1/16/25: NYT Demands Venezuela Toppled, Vivek Exiled by Trump, Jon Stewart Skewers Partisan LA Fire Response, Mr Beast To Buy TikTok, Bernie Ally Wants DNC Revolution
01:09:32 Share

John Stewart is back at The Daily Show, and he's bringing his signature wit and insight straight to your ears with The Daily Show Ears Edition Podcast. Dive into John's unique take on the biggest topics in politics, entertainment, sports, and more. Joined by the sharp voices of the show's correspondents and contributors. And with extended interviews and exclusive weekly headline roundups, this podcast gives you content you won't find anywhere else.

Ready to laugh and stay informed? Listen on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. What's up, everybody? Adnan Burke here to tell you about a new podcast. It's NHL Unscripted with Burke and Demers. Jason Demers here, and after playing 700 NHL games, I got a lot of dirty laundry to air out. Hey, I got a lot to say here, too, okay? Each week, we'll get together and chat about the sport that we love.

tons of guests are going to join in too, but we're not just going to be talking hockey, folks. We're talking movies. We're talking TV, food, and Ed and Ed's favorite, wrestling. It's all on Le Table. Listen to NHL Unscripted with Verkan Demers on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Hey guys, Sagar and Crystal here. Independent media just played a truly massive role in this election, and we are so excited about what that means for the future of this show. This is the only place where you can find honest perspectives from the left and the right that simply does not exist anywhere else. So if that is something that's important to you, please go to BreakingPoints.com, become a member today, and you'll get access to our

Full shows, unedited, ad-free, and all put together for you every morning in your inbox. We need your help to build the future of independent news media, and we hope to see you at BreakingPoints.com.

Same time we have had a slate of hearings that happened yesterday, confirmation hearings for incoming officials in the Trump administration. The most high profile person yesterday was Senator Marco Rubio up for secretary of state. Had a couple of interesting remarks. The most important for our purposes is really going to be about future policy vis-a-vis Ukraine. Here's what he had to say. Let me first echo the president's words and what he said in an interview about a year ago. He was asked about the war in Ukraine. He says, I want the dying to stop.

I want people to stop dying. I want the killing to stop. And frankly, I don't know how anyone could say they don't.

The destruction that Ukraine is undergoing is extraordinary. It's going to take a generation to rebuild it. Millions of Ukrainians no longer live in Ukraine. And the disruption, that means how many of them are going to come back and what are they going to come back to? Even as I speak to you now, the Ukrainian infrastructure and their energy infrastructure is being decimated in ways that are going to cost hundreds of billions of dollars to rebuild over the next decades. So this is an important conflict. And I think it should be the official position of the United States that's

that this war should be brought to an end. And I think it should be the official policy of the United States that we want to see it end. Now, what that master plan looks like is going to be hard work. This is not going to be an easy endeavor, but it's going to require bold diplomacy. And my hope is that it could begin with some ceasefire. And in order to achieve objectives like the one that needs to occur in Ukraine, it is important for everyone to be realistic.

There will have to be concessions made by the Russian Federation, but also by the Ukrainians and the United States has lend itself there. It's also important that there be some balance on both sides. In essence, it will be difficult to achieve this objective of a ceasefire and ultimately a peace settlement unless both sides have leverage. - A couple of very interesting things that happened there. Number one is saying that, echoing Donald Trump's phrase,

we need to stop the dying. But actually, so I watched the entire hearing. The most important part was, he says, unrealistic to believe that Ukraine can ever push Russia back to pre-February 2022 invasion lines. Quote, there will also need to be concessions made by the Russian Federation and by the Ukrainians. He brought up later on, Crystal, the use of Russian sanctions as a leverage tool from the United States, effectively saying, listen, you guys pull out this

this way, we'll take off these sanctions. I don't know how powerful that will be. The Russians have figured out a lot of ways around these sanctions. Turns out they don't actually work that well. Shocker. But I was very interested to say, I mean, this is effectively a declaration of policy here now from the incoming administration that

This idea of nothing without Ukraine, he even said nothing without Ukraine, whatever long it takes, not going to happen. He's like, that era is over. But two, the mere acknowledgement of the incoming Secretary of State to say the pre-February 2022 is not going to happen, that is a radical change in U.S. policy. I know that it was assumed and all this. Nobody really knew for sure. But, I mean, that is as close as you can get to an actual statement from the incoming White House saying,

And in Kiev, they must be, I mean, they're probably freaking out, especially what happened after. They're used to the Biden people just being like, okay, okay, you can shoot into Russia, but only 200 yards. And then the next month, be like, now 300 yards. All right, we'll just do whatever you want. Okay, okay, all right, sure. We'll just do whatever you want. Yeah. Now, I mean, this is a whole other, this is a whole new thing. So arguably the most important thing that came out of that hearing, in my opinion.

Yeah, that's probably right. I mean, Trump says he's going to get us a deal on day one. That's right. So we've only got a few more days of this war. He's got four days. Listen, Steve Witkoff, get your ass on a plane to Moscow. He is our new Avril Herriman, who was this rich banker. He was the FDR's ambassador to Moscow during World War II. He was an excellent diplomat.

by the way. So, but yes, listen, Steve, get over there, man. We need you. I mean, part of what you say though does underscore the difficulty at this point of trying to bring this war to some sort of conclusion because while with Israel we have all the leverage in the world just requires the willpower to actually use it.

With Russia, we don't have as much. But with Ukraine, we've got total. With Ukraine, we do. But you have to get the Russians to come to the table as well. So it is a tricky situation. But, you know, Rubio constitutionally, like he is a hawk, and especially with regards to anywhere in Latin America, which we'll get to in just a moment. But, you know, I think there's almost a Beltway-wide recognition, whether they want to admit it or not, that like,

what Rubio said is just obviously manifestly true.

They're not going to be able to retake all of it. I mean, they were talking about Pelosi saying, we're 100% going to get back Crimea. Yes. That's not happening. It's crazy. That's not happening. So it's nice to hear at least a little bit of realism here from Rubio. We'll see how it actually plays out in practice and the means that Trump uses. He's a wild card in order to try to secure some sort of an end to the conflict if he decides to go in that direction. It was interesting. You know, it's so interesting watching Washington work. Mm-hmm.

Like Rubio is basically, I mean, he is effectively a neocon. He's a hawkish guy. Always has been. Always has been, right? That is his ideological direction. The fact that he gets put in as Secretary of State is really antithetical to the idea that the Trump administration is going to be oriented in this anti-war kind of a way. And so you would think, like if it was you or I questioning, it would be contentious.

But because Rubio is one of them, it's relatively like, you know, it's very cordial. The Washington Post endorsed him. Like, you know, they're like, oh, he's one of us. He can, yeah, he's respect. He passes their respectability threshold. So it's a much different approach to him. I did think there was an interesting line of questioning taken by Senator Chris Murphy. He's emerged as a kind of an interesting voice here in the second Trump, emerging second Trump term, where he really pressed

Rubio on Trump's corruption and the fact that, and this is a very important line of argument, Trump has these business deals all around the world, but in particular, he has massive, and Kushner, have massive financial interests in the Middle East and with the Gulf Arab states. Trump, we don't even know how much money he's getting from this fricking Saudi live Gulf tour. They're going to have another event at one of his properties. That's just one example. Kushner got

what, $2 billion from the Saudis. There are all kinds of financial entanglements there. And, you know, when you've got a president who the largest sphere of influence that a president has is in terms of foreign policy, you have to ask the question, how are these financial entanglements impacting their views and their approach to foreign policy? Is this just about American interests or is this about your business interests as well?

Chris Murphy made this point and pressed Senator Rubio on exactly this direction. Let's take a listen to a little bit of that. Over the last eight years, while he was in office and since he's been out of office, he and his family have become more deeply dependent on revenue from governments in the Middle East.

During his last presidency, Middle East interests sent about $10 million to Trump properties. After he left office, Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, who was his primary Middle East envoy, was handed $2 billion in investment by the Saudis, even though a Saudi investment board said the investment was a bad business decision. That investment actually comes up for renewal in 2026, giving the Saudis massive leverage over the Trump family.

And then to make matters worse, right after the election, the Trump Organization said that in this term, the president-elect's second term, it would drop its previous prohibition on doing new deals in the Middle East with private foreign companies aligned with foreign governments. So...

