0:01

When the extremes on the right and the left

0:03

are both saying you're wrong, you're probably right. Welcome

0:13

to Politicology. I'm Ron Steslow and this

0:15

is our weekly roundup where we invite

0:17

a rotating panel of experts to discuss

0:19

the truth you need to know behind

0:21

the most important stories of the week

0:23

and how they're shaping the political landscape.

0:25

On today's outstanding panel, returning to the

0:28

roundup, Hagar Shammali. Hagar is a former

0:30

spokesperson for the US mission to the

0:32

UN and at the Treasury's

0:34

Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence. She

0:37

has also served as Middle East Director at the

0:39

National Security Council in the Obama White House. She's

0:41

an adjunct professor at Columbia University School of

0:44

International and Public Affairs and

0:46

the host and creator of Oh My World

0:48

on YouTube, a show that breaks down geopolitics

0:50

and world news stories in a fun and

0:52

easy way. Hagar, thanks for being here again.

0:55

Thanks, Ron. Always enjoy being out with

0:58

you. Also returning to the roundup, senior

1:00

advisor to the California Latino Economic Institute,

1:02

my fellow co-founder of the Lincoln Project.

1:05

He is now a senior fellow at

1:07

the University of California at Irvine School

1:09

of Social Ecology. The one and only

1:11

Mike Madrid. Mike, what did you have

1:13

for breakfast today? Numbers

1:15

for breakfast. Numbers are back on the menu. It's

1:18

that time of the year. I think it's probably

1:20

a winter thing, sort of like squirrels. Digging

1:23

in for everything they've been saving up

1:25

during the previous part of the year.

1:27

It's now time to start harvesting

1:29

and we got some New Hampshire stuff. So I'm looking

1:31

forward to the conversation with both of you guys today.

1:34

That's an Easter egg for the OGs. Up

1:37

first this week, Trump and Biden

1:39

cruise to victory in New Hampshire.

1:42

We will discuss what the

1:44

wins mean for both candidates and how the Biden team

1:46

is now preparing for the general election. We

1:49

will look at how reaching a border deal would

1:51

help Biden in November and how that very

1:54

political reality is the

1:56

reason Republican leaders are trying to prevent one. Later,

1:58

we'll talk about the election. about the incredibly

2:01

stark assessment, those are the White House's

2:03

words, that Russia could win their war

2:05

against Ukraine in a matter of weeks

2:07

without additional military aid. Then

2:10

we're gonna illuminate other political developments

2:12

that we're watching and why. Then

2:14

after the main show, we are

2:16

gonna tape our Politicology Plus episode

2:18

where we're gonna discuss AI

2:21

systems and the fight

2:23

over whose values are embedded within

2:26

the technology and what it will

2:28

say and what it can be used for. And

2:31

we're gonna unlock this one as a preview.

2:33

So if you're not a plus subscriber already,

2:35

you can look for that on your plus

2:37

feed right next to this roundup episode. And

2:40

the best way you can support us,

2:42

if you like the work we're doing

2:44

here and you want more conversations with

2:46

excellent guests like these in an ad-free

2:49

listening environment is join us at Politicology

2:51

Plus. Just go to politicology.com/plus and get

2:53

your private podcast feed today. On

2:59

Tuesday, Donald Trump and Joe Biden

3:01

won their respective primary races in

3:04

New Hampshire. Over the weekend, the

3:06

Republican field was whittled down to

3:08

just two when Ron DeSantis bowed

3:11

out of the race and endorsed

3:13

Trump. Here's that endorsement.

3:17

It's clear to me that a majority of

3:19

Republican primary voters wanna give Donald Trump another

3:21

chance. They watch his presidency get

3:23

stymied by relentless resistance, and they

3:25

see Democrats using lawfare this day

3:27

to attack him. While

3:29

I've had disagreements with Donald Trump, such

3:32

as on the coronavirus pandemic and his

3:34

elevation of Anthony Fauci, Trump

3:36

is superior to the current incumbent Joe

3:38

Biden. That is clear. I

3:41

signed a pledge to support the Republican

3:43

nominee and I will honor that pledge.

3:45

He has my endorsement because we can't go

3:47

back to the old Republican guard of yesteryear,

3:50

a repackaged form of warmed

3:52

over corporatism that Nikki Haley

3:54

represents. Trump

3:56

beat Nikki Haley by about nine

3:59

points, effectively. Snuffing out the, I'll

4:01

be terrible and call it a glimmer of hope instead of

4:04

a collective delusion a lot of people had that she

4:06

would mount a serious challenge. New Hampshire

4:08

has an open primary so unaffiliated voters

4:10

can vote in either the Democratic or

4:12

Republican primary. In ABC

4:15

News exit polls, 46% of

4:17

Republican primary voters were undeclared. Haley

4:20

won 60% of independents who participated

4:22

in the Republican primary beating

4:24

Trump by 22 points there. Trump

4:26

won the Republican voters by 49%. Haley

4:30

also won college educated primary voters by 14

4:32

points, but Trump opened up a 36 point

4:35

lead among voters without a college degree.

4:38

And finally, 84% of Haley voters said

4:40

it would be dissatisfied if Trump

4:42

won the nomination. And

4:45

Mike is going to tell us in a minute that that doesn't

4:47

mean they wouldn't necessarily vote for him though. Trump

4:50

also racked up an endorsement from Tim

4:53

Scott last week. But the most notable

4:55

line from Scott came after

4:57

Trump won the primary on Tuesday

4:59

night when Trump was talking about

5:01

Scott endorsing him over Haley. And

5:04

here is that exchange. She

5:06

actually appointed you, Tim. And

5:10

think of it, appointed and you're the

5:13

senator of his state and she

5:15

endorsed me. You

5:18

must really hate her. No,

5:21

it's a shame. I

5:25

just love you. That's

5:28

why he's a great politician. One

5:31

of the most fucking cringe worthy moments

5:33

in politics recently. So

5:36

barring some catastrophic or

5:39

well health related event, the general election,

5:41

Trump versus Biden matchup is pretty

5:43

much cooked. And we're

5:45

now in this go time

5:47

moment. The race is starting in

5:49

earnest. In fact, Biden has just

5:51

moved to the top aides to

5:53

the campaign headquarters. Mike

5:55

Donilon is moving from his role as

5:57

senior advisor to the president to be chief strategist. strategist on

6:00

the campaign, which is what he did in 2020. Jen

6:02

O'Malley Dillon is moving from her post as

6:04

the deputy chief of staff at the White

6:06

House to direct the campaign. And

6:09

this move comes after weeks of

6:11

concern from strategists and donors, because

6:14

Donnell and O'Malley Dillon and Anita Dunn,

6:17

we're all pulling double duty at the White House

6:19

doing both a foot in each camp. And

6:22

I think they got a talking to you from Obama a few weeks ago.

6:25

Mike, walk us through the

6:27

tea leaves. How are you reading the

6:29

numbers from Tuesday night? Boy,

6:32

a lot of tea to consume here. So

6:34

let's just start from the top. You know,

6:36

for all the criticism that our

6:38

early primary and caucus system gets with

6:41

having very non-representative states like

6:43

Iowa and New Hampshire being

6:46

the first in the nation to kind of give

6:48

us a real time sense of what's happening politically,

6:50

I will

6:52

say this is the first time I would

6:54

say that I'm very glad that these two states went

6:57

first because they are actually a

6:59

perfect encapsulation of the Republican base

7:01

and they give us a very,

7:03

very good glimpse into what

7:05

is happening with the dynamics in the Republican party.

7:08

The first is Iowa, which of course you

7:10

saw the caucuses in negative five degree weather, people showing

7:12

up, not a whole lot. But

7:15

Iowa has a very strong evangelical community,

7:17

much more so than New Hampshire. And

7:20

so you have a really strong values based

7:22

voter there, which is a huge part of

7:24

the Republican coalition. The other

7:27

significant part tends to be this non-college

7:29

educated blue collar worker that's more economically

7:31

driven, the economic anxiety voter, and that's

7:33

New Hampshire. So having these

7:36

two go first with Trump

7:38

on the ballot and the other

7:40

candidates give us a really, really good

7:42

real time assessment of how voters and

7:44

how motivated and what is driving them

7:47

actually are. It's not the polling, it's

7:49

not the punditry, it's actual real good

7:51

data. And what it's telling us is

7:53

this, in both states,

7:55

we are seeing about 15 to 19% on

8:00

whether you look at CNN exit polls or

8:02

AP vote cast, both of which

8:04

are very credible, you know, sources

8:06

of information, 15 to 19, about 15 to

8:08

20% of Republican base primary voters

8:13

are telling us they will not vote for

8:15

Donald Trump in the general election. That

8:18

to me is the only data points to be looking at.

