Trump makes SHOCK announcement as he LOSES CONTROL of war

I think this is what peak confusion. sounds like as far as Trump is. concerned. So, some quick backstory and. then I'm going to throw to the clip. It. did not take long for his chickens to. come home to roost here because after. spending the entirety of his second term. in office denigrating every single one. of our allies, now that Trump has found. himself embroiled in an unpopular war, he's realized it would probably be. helpful to have some allies. Unfortunately, he's engaged in a bit of. an internal tug-of-war between his need. for some obvious help on the global. stage and his own ego. So, this is. Donald Trump during the press.

conference. If we ever needed help, they. won't be there for us. I just known that. for a long period of time. We have some. that are really enthusiastic. They're. coming already. This isn't need. Need. would be. one of the big boys. If we need their. mind boats or if we need. anything, any piece of apparatus that. they may have because of a situation. that they have, they should be jumping. to help us. We want them to come and. help us with the.

strait. My attitude is. We don't need anybody. We're the. strongest nation in the world. We have. the strongest military by far in the. world. We don't need them. Again, the. same press conference. And look, of. course the US needs help because it. entered into a war with no plan, no. objective, and no allies. And it's not. like this hadn't been tried before. Donald Trump's not the first American. president to try and take down the. Islamic Republic, not the first. administration to try to do this. Meaning, had he consulted with anyone.

not named Donald Trump, he probably. could have avoided some of the more. predictable problems like, for example, Iran closing or even mining the Strait. of Hormuz, which can have major. implications on the price of oil, a. lesson that Donald Trump is apparently. learning in real time. But, here's the. problem. Trump has spent the last year. alienating all of our allies, basically. tried to declare war on Greenland. He's. threatened to invade or annex Canada and. Panama. God knows how many threats he's. lobbed at Mexico. He shit-talked most of.

Western Europe's leaders. And yet, now. that he's turned the United States into. a pariah on the global stage, here he is. asking other countries to help us. It is. almost like there is some value to. having allies around the world as. opposed to just being a tough guy and. going at it alone. Which would be bad. enough unto itself, right? It would be. bad enough isolating our country on the. world stage. But, what's worse is that. Trump has alienated our allies and. cozied up to Russia, which right now is. the one country actually helping Iran. against the United States. That's why we.

decided that we needed to blow up our. global standing so that we could cozy up. to Putin, who would in turn screw over. our country because something something. art of the deal. And of course, Donald Trump refused to. condemn Putin because he won't. He. can't. Mr. Secretary have you. communicated to the Russians not to send. targeting information and other. assistance to the Iranians? Strongly. said that. But, do you believe that they are? Hate I hope they're not. Have you.

Have you seen any evidence? We don't. know, but it's not doing very well. If they are, it's not helping much. If you take a. look at what's happened to Iran in the. last week, uh if they're getting information, but it's not helping them much. >> So, what would it mean to you if they. were? I mean, even if it's not helping. the Iranians particularly much, it's. still involving themselves in the. conflict that they're not directly. >> Wouldn't they say we do it against them, wouldn't they, yeah? Wouldn't they say that we do it against. them? Uh. I don't know. Look,

they can give all the information. What the. that they want, but. but the people they're sending it to are. overwhelmed. It is more important for. Trump to feel like a member in good. standing of the autocrat club than. bother to act in the best interest of. the United States. This is, per usual, a. matter of Trump's ego versus our. national security. Now, in terms of what. happens next, the reality is that Trump. is, you know, finding himself. increasingly isolated at home and. abroad. Our allies, again, are not. falling over themselves to help the guy.

who spent the last year threatening to. annex their countries, undermine NATO, and relegating their presidents and. leaders to the role of governor, which. is. something he's taken a liking to doing. Back home in the US, his director of the. National Counterterrorism Center, Joe. Kent, just resigned, posting on Twitter, quote, "After much reflection, I've. decided to resign from my position as. director of the National. Counterterrorism Center effective today. I cannot in good conscience support the. ongoing war in Iran." His vice. president, J.D. Vance, has begun placing. stories in Politico suggesting that he.

was skeptical about the war all along. Polling shows that this is the single. least popular war at its outset in US. history. Gas prices are now surging. Here is a little clip that I think puts. everything into a neat little bow. If. you could say something to President. Trump and he was going to hear you right. now, what would it be? You are a worthless pile of sh. And you voted for him how many times? Three times. That was my bad.

Apparently, I'm an idiot. No notes. That about covers it. But, I want to. make one more thing clear, and this is. something that I try to talk about. often. This is not just about Donald. Trump. The rest of the Republican Party. had the ability to exercise their own. autonomy here, and every step of the. way, they refused. They own this just as. much as Trump does. This is Republican. governance, full Republican governance. in action. It's not just Trump who's at. fault. It is every single one of these. people who wanted power, and then chose.

to contract every ounce of that power to. a stark raving lunatic who put all of us. in danger, made all of us weaker, all. more isolated, and who raised prices on. everything. This is a reflection of the. entire GOP, not just the president. So, when it comes time to vote, remember. that every single one of them played a. role in this. You're watching No Lie. with Brian Tyler Cohen. Next up are my. interviews with Dan Pfeiffer, Jamie. Raskin, and Adam Classfeld. No Lie is. brought to you by Shopify. Starting. something new isn't just hard, it's. scary. So much work goes into this thing.

that you're not entirely sure it's going. to work out, and it can be hard to make. that leap of faith. Trust me, I know. When I started this podcast, I wasn't. even sure what I was doing. What if. nobody listens? What if I can't offer. something worth listening to? Now, I'm. glad that I believed in myself and. launched this podcast despite all the. fears and hesitations, but let's be. clear, it certainly helps when you have. a partner like Shopify on your side to. help. Shopify is the commerce platform. behind millions of businesses around the. world and 10% of all e-commerce in the. United States. From my website, briantylercohen.com, to brands just.

getting started. Get started with your. own design studio with hundreds of. ready-to-use templates. Shopify helps. you build a beautiful online store that. matches your brand style. Accelerate. your efficiency, whether you're. uploading products or trying to improve. existing ones. Shopify is packed with. helpful AI tools that write product. descriptions, page headlines, and even. enhance your product photography. Get the word out like you have an entire. marketing team behind you. Easily create. email and social media campaigns. wherever your customers are scrolling or. strolling. And best yet, Shopify is your. commerce expert with world-class.

