The Bulwark Podcast - Angie Craig and Glenn Thrush: Don’t Be Called Weak Sauce

Episode Date: September 24, 2025

A government shutdown creeps closer as President Trump cancels a meeting with Democratic leaders. Former Vice President Kamala Harris embarks on a press tour to promote a score settling book about her campaign. Plus, Trump taps one of his former personal lawyers to replace a U.S. attorney he dismissed for not targeting his political enemies after publicly calling on the Justice Department to move against people he thinks wronged him. In a two-part episode, U.S. Rep. Angie Craig (D-Minn.) joins Tim Miller to talk about her race for the Senate and how Democrats can dig themselves out of a hole nationwide. And Glenn Thrush of The New York Times joins the show to talk about his reporting on Trump’s escalating pressure on the Justice Department. Show Notes: Glenn’s piece in The New York Times about Donald Trump tapping his former defense lawyer as the new U.S. Attorney in Eastern Virginia. Bulwark Live in DC (10/8) and NYC (10/11) with Sarah, Tim and JVL are on sale now at TheBulwark.com/events. NEW show added to Toronto schedule: Bulwark Live Q&A Matinee show on Saturday, September 27 —tickets are on sale now, here. Start your new morning ritual & get up to 43% off your @MUDWTR with code THEBULWARK at mudwtr.com/THEBULWARK! #mudwtrpod

I find myself reliving old patterns and having heavy thoughts. I feel stuck. I struggle to feel secure and authentic. You don't have to stay stuck. Mental health professionals at the Center for Interpersonal Relationships are available to provide you with confidential, compassionate services customized to you to help you feel well, secure, and alive. Psychotherapy starts at $75 per session.

Book an initial session online or in person in Toronto at 790 Bay Street. Visit cfir.com. All right, hey, everybody, just real quick. Reminder that it is Wednesday, so Wednesday evening, the next level is going to be coming out. We're going to get into a bunch more of politics of politics, the Kimmel stuff, maybe some common little book chat. We'll see. It'll be fun. So if you're looking for politics, more politics than you get on this show, make sure to download the next level and check that out when it's out this evening. I also want to mention, we just announced very excited about this. Congresswoman Sarah McBride will be at our live show in D.C. coming up. next month so get your tickets now for that show the borg.com slash events it's going to be real fun we got some interesting plans for you it's going to be a great evening might have a beer after and hang out so make sure that you got your tickets all right on this show up next we got angie craig and glen thrush it's going to be good stick around Hello and welcome to the Bullwark podcast. I'm your host Tim Miller. We've got a doubleheader today in segment two, Glenn Thrush, talking about all the craziness that is happening at the Trump Department of Justice. He's been reporting on that for the New York Times. So stick around for that. She's a Democratic congresswoman from Minnesota running for the Senate seat being vacated by Tina Smith. It is Congresswoman Angie Craig. How you doing?

Hey, great to be with you. I'm good personally. We'll get into that more later. All right. All right. Yeah, that sounds about right. I was telling you in the green room, I had a couple of other of your colleagues on Chris DeLuzo, Pat Ryan, over the last few months. And I've been having a segment at the end when I asked them, I was like, who in Congress can you bro out with? Are there any Congress people that can go and hang with the podcast or bros that the Democrats struggled with? And both of them mentioned Angie Craig. But I was like, okay, well, I guess we got to get Angie Craig on the pod and kind of see how things go. I don't know why you think that is.

Are you guys in a fantasy football league together or something? Are you, you know, are you guys picking on each other? I love those guys. Chris DeLuzio is a terrific colleague. Pat Ryan and I, we collude together all the time about, you know, how you win in the Democratic Party and tough swing seats. So, yeah, no, we hang out all the time and we have a good time. For people who aren't familiar with you, can we just get a little first date, you know, kind of rapid fire of your backstory? Well, so I'm, you know, I'm used to dating women.

So let's just start with that. I, you know, so, Tim, this is a little awkward, but you're kind of cute. Yeah, for me as well. And people don't realize this, but gays and lesbians aren't really natural allies. You know, we're forged together. We're forced together through, you know, shared foes at times, but, you know, some different interests, different habits. So I came in the 2018 race. I took a congressional seat that had been a Republican hands for three quarters of a century. You know, I'm the first Democrat ever to hold. hold it more than two terms. Republicans have spent millions, tens of millions of dollars trying to

take me out, and I just keep winning by more. Pat Ryan and I were the two outperform, most outperforming in the country in the last House election. My wife, Cheryl, and I, we've been married almost 20 years now, which is crazy. We have four sons. What's a big Friday night like for you guys? You're sharing a big kind of pint of ice cream together, two spoons, one one pint, or, you know, I don't know, are you watching shows about woodworking? Oh, my God. So you're going to, you're going to completely stereotype all lesbians here. So here we go. No, a fun Friday night for us is after a week in Washington, usually me falling asleep on the couch while she's watching TV. So let's just just say that. Just like us. Lesbians are just like us. Exactly. Exactly. We're all lesbians here.

But my wife and I, four sons, and weirdly, and believe it or not, those boys are already out of the house and two of them are married and they have kids of their own now. So it's, it's pretty fun. Congrats. How is that possible? Thank you. Are you face tuning right now on this, on this river's neck? No, I'm not enhancing at all. I, you know, I'm a, I'm a young Mimi. That's all I guess. I love that. I'm a young Mimi, too. She's a grandma, but, you know, same principle applies. All right. Well, I want to get into some issues. We can, we can do more, you know, LGBT chat at the end, but a lot's happening. We got to share. We got a shutdown fight coming up here in the next week. And I am uncharacteristically kind of torn on this.

