Sen. Tillis Unfiltered: Trump, Iran & What’s Next For the GOP

Thank you.

“Otherwise, I wouldn't vote for you either.”

I would vote for you, to be fair.

I'm not running, I'm just running my mouth. Hi, everyone, from New York Magazine and the Vox Media Podcast Network. This is on with Kara Swisher and I'm Kara Swisher. My guest today is North Carolina,

a Republican Senator, Tom Tillis. He's one of the very few Republicans willing to criticize a Trump administration right now. That's mainly because he's not running for reelection this year in part because of criticisms from President Trump.

Tillis' voice skepticism about the administration's goals and Iran. He's refused to confirm President Trump's pick to head the federal reserve until the Justice Department drops an investigation into its current chair, Jerome Powell.

And earlier this month, he also got a lot of attention for eviscerating, now former Secretary of Homeland Security, Kristi Nome, during a Senate hearing. We're an exceptional nation and one of the reasons we're exceptional is we expect exceptional leadership.

And you've demonstrated anything but that and the time that I've seen you responding to the emergency in North Carolina and across the southeast and acknowledging when mistakes are made. But Tillis' careful not to criticize Trump himself.

He says the problem is the people around the president

giving him bad advice. Hm, President Trump hired, by the way, but that's another issue we'll talk about. And Tillis voted to confirm some of those very people like Nome, Defense Secretary, Pete Heggseth,

and FBI Director, Cash Patel. I think Tom Tillis' super smart. He was an ex-business person. At the same time, he's got the reputation of Too Late Tom because he wasn't saying these things,

“which I think he actually thought earlier.”

I think he's in a great position though to stop some of the nonsense. And he's using it until he leaves office next January of 2027 when his term is up. It's a shame that people like him can't say what they want

because he's actually very smart.

I agree with him on very little.

At the same time, I really do respect his intelligence. And so I was very excited to talk to him. All right, let's get into my conversation with Tom Tillis. We've got two expert questions today. One from longtime Washington Defense Attorney Abbey Lowell

who we've interviewed on this program and he's representing some of Trump's perceived enemies. He's also represented people in the Trump family, too. An interesting lawyer. The other is from a listener who's also one of Tillis's constituents.

It's not every day we get a Republican on the show. So stick around. Support for the show comes from back market.

“You don't always need the newest tech no matter what your social media algorithm says.”

Sometimes newer doesn't exactly mean better. Back market is the world's leading premium or furbished tech marketplace. Back market offers a range of high quality tech inspected and refurbished by professionals. It's all they do.

They have phones, computers, gaming consoles, vacuum cleaners and even iPods. Back market is also on a mission to reduce the environmental toll that fast tech has on our planet. As refurbished tech is proven to use less raw materials,

leave behind less waste and create fewer carbon emissions than new, making their refurbished tech not only more affordable, but more sustainable as well. Shop now at backmarket.com. If you're tired of endless scrolling to figure out where to eat,

same I'm Stephanie Wu, editor-in-chief of Eater. We've just launched the new-ish and way better Eater app. It has all the restaurants we love. It gives you personalized picks wherever you are and serves up smarter search results just for you.

You can find my list of the best places from our teenies and fries in New York City. And save your favorite spots, share lists, follow editors and book right in the app. Download the Eater app at EaterApp.com.

It's free for iOS users. Senator Tom Tillis, thanks for coming on on. - Thank you. - I like your swanky setup here in the Senate. - Yeah, I like it.

They've done a really good job for you in the Republican conference. - Yeah, it's really nice, it's a good one. I worked here for Senator S.I. Hiakawa, also a Republican when I was a child.

And I, we did not have this. Anyway, I know to listeners were taping this conversation, late Thursday afternoon, so things may have changed by the time you're hearing it. But let's dive in.

Let's start with the war in Iran. It's something you talked about a little bit. President Trump is sending conflicting messages about whether the war is ramping up or winding down or we've wanted or they better talk to us

and Republicans are getting anxious.

who chairs the House Armed Services Committee

last at the Pentagon for not giving lawmakers enough information in these three things. Almost a month into this conflict. Talk about what's happening now in the realistic end. - I don't think one's been articulated

“and quite honestly, my response to the press”

over the last week, when they've asked me if I'm getting brief, I said it's less important for me to be brief right now than the committee's of jurisdiction. But when you hear a chair of a committee of jurisdiction,

saying it's insufficient information, that is unacceptable. - I am looking at this initiative in Iran through the lens of the War Powers Act. - Right.

- And I'm willing to give my president

a fair amount of latitude within 60 days.

But we're almost at the 30 day mark, right? - Right. - And so there has to be very clear strategic objectives. You know, some of the tactical objectives obviously would have to be to the extent that we need to know them

would probably be done in a classified setting. But we need to state precisely what we're doing there. We know why we're there to begin with. But now we need to know why we're going to continue to be there, or including considering having boots on the ground.

I've got Marines from North Carolina and the 82nd Airborne. And so now I'm going to join the chorus of saying, it's time to get us in the scuff. It's time to determine what's next. And you're only going to get that before getting to an AUML.

- Because one of the things was a lot of Republicans off the record was saying, 15 days into this, it's too much. 60 days is your breaking point, or would you vote for a more power as a result? - Well, 60 days is really prescribed by the war power's resolution.

“I think if we don't have clarity at the 60 day mark,”

then you either are determining that you're ramping down over 30 days within the numbers of the war power's resolution, are you there for beyond that? And if you're there for beyond that, it is absolutely reasonable to expect

that you have to have an authorization for the use of military force to legitimize this. And I think you will get it if you're clear on the objectives and you're clear on what we're trying to do there strategically. And you need support for the tactics that you believe

or necessary to accomplish that strategic goal. - And what would that mean for you? What would that mean for you to vote for a more power's resolution? - Well, I think that we need to like we've had to deal with another Middle East engagement.

We just need to look at what the meats and bounds of an authorization would look like. And that's gonna be fluid, but it's gonna be necessary. Or it'd be very, very difficult for me to support future action after the 60 day mark in the absence of that information.

We just can't have these endless engagement. I mean, my goodness, Republicans ran on the concept to vending for endless wars. And the last thing we want to do is appear to be hypocrites when we're confronted with the same sorts of challenges

that we criticize Democrats for. - Do you appear to be hypocrites at this moment? - I don't think so yet. - Okay, looks. - Because again, look, I do believe that Iran.

First off, I was a, when I ran for the Senate,

I was highly critical of Obama's JCPOA.

