Pod Save America: Crossover Episode (w/ Jon Favreau, Jon Lovett, Tommy Vietor)

00:00:00
Speaker 1: Hi everyone. For our returning listeners, thank you so much for tuning in. I think you're really going to like the show today. Now, for those of you who are new to the show, welcome to my pod squad. If you came here because the pod Save America guys recommended us. The conversation is gonna sound very familiar because you've probably already heard it. It's my interview with John Favreau, John Lovett, and Tommy Vitor from Crooked Media. But since you like that podcast, I thought i'd recommend a couple of my favorite episodes of this podcast. A great place to start is our conversation with Alec Baldwin. It was I think the only time he's done is Trump impression outside of SNL. Not only did Alec crack us up, he also made us think because this is a guy with a fascinating story and strong opinions and, as the President might say, a really good brain. Another episode I really liked is with m and named Bill Browder. Now you may not have heard of him, but his life has really been right out of a spy novel. He was once the biggest foreign investor in Russia until he was kicked out of the country and then his young lawyer was killed. He has a fascinating, scary perspective on Vladimir Putin and the new Russia. And coming soon I'm really excited about this, My co host Brian Goldsmith and I will be interviewing Tony Robbins, the great entrepreneur and leadership coach to c e o s and presidents. I can't wait for his perspective on Donald Trump's particular style of leadership. So to all the newbies, please let us know what you think. Just email us at comments at Current podcast dot com or leave us a voicemail. We love getting those at nine to nine, two to four, four, six, three seven. You can also reach out to me on social media. I'm at Katie Kurrik on Twitter and Instagram and Katie dot Kurrik on Chat. Few lots of social media platforms to keep up with. Anyway, without further delay, here's our show and thank you for listening. Hi Brian, Hi Katie. Well, as you know, because you're a real student of podcasts. Brian. Pod Save America is one of the hottest political podcasts in the country right now. It's basically four white dudes sitting around talking about the state of the country and bitching about Donald Trump. Is that a fair assessment. I think that's pretty fair. And they would also add that they're trying to figure out how to harness all this progressive anti Trump energy in a constructive direction. And they know politics like the back of their hands. I mean, these guys have a lot of experience because they're all alumni of the Obama administration. Correct, that's right. The three guys you spoke to all worked in the Obama white House. Jon Favreau was President Obama's head speech writer at a very young age. Tommy Vitour was President Obama's national security spokesman. And John Lovett is kind of the funny guy. He helped Obama with the White House correspondence dinners and he also previously worked as a speechwriter for Hillary Clinton. So they're not just commenting on politics, they actually they really know it. And Dan Peiffer sometimes participates as well. He was the White House Communications director and Senior advisor for Strategy and Communications. Wow, how do you fit that on his business card in the Obama administration? And John love It, by the way, is not the John love that you might remember if you're a certain age the one who said, yeah, that's the ticket on Saturday Night Live. And Jon Favreau is not the director of Iron Man either or the star of Chef. It's a different Jon Favreau. Anyway, there are a lot of fun They have a lot to say, and they're really trying to, as you said, harness the energy that has surfaced in the wake of the Donald Trump presidency. And uh, we had a very fun conversation about a lot of things. I quick Lee took over as the interviewer. Didn't take long because they said, don't you want to ask us any questions I got. I think they got tired of me or board with me pretty early on. I don't think so. I think everybody's just comfortable with you asking questions because you have a little more experience than they do. Anyway, Well, unfortunately, because of challenging technical issues, Brian, you couldn't participate in this conversation. I know you were listening, however, and we're going to be talking about it on the other side and pick apart some of the things that the hosts of this podcast had to say. So enough preamble, Let's get to my conversation with the hosts of Pod Save America, Jon Favreau, Tommy Vitour and John Lovett and Dan Fifer's here isn't he sorry? Let me do that again? Okay, I think we should leave this in where the hell is Dan? Who cares? Just kidding, just kidding. So you guys want to go first? Sure? Sure? So. Um We'll start with Trump's burgeoning relationship with the news media. Last week, the big news was Trump tweeting, the fake news media is not my enemy. It is the enemy of the American people. My question to you is, how dangerous do you think it is for Trump to uh to cast the media is the enemy American people? Or do you think it's dangerous? I thought you were gonna say, how dangerous are you? Katie? Correct? Very dangerous. In fact, my nickname is Katie Danger. No. Um, I think it is incredibly dangerous. Um. I think we've seen him go down this road, but I think it was a brought to a new level with that recent tweet. Um, it's gotten sort of progressively worse in terms of his relationship with the press. Clearly he's trying to delegitimize the press, just as he's trying to delegitimize the judiciary and the entire electoral process, you know, these democratic institutions, because it gives him more credibility. It makes it harder for people to take criticism of his policies or what he's doing seriously, at least a certain portion of the population. So I find it really depressing, dispiriting, And I think the press is still trying to figure out the media writ large how to handle And when you talk about the media writ large, of course you're talking about very bifurcated media organizations because you have the conservative press on one side and a more progressive press, and you know, I think there are fewer and fewer that can be considered sort of straddling both worlds. So I think people are scratching their heads, saying, how do we deal with this as news organizations? How do we regain the trust if you will, Because one thing he said that was accurate in his press conference is the approval rating for the media is lower than the approval rating for Congress. And I think, how do you handle a problem like the old Trump to quote, you know, the sound of music EXTETI revent van Trop von Trapp or whatever. So I think I don't know what The solution is, I think that the media has to resist getting sucked into these personal battles and has and has to try as much as it can to really focus on the policy positions he's taken and some of the things that he needs to be held accountable for, the relationship with Russia and what that means, and get to the bottom of that. I don't think investigative reporting has ever been so important as it is now. And I think that, you know, they need to spend less time focused on his tweets and his style and more time focused on the substance of his policies. What do you guys think? Yeah, no, I think that's right. I mean, I think you see this sort of challenge, which is when Trump says something like, you know, the media is the enemy. There's nothing that a lot of the press corps likes to do more than kind of naval gaze and discuss their own relevance and role. But yet at the same time, it is important to figure out what you do and how you cover a president who says these things about the press. So I guess the question would be, you know, how do you respond and hold the line against the president who declares the media the enemy, while at the same time not letting it distract from the importance of that kind of investigative role, policy role, substantive role. Well, I think yeah, And I also, you know, I was thinking it's a great time to do a documentary on the role of the media in in a democracy and go to a country where there isn't a free press and what that's like and remind people of some of the basic principles that this country was founded on. And I think, to your point, too much naval gazing starts to feel like too much naval gazing. So how do you also deal with all this fake news? You know, during the campaign, I have very well educated friends sending me articles did you see this? And I would be like, where did you see that? This is complete bullshit? And they, my friends would be like, oh, it's all over the internet. So I think that that the technology has moved faster than sort of our ability to consume it with some kind of uh discernment. And I think, you know, maybe news organizations need to get together so that consumers nook