And, This is Rahm Emanuel on How Crony Capitalism And Trump’s Tariffs Will Kill The “American Dream”

Time is precious and so are our pets. So time with our pets is extra precious.

That's why we started Dutch. Dutch provides 24-7 access to licensed vets with unlimited virtual visits and follow-ups for up to five pets.

You can message a vet at any time and schedule a video visit the same day.

Our vets can even prescribe medication for many ailments and shipping is always free.

With Dutch, you'll get more time with your pets and year-round peace of mind when it comes to their vet care. The number one hit podcast, The Girlfriends, is back with something new.
The Girlfriends Spotlight, where each week you'll hear women share their stories of triumph over adversity. You'll meet Luanne, who escaped a secretive religious community.
Do I want my freedom? Or do I want my family? And now helps other women get out too. I loved my girls.
I still love my girls. Come and join our girl gang.
Listen to The Girlfriend Spotlight on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. That's the fun part about being an artist that you need to have the patience for finding your head.
I'm La Gata, the culture's favorite reggaeton historian and musicologa. On an episode of my show, The Reggaeton con La Gata Podcast, I sit down with Bodhi, a Boricua reggaetonera who's demanding her place in the male-dominated music industry.
That's the game, like, who stays and believes, you know? Listen to Reggaeton Co La Gata on America's number one podcast network, iHeart. Follow Reggaeton Co La Gata and start listening on the free iHeartRadio app today.
We asked parents who adopted teens to share their journey. We just kind of knew from the beginning that we were family.
They showcased a sense of love that I never had before. I mean, he's not only my parent, he's like my best friend.
At the end of the day, it's all been worth it. I wouldn't change a thing about our lives.
Learn about adopting a teen from foster care. Visit AdoptUSKids.org to learn more.
Brought to you by AdoptUSKids, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and the Ad Council.
When traveling, curveballs come standard. But at Avis, we're proudly predictable because our only plan is to make sure you keep yours.
And now, get 20% off your car rental when you pay now. Go to avis.com slash plan on us for more.
Avis. Plan on us.
Today I initiated a lawsuit against the Trump administration on behalf of the people of the state of California,

asserting that Trump does not have the unilateral authority to impose one of the largest tax increases in U.S. history.

Impacts of these tariffs are disproportionately being felt here in California.

The number one manufacturing state in America, a state that will be significantly impacted by this unilateral decision by the president of the United States. I'm looking forward to talking about that more with my next guest.
We'll talk trade, we'll talk tariffs, we'll talk about what happened in the last election. Is this 2004 all over again? Are Democrats ready for a big comeback? And what does the future hold to my next guest? Is he running for President of the United States? This is Gavin Newsom.
And this is Rahm Emanuel. Rahm, thanks for coming on the show.
And before we get started, there's so many issues that I want to get to in a relatively short period of time. We'll talk obviously about the state of the Democratic Party, the state of our union tariffs issues, obviously related to your service and time in Asia.
But top of mind this week is so much of the attention on Harvard University and their pushback, which, you know, generated a lot of interest, including from your old boss, President Obama, who tweeted out a very positive statement on behalf of Harvard, asserting that it's time to assert universities to assert themselves more aggressively as it relates to what Trump's trying to do. I'm just curious what your thoughts were on Harvard and moreover what's happening with

higher education in respect to the Trump administration. Well, I'm of a couple of minds on higher education.
And one is, I mean, I don't think anybody's pointed this out, but, you know, Donald Trump started his kind of introduction into public life in one way or another with Roy Cohn, who is Joe McCarthy's

right-hand man.

And the attack on

universities, infamous back Introduction into public life in one way or another with Roy Cohn, who is Joe McCarthy's right-hand man.

And the attack on universities, infamous back in the McCarthy era, squashing both the role the universities played in our civil life and also academic freedom. And that's one element.
the second element is you know having been in japan but i knew this without going to japan

the american university system i I mean, California, you know this firsthand, and its role that it plays from a research and development on cutting edge technologies, new entrepreneur, not only entrepreneurs, but new entrepreneurship, new ideas, new business models. I met somebody from Stanford the other day in the AI space who's now got a company.
That's an example of what is so unique. And people, Japan, Israel, I can give you all over the world, and Europe, all admire what we have built year over year over year.
And not only is the political freedom happening, but we're actually now killing the goose that laid the golden egg for America's economic competitiveness. And then third, if you think of the future on the

international level as a battle, not of a cold war in the sense of ideological Soviet Union versus

the free world, but as a technological battle and competition between the United States and China,

we are really unilaterally disarmed. And then fourth and finally, Governor, I take offense

Let's go. competition between the United States and China.
We are really unilaterally disarmed. And then fourth and finally, Governor, I take offense as an American and as a Jewish American.
The idea that you're going to use anti-Semitism or what universities had as a culture, and I think there's a legitimate point to address that and reform that, but using anti-Semitism to literally destroy our academic institutions and universities, and that's how they're getting the goods through customs, so quote-unquote, dealing with anti-Semitism. And, you know, you and I are talking on Passover, the week of Passover.
The idea that the Jewish community would find any comfort with one person's opinion as opposed to the rule of law. I got 2000 years of history that tells you that doesn't turn out well.
So I can go at this like five different angles. And I'm hoping Harvard and not just Harvard, but other universities, other law firms, other institutions.
And I would say that to the Supreme Court, you're going to find out whether that black robe is a Halloween costume, or you actually earned it and understand it because he's challenging you. There's nothing sacred.
So everybody's going to have to decide, you know, and reach deep down. Harvard has.
Other universities are going to have to do the same and decide that, you know what, there's something, a set of principles here that are more important than accommodation. And I appreciate the reference on the rule to law, particularly as it relates to the Supreme Court.
But I'm just curious. I mean, it's interesting, you sort of an origin story with Roy that I hadn't really considered.
But what, I mean, is there something, I mean, you know, he talks often, Trump, doesn't he, about how highly educated people are. He's always impressed with people's looks.
He's impressed with their education. Well, looks has nothing to do with how educated you are.
No, no question about that. But what is, I mean, so it's an interesting thing to me, just as an observer, someone watches, obviously, Trump closely, this notion that higher education, some establishment plot.
Is this a political agenda? Is this a 2025 agenda? They're getting their goods through customs here. Look, first of all, the whole idea of tenure for professors was built coming out of the McCarthy era so you could not be prosecuted for your political views.
That's the origin of it. That's where tenure as a concept is nurtured.
If I'm reading history correctly, that's where it comes from. and professors were given the ability to be protected professionally for and not being prosecuted for any political expression or views and now were there things that universities got way off track on 100 were there reforms that needed to be done yeah that and there's not a university president or a board member that wouldn't tell you that was true.
100%. Destroying the academic, not only freedom, but also the research elements and trying to coerce their behavior.
Now we're going to the worst of McCarthyism. And I don't think it's a coincidence.
I think it's actually correct. Donald Trump's mentor in public life is Roy Cohn, who was also Joe McCarthy's mentor and sidekick.
And so we're living in a period of time. And I don't think I'm being dramatic or hyperbolic, but that's the period of time.
these institutions, not just Ivy League, but public universities as well,

