Preet Bharara:

From Cafe and the Vox Media Podcast Network. Welcome to Stay Tuned. I’m Preet Bharara.

Al Franken:

It’s turnout. Part of it is less persuasion and more getting your people out. That’s why I still, I think democracy is a good way to get our people out as an issue. I think Roe is another.

Preet Bharara:

That’s Al Franken. He served as a U.S. Senator for Minnesota from 2009 to 2018. He currently hosts the Al Franken Podcast and has returned to his comedy roots starring in the one-man standup show called The Only Former U.S. Senator Currently on Tour tour. Franken began his career at Saturday Night Live as one of the original writers when the show launched in 1975. Following decades as an entertainer, Franken became an outspoken advocate for liberal causes and a political humorist lampooning the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Fox News. We discuss the upcoming midterm elections, the value of humor in politics, and if there might be a political comeback in the cards for Franken following his Senate resignation nearly five years ago due to sexual misconduct allegations. That’s coming up. Stay tuned. Now let’s get to your questions.

This question comes in a tweet from Eve who asks, “Kind of rhetorical, but doesn’t Trump and Lindsey Graham’s immediate appeal to SCOTUS make it glaringly apparent that they look at the court as a partisan tool?” Interesting. I think there are a lot of reasons that we’ve been given over the last number of months and maybe the last few years to be concerned that the court has become a partisan tool. Among those bases are the rejection of precedent and it particularly, I think aggressive opinion overturning Roe v. Wade that we’ve talked about a lot on the podcast. Also, Clarence Thomas’s refusal to recuse himself for matters that relate to the insurrection of January 6. There’s some other examples as well. On the other hand, whether it’s Trump or Lindsey Graham, who avails himself the opportunity to take a matter to the Supreme Court as a matter of right, I don’t think that effort on its own and in a vacuum means that they view the court as a partisan tool.

They may view it that way or at least as a source of political power to accomplish things that aren’t able to be accomplished in Congress or legislatively or by the executive branch. Relatedly, we got an email from Kim who says, “Can you help me understand what’s going on with Graham and Thomas? Why did Graham send it to just Thomas and how does Thomas get to make the decision about Graham’s testimony by himself?” That’s an interesting question and not as nefarious as some people are making it out to be, at least not at this point. Obviously we’re talking about the fact that Lindsey Graham, Senator from South Carolina, has been subpoenaed to testify in the ongoing investigation by the grand jury in Fulton County with respect to things that happened in connection with the election there. Graham’s statements and calls that he might have made to figure out what was going on in the election, perhaps arguably to interfere with the election results with their certification.

Graham’s asserting under the Constitution his right under the speech or debate clause not to be questioned someplace outside the Congress. That’s a real privilege, it’s a real constitutional provision and it’s very important. The question is whether or not the conduct engaged in by Lindsey Graham actually is covered by the speech or debate clause I believe. And I think the weight of authority supports the idea that it’s not, that it wasn’t a legislative function and that he can be questioned about it, but this is the issue he’s taken first to the district court, then to the Circuit Court of appeals, and now he’s gone to the Supreme Court. In fact, you may remember I discussed this very issue with Professor Steve Vladeck on an earlier edition of Stay Tuned In Brief. The reason that Thomas has some bearing on this is when a direct appeal of that nature is made to the Supreme Court, every circuit has a Supreme Court justice assigned to it who can make a decision to issue an administrative stay and give the court, the Supreme Court, some time to consider the merits of the question.

What has happened so far here, at least as of this recording on Tuesday, October 25, is that Clarence Thomas has indeed imposed an administrative stay on the Eleventh Circuit and asked the parties to brief the matter and then the entire court will have some time to consider Lindsey Graham’s argument. It’s not a decision on the merits. Clarence Thomas hasn’t put a thumb on the scale in either way. Although it may be true that he should have recused himself from the matter and let some other justice make the decision about the stay, so far we don’t have evidence to say that he’s done something untoward or inappropriate. In fact, you may remember I discussed this very issue with Professor Steve Vladeck on an earlier edition of Stay Tuned In Brief.

This question comes in an email from Christopher, or actually it’s a couple of questions. Christopher asks, “After he is sentenced, could the 1/6 Select Committee subpoena Steve Bannon a second time for the same or different documents and to testify? Then also if he declined, could the committee refer him to DOJ for contempt a second time or would this be double jeopardy?” These are interesting and clever questions Christopher. I think as a general matter, I haven’t researched it in any detail, but I think double jeopardy would clearly be an argument. If it’s the case that Steve Bannon was prosecuted for, convicted of and sense with refusal to cooperate with a subpoena relating to a certain set of documents and a certain kind of testimony after the fact of his conviction to prosecute him again, I think would not be a good use of judicial resources. It would not be in the interest of justice, it wouldn’t be in good faith and wouldn’t be principled.

Remember, in order for a second prosecution to be brought in connection with a subpoena from the 1/6 Committee, the 1/6 Committee would have to go through that process, vote to hold him in contempt, and then make a referral to the Department of Justice. The Department of Justice in its discretion would decide whether or not to prosecute a second time. I can’t imagine a circumstance in which even if some of the documents and some of the testimony that was asked for was slightly different or deviated a little bit from the original request that resulted in the conviction that the Department of Justice would proceed there. He’s gotten a four month sentence. Some people think that’s too much, some people think that’s too light. I think it’s a reasonable sentence and that will stand even though it’s being appealed and a second prosecution I think would be too clever by half and not proper.

This question comes in an email from Jacob who writes, “Maggie Haberman and Company at the Times reported that DOJ is ratcheting up pressure on Trump aids to testify in the Mar-a-Lago case. What does that say to you about the current stage of the investigation?” Some good reporting from New York Times, October 24, in an article entitled Prosecutor’s Pressured Trump Aids to Testify In Documents Case. What does it say to me about the current stage of the investigation? It says it’s pretty advanced. As I’ve said for a number of weeks now, the question will soon be presented to Merrick Garland, whether to go forward with a prosecution against Donald Trump in connection with the documents or not. I don’t know what decision he’ll make. I don’t know every single consideration that there is. I haven’t been in the grand jury myself. I don’t know what exculpatory evidence there may be and equitable considerations not to bring a prosecution, but it seems to be a reasonable case and a decision is going to have to be made one way or another.