can know what a legitimate news organization is that adheres to certain principles and practices, you know, almost like a good housekeeping seal of approval, so when they read something, they can appreciate and understand that this has been you know, double source that it's been edited. Now. Of course, the problem is fewer and fewer outlets do that now because of the demand for speed is superseded the demand for accuracy. So, I mean, I think there are all sorts of issues entailed in this conversation. Yeah, And another complicating factor is the blurring line between fake news and partisan media because you have, you know, the former CEO of Bright Bart sitting in the most powerful office, uh in the White House right now, and they're sort of this his hand picked uh go to news outlet who you know, they had the only seat reserved in the front row at the first press conference. I'm wondering, how can a press corps work with a White House when they're going to their favorite news sources and there's this clear parts in slant of the press core that's that's growing. It's not getting more objective. I think it's getting actively less objective through these skype interviews and the other things they're doing. No, I agree, and uh, I think that the media just has to continue to stay on top of these stories. I think part of the problem is that there was always this fine line between access and accountability. You know, you do a tough interview with a political leader, president, a cabinet member, and this happened to me in my career, and then you get black all by that White House because they don't like the hard questions you asked, they didn't like your quote unquote tone um And that happened to me several times in the past. And I think these networks still, you know, it's this this kind of struggle because they want the ratings that would come with an interview with high ranking official or even the president. But the minute that you really come down on that president, which is hard to imagine not doing in the current administration, you will never have access again. So I think people need to realize these news outlets that they're probably going to have to give up access because already I think, uh, the administration recognizes um publications and networks and whatever. Who are who are going to be predisposed to be easier on administration officials, right, I mean what you think of you know, there's like this, there's this half hour in the morning, you know, network news shows that is hard news, and I feel like at a certain points of time that that half hour has been longer. It's been forty five minutes or an hour. If you watch CBS this morning, it's a little longer morning. What your take is on sort of watching that block shrink over time, or the sort of sensational or commercialization of tabolization of some of these morning news look at Tommy asking you know it's interesting, Well, um, you know, I think about that a lot. I think about that a lot, because, um, it has shrunk significantly, and I think, uh, you know, the time that is allotted to really serious, important issues has gotten less and less. I think part of it is, you know, with a shrinking audience, you need to appeal to a mass audience. So there's fear I think that you're going to turn people off by doing too much hard news. I think Good Morning America started sort of being lighter, and then I think the Today Show sort of followed suit. I think the Today Show has self corrected to a certain degree. But um, you know, it's tricky, isn't it, because you know, it's sort of some of the same things that these these companies are dealing with. You know, whether it's under arm or L. L Bean or Nordstrum's. Once you get politicized at all, you turn off a big a segment of the population, right And it's it's tricky, I think, But if I were, you know, in charge, I would certainly devote more time two big issues and they don't. It doesn't have to all be politics, you know, it could be explaining NAFTON talking about the controversy of the wall. I had dinner. I went to a dinner this weekend and the Mexican ambassador to the U N was kind of talking to us about the wall and how humiliating that was for Mexicans, and about the fact that many fewer Mexicans are coming to the United States because of NAFTA, because it has been so important to the Mexican economy, that many people are staying in Mexico where they can find good jobs. Things like that. I think that we get so sort of caught up in the superficialities of who did what, who said what, the outrageous behavior, the crazy tweet, that we don't really dig into these issues that I think educate uh and help illuminate some of the big, big policy challenges that we're facing in this country. Um, whether or not they would, you know, abandon a morning show in droves if that kind of thing happened, I'm not sure, but I would like to see much more of it. Frankly, Um, do you have a question for us the first five? I have so many questions for you guys. First of all, I know that part of your mission in doing Pod Save America and Crooked Media is to encourage activism. And I'm curious. I read a piece in the Times this weekend that said, as liberals and progressives become more politically active and kind of stand up against some of the policies that are being enacted by this administration, moderate Republicans are being pushed closer to Trump because again, this this divide is so intense and the rhetoric is so harsh on both sides. And I'm curious, do you think we're forever going to be a polarized nation, a polarized media. Is there any way to cross this divide at all? John, I'll say, I'll ask you first, and I'd love for the other guys to weigh in. Yeah, we we were just talking about that article. We're not fans. I'm being very restrained. But I hate that article with the fire of a thousand and not because the question you're asking isn't important, right, Like I think the question about this polarization is really important. But that article was a bunch of garbage because it conflates a bunch of different things, like is activism protests and Hollywood liberals? Are they alienating Trump voters by the way? You know, First of all, I can't even I can't. The article is so outrageous because it asked these Trump people like, you know what, I used to like Meryl Streep, and now I don't even know if I can go to the movies. Shut up? And then all and then also it's kind being like, you know, I might have supported a Democrat, but then I saw a mean tweet about Donald Trump, and now I don't know what to think anymore. I think I think there's a lot. I think that sometimes you see these that that First of all, I think that there are people who answer these questions in a way that they think pundits want them to answer them, and they're not speaking to their actual feelings about like what the actual way in which they make decisions about politics are. They're they're asked a question, are liberals alienating you? And then the answer is very easy to say, yes, I don't know, I rambling. What about the pupil that showed what moderate republicans think Donald Trump is doing a good job. Are you surprised by that? Well? So I wasn't, because, um, since those since they they may call themselves moderate Republicans, but the idea as republicans and so if your your party i D. Carries more of a weight than whether you identify as moderate, liberal or conservative. Right. So in that same pole, independence gave him a thirty five percent approval rating and disapproval rating. Right, So they sort of they kind of they shaded it to fit the narrative of the story. The other thing is, you know, the two people are the three people that they interviewed for that story. Um. One of them had been in the New York Times before, UM interviewed by the same reporter wearing make America Great Again hat. And then one of them said that, you know, said that she was more scared of Democrats than Islamic terrorists. So these are not like persuadable republicans, right, No, But your larger point, the question about polarization is a good one and a right one. I think the what that article does is it sort of conflates what this is what a lot of analysis has been doing these days, Trump fans with Trump voters, and I think those those two groups are different, right the Trump fans, which I think they interviewed a few Trump fans in that piece, and not just Trump voters, reluctant Trump voters. Um, they are getting their news from Fox and Breitbart and all these very conservative media sources and sometimes fake news sources and trying to pierce their bubble right and trying to persuade them why Trump isn't good for the country, or Trump is lying, or Trump is doing X. I think that is extraordinarily difficult, and that is a huge problem that we have to deal with. And I'm not sure how we deal with that because it's hard to reach people like that who are getting all this news like that. We're