Cocktail Chatter: Congolese Fashion

Hello and welcome to Stlate Pitical Gab Fest june eighteenth, twenty twenty six An Treaty of Versailles edition. I'm Dav Plods of Citycast in Washington D.C. I become a homeowner today. That's exciting. Fr sububstack via New York City, the unquenchable John Dickerson. Hello John Hello, David, Bill Pultty's coming after you now that you're a homeowner. No. man. I didn't lie on any of my documents. That laugh is the slightly quenchable Emily Baslon from the New York Times magazine and Yale University Law School. Hello Emily. Hey, David, Hey John. This week on the Gab Fest, the Iran warar is probably over and we sure did not win it thenen the grotesque, bloody and deeply pressing and corrupt fight night at the White House And then anthropic versus the United States who should win that fight plus we'll have cocktail chedatter. In August of twenty twenty, Paul Rosasabgina boarded a flight in the Middle East for a speaking event in the African country Burundi He never made it there Paul was a human rights hero who saved hundreds of lives during the nineteen ninety four Rwandan genocide and later became the subject of a blockbuster movie. That flight set in motion a stranger than fiction story of an audacious kidnapping, espionage, and a massive global campaign to free Paul from captivity I'm Robbie Grammer, and this is after Hotel Rwanda a podcast from foreign pololicy Listen in the slate presents feed now kind of Schrodinger's cat situation of an Iran deal. there's a peace agreement. It's maybe it is signed. Trump signed something. It was finally published But there is an insistence from American officials that there are actually a lot of key elements that the Iranians have agreed to that aren't in the agreement at all Um What I just like that is so laughable. Continue. Yes, is it is laughable. So Woodrward Wilson had fourteen points. They were supposed to establish peace in the wreckage after World War O. It did not work headline. The US and Iran have a fourteen point agreement to end this trash fire of a war according to the document plan returns the world to something like status quo ante. There is an open strait of Hormz Iran's government is in power. Iran jurors ever having a nuclear weapon But also it includes elements like Iran being able to access three hundred billion dollars in loans for reconstruction from Gulf States at some point. Iran's sanctions being lifted in some fashion, It's right to sell oil restored immediately. It also appears to be planning to charge fees for access to the strait. And there is really no resolution on how to deal with Iran's nuclear material that has been pushed off to unspecified negotiations that will take place over the next two months, and the Iranian people are subject to the same government as before. There was no change in regime So John This is the deal that We knew was going to happen. This is the deal that we've been talking about since about day six of this war. It's the obvious parameters of a deal are have been obvious to everyone forever. Why is it happening now? And is it different actually in any away from what's been talked about This is the why are you beating yourself in the head with a hammer? because it feels good when I stop. This is the it feels good when I stop agreement, which is basically, as you said, it goes back to the conditions as they were before, conditions that were created by the president's decision to go to war with Iran. So in the grand scheme of things as we evaluate whether this war was worth it, you have to measure it against either A, Trump's claims for the war, it falls extremely short of those. He wanted regime change. He wanted unconditional surrender from the Iranians. He said it would be over quickly on and on and on Th you can also measure it against where negotiations were on the twenty seventh of feebruary because the US and Iran through intermediaries, we're in a discussion about ending the nuclear program. As you said, David, one of the conditions of this agreement is that Iran has said it won't pursue a nuclear program Well, that was where Iran was before the war. It was also where Iran nuclear weapon. It says it wont psue nuclear weapon. Yes, sorry, Thankk you. And that's where things were before in February and it was where things were after the JCPOA. And then you can measure it against the JCPOA So there's a lot of measurement that goes on. But by all of those standards, it falls short. Why did it happen? Well, the as we've talked about before, the president wanted to be done with this war. It didn't go as fast as he wanted the international economy was crippling, you know, was crumbling. And we heard from the presresident this week two new reasons, which affirm that analysis. One is he said he didn't want to be Hervard Hoover which is extraordinary because a few weeks ago, he said he didn't care about the domestic economic implications of the war was all about getting rid of the Iranian nuclear weapons, or a nuclear program, I should say, not nuclear weapons. So he gave in the fact that Iran had made the cost too painful of keeping this going, which is why we are where we are now. It feels totally predictable, but also kind of worse for a couple of reasons. I mean, yes, status quo ani, but as you said, David, it seems like going forward after I think like sixty days, Iran could possibly start charging a toll to go through the state of Hormuz, which in addition to just costing money will you know, show that it has this grip over this vital waterway And then also from Israel's point of view, Israel is now supposed to get out of Lebanon. I'm not exactly sure how this meemorandum between two countries which are not Israel can bind Israel to that result, but presumably can, you know, try to force Netanyahu into that part of the agreement and I mean, it's just to take a step back it's just breathtaking. It seems like from the reporting that, you know, Trump's over excitement about the success of Venezuela. in which he really did have a brief military action that changed the regime in Venezuela. led to overconfidence, which Netanyaho then played up They went into this war Trump with completely unrealistic expectations. It played out poorly as so often happens when Western powers try to come into this region of the world, which they don't understand and don't have any real intent of sticking around for long enough, right And now we're in this position where it seems like the United States has essentially reached none of its goals. That seems like a defeat. And Israel is in a worse position than it was before JD Vance, the vice P president went on Ross at's New York Times podcast, interestnting Times today or yesterday and Vance has been sent to own this agreement and he I don't know if you guys listened to the podcast or read the transcript of it Vvance is very insistent. o, this is a quite different agreement. This is when the JCOPOA was in effect, Iran was