Welcome back everyone.
Hope you're all ready for another deep dive.
We're getting close to Christmas 2024,
but things are getting pretty heated in DC.
You said it.
It's definitely not feeling very peaceful
and full of goodwill right now.
Definitely not.
Well, we're gonna try to unpack some of that today.
Electoral-vote.com has a news roundup from December 23rd.
And let's just say there's a lot to unpack.
Yeah, buckle up.
This one's a doozy.
It really is.
I mean, just to set the stage a little bit,
we've got this unusual situation
where you have Donald Trump winning the 2024 election.
But the Democrats still clinging to the Senate
for a few more days.
Right, until January 3rd.
So you can imagine the tension that's creating.
Oh yeah, it's like a political pressure cooker.
And the sources we're looking at today
cover a ton of ground.
I mean, we've got everything from this house battle
over a spending bill.
Who are the winners and losers there?
Right, and what does it mean for Trump's second term?
Exactly.
Plus, Laura Trump's surprise exit from the Senate race in Florida.
Well, and there's legal drama brewing in Arizona.
Then we've got some judge appointments, Biden's legacy,
a controversial ambassador ship pick,
and even a potential scandal brewing.
Oh, there's always a scandal brewing somewhere.
Always.
All right, let's dive in.
First up, this house battle.
Can you walk us through what happened?
They were trying to avoid a government shutdown, right?
Right, so to avoid a shutdown,
they needed to pass a spending bill, a continuing resolution,
a CR, it's called.
Basically, it's just a temporary measure
to keep the government funded.
Until they can agree on a longer term budget.
Exactly.
But it sounds like things got pretty messy.
Oh, they did.
The article lays out this whole list of winners and losers
from the whole ordeal.
And some of them are pretty surprising, like Elon Musk.
He ends up coming out on top.
Elon Musk, I'm intrigued.
What does a tech billionaire have
to do with a government spending bill?
Well, so Speaker Mike Johnson, right,
he'd carefully put together this bipartisan deal,
and then Musk goes and tweets that the deal's a swamp monster,
urges Republicans to vote against it.
And they actually listened to him.
They did.
Enough Republicans defected that it actually killed the deal,
which is, I think that really raises some questions
about the power dynamics here.
Absolutely.
I mean, wow, so a tech billionaire
can just sway votes in Congress with a tweet?
That's kind of unsettling.
It is.
And then you've got Marjorie Taylor Green of all people
suggesting that she'd support Musk for Speaker of the House.
He can't make this stuff up.
But who are the real losers here in this House battle, I mean?
Well, I think Trump, for one, he actually backed the CR,
but 38 Republicans defied him, voted against it.
It's not exactly a good sign for party unity going
into a second term.
Definitely not.
And then Speaker Johnson, I mean,
he really took a hit here, too.
Look weak, unable to control his own caucus.
So not a great look for him.
And what about Biden?
Where was he in all of this?
That's the weird thing.
He was strangely absent from the whole drama,
almost like he was just sitting back and watching
the Republicans tear each other apart.
Interesting.
It does seem like everyone's trying
to figure out where they stand in this new landscape.
But with the Democrats about to lose control of the Senate
in just a few days, why was this House battle such a big deal?
I think it's a preview of the challenges
Trump's going to face in his second term.
Even with the Senate on his side.
Even then.
Because he can't even control his own party in the House.
He's not going to get anything done.
Exactly.
That razor-thin majority they have, it's just, I mean,
it's going to make things incredibly difficult.
The article specifically mentions the salt deduction
as a potential flashpoint among Republicans.
Can you remind us what that is and why
it's causing so much friction?
Right.
So salt stands for state and local tax deduction.
It's basically, it lets people deduct their state
and local taxes from their federal taxes.
OK.
And some Republicans, they see this as like a giveaway
to wealthy people in blue states.
So they want to get rid of it.
Makes sense.
But then you've got other Republicans
who represent those very same people who
benefit from the deduction.
So they're going to fight tooth and nail to keep it.
Ah.
So it's a classic case of competing interests
within the party.
Exactly.
And the article makes this comparison
to Trump's first term when he tried and failed
to repeal the Affordable Care Act.
So are we seeing history or repeat itself here?
It's definitely possible.
I mean, this whole House battle just
shows that governing is a lot more complex than just issuing
orders.
Trump's going to need to build coalitions.
He's going to need to compromise.
He's going to have to like navigate some very tricky
political waters.
Hooray, if he wants to actually get anything done.
