Trending Right (with Jonathan Martin)
01:09:09 Share

Hey, pull up a chair. It's Hacks on Tap with David Axelrod and Mike Murphy. Respectful, lawful authority. You have made savings to your platoon after being briefed by a JAG officer. By the way, would you explain what a JAG officer is? I don't think I need to, sir. Why not? Because the men and women watching understand. Well, perhaps some of my colleagues don't understand.

It would be a JAG officer who puts his or her own priorities in front of the warfighters. All right, there you go. We're off to a flying start here. So I'd want to get the word fly in there.

John Heilman and our buddy J-Mart, Jonathan Martin from Politico. We're going to get to all of that. But before we have a call in from our buddy, Mike Murphy, who has been in fire recently.

plagued Los Angeles where he lives. And Mike, we just want to check in with you before we get on with other business and see how you're doing and how Los Angeles is doing.

Well, thank you, actually. I thought I had the week off, and then all of a sudden everything turned orange here. So we're doing great. Not in tribute to the 47th president. Yeah, yeah. I mean, it's a grim time here in Los Angeles. These fires have been devastating. We're fine. We live in kind of the central area.

area of the city. And so the fires are mostly to the north and to the northwest. Pacific Palisades kind of tickling the Mandeville Canyon, threatening Brentwood and even threatening Encino up north. And then, of course, there's a new fire today, the auto fire up in Ventura. We've got about 72 hours of these super winds coming, which is really how this all works. Things are very dry. There's a small fire, 80 mile an hour winds hit it.

They blow fire fragments in a very wide radius, and then the fire grows. We're up to about 30,000 acres, over 5,000 destroyed structures, at least 25 deaths. I mean, it is a major tragedy here. And of course, it's going to be a lasting political earthquake, both were we prepared that debate and then rebuilding, which is going to be tough.

Yeah, I mean, the where we were, where we prepared question is an interesting one. And I'm sure that at the margins, there are things there, there are answers to that. But I mean, it sure feels like nature's had its say here in a big way. And I don't know when you get 100 mile an hour winds and drought conditions in wooded areas, seems like a prescription for

catastrophe. I hope things are learned from this. But yeah, it's going to be a big political. Football careers are going to be ended over this, and Washington will do what Washington does. Yeah, and there's some silly news out of the Republican House about holding aid back, which is crazy. Yeah, listen to this. Here's a clip to your point. Here's a clip from Mike Johnson, the Speaker of the House yesterday.

Are you appropriate for providing training to outrun the out and condition? I think we've had a serious conversation about that. Obviously there's been water resources management, forest management mistakes, all sorts of problems. And it does come down to leadership. And it appears to us that state and local leaders were derelict in their duty in many respects.

That's something that has to be factored in. I think there should probably be conditions on that, Dave. That's my personal view. We'll see what the consensus is. I haven't had a chance to socialize that with any of the members over the weekend because we've all been very busy. But it'll be part of the discussion for sure. What about the debt limit increase? What about tying the debt limit increase to it? Yeah, it's kind of rich coming from a guy from Louisiana. I don't remember holding up a lot of Katrina aid. There...

There's all kinds of look. This kind of disaster is a combination of the reality of nature and the reality of we build houses in dangerous places in some states, including California and Florida.

Yeah, Florida is another example. There's also the problem of when you do it, you've got to have really good brush control. You have really first rate fire services. And I will say our emergency services here are good, but the fire chief has been in the paper saying they gutted our budget.

So there is plenty of criticism going around, but that's not a reason to cut aid out of D.C. Especially, let me just finish on this, a place that pays more in to the federal government than we get back here in Southern California. We're a cash cow for the feds, and that's a bad way to look at it, and I think very cynical. Hey, Mike, I was going to ask you. I'm glad to hear you're safe, obviously. Thanks, pal. You know...

It's stunning to see my hometown on fire in the way it's been. Staying on the politics of it, though, my colleague Peter Hamby at Puck wrote a piece yesterday, I think, or the day before, about the incredible backlash against Karen Bass and how the kind of cross-party trans-ideological fury at her. What are you hearing out there in terms of

The politics of the local politics of this, both the Newsom of it all, the Bass of it all, the, you know, there's going to be hell to pay, obviously. But an early sense of where that's going.

Yeah, and let me start with a little disclosure. Rick Caruso, who ran against Bass last time, I did not work on that campaign, but he's a longtime friend of mine and an off-the-none client. So, you know, I'll put on my hacks hat and try to go straight ahead, but I am on Team Rick, who a lot of people are mentioning as a possible governor or mayor here. He's kind of a more conservative than normal Democrat, former Republican.

Karen is personally well-liked, but there's been frustration because, you know, the homeless thing, blank check money spent, very little results, rising crime. The voters just threw out the incumbent prosecutor, George Gascon, to elect Nathan Hockman, who is an independent, not a Democrat, had a Republican background. So there was kind of a revolution of...

why can't we have any confidence in Los Angeles? You got to remember how big LA is. You know this, John, you're from here. It 10 million people in LA County, it's bigger than most States. So Karen, despite all the red flag warnings we had, because you know,

Santa Ana, Windsor, no joke around here. That season is considered the fire season for whatever reason decided to take off on a world tour and was not here. And it's just been crushed on that. I think Amby's piece was good. And there have been stumbles. We have this alert system. There's even some humor in it. Your cell phone will start to scream at a volume you didn't know it had. And you look and there's an alert that you got to evacuate. Well, great system.

The problem is it's had two false alarms, one four in the morning to millions of people. So you literally had people in their pajamas running out to their cars or were in no danger because they couldn't get the tech right. So this has become a symbol. And there have been problems with the reservoirs and the management, the brush management. Governor Newsom has called for an investigation into all this.