going to take a quick break to hear some messages from our sponsors and to ask for some messages from you. Will be right back with more from the Pots Save America team. What is cricket media? What is your goal? Is it sort of a Fox News on the left, it's not. I mean, it's weird because I don't want to say that it's Fox News on the left, but I think it is a progress. We want to be a progressive media company. Um that sort of inspires activism, right, And so I think that there is especially there's a younger generation out there right now, and there is a gap between their enthusiasm and their engagement. So we have a lot of young people who are who are really they want to do something, they want to get involved, but they don't know how and they haven't been involved in politics before, and we want to sort of bring that's the start. Yeah, And one big difference too is that I think we're trying our best to kind of like have like an honest conversation. And look, we have a very strong point of view. You know, we are obviously come from we are Democrats, but you know we're not. We're trying to do our best to say what we think, how we feel, being honest about that, and I don't think that's true. Just getting back to your initial question, I mean, I think there's certainly the case during the election that there was a lot of people this this show included where the tone was Donald Trump is an idiot. If you vote for Donald Trump, you're an idiot. And that came through loud and clear to a lot of people. Uh, We've done a lot of soul searching on that, and I think that was unhelpful to say the least. Um. I think it's your god given right as an American citizen to say whatever the hell you want about any elected official in in the language that you feel is most appropriate. That said, I don't think we're going to persuade people unless we're being a little more thoughtful about how we talked about him. Sometimes. I think this is true for liberals, and I think it's true for politicians too. It's never a good idea to play sociologist when you're talking about voters, right because when you talk about like people feeling this divide or feeling that they're like put upon by you know, Clinton supporters or the elites or stuff like that, it's it's people. We often talk about people like they're just like we're like anthropologists studying an ancient culture, like like, what are the white working class voters think borough with a pair of innocular and like look and politicians and the like. Obama has done that a few times when he did the guns and religions comment, like Hillary Clinton did that with deplorables, like it is never a good idea to talk about voters. Well, isn't that part of the problem, you guys. I interviewed Doors Current's Goodwin after the election and on this podcast, and she basically said, and I think Brian Stevenson talks about this a lot as well, being proximate, and part of it is geographical. I mean that we have these these rural and exurban voters often times, and people in these big cities coastal cities have very little interaction with people. I was having dinner with my husband on Friday night and we were sitting next to a very nice couple from Memphis, and they recognized me despite the fact I had no makeup on it. It looked really scary, and so we started chatting and this guy we were talking about Trump, of course, because you can't go anywhere without you know, there's no place that is safe. There's no Trump free zone these days. And he basically said, you know, I voted for Trump, and I was screaming at him on the television saying please shut up. He and I said, but do you do you still support him? He said, yeah, he said, I have a family furniture business. The Chinese, the Asians are are killing American manufacturing when it comes to furniture. The time it takes to build a new factory in this country is crazy. There are too many regulations. We want the best for our employees, and we really hope that he's going to be more hospitable to small businesses. And you know, uh, my husband who's in finance, basically says, you know, Donald Trump could do a lot that's good for the economy. Would you can see that there are some positive things that he could do and maybe some some corrections from over regulation that might have been put in place during the Obama administration. Yeah, I think there's plenty of positive things he could do. I mean, look, what's interesting about that conversation with the guy is that I think where we should be opposing Donald Trump or debating Donald Trump is on those issues, right, because I could make a case that um Obama's policies or liberal Democratic policies would do a better job of helping small businesses and bringing manufacturing back or educating people for the next generation of high tech manufacturing, right, And so I think getting back to those I think those arguments are probably the best way to actually persuade people and not um, oh my god, did you see his tweet? He's awful and terrible, and that's it, because I think, I think the bigger gap, but the bigger bubble here is between people who are super engaged with the media and consume media every day, every minute of the day. And that goes for people on the left and people on the right, and then many many more Americans who are just very casual observers of the media and casual consumers of the media, and they are not paying as close attention to a lot of these debates as we are, and therefore, when they aren't as outraged about everything as Donald Trump does as we are, we're often like, well, aren't you paying attention? And it's like, well, no, people are busy, They're leading busy lives, and they don't want to spend every five seconds trying to like correct Donald Trump's And aren't a lot of these arguments or discussions very nuanced and complicated. You know, not everybody is reading the Economists, where the whole issue was on globalization or automation, and you know, they're there. I think one of the problems and you all can certainly respond to this, uh, is I think President Obama had a hard time communicating in simple terms what his policies would do. And you've heard this before. He was often sort of professorial and to um, almost too sophisticated, and the way he expressed himself. And I think, of course you have the polar opposite in Donald Trump, uh you know, in terms of how simplistic he is in and explaining his positions. So how do you get even those two arguments out there and discussed in in an intelligent way? Yeah, I mean I think so. I think there's sort of there's two pieces to that. There's communicating the policies, and then there's whether or not these policies, it's consensus around economic policy has been accepted. Because what's interesting about what you're saying about this person you met at the restaurants, Actually, you know Tommy and John Hay roll their eyes. But it's actually similar to the kind of thing my dad says, you had a factory, um, and you know, you know they see the eyes of your dad. Like I remever mad that you accused me of rolling my been sitting right here, looking straight ahead, Katy. I want you to know they've been great, and I was wrong, um, but but what I was gonna say is that, you know, I feel like there's been this like you know, especially you know, Trump's actually adopted some of this Paul Ryan language around taxes and regulation. And there has been a really big divide, divisive debate in Washington for a long time on taxes and regulation. But what Trump came in on was was actually kind of breaking up a consensus around things like immigration and trade that it turns out we're incredibly resonant issues with people. And I think if there's one good thing that's coming out of what Trump is doing is, first of all, I think he's you know, uh uh, turning over a bunch of dogmas on the right. But also I think he's forcing Democrats to confront a lot of these policies, which you know, I think Barack Obama Democrats generally have talked a lot about communications failure, and I think that's true. But I think what the Bernie Sanders rise, what Trump's rise is showing is there's actually bigger policy questions that we maybe need to answer in a different way. What are the Democrats going to do to get their mojo back? Guys. I mean, I think it's going to start. I think it's it has to start from the grassroots. I think it's starting in a lot of these protests. I think it's starting with a lot of these town halls. Like I do not think it starts in Washington with a lot of the leaders we have there. I think already a lot of the Democrats in Washington are playing catch up to what's going on around the country. And that's a good thing because I think if we're going to reinvent the party, reinventing it from outside of Washington is better than doing it from inside Washington. And also that's actually I think ultimately what bothered me about that article, your reference to