America’s Cold Civil War + Trump Is DECIMATING American National Security

There is nothing like living here in Washington when Congress is not here. The traffic is better, the flowers are brighter, the air is clearer. Anyway, I'm being I'm obviously being a little a little snarky about this, but only a little. It has been fascinating that once they left, it is as if the sun came out and the bird started chirping, and the flowers started blooming and all of those things.

Because it is one of those weird, weird times here in Washington, where you know, people will regularly ask me, so, how you doing. I'm like, well, my family's doing great, personal life's doing great. Works, you know, even really enjoying this new business ventures and all of this stuff, but oh my god, the country's in trouble. And that's like,

it's this like this nagging thing. It's like, you know, you I wish I were losing you know, I'm glad not to have personal challenges, but it means I'm losing sleep over over what's happening to our country collectively. And I think we're all a little concerned about that. I'm gonna give you a little heads up what I'm doing today.

I interview with a terrific new book. Tim Winer has written a slew of books about the defense, about both the Pentagon, our national security world and intelligence, written a number of books on the CIA. Has got a new book on the c I A he spoke to, uh the not counting Ratcliffe now, but the six all six of the previous heads of the CIA that go back,

uh since nine to eleven. Uh And the CIA is still trying to figure out it's mission, you know, in a post nine to eleven world, uh in a in a in a in a world where uh uh, the CIA was asked to be uh more of a of a military uh more more of a paramilitary organization than it had been in quite some time, right after nine to eleven, the impact that had h and the impact the Trump administration's having, uh, and the trust or lack thereof in the intelligence community. That goes both ways, right

Trump Trump doesn't trust the intel community. In the intel community doesn't trust him. It is it is a it is a recipe for concern.

really want? It's pretty clear he doesn't listen to national security and intelligence folks when it comes to how to deal with Putin, or he wouldn't have given Putin a summit on American soil. Meeting him in Alaska has got everybody nervous. Giving a two bit a sort of tin pot dictator like Putin. This is not a serious world leader. This is a person who has nuclear weapons, so you have to take him seriously. But as John McCain call me, he's basically just, you know, a guy who runs a

gas station with with nuclear weapons. And yet Trump loves to elevate him, and Putin loves that Trump loves to elevate him. You know it is It's fascinating to me that when the idea of this summit was out there, immediately the Trump administration i e. Marco Rubio hinted that this would be no summer would happen without Zelensky being involved. Maybe Trump and Putin would meet first and then Zelensky would be involved. Then suddenly Trump just agrees to a

one on one summit. Maybe maybe Zelenski's there, maybe he's not. So Already Putin is getting everything he wants and the biggest danger here and this is going to dominate the week, by the way, This isn't I've got I've got something bigger. I want to I want to focus on before we get to the interview with Tim. But this is going

to dominate the week. And you know, the I think the biggest concern Europe, Ukraine and for frankly, anybody that wants a world that favors liberal, small l liberal democracy. For those of you that want to take that word and claim on saying something else, it is not liberal as in an American ideological term, but liberal as in

the world order. Do you want to live in a world where where there's essentially where democracy flourishes, or do you want to live in a world where authoritarianism flourishes?

And there is a concern of all the Western world that Trump wants a deal too badly. If he wants a deal, if he goes into that summit with Putin without Zelensky there and he wants a deal too badly, he's going to end up giving away stuff that Ukraine's not going to sign off on, and I don't think Europe signs off on. And what happens then, you know, does he get angry, does he side more with Putin? It looked like he wanted to get tough with Putin, and then all of a sudden he just rolled over

this week and said, sure, let's do a summit. So look, we'll see how he handles this week. We'll see if Zelensky is it really would be a huge I think.

I think at a minimum, he's got to bring Zelensky to Alaska and and sort of force force the situation if he really wants a deal. Look, I get that he wants this deal. He's obsessed with somehow creating. You know, he keeps talking about this Nobel Peace Prize. He's everything Obama has he wants, right, I mean, who knows. At some point he may wish Michelle Obama was the first Lady instead of Malania. But it does seem as whatever

Obama got he wants, right, he's obsessed. The obsession Trump has with all things Obama is quite something, and so obviously because Obama got a Nobel Peace Prize, he wants a Nobel Piece prize. Talking about all of these, you know, he goes out of his way. If he sees a dispute between two countries, he inserts himself. I'll be honest, I don't mind that he does that. I don't mind that an American president wants to use the prestige of the American presidency to try to bring peace. That is

a good thing. So I don't want to sit here and say this is a bad thing. The concern you have though, is how badly does he want to deal? And that's got to be the concern when it comes with Putin. How badly is he going to want to deal?

And does he give does he essentially give up so much? And then what is Ukraine and Europe supposed to do if Trump and Putin agree to something and Ukraine doesn't want to agree to it. As the Lunsky keeps pointing out, just trading Land is against the constitution of Ukraine. Now, maybe Trump doesn't care about Ukraine's constitution because frankly, I don't think he cares about America's constitution, which is the focal focus of what I want to get out here

in a minute. But that is that is going to dominate the week. It should dominate the week. But it is interesting. You do get a sense that the people around President Trump, namely Marco Rubio, since he is both National Security Advisor, Secretary of State, head of the Archives. I don't know how many other jobs he's been handed. Maybe he's the next bedchair. We saw we have more people with two jobs these days with the Treasury secretary. Now he's running the hi RS. That's an interesting story

which I'm going to get to in a minute. But the fact is there was an attempt at a check and balance. Donald Trump didn't like that somebody pushed back and refused to do something that was likely unconstitutional, So he pushes Billy Long out. That is what happened, folks. So that is a concern. But that does bring me

to this larger, the larger issue we're ald dealing with right now. So when you look at what's happening with redistricting, redistricting is is just a It's just the latest skirmish between what is turning into a cold civil war. All right, this way, this is what it is. I hate using that rhetoric, I using those words, but what else are

you going to describe it. We are literally having a redistricting war between the states right now, and we have governors who have decided they don't care about the minority rights in their own states. Greg Abbott doesn't care. If you don't agree with Greg Abbott, he is going to force his will upon you in the state of Texas. And if you don't agree with Cavin Newsom and how they're going to he's going to force his will upon you.

This is not this is not what the founders intended. But look, let's I mean, look, I'm obviously pretty critical of how the Democrats have responded to the Republicans. But make no mistake, it is Donald Trump and the Republican Party are creating this unprecedented challenge to this to our constitutional republic. Okay, on so many levels, redistricting is really just the tip of the iceberg. This is not a policy fight. This isn't the use partisan back and forth.

