While Biden spent the weekend helping fend off Iran's missile and drone attack, supposedly pro-Israel Trump embraced the anti-Israel chant, "Genocide Joe," at his rally. Meanwhile, the trial involving the first time Trump allegedly broke the law to win an election gets underway. Bill Kristol and Ben Wittes join Tim Miller.
**Join Sarah, Tim and JVL for a Bulwark Live event in Philly on May 1, and May 15 in D.C. with the George Conway. For information and tickets head to TheBulwark.com/events
show notes:
Eliot Cohen's piece in The Atlantic
"Stormy Monday" for the win!
Is there a court employee tasked with following Trump's social media in case he strays into threatening or borderline doxing (whatever is possible given his limited access to information)?
But Tuesday’s just as bad…
What happened to Bulwark+? Why am I directed to Substack? What is happing with my paid subscription? Why don't you guys have a place where I can ask a question? Why, when I ask Substack do they tell me all about how to be a contributor?.
Hi Tara - How can we help?
The Bulwark is published on the Substack publishing platform. When you subscribe to The Bulwark you are creating a profile that works for other publications on the platform too. When you login you might see the Substack logo during the set up process.
If you'll shoot us an email at members@thebulwark.com we can try to get whatever is awry sorted out. You can also reply to any newsletter we send you and it gets to a real human.
Thanks!
Hey Tim, putting “Stormy Monday” as the closing music was an inspired choice!!
Agree 👍. The other choice just for Sununu could’ve been [The Remedy by Puscifer].
Chorus Lyrics - “ You speak like someone who has never been
Smacked in the fucking mouth
That’s ok, we have the remedy”
Thanks Ben for the heads-up on Question 30 ("Have you ever considered yourself a supporter of or belonged to any of the following: (the QAnon movement, Proud Boys, Oath Keepers, Three Percenters, Boogaloo Boys, Antifa"). The tacky inclusion of QAnon and Antifa that bookend such a distinguished list of nefarious organizations certainly made me smile. Not least because it seeks to elevate QAnon and Antifa to the status of well-defined similarly nefarious entities whereas, in reality both are simply amorphous catch-all phrases that signal the morbid fears of right-wing conspiracy theorists. I was waiting for: Do you have any Stormy Daniels content bookmarked in your internet browser favorites?
I don't understand why it's become fashionable in pro-Ukrainian circles to dismiss Russia's nuclear deterrent. Like, you guys didn't even mention the most obvious difference between the situation in Ukraine and the situation in Israel. That's before we get to the scale problem; the area requiring protection in Ukraine is just massively bigger than in Israel, and there are a lot more missiles and drones involved, which probably means needing to hit some of those assets left of strike, in Russia. Then you have to do it all in an air denied environment.
All that means you're pretty much guaranteed to have the US directly engaging the Russian military. What could possibly go wrong?
I get that the aid situation is embarrassing, and Ukraine deserves better, but that doesn't mean we should just hand-wave away the risks and Leeroy Jenkins this stuff because it feels bad.
Putin has rattled the saber from the beginning, and we've already crossed lines he warned us about. Russia's nuclear arsenal ostensibly went on "high alert" in February 2022. Putin since has alternated between statements about their readiness, and statements about doctrine that are actually walk-backs. The baseline position is that Russia would use nukes to defend the sovereignty of Russia itself, or in response to a nuclear attack. Which we already knew. And the West makes no threat to Russia here. We are not going to conventionally invade or bombard Russia, and we are not going to nuclear first-strike anything anywhere.
Yes, Ukraine is much larger and any defense is going to be more porous. The difficulty of perfection is not a reason to not try at all.
You are mistaken. Enforcing a no fly zone above Ukraine will inevitably involve strikes against Russian air defense and missile/drone launch sites on Russian soil. At a minimum, it means US troops killing Russian troops and vice-versa. If you support that, that's fine but you need to acknowledge that that puts the US at war against Russia. That's a bell that can't be un-rung. Obviously, that does not mean immediate nuclear escalation, but it starts us down a path over which we have little control.
What do you mean, "inevitably"? Our rules of engagement can be whatever we want them to be. If we say our planes won't go within range of Russian-based air defense, then they won't. We wouldn't be even trying for supremacy on the Russian side of the lines in Ukrainian territory. A limited no-fly zone is *not* air support for an offensive.
