transcript

Speaker 1:
[00:00] Hello, my friend. Welcome back to We Can Do Hard Things. I'm so happy to be back with you on this series where we're pulling back the curtain and digging into the real story behind the stories bombarding us and behind the reality we usually take for granted without questioning. I know I've been calling this series You're Not Gonna Believe This Bullshit, but I'm not sure that label is 100% correct. So let me know if you have any other ideas. DM me at Amanda F Doyle on Instagram. And thank you for reaching out with all of your ideas for future shows and for your responses to the show, both grateful and constructive. A special shout out there to Danae for sharing ever so gently her sadness that I didn't cover the US atrocities in Laos in my review of the secret CIA backed foreign interventions. Check out her work at Legacies of War. You've also shared so many brilliant ideas for going forward. Y'all are very smart and very wise and I just love that we get to do this. Adult school house of rock type vibe together. So let's rock because we've got a good urgent one today. Okay. You know how it feels in your gut when your friend comes to you shocked and outraged and despairing to tell you that her boyfriend, who already cheated on her three times, has cheated on her for a fourth time. Now, you're probably a better person than I am, but that makes me feel ragey and exasperated because of course he did. That's exactly who he is. How many times can we feign shock and outrage and despair? And I can't even hear myself or anyone speculate for one more millisecond about how he did it or why he did it or what kind of horrible person he is or what he might do next. The only thing I can stomach is an action plan for how to get the F out of this terrible situation. Anyway, that is how I feel about this president and this Congress. And today we're going to find a new way forward about what we are willing to hear and discuss and what we are not, about what we are not going to settle for and what we are going to demand. It has been 11 years since fake businessman Trump took a break from filming his fake reality show to descend those escalators, announce his presidential run that would descend our democracy into chaos. From that day forward, his name, his crimes, his grift have overpowered and plunged our politics, our headlines, our liberties, our personal finances, and our mental health into chaos. He has pursued and we have allowed him becoming the center of the universe. Every story beginning and ending with him. Maya Angelou famously said, when someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time. For all this man is, he has been consistent. He has consistently shown us exactly who he is. A trust fund squandering, five-time draft dodging, six-time bankruptcy filing, three-time philandering, 34-time guilty felon, repeatedly flouting the rule of law to protect himself and instigating a treasonous, murderous insurrection to avoid giving up power. It's understandable that we have been shocked by a traitorous, lying, self-stealing madman at the helm. But after 11 years of this insanity, I have come to the conclusion that it is now necessary for practical, strategic and spiritual reasons that we who are committed to democracy and sanity must stop focusing on him. Here's why. When we focus on him, we let everyone else who is abetting him off the hook. Keeping the floodlight on him allows those who are actively or passively enabling him to stay in the shadows. We can no longer allow political cover to the cowardice of Congress. The electeds on both sides of the aisle who have the constitutional authority and duty to stop the president's unconstitutional overreaching, self-dealing and corruption. We need to take the spotlight off of the madman and shine a blinding light on congressional Republicans who are paving its path to tyranny and Democrats who are screaming into the internet instead of rolling up their sleeves and doing their job. It's true we've never had such a self-interested fool as president. But it's also true that we are structurally prepared for one. The framers of the Constitution contemplated this specific scenario. They were deeply worried about the likelihood that a dangerous executive leader would eventually try to accumulate too much power and drift toward tyranny. They had just fought a revolution against a king. So, this wasn't theoretical to them. It was the problem they were trying to prevent. In other words, this is not a surprise. They designed a system built on the assumption that power would be abused. In order to build a government that would safeguard against tyranny, they divided power across three branches and crucially gave Congress the tools to check a president if he overstepped. They granted Congress the so-called power of the purse, control over funding. So a president couldn't act without resources and had to do with those resources what Congress directed. They gave Congress the power to make laws, to investigate, to oversee the executive branch, and ultimately to impeach and remove a president who violates the public trust. Since the framers specifically contemplated the executive as a bad actor and built structural safeguards against it, to the extent our democracy is currently imperiled and make no mistake, it decidedly is. That peril is not as much due to the madman as it is due to Congress violating its duty to defend our republic from that madman. The analogy I've been thinking about is of an arsonist and firefighters. Trump is and always has been a simple minded, transactional, impulsive, exclusively self-interested scam artist who does the very thing that the last person who talked to him told him would make him look good and get richer. Anyone who says they expect anything otherwise from him is either a lying co-conspirator or a willful fool. He's the arsonist. That's the bad news. But hey, good news. We've got a whole slew of firefighters whose literal job and constitutional duty it is to put out any fires the arsonist starts. That's Congress. So theoretically, we should be fine. But we are not fine. What we have is a bunch of firefighters in Congress watching the fire rage. Our Republican firefighters work to feed oxygen to the fire, inviting it to spread, while occasionally chiming in to say that they thought that that one new fire might have been a bit out of line. But another couple of fires were clearly set as a joke. And the other half of the firefighters, the Democrats, are watching the fire with great concern. They keep reporting back that they are carefully monitoring the situation, that there is indeed quite a quickly growing blaze afoot, and that they are very, very upset about it. But that they couldn't possibly put out the fire with only half of the force, and it's actually the other half's fault for not helping them stop the spread. Imagine you are staring at an arsonist surrounded by 435 firefighters who are each holding hoses and extinguishers. And instead of battling the flames, they are yelling at each other about procedure, analyzing what the arsonist did, and debating how dangerous the blaze actually is. Who is responsible now? Listen, an arsonist is going to arson, and God willing, in the fullness of time, he will go to prison and remain there. At some point, and I think that point is now, the most important story is about those with a constitutional duty to put the damn fire out who are choosing not to do so. I am done listening to any elected official feigning shock or outrage at the arsonist. We can only accept action. We will only accept that you do your job and put out the damn fire. I am no longer willing to accept the complicity and passivity of Congress. They can and should and must be doing so much more. And today, I am honored to be speaking with Congressman Ro Khanna, who represents California's 17th District and represents what is possible when an elected has a backbone and cares more about their duty than their next election. A leader of action, courage and candor, Rep Khanna is a fierce firefighter, hell bent on using the tools he has to put out the damn fire. If you've been following our series here and you listen to my show under the billionaire class as the real American welfare queens, you'll want to know about Rep Khanna's Make Billionaires Pay Their Fair Share Act with Senator Sanders. If you listen to my series walking through decades of depraved federal corruption protecting Epstein, you will already know that it was Rep Khanna's dogged intrepid resolve when everyone told him it was impossible to pass his Epstein Transparency Act together with Rep Massie, which forced the administration to release files. If you listen to my episode on Jared Kushner and the real reasons we're in an inane and inept war with Iran, you'll want to know that Rep Khanna sponsored a bipartisan war powers resolution with Rep Massie in an attempt to restrict unauthorized military action. He has taken on big oil for their lies about climate change and was crucial in bringing a coalition together to secure $369 billion in climate investment. He is an advocate for oversight, anti-corruption, transparency, and freeing elections from the scourge of big money influence. And he puts his money where his mouth is. He co-founded the NO PAC Caucus and is one of only seven, one, two, three, four, five, six, seven out of 435 members of Congress who reject all money from special interest PACs. And he brings the fight not only to actively complicit Republicans, but to Democrats who scream on social media, but sit on their hands instead of doing what needs to be done. Congressman Khanna, thank you for being here today and for your relentless action on so many of the issues our community cares deeply about.

