Hello and welcome to The Restless Politics US, to our Monday, except that it's not Monday, it's Tuesday. But anyway, live stream for our founding members. Welcome, everybody who's on. I'm Katty Kay. And I'm Anthony Scaramucci, fresh back from London. And I see some people like Joanne Haswell came out to the Jury Lane Theater on Sunday night, Caddy.
I bet that was, I really wish I'd seen that. I wish I'd gone to that. Joanne, when I kissed Dominic Sandbrook, that uptight Brit, he didn't really like it. And then he tried to deny that I kissed him, Caddy, but I have the photos. what happened it was a magical it was a magical moment for me and you've never seen anybody more horrified in your life
Been a big fan of Dominic's for years. I imagine being a chance to kiss him on stage is exactly what you wanted. It's a bromance. Exactly what he did not want. Yes, exactly. I said to him, Dom, I'm comfortable with my sexuality. Come over here. Let me give you a kiss. You know what he said? I'm not comfortable with my sexuality as I was.
as I was moving in on him. He wasn't comfortable. Oh, well, I really wish I could have gone. It sounded like that was a fantastic event. We got people from everywhere. We got people from Wales, Bristol, Amsterdam, Madrid. I am very excited because Alice is joining us from Shrewsbury. I have actually seen the Shrewsbury football team play twice. They are known as the sheep shaggers. Do you know what that means, Anthony? I don't.
What is that? You don't want to know. No, let's pass. This is a family show, so we'll pass on that anyway. I've seen the shoot shaggers twice. I've got to shout out to Jane, though. Jane came to see me on the British Airways flight. Thank you, Jane. Oh, that's nice. Taking selfies. in the plane. That's great. I hope people know I'm very approachable. You become... Just don't throw like orange paint at me or something like that.
Because my favorite color orange is like Bitcoin orange, not Donald Trump orange. But anyway, big shout out to Jane and her friend for being so nice to me on the plane. It's getting out of control. We're going to need to get this back in control, everybody. Okay. What do you want to talk about?
If you're a founding member joining us live, drop us a message in the chat. We love getting your comments and questions. You can tell that Fiona wrote that for me because I read it so perfectly. Listen, today I want to talk about something that I think has not got enough attention. That is the...
impact that these cuts on scientific research that are all part of the Doge process are going to have on America. We've said several times, maybe a little glibly, that this isn't make America great again. It could be make America weak again. And just in the last few days, I've been speaking to scientists who say all of the other cuts are getting so much attention and the tariffs are getting so much attention. And of course, we'll speak about that later this week.
when we do our regular podcast because we'll have the tariffs then. But what is not getting much attention are these billions of dollars that are being cut from American scientific research. without which America would not have its preeminence in the world of research, wouldn't have the kinds of breakthroughs that it's had in science. And I just thought that would be something interesting and different for us to dig into. Because I do think, you know, we're trying to always on this.
podcasts, look at what matters and what doesn't matter and what has a long-term impact on this country and what doesn't have a long-term impact on this country. I think the cuts in scientific research could be one of those things that both have a long-term impact and do matter and are not getting enough attention.
That was why I wanted to talk to her. What do you think about it? I think it's fascinating. Obviously, the statistics bear out what you're saying. But give me the theory of the case. Channel the administration. Tell me the theory of the case. I think what we're both trying to do is I really do want to understand their theory. I want to understand why they're going at Dolinsky, why they want to crush the automobile industry in the U.S. They've brought the U.S. stock market down 13%.
since they started this debacle. The relative flows are going into Germany versus the US, et cetera. But give me the theory of the case. I'm going to cut the research. I'm going to have people like Peter Stein leave the FDA. So I want to dumb down the system for what reason exactly? Give me the theory of the case. So the argument that Elon Musk seems to be making, and I think he is driving this. It's great. Thanks, by the way, everyone who's putting in comments about.
people they know who are scientists who agree with us that this is such an important topic. So the argument that Elon Musk is... is that there is a lot of bloat and inefficiency in the procurement process for getting government grants for scientific funding. And many people that I have spoken to will say, yes, there is.
inefficiency in the system. It takes too long to do the paperwork. It takes too long to get the grants. And Elon's theory is that basically the private sector is better off doing everything. including scientific research. And so let's cut the amount of money that the government spends and private sector will jump in and start doing this.