My pal, Richard Russo, has been a critic. A lot of the business community has suspected. So, yeah, I wouldn't want to be Karen Bass. And I think, you know, California's a state where you have the recall and those noises are starting to be made. There's just not faith in her confidence. Now, maybe it's a little unfair. You know, one person couldn't have stopped the fire. So it was a terrible time to be on a junket.

and to have, you know, cut the fire department. Now, she will say, I've raised fire spending because I've raised employees, you know, salaries. That's all true. But the operational spend has been cut. There's a memo from the fire chief that was on the city website with her concerns, and they scrubbed it three days ago. Free Beacon scooped on that. So she's in a real political mess here. And, you know,

You know, this rebuild is going to be tough. It takes forever to pull a permit now to build a bigger garage, let alone a new house. She did put an executive order out. I believe it was yesterday afternoon trying to streamline that. And Newsom's talking about that. So there's a lot of scrambling going on, but there's a lot of frustration that this is a place with high tax and low government competency. She's catching a lot of it.

Guys, can I jump in on the federal angle of this? You played the speaker's comments about

I think that's going to go over like a lead balloon with the California Republicans in the House delegation, who are obviously outnumbered by the California Democrats in the House delegation, but are really important because they help ensure that there's a GOP majority in the House. And I can tell you that they're going to want the money with no strings and they're going to want it fast. The Californians will. Yeah.

And, you know, folks like Ken Calvert, who's the old appropriator from out in Palm Springs, for example, look, they don't want to go home in 26 and explain to their voters, even those who are not living in Malibu or the Palisades, that they couldn't get this done for Californians because, you know, the House wanted to change some policy before they gave them money. Right.

So I think Johnson, you heard his heads there that he wants to sort of take the temperature. I think the Californians and the house GOP are going to push to get the money and they're going to get it with no strings.

I couldn't agree more. What a horrible precedent that would be. I mean, if we start, especially because it's very clear as we just marked another year of the hottest years on record, we are going to be experiencing more and more racism.

serious, if not catastrophic weather events, there are going to be disasters. Are we going to now politicize that to the point where we abandon American citizens who need help? One of the other elements of this is, of course, Gavin Newsom is two years left in his term, and then he's widely expected to be a candidate for president. And Trump already dislikes him.

I'll go to Scott. Yes. And he's made that very, very clear. Blaming people was more his interest than the actual disaster. As to your point, Murphy, I agree. It was a terrible timing for Karen Bass to be out of the country in Ghana. This will be Ghana, but not forgotten.

But we're going to have to send you to Ghana. Any more funds like that? That's 17 million. That's 17 million dollars in the fire department is not what caused this crisis. That 17 million was not going to start, was not going to stop.

This was largely, this was in response to the fire hydrants that went dry. Those fire hydrants are there to save houses, not whole communities. They don't have the capacity for that. But communities are made up of houses that weren't saved. I mean, we can debate this forever, but

Even the fire chief has gone off the reservation and been a huge critic. And what department head is not angry about any cuts in their department? Honestly, I thought that was kind of odd for the fire chief. But if you just take population over 10 years and do fire spending per capita, it's not an impressive story, either in the county or the city.

Because we live in a world here where we have to invest in this stuff because a lot of people have houses and places that want to have a wildfire every 20 years. Look, I like Karen Bass. She's my friend. I think she's a fine person. And I think she's a fine public official. And she's in a world of hurt right now. And I think, you know, in California, recounts are easy to do.

recalls, I should say. And I expect that there'll be a lot of saber rattling about that once the main issue is done. But Mike, we're going to let you go. God bless you, your family, your neighbors and the people of Los Angeles. You know, we're here. We talk about politics here, but there's so much more. There's so much more of importance at stake.

Then politics here. And I just hope that these winds blow over without great, you know, more dramatic loss of life. Well, thank you, David. We could use 24, really about 48, 72 hours of luck here. And so we can start to pivot on this. But thank you, guys. Appreciate it. All right. And I look forward to joining you next week. Absolutely. All right. OK. Godspeed, Murph.

All right. See you, pal. Okay, then let's take a break right here and we'll be right back. This show is sponsored by BetterHelp. I've got a friend, a dear friend, who thinks that the month of February should be eliminated from the calendar because where we live, it's cold, it's dark, and depressing. Do you have a friend who thinks that if we got rid of the month of February that that period of cold and dark would also go away with it? I didn't say he was my brightest friend.

I just said that he gets depressed in those months. The point is that depression and challenges are not to be treated lightly. We all experience it. It's part of the human condition. And it's good sometimes to have someone to talk to.

about that who can help you kind of think your way out of that dark tunnel and better help is fully online. It makes therapy affordable and convenient serving over 5 million people worldwide. Yeah. Actually, I'm so with you on this about the February thing. Like I, you know, it's not just the cold and dark. It's that by February, usually you've realized you failed already at all of your resolutions. And, and that's a, that's a very grim be like,

You make all these promises, and then by February 5th, you're like, oh, God, I failed on every single one of them. And that's another thing that BetterHelp can help with because what you really need is not a bunch of resolutions that just fade within a month of making them. You need an ongoing kind of conversation that helps you to kind of better become successful.

to kind of pick up the pen and become the author in your own life. And, and, and you, you know, there's this diverse network, more than 30,000 credentials therapists at better help. They've got a wide range of specialties and you can easily switch therapists anytime at no extra cost, which is the key because you might not like the first one, but eventually if you keep trying, you're going to find the right therapist for you with better help. So February is here to stay.

Better option is to hook up with BetterHelp. Visit betterhelp.com slash hacks to get 10% off your first month. That's BetterHelp. Better H-E-L-P dot com slash hacks to get your 10% off the first month. You'll be glad you did. ♪

Given all the bad luck, given how many things had to go wrong for this inferno to be unleashed, it feels like maybe LA's due, you know, that the warnings, the most dire warnings of this next 48 hours may be

Maybe they'll catch finally catch it finally catch up. Yeah, it's really it's really sad. And you guys don't forget L.A. got selected. They're going to be the home of the 28 Olympics so that they have a massive infrastructure project to had even before these fires. They had their work cut out for them. I mean, there's already talk, as you know, Jay, more about the possibility that they may have to find a new site for this for the for those Olympics because it may not be possible.

given the scale of the devastation. Yeah, now I will tell you, I'm from Chicago, and we had a big fire there in the 19th century. Oh, yeah. Wasn't there a cow involved? Weren't you like 10 or 12 at that age at that point, David? You were 10 or 12 years old? I was not involved. He was covering night cops. It turned out to be a night cow beat. It was a hell of a yarn. But it was devastating and destroyed most of the city

The city rebuilt, and it actually was the World's Fair in 1892.

that became a, you know, a real impetus for the kind of unveiling of a new Chicago to the world. But so I hope those Olympics go forward, but more than anything, I hope people's lives can be repaired and we'll see what happens. Speaking about being repaired,

uh, let's get to these nominations. And they started today with the most controversial or one of the most controversial of those nominations and Pete Hegseth, uh, uh, J Mart, are any of these, are he, or any of these people in danger of actually not being confirmed? I've been doing some reporting on this the last day or so, and I'm

My sense is that they're all in pretty good shape and that this thing has turned since the Gates nomination went down in flames, in part because of the lobbying from Trump forces on the right. But also for another reason, David, and that is I think that the intense focus on Hegseth and almost Hegseth alone has actually been a gift to the others because there's not been the scrutiny. Think about this.