expertise in everything from managing. inventory to international shipping, to. processing returns, and beyond. And what. if people haven't heard about my brand? Shopify helps you find your customers. with easy-to-run email and social media. campaigns. It's time to turn those what. ifs into what Shopify today. Sign up for. your $1 per month trial today at. shopify.com/btc. Go to shopify.com/btc. That's shopify.com/btc. No Lie is brought to you by OneSkin. So,

we've talked before about why OneSkin. really stands out as a skincare company. It's not hype or just fancy packaging, it is real science. The founding team. are longevity researchers who asked a. deceptively simple question. If many. visible signs of aging like wrinkles, fine lines, and loss of elasticity are. driven by so-called zombie cells, what. if you could actually reduce those cells. to slow the aging process down instead. of just covering it up? That research. led to OS-1, OneSkin's proprietary. peptide. It is the first ingredient. proven to switch off those damaged. senescent cells, actually slowing skin.

aging at the source. This is serious. science that fits easily into an. existing routine, and every time I use. OneSkin, I'm giving my skin a clear. signal to repair damaged cells, support. collagen, and strengthen my skin. barrier. Right now, I'm making really. good use of the OS-1 body moisturizer. The cold weather isn't exactly helping. my skin, but this moisturizer is a. game-changer, and it's not sticky, which. is also great. And this isn't just my. experience. OneSkin's products are. backed by extensive lab and clinical. data, including four peer-reviewed.

clinical studies to validate their. efficacy and safety on all skin types. Plus, they've got over 10,000 five-star. reviews and have been recently featured. by Bloomberg as a leader in in. longevity. It really shows that you. don't need a complicated routine to. achieve healthier, younger-looking skin. Born from over a decade of longevity. research, OneSkin's OS-1 peptide is. proven to target the visible signs of. aging, helping you unlock your. healthiest skin now and as you age. For. a limited time, try OneSkin with 15% off. using code BTC at oneskin.co/btc.

That's 15% off oneskin.co with code BTC. After you purchase, they'll ask where. you heard about them. Please support our. show and tell them we sent you. No lies. brought to you by Factor. So, somewhere. between the first warm weekend and. realizing short season is getting close, eating well stops feeling optional for. obvious reasons. Factor is how I stopped. letting a busy schedule be my excuse. Fully prepared meals designed by. dieticians and crafted by chefs. Ready. in 2 minutes, no planning, no cooking. And best of all, Factor's food options. have everything I need. Quality,

functional ingredients, including lean. proteins, colorful veggies, whole food. ingredients, and healthy fats. no. refined sugars, no artificial. sweeteners, no refined seed oils, meals. that fit your goals and schedule. Eating. healthy, calorie management, more. protein. And also, they taste great. I. had the Tex-Mex chicken bowl after I. worked out last night and it was. genuinely the best decision that I made. all day. I also love the variety. There. are 100 rotating weekly meals to keep. things fresh and delicious through. winter. Options include high protein,

calorie smart, Mediterranean diet, GLP-1. support, and ready to eat salads. Plus, the new muscle pro collection supports. strength and recovery, perfect for if. you're getting back into the workout. routine. Factor meals are always fresh, never frozen, ready in about 2 minutes. No prep, no stress, so you can actually. stick to your goals. Because I have no. free time, I have tried so many of these. meal services, but Factor is. legitimately fantastic. I promise you. it's worth trying, coming from somebody. who cares a lot about what I put into my. body. So, head to.

factormeals.com/btc50off. and use code btc50off to get 50% off and. free breakfast for a year. Offer only. valid for new Factor customers with code. and qualifying auto-renewing. subscription purchase. Make healthier. eating easy with Factor. I'm joined now. by the co-host of Pod Save America, Dan. Pfeiffer. Dan, thanks for joining me. Thanks for having me, Brian. So, we are watching the Iran war. continue to play itself out. Most. recently, there was a high-profile. resignation from the Trump. administration citing Donald Trump's. engagement in this Iran war. We're also.

watching gas prices surge across the. country. We're watching issues with the. Strait of Hormuz, where Donald Trump. seems to be begging other countries to. help him. So, as we watch this whole. process play out, is there any upside. for Donald Trump as he continues to. engage in this thing? Not that I can see. And really, it's. hard to fathom a scenario where that. could happen. Even if this were to wrap. up in the next couple of weeks or days, damage has already been done to Trump. politically. Damage has been done to the. United States economically. Gas prices.

have spiked. That has created a glut in. the oil market. That's going to linger. for a while, but it's also just the in. two ways it hurts Trump politically. One. is. he looks like a for doing this. No. one ever understands why he did it. It. violates the principle of no forever. wars that he. claimed to run on in 2024 and it's the. second high profile action he's taken to. raise prices for people. Undermining the. other central premise of his. presidential campaign. I think real. damage has been done here no matter what.

happens. Why do you think Trump engaged. in it? He's an idiot. I think he I mean just. there's no I think I don't think there's. >> you can describe some even even. misguided uh Yeah, if you're if you want. to try to play armchair psychologist, I. think it would go something like this. After Venezuela, he thought the United. States could do this on the cheap, quick. and easy. It would be fast. And I think. somewhere in the back of his mind he has. this image of like as he thinks about. his legacy, he's not thinking about what.

helps keep Mike Johnson speaker or keep. John Thune majority leader. He thinks. about what gets Donald Trump etched into. you know, Mount Rushmore or whatever. else and I think he has this vision. where it's. in his head where it's like I. you know, did regime change in Venezuela. I do. regime change in Iran. I do regime. change in Cuba. And the last two he. believes are historically important. because they have been. long-term problems and long-term. adversaries in the United States. And he. didn't think it through and there's a I. mean he's not the first person to think. that regime change in Iran is a good.

idea. People have been talking about. this, thinking about it, planning it but. the possibility of a war with Iran since. 1979. And the reason why no one has done. it is the consequences. are tremendous because of. the this type of regime that Iran has, how big a country [snorts] it is, and. most notably the Strait of Hormuz. They. have this leverage point over the rest. of the world that is very hard to. unstick. And so he kind of stumbled ass. backwards into it. There's also the fact. that Trump doesn't seem to ever have. enough of an attention span to stick.

