Sen. Murphy vs. Trump's corruption | Today, Explained

0:00 So, here's the thing about Donald Trump's blatant, sometimes open corruption.

0:04 If it's happening out in front of us,

0:06 if it's largely been accepted by the public and seemingly the courts,

0:11 is it even fair to call it corruption at all?

0:13 That was my first question to Connecticut Senator Chris Murphy at a recent forum

0:18 about corporate monopolies and corruption held

0:20 by the American Economic Liberties Project in Washington D.C.

0:24 That's this week on Today Explained Saturday.

0:33 Let's dig in.

0:36 Thank you to the American Economic Liberties Project.

0:38 Obviously, thank you to Senator Murphy for being here.

0:40 And thank you to you all, too, for being interested in this topic.

0:44 You know, when I think about corruption,

0:46 particularly this bending the knee kind of framework,

0:49 one thing that comes in one thing that immediately

0:52 jumps to mind for me is that, you know,

0:53 when we think about the Trump administration,

0:55 this isn't happening in backroom deals,

0:56 this isn't happening in some secret basement.

0:59 A lot of these things are happening right in front of us.

1:02 So, I guess my first question was, is corruption the right word to even use when

1:06 it's been broadly sanctioned by legal and governmental entities?

1:11 Well, that's a good question to start with.

1:13 I guess I haven't really thought about it.

1:15 I think corruption is still a word that resonates.

1:17 I think people understand that corruption is a bad thing,

1:21 that it is something that we have broadly tried to expunge from our politics.

1:29 And I do think that people generally understand corruption,

1:34 though, to be something that happens quietly, behind closed doors.

1:39 Corruption is something you try to hide.

1:42 And so, I do think the most important piece of this moment, in some ways,

1:47 is trying to understand what to do with the brazen

1:51 public way that Trump is engaging in corruption,

1:54 because but just simply by the very fact that he does it every day,

1:58 that he does it openly,

2:00 publicly, and proudly, it is causing some people to question,

2:04 wait, wait, is this corruption?

2:06 Because this isn't what I learned corruption is.

2:09 There's no shame in this, and generally

2:11 there's supposed to be shame in corruption.

2:13 But I don't necessarily know it means you change the word,

2:16 and I I I I guess as I'm literally just thinking out loud,

2:20 if you change the word, you're kind of um seating to his terms, right?

2:25 He's He's trying to change the very notion of corruption by doing it publicly,

2:29 and so if you call it something different,

2:31 then I I think you're probably playing his game.

2:34 Mhm.

2:34 You know, your corporate pardons Mhm.

2:35 You know, your corporate pardons Mhm.

2:35 You know, your corporate pardons report documents over

2:37 160 companies that have had federal enforcement actions dropped.

2:40 Uh but as we know, corporate influence has

2:42 been true in Washington for a long time.

2:44 You know, how do you think this is a qualitatively different moment

2:48 than the usual pay-to-play or the usual lobbying influence that we've seen?

2:52 Yeah, it's it's just so nakedly transactional right now,

2:57 um and it uh and it's just a really easy story to explain, you know,

3:02 whether it's the donations that Boeing made that got them out of their trouble,

3:08 uh whether it's the Toyota donations,

3:10 whether it's the money that Zell pumped into the administration.

3:13 You know, it now doesn't happen through

3:17 slowly putting money into the political system, slowly building up connections.

3:21 It's literally just a million dollars for a corporate partner.

3:25 And And that now happens, you know, within weeks or months.

3:30 It's put Eric Trump on your board,

3:33 the lawsuit or the enforcement action is dropped, right?

3:35 It's It's just so nakedly quick and transactional, um that it's hard to hide.

3:42 And And again, it's that same problem.

3:45 It's so public, it's so transactional,

3:47 that to some people it doesn't look like they're,

3:50 you know, bread-and-butter corruption,

3:52 but the story is just a lot easier to tell.

3:56 It doesn't make it any any less forgivable.

3:59 Um, the slow, sort of building of influence

4:03 in Democratic and Republican administrations is still unacceptable,

4:07 but in some ways the way they're doing it makes it easy for us to explain.