The fact that with respect to one or more of these witnesses, Walt Nauta and Kash Patel, that there are attempts to bring them in to testify a second time. We know that Kash Patel was not particularly forthcoming, invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination in the last number of weeks in connection with a grand jury inquiry in the District of Columbia. The fact that they’re hammering away still suggests to me that they’re trying to cross their T’s, dot their I’s and figure out the full state of play, the full landscape before making the fraud decision that I mentioned at the outset. Part of what’s happening here is the DOJ is trying to figure out the best way to get the testimony that is not being voluntarily offered. Sometimes it’s the case that you bring pressure to bear on one or more witnesses and they flip.

Generally speaking, prosecutors both in the DA’s office and other places haven’t had a lot of success in getting people to flip against the former President of the United States. The other option, which I’m sure they’re considering and it’s a fraud option as well, is whether to give one or more witnesses immunity of some sort. Now as the article itself points out, “prosecutors loathe giving witnesses immunity, particularly in high profile cases because it makes it significantly more difficult to prosecute the individual who has received it.” That’s true.

You don’t want to give someone a buy even if they’re lower down in the totem pole if they have culpability and responsibility also. There’s a lot to balance, there’s a lot to consider. There’s a lot of not just legal analysis that needs to be done, but as I’ve often said, psychological analysis that needs to be done. What are the leverage you push? What are the carrots you offer? What are the sticks that you threaten with? The Justice Department is thinking about all of that. But again, going back to your fundamental question, what does it say about the current stage of the investigation? I think it’s quite advanced. I think it’s not as complicated as issues relating to a decision about prosecution over the insurrection of January 6. It’s cleaner, it’s clearer, it’s more cut and dried, it’s more cabined and I think we’ll hear about a decision not too long after the election.

We’ll be right back with my conversation with Al Franken. Al Franken is a former U.S.Senator, Emmy award-winning comedy writer, and author of multiple number one New York Times best selling books. He’s also been on tour starring in a one man standup show that mixes memoir with impressions and good nature jabs at several of his former Senate colleagues. Al Franken, welcome to the show.

Al Franken:

Thanks, Preet.

Preet Bharara:

First time guest.

Al Franken:

That’s right, but not first time listener.

Preet Bharara:

So you listen, I see. I could quiz you, but I won’t.

Al Franken:

Second time listener.

Preet Bharara:

We have a lot to talk about. We are recording this on Tuesday, October 25, two weeks away from the election. Why are the Democrats doing not as well as one might expect and hope? Why are the Democrats losing?

Al Franken:

Right now, we don’t know exactly what’s happening. I’m afraid you may be right, certainly it looked better three weeks ago, but we don’t know. We don’t know then I don’t trust polling. There’s no reason to, but… Oh gosh, there’s just a lot of reasons for that. I don’t think we message great. All our bumper stickers end with continued on next bumper sticker and we’re just not good at it.

Preet Bharara:

Do we repeat enough? Do we say the same thing over and over enough?

Al Franken:

They have simple messages and also tend not to be true. It’s easy from-

Preet Bharara:

It’s a nice combination, short and false.

Al Franken:

They’re very disciplined about that. I do think that we’re… I thought I was very good-

Preet Bharara:

You were.

Al Franken:

…when I was running and when I was in the Senate and I think that you just have to… I just think that they craft messages too much. It’s too much consultants and I just think that people have to speak from the heart and they’re genuine and they care.

Preet Bharara:

Let me give you an example that people have talked about. On the issue of abortion, it would seem to be the case that Democrats have the upper hand because the Dobbs decision reversed Roe and a lot of people care about reproductive rights and there used to be a popular phrase, I don’t know if it was coined by Bill Clinton or Hillary Clinton, but certainly it was around back in the 90s and the message was, abortion should be safe, legal, and rare. There are folks on the left who said, “We shouldn’t be saying rare anymore.” What do you make of that kind of edit to general political opinions that have worked in the past?

Al Franken:

I think safe, legal, and rare is right. What that’s about is teaching contraception, birth control and sex education in high school instead of teaching abstinence only education, which leaves kids ill prepared. There’s other ways to reduce the number of teen pregnancies, that kind of thing, unwanted pregnancies. For example, Universal Pre-K, early childhood education. The studies on that show tremendous return on investment. One of those is that girls who have early childhood education are less likely to get pregnant in adolescence. That’s just one of those things. They’re more likely to graduate from my school, more likely to go to college, more likely to go to… This is boys and girls. Less likely to go to prison, much less likely. Our message should be… We should be talking about… Remember Universal Pre-K was going to be part of Build Back Better and it’s incredibly popular. My frustration-

Preet Bharara:

Your advice to Democrats is that they should be talking about what?

Al Franken:

They should be talking about, today as we record, this is the 20th anniversary of Paul Wilson’s death and Paul said something that I think is what we should be saying all the time, which is, “We all do better when we all do better,” that the country is stronger when there’s a strong middle class and these tremendous gaps in wealth and income, we need to address that. We need to tax very, very high income people more and everyone… The MAGA people in red states, that they actually believe that, too.

Preet Bharara:

I think so. Look, you’re making the argument that we should be talking about as politicians say, kitchen table issues. Isn’t that always true?

Al Franken:

You should talk about kitchen table issues, yes. Always. By the way, of course, of course. Because inflation is a very real, huge issue. I just did a fundraiser for UNITE HERE. Detailer is the head of UNITE HERE. UNITE HERE is the hospitality workers and they do ground game. My Midwest values pack always, we always donate heavily to UNITE HERE. They’re on the ground now in Nevada, in Pennsylvania, and Arizona. They knocked on over 4 million doors in 2020 and they’re on the doors. They’re hearing what people are saying. These hospitality workers, these are the people, culinary workers, people work in stadiums and hotels, those people, and they’re knocking on the doors of people in their economic bracket and they’re hearing what people are saying and it’s all rent and food and gas. Definitely need to address it. But I don’t hear anything the Republicans are saying that addresses it other than-

Preet Bharara:

No, they’re just saying it’s not good. But that’s pretty effective. Doesn’t it work?

Al Franken:

Yeah, it does. They’re doing this crime stuff, which is crazy.

Preet Bharara:

How’s it crazy?

Al Franken:

The ads are crazy. Let me put it that way. My former judiciary counsel, Josh Riley, great, great, great guy, is running in the 19th for Congress. He’s in a dead heat against pub, it’s a very, very purple district in upstate New York. He’s from upstate New York. He grew up there. They ran an ad against him, which starts with some guy cold cocking from other guy in this grainy footage. It’s all cash bail thing.

