Hi, I'm Molly John Fast and this is Fast Politics, where we discussed the top political headlines with some of today's best minds. And Ron DeSantis is Trump has to attend the GOP debate to quote unquote earn it. Good luck, Ron de Santis. We have such a great show for you today. Senator and Reverend Rafael Warnock tells us about the struggle to reaffirm voting rights and why he's not
giving up on fighting for it. Then we'll talk to CNN anchor Jake Tapper about his new book, All the Demons Are Here and his recent interview with Governor Ron DeSantis. But first we have Washington Post columnist George Conway. Welcome back to Fast Politics, George Conway. Mind Eric, So, let's talk about all of what's happening right now. The Michigan women. That was kind of a surprise, yet.
The know there were rumbling from Michigan earlier. The Attorney General there had indicated that she had referred the whole thing to the Justice Department. Really, you're back from the Justice departments that she said several months ago that she was going to do her own investigation, and she did, and there she is. She should be pretty interesting.
To see the framing of it, and you see people from the alt right, people like Pizzagate Jack talking about how they're just prosecuting them for supporting Trump. Explain to us what the fake elector's case is.
It's a simple case. Look, if you submit a false application to the government for anything, you're a false piece of paper to get I don't know, welfare benefits, a driver's license, cash grants, or to work, register to vote. You submit false paperwork to the government. There any number of statutes that you can be sent to jail for violing. And that's basically what this is about. It's basically of attempt of forged documents to overturn the presidential elections state
of Michigan. And the documents were sworn, they were false, they were submitted to the Commerce Senate, and if you faical work, we're violating all sorts of laws. But they did. It's not that hard and it's sort of amazing that it's taken this long to bring some of these cases against these individuals who clearly signed paperwork that was just false. In the particular case of Michigan, they didn't put any in cautionary language saying that, oh, this is the contingency
if the election is overturned or something like that. They just basically said we are the duly elected electors of the state, which is false because they were never certified as such. And then there was also the fact that they said that they were meeting at the state capital and they didn't meet in the Republican headquarters. And I don't know which town the city it was in Michigan, but they met at Republican headquarters because they were not
the official electors. And it's really amazing that some of these people were pretty sophisticated, including some of these little lawyers, actually signed this false documentation. It was actually a one the Publican party official who said, oh, I talked to a lawyer. This isn't a good idea because these statements are false. These fake electors. They were also told that might hide your cell phone, don't bring yourself here, don't
tell anybody. Secrecy and the secrecy is reflects that date because you don't conceal things that you are doing if you take their own the up and up, and these people are consaling what they were doing because they knew it wasn't on the which is straight out fraud.
That should be pretty simple case in the January sixth case. In that sort of world, this is the only other group of people who have been prosecuted.
We're going to see a whole bunch of people. I think it's yours. And then we're going to see with Jack Smith indicts this week, because then we will hear that in the next forty eight hours or certainly one day or Tuesday next week because it sounds fight today, we'll see.
What do you think that Jack Smith's charges will be?
Well, I mean, I think we already heard some reporting. I guess it's based upon people down in Florida who have heard or see about the seeing the Faria letter. It's going to be conspiracy to for the United States. But it's been predicting for our long time, which essentially means that the neuro submitting false paperwork to get the government to do something it shouldn't be doing. And then there's also obstruction of an official proceeding, and there are
eighteen USC. Fifteen twelve C, which would be the electual boat counting in Congress. And then there's a there's a provision that talks about the deprivation of rights sectionally to forty one. People haven't talked about that much, but that provision of the criminal Code has been used in the
voting context. In fact, there was a case in nineteen forty one called the United States even this classic where people were trying to keep boat count somewhere for some race somewhere, to keep it false, not count the votes correctly and spring or Eld's propriately chargement.
The two forty one.
If you're taking away people that you're right, it's a vote in the free parent election. That's a violation and that's statute. So it's pretty straight. Or it seems like he wants to bring any simple case just judging for what we're hearing. But we'll see, we'll see, you know, we'll see if it's a big case of small cases, the case directed at the top, or case directed at multiple levels at the top, just one person, and we'll see.
You think that we're going to see that case be charged in Washington, DC or in.
Florida again, right, I think that case is overwhelmingly likely could be charged in the district of Columbia. That's what the grantury. The critical events occurred in the district, Yes, and that would be a case, and I think he would be the principal defense clearly, that's why he released the target letter. We haven't heard any indication that there are any other defendants. We'll see target letters in the same period of time. It maybe he's the only defendant,
may not be. We don't have a lot of speculation on that. I'm not sure it really is construction. Speculate until we actually see the document.
And if it's in the district and not in Florida, then Trump won't be able to run out the clock.
There's no venue this. This will have to be an admission of Columbia or any of the states when they're actually resental false electures. So you couldn't bring little federal cases elsewhere but Columbia, which is good because the Juddies are there, very smart generally, and the pretty.
Well and they're not judge a Leen Canon.