4:12 What do you think is the impact of that kind of flagrant

4:15 degradation of the process or or just doing it out in the open?

4:18 I mean, we've we've established kind of how different

4:20 this moment feels in that's in your face nature of it.

4:24 Does that have a democracy corroding impact?

4:25 Like, what do you think is the is the consequence

4:28 of it's being in our face in this way?

4:33 Yeah, so I listen, Trump takes over at a moment when

4:37 a lot of Americans were seriously contemplating giving up on democracy, right?

4:41 And while that conversation may not be sort

4:44 of on the surface of kitchen table talks in our country,

4:49 it's right below the surface.

4:51 People just don't think that their voice matters any longer.

4:56 They for a long time have believed that the elites

4:58 get whatever they want out of the system.

5:01 And the way in which Trump has chosen to do this so transparently,

5:06 I think is an effort to permanently shatter people's faith in the entire

5:13 enterprise so as to transition the country to a kleptocratic oligarchy.

5:19 And so yes, I think this is a particularly vulnerable moment for the country

5:24 in which a lot of Americans are are unfortunately ready to just say,

5:30 [ __ ] it.

5:30 Like, this thing doesn't work any longer.

5:33 It now clearly doesn't work, um,

5:36 because we have an elected president who is just stealing from us.

5:40 I'm just going to walk away from the whole enterprise.

5:42 And when people give up, right?

5:45 When people just retreat from public action,

5:48 that's the moment that the oligarchs seize power and never give it up.

5:53 So, yes, I the reason that I have been

5:57 sort of raising the unacceptability of the corruption, right?

6:00 Raising for people the fact that it is abnormal,

6:04 that we should not normalize it, is because I think Trump's core case here is

6:11 in and is it if he is successful in normalizing it,

6:15 it may be the death blow to people's faith in the entire Democratic enterprise.

6:19 Mhm.

6:19 Um as you mentioned, of kind of Mhm.

6:21 Um as you mentioned, of kind of Mhm.

6:21 Um as you mentioned, of kind of explicit examples, Donald Trump Jr.

6:22 is a strategic advisor uh Mark Cuban,

6:25 he's joined the board of another prediction market.

6:28 Uh your Bets Off Act targets prediction

6:30 markets banning bets on government actions, war, assassination.

6:34 But, as we know, um this kind of insider trading isn't

6:37 a uh uh a bug of these kind of things, it's a feature.

6:41 And they you know, these companies have kind of built it into the cost.

6:45 Has the train left the station on these prediction markets?

6:47 Is there a way um to rein them in as your Bets Off Act tries to do?

6:52 No, it definitely hasn't left the station.

6:53 And and and you're right.

6:55 I mean, these these prediction markets are right designed

7:00 uh to make insiders and powerful people filthy rich.

7:03 So, what the Bets Off Act essentially does is say anytime,

7:07 first of all, you can't bet on government action, right?

7:09 Just period, stop, right?

7:11 Nobody should be able to make money off of war or famine.

7:14 You can't bet on government action.

7:16 But, second, you also can't bet on an event when there

7:19 where there is one person who controls and knows the outcome.

7:24 Um because in almost every case where those bets are offered, you know,

7:29 bets as benign as what a celebrity is going

7:31 to say on the Jimmy Fallon show that night,

7:34 the the bet is controlled by a powerful person.

7:39 Meaning, the powerful person and anyone who

7:42 surrounds the powerful person knows the outcome

7:45 of the bet can place wages that they know will make money on the bet.

7:50 It's rigged and only and always rigged in favor of the rich and the powerful.

7:55 So, the prediction market game is really all about

7:59 bets where powerful people know the outcome and can profit.

8:03 And that's why Eric Trump and Donald Trump are, you know,

8:06 deeply integrated into these industries because they

8:09 and their friends are the ones that profit.

8:12 They are the ones very likely that place those bets on Friday before

8:16 the Iran war started that the war was going to start 24 hours later.