Speaker 2:
[10:04] Thank you. That was one of the best introductions I've ever received. I need to have you introduce me more times, but thank you for your incredible work and leadership and boldness.

Speaker 1:
[10:15] I'm delighted to intro you wherever you need an intro, but it's fewer places now than before. Your intro speaks for itself. I respect you very much because you tell it like it is, and we need and deserve that as a nation. We in this We Can Do Hard Things community are deeply informed and deeply activated, and we are committed to each doing what we can to defend our democracy. We see that our nation is in crisis and yet we see Democratic Congressional leadership that is at worst apathetic or at best ineffective. Last week, you're brave enough to say this, and I want to read it to our people because it's important, and I haven't heard Congress people say this. You said, you know why the Democrats keep losing? Because we don't have conviction in our politics. We don't have inspiration and passion in our politics. We've got people who've been there for 50 years, who read the same scripts, put out the same bland statements. Get out. Let a new generation lead. You've been ineffective. The base doesn't like you. The base wants fighters. The base wants people with moral vision, and the only people the base are more upset with than Donald Trump is the ineffective leadership of the Democratic Party. What, in your honest reckoning, about Democratic Party leadership needs to change?

Speaker 2:
[11:35] Their reliance on the donor class, their fearfulness with speaking concretely about wealth inequality and wars overseas. We need a Democratic Party that's going to say that there was a genocide in Gaza. We need a Democratic Party that's going to be willing to say we shouldn't be giving more dollars to Israel. We need a Democratic Party that's going to be willing to actually tax billionaires, that's going to be willing to stand up for a single pair of healthcare, Medicare for all, child care at $10 a day, free public college and free trade schools that says that in a country that is producing more wealth than ever before, ordinary Americans can have an economic bill of rights that has a moral foreign policy, a moral domestic policy. The problem is when I meant by reading scripts and platitudes is it's not enough to say we change, we need to be for the working class. Well, everyone says that, but what are the policies? What are you going to stand for? Who are you going to be willing to offend? And the problem with our party has been that we're not willing to take risk, we're not willing to take on powerful interests, and we're just mouthing the words without having the courage and the conviction behind us. And the leaders who make change actually have substantive policies of what they want to do to change the country.

Speaker 1:
[12:51] So let's talk about those specific constraints of the donors that are reigning in the Democratic Party. I do believe, like you, that calling a genocide a genocide is vital. I think that one of the reasons we lost in 2024, the presidential election, is because our platform was sort of, we're not evil like that guy, which isn't that compelling, but it also doesn't work if you're trying to represent yourself as the party of decency, if you're not willing to call a genocide a genocide. I am deeply concerned that the Democratic leadership truly understand and not make the same fatal flaw again in 2028. Just last week, the DNC refused to pass a resolution condemning the outside influence of dark money from APAC. This is the pro-Natanyahu regime lobbying group that has given $127 million to politicians. You said that two presidential nominees in the 2028 election or people who are running for the nomination in 2028 lobbied against that. Do you believe that the leadership gets it and is not going to make that mistake again? Because that doesn't inspire confidence.