The counter argument that I've heard is that particularly in the field of kind of medical research, and this goes beyond just medical research, but one example that was given to me was that the drugs. the obesity drugs that we now know of, Ozempic and Wegovy, which are proving to be incredibly popular here in the United States. And one scientist described them to me as something that will literally change the health of humanity going forward.
The research for those drugs, the foundational research, was actually done 20 years ago with grants from the National Institute of Health, the American big healthcare. funding project and that at the time the research was seen as too risky Too high risk, not enough return for any private sector company to touch it. And it took 20 years of research for them to be able to come up with the Zenpik and Wagovi. And if it had not been for that American...
government financing, we wouldn't have those drugs today. There are countless examples of this. You know this, Anthony, but that is why I thought that was an interesting example because it's something, a drug that everybody's talking about, and we literally wouldn't have it.
if it hadn't been for government research, because the companies would have thought this is a 20 years of investment against my company's P&L, and my shareholders just won't let me take that on. So some of this stuff is a moonshot. pans out and some of it doesn't. But in the case of the stuff that does, it's transformational for America and America's competitiveness in the world.
And so to cut it back, we're doing that to save money. We're doing that to dumb down the society. We're doing that to have intellectual capital flight away from our... universities away from our research centers is one doctor in the chat here saying that obviously these graduate programs will end up closing they'll have less private centers for research caddy so
And this is good for America for what reason? What's the reason? Well, I think the idea is, firstly, that there is an anti-expertise bias, potentially, generally, an anti-academia bias. Clearly, we're saying that play out. And this money that goes to the National Institutes of Health basically then gets funneled to universities. They kind of outsource the research, is my understanding.
And the private sector will do it. Now, the private sector then builds, and this is people that probably know a lot more about this than we do. Doors expert is saying that academic research establishes the foundation for private company drug discovery. So, but without... Yes, the private companies then take the ball and run with it. But without that academic research, you're not going to have that discovery in the first place. And I think if you framed this. So I think what's happening.
to your question, Anthony, and it may be happening across the board, is that there is such a focus in Doge and in Elon Musk's cutting of the government, the focus is on the targets. So let's cut everything by 20% or let's cut everything by 10,000 people. whatever it is that you focus so much on the target that you're not focusing necessarily on the actual thing that you're cutting. I mean, I think if the message went out that Americans are not going to get the latest and best new antibiotics.
because of the cuts that are taking place, there may be more of an uproar about this. Or as Roland says, you know, the disruption to the mRNA vaccine research is insane. The kind of research we needed for COVID. What do you think? I mean, you're asking the question and I think you're asking it because you may have a... We go through waves of doing this, by the way. It's like anti-incumbency. We're now in an anti-vax or an anti-science wave, I think.
If we're being brutally honest with everybody, I mean, the vaccines probably lessen symptoms. But there was some people that said before the vaccines came into place that they would stop the COVID or prevent you from getting it. Every one of us ended up getting it, and maybe it did lessen symptoms. I'm not an anti-vaxxer, but you know what happens. If you get a kernel of truth in something, you can really spin it into sometimes some level of absurdity. So this anti...
expertise movement that you're talking about, I think is a big part of it. I think the people in the society that do feel left out that champion and... Donald Trump they feel that they've been shafted if you give me for saying is so directly by the media shafted by Wall Street, they've been shafted by the medical community. And so why not push back? It's almost like, see, again, I'm imploring everybody to look at Trump administration decision making through the prism of the culture war.
See him as Napoleon. He can see the entire field. And if he's attacking the science and he's attacking the doctors, it's good for his base. His base sees that as anti-elitism. It sees it as anti-establishment and they like it. I think, okay, we'll show those rich, smug, know-it-all doctors. We'll show those rich, smug Wall Streeters, media people.