with anything for more than a few days. And so I'm curious because now we're. watching Iran start to bomb their. neighbors and bomb embassies and this. thing really start to unravel and get a. little bit out of control. Do you think. that this is going to be something where. Trump can just kind of back off, focus. on the next shiny thing and be able to. let go in a way that that's kind of. clean and neat or do you think that. we've already, you know, past the. Rubicon here and and this thing has has. taken a life of its own? It's that's a great question and I'm not.

certainly not enough of an expert on. Iran and the Middle East to know. I He. cannot change the subject, move on to. something else as long as. the Iranians are firing drones and. missiles at other countries in the. region. and because that disrupts travel, that. disrupts oil, that disrupts trade, that. disrupts the global economy. And he. certainly can't do it while the Strait. of Hormuz is still blocked. If even if or even if it's somewhat open. and the and the flow of traffic. continues but at a greatly reduced rate,

that continues to keep gas prices up. Americans [snorts] aren't paying a ton. of attention to what's happening every. minute of the day in this in this war, but they are going to pay attention to. gas prices. Yeah. They're going to pay. Food prices are going to go up. Most of. the world's fertilizer comes through the. strait. If diesel prices are the highest. they've been, I think either at least. since the pandemic if not ever. I think the second time in history. diesel prices have been this high and. that leads to greater cost distribution. costs for food, which leads to higher. prices for Americans. And so as long as.

that's in place, it doesn't matter what. Trump focuses on. People are going to be. pissed about it. On the messaging front, Trump has been kind of leaning on this. this Hail Mary uh narrative, which is. this is a small price to pay, temporary. pain and the most important thing is. that we don't have a a nuclear-armed. Iran. And so what do you make of that. message? People do not think Iran should have a. nuclear weapon. They also don't think. that Iran was on the cusp of having such. a weapon. Yeah. And Trump made Maybe. it's possible that if he had spent.

months like the Bush administration did. in 2002 and 2003 to sell a war, to. explain the threat, to lay out the. consequences, he might have been able to. get at least some people to be willing. to pay higher gas prices in service of. that larger purpose. He never did that. The guy gave the. longest State of the Union in history. and barely touched on Iran in that. speech. He did not try to convince. people of this. And you can't do it ex. post facto, right? You can't say, you.

know, cuz it's just like you and I. follow stuff closely, we knew for weeks. that a war with Iran was very possible, could happen at any moment. We knew the. day that the last negotiation was. scheduled. Most Americans had no idea. They truly woke up Saturday morning. that one fateful Saturday morning and we. were at war with Iran. They had no. context, no reason, no explanation. Even. if they'd watched the President of the. United States give that speech of the. State of the Union, which they probably. didn't, they still wouldn't have. That wouldn't have helped explain that. we were about to go to war with Iran. I. mean, it really was a no context, no war.

cuz he didn't try to sell it to anyone. You know, usually Trump has a pretty. good handle on how to control the media, um a pretty good handle on the issues. that he can continue hammering. Gas. prices was one of them. I mean, he's. been taking victory laps on gas prices. pretty much every day of his presidency. And so, the part that I don't understand. is how could he engage in this. recognizing that the biggest. you know, uh um weapon that Iran could. could wield against us is closing the. Strait of Hormuz or or mining the.

strait, and that that would inevitably. send gas prices higher. How is nobody. there around him or or Trump himself. there to say, "Hey, if this is the one. thing that we pride ourselves on being. able to do, this is going to imperil. that, and so we should avoid doing it. It seems like some people told that to. him, right? There are reports that Dan. Cain, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs. of Staff, made that point to him, and. Trump dismissed the idea that Iran would. actually close the strait. He did not He really did not do the.

homework, not understand the threat. And. in war, you have to worry about the. worst possible consequence, right? You. prepare for the best, but you prepare. for the worst, but you hope for the. best. And he simply just prepared for. the best and hoped for the best, and. this is how we ended up where we are. It's not just Trump who seems to be ang-. like trying to find some political angle. here. We also have J.D. Vance now. figuring out his footing. He was, of. course, um this avowed anti-war um. opponent before he got into office.

There's a ton of footage and sound from. him over the course of the last few. years, basically denigrating the idea of. going into another war in the Middle. East, saying that if Kamala was elected, she would, you know, she would be the. reason uh that this war would pop off. Um and and yet, the New York Times also. reported that J.D. Vance was in the room. saying that, you know, if Trump is going. to do this, he needs to go bigger um and. go faster. And so, you know, he's got. his fingerprints all over this. I'm. curious what you make of the Politico. piece that was obviously placed by his.

either either J.D. Vance himself or. somebody on his team saying that he was. like the lone skeptic against uh against. this war. in Iran. And so And so, like the way I. read that is is it's pretty obvious that. he's trying to position himself for. 2028, seeing the writing on the wall and. recognizing how unpopular this thing. already is, but just curious for your. reaction to to kind of this this angling. by J.D. Vance. I think it is pretty. unsubtle and politically and pretty. politically maladroit to do going about. this way. Look, J.D. Vance is the.

overwhelming overwhelmingly likely next. Republican nominee. Sitting vice. presidents almost always get the. nomination. There is no example in. modern history of them not getting it. You basically have to go to prison, like. Spiro Agnew, in order to avoid being the. nominee. Um. Now, there is one big thing that could. get in Tru- in J.D. Vance's way. And. that is if J- if Trump turns on him. And so, he he gets. like I just my like not that J.D. Vance. is asking me for advice, not that I. would give him advice, but he is in for.

a penny, in for a pound with Trump. There is no path for him, which is he's. like he differs himself from Trump. Because there're going to be other. candidates who don't have the problem of. having been his vice president and at. his side during all the untellable. things that Trump did, who can be the. anti-Trump in the Republican Party, if. that's what voters want. And the odds. are they probably don't, but if that's. what they want, he's never going to be. that person. So, like it's just it's he is he just really. is kind of an awkward doofus, and this. is just him and he is so ambitious that.

he can't like see straight. And so, this. is him like he should not be trying to. distance himself from the president. Three years from the Republican. nomination. Right? Like this is when. people will be voting three years from. now for that. And so, it's just it's. very It is It's very J.D. Vance, which. is the guy who thinks he can be. never Trump one day, the most pro-Trump. person the next day, most loyal vice president history one. day, differ with him on the border the. next day. Like it does it just it makes. him look calculating and um sort of what.

