The Bulwark Podcast - Bill Kristol: Taking A Wrecking Ball to the Government

Episode Date: February 17, 2025

Firing air traffic controllers over a busy holiday travel weekend, cutting a veterans crisis hotline, axing and then rehiring people who maintain and keep our nuclear arsenal safe: Musk and his minions aren't trying to "fix" the government. They're trying to make it more susceptible to Trump's personalized leadership. And the MIA Dems need to get out there and throw some punches since the media loves fights. Meanwhile, the US is now more of a problem than a solution on Ukraine, Elon's massive corruption isn't drawing anywhere near the same attention as Hunter/Burisma—and Bill Cassidy could just vote against Kash or delay his confirmation if he's really worried about the FBI.   Bill Kristol joins Tim Miller  show notes Bill's 'Bulwark on Sunday' conversation with Eric Edeleman Don Moynihan's newsletter that Bill mentioned

Hello and welcome to the Bullard Podcast. I'm your host, Tim Miller. Happy Washington's birthday 2025. While we're changing the names of things, we're no longer observing President's Day here. We're going back to the original, the traditional Washington's birthday observed. It's not actually Washington's birthday, but you know, details. And because it's a Monday, I'm here with Bill Kristol.

How are you doing, Bill? I'm hanging in there. How are you? I'm doing well. Do you have any other kind of name changes you're thinking about? I remember it was like a little bit of a conservative thing in the 70s and 80s to object to the change from Washington's birthday to President's Day. I guess they were sort of pushing together Lincoln and Washington, and then of course

they had to be on a Monday. But yes, insofar as it sort of implies that we equally respect all presidents, it's very bad and I'm glad you're... I'm glad you've decided. I'm glad you've declared the bulwark policy of not recognizing President's Day, right? I mean, if we can all just adopt whatever names we want, right? Yeah. We're not recognizing President's Day, right? I mean, if we can all just adopt whatever names we want, right? Yeah. We're not recognizing President's Day.

We're dead naming the Gulf of Mexico. That's just kind of how things are going here. Much to discuss, I guess. It seems like your newsletter this morning was focused on all of the trouble that has been being created from Elon Musk's plaza governmental department of government efficiency. Many different specifics I think worth worth getting into but I'm just at the highest level you know interested in what you were trying to to get across. I just sort of wrecking ball it is and as Don Moynihan, the professor of political science

at Michigan says in a very good newsletter that I recommend and he's a sober guy, serious student of public administration. The point isn't government efficiency. The point is to wreck the government and make it more susceptible, wreck the structures, you might say, of the government of which civil service is such an important part and make it susceptible to Trump's personalized leadership and really to autocracy and and so all the idiotic things they're doing if you sort of Individually, it's like hard to understand. Why do they want to make air travel less safe?

Why do they want to you know damaged our nuclear safety? inspection regime but if you think of it more as just taking a wrecking ball to the government you I Think have a pretty good sense of what's Going on and then I was provoked this morning to write about this particularly I was gonna write actually more about the foreign policy stuff from the weekend, which was so the last four or five days Which is so terrible the IRS headline, I guess broke last night in The Washington Post and the New York Times Doge is insisting on getting into the IRS and into the very, very sensitive part of the IRS that even IRS commissioners don't have access to, which has your tax returns, and my tax returns,

and 180 million or something, other Americans. Trump's tax returns, presumably. Yeah, and Elon Musk's tax returns, and Doge needs to get in there, I don't know why, and look at them, I guess, and have access to them. And they're sort of resisting a little bit of Treasury and it's up in the air. So it seems like that would be a good moment for everyone to weigh it and say, this is a clarifying moment perhaps of what their ambitions are and why it's worth resisting. It is clarifying. And the IRS, I mean, that situation is a little bit murky, I guess, still. But some of the more clarifying

elements are some of the other things you reference. I think it's worth talking about a few of them in particular particular with regards to the National Nuclear Security Administration. So there were up to 350 employees that were laid off late Thursday. They showed up to the office Friday and were locked out. One of the hardest hit offices was the Pantex plant near Amarillo, Texas. The employees there work on reassembling warheads, one of the most sensitive jobs across the nuclear weapons enterprise with the highest levels of clearance.