I don't think it was sustainable. It was a part of that governing with the pin and the foam thing that I think administrations have had, including the current administration. You want to have a legitimacy with international engagements.

“You should get the article one branch involved.”

And so the message now is just that. And we're going to give them some difference. I'm going to give them some difference for the next 30 or so days. But if we don't have an abundance of clarity by then, then it becomes a real problem.

- I also think it becomes a political problem. - That's all media, political problem. - Right, so when you think about that, where is the fault line? What is it, President Trump changing, saying we won,

we're leaving. We're going, or is it defense or secretary? Pete Higgs asks, where is the problem? - I don't know. I have to view Higgs at the Secretary of Defense

as the person who's at the tip of the spear providing best military advice from professionals. But at the end of the day, he owns the work product. And I'll be judging, you know, how well he's doing, based on the best advice he's given the president

and how well the president articulates our goals going forward. - The thing, what grade would you give him now? - Well, I think we're too early to give him, I'll give him an incomplete, because we simply, I do believe that, like the bombings from last year,

it was good to degrade capabilities of the Iranians. They're no friend. - It was supposed to be obliterated, but not. - Yeah, well, it was semi obliterated, I guess. But you know, I don't like using absolute words

to describe complex things, but president did. And I think that that's a part of what confuses people. Because, you know, I think people want to know,

Now we're back, and we obliterate them again. Well, if we obliterate them again, why do we need ground truth? What strategic goal is necessary post obliteration that puts you as certain resources? - Fascinating discussion with your colleague, Senator Mark Warner,

about that. He was like, you know, only way to get rid of the things that are talking about is to have our troops there. Now, and it's obvious, but talk about a realistic conclusion because regime change seems unlikely at this point.

And this is something I actually, when I talked to Senator Warner, he said, absolutely not. These people are going to stay. This was before it was clear they weren't going to stay in Paris, but he said in unstable regimes, it's still in place

is potentially even more dangerous. What is the realistic end that you see?

“- Well, that's what concerns me about the after.”

I mean, you could create, if we're not careful, with how we conclude this, we could create a more dangerous situation that we have today. Maybe less so on any immediate nuclear threat, but more so on having Iran's malign influence

in Hamas and Hezbollah and other organizations that they've supported internationally. They just turned that dial up if they're losing on the nuclear option. So I think there is a scenario where they become

maybe counterintuitive since so much obliterations going on. - Yeah. - But it could create a more dangerous situation if we don't handle the after properly.

- Trump extended his deadline to reopen the state of Hormuz. If it doesn't, he's threatened to strike Iran's power plants, which are civilian infrastructure, if he does it, it would be a major escalation, right? And a possible war crimes against civilians,

he decided to strike those power plants. Where would it leave us? And especially when they have other ways of attacking us

“in the streets from Hormuz with drones, with small boats.”

And so we spent a million dollars on a missile

that obliterates a 50,000 dollars, a 50,000 dollar drop. - Well, that's, you know, we have to look at, we should also view that threat. If the United States follows through on hitting civilian infrastructure, I don't know

what the current sentiment is among the Iranian people. But you could begin to alienate those who would like nothing more than to see regime change when you start killing mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, children.

So they've got to be very, very careful with that. And like you said, they've got to be very cognizant of the fact that we could be moving into violation of the law of war. So we've got to make, you know, the generals

in the Pentagon get this. I hope that they're the ones who are trying to look around corners for the president to understand the second, third order effects. - Right.

I think I would better not do this. - And I believe-- - Well, that's what I-- - I would be shocked if any brief before the decision

was made for the second incursion, if someone said,

one of the first things that the Iranians are going to do is close to straight or move. That should not have been a shock to anybody. I was fully expecting it. In fact to a certain extent, I was expecting it

in the first incursion last year. So hopefully those with stars on their shoulders are going to win the day in terms of the path forward because they don't, we're doing it our own peril. - Do you think they will?

- I'm hopeful that they will. And I think that it's concerning to me when you have a house chair of a committee of jurisdictions, saying he's not getting an end for information, because most of these generals have no problem

with going into the scuff and outline in their plans. So that makes me, you know, I'm an overly skeptical person anyway, but that makes me a little bit concerned about who's actually calling the shots

and advising the president. - Or getting to the president, that's fair. - Right. - So President Trump has been pressuring the Senate to pass the voter ID law and known as the Save America,

and would cry a proof of citizenship to register vote. You've said the bill doesn't have the votes to pass, and you oppose getting rid of the filibuster for that. And that's exactly what President Trump wants. Senate Republicans are very clear.

The filibuster isn't going anywhere. Why haven't you all been able to persuade him? - I don't know, the president, I still, I think I mentioned this to the group when we went out together the first time.

The president, I still have a good relationship. I made it very clear to him that there are no circumstances that I would support Nuke and the filibuster because we're gonna be here after his administration's gone. It will do irreparable harm to the institution of the Senate.

And I think by extension the U.S. and shame on the Democrats for trying to nuke the filibuster after they signed a letter with me

telling President Trump one that we would never nuke the filibuster.

Hopefully they'll go back to their roots and defend it in the future, because now that's the argument. - We need to do it because they will. It's irrational argument for me.

“- That's right, but I think one thing about the save act”

that just blows my mind is you want to know how many U.S. senators are representing states that have voter ID? - I don't know. - 72, so we don't have 72 red states.

You could argue about whether or not they're up to the standards that we would like from the debate. I'd have no problem with laying down a bill that says, these are the federal standards if you achieve them, then you get funding for completing your elections.

If you don't, then that money will be used to audit your elections. That's a way to actually address for the handful of states that may not move forward. But there are not votes to get this done.

It won't achieve the 60 vote threshold and there is no path for the nuclear option. - All the reporting. It's solving a problem that doesn't exist.

- Yeah, but the reality is, I don't know why people,

it's become such an irrational partisan divide in my opinion.

“- It feels like trying to stop people from voting, right?”

- Well, to me is like, what is the big deal? I was Speaker of the House when we passed voter ID in North Carolina. And we used the have-adocuments, things that you could use as a replacement for it.

I got criticized by the right for doing that. We even agreed to pay. I think at the time it was estimated $8 to give somebody a government issue ID if they don't. I mean, this is empowering people.

- If you were going to give people an ID, a lot of it is they don't have an ID or they have to change their name or they don't have a pass. Passports are hunting to be smart.