everyone hates about politics, which is. his probably his biggest vulnerability. in a in a presidential election in 2028. You know, most of these people seem to. have gotten away with um seems to be. able to get away with anything that that. political gravity doesn't exist so long. as you're near Trump. We obviously saw. that that bubble pierced when it came to. Kristi Noem just a couple of weeks ago. Uh she was relegated to some new. position as the head of the uh shield of. the Americas, [snorts]. replaced by a by Mark Wayne Mullin. We. now have Pam Bondi coming in um to. testify for the Oversight Committee, and.

a subpoena was just issued a formal. subpoena was just issued to her to. testify. Do you think that this that. this veneer of protection. thanks to Donald Trump is is kind of. dissipating now that these people are. engaged in all of their respective. scandals, whether it's the war in Iran, whether it's gas prices rising, whether. it's. covering up the Epstein files? Yeah, I think there is something that. has changed, which is Republicans are. looking for some evidence of. independence. And they are they're.

certainly not going to take that from. the president cuz they're scared of the. president. So, they're basically going. for the weakest members of his herd. Right? Kristi Noem is the least in. favor, the most controversial, let's. take her out. Pam Bondi's probably next. on that list, go after her. And so, the. question isn't like it's not every. single person that that works for Trump. is going to be at risk, but it if you. were the person that Trump was unhappy. with at at that moment, Republicans will. use that as an opportunity to. demonstrate some independence either to. swing voters. or to the base angry about the Epstein.

files not being released or whatever. else. Do you think that that as. >> [snorts]. >> that Pam Bondi would ever be at risk of. of getting ousted from her position? The. reason I ask that is because she's there. for one reason, it's because it's. expressly because she won't do the thing. that's causing people to turn on her. Like, she she won't release the files. That's the that's the sole reason that. she's in that spot in the first place. So, I get that that is causing people to. hate her and to lose confidence in her, but but if if not for that, she wouldn't. be in that job. Yeah, so I don't think.

that she is going to be fired and then. replaced with someone who would release. the Epstein files, someone who would. return the Justice Department to its. roots of independence, who would refuse. Trump's orders to prosecute his. political opponents. I think if she were to be ousted, it. would be for someone who was a better. manager of doing the things Trump wants. Right? Like his He's not going to fire. her for mishandling the Epstein files. He's going to fire her for the fact that. she has tried on multiple occasions to.

bring indictments against people he. wants go to prison, and like face. planted in an incredibly embarrassing. way. So, if he can be convinced that. there's someone who will do that job of. political vengeance and corruption. better than her, they can replace her. Like, I don't really care if Pam Bondi. gets fired, because the person who comes. in. is. most likely. as bad as her, but slightly better at. her job, right? And so, it's it's just. Same thing here, like I don't think Mark. Wayne Mullin is going to be particularly. good at. DHS. Like, maybe he'll manage the. department better, but.

he's still going to have I mean, he's. he's going to be as bad as Kristi Noem, just maybe slightly less clumsy in his. corruption. Yeah. Yeah, which which is. almost almost worse. I mean, >> Worse. Exactly. Exactly. Um on another. messaging front, uh. a message that that the right has. largely coalesced around right now amid. all of this bad news, the one kind of. sliver silver lining that they've. [snorts] that they've jumped on is the. fact that uh TSA agents aren't getting. paid right now because of the government. shutdown, the DHS section of the. government shutdown, and there are long. lines at airports. And they're all.

coming together, they've got their. marching orders, and they're saying, um. you can you can thank a Democrat for. this. So, what is your reaction to what. we're seeing as, you know, the the. Republicans kind of coalesce around this. messaging? I think they're going to. struggle to make people specifically. blame Democrats. Most people have no. idea the government is shut The. Department of Homeland Security is shut. down. Um they're more I think most likely to. blame the incumbent party, um. and to blame the president. Now, it's. also worth noting that Trump said he's. not signing a single piece of. legislation uh unless the Save Act is.

passed, which the Save Act is not going. to get to his desk. Um and so, basically, what he's essentially saying. is that if Democrats were to pass a if. Democrats were able to come together and. pass a bill to fund TSA, but keep ICE. unfunded, he wouldn't sign that bill. So, the person right now standing in the. way of any sort of deal on getting the. TSA agents paid is Donald Trump himself. Well, it's also worth noting that. Democrats have tried to do that. I mean, there there was a moment where Greg. Casar and John Cornyn were both doing.

doing I guess publicity. press conferences. gaggles whatever you want to call it at. at an airport in Texas and and Greg. Casar asked John Cornyn right there on. camera, we have a standalone bill to. fund TSA. If you say you want to fund. these TSA agents, let's go ahead and do. it. And and John Cornyn, the first words. out of his mouth were no. I mean, that is that is ultimately the. promise Democrats have the more. reasonable position here. And that's the problem for Republicans. The challenge for both parties is people. are not paying attention to this because.

we're at war with Iran right now and gas. prices have gone up 40% in the last week. and that's sort of drowning all of this. out. And finally, I want to talk about. something that I've seen on on the left. as we're contending with our own primary. elections and that is the the kind of. ever-present issue of progressive. or leftist candidates, DSA candidates. versus liberal moderate candidates and. kind of the infighting that ensues. And. we saw a little bit of it with Talarico. and Crockett with that race and it it.

feels very much like you know, for those. of us who were paying attention back. during the the Bernie-Hillary days, it. feels like a redux of of that race and. you know, on one hand, we have the more difficult. job because the Democratic Party is a. a less homogeneous coalition than than. the right is. But I'm curious, you know, as we engage deeper into this process. and tensions continue to escalate and. emotions continue to run higher and.

higher, how do you avoid. getting into a position where we just. kind of are at each other's throats and. and these primaries are so bruising that. it fractures the very coalition that it. requires to win. You know, the these primaries are sort. of a little all over the maps and in. some cases they are. like truly liberal or leftist or. progressive or DSA. moderate. Sometimes they are just. different approaches to politics, which. is what I think Texas between Kelleher. and Crockett was. They kind of had the. exact same issue positions. It wasn't.

really about one was leftist and one was. a moderate. It was just they sort of. disagreed on how politics works. You know, some of it's generational. change, right? Where you got a lot of. candidates who may be more progressive. on some issues, but are challenge are. representing just a younger set of. leadership. You see that in some of. these Illinois primaries that are. happening on Tuesday night. You see that. in you know, to a certain extent that's. part of the dynamic in both. Massachusetts and Maine. Where you have. people challenging older incumbent. Democratic senators. Here's my take on it. Like our party.

