Jonathan Swan’s Dive into Trump’s Reality | The Weekly Show with Jon Stewart

Do you notice a difference when you are. in front of him. and you provide him with irrefutable. evidence of reality? How does he absorb that? Does he absorb. it? Did you find that that made inroads. into his future, you know, framing of of issues? How does. he absorb reality?

I can't believe we're asking this. question about the president of the. United States. How does he deal with. reality? Hey everybody, welcome to the Weekly. Show podcast. My name is John Stewart. We are back from our summer hiatus, refreshed and ready to tackle. It is. Wednesday, September 9th. Normally uh we. would tape this on a a Tuesday. We'd. release it on a Wednesday. We had to.

shift over because of uh obviously uh. Labor Day and some uh other uh concerns. and events that uh I have to be a part. of. Uh and I know tonight and we. obviously can't cover it on the the. podcast today, but everybody is going to. be tuned into uh the Republican Trumpooa. National Committee midterm uh. convention. 53. glorious speakers. on night one. 53.

Oh, what a. delightful items and speakers on on on. day one. I imagine healthcare. affordability with the top list. The. immigration affordability. Oh, the. Republicans are so on top of it. And uh. I can't wait. and and uh I I really hope. Ken Paxton, you know, it is Texas uh. that Ken Paxton gets an awful lot of. time. He deserves it. Uh couldn't be a. better guy and uh couldn't be a better. representative for uh the state of. Texas. And so I am going to be eyes.

glued on uh the Republican. midterm. convention. two-day Trump pulooa. And in no way will. I actually be just watching football. Why would I be watching uh the Seahawks. and Patriots play in a repeat of the. Super Bowl when I could see Ken Paxton, the the homunculus himself, stand on.

stage as a paragon of morality. and good government, Speaking of morality and good. government, uh our guest today is just. one of the best in the business at. holding said government officials to. account. Uh his name is Jonathan Swan. You may remember him as writing the book. with Maggie Haberman on regime change, but he's so much more than that. He's. just uh uh one of Australia's finest. experts and just a fantastic uh reporter.

and I'm delighted to get an opportunity. to talk to him. So, let's just get to. it. So, we are delighted today. We are. joined by Jonathan Swan, White House. reporter for the New York Times and. co-author of Regime Change with Maggie. Haberman. Jonathan Swan, welcome. >> Thanks for having me, John. >> And I know uh we so appreciate you being. here. You've been on this uh wild book. tour with Regime Change. Uh your family. is expanding. You have a a new baby at.

home as well. So, we appreciate whatever. time you want to stay awake for. Uh, I'll do my best. I'll do my best. Yeah. Yeah. >> Let's just catch up. I spoke to you when. when you first came out with regime. change. >> Uh, since the book came out, what has. the response been, not amongst, you. know, readers and and journalists, but. of insiders? What is there anything when. you put a book out like that? Is there a.

sudden rush afterwards of people going, "You think that's bad? Let me tell you. what, how do how do the insiders respond. to it? >> Well, there's the president's response, and he's written several um angry uh. truth social posts about it. Um you. know, everything's fake. Maggot. Hagerman, he calls me her flunky and her. lightweight assistant. Um you know, that's fair. >> You got off easy. Maggot. Maggot.

Haberman. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Exactly. Um what's. been interesting actually and and quite. a few people have commented on this is. um there hasn't actually been any. specific denials of any of the scenes in. the situation room or the oval office. and pretty early on. >> I think you got to there's sort of been. very little talk publicly from anyone in. the administration about the book and. early on the vice president was actually.

on Megan Kelly's podcast and he said he. thought that we might have tapes in in. the situation room. And I think that. statement. kind of to me anyway revealed that there. were quite a few of them at the senior. level who were probably reticent to make. specific denials. Uh we haven't. commented one way or the other on that. stuff, but. >> until today, today is the day Jonathan. Swan announces whether or not the tapes. are real. Um but they have so so so that.

it's been notable for the lack of of of. denials. Um I'm sort of constrained. somewhat in in you know there have been. people who've reached out privately. about different things and and um. >> particularly with Iran. You know we've. done some reporting since the book came. out um where we have heard from people. saying it the situation is worse than. you understand. And in particular, we've. we've done some reporting on how this. war has depleted America's weapons.

supplies to a really alarming extent. Um, and that reporting has, you know, become the subject of leak. investigations and other things. So, it's it's been a very difficult time. I. mean, some of my colleagues had the FBI. show up at their houses um for for. another story. So, I would just say. generally it's a it's a pretty in terms. of the national security reporting right. now, it's a pretty uh delicate time and. we're just trying to make sure that.

everything we write is completely. bulletproof and and button down. >> How do you do that? What's what's the. process? So, if people reach out to you. and say this Iran war, you're not. getting the whole story and not not to. frame it in, you know, these are the. Pentagon papers, but what is the. process? So just stick with that larger. claim. You know, we have a depleted. supply of of missiles or armaments or uh. the supply chain is broken because. >> the attacks of that Iran did on our.

bases in the Middle East were more. damaging than they had, >> you know, first. >> How do you go about the process of. making those claims bulletproof? What's. the difference between accountability. and actual sort of specific evidence? >> Well, it's difficult for lots of. reasons, but one is because during this. war, information has been kept extremely. tight. I mean, central command has been.

really really secretive about all kinds. of things and and they will say, you. know, it tips off our enemies if they. know how many u air defense interceptors. we have. The problem with that argument. and we have reported quite a bit on the. lack of air defense um interceptors and. and in some cases um gotten quite. specific with numbers. The problem with. that is China and Russia have pretty. sophisticated ways of uh surveilling.

America's weapon supplies both with. human spies and also with electronic um. surveillance. So it's not like they're. in the dark uh about this. And from our. point of view, yes, there are probably. things that uh you know shouldn't be. published because they might endanger. lives. But we we lean pretty heavily on. the side of the public has a right to. know about the state of the American. weapons stockpiles in a war that uh. Congress had no role in approving that.

the president went to war without even. you know any kind of I mean under the. constitution the congress is supposed to. declare war. There was no such thing. happened here. I'm I'm sorry you said. the con you said con constitution like. >> I know it's it's a quaint notion right. >> we don't declare war anymore we just. have. >> uh military actions or marshall issues. >> right an excursion excursion. >> it's now an excursion not a war. >> so so so this is actually one area where.

in some it's hard and it's also in some. ways easier because there are actual. numbers that you can put to it you can. say you know there are x number of. patriot interceptors uh in the European. command stocks. there are x number of. javelins uh so tomahawks you know uh. jimmss whatever. >> is that accounting generally known like. do. >> no. >> it's not so. >> well well sorry now at this point it is. largely frankly largely because of our. reporting and several other uh news. organizations reporting um but uh the.

the specifics of just how many. interceptors we have total and in. certain commands that's still not. publicly completely um known own and you. know that's stuff that we're still. working on. >> What is the cat and mouse game like for. reporters at the Pentagon? So Hegath was. very clear you know they've removed so. many of the people who were placed at. the Pentagon. Does that make it more. difficult? Is this you know you talked.

about uh Russia and China have you know. human intelligence but also electronic. surveillance and all kinds of other. things. Are you relying on human. intelligence? Is it purely based on uh. whether or not someone. will be open to giving you that. information? I without sort of exposing. >> uh the Keebler secrets of how the. cookies are made. I am curious how you. are able to get yeah.

>> specifics of those things and obviously. you don't want to give away operational. details that could in any way place. people at harm but you want the American. public to be aware of whether or not. there's a recklessness or what the what. the effects of this has been. >> right. it's not about um how the cookies made. what I'm very sensitive to is protecting. sources because the people who giving us. this information uh are taking huge.

risks. >> What is the risk that in your mind is is. what they're doing illegal? >> I really don't want to comment on the. legal side of things cuz we're getting. but but let's just say generically you. can go to prison for leaking classified. information. Okay. >> And this information is classified. This. is not the kind of thing that is known. on a kind of military audit. Again, I don't want to say spe No, no. I'm just It's difficult, John. >> Being a reporter is hard. >> The position I'm in, the position I'm in.

is is is I I just don't want to give any. legal ammunition um to the people who. are already trying to sue us and come. after us and um potentially have an. espionage case. Let's just say. generically, hypothetically speaking, not anything I've reported on, but. hypothetically, um, information about. how many weapons America has of certain. types is some of the most sensitive and. guarded information that we have, particularly how many air defense. interceptors we have left. That that.

that is very highly uh sensitive. information. >> Very highly. Is the information about. how we went to war a different category. for you than it is the specifics of. operational specifics? >> Definitely. Um and and although I will. say we've we've done both. I mean we. have even though I'm not going to get. into whether like I'm going to describe. some both categories are areas that. we've reported in great detail. The the. going to war um is you know.

conversations in the situation room. what was the president briefed on? Um. what were those conversations? And we I. think did some of the most detailed. reporting on that march to war and how. those decisions were made and and what. was presented to the president. >> Is this the kind of information uh this. classified information that uh Donald. Trump might safely keep in a Mara Lago. bathroom? Is that. >> or in maybe a box by a car? uh you know, Jonathan, have people then talked to you.

about not just this information, but. their. their surmisal of what this Middle East. scenario is going to look like in the. future. You know, obviously they came. out a week into it and said, "We won. We. have utterly obliterated not just their. nuclear program, but their ability to. they don't have a navy. They don't have. an army. They don't have an air force. They don't have anything. we've won it. We control the straight. Clearly, the. information you're getting is the.

antithesis of that, >> right? >> Does that have any accountability. in Washington? And I guess this gets at. at sort of what I wanted to to talk to. you about, which is the frustration. between great reporting. and its consequence. And is it difficult, you know, and maybe. I have a a kind of hazy nostalgia and. this might have been born of a kind of. Watergate fable,

but. I always think of it as, you know, the. Pentagon papers drop and suddenly the. Vietnam War is no longer viable and the. American public, their conscience is. shocked and uh the Watergate reporting. done by Woodward and Bing shocks the. nation into accountability. ility. >> The biggest difference between now and. then is the the congressional branch has. just pieced out. Um. >> right.

