August 6, 2024 • 49 mins
Katie sits down with House Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi for this special Next Question bonus episode. It’s an intimate, urgent conversation that leaves no issue off the table – from her thoughts on President Biden’s decision to end his campaign and what she believes Vice President Kamala Harris must do to win in November to the increasingly bitter divisions that threaten our democracy and the devastating rise in political violence that has affected her on a deeply personal level, they cover it all. They also discuss Speaker Pelosi’s new book, “The Art of Power,” which is a thoughtful reflection on some of her more consequential legislative decisions across a remarkable political career spanning four decades. As the country rights itself from the recent twists and turns of an unprecedented campaign season, this must-listen conversation gets to the heart of what’s at stake as we look to November.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:03):
Hi, everyone. I'm Kitty Kuric, and this is next question.
It's not often I get to talk to Speaker of
the House, Nancy Pelosi in the library of my New
York apartment, So I can't tell you how appreciative I am,
Madam Speaker, that you made the time to come and
talk to me about your new book, Measure and a
(00:24):
book in your library I know, and it's called The
Art of Power, my story. As America's first woman Speaker
of the House. You have had such a fascinating life,
as you say, going from housewife to house member to
House speaker. But that's not really the story you chose
to tell in this book, is it.
Speaker 2 (00:44):
Well, that is another book, and it is. This book
is about a decision I made years ago that I
wanted to write about at least four decisions or rooms
where it happened, whether domestically Affordable Care Act and the TARP,
the Wall Street meltdown, and globally the war in Iraq,
(01:06):
which I opposed, and our relationship with China. Just telling
the story as I saw it. But that was a
while ago. I couldn't write it until I was no
longer Speaker because I don't have the time. So when
I did, then it was like, well, you have to
say something about Trump, and you have to say something
about January sixth, and you have to say something about
(01:27):
what happened to your husband. So it has some more
current things there, but the point was to write about
what happened in those four important decisions for our country.
There's another book. This is not a memoir. There's another
book that'll talk about some things that have happened around
now and again with more personalities, and that this is
(01:52):
more policy policy. It is a lot about making these
critical decisions, the role of leader, the use of power.
And I know that you write that your friend Louisiana
Congresswoman Lyndy Boggs told you early on in your political career,
know thy power and use it. How hard was it
(02:15):
as a woman, because you're such a pioneer to actually
embrace that power and use it? Was that something you
had to really learn how to do. No, it's something
I had to decide to do. It was I keep
saying when you reach When I became speaker, I knew
I had to do the job in a very particular
(02:39):
way in terms of the use of power, the diversity
that I wanted to bring to it, not just me,
but so many other people the understanding I wanted people
to have about power being from consensus, come from listening,
from respect, not from above, but from the people that
(03:00):
have to make the votes for it, And so you
build them as much consensus as possible, not recognizing that
you're not always going to have unanimity.
Speaker 1 (03:09):
How hard was that though, for you as a woman,
as a young woman, as someone who was in the minority,
who wasn't being taken as seriously, perhaps as you think
you should have been, and as you should have been.
Speaker 2 (03:22):
Yeah, well, that's that other people's problem.
Speaker 1 (03:25):
That's not my problem.
Speaker 2 (03:26):
You don't take me seriously, that's to your peril, because
we're here to get a job done. When I first
went to Congress, there were twenty three women out of
four hundred and thirty five members.
Speaker 1 (03:40):
Is that appalling?
Speaker 2 (03:41):
And so I immediately knew that we had to make
a change, and that made a decision to elect more women,
more democratic women, of course, but more women to Congress.
We now have ninety four when from twelve to ninety four.
Still want more, but the republics have gone from eleven
to thirty something, which is good. But they still need
(04:02):
more as well. But so it wasn't when I say
there were twenty three it was a novelty. It was
a novelty.
Speaker 1 (04:10):
It wasn't.
Speaker 2 (04:11):
It was a rarity too, And so people didn't men
didn't feel so threatened by that. Then as our numbers
grew and grew, they wondered.
Speaker 1 (04:21):
And what's going on here? What's going on here?
Speaker 2 (04:23):
And if we ever wore the same color one day
and solidarity for whatever diagnosis there was or whatever was
going on, they'd be like, what are they up to now?
Or if we other gathered in their well just to
share a thought, what are they up to now? And
then when I ran for leadership, it was poor babies
who said she could run.
Speaker 1 (04:44):
You write about that, and it was so frustrating you
say that a lot of the men really tried to
diminish you and your skills and insist on a pecking
order and a timeline, like wait your turn, little lady.
But you had a great response to them, didn't you.
Speaker 2 (05:02):
Well, they said, you know, some of our people, I've
been waiting a long time for a physician to open up.
And I said, well, wait a minute, we've been waiting
over two hundred years, So don't talk to us about
a timeline. But I I said to them, don't vote
for me because I'm a woman, but don't vote against
me because I'm a woman. I wasn't putting myself out there.
We need a woman in leadership. I wanted to win.
(05:25):
I wanted to prevail for the Democrats. I thought that
was really important. I take great pride in being a Democrat.
And we were losing each election ninety four, ninety six,
ninety eight. So in two thousand I asserted myself politically,
and in California that night we went from twenty six
Democrats and twenty six Republicans to thirty one Democrats twenty
(05:49):
one Republicans, and then they started to take notes. But
I didn't get elected Speaker because of anything other than
the fact that I won the majority. And that was
That's how you got a speaker, you win the majority.
Speaker 1 (06:05):
I asked a friend of mine what he would like
to ask you, Speaker Pelosi, and he said, please ask
her why she never ran for Presido. And so Ralph Esposito,
my friend, this question is for you. Why haven't you
or why didn't you? Well, first of all, I came
to Congress. I ran the first time when I was
(06:26):
forty six years old. That's down the path politically. I hey,
I'm a legislator. I loved legislating, and being Speaker of
the House is the second most important position. I mean,
this vice president is person in line to become president.
But in terms of power, the awesome power of the
(06:46):
speakership is, in my view, on a par not all
a part with the president. He has other responsibilities. But
for what I cared about, making a difference in people's
lives through legislation and the use of power to do
so is about again respect, listening, learning from members, building consensus.
(07:08):
It's hard because you're talking about policy and you with it.
You have to have a vision as to what your
goal is. You have to have a knowledge of the
issues and judgment about how to prioritize. You have to
have strategy as to how you're going to bring people together.
And that's a big undertaking, and so you don't have
(07:31):
time to think about any other office but the one
you're in. For the first time. In this book, you
talk extensively about the brutal attack on your husband, Paul.
It's been almost two years. I can only imagine how
horrifying that was.
Speaker 2 (07:49):
It was horrifying, and it continues to be. We're hoping
about the time it is two years, the end of October,
that pop we call them pop will be more fully covered.
He's on his way, he's about eighty percent. No, it
was beyond shocking that someone would come into our home
and seek me out, not find me, but assault my
(08:15):
husband in that way, and really a centimeter, as the
doctor said on trial, from his being a fatal attacking
his brain. But it is it's not to enlarge the issue.
It's not just about us. It's about the exposure that
anyone in the political arena has if you speak out,
(08:36):
and the rest, and we have to turn that down
in terms of what that man was saying when he
was going through our house and the rest and what
was said, it's very similar to what was said on
January sixth, what was going through the House of Representatives
in the United States, Senate.
Speaker 1 (08:53):
I want to talk to you about the political climate
in a moment, but I saw your husband at the
kend Center Honors shortly, not too long after this had happened,
and he had a bandage on his head, and I
believe he was wearing a fedora, and he was in
good spirits. That was an unusual thing.
Speaker 2 (09:14):
In other words, he does still go to some things,
but he has to prioritize and not stay too long.
But he loves the Kennedy Center Honors. He was able
to go that year, but not the next year. So
how is he doing? You said, eighty percent? What are
some of the challenges he still facing?
Speaker 1 (09:32):
Me one who has any kind of a brain traumatic
brain injury, right, and.
Speaker 2 (09:36):
It's concussion and all that kind of thing. It's about
having dizzney spells, which means you can fall and have
other injuries. It's about being again fainting with the Disney spells.
Things like that. If we go to an event now,
even in a friend's home, pretty soon after a few minutes,
(09:58):
he'll be sitting down, not stand up a long time.
Speaker 1 (10:01):
You know.
Speaker 2 (10:02):
So and that's all doable, No, you know, people are
suffering so many worse things.
Speaker 1 (10:08):
And still it's so unnecessary and so infuriating that this
happened to him.
Speaker 2 (10:14):
Well in our own home, which is to make our
home a crime scene, to come through, break in, find
his way into the bed, our bedroom. Imagine where's Nancy,
Where's Nancy and that. And what was really sad about it, Katie,
was that people on the other side of the eye
(10:35):
were making a joke of it. And you wonder, what
is it about these people that they think it's funny
that someone is assaulted in that way, and not only someone,
but our system is assaulted. Other families are fearing, why
should I go into this if this is one of
the consequence could be one of the consequences. They made
(10:55):
jokes of it, people laughed, They got all this feedback
on the social media, and that's just not right for
our country. How do you explain that? It was so infuriating?
You know, after President Trump's failed assassination attempt, you condemn
political violence and no uncertain terms, and.
