JEFFREY GOLDBERG: McKay, let me ask you are you a TikTok user?

MCKAY COPPINS: Iúm 37 years old.

I am not a TikTok user.

But my daughter is on the verge.

Sheús interested.

I havenút let her find out (ph).

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Iúm thinking of actually joining TikTok tomorrow, just counter opportunistically.

But this is going go through.

The politics here are very complicated.

Can you unpack that for us, or anybody who wants to volunteer to unpack that in a minute?

Because itús very -- and President-elect Trumpús own ideas about this seem to be running into some other ideas in the Republican quarters as well.

MCKAY COPPINS: Letús just take Trump and the Republican politics of this, because it is really interesting, right?

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Yes.

MCKAY COPPINS: On the one hand, you could see a pretty clear conservative case for banning TikTok.

And this is why it was a bipartisan issue during the Biden administration.

It all has to do with China.

Donald Trump, in his first term, did a lot to reorient American foreign policy around, you know, setting up a kind of civilizational clash between America, the west, and China.

So, you know, you could see a case for saying we need to crack down on this app for national security reasons.

This is owned by a foreign adversary.

At the same time, Trump has signaled pretty clearly that he is going to try to undo this ban for reasons that are a little opaque and might have a lot to do with the politics of it.

This is going to be a very divisive ban if it goes through.

Itús already very politically unpopular with young people.

I think itús difficult to overstate how many millions of Americans use TikTok every day not just for entertainment, for news, for information consumption.

And so taking that away is politically unpopular.

And I think on a just a kind of basic, primal, you know, political instincts level, Trump understands that taking something popular away from voters is bad.

And if he can be seen as the one who saved it, he could be rewarded.

ZOLAN KANNO-YOUNGS: Particularly after you benefited from it during the campaign.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Right, obviously.

We have so much to talk about.

I want to do lightning round here.

Hegseth, Pete Hegseth, hearings, Asma, more or less likely that he gets confirmed after those -- ASMA KHALID: I think more likely after the hearings that he gets confirmed.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: He survived?

ASMA KHALID: He survived, in my view.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: It wasnút exactly a sterling example of democratic transparency in action, was it?

ASMA KHALID: No.

But also I think you saw some Republicans show that they are willing to support a variety of Trump nominees, including Hegseth.

I think the other big question mark for me always was some of the concerns that had been raised about his, letús say, morality.

I was wondering to what degree that actually mattered in Washington, because I thought for the last several years none of that stuff mattered.

So, it was eye opening to me that for a minute people in D.C. thought some of those things did matter.

Maybe thatús the cynicism in me.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: But youúre saying that they ultimately donút matter because -- ASMA KHALID: They donút matter, per usual though, right?

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Right.

No, I mean, I think the most interesting thing about this is apart from the fact that he was asked very little by Democrats or Republicans about China, for instance, or, you know, or Iran.

North Korea, American readiness, et cetera.

One of the most interesting things is that there seems to be this tacit kind of feeling on the Hill that if you promise not to drink too much, you can be secretary of defense.

Thatús what I mean by itús not sort of a sterling -- necessarily a sterling moment in American governance.

But, Zolan, is this the new normal?

ZOLAN KANNO-YOUNGS: It seems like it.

I mean, it seems like, you know, the questioning to basically have a viral clip might be sort of the incentive now rather than some of the question we saw like, hey, do you know all of the countries that are in a very important Asian alliance with the United States as well?

You know, although thereús been so much attention on some of the most glaring examples and some of Trumpús picks that one through line that weúve seen, at least for most of them, is that they are consistently not as qualified historically as other picks that weúve seen.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Andrew, Tulsi Gabbard, is she going to make it?

ANDREW DESIDERIO: Well, I was going to say, actually, this is an example of confirmation hearings really not mattering anymore on Capitol Hill, or at least not as much as they used to.

With Tulsi Gabbard, I think this is a case where the confirmation hearing could be determinative in terms of her prospects and her nomination.

Iúve been doing a lot of reporting on this over the last two weeks.

Republicans in particular are concerned about her views on a key intelligence gathering authority called Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

This is something that civil libertarians, Fourth Amendment proponents try to sort of dismantle on Capitol Hill every time it comes up for reauthorization.

Tulsi Gabbard voted against it every time when she was in Congress.

She even proposed legislation to get rid of it.

Republican senators who met with her told me they came away from those meetings unclear of what her view was on that critical intelligence gathering authority.

That is a no go, especially for hawkish Republicans who see value in that -- again, that authority, that program.

And so Tulsi Gabbard and her team gave me a statement after I brought this to them saying essentially she supports Section 702 of FISA.

