrain, appearing awkward and ineffective during interviews. The episode underscores the need for accountability in government operations and highlights how misinformation can erode public trust. A more constructive approach to immigration and national security—one focused on reform, training, and constitutional integrity—was advocated by Michigan Senate candidate Dr.
Abdul El Sayed, who emphasized that immigration enforcement does not require paramilitary forces like ICE. The discussion reinforces the importance of honest, evidence-based political discourse in a democratic society.
FAQs
SimplySafe offers a comprehensive home security system with indoor and outdoor cameras, sensors, and 24/7 professional monitoring. It's designed to cover exterior blind spots and provides customizable protection for homes, with no drilling required for installation.
Setting up a SimplySafe system is simple and intuitive, with an app-guided process that takes under an hour. No drilling is required, making it easy for users to install and activate the system quickly.
Yes, SimplySafe offers flexible monitoring plans with no long-term contracts or cancellation fees. Monthly plans start at around one dollar per day, making it affordable and accessible for users.
SimplySafe provides peace of mind through real-time monitoring, customizable features, and reliable customer service. It ensures strong home protection even when you're away, and the app makes remote access and control easy.
Trump's speech claimed China acquired U.S. voter files, voting machines are vulnerable, and foreign interference occurred, but no evidence of vote changes has been found. Experts note these claims are largely recycled conspiracy theories with no new evidence.
There is no verified evidence that votes were changed in the 2020 election. Intelligence agencies and government reports confirm no systemic election fraud occurred. Claims of foreign interference remain unproven and largely based on misinformation.
Chat with AI
Loading...
Pro features
Go deeper with this episode
Unlock creator-grade tools that turn any transcript into show notes and subtitle files.
PodcastTranscript AI