Transcript

Rahm Emanuel says the U.S. is throwing away global alliances

From NPR · Episode page · Watch on YouTube

· 52 min · 9,506 words · 158 timestamped sections

This is the full, timestamped transcript of "Rahm Emanuel says the U.S. is throwing away global alliances", an episode of NPR published January 22, 2026 (52 min, about 9,506 words). It mentions 4 people, works and ideas, including Zu Jong Xi, World Economic Forum, Ari Emanuel, Zeke Emanuel.

What this episode is about

Rahm Emanuel critiques the current political climate in the U.S., highlighting the degradation of global alliances and domestic institutions, particularly emphasizing the dysfunction within law enforcement and the abandonment of education by both major political parties. He expresses concern over corporate complicity in undermining the rule of law and notes the varying emotions among voters, which include anger from Democrats, discomfort from independents, and feelings of betrayal among MAGA supporters.

Key takeaways

  • America's exporting chaos; political dysfunction isn't just ours anymore—it's a global product with alarming demand.
  • ICE, once a symbol of law, now resembles a rogue militia—who's enforcing the laws when the enforcers become lawless?
  • While both parties abandon core principles, corporate America cashes in—loyalty and lawfulness are the new rare commodities.
  • China's economic woes are spilling over; welcome to the global drama where dysfunction feeds on dysfunction.
  • The illusion of a rules-based order is shattered; nations are now solo acts in a world stage gone rogue.

Who speaks in this episode?

What is discussed, and when

  1. – 5:00: Zu Jong Xi, World Economic Forum, Ari Emanuel
  2. – 25:00: Ari Emanuel, Zeke Emanuel
  3. – 52:26: Ari Emanuel

Notable quotes from "Rahm Emanuel says the U.S. is throwing away global alliances"

  • I think so. Mark Carney just before we sat down here gave a speech at the World Economic Forum in which he effectively said the US-led rules-based economic order is over. That it's always been.
    about World Economic Forum · at
  • Massive overhang of public debt, massive overhang of housing, deflation, the president Xi's decided they're going to export their way out of this. And they're destroying even…
    about Zu Jong Xi · at
  • Ari Emanuel is an entertainment executive which is really not a large enough phrase for everything that he does. Zeke Emanuel is a doctor very instrumental with Obamacare and.
    about Ari Emanuel · at

Who and what is mentioned in this episode?

People

  • Zu Jong Xi — Person · Referenced head of state / geopolitical counterpart · 3 mentions · first at
    Serves as the focal point for Emanuel’s argument that China is exporting economic dysfunction (manufacturing overcapacity, deflation) and coercing other countries, reshaping allied trade and security behavior.
  • Ari Emanuel — Person · Referenced family member (contextual biography) · 5 mentions · first at
    Mentioned to contextualize Rahm Emanuel’s family background and values; used to illustrate how the brothers are processing the political moment.
  • Zeke Emanuel — Person · Referenced family member (policy/medical expert) · 2 mentions · first at
    Mentioned to contextualize Rahm Emanuel’s family and to connect to health policy via his role in the Affordable Care Act ecosystem.
    Executive which is really not a large enough phrase for everything that he does. Zeke Emanuel is a doctor very instrumental with Obamacare and also has a book out and other…

Places & events

  • World Economic Forum — Event · Referenced event · 1 mention · first at
    Referenced in the context of a speech by Mark Carney about the US-led economic order.

Full transcript with timestamps

America today is exporting its political dysfunction. ICE has become a lawless mob rather than a law enforcement agency. What this has morphed to is not what the American people bargain for. Republicans have walked away from public education, abandoned it, and Democrats have abandoned accountability and standards. And both parties are wrong. I think corporate America here uh just I'll say it here is I think they've sold out America. You benefit from a nation built on laws and you're watching from the sideline a nation being destroyed and walking away from the rule of law. There are three distinct emotions in this electorate. Anger among Democrats, uncomfortable and disqued and discomfort among independents. Betrayal among MAGA voters. Rahm Emanuel has been involved at every level of government. He was a Democratic leader in Congress, President Obama's chief of staff, mayor of Chicago, and President Biden's

ambassador to Japan. Now, he's thinking about a run for president, which gives him a platform to promote a particular idea of the Democratic Party. We sat down to talk to him about everything.

Welcome to our studios. Thanks for coming by. Thank you. Um, I want to begin with the prime minister of Canada.

Good. Which is a sentence that has never been said in the beginning of an interesting podcast.

That's where the prime minister wants to begin. I think so. Mark Carney just before we sat down here gave a speech at the World Economic Forum in which he effectively said the US-led rules-based economic order is over. That it's always been partly a lie, but that people benefited. Now it's been exposed as a total lie, and it's done.

Did he use Did he use the ad the word lie? Uh he talked about things being falsehoods. Yes.

Yeah. Well, I mean it probably is a proper followup to we chased him into the arms of President Xi of China,

which was totally unnecessary days ago. Also, it also shows the inconsistency if you wanted to talk about President Trump's policy of having uh this region be our region. You take the country with the largest longest border with the United States and you are shoving them away when they wanted to actually run closer and be uh more aligned. So there's consequences and also an inherent contradiction to the president's own stated policy. I do think um there's two things that I would say that I think are getting lost in all the news and I'll respond to and the speech fits in that.

Okay. America today is exporting its political dysfunction and China under President Xi is exporting their economic dysfunction. Let me unravel that.