They're not, although I don't know. I mean, we'll see how she handles the case. She may be chasing.
Do you ever feel like when we look at all of these like, are you are you surprised ever that some of these judges have turned out to be so partisan? Like certainly I think about like smart people we know, like Neil Katya, people who've written pieces about judges they knew who maybe they were conservative, but they thought that they might grow into the judge ship. Have you been prized at how that hasn't happened.
Actually, I'm going to take issue there. I mean, I don't know what judges you're talking about.
I mean, I'm thinking of that piece of Cabinaugh and how he you know, can't conceptualize, you know, the sort of talking.
About virginiual re sects Trump stuff. I mean, the guy has not done very well with these judges the fact, and I mean except schedual and state court, including in some cases he got slammed in by his own ploytasy you know, and ultimately the judge Cannon thing he is that sequence of ruling before she based. She tried to blomb up the investigation of the law Laga documents. She got reversed handly by a considerative panel of the Letting Circuit.
The judge, the chief judge of the circuit, who was on Trump short list in twenty seventeen, and he just slammed hell out. I disagree with the premises somehow that you know that there these judges are acting in his favor.
I mean, I think he got lucky once, but other than that, he's been getting getting its heady very consistently by the courts, by judges of all political persuasions, including you know, and these these these junior sixth paths are think getting hammered in the district of Combia by Trump judges.
Do you think, though, that it's wrong that this didn't happen sooner? I mean, it was clear in twenty twenty two that Trump had decided to run in the hopes that it would prevent Yeah.
Well, look, I mean I think all there are a lot of things that it should have viewed more quickly in a number of ways. But I think they're really just fine now and they think we shouldn't go to the flow. That's what's happening now.
Do you think he'll still be the nominee?
Yes, of course, there's no all.
Periods because there's just no way that the base would change course.
Now they're not.
They don't know any better, and that's they're.
Going to do.
And to them, it doesn't matter.
None of the best modest to them.
Do you think Trump is trained by all of these legal you know, maybe he's indicted federally to state indictments. Now there's another federal indictment likely and another state indictment. Do you think he's stressed by this? Do you think he understands the magnitude of this?
Yeah, no, I think he does. It's at a certain level. I think he's delusional in some ways. But if you think he understands that he's in deep trouble on a certain way, I don't think it's possible to really understand his mental processes because they're so bizarre. He's a sociopathy. He doesn't have any moral compunctions. He doesn't have any ability to feel remorse, he doesn't have any ability to
feel empathy. He's just, you know, he just does what if he thinks and then hist in any given movement. And I think he does realize his control, but it doesn't, you know, to him, there's no he can't contect up his own conduct to the trouble that he's in. So it doesn't he can't reform his own conduct.
For example, I'm just thinking about this idea of not being able to reform his own conduct with the Egene case, So a jury Trump owes Egene five million dollars defamation. Then he cannot stop defaming her, and now Robbie's going to bring the case again.
But I mean every time he says that it didn't happen, that's another libel. I mean, the question is what the damage is look at this point, but I think one of the things that you're going to play out in this additional trial that occur in the aging cattle case is that Canada damage is our issue. What is it going to take. The idea of IP and damage is to punish send it for daging in this sort of this conduct, and so that to defer people from engaging
in that kind of misconduct in the future. Well, I don't think he's the terrible so what I mean, you know what quantum be put on that. That's a very interesting question. It will be interesting to see how the judgement Thedora resolves.
Yeah, and don't you find it a little bit strange that he can't just keep his mouth shut because of the cash component.
He looks he is very strange. I mean, it's mental ill. I mean he's always beenamentally ill. He's in mentally ill for decades, and he doesn't know how to act any other way. That's it. He just you know, his view is he's just you just need to say where to keep so he seeing regardless of the confluence, you know, that's why you and that's why he keeps talking. He gets speeches, He get speeches very you know, makes pay the increditation, you get respect to the stole the plata
by documents. He's always continually. I mean, he's just you know, it's just a combination, it's just the combination of he just he can't help himself. He's not very smart. He doesn't listen to people who are smart, who advising. He shops around for advice, he gets bad advice.
And then you know, all he does.
Everything he does is is impulsive and it's impulsive. But that's nature, sociopathy and everything.
You know.
His view is that the lies don't catch the first time. He is lie Louder, lie Haarder. That's what he does.
There's also cases against the family business, right.
