Support The Bulwark and subscribe today.
  Join Now

Will Saletan: Pence’s Profile in Half-Courage

March 13, 2023
Notes
Transcript

Mike Pence is trying win over the DC press corps but still refuses to do his part to hold Trump accountable for January 6. Plus, the new too-big-to-fail banks, more Fox dirt, and DeSantis is not a natural people person. Will Saletan is back with Charlie Sykes for Charlie and Will Monday.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This transcript was generated automatically and may contain errors and omissions. Ironically, the transcription service has particular problems with the word “bulwark,” so you may see it mangled as “Bullard,” “Boulart,” or even “bull word.” Enjoy!
  • Speaker 1
    0:00:00

    You all know this slow and relaxing time between the holidays and summer. Hopefully, you’re coasting up inside, catching up on some sleep, and enjoying long warnings. In the bed. Look, however you’re spending the winter season, make sure that you’re getting your best sleep with a set of buttery soft sheets from Bolen branch made with the softest one hundred percent organic cotton you’ve ever felt is the kind of quality you will feel immediately. Make the most of bedtime with Bolen branch sheets.
  • Speaker 1
    0:00:28

    Get fifteen percent off your first set of sheets when you use promo code Bulwark at bolen branch dot com. That’s Bolen branch. B o l l a n d branch dot com promo code bolark. Every Monday, and welcome to the Bulwark podcast I’m Charlie Sykes. And because it’s Monday, I am joined by my colleague, Will Saletan, who spent the entire weekend learning about the banking crisis.
  • Speaker 1
    0:00:59

    Right? Dodd Frank and all of those sorts of things and reminding himself what two thousand eight was lagged. And I just I I How are you, Will?
  • Speaker 2
    0:01:09

    I’m fine, Charlie. You know, this is so we’re in Oscar’s weekend, obviously, and and this is give give me flashbacks to a year ago when I hadn’t watched the Oscar Sarah Longwell, so I didn’t know anything about the slap. And you asked me about the slap and I took the side of Will Smith not realizing that he had just slap the guy. And so, yeah, I’m very excited that there was no slap this year, so I can’t screw it up as badly as I did then. I
  • Speaker 1
    0:01:34

    just have no material for you on the Oscars. So people who are tuning in to find out Oscar stuff. I think Sonny Bunch is gonna have this nailed, but us. I think we have nothing. Okay.
  • Speaker 1
    0:01:43

    So I assume that we were gonna start this morning talking about Mike Pence and and Ron DeSantis, but instead, we have to talk about Silicon Valley freaking bank.
  • Speaker 2
    0:01:53

    Yeah. No. So the government has stepped in to bail out a bank in a manner of speaking. And so the the trick here is we’ve had three banks that were either failing or in danger of failing. The second one was the big one Silicon Valley bank and then another one Signature Bank.
  • Speaker 2
    0:02:09

    So just to make this simple for people, a lot of depositors started to freak out about the idea that these banks were going under and they started to pull their money. And when you as you know, with bank runs, it’s self fulfilling. Right? People start pulling their money out. The bank doesn’t have enough liquidity to give you your your money at that moment.
  • Speaker 2
    0:02:26

    Even if it could in in the future. So it just spirals out of control. So the government has stepped in over the weekend. That’s how urgent it was. To reassure everybody that the depositors will get all their money back.
  • Speaker 2
    0:02:39

    How are they gonna get their money back? They’re gonna get it back through charging fees to banks, which, you know, the government claims, is not you, the taxpayer, bailing them out, but it is you, the depositor, bailing them out. Because if you have money at a bank, your bank is gonna have to pay fees to cover this, that cost is gonna get passed through to you. So that’s where we are.
  • Speaker 1
    0:02:58

    So I had a couple of questions about this to start off the day, and people who are listening to this later on Monday are gonna be smarter than we are because Obviously, we’re entering into a period of maximum risk. You even though the president came out Ron DeSantis, everything is safe. Nothing to worry about here. We know how panics can be fed, so we’re gonna find out what the level of risk to the banking system is, what level of risk to the economy is, the tremendous political risk, I think, to the Biden administration explaining the difference between a bailout and a backstop I guess my initial set of questions, you know, started off with, and I had this in my newsletter this morning. Are America’s banks run by Goldfish or people who have the memory of Goldfish.
  • Speaker 1
    0:03:38

    I mean, did anybody remember what rising interest rates were like? I listened to an analyst this morning. Say, well, you know, the people running the banks, you know, many of them have never actually experienced a period of rising interest rates. What? Did anyone learn anything from two thousand eight?
  • Speaker 1
    0:03:55

    So my second question is, are we back to this too big to fail bullshit again? It’s like, okay, systemic risk. We’re not gonna bail anybody out. We’re going to backstop them. We’re going to bail out all of the investors.
  • Speaker 1
    0:04:06

    Forget that two hundred and fifty thousand dollar limit. We’re going to do that. Are the people going to, you know, be held accountable, the idiots responsible for this debacle going are they gonna be held accountable this time because they were not last time? And of course, we also don’t know whether or not calm or heads will prevail. But anyone who is banking on banking, on Comer heads prevailing have not been paying any attention to our social media
  • Speaker 2
    0:04:32

    and political universe lately. Well, a couple of things here. Let me defend the government on this. Let me defend what the Biden administration did. They’re not bailing out the executives and the shareholders.
  • Speaker 2
    0:04:44

    We’re the investors. Right. So the shareholders are screwed. The executives are screwed. Although, let’s come back to that in a minute because one guy is got some issues with him.
  • Speaker 2
    0:04:52

    But the depositors are the ones who are so they’re basically telling you the depositors you’ll get your money back. Even though you were only nominally insured up to two hundred fifty thousand dollars, the government in effect will ensure the rest of it. And the hope of the administration in this intervention is that by bailing out the depositors, right, they’re gonna stop the runs because the runs are depositors pulling their money out of banks and shifting them to other banks. Meanwhile, they’re hoping they don’t get the moral hazard because by not bailing out the investors, the shareholders, the executives, they’re hoping that the banks will still feel the sting of this and will not screw up
  • Speaker 1
    0:05:30

    the way that Silicon Valley banked it. You hope so. And I guess this is the question whether or not people are gonna be able to make that distinction between the backstop and the bailout. Because essentially, what we’ve done is we’ve by government fiat, now that two hundred and fifty thousand dollar limit is gone. We’re gonna have a lot of, you know, people going back and forth, you know, what caused all of this.
  • Speaker 1
    0:05:51

    I think the stupidest commentary of the day is that this collapse was caused by woke text. I have no idea what that’s even talking about. Except that certain people, you know, what is the old adage, you know, the a man with a hammer, everything looks like a nail. So Donald Trump is saying it. You have congressman saying it, of course, Ron DeSantis who will say anything that the base is saying is saying it’s whoa.
  • Speaker 1
    0:06:12

