The Bulwark Podcast - Amanda Carpenter: Lessons from the Tea Party Era

Episode Date: November 15, 2024

Ted Cruz and Jim DeMint ground things to a halt in the Senate quite effectively during the Obama era, and Democrats should take a cue from them for Trump's appointments: Demand hearings or hold their own. More broadly, the opposition has to be loud and make a scene, while also staying unified and focused. We are a big country with big ideas, and there are more of us than there are of them.  Amanda Carpenter joins Tim Miller for the weekend pod. show notes Part 1 of the "Behind the Bastards" podcast on RFK, Jr. Tim's playlist

Hello and welcome to the Bored Podcast. I'm your host, Tim Miller. A couple of notes before we get to our favorite weekend guest. For the newbies, on Fridays, I have a playlist on Spotify and a super fan has also mirrored it on Apple that include the songs, the sad songs have been playing you to try to get you to cry at the end of the episodes the last two weeks. So for the people who have been asking, just go down to the show notes and you can get that playlist. Also on yesterday, yesterday's guest Rick Wilson said something about Matt Gaetz and

like a dead person in his dorm room. I did not know what he was referencing and did some Googling after. There didn't really seem to be any evidence of that out there. There was a Snopes item on it. So look, there are plenty of things to criticize Matt Gaetz on without getting into conspiracy land. We're gonna try to be reality based here at the Bulwark. There is much, much, much to complain about limited by the confines of reality. So just wanted to have a clarification on that. Speaking of somebody who has much to vent about within the confines of reality, it is

Amanda Carpenter. She's a writer and editor at Protect Democracy, and she's the co-author of the Authoritarian Playbook for 2025, something we're about to live through. Amanda, how you doing girl? Hey, I'm good. I understand there were tears on the podcast earlier this week. I've got to say after taking about a week,

myself feeling sad, I have moved into anger, activation, let's do some stuff mode, so let's go. Really? I love to hear that, because that's what I was going to ask. So you're not in the fetal position anymore. Nope. I was stunned for about a day. But you know what?

That's what they want us to be. Seeing how other people have been paralyzed by the moment actually makes me just really want to get started on doing things. Because it's starting now, I mean, with this nominations fight. The fact that Kristi Noem, that nomination was sort of meant with a, okay. And then there was Matt Gaetz, which was a, and then there was RFK, which is like, are

you, are you crapping me? Yeah, it's time to fight. And the idea that nobody can do anything is false. It is false. So let's talk. Okay, I love that. I might have to call you like once a week or so for a pep talk because I'm all over the place. I'm with you. I'm with you sometimes. I'm the Joker other times. I just want to laugh, cry a couple of cry cries too. I don't know. I'm covering the entire range of the emotional palette.

Yeah. And I'm not to say if you are feeling upset, take time. It is very important, whatever time that people need to process this to get in a place where maybe you feel ready to do something, take it. Because this is going to be a long fight. And nobody wants to hear that after the last election. And Kamala Harris, yeah, she gets to take a vacation. I actually think you might probably need a vacation. Sarah Longwell needs a vacation. But get rested, get ready, because there can't be free passes on all this. I'm not going anywhere. I'll take a vacation next year.

I'm right here with you all. You're stuck with me. I might do a Thanksgiving day pod. Close your ears, Katie Cooper. The producers could take a vacation. I'll be alone. Be alone with a little antenna. You're going to be live streaming

on Twitch trying to play video games with somebody. Live streaming on my Instagram. Okay, I want to go through each of these insane nominations. I guess we've not been on the pod since the RFK choice. So I want to go through all of these insane nominations. I guess we've not been on the pod since the RFK choice. I want to go through all of them with you one at a time. First I want your bigger picture take on two topics. You can pick which one you want to do first. What the threat assessment is from the Protect Democracy standpoint.

Obviously the threat's high, but where you're seeing the biggest threats and then kind of adjudicating some of this bulwark discussion about in pushing back on the anti-norms, mega quasi-fascists, how much do we need to abide by norms or should we be throwing them out the window to play on their turf? So, take either of those and we'll just kind of go from there. Yeah. Okay. So, let's start with the threat assessment and the landscape. The good news and the bad news is that we likely know what is going to happen.