Speaker 2:
[14:09] No, I don't think the leadership gets it yet. I believe a new generation of people running for Congress and the Senate get it. The problem is that instead of just focusing on defeating Trump, we need to focus on replacing the system that produced Trump. And so much of our leadership is just focused on the rhetoric against Trump without understanding some of the broader systemic challenges. One of those is that we messed up and committed human rights violations by aiding Netanyahu in Gaza, and that the American people are tired of it. They want policies that are Team America. They don't want APEC spending millions of dollars like they did in Illinois to tilt the elections. I don't understand why it's so hard for the DNC to pass a resolution saying that we don't believe we should have APEC money. I don't know why it's so hard for them to say that in Democratic primaries, candidates should say they won't have a super PAC. These are basic things, getting money out of our politics, making sure that we're not beholden to interest groups that have led to disastrous policies in the Middle East. The polling shows this, that people can say, well, how do we get young men? How do we get young men? Turns out young men don't want to give dollars of aid to Israel. Turns out young men don't want foreign wars. Turns out young men are concerned about the cost of living of health care and child care, just like young women. What they are sick of is politicians who just kind of tinker around the edges where they don't think anything is going to change. And Trump came in and he said, well, I'm going to blow everything up. And I said, well, maybe I go for that instead of just the status quo. And so I believe we need actual substance in where we stand. And even in the fight against Trump, it shouldn't be performative. I mean, the reason the Epstein issue resonated is Massie and I didn't just give a speech. We didn't just do a podcast, though important. We didn't just go viral. We passed a law. We've got we've been fighting to get three million files released. And we're saying we've got to get three million more. And we're working with survivors. We need action. We need morality. We need substance.

Speaker 1:
[16:20] To get granular on that in terms of the democratic leadership and being about action and about change and not performative, you have already said you think Chuck Schumer, who's the Democratic leader in the Senate, should go. Is that right?

Speaker 2:
[16:37] Yeah. I mean, I don't think he should be the leader anymore in the Senate. He should allow for someone else to come. I mean, it's his decision whether he wants to run for re-election. Certainly hasn't done anything personally wrong where he should resign. He's got till 2028. I hope someone else will step up in 2028 to run. But I don't think he should be the Senate minority leader.

Speaker 1:
[16:58] But you are in favor of Representative Jeffries continuing as the Democratic leader of the House. Is that correct?

Speaker 2:
[17:06] I do think so. I mean, look, there are places I disagree with Leader Jeffries, but he has fought hard on health care. That's where I really lost confidence on Senator Schumer, where he, in my view, folded in the Senate and didn't fight for the health care fights. And also, Jeffries is going to have a very bold progressive caucus that's going to come in. People like Anna Lillia, Fred Haynes from around the country. And he's been open to letting progressives have a voice at the table. So do I agree with all of his policies? No, but I do think that he'll be capable of leading a House Democratic caucus that is strong. And he was very supportive of the work I did on Epstein.

Speaker 3:
[17:54] I've started realizing how much digestion kind of quietly affects everything. So for me, it's not always consistent. Some days feel totally fine, and then other days it's like, why does this feel so heavy? I've been looking for something that helps my body keep up. That's what made me try Massimes from Bioptimizers. It's a digestive enzyme blend with 18 different enzymes designed to help break down the full range of what you're eating, protein, fats, carbs, so your body can actually use it more efficiently. If you're ready to feel more rested, head to bioptimizers.com/we can do hard things and use my exclusive code, we can do hard things to get 15% off any order. And when you subscribe, you'll get great discounts, free gifts and the peace of mind of never running out. Again, that's 15% off your order at bioptimizers.com/we can do hard things. Now, make 2026 the year you finally start sleeping great again.

Speaker 1:
[18:57] I like to consider myself a pretty strong communicator. But there is a difference I have learned between being able to communicate information and advocate for yourself and others versus being able to identify your personal and relational needs and wants and communicate those to build connection in relationships. So recently, I've been doing Esther Perel's course on Masterclass. And what I love about that course, like everything on Masterclass, is that it is accessible to learn in your everyday life, and it's practically applicable to your real life. Masterclass keeps adding new classes, so there's never been a better time to get in. Right now, as a listener of this show, you get at least 15% off any annual membership at masterclass.com/hardthings. That's 15% off at masterclass.com/hardthings. Head to masterclass.com/hardthings to see the latest offer.

Speaker 3:
[19:56] I have to tell you about something from a brand I'm pretty familiar with, that I think all of our listeners must try. It's Gatorade Lower Sugar, and it has everything you need for hydration. It's all the Gatorade electrolytes you love, and 75% less sugar than Gatorade Thirst Quencher. I spent most of my life thinking about performance, but taking care of your body isn't just about performance. It's about having the energy to show up for your life. Whether that's training, traveling, being present with family, or doing the hard emotional work we talk about here. Hydration matters. And what I love about Gatorade Lower Sugar is that it has 75% less sugar and all of the electrolytes of Gatorade Thirst Quencher. There are no artificial flavors, sweeteners, or colors. Try Gatorade Lower Sugar today. It has the electrolytes Gatorade is known for with 75% less sugar and no artificial flavors, sweeteners, or colors. You can find Gatorade Lower Sugar online or in stores near you.

