The GOP’s Rubik’s Cube for Morons

Welcome to the Bulwark podcast. I’m Charlie Sykes. It is Friday. Is it October sixth already? Tim?

I mean, is it that really are we into October already? No.

I just can’t accept it. Luckily in New Orleans, it’s just been summer, and we’re getting our first cold front this weekend, and I and I get I’m gotta go to Denver, my father’s getting an award. K. Congratulations. I gotta go to Denver, and I looked at the I looked at the temperature.

It’s fifty nine today when I landed in Denver. Fifty nine. Fall.

It is fall outside of the south. Oh, we have so much to talk about. Well, you and I haven’t spoken since the fall of Kevin McCarthy. Of course, now Donald Trump has decided that he doesn’t wanna be speaker, but he’s gonna endorse Jim Jordan. So Trump Jordan twenty twenty four, what could possibly go wrong?

We’ll talk about that. Interesting debate about whether the Democrats should have bailed out Kevin McCarthy. Meanwhile, just so it doesn’t get lost here, we had this, amazing jobs report that came out. I think, you know, the economy creating twice the number of non farm jobs expected, which means everybody’s gonna freak out in one way or another. This ABC report that suggests that Donald Trump was was shopping super secret sensitive information about nuclear submarines to Australian billionaires.

I mean, what could possibly go wrong there? And and it and it’s not even like the you know, top four news stories of the day. But could we do something first though, Tim?

I forgot about it. Well, before you get to I forgot about one sentence, exciting thing about the jobs report. Yeah. One sentence, I think, is it it showed that we are now back to pre pandemic levels of hospitality jobs. So I just wanna say to all my fellow people who like to go out and drink.

Yeah. And, you know, have a nice dinner. We did it. We did it. We did it.

We’ve come through. We’ve brought we’ve cut we’ve fully recovered, and, you know, the bars are back at full strength. So I thought that was good news.

Speaking of a good timing for the bars to be back strength. We just briefly mentioned that we’re we’re coming to your hometown of of New Orleans. We’re coming, later later this month, and you are we we’re having a special bulwark event for, you know, Bulwark plus members, actually anybody that wants to come to see us live. Mona’s gonna be there. Sunny gonna be there.

Sarah is going to be there. You’re going to be there. And you have scored a one on one interview with Walter Isaacson. Just give us a little bit of details about, the big easy. Bulwark and the big easy.

Yeah. He’s the king of New Orleans. So I’m so excited about that and and hope can give the people who are coming into town. Fly on into town. It’s beautiful in New Orleans and and late October.

So he can give some people, you know, the expert recommendations on, you know, where to get a nice gumbo or jumbelaya. And, I’m gonna interview him. You know, he’s been doing the Elon Musk tour. I think that me and Walter have a little bit of a different view on Evonus. So we might we might explore that a bit.

Interesting.

But then

I also wanna just get into him with the media stuff. I mean, he ran you know, CNN and Aspen fast. Right? You know, all this change

Time, magazine.

Time. And so, so much to talk to Walter about. So I I’m super excited about that. And and, you know, hopefully, you know, we can all have a daiquary together in the French quarter. The venue is great, La petite theater.

It’s right next to Jackson Square. So, people should come on down.

See, I’m looking forward to that moment. Where you lean forward, you lean in, and you say, Walter. Okay. Can we just cut it out here? Isn’t Elon Musk?

Just a completely deranged narcissistic fascist fuckwad. I mean, you you’re gonna ask him that. Right? I mean, it’s like Come on.

I’ve been already practicing that question, actually, and, I have a few different versions of it. That’s a new that’s a new proposal. So I’m I got a little notebook and, other ideas are welcome. Yeah. Something along those lines.

Yeah.

For people who listen to this podcast, on a regular basis. We’re also now on YouTube. If you wanna watch Tim and I doing all of this, we’re on YouTube and and you’ve been doing Tim’s takes. I’ve been doing Charlie Sykes. So we’re we’re experimenting with this.

And and I think we’re kind of bringing in a new audience. It’s it’s a different thing.

Yeah. And the big thing, and we don’t want you guys we love the OGs, we don’t want anybody to miss anything. But, like, what we’re finding is new people are finding us on YouTube. And that’s, like, part of the mission here. Right?

Like, you know, you can’t save democracy for buying a paywall. Bringing new people in. It’s been the thing I like the most about the Snapchat show is that, like, I hear from young people who do not, like, watch Nicole Wallace all day. Love you Nicole Walsh everyday watchers, but, you know, I, like, to talk to other people too. And so, so it’s been useful and that’s why we’re doing it.

And so if you to go over and subscribe and, you know, tell your teens or your grandchild and and maybe your case, to subscribe.

That’s right. Yeah. Yeah. No. You know, Elliott comes running down all the time and says, yeah.

Tim’s got a new video up on YouTube. And and and then you’ll repeat what you said about Kevin McCarthy, and I’m thinking, okay. This works. I actually see this. He’s not gonna sit and and necessarily read one of our, you know, two thousand word essays on it.

But He’s he’s there. So, this, by the way, is how we save democracy. Just as the voter. One shot at a time. Okay.

So let’s start with Kevin I have to say a couple of things. And I wanna use the term that I used on television with you last night. Yep. That congressional Republican politics is now Ruby cubes for morons because there’s just no way that it actually works.

I like how you’re running out of things to say on TV as noticing you’re like the crazed Jackal caucus, the Taliban caucus, the insane fuck wab caucus. It’s just like, you can, you know, I was I’m just I’m just smiling over that.

I was not coming close to running out of things. I mean, this is like, It is like a fire hose. Don’t do not worry about this, but let’s talk about Kevin McCarthy. Because, I wanna get into this whole debate about whether Democrats should have bailed out because There has been this very radical, you know, defining deviancy down in terms of our politics. I actually heard commentators saying, you know, Kevin McCarthy was actually a much better speaker.

