Tom Emmer, Eric Swalwell, Ro Khanna: Inauguration Interviews: Trump's Talent, Democratic Rebrand & more with House Whip Emmer, Reps Swalwell & Khanna
嘉宾：Tom Emmer、Eric Swalwell、Ro Khanna
全文文稿 · 按对话顺序保留完整内容，深入理解上下文。
本篇目录3 章节
§01House Whip Tom Emmer on Trump's political talent, the Biden conspiracy, taking back the Democratic party, immigration, the role of Whip§02California Rep. Eric Swalwell on where Democrats went wrong, how to rebrand the party, TikTok ban, and more§03California Rep. Ro Khanna on reforming the Democratic party, Bob Iger as LA Mayor, CA Leadership, TikTok ban§01House Whip Tom Emmer on Trump's political talent, the Biden conspiracy, taking back the Democratic party, immigration, the role of Whip
Alright, everybody. Welcome to, the all in inauguration special. We are here in town, to celebrate and or commiserate the 2nd term of Donald Trump depending on where you sit on the political spectrum, and we are extremely lucky to have a partner in Spotify who has given us a box. Yes. We're in a glass box on the street.
They really splurged and got a trailer. It's absolutely fantastic, but we thank them for their hosting us. It's very cool. With me today, of course, my cohost, Shamath Palihapitiya and David Friberg who is a little under the weather. Because let's be honest, Friberg, you've been out there.
You and Lex took on the town last night.
I had a good time with Lex Freeman last night. That was good.
Let's leave it at that.
Let's leave it at that.
Yeah. That sounds great.
It's been a couple nights in a row. I'm pretty beat.
Chamath, you have a, very busy social set schedule. And, you've been just bouncing around town with the who's who and taking credit for Donald Trump's victory. How's the victory lap going here? Because you play such a key role here by coming out and being even more unlikable in our hometown of the Bay Area and supporting Trump. I'm a small bit player.
A bit player. But as you said to me in the car over here, you were the fulcrum that started the boulder that created the win.
I said none of that. But, I think more changes are coming, Jason. Maybe to our home state of California. Let's see.
Let's see. What?
Let's see. What? Phase 2.
We're extremely, honored to have Tom Emmer here. He is the US representative from the amazing state of Minnesota, home of Bob Dylan, Prince, and the Coen Brothers.
And Tim Walz.
And Tim Walz.
Don't be sad. Coming in hot already. Well, let's start there.
With the
The whole time.
Let's start there. How much of a disaster, was the Democratic party? And when you watched what happened with Biden in all seriousness, do you think there was a cover up in terms of his mental acuity? And what do you think of Kamala's job out there not doing podcasts and, essentially being anointed and not having a primary. The the Democratic party seems lost.
Crooked. And crooked. Okay. Yeah.
I mean, the leadership. I I got good friends who are Democrats, so
I don't
I'm not gonna disparage them. But, first, Jason, all of you, thank you. It's nice to be on all in. I've heard everybody's heard about it. Everybody wants to be here.
So it's just nice that
And you promised you'd listen to it after this?
That's right. Actually, I listened last week.
Sadly, it was about, the fires. But, the, the way they did this, was if you think about it, ballot access is a big thing. You you have to run for, months, and you have to get delegates and you have to make your case State by state and you have to meet certain requirements to actually end up on the ballot how the Democrats are able to remove Joe Biden literally, in a coup back room coup and install Kamala Harris in a matter of hours or days, and avoid any convention, like real democracy taking place where people are debating their candidates and where they're at. And then to your your, other question, that that's wrong. But your other question was, Joe Biden, was there a cover up?
A cover up is when you don't see it, when you don't know about it, when you're totally unaware. This wasn't a cover up this was a conspiracy everybody in this town for 4 years watched when he came in he was already diminished and watch him continue to diminish over the course of his over the course of his term, it was the mainstream media that refused to actually comment on it. And then it was amazing overnight when, he has the debate last year, and it's like, oh my gosh. This is terrible. Look at this.
And and suddenly, it was like they'd never seen it before. This was a conspiracy by a left wing media that, they're littered with people who have a partisan view, and they write about it. They create stories about it, and they don't tell you the whole story.
If you were
your Let's go down this pull this thread a little bit more because you said the the Democrats themselves are good people, some of them many of them, you know, but then the leadership you said was corrupt. So just can you help us understand who is the leadership? And then how does the corruption play out? What does the corruption look like?
Well, remember, I'm on the Republican side. Yeah.
No. But I'm
But I I could tell you what I watch. Yeah. What I watch is there were two times that they literally, whoever they are, it would be the super delegates. It a lot of people would say it's the Obamas, it's the Clintons, it's the, you know, original That's the that's the boogeyman for what
it's worth that people point to at least when you're not in DC. Like, if somebody said, who who are the leadership, elected or otherwise, that runs the Democratic party? A lot of people would point to the Obamas and then some of these super donors. Is that sort of your perception of how
it works? It is. And the reason I I go back, as you remember, Bernie Sanders is marching towards the Democratic nomination.
Right.
And they get to South Carolina, and all of a sudden, Amy Klobuchar from my state. It just one after another. I'm out. I'm out. I support, Joe Biden.
Right. Clearly, the whoever that is, because you're right.
We
we're not in the room to see, is it the Obamas? Is it, consultants like Carmel or Axelrod or whoever?
So who
is in that room? Yeah. But whoever's in that room, they have a plan when it gets to the end. And I I never thought, Joe, Biden was going to be the candidate.
And that's not how the Republican party operates. Because I think some people in the public have this perception that both parties operate that way, that there is a cabal of the most influential, and ultimately, they end up getting to pick. And the other party does the same thing. Is that not the case? No.
And clearly, that wasn't the case with Trump. Right?
Yeah. No. Ours I I would say that watching from the outside again, we're not on the inside of the Democrat machine. But watching from the outside, that's a top down process. On the Republican side, that's a bottom up process.
And, Donald Trump is the best example
of Best example.
Because, people in this town, you know, especially in the house where I serve are like, you know, we we got the American people. We have a mandate and you gotta remind them. Yeah. No. No.
Donald Trump has a mandate. He got 77,000,000 votes. We got a little less than 75,000,000. So if you're looking at who literally is expanding this party and pulling this party over the line, it's one guy.
Well, so
It's not a strong So
to your
point You view him the party leader? I do. Mhmm.
So to your point,
this was a almost like a Donald Trump hostile takeover of the republicans. Meaning, if you look at the establishment rhetoric of what republicans stood for, I don't think Trump really cared. He had a point of view, and he had his own intellectual agenda and ideology. And to your point, 77,000,000 people said, I go with that. Do you think that that's possible on the Democratic side as well?
Do you think that there's a different ideology that needs to be born there?
I can only tell you the experience I've had with, one of my Minnesota colleagues who I I won't name him, but he might have run against the, sitting president. He he was we were talking on the house floor one day, and I was complaining to or giving him a hard time, I should say, about some of the off color remarks coming from the squad. And he made a point of telling me off Off color how? Well, let's just say there were some anti semitic, comments, all about the Benjamins, this stuff, and there was a censure that was being worked on.
Oh, wow.
Yeah. And, it was public. But the point is when I was saying, boy, you've had quite a week. He goes, oh, yeah. Yeah.
He says, that's a very small group of people in our party with very large voices. And my response to him was, okay. Well, that might be true. But then people like you have to stand up and speak up and take my grandfather's Democrat party back.
Yeah. Exactly.
And so, no, I think they've got a problem. Identity politics, which they've perfected and been playing for years, it has now come back to bite them.
Mhmm.
And there's where is the way out? They don't have a brand. They don't know who they are. They they they're fighting about, things like, men participating in in women's sports. I mean, it just it isn't resonating with the American people.
So they're they're gonna have to figure that out for the future. But on our side, we're gonna have to figure out Donald Trump is the one that pulled this across the line. Here's here's the problem with the Republican party for me. The last 30 years, we've had great people representing us, but the public has been very frustrated because it seems like government and the bureaucrats always get a better deal Right. Than the average citizen in this country.
Right. We're talking about Main Street. We're not talking about Silicon Valley, which has its own Main Street, but I'm talking about just good old Main Street USA. Yeah. You know, where it's rural country.
It's, you know, people who are just trying to live their lives.
Yeah.
They feel like their government hasn't been listening to them for years. This is what spawned the Tea Party. Yep. This is why we've had this over and over. And Donald Trump, you gotta give him credit.
This energy was out there, and he actually grabbed it. And he showed us what it looked like when he ran in 16 Well, he
took the time to understand it.
Or or he just innately has an ability to read people Yeah. Better than I've ever seen.
Yeah. I mean, I think he is a generational retail politician.
A generational?
I think he's a 1 in 150 year
Yeah.
Leader.
Yeah.
Freeberg, you have a a lot of thoughts on fiscal responsibility and have been banging the drum on the national debt. Tom, you also have a passion for fiscal responsibility. Maybe you have some thoughts on that, Friberg, to
Or maybe you can tell us your point of view on how much of an impact Doge can have. I don't know
if you've talked. And what you think reconciliation is gonna look like? I mean, this is gonna be a very gnarly pitch battle here. How how do we get 2,000,000,000,000 out of the
Why are you stopping
it too?
Exactly. Why are you stopping it?
Well, actually, let's ask that question. Is 2 even possible? And if so, how do you think you can get $2,000,000,000,000 out of it?
So I'd I'd rather let's do it 2 ways. Okay. I'd rather, look at what's what could we put on the table? And we do this privately. So you won't get me to say what it is, where it is.
What is that?
But I'll
tell you, there's a list that we've sat down with that, reaches somewhere between 57,000,000,000,000 a year, over the next 10 years.
Okay.
I and the the, that's what that 2,000,000,000,000 would be over the next 10 years.
Okay.
I mean, listen, if if you're
The budget's 7.2. What's that? The budget the annual budget's 7.2. Yeah. Right?
So
And and the goal is, first, we gotta balance the budget. You gotta quit bleeding 1.5 to 2.2 trillion I think, oh, it's another trillion. Yeah. Whatever. You gotta balance.
Yeah. Second thing you gotta do is start to bend the curve down. We we got the greatest economy in the world. It hasn't been performing where it could. I I think with Donald Trump, we can put it in a place where it can.
You can see those revenues start to go up again. And you if you have this so you're controlling it, you could pay that you could pay that down rather quickly. I mean, if you're talking in terms of a decade.
This requires sacrifice and it requires representatives from each city, and each state to then go to their constituents and say, hey. We fought to get you x, y, and z, and you're only gonna get x and y.
Yeah. Be careful. Some tell you they fight, but they're not really fighting. The, this this thing is going to happen because of Donald Trump. I think, I I leave it to Mike Johnson.
He's the speaker. He will make these decisions. I'm not. Got it. I'm the whip.
Whatever you tell me, my job is to make sure we get it done. And that's what we'll do. But I think you're gonna see a 2 track process. Mike Johnson for reconciliation has set a deadline. He wants to vote on a budget resolution by the 1st week of February.
Why is that important? The budget resolution you have to have before you can even move forward with, reconciliation. That's usually prenegotiated with the senate. So if we can keep with that aggressive timeline, you'll have that back to the house, sometime in February. Once you have that, that allows your 12 subcommittees to get their allotment
Right.
And start to build out their Right. 12 appropriation subcommittees, build out their budgets. Jason Smith, our ways and means chair, believes we can have that process done by the end of March. Mike in again, in this our speaker in this, very aggressive timeline, if that's possible, he would like to vote on it in the house in the 1st 2 weeks of April. Mhmm.