The Trump Organization is going to be signing new business deals in the Middle East with private companies that have connections to foreign governments at the very moment that you are going to be conducting sensitive diplomacy in these countries. That's just extraordinary.

Never before in the history of this country has a president been, I mean, literally receiving cash from foreign governments and from foreign companies that are backed by foreign governments in the middle of their term. If you or I had done this as senators, we would be in violent violation of Senate ethics rule. Do you have an issue or will you raise an issue with the president?

about his growing financial connection with the governments that you're going to be negotiating with? Well, first of all, I am not neither authorized nor in any position to give you sort of any insights into any of these arrangements you've pointed out. You know, you mentioned Jared Kushner as an example. He's a private citizen, happens to be a Floridian citizen.

I don't know what, if any, engagement he has in the work that's going on now. I can tell you what I know. Obviously, I'm not in the State Department yet, but I can tell you as an example, the president's envoy to that region, who is charged, Steve Woodcuff, who is charged with being an envoy towards reaching an accommodation between the Israelis and the Saudis, has been working cooperatively with

And together with the Biden administration. And in fact, I dare to say that all involved deserve credit for the ceasefire that the chairman's just announced. But Steve Whitcow has been a critical component of it and he has been involved in it from day one. I think the broader consideration about whether we want to see a Saudi-Israeli relationship

mutual recognition and relationship would be one of the most historic developments in the history of the region. They have a right to be in the business. I mean, that's the business that they're in. They're in the real estate business they've been for a very long time, both domestically and abroad. They have properties in multiple countries. So at the end of the day, I don't know, his family is entitled to continue to operate their business. The fundamental question is not whether his family is involved in business. The fundamental question is whether that is in any way impacting the conduct of our foreign policy in a way that's counter to our national interest.

And the president's made abundantly clear that every decision he makes and every decision we are to make at the State Department should be driven by whether or not it serves the core national interests of the United States. So in any case, you're not going to get much out of Rubio on it there, but...

I think that's a very important question because we're a long way from Jimmy Carter selling his peanut farm in order to avoid any conflicts of interest. In fact, not only with regard to foreign government entanglements, but I mean, everybody knows the way to Donald Trump's heart is through his pocketbook. So they've been showering him with like insane amounts of money even after he wins reelection into his campaign coffers. He doesn't,

can't even run again. And yet all this money, hundreds, millions of dollars flowing into his campaign coffers, you know, Zuckerberg and Sam Altman and all these people sucking up to him with million dollar contributions into the inauguration fund. And then obviously, you know, the Gulf Arab states in particular, they were early movers in this direction. I mean, the thing to Jared Kushner was just a flat out bribe.

we know that MBS intervened in that decision to fund him to that regard. He had been rejected by the larger council and MBS came in over the top and was like, no, no, no, we're going to make this one happen for him. So very legitimate line of questioning. Obviously, you don't get anything useful out of Rubio there. The other thing that was just worth a mention that Glenn Greenwald pointed out is New York Times, Hawks, in particular, Brett Stevens are

They're already making their move with Rubio lined up here to be Secretary of State and he is almost certainly going to get confirmed by I think a large margin. I think a lot of Democrats will vote for him. Even like Tim Kaine's voting for him. Yeah, I think a lot of Democrats are going to vote for him as well. But New York Times publishing an op-ed literally calling for military intervention.

into Venezuela to take out Maduro. We can put this up on the screen. This is B3. Donald Trump has set some grandiose foreign policy goals for a second term, they say. Here's one goal that's overdue. Morally right, an international security interest deposing the regime of Nicolas Maduro in Venezuela through coercive diplomacy, if possible, or force.

if necessary, and he lays out the case for why we should be willing to wage a regime change war in Venezuela, something that certainly Marco Rubio would be, if anyone would be open to such a thing, it would be Marco Rubio. - Well, the only thing I can say is at least we have seen Donald Trump has been able to exert some influence. Rubio was singing a real different tune on Ukraine, and at least these guys know that it's not up to them in public. Behind the scenes, I have no idea. In fact, Latin America is one of the very things

I warned about because it's, the problem is, is that you can only do that for stuff that you really care a lot about. But when you have somebody like that, Secretary of State in power, there's a lot of stuff that goes on behind the scenes. I've talked about this extensively, that you have no power, that you have no interest in, right? Back burner, relationship, Venezuela, whatever, who cares?

So that means that's kind of default up to the Secretary of State. Now, what policy is he going to pursue? Don't forget, you know, John Bolton and all that in the past always advocated for regime change in Venezuela. So we're all going to keep our eyes on that one. And I genuinely think that is the biggest danger for Trump. Yeah, and there's a significant constituency in favor of a bunch of these psychos. All right, let's go to the next one. This was Pam Bondi. She's going to be the—

is up for Attorney General. She's also going to get through. Probably going to get through. Looks pretty likely. She was pressed about election certification in 2020 and some of those cases. Let's take a listen. That central to the peaceful transition of power in a democracy is the acceptance of the results of an election. To my knowledge, Donald Trump has never acknowledged the legal results of the 2020 election.

Are you prepared to say today under oath without reservation that Donald Trump lost the presidential contest to Joe Biden in 2020? Ranking member Durbin, President Biden is the president of the United States. He was duly sworn in and he is the president of the United States. There was a peaceful transition of power. President Trump left office.

and was overwhelmingly elected in 2024. So, yeah, typical, but I mean, listen, I guess it won now, so it doesn't really matter anymore. Uh, let's put this one up there on the screen as well, because we wanted to keep you guys updated. Tulsi Gabbard's confirmation hearing is probably the diciest one. Uh,

currently just in terms of the number of votes. And also, it has not yet been scheduled, which people are very interested in, shall we say. They are blaming it on procedural paperwork issues. But here, the Wall Street Journal reports, quote, some Senate Republicans have left recent meetings with former Representative Tulsi Gabbard with reservations about her qualifications. Those concerns have largely remained private, and GOP lawmakers are expected to publicly support her despite that.

But further missteps could jeopardize her nomination. In her meeting with Senator James Lankford, Gabbard couldn't clearly articulate what the role of the DNI entails. According to two of her Republican aides and two transition officials, when she met with Senator Mike Rounds, she seemed confused about a key U.S. national security surveillance power.

That's the top legislative priority for nearly every member. I'm assuming we're talking about 702 there. Keep in mind, these are anonymous leaks. I don't know. They probably want to nuke her, and so they're sending this to the journal. The point, though, is that this is the first one I have seen where they said there were multiple people behind the scenes who were very, very skeptical of her. Senator Susan Collins, for example, has told reporters that she's going to wait for the

background check before making any decisions so they're not outright coming out and saying that they would vote for her. Senator John Curtis of Utah said he, quote, needs more information. That was just on Tuesday, so it was a couple days ago, before he can decide to vote for her. So there are multiple people, it seems, behind the scenes who are weary and

Absent direct intervision from Trump, let's say there's one thing they can hang their hat on, then she's only one vote away from getting voted down. So she right now actually seems to be in a way more precarious position than even RFK Jr. I think that's right. I think that's right. I mean, you have to think about both the personal and the ideological, right? The Democrats hate her because she's a turnout.

Right, exactly. She cannot count on... She will not get a single vote. She cannot count on any support from the Democratic caucus. You may have one or two, who knows? But she cannot count on any support from the Democratic caucus because she's a turncoat. They don't want to support her. The Republicans, you have a lot of ideological concern because of things she's said in the past. Now, she's proven herself willing to bend with the wind and flip completely her position on Section 702, whatever. Right.