That Hegseth story about his mom and her e-mail and her excreting him, guys, that was over Thanksgiving. So we're almost two months into intense Hegseth scrubbing, but really little on the others. And I think that's been a godsend, especially to Kennedy and especially to Tulsi Gabbard. The fact that Hegseth has been the focus of the press coverage and really the kind of Democratic opposition here.

Of those who were left, my sense is that Tulsi will have the hardest go just because it's a pure, pure substance and principle issue. She's just not in the mainstream on national security of where most folks are in the GOP. But this is about Trump and picking a fight with Trump. And guys, as you know, the 53 GOP senators, none of them want to do that, especially out of the gates, as it were. Out of the gates. Yeah.

Do you have a sense, Jamron, if you thought about the four, right? There's four of them that are highly controversial, right? Which you mentioned Gabbard, obviously Hegseth, and then you've got Kash Patel and R.F.K. Jr. But if you had to rank them just on politics, if you had to rank them, you just said you thought Tulsi was maybe the most likely to encounter...

difficulties of a severe kind. How would you rank the other three going down the stack from most likely to least likely of not getting confirmed? Well, you mentioned the Patel fan. That's the dog that's not barking either. It's been remarkable how little attention that that's

that's gotten. Yeah. Take your question. I think you put the two Democrats top of the list, Gabbard and Kennedy, in part because they've got ideological issues with the Republican conference. Then after that, I put, I put Hegsav and Patel amazingly last. And again, I caveat this by saying, let's see what, if any new information comes out on these folks, what,

They have a need for speed. The faster this goes, the better for them. I don't think Gabbard can afford to sort of hang out there and wait. And I talked to one Republican yesterday who said, you know, she needs to get confirmed fast because if Democrats hold up the paper or sort of cite the paperwork delays to buy themselves time, that could mean more stories come out, more scrubs, and that could absolutely be detrimental to her. Guys, this only happens.

if there's tough coverage and Trump sees the coverage and responds to it and they drop out. I don't think that you're going to have Republican senators on the floor wanting to actually torpedo these nominees with their floor votes on the record. I think Republicans

For a lot, you know, for a lot of them, it's let's see what else comes out. And maybe the courage will be tough and then Trump will will get impatient. There's a lot of, you know, vote no, hope yes, as the old saying goes. But in this case, they don't want to vote at all. They just hope that maybe somebody will come out. Trump will not like the coverage and Tulsi will go by the wayside.

But that is a lot of hoping and not much planning. Well, one thing, if you're the new majority leader, Thune, the thing you're not going to do is put these nominations on the floor of the Senate.

If you don't think they're going to precisely succeed. And I'm not sure you even wanted to go to a committee vote if you think they're not going to succeed. So the fact that they've gone to committee suggests that he thinks that they can navigate these issues.

through the process. Just to get back to Hegseth for a second, John, let's listen to something else that Jack Reed, who's the former military guy, who's the ranking Democratic member on the Armed Services Committee, had to say in his introduction. We must acknowledge the concerning public reports against you. A variety of sources,

including your own writings, implicate you with disregarding the laws of war, financial mismanagement, racist and sexist remarks about men and women in uniform, alcohol abuse, sexual assault, sexual harassment, and other troubling issues.

I have reviewed many of these allegations and find them extremely alarming. Indeed, the totality of your own writings and alleged conduct would disqualify any service member from holding any leadership position in the military, much less being confirmed as a Secretary of Defense.

So, Hyman, this is really interesting. I mean, by no conventional measure is Pete Hegseth qualified to run the largest, by far, department in government. Certainly, if not the most critical, you'd have to say it's the most critical agency of government. Three million employees. The only thing he's run are two small not-for-profits, and he mismanaged those, according to reporting.

And, you know, then there's abuse of alcohol, abuse of women and so on. There's no way. And yet there this this he's setting this up in his hearing based on the early returns we've seen and what you'd expect as kind of a populist uprising against the institution of the Pentagon as a rank and file member of the military. And, you know, it is sort of.

That's Trump's politics right there. That's Trump's base. Yeah. And it's I mean, look, it's an astonishing thing. You know, one of the questions that we've been talking about for weeks is, you know, if you wanted to try to take Texas down, what would be the what would be the thing to focus on? The Democrats at some point, you know, started making this argument and other opponents of him started making the argument about qualifications and trying to, you know, OK, let's not even talk about the.

The personal – the myriad personal issues that have not apparently been fully investigated by the FBI, which is a whole other kettle of fish, right? Like why are – that there has not been a thorough investigation of many of those claims.