>> Uh when you have a Congress that um is. inert, you don't actually have the only. accountability mechanism is the courts. Um and they give the president's how's. that going? >> Exactly. Exactly. and they give the. president a huge amount of difference in. in conduct particularly in foreign. policy um and national security and then. the press. Um and so the one thing I. will say is it's pretty clear that the. American public is very unhappy with. this war and I think that that is to a.

large extent based on what they're. reading and seeing and hearing. Um and a. lot of reporters have done very very. good work not just New York Times but. other places to get out that. information. You know, when President. Trump says the the Iranian military is. completely demolished, decimated, we. published a story saying they regained. access to 30 out of 33 of their missile. sites, their cruise missile sites. alongside along the street of Hormuz. So, you're not just saying you're wrong, you're actually saying here is real.

information, you know, cuz to me it's. all about my job is about providing. information. You can only act on. information. You can't act on a a vibe. or a feeling. And so every day I wake up. and I try to get more information out. there in the public sphere. So we've. done a lot of reporting, an enormous. amount of reporting about this war and. and try to inform the public. Um but the. accountability mechanism uh doesn't. really exist. you know, there may I'm. sure if Democrats take the House, there'll be investigations and what have.

you, but I think people are um. under appreciating. uh just how difficult oversight will be. potentially in this administration and. what happens when uh if um the. administration essentially refuses to. cooperate with congressional oversight, congressional subpoenas, there isn't a. Congress jail. There's no place, you. know, Congress doesn't have, >> right? It's not like a stadium where in.

the bottom of it there's a dungeon where. people that throw rocks get put in. >> Right. Exactly. >> The enforcement mechanism is Congress. says, you know, this is really bad and. we're going to refer it to the Justice. Department. The Justice Department that. is run by Donald Trump's personal. lawyer, former personal lawyer. Okay. So, that's that's what we're dealing. with in terms of accountability. I hate the news. I I hate what it's. doing to me emotionally. I I hate that. you don't really know where the.

information is coming from. Sometimes. you don't know how it's being. manipulated. And it it adds to the. creeping fog of sadness that grows. But. I have to keep up. I have to understand. what's going on in the world. And that's. why Ground News, I it's they've got a. website. It's an app. It it lets you. compare news coverage across the board. to understand how you're being zoomed. Do you know what I'm saying? You can see. how different news outlets will frame. the same story. They've got a blind spot. feed so you can challenge yourself about.

your news consumption. You'll see who. owns what news outlet to understand why. they're framing the stories the way they. are. This is the one you should uh get a. hold of. Enlighten yourself. Please, to. get the same unlimited access to the. Vantage subscription, go to. groundnews.com/stewart. and subscribe to get 40% off. Discount. only available for a limited time. That's groundnews.com/stewart. or scan the QR code on screen.

I hate to frame it in this way, but it's. sort of the difference between. information. and evidence. The information is just. sort of a broad-based this is is what's. going on. But but some of it is evidence. of malfeasants. or of uh secretive nature or misleading. and and so much of the information that. you put out there could also qualify. as evidence.

And how do you look at the two of those. as as you're going through? Are is there. a goal in your mind of okay they're. saying this and this and this have been. depleted and otherwise and you're saying. but the information we have and and when. you discover the discrepancy. is that information now evidence. >> well evidence. I in a sort of colloquial sense yes but.

but I don't think there's any prospect. of legal uh proceeding. I mean, one. thing that has been really notable about. this term is just how influential the. Supreme Court's 2024 immunity ruling. was. >> You felt that you feel the difference of. that. >> Oh, I think you just got nauseous. >> Oh my gosh. Be beyond. So, so in in term. one covering Trump, >> Uhhuh. >> it was I I can't overstate this. I'm not.

saying he changed that much, you know, in terms of his deep character or. anything like that, but it's. unrecognizable. I mean, they were. certainly in the White House council's. office quite cautious. I mean, people in. the White House administration were. prohibited from talking to the DOJ. There was there was like a real attempt. to enforce some kind of a um a firewall. That's why Trump kept having to do these. sort of talk to this person. Can you. please whisper in Jeff Sessions's ear? You know, that's all been obliterated.

You felt there was real caution there. Who was Can you recall who were the. White House council people then? I know. Sessions was the early. >> Don Mcan. Patalone. >> and they're gone. >> Oh, beyond gone. But but um it's not. really just the about the story about. the White House. It's really just about. Trump. I mean he feels he feels that no. one can touch him. Um and understandably. so. I mean, we we had reporting in our. book um that he's been saying privately.

that he's going to pardon anyone who. came within 200 ft of the Oval Office. He literally said that and he says it in. this sort of joking way, but you kind of. know it's not a joke. Uh because. certainly the way he was at the end of. the first administration. I mean, I. spoke to a senior official who was. working in the first administration and. they're actually kind of a clean sort of. uh by the book type person and they were. sitting with Trump and Trump's like, "Do. you want a pardon?" and they were like, "For what? Like, what what would I want. a pardon for?" Um, but that was at the. end of the first term. And now you've.

seen how the pardon system has evolved. Um, I'll give you another example that. just shows how different it is and how. much freer he feels to act. Uh so so. term one Trump used to say almost kind. of yearningly. he'd say you know we talk about drugs. he'd say you know there's no drug. problem in China cuz she just kills them. she she he just kills them kills the. drug dealers and he goes there's no. problem in the Philippines cuz you know.

detert he just kills them. >> That's right. Well, this term what. happened? Donald Trump said, "I am going. to determine myself that people in. fishing boats who are trafficking. cocaine, maybe we we actually don't. necessarily know that all of them were, but you know, let's just take their word. for it. Let's take their word for it. that these people are all trafficking. cocaine um on fishing boats." Usually, that's a law enforcement problem. You. know, the Coast Guard interdicts them.

You're arrested. you know, there's a. there's a proceeding, there's due. process. Um Trump said, "We'll just kill. them. We're just going to call them. enemy combatants, describe this as essentially a war uh. and kill them, >> right?". >> And there's no appeal process when your. body is scattered at the bottom of an. ocean uh after being, you know, blown. up. There's no appeal process. You can't. put your limbs back together and go and. say, "Hey, actually, you know, this. one." So that's what's happening and.

they didn't really even bother to. justify it legally. I mean they have. lawyers in one of the biggest things. that uh Steven Miller and others did. between term one and term two was change. the types of lawyers that they start the. administration. More aggressive lawyers, lawyers who are willing to push the. envelope. Lawyers who are willing to get. to yes and not put up a no. So their. internal legal opinion basically green. lit this whole operation of blowing up. boats. In term one, you had people like.

Mark Esper, the defense secretary, and. others saying absolutely not. Uh this. would never have flown in term one. >> It's interesting that that they still. feel the need to even make a kind of uh. theatrical move towards justification. legally, >> but they didn't really, John. It it was. like they didn't even publicize it. They. they like they put out and said, "Here's. our legal. >> Here's the framework around it. Here's. why we're doing it.". >> No, no, no, no, no, no. It was like, you. know, they it was,

>> you know, basically, take our word for. it. This is legal. Um, uh, they didn't. sort of go to great lengths to make a. legal justification to the public. >> Do you think this is the learned effect. of, and I don't want to blame everything. on January 6, but January 6, strike me, and and January 6 was the culmination of. a strategy. People, I think, like to. point to that day as, boy, that was just. a day that got out of hand and chaotic, but I thought it really was the. culmination of a very intentional.

strategy that began right after the. election. He loses. His first idea is, well, I'll just call up the states that. I lost and say, can you flip those. votes, please, because, you know, I. actually won. And when that didn't work, he sort of started the process of at at. you know, then I'll go after the people. that certify the election. So I'll I'll. call the Republicans in Michigan or. Wisconsin and I'll say don't certify it.