Yeah, there is also I mean there's one case that people forgetting about is there's a case called ACN. And ACN was a pontic scheme. It was essentially, you send your money in and then other people send their money in and you get something back. And it was a total, total, total ripoff. Thousands of people. I wrought about hundreds of people lost money. It's something that was promoted that he
his kids promoted on the countess. And he has a class action brought by Robbie Tappolo and Bath people who are sleeps, and that's going to go to trial college early next year. That's about the serious point. He's got that case. He's got the the state civil tax case that's pretty big. He's got the state criminal indictment where he was invited for paying off support Star and he's creating false books and records. He's got that. He's got the January sixth coming up right now. He's got the
you know, he's got the lark with documents. He's got the second case of the Eugene Foul trial, and he's got and he's going to get invited almost early in Georgia. And then we don't know, it's possible. You know, we saw what happened in Michigan the other day. Attorney General Nesshole says, our investigation contains I mean, I think her focus is no principally people what happened in the state of Michigan but they were directed to do that by people elsewhere, so others can see the bull bit that
somebody else could be charged outside of Michi. But we'll see. And then I think there are suggestions out there that that both Georgia and the Michigan are going to prompt I mean, there's apparently some activity in the Arizona and Nevada from state prosecures there, so we could see, you know, this, this is what''s going to go on for quite a while. I mean, the level of criminality is just not that.
I mean, it was just everything from the people who are on the ground at the Capitol on January sixth to people who are comitting the fraud with the fake electors calling them the Secretary of State of Georgia to get him by exactly votes were needed to attempts to course Vice President pens to essentially violating his open office and the Constitution of the United States through what it
requires in the county of votes. There are so many different ways, so many falsehoods that were made, and there are just so many ways to charge this under funerals, state laws, because if you know, it's just false documents, false representations generally, and we are submitted to the government. You know, they subject to the potential criminal live open. Any of people did this and grow.
You think that one of those things that helps Trump is that there's no legal precedent for some of this stuff. There is legal precedent, but I mean like for a president running from jail or running with multiple federal indictmonds.
Yeah, I think people are intimated by that fact. What I how many people the fact that it is if anything, it can effect across the tutorial discussion adverts man of adverse and because it's like of all the peoples that should have be known better will be the man who has sworn uphold and protective, defended the Constitution of the United States, and yet he was ready to abandon, he was ready to destroy it in office. And there were people who just ever seen in the United States before,
you know, arguing the Civil War. People succeeded authority.
Thank you so much, George Conway. Senator Raphael Warnock represents Georgia and the United States Senate. Welcome to fast Politics, Reverend Warnock. You're Senator Warnock, but you're also Reverend Warnock.
Senator, Reverend reverend. Senator just called you a time for lunch.
I interviewed you before you won your Senate post. You have had. You have basically been running for this Senate position for the last four years. I mean, the way that it works in Georgia is so insane. But you do do I do still preach, right, I do.
I still lead my congregation. I preach at it the Ebenezer Baptist Church, of course, the spiritual home of Martin Luther King Jr. And John Lewis. It keeps me rather busy, but I've decided to stay in my pulpet because I think the last thing I want to do is spend all of my time talking to politicians. I'm afraid of my accident with the come one, and I intend to be a public servant who serves in politics and hopefully never become a politician.
So let's talk about Martin Lither King. Is Martin Luther King's pulpe at originally a well.
Actually the church was founded in eighteen eighty six. It's most it's famous mostly because of doctor King, obviously, but we both five pastors. I'm number five, and the church was founded a few years after reconstruction. And I mentioned that only because Doctor King. Although He was an incredible activist, and he's the reason why the church is famous. It has a history of activist pastors that actually predate Martin Luther King Junior, including his own father, who led a
voting rights struggle in the heart of the South. Listen in nineteen thirty five, and I.
Actually was getting around to talking to you about voting rights because that is the legacy of doctor King, and it sounds like his father. Can you talk to us about what you were doing around voting rights?
Absolutely, I was proud to reintroduce alongside my colleagues, the freedom to vote at There is nothing more important for us to do in this moment, in this season, in this Congress than to preserve the House of Democracy itself. To be sure, there are a number of issues that confront us and concern us. Climate change, for example, is a real present and existential crisis.
Hot is summer ever, right, We're.
Dealing with the issues around gun safety, as we've seen so many mass shootings this year. Of course, jobs and opportunity to economy, all of these things matter. But the democracy is the framework in which we get to fight for the things that matter. And so when you talk about voting rights. When you talk about making sure every voter has access to the franchise and can know that their vote is counted, that's the heart of the thing itself, and that's why I introduced the Freedom to Vote Act.
Our democracy is in a nine to one one state of emergency right now, and we've got to do everything we can to preserve the integrity of the democracy.
Why is it so hard for Congress to pass this voting right spill? Because, like, obviously they're unable to codify RAU, Yes, but also they were able you guys were not them. You were able to pass this codifying gay marriage.