in a position of huge strength. Now they're incredibly weak. They're not going to get access to any of these things they want unless they behave themselves, it is it qualitatively different state that we are in is that line, John going to fly Well, it's definitely not going to fly given the fact that the country thinks that war was a mistake and it hasn't achieved its goals. So that's the position that he has to overcome if he's to have that spin land successfully. It also doesn't work because the Israelis are saying you didn't get anything that went that we went to war for. And it also doesn't work because Allies of the president are saying a version of the same thing. So it has to overcome too much existing opinion And it can't overcome that when the facts that Jie Vance are putting forward Don't stand up So toall Mountain tolimb canan't do it if you are, you know, carrying a seventy pound pack on each ankle. And the reason it doesn't add up is that there are all of these First of all, shifting descriptions of what's in the plan, which mirror the shifting reasons that the president went to war in the first place. They're just choosing to believe the Iranians Now about their nuclear ambitions in a way they chose not to either before february twenty eighth missiles were launched or when they killed the JCPOA in the first time. Okay but got if you're going to make the case that JD Vance is making, then you have to actually make the case. Another way in which this is piffle is that when Barack Obama made two payments, essentially to the Iranians, let's focus on the one as a part of the JCPOA, it was essentially giving the Iranians back money that had been frozen by sanctions. They're also in the deal for the hostages, gave Iranians money that was frozen when the Shw was deposed When that was done, JD Vance and certainly President Trump, then candidate Trump said, this is an absolute bribe. It's a capitulation Now Trump is saying We've given them frozen assets because it was their money in the first place, which is essentially exactly what the Obama administration was saying. President Trump is also saying, you know, the Iranians need to defend themselves. They need some missiles Missiles were the reason the whole they went to war in the first place, according to Everybody else has them, it's only fair. That wh me the line So when you're shillying and shallallying in real time and then coming up with new ways to shilly shallally, it makes the case that JD Vance is trying to make even worse So in the end, perhaps you forty eight rabbits will come out of the hat. The Iranians will get rid of all nuclear material, put it on a boat and send it to the moon by Elon Musk because you can send boats to the moon on a SpaceX rocket and they'll never have, you know any of these bad things that they did before, but that seems unlikely So The people who are most unhappy about this deal appear to be sort of cl' classic neoc consons and Israel's strongest supporters in Israel itself They are unhappy with it The rest of the American people seem basically indifferent. Pople want the war over So in that sense, Is this a D does does And do the Republicans pay any cost for the neoc Cons and Israel supporters being kind of unhappy that Iran has gotten what it wants out of the war? Or is it I guess what I'm trying to figure out, John is like there's clearly There's clearly a cost to the nation. We've have higher gas prices, inflation is up There's a cost to the world. Fertilizer is not getting to places fertilizer needs to get. People's energy supplies have been cut. The world economy has been strained by what's happened at this war But as a political matter Do this work impose any cost on Republicans. Well, the presresident's pro rating is in the basement, as low as it's ever been. This contributes to that. To the extent that Republicans have to say insane things on television to support what the president has done saying, you know, it's okay for them to have ballistic missiles. Like it puts them in the space of between now and November having to go and say things that people don't believe with their own eyes. They have to say at first about prices, And then they have to say it about the war. In other words, this is a great, huge victory. People don't believe that Now we can have an abstract argument about maybe the Iranian regime is more likely to give up their nuclear ambitions now than they were on february twenty seventh But then you have to ask, well, at what cost, not only in lives but in alliances, also in damage to the global economy, and all those missiles that were spent doing this. But that doesn't matter. In terms of your political question, David, when the president is in the rock bottom, it tends to affect the party. And also, I think it very neatly plays into the larger narrative, which is took the eye off the ball elected to do, you know basically a big thing, which is get the economy under control and he's done everything, but his tarriff program, which was his signature economic plan has hurt the economy, and he goes off and has these wars that make no sense and doesn't get what he wanted going into the war when he came out of it And how do we know that he didn't get what he wanted? Because he's now saying, well, I had to end this war and basically take things back to where things were before the war because I worried about being Herbert Hoover, which underlies the critique that this war damages the economy. So he's sort of shooting himself and Republicans in the foot. Also, the story continues, right? I mean, now they have the sixty days to supposedly negotiate. It's going to dribble onward, veryer possible that the Iranians will not come up with any deal in that sixty days and they'll just like keep kicking the can down the road. so It's not as if this question just ends, although I do think there's going to be relief and probably some bump up in Trump's approval rating just for the war ending, especially if people see gas prices come down because that is, I think what most people wanted. It doesn't excuse the folly and all the waste and death occurred because of it. But You know, that is probably part of the political dynamic Can we linger for a second on Israel? What I thought was striking was not only the president saying out loud If it weren't for me, Israel would be wiped off the map But then also saying things like, Netanyahu has no essentially restraint. He didn't use that word, but when it comes to Lebanon As you said, Emily, if you read the actual memorandum of undernderstanding I mean, it says you know the Republic of Iran and the United States and their allies. In other words, it includes Israel in the deal even though Israel was not a part of the deal, which for the United States to agree to that is some serious passive aggressive ar arm twisting. But then also the president said about Lebanon. He says, you know, you don't have to blow up a whole building to go after somebody