And when that didn't work, he went to. the next stage. But at each stage, there were meetings. And he was meeting with a team going, "What else can we do?" And I always. assume that what ultimately came to him. was they said your this is your final. chance. If they certify this in the. Congress, it's over. So if Mike Pence doesn't.

somehow uh you know do the right thing. and stand up and not certify it, that's. your last chance. your only other chance. is to disrupt the proceeding and maybe. then that thing gets kicked into the. House of Representatives. and maybe then they could they could. just decide because we have the. advantage there that you're the. president. Is that where he learned. because there were so many lawyers that. said, you know, including Bill Barr, that's nonsense. You lost, you can't do. this. He lawyer shopped. He ended up.

with people like Sydney uh uh whatever. her name was and Eastman and all those. people that would do that bidding. And. is that when he realized, oh, I don't. need to change the law. I just need to. change. >> the people who will help me justify what. I want to do. >> Yeah. The the only part of that that I. don't have any supporting reporting for. is I don't think that they expected the. riot at the capital. I really I really.

don't expect that part of it. But. everything up until that point, yeah, I. really don't think um that I think that. surprised them. Came as a real surprise. Um but everything up until that point. was PL was an effort to use every lever. to overturn the election, right? And and. and what happened was. >> it's not like he had a bunch of lawyers. working for him that were uh squishes as. they would say or these were loyalists. These were hardcore truck people, but. they said, "No, this is this is crazy.

>> We don't have it. >> We don't have it. We just don't have. it.". >> But he lawyer shopped in the way that. somebody who wants pills would doctor. shop. >> Exly. That that's exactly right. And and. so that's how you get a legal team that. comprised, you know, Sydney Pow, Rudy. Giuliani, and the others. And um so I. think that that is that is something. that he was Trump would already do that. in other areas. So when he wouldn't get. the answer he wanted from his military. generals or whatever, he was, you know,

going out and talking to others that he. might see on Fox or other places. I just. think what happened was this turn around. he came back with with a very clear. determination that I'm not even going to. have that first step. I'm just not going. to have people around me who are doing. that type of push back. And so you just. clear out that first step um and start. with with the second step. Um, and. that's basically where we're at. And. it's so interesting because term one was. considered.

such an aberration from traditional. American presidencies. that the idea that term two is almost. unrecognizable even to term one, which. at the time we thought, my god, this is utterly pushing the bounds of uh. executive power and uh of the way that. uh you know the executive functions as. opposed to congressional oversight. We.

thought that was an aberration. I mean. term one looks like the Eisenhower. administration compared to what we're. dealing with now. >> That's that's just makes me sad. But then but and and term one though was. all leaks. Would you say that's like. term one people just came to you? How do. you So now. what is it all deep throat in a garage. like how does it work now for you now.

that they have removed so many of the. avenues of oversight? How does anything. and and maybe do they get to the point. where that information they don't. believe it hurts them anyway? Do they. not even care? >> No, they they care. >> They still care. >> He still he certainly does. um. term one the leaks were largely a. product of fighting of people factional. warfare people trying to destroy each. other Jared Kushner is trying to destroy. Steve you know Steve Bannon trying to. destroy Jack Jared Kushner etc etc and. you know things break out you have.

faction you have camps and they're all. at war um that's how a lot of the the. leaking came about. >> the reason you've seen so much less. inside the room reporting for this. administration is because it's just much. harder just much much much harder. >> they don't have those factions anymore. where there are not people vying for. >> it's subtle. It's much more subtle. It's. not really factions. It's not there's. sometimes I'll see commentary that. suggests that there's sort of these very. bright lines. It's not really the way it. works. Uh it's a team that yes, there.

are little nuances here and there, but. they're basically all people who believe. in Trump, who want to work for him, who. want to implement what he has to do, you. know, are not pushing back and trying to. stop him. I mean, in the first term, you. would Routinely we would talk to for. those of us covering him talk to very. senior officials who thought that Donald. Trump was dangerous um and saw their job. as protecting the country and the world. from Donald Trump. That's really what. they would say explicitly. >> They felt they were there as kind of a.

firewall. >> 100% 100%. There's no one at a at a. meaningful senior level who believes. that in this administration. Zero. But. at what point, Jonathan, does reality. begin to erode that fantasy or that. facade? You know, JD Vance, who I think. is a pure creation of ambition. I don't. believe there's anything, you know, he. has his ideas or whatever, but I think. he is all strategy. They say like all.

hat, no cattle, but he's all strategy, no principle. So he sits in the Oval. Office or stands as Donald Trump sits. and says these other presidents got us. involved in these wars uh because. they're stupid. But Donald Trump is. smart. So and he was talking about Iran. You know, we're in this war with Iran, but it won't turn badly because Donald. Trump is smart. Well, now that it's turned badly, do. they deny that it's turned? They can't.

they can't truly believe that it's going. well. So at what point does reality. erode their belief in his. powers of even basic competence? Well, Vance is probably a bad example. because he was actually the the single. person at that senior level at the inner. circle who actually argued against the. war in the meetings with Trump and it. cost him. It irritate really Trump did.

not want to hear it and we've spoken to. people who talked to Trump at the time. he was complaining about about Vance. So. Vance actually made a case against the. war before the war. >> But publicly what he made the case for. was it won't go badly cuz this guy's so. smart, >> right? Um, and that's just I mean, you. know, you know, >> but my point is if if they're loyalists. who believe in Donald Trump, where is. the evidence for their belief other than.

he's great at becoming president and. shitty at being president? >> Well, it's hard to know what a lot of. them actually think, right? because, you. know, I I don't want to sort of go beyond what. I have in terms of reporting. It it's. sometimes really hard to untangle, you. know, personal ambition, um, pragmatism, cynicism, what you need. to do to survive, the the stories you. tell yourself, all that stuff. Uh, it's.

very hard to untangle. And I'm sure it's. much more nuanced than, you know, I. mean, there's a spectrum, right? like. not everyone is Natalie Harp. Um. >> you don't think they're all just writing. love letters? >> No, they're not. And you know, we had. reporting in the book, for example, like. just to give you an example, um when. Trump starts a trade war with the whole. world, >> right? >> Um you know, Scott Bessant um. understands bond markets. He he could. see what was happening in the bond. markets. And him and Howard Lutnik uh.

even Howard Lutnik who has. >> Yeah. who's, you know, said all kinds of. flattering things about Donald Trump. >> Both of them privately uh realized this. could really go wrong. This could really. go off the edge. Uh and they made a case. to pull back on the tariffs and Trump. did. He put up a a pause on uh tariffs. for just about every country, I think, except for China. So, there are moments. of that. And it's not if it was just. total blind uh Natalie Harp level.

adoration, you wouldn't have uh an. episode like that. You wouldn't even see. it. But they're uh so they're they're. still reacting at some level to the. realitybased. >> Yes. >> community. >> Yeah. Absolutely. >> And they're making changes. What form. might that take. when it comes to the Iran war? Or is. that such a cluster at this point? There's almost they don't have the same.

ability to do what they were doing uh. with the tariffs. >> They certainly don't. I mean, >> and by the way, the crying that you hear. in the background happens in all of my. interviews. It's not just. >> Oh, can you actually hear it? >> Oh, I can hear it. Yeah. Yeah. Oh, I'm. I'm so Jonathan, I'm so attuned to B. like I immediately want to go like, "Oh, are you like once you have kids. >> Oh, that's bad. Just give me one sec. One sec. Let let's go to commercial. Let's let's take a break.

Oh, you know, I like to sleep because. I'm old. You know, when you're old, where you sleep matters more than most. things. You'd be surprised. When I was. younger, I could fall asleep on tile, in. a backyard, on a bench. When you get older, you got. to have yourself a little bit of the. comfort. And that's where uh the Avocado. Green mattress comes in, man. Avocado. green m And before you ask, again,

they're not made from avocados. Let's. not be crazy people. It's the name. So, if you could please. not keep asking them that. I think. they're they're not actual avocados. Avocado mattress is designed for. comfort, support, helping your body stay. aligned. You know, the last time my body. was aligned, it's been. I think it might have been the last time. the Mets won the World Series.