And I just want to be clear on this point. We have warned that there are many threats to democracy that will come from a Trump 2.0. That is true. Because he won reelection, things get much harder, but they are not impossible. And that doesn't mean we don't need to start trying things and organizing. So I just want to be very clear on that point. Things are harder now, much harder. They are not impossible. So the biggest threat areas I am adhering to that were outlined in the authoritarian playbook for 2025, because they have to do with the things that he specifically promised and will be able to enact as president that are truly threats

to democracy. This was actually a very helpful exercise and discipline in order to determine what would we have to focus on because the thing that we learned from all autocrats, and especially the first chaotic Trump administration, there will be a lot of things coming down. And the whole idea is to get people divided and distracted and blaming each other within this coalition is divide and conquer. And so it's very important that we find a way

to get the site set on the most important things. And so I'll just outline broadly what I believe those buckets to be. Number one, pardons. That is coming down. We warned about the pardons for the January 6th rioters and how that will impact rule of law. Can we just, I just want to pause on pardons for one second because I don't think we've mentioned it since he won and because I share that concern. In fact, you mentioned it first is noteworthy. The other thing that I think is underappreciated with the pardons that people need to be vigilant about, particularly in your world and the legal world, is the impact that the pardons have on people that act extrajudicially in other areas. Right? And so, if it comes in and immediately

pardons a bunch of people, that's like a signal to the ICE agents and to the constitutional sheriffs and stuff, right? That you can do what you want because we'll cover your back. And I think that's, I just wanted to put a finer point on that. Because I think it's not just letting the January Sixers out, it's like what signal that sends. Yeah, and I sort of say that it is a priority just in terms of rule of law, but it's also the first thing that's likely coming. We will have the January Sixth anniversary coming up before Trump takes office. That is a big opportunity to shine a spotlight on what's coming because this narrative that has set in that there's just a bunch of

trespassers who didn't really do anything wrong, they deserve pardons, you know, there are some truth perhaps to that. But if you look at how these investigations have gone, a lot of those people have gotten off relatively lightly. What he is talking about doing is parting the people from the DC jail, the DC choir, and those are people who committed violent crimes. Let's make no mistake about that. Those were the people he was platforming at his rallies by playing their music. Those are the people holding, popping champagne after Trump won, knowing that they would get

out. And so, I want to get really specific about the people that he has promised to free because it wasn't your mom down the street who got swept up. The horns guy. It wasn't the horns guy. Yes. They're people that assaulted police officers. And he's officers. You've been on this. He's been asked about that on the spot. He doesn't rule it out. No one's ruled it out. That's something

that needs to be put into context. We should not just let happen. He may be able to do it, but I am going to sound like I'm just going to repeat myself here. There cannot be any free passes. You have to make scenes about this. You have to be loud. Someone has to impose some kind of political cost on this, no matter how little it may be, because these issues are too important. So that's the first thing, and that's coming first, most likely,

or at least there's an opportunity to talk about it and organize it around January 6th through that month. Second big thing is the politicized investigations. We can put this through the frame of Matt Gaetz, but I actually think it's more important to talk about it in the larger picture and not just make it about one personality. The thing that I've noticed that is so interesting in walking around the space that we belong in now is how everyone thinks they're potentially a threat. And what was really funny, when Gates was announced,

there was a Republican congressman interviewed for reaction and he kind of said, well, it's bad, but I shouldn't say anything because now I'll be investigated. The fact that they're even making jokes about that, everyone thinks they're potentially a target. That should not be a reason to cower. That should be a reason to unify it because they

can't go after everyone. There are people we know who have already been impacted and I'm not minimizing what they're being put under and there will be real targets, but there are more of us than there are of them. The bureaucracy of the Department of Justice is not going to go after every podcaster, every organization, every person that makes a donation. Come on. We are a big, big, big, big, big, big, big, big The bureaucracy of the Department of Justice is not going to go after every podcaster,

every organization, every person that makes a donation. Come on. We are a big country. And I've listened to all the warnings from Ann Apple, but yes, I've internalized all of this. And I'm not going to say it's not going to be rough and tumble and innocent people aren't going to be swept up in this. But as a reason I woke up feeling motivated the other day, is I looked at, we're not hungry.

We are a big country with big ideas and lots of people who can do things. And so the sooner we realize that we have more of us on our side of these issues, if we just find each other, things like start to get easier. It starts to feel like Trump might be the Wizard of Oz behind the curtain a little bit. And so let's not build it up to be bigger than it is. I think you'll, well, hey, you're giving me some goosebumps. So that's good. You're getting me out of my fetal position. But

just really quick on this point on Gates too, I've been warning people, we'll continue, Matt Gates is smart and savvy. Like this is not a dumb ass. This is not, this is not peg stuff or whatever. Like some of the other appointments that we'll see. That said, to your point about more of us than are of them, how challenging it is to get the bureaucracy spun up, like he isn't going to know his way around. Like he could have picked somebody, you know, and they can hire people and this will be all stuff to monitor, you know, that was Ben and DOJ, you know, knows where the bodies are buried, knows what, you know, knows which of the attorneys are gonna be, right, like the most willing to, you know, push the boundaries,

right, like that's all gonna take time for them. And I don't think that is gonna be true in other areas like immigration and pardons, but I think that's another important thing to remember that we'll get a look at what they're planning on doing because it's gonna take them a little bit to get it spun up. Yeah. And I just want to make a point on that.