- And we need to be smart. But I think that some of the real problems that I have with the underlying language in the bill has to do with absentee balleting. That's working great in red states like North Carolina.

And if you get rid of all but extreme cases for absentee balleting, you can have an enormously negative impact in Alaska, in Montana. - And a number of other red states. - So it's just political.

I would think that if they really seriously believe that this law could get passed, then they would have taken care of those defects. So there's a side of me that wonders if this was all just theater to make the filibuster rather than really

putting in good solid, durable voter ID, which I believe we should have. - He would like to make the filibuster.

“What does he say to you when you say I'm not doing that?”

- The president, I've never had really a pitch discussion

at all, even with the discussions or disagreements that we have. But I've been saying guys, you're gone in 2028. We, they who are, the people we're gonna be are gonna have to pick up the pieces. And as a business person, I said,

do you all have any earthly idea how damaging the U.S. going from making it really difficult to do something bad or do something good with the 60 vote threshold to having massive swings and regulatory tax policy every two, four or six years?

- I'm a business person. - You would get a complete, I would discon, I advise clients on setting up operations. And I would take away the premium. People are willing to pay a premium to set up shop

in the United States because of the rule of law and the level of certainty that comes with how difficult it is to change the law major.

- Right, right, you can change the law.

- That goes away. And so that diminishes our global competitiveness

“that I believe a bad rock of that is the exact way”

the article one branch of structure today. - So Trump said this week that he wants to tie his voter ideology, which is the deal to open the Department of Homeland Security. It's been shut down for more than a month speaking of chaos.

Talk a little bit about this. - About the situation of T.S. and linking it to this other bill. - I don't think it makes any sense. It takes something that's already impossible

in terms of passing the save act in its current form and making something that we must get done equally impossible. So let's just separate. I know the president is frustrated. By the way, I had this with the Democrat governor

and a Republican governor. I don't mind the president trying to make his branch. The steward, he is the ultimate steward of his branch as powerful as possible. I don't mind that.

What I mind is people not being good stewards of the article one branch on something that they know is critically important to the functioning of this great nation. And so let's set save aside and let's talk about DHS.

Well, the operation and this is where the Democrats have to acknowledge that the operations that they are trying to defund are not going to want for funding for a good two and a half or three years. The big beautiful bill gave them the baseline funding

to build the wall and to do the sort of operations that I used to need to do. So now we're kind of holding TSA, the Coast Guard. I had somebody ask me a reporter coming over here. What do you think about a unanimous consent for TSA?

I said, number one, I've got to believe some Democrat pick one that's not up until 2030. We'll object to it. Number two, it just means that now the focus will be on, I would say the Coast Guard, who's in the straight of hormones.

And they're the only people in that region right now. The other arm services are being paid and they're not. That will become the next story. So the bottom one is we need to get the funding build done.

This would come out after probably after this is resolved,

“but we should not leave Washington until we do get it done.”

And whether that's through administrative action through an active Congress, this funding needs to get done. I believe so. Now the question, again, the question is, is it to an active Congress that maybe embraces some of the reforms

are as it's through administrative action where they have the authority to move some resources. I don't have a problem, the problem that I have. If you've been on the border, for example, I've done several border tours in the middle of the night.

And I've had a witnessing counters with people who subsequently proven to been members of Cartel. Of course, they should have their mask up then. If they're right and through the streets of Minneapolis between meetings, absolutely not.

I think there's a happy median.

But for the people saying their mask should always

be down really, as somebody who's just dealt with a family doxing event two weeks ago, that's the world I've chosen to live in. I don't think that that's fair for law enforcement. So there's got to be a balance.

No, they're law enforcement. It doesn't have to be black and white. None of the rest of us are wearing those masks to hide ourselves. Well, that's right. But you're also not going into a place where the other argument

here is everybody is casting, everybody that works in ice is bad people. The vast majority of them are good people. There are mothers and fathers, there are brothers and sisters who go to work every day in a dangerous job.

And when they're in dangerous settings with people who contract killers and murder people, then I

think that they deserve that extra piece of protection.

But not everywhere. But not everywhere. So let me see this world so binary. I just get sick of it. I get it.

I just feel like if military doesn't wear it, police don't wear it. Judges, judges, you, you. I actually believe that there's something to be said for more judges protection, because they've been

“going to say, remember when Chuck Schermer said,”

well, unleash a world win on the Supreme Court. So that became standard that they article three. No, no, no, no, no. But I bet you wouldn't like to be in a court and have a judge with a mask.

Hot for some. We'll be back in a minute. [MUSIC PLAYING] Support for the show comes from Framer. If you're a business owner, you know

that a website should help your business grow. If updates to your dot com feel harder than they should, Framer is the shortcut you've been looking for. Framer is a website builder that can transform your dot com from a formality into a tool for growth.

They've already helped thousands of businesses from early stage startups to Fortune 500's build better websites faster. Framer is an enterprise grade, no code website builder used by teams at companies like Proplexity

and Miro to move faster.

“With real-time collaboration, a robust CMS”

with everything you need for great CEO and advanced analytics and include integrated AB testing. Your designers and markets are empowered to build and maximize your dot com from day one. Changes to your famous cycle live to the web in seconds

with one click without help from engineering. So whether you want a launch a new site, test a few landing pages or migrate your full dot com, Framer has programs for startups, scaleups, and large enterprises that make going from my idea to live site as easy and fast

as possible. Learn how you can get more out of your dot com from a Framer specialist start building for free today at framer.com/carap for 30% off a Framer Pro annual plan. That's framer.com/carap for 30% off.

Framer.com/carap rules and restrictions apply. Support for on-with-carap swisher comes from Runes. If you're looking for a health goal that you can actually stick to, you might want to check out Runes. Runes is simply daily habit that deliver real benefits with minimal effort.

Their convenient comprehensive formula packed into a snack pack of gummies a day. This isn't a multivitum and a greens gummy or a prebiotic. It's all of those things and then some at a fraction of the price and bonus, it tastes great. Runes and ingredients are backed by over 35,000 research publications.

While generic multivitumans contain only seven to nine vitamins, drones have more than 20 vitamins and minerals and 60 ingredients, which include nutrient-dense and whole foods. That includes six grams of prebiotic fiber, which is three times the amount of dietary fiber

compared to the leading greens powders and more than two cups of broccoli. It's a daily snack pack because you can't fit the amount of nutrients, drones does into just one dummy, plus that makes it a fun treat to look forward to every day. Kick off the new year, right and save up to 52% off

with the code [email protected]. That's code Cara [email protected]. Support for this show comes from Quints. A thoughtful wardrobe starts with quality over quantity. That means collecting pieces that are well-made,

That's exactly what Quints offers.