As of this morning, the administration has decided that that was an oopsie doops and they're going to try to bring back all but 28, but there's some kind of HR and legal questions about how to do that. Just to your original point, like this is not about efficiency. I'm sympathetic to the idea that there are some bureaucrats that maybe are cashing a government paycheck and aren't providing value at the level of their compensation. I do not think that is the case for the people that are reassembling the nuclear warheads. I don't think anybody would consider that, but I don't know.

Maybe Elon thinks big balls, or one of his 19-year-olds could reassemble nuclear warheads better. I'm not sure. Yeah, and God forbid they should actually study it for 30 days and see whether they can cut 10% or maybe increase 10% in some parts or reorganize the place. There's none of that, of course. They show up. They give, I guess, each supervisor 200, if I read this correctly, 200 characters,

not 200 words, 200 characters, like on a tweet, to explain what each of these employees are doing. These are the probationary employees, which mean people who've been hired in the last year or two, or people who've assumed new jobs in the last year, as I understand it. So they can be quite senior, some of them. They don't have civil service protections, they're easier to fire. They just went in and fired them. I mean, it's such a wrecking ball.

It's so unserious about any of the things government does. This one, I guess, was even less. It was a bridge too far. There was a public outcry and some congressional outcry and experts saying, what are you doing? And they did retreat, which incidentally is a good sign, which suggests to me that if there's a little more of an outcry in all these areas, including by the Democratic Party, maybe they would retreat a little more. Part of the problem though is it's happening so quickly, it's hard to get enough of an outcry to focus on a particular thing. So just a couple of other examples. The FAA, we've had like six

plane crashes recently. I don't know, we didn't have a plane crash for 16 years. We had obviously the horrific one outside of Reagan National in DC, but then a couple of other smaller incidents recently. Trump administration has started firing several hundred FAA probationary employees who maintain the air traffic control infrastructure. We've been discussing the CDC and NIH cuts, which are just seem draconian. This one caught my eye over the weekend, veterans crisis hotline employees. This is an individual person, you know, posting on their social media.

I'm devastated last night, myself and many others at the veterans crisis line were terminated without warning. I mean, that again, seems like some, a valuable service. So when all of this stuff is happening so fast, it is a little challenging to like create the dust that necessary to get them to, you know, backtrack, I guess. So when all of this stuff is happening so fast, it is a little challenging to create the dust that's necessary to get them to backtrack, I guess. And I think that's probably their point. I don't think they mind backtracking in a couple of cases because a bunch of other stuff

ends up flying under the radar. Right. I do think, though, that, I mean, the Congress, of course, the Congress is controlled by Republicans, which is a huge problem. I mean, the media can do its bit. The civil service themselves can do a lot and probably should be encouraged to do as much as they can safely do really to publicize what's happening and to explain how dangerous it is.

But there is this thing called Congress. They do have oversight of the executive branch. They're even organized into committees that kind of by departments and they oversee the different departments. There's a subcommittee of the Finance Committee in the Senate and the Ways and Means Committee in the House that oversees the IRS. I don't know. It seems to me that maybe the ranking Democrat on that committee should be just screaming

and yelling on every platform he or she can get onto, and screaming and yelling at the Republican members for failing to do any oversight. That should be the equivalent on all these places, whether it's the FAA or the CDC and FDA and all that. I said this to some Democrat over the weekend. I was like, well, they're doing town halls. They really laying the predicate for fighting on the budget, which is coming out. It's really all about winning back the House in November of 2026.

I don't disagree with it in a way. That's why these town halls are so important, Tim, because if you do a town hall on February 17th of 2025, it's really going to help you win back the house in 2026. I think you get a little more punch actually out of making this a huge national story of how they're destroying these important government agencies that help us fly safely and take drugs with confidence that they work and check epidemics and make sure our tax returns are treated professionally.

But what do I know? Maybe this town hall where they have some happy talk with 80 people is really better. I don't know. Yeah. I mean, I think that you're right about, or this Democrat you talked to is right about, they do seem to be thinking a lot about the budget fight that is coming up. And I had Brendan Boyle over on the YouTube feed at the end of last week, who's the ranking member on the budget committee.

