And, This is How Trump’s Tariffs Cost YOU Money With Anthony Scaramucci

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. If you're from the Bay and grew up on the JV Show, then you know Wild 94.9 runs deep in your DNA.
Yeah, Wild 94.9 has been the Bay's number one hit music station for years. And every morning, we're bringing you the biggest hits, laughs.
We've got the biggest giveaways, the day's top headlines, and everything trending in the Bay to start your day. It's all on the JV Show weekday mornings on Wild 94.9.
And if you're busy in the morning, you can catch the JV Show podcast anytime, anywhere. Just save Wild 94.9 and the JV Show podcast as your top iHeartRadio preset.
It is Ryan Seacrest here. There was a recent social media trend which consisted of flying on a plane with no music, no movies, no entertainment.

But a better trend would be going to Chumbacasino.com.

It's like having a mini social casino in your pocket.

Chumbacasino has over 100 online casino-style games, all absolutely free.

It's the most fun you can have online and on a plane.

So grab your free welcome bonus now at Chumbacasino.com.

Sponsored by Chumbacasino.

No purchase necessary. VGW group void.
We're prohibited by law. 21 plus terms and conditions apply.
Well, we're finally here. It's Liberation Day.
Or is it in America? Is it Recession Day? Is it Tax Day? Is it Liquidation Day? All the punditry out and the realities, the new realities of unprecedented tariffs, unprecedented tax increases in the United States of America, certainly in peacetime, up to 23% tariffs all around the globe. Are we in a trade war? What does this mean in terms of you and your household and expenses? Are cars going to get cheaper? Or as Donald Trump says, it doesn't even matter.
We're going to talk about all of those things as well as what went right, what went wrong with the Harris campaign. What is the path back for the Democratic Party with Anthony Scaramucci up next on This is Gavin Newsom.
this is anthony scaramucci governor newsom going for the silver fox look okay this is this is latin american dictator brown governor if you ever need it's called it's called just for men anthony that's what that's called well i was using Cuban Leader Black, but it looked terrible on TV, so I lightened it up a little bit.

How often do you have to do it?

I don't even have the guts to try.

It'll turn orange.

Well, you definitely don't want to turn orange, especially these days.

That would be a bad color for both of us.

Speaking of orange, I mean, we all waited for this moment.

Did you predict it would be this volatile, this reckless? I knew it would be bad. I didn't, you know, the thing that you always prayed for is that he would have some people around him slow him down.
You know, if you talk to Mnuchin or you talk to Gary, Gary Cohen, former Goldman Sachs president, chief operating officer. They slow, this was the potential implementation 2018.
They slowed that down. Kelly slowed it down.
Mnuchin, all of those guys did not want this. And so he wasn't able to do this.
Now he has willing accomplices. How do you want me to address you? Governor Gavin, how do you want me to talk? Gavin works.
I mean, I get, you know, walk the streets with me. I'll get asshole.
I'll get everything. So I'll take Gavin.
I've been called a lot worse than Mooch and Anthony. Trust me.
You can't go into politics without getting some shit. But let me, I'm curious.
I mean, it is interesting because Trump 1.0, I mean, obviously this fixation that he's had for decades, you've known Trump for quite literally decades, you know, on and off and obviously worked briefly for him. But I mean, he's the one thing legitimately he has been consistent about as a former Democrat, pro-choice Democrat.
It's an interesting area of consistency. It's on the issues of tariffs.
So to your point, this obviously must have been on the agenda, at least internally in the first administration. But did you ever see it at this level? I mean, this is not even reciprocal tariffs.
These are sort of seem random and they seem almost, I mean, it's like a, that was a strange, I mean, it's always a reality TV show, but you had to see that board yesterday and the nature of how they came up with some of the numerics and divide by two. I mean, that couldn't have been necessarily on the docket in the first term, was it? No, I don't think it was this level of unseriousness.
I think in the first administration, it was he wanted to tack on across the board tariffs and he wanted to put up a border, a financial border, if you will, around the United States. Remember, he wants to wall the United States off literally and physically from the rest of the world.
The Trump doctrine and the reason why he goes back to McKinley, during President McKinley's administration, 97% of what we produced we consumed inside the country. And so Trump's attitude is that the world has freeloaded off the U.S.
and that we need to wall ourselves off literally and physically from the rest of the world. Now, that misunderstands how actually the world works.
And this is the problem we're all having. We need somebody like you to organize dissent and explain to people that what Trump is doing is actually catastrophic for our economy.

what he's doing would take us back to the 1930s with the smooth Hawley Act which steepened a

recession and turned it into a great depression uh Trump Trump could touch off deflation Governor

Newsom and if you if you touch off deflation in a society like ours, it's absolutely catastrophic. Because remember, we're in a debt-laden society.
So let me just give this example. If you have a $250,000 mortgage and an $80,000 job in a deflationary society, your salary is going down alongside the goods and services, but your debt's not going down.
You're forced to pay back the debt with dollars that are worth more than the dollars you borrowed. In an inflationary situation, you can pay back the debt with dollars that are worth less.
But if the counter should happen, it's absolutely devastating for the society. And so the Fed is going to be forced now to cut rates because the Fed fears deflation way more than inflation.
So what he's doing is actually historically catastrophic. He's doing something that literally, if you said, Governor, if I said to you, okay, let's get in a room, you and I,

and let's dismantle the global trading system. Let's get every one of our allies sore at us.
And let's give our adversaries a leg up. Let's give China an opportunity now to re-engage with Europe and become their number one trading partner.
What should we do to do that in 65, 70 days? And this is what you would do. Everything that he's implemented is doing that.
And his unserious cabinet, they can't defend it. I mean, Lutnick's on TV trying to defend it, cannot defend it.
I feel bad for Scott, the Secretary of Treasury, Bessette. It's like blink twice, we'll get sealed Team 60 and take you off the CNN show.
You know, I mean, it's embarrassing for all of us because, okay, there are, and this is the thing with Donald Trump, there are things about him that centrist, Wall Streeters, centrist do like. They want a stronger border.
I think you've had several people on your show that have articulated that. They want some banking deregulation, some positive crypto regulation.
But with Donald Trump, sir, you go to the buffet table with your tray. You can't pick the things that you want a la carte.
He force-feeds you everything. He force-feeds you the meme coin.
He force-feeds you the rhetoric on the 51st state. He force feeds you the meme coin.
He force feeds you the rhetoric on the 51st state. He force feeds you the nonsense about NATO and the dressing down of Zelensky.
What they did to Zelensky to me is literally one of the most un-American things that I've seen. So we're in a situation now where even Rand Paul, sir, even Rand Paul got to the airwaves last night and said that what he's proposing is absurd.
And of course, the markets are reacting with their signal, not noise, signal. They're signaling how absurd this all is.
So there's so much to unpack in what you said, and I want to explore a number of the points you made. But just go back to a fundamental point, and it goes back to just the person that is Donald Trump.