bring it back, which is, look, Hollywood, people, you know, sounding off about love Trump's hay, Like, I think that that can be useless. But to conflate that with an incredibly exciting and inspiring moment of activism and protests and people are going town halls, I think that's wrong. And I think that's um uh, too broad a brush, you know, not not a not a precise enough tool. Because I think that this activism um whether or not there are some protesters who go too far and say things that maybe bother some people on the whole has been a few one of the only things that has successfully taken the microphone away from Donald Trump. It is funny you have like on the on the on the national level, you have Democrats with like simplistic slogans like love Trump's hate, and then at these town halls you have average voters with incredib with an incredibly sophisticated understanding of the Affordable Care Act, asking their congressman questions about lifetime limits and caps and stuff like that. And it's it's really inspiring to see that. And it's also a lesson that, you know, people know a lot more than just the people are more than the simplistics. You know, I remember watching those town halls after that summer when President Obama first introduced the Affordable Care Act, and you know, I think it was a very organized effort to protest that this this program. Remember, and people would be like on page thirty eight paragraph to you state, so I think that are are people at those town halls following that model that we saw early on in the Obama presidency. You think so far, Yeah, I mean it's so far. It looks like there's a very active, very well organized, very well educated, respectful campaign to go to these town halls to demand the members of Congress hold them and to ask them very specific questions, both about the Affordable Care Act but also sort of the Russia scandal and other things going on. So it seems like that playbook is being followed, although I do think these town halls have gotten shy of being quite as intense or caustic as maybe the tea party ones were back in the day, But that was because those people legitimately thought that they were going to be death panels and things that were live. Well, I remembered watching those and thinking how woefully uneducated the members of Congress were when they faced that their constituents. It was shocking to me, shocking, was it to you know? Look, we you know, look, approval rating of Congress amongst the American people as somewhere around ten percent. Approval rating of Congress among people who have worked dit Congress is about zero percent. Think, you know, we know that, we know these people, and it's the worst. The closer you get some of them lovely, that's so depressing. But what's what's so okay? So we got we have the educated people at town hall meetings to have people protesting, So what is this realistically going to accomplish? I read David Brooks a couple of days ago and he said, basically, there's nothing that really can be done for the next four years. I mean, what do you think? What what what is the road forward? In your view for people who opposed Donald Trump? The mid terms don't look super promising. No, I would just I think that the mid terms do. I think there's democracy twenty four seats to take the House back. I think there were something like thirty seats where Hillary Clinton beat Donald Trump in a district or a Republican is sitting in the district right now. So I think that's the first target. And um, but the Senate. Senate looks pretty doobiouse, sid It's tough. I don't think we can win to Senate back because I think you can pick off at best, you can pick off Dean Heller and Nevada and Jeff Flake in Arizona at best, and then you're still a couple of year basically got a tide Senate at that point. Decrats it seems like, yeah, yeah, the best case scenario is a tide Senate and then the Democrats taken the House back. But if the Democrats take the House back, then they have subpoena power, then they can investigate, Then they can legislatively stop a lot of Donald Trump's domestic policies. So it would be huge. And when I say hold Trump accountable, I mean impeachment, but I don't say it, well let's go there. I mean I think you could. I don't think it's a good idea to like throw around the word impeachment unless there's an ippeachable offense that you are. I don't know that we know yet, but I don't. I do think no one should discount how unbelievably distracting these ongoing investigations are going to be. I mean, you know, depending on who you read, there are multiple FBI investigations going on on a variety of Trump associates or aids or what have you. And this White House is going to be more bogged down than they could ever possibly imagine. And it's just begun and possibly for good reason. I mean, it might not just be a distraction, very seemingly for good reason. In all seriousness. I think holding them accountable means investigating, means means actual hearings, means doing the job that people like Jason Chafitz and Paul Ryan refused to do. Um Whether or not there's grounds for removing Donald Trump, I don't think we can say it. Well, what do you think the Democrats should do in Congress? The people you hold in such high regard? Should they do what what to Trump? What the GOP did to Barack Obama? I mean, I think they should oppose every policy they disagree with, which seems to be many, you know, I mean I don't think he has put for like if if if the Paul Ryan Repeal and Replaced plan, which basically just like takes Medicaid and healthcare subsidies away from millions of people, is the plan that absolutely they should oppose it. You know. I think that every time a plan comes up for a proposal, or a policy comes up, Democrats should decide, you know, would you support it on the merits right? And it doesn't seem should they pick their battles? In other words, I mean, should they put up a fight against Neil Gorsts Because if they if they really do that, it's going to pretty much hand Donald Trump a big, fat victory, is it not. I think he's going to get gorset John regardless because he's got the votes. But I do think, look, I think hearings are important for Gorsets, which is what Marck Garland didn't get. And I think let's hear him out, Let's ask him really tough questions, and if it seems like he's a judge that's not in the mainstream, which we believe Marrick Garland was, then vote against us. And if you do think he's in the mainstream, then vote for in the main stream. I mean, like that's that's whether or not Democrats should vote to confirm him is shouldn't. It will really ultimately have nothing to do with whether or not he's in the mainstream. They've already made up their minds and it's totally a political decision. The thing I would say about that political decision that's important to me is we need to give people a reason to vote for Democrats. And there's a lot of people out there that want to see that Democrats are fighting, and the fact that gors will go will get on no matter what is almost beside the point, like showing that we're willing to fight is going to get people excited about sending more Democrats to the House and to the Senate. Let's talk about Hillary Clinton, if we could, John, I'm just curious, you know. I heard so many people say if the Hillary we saw in the concession speech would have surfaced more during the course of the campaign, it might have turned out differently. Does that call you when people make that observation, What do you think of it? I think people who were saying that if only the Hillary that showed up after she lost were around, she would have won. They said that, um after her two eight defeat. I think they said that again again this time. I think that there is some truth to it. Um. I think that there's some truth to the fact that there's some kind of a a political instinct that she has and that the people around her have over the years that has nothing to do with an individual team. Because it repeats over and over again that there's a kind of um control that ultimately is self defeating. And I think that's absolutely true. So was that what do you think what that's what went wrong? She was too cautious and controlling or the campaign itself that sort of I said that sounded over personalized, but that that the sort of ethos of the campaign was too cautious and controlling. You mentioned that about the concession speech. People have said that about They said that about John Kerry after his concession speech. They said it about Mitt Romney after his concession speech. They said it about Al Gore after his concessions. They said about Son McCain, they said about John McCain. There are certain brand of politicians who are too cautious during a campaign and it is not in there, and are less cautious after the campaign's over. And that is because they run with an overwhelming fear of losing, and that fear of