    It does appear to be a problem of rising interest rates that they kept, you know, pushing the money out and then figuring that they could make investments that would, you know, keep them liquid except that the value of some of those investments went down as the interest rates rose. As we have been told they were going to rise for more than a year now, this
  • Speaker 2
    0:06:30

    is another thing by the way that the Republicans are blaming this on. So it’s the wokeness, right, which is BS. But the other thing is they’re blaming Biden for causing the rising first of all, it’s the Fed that’s raising the interest rate. But secondly, Charlie, it’s exactly what you said ordinary people figured this out. Right?
  • Speaker 2
    0:06:47

    The interest rates are going up. Make your financial decisions accordingly to the extent you can. Here’s this bank you know, they got themselves locked into this and they didn’t hedge it. They just they screwed up massively. They made terrible financial decisions, this particular bank, Silicon Valley Bank.
  • Speaker 2
    0:07:05

    And it’s not the fault of the Biden administration. It’s not even the fault of the Fed. The fault of these guys, the people who ran this bank, for failing to do what everyone else did, which was to hedge against the rise in interest rates. Well,
  • Speaker 1
    0:07:19

    and also, I mean, there’s a lot of people pointing your fingers at this two thousand eighteen law that that actually eased back on some of the Dodd Frank capital requirements for midsize and small banks. I mean, some critics are saying that this is, you know, at least partially to blame for, you know, SVB’s troubles. Interestingly enough though, you know, Republicans obviously led the Africa pass the law. Trump signed this rollback, but thirty three house Democrats and seventeen senate Democrats also voted for it. So, you know, that’s one of those moments like, hey, when did you think that was a good idea?
  • Speaker 1
    0:07:51

    Here’s a little bit of a a tidbit for you this morning. Earlier this month. Okay. This month, which is March. Senator Tim Scott, The ranking Republican on the senate banking committee sent a letter to the Federal Reserve Chair, Jerome Powell urging him to adhere to the two thousand eighteen law and not increase capital requirements, which basically tell, you know, how much of a buffer bank should have on hand in regard against losses, they should not increase capital requirements for mid sized banks.
  • Speaker 1
    0:08:24

    So even with this impending crisis, you had politicians telling the Fed hey, don’t require the banks, you know, to toughen up their liquidity. Why politicians are engaging in this kind of micro management? Why they are engaging in this. And apparently, Tim Scott who’s running for president and Lord knows what the motivations are here. He’s standing by his letter even though obviously now we’re seeing the disastrous cons nuances of it.
  • Speaker 1
    0:08:48

    So once again, the
  • Speaker 2
    0:08:50

    involvement of the politicians in Washington is is not covered with glory. No, it’s not. And, Charlie, this gets to one of my favorite topics, which is fake libertarianism. Right? So we deregulate the market, we say, you know, we don’t want to require you to have liquidity.
  • Speaker 2
    0:09:05

    We do this in the name of the free market, which is supposed to be sink or swim. You take your risks you reap the rewards, if the risk pans out, you pay the consequences if the risk fails. Right? But in reality, what we’re seeing is that when you fail, and you’re threatening to take other people and other banks down with you because of the panic. In that situation, we’re gonna step in and we’re gonna cover you.
  • Speaker 2
    0:09:28

    Right? Suddenly everybody’s a socialist. Everybody’s a socialist. Yes. Yes.
  • Speaker 2
    0:09:33

    So just to be clear to people, I’m not a socialist about this. I generally am a libertarian, but you have to be honest with yourself about what consequences you’re willing to allow people to suffer. Right? So for example, in the case of healthcare, if you’re not willing to let people die when they need medical care, then you need to socialize the cost of medicine somewhat because you know that when people get sick, you’re gonna provide the care. So let’s be clear about that upfront.
  • Speaker 2
    0:10:02

    Let’s distribute the cost fairly. And not later on, do it under the table, similarly with banking. Right? If we’re gonna insure deposits de facto, above two hundred fifty thousand dollars. Your whole payroll, you what was it?
  • Speaker 2
    0:10:15

    Like, fifty percent of companies in America backed by venture capital apparently had money in this bank. Right? If we’re gonna bail them out and we’re gonna go over the two fifty, then let’s pack that into the deposit insurance upfront and not later on pretend that didn’t happen. This
  • Speaker 1
    0:10:29

    is the upfront thing. Let’s understand what the permissible risks are. And if someone wants to engage in risky behavior, I think be clear right from the get go. This is a risk which means you can lose money and we’re not going to bail you out. We’re not going to tell you what to do necessarily.
  • Speaker 1
    0:10:44

    Maybe we are in terms question. But we’re not gonna be coming in when you start, you know, screaming for the feds to to bail you out because otherwise we get this kind of situation and I don’t know what role Bitcoin and crypto played in all of this, but I’m telling you that if anybody that had my money in it was saying, hey, by the way, we’re, you know, we’re diverse following into Bitcoin and crypto. I’m like, I’m quiet. I’m out of here. I just don’t wanna be part of this anymore.
  • Speaker 1
    0:11:09

    Right. So because I understand it. But then I’m not gonna call my congressman and say, hey, can you take care of me because I was playing free market, free market here out here, and amazingly things went wrong. So everybody else is getting bailed out. Can I get my bail out?
  • Speaker 1
    0:11:25

    Right? And we are getting screwed by
  • Speaker 2
    0:11:27

    the first of the banks that went was not Silicon Valley Bank. It was called Silvergate, and they had loans out to crypto companies. And if the government has to step in, that’s you and me in every deposit or paying fees to bail out the people who bet on crypto. So that is absolutely infuriating. One other thing, Charlie, if you brought up social media before, that is a huge new factor.
  • Speaker 2
    0:11:49

    Right? So the last time we had these failures was fifteen years ago. Now it’s completely different because of Twitter. Right? Because the the run is accelerated by people just tweeting out get your money out of these regional banks, and then everybody starts doing it.
  • Speaker 2
    0:12:06

    And, Charlie, they had to the feds were out trying to sell this bank, this two hundred billion dollar bank, over the weekend. They’re trying to do this faster than any company can bet the books on the bank. And that’s how fast you have to move now. So that’s a way in which our government has to catch up to the technology of today.
  • Speaker 1
    0:12:25

    I do think that in terms of which way populous winds blow. We’re gonna see how the politics play up, but that’s also an added level of risk because I just think that there is zero appetite for anything remotely looking like, smelling like, walking like talking like a bailout. And then, of course, that they’re saying there’s no bailout except that we’re doing these things. Okay. So I talked before about having bowling brand sheets, but I have to just tell you how much I love being able to climb into bed knowing that I have some of the world’s most wonderful sheets.
  • Speaker 1
    0:12:57