needs to figure out, you know, what the. we're doing, what the we stand. for, you know, how we go execute. politics, and primaries are one way in. which we do that. And I think Texas is. an object lesson because as as bitter as. that primary was online, and it was a. brutal online conversation. And there. were some, you know, some tough ads. exchanged and some tough commentary on. the trail itself. But before that. election was. called, both Kelleher and Crockett said. they would support the other person and. campaign for them to help beat whoever.

the Republican nominee is. And and they. have come together since then. And so. whatever happens between now and when. the primary votes are cast, I'm not. worried about. What I care about is. whether people come together on the back. end. So you take Maine, right? Which is. this increasingly bitter race. If Janet Mills is the nominee, I fully. expect Graham Platner to marshal his. supporters to campaign for her to beat. Susan Collins cuz that's the main goal. And if Platner is the nominee, I expect. Janet Mills, her supporters at the DSCC. and Senator Schumer to do the same thing.

for Platner. Like that's what we that's. we should expect. And I do think that. there is a. Unlike 2016, everyone understands the. threat that we are under and they have. the urgency of the cause. And so we have. to do is we have to get people to come. together. Um, and And these I think the primaries are. healthy. It's they're but they're only. healthy if there is unity after the. voters have their say and we all get to. work of defeating the Republicans and. taking back the majority this fall. Well, from your lips to God's ears. Highly recommend for everybody who's. watching and listening right now. If. you're not signed up for Message Box,

which is Dan's newsletter, it is the. smartest political writing online. I'm. going to put the link right here on the. screen and also in the post description. If you're listening on the podcast, I'll. throw it in the show notes. So, if. you're not yet subscribed, please do. yourself a favor and subscribe. Dan, as. always, I appreciate the time, man. Awesome. Thank you, Brian. I'm joined. now by Congressman Jamie Raskin. Congressman, thanks for joining me. again. Brian, thank you for having me on. So, Congressman, you have some news to share. about a new criminal referral that. you're working on right now as it. relates to a. former top Trump administration.

official. Can you explain what that news. is? Well, I mean, we can't allow people to. come before Congress and then lie or. conceal material facts, both of which. are against the law. It's against the. law to make uh material false statements. under oath, period. And then there's a. specific statute which uh adds that you. can't conceal material facts from. Congress when you're testifying in. Congress. And um Kristi Noem came here.

and uh it's just inescapable that she. engaged in false statements and. concealed material um. facts from Congress repeatedly. So, in terms of whether or not this uh. criminal referral is successful, the. criminal referral goes to the Department. of Justice. And so, if we're talking. about putting the fate of whether or not. Kristi Noem for lying to Congress it. putting the fate of Kristi Noem in the. hands of Pam Bondi, I think it's clear.

to everybody what Pam Bondi is going to. do or I should say what she's not going. to do. And so, how do you overcome the. obstacle of the fact that this is a this. is a Department of Justice and an. Attorney General who are there not to. uphold the law without fear or favor, but rather just to run a protection. racket against Trump and all of his. acolytes. Well, I sent this letter with Senator. Durbin. uh from the the Senate Judiciary. Committee and the single most important. line in our letter might be uh the.

simple restatement of what the federal. statute of limitations is on lying to. Congress. Yeah. And that's 5 years. And. that takes you beyond the Trump. administration. So, all of those um. well-trained cabinet officials in the. Trump administration who think that. their job is just to cover up for the. president and to lie in every context. possible must reflect on the fact that. we have federal criminal statutes which.

make it a crime to lie under oath and. those actions, those criminal. prosecutions can be brought for a 5-year. period. So, if we are in a world where. Kristi Noem is held to account as as you. know, there is a criminal referral sent. to the DOJ and a subsequent attorney. general, one who is not there to just. protect Republican officials, but rather. to uphold the law without fear or favor. If we enter that world, then would it. why would it just be limited to Kristi.

Noem? There are other administration. officials or other figures in the. federal government who have also. committed the same violation. I think. these are 1,001 violations lying to. Congress. Uh just a few weeks ago, Pam. Bondi sat in front of uh a congressional. committee and said that there is no. evidence implicating Donald Trump or. tying Donald Trump to the Epstein files. That's patently false. Now, the. credibility of that evidence. notwithstanding, she didn't make that. caveat. She said there's no evidence. tying Donald Trump uh to any criminal. activity within the Epstein files and we. know that there are interviews where uh.

where Donald Trump was accused of of. committing crimes uh that are contained. within the Epstein files. And so, how. are you thinking about about this about. consistency as it relates to lying to. Congress? Well, I mean, some of the lies that Nume. engaged in are easily contradicted by. the public record. So, for example, she. said that the DHS always complies with. court orders and always follows court.

orders. We know that there were at least. 210. cases that have been cited by courts. themselves. where the Department of Homeland. Security violated court orders and in. fact, the Department of Justice even. admitted it in 50 cases and yet she. said, "Not." Okay, so that that's one. where we publicly can determine that she. was lying. But then she was also lying about things. that she did where it would be tough to.

know. without, you know, pretty deep. investigative work that she was lying. But we were able to determine she was. lying, for example, about this $220. million. contract where she told the Senate that. that was the product of competitive. bidding. That was a lie. My colleague Joe Neguse. refuted her and said, "Here's the form. you filled out to escape competitive. bidding. You said you were invoking a.

national security exception why you. needed to invoke a national security. exception for a PR contract, you know, to show you on horseback, out in the wild west, um, you know, it is a little bit weird. But. in any event, he showed that that wasn't. true. And then. she said, "Oh, well, right, but you. know, we looked at different bidders, but those were all different friends of. hers." So, that was a dodge about, you.

know, the the competitive bidding. process. So, the bottom line is you. can't come and lie before Congress any. more than you can go and lie in court, and we have got to hold the line on that. to show that the perjury laws and the. material false statement laws mean. something. But I guess my broader. question is there are other people who. have also lied who are who have also. told demonstrably false statements, not. just Pam Bondi for example, which was. the the the example that I brought up.

before, but also what about these. Republican Supreme Court Justices who. when they were just nominees sitting in. front of, you know, the the the Senate. for their advice and consent. hearings, they said that they respected. stare decisis and respected precedent. and then immediately went and overturned. Roe v. Wade. I mean, there is this sense. as people watch this that you can say. whatever you want to Congress and then. once you're in a position of power, you. can flip-flop immediately and there are. just no consequences for it anymore. That's right. Well, look, and my point.