As a result, a lot of additional Republicans came out in favor of her nomination.

I will say when she goes before the Senate Intelligence Committee, where itús a 9-8 Republican majority, Susan Collins is on that committee.

Todd Young is on that committee.

These are two senators who are viewed as swing votes.

If just one of them votes against her, itús going to be very hard procedurally to advance her to the floor.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Right.

Letús talk about Joe Biden and his legacy.

He promised at the outset that he was going to be a transitional figure for the Democrats.

He didnút mean it in the way that he has become a transitional figure.

Heús transitioning between one Trump administration and the next Trump administration.

And so my question for all of you is, is he going to be remembered ultimately as the guy who inadvertently enabled the return of Donald Trump?

ZOLAN KANNO-YOUNGS: I think President Biden will forever be linked to Trump.

You know, for the last four years, we have heard his aides say, whenever they were faced with questions about his age or his ability to win reelection, that he was the only person who defeated Trump and that he was the only person who could defeat Trump, and he did not end up doing that.

I think that you cannot talk about his legacy without linking him to President Trump.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: McKay?

MCKAY COPPINS: I think thatús true.

I also think that he, very self-consciously, framed his entire presidency around defending and protecting and restoring democratic norms and democracy.

And when you end up doing what he did and losing your party, the White House in pretty dramatic fashion to usher in the return of Donald Trump, who his party believes is, you know, a quasi authoritarian figure, itús going to be hard to make the case that he did what he set out to do.

Now, there are other things that he could claim as key parts of his legacy, the infrastructure bill, bipartisan legislating.

But on the thing that he promised that this was going to be what his presidency was, I think itús hard to make a case that he succeeded.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Andrew, I want to ask you about something he said in his farewell address.

Letús just actually watch a short clip of it, and then Iúll ask you the question.

JOE BIDEN, U.S. President: Today, an oligarchy is taking shape in America of extreme wealth, power, and influence that literally threatens our entire democracy, our basic rights and freedoms, and a fair shot for everyone.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: He was supposed to be the - - let me just acknowledge, for fairness sake, that there are plenty of rich people who could be called oligarchs in this -- in Bidenús circle, including George Soros, to whom he just gave a Presidential Medal of Freedom, acknowledging that for fairness sake.

But heús saying after four years of his administration that America is threatened by oligarchies.

Thatús not a successful administration by his own standard here.

Is that fair?

ANDREW DESIDERIO: I think thatús totally fair.

And I also think him using the word oligarchs and oligarchy sounds a lot like Bernie Sanders.

Bernie Sanders talked about this in 2016, when he first ran for president.

This has been a problem, an issue that progressives have been talking about for a long time, and it was very fascinating to hear him embrace sort of that line of questioning, that theme.

But also, as McKay just referenced, you know, heús frustrated that Americans apparently didnút give him enough credit for the bipartisan infrastructure law, for the Chips and Science Act, things that he believes Democrats believe are really impacting American communities, positively revitalizing parts of the country that really needed it.

Republicans, of course, supported all those pieces of legislation.

The first two years of Bidenús presidency, that Congress, the 117th Congress, was historically productive.

They passed a number of major landmark bipartisan bills, and there was an obvious frustration on the part of Biden that he feels like that didnút break through to Americans and, you know, Democrats running in contentious Senate races and House races tried to use that to their advantage too, and it fell short.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Right.

Asma, could you answer the very quick question.

Why didnút that break through?

And then Iúll give you the last word on -- youúve covered Joe Biden so closely.

ASMA KHALID: Why didnút the policy stuff break through?

Look, I covered -- I spent like two years going out actually specifically looking at this policy stuff in action.

I think it is massive investments, whether or not you agree or disagree with the purpose of the investment.

It didnút break through because, frankly, it hasnút yet been felt in a lot of communities.

I think thatús fundamentally the issue.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Right.

ANDREW DESIDERIO: Projects take a while, yes.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: The last question to you is, how will he be remembered by Democrats at least, not tomorrow necessarily, not Tuesday, but five or ten years from now?

ASMA KHALID: I feel that I should wait five or ten years, to be honest, to actually make that assessment.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: You just want to be invited back.

ASMA KHALID: No, because I think, look, we just saw the funeral of Jimmy Carter.

I think Jimmy Carter was remembered at his funeral in a different way than he was in the moment.

And so I think itús worthwhile to be cautious before we write the pages of history.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: That is a very fair point to end on, and I thank you for that point.

And I thank all of you for coming.

Unfortunately, we do need to leave it there for now.

Thereús a lot to talk about, and weúll be talking about it next week, of course.