Speaker 1:
[21:02] As the people of the country who care, just everyday citizens like me, it feels like when it matters, when we need some action, when there has been a dramatic overreach, we see tweets, but we don't see action. And I am very confused about what happened with the War Powers Resolution, because the first one that was in February, there were four Democrats that voted against it, this is basically Congress doing its constitutional duty to say, we're the only ones who can declare war and president, you have to stop doing what you're doing, and it has to be authorized by us. So in February, it came out, four of the Democrats voted against it, including three whose biggest donors were APAC. Then it came up again in March. And what the heck happened there? Because Jeffries wouldn't take it to a vote, which sure looked like trying to avoid going on the record because it seemed like y'all had the votes for that one. So that's the kind of stuff that when the rubber meets the road, we need action.

Speaker 2:
[22:10] Well, as you said, the first War Powers Resolution, Massie and I introduced, we fell four Democrats short and we couldn't get enough Republicans. But I believe, first of all, that leadership should be speaking about this war being illegal and moral, not just that they have a blunder, it's not strategically correct. No, you don't go threaten to wipe out the Iranian civilization. You don't strike young school children in bombing in Iran. You don't go into a war in the Middle East that's costing us billions of dollars a day that has had 13 service members die when that money should be going into jobs in the United States and a community in the United States and hasn't made us safer. So we need to make the case against this war. I had called for actually having War Powers Resolution votes every week. I lost that argument. The leadership's argument was that we wouldn't have won the votes, but I said, who cares?

Speaker 1:
[23:01] Right. Go on record and do it.

Speaker 2:
[23:04] We need to see some fight for our vision. Clarity, yes, we're not going to be for this war. Donald Trump ran as the peace candidate. He's now the war candidate in Iran. We are the party that's going to be anti wars of choice. We are the party that's going to say no to this funding. It drives me crazy. I see these senators, some of them I know and respect, they get asked, will you be for 400 billion more dollars for Iran's funding? Well, I have to study the bill. I have to read the bill. What do you have to study? Whether there's pork coming to your state? I mean, how can you not just answer that absolutely no? No, we're not going to have a 1.5 trillion Pentagon budget. No, we're not going to fund a war where American service members are dying and thousands of civilians are dying and the price of gas is going up. We speak in paragraphs and sometimes it's described as words. Oh, that's not what people are upset about. It's not whether you missed a preposition or didn't get the grammar correct. It's they don't know where you stand. People just want to know where do you stand? Are you for the war? Are you against the war? Are you for the funding? Are you against the funding? Do you think it was a genocide? Do you not think it was a genocide? Do you think we should tax billionaires or not? And our party thinks that just through language, through messaging, you know, I've heard Chuck Schumer say this. Oh, we had all the right policies. We just need to say it better. No, we didn't have the right policies. That was the problem. We've had a nation which has 19 billionaires have 12.5% of the GDP, three times the concentration as the Gilded Age. You have $20 trillion in my district in Silicon Valley, one third of the nation's wealth originating in my district. And 70% of Americans don't have the American dream. And you've been in charge, a lot of these folks in the party have been in charge for the last 40 years. And they've shafted the working class. They've gotten us into Iraq, into Afghanistan for 20 years, Libya, Iran. They need to go. There needs to be a new generation. And it needs to be like the New Deal coalition with bold policies. And that's I think what's missing. It's too rhetorical a party, not substantive enough.

Speaker 1:
[25:03] Right. And to me, that includes being willing to go on record and take the vote. And that's why I don't understand why Jeffries didn't bring up the vote in March, even if he was a couple dem shy of getting it, which arguably he would not have been. But it looks a lot like trying to have your cake and eat it too. Trying to yell about Trump, but not wanting to go on the record with something that could come back and bite you because your donors didn't want you to vote that way. And so that scares me out of a leadership. Less like in the weeds of the actual votes, but just from like a 10,000 foot view. I feel like I hear it a lot of, well, they can't vote that way because they'll get primaried. They can't vote that way because of the investment of their donors. And I guess every time I hear that, I think, who cares? It's not important that you be in that job. It's important that someone be in that job who's willing to do that job. So what happens when people get to Capitol Hill that makes them so terrified to not be reelected? Like there is something weird because it doesn't make any sense. It's not about the money because half of Congress is millionaires. So just from a higher level, what is that about?