have a history of them having stood up, having their voices heard and pushed back. And I know you want to stay in this area, so I just say this.
I find it offensive that you're using, quote unquote, anti-Semitism that was perpetuated on the universities to really deal with your political agenda. So let me just say this, like the student at Columbia, I disagree with his views on Hamas.
I disagree with what happened on October 7th. You want to deal with him in some way, have him force him to do community service as an intern at the Holocaust Museum for a year.
Now, he was expressing his views, which I find abhorrent, and I think the American people will see it. Killing 1,200 citizens because they were Jewish is not acceptable.
Cutting a fetus out of a woman is not only unacceptable, it's a crime, okay? And you want to identify with that. We can handle that as a country without having to destroy either Columbia University, Harvard University, or a public university.
Well said. So, no, look, I appreciate that.
Of course, I'm serving on the UC Regions Board as a lieutenant governor. Governor, no more precious system from my perspective in terms of conveyor belt for talent for this country and the research and development component of that.
And you're extending beyond that. I mean, the NIH grants and all the other efforts to really wreck the systems.
Put the research aside. Could you reform it? Yes, the universities were skimming some dollars.
That's an easy way to reform, but don't throw out the goose that lays the golden egg. The second is, as it relates to academic, not academic freedoms, things that were done to Jewish students, Jewish culture, Jewish life on universities that would never be accepted to any other minority group.
And that too had to be dealt with. And the universities being forthcoming about that would be helpful, But don't use anti-Semitism or the attack on the Jewish community at a university as your way of getting your goods through customs to actually fulfill a political agenda that was articulated in Project 2025, way beforehand.
That's right. So let's, you know, and just sort of segue from Harvard.
I mean, there are a number of Harvard graduates that happen to be members of the Supreme Court and you referenced the court. And obviously, another big story in the last few days has been referenced in the Oval Office visit with President Bukele of El Salvador and the conversation that was very publicly held in the Oval Office related to issues around the Supreme Court's 9-0 decision and the defiance, apparently the defiance of Pam Biondi, the attorney general, and obviously the president himself, including the president of El Salvador, as it relates to that ruling.
I mean, how concerned are you? People have talked about a constitutional crisis. They talk about red lines.
They talk about the foundational principles of our founding fathers, three independent branches of government. When you defy or apparently defy a Supreme Court ruling, have we crossed that red line? Are we on the other side of this? Are we being hyperbolic? Well, I don't think you're being hot, but look, I think we're going to find out whether

the black robes that the members of the court wear are a Halloween costume, or they represent

the dignity of the court wear are a Halloween costume or they represent the dignity of the court and its opinion as a co-equal branch of government. They were not ambiguous as related to the individual in that the United States acknowledged they wrongfully sent to the El Salvador prison.
Now, the court either going to show that not the court's opinions are the final verdict and opinion now need to be executed by the executive branch. And if he defies them and they take no step in that, you know, there's a lot of ways to deal with, I mean, you know, individual citizens that are held in contempt of the court.

There's a lot of different ways to deal with this. And, look, I go back to when Chief Justice Roberts was being confirmed by the Senate.
He said that judges are like umpires. That was his words.
They called balls and strikes. Well, you called this one.
Now either

You're going to allow your opinion

As a umpire

Which I think balls and strikes. Well, you called this one.
Now, either you're going to allow your opinion as a umpire, which I happen to think is a horrible metaphor, but you used it and you're going to let your opinion hold the day or basically it's a fungible opinion. It doesn't matter what you say.
Now, I'm not a lawyer. I don't know if you are a governor, but I studied the Constitution.
I always understood there were three co-equal branches of government, not one above all others. We're going to find out something about the court, not just the president.
Amen. The best of the Roman Republic, Greek democracy, independent co-equal branches of government, popular sovereignty, sort of fundamental principles we've been celebrating for 240 plus years.
Look, we've also been sort of reflecting in the last few weeks, the years and years that Donald Trump himself, and back to, I think, the origin story. And I think it's really interesting and insightful how you began the conversation as it relates to Roy Cohen and the history of McCarthyism in relationship to this moment.
And so much, I think, about Trump goes back to sort of indelible ideological perspectives that he's had for years and years and years. And I don't think we give enough credence to that, including on the issue that connects to you in a more modern term and your ambassadorial time in Japan.
And that's the issue of tariffs, where Trump, I think in the 80s, put out a full page ad, if I recall, around how unfair trade policy was and how Japan at the time was cleaning our clock. And here we are, fast forward with all these tariff policies.
So are you surprised that we're where we are? Obviously, you have strong opinions about the recklessness of it. But from an historic perspective, of that perspective, of that prism, does it surprise you what he's advancing? So let's deal with a couple things that I think are all in there.
One is, it doesn't surprise me either. He said he was going to do the tariffs.
What surprised me is the erraticness, because it was the one constant thing he said in the campaign, one constant thing, as you said, in his public life. And it's been the most erratic, not thought through most, I mean, as opposed to kind of the Project 2025 stuff that he didn't mention that's been unbelievably like there was a strategy here is what he did mention and it's just every day is a new day look it's the largest tax increase in american history full stop two it's a corrupt system because whoever goes to mar-a-lago gets a cut it gets a bit gets a cut as you're seeing on cards.
If I could pause on that, I think that's the most underreported part of this. The regressive tax side is one thing.
What this means for crony capitalism is another. This is the worst of crony.
As I said, when he first got elected but wasn't inaugurated here, he's going to turn the Oval Office into eBay. And it's the highest bidder.
And if it ain't

nailed down, he's going to sell it, and it's crony capitals.