8:20

I'm gonna say that for a while is I don't care

8:22

if Nikki Haley wins New Hampshire. She's not gonna win the

8:24

primary. It doesn't matter. We may have fun

8:26

with it. It may give a little bit more of a media run. But

8:29

look, in New Hampshire specifically,

8:31

because you can as an

8:34

independent vote in a Republican

8:36

primary, the data is

8:38

a little bit muddy. It's a little bit noisy. It's

8:40

not as clean as we'd like. And that's why we

8:42

look for those exit polls. We're not looking for anything

8:44

pre-vote. We're looking for exit polls. And

8:47

again, the data is telling us something that

8:49

is fundamentally different than what we saw in

8:52

January of 2020 when we were just getting

8:54

the Lincoln Project kicked off and we were

8:56

starting to see numbers saying at most we were

8:58

gonna be able to get to like seven

9:00

to nine percent of Republicans to bail on

9:02

Donald Trump. We're now sitting at least

9:05

double that, at least double that, maybe

9:07

a little bit more. Now, will some

9:10

of those votes come back? I

9:12

think some of them will come back. I

9:14

think a considerable amount of them will come

9:16

back. I'm absolutely convinced that not all of

9:18

them will come back. And

9:20

that's extremely important because what that

9:22

means is Donald Trump is strong

9:24

and dominating the Republican Party. I

9:27

think the intensities for him amongst

9:29

his voters have gotten even stronger.

9:32

There's no question he has this unholy,

9:34

weird, peculiar grip

9:36

on these voters. But

9:38

for those marginal voters that have been moving

9:40

away from them, he has been

9:43

increasing that divide with them while

9:45

he has been increasing that

9:47

intensity with base voters. And

9:49

he lost in 2020 by losing nine percent

9:52

of these voters. He's again

9:54

in a weaker position now than when

9:56

he ran and lost in 2020, four

9:58

years ago. There's

10:00

two other reasons why, and again, I'm looking at

10:02

this, 30,000 foot, that we're just

10:05

beginning this race. I'm not making any predictions right

10:07

now. I'm just saying the fundamentals of this race

10:09

look very good for Biden at this point in

10:12

time. The second is

10:14

that he's losing, he lost

10:16

60-40 amongst independents in New Hampshire,

10:18

which is brutal. It's just a

10:20

brutal takedown. No Republican

10:23

can recover. A Democrat couldn't

10:25

recover. When Hillary and Trump

10:27

ran in 2016, Trump

10:30

had that late break amongst independents after

10:32

the Comey report. The announcement that she

10:34

was under investigation. Anyway, so

10:36

look, in some ways, this is going to look a little bit

10:38

like 2016. In

10:40

some ways, it's going to look a little bit like 2012. I'm

10:44

sorry, 2020. I'm really looking

10:46

at 1996 as a model of

10:48

what this race is probably going to look like, just

10:51

because you have Biden, who I think is

10:53

bottoming out right now with his polling numbers.

10:56

I will make this prediction. I think the race begins to get much tighter

10:58

now in public opinion surveys. I think

11:00

voters are starting to see that this is a

11:03

real race and they're going to have to make

11:05

a decision. It's going to be a long, long,

11:07

long general election slog. You saw

11:09

correctly pointed out that the

11:12

adults in the room in Biden land are now taking

11:14

over and moving over full time and saying, we can't

11:16

run the government and the campaign. We need

11:18

to go run the campaign. You're starting

11:20

to see even some early polls

11:22

showing Biden doing really, really well

11:24

in places like Pennsylvania and such.

11:28

That to me is the environment. That's what New Hampshire is

11:30

telling us. God bless Nikki Haley and

11:32

Chris Christie and everybody else who

11:34

began to take on, not everybody else. Those

11:37

were the only two that were truly taking Donald Trump squarely on. They

11:41

did point out some weaknesses, but I think as

11:43

I said here on the show, their involvement is

11:46

not going to hurt Donald Trump. It

11:48

does give, I guess, that permission structure back to

11:50

a broader swath of Republicans saying no, but

11:52

you can palpably feel even in, I think in

11:55

our circles, I'd love to get your impression

11:57

wrong on this. You can feel that there's more,

11:59

more. Not a lot more, not as

12:02

many as we would like, but there are definitely more people

12:05

stepping up and saying Trump is bad from

12:07

Republican land and saying, I'm just not going

12:09

back to this time. I'm not

12:11

feeling it. And like I said, even if that's one

12:14

in 10 Republicans, that's

12:17

a huge massive number. He lost by

12:19

losing 9% last time and

12:21

he's currently, this will tighten, but he's

12:24

currently double that. So that's my takeaway

12:26

from New Hampshire, but I'd love to hear what you guys

12:28

think about it. I

12:30

think that's, I think your observation that

12:32

more people are standing up and saying

12:34

not going back is right. I

12:37

think part of that is because Trump has gotten

12:39

so much scarier and worse than he was before.

12:42

Obviously there's the mental fitness issue.

12:44

He's not all there all the time

12:47

either, but more so

12:49

than that, I think it's because it's

12:51

becoming easier for people to visualize exactly

12:53

how much more sophisticated a Trump

12:56

operation in the White House in

12:58

2025 would be and just how

13:00

damaging and potentially democracy ending it

13:04

could be. And we're going to start talking a

13:06

little bit more about that. His campaign is more

13:08

sophisticated. They've got an operation. They're

13:10

not. They've got an operation. They've got a, they've got

13:12

a plan for day one as well that could lead

13:14

to, you know, the biggest

13:17

transformation of the federal government and

13:19

subversion of democratic norms than we

13:21

have seen or even maybe envisioned

13:25

from Trump world. And

13:27

I don't think, and Haggard, this is where I'd

13:29

love your view. I don't

13:32

think that a lot of that has

13:34

really been bubbling up to the surface of mainstream media

13:36

coverage because they've been so focused on this primary as

13:38

if it's a real primary. And you

13:40

know, the narrative around that I think is

13:42

maybe going to shift now, hopefully now that

13:45

New Hampshire's over. Last

13:47

week, Alex Thompson of Axios was on and he

13:50

predicted that, you know, if Trump

13:52

won convincingly in New Hampshire, that maybe some of

13:54

this would start to shift and we'd stop, you

13:56

know, obsessing over the Republican primaries if it's a

13:58

real race. And how do

14:00

you think about that? How does the

14:03

change of framing of conversations about the

14:06

Trump versus Biden rematch start to take

14:08

place? Well,

14:10

first, I agree with you. Some of the media coverage has

14:12

been a little weird, I find, on this.

14:15

Part of it is a real race, but I understand why. They

14:19

have to, but they also...

14:22

I do feel like we're falling back into the same routines

14:24

that we were in 2016 with maximalist coverage

14:27

of Trump. And then also

14:30

I find that there's this heavy media focus on Biden

14:34

losing voters over

14:36

the Israel-Gaza conflict, which I

14:39

refuse to accept. I just don't see how that's

14:41

going to play out unless it means

14:43

that voters are going to stay home. But...

14:47

That's what they're saying. The notion that it would go

14:49

to Trump to me, or that that voter would

14:51

go to Trump, and as some of them have

14:53

threatened, is just willful

14:55

ignorance in my opinion, because there was...

14:58

Trump was very, very loudly supportive of

15:00

Israel. And I believe that if you

15:02

had a situation like this, I actually

15:05

don't think that he would extricate himself

15:07

the way he implies for other foreign

15:09

conflicts. I think

15:11

he would do everything he could to support Israel.

15:13

And so I hate that the

15:15

way that it's been portrayed in

15:17

that light. The

15:20

thing that... So

15:23

the thing that I find that people are not focused at

15:25

all on his day one plan. In

15:28

fact, I would hazard to say you're the first to

15:30

talk about it. And even when I went to

15:33

his website, I did a cheat sheet for my

15:35

own show on his foreign policies, and I went

15:37

to the website. It's

15:39

very vague and very general, but

15:41

some of it very clearly has this effort

15:44

to walk back democratic norms, as you said.

15:46

Oh, big time. Yeah. And it's

15:48

funny, a good example of that is... And

15:51

not to take to everything the foreign policy, but in one of

15:53

his campaigns, he went out

15:55

and said that his... The witch

15:57

hunt after him and then the...

16:00

that the all the the

16:02

charges he's facing and so on he

16:04

used Vladimir Putin as basically

16:07

as a character witness of the United States because

16:09

Putin had come out at some point a couple

16:11

months ago or a month ago and Said

16:14

that that this that this effort

16:16

to run after Trump and then these criminal charges

16:19

Showed quote the rottenness of

16:21

the United States and the how everything was politicized and

16:24

so on that's not surprising To

16:26

hear from Vladimir Putin. What is surprising

16:28

was to hear Trump use that publicly

16:31

as proof that the US was

16:33

quote rotten and he said that

16:35

and That

16:37

again shows further, you

16:39

know his plans to erode it's

16:42

it's it's not just democratic norms, but

16:44

when you when you erode

16:47

faith in our systems then

16:50

it it crumbles

16:52

the government it encourages

16:55

conspiracy theories it it

16:58

and that eats away at Obvious

17:00

away at everything but it needs to wait our

17:02

democracy It eats away at the ability to discern

17:04

truth from fact from from fiction and

17:08

The problem and you can see this Israel

17:10

is a perfect example of this When things

17:13

are not going well in your own country

17:15

when things are very divisive and you are

17:17

very and your country is very Focused on

17:19

that and obsessed with it, which was the case

17:21

in Israel up until October 7th You

17:24

create vulnerabilities for

17:27

Adversaries to take advantage of and I

17:29

am particularly concerned about that as

17:31

well Yeah, one

17:33

thing just a button this

17:35

segment up And I want to dig into

17:37

more of what you're saying in the Ukraine

17:39

segment but one thing we've been talking

17:42

about and I think we're gonna make a Valiant

17:44

effort to do is stop using the word

17:47

Democracy on its own small d democracy as if

17:49

it actually means something to most people means the

17:52

same thing to most people and

17:54

instead start to talk

17:56

specifically about what we are afraid

17:58

of happening under Trump presidency because

18:00

I think that I think the phrase saving

18:03

democracy or defending democracy has just become

18:05

so meaningless,

18:08

empty at this point, that

18:11

we really do need to start to be explicit

18:15

about what norms

18:17

would be violated and how and how that

18:19

may end up stopping

18:23

liberal democracy in the United States

18:26

or halting it in some way. So yeah,

18:28

we're going to talk more about that. Okay,

18:32

in these next two segments, we

18:35

are going to talk about border security and

18:37

Ukraine aid. These are linked because of how

18:39

Congress is handling them, but we're going to

18:41

take them on one

18:43

at a time. And so

18:45

first, we're going to take a look at the

18:47

border crisis and the politics here. So the surgeon

18:50

migration and border security look

18:53

like they are going to become a major

18:55

issue. They are a major issue. They're

18:58

not going away anytime soon.