Than we expected. Like, wait. What were our expectations here? Here’s a reality check from Liz Chaney. And I I we have a bunch of sound bites from Liz Cheney.

Liz Cheney, who reminds us, who Kevin McCarthy was, and why he was completely unfit to continue in office and why it would have been absolutely insane for the Democrats to have bailed him out. Here’s Liz Cheney speaking University of Minnesota this week.

Kevin McCarthy, at every moment over the course of the last two years. Has done more to enable and collaborate with and apologize for

Donald Trump. Kevin McCarthy stood

on the house floor an hour after the capital had been cleared and said that the objections should continue. He released security tapes to Tucker Carlson. He refused to abide by a subpoena that had been issued by the committee, and on and on and on. Oh. So the Democrats made what is a, principled and honorable and in my view the right decision to say, we cannot abide by that.

The Republicans need to choose their speaker here in the majority. But we are not gonna help to, enable somebody who has done those things and who has apologized and appeased Donald Trump. I think they did exactly the right thing, and it was a courageous show of leadership.

Okay. This will not be the first time that you and I have agreed with Liz Cheney, but You know, I mean, there there there there

there was some and, you know,

there there was some pearl clutching. You you’re not clutching your pearl on this, but it was like, oh, no. No. No. The the should have been the grown ups in the room.

They should have, stepped forward and bailed out the Republicans from their dysfunction. I’m gonna cut to the chase here. I completely disagree with that. Your take, Tim.

Yeah. I’m a ninety eight percent no on that and a hard no in my ninety eight percent. The two percent is Ukraine in which we can get it. I I am a little bit I’m a little worried about Ukraine. I think Kevin wanted to protect to that.

And so I could hear an argument for somebody from the Ukraine perspective. Besides that, fuck this guy. Right. Every way till Sunday. I love that Liz Cheney was calling Dems maybe whipping.

We don’t really know whether she was like actually whipping votes to say no, but I think maybe just giving them the cover. Right? Because sometimes the democrats do need a little bit of a buck on the on this sort of thing, on their on having the spine because a lot of them are earnest and do care about this sort of stuff. Right? And so I think that Liz, Jamie calling Goldman, and some of the others, and being like, no.

You know, shiv this guy. I think did help.

Yeah.

And I I will though I will also say I’ve I heard from a couple of Democrats on the hill you know, this week. And and I don’t actually think that they needed the buck up. I guess is really where I’m getting to this and this one. I I think that Kevin McCarthy had been so deceitful to them. You know, he’d rubbed it in their face on Brennan’s show as everybody’s discussed.

But also, you know, they remember all the stuff. They remember the January six Committee that he tried to sabotage. Person to person, it was just kinda like throw him overboard, you know, tie a brick to his leg and, you know, we’ll see what happens. And and I think that that’s basically right. Sure.

Sure. He kept the government open and we didn’t default. And that’s not nothing. But, like, you know, had he done anything to demonstrate that he was gonna act in good faith, but be conservative, that’s one thing. But he wasn’t.

He was bad faith all the way down. And so it’s like But what so how much worse is it? Why don’t we just remove the mask and see Jim Jordan as speaker? Because Jim Jordan was basically speaker anyway.

I do understand the the the concerns about Ukraine, but in terms of the dumbing down our our our standards, here here is a guy who has been just a shameless shield for denialism, ran down to Mar a Lago through a lifeline to to Donald Trump, you know, pushed ahead with this. The bogus, evidence free impeachment of of Joe Biden. And somehow, Democrats were supposed to prop him up because why. Now if there was a grand bargain out there, if he was Will Saletan, there there was that that other And I’ve described this as Rubik Hughes for morons, is that, you know, that you either have to appease the lunatic caucus or you have to make a deal with the Democrats which, of course, will enrage the base. But to make that deal with the Democrats, you would have to, okay, say, what?

We’re gonna not do the impeachment bullshit. We’re not gonna do some of these other things. Was no way he was gonna do that. He announced right away I’m not gonna deal with the Democrats, and then everybody’s like, whoa, wait. Why are the Democrats not lowering their standards to the point where they’re going to empower this particular guy.

So He didn’t even call to ask. He didn’t even call to ask.

The other argument that is not totally baseless is Kevin McCarthy was the devil that you knew. And so now what you’ve done is you have empowered even worse people Whoever replaces him is going to be worse. It’s going to be somebody like a Jim Jordan or a Steve scalise who again playing this Rubik’s cube for morons is gonna have to either have to do the exact same thing that Kevin McCarthy did, which is make one concession after another to the bomb throwers, gonna go through the Jackal caucus. See, crazed lunatic Jackal caucus, Alabama, or he’s going to have to cut a deal with Democrats. I don’t see how any of that works.

Right? So so what about the argument that Okay. You’re gonna get somebody who is much, much, much works.

Again, I I guess my thing is is, like, are they gonna be much much much worse. Just to who they are. These guys controlled McCarthy. He did the debt ceiling deal. That is good.

Would Jim Jordan have done it? Probably not. But, like, here’s the thing. The Republican Party has been deteriorating slowly but surely in front of our eyes for eleven years now when Nor Warrenstein wrote that article in the post about how the republicans are the problem when Bainer was the speaker. Right?

So he went from Bainer and then it went to, you know, Paul Ryan had to do it and then Kevin. And so, like, This is the inevitable endpoints. And

that’s I knew.

Right? Of getting to a Jim Jordan or someone even dumber than that speaker. Like, we’ve been on this for a long time, and the Democrats were not gonna stop that trajectory. Right? Like, the Republicans need to stop their own, you know, debasement.

And they need to do it by taking a little pain. And they’ve never been willing to do it. Right? And the pain being that, like, some their base is gonna be mad at them. I think that this wasn’t the inevitable trajectory.

