Share This Podcast

• Check out Elana’s work – www.semafor.com/author/elana-schor
• Subscribe to the What A Day Newsletter – https://tinyurl.com/3kk4nyz8
• What A Day – YouTube – https://www.youtube.com/@whatadaypodcast

Follow us on Instagram – https://www.instagram.com/crookedmedia/

TRANSCRIPT

Jane Coaston: It’s Monday, June 30th, I’m Jane Coaston, and this is What a Day, the show that celebrates LeBron James deciding to play a record 23rd NBA season. LeBron will not just be the oldest active player at 41 years old, there are dozens of NBA players who will be playing James this season who were not born when he entered the NBA. [music break] On today’s show, President Donald Trump hints at a possible TikTok buyer, and Trump pressures Israeli officials to drop Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s corruption trial. But let’s start with the Republican big, not very beautiful bill, which President Trump wants on his desk by July 4th, as in this Friday. And like with any group assignment, getting this absolute shit show of a bill across the finish line will take a lot of teamwork from people who are not very, let’s say, teamwork-inclined. And the group project itself. It sucks. If passed, the big beautiful bill would greenlight the single biggest cut to America’s social safety net in decades. Under the Senate version, more than 11 million people could end up without health care coverage over the next decade. That’s according to the latest projections from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. And millions of people could lose access to food assistance, mainly to keep funding giant tax cuts passed during Trump’s first term. Immigration and Customs Enforcement would get a multi-billion dollar budget bump. Oh, and the bill was projected to add trillions of dollars to the national debt, a fact which Washington Democratic Senator Patty Murray made sure to highlight on the Senate floor Sunday.

[clip of Senator Patty Murray] Have you no shame. If you think you can look the American people in the face and tell them we have to bring down the debt after passing what might be the most expensive bill in history, if you think that you can do that and then be taken seriously, well you know what? If you believe that, maybe you are foolish enough to think that zero and a trillion are the same. 

Jane Coaston: So for more on the latest with the Republicans’ big, beautiful disaster of a bill, I spoke with Elana Schor. She’s a senior Washington editor for the online news publication Semafor. Elana, welcome to What a Day! 

Elana Schor: Glad to be here. 

Jane Coaston: So I want to be clear, we are taping this interview Sunday afternoon, but everything’s moving very fast. So things may have changed by the time people hear our conversation, but I guess to start, can you tell us about the major differences between the Senate bill that is being debated right now and the version that passed in the House last month.

Elana Schor: Well, the biggest difference is on Medicaid. There are much, much steeper cuts to the program under this bill. And in fact, Senate Republicans are still debating whether they even, work with me here, wanna go through with these steep cuts that they’re proposing. They’re openly talking about delaying them just as they’re about to put them into effect because they know how contentious these cuts are. So Medicaid’s the big one. Also on clean energy credits, not only do they phase out these credits a lot faster than the House, which is something that, obviously, Democrats hate. And even Republican moderates don’t like. They also slap new tax on wind and solar. This is a hit so big to the clean energy industry that Elon Musk is out there again, saying don’t pass this bill. It’ll decimate clean energy manufacturing in America. There’s other stuff, but those are the two biggest. 

Jane Coaston: So, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office released its cost estimate of the Senate bill, and it says it will add more than $3 trillion to the national debt over the next decade. Nearly 12 million Americans would lose their health care, too. How could that complicate the final passage, especially given the fiscal hawks in both the Senate and in the House? 

Elana Schor: Um, so it could, but it also couldn’t. Let me explain how it could. Namely, you know, that’s a huge deficit number. The White House kind of waves its hands on that math and says, well, these projections don’t factor in all the growth that’s gonna result. They’re overly doomsaying. And to be sure, sometimes these projections are a little bit off. But the real rub is, will the fiscal hawks stick to their guns and say, you know I want more deficit reduction, which is what they proclaim before I’m gonna vote for this. They don’t have a habit of sticking to that. I mean, in fact, as we’ve seen throughout this Congress, very few Republicans have a habit of sticking to their hesitance and reluctance when Trump and the White House, you know, really put the pressure on. 

Jane Coaston: Yeah, I think, you know, we’ve seen some of the hawks like Rand Paul, Mike Lee, Ron Johnson, try to hold out their vote on even starting a debate. And Johnson and Lee caved, Paul didn’t, but I am curious as to another senator that we’ve been keeping an eye on, which is Alaska’s Lisa Murkowski. Over the last few days, Republicans have added a ton of provisions to the bill specifically to get her support, which I’m kind of entertained by. Everything from waivers to exempt Alaskans from work requirements for food aid to a tax write-off for whaling captains. And she still seems reluctant to move the bill forward, which like the whaling captains, Lisa? Where does she stand right now? 