    They make a completely different experience out of cozy up on a long winter night. If you’re looking to try a new set of sheets, you really should consider Bolen branch overall of the others. The feel of the Bolen branch sheets will tell you how high quality they are, but also they’re going to help you sleep better at night. They look and feel just absolutely Wonderful. We chose Earth’s tongue and you can choose pretty much any color you want.
  • Speaker 1
    0:13:23

    We gave Golden Branch products as gifts over the holidays, and I have to tell you that everybody who got them continues to rave about how wonderful they are and how surprised they are about the experience of having sheets that you look forward to getting into bed with, the signature hemp sheets from Bolen branch are a best seller for a reason. Bolan Branch uses the highest quality threads on Earth. Their sheets are made from slow growing organic cotton for superior softness and a better night sleep. They feel buttery to the touch and are super breathable so they’re perfect for both cooler and warmer months, which is why they’re loved by millions of sleepers. They’re so luxurious.
  • Speaker 1
    0:14:06

    They’re loved by three US presidents, and they’ve had more than ten thousand rave reviews, Boling Branch Signature Sheets, come in ten versatile colors in all sizes from twin up to California king, and they’re labeled with top and bottom tags, so making your bed is easier than ever. I find that, but particularly helpful for me. Best of all, Bolen Branch gives you a thirty night risk free guarantee with free shipping and returns on all US orders. Make the most of bedtime with Bolen branch sheets get fifteen percent off your first set of sheets when you use promo code Bulwark at bolen branch dot com. That’s bolen branch b o l l a n d branch dot com promo code, Bulwark.
  • Speaker 1
    0:14:49

    Alright. Mike Pence. So I spend an inordinate amount of time yesterday as you know because you were on Slack. Looking for audio or video of Mike Pence’s comments at the gridiron dinner on Saturday night and lo and behold, as we all know. Now, oh, there are none.
  • Speaker 1
    0:15:06

    Right? There are none. So what do we make of this? I called it this morning. I was on morning, Joe, and I said, talking about Mike Pence’s denunciation of Donald Trump for his role in the insurrection that it was a profile and half courage.
  • Speaker 1
    0:15:19

    Like, hey, this is great, but, you know, counting on history to judge Donald Trump Parsley when you, yourself, will not testifying or resisting subpoenas is sort of just kinda halfway there, kinda
  • Speaker 2
    0:15:34

    halfway pregnant, halfway courageous, not quite doing it. Well, I wanna give Pence credit for one thing here, which is that he’s speaking out after Tucker Carlson has put out his, you know, worked version of January sixth. And a lot of what Pence was doing here I think was not aimed at so much at Trump as it was at Carlson and his lies about January sixth. So one of his lines was the American people have a right to know what took place at the capital on January sixth. What happened that day was a disgrace and it mocks decency to portray it in any other way.
  • Speaker 2
    0:16:08

    Yeah. It’s not like Trump has said anything new. That’s Karl said, and
  • Speaker 1
    0:16:11

    that’s a shot. Now that that’s a shot at Carlson and his golfers in the house GOP. And he went on to say, tourists did not injure one hundred and forty police officers by simply sightseeing tourists don’t break down doors to get to the speaker of the house. Tourism do not threaten public officials. So this was a strong statement.
  • Speaker 1
    0:16:29

    But I guess the question is, okay, you know, choosing to unleash this attack to a group of glittery DC insiders political types and journalists is one thing. Saying it on Fox News or saying it to a Republican event is something very different. Is he gonna do that?
  • Speaker 2
    0:16:49

    You know, Charlie Sykes, so usually I’m the one looking for the pony and you’re the one pointing out all the manure. So don’t have to dig for the pony here. I feel like the pony is right in front of us and you’re you’re focusing on them newer. Now that’s fair. That’s fair.
  • Speaker 2
    0:17:02

    Like, what Mike Pence didn’t do here. It’s a giant whale. So, I mean, he’s fighting a subpoena. He’s refusing to testify.
  • Speaker 1
    0:17:12

    He’s waiting on the Doris Curran’s goodwin of the future to kick Trump’s ass. Oh, yeah. We’re gonna stick Michael Beshlock’s students on you. Those historians are gonna rip you a new me. I’m just gonna hide behind my lawyers.
  • Speaker 1
    0:17:26

    I’m sorry. Go ahead.
  • Speaker 2
    0:17:27

    Okay. Alright. I’ll give in for a minute here. So let’s talk about what what he didn’t do. Look, the historians, you’re bringing up a really good point here.
  • Speaker 2
    0:17:35

    The big line that people loved from this was Mike Pence saying, what was it? History will hold Donald Trump accountable. Okay. Well, I think that’s true, and I hope it’s true, but I feel like when you’re in the moment, you’re the former vice president who has been asked to testify first by the January sixth committee than special counsel. You’ve refused both.
  • Speaker 2
    0:17:59

    You could be acting in the present to hold Trump accountable. Yes. Instead, you deliver this line about history, which I feel like is a way of kicking the can way way down the road. You’re saying somebody else my grandchildren will judge this time when I could have acted in the moment. So that does infuriate me that he doesn’t act in the present and he passes it off to history.
  • Speaker 2
    0:18:23

    So where did the pony go?
  • Speaker 1
    0:18:26

    Well, what
  • Speaker 2
    0:18:26

    did you do with the pony here? The pony is We’re looking at a political party where nobody has the courage to just stand up and state the truth. And so for Mike Pence to do that, which is to the extent anyone in the in the presidential feel on the Republican side is stating the truth. He’s the one doing it. Right?
  • Speaker 1
    0:18:45

    Alright. I am willing to ride this pony at least around the the parking lot a little bit here because you are right. He is unambiguous there. When when he talks about I mean, he says president Trump was wrong. He said some of this before.
  • Speaker 1
    0:18:56

    He said a lot of this even in his book. He said, I had no right to overturn the election. And his reckless words endangered my family and every one of the capital that day. And I know that history will hold the Donald Trump accountable. There is no other Republican that I know of who has been that direct.
  • Speaker 1
    0:19:10

    I don’t know what Chris Christie has has said. And I guess the tragedy is that Mike Pence and I wrote this today and people I’m gonna get some plaque for people who don’t actually read the article. My newsletter morning shot says, Why not patents? Why not patents? I mean, think about an on paper former governor, former vice president of the United States, solid conservative, Christian Wright loves him.
  • Speaker 1
    0:19:29

    He was anti woke before it was super cool. Right? Hyper loyal defender of the Trump agenda. So what’s not to like if you’re a Republican? And the answer is, what uniquely disqualifies him.
  • Speaker 1
    0:19:41

    Why he will never be president? Why he will never be the nominee? Is this one thing? Because he refused to aid and abet the coup and he’s called them out on, and they will never ever forgive him for that. And that’s such a commentary on the Republican Party.
  • Speaker 1
    0:19:55