Did the Democrats like press the gas pedal on it a little bit by voting for this? Yep. Yeah. They did. But for how long?

I mean, maybe they only sped it up by forty five days. Like, could Kevin McCarthy have really survived the next government shutdown? Like, probably not. Like, they probably would have thrown him over then. You know?

So it’s like the problem with the institution is the Republican Party and the Republican conference. Like, that’s the institution that is right now that needs to be dealt with.

Kevin McCarthy is is very much a symbol of who the Republicans are in Congress. I mean, he he was the face of all that, and that is not gonna change. So we may get Jim Jordan. Donald Trump decided last night to the surprise of some folks that, because I think when you and I were on television last night, There was, this this buzz about Donald Trump is thinking about going back to the Capitol and is offering himself as an interim speakership, you know? Instead, apparently, he’s endorsing Jim Jordan.

And by the way, before we get to the the trump thing, let’s just a reminder who Jim Jordan is. Let’s just remind you. Liz Cheney provides the public service by, by just saying, you know, remember the Jim Jordan with the role that he played in January sixth. Let’s let’s play Liz Cheney.

Jim Jordan, knew more about what Donald Trump had planned for January sixth. Than any other member of the House of Representatives. Jim Jordan was involved was part of the conspiracy in which Donald Trump was engaged as he attempted to overturn the election.

Also relevant.

Jim Jordan, if you think about the extent to which, people have now said, well, it was Speaker Pelosi’s fault. That Donald Trump’s mob invaded the capital, that, you know, the security wasn’t sufficient enough. The person who knew there were probably more than just Jim, but there was a handful of people of which he was the leader who knew what Donald Trump had planned. Now somebody needs to ask Jim Jordan, why didn’t you report to the Capitol Police? What you knew Donald Trump had planned.

Wow. You were in those meetings at the White House.

Somebody should ask that.

And if the Republicans decide that Jim Jordan should be the speaker of the house, there Will Saletan, by the way, I don’t think that’s gonna happen. I think he’ll lose.

A dispute list first time.

If they were to decide that, there would no longer be any possible way to argue that a group of elected Republicans could be counted on to defend the constitution.

Damn. Now, there’s there’s a grim warning. Okay. So Tim, you disagree? Okay.

So Donald Trump is weighed in. Donald Trump is rhea asserting his control. I mean, he is the big dog who is basically lifting his leg on the capitol and says I own this.

Yeah. Just I also wanna add a little bit to it list. Said there, which was really right on. Jim Jordan also spoke at a stop to steal rally in Pennsylvania after the election. Mean, I guess this is part of what she was alluding to, but just to be more specific, he participated in numerous post election meetings in which Rudy Giuliani and others discussed strategies for challenging the election on he was on a conference called Trump on January second.

So, anyway, I mean, he was part and parcel with the coup attempt. And so I I I do think that you know, that this should be the Republicans need to, like, have this held around their neck, and he needs to have to answer for it. And these the quote unquote normal Republicans are gonna have to decide whether or not they wanna completely own this. Here’s the problem is they already own it. Like, Donald Trump’s gonna be the nominee.

Right? And so when I just game this out, I would love to be wrong. I always wanna caution this. I would love to be wrong. But when I game this out, I just see that the Jim Jordan Jackle Taliban, fuckwad, caucus, whatever we’re calling them.

Right? Those guys are not gonna fold. We’ve seen it already. You know, they are not gonna Seven

eight of them, man.

Yeah. Yeah. Seven or eight of them. Right? Like, at least some number.

Probably maybe a little more. I mean, it was up to nineteen twenty in the first round of January, and there are other names you can throw in the mix. You know, so there’s a really about two dozen of them to kind of rotate through. Right? That are crazy at various ways.

They’re not gonna go for a normal person. Right? And so the question is, are there five Republicans in this conference who Will Saletan. I can’t do an insurrectionist Let’s try to cut a deal. Steve’s release.

You don’t think so? You don’t think it’s mine?

I don’t know. That’s the big question. Right? Are there five? Because because he’s gonna be no on Ukraine.

He’s gonna be zero dollars on Ukraine Right. Pro insurrection pro impeachment. So there are five people Are there just five Republicans who say, sorry. I can’t do all three

of those. This is the key question, isn’t. And and this this is where we we get to the the nub of this. He has to get two hundred and eighteen votes. He can’t just get a majority of

Right.

The Republican caucus. He’s clearly Donald Trump’s candidate. So, you know, there are members of of the house who would like to, perhaps, distance themselves a little bit from Donald Trump. If Jim Jordan is elected, it becomes not just Donald Trump’s Republican Party, but certainly Donald Trump you know, Republican congress as well. There is no distancing whatsoever from here.

Right? So in many ways, This is, as you pointed out last night on television, this is Donald Trump reasserting his control over the party, but this has got to be one of the worst nightmares for a lot of Republicans in swing districts or who are, say, quietly, Trump skeptical or pro Ukraine, all of that. It’s also gotta be a gift. To the Democrats and to the Biden campaign. Such.

We were thinking, boy, you know, we want twenty twenty four to be a referendum on Trumpism, and this just, this just ratchets it up times ten.

Yeah. It’s a huge gift. And that’s, I think, the biggest threat to Jordan. Right? I I think that in let’s just go through and you did a little bit of this.

It was Ben Willis, but in order of pop probability. Right? I I would say that Jim Jordan, like, if he comes out and he gets a hundred fifty members. It’s like eventually kind of inertia takes hold. Right?

I I think that’s the most likely most likely. I don’t think that’s a hundred percent. I just think that’s the most

likely.

Yeah. The second most likely is that there are enough members that say, you know, I can’t do it. It’s just it’s too much. Trumpism, we’re gonna get crushed in the swing districts. Not to have scalise instead.