Speaker 1 (11:19):
I thought he survived, Oh my god. And after this
happened to your husband, people were making jokes. They were
mischaracterizing this situation, lying, yes, lying about the situation, including
the president's own son and high ranking people. I mean,
(11:41):
it's just gross, isn't it. It's gross?
Speaker 2 (11:44):
But you have to remember this is follows the context
of the current former president, current candidate for president again,
I don't like using his name, saying to the mobs
in his events. If you beat up the press, don't
worry about it. I'll pay for your lawyers. I'll pay
(12:04):
your legal fees. Well, what is that, If you beat
up the press, I will pay your legal fees. We're
talking about freedom of the press, which is the guardian
of our democracy, of our freedom, of all of the
First Amendment rights. You know, the press is about transparency
and the rest. So I consider it the most important
(12:25):
of them. And if you beat them up, I will
pay your legal fees. And then we saw what happened
in Charlottesville, with all the violence that happened there. Oh,
there are good people on both sides of that. The
President's the then president said, and of course culminating on
January sixth. January sixth, an insurrection incited by the President
(12:48):
of the United States. It was horrible, and now he
tries to distance himself from it. But he refused to
send the National Guard, his Secretary of Defense, Secretary of
the Army, that's the chain of command for that. They
refused to send it. And now they're lying about it too.
But it's really a sad situation. Let's know, you'se even
(13:12):
talking about. All we have to do is win the election.
And hope that the Republicans will take back their party.
It's really turned into a cult to a thug in
my view, and this is more of a situation where
the Grand Old Party did great things for our country,
provided great leaders in our country, and whether we disagreed
on some policy matters, we're all patriots and respected each
(13:35):
other in that way. That's not the case with this guy.
So if they would take back their party, it's up
to them to decide what that party is, of course,
but it shouldn't be what we're seeing now.
Speaker 1 (13:50):
We'll be back with more of my conversation about Speaker
Pelosi and her new book right after this. You want
to get smarter every morning with a breakdown of the
news and fascinating takes on health and wellness and pop culture.
Sign up for our daily newsletter, Wake Up Call by
going to Katiecuric dot com. We're back with more of
(14:17):
my conversation with former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi.
What do you make of people who have now minimized
the threat of bodily harm and the damage that was
done on January sixth, Madam Speaker, I mean, what do
you make of that and the fact that former President
(14:39):
Trump says he will pardon the insurrectionists.
Speaker 2 (14:43):
Well, first, and what happened that day was horrible. It
would assault, of course on the Capitol, the beautiful capital,
which is an emblem of a temple of democracy to
the world, under the dome that Lincoln built during the
Civil War. During the Civil War, people said, don't continue.
The dome saved the steal and the manpower for the
(15:04):
war Civil war, and he said, no, I have to
show that we are resilient, and they completed the dome.
And these people came in with Confederate flags under the dome,
even a Nazifi under Lincoln's dome.
Speaker 1 (15:17):
So that was.
Speaker 2 (15:19):
Horrible optically to the world that it was an assault
on our constitution, which was more significant because this is
when the day we are supposed to ratify, certify the election,
a peaceful transfer of power of the results of the
electoral College for the president. Appalling. But that's why they
(15:42):
came that day to prevent that from happening. This just
wasn't any day of the week. It was the day
that we were required to do that, and we did.
And then the third was of course an assault on Congress,
an assault on Congress which had the responsibility to do that.
But physically the Senate chamber, the House chamber, seeking the
(16:05):
President of the Senate, who's the vice president of the
United States, with the gallows, you know, a horrible situation,
seeking out the speaker of the House on our side,
I'm going to bullet in the head and all that.
So Congress, the Capital, the Constitution all assaulted that day,
(16:27):
intentionally that day because of the day it meant. Thank god,
the vice president honored his responsibilities as vice president according
to the Constitution. But what's sad about it is, following
all the damage and defecation and danger of all of it,
(16:47):
we go back in. They said, oh, we'll just have
to do it and undisclosed because no, we're going to
We're going to the Capital.
Speaker 1 (16:53):
We're going to the floor.
Speaker 2 (16:54):
And Chuck and and Mitch we all agree that would
be the course, the three of us, and so we
went back. But when we went back, overwhelmingly the Republicans,
including their leadership, voted not to accept the results of
the electoral College. It was so saddening to see them
walk away from that. So when you ask what do
(17:17):
you think of these people? What do you think of
Mitch McConnell. If you read his speech that day or
even up until the thirteenth of February when we were
impeaching the president for this and McCarthy and the things
they said that day, and then what they ended up doing,
(17:37):
just walking away from their remarks and now supporting him
for president.
Speaker 1 (17:41):
Why do you think they had a change of heart.
Speaker 2 (17:45):
I don't pay too much value of whether about Kevin,
but in terms of Mitch, he's a serious person in
the Congress of the United States. I feel very sorry
for him. I don't know how he lives with his decision,
but that's his decision.
Speaker 1 (18:00):
Are you concerned that after this upcoming election that if
President Trump loses, Hi'll refuse to accept the results. Oh? Sure,
I mean he is irresponsible. I don't know what he
will do, But is there a plan if that happens?
You plan on our side? Yeah?
Speaker 2 (18:17):
Well, everybody knows what he's capable of. Who would have
thought the lack of patriotism, the lack of interest in
a peaceful transfer of power, abandonment a fact and truth.
I mean, this was a very irresponsible thing for him
to do, and to encourage people to follow him, his toadies,
his enablers in the Congress and in other parts of
(18:38):
the country. When we brought the case for our accepting
the electoral college results, it was based on most of
these states had Republican leadership in the positions of authority
to approve these plans, mostly Republican that we were quoting
(18:59):
in terms of the integrity of the vote. So now
everybody knows what to expect of him, and that's a
different story.
Speaker 1 (19:10):
But an insurrection.
Speaker 2 (19:12):
Incited by the president of the United States was not
something anybody could expect.
Speaker 1 (19:17):
I know that this is a plea for decency, a
return to decency in some ways. Do you think that
both sides are contributing to the current lack of civility?
To put it mildly, and why do you think it's
gotten so bad. I've covered politics a long time. You've
(19:37):
been in politics probably for as long as I've covered them,
and I think people have said, it's just never been
like this. What do you think the root casts?
Speaker 2 (19:48):
First of all, let me disagree with that stipulation that
you put forth that both sides are responsible.
Speaker 1 (19:53):
No, I'm asking if you think, oh, oh yeah, I'm
not saying they are. I'm asking if you believe that's
I think.
Speaker 2 (20:00):
I don't see any of our people saying to their supporters,
beat up the press and we will pay your legal fees.
I don't think I see our people saying in Charlottesville
there are good people on both sides. That equivalence that
some have put forth is so wrong. And also when
they say there's dysfunction, there's not a dysfunction. It's obstruction.
(20:23):
Obstruction on the part of the Republicans who do not
believe in science, do not believe in governance. And if
you don't believe, if science tells you we have to
take care of children because this is how their brands developed,
and you don't believe in any initiatives to address that
because you don't believe in governance, then we have a disagreement.
(20:44):
Same thing with the planet, and the list goes on.
So we have a major policy disagreement, and that's legitimate.
Since the beginning of our country, we've had those disagreements.
But that doesn't mean that if you're anti governance of
that you're going to take it down. You take it,
(21:05):
you want to minimize it, you want to change the
balance between federal and state and all that. That's legitimate debate,
but not to take it down as they try to
do on January sixth, So I do not in any way.
See now, I have been a victim of everybody, well,
the far left, the far right, everybody, as far as
(21:26):
I'm concerned. But on the left it's mostly policy. At
largely it is always policy disagreement. They don't want I
don't go far enough here and go far enough there.
Speaker 1 (21:37):
Yeah, okay.
Speaker 2 (21:38):
But on the other side, I've been a victim of
the Republicans for twenty years I was leader or speaker.
They had me like a devil in flames, an animal
with horns, cloven feet, all the rest of that. And
really contribute it to the atmosphere in which my husband
(21:58):
was attacked.
Speaker 1 (22:00):
Where do you think that comes from? That rage against
you specifically? Do you think it's misogyny? What do you
think is behind that? I think it's a bankruptcy of
ideas on their part. They don't have anything to suggest,
because what are they for. They'refore tax breaks for the rich.
Speaker 2 (22:18):
The only thing they did when he was president and
they had the majority was a tax bill that gave
eighty three percent of the benefits to the top one percent,
top one percent, adding two trillion with the T not
a B or an M, two trillion dollars to the
national debt, and then saying well, we can't do this
(22:39):
for the children because it will add to the national debt.
So they don't have an agenda that has popular appeal
if people understand it, So that do they have to
do the politics of personal destruction or attack. And that's
what they did. And of course I'm very proud to
represent San Francisco. In fact, when I gave up my
leader ship Roles, I said, don't worry about me. Nothing
(23:03):
makes me prouder than to step onto the floor to
say I speak for the people of San Francisco. They
like to say, oh san Francisco, Yeah, san Francisco values,
the song of Saint Francis. Make me a channel of
thy piece. Or there's darkness, May we bring white hatred, love, despair, hope.
The list goes on. So but I think it's their
(23:26):
anti governance attitude, they're anti science attitude, and they don't
want en rich people don't some rich people don't want
to pay taxes, so they fund this bankruptcy of this
lack of ideas with personal attacks.