Here is my

another P, and it's

affecting the dollar, it's affecting your

401k, but here's the other piece.

20 years ago,

China was on the rise, and America was seen

as stagnating decline.

Xi does a couple

things that is the worst economic damage any one person can do. And he did it to China.
He busts the housing bubble. He busts the municipal debt bubble.
He cracks down on the private sector. Foreign investment flees.
Foreign entrepreneurs flee. Entrepreneurs in China stop.
And the economy goes into what people were referring to as a Japanese-style deflation. And youth unemployment shoots way up.
The United States is on the rise. Money is flowing in.
Unemployment is down. Manufacturing is coming back.
And China's strategy in that scenario is we're going to export our problems through manufacturing all across the globe. Chile loses its only steel plant.
South Africa is about to lose their steel plant. Countries that align with China, Brazil, Mexico, file WTO cases against China.
We're the safe harbor. We're the adult that is the United States.
What happens? We do these tariffs. They're erratic.
And then all of a sudden, China looks like a place of stability, and we look like the chaos agent. Rather than China being isolated and the world aligning with the United States, the United States gets isolated.
And we have turned... We had China.
And they knew it. They said it.
This doesn't require interpretation. China said, you're isolating us.
We took advantage of China's on goal. They did to themselves economically through their mercantilism what their wolf warrior was on the diplomatic front.
And we used it strategically better than we actually assumed we could do.

And we just committed the worst on gold and snapping, literally ripping the victory from the jaws of defeat. And now we're the isolated party.
And what's worse, and let me say this as a father with two children, one full time and the other reserve, enlisted in the armed forces. 1979, Governor, was the first time the United States deployed a sanction that was on Iran and used its economic power and the power of the dollar so we didn't have to do something kinetic militarily.
We refined this and really become experts going through the war on terror.

And we had built up the capacity. One of the things that China and Russia hated was the United States through the dollar could economically punish you in a way that it didn't have to require the US military to do it, but we could use our economic power and our power of our dollar.
We have destroyed, destroyed, not inhibited, one of the most important tools we have developed over 50 years to punish an adversary without putting men and women in the United States uniform at risk. This is, as my grandfather would say, a Shonda.
It's a crime committed against ourselves.

It is ridiculous.

Now, most importantly, the American people, I give them a lot of credit.

It took them, they didn't go to Harvard.

They didn't go to Columbia.

They didn't even get a four-year degree, most of them.

They knew that a tariff was a tax on day one,

and they knew they were going to get hosed. That's right.
out without going to business school knew it up front rejected it and he is showing political the political peril of his own position yeah we completely betrayed them right i mean by definition number day one bringing down prices number one promise he look the one look we have our own problem as democrats we'll get to that in the rest this podcast. But the one thing you can say about Donald Trump, he'll betray you and stab you in the back.
And he's doing it all. And the American people are going to punish the Republicans for this.
And you saw it in the election. Hey, it's Elliot Wilson, hip-hop's greatest journalist.
And I want to tell you about the Ellie Wilson experience. That's right, my new solo podcast

where I talk to hip-hop's elite.

I'm talking about Snoop Dogg,

Wale, Abso, and R&B

cessation Leon Thomas, and many more to come.

My love for documenting hip-hop

started in 1992. That's right,

I'm three decades in, covering the culture that

changed my life. You might know it from

my days at XXL Magazine,

dominating the game in the early 2000s,

or you might be more familiar with my classic rap-radar

podcast interviews with artists like

I'm going to go to the next one. changed my life.
You might know it from my days at XXL Magazine, dominating the game in the early 2000s, or you might be more familiar with my classic rap radio podcast interviews with artists

like Jay-Z, Drake, Will Smith, and the late great Nipsey Hussle. But today's focus in 2025 is Delia

Wilson Experience. This is my new home where I'm going to tell these stories.
I will continue to

deliver the best interviews in hip-hop every Tuesday. Delia Wilson experience is available wherever you listen to your podcast.
Download or subscribe. Time is precious and so are our pets.
So time with our pets is extra precious. That's why we started Dutch.
Dutch provides 24-7 access to licensed vets with unlimited virtual visits and follow-ups for up to five pets. You can message a vet at any time and schedule a video visit the same day.
Our vets can even prescribe medication for many ailments and shipping is always free. With Dutch, you'll get more time with your pets and year-round peace of mind when it comes to their vet care.
Hey, my name's Jay Shetty and I'm the host of On Purpose. I just had a great conversation with Michelle Obama.
To whom much is given, much is expected. The guilt comes from, am I doing enough? Me, Michelle Obama, to say that to a therapist.
So let's unpack that. Former First Lady Michelle Obama.
And someone who knows her best, her big brother Craig. Will be hosting a podcast called IMO.
What have been your personal journeys with therapy? We need to be coached throughout our lives. My mom wanted us to be independent children and she would always tell me, stop worrying about your sister.
Having been the first lady of the entire country and representing the country in the world, I couldn't afford to have that kind of disdain. What would you say has been the first lady of the entire country and representing the country in the world,

I couldn't afford to have that kind of disdain.

What would you say has been the most hardest recent test of fear?

Listen to On Purpose with Jay Shetty on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

I'm Michael Kasson, founder and CEO of 3C Ventures and your guide on Good Company, the podcast where I sit down with the boldest innovators shaping what's next. In this episode, I'm joined by Anjali Su, CEO of Tubi, for a conversation that's anything but ordinary.
We dive into the competitive world of streaming, how she's turning so-called niche into mainstream gold, connecting audiences with stories that truly make them feel seen. What others dismiss as niche, we embrace as core.
It's this idea that there are so many stories out there, and if you can find a way to curate and help the right person discover the right content, the term that we always hear from our audience is that they feel seen.

Get a front row seat to where media, marketing, technology, entertainment, and sports collide.

And hear how leaders like Anjali are carving out space and shaking things up a bit in the most crowded of markets.