It is a direct stress test of whether our constitutional system actually works. When a president and his party decide they don't have to care about the limits that are written down on paper. Okay, he is Spinello. Trump has spent years, parts of his first term, and much so far of these first two hundred plus day bending and breaking the guardrails of the of the Republic. He's weaponized

federal agencies for personal vendettas. He's ignoring constitutional boundaries on executive power, treating the Justice Department in his personal law firm, unilaterally imposing tariffs for reasons that have nothing to do with trader law. That's unconstitutional. I think the courts are going to figure that out soon enough. And the GOP from its leadership to its so called moderates in the

party have all chosen to enable him. They've confirmed his most troubling cabinet choices, including one who is wrecking America's health, which I talked about last week. They've refused to conduct

meaningful oversight over these horrendous decisions. They've allowed the constitutional tools that the founders gave them. They're in their hands and they're just gathering dust. But here's the part that people on the left don't want to talk about. The Democratic response is pretty troubling because right now, as a party, okay, as an official party apparatus, they've decided to frame this moment as a war, right, Okay, you got to fight fire with fire. That we're in a this is an

unprecedented moment. So they're framing as a war. And when you tell yourself you're in a war, you start rationalizing things you'd normally not do that you would say is immoral or wrong or unprincipled, But hey, it's war and all spare and war. Right, that's the mindset. For a decade, the Democrats made the moral and civic case for less partisan redistricting and in some cases to take it out of politicians' hands altogether. The Demoocratic Party, many inside the party,

Eric Holder has been working on this. Others have spent money on referendum around on states Florida and California and Ohio and New York and Virginia and many of these places too, because they argued it was the right thing to do. And guess what, I think it is the right thing to do. Take as much politics out of this as you can.

goddamn understand the stakes. And we are not replacing one unprincipled, unconstitutional set of leaders with another set of on principled

and constitutional set of leaders. And that's the mistake people keep making with Trump. Trust me, I'd love to tell the guy all these things and do all these horrible things, but you're not. You go low with him, and he wins. What he wants is to drag his opponents into the same immoral gutter that he lives in to make them behave. He wants all of his opponents to behave as immortally and a morley as he does. And the moment somebody does, he wins, because then what does he say? See, I

told you the entire system is corrupt. They're all corrupt. I'm just more honest about it. They're all like me. And we've seen it in little ways, in big ways. Marco Ruby in his little hands, right, what was the end of Marco Rubio's political career when he decided to go low with Donald Trump? Anybody that is attempted to go into the gutter with him has has only allowed him to win. But let's go through the blueprint that the Founders actually gave us. The Founder saw this danger coming,

maybe not Trump specifically, but the idea of a leader or a faction that believed winning an election meant a blank check to rule. Minority rights be damned. The Founders feared two things above all, another king and tyranny of the majority. Here's what James Madison said in Federalists number ten, if a majority be united by a common interest, the rights of the minority will be insecure. His solution was

a very large republic. He wanted enough competing interest to make it quote very improbable, if not impracticable, impracticable, excuse me, for one majority to unite and trample the rest that there would be so many sort of different groups of majorities at any one time that would be a check on any sort of dictator like figure. And in fact, in Federalists fifty one he sharpened the point and he said,

this ambition must be made to counteract ambition. The great security consists in giving each department the necessary constitutional means to resist encroachments of the others. Checks and balances, folks, Okay, checks and balances. Hamilton added in Federalist seventy eight, when he was defending the need for an independent judiciary, he said, neither force nor will, but merely judgment. That's the shield

against mob arrel. These weren't lofty ideals, they were tools. They were designed to be used when majority power got dangerous. Well guess what, folks, Majority power is dangerous right in this moment. We have the tools no one uses them, or someone like Mitch McConnell is afraid to use them. He had the most important tool of all and he failed the biggest test of his life. He will have to live with that. Maybe he can't. But here's where we are. The tools are still there, but the people

holding them refuse to use them. The moderate or mainstream Republicans, the ones who actually know Trump is wrong, have chosen silence over action. They confirmed troubling cabinet secretaries that they all knew were going to create problems, problems for our

health with Bobby Kennedy Junior at HHS. My god, it's a bigger disaster than anybody could have predicted, and a lot of people predicted this would be a disaster, but literally, this man is a menace to society, a menace Pete hag Seth, that Defense weighing over his head, lots of concerns about readiness, lots of concerns about troop morale, all due to the bizarre leadership that hag Seth has had at Defense. And again, multiple members of the Senate basically

got intimidated into voting for him. Jony Earns him and Tom Tillis knew this guy was totally unqualified for the job, and they got bullied by MAGA into supporting them. And

of course there's Tulsa Gabbert, who may or may not be the single most important asset Rush has ever had. Congress is also ignored on the unconstitional tariff abuse. They're not the ones that have filed suit in the courts that Trump is unilaterally using authority that belongs to the legislative branch. It's others that have filed suit. The Congressional Republicans have looked the other way as foreign aid was gutted and the intelligence community hollowed out. They've not lifted

one finger of oversight. Not one. It's not they're not even You can't even say there's been a week check on Trump. It has been no check on him at all.

can and can't tell you what to do. Okay on this, but CBS has decided it's easier not to fight, so they've accepted these unconstitutional handcuffs. And by them swallowing these restrictions, they potentially create a precedent, and they're coming after other networks. Renting car has all but said this, He's coming after NBC's coming after They're going after all the networks, and again, totally unconstitutional for government to do what he's been trying

to do here. Founders Again, the founders did not write the Constitution so it could sit in a display case at Mark Rubia's National Archives. Remember he's currently also the archivist. Right now, they're meant for it to have a living set of guardrails, but the guardrails only work if someone

grabs the wheel. I want to call my friend Andrew Sullivan, who just nailed it in this most recent substack, right he said, this is a permanent stain, and that's scary. Here's what he writes in the face off between this man's wilful power and liberal democracy. Liberal democracy would just fold. We didn't think that was going to happen. But it has. We've watched Trump used tariffs, which is constitutionally Congress's job,

as personal punishment against countries that displeased him. Me and what he's doing with Brazil.

promises immunity for crimes done in his name, and anybody who pays it, he pays him or his family enough money, they get they get a little extra something. I mean, look, just go look at the lobbyist filings right now. Right those with the every country trying and company trying to get an exemption from the tariffs have all hired the same firms who know what the correct way to do business with Trumpets. I think I think some in another life people would have just referred to this as mob rule.

I don't want to leave. I don't want to leave Tim Cook out of this moment. Apple CEO stands in the Oval office and he hands Trump a golden plaque, an engraved Apple glass, smiling for the cameras. Right, pay the tribute to the king, to the mad camp Now, I get it to Cook. This is a small gesture, Eh, they look at it. The statue is nothing compared to the damaged Trump could do to Apple's business. Okay, so I understand, and he's got a fiducial responsibility to his shareholders.