losing makes them more cautious and calculated sometimes. My sister was running for Lieutenant governor of Virginia with Mark Warner when she was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer and she was a real rising star in the Democratic Party and a lot of people said she was going to be the first female government governor, and unfortunately, tragically she passed away. But she told me when she was running first State Senate, etcetera. She said, when you run for office, you have to be willing to lose. And I think What she meant is it sounds so simple, is that you have to be true to yourself and to your core values and principles and let the chips fall where they may. It's it's absolutely right, It's so it is. It does sound simple, but it is incredibly hard and a lot of people don't do that. Yeah, I mean, is this this people? It's like there's so many advisors and there's so many polls, and you know, but ultimately, people don't make a decision based on like how you met ten different metrics. You have to get them to vote for you. You as a person have to get someone else to vote for you. And look, I think ultimately it's actually probably not that helpful to worry about what Hillary Clinton's individual liabilities were when we need to figure out who next person is and how they're gonna win. Um. And the truth is everything mattered in this campaign. You know, we lost by a hundred thousand votes across three states. Comy mattered. Uh, the email matter, that, the hacks matter, the leaks, everything mattered. Um, But uh, well, what about but about it? A coherent message to blue collar Democrats? I know you you all have said that there was that message but somehow it just didn't come through, and saying go to my website just doesn't cut it. Fellas. I mean, look, I think that's fair, and I do think that it's worth it's worth examining this campaign, because you know, I don't want us to over learn problems that may or may not have been specific to Hillary Clinton and her campaign and apply them too broadly to Democrats and overthink sort of needing to segment the population the United States and reach out to X, Y or Z voter. That said, I think the bigger problem we all made was the lesson of Bernie Sanders and of Donald Trump, was that every voters across the country were screaming, we are sick and tired of washing and then we handed them someone that they've been seeing in Washington for thirty years nominee, and that was just summarily rejected on a million questions that are probably values based. Do you think Bernie Sanders would have beaten Donald Trump? Yeah, it's the look. Yes, I think My position is yes. My position is I say yes, but I hate count of factuals because it's so like evidence free. But I have I have this feeling now that you would have yeah, And look, we talked about this before, like and this actually goes back again to that article, like liberals aren't helping Trump, but liberals do need to think very carefully about the language we use and the way we talk to people that are really suffering. And I think that that was a failure not of the Hillary Clint campaign, but of democratic politics generally. But I think I think you risk it at perpetuating that because I think there's something patronizing and dismissive about some of the approaches that are being taken by progressives in fighting Donald Trump that you have to be aware of and um, you know, just in some ways stay away from where it's almost class warfare. I think that we're seeing, do you guys. Yeah, I mean we sell patronizing and dismissive by the pound here on brand. Look, you're you're absolutely right. A good message is inclusive and disciplined and proactive and positive and focused on the future, and it's a lot easier and more fun to criticize the dust about the day. Also, we've we've noticed, like small things, We've talked about this where democrats often say, you know, the working class feels left behind by the last twenty years of inequality and blah blah blah. And it's like, well, they don't feel left behind. They have been left behind, you know. But it's like it's little comments like that that are more like I said, they're more it's analyzing people as opposed to advocating for people anthropological approach you refer to. And I think and I think one thing Bernie Sanders does really well is he advocates for people in a real simple way. And it's not white and and it it's ideology aside here, right, It is just it is speaking to people's real frustrations and anxiety. And it's also, by the way, it's not being too smart for own good you know, complicated uh policies that we're trying to sell. You know, people want good health care, you know, they want simple, elegant solutions to problems that they can understand. And I think a lot of sort of democratic insidery. The conversation got very complicated. It got very much like like a I don't know, like a policy. Yes, Like I remember, you know, there was all that talk during the campaign, like we've got so many more pages of white papers in that dumb guy Donald Trump It's like if I ever hear anyone brag about the length of white paper again, I'm gonna lose it. You know, one thing that, like you mentioned earlier, that people did call Obama aloof or you know, professorial and all these things. The one thing that I always noticed about him because I spent a year with him in Iowa, watching a bit literally in back yards and every Iowa cliche you can imagine, I will spout. But like, the thing that was true at him and about the first Lady was that it was more recent that they were paying off student loans than that they had become famous politicians. And like that that reality allowed them to connect with people in a way that was authentic and that is perishable, right, because you spend long enough in Washington being told you're great and everything is brilliant, and things get paid for by so and so a bistro b or wherever you're going for lunch, like you you get lost great stake freaks there? What of that was? So? So what happens when when Donald Trump doesn't or do you think he will bring manufacturing back? I mean, first of all, only of the jobs lost in manufacturing between two thousand and two thousand and ten were lost to trade. The rest were lost to automation. I read an interesting piece today that said Bill Gates wants to start taxing companies to slow, you know, for their use of robotics, to sort of slow the progression this transfer. Mean, we're witnessing from an industrial to a technological society. I mean a do you think he's going to bring manufacturing back and be what happens if he doesn't? Go? Yeah? I mean, look, the most frustrating part of Donald Trump's you know, vision that he's selling people is that it's largely fiction. Right is that that that a lot of that most manufacturing jobs aren't coming back right now. That's something that you know, Bill Clinton was saying back in when he was running for president. He was honest with people about that. Barack Obama used to be honest with people about that. Now that's not There are companies that are you know, we saw this over the last eight years. There's a trend towards insourcing where a lot of these companies are moving production back to America. So that's good, but it's still a tiny, like he said, is a tiny fraction of the jobs that we've lost The largest challenge we have as a country that we have to talk about is and Obama was telling us this when he was on the podcast too, is automation, right, Like, what are we going to do? Talk about that? During the campaign. It infuriated me. You know, well one they should have too. It's a complicated issues that you know. I don't think anybody knows the answer. That's why I think they. I think no one knowing the answer where the next generation of job is going to come from is left and opening for someone like Trump and other to lie about it. Yeah. I mean, look, if if the solutions of the center left and the center right are not going to answer the problems are regular people, it's going to open the door to monsters. But has I would just say we we all should be rooting for Donald trump success because it's the biggest challenge we're gonna face. It's going to get worse, It's gonna get harder. I hope to god he can figure out a way to bring back Jack. Are you really reading for Donald Trump's success? I am the on the pot of policy level. But the reason I don't have a lot of the reason I don't have any but the reason I don't have a lot of hope that he's really going to work on this and make progress. Is that he filed for re election five hours after he was sworn in, and this weekend you hold a campaign rally, and the guy loves the crowds and the big promises in the Blusster and Bravado, and we have not seen him spend a lot of time at the White House getting to work doing stuff. And yes, he can make press releases and repackage announcements from companies that had already pledged to