Sen. Amy Klobuchar on Regulating Tech, Antitrust, Trump’s Picks & More

Now, you're still off the record, so you just have to say, now I'm on the record.

Oh, now I'm on the record. Because we're classy folks that way.
Hi, everyone from New York Magazine and the Vox Media Podcast Network. This is On with Kara Swisher, and I'm Kara Swisher.
My guest today is Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar. Senator Klobuchar was reelected in November for her fourth term in office, so she's been on the Hill for 18 years and is currently the third highest ranking Democratic senator.
Throughout the years, I've interviewed her a number of times because she's been a leading voice on tech regulation and antitrust legislation, even if she hasn't always been successful. In fact, I always give her a hard time over it.
She says she's going to pass something. I say she's not.
They don't pass it. And she says she's going to do it again.
But she likes to say she plays the long game with these things. It is a very long game, Amy.
You and I both know that. I really enjoy our back and forth, and I do think most of her legislation is critically important.
And I do wish her success in the future, even if I think the tech people will continue to stymie her. When I spoke with her last for Pivot back in August, it was during the Democratic National Convention.
She was very hopeful and positive about the election. This week, she was one of the team to certify the electoral college votes, which will put President-elect Trump back in office in less than two weeks.
So I'm interested to talk to her about what a Republican trifecta plus a Trump-heavy Supreme Court mean for her and the Democratic Party, at least in the next two years. I want to get her take on the Trump nominations in the FCC, FTC, and the Justice Department, all areas she deals with directly as a member of the Senate Commerce and Judiciary Committees.
And I want to hear what she thinks about big tech influence, obviously, in Washington, which has gotten stronger than ever, and how it

could continue to hurt her efforts. Amy, I'm still hoping for you, but we'll see.
Our expert

question today comes from former Assistant Attorney General Jonathan Cantor. Stick around.
dark comedy thriller A Simple Favor. Frenemies Stephanie Smothers and Emily Nelson,

played by Anna Kendrick and Blake Lively,

reunite on the beautiful island of Capri

for Emily's grandiose wedding,

where revenge is a dish best served chilled with a twist.

And with more twists than the winding roads of Capri,

it will keep you on the edge of your seat

from start to finish.

Another Simple Favor premieres May 1st only on Prime Video. Support for the show comes from the ACLU.
The Trump administration is pushing a dangerous and sweeping attempt to control our bodies, our families, and our lives. At the same time, a Supreme Court case this term could shape the future of bodily autonomy for all.
Tennessee wants to take away transgender people's autonomy over their own bodies. They think the ruling that overturned Roe v.
Wade allows them to do it. This would hurt everyone's freedom to control their bodies and lives.
The government has no right to deny a transgender person the health care they need, just as they have no right to tell someone if, when, or how they start a family. The ACLU told the court that everyone deserves the freedom to control their bodies.
Learn more at aclu.org slash autonomy. It is on.
Well, we took an oath that gave me my resolution, and that oath is to support and defend the Constitution of the United States. And I think we're going to need to consult that oath and that consult Constitution many times over the next few years.
And I think it's not going to be an easy day-to-day world, certainly not for the people of America, but for someone like me who actually works across the aisle and will continue to do that, I believe you got to stand your ground and find common ground. So I kind of feel like every day you'll be figuring out where is the red line? You know, is this a battle we can win? Is this a battle worth making even if we can't win? But also, is there an opportunity to find common ground? And figuring out where that red line is, you know, people can say it's easy.
Oh, I know exactly what I'm going to do every day. It's just going to depend on what they do and how far they go.
Clearly for me, a bunch of tax cuts for the wealthy and making it hard for regular people, that's a red line for me. I'm not going to support that.
Whether it is things on consolidation, I'm going to be very strong on that. As you know, there's a few voices and I'm one of them that speak out when it comes to that.
I think there'll be issues of making sure that we have nominees that are qualified if they know what they're doing, if they believe in the mission of the work of that agency, and if they have integrity with the FBI check and the like, you know, I'll support them even if they weren't my first choice. I think I supported half of the nominees in the first Trump cabinet right at the beginning.
Then it got a little weirder with some of the people they were putting up. But clearly there's concerns with that right now.
So we have our work cut out for us. But for me, the North Star is just, you know, does this help people and improving people's lives? And if it greatly hurts people, I'm going to call them out on it and hold them accountable.
So that line seems to be moving rather quickly in a direction that's somewhat retrograde to a lot of people. But we'll get to that in a second.
But last time we spoke in a quick 10-minute speed date on Pivot during the Democratic National Convention, you were optimistic about Vice President Kamala Harris's chances. But this past Monday, January 6th, as outgoing chair of the Senate Rules Committee, you led a procession of senators in the House chamber and helped count the electoral college votes putting President Donald Trump back in office.
Talk about what that was like for you. You know, I had a job, and that job was the

peaceful transfer of power. And again, for Kamala Harris, I thought she was incredibly dignified,

stood there so strong. I can't imagine what it was like for her to read those states and those