But I assume Tim Cook considers himself a patriotic American and believes in the US Constitution because by doing what he did, this is America's most famous company now, right, the pre eminent corporation right, arguably the most valuable real company. I know, Palanteer I think technically has a higher value

right now. But that is all speculative, like Apple is essentially right, this is this is the symbol of an American company in the twenty first century, all right, Apple, what GM was, what GM and Ford were in the fifties and sixties, That's what Apple is, right, And here he is bending the knee, setting an example. What are other corporate leaders supposed to do? Bend the knee or fight? Nobody's fighting. All of these folks have constitutional tools to

fight this tyranny. The founders gave them all these tools to do this. And everybody's surrendering, and everybody's surrendering for self protection, political survival, shareholder price, maybe their own survival in a corporation. All seems like good ideas until we lose it all. We're not in a constitutional republic. If

we lose this democracy, you're going to lose a lot more than a few dollars of price on apple shares. So this gets me to what the Democrats are doing. They're taking the bait. They've decided the only way to fight is to act just as ruthlessly revenge redistricting in Illinois, New York, California. And they tell themselves it's self defense, but in reality, it's exactly what Trump wants to make his opponents, his illegal and immoral game by his rules

in his universe, and here we are. It's the political version of the old saying when you get into the mud with a pig, you both get dirty, and the pig likes it, replacing am and don't give me this crap rationalize that. You know he's a bad mob boss. You got to do whatever you cake, we'll be a good mob boss. The answer is no mob bosses at all. Look, I don't like the lazy comparisons to nineteen thirties Germany. I hate the quote second Civil War predictions. I'd like

to believe that we're a lot better than that. And frankly, you know, I sort of buy into to that thesis that says I think it's Godwin's law when it comes to the Nazis. You know that, you know, if you can't make your point without invoking the Nazis, and you're probably not very good at debating and making your point. But let's be honest, it's a bit uncomfortable seeing how many mistakes from the eighteen fifties, from eighteen fifties America or pre war Europe in the early nineteen thirties are

happening again right here. The normalization of the unacceptable, the rational rationalizing of just this once will breach our principle.

Just this once will do this because it's in the name of something bigger and better. The founders gave us these tools to prevent this. They feared a king, they feared a united majority trampling on the rest of us. They didn't imagine leaders who would just refuse to use the tools. They didn't they'd come back here and be appalled,

be appalled. And here's the thing, you know right now, both political parties only hear from the loudest voices, and the loudest voices are angry, and they're in the base base MAGA, and you have the progressive base, and they're all on fire right now for various reasons. One is celebrating, one is on fire and anger, okay, But the majority of us live somewhere in between those bases, and many

of us have tuned out. I haven't. I hope some of you who were tuning out or tuning into me, tuning into somebody who isn't going to sit here and just tell you what you want to hear on stage left, stage right. I'm just trying to live in the real world. I like a world where there is always look. I think when one party goes too far and want the

other party to get power and drag them back. I am one of those who believes that this country is always better off when we just sort of we do that little balance, not quite a rocking seesaw, but that little balance that would go a little one way, a little the other. And then I count on members of

both parties, even when they're in the minority or majority, to know when to work with the other side when they realize, hey, this is like our health. I mean, the idea that a majority of the US Senate can't get up here and impeach this menace to society and Robert F. Kennedy Junior, who is literally making decisions that are going to kill people, and they're doing nothing about this,

nothing about this. And it's the independence. It's the people here in the middle that are not being represented by either one of these parties right now. These parties are trying to protect their own They're trying to entrench their own power, right Republicans are trying to save it and Democrats are trying to entrench what they have to get it back. But nobody is trying to think about what's the right thing to do, what's the right way to do this. Who's going to stand up because you know what,

redistricting blue states, that's the easy way out. You know what. The hard way is running a campaign and defeating Greg Abbott as governor, or going to win some legislative seats, organizing in the state of Florida. That's the hard way. The easy answer is an undemocratic power craft with your own undemocratic approach. The hard way is to resist within the law, within the constitution, and within your own principles, even if it might cost you politically. Madison's warning still

sands of the majority be united by a common interest, the rights of the minority will be insecure. And right now the people who could stand up aren't standing up. Leaders in both parties are failing this test. Nobody is looking out for the best interests of how a very fragmented society can live. We are a very fragmented society. Not everybody was united on how whether we should even

revolt from the British and how to do it. But they wanted to come up with a system that would give everybody a chance, and everybody a voice, and everybody a say, and everybody some protection. And the Bill of Rights were designed not to help the majority rule, but to make sure the majority didn't overrule and then run over people's rights run over people's rights to on faith or not to have faith. I mean, you look at what Louisiana and Oklahoma are doing. They're shoving religion through

the public school system. That is not what the constitution allows for, and that is unfair to the minority who do not want If you want a religious based education, you can go to a private school and do that, but you don't use tax dollars to force it down people.

This is happening left and right these days. So if nobody's going to stand up and defend the rights of the minority, which again that's why we have the Bill of Rights, was to defend those in the minority in any given moment, in the minority, on speech, in the minority, on religion, in the minority, on political power. They were not to be thrown out of the country. They were not to be thrown in jail. They were not to be called treason. Is the most patriotic thing you can

do is to disagree with your president. There's nothing and it's just as patriotic to disagree with them as it is to agree with them. And sometimes it's just as unpatriotic to agree with them. If you're doing it in order to slim your fellow US citizen. So I couldn't be more disappointed. There is literally zero leadership in the Democratic Party that's standing on principle right now. We already have a Republican Party that's principalists amoral at this point,

right Johnson and Thune are doing nothing here. Nobody is standing up to this stuff. But the Democrats answer is using tools and behaving in ways that is only going to make it easier for him to get what he's trying to get done, not harder. Look, the Democrats actually had a much smarter way to resist Trump in the first term, and a lot of Republicans stood up to Trump in the first turn, and that was the proper way to deal with a mad king, and the guardrails

got dented, but they worked. Nobody's even trying it that

way this time. That's a shame and that's a problem. Before we get started with Tim Winner, I do want to focus on the tragedy that unfolded at the CDC because it dovetails.

and I thought, why not. And when you listen to the lyrics, it's all about a man wants to make the point that when it comes to disease, disease, they don't they don't find out if you're a liberal or a conservative. The disease comes for you. They don't find out if you're rich or poor, disease comes for you. But it's his way. He's looking for any way to communicate to people that what what, hh, what nih has

been doing has been only for the betterment of the human of human health, period and that this nonsense that Kennedy has spewed is just that it's nonsense. It's complete and utter nonsense, And it was just a very The whole interview is very troubling when you just hear about all all of the things that we're now that that

Kennedy has set us back on decades. If Kennedy went away tomorrow and you could flip the switch, Francis Collins told me that it would still take years to recover from all the lost researchers who have been fired, who are now leaving the country. In some cases, he said, from Australia to France, to the UK, to Japan to South Korea. All of these allies of ours who believe in medical research are all recruiting all these people that worked at nih SO. And obviously Kennedy's not going the

way tomorrow, so this damage is going to be exponentially worse with every day he's there. But I don't want to let this moment go without what letting you know what. I'm sure some of you followed what happened. But late last week a lone gunman opened fire on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention CDC, killed a police officer, shattered some windows across the campus. CDC employees are obviously in shock and in fear about what happened. So this

is a real moment. HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Junior is in charge of the CDC. Now the CDC's chief medical officer told staff on a Saturday morning call, we're mad that this happened, and on that same call the agency's new director, doctor Susan Monarez. She tried to reassure him, but one employee asked her directly, quote, are you able to speak to the misinformation, the disinformation that caused this issue, and what is your plan forward to ensure this doesn't

happen again. Well, here's the issue. According to law enforcement, the suspect that had become fixated on the coronavirus vaccine and convinced that the vaccine was causing all of his physical ailments inside the CDC. Many are seeing this attack as part of a disturbing pattern where public health workers have been targeted by political, verbal, and now physical assaults ever since the pandemic began. So this is just violence

at the workplace. It was violence born from disinformation, the kind of disinformation that's been allowed to fester, amplify, and fantastasize. Much of this disinformation is courtesy of an anti vaccine activist by the name of Robert of Kennedy Junior. Now, of course, now he's a HHS secretary and he oversees CDC.

