Bulwark Takes - EXCLUSIVE: Rep. Garcia Criticized Elon Musk — Then The DOJ Threatened Him

Episode Date: February 21, 2025

Rep. Robert Garcia joins Tim Miller to discuss the letter sent from Trump's DOJ after he publicly criticized Elon Musk.

Hey everybody, it's Tim Miller from The Bulwark. I am here with Congressman Robert Garcia, Democrat representing the Long Beach-ish area of Southern California. And he's in the barrel at the moment. The Trump administration has their eyes on him and more than that. And I want to get into that here. But hey, what's up, Bruce? Welcome to The Bulwark YouTube. Yeah, happy to be here. Thanks. Appreciate you. All right. So here's what has happened that prompted this. Eagle Ed Martin, people who are watchers of this would know already, is the new, I guess, temporary U.S. attorney. Hasn't been confirmed yet for the Washington, D.C. He's a longtime hack I've seen around Republican circles.

It was a ridiculous choice to be the U.S. attorney for D.C. It's just me editorializing there. And it's proven by the fact that he sent you this letter today. He said, I respectfully request that you clarify your comments from a February 12th CNN interview. You were asked how Democrats can stop Elon Musk. Congressman Garcia, you spoke clearly. What the American people want is for us to bring actual weapons to this bar fight. This is an actual fight for democracy. That sounds to some like a threat to Mr. Musk, a person who you called a dick.

He goes on from there. So I guess the government wants to police your use of metaphor. And I'm wondering how you take that. I'm absolutely right. I mean, this is completely ridiculous to essentially threaten me with possible prosecution investigations through the U.S. Department of Justice because I used a metaphor to criticize Elon Musk is both ridiculous, but also quite dangerous. And I think that in this moment, there is no question that Donald Trump is

weaponizing the DOJ to go after anyone that will dare criticize the administration or what Elon Musk is actually doing. And this idea that then we somehow need to like police that language. You talked about the acting U.S. attorney, someone that has supported, defended January 6th insurrectionists. Donald Trump has pardoned people that attacked the Capitol, yet has concerns about someone using figures of speech or metaphors to criticize Elon Musk. That is very concerning. And we're not going to be silenced by that. And certainly the message here for Democrats, I think, and for the House has to be that we've got to push back even harder. And we can't allow these intimidation tactics to push us back. Yeah, it's chilling, honestly. And, you know, they it's Orwellian the way that they have been like, we're going to depoliticize the Justice Department. And, you know, the first things that happen is, uh, uh, Pam Bondi and the DOJ and Emil Bove, uh, you know, cutting this deal with, with Eric Adams,

which is very political. And then now the U.S. attorney targeting you and all this has happened on the day that, uh, that Kash Patel gets confirmed. And there, there are reports that he has been behind the firings of people within the FBI that were involved in the investigations into Donald Trump. I mean, like this is the opposite of depoliticization. I mean, it seems like their top priority right at this point is going after foes and cutting political deals. I think that's absolutely right. And I think what's also really concerning is, you know, what we're hearing, and you've talked about this and others, people right now at this moment want to see Democrats fight against everything you just talked about. They want to see us engaged. They want us to match the energy that's on the ground. They want us to make sure that we're, you know, fighting fire

with fire. And yet at the same time, they want to attack the DOJ, Trump, Elon Musk. They want to attack us and those of us that are out there speaking out and speaking out forcefully. And so it's also very concerning and will and could have a chilling effect on other folks that actually want to come out and criticize and oppose. And so I think what I've been telling folks, I've talked to a lot of folks, members of the House and others that have been very supportive. And I said, look, we can't allow this singling out of me. It's not really about me, right? This is about silencing critics and critics in Congress, even though we're constitutionally protected with our speech to be able to oppose the Trump administration. We're liberally as Congress. I mean, our job is to be the loyal opposition. And in this case, unloyal opposition, if we need to be to the administration.

I appreciate that. I appreciate how you're talking about how you guys have protection. And it's important you don't back down because to me, you know, I mean, just beyond their abuse of the Justice Department, which is very concerning. The other concerning thing is that other people look at this and say, it's just not worth it for me to speak out. Right. And like, that's how you get into kind of how soft authoritarians like shut down criticism. Right. Because people are like, you know, somebody that doesnJ because of something that I posted, you know, like that, that could have real effects on my life. And I think that they know that, you know, and that that is part of their strategy to silence people. I think that's absolutely right. I mean, one is it's clear that the message they were trying to send to me was a broader message to Democrats, right, and Democrats in the House, but also a very clear message through this action and others that they're willing to go after

whoever they perceive as enemies or critics. And that is not just elected officials or members of Congress. That's going to be members of the media. That is going to be other folks that are out there protesting in the streets and trying to push back against what Elon Musk is trying to do in terms of raiding the federal government so he and his billionaire friends can get tax cuts. So this is all – should be very concerning. The Trump administration just started. It has not been going on for that long and already the kind of weaponization – things, by the way, that Donald Trump, as you know, during the campaign said he wouldn't do.