    But the tragedy is also that by being mealy mouth about it, by only these these shows of half courage, he’s actually kind of putting himself in the no man’s land. Right? He’s neither too hot nor too cold. He’s not willing to embrace his own freaking legacy. He’s willing to go far enough to disqualify himself from ever winning the Republican nomination, but not far enough for the rest of America to go that man’s a
  • Speaker 2
    0:20:19

    hero. Right? And to your point, so, you know, people say, well, there’s no video of this. Right? Because where was it delivered at dinner featuring a bunch of Washington insiders and journalists.
  • Speaker 2
    0:20:30

    And incredibly, Charlie, there’s a story in political about they talk to Pence’s advisors about what thoughts went into this. And the thought is exactly what you would expect given the context. Mhmm. This was about Mike Pence’s relationship with the press. With with Washington insiders.
  • Speaker 2
    0:20:45

    Pence’s advisers actually said they’re trying to connect with these people and show that he’s the adult in the room and that he’s friendly with the press. Know, a lot of his remarks were about the importance of a free press and the, you know, what the press is sacrificed for and all that. And that’s great. They’re sort of modeling it on John McCain’s campaign, but John McCain’s campaign twenty eight, that’s a long time ago. That’s before the tea party.
  • Speaker 2
    0:21:07

    Right? And the whole Republican party that we’ve seen since then and that you’re describing is a completely different context in which being the candidate so that the press will not get you anywhere in a Republican primary.
  • Speaker 1
    0:21:18

    Well, also, you mentioned this political report and, you know, about, you know, Mike Pence’s advisers saw the gridiron dinner as he had this opportunity to amplify his criticism, and then there’s the sentence here. If you can pick up the floor. They also believed it would help Pence win over his most skeptical audience these days. Washington insiders and journalists who have given him short shrift in the early twenty twenty four primary. The flaw is, and I probably should have gone off on this a little bit more intensely.
  • Speaker 1
    0:21:45

    This is not his most skeptical audience. This may be his most irrelevant audience, but it is not his most skeptical audience. His most skeptical audience is the Republican base who will vote in Republican primaries next year. They are way more skeptical. The megiverse people.
  • Speaker 1
    0:22:00

    The people in the Trump culture are way more skeptical than the Washington insiders because they don’t get a vote in the primary really. In fact, if you wanted to pick out like a focus group that is the worst possible focus group in America for a Republican presidential candidate, It would be these folks. These are the people that the Republican base most despises. You wake them up at three o’clock in the morning and they say, who do you hate the most? It would be the Washington Elite, the Washington media, the corporate.
  • Speaker 1
    0:22:28

    So I’m not
  • Speaker 2
    0:22:29

    sure this was worth it for him. Okay. So, Charlie, you’ve depressed me with all of this. So, can I go back to the pony for a minute, get the damn pony? We’re in agreement that Pence himself has not really covered himself in glory and has cut short what he should have said and and how he should have said it.
  • Speaker 2
    0:22:42

    But It is really important in the long term that we defend two things. One is the idea of truth, the idea of verifying truth, as opposed to the lies, the propaganda that people like Tucker Carlson put out. And the other is the idea of backing the blue, the law enforcement seriously in all context. Right? The Republican Party has largely abandoned that.
  • Speaker 2
    0:23:03

    They’re for police when they’re fighting black people who are protesting the killing of a black man. They’re not for police when a bunch of white people attack the capital, etcetera. So in this speech, Pence says the line about, you know, tourists don’t injure a hundred and forty police officers. The one you read, tourists don’t break down doors. Charlie, that’s evidence.
  • Speaker 2
    0:23:22

    What Pence is doing is he’s saying, Taco Carlson is hiding from you some very basic facts that show what really happened on January sixth. And it’s really important to establish the idea that we’re gonna settle what happened by consulting facts, you know, the injuries, the damage to property, and then, you know, Pence delivers the line about I’ll never diminish the injuries, sustain the lives lost, or the heroism of law enforcement on that day. And it’s really important that actual conservatives defend law enforcement when it is
  • Speaker 1
    0:23:50

    defending the country. Okay. I’m gonna agree with you on this. I hope he continues to say it. I I hope that he continues to to speak out on this.
  • Speaker 1
    0:23:57

    I mean, he did do something. That we’ve been waiting for, which is he said his name. We have talked about Mike Pompeo and Nicky Haley who refused to say what they disagree with Trump on. To his credit, Mike Pence is saying it. And I and I think that’s good.
  • Speaker 1
    0:24:13

    And I think that the the pushing back against the Fox News denialism is absolutely crucial, because it has to come from that side. Right? I mean, it has to come from conservatives. It doesn’t matter what NPR says in the New York Times. Or what, frankly, you and I say about all of this.
  • Speaker 1
    0:24:27

    It’s gotta come from somebody that still has some residual level of trust. It means we diminish now So, yeah, it is good that he’s saying that this fox thing is just not, by the way, you know, continues to what is the word deteriorate? More text messages, emails over the weekend where somebody is referring to the audience as a bunch of cousin bleeping terrorists. I mean, The level of contempt they have for their own audience is truly
  • Speaker 2
    0:24:54

    amazing. Actually, not amazing. It is palpable. How much they despise them. Have you settled in your own mind whether in your moral code, it is worse to be lying to the viewers about that stuff or to actually believe the craziness, the crazy lies about January’s sake.
  • Speaker 2
    0:25:10

    Oh, it’s definitely worse to be lying about it. You mean, people can be
  • Speaker 1
    0:25:14

    misled, people can be in error, people can sincerely believe something. But the real rank hypocrisy of knowing it’s a lie and pushing it out anyway, I think that’s worse. What do you think? Yeah. I
  • Speaker 2
    0:25:26

    don’t know. I’m just thinking about somebody like Maria Bartorama who seems to genuinely believe the lies. Yeah. It frightens me that that she has so much TV time to control when she’s fairly deranged. And I almost feel more comfortable knowing that somebody like Tucker Carlson as awful as he is actually knows the truth because I’m afraid of like the the whole idea of truth unraveled.
  • Speaker 2
    0:25:47

    Well,
  • Speaker 1
    0:25:48

    this is interesting because, you know, in terms of like Dante’s hell of, you know, who’s the worst sinner, I’ve always made a distinction between other people who are just merely dumb versus the people who know better and then who misused their talents. I you know, the people who know better and yet, you know, continue to spread the disinformation I think are far worse. So I I guess I would put the people who are just like, you know, dumb as a boxer rocks, Sean Hannity, and put them in the same category as the merely gullible the gullible, like Maria Bartoromo. And then you have Tucker who who is a consciously malign actor. So I do think he’s morally worse.
  • Speaker 1
    0:26:24

    But again, you know, there’s a certain danger having more ons running around the China shop with hammers. Right? I mean, so they can do the same amount of damage. Did I see that smart matic is now coming in with another big giant lawsuit against Fox News? Right.
  • Speaker 1
    0:26:38

