The Bulwark Podcast - Jon Ossoff: Trump Is a Lifelong Racist

Episode Date: April 30, 2026

The bombshell voting rights ruling from the Supreme Court may have been years in the making, but Ossoff sees a tie-in to Trump's sore-loserdom and his inability to accept that black voters in Georgia were responsible for his 2020 defeat. And the senator expects a full-court press to get Alito and Thomas to retire so Trump can nominate MAGA fanatics to the court—and impose his most durable legacy on the country. Ossoff also discussed potential limits on aid to Israel, the geopolitical malpractice of the Iran war, and the brazen corruption of the Trump family’s overseas business deals. Plus, Luke Thomas explains the links between MMA and Trump world, the UFC’s key role in rehabilitating Trump after Jan 6, and the sportswashing behind the upcoming fights at the White House. Extra bonus: Tim weighs in on the Maine Senate race.Sen. Jon Ossoff and Morning Kombat host Luke Thomas join Tim Miller.show notes: Ossoff's campaign website Ossoff in 2024, explaining his vote for a resolution that would've blocked arms sales to Israel Luke's "Morning Kombat" Tickets for our Bulwark Live shows in San Diego on 5/20 and in LA on 5/21: TheBulwark.com/Events Get 20% off your DeleteMe plan when you go to joindeleteme.com/BULWARK and use promo code BULWARK at checkout.

Right. Hey, everybody, I got a bunch of stuff for you today. The pot is going to be a double header. In segment two, we're going to do a little MMA talk with the woke bill crystal of MMA world. So I think that will be interesting, particularly with the big fight coming up on the White House grounds and all of the, and there's more corruption than I even realized between Trump and MMA world. So do stick around for Luke Thomas up first. We got John Osoff. You might have heard about him. He has been hot on the stump lately, so I was excited to chat with him about his reelect in Georgia, but also some bigger picture stuff. Reminder, we have our live events in California. San Diego, downtown San Diego, May 20th, downtown L.A. May 21st. I'm getting some fun stuff ready. So, come on, come hang, pull the trigger. Let's do it. Before we get to both our guests, I taped both of them yesterday, so Wednesday.

And I'm taking this Thursday morning, we have some news this morning that Janet Mills has dropped out of the main Senate race. I just, the main Senate race has been an absolute calamity. And I think that hopefully it doesn't end as a calamity. Hopefully it ends a Senator Plattner. But I do think it's important for the Democratic establishment to take this moment to learn from what happened in the race. And the Democratic base is unhappy. They want fighters. they don't want people in their 80s.

They want people that are going to demonstrate that they are up for the moment. And so having the DC establishment try to force people on them is not only not going to work, it's going to backfire like we saw in Maine. And this is kind of related to the Hassan discourse I was getting into. I sometimes I feel like I'm going crazy because I live through, obviously there are differences, but I live through the populist base uprising in the Republican Party. Some of it is untameable. But there are things that can be done and there's things that shouldn't be done. There are things that backfired.

I watched it all. Like I watched it all happen. I watched how the limp Republican establishment just kept stepping on rake after rake as they watched the Tea Party and then eventually Trump take over. And so there's at least some lessons learned for what not to do that I can offer to people. And one thing not to do is try to feed a 80-year-old establishment candidate, Lobster Biden, on to an electorate that has told you they don't want it. Okay?

If you want a fight and mud, you've got to find a fight and mod. And I don't exactly know. Dan Cleveland was in the race initially. He's a beer guy in Maine. Who knows how good of a campaign he could have run. But the fact that Chuck Schumer went and pushed a kind of an independent-minded, mainstream democratic businessman out of the race and pressured him and others to endorse Janet Mills' hopeless campaign.

campaign and then went negative and started dropping opo on Graham Platner long after it was obvious that Platner was going to win. And it was just a comedy of errors. And the comedy of errors was based on a lack of understanding of what is really happening on the ground. And if you understood it was really happening on the ground and you were worried about Platner because of his history, because he's a little bit of a loose cannon, whatever reason. Like if you have legitimate concerns that that this is a risky bet for Maine, well, you had sitting there an outsider businessman candidate that, you know, didn't have quite as rowdy of a background. And maybe that wouldn't have worked. Graham was super talented. Graham might have been winning anyway. But at least going the other way, there was a chance, you know, dumb and dumber. So you're saying there's a chance. And certainly, if you're going to do this, like officially a. endorsing the establishment can't. I mean, like, they cost Janet Mills points by doing this, by you being heavy-handed and getting into Maine. Okay. So, you know, I think that there's a good reason for the Basie

Mad. You don't want, you know, to get eaten by the crocodile. So I was scrolling through my Instagram feed this morning and had multiple message from people sending me a post that has like millions of views from an influencer talking about how they're not a conspiracy theorist. And then lay out a bunch of conspiracy theories. Like, you have to have lines around all of this. You have to recognize, like, this thing can spiral out of control. And so, you know, wasting your credibility on a 79-year-old Senate candidate and demonstrating just total tone deafness ruins your ability to, like, have any trust with voters when you're

going to them and saying, hey, you know, this thing is true or this is out of line? This is too far. Maybe, you know, maybe we need a different type of candidate to win in this type of state. I mean, like, they just, the establishment has just totally torched their credibility. It's, it's also related to the Favreau interview with Ken Martin that I'm sure many of you guys listen to over on Ponce of America. It's like, they got to wake up. They got to wake up.

And if they don't, there's going to be a violent overthrow of the party by the populist left. And we'll see how that shakes out. So that's where we're at. It's going to be Grand Platner versus Susan Collins. We'll obviously be covering that race a lot. and just a total disaster class from Schumer and the DSCC and how to handle that race. I will say there's some other green shoots, including our guest today, including the recruitment of Mary Peltola and Alaska, some other ones.

So it's not, you know, things are nuanced. Humans are fallible. They make smart decisions and mad decisions. They're running a great race in Georgia, have had some good recruitments in other places. but the main situation was basically a 101 and everything that you can do wrong as an establishment trying to deal with a populist uprising in your midst. So, all right, so that's that. There's a bunch of other stuff out there that we get into later on in the week. The gas price, we could have hit an inflection point, I think, on the economic strife.

The gas price is increasing that we're seeing this week, particularly in the upper Midwest, is pretty alarming. and there's a lot worse to come on that front. That's going to have major ripple effects in our politics. I think that we're very, very early in the economic crisis. And things are going to get worse before they get better. And that's going to have a lot of impact on the midterms. And hopefully that'll help people like Graham Platner and the guest we're about to get to next. So stick around, segment two.

It's Luke Thomas. I'm not an MMA person. So even if you're not an MMAP person, it's very 101. and I think it sheds a lot of important light on what's happening with Trump. So I encourage you to stick around for that. But up first, it's John Ossoff. Hello and welcome to the Bullwark podcast. I'm your host, Tim Miller.

Delighted to welcome to the show for the first time. The Democratic United States Senator from the state of Georgia, it's John Ossoff. How you doing, man? Hey, Tim. Thank you for having me, man. All good. It is really good to have you. We got a bunch to get into a couple of news items I want to start with.