You know, I think there's a lot of strident views on what the right thing to do is. But I do think the Dems are kind of in a tough situation in part because I don't know that the Trump administration cares that much if the government shuts down. And so there's not, you know, when there's an asymmetry, like when it's the inverse, Democrats actually care about government services going to folks. So it's a real threat for Republicans to shut it down. So I'm wondering how you think that the Dems should navigate this and what you'd like to see out of Speaker Jeffries and Leader Schumer? Well, I've said a number of times now, don't be a cheap date. You know, don't give in this time. Don't cave. Care more about democracy than decorum over in the Senate. I mean, you know we can't

stop them in the House, but we can in the Senate. And, you know, they've got the White House, they've got the House, they've got the Senate. And at this moment in time where they just passed the big ugly bill to take health care away from Americans. You know, in Minnesota, where I'm running for the U.S. Senate, by the way, this election cycle, we are, we're starting to get our bills in for the on mincher. It's called the ACA's called Mincher here. And, you know, the costs are going up fourfold. And people are starting to freak the hell out. And, you know, if we as Democrats aren't going to stand up and fight for all these costs going up for our constituents, you know, I think we're going to continue to be called weak sauce. And so, you know, I get the concern about, you know, what's going to

happen and who's going to get blamed. But this president is out of control. He's, you know, certainly not complying with the rule of law already. And I think this one, we've got to take to the mat, not for politics, but on behalf of our constituents. And so I, that's what we're going to to do here? And I hope the Senate, again, doesn't decide to be a cheap day. When it comes to those Obamacare subsidies that you mentioned as kind of the focal point, and I'm encouraged at least by the fact that the Democrats, that the party has sort of dialed in on something that they're asking for, that people can understand and that can be a message to folks. There's another side of the coin that's like, what if Republicans take you up on it?

And is it not maybe better for people to feel the consequences of the, you know, Republican Trump policies as you head into next year. What do you say to that argument? Well, I think that we don't want Minnesotans to have to pay fourfold for their health insurance. And we've got to be fighting for that. And look, if, you know, if Republicans decide to come to the cable and negotiate, which, of course, Trump hasn't intimated at all, in fact, he's doing the opposite, right? Yes, we'll sit down with you and no, we won't sit down with you. And on TV a couple of weeks ago, he said, we got this. You know, we've done. don't need Democrats. You know, we get to take credit for saving health care for Americans again,

and we get to turn around, you know, and talk about the fact that Republicans keep raising your health care costs. I think we have to be smart about how we talk about this. A trillion dollars in Medicaid cuts. It's going to trigger Medicare cuts as part of the big beautiful bill, the ACA tax credits. No matter what happens with the ACA tax credits, health care costs are going up everywhere, Because if you really understand health care, and I think we can't get too geeky about it, you know, the bottom line is Republicans are raising your health care cost. And why is that? Hospitals are already adjusting to what's happening.

Minnesota Mayo Clinic is already shutting clinics in response to the Big Beautiful Bill. Employers are already starting to shift cost share to their employees. Healthcare costs are going up. And we won't even have to try to make the case because people are literally getting their premiums and their deductibles for next year in the mail this fall. And it's happening. We won't have to defend it because it's happening. And it's because of Republicans. There's some among the base, the Democratic base, you know, it's a little bit of frustration with Democratic leadership that you hear.

It's like not fighting hard enough. You sort of made this point a little bit. How do you feel about like Speaker Jeffries and what, you know, the least. leadership in the House has been doing over the last nine months. You know, you saw the House stay completely united in the first continuing resolution. We all voted no, except, you know, I think my good friend Jared Golden and, you know, I mean, Jared's Jared. But the rest of us stayed united. We've wanted to fight from the start. And when you look at what the Trump administration is doing, again, you know, I head up the Ag Committee for House Democrats. I spend a lot of time on

family farms. The tariffs are absolutely destroying Minnesota farmers right now. We're talking about farm bankruptcies are up 95%. Half their markets have disappeared for soybeans already. The leadership does need to show fight. And the truth is, we don't have to make the case to family farmers or folks who are in all of these sectors right now. Costs are going up everywhere for people. People feel it's, you know, just reminding them why it's happening and who's in charge while it's happening. The Senate's a little bit different animal. You know, I think, as I said before, the Senate needs to care a little more about democracy than decorum right now. And, you know, the truth is, you know, I don't go around my swing congressional district saying, you know, vote for me because I'll defend

democracy. What I say is I'm going to, you know, take on the affordability crisis. I'm going to be a Democrat who helps to keep our community safe. And I don't think Washington is great either. So let's change it. So we have to win elections. If we want to protect democracy, there's only one thing left to do. And that's win elections, take back the House, you know, accelerate our path to taking back the U.S. Senate and put a little check and damn balance on this administration. I want to get to kind of what the Democratic Party should do here in a minute. But you mentioned you're the ranking member on the Ag Committee. I want to talk about some of the ag policies because don't get a ton of excuse on this podcast to talk about ag policies. You know, I guess I should do better about getting

farmers on the show. But it's pretty real. And obviously, this is an important constituency for Trump. And, you know, what you're seeing, you mentioned the soybean situation because of the trade war with China. And soybean farmers are in really bad shape. The price of commodities are down, but the costs are up on stuff that we import, whether it's fertilizer, seeds, things such as that. You know, you're out there in the district and now in the state running for Senate. Are people starting to blame Trump? And this happened the first time around and Trump ended up bailing out the farmers, right? And so I wonder, like, what the level of consternation is that you're feeling in rural America because that's been pretty strong territory for the Republicans for a bit now. It's been incredibly strong

territory for them. And this is a huge opening and opportunity if we play it right. I've been saying from day one that the tariffs are going to absolutely destroy farm country, from, you know, the committee hearing room to every press interview that I've done. And remember, I, you know, I probably shouldn't be ranking member. I was, I think, number 12 in seniority on the ad committee, but I came back for my last election and I said, you know, I'm fed up with the status quo in the house and we got to have a little disruption and people need to get out of line if they think they can do a better job leading. But, you know, that's the thing. I'm going around the state right now at the beginning of the second Trump term, farmers were saying, well, we hope it's all bluster.

