[0:00]Donald Trump has roasted countries investing in windmills, calling them suckers >> terms of energy. They showed people, look how beautiful this is as those poor
[0:10]suckers buy those windmills and lose their ass. But it's it's a terrible form of energy. Most expensive form of energy. It's intermittent. Doesn't work. And in my opinion, it kills the
[0:21]environment. It kills kills the birds, but it's visually it's terrible. It's it's terrible. It's a terrible thing. And I'm proud to say that we have
[0:30]approved almost none. I think none, but we are uh they are everybody's under an order. No wind. We don't want the windmills. We don't want them. And let
[0:40]somebody else use them. >> Yeah. He is not afraid to tell you what he really thinks. The president made the comments while he was in Pennsylvania announcing $10 billion of investment for
[0:51]America's industrial base that's set to create thousands of jobs. But of course, the president could not escape being asked by reporters what is happening with Iran. Just how far is he willing to
[1:02]go in terms of ramping up strikes? In fact, he was asked by reporters today if he's willing to potentially wipe out the IRGC, to which Donald Trump said, "Yes,
[1:14]we'll see." Now, this comes as the vice president, JD Vance, sat down with podcasting giant Joe Rogan for more than 3 hours. I've listened to 2 and 1/2
[1:24]hours of it. I've got around 20 minutes to go. But it was fascinating. And I think what people really like about these long form podcast is there's nowhere to hide. You you can't dodge
[1:35]questions. You're in there. So if you're a politician, there's only so much spin that you can give. And it's also pretty telling just how across the details these people really are. This
[1:46]conversation in particular with Joe Rogan and JD Vance was fascinating. It was a wide ranging conversation that covered everything from UFC fighting to
[1:56]the Iran war, the Epstein files, UFOs, the supernatural, and just how much access the vice president has to accusations of voter fraud, which we
[2:06]might be hearing more about tomorrow. And of course, a fair bit of roasting Democrats in there as well. JD Vance promised that he'd also be doing a bit of digging or digging a bit deeper into
[2:18]UFO files while he's in office. So, we'll see if he holds his promise. But on the issue on the Iran war, JD Vance ruled out the idea that the US would be
[2:28]sending ground troops to achieve regime change. He told Joe Rogan, "We're not in that business anymore." He also said, "If the Iranian people want to rise up
[2:38]and change their government, that's up to them." It's an interesting position seeing as just yesterday, Donald Trump told Fox News that he did believe regime
[2:48]change was possible back in January when he told the Iranian people that help was on the way. So, judging from this podcast, we're once again getting the sense of the different positions that
[2:58]Donald Trump, Donald Trump rather, and JD Vance have when it comes to the war in Iran. The vice president also hid out at those that he claimed were deliberately trying to tank peace
[3:09]negotiations to keep the war going. Here he is saying that the claims that America would be giving Iranians $300 billion was fake. >> So there's this line in theou that
[3:20]basically says that if Iran meets all of its obligations, then we will permit other countries to invest in Iran. That's it.
[3:28]And that like again the hawks attacked us and misrepresented this and lied about it and said the Trump administration is going to give the
[3:38]Iranians $300 billion and it's totally fake. It's completely made up and it was done purely in order to politically tank the negotiation. We are less than 24 hours away from the
[3:53]highly anticipated speech Donald Trump will be delivering tomorrow when he addresses the nation during prime time. Joining us now is our panel, Josh Hammer, senior editor at large at
[4:03]Newsweek and Alex Terrasio, signal principal and pollster. Great to have you both back on power hour. Let's start with Donald Trump's address. He's expected to talk about the war in Iran
[4:14]and also expected to speak about election integrity. Josh, Donald Trump says that he's got very big news. What are you expecting tomorrow?