8:20 And they see an infinite amount

8:23 of enrichment that comes from these these markets.

8:26 Now, here's where your question is an interesting one, right?

8:30 And I've and I literally got it two or three times yesterday.

8:33 Is it too late?

8:35 Like and of course it's not too late.

8:39 But people I feel like it's baked into the culture, baked into the Yeah,

8:42 but it but it doesn't but but people people

8:44 are beginning to smell how corrupt these markets are.

8:47 Like a lot of people do know what happens with those Iraq war bets.

8:52 And here's where I just think the Democratic

8:54 Party perpetually suffers from lack of imagination, right?

9:00 So, we should say that if you elect us,

9:03 we are going to take all of these corrupt prediction markets down.

9:06 Now, whether we can or not, right?

9:08 That's a question of the politics of the moment,

9:12 but we should promise that we are going

9:14 to eliminate corrupt prediction markets the minute you elect us.

9:17 Just like we should be saying to the broader

9:19 case of the work that this organization does, if Democrats are elected,

9:23 we are going to break up all these big corrupt

9:28 monopolistic media companies that have

9:30 been constructed under Donald Trump's regime.

9:32 We should just say, like, okay, uh Paramount,

9:35 enjoy this while you have it because as soon as we

9:38 get elected we're going to break you into pieces, right?

9:43 And and and people would respond to that boldness of vision when

9:46 it comes to antitrust and I think they would respond to that boldness

9:50 of vision when it comes to the most corrupt new ways

9:54 that people in and around the president

9:56 are profiting like the prediction markets.

9:58 And people would definitely respond.

9:59 I guess my question is there are some form of a conflation

10:02 between the over corruption we were talking about in the beginning

10:05 and something like corporate consolidation or do you see those as kind

10:08 of one in the same when we're talking about these monopolistic media companies?

10:13 Yeah, there it's all part of the same story.

10:16 The only way that Paramount Skydance gets to be as big

10:19 and as corrupt and as manipulative as it is is because of corruption.

10:24 It's because of an underlying deal that is

10:26 done between the Ellison family and the Trump family.

10:30 I mean Hexter literally says it on stage, right?

10:34 I can't wait until my friends, the Ellisons,

10:38 get control of CNN because then you'll stop telling the truth about the war.

10:43 The sooner David Ellison takes over that network the better.

10:47 Like that's literally what he says on stage is

10:50 that I don't like the criticism that we're getting

10:52 but it's cool because pretty soon my buddies will

10:57 be in charge of the of of of the storytelling.

11:00 So, no, it's all it's all part of of of one story.

11:04 And again, back to how you message this.

11:06 Yes, I understand that it's a hard thing to break up that corrupt consolidation.

11:12 Yes, I understand that by the time we get control of things here,

11:16 the prediction markets will be even more mature.

11:19 But by stating what you were going to do, you can actually bend reality, right?

11:26 By by being bold in your in your claims about what you will do with power,

11:32 you actually people are people start signing up for the project.

11:37 Not just people out in the public, but members of Congress,

11:40 right, start signing up for the project the bolder it is.

11:44 So yes, these are hard things to unwind,

11:47 but they become less hard if you state very

11:50 clearly at the outset about what your intentions are.

11:53 To this point, you signed a memo with Senators Schiff, Warren,

11:56 and Smith that argues that Democrats can't run on affordability

11:59 without naming the corporations and the billionaires driving the crisis.

12:02 I guess I wanted to ask about that with the context

12:07 of what the Democratic Party's history has been in mind.

12:09 You know, there's close relationships between the Democratic Party and some

12:13 of these let's say Silicon Valley money or tech money.

12:16 There's close relationships between Democrats and folks in big law.

12:21 Are those relationships an impediment for Democrats doing

12:23 that clear naming and shaming that you're talking about?

12:27 Absolutely.

12:27 I mean like absolutely.

12:28 So we So what did we do last last year?

12:33 We we passed a bill essentially

12:36 green-lighting the massive expansion of the crypto

12:40 industry and corruption inside the crypto industry with Democratic votes, right?