Elevated fabrics, thoughtful design, and a price tag that actually makes sense. Quints makes the high-quality wardrobe staples that using premium fabrics like 100% European lemon, 100% silk, and organic cotton poplin. And their lightweight cotton cashmere sweaters are perfect for changing seasons.

Quints works directly with factories cutting out the cost of the middle man. So you're not paying for brand market, just quality clothing. I have gotten a new group of clothes from Quints. I love Quints. I love all their athletes, your stuff. I wear it all the time. I'm wearing some right now.

But what I really like now is I got myself a cashmere sweater that I love, it's so soft, it's so comfortable. Right now, they have a lot of great seasonal colors and prints for spring that I'll make getting dressed, a breeze, I'm planning on ordering a lot more. Go to Quints.com/Cara for free shipping and 365 day returns.

That's a full year to build your wardrobe and love it. And you will, I promise you, now available in Canada too. Don't keep settling for clothes that don't last, go to Quints.com. That's QU-I-N-C-E.com/Cara, K-A-R-A for free shipping and 365 day returns. Quints.com/Cara.

Let me go through a couple of things. You recently went viral for a brutal take-down of former DHS secretary Christy Nome during the Senate hearing.

Didn't know when viral, but you never remember the mean thing.

Yeah, you had a chart, that was great. I love a chart. And you've voiced confidence in her replacement Oklahoma Senator Mark Wayne Mullin. Talk a little bit about what happened there and also when it comes to immigration the administration isn't changing its goal to deport millions of people and million people in one year.

“Is it meaningfully different from your perspective under Mullin?”

It will be. I believe it will be actually, you're asking me about the bowlobe. It represents the Lumbi tribe. I'll give you a good example of the kind of character that kind of character that Mark Wayne Mullin possesses. Mark Wayne Mullin is an enrolled member of the Cherokee Nation. But when he was even in the house, he decided to vote for Lumbi recognition

because he believes he studied it and he believes it was wrong. And he was wanting to go up against his own tribe and the politics of it because he

believed it was the right thing to do.

I believe he's going to carry that same sort of thought process into his new role. And I also believe he will project that thought process on any advisors from the White House that are at odds with what he believes is the right thing to do. Do you think you're a friend of mine or anybody else?

I think it seems like there was a fair amount of evidence that the prior Secretary Nome had a lot that Stephen Miller had a lot of influence.

“I think that Mark Wayne will listen to all comeers, but I don't see Mark Wayne”

losing many arguments or differences of opinion if those two are at odds with each other on what's best to do for Homeland Security. Also think Mark Wayne is going to let FEMA be FEMA. Get the right leadership in there, set it and forget it. It is a part of Homeland Security.

One of the reasons I got mad at that hearing was an hour before they hearing after a month of waiting. I was told that they were not going to give me information on the operation in Charlotte. And I'm going, that told me all I need it to know about how poorly the operation was executed in Charlotte because if you had 500 encounters and 250 of them

were people who had criminal records, dangerous criminal records. I mean, Washington loves embarrassing politicians, right? And particularly some of the people in this administration. If they had that evidence that just made it clearly, it was a resounding success, I would have gotten a letter an hour before the hearing saying I'm going to get it.

That's what made me angry.

“That's why I went into the hearing a little bit hotter than I prefer to be actually.”

Right. And you don't think he'll be pulled around by Stephen Miller. And do you think Miller has had a deleterious impact on? I think Stephen Miller, I just feel like I've told the President, I've told other people. I said, look, this guy is a surfer.

I mean, he surfed into DC with Jeff Sessions and quickly surfed onto some other way. I mean, does anybody really believe Stephen Miller is going to be the curator at the Trump Museum? By the Trump Library when we're down here, he's going to surf onto something else. I don't appreciate what really made my private conflict become public with Miller. As when he went on TV and said, it is a position in the United States that Greenland will become a part of the U.S.

He doesn't speak for the article one branch. He doesn't actually speak for the American people. He speaks for one branch that represents the American people. And that's what made me feel like he was skating way outside of his lanes. And that made me angry because I also, you know,

the Republican leader of the Senate and NATO observer group had been since 2018. And I know how those words are perceived in capitals across Europe. And I wanted to make it very clear. He didn't speak for me are the vast majority of the members of Congress on this particular issue.

I think you're saying he's over his skis.

Yes, Lord. He's got it. Way over. Unlots of issues. That's right.

Yeah. So go back, be an advisor. But, you know, stop enjoying watching yourself on TV. That's not a part of your job. Quickly Kevin Warsh, when it will be appointed, the Diajoo's investigation of Jerome Powell

and the minimations. It's still ongoing, although they're losing in court. Well, the hearing.

“I mean, obviously, if you're a prosecutor, you should have embarrassed by the rolling of the judge.”

And now we've subsequently heard even prosecutors stipulated that they didn't really have much evidence in criminal jail. But you know, I go back. I'm going to go back. This is just so we, I was at this day. I was talking about it.

I was at the alleged scene of the crime, right? And so we're seven other members, including the chair. We all said that there was no criminal act, the criminal act occurred. So what more? I mean, you got a prosecutor insisting a crime occurred in spite of the fact that the majority,

everybody who's spoken on the issue said no crime was occurred. So I say all that to say until that case is carried through. Maybe more evidence comes up that they can convince me beyond two minutes of testimony. I like Kevin, I think he'll be a great chair. Yeah.

And we can have the hearing at any time. But I will withhold my vote, which in committee means that it won't get reported out of committee. Right. And there's no path to discharge. Trump seemed to double down today.

He said the guy who's interest rates are too high. It seems to be related to interest rates and not to get him pressured. Well, it's not to be pressured. It relates to Fed and a penance, which is exactly why on Sunday night, I took the definitive position that I did to make sure on Monday morning when markets opened up.

They didn't wake up for the first time since the existence of the Fed,

that the Fed serves at the pleasure of the president. It doesn't. What I like about what Wash is saying is you're going to still have independence with respect to the dual mandate.

“But there are other things that go on in the Fed that I think we do need more transparency.”

When you talk about bank examinations and supervisory functions. So I like what he wants to bring. And now, because some prosecutor with a dream decided to go forth with Sapena and an investigation, I'm in the position unless it's completed. I got 283 days left, and I'm simply not going to vote for him.