[4:25]>> Well, listen, there have been all sorts of articles that have been flying around about the DOJ and the FBI that have been looking at new documents from from the 2020 election. I'm sure there'll be some some talk about that, but I I think that
[4:36]the context for any conversation that happens about the 2020 election will will be used I I think as grist to try to convince Senate Majority Leader John Thoon really above all to to actually
[4:47]get the Save America Act passed. So this this continues to be Donald Trump's number one legislative priority at this moment is it is a bill that has that has gotten out of the House. So it is really
[4:57]on on Jon's desk at this time. And it's a bill Gabriel that fundamentally would would do two things. two of which are both both of which are which is overwhelmingly popular with the American people. One is that it says that if you vote in a federal election, you need a
[5:08]voter ID. The other which is equally common sensical is that it says that if you register to vote, you need to show proof of citizenship. And this is happening in a context where you have people like Zorani in New York City like
[5:19]Karen Bass in Los Angeles, major blue cities that are are actively trying at times are bragging about the fact that they are trying to register illegal aliens to the franchise. The these are not 50/50 issues. These these are 8020
[5:31]issues. They have majority support across every slice of the American electorate. I think Donald Trump is fundamentally correct to press on this topic. So that that's what I expect any 2020 talk will will lead to a renewed
[5:41]national push for the Save America Act. It's really a demonstration of earnestness. I think a lot of people have said, "Oh, Donald Trump is just tweeting about Save America Act. He's just posting on truth." No. No. He's actually dead serious. He's actually
[5:53]very serious about it. And I think that's why he's going to talk about it in in this prime time address on the Iran war. Not entirely sure exactly how much time he will he will reserve for that. Personally, what I can tell you
[6:04]Gabrielle and your audience, what I would personally like most to hear as a supporter of the presidents, as a supporter of of the war against the crime regime, I would like to hear a very clear articulation of what exactly
[6:15]are the American goals in this operation. I'm not entirely sure, frankly, to this day that we have heard that in deeply crisp clear fashion. To me, for whatever's worth, the goals are fairly obvious. I think the goals at
[6:25]least ought to be clearing these three4 moves. One, two, depriving the Iranian regime of all their funding of their terror proxies throughout the region, of which there are many. Three is some resolution to the Iranian regime's
[6:36]stockpile of ballist missiles. And four, above all, is some resolution on the nuclear issue. To me, that's obvious. I I would love to hear the president say it and from there articulate what we are doing and how we can actually achieve
[6:46]those goals in a realistic fashion. >> Yeah, it's interesting. You look at the president's strategy and his communication strategy, he's often uh responsible for for making people feel pretty confused, but maybe that's part
[6:57]of it. If if Americans are confused, imagine how the Iranians are feeling. Alex, what about you? What are you expecting in terms of potentially the war? But also, I I think it's pretty interesting if we are going to be
[7:07]hearing some analysis on potentially voter ID, making that point, you know, we're expecting to hear that from Donald Trump ahead of the midterms. How crucial
[7:18]is that for him? >> I essentially agree with Josh that that he's going to be talking about voter ID. He's going to be talking about the Save Act. We've been polling on this for several months now and public support
[7:29]really hasn't changed that much. Uh it's between 57 and 66 56% support. So about 1% difference over five or 6 months that we've been asking this question about
[7:39]Americans. Do you support uh asking do you support providing every American providing a uh proof of citizenship when you register to vote and then providing a voter ID when you go to vote? This is
[7:50]one of these issues. It's not literally an 8020 because it's a 57% support issue, but this is something that Americans support. Even quite a few Democrats support this. I think that Dem I think that Trump is going to be pushing the Save Act. I doubt it's going
[8:01]to work. One of the reasons that it's not going to work is because there are a few members of the Senate that the Republicans simply need. They cannot work without. One of them is Susan Collins. And Susan Collins is not somebody that you can push right now.