So what he's saying there is essentially one of the primary critiques of BBi Netanyahu, which is, okay, obviously Israel has to defend itself and the attacks of october seventh were outrageous. and you know, but You don't have to bomb a whole building to kill one person. And now you have the president of the United States saying that out loud this deffender of Israel, which You know is more than just being mildly upset with By N andi Absolutely in Netanyahu iss facing elections in October Do you think, Emily that Israel willed confine itself to the terms of this deal, will they in fact cease their invasion of Lebanon or drastically dial it down cease their attempt to Hezbllah I mean, it will depend on what messages Trump and his emissaries actually send, right? Because they're not bound by this agreement and they seem to very much want to keep fighting in Lebanon as does Hezbollah, right? I mean, it's like There that conflict has become quite hot. I would imagine that the Israelis will dial a way down for some amount of time. because they'll be told by the Americans that they have to do that. and that will be a line that will be really risky for the Israelis to cross, but then I would assume no, like they're not going to stay out of Lebanon forever because of this memorandum of agreement they didn't sign. It is kind of amazing that we're not really talking about the fact that Israel has effectively occupied half of another nation pretextually driven its population. I mean it did that in Gaza, but in Gaza. slightly different situation. it's more Israel, internal Israel, I suppose, driven driven a quarter of the Lebanese population into refugee status just And they just did it can I just one random thing which is I know it's about theater, but Marco Rubio has been Mute And he was quite vocal in the original bombing campaign He has been totally mute. This has been a complete JD Vance sales campaign. And listening to watching Rubio's body language as Trump was saying various things, including saying that the bombing and killing of one hundred school children happened a long time ago which is a weird thing to say about something that was just a couple of months ago. Anyway, that just Uh Stuck me I mean, in the, you know pre pre warm up to twenty twenty eight, Vance is the one that is going to just be completely stuck to the Trump administration and all its worst mistakes because he's out in front defending everything and Rubio is going to try to distance himself. That seems like the play. I mean, it's a little hard when you're the seecretary of state, but that does seem what he's aiming Can we end actually I know Q question for both of you, Emily from the legal perspective and John from the presidential perspective. There was a Jack Goldsmith piece that we were reading that I thought was super interesting. It was a reminder or sort of an explication of just how much foreign policy has become executive dictatorship the legislature and the public have had effectively no role at all in this war that Congress did not declare this war, did not vote on this war, really, did not vote to spend money on this war Funds for it. ye no sense that the legislature or public opinion mattered at all or even for that matter, the military's thoughts, like the military expertise was also not really included. Oh that's a sort of a separate point It's imperial in a way that feels very, very unhealthy and I guess I'm thow to each of you from John from an executive authority perspective and Emily from a legal perspective, like what are the consequences of a world in which the present is sort of the sole decider, actor on foreign policy and on war I mean, I think first of all, as a matter of decision making and policy, it is really bad that we have dramatically increased the degree to which War is a one person show the president directing everything and Congress having zero role. Now Congress could reassert itself. That is absolutely a prerogative that is available And yet it did not this time. And you know, Jack was also writing about how in some ways this dynamic of the president having more authority over war has been urring gradually since the founding, that you know the sort of erosion of the idea that it is Congress that declares war written into the Constitution has been jeopardized many times along the way you know, I think It is also absolutely true that Trump has taken that to a new height. and really it's like a new low because you should have more collective buy in, better decision making. and it also just seems very undemocratic And alarming that we're in this state And I just long for some future Congress that shows up and actually puts some teeth into pushing back. And I think The main u The tool that Congress always has is money they can always take away the money for the war or for something else. And this Congress obviously has barely assert as itself. It has obviously, it was a tension built into the very beginning of of the American government, what's changed radically And particularly with respect to Republicans is that the partisanship and specifically the lock that this president has over the partisan voters in his own party. Um means that Congress gave away its war making powers, essentially, wrestling with this tension that only a president can move with secrecy and dispatch and that Congress can muddle and get in the way of something that needs to be moved on quickly by a president So that's the original intention So they gave away that power. but now you have members of Congress saying If only I had more power to give away. don't all I have left is my dignity and my free critical thinking skills. And so let me give those away as fast as I can So you have Tommy Tubberville saying Well, I trust the president and JD Vance. L just giving the whole thing away, That's not just a matter of know, contrary to the American system of balance of powers, that just makes no sense as a rational Matter. that this much power, you know, the fog of war affects that the executives as well as as as John Kennedy said about the Cubbe missile crisis, you know the essence of the decision is sometimes imperceptible even to the person making the decision, which is to say the president. So it's a complicated thing and you want, at the very least, more voices. And what's happened in the current admist in the current politics in the current Republican Party is it's down to one dude's whims. So it's a bad thing made worse by the particular political dynamics of the Republican partarty at the moment This episode is sponsored Upwork. Hiring help for your business shouldn't be a headache or drain on your budget Upwork makes it easy to hire specialized freelancers quickly so you can get the expertise you need now without weeks of recruiting or a full time hire. Upwork is the one stop platform to find hire and pay expert freelancers across web and software development, data and analytics, marketing, business ops, and