Listener stories from Delaware

This BBC podcast is supported by ads outside the UK Summer smells like summer road trips, ocean breezes, and long evenings under the stars. It's a feeling you want to hold ono. Restore your sense of place with Pura's new summer fragrance collection. We've captured the magic of the season in clean, premium scents that transform your home into your favorite destination. Discover the art of Sensescaping T Bring the summer in, visit pure. com to explore the collection. Any team that's tested AI tools for data has seen the pattern already. AI gives a different number than your BI tool Metrics don't match across teams and inevitably Users lose trust It turns out, turning on AI is easy But making it work on data is not. Text AI was built to solve this The key is nailing context is built to unify and curate your data context for agents Data teams can observe, govern, and continuously improve every AI answer. So answers get smarter, the more your team asks. result Your entire organization asks data questions in natural language and trusts the answers because the AI got lucky. because it knows your business and its data Because that's what an AI analytics platform should do Join data teams from Cursor, Lovable, Ramp, AWS, and over two thousand more at hex. Ai American presidents have always told lies. Think of Richard Nixon and Watergate, thinkink of Bill Clinton and Sx The current president says plenty of things well without evidence and plenty fear that it is becoming acceptable for politicians on both sides to spread falsehoods. So does it matter? How much do Americans care? And is there a solution that might hold lawmakers accountable for the lies that they tell in office Welcome to Americast Americast from BBC News. You hear that sound? Oh I think when I hear that sound, it reminds me of money. We didn't start this war, but under President Trump, we are finishing it. This is a big cover up and this administration is engaged in it. This guy has Trump arrangement syndrome. I have for you, turn the volume up. Hello, it's Sarah in the BBC's Washington Bureau. And it's Justin in the worldwide headquarters of Amercast in London, England and I should say it is five past three in the afternoon here in London on Thursday and I, Sar, am going to be joined by the guest today, which is a real pleasure. He's actually going to be here. He's not here yet, but he is Andrew Weisman. He played a very big part in Robert Mueller's investigation into the Russia interference in the twenty sixteen election. He's got a new book out which has this really interesting argument which we are going to challenge him on which suggests somehow that politicians could be held to account by law if their lies damage democracy And when you look back, Sarah at the various efforts that were made to hold Donald Trump to account by law in the run up to the twenty twenty four election. I think it is fair to say that the jury is out on whether it works Yes, yes. And I'm just running through a sort of mental roolodex now of all the politicians who could end up in trouble if lying in office and therefore potentially damaging democracy were to become a criminal offense, the courts could get very, very busy and not just in the United States, I think And the issue, I suppose, the kind of the broader issue is whether two things. numberum one whether law works or law fair as it's sometimes Can you? should you in a democracy be going after people in law and there's a lively debate about that. and I say kind of flippantly that it didn't work with Donald Trump, but there are plenty of people who think it should have worked, of course, and also potentially might work in terms of impeachment, which is a slightly separate thing, but in terms of impeachment that might still be to come over the next couple of years or so. But then the other thing is what how would you have a new law that really people to account. and that's one of the things that Andrewisman wants to talk about. and I was saying that he has experience in this area. So not only as a former federal prosecutor But he did play a big part in the Robert Mueller investigation. I suppose we should kick off by reminding people about what that investigation was and why it was so important, so seminly important, although it didn't quite come up with the the goods that many people hoped it would Yeah, it's what Donald Trump calls the Russia Russia Russia investigation. and he says that so often, that's what it's sort of now stuck in my head as as well. It was the attempt by former FBI director, Robert Mueller to investigate Russian interference in the twenty sixteen election when Donald Trump was first elected It was controversial at the time, Donald Trump was absolutely furious that this investigation had been set up whilst he was in the White House. and he was also really, really worried That this could be the end of his presidency. He saw this as the equivalent of what happened to Richard Nixon or something that this was going to really damage him. and he became obsessed by it In the end Mueller found was that there had been coordinated Russian interference in the election, but he wasn't able to substantiate that it had been coordinated with the Trump campaign, but he also didn't completely clear them either. He said there were some questions around that and he hadn't been able to find the evidence. And so that has just eaten away at Donald Trump ever since. And Robert Mueller became a real hate figure of his. He died reasonably recently And it's not often you're shocked by a social media post by Donald Trump, but when he said, I'm glad he's dead on the same day that Robert Mueller died, that was pretty shocking. Yeah. they've also twisted it round kind of face in the opposite direction, haven't they? So last year now former Director of National intntelligence. This is Telsy Gabbard, who's very recently stepped down. She made an extraordinary allegation about Barack Obama, didn't she? Not only Obama actually, several of his top officials as