But it's amazing to me that the qualifications argument seems to have gone nowhere. I mean, I have been, you know, from the moment he got named, I've been citing the thing that's been in my mind has been that first chapter that I know both of you know, and this will warm Jay Mart's heart.

uh, the first chapter of the best and the brightest where, where Robert Lovett goes to see Kennedy. And at the end of that chapter, he says, you know, the, he says the, the, the, the Pentagon is a monstrosity. It's a, it's a, it's a, it's a Leviathan. It's a, it's a, it's a feral, um, just impossible to manage. And that's when there were like 500 people there, right? This guy is, you know, someone said, uh, I think, uh, your, your Senator, uh,

from Illinois, Tammy Duckworth said that most people who manage the local Applebee's are more qualified to run the Pentagon than Hegseth just on the merits of what he's actually managed. Jay Moore, why is that not cutting... Do you have a sense of why? I'm just shocked that that's not cutting any ice with anybody in this process. Speaking of the dog that's not barking, yeah, I mean, look, I think if we're being totally honest between us girls,

It's a hard argument to make in the Trump era. And what passes for qualifications for, you know, these jobs, I think, has changed. And there is a sense that because he was on TV and he sort of has this affect, well, that's what Trump wants and Trump's the decider. And so that's that. And I just don't think there's the independent power forces in the U.S. Senate anymore.

of yesteryear that would precisely say that. I'm thinking of people, yes, like John McCain, who I think would say that correctly, but also other figures from years past were more independent operators in the Senate. John Warner, the great armed services chairman from Virginia, you know, who would say that out loud, frankly. I just don't think that those kind of people exist anymore. The

They don't want to transgress Trump, but they don't want to say what's staring them in the face. And I think that's a challenge. Guys, we should also acknowledge here for a second the math here, because, you know, they can't lose more than four because of the majority. No, I'm sorry, more than three, I should say. Here's the issue, though.

That doesn't include Democrats. And I think we have to talk about the possibility that some of these folks are going to get Democratic votes. John Fetterman, the center of potential. Yeah, I was down there in Mar-a-Lago this weekend. Yeah, that's fair.

I didn't know whether he was going down there to make nice with Trump or because it's better weather for shorts down there, but he went down there this weekend. It's a win-win, David. It's a win-win. I was going to say, that's a false... I'm talking about a false binary. He had plenty of nice things to say about Fetterman, which suggests that Fetterman made some representations to Trump that pleased Trump. But yeah, I think there could be some Democratic defections there. But on this one, man...

On this one, it's one thing to confirm a guy. It's another thing to own him. And boy, I'll tell you what, something goes wrong. Right.

A lot of what's being said now is going to be remembered. And parenthetically, while I agree the qualifications issue is probably the soundest one to go after him on, you know, the reports of him being falling down drunk, which he explained, I think, in his opening statement as that was before he became a Christian and he's in better, you know, if he is still drinking,

If he is seen drinking, if something, if he reports that, I mean, this is all on there. This is all on them now. This is all on them.

I know he's promised not to, to, to, to not drink. If he is confirmed, has he said right now, whether he could still, you, you, you, you've made that promise a few times too. I know that's why, that's why I, that's why I distrust his problems. Anybody who has to promise they're not going to drink if they get a certain job, that's someone who's going to drink if they get that job. But, but is he drinking? I mean, he's right, right now, is he supposedly, uh, has he made a statement about whether he is currently does, whether he currently consumes alcohol or not? Do we know about that?

I don't think he's currently drinking, no. It's an incredible thing to promise. It's an incredible thing to promise. I swear if I get this job, I will not be drinking on the job. Well, don't forget, John Tower, you know, was spelled on precisely the same issues of womanizing and alcoholism. And that derailed his candidacy. Every time, different standards, right? It is such a stark reminder of the different times we're in. But it also is a reflection, as I...

said earlier of this sort of fundamental, the core of the Trump base is so fundamentally hostile to, you know, when Washington says, well, they're not qualified, that goes right to the heart of their, of the Trump appeal, which is like,

Who are they to judge us? He's one of us. He's a rank and file... He's a war fighter. He's the guy who's been bearing the burden of these wars, not like those...

uh, you know, dandies and the high rises of, uh, Manhattan and Washington and so on. But, uh, so it's, it's an interesting thing, uh, to watch. So you, uh, uh, Tulsi comes up this week in theory. I think, I'm not sure they, I'm not sure that here. I'm not sure that's going to happen. Yeah. I think they've signaled that they may have to delay it because of, you know, the paperwork backlog, right? Yeah, no, exactly. I think they're still waiting to get paper on her. And, um,

Yeah, you know, my theory is if somebody's going to go down, it's probably going to be her. I still think it's slightly less than 50-50, but I think it'd be her. To get a little in the weeds here, I think one of the reasons that she may get through, guys, is because the DNI post is a relatively recently created post, and I think

Speaking to a couple of smart folks on national security, what they say is, you know, we could probably work. They've got Radcliffe over at the CIA. Yeah, exactly. We can roll her. And there's no public. And there's, you know, to explain to people, to try to make the argument, which is a serious argument, that...

Like America's allies would not trust her with intelligence. That five eyes would basically be like, that's not an argument that cuts much ice with, with the average voter. That's not a politically set. It's obviously a very serious substantive issue, but, but not an issue that the average voter cares. It is something that should worry them because I'll tell you something, having been in the white house, uh, the ability to access and share intelligence has helped keep Americans safe. Uh,

And if people and if other countries don't feel free to do that, there are real ramifications. That last thing on this whole national security thing. Not just that, real fast. Sharing intelligence between agencies here in the U.S. Yes, yes, yeah, yeah, yeah. That was the great tragedy of 9-11 was the so-called Stoves.

you know, stope piping. They, the FBI wasn't talking to Langley and vice versa. And if you have somebody, the agencies don't trust to share info, then that's going to create a challenge, you know? Well, if, if, if, if catch Patel, uh,

If his past positions are prologue, he doesn't he doesn't think the FBI should be involved in counterintelligence, which which is also life threatening to Americans. What are you saying, John? David, I was going to ask you whether how competent do you think today's Democratic Party is at converting those kinds of concerns into a politically salient issue with the general public?

I don't, you know, I think plenty, plenty competent if something goes wrong. I don't root for something to go wrong. No, I mean now. I mean now, the prospect of it now. Yeah, I don't know. I don't, I don't, uh...

I don't know. I don't have a high level of confidence. I think they'll land some blows in these hearings. That will be more markers than market moving is probably the case. Okay, let's take a break right here for a word from our sponsor. We'll be right back.

Axe, happy new year. Thank you. Same to you, brother. Happy new year. As usual, my new year's celebrations got a little out of hand and I came face to face with the fact that after a night of drinks, I just don't bounce back.