Listen to Good Company on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. We ready to fight? I'm ready to fight.
I thought it was, oh, this is fighting worse. Okay, I'll put the hammer back.
Hi, I'm George M. Johnson, a best-selling author with the second most banned book in America.
Now more than ever, we need to use our voices to fight back. And that's what we're doing on Fighting Words.
We're not going to let anyone silence us. That's the reason why they're banning books like yours, George.
That's the reason why they're trying to stop the teaching of Black history, queer history, any history that challenges the whitewashed norm.

Or put us in a box. Black people have never, ever depended on the so-called mainstream to support us.
That's why we are great. We are the greatest culture makers in world history.

Listen to Fighting Words on the iHeartRadio app,

Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. So let me, and I definitely look forward to talking about the political implications, but let's just talk about the practical.
I mean, because you've, I mean, you've experienced firsthand, up close, our efforts, particularly during the Biden administration. I really applaud those efforts, particularly with Japan and Korea in relationship to China.
You were very vocal, very vocal, more than any ambassador, which took some courage, I thought, against China. You've seen this sort of geopolitical shuffle.
I mean, what are they saying? You know, Trump's now saying we're respected around the world. What are they saying in the halls with our allies? I mean, how consequential is this to trust and how long is this wound going to fester? I would say to you, Governor, first of all, in 80 days, he's destroyed 80 years of credibility in the United States.
A big hit on our credibility. You can look at Indo-Pacific, you can look at the Middle East, you can look at Europe, you can look at Africa.
No one region is more outweighs another. The most important thing, post-Donald Trump, is somehow restoring trust and credibility to the United States'.
People are ridiculing the United States. If you're not just in word, but also in deed.
I work tirelessly, and I give the president and the national security apparatus credit with my colleague in South Korea. In the historic coming together at Camp David between the president, the president of South Korea, and the prime minister of Japan.
We all three countries have a complicated history. We came together, saw the future as more important than the past, and embraced it and shaped it.
Two weeks ago, China brought together the foreign ministers of Korea and Japan with them. They announced an economic partnership that the ground was developed.
Korea, that was essential to the export controls against the semiconductor industry in China. Samsung, the shining corporate semiconductor company in Korea, announced an agreement with a Chinese company.
Now, nobody's respecting the United States. Nobody's trusting the United States.
They're looking out for their own self-interest. That meeting between China, Korea, and Japan never would have happened on the kind of level it happened with the outgrowth that happened had we not committed and isolated ourselves with a tariff policy that hit ally and adversary with equal force.
It's an on-goal. There's no other way to describe it.
Would you extend, I mean, obviously there's a lot of talk now in South Korea about the prospect of a Korean peninsula where everyone is a nuclear power. Obviously there's now renewed conversations, which is remarkable to me.
You would understand it better than anyone in Japan, even. I mean, do you think that's an outgrowth of this moment? Or is that a more complicated question that may predate the recklessness of Trump's tariff announcements? So one is, everybody used to say, oh, about nonproliferation, it was expensive what we did.
You're about to get sticker shock on proliferation. We spent a year and a half, I was more on the sidelines on this one, of convincing Korea not to go nuclear, but to abide with the United States in a whole process of that.
Fast forward, what happens is I think Korea is going to look at the united states as an untrusted ally and they're going to make a decision with north korea's possession of nuclear capacity china's past uh capacity they're going to go nuclear and they're not going to put their faith in uh in the united states anymore and if korea does it japan will do it so just close your eyes. Pakistan, India, China, North Korea, South Korea, and Japan, all in that region will be nuclear.
What could go wrong? It's insane. I want to go double back on something I skipped, and I want to say something about the tariffs we had asked, if I could, Governor.
We're treating textiles, toys, and technology as equal.

And I don't, the idea that we're going to see technology or semiconductors, and I'm not saying they're more, but they are slightly more valuable than a t-shirt

from our economic capacity and strength.

So if you're going to have a policy on making sure that America's own economy is secure and slightly more self-sufficient than where it was, you don't treat toys manufactured in China, textiles manufactured in Southeast Asia, and technology like semiconductors as if they're equal economic capacity. And lastly, what's also lost in this space, almost 45% of all imports into the United States are things that go into our own manufacturing base.
So we're going to affect manufacturing, but not the way that Donald Trump said. It will have an impact on manufacturing.
It will actually lead to unemployment in the manufacturing i don't

know if you know this and i'm sure you do because you have your own industrial base in california there's 500 000 manufacturing jobs today with the help wanted signed around it yep we're short workers you know this and i know this is going around i used to have ceos come through here. I talked to them in this today.
You do too. Biggest item besides this regulation or that tax, biggest item, a workforce that they can't find.
That's right. So if we started at home, we would be, actually, there's 500,000 manufacturing jobs.
Today, we could have done something about it before we hit the tariff chaos. Look, I appreciate it.
Also, speaking of kids, I've got four kids and they still love toys. I think 80% of the toys under the Christmas tree come from China.
They've doubled the cost of that. Obviously, if you've got your 401k, as you said earlier, and I think the focus on 401k more than the markets, I think even Carville brought that up in a recent op-ed I thought was very wise and connects with people in a much more personal way.
But I want to highlight what you just said. California is the biggest manufacturing state in America.
People forget that. California is number one in two-way trade, number one in direct foreign investment, and number one manufacturing state in America.
40% of the goods movements in this country come through two ports of entry in California, about 50% of that from China itself. No state has more to lose, more to gain as it relates to ag, as it relates to all of these industries and tech, as you noted, AI, et cetera.
So that's, by the way, why we just filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration. We did it on, I think, very sound grounds.
And it's an interesting lawsuit for many different reasons. But we've got to push back much more aggressively on the consequences of this.
Let me say this without trying to go into a witness protection plan. Which, by the way, is hyperbole, but not necessarily in this day and age.
So I appreciate the caveat. Yeah.
Do you know a lawyer before I say it? By the way, none at Skadden Arbs, none at Paul Weiss, none at all these firms that have capitulated. You brought that up at the top.
Here's the thing is the analysis that we have a problem where America did not invest in America or Americans, and it led to our economic independence being adversely not only affected, but it also affected our civic life because people lost confidence in America by Americans. That is not a wrong analysis.
Going about that tariffs are the most beautiful word in the English language and hitting everything ally and adversary the same, not thinking it through strategically, not understanding the difference between toys and technology from a economic standpoint, is actually the cure is worse than the illness. and it's going to affect people's family budgets, it's going to affect their employment,