This includes the tax permanency extensions, etcetera, from the Trump tax cuts back in 2017. If we're able to keep to that schedule, then you could you could realistically have a reconciliation bill to president Trump's desk by Memorial weekend.
Let's just talk about the other long term challenge and your point of view on the solution. What's gonna happen to Social Security by 2030, 2030 2, 2033? Where is this headed?
Well, I think people are gonna have to innovate, And I think, you gotta honor the promises that have been made. There are many different things out there that are being looked at like a voluntary program that people, in a certain range, and this is above my my pay grade, a certain range, age range. Yep. Like, I don't know, 18 to whatever it is that are just coming into the system Yep. That it would give them a choice.
Right. They would have a choice to stay in social security as we know it or to pursue a private route that will have federal parameters so you can't just be putting it into a retirement account, taking it out.
Right. Right.
It would serve the same purpose,
but Like Australia system, the super system.
It would obviously. And then it would grow the, the private side.
Yeah. But it's
and sorry. Is that ultimately necessary? We need to change Social Security.
We gotta change
And when do we have to change it by? And now that the election is over, it because every politician is scared to talk about Social Security because everyone's got an election coming up. Are we gonna hear something different this time around? Or is it always gonna be the kick the can down the road with Social Security and whenever it's just such a golden goose. No one can talk about it.
No one can touch it.
Donald Trump was elected for three reasons. 1, to fix, our economic, woes, the inflation that's killed people, get energy moving again, seal the southern border, and create peace and stability around the globe. If we perform, and I'm I'm gonna change that because that's not really my attitude, when we perform. Mhmm. You start to build credibility with the American public.
Yeah. Then and only then can you start talking about because nobody believes us.
Right.
Right? So and and the media plays games. They try to plays games, they try to pit us against each other with these different ideas. The key is you have to honor the promises that have been made to Americans since Social Security was created. And then you have to look forward.
And, again, we've said we're not going to touch Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. That was the president who said that. I got that. But there are some, efficiency things, reforms that you can do around these programs that actually
will make them, not only more, viable financially, but more efficient. Should Americans be able to trade cryptocurrency freely without regulations, Or do you think those regulations are in place for
a good reason? Well, you're talking so you remember animal house with the evil and the good on the shoulders?
I had that last night and the evil one.
Well, I got the libertarian Yeah. And the, republican with a small r on either one.
Libertarian always wins for me. But yeah.
Well
and it it it used to for me. But I realized that I was a republican with a small r when I was doing a radio show with an anarchist for several months, and all he ever said was shut her down. She's pumping mud. And he's like, no. I must be a Republican.
I the libertarian says absolutely. Okay. I the Republican with a small r, I I think the key is gonna be we have the greatest financial system, markets here in the United States in the world. We have an existing legacy 2 tier banking system. It needs to come into the 21st century.
The beauty of crypto to me is not just that it's crypto. 1, it's going to help us if congress does its job, if we put some parameters up, market structure, you know, give people rules of the road so they know what they can and can't do and who's gonna be, having responsibility for oversight. We can protect the existing 2 tier legacy system Yeah. And allow it time to move into the 21st century. I think the the key is and this is why the, central bankers are so worried.
This is so disruptive and potentially destructive that they're scared to death. It's not just losing their power. They're they're afraid that, this decentralization is gonna somehow, send finance back to the,
social media. Also concerned that consumers, maybe who are not super sophisticated or new to it, might lose their money. And yesterday, Trump launched a $30,000,000,000 Yeah. Coin, which we refer to on the Internet as a coin or a meme coin. Are you troubled by him doing something like that?
Was that a wise decision on his part?
I don't know. Time will tell about that. He seems to make some pretty good decisions they've,
they've done better for him. Work on the regulations for that.
So We do.
If he can do that, can we all just do it? And take any
Oh, you you could have done
that too. Oh, well, it was the the SEC previously would have, actually gone after you for, taking money from retail investors.
Ding dong, the witch is dead. Now we're gonna be moving forward with the new SEC.
Got it. Okay. So YOLO? What's that? YOLO?
YOLO. You only live once. Just go for it.
Hard time because I don't know all those cute quips.
Yeah. But you're you're cool with it. You're cool with hitting doing the coin 24 hours before
I have no problem. Did you see the meme that said that Baron apparently had his dad's phone last night and made a $1,000,000,000?
I love the Baron meme. They're my favorite. What's happening?
They call him the Lisan Al Gaib, which if you like if you watch Dune, he's like he's the savior that sent in Dune to basically save all of us.
It's it's definitely gonna be an interesting 4 years. Let's talk about that.
Jason is about to implode, congressman. Yeah. No. No. Is in melting down in stock.
Has a big negative bias against, these coins.
No. No. No. I I have a bias against stealing from
Meanwhile, you want every retail you want every retail investor to have access to buy startups and
because that that'll benefit you.
But when it comes to coins, you're like, oh, no one should be able to do that. Well, I'm gonna address that.
I think there should be a sophisticated investor test where people learn about things like diversification. They learn who owns 80% of the coins that have just been dumped on retail, and, under what circumstance they can sell them. And, you know, there is a a a legitimate issue here that, foreign adversaries could just buy these coins and influence the president. I think that's a real concern that people should buy.
So you can diminish it.
No. No. From you're actually not.
No. I actually a real issue.
I actually agree with you. Like, securities regulations require and when you do an IPO, you file an s one
Yes.
And you disclose who owns the shares Yes. And it has to go on a regulated exchange so you know who the buyers of the shares are. So I do actually think your framework is pretty reasonable that Oh, okay.
Yeah. Yeah.
I thought
you were just mocking me.
Well, I do mock each other. Yeah. Okay. In addition, I was wondering if
Let's go to the next one then.
No. No. I do think that's right.
You brought up the border. Steve Bannon says
No. I did.
You did. You said the border was one of
the most recent ones in his, his
mandate. Yeah. So let's talk about that part of the mandate that you brought up. Steve Bannon says,
he's
doing a great job today's moderator.
Does he? You're doing a great
job today's moderator. Does he? You're doing a
great job. I think
he's the only one that's left. Good.
Yeah. See, they knock you down and
then they build
you up.
It's all good. I'm not paying attention to them. I'm paying attention
to you.
This is bad. Management.
Steve Bannon said he wants all 15 out day 1. So what's going on? Steve Miller says America is for Americans and Americans only. Do you believe 15,000,000 people should be dragged out of this country day 1 like Steve Bannon and Steve Miller?
I I think we should look at what the, American people think. So, New York Times, of all outlets, had a poll that said, it's like 80%. I believe that criminals, terrorists, people who have committed a bad offenses should be the hell out of here.
Yeah. Easy one to have consensus on you.
No. But then it starts
to drop down.
Yeah. Which is, the next one is, oh, I forget what the second one is. It drops down about 60. But 55% of Americans believe any illegal immigrant should be out of here. How many?
55%. 55% is
in a New York Times poll.
Uh-huh. What do you think that'll do to the economy? You brought up inflation, and we have to tame that. We have 4% unemployment, the lowest of our lifetimes.
Can I just tell you agricultural, labor costs have climbed by probably 3 x in the last 4, 5 years?
Yeah.
It's and there's not enough labor to address kind of agricultural production needs in this country, particularly in specialty crops, because it's the world I I work in. How do we get a kind of address both the kind of economy economic demand for labor in this country and address this kind
of immigration challenge? You don't fix your labor problem with, illegal immigration. You fix it by fixing your immigration system and making sure that it's working the way it's supposed to. By the way, I come from the state of Minnesota. The 2 primary drivers of our state's private economy are manufacturing and ag.
I mean, I I've got huge, operations, of families that have bound together as a coop that they literally have to bring in foreign workers. And they they built a village housing. They, have teachers. Right. But there's there's the solution.
This idea and I come from Minnesota, which is why you made the hair on the back of my neck stand up. The the argument is, oh, illegals. People who are here illegally and their advocates are bracing for Trump's arrival. And then they write an article that says, if they remove all these people, our economy is gonna tank. Stop it.
You you you've got laws for a reason. You gotta enforce the laws that are on the books, and if they don't work, this is why we passed the strongest border bill in 20 years with 222 members in the last congress, which Chuck Schumer never looked at. They they wanted to say that Trump killed the bipartisan bill. You realize the house bill did 5 things, finish the wall, reform the parole process, reform asylum, end catch and release, and restore remain in Mexico. Those were the 5 pillars.
That so called bipartisan bill actually codified catch and release, said that if you don't have emergency authority on the border until you have 5,000 plus one coming across a day.
So we said
have That's an answer.
We seem to have, you know, pretty solid consensus here and in the country. Criminals who are basically committing 2 crimes, whatever crime they committed here and come across the border illegally, they have no standing, they go. But you seem to be, hunting and not answering the question of, should the 14,500,000 other people be dragged out of the country in year 1. So maybe you can answer that one.
That means a journalist.
I I'm I'm telling you right now that Trump Trump was elected
to get
this done. You think, though? You are from a state where it's gonna be highly unpopular.
I I don't think you should be here if you're illegal.
So all 4 all 15,000,000 gotta go in year 1.
I don't think you should be here if you're illegal. Now you're you're painting with a pretty broad brush. I know. I don't know what specific,
situation Bannon and Steve Miller have said. So I'm just quoting their words.
Again, I think the, the goal is to make sure What
do you think Jamie Vance Jamie Vance came on our show, and he said, hey. You gotta do the first thing first and, you know, then the second thing second. There it's not all gonna happen on day 1. But, yeah, it's gonna be
Well, I'm trying to interpret that, but you're No. You're you're straight.
So
Well, actually, I resent that. I am being straight. I will tell you straight.
Adversarial No. I just wanna know you if the
this is a I think there's a lot of Americans who wanna know if 15,000,000 people are literally gonna be dragged out. This is a big question for the American people. Are you going to drag 50,000,000 people out of the country or not? Because Stephen Miller, who seems to be, you know, a big part of this administration, and Steve Bannon, who was the architect of the previous administration, say that's actually gonna happen. People are actually nervous about
that. This is when we need Sachs here to check you, to fact check you on whether those guys have said that.
And the the problem is you're using terms like drag them out.
Right.
No. I mean, they're gonna start with the worst of the worst. In JD's, answer, you start with those because you know that this is going to have an emotional aspect to it. And that's what I'm And guess
what? Yeah.
If you start doing it the way you're supposed to do it, I'm gonna suggest to you that a lot of them are gonna leave voluntarily. And then if we fix the system that we have, then we can start to restore this
By the way, that's already happening because I've heard from a lot of agricultural leaders. They're seeing labor depart anticipation of the administrative change, and a lot of labor is very scared of what's happening. They don't wanna be caught. They just came here for work. These are individuals who came to this country to work.
They are employed, whether legally or illegally, to do work that's in demand in this country, and they're worried they're gonna go to jail, so they're leaving. And and And then there's a massive absence right
now in
production. Particularly in rural areas. There's a massive absence right now of labor that's really critical to a lot of those farming economies. And a lot of people in the agricultural sector are very nervous about what's about to happen in the impact. But let me ask you another question.
Do you think in in the line with Elon's point of view and some of the stuff that's been promoted that there's a big push by the Democrats to keep the borders open to create more voting Democrats in this country, that that's a big reason or rationale for the alternative of, you know, having illegal immigration and then converting everyone to legal?