Speaking of tricky waters, let's move on to Lara Trump
bowing out of that Senate race in Florida.
Oh, yeah.
That was a surprise.
It was.
But to be honest, her candidacy always felt a little strange.
Can you remind us why?
Well, I mean, she doesn't even live in Florida.
The whole thing was really about Governor DeSantis
being able to appoint a Trump loyalist to the Senate.
When Rubio becomes Secretary of State.
Right.
It was a power play.
Yeah.
But it seems like it just completely unraveled.
It did.
And the article throws out a bunch of possible reasons why.
What strikes you as the most plausible explanation?
Well, there's one theory that Trump didn't actually offer
DeSantis anything substantial in return for the favor.
And these guys, they're both transactional.
They like to make deals.
Good bro quo.
Exactly.
And then there's this speculation
that DeSantis saw Lara Trump as a liability.
Like, she could actually lose the special election in 2026.
So it was more about protecting himself.
Possibly.
And then, of course, there are the whispers
that DeSantis is already playing his own game,
setting his sights on the 2028 presidential run.
So the whole Lara Trump thing was just a distraction,
a smokescreen to cover up his own ambitions.
Maybe.
But it definitely adds another layer of intrigue
to this whole saga.
What do you think?
I think it's fascinating.
I mean, are we seeing a rift forming between Trump and DeSantis?
Are they going to be rivals in 2028?
Could be.
I guess we'll have to wait and see.
But it's definitely something to keep an eye on.
It is.
OK, let's shift gears now and delve into some legal drama.
We know the Georgia case against Trump
has been put on hold for now.
But this Arizona case against his inner circle is heating up.
Right.
So what makes this Arizona case so significant?
Well, you've got the Arizona Attorney General obtaining
these search warrants for the Apple, Google, and Twitter
accounts of some pretty big Trump allies, Rudy Giuliani,
Mark Meadows.
They're looking for evidence related to that whole fake
elector scheme.
Wow.
Sounds like something out of a political thriller.
It does, doesn't it?
But there has been a bit of a hiccup.
Yeah, the judge on the case recused himself.
And?
Well, and the new judge might delay things further.
I'm curious, why could a delay actually hurt Trump?
Well, think about it, having a trial of his top aides
in the middle of the 2026 midterms.
It's not going to look good.
It could remind voters of all the reasons they dislike him.
Ah, so it becomes a political liability.
Exactly.
OK, here's something that I think might surprise
some of our listeners.
Joe Biden has actually appointed more judges than Trump.
How is that even possible?
I mean, the Republicans currently control the Senate, right?
Right, but it all comes down to timing.
See, federal judges often plan their retirement strategically,
trying to give a president from their preferred party
the chance to appoint their successor.
So a lot of judges who thought Hillary Clinton was
going to win in 2016 ended up retiring
during Biden's presidency.
Exactly.
It's a bit of a numbers game.
But it's important to understand why judicial appointments
are so important.
These are lifetime appointments.
So the judges, Biden has appointed,
they're going to be shaping the legal landscape
for decades to come.
That's a great point.
The article also mentions this blue slip tradition
in the Senate.
Can you explain what that is and how it actually benefited
Biden?
So the blue slip tradition, it basically
gives senators from the state where a judge will
serve a kind of informal veto power over the nomination.
And the Democratic chairman of the Judiciary Committee,
Dick Durbin, he upheld this tradition during Biden's term.
Even though it meant some of Biden's nominees
were blocked by Republicans.
So it was a kind of a double-edged sword.
It was.
But now, the incoming Republican chairman, Chuck Grassley,
he says he'll do the same thing.
Which means?
It could end up backfiring on Trump
if he tries to appoint some of his more controversial judges.
Interesting.
So this tradition that was meant to foster bipartisanship
could actually end up hurting the Republicans in the long run.
It's possible.
Let's talk about one potentially controversial pick,
the ambassador to the Vatican.
Trump has chosen Brian Burch, who runs this pretty right-wing
Catholic group and has been openly critical of Pope Francis.
Why on earth would he pick someone who, I mean,
openly disagrees with the pope to represent him at the Vatican?
It's a headscratcher, isn't it?
It is.
There are a few possible explanations, I guess.
Maybe he's trying to appeal to conservative Catholics
in the US, or maybe he overestimates
Burch's actual influence within the church.
Or maybe it's just classic Trump,
stirring the pod and relishing the controversy.
That's always a possibility.
But I think this appointment could really backfire.
