The Bulwark Podcast - Neera Tanden: Aiding and Abetting Trump

Episode Date: July 23, 2025

Mike Johnson is racing to shut the business of the House down to avoid a vote on releasing the Epstein files. Trump's own criminal lawyer, who's moonlighting as deputy attorney general, will be minding the matter of Ghislaine Maxwell. And Texas is looking to squeeze out some more House seats to try to protect Trump from having to be held accountable on Epstein. Has any other politician ever acted so guilty? But in this moment, the Dems are finally bringing a gun to a gunfight. And for the midterms, they need to commit to Benghazi-style hearings on the contents of the files—and the Republican cover-up. Plus, securing the border without a terror campaign, and recruiting candidates to fill out a bigger Democratic tent. Neera Tanden, at the Center for American Progress, joins Tim Miller. show notes CAP's new immigration policy platform, co-authored by Neera Life insurance is never cheaper than it is today. Get the right life insurance for YOU, for LESS, and save more than fifty percent at selectquote.com/bulwark

Hello and welcome to the Bulwark podcast. I'm your host, Tim Miller, delighted to welcome back one of my favorite posters, president and CEO of Center for American Progress, formerly domestic policy council director under Joe Biden. It's Nira Tanden. What's going on, Nira? You know, I feel like I'm experiencing the greatest amount of joy I've had in the first six months. So I'm just happy to experience that joy. Is it the Mali or what is it? What's working for you? I don't know. I feel like going two weeks on Epstein has just put a spring in my step.

Yeah, with some endorphins? Okay. But you're not concerned at all about the imminent arrest of Barack Obama? I mean, you did work for him. Yeah, I'm not really worried about the imminent arrest. I mean, I do think it's, unfortunately, we live in a kind of crazy la-la land that we could actually talk about something so insane. But my general take is that I have never seen

a politician or political leader in my lifetime act as guilty as Donald Trump has acted in the last two weeks. So, I mean, I feel like it's like he's indicting himself. So you're saying you don't think Barack Obama's like quaking in his boots right now, you know, sitting around his home? I don't think so. No?

I don't think he's quaking in his boots in particular because the Donald Trump Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, is the one who said, who backed up everything Barack Obama said about Russian interference with the elections. And when he talked about Russian interference in the elections, he was talking about what has been well established that they, you know, use disinformation. And just want to say, one of the victims of that disinformation right here, during the 2016 election. So I was following the news pretty closely on this one. I'm sorry, Nira. I think you're part of the hoax there.

I think that when you put out your own emails and you dealt with all of the slander and all of the terrible news coverage in the New York Times, it was all part of an elaborate hoax working in concert with Barack Obama to pretend like the Russians. Yes, to pretend like the Russians were hurting Hillary Clinton to elect Donald Trump. To elect Donald Trump. So that you could, I don't know, do something during the transition to slow down his presidency. The whole thing is just, it doesn't even make sense if you say it. Marco hasn't really gotten pressed on this, like pretty important.

Yes, he hasn't gotten pressed. Someone should, I mean, you know, what's really sort of tragic about Marco Rubio as a human being is, you know, I remember testifying in front of foreign relations. I think, yeah, it was foreign relations in the spring of 2016. So it was after he was out of the primary, but still like a normal Republican. And he was talking about the importance of NATO and how we needed strong alliances. And he threatened, you know, he's talking about the threat of Russia. And he has like literally eaten every actual view he's ever had in order to be

Secretary of State. So I really welcome how he handles this, but you know, you don't need to listen to me. every actual view he's ever had in order to be Secretary of State. So I really welcome how he handles this, but you don't need to listen to me. I mean, there's plenty of video of him talking about Russia's interference with the elections. Yeah. Well, hopefully, I don't know, hopefully he gets pressed on that a little bit in the coming weeks. I do think we're going to get to the CAP immigration plan.

I want to kind of talk about the project 2029 stuff in a second. But the thing about Marco to me this week, I just really can't get over, is thank God those men are out of Sikat, right? But they do this trade with Venezuela, this hostage deal. And there's a story after that, I don't know if you've seen this. One of the people we traded for was the perpetrator of a triple murder in Madrid. Yeah, he killed people with an axe, I guess, de Houd, Hanid, Ortiz. And it's like, Marco just gives this huge geopolitical win to Maduro, to the communist dictator that he like supports, proposes to hate. And now Maduro gets to go around saying, I saved these men

from the capitalist white devil and be accurate about it, kind of. And we sent the people that were fleeing communism to like a concentration camp. And it's all Marco. I feel like he almost gets kind of a pass on this because people focus on, you know, Trump and the Stephen Miller, but it was Marco, the secretary of State, it was Marco that orchestrated this whole thing where we send the people to El Salvador. They were fleeing communism just like his parents did. And then now he gives this huge win to Maduro. It's wild.