We’re throwing up scalise or somebody else, right, some other conservative guy. Now most of us, you know, in the BullWork world, their Democrat Pro Demox, you’re able to be is this really much better? I mean, Steve scalise was also voted to overturn the election, but they might be able to tell themselves that it’s like a consensus choice. I think that’s the next most likely. The third most likely, but I don’t think is zero.

Is that five of them say, guys, I’m sorry. There’s a reverse gates. Like, I don’t I don’t think that there are fifty of them, but are there five of them that can do the reverse gates and say, nope. Like, I we need somebody even more attuned to swing district voters’ needs I think that’s a low chance, but I think they should be pressure. So who and all those guys, Mike Gallagher, Don Bacon, fits Patrick in sylvania.

We validate you in California. Go down the list. They should be saying, are you going to vote for somebody that will not fund Ukraine once you impeach Joe Biden over nothing? And and it was for the Donald Trump coup because those are gonna be the three parts of your plank. And can five of them finally show balls for the first time since twenty sixteen Well, unless you count our friend Adam and and Liz who who already have done it.

But but, you know, can five of them do it? I don’t think so, but I don’t think it’s zero I don’t think it’s totally fantasy.

I don’t think it’s zero at all. And and by the way, could you just remind me since we’re we’re adding to the Jim Jordan resume?

Yeah.

Remember when he was, the the ranking Republic a member of the judiciary committee before he became chair. He was responsible for that legendary tweet. What was it, Elon? Yeah. Trump and Kanye.

Yeah. Or I can Yeah. That’s worked out. Yeah. So Yeah.

That’s what he wants the party’s brand to be. Right.

Is this the future of conserve I have to do a a thing next week with some local university students. And I I don’t wanna be too mean because they’re these young Republicans, very, very earnest and everything. And I am tempted to do to show up and say, okay. So let’s talk about, the state of modern conservatism. Is it Elon, Trump, and Kanye?

Discuss. Just wanna mention that. That

would be a good place to start. I think

it is definitely non zero chance that people are gonna go, no. This this is nuts. We can’t do this. It’s one thing terms is gonna be the nominee. We just need to keep our heads down and go in a different direction.

This is like all in, all in on all of this. And plus, it means that each and every one of them will be asked all the questions that you just raised. You know, it’s one thing to say, well, what do you think of Donald Trump’s role in the insurrection now going to be, well, you voted for somebody who, was one of the conspirators. So I actually think and, by the way, can I do something really profoundly stupid on this podcast? Let’s do it.

And I wanna signal it as something that is probably stupid and that I will almost certainly regret.

Yep. I’m ready.

I think that there is at least a thirty three percent chance that six months from now, the speaker will be Patrick McHenry Really? Because he’s there. Just inertia. If everything goes to shit, what do you do? The guy who’s there just stays there.

Now what I am very, very confident on And I would strongly discourage any listeners from, smoking any of the Hopium, that there will be five Republicans who will switch parties and vote for King Jefferies.

Yeah. No.

That is just wishcasting, that is just fantasizing. I mean, look, it’s one thing to fantasize that maybe wouldn’t it be great to be with Taylor Swift? It’s something else to get in a car and go to her house and hold up a sign saying, date me. I mean, there there’s there’s fantasy and then there’s crazy stocky fantasy.

Even I do wanna say that seems dangerous. Can I just say I do think the problem might be Taylor? I know this isn’t the point of this

god knows, but, you know, I mean, she

has once you’ve had twelve relationships go sour and you sing about all of them, I do think the problem might be her. So maybe fantasize about somebody else that you can have a future with. This is something else to think about. For folks.

I don’t

know. Just one idea.

So you’re saying that there’s a chance that Taylor Swift could be the next speaker of the house.

I think it’s higher than Joaquin Jeffrey. But, not much.

We agree on that one. They have one more Liz Cheney, Soundbyte, because among the things that pass so quickly, and, you know, we’ve talked about this, is that Donald Trump layers one outrage upon another to the point where we get what Brian Class calls the banality of crazy where the media goes. Okay. So, yeah, Donald Trump just gave another speech where he’s he’s endorsed extrajudicial murders. He’s mocking the hammer attack on Nancy Pelosi’s husband.

And it’s kinda same old same old. Right? It’s like, wait. No. He’s leading candidate for president who’s calling for judicial killings, but the media is sort of locked into the novelty, and it’s not new that Donald Trump is crazy.

But We are still a few weeks out from the former and perhaps future president of the United States calling for the death penalty for one of the nation’s leading generals. Mark Millie, and as far as I know Tim, no other Republican has denounced him for this, but Liz Cheney brought it up In Minnesota. This is what Liz Cheney said about, the death threat against Mark Miller.

The leading presidential candidate. He’s not just the former president. The leading presidential candidate called for the execution of the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff in the United States of America.

Seems

American. I don’t care if you are a Republican or a Democrat, a defense hawk, or a pacifist, an isolationist, or somebody who believes in a strong national defense, Every American must condemn that. Every American must stand against that.

You’d think But that that’s not happening. Is it Tim?

No. And, you know, not to get too repetitive because I I’ve been this before, but I I am frustrated with the media on this. Oh, yeah. On the military thing, but also just on these other items, this is their job. Right?

Like, this is the nightly news’s job to keep track of the in saying, like, the extrajudicial killings about the shoplifters, that even kind of went over me over my head a little bit. And I’m, like, obsessed with the stuff. So I I understand that there’s a challenge here. That you would think that that would be something that people would talk about. This is what we did in twenty sixteen.

I think there’s we are over learning the lesson a little bit. You know, one thing that I I’m frustrated with is, you know, obviously, there’s all this chaos in the house, and so that’s the lead story. But the Senate’s doing nothing. And, you know, we there was a period of time, right, where, you know, we had the hill reporters that would go up to every Senate Marco Rubio and be like, what do you think about the fact that Donald Trump wants to deport Elon Omar. What do you think about this and that?