19:00

And Trump and Republicans, congressional

19:03

Republicans will likely do everything they can to keep it in

19:05

the spotlight because it is helpful

19:08

for them, which is actually

19:10

pretty easy for them because it's becoming

19:12

a serious problem in places far removed

19:14

from the southern border. The

19:17

emergency shelters in cities like New

19:19

York and Chicago and Boston are

19:21

all overwhelmed. New York

19:23

has been housing migrants in tents in a

19:25

park in Brooklyn for months. And a couple

19:27

of weeks ago, we talked about the city

19:29

moving them to a school during an extreme

19:32

storm and students at that school then

19:34

were switched to remote learning the next

19:36

day. In Boston, Chicago, they've

19:38

started to house migrants in major

19:41

airports overnight. So you have these images

19:43

of families sleeping on the floor at

19:45

Boston Logan. The CBS

19:48

affiliate in Boston is reporting that they don't

19:50

have access to showers. Nine Democratic

19:52

governors now sent a letter

19:54

to the president and congressional leaders asking them

19:56

to improve the immigration and

20:00

migrants at the border and provide funding to deal

20:02

with the humanitarian crisis. Earlier

20:04

this month, we talked about polling

20:06

showing Biden's approval rating on immigration

20:08

hit an all-time low of 32,

20:10

68% disapprove. Now, congressional Republicans have

20:12

a 35% approval rating on immigration,

20:17

so not much better. The

20:20

negotiations over a border deal were inching

20:22

forward until Wednesday. There was

20:24

even a reported deal on how to handle

20:26

parole authority, which has been the sticking point

20:28

with Biden up until now. But

20:31

then on Wednesday, Punchbowl News

20:34

reported that Mitch

20:36

McConnell told Senate Republicans that the politics of

20:38

the border had changed. And

20:41

according to Punchbowl, McConnell told them Trump

20:43

wants to center his campaign on immigration

20:45

and that the Senate, wait for it,

20:48

shouldn't do anything to undermine him.

20:50

The Huffington Post reported that Trump had

20:52

also reached out to several Republican senators

20:54

on Wednesday, urging them to reject any

20:57

deal on the border. And all

20:59

of this comes as the Biden administration is

21:01

fighting with Texas over border enforcement and whether

21:03

or not the Texas Department of Public Safety,

21:05

which is one of the agencies responsible for

21:07

putting up wire, razor wire, concertina

21:09

wire, said that the state would maintain

21:12

its current posture by using barriers and

21:15

wire along the Rio Grande. So,

21:18

Mike, I guess first of all, what do the numbers

21:20

say about border security as a

21:22

campaign issue? We've talked about

21:25

this with you on the show before,

21:27

but as of yesterday, the question I

21:29

really have is, what happens

21:31

if this is allowed

21:33

to fester all the way through to

21:35

November? Because it looks like that

21:38

is now what Republicans intend to do.

21:40

I think maybe a month ago or

21:42

so, you and I were discussing

21:44

this issue and I said,

21:46

like, why doesn't Biden just get

21:48

rid of it? Take this issue

21:50

off the table, solve it,

21:52

cave, give them what they want. Now

21:54

it looks like even if he gives them everything they want,

21:56

they're not going to pass a deal. How

22:01

does this play? Well, look,

22:03

as somebody who's been dealing with this

22:05

issue in many multifaceted forms since I

22:07

started in politics in the early 1990s,

22:10

we haven't done a real immigration deal

22:12

in this

22:14

country since 1986. And so this

22:16

problem has been festering for a very, very long time. Usually

22:19

you need to get one done every 30 years or

22:21

so to accommodate changing demographics and

22:24

pressures of increased migration. The

22:27

intractability of this problem on both sides

22:29

of the aisle, and I won't go

22:31

down swinging saying this, this problem has

22:33

been promulgated by both sides of the

22:35

aisle for political gain in their respective

22:37

corners. I wrote in the

22:39

New York Times last week about

22:42

the need for Biden to

22:44

basically jam his base and triangulate

22:46

and go hard crashing into the

22:48

center and take the mantle and

22:50

run with this issue. I

22:53

wish that article, that column I wrote, would

22:55

have run this week because it's even more

22:58

important now. He needs

23:00

to get past the Democrats'

23:02

strategy of just

23:05

simply attacking Republicans and

23:08

using that to energize their base

23:10

voters in order to win elections.

23:13

And I want to explain mathematically and

23:15

demographically why, okay? Because we are

23:17

in a very different era here. And

23:20

the numbers, the polling as you asked, shows

23:22

that this is the weakest issue that Joe

23:24

Biden has. Set aside the economy, set aside

23:27

foreign policy, this is the issue. And this

23:29

is why the Republicans don't want to give

23:31

it to him. And this is

23:33

why if he does his right, he can actually

23:35

turn this into a massive victory, I think, and

23:38

not only smash Trump

23:41

and the Republicans on this, but actually

23:43

reconstitute the Obama-Biden coalition

23:46

of the earlier part of this century, or at least

23:49

for the past 20 to 30

23:51

years, and redefine the party in a

23:53

more multiracial, ethnically aspirational way than simply

23:55

on the border issues. So again, sorry

23:58

about the big windup. But

24:00

basically here it is. From 2007 to 2020, United

24:05

States has been experiencing declining immigration.

24:07

Immigration has been going down for

24:09

a very long time. And

24:12

in that environment, Americans of

24:14

all stripes and all colors are

24:16

much more amenable to the

24:18

whole idea and

24:21

concept of immigrants and migration. Okay,

24:23

when it's not happening, when we're not

24:25

seeing it every day, it's very easy

24:28

to say, yeah, that's good. That's something that we need.

24:30

Of course, we rely on the mythology of Americans. They

24:32

sure we're all a country, a

24:34

nation of immigrants. In 2020, that's changed.

24:38

We are seeing, and it is a

24:40

crisis. And it's okay to say that

24:42

it's a crisis, okay? This needs to be

24:44

dealt with. And it needs to be

24:46

dealt with seriously and quickly and efficiently

24:48

and expeditiously. And every deal on

24:50

immigration that I have looked at over the past

24:52

30 years begins with

24:55

border security. That is the

24:58

one issue that everybody can agree on, or

25:00

at least most. There are a lot of

25:02

advocates, especially in the Democratic Party, who will

25:04

say, that's horrible, that's inhumane. And arguably it

25:06

is, but until you solve the problem, the

25:10

solutions get more inhumane because the problem

25:12

gets more, they get larger. So

25:16

the public has shifted on this. I

25:18

actually got some polling

25:21

results from a data for progress

25:23

group that actually shows progressives, Latinos.

25:25

There's no discernible difference between Latinos

25:28

and whites on this, essentially anymore.

25:30

It's a very small, single-digit difference.

25:32

Latinos are saying, increased border security,

25:35

right? This rightward shift that was

25:37

happening into 2016 and 2020

25:40

is happening most acutely on the border. These

25:42

are Latinos on the border saying, fix

25:45

this, okay? So we

25:47

need to accuse ourselves of the

25:49

idea, this fake narrative that has

25:52

been set in stone by some

25:54

Latino consultants and Latino advocates in

25:56

the Democratic Party, making this

25:58

a defining issue for the Latino. vote in

26:00

Latino community, it has

26:02

always been untrue. It is especially

26:05

untrue now. What Biden

26:07

needs to do is co-opt the

26:09

message and start running offense on

26:11

this. And for the first time in 20 years,

26:15

put down specific policy proposals

26:17

that the Senate Republicans agree

26:19

with, go to the border and

26:22

start saying, let's shut this down

26:24

and defy the Republicans and say,

26:26

how dare you not fix this

26:28

problem? We've got the solution, let's

26:30

vote on it today and

26:33

force the Republicans' hands. Go

26:36

seize the issue, go run

26:38

offense. Get past this scary

26:40

notion that you built in your sense

26:42

that this is somehow a racist issue

26:44

or that you're gonna alienate Latinos. You

26:46

know who you're gonna alienate? You're gonna

26:48

alienate the Latino advocacy groups about a

26:50

dozen of them in Washington, DC that

26:53

make a ton of money on this,

26:55

but you're gonna start getting the handful,

26:57

I'm sorry, not the many

26:59

thousands of Latino voters that are

27:01

saying increasingly, let's fix this problem.