well. She said there was a treasonous conspiracy To highlight that Russian interference in twenty sixteen, let's listen to what she alleged When you look at the intent behind creating a fake manufactured intelligence document directly contradicts multiple assessments that were created by the intelligence community The expressed intent and what followed afterward can only be described as a years long coup and a treasonous conspiracy against the American people, our republic, and an attempt to undermine President Trump's administration. Well, that sounds a little bit like Tulsi Gabbard's thinking of something similar to what Andrew Weisman' is going to talk to us about doesn't it? that basically trying to criminalize things that people did as a result of getting involved in politics here. So I mean, that is very, very interesting. But it's exactly why this stuff doesn't work, isn't it? mean we'll put this to An But it just seems to me both sides, as soon as you go down this path, you're in trouble Yeah, I think well, it's certainly going to get very, very complicated, but it's obvious to see why he's introducing this into the political discourse at the moment and why it's a particularly interesting idea because it's not just over the Muller Russia investigation that there's issues around Donald Trump. There are lots and lots of things he says that are not factually accurate, that cannot be backed up by evidence are what we would, you know, generally in common parliaments say to be lies. No There are all sorts of them every day. Some of them are unimportant. S of them are just boastful, for instance. And maybe they don't really harm the fabric of democracy, But then there are some that are deeply insidious And the big lie, of course, is, which he continues to perpetuate, is that the twenty twenty election was stolen from him. that Joe Biden wasn't democratically elected, but there was a conspiracy to steal Trump votes and stop him returning to the White House. And a lot of people still believe it. That's a problem. People in public office, but also just members of the electorate, people who voted in twenty four who willll be voting again in twenty twenty eight still believe that the system is fundamentally corrupt enough that the election could be stolen from Donald Trump. And investigations are still going on into that. We had an FBI raid of the election offices in Fulton County in Georgia just earlier this year, for instance, where they're still looking for evidence to try and prove that that crucial key state really voted for Donald Trump, despite the fact that the votes were Counted three times, counted by hand, everyvery single time it came up that Joe Biden was the person who had been returned by Georgia. There's something deeply insidious about that lie about the twenty twenty election. It's what led to the Jan six riots, of course, in twenty twenty one. And it undermines the whole basis of American democracy if you've got a substantial number of voters who just don't believe that the process works And of course, it doesn't stop with what he said about past elections. This is in a sense why all of this is so important, isn't it? It is what he might do now in terms of future elections, including the one that's coming up this year. and he has repeatedly called, hasn't he for elections to be nationalized? What exactly does that mean? Here he is in the Oval Office just a few months ago Take a look at Detroit, takeake a look at Pennsylvania, takeake a look at Philadelphia You go take a look at Atlanta, look at some of the places that Horrible corruption on elections and the federal government should not allow that The federal government should get involved These are agents of the federal government to count the votes If they can't count the votes legally and honestly, then somebody else should take over. And I wonder Justin who he thinks that somebody else should be, possibly the president of the United States. What he means when he talks about federalizing the elections is that at the moment, all fifty states run their own elections and their own process for counting the votes, they're supervised state by state, and then of course, they all come in centrally And eventually the electoral collllege decides who has won the presidency Donald Trump has talked several times about wanting to take this over, wanting the federal government of which he is in charge to run elections. And that really has worried a huge amount of people that this is part of some kind of greater plan to try to know alter the outcome of elections because you've got somebody here who Saying things that are not true about the twenty twenty election, undermining confidence in it, but also wanting to change a system at the same time so that what happened in twenty twenty, e Joe Biden getting elected or Donald Trump not getting elected couldn't happen again. And that people are really, really worried that he's wanting to change the rules to favor himself or his favored candidate and would come up with something that wasn't true Yeah, and it's worth saying people more broadly do think that Honesty, ethics, the whole idea of politicians telling the truth has reduced. No surprise, I suppose that they think that. but there was a pew research survey wasasn't though relatively recently, fifty six percent of U.S adults now believing that the overall level of ethics and honesty in politics has fallen since twenty twenty five. So quite precipitative fall in a sense and recently. and you've got that old thing, the Washington Post thing, and I know the Washington Post has Well, at least until Jeff Bezos took it over isn't a great friend of Donald Trump, but they have this tally, didn't they? There's more than thirty thousand tally, didn't they during the first time of all the false or misleading statements that Donald Trump personally has made Absolutely. and there are, you know, ones that are just demonstrably not true Then you know, there's other ones where you wonder, does Donald Trump believe it, even though there's