Rahm Emanuel: “Nobody Believes Our President” on Iran | Pivot

I know. I know. I know. I know. You can do it anytime.

I'm good. How are you?

Well, first of all, I'm listening to the American people. I've been out and talking to them about things like how to make sure they get ahead, their families get ahead, on the community college plan. But also, you know, like a young man I met in Spartanburg who's going to community college, he's got a job waiting at GE for $33 an hour with benefits and he was unemployed. And what they're doing at that community college is exactly what I want to see us do everywhere. Something similar we did in Chicago, something similar in La Crosse. But also, you know, listening to the nurse in Iowa who's talking about that she now spends close to 50% of her time arguing with the insurance companies. So, and about how to make sure that people get the healthcare that they're actually, her and the doctor are prescribing.

Yeah, I mean, that's fair. Look, I mean, I've been a congressman. I've been a mayor of both.

Front facing. Yeah. Front facing.

Also chairman of a leadership in Congress. But that said, I mean, you're evaluating, and one of the things I know about running for office is you got to make sure your head, your heart, and your gut are all aligned. I'm going to just say it up front. I don't need a title. I got more titles. I can auction them off. I'm about getting stuff done. Like take something I'm very proud about. You know this because from our many conversations, we raised our graduation rate from 56 to 83%. 98% of our kids had a plan post high school: college, community college, branch of the armed forces, or vocational school. I'm about getting stuff done, not about getting another title. And do I think I actually understand what it takes to move this country and help the American people get ahead and their kids get ahead, and do I have the fortitude to do that? And so that's what I'm looking at. I don't need, as I said, titles. Titles are for other people. Getting crap done is what we did in Chicago. 20,000 kids went to community college for free. Every child had a plan post high school. On education, we started pre-K and kindergarten. So I'm into moving stuff. And as we like to say in Chicago, taking the garbage out, getting stuff done. And so what do I think I do? So you evaluate that, right? But you know, this also takes, I jokingly said when I was recruiting candidates for Congress, it takes a little level of irrationality because you're jumping over without anything below and anything above. So if you're like Rahm Emanuel evaluating you as a competitor, what would be your biggest asset and your biggest negative from your perspective? If you were like, I'm going to get this. Let's go ahead. This I'm getting on the couch and we get to make sure Blue Cross covers that at one level. On the positive side, and here's how I stand: it is putting out ideas like we did on elementary school and learning and reading and addressing the 50% of our kids who can't read. Went to Mississippi, how to reform our high schools so they're less about diploma, more about college, career planning, and community college. Educational ed to social media ban, basically a wealth of ideas. I am tired of having a debate about how to restore a past and about how to build a future, and that is what I'm so on that point. Get an A on the kind of strength and energy that is determined not only for the job, bringing there an A-game as well. And I also think more importantly, telling people the truth. I'm not going to tell you what you want to hear. I'm going to tell you what I think you need to know, and we're in this together rather than trying to fight each other all the time. And that's a rare moment for a middle child to say that. On the other side is you have a campaign which is slightly about, it's not slightly, there's a big debate about generational change, and I've been around. Now, the good news of that is I think I know the family room. I know what I could call the classroom, the break room, the boardroom, the situation room, and I want the Democratic Party to get out of the bathroom. I'm tired of being there. That said, all your strengths are your weaknesses. So, the long resume, I can hit the job one. The problem with the resume is in a period of change, you kind of don't represent that from one level. The other part of change though is for a party known for its weakness, I don't bring that. I bring a different level of strength. So that's how I evaluate it.

No, you know, no, because first of all, I know how I am out with people. I'm out about people where I was in La Crosse, Wisconsin, in Grand Rapids, Michigan, in Franklin, New Hampshire, or in what is referred to in South Carolina as a corridor of shame and Abbeville, etc., all the black counties that were ignored by Columbia, South Carolina. So, I know that. On the other hand, I am, I mean, again, this gets back to, this is true for you, it's true for me, it's true for everyone, which is your strengths, your weakness. I'm direct. I'm forthright. Nobody walks away from me and goes, 'Boy, was he subtle? We didn't really know what he said.' Now, at one level, that works. At another level, it doesn't. But here's the thing. I'm at a point in my life, this would be the last race. I'm going to tell you what I think has to happen. As I said, in 2024, you didn't have a choice. 2028, it's going to be Baskin-Robbins. And I plan on being Rocky Road. I'm going to say this is in this moment of where I'm with my therapist, Miss Dr. Swisher. I am liberated at a different place than I've been as President Obama's chief of staff or as mayor or ambassador or whatever. I'm going to, this is it. Final race. I'm going to leave it on the field in the sense of we as a country literally have Hunger Games. This is about the future. We've had two presidents who've argued about restoring a past that's not coming back, and either we're going to build that future or we're going to talk about America in past tense, and I don't want to do that, and I'm not going to sit here commenting about it.