I just, the word bluster kept coming to me over and over and over again. And it's like, okay, I hope you're right. He does bluster. That's true. He blisters, right? But, you know, I kept saying to farmers, well, I hope you're right. And now what I'm saying, because they are very upset. And I think as Democrats, we need to think about how we respond to farmers and to

people who, you know, supported Trump, but we want them back. We rub their face in the dirt and just rub it out. Right. We do. Here's what I can point out of and laugh. We do. You know, we go around saying, well, you did this. Do you think that's going to bring them back to Democrats or the Democratic Party? No, it just pisses them off. And they're like, feels good, though. It does feel good. But does it feel good to lose? Because at the end of the day, I don't like losing. Oh, my God. And we can't stop them if we lose. So here's what I do, Tim. I say, I know this isn't what you voted for.

That completely disarms them. And then we spend 20 minutes talking about how bad it is for them and how bad the Trump administration has been for them and how much they wish their Republican members of Congress would stand up for them and try to stop it. Take back your Article I powers, stop the tariffs. But if you say, oh, my God, you guys were. really wrong. I mean, what does that do? You don't even get to another sentence of a conversation.

And that's how we do. You don't normally do it is. So that sounds good. I'm with you. I want to let my better angels flourish. I do wonder when you're having these conversations, and maybe people aren't going to say this to your face, but, you know, it's kind of, there's the idea of revealed preferences. We see what that people actually care about. Do you think that Democrats can break through on things such as farm policy, ag policy, or is rural America really mostly upset the Democrats over culture stuff? And they will deal with continued economic pain because they're upset that snow white isn't white or whatever.

There's trans girls playing the lacrosse team or, you know, I guess field hockey would be. Well, Tim, what I will say is, you know, I outperform the most in my own congressional district. in the towns and townships in the rural areas. And I'm a lesbian mother of four. So, you know, yes, there are some people there who maybe get caught up in the culture stuff. But as Democrats, we've got to realize if we can turn seven to 10 percent of them, Kamala and Tim, they won my district by five points. I won it by 14 points in a really bad election year.

And it's a D plus three district, which means I'm winning in. those areas that don't typically vote for Democrats. And Tim Walz was a little bit of a good example of this, though, with all due respect, right? And he was in, was it your district, actually? It was in a similar district, at least, in Minnesota when he was in Congress. No, he was, he was just below my, just south. Just below it. Okay. So, and he overperformed the party for a while.

Yep. And then he becomes governor. He ends up kind of getting branded as more of a typical Democrat. And Kamala picked him, I think, with the hope that he might be able to appeal. to this part of the country, and he just didn't because I think the culture stuff, the atmospherics, the national politics, you know, were part of his brand more than whatever, the fact that he could fix a carburetor. So, like, how do you avoid that trajectory? Well, look, I mean, we're a big tent party, right? Like, I have no problem continuing to be a big tent party. But in these swing districts,

we got to let Democrats do what they need to do to win. Otherwise, we can't stop. Republicans. We can't govern. We can't get anything done for our constituents. We can't stop the attacks on our immigrant communities, which, by the way, is a huge issue in farm country too right now. We can't stop the attacks on the trans community. So as Democrats, you know, for the life of me, sometimes I think we, you know, we want to be the party of the permanent minority, that we're not willing to let individual Democrats do what they need to do. We want to put every Democrat in the same box and say, well, if you don't agree with us on everything as a Democrat, we're going to kick you out of the box. That is just the path to becoming the permanent minority in this

country. It really is. What does that look like, though, that could work? And it's working for you, like, what is it, what are some examples of things that, like, Democrats you think could offer into red America that would be different from what they're already offering? Sometimes I feel like I get from Democrats like, they say that we should do this. But then you end up with somebody that's kind of like, has the same policies, basically, but just in a little bit different packaging. And that's good, too. I'm all for changing the packaging, if that helps the districts.

But are there substantive things that you think would help? Well, there is framing, of course, the way you talk about these things, right? I mean, I'm a gun owner who belongs to a gun club in Egan, Minnesota. And I support a ban on assault weapons in our country. and looking at the size of these magazines, high capacity magazines in our nation. Like there is framing, but there's also what you're focused on in an election, right?

In an election where Democrats are kind of all over the place. And frankly, the Biden administration was running around saying, reelect me because, you know, the economy's great. And don't you love Bidenomics? I'm in my own district saying, what the hell? People can't afford hamburger meat. right now to make spaghetti for a family of four. We have an affordability crisis. How do we lower

cost? How do we put more money in people's pockets? I'm focused on keeping our community safe, whether that's supporting our local police departments, openly having, you know, sheriffs go to camera for me saying, this is a Democrat who wants to keep her community safe, being able to step into those places where people don't exactly expect a Democrat to step in there. But people aren't going to switch to voting for us, no matter what else we're selling, if they think we aren't committed to keeping their family safe. They're just not going to do it. And then, you know, the third platform I run on is, you know, we've got to change Washington. And so when we're seeing more as the party of the status quo, which is what we are seen as at time, that is a real problem

for us. So how do we create that kind of platform or give Democrats the space who need, to step out of what people's branded perception of the Democratic Party is. I mean, to be honest, it would be better if the party wasn't branded in some ways as the defunded the police party. Improving the whole party brand would help. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I mean, it would be a lot easier. But for sure, we can't go around bitching about, you know, people running in these swing seats and swing states. And, you know, my God, we've got to put up a presidential candidate in 28 who can win swing states, or we are on the path to being the party, the permanent minority in this country. Maybe expand the map.

Expand the map. How about that? Oh, my God, that would be unbelievable. It's like, okay, Barack Obama on Indiana, you know? It would be a crazy thought. We should at least try. You know, it feels like shrooms are really in these days. Hearing a lot about shrooms and the tech guys in California here about microdosing.

That's something we're reading trend stories about. But I'm eating a lot of the fancy mushrooms. I was never really a mushroom man growing up, but now I'm into all kinds of the artisanal mushrooms, you know, the maha mushrooms, if you will. And in addition to that, our sponsor of this show is offering a mushroom beverage that helps with the brain fog in the afternoon

and keeps away those afternoon caffeine jitters. That sponsor is Mudwater. Mudwater is a coffee alternative made with cacao, chai, turmeric, and functional mushrooms. like Lions Main and Rashi. You know, I've gone full lib when I'm advertising for something that has Lions Main and Rashi in it. All right.