I think it's I I think it's more basic than that. I do think there's a political element to it. States like Minnesota where the, where the traditional educated, what entrepreneur Yep. Is leaving. They're being replaced with, in many cases, with illegals.
Yep. Right? Because we are a sanctuary state.
Right.
So they come into Minnesota whether they vote or not, that it there is a big there's a big argument that, yes, many of them are. Yeah. But I think the bigger issue is how congress is, divided up. You're losing. You're hollowing out whether you're Illinois or you're New York.
You're hollowing out your state. They bring illegals in, and, incredibly, our census calculates them in the, the numbers.
That doesn't make sense.
No. So you got these blue states that That's the gerrymandering cartel just
to try to reverse. Yeah. I guess that's a longer conversation. We probably need to wrap up in a minute. I never heard of said that word.
I have a totally different question, something more fun. The job of whip was totally romanticized after house of cards.
Is that
romantic? You got to kill people?
Well, no. Because you had you had Spacy you
had Spacy in this really
famous scene You got an interesting calling the
whip and saying, when I was whip, my the whip and saying, when I was whipped, my job was to whip the votes. And then he was screaming into the phone, whip the votes. And I just remember this thinking, now that seems like a really cool job.
His nickname is Chairman Dictator, just so you know. He was voted like number 1 commentator by Xi Jinping in the Teddy's Communist Party in the
1st year of the final I
have a
lot of important people in this afternoon. Yes.
Yeah. But but just
the job of Whip, is it as enjoyable as it sounds?
So everybody likes to say to me, you've got the worst job in Washington, DC. I think the speaker has the worst job in
Washington DC. Yeah.
That guy can be having a great day, and he's got all kinds of people that are just throwing sandwiches at him all
the time.
The majority leader, does a calendar, manages the floor, works with the chairs. Great job. The whip, you don't get to do anything those guys wanna do unless we can actually get it across the floor. And and the the world has changed. You know, they I think I know they elected me because they thought my personality is very direct.
I am from, Minnesota.
Well, I get the sense that you're incredibly effective and you could whip the votes.
What? But it's you just gotta be honest and you gotta respect everybody. And and it's a different world because we probably have 40% of our members who will vote for whatever Mike Johnson says we're gonna put on the floor.
Mhmm.
But we got 60%. And this is what's been changing, I think, over the last couple of decades. It keeps getting larger. They didn't come here to follow somebody. They came here to to lead.
To represent their people. And they need to be involved in the process. And and what I tell them all the time, I don't care if you like each other. I don't care if you despise one another. I don't care if you socialize together or the second you walk out of here, you run to 2 polar opposite places.
When you're here, the American people elected Donald Trump, and we have the benefit of, a majority. You're whipping the votes. But that's what it is. And I I tell them, you gotta get over yourself.
Yeah. We're
gonna let everybody participate in the process. We're gonna take all of your ideas. We put the, the more centrist part of our our our majority and the more, right wing part of our party together. And that that list of, savings cuts offsets I was talking about, we privately run that through small groups one at a time so that they can talk to each other. So that if if you come from a ruby red district down south and I come from a, you know, swingy swingy district in New York, we can have a conversation about why I can and can't do something and why you will and won't do something.
And at the end of the day, this is how you're successful. Everybody wants to be involved. It's it's hard only from the aspect that you you can't afford to leave anyone behind. Last question. When you saw the
last week was pretty prolific in terms of the senate confirmation hearings that started. I think we're still waiting to figure out when Bobby's gonna come up. Like, do you see any pushback? Who do you think
Who might not make it?
Who might not make it? I think everybody's making it.
And I I think anybody, that listens to you guys or anything that interview where they start say bringing this up, we gotta remind people, this has been the left's playbook since Robert Bork. Yeah. They started it with Robert Bork. They took him out of his supreme court appointment. They, they did it to, Clarence Thomas.
Mhmm. They really did it to Kavanaugh. And look at this. Now they've moved it to cabinet picks.
Right.
And and Pete Hegseth is a great example. Right. None of us is perfect, but all of that was anonymous. And I think once it started going through the process and somebody asked me this question a few weeks ago. I said, yeah.
They're starting with Pete. Pete's gonna get, he's gonna get through the process. They'll move on to Tulsa, then they'll move on to Bobby Kennedy Junior.
Right.
Those will probably be their their their biggest ones that they'll attack.
Yeah. Right.
I mean, my my perspective on this is that to your point, in the absence of somebody being compromised, it's not an ideological difference that should stop cabinet picks on either side. Whoever is the president should get to pick their team. Put the team on the field. That's the mandate he was given by the people, and then the people should get to vote. It up there.
It's supposed
to be an advisory capacity. Right? I mean, the
It is. Congressional law. It is. But the beauty of what Donald Trump is doing, you can't fix what's broken with people that broke it. He's going outside of this, godforsaken place and bringing people in that have have completely new ideas whether you like them or not.
Right.
Come on, folks. Let's see what this does. We've been doing the same thing now for years.
Which, by the way, is what happened 250 years ago when this Okay.
Wait. Congressman, last week. Okay.
This is
The congress that
last Give us give us the Give us the reduct last one. And opinion. You said you listened to the fire episode that we did. But just general, from the outside in as a Minnesotan looking at California, just diagnose what's going on there.
It's it's more complicated than the right and the left wanna make it seem. But, there definitely is a problem. It's not just limited to California. It's across this country with not managing our resources the way we should. We had this problem in Northern Minnesota probably 20 years ago, 25 years ago.
We had a blow down in the BWCA, the Boundary Waters Canoe Area. You had all those trees, laying down. They were kindling. Right? And, I think our governor at the time, Jesse Ventura, said he was gonna go in there and he was gonna log it.
Right? So we could protect the, citizens and their property, and we could actually make use of these, trees that have been destroyed in the storm. The federal government told him he couldn't do it. And, of course, we've had fires. Right?
California, this is tragic. My brother-in-law sent me a picture. He lives in Woodland Hills. He sent me a picture of flames at the end of his cul de sac above the bottom.
My parents lived. They probably lived a couple blocks from each other. Yeah. In Woodland Hills. Yeah.
The fire stopped 2 blocks from their house.
Yeah. That's the picture he took.
Yeah. Well, they might Did
the winds just take?
No. So they, the the the the Ventura County line comes up to right there. Yeah. And the fire department didn't and I I Cal Fire and Fire Department are incredible. They stopped it from entering the neighborhood.
That's amazing. It was amazing. Yeah. Very amazing. I don't
know how his house is still standing based on the picture he sent.
Yeah. Thomas has been amazing. He fit right in here. I appreciate the honesty and candidness, and we'd love to have you back anytime.
I appreciate the conflict. I love that.
Well, I
mean, the American people have This
is why we love Jay Cutler. Well, he
got he got motivated. We went to a Spotify dinner last night, and they were talking about journalism. He's like, I'm a journalist. I'll show you guys. I can be journalism.
I don't wanna
I think it's a really important conversation, and, you know, I I the one thing I'm a little concerned with is, just some clarity. Because Trump has an ability to say things in a in a in a bold way, in an effervescent way. And then, you know, sometimes these things actually affect people, and they they want a little more clarity.
So Well and the whip has, has to find clarity amongst 219 people.
Yeah. Good luck with that job. Appreciate it.
Thank you. Thank you. You guys are fun. Great. Thanks.
§02California Rep. Eric Swalwell on where Democrats went wrong, how to rebrand the party, TikTok ban, and more
Okay, everybody. Welcome back to the all in podcast. We're here for the inauguration of Donald Trump in his 2nd term, and we're delighted to have Eric Swalwell with us today. He is obviously the house representative from California in the Democratic party. You guys got East Bay?
East Bay.
East Bay.
Yeah.
You guys got shellacked this time around.
You said It
wasn't great.
It wasn't good. Yeah.
What are the lessons that the Democratic party can take from this? I will, insert myself into this a little bit. I'm a moderate Yeah. Who's voted Democrat 2 out of 3 times. I was absolutely really disappointed.
Yeah. I'll I'll just leave it at that, that you didn't have a speed run primary, that Biden was put up when he was clearly in cognitive decline. And I'm absolutely disgusted by the Democratic party's, hatred of successful entrepreneurs in this country. You've kinda lost me as somebody who voted 2 out of 3 times. Why has the Democratic party left me somebody who, you know, 2 out of 3 times
Yeah.
Would vote democrat, and now you hate as a party entrepreneurship, winning, and you you you seem to hate democracy, and you won't even have a primary.
Jesus Christ. Don't hate democracy.
No. But this is my perception. I think
a lot of Democrats feel this way. We just
lose you.
Silicon Valley demands a lot of folks. Silicon Valley demands a lot of folks. Like a lot of places. No. I mean, this is across the board.
There's a lot of middle
of the road folks that just Yeah.
Yeah. We we need a story that connects with everyday Americans. I think when you look at a lot of the policies that we, like, believe in, and you look at polling and focus groups, people will be like, oh, yeah. I like that. I like that.
I like that. But our story right now, I I don't think we know who we are and who we're fighting for. Now so it is, to me, exciting that we can go through this reset and renovation to find that story that connects. I'm a blue collar kid. I was raised by a cop and a mom who had 6 different jobs.
I was the first in my family to go to college.
I like to think you were raised by 2 Republicans.
Yeah. I was they they
they were they are were and are 2 Republicans, and I've got 3 little brothers who are cops. And I grew up in Dublin, California. Everyone called it scrumbling until we invested, there and we saw success. What was
your ideological change growing up in a Republican household of cops, essentially Yeah. To becoming a you know, you're a bit of a Democratic poster boy.
Well, that's that's only because I've gone after Donald Trump. But if you look, I ran against the most liberal member of Congress, Pete Stark. I have been a pretty independent vote in Congress and I root for success of entrepreneurs and business and wanna connect that success to the people who work hard at those businesses so everyone does well. And I think if we're just perceived as rooting against success overall and vilify people who are successful, then no one can be successful if if that's the case.
Did you
like, or not like? No. Did you agree with Biden's framing as he was leaving about this tech oligarchy?
It's only an oligarchy if working class folks don't benefit from it. So if that's what it becomes, then that that's a problem. What I wanna see, and I think what you all are rooting for, is that anyone, if you work hard, work your ass off, you should do better for yourself and dream bigger for your kids. And I think we have an opportunity to do that. The president, the president-elect has an opportunity, to make that happen.
And where he tries to do that, he'll find, a partner in me. But do we have this, branding issue? Yes. No. I I think
that should
be What is the branding issue?
Yeah. Let's take a
look at the branding issue.
The wokeism, is it the judgmentalism, is it the sanctimonious pandering, is it the moral grandstanding? You have to
be perfect and pure is what the perception is right now.
But nobody's perfect.
No. No.
No. That's the percept of of people who, like, sort of, like,
sort of, like, sort of, of
course, we're not perfect and and pure, but I think the perception is that to be a Democrat, you have to check all these purity boxes, and then you can be a part of the party. And right now, the Republican party is, like, I think the exact opposite. It's like, do you like Donald Trump? Great. Come to the party.
And so By the way, if
you don't like Trump, can we get you on these three policies? And you can still come to Peter Thiel's party.
Sure.
I have never been more courted by a political party than Trump's, and I have never been more hated than I've been by the Democratic party.
Well, that's wrong. It shouldn't make people feel that way.
Chamath feels that way, I think he was a major donor. You guys are talking about having a a dumb donor. You guys are saying you should have a a Joe Rogan, equivalent. You had Joe Rogan.