is this, the Supreme Court Justices are. in a somewhat different category. Like, they all got up and they swore their. fealty to stare decisis and precedent, but then it's very easy for them to. invoke various exceptions to stare. decisis when factual circumstances have. changed, when the law has changed, and. so on. That's pretty slippery, so that's. tough on that particular case. But the. the ones you've invoked with respect to. the Attorney General are serious and. real. And so, we simply need to get the word.

out in a deterrent way. We are watching. you. You can't get up and lie before. Congress under oath the way that Donald. Trump can get up and lie the way he does. every single day from the White House. Oval Office or on the tarmac someplace. Yeah, nobody can get him on that. The. Supreme Court has said that under the. First Amendment, you basically can't make it a crime to.

lie unless somebody's under oath or. unless we're talking about fraud in. order to deprive somebody of their. property and so on. But we can't get so. conditioned by Donald Trump's lies that. the word goes out among the cabinet. secretaries that you can go ahead and. say whatever you want. An interesting. thing about Attorney General Bondi was. she refused directly to answer questions. basically from any Democrat. She changed.

the subject, she evaded, she began. talking about irrelevant stuff going on. in other parts of the country and so on. She had her I think she had her little. burn book as well, so everything. devolved into a personal attack against. every Democrat. >> it into ad hominem attacks, yeah. All of. that was a way perhaps on her part to. avoid committing perjury because the. truth is none of them is going to say. anything that. contradicts Donald Trump. Now, one of the ways that we assert that Noem.

lied was with respect to Donald Trump. because she was asked the question, "Did. you tell. Donald Trump, did you get his approval, then did he know that you have this $220. million contract?" And she repeatedly. said both in the Senate and the House. that she did. He. directly. refuted that and said he didn't know. anything about it. One of them is lying. She was under oath. and if she was lying, that's perjury. He.

wasn't under oath and he lies all the. time. So that might be the one that's. hardest for us to prove, but in any. event, one of them is definitely lying. Congressman, is is there anything that. Congress can do. to vindicate crimes against Congress, which is to say lying to Congress, you. know, committing perjury or or. committing contempt of Congress to to to. to vindicate crimes against Congress if. and when the DOJ inevitably abdicates. its responsibility to adjudicate those. things. Right. Well, one thing we can do.

is we can wait for a future. administration to come in if the statute. of limitations last that long. That was. the point I was making before. But we. also can hold people in contempt of. Congress. Uh there's an old power that. Congress has called inherent contempt. And the Supreme Court repeatedly ruled. that the Congress has the power to. render both civil and criminal contempt. charges. Civil contempt being holding. someone or finding someone until they.

give Congress what Congress has demanded. in a subpoena, whether it's testimony or. documents or what have you, but also. criminal contempt. You can be punished. by Congress for uh acting in contempt of. Congress, which would include lying. Um and there were people that were we're. talking a century ago now, but who were. held in contempt of Congress for. engaging in behavior like that.

Is that something that Congress would. consider looking into in the event that. Democrats retake the House and Pam Bondi. and this DOJ continue. to abdicate their responsibilities to. uphold the law? Well, there was a lot of talk about it. during the first Trump administration. when we had a majority in the first 2. years. And a lot of people explored it. and people were even looking for the old. jail that nobody could find that was. somewhere in the the maze of the Capitol.

basement. to see whether, you know, this could be. done. It never really crystallized. legislatively, but it could crystallize. legislatively in the future if we. continue to have. spokespeople for the administration, cabinet secretaries coming forward and. blatantly lying to Congress. Is there a. world in which that that contempt power. could be used to compel the release of. the Epstein files if we're at a point. where Pam Bondi continues to refuse to. release these 3 million outstanding.

documents? Um there is nothing in the inherent. power of contempt that would prevent. that from being used in that way. Now, we shouldn't have to. you know, cite. inherent power of congressional contempt. to get the executive branch of. government to comply not just with a. subpoena, but with a federal law. Um but. we will use any means at our disposal, but basically. um. Congress.

uh would go to court to say that there's. not compliance taking place and that the. federal government is not itself. enforcing the law, but I I would say we. have to use any means at our disposal to. restore the rule of law in America and. we are living through this. absolutely atrocious reign of. lawlessness. um and terror as we saw in Minneapolis. And you know, if you've got government. agents who think that the Constitution. doesn't apply to them and the rule of.

law doesn't apply to them, then you're. going to end up seeing US citizens. getting shot in the face by government. agents and that's where we're at. Donald. Trump who feels absolute immunity and. impunity because of some things the. Supreme Court has done has let the. message go out throughout his. administration that they're somehow. above the law and that's what makes this. such a dangerous moment. And and. actually I wanted to ask you about. exactly that, which is some news that. Greg Bovino who was formerly the person. who was overseeing all of these ISO.

operations including when Renee Gooden. Alex Pretty. were were shot and killed in the streets. of Minneapolis, that there is reporting now that he will. be leaving government at the end of this. month. Can I have your reaction to that? Um yeah, I mean I don't know under what. circumstances cuz I'm hearing this from. you. I'm not sure I I saw that before. Um. so. uh there does seem to be an effort to. change the subject. Um Minneapolis was an absolute political. Waterloo for the Republican Party where.

millions and millions of Americans. turned against them uh for violating not. just the rights of immigrants, but the. rights of US citizens to the point of. shooting them because they were bearing. a lawful firearm uh consistent with. state law and the Second Amendment uh to. the point where, you know, uh US. citizens are being shot down simply for. exercising their First Amendment rights. So, the the they're not supposed to use. apparently the phrase mass deportation. anymore. The public understands that.

mass deportation is shorthand for. violating the rights of the people and. trampling Bill of Rights. So, I don't. know whether getting rid of him now is. part of that or, like most of them, he. wants to try to cash in as quickly as. possible and make money as quickly as. possible because I understand that the. whole thing from. uh you know, from jump ball is they're. trying to make as much money as possible.

off of the American people. And Donald. Trump has made billions of dollars in. just over 1 year in office. Um and uh we. believe that the Trumps want to make. themselves the richest family in America. before they leave office or before. they're forced to leave office. Congressman, I want to switch gears. finally to one last point and that is. that applications are now open for the. Democracy Summer 2026. uh program. And this is this is a. program you and I have spoken about at. length. So, can you give um.

uh. a little bit of an introduction on what. that is for folks who don't know about. it and why it's so important? Well, I. appreciate that, Brian. It's for high. school and college kids across America. uh who are paying attention politically. or maybe just starting to pay attention. and want to get more engaged and. involved. And so, you sign up with. Democracy Summer, you will get to participate. in. nationwide campaign zooms with people. like Heather Cox Richardson and Larry.