12:45 This the the stablecoin act, the genius act,

12:49 which has like a modicum of consumer protections,

12:53 literally has in it a carve-out from ethics rules for the president

12:59 of the United States to be able to issue his own cryptocurrency.

13:05 Like that's incredible that the Democratic Party signed off

13:09 on a crypto regulatory bill that green-lights Donald Trump's corruption scheme.

13:17 There's no explanation for why we did that other than the integration of parts

13:23 of our party and very powerful people

13:25 in the crypto industry or maybe more charitably,

13:29 our fear that the crypto industry is going to spend a ton of money

13:33 against Democrats in the next election if we don't do what they want.

13:37 But that's, you know, just a slightly more acceptable form of corruption, right?

13:41 Just the the the I'm going to do what you want because

13:43 I fear that there's going to be political consequences in the next election.

13:47 So, yeah, the memo that that um that Adam

13:51 and and Elizabeth and Tina and I sent says very simply,

13:55 you're not going to win over the public unless you tell a story about corporate

14:03 and billionaire corruption because people are smarter

14:08 than a lot of us think they are.

14:09 People understand that the corruption of the economy, right?

14:13 Their stagnation in their economic lives is derivative,

14:18 is downstream of the corruption of our politics.

14:21 Like they get that.

14:21 And if you don't tell that full story,

14:24 the influence that the corporations and the billionaires have

14:27 in our politics and how that has limited your economic opportunities,

14:32 it's your your message is just is just not believable.

14:35 If you just like start with let's let's trim

14:39 the sails of the way that the pharmaceutical companies price drugs.

14:44 It's like you're not telling me the whole story.

14:46 Like the the real story is that we got into this mess

14:48 with prescription drug prices that are so high because our politics is corrupt.

14:54 And the prescription drug companies have way too much control over Washington.

14:58 So, don't just tell me your plan for lowering prescription drug costs.

15:01 Tell me your plan for knocking out

15:04 the prescription drug industry's power in Washington.

15:07 Like I need to know both things.

15:09 Mhm.

15:09 I mean, that that really rings true Mhm.

15:10 I mean, that that really rings true Mhm.

15:11 I mean, that that really rings true from, you know,

15:12 even my some experience on the road.

15:14 I mean, often times uh leading up to 2024,

15:16 things like corporate capture or corporate consolidation

15:19 were things I heard uh even more

15:21 Trump supporters or RFK supporters sometimes talking

15:24 about Uh and not necessarily coming from Democrats.

15:27 What took so long to name this to to name something

15:30 that feels like it's been in the populace air for a while?

15:35 I mean listen, I I I think inside the Democratic

15:39 Party there is an enormous hangover from Barack Obama.

15:46 And and I mean this not And I mean this I'm

15:48 going to do this in a complimentary way to Obama, right?

15:51 So Obama lifted our party, right?

15:53 Into power and we did really important things with him.

15:58 He did not use this frame for the world, right?

16:02 A frame of corporate capture and an agenda of of release from that capture.

16:10 He you know was more technocratic, right?

16:14 More market-based in his reforms.

16:15 And we got away with that as a Democratic Party

16:20 because of the unique talent of Barack Obama as a messenger.

16:24 He was just somebody that we were never going to be reproduce in our party

16:28 as someone who just made folks feel

16:30 better about government because he was in charge.

16:34 And and what it exposed though in in his absence is a lack

16:39 of a narrative that the Democratic Party tells about who has power,

16:44 who doesn't have power and how we're going to fix that.

16:48 And so I do think our reliance on Barack Obama

16:50 is kind of a savior for the party's messaging exposed

16:54 us as not having a coherent underlying message when we

16:59 didn't have a uniquely talented political figure at the top.

17:02 Makes sense.

17:03 Um I'm going to end on a question

17:05 about people's own kind of emotions in this moment.

17:07 I think the scope of Trump's corruption can feel disempowering.

17:10 Uh the administration seems immune to public opinion at many times,

17:14 undeterred by legal and kind of institutional restraints.