That's how long it's been since it's. been aligned. But these mattresses, Avocado Green mattress, responsibly. sourced organic materials that are built. to last. So, get an Avocado Green. mattress. Avocado products are made, not. manufactured, and thoughtfully crafted. with real materials to deliver lasting. comfort and support. You can experience. them in person at an avocado showroom or. a premier retailer near you. Or shop. online at avocadogreenmattress.com/tws. to check out their mattress and.

furniture sale. It's. avocadmattress.com/tws. avocadogreenmattress.com/tws. Period. Now is that that's that's a baby cry. That's not a six-year-old. That's not a. four-year-old. That's a baby, man. It's. a 3-w week old. 3 week old. >> Can I tell you something, man? I like my. wife. So, I would come home from work. and I remember I'd be like, you know, I.

had such a tough day and I'm like, my. wife would just look at me like, I'm. going to throw you off the roof. I'm. going to punch you in the face. >> And I can remember one day I was like, you go out, I'll take care and I'll be. fine. He cried like that nonstop the. whole time she was gone. She comes back. I'm in the bathroom door closed with a. hair dryer on. cuz cuz I think that she had told me.

like weirdly like if you turn on the. haird dryer he'll stop crying. I'm sweating. I'm crying. I'm holding a. hair dryer like it's a weapon. And she. just all I said to her like, "You go. relax." She literally opens the door and. is like, "I was gone for an hour.". >> Oh I I very much have had not. exactly the hairdryer, but uh exper. Yeah. It's like you you get a new. appreciation for them, right? Uh for for.

your wife. It's uh. >> Dear God, >> it's it's something. >> It is it is something. Sorry, the. question was about Iran and intrud. So, so I think look, I think one of I think. one of the biggest um problems that. American presidents tend to have and. Trump has has to the extreme is the. misconception that you can control. events anywhere that you have the power. to control events everywhere. And Trump. seemed to believe at an almost cellular.

level that and whe I don't know if it. was the power of positive thinking or. whatever but before. >> I think that I mean he is a Norman. Vincent Peele guy like that is he was. raised in the church of Norman like that. is his. >> totally. >> you know loadar. >> He believed before the war despite. everything he'd been briefed that the. Iranian regime would collapse really. quickly. And when that is your operating. assumption, when that is infused through. everything, considerations like the. straight of Hormuz stockpiles, they all.

are not considerations because if the. premise is this regime's going to. collapse like that, these problems don't. end up happening. So when that didn't. happen, uh you saw this I mean Trump uh. you know we have reporting that early on. first few weeks of the war Trump almost. couldn't fathom that the Iranians were. still fighting that they still had fight. left in them and he was asking you know. General Kaine the chairman of the George. chief staff you know.

yeah they still got fight left in them. they were still doing this he did not. believe that they were going to be as. resilient um as they ended up being And. so we saw him pivot to diplomacy. um by April. Uh and obviously it has not. gone well at all. They had the. memorandum of understanding that they. unveiled in June which was hailed as the. end of the war. Um the 60-day deadline. expired uh in August. where now last. night was heavy strikes uh you know on.

the Jordanian the US base in Jordan and. you know back and forth further apart. than they were the two sides um with the. MU. So you know Trump has been wildly uh. flailing from kinetic action to uh. diplomacy coercion and does not have. anything that you could describe as a. strategy um here. So that's that's where. we're at right now. >> You I and again and I so appreciate you. do something that I think very few other.

journalists do which is you refuse to. speculate beyond the measure of your. knowledge which I think is admirable and. it's the antithesis of cable news. television which is just 24 hours of. like what do you think it means and. people just go out over their skis. In. your experience though with Trump, when reality punctures that power of. positive thinking, have you ever seen him? You know, you've.

been involved in in two really. interesting interviews with him. Uh the. first one I think was 2018 where you. were talking about birthright. citizenship and he mentioned, you know, we're the only country in the world that. has birthright citizenship and you. didn't say that's not true and people. really went after you on that. was ter. bad interview. >> Well, so and and you came out and said, but I you know, my bad. 2020 was the. opposite. You sat down with him about. COVID and he was making statements and. you.

steadfast and and he brought up. something and and I I think it was about. what was it the the death rate. >> Yeah. >> And and you were saying, "Well, that's. not how it's calculated. it's it's per. capita and we're doing you know we're. not doing great we're doing badly. and every and people hailed that. Do you notice a difference when you are. in front of him. and you provide him with irrefutable.

evidence of reality? How does he absorb that? Does he absorb. it? Do you did you find that that made uh. inroads into his future, you know, framing of of issues? How does. he absorb reality? I can't believe we're asking this.

question about the president of the. United States. How does he deal with. reality because his world is so. distorted? So I think there are there are realities. that are just too intrusive to ignore. So things like the bond markets, the the. price of gas, >> um when American service members die, >> um and even then he'll still try to spin.

it publicly. But it's pretty clear from. his actions since April that reality has. intruded because he's changed course. He's not, you know, he hasn't continued. to escalate this war. He's trying. whatever he can do to get out of this. war. It's just not working. Iran has a. vote in that Iran is extending the pain. is, it feels like they have leverage. But it it wouldn't be true to say that. Donald Trump was oblivious to reality. because why then would you authorize. your team to go and negotiate a.

settlement? You don't do that if you. genuinely think you're winning. You. don't say, "Oh, Vance, Kushner, Whitov, go and get me a deal to get out of this. war." If you think you're crushing it. and they're totally decimated, you've. won. Like, you don't do that. So, by his. own actions, it's clear even if he he's. not willing to admit it publicly that he. acknowledges uh some degree of reality. in this war. And so the the you know. because he does seem to have his what he. falls back on because I'll say like in. terms of gas prices he'll just come out.

and say right. >> they're actually not very high. Uh I. actually thought they were going to be. much worse. He'll send Besson out to say. oh no this is nothing. It'll be gone. They'll be down to $2 a gallon. When it. comes to uh you know the casualties of. war Howard Lutnik will literally say hey. we did this without anybody dying. Trump. will say, "Oh my god, look how much. better we're doing than Vietnam." Like. he'll bring up, they'll still spin it, but you're saying he is viscerally aware.

that this has been a disaster. But that. gets me back to the other thing. The. people around him, do they not see now. that his competence was a facade? that. he's a reckless. and and capricious individual, not this. strategic. uh. fivelevel chess Jedi. >> Um I don't know. Is is this the short.

answer? No one has sat down with me and. said, you know, I thought he was a Jedi. master and now I think he's, you know, completely incompetent, >> right? I think he's kind of a boob. I. also think that probably for a lot of. them it wasn't that they thought he was. a 5D chess master. It was that it was. something slightly different which is. he's an instinct player and his. instincts are often right.

>> I see. >> Now has that changed? May well have but. I don't have reporting to support it. >> How have you changed in dealing with. him? You know those experiences that you. had in 2018 and then 2020, what did it. tell you about? Look, reporters can't. have. specific evidence at the level to refute. on everything. It's just not possible. But are there things that you learned. about dealing with him or dealing with.

his administration in a way that helps? I always said. Trump has always stopped usually when. it's not the Supreme Court by the legal. system because the legal system has. evidentary standards. Anybody can go on. CNN and just say whatever the they. want, but there are evidentiary. standards and it's why they do so badly. in court most of the time. >> It was two things. One was just. learning, frankly, learning and studying. how to do an interview. The first time I. interviewed him um is the first.

interview I've ever done on television. on camera. >> That 2018 interview. >> was with the president of the United. States. Yes. Your first interview was. with the president on camera. >> Yes. Yes. You would think it would be. good to do Yeah. It's crazy. You like. it' be nice if I had done like a mayor. or a governor or something. >> No, it was insane. >> Start out with a mayor. You got to start. out with a controller and then move your. way. >> Yeah. Comproller, a school council. person or something. So, a school board. person. >> Oh, Jonathan, that's amazing. >> No, it was totally Um, so um and.

I face it was it was the worst. I face. planted um a and on the biggest stage. you could imagine. >> I'd I'd go a little easier on yourself. that you didn't face plant. You did what. most reporters have always done with. him, which is you didn't realize he was. going to be a fire hose of nonsense. >> Well, I guess shame on me for for that. Um uh but no, no, sincerely. I mean I. mean you you know so I I'd been on. television been on panels and whatever. you I'd never done so actually we.

launched this HBO show and that was my. first time I'd ever interviewed someone. on camera Donald Trump. >> That's wild. >> So that was a disaster. So So I do that. interview and it's it's a really bad. interview and I get completely shredded. Um and everyone you know cuz cuz every. element of it gets analyzed because it's. understandably it's the president of the. United States. system or whatever. It's. a a huge opportunity. >> and the ecosystem is you aggregate. moments and you pass them out over every. sort of internet outlet or social media.

outlet. That's how things work, >> right? And so after that interview, I. made a study of interviewing. >> Oh, that's interesting. >> I like I kind of created my own sort of. self-curriculum in a sense. I I went. back and kind of said, well, who's done. this really well over the years? And you. probably remember Oriana Falachi. She. was incredible. She She's my hero. I. mean, before she she went kind of crazy. in the last decade of her life. So So I.