more You get fast access to specialized talent across one hundred and twenty five plus categories you can fill skill gaps, launch projects faster, and scale support up or down without committing to full time headcount Upwork cuts down on operational hassle by handling things like contracts and payments in one place. You can spend more time running the business Thousands of growing businesses already trust Upwork to hire flexible, high quality freelance talent for everything from one off projects. ongoing support. Visit upwork. com right now and post your job for free uppwork. com to connect with top talent ready to help your business grow. That's you p wor k d. com upwork d. com. This episode is presented by the Planned Parethood Federation of America We're watching the devastating consequences of policies decisions play out in real time. The Trump administration's backers in Congress permanently defund Plned parenthood an effort to shut down health centers and block patient care like wellness exams, cancer screenings and more across the country especially for those with low incomes If you want to do something concrete to help, visit plannedparenthood. org slash defend Y gift builds a future where everyone can get the care they need and deserve This episode is sponsored by Ground News I've been fascinated by the reflecting pool story in recent days, just fascinated I'm a Washingtonian and This fight over the Relecting pool and President Trump's renovation of it or tempted renovation has just struck a chord with people in Washington and around the country. and there's been a huge amount of news coverage of it Ground newews is one of the most helpful tools you can find to cut through the noise and get down to the facts of important stories. Instead of getting lost in the hype and the headlines, it helps you understand what's happening. Ground News in a way like the Gab fest tries to get to the truth and tries to avoid echo chambers And it does that. by showing you where the news that you're reading comes from what its biases are and how you can take into account those biases as you consume news about topics you care about from sources you trust So if you like this podcast, I suspect You'll like ground News. Go to groundNews d. com slash gab to get forty percent off the unlimited access vantage subscription ground newews d. com slash Gab whether you subscribe yourself or send it as a gift Groundneews d. com slash gab, use My link so they know the gap that sent you I live in Washington, D C. and I confess that on Sunday night, june fourteenth, the flag day, President Trump's eightieth birthday and fight Night I was rooting lightning, I was rooting for sudden squalt, I was rooting for torrential rain, really anything to throw off and destabilize the spectacle at the White House, the spectacle in the White House long the bloody macho orgy to celebrate Trump was as bad as you could have feared. The White House lawn deceorated, polluted with this grotesque UFC cllaw, the octagon prison plastered with ads for companies notable for their shamelessness like poolymarket and Morgan and Morgan fighters strutting through the White House, the military dragooned into escort duty for street fights, it was awful And I say that as somebody who absolutely loves the UFC, who has no problem with mixed martial arts, who likes those fights, has been to UFC fights Man, as a citizen, it was really It was really gruesome Also, they did fireworks at one AM, which is literally the definition of being the worst possible neighbor you can be do fireworks at one AM onn a weeknight Jesus Um So I guess my question to you, Emily is Why did Trump want to hold this particular spectacle at the White House this particular spectacle. There are all kinds of spectacles that Trump does and he likes and he loves sports obviously. But why this one in this way I mean, it just seems like the Gadiator analogy explains a lot that you have people It's Really like trying to beat each other into a bloody pulp, right U It's incredibly testosterone laden, like male coded It's his people These are right both The people who came to the event and the performers are like, right in his wheelhouse and It's such a brazen display of what we have traditionally not expected from the White House and the presidency. I mean, it's absolutely remaking both in the image of President Trump in a way that he seemed to find enormously satisfying. I mean, he was there with his kids, his grandchildren, watching avidly right there, the performers were coming over to him. during the fights and he seemed to revel in all of it. So I think it's both like the sort of you know, middle finger to tradition and what it means to be presidential in some traditional way and then just really enjoying being surrounded by people who are flattering and admiring and part of sarage I guess? Yeah. It's a flex in I start basically the entire Trump presidency is a flex Like it's, I can use power in whatever way and find me new ways to use power U All right at at willilly, nilly. And and so it's a it creates, I mean, it is a it's a it's sort of he takes the energy from the power display There wass nothing more powerful than watching a UFC fighter esssentially finishing off an opponent. I mean if anybody has never watched it, like it's not it's not even like boxing where like a person falls down and then you know, you wait to see if they can get up. They fall down and the fighter hummels them until they cannot stir. So there is a ra that it is really not what's happening, John. Okay wait sorry sorry sorryororry no, hold on.or's really not what's happening. Hold onical sport Okay on. let me ask you this question. When a part safer than boxing. Let me ask you this question. When a person falls to the when a person when the when the opponent falls to the ground What do you do in boxing It's ay. It's a different sport. They They're different sports. They're That's why I said they're different sports. That's no but the analogy. Okay so wit what happens in? I feel this is a willful misinterpretation of what Well just answer is. Then just answer the question. What are they do doing in boxing Wed all know yes, boxing has Markcus Queenbury Rules Mark Queensbury rules. So what are they doing in the US? There's a break UC so which is more what is technically are you correct? Yes, you' correct. What What is a more dominant display of power? When you beat the shit out of somebody who can't who is on the ground, is that more dominant or do you let them Do you let the rules intercede when they're not? whichich is the more dominant display of power? I do not u I do not accept the terms of your analogy I not why not just way I genuinely don't understand. So it's a less because I think when you when you interpret US I didn't know we were going to have a we're going to have a referendum on the UFC in this When you interpret UFC as essentially being a display of dominance rather than display