Elana Schor: I know, think of the whaling captains. Um. 

Jane Coaston: The whaling Captains! 

Elana Schor: Literally as we speak, right? With the ultimate fate of the bill, somewhat but not totally up in the air, Republicans are preparing to argue before the Senate parliamentarian. And I know I’m getting wonky again, but I’m sure you’ve talked about this figure. Nonpartisan referee has also dealt a lot of blows to Democrats in the past on stuff like the minimum wage. She, you know, she’s known to be equal opportunity in what she pushes out of these bills. And the big question is whether she lets some of these Alaskan carve-outs stay intact or whether she rules, this is like too obvious a carve-out for Murkowski’s state, doesn’t have a meaningful effect on the budget, it could be filibustered out of there. So I would say right now Murkowski voted to start debate if a lot of these carve- outs, I don’t want to say giveaways, to her state stay, she’s likely to keep voting yes, but it really depends on how those rulings go. 

Jane Coaston: Now, amidst all of this, North Carolina’s Thom Tillis announced that he won’t be seeking reelection next year, which I think we kind of knew a couple of years ago. But he’s been opposed to this bill saying it’s bad for his state. And in his announcement on Sunday, he had some pointed criticism for his colleagues, quote, “too many elected officials are motivated by pure raw politics who don’t really give a damn about the people they promise to represent on the campaign trail.” How is that reverberating in Congress? 

Elana Schor: As you say, I don’t think it’s a particular shock. Even before this, you know, Tillis really didn’t want to vote yes on Pete Hegseth. He was going around strongly signaling that, I don’t think this guy is worthy to lead the Pentagon and then just kind of folded amidst some really fierce pressure from this White House. So he was on retirement watch for a bit this year. I think this will reverberate, though, just because he was so blunt in his statement. He also said he’s looking forward to calling balls and strikes, you know, as he sees fit, which is essentially in Senate speak saying, I’m now going to speak my mind and look out, Republicans. I may or may not keep voting the way you want me to vote. 

Jane Coaston: Now, though this is only entertaining to me. Should the Senate ultimately pass this bill, it has to go back to the House to approve any changes made. And we’ve heard a lot from various members of the House saying, for example, the stipulations with AI, saying like, oh, I didn’t even know that was there. And I hate it. And I’m mad all the time. So there’s been a lot of differences between the House and the Senate, even among fiscal hawks, even along the people who should be the most supportive of this bill. So what are the potential poison pills that could doom its chances there? Because the House version originally passed by a single vote. 

Elana Schor: Um. Certainly SALT, or I should say that the state and local tax deduction debate could really hurt this. SALT it’s blue state Republicans, mostly New York and California, high tax regions where they want to eliminate this cap on the deductions. Again, super wonky here, but this is something Trump has very frequently said like, I’m going to help you out with, and then just not. 

Jane Coaston: Right. 

Elana Schor: For what? 

Jane Coaston: This is as far as I can tell, this is why Mike Lawler talks about anything, is talking about SALTS. 

Elana Schor: And Mike Lawler, let’s not forget, really wants to be governor, is kind of digging in here, but also saying that he’s maybe gonna cave in support the compromise that senators in the White House worked out, which is just plain not as good for these Blue State Republicans as what the House agreed to. Another New York Republican, less talkative, Nick LaLota, he’s already said, I’m a no, right? So that’s not good. We at Semafor actually though cornered Warren Davidson, who voted no along with Thomas Massey the first time. And he says he likes these steeper Medicaid cuts. So he might be back in play for a yes. So it’s like, you know, Jenga math, right? Like you take out one definite yes, put in this. So this is Mike Johnson right now, trying to hope his vote count doesn’t collapse on him. 

Jane Coaston: Well, there’s also California’s David Valadao, who has voiced concern about the Medicaid cuts in the way you voice concern about things. 

Elana Schor: Yeah, that’s a good point. I didn’t mention that because, again, I’m just deeply skeptical at this point that the Medicaid cuts, given that the House was already cutting Medicaid by quite a bit, other than Tillis, who was in a very specific position trying to get reelection in a state where legislators were on record saying this is going to be a problem, trade associations. I’m less certain Valadao will actually follow through with that. 

Jane Coaston: Now, here’s a basic question for you. Is the house in town? Can this really get done by the holiday, which is Friday, as in this Friday? 