But they don't trust her, right? And she doesn't have a—she wasn't in the Senate, so she doesn't have a relationship with these people. And I'm just going to be honest with you. When you're around Tulsi Gabbard, she comes off kind of odd. Like, she's a hard person to, like, really immediately click with. So the Republicans are like, hmm, not sure about this one. Now, I think they'll probably all end up voting for her. Donald Trump wants her. Donald Trump is likely to get her. But if there was any other shoe to drop with her and they had an excuse—

to not vote for her. I think that there are a number of them who would take that excuse to not vote for her. And the margin is very narrow. Republicans control 53 seats in the Senate, so she only has a few that she could lose, assuming that she gets absolutely no Democratic support. So hers is definitely the most on the rocks. Again, I expect that the most likely outcome is she also gets through. But this leak to The Wall Street Journal is, you know, a little bit of like a

test balloon, I feel like, to the Trump people of like, well, if we didn't vote for this one, how mad would you be at us effectively? Yeah, exactly. So look, let's all watch it. It's very possible that it may not happen. The hearings, I mean, we've only got four days till Donald Trump is going to take office. They're going to continue a little bit after that. But

I mean, John Ratcliffe appears to be able to go through quite easily for CIA director. But as of things where they stand right now, Kirstie Noem and Tulsi Gabbard and RFK Jr. do not have hearings currently scheduled before the committees, which itself is kind of a problem just because the longer this drags out, the more juice and energy that may be able to have. That said—

Probably more likely than not she gets confirmed, but she's the one who I only have at like the 55 percentile as opposed to the rest where I have in like the 60s and plus, absent something pretty crazy would happen.

Catch Jon Stewart back in action on The Daily Show and in your ears with The Daily Show Ears Edition podcast. From his hilarious satirical takes on today's politics and entertainment to the unique voices of correspondents and contributors, it's your perfect companion to stay on top of what's happening now. Plus, you'll get special content just for podcast listeners.

like in-depth interviews and a roundup of the week's top headlines. Listen on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast. What's up, everybody? Adnan Burke here to tell you about a new podcast from iHeart Podcasts and the National Hockey League. It's NHL Unscripted with Burke and Demers. Hey, I'm Jason Demers, former 700-game NHL defenseman turned NHL network analyst, and boy, oh boy, does daddy have a lot to say. I love you, by the way, on NHL Network.

We're looking forward to getting together each week to chat and chirp about the sport and all the other things surrounding it that we love, right? Yeah, I just met you today, but we're going to have a ton of guests from the colliding worlds of hockey, entertainment, and pop.

Pop culture. And you know what? Tons of back and forth on all things NHL. Yeah, you're going to find that we're not just hockey talk. We're into all kinds of random stuff on this podcast. Movies, television, food, wrestling, even the stuff that you wear on NHL Now. You wish you could pull off my short shorts, Berkey. That's sure to cause a ruckus. Listen to NHL Unscripted with Berk and Demers on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

At the same time, turning to Vivek Ramaswamy, it seems that there could be a way out of him for Doge, but it wouldn't be necessarily a firing, maybe just moving off. Let's put this up there on the screen. Our very own Jeff Stein has scooped this report. Vivek Ramaswamy is being engaged

encouraged by Donald Trump to consider filling Ohio's vacant Senate seat. So remember, J.D. Vance has officially vacated his seat as United States Senator before he's sworn in as the Vice President of the United States. In the interim, Mike DeWine has a few days before he has to name the replacement for J.D. Vance. Now, the reason why that's important

is that it is presumed whoever DeWine will appoint to fill out the remainder of the two years on J.D. Vance's term, that that person will then run for the seat after the term is up in 2026. Okay, so...

So when we think about that though, it means that Sherrod Brown, who just narrowly lost his election, Crystal, could actually run against Vivek Ramaswamy. So part of the reason why people are afraid of appointing Vivek is yeah, look, he might be a beloved MAGA figure and all this. Ohio, it's red, but it's not that red. We're not talking about Montana or something like this. And Sherrod is a very unique political talent. Also, Black Swan stuff happens all the time, right?

In two years, who knows what's going to happen? Trump could be massively unpopular, like in the 2018 midterms, and you could have all these people who get elected who have no business usually getting elected in their home state. You know, you don't want to leave a lot of things up to chance, but...

It seems clear that Trump, Vivek has not tweeted in, what, two weeks, January 3rd, so it's been 13 days since we've heard from Vivek. He's been effectively disappeared. Trump is now leaking, or people around them are leaking, that they want him to go take this Ohio Senate. So clearly they're like, yeah, this Doge thing, maybe that's going to happen. The other argument here is that he didn't piss Trump off, he pissed off Elon.

which I think is equally possible, who has big egos. Maybe Elon doesn't necessarily want to share the doge mantle with Vivek Ramaswamy, and he told Trump, he's like, hey, I need you to get rid of Vivek for me. So I don't know what's happening now currently, but it is interesting because Vivek had zero chance of getting the Senate seat, zero. Previously, Mike DeWine, we're about to show everybody, Ohio local media had lists of people floated as of a couple of days ago. His name's not even on the damn list. It was 100% assumed

But ever since this whole H-1B saga, it now seems that Trump is looking for a way to get him out of the government and shunt him over to the Senate. A little weird, though, because senator is actually a very important job. True. Also, you're your own principal in your own right. I'm not so sure how Ohioans feel about being called lazy. Love to see that one go over. Yeah.

Good luck. Good luck to you. I'm sure Sherrod would make a field day out of that. Oh, he would make a lot of AK out of that. So I'm very curious to see what happens here. But nonetheless, something is happening. Either he pissed Trump off or he pissed off Elon. He hasn't tweeted in a while. And now this thing, before he's even taken his job, now he's being floated for another job. You don't want to be this whenever you're here in D.C. Could be some combination of both. But the pissing off Elon thing actually does make some sense because this did—

Vivek's, you know, boy meets world, say it by the bell, infamous tweet at this point, which seems to have spelled somewhat of an undoing here in MAGA world. I mean, that is part of what brought so much wrath against not just Vivek, but against Elon over the age of one. I mean, that just was absolutely

absolute fuel on the fire. And you can see the way that Elon has reacted, you know, jumping into the UK grooming gangs discussion and all of that in an effort to regain the credibility that he previously had with MAGA. So he clearly sees this as having been a problem for him with regard to his rep on the right. Um,

And yeah, Vivek was an important part of creating that story and making it as much of a conflagration as it ultimately was. So that does actually make sense to me that Elon was like, you know, I don't really need this dude around. Like, go do something else with him. Go to the hinterlands and run for this Senate seat in his conception. Yeah, I don't know how it will go for him if he's running against Jared Brown, who's probably the one Democrat who could

potentially still even win in the state of Ohio, has tons of working class and labor cred. After Vivek did his whole screed against the white working class and kind of showed his colors there, that might be a little bit of a difficult thing to overcome. And then the other thing, Sagar, that I didn't realize is apparently Vivek had wanted to run for governor of Ohio.

Which is up in 2026. Yeah. Which if you are in the Senate seat and you get appointed, then you have to run in 2026 for the full Senate term. So it creates some awkward timing for him. So, and then you've got DeWine who just won, I mean, DeWine won his seat in

absolute landslide, has his own power base in the state of Ohio, does not have to kowtow to Donald Trump and, you know, enact his wishes. But then what does he want to do post-governor's mansion? Does he want some sort of administration gig? Is there something that Trump could give him as well? So there's a lot of different interesting political pieces here going on. But the most fascinating one is Vivek's standing within MAGA world vis-a-vis Trump, vis-a-vis Elon, and how they clearly are trying to kind of

push him aside and push him out of Doge at this point. Absolutely. Let's put C3 up there on the screen. So this is why this is a time sensitive segment. Governor DeWine is set to put his, is set to name this person, like I said, any day now. According to somebody close to him, this was local Ohio media, they say whoever it is has to be sworn in or should be sworn in before J.D. Vance is sworn in as vice president on January 20th. Okay. So that means like we're talking about four days.

And now this is a very fast moving thing. The previous names that have been floated are the Lieutenant Governor John Husted. Sorry, by the way, to the local Ohioans. I don't know who you are. Other notable names include the Ohio treasurer, Robert Sprague, former state Senator Matt Nolan. Big Sprague head myself. Yeah, big Sprague head. Secretary of State Frank LaRose. Uh,

Columbus area Congressman Mike Carey and former Ohio Republican Party Chair Jane Timken. I don't know why that name sounds familiar. I know, she's familiar to me. She ran for something else. I don't know. It's funny, some of these names, they're back here somewhere from various news coverage now over the years. But the point is, every single one of the folks that we just listed are Ohioans in their own right. They're people who have longstanding ties in the state. They have been floated previously. Vivek is from Ohio. I don't actually know if he lives there. I

I'm assuming he does. Probably has houses everywhere. But he was not even on the short list. It was assumed 100% he was going into Doge. So the question mark now is if he does get it, was that an Elon move? It makes some very interesting politics going forward. Man, I would love to cover that mid...