And I think he's sharp on this and there, you know, I think that their strategies are making sense. And later in the week, we're going to have other folks from the Hill on to talk about what the Democrats are doing. People that I think are doing a good job. That said, there was a big Politico story over the weekend on this about how far the Democrats are behind on messaging and platforms, particularly in the online media world, and I was quoted in there.

And what I said was basically, anything that you tell me they're doing well, like they should be doing 700X with with that much more intensity, right? It's just the amount that Trump and Musk are in people's faces. I mentioned this the other day, but I was scrolling through, you know, one of my, one of my sports podcasts I listened to. And it was a non-political comment. It was just like the guy on this Barstool podcast was saying, he's like, I'm so fucking sick of Elon Musk. He's like, I just don't want to hear about him anymore. He's like, I feel like the only people I ever hear about are Taylor and Travis and Elon Musk. And it's like on somebody that's not political, the show doesn't

talk about politics. And I think that that's just a telling anecdote though about like volume and just like how much of the messaging from Trump and Elon is just seeping in to casual Americans and Democrats like are doing some stuff like on the hill and in these town halls. But like these examples, the veterans crisis hotline, the FAA, nuclear, I like these are all things that if you're really banging the drum, I do think, you know, just regular people are like, why are we firing the veterans crisis line? Like is that really what's gonna resolve our trillion dollar budget gap? Like it doesn't feel like it. Right, and you could show up with veterans obviously who benefited from this crisis

hotline in your district or not in your district. But I agree, it's probably the volume, it's probably you've got to fight. I mean the media likes to cover fights. People like to watch fights. They don't like to watch press conferences. And I love the Democrats all this, you know, well, we can't swing at every pitch. You know, I mean, they're so busy not swinging at every pitch, they're taking called third strikes if I can torture this metaphor. Yes. I mean, it's really ridiculous.

So swing at every pitch. You'll miss a few. But they've talked themselves into a kind of bizarre form of overthinking where they don't take them on and they've got to preface everything they say. Well, of course there's probably waste there. I mean, I wouldn't question that. They don't know that there's waste there. For all we know, the FAA is understaffed. You know, the IRS is understaffed. That was pretty convincingly shown in the debates over the last two, three, four years when Biden tried to increase it. It was a pretty engaged issue and experts weighed in. Not much question that more IRS agents properly governed and controlled,

not by Doge creeps, would help generate more revenue and a fairer, you know, auditing of taxes and so forth. And especially wealthy people who are getting away with some stuff. But anyway, the Democrats are so defensive, so hesitant, so overthinking. I, okay, I've, it's just the problem of I talked to actually a few Democrats this weekend and it kind of, my head's exploding, but I've got to calm down. Swing at every, I might do the meme where it's like, don't make me tap the sign again, which is like, actually, yes, swing at every pitch.

Right now, I mean, maybe don't swing at every pitch on Labor Day of 2026, but like right now, start, well, now we're really going to beat this metaphor to death, but do anything and see what sticks. We don't know. We can't predict what is going to stick. Right. Put the ball in play, right? You know, they could be errors. They could turn out to have done something very stupid like they apparently did with the nuclear safety officials. So you don't know until you challenge it. Nobody last week would have been like, you know, the real thing to focus on is the National Nuclear Security Administration, right? Like, you know, you just don't know, especially

with how quickly things are moving. While we're complaining about people on the Hill, we should also focus a little bit on the Republicans because Bill Cassidy is just going to be my cause celeb, I think, unfortunately, you know, because I just can't take it with him in particular. So somebody's got to talk about it. Here is a tweet he sent over the weekend. This was on Saturday. I am all for efficiency and ultimately downsizing the federal government, but firing large numbers of new FBI agents is not the way to achieve this.

Louisiana specifically benefits from newly hired FBI agents. We need to add to our law enforcement, not take away. So every sentence on that I agree with, every single word on that I agree with. But here's the thing, the Cash Patel vote is tomorrow. So Cash is not mentioned in this tweet. The only action that he can take is to vote against and maybe convince some of his colleagues to vote against or to delay the confirmation of the person who reportedly, according to whistleblowers, was behind the downsizing at the FBI that he's so upset about.