You're not young anymore. Yes. I am not young anymore. And, and the alcohol just, you know, it's, it's having a much more deleterious effect on my, on my, on my being. And so I have to make a choice. Basically at this point, I can either have a great night or I can have a great next day. That was the choice I was facing until I found alcohol.

pre-alcohol, Z-Biotics pre-alcohol probiotic drink is what I'm talking about here. It's the world's first genetically engineered probiotic invented by PhD scientists to tackle rough mornings after drinking like I had on January 1st of this year. All right, enough confessional here because now you can have a great night and a great next day because of Z-Biotics. Here's how it works. When you drink, alcohol gets converted into a toxic byproduct in the gut. It

It's this byproduct, not dehydration, that's to blame for your rough next day. Pre-alcohol produces an enzyme to break this byproduct down. So you just got to remember to make pre-alcohol your first drink of the night. And then, of course, drink responsibly and you'll feel your very best.

the next day. Every time I have a pre-alcohol before I have drinks, I notice the difference the next day. Even after a night out, I can still confidently plan on getting up the next day, getting in my workout, getting my writing done, and even coming on Hacks on Tap and performing with like, you know, acts like a

as much confidence as I can muster. Splendidly. Whether I've had anything to drink or not, I don't have to worry about any of that. So go to zbiotics.com slash hacks to learn more and get 15% off your first order when you use hacks at checkout. Zbiotics is backed with 100% money back guarantee. So if you're unsatisfied for any reason, they'll refund your money, no questions asked. So like we said, just remember, head to zbiotics.com slash

slash hacks and use the code hacks at checkout for your 15% off. I'll tell you one thing I want to say. The Kennedy nomination, which probably he may get some Democratic votes. There was a piece in the Times just yesterday about the declining rates of childhood vaccinations and what that means in terms of

You know, future potential public health crises. And and here we are installing as the sort of chief health chief health officer of the country, someone who has been a serial propagator of.

of conspiracy theories that have been disproven about, about vaccines that have discouraged people from, or given people pause about using, uh, vaccines that have been around for generations and have, and have banished diseases like polio and measles and diphtheria and so on. Uh, you know, uh,

That that that is that is frightening. And I think I hope that they and I trust that they will make more of that. But look, the bottom line on all of this is we are of several days when we're six days away from Trump returning to the White House. Think about how he came eight years ago and how he left four years ago and just how remarkable that.

That is, I mean, he is more power. He left in disgrace four years ago from a mob scarred Capitol after helping to incite an insurrection. And he is returning and he is more powerful today than he has ever been. Right. And, you know, I guess, Jay Martin, even if you take away in some ways after January 6th, the.

The very quick way that the, that the, which was symbolized by Kevin McCarthy, the way that the party shockingly kind of fell in line behind him again after January 6th is in some ways less sort of shocking than the contrast between back in 2017. And now, you know, he came into office in 2017 with rep with the Republican party, largely, uh,

acquiescing, but pretty unhappily to, to the fact that he'd taken over the party and the Democrats in a, in a position of fierce, loud, ultimately ineffectual. And in some respects, ineffectual in other respects, resistance now, and the, and the, and the, the business community also acquiescent, but not enthusiastic and,

And now you just have, you have genuflection. You know, the Republican party is wholly owned by him. Not, not, not just the Republican party. The business, the business community is genuflecting before him. And there's no sign of effective little or vocal opposition or resistance on the, on the right. It is stunning that what, how different things are eight years.

Hence, a thought that it was temporary. I think, John, in 2017, that the Paul Ryan's Mitch McConnell's thought, well, this is a blip, but it's still our party. Nobody believes that anymore. Least of them people like Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell. Then the party has changed and they're not really part of the main current any longer of the GOP. No, he has transformed the party.

which we've kind of known for a while. I think that's not quite a shock. What is surprising, I think, John, to your point, is A, the Democrats being totally flat-footed now for almost two months, uncertain as to the way forward, I think stunned by his popular vote victory and sort of not sure. We can't be the resistance, but we can't be acquiescing to him, and they haven't figured out the third way yet, which I think resolves itself because Trump will be Trump and they'll obviously...

reap the benefit eventually of his excesses. But the other issue you mentioned to me, guys, which is the business community, especially the tech folks who are acting like this is 1984 and Reagan just won 49 states as opposed to being a 50-50 country, which it still is, in which Democrats could still very much win the House majority in 26 and the White House in 28. You wouldn't know it from the response of

of the business community. And yes, some of that is them doing the stuff they always wanted to do anyways, you know, pulling out of these climate accords or in the case of the tech folks, not doing moderation. But boy, I've just been really surprised that they're not more savvy to recognize that Trump was an elected king. This country is still pretty damn evenly divided. And to act like everything has changed and this is now a red America forever. I mean, this is a function of

Something that I think I think what has changed is he has over the course of these eight years successfully eroded some of the guardrails. And, you know, the the courts are more of a question now than before. The Supreme Court is more of a question now than before. The media has been weakened.

in these eight years as a source of accountability for him. And he has clearly shown an inclination. He believes that every lever of power is fair to use to bring people to heel. So they're looking at a president who's going to control the regulatory process

process, control the Justice Department in a way we haven't seen presidents tried to control before. So antitrust stuff, all of that, and generally reward his friends and punish his enemy in a way that we haven't seen, you know, in our lifetime. So, David, I ask you this question. So let's just take Jeff Bezos.

According to my Google, he's worth $236 billion right now, almost as much as Jay Mart. So $236 billion. Those speeches are worth a lot. I know. Jay Mart, Washington Speakers Bureau is a dynamo. He's not only a guest, we're going to get him to be a sponsor, but go ahead.

$236 billion. And he, you know, has done a series of things. The Washington Post, we could spend a lot of time. I won't, you know, give a long oration about that, but obviously there's been various things that have happened that have, that have eroded a lot of faith in the paper, uh, have thought that it looked like they had political taint, uh, associated with them, him, him pulling out, canceling the endorsement. A lot of people at the paper are leaving, et cetera. But here's, but here's the thing. He also went down Mar-a-Lago as others have.