27:04

That's what the Biden administration needs to do and they need

27:06

to do it quickly, by the way. They

27:08

need to do it aggressively and quickly while the

27:10

Senate Republicans are at where they're at and

27:12

have publicly said what they've said because

27:15

you need to jam the House Republicans.

27:18

If you, by doing that, not only

27:21

do you increase the chances of winning the House, not

27:23

only do you start flipping the Americans

27:25

perceptions on the generic ballot, you put

27:28

Trump in a really big quandary on

27:30

this. You make him say,

27:32

no, don't fix the border publicly. He'll start

27:34

getting asked and then what's he gonna say?

27:37

He'll come up with some line, he'll

27:39

keep his base, but he's gonna further

27:41

alienate all those voters, those independent voters,

27:43

those college-educated voters, and even some of

27:45

those border communities that are desperate for

27:47

this, he can't win those back and

27:49

he won't. It's a cultural

27:51

problem in the Democratic Party where they're

27:54

not comfortable running proactively and offense on

27:56

an issue where they have been on

27:58

defense for 30 years. And

28:00

they're gonna have to get past it. That's why I

28:03

wrote what I did I was trying to give the

28:05

president cover of saying don't be afraid of this issue

28:07

Go run on it The American people will trust you

28:09

on it if you put some policy specifics that they

28:11

can that can not only sink their teeth into But

28:14

that Senate Republicans have already agreed to it's

28:16

already by but it's a bipartisan package. It's

28:18

a bipartisan deal They're they're publicly saying we'll

28:21

support this go grab it. No seize today

28:24

Unleash the cavalry don't take the hill draw your

28:26

swords and give no quarter on this thing Take

28:29

Trump down take the Republicans down go beat him at their

28:31

own game So interesting when

28:33

you say by the way that this has been

28:35

a you know a problem within the Democratic Party

28:37

What we we need to be very clear. This

28:40

is a very inside the beltway problem Oh, yeah

28:42

It is a cultural problem within the advocacy organizations

28:44

And I think when we were discussing the piece

28:46

you wrote in the New York Times Lene

28:49

was on and I I asked her

28:51

because she said something like this would blow up the

28:53

coalition I was like wait be what do you mean

28:55

by that and that she said the Advocacy

28:58

coalition in DC that continues to push

29:00

this issue and and the

29:02

the very pragmatic folks at Third Way We're saying

29:05

exactly the same thing when a saying exactly the

29:07

same thing We need the president to lead and

29:09

leading I think looks like exactly what you go

29:11

to the border. Yeah Yeah, let

29:13

me let me even clear. I don't know if I'm

29:15

agreeing with her disagreeing with Lene obviously respect her

29:17

I think you are she's she's where you're at. Yeah,

29:20

what I'm saying is that if you blow

29:22

up the coalition good Triangulate

29:24

right let them are right. Let them

29:26

argue that you're not progressive enough for

29:28

open borders enough good, right? Good. Yeah,

29:31

keep saying have a sister soldier moment

29:33

go Adam Go to

29:35

the border and go run hard at them

29:37

with with a bipartisan proposal to solve the

29:39

problem Tomorrow and let the Republicans and the

29:41

Latino advocacy organizations that are that are promoting

29:43

open borders or whatever they're promoting They don't

29:45

even have a policy prescription. They're just saying

29:47

no, no, no Let them

29:49

both be the ones that oppose you That's

29:51

what cements you in the center when

29:53

the extremes on the right and the left are

29:56

both saying you're wrong. You're probably right a

30:00

I know you

30:02

probably don't have any specific insight here with regard

30:04

to the White House, but you are very close

30:06

to the White House, and I wonder if you've

30:08

heard any chattering about

30:10

this, about whether or not the White House

30:12

is going to change posture and looking

30:17

for your overall thoughts. So

30:19

I haven't heard anybody talk about it. That

30:22

doesn't mean that they're not thinking about it very

30:24

deeply or that they're not concerned about it. The

30:27

thing that I can't understand, and that if I

30:30

were in the White House, I would advise them

30:32

to do this, is that

30:35

we have a very clear national

30:37

security threat at the border in

30:39

addition to a domestic policy issue.

30:42

And I find that, and again, I know

30:44

I could be accused for looking at everything

30:46

through the lens of foreign policy and national

30:49

security, but I really feel

30:51

that the national security threat that

30:53

we face at the border, which is now

30:55

unprecedented, and I'll get into that, is

30:57

an opportunity for President

31:00

Biden to use that to

31:02

shift. If he needs something to shift because

31:04

it's been unpopular and because Democrats have had

31:06

this way of trying to be soft on

31:08

this issue, then he could use this as

31:11

an excuse. And the best way to do

31:13

that, by the way, is that after

31:15

October 7th, the FBI director Christopher

31:18

Wray was testifying on the Hill, and

31:20

this was early December, and he said that we face

31:23

an unprecedented foreign terror threat in the United

31:25

States since October 7th, that it has never

31:28

been this high, number one. And then he

31:30

said that threat is at the southern border.

31:32

So he couldn't have been clearer. And I

31:34

do have a statistic for you on this,

31:37

by the way. The

31:39

number of people on the terrorist

31:42

watch list who were stopped

31:44

at the southern border has risen,

31:46

has been rising. So in 2022, in 2022, 100 of them

31:49

had been, and these are the ones that have been apprehended,

31:53

so these are the known ones. And

31:56

in 2023, as of September 2023, so there

31:58

may be, but that's before October. 7

32:02

160 migrants had matched those on the terror watch

32:04

list and had been apprehended again These are the

32:06

ones that they know of and that's why Christopher

32:08

Ray went and he said this and I

32:11

remember at the time that he Did this I felt

32:13

like it made some media waves and then

32:15

it kind of died down And I and you

32:17

see President Biden in this in this effort I

32:19

know we're gonna talk about Ukraine aid, so I

32:21

don't want to jump ahead here But you see

32:23

him being very willing to negotiate on The

32:27

southern border and and providing money I

32:29

don't love the you know tying these

32:31

issues together, but he seems very willing

32:34

But I agree with Mike in that it's

32:37

okay to grab this issue By

32:39

the horns because I will tell

32:41

you sitting in New York in the in the New York area

32:43

I have I've never seen

32:46

so many people who are left or far

32:48

to the left Talk

32:50

about the migrant crisis until

32:52

this year and it's because and

32:55

I hate to say this But

32:57

the strategy that that the Santas

32:59

and Abbott pursued to send migrants

33:02

up to these to the Cities

33:05

that you know quote unquote safe haven cities. It's

33:07

working It is working because people now

33:10

feel that pressure and they feel that

33:12

economic The the

33:14

struggles with that and and they feel you know

33:16

a whole other slew of issues with that And

33:19

so I think this is this is

33:21

the one thing that I can understand is why? Why

33:24

isn't this from a communication standpoint and

33:26

strategic standpoint being couched in more

33:28

of a national security issue when it so

33:30

is There's his out

33:32

on the racism charge Mike now I mean there

33:34

it is She brings up such a such a

33:36

powerful point if he goes if he

33:39

goes to the border and owns this issue It

33:42

means that anything if anything were to happen

33:44

before the election some sort of domestic terrorist.

33:46

It's Trump's fault It's not his fault. It's

33:48

the Republicans fault Get

33:50

out there and do it your own security, you

33:52

know, you own your own Intelligence

33:54

communities are telling you this is a

33:56

real threat. This is not Fox manufactured

33:58

at this point I mean, look, as

34:01

somebody who's been dealing with this for a very

34:03

long time, it was manufactured by Fox for 20

34:05

years. So I'm not

34:07

saying it isn't. And it feels icky to agree

34:09

with a lot of these people. I get it.

34:11

That's been a big part, frankly, of my career,

34:14

if you hate agreeing with these bad people, because

34:16

sometimes the right thing to do dovetails

34:19

with their bad intentions. That happens in

34:21

politics, unfortunately. But that doesn't mean we

34:23

don't need to solve the problem. It's

34:26

pervasive. It's significant. The number

34:28

one weakness that Biden faces,

34:30

and he sits at this moment

34:32

at an extraordinary time to go

34:35

and seize this, take it from

34:37

them, run offense, divide the Republican

34:40

base, and just again, unleash the

34:42

cavalry on these guys and let

34:44

Trump respond. Put Trump on the

34:47

defensive on immigration. I mean,

34:49

come on. Well, this moment isn't going

34:51

to last. Go do it this week. Like now, get

34:53

him out there. That's his

34:55

biggest cudgel. You can take it away from him. That's his biggest

34:57

cudgel, and you can turn it against him. If

35:00

you just look at the region, at Central

35:02

and Latin America, there's no way

35:04

this doesn't get worse. If you

35:06

look at what's happening in Haiti and the

35:09

gangs that have taken over Haiti, and that

35:11

feels like a problem that is insurmountable. If

35:13

you look at what's happening in Ecuador over

35:15

just the last two weeks, where gangs have

35:18

taken over and caused chaos, that

35:20

all of these issues ... I'm

35:22

just highlighting, I'm just skimming the top here.