He wants to be loved.

The markets matter to him.

It's the one sort of objective scorecard.

He's got to see this kind of volatility.

I mean, he sort of previewed a little bit of it.

You've seen some of that volatility over the course of the last few months, and he pulled back on some of his assertions and some of his threats and promises. I mean, what happens, you think, in the next few days on the basis of this reaction, global reaction, but profound impacts in terms of the market volatility? Well, he has sent out his keyboard warriors this morning to say to people, come to the table.
Eric Trump is out on X or whatever they call it now saying, hey, come to the table and negotiate with my dad or it's going to end badly for you. I've seen it my whole life, you know.
And so they're nervous. You know, they're sending out signals to people that, okay, we've obviously overstepped.
Obviously, this, Governor, I call it the anti-Ten Commandments. It's like the evil Ten Commandments.
He had this big tablet in his hand. We had Orange Moses descending from Mount Evil with the, you know, indiscernible tablet.
but they now know that they've overstepped. And so they're nervous and they're trying to tell leaders now,

come to the table, let my... discernible tablet, but they now know that they've overstepped.
And so they're nervous.

And they're trying to tell leaders now, come to the table, let my father declare victory, you know, Prime Minister Carney, come to the table, and then he'll put out on Truth Social, I've lowered the tariffs for Canada, you know, this sort of thing. And it's actually embarrassing.
You know, it's embarrassing because embarrassing because I can't speak for the school system in California, but I would imagine sometime in the first grade, like the school system here in New York, you read The Emperor Has No Clothes. I was seven when I first read this brilliant piece of literature.
And I remember remarking to myself at age seven, well, who would be stupid enough to tell an emperor that he has clothes on when he has no clothes on? And of course, now here we are in 2025, it's 54 years after I read this beautiful piece of first grade literature. And I'm watching people in the president's court do things.
They're bobbleheads, governor. They're bobbing their heads saying yes, yes, yes, where privately they're saying no, no, no.
And so I do think there will be a breach. But I want to go back to your loved thing, because I think this is a 40-year idea for Trump.
He mentioned it to Oprah Winfrey in the mid-'80s, and he wants to implement it. And so if it causes hardship in his perverse mind, he thinks that this is a solution for America.
He thinks this is a reshoring solution for America. He thinks this is an end of the freeloading.
This is what his team says on Signal. But of course, you and I know that that's not the case.
And I can prove to your viewers and listeners that this is not the case. America, by integrating with the rest of the world, created a bigger market for America, more prosperity for America.
Is it perfect? No. Should our political leadership have checked some of the rights that the Chinese had in the WTO as the Chinese economy grew? Yes, I accept that.
Should we have checked some of the tariffs that could put on us? Certainly. But the notion that America would integrate with the rest of the world and then generally provide a security umbrella for the free world has led to incredible amounts of peace and incredible amounts of prosperity here in America.
And let me just point this out to you before you ask another question. In 1982, we had approximately 5% of the world's population and 26% of the world's output.
It's the same number today. So think of the rising living standards around the world.
I can prove to you, prima facie, that the policies have generally worked. We just needed to have done a better job.
We left a vacuum of advocacy, your party, frankly, my party, my old party. We left a vacuum of advocacy for white, middle class, blue collar workers.

And I would suggest that we got to get back to that. If you want to have the counter narrative to the nonsense that's going on, those families, and this would be my own family, they voted for the Franklin Roosevelt's.
They voted for the Jack Kennedy's. They voted for the Lyndon Johnson's.
But it seems like we just lost our way and we left those people out of the American aspirational economy. Many of those people now feel desperational.
And I appreciate that. I think it's what led you to appreciate Trump as a Republican and you were out there campaigning for Jeb Bush and others.
But I think you constantly- You're a Catholic. Is that right, Governor? I'm right out of the old Irish Catholic clan out here.
Okay, good, because this could be a confessional for me. I won't have to go on Saturday.
I can confess all my sins working for Donald Trump. No, but I'm going to compliment you a little bit because what you just expressed is what you also experienced.
And you talk often about New Mexico when you were out there and you saw him at least talking to those folks. You were not talking down to them and acknowledging them.
I see you. I care, at least asserting that he cared.
And you saw my party that seemed to be defending NAFTA, defending TPP, defending some of those trade deals, or at least struggling with them as it relates to an electoral strategy, not fully appreciating the magnitude of the displacement and the despair in the faces and the heart of so many. And so what, you know, appreciating that and appreciating there were people there yesterday with President that, you know, United Auto Workers and others that just feel like we are getting ripped off and at least this gives us a shot again.
I mean, is there a case that you can make? Is there a case that Trump himself at this moment, particularly, he can defend or do you just think he went further than he realized he went? And this is completely reckless, not just taking the risk. So again, the case could have been made 40 or 50 years ago, but it can't be realistically made today.
That's the problem because NAFTA caused a full integration of the Canadian and almost the full integration of the Mexican economy. So as an example, Prime Minister Carney, who's a personal friend of mine, I worked with him at Goldman 35 years ago, he would tell you that auto parts are coming across the border back and forth at least six times before they get installed in the car.
You can't charge 25% tariffs each time it moves across the border. And so we've integrated the economies.
If you said to me, we needed to right-size elements of the tariff system to protect American working-class families, I would say resoundingly yes. If you said to me, we need surgical tariffs, where we need to go through the tariff system and say, OK, the Chinese are dumping this product into our market.
They are subsidizing it with their government's help and they're giving an artificial price. And we saw that, of course, with Biden.
I mean, he he built off Trump's targeted tariffs and Biden administration certainly had that. They went more delicately through the list.
And this is the thing about Donald Trump that we have to acknowledge. There are kernels of truth in what he's saying.
It's the implementation of the policy that's flawed. But if you're telling me we have a problem at the border, Milton Friedman would have said years ago, well, if you have a welfare state and the U.S.
does have one, you have to protect your border because free market forces dictate that people will cross the border. And so I think what happened is because of anti-Trump sentiment, President Biden reversed all of that through executive action.
It was more of an anti-Trump statement than it was real thought out policy, and that hurt the Democrats in 2024.