    I
  • Speaker 2
    0:26:38

    don’t I have no idea that whether they have done any of I mean, I assume that Dominion got all the good text messages that we’re there to get.
  • Speaker 1
    0:26:44

    They’ve done all the work.
  • Speaker 2
    0:26:46

    So smart magic won’t have won’t have the same news value in terms of exposing the the dishonesty at Fox. Well,
  • Speaker 1
    0:26:52

    they’re asking for more than two billion dollars. So you you know how it is? It’s, you know, a billion here, a billion there before you know it. It adds up to real money. Right.
  • Speaker 1
    0:27:00

    But,
  • Speaker 2
    0:27:00

    you know, on the on this on this theme of consequences, if Fox were to actually have to lay off top talent, which, of course, is the last right? The the top talent in Fox is probably like the executives at SVB. Right? Somehow, they’ll they’ll get their parachute and get out. So Unfortunately, probably the people who should be the consequences won’t.
  • Speaker 2
    0:27:19

    But it would be great if the financial damages from these suits actually instilled a sense of fear and honor and respect for truth in right wing media.
  • Speaker 1
    0:27:29

    Yeah. That that’s not going to happen. I I would settle for a sense of fear anxiety and a decision not to cross those lines again because it’s too dangerous. That’s the most I can hope for. Mhmm.
  • Speaker 1
    0:27:43

    You know, that conscience being that small voice telling you somebody may be watching and they may have lawyers, that’s as much as we can hope for. Okay. So, Will, this was the weekend that we got our first really I know. First, I think kind of a good glimpse of of Ron DeSantis out in the wild as he’s pushing his book, he’s campaigning, moving closer and closer to an actual presidential campaign and he’s in Iowa pressing the flesh sounds like he was he’s a little awkward, a little, you know, not used to that kind of retail politics. But but otherwise, generating the kind of interest do you think kind of interested that
  • Speaker 2
    0:28:24

    that he would hope for? He’s got to be kind of pleased? Yeah. I mean, I guess I would distinguish at this point between DeSantis himself as a performer and — Right. — in the larger context of what people expect and hope for from him.
  • Speaker 2
    0:28:36

    I mean, he’s got a lot behind him because he’s He’s viewed as, you know, a successful governor who checks a lot of the boxes in terms of why people like Donald Trump Ron DeSantis has the right enemies. He’s attacking the woke and all that. But he’s got a a governing record, and he isn’t, you know, a jackass in the same way that Trump is and he’s younger and he’s younger and he hasn’t lost. He just won a big election instead of losing one as Trump did. So there’s a lot of people who want the Sanders to succeed.
  • Speaker 2
    0:29:05

    Ron DeSantis himself now has to show up and and just be himself on stage. And it’s a little underwhelming. And I think everybody sort of picked that up. So he comes out, he’s got a whole line about about energy and the executive, you know, the line from Hamilton, and he’s got you know, they’re playing I of the tiger as he’s in the rope line and all that. So he’s trying to project energy, but if you actually watch this guy on stage, it’s not scintillating.
  • Speaker 2
    0:29:32

    He’s kinda nasal and nerdy and, you know, he he’s not a natural people person. And as weird as it is to say this Charlie Sykes, Donald Trump being sort of associate path, he’s good at people. He’s good at controlling a room. He’s got charisma. Ron DeSantis just ain’t got that.
  • Speaker 1
    0:29:52

    No. I do think that Trump does give off those fat elvis vibes these days. I think it was our colleague, Amanda Carpenter, who made the analogy. He said, you know, DeSantis is more Richard Nixon. Then he is Donald Trump.
  • Speaker 1
    0:30:04

    Remember, Nixon was just very sort of awkward and stiff and kind
  • Speaker 2
    0:30:09

    of wonky. Mhmm. Actually, the more I think about that, the more I think of DeSantis being in that mode. Yeah. Yeah.
  • Speaker 2
    0:30:14

    And if you think of Nixon as is kind of an introvert that seems to be where DeSantis is. I mean, there’s a lot of differences, but the fact that DeSantis goes into a room and he doesn’t draw energy from it, the way that a successful politician usually does. He kinda wants to end the event he’ll go around and shake hands, but he doesn’t light up. I mean, even Joe Biden, he just connects with people, even at his age, he seems to get energy from that kind of indirect. And, Charlie, people pick this up.
  • Speaker 2
    0:30:43

    Think about George W Bush. George W Bush was kinda dumb in a lot of ways, but he was a guy who would go out and say what conservatives wanted to hear in a way that people just liked him. There’s some value in having the front man be somebody who’s likable and who connects that way. And if DeSantis isn’t that guy, that’s gonna be a problem.
  • Speaker 1
    0:31:04

    Well, also and I know this is an overused term, you know, authenticity that people want you to be authentic, and I think that can be overstated. On the other hand, The thing about DeSantis that continually strikes me is that he’s playing a role. I mean, I don’t know who the real Ron DeSantis is, but he’s clearly decided that the quote unquote, Ron DeSantis, who’s running for president right now, is going to be a certain persona. And he’s not obviously, you know, running as an anti Trump as he’s running as the successor to Trump. Right?
  • Speaker 1
    0:31:32

    I mean, he is going for the trampy in red meat that I’m trumpism without Donald Trump. And you see it. And so there’s always that that little gap of inauthenticity. Now maybe he does believe all of these things. But it does feel like he’s putting on the kind of, you know, the trumpian mask every time he goes on because everything is knee jerk, everything feels like it’s road, know, he keeps going back to the same things.
  • Speaker 1
    0:31:58

    You picked out some sound bites. He was in Des Moines and in Davenport this weekend. Let me write about this. And Gabe, almost identically the same speech. Yep.
  • Speaker 1
    0:32:08

    And he’s really, really proud of sending the immigrants the asylum seekers up to Martha’s Vineyard. And apparently, the crowds, they’re showing up really like that. There’s two different sound bites. He says virtually the same thing. This is Ron DeSantis from Davenport, Iowa this weekend.
  • Speaker 3
    0:32:25

    And because I’m sick of I’m sick of elites imposing their vision on open borders on you and on us with them not having to face the consequences of it So we thought it was worth it to send fifty illegals to Martha’s Vineyard. They said they were a sanctuary city, tried to claim that nobody was illegal and all are welcome. But you know what they did? They deport it on the next day.
  • Speaker 1
    0:32:58

    Okay. So
  • Speaker 2
    0:32:59

    you wanna fat check that for me? Well, I mean, they did they did not deport them. Deporting as you send people back to the country they came from. DeSantis did with the same thing Greg Abbott does. Governor of Texas.
  • Speaker 2
    0:33:12