So Bill Cassidy, if you're pissed about this, if you think it hurts Louisiana, then vote against Cash Patel or go out and do interviews about how Cash Patel needs to come clean about whether he was involved in this and that we need to have another round of hearings to ask Cash Patel what his plans are for the staffing of the FBI. I mean, like, this is your moment. Like you have a moment now for 24 hours. Now, obviously he's not going to do anything. So I don't want to pretend like we might think that he could, but like, this is the window for him to do something

about this. And instead, it's just this limp tweet that doesn't even actually address the person who's responsible. I totally agree. Obviously, Patel will be really, and to confirm Patel after what we've seen now, of course, makes it even worse because you can't pretend I didn't know what he was going to do. They've done what he wanted them to do and he probably lied about whether he knew about what they were doing. They are senators on the other end. They do have appropriations authority, power.

And he also could say, and incidentally, when the budget comes up, it could be the first reconciliation bill, which I guess could be pretty soon, right? And then there's the CR for the government shutdown a month from now, a little less than a month from now. You can put things in riders and bills that say, no money should be spent to get rid of XVIHS, or we need to have this minimum number of XVIHS. It's not like Congress doesn't have quite a lot of say on this. They don't even seem to think of that.

It's like they're so pathetic in terms of exercising. When I was at the education department, granted a long long time ago, I mean if we had, you know, moved one person in Louisiana where she didn't want to go, he or she didn't want to go from one research institute to another, you know, like phone calls from the members of Congress, the Senator, Chief of Staff, you reverse that right well, sir. We did it according to the book. I don't care Yeah, sometimes we would resist them Sometimes we wouldn't but I mean they've sort of totally forgotten that they have quite a lot of clout if they would exercise it But of course the Republicans are just won't take on Trump or any of Trump's agents apparently and the Democrats don't have much power to be

Fair, but they also not screaming enough to put the Republicans on the spot I mean it seems to me as your client're calling it a column over the weekend about, um, how the Republicans on the Hill have become non-player characters, which are like the characters in the video game that don't do anything. Like they just exist. And like that is, that is correct. Right. It's just, it is a kind of a Marvel that they have just decided that they have no.

Role at all. And it's interesting because it is interesting to see the McConnell play on this. I mean, obviously I have no sympathy for him or I'm not at all moved or inspired by his 11th hour effort to be the one person that votes against these various Trump nominees. But when he was majority leader, he at least tried to exercise some power, oftentimes in ways I disagreed with sometimes in ways that was good during Trump 1.0. That is gone. You know, I mean, John Thune might as well not exist. Right. I mean, these people do have agency. They're pretty

important people, actually, they have more agency than most of us. But everyone has some agency, actually, Rene Jarest, in this conversation that's online, a conversation with Bill Kristol about the internet, makes this point, too, about regular people. You know, everyone talks about something going viral. Well, people choose to hit the button that allows it to go viral, and they can choose not to,

and they can choose to tweet and retweet things and so forth. Now, Musk is weighing the, is putting a thumb on the scale of the algorithm, so people don't have that much agency in some of these cases Yeah, but agencies isn't that been one of our that's one of your favorite themes and JVLs and stuff And I think it's a good one. We should remind people that I don't know there Everyone's a commentator right no one including elected officials who are like elected to Govern not to commentate. Yeah, everybody's a podcaster, you know, Ted Cruz and Matt Gates are competing with me

You know in the marketplace. It's not as great of a job as it looks. They're all aspiring to be podcasters instead of doers. Speaking of people at the agency, an update on the story we talked about with Andrew Weisman on Friday. So we had these resignations to the DOJ over the effort to kind of, I guess, let Eric Adams off the hook in exchange for promises that he would follow the administration's immigration guidelines.

The character, Emil Bove, has been one of the central villains of the first month of the administration who was the person at DOJ that was pushing this. He's also the one that was pushing people out of the FBI and is mobbed up in the aforementioned Cash Patel story. Anyway, since we talked last week, we had another person resign over this Hagan Scott, and I'm going to read a little bit from his statement because it is blistering. Any assistant US attorney would know that our laws and traditions do not allow using the prosecutorial power to influence other citizens, much less elected officials in this

way. If no lawyer within earshot of the president is willing to give him that advice, then I expect you will eventually find someone who is enough of a fool or enough of a coward to file your motion, but it was never going to be me. That was his resignation letter to Emile Boeve. This guy, Hagen Scotton, two Bronze Stars, special forces. In this letter, he expresses that he shares some perspective of the Trump administration. He clerked for Kavanaugh and Roberts. Times calls him a conservative Republican.