But there was a kernel of truth to what Trump was saying. It's more about the implementation and the heavy-handedness.
And again, same thing with the tariffs. The president is correct that we need to bolster living standards in America for lower- and middle-income people.
the president is correct that there have been elements of the trade system where we've been

taken in America for lower and middle income people. The president is correct that there have been elements of the trade system where we've been taken advantage of.
You know, the World Trade Organization let China in with extraordinary emerging market latitude, extraordinary. And they never corrected it as China rose.
And I'll say something, Governor, that does not reflect well on me, but I'll share it with you. At the age of 25 in 1999, the World Trade Organization, there were protests in Seattle.
Do you remember these? I don't know if you would. No, I remember.
Of course. Okay.
And so Ralph Nader was up there. Working class families were up there.
They said, please, please do not let the Chinese into the WTO. Yep.
And you'll cause a hollowing out of our manufacturing. You'll ruin our middle class aspirational jobs.
Please don't. I was a young Wall Street person at the time.
And I had bought into the Wall Street narrative that this was going to lower the cost of capital deployment, lower the cost of labor, and was going to be generally good for the economy, the stock market, and generally good for people. And it was an advancement.
It was progress. But those workers were right, Governor Newsom.
I got that wrong at age 29 because the aftermath of what happened 25, 26 years later is this dilemma, this systemic rise in populism. Moreover, when President Bush implemented the TARP money, he made a very big mistake, and I think he's willing to admit it today.
He put a trillion into the banks. If he put $750 into the banks, sir, and maybe $250 into the lower and middle income people,

he maybe wouldn't have had the Occupy Wall Street movement.

Maybe it wouldn't have morphed into the Tea Party movement.

You see, there was an unfairness in the policy that created a prairie fire of populism. For early bird pricing and to qualify for access to the ultimate fan pit, buy your tickets before April 15th at axs.com.
For complete rules and alternate method of entry, go to wangotango.com. Wango Tango is produced by iHeartMedia Los Angeles in partnership with Code 4.
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.
Yeah, no, I mean, I think you marked two profoundly consequential moments, the WTO. It's interesting just even talking to members of the Clinton administration, talking to former President Clinton himself about WTO and its aftermath.
I think there's not only a reckoning in terms of our politics today and direct connection in that respect, but I think there's a growing recognition of the outsized consequence of the WTO.