numbers, but she did it, and she did it with integrity. That being said, it was a tough election from my perspective.
I won my election. I won by 16 points.
I got to all 87 counties. I think I beat the national ticket by 11 points, and a lot of that was because of getting out to rural areas.
But that's not enough. a number of my friends that for me were just moral compasses lost from Sherrod Brown to John Tester to Bob Casey, and we're going to miss them.
So when I look back at the election, I see it as a change election. That's how people saw it.
It was an economic election. Yes, people wanted their rights protected.
And in 2022, that came out strong in the likes of protecting democracy and abortion. That's still there, believe me.
But I think a lot of them, when you look back at this election, they said, well, you know, I don't know that Donald Trump is really going to get rid of all abortions. And I'm really worried about pharmaceutical prices, even though President Biden had actually the first president to get something done on that front, or there isn't affordable housing in my area.
It was an economic election. But I think it would be a mistake to rule out the fact that people still care about our democracy.
They still care about their rights. It's just that it is on us in the next few years to make the case that we can do things that would improve people's lives because that certainly didn't get through.
That didn't get through. So obviously, it went off without a hitch this time as opposed to four years ago when Trump supporters raided the Capitol to try to stop President Biden's certification.
You played a critical role in improving security for the process. I'm guessing there were no MAGA threats, but we've seen a spate of attacks recently.
The Tesla truck explosion outside the Trump Hotel in Las Vegas, for example, the attack in New Orleans. What were the concerns or warnings this time? What kind of measures are now in place to prevent or at least minimize the risk of such a repeat? Major changes on that front.
First of all, I will never forget that day. 75% of the officers didn't have access to riot gear.

In many cases, the insurrectionists had better gear than the officers.

The haunting words of one officer on the phone where he said on the police radio,

does anyone have a plan?

Does anyone have a plan?

It took four hours to just call in the National Guard.

Four hours.

So what did we do?

Fired the police chief and a lot of the other people that

were in charge that day. So there was much stronger leadership and more accountability.
We've had the same new police chief since that year. Secondly, we have in place a number of measures that were changed, 103 recommendations from the inspector general to the new Capitol police chief.
All of them have been implemented in one way or another. You can now call in the police.
I know this sounds crazy, but the police chief can now call in the National Guard with one call. It doesn't have to go through a phone tree.
I literally had to pass a piece of legislation to make that happen. Architect of the Capitol, funny name, but oversees almost all these other employees, thousands of employees.
We can now hire that person. We just hired a new person, and we can terminate the person.
It's not the president. It's members of Congress that have to agree on that.
I also led and passed that bill. So we have done a number of things to put accountability back in our shop and to make clear that security prevails.
Hundreds of new officers have been added and morale is way up. And you could feel that at the Capitol as it was a national security event yesterday.
So, but President Trump has pledged to pardon some or all of the January 6th defendants. I just did interview with Maggie Haberman.
She thought he'd just do some of them. It's not clear.
Oh, interesting. What are your thoughts on that? Is there any way for Democrats to push back? Yeah, you push back in that people died, in that officers were severely injured, in that this was an assault on the citadel of our democracy and clear crimes were committed.
And it was an assault on police officers. And I know that the president-elect likes to talk about his friendships with police officers.
Well, this was an assault on law enforcement, the rule of law, and police officers. So it is my hope that at the very least, he's going to look at these on a case-by-case basis.
I'm not a big fan of across-the-board pardons. I didn't agree with some of the pardons President Biden just made, agreed with some of them, but certainly not all of them, and not the one involving his son, and not a number of them, including the judge in Pennsylvania.
But if President-elect Trump is going to pardon these insurrectionists across the board, that's just outrageous. Some of them were very violent and committed serious crimes.
He's obviously on their side and not the police's, this particular police force. But as chair of the Joint Congressional Committee for Inaugural Ceremonies, you're also responsible for Trump's upcoming inauguration.
What are your concerns and what are you preparing

for? Well, again, this is going to be the peaceful transfer of power. And it's going to be hard for a lot of people who, like myself, supported Vice President Harris.
But in the end, no matter who wins an election, there are those of us involved that have to say, OK, this is a democracy. And And that is a very reason why you saw George Bush, for instance, on the platform when Joe Biden won.
It is why you have seen a number of Democratic presidents, former presidents on the platforms when Republicans have won. And I'm sure you'll see the same thing at this upcoming inauguration.
So this is all about that peaceful transfer of power. And so what do I expect? First of all, again, given the heightened security, given the attempt on the president-elect's life in the past and what we've seen from New Orleans to Las Vegas, there is obviously going to be heightened security.
We certainly saw it on January 6th. And in this case, it was successful.
But we know that these attacks can come in any way, and you can't exactly imagine what people might try, and that's why they have to be prepared for everything. And I do believe that they are prepared.
So that is one of our big major focuses. The second, I know the president-elect is having a rally the night before.
I'm sure there'll be all kinds of rhetoric and a lot of claims and angry words, but we will see. I call them sore winners, but go ahead.
Go ahead. Okay.
But on the inaugural stage, I hope that this can be different than his last inauguration. I hope that there can be appeal to people not just supported him, but people who didn't support him as well.
But, you know, my job is to make sure that this happens. And as hard as it is when your own candidate doesn't win, we have a job to do.
I will note that President Trump did not attend President Biden's inauguration. That is correct, and thank you for clarifying that record.