But don't you think, I mean, that's such an interesting way of framing it. So that trumps, to forgive the pun, the argument that Americans like their healthcare. They might not like the system, but they go to the doctor a lot. They use pharmaceuticals a lot. They like the idea that America has the best healthcare system in the world. They like the idea that when they go to the doctor for treatment, they know they are getting the latest and the best.
therapeutics for whatever it is they have. They like the idea that it is America that comes up with the cutting edge therapeutic for Alzheimer's or cancer or I don't know, atomic energy even. This goes beyond geriatric care. Don't you think that that is something that Americans are proud of having? And I'm not talking about blue state Americans here. I'm talking about...
equally about red state Americans. They would hate the idea that America didn't have the best healthcare service in the world. Because how does that fit into the MAGA idea? Oh, you remember the science caddy? When the tea party, first of all... The MAGA movement is an evolution from the Tea Party movement and from Occupy Wall Street. It's almost like Occupy Wall Street.
And the Tea Party had a baby and the baby was MAGA, right? And then Donald Trump became the father figure of MAGA. But I submit to you that there would have been another figure. Trump is a part of this thing, but-
There was a populist movement and there would have been a political leader like a Nigel Farage that championed that movement. Maybe they wouldn't have been as successful as Trump, but there would have been a movement. And those people used to hold up signs, Caddy. Get your government hands.
off my medicare you're laughing could you remember the signs yeah and then reporters would go it's a government program and they'd be like it's a government program and then they put the sign down and so so what's going on No one's explaining that to him. No one's saying, hey, you know, Trump's cutting this stuff. He's pulling the doctors. And they say, yeah, good. Give it to the doctors. And then the second question is, oh, by the way, Trump's cutting this stuff. He's giving it to the doctors.
And it's now going to hurt you when you go to the doctor's office. Oh, wait, wait, no, no, I don't want that. Right. You see the superficiality. Because you're not getting the full story. Yeah, it's superficial. my thing is is trump brexiting america from the world okay so just hear me out for a second and react to it
I feel like Trump has decided I'm going to disengage America from the world the way the United Kingdom disengaged itself from the EU. Moreover, I'm going to pile on some austerity with Doge. And so I'm going to create a multiple decade cataclysm for America, but I'm doing it because of the culture war. We're going to show those foreigners and teach those foreigners a lesson. We're going to block them from coming into the country.
There will be less jobs in the country, but don't worry. Whatever jobs there are, no foreigners will get that job. And you'll have less wages and you'll be more miserable and you'll have less medical care. But this is what we're going to do because we're going to own the libs if we do this. But I'm using the word Brexit as a verb in the sense that I believe that Trump is Brexiting America.
from the world. And he's doing it on the healthcare side. He's doing it on the allies side. He's doing it from military perspective, immigration perspective. And I think it's going to have a similar outcome for America. What's your reaction to that? Yeah, I think-
I think there's a look a couple of things when you were talking about expertise just now that did remind me of a discussion I heard before Brexit actually on UK television about economics and somebody who actually was on the Brexit side saying, well, we don't want economists running our...
economic policy plans because they've got it wrong so far. I don't know who you want running your economic policy plans, but the implication was that you don't want expertise. And to bring it back to this particular case of the scientific research, I think you're right, because what is likely to happen now is that America is going to be further cut off from the world in two ways. It's going to lose good academic talent. You're already seeing that happening in the scientific field.
with academics who are going to go to Canada or going to go to Europe. You're seeing the Chinese put out ads literally saying, come to Guangzhou. It's right near Hong Kong. Everybody speaks English. It's great. Come and live here, you scientists, because we will. reward you and let you do your scientific research. So in that respect, it's going to get more isolated. It's going to lose a lot of its talent. But it's also that it's going to cut itself off in the sense that...