create some sort of jobs here in the United States, but like it's it's governing by press release. There's not a dedicated, thoughtful process in places actually, and even that is kind of a band aid, although he is very very good at making hay over small accomplishments like the car jobs created that and that was actually an incredibly effective part of his pitch. So so he's got this, he's got this narrative. He's writing about how he's renegotiating these little things and he's going to renegotiate the deals. Right, that's not gonna solve America's job problem. Then he then, you know, they go back and forth you know, some days they're talking about some trillion dollar infrastructure project. The next day you hear from the Hill that that's not possible. Um, you know, that's actually something that could make a difference. Of course, these are the same Republicans who fought tooth and nail against a democratic stimulus measure when the president came in and when we were in crisis. Look at the other policy is, you know, tariffs and like starting trade wars, which is is certainly not going to solve the issue because that's just going to raise prices on poor and working class people, right It's that's so that's that's not an answer either. So his answers to the problem of manufacturing, which is seems to be like threatening individual companies, um, promising an infrastructure bill that's that hasn't materialized yet, and thrown up tariffs are not you know, policy wise, are not great solutions. And and it's one more point to that that right now the economy is growing and adding jobs. That won't necessarily be true over the next four years. You know, he is sort of writing a long trend of job growth which he can say, oh, look, a new factory here, a new factory there, um. But at a certain point, you know, it's by the taking credit for the stock market is a dangerous game, buddy. It goes up and it goes down. Why we didn't do it. But let me ask you guys about the President Obama's relationship with President Trump. Do they talk? I mean, you guys probably know this, do I can't imagine President Obama being like, Yo, Donald, let's talk, given some of the stuff that Trump has been saying in recent days about you know, he inherited a real mess, blah blah blah. Right, I think President Lama is better at brushing that off off than his hack aids who are on the phone right now are, you know. And I think he can sort of see through that and try to have a constructive relationship because they you know, when they're alone in the Oval office, like nobody's tweeting make America great again. You know, it's a conversation about how hard the job is going to be. And I think he's tried to have a constructive conversation with him about the realities of a hardness. Is the things he thinks he should protect and preserve, you know, the political traps um, the challenges of building a good team. So I think he really tried to help him in a constructive way. He hasn't really popped off in response to any of the provocations you mentioned. Well, let me ask you though, at some point, does he become a voice of those who are opposing Donald Trump? And is that how he's Is that how he becomes an effective former president? I mean, I think on on big issues he may. I think that it's his belief, and it's been his belief long before Trump, that the most important thing he can do is sort of inspire the next generation of voices to go out and lead, right, because he knows that he's not going to run for office again. He's not going to be president again. But we do need leaders who aren't afraid to stand up and speak out and and and take up the fight. Okay, that's a perfect segue to my next question. Sure sighting, who are this is going very seamlessly, isn't it? You guys, you're very good at this. That's why who are the future stars of the Democratic Party and really for maybe a more moderate Republican Party as well, if that exists. So there's Tommy, there's John. I'm here, um, So we'll start there. I think that's an important group, But beyond that, I'm actually not sure. I don't really follow politics. Kla Harris out in California has got the maybe the best bench for the party period. Garcetiis um devenue so and then Jason Candor candor friend of the Pod Jason Cander. Is he the one that did the great ad where he put together the automatic weapon blindfold blindfold? Yeah, and he lost, but he's still a very strong and h much followed progressive voice, right yeah, yeah, and he did so much better in that race, uh than he had any right to do. He's a card carrying badass. But we also know obviously Elizabeth Warren is like cards I think you have, you just had to apply. Anybody can get one. It's it's like, actually just like it's a scam. Really all right? Who else? Who else do you see? Is um? And and what about We'll go ahead and tell me and then I have a follow up. Go ahead? Who else? Who else do we say? I like Pete Boudagedge, the mayor of South Bend, Indiana. What about Michael Bennett? Love Michael Bennett. I remember seeing him at a fundraiser once and I was traveling with with Obama, and I wasn't paying attention because it was a long day, and I just heard this speech and like, who's delivering that speech in there? And it was Michael Bennett. The weird thing is, you know, you start to you think of these politicians as like people who are adults in your senior and then all of a sudden, there's this generation of leaders like Jason Kander or like Seth Molton, who's a member of Congress side of Massachusetts. Yeah, who are like you know, third five, the next generation of leaders that are that are really really impressed. What about Corey Booker and Andrew Cuomo? Do you see them running in Booker I could see, Yeah, I don't know if Cuomo, I feel like he's got a lot of baggage. Who doesn't Who doesn't, Katie, We don't like to criticize people until after they've been on the podcast, so you're kind of getting us in trouble. I basically sounded like an uninformed voter there. What about someone outside the political realm? You know, we've seen what Donald Trump businessman can get elected. What about someone like Howard Schultz? And I know people sort of jokingly suggested somebody like Tom Hanks. I mean, do you see this opening the door to a new breed of you know, the non politician running for president. I would say that we should probably not try to learn too many lessons like that from Donald Trump, who is I think a unique figure. Um, but I think the more of the merrier. I mean, if there are people who are smart and charismatic and have good ideas and are expert, I mean, I don't know about famous actors, um, but about Mark Cuban. I think it was say Zuckerberg. Oh well, what about either of them? Actually, let's discuss both of them. Let's start with Mark Cuban. He appeared at that All Star Celebrity game in New Orleans on Saturday in a jersey emblazon with number forty six. I think Donald Trump then tweeted that he wasn't smart enough, or has in recent days, Mark Cuban isn't smart enough to be president. I mean, honestly, you guys cannot make this ship up? Can you might have to say that on a podcast explicit rating? Okay today? But yeah, I mean I like, I like Cuban, just clearly Cuban gets under Trump's skin. So as long as Cubans out there doing that, I think that's great. And what about Zuckerberg, I mean, I just don't like. I think what we've all been hitting on this conversation is that authenticity has become coin in the realm, and I don't know that Zuckerberg seems to be approaching this as cautiously as humanly possible. Yeah, it's like Mark Zuckerberg seems like he's spent thirty years in Washington when he speaks the way for it is not six thousand word letters, it's you know, talking to people. Do you think he's charismatic enough? I mean, do you think he's charismatic enough? Because I think the thing is with Trump, you know, like him or not for whatever reason, his bravado and his bluster and his kind of unconventional way of speaking. Trump is charismatic and he is charming, and he is funny, and we ignore that at our peril. I've I've always felt that he has a great sense of humor when he brings up if you watch his rallies. Look, it's hard to put it beside because he's racist and despicable and he's lying all the time. But if that's not how that well, other than that, how is the play? But the but but but if you could put that aside, or if you didn't approach it with that sense of of who he is, Um, he's great. He's an entertaining guy that Raley brings up. A guy everybody's laugh. He's like, we know our people. Everybody it's he's it's he's a He's an entertainer. He's a showman and it works. Um seems like he's running the white House like an episode of The Apprentice to write, I mean, kind of encouraging people to compete and to I don't know, that's sort of what I've heard from people who are recovering this white House. Didn't he say it was an well