Rep. Katie Porter, Jeet Heer & Ben Schiller

the Time of Monsters, the Nation's GT here. Welcome to Fast Politics. GT Here. It's always good to be here. You're a fan favorite and I'm so delighted to have you here. I wanted to talk to you first about aliens.

They're real and they're mad. He would be very ironic if the end of the human species came a vote, because the Republican has decided to make a big stink about Chinese weather balloon that went off track, and this led Biden and Justin Trudeau to lons of war against space aliens, and they retaliated by just bring the planet that. I have to admit that's something I'm hoping for. But that would be a funny turn of events. I see

this as like a way it could go down. So I want to talk to you about the aliens and the space blends. No, I actually want to talk to you about what's really going on in life, which is and not even life politics, because we know that's really not life. Here we are, we are in this crazy period in American life, the run up to the twenty four election, which basically starts the day after the midterms are over. I don't know if you read Political Playbook

this morning. I did. Republicans are embracing authoritarianism like you

can't fucking believe. Discuss yeah, I know. I mean if you look at the true front runners are you know, Donald Trump, who's like calling for a firing squads against criminals and basically following the path of direct he in the Philippines, and Rhonda Santis, who's offering a kind of you know, while I'm the competent Trump put the fun and fascism, Yeah, really take books out of your libraries and smash teachers and make life very painful for LGBT people.

I mean, like obviously, yeah, I mean the two front runners are both offering a form of authoritarianism. Yeah, so, I mean, and then it's clear that's where the party wants. And it's interesting why the party elite has settled on the Santis, like they really seem to think he's their answer to Trump. And it's because they understandand that their base wants some sort of strong man who's very cruel and punishes the enemies, and they think that the Santis can offer that and also be a little bit more

stable or a little bit more pliable than Trump. Not a good situation, yeah, I mean, I just wrote a piece about this, that the Santis is really being covered as a normal Republican candidate when he's really not. Yeah, I know, there's all sorts of efforts to normalize him, and it's coming from both he has a lot of like what I would call the institution of Republicans and

the mainstream people National Review, Fox News. But also, and I think it's very crucial, a lot of centrist people who aren't wouldn't say they're Republicans, but they want that kind of what they see as a return to normality. So they want a Republican party they think they can work with, and they are also really whitewashing descentists, and I see that. I think you can see that a lot of the coverage of descentists in the mainstream press.

I'll just reference Pamela Paul We can talk about for a number of reasons, but he just had a before her latest terrible column in defense of J. K. Rowling, she had another terrible column. You know what liberals can learn from Rhonda Santis basically whitewashing his reputation. I think there's a you know, because people who have like a kind of really personal view of politics and see Trump has being bad because he's a vulgar criminal, all right,

and not because he ignores democracy, not because of his policies. Yeah, they're all settling on you know, Ronda Santis, and as I said, that doesn't extends well outside of the mainstream establishment. Republicans' is a real effort. I mean, honestly, I'm not I could work. I don't know, I don't I don't know if de Santis has the juice. I think that if you're really into meat, why would you take like a

veggie burger when you could get the real meat? You know, like Trump is out there, you know, calling for people to be executed by firing squad. Why would you? And you see this in the fact that like none of the so called challengers that Trump are willing to take him on like that. You ask like de Santis or Nicky Haley about Trump and they'll say, well, you know, like he was a great president and he's very badly

treated and I don't want to fight another Republican. And then you have Trump going like meat fall Ron to all of my Italian American friends, nothing but respect. And I understand the offensiveness of this, but it is also very funny. Yeah, no, no, I mean the man is very good and what he does when it comes to nicknames. He is bad and evil when it comes to everything else. Sure, yeah, but but the nicknames, I mean like the power dynamic, right, like and think about it in school. Who has the power?