If the research is not being done here, the big pharmaceutical companies for their R&D, one doctor told me, medical researcher told me, are likely to start pushing all of that R&D abroad as well. We've just realized the implications of having our supply chains dependent on other countries, but we're going to get even more dependent. I mean, weirdly, the idea is to make us more isolated, but we're going to be...
dependent on other countries doing our R&D for the medicines that we want. I mean, it doesn't... When you look at the stats, what is it? It's for every dollar invested in research and development in America in science, the returns are about $5 in economic gain. The Dallas Fed had this research that just came out. The government funding in research accounts for...
a fifth of all growth in American productivity since World War II. A fifth, 20% of all growth in American productivity came from government research and funding. The idea that you can just say, well, we're going to cut ourselves off from the rest of the world. We'll lose our good academics. We won't do our scientific research funding. What are you going to do then? What are you going to do when you have a crisis of...
Alzheimer's or aging as we are heading into an aging population and you need those drugs. You're going to have to get them from somebody else. And then you're going to be, you think you might have Brexited, but you're going to be dependent on somebody else's supply chains.
I guess it's so hard for me. So I'm just trying to. This is one of the hard. This is why I want to talk about this. It's so hard for me. Because it's one of the hardest things for me to understand when America is being so good at this. I got paid a compliment the other night at the jury. They said that I.
They said that I cursed less than you. I was so happy. I was about to let out like a firebombing of cursing. And then I would remember this compliment from the Jury Lane Theater that I cursed less than Katty Kay on the podcast. Can I tell you what you're doing? I was so happy.
You thump your table more and poor Fiona is chatting to us. Oh, okay. I'm sorry. I'm not going to thump the table, Fiona, but I'm doing my best not to curse. Not to curse either. MFing crazy Donald Trump is. I think I have cursed once or twice. But let me just say. This is mad. But let me just ask you this because it's super important for me and you have a different perspective than me. So I'm going to create Liberation Day.
which actually became liquidation quarter, meaning the first quarter of 2025, we liquidated the capital markets in the United States. The Fed is now talking about the likelihood of a recession. And it could probably be the first quarter of 2026. We're probably going to have a contraction in the economy. You get a positive flywheel, confidence, spending, spending, earnings, earnings, stock market growth. But you can get a negative flywheel.
Mr. President, you're creating a negative flywheel. Oh, yes, I'm doing that. But these countries have ripped us off. And so now I'm going to get back at them. And so they're going to pay their fair share and not rip us off anymore. That's not going to happen, Caddy. It's not going to happen. So just go ahead. You try to explain it. There's a lot of people listening. Before I do. They want to understand it, and it's hard to understand.
We're going to take a quick break and we will be right back. I'm Sarah Churchwell, author, journalist and academic. And I'm David Aldashogga, historian and broadcaster. And together, we're the hosts of Goalhanger's latest podcast, Journey Through Time. We're going to be looking at hidden social histories behind famous chapters from the past. Like, what was it like to actually live during Prohibition?
or to have been there on the ground for the Great Fire of London, we'll be uncovering it all. And we'll have characters and stories that have been forgotten. but shouldn't have been. This week, we've got one of my favorites, Victoria Woodhull, the first woman to run for U.S. president all the way back in 1872, 50 years before American women could even vote.
She was also the first woman to address Congress and to open a brokerage on Wall Street where she made a fortune. It's an incredible story, but it is also full of contradictions. trailblazing woman in politics, but later in life, she also turned to the pseudoscience of eugenics. So join us on Journey Through Time and hear a clip from the Victoria Woodhull story at the end of this episode.
You're getting to the point about what are they trying to do with all of this? And is it purely ideology? And do they think they have so much power? Is there such hubris that they can bend? the systems that have been in place for the last 70 years to their will in a way that will recreate the country in the model, the image they like. America that is more independent, America that has more power over.
other countries, but in a transactional, non-multilateral way that just negotiates everything. You sent me that great piece of research by Michael Grief on this. America that just negotiates everything on a kind of two-way basis, but with a sort of slight...
stick, not a carrot. And is that what they're really trying to do? And they think with the tariffs that in the end, yes, okay, the market won't like it. There could be a bit of a shock. I'm sure they don't buy the argument that there could be a 2026. I guess the president genuinely believes, although this is not what most economists say, that it's just going to bump up manufacturing and produce jobs.
in such a way that it will replace what is lost from the imports. I mean, that's the argument they keep making, right? I think what I see on the scientific side where they think, well, we will do this and the private sector will step in because that's what Elon fundamentally believes and that you just don't want government doing anything. Or on the tariff side, we can defy history. and make this not a tax for American consumers, not have a market run, not have a recession potentially.