But I don't, you know, the one thing I know about presidential politics, President Obama was an answer to George Bush. George Bush was an answer to Bill Clinton. Bill Clinton was an answer to the Reagan-Bush years. Not where is Donald Trump. You're interested in clicks. I'm not that. I'm interested in kids knowing calculus. You're interested in social media posts. Great. I'm interested in making sure we know our social studies. So, that's not it. And I think where the puck will be in 2028 isn't about how do you imitate Donald Trump. It's actually how do you act like an adult? And I think if we're all honest with ourselves, I do look, President Biden, Build Back Better, Donald Trump's MAGA is about restoring something that is not coming back. The sooner we get to figuring out a future and then how to work together to get that done will actually matter. And the reason all the things, I happen to think education is a ticket to the middle class and to families making it and your kids making it. The reason I've been so focused on it is you're not getting there with 50% of our kids not able to read at grade level. You're not getting there when we don't have a plan how to make sure that we have the electricians, the carpenters, the sailors, the nurses, or the chemical engineers. Not just people who know how to do fast trading on the stock market, but the engineers that know how to actually build something for the future. That to me is more important. And if it's not rejected, my ego is not hurt. I'll have done what I think is important to shape the debate and get us focused on the future in a way that I think the last 20 years focused on the past.

That was exactly what my political just told me in an interview I did with him last week. Same thing.

Donald Trump's bringing people together rather than dividing them. You like Megyn Kelly. Think of the upside of this, a new level of humanity in you that's been found towards people you disagree.

I don't want to just say about the room, but it's clear there isn't a situation room. They've moved it into the Oval Office, and whoever walks in, there's a couple doors. There's four doors. There's one outside. There's one to the, you know, where the assistant sits. There's one that goes to the Roosevelt Room, and there's one that also goes to the first president's library. And they've moved all in there. There's not a serious analysis. Think about this. You have Vice President Vance is going there. You have Witkoff and Jared Kushner with no diplomatic support. Go back to when they're meeting in Geneva. There was no experts around the nuclear capacity or everything. Witkoff and Kushner were winging it, and it clearly showed because the UK intel officer who was there said Iran was actually offering us something very serious in the sense of concessions to avoid the military confrontation, and neither Kushner or Witkoff understood it. Now, I said this jokingly, but I'm very serious. If they ever do a sequel to Dumb and Dumber, there's going to be a lot of competition for who gets to play the lead in this administration. Now, the other piece is, and you led on this, and we're talking about what Megyn Kelly said. Look, there's a lot of different roles to the president. There is the moral voice of the presidency when the Challenger goes down, you know, bringing the country, or 9/11 like President Bush. There is the commander-in-chief, which is the most solemn position of the president of the United States. The president, the commander-in-chief, Roosevelt understood it when he said America would be the arsenal of democracy. Lincoln understood at the beginning of the war. He understood it midway when he did the Emancipation Proclamation, changing the definition of the war. We have a president of the United States who has asked 50-plus thousand servicemen and women, not counting all the other pieces that are supporting those 50,000 on the front line, to achieve a mission of national security importance for the United States. And he's talking about obliterating a civilization. You owe the troops a definition of why. You owe the servicemen and the country. You owe the servicemen, here's what victory will look like. So, we've accomplished our goals, and here's how it's going to end, and this is how we know we have succeeded in one and two. None of that by the commander-in-chief has been accomplished.