But I also appreciate your point around the Wall Street relief and this sort of Main Street, Wall Street frame after the financial crisis with, you know, and obviously, Obama administration inherited a lot of that and sort of maintained not totally dissimilar policies as it relates to that bailout and the consequences to the populism that we're experiencing today. Let me just back up, just talking about the challenges of today.
I mean, how does, knowing Donald Trump is the way you know him, how does he get out of this? Is it just, you know, he's got 60 countries, he's got 60 leaders come in, one off, he starts negotiating BS deals that he claims credit for having, quote unquote, succeeded in level setting the playing field. Or is there going to be more sweeping across the board recalibration with the EU, as an example, or other allies? What's your over-under in terms of the next days, not just weeks? I mean, anything is possible, Governor Newsom, and I'm generally an optimist about life, but I'm pessimistic about this.
And just hear me out for a second, and I'd love to get you to react to it. We've had a bipartisan commitment to this economic geopolitical footprint.
We've had a bipartisan commitment on containment, the NATO security umbrella, the free trading mechanisms around the world, America absorbing some of that because we're the richest nation. And he's ending all of that.
He's ending all of that very abruptly. and he's doing it in a way that's raising risk premium around the world.
So said differently, if I was a European leader, I'd be like, okay, whoa, it's not just Donald Trump. 50% of the people voted for him.
There's something wrong in the body politic in the US now that's gonna make the US a little bit more arbitrary and a little bit more capricious in its decision-making, unless you're telling me we can find a transformative postpartisan leader that can galvanize the Americans again. If I'm in Europe, I'm like, okay, I got to have other options now.
And I think the market is signaling, even if Trump tomorrow says, okay, EU, here's this deal, and China, here's that deal, and oh, by the way, I waved my beautiful magic wand, here's the new tablet coming down from Mount Stupidity, and here's what we're going to do now, I think he's upset the apple cart enough where you're now creating different sets of outcomes and different sets of decision-making from other responsible political leaders. Do you think I'm going too far in thinking that? No, I mean, I think that course was set weeks and weeks prior to the tariffs as it relates to the reordering our alliances and, you know, J.D.
Vance's speech in Munich, the security conference and talking down and past our allies. And as you said, the ambush in the Oval with Zelensky and the messages that have been sent.
And I can just, let me just reinforce that point of view on the basis of the kind of outreach that I've directly received as governor of a state that happens to be larger than 21 state populations combined, the fifth largest economy in the world, where foreign leaders have reached directly out to California to express that anxiety and concern from a subnational level and look to engage us directly with all the volatility and the uncertainty, again, prior to this tariff announcement coming from the White House. So I think the consequences are off the charts and profound.
And it begs then this question, Anthony, you've, look, we watched Project 2025. I felt some of us were accused of crying wolf on it.
But this sort of shock and awe, this flood in the zone, as Bannon loves to say, he has won speeds, you know, he puts his foot on the gas, there's no break with Trump. Has that even surprised you to the degree that he's moved this early? Yeah, that didn't.
I think what has surprised me, frankly, is the willing sycophants, the willing enablers. There's usually people of conscience in the room that say, whoa, that doesn't work for me.
You know, John Kelly fired me, Governor Newsom, on the 31st of July, 2017. We've become very close friends.
And, you know, we socialize together. And my wife, Deirdre and Karen, and him hang out together.
And we talk about the dilemma of working with Donald Trump. You know, and it's just a weirdness to him.
There's like an anti, there's a conflict of of voice i've been dying to ask you this question since i saw you at the night of the debate where you and i were at september together in philadelphia both they're supporting vice president harris uh when he attacks you the the president president trump he attacks you as a keyboard worrying bully but then when he has to face you in person, and thank God you're a tall SOB, because I'm not as tall as you. At least you can stand off to him face to face.
He never attacks you face to face. Oh, Gavin, you're a great guy.
You know, this sort of stuff. What do you make of that, sir? If you don't mind, I've been dying to ask you that question for six months.
Anthony, I've had, for me, sort of a bookmark in history, interesting experience. I was there near the end of the Biden administration in the Oval for about 90 minutes up in the residence with President Biden, and then invited back, same guy, same state, same Democrat, a few weeks later.
And I think I was the first Democrat to sit down in the Oval with Donald Trump. And it was 90 plus minutes.
And they kept trying to extract us from one another. And it was because it was deeply engaging and personal.
He's incredibly charismatic, as you know well. I hate to say this to people, but he's a very charming guy in that interpersonal interaction.
And there's no, he doesn't want conflict. And I'll be candid with you.
It surprised me on the Zelensky. I call it an ambush.
I saw that more as an ambush coming from J.D. Vance and the vice president than even Trump, because it's not like Trump to do that in the Oval.
I was surprised because of the interpersonal, because he tends to like that rapport one-on-one. That said, others have different theories, but it's an interesting dynamic that people don't fully appreciate.
But sir, when he goes off on you on Truth Social with the nonsense name-calling, and then you see him like a week later or a day later in California, he acts like it didn't happen, right? Of course. No, and in fact, gets a little uncomfortable when you say, hey, what happened to the new scum? He's like, oh, and he literally, that's when he's sort of unmoored a little bit because he doesn't want to engage in that.
And so, look, and I think that's the difficult part is figuring out what's real, what's not, what's performative, what's not. I mean, for him, it's about the crowds.
I mean, he even made that point. He goes, the crowd loves it.
And so I'm like, okay, whatever your crowd needs. The problem is, I feel like it's, you know, I'm watching Gladiator 3, or at least a preview of Gladiator 3 with a thumbs up, thumbs down.
You don't know which direction it's going to go based upon the crowd. And that, again, begs my concern now, you know, and not just concern, but consideration of a sort of reconsideration.
How would this crowd, in terms of the markets, you know, dismisses mother nature, but the markets can't be easily dismissed. People's 401k, you're even seeing it's not just Rand Paul.
There's some other Republicans that are marginally expressing concern around tariffs. You're seeing now layoffs.
You're seeing announcements from these companies that were supposed to be spending trillions of dollars coming in the United States now actually saying they're not going to invest in these factories in some of these rural parts of the country. I mean, I've got to think, and I know you're sort of challenging that, that he's got to reverse more quickly than perhaps even you think.
No? Yes, but I don't see how we get undamaged from this. Here's the cruel admission.
I knew how bad it was. I endorsed President Biden in 2020.
As you know, I helped on debate prep and and tried act as a surrogate for the vice president Harris in 2024. You didn't try to act.
You were a surrogate and an incredibly effective one. This is an existential crisis, sir.
This is a postpartisan thing. My message to your party is open the door, expand the tent.
Remember what Lyndon Johnson said, let's get all the elephants in the tent pissing out. Let's not have elephants outside the tent pissing in.
Make it a pro-democracy movement. Make it a pro-America movement.
Make it a post-partisan transformation so that we can beat the current Whig party, which the Whig party is the MAGA party. It's at a step with America.
They can beat us if we are dissembling. They can beat us if we're internecantly fighting with each other.
But if we expand the tent, and some of your friends on the liberal side don't like me because I was with Trump. I understand that.
But hold your nose. Okay.
Hold your nose. They don't like me because I shook his hand at the tarmac and return his phone calls.
I mean, which, you know, that's a deeper conversation. And so I appreciate your frame.
I applaud you. Look, I don't like Steve.
Okay. Bannon, I think, is a national disgrace.
I'll just say that. Thank God he's so ugly, frankly.
Otherwise, he could be like a more powerful figure. I think that was the good Lord helping us.
But I'm just saying to you, I admire you having a conversation with him. Charlie, I know forever.
I campaigned with Charlie in Pennsylvania with Trump. He's a formidable young man.
I think he's intellectually misguided, but I think it's important for you to speak with him. And the fact that your base or your coalition on the Democratic side would lambaste you for that, they are making a mistake.
If Churchill could hang with Attlee to beat Hitler, okay, and I'm not comparing Trump to Hitler. I'm just saying we have an existential crisis going on.
He is going down Project 2025. He wants to weaken the legislative branch.
He wants to disgrace the media, weaken it. He wants to weaken the judicial branch.
He's going after our law firms in a way that I don't fully understand. By the way, and the law firms are quickly capitulating.
Yeah, they're are quickly. Let me restate it.
He's going after our law firms in a way that even they don't understand the long-term ramifications of it. There you go.
Well said. And so guys, let's stop fighting with each other, okay?

We love our country.

We love our system.

We like the checks and balances, the decentralized nature of the country that have allowed our families, the Newsom family, the Scaramucci family to rise, okay, from modest beginnings,

whether they were in Ireland or they were in Italy.

Got it.

We came here for this great opportunity. We don't want authoritarianism to spoil it.
He wants that. If you don't think he wants that, you're not paying close enough attention and you're not going down the list.
And somebody like you, I applaud you for bringing me on so that we can discuss this. I admire you for bringing these other guys on that I may disagree with, but I admire you for it because open the tent.
Let's get the people in the tent. There's more of us that love the country, care about the country.
I may not agree with you on certain policies, so what? We care and believe in the system together. And I think that's the resonating

message that you're going for, and I applaud you for it.

No, and I appreciate that. And I hope our party's listening to that because this notion, I mean,

you know, this is about addition, not subtraction. We can't afford to lose any more folks.
And I think