I just don't think nearly enough attention has been focused on this Melania documentary thing. Yeah. Totally agree. Amazon is paying $40 million, essentially, to Melania Trump, and in the process, resurrecting the career of one of the most egregious Me Too sexual misconduct people in Hollywood, in Brett Ratner, and just basically paying it

You know, it's a fee for Melania Trump, essentially life rights, basically, and her participation in it. $40 million. Billie Eilish, who's one of the most popular singers on planet Earth and has moved hundreds of millions of units as a musician, got paid about $20 million to do the same thing for Apple, the same kind of a documentary. Well, in fairness, she's in her 20s, so she's lived less. She's probably—she's lived—

Less than half the life of Melania, so it's a shorter story. Although I'll say, I think Melania's book has sold a couple hundred thousand copies, which is about a couple hundred million less than what Billie Eilish has moved. Anyway, my question is this. Is that fear driving Jeff Bezos?

Is it fear? Is it like, what's, what's the, I mean, you seem to be saying the guardrails do well. Look, I think that it is, it is fear and opportunism because the flip side, I said that he was going to punish his enemies and reward his friends. Remember he canceled the, the, the Pentagon canceled a $10 billion contract, uh, for Bezos is one of Bezos's other concerns, blue origin. Uh, that's what it's called, right? Yep. Uh,

during the last administration. So I think they're all aware of the punitive, but they're also aware of the opportunity. And I suspect that is part of what has turned Mark Zuckerberg into the most flagrant of panderers, you know, because I think at the end of the day, his bottom line is not

you know, truth, not democracy, not any of that stuff. It's like, how much money is Meta going to make? But Jay Mart, to the politics of it though, Jay Mart, I ask you this. I mean, I've never, to your point,

I mean, Mark Zuckerberg was on with Joe Rogan the other day, basically trashing the Biden administration before it's even out the door. Now, again, I understand there are companies, many companies have many problems with regulation and quarrels with administrations. But just in terms of long-term politics, to your point, Democrats could be back in the White House four years from now. They could be back in control of the House two years from now. It just seems like you would, even if you wanted to suck up to Trump,

The idea that you want to crap on the Biden administration is just not going to do him any long-term favors in terms of his political standing in D.C. He's not thinking long-term, clearly. But yeah, it's a remarkable overcorrection. But John, the $40 million payday to Melania for what will be a surely tough but fair documentary. I mean, you know...

To borrow one of David's favorite characters, Mike Madigan was told, hey, we're going to grease the spouse of this guy for $40 million. Even Mike Madigan would go, it's a little bit excessive. I'm not so sure, right?

It would make Blago blush, you know? $40 million? Oh, my God. For our listeners, Mike Madigan was the longtime Speaker of the House in Illinois who's currently on trial for corruption. I think he's on the stand as we speak. He was not known for his ethical probity, I don't think. As we speak. But, no, listen, it's...

And this is how people thought Chicago worked years ago. And in some ways, it did work that way years ago. You rewarded your friends. You punished your enemies. You'd use the power of government to do those things. This has been raised to a level nationally that we...

We haven't seen, as I said, in our lifetime. Hey, John, the Trump are buying back the hotel on Pennsylvania Avenue because that's their home base operations to make money for the family. That's the enterprise there. OK, then let's take a break right here and we'll be right back.

If you love your cats as much as I love mine, then you want to make sure that they're fed and they're fed well. So I'm so happy this podcast is sponsored by Smalls. If you're a listener of this show, then you know.

that cats cannot live without Smalls. To get 50% off your first order plus free shipping, head to Smalls.com and use our promo code HACKS. Smalls Cat Food is protein-packed recipes made with preservative-free ingredients you'd find in your fridge, and it's delivered right to your door. That's why Cats.com named Smalls their best overall cat food. Yeah, my cats, Augie and Twizzler, they live in our garage.

They have a great little setup there, but man, they love to eat and they're happy when we fill their bowl with Smalls. You're still not a believer in Smalls? New York Magazine called Smalls the best cat food, according to veterinarians. And who would know better other than cats? While BuzzFeed said, my cats went completely ballistic for this stuff.

After switching to Smalls, 88% of cat owners reported overall health improvements, and that's a big deal. And I'm not spinning a ball of yarn here. You have a particularly picky cat? Smalls has a sampler so your cat can try everything Smalls has to offer, and the team at Smalls is so confident that your cat will love their product that you can try it risk-free.

They will refund you if your cats won't eat their food. So what are you waiting for? Give your cat the food they deserve. Head to Smalls.com and use promo code HACKS at checkout for 50% off your first order plus free shipping. That's the best offer you'll find, but you have to use our code HACKS for 50% off your first order. One last time, that's promo code HACKS for 50% off your first order plus free shipping. ♪

Well, speaking of home bases of operation, just to stay on our tech lords theme, it's now reported that Elon Musk is setting up shop in the OEOB, right?

Um, and, and, and he's the, he's the tech Lord that's obviously bought his way into Trump's good graces and has the most influence, et cetera. And is the most vivid symbol of this, of the fear that people have about like the oligarchic tendencies of the Trump administration. So David, I, the one person who said he like basically over his dead body would Elon Musk ever end up inside with, with, with real estate inside the white house is Steve Bannon.

And this battle, which took place, has been unfolding over the last two or three weeks in a very pitched way between...

musk as and musk is a stand-in for all of of silicon valley and the tech billionaire class with bannon as a stand-in for maga and populism it seems to me to be one of the actually the most interesting and potentially long-term consequential fights that's happening right now within the republican party i'd love to hear what you think about that well the you know look it's uh the globalists

versus the populace. And yes, you know, there is populace. There are populace intimations from Elon Musk and that most of them have to do with immigration, which is a big driver here and in Europe. And that's what he's working greatly. He just hosted the right wing

the far-right candidate for leadership in Germany. On X, he's going after the Labour prime minister, Starmer, in Britain. And a lot of it is around this immigration issue. But, you know, you guys mentioned Melania that, you know, I'm tempted to say it's another story of an immigrant who came to America and made good, right? You know, all of a sudden, Musk is at odds with the

the base on this issue of h1b visas high-end visas uh and immigration and bannon is going after him at it on it the the i think there's a subtext that i don't know anything i'm just speculating but you know musk is working bannon's side of the street here and he's got more to offer

And Bannon may feel that. He may feel like he's being displaced here as the leader of the global right-wing populist movement. But this battle within the Trump world is interesting to watch. John...

and John and John, I've got to, because we should get to questions this week. The mailbag. The mailbag. But before we do, the mailbag, just a couple of minutes on Biden. He's making his farewell speech tomorrow night. Jaymar, you had some pointed comments about him on Meet the Press a couple of Sundays ago. And

You know, I've been pretty critical and, you know, I think it's kind of a tragic story. The Post had a great piece the other day on the long-term impacts of his infrastructure plan and how it's been executed and how communities will thrive and America will be updated. And there are other elements on climate, on health care that are huge achievements. And they've all been obliterated in a kind of Shakespearean tragedy, right?

vanity and ego. And it's so tomorrow night he will make his farewell address. But the question is, how much damage has he done to his justifiable legacy as president?