It's the bully that can, like you know, impose nicknames on people. And who is like, you know, the second in command. It's the people who allow themselves to be nicknamed and bullied. And you know we see that like with Trump Ley not to the meat fall the Santas. But you know, like you know, yes, this is you know,

rufically racist attacks on Mitch mcconnald's wife. McConnell is like, well, you know, I think we should be talking about the issues that matter to the American public, like and then going back to like Trump's attacks on Ted Cruise's wife, like the purpose of these attacks the show Who's boss

and who cowers and lives in fear? And I have to say, you know, you're looking at the Replican primary so far, like you know, neither the Sentist nor Haley nor Pence, you know who like Trumps like basically inside of the Bob to kill, like none of them are willing to, like, you know, like say anything deeply critical

of Trump. Yeah, exactly. And I mean I think that if we find ourselves in this insane position right where you have these Republicans who are completely terrified of Trump because they don't want me and tweets, I want to go back to this uh pla book issue that I read this morning newsletter, um, where they were, you know, quietly Democrats wonder if Joe Biden is too old. And someone sent this to me, Someone in the business sent me this and was like, oh my god, Democrats don't

have a base. What are we? What are we? What are Democrats going to do? Oh my god, Oh my god, I'm god. And I thought about this for a minute.

And look, one of Joe Biden's great genius things is that at every point people have been like, but you know, ultimately, and again at every point people have been like, but ultimately he won the mid terms, and he had like brilliant political instincts, right, he went against he said Republicans are against democracy, and he went and gave all these speeches and the mainstream media was like, man, who cares? And it was the winning issue for him. Yeah, No,

that's right. Yeah, I mean, I mean, I can't think any of these things. Seriously, there's no one of any statue in the Democratic Party who's going to challenge Joe Biden in the primaries. You know, I've done a little bit of partying on this myself, and there's a lot of other people have done more reporting. And so who are these Democrats that don't want Joe Biden to run again? If no one is going to challenge him in the primaries. But beyond that, I mean, like he has been a

very successful president and especially the mid years. I mean basically, like, you know, the best kind of midterms for the Democrats going back, depending on how you look at it, either to nineteen sixty two or really to like nineteen thirty four. So and beyond that, I mean, I think that they're real,

you know, the whole age issue. I mean, like, you know, like you just look at that state of the Union and like he handled himself perfectly well and not only have himself well, like you know, like it feels me like after delivering an hour and a half speech, i'd say, you know, time for a nap, and he spent like another hour and a half just like hob nobbing with the senators and members of Congress. To me, just feels

like a media thing more than anything else. I mean, I will say, like, yeah, I'm not sure if there's there's a groundswell of love for Biden as whatever, but what you described as a genius is the fact that he's very attuned to the party and he knows, you know, where the party is at any given moment. As such, he seems like a perfectly fine leader. Like I don't know, I find all this stuff very hard to take seriously. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

This friend of mine was like, and Democrats have no band because there's a lot of I don't know if you know this about the Democratic Party, but it tends to be a party that enjoys wringing its hands. Yeah, the whole bench thing. I don't even know if that's like true. I can think of quite a few people, you know, starting with Whitmer, but a lot of the candidates that ran in against Biden and lost, but you know,

did the very interesting things. You know, there's people I don't even like, like Pete Buda Judge, but who seemed to have like strong support among at least some faction of the party. And the other thing is things are so polarized that the thing with the Democrats is that they will coal us around whoever the party leader is, and the party leaders right now Biden, but whoever gets the nomination, people coal ess around because the alternative is

like Trump or dissentist. So for both parties, I think what we see is that like, look at all the problems Trump had and all the flaws, and all the people have to kind of hold their nose. But at the end of the day, you know, when you're a jet care jet all the way, m m m m, Yes, when you're a jet you're a jet all the way. I also think that we find ourselves in a world where we have Nicky Haley just jumped into the race. Actually got a d M from someone today that was like,

can you talk about Nicki Haley's candidacy. Okay, let's talk Nicki Haley's candidacy. I feel like it's the perfect it's like the perfect candidacy for UM two thousand and three. Yeah, no, I I think that's right. Yeah. And Neil Haley can run on some substantial things. She was a governor of you know, South Carolina, and actually as governor a little bit more moderate than what would expect from a Southern Democrat. But having said that, I mean, what if you have

to look at what she's running on. She's running on I will be your person of color friend, she said, you know, like racism is in public in America, like look at me. And Republicans love that sort of candidate, but have ever like nominated them on a presidential level.