Right? They don’t even do that anymore. Right? So when you say I haven’t heard any Republicans condemn. They’re not even being given the chance to condemn.

So his opponents in the primary aren’t condemning. I mean, like, this is the thing. Like, everyone has just gotten so beaten down by this. I think it’s really alarming. I think the Washington Post article about this was was very important and critical.

Shake people back awake.

I hope they do. And if I understand how how hard it is, because There are people who are listening to us right now who are saying, you know, the answer is we should just not give him any oxygen. We shouldn’t cover him. We should ignore him. No.

Completely wrong. You know, you need to know what he is saying, what he is promising because he’s being very, very clear and unambiguous about it. So I reject that. The other problem though is the media is there’s just too much. We can’t spend this much time, and it is repetitive.

But I think Brian class made the point. That you need to stress the magnitude of his comments, not just the novelty. When he says these things, we have to cover So you you mentioned the the the primary opponents and they’re sort of, you know, doing the slap fighting with Donald Trump. So Rhonda Sanders’s folks are touting this, somebody that I wanna play here is like, now he’s taking the gloves off. He’s really going after Donald Trump This is, after he’s fallen to watch third, fourth, fifth place in the polls.

Here’s Ron DeSantis’ latest big attack. On Donald Trump.

A voter that goes to ten rallies, their vote counts the same as somebody that’s unenthusiastic, and then that goes in votes. And and we just have to understand that. And people will act like twenty twenty. They’re like

Black of

America was was such a disaster. But here’s the thing. I don’t think I don’t think anybody voted for Biden. Okay?

I did.

They were voting against Trump. That was why they did it. I mean, let’s just be honest. He and he energized Democrats You could have John Kennedy walk through the door right now, and he wouldn’t energize Democrats as much as Donald Trump does. That’s just the reality.

What did we do in Florida with these Democrats? We defeated these Democrats. We left the Democratic party in Florida in a pile of ruins.

Don, he makes Democrats mad. That’s the big hit. That’s kind of the point, actually, if Donald Trump That was almost an ad for Donald Trump.

Yeah. So I it it seems the same old same old. I mean, you know, it’s I’m sorry, because I had run out of terms, you know, too little too late. Tim, wanna turn over the the wheel to you for just a second here because, Fox News is Greg Gutfield.

You have to pee. I’m sorry. I thought I thought maybe you had to run and We’re on camera now.

I’m sticking around at least for now. Okay. Thank you for caring. I feel the concern there. Greg Godfield, who is influential guy on Fox News.

By the way, is he supposed to be funny?

Apparently, he’s their he’s their late night man. His ratings are good, I guess.

Okay. So Up until about five minutes ago, conservatives would have denied that we are not anti democracy. We’re not anti elections. This is Trump derangement syndrome. The reason we tried to burn down the capital was because we cared so deeply about democracy because we are so concerned about the integrity of elections.

And, you know, there’s been kind of this slip slide. So I wanna play the and this you highlighted this. I would have missed this, Tim, if it if it wasn’t for you. You highlighted this, little rant from Greg Guttsfield. Let’s listen to Okay?

Oh, elections don’t work. We know that. We know they don’t work.

They do.

Look what we have. Look what we have. But, Kevin, we had a moderate president. And we have crime exploding everywhere. We had a Democrat president promise that he was gonna be moderate.

Promise that he was gonna unite the country. And now We have a terrible education system. We have no border. We have crime everywhere. Every facts of society is in peril and in chaos.

Because our elections don’t matter.

Okay. Our elections don’t matter. And he goes on to say basically that’s why we have to have a civil war. I mean, so Tim, what what what going on there.

Every facet of our societies and chaos, this shit just pisses me off so much. Oh, yeah. Like, this guy was really ready for Joe Biden, the United Country, the Fox News guy with the five o’clock in the ten o’clock show on Fox. If, you know, he was certainly open to Joe Biden’s efforts

Yeah.

To, you know, provide an olive branch. The thing is, Charlie Sykes, This chef is really, like, it’s mockable, but it’s also really dangerous. But, like, this guy is, like, a reasonable guy, like, the viewers, there are a lot of unreasonable people view watching. And they’re looking at this and they’re saying, well, this isn’t, you know, this isn’t Judge Box of wine. This is gutfeld.

Like, gutfeld’s on the five o’clock show. He’s on the during the day. Right? Like, and he’s out there saying that elections don’t matter. Our entire society is in chaos, and we might need to resort to a civil war.

The rest of the clip, you know, he’s talking about how you know, this is the parallel between the situation that Republicans are in right now where they are persecuted by a group And he he somehow makes some torture comparison to slavery about how the other side can’t admit that they’re wrong, just like the slavers could admit they’re wrong. And so,

and that’s good. We we had to go to war with them and kill them.

You go to war with them and kill them. Okay.

So this is this is the analogy to this

is my corporate thoughts. And it’s just like Greg Gutfeld went to Cal. Okay? Like, he lives in soho. One of my friends, like, texted him off.

We were texting all this. He’s like, I’ve been to his I’ve been to his flat. Okay. He lives in Manhattan. He’s a very rich man.

He has two shows on prime time fox. I assume that he has some cats, you know, because he doesn’t seem to have a family. And, like, I assume that he has a driver that takes him to work. Like, what is his life? Like, his life is society is in chaos.

Like, we’ve got problems. New York City is one of the safest cities in America right now. It’s not this is not it’s not the nineteen eighties. It’s not pre rudy. New York.

There’s crime in New York. Yeah. But, like, there’s that with it is not, you know, it is not a wasteland. Right? Like, the this is not a dystopian movie if you go to fucking Fox.