It’s like, “Josh Riley wants to let his allies…” They always say his allies and then want to “defund the police” and then they run defund the police across the frame over his face. He’s never wanted defund the police. When I was in the Senate, I passed Christ Intervention Training funding for police all over the country. I did it in a bipartisan way. Christ Intervention Training is teaching cops how to recognize when they’re in a situation that’s fueled by mental illness or by drugs and how to deescalate. There was no funding for it. It had expired years ago. I said, “No, we need to do this.” It saves lives and it does. It’s all kinds of good stuff.

Preet Bharara:

You weren’t for defund the police and it sounds like your former counsel wasn’t for defund the police, but there-

Al Franken:

No. I’m sorry, he worked with [inaudible 00:17:09] guy. That’s how you work. That’s how you do something.

Preet Bharara:

I guess what I’m saying is, do you lay any blame at the feet of progressives who did say and chant “defund the police” in a way that’s being used fairly or not against other [inaudible 00:17:23]?

Al Franken:

Yeah, it was idiotic. It was the Minneapolis City Council. It was after George Floyd. They chose that “defund the police”. We couldn’t have… Remember I said our bumper stickers?

Preet Bharara:

Continued on the other side.

Al Franken:

Continued to next bumper sticker? They gave them a bumper sticker, which is “defund the police”, which is ridiculous. It’s “reform the police” do police reform.

Preet Bharara:

Do you think the average Democrat elected official understands the potency of the crime issue?

Al Franken:

I think they’re begin… I hope so. I hope they’re beginning to, but you can argue, here are the crime statistics versus 10, whatever. It’s these ads. These ads, of course, it’s dark money. This gets me in the sunlight I want to talk about if I could.

Preet Bharara:

Please.

Al Franken:

Which is that I worry that… I’ve always worried that we’re going to have a tipping point. We’re going to lose our democracy. What I’ve been thinking about lately is that maybe we had the tipping point, maybe we’re past the tipping point. I was discussing this with Sheldon Whitehouse.

Preet Bharara:

He has a book coming out.

Al Franken:

Who has this book about how they captured the court. I’m reading the book. It’s a very good book. If you go back, Citizens United unleashed all this money. That’s where these ads are from. It’s no longer your campaign running the ads. It’s all these horrible negative ads are just run by these groups that no one knows where the money came from. They’re flooding the airways with these horrible, dishonest ads and they can do it. That’s Citizens United. Then there’s Shelby County, then there’s Merrick Garland and the court, and then Trump.

Preet Bharara:

All right, let’s talk about some of those things.

Al Franken:

Those things combine make me worry. I mean, when you have… How dangerous is it that you have all these secretaries of state candidates in these states who are deniers? It’s really dangerous. How dangerous is this North Carolina court case that’s at the Supreme Court that… What’s it called? The…

Preet Bharara:

Independent State Legislator Doctrine Theory?

Al Franken:

That thing which basically saying this state legislature can’t be overruled by judges on election stuff. That’s simplification of it.

Preet Bharara:

Essentially.

Al Franken:

That’s horribly dangerous, obviously. I just worry that we are descending into a very dangerous reality.

Preet Bharara:

There are two sets of things we’re talking about. I know you care about both of them. I care about both of them. One was this set of issues we were talking about at the outset, kitchen table issues if you will, gas, inflation, and everything else. The other is basically democracy. There’s this crazy poll that I’ve been thinking about and talking about for the last week or two.

Al Franken:

Is this a 70% say they care and only 7% say it’s a-

Preet Bharara:

Yes. Say it’s…. Yes. Just to repeat it for folks, they may have heard me talk about this before.

Al Franken:

You go ahead.

Preet Bharara:

It’s in New York Times Sienna Poll and this just really freaking me out, 71% of respondents in the poll said democracy itself is at risk. But of the people polled, as you point out, only 7% say it’s their top issue.

Al Franken:

Yes.

Preet Bharara:

Can you both as a smart politician and comedian, explain that gap?

Al Franken:

Wow. I’m trying to figure out which smart… How about as a smart comedian?

Preet Bharara:

Sure.

Al Franken:

Man, oh man. I mean, obviously people care about their pocket books, just it’s the economy. Stupid is… Every, just always… Just… That’s every election I guess. Especially when people are just very challenged economically. I guess that’s it.

Preet Bharara:

What’s the advice? Let’s say, you said before, we don’t necessarily have reason to have faith in polls and maybe this is an example of that and maybe we’re making too much of it, but if it’s true and we credit it, what’s the advice to politicians given that discrepancy? Should they spend any time at all talking about the insurrection and talking about democracy?

Al Franken:

I think there’s… Right now we’re two weeks away and there’ll be less when this airs, but it’s turnout. Part of it is less persuasion and more getting your people out. That’s why I still… I think democracy is a good way to get our people out as an issue. I think Roe is another, but we should have been talking about the middle class for… We all do better when we all do better. That philosophy and how to do that. We should have been talking about that all the time for the last couple years, all the time.

Preet Bharara:

Donald Trump is not on the ballot in 2022. Should Democrats be talking about Trump?

Al Franken:

Yeah.

Preet Bharara:

Because that gets out the base and turn out is important for that reason.

Al Franken:

Yeah.

Preet Bharara:

How does talking about Trump you think hit the ears of independence?

Al Franken:

I think that what’s scary about right now is that I don’t know what percentage of Americans support Donald Trump. It might be 30, 35%, something like that.

Preet Bharara:

That sounds right.

Al Franken:

But my fear is that that’s enough.

Preet Bharara:

That’s enough for what?

Al Franken:

That’s enough him to win the next election.

Preet Bharara:

For his people to win in 2022.

Al Franken:

This is what I’m saying, the tipping point may have already happened that I feel like we’re going down a road that’s very, very… It could get very, very ugly. I mean if Trump won, it’s all over. I mean, it’s just all over.

Preet Bharara:

It’s very bad. I’m trying not to try to focus on it.

Al Franken:

I mean, if that happens-

Preet Bharara:

The immediate term. I don’t quite know-

Al Franken:

The immediate term.

Preet Bharara:

I don’t quite know because I have not done what you have done. I have not run for office, I have not served in an elected position. I’m trying to figure out, by talking to smart people like yourself and others, what is the right path for people on the democratic side, given the state of affairs who care about democracy, who are horrified that we had an insurrection in [inaudible 00:23:44] and we almost stopped. People try to stop the peaceful transfer of power for the first time ever. Looking forward to 2024 when it’s going to be a lot worse.