Every primary season you see someone who runs on that is Herman Kane, Dr Vent Carson, you know again, who had like even more than very impressive biography, impressive the year, but I mean the whole point is like like the idea that we know we're not racist, and then these kind of specifically run on that, Yeah, it doesn't racism doesn't exist. Is that? Yeah? Yeah, you know, like that's an appealing message for a certain type of Republican But in each of these cases, these are kind of who

often enjoy a bubble of support. All it took was Trump to start talking about Ben Carson might have life to somebody and was a very dangerous guy, and he pulled it. He pulled it very quickly. And I you know, like I'm just you know, speaking as a seek, I'm not looking forward to whatever ethnic nickname that Donald Trump comes up with, Nicky Healey. I can imagine several of them. So that's a niche she's trying to fail. I think it's a limited niche, and we've we've already seen that

at to the extent. Yeah, I mean, she's a kind of Jeb Bush. You know that that faction of the party, which we've already seen is weak. I don't see a future. We would not be so worried about the Republican Party if it were the kind of Republican party that nominated Nicki Halett. That's right. The thing is, even if it nominated her, she'd be then come under all the pressures and we already see this like to actually get where

she wants to be. Her first campaign event was with this preacher Haiggy, who's like, you know, like a really awful like anti Semite and Bigett who said like all the terrible things that that sort of fundamental licenseys. So, I mean, the whole pitch would be that she can appeal to more moderates when she gets the domination. But to get to the nomination, she's gonna already you know, she's already made all these compromises and she's not going to get the domination. So so so I think the

whole thing is a fiasco from start to finish. Yeah, it's a fiasco. And the other thing is that Trump has has ruined any normal There's like one and again normal needs to be in quotes because she's not particularly normal. But there's like one Republican presidential candidate who hasn't been completely sullied by the everything Trump touches dies law of physics, and that is Liz Chaining. Yeah that's right, that's right, Yeah,

I know, who will not also get the nomination. If she runs right, there's no world and when she she couldn't even win her seat, you know, I mean, unless there's something where the Santis and Trump cancel each other out. But I just don't even see that. Trump is already called to meet ball Ron. Yeah, no, no, I I think that's right outside with NICKI I'll make a prediction she won't even get enough votes that Trump will feel the need to come up with a nickname for her.

Oh that makes me slightly sad. Yeah, so she won't even get a nickname out of this. Yeah, that is the worst possible. If you can't even get nickname, then you have a lot of trouble. What else are you seeing in our political landscape? Right now? Biden is going to talk about the aliens today, Republicans continue to desperately try to make content for Fox News. Is there anything

else on your landscape? Well? Yeah, I think we should mention like the situation in Ohio with the train rack and well, first of all, the sort of really terrible exploitation of this by Republicans who are doing two kinds of things, one of which is to make this into a white genocide narrative, saying like well, nobody's covering this, and they're covering stuff up because it's white, working class

Trump supporters. I'll say the politics of this, which is I think that this has led there's a certain class of democratic pundits and commentators and online personalities who have decided to respond to this by simply saying, well, there's nothing to see here, you know, like this is unfair to pee Buddha judge and there's not much he could do anyways. And I obviously think that's the wrong approach.

I mean, they're real issues with train safety, with deregulation, with the fact that you know, like this company is behaving terrible. I mean they offered, you know, like five thousand people, they offered twenty five dollars, which is five dollars per resident who are being evacuated. And there's much

more that could be done and should be done. And I think the more proper approach we're seeing this from Shared Brown and but also from Eliane Omar, is to call for congressional investigations to look into this, because, I mean, on the one hand, one shouldn't engage in fearmongering. On the other hand, this is an environmental disaster already, like you know, the water is being affected in animal life

is being affected. And I don't think that one should simply take the word of the company that causes disaster that all is Hunky Dorrian. Right, Yes, those are not the people to go to. Yes, yeah, trains like they're virtual monopoly, like you can't actually have competing train lines, and so therefore they have to be regulated. And there's a real issue. And I think Trump has a lot blame here, but not just Trump in terms of like how the training industrsement de regulate it is. So I

honestly think that this is a political issue. And rather than you know, like having you know, you put your head in the sand and say nothing's going wrong, I think that's going to feed this sort of you know, very racist Republican exploitation of this. Yeah, I think the elian Omar approach, the shared Brown approach, is the right one. Right. No, No, Look, this is a major environmental catastrophe caused by stock by backs and a lack of people listening to unions very

much things that liberals believe in. This should be something we are all talking about as much as possible. And the reality is Biden is a president of everyone, whether or not they voted for him, and that's an incredibly important data point. But thank you so much. The time has already gone by, and it went by quickly. Here Congresswoman Katie Border represents California's district and is a candidate for the Senate. Welcome too fast, politics, Katie Border. Thank you,