[8:13]She's in a very, very tough fight. Uh, not against a known primary opponent in Maine anymore with the withdrawal of Graham Platner. The main Senate race has been full of a ton of drama over the last couple of months. Um, but with
[8:24]everything that has happened with ICE in her district, this is not something the White House is planning on pushing her on. And so, he's going to ask for Thoon to pass the SAVE Act, but I there's only so far that he's willing to push for
[8:36]that reason. When it comes to Iran, I think he owes the public an explanation. Going into the peace deal, going into theou, Trump had been saying that peace was just around the corner. He'd been saying that for weeks and weeks, peace
[8:47]was not around the corner. We signed this agreement. It went nowhere. A lot of people predicted the Iranians would not follow it. That's what happened. And now, where are we? And so, again, I agree with what Josh said that we're going to hear, I hope, an articulation
[8:59]of what the goals are now because I'm not entirely clear what those are. if if we're just continuing to dance as long as we have a dancing partner, that's not something the Americans the American voters really want to hear. They're
[9:10]slowly but surely and steadily turning against this war. And so, the longer that this goes on without any clear expectation of what victory means or what an exit means, then the worse it is for the president. >> Well, it's interesting hearing you both
[9:21]agree on that, that you want to hear clear goals and and a clear explanation. CNN is reporting that Trump's foreign policy ratings are down at the moment. That voters trusted him by 10 points
[9:33]over Kla Harris back in 2024 when it came to foreign policy. But now his net approval is way down. Let's look at this. >> So, how's the president doing on foreign
[9:44]policy? Bad. Bad. I mean, you know, he came into office, oh, you know, during the campaign, you know, I'm going to end the wars. Well, the wars aren't ending. And if anything, we're adding to them.
[9:55]And you can just see it right here. I mean, Trump and foreign policy in 2024 versus Kla Harris, foreign policy was a strength for this president. He was trusted more in foreign policy than Kla
[10:05]Harris by a 10-point margin. Among independents, he was trusted more by 14 points. Come over to this side of the screen. The net approval now on foreign policy in 2026. Down he goes right into
[10:16]the straightup floor moves. Look at this of 22 points in the negative direction. A minus 22 point net approval rating. That is a drop of over 30 points. Foreign policy, which was a strength for
[10:27]this president during the 2024 campaign, has become a weakness for him here in 2026 leading up to this midterm. >> Alex, we'll go to you being the pollster. Just how bad is that for
[10:39]Donald Trump? >> I love Harry Anon. I don't think this is the best way to ask this particular question. Okay. >> It is very easy to say that you don't approve of what Trump's doing on foreign
[10:50]policy. It's easy for Republicans to say that. It is much harder and more relevant to ask which party do you approve of more on foreign policy. Who do you actually choose? And the reason that that's the right question to ask
[11:01]right now is because we're not having a presidential contest. And so there's no choice between Donald Trump and somebody else. It is a choice with whether or not you're going to vote for a Republican for Congress or a Democrat for Congress. And so that's why in June when we asked
[11:13]this question, which party do you trust more on foreign policy? The Democrats had a one-point edge. And that was in a poll where they had a a five-point edge on who are you going to vote for? And so this is essentially a deadlock. However,
[11:24]there were 8% who said that they trust nobody. And of those like who that is, uh the right-leaning independents, about a quarter of them are in that category.