No problem.

So the last tally speaking, which he raised over $150 million,

I think it's closer to $200 million for inauguration festivities,

beating the previous 2017 record, about $107 million.

For context, Biden's inaugural fund was just under $62 million.

The list of million-dollar-plus donors reads like a tech world who's whose, people both you and I know, Amazon, Meta, Uber, AI startup perplexity, the investment app Robinhood, Sam Altman of OpenAI, and Apple CEO Tim Cook, and others have promised personal checks of a million dollars. You've been one of the leaders on tech regulation in Washington.
We've talked about it for years, Senator Klobuchar. What do you think of these huge donations and what do they signal to you about the upcoming administration's relationships with Big Tech compared to Trump 1.0? He was relatively hostile to tech many times, although it was haphazard, I would say.
Now, as you know, tech has given to both sides of the aisle, and I think it's important for people to know that. Yes, that is true.
They have— Not like this. No, but they have really pushed money into campaigns on both sides of the aisle, and it has had influence on both sides of my mind.
Many directed at you, I will note, as we've discussed. Yeah, directed at me, not given to me.
No, no. At me.
But they are a very huge lobbying force on the Hill. That being said, of course,

I am concerned that they are immediately showing their colors and what the effect will have on this

because effective antitrust legislation and effective enforcement, whether it's the AT&T

breakup way back or whether it is some of the work going on with tech right now, which has been to some extent effective. It starts with Republican, maybe goes to Democrat, goes back to Republican.
That was the AT&T breakup. Many different presidents, different parties, these things take a long time.
Both the Google and the Facebook cases, as you know, were started during the Trump administration. Facebook with the FTC, Google under Makan Delrahim, the head of antitrust under the Trump administration.
And then they were carried on by Jonathan Cantor and Lena Kahn. They, of course, added more cases with Amazon and concluded some cases and have been incredibly aggressive, and not just on the tech front, but also whether it is the Kroger's Albertson merger or whether it is the work they did with Spirit Airlines, whether it's the work that they are doing and will be carried on, I hope, by the Trump administration on Ticketmaster.
This has been a sea change, and it's not just one party or the other. I think the Democrats were clearly more aggressive, and I think that's good for our country.
But this money that they're throwing at the president-elect right away, right at the beginning. He also seems to like money.
Oh, really? Yeah. Yeah.
It is. It's concerning because you've got you're going to have them have, you know, unequal access and out there.

I don't really see all these little companies that are trying to compete and get into the marketplace. And you've got, whether it's Spotify trying to get the App Store fees down from Apple, or whether it is companies that are competing against Google and Amazon and simply want their products to be on equal footing on their search engines

and the big monopolies are self-preferencing.

They're not putting a million dollars in and being able to get seeds right up front there at the parties.

I mean, you know, that's not happening to them.

So it's my job and the job of some Republicans who care about this to make this case and have strong oversight.

We'll be back in a minute.

Support for the show comes from the ACLU.

The Trump administration is pushing a dangerous and sweeping attempt to control our bodies, our families and our lives.

At the same time,

a Supreme Court case this term could shape the future of bodily autonomy for all.

Tennessee wants to take away transgender people's autonomy over their own bodies.

They think the ruling that overturned Roe v. Wade allows them to do it.
This would hurt everyone's freedom to control their bodies and lives. The government has no right to deny a

Transcription by CastingWords overturned Roe v. Wade allows them to do it.
This would hurt everyone's freedom to control their bodies and lives. The government has no right to deny a transgender person the health care they

need, just as they have no right to tell someone if, when, or how they start a family. The ACLU

told the court that everyone deserves the freedom to control their bodies. Learn more at aclu.org

slash autonomy. Support for this show comes from Nordstrom.
Nordstrom brings you the season's most wanted brands. Skims, Mango, Free People, and Princess Polly.
All under $100. From trending sneakers to beauty must-haves, they've curated the styles you'll wear on repeat this spring.
Free shipping, free returns, and in-store pickup make it easier than ever. Shop now in stores and at Nordstrom.com.
Hey guys, have you heard of Gold Belly? It's this amazing site where they ship the most iconic, famous foods from restaurants across the country, anywhere nationwide. I've never found a more perfect gift than food.
Gold Belly ships Chicago deep dish pizza, New York bagels, Maine lobster rolls, and even Ina Garden's famous cakes. So if you're looking for a gift for the food lover in your life, head to goldbelly.com and get 20% off your first order with promo code GIFT.
That's goldbelly.com, promo code GIFT. Let's talk first about tech legislation.
Every week we get a question from an outside expert. Here's a guy you and I both know well.
Hi, I'm Jonathan Kander. I was head of antitrust at the U.S.
Department of Justice from 2021 to 2024. Here's my question.
Big tech companies have unprecedented reach into our daily lives, but remarkably, there are few, if any, industry guardrails regarding even the most basic issues like the collection of data and accumulation of power. For years, Congress has proposed moderate rules of the road, and you have actually sponsored or co-sponsored bills that have bipartisan support and widespread support from the general public.
Yet here we are, unbelievably, in 2025, with almost no industry rules or safeguards at all. What has to happen for Congress to finally pass table stakes legislation for tech? And I will also note, as today, Mark Zuckerberg has decided to remove most fact-checking from Facebook and move it to Texas.
They are doing everything possible to go against some of the many things you've done. So I'd love you to answer Jonathan's question first overall, and then we'll get into some specifics.
Sure. So first of all, I love that Jonathan Cantor is a celebrity questioner on the