That race would be fun. If he gets it, I'm going to go to Ohio to go see the midterm. I got to see it for myself. Like this H-1B stuff, Sherrod. It would be an incredible race. It absolutely would. Well, because, I mean, not only is Vivek his anti-white working class group, but also, I mean, here he is, this...

billionaire dude who, you know, basically got rich from scamming investors on this Alzheimer's drug that had already failed test trials multiple times. And so there's a lot to work with that someone like Sherrod

can actually make a different Democrat. We had this problem in Virginia with Glenn Youngkin running against Terry McAuliffe. McAuliffe couldn't make anything of Glenn Youngkin's past financial dealings because he was implicated in that sort of thing as well. So yeah, he couldn't make anything out of it. But Sherrod Brown, that's his lane. He would know how to exploit

those weaknesses with regard to the vague. So it would that would be I'm cheering for it just because that would be a really interesting race to cover. And listen, if you had to bet right now, I mean, just history is that typically the opposition party does well in the first midterm. You know, there's like a backlash and people want to check and the opposition is motivated and the people who are in power are less motivated. So, you know, that also makes things more interesting.

I think there's only been three midterms since the 1800s where the party in power has gained seats. So three since the 1800s. Biden was actually one of those who defied expectations, shockingly enough, only to go on to get blown out in the next election. So that goes to show you public opinion is very thermostatic and it moves around a lot. You can do well in the midterms and get blown out in the general election. So things happen and they move and they shake all

the time. Yes. All right. Let's get to California. Yes. So Jon Stewart had a, in my opinion, fantastic monologue talking about the L.A. wildfires and really in particular going after Republicans for suggesting, and many of them have, we'll show you in a minute, including Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, that either California not get aid or that it be tied to some sort of preconditions. Let's take a listen to a little bit of what Jon Stewart had to say.

The problem now is Republicans appear to want to attach their I told you so's as a condition of funding California's disaster relief. Expect that there will be strings attached to money that is ultimately approved. I think there should probably be conditions on that date. That's my personal view. Before we put funds funds into place, we've got to find out exactly how we're going to hold these leaders accountable and what sort of policy changes are required. Red states are

always the tragic victims of circumstance outside of their control. And Democrats always vote for their aid, whereas blue state disasters are a function of their flawed morality and policy. And if we help blue state survivors, well, what message will that send? Improvements can be made in leadership, in management, in design, in materials, in myriad ways. But sometimes fire f***s a tornado.

and makes a mockery of human infrastructure and our ability to dictate the terms of our existence on this planet. But the one thing it shouldn't dictate is the cruelty that we would show to those in pain because we don't think they consistently vote right. I think that is all very well said. And I was telling you, Sagar, one of the things that actually radicalized me against the Democratic Party is when I lived in Kentucky.

And Kentucky has – was one of the sort of shifting red states that actually held on to Democratic majorities in their statehouse for a long time. This like Appalachian realignment was the last one to happen at the state level. And the number of just – I mean I'm not talking about like Nancy Pelosi. I'm talking about just random Democrats online who as this raft of terrible legislation, attacks on teachers' pensions, attacks on labor unions, et cetera, et cetera, was –

rolling through the Kentucky Statehouse and being signed into legislation by the, at that time, Republican Governor Matt Bevin, who were like, well, screw you. You should have voted different. Like, you should have known better. You should have done something different. And I found that attitude so disgusting because I don't think whether people have a good life or not should be dependent on whether they voted for the politician that you like or don't like. I, you know, have...

Karen Bass, I think, has made a mess politically for herself. She pledged she wouldn't go out of the country. Then she was out of the country when the worst disaster possible struck the state. I am no Gavin Newsom fan. I don't think that should have anything to do with whether or not people who just lost their homes and everything they ever worked for, whether or not they get aid. Some of those people

I'm fine with conditioning aid as long as it's reasonable.

And what I mean by that is, for example, like when we bailed out pension funds, right? We don't bail out pension funds and allow them to just continue doing business after 2008. We'll bail you out, but we need to have some systematic reform to make sure that this stuff doesn't happen. So if it was actually policy-focused, I would be fine. But the problem is, is if they're, for example, as people here know, I don't agree with the electric vehicle mandate at all. It had nothing to do with the fire.

So we shouldn't be bailing out the state, conditioning on them reversing policy that has nothing to do with the actual circumstances here. So let's say we're talking about water reservoir. Well, we're like, all right, well, here's this money for this water reservoir to build 10 more. Don't use it for something else. I'm fine with that. You know, whatever. I don't even know if that's necessarily conditioning aid.

But if it's about broader politics, I'd be totally against it. I mean, another principle thing, too, people here know I love California. Always will. Doesn't matter how screwed up it gets. It's just a beautiful state. But the thing is, is California,

we're giving unconditioned aid to Ukraine and to Israel, but we're going to condition aid to the state of California. That's too much for me. Thank you. Where I'm like, so the Israelis can do whatever they want with our money. And so the Ukrainians can do whatever we want with our money. And look, I can make an economic case. Probably.

Probably California deserves to get bailed out than any other state in the entire nation. They pay probably more income tax to the federal government than anybody else. They've got the biggest population. It's a G7 nation in its own right. You got 25% of the GDP of the entire country tied up in an industry which is headquartered there. So look, got a lot of problems and all that. But if California split off from America, we'd be screwed. It'd be not good for any of us. So look, just based on that,

And then you've got the civic argument here, which is, look, it's a state just like any other. I would say it for Alabama. I'd say it for Mississippi. All these other states, which are probably net negatives, you know, on a balance sheet for the federal government, doesn't mean they aren't our citizens. Puerto Rico, any of these places, if you're under our purview, we take care of you.

So yeah, I have some problems with it and I just think it'd be absurd. I also do think- It's pretty antithetical to the America first conception of it when you're like, sure, Israel, have whatever you want. Exactly. But oh, struggling citizen in California, sorry, not a big Karen Bass fan, so you're screwed. And I do think that there are, I mean, like you said, there are a lot of Republicans in California. I need to go look it up. I

it up. I have millions of people voting for Donald Trump. I think just because the state is so large, but I think there's the largest number of Republicans of any state in the state of California just simply because it is such a large population there. Population shift all the time. I mean, I can tell you this. I know people in L.A., California, they have been around.

Things are very going to be, they're going to be very different, I think. The L.A. elite, I mean, look at Ari Emanuel is already supporting a recall on, not officially, but he's like endorsed Karen Bass. He's the unofficial mayor, right? Like WME. You've got people like Rick Caruso and others. The tech guys, half of them are right-wing. Peter Thiel lives in L.A. There's a lot of right-wingers who live in L.A.,

There's a lot of very rich Californians, but not just them. Now the voters, they've got a good case against Karen. I mean, she's done, right? She's dead. She's never gonna happen. I would certainly. Yeah, she'll probably get recalled given what's happened to her. And that guy, Rick Caruso, is probably gonna win. So you can think about, you've got all these guys and others who are effectively supporting a dino, like a Democrat in name only. I mean, who cares whether it's Democrat or Republican? If you want the policy to change, this would actually give Karen Bass...

And some of the liberals, an argument for why – to argue against people like the actual reformers and others that you may want to see in power. So that would be another main reason not to do it. Well, and also just keep in mind, like a lot of the focus has been on Pacific Palisades, which is not, I guess – I mean I have sympathy for anyone who wants their home, even if they're rich, famous, whatever. But these are wealthy people. They're going to be able to rebuild Palisades.

by and large, there's a middle class, long time black community that was just utterly devastated. And you're going to tell me you're not going to give them help in this horrible situation, no fault of their own, because you don't like the way that California votes. Like, that's disgusting. That is just, to me, that is just an absolutely repellent,

way to treat your fellow human beings, let alone your fellow citizens. And, you know, Democrats certainly, they have always consistently voted for the aid for whatever state, wherever it comes from, but there's nothing that would keep that principle in place. If you're going to wage war on California that way, guess what? Next time there's a hurricane that hits Florida, which Lord knows is going to happen next hurricane season, suddenly they may have some questions about whether they want to vote that aid through and help

Floridians in their time of need because they don't like the way that the state has shifted to the right. So that's why I say this is, you know, absolute hell path to go on as if the nation isn't already divided enough. There you go.