it's going to be affect people's family budgets and affect their employment is going to affect a whole host of things uh and their economic security their retirement security their education for their children and so to me your first question kind of was i get the analysis of what it ails America or one of the things that ails America. It's not wrong.
But like all things Trump, he makes the problem much more severe than addressing. There you go.
Yep. In every aspect.
Take the academic institutions. Were there things that they had done over the years that got them off kilter? 100%.
But using anti-Semitism to execute a political strategy to silence universities and academics? No. That's exactly right.
And so I know I'm with you on what you're saying is you're not an anti-tariff absolutist. You believe in targeted tariffs and along the lines of- No, I didn't say that.
Actually, no, I want to speak. But you haven't been opposed to tariffs in the past.
I mean, the Biden administration tripled them on Chinese steel and aluminum. Here's my thing is, if we've got a problem, what does it take to address and build an industry? Now, look, my analysis going back then as ambassador, China's the one that came up with self-sufficiency as an economic model.
That's why they're exporting their mercantilism and crushing all these countries around the world. They've decided how to isolate themselves from the world rather than interact with the world.
And it's only on China's terms. If you want to apply a tariff, my view is, okay, what are the things that we are going to do that tariff give us a window of time? What are our investments? What's our training? What are we going to do from a research standpoint in semiconductors, in steel or pick your industry.
I'm not for tariffs.

They are a tool in a toolbox but tell me what we're doing with all the tools in the toolbox so you have an integrated cohesive comprehensive strategy if we don't train the workers for the 500 000 jobs i don't care what tariffs you do yeah okay and if you're not going to fund some research that's take a look of you know i'll just say this fracking as a technology came out of our universities look we're now we went from a 400 billion dollar import to a 45 billion dollar export that's a big swing tell me what we're going to now people are thinking of using that hydraulic technology to do geothermal tell me what we're're doing, where's the end line, and what are all the pieces that fit into that? We're just going by gut instincts of one guy who failed seven businesses. So what you're saying, I mean, and to be more clear than the basis of that reaction, targeted tariffs with an industrial policy, with a policy to back it up, with a rationale to use it as a tool for strategic national security issues or for legitimate questions around imbalance of trade or unfair practices.
There are people like the Secretary of Commerce and the President who believe tariffs are the economic toolbox. They're not.
They are a tool in the toolbox. But you tell me each sector, what is the strategy? What are we going to do for training? What are we going to do for infrastructure? What are we doing for research and development? How are we going to take certain U.S.
companies and build them up or invite foreign investors to build those up? And I'll give you an example. Take the shipbuilding industry.
Japan and Korea, unbelievably capable of coming in and investing

and helping build that domestic industry

in the United States.

Are they banned?

Are they part of that?

Are they allies that we're going to invite in

to help us jumpstart something

that we've lost our muscle memory on?

That's a strategy.

What it is we're going to do?

What's the roadmap here so everybody knows how to contribute and knows what the goal line is or what the end point is. This is an opportunity to pivot a little bit, but pivot with a little bit of self-reflection.
And one of the things I've really appreciated about- Oh, that's going to be hard for an Emmanuel. That's why I don't know.'ve been pretty i was about to compliment you as an emmanuel self-reflection on the podcast too yeah no i mean well you know we could we could get in a deeper conversation yeah all all two of your two other brothers we got her too yeah we could talk about mom as well you already think you brought up the family in the context of what was the word you used wasn't mishigash what.
What was it? Shanda. It's a sin.
It's an embarrassment. It's a shanda.
I like it. I'm going to steal that.
It's Yiddish. It's half sin, half comparison.
It's good. It fits the moment.
But let me talk about a different moment. I mean, you and you were part of it.
And frankly, I think all of us were. A lot of us were parroting it to be Canada.
You know, as I sort of a Clinton Democrat back in the day, NAFTA, the WTO, you know, people talk a lot about the WTO sort of as a point of emphasis that sort of led to this point, not just an op-ed in 1980s or an ad by Trump as it relates to his positions on trade. You know, what do you make of the Democratic Party and our culpability for this moment and the hollowing out of our industrial base and the need to jumpstart? I mean, just take their arguments, the Bannon arguments, take the arguments of Trump and the acolytes around him that it's time to re-industrialize.
It's time to bring those supply chains home. It's time to really start focusing, yes, dare I say it, on America first, Rom.

No, look, I don't.

So I agree with that on both America and Americans first.

As a person who, first city to ever create free community college and make sure high

school isn't the endpoint of a public commitment to education.

And so, Governor, here's what I would say, and I'll talk to both NAFTA and WTO, meaning China getting to WTO, and they're slightly different, but of single spirit. The mistake, it's a mistake, and we owe a apology to the American people, is we allowed La Crosse, Wisconsin, Peoria, Illinois, Youngstown, Ohio, Saginaw, Michigan, or Battle Creek, Michigan, or Terre Haute, Indiana, to navigate the world market on their own against China and much bigger forces.
We didn't, if you go back to NAFTA, President Clinton had proposed billions and billions of dollars of investment that was turned down by Congress. I ended up with like a job training program, like a voucher, and basically said, here, you're on your own.
And the truth is, you and I and our kids, we're going to get the rewards of the system that we built. But that's not true for everybody.
The American dream has been unaffordable and inaccessible every year after every year, and it's down now to about 10% of the children of American families have access. All American people want is a simple thing, a shot at the American dream, and they got the shot.
And we left communities unprotected against China. Peoria is not set up, and the people who live in Peoria, to fight China on their own.
And that's just an observation, that's just a fact. And while trade had benefits, the benefits were not equally shared, and the risk was not equally shared.
And that's a fact, and for too long, it was ignored as a scream and a yell. And you can explain something of Donald Trump in that.
Now, on WTO, same analysis, except for I would say one caveat.

When China was brought in, it was part of,

in the same way that Russia was brought into NATO,

and Russia was brought into the G7.

There was a theory of the case, and it's kind of a 60-40 issue.