    They ship these migrants and they just dump them. They dump them. They so if you actually care about the migrants. Right? Just as a reminder, these are not illegal immigrants.
  • Speaker 2
    0:33:21

    These are people they were seeking asylum. And they may not have qualified for the asylum, but they are then failed asylum applicants. That’s a different thing. Right? But if you cared about these people, you would send them to a place where there is some kind of shelter awaiting them.
  • Speaker 2
    0:33:35

    So And what Abbott does and what DeSantis did is just dump them in a place that was designed it was a kind of a photo op. Right? Oh, Martha’s vineyard, a bunch of rich librils will dump them there. They did not have facilities there for these people. They did have them on the mainland.
  • Speaker 2
    0:33:51

    So they moved them in Massachusetts to a place that could handle them. That’s not deportation, but DeSantis doesn’t care about that. He just wants to score one against the lips. And to me, this sound bite, which by the way, in both speeches, Charlie, I believe, as I heard it, was the biggest applause line. Yeah.
  • Speaker 2
    0:34:09

    Right. It was nice. He just totally picked up on this, so he’s gonna do it. And that just illustrates what you’re saying. The desantis appeal to the Trump voters is I have all the same enemies and I’m gonna stick it to them just the same way that Trump did except I’m more electable.
  • Speaker 2
    0:34:24

    So the fact that I sent these people to Martha’s Vineyard and that the lips were unhappy about it is something for you to treasure and enjoy their tears. So
  • Speaker 1
    0:34:32

    that’s about a thirty second sound bite in which you just identified two pretty fundamental mistakes. To fundamental untruth of, for this way, they’re not mistakes. They’re clearly not mistakes. They’re untruth. Number one, when he says they were illegals, they are not illegal, they were legally seeking asylum, and then saying that they were deported when, in fact, they were not deported.
  • Speaker 1
    0:34:54

    So again, in thirty seconds, in his most important, you know, most popular line on his stump speech, he gets wrong. And he knows he gets on.
  • Speaker 2
    0:35:04

    Right? And to him, that doesn’t particularly matter. He want just to give people an idea of these speeches because more normal person’s gonna wanna watch on this Anderson side. I watched three of his speeches. Right?
  • Speaker 2
    0:35:14

    So the two in Iowa, he also did another one in Las Vegas. And it’s similar kind of stump speech, but he’s got a list of enemies. A list of, you know, tears he’s gonna extract. So one of them is the Liberals and Martha’s Vineyard. Right?
  • Speaker 2
    0:35:25

    And the other one is the woke companies, the wokeocracy. Disney. Disney is like the big company that he’s targeting and it’s supposed to be a symbol of liberal excess. Faucien dystopia. This is Have you heard this one, Charlie?
  • Speaker 2
    0:35:40

    DeSantis is running against Fauci and Fauciism and what he calls the medical bureaucracy, but also Fauci and dystopia, which is a bench of scientists and medical people trying to take away your freedom. George Soros, another big line of dispatuses, sources funding all the prosecutors who were letting people out of jail. The United Nations’ Charlie Sykes speech he’s giving now, he talks about how he passed an anti rioting law and that the United Nations condemned him and that he says, I wear this as a badge of honor. So his message to the Trump voters is, all of these liberal institutions and people are your enemies and they’re my enemies too.
  • Speaker 1
    0:36:19

    And that’s why he’s hugging that Trumpian lane so tight because he gives them the same rush that Donald Trump does without some of the other stuff. So if he’s able to hang in there, he is going to be, you know, quasi acceptable to some of the hardcore mega base, not to the complete cultists. But again, this is why Donald Trump has to destroy him because he’s the one who has that Venn diagram where they share the same people. If he rises, if he catches fire, he catches fire at Donald Trump’s expense. Ron DeSantis is going to get really, really nasty.
  • Speaker 1
    0:36:54

    So here’s a question. And I know people are going back and forth, you know, Trump done. No. He’s not done. He’s leading in the polls, etcetera.
  • Speaker 1
    0:37:00

    You know, and the the confident predictions from people who don’t wanna make a moral judgment, well, I don’t have say anything about Trump because he there’s no way he becomes the nominee. My question is, how does Trump lose? What is the scenario in which Trump goes away or is defeated? I mean, if people work that out, which will be the primary defeat that will end his presidential ambitions, and will Trump ever acknowledge it? I mean, if we’ve learned one thing, Will, that Trump can never lose.
  • Speaker 1
    0:37:33

    Trump can only be cheated. Trump can only be betrayed. So How is it going to work out? What has to happen for them to move past them? I’m I’m trying to work this out.
  • Speaker 2
    0:37:44

    My view about this is I think Trump will lose Okay. Just to be totally upfront with people, I thought Trump was gonna I didn’t see this happening in twenty sixteen. So don’t He’s skeptical. But Fair enough. My the reason why I think it is quite plausible that he loses is I don’t think much has to happen.
  • Speaker 2
    0:38:02

    For him to lose at this point.
  • Speaker 1
    0:38:03

    Okay. I
  • Speaker 2
    0:38:04

    hear the story about it’s his to lose. He’s the front runner, etcetera. But in fact, Ron DeSantis is already at a level where he can be Trump. So let me give you some evidence for this. We just had a new poll out from the Des Moines Register.
  • Speaker 2
    0:38:19

    To poll of Iowa Republicans. And in this poll, Trump does have a higher favorable rating Ron DeSantis because Trump is better known than DeSantis. So Trump’s got an eighty percent DeSantis has got a seventy four. Everybody else is trailing. Right?
  • Speaker 2
    0:38:34

    That’s very high, by the way. Seventy four, so very
  • Speaker 1
    0:38:36

    high. It is high.
  • Speaker 2
    0:38:37

    It is high. And you’d like all of which is one of the problems is is that all the people who love Donald Trump are concentrated in the Republican Party. So even though Donald Trump is a terrible terrible human being —
  • Speaker 1
    0:38:46

    Yeah. — in
  • Speaker 2
    0:38:46

    the Republican party who’s below. But if you look at the net favorables, so obviously favorable, minus unfavorable rating. DeSantis is actually already ahead of Trump. DeSantis has a sixty eight point net favorable Trump’s got a sixty two, and then everybody else is trailing well behind that. So DeSantis is already in a position where he can be Trump in Iowa.
  • Speaker 2
    0:39:10

    And we’ll have to see what the updated numbers are in other places. But if DeSantis beats Trump at the beginning just because people are on even in the Republican Party. They’re less comfortable with Trump. More people in the Republican Party have an unfavorable view of Trump than they do Ron DeSantis. And that that ends up deciding the first contest I can see it just cascading from there where people feel Ron DeSantis is giving us the parts of Trump we want, not the parts we don’t.
  • Speaker 2
    0:39:35