Catch Jon Stewart back in action on The Daily Show and in your ears with The Daily Show Ears Edition podcast. From his hilarious satirical takes on today's politics and entertainment to the unique voices of correspondents and contributors, it's your perfect companion to stay on top of what's happening now. Plus, you'll get special content just for podcast listeners.

like in-depth interviews and a roundup of the week's top headlines. Listen on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

What's up, everybody? I'm Dan Burke here to tell you about a new podcast from iHeart Podcast and the National Hockey League. It's NHL Unscripted with Burke and Demers. Hey, I'm Jason Demers, former 700-game NHL defenseman turned NHL network analyst. And boy, oh boy, does daddy have a lot to say. I love you, by the way, on NHL Network. We're looking forward to getting together each week to chat and chirp about the sport and all the other things surrounding it that we love, right?

Yeah, I just met you today, but we're going to have a ton of guests from the colliding worlds of hockey, entertainment, and pop.

culture. And you know what? Tons of back and forth on all things NHL. Yeah. You're going to soon going to find out. We're not just hockey top. We had all kinds of random stuff on this podcast, movies, television, food, wrestling, even the stuff that you wear in NHL. Now you wish you could pull off my short shorts, Berkey. That's sure to cause a ruckus. Listen to NHL unscripted with Burke and Demers, the I heart radio app, Apple podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast. All right, let's get to Mr. Beast. This is a really fun story. Uh,

I've been excited to cover it. First and foremost is just the fate of TikTok. What the hell is going to happen literally four days from when we're taping this segment? TikTok is set to shut down as long as the Supreme Court doesn't issue an opinion. The Supreme Court has already said we're not issuing opinions for the next week. So basically, it's over. As of January 19th, TikTok's plan is shut it all down. Now, people have been floating trying to buy it. Mr. Beast has claimed... Nobody really knows if this is a bit or not. It's probably both. But...

Mr. Beast has come out and said that he's met with a bunch of billionaires to try and buy TikTok. Here's what he had to say. Just got out of a meeting with a bunch of billionaires. TikTok, we mean business. This is my lawyer right here. We have an offer ready for you. We want to buy the platform. America deserves TikTok. Give me a seat at the table. Let me save this platform, TikTok. So

So that's his lawyer. I don't watch enough Mr. Beast to know the names of all the side characters. Isn't one of them named Chris or something? Is that his name? I have no idea. I do know that there are many people in the Beast universe. He may be one of those. I'm not 100% sure. Maybe he's the one who they're always making fun of his mom. But anyways, that is something on the table. We have previously covered... We've previously covered...

The Chinese Communist Party floating, selling it to Elon Musk without even the consent of ByteDance. They didn't even know that that was possible. They have also come out and said previously, we're just going to shut it down. So we have no idea what is happening. Even if this is real and billionaires are backing a Mr. Beast campaign.

purchase of TikTok. It may not be for sale. I mean, that's what TikTok is saying is we are not for sale. If this does not get, um, you know, thwarted, this ban, uh, like, reversed, then we're just gonna shut down. Um,

One update is that Trump is apparently looking at an executive order that, I mean, he can't reverse the legislation without Congress. Exactly. But he could issue an executive order saying, yeah, we are going to use our prosecutorial discretion to not enforce this legislation.

ban against TikTok, at least for this number of days while I try to work out some kind of a deal. So that appears to be the direction that they're moving in. Keep in mind, though, the ban is supposed to go into effect the day before Trump is inaugurated. So whatever. But we also know that Trump has now invited the CEO of TikTok.

to sit with Mark Zuckerberg and Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk at the dais. How do you feel about that, Sagar? I'm not happy about it. What can I say? What did I open the show talking about? How Trump is a deeply transactional, egomaniacal figure who has to be manipulated through the media. Well, you know, it's like... They succeeded. I mean, Trump became popular on TikTok. Yes. He has now a warm place in his heart for it. I think he even said something to that effect.

Yeah, he did. He literally said that. He's like, the young people love me. The TikTok. He did better with young people than he's ever done before. And so suddenly he feels, and oh, and by the way, he got a bunch of money from Jeff Yass. That never hurts. No, it certainly doesn't. He's a Mar-a-Lago member. He's got $20 billion net worth. Half of it's tied up in ByteDance. Mm-hmm.

Why a US billionaire is allowed to have a majority of his net worth tied up in a Chinese company. Very interesting. Anyway, we'll continue to move past it. The whole point in all of this though is there's also been an organic backlash and this may surprise people. I'm really enjoying it. So lots of Americans are now downloading Chinese social media apps as a screw you to the government for banning TikTok.

Some of those apps include, and I'm gonna butcher this in Mandarin, I'm really sorry, is it Zhejiangshu or Zhaohongshu? That's what we're gonna go with. And also RedNote. Zhaohongshu, RedNote, is a Chinese social media kind of TikTok competitor, but also has a messaging function on it. The fascinating part of this has been Americans interacting with actual Chinese netizens. It's the first time in almost 20 years

that that has happened, which I think is great. So let's go ahead and show people some of what we have got. Here we've got some creators just marveling over Chinese infrastructure. She says, "Your mind is about to be blown at what I found on John Red Note." And she's showing off that.

Here we have a creator just reminding all of the new Americans that this is a safe Chinese space. We need to respect the rules that are on this platform and not bring our American bullshit. I actually like it. That's how all Americans should act whenever they go to Asia. Shut your mouth. Stop being so loud. Eat the food that's put in front of you and observe local customs.

This was great. I love this. I didn't know China was so beautiful. Does China really look like this? So this is what I just wanted to talk to you about.

There seems to be this like lib and leftist consideration that Americans have been psyoped into believing China is like some backwards nation. I don't think that that is the case. I think this is actually just a matter of people being completely uninformed because if anybody – if you're listening to me at least –

on China and others. What's the number one thing? They're getting ahead of us. I respect them. It's not in terms of, oh, there are these backwards, horrible people. I'm like, no, no, no, you don't understand. They're lapping us on multiple different industries. In many ways, they have a better quality of life in some cities and others than American citizens do, which also apparently will be shocking.

to people. So my take on this is it's great. I think it's great that Americans are getting to talk to Chinese people on their social media apps. The question for the Chinese is are they going to continue to allow that? Yeah, yeah.

Well, it's an interesting question for them because on the one hand, you know, it makes it so it's harder to control, right? And you have this, I mean, I think this sort of cultural exchange is a beautiful thing. Oh, it's good. Listen, I'm pro. I think the more that we interface with people from other countries and see them as just human beings going about their lives and doing their thing with personalities and sense of humor and whatever, I think that is a beautiful thing. I also think, I don't know what conceptions people have in their head about China, but I do know that most of the coverage from Western media about the

the country of China is quite negative. So, you know, having interface with just regular Chinese people and being like, these are nice people. I like this person. Like, you know, they're just like me in a lot of ways. I think that is a net positive. You know, for the Chinese government, on the one hand, it's kind of like tremendous support

that they're having access to right now because they are the perception of China and what the country is like and what the people are like among young people in this country who have been more willing than other generations. I mean, they're just not locked in this Cold War mentality. They're not locked in the mentality around Israel. They're not locked into some of the previous preconceptions. So minds are a bit more open to start with. I think that is interesting.

I think the Chinese government probably sees that as a tremendous asset. Boom. On the other hand, you know, they want to control. They exercise much more tight control on their social media than we do, even from the perspective of just like they don't let young people in their country have the screen time that we have.

So they see social media, and in some ways they're very correct about this, about some of the incredibly deleterious effects of social media on our own young people. And so they're more, like, sensitive to those concerns. And then also they're obviously, like, censorious in certain ways on their certain topics. They don't want pressure whatsoever. So it is an interesting balance for them. This is what a friend of mine, Rush Doshi— But I've been loving it.

But I would say bottom line, I've been loving it. I've been enjoying the exchange, the things that are popping up on Twitter. It's funny. If you think China is backwards, you're an idiot, okay? I mean, Shenzhen is probably one of the world's most advanced cities. If I encourage, I'm totally blanking on the guy's name right now. He's a car reviewer. I think his name is Forrest. I'm going to go with that.