He never spoke publicly about this issue on Friday. By late Saturday morning, according to one report, more than half an hour after posting phishing photos on social media first, Kennedy finally posted condolences on x and pledged to support CDC employees. Later in that day did send an email to the entire HHS workforce, and the email, he said, this is a reminder of the very human challenges public servants sometimes face, even in places dedicated to healing and progress.

But it also reinforces the importance of the work you do every day. That was the official response. But let's not forget the backdrop. Here's the backdrop. Kennedy spent years calling the CDC quote a cesspool of corruption. That was what activist Kennedy called it. He also referred to the CDC once as a fascist enterprise. Robert of Kennedy, those are the words he's used and again. He has been called by Nature magazine the leading super spreader of health

misinformation and vaccine misinformation. He accused scientists of ignoring vaccine

arms feeding right into what the shooter claims to children, and he compared them to the Catholic Church covering up a child child sex abuse. He called the COVID vaccine, the deadliest vaccine ever made. So that's the backdrop. This stuff has real world consequences, misinformation and disinformation in particular,

and the weaponizing of it. Look, there's a lot of social media companies that need to rethink how they've handled Kennedy and how they handled health because they really put up we don't control the distribution of good information the tech company to do. Just remember that. So look, this is this is the public record, This is Kennedy's public record. This happened on Kennedy's watch. Now he's got to lead the CDC. Nobody's going to trust him on the inside,

and nor should they. How do you expect them to? The only thing I think we all should fear is that if the CDC gets purged the way nih has been purged. This is anyway, it's a rough moment. It's a rough moment. But I want to quote Celine Grounder. She's an infectious disease specialist at Bellevue and she put it this way. The intersection of disinformation, conspiracy theories, and

political violence is getting scarier by the day. I'm very worried about how this is now going beyond defunding of infectious diseases in public health to political violence against the people working in those fields. Leadership matters here, folks. I think what he's already done are multiple impeachable fences. If

the US Senate would get off it's ours and do it. Bill Cassidy said it was troubling what Kennedy did with in the cuts to when he cut r mRNA funding completely from NIAH, canceled all those contracts. I think it's more than troubling information. I believe we have impeachable offense. And then some Congress needs to do oversight and quickly because America's health is counting on it. All right, once again, I had a very uplifting way to open. I know it's what you guys turned to me for right to

feel good about everyday life. I'm half kidding, of course, but I'm gonna sneak in a break when we come back. My interview with Tim Winer. It is terrific, all right. He was in a remote location in Vermont, so the audio is you know, we need more broad band in rural America, folks, but it's look, he's worth the interview. I know the audio is going to be a little bit different than you're normally used to, but trust me, it's a good interview. I really think it's worth your time.

So take a listen, enjoy the break, and when we come back after it, I got a little sports update for you and I'll do some questions. Joining me now is one of the most prolific reporters authors when it comes to the world of intelligence. Tim Weiner has written

extensively about the inner workings of the American intelligence community in general, the CIA specifically. And I have him on today because he's got a new book on the CIA sort of in What Is the Mission in the twenty first Century? In this post nine to eleven world, he spoke to six the six CIA directors that have had have been running the agency in the twenty first century.

It is a terrific book. In it, we're I feel like we're constantly trying to figure out what is the mission of the CIA, what should their role be in defense, in intelligence and everything, and it it isn't something that actually we seem to I feel like every decade it slightly changes, and I think it's fair to say we're in another one of these transition periods. And Tim's book does a good job of sort of setting that predicate and Tim joins me, now, good to see you, hi, Shot.

So look, you've you've, like I said, you've reported on the agency for decades. This feels like you're trying to and this goes to it. I guess we've been trying to figure this out for other parts of the government since the fall of the Berlin Wall. But is the CIA still looking to figure out what its role is post Cold War? I mean, is it is this still? Does this still go back to not figuring out what

is what is the role of the CIA in a post Cold War world?

You go mean, they're clacked records, which needs to be fairly belluminantan no longer you talk to them. The mission of the CIA from its creation Partwood, its core mission spion art no thy enemy, Sunsu wrote in the Art of War, and then one hundred ballants will not be defeated. After nine eleven, counter terrorism swamped everything for fifteen years. Espionage it's swamped counterintelligence, which is spy cascading starting against

enemy penetrations of the government of state. And that was not, in the long run a good thing. And the espionage mission didn't really get revived until about eight years ago. I'd talk about that later in the show.

of that. You know. I interviewed the guy who was put in come to constructing the secret prison system on the record, as all the interviews in the book are, and he said, you know, we're not jailors. We didn't have enough people who spoke Arabic, much less knew how to do an interrogation. The only killed interrogator they could find had been harshly disciplined for misconduct in teaching the contours in Central America how to torture back in the

nineteen eighties. Not good instructor, you know, for for your recruits in detail to run a secret prison system. And the other thing is they do this would not stay secret. It's very hard to keep a secret in America. Preparing and they knew they would be caught violating the laws of God and man, not to mention the Geneva Convention, and they knew that they would take it in the net, not the president who ordered.

CIA in a different direction. He figured it was better to kill people than to capture them, and he mightily stepped up the drone war for the first bod his presidency.

Pelti Gabbard running the Director of Natural Intelligence, which oversees all seventeen US intelligence agency. H do you want to Obama running the CIA at a time when it was uncovering Russian election interference to help Trump in twenty sixteen. Over the FBI, You've got the right wing podcaster and MAGA soldier Ash Patel, who is running Perhaps the right word is ruining the FBI dismantling its intelligence and Natural Security divisions and firing everybody who was involved in investigating

the Russian This is madness. And at the CIA you've got Jon Rador. Now. Radcliffe was a three term Texas congressman, former personal injury lawyer who had briefly served on the House Intelligence Committee. When Trump saw m on Fox defending him against the so called Russia hopes, and he liked to cut a gym, and so for eight months and twenty twenty, he made him the Director of Natural Intelligence.

In those eight months at the end of Trump's first term, Radcliffe spent all his time distorting and twisting intelligence reportant to absolve the Russians of trying to help Trump, cutting off intelligence reporting on the Russian Congress, and generally telling Trump anything he wanted to hear and not telling him things that he didn't want to hear. He's doing much

the same as the I director, and much worse.

was the holiest of holmes at the CIA. It's the briefing that the president gets supposedly every morning. Were Trump doesn't do intelligence right, and he cureinly doesn't read intelligence briefings. And when he talks about intelligence, he usually puts it in a scare quote, right, And uh, you know at root of this, Jock, is that Trump is an ideologue. Ideology is the enemy of intelligence. If you are an ideologue, right, you don't care what the way.

but it's actually two former CIA agents, former State Department. Because the issue is good information and there is a real concern what I have found and I'm sure you found in your book, but I'd love for you to explain this that among the rank and file Intel gathers, the people that have that work through, that worked in both the Bush era and the Obama era and were

held over in some cases into the Trump era. They're alarmed, and they're very right, they're totally alarmed that there is no longer you know that, you know the accusations of political bias that the CIA come with every administration, but it is now, it is now actionable, right it is.