Well, what we have seen over the last few years especially, is an all out, unabashed, unembarrassed assault on voting rights. And your question is it's really a good one? You say, well, why can't we get this pass? Because voting ranks in recent decades has been a bipartisan issue. We reauthorized the
Voting Rights Act time and time again. The last time we did it was actually under a Republican president, George w. It passed the United States Senate ninety six or ninety eight to zero, and many of my colleagues who were here then, some of them were serving on the House side at the time, But they're folks in Congress right now on the Republican side who supported the reauthorization of the Voting Ranks Act the last time was passed in
two thousand and six. But there's been a sea change, and I think that as the country has been changing, the folks who are losing the argument have decided that they're much more committed to preserving their power than they are to democracy. And and since the Supreme Court gutted the voting rights law in twenty thirteen and Shelby versus Holder and ask Congress to update it to fix it, we just haven't been able to get our colleagues on the other side of the owl to cooperate and to
ensure that every American has access to the franchise. I think when the history of this moment is written, this will be a scar on the soul of our country that so many elected officials were either quite willing to aid in the bet this kind of assault on voting rights or to attack it outright. And that's the moment we're living in. But I'm not about to give up.
You know. I was John Lewis's pastor. He had no reason to believe when he was crossing that Edmund Pettis Bridge with police and billy clubs on the other side of that bridge, he had no reason to believe that he could win. But he stood up for right because, as doctor King said, the time is always right to stand up for right. And I think that time is right now.
Yeah, I think you're right. It does seem like to me the fact that these Republicans who used to support voting rights no longer support that. I mean, doesn't that seem like the party, the Republican Party, has really shifted to the right.
Yeah, I mean, this is a sea change. And this is why I'm not willing to let them off the hook. Some point out that they're in charge of the House this Congress, so why do we think we should get this pass? Because this should be a bipartisan issue. It always has been. And when you think about those historic watershed moments when we did get progressed on voting rights in the Civil Rights era, for example, we were able to get it done because there were folks on both
sides of the aisle who joined the fight. And I think this is another one of those moral moments. And I would say to my colleagues who maybe didn't live during the Civil rights era, who maybe like me or post Civil rights generation babies, you don't have to ask yourself what you would have done when John Lewis was standing up. You don't have to ask yourself what you would have done when martinther King Junior was giving eloquent boys to the urgency of passing voting rights in this country.
When Byola Luisa, white woman out of Michigan, gave her life fighting for voting rights, When Schwerner, Cheney and Goodman, two Jews and an African American stood up and paid the ultimate sacrifice for voting rights, you don't have to ask yourself where you would have been on, what side would you have been of that valiant struggle, what you would have done? Then you're doing right now, and the moment to stand up for voting rights is right now.
My grandfather, Howard Fast, who was very involved in Peak Skill riots, and you know, was very tight with the good Men's and I mean, it is really a question of being on the right side of history here. It's strange to me to think that these Republicans don't know what they're doing. I mean, I feel like on the Senate side especially, I mean not all of them, but they I mean not Tommy Tuberville, but they but a lot of them are quite smart.
Let me tell you. They know exactly what they're doing. And I know exactly what I speak of when I say that, I think people look at the fact that I won in Georgia and they say, what do you mean access to voter There's no voting rights issue, after all.
You won.
In fact, I've had Republicans in my state, even as they engage in voter suppression, I have tried to make hay of the fact that I won. Well, the fact that people overcame barriers doesn't mean the barriers doesn't exist. It just means that the people refuse to have their voices silence. The truth is, when I entered the runoff this last time, I won, and I won five times in Georgia.
It's so crazy that you had to run five times.
When I entered the runoff this last time, First of all, they cut the runoff in half because they studied my victory and they tried to change the playing field. Then as we entered the runoff, the Secretary of the State and others announced that there would be no Saturday voting the first weekend of the runoffs. And I think there are only a couple of weekends when people could vote. There would be no Saturday voting the first weekend of the runoff. And he and others said, because of a
state law that was already on the books. And they said, you know, I'm sorry, it's just the plain letter of the law. If you could vote, if we could let you vote, we would, but it's the letter of the law. And so they said, I'm sorry, our hands are tied. So I decided to do them in favor. I took them to court and I untied their hands. And then those who claimed that their hands were tied then showed
us their hands. Because after the court's ruled in our favor and said yes, you can vote on the first weekend of the runoff, those who said their hands were tied then showed their hands by appealing the ruling. Think about that, as we're enterating a runoff election. The Secretary of State, who should be busy trying to facilitate the voting of the citizens of Georgia, was busy, along with
other Republican operatives, trying to stop people from voting. They appealed the ruling we want again, and then they appealed it again, asking for emergency relief, relief from what the voices of ordinary people, working class people who want to be able to vote on the weekend so that they don't actually lose time at work in order to exercise their franchise. Students who were home for the weekend, who were citizens of Georgia and wanted to be able to
vote as we went into that Thanksgiving weekend? Are those the people they were asking for emergency relief from. We had to win in court and then win two appeals just so the people of Georgia could vote. About one hundred thousand people voted that first Saturday, which, by the way, is around the margin of mind victory. This is how voter suppression works. It's not huge margins. It's about mitigating
people's voices. It's about shaving a little bit of people's voting strength a little here, a little bit, and after a while, you know, what is the difference in an election? What do we hear in Georgia? Can you find me? Somebody said about eleven thousand votes, that the margins and when the margins are closed especially voter suppression matters. What this Freedom of Vote Act will do is it will
provide some federal guidelines, really just the baseline. The states will still be very much in charge of their elections, but it will say here are certain just basic standards that we will have in this country. That in this country, election day will be a federal holiday so that working class people are not unfairly disadvantage. We will have automatic registration, people will be able to vote on the weekends. These
are just basic kinds of standards. We won't allow partisan actors to dip in and rob local boards of elections of their ability to administer the election. These are the kinds of things that make basic sense, and they are about ensuring that every eligible American can vote and the voices that their voice can be heard in our democracy.