[11:35]And so the people who are unhappy right now with Republican foreign with with foreign policy are Republicans. They are independents. Some of those are more on the right. Some of those are more in the center. But it's people inside Trump's
[11:47]own coalition. And that's that's reflective of a larger split that's in the party right now. this kind of this uneasy alliance between restrainers or like hawks and doves or or restrainers and and hawks. Uh Lindsey Graham was on
[11:58]the hawk side. You think that you can we can and should bomb all of America's enemies into submission essentially and I think he would he would probably cosign with that. Rubio is really in that camp. Uh Vance is in the other camp. He's in the camp of saying that we
[12:10]should use American power sparingly. Those are two real live debates inside the Republican party. And so these numbers, while I I wouldn't have asked the question this way, it does it does show that there is something real here,
[12:21]which is unhappiness, particularly with Republicans, cuz Democrats aren't going to be happy with Republican foreign policy. But if Republicans are unhappy with it, then that could be an issue. >> And Josh, how is this going to impact
[12:31]Trump looking ahead at the midterms just in November? Trump was asked about the midterms today, and he warned that if Republicans lose the midterms and the next election, Democrats will destroy
[12:42]the nation. and he said what they will do to the country if we don't with the the midterms it'll revert back to open borders ridiculously high interest rates. You know, is Donald Trump right there or is he potentially a bit
[12:54]worried? >> So, first of all, I I totally defer to Alex on on the actual polling nuances. But for the record, I I actually have kn since we were teenagers. I've known Harry for for for more than half my
[13:05]life, actually. And he he's having quite a moment on CNN. He's probably the only person worth watching actually currently on that network. And I [clears throat] and I love it. when when his clips resurface. But don't tell Harry, hopefully he doesn't see this clip. I actually trust Alex, not Harry, when it
[13:16]comes to to how to ask perhaps [laughter] when it comes out. It comes out how to ask this. Um, listen, on your question, Gabriella, I honestly I feel bad for the president on this. I I actually personally feel bad because you can see
[13:28]so clearly how badly he and his White House, I'm sure Susie Wild, chief of staff, Steven Miller, deputy chief of staff, I'm I'm sure they all desperately
[13:37]want to move on from the Iran quagmire. And at this point, it clearly is a quagmire. The problem is that to kind of go back to Alice's analogy of a dance partner, the other partner has is
[13:48]dancing with their arms like latched on to you with with their claws like like clawing into your back. It's this toxic cancerous apocalyptic bear hug and they just will not let you
[13:59]go. And that's been the fundamental problem with this regime for 47 years as many of us have been saying. And that that's why among other reasons, Gabrielle, that's why I personally opposed what I viewed to be the premature ceasefire in April 8th. It was
[14:11]kind of functional equivalent. You know, we're here during the World's Cup. We we we now have this Spain Argentina final coming up this Sunday. It's kind of the equivalent of of coming out of of the soccer or the football, I guess you guys call it in Australia. It's coming it's coming out of the football halftime room
[14:23]back onto the pitch with like a 5n lead and essentially begging for a tie game. That that's not how it works. When you have your foot on the jugular of the opponent, you go for the kill shot. And and that's why I I've been at times so
[14:34]so frustrated by this the schizophrenic back and forth is a wars of peace time. So I feel for the president because he wants to get a real W. He wants to get a real win. Not a symbolic win, but an actual win. But again, we're not even
[14:46]clear exactly what the terms are there. So So the whole thing is is a bit of a mess. And I think that the easiest solution is to define some clear goals and just to rip this freaking band-aid off as quickly as possible at this
[14:56]point. Stop the dillydalling. Stop the wishwashing, the proaricane. Just rip this freaking band-aid off. Because ultimately, Gabriella, American elections are almost always one on the issues of the economy. Jimmy Carville
[15:07]fundamentally was right when he said it back in 1992. Economy, inflation, jobs, wages, affordability, etc. Cost of groceries, cost of housing. These are these are the issues that decide American elections. There are some
[15:18]exceptions. For instance, the 2002 midterms after 911, national security referendum election, but those are few and far between. The American elections are almost always economy elections. The good news, the good news for
[15:29]Republicans, potentially their saving grace, well, there's actually a few saving graces. One is that the Democratic Party brand is, if anything, even more in the toilet currently than the Republican party brand is, and that's helped in no small measure by all
[15:40]this this current wave, this crop of of literal socialists who are winning elections on that particular side of the aisle. The the [snorts] other thing is that American voters when it comes to the economy have a very very short
[15:51]memory. So if things start to change in let's call it September, October into November, that's really all that's going to matter. No one's going to remember what when inflation happened when the straight was closed back in April or May
[16:02]that none of that's going to matter. So it's very much a live debate and it absolutely can change. But again, the sooner that you rip this band-aid off with Iran, it can actually focus on the economy in earnest, they'll be the better for everyone involved.