extremely technically skilled fighters who often are on the ground. They're often standing up. They're kicking each other, they're punching each other, they're wrestling each other. and that it can in fact be the case when you are on the ground on your back that you're in a dominant position in the UFC. That is a perfectly legitimate place to be. And so the idea that somehow you know, the the visual optics, which is that if one person is on the ground, the other person is attempting to kick them or punch them, that that is a is sort of Ungentlemanly here inhumane in a way that box I don't think Ier just I is a false is a false description of it Just because you chose to misinterpret what I was saying doesn't mean I'm on the hook for your misinterpretation. All I was saying, neither gentlemanly nor humane nor any of those words, All I said is what is more of a display of raw power You can ascribe that raw power to skill. I'm sure the presresident describes skill to all of his raw power moves. My only point is that the aesthetic of the moment in which victory is won by engaging in power moves like beating somebody when they're down on their back is different than what people might expect. in a boxing match. Therefore this display He's more of a display of raw power, and that's something that appeals to the president and in all of the norms he's broken. that too is a display of power. and this is a president who enjoys displaying his power I I think The fact that there are a lot of people such as yourselves who watch this and see it primarily as a display of raw power is meaningful. Like it's meaningful that you you watch the sport and see it in a particular way. And I think that's really important I would just say that I do not as a person who has watched UFC and mixed martial arts for twenty years in various I do not see it as being more of a display of raw power or different than a lot of other sports include and I actually see it as a relative to boxing as a much less brutal form of combat That is Why is it safer because they're not going after the head in the same way? Yeah, becausecause you just don't punch people in the head nearly as much. And that's where boxing is so bad And boxing gloves, the point of a boxing glove is not to protect the head. The point of a boxing glove is to protect the fist so you can punch somebody again and again in the head And so you're getting concussive blow after concussive blow in a boxy match in a way that you don't in a UFC. UFC you're much more likely to like, you know have a tendon messed with and, you know, you can you can suffer a very serious injury, but not that same brain u brain destruction that boxing promotes Okay, that makes sense I mean, the dominous display to me seems pretty inarguable and you guys argued about it. Well, it would be odd for the president to on his eightieth birthday on the lawn of the White House to choose the least dominant display in sport. I mean, he definitely didn't go for shuffle booard So of all the sports available to him, all. He certainly thinks it's a display of dominance And what is striking though, about why this break of the traditional use of the White House, Well, first of all, obviously people mention the fact that Teddy Roosevelt U had boxing, not only boxing matches on the White House L, but that he engaged in boxing fights For Roosevelt, boxing was a matter of character. So for example, there is this great story of how he told those who box with him never to let up on him which meant that sometimes he had bruises and swelling as a result of boxing himself But then the famous story is that one of the Amy sergeants that he was boxing with actually hit him so hard it detached his retina and ultimately led to him being effectively blind by the end of his life and that he never told the Army serergeant, I think it was a sergeant that this had happened because he thought it would be too much weight on that sergeant that he'd done this to the president. And the serergeant only figured it out later when when Roosevelt wrote about the detached retina in his in one of his books and the sergeant was like, o my God, that must have been me So that's a far different U use of sport in the Teddy Roosevelt context. but becausecause there are people like David who would otherwise not be a supporter of the president who nevertheless like this sport, And you had Ari Emmanuel there, who does not share the president's politics. He happens to be owner of TKO, which owns our the UFC fight or I owns or partially owns anyway, you could have used this as an opportunity the way the symbols of the White House have been used in the past, which is to bring people together. I mean, I know this president wouldn't do that part of what's Part of the injury here is that the symbols of the White House are supposed to be used in the furtherance of national unity, particularly in the two hundred fiftieth. and none of that was on That right. I think that you've hit the nail For me, John, about why this is so disturbing. I mean, there's the I was embarrass that there were no women fighting. I thought that was really shameful. If you're going to do this, like don't make it so male, let women fight too I was embarrassed the wrong timeline. The only women that the only women performed were the Ring card girls That was embarrassing. I was embarrassed the it's meant to be I was embarrassed at the corruption, like the way in which, you know, David Ellison and Paramount Plus gets the access to this, the way that all these companies that are Clearly Trump aligned are advertising on it. The way that Trump's own crypto business is got a piece of the action I was embarrassed to see the way the military was pulled into performing for this Um So that part and that part did embarrass me. But in terms of I absolutely agree with you, John. L one of the things that is such a bummer as a Washingtonian about this two hundred fiftet anniversary is that It could be so fun to be celebrating the nation in America right now. And the way that Trump has made it about himself and the way that Trump has politicized it has made it very hard for somebody who isn't a Trump sympathizer to take pleasure in what they're doing and And you know, this UFC thing was that taken taken on literally on steroids, probably literally on steroids. Um, but just max the maximalist thing. I mean, the presence of that claw on the White House lawn so dismal as a visual image Sorry Emily, you were you were interrupting me. You had things to say. You were you were you were quote tweeting me as I was talking. what do you want to say My only minor point was that of course women were only included in the most like, you know stereotypically sexist way because the whole impulse behind this and this whole thread of the Trump presidency is about masculinity in a way that, you know, often involves saying that women can't be in combat. You know, the Founding pastor of Pete Higsest Church says that