There will be targets and there'll probably be people we know, people who aren't famous necessarily. It is important to rally around them. They should not feel isolated because the entire purpose is to pick a few targets up front, right? Yeah. And make a chilling effect to make you think that you will be taken down with them. The posture in the first three months that whatever we want to call what we are, I mean, I don't think it's the opposition.

I don't think it's the resistance. But they have to know we're not scared. We're worried. Yeah. We're serious, but we're not scared. We're worried, we're serious, but we're not scared. Totally agree. All right. What else? The third thing, the regulatory retaliation, which isn't as high of a list as investigation. And one more point on the investigations.

I think there's some solace that some people take with that, oh, well, Matt Gaetz won't be able to secure a conviction. The investigation is the punishment. Let's just be really clear about that. The investigation is the punishment to make you go get a lawyer, to spend thousands of dollars an hour, to get everything in order. That's the harassment. I mean, literally, Bannon is just saying this yesterday or two days ago on his podcast. It's like, lawyer up, people. Lawyer up, MSNBC producers. He was trying, that's the point. That is the

punishment for sure. Yep, yep. And so in turn, that there's also a lot of potential and promise for the regulatory retaliation, using these government agencies against companies to make them cower, to get them off the sidelines. Tariffs are also part of that. I'd lump tariffs in with that category too. Yep, oh, absolutely.

Yeah, the tariffs in the way that Trump has promised to wage them are to solicit political loyalty and make his agenda look better and coerce companies, like without a doubt. And that will have damaging effects on the economy, of course. Probably the most concerning that will take them longer to do is the domestic deployment of the military. Big one. Like the bright line, we should not be using the military to police American streets. I think there is a big opportunity and need to organize former military members

to start talking about this now. Like we've had a lot of academic work about the Interaction Act, et cetera, but we're gonna need a lot more former members of the military to stand up and talk about this and push back early about how Trump plans to improperly use the military. And the fact that he appointed a Fox News head of hair to be in charge of this type of stuff, we need to get going on this immediately. And in turn with that is federal law enforcement overreach, which gets in terms of just like getting the state and local police to do these kind of militarized type duties.

Those are the big buckets. What do you think? Immigration kind of crosses like three of those, right? But to me, that's something that you didn't mention that I think is going to become fast and furious. I guess I want to talk about that for a quick minute. And the reason I didn't carve out immigration as a separate issue, this is a complex one

because there are going to be a lot of things. Number one, immigration policy is cruel and hard on its face within the law. And you've got to understand they're going to be able to do a lot of things within the law. Normal immigration enforcement is ugly. There are people in camps. There are people like in the cages that we saw.

That's a lot of that is hard to see and it's within the law. The reason why I think it's potentially, I'm just offering this as an idea in a frame to talk about things in terms of domestic deployment of the military and federal law enforcement, is because that's when you talk about going beyond the law. That is talking about in a way that I think that more Americans can understand as counterfactual to their values. You may be

for robust immigration enforcement. I am. Are you for the military doing sweeps down your street and stopping anybody with the last name Rodriguez or whatever have you? Do you think that's a proper use of the military? So we have to make people think about it more in terms of their values and how America should conduct business because there are lots of ways that within the law, on the books now, that we can tighten up the border. They're talking about seizing and expanding power. As we know from history, once you consolidate that kind of power, it rarely is just used for that purpose.

When I say you think this might be exercise in the out groups you don't like, don't think it's not coming for you. Maybe by mistake, maybe intentionally. I agree with that. I kind of add the wrinkle. I focus also on to your point about how there's a lot that can do within the law. We saw in the first Trump administration and they're already signaling that people that are legally here are going to get swept up in this.

And so focusing on that, not to minimize whatever cruel treatment of the people that are not here legally, but like as a political matter, focusing on family members of undocumented immigrants getting lumped in with them. I wrote about this back in 2019 or whatever when they did that with the kid in Texas. TPS, like people that came legally that we gave, we had a deal with them and now they're reneging on the deal and sending people back to places they've never been. That sort of stuff, like picking and choosing areas where they will kind of play fast and loose, I think is another way into the same point

you're making about the military, like focusing on things that are gonna make the American people go like, wait a minute, that's too much. Yeah, well, when they talk about the enemies within, who are they talking about? I mean, really, they're not just talking about people who came in the country illegally.