He seems to run out of fox. I think. Yeah. Yeah. He seems to have.

So just very briefly, you're not voting for Casey Means, the next surgeon general. Well, I've said I'm a lean. No, she gets reported out of committee. Yep. Yeah, I'd have to have members members.

But what I most of the time, Cara, I've said. On noms, I'm going to defer if you get an anonymous vote. You voted for the committee. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Right.

If you get one, and you know, and I talked to members who were probably on the fence, I said, look, if you on some of these nominees vote, no, I'll be there to back you up. But I'm not going to be the lone person. And in these cases, where I'm deferring to members on the committee of jurisdiction. And now, in this case, the norm hasn't moved forward.

So that suggests to me there may be some concerns on the committee. You said the resume puts you on alert. Yeah, she did not impress in the hearing. And the resume did not, you know, did not look like the kinds of resumes we've seen before, in terms of surgeon generals, but from either side of the aisle.

So you think, done, where is it going to go?

“You know, I think if we're, what are we three weeks past the nomination hearing?”

And we're about to go on recess generally speaking. Any time a major nom like this isn't committee for more than a month or six weeks, it probably means ultimately they get withdrawn. But we'll see. We'll see.

So let's go on very quickly. I think, because I know we've limited time right now. You're one of the few Republicans willing to challenge the administration. Getting a lot of praise for that. Your critics call you too late, Tom.

Do you know that? I couldn't care. I know. Number one, you know what, that's the problem about either the liberals. Most of the time that's the liberals that just want to, you know,

attack any, any conservative, even a right of center conservative like me.

Because the dirt has never do that these days.

But there's equal and amount of dumbness at either end of the political spectrum. I'll stipulate that. Okay. But the reality is, two late Tom, my God, six months into my freshman term as a brand new state legislator.

I broke with the Republican conference to negotiate the first ever renewable portfolio standard in the South East. These folks should stop there either lazy or their dumb or their both. They ought to look at my right thing. And they're like, why does it have been like this? Well, but I've said.

You know, I think I'm saying why are you, John, I think that's the problem. But you are liberated from the pressures of running for reelection. Do you feel that way? No, it's like I've said. I've been, look, I got in a dust up with the Trump one over found a bill that could only allow them to fire more over for cost.

But like I've said, Tom and Tom again. I forget who the talking head is on the sea span. But I think he consistently wears a plaid jacket. I need to know his name.

But he almost always prefaces a comment that I make about, well, of course he's retiring.

Why, why is that even relevant? Because the reality I feel a little more free. Well, no, but the point is, I would, I have expressed my concern in the past. Not no longer have to worry about what language I use to communicate it because I don't have to go through the cost benefit. Do you think you can be clear than some of your colleagues?

Because I have to tell you, when I talk to some of your colleagues after record, the Republicans don't much more critical of Trump or. Of course, but look, I mean, you know what all martyrs have in common? What they're dead. And in politics, that's losing elections.

I have no problem with people who are running for reelection or managing the complexities of their state to pull back. I believe that they would be there if things became existential. But it's silly.

“That's what I'm saying to this talking head dude.”

It's like, of course, I don't have to go through that cost benefit analysis. I don't have to wonder if I say it this way or in one sentence. Am I now going to have to raise $10 million more dollars? And by that, many more gross rating points to explain what I'm in. Right, right.

So it's not that I wouldn't say it. What I'm saying has been consistent since I was a freshman in the state house. How I'm saying it is different because I don't have that cost benefit analysis. You'd be fair. A lot of speaking of martyrs or Republicans criticizing Trump on their way out the doors become a theme.

It has, and you had former senators Ben Sass, Mitt Romney, Jeff Flake, former House Speaker Paul Ryan, Congressman Lee's, the Jamie Marjorie Taylor Green. You know what they all have in common? And Congressman Don Bacon. Do you know what they all have in common?

Yeah.

That they've criticized the president and I've never criticized the president.

Yes, I wanted to ask about that. Because look, I mean, all these people. Can I just point that that was really interesting when we met. You, you, you aim at mainly the administration advisors and not himself. Yeah.

You've repeatedly said you think he's getting bad advice. There was a former business person at blue chip corporations. You, you've been around the block. You know, the CEO often is the center of criticism. So.

“Well, I believe there's some great people.”

By the way, the majority, what things I've done, what I talked to a lot of people in the administration. And I feel like I have very good relationships with a number of people in the cabinet and the administration. I say, I'll let them know off the record who I'm talking about, but I'm not talking about you. I mean, that's, that's the way I've said. I've got a problem with people.

I'm in the unique position of having spent almost more than 25 years in top tier management consulting. You have. And 20 years in legislative politics, including leadership roles, particularly as speaker of the house and turning the state around. So I'm in a unique position to really help. Or maybe just intuitively look around corners.

And I'm expecting people in the White House who are similarly situated to use that experience to warn the president about second and third order effects.

And I feel like there's two ways to get the president bad advice. One is coming up with a really lousy idea in selling the president on it. Kind of like Stephen Miller saying any immigration reform is bad. I think the president would like to do immigration reform. I believe Stephen Miller is one of the people that are preventing that from happening.

Another one is the president comes up with a really bad idea. And you don't have the guts to tell them it's a bad idea. Okay. And that's what I'm pointing to. I expect more out of these people.

But not president. What's that? Not from him. The president at the end of the day needs people that have the courage to let him know what he doesn't know. Okay.

And then if you start seeing, if I start seeing more signals from the White House say in Tom, we did our, but we went to the math. We agree with you. Then maybe I've got to start looking at the president. That happened in the first administration. He seems to be staffing with people who don't do that.

You had tech creative defense. Jim Matt is a attorney general bill bar chairman. Well, yeah. Five. Mark.

Mark. So. Yes. Did you? You went into a spinal tap back in the day.

Yes. I did. Well. I said, you know, the second house were like the drummer in spinal tap. They kind of blew up after every major performance.

But. So yeah, I get that.

“But that maybe that's why some people are holding back.”

But you can hold back. And the reason why I would suggest they do it for no other reason. They're own personal reputation. One of the reasons why I like wash, you know, as the future Fed chair is I think his reputation and the work that he has done is more important and help to him that any sort of alignment with

the president. I don't think I don't believe he'll be a second. I'm too many sick of him. I do believe we have some folks at gosh boss. That's a great idea.