no evidence to back it up? And that's where you get into some quite interesting territory around what we do and don't can and cannot say about him or indeed any other politician who we think is saying something that isn't true. so certainly at the BBC will say some things are not true or are alive, but we don't tend to call Donald Trump a liar because that means that we would yeah, we would have to understand what his intent was as well as what the facts are And we would be in the business of calling other people' lives as well. I mean, something I'm going to bring up with Andrew is Joe Biden. I mean, an absolutely plain case, isn't there? Remember when he said that inflation been nine percent when he took office. And he repeated that claim again and again and again and it was debunked again and again. Inflation was actually, I think between one and two percent when he came into office. So are we to call Joe Biden a liar as well? I mean, where does it I think almost u In terms of political criticism and journalism, I'm not sure where labelling people in that way actually gets you. although it satisfies people when they hate a particular politician, it satisfies them and they kind of demand it too. but I think there are reasons not to do it Yeah, And I feel like we say almost every week on Americas that Donald Trump has rewritten the rules and done everything differently, but we don't know whether other people can get away with the same things that he has. And this is probably yet one more case of that, where I don't think there's even his most fernt supporters think that everything he says is absolutely accurate. But they're perfectly happy to have somebody who using mist trruths around the place to try and make their case. Will we then see that this is a new norm in politics that was spread internationally or when he goes in his particular individualistic way of doing things is gone from the stage, will we, once again, as you say, revert to business as usual in a slightly different way with a greater presumption that politicians are at least trying to tell you the truth. There are so many ways in which the political stage, when Donald Trump has left it, it iss going to be fascinating to see what kind of lasting imprint he has made on how politics is conducted not just in America but around the world. Okay, that's a good moment at which to turn to our guest, who is the former federal prosecutor Andrew Weisman, author of Lars Kingdom How to Stop Trump's Deit and Save America. It's a book out now. I think I'm writ and sing on both sides of the Atlantic and it looks at the dangers of politicians playing fast and loose with the truth, but of course very much In the shadow of one particular politician and it's a politician that Andrewiseman has followed for some time because he is a podcaster as well and one of the early aspects of Me getting to know him as it were was on the Airways when he was talking about the prosecution of Donald Trump. He had an entire set of podcasts based on those prosecutions of Donald Trump in the early days. when it was thought that he might be prosecuted and might even go to jail long before the twenty twenty four election. Anyhow, Andrew Wiseman So good to see you in person. It's great to be here. Yes, it is I do so many podcasts Where it's remote, It's really nice to be in the same room as somebody. Mentioning podcasts, I'm a real fan boy and I'm going to bring this out right at the beginning because I was a big fan of prosecuting Donald Trump, not the actual doing of the prosecuting, you understand, because I work for the BBC, but your podcast that you did, prosecuting Donald Trump During all of those court cases that we talked about repeatedly on our podcast You had so much detail and so much insight because of who you are and the stuff that you've done. Well, I had a great collaborator, Mary McCord, but both of us had worked for decades at the Department of Justice What is the plan that you have? Because you come out in your book with a plan that I think will really interest people. It's a plan not just to stop Donald Trump, but it is a plan to stop anyone who wants to lie what anywhere in public office, explain what you want. I love that you are focusing on the fact that it is not specific to Donald Trump. It could implicate sort of what he does, but it really would apply to anyone who is in elected office. and we have both a federal system and a state system. so It could apply to federal officials, presidents, Congress people, but also at the state level, governors and legislators within the fifty states of the United States and in a nutshell to cut to the chase, it is to when you have a material lie, not an opinion Not a mistake but a material lie such as, and this is the example I use, that there was fraud in the election and I really won. and you could show that that is not true and the person knows it's not true that it's criminalized. So how would you deal them with Joe Biden saying inflation was nine percent when I came into office when it wasn't it was between one and would he have been prosecuted? So having been a federal prosecutor for a very long time I would ask is one is it factually true or false? Just that's sort of step one.. The other is is it intentionally false? In other words, what did Joe Biden, whoever we're talking about, did they what did they know at the time? And were they was it it just a mistake, a slip of the tongue? Did you repeat it Exactly. did. And so those kinds of things, if and then what would what's his argument for why he thought it was an okay thing to say? He has to make this argument in a court. Well, if you were charged. And so one of the ways though to cabin this, so which I talk about is that you can imagine a law that, in my view, sort of goes overboard. Our president been reported to have made false statements about how he did in in as an undergraduate in school about the crowd side Right and you wouldn't do any of that. And those things do not have to be criminalized.ah let me bring Sarah. that