Tribe and Tim Snyder and Benny Thompson, Nancy Pelosi, you name it. And then you. go out and you exercise your First. Amendment rights. by involving yourself with a campaign. And there people are. engaged in door-knocking, in canvassing, in. registering voters, what have you. And. so, it's a really great life-changing. opportunity, but you'll be able to. change not just your life, but your. country, too, because. young people.

have been dramatically affected by. things going on, whether we're talking about war, whether. we're talking about the high cost of. housing and education and groceries. And. young people. need to be engaged in this process. And. that's without even getting to some. overarching crises of our time like. climate change and like artificial. intelligence that young people need to. have their voices engaged in. Well, look, if anybody watching is in high. school or college or knows someone in.

high school or college who you think. would be a good fit for this program, I. could not recommend it highly enough. I've been a major fan of this for years. and years and years. So, I'm going to. put the link to Democracy Summer right. here on the screen and also in the post. description of this video. Again, highly. recommend that you sign up. Congressman, as always, thank you for the time. I. appreciate it so much. Thank you so much, Brian. I'm joined now. by All Rise News's Adam Classfeld. Adam, we have a major update from the hands of. a federal judge who just gave some bad. news to one of Donald Trump's more. unhinged cabinet members, J- Jr. Can you.

explain what just happened in court. Absolutely, Brian. What happened is that. a federal judge struck down RFK Jr.'s. anti-vaccine policies and found that the. ideologues that he stacked in his. committee to give advice on vaccines. were not properly appointed. So, he had. stopped all of their recommendations. He. stopped RFK Jr.'s attempts to take off.

critical vaccines from the childhood. vaccine schedule. It's a major loss for. RFK Jr. And importantly, a rejection of. government's long-standing claim that. RFK Jr.'s actions aren't reviewable by. any court. And that's an extreme. position. I'm happy to go into that. first. >> Yeah, I would love I would love for. exactly that. Okay, well, I want to read this part of. the ruling because it's incredible. You. had Judge Murphy.

saying in oral arguments, he was. providing some hypotheticals. You see. very often, I've been covering this beat. for two decades. And very often, you. have federal judges take a party's. argument to its logical extreme. And he. did that with the government saying that. RFK Jr.'s actions could not be reviewed. by any court. And here [snorts] are some. of the hypotheticals that he gave. Judge. Murphy said, "Let's say that instead of. revising the vaccine schedule, the CDC. said, 'Actually, we think measles is.

good for you. You should go have lunch. with someone with measles, and we are. sponsoring measles lunches in every. city. Come have a measles lunch.' That. would seem to go right up against the. goal of preventing communicable. diseases. Would such a policy by the GD-. CDC be judicially reviewable?" And the. government essentially said, "No, it. wouldn't be reviewable." Said, "I think. that would still be committed to agency. discretion by law. The judge went. further, said, "So, even if what the.

agency was saying is, 'We like. communicable diseases and we think you. should get more of them.' That's not. judicially reviewable." The government's. lawyer said, "No." And just think about. that for a second. Think about you. mentioned RFK Jr. being unhinged. This. would be an unhinged RFK Jr. being. unleashed and saying that there is no. federal court anywhere in the land who. can second-guess when he says that one.

of his pet theories about the public. health should have the force of law. So, now that a judge has struck down. uh this effort by RFK's health agency, what are the practical implications for. American families? Well, what it means is the public health. is being protected. Just to put this. into perspective, I recently spoke to a. doctor in the wake of this uh ruling, an. emergency room physician in Michigan, and he had mentioned that the United.

States is now on the brink of being off. the list of countries that have. eradicated measles. And it's not just. measles. The doctor was talking about. meningitis vaccines and outbreaks of. that. I saw that ProPublica had an. exposé on how whooping cough is now an. issue. That long-controlled. and eradicated diseases are now part of. the national conversation. And what it. comes down to is putting confidence in.

expertise again. The foundation of the. judge's ruling was not only the science, it was the law. He was talking about the. Administrative Procedures Act, which. safeguards against arbitrary and. capricious government actions. And what. we had here was RFK Jr. essentially. nullifying. and purging an a body called ACIP, the Advisory Committee on Immunization.

Practices. So, he purged the people who. were properly appointed to it and. stacked it with his fellow ideologues. And in another part of his ruling, Judge. Murphy said, "Of the 15 members. currently on ACIP, even under the most. generous reading, only six appear to have meaningful. experience in vaccines, the very focus. of ACIP." So, the judge is saying, "You. can't short-circuit. this procedure that was in place since.

1964. to provide sound medical advice and put. it with people who share your pet. theories.". Adam, how come this is working? And I'm. glad that it is working, but how come. this is working for Health and Human. Services, but not the Department of. Education, for example? Not the EPA, for. example. There are people in place atop. each agency that are hostile to the very. mission of their agencies, and yet. they're allowed to act with abandon,

with reckless abandon, and oftentimes, um, destroy the very agencies that they. were tapped to lead. And there really. doesn't seem to be any. recourse for any of that. But in this. instance, where RFK is trying to. undermine the stated mission of Health. and Human Services and its corresponding. agencies, there are judges who are able. to step in and say, "No, so long as as. you're acting in a way that's. antithetical to the mission of each. agency, there is a check on that.". Right. Well, what we're seeing is the.

kind of interplay of what's happening in. the trial court level and on appeals. And I should be clear, the Trump DOJ is. going to appeal this. And we've seen. other federal judges try to take actions. with the Department of Education, for. example, and other agencies. There's. litigation right now over DOJ, and a lot. of this litigation is under the very. statute that this case involves, the. Administrative Procedure Act, because if. there's one common theme in Trump's,

both of his terms, is this explosion in. Administrative Procedure Act litigation. because he does things arbitrarily and. capriciously by definition. It's a sort. of unilateral thing, and he stacks his. cabinet with members who act. unilaterally without notifying the. public, without bringing in the experts, working against the experts. So, that's. why you see a lot of this litigation. A. lot of this will come down to whether.