And you know in their heart of hearts, it's not you're being dishonest to the president. When you know and you're heart and in your mind, it's not a good idea. And you say great idea boss. You're being dishonest to the president and you're being dishonest.

You know, who doesn't lie?

But I like the opposite. But I do too.

I like my you'll go in my office sometimes.

And you'll hear yelling behind my doors. And half the time it's the staff yelling at me. That's the sort of stuff that I reward. I want people to stretch me and grow me and inform me. And the president needs people that are going to stretch him grow him.

“And if not walk out guys, life is good on the outside.”

If you have any kind of experience, you should be able to get the job pretty easily. Any different selections of staff. Yeah, I know it. I'm just saying they're they're letting the president down and they're diminishing what could otherwise be a strong legacy if they don't get their act together.

And there are political consequences the thing we have to talk about right now. We're not doing too well. And what would typically be a negative election. I think is far more so because we're not executed.

I'm going to get them because you know, if saying he's giving getting bad advice,

makes him a passive bystander, he doesn't seem to be that. But ever so we get a question from an outside expert. Do yours comes from longtime Washington defense attorney Abbey Lowell, who's represented people in the Trump family. And also obviously it should James and many others down lemon.

Let's listen to it. Senator Dilis, so good to talk with you. I have this question. You've been one of the very few Republicans to have pushed back on President Trump or folks in his administration on a must any issue.

The founders entire premise was that there would be three co-equal branches of government to check the power of the other branch.

“Has Congress abdicated its role when the majority in Congress and the president are of the same party?”

And will this check in balance only be able to occur when there is the so-called divided government? And lastly, since you have decided to leave this very important role,

who will you hope or who will you ask to play the role you have played over this last year in the future?

Great question. Well, let's start with the foundational question. Well, I've been here when Washington was completely controlled by Democrats. I saw the same behavior. Let's not pretend like questioning the president is this are failing to question the president.

Is this new thing under Trump? I saw it under Biden. I saw it under Obama. So let's be real. In fact, back, I think it was when we either passed the respect for marriage or say for communities.

I had a couple of Democrats come up to me in high five and he said, "Thank you for being by partisan." I said, "I appreciate that. I'm looking forward to you doing that someday." And then what we did, we voted on the bill. So my God, you had 50 members, 51 of your members vote on the bill.

That's not a tough vote for you. And so I would ask people to show me an example of somebody who was a Tom Tillos in the Biden administration on Democrats. This is your party. We're talking about it. Yeah, no.

I just want to make it clear. There are so many people that their memories only happen to be as recent as the election. The election you had sent him on. And they're gone because the Democratic Party turned their back on him and tried to replace him. Kirsten's cinema was absolutely recruited.

The Democrats recruited to go against her. Fatterman. I'm just saying it. He's still welcome to the party. But I'm just saying, it exists in every camp.

And the ones who did it, who actually Kirsten wanted to continue her career, was rewarded by having a primary run. She's got a whole lot of other problems. But anyway, all I'm saying is, everybody needs to look in the mirror when they ask this question. It's not a Republican phenomenon. It's a bipartisan phenomenon.

It is better to have a divided government with Congress and a different.

“If you have the right leadership, I could see where I think that the article one branch is safest when you have divided government.”

And who would you think is going to take up your sort? I don't know. There's people out there that are independent. And I think a lot of it will come down, you know, state that the state's matter. You know, you're more likely in this election cycle.

Where risk may be losing some of the more moderate state. So it's going to be less likely. It comes from the usual suspects. I represent people. People don't care.

People ask me what? I loved or cared a lot of the reason I've lived in it since 1998. I love it. But I also love the politics of North Carolina. We're 40% of the people are independent.

They're not affiliated with either party. And then the remainder are evenly divided. So when people ask me, you know, I said, look at my state, look at my positions. And plus or minus 10% is in complete alignment with the priorities of the people of North Carolina. And that's what I'm saying.

And that's what I'm saying. You consider very independent in the GOP. I think, you know, I think you're looking. I don't want to name names because then you put targets on.

But there are four or five members that I think given the right situation.

“We'll be doing the very same kinds of things that I'm doing today.”

We'll be back in a minute. Support for this show comes from Shopify.

Starting a business has never been easy.

But these days there are so many moving parts that can feel absolutely terrifying to take the leap. Thankfully, they're Shopify. Shopify is the commerce platform behind millions of businesses around the world. And 10% of all e-commerce in the U.S. From household names like Rare Beauty and Skims to Brands just getting started.

Shopify can help you build a beautiful online store that matches your brand style with hundreds of ready to use templates. And whether you're uploading new products or trying to improve existing ones, Shopify can help accelerate your efficiency. Their AI tools can help write product descriptions, page headlines, and even enhance your product photography. Best yet Shopify is your commerce expert with world-class expertise in everything for managing inventory

to international shipping to processing returns and beyond. Shopify can even help you find your customers with easy-to-run email and social media campaigns. It's time to turn those what-ups into. We Shopify today sign up for your $1 per month trial today at shopify.com/caruswisher. Go to shopify.com/caruswisher.

That's shopify.com/caruswisher. It's almost over the store. Also, it's a schoolflashback. It's just an example. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback.

It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback.

It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback.

It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback.

It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback.

It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback.

It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback.

It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback.

It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback.

It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback.

It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback.

It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback.

It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback.

It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback.

It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback.

It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback.

It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback.

It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. It's a schoolflashback. Now, Democrats have problems too. Let's talk about the radicalization of the young right.

“What are the key things in this election coming up?”

Are you most worried about? To be honest with you, I hear that. But I don't think that the young right described in the way that you did is any greater than the young left. Matter of fact, I had a young lady who had to be a part of the young left.

Try to get me a gotcha question on the way out the door.

Now, you're talking to somebody who has speaker passed the first only restitution for forced

serialization victims that was invariably imposed against black people. I come up here right 137-year-long with the Lombie Nation. I get them recognized. You're a complex man. You're a complex man.

All the way through Jim Crow, et cetera. But I have this young extreme equivalent to what you're talking about the radical right. Asking me some nonsense question trying to paint what she had perceived, I guess, is he's a white Republican, so he must be a racist. He's not a gotcha question.

Nick Funtay's popularity is not good branding for me. Neither is. No, no. What I'm saying though is I think we need to just be clear that we're probably in equal ratios of the radicalized if we want to call it young or whatever.

Having said that, the people who are in the left are right of center of politics that are registered are independent voters.