show. He's very cool.
Secondly, why is this not gone as farther than it should? I got to start

with the successes. And one of them is Jonathan's and it has to do with legislation because actually

Senator Grassley and I passed our bill to change the merger fees. It was a vote, and we got nearly, I think, 90 votes or in that range for it.
More fees on big mergers, less fees on small mergers. That has added significantly to the funding for the Justice Department.
I do know that Merrick Garland has significantly increased with Cantor's urging the number of lawyers and other personnel in antitrust. We're still not at the level of the Nixon administration, but we have greatly improved that.
And that's a lot to do with what we did. So I figured if we couldn't get all our bills passed right now, that's one answer, is that we helped them to do the enforcement.
Second thing, we also passed a bill to Mike Lee and my bill to allow state AGs to keep their cases in the states where they bring them and not move them all to California and New York. Also a bit of a game changer.
What are the challenges? You mentioned one of them, the big bill, the bill I have with Grassley, so they can't be self-preferencing their products. This is the American Innovation and Competition online.
That's exactly right. Right.
It still has not passed. You and I have been talking about it for a while.
Let me just, for people who don't know, it would have restricted tech giants like Amazon and Apple from giving their own products preferential treatment on their sites. Exactly.
That was the main thing, but there are many other things. Right.
And made it easier with some of this anti-competitive behavior to bring cases. Okay.
So there's that bill. We get it through the committee.
You know that. On a very strong vote, Democrats and Republicans picked up a bunch of Republicans.
But then it never was able to get a vote, in part because, honestly, the last few years, Jim Jordan over in the House had made it very clear he wasn't going to let any tech legislation, any antitrust legislation that was significant, including my broader bill, which would just kind of tip the scales a little to make it easier to bring any antitrust case, including in health care, including in ag and the like for mergers, but also for anti-competitive behavior. And so that made it really hard to get the muster to keep pushing this bill when in in fact, they weren't going to do anything in the House.
So my major focus turned to making sure that we got the funding into the division. And that's really important.
That's how they brought the Ticketmaster case. Do some big blockbuster hearings that we did, including one on Ticketmaster that I believe was one of the most significant hearings of the two years of any hearings in the impact that it had to gather evidence to finally push the Justice Department to move forward on what's clearly a monopoly.
And then when it comes to tech, we just continue to get more allies. Sometimes it's on things like app stores, and you know where we have had success, and that is on these kids' bills.
Success in that we have gotten some of these bills through the Senate. We've got the bill on the Take It Down Act that I have with Senator Cruz that we are this close to passing.
I predict it'll pass in the first six months of this year. It was in the final deal that somehow Elon Musk imploded, but we're not going to go there.
Well, I am going to go there, actually. Great.
I'm going to go to him in a second. Go ahead.
But I want to just to kind of do the forest for the trees. We did the funding.
We've done better. We have done better in building momentum.
When the next administration under the leadership of Gail Slater, and I'm hopeful she'll do a good job. She's the new Jonathan Cantor for people who don't know.
Right. When they have the opportunity to make the agreements in some of these tech cases that aren't yet resolved, guess what? They can put in their consent decrees, if they're a settlement or whatever they are, some of these things that are in my bills, right? Because they're already doing some of these things in Europe and Canada and other countries, so they can actually put these consumer protections in place that way, even if I still can't pass them as I wait and wait.
And these things in other eras have taken many, many years to get passed, so there is absolutely no way I'm going to reintroduce the bill in the first month of this year. So no way I'm going to give up.
I mean, we're going to move forward. This is what I like about you.
But let me just, the Kids Online Safety Act had bipartisan support and failed to pass House Speaker Mike Johnson. Didn't bring it to the floor because, as said, it was worried about, it will regulate free speech.
But that's one. The Take It Down Act, another bipartisan criminalized revenge form, including AI deepfakes, passed the Senate, was taken out in the spending bill, as you noted.
But that bill we have gotten through the Senate. Like that bill has a very good chance.
Yes. Okay.
But it fell out. You've also introduced the No Fakes Act, which is generally to protect people, especially actors, singers, to have their likeness and voice replicated by AI.
You said we need to put rules of the road in place for AI. Mostly Europe has been acting here, as you correctly noted.
And obviously you've been at the forefront on antitrust legislation, much of which has been stalled. And I'm not getting to TikTok even yet, but you had Jim Jordan in your way.
Now you have Elon Musk in your way for many of these things. The richest man in the world.
And his fortune has doubled doubled. He's now has 400 billion dollars versus 200

billion dollars before, even though the Tesla is struggling, even though the stock has gone up 68 percent, even though its recent results were relatively weak compared to before. So what what are you going to do? Jim Jordan is one thing, but Elon Musk is quite another.
And he has a Cottage at Mar-a-Lago, by the way.