[16:13]>> Donald Trump is also focusing on domestic issues. I'm sure he's trying to get the the spotlight on those. as he announced today that any American veteran who has driven a heavy truck for our military will soon be eligible for a
[16:24]commercial driver's license. Listen to this. >> Today, I'm making one more important announcement. My administration will soon take historic action to get illegal alien truck drivers who are just killing
[16:35]a lot of people. They can't read signs. Uh many of them are on drugs or alcohol and they shouldn't be driving these things and they're they're they came in
[16:46]totally illegally and they they we don't want them. But they are driving all over American roadways and we're going to replace them with proud American veterans and we're going to take our
[16:58]veterans. We're going to make them we're going to teach them a lot about driving trucks. And in many cases, they know we're going to say any American who's driven a heavy truck for our military will automatically be eligible for a
[17:09]commercial driver's license. So, we're going to get them taken [applause] care of. And the radical left is very much opposed to that. But it doesn't matter
[17:20]what they want because we're the ones that are running. >> You can hear the applause there. Alex, what will this do in terms of Trump's popularity? I just think Trump Trump is a he's a
[17:32]funny president and whoever comes after him, I don't think will quite have the same the same wit. Um, but I think this is a one of these no-brainer policies that most Americans hear and they're like, "That makes sense. Why wasn't this in the why wasn't this in place
[17:43]beforehand?" Uh, he explained it really effectively. There are horrifying stories every week of some driver of a huge heavy truck just plowing into a
[17:55]family and you find out that they either crossed into the country illegally or they came here illegally and they just can't read English, they can't speak English, and they they have no idea how to interact with the the family that's still alive at the scene, the police
[18:06]officers. Why are these people driving these trucks? Well, in many cases, it's because they're given licenses in states like California, Minnesota, and they're just unleashed onto American roads. And that's a terrible, terrible thing. We
[18:18]have 50 states. They have different rules in how they issue driver's license out. But this is why the SAVE Act is so important because a driver's license does not indicate that you are from this country, that you have American citizenship, or even that you know how
[18:30]to drive or you know how to read road signs. And so, I think this is this is good politics. This is easy politics. I wish it could get some of these people off the roads and raise the standards for who is on the roads, but it's a good step in the meantime.
[18:41]>> Yeah, Josh, do you agree? It seems like a bit of a no-brainer. >> Yeah, I think this is very low hanging fruit. It's a very crucial state. By the way, Pennsylvania talking in the state, Donald Trump is one of the main states
[18:52]that he famously flipped in 2016. He's still campaigning there, still doing good work. He was appearing there earlier today with Dave McCormack, the the senator from Pennsylvania. So, this is this is breadandbut po populace, but
[19:03]it's smart populism. It's not Zormani populism. This this is smart Trumpian populism. And Trump really does have this this visceral instinctual connection with a lot of these voters,
[19:15]right? There really is no one quite like him in American politics. There probably won't be for a very long time. As Alex mentioned, his sense of humor is really second to none of any politician in my
[19:24]lifetime. But this notion of the of the gilded Fifth Avenue billionaire who just has this this this connection, this connection with the people of America, it's a it's a very very rare thing. I'm I'm not sure really it's ever happened
[19:35]before in American history and it'll probably be a very long time until it happens again. But for now, I I'm personally just just along for the ride. I think I think things like this are indeed very smart politics. >> JD Vance was on Joe Rogan's podcast.