I want to talk to you about insulin. You have become a champion for thirty five dollars insulin.
Talk to us about that insulin should not be expensive. Here is a drug that was invented one hundred years ago. When it was invented, the patent was sold for one dollar. And what we have witnessed in recent years especially is price couching by big pharma. Literally, people have not been able to afford insulin, which again speaks to the issue
that we're talking about. Primarily, the people's voices are being squeezed out of their democracy, and their voices are being flooded by dark money from big pharma, in this instance, from the big oil and gas corporations, which is why we can't get the movement we need on climate change. That's the state of affairs, That's why we find ourselves here.
It is at root of democracy problem. But thankfully we were able to get progress on the question around insulin, and I introduced to bill last Congress at cap the cost of insulin to no more than thirty five dollars of out of pocket costs. I was trying to get it for everybody, but we did manage to get it for seniors on Medicare and they are enjoying that benefit right now. And then this Congress, I reintroduced the bill, the Affordable Insulin Now Bill, with my Republican friend and
colleague John Kennedy out of Louisiana. And why has he joined me in his effort Because he's got more diabetics in Louisiana than we have in Georgia. This is not a partisan issue. Some twenty states have already capped the cost of insulin, many of the red states, like Alabama, like Oklahoma, like Utah, and I'm hopeful that we will get insulin cap for people with insurance or people with no insurance at all, that we will get this done very soon. And I think this will make a difference.
Number one for the people who need insulin, because when you need insulin, you need insulin. You shouldn't be rationing insulin. It literally can be deadly. And then number two, managing diabetes is a win for our total healthcare system. One dollar out of four dollars in our healthcare system is
spent on people with diabetes. So when you talk about diabetes, you're talking about the consequences, the human consequences and the costs of amputations of having to go on dialysis because of kidney disease, and the number one cause of blindness. In real sense, it's a point of entry into the larger landscape of our healthcare system, which is why I'm so narrowly focused on this issue, even as we address the issues of the cost of prescription drugs more generally.
I think that it seems like such an important thing, and it's just so crazy that it's so hard to do this. John Kennedy is No one is accusing that man of being a liberal, though he used to be a Democrat right way back.
I got friends with whom I disagreed.
Right, But I'm curious. So that's a real like. You two are very much on different sides of the partisan divide. Do you think that that means you'll be able to get it through the bonkers GOP house.
I think that we need the people who are listening to me to call your congress person, to call your senator and tell them to get this done. Listen, everybody knows somebody with diabetes. This will make a difference in the lives of ordinary people. It's not a partisan issue. It's a health care issue. People ask, can we afford it? Yes, this is what we can afford. We can't afford to not do it. Not doing it would be far more expensive.
Yeah.
I appreciate you so much. Thank you so much, Senator Warno for joining us. Hi, it's Molly and I am wildly excited that for the first time, Fast Politics, the show you're listening to right now, is going to have merch for sale over at shop dot Fast Politics Pod dot com. You can now buy shirts, hats, hoodies, and toe bags with our incredible designs. We've heard your cries to spread the word about our podcast and get a tow bag with my adorable Leo the Rescue Puppy on it.
And now you can grab this merchandise only at shop dot fastpoliticspod dot com. Thanks for your support. Jake Tapper is the host of the Lead with Jake Tapper on CNN and author of All the Demons Are Here. Welcome to Fast Politics, Jake Tapper.
It's so great to be here. Thanks for having me.
So we are talking about your books, but your most recent book, I want to do two seconds on this. It's called All the Demons Are Here. It's a trilogy.
Yeah, you don't have to read the previous two. I write them as standalones. But yes, it's the third and the series about the Martyr family, the fictitious Martyr Family. The first book takes place during the Joe McCarthy era in nineteen fifties Washington, and the stars of that book are Congressman Charlie Martyr from New York and his zoologist wife Margaret. The second book has Charlie and Margaret out
in LA investigating the rat pack. And the third book is their kids, and that's all the demons are here. It's Ike and a wall Marine and Lucy, a twenty two year old aspiring journalist in Washington, d C. And it's their adventures in nineteen seventy seven America.
So funny. I was born in nineteen seventy eight, and my parents had this car with this enormous gas tank. I don't know why the seventies are just so stuck in my head.