That is a broad, broad swath of people. They're talking about anyone who opposes them. That's what they're talking about when they talk about the enemy within. They're talking about anybody that's woke, left, transgender, immigrant. It's a huge pool of people. There's a reason why they're not specific because they are amassing this power and they want a lot of leeway to do with it what they want. You and me, I've been pushing for some enemy within swag. We'll see how people feel about that. I kind of feel like I need an enemy within ball cap.

This stuff is scary. I'm not going to minimize that. But there is something empowering about sort of adopting kind of a more punk rock spirit about it. I like that. You know, it just. I mean, Amanda Carpenter isn't who comes to my mind first when I think of punk rock spirit,

but I like that you're, you're going there, you know? Yeah. I couldn't name any artists immediately, although I've been listening to a lot of Paramore on repeat. That's probably about as far as I can go. And I don't know how outcast that is given that she was the opener for Taylor Swift, but that's my level right now.

What else do we have? All right, the norms thing before I move on to the appointments. This is more of, I guess, more of a JVL and Sarah debate that we have over on the next level and that he doesn't try to add, but you're at Protect Democracy. So by nature of the name of the organization, there is a sense that we need to protect and defend the norms that undergird our institutions. That said, can we be a little too normsy at times? Let me give you one example of this, things that aren't necessarily laws and rules. I haven't brought this up all week. It's been fucking bugging me all week though. at times. Let me give you one example of this, things that aren't necessarily laws and rules.

I haven't brought this up all week. It's been fucking bugging me all week though. The smiley pictures of Biden and Jill with Trump. I kind of put this in the norms bucket. It's one thing to say you invite Trump in, there's cameras, you're serious about it, shake his hand. You say, we'll make sure that we have a smooth transition. We're not going to do anything to impede your transition. That's good. That's sufficient for me. Like a first day of school picture, you know, sesh with Dr. Jill, I find that fucking sick. All right. And, and actually undermining of our effort.

So it's a little thing, but like there are a million of those, right? Where it's like, we're playing by rules. They're not. How do you kind of judge that? Yeah, I agree with you. The images of that didn't sit great with me because it, it makes the point that a lot of the MAGA people make is that, oh, they didn't really mean it. They didn't really mean it. I'm not sure why the cameras had to be there. Right? Did we do we have to have the photos of them

sitting in front of the fireplace shaking hands and making nice? I think one photo of Biden letting Trump into the White House probably would have sufficed, right? We're not going to say don't do it. Or a pool or whatever. Yeah, but them smiling at each other and acting like- Let's just be honest, Biden and Jill looked happier to see Trump than to see Kamala. I mean, whatever, maybe this is armchair psychology, but like that stuff matter, like images matter, you know? Yeah. But in terms of the greater norms discussion, I think there's a way of respecting the traditions

and things that we have, but not falling over ourselves to make nice about it. Preserving norms doesn't mean you don't disagree and you don't have loud disagreements and you don't have passionate disagreements and you don't show what you think is beyond the pale. And so I think a lot of people when we get into the norms discussion it means we're going to be nice. Really like we're gonna be civil, we're not gonna be civil. We're not going to be violent. Absolutely not. I don't think you have to make nice.

Yeah. Also considerate of decorum. They're starting to confirm judges in the Senate. There's some element of me that's like, if necessary, shouldn't Chuck be keeping them through weekends to do what needs to be done? All that kind of stuff. Yeah. Well, all that stuff is within the bounds. And so maybe this is a good time to start talking about my days, you know, working for Ted Cruz, you know, the things that we did to hold the Senate floor were within the rules.

Yep. Right? When Mitch McConnell didn't want to confirm Merrick Garland, that was within the rules. I understand everyone thinks that's a big travesty, that was into the rules. You didn't have to hold an up or down vote on them. So, I think people need to start thinking about what tools do I have and how will I use them, right? Yeah. I want to play John Thune, who I don't know that he knows what he signed up for. I don't know.

The John Thune thing is a little bit of a mystery to me. But he was on with Brett Baer, the place you go if you're a good Republican. Brett was asking about these appointments and I want to play a little bit of it. Would you have to do recess appointments? You're saying yes or no. Would you say? Well, I hate to say yes or no, because I think that's still an open question. My view is we want to do this the regular way and give the Democrats a chance to work

with us on getting people in place. And the first ones that are going to come up are the national security and I hope the Democrats will work with us on defense and CIA and NSA and some of those and state. But if they become obstacles and obstructionists to moving these along, I mean, we're going to grind them out on the floor of the United States Senate. I just said we're not taking any options off the table. Right. So I read that as if we need to confirm these people without hearings, it's not Donald Trump's fault for nominating totally incompetent clowns who couldn't get a security clearance. It's the

Democrats' fault for being a little too mean about it. But I saw your response to that was basically Dems need to take a tea party spirit to taking the stuff on. So talk about that a little bit. So in the days when I was sort of moving slow after Trump won, I started thinking about what can we look to... The big question is how do you impose political costs when you have no leverage? And I started looking at Erica Chenoweth and Gene Sharp and these other books, which I am still going to do a very deep dive on and become a student of.