On Wednesday morning, the Supreme Court narrowed Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. That's going to impact, have unclear, but potentially up to a dozen or more majority black districts held by black representatives. I'm wondering your thoughts on the ruling and how to move forward from here. I think it's a disaster, and it's the fruit of a many years-long effort to dismantle the policy legacy of a civil rights movement and the foundations of black rights movement and the foundations of black. political power in the United States. And it makes me think about what President Trump has done and tried to do in Georgia since 2020, up to and including the recent raid on Fulton County, where Tulton Gabbard, the nation's spy chief, right, the nation's senior most intelligence officer, not a law enforcement official, was there overseeing, overseeing, and those are her own words

that she used under oath in front of a Senate Intelligence Committee when I questioned her, the nation's spy chief, overseeing a ballot raid in Fulton County. Well, why is it that Donald Trump has been so obsessed with Fulton County, Georgia and the 2020 election? And in my view, it's because this man who is a committed lifelong racist, who recently posted memes of the Obama's depicted as apes. cannot wrap his head around the fact that black voters and black political power in the American South was responsible for his defeat in the 2020 election, hence his obsession with Georgia ever since. I'm wondering what your reaction is with regards to SCOTUS itself. I mean, it's a 6-3 ruling.

It ends up going on partisan lines. We don't know what's next as far as potential resignations. Obviously, there's some discussion of if the Democrats ever get back in power. thinking about reforms to SCOTUS expansion. I'm just kind of wondering what you think of the state of play of the Roberts Court and what could potentially be done. Well, it speaks to how important these U.S. Senate races are because, you know, they will try, I am confident, to push Alito and Thomas off of the bench.

And if they have the votes in the Senate, they will try to put 30-something MAGA fanatic lawyers on the Supreme Court who will serve, like, literally for generations. And that will be, if it comes to pass, in some ways, the most durable legacy of the Trump presidency. And when it comes to controversial Supreme Court nominees, every single vote in the Senate matters. So, first of all, the Senate majority is in play. But even if it were not, we would need to fight for every vote in the Senate to ensure that we can defeat the most offensive and extreme potential Supreme Court nominees who may have some difficulty peeling off some of the moderate Republicans. What do you think to that question?

It makes me think of the new Garland rule. Let's say that we get into next year and there are resignations on the Supreme Court. And at this point, I'd have to think that the Democrats would have to play hard ball in the same manner in which Mitch McConnell did with regards to that Garland, Gorsuch seat. It is very difficult for me to imagine in this political environment, given the crisis that the nation faces right now, Democrats in the Senate feeling in a cooperative mood with respect to any Supreme Court nominees from this White House. Another thing that's been happening this week when it comes to the Trump Justice Department is he's targeting political foes again. The most reason is Jim Comey over the seashell meme. Cash Patel said yesterday there was a years-long investigation into the shells. They're really looking deep into that 10, 11 months.

Today in the Oval Office, the president was asked if he really felt like his life was in danger from the meme, and he said probably. So the president was saying that he was really scared that Jim Comey might be threatening to kill him. And that is why he supports the prosecution. What do you make of that? I think we have to step back and just acknowledge how catastrophically the Department of Justice has been politicized in very short time, how standards of independence that were long considered crucially important for presidents of both parties have been demolished. I mean, the Department of Justice has a giant banner of the president hanging from it right now. now, like some totalitarian farce. And the DOJ is just going after his critics and adversaries and chosen targets. You know, taking us back to the Fulton County raid. And if folks go back and they

look at what Tulsi Gabbard said about why she was there and that the White House asked her directly to go, just think about the fact that the president of the United States, is personally managing the staffing of politically sensitive law enforcement raids on polling places or election facilities in the United States, while DOJ brazenly and blatantly goes after his political adversaries, while they wield prosecutorial power to try to intimidate the Fed chair to cut rates. This is Banana Republic stuff, and it has to be opposed every step of the way. Yeah. I feel like even in Banana Republic, so kind of laugh at the autocrat. If they're like, you know, I was really worried about the Facebook meme.

The seashells were there on the shore, and they looked very intimidating. I mean, the whole thing, it's like, it's farcical. It's idioca, and it's menacing and idiocacy together, no? It is, and I think we have to take the authoritarian, communism seriously as a threat to the constitutional order and our civil liberties and our civil rights. We also have to step back and recognize that it's all grossly incompetent and they're clowns, right? I mean, that the power grab is being very hamfistedly executed and they're hemorrhaging support across the country because what's the backdrop for all of this? People suffering economically, just this year alone knew all-time record high prices for rent, for groceries, for the power bill, for a meal out at a restaurant.

And what the public sees is the president engaging in reckless and incompetent militarism around the world, talking obsessively about building a new ballroom and trying to prosecute. his political adversaries. And so it is extraordinarily dangerous and it's unacceptable. It's also a big part of the reason that the national mood and the political momentum has so drastically shifted against this administration and toward the opposition. Let's talk about the forward adventurism. So we have the Iran war going on. As of today, the president is saying that we need to keep the blockade, maybe for a little while.

I guess we've got to keep the straight closed in order to open it. hopefully in the future. I guess the hope is that the Iran regime will crumble by itself. Just wondering what you can make of the strategy and the way he's been prosecuting this war in Iran. I don't think there has been a strategy. I think this is strategic and geopolitical malpractice and it's been a debacle for the national security and economic interests of the United States. Because first of all, not only is the regime in Tehran in Texas, it now appears to be dominated by hardline IRGC elements who may pose even more of a threat to our national interests and who may be arguing internally against any kind of restriction on nuclear weapons development,

particularly now that for them, you know, this is like the lesson of Libya versus North Korea. from their perspective, they may believe that they have more reason to sprint for a weapon on the basis of a stockpile of highly enriched uranium that they only built after Donald Trump shredded President Obama's Iran deal over the objections of his secretaries of state and defense. So you've got a more hardline and dangerous regime in Tehran, which has now shown to the world that under heavy aerial bombardment from the two most powerful air forces in world history, they can sustain closure of the strait and throttle global energy supply. And very swiftly in this conflict, the president found himself in the dilemma where his options were to escalate or to lose.

And now we're in this standoff that is doing immense damage to the global economy. and our leverage in these nuclear negotiations, which are crucially important because an Iranian nuclear weapons capability would be an existential threat to many of our allies, a critical national security threat to the United States. Our leverage in that diplomacy is now diminished. There are more important policy ramifications of this I want to get into with you. But I just, I'm struck by how humiliating this all is for Trump and how weak he looks. And you gave that speech a little bit ago now where you're talking about how, you know, on day 10, he said the war was almost over. You know, on day 11, he said, we've already won.

But originally when we started, it was only unconditional surrender. A couple of weeks ago, he was going to end their civilization. And we have now here today, you know, a president that is very limply, like trying to hope that the Iranians come back to the table. And he just looks unbelievably weak. I put my former Republican hat on. I was like, if a Democratic president was this week in a counternegotiation, we would be mocking and belittling just how feckless and humiliated he is. And I just wonder if you think that there is any benefit in engaging in that kind of attack on the administration,

just given how embarrassing this has all been for them. I deeply and sincerely regret the immense damage that this incompetent president has done to our standing in the world, our position in the world, to our national power, to our economic power, and to our alliances through his and his team's rank incompetence and amateurism. This has been an ill-fated, ill-considered debacle from the very start. And the whole world can see it, and they can never unsee it. Well, there's some good news, though. We can say pussy again. You know, so that's nice. We can, they said he gets back in there.

We'll be able to say... No, Tim, you can. You can't. Well, people can say pussy again. And I think that's, okay, well, that's fine. I just, I think it's convenient. It's convenient for me as a podcaster for him to be acting in this way and also be freeing me to be able to say the P word again. But that's, I appreciate that. There was a post recently about how all the Democrats are cussing now. It's like very in trend. Are you not, are you not a big cusser? It's not really my thing. Not your thing. Do you have a favorite cuss word? You know, I'm afraid that that's just one of those private questions.