They do not like bullies. And they do not like to kind of elevate it language that we have today. And you know, it was in 2009. I was convinced that the bullying and the pin and the phone. And you know, getting Obamacare and spite of any Republican,

I was convinced when Tom Magazine was saying this is the end of conservatives, the beginning of liberal progressivism to quit my job because I believed that the Obamacan administration was going to overreach. And that I was going to get us a majority and probably become a speaker of the house. That happened.

And it happened when everybody thought that they were, they were riding the way. We're almost guilty of doing the same thing. We read more into the election results than we should have. We're driving down a mandate that our base loves and much a lot of it. I agree with the white.

I have problems with the hell, but it is alienated independent voters. And independent voters the other way you went statewide elections in North Carolina. So we're worried mostly about the independent vote. I'm very worried about the independent vote. And I'm worried about the suburban voters, the right and left of center.

And in my race, I got about 10% of the Democrat vote in both of my two elects.

“I think now you'd be lucky to get one or two percent of the Democrat vote.”

You're seeing all these elections. Yeah, oh yeah. I mean, it fills 2,000 in tennis in reverse. So in that regard, we have two more questions.

We have a second expert question for you.

Comes from one of our listeners who happens to be one of your constituents. My name is Bob Thomason, native of North Carolina and a North Carolina voter. I'm our tired business man living in Charlotte. My question to the senator has to do with the fact that our country can no longer get things done. And the major reason for that is that our politicians won't work across party lines to make things happen.

It's really gotten embarrassing quite frankly. Half our population is left behind by our economy. Our infrastructure is failing, including our once admired air traffic control system. And I asked coming and we had no plan. I'm old enough to remember a time when politicians did cross the aisle and worked with each other.

They even held a road president to account once. So my question to the senator is, what has to happen for our country to get working again

“for politicians to work with each other instead of, you know, adopting the highway or the highway approach?”

We're rapidly losing ground, not only to our rivals, but our enemies. I look forward to hearing the senator's response. I'm just really thoughtful. What? It was and he lives in my neck of the woods in North Carolina.

First and foremost, we got to preserve the filibuster.

That will destroy by partisanship forever if we do it. Because all you'll, because because the, the basis of both parties will, will absolutely vote you out. If you give on, as so, I think, I think first and foremost, we need to get the democratic party. And now the Republican party is litmus test or asking primary opponents, are they for nuking the filibuster? So number one, I don't know what his party affiliation is.

Go back to your Democrat or our GOP meetings and say, this is nonsense. And then I think be a part of an organization that remembers the people that produce bipartisan results. And reward them. And go after the ones who are actually making it almost impossible to get done. But Kara, I'll tell you, you're a, you're a smart person.

You do your research. You go back and find a time. And in the Biden administration, I was one of the leads on respect for marriage. By partisan say for communities act, I was the six person to join the discussions to, to the gentleman's point about the bipartisan infrastructure bill. You go find a time where Democrats pass bill.

That many bills of that substance when the roles were reversed. And they had to walk the so-called plank to add to Republicans to do it. So a part of it, again, I don't know his party affiliation.

“A part of it's going back and say, can you at least do what the Republicans did in the Biden administration Democrats when the roles are reversed?”

Can we can we start telling everybody that compromise is good? Good. Good can come out of it. That's a language in the right legislation happens. Right.

Well, I agree. So it's the, so it's the language. And you know, frankly, even I mentioned this with the reason, you know, these were historic bills. These bipartisan bills, you know, why didn't go to the White House for the signing ceremony?

And particularly for the two that we've led on is because I was always wondering if I did.

There would be some partisan statement of the signing ceremony. And in all three cases, there were a Democrat president.

He says that when he has Republicans present, what has taken on political care of.

But that's been a political capital. Trump made nine of those today, for example, the cabinet. So what had this guy is saying, I don't really care what's going to bring it back.

“Well, I think the, I think independence voters rewarding independent members.”

This is how you get back. So get independent voters could do this country a great service by saying, you know what? But I'm going to set aside some of my ideological priorities for a while and reward behavior. Just say because if you have enough people thinking independently, then if you're a extreme writer, extreme left, this is it for you.

Don't waste your time. But for the remainder of the majority of the country, you'll see things that will swim, Releft and right of center. That will be done on a more consistent part. I mean, I know you're worried about these elections.

You're going to sign up the other way.

I think, you know, look, for this Congress, you know, any sort of major bipartisan bills are all, but probably impossible to get done. Function of time for one thing. You know, after June, I mean, it's going to be all about the campaign. So what are you most concerned about with the midterms coming up?

I am concerned as a Republican. And I became concerned. It's why I've voiced my concern. Now the Senate's employing now. I believe I think we're going to be okay with the Senate.

You know, as long as we continue to support our incumbents. But I believe, you know, we could, we could net loss. I don't think this is a year where any reasonable expectation of gaining numbers exist. But I'm, you know, I'm going down and working and going to work in the trenches with the state legislatures.

“And I think one of the things is beginning to be reported is very important.”

Our, the number of state legislatures across the country that many of them gain a majority back in the same time frame that I became speaker. Starting to look at their sub-arban districts. One's with the either white and center Republicans and the pendants that are at risk. On beach, just shifted. That's exactly right.

So I'm going down. What is black here? What's the redest flag right now for you in this? Uh, basically the evaporation of independence. The only independence that are supporting us right now are the ones who are right of the most extreme mega movement.

Uh, they're the only ones that will support us because they got nowhere to go. But that's a fraction of the independent base for the most part.

80, 85 percent of the independent bases.

They're either going to stay at home or they're going to vote for what they consider to be. It looks like they're voting. And also they're voting like in Marlaga. Well, you got voter intensity too. Democrat voter intensity is through the roof.

120,000 more Democrats vote in the primary than Republicans. Uh, Roy Cooper got 125,000. He looks like he's quite ahead. He got 125,000 more votes than all Republicans in that Republican primary. We got to get our folks enthusiastic.

And we also have to get a fair share of the independence. Cooper's very popular right now. And he would be replacing. I don't know Roy. You know, I'd have a non-alcoholic beer with them, but I'm not going to vote for him.

Okay. I don't know Roy that. Yeah, I think he knows last question.

“Um, when you think about what happens post-Trump, would you come back to politics?”

Would you or what are you going to do next? What is your, your businessperson? What do you think your best contribution is? I, you know, what thing? What thing that I want to do is really take a look at an organization that, like the gentleman,

uh, and the question could come to and say if you're serious about, you know, supporting people and encouraging bipartisan behavior. That there needs to be an organization that provides the air cover for the people that do that. Everybody have five signing ceremony is like, well, sucks for you. You've got a primary.