this stands up on appeal, but one of the. things that I find so important about. this ruling, and it's a 45-page ruling. here, is the principle being defended here. that. RFK Jr. cannot act alone without any. court oversight. If that legal theory is. adopted, we're in deep trouble when it. comes to the public health. Well, isn't. that really what Trump is looking to do? I mean, he wants he he and his party.

want unreviewable power. I mean, this is. what they tried to do with the. independent state legislature theory, which is this idea that each legislature. in each state can adopt voting rules, no. matter how insane, and they wouldn't be. uh they wouldn't be susceptible to any. check or review by the judicial branch, for example, or by the governors. So, if. you had a state like North Carolina, for. example, with such a gerrymandered. Republican legislature that there was no. hope that any Democratic legislature. would be able to take over, but you.

know, there was Governor Roy Cooper, those people would be able to adopt. rules for the up for the subsequent. elections that would be completely. unreviewable by uh Governor Roy Cooper. or even the the Democratic uh state. Supreme Court at the time. And so, this. has been a recurring theme for this. party where they were so long as they. have their own acolytes, uh their own. hardliners in positions of power, they. want those positions of power to be. completely unreviewable by any other. branch of government. That's absolutely. true. As a matter of fact, one theme.

with the Trump uh government and the. MAGA movement more broadly is these. sweeping assertions of power. And to put. a little bit of glimmer of hope here, a. lot of these have failed pretty. substantially in court. I mean, we've. spoken about the case of Kilmer Brego. Garcia many times. Early on after Kilmer. Brego Garcia was spirited out of the. country and put in a prison in El. Salvador where he was tortured, the. Trump DOJ line was that now it's.

unreviewable, now it's on out of our. hands. And that was rejected 9-0. by the Supreme Court. In In saying that. there has to be some sort of due process. not only with Kilmer Brego Garcia, but. with hundreds of others who were. spirited out of the country without. notice or hearing. This is an extension. of that where we have another claim of. unreviewable authority, absolute power. if you will, where a judge is shooting.

it down. And so, there are two things. that I'm looking for on appeal. One, does this ruling hold because it holding. is vital to the public health and the. ability of any Secretary of Health and. Human Services to be able to stack the. deck with their preferred ideologues. rather than follow any procedures on. something as important as public health. recommendations. But, the other thing. that I'm going to be looking forward.

to uh the ruling on very closely is will. the higher courts reject this idea that. Trump's cabinet members can do whatever. they want without the federal courts. touching it because if that is a. finding, we're in real trouble. Right, because then it basically just. eliminates our system of checks and. balances. And when you have, you know, these extremist uh these extremists in. positions of power then then, you know, we're setting ourselves up for a pretty. uh pretty dangerous situation. Is there. any way to read the tea leaves on what.

an appeals court might say on on this. matter in particular? Well, I citing the whole Kilmer Brego. Garcia route, I find it very unlikely. that a federal court is going to rubber. stamp, even in an appellate court, given. the 9-0 nature of the Supreme Court's. ruling on Kilmer Brego Garcia, this. whole idea of unreviewable authority. It's something that the Trump DOJ trots. out all the time and they are always. rejected on this issue. But, it will see.

what happens because this judge Judge. Brian Murphy has had a ruling paused on. the shadow docket before. It seems that. Trump DOJ is really attacking him on the. basis that prior rulings have been. paused but not fully overturned on. appeal. I think that the courts always. move slowly and cautiously, but as I. look at this opinion, he it is so.

devastating and it really lays out the. radical nature of the power grab here. and how it cuts against the science and. cuts against the expertise that I think. that Judge Murphy. took a really cautious and careful. approach to this ruling that I expect. will stand up on appeal. Was there. anything especially striking that you. saw in this decision? Because. oftentimes, um you know, these judges.

are speaking out in a way that we. haven't seen before. and so I'm just. curious whether there was something from. the decision. itself that you think was especially. unorthodox or unusual. It's not so much that it was unorthodox. and or unusual, but I think that Judge. Murphy puts his finger on the atmosphere. of distrust and I thought he opened this. ruling in a very moving way. He quoted. Carl Sagan and I'm going to read from. the introduction said science like law.

is far from a perfect instrument of. knowledge. History is littered with once. universal truths that have since come. under scrutiny. Nevertheless, science is. still the best that we have. And he's. dressing the vaccine skepticism that is. all over social media, but he goes and. connects that to the law and he says a. little bit later for a public health. Congress and the executive have built. over decades an apparatus that marries. the rigors of science with the execution.

and force of the United States. government. One extraordinary product of. that apparatus has been the eradication. and reduction of certain communicable. diseases through the development and use. of vaccines. And I thought it was just a. powerful way of laying it out there that. we have since 1964 come up with a system. that married the law and science that. benefited from things like we don't have. to think about measles unless someone.

mucks up the system. And I think that he. really spoke to something in our culture. that that really spoke to and addressed. real distrust in many institutions. whether it's science and the law and. saying look what we have accomplished. with that and look what we risk if we. throw it all away. Look as there. continues to be a lot of distrust on an. institutions, one. one space where I think it's it's a. little bit well deserved is the media.

space the legacy media space and we have. seen a number of institutions and. formerly trusted outlets. basically capitulate to Trump and show. that it was more worth it to. side with and kowtow to. a despot as opposed to staying true to. their own stated values. We're seeing. the extent to which the Washington Post. and CBS News and ABC and so many. different instances thought it was more. important to to cozy up to Donald Trump. and so a small step that I would ask. everybody watching right now to take is.

to support independent journalism. fearless independent journalism and. nobody does it better than Adam. So I'm. going to put the link to All Rise News. right here on the screen and also in the. post description of this video. Adam is. not owned by some major media. conglomerate. It's him. He is doing this. work by making sure to to pay his own. way and go all around the country. wherever these cases are happening and. he has built a brand that is trusted if. nothing else. I'm going to put a again. that link right here on the screen and. also in the post description. If you're. not yet signed up and you want to show. some support for independent media.

especially at a time where we need it. Please make sure to subscribe. Adam as. always thanks so much for your time. Thank you so much Brian. Always a. pleasure. To listen to the audio version. of this episode click the link right. here on the screen and make sure to. subscribe and of course to see more. video content that subscribe button's on. the screen as well. >> [music].