He does some of the best car reviews in the business, and he does a ton of Chinese EVs. BYD will lap a Tesla and any American-made EV by a mile. There's a reason why we have to have protectionists. Oh, absolutely. These VW EVs, because they're kicking our ass. I'm forgetting the guy's name. Warren Buffett's billionaire partner who died, Charlie Munger. Charlie Munger.

Charlie Munger, I listened to the last interview he gave before he died, and he said that the founder of BYD is the single smartest person he ever met, the greatest inventor. He was like, I would have put more money into him if I possibly could have. Just so people know, I have deep, deep respect for a lot of these people. I've also been to China. I was very young. I was like 16, 17 or whatever when I went. It's one of the most beautiful places I've ever been. Specifically, the Great Wall of China is one of the coolest –

one of the coolest things I've ever seen in my whole life. The Forbidden City, it's incredible. They have an amazing history. I have nothing but respect for these people. And in fact, it's my respect which makes me fear them. But a question here with Rush Doshi, let's put E4, please, up on the screen, is Rush makes this point.

As Americans flood, Zhaozhongxu, which is what we're going with, we're seeing a lot more direct online interaction between the US and PRC citizens. But the PRC has not always welcomed that, which is partly why it has banned foreign social media. So the success of the app is a major test for PRC authorities. He follows up, candidly, I've enjoyed seeing the interaction. It reminds me

of an earlier, more hopeful era of US-China people-to-people interaction on the internet, which is 20 years old now. And that's precisely why I would be nervous if I was an executive of that company right now. Previously, we have seen this. Facebook nuked. Google nuked. And they nuked these things early. And when I visited in 2009,

I wanna say that's when we were in high school and we were very on Facebook. There was no Facebook. That was the first time I ever went to a country where I'm like, "I can't use Facebook." Same with Google. It was shocking, I remember, even then. I mean, what, almost 15 years ago or so now. So that's the reality of what life is like in China.

All of their actions around ByteDance have showed us this. Again, people don't seem to understand this. TikTok, it might be a Chinese company. It's not what they use in China. They have their own version. I think it's called Douyin. And Douyin has screen time restrictions, one hour a day for people who are teenagers. If you're an OnlyFans model, yeah, good luck. You're getting nuked. If you're like a little influencer girl who's promoting consumerism, nuked.

If you are promoting transgenderism or gender ideology, nuked. If you are promoting hard work and filial piety to the Communist Party, oh, all of a sudden you're a nice little influencer there. So just so people know, the difference between actual Chinese social media and American social media is gigantic.

for what it actually shows. But in general, I have been really enjoying this American cultural exchange. As people know, I don't like Europe. I encourage people, if you're able to visit China, go for it. I know a lot of people who did study abroad programs there. They absolutely loved it. Immerse yourself in the culture. It's cool. It's like an alien society because they do things totally differently.

Their evolution of tech is incredible. What they did is because they skipped Facebook, Google, and everything on the MacBook, everything in China is on the phone. They pay for all of their stuff with their phones. All their social media, Uber, everything, it's one of the world's most convenient societies. Now it has some downside with social credit score. If you piss off the government, your phone stops working, your payments stop working. You need permits to be able to leave your village permanently.

and like to be able to go from one place to another. You should ask them about that on Zhizhong Xu. But yeah, look, I'm enjoying people learning more about the world and I think it's a good thing. Yeah, it's earnest and it's sweet. And I think anytime we can break down those human to human barriers is a good thing. This is also kind of funny.

Apparently the interest in learning Mandarin has like skyrocketed. That's good. Duolingo is, you know, seizing on this moment as well. I can put this up on the screen, which is kind of funny to say, oh, so now you're learning Mandarin and they've been putting out a bunch of tweets about, and also I did see a graph just showing the tremendous spike in people who are trying to, um,

learn Mandarin or at least the basics who have had their interest sparked by this whole thing. So it's just sort of funny and ironic that the attempt to ban TikTok over concerns about like Chinese influence and infiltration, whatever, has led to this response of people learning on a very visceral human to human basis way more about China than they ever had before. So caricatures of people are never accurate. China is a country of what, 1.1 billion, even saying Chinese people is insane.

You have all of these different provinces. Minority groups. There are so many different, which they don't like to talk about. Ask them about that too. Ask them about Han Chinese domination and how they feel about that. You've got what, multiple, well actually they're on one time zone, which is insane.

Like people in Tibet are on the same time zone as in Beijing and have to keep the same time. But it's a vast country. They have everything from, like I said, rural to multi-tech oligarch billionaires. They've got people who don't even drive cars to people who take some of the world's most advanced technologies.

transportation. That's why it's interesting. I encourage people to learn a ton about it. And I think the more that you will learn, you will understand exactly how they use their corporations and others to try at the detriment, in my opinion, of the United States, of their competition, of their ability to plan long-term, baked in to their government and foreign policy since the days of Deng Xiaoping. And I think the most interesting thing about them is the duality of China. Like I said,

the rural and the urban, the communist and the capitalist, like the oligarchy but the communist party. It's a fascinating country. And look, we're gonna have to live with them no matter what. So it's great. Learn Mandarin. The more you can learn, I wish I knew it. I wish I could speak some of it. Learn Cantonese too. It's actually one of the coolest sounding languages in my opinion. Hong Kong, that would be the next one on my list.

if I was able to go. So we'll see. Yeah, I would love to go to China. That's definitely on my list. There you go. All right, let's go ahead and get to Fashikir, who has announced a run for DNC party chair. Very interesting to hear what he has to say. That's next.

Catch Jon Stewart back in action on The Daily Show and in your ears with The Daily Show Ears Edition podcast. From his hilarious satirical takes on today's politics and entertainment to the unique voices of correspondents and contributors, it's your perfect companion to stay on top of what's happening now. Plus, you'll get special content just for podcast listeners.

like in-depth interviews and a roundup of the week's top headlines. Listen on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

What's up everybody, Adnan Virk here to tell you about a new podcast from iHeart Podcast and the National Hockey League. It's NHL Unscripted with Virk and Demers. Hey, I'm Jason Demers, former 700 game NHL defenseman turned NHL network analyst and boy oh boy does daddy have a lot to say. I love you by the way on NHL Network. We're looking forward to getting together each week to chat and chirp about the sport and all the other things surrounding it that we love, right?

Yeah, I just met you today, but we're going to have a ton of guests from the colliding worlds of hockey, entertainment, and pop.

Pop culture. And you know what? Tons of back and forth on all things NHL. Yeah, you're going to find that we're not just hockey talk. We have all kinds of random stuff on this podcast. Movies, television, food, wrestling, even the stuff that you wear in NHL now. You wish you could pull off my short shorts, Berkey. That's sure to cause a ruckus. Listen to NHL Unscripted with Berk and Demers on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

So we've got a bit of what, it's maybe an exclusive, I don't know, we're a little unclear on that, but a potential first interview on a YouTube channel from FashionCure, who you guys probably know was Bernie's 2020 campaign chief. He's also executive director of More Perfect Union and doing fantastic work.

work over there. We rely on the content you guys create a lot, so it's been really important. And you've been featured in a More Perfect video. That's true. That was a great honor. Mutual collaboration. I appreciated that. And the reason in particular, there are many reasons we may want to speak with you, but today you've just announced that you are running for DNC chair. So welcome, Faz. Great to see you. Thank you, Chris. I appreciate the opportunity to talk about it with you. Yeah, of course. So what made you jump in? It's a little bit late in the game. There's already a number of contenders. When are they

They're voting what, like early February? February 1st. So you got about two weeks to make your case here. So what made you jump in? Well, one of the reasons was at first I was hesitant for a long period of time. I've been doing a thing with More Perfect Union. I enjoy it on a daily basis. I have no hunger and ambition for the title of the job. Yeah. And...

I guess what motivated me is watching a number of the candidates go out and do conversations and be in forums and talk about, oh, we're going to appeal to working class people. We need to rebuild this party around working class ideas. I'm like, great. Well, rhetorically, we're moving. So give me the next answer. What are you going to do differently?