nice to be back. Why are you the best woman for the job? So I think I'm the best person for the job, I want to say, um, although I do think it's really important that we continue to try to achieve a balance of men and women in politics. We know that organizations that have women in leadership about perform organizations that underrepresent women. So the Senate is no

exception to that. But I think that, you know, what I can really bring to this race is, as a relative newcomer to politics, is a real sense of what we need to do in the next two to ten years to build that durable majority. I want Democrats to win this cycle, but I want them to win the cycle after that and the cycle after that, which means that we have a politics that really speaks to what voters are worried about in the future, whether that's climate

or housing or leaning up government. So I want to ask you, you come from a purple state. It became redistricted, it became more rad you won by three points. You become sort of a really good example of a Democrat who can win in a difficult district, which is again unusual because of the way the Congress is made up. Why are you the right person to win a primary

in a very blue state. Yeah, So I represent a purple district in Orange County, and with redistricting, have now represented about a third to a half of Orange County, which is very purple. But I think what I've learned from that is how to get voters to see that you're fighting for them in Washington, and that is something that I think all voters want across the ideological spectrum. So in Orange County, I focus on making sure that I am standing up to the bad guys in Washington.

Sometimes that is Trump Republicans, make no mistake. But sometimes it's a corrupt e O who isn't delivering for his customers or his employees. Sometimes that's a government official who just won't pick up the tools that he has and do a better job for the American people. And so I think one of the things that can offer in this race is I know how to win in tough districts, and we have tough districts in California, and we have a lot of them, as you mentioned, Molly, across the

United States. So I think California needs someone who can be a political leader helping us win and get rid of the California Republicans who are failing California. But also somebody think the country needs California to have a Senator that can go on the road and get out in every part in pocket of this country and be able to connect with voters. That's how we're going to hold

this House and the Senate for generations to come. This is obviously, I mean, I think you've done a really good job in Congress and you've become a star there. I'm curious what is motivating you to go to the Senate. Well, you know, I think the Senate has long been perceived to be the kind of last line of defense for America, for our economy, for our rights, for our democracy, and

I think that it's that's really at peril. And I think we in my time in the House, most of that time the first four years my first two terms, we had a Senate that failed to step up, who hid behind the filibuster UM, senators who often cited more often with Republicans than with Democrats, or were unwilling to kind of get in the fight and stand up to

corporate power. And so I think that you know the class that I was elected with in folks who were who ran to kind of stand up to Trump and bring new energy to Congress, You're seeing lots of us look to take that same energy and help spread it throughout politics. So I have candidates colleagues who have gone into the administration, like Dev Holland, UM. I have candidates who have gone into becoming lieutenant governors UM. And I think you're seeing some of us run for the Senate.

And I think that's good that we are bringing that at that energy and that perspective on what needs to change in Washington to every all that for kinds of institutions that make up our government. Elizabeth Warren was your law professor. You're very influenced by her. Anyone who's watched to do question and knows that what are other ways

that you might be more progressive than people now? Yeah, And I think what I've learned from Elizabeth Warren Um watching her and working with her for years um as a law professor before I ran for Congress. UM. I guess that was it. Two things come to mind. One is that she is a teacher, and so am I. And her ability to talk about issues in a way

that invites people into the conversation. She's been her career before she became a politician, making it easier for people to understand the law, making it easier for them to understand how the economy works and whether it's working for them.

And I really try to do that. I try and my questioning and speeches I give, and my social media to give Americans information to teach them, because then they can pick up the tools of democracy and make their voices heard, whether that's voting or call in their senator or representative. I think the other thing that Elizabeth and I share is a real commitment to understanding the importance of a strong and stable, globally competitive economy. We have both seen in our personal lives as well as in

our professional lives what happens when the economy fails. It's not just as President Trump obsessed about the stock market going down it's people who are out of work, it's kids who are going hungry, it's families that are losing their houses, it's it's a whole generation of folks who are being held back from having a secure retirement. And so I grew up in Iowa during the farm crisis,

the watch families get more closed on around me. And then when I got to California, my entrance into public service was then Attorney General now Vice President Kamala Harris asking me to hold the bank's feet to the fire on stopping cheating people out of their homes, on actually making them follow the law and hold them to the

terms of the deal that they had signed. And so in doing that, I got the chance to travel the state of California and talk to people and see firsthand, especially in a state where home ownership is such a challenge for people, how terrible the consequences are of allowing big corporations to cheat and to rig the economy in their favor. And so I'm a strong proponent of capitalism. But to have capitalism, you have to have competition and

consumer protection, investor protection, consumer choice, price transparency. And when we don't have those things, we have to be willing to challenge corporations and change the rules to deliver that. So would you change the filibuster? Yes, absolutely, Look, the filibuster is not functioning to protect democracy. It's functioning to protect the rear end of senators who don't want to take a vote on tough issues, and so it's actually antidemocratic.