I think it's the first paragraph of his legacy that the man who defeated Trump and seemingly extinguished Trumpism as a political force in America ushered it back in by insisting on running for reelection at 82 years old, at which point he conceded himself after the election that he was not sure that he could serve a full second term. His words, not ours.

Massively indulgent, as I put it the other week on Meet the Press, and personally indulgent in ways that have enormous ramifications for his party and for the country. And I think Democrats are right to be infuriated at him for doing that. And then to say after the election that he thinks that he still could have beaten Trump, yeah, I don't know if I could have served for four more years.

I think it just compounds things. And you add to that, his pardoning his son, um, after saying he wouldn't do it. And I think it does not bode well, uh, for the Biden legacy. David, you know, this there's always been a kind of true bite, right? And it's been this sort of proverbial devil on each shoulder. And, um, uh,

You know, the sort of overly insecure, desperate to be seen as a big figure in Washington and in posterity, I think sadly won out here. And that's the Biden that we got.

the person who, by God, I'm not going to be the parentheses between Obama and Trump. This is going to be the age of Biden. God damn it. You can, you know, that's the Biden that won out. And that's the Biden that tried to run again. And that's the Biden that ushered Trump back in for four more years. Yeah. I'll bet.

I just, you know, I think the thing that that that, you know, we've talked endlessly about this both on the show and privately, David. And, you know, the the hinge of history moment, of course, is that moment after the midterm elections in 20 in 2022 when when Biden could easily have to have declared victory.

you know, have had, had a decent midterm achieved a lot in those first two years said he was going to be a transit said he was going to be a transitional president and handed the torch off and, and everything in terms of his legacy would be different because he really would have been the guy just to beat Trump in 2020. And then he was a transition and a handed off and he got things done and he helped them. Now there's a million things that could have happened. I think his, his to, to J Mart's point though, this, I think it's devastating to say that,

I think I could have beaten Trump, but I'm not sure I could have served four more years because it really is. It is really a, it's a thing that everyone knows.

who's ever had, you know, to use the cliche, anyone who's ever had a parent who's gotten into their eighties knew this in their heart all along that, that the idea of serving as president of the United States from 82 to 86 is Matt was madness. And if that was the case that he wasn't certain he could serve four years, he literally had no business running regardless of his political analysis of whether he could be Trump or not. Let me just say this. Um,

He was pissed at me. He made that clear for making this point a couple of years ago. And I said at the time, this is not a political judgment. This is an actuarial judgment. And I felt then that it wasn't in his interest, much less the parties or the countries for him to run and that he would be, as you said,

so much better served by being big and saying, you know, I'm going to spend the final two years of my career focused on the business of the American people and not on running for reelection. But I think he so wanted the approbation that I think he felt like to be a great president, you had to be a two-term president or at least elected to two terms. And that was a terrible, terrible mistake that was made.

I think, you know, that he that that he will pay a price for that will be beyond anything that he would have imagined, because what he really wanted, what he's always wanted was recognition for the things he's done. And this has clouded that. And I hope that the clouds will recede and that he, like others, will be treated better by history.

than he is by voters right now. But all of this hangs over that final address tomorrow night. Time is hanging over us, though, so we better hit the music. Listener Mail

All right, Murphy's not here, so I will just tell you that if you have a question for the hacks, send it to hacksontap at gmail.com or at this number, 773-389-4471. I'll repeat it because who can remember that? 773-389-4471. Thanks to AI, the presence of Mike Murphy is always great.

felt here, even when he is somewhere else. Long but not forgotten. Exactly. Jonathan Martin, Bertha asks, I wonder if she was the inspiration for that Grateful Dead. One of my favorite tunes. Yeah, it is. Great song. With Vice President Kamala Harris facing scrutiny over her role and influence in the administration.

What should her next steps be to redefine her political narrative and strengthen her position within the Democratic Party? Well, Bertha, you can come around here anytime to repurpose the dead lyric.

I couldn't help myself there. I was in California last week and did some reporting about this question. And it's a really live question. I think Kamala Harris is thinking now, and she'll think more in the weeks ahead after she leaves Washington, about the possibility of running for governor in 26. Let me interrupt you there. Does that, you think that changes with this fire? Because I think that this fire is going to create a market for an outsider candidate, a business person, or someone who says,

you know, what we need is a great manager, someone who can really run government and reform government and so on, not a regular politician. Well, needless to say, she does not want to run and find herself in the Nixon 62 scenario, although she wouldn't mind finding herself in the Nixon 68 scenario. Yeah, yeah, exactly. But I think the smart set thing

thinks that she would be assured of the Democratic nomination, that the mainstream folks in her party would clear away for her. But David Bray's a good point. You know, Murphy's buddy Rick Caruso obviously ran for mayor against Bass. The smart set in California had been assuming that Caruso was going to snip at Gov in 26th.

But what does Caruso do now? Does he stick with Gov or does he try to run against Bass either in a recall or in her reelection? But I think Caruso could shape some of this. Look, I think Harris wants to stay relatively active in politics. I think you guys know this. When the phone stops ringing and the detail goes away for a lot of these people in politics, especially those who are young, she's 60 years old. That's tough. And, you know, 28 is a long way away.

I'd say intolerable more than tough. Intolerable for many of them. Yeah, I think 26 is going to be appealing to her. And there's folks around her who I think want her to take a good, serious look at it. And it's one of the best jobs in the country. Guys, you know this better than anybody. After president, California governor, New York City mayor, right? Chicago mayor. I mean, those are some of the top jobs there are. Yeah.