Speaker 1 (23:41):
Let me ask you about that, because the Democrats have
been losing white working class voters for some time and
they seem to be gravitating toward Donald Trump. Why do
you think that's happened and why do you think that
they feel? Many Trump's supporters feel that he cares more
(24:03):
about them than the Democrats do.
Speaker 2 (24:06):
Well, because he's a good snake oil salesman. That's why
you have to give him credit. He gets out there
and sells a bill of goods. But what does he
do give a tax break to the top one percent.
He doesn't care about those people, but he gives them
the impression they do.
Speaker 1 (24:21):
But I do.
Speaker 2 (24:22):
I'm respectful of the American people. I do think there
are some people who have concerns about well, some of
them are just want to discriminate and we'll never get them,
and we're not. Our appeal is not to them. Are
There's some cultural issues Gun's God being a woman's ready
to choose and gaze which have been for a while
(24:42):
pulling some people into a place where they felt they
should vote because of cultural issues. And that's important. Some
of that is diminishing in terms of LGBTQ as they
see more of family members, etc. But nonetheless the gun
issue in that. But I am very respectful the fact
that there are some people in the country, some of
(25:05):
them have voted that way, that are concerned.
Speaker 1 (25:07):
About the future.
Speaker 2 (25:10):
They don't They're uncertain about globalization, they're concerned about innovation,
They're concerned about immigration. They are seeing everything that diminishes
their prospects immigration the least. But that's not how they
see it. Immigration, innovation, and globalization. They have to see
a larger picture about how they do benefit from that.
(25:32):
But if they see a factory leaving down the road,
they have a legitimate concern. I think what Joe Biden
has done and masterfully. I give him so much credit
for it is he all of the bills that we've passed,
whether we started with the Rescue Package, the First Bill,
the Infrastructure Bill, the Chips and Science Act, the Packed
(25:56):
Act for Our Veterans, and the IRA the Inflation Reduction Act,
all of those bills have a justice element in them
that more people will participate. They'll be a funding for
education for stem so people can be involved. That people
understand that this Infrastructure Bill and some of the others
(26:18):
have real jobs. You don't even need to go to
college for there about making a good living and if
you decide to go to college after, that's up to
you and good for you. But you don't have to
be able to sustain a lovely lifestyle and a retirement.
(26:38):
And I don't think those bills have been put out enough.
And that's part of what my shall we say interest
is in this campaign is to make sure people understand
what is in it for them at their kitchen table.
Joe Biden, fifteen million jobs, the other guy, the worst
(27:00):
job record since Herbert Hoover. Okay, and these people are
voting for fifteen million jobs, wages rising, unemployment down, the
list goes on of things that have affected people at
that table that they may not be fully aware of.
Speaker 1 (27:16):
Something is clearly being lost in translation.
Speaker 2 (27:19):
Well it is, but again they inoculate, They go out
there with guns and gay blah blah blah blah blah,
and so it's harder to get the message across. But
we have to do it, and that's what campaigns are about,
and that's what we will do, and in doing so,
to make sure everybody understands the legacy of Joe Biden
as president, one of the most consequential presidents in our
(27:42):
country's history when it comes to all of the issues,
whether it's jobs or pensions, whether it's education or environmental
protection for children to have clean air, clean water to drink,
and safer neighborhoods with gun violence legislation, but we all
all of it. We have to do more. Elections are
(28:02):
not about what you have done. It's about the future.
So when we go out there, we have to make
sure that people see the contrast for the future for
their kitchen table, not the boardroom table, not the cabinet table.
Their kitchen table needs. Whether it's about how democracy affects,
Democrats are about freedom, freedom of a woman to choose families,
(28:25):
to choose the size, timing or if they have a family,
about LGBTQ, but choosing who you love rather than somebody
in Washington, d C.
Speaker 1 (28:33):
Doing that for you in your state.
Speaker 2 (28:35):
Capital issues that relate to the job opportunities sixteen million
jobs versus worst record since Herbert Hoover and they're voting
for him. Well, we have to make sure that people understand.
Now there's inflation and the cost of living, and that's global.
(28:55):
It's been contained the most in the US, but people
have to know, and they blame that on President Biden. Well,
they blame it on whoever's in power at the time.
But many of these things go back in terms of
chain of command. But you know what, that's the way
it is. You get the credit, you get the blame
if you have the office, and it's no use. We
(29:16):
don't agonize. We organize to win the election and not say, oh, bony,
they thought this.
Speaker 1 (29:21):
No.
Speaker 2 (29:23):
I respect the goodness of the American people and the
fairness of the American people in a calm, respectful way.
I think Carmo House will do that beautifully. We have
to take a quick break, got to pay the bills.
We'll be back right after this.
Speaker 1 (29:49):
We're back with more of my conversation with former Speaker
of the House Nancy Pelosi. I want to ask you
about the current political situation and the time we have left.
I know that, but it also is connected with your book.
You talk about the Trump family and basically saying that
(30:09):
there should have been an intervention by the family. You right,
a former President Trump's family and staff truly understood his
disregard both for the fundamentals of the law and for
basic rules, and if they had reckoned with his personal
instability over not winning the election, they should have staged
an intervention. But with all due respect, Speaker Pelosi, when
(30:33):
I read that, I wondered, couldn't the same thing be
said about President Biden. Should people have earlier determined that
perhaps he didn't have the physical stamina to endure a
re election campaign and put the Democratic Party in a
(30:54):
better position for this election.
Speaker 2 (30:56):
Well, with all due respect, again, you're making an equivalence
here that doesn't exist. Whether you think their stamina to
run again and serve for four years is quite different
whether you're undermining our democracy in the office that you hold.
And that's what Donald Trump was doing. And this was
about his harm, his harm to the country, and his
(31:20):
instability that he was bringing to it and the anti
patriotic attitude he had. It wasn't about whether he was
healthy enough to do this or that by physical health.
It was what it was happening in his distortion of
the facts and how he was misrepresenting to the public.
(31:40):
Two completely different situations. And when it came, it's just
a question of does somebody have the stamina, say, for
four years, we have addressed that, they haven't.
Speaker 1 (31:52):
Let's talk about how it was addressed, though, should there
have been more transparency. Even if these two things are
not equivalent. Well they're not equivalent, so why they're not equivalent.
But that doesn't answer the question of whether there should
have been more transparency, if if President Biden was too
(32:13):
protected and kept from the public for too long, and
that it put the Democratic Party at a disadvantage given
the election is less than one hundred days away. Well
he's not the candidate. No, but I'm not the kendidate.
Speaker 2 (32:34):
Up until up until ben he had an enormously successful
NATO summit, the seventy fifth anniversary of NATO in Washington,
d C. They produced great policy statements and the rest
very unified. A newly expanded NATO under his leadership, strengthened
(32:55):
and expanded, with two new countries, Finland and Sweden coming
into the country. Unified in terms of the fight in Ukraine.
As was stated by them, he has now just a
matter of days ago, affected a virtuoso performance in bringing
(33:16):
home the prisoners.
Speaker 1 (33:17):
It was a very.
Speaker 2 (33:18):
Complicated deal, involving many countries willing to surrender prisoners in
order for us to get our prisoners out and other
prisoners out. It was masterful. So he has been functioning
a plus. Whether he would do that for another four
years is a different story. But in the presence we
(33:40):
haven't lost anything with his service, whereas with that other guy,
we were getting our democracy shrunken and diminished and our
freedoms diminished. And you're like, well, why is this happening?
How could he be standing up there and saying, if
you beat up the press, I'll pay your bills.
Speaker 1 (34:00):
Is that a normal thing to say? Does that seem normal? No?
Speaker 2 (34:04):
I don't think it does. But I don't think it's
the equivalent of somebody saying somebody didn't do well in
the debate and whatever the family decisions were. Now, I
work with him quite a bit. I never saw that
because I work with them usually earlier in the day,
when he was more in charge than I saw that night.
I saw it that night with the first I saw it.
(34:26):
So I don't subscribe to any of these Democrats or
this or that in terms of violence the Democrats, or
this or that. In terms of holding people accountable. He's
not running. The other guy is running.
Speaker 1 (34:40):
Let's talk about Kamala Harris's candidacy. It seems that it's
off to a very good start. What are you most
worried about between now and election day.
Speaker 2 (34:51):
Well, as I say, we don't agonize, we organize, and
I wanted to just make sure that we have our
three ms, our mobilization at the grassroots level, which is
owning the ground, to make sure whatever persuasion we have accomplished,
we're getting out the vote, own the ground as mobilization
(35:11):
messaging the boldest, most progressive message, non menacing, though not
to be tattooed with some minority view that people have
that they like to see the party go in that's
not our consensus, but of our consensus. So mobilization fueled
by a message of hope and for the future, and
(35:32):
then the money to get that done. Obviously, she's raising
money at the grassroots level a million people and many
of them knew small donors adding to the coffers to
mobilize with a message that is again unifying for our country.
So if we have that in place, I think that
(35:53):
we will do well. But none of it matters as
much as the candidate. What is the vision of the
candidate for our What are the values that that person
brings to the table. What is the empathy that she
has in our heart for the American people, What is
the commitment to the values of our founders for our democracy,
(36:14):
the gratitude to our men and women in uniform for
fighting for our freedom, and the aspirations of our children
as we go forward. I feel very confident that Kamala
will be able to convey that. You see, they don't
want to talk about kitchen table issues because they're about
the boardroom table, not the kitchen table. So they're questioning
(36:35):
her race and this or that, which just shows you
the bankruptcy of their ideas.