It's a weird time. I was eight in nineteen seventy seven, so I don't really remember much. I remember gas lines, and I remember Elves Steine and Go. But when I went to do this book, which you know, since the books take place in the fifties and sixties the previous two, I thought, Okay, the seventies now, and I found this year in nineteen seventy seven, where so many bizarre things happen. Obviously, Jimmy Carter's inaugurated, but Evil can Eevil stunt, Daredevil and
Superstar literally jumps over sharks. This is months before Fox. He does Elvis Dies Studio fifty four opens. This is a New York City blackout. Son of Sam murders take place, the lives of tabloid journalism because of Son of Sam in New York City takes place in New York post
Horizons and so many other weird things. The cult membership is rising, UFO sightings throughout the country, and so it was really fun, even though I lived through this era, because I didn't remember much of it to write about this time, which was really kind of an underrated, bizarre period in our nation's history.
What are your sort of thriller writer influences?
Well, there are a lot, because there are a lot of great ones and a lot from whom I admire different parts. I'm a Gillian Flynn is a hero of She's just amazing, and you know, obviously David Baldacci and Harlan Coben. James Patterson's career is unbelievable. There are just there really are so many. Michael Connolly, Scott Tureau. I'm a big reader of thrillers, and so it's humbling to try to join this elite club.
Yeah, what are you are? More sort of literary influences because you write incredibly well and oh.
You're so crying.
It's true. I mean no, and it's funny because it's like this is a very boring topic, so our listeners can tune out. But I believe this truly, Like there just isn't a ton of focus on pros in what we do political journalism, which is fine. You know a lot of people don't care, but you know, when you have really good pros, it does really stand out.
Well, it is, I mean, it's fun. As a journalist you kind of like are influenced to write in not a writer like you that gets to have more fun. But like you know, C and N writers or whatever, we tend to be more straight, more like the asseach.
As I say to whenever I have a straight journalist on here and try to bait them into giving their opinion, I say, like on the opinion side, you know, I have a lot more space.
But yes, but also, you know, writing for even if you're writing a straight up news story for Vanity Fair, Rolling Stone or someplace like that Slate, you can have more fun. And that was in you know, earlier in my career when I wrote for Salon, and I would when I did more freelance stuff eating you know, even for the Weekly Standard or whomever that. You know, it's more enjoyable to have that kind of freedom. So exercising those muscles as a fiction writer is enjoyable. You know,
Matt clam is a good friend of mine. I think you know Mary, Yeah, yeah, I love Matt and he's obviously in the influence. He's also an editor of mine. I hire him to all my books and then but you know, in terms of like people, I read a lot. Like I said, Gillian Flynn, I think is a beautiful writer. I really was a or am a big fan of Pete Dexter, the writer. He wrote Paris Troud, he wrote The Paper Boy. I just think his his pros are beautiful. Richard Price is another one who he's ever written.
Yeah, so you and I are both power Twitter now threads users.
I'm on everything now me too, me too. If I have something, I just like, okay, and here's what I'm doing, whether it's a book promotion or an observation or a nice photo of you know, I was in South Carolinia's Gename. I took a picture of McCary Sellers with his adorable little kids. Then I'm like, okay, here it is and I go Twitter, Blue sky Red, personal Facebook, professional Facebook, Instagram, if it's worth it, TikTok. I mean, it's just like it.
It's like a full time job because there's so many different places and they're all they're all so different.
Yeah, Bacari sellers twins are really cute, which but let me ask you, it's funny because it's like, actually really love to do these social media sites because I really like interacting with people. I really like reading what I mean. For example, for me, one of the most useful things about all of this is like you tweet something or you read something a story, and I guess Twitter doesn't have us anymore, but you could read a story and
then see what everyone you follow. A lot of people are very smart, many of whom are smarter than I am. Think of a story.
Yeah, including smart regular folk out there who aren't in the media or political world. And that was one of the great joys of Twitter, and that I find has pretty much gone.
You can't find those people.
And just the way that threads exist, I don't even I mean, threads is fine, but I can't find people and it's you know, it's just strange. Also, like just because I'm following somebody on Instagram doesn't mean I want to follow them on threads. Instagram is a very visual is a very visual medium, and Threads is the opposite and very They're very different. So I don't know. Look, I remember, I'm old enough to remember when the Internet was still relatively new and comment sections of a blog
could be a joyous place. I remember I had a blog at ABC News. It was very experimental for ABC to do this, but I had a blog. It's ABC News. I started there in three and I was there for about ten years, and it was great. There were like ten commenters that were regular, my dad, my father in law, and it's like just a few other randoms, And no matter what I posted, they would post, and it was like this nice little you know. It's just like a
bunch of folks, like at a diner. Yeah, and then all the circus freaks and angry people and the haters and the whatever discovered it. And then that ended, and then it just it just inevitably. This is what happens
in social media. Unless you like really have this small discrete group of people, you know, which necessitates locking other people out of it, it just becomes unpleasant and all the pleasant people and all the interesting exchanges and by the way, even polite pushback or constructive criticism, all that that stuff, you can't get at it because there's just jerks and Nazis. Life's too short.