It's better to have them in the tent pissing out than outside the tent pissing in, to use an LBJ term. You know this as a governor.
I know this as a mayor, as a chief of staff. Nothing's 100 to zero.
That's what you have AI for. These are judgment calls.
It was better to think that you can make China and invest it in the system we have.

By 2012, when Xi becomes president of China, it's very clear they go from strategic competitor to strategic adversaries. Much different.
It was actually also very clear, and I say this as a congressman, representing many companies, as chief of staff, dealing with CEOs. China's intellectual property theft and economic espionage is core to the business model in a way that patents and rule of law are core to ours.

And in 2012, we held on strategic competitor, ignoring things that we knew were happening.

And they went to strategic adversary and core to their idea.

You have Google based in California. Only one country was stealing AI secrets from them, and it's called China.
They do it all over our universities. They do it all over our companies.
It's core to them, and we ignored it. Now, in 2012, we should have blown the whistle, called the game, and said, this is a different game.
And the only thing I would say is that we woke up on Wolf Warrior, the economic coercion, 10 years earlier than China expected us. And we started making use of that kind.
So was it a mistake in 1999? I got to be honest, it was a 60-40, 65-35 call. Do you let them stay out or you bring them in? And when they started changing and not playing by the rules they agreed to, they should have gotten called out earlier and not just called out.
The whistle should have been blown and they should have been forfeited the game and been dealt with differently. They're not a developing economy.
They were cheating and stealing their way to economic secrets. And not only cheating and stealing, we permitted American companies to give away research and development to get access to a market.
Well, I'm sorry, taxpayers pay for that research and development. We own that as much as any one company owns that R&D.
When we give you a tax credit, we're an equity investor. We gave away our family jewels because a bunch of company CEOs, all of us did.
DR, both sides of Pennsylvania Avenue, governors, everyone. Because they wanted access to the market.
And the biggest mistake, we commercialized our forms in national security policy. We commercialized it.
The business community had way too big a vote. A big mistake.
And now we have to make up for that lost time. We were in the process of doing that.
And I think what we're doing, treating allies as if they're adversaries, adversaries, as if one day they become allies. And it's a total mistake because we don't know friend from foe.
Hear, hear. And you say we'd start, and this is a segue then to the Biden years.
And, you know, I've been very vocal. I thought it was a masterclass of policy making.
I thought it was extraordinary legislative accomplishments. $369 billion in the IRA, 52-3 in the Chips and Science Act, 1.2 trillion, I think 550 billion more that new in the infrastructure.
I mean, the punchline aside of Trump, I mean, literally 300 weeks of infrastructure bloviation and the Biden administration delivered seemed to me an industrial policy that was worker-centered to begin to substantively address these trend lines and address these headlines of today. Do you agree with that? And I'm not looking to you as a former ambassador to the administration.
It's difficult to, you know, I'm not looking to create any wedges. But it seemed to me a pretty robust response to the concerns around the working class, to the concerns around what's happening in the heartland.
By the way, the heartland includes California, which, again, largest manufacturing state that has more hunting jobs, more fishing jobs and more forestry jobs, not just ag jobs than any other state.

So, Governor, I would say to you, look.

It started dealing with the fact that both of industrial policy and key sectors of the economy that were going to produce both jobs and economic independence.

We started to make investments in America, making up for what we just, the other question, which is things that we didn't invest in. And we allowed the freedom of the market to take place.
And it affected both our competitiveness and most importantly, the American people and their confidence in America, because we lost face with it. I do think there's, you know, it was robust, but what was one of the principal things that undermined the president was inflation.
And that was an outgrowth of the robustness of the first act, which is, and how big it was. Which I neglected to reference.
I referenced three referenced three of the actions my point is what was the infrastructure and not exclusively that i mean it was partially i mean to be fair you had international coming out of covet there's a lot of coming out of covet supply chains the war in ukraine issues and obviously international inflation that impacted the globe but yes partially impacting partially impacting America more than the other parts.

The first bill, everybody was, oh, it's big and bold.

And look, I can say this.

I mean, a lot of it was, oh, we were going to show President Obama, you know, about the

competitiveness.

We were going to show President Obama the right way to do this.

You think, meaning that Obama's bill wasn't big enough, your bill, and we needed to show

we could go bolder and bigger?

Look, I always, now you're going to deal with, talk about self-awareness.

Nobody ever offered an amendment to make it bigger.

That's a fair point.

Everybody that's rewriting history, you know, some of us were there.

Nobody offered an amendment for a trillion dollars.

It wasn't going to pass, okay?

Right.

So nobody offered it.

Everybody that's walking around, oh, it was too small, too timid.

OK.