the cornerstone of this conversation is the folks we are losing is the working class. Again, I keep going back to your story that was so resonant with you, at least as you continue to share it over the course of the years of being there on the campaign trail with Donald Trump and giving voice to these folks.
And Bernie Sanders, in some respects, does as well. There's sort of populism on both sides of the aisle.
But our party, for whatever reason, hasn't been able to connect in that respect. And to that point, I want to ask you this.
Why? Because I thought, and my, not just think, I have a core belief that Joe Biden, in his four years years as president was one of the most pro-worker presidents in my lifetime. He had an industrial policy that was worker-centered.
I mean, hell, he even walked the picket line, the IRA, the Chips and Science Act, the bipartisan bills. I mean, there were over 400 bipartisan bills, but infrastructure, The fact we saw actual investments being made, again, supporting workers, supporting the heartland, supporting the folks, quote unquote, that we lost in this election.
Did I read that wrong? You were a supporter of Biden. I thought we were making that point.
But it seems to have been lost or at least wasn't inherited by Harris. I don't think you're reading that wrong.
But what I think we have to acknowledge, unfortunately, is that the presidency itself, to quote Theodore Roosevelt, is a bully pulpit. And so one of the jobs of the president, he or she, is to be the great salesman or saleswoman for the country.
And the president put in the CHIPS Act, very successful. The Inflation Reduction Act, which had all that embedded infrastructure, very successful.
There was a lot of things that he did that were pro-worker and pro-union, very successful. But unfortunately, the president was struggling verbally by the middle of his term, and he was no longer able to passionately advocate for that.
The 65-year-old Joe Biden, if I'm just being brutally honest, would have slayed Donald Trump, stayed in the race, been able to make that argument and built on that legislative agenda. Now, he made that fatal Shakespearean mistake.
He should have said in September of 23, here are the 15, 20 things that I've done that have very benefited the economy. Economy's on the uptick.
Inflation is on the downtick. I heard the message.
I got the message from the absenteeism of us, meaning normal Democrats, absenteeism. I got the Bernie Sanders Trump message.
this is what I'm doing with policy to fill the space, but I'm too old for the job. And so it's September 2023, I'm going to open up the primary.
Okay. Not having a Democratic New Hampshire primary in 2024, again, if I'm being brutally honest or it's shameful because you're attacking Trump for his anti-democracy stance, but then you're saying, well, we're not going to have a primary.
Well, you know what? Even Jimmy Carter had that primary against Teddy Kennedy. And I think it's a mistake.
And so I don't want to go back and re-litigate the whole thing. I respect the Biden family.
I'm not trying to do that, but I'm saying going forward, you guys got to get it together. And you got to coalesce around a national figure that can offer the dissent, that can offer the opposition.
Now, he's blown – I'm looking over the camera here to see CNBC. He's blown the doors off the global economy.
He's blown the doors off the stock market. We're plus 50% now, greater likelihood to have a recession.
The poly market's saying four rate cuts, sir. So that's a first quarter 26 recession.
And so get it together, beat these guys in the midterms, get it together and put up a candidate to box these guys out in 28 so that the situation doesn't get worse. And Anthony, let me ask you a question.
I mean, it's tactical and I want to talk a little bit about your perspective on Harris and the outcome, because I think you were like me that we felt more confident than certainly the outcome. But in terms of the guy or gal on the white horse to come save the day, I know, you know, parties tend to focus so much on that.
And my party, Democratic Party, seems disproportionately always focused on the person on the white horse to save us. Seems to me over the years, the Republican Party has been a little bit more structurally focused on school boards and focusing on legislative races in states large and small, a bottom-up frame, not necessarily a top-down.
Operation Red Map, sir. You know the coinage of that term, right? They said, okay, we got to get into those state legislatures.
They'll help us gerrymander these districts. And we'll, even though we're a minority party in terms of registrations, let's organize and we'll beat these guys by using the tyranny of the minority, right? The founders were worried about the tyranny of the majority, but the Republicans organized and asserted themselves using the tyranny of the minority.
That's a fascinating point that you're bringing up. Yeah.
And so it's interesting. For me, it's both and.
And one of the things that I caution my party about is if we're too fixated on a personality, then we're missing the opportunity to sort of reimagine our party because there's bigger trend lines here that sort of predate COVID and even Trump as it relates to, you know, starting to lose this multi-ethnic young men in particular across the spectrum. Some of that was arrested because of COVID and Trump, but that trend line is now a big headline.
And I'm curious, you know, your sort of reflection on that, but also reflection on where Harris may have struggled.

Was it just the 107 days?

Was it the lack of an open primary?

Was it the fact she didn't distinguish herself enough and separate herself enough from an incumbent?

Was it the issue of incumbency?

Was it inflation?

Was it interest rates?

Was it immigration?

Was it wokeism, broadly defined?

Have you landed on any theory of the case of what the hell happened in that election?

so let me let me give you three things some of them are going to be controversial for your party and so uh you know you're probably going to get some negative press me saying this on your on your

air and i i apologize to you in advance but i hope the people listening will be open-minded

because i want you to win i you have to slay this MAGA party. This is no longer the Republican party I lived in, sir.
This has been decapitated, hostile takeover, third-party insurgency has changed this into a Frankenstein monster, a Frankenstein monster of anti-democracy. So we have to beat them.
So I would say, let's leave off the table of the open primary. It didn't happen.
I think we would have liked to have seen that starting in September of 23, and that would have built up a case and somebody would have grabbed, got to the top of the pecking order. That would have fortified that candidate.
But in the 107 days, I'll just make three very close observations. Number one, the vice president is a very competent, very capable leader, but she was not a great risk taker in that moment.
Unfortunately, to rise to the presidency now, it requires exogenous risk. If you've got a group of handlers around, you say, don't go on Rogan, don't go on this person, don't go on that person.
Fox News one time, not 25 times. If I were her, I would have said, hey, every morning I'm going to be on Fox News.
I'm going to eventually chum up to those anchors that hate me, and I'm going to get some messaging out there where people will see that I'm not the demon that they're trying to present me as. You see what I mean? I would have said, hey, Fox News, I want to be on every day.
You know, these podcasts that people are excoriating me, these alpha bro podcasts, at least once or twice a week. Okay, so she was not a risk taker.
That's number one. Number two, Robert Caro and his books on Lyndon Johnson, which I think are some of the best biography ever written,

he describes Humphrey's situation with Johnson.

He didn't break from Johnson.

Johnson comes out of the race in 68.

Humphrey waits till October 1st to break from Johnson.

He's not even willing to do it then.

He's such a gentleman.

Johnson brings him into the Oval Office and says,

you got to break from me.

You want to blankety blank on me on the Vietnam War, blankety blank on this, blankety blank on that.

You got to do it.