I don't associate myself. >> We do. We all do. >> So her last 15 years where she just like. went off the bench, but between about. 1960 and 1980, she was this fearless, brilliant, well-prepared interviewer. And I have a book of her interviews, a. collection. >> What did you think was instructive about. her? because she was fearless. >> Fearless. I mean, Henry Kissinger said. it was the most disastrous interview he. ever did. >> Really? >> Yes. She got him to admit that Vietnam. was a useless war during the war. During.

the war. Okay. And and what she did, I. mean, there's this moment in the. interview with Kissinger. um the stuff. that she did that you and I couldn't do, but um she she she she said, you know, I'm paraphrasing, but it was it was. like, you know, Henry Henry, women find. you so attract why do you think it is. people find you so attractive and and. and and he said, "Oh, do you have a. theory?" He said, "You know, I have a. theory, but I'm not going to tell you.". And oh, come on. Come on. And you're.

sort of reading the interview. You go, "Don't do it, Henry. Don't do it. >> Don't do it.". and he says, "All right, I'll tell you.". You know, in the American um mythology, we love the cowboy who rides into town. on the horse on his own. He doesn't even. have a weapon. Basically, that's me. And. he just he just humiliated himself. And. then and she she had unhorsed him so. much, so to speak, that he then starts. saying, you know, really stupid things.

So what I learned from reading her. interviews and studying her and the. other one I studied a lot um there's two. others Mike Wallace old 60 Minutes. interviews and also Andrew Neil in the. UK who's just at his best. >> so detailed he's so good when he's on. like he'll read the the bill the. legislation he'll know the budget he'll. know every detail. >> but what I what I love about them and I. it's hard to is. >> they don't do it When people know that.

sometimes the tendency is to just. demonstrate your specific knowledge over. and over again and I've fallen into that. trap sometimes where you try to do that. >> right. >> those guys prepared. but then they allowed they were very. present%. >> so present and it would it never felt. like they were performing. their knowledge I thought. >> so the thing I again and I I've spent so.

much time on this uh it's sort of insane. and watching tape of people so knowing. what are their programmed answers. >> like a prize fighter. >> what are their programmed answers what. are their moves and so cuz I think in an. interview you know I think about it in. terms of lines of questioning and you. only really get to the interesting stuff. on the third or fourth follow-up. question it's never the first the first. answer is always glib it's always. rehearsed the second one's a little more. interesting the third one and The fourth. one is when you really unhorse them and.

get to something close to interesting or. the truth. And what I found over time as. I got better at it was the preparation. liberates you. It's exactly what you. just said. If you are so well prepared, Mike Wallace used to call it um the. chemistry of confidentiality. It was. this moment at its best where you're. sitting down with an interview subject. This is not true of Trump, but most. interview subjects. And they realize.

you've done your homework, and it's a. show of respect really. You've really. done your work. You know the subject, and you're not going to put up with the. old give. And there's a moment. where they say, you know what, the. lights are all here. it. We're just. going to have a conversation. Like, I'm. not going to. And so, that's the kind of. holy grail. But what I find in in in. even like the most adversarial. accountability interviews is the. preparation liberates you to put the. notes aside and just listen and just.

listen to what they're saying. And if. they say something really interesting, follow that path. Don't go back to the. script. Follow that path to wherever it. goes. Um and have the confidence to do. that. Um and that's what that Trump. interview was because we'd spent like 25. minutes on co I was only allotted a. 30inut interview. I knew I could extend. him out cuz his staff wouldn't have the. balls to cut off the interview, but I. was kind of getting a bit, you know, anxious because I had other stuff I.

wanted to ask him about. And I could. have said he pulled out these papers. that he had and I could have said, "No, sir. Moving on to the next question.". But I was like, "No, I'm going to take a. look at these papers. What's on them?". Right? And that was the that was the. most revealing and interesting moment in. the whole interview because he was. trying to say basically they were. winning at death uh and and based on the. most kind of preposterous conception of. of co um death statistics. So um yeah I.

mean. >> but were you surprised because I. remember that interview. astonishing people and it astonish. people because I mean you might look at. it as well that was in that moment and. it was the natural thing the curiosity. of a journalist to be in the moment. People are not accustomed to journalists. who are not just going down their list. of the 10 subjects, allowing the answer,

and then just going to the next thing. And I'm surprised that. what you did. wasn't then modeled given how, you know, the incentive structure for journalists. is you're also trying to make a name for. yourself. Why do you think that didn't. then become the norm? >> I don't know. Is is is. >> it too hard to do? Are they trying to. just produce for 24 hours? Is is it too. hard to pin him down like that?

>> There aren't. Firstly, he doesn't he has. the perception of ubiquity uh because. he's sort of everywhere, but he actually. doesn't do that many serious sit down. interviews. He really doesn't. Um it's. mostly friendly uh interviews. >> or easily manipulated in a you know it's. so easy to conduct a room like the White. House press it's. >> oh that's not an I mean that's the. easiest interview in the world those. press I mean like you know you shout a.

question you know shout at you you don't. have even have a mic proper microphone. half the I mean it's no it's impossible. and you know it's not impossible you can. you know ask a tough question and what. have you but you can't you can't do a. serious interrog, you know, >> it's so easy to move past. >> Yeah. Yeah. No, no, that's that I mean, it is so stacked in his any politician's. favor in that kind of a setting. >> And that's why when they refer to that. as transparency or accessibility, you. just think, well, that's a lie. That's. just his ability to dominate uh a.

theater of his choice. That's a home. game. And he makes the rules and he puts. out that's not transparency and it's not. accountability. It's a performance that. he gets to put on to satisfy himself. >> Yeah. I mean, yes. Obviously, I'll. still, you know, again, I I haven't I. haven't been in I haven't been in one of. these for a very long time. Uh more more. than a year, actually, I think since the. last time I had a chance to do one of. them. But, um I'll take it over nothing. But, uh but but for sure, it's it's not.

uh it's not, you know, meaningful. transparency. >> Hey, everybody. I you know obviously. it's a podcast so like you got to do ads. but every now and again a company comes. along and you're like oh I use. those. they they you actually go like oh yeah. those are great and that's where we're. at now. Bombas Bombas is great. I use. those. and and and not just like not in in the. sense of like oh socks. Yeah, I mean.

everybody uses those. I'm not a delicate. flower. I'm not I'm not one of those. bold docsider no sock dudes that we all. read about in the 80s Bonfire the. Vanities and such. None of that. No, I. wear the socks for comfort. But the. socks I wear are bombas. They're. phenomenal socks. Now they got t-shirts. and underwear too. What? Start with the. foundation and build all the way up in. comfort.

and generosity. By the way, here's the. other thing. Okay. So, forget about. this. I don't even care. If if Bombas. just was the quality that it was and. felt as good on your feet, as they say. in uh as my people would say, Dianu, it. would be enough. But they're good. people, too. Yeah. Every single item you. purchase, an essential clothing item is. donated to someone in need. Head over to. bombas.comweekly.

and use code weekly for 20% off your. first purchase. That's boom. bas.com/weekly. Code weekly at checkout. Do it now you. Did you ever see you know there's you. brought up Mike Wallace. I'm curious if. you ever saw because there was an. interview that Mike Wallace did with Roy. Conn and Roy Conn being the lawyer that. kind of. >> Yeah. >> taught Donald Trump the the basic steps.

of ambition and power and corruption. You don't hire Roy Con to be your lawyer. cuz you want him to make sure you're. doing everything by the book. He's a. manipulative, dangerous guy. It was Joe. McCarthy's lawyer, you know, on the the. House on American Activities Committee. Bad person. Mike Wallace does an interview with Roy. Con, and it gets back to sort of what we. talked about about. the power, positive thinking, and.

reality distortion. Roy Con at the time is dying of AIDS. And I I urge you to go look this up. because it is a master class not just in. what you're talking about as a. journalist but in a a subject that is I. think quintessential to understanding. the way Trump operates. So he says to. Roy Conn, you know, there are reports, you know, that you are a homosexual.

>> Well, that's No, that's absolutely seen. >> Oh, you've seen Okay. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. >> So, you know what I'm talking about. >> Yeah. Yeah. yet. >> you're dying of AIDS, a homosexual, not. a homosexual, not dying of AIDS, have. you know, you're welcome to talk to my. doctors. Mike Wallace says, "Can I? Because I. talked to your doctors and they said I. couldn't talk to them unless you said it. was okay. Are you saying it's okay?". You know, they go through this whole. dance. What's so interesting about it is.

they both know he's gay. They both know. he's dying of AIDS. Mike Wallace is. pressing the point incredibly. respectfully. Roy Conn is such a. fabulous. fabulist. M. >> he's such a great. liar and watching him and that gets to. the question I was talking about earlier. is does he believe this. or is he just so.

accustomed. to the show and what happens a few. months he dies of AIDS. >> and and I think ultimately came out and. said yeah I'm gay and. but I thought you So, is that what it's. like when you're faced with someone who. just. won't give up the game of reality in. front of you? >> I think it's so hard to know sometimes. what he actually believes. I'll give you.

one example where he clearly believed. the lie. Um. Terry Moran who used to be at ABC was. interviewing Trump and he asks him about. um Abrago Garcia. um and. >> and the tattoo and Trump brings up this. MS-13 tattoo which he posted. >> Yes. >> Um it was photoshopped. >> Yes. But Trump afterwards after the.