Where was your amendment? Calling for a trillion dollars. OK.
Nobody did. Number two, it was big.
It was bold because we were having a problem. But part of it was all there was a political piece to this.
And we should just be honest. It was to show that, oh, we were different than the timidness, which I don't think was timid, President Obama dealt with, on the heels of having just dealt with TARP of what President Bush passed and signed, implementing that, but also the Recovery Act, that was what the political system could bear.
Now, the inflation that kicks off under President Biden is one of the pieces, not the only, but it is a result that big and bold came with a price, not just economic. It came with a political price because inflation kicked off, and it was known at the time it would warrant.
But there was something, considerations done where politics was, to be honest, more valuable. Yeah.
And I think sometimes also, if I could, in the rewrite, less is more. It became a giant appropriation bill rather than a strategically thought through.
And that criticism also applies to certain things we did under President Obama's first bill also, the recovery bill, which became too big of a funding bill rather than a strategic approach to either the recession and or post-COVID, President Biden's decision. So, Rahm, is your point then that it then clouded over some of the accomplishments on those other bills, that sort of three-legged stool that I was arguing were not insignificant, the Chips and Science Act and the infrastructure bill, and in making those investments intentionally in the IRA that have benefited disproportionately rural and red parts of this country.
There's no, look, you got three or four, in my view, there's telling people that the economy is great when they're feeling stressed, as if you like tone deaf that's one two that's on the politics okay yep yep second people ready breaking news people like order versus disorder you're talking to the guy in clinton white house who put together operation gatekeeper on san diego and the border looks like totally out of control i think american people are actually more on immigration, but they don't like the law being broken and being so flagrant and disregarded. And we allowed it to happen.
And then third, our party, and I've spoken about this, got into a cultural cul-de-sac. You know, look, we weren't good on the kitchen table issues.
We weren't really good on the family room. The only room we really did well in the house was the bathroom.
And I don't know if you know this, Governor, but the bathroom is the smallest room in the house. And that's the only place we were good.
Okay. And my view is we not only look like we were on the cultural periphery, we look like that's what was front and center for us.
Yeah. And I'm sorry.
I've written about this, I've talked about it. Stop.
The bathroom, the locker room, it's not more important than the classroom. And the kitchen table, a lot of things get discussed at that kitchen table.
Like what's going on in the neighborhood? Who are the kids hanging with? How does technology affect our children's isolation? They're in the basement. I can't get them off the telephone.
There's a whole host of issues that happen. They happen at your kitchen table.
They happen at my kitchen table. And they go from the kitchen table to the family room to at night when you have five minutes to talk to your loved one and your partner about what we're going to do.
So we actually got totally sidetracked into a discussion. Now, as a party, we're an accepting party, but we started becoming advocates.
And I'm sorry when two thirds of our kids can't read at grade level, the worst in 30 years, two thirds of our kids can't do math at the worst level in 30 years. That's the priority.
You make it for your own children. And we didn't make it for the American children.
And I just really like, yes, I was in Japan. I couldn't have been happier.
But I was like, I was watching America from this. And I said, have we lost our mind? The Democratic Party is about the American dream.
Owning a home, saving for your retirement, saving for your kid's education, and making sure that grandma wasn't one little away from the chapter 11 and moving into the house. You wanted her blocks away.
Okay. And the American dream is not accessible.
It's not affordable. That is what should motivate us as Democrats to speak to.
Now, the opportunity for us, if I can go on a tirade here. By the way, you sound very much like I have lately.
So keep going, Rom. Keep going.
Well, the Democratic Party, look, between now and 2026, there's going to be a referendum on Donald Trump. And there's going to be a lot of energy.
It's not going to be about us. It's going to be about him.
But you're not arguing for that. You're arguing for something bolder and bigger beyond Trump.
Here's what I'm arguing. The day 2026 is over.
Yeah, got to turn that page. And if you want the American people to give you the keys to the car, you got to know how to drive.
Yep. You got to know that you have a Google map to the American dream.
Vision. That you know how to steer that car, not get it off onto the shoulder of the road, and you know how to take it so not just the Newsom children and the Emanuel children can one day own a home.
You have kids graduating college with $35,000 in debt, and they're living in the basement until they're 35. This is not how you and I grew up.
Then you got grandma living upstairs where the kids used to live because she can't afford to live on social security and Medicare and she's skipping medication and you're skipping doctor visits. This is insane.
And if we're going to get the keys to the car between 2026 and 2028, we've got to tell people, you're not going to get the shaft anymore.

And I may not solve this problem, and I may have my tongue hanging out of my mouth at the end like a dog racing,

but I am going to work every day to make sure that more and more American children and more American families have access to that dream.

And the reason our politics are where they are, and the reason we have Donald Trump,

is that trust between the American people, the American dream, and those of us who are stewards of it,

Thank you. has been, and the reason our politics are where they are, and the reason we have Donald Trump, is that trust between the American people, the American dream, and those of us who are stewards of it, has been broken.
And we need to repair it. And that's our number one goal.
I appreciate everything you said. And I also appreciated your courage of saying, which I was right there with you, calling our party brand, which was not very well received, at with my inbox, when I called our party brand toxic.
I mean, when you're 27 percent that, you know, we were high water market, 29 percent on a CNN poll only to see 27 percent a few days later in NBC poll where people don't trust us. They don't think we have their backs on issues that are core to them, which are these kitchen table issues.
It is both the kitchen table issue and the family issues. And you mean family broadly defined in what context? Let me say a couple of things.
Now, I'm a product of my experiences. President Clinton is infamous in the 92 election for the economy, stupid.
but there were a set of issues coming on the heels of both Jimmy Carter, Walter Mondale, and then Dukakis, where he talked about ending welfare as we know it. A shorthand in your state coming out of the Rodney King sister soldier moment.
That he was centered on a set of values that all of us collectively had a consensus around so that the economic message about the middle class first could be heard. And for President Obama, it became dealing with Father Wright, his pastor, who has made some very ugly comments.
For President Kennedy, it was going to Texas to give a speech and say, I'll be a president who's Catholic, but not a Catholic president. There were threshold issues that were important on the cultural front that allowed the rest of what we had to say a permission slip to get heard.
Now, that's a political analysis. And I would say to you, the kitchen table and the family room are one piece.
And we got stuck as a party in the bathroom, i say jokingly but it's serious it is the smallest room in the house and we're not going to be heard on a set of issues and you say 27 i sometimes we earned that 27 the old-fashioned way we turned our back on the american people and they had they had hope in us they put their confidence in us. And we walked away from that contract with them.
Ron, what you just said, I think, is really powerful and important. Because in order for people to hear the other message, they had to hear that.
what you, I mean, they had to hear that we were connected on some of those other issues, meaning it's not just an economic message. I mean, that was, I think, Biden's frustration.
He was talking about Build Back Better. He was talking about an economic message.
He was talking about his worker-centered industrial policy, but it wasn't necessarily breaking through because we couldn't break out, as you point, of the bathroom debates, the pronoun debates and all these other debates. I've said this before, so I'll say it here.
In his last State of the Union, if my theory of the case is right, in the last State of the Union, when he was not reading off script, he said, when he went off script, he said illegal immigrants. People didn't like the word illegal.
All of Washington's immigration groups started yelling at the White House, and they went to undocumented. Now, to me, that was the slowest pitch over the center plate.
He should have said, look. No one's illegal.
I remember it. I remember it well, Ron.
Yeah. And he switched to the voices on K Street of Washington.
Yeah. And to me, that was the easiest way of showing, as I showed Kennedy, Clinton, and Obama had different footprints on this area of what I call a cultural landscape, where he could have said, look, uh-uh.
I said what I said. I'm sticking by what I said.

If you don't like it, you can use whatever term you want.

And this is, I find it ironic from a bunch of people yelling at you.

When you say, don't say defund the police, you say it doesn't mean what it says.

Well, don't use the English language then.