But, but, but, but this is what I say. But here, step back underneath what you just said. You know, and everybody else in the world knows except for people of 1600 Pennsylvania. Nobody believes our president. Now, this has been overused as an anecdote. When Stevenson goes to see de Gaulle during the Cuban Missile Crisis, he's about to take photos out. De Gaulle says, 'I have the word of the president of the United States. I don't need those photos.' Nobody would do that here. Everybody is looking at our Keystone Cops at 1600 Pennsylvania. They know a president of the United States who literally, truth is the most flexible thing he's ever seen. He doesn't believe in truth. He believes in spin. And so this is the degradation of the word, the credibility, and the mantle of the president of the United States, and more importantly the United States of America, because this is a baton that gets handed off. So at every level, not only did they start not knowing that they actually had accomplished something, they were too foolish and stupid and arrogant to know that. B, they go into a war without clear objectives, and then they literally talk about a victory here. Now, I have, I thought about the, you know, there's two points I would make right now, because they went into a war to obliterate, degrade, whatever word you want to use, the nuclear capacity of Iran. They already had, even we obliterated, then we obliterated it again, and then now we're going to obliterate it. He was even making fun of the, of Iran discovered they have a nuclear operation called the Strait of Hormuz. So, first and foremost, declare a policy: either all ships get out or no ships get out. That would cut off Iran's economic lifeline to China and would put pressure on both of them. Two, medium-term, the United Nations international maritime group would run the Strait of Hormuz in the sense of a fee that would be split between Iran, Bahrain, UAE, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, all the countries affected. So they don't collect it. The United Nations and international association does. And it's split because the war affected both parties, not one party. Third, and doesn't allow Iran to control the Strait of Hormuz, which is an international body of water. Long-term, take the Abraham Accords for the United States as a party to, and do three things, and use it, which doubles down on America as a permanent power in that part of the world, which is Iran's goal, which is to get us out, to build pipelines for Bahrain, Kuwait, Iraq, UAE, and other countries in that region out to the Strait of Hormuz, to the Red Sea, or to the Gulf of Oman. That would have a short-term, medium-term, long-term plan, and would also reinforce that the Abraham Accords the United States has is the vehicle for our Gulf allies and countries that don't become now subjugated to Iran's blackmail and coercion. To me, that is the most important. Now, I don't think, in fact, I can tell you this since I haven't seen a single idea where, except for the president says, 'Well, Iran's 10 points are pretty good.' I can't believe a president of the United States, a commander-in-chief, a leader of the free world, a person with military instruments that he has, just said the other party, their term sheet is the term sheet we're going to work off of. Everybody in the quote-unquote art of the deal, you don't use the other side's term sheet. So at every level I find this incredibly dangerous, reckless.

They're pointing fingers at him directly, not or at Bibi Netanyahu, but they're certainly trying to say, 'I thought it was FARC.' That's obviously from the head of the CIA. I thought it was wrong. Susie Wiles, etc., etc. Yeah. No, they're going to let one guy wear the, the guy with the dunce cap gets to keep the dunce cap at the end of this process. Here's what I would say to you is there are four tools in your national security toolbox: military power, economic statecraft, political persuasion, and cultural attraction. And you will assemble them differently in different parts of the world, in different areas, etc. Somewhere in the second term. Now, the president degraded the first three, but in the second term as opposed to the first term, he's decided military power is the most, not only the most important tool, the tool he's most comfortable with, which was not true in the first term. He is degraded through tariffs. He's degraded through belittling our NATO allies and not consulting them, and the brand of America from a cultural standpoint. So all three of the four tools have been totally drained of any capacity, and a person who was risk-averse in the first term has now reduced America's national security to a single tool and made it the toolbox. And what is dangerous about that is obviously the servicemen and women are becoming literally a play toy for the commander-in-chief with no respect for what he's asking of them, who have volunteered to serve the national interest of this country. And more importantly, the other tools are atrophying at this very time, and we economically, politically, culturally, as you can see the way he's banging out of NATO, are more isolated than leading. You can't be a leader if nobody is following. That was the casualty here. Our NATO allies and our Gulf allies and our Asian allies are not following the United States. They're distancing themselves in that case. What is, what happens next? Because his own people are distancing themselves. Also, speaking of leaders, watch what he does. He's going to blame somebody. He's now going to, the next thing is who he tries to blame. And that's kind of a palace coup type, palace intrigue game. I'm into not that. And I understand the lore of that. My thing is what do we do to take a generational approach to restore the trust, credibility, and the capacity of this country?

And this is my argument both to Democrats but also Republicans as a country. We're Americans. There's no reset button at the Resolute Desk. I try to lay out a different scenario by different parts of the world. How do you assemble these different tools into different kind of stacking orders of priority? There's no reset. So when Prime Minister Carney in Canada says this is a rupture, you're not getting superglue and reassembling. We have to earn not only the trust, we have to build our strengths that have been atrophying. Where is the political power? Where's the cultural persuasion? How do we recreate the economic statecraft where again the American economy is central to the world, not sidelined? And I do think the last 25 years, when you look at this war, if you look at COVID, you look at different things that have happened in the last 25 years, this will be the era of supply chain, and will be known as the era of supply chain. You take oil, take ammonia, take the petrochemicals of the region, you take what happened during COVID, medical gear, etc., and the pharmaceutical products to deal with the vaccines. This is the era of supply chains, little things that hold the entire, whether it's the Strait of Hormuz or whether it's the products coming out of the Strait of Hormuz or whether it's medical supplies and vaccines, little things take the entire global economy to a halt. A drone, a $50,000, I said this the other day and I'll just repeat this. You have two countries with no navy, but they control both waterways, Ukraine and Iran, without a navy. We have a theory in America's national security being able to fight two wars simultaneously. We're going to have to rewrite it to be able to fight two different wars simultaneously, one conventional and one unconventional.