Favorite question is a private question. You know this about me? I love that. I love that. My mother, when she listens to this, is going to kind of wish that her son was more in the Senator Ossoff mold. We're in different roles, my brother. That's true, but her feedback is still that I could probably dial it back a little bit.

Tell her I said a little bit. The other, I guess I wouldn't even call it subtext, too. what's been happening with the war, and really it's from the text, is what it says about our relationship with Israel. You had BB Netanyahu in the situation room making the pitch to Trump. Trump's son-in-law was there, apparently, even though he doesn't have a security clearance as well, and, you know, talking about why we should get involved in this war. Past presidents and secretaries of states of both parties have been saying he's been making this pitch for a long time. This isn't anything new, but, you know, we have Israel, in some level at least encouraging our involvement

in this disaster. And then there was already, you know, concerns about the degree to which we were supporting Israel, given the way that they were prosecuting the war in Gaza. And so I'm wondering, you know, as you sit here today, how you think we should be thinking about our relationship with Israel and whether we should be reimagining it. Look, I've been clear and outspoken about this for years now. Israel is an important ally of the United States. The United States is committed to the security of the Israeli.

people. But there's no such thing as unconditional security assistance to a foreign government. No foreign government is simply entitled as a matter of right to American weapons at any time, for any purpose. We have no strings attached. And it's entirely reasonable for the United States to use the leverage that comes with the provision of armaments to a foreign government to shape that foreign government's conduct, no matter how close an ally they are. And so where a foreign government's conduct is adverse to our interests or contrary to our values, then using that leverage, using that power to advance the interests and values of the American people is not just appropriate. It should be normal. I'm wondering how you think about that in the context of Israel,

but also UAE, Saudi. You know, you have Qatar giving gifts to the president. You have UAE being in business for the president's kids. Saudis and the president's son-in-law. Israel, I guess, to some extent, depending on what you make of the Board of Peace and what's happening in Gaza, right? Like, there was a promise made by this administration of the American people

that they were not going to get us into these Middle Eastern entanglements, and now we're more entangled than ever. And I just wonder how you think about that going forward and whether the U.S. should be trying to disentangle itself as much as possible, not just from Israel, but from all of the factional fights in the region. Yeah, I want to go deeper on the Saudi and Emirati connections because I think this is some of the most blatant and grotesque conflicts of interests and corruption in the history of white houses.

But I also just want to put us on alert that we need to be watching like a hawk as this president engages with Xi Jinping. Because the message that he and his family and his emissaries have been sending to the whole world is that the personal private business of the first family and the interest. of the United States are in the view of this president linked. That's the message that the world has gotten. And we have to be on alert that the Chinese leadership may see opportunities to influence the foreign policy of the United States by offering direct or indirect inducements commercially that suit the interests of the Trump organization, the president's businesses, his crypto venture, his sons' businesses, his sons now the sprawling business empire. We didn't suddenly become great entrepreneurs. It's just that the whole world thinks they can curry favor with the president of

United States by patronizing his family's businesses. I mean, Jared Kushner, who had already received through his private equity farm, affinity partners, billions of dollars of Saudi investment, very substantial Emirati investment, has been reportedly going around the Middle East asking for billions more from princes and shakes in the region while moonlighting as the special envoy or whatever they call him leading the most sensitive American diplomacy. It's grotesque. It's absurd. And I think that the American people see it for what it is. And it is another reason that a wave is building toward these midterm elections that is going to rebuke these abuses of power. this corruption in a historic way.

Why has Jared been up on the Hillmore testifying about all of this? It is insane. You know, I mean, if he's the lead negotiator, in addition to all the things you just laid out, I mean, Saudi in particular, is a geopolitical rival to Iran. Like, why would Iran trust a counterparty that is on the take from one of their strategic rivals? And the whole thing is wild. And I just wonder, like, A, you know, why you don't think that we've seen more oversaw?

of that and B, if you guys take power, if that is at the top of your priority list, or what else is on the list? Well, I mean, and of course, you know the answer to that question. I mean, today, to my knowledge, this is the first time that the Secretary of Defense has even testified in public since this war began two months ago. And the Republicans in Congress have shown zero inclination, zero inclination to use their oversight power in any meaningful way. He was making money, though, when the Democrats were still in power.

I mean, this could have happened during the Biden years, I guess was really my point. That's a fair point. That's a fair point. And it probably should have, although I will say I don't think he was occupying the same sort of role of diplomatic prominence during that period. But he was clearly advising the administration on foreign policy during the first term. But look, the oversight and investigations muscles in Congress generally have atrophied. I mean, that the Republicans in office right now are living in fear of the White House. They're not going to impose any accountability or transparency.

But I'll just say generally, even I've spent the last few years using oversight power in Congress to investigate civil rights abuses in our prison system, to investigate abuses in ICE detention, to investigate the mistreatment of military families by defense contractors. And part of what's happened in the United States, part of the reason that power has shifted so toward the unaccountable executive is because Congress doesn't bother doing real investigations and real oversight. You don't have to travel far to lend a helping hand. When neighbors help neighbors, hope can blossom.

When hope blossoms, families and whole communities thrive. The dedicated staff and volunteers of the Catholic Charities Network believe a neighbor isn't just someone who lives nearby or down the block. It's someone who shows up and sticks around, cross-distance or discomfort. It's the one who acts with compassion and follows through and carries on in moments. of need. For more than a century, the Catholic Charities Network, with 169 agencies nationwide, has served communities across the country and down the street, no matter of beliefs or differences, whether it's through housing, food, disaster relief, job training, or simply listening. Because

when you faithfully serve as a neighbor, the life you change may be your own. Be the hope around the corner in your neighborhood nationwide. Learn more and volunteer at peopleof hope.us. I just want to go back to Israel and one other thing. This has obviously become a flashpoint in democratic politics. You know, the question of whether candidates are getting money from APAC has really come to the forefront and a lot of the primaries that are ongoing. APEC attacked you last year. I just wonder as a Jewish Democrat, out of like how you think about this and how you want to talk about it in a way

that may disentangle, like, criticisms from Israel from, like, legit concerns about rising anti-Semitism in the country. Yeah, I mean, look, the first Jew elected to the Senate in Georgia history. And maybe if you're willing throw in your show notes or a description here, a link to some of the speeches I've given on the Senate floor on this subject. The Jewish community is not monolithic in its views of American foreign policy and its views of the U.S. Israel Alliance. Jewish voters, Jewish Americans have a wide range of views and see the complexity and nuance inherent to complex foreign policy. policy issues. And what I have done is taking the decisions and made the statements that I think are in the national interest and in my constituents' interests and let the political chips fall where they

may. And I think that that's my job and that's the oath that I took. Just given your background, and you've talked also about how your ancestors fled pogroms and you grow up around Holocaust survivor relatives. And I just, I don't know, it's hard. I think that I've become increasingly critical of Israel over the last couple of years because their actions have called for more and more criticism, right? At the same time, you also have seen, like, I see on social media and elsewhere attacks on Jewish people that I don't think are really related to Israel's actions at all. I've seen an increase of that, and I've seen some of that from the left. And I just kind of wonder, you know, how you kind of process that and think about that, particularly when it's coming from inside the tent.