Can you educate us a little bit? I don't know, Gene Sharp. Yeah, these are scholars that talk about resistance-stripe strategies that worked in other countries in use cases, which I want to get much smarter on because there's probably a lot of lessons to be drawn. So listeners, send me more things to fill out my bookshelf because I'm going to get real nerdy. But short of that, after a couple days of reading, I realized this is all stuff that the Tea Party did quite effectively. This is in my recent memory for the most part. If you look at, we can talk about Tea Party, but I'm going to talk about my experience

working with Ted Cruz and Jim DeMint because it so closely aligns with what was in the Senate. Those are both senators that everyone tried to ostracize to say, no one likes you, everybody hates you, you can't do anything. And we ground things to a halt quite often, using the rules within the Senate. And so when John Thune says, well, if the Democrats want to grind this out,

yes, I'm saying yes, go grind that out. Make them call up one by one as slowly as possible, make it painful, make a show, organize around it. Because if you look at the origins of the Tea Party, that was when Obama was on the rise, right? There was a bailout, it's a bunch of energy, but because there was so much anger about spending and the potential government takeover

that we knew that was coming with healthcare, people started organizing early. And so Obama took office, you know, all the excitement, and people were on the ground taking the streets and doing organizing and meetups that spring. Right? And so there was an outside in strategy that was movement based, not organized around a particular politician, and what have you, to try to influence the people who were in Washington who could potentially do something with their limited tools. And that really was Jim DeMint and Ted Cruz became sort of vehicles or avatars of that. And so people will think about the filibuster that we staged over healthcare, and it was not successful, but as an organizing effort, it was hugely important, hugely important.

You know, we did a little hashtag, make DC listen. We made it about inviting people in and we were stopping a process that was very nerdy, but people came to understand that there was someone in Washington who would actually fight for you on these things because they were begging to have someone that wouldn't just roll over and take it

and rubber stamp it and let these things happen. I don't know what we're waiting for. We know what these fights are. When we talk about these nominations that are coming, this is not just about Matt Gates or Tulsi Gabbard or whoever. This is about the abuse of power that Donald Trump expects and commands and that people will enable in his second term. Because when the Senate confirms people, that's a check on his power. He wants them to give that up before he even steps foot in office. Now, John Thune is considering it.

He's not saying, of course we're going to have a confirmation process. Of course we're going to have up or down votes. He's saying, I don't know, we'll see what happens. We'll see if it's the Democrats' fault. See if the Democrats are too mean. No, grind it out. If someone needs it, maybe it's Fetterman, maybe it's somebody, but they may not be successful. Brian Schatz, sounds like a Brian Schatz job.

I just wanna offer the other side to this, because you and Bill are on the same side. Bill Kristol has a newsletter this morning that echoes kind of your sentiment here. I don't know that he shouted out, use Jim DeMint tactics. So, you know, not exactly the same, but same mindset. There's a part of me, there's just a little man

inside of me somewhere that's like, I don't know, maybe just let them roll around in their own shit for a while. And maybe let the just let the the actions that come over the course of 2025 be the things that you rally around rather than the appointments? What would you say to push back on that? I'm saying it's both. So expecting Republicans to own the problem and wallow around in the mess they created is just expecting the environment to take care of you. You have to create the conditions

where these things become painful, right? So without a show of, let's just say, Senate Democrats taking the floor and saying, we want hearings and maybe doing a shadow hearing at a rump thing, give the media something to cover, to go ask the questions. Because why should John Thune be walking around the halls of Congress without reporters squirming him and asking him, well, so and so Democrat said that they

want to vote on this because they did this whole video or whatever. You have to create that kind of pressure and it's not, well, we'll do this, but we won't do anything else later. If you've been listening on Hill, don't think about specific issues. Think about themes that are going to be constant in the first three months, six months of this administration. It's going to be abuse of power. It's going to be corruption.

It's going to be unfairness. So there'll be a lot of issues around that. And then the harms will come. And once you have this Venn diagram of where things that are unpopular, real harms to people and things that actually impact, from my perspective, rule of law and democracy, those are the things you go hard on. You're not going to stop it potentially, but maybe you have to do some brinksmanship. We know the process, so okay, well, if Democrats throw a stink, the Senate can throw into recess

and if the House doesn't agree, Donald Trump will have to put the entire Congress into recess. Well, maybe you need to have that fight. Is Donald Trump going to shut down Congress for Tulsi Gabbard? Maybe we need to find out. Maybe we need to make him do that in the early days so people can understand how serious he is about abusing his power. All caps, Amanda is back. Here's one argument for you. You have me mostly convinced. I do think that the Democrats should pick their spots a little bit and we can talk about what that means.