Well, I mean, someone did stop Nixon, right? Someone walked up to Pennsylvania. I mean, yeah. I mean, I don't want to look. I didn't listen to the podcast with Senator Tillis. But, you know, I, this is a criticism. You were the, you were the key vote for Hegseth becoming Secretary of Defense. I'm sorry. Like, you know, okay, fact is you have a person with a drinking problem and other types of problems who now the head of a military who's involved right now in a military political purge of the military. The greatest turnaround in American history was the armed forces post-Vietnam. I've worked with the head of the Seventh Fleet, head of INDOPACOM. These are incredible men and women. Amy and I, I just want to side note. We do a ROC scholarship named after Lisa Franchetti, the former CNO of the Navy. She's an incredible capacity. Fired out of political retribution. This is stuff you read in China, right? And Senator Tillis who obviously has found his conscience and that's good, but you confirmed this person that you knew in your gut was not right. And I want to say one thing. When I was chief of staff, I was an employee. When I was senior adviser to the president, I was an employee. How many times I've walked into the Oval Office daily and said no, and here's the consequence of you. You're a US senator. You're independently elected. You're independently elected congressman. You have your own voting card. You have your own pin for security. What are you doing?

I think what's going to happen is the United States Congress is going to flip. The Senate's 50/50, and you're going to finally have the third branch of government that has been basically in deep freeze for the last two years. I said this once privately a couple months, right? That's... Yes. I said this privately to a Republican senator. I said, 'You're going to want a Democratic president.' He goes, 'Oh, no, no.' I said, 'Yeah, the reason is you put your manhood in a lockbox and you're finally going to take it out in about three years from now, right? That's what's going to happen.' I can't believe these individuals who know better and say it privately under cloaked force of course. And what will happen is elections have, as to quote my good friend and my former boss, President Obama, elections have consequences. Yes, we got X months till November. Republicans doesn't hear the sound of the footbeat coming. You saw that in Wisconsin. You're going to see it in Indiana. Saw it in North Carolina the other day. You saw it in Georgia. And the fact is you're going to have the third branch of government, co-equal branch, finally exert its responsibility. You are, it's just a matter of time. We're going to move over this. But I would agree with you. They're suddenly appearing on my podcast. So, you know what I mean? Like suddenly they're like, I do, I wanted, it's so frustrating. Take a look at the senator of Louisiana. You confirmed a guy, Health and Human Services, Kennedy. You as a doctor, you know, was wrong. The president turns around, flips on you, and you try to do that to encourage favor or bring favor to yourself, and he's going to mess with your reelection, and you knew Kennedy was not right. Senator Tillis, I'm glad he's speaking up. I'm glad he found his voice, but when your vote was needed, he decided, you decided to go somewhere out. Maybe you're making up for lost time, but the rest of us, most importantly, the men and women in uniform have to deal with a Secretary of Defense.

Yes. Yeah. He has to keep, and not only have to say that, you have to work with others to finally get your vote and your voice to kind of line. Your vote was not where your voice is or your conscience.

No, let me be really clear, etc. Yeah. As I said in that piece, I said there's a difference between corruption and dishonesty. I'm for absolute investigation of all the corruption. This is crony capitalism run amok. People trading on inside information. They abnormalize corruption 100% for that. You cross the line when it's all about retribution, vindication, and not addressing what I think is not only the affirmative agenda, but I do believe their corruption. I've said it two years ago. That's the backdrop. So, I'm 100% for what did Kristi Noem do at DHS? I'm 100% for everything the inspector generals have reported and all the type of corruption both inside, outside, members of family, or the Trump kids. 100% for that. Don't get caught in a game of politics of retribution where then the people go, it's just more Washington. Now, on the affirmative, I think on the affirmative, and this was part of that piece. If you go back to the presidentials of both President Clinton and President Obama first terms, '08 and 1992, what George Mitchell does in 1990, forcing President Bush to raise taxes and break his pledge on 'read my lips,' and what we did in forcing Bush to veto the children's health insurance initiative in 2007 sets up 1992 Bill Clinton and sets up President Obama 2008. 2027. I look at the kind of landscape of all the issues from minimum wage to predictive markets to healthcare cost control and/or a ratepayers' bill of rights. I lay out a number of piece ideas in that piece. You now, a part of this politically is determining you have the Senate or not is get a bill on the desk that one creates divisions within the Republican Party and two, either force the president like Bush...