Yeah, we've got to be able to hold complexity in our minds at once. a desire for the state of Israel to be secure and successful does not in some way forbid criticism of the Israeli government or the Israeli leadership or imply that American security assistance to Israel should be unconditional at all times and for any purpose. And the fact that there is legitimate grounds for critique of this foreign government also doesn't mean that some of the criticism isn't motivated by religious animus or or. or bias. So, you know, look, in terms of anti-Semitism in the United States, I just need to open my mail in the morning on any given morning to be reminded of the intensity and prevalence of

anti-Semitism today. I have to make these foreign policy decisions based upon my assessment of our national interest, and I think that's what I've done. And among that is potentially cutting back or eliminating military aid to Israel, and how far have you been willing to go on that? Well, as I've made clear in my remarks on the Senate floor and those, votes that I have taken. And as I said to you earlier during this interview, I don't think any foreign government, no matter how close an ally, whether it's the state of Israel or the United Kingdom, is simply entitled to American arms. Our sale and provision of weapons to foreign governments is a serious matter that needs to inure to the interest of the United States. And we need to

have confidence that those arms will be used consistent with the law of armed conflict and with the values of the American people. And it is okay to say no in order to influence the conduct of foreign governments if we have concerns that the use of those weapons is inconsistent with our interests or our values. You had a new ad out earlier on Wednesday going after pharma, after corruption broadly. I'm going to play a little bit of that. You aren't the problem. Neither are your fellow Americans, the problem is a corrupt and failing political system. The problem is that the people's elected representatives don't represent the people. They represent the donors and special interests. Corruption is why things don't work for ordinary people. To fix it, we have to understand

it. Corruption's impact isn't abstract. It shows up in our daily lives. Take prescription drugs. The cost of medicine in America is astronomical. But how have they gotten away with it? Every election cycle, drug companies spend millions on campaign contributions to Republicans and Democrats to shape policy and protect their profits. And members of Congress fall in line. It's corruption in plain sight. Why engage on this now? Why this issue and, you know, what do you think you want voters to know about?

Well, first of all, because it's top of mind for my mind. constituents. I mean, health care costs are the number one issue in Georgia, the thing that folks raised with me the most when I'm out on the stump. With the attacks on the Affordable Care Act, you've got health premium skyrocketing, more of a quarter of a million Georgians have lost their insurance altogether in recent months. People are furious about drug companies ripping off the American people. And the point that I'm making here, whether it's in my speeches that I've been giving it rallies across Georgia or this video we put out today is we have to recognize that political corruption in the United States is systemic. Yes, the Trump administration has taken

overt brazen corruption to a whole new level, and there has to be accountability for that. But in some ways, in my view, Trump's rise is itself a symptom of the deeper systemic failure, especially since Citizens United, which just opened the floodgates to secret spending, billionaire spending, corporate spending on both sides of the aisle and has corrupted the policymaking process in a way that doesn't represent the interests of the American people. And we can contain this present wickedness and contain the administration. But if we don't fix this more fundamental thing, I think our repatriate. public is still going to be in a tough spot.

And what does that look like? What's something that you like to do to fix that, you know, that is not related to the unique Trumpian corruption? I think the most pernicious thing, the most destructive thing is the unlimited secret political defending. I mean, and it doesn't pass. But that's the Supreme Court thing. That takes us back to the Supreme Court question at the beginning. Like, how do you fix that without fixing the court? I think that, first of all, we can and we should try to get it through statute. And some of it is also a constitutional question.

But here's the thing. Don't you think we could build like an 80-20 majority to address this? There is no reason that the coalition that we could build to reform our corrupt campaign finance system should be limited by partisanship. Like if we were to go up to, maybe we should do this. If we were to walk up to people on the street in Georgia, Democrat, Independent, Republican, unaffiliated, non-vote or whatever and say, hey, does it make sense to you that a corporation, or a spectacularly wealthy person can spend unlimited amounts on political campaigns in secret. Like, I think nobody actually thinks that's good for our republic or good for public policy. And so we should be building that coalition to change it because it's doing so much damage. All right. I want to run through a couple things rapidly really quick for I lose you. We'll get to the fun stuff.

Well, this would be fun for me, actually. Where are you at on impeachment? I'm kind of torn on the question of impeachment. Well, I think that the president's conduct within, I don't know, the first days or hour of his swearing in this term exceeded the threshold probably for any past impeachment. I can just think of right off the top of my head multiple impeachable offenses. people speculate about the political wisdom of it and so on and so forth. But like just taking a step back, whether it's this or just the necessity of oversight and investigations, there does have to be accountability for misconduct just as a governance question. And I don't think that the choice is between economic policies and the interests of America's working in middle classes on the one hand, or exposing wrongdoing and ensuring there's accountability.

for it on the other. I think both of those things are necessary. You don't seem to post on social media yourself. If this goes against the conventional wisdom now, politicians need to tell us everything. They need to be authentic. You know, we need the vertical video of you in your kitchen talking about your feelings. Why? Why is that not you? If I were to post on social media every hour, that would not be authentic. I don't like social media. You're not a poster at heart like me. I don't have it on my phone. I see the importance of the power of reaching and organizing people using this technology, but I'm not going to pretend to be extremely online hour by hour when that's actually not how I live my life. Maybe there's some wisdom in that that can be relayed on the next question.

I was wondering what your thoughts are on this trend with young men called looks maxing. Right now you have a lot of young men right now who are adrift. Oh, yeah, yeah. and I think for whatever reason, the MAGA movement, which did really well at appealing to them going into the last election, feels like they're back up for grabs.

You're seeing one of the things that, you know, they're turning to is this very online, you know, kind of the, they're bashing their faces. They're trying to look more and more handsome. They're kind of going through

what a lot of young women really had gone through in the earlier social media age, you know, being very sensitive to looks. I'm wondering what your thoughts are unlike that trend and kind of the direction of young men in the country. Yeah, look, I mean, I'm concerned about, first of all, the mental health crisis that's impacting

a lot of young people who experience intense loneliness and who struggle with addiction to social media. And, you know, a generation of young people whose high school and college experiences were so disrupted by the pandemic that at the same time, this. technology was getting better and better at at hooking us and drawing us in they were also deprived of the kinds of relationships and social interactions that bring that bring meaning to life and i think we've got to make a decision as a society to re-engage in in genuine togetherness whether we're you know in our 20s or um or my folks generation uh because that the you know the the

the folks running Silicon Valley would be perfectly happy for us all to just sit on the couch with blue light in our eyes, scrolling mindlessly and consuming whatever the algorithm serves us and forgetting how to actually be with each other because that sells more ads and gets more engagement. But they're spying on us and manipulating us and and addicting us to these technologies. and in order for us to, I think, achieve our potential together as a nation. And in order for us to be happy and functional, we got to have to get back together in physical space and recreate shared experience. Lastly, I hope these aren't private questions like your favorite curse words.

The people want to know what your arms routine is and whether you really like Imagine Dragons, so that's real. So we need both of those before we depart. So I grew up with Daniel Plattsman, who is a very close friend of mine. It was the founding drummer of that band. So I have been a fan. I have been a true fan since before they were well known. And Daniel's an amazing musician. And he's also a great film scorer.

And folks should look him up. Look up Daniel Plathsman. And the arms routine, I just try to work out when I can every day if I can. And I actually told my team, I know you've been talking to some folks on my team, I told my team like a year ago as we were entering the election cycle that we can't treat physical wellness as something to like squeeze in between engagements. It needs to be part of the schedule because I, you know, sleep, nutrition, exercise, mindfulness. These are the building blocks of good work. And this is Blue Maha coming together right now. I'm seeing Blue Maha come. I think this is like, I hope this is fairly non-controversial wisdom that we can all agree on.

You're ducking those. Is it triceps or, you know, like what are we, you know? I try to get a well-rounded workout in, you know. I try to mix it up day by day, get different groups in. I don't. I don't have a secret arm routine. I'm hiding. You don't. Okay. I'm not like an expert. It's not like you and Claude are talking about how to define the arms so they look good in a suit shirt. No, we have not had that conversation. Okay. Well, people would like tips. So I'm just throwing that out there.