There is just this incredible sense, I guess, of confidence that they can do things differently across the board and the result will be the country they want. Is that what's going on? That's the only way I can explain it. Yes. I mean, and I sent you that for a reason because I think that's the most... optimistic view that if you're a Trump person, what he wrote is the most optimistic view. But the more realistic view is he's going to throw us in a recession. It's going to cause a huge problem.
There was two reports today, again, I'd like you to react to. Number one was some of the Democrats are going to team up with the Republicans. Or let me rephrase that. Some of the Republicans are going to team up with the Democrats and stop this. declaration of emergency related to fentanyl to prevent the 25% omnibus tariffs that the president has the legal authority to do. So I guess that first question would be,
Do you think that's going to happen? And then the secondary question, because I know how Washington works, the people inside the Trump administration do not like Howard Lutnik. And they think Howard Lutnik is fanning the flames. of Trump tariffism? And do you think there will be any repercussions to how we're looking? Because there's a lot of people leaking on him now. So first question, will any Republicans break ranks and try to stop this insanity from happening?
I don't think so in a way that's going to stop the tariffs from happening. I mean, look, we're going to talk about the tariffs and the impact and what we see in the markets and any retaliation we see from other countries when we record on Thursday morning. But I think the Republicans... You've already had one or two voices who said that they don't like tariffs. There's mutterings that you have up to six senators who wouldn't like this to happen, would like to stop this from happening.
But if they haven't managed to change minds in the White House by now, when we're kind of literally up against deadline time, I would be surprised. I know that Donald Trump is capable of making a decision until that decision is reversed by himself. but I haven't seen enough of a groundswell. My understanding on the Republican side is that anything less than eight or nine Republicans speaking out is too much of a risk for those individual Republicans.
to stick their neck out in a way that has impact. On Howard Lutnick, I've heard the same thing and it's been interesting to see how much leaking there is against him. I love the fact that Susie Wiles, the chief of staff, came in and said, right, there will be no leaking in this administration. And it's like kind of, you know. Is she the one leaking it though? Because it's like Shakespeare, right? Yeah. There'll be no leaking. Whoever smelt it, dealt it. Excuse me.
Yeah, quickly call up to the New York Times. So the argument is that there are people within the – I mean, look, you've got plenty of people within this administration who are big believers in tariffs. Peter Navarro is a big believer in tariffs. Scott Bessent, the Treasury Secretary, seems to be okay to a certain degree with tariffs. Howard Lutnick.
It seems to be the main champion at the moment. And maybe he's just enjoying being the person in the Oval Office who out trumps everybody else. I mean, I think there is this, I have this image of everybody in the cabinet at the moment trying to be mini me. Like the signal chat.
The Signal Chat was exactly, wasn't it exactly an example of that? I know we probably have to go, but can I tell you a quick funny story? You have not taken any questions yet. We'll have to go to some. Okay, but I got to tell this story quickly. I promise it's only 30 seconds. So I'm in the White House. And, Caddy, I know this happened on a Tuesday because I was only there for one Tuesday. So it was a Tuesday. And there was an aide to the president that said to me, hey, listen.
There's an email coming in from XYZ. Could you go to my Apple computer on my desk and respond to the email for me? And I said, okay, fine. I'm happy to do that. When I got to the desk, okay. It was tied to the person's cell phone. And there was one... text after another coming in. I know who you're talking about. Okay. It's one text after another coming in from different reporters. And this was the person that was complaining about all the leaking in the White House.
And I was like, oh my God, this is the biggest leaker in the widest. I was literally underneath the sink watching the water pour from underneath the sink. For some reason, and I'm not going to mention the gender because people will be able to pick it up. The person didn't realize that I was watching. Can I just say. Okay, so can I be on the record on this? Is this off the record? Is this on the record? I'm like.