It's a full transition at this point. We're doing Rashi ads. With Lions Mane and Rashi, you get energy and focus without the wired feeling or midday slump. And if you're more of a Macha person, their Macha Starter Kit is a total game changer. It's smooth, earthy, and gives you the right amount of lift without bitter aftertaste or weird additives that a lot of machas sneak in. So, are you ready to make the switch to cleaner energy? Head to mudwater.com and grab your starter kit today.

Right now, our listeners get an exclusive deal. Up to 43% off your entire order plus free shipping and a free rechargeable frother when you use code the bulwark. That's right, up to 43% off with code the bulwark at MUDWTR.com. After your purchase, they'll ask you how you found them. Please support our show and let them know we sent you mudwater. It's delicious. Go get it.

I want to go back to the farm stuff really quick because it kind of related. So the big news of the week was the clownish autism press conference that Trump had with R.F. Kennedy Jr. and his maha effort to, I guess, stigmatize mothers that wanted to have Tylenol to deal with pain during pregnancy. So I'm interested in your thoughts on that. I'm also interested in maha as it relates to the farm angle that we're talking about. And I think that a lot of farmers were concerned about some of the pesticide. rules that they were talking about putting in, though we haven't actually seen that. Meanwhile, they say their MAHA, but they're doing nutrition programs.

They're getting cut, which hurts farmers, because they're feeding the food. Produce prescriptions and food is medicine, that could be something that they could do, and that's not being invested in. So I'm wondering just kind of what you make of the whole MAHA project and how it relates to Ag Country. Yeah, so let me start with just the embarrassing press conference with RFK. I have a 22-year-old son. He's our youngest son.

He just graduated from college who is on the autism spectrum. So this could not be more personal to me and my wife and our family. I have called on Robert F. Kennedy to resign, to get the hell out, to stop giving medical advice. You are not a doctor. And I call on the damn president to do the same thing. Well, we'd love for him to resign, but to stop giving medical advice to our country. I guess we're stuck with Jady Vance now, fears. I don't know, I want them to, I'm with you.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. So stop giving medical advice. But this is a really interesting intersection in the Republican Party right now with the Maha movement. And look, we all want to make America healthy, right? Like, we should all want that. So I think we have to be careful as Democrats about how we talk about this, you know, red and yellow dye, you know, is an area where obviously there's some science around. but, you know, the family farmer also is, you know, concerned about the Maha movement because they are very, very anti-pesticide. And they are putting a lot of pressure on my Republican

colleagues as, you know, as well they should. So I think this is going to be a really interesting dynamic here as we go through the next six months of just kind of, you know, what the Maha movement does. RFK pulled any criticism of pesticides out of the report that they put out, and it just really infuriated the Maha movement. And, you know, of course, Republicans are trying to get preemption for pesticides at the federal level enshrined into law, which is really infuriating the Maha mom. So, you know, this intersection of Baha and Republicans and farmers is going to be very interesting to watch as we move forward. Yeah, and I think potentially just another proactive opportunity for Democrats to speak to

that community, right? Which is just like, we want people to be healthy when we're talking about fresh foods. We're talking about you being able to sell your product books. And I got a phone call from a farmer in Louisiana who just listens to the show and talking about their policies. He's like, I thought they were maha. I sell fresh lettuce to school programs, right? Like instead of importing lettuce from across the country, I do organic lettuce.

it's local, it's here in Louisiana. And he's like, they're canceled the program. He's like, I thought these guys were Maha. Yeah, it's the farm to school programs. It's the farm to food bank programs have been canceled, which remember, this is also farm revenue. You know, when you cut $186 billion from the SNAP program in this country, which, of course, helps people stay healthy as well, access to nutritious foods. You're also directly cutting $25 billion in farm revenue. When you cut USAID, when you let fresh fruit and vegetables literally rot in warehouses that were supposed to be sent overseas, you're cutting billions of dollars in farm revenue on top of the tariffs, which of course have really shattered many of our export markets. And, you know, the Trump administration has been challenged by a number of groups to create more domestic markets as well. And so far, They're kind of frozen.

I mean, they keep promising farmers that they're going to help them. They keep, you know, talking about how much they love family farmers. I'm just not sure within that 7 to 10 percent that I mentioned earlier, we need to win back, that that's going to fly. So I'm optimistic that if we keep pushing here, we can win some voters back. And candidly, that's why I ran for the top Democrat on the Ag Committee, because I want to help my fellow Democrats understand that if you're in a swing seat, if you're in a slightly Republican district, you know, get your ass out into those rural communities

and get in front of them. Tell them that you are working for them. You know, I noticed there was some conversation this week. I won't say much more about it about, you know, whether a gay person can win elections in this country and whether that's the right thing to put somebody who might be married to a man or a woman on the ballot. And what I can say is that I fundamentally, agree, if you go into these Republican spaces and you make it about them and their lives, they don't give a damn who you're married to. I won my seat and I was the first LGBTQ member of Congress from Minnesota, not from Minneapolis, not from St. Paul, but from a district that had been in Republican hands for three quarters of a century. I can go anywhere in the state running for

the U.S. Senate right now and talk to anybody. And I will go in those red space. And I will help a portion of them come back to the Democratic Party. And I think that's what we need to do across this country. I'll note that you and Pete kind of both did better in red areas than some straight Democrats running for office. So might not be all about identity, actually. What's wrong with these straight candidates? Why can't they win in rural America? I don't get it.