Elana Schor: Correct. I mean, so as your listeners may know, whenever there’s a Congressional recess, you know, some of these guys go home and hang out with their families, but a lot of them go on CODELs, congressional delegations to, you know international locations. There’s a lot of plans, not to mention holiday parades and constituent events that are getting cancelled and rejiggered right now. And that could be even bigger of an issue in the House because we’re bumping right up until July 4th to potentially pass this thing. House Speaker Mike Johnson has said, I’ll give my members notice, probably around 48 hours for them to get back to Washington and vote on this. But that gives them a super, super narrow window, like between maybe Wednesday morning and Thursday afternoon to get this all done. And anybody who watches Congress knows the House has trouble moving that fast on anything. 

Jane Coaston: Now, I realize Republicans don’t have huge margins in either chamber, and they are trying to satisfy wings of their caucus that have exactly opposing interests and seem to hate each other. But what do you think it says that so many Republicans seem so reluctant to pass this bill? Polling shows voters aren’t on board with it, and it seems like the only thing keeping it alive is the threat of the president calling you and yelling at you. 

Elana Schor: This bill has had a super interesting history, right? I mean, keep in mind, in 2017, when Republicans used the same filibuster protections to pass the first Trump tax cuts that they’re now trying to extend, the House and Senate were in agreement and totally had a plan basically by New Year’s. Right as the Congress was starting. And this time, they’ve squabbled, they fought, should we do one bill or two? It was being dragged down well into the spring, right? So there was never the chance for them to kind of sing kumbaya, to use the cliche, and get excited about doing something along party lines. And you’ve seen that, right. There’s been this level of like just malcontent with the process that I think now is spilling into the policy as you’re seeing more and more Republicans come out and criticize more and more things. I mean, you have Josh Hawley come out this weekend and say, on camera, I don’t think we should be cutting health care for working people while giving corporate tax breaks. He fully plans to do that. Like he said, I don’t think we sould be doing the thing that I’m about to vote for. And this is not to pick on Josh Hawley. I think that’s how a lot of Republicans are thinking. They’re almost like realizing in real time, this is gonna be pretty hard to sell because on paper, yes, preventing a tax increase is part of Republican ideology forever. Yes, that’s sellable. But there’s so much other stuff in here, from the Medicaid cuts to AI. Not to mention a lot of these guys have never voted to increase the debt ceiling. We’re talking trillions of debt that they’re voting for the first time in their careers. Of course, they’re not going to like it. 

Jane Coaston: Elana, thank you so much for joining us. 

Elana Schor: Thanks for having me. 

Jane Coaston: That was my conversation with Elana Schor, senior Washington editor for Semafor. We’ll link to her work in our show notes. We’ll get to more of the news in a moment, but if you like the show, make sure to subscribe, leave a five-star review on Apple Podcasts, watch us on YouTube, and share with your friends. More to come after some ads. [music break]

[AD BREAK]

Jane Coaston: Here are some stories you may have missed over the weekend. 

[sung] Headlines. 

[clip of President Donald Trump] We have a buyer for TikTok, by the way. I think I’ll need probably China approval. And I think President Xi will probably do it, you know? 

[clip of Maria Bartiromo] Who’s the buyer? 

[clip of President Donald Trump] I’ll tell you in about two weeks. 

[clip of Maria Bartiromo] A big technology company? [?]

[clip of President Donald Trump] They are very, very wealthy people. It’s a group of very wealthy people. 

Jane Coaston: Two weeks, it’s always two weeks. President Trump appears pretty confident that he has a solution for his TikTok problem. The Chinese-owned app has been facing the possibility of a ban in the U.S. over national security concerns, leaving its fate for American users up in the air. Trump has extended the deadline three times since he took office in January. Trump hinted at the possible deal in an interview with Fox News’ Sunday Morning Futures. It was taped Friday and broadcast Sunday. Trump discussed a slew of other topics with host Maria Bartiromo. Here’s what he said when she asked about his 90-day tariff pause on most countries, which is set to come to an end next week. 

[clip of President Donald Trump] We made a deal pretty much with India, we made a deal with China, we’ve made a deal with UK, great people, we made deals. But I’d rather just send them a letter, a very fair letter saying congratulations, we’re going to allow you to trade in the United States of America, you’re going pay a 25 percent tariff or a 20 percent or a 40 or 50 percent. I would rather do that. 

Jane Coaston: When Bartiromo asked if he would extend the pause, the president said he doesn’t think he’ll need to, but he could. And of course, Trump rambled about the obliteration of Iran’s nuclear sites. 