You didn't provide any on this show. But as the campaign goes on, if you have any thoughts on what's happening to make the arms work, I think people like to hear that. Okay. Let me reflect on this, Tim. That's Senator John Alsuff. We covered all the important topics. I hope you'll come back soon. You're running for reelection.

The website's electjohn.com. Yeah. I think it's pretty relevant that we didn't spend a ton of time on the election to show how strong of a campaign you're running, but people shouldn't take it for granted. And I don't know if you have any final thoughts on that. Yeah. In fact, again, it's elect John, elect joan.com. And in all seriousness, like a year ago, I was worried about despair and people being so addicted to their misery that they could not see their own power and the necessity of action. if anything right now, seriously, I worry about complacency.

This race in Georgia is going to be the hardest fought Senate race in the country. The national GOP is going to spend like hundreds of millions of dollars to try to unseat me. This is a tough battleground Senate race, and I need people's help, and you can help me at electjohn.com. Appreciate it so much. That's Senator John Ossoff. Talk to you again soon, brother. Thank you. Thanks so much to Senator John Ossoff. Up next, Luke Thomas. Delete me makes it easy, quick, and safe to remove your personal data at a time when surveillance and data breaches are common enough to make everyone vulnerable.

It's easier than ever to find personal information about people online, having your address, phone number, and family members' names hanging out on the internet can have actual consequences in the real world and make everyone vulnerable. Delete me, you can protect your personal privacy or the privacy of your business from doxing attacks before sensitive information can be exploited. You know, I'm kind of an open book these days. I'm blurting out what's happened in my life. you know, when you hear about somebody that they keep things close to the vest.

That is not me. You usually know exactly what I'm thinking just by looking at my face. And so as a result, I'm also a little fast and loose with the amount of information I have online, but as we've grown here at the bulwark, that leads to, you know, potential threats and troublemakers and other fuckery. And so delete me has brought me some peace of mind. And thanks to delete me, my data isn't flowing out there for bad actors to use. And we can update it constantly.

and they make it easy. Take control of your data and keep your private life private by signing up for Delete Me. Now to special discount for our listeners, get 20% off your DeleteMe plan. When you go to join DeleteMe.com slash bulwark. Use promo code Bullwork at checkout. The only way to get 20% off is go to joinDeletme.com slash bulwark and enter code bulwark at checkout. That's Join DeleteMe.com slash Bullwork code Bullwork. Delied to welcome to the Bullwork by popular demand, a combat sports analyst, host of

morning combat. You can also find them on Substack. Everybody's on Substack these days. And he's got a YouTube channel. Luke Thomas gets political. It's Luke Thomas. As mentioned, you know, there are some in the MMA UFC world who have been like messaging me. You got to get Luke Thomas.

You got to get Luke Thomas on. But for others like me, dainty homosexuals who don't know anything about UFC, can you give those in the audience? Just like a little bit of a, you know, I don't know, like a first date. Like, how'd you get into all this? where you're getting into a lot of fights in high school? You know, what exactly is your purview? No, I was a mathlete in high school. I was not anything like this, but I decided to join the Marine Corps.

The limit does not exist. Yeah, right. I decided to join the Marine Corps out of high school. I joined, I graduated high school on a Friday. I went to boot camp on a Monday, but I also went to college at the same time. Marine Corps does not have an ROTC program, so it was either be an officer or enlisted in the reserves. That's what I chose the latter.

I was with Hotel Battery 3, 4. 4th Mardiv out of Richmond, Virginia, for the entire time, which was an artillery unit. And this was 98-204. And then I had watched MMA coming up as, you know, at 94 as an American teenager, just like, you know, amazed at what had happened. And then kind of got back into it after the Marine Corps had kind of, well, I mean, during that time, but like really picked it up after the Marine Corps time had ended. And this was right when in 2005, the Ultimate Fighter, the reality show on Spike TV had hit. and it just sent the sport into another stratosphere. And I never really intended, to be honest, to do any of this.

It just, I caught a wave at a really strange moment in time. I was actually doing, you know, political messaging and speech work in D.C. prior to that. No shit. And I got, I hate, well, I'll tell you off the air. I actually don't even want to say on the air. Wait, I mean, that couldn't be any worse than the people I worked for, I think. I actually think it's some of the same ones, actually. Okay.

So, anyway. I hated it. I hated it. I hated it. And so, I may kind of took off and I was like, maybe I can do something with this. And yeah, many years later, here I am. What'd you hate about being a speech rider? You know, you could have been on the John Fabro trajectory. They kept giving me clients who were so reprehensible. I hated my life. Got it. Literally, I have from stress, this is a true story. My fingernails fell out on that job. Like one or all 10? Not all at the same time, but one after another. Yeah. Really? It was terrible for my health.

It was just I couldn't do it anymore. I only did it for two years and I hated it. And then I'm, you know, I found a way out. You know what that says about you is that you're a better person than me. You have more integrity on the inside because I worked for terrible clients for much longer than two years before I felt like I couldn't take it anymore.

There's a lot of DC people like that. It's better to come around than to never come around. But something to be said for only being able to handle two years. So anyway, so then you get into the MMA. world just always in the media side. Yeah, so I was on the corporate media side as well. I worked for VoxMedia for a long V-O-X, VoxM-Nation at the time.

I had a serious XM show nationally. I was on Spike TV. I worked with Showtime, CBS Sports. I mean, you kind of name it. I've done basically everything you can really do in the industry. And now, to your point, I'm on Substack and YouTube. So talk to us about, like, for somebody who's an outsider like me, it was kind of funny hearing you tell that story because you're like, and on Spike TV, there's a lot.

the ultimate fighter and then we went into the stratosphere like we're about the same age and i was like i don't remember any of that you know it's like this just was just never of interest to me and so when the trump mma stuff started happening like like when the overlap started happening they're going to fights like i recognized that it was popular of course i have some friends that are into it but i didn't have the background to kind of understand like where this overlap was happening like what was driving it like i got it on the w w w said. I did watch that as a kid and kind of understood Trump's back story with them and how he kind of knows about k-fabe and storytelling. But this is different than that. It's real fighting,

for starters. From your vantage point, like, when did the kind of like merging of the politics and the MMA world start? And like, what is underneath all that? This is a more complicated answer because you could even go back to 1930s Brazil and the origins of the Gracie family. These are the people who are the original like UFC one stars. Hoyst Gracie was the star of that. He was using jujitsu as kind of like wrestling with pajamas essentially to beat people much larger than him. And it was this revelatory.

It actually in general really was a revelatory moment for hand-to-hand combat in terms of understanding what worked and what didn't and what was valuable. But like that family in the 1930s were part of the integralist movement, which was like a avowedly openly based on European fascism as a fascist movement. Oh, we got some integralist. Now I know about that. Yeah, right. I mean, I guess they're back.

They come back. Yeah, they come back. In any event. But like, you know, in terms of the majority of my time covering the sport, it really had no relevance whatsoever. And in fact, what you really have to understand is that the UFC post-ultimate fighter. So they have this reality show on Spike TV. The American public seized them for the first time. The ratings are very, very good.