Uh, we, there needs to be an organization in place that rewards behavior, not specific legislative outcomes. There also needs to be an organization that goes after the far left and the far right for being the antithesis of that behavior. So that's going to be an unpaid project.

I don't want to make any money. I'm not going to be a registered lobbyist. I don't want to make any money. And you're just going to call Joe Manchin in the two of you. Political operations.

Uh, but, you know, I, I had, uh, equal about a time at Price Waterhouse, Price Waterhouse Coopers, and IBM, uh, and technology, median entertainment, telecommunications, banking, and, uh, and utilities. So I'm probably going to go and, and, and technology, AI is interesting, you know, that's an interest to an area of interest for you.

Um, I think that that industry is going to need some help to, to really, maintain our innovation advantage that we have today. And that's an area where short of lobbying, I think we can get the industry to provide an answer to a lot of the questions about governance.

that the pace for that had the worst reputation, the technology industry. You go, and let me ask you the last question. You go into the technology industry. What do you do for them? Well, the first thing.

Because they look like villains.

I know. Well, the first thing to do for them is say, guys,

you got to get your act together on all of your platforms with respect to child safety, and to other kinds of, um, bad outcomes that are there being well-dark, you know, with this a great week to have this discussion, because you've seen the judgments. You, you, you got to make this to say, play, I have no problem incidentally,

uh, with having a significant Australia-like controls on people under 16, using the internet. And let's say it has. We agree. Yeah, it, it has to have some, uh, some sort of a, uh, a qualification process for a child to get online.

Um, then you got to go beyond that, my goodness. Uh, even if, you know, I heard on judiciary committee years ago, well, it's so hard to do. You can't tell me it's hard now. It's a matter of margins and will. Okay.

“And you need to plow some of the margins back into getting this right.”

Because if you don't, then it's going to slow down our tech sector.

I want my tech sector to survive and thrive.

I want them to pay some time. No, because they're going to be around. I think that the difference with the cigarette company that cigarette company, moment is recognizing it's going to be the end of an industry, except for the fact that the tobacco plan has a lot of other scientific uses fortunately.

But, um, no, they're going to be around. The, the question is who the 800 pound gorilla is going to be. I want them to be US-based tech firms, but operating in a way that is safe for children, they're going to pay for business and addresses many of the malign uses of their platforms as possible.

Because there's a political, well, we got to get our act together because state on act, state actors and now any terrorist organization. You know, now it used to be, you had to be a nation state to have the kind of scale to be disruptive in any of the society. Hell, now you need as a smart dude with a computer or, or, or woman.

Um, and that's a, uh, that's a frightening prospect. Um, and so they have to get it under control. They have enjoyed great success. I'm glad they've returned value to the shareholders. Their shareholders should also know that they want to be aligned with companies that are responsible and addressing some of the, the negative outcomes that but for these platforms

would have never existed.

So you're going into AI. Uh, to the, you know, I just, I'm close. You are. I'm just, you know, I don't know what I'm going to do. But what they am going to do is spend more time with my wife and spend more time with my grandchildren.

“But I have 65. I think I'll probably have some time.”

I do have to ask it. Why is it that you want to live forever? You'll have to find out. Okay. You don't have to watch it. I don't.

It's a joke. It's a joke. I don't want to live forever. Um, I, there's incredible speaking of AI and, but there's so much incredible scientific progress happenings.

Yeah. And it's being hindered by a lot of narcissism and not focused on everybody. Just the very wealthy and so I want to separate the Charlottonism from what's real because we can self cancer. We can solve all manner of things.

And North Carolina obviously, in fact, be one of the bigger centers for it. Yeah. I'm, um, I'm watching right now. I probably shouldn't admit this on TV.

But I'm watching the, uh, you did wrong. I'm probably going to get that fall out. Have you seen that soon? No.

No. Well, it's a really distorted outcome if we don't get this. This is a nuclear worth. Well, it did. So it's premise on the game, fall out.

I know, but I watch happy. Oh, I watched dark. See, my wife says I go feral when I'm up here. Yeah. I watch all the dark stuff here and I watch the happy stuff at home.

All right. Okay. Um, but really, you should almost watch it. You will hate it. But you could watch it if, you know, because you talk about life extension.

Right. And only certain people have a privilege in the future. Right. I could easily, I hadn't thought about it until you made the comment. But I could easily see where you go.

Yep. That's exactly what I'm talking about. Yeah. I think you'll like it a lot.

“I think as you won't cause you to answer, what does the party look like after Trump?”

Um, I think the party will settle back in like every time. It'll, somebody probably asked that question during the guilty age. You know, somebody asked it during other periods of populism. Um, so I, you know, I think that, you know, we go through the Evan flow. I mean, some people probably asked that after Democrats got hammered in 2010.

What does the future of the Democratic party look like? So we go through these. This is, I mean, these are, it's gonna, it's gonna depend on who steps up as a leader. If people doubled down on another phase of populism, if, if we get hit, if we doubled down on something that deals as a loss in November,

whoever suggesting that should by no means be the next nominee for president of the United States for the Republican Party.

beyond what the historic average would be for a midterm election after presidential,

then I want a leader that's instructed by that. And if they're not instructed by that, it's not like I'm going to go change my registration

“and vote for a Democrat, uh, but I'll work on everything I can to get the kind of person that I think they do that.”

Well, turn the rudder. Yeah. So would you run for a president? No, not under any circumstances.

I've never won at a, uh, a public job.

“I actually deferred on having a security detail when I was speaker because I actually thought it was silly.”

Um, I never want to job. It requires a security detail. All right.

Does it robes my privacy?

Yeah.

“And I'm a very private, rather be in the woods than being an office person.”

All right, then. Thank you so much. I really appreciate it. Thank you. Today's show was produced by Christian Castro Rossell, Michelle Aloy, Catherine Mills-Sop,

Megan Bernie and Kaylin Lynch. Now, shot current is if our comedian is executive producer of podcast. Special thanks to Amen Whalen. Our engineers are Fernando Aruda and Rick Kwan and our theme music is by track edemics. If you're already following the show, you're just in time till us.

If not, you're too late, Tom. Go wherever you listen to podcast search for on with care, swisher and hit follow. Thanks for listening to on with care, swisher, compote him media. New York Magazine, the Vox Media Podcast Network, and us. We'll be back on Thursday with more.