17:17 And it feels like, you know,

17:18 we're kind of strapped in the beginning of a roller coaster that, you know,

17:21 you don't know where it ends.

17:23 It It's that true?

17:24 Like, do we have Are constraints coming?

17:27 Is moderation coming?

17:29 Or is it just a matter of like, you know, fingers crossed?

17:33 Yeah, I think it's again, I think it's only coming if the Democratic Party,

17:38 as we head into this election the 2028 election,

17:43 makes the unrigging of our democracy

17:46 a tentpole for our party's messaging, right?

17:48 If it's up to me, our party's message is unrigging the democracy,

17:53 unrigging the economy.

17:55 Kind of period stop, right?

17:56 And and and if you're like signed up for those two projects,

17:59 and and we got to fill out what that means to unrig the democracy,

18:03 it probably means that we're running on a constitutional amendment to get

18:06 dark money and billionaire money and anonymous money completely out of politics,

18:10 but like people are up for that.

18:13 And I guess I'll end here because you are right

18:16 that people are feeling super discouraged and super powerless right now.

18:21 And and so we as a party have to sort

18:25 of start our analysis of what this moment needs,

18:28 you know, through a diagnosis of the way that people are feeling.

18:32 And people are feeling like they have no agency, like they have no control.

18:38 So, both our economic and political messaging has to be

18:42 about returning control to human beings and explaining to them,

18:45 as we've talked about a few times, that that it goes both ways.

18:50 The corruption of our economy is downstream of the corruption of our democracy,

18:56 but also, and I'll try to say this the right way to end,

18:59 the corruption of our democracy is also downstream

19:02 of the corruption of our economy in this way.

19:06 When our economy is an economy that only cares about profit and efficiency,

19:11 it's a virtueless economy.

19:13 It's an economy where morality doesn't matter,

19:16 where the health of workers or the health

19:19 of communities is just irrelevant to economic decision-making.

19:22 It becomes this just winner-take-all economy in which

19:26 the folks who do well just grab it all.

19:30 And we've normalized that because we've normalized the idea that that that sort

19:35 of shared prosperity is not a value any longer in our economy.

19:39 Okay, when that becomes normalized inside our economy,

19:42 it becomes normalized inside our politics, too.

19:45 Our politics becomes winner-take-all politics.

19:49 So, if a CEO is justified in making

19:52 a thousand times more than the average worker

19:55 and using his power as CEO to abuse

19:59 workers in order to enrich himself, and that's okay,

20:03 then why is it wrong for a president

20:07 of the United States to use his power to abuse

20:11 the people under his authority and enrich himself

20:15 maximally in the same way that a CEO would?

20:18 So, when we normalize zero virtue in our economy,

20:24 it's really easy to say, "Well,

20:26 maybe virtue shouldn't matter in our politics, either." And so,

20:29 that's why the project is so big, right?

20:30 They They There's crosscurrents between what has

20:34 happened in our economy affecting our politics,

20:35 what's happened in our politics affecting our economy,

20:38 which is why you're willing this to confront

20:41 this question of corruption in government and in our economy,

20:46 and recognizing how they flow back and forth,

20:48 I just think is so critical and why I was so,

20:51 you know, glad to help kick this off today.

20:52 Well, Senator Murphy, thank you for coming.

20:54 Appreciate it.

20:54 Thank you.

20:59 That was Senator Chris Murphy.

21:01 Every Saturday, we'll be in your video and audio feeds

21:04 with a new and interesting interview in politics or culture.

21:07 And of course, you can catch today

21:09 explained every weekday wherever you get your podcast.

21:12 I'm Ezra Klein and thank you for joining us.

21:14 And I hope you tune in next week

21:16 for the first episode of our new podcast America actually.

21:19 Now, what's the show about?

21:21 It's about who we are beyond Donald Trump.

21:24 He's been defining our politics for more than a decade,

21:26 but we're building to a presidential

21:28 election that should theoretically replace him.

21:30 So, who do we want to be?

21:32 I'm going to start asking those questions and I hope you join me.

21:35 Subscribe so you don't miss a thing at youtube.com/vox.