This is kind of the essence of the authoritarian attack on liberal democracy. Right? The liberal democracy does not keep you safe. Liberal democracy does not keep order. Liberal democracy Right.

Is going to lead to this chaos. So, therefore, we need to move past those norms and elections are not the answer. And this is part of this moving of the overton window of what what is acceptable. So before Tucker Carlson, the idea of, you know, the great replacement there These brown people are coming in and these Jews, they’re gonna replace you. This was fringe thought.

Now it’s mainstream. Now you have Greg Gottfield talking about Yeah. Elections don’t work. Everything is complete chaos. We need to have a civil war because the slavers weren’t gonna give up the slaves unless we went and shot them.

And it’s pretty much the same thing with these liberal progressive mayors and say, Wait. So is this now moving this window of acceptability of Donald Trump talking about the border? By the way, there’s legitimate concerns about the border. But his new rhetoric, by the way, speaking of new rhetoric and being numbed by it, he’s now talking about these immigrants coming in and poisoning our blood.

Sure.

Now I understand there will people think that it’s Trump derangement syndrome to say, this kinda sounds like that German guy who talked about you know, aliens poisoning the pure aryan blood, but it’s like, woah, this is the kind of rhetoric. That had no place in American politics just a few years ago.

The authoritarian side of this is exactly what right. The authoritarian threat against liberal democracy because Greg Gutfeld is a five foot five little man with Napoleon syndrome. That’s what this It’s like, we need a strong man.

Is he really five foot five?

He might be five six and a half. I don’t know. We need a conservative strong man that is going to stop this. And it ties directly to the Shoplifter’s question. Right?

Like, the trump thing that we’re talking about. We need somebody that’s gonna say, oh, if you wanna steal from the store, we’re not gonna have a trial. I am gonna assume that you stole from the store and I’m gonna shoot you. This is Taliban style. Right?

Like, I’m gonna decide by looking at you. Maybe Bulwark. Yeah. Like, I’m gonna look at you and decide, do you look like a thief? And then I’m just gonna be able to shoot you.

Now is this gonna happen in twenty twenty five? No. That these threats But, like, this is how, you know, a over the long march, we get younger conservatives deciding that this is what conservatism means and how it becomes more and more authoritarian over time. And this answered the threats of these people that are unstable that do not live in flats in soho, that do not have, you know, riches unimaginable by everybody who in history who are struggling and who have guns and who have to be like, you know, Greg Gutfeld’s right. Maybe I’m should be the one to fire the first weapon because Greg’s certainly not gonna do it.

I can be elite, even a little bit more, dystopian here.

Oh, great.

Donald Trump is clearly also sending a message to law enforcement. I mean, you know, let’s put this in some contact Donald Trump has a king for brutality and for bloodshed. And he’s been talking about it. He’s been talking about war crimes. He’s been talking about pardoning.

On camera. He doesn’t wanna see blood. He was he gets tired.

Oh my god. You’re right, but he he has a kink about at least other people doing these sorts of things. And he’s made it clear that remember when he spoke to those cops and he says, don’t be so nice to those people. Maybe bump their heads and everything. Yeah.

Look, what he’s also saying is that How dystopian do I want to be here?

Rest of

the We’re, like, five minutes away from him saying, you know what, if you’re a cop and you shoot some fuck out there, I’m gonna pardon you. Right. I’m gonna use my pardon powers to pardon you. Here’s another contact. It’s twenty twenty three.

Right? We’re only a few years, out from the murder of George Floyd. And think about, you know, the country was coming together. There was a moment. We said we need to deal with the the problem of police violence, Bulwark lives matter.

Perhaps there were, you know, extreme things right there. But now three years later, one of the central planks of the Republican nominees platform is Yeah. We ought to shoot more people. We ought to shoot people who committed nonviolent crimes. I understand that looting is terrible, and that shoplifting is a real problem.

But this notion that I will order law enforcement officials or give them a green light to shoot to kill people. There are possible consequences to this. And there’s no pushback. Not only there’s no pushback, but Ron DeSantis is saying, well, yeah, I’m gonna kill people at the border. We’re gonna shoot them stone cold dead too because of what might be in their backpack.

And the people love this, Tim, and you know how this works. He’s watching that crowd, and that is that’s the ultimate erogenous zone for Margo right now.

Grew with all that. I just wanna put a finer point on one thing that the the pardon point that you made about the cops, which is the article I wrote this week is some actual real life evidence for what you’re saying that people are gonna start thinking about this. There there’s this guy Mike Davis who used to be an establishment, republican guys, which which just shows you the radicalization of all this. But Mike Davis talked about how he wants to be attorney general.

Oh, yeah.

He’s gonna have a reign of terror. And during the reign of terror, he described all the horrible things he’s gonna do deportations and gulags and all this other fan fiction for demented people. But the line in there that Bill Crystal actually pointed out to me after watching the clip that I wrote about, he was like, the line in here that’s the most concerning is the part of mine. Because he lists all these horrible things he’s gonna do as attorney general. And then he’s like, and then I’m gonna eventually get pushed out, but but I know that Donald Trump will part of me.

And all of Donald Trump’s pardons of Manafort and Stone, that he has set the tone for this, right, that if he gets in there again, that his people quote, unquote, can do whatever they want, and they will know that he will pardon them. And that is

a People need to pay attention. Okay.

Yes. This is a very, very real threat.

This is very real threat. And in fact, you remember at one point, Trump was suggesting when he was talking to border agents that that if they violated people’s rights that they if they broke, don’t worry about it because I will take care of you. This is a real danger. When you when you think about, okay, so in our constitutional system, we have unlimited pardon power, which I increasingly have come to think is it was a mistake by the founding fathers to give that sort of thing because they assume that nobody like Donald Trump would ever be president or that if someone did abuse it, that the Congress would exercise its impeachment, that, you know, impeachment is now a kind of a dead letter in terms of holding him accountable. He could actually do this.