The whole point of the filibuster, remember, besides it's deep and racist history, and for that I recommend people read Adam Gentilesen's book. But the whole of the filibuster in theory today is to protect the rights of the party in the minority. It's just a rule of procedure, no different than a rule that says you have to raise

your hand before you can be recognized. But when that rule isn't working, and instead of protecting the minority, it's allowing the work of the Senate to come to a complete halt, I mean, depriving the American people of knowing where their senators stand on issues. Than it is failing our democracy, and we should get rid of it and substitute other ways to protect the party in the minority and make sure that they're able to be heard. We have tools to do that, in the House, and they

work very very well. They're just not the filibuster, and the filibuster isn't working as a rule of procedure, and we shouldn't elevate it to anything more or less than what it is a rule, a rule that can be changed. I want to push you here. The California historically kind of elects the most left candidate in the primary. Talk to me about the lefty bona fide is you have. Well, Look, I started into politics, and from the get go I ran a little bit differently. I didn't take corporate pack money.

I'm one of four members of the House of Representatives, four out of four thirty five who don't take federal lobbyist money. Despite those things, I was the second highest fundraiser in the House slash cycle, behind only Kevin McCarthy, who does take pac money. Of course, he takes every count of money. You can raise the resources you need to win the toughest, most expensive races in the country without being behold into big corporations. And I'm proof of that.

And so I think that really matters to progressives. Um, we need people to believe that we're fighting for them, and I have shown that and I show that not just in my words, but in my actions and in my decisions and the consistency of votes. I've also been

in leadership in the House Progressive Caucus. I was elected by by colleagues to have the number two role, the deputy chair representative from Illegia Pol last Congress, and in that role, I work closely with Caromela on trying to build progressive power, but also get a lot of our colleagues to see that the issues that progressives the Progressive Caucus was fighting for, issues like affordable childcare and investments in housing, actually have the support of the vast majority

of Americans, and also to highlight for people you can be a strong progressive and win tough races, and I that's exactly what I've done three times here in Range County. And so I think when I'm in the Senate race, I think I have the ability to both know how to talk to independence and persuadable Republicans, whatever portion of Republicans that is, and get them on board. And I've

had to do that to win every time. And at the same time, I ran in two seventeen, when I first launched my campaign on things like Medicare for All and the Green New Deal. I ran as an unabashed progressive and I have stayed that way. And I think that consistency of values is something that should give people comp and instant as I'm campaigning, when they asked me a question and I give them an answer, they can they can count on that. So I have to ask

you about the staffing thing. You know, there's been accusations that you were not a nice boss. Have you been able to sort of quell this? Yeah, I am a terrific staff and there's no way that you can do this job without them. We are a team, and we are in partnership, and we count on each other. And that means sometimes they say to me, you let me down, and I told you to give this speech, or what

happened to my third paragraph? And and sometimes I say to them, what are we That third paragraph didn't seem to fit with the rest of the speech. What are we gonna do? But I'm really proud of my staff. I'm proud that I have promoted from within several times, that my district director, for example, started out as an intern in my staff. I'm proud that, you know, my communications director has been with me from day one. I have seen him grow and he has seen me grow,

and that is an amazing relationship to have. I expect a lot of my stuff. I looked the expect a lot of myself, but I don't think the American people deserve any less. With regard to the most recent stuffer, the recent stuffer who has said that I wasn't treating her fairly, I will say three things. One, I consulted with house employment counsel about what to do when she broke our office policy with regard to COVID safety. Too, I have a duty to protect the people who work

in my office. If someone isn't following office policy with regard to security, or ethics or COVID, they are putting all of us, including constituents who might come into the office, at risk. So I have to think about my obligations as an employer and as a representative to keep people safe. And the third thing is I'm grateful that she was able to finish out her term. She worked two years for me as a wounded warrior fellow, and I was really grateful to have her contributions in the office, and