You want to make a working class party? What are you going to do for it? And I just constantly felt let down that the ambition, if you're talking sincerely with conviction of changing the party to be a working class party, get me something that I can believe in. Make me turn my head and say, oh, that's different. And I just didn't see it. And I'm like, well, I'm sitting here saying, I think I have some ideas. And I'm watching the clock run down on the fourth quarter. You only live once, Crystal. So I'm like, I'll get in. I will make my case. I will try to make the argument that if you had a vision and conviction around what a working class party of the DNC would look like,

I'll make it. And so that's the hope and the opportunity here. And I'll hopefully present this case to all the delegates, talk to all of them and say, you know, I'm asking you to make a choice of do you really want a working class party? We can get in the substance of it, of how you change it. But that's the case. Yeah. So I've

I had a similar frustration. I talked to Marianne Williamson last week who also is running. I think she acknowledges, you know, pretty long shot because she comes in as a total outsider. And I think she has that larger vision. But the top contenders, I agree with you, it feels like shifting deck chairs around on the Titanic. So the rhetoric might be good about we've got to be a working class party. And it's like, okay, well, how are you going to do it? Well, I think we should allocate a little more money to this, you know, this state or that state or whatever. It's like, well, I don't think that's really going to get the job done. So what is your –

broader vision for how the Democratic Party turns around what has come to be an utter catastrophe among working class Americans. So you start with the problem. What is the problem? Right now we are losing alignment with working class people. We saw it in the election and people sitting out. So you say, okay, that is the North Star. Everyone acknowledged that's the North Star. And so how do you solve it? What's the problem

And I look at like the grassroots nature of this party as having been dilapidated. There's no conception of using organizing to say we need to reconnect with people.

and make ourselves a healthy list, a healthy convening body. How would you do that if you really cared about working class people? Well, when Boeing workers go on strike, Crystal, do you think the DNC should play a role in letting people know that the Boeing workers are out there, that we could go and stand with them, that we could get pizza to the strike line? When the UAW is organizing, do you think the DNC could mobilize a community and say, hey, we stand with you? When people are fighting in tenant unions, trying to advocate against evictions and trying to stop

unreasonable rate hikes. Can we do something about that? It's thinking substantively. You are a working class person living a life. You are struggling. I at the DNC have some authority. I don't have full authority. I don't run the world, but I have some ability to say, I stand with you to do something to move the dial on your behalf. That's a reconception, not only of organizing capacity and the state capacity to stand with working class people, but then I think you broaden that out to say, well,

People are not always thinking about politics. You and I know, Crystal. They're thinking about, let's say, football. Could we hold Super Bowl watch parties together, convene people together as a place? Here's a beer and here's a nice place to hang out. Come and hang out with the Democratic Party to watch the Super Bowl. Why not? Tell me. I'd love to hear an example. Why can we not do these things? It's just a lack of ambition. If you spend some money and say...

This is what I care about because the Democratic Party in this day and age where there's loneliness, there's more isolation, more people not talking to each other, the beating heart of being a party is that there's people. You are associated with the working man and woman. You are caring about their lives and you want to be in league with them. You want to be talking to them on a constant basis. This to me just bothers me because it's become kind of this –

clubby, you know, top-down approach to the DNC that we talk about contracts and vendor contracts and, you know, who sits on what committee where. Like, no, no, no, no. They're the people. Like, especially in this day and age where the Silicon Swamp is about to come in and run the government, their biggest merger and acquisition in history. They're going to

By the by the government. So what are what are we doing in an age of great wealth and income inequality to say? Hey, we we stand with people to fight on their behalf. What does the DNC primarily do now? How does it operate primarily now for people who were I mean even I am not sure I could fully answer that question I worked at the DNC building so you say DNC headquarters is my first political job actually as an opposition researcher and

And so you have departments who do a variety of different things, communications, digital, party affairs. And so at the headquarters, you're kind of figuring out how to help, you know, build state parties, give them some direction, but mostly letting, I would say, you know, opposition to Republicans and opposition to Trump right now at this current moment guide you.

the daily, here's a message that we have to send out. And then state parties are gonna say, well, we're mobilizing in Virginia for the upcoming elections. Can we send some money over there to get the state party some resources on the ground and build up some staff? That all is fine and good, right? And so in that way, Ken Martin, Ben Wickler, people who have been running the state committees of Minnesota and Wisconsin successfully,

are well positioned to say, hey, boom, this is tactically what you need to do to move money around, move committee assignments, restructure. The problem and the challenge I see is like, well, Donald Trump is president of the United States. Who speaks for Democrats right now? Honestly, Biden leaving, there's no presumptive leader of a Democratic Party. Yeah. Yeah, Schumer and Jeffrey's over there, minority.

And I think you've got to be more ambitious with the power. We don't have much power. One of the places is the Democratic National Committee. The chairperson needs to be a bold public messenger about what is the brand of this freaking party? What do we stand for? That historically has not been a major role. There were moments, you remember Howard Dean when he ran. He had a bit of a stature of being a national spokesperson for a brand.

But for the most part, you think of people, most people wouldn't even know who a Democratic National Committee chairperson or chairman is. I mean, I don't know how many people know who Jamie Harrison is or Tim Kaine at one point was and Terry McAuliffe back in the- I sort of forgot Tim Kaine had been in there.

- To be honest with you. - Terry McCall back in the day. - McCall was kind of a larger than life figure, but maybe not necessarily a beneficial way. - He was gregarious, yeah, he was always a gregarious person. - Large personality there. - And a big fundraiser, yeah, that was his thing. - Well, that was his thing. And that's why I say maybe this was not necessarily advantageous to the Democratic Party brand. I mean, that is one of the things that has been important to me is that, listen, we can't change the whole landscape of money in politics without probably a Supreme Court decision.

But Democrats can run the way that they police their own primaries, their own intra-party contest. So is one of the things that you would be looking at getting big money, super PAC money out of that intra-party Democratic primary process? Because right now the Democratic Party has no credibility to say that we're any different from the Republicans when it comes to the courting and the obsession with big money politics. Well, that's an obvious, that's a slam dunk.

The question then is, to get money out of politics, how do you wield power? And I've heard a lot of the candidates, and they say, well, there's not much you can do as Democratic National Committee chair. It's true that legally, we are in a different legal regime, and people can spend money. And you can't necessarily stop them. You could sanction state parties. You could use your bully pulpit. And I feel like as a Democratic Party, we're not as comfortable using the bully pulpit.

Just like get out there and make a stand and say something bold about your values. If you look at – there's a certain muscularity of saying, hey, that is wrong. And maybe, yeah, sure, you could spend money as a super PAC diving into this race. But we as a state party, as a Democratic National Committee, abhor and reject influence and make – by using the bully pulpit at whatever scale you can to –

attack outside spending, you're also elevating the issue in the race. Yeah. You know? And you have to make, I think one of the challenges we often face is sometimes voters in these districts in elections may not always know of the great presence of big money in the election. They see TV ads, they see APAC come in and spend whatever money in, you know, Corey's or Jamal's race, and it's not always clear to the ton of voters, you know, who's doing this, why the crypto people spending money here and there. They may not always know.

We could, right? Like if you spend some time using your national chairmanship in the brand and say, hey, that, here's what they're trying to do. Here's why it's wrong. Corporate purchase of this party will not be allowed. It's not, I'm not going to tell you you got the legal authority to stop them, right? Right.

But this is where Trump, to some degree, has brought to the Republican Party successfully is use your bully pulpit. He gets in there. I mean, if you look at the Middle East situation, he says all hell will break loose.

if this isn't done by the first day of my administration. And how many times you get out, you use his rhetoric and say, with some conviction backed by it, but people have to kind of believe that it's consistent with your values. When you say this is wrong, this is upsetting. But when, for a Democratic Party, when we say things sometimes, it's not always the case that it's backed by a conviction. So if you say, oh, you know, Donald Trump is X, Y, and Z, the worst, you know, whatever, and then you are going out there and talking to him and treating him as if, you know, it's

It's fine. Then that conviction orientation, say what you mean and then act like you mean it. Yeah. I mean, it seems simple, but apparently this is difficult to do. I did want to get your take on some of the election post-mortem. You know, there was the infamous –

Pod Save America interview with the top Kamala aides. Did you watch that? Yes. You were basically like, oh, we did everything right. It was fine. We just couldn't have possibly won. And, you know, we checked the boxes and we ran the data and this was the best possible campaign we could run. And then no one else could have won. Like, basically, that's kind of the argument. Yeah, that was the argument. It was impossible. It's not our fault. So zero self-reflection there. You've also had, you know, you've had some...