Speaker 1 (36:42):
What do you think she should be looking for in
terms of a vice president that can be up to her?
Speaker 2 (36:48):
I think the most what do you think what is
the most important thing is who can be serve as
vice president and be a source of judgment, knowledge again
vision values her for our country when she's president of
the United States, it'd be important for her to have
somebody who could help win the election because we must
(37:09):
win the election. Everything is at stake, our democracy has
everything is at stake with that guy the other one.
But the most important thing is that's over and above
the most important thing. Who can be a great vice
president for our country? And again, somebody that could serve
down the road, or if necessary.
Speaker 1 (37:31):
Is it important that person be from a swing state
for example?
Speaker 2 (37:35):
That's almost incidental to what is the purpose of the
vice president. My view is that all six of the
candidates that we've heard about, I don't know if there
are others, are great. I love them all. Any one
of them would be a great vice president. She has
a rich field of talent to choose from, and so
(37:59):
some may be helpful one place and more helpful another,
even if they're not a swing state. They may be
helpful in swing states because of what they bring to
the table.
Speaker 1 (38:09):
But they're all.
Speaker 2 (38:10):
I've worked with all of them. I have great respect
for all of them. Any one of them would be
a great vice president. And that's really my experience with
presidents has been that's the value that they want to
know who they can live with very effectively for America.
Speaker 1 (38:28):
Some of it is about chemistry, too, don't you think, well,
that's to mean who does she have the comfort level
to trust, the judgment, you know, with speak shorthand to
each other so that you have an understanding about how
you go forward. No, I think chemistry is important, But again,
vision values, empathy, knowledge, and judgment, or part of it
(38:55):
and that's part of the chemistry. I think you give
it that name.
Speaker 2 (39:00):
I think she has she knows the job, she's been
in the job, she knows the job, so that gives
her an advantage in making an evaluation.
Speaker 1 (39:11):
But they're all great.
Speaker 2 (39:12):
I couldn't make an argument for any one of them
and just say I don't understand why I can't be
this one. I don't understand why I can't be that one,
because they're all great, and I've worked with each of them,
so I know pretty well what they bring to the table.
Speaker 1 (39:26):
I want to in the way I started with your
extraordinary life and career. You know, I'm sixty seven. I
say I'm on the back nine. My husband says I'm
on the fourteenth hole, which I really don't appreciate. You're
a few years older than I am, more than a few,
(39:47):
and you know, these days, I do think about my
own mortality and what I've contributed. I hope I've done
something good in the world. And I'm just curious when
you think about your legacy, Speaker Pelosi, what do you
think about what do you hope it will be?
Speaker 2 (40:05):
Well, I don't think about it too much, but I
think about yours and I think that young women around
the country for a while now have looked to you
with enjoyment, pride, confidence that they might be able to
do something similar because you have shared your personal experiences
(40:27):
in a very generous, great generosity of spirit. So thank
you for that. That's why I'm here with you today
as a respect that we all have for you. From
my standpoint, I just want women to know their power
to be ready for whatever opportunity comes along, and when
it does, to be themselves because there's no one like
them in the world. And I give them the same
(40:49):
advice that Lindy gave me. She gave it to me
because I said, I have three important titles in the
Democratic Party. I should probably give one up, She said, Darling,
no man would ever make that statement. Know your power
and use it, which I did, and here I am.
Speaker 1 (41:06):
Well, thank you so much, Speaker Pelosi. I wasn't fishing
for compliments. I wanted to say that because you're wonderful.
You know, you're just really a remarkable person. And we
all think about legacy and the rest, but it's really
important to know how young women are, not even young
young going into fel They may come out of the
(41:28):
kitchen or the nursery or wherever it is to be
in the public arena, and they've got to see the
respect that you command. Maybe they could do that. Well,
that's why I believe representation is so critically important. I've
been watching the Olympics and I've been seeing all these
(41:49):
extraordinary female athletes and now there are as many women
as men in these Olympics for the first time, and
I think, and then I see little girls on the
balance beam in their living rooms, and I think, this
is why it matters. Because it sounds trite, but they say,
if you can't see it, you can't be it, and
(42:11):
I really think that's true. That's why we need people
in visible leadership positions coming from the whole spectrum spectrum
of America, different from rural places, different socioeconomic levels. We
need to see everyone so everyone can see themselves and
those people, well, you know.
Speaker 2 (42:34):
One of the things I want to say to you
now is that's what Joe Biden was all about. When
we did the infrastructure bill. He had forty percent justice
piece in there, so that the outreach would be that
everyone could participate job wise, but not only that, equity wise,
could have ownership of some of the opportunities that were there,
but also that there would be training for it as well,
(42:57):
so that people see a whole different avenue. Same thing
with the Chips and Science Act. The Chips Act was
what it was, but the Science Act was was a
STEM we in California called steams science, technology, engineering, the
arts and mathematics. But we have the arts in there too,
(43:18):
But the STEM in this in this bill to reach
out so that women and people of color and the
rest who might not have been drawn into this are
and there's so much talent out there un exploited. I
don't like to use that word, but untapped, untapped, and
(43:40):
so that he has that in each of the bills
was to make sure. And he would say to me
all the time, what are the workers thinking? Is it
getting to the workers? What are the workers thinking? Not
for political reasons, but for the effectiveness of the legislation,
Because it's one thing to pass a bill, have it
signed into law. It's a big deal, but the execution
(44:01):
of it is really important.
Speaker 1 (44:03):
And he did both.
Speaker 2 (44:04):
He helped pass and execute things that are making it
really different. Used to be, people would have a highway
come through their neighborhood, and divide it. That's not what
this is about. It's about how we unify neighborhood. Then
let's listen to people about how they would see it,
and what are the job opportunities for them? When you
(44:25):
make those decisions, you make job opportunities one way or another.
Speaker 1 (44:30):
What advice would you give to Kamala Harris to convey
that to the American people? And what do you think
are going to be the most important issues of this campaign?
Speaker 2 (44:40):
Well, but I'd always say the same thing to women.
Be yourself. You know, don't go out there and just
you're the vice president of the United States. You have
had opportunity beyond description in that role. You know the challenges,
(45:02):
you know the possibilities. Everything is an opportunity. So take
your priorities out there. Be yourself. I keep coming back
to that, be yourself. And she's a great communicator. She
knows what is at stake. In a larger sense, I
don't want any of us. This is not for her.
(45:25):
It's for all of us to be talking about what
are the important issues. I come right back to the
kitchen table when people ask me, we're the most important issue?
Speaker 1 (45:35):
Our children?
Speaker 2 (45:35):
Our children, our children, their health, their education, the economic
security of their families, safe neighborhoods in which they can thrive,
including safety from gun violence, and a world at peace
in which they can reach their thrive and reach their fulfillment.
But we come right down to that kitchen table. Some
(45:56):
of those issues are democracy issues too. To choose to
have a family, right to choose who you love, right
to choose the field you might want to be in.
Speaker 1 (46:07):
That might not sound as.
Speaker 2 (46:11):
Shall we say, prestigious, as some might want you to pursue,
but it's your choice and we want you to have
that opportunity, whether it's in whether it's in technology or vocation,
occasionally whatever it happens to be. And that's what our
country is about. And so when you're dressing innovation or globalization,
(46:35):
legitimate concerns that people have and we have to respect that.
And some of them don't understand, well, they understand what
it means to them, So it's not to disrespect their
understanding of it, but we have to make it clearer
to them what this means to them and the issues
they care about have to be addressed. That's right, Well,
(46:56):
they have our address, So we did that for two years.
That's why I'm praising Joe Biden so much, and I
want his legacy to be protected. A far different agenda
than the proposition of Project to twenty five, which the
President says, I don't even know those people.
Speaker 1 (47:09):
No.
Speaker 2 (47:10):
One of them was his Office of Management and Budget.
One was his personnel person Now they worked right in
his office. So again misrepresentation, but he gets away with
it because you tell misrepresentation enough times, people start accepting
a fact and we don't want to go around being
fearmongers saying lookally lied again. No, we're talking about what
(47:30):
we bring to the table. I feel very confident about
the election, especially now. The enthusiasm is great, and that's
the energy that runs a campaign. So and Kamal is
just to be great, and we're all awaiting who the
vice president will be. I keep thinking it might happen
(47:51):
right when we're sitting here.
Speaker 1 (47:52):
Wouldn't that be great? And we did have breaking news
and get your reaction that speaker. We were sort of
hoping for that too, But I don't think it's going
to happen. I think if you hear all that until tomorrow.
Thank you so much for your time, Thanks for listening everyone.
(48:15):
If you have a question for me, a subject you
want us to cover, or you want to share your
thoughts about how you navigate this crazy world reach out.