I mean, that is a pretty blistering statement for somebody with that background. No, it's a terrific statement. And Danielle Sassoon's letter, she clerked for Scalia, is really excellent. And it's excellent partly because it goes on for eight pages. Some of it's a little dense for a non-lawyer like me, but it really explains just how terrible what's happening is. And so this statement in a shorter, punchier way maybe, does as well. So all credit to them, all honor to them.

Meanwhile, Chris Ray, who served as FBI director for what, seven, eight years, he's just decided to check out. I mean, he's not willing to weigh in on the fate of the agency that he led. He personally appoints what, five, six people? The people who really run the FBI, and they're all fired. Maybe you should say a word about these were good public servants, and they shouldn't be fired. This is very bad for the future of the FBI, and maybe we need to have some oversight of

all this. But no, Chris Ray is busy being a gentleman, I suppose. A gentleman just... I don't even know what he's doing. What are they all doing? I guess I'm just you know, maybe it wouldn't matter. No one likes Chris Ray's. He was appointed by Trump. Again, he's not exactly a, we're not talking about a Biden operatic here. So. Well, Chris Ray is welcome on the podcast if he's looking for something to do. But just your point about agency, I just, it is worth just sitting on that for a second, that him and Sassoon, like they could have not done this. Like they could have just gone along with this particular, you know, kind of

extra legal, you know, quid pro quo sham that the administration was trying to do. It could have rationalized it's better to be in there. And so, I mean, it is a big credit to them for not just resigning, but doing so in a way that is crystal clear about the rationale and the fact that they are adult grownups with agency and can make choices about what is right and wrong, which is apparently something that the congressional Republicans haven't come around to. Unray, I mean, it is wild, right? His whole rationale for resigning, for the preemptive surrender, was that he didn't want

to draw additional attention to the FBI. And so that strategy totally backfires. All right. I mean, like he resigns and he just like, lets them walk in and fire all of his deputies. And he basically just rolls out the red carpet for the people to do the thing that he didn't want. And then it happened and nothing. You know, I mean, it just as a total abdication of responsibility, like, I'm sorry, like he could have forced them to fire him. He could have made a stink about it. You know, he could have testified. He still could testify again, the cash for tell vote isn't until tomorrow. Now, when I keep getting assured by people who are on the other side of the, some of

the Republican senators left very comfortable with the cash for tell vote. They've talking privately to some FBI veterans. some of them, you know No people in the FBI obviously over the years, especially if they're on the relevant committees. They're not happy But you know, no one is speaking out the one guy who spoke out William Webster the FBI and CIA director from Reagan and Bush Way way time long ago who's a hundred years old and he went to the trouble of writing quite a good letter explaining how damaging it is to have the politicization that we're seeing of the FBI and CIA and people totally unqualified for the job in those two positions.

I think he's the only person to have held both positions. But again, there are other former FBI and CIA directors, there are other national security officials and they mostly just decided to let the new administration have a chance to destroy the US government, you know? Well, we should also shout out the DRIZ, Brian Driscoll, who's the acting FBI director, who's been really holding the line here so far. Yeah, I think he's about right.

He'll probably be getting fired later this week. We'll see how that shakes out. So, there'll be much more to discuss about that. You know, when you buy a new house, everything's a hassle. But the thing that was maybe the most annoying when we bought ours a couple years ago was the window treatments and the blinds was a lot more work and a lot more expensive than I anticipated. And so I'm happy we have a new sponsor that's trying to make sure there's a better way to buy blinds, shades, shutters, and drapery.

It's called 3-Day Blinds. They're the leading manufacturer of high-quality custom window treatments in the US. And right now, if you use my URL, 3dayblinds.com slash thebullwork, they are running a buy one, get one 50% off deal. We can shop for almost anything at home. Why not shop for blinds at home too?