Speaker 2:
[26:22] It's about status and about being treated with deference and having staff around you. I mean, we saw this very tragically with Eric Swalwell and Tony Gonzalez where the power and the status went to these people's heads when they were abusing and in some cases, allegedly raping young women and young staffers. I mean, obviously, that's the extreme case, but people get used to being treated in a way of deference, of making sure that everything of their whims and needs are dealt with because they're supposed to be serving the public, but they forget the original goal of serving the public. Look, both Massie and I have primary challenges against us. I think we'll prevail, but when you take stands that upset people, you get primary challenges. I have more billionaires than anyone in my district. I represent the heart of Silicon Valley, and I worked with Senator Sanders to say, we need to be taxing these billionaires 5%. Well, let me tell you, there are billionaires in my district who don't like that and are funding my opponent. There are billionaires in my district who are in the Epstein files and they don't like that I keep using the term Epstein class. There are certainly people in APAC who are very upset at me. They're running ads in my district and saying they don't like the fact that I'm saying genocide. But there are a lot of people who like what I'm standing for. And the point is that you've got to fight and take risks for what you believe. And I just think we have a group of political folks who have been too risk averse, who've just kind of said, let me just hang on, give speeches, go to hearings when the Times called for boldness. And I've often said courage is the new charisma, that we've got to get courage. We've got to get people with actual stances on these issues. And a lot of the new generation has that.

Speaker 1:
[28:06] Yeah, the new generation is in the streets. The new generation is risking getting arrested. The new generation has a fight and a hardness that is a very stark comparison to the softness of those in Congress who are crying because they might not get re-elected. I mean, your grandfather spent two years in prison because he was a politician fighting for independence of India. And we have people who act like the most tragic thing would be that they would not be re-elected. So I guess that is a message from the people to bring back, to say, y'all are not that important. What is important is the job. Do the job. And that is what's necessary because if you don't do the job, we're not going to re-elect you anyway. It's frustrating. It's really frustrating to see.

Speaker 2:
[28:57] Well, you should run. We need people like you to get up and run. I really think that. I mean, I couldn't agree with you more. I mean, I'm personally for term limits. I'm for getting money out of politics. But I just think that it's not that they're bad people. They've just got used to a certain status quo and that's not going to cut it.

Speaker 1:
[29:14] As a lawyer, my brain is always thinking, but what is the question not being asked? What is this story not being told? Stop focusing on what's being talked about, what's not being talked about. We're in this quagmire in Iran. It's a disaster. We have Jared Kushner who, by his own self-admission, one and a half million from UAE Qatar, three billion from Saudi Arabia, untold connections to the rest where he's developing this Riviera in the genocide site in Gaza. He, as a special envoy appointed by the president, has a legal obligation to provide financial disclosures, which has been upheld by the Supreme Court. Witkoff did it, and he just ignored it. He just didn't provide disclosures. That is wrong in any era. But in this era where you have stirred up, cultivated and exposed this very serious desire of the nation for transparency and the pressure for transparency by your near unanimous vote on the Epstein Transparency Act, why are Dems not going in on those issues and forcing Republicans to go on record and say, no, I don't want transparency of Jared Kushner's self-dealing overseas? He was there for both Iran negotiations and we don't have any insight on his financial connection to that region?

Speaker 2:
[30:34] It's absolutely relevant and we should be pushing harder for transparency because it matters. The fact that Jared Kushner may have relationships with Saudi Arabia that is pressuring the president to continue the war and not have a ceasefire with Iran is very relevant. Is the Trump family benefiting financially to continue the war because they need to please Saudi Arabia? The fact that Jared Kushner has relationships with the UAE or senior people at the UAE are investing both in Kushner and in the Trump family cryptocurrency is very relevant. I called for an investigation on the China committee into Trump's pardon of one of the people who was supporting his cryptocurrency. I mean, he has made billions of dollars, the family, allegedly, with the corruption. And that's at the expense of the American people, at the expense of us being in wars, at the expense of money that should be going into our community. So absolutely, the Democrats should be going on an anti-corruption transparency platform. And that is why it's so important for us to have transparency. And Ken Martin doesn't like it every time I say this, but we need to be releasing our autopsy. We need to be passing resolutions opposing special interest money. Because otherwise, what Trump does is, oh, they're all bad, they're all bad. No, we are the party that's against big money and for transparency. They are the most corrupt administration in modern American history.

Speaker 1:
[32:03] OK, y'all, I'm popping in with an exciting post script on the call in this episode for Congress to do something to secure accountability and transparency on Jared Kushner's self-dealing. I recorded this episode with RepKana on Wednesday, and I am very, very happy to report that less than 48 hours later, House Judiciary Committee Democrats launched a sweeping probe into Jared Kushner. The inquiry will investigate Kushner's financial conflicts of interests and foreign entanglements, demanding documents and communications related to his foreign funding private investment firm, Affinity Partners, as well as Kushner's communications with foreign officials, financial backers, and US government entities, all toward uncovering potential violations of federal ethics, bribery, and foreign agent laws. So let's keep our heads and our fights up, y'all. It's working.

Speaker 3:
[33:06] I've talked before about my hair journey. The biggest thing I've learned is that most shampoos are packed with harsh detergents that strip your scalp of its natural oils. And when that happens, your scalp just produces even more oil to compensate. Suddenly, you're stuck in this endless wash, grease, repeat cycle. That's why I switched to Hair Story's new wash. The new wash isn't a traditional shampoo. It's a detergent-free cleansing cream made with gentle ingredients that clean your hair without stripping it. What I love most is how easy it is. My hair air dries better, feels softer and healthier, and I can go much longer between washes. And if you want to level up, you can pair it with their pre-wash, a prebiotic scalp rinse that helps break down, build up and rebalance your scalp. If you're ready to break the wash, grease, repeat cycle, head to hairstory.com/we can do hard things and use code DOHARDTHINGS15 at checkout for 15% off your first order.