[clip of President Donald Trump] And they did obliterate it, it turned out, then we had to suffer the fake news with the fake news and cnn and the new york times was saying well maybe it wasn’t as good as Trump said. Maybe it wasn’t totally obliterated but it was destroyed but not a you know just horrible. 

Jane Coaston: Trump also suggested consequences for whoever leaked the preliminary intelligence assessment last week that suggested Iran’s nuclear program was only set back by a few months by the U.S. strikes. 

[clip of Maria Bartiromo] You tweeted the Democrats leaked intelligence. 

[clip of President Donald Trump] They should be prosecuted. 

[clip of Maria Bartiromo] Who specifically? Do you know who? 

[clip of President Donald Trump] The people that leaked it.

[clip of Maria Bartiromo] Will you be able to find out? 

[clip of President Donald Trump] We can find out. If they want to, they can find out easily, you know, you go up and tell the reporter national security who gave it, you have to do that, and I suspect we’ll be doing things like that. 

Jane Coaston: We’ll be doing things like that. Sure. The head of the International Atomic Energy Agency said of Iran’s nuclear sites in an interview that aired on CBS Sunday, quote, “it is clear that there has been severe damage, but it’s not total damage.” 

[clip of President Donald Trump] I was elected on a historic mandate, but in recent months we’ve seen a handful of radical left judges effectively try to overrule the rightful powers of the president to stop the American people from getting the policies that they voted for in record numbers. 

Jane Coaston: It’s not a historic mandate, and it wasn’t record numbers, but okay. On Friday, the United States Supreme Court released five new decisions, including one that limited the ability of lower courts to issue nationwide injunctions against executive orders. The specific issue the case addressed was President Trump’s attacks on birthright citizenship. In late January, Trump issued an executive order that sought to deny automatic citizenship to the future children of undocumented immigrants and those with temporary legal status. Birthright citizenship has been upheld for 125 years under the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. The Supreme Court’s 6-3 ruling rejected the validity of injunctions filed by state judges against that particular order, meaning that it will now move forward in most states. The ruling did not, however, address the constitutionality of Trump’s attempt to end birthright citizenship. The decision fell along ideological lines, with justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissenting. Just hours after the opinion was released, a group of immigrants’ rights advocates filed a class action lawsuit challenging Trump’s executive order. On Sunday, the Jerusalem District Court canceled this week’s upcoming hearings in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s corruption trial. Netanyahu requested the cancelation, citing classified diplomatic and security reasons. Notably though, the change came a day after President Trump wrote on Truth Social that Netanyahu’s trial could interfere with his current negotiations with Hamas and Iran. Trump implicitly leaned on Israel in his message, noting that the U.S. spends billions of dollars every year in aid to Israel. It was Trump’s second post in three days about Netanyahu’s trial. His earlier post on Thursday also called for Israel to cancel the proceedings. Netanyahu was indicted in 2019 on charges of bribery, fraud, and breach of trust, which he has denied. His trial has been ongoing for the last five years. Trump has repeatedly called for Israel and Hamas to end the war in Gaza, and told reporters last Friday that he thought a deal for a ceasefire could be reached within a week. Trump posted again on Truth Social early Sunday morning, writing simply, quote, “Make the deal in Gaza! Get the hostages back!” More than 100,000 people marched in a Budapest Pride Parade on Saturday, just one day after Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban warned people to steer clear of the banned parade. In March, Orban’s party passed legislation barring Pride events, and allowing the use of facial recognition to identify attendees. Potential participants were threatened with fines of up to $600 US dollars. But Budapest’s Liberal Mayor tried to facilitate a workaround, renaming the event Budapest Pride Freedom. And recasting it as a commemoration of Soviet troops pulling out of the city in 1991. Even after police banned that event, a record-breaking number of people showed up to the parade. The impressive turnout is already being called a political turning point for Orban’s conservative Christian government. The overwhelming display of opposition to his policies comes as Orban faces an unprecedented threat in next year’s election from his political rival, Péter Magyar. On Sunday, Orban called the event, quote, “Repulsive and shameful.” Good luck next year, buddy! And that’s the news. [music break] One more thing. Let’s try something. Let’s say you’re at work. You’re a dishwasher at a nice restaurant, and it’s about halfway through your shift. Suddenly a man walks into the kitchen claiming to be from Immigration and Customs Enforcement. He’s wearing a balaclava, a face mask that only shows your eyes and mouth, and he’s carrying a gun. Let’s say you’re a legal resident of the United States, but some of your colleagues aren’t. You’re probably scared. You’re possibly wondering what to do. And you may be wondering, what if this person isn’t from ICE? As ICE raids continue to take place at businesses and homes and farms across the country, we are seeing a rise of ordinary people pretending to be immigration officers in order to do, well, who the hell knows what. In Philadelphia, a man was arrested two weeks ago after he allegedly impersonated an ICE agent in order rob a business. Here’s a local ABC affiliate. 