Okay. So I I wanna come back to the border in a moment, but I’m sorry. This story today, in ABC, holding this up to the screen.

Oh, yeah. Yeah. The nuclear the stars.

Trump allegedly discussed US nuclear subs with foreign national after leaving the White House. See, the thing about the Mar a lago document case is, you know, originally, I think there might have been some thought. Okay. Maybe it’s just trivial stuff know, it’s just papers. He’s keeping them around his souvenirs.

But it’s hard to imagine if you and I were just gaming out this or if we were writing a script, then it would be almost too much on the nose to say what was the most sensitive possible thing you might leak out? How about the capabilities of American nuclear submarines? So here’s the ABC report. Months after leaving the White House, former president Donald Trump allegedly discussed potentially sensitive information about US nuclear submarines with a member of his Mar a Lago club, an Australian billionaire, of course, who then allegedly shared the information with scores of others, including more than a dozen foreign officials, several of his own employees, and a handful of journalists according to sources. The potential disclosures were reported to a special counsel Jack Smith’s team blah blah blah blah blah, you know, prosecutors have interviewed this guy His name is Anthony Pratt, who runs Pratt Industries.

In those interviews, Pratt described how looking to conversation with Trump, he brought up the American submarine fleet, which the two had discussed, according to Pratt, as described by the sources. Pratt, the billionaire, told Trump that he believed Australia should start buying its submarines from the United States to which an excited Trump leaning toward Pratt. As if to be discreet, then told Pratt. So it’s pieces of information about US submarines. The supposed exact number of nuclear warheads they routinely carry and exactly how close they supposedly can get to a Russian submarine without being detected.

Nothing to see there, Tim.

There’s another part of that story where the this guy mentions that the, you know, Mar a Lago male cougar, whatever the word is for male cougar that is at Marilago. That he mentions it to three. Jackal. Three. Yeah.

Jackal. There you go. Three. Ocelot, three former prime ministers of Australia. Again, like, this guy was been talking about it and chatting about it.

I don’t this is not my area of expertise. Don’t know exactly how big the threats are, but again, it I think it showed the

Doesn’t sound good.

Yeah. It shows the legitimate concerns people had with the Saudis, Like, what what is Jared whispering to the Saudis if if they’re just whispering things to random Australians at Mar a lago? I do wanna find one other thing. Do you remember the story? I’m not saying that there’s a direct connection here, but again, I think it just shows the sensitivity of all this stuff and the recklessness, which what Trump was dealing with it.

Here’s a story from September twenty twenty one. Australia bailed on a submarine contract with France worth sixty six billion last week choosing instead to work with the United States. Outrage, France, recalled its ambassadors from the US and Australia. Very well. Could be nothing to do with the story.

But but I I just think that that shows right that that was there that all of this stuff is very sensitive that there is a reason they call it diplomacy. And like, you know, you just can’t be just randomly going up to people at weddings at your club, like talking about nuclear subs. Like, that’s just something you can’t do.

Okay. So the fact that we know about this conversation, I mean, ought to at least suggest that maybe there were other conversations Sure. Maybe this was the chit chat around Mar a lago. Yeah. I mean, think about how how much foreign government spend on espionage.

And yet, the cheapest thing they could possibly do apparently is buy a membership tomorrow, a lago.

And we already know that was happening. We already know the Chinese were doing that. So I’m sure there are things we don’t know.

And it’s interesting to remember all the outrage about the Chinese balloon. How dare we allow that Chinese balloon? And there’s Donald Trump going, hey, yeah, the nukes. You know, they have seven nukes. They can get it within, you know, a hundred feet of what whatever.

Okay. Change changing gears because you can explain this to me. Maybe you can explain this to me.

Oh, pressure.

I’m genuinely confused. This is not like pretend confused. What is going on with Joe Biden and the wall? The border wall? Do you know the can you can you track that out for me?

I think I can answer this. Thank you.

I think I was just phoning on you.

Now, I mean, I’m sure you we could bring on an immigration reporter that could give you the nitty gritty

of this,

but I can give you the broad strokes. So the previous Congress, right, had funded certain amounts of the wall that Donald Trump didn’t build. Right? This is something we all know. You know, Mexico is gonna pay for it.

No. It turns out they weren’t. America’s money paying for it. Donald Trump, despite this being his top priority, you know, only built, like, you know, one nineteenth of the wall or something, one fifty ninth.

Yeah.

And so there were at least, I think, twenty more miles that had been funded when Biden came in. There were some legal wrangling over this, some fighting over this, but the parallel I can think of is when the Obama administration had to defend doma, you know, and they’re like, Obama’s like, I’m not for this, but this is the law. We live in a country with rules and laws. I’m like, you know, the government, if something has passed the congress and been signed, the government, you know, there are only so much you can do. Mhmm.

And so the Biden administration, I think, basically said, okay. Well, now this has been decided in the courts, and now we gotta build these twenty miles. So there’s already been the, you know, already been the funds for. Okay. Now within the Biden administration, I think that there are competing views.

Right? There are some people that are like, this is really bad and terrible. There are some people, apparently, my orcas, out of department of homeland security. They’re like, actually, we could probably use twenty more miles. Like, I’m not for the full wall, but, like, this place is, you know, this is a high traffic place.

And maybe president Biden disagrees with him, apparently. Because during a comment yesterday, you know, Biden was like, no. This doesn’t work. So Does it work? Does it not?

I don’t I don’t know. I I think that that is like what is happening here, which is I think that they they legally obligated to do it and they have differing views within the White House. And, obviously, this is an ideal. Usually, it’s best for the White House to speak with one voice and have a clear message on things like this. And frankly, you could see some political advantage maybe to saying, Hey.

Yeah.