It has gone to another level of political interference. And they have a real fear that our political leaders are not going to get unvarnished information from the intelligence community in the same way we've seen what happens when the American electorate doesn't get straightforward, unvarnished information without an ideological tilt to it, and what happens to the information ecosystem. This is a huge problem right now in our in our system.

States at home abroad. Let me ask you a rhetorkey questions, Scott. Let me ans script here, what do you think Trump would do if the United States were hit again?

wants to essentially renumber the census, right, you know, he wants to because he is claiming without evidence in order to support what he did at BLS. Hey, all of this is manipulated. Everything government does is manipulate, right, So it's sort of a bit of a power grap And if we got hit again. You know, it's pretty clear. You know, they don't let you, don't let anything get in the way of the of the ability to sort

of concentrate power. So I think they'd see it as an opportunity to concentrate more power.

the door with what you're talking about.

experiment in American democracy. Chut My mom grew up in Hitler's German and she made it up of Skinberte, and I don't want my daughter to have to face that terrible, terrible prep.

I assume it's at risk right now because there is concern that he could manipulate what they give them, that it could get leaked, that it could not get that it could get misused. So how blind do you let me ask you this, how blind our rank and file CIA intel gatherers feeling right now when it comes to our supposed best intel allies, and I'm talking about Israel and the Five Eyes.

United States. However, the CIA relies Michael as does the United States on those alliances because born intelligence, the GIA cannot do its job without its liaison with foreign intel services.

The CI does not have enough people, enough language skills, enough country knowledge to cover the entire planet. So if something really dangerous is happening in Jordan or Pakistan, it relies on its liaisons, as they are at times with

the host intelligence service. Now let us say that you are the head of the BND, the German intelligence and you are perceiving correctly because this is happening right now, that Putin is waging a war of sabotage and subversion in Western Europe, and you've got some good sorting funds recruited Russian Are you going to share recruited Russians intelligence with Pelsey Gabbard, who is a putent apolitics, you would think twice about doing this. And you know there are

roadblocks in this two way street now, and that increases the danger for being that state, as does you know Trump's rupturing of relations with the nation to NATO. Right, what Trump has done in books short months is to take a wrecking ball. The architecture of American national security was built over the court of eighty World War two, with one of its primary purposes being keeping the Russians from attacking arrest of the world. The Russians are attacked

the nations of Europe. They are conducting assassination, they are conducting political warfare, they are conducting information warfare, and they are conducting actual lacks of sabotage on information infrastructure in Europe. If Vladimir Putin is allowed to keep one square inch of Ukrainer, yeah, you will not stop there. He will move westward. And the United States is you know, essentially withdrawing moral, political, financial, and military from the nations of

Europe to prevent that. That's World War three, Betty, No.

And we signed the treaty.

Does Trump like Putin because he wants to be like Putin? That is government's an autocrat? You know? Do the Russians have something on Trump called promot from some time? And unless the intelligence archons brush are opened at some point in the future and there's a big boulder in it labeled b Trump, we're not going to know the answer that question. But in a way, the question now answers himself.

Trump has not been Pudent's agent. He's been Putin's ally, right, And you know, somebody evidently got to him a couple of weeks ago and said, you know, you really have to man up again, Pudin, because he's been leading you

around the nose by the nose for the last sevil year. And so you know, nowsum, we'll believe Trump and Fuodin are going to sit down and Trump is going to say this warned to end, and Food is going to say, you know, stop people, thank you very much. Uh, there's the door. You don't think he.

the foreign policies or political goals of a foreign power. Right, don't you know, Chelsea Gabbert will not be photographed taking a briefcape full of frimlin gold under a bridge in Piena at midnight.

Intel director who oversaw the irreputable report about the liaisons between Team Trump and Team Putin during twenty sixteen, but also to prosecute the President of the United States at the time, Barack Obama, well is CI director John Brennan, and possibly any number of CIA officers and FBI eight. As my friend Garrick Rafts, the great journalists and author, often says, if he saw that happening in another country, what would you call it?

the only hope If you were an ahead of the MI six and you really needed to get something in the United States, and you didn't trust the CIA and you didn't trust Gabbert, do you go to Marco Rubio? You see the last bastion of potential truth in Trump's ear or not. Well, Duck, I never covered politics, and you have so correct me if I'm getting a quotation raw.

But I believe that the late great Governor pets and Rick Keegs once instead of uh, President George Hubert walker Bush when he was running for president.

Agency for Interacting Development, which was the most powerful foreign policy tool the United States has ever wielded, has presided over ideological purchase of the State Department, has put a spokesman in place who belonged on North Korean state telemension, and is putting what is left of the reputation of

the United States abroad at the deepest risk. You know what, if I were an ambassador or born intelligence chief and I wanted to back channel something into the contexts of the American government, I just give it to my friendly local CI station chief. I would certainly not give it to any memor member of Trump's cabinet or inner circle.

not be a way to get good actional intelligence in front of rational actors.

you need to know, but you don't want to know. Yeah, because it's too unpleasant, too harsh, because it bumps up against your preconception. And that kind of ignorance goes a long way to explaining why we were in Vietnam, why we were in Iraq, and what lies ahead for the government of the United States. It's natural to jurity establishment

and it's an intelligence community. You've got a president who is wilkilly ignorant, who doesn't want to know, and who despises and disdains the CIA because it is, in his mind the capital of deep state.

say take me to your leader, and likely is not we will be taken to the leader. This is good. They're the roads diverge. Okay. The CIA pays handsomely, very handsomely for information. We don't unless you know we're crooked, and most of us are not. The CIA is recruiting for an agent to you know, enter into a criminal conspiracy to commit treason. We just want, you know, enough

facts to write a decent story. Right and uh, but I have found that the the you know, small but significant ben diagram between what spies do and what journalists dout has helped me, you know, over the years, conduct hundreds of on the record interviews with u C I officer, c I analy C I veterans BI director. And you know this is not some meat trick. Uh, this is

just you know, good journalism. If people are on the record, yep, they're much less likely to fudge or to play or to concoct, okay, because their name is attached to what

they said. I haven't been a Washington journalist since the late twentieth century, and I find that, you know, if you're on deadline, if you're working for the New York Times or Washington Posts, yeah, off the record or background instance, okay, but not if you're writing a book, right, okay, and you're playing the long game. Why should you reader trust me? If you writing a book with off the record, you know, source.

to figure out what's happening in the world. Okay, that

is a vital function. And if the CIA in its reported, and of course they had made catastrophic mistakes in the past, as we all know, you know by saying, for example, it's that I'm staying had uh you know our toolm brickling weapons of mass destruction, and you know the stench of that lasted for a long time. But if the CIA in its reporting tells the president something terrible has happened, something terrible is likely to happen in the not dis in the future, and the president of the bull kit,

I don't believe it. If the CIA is not believed, it has no purfect right. And you know, uh, substantial risks are taken in trying to gather information over seasons, Risks to the recruited agents, risks to the officers themselves at the dirty, typicult, dangerous business. And you're going to get burned from ton. But if you're a superpower, you need an intelligence service to look over the horizons, and it anticipates surprise, and if you don't have that, you're gonna get surprised.

the biggest win for the CIA in the last ten years is you know, basically teleg you know, showing the world telling Zelenski. You know, you got to believe us. Look at our intel here right, the the intel that Russia was going to invade Ukraine is a is a win right for the for the intel community on this one.

never happens again? And he ginned up a call to arms and the result for years later is that the CID Vladimir Futla's war plans out of the Kremlin.