Sure. China has a uh is now 40% of the world's or nearly 40% of the world's manufacturing,

right? More than the United States, Europe, and Japan combined. And because their economy is imbalanced, massive overhang of public debt, massive overhang of housing, uh deflation, the president Xi's decided they're going to export their way out of this. And they're destroying even to not just us but other allies of theirs not us industrial base. They're exporting their problems onto the world economy which is why Europe is trying to protect itself. As an example Chile the only re the reason the EU has a anti-coercion plank in their economic toolbox which they refer to as the bazooka. Okay? It was designed to protect Europe post Lithuania getting attacked by China. It's being only deployed or talked about in defense of the United States, but it was originally conceived of because of China.

Oh, meaning that they were preparing for a trade war with China. Instead, they have one with the Unitedia did something with Taiwan and China did a three-year economic coercion. They came up with this tool, an attack on one

economically. You could use an anti-coercion tool, etc. Now they're talking about and the only time they would ever think of deploying it, not to saying they're going to, was because of the United States and mainly because of what the United States is doing, threatening tariffs on EU countries, mainly EU as a whole because of the way we're approaching Greenland. And I don't think Car's uh take um is totally wrong. I'm not sure it's totally right because of the size of the economies, but the order in which we have been a beneficiary um is now fundamentally broken and cannot be repaired. So, it has to be thought a new.

I want to talk that through. Carney is essentially saying the US set up these rules for the global economy and also for human rights and conduct among nations. It was always partly a fiction, he says. I believe he uses the word fiction, but it kind of worked and people But now he says the US has stripped the fiction away. It's a naked power grab or great powers he says are making a naked power grab. So it's done and smaller nations have to defend themselves.

Yeah, you expanded the point. I thought he said only economic. Now I'm hearing also political.

I think it's all in there. Everything is in there. Freedom of the seas, all manner of things. So let me say that the United States while maybe never totally lived up to its idealistic claims, it was more consistent with it even when it did things in violation of that. I think him saying is okay the game is off. The mis the mask has been ripped off. There's actually no even uh fake head faking these aspirations.

You guys aren't even pretending anymore. So smaller nations have to fend for themselves.

Yeah. I mean, this is there is going to be uh damage, a legacy of damage and collateral damage from the United States walking away from uh not just that it constructed this, it constructed an international economic, political and strategic, that's what I'd call NATO and other allies in Europe.

Sure. A whole set of systems that we benefited from when you let me give one example of having been ambassador to ch Japan for the United States.

Yeah. when we deployed export controls against uh the semiconductor industry of China, we had Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Dutch, and the European standing with us. So, we didn't have to do it alone as we saw the president try to do something against China alone and folded like that's where the phrase taco comes from.

Yeah. But because we had allies who were invested with the United States, China used to say we're being isolated and the answer was ding. You're right. But it was isolated because allies stood shoulder-to-shoulder with us. So we were a direct beneficiary when we wanted a strategic objective. We had an army that came and it wasn't just us. And I mean that metaphorically, not economic, etc. But that was an example of having people work with us. And Carney's not wrong. We decided that is a burden on us and we're going to see the price for that. And that price will be more than the American people on a host of issues economic political strategic defense-wise, that the American people aren't ready to bear alone.

Here's the next question, though. You're talking about that system in the past tense, which may well be appropriate, and Carney talked about it in the past tense. Do you believe the next president after President Trump could put that system back again?

I think the biggest damage will be the trust level, which is we could do it with you, but how what's the guarantee it will it will stand the test of time? That's what's being tested in Ukraine. That's what's being tested in Greenland. That's what's being tested on the tariffs. That's what's being tested when the United States, you know, as somebody who was part of this creating the trilateral between the United States, Japan, and Korea, which was the worst nightmare for China. The Korean president and the Japanese prime minister just had a two-day state visit.

Yeah. And the United States was AWOL. Wasn't even invited. That tells you the cost of going alone. And so I don't think it's thrown out, meaning it's over. I understand why the prime minister of Canada would feel that way having just been in Montreal last week. I think being forthright with the our traditional allies, here's the trust we have to build. Both of us have a role to play. I think that's the most important thing you can do. how we construct NATO, how we construct our economic relationships or political coordination in the G7, etc. Roll those out that you can do and kind of reform them. Not just hit a reset button, but reform them to better serve the future.

Reform meaning you would not want everything to go back to just the way it was in 2016.

First of all, you can't wish these four years away no matter how much I want or maybe your audience wants. You can't. So the question is and the biggest damage is going to be to the trust of the American word. You have a president of the United States and I let's deal with Greenland. It's in the news.

Sure. You know I why would you I I said this the other day. Why would you pay full price that for something you can get for free?

Denmark and Europe are saying we will do all of that and I in terms of national security for everything you want

minerals and everything. Let me say this goes back to Truman set up a defense treaty. Why would you want to pay full price for something you can get for free? You're asking the American taxpayers to build this. Second, is this a geostrategic or is this ego strategic?

Because every he says, "Well, I need it psychologically." Well, that may not be true for America.

This is a thing the president said we should know. He said it's psychologically important to me to own it. Now, because of the way the both the stock market, but also the bond market's reacting, American homeowners who want to get a mortgage for their first-time home are going to have to pay more on a mortgage because of the president and the way he's behaving. Pause. Is his strategic vision about Greenland correct? Not wrong. How he's going about doing it is massively d uh dangerous and damaging to America short, medium, and long term. And to me, so you just can't say, "Okay, I'm back. Let's hit reset." You're gonna have to make fundamental reforms, and I would do it together that serve us collectively.