This is an inflection point in the immediate term. I wonder what kinds of lessons… It’s another question to ask you. Suppose it does not go well as a lot of people predict and Democrats lose the House and/or the Senate. Do you think the Democrats will get… Do you think the Democrats will change how they campaign and what issues they talk about and what they propose? Will a lot of Democrats stay home after that because they’ll think, “What’s the…” I mean, I don’t know. How do you think people are going to react if the midterms go bad?

Al Franken:

To me, a lot… I go back to Wellstone. You knew that he meant what he said. That’s what we need from… To win. As far as a communicator, and he’s not much like Wellstone at all, I guess is Buttigieg, which is at least when he is talking, he’s thinking while talking.

Preet Bharara:

Some politicians do that. But if you’re talking about meaning what they… I’m a fan of Mayor Pete, Secretary Pete who’s been on the show, but as far as meaning what they say, whether or not you agree with the policies and the proposals, where do you rank Bernie Sanders on that scale?

Al Franken:

He means what he says. I think he’s right about a tremendous amount of this. I was against single payer in the last race because I think we would’ve lost terribly. My reasoning for that was we won all these purple districts in ’18 and it was because all these people in suburbia and actually America learned what the ACA was when they tried to repeal it and realized, “Oh my God, they want to get rid of the protection if you have preexisting condition, won’t necessarily be protected.” They wanted to get rid of Medicaid expansion. They wanted 23 million people will lose their insurance.

But if you think about those districts, those purple districts or those districts that we converted, those people in suburbia were getting their healthcare through their employer by and large, who was paying, I don’t know, 65, 80% of their healthcare premiums. They liked their insurance. The idea of, we’re going to replace that with single payer where there’s no insurance, there’s no private insurance. Every other developed country has universal healthcare, universal coverage and private insurance. Bernie was saying get rid of all private insurance. We would’ve gotten clobbered. That was one area where I was again, Buttigieg said single payer for everyone who wants it. Which would’ve been-

Preet Bharara:

No, that was to make sense. Bernie is an example of somebody who means what he says, but you don’t always want the thing that he wants.

Al Franken:

That was one thing, but he’s right about so much of the rest. I mean, we need to catch up with the rest of the developed world. I mean, I’d be on the Health Education Labor and Pension Committee and we could have paid family leave. Every other country does that, subsidized childcare.

Preet Bharara:

Why don’t we?

Al Franken:

Because we’re idiots.

Preet Bharara:

We’re all big fat idiots like Rush Limbaugh?

Al Franken:

Let me talk about-

Preet Bharara:

No, but I guess it’s popular. The other countries do it. It seems to go well.

Al Franken:

It’s good policy. Subsidized childcare, let me just give you a statistic. The average European country subsidizes childcare, $7,000 a year per child. We, 500 bucks. I mean it’s crazy.

Preet Bharara:

But the dollar is very strong.

Al Franken:

The pound didn’t sink that load today.

Preet Bharara:

I think Herschel Walker would give that answer in a debate-

Al Franken:

No, he wouldn’t.

Preet Bharara:

… and he would get away with it.

Al Franken:

That’s too-

Preet Bharara:

That’s too clever even for him.

Al Franken:

It’s not what he was told to say. I don’t think he would say that.

Preet Bharara:

We’re going to get into some of the particular races in a moment.

Al Franken:

What I’m saying is people like that. People want childcare and that means they can go work.

Preet Bharara:

Does a Republican base want that and want to pay for that?

Al Franken:

It depends which Republican base you’re talking about.

Preet Bharara:

Twenty percent of them. That would be enough, wouldn’t it?

Al Franken:

Oh God, yeah. Look, the people in these red areas, they’re the ones who rely on this stuff is more than people in… A lot of people rely on this stuff in city, but if you look at where federal money goes, the balance of it, it goes to them. They would like childcare and it would give them flexibility to work. Right now we have a shortage workers as part of inflation. Wages are just going up because we don’t have enough people to work, which is we can get in immigration, we can do other stuff, too. But childcare would so much help, just help that.

Preet Bharara:

Look, in this country we don’t get what the majority wants often. The polls with respect to how many people want universal background checks and closing the gun show loophole to pick a totally different topic, top 70, 80, I think 85%. That doesn’t get done either.

Al Franken:

Again, it has to do with something to do with dark money. It has to do with… I do talk to a number of my former colleagues and Republican colleagues, too. I’m just going, why the hell do we need assault weapons? They’re just afraid. They’re just afraid of their voters. These are obviously in red states.

Preet Bharara:

Somebody might listen to you say that and say, “That’s democracy.”

Al Franken:

It is. I guess.

Preet Bharara:

Representatives are supposed to be-

Al Franken:

No, you shouldn’t be afraid of your voters.

Preet Bharara:

… responsive to the voters.

Al Franken:

Yes and no. Again, I’ll go back to Wellstone. Paul was in a dead heat with Norm Coleman in October 2002 and he had to vote on the Iraq war and he was against the Iraq war and he said to number of his friends, [inaudible 00:30:00] that, “I’m going to vote against it that’ll be the end of my career.” Because a large majority of Minnesotans were for going to war. He voted against it. The next poll had him up by seven. That’s because people respect someone who believes in something.

Preet Bharara:

Now explain Liz Cheney.

Al Franken:

I couldn’t believe that Liz Cheney lost by that much. That is… I think that has to do with maybe things have changed a little since Paul did that in 2002.

Preet Bharara:

A little bit.

Al Franken:

Which is the information universes are so drastically separate and that’s-

Preet Bharara:

You’ve talked about two universes of information. What do you mean by that?

Al Franken:

Two universes of information? It’s exactly that. It’s people get their information from where they choose to get. It’s all divide up. If you go on social media and if Facebook knows that you like to get agitated, that keeps you on, they’ll send you something that’ll further agitate you. If you like right wing MAGA bullshit, they’ll send you that. The idea that Facebook… The algorithms that they have are basically about keeping you on. They know more about you than anybody… Than about you from all the choices you’ve made. That’s what the algorithm does. What will keep this person on the most? The idea that, “Oh, we don’t have any control over this shit,” is bullshit. Then they’re all the other places that people get the information they choose. Part of… You remember I wrote a couple books, Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot and Other Observations.

Preet Bharara:

I do. I have that book.

Al Franken:

Lies and Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right. This is the first one was in ’95, I think and the second one was in 2003. I was basically saying there’s a lot of disinformation being put out there by the right and it’s very dangerous. I don’t know what’s happened to that idea. Then of course you add social media onto that, then you add this segmentation of our population that people are red areas are getting redder, blue areas bluer. It’s part of the danger here because people are just told over and over again, the election was rigged. Trump really won and they believe it.