You can leave a short message at six oh nine
five P one two five five oh five, or you
can send me a DM on Instagram. I would love
to hear from you. Next Question is a production of
(48:36):
iHeartMedia and Katie Kuric Media. The executive producers are Me,
Katie Kuric, and Courtney Ltz. Our supervising producer is Ryan Martz,
and our producers are Adriana Fazzio and Meredith Barnes. Julian
Weller composed our theme music. For more information about today's episode,
(48:56):
or to sign up for my newsletter, wake Up Call,
go to the description in the podcast app, or visit
us at Katiecuric dot com. You can also find me
on Instagram and all my social media channels. For more
podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or
wherever you listen to your favorite shows.
Hi, everyone. I'm Kitty Kuric, and this is next question.
It's not often I get to talk to Speaker of
the House, Nancy Pelosi in the library of my New
York apartment, So I can't tell you how appreciative I am,
Madam Speaker, that you made the time to come and
talk to me about your new book, Measure and a
(00:24):
book in your library I know, and it's called The
Art of Power, my story. As America's first woman Speaker
of the House. You have had such a fascinating life,
as you say, going from housewife to house member to
House speaker. But that's not really the story you chose
to tell in this book, is it.
Speaker 2 (00:44):
Well, that is another book, and it is. This book
is about a decision I made years ago that I
wanted to write about at least four decisions or rooms
where it happened, whether domestically Affordable Care Act and the TARP,
the Wall Street meltdown, and globally the war in Iraq,
(01:06):
which I opposed, and our relationship with China. Just telling
the story as I saw it. But that was a
while ago. I couldn't write it until I was no
longer Speaker because I don't have the time. So when
I did, then it was like, well, you have to
say something about Trump, and you have to say something
about January sixth, and you have to say something about
(01:27):
what happened to your husband. So it has some more
current things there, but the point was to write about
what happened in those four important decisions for our country.
There's another book. This is not a memoir. There's another
book that'll talk about some things that have happened around
now and again with more personalities, and that this is
(01:52):
more policy policy. It is a lot about making these
critical decisions, the role of leader, the use of power.
And I know that you write that your friend Louisiana
Congresswoman Lyndy Boggs told you early on in your political career,
know thy power and use it. How hard was it
(02:15):
as a woman, because you're such a pioneer to actually
embrace that power and use it? Was that something you
had to really learn how to do. No, it's something
I had to decide to do. It was I keep
saying when you reach When I became speaker, I knew
I had to do the job in a very particular
(02:39):
way in terms of the use of power, the diversity
that I wanted to bring to it, not just me,
but so many other people the understanding I wanted people
to have about power being from consensus, come from listening,
from respect, not from above, but from the people that
(03:00):
have to make the votes for it, And so you
build them as much consensus as possible, not recognizing that
you're not always going to have unanimity.
Speaker 1 (03:09):
How hard was that though, for you as a woman,
as a young woman, as someone who was in the minority,
who wasn't being taken as seriously, perhaps as you think
you should have been, and as you should have been.
Speaker 2 (03:22):
Yeah, well, that's that other people's problem.
Speaker 1 (03:25):
That's not my problem.
Speaker 2 (03:26):
You don't take me seriously, that's to your peril, because
we're here to get a job done. When I first
went to Congress, there were twenty three women out of
four hundred and thirty five members.
Speaker 1 (03:40):
Is that appalling?
Speaker 2 (03:41):
And so I immediately knew that we had to make
a change, and that made a decision to elect more women,
more democratic women, of course, but more women to Congress.
We now have ninety four when from twelve to ninety four.
Still want more, but the republics have gone from eleven
to thirty something, which is good. But they still need
(04:02):
more as well. But so it wasn't when I say
there were twenty three it was a novelty. It was
a novelty.
Speaker 1 (04:10):
It wasn't.
Speaker 2 (04:11):
It was a rarity too, And so people didn't men
didn't feel so threatened by that. Then as our numbers
grew and grew, they wondered.
Speaker 1 (04:21):
And what's going on here? What's going on here?
Speaker 2 (04:23):
And if we ever wore the same color one day
and solidarity for whatever diagnosis there was or whatever was
going on, they'd be like, what are they up to now?
Or if we other gathered in their well just to
share a thought, what are they up to now? And
then when I ran for leadership, it was poor babies
who said she could run.
Speaker 1 (04:44):
You write about that, and it was so frustrating you
say that a lot of the men really tried to
diminish you and your skills and insist on a pecking
order and a timeline, like wait your turn, little lady.
But you had a great response to them, didn't you.
Speaker 2 (05:02):
Well, they said, you know, some of our people, I've
been waiting a long time for a physician to open up.
And I said, well, wait a minute, we've been waiting
over two hundred years, So don't talk to us about
a timeline. But I I said to them, don't vote
for me because I'm a woman, but don't vote against
me because I'm a woman. I wasn't putting myself out there.
We need a woman in leadership. I wanted to win.
(05:25):
I wanted to prevail for the Democrats. I thought that
was really important. I take great pride in being a Democrat.
And we were losing each election ninety four, ninety six,
ninety eight. So in two thousand I asserted myself politically,
and in California that night we went from twenty six
Democrats and twenty six Republicans to thirty one Democrats twenty
(05:49):
one Republicans, and then they started to take notes. But
I didn't get elected Speaker because of anything other than
the fact that I won the majority. And that was
That's how you got a speaker, you win the majority.
Speaker 1 (06:05):
I asked a friend of mine what he would like
to ask you, Speaker Pelosi, and he said, please ask
her why she never ran for Presido. And so Ralph Esposito,
my friend, this question is for you. Why haven't you
or why didn't you? Well, first of all, I came
to Congress. I ran the first time when I was
(06:26):
forty six years old. That's down the path politically. I hey,
I'm a legislator. I loved legislating, and being Speaker of
the House is the second most important position. I mean,
this vice president is person in line to become president.
But in terms of power, the awesome power of the
(06:46):
speakership is, in my view, on a par not all
a part with the president. He has other responsibilities. But
for what I cared about, making a difference in people's
lives through legislation and the use of power to do
so is about again respect, listening, learning from members, building consensus.
(07:08):
It's hard because you're talking about policy and you with it.
You have to have a vision as to what your
goal is. You have to have a knowledge of the
issues and judgment about how to prioritize. You have to
have strategy as to how you're going to bring people together.
And that's a big undertaking, and so you don't have
(07:31):
time to think about any other office but the one
you're in. For the first time. In this book, you
talk extensively about the brutal attack on your husband, Paul.
It's been almost two years. I can only imagine how
horrifying that was.
Speaker 2 (07:49):
It was horrifying, and it continues to be. We're hoping
about the time it is two years, the end of October,
that pop we call them pop will be more fully covered.
He's on his way, he's about eighty percent. No, it
was beyond shocking that someone would come into our home
and seek me out, not find me, but assault my
(08:15):
husband in that way, and really a centimeter, as the
doctor said on trial, from his being a fatal attacking
his brain. But it is it's not to enlarge the issue.
It's not just about us. It's about the exposure that
anyone in the political arena has if you speak out,
(08:36):
and the rest, and we have to turn that down
in terms of what that man was saying when he
was going through our house and the rest and what
was said, it's very similar to what was said on
January sixth, what was going through the House of Representatives
in the United States, Senate.
Speaker 1 (08:53):
I want to talk to you about the political climate
in a moment, but I saw your husband at the
kend Center Honors shortly, not too long after this had happened,
and he had a bandage on his head, and I
believe he was wearing a fedora, and he was in
good spirits. That was an unusual thing.
Speaker 2 (09:14):
In other words, he does still go to some things,
but he has to prioritize and not stay too long.
But he loves the Kennedy Center Honors. He was able
to go that year, but not the next year. So
how is he doing? You said, eighty percent? What are
some of the challenges he still facing?
Speaker 1 (09:32):
Me one who has any kind of a brain traumatic
brain injury, right, and.
Speaker 2 (09:36):
It's concussion and all that kind of thing. It's about
having dizzney spells, which means you can fall and have
other injuries. It's about being again fainting with the Disney spells.
Things like that. If we go to an event now,
even in a friend's home, pretty soon after a few minutes,
(09:58):
he'll be sitting down, not stand up a long time.
Speaker 1 (10:01):
You know.
Speaker 2 (10:02):
So and that's all doable, No, you know, people are
suffering so many worse things.
Speaker 1 (10:08):
And still it's so unnecessary and so infuriating that this
happened to him.
Speaker 2 (10:14):
Well in our own home, which is to make our
home a crime scene, to come through, break in, find
his way into the bed, our bedroom. Imagine where's Nancy,
Where's Nancy and that. And what was really sad about it, Katie,
was that people on the other side of the eye
(10:35):
were making a joke of it. And you wonder, what
is it about these people that they think it's funny
that someone is assaulted in that way, and not only someone,
but our system is assaulted. Other families are fearing, why
should I go into this if this is one of
the consequence could be one of the consequences. They made
(10:55):
jokes of it, people laughed, They got all this feedback
on the social media, and that's just not right for
our country. How do you explain that? It was so infuriating?
You know, after President Trump's failed assassination attempt, you condemn
political violence and no uncertain terms, and.
Speaker 1 (11:19):
I thought he survived, Oh my god. And after this
happened to your husband, people were making jokes. They were
mischaracterizing this situation, lying, yes, lying about the situation, including
the president's own son and high ranking people. I mean,
(11:41):
it's just gross, isn't it. It's gross?