So reset, no, reform, yes. I want to move domestically. There's so much to talk about with you because you've had such a range of experiences in your life. Immigration, there's a lot of focus on Minnesota right now.

Uh, and the other day on television, you said you wanted to quote, "End ICE as you know it today."

As we know it. as we know it today. Uh, some people will hear that and think you meant abolish ICE. Did you mean that?

No, as we know it today. That couldn't have been I think clearer. Uh, I'm inviting you to be clear now.

Well, that will be a test. We'll see if I can pass it. Okay. No, but I has become a lawless mob rather than a law enforcement agency.

It serves a role, but not trying to be an occupying force in our cities. Taking a US citizen out of a school, grabbing people who are filing their immigration papers at the courthouse, which means we're they understand that the rules and this is the law is lawless. Wearing masks without identity, no body cams, there's a lot of reforms. And I'll tell you, not just for immigration. As a former mayor of a big city, you have a national pro crisis one day, a terrorist act. I've seen it both as a mayor and and also as a chief of staff to a president.

Yeah. The trust between a national security entity, whether it's ICE and any other entity, local law enforcement, and the public, is essential to responding to a crisis. You're destroying that trust. And so I say, and ICE as we know it, because it's not become it's not a law enforcement entity anymore. It's become a lawless mob. And you can see the action. And the American people agree with this conclusion. what they're doing is creating lawlessness and disorder. So how it's functioning and the way it's lacking both oversight is ended as that is and the Congress is going to improve the appropriation with some changes here. But another point and illustrating of this example, no police chief of any city of size would ever allow a young man who 6 months ago got 33 stitches on having served

back on the street given all the other both physical, mental, and emotional scars.

You're referring to the agent who shot Renee Mlin. Yes. And so to me, it has lacks supervision. It lacks purpose. It lacks focus. And it is serving for a political goal, not a law enforcement goal.

Well, let's talk about So that's what I said. Yeah. And that's what I meant by end it as we know it, not end it.

That leads to another question. Do you think that in your view a more competent, better trained ICE with better guidance could accomplish the goal the president has in mind, which is deporting millions of people as quickly as possible?

I don't think Well, that's I think you're cleaning up. The president had consensus in the country and what he claimed we were going to deport and is deport undocumented immigrants with criminal records.

Sure. He said many things and that was one of the things. Yeah. Well, that was he said everything at once.

Yes. Yeah. And you could It was like a salad bar. You could pick which one you wanted.

I think that's actually accurate. Yeah. What this is morphed to is not what the American people bargain for. And you can see it. If you don't trust me, listen to Joe Rogan referring to them as Gustapo. Okay? So, this is not a political I I'm making a political and not a partisan but a political observation. He has lost the American people and for good reason because he has overextended be way beyond he never had a mandate but way beyond what you could have said was the support of the American people. And I think it's more than just a tweak of management and reform. I don't think any city, and I'm talking about this as having lived through this in Chicago, should have the federal government come in as an occupying force. It's just wrong.

That leads to another question though. You talked about coordination. I think all of these lead to another question.

That's absolutely true between federal, state, and local authorities here. We're just going to continue on. It's going to be a flow of conversation as things often are. Um, but the next question has to do with that collaboration between uh federal and local authorities. Um, in many cases, of course, as in Chicago, uh, the the governor of Illinois, Pritsker, has said, "Well, they're not even communicating with us."

Yeah. But that there's still a question, should local authorities be cooperating with the feds, even when they're committing a even when they're a mission, they don't like.

First, you know, I believe in community policing, okay? And community policing means, you know, the first word is community. It's working with the community. When you have a wall of distrust that breaks down, every police chief, every per head of any law enforcement, federal, local, state will tell you that's a massive problem. One anecdote if I can.

Sure. A mayor of Chicago, President Obama decides we're going to have the largest NATO meeting in the history of NATO at that time in Chicago. I I'm doing this by memory so I could be off, but 63 countries come, not only NATO, but participating countries, etc. Sure. We're going to have clearly demonstrations. There was a The federal government loved our OEM, which is an emergency management department, modern techn. They take it. We coordinate with them. There's heads of state, foreign ministers, defense ministers from 60 plus countries.

There are 25,000 protesters each night for four nights. Nothing bad happens. meaning from either property damage or otherwise. That's the type of coordination you want. That's the type of trust you want and that's the ability of this uh when you have a major event. You have other types of things that are crises that happen. But here was a major international event held in the what I consider the most American of American cities, city of Chicago.

Sure. and the federal government. And I'm not talking about one single entity. There's national security, there's FBI, there's Homeland Security, a lot of entities, Chicago Police Department, state troopers,

there were protesters exercising their first amendment rights. All went off without a without a hitch. And everybody high-fived at the end because people were able to express their protests, their first amendment right. There was an agreement at NATO that was historic as it related to Afghanistan and you had more countries heads of state and defense miners ever in the I so you're asking me so I'm saying that's what you want when and when governor

let's talk about that there's two sides to the cooperation I mean there's a federal government informing the locals what they're doing but the other question is should local governments be assisting immigration authorities in finding people who are in the country illegally? Well,

should they for example be allowing access to jails where people who may have record are also jail? If we have to go through every location, let's go through it. One, a school down the block from where uh Amy and I live. There were ICE agents in unmarked car waiting for parents to pick up their kids from school. No, that's a parent doing exactly what you would want a parent to do. And that is not the crisis we're seeing of. Somebody who's doing their small business and picking up resources at Home Depot is not where you want it.