Preet Bharara:

It’s a catch 22 or conundrum or some other related metaphor. Here’s what I mean by that. It’s craziness. There’s two universes of information. Outlandish lies get told and repeated. I think people of good faith on the other side of the aisle, like you and me and others, want to call it out. we get angry about it because we care about truth and we care about the country and we care about democracy. Here’s what… I don’t know if you remember this guy, Barack Obama said recently, he said, “We joined that game and we spend enormous amounts of time and energy and resources pointing out the last crazy thing Trump said or how rude or some of these Republican candidates behaved. And that’s probably not something that in the minds of most voters overrides their basic interests. Can I pay the rent? What are gas prices? How am I dealing with childcare?” How do we resolve that dilemma of being angry about lies and the lying liars who tell them, to coin a phrase, and also understanding that people care about gas and inflation.

Al Franken:

You could do both.

Preet Bharara:

Really?

Al Franken:

You can.

Preet Bharara:

In the mornings you do one, in the evenings you do the other? Pr you have different spokespeople depending on what their roles are in Congress. You have many times-

Al Franken:

If you’re running for office, you can talk about both.

Preet Bharara:

You think the people should.

Al Franken:

Yeah.

Preet Bharara:

Not ignore the truth.

Al Franken:

I mean, I understand what I would do my ad on, that kind of stuff, but you should be out there talking about this stuff. Look, because there are two universes of information, no matter what you say, the people in the other universe probably aren’t going to hear it. That’s the problem. That’s a big part of the problem.

Preet Bharara:

It is. We’ll be right back with more of my conversation with Al Franken after this. Let’s talk about some particular races in the Senate that people have their eyes on and things may have shifted in the last few weeks. Not clear what’s going to happen, things can shift again. Let’s pick… I want to talk about three of them quickly. Let’s pick one. Let’s pick Mehmet Oz and John Fetterman in Pennsylvania. Do you have a thought about that race and how it’s going?

Al Franken:

As we speak, I’m awaiting the debate tonight.

Preet Bharara:

That will have already happened by the time this airs.

Al Franken:

That’s right. But as we’re speaking, so I think a lot… I can’t imagine the pressure on Fetterman. He’s a genuine guy. Oz is a little bit of a snake oil salesman and doesn’t live in the state and has run a terrible campaign and yet is somewhat close. But I think it’s stayed pretty solid Fetterman up a couple points and that’s bode well considering, especially that we’ve seen the trend we’ve seen. But he still seems to be holding. I didn’t really have my eye that much on that race, so I don’t don’t know McCormick that well, but I know that he was actually, an actual-

Preet Bharara:

Let’s talk about Georgia for a moment. There’s a lot of ink has been spilled in commentary given about the closeness of the race between Herschel Walker and Rafael Warnock. Do you think the magic is gone for Democrats in Georgia?

Al Franken:

It used to be that if you held a gun to your girlfriend’s head, that was disqualifying for the Senate.

Preet Bharara:

Not anymore.

Al Franken:

I have to believe if… That can’t happen, can it? I mean…

Preet Bharara:

I don’t know. I think now anyone can get into any position because they have a backing of a particular wing of what has been known in the past as a Republican party. That’s my view.

Al Franken:

I liked what qualified for exceeding expectations in the debate.

Preet Bharara:

Do you think that some politicians struggle and did you struggle with the dilemma of being positive on the one hand and on the other hand, if your opponent is a maniac or radical in some way going negative to distinguish, how do you think about that balance?

Al Franken:

Yeah, I mean, it depends. Are you talking about in a debate? Are you talking about-

Preet Bharara:

I’m talking about Warnock. The reason I’m thinking of it because we’re talking about Warnock and Herschel Walker and some people said that Rafael Warnock could have been tougher on Walker.

Al Franken:

I think he could have been, but they game that out. That’s the problem. I remember in 2008 when I ran against Coleman, I liked debate prep. I really did. I was eager to debate him. Then in 2014 when I ran for reelection, I hated it.

Preet Bharara:

Why is that?

Al Franken:

Part of it, was I was ahead by so much. It was like-

Preet Bharara:

You’re like, “Why be bothered?”

Al Franken:

I remember the President called me, Obama called me and just a day or two before my first debate and he went like, “How you doing? How’s it going?” I’m like, “I’m ahead, on the ball, but I hate the frigging debate prep.” He goes, “Oh yeah.” He said, “It’s like you’re in a play and you have to learn your lines.” I go, “Yeah.” I just hated that. Now part of it was, my instructions were play error free ball or just don’t… But again, Buttigieg in the… Do you remember the presidential debates in ’20 were just so horrible on the Democratic side we, because we’d had 20 candidates at one point. You’d have 10, and then everyone was given a minute to answer. The consultants would craft a minute 20 answer that they would say as fast as possible. After a minute 10 they would be interrupted. “Your minute’s over,” and then they’d finish the next 10 seconds of it. It was every one of them except Buttigieg and Yang, basically by and large were doing that. I mean, less Bernie maybe. But it was exhausting. You remember how exhausting it was to listen to those?

Preet Bharara:

I remember watching the 2016 Republican debates, and this might make some people annoyed, but I remember because I didn’t think there was any chance that Donald Trump could win so I didn’t think and appreciate the threat that he posed to the country. Not to mention potentially the world. I found him to be comic relief.

Al Franken:

Oh my God.

Preet Bharara:

When he called out the other people on this stage, he was great amount effectiveness in those debates in 2016, putting aside whatever you think about him, otherwise.

Al Franken:

No one else had a chance.

Preet Bharara:

Did you think that at the time, or is that in retrospect?

Al Franken:

I meant in the Republican field. No, I didn’t think it at first. I thought that… I know that they all said, “I won’t go after him. I’ll be the last man standing.” Or, “If I’m weak enough, I’ll go after him like Jindal or something like that. Then I’ll be gone right away because he’ll attack.” But there’s… As a comedian, I wish I remember his name, but he talks about this, who is at the comedy seller. Shoot, I wish I remember his name.

But he does talk about how this was just not fair. He says this… Gosh. He says something, he would just go, “Your wife is ugly.” After these guys would do some public policy then. He would go… You would laugh and you’d go… He was the only one who stood out. Then on top of that were the rallies, which I mean, I talked… During that, I campaigned for Hillary of course. I remember her being with her and Huma backstage or something and she said, “Oh, we watched the Trump rallies all the time because they’re hilarious.” Of course CNN just… Man, if there was a Trump rally, they’d go to it. At MS-

Preet Bharara:

People watched.