3-Day Blinds has local professionally trained design consultants that provide expert guidance on the right blinds for you in the comfort of your home. Just set up an appointment and you'll get a free no obligation quote the same day. With 3-Day Blinds, you choose from thousands of options that fit any budget or style and with actual samples, you won't be guessing about what your blinds will look like. 3-Day Blinds has been in business for over 45 years and they've helped over 2 million people get the window treatments of their dreams.

So they are a brand you can trust. Right now, get quality window treatments that fit your budget with 3-Day Blinds. Head to 3dayblinds.com slash The Bullwork. For their buy one, get one 50% off deal on custom blinds, shades, shutters, and drapery. For a free no charge, no obligation consultation, just head to 3dayblinds.com slash the bulwark. One last time, that's a buy one, get one 50% off when you head to the number three, d-a-y, blinds.com slash the bulwark.

I want to do the aforementioned foreign policy stuff, a lot happening. There are going to be talks between the United States and Russia and Saudi Arabia. So I had to do this on, I was going to say on Putin's home turf, but I guess since Kushner is the sugar baby of the Saudis, I guess maybe it's on Kushner's home turf.

They will hold talks on quote, improving their ties and negotiating an end to the war in Ukraine. Not involved in those talks is Ukraine. Zelensky was not invited. He's showing up to Saudi on Wednesday. Unclear why, we'll see what happens. Maybe for a PR effort on that front.

Meanwhile, European leaders are meeting in Paris to discuss thoughts, Bill. I mean, Zelensky and the Europeans are doing their best scrambling to try to mitigate the damage that was done by Trump in the phone call with Putin and then the subsequent announcements of these that imply incidentally the sanctions will be lifted. I mean, the Lavrov, who's the Russian Foreign Minister, Rubio, had a conversation Saturday,

and Eric Edelman interpreted this for me yesterday on our little Sunday podcast. We'll put a link into that. It was really good. It was on our sub-step. Thanks to Eric. I mean, you know, they're sort of implying, at least the Russian readout of the call, that, you know, we've got to get rid of these sanctions. We have to have close ties again., and of course, Putin and Trump himself

said he wants to get together with Putin and so forth. So we're just the whole resistance to Putin, which had been held pretty well for three years, incidentally, with a lot of European nations who started off, everyone assumed they're going to have a tough time doing this, they've held pretty firm. The international resistance, including Asian allies of ours. Totally. I mean, without the US there, it's hard to believe it can hold that much longer. One worries a lot about what happens on the ground in Ukraine. So, I mean, it's very bad what's happened and the collapse of confidence in the US, the Hegseth speech, we're no longer really too focused on Europe. I mean, what's Europe after

all? It's only the place where two world wars started in the first half of the 20th century that has been kept at peace for the last 80 years, basically, until Putin invaded Ukraine, the largest ground war in 80 years, which Vance couldn't bring himself to criticize Putin on his speech in Munich, and whatever that was, Friday or Saturday, Friday, I guess. It's all so bad. I mean, it was all going in that direction. And that's why some of us were against I mean, it was all going in that direction and that's why some of us were against Trump

and thought it was very, very dangerous to elect him for a second term. But I've got to say with Musk on the domestic front and the full America first onslaught on the international front, it's kind of on the, what's the way to say this, the worst end of what I thought might happen, both domestically and internationally.

Yeah, in the international reverberations, I do think that people just underestimate how it will change our role in the world, view of us, our ability to have influence. And there's just this one quote that jumped out to me in one of the articles I was reading over the weekend. It's by Anna Merlequina. She's a journalist who fled the keep from more appall in 2022. As you wrote the Trump statements is a chain of humiliation for people like me, people who believe that there was law and justice in the world.

When you live in a world that is crumbling under your feet, the only thing that helps you survive is to believe in guidelines and civilized democratic countries that uphold values. When countries like the United States cease to be pillars, there's nothing to hope for. Wow. Yikes. I didn't see that. That's really powerful. Yeah. Yeah. And I think that there's just something to that. I was interviewing Mark Salter, who

is McCain's speechwriter. God, must have been three years ago. I was living in Oakland at the time. And he was just talking about how when you travel with McCain, you'd go to random places like small villages and stuff where there are people around the world that like, where we had helped them when they're pushing back against a tyrant. And, and it was something they remembered, and it gave them pride and how excited they were and how grateful they were. Like all of those little nodes, like had to add up to something, right? It doesn't mean that the world wouldn't be perfect or you know, like it would get a great result, but it had to add up to something. And I feel like this is just undoing. We've essentially

undone all of that in a month. No, it's depressing. It really is depressing and terrible. I mean, another way of putting it maybe, I think Eric might have said this yesterday, is the US, which has basically been on the right side, I would say for 80 years in terms of freedom and democracy and a decent, peaceful world order, also a prosperous one, incidentally, that's not a trivial consideration, all of which has benefited us.