Somebody filing their papers at the court, following the laws we have established as a country based on the law, following the rules for their immigration papers is not where you want to go. Now, I don't want to go through every location, but I think you get the general gist of what I'm saying. The consensus on the country was and Democratic Republican governors and elected officials at many levels. You had an undocumented immigrant with a criminal record.

We don't want them in the country. That was the basis of what we have done. But there's a particular question under wait. Go ahead. Go ahead. Under President Obama,

we deported I I'm doing this by memory. I think it was like millions of people over two million two and a half enough that

people decided to protest this event. call him deorter-in- chief. Sure. But you did not have

the federal government using tear gas. You did not have the federal government being masked security people with without names, etc. showing up taking kids out of schools or people out of places of worship. So there's a there is a difference here.

Yeah. But there's one specific question I have here. Alejandro Morcus, who you know very well, who served in the Obama administration, was Secretary of Homeland Security under President Biden, has said the same thing that Tom Hman, who works for President Trump, has said. Essentially, we would like to be able to go into jails locally and bring out people who have a criminal record and also have an immigration problem. And not every city will allow that. Should that be allowed?

No. And you you particular thing I would say no, it should not be allowed. Well, hold on. I think let me do draw the distinction. Prison yes.

Jail, I'm not sure what they're charged with and whether they're convicted. If they're in jail,

if they've been convicted, take Yeah. They're in jail. I mean, rather in prison,

100%. Yeah. They're undocumented and they're serving time because they've been found guilty. Yes. If you're in jail, we don't know whether you're guilty yet and we don't know whether it's a misdemeanor or a felony yet. There's a lot of unanswered questions. So, there's a distinction there. I want

So I don't want like I don't want you to say you send end welfare. That's not what end rather. I that's not what I said. I said end it as we know it.

Quoted you and invited you to I have a feeling with NPR. I want to make sure the whole answer was there. Not that.

We're going to make sure the whole answer is there. This is all prison is not jail and prison is what I said.

Got it. Got it. Prison is what you said. Because they're convicted. I want people to know if they don't that you are one of three very successful brothers in wildly different fields. The other two never think that. But I'm glad you

never think that you're successful. Is that or what are they being humble about themselves? Ari Emanuel.

Humble does not fit with the manual. Ari Emanuel is an entertainment executive which is really not a large enough phrase for everything that he does. Zeke Emanuel uh is a doctor very instrumental with Obamacare and uh and and also has a book out and and other things. I'm just curious being in such wildly different fields, how are the three of you experiencing this moment in history? So uh this is not to get, uh, teareyed, but I will.

It's allowed. So, in our family room growing up, um, mom and dad had my grandmother on my maternal side purse in the center of the, uh, wall. It was framed.

Her purse. Her purse. Above it was Grandma Sophie and Giddy and Aunt Ida's passports. That was the purse that carried their passport when they came in 1914 to America.

Oh wow. On either side of that purse was the black and white photos of mom and dad's family that neither in the pgrams or the Holocaust made it to America or whatever. And All 28 eyeballs were on you when you were in the family room.

Grandpa Herman and Grandma Sophie, who are my mother's parents, lived with us growing up for part of our childhood. And he, Grandpa comes to America in 1914 by himself, 13, 14 years old. goes to Maxwell Street, steel worker, meat cutter, truck driver. They meet in Douglas Park and Lawndale on the west side of Chicago at a dance for Eastern European Jews.

We knew growing up that America was a very special place. Those pictures were a reminder to the three Arhi, Zeke, and I. You're not to mess this up because you got something that nobody else got. This was a special place. And I think America's pull is a special place. There's a gravitational pull towards freedom. And America has been that place that the and I don't mean this soap. I don't want to be because the story is told in many different languages and different cultures. But the idea that my grandfather at 15, his two his three grandsons, one is an oncologist has made a name for himself, another in entertainment, has achieved riches and cap capacities unimaginable from a stuttle in Muldova and that his grandson can be the both the mayor of the city he called home and the chief of staff to a president is not the Emanuel story. It's America's story. And the idea that you have ICE agents chasing people, firing tear gas,

unnamed, a president attacking people both religion, gender, or faith and using that is unimaginable in a country that opened its arm to him. And so when we talked and we texted and I saw Ari this weekend, I saw Zeke on Thursday when he was in Chicago. Um, we all went to see my mother. It's It's hard to put into words how we're living through this because this is in such a violation of every value and principle from about 4 days old to where we are today. And I'll close on one thought.

Sure. My mother is, you know, ran core in Chicago in the late 50s, early civil rights and doing open housing, open beaches in Chicago. And her and grandpa used to fight about politics all the time. Mom was a much more progressive, grandpa was a Teddy, a Franklin Roosevelt, Terry Truman Democrat, etc. And so my mother said the other day, she goes, "I have to live another three years." She's 93. I have to live another three another three years just to make sure that that bastard's out of the office.

So she has an opinion is what you're telling me. Whether you ask for it, she'll give it to you.