Speaker 2 (11:44):
But you have to remember this is follows the context
of the current former president, current candidate for president again,
I don't like using his name, saying to the mobs
in his events. If you beat up the press, don't
worry about it. I'll pay for your lawyers. I'll pay
(12:04):
your legal fees. Well, what is that, If you beat
up the press, I will pay your legal fees. We're
talking about freedom of the press, which is the guardian
of our democracy, of our freedom, of all of the
First Amendment rights. You know, the press is about transparency
and the rest. So I consider it the most important
(12:25):
of them. And if you beat them up, I will
pay your legal fees. And then we saw what happened
in Charlottesville, with all the violence that happened there. Oh,
there are good people on both sides of that. The
President's the then president said, and of course culminating on
January sixth. January sixth, an insurrection incited by the President
(12:48):
of the United States. It was horrible, and now he
tries to distance himself from it. But he refused to
send the National Guard, his Secretary of Defense, Secretary of
the Army, that's the chain of command for that. They
refused to send it. And now they're lying about it too.
But it's really a sad situation. Let's know, you'se even
(13:12):
talking about. All we have to do is win the election.
And hope that the Republicans will take back their party.
It's really turned into a cult to a thug in
my view, and this is more of a situation where
the Grand Old Party did great things for our country,
provided great leaders in our country, and whether we disagreed
on some policy matters, we're all patriots and respected each
(13:35):
other in that way. That's not the case with this guy.
So if they would take back their party, it's up
to them to decide what that party is, of course,
but it shouldn't be what we're seeing now.
Speaker 1 (13:50):
We'll be back with more of my conversation about Speaker
Pelosi and her new book right after this. You want
to get smarter every morning with a breakdown of the
news and fascinating takes on health and wellness and pop culture.
Sign up for our daily newsletter, Wake Up Call by
going to Katiecuric dot com. We're back with more of
(14:17):
my conversation with former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi.
What do you make of people who have now minimized
the threat of bodily harm and the damage that was
done on January sixth, Madam Speaker, I mean, what do
you make of that and the fact that former President
(14:39):
Trump says he will pardon the insurrectionists.
Speaker 2 (14:43):
Well, first, and what happened that day was horrible. It
would assault, of course on the Capitol, the beautiful capital,
which is an emblem of a temple of democracy to
the world, under the dome that Lincoln built during the
Civil War. During the Civil War, people said, don't continue.
The dome saved the steal and the manpower for the
(15:04):
war Civil war, and he said, no, I have to
show that we are resilient, and they completed the dome.
And these people came in with Confederate flags under the dome,
even a Nazifi under Lincoln's dome.
Speaker 1 (15:17):
So that was.
Speaker 2 (15:19):
Horrible optically to the world that it was an assault
on our constitution, which was more significant because this is
when the day we are supposed to ratify, certify the election,
a peaceful transfer of power of the results of the
electoral College for the president. Appalling. But that's why they
(15:42):
came that day to prevent that from happening. This just
wasn't any day of the week. It was the day
that we were required to do that, and we did.
And then the third was of course an assault on Congress,
an assault on Congress which had the responsibility to do that.
But physically the Senate chamber, the House chamber, seeking the
(16:05):
President of the Senate, who's the vice president of the
United States, with the gallows, you know, a horrible situation,
seeking out the speaker of the House on our side,
I'm going to bullet in the head and all that.
So Congress, the Capital, the Constitution all assaulted that day,
(16:27):
intentionally that day because of the day it meant. Thank god,
the vice president honored his responsibilities as vice president according
to the Constitution. But what's sad about it is, following
all the damage and defecation and danger of all of it,
(16:47):
we go back in. They said, oh, we'll just have
to do it and undisclosed because no, we're going to
We're going to the Capital.
Speaker 1 (16:53):
We're going to the floor.
Speaker 2 (16:54):
And Chuck and and Mitch we all agree that would
be the course, the three of us, and so we
went back. But when we went back, overwhelmingly the Republicans,
including their leadership, voted not to accept the results of
the electoral College. It was so saddening to see them
walk away from that. So when you ask what do
(17:17):
you think of these people? What do you think of
Mitch McConnell. If you read his speech that day or
even up until the thirteenth of February when we were
impeaching the president for this and McCarthy and the things
they said that day, and then what they ended up doing,
(17:37):
just walking away from their remarks and now supporting him
for president.
Speaker 1 (17:41):
Why do you think they had a change of heart.
Speaker 2 (17:45):
I don't pay too much value of whether about Kevin,
but in terms of Mitch, he's a serious person in
the Congress of the United States. I feel very sorry
for him. I don't know how he lives with his decision,
but that's his decision.
Speaker 1 (18:00):
Are you concerned that after this upcoming election that if
President Trump loses, Hi'll refuse to accept the results. Oh? Sure,
I mean he is irresponsible. I don't know what he
will do, But is there a plan if that happens?
You plan on our side? Yeah?
Speaker 2 (18:17):
Well, everybody knows what he's capable of. Who would have
thought the lack of patriotism, the lack of interest in
a peaceful transfer of power, abandonment a fact and truth.
I mean, this was a very irresponsible thing for him
to do, and to encourage people to follow him, his toadies,
his enablers in the Congress and in other parts of
(18:38):
the country. When we brought the case for our accepting
the electoral college results, it was based on most of
these states had Republican leadership in the positions of authority
to approve these plans, mostly Republican that we were quoting
(18:59):
in terms of the integrity of the vote. So now
everybody knows what to expect of him, and that's a
different story.
Speaker 1 (19:10):
But an insurrection.
Speaker 2 (19:12):
Incited by the president of the United States was not
something anybody could expect.
Speaker 1 (19:17):
I know that this is a plea for decency, a
return to decency in some ways. Do you think that
both sides are contributing to the current lack of civility?
To put it mildly, and why do you think it's
gotten so bad. I've covered politics a long time. You've
(19:37):
been in politics probably for as long as I've covered them,
and I think people have said, it's just never been
like this. What do you think the root casts?
Speaker 2 (19:48):
First of all, let me disagree with that stipulation that
you put forth that both sides are responsible.
Speaker 1 (19:53):
No, I'm asking if you think, oh, oh yeah, I'm
not saying they are. I'm asking if you believe that's
I think.
Speaker 2 (20:00):
I don't see any of our people saying to their supporters,
beat up the press and we will pay your legal fees.
I don't think I see our people saying in Charlottesville
there are good people on both sides. That equivalence that
some have put forth is so wrong. And also when
they say there's dysfunction, there's not a dysfunction. It's obstruction.
(20:23):
Obstruction on the part of the Republicans who do not
believe in science, do not believe in governance. And if
you don't believe, if science tells you we have to
take care of children because this is how their brands developed,
and you don't believe in any initiatives to address that
because you don't believe in governance, then we have a disagreement.
(20:44):
Same thing with the planet, and the list goes on.
So we have a major policy disagreement, and that's legitimate.
Since the beginning of our country, we've had those disagreements.
But that doesn't mean that if you're anti governance of
that you're going to take it down. You take it,
(21:05):
you want to minimize it, you want to change the
balance between federal and state and all that. That's legitimate debate,
but not to take it down as they try to
do on January sixth, So I do not in any way.
See now, I have been a victim of everybody, well,
the far left, the far right, everybody, as far as
(21:26):
I'm concerned. But on the left it's mostly policy. At
largely it is always policy disagreement. They don't want I
don't go far enough here and go far enough there.
Speaker 1 (21:37):
Yeah, okay.
Speaker 2 (21:38):
But on the other side, I've been a victim of
the Republicans for twenty years I was leader or speaker.
They had me like a devil in flames, an animal
with horns, cloven feet, all the rest of that. And
really contribute it to the atmosphere in which my husband
(21:58):
was attacked.
Speaker 1 (22:00):
Where do you think that comes from? That rage against
you specifically? Do you think it's misogyny? What do you
think is behind that? I think it's a bankruptcy of
ideas on their part. They don't have anything to suggest,
because what are they for. They'refore tax breaks for the rich.
Speaker 2 (22:18):
The only thing they did when he was president and
they had the majority was a tax bill that gave
eighty three percent of the benefits to the top one percent,
top one percent, adding two trillion with the T not
a B or an M, two trillion dollars to the
national debt, and then saying well, we can't do this
(22:39):
for the children because it will add to the national debt.
So they don't have an agenda that has popular appeal
if people understand it, So that do they have to
do the politics of personal destruction or attack. And that's
what they did. And of course I'm very proud to
represent San Francisco. In fact, when I gave up my
leader ship Roles, I said, don't worry about me. Nothing
(23:03):
makes me prouder than to step onto the floor to
say I speak for the people of San Francisco. They
like to say, oh san Francisco, Yeah, san Francisco values,
the song of Saint Francis. Make me a channel of
thy piece. Or there's darkness, May we bring white hatred, love, despair, hope.
The list goes on. So but I think it's their
(23:26):
anti governance attitude, they're anti science attitude, and they don't
want en rich people don't some rich people don't want
to pay taxes, so they fund this bankruptcy of this
lack of ideas with personal attacks.
Speaker 1 (23:41):
Let me ask you about that, because the Democrats have
been losing white working class voters for some time and
they seem to be gravitating toward Donald Trump. Why do
you think that's happened and why do you think that
they feel? Many Trump's supporters feel that he cares more
(24:03):
about them than the Democrats do.