And so he starts that process in October. It's too late.
and unfortunately the vice president's respect for joe biden uh that infamous line that she says on the view i can't think of anything i would have done differently is harmful to her because

we're in an anti-incumbency moment and she needed to do what Johnson suggested to Humphrey. But in Humphrey's case, it was too late, sir.
The polls were closing. He was catching Nixon when he made that break, but it was too late.
And then the third thing, and I know this is really going to drive everybody crazy. So you have a fire extinguisher behind you in case your hair sets on fire, because the third thing is really bad.
You're okay? I just want to make sure you're in a flame retardant vest there. Let's do it.
Let's hear it. The third thing is how on God's earth do you let Bobby and Elon out of the party? Interesting.
How do you guys do this? Okay. I wasn't expecting that.
I'm sorry? Interesting. I wasn't expecting you to say that.
Okay. But how do you guys do that? Okay.
Bobby is a Kennedy. Yeah.
Whole family's tied to the party. Yeah.
He actually wants to stay in the party. And I know this because he endorsed the back of my Bitcoin book, and I know Bobby Forever from New York.
How do you let Bobby out of the party? Even if you don't like Bobby or you think he's a kook with the vaccines, you open the tent, keep him in the party because he's got that bro connectivity that costs you a few points where you don't want them right and elon i don't care what the uaw is saying or whoever told whoever told biden to disinvite elon from the electric vehicle summit i don't know who it was but president biden should look man i'm sorry the guy's the richest guy in the country he's got a 44 billion dollarhorn, and he's coming to the party. He also created the space.
How the hell do you have an electric vehicle? You don't have to sit next to the guy, and you may not like him because he doesn't have a union shop, but he's our guy, and we got to keep him in the party. And so those two guys, they hurt you in Pennsylvania.
Elon hurts you in Pennsylvania.

He hurts you in the Twitterverse or whatever you want to call it with the toxic algorithm.

And Bobby hurts you.

And I'm just submitting, again, this is the indictment of your party, if I could be bold

enough to say this to you respectfully.

Open the tent.

Hold your nose.

If somebody like me wants to help you, invite in i will try to help you get those guys back in the party i know you want to cancel them now you want to blow up tesla vehicles and so on and so forth yeah get elon back okay calm down calm down he's shooting rockets into space he's he's got an environmentally friendly vehicle that he's made, which you guys used to buy in droves. Let's calm him down.
Let's disengage him from where he is right now. Get him back to neutral because those three things hurt Harris.
No risk-taking, no break from Humphrey, and how the hell do you let Bobby and Elon out of that party? It's interesting. And the fact that you attach, I mean, the first two, I certainly appreciate, but it's interesting.
You thought it was that determinative, these two individuals, these brands and what they represent historically and iconically, both interestingly, two people that are best known for their environmental stewardship. They were Democrats.
For decades. Governor Newsom, they were Democrats.
By the way, I can't tell you how many events I had with both of them in San Francisco as mayor of the city, talking about environmental stewardship, climate change, and issues related to low carbon green growth and electric vehicle transition. What he did in Lancaster County with the Amish was, you know, to quote him because he says

he's on the spectrum.

Okay.

It was on the spectrum.

Beautiful.

He got them all in vans.

He told them that the unpasteurized milk that they were pumping out of their dairy farms

was going to be destroyed.

It was misinformation.

That was, you know, he gets a red card for that.

He says that Biden's going to come after them with that.

And then he gets them in a van because they can only take the horse and buggy unless they're not driving. And he drives them over to the voting.
And there's 99,000 of them vote for Trump. And I'm telling you, this is a game of inches.
You know this. I know this.
I've worked on six presidential campaigns in the last 24 years. It is a game of inches.
It's a game of risk taking. It's a game of calculated risk taking.
But when you got guys on your team that you may not like, don't be so righteous. Bring them into the tent.
You know, I was told that some of the campaign guys wanted me on the campaign plane. And there were hardcore lefties that were like NFW with that guy.
He once worked for Donald Trump. Guys, give that up.
Release anger. And let's study the existential threat and work together.
And that disappoints me to hear you say that and but it doesn't shock me i mean and and disappoints me because i saw how hard you worked for biden and then how hard and sincerely you worked for harris and how you've been a pretty consistent and vocal uh opponent of donald trump and with your insight this is not it even Republicanism, sir. It is a perverse form of populism.
And I'm going to give you a new word. Okay.
And I didn't know the definition of this word, but I know it now. Do you know what the word autarky means? A-U-T-A-R-K-Y.
Do you know what that means? You got me. You stumped me.
What is it? Okay. So I didn't know what it meant either.
Okay, someone had to explain it to me. A-U-T-A-R-K-Y.
It means an autonomous economic system. So Trump wants to create an American autarky.
He wants to wall us off literally and physically from the rest of the world. He wants to disengage America.
It would be as if Huey Long or Charles Lindbergh beat Franklin Roosevelt and created the America First movement in the 1930s. This is what this guy wants to do.
And I'm telling you, this is an existential threat to our children and our grandchildren. Put down the swords.

Let's work together.

Let's figure out how AOC and Bernie can build this coalition alongside of whatever you're

representing and, frankly, alongside of whatever Christie, myself, and Kissinger and Cheney

are representing.

And let's lock forces.