Got it. Got it. At the same time, you're all trying to continue to succeed in this changing world, in a rapidly changing world. Do you talk about that? Like, you know, Ari is in an entertainment world that is royled by constant change. You're in a political world this

I think the change was Yeah. But I think the change we're trying to see is change not for ourselves but for other people. Uh and of course you do. I mean that's the what those eyeballs on you are about. You have something that's a gift. This is not to be careless or reckless with. And so there's a responsibility that comes with this and that is self-evident. And so, yes, are we continuing to kind of move forward? Yeah, because you have a responsibility. It's easy to kind of turn your back on it and be my three kids are doing fine.

Amy and I are doing great. So, at one level, you could just say that I feel guilty saying my family's well when I look at everything else going on for everybody else's family. And that's a responsibility that comes with being here.

And you're thinking about running for president. If if you ran, what would your cause be? Cause be to make sure that the American dream stays alive for another generation. I think that we have broken faith with it. It's unaffordable. It's inaccessible and that's totally unacceptable. I'm a product of the American dream. When you said, and Steve, you said this, you know, we're going to get ahead. Who are we getting ahead with? Our parents. You can't do that today. Kids are making three times what their parents made when they got out of college. Yet, they're in the basement. Their kids and their parents could afford a home. In the 1950s, 50% of our young adults at the age of 30 were married and own a home. Today, it's down to 14%. The first-time home buyer is now 40. This is crushing. We have pulled up the ladder, double lock the door. The bridge is closed rock solid.

And a few kids are able to make it. And 97 of the other kids out of 100 can't. They can't own a home. They can't afford. They're one sickness away from a healthcare. They're fighting with the insurance company to get to get what the doctor prescribed. Their 401 401k has become a backs stop to their paycheck and education has become unaffordable and forced them into the basement. And to me, the cause would be restoring both the American dream. And I do think and both accessibility and the affordability of the American dream and is from something if you want stability in democracy, get stability in the economy to work for people. You used to strive to get to the American middle class dream. Today you struggle to stay in it and more likely you're falling behind on it. And so to me that would be now I've also put at the center of that because it's what makes it accessible. You live in a period of time where you earn what

you learn as you know because we've talked about this many times. Sure. Today 50% of our kids are not reading at grade level and doing math at grade level. It's the lowest it's been in 30 years. those kids will be uh fighting and playing with one hand tied behind their back. If you can't do third grade reading, fourth grade is not easier. That's the answer to the pop quiz. It doesn't get easier. Now, I just came back from Mississippi where they have what is referred to as the Mississippi miracle, but I would refer to it as uh as Mr. Barkstdale said to me who funded this. It's the Mississippi Marathon.

I just want to underline for people Mississippi traditionally right near the bottom education.

And in 20 years, they've gone from 49th on breeding to ninth. And it's a very conservative state. Let's note that as well. So what are they doing right? But they but also the two points.

One is every other state Louisiana, Tennessee, and Alabama that have replicated are all seeing similar growth in their reading scores.

It's they've returned to the fundamentals. One, back to phonics. Get away from all the hoie that's taught out of Colombia that's ruined kids. Phonics, the science of reading. Retrain the teachers around it. Support the teachers with constant coaching around phonics. Give kids the additional time needed on reading. Give them the additional support if they may need a tutor. And then hold them accountable. No going to fourth grade if you can't hit third grade. That is it. It's the fundamentals. And they have succeeded dram uh and every state that has replicated has seen similar growth.

They've gone from 49th to 9th. Every challenge we face can be answered by what's working in America. Now, I happen to think on the latter years, and we'll get to this if you want, what we did in Chicago in the high school years were the kind of fundamentals. that needs fundamental reforming. The K through8 or what we did in Chicago, preK through eight

is about returning to the fundamentals, giving the time, giving the teachers the training, giving the kids the support, and you will get gains on reading and math, which are essential for the rest of the education to work.

I just want to note, you're a Democrat. You went to an overwhelmingly Republican state. Not only overwhelming, I went to a county, did a town hall

Mhm. a standing room only in a county that Donald Trump won by 21%. And is there anything partisan about what you're saying? Anything at all?

No. I think actually if I had to say a, as my mother would say, a on both of you is one I don't know if that gets translated in the radio, but it's an old Jewish phrase.

Got it. I'll ask you to spell that. No, it's like a fine. Never mind. All right. Republicans have walked away from public education, abandon it.

You mean national Republicans, I assume, since you're praising Mississippi, but go on.

Yeah. And Democrats have abandoned accountability and standards. And both parties are wrong. And it is unacceptable that 50% of our kids are not reading at grade level. I grew up and I believe in a politics where Governor Clinton, Governor Winter from Mississippi, Governor Riley from South Carolina, Governor Hunt from North Carolina, Governor Zel Miller from Georgia, Governor Lton Childs from Florida, they answered Mr. Bloom's a nation at risk report. And they came up with a major famous report that got us on a 25-y year

slow, steady progress in reading and math scores, some fits and starts. That's how this is. You ain't going to have a linear line. Find somewhere else if you want instant gratification. Ain't happening here. It's hard work, but we as a country answered that challenge. Today, you know more about the president's position on windmills than you do about the fact that we've had a 30-year low in reading scores. He's never commented on it. No governor of either party has called for a national emergency meeting. And this is not a pop quiz. The answer is with four states who have all adopted something totally fundamental. and they showed you not once, not twice, not three times, four times, how to succeed.

And to me, that is what's essential to getting this country right and getting those kids future right. And one of the things I will say, and I'll and I'll shut up, Stephen. I know you want to

get one of the 925,000 questions. I got a few more to go. is the and this gets back to when you talked to me about us and my family responsibility is when you walk through the door of opportunity is not to reach back as Ms. Obama said and grab a door handle and shut the door but to grab a hand and pull somebody through that. You can't get from here to there. You can't believe in equity if you're complacent with 50% of the kids not reading at grade level.