oiled machine? Or what did he say? And but but it seems like, I mean, what do you guys hear about what's going on Pennsylvania Avenue exactly that I mean, I think that's his achilles heel is that competence in the ability to run is the biggest organization in the world, is what the job is, and he is shown no capacity to do that. He's put in a place a team that's over its head at best, if not constantly knifing each other. Um and I think that there will be repercussions. So we haven't seen them yet because nothing really bad has happened, but it will because the dangerous, dangerous place I heard. He doesn't really have a schedule. He sort of wanders around a lot. Reporters tell us that, you know, in years, many reporters wives to be spoken to, never ran into Barack Obama in the hallway and they'll just see Trump wandering down to lower press, or they'll walk into the press Secretary's office and he'll just be sitting there with the chief of staff watching able TV. And that's just it's not a good use of time. Well before we go, because I know you guys have given me more time than you schedule, which I really appreciate. I know you, I know you all are busy. But let's let's talk about with with crooked media. Are you trying to convert people to the cause? Are you just preaching to the choir? We want to do a lot of converting here. We want to do a lot of brainwashing. No, we do. We think like I would love this company to expand its audience right and to reach more people who are who might especially people who might not have been as engaged in politics as they want to be now, right, because there's a like you said, you can't escape Trump. Right, we are in a moment in our history now where more people are paying attention to politics and they have been quite some time. And for that new audience that's tuning in, you know that that's who we want to reach. And I think mostly they're younger too. Yeah, I think there's there's there's I think there's arming people with information and resources, and I think that's hopefully a role we can play. Um. I think that there's taking somebody from being less engaged and more engaged. And then I think there is also room for people who may not have heard a kind of I don't know. I mean, look, it sounds like Brandy, but like kind of a no bullshit conversation that maybe has a liberal perspective but might be accessible to somebody who isn't sure what their politics are, maybe thinks are Republican or maybe has been conservative in the past. But do you think this is going to translate to a higher voter turnout? Because I find that one of the most depressing aspects is the fact that so many people didn't vote or voted for, you know, through their vote away by voting for Gary Johnson. Although I saw Bill Well the other night and he said their voters were actually Trump voters. I'm not sure if that's so anyway, But do you think that that more people will get out and vote because of all the people protesting, I'd like to walk around and ask all of them if they voted. I think it's entirely incumbent upon the Democrats to put forward a candidate that inspires people and get some out there, because I think we did learn that demonizing someone, even when they deserve it, is not incentive to get people out, and we need to inspire them and get them to the polls. And Barack Obama did that incredibly well, and we need to find that next leader that can help you. And even before I think the single biggest challenge that Democrats have is taking this energy, this enthusiasm for protests, this fear and this anger and this anxiety and translating it into votes to win the House so that we can begin the process of actually having a government that holds these people accountable. Do you think there's any appetite for Hillary Clinton to run again. We've already started hearing rumblings about that, that she's positioning herself to to go for its Literally none, I would be shocked, if shocked, I would be more shocked than Trump when she would want to do that. I punched the staffer. I don't think that's I don't like. First of all, I can't believe that's real. I think that probably if this group of people are being honest, we'd say that we would be very much opposed to that because we need new people, We need a new way, somebody that can challenge Trump from the outside. So as fascinating as you three are, don't you want to ask me some questions about my podcast and why we're doing this, and YadA YadA YadA. Kati tell us about your podcast and why you're doing it. Well, thanks for asking John. You know, I found it would be really interesting to have these kinds of conversations. First of all, I'm able to express myself during a podcast in a way that I can't in any other venue. And I think and I think people are hungering for deeper, more kind of meaningful and spontaneous conversations, and I think that that is what a podcast affords and people seem to respond to it. I was buying bananas at this little neighborhood market the other day and this woman came up to me. She said, I can't believe it, and she had her phone. She said, look what I'm listening to. I was like, do do do Do Do Do doo. That's really weird. So it's fun. No, we we we enjoyed. The form of podcasting is it's a medium that lets you do a lot that others don't. Yeah, and it's into it and like I feel like, you know, I listen to podcasts and it feels like you're kind of sitting at the table with the people that are talking, so it's kind of a different relationship. I feel like we're having a slumper party. That's right. I am in I am in my pants. That doesn't have to do with the party. This is really really fun. I love talking to you all, and I think, you know, it's I don't know if you've found this to be so, but you can't really go anywhere. We're we're not talking about the state of the country and what's going on in Washington and President Trump and um, I find it still endlessly fascinating and why do you think that's the case? That that And I don't think it's just you know, people who love politics either, do you I think it's a mixture of fear and fascination. Yeah. I mean, look, you know, I the fact that this happened this way, I think is incredibly I think everybody's surprised and everybody still trying to figure it out. And I think certainly, you know, I've happened to think we're in the middle of a national crisis. And I think that that crisis is if there's one good thing coming out of it, is that people are talking to other and trying to figure it out and thinking about politics in new ways. And it's kind of you even see this with journalists. You see like people kind of getting back to first principles, you know, like what do I do, why do I care about it? What is important to me? I mean that's part of the reason we did this company, because the election of Donald Trump, I think, force us to confront what we cared about and what we if we cared about it enough. Do you think there's a risk that Democrats are just repeating Hillary's mistakes by attacking Donald Trump and not coming up with a clear and cohesive message for their own sort of mission. I think that could be a risk. I don't know if it's happening yet, but I think if we do not have a coherent vision to sell voters, um, then yeah, then we very well could repeat those mistakes. So I think it's important that we do that. And something we've talked about a lot here is that you know, I think that we that especially and this is the point that you're making about kind of talking just to ourselves. Um Uh. It can't just be about how bad Trump is and and it can't just be about how he insults our values are norms, that the way we think politics should sound vulgarantying all the us. It has to be about how Trump's policies will hurt you, right, how will actually affect your day to day life. And we need to make sure we're constantly talking not just about how we have the right values, how we care about freedom of the press, how we care about these institutions and norms, but why they matter and why they'll make your life better if you follow I alluded to this question earlier, and I don't think you all really answered it at what how long will it be? I guess I think we we veered off into a whole conversation about manufacturing. But how long will it take before people who think that Donald Trump voted for him because they believed he would make their lives demonstratively better? Uh? How long will it take before they say, Hey, you have to pay the piper, we voted for you and our lives aren't better. Or do you think that he'll take enough incremental steps and their lives will be sufficiently improved. I think the odds are that he will hurt them because they will not necessarily realize that the Affordable Care Act was benefiting them, or that certain tax policies will be changed that will overly benefit the wealthy. So I can't put a ball park time frame on this, because some of it is going to have to do