My sense, and I'm curious of your sense, is that there was an initial shock. Oh, my God, this guy's going back to the White House. This is a disaster. We are in the minority, both the House and the Senate. Working class voters are fleeing us. So even though, OK, sure, he only won the popular vote by a point and a half or something like that.

If you're on this trajectory, this is a trajectory of death. If this realignment continues in this direction, you're talking about permanent minority, like small minority status, or just being effectively subsumed into Trumpism, which is another direction that some Democrats seem to be going in. And now I sort of feel this level of listlessness. Like, I mean, I feel like that's what you're kind of responding to jumping in this race of like, well,

wasn't that bad and we'll get them next time. And maybe our messaging was a little bit off. We'll just tweak that and we should be fine. And I find that sort of, I find it sort of insane. Not to mention, obviously incredibly frustrating, incredibly disturbing when we see the direction that the Trump administration is going and we see this, you know, obviously money in politics and nothing new and it's a bipartisan problem.

But the level of consolidated oligarchy that we're seeing under Trump and Elon Musk and these characters is deeply disturbing. And I don't really see a Democratic Party that is standing up to forcefully oppose that. Yeah, just to add to what you're saying,

I'm not going to dispute that certain people would say correctly that there's a chance we'd get back the House in two years. It's possible, right? But why, Crystal? I mean, if we flesh that out for people, it's because, to your point, the voting base of the Democratic Party is changing. And so if you get into a midterm election where fewer people vote, higher educated, more college degreed circuit,

We might win and we might get back the House. And I think in that situation, if you back this out into 2022, right, where you Democrats kind of maintained better than they thought some some degree of the seats in that election, John Fetterman wins and, you know, Josh Shapiro and Gretchen Whitmer and we defeated Carrie Lake in Arizona. There were some successes, right? Fetterman's a mixed bag at this point.

Well, but I'm just saying that the outcome. Democrats won. Yeah, Democrats. That's the point. So then you go into 2024 where tons more people vote and we learn like with the Democratic brand is losing steam and traction with working class people. To your point, could we get through the next two years and find that we might get back the House, maybe not the Senate, and then think, oh, well, we're on the track to win back the presidency, only to find that in 2028, J.D. Vance or whomever is on the ticket is

and we lose even further because we aren't having been challenged or learning the lessons of where is our weakness, where is the brand of the Democratic Party hurting. And I mean, that's a political analysis, but what bothers me and I know it bothers you is just a values orientation. Like your party, like your FDR, what is it that defines you? It is a fight for the common man woman.

It has always been the lineage. So we can have this political conversation, but it's supposed to be tied to values because when you come into office, you have a mandate of saying, I'm going to do something. I think that that is the goal and the mission of saying,

create a working class coalition so that they compel us in the right direction for the policy changes that we need. Yeah, I don't really care about the Democrats winning back the House or winning back the presidency if they're not going to do anything beneficial for working class people with that power ultimately. The last thing I wanted to get your thoughts on, Faz, because I've had sort of complicated feelings about it, is what have you made...

made of all of the, you know, James Carville and David Frum and some of these characters now that Bernie Sanders is never gonna run for president again. You're like, you know, that Bernie Sanders guy, he wasn't so bad. He kind of had a point. I would be lying to you if part of that isn't what's driving me here, right? That's what I see people saying and becoming more aware that

That, oh, Bernie, when he ran in 2015, 2016, maybe he was on to something. Maybe we do need a grassroots party. Maybe the oligarchs have too much power in American society. Maybe we do need to talk about Medicare for all. Maybe we do need to address corporate corruption of our campaign finance system. All of those things.

Now, we're coming around and you can see, watch on MSNBC and other places, people like railing against the oligarchs. Right. Okay, well. Joe Biden railing against the oligarchs now. And you're like, okay.

Rhetorically, I appreciate it. I do. I mean, the job of politics is persuasion. So we're moving towards more awareness and understanding. And part of that, Crystal, as you know well, is we live in a society of great income and wealth inequality. We're seeing the downstream effects of it. When you're seeing the great Musk and David Sachs and a bunch of billionaires taking over the government, we should rightly, as the Democratic Party, be concerned and express anger at what the hell is going on with the purchase of our government, the looting and the great heist. But

The question at this point isn't just rhetorically can you see the problem and understand the problem, great. What do you want to do about it? Wield some authority and power. Tell me that you're thinking about the construction of this party differently than you ever had before. Convince me because I don't think, you can correct me if I'm wrong, I think most working class people have checked out, don't believe in government, don't have faith in institutions. And I would argue to those people, I don't know if they're watching,

At the end of the day, and I believe it's about unions, I believe it's about a lot of institutions, this is a representative democracy. In a world of great wealth and inequality, the way you challenge it is with some solidarity where you have

people who lead people. Like you need someone to lead institutions with authority, with power, to do something on behalf of all of us. And the people at the top, we have to pick them who have a gumption and desire conviction to fight. But I understand people are getting concerned that the institutions are fading, and that we don't have trust in them. And as that devolution occurs, right, power gets to spread out, you know who wins?

because they can purchase into a devolution, right? - That's right. - They're like, okay, you don't have a party anymore? Well, I got the super PAC that I run. So your party is weak. I can go run my own thing with money.

That's what happened to the day. And so I would urge people, you know, you're trying to take on power in a world of great wealth and inequality to care about institutions, find people to run them with conviction, unions, and democratic national committees, you name them across the board. Obviously, that's one of the reasons I started More Perfect Union, you got to have an institution that's starting to build power for working people in order to take this on. All right, I lied. I do have one last question, which is, you got a shot in this thing, because you're getting in a little

I know it's an insider game. It is you know as much as our audience or others out there may want you to be how they don't get a vote so What is what does this look like? What is what does the path to victory look like? Well, what I'm promising is I'm gonna hustle and do the things that you have to do internally I mean when we leave this that I'm gonna I'm continuing to call Members and say give me a chance. I know that some of them I still think at this moment the plurality is undecided uncommitted and

My sense is Ken Martin, as somebody who's been kind of involved running this, is probably a bit in the lead at the moment.

But I don't think everyone's made up their minds. And I was like, right, because we haven't forced the question. So now just just I'm not asking you to endorse. I'm just asking you not to endorse. Right. Like just let's play this out. Let me make a case. I got two weeks here. There's time left on the fourth quarter. I don't believe on kneeling it down. Let's try to let's try to run this through. Get to the vote on February 1st and make a judgment about what direction the Democratic Party takes.

can go and who can best do it with some conviction and orientation and change the way we operate.

Well, I really appreciate you being out there making the case. And we, as I told you, really appreciate and value the work that you're doing at More Perfect Union. I think it has filled an incredibly important role in the sort of journalist and cultural landscape. So, Faz, always great to see you. High compliment from you, Crystal. You've been doing it well for a long period of time. So thank you. Thanks. Thank you guys so much for watching. We appreciate you. We will see you on Monday for our inaugural coverage. And so we'll see you then.

Jon Stewart is back at The Daily Show, and he's bringing his signature wit and insight straight to your ears with The Daily Show Ears Edition podcast. Dive into Jon's unique take on the biggest topics in politics, entertainment, sports, and more. Joined by the sharp voices of the show's correspondents and contributors.

And with extended interviews and exclusive weekly headline roundups, this podcast gives you content you won't find anywhere else. Ready to laugh and stay informed? Listen on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

What's up, everybody? Adnan Virk here to tell you about a new podcast. It's NHL Unscripted with Virk and Demers. Jason Demers here, and after playing 700 NHL games, I got a lot of dirty laundry to air out. Hey, I got a lot to say here, too, okay? Each week, we'll get together and chat about the sport that we love. Tons of guests are going to join in, too, but we're not just going to be talking hockey, folks. We're talking movies. We're talking TV, food, and Adnan's favorite, wrestling.

It's all on Le Table. Listen to NHL Unscripted with Verkan Demers on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.