He wasn't there. A democrat.
If you
want to call him Joe, if they were all
He had Bernie Sanders on.
He wanted to have Hillary You guys fumbled it. You guys
had Elon Musk. You fumbled it. Yeah.
Well, say the party fumbled it. Maybe you can comment. Well, here,
you you represent the party. And we have Let's talk about rebuilding.
And we have a this is a we have opportunity to rebuild that. And so on, for example, the Department of Government Efficiency, like, we should root for government to be more efficient and we should try and enable that. But, like, if that effort goes into an area where it's going to cut social security or cut, you know, Medicare, then I think you'll see us be guardians against that. But, like, most small businesses think it's pretty hard to start a small business and then even once you do, you don't have the resources that bigger businesses do. And they see regulations as what gets in the way.
So we should try and knock them down.
What's happening in the party? Like, what what are you guys doing? Or is it just headless as an organization?
Yeah. Who runs the Democratic Party?
I would say in in the house right now, Hakim Jeffries, has been pretty effective at at uniting us. And and even in the last congress, you saw something that you've never seen before in any congress in our country, any parliament in the world, which is the minority party delivered the majority votes on every vote of consequence. So keeping the government open, lifting that that ceiling which which the incoming president now supports, which we welcome that and we'd love to get rid of it, by the way. You know, the funding of, even the funding, you know, to Israel, that that moved forward because, Democrats were unified, on that front. So I think Hakim has shown himself as, like, a practical negotiator, someone who can work with
senator Johnson. But I think the the the other fair commentary is he's young and he's inexperienced. What I mean by leadership is Yeah. Who who is the elder statesman that can Yeah. Help push and cajole and influence the Democratic party to find a more solid ground?
I think one of
I think
one of our best thought leaders is Mark Cuban. I I think he's Mark Cuban. Mark Cuban. Yeah. He he's very influential.
We
have a lot of relationships with my colleagues, and myself. He has business experience, but I think he's also not lost touch of, like, what regular people care about. And I thought he was a defective surrogate, for Kamala, being out there on the trail. But I I go to Mark on a lot of stuff, and I think he, understands where most people are.
How did Kamala get selected? How does
she get select so she was vice president, and the runway was about a 100 days. And I we can go through the different scenarios. I don't think any of them were good. And as you said, if if your premise is that president Biden should not have run for reelection, Making that decision that close to the election, you know, I don't know if any candidate would
Did you know Eric Schmidt? The GOP primary, like Jake Hall? I
we could go through a 100 scenarios. There are a bunch of great candidates. I I still think all of them would have probably been set up to fail.
Did you It's too
too short of a runway. So Did
in your interactions with the president, did you say to yourself, gosh, what's going on here?
I I didn't. And my colleagues and I, I don't think we interacted with him that often. And and we kind of, you know, we started his presidency in COVID. And so the Joe Biden that I knew when I was a baby, you know, child in the congress in in 2013 was very engaged and, you know, loved meeting with congress. And the meetings would go an hour over the time allotted, and it was kind of that Bill Clinton charm offensive that he could put on.
And I will just tell you, like, the 1st 2 years with the COVID restrictions that we had, we didn't see that because we, you know, we would have remote meetings with the White House. And so,
also They hit him. They hit him.
I I don't yeah. I don't know. I I know I know where I know where we are now.
Reports are, he was gate count.
Yeah.
Yeah. Like I said, I'm I'm They
managed him.
Focus on the future.
Committee?
Yes. Let's talk about TikTok.
Yes. Yeah. Okay.
Done and dusted. What what do you
think be back tomorrow.
Might. Yeah. Might not. Yeah. You're you're in the room and these things happen.
There are these off the record, I guess, intelligence briefings that happen. And, this was a 9 O unanimous Supreme Court decision. It was an overwhelming majority in Congress. Can you just help us understand what needs to happen for something like those two events to happen? Yeah.
It would just be general. You don't have to say specifically, obviously, and disclose anything that you know, but we're just trying to understand how does something, when it's such a rancorous Congress, which can't seem to agree on anything, or a Supreme Court, which tends to be 5 4 on every issue, finds a 9 0 and a super majority in Congress. Can you just help us understand?
So the Supreme Court was not saying whether we should ban or not ban TikTok. They were saying that Congress voted, president signed
Correct.
And there's no way around Yeah. This ban. So they I think they were just following Mhmm. The law. I voted against the ban.
I think China is the place where you ban things. And and the problems that I have with TikTok, as a father of, like, 3 little kids, are the problems that I have with Meta. And the problems that I have with yeah. It also
So you don't view it you don't view it as a security risk for the United States?
And and I look to Jim Himes, who is the senior democrat on the intelligence committee, the ranking member.
He's in
what's called the gang of 8. He has the most exquisite access to intelligence, and Jim voted against the ban. And I thought, you know what? If this guy has not seen anything on the national security level
There was an off the record or confidential briefing to the House of Tel Aviv. So you think in that meeting, there was nothing that was very meaningful that was disclosed about TikTok?
Nothing that I had seen. Is it owned by the Chinese government? Absolutely. But is there a national security risk? I have not seen that.
Hold on a second, though. I mean, if the Chinese government owns a 100,000,000 plus American phones, their location data, access to their microphones, access to their cameras, how is that not a security risk? And where I mean, that seems incredibly naive to say that.
I wanna I wanna build on what you've been saying. We know that there are security vulnerabilities, for example, in WhatsApp. It's riddled with stuff. So, you know, you could send a PDF before, then you could send an image. Now you can just send a message and you can root your phone.
The difference is WhatsApp is owned by an American citizen. I really and so what which is to say all these apps are compromised. It's just that the TikTok is owned by a Chinese owner who is out of the reach of the United States government.
Yeah. And and
Is that fair or unfair to you?
It is out of the reach of the United States government.
But what
I will say is most of what we buy as far as, you know, what's in our basket at Walmart is has a Chinese component
that What's
in our basket doesn't have a microphone or your GPS?
Well, let me just say A lot of it does. Have you seen a lot of stuff
you buy? The drones.
The Chinese made drones. There's a whole website now. There's a whole website now that that breaks down modern consumer electronics from China Yeah. That actually have these hacking devices built into them. I don't know if you've seen them.
Yeah. No. No. I mean Like, you'll you'll buy, like, a USB charger that's, like, $8 on Qumu or something. And it's inside it's got, like, an IP address, and it actually finds Wi Fi.
It connects, and it transmits it. Yeah.
This is an incredible day.
And and, like, there's so many and I bought this, like, cheap drone for, like, Christmas. Someone, for, like anyway, one of my little nephews brought it. And I'm like, dude, this thing is, like, a $149. And I looked it up online. It's, like, got camera, connects to your Wi Fi, and then it asked for access to your phone.
Oh, Dave. And I'm like, I'm not doing that. Like Yeah.
I tweeted this a few months ago.
Like, I don't think TikTok's the issue.
The USB c charging cables.
Exactly. Yeah. Those can be hijacked. Yeah. They're they're rooted.
But charging cables yes. This is
more reason to ban this.
Speculative. No.
I don't but I don't think TikTok
I guess my point is like
we yeah.
TikTok You wanna ban everything that's made in China. That's great. You'll destroy the
economy. Exactly.
But one thing has a 100,000,000 people in an algorithm that could influence people's perception
Yeah.
That, you know, that Hamas is being harassed by the Israelis. Like, they they literally can change how Americans, especially young ones, perceive the world. Even if they're not doing it currently, do you not see how obvious it is that they can use it?
Necessarily? Censorship point
of view, which is
No. No. I want his role as control.
Let's get his in. Yeah.
I guess I'm the only one of the 4 of us that doesn't wanna ban speech.
Yeah. I'm no. I'm not No. I'm with you. I don't
I wanna speak. I wanna ban I want either reciprocity where we can put our apps in China or I want it gone. Well, then you guys are now making
a different case. Now you're saying it's, like, reciprocity as opposed to controlling first, you were saying it's security, then you're saying it's, like, controlling our point of view. Now you're saying reciprocity. You're like, those aren't the same thing.
Here's the thing.
Security security risk likely lies everywhere. On security? I think I'm controlling the point of view of stuff.
I think you guys have to separate look. TikTok, there are 3 things in TikTok. Okay? There's the content and the content creators. That's one thing.
Then there is a network effect, and then there is the vessel, which is the app, okay, which is the code. My very specific point of view is the content creators and the network effect can easily be replicated in other places. The vessel itself is corrupt. And I think if you can't technically see that, it's probably because you just you're not steeped enough in the technology.
The intelligence committee doesn't technically see that.
So Oh, no. They've seen
Clearly, they're they're not
a great company. They've they've been caught.
They've seen tracking, journal, a great hand. Intelligence committee
here telling you. Well, but I I also looked at the small business owners who use that as a platform. I understand how you just the buckets that you just created.
People depend on.
And more people in the what I was telling the White House was more people watch president Biden's state of the union address on TikTok than anywhere else. And the and president Biden had just gone on TikTok
Yeah. Right before this But that you're speaking to is the content and the network. No.
I get it.
So my point is across meta or across x, my preference would be x. You can replicate the network effect, and you can create a mechanism for those content creators who are already on those platforms anyway to shift. My point is the vessel itself is easily worded. I I I told this to president Trump. When we were sitting down, I was like, that phone the microphone on that iPhone can get turned on remotely.
You can choose what state actor wants to do it, but I will bet you dollars to donuts, it is inconceivable to me that the NSA did not find that capability. And the reason is not because TikTok is bad or good. The reason is all of these apps are rooted. The only difference is that most of these apps are controlled by American citizens. So there is a control mechanism.
And this app is not.
I I mean, I think Donald Trump is going to allow TikTok.
Well, he got a $50,000,000 donation from Jeff. Yes.
That and I think he also recognized I think this
is Super PAC. 50,000,000.
Yes. And I think the reason he cares is because he knows a lot of his followers
are out there.
And then for whatever reason, they didn't choose they have not chosen
You know
what else
is a very popular export
from China?
Fentanyl. Yeah. And and we probably
ban that too. Yeah.
So we
I mean, the fact that it's popular should not be why we are doing. That's why I think you're framing Fentanyl is popular.
It it
what I'm saying
is you It's addictive, but it's popular.
Yeah. Back in the tube. And and so you're take you're gonna take away a platform that is widely used on it. Yeah. By Americans.
So it's a weakest not weakest chosen to go
to those other ones. And I just don't think we ban things in America. I I think that's This
is the Chinese Communist Party.
Jason, if you if you actually
didn't They spy on their own citizens.
If your just think about this for a second. If your business depended on you using TikTok, how would you feel about the TikTok? And you're you're you're not simply you're not well I have to assume.
I have to assume that if if it is true that the CCP uses the Chinese version of TikTok as a mechanism to surveil their own people, the idea that for an extra few units of resources, they would spy on the most important powerful nation in the world, to me seems pretty illogical and dumb. They're gonna they would do it. And separately, it's not to say that president Trump is using, TikTok per se or, you know, important people, but it is true that when you have enough people use an app and those people come into contact with other people like, look what happens today. How do you exchange contact information with an iPhone? You touch one another.
Right? There's an NFC capability to pass code from one to the other. I mean, I just think it's really naive, guys, for us to not assume that technology is very deterministic. There are so many good things that happen, but there are people that are paid to find every single edge and to push it because the stakes are high. And I just think that this is an assumption that we have to live with.