Speaker 1:
[34:06] OCD can feel unbearable, but it's also highly treatable with the right approach. The key is finding specialized therapy because OCD operates differently than other conditions. And standard talk therapy isn't recommended for OCD because it can actually make it worse. That's why I want to tell you about NoCD. NoCD is the world's leading provider of specialized OCD treatment, with licensed therapists trained in Exposure and Response Prevention, or ERP, therapy, the most effective treatment available for OCD. Therapy with NoCD is 100% virtual, covered by insurance for over 155 million Americans, and provides a safe space where your struggles will be understood without judgment. If any of this sounds like you or someone you care about, visit nocd.com and book a free 15-minute call with their team to learn more about how NoCD can help. That's nocd.com. Okay. I didn't realize how bad my bedding had gotten until I replaced it. We recently upgraded to Bowlin Branch. Bowlin Branch creates everything you need to make your bed feel finished. Signature sheets, supportive pillows, cozy blankets, luxurious comforters, all crafted from high-quality organic materials. Recently, we swapped out our old tired sheets for the Bowlin Branch Signature Organic Cotton Sheets. I've got to tell you, these things are so soft and they're breathable. We also got, and may I recommend to you the dusty rose color because that's what we have and it makes me very happy to look at. We got the dusty rose color sheets and the waffle blanket. It's lightweight but somehow still warm but doesn't make you sweat or overheat. Upgrade your sleep with Bowlin Branch. Get 15% off your first order plus free shipping at bowlinbranch.com/wecandohardthings. With code, we can do hard things. That's bowl and branch. B-O-L-L-A-N-D branch.com/wecandohardthings. Code, we can do hard things. To unlock 15% off. Exclusions apply. Speaking of information we need from bad actors, just in the last several days, Pam Bondi has just not shown up, despite being subpoenaed to testify about the Epstein files and the White House cover-up. She's just not coming. It just feels like Kushner not releasing legally required financial documents, like Pam Bondi being subpoenaed. I mean, at some point, if you tell your kid over and over that they have to do something, and you don't give them consequences, they're right to continue to do it. So what's going to happen with Pam Bondi, and what is it within congressional power to hold her accountable for her involvement in the Epstein cover-up?

Speaker 2:
[37:15] The thing that will hold her accountable is the coalition that we built in Congress. I mean, Nancy Mason, I wrote the subpoena, and the subpoena didn't say Pam Bondi as attorney general. It said Pam Bondi as an individual. Let me tell you, if they can go after Hillary Clinton, who had almost nothing to do with Epstein, who's been out of office for 20 years and hold her in front of the committee, and Clinton shows up, certainly Pam Bondi, who was the attorney general covering this all up, should show up now that she's out of the job. The good news is both Nancy Mason and other Republicans are willing to hold her in contempt, and we will if she doesn't reschedule, that by law we have to give her a chance to reschedule, so we're waiting on that, and if not, we'll bring her in contempt. Now, she may say, well, my attorney general Blanche isn't going to prosecute her, but the next president is going to have an attorney general who could prosecute her, and so that's why we need to emphasize that we are going to have accountability when we have a new administration.