[19:47]They spoke for around three hours covering a range of topics and they also took aim at Gavin Newsome. Listen to this. >> Pass too broad of a brush here. But it's it's like, you know, Gavin Newsome did
[19:58]this speech a few months ago. the president. I think it's the funniest thing ever because he's like speaking to a group of black leaders and black businessmen, but it's like an audience
[20:08]that is 95% black. And they're asking him about his dyslexia and his struggle with education. And he basically says, "Yeah, you know, um I'm not very smart like a lot of you." And it's like, "I'm
[20:19]like you. I can't read." >> Meanwhile, there's a ton of interviews where he's talking about all the books he reads. like he's so full of >> Alex. I'm interested to get your
[20:29]thoughts on this one. Do you think JD Vans was trying to deliberately take aim at Gavin Newsome seeing as he seems to be the front runner apart well him and Kla Harris when it comes to the
[20:39]Democrats in 2028? And do you think this kind of banter actually cuts through? >> I I wouldn't assume this is part of any particular strategy to go after Gavin
[20:49]Newsome. Gavin Newsome is just really easy to go after. He does a lot of things that are obnoxious. He has he clearly wants to be president more than anything else in the world. He's wanted it for a huge amount of his adult life. I think he looks at himself in the
[21:01]mirror and he and he says, "Mr. President," and a lot of voters see that. And that's one of the reasons why he he struggles to break above like the high teens and and past the 20s in polls
[21:12]of Democratic primary voters for who they want to see as president. I see that field is is still pretty splintered. The fact that Kla Harris still shows up in most of those polls tells me that there's a there's a lot of
[21:22]inertia left behind from the 2024 election. She may decide to run, but I I just can't imagine a world where she gets the nomination and does well or or that really she gets the nomination at
[21:32]all. And and so that's a reflection of the poor choices that Democratic primary voters have. And so in the meantime, Gavin Newsome does represent something of a front runner until somebody else appears and unless somebody else
[21:44]appears. And so he's just really easy to make fun of. Josh, do you agree? >> Yeah, I do. I I I I think it's hard to say with any degree of certainty that he's deliberately taking a shot at
[21:54]Newsome because they are perhaps the two parties front runners. I think I think it's probably a bit of a stretch. I I think AAM's razor, the simplest explanation here is like Gavin Newsome was just a bit of a buffoon and and and indeed says and does a lot of very silly
[22:06]things. I mean, this particular video, this whole dyslexia video, I I remember it vividly actually. I I remember watching it and indeed I was actually laughing quite a bit, you know, quite a actually to myself because it was it was it was ridiculous. It was it was an
[22:18]absolutely absurd thing to say. I I I do think Gavin Newsome is probably the favorite and probably actually I I would say probably probably the clear favorite in 2028. I don't know exactly what the betting markets say at this time, but I
[22:29]mean I think of it this way. Who else could it possibly be? Like like really I I mean Kla Harris again I don't think Democrat voters are actually quite that stupid. Ro Kahana clearly wants it, like
[22:39]wants it really really really badly. But are they really going to go with a with a a mid-ranking congressman from California when you can get the the multi-term governor of California? I I I
[22:50]think that that Baker's belief. Other than that, who else could it possibly be? I mean, I I I mean, you you have you Chris Van Holland who wants to send her from from Maryland. Maybe Alexandro Cosortez. Really? I mean, she's I mean,
[23:02]she's so young. I mean, Jasmine Crockett, give me a break. So I I I feel like they're I I I I feel like I feel like they're probably going to nominate Gavin Newsome. It's definitely not going to be Josh Shapiro for the very simple reason they can't nominate someone whose name is Josh Shapiro. That's actually
[23:13]the current state of the Democratic party. It's really actually that simple. It's tragic. So I I I feel I feel like it's going to be Gavin Newsome honestly and he's a terrible candidate. But uh look, I mean get your shots in now because he's probably going to be the nominee.
[23:24]>> Well, you mentioned AOC potentially could be her. She's heartlessly questioned whether it's legal for Senator Mitch McConnell to take a month off work amid serious health issues.
[23:35]Take a listen to this. It I don't even know how this is legal. I really don't even know how this is legal. Things do happen. You know,
[23:46]people get into medical incidents. If you're in the hospital, you're in the hospital. But I do think that there should be some sort of
[23:55]there's a line here. And I think almost everyone can agree that it's been crossed. This is not normal. This is not normal at all.
[24:06]>> Alex, I'd love to get your reaction to that one. You know, it's always that side of politics, isn't it? That they preach about being champions of of empathy. Not so much.