He's living with him.

So, well, yeah, living at the... Jordan is one thing, but Elon Musk is quite another.
And he has a cottage at Mar-a-Lago, by the way.

He's living with him. So, well, yeah, living at the same place.
Okay, so number one. I'm using it broadly.
Apparently Melania doesn't mind, according to a recent report. Okay, there are still some fact-checkers in the world, even if Mark Zuckerberg is getting rid of them.
Living next to him. Okay.
So what we have seen across the country is, as I said, I believe there's momentum on this issue. There's a reason that the Trump administration put in a tougher enforcer who used to work with J.D.
Vance, right? I talked to J.D. Vance about this directly.
He's willing to talk about antitrust. And that is because there is some momentum with the public when it comes to consolidation.
It's big. And people are really tired of having their data stolen.
They're tired of having their kids exposed to crap from fentanyl to pornography. It is off the charts with where the public is on this.
So if these guys just stand and do nothing for year after year after year, believe me, it will go back to haunt them because they are already responsible for stopping the porn bill. This is the bill I have with Cruz, and it's very good.
It says in 48 hours, the platforms have to take down any of these pornographic images that are on their platforms. And that includes AI, and includes actual pictures.
So it's taken without people's consent. And it is a big deal.
We've had over 20 suicides in one year from kids who are victims of revenge porn because they don't want their parents to know they had put this picture online. It's unbelievably sad stories.
That is in one year. So this big deal, and they're going to own this if they don't let this stuff pass.
And Elon Musk stopped that bill, I believe, for other reasons. And they have had some support from their company for some of the kids' stuff, I know, because I heard them testify at the hearing on some of the kids' bills that we have, including the one you mentioned.
So hopefully those will go through. To me, that's just like the tip of the iceberg, if we can get the porn and the kids' bills done, because then you go to the real meat of this, which is— Antitrust.
Antitrust. And that really gets into why is the National Independent Federation of Businesses, which is a more conservative group, this is their number one goal to get this bill done that Grassley and I have, because they are starting to just get screwed online because of whether it's Amazon Basics putting their stuff at the top, or whether it's Google messing around with the algorithms, or whether you have, by the way, renters who are screwed because of the way information is being fed into just one platform.
And it's like a high price fixing that's going on. So you see this all over the place.
But, Senator, these people are now – look, Mark Zuckerberg today just removed guardrails again, like the things you're talking about. And he attacked Europe, which has been more stringent than anybody else.
And Elon Musk is now attacking European politicians with absolute misinformation just in order to hurt them and backing right-wing groups and things like that. These are tech people have run amok now, and they're in the positions of power that they were not in any previous administration that I can think of.
Right, Kara. So I think that that is true.
And it is on us to call this out. So when Elon Musk stops a bill that would limit pornography on his own platform, it's on us to call it out, even if he was stopping the bills for some other reason.
And I just think we're going to have to call people on it, show the conflicts, whether it's him or some other billionaire, because we've never seen anything like this. This is going to be a cabinet, put outside of tech here, that has people that we've never, the likes of which in terms of their money and the reach of their companies that we've never seen.
So, by the way, it's one of the reasons I've been so strong on calling not only for FBI background checks, but also for these conflict checks, economic interest forms from all of these candidates and nominees for these jobs. Because we have to know where they're coming from.
Well, I kind of do. I kind of do know where they're coming from.
They don't want any strictures. They don't want any regulations.
They'd like you to go away. That's for sure.
I've heard it from them directly. I mean, the concept that these people are right next to Donald Trump and he is doing their bidding.
Good example is the Supreme Court hearings this week on TikTok, China-based owner ByteDance, which is seeking to block the ban of the app from going into effect on January 19th, the day before the inauguration. Now, I have been a longtime critic of TikTok.
You know this. Trump has asked the Supreme Court, he used to be a critic, to delay the implementation.