    And Trump just falls into a steady second place Ron DeSantis wins. So let’s go
  • Speaker 1
    0:39:41

    back to twenty sixteen and we’re going back to Iowa. Donald Trump loses isiah, mhmm, to Ted Cruz. What did he do? What did he say? He said, he cheated.
  • Speaker 1
    0:39:54

    He lied. We should run it over again. I was robbed. It didn’t stop him at all. You know, he loses in Wisconsin.
  • Speaker 1
    0:40:02

    He, you know, denounces the political machine. I agree with you. I just I’m trying to work out the scenario where he loses And how many does he have to lose and by what margin for him to actually acknowledge it because I cannot imagine a scenario. In which Donald Trump says, I have lost. I am dropping out of the race.
  • Speaker 1
    0:40:20

    I just can’t see that particular moment. He cannot allow that to happen. So he’s not a conventional politician who if he consistently finishes second. So again, so what happens? So let’s play it Ron DeSantis wins in Iowa.
  • Speaker 1
    0:40:35

    Okay? Trump says he cheated, he lied. He’ll pick up some no reason for whatever whatever. They move on to New Hampshire. Ron DeSantis wins again, presuming that Governor Sunu doesn’t get into this race.
  • Speaker 1
    0:40:46

    Go to South Sarah Longwell. Don’t know exactly how it happens, but Trump finishes third. Okay? For you and me and for every other sentient political observer he’s done,
  • Speaker 2
    0:40:58

    What happens though? What does Trump do? This is the thing I can’t get past. Okay. So we you’re separating it now into two questions, which is helpful.
  • Speaker 2
    0:41:08

    One is, does Trump start winning? Or does he keep losing? And the other does Trump concede? Right. And I think the answer is he keeps losing.
  • Speaker 2
    0:41:16

    But he doesn’t concede. I agree with you. But that’s not my problem. Correct. That’s that’s the Republican party’s problem.
  • Speaker 2
    0:41:22

    But then he threatens to burn it down. You
  • Speaker 1
    0:41:25

    know, he doesn’t go away. You know, Trump will try to burn it all down. So Right. I’m just trying to work this, this all. And I do think you’re right.
  • Speaker 1
    0:41:33

    That these early contests are gonna be decisive because the moment that Trump looks like a loser, he sustains more than average damage. On the other hand, Ron DeSantis underperforms, then, you know, the luster comes off him and he could drop like a stone very, very quickly. Right? If it looks like he is not the real deal, I just don’t see anybody else being able to step up and go, okay, you know, now it’s it’s Glen Youngkin time or it’s Mike Pompeo time or is Mike Pence new, it’s not going to be. You know, if if to say this goes, I think it’s going to be Donald Trump runs the table.
  • Speaker 1
    0:42:07

    What do you think? It could happen, but let me back up that second here.
  • Speaker 2
    0:42:10

    In terms of Trump refusing to concede that he lost, so you and I have seen for the last couple of years polls in which Republicans say Trump didn’t really lose the twenty twenty election. Right? They say that. Now one question is, do they really believe it? I think one test of whether they actually believe Trump lost is when DeSantis presents himself as he is doing as a winner.
  • Speaker 2
    0:42:32

    I believe the stuff Trump believes, but I’m a winner. Do Republicans actually know in their heart of hearts that Trump lost? That they do. They view him as a loser, which I think they mostly do. And therefore, they go with Ron DeSantis because what they said to the poster isn’t what they really think.
  • Speaker 2
    0:42:48

    I hope that’s the case that they accept reality. Right? But your second point about what happens if DeSantis fails? I think a lot of the energy behind Ron DeSantis is not about Desantis. It is about coming up with somebody who is younger and more attractive than Trump.
  • Speaker 2
    0:43:06

    And so Ron DeSantis falls early in the process, there will be some kind of move to try to find somebody else push somebody else up there next to Trump. But who? I don’t know if it’ll succeed, because DeSantis is there in
  • Speaker 1
    0:43:19

    the way nobody else is. The problem is that Ron DeSantis, you know, fails early on, there really is not enough time for somebody else to rise up. And I think what happens is that creates this dynamic that is the most favorable for Trump, which is that a lot of people think this is my moment and they all step in. Mhmm. And as we know, we know what a crowded field does.
  • Speaker 1
    0:43:38

    So, and again, we’re we’re now speculating. We don’t know what’s going to happen. So, yeah, I have another question for you. On the on the indictment watch. And I have to admit somebody asked me about, you know, is are the walls closing in?
  • Speaker 1
    0:43:50

    And I said, wait. We’ve been doing this game for seven years. Yeah. Wait waiting on stuff that never happens. Can we just take a deep breath?
  • Speaker 1
    0:43:58

    Maybe what you have is you have criminal charges coming down in New York, you know, followed by, you know, an indictment in in Georgia, followed by an indictment by the Department of Justice we just don’t know. We also don’t know whether those indictments will in fact be the wind beneath Donald Trump swings that the base will coalesce around him or whether or not the cumulative weight begins to catch up. You know, it’s not this or that. It’s just the guys, you understand that he faces this investigation and these indictments. I at this point, I
  • Speaker 2
    0:44:32

    really don’t know how it’s going to play out. So I am not excited about this New York case for a couple of reasons. It’s about sex, Charlie. It’s about, you know, it’s about, okay, it’s about covering up sex, but it reminds me very much of Bill Clinton. Right?
  • Speaker 2
    0:44:46

    For Clinton, it’s Monica Lewinsky, for Trump, it’s Stormy Daniels. But Still, whatever financial crimes are involved, it’s still about sex. And I just don’t think enough people are gonna think that, you know, they’re gonna support an indictment execution of conviction over something like that. And it just seems like such weak sauce given that Trump has much greater crimes out there. So I think it won’t hurt him.
  • Speaker 2
    0:45:10

    I do not disagree
  • Speaker 1
    0:45:11

    with you. Yeah.
  • Speaker 2
    0:45:12

    And I think, you know, to your point, I think it does help him because he gets to play the victim and being the them, you know, is a lot of people on the right now are picked up victimology from the left, and it’s all about we’re being oppressed, and Trump is being oppressed more than anyone and all that stuff. But it might add. It might add to your other point. It might add to the idea that Trump is not just a victim, but a loser that he’s got he’s carrying too much baggage. And therefore, whatever the baggage is, we’re better off going with the scientists or somebody else.
  • Speaker 1
    0:45:42

    Well, that’s gonna be what will be interesting to to watch is how DeSantis and the others handle this because, of course, they will have to issue some sort of boilerplate criticism of whoever issues the indictments of Department of Justice, but it’s gotta be boilerplate enough. It’s gotta be clearly boilerplate like, yes, I am shocked and appalled to buy this. Wink, wink. Will Saletan move on to something else. They have to find a way to straddle this, to not look like they are piling on, but also to make it clear that, hey, I’m the guy running who’s not facing indictment.
  • Speaker 1
    0:46:15