Yeah, I mean I have actually found really interesting and useful pushback from normal people. Yes, but it's you can't but you can't find it now because it's a sea of like we are, verified accounts that you never that are not operating in good faith.
One of the things that really bothers me when I when I mute somebody, especially if it's somebody that I think probably I would agree with on ninety five percent of the stuff. But like you know, I'm sorry, it's one strike. You're out just because I don't have the time. If I don't know you and you're coming at me in a personal way, nasty way, I'm going to mute.
You on that.
One of the things that's disappointing, and I want to say this all the time, is do you not realize that, like I read this stuff and I'm really willing to be criticized, to improve, to hear your ideas, to hear your thoughts, to hear your story ideas to want to you know, like I am, my mind is open, and I do not think that everything I do was great, But I also just for self preservation, like I'm not
gonna subject myself to that kind of vitriol. So it's just such a waste when normal people, not the people who are like professionally jerks, but like when normal people fall into this knee jerk, I'm just gonna be nasty because that's how people talk on social media mindset, because it's just a loss for me because I would have liked to have heard from that person if they weren't in a bad mood.
Yeah no, I mean, I got what did this show? Morning show? Nighttime show on Monday? And like if I'm doing something annoying, like saying right after I say something, which sometimes I do, I want to know that I'm doing it. But like you'd be good looking if you took off your glasses, not helpful, you know what I mean? And I do think like also it is this idea that like we are actually people.
Yeah, well I don't mean like, no one, I'm not saying this in a pity party.
No, no, I mean, and I'm just saying like there are people reading it, and that's useful, but I want to get onto you had this humongous interview. You're like the first mainstream media maybe not the first, but.
First non conservative I think, the first non conservative member of the media to have a sit down interview with Governor DeSantis in years, I think, not including I'm not including Florida media in that person.
But which is a very strange situation over there in Florida. But shockingly, that is quite anxiety provoking in a strange way, especially with the way that conservatives are towards the mainstream media and especially CNN. You know, just talk to me a little bit about that.
So it is kind of an interesting situation because a I think that in many ways, the more ideological channels have kind of broken everybody's brains in terms of like what the purpose of an interview with a presidential candidate in July twenty twenty three should be. Which is not about me like coming in, you know, looking for a pelt, or by the way, him coming in looking for a pelt.
It's just about I had fifteen minutes. Here are some questions I have for you about issues of the day, the new policy you introduced and you know, some other things on my mind. What do you think it was
not meant to be like a hugely adversarial showdown. This is a beginning of the campaign interview in which you are like as in previous years, you know, establishing a relationship with the campaign, trying to get some answers to some questions that you have not been able to get answers to, and hoping that the person will come back so you can ask, you know, the three hundred other
questions you have. So I think probably the DeSantis campaign wondered if we were entering it, in entering the conversation in a good faith way, certainly, you know, I'm sure there were people at CNN, although you know, not me, who wondered if DeSantis was entering it in a good faith way. And I think we both were, which was, here are some questions, what your answers? And you know I pushed back on this. I pushed back on that. But again, it wasn't going to be a Jake Dabber
destroy his run. That's not where we are and that's not necessarily journalism. I mean, that's in some ways showmanship. And the interview was about his thoughts and opinions not mine.
Yeah, you know this is not what I do. So I'm not the arbitrar by any stretch. But it's interesting because it's like he's so much more intelligent than Donald Trump. Like you could see the shift between how he interacts in the conservative media and in the mainstream media right, Like I saw in my mind, like a clear move from like that kind of very partisan right wing media
talking points. What I think is pretty interesting is over the last since twenty fifteen, but really since the Trump administration got going, we've seen this sort of shift to extreme partisan rhetoric. I think more on the right than the left, but I'll agree that there certainly is some on the left, but that you know, in order to get small dollar donations and to become popular. And I thought it was pretty interesting you didn't see so much of that in this interview.
Yeah, I mean, I thought he's obviously a very different candidate than Donald Trump. I mean, interviewing Donald Trump is like stepping into a cyclone, right, I mean, it's this big force of nature and you try the best you can to get your questions in, but it's not like a normal human interact. It's true, DeSantis is very conservative. He rejected the premise that I said, like, you know, there are people out there who think that he's gone so far to the right. You know, he's perceived among
many Republicans as being not electable in November anymore. And he rejected that premise. But I thought it was, you know, a decent exchange of ideas for a fifteen minute interview. I thought it was interesting that he was doing it. It definitely shows that, like his campaign thinks he needs to step outside of just the conservative bubble, which is
you know, strong, but only represents a small percentage. One of the reactions I had to in two thousand and twelve the first presidential debate between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney, Barack Obama did not do well. And one of the reasons I thought, and look, I was biased. I was a White House reporter who had not gotten an interview with Obama in more than a year at that point, I think. But one of the reasons I thought he didn't do well is because he had only been giving
interviews to friendly outlets. And I just think that if you don't take the time as a candidate or a politician to know have your the tires of your car kick. Then you're not going to be as quick. You're going
to think, well, I can handle any of this. And in fact, I remember in two thousand and eight, I remember he got an interview with Brian Williams, and I remember his staff telling me, this is what Brian Williams was anchor chief anker of NBC News, and I remember his staff telling me that Obama didn't He wasn't particularly impressed with the questions. He thought they were so easy.