You have argued that your party was missing its priorities on education. Arguing and I'm paraphrase here. Sure. That uh Democrats were spending too much time on who goes into what school bathroom and not enough time on the kinds of issues that you have raised. Too much time on trans issues to be blunt. You a few months ago were on a Megan Kelly podcast

and she asked you a yes no question and as I recall the question was can a man become a woman? You said no then said you were heading for the witness protection program.

Yeah. Um, I want to ask about that because with that remark it seemed to me you were going beyond the question of trans kids where there's all kinds of debate or trans kids in sport where there's a very nuanced debate and you're saying there aren't trans people. Is that what you meant?

No, that first of all that's not what I said Steve. Okay. So what I said let's so let's dial up since what you said.

Okay. What I believe way too much time on bathroom access and not enough time on classroom excellence. And you could see it in the whole debate. As a former ambassador of Japan, 8,000 miles away, I was watching this country and you got 50% of your kids can't read at grade level. You tell me the amount of coverage of that versus the amount of coverage on a bathroom, a a locker room or a sport as your question indicated. Got it.

I will also say number two to you. I've been in Iowa at a front yard, 400 people, two hours of questions. I was in Waterberry, Mississippi, standing room only about an hour and a half. So, I've taken about 40 questions. Nobody has ever asked me a single question about bathroom, locker room, or sports. Every time I get within 202 area code, it's the second or third question.

Uh-huh. So, that's number one. Okay. It's not a priority. And American people actually feel in their bones

what's missing in education. Now, I'm a mayor. In 2016, a full decade ago, I passed an ordinance on bathroom access, but I never allowed it to distract me from high school graduation rates, reading scores, and math scores. I was the ambassador, led the one of the largest embassies in the United States across the world. We were a very welcoming community, inclusive, but I never allowed it to be a digression from our mission is serving the US Japan alliance and building it stronger and better for the 21st century. Never. Now, did I go from acceptance to advocacy? No. That wasn't the job. That wasn't the mission.

You accept transformation. More than I created an accepting culture, but I said, "Here's who we're serving. the United States of America. So to me, that's what I think is a focus. I never took my eye off a ball. We had eight years of graduation growth. Did in 2016 midcycle in my eight years as mayor, we changed the laws and the uh the ordinance and pass one on bathroom access. Yeah. But I never took the eye off the ball.

And I unlike what has happened in the debate here. Mhm. And I just say this because you can see the amount of energy and oxygen on a set of issues. And I

we should be frank. Republicans are going to raise it if you don't. They just they did in the campaign and walking around in a campaign and saying, "Well, that I said that in 2020." Well, that campaigns are not about what you said yesterday. They're about what you said in your career.

Okay. So, that said, you got to deal with that. And I believe the American people are an accepting a culture of acceptance, but not one that becomes advocacy. That's what crossed the line. Now, I've made my position clear. It's not the biggest It's not the biggest issue. And I think when you have, and I've said this in tongue and cheek, but I mean this one child is already discussing their pronoun and the rest of the class doesn't know what a pronoun is. If I want to be frank, I don't know if I'll run, but if I run and the issues on trans are the most important you, I'm not your guy. And I'm okay with that. If getting us off of a 30-year low on reading or mask scores and somebody that's willing to make that core to what we have to do as a country, then you may think my answers are right and you may think my answers are wrong and I'm okay with that. But I'll tell you one thing I know from history.

End of World War uh civil war, turn of the century, end of the GI and hit meeting this challenge. The four greatest periods of economic growth and prosperity in American history are underpinned by one constant. Land grant colleges under the Civil War, universal high school education, the GI Bill, and the science and technology challenges of the Splutnick challenge. We are h fighting and we're letting people in America fight with one hand tied behind their back. And so to me, that is what I said I would do. Now, I again believe in a culture of acceptance. I have no problem with that. But he will not distract or digress from raising graduation rates, post high school education, and reading a math course.

It's something that should be done, but it's not the thing we send kids to school with. And I also think arguing about the name of a school after Abraham Lincoln and not worrying about the fact that the kids don't know why Abraham Lincoln is an icon is also messed up. debate in California over and I think and I think

we engaged and I say we meaning Democrats engaged in bringing cultural wars to schools

and then found out we were on the losing side of those cultural debates not exact in politics is about picking where you want to have a battle and I think we made a big strategic mistake we took our eye off of educational excellence went into a cultural landscape and found out we didn't have the public with us

I want to find out if you think there was another strategic mistake I'm thinking Yeah, the answer is yes. Many strategic.

Now you figure out the question that works with that. Be more a little more specific. Um I'm thinking about corporate America which is thought of as a traditional Republican constituency. But I think that during the Obama administration, you believed that you had some support in corporate America. There were prominent executives like the head of General Electric who were more or less with you. And I think a lot of corporate America was on board with a lot of the Democratic agenda. It seems clear that in 2024, corporate America made their peace with whatever qualms they had with President Trump and got on board with President Trump. Why do you think Democrats lost corporate America?

We're going to have to come back for a whole another uh hour here. I'm here for you.

Is that H E R E or H E A R? Either one. Either one. So you know one thing is when I said yes to before the question you know Henry Kissinger has a great quote. Does anybody have questions for my answers which is describes in a manual perfectly. Okay.