women should lose the vote he's in favor of male household controlled voting. There's just this deeply misogynist take away women's rights and place in society strain. But also Emily, I would just like to note they also think that a lot of women are men. So Michelle Ob the fighter, They Michelle Obama iss a man. so they would like, you know, they do they think man men belong everywhere Yeah, but some weird like I know. that was I was just trying it. I could j about something really, really disgusting Right at the end, why don't we I mean, I can't imagine there's the listener out there who doesn't know this slur about Michelle Obama into the microphone with Joe Rogan smiling as the the fighter made the slur was really like it was the cherry on top for the for the event Before we leave this sort of general topic of Trump's Washington, which we talk about all the time, there was a great reporting in the Washington Post The ballroom that was going to be paid for with whollly with private funds, as Trump assured us, actually has had hundreds of millions of dollars already poured into it from our taxpayer u taxpayer contributions to the FIisk. What did you make of that Emily? I just don't know what to say about all of this. Like it's so over the top, the level of corruption and lying and grift and it just seems endless and overwhelming. and peopleople are paying attention to it and considering how they would feel if the opposite party was doing this And it's just a lot I swear, I feel like, I mean, what was so great about the Washington Post reporting, two things stood out to me. One, President was lying knowing already because invoices had been submitted, that taxpayers were on the hook for for paying for this. I mean, he was lying from the start And also because the idea that the Secret Service needed to have some of this paid for both in the demolition and the construction so that it would come out of their budget that there was some actual policy reason to have taxpayers pay through The Secret Service The post interviewed a bunch of procurement people across multiple administrations who said that that didn't pass the laugh test. So the president wasn't just lying after the fact or conditions didn't just escalate to make him not having told the truth. He knew in real time, and then repeatedly in real time knew as the costs escalated. And so it feels like the president engages in activities for the purpose of finding new ways to lie about them Like that that there we have wrongly conceived the president's obsession with ballrooms and reflecting pools, that they are really just an opportunity to mint new kinds of lies and get people to say insane things in the service of flattering him or not running afoul of him on his vanity projects. And also my other favorite piece of reporting was the White House lawyer who changed the language in one of the official documents so that it comported with the fact that taxpayers were paying for it. Yes, Yes Um At least the reflecting pool is bright green with algae Just as planned Hi, this is David Plot I'm one of the hosts of the Slate Political Gab Fest Now I'm also hosting a new podcast called yourour city could be better, because it could be Each week, I'm talking to someone who really knows a city about something their hometown is doing surprisingly well. I talked to Sean McPherson about how the anti Iice movement and the twin cities organized so quickly and effectively. Last week, Meghan Harris came on to explain how Pittsburgh might save its struggling downtown with sweetheart rent deals for small businesses. If you love your city and also love to complain about your city, then this could be the podcast for you. Listen to your city could be better on YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts the White House has used its authity to regulate and control exports to stop andthropic the AI company from using releasing or more broadly releasing or allowing to be continue to be used Fable. and Fable is a AI model that is a more safeguarded version of Mythos, an earlier model that caused convulsions around the world because of its power Anthropic had withheld mythos to protect cybersecurity around the world to protect software around the world from hackers. And inststead modified mythos made it protected and released it as a fable model Amazon, which was using Fable. found that Fable could in fact identify some flaws in software and potentially target them. reported this to the US government Um and the US government responded by essentially telling Anthropic, you cannot allow any foreign national to use this model, which means that Anthropic can't release the model at all, the model can't be used because they can't control whether foreign nationals use it Um no matter that the same capabilities that Amazon identified in Fable are also available in an open AI product. openingI recent releases So it's a really really fascinating and difficult issue because of course We do want a world in which there' a responsible government regulating AI and the risks of powerful companies having unlimited power with their AI models is really profound. We also don't want the US to lose a competitive battle with other nations that are developing AI and have their AI models, which maybe are more unscrupulous or damaging to us be the dominant world models. Um And you also don't want political favoritism being. u the way that that government's deciding how to regulate. So Emily, when you first saw the story, what struck you Well, I'm a little confused about how serious the jailbreak was, right? what Amazon reported because then it seemed like First of all, we don't have the Amazon report. That's not public. And then some people who maybe saw it were like, well, actually, this is fine. This was a way that the model was trying to identify defense capabilities, not how to destroy things and it's actually like the same critique you could mount against some of Chat GPT's models some of how Chat GPT also operates. I don't know if that's true or not. It It was really hard to tell, right? Because part of the issue here is anthropic I beat a big drum roll about mythos and made it seem really dangerous and said, hey, we're not releasing it. We're going to have everyone test it first And so then that made you think on the one hand, okay, well, if Ananthropics's not worried about this jailbreak, maybe it's okay. Or well, actually maybe they were right, this is really dangerous and they're downplaying this particular problem that Amazon found It seemed as if the government and the company did not have a really good way of talking to each other, which we already know from the last fight that the Pentagon had with anthropic. It just seems like Um, They don't really speak each other's language. and then possibly that the Trump administration has just decided that anthropic is the you know, liberal, quote woke AI company and so they're going to pound on it whenever they