    No former president has ever been charged with a felony before. So we’re in uncharted territory. Maybe they don’t have to do much of anything. Maybe they just figured that things will happen on their own. These are among the unknowns because we literally have never gone into a new cycle or a presidential cycle like this.
  • Speaker 1
    0:46:32

    I think this is what we need to constantly remind ourselves Nobody is an expert because this has never happened before in the long stretch of American history. We have never had a former president who has been indicted facing felony charges possibly a trial during a campaign for the presidency. I mean, we’re This is not Grover Cleveland’s third presidential run, you
  • Speaker 2
    0:46:55

    know, grandpa. So I agree with that. On the other hand, Charlie, we’ve never had such loss of public confidence or at least on the right half of the political spectrum — Yeah. — in the criminal justice system. So indictment used to mean something in a way that I’m not sure it does today because Trump and his minions and the larger Republican party following him have done so much to destroy faith among conservatives in the criminal justice system portraying it as ruthlessly partisan and I I just don’t think indictment’s
  • Speaker 1
    0:47:25

    gonna carry the same weight it used to. Well, we we don’t know. I can’t argue with you about that because we’ll be a lot smarter a year from now, presumably.
  • Speaker 2
    0:47:32

    So what else are you keeping an eye on this week? You know, I was looking at with this situation in Mexico because — Mhmm. — I follow Fox News. Again, normal people out there, you don’t wanna be watching Fox News, but I follow it so you don’t have do. And one of the things that has struck me is they move in in a flock.
  • Speaker 2
    0:47:47

    They find a new issue. So it’s, to some extent, it’s fentanyl. But, like, the kidnapping of these four Americans in in Mexico and the killing of a couple. This has, like, driven a consolidation of conservative media around the idea I don’t know how to describe it, Charlie. There are people talking about basically invading
  • Speaker 1
    0:48:04

    Mexico — Uh-huh. — bombing them. Just firing a few missiles at the cartels.
  • Speaker 2
    0:48:09

    Yeah. The that the cartels are terrorists, and therefore and I see some Republicans pulling up short. I saw senator John Kennedy saying, no, we’re not gonna go to war in Mexico. But I see Lindsey Graham and others saying, you know, threaten Mexico. Tell them if they won’t control the the cartels, we’ll go in and do it ourselves.
  • Speaker 2
    0:48:27

    What the hell does that mean? What are these people advocating? What are they advocating? Seriously, I don’t think they know. And And, Charlie, these are the same people who were talking about how we don’t wanna send our sons and daughters over to Ukraine, you know, we don’t wanna get involved in any wars.
  • Speaker 2
    0:48:42

    Meanwhile, they’re like threatening our neighbor. Look, Mexico is a mess in a lot of ways. But this idea that because there are bad guys, next door that we’re just gonna go in and take matters into our own hands. Do you have any idea what you’re talking about? I don’t think they do.
  • Speaker 2
    0:48:57

    We have
  • Speaker 1
    0:48:57

    done this in the past though. I mean, we have a long and story tradition of it. Right?
  • Speaker 2
    0:49:02

    Panama. No.
  • Speaker 1
    0:49:02

    I mean, going to Mexico. Right? I mean, we went after panchovia. We we actually we actually sent it to was it general Persian? Actually went into men We
  • Speaker 2
    0:49:11

    say the conservatives seem to believe in sovereign borders, especially our southern border as long as it’s preventing others from coming into our territory. But For us going south, apparently, sovereignty doesn’t matter so much.
  • Speaker 1
    0:49:20

    Well, speaking of unintended consequences, destabilizing Mexico at this particular time does not seem a good idea. I mean, if we were to have, you know, relations totally break down or cooperation break down on the southern border, be faced with, you know, a really talks basically unstable Mexico at a time when there are other international priorities, including an obvious aggressively competitive China. We haven’t even talked about what the implications are for China to have negotiated a rough brochure between Iran and Saudi Arabia. I mean, what is that about? And how worried should we be?
  • Speaker 1
    0:49:56

    We don’t have time to get into it. But, I mean, there are a lot of other things and, of course, no continuing to watch what’s happening in Ukraine. Where Ukraine is obviously at a they have been for the last year or more than a year, you know, at a at a sort of a life for death existential point. But we are at a crisis point there, but will we provide them with everything they need to continue? Because I think Given those that we are in we are part of this group, I suppose, you know, addicted to the Rosie scenarios.
  • Speaker 1
    0:50:23

    Did you go with something this morning? Yes. We’ve been telling ourselves happy stories about Ukraine for a year. And yet at some point, it’s like, is there a breaking point? You know?
  • Speaker 1
    0:50:33

    Are we going to continue to just give them enough they need to not lose but not to
  • Speaker 2
    0:50:38

    win? And how long is that sustainable? And what could possibly go wrong so much? Well, this is one where I’m prepared to go dark in my analysis of what’s going on. What if Charlie Sykes giving them enough weapons?
  • Speaker 2
    0:50:50

    Consciously, to just bleed Putin, just to bleed Russia. I mean, Putin is starting to suffer some serious economic consequences. He’s got no more troops to put in there. It’s a terrible situation for Russia. I mean, I agree with the people who say, if we gave the Ukrainians more quicker, they could win the war quicker.
  • Speaker 2
    0:51:06

    And that would be better. But I’m I’m not convinced that there’s enough political will to do that. We were just the principal’s first conference and somebody pointed out, The important thing, the most important thing is for Putin to lose, and for Xi to get the message that if you invade a a neighbor, you’re gonna lose,
  • Speaker 1
    0:51:21

    that’s actually the bottom. I think that is actually the bottom line. Will, it is so good talking with you. Have a great week. We’ll do this again next week sometime.
  • Speaker 1
    0:51:27

    Yep. Thanks, Charlie Sykes thank you all for listening to today’s Bulwark podcast. I’m Charlie Sykes. We will be back tomorrow and we’ll do this all over again. Bulwark.
  • Speaker 1
    0:51:39

    Podcast is produced by Katie Cooper and engineered and edited by Jason Brown.
  • Speaker 4
    0:51:55

    We’re all juggling life, a career, and trying to build a little bit of wealth. The Brown Ambition podcast with host Mandy and Tiffany the Budget Nees that can help. Randy
  • Speaker 5
    0:52:04

    and I are the same made. So she came out, she really popularized natural hair via braids. And so all of us had braids. It’s written into dress codes and like schools and even some workplaces where raids, locks, are not considered appropriate, needs to be like written into the law. You cannot discriminate and says for her hair, brown ambition,
  • Speaker 1
    0:52:22

    wherever
  • Speaker 2
    0:52:23

    you listen.
Want to listen without ads? Join Bulwark+ for an exclusive ad-free version of The Bulwark Podcast! Learn more here. Already a Bulwark+ member? Access the premium version here.