But I like that thing at the top of my list on picking their spots is like, getting really outraged about things that these people have said is not it, right? The American people have spoken loud and clear that they don't really care about that. So, you know, I like to clutch my pearls as much as anybody, but focusing on specific things and some of that is action. So here's one. So when you talk about maybe having, if they're not going to have hearings, have hearings yourself. Some people might know the story. I kind of knew it in my periphery, but I didn't really know the whole story. And I want to share this with everybody. This is on the new nominee for HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy. Paul Fari of the Washington Post

shared this. And I'm just going to quote from Paul. He writes, your future guardian of America's health, a short story. The outbreak of measles in Samoa started in September of 2019 and created a panic. Schools closed, Christmas events were canceled, lockdowns ensued. People stayed inside their houses and the unvaccinated hung red flags in their front yard, both as a warning and to signal to emergency health workers they wanted to be vaccinated. The US rushed in medical teams and vaccines. Even with these draconian measures, by early January, about 3% of the island's entire population had been infected. 83 people died, most of them infants and children. How did that happen? Health officials said the

island's immunization rate had fallen dramatically in the years preceding the outbreak and the anti-vax misinformation was rife. The latter got so bad that anti-vaccination activist Edwin Thomasis was arrested and charged with incitement against government order. I don't like that. We shouldn't do that. People should be able to say misinformation in a free country. That said, he was arrested after pushing the fact that the vaccines were dangerous and encouraging people not to get them.

Well, another guy had a part in all this. A few months before the measles outbreak, RFK Jr. went to Samoa. During his trip, Kennedy met with and publicly supported leading anti-vaxxers, putting whatever credibility he had as a Kennedy behind those encouraging people not to seek immunization. Kennedy later acknowledged his trip to Samoa had been arranged by Edwin Thomasis, the guy later arrested by the government for incitement. Kennedy later wrote a blog post describing Thomasis as a medical freedom hero. Kennedy had all manner of disclaimers about his trip to Samoa, but it's what he didn't

do that's worth noting. Encourage people to save their lives and the lives of their babies by getting vaccinated. Anyway, that's the guy who'll be in charge of America's health. Again, that is like a tangible thing. It's not like, oh, RFK said poppers caused AIDS. That's a really stupid thing to say. I don't think poppers caused AIDS. I'm making myself a little graphic with the help of some of our listeners saying, come and take my Rush Poppers government, RFK. You can pry it out of my cold dead hands, but this is a specific thing.

We want a man in charge of the government who not in 1999, in 2019 was part of an effort to discourage vaccination that led to the rise of measles that led to dead kids. Yes. So if there's not a hearing about him, there needs to be a way to have a rump one of some kind. The specifics are there with RFK, but I mean, maybe, just throwing this out a little bit more, there's going to be a continuation of crazy people doing bad things, right? And so, how did RFK get

in this position as it deals also with privilege and corruption? RFK comes from incredible privilege. If people haven't listened to the Behind the Bastard series about him and his upbringing and how he was raised and the doors that were continually opened for him despite his repeated dangerous drug use and all kinds of manner of other horrific incidents is insane. Those behind the bastards, DSA socialists, get so much love on this podcast. I don't know what's happening.

I did love the Robert E. Lee episode series as well. Oh yeah, I am a big fan of it. Robert Evans, have me on sometime. I don't know how we can do whatever bastard you like. But again, going bigger about this, that is a specific incident. I think it is important because it's just worth remembering that RFK has no health background. He's an environmental activist and he got into that business because he was required to do court-mandated

community service and then got an interest in water issues. Because guess what? Someone gave him a nice position for a nice nonprofit, and that is the beginning of his advocacy. No health experience, no health background. So the idea that we're getting people into these positions of power that have absolutely no qualification other than political loyalty to Trump is something that definitely needs to be talked about from my perspective.

Yeah, I wonder also I think that eventually this isn't gonna happen in the next two months, but prying the divisions within this coalition is also gonna be there. Yes. I want to play Howard Lutnick, who is supposedly the head of the transition. He was on CNN with our friend, Caitlin Collins, a couple of weeks ago. This just gives you a little insight into how much the head of the transition knows about what Donald Trump has planned. Elon Musk's ability to do doge, he and I worked that out together and we structured that.