Al Franken:

There was no oxygen for anybody,

Preet Bharara:

Including fools like me.

Al Franken:

He is… I’ve never seen the man laugh, Trump.

Preet Bharara:

No, we’ve talked about that. I don’t think anybody has.

Al Franken:

But he makes his audience laugh and he’s like… I’ve compared him to a standup comedian. He’d go up there and riff. He can just talk. You know Jim Gaffigan? Do you know that comedian?

Preet Bharara:

Yeah. I do.

Al Franken:

Do you know Hot Pockets?

Preet Bharara:

Yeah.

Al Franken:

To me, what Trump would go up there and whatever people responded to, he’d keep it and Build the Wall was his Hot Pockets. He just threw it out there, they just went nuts and make Mexico pay for it. That’s how we got that policy. He would just go up there and just riff, which is talent.

Preet Bharara:

He rejects stuff that doesn’t work. Look, we all do that. People who speak for a living, as I do, not as a comedian, but you want to be compelling and entertaining when you speak, even if you’re speaking about something serious, you learn over time the things that work with an audience and the things that don’t. Which is exactly the manner in which comedians build an act.

Al Franken:

But you don’t go up there when you give a speech, Preet, I don’t imagine, and free associate for an hour.

Preet Bharara:

No, I don’t. I usually have some plan. I have a… That’s not been my way of handling any professional…

Al Franken:

Man, Preet was all over the place, but he-

Preet Bharara:

Look, people listen to what he’s saying. I want to do a thought experiment with you because this came up when we were talking amongst ourselves at cafe about you being on the show. I think someone asked the question, “How would Al Franken debate Donald Trump?” Can you do that thought experiment for us? Because I think people underestimate the difficult… Because people think, “Oh, you get someone really smart or someone really funny or someone really sharp, they’re going to wipe the floor with Donald Trump.” But he doesn’t play by normal debate rules. How would you go about that?

Al Franken:

No, you just got to just do… I don’t think fuck you is, it was wrong in a debate with him.

Preet Bharara:

Yeah, you mean literally?

Al Franken:

Literally. At a certain point. I mean, it’s just, you got to go balls out.

Preet Bharara:

Apart from that feeling, any other strategy, Al?

Al Franken:

That’s it. Fuck you. Then I got that… You can… I yield the rest [inaudible 00:42:36].

Preet Bharara:

Short debate, you would definitely come in under the-

Al Franken:

No, but I mean you shouldn’t… Fuck you should be later in the debate after you’ve exhausted some other stuff. But you just got to go like, “Okay, you’re lying.” Then to, “Why?” Then, “No,” and then, “Shut up,” is good. I mean, actually Biden did that. That first debate was pretty disastrous for Trump. I still can’t believe how close the race was in certain ways. I mean, it’s 7 million votes but still.

Preet Bharara:

Last Senate race, I wanted to ask you about, J.D. Vance and Tim Ryan in Ohio.

Al Franken:

I think Ryan has run a very good race. Ohio is a very tough state for us.

Preet Bharara:

Do you think Tim Ryan is a model for how Democrats should be or only in states like Ohio?

Al Franken:

It depends what you mean, a model.

Preet Bharara:

He is kind… He a little bit avoids the cultural wars. He talks like a person who, you said earlier, alluded this. Means what he says.

Al Franken:

All that. Yes.

Preet Bharara:

He’s like… I don’t know. People don’t like the way sometimes you describe folks and how they speak, but he’s a regular guy. He bucks his party sometimes. He speaks about why he does that.

Al Franken:

He’s running a really smart race in Ohio. Boy, I hope he wins that. Boy, is Vance [inaudible 00:43:58]. These people like Vance are really dangerous.

Preet Bharara:

Why is he dangerous? Because he knows better?

Al Franken:

Yeah, because he’s cynical and all the… I mean, these power hungry, cynical people, your Cruz’s, your Hawley’s, they’re scary.

Preet Bharara:

Herschel Walker, less scary.

Al Franken:

Unless you’re his girlfriend.

Preet Bharara:

Boy, can we talk about your beginning time in the Senate before you go?

Al Franken:

Sure.

Preet Bharara:

Tell me if I’m wrong about this. I worked for Senator Schumer for a number of years and I was ending my tenure with him when you began in the Senate, once you were finally seated, you won by how many votes again?

Al Franken:

Three hundred twelve.

Preet Bharara:

Three hundred twelve. It’s a lot. It’s pretty good.

Al Franken:

Clobbered.

Preet Bharara:

It’s more than one.

Al Franken:

It was the narrowest clobbering in history.

Preet Bharara:

I remember among my peer group, everyone was very excited for you to come to the Senate for a lot of reasons. But among them, I had followed your career for a long time and had your books, as I mentioned, long before you became a senator. We were looking forward to using your humor and wit and quickness on the Senate floor and in hearings. But at the outset, I believe you chose not to do that. Not to use what I preceded to be-

Al Franken:

Don’t be funny. That was what my team said.

Preet Bharara:

Super power.

Al Franken:

Don’t be funny.

Preet Bharara:

Explain why they said that and how you feel about that in retrospect.

Al Franken:

I won by 312 votes. I wanted to show the people in Minnesota that I was there to do the job. My team said, “Don’t be funny, don’t be funny.” I said, “Yeah, okay.” I got to put my head.

Preet Bharara:

It’s like your distinguishing superpower, and they said, “Do not use it.”

Al Franken:

Yeah, because I just wanted to establish that I was there to do… Because people thought I was there to be funny or something and I wasn’t.

Preet Bharara:

Right.

Al Franken:

I was there to get stuff done.

Preet Bharara:

I don’t think my friends and I were suggesting,-

Al Franken:

No.

Preet Bharara:

… that you do it as a strategy.

Al Franken:

But I mean, it was stand up strategy.

Preet Bharara:

[inaudible 00:45:48]

Al Franken:

But I also avoided national press. I just did Minnesota Press. I was-

Preet Bharara:

Keep your head down as the new guy.

Al Franken:

And do the work. I passed a bill two weeks in. Remember I was delayed six months from… I had done a lot of USO tours. I was friends with Paul Rykoff, the head of the Iraq and Afghanistan Vets of America. At the inaugural, I went to their dinner or their party and met a veteran in a wheelchair who had a service dog. Long story short, I was amazed by what the service dog could do for him. I spent the six months learning everything I could about service dogs. My first bill, which I did with Johnny Isakson, Republican in Georgia, was to get funding to do a study matching 200 Vets with PTSD with 200 dogs and see what the cost benefits are, et cetera, et cetera. Twenty Vets a day commit suicide. It passed right away.