Remember, the Whigs got destroyed by a new party called the Republicans. They got destroyed by that party because they created a new party in 1856.
They went after the abolitionists that were Democrats and they went after the Whigs that wanted abolition and they created this new party and they got a guy named abraham lincoln elected the first republican president the new whig party is the maga party which has the republican name in name only they're the true rhinos governor newsom they're maga republicans in name only Let's team up and let's build a coalition that is a plurality, a majority to restore confidence in America globally, to restore confidence in America economically. And then let's, once we look at the burning of the House, let's fix parts of the House with maybe some constitutional amendments, maybe some policies or laws that will benefit all of us and make us safer in sort of a new American social contract.
Well, you're not going to get an argument from me. And I'm not that old, but I'm old enough to remember that that's the Democratic Party you were referencing that built the middle class, that gave us the weekends, that gave us Medicaid, gave us Medicare.
How about the GI Bill, sir? Thank you. You can go on and on and on.
The GI Bill transformed everything. That was a Democrat idea.
And the GI Bill took Jewish tailors from the Lower East Side and turned their children into doctors. It took Italian construction workers and turned their sons and daughters into accountants, lawyers, or doctors.
We had an ethnic middle-class movement driven mostly by Democrat policy in the post-World War II era that gave opportunity to people that didn't have it in the old country and didn't, frankly, have it in America prior to that. That's the idealism of your party.
That's the Jack Kennedy vision of your party. Amen.
Look, let me ask you just a couple of tactical points. I appreciate the larger tent framework.
I think this party needs a vision. It needs an economic vision.
I think if you're going to talk about Kennedy, he was the last president to bring us on a journey together. We saw ourselves on that journey.
And I think that's a big part of also what's missing. What's the positive alternative vision that can enliven and excite people and people feel included at a time of such division and fear and anxiety? But there's also the fear and anxiety and division that comes from the information superiority on the other side as well.
The weaponization of grievance, the ability to surround sound, to dominate the narrative, to flood the zone in terms of communication. You've got sort of a gender bias, I would argue, algorithms that skew as well.
Online, you've got 14 of the top 15 cable shows are all Republican shows. Podcasts are dominated, as you say.
It's not just that manosphere, the bro culture, but sort of dominated by more moderate to conservative to ultra-conservative voices. What do you make of that landscape? And what's, if you were going to just observe as a participant, you've got two podcasts, successful podcasts, you're out there, you've been in the media dominating for decades back to your CNBC days.
I remember a few decades ago. I mean, what do you make of this environment? And what do you make of, how do we begin to sort of reconcile with that? And how do we sort of address the reckoning that is that asymmetry? Well, I mean, it's such a great question on so many levels and so many different layers, but I'll just add one thing to it.
While the conservatives are dominating podcasting, and let's be honest, they are dominating cable news, mostly through Fox. They say the corrupt mainstream media is against us.
But in the meantime, the media, it's almost like the typewriter business, right? The big media is dying. Okay.
And the reason why I applaud you starting this podcast is you're going to reach a lot of people because they can download you on their phone. They can go for a walk.
They can hear what you're saying. And they'll say, okay, I like that one.
And then they forward it to five of their friends. It's like that old shampoo commercial.
And so what I would say to the Democrats, start over. Okay, be the engineers.
And you remember that movie, Brian Grazer, Ron Howard, Apollo 13, Tom Hanks plays Jim Lovell. Be the engineers that go into the room and say, here's the tools on the table.
We have to reinvent ourselves. Forget the mainstream media.
Forget the old totems. Let's be engineers.
Let's be scientific marketing engineers, media engineers. How would we reinvent ourselves today? And what would we do? What podcast would we have? What business podcast would we have? What messaging do we want out there? How do we stop attacking each other? The Republicans have done a very good job of not attacking each other.
I find it curious that Bannon goes after Musk, because I know Bannon well. I work with Bannon on the 2016 campaign.
he's going after musk for many different reasons but he knows that musk is not pure maga he knows this okay he knows musk is reacting to what happened to him in the world of the blue world he moved into the red world or the dark maga world whatever he calls it because of what happened to him the blue world. So get to the table like the engineers on Apollo 13.
Let's start from scratch. Let's have a summit.
You call the summit. I'll be there.
And let's start a laboratory of ideas to beat this back because the average American is kind. The average American does not want to play the victim.
The average American is aspirational. And the average American believes in lifting the boats of others.
You know, the Marshall law, the Marshall plan, excuse me, passed because the average American looked at the landscape of the world and said, the world needs this. And if it's good for the world, it's going to be good for us.
And you know, Governor Newsom, you're at your best when you're helping other people. Americans know this.
Americans get their best feeling on the side of giving. Donald Trump has set up an America, and I'm going to give you these two allegories.
You have one blue collar family where the young man young man in the blue-collar family rises to great success, and he pays for some tuitions, Governor Newsom. He buys a car.
He helps people with medical expenses because he's the one rich person in the otherwise blue-collar family. Imagine the second family where the same thing happens, but the man or the woman builds this beautiful swimming pool and this great mansion, and then they charge their family members to come into the swimming pool.
Hey, Gab, you want to come to my swimming pool? It's 25 bucks. Which family is going to do better? Which family? Yeah.
Okay, and the Democrats know this. The Democrats know this in their bone marrow.
Get back to the table. This is what we represent.
This is the party that built the United Nations. This is the party that laid the framework at Bretton Woods for the IMF and the World Bank.
And by the way, globalism, I maintain, just has bad marketing because the globalism has led to rising living standards

here in the United States, elsewhere, better health standards, less pestilence. It has actually worked.
We just got really bad marketing people involved with this. Get back to the table and let's brush up on this.
And I think the counter narrative would blow the doors off these people. They are in the minority, by the way.