35:28

There is no end in sight, is my point. These

35:30

issues are only getting worse, and we

35:32

know that they contribute to the migrant

35:35

crisis, no matter how many times Vice

35:37

President Kamala Harris goes to the region

35:40

and says, do not come to the

35:42

United States. That's not going to get through. Well,

35:44

let me say this too, because it's important that

35:46

we understand what's happening at the border. We

35:49

are now at the point where

35:51

most of the people apprehended

35:54

and stopped at the border are not

35:56

of Mexican or Central American descent. from

36:00

Asia, the Middle East and Russians coming

36:02

through the border. This is the way

36:04

you get into the United States. And

36:07

so, yes, you are right. This problem

36:09

is getting bad and worse in

36:11

Latin America, but it is the

36:13

entire globe is using this as an entry

36:15

point. And that, I think, is the national

36:17

security threat. Problem is, think of

36:19

the people that we've caught at the border that found on the

36:21

watch list. What about those that we didn't catch? Like,

36:23

that's the worry, right? That's the worry. And

36:26

that is a weakness for Biden

36:28

if anything happens from now through

36:30

November, certainly. And I'm not saying

36:32

just do this for political purposes.

36:34

It is for national security purposes.

36:36

Get out there now and put

36:38

Trump and the Republicans on the

36:40

defense. Say this, own

36:43

this, and say, we're going to fix

36:45

this with Republicans, Senate Republicans. Let them

36:47

say no, and then you can blame

36:49

them for saying, this is why this

36:51

didn't happen. In all my

36:54

years of working on this, I've never been seen an

36:56

opportunity for Democrats to go on the offense

36:59

on this. I wrote that piece

37:01

for the Times to hopefully give the President some

37:03

rationale and some cover in saying, don't be worried

37:05

about your left flank here, buddy. The

37:07

voters are with you on this. Latino voters

37:09

are with you, even though those chirping voices

37:11

you're hearing aren't. They've got an institutional reason

37:13

to not be there with you. Go

37:16

with where the voters are at. Go with where

37:18

your intelligence community is telling you. Go with where

37:20

the politics tell you, because that's going to give

37:22

you good policy out of this. It may not

37:24

be ideal for some groups, but

37:26

this is a problem that needs to be

37:28

stopped, and it's not racist to fix the

37:30

border problem. It is the first responsibility of

37:32

a sovereign nation. That's

37:35

the line in the piece. By the way, for the

37:38

White House staffers listening to this, we'll link to that

37:40

New York Times article for you in case you missed

37:42

it. Okay,

37:45

speaking of tying Ukraine aid

37:48

to border security together,

37:50

as Hagar mentioned, Republicans

37:53

have done. By the way, this is

37:55

the same Republicans who, I don't know,

37:57

ousted their own speaker over his inability

37:59

to... deliver on his promise to vote

38:02

up or down on individual spending bills,

38:04

but now they're fine tying disparate

38:06

things together. But anyway, last

38:09

week, congressional leaders went to the White

38:11

House for a private meeting about

38:14

the war on Ukraine. National Security Advisor

38:16

Jake Sullivan and Director of National Intelligence

38:18

Avril Haines told the lawmakers that

38:20

without additional support, Russia could win

38:23

the war in a matter of weeks, months

38:25

at best. ABC News is

38:28

reporting that Ukraine will run out

38:30

of some air defense and artillery capabilities in

38:32

the next few weeks. The

38:34

White House described the assessment as

38:36

incredibly stark. Sullivan didn't

38:38

predict an outright imminent victory for

38:40

Russia, but he did give date

38:42

ranges of when

38:44

Ukraine would run low on different munitions.

38:47

They also emphasized that the impact of

38:50

not providing additional aid would be far

38:52

more reaching than just Ukraine. The White

38:54

House believes it would make other countries

38:56

like Japan and South Korea rethink their

38:58

reliance on the United States.

39:01

So Hagar, bring us up to

39:03

speed here. What

39:05

will it mean for our position in

39:07

the world if we bail on Ukraine?

39:10

What's at stake if Ukraine loses?

39:13

Oh, where do I begin? It's

39:16

so bad. And you have to know that I am not,

39:18

and you know this, I mean, and your listeners know this,

39:20

I am not an alarmist. When you

39:22

work in national security, you can't be an alarmist, and

39:24

this I am alarmed at. And

39:27

it's because the ripple effects would be so, so

39:31

far-reaching and so catastrophic

39:34

that it is something that we will, there will be

39:36

a very clear cause and effect. So

39:39

first, let me start off domestically by saying

39:41

I believe that they're going to get

39:44

this package through. Biden

39:46

has, for those who are not following

39:48

this bill closely, he's requested $60 billion

39:51

in military aid for Ukraine. There

39:53

was a bill earlier in December for $50 billion.

39:56

It didn't go through, and which

39:59

was... Embarrassing to start with and the

40:01

National Republican said oh Kibble was because there's

40:03

no money for this for the southern border

40:05

we want to tie together and that's how

40:07

we are where we are on. I

40:09

billie and and and be and big and

40:12

top republican negotiators have said that while the

40:14

keeps haven't been worked out that they do

40:16

expect, they are optimistic that this will go

40:18

through and I am too. but it doesn't

40:20

mean the damage is already done. So first.

40:22

Is. It doesn't go through. You

40:25

as as we're hearing from the White House

40:27

and as was briefed. On Capitol Hill,

40:29

Russia could win. This war in a

40:32

matter of weeks and then is because Ukraine

40:34

will run out of the artillery of the

40:36

ammunitions of the munitions that they need to

40:38

keep on going. And we've always known that

40:40

this has been a big issue with support

40:43

for Ukraine that they've been the run through

40:45

artillery and munitions. Often faster

40:47

than production companies. Can keep up

40:49

with and by the way, even faster than

40:51

our own stockpiles can keep up with we

40:53

have to maintain we endured and. Other partners

40:55

that has been providing support you. Crunch. Have

40:58

to maintain our own combat readiness so we

41:00

need to have our own stockpiles And that

41:02

aid by the way, that that says sixty

41:04

billion also is in part to replenish our

41:06

own job titles. So danger move pretty quickly.

41:08

It's so that's that's that's to put that

41:10

out there, so it's to undertake. Understand the

41:12

gravity that they would win this war. Within.

41:15

A matter of weeks. What doesn't look like it

41:18

should look like a differ and number of different

41:20

things. A I did. I think that would mean

41:22

that they would install somebody in Ukraine who's pro

41:24

Kremlin and that they would take over the twenty

41:27

percent of Ukraine the land that they've already take.

41:29

that they are they they are in charge of

41:31

and then he could. It could. Break.

41:34

Could go further into that as as

41:36

years go on that see immediate and

41:38

nights sometimes when I hear Republicans talk

41:40

about eight Ukraine I feel it They're

41:42

only thinking about this in that box

41:44

and there's a gigawatts. This is a

41:46

war that thousands of miles away and

41:49

and maybe you cringe to cut a

41:51

deal and and giveaway so this land

41:53

and just to the we don't have

41:55

to be supporting it anymore. This is

41:57

why not only is that terrible. Even

42:00

the difficulty in giving a desirable why?

42:02

Because if if Russia wins, they don't

42:04

stop at Ukraine. they will continue on

42:06

to Georgia and Moldova because they see

42:08

very clearly that the international community is

42:10

set up that there are. They have

42:12

limited resources that they're not going to

42:14

go run after every single country to

42:16

support them. And then that's a message

42:18

to every dictator around the world telling

42:20

them that they can do land grabs

42:22

or invade their neighbors Because again, the

42:24

internet communities fatigued tired, they are focused

42:26

more on putting food on the table

42:28

or lower gas prices. And so

42:31

they're also not gonna run to their

42:33

help. And by the way, in one

42:35

year alone in twenty twenty three alone

42:37

you already saw three sort of pass

42:39

attempts at this in one you you

42:42

had Azerbaijan. Take over

42:44

in twenty four hours and area in

42:46

within it's borders called the Gordo carbon

42:48

which was governed and populated by ethnic

42:50

Armenians stay took it over and the

42:52

hundred twenty thousand ethnic Armenians who were

42:54

living there sledge to Armenia. Fled.

42:57

gone, Then you had China

42:59

put out a national map where they

43:01

staked clean and sovereignty over the entirety

43:03

of the South China Sea, parts of

43:05

the Himalayas and other areas. and the

43:07

risk that is that than their military

43:09

will enforce it and you're already seen

43:11

that happen in the South China Sea.