Yeah, I expect that she will take a good hard look at that. I just I mean, I'm curious as to whether the dynamics have shifted at all out there. This is this has been sort of an existential event in California. So we will see. John Heilman.

I want you to hear this from Helen, who is eager for your insert. I can't think of a Grateful Ted song here that would. But anyway, in what ways? Helen of Troy.

Hell in a handbasket. In what ways could meta shift away from content moderation in response to political pressure, impact public discourse and the company's relationship with users and advertisers? Are we seeing the end of reasonable social networks? Oh, Helen. Well, I don't think it's, it's look, content moderation is a really hard thing to do. I have, I'm actually, you know, somewhat sympathetic to the notion that it puts, uh,

trying to take on this burden of doing content moderation is no one's ever going to be happy with the outcome. And it puts these companies in a terrible position of trying to act as, as you know, it's a thing that it's very difficult to do. They've tried to do it with AI. They have never get the balance, right? It's a noble fight though. And giving up on it entirely means that the platform, the largest news platform in the world place where people get more news information, more people get their news from Facebook than any other platform is

globally is going to become increasingly like, uh, and, and Zuckerberg has said this, it's going to be increasingly like the platform formerly known as Twitter. Um, and anybody who spent a lot of time on, on that platform now known as X under the Musk and understands what it's going to mean for the quality of the discourse there. It's, uh, you know, um,

Scott Galloway, I think, calls it a Nazi porn bar. It's terrible on X, and Facebook is going to – which already had a lot of problems with misinformation and disinformation – is just going to become, I think, a nastier and rougher place for as long as this policy is in place. The hope is that –

is that capitalism will save us, which is to say that the market will, that the, that the end of quote reasonable social networks will be temporary because someone will come along as blue sky has to some extent now, but this will increase the incentives for some other platform to arise in which what you think of and what most of us think of as a reasonable social network can arise because people, there are a lot of people who have left X over what it's turned into. There are going to be a lot of people who are going to leave Facebook and

because of what it is increasingly going to turn into. And maybe that will create an opportunity for someone to rise up and finally do what others have tried to do, but failed, which is to create an alternative that draws, you know, tens of millions of people like you, Helen, and probably like me and like Axe and, and J Mart, who would like to have a more

civilized discussion. Uh, so that's what I have to say about that. Uh, but it's a grim, it's a grim prospect we're facing acts. Uh, here's, here you have a bill. We're going to pull this. We'll pull Patrick's question out of the mailbag for you. Uh, and he says, uh, Patrick says, I sort of get no jail time for Trump. I kind of get that thing, even though I don't agree with it on principle, it would be very disruptive. And so we defer to the office of the presidency. However,

How do you justify no fines for Trump, even if he won't ever pay? Shouldn't they still be imposed? And David, this gets to some larger questions related to Judge Juan Marchand and his non-sentence sentencing last week and the release of Jack Smith's report this week. I think it just came out last night. Talk to us about all that. Yeah. I mean, I think that Trump would not, under normal sentencing—

Trump would not have been imprisoned around this New York case. So that would have been extraordinary and improper in any case. I think that Mershon did what he did because he felt like, uh, the, um, the Supreme court ruling, uh, about the president's immunity, even though he wasn't president when he committed these crimes or, or partly these, I guess he paid off, uh,

Michael Cohen during part of this, but which would have been a it would have opened up a can of worms. And he mainly wanted to codify the fact that Trump was convicted by a jury of breaking the law. And that's what he did. Now, Jack Smith overnight released his report on the January 6th investigation. And it is it is a measure of how

This whole landscape has shifted that four years after the insurrection at the Capitol, that that was like a tree falling in the woods. Uh, it, you know, it barely got noticed because a lot of the story has been known. Some of it can't be told from grand jury testimony. Uh,

And and so all the headline of Smith's story was that he believes Trump would have been convicted had this gone to trial. But honestly, what that means is the only conviction here is Jack Smith's conviction that Trump would have been convicted. And so it is really a testimony to the degree to which Trump's lawyers triumphed by using all of the protections that he was afforded.

to delay, delay, delay until he could cloak himself in the protections of the presidency. And, you know, the story is still, you know, an appalling, alarming story and that will attach itself to Trump forever. But the fact that it is so not a story today is really sort of

And it's shocking if you were to think about this four years ago. One thing about that New York case, you guys, I said from the beginning, I'm sure that he was guilty of what he did. The jury agreed with that. But, man, you wonder how history would have been different if that case had never been brought.

Because of all the cases, that was the least significant. It seemed like most more, I said at the time, if you have to use the words novel legal theory and porn star in the same sentence, maybe you should think twice about bringing the case. And it gave him a chance to color all the other investigations. So he might not be president of the United States. He should send Alvin Bragg a bouquet.

for having brought that case because I think it benefited Trump. It certainly was the case that inspired his more sympathy for him and allowed him to rally his troops. And David, I'll just say one quick thing. You didn't quite note the irony. The

The irony of the fact that the thing that Trump's lawyers were able to do was to use, as you said, the protections afforded him to create this delay. The protections afforded him under a system that he referred to constantly as a witch hunt and as an illegitimate process. Well, and as a corrupt system. The great irony is that Trump's like, this is all totally corrupt. It's all totally illegal.

It's a witch hunt that's designed to persecute me. And yet somehow I managed to, my lawyers managed to use the protections provided to delay it and make it ultimately render it irrelevant. There is a deep, rich, and sad irony. Yeah, there is. We have some breaking news at this hour. Trump has decided to our president-elect that he's going to create an external revenue service that's going to collect, quote, carers' duties and all revenues that come from foreign sources.

You know, if you missed 19th century mercantilism and custom houses in every port, this is huge news. Well, depending on how he does it.

uh, everybody will know everybody hates the internal revenue service. They may come to hate the external revenue service too. If it raises their prices as almost every economist, uh, predicts it may. So, uh, we'll see. Anyway, we have to economize on time here. So, uh, J Mart, uh, always great to have you Heilman. Good to see you, buddy. We'll be, we'll be seeing you soon. And man, the great, uh, uh,

The great pageant of democracy goes on. Stumbles on. Goes on. So we'll see you all later. Sayonara.