I wish her well in her new endeavor. Where are you on congressional staff unionise saying, oh, I'm in support of that, and I think we've seen some offices trying to unionize. I think the republic things are taking in with that. But I think it's really really important. Look, I don't think this is a tough one. Every worker should be free to organize and decide to join the union. That that is a core principle. I think President Buying here has the exactly is exactly right. You would say

I'm a union guy, I would say I'm a union gal. Yeah, I think that's definitely true. We are having a lot of transit issues. The train collision, we had a bunch of nearer misses with aviation. What do you think should happen here? I mean, some of this is because of corporate buybacks, especially when it comes to and when you're talking about unions, I'm thinking about the the train workers who fought and fought to try to prevent this train

accident from happening, and we're warning us about it. What do you think needs to happen here? There's a fundamental problem I think with this. Well, Look, I think what we see in transit is emblematic of what we're seeing in several other industries right now, which is the consequences of years of deregulation and Washington kind of giving corporations

what they want and how telling to them. Um and so I think what those what this works out in is in transit is these folks have lobbied and bought and paid for sometimes bills that deregulate the industry, that take away safety protections, that limit the resources of regulators to do their jobs keeping us safe. I think the union busting and anti union activity that we've seen in

transits also a factor. So I think when you decade after decade, each of these things is well, is just a little bit to help the business, is just a little bit to make it easier to do business. But when you pile those things up and nobody is willing to stand up the corporate power, at the end of the day, you have corporations that are putting profit ahead of their core business mission, in this case, to get people from our goods from point A to point me safely.

That's your job. If you're an airline, that's your job. If you're a trucking company, that's your job. If you're a train along the way. We want you to make money and be able to contribute to our economy. But they are more focused on making money for themselves, on lighting the pockets of their executives and their shareholders, than they are on executing their core business models successfully. And I think there is a role for greater federal regulation here.

I think we need to make sure that our cabinet secretaries, all of them in every department, are willing to stand up to those that they're regulating. I think we've seen great leadership at the Federal Trade Commission and with regard to antitrust on this front, and I think we need to keep pushing President Biden, who has shown a real willingness to stand up for workers and stand up for consumers, to make sure his cabinet in every department is doing

the same thing. I have one more question with the environmental impact in Ohio terrible right, What comes next? It just seems to terrifying. Well, I think one of the really important things is that our government officials need to be on the ground making their own assessment. We cannot take, as we often have in these situations, the corporation's talking points switch out the head or on the paper and speaks out the letterhead and then make them the government

talking points. The American people and especially the people living in East Palestine need to know that they are safe. They need independent verification and testing, and we need to not take the fact that we're not finding harms today as a guarantee that there won't be long term harms. We have to have to learn the lessons of environmental justice and the lessons of pollution from our past, and we can't keep repeating the same thing because it's simply expedient.

For those whose campaigns are funded by the railroad of hand, we have to hold them accountable and the government has to be a trusted partner in delivering that safety information. Katie Porter, thank you so much for joining us my pleasure. I know you, our dear listeners, are very busy and you don't have time to sort through the hundreds of pieces of pundentry each week. This is why every week I put together a newsletter of my five favorite articles

on politics. If you enjoy the podcast, you will love having this in your inbox every Friday. So sign up at Fast Politics pod dot com and click the tab to join our mailing list. That's Fast Politics pod dot com. Ben Schiller is the managing editor of Coin Desk. Welcome to Fast Politics, Ben. It seems like this is not crypto's greatest moment. It would certainly not be crypto's greatest moments.

Definitely having a tough time, and that's coming from the pullout from the FTX scandal, which was a forty billion dollar implosion, and it's coming on the back of a lot of big claims of the industry mate in Washington, d C. Which has turned out not to be true. And it's really a reckoning moment for crypto in the capital now. So we are about to go into a

week of crypto. Crypto meats government exactly. Yeah. I mean, legislators are lining up to crack down on the industry, and I have a lot of hearings, particularly from the Senate Banking Committee, and then there's a lot of action on the kind of regulatory front with the SEC of particular, So Gary Gainslow, who's the chair of the SEC, is under a lot of pressure from legislators to really come

down hard on the industry. For various reasons. A lot of industries have a partisan like Republicans have oil and gas but in this I think both sides are very piste off crypto, right, Yeah, I mean I would argue