And this is back in two thousand and eight. So I mean, I think there is a part of politicians who have a brain and look to Santus whether you like him or not, he went to you, Yeah, he's a jag. I mean, like he has a brain. Again, you might not like what's in that brain, but he has. But like people like this, they need to have their ideas tested. I just think it's good for every candidate.
And that goes for you know, liberal candidates too, going to you know, not necessarily the friendliest outlets either, it's better for everybody.
I'm a big fan of Jessica Tarlov who's.
On the five God Blesser. That's a tough environment.
I mean that's a killer. And like I like, you know, I go on GB News, which is like this incredibly right wing British news channel, because I think it's really like you don't change hearts and minds on MSNBC. Not to say that I don't love MSNBC, but just like you know, you go on GB News, you might be the first non insane person anyone has ever heard. No, I'm sorry, that's wrong.
Look, all I can say is this, like I'm selling a book right now, I'm selling a novel. No no, no, no, no, no, I'm not I'm not criticizing. I'm making a point. I'm selling a novel right now. Like I wrote a novel. It came out a week and a half ago. And you know, I know that CNN people, because because my fellow anchors and colleagues have been so generous and talking to me about my book on air, I know that the CNN audience knows that my book came out, and
they'd probably have heard about it by now. But there are other audiences that haven't your audience and other audiences, and it's important to get my message out there about like this is what my book's about. I would be honored. If you take a look at it, I think you'd find to find it a fun read, et cetera. And I am just trying to sell a book. I'm not trying to sell myself as I should be running the world,
you know. So I do think there is something to be said about going everywhere you can go to make the sale. All the more so when you are trying to win votes and you're trying to get ioins to go to their local classroom to stand in the middle for the middle of in the middle of the caucus for hours to advocate for you, you really need to convince people. And that means going everywhere. That means talking to everyone you can talk to.
In this DeSantis interview, so you have fifteen minutes. Doesn't it seem like every time DeSantis tries to get and this is and by the way, this is happening to all the other candidates. We saw this with Asa Hutchinson. I remember this split screen of Asa Hutchinson trying to talk to Andrea Mitchell while Trump's plane was landing in New York for his Alvin Pragg indictment. And I thought like,
here's Asa Hutchinson. I don't necessarily agree with him politically, but this guy has been around and he can't even like get this full screen.
That's a tough metaphor.
Yeah, I mean, but like, but the same thing happened with Desantas for this one. There's a third set of indictments that Michigan. You know, we this target letter and then we had these Michigan fake electors. Not even indictment of Trump, but you know, certainly his group's plan what that looks like, you know, and we don't know how involved he was, But do you feel like this was heavy on the DeSantis interviewed? Did you feel that he continually was upstaged by this?
I was going to ask one Trump question because Trump and Seen were in court that day and then for the classified document's case, and then this news came, Trump announcing.
You can't not ask, it's malpractice.
Yeah, I can not ask. And also, you know, it's interesting timing because Trump is down this on Sunday and then literally minutes before DeSantis gives a big speech on military policy and sits down for his first non conservative interview, Plump announces this. So I asked what I asked, and you know, I didn't lead the interview with it because I knew he wanted to talk about military policy, and I felt like I had some good questions for him on military policy. And you know what he calls, you know,
wanting to rip the woke out of the military. But yeah, Trump is a not literally, but he is an eight hundred poun guerrella. I mean, he's just there. And I'm sure that DeSantis would rather not be asked about Trump, would rather have be asked about his his vision. But at that point there was nothing I could do. So
I asked those two questions and we moved on. I mean, I had roast of my questions were about his views, his policies, trying to get him on the record when it came to Ukraine, China, what should what should trans Americans expect from the Santus administration, his position on abortion, and on and on and on. But yeah, I mean, you can't avoid Trump. You can't.
Yeah, Jesus, thank you, thank you, thank you.
It's so great, great talking to you, Molly, Thank you so much. All the demons are here is out now wherever books are sold, no moment.
Thickly, Jesse Cannon.
Molly, Jong Fast, Kevin McCarthy always licked Trumps boots all day and all night.
Well, he made another deal, right, Kevin McCarthy, King of the Secret Deals. Trump was mad that Kevin McCarthy had not endorsed him. I mean, it's so ironic, right because Kevin McCarthy, who completely rehabilitated him after January sixth, didn't actually endorse him yet and Trump is mad. So Trump has made Kevin McCarthy promise that he will expunge these two charges from the record. There are six days left in the session. We shall see. This is our moment
of fuckery. That's it for this episode of Fast Politics. Tune in every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday to hear 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.