does that argument hold weight with you, Sarah? It makes lots of sense. and I think a lot of us could apply some kind of common sense test as to whether or not Donald Trump lying about previous achievements really, really mattered as opposed to say saying things that are not true about the twenty twenty election fraud What we're witnessing happening in the United States at the moment is the politicization of all sorts of aspects of the justice system, even before we've got a law like this coming in. For instance, the latest news at the moment is that the Department of Justice is investigating Egene Carroll. the woman who sued Donald Trump for sexual assault and defamation. And now his justustice deepartment appear to be going after her saying that she committed perjury and some of the statements that she made during that case. It looks from the outside, nakedly political, as do a number of the other criminal investigations that are being pursued by the DOJ at the moment, like against James Comey, for instance, the idea that he was threatening the president's life when he tweeted a picture of seashells that said eighty six forty seven If you had legislation like you're proposing, Andrew, is it not a weapon for a politicized administration like the one we've got in office at the moment, just to use this as another way of attacking opponents and perceived enemies? That's a great question. I actually address that because there's no question that if you create another potential tool for a corrupt administration. And again, I'm not speaking about just going forward in any sort of administration that it can lie around like a Cakovian gun. you know, where it's sort of there and you're sort of waiting to see when someone's going to pick it up and shoot somebody. Um, and u there are a number of responses to that. One is how you assess the current situation that we're in in the United States. If you think it's a pendulum swaying and it's not that serious and it's not something that is a deep threat to democracy in the United States then you might say it's not worth the risk that there really are there are too many downsides to this idea I don't have that view. I have the view that I think Certainly people, I think, in Europe looking at the United States are somewhat shocked by they had thought of the United States and the rule of law, not that America is perfect in any way, shape, or form, but that this is such a turnabout from what they thought what the ideals were that America was aiming for, even if they didn't always achieve it. Just before you joined us, Justin and I were talking about the difference between the way the BBC reports some of this, exactly around the twenty twenty election, which we often call the idea that it was stolen a lie or the big lie, as it's known in America We don't generally call Donald Trump a liar when he is talking about that because that involves a whole extra step of understanding their motivation, their level of understanding, their level of knowledge, just as you have been explaining. But that's also quite a difficult thing to prove, isn't it? I mean, you quite correctly say it's used as a litmus test for people joining the cabinet or whatever Donald Trump wants them to go out there and say the twenty twenty election was stolen How do we know they don't believe that? I've spoken to people who' said, yeah, no evidence was produced in any of those court cases, but that's because they weren't looking for it properly. I just know in my gut, it must have been stolen because Joe Biden was a terrible candidate. Donald Trump was a fantastic candidate. This is what people truly believe. There's no way Joe Biden could have beaten him. Therefore, I do believe it was stolen You can't say that person is a liar, can you if they seem to be believing what they're saying Just to be clear, that is an issue what you are putting your finger on is an issue that criminal prosecutors have to deal with all the time. I've also been a defense lawyer. So I'm very aware if you cannot show as a prosecutor beyond a reasonable doubt that it's an intentional lie then you have no business bringing the case in a jury. either you don't bring the case or you're going to lose the case if you do bring it But there are ways to prove that. And that is where, as I mentioned We have laws that say it's a crime to lie to Congress. It's a crime to lie to a federal prosecutor or the FBI. what we're talking about and what I address is saying something that is deliberately false. Can I bring up a kind of wider? So you're claiming it would work. We're a little bit skeptical and I'm thinking particularly of how you'd prove it in the case of Joe Biden where There will be plenty who say that he did lie, but there will be plenty who say that he didn't. and it just seems to me to be unwieldy to put it mildly to get to a court case. But I suppose the other argument is that It doesn't work. And in a sense, you have that wonderful podcast prosecuting Donald Trump that I used to listen to when I was walking my dog And again and again I think, o my goodness, this is really coming to something. And I used to say on our podcast andmer cast, we used to say Sarah and I used to have these long discussions about Is he going to go to jail? Does he need well he need to have secret service people with him in jail? How does that work? Can you go for office jail? And in a sense, everyone fooled themselves into thinking that that lengthy legal process involving several cases was somehow going to do him down. Actually it did the opposite. I'm not enough of a sort of political analyst to know that. I try to stay in my lane. I guess I would give you a counter example of prosecutions of political leaders that I think are healthy and necessary as a deterrent So Bolsonaro was in Brazil in Brazil, who is somebody I talk about the many similarities that there are to his conduct found by different courts to our current president He was criminntly prosecuted for his participation in an interurrection. and before that He was