And they did this by recognizing how corrupt the Chinese political system was, and by paying their promotion kees broad

that they had to pay to claw their way up the greasy poll. And these were substantial keys, you know, millions of dollars, and by roughly twenty ten they had an agent network in China that was remarkable. One by one by.

in twenty twenty three and twenty twenty four. The CIA hired a very large number of people, train them up, make sure they assible Chinese, and you know, put them in the Chinese China Mission Center, go forth and smile on China. When Radcliffe came into office, he summarily dismissed everyone that CIA had hired and trained in twenty twenty three and twenty twenty four because they were Biden hires and Elon musk Polding the cut five percent out of if they.

email to the White House and Elon Mutz and his doge brods, so he closed them all. Wow, and the doge bros are walking cardiffs. They are they do not have good op sec. You know, they do not have good hygiene when it comes to guarding against somebody. You know, think, hey, bro on a LinkedIn, how would you like a really good job working from the X y G Corps? And they're Chinese spire.

person self following everybody working for CIA. Okay. And if you are a CIA officer newly stationed abroad and you are gathering your bags at the baggage carousel in a while, the Doogu or Kuwhala, Lumpur or Beijing, likely enough a Chinese intelligence officer to come right up, he sticks figuring your chest and say, hey, show I know you are.

they have established in China. Up on top of your head, how many GTTV cameras do you think there are in China looking down at the.

see the battlefield mapping, and they're well on the way to that. Chuck and Trump has dismantled every single cybersecurity entity of the government that was set up after the Russian hack of the twenty sixteen election, dis medled them them. Okay, we are defenseless against this kind of thing because Trump wants it that way, because those agencies.

to get up to speed. Okay. The trouble with it at the CIA is secrecy and compart petrolization. Okay, you know the CIA was criticized, and rightly so, for a failure to share intelligence with IF friends and enemies at the FBI and elsewhere in the government before nine eleven. So then after nine to eleven, the in Washington it's something goes from me go one hundred day experienced in

the other direction. The impetus was, then there's a need to tear, a need to share, not a need to know, but a need to share.

I I didn't want to lead you. You said it, so now I am going to lead you. I mean, Burns might have been the best equipped I had the CIA in the moment we live in right now.

that intelligence is information and that information is power. And when the CIA, after a four year remarkable effort that details somewhat book lay in the mission Dold Glaimer Pruden's war plans out of the Kremlin. Burns said, we need to tell the world about it, right, okay, incredibly sensitive secret intelligence that we have stolen from under Prutent's nods.

advantages when he came to CIA under Obama was that he had been a congressman, what eighteen terms.

to Dover and Biden and Kamala Harris were there. Burned to TI did that Yeah, bull stop So intelligence diplomacy, intelligence that by uh an accomplished ship from that man. That's that's a high ideal. What we have now is the reverse, uh, which is intelligence has politics, not diplomas.

number of people a bill whom were still alive who got burned from that, and you know that's bad ju ju, you don't do that. To answer the larger question, you know that tenders of millions of Americas believed that the CIA killed JB. Yeah, it's fat that they believed that.

And the reason they believed that is that not long after the assassination of President Kennedy, the KGB put out elaborate, reconstructed disinformation that appeared person foreign papers and the American papers that the CIA did kill JFK and was part of, you know, a massive conspiracy to do so uncovered up.

In nineteen sixty seven, Pack the Wollan's restrict attorney named Jim Garrison prosecuted and persecuted a New Orleans businessman who had once or twice's been the Greek by the Iopa seas and said, you know, he had conspired with osbal killed every Well, the jury threw that out about fay two minutes. And then twenty five years later OLIVERT. Stone made a move and.

the room. Either you believe that Lee Harvey Oswalder trained marine marksman not off a million to one shot, or you believe that the intelligence services of the Soviet Union and Cuba conspired to capitate the government of the United States by killing its president. It's one or the other. The CIA, during the course of the Cold War, after committed many mistines, almost all of them at the beads

of President. I mean, do you think that a couple of CI offered FOP were sitting around in a kind of a mad man setting in nineteen sixty having their second or third Martiginis, and one of them said, Hey, I have a good idea. Let's go to the old cadel. That didn't happen.

aged virus was manufactured in their laboratory run by the Army in Maryland. You know, put that story out a g okay. Millions of Americans believe it, and you cannot mon they We're people have no Please. You have a president today who, like Bladder, wants you to believe that there are no facts and there is no truth. You might as well just give up. Yeah, that will be the death of it.

had that embassy wired. Okay for the FBI and Jaggar Hoover. After the assassination disciplined I think it was nineteen FBI agents and said that they were guilty of growth snag wars. So you want to Blayne in and on Jen or Hoover in the FBI, who in their declassified files that I wrote about in Enemy's History in the FBI, UVU's like maya freaking Kulpaman, we blew up. But the CIA did not kill President Kenny, nor did it have a hand in a conspiracy to cover up the real killer. Yeah.

book is a quote from me tempteen satory play right Joan Racine, which is there are no secrets the time will not reveal.

like they bypass everybody else. It's the one thing thing. So I thought that was interesting. And when you actually look back, you do sort of see that pattern there a little bit. But the other, of course, is what he had to say about about Russia and about Putin, and then the and then and then of our what maybe what maybe our intelligence gaps with China. Anyway, I I enjoyed the book. It's it's a it's a it's a thick read. But I mean that in a in

a good way. But ay, you know, and it was interesting that he came to the conclusion that I had, which is that Bill Burns he is somebody. I'm sorry that that Trump only views everything through his myopic lens, because Bill Burns should still be, say, a director, you have a guy who understands how Putin ticks better than sometimes Putin does not. Many people are that way, and we've sidelined this guy anyway. Seems to be a huge

missed opportunity. All Right, I've been ranting and raving about my frustration about the Constitution and about about healthier so

I thought i'd do a little bit of of a little bit of my own little sports talk here. Yes, I've been watching way too much preseason football. But here's the here's the only takeaway I have. And if there's one theme with my two little sports nuggets today, it's oh my god, I'm old and that is and I am about to make some of you feel really old.