So here's what I one is this is a infamous March 2009 or spring 2009 I should say March. We passed the president's recovery act, the extension of health care for children of working parents without health care, Lily led better, pay equity, series of other things about teen and tobacco, national service. We have this big Saturday meeting of the president's three children, as he called it, healthc care reform, financial banking reform, and capp trade. And we have this big debate. Now, I would, you know, and I point at the other end of the Roosevelt table is domestic policy. Every day that you're not doing healthcare is a day you're not going to get it done. And if you look at the history of healthcare going all the way back to Teddy Roosevelt,

pretty good analysis, especially with Hillary care being uh kind of front and center

in the 90s. Yeah. The economic team did not uh want to do anything, but they also thought specifically financial reform would uh prevent banks from lending that was important for getting the economy moving again.

Yeah. representing the uh the political group around the table myself and David Axra as a vocal I was for doing first financial and uh and banking reform one is if the history as I told the president if you want to pass healthcare reform the industry insurance far have to be on your side of the table that's a lesson from Hillary's fail in financial reform the banks and the insurance executives are going to be on the other side and America after the recovery act, after the t need a tarp need to see you fighting for them against the people that they think have wre havoc on their lives making them lose homes.

Yeah. Um obviously you know the history he said was healthcare reform. He went for that didn't do financial

that's why you get no and that's you know look and I kind of argue you got universal healthcare reform but you also got the tea party.

Not everything's 100%. That's life. But that's why he gets to paid the big bucks and you have to have judgment in the Oval Office, which is something that's sorely lacking right now.

So to me, that's kind of the choices. Now, why corporate America goes from kind of okay with the uh President Obama's policy, and I I think this a little short change. Not all of corporate America was there.

Understood. Yeah, that's kind of a But you had some support in this traditionally Republican area.

Yeah, I wouldn't say you did. I mean, I could give you Steve Schwarzman yelled at the president for called him, you know, I think his policies, I mean, I don't want to even get into language about Nazis and stuff like that. And they they had images of, you know, I mean, just things that were said about the president out from voices in corporate America.

They were also violently against him doing healthcare when they said just talk about the economy and etc. So, it was not like they were

always applauding. So, at least your my memory is slightly different than your memory.

No, I understand. I understand. But there was a consensus around uh when we were first coming up with the recovery act. I mean Jamie Diamond says in the east wing in a big meeting with financial and business leaders and this is when you're facing close to a small D depression. Whatever it is it's got to be big. It's got to be bold and it's got to be harsh. Uh and just get the thing moving and do it at all across the whole waterfront. that became pretty much what we did from the recovery act etc. So there was some consensus there. I think corporate America here uh just I'll say it here is I think they've sold out America and America was loyal to them.

And what I mean by that is you benefit from a nation built on laws and you're watching from the sideline a nation being destroyed and walking away from the rule of law. Everything you have is built on the premise of the rule of law. Number two, the president's declared war on the greatest research system in the world has ever seen. And you are your company is a direct beneficiary of that. And you're like the three monkeys. See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil. You are timid souls. And if you don't want to speak of individually, what is these business groups for? But collective voice with a singular message. The core crux of the world economy and the US great economy is built on the rule of law, great education, great research at our great universities and the capacity to both find the talent, the kind of level playing field that the rule of law gives and the certainty it gives and also the ideas

that are coming out of the golden goose called our university system. and every one of you but one or two to the person have been incredibly timid souls to quote Teddy Roosevelt I have lost and I know this in respect so they've decided for their short-term stock I suppose and I don't want to say all of corporate America but for a whole host of reasons and I've heard them say things in private to me but for a whole host of reasons they've decided to bite their tongue and I will tell you this will come home to roost.

Did Democrats also do something as on other issues to drive people away? That might have been

people or corporate America. You corporate America corporate America. Okay. You said people there and I wasn't sure what you were saying.

Thank you for asking. No, I don't. I'm serious. I wasn't sure what you were talking about.

I wanted to know if you you said that Democrats were driving people away with the wrong focus on education. Is there something having to do with corporate America? Were Democrats something about your approach to social issues or taxes or business or regulation corporate America? I think one of the things my analysis is both parties got wrong. I kind of I'm saying this shorthand but the Republican parties are dominated by a monopolist mindset and our party's starting to get dominated by a bunch of Marxist and both Marxism and monopolists don't serve the economy well. I think generically this is generic at 10,000 ft without a name to it. Democrats don't talk about growth and should be the party that talks and actually executes growth versus redistribution. I happen to think education is core to growth. Investing in our energy capacity is core to our growth as is modernizing our infrastructure is core to our

growth. our university systems and when and college systems and higher and community college systems are essential for our growth. A country based not only in the rule of law is also essential for our growth and I think making sure that more people not only there is growth but more people are participating and beneficiary to me like take this whole issue of affordability people are talking about housing they're talking about groceries they're talking about gas I want to talk about incomes you have a situation where incomes you have one man getting a trillion dollar income from a company and other people haven't seen either their minimum wage or their incomes grow. And this is insane to me. So if you want to deal with affordability, maybe you can drive grocery prices down.

I think it's better you have ch to grow people's incomes up. I want to ask separately about

corporate America to get to this point. Their profits have never been better. Their stock has never been higher until today when the president decided to have war on Greenland. And they have done nothing to share that income growth and the growth of the company with all their workers. Final question.