One of his biggest funders, Jeff Yass, who has given him $100 million, has a huge economic stake, and he owns 15% of the company. He has basically said he does not want to support the ban.
You all passed it. This is a law now at this point.
So that is very clear. It's a law, and they have a way to deal with this, and that is that they can simply sell that part of the company to someone that doesn't have ties to China.
And I know there've been groups of investors that are interested in buying. They can divest.
This is normal, as you know, in antitrust cases. It may not seem normal when you're dealing with TikTok in China, but it's normal all the time in America when there's some kind of an antitrust reason the government can say, okay, you can do this deal, you can do this thing, but you got to divest your interests.
In foreign relations all the time, companies have to divest certain parts of companies because they're dealing with whatever, Iran or a terrorist group or you name it. This happens.
And so that is what they still have the opportunity to do. Obviously, there's going to be a court case on this in the Supreme Court.
This is going all the way. They've taken the case early.
I have no idea how that's going to be resolved. Do you have a thought? You're a lawyer.
What would you think? Well, I think the will of Congress was pretty clear that this was about security and national security. And of course, we want to have this ability for people to keep using this platform, but they simply need to divest it.
And that's what's going on. I know there are groups of investors that are interested in right now.
And as for what Trump can do, the law is clear. I mean, if he wants to change the law, he will have that ability to get a Congress that is now seems very beholden to him.
I suppose he could try to do that. But at the same time, you have a number of Republicans.
This was a strongly bipartisan bill that passed, whoa, whoa, whoa, while the Republicans controlled the House and were very close in the Senate and it had bipartisan support in the Senate or wouldn't pass. So that's what he's going to run into.
And it was all about security. I personally, and you know this, would have liked to see a law that would have been about, yeah, the security issues with China, yes, but also would have dealt with some of these other privacy issues and antitrust issues with Facebook, with Google, with Amazon, with Apple.
And that just didn't happen because of their lobbying against my bill, against the App Store bill, which simply says, hey, you can't just pell-mell, charge certain companies huge amounts of money just to get on your App Store while they're competing against, say, Spotify, competing against Apple Music. So these things which are going on in other countries are things we could do here.
And I just want to make it very clear. I am in this.
I am not giving up the fight. I'm going to hold them accountable for this.
And at the same time, as we continue to grow and we do more interest in this, less people saying, oh, Amy, what's wrong with the tech companies? Why are you being mean to them? And I'm like, I love tech. I really do.
I use all the platforms. You know, I have a Fitbit.
I use all these things. But it doesn't mean that I don't want competition.
I truly believe in capitalism. So I just say to them, I guess I believe in capitalism more than you do.
That's all. I believe that we should have competition and that we shouldn't have monopolies that are dominating.
That's to me what it's about. It's not destroying these companies.
It's simply finding ways to have more competition and not allowing them to use their monopoly power to screw everyone around them. They can still exist under the scenario.
They simply may have to divest part of it, whether it's Google ads, whether it is how they're running their ad tech platform, whether it is what's going on with self-preferencing. There are ways to do this where they would continue in all their glorious, strong brands.
Look at AT&T. They're still going strong after that breakup.
All right. So one, you should probably use an aura ring at this point.
An aura ring? Okay, that's what Mark Warner wears, an aura ring. I have really small hands, and I think it would look like super dominant on my hand.
Are you wearing? I have an aura ring. Yeah, I am.
Of course you do. But I don't know if I want to track every single moment of my life.
I just use a simple thing to see my steps and try. And when my phone calls come in.
But thank you for that. No problem.
Thank you for your tech suggestion. No problem.
But one of the things that might happen was he hands it over to Elon Musk, who has some Chinese affiliations with his companies. Well, I don't know.
I'm not going to engage in these hypotheticals, but it is a very— Distinct possibility.