But would he actually come into the government? Because I mean, he'd have to divest, it would be quite tricky. He's not coming into the government. He can't sell SpaceX to divest it would be quite tricky he's not coming into the government he can't sell SpaceX no so what is he's gonna be adjacent to it I think adjacent to it and and writing software for the government and then giving the software to the government so helping the government it's going to be amazing okay I mean his point is really interesting so here's what he says autism which Which is our K pushes why people are concerned that he could get a job like HHS And I don't even getting a job page. He says what he's trying to do. Here's what he wants to do

He said I want data So that's ahead of the transition just like three weeks ago. Elon must not coming into the government He's just writing software for the government or I would have Kennedy juniors not killing the head of HHS. I like the people who think that they are going to be in charge and like while the crazies go off and do their shit, they're in for a rude awakening. Just a point about the Elon Musk being appointed to the Doge Department of Government Efficiency. The whole far said this is actually about cutting government spending and not preserving spending for Elon Musk and his companies is the biggest ruse of all. It is

amazing to me how easily that has been accepted that this just isn't about giving Elon a seat at the table to get all the contracts and everything else that he likes. The idea that this guy sat with a straight face, that he's just going to be writing software for, out of the goodnesses of his heart, for the government. How did they not laugh him off the set? I think Caitlin tried. I know. This isn't a Caitlin thing. She gets these interviews. Number one, I really liked your interview with her. I am thankful that she does what she is doing because we do have to hear from these people and I would never play poker with her because the way that she keeps a straight face through that girl, if CNN goes down, go sit at the table in Vegas.

Pete Slauson Yeah. It's just somehow that the Latinx of the world and the John Thunes of the world, I think have convinced themselves that it's the Gateses and the Elons and the RFKs that are the dupes and that they are going to be in charge. And it's the opposite. You're the dupe, Howard Lutnick, John Thune, the craziest people, the clowniest people are the ones that are in charge. And you might like win a little battle here or there and some skirmish on something that you care about

that they don't care about. But I'm not sure that even many of the people on the inside know what they've signed up for here. I bring that up to say that presents opportunities to the opposition. Oh, absolutely it does. But just as a alternative, so I talk to me with some people who still operate

within this space. And I think a lot of what they tell themselves is that with Donald Trump, you do have the circus, there is the clown show, but there's a lot of business that can get done that he doesn't pay attention to. And so that's where they see opportunities still because the government is still so big. I don't buy it, but this, you know. It's true in niche issues, right? Like it's true if you care about like random,

you know, policies that are overseen by like EPA now that Lee's Eldin is in charge, right? Like you can do business with Lee's Eldin, you know, if you're a chemical company or whatever, right? Like there's certain, gonna be certain ways that you can do business outside of their scope. But their scope is a lot wider this time, the crazy people's scope. Absolutely.

Cause it's most of the cabinet. Yes. Me and Sam Stein played a fun game on YouTube last night. I want to get you in on, you know how I like to rank. What's your threat assessment? RFK, the hair that's going to be running the military, Hegseth, Gates, Tulsi. What do you rank there as the worst slash scariest pick

to the least worst? I wouldn't say it's necessarily about the pick, but the resources that they have at their disposal. And I think you actually have to think about Pete, Hegseth, and Kristi Noem together, because a lot of what I read through Project 2025, the talk with Tom Homan, and the talk from Donald Trump on the campaign trail, is a consolidation of resources essentially between Homeland Security and the Department of Defense to carry out immigration policy.

And it's always the consolidation of those resources. And I'm going to say something really wacky. Okay. I think the reason Kristi Noem got that position is because of the stuff she said about shooting her dog. I think that signaled to people that she was willing to do hard things. Tough.

And she wouldn't back down from it. So it worked. The dog story worked. I can't say that with confirmation. That's not crazy actually. I mean, I, I, I'd like the main reason, but like as a supporting point of like, Oh, we know that she's not going to back down when like it gets hot because it's going to get hot at DHS and

Kristen Nielsen, you know, she buckled. And especially women are always doubted in their ability to be tough. What better way is there to show that you are cold-hearted other than shooting your family dog in a pit and bragging about it? And so that is what I think is chilling. So that's interesting. You're braiding no man.

So I thought we had a clear fab four. My ranking was Tulsi is one that scares me the most, followed by Hegseth, followed by RFK. I think those two are pretty close, and then Gates. They're all horrible, but that was my ranking. But you're throwing Gnome in there. Only because of the resources at her disposal. Because the government is so vast and all these logs are so vaguely written and they're

willing to go back into these things from the 1700s Insurrection Act, Alien Enemies Act, to do broad things. That will be draconian if they do it as they have said that they will. Maybe they won't, but I take them at their word and because you're talking about the power of the military, I think you have to rank that the highest, even though it may be an outlier.