that they're really taking it personally. So I mean, just to backtrack a little bit, I mean, for a long time, you could have been around since the invention of bitcoin, which is about twelve years ago, and for maybe ten of those years it wasn't really taken seriously in d C. And then last year there was a massive full run and there was a lot of money flowing around, and crypto really started to get some traction with members of Congress,

and there was sort of talk of favorable legislation, you know, the packs formed, and particularly there are a lot of donations flowing around, particularly from SBF or san Band Freed, who was the CEO and founder of f t X. Him and his colleague gave money to up to a third of Congress, So I mean, you know, hundreds and

hundreds of people. So when the ft X folded in this kind of very dramatic way, I think there was a kind of a loss of faith both in him obviously, but also in the industry in general, because a lot of things he'd been saying, and he was a charming guy, had this kind of tousel head, kind of young princely image, you know, when they when he turned out to be a charlatan, I think they really took it personally and there had no reason then to really be the champion

of the industry. And that's what we're seeing now is kind of blowback. But didn't SPF actually give money Republicans too? Absolutely, it was it was an equal handed operation. I mean he joined the Biden election, and you know, the first Biden election he gave very heavily to Democrats, but when it came to the last two years, he was giving even handily to to both sides. Yeah. So it actually the idea that he's some kind of that this is a partisan crime is really not accurate, not at all.

I mean, I think his personal leanings are definitely to the left, but in terms of building up his political capital in Washington, he was definitely giving to everybody. There's more than just SPF. That is a problem problem. Yeah. I mean, the the legislators and particularly SEC are going

after all aspects of crypto. I mean, I don't want to get too into the weeds on this program, but you know, there was a big enforcement action from the SECC this week coming down on a company called Kraken, which is a leading exchange regarding its staking service, which sounds a bit sort of in the weeds, but it's a big deal for crypto because that's a big source of revenue and a big What is staking staking is when you take your bitcoin or another coin and you

give it to a company like cracking, and then they give you a return on that money. So it's basically a form of collateralization in the same way that you would give money to a bank and they would give you an interest rate. And what is wrong with their staking service, Well, this goes back to what Gary Ginster

has been saying about crypto all along. If you want have been listening, which is that you know, when you issue a coin and you have an expectation or give the other party an expectation of a return on that coin, then you can reasonably expect that asset to be called a security. And this is what the argument has been about all along, where Gary Gains has been saying that all tokens are basically securities, and the industry has not wanted to really believe him or really go along with

the logic of that. So you know, they've been operating as if these assets are not securities, and Gary Ginsler has secretly or not so secretly been thinking they have been securities. But what about candidates Like in Yomy we have Cynthia Loomis, who has been very big on crypto. In Miami we have the Miami mayor who is a slightly lefty Republican and he went big on crypto. I mean, did these people and also like all this clebrities who did crypto ads, Like, is there any kind of like

regulatory problems for these people? Do does anyone have to pay a fine? I mean not that I know, I've know. I mean most of these people have. They've taken money from SPF for or some other discredited crypto person, have given the money back, or they've given them the money away to somebody else. That's the only penalty that they faced. Do you think that people have not been hard enough

on like this? You know, like think about like last year's Super Bowl was almost all crypto ads and celebrities got millions and millions of dollars, and even like all the n f T stuff that is connected to crypto that also is a huge payday for celebrities like Onwyneth Paltrow. I mean, do you think that there's been enough reporting on just the kind of how unfair that was and how misled a lot of people were, or do you think we'll generally not and just going back to ft

X again. I mean, he had a number of celebrity endorses. Larry David, for instance, did a big Super Bowl ad last year, and of those people have gotten into trouble for taking all of that money. I don't believe they're even party to the bankruptcy proceedings that are going on now. It's noting like people are trying to plow that money back, so they've got a free reign. I mean, the only example really of a celebrity who has gotten to trouble

is Kim Kardashian. So the SEC made a big kind of scapegoating moment out of going after her for pitching a a nonsense coin, what we call in the industry a ship coin called ethery and Max, where she basically went on her Instagram and and said this was this was the greatest project ever. And the SEC went after that for basically an illegal activity, and they used her celebrity against her, and as a sort of an example for others not to follow, you know going forward. That's