with, you know, the the implementation of policy and the way people get their news about it. But I think that what he's going to do is going to cost him electorally. I genuinely do. I will say that elections help focus the mind. So I think when we get to eighteen, if there has not been any policy that helps working people out of this White House, I think people will respond accordingly at the polls. Yeah, I mean it's not a camp. You know, being president is in a campaign you actually have to do things. You can't just complain, you can't just wind, you can't just pick a target. People will actually see what happens in their world. And I know you aren't betting men, but do you think he's going to make it all four years? And maybe you are? I don't know, I don't know. You guys, Well enough we are out of the prediction business alright, because suck at it, because because I still think Hillary is gonna win. Well, that's a nice way to end this conversation. It's really fun talking to you guys. Can we do this? Can we do this again in six months? And super country journalism? What's happened to policy? And what's happened to the Democrats and the Republicans? For sure? Right, if one of us can get used our phone call of the day. All right, this was really fun. Thanks so much you guys. Thank you Brian. You were listening to our whole conversation, which went on a little longer. I think that they anticipated what did you think of some of the things they had to say? Well, I thought one thing was very smart, which is that they're now out of the prediction business. I think journalists can fall into that trap at their peril. And I thought, Katie, you made a really interesting point about where the media should go from here in the face of this unrelenting assault from both the right in general and Donald Trump in particular, which is less focused on tweets and style and more on facts and substance. And I think that is how the media responds. I mean, I have always thought that Fox News gets at half right with their tagline that the press should be fair but not balanced, that if one side is right on the facts and the other side is wrong, it is not biased for the media to take the side of the facts. And I think that's what the press should do now. I think what it might be an interesting idea, Brian, is that during a presidential press conference or even an interview with the surrogate, for Donald Trump to have someone in a control room where a fact checker can put on the screen immediately when a statement is made, if in fact it is true or false. I don't think you do the true, but you would do the false. For example, when Donald Trump claimed during his press conference that he won more electoral votes than anyone since Ronald Reagan. Peter Alexander fact checked that immediately. I'm sure he was looking on his phone and figuring out the numbers for all the presidents who had more electoral votes than Donald Trump. But if you had someone in a control room saying right away, this is in correct, these are the facts, what do you think, Brian. I think live real time fact checking is challenging because sometimes it takes a little while to dig up the facts. But if you can do it on something quickly like that, it would be very powerful. Like when Donald Trump said over the weekend that there was a terrorist attack last night in Sweden, which was totally wrong. Somebody could have fact checked that at the time. I mean, I remember watching that press conference when he said the thing you mentioned about the electoral margin and thinking, yeah, that's great. You know, he's gotten the biggest electoral margin of any president since Reagan except for George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and Barack Obama. So that would have been a good fact check at the time. Let's talk about what the Democrats are going to do moving forward. I think the hosts of pot Save America and the people behind a new company called Crooked Media, as you said earlier, Brian, are trying to harness this sort of wave of activism that we're seeing almost on a daily basis out in the streets on social media wherever. Where do you think that's at it and what do you think they can actually do to shape the narrative or how this activism is actually employed. Well, what's interesting if you look at history, often when one party moves to an ideological extreme, the other party follows suit. That is, they don't fill in the vacuum in the center and reach out to all those people who feel alienated by the ideological party in power. Instead, they kind of they're so angry and outraged, they move in the other direction and they rally their own base. And I think the Democrats are at risk of doing precisely that right now, seating the center. And I think the the major challenge for the Democrats moving forward is figuring out both how to rile up their base and how to reach people who abandon them in the last election. And what about the Republicans on Capitol Hill? So far, other than John McCain and Lindsey Graham, they seem to be supporting Donald Trump. At some point, do you think they're going to get to a place where they say, a, you know, we're not so jiggy with that. Yeah. I think that point would have to be when Trump's support drops below eighty five among members of his own party, because you've got to remember that most congress people are more concerned about primaries these days than they are about general elections. And then I think the water would be a little warmer for more Republicans to to wait in and join McCain and Graham and criticizing Trump. But Katie, you know, I wanted to ask you about this UH manifesto that Mark Zuckerberg wrote that's gotten a lot of attention saying that civil discourse depends on a strong press, that we should support the news industry. What was your reaction to that? Obviously, I am very much in favor of a free press, and I think Thomas Jefferson said, if you gave me a choice between a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I choose the latter or something I'm paraphrasing. We're not about my university, so we're not enemies the American people, Katie, No, I don't think we are. But you know, how do we convince the American people are a certain segment of the population that that's certainly not true. So it's a very challenging time for for the media, and uh, I think that it's smart for for us to band together and try to figure this out for the good of the country. I worry that we're headed toward the kind of bifurcated media future that you describe, in which I don't think we're headed. I think we're smack in the middle of it. Brian. Yeah, people don't even agree on the facts anymore. I mean people you know have said we used to agree on the facts and disagree on our views and opinions. Now we disagree on the facts themselves, and that makes it very hard for us to kind of come together to solve any problem. Well, here's the fact. We're out of time, Brian. But it's been fun doing a debriefing with you after chatting with the fellas from Pod Save America. And we'll see you next time. Everybody. Thanks so much for listening. Bye Brian, Bye Katie. Thanks to the lovely and talented Gianna Palmer for producing our show. To Jared O'Connell, who's also lovely and talented for mixing and engineering. Now, damn it, I'm gonna have to say everyone is lovely and talented, so are you, Ryan Connor for your engineering assistance in Los Angeles. Also thanks to our social media maven Alison Bresnik, who helps spread the word in such a creative way about our podcast, and to Emily Beana for her part and producing the show. Mark Phillips, thank you so much for our very catchy theme music. It's still in my head as always. Katie Kirk, Mitch Simil and I are the executive producers of this show, and remember you can always email us at comments at current podcast dot com. You can find me on social media too. I'm Katie Couric on Twitter, Instagram, Katie dot Kurric on Snapchat. Brian, you're on social media too, right, just Twitter at Goldsmith b you can join my tens of followers. People. Anyway, we're gonna ask you a big favor. I know we're not just saying this as a as a final thought on our podcast, but we really would love you all to rate and review us on iTunes. Brian, tell everyone why that's so important? Well, it really helps more people to become aware of the show. The algorithms on Apple take into account how many people rate and review each show the activity around it, and that helps to drive awareness across the tubes on the Internet. So we really do appreciate all of you not just telling us how much you like the show, but telling your friends and your family if you appreciate the show, spreading the word to them as well. Brian, that was really moving and a little desperate, but very matter for making the case for rating and reviewing. Anyway to subscribe as well, and thanks for listening. As always, we'll talk to you next time. Thanks