But more to the point, it launched the sport into the stratosphere. The sport was hanging on by a thread. It was barely allowed on television in certain cases or paper viewing. view. Even up until many years later, it was not allowed in most states. And this show changed everything. But when that happened, you got to understand the pitch that they were making. The point that they wanted to make was, we're going to show you that this type of sport is for everybody. Kids, adults, old, young, male, female, black, white, gay straight. In fact, Tim, the UFC no longer does this, but they used to sell a shirt that said, we are all fighters. And it was written numerous times on the

shirt all in the colors of the gay flag, right? Or the rainbow. Yeah, sure. They've since taken that one down. I don't think that they're into that kind of messaging anymore. But there was a point in time where they were, where they were clearly making this pitch. You asked about when the switch happened. Dana White speaks at the Republican National Convention in 2016, but even that is really not the answer. And the pandemic itself began to, I think, send White in a particular direction. But it was after January 6. It is 2021. It's the summer of 2021. UFC 264.

Donald Trump had made one appearance at that February C-PAC. You recall after Jan 6. And then one in that summer. And on that same weekend, he goes to this event in Las Vegas, which had Connor McGregor on the car. So it's a very, very important event in the UFC calendar.

And he makes his return. And what you really have to understand is the UFC did many things for Donald Trump. But there is no private actor that I can think of during the Biden years and in the 2024 election that did more to rehabilitate Donald Trump's image than the ultimate fighting championship. They laundered him completely, among other things that set in motion these forces. Yeah. And so is that relationship-based between Trump and Dana and Rogan or like where there's some policies, you know, that UFC, you know, they didn't want to

be regulated by the libs? Or was it, is it like a cultural thing you think that there's a affinity from like this is like an outsider league and he's seen as an outsider like what do you think it was like what was the tie that bound them you know even after the insurrection it's a great question and some of this does remain murky and some of this i'll just be honest is speculative to a degree certainly donald trump it should be noted i i have nothing but antipathy for the man but it should be noted if you were to say true or false is he a real fight fan the evidence is the side that he is. This is a guy in the 90s that did infacinate. This is not true about some of the other sports. He can make, you know, he can make football references from like the 90s, but when

you hear him talk about the modern day stuff, it seems like he's falling off. If you hear him talk about anything in the modern day, he's falling off. That's true. I mean, his ability to hold coherent conversation is substantially challenged. But the point I'm trying to make here is when the UFC first sold to the company or the ownership structure that took it over in 2001, that Dana White was a part of. He was not a part of early UFC's. He didn't take it over until 2001. The first two shows that they had as a consequence of that were at the Trump Taj Mahal.

And so a lot of folks sort of pinpoint those moments is like, oh, this is the date from when they were growing. Because to understand something, in 2001, to be in New Jersey, actually is quite important because that commission is one of the more established ones, the state athletic regulatory board, and they were willing to sanction UFC within their system. That was kind of a big deal. But being a Trump, Taj Mahal, was not a big deal.

It didn't mean anything. But the one I would like to make is that actually is not the place where they began to develop a fruitful relationship. There is evidence to indicate in the late 2000s that they were actually kind of a little bit of friction between the parties. But somewhere they come back around together, circa 2016. I think Dana White became much more rich at that time. And I think a lot of rich guy politics tends to intersect. But you asked about what was really binding it. And my personal belief is there is some ideal.

theological symmetry between them, but it's more about a willingness to get transactionalism through each party. The DOJ under, sorry, the FTC, I should say, under Obama looked into the UFC two times during the 2000s and kind of looked the other way. And now what they're trying to do is, this is true, the first piece of legislation this year that Congress has taken up in terms of the labor force is a piece of boxing legislation to essentially hand monopolistic control over to a single dominant firm. They get this because of what I was told on Capitol Hill was the White House was kind of leaning on Republican lawmakers to push this through. That is part of it. The lack of regulatory scrutiny. They now have huge monopolies over this parent company through TK. It's called

TKO. It owns WWE. It owns UFC. It's owning now other verticals that they're trying to put in place. So you get this like the regulatory wind that you're back in a way that is generationally impossible by virtue of this transactionalism. But I will say this. A lot of people say, oh, does Dana White have the same politics as Trump? I mean, I don't know exactly. I've heard him repeat election denying stuff before kind of vaguely. But the reality to me is it doesn't matter. If you did your part in substantial portion to return this political project to power, you are on the hook for it. It doesn't matter whether you agree with every part of it. Year after year after year, Tim, of trying to make sure this guy got in the public eye and to rehabilitate him during the jacksmith indictments during

the trial in new york city during you know you name it jan six stuff and they went out of their way to lift him at that time you're on the hook for what comes next it's funny listening to you talk about that i don't know a ton about this legislation but just like the fact that they're on the other side of the antitrust folks again i there's this period of time where there is a big push for antitrust across a lot of different verticals like the populace like the maga populace for like we can work with the populace on this and and antitrust is important because it's going to help the workers and the people and I just like listening to you talk about the transactionalism you know one tie that binds these guys is like the fake populism right like this idea of like oh I'm going to talk like I'm on

behalf of like the regular guy but what I mostly care about is enriching myself and you know it seems like that this this legislation and you know kind of the deals that they're doing having a having them on the White House, which we can get to next, like is all an effort to enrich the people at the top, like Dana himself and his partners. And that's similar to how Trump is active in a bunch of different areas where there's like a lot of populist rhetoric. But really, you know, he's lying in the pockets of himself and his Mar-a-Lago buddies. Consider the following. Consider this. Mark Wayne Mullen, when I interviewed him maybe 10 years ago, a little bit less, made nine years ago, he was a congressman, Mark Wayne Mullen from Oklahoma. He was a former

MMA fighter. A lot of people clownish. No, he was a fighter. He was in five fights. He was in five fights. That counts? That counts. I mean, I don't know. Here's what I'm going to say. People tried to make the wrong, I saw your episode on this. People try to make the wrong argument about it.

Well, sort of. The argument is not, was it semi-pro, was it pro? It was pro. I mean, there's not an argument. It was pro. But what you have to understand is like, pro in regional Oklahoma, like, not a significantly difficult strength of schedule. Let's just put it that way. Okay. I mean, he was fighting make a wish kids and shit like that. And, you know, just like absolutely like, I don't know if there was odds on his fights,

but if there were, you know, they were heavily favored in his regard. Nevertheless, he trained, he fought. There's something to be said for that. But the point I'm trying to make is in 2017, as a congressman, Mark Wayne Mullen tried to take the existing law that I'm referencing on the books. It's called the Bahamad Ali Boxing Reform Act. It is a piece of labor protection for boxers. was put in place by John McCain in 2000.

He tried to get that. He was helping them from them getting from screwed over by the promoters and stuff. Basically. I mean, there's more to it than that, but that's a basic way to understand it. He tried to put legislation forward that would have extended it to MMA because it doesn't apply to MMA. It only applies to boxing. And in fact, had UFC executives on the hill in hearings like cross-examining them, like

getting testy with them. And then when the Trump UFC alliance became. into focus and he became a senator, all the fighters who were initially part of that effort to get it extended, they called up Mark Wayne Mullen and said, hey, let's get this going. He had no interest in it whatsoever. The point I'm trying to make is, of course, this transactionalism reveals that it's only about the top 1% or the approved parties. But I'm just also trying to underscore even a guy like Mark Wayne Mullen who had kind of

a little bit of skin in the game and tried to do some good. When Maga's sort of priorities became clear, abandon it immediately. these people believe in nothing. It's very revealing. So talk to us a little bit about what's going to happen at the White House and what the buzz is about that around MMA circles. The way to understand this White House event is think of it as two different events simultaneously. It's just one, but try to wrap your head around it.