Speaker 2 (24:06):
Well, because he's a good snake oil salesman. That's why
you have to give him credit. He gets out there
and sells a bill of goods. But what does he
do give a tax break to the top one percent.
He doesn't care about those people, but he gives them
the impression they do.
Speaker 1 (24:21):
But I do.
Speaker 2 (24:22):
I'm respectful of the American people. I do think there
are some people who have concerns about well, some of
them are just want to discriminate and we'll never get them,
and we're not. Our appeal is not to them. Are
There's some cultural issues Gun's God being a woman's ready
to choose and gaze which have been for a while
(24:42):
pulling some people into a place where they felt they
should vote because of cultural issues. And that's important. Some
of that is diminishing in terms of LGBTQ as they
see more of family members, etc. But nonetheless the gun
issue in that. But I am very respectful the fact
that there are some people in the country, some of
(25:05):
them have voted that way, that are concerned.
Speaker 1 (25:07):
About the future.
Speaker 2 (25:10):
They don't They're uncertain about globalization, they're concerned about innovation,
They're concerned about immigration. They are seeing everything that diminishes
their prospects immigration the least. But that's not how they
see it. Immigration, innovation, and globalization. They have to see
a larger picture about how they do benefit from that.
(25:32):
But if they see a factory leaving down the road,
they have a legitimate concern. I think what Joe Biden
has done and masterfully. I give him so much credit
for it is he all of the bills that we've passed,
whether we started with the Rescue Package, the First Bill,
the Infrastructure Bill, the Chips and Science Act, the Packed
(25:56):
Act for Our Veterans, and the IRA the Inflation Reduction Act,
all of those bills have a justice element in them
that more people will participate. They'll be a funding for
education for stem so people can be involved. That people
understand that this Infrastructure Bill and some of the others
(26:18):
have real jobs. You don't even need to go to
college for there about making a good living and if
you decide to go to college after, that's up to
you and good for you. But you don't have to
be able to sustain a lovely lifestyle and a retirement.
(26:38):
And I don't think those bills have been put out enough.
And that's part of what my shall we say interest
is in this campaign is to make sure people understand
what is in it for them at their kitchen table.
Joe Biden, fifteen million jobs, the other guy, the worst
(27:00):
job record since Herbert Hoover. Okay, and these people are
voting for fifteen million jobs, wages rising, unemployment down, the
list goes on of things that have affected people at
that table that they may not be fully aware of.
Speaker 1 (27:16):
Something is clearly being lost in translation.
Speaker 2 (27:19):
Well it is, but again they inoculate, They go out
there with guns and gay blah blah blah blah blah,
and so it's harder to get the message across. But
we have to do it, and that's what campaigns are about,
and that's what we will do, and in doing so,
to make sure everybody understands the legacy of Joe Biden
as president, one of the most consequential presidents in our
(27:42):
country's history when it comes to all of the issues,
whether it's jobs or pensions, whether it's education or environmental
protection for children to have clean air, clean water to drink,
and safer neighborhoods with gun violence legislation, but we all
all of it. We have to do more. Elections are
(28:02):
not about what you have done. It's about the future.
So when we go out there, we have to make
sure that people see the contrast for the future for
their kitchen table, not the boardroom table, not the cabinet table.
Their kitchen table needs. Whether it's about how democracy affects,
Democrats are about freedom, freedom of a woman to choose families,
(28:25):
to choose the size, timing or if they have a family,
about LGBTQ, but choosing who you love rather than somebody
in Washington, d C.
Speaker 1 (28:33):
Doing that for you in your state.
Speaker 2 (28:35):
Capital issues that relate to the job opportunities sixteen million
jobs versus worst record since Herbert Hoover and they're voting
for him. Well, we have to make sure that people understand.
Now there's inflation and the cost of living, and that's global.
(28:55):
It's been contained the most in the US, but people
have to know, and they blame that on President Biden. Well,
they blame it on whoever's in power at the time.
But many of these things go back in terms of
chain of command. But you know what, that's the way
it is. You get the credit, you get the blame
if you have the office, and it's no use. We
(29:16):
don't agonize. We organize to win the election and not say, oh, bony,
they thought this.
Speaker 1 (29:21):
No.
Speaker 2 (29:23):
I respect the goodness of the American people and the
fairness of the American people in a calm, respectful way.
I think Carmo House will do that beautifully. We have
to take a quick break, got to pay the bills.
We'll be back right after this.
Speaker 1 (29:49):
We're back with more of my conversation with former Speaker
of the House Nancy Pelosi. I want to ask you
about the current political situation and the time we have left.
I know that, but it also is connected with your book.
You talk about the Trump family and basically saying that
(30:09):
there should have been an intervention by the family. You right,
a former President Trump's family and staff truly understood his
disregard both for the fundamentals of the law and for
basic rules, and if they had reckoned with his personal
instability over not winning the election, they should have staged
an intervention. But with all due respect, Speaker Pelosi, when
(30:33):
I read that, I wondered, couldn't the same thing be
said about President Biden. Should people have earlier determined that
perhaps he didn't have the physical stamina to endure a
re election campaign and put the Democratic Party in a
(30:54):
better position for this election.
Speaker 2 (30:56):
Well, with all due respect, again, you're making an equivalence
here that doesn't exist. Whether you think their stamina to
run again and serve for four years is quite different
whether you're undermining our democracy in the office that you hold.
And that's what Donald Trump was doing. And this was
about his harm, his harm to the country, and his
(31:20):
instability that he was bringing to it and the anti
patriotic attitude he had. It wasn't about whether he was
healthy enough to do this or that by physical health.
It was what it was happening in his distortion of
the facts and how he was misrepresenting to the public.
(31:40):
Two completely different situations. And when it came, it's just
a question of does somebody have the stamina, say, for
four years, we have addressed that, they haven't.
Speaker 1 (31:52):
Let's talk about how it was addressed, though, should there
have been more transparency. Even if these two things are
not equivalent. Well they're not equivalent, so why they're not equivalent.
But that doesn't answer the question of whether there should
have been more transparency, if if President Biden was too
(32:13):
protected and kept from the public for too long, and
that it put the Democratic Party at a disadvantage given
the election is less than one hundred days away. Well
he's not the candidate. No, but I'm not the kendidate.
Speaker 2 (32:34):
Up until up until ben he had an enormously successful
NATO summit, the seventy fifth anniversary of NATO in Washington,
d C. They produced great policy statements and the rest
very unified. A newly expanded NATO under his leadership, strengthened
(32:55):
and expanded, with two new countries, Finland and Sweden coming
into the country. Unified in terms of the fight in Ukraine.
As was stated by them, he has now just a
matter of days ago, affected a virtuoso performance in bringing
(33:16):
home the prisoners.
Speaker 1 (33:17):
It was a very.
Speaker 2 (33:18):
Complicated deal, involving many countries willing to surrender prisoners in
order for us to get our prisoners out and other
prisoners out. It was masterful. So he has been functioning
a plus. Whether he would do that for another four
years is a different story. But in the presence we
(33:40):
haven't lost anything with his service, whereas with that other guy,
we were getting our democracy shrunken and diminished and our
freedoms diminished. And you're like, well, why is this happening?
How could he be standing up there and saying, if
you beat up the press, I'll pay your bills.
Speaker 1 (34:00):
Is that a normal thing to say? Does that seem normal? No?
Speaker 2 (34:04):
I don't think it does. But I don't think it's
the equivalent of somebody saying somebody didn't do well in
the debate and whatever the family decisions were. Now, I
work with him quite a bit. I never saw that
because I work with them usually earlier in the day,
when he was more in charge than I saw that night.
I saw it that night with the first I saw it.
(34:26):
So I don't subscribe to any of these Democrats or
this or that in terms of violence the Democrats, or
this or that. In terms of holding people accountable. He's
not running. The other guy is running.
Speaker 1 (34:40):
Let's talk about Kamala Harris's candidacy. It seems that it's
off to a very good start. What are you most
worried about between now and election day.
Speaker 2 (34:51):
Well, as I say, we don't agonize, we organize, and
I wanted to just make sure that we have our
three ms, our mobilization at the grassroots level, which is
owning the ground, to make sure whatever persuasion we have accomplished,
we're getting out the vote, own the ground as mobilization
(35:11):
messaging the boldest, most progressive message, non menacing, though not
to be tattooed with some minority view that people have
that they like to see the party go in that's
not our consensus, but of our consensus. So mobilization fueled
by a message of hope and for the future, and
(35:32):
then the money to get that done. Obviously, she's raising
money at the grassroots level a million people and many
of them knew small donors adding to the coffers to
mobilize with a message that is again unifying for our country.
So if we have that in place, I think that
(35:53):
we will do well. But none of it matters as
much as the candidate. What is the vision of the
candidate for our What are the values that that person
brings to the table. What is the empathy that she
has in our heart for the American people, What is
the commitment to the values of our founders for our democracy,
(36:14):
the gratitude to our men and women in uniform for
fighting for our freedom, and the aspirations of our children
as we go forward. I feel very confident that Kamala
will be able to convey that. You see, they don't
want to talk about kitchen table issues because they're about
the boardroom table, not the kitchen table. So they're questioning
(36:35):
her race and this or that, which just shows you
the bankruptcy of their ideas.
Speaker 1 (36:42):
What do you think she should be looking for in
terms of a vice president that can be up to her?