OK, if it doesn't mean I use the English language, convey what I mean, not what I don't mean.

So to me, we put ourselves in a position where we're not seen or heard by the American people because we disappointed them. And so you're, and I look, I appreciate the specific example as it relates to Biden in that particular moment as it relates to illegal immigration versus undocumented.
But broadly, how do you sort of reflect, there's a lot of dialectic within the party or not within the party, within punditry. More broadly than that, it's the weaponization of grievance.
The other side's so much more effective at making CRT, DEI, ESG, IRS, DOJ, anything with three letters, the issue of the day, and that they're able to surround sound Sinclair Media, not just Fox Newsmax, not just One American News, not just the blogosphere and the manosphere, but their ability to shapeshift. And constantly, we're on the defensive in that respect.
And they color things in. And even if we're trying to run away from those issues, we don't even want to indulge in those issues.
We have an almost impossible time in that media landscape of breaking out and getting back on our message. How do you reflect on that? Is that a component part or is it still we're not victims and we need to take more accountability? Look, they do have a very powerful ecosystem.
But, you know, even with the ecosystem, they lost Wisconsin. They lost every special election.
So, I mean, one of the things that you and I both know this, don't overinflate your opponent's power and don't underestimate it either. Does it have a powerful ecosystem? Yes.
Sometimes we are our worst marketers. Latinx, 100,000, defund the the police i can give you chapter and verse of terminology we you know i'm not i actually appreciate the spirit okay so don't get me i appreciate the spirit of those that are going around on protests calling oligarchs you're all over california how many people in your you've been a lieutenant governor governor how many times

did somebody come up to you said oligarch rather or big big big fat special interests okay why don't we use terms that people understand okay well i i didn't know we were applying for our tenure position okay give me a break so are we our worst are we our? Yes. Do they have a more sophisticated ecosystem?

Yes.

Do people like his tariffs?

No.

Did we win in Wisconsin?

Yes.

Did they lose Escambia County where Pensacola is and its 14% veterans, double the national average?

First time since five decades a Democrat won that in a national election.

Trump won it by 19.

We won it by three.

Yeah.

So I don't overestimate the power of it.

Thank you. The Democrat won that in the national election.
Trump won it by 19. We won it by three.
Yeah.

So I don't overestimate the power of it.

I think I'd like to have that ecosystem and I'd like to be more strategic and more sophisticated about how we talk about what's core to us.

I wouldn't want to be a better talker about the locker room and the bathroom.

I'd rather be a better talker and have a good ecosystem about this is what we're going to do to improve reading scores. Here's how we're going to make sure that kids can do math at math level.
Here's how we're going to deal with a chronic absenteeism race. So I'd like to have that ecosystem if I was focused on the right things.
If I was saying, you know, and I did not tout it, but, you know, we created universal pre-K in Chicago, never had it. Universal kindergarten, never had it.
Free community college for B students, never had it. So I'd like to have the ecosystem that tells that story and why it's important that two-thirds of the 20,000 kids that went to college for community college for free were the first in the family that ever went.
That passport, that education, that's your visa and your passport to the future i think there's other ways so i want the ecosystem and i want the way to talk about what we're doing in a strategically focused way not that makes me feel better about me but makes them feel better that i'm actually in their sleeves rolled up like a beaten dog working for them. Rob, are you, and we'll segue a little bit off that.
You had deep experience with all things tactical and political, particularly not, and you've had a remarkable career, so many remarkable roles working for three presidents, two in sort of more elite and established status.

But the Congressional Committee, you were running that in 2006, right?

Yeah.

And I bring up 2006 in this context, because after 2004, I remember everybody, we got shellacked.

They won the popular vote, the electoral vote.

Democratic Party was toast.

Everyone was running, saying we got to go to Applebee's, read, you know, what's wrong with Kansas. This is before Hillbilly Elegy, the whole thing.
And, you know, we're too elite. We're too out of touch.
And then all of a sudden, two years later, you successfully win back the House overwhelmingly, somewhat by Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House. And in 2008, you guys went with the biggest landslide since 1964 with 53% of the vote.
And all of a sudden, you're on transition team and chief of staff of some guy named Obama. Is this 2004 all over again, if we do it right? Or are we in a deeper, darker wilderness at this moment, from your perspective? So I'll take one anecdote.
So the day after we win 06, you'll appreciate this.

This is the day of President Trump,

President Bush rather,

giving that press conference that we took a thump.

But I'm in my Democratic congressional Campaign Committee. I love this story.
And it's President Bush. And he called to say, I want to congratulate you on a great race, you know, the race you ran, et cetera, et cetera.
And I said, I said, Mr. President, I said, I want to thank you.

And he goes, what do you mean?

I said, we did everything we needed to do, and you did everything we wanted you to do.

There you go. And that was, he wouldn't fire Rumsall.

It was also the, you know, he goes, you know what, Rom, you're as big a prick as they say you are.

We started laughing our asses off.

I said, here to serve, Mr. President.

And we were, actually, we were very respectful. Because, you know, two years later, as you said, I'm chief of staff, etc.
I think this gets back to what I said to you. Between now and 2026, it's all about Trump and it's a referendum, him and the Republicans.
But we better do the intellectual work right now on that window of time between 2026 and 2028. It's going to come fast and furious and we're not going to be living off the fumes of donald trump we got to be living we're not going to just fight donald trump we're going to fight for america and i'm spending my time intellectually what is that fight for america i love it so rob so just simple question it's the last question and i don't want any bullshit from politician i don't like those Are you or are you not running for president of the United States, Rom? I want to know right now.
Not another BS. The American people will decide what is the answer.
Here's the answer, which is if I think I know the answer to that question, which is the question I said, which is what is the fight for America? And I have something to contribute to that. I'll deal with that.
But if I don't think I have something that over yourself, governor, my governor here or other governors, that I think they're doing what I would do and enunciating that because being anti-Trump ain't going to get you squat in 2027. If I have something to say, and I've never been shy about saying it, and I don't think anybody else is saying saying it and I've thought through in my head how to do it I'll deal with that I gotta offer

something first that I think the American people need to hear well we heard a lot today and I

really appreciate the record of show governor you were the first to swear on this show not me

I don't know bullshit's not even a swear word Jesus I mean come on I love you talk to you soon

see you brother bye