But we've made mistakes, there are times we've been too close to dictators, and maybe some of these wars were ill-advised and so forth. But on the whole, we've been directionally, you might say, on the right side. You really have to ask the question, is the US now part of the solution or part of the problem? And that's where I think it's so demoralizing for people in Ukraine and people in Europe. And that's suing people in the Indo-Pacific. I mean, they're thinking about a world in which the US is not basically with them, sometimes, as I say, hesitantly, too hesitantly from the point of view of some of us, sometimes

to the point of view of the more dovish parts of the internationalist coalition, too aggressively, but not on the right side. And I hate to even say that. I mean, I really honestly don't like saying it. I don't want to say it. I mean, we're meeting with the bad guys and not inviting the good guys to the table. I like, I don't know what else, how other way there is to describe it. Keir Stormer in UK over the weekend expressed that if necessary, the openness to sending peacekeeping troops

in. I just mentioned that because just the gap between that and what you're saying from us is so wide and it's opposite. I guess it's not a gap, it's opposite, right? Like they are actually saying that we will put boots on the line if necessary to help protect Ukraine and meanwhile, I guess Marco, little Marco and Lavrov are meeting about what Russia can get out of this deal. It's really, really something. One other foreign policy thing I just had to mention to you because it connects to the domestic that you mentioned with Elon.

Did you see the meeting between Elon and Modi? Just saw a photo of it. Yeah. All you kind of need to do is see a photo. Modi, leader of India, of course, they're meeting at the Blair House. And it's like the flags are up. It's like the formal setting for, uh, you know, a meeting between either state leaders or our secretary of state and their lead diplomat.

On the Modi side of the table, there's like all of his advisors. And on the Musk side, it's like a couple of his children and that's it. And Trump has then asked about this meeting and he's like, I didn't know about it and he says, maybe they're meeting about business. I mean, like, you know, it's hard to even think about what to say about something like that, right? Like, you know, all of these, like the whole conspiracy about the Biden administration, about Burisma, that Hunter was doing a deal in Ukraine and that Joe

Biden like took a phone call at some point with one of the Burisma people. And like, that was the big controversy. And here we have like the shadow president meeting with a counter party in the Blair house in like a formal setting. And the president is saying, well, that's fine because maybe they're just doing some deals. meeting with a counterparty in the Blair House in like a formal setting and the president is saying well that's fine because maybe they're just doing some deals. Like the scale of corruption is just as really mind-boggling and I do think it connects to the foreign policy side of this when you talk about us

being on the wrong side because it's the type of behavior of an autocratic nation right like that's what it is. Yeah, that's very well said. Absolutely. All right. You've been kind of a downer. So I'm going to keep kind of leaning into that. You never know how much attention to give to stupid shit like this, but Trump bleated over the weekend. He who saves his country does not violate any law. This was, I guess, from a 1970 movie, Waterloo, where the Napoleon character says this in the movie. It feels, I think, apocryphal.

Not a real Napoleon quote, it's a movie quote. Republicans on the Hill are very excited about this. One Republican congressman wrote, the president is Napoleon posting. I don't know. What's your state of alarm on Donald Trump posting as if he's an autocrat to Napoleon? Yeah, Napoleon would be the best case. It also has a certain resemblance to even worse, I suppose, 20th century autocrats. But I don't know, Napoleon was pretty bad.

He did cause 20 years of war in Europe. I mean, I do think to the degree it's true, and I don't know much about this, Napoleon said something like that when he took over in the 1790s after the chaos of the French Revolution, not excusing Napoleon, but even thinking about it at that level, what Trump is sort of saying is that the republic's finished, democracy's finished, and I've got to step in and be Napoleon for the next 20 years. I guess he's a little old for the next 20 years, but those were not a great 20 years. That didn't end up working out great for France or for Europe.