I'm just very cautious when it comes to bans. That's
That's fair. That's an ideological thing. I and I I get to agree with you. Because because,
Chamock, where this goes is you're like, well, I don't wanna import Korean cars because they've got electronics that are connected to the Internet in every Korean car. Now the Koreans can spy on where we are. I mean, you can very quickly see how this can open up a floodgate of banning because foreign adversaries could take advantage of us. Exactly. Including including banning chip imports, including banning router imports, you could very quickly make this a whole with routers.
A whole
it was 2 days already out
of the port. Telecom equipment. We're gonna go down a very nasty place. Like, if you Okay.
But that that
would be down an intelligent route, which is to not give access to all of the personal information of the sons and daughters of representatives of military experts to the Chinese Communist Party. There there is a
reason why Huawei is banned in America.
Yes.
Yeah. Security vulnerabilities were found. They don't have our best interests.
You think it stopped there? China, like, gave up and said, okay.
I'm saying there's a different quiz.
Go watch the dance videos now.
It's great.
Let the Americans dance.
By the way, it does seem it does seem a little crazy. That's nice. Isn't the US revenue for TikTok for ByteDance, like, 5% If
it wasn't a part of the Chinese government, they would have divested. No.
I think
it's a 30 over 50.
Give up their golden share.
The US is 30.40
Let's move on to the border. Yeah.
Wait. Wait. Doge. We're gonna do Doge. Okay.
Let's do Doge. Because you you tell us your point of view on Elon, Vivek Yeah. Coming in, what they're gonna do, what's good about it, what you really don't think is good about it.
Concerns? Yeah.
Well, so I do think it's funny that a committee about efficiency has 2 people running it. That's but
But I
think it's It's quite efficient.
It just cut itself in half if with if Vivek's running, you know, for governor. So that is their first success, I guess, you know, to cut, you know, the size of the committee.
But they got a lot
of people that they've recruited.
No. I
got yeah.
And, you
know, as I said, knock yourself out. If you wanna make it easier for small businesses, you know, to start a business, if you wanna save, you know, money
and fraud Federal employees not showing up to the office.
Yeah. Look, I my staff shows up, and and we benefit from people being in the office. We show a lot of flexibility, for people who have family issues, kind of on a case by case basis, and and people with disabilities have more access to work. But I I generally I see the benefits of having everybody at the office. And we were one of the first offices to come back, on the hill, you know, during COVID because I saw the benefit of that.
And if they can draw a straight line between, you know, benefiting our constituents and people being in the office, I'm I'm open minded
to that. Mhmm.
Eric, tell us about
how
you think this reconciliation bill, the budget Yeah. It's gonna be a very knockout drag out kind of a process. We're gonna hit the debt ceiling Yeah. Tomorrow. Yeah.
And so you guys are gonna be back to work right away. What do you expect?
What I'm going
to be
asking my constituents, you know, is tax cuts are proposed and regulations, you know, potentially are cut is, you know, what did you get out of this and what have you lost? Because if it's just, as I said, if it's just kind of a a broligarchy that benefits and and you don't benefit, then I won't support it. But if you can draw the line and say, you know, this business getting this benefit or this corporate tax rate going down means that, you know, you're going to do better and dream bigger. I can be for and and so that's what I'm gonna be looking at.
Do you think generally that governments should generally just have less tax receipts and be forced to spend less to be more ingenious and less over reliant on overpowering things with money?
Yes. And and frankly, a lot of that starts with the Department of Defense. I mean, look at where the cost drivers are.
Is that
where you go? Yeah. Yeah. And and I think that but that means you need to have alliances in the world. Right?
You're gonna have if you're gonna reduce what you spend on defense, you better strengthen your partnerships.
Some people on the Republican side so I think it's a wonderful point. Some people on the Republican side say this is why energy is so important for us because when we have resource independence, it actually allows us to forge and recast many of our relationships abroad that then create a very different security envelope.
I just wanna share the
the rare earth Yeah. Exactly.
Minerals caucus. And for this reason, and it probably surprises people that a Bay Area Democrat wants to get the US, you know, back into mining.
Yep.
And that's because we're getting our ass kicked by China on this, on the, you know, not just the mining, but the processing and the magnetizing. But we do have allies who have these resources. So we can do it in the United States. There's Mountain Pass, where they're doing it with
Defense.
Almost a 100%, recycled water, so you don't have the acid pond issue. But you also have countries that you could have So
I I I helped fund Jim to get that thing off the ground Yeah.
I've been out there.
And going. It's an incredible thing. But even he he will tell you, doing these kinds of projects in America today is almost next to impossible. And the reason he was able to do it, I mean, he he has support from folks like you, which are forward thinking, but the reason was because it had already largely been built.
Right.
And he said if he had tried to get it permitted.
Sure.
And it's just a question, you know, less money for the government, less regulation. It it almost seems like sometimes if the Republicans say yay, the Democrats say nay. And if the Democrats said yay, the Republicans would say nay. But if you ask everybody privately, everybody agrees the government should have less. And to your point, business people should just have more of a wide berth to actually go and work.
And then be held to account, as I said, if the wealth is only concentrated the top Right. To your ass off the middle. To ensure
we can point to people at every part of the economic spectra. Yes. That's like a but that's a very reasonable thing to say what you're saying.
Well, I I I hope that's how we govern in in this next
But it
doesn't come out that way.
Well, I
think this is a key point What you lead with and what you talk about and what you make a priority, that will be people's perception of your focus. And the perception that I have as somebody who again has voted Democrat 2 out of 3 elections is that you're focused on and talking about things like DEI, things like having trans kids get surgery, and no parent agrees with this. Nobody agrees with this. They're banning it around the world. And you guys lead with that.
That shows a lack of prioritization that is palatable to the voting populace. What they want is effective leadership. And when you look at what happened in Southern California, it is the height of arrogance that they're working on things like DEI and saying this is important when the reservoir is not filled, when they're not clearing brush. And you have to make trade offs in the world. And you guys don't seem to be able to communicate that.
It's incredibly frustrating for me. You can hear it in my voice that you can't say, you know what? We care about nature. We care about the trees. But you can't have trees on the floor around homes in
a fire zone. Oh, no,
no, no. You said floor. You didn't say ground. So no, I'm gonna not listen to you.
Or we can't get minerals that
we're gonna be dependent on China for minerals. We need those minerals. We cannot be dependent on foreign adversaries to make important weapon systems, to make important things like electric vehicles. And you guys are concerned about the cranes and trans kids being able to get surgery that nobody wants. That's the problem with the party.
We need a better story. And I don't think
you leave focusing on those weird things.
Leave that story with the concerns people have with DEI. Although I would argue now the new DEI is Don, Eric, and Ivanka, and people probably won't like that approach to it, either. But
that you floating the you're trying oh,
didn't it? It's a happy
new test.
Yeah. I'm not sure, but okay.
We need a better story, and I look forward to being Is that the first time? I I workshop.
Did you
work with just recently. We could workshop it. Yeah. Yeah.
Yeah. You can have to workshop that one. Thing.
No. Yeah.
I mean, listen.
There's a long tradition in these parties of the kids being grifters, Hunter. Everybody's getting in on it. But let's let's close on the borders.
No. No. Hold on. Before we do that, I just wanna ask you about, should the United States spend spend $200,000,000,000 to acquire Greenland from Denmark?
I don't give a if he tries to acquire Greenland.
Now it's
I just want the cost of eggs to go down. That's what my constituents are proud. Right?
Knock yourself out. Don't get green money. Security assets. Of course. There's there's there's
benefits there. But I I just I wanna know, you said you're gonna lower the cost of eggs. Eggs are pretty expensive. What it like, how are you gonna do that? And if you can tell me that, you know, spending $200,000,000,000 to get Greenland is gonna help lower our cost, great.
But I think people wanna see costs come down.
I I have a question about today, and I I just wanna actually go back in time. Today, are there any of president Trump's nominees that, really give you agenda? And if so, who and why?
Mhmm. And who's inspiring? Give me give some credit if there's something, like, inspiring. Yeah.
Who do you like? Sure. Give us one that inspires you and give us one that you're
like I think Rubio is gonna do a great job as secretary of state. He's he has the the gravitas and the experience, to do it, and I wanna I wanna see that happen. Kaush Patel is the one that I I think could destroy the president's agenda because
Can you say more?
Well, what I see and and I may be a little bit biased because the guy wrote a book, he listed a 100 enemies. I'm not in that 100. I'm actually in the preamble. He starts it with, of course, Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell are the most dangerous
Well, you
were part of the house Russia investigation.
But I I do believe if if the president focuses on going after his enemies, he's going to lose the ability to bring order to the border Yep. To get the most violent, you know, the most violent undocumented immigrants out of the country
Yeah.
And make people feel safe in communities where they don't feel safe.
What do you think about Jason's comment? Do you think that we should systematically, work through a process to deport 15,000,000 illegal?
I I think you should focus on violent offenders.
Yeah. No brainer.
Sexual So
let's say you get that done in 6 months. What do you do after that?
Well, you also need order at the border. Right? I mean and I I support surging resources to bring that, but 40% of my constituents were born outside of the United States. We are the 8th wealthiest district in the country. No thanks to me.
I'm not contributing to that wealth. There is a straight line between those immigrants and that wealth. And so if we can find a way to address, you know, shortages in the workforce, in agriculture, hospitality, food and beverage, of course, we see it in biotech and tech. I think we can have the best in the world. I'll just leave it leave you with this.
A foreign minister, in Asia said to me, in the past year, he said, Eric, he said, you know, the population of the United States is 3,000,000,000 people. And I looked at him and I said, then you mean it's like 300 +1000000? I thought he misspoke. He said, no. He said, there are 3,000,000,000 people in the world who would give up everything Yes.
To come
to the United States. He said, if you get it right, he said, you can pick the best.
That's right.
Absolutely. Recruitment as opposed to immigration is a better framework.
Yes.
Go go go back, please. You mentioned this, the house Russia investigation created a lot of
Yeah.
Talking points on both sides that I think are still lingering. And in the spirit of sort of putting it to bed, any regrets about that whole process? Was there anything substantive that came out of it ultimately, or was it the beginning of this more politically directed kind of action reaction, which is now why people are afraid about what happens?
No. Russia had a preferred candidate, and they did a lot to try and get that guy to win. I think he could have and I I think he may regret that in a lot of his trolling, he made himself look guiltier when he probably could have shown us that the concerns we had weren't there. But I I don't I'm not gonna dwell on that. I'm not gonna, you know, focus on the fact that he was impeached twice and sent a mob that, you know, could have killed many of the people in the capital with me on January 6th.
I'm gonna focus on if he wants to bring order to the border, make our communities safer, and raise wages and lower costs, I'm gonna work with No.
What I meant what I meant was
I think that's a great message for you and Adam.
Yeah. Work backwards from
Yeah.
An outcome? Or do you think you and Adam actually just followed the facts and
I was a Alameda County prosecutor, in the same office Earl Warren, you know, worked in, and we were trained that it's not about wins and losses. It's just about doing justice. And I approached it just trying to follow the facts.
And when you were watching some of the other things that happened post all of this Yeah. Like what's happening in New York and whatnot, what were your thoughts for as a prosecutor on the legal veracity of some of the things that were going on to to Trump leading into this election?