Yes, Steve. What's one piece of advice you would give to Democrats running in this year's election?

My advice is that this is a referendum election. Keep it focused on the rubber stamp of Republican Congress to President Trump. He's unpopular. Midterms that have one party in power have a law of physics. Massive energy by uh party out of power. We're seeing that in every special anywhere in the country for the last year. Massive downturn by the party out of uh in power. You're seeing that with Republican votes all over the place. You have to win independence two to one to win the House. They are uncomfortable with Donald Trump. And they're uncomfortable that nobody's from the Roberts court to the press and media to the Republicans in Congress are putting a checkmate on him. What do you have to do with the Senate where you will have to win rural states, Republican states?

This is my look, the nearly 50% of the electorate identifies as independent in every house, every US Senate where you have a chance of building a majority and also which is lost. If I may say this, Steve, what's also happening in the state races?

Mhm. School every this election, there shouldn't be a school board seat all the way up to the governor in the seven most important swing states empty. It should always have a D next to it. But make this a referendum on what the Republicans have been enabling Donald Trump to do because he is going to drive this election. He's driving down turnout among Republicans and driving turnout among Republicans. Win the hearts and minds of the unaffiliated and you got yourself a majority.

You think that you could even win an Iowa where Democrats haven't won for years with that formula. So, let's go over the real estate. Not everybody's a a weirdo like me. You have a governor's race, a Senate race, four congressional races, not counting also the capital. who won 5 months ago in an area Donald Trump won a state senate seat that he won by 22%. It flipped to the Democrats. It was the canary in the coal mine. This thing is coming. And there is a potential for a wave. But to win in Iowa, yet you are going to have Democratic turnout, here's how I look at the electorate.

Democrats are mad at what Donald Trump's doing and mad that he's getting away with it.

Independent voters are uncomfortable. They made a fostian bargain. They didn't like Donald Trump personally. They were uncomfortable with him, but they thought they were going to get economics out of it. They've gotten neither the economics and they've gotten all the personality. And so they're furious. They're uncomfortable with a rubber stamp Republican Congress. I happen to think Republican MAGA voters, as seen by Marjorie Taylor Green, seen by Joan Rogan, feel betrayed. A different emotion. There are three distinct emotions in this electorate.

anger among Democrats, uncomfortable and disqued and discomfort among independents, betrayal among MAGA voters and Democrats focus is on their base which will going to turn out because they want to send a message win the hearts and minds of the unaffiliated voters and that's your ticket to a majority.

You said also you don't even want a school board seat to be empty. You want Democrats running for every office. Why does that matter in swing states? Just explain it for me.

Well, one, it, you know, the closer you get to where people live, thrives, the more energized they are. Nothing's more energizing than school boards. Number two, not just school boards, but I'm saying anything that gets close to the I used to have a rule when I was mayor. You better be very smart and strategic about it. It gets to the front door, the back door of the house. So, my thing is I happen to think like two 1994, like 2006, like 2010, and like 2018, this is going to be a wave election. If you want to set up 2028, make sure in Nevada, Arizona, North Carolina, Georgia Pennsylvania Michigan and Wisconsin that you have every office from top to bottom have a person registered as a Democrat or an independent running for under the Democrat.

They got no chance to win. They need to be running. You're saying when you have a wave election, the the rule I've always had in politics,

the wave, maybe they do. Okay. Okay. The rule I've had in politics, when you think it's bad, it's worse. When you think it's good, it's better. Where I'm sitting today, good is going to look like better. Could change 10 months to go. But take, let's just take the news today. Here's how I would see this. He's all focused on Greenland. I want to focused on groceries. You want to focus on Venezuela. I want to focus on Virginia. Number two, there's a consequence him focused not on groceries and him focused on Greenland and drive that home. He's not looking at your pay paycheck. He's looking at his checkbook every time. Take a look at what he is doing and make and tie the fact that the Republicans are not constraining him, not refocusing him, but it's going to come to you in an electric bill. It's going to come to you in a health care bill. And it's going to come in the fact that your child who did everything right

is now living in the basement and can't find a job. Rahm Emanuel, thanks so much. Y

enjoyed the conversation. Yeah, we got a thousand more questions to go. We do. We do. We'll do those afterward or the next time you come by. Thank you.

Thank you, Steve.

Questions about this episode

Who speaks in "Rahm Emanuel says the U.S. is throwing away global alliances"?

Rahm Emanuel (Guest), Steve Inskeep (Host).

What is "Rahm Emanuel says the U.S. is throwing away global alliances" about?

Rahm Emanuel critiques the current political climate in the U.S., highlighting the degradation of global alliances and domestic institutions, particularly emphasizing the dysfunction within law enforcement and the abandonment of education by both major political parties. He expresses concern over corporate complicity in undermining the rule of law and notes the varying emotions among voters,…

What is mentioned in this NPR episode?

4 people, works and ideas are mentioned, including Zu Jong Xi, World Economic Forum, Ari Emanuel, Zeke Emanuel. Each one on this page links to its own page with every episode that mentions it.

How long is "Rahm Emanuel says the U.S. is throwing away global alliances"?

The episode runs 52 min; the transcript is about 9,506 words in 158 timestamped sections.

More from NPR

About this transcript: the episode's spoken words as captioned on YouTube, split into timestamped sections. Reclip.Me locates every person, work and idea in the text, keeps the time it is first named, and quotes the words around it verbatim. Last updated January 24, 2026.