But I learned this watching the Ravens preseason game. I think it was Ravens Colts that the Ravens are I think a year or two away from have to have been in Baltimore longer than the Colts were in Baltimore. More importantly, the Colts have already been in Indianapolis longer forty one years. I think it is going back to it was an eighty two that they moved eighty three something like that, right, it was eighty three, eighty four something. They've been forty one, forty two years. They've now been

in Indianapolis longer than they were in Baltimore. So the Indianapolis Colts are now older than the Baltimore Colts. Okay, see, I told you i'd make you feel old if you're someone of a certain age. And for those of you that go, yeah, so what screw you? All right? Some of us want mark time. The other is Mario Rivera. Jesus,

he lived my fear. I constantly I have stopped playing pick up basketball. I miss pick up basketball. I've been trying to talk myself back into it. Now that I see Mario Rivera torp ripped his achilles playing the old timers game shag and fly balls. He I think he and I are about the same age. He might be a year older or a year younger. Man, Mariano, you just convinced me I'm out. I am just going to stick to running. I am now going to do these

extra I'm a doctor. I messed with my doctor gave me some how to strengthen your calf, to try to strengthen to limit to the possibility that you that you could tear your achilles. So let's just say that, Mario and Rivera, you've just motivated me better than any any trainer could motivate me to do those exercises. For sure, I might as well give you a quick mats up. They took two of three from the Giants, so it can't.

First of all, the Giants obviously not so good after after overperforming in the first half for a while. You know, it never looked like a team that was going to be a real contender there. But I do imagine Buster Posey, we'll turn those things around. But look, the biggest news for US Nats fans was that cade Cavally looked great. All right, this was a guy that has had two Tommy John's think about that. That's amazing that he's back pitching.

It was a terrific outing thirteen outs, but I'll take it. It was pretty good. Mackenzie gored a great outing against Justin Verlander. I know verlandery Verlander anymore, but uh, you know, he's it's still that's still a pretty good, pretty good, uh, pretty good thing to say he did, which is to get a win over Verlander, which Gore did. And it was nice to see James Wood in the leadoff spot. Let's see more of that, more of shaking that out.

But I will tell you it's still frustrating. I'm glad to see Barry Zarugula took it, took it to the Nats correctly. The Washington Post Sport section did a separate piece about how Nats fans are frustrated with the ownership and with the front office. Finally, some public heat is

being applied to the Learners, which needs to happen. They are harassing me and other season ticket holders right now to hurry up and renew, and I basically I keep dodging the call right because I'm waiting for the Learners to speak, and they still haven't spoken. Will you please tell us the direction of this franchise. Are you trying to contend next year or not? Are you going to sell the team or not? Doing this? No man's land is why you are getting people to say sell the

team now. I think the Learners have earned the right to change direction here because they did bring us one winner, but saying nothing, please, we already have enough people not being leaders in Washington DC. Don't become just another another member of the Washington DC community who refuses to lead. We expect more from you, mister Lerner. All right, so

there's my little sports update, and with that, let's do a few questions. Let's get the little ass Chuck in here. Ask Chuck, all right, we got a little overseas questions comes from the Netherlands. Heare, mister Todd. I'm a regular listener to the podcast, truly appreciate how you unpack complex

political topics with such clarity. Thank you for saying that. I've been wondering how did the US and EU, too long standing allies drift so far apart diplomatically and politically, and why does it feel like neither side knows how to respond. Also, as a European who feels connected to the US, I'm troubled by how much influence one individual,

be it a president or billionaire, can have globally. Have we reached a point where democracy no longer feels like it's truly in the hands of everyday people or regards Randall Vanderval from Leyden, the Netherlands. Randall, I appreciate the question on that. Well, Look, I think there's always been a little bit of a political divide about Europe right where the right has always been a little more eurosceptic

than the left. Part of it has to do with the governance of many Western European countries democratic socialism in the Nordic states in particular, but there's been some disagreements on sort of some of those governing styles, and then of course on some cultural things, and in some ways Europe's a bit culturally, you know, more liberal or culturally more progressive than the United States is and so I think so, I think some of it is because we're,

you know, currently the the right is ascended on culture. That culture is is in some ways an anti discurrent set of your European leaders. I say current set because there is also this connectivity between the American right and the European right right the breaks of Tears Steve Bannon. You've got the a f D party in Germany getting a lot of love from like the seapack world. You've

got hungry right, you know. So there is there's also been this sort of unity of the of the far right parties both in the United States and Europe.

to the Pacific right. That was Obama's last half of his lifelast term was the pivot Asia because everything was China right when everything was the Cold War, Europe was everything without the Cold War. Now you would think that Russia's aggression would have brought the EU in the United States together, and in some ways it has, right, Right, NATO's never been better funded, NATO's never been more euro you know. I mean the addition of Sweden and Finland

have been huge, right. I mean, if if we ever have to go to war with Russia, we're going to crush them. It's not going to be that close. I mean, we have the much more durable collective security than they do. So I think some of it is just simply attention to the Pacific. So that so there's a little bit of atrophy in the relationship. Some is what I described earlier, sort of the right wing skepticism of the sort of democratic small d democratic socialism, that sort of you know, mindset,

you know. And and then of course I think Europe in general is very anti trumpa, right, So then that makes Europe seeing anti Republican these days. So and it's the Republicans that are in charge. So you put all those ingredients together in it, and that's what you have. So look in some ways this could be the best thing to happen to the EU, that they have to be prepared to be more independent, less reliant in the

United States. That doesn't mean the United States isn't the single most important ally to the to the EU and EU nations, but that doesn't. But you've got to but you've got to assume that there are going to be times when there's a more hostile government. So so in that sense, look, I think and I think you're starting to see more European leaders, well they're not happy about it, embracing the reality that that's what that's what has to happen.

But let's just say the entire relationship between Europe and the United States may transform again depending on whether Trump gives Pootin everything he wants at this summit later this week. So let's just say the relationship is still. The irony is that both continents are dealing with a migrant crisis, and the migrant crisis is caused by the same issue, right displacement due to lack of opportunity, some of its climate change inspired. What's happening right in Central America, what's

happening in North Africa. And I think that that migration is really stirred a lot of populist politics and a lot of nationalist politics, both in Europe and in the United States. So in that sense, we have a lot in common on that front. Not sure if I answered the question the way that as thoroughly you're asking, you know, why it's been so much you know, just sort of

the future of democracy. Look, I think, you know, sometimes I think we've had we had it so good and so easy for so long, we forget that sometimes citizenship demands work and keeping a democracy healthy, you got to

attend to the democracy garden a little bit, and we haven't tended to that garden. You've been hearing me come up with a lot of ideas about how to essentially reanimate the democracy here, and I think my guess is we're not alone. I think it needs to be reanimated in a lot of Western societies. Next question comes from Judith w and she asks, I've just finished listening to your introduction to the episode that dropped August six, and

there are two things that I want to ask. One, how come it has taken the media so long to see Trump's mental decline? Too? It was evident long before Biden left the race too. The people that are suggesting that blue states also redistrict would agree with you that redistricting to gain seats is not a good thing. But what is it that you think the Democrats should do to counteract the redistrict in Texas and other Republicans states? This seems like just one more issue than in the

long run needs to be resolved updating the constitution. But in the short term Democrats don't appear to have much of a choice. Thanks. Look, obviously I get your answer on the on the first part on the mental stuff, I think with Trump, Trump's always been a little weird, and so I think in fairness, you're not sure whether you know whether this is same old Trump or whether