Totally agree. Also Israel would have the most powerful military in all of nato (other than us). All their equipment was developed with us or purchased by us. Have the stuff Ukraine is using is s-300s. We wouldn’t know good from bad
An expert on Russia at Peking University, Feng Yujun, was allowed to publish a piece in The_Economist on April 13 with the headline, "Russia is sure to lose in Ukraine, reckons a Chinese expert on Russia". One of many interesting things it says is, "In combination, these four factors (Ukrainian unity and resistance, foreign aid, the nature of modern war, and information) make Russia’s eventual defeat inevitable. In time it will be forced to withdraw from all occupied Ukrainian territories, including Crimea." Another is "Although China has not joined Western sanctions against Russia, it has not systematically violated them. " A third is is "Since the war began China has conducted two rounds of diplomatic mediation. Success has proved elusive but no one should doubt China’s desire to end this cruel war through negotiations. That wish shows that China and Russia are very different countries. Russia is seeking to subvert the existing international and regional order by means of war, whereas China wants to resolve disputes peacefully." Right after the Russian Foreign Minister visited Beijing, and just before the US House of Representatives finally considers Ukraine aid, the timing can hardly be coincidental.
https://www.economist.com/by-invitation/2024/04/11/russia-is-sure-to-lose-in-ukraine-reckons-a-chinese-expert-on-russia
The ending blues song was so perfect!!
Maybe that "bleeding" from Trump is his spray on tan is running.Much like Rudy and his hair dye dripping down the side of his face while conducting a news conference.Also Trump's dozing off during the first day of his trial revealed that for the first time in his life his mouth was open and nothing was coming out.
While it is disconcerting that a large number of younger voters have said Trump hasn't said offensive remarks recently, don't underestimate his ability to say totally bellicose and offensive things in the campaign.It is what he does.And it is in his DNA.
Tim is right to call out Trump for sympathizing with “genocide Joe” chants at his rallies. Who are these people anyway? I can’t believe they’re the usual hard left or islamist instigators who would show up at a Trump rally. But that’s just typical Trump myopia. If you criticize Trump’s opponent for any reason it’s okay. The bigger issue is where will Israeli-American relationship be twenty years from now? For most of my life support for Israel was the most bipartisan consensus policy in politics. Reagan got crap from both sides of the aisle just because he wanted to sell AWACS to the Saudis. Israel is now getting squeezed from both sides. The hard left and most Muslim immigrants outright hate Israel. The hard right is starting to turn on Israel too. Look at Tucker Carlson and Candace Owens. And even the “principled”isolationists who may not be antisemitic like Rand Paul and JD Vance are starting to question American support for Israel. If I were Israel I wouldn’t count on American support forever, and that’s an unfortunate development
Yes, I can’t help but think this interview by author of “Black Swan”, who predicted the 2008 financial crash, Nassim Nicholas Taleb, probably contains a grain of truth: https://today.lorientlejour.com/article/1362814/is-israel-a-fragile-state-interview-with-nassim-nicholas-taleb.html
There has never been or ever will be a John McCain moment regarding Donald Trump.
Awesome Blues music at the end, and of course another great podcast!
Show notes, show notes, show notes for the music!! Who’s singin’ those blues, baby?
Tim's playlist:
https://open.spotify.com/playlist/0dApY6YT48kTh6j9xFDQch?si=duwnuIpGRxeVWDSkrwaD1w&pi=u-QDtY_MnOS0mV&nd=1&dlsi=c289217c41f94c9e
Oh wow, I was about to start Shazamming him. Thanks for the shortcut!
Whether I agree with Bill on any issue I always appreciate his gentlemanly delivery and insistence on speaking in polished paragraphs.
He truly does have the best words
And Pete!
Forgot about Pete!
Ok, I am all for expanded aid to Ukraine. But imposing a no-fly zone is insane. Because a no-fly zone involves targeting airfields that aircraft, in this case Russian aircraft, take off from.
That's all well and good, but there is no way for a Russian radar crew to see an incoming missle or an incoming wing of bombers aimed at an airfield and know whether the strike being carried out is conventional or nuclear. And sure, the U.S. says that it won't start a nuclear war, and I for one believe that statement, but I have the nagging suspicion that Russians are not so optimistic about U.S. policy declarations.
And I've also jeered the current administration's 'self-deterrence', and that aid was too little and too slow and too afraid of Russian nuclear escalation. But that was because the level of ratcheting up by giving aid is tiny and its effects hard to mistake. A no-fly zone is a very different beast and markedly ramps up the actuality of this escalating beyond control and not empty sabre-rattling that Putin is so fond of.
Amen. I am just so surprised when people make comments about what we should or shouldn’t do when it comes to escalation management and deterrence. We are deterred. Russia is also deterred from attacking nato. It goes both ways.