43:13

And then you had Venezuela do this

43:15

weirdo land grab were or attempted land

43:17

grabs where they put a referendum a

43:20

vote to their people to ask them

43:22

if they supported taking over two thirds

43:24

of their neighbor Guyana of the As

43:26

to Quibble region which is rich in

43:28

oil. And their people. Allegedly though

43:30

you know these votes are rigged, Stamps

43:32

voted in favor of it and then

43:34

now they're in negotiations split eat. Why

43:36

would these attempts even happened? Why would

43:38

that brazenness exist Is because they're watching

43:40

put do this and so so that

43:42

so it's a it's a message to

43:44

defuse everywhere. I haven't even gotten to

43:46

the part about our alliances. If you

43:48

are Japan and South Korea for sure,

43:51

you're going to start questioning. well as

43:53

the Us. Really always gonna be there

43:55

for us if North Korea comes out

43:57

as if China comes. at us am

44:00

It starts to become questionable. The

44:02

EU is gonna- Do you mean what we say? Yeah. And

44:04

so if I'm president, she, and I'm sitting

44:07

there and I'm watching what's happening on Capitol Hill

44:09

very closely, watching Congress

44:12

face difficulty, debate this

44:14

aid to Ukraine, tie it to all sorts of

44:17

other issues, I'm gonna sit there and

44:19

I'm gonna say, hmm, this might not be such a

44:21

bad time to do something toward Taiwan because the Americans

44:23

seem fed up already. They barely

44:25

wanna support Ukraine and Israel. And

44:28

by the time I do something in Taiwan, they're

44:30

just gonna be fed up with foreign conflicts. And

44:33

I don't think he would be wrong in

44:35

that assessment, unfortunately. And so this has, it

44:39

just ripple effects. If

44:41

you add to that Trump rising,

44:44

following that, you've

44:47

got leader, you've got Putin and

44:49

Xi watching that very closely because they know

44:51

that it would translate, Putin in particular, it

44:54

would translate to a policy that would be

44:57

more focused on the United States, much

44:59

more hesitant in giving foreign aid. And

45:03

the problem with that is that the EU will

45:05

think that the US would

45:07

not run to help the EU or

45:09

NATO if a NATO

45:12

country is attacked, which undermines the

45:14

deterrence of NATO and our

45:16

alliances. Basically, it's a catastrophe. I

45:19

know I've painted a very ugly, an ugly scenario

45:22

that has if this and that and if this

45:24

and that, but that is

45:26

how national security works. And this

45:28

is really what's at stake here. So

45:31

there's one thing you said

45:33

that I'm curious about, we don't have to really

45:35

get into it, your confidence that they're gonna get

45:37

this deal done given Republicans' cynicism and tying these

45:39

deals together. I don't know where that confidence comes

45:42

from unless you know something I don't. No,

45:45

I mean, it's what I'm seeing in the press.

45:47

I just, I keep, I try to keep staying on

45:49

top of this and I keep seeing the top Republican

45:51

negotiators saying, you know, we just have this to work

45:53

out. Now, again, they have been saying that for a

45:55

while. They've been saying that since end of December and

45:58

this has already gone long. than I

46:00

expected. I thought this would be wrapped up

46:02

at the beginning of the year. I really

46:05

do think it'll come through in part because

46:07

of the assessment the White House has given,

46:09

in part because you do have Republican leaders,

46:12

which McConnell and others, who seem to understand

46:15

and publicly say that it's important to

46:17

support Ukraine, that they understand what's at

46:19

stake here, and because

46:21

I think the Biden administration does want to make a

46:23

deal to support the southern border.

46:25

So I think that they'll get there. But again,

46:28

just even if they do, and I do think they

46:30

will, but even if they do, just

46:33

showing how difficult it was to get there

46:36

is already problematic. And I also

46:39

worry that this is it for the

46:41

year until we pass,

46:43

until we get to the next election. And

46:45

that is also concerning. Okay,

46:48

so Mike, there's a

46:50

lot of different directions we could go here. You and I

46:52

have talked a lot about Ukraine.

46:54

Politikology listeners will remember us doing

46:56

podcasts from Ukraine shortly after the

46:58

war broke out. And our good

47:00

friend Molly McHugh is on her

47:02

way over there very soon. Again,

47:04

I think it's okay for me

47:06

to say that. The

47:09

thing I'd kind of like to zero in on,

47:11

first of all, I think Hagar's right in everything

47:13

she said, and it kind of really

47:15

breaks my heart to think about the Ukrainians

47:17

that we met over there fighting for our

47:19

values, fighting our

47:22

war for us, bleeding

47:24

and dying, and all they're asking

47:26

for are bullets to see

47:28

this fucking circus. That

47:32

is why supporting Ukraine is

47:34

the deal of the century. That's why. Yeah.

47:36

Because we are not sending our own troops

47:38

there. And yet they're fighting on behalf of

47:40

everybody. It's

47:43

embarrassing for

47:45

us. But I think

47:48

where I'd like to go with

47:50

this is how Biden

47:52

might potentially be able to

47:54

turn this issue around on

47:57

Republicans. And One thing that comes to

47:59

mind, How does the two

48:01

things? One Obviously and we've mentioned this before,

48:03

but I feel like this really still hasn't

48:05

penetrated the Zoc case. which is that all

48:07

that money that we're spending is to buy

48:10

new sit for our military. To. Replenish

48:12

our own munitions, our own

48:15

defensive capabilities, Our own munitions.

48:18

A week. Which. Republicans. Are

48:20

now. Stop. There, we should

48:22

be talking about the services as if it

48:24

is. Ah, Military spending Us Military

48:26

defense spending because that is ultimately what

48:29

it is we're giving away old stuff

48:31

to Ukraine, were buying new stuff and

48:33

updating our military capabilities, and I don't

48:35

know. Why maybe that lane

48:37

hasn't opened up? A why we haven't

48:39

seen more pro Ukraine democrats start to

48:41

talk about it in that way, I

48:43

wonder if that might be more effective.

48:45

And the other thing is a garments

48:47

and. A lot of the

48:49

ways Republicans are talking about this is of is a

48:52

war that's a long ways away from here and doesn't

48:54

really matter. As

48:56

if they really believe that. But.

48:58

Of course, most of these people. And

49:00

until a. Few. Years ago.

49:04

Vast majority of these republicans understood

49:06

that Russia was. Are. Adversary.

49:08

And that anything we could

49:10

do to weekend and disarm.

49:13

Russia. Would. Be in our

49:15

interest in in it now. Seems like I

49:17

don't buy this. Oh they they? They really

49:19

believe that this doesn't matter, that this is

49:21

a far off war that has nothing to

49:23

do with us and we should stop intervening

49:25

snow see, know exactly what's happening here. And

49:27

the same level of cynicism that's a play

49:29

on the on the immigration seal is a

49:31

play in the. Ukraine. Seal.

49:34

So I wonder what you think about the politics of this

49:36

and potential for the White House? Turn it around. Or.

49:40

I target and agree with you more on

49:42

everything that you just sad. I mean to

49:44

them to believe that Marjorie Taylor Green actually

49:46

believes that this is somehow in America first

49:48

thing and not doing food and bedding as

49:50

justice to suspend all of your own bullies

49:52

and reality. Of course the know what this

49:54

is about. This is about Russia getting what

49:57

Russia wants and those are voices in this

49:59

country that. The kidding of to

50:01

to starve Ukraine of the fight

50:03

that it needs to put up

50:06

are are literally doing Vladimir Putins

50:08

work. The and it is that

50:10

there's anybody of with with more than

50:12

a sixth grade. Sensibility understands that this

50:14

war will be lost in weeks. I

50:18

chose not to say that because of the

50:20

people that we know that are there fighting

50:22

oh yeah oh and that the Ukrainians by

50:24

the was Ukraine is and they will say

50:26

this they will win this war out mans

50:28

tend to one if they are just given

50:30

the fire fire fire power to win and

50:32

I believe that my billie them than and

50:34

I believe that yeah we will go back

50:36

around to to to those people again when

50:38

Ukraine is is free and out of the

50:40

rest but this is a critical moment in

50:42

that fight. And. The way I see to get

50:44

to win actually the way I think she gets to a

50:46

when. His with

50:48

mcconnell be I'm putting up. I'm basically saying

50:50

look. Will move this

50:53

deal to but even after. On. Freeze

50:55

Russia's assets and sell them explicitly need you

50:57

to Russia's assets. I don't know yet how

50:59

many there are. no the five dollars worth

51:02

of five hundred million dollars worth. but this

51:04

is that moment to use their own money

51:06

against them and make that part of the

51:08

political deal. right? Because lot of

51:11

buttermilk him. So why were we doing that the

51:13

first place right after the average male voters going

51:15

to be incident that question but a second is

51:17

make it part of the deal, point the drug

51:19

and agree with anyway and start moving again offensively

51:21

on this issue. This. Needs to

51:23

be of. Look guys, we need to

51:25

start framing this as an anti Russia

51:27

and I put an effort more than

51:29

a free Ukraine protect you train effort

51:32

it. We need to move off, have

51:34

the decency are we need to start?

51:36

Biden needs to start getting more aggressively

51:38

prescriptive in what we're fighting against as

51:40

much as what we are fighting for.

51:42

That's what's gonna move American public opinion

51:45

and get the average American person back

51:47

into this into this fight, back into

51:49

committing to it in back to making

51:51

it's a political issue. Remembers.

51:53

Is the last time we had

51:55

an older. You. know i'm kind

51:58

of of viewed as a backbench president

52:00

who wasn't really supposed to be there, but was

52:02

just there in a caretaker role, was

52:05

Harry Truman. And

52:08

Truman realigned the geopolitical order

52:10

when he was in office.