It was a three year study that took 10 years because VA fucked up many times. But finally, and I was out of the Senate by the time the results came in, cost benefits were unbelievable, the benefits were unbelievable. Now, they passed the PAWS Act, very, very proud of that. I cried when the results finally came in. That’s what I was there for. I was there to do that. I wasn’t there to be funny. Later, after I won very big in ’14, I said to my team, “I can be funny now.”

Preet Bharara:

Your troop said okay?

Al Franken:

Do you remember when Obergefell came out, I wrote the press release that I wanted to put out. I got my communications person and my chief of staff in and I said, “Okay, here’s what I want to say. Senator Al Franken, Democrat of Minnesota, applauded the Supreme Court’s decision in Obergefell today, legalizing the same sex marriage nationwide, but called Justice Antonin Scalia’s dissent ‘very gay’.”

Preet Bharara:

I missed that. I don’t remember that.

Al Franken:

You missed it because they said, “No.” They took it out. I went, “Come on. I just won by over 200,000.” And, “No.”

Preet Bharara:

I enjoyed that.

Al Franken:

My audiences… The Al Franken… I’m on tour and I’ve paused my tour because I just got back surgery, but I’m going to be back. The only former U.S. Senator Currently on Tour tour.

Preet Bharara:

That’s what I understand to be true, but I’m a little surprised, when I asked you the question-

Al Franken:

I tell that story there, so you get to hear that.

Preet Bharara:

Yes. It’s not exclusive for my audience.

Al Franken:

No, but they’ll enjoy it when they see the tour. They’ll go, I heard that on Preet.

Preet Bharara:

Maybe you want to amend your prior answer about the debate. What I thought, one of the things you might say is if it was Al Franken debating Donald Trump, one strategy would be to try to make jokes in a way that everyone laughs at Trump.

Al Franken:

Okay.

Preet Bharara:

Would that be part of the strategy [inaudible 00:49:02]?

Al Franken:

I could say, “Mr. President, I’m going to call you Mr. President because you were the president,” but I think as one of the debate conditions for the debate that I had was a wind machine.

Preet Bharara:

It causes cancer.

Al Franken:

But you rejected that. I don’t know why. I don’t know, I would give him complete shit. But it’s also… He is just the most vile human being in the world. I think that should establish that as well.

Preet Bharara:

But he got elected to the presidency. Do you think most politicians are correct to avoid humor because they screw it up?

Al Franken:

Yes, because they’re not good. Because they’re not funny. You know who’s funny? The funniest, I had to say funniest colleague.

Preet Bharara:

I was going to ask you.

Al Franken:

People hate me when I say this, is Lindsey.

Preet Bharara:

Lindsey Graham.

Al Franken:

Mm-hmm.

Preet Bharara:

Lindsey Graham’s… I know people have a view of him now.

Al Franken:

It’s absurd what he’s done. But I’ll give you a couple… Let’s see. We’re going on this last session before Christmas break, and it goes like… “You’re taking your family anywhere for sun?” I say, “Yeah, actually we’re going to Vieques.” Which is in Puerto Rico. He goes without hesitation, he says, “Do two fundraisers. One for the people for statehood, one for the people who are against statehood. They never talk to each other.” He just had that at the ready. All his jokes really were about how cynical he is. I’m not that surprised how cynical he is. I remember when he was running for president, I was in the Senate bathroom and I say to him, “Lindsey, if I were voting in the Republican primary, I’d vote for you.” He went, “That’s my problem.”

Preet Bharara:

Yeah.

Al Franken:

He’s funny, but Amy gets off one every once in a while.

Preet Bharara:

Klobuchar?

Al Franken:

Yeah. Let’s see…

Preet Bharara:

Was John McCain funny?

Al Franken:

He was funny.

Preet Bharara:

It’s pretty funny, right?

Al Franken:

I’ll tell you a story. After the thumbs down, McCain… I was afraid I wasn’t going to see him. He was going back to Arizona. I was afraid I wasn’t going to see him again because of the brain tumor. I said to him, “John, I’m going to write you a bad news, good news joke every week.” He said, “Okay.” Ron Johnson went back to Wisconsin and said on a Wisconsin radio show. The reason he put the thumbs down was he was addled by his brain cancer. That’s Ron Johnson. My first bad news, good news joke to John was, the bad news is you have brain cancer. The good news is that Ron Johnson’s ass cancer is moved to his mouth.

Preet Bharara:

God.

Al Franken:

John did come back, I did get to see him again. When he came back, he walks in and he sees me across the chamber and he points at me. He goes, “That man earned every dollar he ever made. Not here, but at Saturday Night Live.” He was funny. He was also could be… Had a temper and…

Preet Bharara:

I got to know McCain a little bit when I was in the Senate as a staffer and he had a range of emotional reactions to things. But he was very real. Very real guy.

Al Franken:

Very real.

Preet Bharara:

Loved his country.

Al Franken:

I mean…

Preet Bharara:

I got to ask you, since you mentioned it, is Saturday Night Live still funny?

Al Franken:

I did the first five years of SNL, then I left for five and came back for 10. The first show of the second season, we did a show, I go up to 17 and the phone’s ringing and like an idiot, I answer it. Somebody goes, “The show’s terrible. It’s over.”

Preet Bharara:

Season two.

Al Franken:

We’ve been hearing Saturday Night Dead since the second season. I don’t watch it.

Preet Bharara:

You’re defending the quality of humor in recent years?

Al Franken:

I’m not doing that.

Preet Bharara:

Noted.

Al Franken:

But there’s always sometimes something good. Also, I do feel old when I watch it. Although when we did the show again, those years, I didn’t feel like we did stuff for any generation at all. We were the… I mean, obviously, the first baby boomers to be on TV or to have that. That group and so we had obviously a different sensibility. Also then you have to understand that at that time there were three networks and so everybody was culturally experienced the same stuff. Some-

Preet Bharara:

But even though it’s 2022, there’s really not a lot of comedy competition-

Al Franken:

There’s none.

Preet Bharara:

… at that hour-

Al Franken:

There’s none.

Preet Bharara:

… on Saturday night. I find that interesting.

Al Franken:

There’s none, there’s no other variety sketch show.