[24:17]>> So, this is going to be a rare time that I agree with every single thing that she just said. I think it is complete BS that there are so many members of Congress that are disappearing for age
[24:29]related reasons that they are dying in office such that there has never been a complete 435 slate of members of Congress in this Congress. There have
[24:39]been five members who have died in office uh four of old age. Of the last 10 members of Congress and the Senate to die in office though, eight are Democrats, two are Republicans, one being Lindsey Graham, one Doug Lamafa. They are two of the youngest on that
[24:50]list. The average age of the eight dead Democrats is 77 years old. And that's that's the answer. AOC, she and I are the same age. The Democratic caucus is
[25:00]so old that it's no wonder that they are not able to hold on to their members. There's a couple that have disappeared as well, likely because of other age related reasons. Part of that is the Congressional Black Caucus that has
[25:11]really an iron grip on seniority in so many of these committee assignments. And they are very, very, very old. These are people who marched with do Dr. for Martin Luther King and nobody wants to challenge them because of their position
[25:23]in the party and they their retirement plan is to die in office or to go into a nursing home while their staff pretends that they're still voting. This is a disgrace. This is part of why people think Congress is terrible. It's part of
[25:33]why their their ratings are in the toilet and and really it's a contest between who can get to the bottom faster, Republicans or Democrats. >> Josh would love to get your thoughts on that.
[25:44]>> Uh I agree with basically everything Alex said. In fact, Gabrielle, I wrote a column a few years ago about American gerontocracy, which is kind of a fancy way of saying that America is really old. And it's not just our political elites. Actually, it's really a lot of
[25:56]institutions that are just governed by an increasingly old outofouch class. But the the realm of politics may is made the most conspicuous and obvious of of
[26:06]the bunch. It's not great. It's not great that Mitch McConnell, listen, I mean, obviously we all wish him a speedy conallescence, a full recovery, a swift recovery, etc., etc., But his office did
[26:16]not handle this very well. They they left, frankly, their own party in the dark. In fact, just last week, less than a week ago, actually, it was Marlon Stman, the Republican congressman from
[26:26]Indiana, who went on on NewsNation, the the American television station, and said that he did not know whether Mitch McConnell was alive. And this goes back to M to Mitch McConnell's fall that if
[26:37]I'm not mistaken, happened right around June 14th, June 15, right around the middle of month of June. So this this is weeks later and you have congressmen from his own party saying they don't know whether the man actually has a pulse whether he's alive. That's that's
[26:49]just not transparent. I it's just not I mean and we can we we can say maybe that there was a legitimate reason but surely at some point that legitimate reason expired by the way is obviously not just Mitch McConnell. So so Congressman Tom
[27:00]Keane is named that a lot of the viewers probably have not heard a whole lot about. He's he's a Democrat from New Jersey who went months like months without casting a single vote on the floor and then eventually he came back
[27:11]and he he he gave a speech saying that he was fighting a very serious bout of depression which obviously is terrible and again we wish him a speedy psychological recovery from that. But the point is if you were a public
[27:22]official I if the public if the people elect you to represent them you owe them an explanation when you are not going to be there for an extended period of time. If you have a family emergency, wife
[27:32]giving birth, death in the family, etc., by all means, go do your thing. No one would ever doubt that for a second there. But there's something here when it comes to to transparency. By the way, it's actually one of the things that Donald Trump has consistently run on.
[27:43]Ever since 2016, one of his great campaign planks and his planks now that he's governing again as president of the United States is transparency. He's very big on that. That's why he's declassified everything from the JFK
[27:54]files to the Martin Luther King fires files to the UFOs most recently at the at the Department of War. He's big on transparency. So I think this this is increasingly common sentiment among a lot of conservatives is we want more
[28:04]transparency and to that extent I suppose I think AOC is on to something but she should probably apply the same standard to her own to her own party as well. >> Josh Hammer, senior editor at large
[28:13]newswork and Alex Terrasio a signal principal and pollstar. Thank you both so much for joining us on power hour. Great to speak with you. >> You too. Thank you.