barred from running for office because of his false statements about the election, and it was necessary under Brazilian law to prove they were intentionally false, that these were not things that as to Sarah's point, that were honestly held beliefs and the judges had to address that in their decision about why they thought there was sufficient proof that this was intentional I think if you dumpt hold people to account And you don't have even trials, which in the United States, as you mentioned, we had one state court trial, but the key trials particularly the one about insurrection in Washington, DC that never saw the light of day The message to politicians is that they are immune from the legal system And I think that that is something that we are living through right now is that sense of no checks and balances, which is such an integral part to the structure or the intended structure of the United States. Let me finish if I can with this final thought about the political side of prosecution, which is impeachment and which Donald Trump has faced, and of course he was impeached in the has a representatives but then goes through the Senate, the Senate have to convict and they didn't convict on either of the two occasions He could be impeached again, couldn't he? It's entirely possible, particularly if the Democrats win the House back in in the midterms and It is then The job of the Senate, isn't it to decide what to do And it would have been The right thing to do if they felt strongly enough about it. And I can't remember the exact voting You think of january twenty twenty one, when they had an opportunity The the January the sixth had happened. They impeached him in the house, didn't they It went to the Senate. Quite a few Republican senators did say, okay, enough, he should be barred from office because that's the effect, isn't it of a conviction? would have But they didn't go through with it. And in a sense, that was America's opportunity and the right opportunity, the right place, the right time Be they didn't do it, I just wonder whether for Donald Trump And for anyone in that position The moment has passed Well, what I'm talking about is really looking forward to future conduct, as opposed to looking Yeah, your law isn't going to apply to Donald Trump, is it? Yeah, exactly. That's essentially's exactly right. I'm going to talk about that. This is really trying to deal with the problem of t exactly I mean,'s really it, isn't it? It's the post Trump world that you're trying to address, aren't? Absolutely, iss one hundred percent right. One thing to note is the what you have recounted, many people including me, think that that is why impeachment is something that while it was envisaged by the founders, the people who wrote the Constitution, that that would be an effective mechanism to be a check on the presidency Um, it is really and it's hard to think of a a more salient example of having an impeachment than where Congress were the victims and saw themselves firsthand what it happened And yet even there, there wasn't a conviction in that case. And it's notable to me to have a slightly different take is that Mitch McConnell, who was the leader in the Senate at the time when he said I'm not voting for it. What he said is criminal laws to deal with this So he was say sort of passing the buck, but he was saying, no, it isn't an impeachment issue. Part of that, to be fair is because the timing of when it came up was at the very end of Donald Trump's first term in office, so that there was a sense of You know, is this really the right time? But he also thought This is something that the criminal laws could deal with. Now the Supreme Court of the United States dealt with that in its immunity decision, which is a whole can of worms that we will not open But I think it's a useful point to remember in thinking about how impeachment works and it doesn't work. It it doesn't work's the point Sarah,all we leave it there Yeah, fascinating though Andrew. Thankk you so much for coming in to talk to us about that. They brought up a lot of issues that really do need a lot of thought, I think. so really, really pleased to hear from you about that. Yeah. And actually on that impeachment point because it's a point that's going to come up again and again, if the Democrats do do well in the midterms and there's pressure from their own base to go for another impeachment and what we're hearing very clearly Andrew, and you hear from others too, you is that impeachment it's a blunt instrument and it doesn't properly work and it's too politicised, etcetera. But anyway, Andrew, real pleasure to talk to you. Thanks a lot for coming in. Thank you Okay, Justin, we can't leave without this just before we go allgance to the United States Now great thing that we do love, but not as much as we love all the messages that have been coming in from you as we build our own United States of Americas, the map of all of our listeners that we want to cover all fifty states And remember, to take part in this, you don't have to live in one of those states. Maybe you visited, you might have family there, any kind of niche connection that you have to one of the fifty states. We love them and do please keep sending them in. Here's this week's entry Hey Americast team. My name's Tom and I'm a pretty new listener from the state to Delaware I work in tech, so a lot of my jobs have been remote, and I quickly realized that I'm usually going to be the only person from Delaware, these companies ose companies all know where Delaware is because they're all incorporated here Delaware is a pretty business friendly state, which is probably something your listeners may already know about Delaware But something they may not know is we make space suits. The suits astronauts wore on the mooon in the sixties and seventies were made here And we're still making suits today that astronauts use for spacewalks on the International Space Station a sci fi and a space geek, I was surprised to learn that Maybe you and your listeners will be too