can. And all of those dynamics made it really hard to evaluate this particular conflict I do think there's this larger set of issues looming which you were talking about, David, which is like how are governments going to regulate these companies and Should we be rooting for a world in which the governments, which at least in our country and lots of countries were elected have more say because otherwise we're moving into this world in which these corporate CEO's who head the company send to be seem to be on their way to becoming more powerful And on their own. And that part of the dyamac, it just at this point, there's so much uncertainty. It's just hard for me to evaluate that It's like doing surgery on the Titanic. You have the complexities of brain surgery itself and that's super complex And then you have the fact that it's taking place on a ship that is going under. And the ship going under is the Trump administration because you have all of the grievance reasons that the administration would want to punish Anthropic. you have all of the totally scatter shot views about government meddling in private industries. So on the one hand, you have JD. Vance saying, let eight a thousand AI flowers bloom. We're not going to get in the way. But then you have instincts within the Trump administration, obviously which emanate from the Oval Office, which are wait a minute, this is a huge leverage spot that we can use on the most compelling new technology to perhaps ever hit mankind. So like let's not give up our ability to have leverage over these companies, whichresents which you can argue represents what was the motivation in part behind the executive order that asked companies to put for to give the administration their models. So Even if you left aside all of the complexities of the Titanic, which is the administration, The uncertainty you're talking about, Emily is is embedded in the product, which is to say that even the people, one of the things that struck me so many years ago listening to this panel of AI, the real leading lights in AI was that they basically said there will come to be a time where we won't know what it's able to do. and it will teach us what it is doing And that is part of the uncertainty embedded in these models and what Anthropic has had this interesting, some would say, self serving view, which is we need to let it go and do possibly evil things because only by discovering the evil things, can we then restrain it The question is, as you pointed out, Emily, whose hands are those evil things Wh's going to do the restraining? And we have two broken systems. You have the financial pressure and the speed of adoption pressure in the private sector, and you look at the what came out in the Musk versus versus open AI court battle, and you see that the actors in charge of making these decisions are not exactly guided by the moral lessons you would have learned in kindergarten. And then in the other hand, you have an administration that is proven to be morally wobbly And so in an unknown condition with breakneck pace decisions having to be made, there is no moral actor, which is why the pope had to come running into the room and say, hey, slow down gang. And I would just say one final thing in the coverage of this, the spat between the Unitedates between the Pentagon and anthropic gets written about like a debate over how it would be used in defense It was like the centerpiece debate of this entire thing, which is who has control over the lives of other people? Will it be humans or AI? And Anthropic was worried it would be the AI left alone. So like as people are writing about this current spat, they kind of gloss over What was the is the central question of AI, which is who makes moral choices about life and death, which was at the heart of the Pentagon's path One of the other complications which what you' getting at John, is that because administration is manifestly a bad actor, both because it is incompetent, It has incompetent people doing things and also because it is so corrupt. even as a citizen who is rooting for a kind of active effective government to you know, well regulate commerce in this nation, which is what I am doing It's very you can't. You can't You don't know where to side in this, because you cannot trust the motivations of the Trump people, both because they seems stupid and because they are so clearly corrupt and that that the existence of that mistrust, the existence of people not believing that government can fairly regulate is a gigantic problem for future presidents too, or for future governments, which is that you even if you think like, well, there should be a regulatory framework that exists in federal government, the U.S. federal government, which is democratically responsive, is the right place for that to exist There are many of us who will be suspicious because been 's been poisoned, it's been turned into black mold by the way that the Trump administration is behaving. And that's just like a bummer of a situation to be in. I would also note like If you're if you're a a foreign national or your person in another country. or business in another country. This makes you very suspicious of all United States products. If the United States can suddenly turn off an extremely valuable economic engine that you use every day for your business. If it can just be like, nope, you cannot use it, sorry. That is a that's a place where you might say, well, maybe I should find a different kind of model, maybe I should work with a different country or a different kind of company because the United States and the United States is products now are clearly subject to the will of a presidential dictator who may turn it off any moment Yes. and stability is very bad for that reason To go back to what you were saying about the mold that is growing, it reminds me of this problem in court of losing the presumption of regularity for the government, which is this idea that when the Justice Department, federal prosecutors come into court judges Trust them to tell the truth about the facts and to present the basic facts in a clear and accurate manner. There have been all kinds of distress signals from judges about what it means when the Justice Department just starts lying or misrepresenting in a lot of cases. And I think this is analogous, except that it's all of us as citizens trying to evaluate the government's conduct In the end, we have to root for the humans, right? I mean because the well the larger question about AI is like not just this tug of war between governments and CEOs, but also between humans and the AII model itself, at least in theory at some point. And so That also always ends up affecting my thinking about this. Like I It makes me willing to tolerate, I guess, worse behavior by governments because I just want to make sure that the AIs don't end up taking the control away from the humans, exxcept that then I also worry that if you have super incompetent