Oh, I'm probably not supposed to be watching this. You know what I mean? But just a lesson to everybody, because you're our founding members. You know, we love you to death. Don't link the cell phone to the hard computer. if you're trying to hide shit.
I just point that out to people. And maybe also don't include jokes. Okay, listen. Wait a second. I love this one. We're going to give ourselves a compliment. Not that we haven't given ourselves enough compliments already. Sandra Spencer Gibbs has written in saying, Bravo for multitasking, masculine and feminine. You are talking to one another, looking at.
screens and our comments, which are whizzing up and making pertinent comments with your back knowledge. Sandra, we love you. Thank you. Thank you, Sandra. But I don't know. So one, I was in Wall Street, too. I think somebody's asking that. That was a lot of fun for me. And I met with Mickey Downs, who's the writer for industry. So I've got my script, ladies and gentlemen. So I'll be practicing all weekend my lines for industry.
And then there was another question I wanted to answer. I thought it was a really cool question. Okay, here it is. Is anyone terrified for US national security? between U.S. Cyber Command ceasing offensive operations against Russia and the group chat. This is from Rachel Haymaker. Kenny, I think it's such a good question because Rachel, I'll just let you know, I'm terrified.
OK, there are former cabinet officials that I talk to all the time, you know, in the secretary of defense category, terrified. Oh, and by the way, having your wife in sensitive. Secretary of Defense meetings as Pete Hegseth has done a couple of times. I don't know why his wife, nobody, no Secretary of National Security brings their spouse. into a sensitive meeting with a foreign counterpart when that spouse doesn't necessarily have
top clearance. I mean, the level of the things that are being done from the National Security... Oh, we were talking about medicine in terms of cuts to research and development, but... Look, it's AI too. I mean, the next big push is going to be in AI. So far, why does everybody point to the United States and say, look, where are the big AI companies? They have come out of America. We know now there's one also come out of China, it looks like.
too, but it's because of the kind of thing that we've been talking about, the amount of research money and dollars that has gone into keeping America ahead of the game. I mean, that's equally relevant for... national security, I mean, hell, I would argue that healthcare is a national security issue, but it's equally relevant for healthcare and national security. Okay, here is another one that I really wanted.
about the fact somebody was asking about how there will be, will this anti-science, here we go, Logster 2004, will this anti-science, anti-US university college approach? ultimately drive scientists abroad. I don't know, honestly, Lockster 2004, if that's your real name, that it's going to do it in huge numbers, but we are starting to see some of that.
brain drain we're starting to see oxford and cambridge in the uk um appeal now one i actually was having conversation you know my daughter is a phd scientist and she was working on a malaria research project that was cut because of funding cuts, which now maybe you'd argue that malaria has never come to the United States. Maybe that's what Elon Musk thinks. So you don't need any malaria research for America, but...
It's probably a good idea for America to be monitoring malaria outbreaks in Western East Africa, as she was doing. And I asked her whether she thought she was now tempted to move to Europe. She actually is going to start looking at jobs. She's always lived in the States, went to.
The top universities here has benefited enormously from America. She was a National Science Foundation fellow, benefited enormously from American scientific research. But she says that if there isn't money to do the kinds of research she wants here, and somebody else offers her that kind of research, then she's a research scientist. That's what she wants to do. So I think, will you see it in huge numbers? Not necessarily. Will people who can move and get offers, as we've already seen this week?
move abroad, will students not come to the United States? Because they're worried about getting picked up on the streets. And American universities, again, benefit from the best students that they can get. I'm not making a comparison to Nazis. I'm not making a comparison to Nazi Germany. I'm not making the comparison. And I was told at the Jury Lane Theater, I can't use the word fascism in Europe. And Dominic Sandberg doesn't think Trump is a fascist. But I just want to point out.
I just want to point out that they did something similar, and that's how Albert Einstein showed up in the United States. Okay, so the question is, which Einstein is leaving the United States now because of the imbecility? Or not coming. Or not coming because of the indecility of this policy and this posse. Here's a good, I came across this study, a 2022 study. Immigrants have accounted for, what is it?