He's not going to go after his critics. And I think we're just seeing that fall apart. We cannot allow this to silence us, especially at this very moment when our institutions are being attacked so fiercely. Yeah. Well, to this point about how they campaigned, like this is obviously an absurd attack on your First Amendment rights. And so like at some level, it's almost like, should we even address that? But I think you have to because there are people out there that, whether we agree or disagree with them, had legitimate concerns about their free speech rights, maybe not about the First Amendment, but about their free speech rights and what big tech companies were doing to silence them or de-platform them, etc.

And you heard this on, like, other podcasts and other YouTube feeds, right? People who are like, I don't like these threats to my free speech about COVID or about whatever. And, and they, these folks, a lot of these folks are not really particularly political and they were attracted to Trump and Elon because they talked a lot about how, you know, people should have a right to say whatever they want, say offensive things, make jokes, you know people should have a right to say whatever they want say offensive things make jokes you know and now they get in and they're making this direct threat onto people's

speech because of a joke because like a like a figure of speech like that should you know if any of those guys are paying attention like they should wake up to this right like this is crazy i just think about the right you know it it's like using a football metaphor or something or saying, oh, he went nuclear on him. And like now it's like, oh, are you, you know what I mean? Like, this is a crazy thing and a crazy assault on people's free speech rights, don't you think? Of course. And I mean, you know, anyone that watched the interview or maybe have read the transcript, I mean, clearly said the American people want us to bring weapons to this bar fight. I mean, that is literally a metaphor. And we've heard, you know, in many, used many

other ways. And then I went on to say the American people want us to fight this democracy. And I think, you know, this idea that we're going to tone down language that's about fighting back is really crazy. But, you know, again, I think they've given me, by the way, till Tuesday to respond to this letter. What are you going to do? You know, we're having some conversations about that. What we're not going to do is stay silent and, you know, and somehow shut us down and silence our police, our language. We're not going to do that. We're talking to the appropriate folks and, of course, talking to folks in the Democratic leadership. democratic leadership and they understand,

I think we all understand this is a broader issue about trying to silence members of Congress. Yeah. I mean, maybe the response just goes over other common figures of speech, you know, like in, in RuPaul's drag race,

a death drop doesn't mean somebody is literally dying. It's like, what are you going to do? It's like in the water boy when they were shouting, kill them on the sidelines in the football game. They're not actually, you know, it's like literally murder them. I mean, this is, you'd think that somebody that went to law school like Eaglehead Martin should be able to figure that out. Well, look, I appreciate your finding for this. Keep us posted on this. And I think that

leaning in on the first amendment side of this is important, like on the free speech side of this as well, because I do think it resonates not just with the democratic base voters you're talking about earlier that want Democrats to fight, but with broader, just regular people do not want the government sending them letters if they say the wrong word, you know, like that is an un-American activity. That's exactly right. And I think the lesson here is not to retreat, but the lesson here is to push harder and continue to let people know that they are literally trying to limit free speech. And that's exactly what's happening. Last thing. On another topic, we're now, what, a little under a month until this budget fight is coming up.

I talked to Moskowitz earlier this week about this. I talked to Brendan Boyle about this. I'm wondering how you see that. Obviously, the Republicans have asked Democrats to bail them out ever since McCarthy and then Johnson took the speakership. They've never had the votes to pass a budget or to keep the government open. And so now we're coming up on another moment where I assume we'll see that they wanted the votes again, and they'll come to you guys. And I'm wondering what you think that your posture should be on that. Well, I can tell you, they're certainly not getting my vote. And I think that we should

be providing votes to a Republican budget that is going to dramatically alter the very programs that people need to survive, whether particularly seniors and low-income folks and working class folks. And so we'll see where this all ends as far as this budget negotiation process. But I'm in no interest to support a group of people that are literally working to destroy our democracy and fundamentally change how we interact with government services just so they can take all of that quote unquote savings and then give it to themselves, their companies and their billionaire friends. Yeah. What if they decide they can't figure out the votes? And so

they're saying, oh, we're going to kick this can another couple of months and we'll give you some wildfire relief money and a couple other things. What do you think about a deal like that? I don't see how we can support a budget that is going to essentially destroy Medicaid or that is going to somehow damage the programs that people depend on to survive. I just don't see a situation in that. Wildfire, we've been very clear as it relates to the fires. It's never been, disaster aid has never been conditioned and it shouldn't be conditioned. And that's our position.

Congressman, anything else you got for me? Not to, you know, I'm not sure if you're watching the season of drag race, but I'm a few weeks behind. Do you have a favorite? I yeah. Lexi probably is probably my favorite. I mean, I think they're all great, but I I'm a fan. All right, Lexi. All right. I'll take a closer look. If I'm going to be really candid, I've been watching, but I'm rage tweeting half the time that I'm watching. And so I need to put my phone down and really, really give the Queens the focus they deserve. But so I appreciate it. Yeah, it's my only fun, you know, that I get just to relax a little bit. So just catch up on you. You deserve it. All right. Congressman Robert Garcia, please come back. Thanks for jumping on. And, you know, don't let these fuckers get you down. All right. Yep. Thanks.

I'll be seeing you soon. Everybody else subscribe to the feed. Thanks so much.