52:12

This is that same moment. This is a

52:15

history rhyming, guys. Biden's there. He

52:17

was the caretaker. He was put in the office because he's the only guy

52:20

who could beat Donald Trump, and he's done that.

52:22

And the American public is like, wow, we don't really know

52:24

if this guy's got the gravitas. Look,

52:26

Biden has reconstituted NATO, at least

52:28

the political will for NATO. He's

52:32

fighting the Houthis

52:34

in the Middle East, and he's

52:37

both fortifying our efforts there while

52:39

trying to prevent an expanding war

52:41

there, and at the same time

52:43

is looking over his shoulder into the South China

52:45

Sea. This is

52:47

a test of America's dominance. It is

52:50

not just Putin. It's largely Putin. It

52:52

is Xi. It is the Iranians.

52:54

It is this global

52:56

efforts to destabilize the

52:58

United States' hegemony. This

53:01

is the moment. And unfortunately,

53:03

I believe our greatest weakness is

53:06

internal. It is in the

53:08

Republican Party. It is from

53:10

assets that are being deployed

53:12

to destabilize us from within.

53:14

That is the only thing preventing

53:16

our success in helping our allies

53:19

and freedom lovers throughout the world.

53:21

The biggest obstacle to Ukrainian

53:23

success is the Republican

53:26

Party here in this country. That's

53:29

what it is. That is the biggest problem

53:31

that our allies in the Middle East face and

53:33

the biggest problem that we face in the South

53:35

China Sea is the

53:37

domestic influences

53:39

that are working against us

53:41

in our own Congress and

53:44

in one of the two

53:46

great parties of this country.

53:49

That's what history is going to write and it's becoming

53:51

more evident every day. This

53:54

president, I don't know how he's... I

53:57

don't know how he's balancing and spinning plates while

53:59

he's... tap dancing through a minefield here, but

54:01

somehow he's doing it. And you

54:04

got to give the guy credit. Like I said,

54:06

no one, the expectations for Harry Truman were so

54:08

low that he was surpassing him in many ways.

54:10

What I see Biden doing and reconstituting the

54:12

geopolitical order and increasing

54:14

America's strength is exactly what's happening

54:16

here. But our resolve has to

54:18

be demonstrable. We have to show

54:21

up because everyone, as a guard

54:23

just said, is watching. Our

54:25

enemies are watching whether they be strong or whether

54:27

they be weak. When America

54:29

falters, when America shows weakness,

54:32

everybody perks up and listens and starts

54:34

to move aggressively because that vacuum needs

54:36

to be and will be filled. And

54:38

if we allow that to happen, it

54:41

is our fault. It is our

54:44

relinquishing our duty as a global power

54:47

and as the tip of the spear

54:49

for the free world. That's what's

54:51

happening daily. So until

54:54

we start framing it in those terms, and

54:57

not allowing this to be viewed as a

54:59

regional war and start explaining the stakes. I

55:02

mean, I love these people who are saying, you know, oh,

55:04

you know, it's just far off war. It doesn't matter. If

55:07

Ukraine falls in a matter of weeks, we're going to have

55:09

boots on the ground and in crack out.

55:11

We're going to have we're going to have boots on

55:13

the ground in Poland to fortifying that border. And

55:16

and Europe, you know, a dark, dark

55:18

shadow falls over Europe again. And these

55:20

are the same forces and it's the

55:22

same debate and we can't allow history

55:24

to do this. We've got to demand

55:26

that we be more offensive in this

55:28

struggle. I'm sorry, I've gone on too

55:30

long here, but I'm passionate about this

55:32

emotional issue for you and for me.

55:34

And I know for Hagar, it's it's,

55:37

it's everything. It's so much

55:40

more real also if you if

55:42

you've actually put feet on soil

55:44

there and and let's

55:53

turn to what we're watching

55:56

under the radar, over the radar, wherever

55:58

it happens to be. What developments are

56:00

you keeping an eye on, Agar? Well,

56:04

I've been fascinated by what's happening in Germany

56:07

very quickly. Over the weekend, over

56:10

a million protesters demonstrated

56:13

across Germany against their far-right

56:15

political party called the Alternative

56:17

for Germany, otherwise known as

56:19

AFD. And the thing that

56:21

sparked these protests is

56:23

what I found absolutely

56:25

terrifying, in particular because

56:28

this is a political party that

56:30

enjoys quite a fair

56:32

amount of support in Germany. So let me break that down a little bit. So

56:34

first, a nonprofit research

56:37

institute called Corrective released a report,

56:39

an investigative report that they did,

56:42

that found that officials from

56:44

this political party met with some

56:46

far-right political officials in Germany,

56:48

some business leaders, and

56:50

this far-right Austrian activist, if

56:53

you will. And

56:57

they had a secret meeting where they planned

56:59

a master plan, they talked about a master

57:01

plan, to pursue mass

57:03

deportations from Germany should

57:05

this political party, AFD, come to

57:08

power. And

57:12

they would deport

57:15

all non-assimilated Germans,

57:18

including non-Germans with residency

57:21

rights. And

57:26

Germans who hadn't, German citizens who

57:28

hadn't assimilated to Germany.

57:32

And so this is their plan. And

57:34

all asylum seekers, all asylum-listening migrants, they

57:36

would all be mass deported,

57:38

which is very eerily reminiscent to

57:40

plans that the Nazis had in

57:42

the 1940s to deport 4

57:44

million Jews to Madagascar. Oh,

57:46

by the way, they would be deported

57:49

to a, quote, model state in North

57:51

Africa. So this secret meeting happened and

57:54

was serious in its planning. And

57:57

this political party, AFD, enjoys.

58:00

They're pulling at 22%. And

58:03

that's significant in Germany because it has a multi-party

58:05

system. And that polling

58:07

number, 22%, is greater than

58:10

each of the three

58:13

centrists and one center-left party

58:15

enjoys. That's higher than

58:17

each of those other parties have right

58:19

now. And they have

58:21

state elections in the coming months

58:24

where AFD participants could really

58:26

get spots and gain influence.

58:28

So this is a real

58:30

fucking problem in Germany. This is

58:33

not bluster. This

58:35

is not like, oh, those far-right wackos.

58:38

This is a real serious problem.

58:40

And I'm grateful that this organization

58:42

did this investigative report and they

58:44

put it out. And

58:46

I'm really grateful that over a million Germans

58:48

hit the street to warn against the

58:51

return of Nazis. That's what it's saying. This is the

58:53

return of Nazis. They were protesting against fascism. And I

58:55

think that that's great. And I'm so

58:57

glad because in the United States, the

58:59

only movement I'm really seeing

59:02

garnering that much support is the

59:04

effort to buy Stanley Cups. And I really still can't understand

59:06

why. Owning one, I really don't

59:08

understand it. And

59:10

so I'm moved by the effort to

59:13

move against them. I'm

59:15

horrified that this group even came up with

59:17

this master plan in a very serious way.

59:20

But I just, I really just hope that it

59:22

translates in their elections in the coming months.

59:24

And so I'm going to be watching that very closely.

59:27

I really scared you all today. I

59:29

really not very doing. My eyes just

59:31

like popped open. I

59:33

had no idea this. I saw

59:36

the headline. I did not realize there was so much

59:38

under the surface there. Same, by the way, same

59:40

with me. I

59:42

saw the headline and I was

59:44

like, yeah, yeah, isn't this more like the farmer

59:46

protests? And then I started reading

59:48

one article and my jaw dropped. I couldn't believe what I was

59:50

reading. Okay.

59:53

But I've got two, I'm going to try and blitz

59:55

through here very quickly, but maybe they're a little bit

59:57

more hopeful than that. I don't know why they're.

1:00:02

So, as you both

1:00:04

know, our listeners certainly know, I've been something

1:00:06

of a court watcher for the last several months. I

1:00:09

mean, the Supreme Court. So two cases that

1:00:13

I want to just mention here really

1:00:15

quick. Last week, the Supreme Court heard

1:00:17

oral arguments in a case challenging Chevron

1:00:19

deference. Basically, it's the legal doctrine that

1:00:21

has developed over time that federal courts

1:00:23

could defer to a federal agency's interpretation

1:00:25

of the statute when the statute is

1:00:27

ambiguous. So, if

1:00:30

the agency's interpretation is reasonable,

1:00:33

whatever that means, based on

1:00:35

the oral arguments, it sounds like

1:00:38

the court is likely to limit

1:00:40

or overturn Chevron entirely. That would

1:00:42

mean the federal court would interpret

1:00:45

the statute and not defer to the

1:00:47

agency as a default. So, what

1:00:49

does that really mean? There's a lot of hand

1:00:52

wringing going on about this on the left, where

1:00:57

there are some areas of technical expertise

1:00:59

where courts probably should defer to trained

1:01:01

experts, like I don't know, with the

1:01:03

nuclear regulatory agency or say something. But

1:01:06

there are two things I think are really

1:01:08

important to think about. If

1:01:10

you are sort of concerned, very

1:01:13

concerned, and you're on the left and you're

1:01:15

like, oh no, the federal government is not

1:01:17

going to be able to do anything anymore.

1:01:19

I would suggest you think

1:01:22

about this. First, Congress actually

1:01:24

should be legislating regulations.

1:01:26

They actually should be making rules.

1:01:28

That's how it's supposed to work.