interview um was asking people, well, we. need to, you know, this is real. Basically, get me the photos, you know. So, he he he sincerely believed that. this tattoo and was insisting that it. was real. >> Um but other times he will say something. like, "We have all the weapons we need. for Iran." He he knows he's been very. well briefed on the weapons constraints. and if he actually believed everything.

he's saying about the war, he would not. be acting in like he wouldn't have. authorized his team to try to get out of. the war. Um they would have pressed. ahead for regime change. Lord knows what. else they would have done kinetically. You know he pulled back from major. operations that they had planned that. you know huge additional bombing. campaigns and things to destabil. So. clearly he knows uh that they have. leverage because if he if he believed. everything he said he wouldn't have. pulled back. He would have gone ahead.

press the advantage and um taken over. the country. Um if he Yeah. >> It's so interesting though that you're. you're saying this because it is it. seems like there's two information. streams. there's sort of, you know, he's. getting updates on the war and things. like that and he's realizing like, so. have they given up because he can't fake. that boats aren't going through the. straight of Hormuz or are going through. like you just can't fake that sort of. thing. But things like the MS13 tattoo. on his on his fist, my guess is and.

again don't know for sure and and you. can correct me or say well that's just. speculation is people feed him a lot of. information that they think he wants to. see. It's the Natalie Harp the human. printer. Sir, your poll numbers are. great. here's I found this story that. says 97% of Republicans and they give. that to him and so part of the reality. distortion field is created in his mind.

but part of it is reinforced. >> definitely. >> by a lot of people around him who he. goes is that guy MS-13 let's say he is. curious about it absolutely sir let me. show you this and they do that up to. show him like that's really and so he. thinks that picture's real and that is. actually what he's going. like when you got him on the numbers. My. guess is they feed him that He. doesn't look at it that carefully and. say to him, "See how well we're doing.".

>> And it's almost like they're feeding him. a a distorted world as well. >> It's both. Or he'll solicit it. You. know, you know, he goes out, you know, put me together a graph that shows we're. doing why. I mean what one dynamic is um. Bill Py who uh was the head of uh the h. the fin housing finance agency. >> right is a real estate guy. Yeah. >> Yeah. Real estate guy but but um uh has. no no experience in intelligence and was.

briefly the acting director of national. intelligence. But he goes to Trump's. golf clubs and he brings these foam. boards and. it's like they often end up being Trump. will truth a lot of the stuff you see on. his truth social on the weekends in. particular is is sort of Bill Pulsey's. uh often his his handiwork. >> and so you have people like him and. Natalie Harp who are feeding him what he. wants to see. Uh it's very much both. ways. He solicits, he gets it. Um, and.

then he has obviously, you know, his. intelligence briefings and what have. you, which are, you know, yes, they're. tailored to what he's interested in, but. it's not, you know, wacky stuff from. Gateway Pundit. It's, you know, intelligence. >> Right. Right. And and they make little. pres sort of like in the way my daughter. got us to get her a hamster. Like they. make little presentations with a couple. of slides that are easily, you know, well digested and that's how they get. their way with him. He loves a little.

pres everything is Shark Tank to this. president I think to some extent. >> Very very visual. You often see these. kind of dramatic um you know images of. he loves looking at the um you know the. the big naval vessels and things like. that. >> Loves to have his name on it. Where do. you think. is there a future? You know, for the. fact that you talked about I studied all. these interviews, I learned how to do.

them better. I walked in there. That's. an incredibly competent and thoughtful. way to go about in a world that is. moving away. I feel like you're artisal. You're like you're you're like one of. those shops where like you go in and a. guy is still making chairs by hand and. he's got a little lathe and he's like. look and they're like yeah but I just. went to China and got 800 of them for. $2. >> Yeah. >> The type we are now in a world of media.

consolidation. We are now in a world where it's. incentivized to. quickhitting. vitriolic hostile pits. Good journalism. has to exist in that world. Can it compete? What are the incentives. that you would like to see change or or. stay the same? How does this arteasonal. methodology. survive.

in a new world of Twitter and you know. Instagram and influencers and media. consolidation. or does how do you break through? So on. the interviewing on camera which is a. very specific thing you know. >> it is an art and it takes a long time to. work on it and I still feel like I was. only 5% of what I you know what I wanted. to do with that. >> You know.

we had the HBO show for 3 years. We won. the Emmy for that interview and then HBO. cancelled the show uh almost two weeks I. think after the um after the Emmy. >> Sure. Why why wouldn't they cancel an. Emmy-winning journalism show? >> So, so I don't know. I obviously I don't. know their their reason. I I I do know. that we were doing very controversial. interviews, you know. Um u we. interviewed Imran Khan in Pakistan and. and I pressed him on China's treatment.

of the Weaguers and that caused a huge. amount. I I don't know what what. happened internally. I'm not saying I. have any insight into it. >> I I can tell you. Um, certainly we were. we were doing shows that were getting a. lot of public debate and they were. highly political and what have you. And. I gather that a lot of these streaming. things just don't want to be in the news. business. I mean, it happened to you. obviously with um Apple, right? >> That's right. >> Yeah. So, so, >> and by the way, explicitly so. I mean, I. was in the rooms where they said, and.

you know what was so interesting? What really seems to have affected these. companies, it's not necessarily even. FCC, Ron Dantis. suing Disney when do you remember when. Disney came out and they took a stand on. don't say. >> him suing them and and actually going. after their sovereignty. >> in Orlando. that was brought up to me.

specifically. when it came to they did not want. politicians interviewed on the show for. fear that those types of repercussions. might occur and then there were. obviously other very touchy political. things that you know they came and and. we got a lot of push back on. What you. realize is. their interest diverges from your. interest. Your interest is to get the. most interesting interviews that are the.

most incisive, that are the most. revealing, that get to litigate the. boundaries of our reality and the. people, the powerful people that control. uh that reality. Their interest is. selling phones, mergers and acquisitions. You can only hurt them. You can't help. them. >> I think one reason so I think that's all. true. Um the and this is I'm almost. reticent to say this because it just. sounds like I'm promote being.

promotional, but I'm not. It's sincerely. what I think. The New York Times is kind. of a unicorn in that the the Trump would. like nothing more than to shut down the. New York Times, but he actually doesn't. have we don't need we don't depend on. the government for licenses. We don't. depend on the government for money. We're run by a family. Sourceburgers, this is their only thing. They're not in. all these other industries. The the New. York Times is everything for them and. they're willing to invest and support.

it. And I I'm all for independent media. I think it's it's wonderful. I'm all for. it flourishing. But for the sort of. national security type of stories in. particular, man, we need that. infrastructure, the legal. infrastructure, the the digital. information security and also having. knowing that the ultimate power at the. New York Times will support us, you. know, when Trump suing the paper and all. these sort of things that he he has his. back. >> Sure. When they're they're going to. their houses and they're giving them. subpoenas, >> right? A and you know, I'll just say,

you've never seen Ag Sberger um give a. donation to Donald Trump, go and uh suck. up to him. It doesn't happen. Doesn't. take private off the records with him. Nothing. Nothing. So to me, that that's. the ideal model. But I'm not naive. enough to think that everyone can just. replicate that. The New York Times has. managed to build in this very difficult. economic environment. I mean, New York. Times was no sure thing 15 years ago.

This thing was floundering uh. economically and they they built a a. digital subscription model and it's. worked. Um, and thank God it has, but um. it's really hard to do and and there's. not many people who've managed to do it, certainly not at scale. Um, investigative journalism is very. expensive. It's not a profit center in. and of itself. It's something that gets. subsidized by other things. So it's. never going to be this pure commercial. um thing. So then you have other models.

like the nonprofit model which you know. philanthropic model which again I'm all. for all of these things um existing uh. but it's really hard and the other issue. I had probably towards the end with the. interviewing. um and I'm sure you've had this issue as. well is once you start doing a few. interviews that are tough accountability. interviews people stop stop wanting to. agree to be interviewed by you. So. actually getting getting the interviews.

becomes an issue and and so I actually. didn't see a huge future for myself in. on camera interviewing because it. requires a guest booking and access that. uh was becoming apparent to me was uh. diminishing. >> pretty rapidly. >> and and and what you have to give up to. gain that access. Can I ask you about. another the flip side of that? You said, you know, when you start doing these. accountability interviews, it becomes. harder to book people. The other thing I. found was once the audience gets a taste.

of something like that, their. expectation is for blood. >> They they their expectation now is all. interviews must draw blood. I must taste. blood. They must draw blood from the. right people, >> right? Uh, and it must be and there is a. disappointment. if it's not be because the way that. social media has kind of a grandized the.