A lot of people around him went to jail, and it felt like, well, if Michael Cohen went to jail, like, why the is this guy not being held to account? Like, Michael Cohen went to jail for being a part of that hush money settlement. So, again, just being a blue collar kid who resents people who think that their position entitles them to be better than regular folks, I just wanted everyone to be treated the same. And and so that's the way I was raised. My dad lost his job as a cop when he wouldn't essentially be get bribed.
He when he wouldn't allow a bribe from a mayor, to influence him
and and he Well, that's amazing.
That that was my earliest experience.
We're in
a small town in Iowa and he was the police chief. The mayor very publicly tried to, like, corrupt him, and he wouldn't do it. So my earliest memory is that he was willing to lose his job to do the right thing.
But you're saying something very important, which is everybody should be treated the same. So Correct.
If no one's working
if one of your kids were charged with a misdemeanor, would you hope that it was just prosecuted as a misdemeanor, or do you think that folks that may not like Eric Swalwell figure out a way to now make it a felony? The former. Yeah. Okay.
Yeah. Yeah. I mean As
I said, I'm I'm going into this open mindedness.
What we
can do no.
I'm I'm just saying into this new year. Open minded. Not focused on the past on what we can do to make the country succeed.
Yeah. And on the border issue, I think that's the one where y'all could maybe get some consensus and some clarity because it really does seem to be creating an underlying tension in the country as to what's gonna happen.
And you can't do anything on the workforce issues until the public believes you've secured the border. That's just a whether that's rational or not.
How much of that was why you you think Kamala lost? Was just her not taking ownership of the border?
I just think she was attached to an incumbent party. Incumbent parties worldwide are just getting pounded, and there wasn't much that was gonna change Eric. Where this thing was going.
Eric, what's what's happening in California?
It will have
Give us the grade on Gavin Newsom and Karen Bassett.
Which Republican will be the next governor of California?
Well, they they don't have their together either, by the way, the Republican party in California. Look, I'm I I was in the Palisades on Monday. I have 10 friends who lost everything. I was with a woman who stood on top of a pile of ashes that was her house looking for any memento for her family, and it it's it's awful. And I'll I will also be open minded as to what we could have done to prevented it to prevent it, why resources that should have been there weren't there.
And as a member of the Homeland Security Committee, make sure that, you know, we're better prepared next time. And if there is accountability that should have that should come, to be a part
of that.
But, like, there's fires are still burning right now, and so I don't wanna be that game where it's like, you know, the guy that like, last week, I was a hostage expert. This week, I'm a wildfire expert.
Well, that's us.
Yeah. Yeah.
That's our French. Yeah.
Yeah. 2 and every My job is is to look at, you know, what we could have done, who should be held accountable. But with the fire still burning and families, you know, living, with friends and relatives right now, I I don't wanna hop I don't wanna give this a hot take yet.
Yeah. Fair enough. Fair enough. Thank you. Alright, everybody.
Eric, we really appreciate your candidness and good luck rebuilding the party.
Thank you. Well done. Best of
luck to you. Okay. Thanks. Awesome. Great job, bud.
§03California Rep. Ro Khanna on reforming the Democratic party, Bob Iger as LA Mayor, CA Leadership, TikTok ban
Alright. Welcome back to the All In Podcast at the inauguration of Donald Trump, our 47th president, and we're really delighted to have friend of the pod, Ro Khanna, back on the program. He is the US representative for California's 17th district, aka our hometown, Silicon Valley. How are you, Ro?
Honored to be back on. You made it big time. You're now, like, in DC, inauguration.
Jason's a republican now. Did you know that?
You know?
I remain a moderate.
Jason, I'm holding on to you as the democrat in Silicon Valley. I'm a
I'm a I've always been a moderate. I like to vote for what I believe is the most qualified person. And this time around, I was what they call in your business a double hater. And let's let's get right into that with the Democratic party. You guys got shellacked.
The candidate who you put up didn't go through a primary. The previous candidate seemed to be in cognitive decline, we can all agree, and it feels like a bit of a mess in the party. What is gonna happen to the Democratic party going forward? Is there a voice saying this is the plan, or is it a little Game of Thrones right now? We we're all wondering where are the Democrats?
It feels like you went dark. And is that a strategy to just sort of let Trump have his moment and then come back and be adversarial or, you know, state a new platform. What's going on inside the democratic party?
I think crises are times for reform and renewal, and the reality is that this was a huge blow to the establishment of the party. People wanted a more competitive process. They want new voices. They want a new generation of leadership, and now that's going to emerge. And so you're seeing it happening in California with Dan Lawrie, winning in San Francisco for mayor, Matt Mahan winning in, San Jose.
You're seeing new people in congress emerging, new governors emerging. And so I think that there's gonna be a lot of reflection. One of the things I've said is the democrats need to spend as much time understanding why many Americans voted for Donald Trump as we do criticizing Donald Trump. And, I think you're starting to see
that happen. What do you think the new platform will be? If you had to think of, you know, things to remove from the platform and things to prioritize in the platform, if you were in charge or Dean Phillips, friend of the pod as well, there's some people who feel, you know, there's some more important issues than the ones that maybe you've been focused on that you, the Democratic party has been focused on for this last election cycle. So maybe give us 2 or 3 ideas of what you would add to the agenda and 2 or 3 things that you might say, hey, this isn't a priority for Americans anymore.
I think the whole thing has to be about prioritizing the economy, the economic independence of Americans. How are we gonna have economic renewal, economic growth, in a stagnant working and middle class? And then let's argue our different visions. Donald Trump says that the way he's going to turn around Johnstown and Youngstown and Downriver, Michigan is just with, a large tax cuts and deregulation. Our view has got to be that it has to involve technology leaders, business leaders, but also strategic government investments to be able to build new industry there, to be able to credential new folks there, to be able to build a workforce.
But we have to offer a compelling economic vision, and then an economic vision so people aren't dependent on, the denials of private health insurance and so that they have childcare. But I think whoever wins the argument that there's gonna lead America in the 21st century on the economy, and on economic independence is gonna win.
Ro, do you you're saying government investment in building new businesses, building new industries is necessary to achieve that vision, and that's a better alternative. What is the historical kind of examples where, policies or government was gonna go start new investments, start fundamentally supporting new businesses being built that's worked successfully and worked better than free markets. Like, the the the the Republican argument is the free market is more efficient. The free market works better. Let capital and capitalists find where the capital is best applied.
They'll be more efficiently utilized versus government making the decision about where capital should go. It's typically lower ROI, very often negative ROI, and doesn't actually create sustainable economic growth.
I think that's with government investment that's market sustainable, but you look at Hamilton, you look at Lincoln, and you look at FDR. That is in my view what built America. Infrastructure. Well, it's infrastructure, but it's also manufacturing. I mean, I have a bill to build new steel plants in Johnstown, in Ohio.
Now you need the private sector. You need Cleveland Cliffs. You need a a private steel company. But if we're gonna finance that, the scaling of that, the federal government has to have some role. And what we ended up having in free market, economics is China last week.
$1,000,000,000,000,000 dollar trade surplus. Now we are at almost a $1,000,000,000,000 trade deficit. Yep. You know the economics well. So that's financed with a capital account surplus.
That means all that money is coming into the Wall Street. Wall Street's doing really well. The finance sector's doing really well, but it's hollowed out our manufacturing base. It's hollowed out our industrial base. That is free market economics gone too far.
That's globalization is what some of the non NeoCon Republicans would say is that global trade versus cut off some of the global trade, create a tariff program with China, and we'll reignite manufacturing. That's kind of a a counter policy argument. But to your point, it's a different point of view that uses different set of data to make the case.
And I I'd agree with some of the strategic tariffs. I just don't think that's gonna be enough for us to have pill factories here, have, the steel factories, aluminum factories to to revitalize these areas, and to look at what is the investment
we need government programs? I think we
need government partnering with the private sector.
And on D Reg, so, you know, do you feel and does the party feel that there should be no deregulatory effort in the United States to unleash kind of, you know, economic investment and growth? Or, like, this this whole point
just to Yeah.
You know, it just feels wrong to me to say, like, we don't want the reg like, shouldn't d reg be a thing that we're always cutting back? Things bureaucracy, bureaucratic red tape that we've created to unleash. I mean, even Gavin Newsom's making this claim now in California with respect to the rebuilding. I I think
you need effective government. I think
I think you need effective government. I think execution matters, and I think there's fair criticisms to say that the execution of the Chips and Science Act, which I helped write or the IRA wasn't enough. I mean, the money didn't get out fast enough. There were the bureaucracy in permitting, was, was slow. And if there are ways to make government procurement more competitive, that is good.
I mean, why is it that 5 primes are dominating, the defense procurement system? So Michael Bloomberg had a plan which I think seems pretty reasonable have 15% of Department of Defense spending for startups and innovative, technology as opposed to just going for the 5 primes. That's regulatory reform. But we also have to look at the fundamental why is Intel not succeeding. We had as Pat Gelsinger who was, asked to leave in Intel.
And I said is it was it the permitting reform? And he said no. It's that the the the capital expenditures to make Wall Street's numbers, were was very high, and there was no no procurement
app Everything's too expensive in this country. By the way, this goes back to nuclear energy. It's too expensive to build a gigawatt of nuclear power in this country. It's too takes too long. Meanwhile, China can do it for about a tenth of the price, they're scaling up 300 x r rate in terms of new energy production.
You And
they can do it
in half
the time. Half the time. Yeah. A tenth of the cost, and there's a regulatory path for Gen 4 reactors going up in China versus here.
I'm for nuclear energy. I'm for smart modular nuclear energy. I'm for looking at how we, build nuclear energy here in the United States in a safe way, but in one that I agree that our part my party has been, opposed to largely.
So so this is really important because I think what happens is the Republicans or the Democrats will come forward with a general policy statement. We need to derag to unleash economic prosperity or derag to unleash nuclear. But the the other party then says, well, we've gotta figure out a way to attack them on that vector. And then they take this, like, diametrically opposed point of view to try and diminish the strength that they're gaining because of their strong policy perspective that may be good for America. And then we end up in this unfortunate circumstance where we can't ever align on the things that really are good for America.
That's how I feel as an American looking at how the the parties attack each other. One party says, this is a good thing for America. Why doesn't the other party say, you're absolutely right. We all agree on that. Let's move forward.
Yeah. Can you can you
give the win on Doge? Like, government efficiency seems like consensus.
Well, I've gotten to criticize because I put out an innocent tweet and I've said that, if Musk and Ramaswami have a good idea, then, I wanna look at that. And, you know, Musk disrupted the entire Pentagon with SpaceX. I mean, he worked with Ash Carter to do that. The track record's there. The track record's there.
So if he's gonna and you have all of the progressives like me saying the defense budget is bloated, 56 per percent of spending. We need to figure out how to have more competition. We need to look at the waste that is there. I mean, spending a $150,000 on soap dispensers. And so now it must just it's really against Boeing.
$150,000. 60 minutes. $1400 for breast pumps. I mean, I think the it's outrageous. Yeah.
And so now because Musk is saying, let's look at the defense department. You don't wanna do it even though you've been saying to do that for the past 5, 6 years. That's the stuff that drives people crazy. Or I floated, you know, that Bob Iger would be a a good person to run next time
I saw it.
For mayor of of LA. He's considering it. Well, I mean Did
he tell you that when you talked about
wanna to talk about what he what we've talked about privately. I just think he'd be
But you did ask him.
I did ask him. I I've I and so now I'm getting, attacked for well, am I for an oligarch? That's that's literally my my Twitter stream.