grrifty attempts at government interference, then that's going to produce the opposite result where you know, then you end up losing the AI race to some company in China that's going to lose control to theA model, etcetera. That to me is an interesting offshoot of this, which I'm out of my lane And but the if Companies worry about these the switch being thrown and denying them the AI they rely on and start going to open source than the which obviously gives an advantage to China, but also If there's no guardrails, then open source goes into the hands of people who have deeply bad motives and use it for things like creating new biological weapons or you turning off power grids. That seems like it leaves a gate open for real harm Let us go cocktail chatter. When your reflecting pool is clogged with algae, And you're staring at your green reflecting pool in your backyard, Emily What are you going to be chattering to Dr. Baslon, your husband about. So I had a dream last night that my dog had a like little stem and leaf growing out of her belly button And that this seemed bad that we had left this. It was like a big maple leaf that was like attached to her belly button Th And I woke up and I was really relieved that in fact, this is not the case, but also I was confused. I realized I had never really seen her belly button. I was like, wait, new dogs have belly buttons. I mean, maybe this is something that They must Yeah, they must. I actually asked Claude this morning. Claude wanted to let me know that Flaw Fable five is currently unavailable for our segment on anthropic But but Claude does know that dogs have belly buttonss. and in fact all small like mammals have belly buttons. That's right. they're attached to the placenta through an umbilical cord And then I had a further question which was like, well wait, you know we cut humans cut umbilical cords. Well, so all animals just thank you. Yes.. They know to just me biting. That's you biting. Eactly I this is super impressive that all mammals know that they just have to chew off this um The umbilical cord at birth and also seems like maybe it's like less thick and easier to get right at the source of the belly button. But it's why mammals belly buttons just kind of disappear and hide under their fur because it all is like Nakature is just taking care of this. And the exception, as you probably also knew, but I had forgotten are the marsupials. R They in the very beginning have a placenta and umbilical cord, but then it's only this really embryonic earlier stage of development. and then they' they come out I guess, like very underdeveloped and go into a pouch and then get attached by a nipple. I have always wondered what s of things you would think about if you ate edibles in the morning. This is my favoritelon chatter ever. This is so much better than all your other chatters. I was like, this is a David Plot style chatter, but it's coming from Emily and that makes it even better I thought you would like it and I do think it is also Mable Thank you. Um So beats the usual like, you know death row homeless person on Death row denied late lawyer by you know, incompetent malevolent prosecut I'll be back John, what is her child? I didn't know what a witness tree was. and so w there is so witness tree is a tree that was alive during a significant historical event and two that are in that I have found in my research are the Burnside syycamore in Maryland that witnessed the eighteen sixty two Battle of Antietam, which David probably knows about since he's his civil War geography expert. And the other is that the Oklahoma City National Tree, which absorbed gas and metal from the nineteen ninety five bombing. The reason I was on the hunt for witness trees is that sadly one of the last remaining witness trees at Lincoln's home in Springfield, Illinois dating back to the time he lived there, which was in eighteen forty four that alas, it was hurt by severe storms Thursday and it's irreparably damaged So we are losing one of our witness trees. but that idea of connections in time between a thing that still exists and ourselves and obviously the tree didn't actually bear witness. And yet our imagination kind of makes us think that it did and that that somehow creates a connection that's a little stronger than just pure intellectual connections that you draw. Anyway. And then I started to think about the witness trees we all have in our own lives, the things that are still standing that witness us doing going to school, the house, the first houses we grew up in. And as I was thinking about this, sadly, they were digging up the stump of the witness tree in front of our house, which has been here. I counted the rings for I'm not sure it was a proper count, but like for at least ninety years. Love that. So beautiful a great pair of cocktail shatters. We should just make the so Have I ever told you about my plan My scheme my desire to replicate in the United States something that exists in Europe, which is they in Europe, in every country in Europe, and then across Europe, they have a tree of the Ye competition every year they name great trees and the trees could be great because they are beautiful because they're enormous because they're distinctive or because they're witness trees. And so there' they'll be one, you know, this Hawthorne that survived a bombing German bombing in, you know, on august eighth, nineteen forty two. And each year they'll be the finalist trees and they'll tell little stories about them and then They name the winning trees. And I just think they should do that in the United States. And I keep meaning, this is a kind of retirement project for me is to start this in Washington, DC. I think love it. greatreat. Oh my go, I think it's fantastic Okay, my chatter, God, I can't even live up. Uually I'm like, I can top these chatters. No problem John boring historical thing, Emily, some outrage. I'm like, I'll come in with a fun, but Not today. First of all just a bit of pitching. I need to hire someone to replace me. So I am acting as the general manager of Citycast DC. I'm running Citycast DC as we expand Citycast DC into a really great local newsroom here in Washington. We're trying to build the best bigiggest local news room for Washington, D.C. and we've now hired you know, a dozen journalists and we're just about to do a website relaunch and it's really exciting. we're really trying to fill the space that the Washington Post has left in the market. And I've been running it, but I need to hire somebody to run it. I need to hire a general manager. So if you're somebody who like has worked in media, you've sort of run the business side of a media business or worked in business side of a media business and also know the editorial side, and you're excited by the challenge of a local building something wonderful local with a fantastic local owner in the Graham holding company, please reach out to me, David Potz at gmail dot comot and