Does in 1990, signs a bill or vetoes a bill like President Bush does in 2007 on the children's health insurance program that creates divisions inside the Republican party and advance your agenda that you're ready to take and secure the future. So, I do think Democrat, let's just fast forward. Democrats win both the House and the Senate. What they do in 2027 will be as determinative as who we nominate in 2028. My view, this is mine, is go to those predictive markets and put a piece of legislation on the president's desk that bans all members, Congress, Senate, executive branch, judicial branch, staff, family from participating in the predictive markets and that there's a division of the criminal market. Right. Yeah.

Yeah. And the reason is, and first of all, all that can be done by executive order. The president will not do it because his two sons are investors in it. And you drive right there because the Republicans are there, independent voters are there, the president of the United States is not there. And I would take that bill and run it right down through one end of Pennsylvania Avenue to the other and put it on his desk because everybody, and I can tell you this from La Crosse, Wisconsin to Franklin, New Hampshire to Abilene's partner, everybody in their gut knows that these prediction markets are being played and manipulated with inside information. And yes, and people, other people are putting their lives at risk while little nepo babies in Palm Beach are making money. Most importantly, Don Jr. and the rest of the family and Lutnick's kids and Winklevoss's kids. Put it on his desk. Make him pick his wealth or the American people's democracy and political and economic.

In 1990, in 1990, President Bush signs the bill. It actually does help reduce the deficit, but it creates Pat Buchanan and a Republican revolt. And 20 Republican senators support that, but the other 25 do not. In 2007 when we do the children's health insurance bill, President Bush 43 vetoes it, but 60 Republicans in the House and Senate align themselves with Democrats. What brings us together? What divides the other side? And whether it's signing or vetoing, as I would say to quote that great philosopher, when you get to a fork in the road, take it.

I actually think one thing that slightly didn't get the coverage. I mean, I went up to Wisconsin six weeks ago for the Supreme Court for Rebecca Cook in the third district, Southwest Corner. In Wisconsin, battleground state. First of all, the Supreme Court candidate does better than any of the other two from a year ago. The Democrats in Wisconsin win the important county outside of Milwaukee. That's the Republican base that counters the Milwaukee vote. We now have the county executives. The Supreme Court nominee in the third congressional district, the southwest corner where La Crosse is, etc., that Ron Kind used to represent and is a Republican there that Trump won. The Supreme Court Democrat, not Democratic, but the progressive candidate takes 57%. Donald Trump won that with overwhelming amount. That tells you if you win that seat, you're winning the majority. So when you look at Wisconsin at the top all the way down and all the races between, it's an unbelievable victory and it says the same thing.

Massive energy in the Democratic vote base and Republican turnout depressed. The two, the election in North Carolina, when Donald Trump endorsed a state senate majority leader, the most powerful Republican, he loses the Republican primary. That was more important than Mar-a-Lago. I get the value of Mar-a-Lago. It's kind of, I get it. But the fact is power over the Republican primary voters, right? You want to call liberation day, that's liberation day. So all you Republican congressmen and senators, Senator Tillis, that you were scared of your shadow for the last four years and four years ago, you don't have to be scared of your shadow, right?

Well, now in the Senate in Texas, I think that you have a Republican primary that ends up, it doesn't matter who wins in one level, they're going to both be a weakened candidate for the general election. That's what I think. Can I, you know, and I happen to, one thing I would also say to my fellow Democrats, when you look at the health care for President Obama or the IRA, the climate bill under President Biden, under the health care bill, Senator Nelson from Nebraska helps us pass that. It's the 60th vote and the senator from West Virginia helps pass the IRA. If you don't win in purple to red states as a Democrat, we're not going to get the type of economic and political and social legislation we want. The two most significant pieces of legislation Democrats passed in the last 20 years, they clinched the vote with a Republican, with a senator from a state that is not quote unquote safe blue. So winning in Ohio, winning in North Carolina, winning in Texas, winning in Iowa, winning in places Democrats have not presidentially won is how you secure the type of legislation.