That's going to be a big deal, and I wish they would have taken the opportunity of divestiture and ways to do it seriously, and we'll see if they do.

And do you think China will go along with this?

Well, that is—again, this is a company with strong Chinese ties. We know all of that, and that's why Congress passed this bill.

But again, maybe there is a way to resolve this.

We'll be back in a minute.

What makes a great pair of glasses?

At Warby Parker, it's all the invisible extras without

the extra cost. Their designer quality frames start at $95, including prescription lenses,

plus scratch-resistant, smudge-resistant, and anti-reflective coatings, and UV protection,

and free adjustments for life. To find your next pair of glasses, sunglasses, or contact lenses,

or to find the Warby Parker store nearest you, head over to warbyparker.com. That's warbyparker.com.
This episode is brought to you by SelectQuote. Life insurance can have a huge impact on our family's future.
With SelectQuote, getting covered with the right policy for you is simple and affordable. SelectQuote's licensed insurance agents will tailor your experience to find a life insurance policy for your needs in as little as 15 minutes.
And SelectQuote partners with carriers that provide policies for many conditions. SelectQuote.
They shop, you save. Go to selectquote.com slash Spotify pod today to get started.
Your snacking routine can get a little dull. Time for a light & Fit remix.
Like a crunchy storm of graham cookies, caramel pearls, and dark chocolate, showering down into a smooth, creamy yogurt. Enjoy three Light & Fit remix varieties with craveable flavors and up to 120 calories and 10 grams of protein per 4.5-ounce serving See RemixYogurt.com.
Let's finish up with the Trump administration coming in very quickly. I'm not going to get into all the controversial appointments on Trump's list because there are many.
There's some that are closed issues you focus on. You're on the Senate Judiciary Committee and the Commerce Committee.
You were chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee on any head trust. So let's do a lightning round.
I'm going to name some nominees like you. Tell me briefly the question you like to ask them in a Senate hearing, if they have one, a few of them won't.
And what's your biggest concern about, you don't have to, whichever one, or their biggest concern about their nomination. Former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi, Trump's AG picked.
You said you worried about revenge. Okay.
Well, I'm going to be meeting with her before the hearing, so I'll have an opportunity to ask a lot of questions. But my basic question for the next attorney general is, will you uphold the law? That is what an attorney general is supposed to do.
That's kind of basic. And I think that'll get us into it.
I will also, of course, I think this is very important to do. Will you enforce the law when it comes to financial crimes and all kinds of things that we know are going on that are hurting people in the economy? But I'm also going to ask about antitrust, which is part of that, because if I don't, I don't know who will.
My guess is Senator Blumenthal will and some of the Republicans will. But we've got to make sure that that is up front and center.
And I'll be asking her about that in our private meeting as well. And you've noted that you're worried about revenge being part of her mission.
Gail Slater, who you've mentioned to lead the DOJ's antitrust division, she was an aide to Vice President-elect J.D. Vance.
She's in here. It's lawsuits you mentioned before.
Right. I've heard very good things about her.
Yeah. And I'm looking forward to meeting with her.
I've heard the same. and I'm looking forward to talking with her just about some of the cases.
She obviously can't go in deep about what they're doing, what she will want to do with certain cases, but I'll just give her some of my views and really push to have them look at the legislation that we have now that the Justice Department supported, because that would help me. Macon, Delrahim had supported, for instance, a merger fee bill, and we eventually got it done.
I'll push on that, and then I'll say, look at the details in some of those pieces of legislation and think about how they can be incorporated in consent decrees with the companies as ways to remedy what is monopoly conduct. And in a way, that is one way we can get into, without passing the legislation, changing the conduct for everyone.
So I'm going to put as a pair, Andrew Ferguson and Brandon Carr. Andrew Ferguson is going to replace Lena Kahn as the head of the FCC.
Brandon Carr. I thought you were going to go to Cash Patel.
I'm going to get to him. Don't worry, he's the last two.
Andrew Ferguson and Brandon Carr, neither of two will actually have confirmation hearings because they're already on the committees, but they both say they want to crack down on big tech, and also media companies, and their biggest concern seems to be content moderation against conservative voices. So we won't have a confirmation hearing, but I think you can imagine I will ask for a meeting with each of them.

I've met with Brendan Carr.

We had previous confirmation hearings on Ferguson. And I mean, I'm going to be, or previous hearings, I'm going to be really pushing hard on the ongoing cases, the tech cases, and what they're going to do.
I'm also going to be pushing really hard on the resource issue because the merger fee change that I mentioned gave more resources to both the FTC and to the Justice Department. As I said, something like a 90 vote, a 90 senator vote on that.
It just shows that I'm not alone in believing that this is good for America. When they enforce these laws, it actually brings in resources, some of the cases do, to the departments that they will lead.
And so I'm going to have focus a lot on them standing up for the law and the antitrust laws and, of course, the consumer laws with the FTC. Cash Patel, go for it.
Unless you want Pete Hegseth, you choose. Ladies' choice.
I'll stay with my Judiciary Committee nominee. I guess I may ask about why did Bill Barr, a very conservative attorney general, say that over his dead body would Kash Patel serve in the administration back in the last administration? That seems concerning.
Concerning. And so then I don't know if I'll say it that way.

No, say concerning.

Given that we just saw a terrorist attack, a horrific terrorist attack with so many innocent people, so many of them young, dying in New Orleans and what we just saw in Vegas and all of the cyber attacks that we've seen and change health care.

How do you explain that you want the FBI building in Washington to become a museum and that you want to destroy the headquarters? And I get having strong field offices. I'm a former local DA.
I know how important that is, but come on, some of these investigations are by their nature consolidated. You're not going to have just a Minnesota or a New Mexico investigation.
You have to have them coordinated. And just some of the comments that he's made about having a revenge agenda, very concerning to me.
Yeah, as are to everyone. Okay, last few questions.
As an outgoing head of the subcommittee on antitrust, you held a hearing about continuing bipartisan path forward, as you mentioned at the beginning of this. It was a very good hearing.
Yes. Now, there's been lots of bipartisan agreement, and I know you're from a purple state, and you pulled from a broad swath of voters in your re-election, but do you really think a Republican trifecta in Washington is looking to reach across the aisle? They don't have to now.
They don't, but they still do in the Senate, Kara. I mean, like, you know, except for these nominations are 51 votes and these certain kinds of things like tax and spend, that can be 51 votes in that procedural thing called reconciliation.
But the rest of it is 60 votes. So in the Senate, they are going to need bipartisan support on a lot of things, including antitrust.
And so I start with that, where they're going to have to work across the aisle. They can't do just, hey, we run the world so we can do what we want.
At the same time, if they all really believe in doing something on consolidation, well, they've got the votes because I can easily get them seven Democrats in a minute. There's 53 of them in the Senate and they have the majority in the House.
So I think holding them accountable for using that majority in positive ways is going to be really important. And if they want to talk the talk on consolidation and doing something about tech and privacy and pornography and protecting the public, and they believe in capitalism, which I believe many of them do, and if they really believe in it, then they can't be bought out by monopoly interests, whether it's for the inauguration or whether it is for the way that legislation heads through Congress.
And that is your red line. Red line will be, you guys need to push on getting things done.
And I know it's hard because it's even a little hard on our side sometimes. I'm not some, you know, Pollyanna about how hard it is to pass this