Jonathan Swan eviscerates Trump, right? Jonathan Swan uh lays low the head up. and it's almost as though. the audience. becomes thirsty for something. that you weren't trying to provide in. the first place and did you feel any of. that? >> Oh man, that's so true. That's so true. Um, I don't know that I I I've observed. it more than I I guess I felt internal.

pressure to um do the best. accountability interview I could, but I. didn't feel I've always hated. I I've never never gone into an. interview with like I'm going to take. their head off. Like it's it's just not. my approach. Like I the style of. interviewing it's not the way I operate. at all. Um, I think it it can go it can it can take. an interviewer to not great places. So. like I'm sure you've seen a lot of.

Paxman over the years, Jeremy Paxman in. the US. >> Yes, absolutely. >> In the UK. >> So I think Paxman's done some brilliant. like like some of his interviews are. brilliant, right? >> But I know where you're going with it. >> But you know what I'm saying? Like like. so he it became a shtick where he would. like like you know he there was the. famous one where he asked the same. question 10 times of that hless guy and. then there was the woman who I think was. the treasury minister or something where. he just oh it was so brutal she just.

he's like aren't you embarrassed to be. you know you're so mean and whatever and. so he he did a couple of great ones and. then over time it became a cartoon Um, and I actually didn't think that it. actually revealed much or shed any. light. It, you know, the cliche of heat. not light. It was all heat and very. little light. And not every interview uh. is this sort of. >> boxing match. It's just not. I mean, interviews, you have to have range as an.

interview. You have to be able to elicit. and and probe and, you know, whether you. agree with his politics or not. William. F.Buckley, Buckley, you know, go watch. his old his old firing light interviews. are brilliant. >> Yeah, >> they're brilliant. >> There's a lot of conversation. Dick. Cavitt was similar to I don't know if. you ever watch a lot of Dick Cavitt. They're so probing. >> Yeah. >> And he gets things out of people that. are uh astonishingly. insightful. But I think that you said.

it, it's preparation. plus presence. If you have listen if. those organic moments arise and by the. way I've done both you know I've been in. situations where you know Rumsfeld. famously where I was like I'm gonna get. this and they were terrible. and and it showed it the the narrowness. of the questions my lack of being. present like it all showed and it was it. was poorly executed on my part and and I. try to learn lessons from the bad ones.

but I'm also cognizant like and tend to. shy away from that idea of. drawing the you know you've got to. you've got to punish them and you're. like that's it's not punishment if if. within the body of the interview these. things happen they happen but you don't. know the alchemy of it. >> but even like take your Fedan interview. like you weren't you weren't out for. like it was very respectful it was very. respectful and you're giving him every. opportunity to explain himself like.

every opportunity to explain himself and. >> you There there was a show on Australian. television I used to love called Enough. Rope and and and I just I just it was by. um it was by this guy Andrew Denton. >> Such a good idea. >> Yeah. And Andrew Denton's a comedian. Very smart guy. >> Brilliant. And that's what the show was. It was he gave them enough rope. He was. probing. He wasn't disrespectful. He was. very respectful actually. Um he done his. homework. And man, it was one of my.

favorite interview shows. It was so. good. Uh, and I think that's a great. concept, you know, the enough rope. concept. U for a lot of interviews. doesn't always work. Uh, sometimes you. need to like fasten it yourself and. Yeah. >> I love the fact that you do I I feel. like you're the same way, which is like. the person you're always mad at after an. interview is yourself. >> Oh, a million%. >> Cuz you're always like, I should have. done I should have said, you know, all. those things. Well, I I really. appreciate the time. By the way, I want. to correct something. I I said earlier. we talked about Roy Con that he had come.

out at the end of his life. Apparently, he did not. My Jillian texted me in the. middle and said, uh, actually never. admitted even through his dying day, which wow, I did not realize. I thought. he did at the very end. Um, Jonathan. Swan, thank you so much for taking the. time. Thanks for being so thoughtful. about uh the whole process of sort of. interviewing in the public square and in. in the eye and and not going out over. your skis, over things that you don't. know. It's just a rare quality these. days. So, I really appreciate you and.

and it's so nice to talk to you and get. some sleep cuz I know you got a baby. >> Thanks, John. Really appreciate it. >> Thanks, man. >> Thanks, man. >> You know, uh before I was uh surrounded. by dogs and goats and uh pigs and sheep. and the like in the uh rustic life that. I now enjoy. Uh a couple of cats and I. was uh I thought a responsible cat. owner. You'd feed him the uh what was. it? a bag that was like was like cereal,

like weed to pick but for cats like. supposed to provide everything, you. know. But we know better now and no one. knows uh better than Smalls. Smalls cat. food. Uh uh I'm telling you, man, if my. cats had ever gotten a hold of Smalls or. if they had known there was another cat. like across the hall getting Smalls, they'd have left me toot sweet. They. would they would have been out of there. I was, you know, feeding them like fast. food.

But Smalls, man, fresh cat food, preservative free, 100% humanra. ingredients you find in your fridge. Back then, I wasn't eating human grade. ingredients, let alone my cats. And by the way, like not hard to get the. deliver right to your door. Uh 88% of. cat parents, and you know, if you know. uh uh people that have cats, you can't. get 88% of them to agree on anything. 88% of them say after feeding smalls, notice the cat has better digestion,

softer, and shinier, and has more energy. to play. Stop serving your little. carnivore a bowl of processed shortcuts. for a limited time because you are a. weekly show listener. Get 60% off your. first order, plus free shipping and free. treats for life when you head to. smalls.com/tws. One last time, that's 60% off your first. order, plus free shipping and free. treats for life when you head to.

smalls.com/tws. I how alert was he for having a 3-week. old baby. >> Seriously, it's pretty impressive. Yeah. >> Yeah. I loved in the middle. I was like, you know, there's a baby crying on the. thing. But that's the difference between. uh I think, not to be overly gendered,

uh a a man and a woman. Uh. >> tell us more. That. >> man explain this to us. >> That baby that baby could have cried for. 30 minutes. And Jonathan and I would have just kept. talking. Oh yeah. You know, it's. interesting on the thing. Like if my. wife had been in the room, SHE'S LIKE, "SOMEBODY GET THE BABY.". Like the the there it's a different. visceral. It's all that. It's like what. I was saying to him like that day I came. home and I was like, "Oh god, work was. so hard today." And she was like sitting.

there with the two babies. >> Was it? >> And just like, "How about I punch you in. the face? >> Do you want to make work a little. harder?". >> Yeah. Um, but he really is. I I love how. the way that he described preparation I. thought was. all the people whose craft I admire I. feel like prepare in that kind of a way. >> He studied tape. I mean I have so much. respect for that. Like you see so many. interviews that and he was actually like. what he didn't mention was like the 2020.

interview he held him to account and. they covered a broad variety of topics. in about 20 minutes. Like it's not just. that he. >> held him to account on one issue and he. had to give up so much in order to do. it. He still was able to get the. conversation moving. >> It's you can do both. You can walk and. chew gum here, >> right? And it is true that you know you. can't I think our expectation that. reporters must all be in the Jeopardy. tournament of champions and understand.

you know at a granular level the. specifics of every issue. But I also. think there's room for you know and and. we do. >> to give people at home some insight. There is a chat and Jillian and and and. Britney are on it and also you know. Rebecca is keeping an eye and when. shit's wrong when I say something wrong. or somebody says something there is a a. person who is thinking about the.

veracity of things. >> and I don't know why that's. not more utilized. It's It's not like. it's a college course where you're like. you're not allowed to use. >> your phone. You are allowed to. Right. >> Yeah. >> Life is open book. >> I mean, Trump certainly treats it open. book. You know, he's got somebody. somebody handing him things in the. Jonathan Swan interview. He said, "Well, let me show you what I've seen." You. know, he didn't say, "Just going off the. top of my head.". >> That's right. I don't understand why we.

make interviews that kind of a. it's sort of like in the way you know. presidential debates are like you can't. bring your notes and you're like sure no. you've got to make cuz in when you're. the president you're not allowed to use. notes you're not allowed to use your. phone as president like what the. are we doing? >> Yeah. But I also think you guys when you. were talking about how like the. expectations of your interviews now and. how people are out for blood and stuff. >> Yeah. Yeah. I do think that ties into. the like gamification of like you.

knowing more fact-wise. and like crushing on your interviewe. >> Yeah. You know what? That's that that's. so true. And I do feel that like because. there have been a couple of interviews. like I remember it began with there was. a a Jim Kramer interview during the. financial crisis and every like I. remember being on the street the next. day. >> and walking in the streets of New York. and people like YOU TOOK KRAMER. TO THE HOUSE LIKE and you really. felt like like. >> like a boxing match.