Bob Irish an oligarch? That's that that you look at my Twitter Disney. He wants to I said, I
want someone who's gonna rebuild this this place. He's it would actually be a public service for him after
f r popcorn and lemonade stands on every corner.
And Totally. You know, and FDR $18. Was FDR FDR FDR went, oh, look. FDR was one of the wealthiest people in John f Kennedy. So I think there's gotta be a bet there's gotta be common sense.
Mhmm. Yeah.
How do we actually help people? That has to be the the metric and willingness to to to work across the aisle on things.
Yeah. It it does seem in the wake of what's happened in Southern California, Pacific Palisades, and all the other regions, that were impacted, that a large number of affluent and and voters and people who are active in politics are now saying it's kind of enough. The progressivism went too far left. We need really qualified people in office. And so what do you think is going to happen in California and what impact do you think these 12,000, 14,000 homes being destroyed?
And of course, the 25 people who lost their lives tragically, what impact is that going to have? Do you think that's a turning point in some ways?
I do. I I mean, first of all, it's just horrific, and I'm sure you know people
I have a couple of friends who lost their Who lost their homes. They're alive, and that's what's important, but they did lose everything.
They lost everything, and I mean, a place that just burned down into it's a it's it's devastating. And I think it's just a culmination in California of something that's been creeping up, which is governance matters, execution matters. Yes. Keeping places safe matters, making sure that we're pragmatic matters, and that's why you saw Dan Lawrie win. That's why you saw Matt Mahan win.
That's why you've seen, sort of reasonable people and district attorneys win. I think that's and you're gonna see that in LA. I think you're gonna see that in the governor's race. I I do think California is saying regardless of your ideology on issues, we need to be able to govern well. So you have the economy.
I think safety's up there for folks. What else do you think is on that short list of things that the party in California could say to the voters in terms of winning them back and letting them understand you're focused on something other than in their perception, DEI, maybe environmental overreach. I can't believe I'm saying that, but, like, the fact that people don't believe in clearing the forest around homes and they're fighting it on environmental grounds, well, I mean, it doesn't take a rocket science to understand rocket scientists to understand that these wildfires have been occurring for her a long time. We got the sultan of science here who can go into the science of it. And that if you wanna live near a forest in a fire zone, you kinda gotta clean up the detritus on the forest floor.
Like, it feels like we you know, the the the leadership in California is kinda pressing company excluded has has kinda lost the script here.
I think it's reasonable to ask why the brush wasn't cleared outside LA. I I got in trouble for asking that. I said, these are legitimate questions. That's not going after people, and I supported Karen Bass in full disclosure against Rich Caruso. I was proud to do it.
But if Caruso asked reasonable questions, the whole point of being in governance is you say, okay. The guy had a good
You're disappointed in her performance. The fact that she's out of the country.
Going back in time with the vote, would you have endorsed Caruso knowing what you know now?
I I don't know if I would have endorsed him, but I I I I certainly think it's fair to say that people are disappointed in what's what's happened to LA. And I I I I didn't know someone like Iger or others. I think there's I certainly think there needs to be a a new mayor.
Do you think there was any reason for her to be in Ghana?
But she said she says that she went on
the president. Of the president.
The inauguration. I I Like,
she was in a palace having cocktails.
Now whether if if there were actual warnings before, I think she would probably say she
should have said be going to Ghana as the mayor of the city that has no economic on vacation, I suppose.
No. Well, that no. Look. That's a common thing where the president of both parties ask people, mayors, governors, I haven't been asked as a congressman yet, to to represent them at a at a forward inauguration. No.
Is there I, Yeah. That's a common thing. And I don't if there weren't the warnings, I don't think that's a big big issue. Right now she's going to Paris because, you know, the, LA is hosting the Olympics. The question is though your first priority and if there were warnings, if she should explain why why why why she didn't go.
And I I like her. I think she's a good person, but the question is, what is it gonna take going forward? But the big point about one of the points about what what we need to do differently other than the economics is we've gotta also go around the country and say my party is not going to look down on people who we have different, cultural or social viewpoints with. Yeah. I think there was this sense of condescension and that if you disagree with someone, somehow our party is morally superior, and that's gotta stop.
And this whole thing about if we disagree, the policy generally is wrong, which is, I think, this distinct distinguishing the policy from the party. Do you think California has a chance of electing a Republican governor from 26? Do you think that that chance is now greater than 50% after the wildfire?
I still think, and I will support most likely the democrat. I mean, whoever the good a good democrat is, there are a lot of good democrats, that can run. But, you know, I mean, Arnold Schwarzenegger was a republican, and can a republican who is a pro choice and take some of the social issues off the table be competitive? Yeah. I think the Democratic party would be naive, to take that for granted, and we need to have, thoughtful, strong people on our side run, and run understanding people care about public safety.
They want effective government. They want, reform. I mean, people like Matt Mahan, who now have had a couple years and have been effective, are are the type of Democrats I think that can win statewide.
What are your thoughts on, TikTok, going dark in the last 24 hours here?
It's terrible. I've been I've been vocal. We had 1,300,000 people sign a petition. We've never had that in orders of magnitude saying keep, TikTok,
the right the product or they make a living on it?
It's yeah. It's first of all, it's the the stories about people who make a living. I there was one person, a content creator. Her husband cheated on her abusive marriage. She leaves.
She's got 4 kids, 2 toddlers, and 2 people around 2 kids around 5, and she's broke. She's in a hotel. She's staying in her best friend's, living room for 4 months, and then she starts telling her story, and now she's making 60, $70,000 as a content creator. I could tell you 50 stories like this, so people are actually relying on this for their livelihood. Some people are making it making using it to make rent.
And then you have the issue of free speech and, just being able to express it. Now people say, what about China? Well, why don't you pass a broad, broader law that says any interference by a foreign government in algorithms is gonna be illegal and criminal.
Well, India banned these apps.
Yes.
And, this We're
not India.
They're pretty savvy though. I mean, these things are an attack vector. You can remotely control these phones. They were caught spying on journalists, and, they could shape public policy. So, and they've had years to divest.
Seems to me that the Chinese government sees this as a strategic military asset. Do you disagree with that?
I do. I one, I think the United States has a much, much more robust tradition of free speech than in Obviously. Than in India. And and so I think our considerations are are different. I also think we have far more capability, in making sure that we protect our data, and protect, any foreign interference and algorithms.
Now president Trump has floated this idea that, you have 50% US ownership. My understanding is 60% of the investors already Yep. Are are US investors. I will work with him and Mike Waltz. I know very well.
We were co chairs of the India caucus together in Congress. I will work with him in a bipartisan way to figure out how do we have this app operational.
If the Chinese government spies on their own people, why wouldn't they spy on their adversary, the American people?
Well, certainly they would. But the question is are they, can we protect the American people from that happening on this app? We can, as long as we have 2 clear laws. 1 that the data stays here. By the way, a lot of the data that's going to the China Communist Party is through data brokers.
There's no law against that. So pass a law that all data of Americans, if you're dosed to in the hand
Which, by the way, there's US companies that are selling that data. There's US companies that are buying that data. Any third party can access that data if they wanna buy it in one of the markets. That stuff exists. It's existed for a very long time.
It's a yeah.
And and the irony of it is I'm going back to the trade deficit. China's got a the same week China announces $1,000,000,000,000 trade surplus. They're building more drones than us, more ships than us, more steel than us. We're talking about banning this TikTok app. More electricity.
You know what I mean? What about
the concept of reciprocity? Would you be, in favor of requiring that we have our social networks in China if they wanna have theirs here?
I would be in favor of us pushing for our social media networks to be there just because of free speech, but I would not allow the Chinese Communist Party to be controlling any social media app or having any influence whether it's on TikTok or whether it's on, any other app. I don't wanna name another app because I don't wanna malign other apps, incorrectly. But they pass a law that says it's a criminal offense If an executive in this country is found collaborating or overseeing any app that has any influence in the algorithms by the Chinese Communist Party or if our data goes to the in the hands of the Chinese Communist Party. You could you could have a law. We're still keeping That's right.
TikTok operational.
Yeah. You litigate the outcome. You don't litigate the method.
I I don't trust China as much as you gentlemen do. Let's talk about
but, Jason, it's not about trusting China, and you keep trying to characterize it as, like, people being pro China if they're pro free speech or they're pro giving people It's the only platform you can have your speech. You're making you continue to make assumptions about security when there are security issues with a lot of apps and security issues with a lot of phones.
They don't have the same scale as TikTok.
This is great. The scale of TikTok is extraordinary. Guys, I'll
tell you where we got the politics from. Right? I mean, so Donald Trump comes in there and he says, you know what? The Chinese took your jobs. They took your steel jobs, they took your auto jobs, and we're gonna have tariffs.
And by the way, this TikTok thing, pretty popular app for young people, we're gonna keep it. What do what what do we do? We do the exact opposite. We have running ads. We don't want tariffs.
So we're telling all these folks in the Midwest that we're opposed to the policies that could save some of their jobs, and then we're telling all these young people that we wanna ban TikTok.
And in fairness,
they didn't take
the jobs. We gave them to
them. At some point China. I think we've got it one of the things the Democrats need to do is stop listening to the foreign policy blob in the Beltway exec you know, pundits who've got fancy titles and fancy think tanks. And every time we get these letters, 500 groups, 200 groups, I said, who are these groups? These are 200 groups with a 130 people.
It's like every person has 3 groups.
So true.
And we're listening to them I just opposed to
I just think to I just
popped up 5 groups while we're speaking here.
You know? And I I and I think part of what Trump was doing. I mean, I I and I obviously totally opposed him. I voted for his impeachment twice, but it was sort of, like in the in our world, AB testing or fast, iterations. He put out ideas.
He get feedback. He iterates it. He may not call it that, but he's just kinda gauging where people are.
About one of
those ideas. Americans want the border secure. There's no doubt about that. The statistics just show it. 80% of Americans want it kind of shut down and be orderly and legal, maybe even more.
But this idea that we're gonna drag 15,000,000 people out of the country.
Steve Bannon. Because he continues to.
No, I'm quoting Steve Bannon and, Stephen Miller who work, one of them worked in the first administration and architected his first win, and the other one is the most powerful person inside the administration this time. So I'm just quoting people. They say day 1, 15,000,000 are going. So do you think that's actually gonna happen, and do you think it should happen?
It shouldn't happen. Whether it's actually going to happen or not, I don't know is the answer. Whether they're gonna try.
What do you think should happen?
I think you should have people who are convicted. First of all, we need a secure border. We need to encourage people to come here through the legal process like my parents did or like so
many encourage?
Do you say encourage or require? Require. But but but to do that, we've gotta have reform to make that more possible because right now that's a a a a very hard thing to do, and it wasn't as hard by the way when my father came in the 19 sixties, studied engineering, had a green card within a month
of
of graduating. So how do we do that? But, of course, require people to come through the legal process, and secure the border. I don't deny that there's been a problem on the border. But and then for those who are, criminals here who are convicted convicted of crimes, fine.
Deport deport Okay.
Do you all agree on that? Those all seem logical and and obvious.
But but in terms of so let me tell you someone in my district without telling her name. I mean, you you tell me what what should happen with this person. She's a she's been in the country. She's undocumented. She came to to to see me with a a group of people.
She's a dental hygienist. Her daughter is going to med school.
She's undocumented. She's undocumented. Do you consider yourself to be her representative? She's not a citizen of the United States. She doesn't have a legal right to vote.
Are you representing that undocumented non American person?
I am supposed to represent everyone in the district.