But again, the idea that an American president would, even if he's just quote, just, you know, taunting us and, you know, shitposting and all that sort of stuff, it's still awful, of course. And then of course, everyone rushes to defend him. And Musk loves it. And these Republican members of Congress love it. They're just against liberal democracy. They're against the liberties of liberal democracy and they're against the democratic processes

of liberal democracy. They are for autocracy, dictatorship, different levels probably among each other about how far they want to go in suppressing freedoms and then just having one guy, one man or a coterie of plutocrats and oligarchs around the country. That's what they're for. They're not even hiding it anymore. It would be nice if some Republicans somewhere criticized it apart from us ex-Republicans. And I know the Democrats don't want to react to every tweet, they don't want to swing at

every pitch. I don't know, some former president, I mean, not to get too earnest, but I don't know, if a current president tweets something like that. I would think Former presidents maybe presidents Obama and Bush could do it together might say something about this, you know, I mean again They know they wouldn't help why should I do it? But of course if none of them does it then ordinary people think well, I don't know Maybe it's not such a big deal or maybe this you know, we'd be sort of right or anyway We shouldn't get too alarmed. But of course it's consistent with everything they're doing at home and abroad, right? Soterios Johnson It is. And to your point about, you know, kind of the their opposition to liberal

democracy and the different degrees, Musk was posting over the weekend about how he thinks 60 minutes should be jailed. People from 60 minutes should be jailed because of, it doesn't even matter really what the rationale was for that, but it shows you where their heads at. So you're kind of alluding there to your request from others to speak out. You addressed this directly over the weekend you wrote, without going all Martin Neimoller, I do think it's bad not to speak up for immigrants, transgender Americans, civil servants, women, Ukraine, and everyone that the MAGA bullies are going after.

We're beyond picking and choosing who to defend. It's time to stand up and speak out. Do you want to expand on that a little bit? I guess, should we leave people with a little bit of a stiffened spine, a lesson from Niemöller? I don't think it's so hopeless. I guess I'll come back to this. It's not as if, again, it's not as if Musk got 73% of the vote or 55% of the vote, right? He got Musk, Trump shows up.

Well, that's a, that's a 40 and slip, but Trump got slightly under 50% of the vote. They have 53 members of the Senate out of a hundred, 200 and whatever it is, 18, 19 in the house out of 435, a tiny margin, a half the governorships and so forth. It sounds as if there isn't, there are plenty of Americans who aren't on board this. And there are some Americans who voted foolishly in my view for Trump, who

probably aren't on board what he's doing at home or abroad. Incidentally, half the Republicans in Congress voted afraid to Ukraine less than a year ago. So I don't think the opposition is impossible. I don't think we're in a kind of horrible situation of every person who descends has to be a genuine hero or martyr or something like that. But people do need to take the threat seriously and be serious about their opposition and they will have endless debates about the right way to oppose. And I'm not

sure I know. I really am somewhat bewildered in some ways. But I got to think just opposing a lot is better than not opposing a lot. I guess I have a simple-minded view of this. And opposing across the board actually is better than being really cute and selective. That I think is the part that a lot of the professional Democrats don't agree with, but you cannot just sit there and look at people bullying and just doing things that are obviously not complicated policy issues, but just contrary to people's basic freedoms and contrary to basic decency.

Once you accept that, you are in a very slippery slope, I think. We'll leave it there. Bill Kristol will be back next Monday. I'm sure there'll be another parade of horrors to discuss then. Everybody else, we'll be back tomorrow for another edition of the Bullwork Podcast. We'll see you all then. Peace. No hundred dollar bill You've got to question your intentions Cause the bad ones kill

Everybody wants the same thing Everybody wants the same thing Treating places on the chain gang It doesn't matter how you swing it Everybody wants the same thing When your exercise is coming up around an event Now did you live your life right? But did you just pretend That you knew what you was talking about? Which side was your fence? Cause when my hammer comes down it never makes no sense Chaos is not a virtue, paranoia loads the bases

Just imagine giant rivers, overblown with our faces Everybody wants the same thing Everybody wants the same thing The Bulldog Podcast is produced by Katie Cooper with audio engineering and editing by Jason Brown.