>> like you imagine like what OG Anobi felt. like after the t you know not to that. extent but like you're like oh that. wasn't like the idea isn't necessarily. to put people in headlock. It's the. alchemy of it in the moment. You're so. stunned by someone's lack of. accountability or whatever and you go. for. But that can't be everything. >> No. >> And that can't be your goal. It skews. things too much. >> Yeah. I do. But I also think like. interviews have become so friendly on. the opposite side of that that people.

don't expect any push back. You know, maybe Kramer came on your show really. not expecting anything because. >> Oh, no question. people, you know, he's. he's never never been asked anything. like it's we have to people should be a. little scared when they sit down. They. have to do it anyways. I mean, when he. mentioned, you know, how he really. didn't see a future for himself in. television journalism because of the. bookings, like Mike Wallace still got. interviews, like what what has changed. here? And they, you know, it used to be. tougher. >> I think it's gotten so much easier. I do.

think it is like I think the politicians. have figured out what environments they. can thrive in and what what environments. they will they will crumple in. >> and how to derail it. You know, they've. really figured out how to get around it. the little cheat codes they can do say I. mean actually that was one of the things. I was most um you know it's so basic but. in regime change just like how. intentional the administration has. become about distracting the media and.

how they literally have a list of what. can we say right we want this news story. to go away what do we have in the wings. okay well let's do this then you know. >> and it's so strange that there's not a. lot of self-reflection on the media's. part of oh every you know it's like that. dog and up, you know, where every now. and again they're like squirrel and. they're like should we stop doing that, >> but they don't. >> and it's it's in the book. Yeah. >> But when it comes to journalists, politicians, even business leaders, they. don't have to say yes to interviews.

anymore. >> No, they don't. Or they only have to say. yes to the ones they know will go a. certain way. >> Of course. I mean, we have certainly. seen that, but like I've been surprised. like people will think like, "Oh, we'll. be so friendly to Democrats on the. show." We've had Democrats say no to us. because they think it's going to be a. tough interview, which is. >> bewildering to me, but you know, but. >> and if you can't handle questions, what what are we doing? >> What are you doing? What are we doing?

Yeah. >> Speaking of which, handling questions. What a segue. >> We've got some doozers for you this What. a set. Do we really? >> We're going to hold you to account. >> They have been piling up. >> We've been away. So, they've been piling. up on there. All right. Come at. me. Come at me, bro. Remember when we. were going to I think we were going to. do a segment. This is on the old show. >> where it was like we were going to do a. segment called Come at Me, bro. And it's. like all the people that would talk. about the interviews and all that, we. would just have them on and we would we. would go It's like that jubilee.

>> What a great idea. >> They would just fire at me from all. different directions. Uh what do they. want to know? What do they want to know? >> John, I'm really mad at you. >> No, come on. I've been on vacation. All. right, let me hear. >> I listened to you on Michelle Obama's. podcast and do you really think the. Daily Show is giving the country. political diabetes? Like, come on, brother. >> Uh, I don't I think the point was I. don't know. Like, you. you don't know what you Here's the.

thing. We think we're making healthy. food, but we don't you don't know the. overall. You can never know. All you can. control is what you're making. You can't. necessarily control how it's being. digested, what the downstream effects. may ultimately be and all those things. Do I think that? No. I think that uh at. our best we can identify the space.

between what you see on camera and. television and what's actually happening. in the rooms where that is planned. the. best sort of insight and satire, but at. its worst, it can create a gamified atmosphere of. disdain that is not uh is it's sort of. like, you know, you everything can't. make you outraged. You have to always.

try. And the difficulty when you're. iterating a show that often is to make. sure. you've adjusted your governor that. you've synchronized everybody's watches. so that you're not it's I used to say it. was the um Snuggles the Bear problem. where comed you ever seen comedians that. like will go on stage and be like IF I. SEE THAT SNUGGLES THE BEAR COMMERCIAL. ONE MORE TIME AND you're just like. really. >> where do you go from there? the snuggles.

the bear thing's really good. You don't. want to be a ungrounded outrage machine. >> And so you're always trying to calibrate. that because if that's what you become, then it's just Morton down. We're the. thing that we try to do and I think it. was what I appreciated what Jonathan was. saying he tried to do. is postmort the reality of of what. you're doing and how you're doing it and. how you're executing it and where you. think that wasn't justified or that you.

know you always want to make sure that. fairness and veracity and good faith is. being ex and context is a part of that. doesn't mean that the tools of satire. hyperbole and you know juxaposition and. and you know adjectives that are not. kind can be used because there are. things that are contemptable that need. to be attacked. >> Mhm. >> But you want to make sure that the. targets justify.

the deployment and the amplification of. the tools you're using. And you hope that the downstream effect. of that isn't a caricatururing. even though caricature and stereotyping. are such a tool of satire. I don't know if that made any sense. >> No, it did. It absolutely did. It really. did. >> But that's the point is we're definitely. not trying to give you diabetes, but we. also don't think we're curing anything. If that makes sense. What do we got.

next? What do we got next? >> Okay, John, you've been recognized for. your advocacy on behalf of 911 first. responders. Why do you think Donald. Trump hasn't been acknowledged for all. he says he did? >> I mean, >> he's the president. I think that's Is. that not acknowledgement enough of of. all that he's done uh to the country? Yeah, he he's such an interesting figure. in that in. in that he really does feel the need, I. think, to inject himself as kind of a.

crucial part of that day. >> Yeah. even from that I you know and the. famous one is him going like I guess my. building's the tallest now. >> such a. it's such a like. you know Tracy loves the narcissist she. loves studying you know what's that. relationship ora's show uh I can't. remember the name of it but like. >> couples therapy right. >> couples therapy where you know there'll. be such a clear narcissist or narcissist.

on narcissist crime in the in in the. couples and she's so attuned to that. It's so. obviously. a destructive character trait. >> Mhm. >> It's so obviously. corrosive to the people around you. And. so to see that rewarded with the. position of the most powerful person in.

the like it's hard to imagine the. country. in a voluntary relationship. with such a damaging narcissist. >> Yeah. >> That's I feel like how did why are we. going out with him? >> Yeah. And we broke up with him and we. took him back. Why did WE TAKE HIM BACK? >> Our girlfriends did not help us. The. group chat, >> he lit the house on fire.

>> This is why you need good girlfriends. They stop you from doing these things. >> But does like how doesn't anybody go. like, "Girl, don't you remember he. stormed your house?". >> Yeah, >> we loved the attention. Like, it's. >> it's some sick That's what I'll. tell you. >> But the sick is it almost is like a. country is like, I know he did that, but. he was good to he was good to me. He. bought me. >> He keeps calling me, >> right? >> You remember my 401k during that. relationship, >> right? That it's almost like But I.

remember I, you know, we used to eat at. Lasserk. And that was really, >> but even even that was a fantasy. >> My favorite comment he made this week. though about the 9/11 stuff is when he. said, um, I'm not the smallest guy. Cuz. they had two the big trunk guys to come. and lift him up. They lifted him up. under the arms and they. >> and I I'm not the smallest guy. I'm big. Yeah. Hey, he does love talking about. big strong guys. >> It's interesting how that story just.

arose like a couple of years ago and. just wasn't one of the, you know, stories, but. >> I mean, you could say that it was really. big of him to hold on to that story for. so long. A lot of people saw it the. spotlight for, you know, but not not. Trump. He said, "I'll wait. I'll wait. two decades." And then. >> it's just it's it's so interesting to. see something so fundamentally awful. happen to so many people and so much. bigger than anything any of us can ever. conjure. And it's almost like his first.

thought is, "How is this about me? >> Me? I want to be part of the story.". >> Right? >> They're not talking about me. >> And I am now, aren't I? I guess I'm the. tallest building now, aren't I? That's. my takeaway. What's your takeaway from. 9/11? I guess the size of my building. Isn't that what everybody's takeaway is? It's psychotic. >> Yeah. >> Anyway, I think our next uh episode is. also going to be on a a Thursday because. of uh I guess maybe it's the timing of. next week. I don't I don't really.

>> Emmys. >> Oh, for God's sakes. Okay, so that's it. Oh, yeah. >> Who'd you vote for? >> I don't Oh, everybody. Apparently. everybody. Um but I'm hoping Jimmy. I I. I'd be I'd be stunned if Jimmy doesn't. uh although now I think there's some. they've changed the rules. I'm not. really exactly sure. But uh you know but. god. >> what why can't they just do it. in New York. >> just like at least alternate. >> right something along those lines. Well.

how can they stay in touch with us. Britney? Uh Twitter, we are Weekly Show. Pod, Instagram threads, Tik Tok Blue. Sky, we are weekly show podcast, and you. can like, subscribe, and comment on our. YouTube channel, The Weekly Show with. John Stewart. >> Beautiful. It's so nice to see you guys. again. It's so nice. Uh I hope everybody. had a good break and enjoyed themselves. and uh got a little rest and relaxation. Our producer Britney Mavic, producer. Jillian Spear, video editor and engineer. Robo, audio editor and engineer Nicole. Boyce, our associate producer Rebecca. Roenberg, and our executive producers. Chris McShane and Katie Gray. Uh, good.

to see everybody and we'll see you guys. next week. >> The Weekly Show with John Stewart is a. Comedy Central podcast. It's produced by. Paramount Audio and Bus Boy Productions.