That lives there regardless of their citizenry.
I I my my Citizenship. I don't we don't ask in terms of their citizenship in terms of just being a representative of the area. If everyone no. I won't. But as a
congress member, you believe that you should represent non Americans that happened to be domiciled in your region, in your district.
I don't think I don't think that I need to represent their political views. But if they're being abused in terms of the process in some way and they came to us within the law, we would figure out how they got due process.
So you would have empathy and sympathy for the person living in your district even if they weren't legal is what you're saying, I think. It's quite reasonable if I may interpret. Yeah.
I mean, that's that's that's a more eloquent way of putting it. But let me just tell you about this this person. So she's she her daughter is in, med school in in Southern California. She drives down once a month and drives back because she can't afford a hotel down there. And the reason she can't afford a hotel is she's being underpaid as a dental hygienist for 20 years.
Now do you really think we need to deport her? And what is that gonna do to her daughter? Or do can we find a path
Sounds like a great So
so the potential American
to me. Will be the the, the alternative point of view someone would say, I'll I'll play the the the devil's advocate here. They would say, but there is another American who is qualified to be a dental hygienist, who cannot get a job, who would be getting paid more because they are a citizen and they are legal and documented. This person is undercharging their employer, and they are taking a job away from America. And that's what the counterargument would be from some people.
So there are 2 things. 1, I agree that if there's someone who is in a position that is undocumented or even on an h one b and they are being underpaid. That's wrong. That's why we need reform so that people are being paid, appropriately and aren't being employers aren't abusing the process to drive down market wages. But the immigrant as a worker, yes, you're increasing the labor supply and the if you increase supply that drives down price or wages, but you're also increasing demand because they're spending a lot of money on things.
And most I've always viewed this to be more of a demand part of the equation for growing the US population so you can actually increase the economic growth.
So let's put a number on this. Yeah. You know, so clearly, you don't believe these people should be dragged out of the country. Correct. I think we're in agreement on that.
Some people are not. Maga 1.0
on it. Do you
believe they should be dragged out?
It's a long
let's I don't wanna put you on this fire.
No. No.
It's it's not that simple. And I'm really hungover today, so I'm not gonna be super articulate about it. What
about that dental hygienist? She's been here for 20 years. Would you give her amnesty? I would. Seems like a great American.
Working hard,
has a daughter. Obviously, being empathetic, I think, for me would always be a priority. That person should not lose their job, lose their life. That's a very hard circumstance. At the same time, there are a lot of Americans who feel they are getting underpaid, that they don't have jobs, and there's empathy that I think is part of the alternative side of that equation.
So I don't know. I would you know what? Let me let me ask this question. Whenever we talk about immigration, we never have a number put on it.
I see.
And we never have a point. We don't have a point based system here. So it devolves into this discussion we're having right here, which is, oh, they they stole our jobs and wages are down in the face of the lowest unemployment of our lifetime, 4% and 7, 8,000,000 jobs out there. There's 2 jobs for every person who's unemployed if you do that basic math. Now, of course, there's some disparity in people having the skills to take certain jobs and and geography.
Putting all that aside, we have 340,000,000 Americans. Would a would an easy situation here be to say we will import people based on the need in the country? So if we don't have enough people working in healthcare, we're gonna open up, and if unemployment's under 10%, we'll have 3,000,000 people come in a year. We'll have 2,000,000 people come in a year and just put a number on it and then have Americans and our representatives debate that number. Why don't you guys do this?
Well, I'd say 2 years. I think my view of why we have lost jobs and stagnation has been the offshoring of so much of our industry and the hollowing out of towns and communities where we just watched as wealth piled up in districts like ours. Not because we people in our district stole the wealth from Youngstown or downriver. It's just that the wealth was piling up, industry was being off shore, and there was kind of indifference towards it. And if we want real solutions, we need to have economic revitalization instead of blaming the dental hygienist in my district.
Like, that's not why, you know, Johnstown or Warren, Ohio are suffering. The the the broader point though is that we have a number on, green cards and, legal immigrants around 1,400,000 a year. And then we should debate how do we, where which categories do you wanna increase it? Why? And how do you get people out of the status where they're being underpaid?
I do think that's what's hurting is this is whether you're on an h one and you're there for years and you're being underpaid, or whether you're undocumented and being underpaid, that's hurts the American worker far more than when That's
such an important point. People don't understand this about the h one b is is they are transferable, but you have 30 days, which makes essentially, as it was explained to me when I was in the IT business, these are indentured servants and they don't have choice and they have this, you know, threat that they're constantly under. If you don't do what we say as an employer and you don't accept this salary, you're gonna be out of the country. Exactly. And you're gonna have to take your family with you.
Would an easier solution to be to just charge 10% of the salary into a pool as a tax so people don't abuse it?
The salaries go up, have
a minimum salary, and give them maybe a year to find another job.
What do you think of that?
I think that type of a solution is reasonable and have them be paid well. I mean, this idea that they're being abused floor. You know, put a floor or have it be the prioritized based on the the highest wages because that's reflective of, talent coming in. But, you know, you don't want a situation like now where you're on a h one for 3 years then you get it extended, because you apply for a green card to 6 years. And then while your green card application is in process, it keeps getting extended.
So these folks are here 10, 12 years Yeah. And and and and the abuse of it. And and and my view is, you know, I think the American people are pretty decent and fair. I grew up in Bucks County, Pennsylvania. It was 95, 98% white.
It was a few Indian American families, and I grew up with a belief that you could do anything in America.
And look
at you. And and, you know, the country trusted me to represent a district with $12,000,000,000,000 of value of the most economically prosperous place perhaps in the history of humanity, perhaps in the world. Right? Right? And I I I just think that that is America.
And people are upset at the extremes. They're upset at the abuses. They're upset that there wasn't a process at the border. But deep down, this country has always been one that embraces, immigration and most almost most immigrants tend to be very patriotic.
So when you hear Stephen Miller say, America is for Americans and American only, you think that flies in the face of the spirit of this country?
I'd say, what does he mean by Americans? I you know what I wanna do? I'd I'd love to have lunch with them, actually. Me too. You know, maybe have them on all in.
Be great. Yeah. And You
wanna join for that if we
I'd I'd love to. And, you know, we should all instead of just reading every tweet. Right. You know, read Lincoln's
because I heard he's a guy that if you sit down with him and have a long form conversation, you get a lot more than what the the short form media, bites have been about him. So I'd actually be
really Yeah. No. I would love to have him on because I watched his entire speech, and the way he speaks seems incredibly xenophobic and a bit racist to me.
So what I would I would argue what I would ask him about is is is without being too, pedantic about history as Lincoln has the speech in 1858, on Independence Day. And the challenge for Lincoln is to say, how is a German American or French American American? Because back then, to be American, you literally had to trace one great grandparent who fought the revolutionary war. How could you be American if no one in your family fought the revolutionary war? And Lincoln has this brilliant formulation that he says, your flesh of the flesh, blood of the blood, of the founders if you believe in the constitution, if you believe in the declaration of You're independence.
And so I'd say to Steven, do you do you still believe that?
What how
are you defining It's okay if you don't too. Right?
I mean, we can have that discussion in America if we're pulling the ladder up now, and we're not a land of immigrants.
But I agree with you. I'm an immigrant. I think the immigrants are the most patriotic.
That's why I believe in it. It's because
of you, Freeborn. Everything with well, I mean, you should because you're doing great things, and look what you're gonna do from potatoes. From South Africa. South Africa when I was 6 years old, and I'm hanging out in Washington, DC with a congressman. And how
many jobs have you created?
President and the vice president. I get to meet all these people and hang out with them. It's And
you've created thousands of jobs, and you're gonna create billions of extra calories with these amazing Ohana strawberries. Ohana strawberries. Ohana strawberries.
Ohana strawberries.
But I appreciate
it. Ohana.
Because I think I think my company might actually be in your district. You cover Santa Cruz County?
No. That's Jimmy Panetta.
I see. Okay. Alright.
No. No favor. Let
me ask
you a question.
Do you think the United States should spend $200,000,000,000 to acquire Greenland from Denmark? Denmark has a $150,000,000,000, debt.
Yeah. They could build
a public pension plan. They could
Here's what what are we trying to solve? First of all, I'm a a person that believes that we need to respect the self determination of other countries. That's what makes us different than Britain, that makes us different than Rome, America. You know, when my Even though we intervene in
foreign elections and use military force to overturn foreign governments?
Well, those nobody's perfect. There you go.
There you go.
I gotta get this guy on the he he's got my tongue.
He's got his back. But, you know, need a hyped in or a campaign manager, I can't go. Let's go. When you do your love, Rob, when when you do your run for governor Yeah.
Exactly. With your guy.
By the way,
the show has been brought to you, but not only by Roe, but also Roman. Go into get Roman, Roe. We gotta wrap up. You gotta go. No.
No. Hold on.
I wanna go to Greenland. Yeah. Greenland.
Well, look. Yes. So But but but but the question is why what interest does Greenland have? They have critical minerals. They have, a lot of, important resources.
And, basically, they wanna partner economically with us. They're letting us invest. They're letting us develop it. So what what what do we gain?
So you're saying we could achieve our objectives without without it becoming a territory? What about Puerto Rico? 50 first thing?
Do you really want here's here's my cautionary tale. I think this could be the this positive argument. Every time Bernie Sanders ran, you know what he talked about? The politics of Denmark. You really want Greenland in our state?
We're gonna we're gonna get to Denmark. They call it getting to Denmark.
Oh, Greenland is gonna that's gonna that those 2 senators are gonna be
downtown and senators. If you
watch We're gonna have 2 years of paternity.
Interviews that have come out on Twitter from the people that live in Greenland. They're sick of the socialist, you know, kind of overseers. I think they do wanna have a different way of governing.
I don't know, man. I'm gonna have more kids if I get
2 years of paternity.
It sounds pretty amazing. Yeah. But it is I mean, look, I I don't think that you're necessarily getting that, but there's What about Puerto Rico? It's an important question is like, does, does the United States need territorial dominion to achieve its strategic objectives? I'm open.
I'm open minded. What about Puerto Rico?
Well, I there are 2. Like, look, every democrat is like, oh, we want Puerto Rico. Why? Because you're gonna get 2 democratic senators and congresspeople. But my view is it should be a Puerto Rico self, a referendum
for the 90 percent wanna
do it, you'd be down? Yes. If they wanna join the United States, because that's a different thing. There there we cut you know, we basically took that as a territory. Now let's see what they wanna do.
I'm all for it. Let's go straight to 60 states.
Are you, are you running for governor in California?
No. Are you?
Why not? You've done such a great job. I'm sorry about that, Jason. But,
no. Not you, bro.
I I I I think Talk to your family. I I think there's a I I love being in congress. I love representing Silicon Valley, and I have been focused on how do we get, innovation, technology, partnering with, communities to to have economic rebalance
If you were asked, would
you consider? Didn't I see a rumor this week that someone said something that you were
am I wrong? I think someone may have floated a rumor. I'm trying to get
out of here.
Asked by your party and the citizens of California, would you consider? Would you consider it?
Is that just a consider? I'd consider anything. Okay, Brent. You know? There you go.
Alright. He'd consider it.
You're gonna be gonna
be a
manager might might I
I need that. I mean, he's good.
Well, he's got he's got his moment. I'll take it. I'll take it. He's a wrap. That's a wrap
from the 47th, inauguration of the United States, and we'll see you next time. Bye bye.