Hey, everybody. You've probably heard me mentioned that the bulwark is headed back on the road this fall. But we've got some big updates that I want you to hear. first, most importantly, we are adding a show in Toronto. I told you Canadians. I was doing my best to make it happen. I'm so thrilled by the response we've had from our Canadian friends and wanted to make sure if you wanted to be able to come, you could. So we added a matinee, a brunch show, whatever you want to call it, maybe a drag brunch. Don't tell J.D. Vance the next day. No promises on drag queens there, but, you know, maybe the spirit of a drag brunch. And so that will be

Saturday, the 27th. Go to the Bullwark.com slash events to get all the details and to get your tickets for that encore show in Toronto. Also, New York, that's going to sell out here any minute. So if you want to see us in New York on October 11th, get your tickets ASAP. There's still a bunch of tickets left for D.C. on October 8th, but we've got some exciting guest announcements coming soon. So if you're interested in coming to D.C., get on that as well. All of information available at the bulwark.com

slash events. It's me, Sarah, and Sam up in Toronto. Me, Sarah, and JVL and some of our other bulwark friends and a special guest in Washington, D.C. Look forward to seeing you all out on the road. We'll catch you soon. Get those tickets now. I want to go back to the autism thing just really quick

because of your son. And I just like to hear you talk about that just a little more because I feel like obviously the government should do what they can to study and research you know, any issues such as this to try to give people the best information they can. And I'm sure that you would want the, you know, best treatment possible or best awareness, you know, possible to help make sure everyone has a fulfilling life. I feel like the way they've dealt with this is extremely callous towards folks that are on the spectrum. And, you know, and the way they've

talked to like mothers about it. And there's this one tweet that was just posted right before we came on, but it's got Cali Means, who's one of RFK's top advisors. I just want to read this to you. He's Quote tweeting an old Tylenol post where they gave some warnings about using the product while pregnant. He goes, this post makes me sick when contrasted with the barrage of statements from medical groups saying Tylenol is safe for babies. Why is the medical industry so quick to aggressively defend drugs, but so slow to fight for American children who are getting slaughtered?

Slaughtered. Like, what is that? What is he talking about? Like, even if their framing was true in Tylenol, what was some way related to folks being on the spectrum. Like, people are, people who live fulfilling lives with autism on the autism spectrum. Like, like talking about it like that, like they're being slaughtered. It's just so callous to me. Well, it's, it's callous. It's disgusting. You know, RFK had a quote sort of at the beginning of his tenure too that said something to the effect of, you know, that, you know, kids on the spectrum,

people who are autistic, you know, don't live meaningful lives. They, you know, basically, they're a drain on society. And, you know, I came home that day from, you know, whatever I was doing out in the community. And I was just livid at this man. Don't tell me that my 22-year-old son, who just graduated with honors from college, is, you know, somehow not going to be a productive member of our society. And of course, we all want to know, you know, what is causing the increase in folks. on the spectrum. But at the end of the day, you know, they're neurodiverse and we have to figure out. I mean, that's the term that my son prefers, neurodiversity. You know, we have to figure out how we help them have meaningful lives. And to be so callous to sort of say these, you know, these kids are being slaughtered when, you know, they're productive members of our communities, you know, it's just so callous. And look, I will note that Means has, you know, a very appropriate last name. You know, don't get IEP moms for those of you who don't know if someone is on a special education plan in school.

You know, I'm an IEP mom and I know a bunch of them. Don't piss us off because we will come with everything we have to push back. And I feel like, you know, every time they tweet, all they're doing is organizing for us as Democrats. I hope so. All right. Final topic. We might have one area of disagreement. Are you ready for it? Okay, tell me. Crypto. You're the only Democrat to speak at a crypto conference. You're speaking right before Eric Trump. Did you guys get to hang out? Did he just get to talk about? Thank God I did not come across Eric Trump. I actually, yeah, I actually got some whistles and booze a little bit at the conference. Look, I'm ranking member of the House Ad Committee. My committee has jurisdiction over the CFTC, which has jurisdiction

over digital commodities. So I was actually with Brian Stile on the stage, who is the chairman of one of the subcommittees on the House Financial Services Committee. And we were talking about the Clarity Act, which passed the Congress and a bunch of Democrats voted for it as well. And the reason why I think it's important

is 52 million Americans are now participating in these markets. And if we just continue to not have any regulatory structure in place, then those Americans have absolutely no consumer protection. So, you know, and I got booed because I pointed out that it'd be a hell of a lot easier to regulate this space if the president's family was not participating in this market. But the same can be true, Tim, for like, you know, they've now got like some mobile phone company. Like, we should absolutely have a law that says the president, the president, the

vice president, the administration cannot participate in markets. It's corrupt. It's a conflict of interest. And it shouldn't just cover crypto. It should cover every other industry that his family business is participating in. If Democrats get the House back, should there be a inquiry, a formal inquiry into who's paying his crypto companies, like looking into all the crypto deals they're doing? Well, I think there should be an inquiry into all of the deals that the family business is doing, whether it's crypto or whether it's mobile phones or everything else. I mean, it absolutely is corrupt. It seems like the most money's coming in through the crypto, though.

Well, it seems like they're making a lot. They're making billion. And the UAE, there's an air time story last week. You know, like invested $2 billion into his stable coin, absurd. Remember, though, crypto is completely unregulated. And his family is participating in it today. At a minimum, if we put guardrails around this industry sector, we bring his family business into those guardrails.

Think about FTX. If what we're trying to do with clarity had been in place during the FDX debacle, consumers would not have lost their money because those assets would have been required to be segregated, kept somewhere else, not sent to some, you know, overseas account somewhere. So the other side of that, though, is that the more it gets incorporated into the financial system, the more that risk is incorporated into the financial system. And there's a lot of scams out there. You have to admit, there's a disproportionate amount of scams in the crypto industry as compared to other industries. And without segregation of assets, those scams continue, right?