Speaker 1:
[38:09] Okay, I'd like to talk about midterms for a bit, which are about six months away. First of all, I want to say that I do not want people to be freaked out. I want to talk about this to ensure the opposite. When you're on a plane and there is sudden unexpected turbulence, you freak out. When the flight attendant gets on the intercom and calmly explains, we are about to enter turbulence. This is how intense it will be. This is how long it will last. Here is what you can do to keep yourself steady during it. And I will get back on and report when we have passed through it. That feels a lot better. No surprises, no chaos. Democrats need to be the flight attendants here. We have a good idea of what is going to happen. And we have an obligation to calmly tell the American people what to expect and what the plan is. Because this is not unexpected turbulence. The president, his cabinet, and his co-conspirators are facing an existential threat. And they are going to do everything they can, much of it already obvious, to create substantial turbulence during these elections. Bear with me for a minute because I need to lay this out. This is a man who incited a treasonous, murderous insurrection to overthrow the democratically elected government. And who pardoned or freed from prison more than 1,500 of those insurrectionists who had been convicted by a jury of their peers, including Proud Boys and Oath Keepers, to ensure they'd be available when needed next. A man who said during his last election, quote, in four years, you don't have to vote again. We'll have it fixed so good, you're not going to have to vote. More recently, he said, we should take over the voting. The Republicans ought to nationalize the voting. And he has publicly discussed canceling midterm elections. He signed a March 2025 executive order to make sweeping voting changes to disenfranchise voters. Since that was blocked by courts as unconstitutional, he now needs Congress to pass it in the form of the SAVE Act. He said he won't sign any legislation until Congress passes the SAVE Act to disenfranchise 170 million Americans. Here's what he has done. He has secured state voter files, frozen data used to register students to vote. And most recently, this is important. I want you to pay attention to this because this is sort of like finding the other team's playbook. And when you find the other team's playbook, what you do is you develop a plan, okay? You don't find a team's playbook and then just say, well, we'll see how it goes when we get to the game. We have seen a draft executive order that puts forth the plan. The plan is to declare a fake national emergency based on false claims of interference in the 2020 election. That emergency, the fake one, would allow the federal government to bar widely used voting methods, including mail-in ballots. It would force Americans to re-register to vote on short notice requiring proof of citizenship. It could insert federal agencies into the voter verification process in novel ways. Federal agents could be deployed to polling places in the name of election integrity, intimidating voters rather than protecting them. Entire categories of lawful ballots could be seized or discarded based on unsubstantiated claims of interference. The steps for this are already in motion. The Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, seized voting machines in Puerto Rico, searching for voter fraud at the behest of the president, and was present when FBI agents executed a search warrant, later revealed to be based on bogus claims, to seize 2020 ballots in Fulton County, Georgia. Tulsi herself testified that she was there in Fulton County at the direction of the president. Putting all of this together, the plan is clear. Gabbard, as the Director of National Intelligence, is set to manufacture a claim of foreign interference, they will claim this is either China or Iran, in the 2020 election, based on their review of the ballots. They will say, we reviewed the ballots in the 2020 election, from Puerto Rico, from Fulton County. Oh my goodness, we've found interference by China or Iran. They will then release selectively intelligence to try to support this claim, and that will all be a pretext for declaring a national emergency that will allow them to do all of the things above. This is important for us to know because this cannot come as unexpected. This cannot come as a surprise, and we need to continue to talk about this so that we are prepared and confident to continue to move forward regardless. We should know that this just happened with Victor Orban, and he was still thrown out after 17 years. There is a way forward, but let us not be surprised. Now, crucially in 2020, when Trump started that insurrection, it didn't work because public servants and leaders honored their legal obligations. Cybersecurity professionals and state and federal officials chose not to bow to political pressure, and Vice President Pence upheld his constitutional duty to certify the Electoral College. What we need to know now is that this time, as Michael McNulty, who has worked in this kind of work for 20 years, has pointed out, instead of relying on impartial professionals, the administration has elevated people who sought to overturn the 2020 results into roles that directly influence election policy, voter data litigation, and federal election security coordination. Okay, this includes Kurt Olson. He is the White House's Director of Election Security and Integrity, who helped trigger the seizure of ballots in Georgia. Also, Heather Honey, who is the leading promoter of false claims about the 2020 election, who now serves as Deputy Assistant Secretary for Election Integrity. And another election denier, David Hartfelitz, who is the Assistant Secretary of Cyber Infrastructure Risk and Resilience. What I'm saying is, all these people who were independent before, these positions have been filled by people who were willing to go along with the 2020 insurrection, and we should expect them to be willing to go along with it the next time. For all these reasons, what I can't hear from Congress is we will address it if he interferes with the election. We need to hear what the plan is for when he does. Because if I as a regular citizen can see this coming, then any member of Congress who wishes to see it, would also be able to see it too. So what is the plan?

Speaker 2:
[44:45] Well, first of all, I appreciate your flight attendant analogy. I believe that we need to be both flight attendants and pilots, in that we need to talk about the interference that's going to happen, but also when there's turbulence on the plane, you don't want your pilot to say, we're going to crash, you want your pilot to say, we're going to get to the other side and land it safely. And I think Democrats need to inspire the confidence in this country, that we're going to defeat Trumpism, we're going to have fair elections, and we're going to take back the House, Senate and presidency. But there is every week meetings both with the Hakeem's leadership team and also with independent voter groups to anticipate the election interference. This means making sure we flood all of the states with election observers, like we did in Virginia, New Jersey and California during the 2025 election, so that the polling places have that. This means that we uplift local election officers, including some of the local republicans who still believe in elections, like they did in preventing the 2020 election from being stolen, and that we actually work with those local election officers. This means that we have local journalists and local media in places across the country to be observing what is going on, that we take as firm a stance of ice not coming into election interference, like we did in 2025. But there are people who, like you, are skilled lawyers and focused on this, who are putting a battle plan for the midterms. I think Congress will do some of it, but it's really going to be a lot of these independent groups who are going to mobilize the country for election observers.

Speaker 1:
[46:23] It's not lost on me that had Mike Pence, for all the myriad reasons, I am on the opposite side of the spectrum as him, in many ways, held an integrity for the Constitution and certified the election. Are there alliances that are being built? Do you have commitments from Republicans that, whether they're behind the scenes commitments, that they will not move with Trump on the same treason that he had in 2020? Are those across the aisle things happening so that our institutions will uphold the Constitution?

Speaker 2:
[47:03] There are more Republicans who are willing to have that conversation. Unfortunately, not enough, and I don't have confidence in the Republican leadership. But the lower his poll numbers go, the more people are seeing that it's a sinking ship, the more they're willing to suddenly find a backbone and have courage. But I think it's important to have those conversations, not just in Congress or the Senate, but with the local election officials, the local county officials where you found more courage during 2020. Those were the people who stood up for those things, the ballots to be counted. I think we will see more of that around the country.