Preet Bharara:

Unless you go to-

Al Franken:

… Other than Netflix.

Preet Bharara:

… Netflix.

Al Franken:

There’s a sketch show on a Black women who do sketch comedy on HBO. A good show. But no, I mean, that was a great thing about doing a live show on Saturday night is that something happened that week. We could do it. I wrote a lot of the political satire with other people. Jim Downey, especially who… Jim is a conservative. We always felt it wasn’t our job to be a partisan. We felt it was our job to do well observed satire and to reward people for knowing stuff, but not punish them for not. I feel sometimes it’s the opposite now when I watch.

Preet Bharara:

And make the people laugh.

Al Franken:

Of course, that was-

Preet Bharara:

Make the people laugh. I find myself laughing a little less.

Al Franken:

That’s always, of course, it was a comedy show except during the music, we didn’t want people to laugh. But no, that was the goal, was to be funny. Very proud of those years that I did. Just best… People ask me a lot, what is your favorite memory from SNL years? It would be three in the morning, Wednesday morning when we’re writing the show, read through’s on Wednesday and just rolling on the floor laughing.

Preet Bharara:

You knew had a winner.

Al Franken:

That’s true. That’s part of the joy of it, is like, “Oh, I did my job. This is really funny.” But I’ve worked with so many hilarious, brilliant people in those years. Then the Senate experience was different.

Preet Bharara:

Will you run again?

Al Franken:

I get asked that all the time.

Preet Bharara:

I wasn’t going to ask it because everyone asks you, but then I figured I should ask.

Al Franken:

I could say… I’m keeping my options open, is what I’d say.

Preet Bharara:

That’s a yes.

Al Franken:

No, that’s a keeping my options open. That’s what, it literally means what it says.

Preet Bharara:

When you first left the Senate under those circumstances and if you want to say something about that, feel free.

Al Franken:

I deserve due process.

Preet Bharara:

Do you think that-

Al Franken:

I think it was very… I just…

Preet Bharara:

If you had to do it over again, you would not resign.

Al Franken:

No, but someday I’ll tell the whole story. I was kind of given no choice.

Preet Bharara:

Do you want to come back here and tell the whole story?

Al Franken:

No.

Preet Bharara:

Honesty. But did you think then that you were done with politics? In other words, how recently-

Al Franken:

I was in shock.

Preet Bharara:

Have you-

Al Franken:

In total shock. I couldn’t… Read the Jane Mayer article, which isn’t-

Preet Bharara:

I did. I’ve read it.

Al Franken:

I mean, she was lying. I mean-

Preet Bharara:

Who would you want at primary? Who would you want to run against?

Al Franken:

Who would I want to run against? I don’t know. No, I’d run not to run against someone. I’d run-

Preet Bharara:

For someone.

Al Franken:

… to go back and do the work I was doing and try to get early childhood education and try to get the child tax credit extended and that stuff. That’s what I would… That’s why I would go back.

Preet Bharara:

Those are good reasons. It’s nice to talk to you, sir.

Al Franken:

Great to talk to you.

Preet Bharara:

Maybe you’re not just former Senator Al Franken, but also Future Senator Al Franken. We’ll have to wait and see. Thank you so much for joining us.

Al Franken:

Thanks, Preet.

Preet Bharara:

My conversation with Al Franken continues from members of the Cafe Insider Community. To try out the membership for just $1 for a month, head to cafe.com/insider. Again, that’s cafe.com/insider.

To end the show this week, I want to share with you a story I came across that really struck me. It’s the story of Moyenne Island, a small island in Seychelles, which is an archipelago off of East Africa in the Indian Ocean. As the BBC reported, an Englishman by the name of Brendon Grimshaw purchased Moyenne Island in 1962 while he was on vacation in the area. He was a newspaper editor in Kenya at a time when many East African countries were declaring independence from British colonial control. Sensing the industry would change, he made a career pivot. He dreamed of owning land in the area, and so he bought the island for 8,000 euros, which is about $10,000 at the time. Grimshaw was fearful that in a matter of years, developers would buy the island and turn it into a tourist attraction. So instead, with the help of local friends, Grimshaw set out to clear the island of its weeds and overgrowth and restore the native biodiversity that once inhabited the island before tourists came to the Seychelles.

He was right. According to the BBC article, as tourism on the islands grew in the 1980s, investors saw Grimshaw’s Moyenne as potential for development. He received offers of up to $50 million for the land, the land he had bought for $10,000, but he refused every single time. Grimshaw dedicated his life to Moyenne, to bringing back the trees and the birds and the tortoises and the life that once occupied all of the Seychelles. He moved there permanently in 1972, and over time had water, electricity, and a phone line set up. But he wanted the island to be more than just about him and his goals.

He wanted it to outlive him. So in 2009, he signed an agreement with the Seychelles’ Ministry of Environment to turn Moyenne in into a protected national park. With that agreement, it became the world’s smallest national park at just a quarter of a mile long and under 0.2 miles wide. Quoted in the article that Isabelle Revinia from the Seychelles’ National Parks Authority, she said, “He gave the island back to the country, which was a noble thing to do. Normally, people would try to sell off the island before they die so they can obtain money to do something else. Instead, he did something incredible.”

Sadly, Brendon Grimshaw died in 2012 and was buried on his beloved Moyenne Island. Just like he wanted, the land and its inhabitants live on. They are visited by no more than 300 people over the course of a day, even during peak tourist season. But the land is restored, safe, and protected. Grimshaw’s story shows us how much impact one person can have on the land and on a community. He wasn’t in it for the investment or the money, in fact, just the opposite. In a world with so much greed and destruction, stories like this shine just a little brighter.

That’s it for this episode of Stay Tuned. Thanks again to my guest, Al Franken. If you like what we do, rate and review the show on Apple Podcasts or wherever you listen. Every positive review helps new listeners find the show. Send me your questions about news, politics, and justice. Tweet them to me at Preet Bharara with the hashtag Ask Preet, or you can call and leave me a message at 669-247-7338. That’s 669-24-PREET, or you can send an email to letters@cafe.com. Stay Tuned is presented by Cafe and the Vox Media Podcast Network. The executive producer is Tamara Sepper. The technical director is David Tatasciore. The senior producers are Adam Waller and Matthew Billy. The cafe team is David Kurlander, Sam Ozer-Staton, Noa Azulai, Nat Weiner, Jake Kaplan, Sean Walsh, Namita Shah, and Claudia Hernandez. Our music is by Andrew Dost. I’m your host, Preet Bharara. Stay Tuned.