Well, I think that's insightful. Hilarious. I just, just because it is so on topic to the thing we were just discussing about the Latinx and the Thunes and how these like establishment people and industry people like don't really know what they're dealing with and haven't like wrapped their heads around what Trump has planned. I received this text from my loving husband as we're talking here. This is from Politico Playbook. Food and agriculture industry executives said that there was serious talk about launching

a coalition to publicly oppose Kennedy in any food or health role within the Trump administration. But that ultimately never came together because the industry didn't think Trump was serious about nominating Kennedy for a cabinet role. It's time for everybody to fucking wake up. All right. It's time for everybody to fucking wake up. I did this on yesterday's thing with Rick Wilson about Lisa Murkowski talking about how she's looking forward to reviewing a serious nominee for attorney general. There will be no serious nominee for attorney general. Even if Gates gets taken

down because of bad personal relationships, the person coming behind him is not going to be whoever you would consider to be a serious attorney general. It's not going to be somebody that's like, that cares about the rule of law and the constitution in a deep way and it's going to prioritize that over service to Trump. No, it's intentional. The reason why he's surrounding himself with inexperienced, incompetent people is intentional. It's because they will do what he says. This is common in autocratic places. Okay.

That's a little bit of a downer. One more group that I think is worth mentioning as far as thinking about how to deal with this. You know, I'm always iffy on media criticism because like media is so vast, but how to deal with these guys is going to be very challenging for them. And there were a couple of things yesterday that just caught my eye and they were both also in Politico. One was about DeSantis replacing waltz and gates in the house.

Several Florida sources suggested to us- Hold on, can I just laugh? DeSantis' reward for all this is going back to the house as a congressman? No, no, no. DeSantis getting to replace. That would be funny. That would be funny. That would be funny though.

Okay, sorry, sorry, sorry. Maybe you could put Casey there. Here we go. Here's the Senate. Several Florida sources suggested to us that DeSantis may try to shorten the deadline and not worry about the legal niceties. In other words, he could push the deadlines up and worry about the lawsuits later. Legal niceties is how they described it.

The other one was, I don't have it right in front of me, but it was essentially that the idea that Sebb Gorka could be deputy national security director was another signal that Trump was looking to fill his administration with loyalists and extremists. It's like, just among the groups that are not prepared for what's coming, uh, the industries, the Trump's own, Trump's own transition leader, the old school Republicans on the Hill and the journalists set to cover this. By the way, how long is it going to take for a Lara Trump to become the next Senator from Florida?

I mean, they're pushing for it. They're pushing for it. I don't know. I mean, Rick Scott put it out there yesterday. As she tried to run North Carolina, it's a good state. Is she from? That's the thing. These guys are not going to play by the rules. They're not going to follow the law. They're going to put the craziest people in there possible. And they're going to dare

everybody's responses to that to be the same type of response they would have when Joe Biden overstepped. And he did, like on student loans, you know, and like, be like, treat us. We're going to trash the rule book. Yeah. It's going to be, what's the saying for my friends, everything for everyone else. My enemy is the law. My enemy is the law. Yeah. That's what they have planned and they're going to trash the rule book and everyone else circling back to your original point about how it's time to buckle up and get ready to push back. When whether you play nice about it and how closely you got to follow the norms. What they have

planned is a total shredding of the norms and the laws and hoping that all of the existing power structures just treat it as business as usual. That is maybe, I don't know if I'm overstating this, I'm going to think about this. I guess it's not more alarming, but it's almost as alarming as the actual choices themselves is the response to them so far. It goes together. I mean, it all goes together. They want us to be scared. They want us to think that we can't do anything and although things will be difficult, that is wrong.

Pumpkrock Amanda, do you have any final thoughts for the people? I don't know. I'm going to go blast some paramour. Some paramour? Check out Fugazi. Bring back to old school. Check out a little, I don't know, Fugazi might be a little hardcore for you. I don't know paramour. So send me your favorite paramour. I'm familiar with the existence of Paramore, but I don't think I know any of their numbers. Okay, what I'm playing on repeat right now, Hard Times, Rose-Colored Boy, Burning Down the House,

Crush. That's a cover of Talking Heads song. I have listened to Paramore's. Better than the Talking Heads. I have listened to Paramore's cover of the Talking Heads song. Hard Times, that sounds right for what we got coming. Hard Times.

Thank you Amanda Carpenter, we're going to be talking a lot in these Hard Times. I appreciate you. Bye. Everybody else, we'll be back Monday with Bill Kristol. See y'all then. Peace. Hard times, stepped into hard times All of this hard time, welcome to hard times Waiting for the world to end, waiting for the light to bend like a star Waiting for the silent end, bringing us to faith at just so hard Walk into a hotel Step into a hotel

All of these are times Welcome to a hotel Say what you mean, I mean what you say. The Bulldog podcast is produced by Katie Cooper with audio engineering and editing by Jason Brown.