[clip of unnamed ABC news reporter] Captain Jack Ryan says the suspect, who was wearing a makeshift law enforcement outfit, presented himself as an agent from Immigration and Customs Enforcement, commonly referred to as ICE.

[clip of Captain Jack Ryan] He yelled immigration. Um. Some of the employees promptly left the business. He zip-tied the female that was present behind the counter. 

[clip of unnamed ABC news reporter] Captain Ryan says the whole thing lasted no more than 30 seconds, with the suspect making away with approximately $1,000 in cash before driving away in this white van. 

Jane Coaston: And in Huntington Park, California, a man is now in custody after police say he was spotted in a vehicle meant to look like it belonged to law enforcement. Here’s the local CW affiliate. 

[clip of unnamed CW reporter] They say the suspects’ Dodge Durango, had law enforcement type lights, and inside, copies of passports, federal enforcement style documents, cell phones and a loaded firearm. 

[clip of unnamed law enforcement officer] What this individual was doing with those items remains under investigation. But the presence of law enforcement style equipment without any verified authority raises serious concerns. 

Jane Coaston: In North Carolina, a man allegedly impersonated an ICE agent in order to sexually assault a woman back in late January, reportedly telling her he’d deport her if she didn’t have sex with him. In South Carolina, the man allegedly detained a group of Latino men in a fake traffic stop in February of this year, taking the keys to their car and saying, quote, “You all got caught, you’re going back to Mexico.” Back in March, California Attorney General Rob Bonta even issued a warning against fake ICE officers, saying, quote, “We have received reports of individuals looking to take advantage of the fear and uncertainty created by President Trump’s inhumane mass deportation policies. Let me be clear, if you seek to scam or otherwise take advantage California’s immigrant communities, you will be held accountable.” He’s right, because these individuals are taking advantage of President Trump’s mass deportation policy. Specifically, the policy of ICE officers not wearing anything to indicate that they’re federal law enforcement agents. Instead, as we’ve seen over and over again over the last few months, ICE officers are often wearing plain clothes and with no visible identification. So if you’re at work or at home and someone shows up wearing a face mask and a sweatshirt and claiming to be a federal law enforcement agent, how exactly do you know they are or aren’t? You don’t, and how could you? As Michigan Democratic Senator Gary Peters pointed out last week to Attorney General Pam Bondi, letting ICE officers operate with no visible indication they’re not just terrifying guys trying to hurt you for no reason isn’t just bad for ordinary citizens, it’s dangerous for ICE officers too. 

[clip of Senator Gary Peters] People think here’s a person coming up to me, not identified, covering themselves. They’re kidnapping. They’ll probably fight back. That endangers the officer as well. And that’s a serious situation. People need to know that they’re dealing with a federal law enforcement official. 

Jane Coaston: Now, Bondi claimed to have just now learned about ICE officers using face masks, which I 100% do not believe. What do I believe? That ICE trying to conceal their identities is putting everyday people at risk, even those who will never actually encounter federal immigration enforcement, but might encounter someone trying to commit a crime while acting like federal immigration enforcement. [music break]

[AD BREAK]

Jane Coaston: That’s all for today. If you like the show, make sure you subscribe, leave a review. Do not tell me what a Labubu is, and tell your friends to listen. And if you’re into reading, I’m not just about how seriously they are beanie babies but for generation alpha. And that’s all the information I’m going to hold in my brain about them, like me. What a Day is also a nightly newsletter. Check it out and subscribe at Crooked.com/subscribe. I’m Jane Coaston. And they are beanie babies for people who do not know who Princess Diana was, and that is my final answer. [music break] What a Day is a production of Crooked Media. It’s recorded and mixed by Desmond Taylor. Our associate producer is Emily Fohr. Our producer is Michell Eloy. Our video editor is Joseph Dutra. Our video producer is Johanna Case. We had production help today from Greg Walters, Matt Berg, Sean Ali, Tyler Hill, and Laura Newcomb. Our senior producer is Erica Morrison, and our senior vice president of news and politics is Adriene Hill. Our theme music is by Colin Gilliard and Kashaka. Our production staff is proudly unionized with the Writers Guild of America East. [music break]