I mean, this allows the CFTC and the SEC to go after those. Those scam companies would also. Not this CFTC, but a future CFTC. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Okay, you're right. You're right. There's barely one. So, but these scam companies couldn't just automatically market their businesses. I mean, you have to understand, like, right now it's the Wild Wild West out there. At least this starts to put some guardrails into this business. And 52 million Americans and growing by tens of millions every year, when do we start regulating when Trump's out of office? Right. Here's the other side of that, which is, this is the other part of me inside. I'm a little torn on this, like on the substance. I find it. I just, I think that the degree of the crypto scam is something that we're going to look back on in 10 years and be like, wow, I can't believe how many people got wrapped up in that. But as you mentioned, a lot of guys are in it. And I do wonder, like, are you able to kind of talk with crypto guys and sort of like, you know, do the lingo or any of your sons invested in it? Like, can you know, do the ETH talk or the fart coin? You know what I mean? Like I think sometimes the Democrats can't even speak the language, which hurts, you know. My sons are too poor to participate in crypto. So there, you know, that's true.

Unfortunately, a lot of people, it's their only investment, poor folks. Yeah, to my knowledge, I don't think any of my kids are invested in crypto. Can you, you know, talk to talk? Or are you on the learning curve? You know, I think most Democrats are on a learning curve. I have been on a learning curve the last four years. I've brought, you know, our committee staff together to try to educate Democrats on, you know, the difference between a digital commodity, of course, and other things that might be governed by

the SEC. And, you know, that's exactly what this legislation is. It defines what gets regulated by the SEC and what gets regulated by the CFTC. That's the entire point of the legislation. Congresswoman Angie Craig, I really appreciate all the time. Good luck in the Senate race. Let's stay in touch. All right. All right. Hey, and Angie Craig.com, if anyone wants to go and visit. Thanks, Tim. There you go. That's a good candidate skills. That's what I taught my candidates to do, too, back in the day when I was on that side of the aisle. All right. Thanks so much to Angie Craig. Up next, Glenn Thresh. All right, excited to welcome back to the pod, my old friend, New York Times reporter covering the Justice Department.

It is Glenn Thrush. What's out, brother? Hey, man. How you doing? You know, we're just living. I'm living down here. I'm doing my best. I'm going to go see Vampire Weekend tonight. you know, I'm finding little joys, uh, parenting. We're in soccer season now, you know. Outstanding. I saw the water boys last week. The water boys were excellent. Where was it? Where'd you see them? At the 930 club. Oh yeah, look at that. Shout out our, shout out to our crew at the 930 club. All right, let's get to business. You sent this tweet. This was one of the reasons I texted you to have you come on. It said this, people need to pay attention to what's going on

with Trump and DOJ. The president of the United States is demanding his attorney general, prosecute enemies solely because he says they are guilty, which wouldn't scare quotes. I agree. People need to pay attention to it. So I want to go through some of the details, but I just want you to kind of cook at the 20,000 foot bubble. For people who haven't paid close attention to this, and most people haven't, the president of the United States has essentially, and this is well known, he said this during the campaign and he said it and truthed it repeatedly, that he wants Tish James, who went after him in New York State on a civil case, Adam Schiff, his longtime arch enemy, John Bolton, James Comey, the list of horribles that he

has identified as targets. He wants them prosecuted, right? With Tish James, he's gone after her on potential mortgage fraud for putting on a loan application he claims for primary residence when, in fact, it was a secondary residence of sort of this technicality. The president had to have been very meticulous with all of his real estate paperwork back back, you know, when he was a real estate man. So he's censored to this. We know he never cut any corners on his real estate. You said it.

Not me. So the jurisdiction is EDVA, the Eastern District of Virginia, which is just outside of Washington, D.C., really known more for national security cases and terrorism. in cases like a very heavy, serious office. Well, line prosecutors in that case looked into the Tish James thing, and guess what? They told people in Maine Justice, headquarters, there's no there there. You can't bring a case. That was transmitted up to this guy, Eric Siebert, Trump's own appointee to run the office. That was transmitted up to Pam Bondi and Todd Blanche, the number one and two at the department, who then told the White House, no go. Trump does not like to be told no go. He views

the senior Justice Department officials as his personal lawyers. And in fact, Todd Blanche was his personal lawyer and took this extraordinary step. We still don't even know precisely what happened. It looked like a DM that he inadvertently made public. And then maybe he did a meant to do that truth social post out of it. But essentially he said that Tish James and his other enemies were guilty. He knew they were guilty and that Pam Bondi needed to take action fast. The scare quotes were there because this is scary. And you got the president of the United States essentially telling his own people, people who, by the way, support his extremely broad article two interpretation, that they can hire and fire whoever the hell they want. These are people who

said, no, sir, this is a bridge too far. And he just went through it. Well, part of the reason is in legal cases, you know, you've got to convince a jury of things. You have a convince grand juries of things. You've got to convince judges that you have actual facts, right? And so that seems to be a limiting factor. As much as Trump wishes that he was in a country, you know, where he could just put his enemies in jail, I suspect, you know, there's a process here that's still in place. And I assume that's a key issue that the folks at DOJ are taking. And they take a lot of Ls for him already in court, but, you know, like you can't force a grand jury to, you know, take up a case such as this. Well, the way that this works and the best example,

recently is occurring in the District of Columbia, where Janine Piro, who is the U.S. attorney in D.C. has been- Can you repeat that one more time? That Janine Piro, who is the U.S. attorney in Washington, D.C. Sometimes I just got to slap myself when sentences like that come out. Go ahead. Continue. By the way, you should read my outstanding story that I wrote about three weeks ago, talking about how she is among the most conventional and rule-abiding Trump political appointees, which is a fact.

But this is where she might diverge from that description. She brought the case against the guy who chucked the sandwich at the cops, knowing pretty much full well that no jury in D.C. was going to bring an indictment on that. And that has happened several other times. So Piro's hack of this system seems to be rather have the grand jury say no than me say no. And let me tell you how weird that is. I was talking to somebody in one of the big New York prosecutor, federal prosecutor's office. Out of a thousand cases every year, they estimate that only one, maybe two, in each year, a jury, grand jury rejects.

It is a black mark against the assistant U.S. attorney who brings that. That follows them their entire career. So, like, this is so, it's not only rare, but it's seen as a monumental screw up. This is now, I think, going to become a regular feature of the federal criminal justice system. Who knows what cases are going to be brought by prosecutors who have a sense that they're they're not going to pass muster with a grand jury. To that point, so let's talk about what their plans are for this Eastern District of Virginia. So Eric Siebert gets pushed out.