What happens if Burch and the pope clash publicly?
Yeah, that could be a diplomatic nightmare.
It could.
OK, let's wrap up this section of our deep dive with Kristi Noem.
She's the governor of South Dakota,
and she's been nominated for secretary of Homeland Security.
Which that's a massive department, right?
Huge.
And our sources are suggesting she is utterly
unqualified for the position.
I mean, the article straight up says
she has zero experience in this area,
knows nothing about the department.
So why would Trump nominate her?
I mean, is it really just based on loyalty?
Well, loyalty is certainly a factor.
I mean, there's no question about that.
But the article suggests there might be other motives
at play here, too.
Like what?
Well, one theory is that Trump actually
wants to keep immigration policy under his own control,
maybe even operate it from outside the department
altogether.
Almost like a shadow government for immigration.
Right.
And the article specifically mentions Steven Miller
as a potential player in this.
He was a key figure in Trump's immigration policies
during his first term.
So Noem might just be a figurehead.
Possibly.
With others calling the shots behind the scenes.
But then that doesn't really explain why Trump wouldn't
choose someone who at least appears qualified.
For such a high profile role, it's strange.
It is strange.
And then there's the whole Corey Lewandowski factor.
Why is he so involved in all of this,
even though he doesn't have an official position
in the administration?
Well, the article suggests he's advising Noem
on personnel choices, making sure everyone is sufficiently
Trumpy.
But you have to wonder about his true motivations.
Especially with those persistent rumors
about their relationship.
I mean, this whole situation is just, it's tangled.
It really is.
But it does highlight how personal relationships and power
dynamics, I mean, they really complicate
the political landscape.
Sometimes it's not even about policy or ideology.
It's about who you know and who you owe favors to.
It's all very House of Cards-esque, hopefully,
without the murders, of course.
But we'll dive deeper into all of this after a quick break.
Welcome back.
Before the break, we were discussing
Christy Noem's surprising nomination for Homeland Security
and the lack of experience she brings to the table.
It's a massive department.
I mean, they have such a huge impact
on national security immigration policy.
But the source mentions that might be exactly why
we Trump chose her.
It's one of the more interesting theories here.
The Trump actually wants to keep a tight grip
on those policy areas.
Maybe even operate them from outside the department
altogether.
Almost like a shadow government for immigration.
And the article mentions Stephen Miller
as a potential player in this.
He was one of the architects of Trump's immigration policies
in his first term, right?
Exactly.
Miller's a hardliner on immigration.
And someone Trump trusts.
So if Noem was just a figurehead,
Miller could wield considerable influence behind the scenes.
Which raises some serious concerns, I think,
about transparency and accountability.
But even if Trump wants to pull the strings,
wouldn't it make more sense to just appoint someone who,
at least appears qualified?
This nomination just seems so strange.
It is an unorthodox move, even for Trump.
But it really speaks to this idea
that loyalty often trumps competence
in this administration.
And we can't ignore Corey Lewingowski's role
in all of this.
The article suggests that he's helping Noem select her staff,
making sure everyone is sufficiently Trumpy.
Lee Vendowsky, he's Trump's former campaign manager, right?
But he doesn't have any official role
in the administration.
So why is he so involved?
It's unclear what his motivations are.
But it's worth noting that Lewingowski
has a history of controversial behavior
and has been accused of using his proximity to Trump
for personal gain.
And then there are those rumors of a personal relationship
between him and Noem, which just adds another layer
of complexity to this whole situation,
starting to feel like a political soap opera.
It really does highlight how, I don't know,
how personal relationships empower dynamics.
They can really complicate the political landscape.
Sometimes it's not even about policy or ideology.
It's about who you know and who you owe favors to.
It's all very House of Cards-esque.
Hopefully without the murders, of course.
But I think it's time to zoom out for a moment
and consider some of the broader themes that
emerge from all these stories.
We've covered a lot of ground, haven't we,
from a Christmas tree battle to potential scandals,
from judge appointments to a pope's skeptic ambassador.
What are the key takeaways here?
What do you think our listeners should really walk away with?
One thing that really stands out to me
is the fragility of Trump's power.
Yes, he won the election.
But he's entering his second term
with a historically weak mandate.
And he's facing resistance from within his own party.
That House battle was a prime example of that, right?
I mean, he couldn't even get his own party
to support a spending bill that he backed.
Exactly.
And there are a Trump situation, the Arizona legal case.
I mean, these all suggest that Trump's not
the all-powerful figure he might project himself to be.