Speaker 2 (36:48):
I think the most what do you think what is
the most important thing is who can be serve as
vice president and be a source of judgment, knowledge again
vision values her for our country when she's president of
the United States, it'd be important for her to have
somebody who could help win the election because we must
(37:09):
win the election. Everything is at stake, our democracy has
everything is at stake with that guy the other one.
But the most important thing is that's over and above
the most important thing. Who can be a great vice
president for our country? And again, somebody that could serve
down the road, or if necessary.
Speaker 1 (37:31):
Is it important that person be from a swing state
for example?
Speaker 2 (37:35):
That's almost incidental to what is the purpose of the
vice president. My view is that all six of the
candidates that we've heard about, I don't know if there
are others, are great. I love them all. Any one
of them would be a great vice president. She has
a rich field of talent to choose from, and so
(37:59):
some may be helpful one place and more helpful another,
even if they're not a swing state. They may be
helpful in swing states because of what they bring to
the table.
Speaker 1 (38:09):
But they're all.
Speaker 2 (38:10):
I've worked with all of them. I have great respect
for all of them. Any one of them would be
a great vice president. And that's really my experience with
presidents has been that's the value that they want to
know who they can live with very effectively for America.
Speaker 1 (38:28):
Some of it is about chemistry, too, don't you think, well,
that's to mean who does she have the comfort level
to trust, the judgment, you know, with speak shorthand to
each other so that you have an understanding about how
you go forward. No, I think chemistry is important, But again,
vision values, empathy, knowledge, and judgment, or part of it
(38:55):
and that's part of the chemistry. I think you give
it that name.
Speaker 2 (39:00):
I think she has she knows the job, she's been
in the job, she knows the job, so that gives
her an advantage in making an evaluation.
Speaker 1 (39:11):
But they're all great.
Speaker 2 (39:12):
I couldn't make an argument for any one of them
and just say I don't understand why I can't be
this one. I don't understand why I can't be that one,
because they're all great, and I've worked with each of them,
so I know pretty well what they bring to the table.
Speaker 1 (39:26):
I want to in the way I started with your
extraordinary life and career. You know, I'm sixty seven. I
say I'm on the back nine. My husband says I'm
on the fourteenth hole, which I really don't appreciate. You're
a few years older than I am, more than a few,
(39:47):
and you know, these days, I do think about my
own mortality and what I've contributed. I hope I've done
something good in the world. And I'm just curious when
you think about your legacy, Speaker Pelosi, what do you
think about what do you hope it will be?
Speaker 2 (40:05):
Well, I don't think about it too much, but I
think about yours and I think that young women around
the country for a while now have looked to you
with enjoyment, pride, confidence that they might be able to
do something similar because you have shared your personal experiences
(40:27):
in a very generous, great generosity of spirit. So thank
you for that. That's why I'm here with you today
as a respect that we all have for you. From
my standpoint, I just want women to know their power
to be ready for whatever opportunity comes along, and when
it does, to be themselves because there's no one like
them in the world. And I give them the same
(40:49):
advice that Lindy gave me. She gave it to me
because I said, I have three important titles in the
Democratic Party. I should probably give one up, She said, Darling,
no man would ever make that statement. Know your power
and use it, which I did, and here I am.
Speaker 1 (41:06):
Well, thank you so much, Speaker Pelosi. I wasn't fishing
for compliments. I wanted to say that because you're wonderful.
You know, you're just really a remarkable person. And we
all think about legacy and the rest, but it's really
important to know how young women are, not even young
young going into fel They may come out of the
(41:28):
kitchen or the nursery or wherever it is to be
in the public arena, and they've got to see the
respect that you command. Maybe they could do that. Well,
that's why I believe representation is so critically important. I've
been watching the Olympics and I've been seeing all these
(41:49):
extraordinary female athletes and now there are as many women
as men in these Olympics for the first time, and
I think, and then I see little girls on the
balance beam in their living rooms, and I think, this
is why it matters. Because it sounds trite, but they say,
if you can't see it, you can't be it, and
(42:11):
I really think that's true. That's why we need people
in visible leadership positions coming from the whole spectrum spectrum
of America, different from rural places, different socioeconomic levels. We
need to see everyone so everyone can see themselves and
those people, well, you know.
Speaker 2 (42:34):
One of the things I want to say to you
now is that's what Joe Biden was all about. When
we did the infrastructure bill. He had forty percent justice
piece in there, so that the outreach would be that
everyone could participate job wise, but not only that, equity wise,
could have ownership of some of the opportunities that were there,
but also that there would be training for it as well,
(42:57):
so that people see a whole different avenue. Same thing
with the Chips and Science Act. The Chips Act was
what it was, but the Science Act was was a
STEM we in California called steams science, technology, engineering, the
arts and mathematics. But we have the arts in there too,
(43:18):
But the STEM in this in this bill to reach
out so that women and people of color and the
rest who might not have been drawn into this are
and there's so much talent out there un exploited. I
don't like to use that word, but untapped, untapped, and
(43:40):
so that he has that in each of the bills
was to make sure. And he would say to me
all the time, what are the workers thinking? Is it
getting to the workers? What are the workers thinking? Not
for political reasons, but for the effectiveness of the legislation,
Because it's one thing to pass a bill, have it
signed into law. It's a big deal, but the execution
(44:01):
of it is really important.
Speaker 1 (44:03):
And he did both.
Speaker 2 (44:04):
He helped pass and execute things that are making it
really different. Used to be, people would have a highway
come through their neighborhood, and divide it. That's not what
this is about. It's about how we unify neighborhood. Then
let's listen to people about how they would see it,
and what are the job opportunities for them? When you
(44:25):
make those decisions, you make job opportunities one way or another.
Speaker 1 (44:30):
What advice would you give to Kamala Harris to convey
that to the American people? And what do you think
are going to be the most important issues of this campaign?
Speaker 2 (44:40):
Well, but I'd always say the same thing to women.
Be yourself. You know, don't go out there and just
you're the vice president of the United States. You have
had opportunity beyond description in that role. You know the challenges,
(45:02):
you know the possibilities. Everything is an opportunity. So take
your priorities out there. Be yourself. I keep coming back
to that, be yourself. And she's a great communicator. She
knows what is at stake. In a larger sense, I
don't want any of us. This is not for her.
(45:25):
It's for all of us to be talking about what
are the important issues. I come right back to the
kitchen table when people ask me, we're the most important issue?
Speaker 1 (45:35):
Our children?
Speaker 2 (45:35):
Our children, our children, their health, their education, the economic
security of their families, safe neighborhoods in which they can thrive,
including safety from gun violence, and a world at peace
in which they can reach their thrive and reach their fulfillment.
But we come right down to that kitchen table. Some
(45:56):
of those issues are democracy issues too. To choose to
have a family, right to choose who you love, right
to choose the field you might want to be in.
Speaker 1 (46:07):
That might not sound as.
Speaker 2 (46:11):
Shall we say, prestigious, as some might want you to pursue,
but it's your choice and we want you to have
that opportunity, whether it's in whether it's in technology or vocation,
occasionally whatever it happens to be. And that's what our
country is about. And so when you're dressing innovation or globalization,
(46:35):
legitimate concerns that people have and we have to respect that.
And some of them don't understand, well, they understand what
it means to them, So it's not to disrespect their
understanding of it, but we have to make it clearer
to them what this means to them and the issues
they care about have to be addressed. That's right, Well,
(46:56):
they have our address, So we did that for two years.
That's why I'm praising Joe Biden so much, and I
want his legacy to be protected. A far different agenda
than the proposition of Project to twenty five, which the
President says, I don't even know those people.
Speaker 1 (47:09):
No.
Speaker 2 (47:10):
One of them was his Office of Management and Budget.
One was his personnel person Now they worked right in
his office. So again misrepresentation, but he gets away with
it because you tell misrepresentation enough times, people start accepting
a fact and we don't want to go around being
fearmongers saying lookally lied again. No, we're talking about what
(47:30):
we bring to the table. I feel very confident about
the election, especially now. The enthusiasm is great, and that's
the energy that runs a campaign. So and Kamal is
just to be great, and we're all awaiting who the
vice president will be. I keep thinking it might happen
(47:51):
right when we're sitting here.
Speaker 1 (47:52):
Wouldn't that be great? And we did have breaking news
and get your reaction that speaker. We were sort of
hoping for that too, But I don't think it's going
to happen. I think if you hear all that until tomorrow.
Thank you so much for your time, Thanks for listening everyone.
(48:15):
If you have a question for me, a subject you
want us to cover, or you want to share your
thoughts about how you navigate this crazy world reach out.
You can leave a short message at six oh nine
five P one two five five oh five, or you
can send me a DM on Instagram. I would love
to hear from you. Next Question is a production of
(48:36):
iHeartMedia and Katie Kuric Media. The executive producers are Me,
Katie Kuric, and Courtney Ltz. Our supervising producer is Ryan Martz,
and our producers are Adriana Fazzio and Meredith Barnes. Julian
Weller composed our theme music. For more information about today's episode,
(48:56):
or to sign up for my newsletter, wake Up Call,
go to the description in the podcast app, or visit
us at Katiecuric dot com. You can also find me
on Instagram and all my social media channels. For more
podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or
wherever you listen to your favorite shows.
Host
Katie Couric
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.