There is one side of it, let's call it with inside the bubble. How is the community viewing it? And they view it as it's a smaller fight card. A fight card can be, you know, to 10 or more fights. This one is small. I think it's just seven. They were six. They had one last minute. It's a smaller fight card. However, two of the top best guys in the sport are in the main and the co-main event. It has real relevance. And within the sport, for a sport that had really hard time getting regulated that nearly went away completely, the ability to say, hey, we're in the

White House. This means something to us. We have ascended. And there is, I think, something to be said for that. But there is going to be an event, a fighting event on the White House lawn. They're building this sort of in crazy structure, just on the other side of that street there on this space called the ellipse where Trump gave his Jan 6 speech, by the way. They're going to have a crowd to watch it, not so much like directly watching it, but on screens out there. It's just kind of like a big event, but that's only one side of it. The other side is like, why is this event happening at all? And the answer is, this is the reward from the Trump administration to the UFC for what can only be described as their unique contributions to

keeping him out of prison. There's really no other way to say that that's why this exists. It is sports washing of the highest order. It is a political reward in giving them something that he gave them. I mean, a mainstream sport that was really hot during that portion of the pandemic, putting all their chips in on a guy, you can't buy political coverage like that. You can't make a rally be anything like that. It is something that is literally not even available for purchase. This is the return to them for that. And so a lot of folks, Let me just say this. A lot of folks make an idiocacy argument about this, which I understand the optics kind of lend itself. It is a gigantic mistake to look at these people and think, oh, this is idiocracy.

It might look that way and maybe they say stuff that makes you feel that way. But these people are not screwing around. They're highly skilled operators and their ability to manage these channels of power, I think, speaks to that. Just on that level, you mentioned sports washing and the skilled operators. These guys are also, you know, mobbed up with the Middle East. Eastern dictators that are also doing deals with Trump and his family. You do have the Saudis involved in all this. Like, what is the scale of that kind of like the involvement of those Middle Eastern regimes

and what's happening here? So it is significant, but it can vary depending on what we're talking about. Okay. Okay. Partly the Iran War is throwing a huge wrench into all of this. I mean, I'm sure you, I don't know if you follow. Do you follow sports at all? Like, have you heard about Luke golf?

Oh, yeah. Just not fighting sports. Okay, okay, fair enough. Basketball. Yeah, I mean, golf, I'm not really, but I understand what's happening with Liv. Fair enough. I watch Rory, my brother from another mother when he's in a major. I get, I do a little. So you get the idea that like there's clearly like pressure due to what's happened over there.

Okay. So that's, so just put that aside because that's its own little wild card. But let's just talk about what we've gotten here. Two different ways to understand it. There's the MMA side and then there is the boxing side. And they do differ. The UFC has been famous about never letting end. anyone have control of their product. When they would do television deals in most other sports,

the network assigns who the commentators are going to be and who's going to cover it. That is not the way it works with UFC. They always have control over all their production, all their broadcast, all their systems of information, over their journalists, everything, right? I'm on the outs with them because I do conversations like this. Okay. So they will give, they'll bring premier events to some of these places. They are going to go to Saudi Arabia. And then, They haven't announced one yet, but they've been there. Or, you know, other UAE, they've been to Dubai a million times because they'll do deals, like any of these kind of dictators and these governments who just pay them maximum of money,

they'll bring there. But they don't give them control over the product. And they don't necessarily bring always their A game to Saudi Arabia. They'll bring their A game to UAE, but that's the general idea. The boxing side is very, very different. Zufa boxing, which is that TKO boxing vertical. So does the WWE, MMMA, and now the boxing vertical, they are being bankrupt. by them, essentially. They are trying to get this legislation passed that would take away these

protections that would enable them to monopolize, but then who's footing the bill is Saudi Arabia on the other end. And so that promotion and that union is actually quite significant to say nothing of how the rest of the boxing world has, I mean, you don't get modern boxing without the Saudis at this point. They have almost, I'm not total control is a strong word, but pretty significant control of that industry. So you referenced us here a little bit on the outs. You've done Rogan before, but it was not with your politics hat on. It was many hours, so I've not watched it. Not at that time, no.

I only got into politics because they got into politics, and it just kind of forced my hand, you know? And so I'm just wondering, like, what is the reaction like from this? In the MMA world, obviously is more conservative, and we've been talking about the relationship with Trump, but I have friends who are MMA fans that aren't MAGA. You know, it's not everybody in that world. And so I'm just wondering what you think,

the kind of average MMA person's, like, reaction is to the degree to which they've been mobbed up together and kind of like how that's impacting your relationships. My relationships have suffered greatly as a result of this. You know, and my standing has, I think within MMA has suffered greatly as a result of this. Well, let's just talk about that first then. What I do, I mean, obviously having been someone who's been through that, like, you didn't have to do this. So, like, why did you feel compelled to do it if the, if.

it was going to suffer to that extent. I don't feel like I really had a choice. I cannot be told what to say. You know, be friendly. Okay, fine. You know, like have some professional decorum. Okay, fine. Sure.

But, like, you can't talk about theocratic dictators taking over your sport. Like, I'm sorry. I just can't live that way. I don't know how else to explain to it to. I cannot allow myself to be told that. And that is a big one. But that's just a small part of it, to be honest with you. Just within the industry itself, like the UFC, it's very, very funny, right?

So the UFC sells itself to the public as like a free speech organization. I have to be very, very clear with you. Nothing could be further from the truth. It is complete and total kabuki theater. So let me give you just a million examples. First of all, they control their media class. Like no sport on earth controls their media class. If you get out of line, brother, they will take your credential, period.

this is well established, even against very, very big names. They'll do it. I haven't gone to a UFC show in four years. Now, I'm not applied for a credential, but I'm not going to waste my time, right? There's really no point to it. And then more to the point, if you're a UFC fighter, they'll say, you know, we don't control these guys. What they mean is they'll let them say slurs.

But if you, for example, are, you know, your water's been turned off. I've seen this. And then you win a fight. They put a microphone in your face. You say, I really need a bonus because I don't, my water's not turned on. They'll purposely not do it because they don't want. you on the microphone broadcast into the world that you're poor. But if it's a free speech organization and you don't control what guys say, why do you just let them say slurs and then

not let them question the necessity of some of your business practices? The reality is, I'm not going to be told what to do by them. And the way in which I have constructed my career is to never be able to position where I have to ask them for anything. Because if you ask them for something, well, then they hold it over your head. But the reality is, Tim, it's honestly worked out to my benefit. Because the media class is so unable to marshal any of these criticisms in any kind of way, it has created a gigantic lane for me. Yes, it creates friction within the industry that is true. But there's so many people, including UFC champions, who have messaged me saying that they're grateful that at least somebody is articulating this into the marketplace,

you know? Talk about feeling like you're living my life. You've even got the people whispering bring to you. I'm with you. I was like, that was just like the worst shit. You know, my old friends will be like, you know, you'll see them out at an event and they'll be like, you're really doing a great job. I was like, you think that? I was like, you wouldn't know that from what you're saying publicly. I know, it's like I could, I could use a little public help here. You know what I mean? You know, you're welcome to come on anytime. We could hash that out. That's funny. Do you think that there's any risk of backlash on this? I mean, I don't know, like how pervasive is the notion that, you know, they're silencing dissent that like they're doing stuff that people find out of

super pervasive it's well known it's it's well known yeah yeah that's not a thing and you're asking about the average fan i mean the way the average fan is also pretty tired of it now the reality is they're not upset that media has been affected in that particular way to the best that i can ascertain like oh we're really sad about the media class that's not sure it's not really a thing very very often but what they are noticing is that the total control that is being exerted has made the leadership of the company feel distant from the actual concerns. So recently, for example, the UFC had used AI, for example, on one of their ads. And the fans didn't like it because it was not good.