So what does this mean for his ability to govern effectively?
The source seems to suggest that even basic tasks,
like passing a budget or raising the debt limit,
could become major battles.
Absolutely.
I mean, governing requires compromise.
It requires building coalitions.
It requires a willingness to work with the other side.
And those are not qualities that Trump is known for.
No, they're not.
And the article points out how divided the Republican Party
is. We talked about the salt deduction as one example.
But there were so many other issues
that could fracture the party even further, like immigration.
Which is always a hot button issue.
Always.
And the article mentions that Trump's plans for tax cuts
and border security could also face opposition
from within his own party.
Plus, there's always the wild card of the Freedom Caucus.
That group of hardline conservative Republicans
in the House.
Yeah, the ones who helped tank that spending bill,
even though it had Trump's support.
So they're a reminder that Trump can't just assume
he has the unwavering support of his party.
Right.
He's going to have to work for it.
Which could make things, well, let's just say,
his second term could be even more chaotic than his first.
It's certainly a possibility.
And I think it raises an important question for our listener
to consider.
How will these internal divisions
within the Republican Party, how will that impact Trump's
ability to govern effectively?
It's a question worth pondering.
And speaking of pondering, the source also
reminds us that Trump's claim of a mandate from the people
is, well, pretty weak.
He won the Electoral College, but more people
voted against him than for him.
That's a good point.
It really undermines his ability to claim
that he has this widespread support for his agenda.
It does.
And without that perceived mandate,
it becomes even harder to rally people to his side.
Especially when you factor in how narrow his victories were
in those key swing states.
So even though he won, his grip on power
is, well, it's more tenuous than it might appear.
Exactly.
And that just makes the next few years all more unpredictable.
Which brings us back to the purpose of these deep dives.
To equip you, our listener, with the knowledge and insights
to navigate this incredibly complex political landscape.
We're giving you the tools to cut through the noise,
understand the forces at play, and hopefully make some sense
of this whole political roller coaster.
We've covered a lot of ground today,
but it's just a snapshot.
Right.
Of a much larger story that's still unfolding.
And that's what makes it so fascinating.
I mean, we're witnessing history in the making.
And we can only speculate about the twists and turns
that lie ahead.
The beauty is there's always more to learn,
more to understand.
Well, I'm ready to unpack some more.
Let's dive back into this news roundup after a quick break.
And we're back.
I don't know about you, but my head is spinning a bit
after all of that.
It's crazy how much is happening in DC,
even with the holidays right around the corner.
It never really stops, does it?
Yeah.
That constant whirlwind of activity.
And every move seems to have consequences
that ripple outward, affecting everything
from policy decisions to the balance of power.
It's a lot of.
It really is.
So as we wrap up this deep dive, what's the, I don't know,
what's the one thing you really want our listeners
to take away from all of this?
What's the so what of all these political power plays?
I think the main takeaway is that we're entering a period
of, well, significant volatility.
We have a president entering his second term,
but with a historically weak mandate.
And he's facing resistance not just from the Democrats,
but from within his own party.
Yeah.
I mean, that was clear from that whole house battle
we talked about.
Exactly.
And you've got legal challenges swirling around.
The political landscape is shifting constantly.
The global situation is anything but stable.
It's a lot to keep track of.
It's like trying to build a house on shifting sand.
And this is just a glimpse, right?
This is just what's happening right now as
2024 comes to a close.
Right.
We didn't even have time to touch on everything
from the news roundup.
I mean, there's that whole saga with Matt Gaetz
and the attorney general nomination,
the potential fallout from that Georgia case being halted,
the speculation about Biden's legacy.
It's a lot to process.
It really is.
But that's kind of the point of these deep dives, isn't it?
I mean, we're trying to give you the tools
to understand what's happening, cut through the noise,
get to the heart of the matter.
And ultimately, we want to empower you
to form your own conclusions.
We're not here to tell you what to think.
We just want to give you the information and analysis
you need to be, well, an informed and engaged citizen.
So to everyone listening out there,
don't tune out and go back to your holiday cookies just yet.
Keep paying attention because these stories matter.
They affect your life.
They affect your community.
They affect your future.
And remember, this is just the beginning.
We're at a real turning point in history.
And what happens next is up to all of us.
So stay informed, stay engaged, and stay curious.
Couldn't have said it better myself.
Thanks for joining us on this deep dive into, well,
into the wild world of politics.
Happy holidays, everyone, and stay tuned for more
in the new year.