Well, this is what I was gonna get to because the political playbook, if I’m if I’m remembering this, seem to suggest that this marked a little bit of a of a pivot, and I actually rather dramatic pivot on Biden’s part because he recognizes they recognize this as a huge political liability. And so you’re seeing a little bit of panic here. Look, they’re they they’re throwing some up against the border because this is going to be a big issue in twenty twenty four. You don’t see it that way? You see it as more of a bureaucratic working working through as opposed to.

Guys, we gotta do something at the border because whatever we’ve been doing isn’t

Yeah. I think it’s two thing. I think that it’s bureaucratic. I do think that Joe Biden, I know he gets no credit for this, but has been, like, to my taste actually a little too cautious on Yeah. Liberalizing immigration stuff.

I I think that it might I don’t know this, but I think that it might help. One thing that might help is expanding the amount of a salees or expect to, you know, and expanding a guest worker program. So that might take some pressure off the border. Maybe that wouldn’t help, but that’s I think that’s one idea that’s out there. A lot of pro immigration groups are pushing for.

He hasn’t wanted to do that because he doesn’t wanna seem like too pro immigrant. I think he’s worried about Right? And I think Joe Biden does come from this old union Democratic, you know, mindset that was a little hostile to immigration, right, because of wages and all that. Right.

I

think that Biden has not been the liberal open borders president that the Fox wants him to be. I think that the problem at the border is very real. I think that there’s some people in the administration that are concerned that, you know, maybe they can do some things to alleviate that, you know, to make it less of a political problem. I think that the real long and short of this is. I don’t think the Biden administration has a coherent view on immigration.

I think these are a lot of staffers who are super liberal. He’s more cautious. There are couple department of homeland security guys. They’re like, let’s be tougher and end up with a policy that’s kind of

Okay. See, I think that’s exactly right. Is that you don’t have a coherent policy. You do have progressive elites who have a very outsized role in the Democratic Party. Rui Tashara is absolutely right about this.

But I think that you’re also right that Joe Biden has very different instincts. And so you get that push pull. And it’s kinda messy. Then they they need to clean it up. Over the next couple of months, what are you gonna be watching over the weekend?

Tim, give me something to keep an eye on.

What am I gonna be watching over the weekend? I mean, I guess I’m gonna watch you to see if there’s any actual momentum against Jim Jordan, which we talked about at the top. I’m gonna be going to the goose concert at Red Rock in about, twelve hours. So I’ll be watching goose then I guess that’s a more Excellent. Micro answer to your question.

I hate that question. I know as as soon as we hang up, I’ll be like, oh, I’m gonna be watching this other thing.

So what we’re all gonna be watching is how deep the chaos is going to be in the Republican, you know, caucus? I mean, they’re it’s like a euphemism you know, the Republicans are now in uncharted territory, which means no one has any fucking idea what’s gonna happen right now. And so it is going to be interesting to see what is the reaction to Trump’s endorsement of Jordan? Do they just roll over as they are won’t to do? As they usually do, will there be some pushback Are there five Republicans were gonna say, no.

We don’t wanna go with with the seditionists. You know, is there going to be any rallying around scalise is this going to be one of those things where it’s going to be next week, where it’s going to be fifteen, twenty ballots. And are they gonna say, okay. Patrick McHenry, we don’t care. You just stay there.

You just keep doing that. As long as long as you keep expound by the way, what what do you make of the expelling of Nancy Pelosi? From her capital office. It just seems like pettiness on steroids, but also an indication of this is our future. It’s going to be about retribution and revenge from here on.

The Nancy Pelosi thing is re is related to my answer to your other question, which is who are we watching? And we’re watching the people I don’t wanna pick on my my friend Jonah who I agree with on a lot, but they’re this phrase called the closet normals that use. So there’s a lot of closet normals over there. And republicans who are normal, but they have to be in the closet about it. Deep And and yeah.

They’re deep blue. And I know a lot about the closets. So I can talk to you about that. About the way that that, warps one’s brain. But, McHenry is, like, the poster boy for this group.

Right? If you ask anybody who are the closet normals, McHenry is, like, first name that comes up.

He looks like a normal. Right? I mean,

he looks like it. He’s from the old chamber of commerce wing of the party. He’s been he’s managed to survive. You know, by keeping his head down. Bow tie.

Bow tie. You can’t be an authoritarian with a bow tie. You know what I mean? Like, you have to be a Michael j fi. Oh, well, was he an Alex dkeaton republican with anyway.

Well, I mean, tackle Carlson lost the bow tie right about the time that he decided to go, you’re fascist. Right? Because, hey, you know, he gave me mussolini in a bow tie.

Great point. Anyway, I will be watching the mccannies of the world to see if any of them actually let their normal out of the closet. And the the Pelosi action leads me to expect that the answer is gonna be no. Because it’s like if this guy is the one that we’re supposed to be like, oh, he’s gonna bring some you know, just, like, take the temperature down. But then he’s up there banging the gavel like an angry little elf and saying, I’m taking the keys to your office while you’re at a funeral I that leads me to believe that that there just aren’t that many people that are gonna come out and, you know

There’s no deep closet state here. It’s it’s we’re really left with you know, what degree of crazier be going for. And considering the fact that people are going, you know, maybe we should have propped up Kevin McCarthy. It’s an indication that it’s just sort of like crazy, less crazy, sedition is crazy, what? We’re just constantly defining our deviancy down.

Right? So Hey, have a great weekend. It’s always good to talk with you, Tim, and thank you all for listening to this weekend’s Bulwark podcast. I’m Charlie Sykes. We will be back on Monday.

And we’ll do this all over again. And by the way, if you are a regular listener to the podcast, you might want to check us out on on YouTube as well. Tim’s got his takes. I’ve got my Charlie takes and this whole conversation is up on YouTube now. Buller podcast is produced by Katie Cooper, and engineered and edited by Jason Brown.