Speaker 1:
[47:38] I know you're out of time. I want to say how much I appreciate you. I feel that you are identifying so much with where the people are, and you're identifying the issues that really matter. That's why so many powerful groups are fighting against you, is because you really are honed in on the bullseye of what matters. Your Billionaire Act, I would love to talk to you another time about that, because that, to me, is the whole ballgame. That's where everything for their democratic future should be living. I think that's the unifying force for all of this. If we can get through the resistance of it, that is the message. And I just appreciate you being brave and clear, and I think your grandfather would be proud.

Speaker 2:
[48:26] Oh, well, that's so thoughtful to say. I mean, I do look up to my grandfather, and he's my inspiration. There was an article in the British press, grandfather jailed by British monarchy, grandson in Congress may topple the British monarchy. I don't plan to topple the monarchy, but this was former Prince Andrew. But I have a perspective similar to yours, which is that my grandfather had a much, much harder life than me. He showed much more courage than me. He didn't even know if India would be a free country, let alone whether he'd be out of jail, and yet he fought for his convictions. And so, so many of us are in Congress. We've been given such an inheritance. We've been given the inheritance of the people who fought the Revolutionary War. Given our 250th anniversary, I was just seeing 1776, and what our founders risked, literally, their lives in signing the Declaration of Independence. We've been giving the inheritance of those who fought for the 13th, 14th, 15th Amendment, those who fought against Nazism and scale the Cliffs of Normandy, the women, Rosie the Riveter, industrialized the country, John Lewis, King, people who fought for civil rights and then women's rights. Here we are, and our leg of the relay is to stand up against billionaires, and to stand up against APEC, and to stand up against Donald Trump. How can we cower? Look at the rich inheritance. It's like the other folks have done 80, 90 percent of the work. We're in the final legs of the relay towards a cohesive multiracial democracy. We're going to stand up and take some risk and show some fight and courage, because it's not what my grandfather had to do. It's not what Jim Clyburn or John Lewis or Dr. King had to do. That should be our inspiration. I think the young people around this country get it. I think you get it, and I'm hopeful that we'll build this kind of social movement in 26 and beyond to take back our democracy and build a multiracial democracy.

Speaker 1:
[50:18] The world is in that current. We just had Victor Arbonne after 17 years out the door, despite or maybe because of Vance campaigning for him, and we just had Kerry in Canada. I mean, we need to get in the tide and keep moving. I love it.

Speaker 2:
[50:36] You got to send Vance out everywhere around the country.

Speaker 1:
[50:38] Yeah, exactly. If you should be so lucky that he would come campaign in your primary. That's what I'll pray for tonight, Ro Khanna.

Speaker 2:
[50:48] Thank you. Thanks for having me.

Speaker 1:
[50:50] Thank you for your time. OK, y'all, that was Representative Ro Khanna. I really like him very much. I feel like he is someone who is not gaslighting us. He is someone who sees the issues and the stumbles and the blocks that Democratic leadership wants us to ignore because we hate Trump so much. They are counting on us saying, well, they're not as bad as Trump. And Representative Khanna doesn't take that tact. He said, we can be better and we can have better policies and we can actually go to the heart of the thing. And the heart of the thing is the billionaire class, the Epstein class, the Epstein cover-up, the genocide, all of the things that are too hot for establishment dems to touch. He jumps into that fire. And I'm grateful for him. And also, if there's any disappointment to be expressed to Representative Khanna, it's that he did not embrace this opportunity. We can do hard things to announce his 2028 presidential candidacy, because y'all, that's coming. It's coming. You didn't hear it from him first, but I'm just saying, keep your eyes open and your head on a swivel, because Khanna is coming in hot for 2028. In other good news, I want to make sure you all know that the global tide is turning, that there is something in the air. Can you feel it? It's happening here on the ground with people just seeing that a insane, intractable war in Iran with no plan, no mission, no exit strategy, where we had for 47 years, the Iranian regime has never controlled the straight of Hormuz or established tolls and suddenly we go to war and now we have that? That's odd because that seems to be worse than when we started. Also, what seems to be odd is that Obama had made an agreement with Iran, that Trump ripped up and now his whole administration would flip over backwards to get to the place where the ripped up Obama agreement was, but they will never get there because they accidentally showed Iran that it has global financial impact and can hold the world hostage through the strait of her moves. That was a fuck up of epic proportions, and that is part of why the national tide is turning. But the globe is with us. I don't know if you saw, but Canada's liberal party under Mark Carney, who has been a strong voice against Trump, just had a huge win. And one of Trump's authoritarian crushes, Victor Orban, was just kicked out of leadership in Hungary after 17 years, and it happened directly after the utterly unlikable Vance campaigned for him. So both of those are seen in many ways as referenda against Trumpism. It's happening across the globe, it's happening here. So keep your spirits up, keep your fight up, we're gonna get through this together. Also, y'all come back on Thursday because Glennon and Abby and I are gonna be debriefing this conversation we just had with Ro Khanna as well as just all of our feelings and thoughts and reactions, and more things we need to know heading into the midterms and how we can do our part to force Congress to do its part. All right, see you on Thursday.

Speaker 4:
[54:53] We Can Do Hard Things is an independent production brought to you by Treat Media. We make art for humans who want to stay human, and you can follow us at We Can Do Hard Things on Instagram.