tech legislation, but the cases that you've got already and the ones you can bring, they better be resolved in a good way that helps the American public and not sold out for cheap. Okay, last two questions.
In 2028, are you running for president again? I am happy being in the Senate. I just moved into the number three leadership spot in the Democratic caucus.
The president's kind of better. The president's still better.
Every day is just a joy here. No, I am focused on my job.
I just got reelected, and I think that we have such an important job right now in the Senate that I hope no one's thinking yet of their own demands for years. They've got to be thinking about what's in front of us.
It's amazing. Nobody is.
Nobody is. No one.
No one. Anyway, so are you having fun with this podcast, Karen? Yes, I am.
All right. I'll move on.
It's very good. What's your plan for your podcast four years from now? Are you kidding? It's bigger than ever.
Who are you going to have on your guest three years from now? President Amy Klobuchar, hopefully. All right.
Anyway, one more last personal question. The podcast will air on Thursday, January 9th, the day of President Jimmy Carter's funeral.
Your first gig in Washington was as a college intern for Carter's Vice President Mondale, another famous Minnesotan. He seems to be the opposite of everything right now, it feels to me.
I'd love you just to talk for one minute about Carter and his legacy for you. So I got to know Carter quite well.
I got to have pimento cheese sandwiches with Rosalyn and Jimmy Carter down in Plains. I got to watch him teach Bible school.
And a lot of that was because of Walter Mondale. And if you go down to the Carter Center, which I strongly suggest people do in Atlanta, you see him blazing down the wall the words of Walter Mondale, not uttered when they won, but when they lost.
And he looked back at their four years and he said,

we told the truth, we obeyed the law, we kept the peace.

We told the truth, we obeyed the law, we kept the peace.

I can't think of a better mantra, of a better goal for us and purpose in the next few years.

So Jimmy Carter not only taught us how to run when no one thought you could win

and have a purpose, and that's why he did it.

And by the way, his relationships with musicians is kind of fun.

My favorite movie of the year.

Yeah.

My favorite movie of the year.

Rock and roll president?

No, the Dylan movie.

Oh, the Dylan movie.

Okay.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

Oh, I really like it.

It's really good.

So a complete unknown.

That was Jimmy Carter back then, right?

So he taught us that.

Then he taught us how to govern with dignity during a very difficult time.

Then, and that's where the told the truth obeyed the law kept the peace.

But then what did he do when he lost?

Resiliency.

Unbelievable post-presidency building homes across the country with the expansion of Habitat for Humanity, the work he's done on human rights, the work that he's done, did on so many other things that mattered. And I just think that that resiliency is something people need right now.
A lot of people feel gut punched after this election. Duh.
You know, they're tuning out. Hopefully they're listening to their podcast or they wouldn't get to the end of this podcast for me to answer this question.
So they are not totally tuned out. But there's a lot of people that are tuned out and they feel so separated out.
So what I say to them is go back in. And it might just mean going to your work parties and hanging out at ball games and doing things you wouldn't normally go to concerts and seeing each other again and looking up from your phones.
But it also means believing in a purpose

and what you can accomplish and not giving up.

We might have lost an election from my perspective,

but we didn't lose hope.

All right.

Senator Klobuchar, thank you so much.

Thank you.

Thanks, Cara.

On with Cara Swisher is produced by Christian Castor-Russell,

Kateri Yocum, Jolie Myers, Megan Kunane,

Megan Burney, and Kaylin Lynch. Michat Kirwa is Vox Media's executive producer of audio.
Special thanks to Kate Gallagher. Our engineers are Rick Kwan and Fernando Arruda, and our theme music is by Trackademics.
If you're already following the show, you are watching your steps like Senator Klobuchar. If not, be more like me and put a ring on it.
Go wherever you listen to podcasts, search for On with Kara Swisher, and hit follow. Thanks for listening to On with Kara Swisher from New York Magazine, the Vox Media Podcast Network, and us.
We'll be back on Monday with more. Support for the show comes from the ACLU.
The Trump administration is pushing a dangerous and sweeping attempt to control our bodies, our families, and our lives. At the same time, a Supreme Court case this term could shape the future of bodily autonomy for all.
Tennessee wants to take away transgender people's autonomy over their own bodies. They think the ruling that overturned Roe v.
Wade allows them to do it. This would hurt everyone's freedom to control their bodies and lives.
The government has no right to deny a transgender person the health care they need,

just as they have no right to tell someone if, when, or how they start a family.

The ACLU told the court that everyone deserves the freedom to control their bodies.

Learn more at aclu.org slash autonomy.