1:01:30

Moreover, it is more democratic. If

1:01:32

you have more democratic representation involved

1:01:35

in making

1:01:37

federal law, I

1:01:40

would argue that that's a good thing. The

1:01:42

reason Congress has sort of ground to a

1:01:45

halt and can almost never do anything now,

1:01:47

yes, has to do a lot with partisanship

1:01:49

and negative

1:01:51

partisanship, but also because

1:01:53

they can, because they've been allowed for so

1:01:55

long to write them very vague statutes and

1:01:58

pass them off to... federal

1:02:00

agencies to interpret and those agencies often are

1:02:02

bipolar in the way they interpret these because

1:02:04

you have different presidents of different persuasions

1:02:07

coming in and remaking rules all the time. Second,

1:02:10

with the potential for a second Trump

1:02:12

term, when he's telling us

1:02:14

exactly how he'd abuse the executive branch, including

1:02:17

these agencies, to go after his

1:02:20

enemies, help himself, I

1:02:22

think we should be thinking very seriously about the

1:02:25

power of the executive branch and taking

1:02:27

steps to limit that power. And

1:02:29

I made the same argument about the Jarkosy

1:02:32

case, which was argued

1:02:34

recently in which the government's practice

1:02:36

of administrative tribunals to adjudicate violations

1:02:38

of rules that they themselves make and

1:02:41

in which defendants are not granted key elements

1:02:43

of due process like their Seventh Amendment right

1:02:45

to a jury trial. These

1:02:48

are things that the court is considering

1:02:50

now. And I would argue if you're

1:02:52

concerned about the size

1:02:54

and scope of the federal government being

1:02:57

curtailed and you think that's a bad thing, I think

1:03:01

you need to look at the other side of that coin and

1:03:04

at the timing of these decisions, if they

1:03:06

come out this way, may ultimately be a

1:03:08

good thing. The second

1:03:10

is this Colorado

1:03:12

case about keeping

1:03:15

Trump off the ballot in the state.

1:03:18

The oral arguments are coming up on February 8th.

1:03:21

I said a couple of weeks ago that I was

1:03:23

looking forward to reading the amicus briefs, especially the one

1:03:25

from Professor Akhil Amar. And there

1:03:27

was one thread in particular that I

1:03:29

found really interesting. So he wrote this brief with

1:03:31

his brother Vikk Amar. There

1:03:34

is a historical figure from

1:03:37

the Civil War era who has completely flown under

1:03:39

the radar here. You've probably never heard of him.

1:03:42

As a matter of fact, Amar jokes that you've heard of

1:03:44

Benedict Arnold, but you've never heard of John B. Floyd. He

1:03:47

was the Secretary of War under James Buchanan

1:03:49

and later went on to become a Confederate

1:03:51

general. But here's the most important

1:03:54

piece. Floyd used his cabinet position to

1:03:56

try to stop Congress from counting

1:03:59

the electoral college votes for Lincoln.

1:04:02

Here's how Amar puts it. Floyd

1:04:04

used the great powers of his

1:04:06

office through a devious combination of

1:04:08

affirmative acts and strategic failures to

1:04:10

act to try to thwart

1:04:13

a proper transition of power.

1:04:16

Does that sound familiar? You're going

1:04:18

to hear a lot of arguments

1:04:20

about this case, and this is

1:04:22

one of the more persuasive ones

1:04:24

when it comes to the comparison

1:04:26

between the insurrection

1:04:29

and what Trump did doesn't

1:04:31

really look like Civil War, right? That's what

1:04:33

a lot of people are saying. Amar is

1:04:36

arguing that this was the first insurrection,

1:04:38

and everybody in Reconstruction

1:04:40

era Congress would

1:04:43

have known Floyd's name and exactly what

1:04:45

he did. So

1:04:47

their argument is that his

1:04:49

actions before the Civil War started made him

1:04:51

an insurrectionist, an oath breaker, emphasis

1:04:53

on the oath breaker, and put him

1:04:55

firmly in the bullseye of section three of the 14th

1:04:57

Amendment. So we'll put a link to that brief in

1:04:59

the show notes. I recommend everybody read it. It's

1:05:03

truly excellent. I'm watching that case very closely. As

1:05:06

you know, Mike,

1:05:08

what'd you bring for us? Well,

1:05:11

once again, eyes are on China. New

1:05:13

York Times wrote a story just today

1:05:15

saying that the One China policy is

1:05:17

showing the collapse of the

1:05:20

population increase numbers in China is greater

1:05:23

than they had anticipated, and this is

1:05:25

leading to economic stagnation. And

1:05:27

again, we've talked a lot about China's

1:05:29

internal domestic problems and its economic

1:05:31

conundrum. I think this is probably

1:05:33

one of the main drivers because

1:05:35

it's socially a problem. And what

1:05:38

is fascinating to me and what's

1:05:40

fascinating about the story is not

1:05:42

just this extraordinary decline in population

1:05:45

as a result of the overall

1:05:48

more advanced economies are seeing population

1:05:50

decline, but 30 years of China's

1:05:52

One Child policy is actually now

1:05:54

having this cumulative effect of

1:05:57

the inability to really re-bolt bolster

1:06:00

its population numbers to help

1:06:02

its economy stabilize. Add

1:06:05

on to that is, during the one

1:06:07

child policy, all Chinese families wanted men.

1:06:09

So this is a disproportionate number of

1:06:11

men. And what's happening is

1:06:14

women now are, there's a very aggressive

1:06:16

campaign in China to convince women to

1:06:18

kind of go back to the home

1:06:20

and have children as part of a

1:06:23

nationalistic effort. And

1:06:25

Chinese women are kind of, they're not having it. They're

1:06:27

having their own careers. They've

1:06:30

got their choice of what they, men they

1:06:32

want to date and see and marry, or

1:06:34

if they want to marry. And they're

1:06:36

basically being asked by their country to

1:06:39

now take on the brunt of its mistakes.

1:06:42

These are career-oriented, educated women.

1:06:45

And increasingly they're saying, that's not the life that

1:06:47

we want to live. And

1:06:49

so even with the declining population, the one

1:06:52

solution that China has to turn that

1:06:55

dynamic around is

1:06:57

decidedly not buying into it. And it's

1:07:00

just continuing this steep. You look at

1:07:02

the numbers on

1:07:04

a graph and it's just a drop off of

1:07:06

a cliff of their population at a time

1:07:08

when they desperately need the labor force reinvigorated.

1:07:11

Add on to that, high unemployment with younger

1:07:14

people too. Totally. And you've got

1:07:16

these huge problems, which again, in my mind, it's like, what's

1:07:18

the solution to all of this? And I hate to be

1:07:20

so cynical, but oftentimes it's

1:07:22

war, right? That's what gets you out

1:07:24

of it. And you have to remember

1:07:26

that internally, both Putin and Xi face

1:07:29

these huge internal challenges economically of

1:07:31

which the only solution sometimes is war.

1:07:33

So my eyes are always fixated there

1:07:35

on China, especially as we are opening

1:07:38

up essentially a second front in the

1:07:40

Middle East. And we're being

1:07:42

taxed there by our enemies. Our

1:07:44

resolve becomes all the more important and

1:07:46

drawing the line there, because if we

1:07:49

do demonstrate weakness or a lack of

1:07:51

commitment, it opens up the possibility of

1:07:53

a third front and then at that

1:07:55

point we know that we're

1:07:57

essentially flirting with the early

1:07:59

state of a global conflict

1:08:01

with currency fights and misinformation campaigns and

1:08:04

the intrusion into people's elections This

1:08:06

this would take it to the next level. So Okay

1:08:10

before we head over to political G plus

1:08:12

which again we're gonna unlock as a preview

1:08:15

for everybody today Where can everybody find you

1:08:17

on the internet? I? am

1:08:19

across social media at at geek out with

1:08:22

Hagar because I love when people geek out

1:08:24

with me and my show is at Oh

1:08:27

my world show on across social

1:08:29

media and please subscribe. Oh my world

1:08:31

on YouTube Amazing. I love

1:08:33

what you do Mike. Where are you these days? Follow me

1:08:36

on at on

1:08:38

threads at Madrid

1:08:40

underscore Mike one or

1:08:43

back on old Twitter X whatever it is

1:08:45

I've still hang out and lurk into those

1:08:47

dark shadows and alleys somewhere at Madrid underscore

1:08:50

Mike Okay, and will

1:08:52

we have news to share about a book soon we

1:08:55

will have news to share very very soon So I'm

1:08:57

excited and you'll hear about it on political first beautiful

1:09:03

All right, everybody Thanks for listening today If

1:09:06

you have questions about anything we discussed today

1:09:08

you can reach us as always at podcast

1:09:10

at political G com whether it's

1:09:12

an episode idea a topic recommendation or

1:09:14

just a simple note about what you

1:09:17

thought We love to hear from you,

1:09:19

and we might even use it on an upcoming episode Also,

1:09:22

if you can head over to the Apple

1:09:24

podcast app and rate us five stars and

1:09:26

leave a review there We'd really appreciate it

1:09:28

this helps us rise in the rankings so

1:09:30

that new people can discover Politicology organically I'm

1:09:33

Ron Steslow, and I'll see you in the next episode