really interesting. What else you seeing a coin desk right now in the industry itself, which is what we cover, you know, and we broke the the spf ft X story, So we're kind of seeing both sides of it. On the one hand, you know, this is a reckoning moment. On the other hand, you know a lot of people in the industry are not really getting it. So I

think there's still that argument to play out now. So um, you know, the industry would argue that the sec has not been clear in what is and what isn't legal, and it's now being rather sort of capricious and arbitrary

and enforcing traditional securities laws. On the other hand, I think most people would say, most reasonable people would say, you know, the the industry has been living under kind of a wishful thinking and imagining that they're different from the rest of the financial system when they're really not. And uh, you know, Gary Gansler has been saying for years, as I said that, you know, most tokens are securities, and the lawyers working for these companies have not wanted

to really listen to that message. And they've been telling their clients, these companies that they can go and do lots and lots of kind of exotic things when you know there was no kind of legal basis for that. So I think we're seeing a process of innovation, sometimes you know, worthy and often not worthy, really catching up with the law, and regulators starting to really do what they've say they're going to do in principle actually an actuality.

So I think, as I say, it's it's a reckoning moment, and it's going to be interesting to see how this plays out because there are a lot of big fish in this industry that haven't faced any regulatory action in the past who are now likely to face it. So it's a it's a big moment. Oh yeah, absolutely. I mean, doesn't it seem like bitcoin is still kind of overvalued, Well,

it depends how you look at it, I guess. You know, it's been an argument about how you value bitcoin for for years and years and what sort of role it actually plays, and there's an argument there. I mean, on the plus side, you know, it does have millions and millions of people out there who really believe in the project and really are invested in it, not only financially, but in terms of its values and in terms of its kind of bigger message and that kind of ideas

that it kind of holds onto. On the other hand, it's made some claims about being a source of value in in inflationary times hedge against inflation, which really hasn't proven true. It's made some claims about being a currency on the Internet, which isn't really true. And so I can kind of see it both ways. On the one hand, you could say, well, there's an enormous community and that

community equals something important on the Internet. On the other hand, you can say, well, it's made these big claims and it hasn't really fulfilled them. So you know, it's kind of an argument now about whether Bitcoin is going to remain the pre eminent cryptocurrency or whether some other, more nimble, more technologically advanced projects will really begin to take over.

And that's particularly ethereum, but not only ethereum Um, and that that argument is very much so sort of taking shape now, and it's both an ideological argument and it's also a practical sort of technological and financial argument. Jesus, what an interesting and strange time we live in. What would be an exchange that would seem better, you know, would that be a theoryum? I mean what coin would

be more stable than Bitcoin? Well, I mean none of them are particularly stable and less you include what are called stable coins, which are expressly designed to be stable, i to to not fluctuate in price. And that's always been a problem with Bitcoin as a currency. It's it goes up and down too much to be um something you would actually want to use in a store, because you know, if it's going up, then you don't wanna, you know, spend it, because then you're losing the potential upside.

The industry came up with these this idea of stable coins, which are sort of mediums of exchange which retain their value. But now even though stable coins are now under trouble, you know, in trouble legally and in terms of regulation. And just this week a stable coin project called pack Sauce, which is based here in New York, was forced to stop issuing a stable coin on behalf of a very

big crypto company called finance. It's called be USD. That's also seen as rather foreboding for the market because if the stable coins, which are supposedly stable are also going to full foul of the law, then that could really be, you know, an existential threat to the industry going forward, because if you don't have stable coins, and you don't have big companies like FTX, and you have these other issues that the industry is facing, then what do you have?

And that might be good for bitcoin because bitcoin is a sort of unmediated project. That's kind of the whole point of it. It kind of ticks on in the background. It doesn't need any kind of CEO or any management, and that can be good in a time when crypto or other aspects of crypto are relying on intermediaries for its well being. So that might actually be good for bitcoin in the long term. Well, a little bit of good news for bitcoin. Uman, you so much for joining us.

I hope you'll come back. Thanks very much, money if it's a pleasure. Jesse Cannon, Molly John Fast. We've all been waiting for Fatty Willis to head it down, and it's here. I know you'll be shocked to hear this. She thinks there may be some lying liars who lie in Trump World. Congratulation to all involved. That's it for this episode of Fast Politics. Tune in every Monday, Wednesday and Friday to your the best minds in politics makes

sense of all this chaos. If you enjoyed what you've heard, please send it to a friend and keep the conversation going. And again thanks for listening. H