It didn't look good. And Dana White's response was quite literally, how about, this is verbatim. How about this? Shut the fuck up and watch the fights. That was literally what he said to the fans. Like, can you imagine Roger Goodell saying that, or even Jerry Jones or whatever, the proper description or the comparison would be. It's simply impossible. So what I would say is there is dissension in the ranks and realizing that they run this kind of operation, the fans do, the hardcore

fans anyway. And then you're asking about like the right wing sort of valence and their recognition of it. They've changed the fan base. It used to be more mixed. There used to be a lot more people like me. Most of the people like me are gone. Like they don't really exist anymore. However, what I would say is Trump antipathy is real. Like the way you can tell that, like understand something. They brought him out to UFC 327, which was the last big UFC event. They brought Trump out. And I had two friends in the arena who I trust.

And they were like, you know, there were some booze. There were some cheers. But mostly it was just kind of a little bit quiet. Understand that that fan base is going to be his alamo. If the alamo is treating you like that, you have serious problems. You need to start understanding. So I will say that. The Trump love, they'll look the other way because they just want to see great fights on

the White House. and I understand that, but they don't like him that much anymore. Yeah, it's waning. Okay, so put on your political consultant hat from 20 years ago, all right? You know, you did it for two years. If you're the Democrats right now and you're trying to think, okay, like the popularity is waning with this community, are there any Democratic politicians that like UFC? There must be one, you would think.

Nobody's coming straight to mind. But let's imagine that we identify one. Okay. What do you think they could do to communicate to that audience? I do think that sometimes people just are looking for folks to show. up. I say this all the time. Like Theo Vaughn was not ideological five years ago before all the stuff happening. And you got a little mad about COVID stuff and various other things. But it was more about like Trump courted them. You know, and I guess I just wonder is, is there even a path there for some type of Democrat to try to court that audience? There could be. I don't know who it would be right now. You know, on the boxing side, I know Ruben Gallego, Senator Gallego was a big boxing fan. Yeah, yeah. A former Marine, I believe as well.

So that is a possibility. But on the MMA side, you know, someone from CNN asked me this. It's like, you know, what can the Dems do? And I'm like, to be honest with you right now, nothing. Shut up. Well, the answer is not nothing. But what I'm trying to point out is no one on that side of the political aisle has a relationship to these people. You just need to understand that flat out.

I've seen right-wing influencers a million times at MMA events. I've just never seen left-wing ones there. It just doesn't exist. And so you just got to recognize if that's a real audience that you want to capture, like it's just for whatever reason. Let's imagine we're going to get that. You have to start from nothing. You have to start from the belief that I have to now bring this from fucking scratch.

Pardon my language. That's really what it has to be. If you're asking like policy avenues that are usable, I don't want to stereotype all MMA fans is working class. There would be no problem with. that, but that would also not be true. It's a mixture, certainly, of white collar and blue collar. But I would say that MMA fans have a real keen sense of the unfairness in the market. I think somebody who could get behind Medicare for All, somebody who could get a handle on AI regulation,

somebody who is doing something that made the average Americans life measurably, materially, noticeably better on these core kind of kitchen table issues, I think could win. And I do want to say when more, this is probably going to be an area of disagreement between you and I. But I'll say this. It's the area I get the least amount of pushback on from my audience is real. They have deep, profound skepticism of any politician closely aligned with their interests. And I think anyone perceived to have that is going to have a real hard time winning over this audience. Yeah, I don't know if that difference is going to be there. Given what's happened with the Iran War, this is basically when I've been banging the drum on for the past month,

which is, and I'm saying, like, as a former Bush person, I feel like I have the credibility to say this, which is like Democrats need to take this opportunity to speak to the type of person you're talking about, whether they're MMA fan or not, you know, somebody who's working class who's culturally more conservative, went along with Trump with skepticism of these wars

and say, I'm opposed to that SCARP launch. And the fact that Israel, like, was in our situation room, pushing Trump to get involved in this war. And as a result, you're going to pay more at the pump. You're going to pay more at the groceries. Like, that's insane. And you mentioned Ruben earlier. Ruben's been good on this.

But I just, I feel like the Democrats need to be more clear. And it is maybe an opportunity to talk to that type of voter. I don't know. Listening to you talking about this, it kind of reminds me of NASCAR, how Democrats talked about NASCAR 15 years ago, right? It was like there was no, like there was just a cultural difference, right? Like there weren't a lot of Democratic politicians or influencers who just, or they didn't call them influencers then, but media members or whatever who like liked NASCAR could speak about

it fluidly, would go to the events and enjoy them. But they just started to try. Obama just like invited the NASCAR champions to the White House, just like he would invite the winners of the NBA finals to the White House.

And he knew more inside jokes that he could tell with, you know, Steph Curry when he came through than he did with whoever it was, Jimmy Johnson or whoever. But that's trying. And to me that's like my main message that Democrats. Like even if they are starting from zero.

Like, you know, maybe this is an opportunity to try. The reason why I say it's important to mention you're starting from zero is like Kamala Harris coming out. You know, I vote for Kamala over Trump if it was a thing again or whatever, but I don't like Kamala Harris. I want to be very clear about that. And her coming out and being like, oh, we're going to do stuff on crypto and weed legalization.

It's like, this is not going to do. You don't feel authentic. Yeah, this is nothing. You were doing nothing. And so I just want to be, it's important to like kind of set the terms. to understand what has to happen. The last thing I'd say on this is, to me, it's okay. Like, if some sports just are more conservative than other ones,

I want to be clear about that, like they don't all have to cater to every audience. My only point, the reason why I've kind of focused on this for me is that it had significant and disastrous electoral outcomes in this country. And I think interrogating how that happened is a useful exercise. Anything I didn't ask you about?

Do you find interesting about what's happening in this world? Dana White at the White House. Dana White, first of all, being at the White House Correspondence Dinner, an event that is, at least in theory, designed to honor excellence in journalism is just profoundly funny to me. And then to have this like response being like, yeah, that was great. It's like that's how you get to a point where you're promoting professional slapping is to be so desensitized to humanity. Yeah. Is to then, you know, be like, oh, we can get guys to slap each other for $400 a, you know, a match. or whatever.

Kind of, kind of a very revealing moment to me, to be honest. The correspondence center or the slapping gimmick? How it all intersects, you know? All right. There's something,

I don't know, maybe this is, maybe this is the intersection with my interests and the UFC. Maybe the slapping was a way to get me in because I don't know, in some ways that's not that different from Rupal's drag race,

you know? Yeah, I mean, but Rupal's drag race is, I mean, I've not seen many of them, but it seems a little bit more artistic. and enlightened atmosphere, but maybe I'm wrong about that. No, that's right.

Luke Thomas, man, I appreciate you bringing your expertise on this. Let's stay in touch and maybe we can connect again this summer around the fight, all right? Anytime. All right. Thanks so much to Luke Thomas

and Senator John Ossoff. Great show. I'm off to Janice Fest. We've got Nuggets Game 6 tonight, so I'm going to enjoy my Thursday. I hope you do too, and we'll be back Friday with one of our faves.

Somebody can carry me if I'm in the dumps, if the Nuggets season is over. Very excited. We'll see you back here tomorrow. Peace. Georgia, Georgia, I love your son. And when he gets older, you might be the... The Borg podcast is brought to you thanks to the work of lead producer Katie Cooper, Associate producer Ansley Skipper, and with video editing by Katie Lutz,

and audio engineering and editing by Jason Brown.