You can provide a little more color on exactly how that went down. He's replaced with this woman, Lindsay Halligan. Halligan is 36, has no prosecutorial experience. And your story on this from earlier this week says that she's being put in basically to advance the president's wishes as he, quote, becomes increasingly impatient for the indictments of two people he despise. as Comey and Tish James. So tell us about what happened there and what we should expect as far as

Comey and James are concerned from Halligan. Well, first of all, it was maximum confusion because a Commonwealth attorney from the state of Virginia sent out an email to the entire staff of EDVA saying she was going to take over and then a couple hours later. This was that Maggie Cleary.

Maggie Cleary, right. I've overlapped with her. She's like a more long-time conservative. Like traditional conservative. I'm right, but traditional conservative legal world, whereas Halligan is kind of out of, I don't know. You tell me out of thin air. No, no, no. And clearly it was best known for this first person piece she wrote about being improperly implicated in the J6 attacks.

I would urge people to read it. It's an interesting document for a prosecutor to have written. But Halligan, you know, when did I last see Halligan? I last saw Halligan in the halls of the Department of Justice last year when she and Jim Trustee and a couple of other lawyers were showing. up to get a briefing on Trump's J6 indictment. So Halligan is another part of the, is another part of the Trump legal team. The one thing I would say about her is she's not an Alina Haba type. She's not one of those people who's sort of been out there publicizing herself in the same

way. So it's really hard to kind of figure it out. It does seem, and again, this could change in 10 minutes. It seems like the Tish James mortgage prosecution in EDVA, if not dead, if not dead, is on life support. And part of that is because all of these shenanigans may have, and this is from Trump appointees that I've been interviewing, all of this public stuff has, in a weird way, inoculated Tish James from being prosecuted on this. It's very hard to bring a malicious prosecution case, but you have now this massive public reporting by us and others that the department itself had

tremendous skepticism about this. So the case that I would look for where we do not have any sense, as to its resolution is the Comey case. And the statute of limitations on Comey is running out quickly. Yeah. So this is, I said here. So there are, I guess, three separate investigations into Comey. There's one in this Eastern District of Virginia. That one involves his congressional testimony about the Russia investigation.

And I guess the statute of limitations runs out on that on Monday, this coming Monday. So talk about that and just the broader effort to go after Jim Comey. Well, Comey is one of Trump's top targets. And Trump has always believed, and I happened to have been out in Bedminster doing pool duty the day that he fired Comey, which back then in 2017 was a shock to the system. It was a bomb shell. I remember where I was when it happened. He's doing those kind of firings all the time now, but that was. Now it's a Sunday. Right. I mean, really. So he really wants to get Comey. He said he wants to. wants to get Comey. Comey doing his little seashell thing on Instagram didn't help this situation. Comey's daughter, who was part of the Epstein investigation, was fired again without cause. So Trump really wants to get Comey, who he believes to have been at the center of the Russia

investigation. Of course, as I'm sure your listeners know, Hillary Clinton feels the same way about James Comey, probably. But it's a pretty convoluted. investigation. We're not sure of the details. But Daniel Richmond, who is a Columbia law professor, who was close to Comey, was brought in subpoenaed for questioning about interactions and leaks. Our reporting seems to indicate that Richmond didn't say anything that would have contributed to the investigation. And that investigation itself seems to be somewhat questionable. But what we are hearing is it is ongoing and we could actually see something result from that, even though we don't necessarily have any evidence at the moment to indicate that. But it is not dead or it is not on

life support in the way that the Tisch Virginia investigation seems to be. You mentioned the firing of Maureen Comey. Have we learned any more about that? And obviously, it seems like it was just based on her last name. But what is the DOJ? What is their rationale? Have they provided you a rationale for why? No. Look, Tim, in the larger context of stuff, this is really arcane stuff, okay? I came from the world of politics and covering the White House broadly. It took me really, I would say two years on this beat to understand the way that DOJ really works. And even now, I'm in the fog most of the time. But these things, which seem very procedural and very arcane, are in fact seminal to rule of law. And one of the really big things that

that the administration has done, really, Emil Beauvais, who is now a federal judge, who was Todd Blanche's number two, Emil really ran the department for the first three or four months, perfected this as an argument or made it as an argument, is the Article 2 firing. And basically what it means is some people get a letter getting fired that says you're being fired for cause, you help weaponize the department, you're not very good. But the main reason why you're being fired is because Article 2 of the constitutional allows the president of the United States, fire whoever they want. That will ultimately be litigated in the Supreme Court, it is presumed. But for now, that is basically what the

administration used to get rid of Comey and is using for all sorts of other actions. Yeah. And it is arcane. There's another way to look at it, because it's arcane in the rule of law side of it, but there's another way to look at it as, you know, the human side of it, which is like, this is a woman that was out there prosecuting some of the worst people in the country and doing so effectively, going after child sex predator. who this administration claimed to really care about going after child sex predators, and they fired one of the people that was out there doing that effectively and had a record of success, putting those folks behind bars because of our last name

and because politics, essentially. I mean, we don't know for that for sure, but that seems to be the reason. Tim, I think the predicate for all of this was the pardoning and clemencies for the J6 rioters. I mean, I was at Pam Bondi, the Attorney General's confirmation hearings, and she basically said this was before the pardon. came down. What was her quote? The president doesn't like people who beat up cops. Yeah. Well, all those people are now got there, get out of jail, a free card. You're doing this reporting that you're talking about trying to kind of get a sense of the

building. What are the vibes like among kind of mid-rank careers at DOJ at FBI? And we had Michael Feinberg on this podcast a couple of times now, who got pushed out of the FBI, essentially because of his friendship with Pete Struck. We saw some leaks about the Homeland investigation. which to me indicates that maybe there's some folks that are unhappy in there. I obviously don't know that for sure. Feinberg says that there are a bunch of people quitting that haven't made news because they don't want to be in the press. What is your sense of that? Is that happen?