36% of total innovation in the country since 1990, if you measure by patents, right? 36%, they only make up 20% of the population. So they kind of, they punch way above their weight. in terms of scientific research. And America wants to keep attracting them, I would have thought. Okay. Are there any more? So someone's asking a quick market question. Why is the NASDAQ up with the tariffs? Yeah, that's it. I was going to ask you that. The NASDAQ has gotten blasted in the first quarter.
This is like the second trading day of the second quarter, if you will. And so there is some small buyback going on right now. And there is some expectation in the community. that the tariffs on certain things may not be as bad as have been originally reported. And I just want to point out to people that are market participants here, Trump has delayed the announcement of the tariffs tomorrow.
Remember, Trump didn't want to do it on April 1st because it was April Fool's Day. And he is a fool, but he didn't want to do it on April Fool's Day. But he's delaying the tariff meeting now, the declaration of them until 4 p.m. And the reason he's doing that. is that he wants the markets closed while he's making these announcements because
I'm sure several of these announcements, Katty, are going to hit the markets pretty hard in the after trade. Yeah. So what do you, I mean, we'll record afterwards sensibly. What's your kind of... speculation 4 p.m tomorrow so i i think some of these tariffs are going to stick and they're going to be harsh some of the giant
China wants. I think they're negotiating and they've been negotiating around the clock with Canada. Again, I think the person that's handled Donald Trump the best of the Western leaders is Prime Minister Carney. And I think he realizes that he needs Canada more than he realized. I think he's looking at Carney and saying, okay, that guy's not blinking. And he's going to put a lot of pain in the U.S. You know what I said yesterday in London? Don't fight with people that live in cold weather.
Okay, because when you fight with people in Cold War, they get really pissed off. You can't beat the Russians in the winter in Stalingrad. And you can ask Napoleon about going to Moscow in the winter. Not a good idea. Do not fight with people in cold weather. Trump is going to be surprising on some of the Canadian tariffs. And Israel did something today that I thought was interesting. They have eliminated all tariffs on U.S. goods coming into Israel.
Because Trump did say that. You eliminate your tariffs. I will eliminate my tariffs. So I think some of that is probably going to happen during the day tomorrow. Some gentleman here, I think it was a gentleman saying, buy the dip. I do think that that's right long term. I do think that you're going to see people. I think you're going to see a softening of policy. I do think that that will happen.
I don't think these things are going to stick. And there are car dealers in the US, German car dealers, British car dealers, Rolls-Royce, Aston Martin. They're leaving the car off the shore or at the port. before the duty gets charged, hoping that the duty will be reduced in the ensuing weeks slash months. And it's also possible that if there are some exceptions, even though the White House is saying there won't be exceptions and the tariffs are coming into play immediately.
If they've set the bar so high, I think for a show of toughness, and I think that Trump wants and feels he needs to have a show of toughness on this. But if there are some exemptions, you could see the markets be less. freaked out than they have been. I have to read this one from Peter Korachan. Anthony, how are you so fresh and energetic back home after the fantastic Rest is Assassinations event in London only 48 hours ago? You always do this and you have this ability to fly.
Yeah, it drives my wife crazy. Half an hour and come back and look like a dizzy. My wife gets my wife crazy. Well, first of all, I am Peter. I'm going to totally embarrass myself here in the founding members. You guys are like my family. I'm going to open up to you. I've got some self-tanner on Peter. I just want people to know that. Me too.
All right. Oh, you do. In the middle of winter, you've got to have a bit of makeup. Just do me a favor, Peter. Don't tell Dominic Sandbrook that I use self-tanner, okay, because I think it would upset him. This new relationship that I have with Dominic, I think he'd be very upset.
know that I have some self-tanner on. But I do appreciate it. But I also did Matt Ford's show last night in London, which I had a great time with him. I mean, what a great person. When did you fly back? I flew back. I took the 825B. flight this morning, landed at 11 and took a shower and here I am. But, but Katie, before we go, Donald Trump, three terms. Is he going to have three terms? We're going to talk about that as well tomorrow. I mean, look, I have two thoughts on this. One is that...