When,

final question, just because I'm curious. I mean, when the dust settles on Trump, Trumpism then is top of mind.
And what's top of mind for a lot of folks out there that are whispering is what's J.D. Vance up to? You talk about Elon Musk.
You talk about others that really supported his nomination for vice president, members of Trump's own family, Peter Thiel types, and others. You've got Bannon out there either performatively or very seriously making the case, 2028, Donald Trump extending term or it's Vance, and then he'll step aside and will continue MAGA for another four years.
I mean, what do you make of the 2028 third term? What do you make of J.D. Vance? How serious and concerned are you about J.D.
Vance and what he represents and the people that are his closest confidants and allies? Well, I mean, so you know from California, these guys are Curtis Yarvin, post-democracy sort of people. They believe in a monarchical structure.
That would be Teal and Musk, and J.D. Vance is an acolyte of that, which is why they put him in there.
It's interesting. I really feel Trump made that decision distracted by a bullet that whizzed by his ear.
He only had 72 hours to compose himself prior to the convention. And I think he made that decision.
I don't think he likes Vance. He's been pretty clear when he says, is he my successor? He says no.
He slammed Vance after the Margaret Brennan Sunday morning show where Vance said, we're going to pardon the nonviolent J6ers. Trump got pissed at him and pardoned everybody.
So you remember that scene in Fargo with the wood chipper? Vance is going in the Donald Trump wood chipper. Just a matter of time because he's too close to power.
Trump doesn't like anybody near his spotlight, as you know. And so he'll do to Vance what he did to Pence.
So I'm not as concerned about Vance as other people. The third term thing, I do believe people should take seriously.
He's 82 when he aspires to that third term. That's good for America that he's that old.
But I think you have to take that seriously. And you have to take seriously that the stuff that he's doing to weaken America, you know, I'm in the category that you'd have to have at least a 5% probability that he tries to call off an election.
Other people will find that incredulous. But I think you got to get it out there because there's a law of reflexivity, Gavin.
If you get that out there, people will start socializing it and then they'll plan themselves to attack that. If I talk to somebody and say, well, that's never going to happen, well, then you don't know Donald Trump.
So many things have happened in the last 10 years that I literally looked right down the barrel of a camera and said, that's never going to happen. And then two months later, it happens.
So I've got 5%. He's going for the third term.
Okay. And I've got, you know, some percentage that he could not even have, try to pretend that he can't have an election.
I do think the country's strong enough to stop that, but I have to throw that out there. But I do think Vance goes into the whip chipper.
By the way, he's unpopular. He looks terrible.
And if he wants to out Trump, Trump, shave your beard, buddy, because the beard looks terrible and Trump doesn't like the beard. And I'm just letting you know, you're not, you know, going to Greenland like you did and going to Space Force, you really look like a dummy.
So I'm not worried about him. What I'm worried about is that younger movement.
I am worried about the Charlie Kerr. I am worried about the podcasters that are out there that are strong, vigorous guys and girls that are incredibly smart.
And you guys need a counterdote to that. And so let's get to work on that.
No, that's why that's one of the reasons. I mean, that's precisely why I'm trying to invite these folks in.
So we start to understand how potent and powerful they've increasingly become. Final, final, over under.
Musk is gone in two months. Rubio, two months.
What I mean, what's what's your over under on some of these players around Trump? Because remember, they have to own the libs, right? So Walsh can get on signal. He's texting Jeff Goldberg like war plans.
And then it turns out he's using Gmail for all of the other stuff. So they're upset with Hillary Clinton for some reason, but then they're doing worse than what she did.
And so he can't fire Walsh because he can't waltz because he can't give a liberal a scalp you know we got to own the libs remember he is the napoleon of the culture war donald trump okay so you guys have to find wellington but he's the napoleon so we can't you know we got to own the libs first before we do anything else right we've got to run the ads on the trans gender athletics even though it's a small group of people to trigger everybody right yeah so that guy's not getting fired right so what trump is pushing and what you have to be worried about in my opinion is that persistent culture you guys seem to be one step behind him in every culture war you know i mean bill bill's going to have dinner with him okay bill's on your team by the way don't let bill go the way of elon musk and bob talking bill maher yeah bill maher yeah don't let him go the way of elon musk but give him when you're done with me podcasting pick up the phone call bill say dude let's go have lunch calm down okay i'm just coming on the pod soon i'm sure he had wellington in the white house because trump eats that every night for dinner calm down okay and come back to the fold here billy because we need you and you need us yeah you don't you don't want to go down we need bill maher i absolutely agree with that right and by the way you did great on his show the other night i mean you're realistic, you know, but I've been on his show many times, but, but dude, you know, don't let him, don't let him go that way, man. I hear what you're saying.
I hear what you're saying. No, and it, well, and I lied about the final, final.
This is the final, final, because I want to pick up what you just said is really important and looking for advice here because I'm a practitioner in this respect as, as governor of this state. I mean, you know, every day my state of mind is one of sort of just overwhelmed with all the incoming, the missives, the messages, the letters, the threats from members of his cabinet, agency directors, lawyers, constant back and forth as it relates to sort of this deconstructive state mindset that Trump has and what 2025 represents.
From our perspective, what do you chase? Do you react to every little indiscretion or do you wait for the big things? Is it a Carville notion? Just stand back and watch him implode. Watch what's happened in the markets.
This is a proof point of Carville strategy, one Carville may argue. I don't know.
I mean, what do you do? Do you flood the zone back? Are you constantly in everybody's face and do what Charlie Kirk's doing every single day? I mean, where are you in the calibration? I believe in the big story, Governor Newsom. I believe in the narrative.
If you study Lincoln, you study Jack Kennedy, you study the Roosevelt Revolution when he beat Herbert Hoover, I believe in the narrative. And so you're not going to beat him, being a pig like him.
If you call his hands little like Marco Rubio, you end up as one of his knaves right so you're not gonna you're not you know it's like the farmer said about the pig you're not a pig the pig likes getting in the mud don't get in the mud with the pig i don't believe in that you have a supra narrative okay you can point out to people what they're trying to do to you the the bureaucratic terrorism that they're trying to do to you with the federal government exerting power over you. You can do that, but you've got to do it subtly.
The big narrative has to be, who are we as Americans? When you look in the mirror, do you see an America that's aggrieved and victimized, or do you see an America in ascendancy? We represent the Americans that are in ascendancy. We are the side for good.
We are the benevolent people. We're not locking the gate to the swimming pool to charge admission.
We're going to teach other people how to build their own swimming pools. And we've made some mistakes.
Maybe you've got to have less regulation so Bill can get his roof done. I'm not saying that the Democrats are perfect.
They made some mistakes. You're working on reform to correct those mistakes, but mistakes that you've made have been from inclusivity.
The mistakes that you've made, whether it's bail reform or things like that, have been mistakes related to frailty of human beings and our humanity.

And so I wouldn't focus on Charlie Kirk's rat-a-tat-tat, flood the zone, or Steve Bannon's stuff, because that's already old news.

The new, new news is what is the narrative?

What is the compelling democratic narrative which allows Americans to look in the mirror and say, that's me? I'm strong. I'm aspirational.
I'm kind. I'm benevolent.
And I'm going to work alongside of my fellow Americans to put down the internecine warfare and the internecine tribal warfare. These guys want the tribal warfare.
But the average American does not. And they're beating you on the tribal warfare and in the culture war, but you can flip the table on them by going in the direction that I'm describing.

I thought a great way to end Anthony thank you for the conversation thank you for your insight thank you for it's a huge it's a huge honor to be on with you okay I mean and by the way you

got it the hair I mean noose that hair is an asset for you, okay? You got to use the hair more, man. Use the hair more.
Yeah, I mean, right now it's a state of California asset, you know? Oh, Jesus. Here we go.
Very cute. What a way to end, buddy.
Hey, pleasure. Thanks for taking the time.
I really appreciate it. By the way, thank you for being so good to staff.
That's your character, the way you treated

everyone around me. They said, this guy is a gentleman.
So I just want folks to know that.

And I appreciate that. My grandmother was a maid, Governor Newsom.
So trust me, it's very important

to me that I treat everybody with great kindness. And by the way, that is a non-starter at Sky

Bridge. If people are mean to people that are beneath them, it's literally like an evacuation.
I treat everybody with great kindness because, you know, and by the way, that is a non-starter at Skybridge.

If people are mean to people that are beneath them, it's literally like an evacuation, you

know?

God bless.

But thank you for that.

And not to be so, you know, if it's not an imposition, I would love to do this again in

person.

I think it'd be a lot more fun.

That would be a lot of fun.

Let's make that happen.

All right.

All the best to you.

Thank you.

See you.