Trump is losing it a little bit now. I think you're starting to see some signs that he's sunsetting a bit in the evening, right, He doesn't look he's not traveled the country at all. He travels the country very rarely. Now, when was the last time he saw him do a rally,

doesn't do them very often. Doesn't like leaving Washington, DC much, doesn't like leaving the New Marlago patio that he put into the Rose Garden, there, and so I think some of that is just, you know, like anybody, the older you get, the less you want to leave your own abode. And he's behaving that way, and he's certainly behaving put it this way, he is behaving like somebody like a president of a second term who's burned out on traveling

the country because he hasn't done it. And I think that's politically a huge problem for Republicans because he's not selling his agenda at all. He's dictating his agenda, but

he's not selling it. He's not traveling the country, he's not trying to sell it. And I think part of that is is that he's just getting too old to do the job on We're starting to see certain signs in certain places that that's the case. He's certainly getting a lot more bad information than he ever has before. Whether that is intentional that he's getting this bad information or he's just not as as as well read as he once was is unclear. Look, you ask, what should

the Democrats do. Run a campaign in Texas, Go run a campaign in Florida, Go build a party, Go push back on Greg Abbott, Go push back on Rondo Santis, Go push back. Look, I think what the Democrats are doing in the state of Texas, you do everything you can and you're elected officials. But I so but but

I think sort of going and hoping. Here's my problem with it, right, which is, if you think it's unfair what Texas is doing, then why I go to your own home state and intentionally make it unfair to the minority community in your state, to the minority of voters in your state who don't who aren't blue. There's a

reason for the expression too wrongs don't make a RNY And this is to me, I don't know. I mean, this is the screams too wrongs don't make right. My frustration is they The hard thing to do is to go figure out how to run a tougher campaign in Texas than in Florida and make them pay a price at the ballot box. That's the hard thing to do. The easy thing to do is to change the rules somewhere where things are more supportive. Final question comes from Greg w. Hey check love the new show and format.

The longer form has made you my walking podcast. I appreciate that one of my favorite ways that somebody was marketing at one of my favorite cannabis shops was marketing little pre roles as dog walkers now, which I thought was hilarious. I don't so, I don't care. I think a walking I don't want to be just a dog walking podcast is shorter. I think a long walk podcast.

I'll take that anyway. He asked. What amazes me is when you bring on another political walk like yourself, and you can discuss an individual running into district only to end up talking about the history of that district in terms of voting or events that change how the district votes, how are What do you use to find out that information? I'm betting some of it is just living in that world. But for newcomers, what are some information sources we can look at? Well, I'll tell you what I did when

I was younger to learn. I mean, I was obsessed with understanding every congressional district. So the Almanac of American Politics. And it's funny you're bringing this up. I'm going to be interviewing my friend Charlie Cook this week. He's written the big introduction to them, The Almenic of American Politics, which is published by my old employer in the National Journal. It was founded by Michael Barone at Harvard in nineteen seventy two with a gentleman named Grant Ujifusa. And it

is it is. It is called the Almanac of American Politics. But what it really is is it's a profiles all foreign and thirty five districts, all fifty states, and then it has profiles of every governor and every US Senator. So you have one hundred and fifty of those profiles, plus four and thirty five House members. It's five hundred and eighty five profiles. And the profiles of the congressional districts are one half about the member and one half

about the district. Now, what did a dork like me do? Well, so I started. You know, my first almanac, working almanac was was for the ninety for the ninety two cycle, which so it was nineteen ninety two almanac is always up to date through the ninety elections. The ninety four almanac is up to date through the ninety two elections, and so on and so on. Well, I had to make sure I had every single cop every single edition, so I have every edition going back to seventy two.

By the way, our friends in Congressional Quarterly have have their theirs. It's called politics in America. It's a little thicker. Frankly, I think a little drier some of the profiles that think national journals. I think the Almanac is a little a little more readable all the informations there in politics in America, don't get me wrong. And it's good info in some ways, sometimes more thorough in some data there

than than than the Almanac has. And I've that for previous and what I've done over the years, and what I did early on is I read every you know, anytime I would focus on a congressional I would go back and read what the read the various Almanac bios from previous editions, and it's look, it was fun. I used to say, you could see Michael Barone's evolving politics, right. Michael Barone was a big liberal in seventy two, fairly

conservative these days. And I used to say, if you just read the Henry Waxman profiles, the ones he wrote in the eighties were this liberal do gooder champion would take it to government every now and then, versus the one he'd write about in the nineties and the odds, who he thought was a limousine liberal, and that sort of mindset. But you could, you know. I used to say you could see you could read Michael Barone's evolution

through that, but he you know, all kidding aside. It would be in the profiles of the individuals that you would sort of you could you could hear. I know Michael well enough that I could see some of his police evolutions, if you will. But it's the profiles of the district itself, finding about its history of voting and industry. It's second enough, right. The model that Barone created is terrific.

National Journal has kept that model and I don't think there's anything like it, and the new edition's coming out it is. And I always say this, Almanacs are more useful the older they are, you know, because the most recent stuff is usually front of mine. Anyway, I have most of that, but as it gets older, you're really thankful to have it. So I don't work for them.

I don't get any money from them anymore. There was a time I really wanted that my real ambition, before there was ever a meet to press, I wanted to be co author the Almanac of American Politics. So that's how much I love the reference book. I think it's the single most important reference book in politics. So but you need to get every single edition comes out every two years, and it's been coming out every two years

since nineteen seventy two. And I will tell you, just like in card collecting, there's a short print the seventy six edition, which is the Watergate elections through seventy four. It's the short print. For whatever reason, they didn't have that many, they didn't print as many of that edition.

I think I spent five hundred dollars at a used bookstore to get my copy of my seventy six almanac, because by the way around around Washington, when I was first trying to make get every single edition, I had everything, you know, going back to eighty two because National Journal had older copies, but they didn't take over publishing until eighty two, so it was the previous those seventy two, four, seventy six, seventy eight, and eighty I was trying to

get and the last one was seventy six. But I can't tell you how many times I'd go to a used bookstore they say, Okay, we'll put your name on a list, but you know you're below Charlie Cook. And I was like God damn it. Charlie Cook was also trying to do the same thing back in the day. But like I said, Charlie's gonna be on the show soon and we're going to be giving a lot more love to the Almanac after that. All right, So enough of me promoting that. I do want to promote my

news for you. Interview with doctor Francis Collins. You want to understand what mRNA vaccines are, why this technology is so important, and how incredibly just how it's a dereliction of duty for the future of healthcare, for what Kennedy did. You'd also got to check out my blues man, Francis Collins, because he's got the blues. He's got the blues, but he also has the blues and you could feel it and hear it in his music. It's a little different.

But I think doctor Collins is just one of the great treasures of the United States, one of the great treasures of America, and I hope you take a look and take a listen. So with that, I appreciate you listening. Thanks for keeping the faith with me. And until we upload again,