He knows every time, and this is Donald Trump on an interview with NBC over the weekend, who said that he was looking at methods by which he could possibly run for a third term. And no, he isn't joking. Um, but he, I, Part of the reason Trump raises this is to every, it's a sort of distraction thing. Every time he talks about it, people don't talk about the other things that are happening. He knows that it riles up.
the mainstream media and liberals. So he loves doing that. Any opportunity he can to do that, he enjoys. But there is something a little bit more serious. I'm speaking to a democratic strategist who has always dismissed this idea. but thinks that he is planting this and the method that he spoke about or that he said was one of the methods he was looking at was that actually J.D. Vance would run, be elected president and then hand over.
to Donald Trump and Donald Trump would be his vice president, but then they would flip seats. I don't know if J.D. Vance is in on this scheme or not and would be happy with that. scheme. I keep coming back to the idea that he will be 82 by the time this term ends. 82-year-olds are vulnerable to health events. They start slowing down. Is he really going to?
If it were not for his age, if he was 10 years younger, I would be taking this more seriously than I am at the moment. But I still think it's, don't rule it out. Don't rule it out. I know what you think. I know you think this is a possibility and you've always thought it was a possibility. We'll still be here. Listen, I mean, 36% approval rating on how donald trump is handling trade policy yeah there was a vote this uh there's a poll this morning so
Keep it up. Let's see if you can keep it up like this. Helen Mann has just commented. I think this is good. Katty, all your comments touch on the issue of today's China-Japan-South Korea accord. When you get Japan going into an accord with China, you realize things are. a little off and not what you might be expecting. And that is the danger of unpredictable policy. You force your allies to make decisions that they wouldn't make. India...
And Canada have had no on voice. I don't know. It's gone on for at least a year. They've been fighting. They said, whoa, the Americans are nuts. Let's team up again. And they've now got the door open diplomatically to both sides. Watch the Chinese are trying to make as much hay out of this as they can in Europe, understandably. If you haven't got an ally in America, you're going to start looking somewhere else and you'll get straight. strange bedfellows.
coming into alliances because of this. Okay, we're going to leave it there. Thank you very much, everybody. Thanks for all the questions and comments. We love them. Thanks again for being founding members. If you want one of your friends to join up, you know where it is. The rest is politics. Before we go, it is April Fool's.
day and caddy is stuck with me she's not getting another host i know the wise guys at goal hanger put out that tweet it was upsetting to me even i was upset i thought well wait a minute it's april fools so too bad caddy You're stuck with me. And so are our founding members. Sorry. You bought the idea that this was just one hour a week. Yeah. Well, I know it's like 50 hours a week, but I'm just like, you know, I'm not going anywhere. You guys are stuck with me.
Thank you guys for being here. Okay. Thanks guys. We'll see you next. We'll see you later in the week and next week we'll be back as well with another live stream, but we will see you for our regular podcast on Friday. Thanks everyone. Thank you. I'm David Olashogga. Here's that clip we mentioned earlier on.
You see spiritualism kind of working its way up the social hierarchy, up the ladder of respectability, because people are desperate and they will cling to anything. And remember that we're still in an age of great religiosity. And so if kind of traditional Christian messages are not enough consolation, then you might seek something more direct like trying to speak to a lost loved one. It's also worth saying that.
Historians have pointed out, I think this is really interesting, that in an age where telegraphy had just been invented, you suddenly have telegraphs which can send invisible messages across. The ether, apparently. Almost magically. Almost magically. And suddenly people can receive them. It's not really that much of a stretch to then start to imagine people receiving messages clairvoyantly. You start to think about telekinesis. You start to think about...
the idea of invisible movement of messages, invisible transmission. It's a really interesting idea, isn't it? I mean, I think it's a really, really smart idea. And it suggests the ways in which other cultural... factors can help influence those kinds of trends. Why would you suddenly believe in spiritualism? Well, if telegraphs, well, why not? Who says it's not possible, right? If you want to hear the full episode, listen to Journey Through Time wherever you get your podcasts.