Are there a lot of people that have left that we don't really know about? Is there a lot of consternation? What can you tell us about that? Well, I think, for instance, the Virginia, the eastern Virginia office is completely decimated. And I talked with a former supervisor in that office over the weekend who basically said, they're being inundated with questions about what the market looks like to get out of there. And these are people who really love their jobs. We should emphasize this.

And there are people also across the political spectrum. We're not talking about like this notion of sort of deep state progressives who have a political acts to grind is bull. Most of these people are just really law and order types. I mean, Siebert was a Trump appointee four months ago for just one example. Totally, totally. And the other thing is all of them are sort of looking for liability insurance. to increase the insurance that they take out to protect themselves in the case that they're sued

on any of these cases, which is also extraordinary. What is going on? I just can't emphasize this enough. It is not normal. It is not exactly what was done in the prior administration. This has never happened before in the modern history of the department, period. And I did a story, it seems like 20 years ago, but last week in which I interviewed two FBI agents who were fired without cause, one of whom was fired because Kyle Seraphim, a former FBI agent, who's now a far right influencer, made up a story about them. Big tweeter. He's messaging me a bunch of these guys. And then the other guy, Cash Patel fired despite the fact that the head of the Washington

field office of the FBI said, this guy has a spotless record. and his wife is right now dying of stage four adrenal cancer. And what did Cash Patel do? He offered the head of the Washington field office three cigars, a challenge coin, and then a couple of weeks later he fired the agent, and then for good measure fired the head of the Washington field office. So, like, what do you think people are feeling? Can you imagine a workplace in which people were just being fired because the boss,

you know, because the big boss didn't like him? Heard a rumor about him. And then Cash Patelah goes and testifies, we should add, then it goes and testifies publicly in the hearing and says that all these firings happen because these folks weren't up to snuff. Like he smears them and says that it was because they weren't, they didn't do a good job, right? Yeah. So I would imagine that would rankle me. Well, he also, the other thing he said in the testimony was that our story on the agents was one-sided, implying that he didn't have a chance to respond. And his people knew about what we were doing 24 hours in advance and got a detailed set of questions.

So Patel has said repeatedly that he's running the most transparent FBI in history. That has not been our experience. Well, he is live tweeting assassination investigation. So that is new. I mean, that's more transparent than previous FBI officials. Sometimes I like to call balls and strikes here. That is something that is extremely transparent and unusual. Last thing, this home investigation, I just kind of want to broaden it out a little bit,

talked about a bunch this week. But to me, the interesting angle on this, I'd like your take on is just the closing the investigation part of this. And that there is, to my perception from the outside, telling me this is wrong, like that the public integrity unit basically is completely shut down unless it's one of a Trump's political foes. Like, so the Holman thing is specific controversy, you know, because they're shutting down what seems to have quite credible investigation over a top appointee in the administration. And then on top of that, it seems like this is kind of happening broadly, right? That this is just no longer a priority for this DOJ looking after public corruption cases.

Is that a fair statement? Yeah, I think the latter part is fair. I'll give you the caveat at the beginning. I don't know what Tom Homan did. We're just reporting on an investigation. It could have, you know, his explanation for it is out in the public sphere. And we have no reason. We have no evidence of criminality in this.

We just know the basic facts of this. So. So, that he took 50 grand on Kavana back. Correct. Correct. But what I will say to you is the Biden administration, the Garland Justice Department, per my reporting, had knowledge of this and was essentially confused, this was in our reporting, was confused by what the, what the set of circumstances were.

And also, I got a general sense that this was fall of 2024, that they did not want to begin a significant criminal investigation against a Trump ally that late in the game and we're sort of waiting for the election to play out to then to then revisit kind of a different ML from what we're saying yeah yeah yeah but but as per the the public integrity unit gone it doesn't exist anymore there were 30 i'm trying to remember my last tally of this i think there were 35 or 37 members in that unit and as of my last count they were under four currently working now to be fair a lot of those people got farmed out to individual u.s. attorney's office and are people working public integrity cases outside of that unit.

And that unit has not had a completely flawless record, but it is a remarkable demonstration of how Trump has devalued white-collar crime in general and public corruption cases, particularly. It's part of his effort to redefine criminality, to focus on people who are his political adversaries or groups that haven't been inclined to vote for him versus people. who resemble him, both in terms of his wealth and power. And I think that is a really kind of underappreciated facet of this administration, how they are just simply sort of inverting the priorities of the department. Glenn Thrush, covering the Justice Department for the New York Times, man.

I really appreciate your time. It's good to see you. Great talking to you. Thanks so much to Angie Craig. I appreciate her time. It was great to meet her. And to my friend Glenn Thrush, for getting us up to speed on what has happened at the DOJ. We will be back tomorrow for another edition of the Bull.

work podcast that some of you might be interested in. So we'll see you all then. Peace. We took a vow in summertime. Now we find ourselves in late December. I believe that New Year's Eve will be the perfect

time for their great surrender. But they don't remember. Anger wants a voice. Voices won't. sing singers harmonize did it can't hit anything thought that I was free from all that questioning but every time a problem is another one begins and the stone walls of I'm on bad witness anybody with a wood in mind can never forgive the side wicked snakes inside a place you thought was dignified.

I don't want to live like this, but I don't want to die. Within the horrors of power lies A nervous heart that beats like a young pretender's Beneath these velvet gloves I hide the shameful crooked ends of a money lender Because I still remember Anger wants a voice Voices want to sing

Sinners harmonize I thought that I was free from all that questioning. But every time a proud remiss, another one begins. And the stone wall was a vomiting all bear witness. Anybody with a word in mind can never forgive the sight. Wicked snakes inside a place you thought was dignified. I don't want to live like this, but I don't want to die. I don't want to live like but I don't want to live like this, but I don't want to die.

The Bullwark podcast is produced by Katie Cooper with audio engineering and editing by Jason Brough.