Also people don’t realize how saturated Ukraine air environment is with middle defense systems. What happens when those systems shoot down American and nato planes. I hope we are prepared for losses and not escalate further.
Also the comparison between Israel and Ukraine was a bit out there. We have a 75 year relationship with Israel. They are embedded in our politics. Ukraine was something most Americans heard about 2 years ago and we still gave them a 100b over 2 years. Israel is also far more powerful than every other countries in nato other than us
A limited no-fly zone would not have to strike targets in Russia, or any Russian ground assets necessarily; we could just say that we will shoot anything airborne west of a given line.
Unless that line is within Russia itself, it's not likely to do much. As it is, most of the Russian aerial attacks are glide bombing ones from 40ish km out of the targets. And you can bet that whatever aerial forces are tasked with enforcing the no-fly zone will quickly start to insist that they can't do their jobs properly without striking at the support network helping the Russian planes stay in the air.
I'd rather do it carefully than "properly," in that sense. The point would be to make Russian pilots and their commanders not want to risk getting in the air so much, or to run away faster when they did cross the line. Not to actually destroy their capability, just to keep them operationally limited over most of Ukraine.
I'm continually amazed at the degree to which commenters underestimate the ability of US and NATO forces to project conventional force over distance with precision. I think that the kind of limited no-fly zone that you suggest here would surprise many Americans on both sides with its effectiveness; the Russians and Ukrainians, who are probably better informed, would be much less surprised. The Russians would probably drastically reduce sorties after the initial losses, or maybe even reduce them pre-emptively to avoid the losses.
id rather 3d print f16s for em.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5UrfJqCoLUw&list=LL&index=23
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ceZd93ahpk&list=LL&index=29
well its 2minutes in and already tim and Bill are agreeing that iranians strike was a full deliberate strike that was designed to strike at israeli targets ...and yet nobody can explain then why the iranians leaked the rough designs of the attack to their neighbours who passed that data onto america, and thus all the allies were ready..Add in the additional factor that they launched their slowest drones first , in such numbers to telegraph was on the way,so everybody had plenty of warning...but hey lets start up the jingo band, and lets have a war with iran with american standing between israel and iran and all those anti-war campaigners will stop voting for biden...oh happy days[as i start bashing my head into the wall -sighs] :(
Launching the slowest drones first makes perfect tactical sense. They need a head start, or they'll arrive too late to be of consequence. If everything arrives at the same time, that maximizes your chance of getting through the enemy defenses.
Tim & Bill would do well to cool the rhetoric and spend a few hours reading "The Guns of August"
For all of those wanting to see Israel and/or the U.S hit back at Iran, think for one minute what the American response would have been if Iran had done an airstrike on the U.S Naval Base in Bahrain and killed several top American military officials.
Iran sent a message and warned the Israelis far in advance what they were doing. Drop it while you still can.
Yes, those savvy Persians are the best chess players in the world. After forty years of relying on surrogate terrorists to carry out their dirty work, the Iranian cowards finally put on a jersey and step on the field. They launch a myriad of 300 drones, cruise missiles and ABMs from different locations designed to confuse and overwhelm Israeli defense systems. 99 percent are shot down, no damage, and the only casualty is a seven year old Bedouin who has to be unluckiest girl on earth. This huge attack made Iran a laughingstock in the Middle East amongst friends and foes alike and consolidated Israeli support with its openly (though wobbly) Western allies and even surreptitious Arab sympathizers. So tired of these stupid theories. The Iranian people aren’t morons either. They know this attack was a colossal failure and are hoping Israel doesn’t respond because if their offensive capabilities are this pathetic their air defenses may be just as bad.
[sighs] so you would prefer that iran instead of telling and warning people about the attac, had done a surprise attack,with overwhelming force and just killed loads of israel citizens instead? whilst america is watching and has forces in the middle east? [sarcastic sighs] sometimes you just cant please any people at all :(
My feeling is it was calculated effort for maximum tv time BUT perhaps viewed arguably as a dead end to it for now.
It was deliberate and they leaked plans so they could maximize noise and minimize damage.
well isnt it telling that they launched so many, to little effect?.....[sighs] but the hubris of usa and israeli is like , yes our systems are so great, its all our greatness that was the main factor....[sighs] its the axis of evil all over again...where have i heard that before? [sighs] :(
Exactly!
If you really are looking to inflict damage, do you lead with propeller driven drones that take hours to reach their target?
Tim,
I promise to boo during the Philadelphia event if you mention Eyeran, Eyeraq, or the Eyetalian Market. But I’ll cheer wildly if you ask for a glass of ‘wooder’.
Either everybody is inhaling helium or the sound is squirrely today.