I mean, even, I mean, that is a horrible story, but, you know, let's just step back. These people were fleeing Venezuela and now they're being, and why were they fleeing Venezuela? Many of them were opponents of the Maduro regime. In a normal world, Republicans would have supported opponents of the regime, a Marxist regime. That's what's also really crazy about this whole immigration slash human cruelty regime, right? You have people in any other time who are fleeing a communist regime coming to the United

States to make a better life for themselves. We did take a lot of Venezuelans, totally except that, but they were people who are, you know, basically most of these people were political opponents of a Marxist administration. We send them to an El Salvadoran gulag. Our courts say that's like reprehensible. So instead of pulling these people back into the United States because they think this would be some kind of political loser, right, to acknowledge that their plan was wrong. They've sent the opponents of the regime back to Venezuela, right?

So I mean, if you actually think about it, it gives a lie to 50, 60 years of Republican foreign policy about how we have to be a beacon against communism and Marxism. And it's just like, it's just another core Republican tenet set aside for MAGA white nationalism that doesn't want brown people here. So I mean, that's what I think. I mean, I love Marco Rubio to ask like, why he thinks it's okay. I mean, would he be okay if we sent Cubans back to Cuba?

No, that would be terrible. Maybe now. Because they're opponents of the regime. I mean, who knows now? But usually, you want to ensure that people who leave dictatorships and who are actually fleeing to democratic capitalist countries, that has helped us geopolitically in the past. Yeah. I mean, Marco kind of positions his own story as having fled communism, even though technically I think his parents fled like the pre-communist fascists in Cuba.

But either way, just a total gift to Maduro in exchange, apparently for an axe murderer. Before we get into the more challenging questions, let's just kind of roll around in the Epstein. So, stop for a little bit, and just in this fucking bed that they've made for themselves. Yeah, live by the sword, die by the sword, my friend. It is like, you know, like it is the most like karma experience.

Like it's so. Really is. So the house is shutting down until September, I guess. Ann Coulter, famous lib tweeted, this totally conveys innocence with a screenshot of the Mike Johnson plan to shut down the house. I guess on the one hand, I just kind of riff on what it says that they like that they've completely, I guess, given up on governing because they are covering up this Epstein situation. But also, I mean, I guess about the democratic strategy and how that feels like they finally found their sea legs a little bit and using the limited power they have to pressure these

guys. Yeah. I mean, let's just be clear. What's happening here is because there is a bipartisan but heavily Democratic discharge petition that's, you know, also pressuring the rules committee because, you know, Democrats and some Republicans, but mostly Democrats are talking about the Epstein case. And let's just be reminded what the Epstein case is about. The Epstein case is about Jeffrey Epstein, who is a known sex trafficker. And

because essentially people are asking for the files to be released, Republicans do not want to take a vote on the release of the files. Because, I mean, let's just also say, let's say you're a Republican. Like, why are they trying to avoid this fit so much, right? Like, let's just game this out. Let's say you're a Republican. Like, why are they trying to avoid this fit so much, right? Like, let's just game this out. Let's say you're a Republican House member and you vote no on releasing the files. We could get a vote where a handful, most likely outcome here on a discharge petition is a handful of Republicans join Democrats in getting a discharge petition and getting a push for release of the files.

Somehow the files come out after this discharge petition, and then you have voted no, which is what most of the Republican Party will do because Donald Trump will demand that. And then terrible things come out about Donald Trump. So you have now just opposed that. So I think this is a protection of his own members and I think they're hoping that people will just forget this in the next five weeks, which is odd since they haven't forgotten it in six years since the man died. But of course who knows? I think at this point you know when people are in power in a moment like this you you're in a scandal, people are living day to day.

I think Mike Johnson's is like, I need to get out of town. So to me, this whole effort is just confirmation about the fear of what's in these files, because no one would get the headlines of closing down the house, which of course, I cannot remember this ever happening. I've lived through some scandals, by the way. Of course, I worked for Bill Clinton in the last couple of years there. Lived through some scandals myself. We never, I've never seen the House just shut down business.

The Senate just shut down business. Either House shut down business in order to avoid votes on a scandal. So I mean, I just think this confirmation to not just, you know, tin hat, foil wearing people, but to just normal people that the entire Republican Party is includes to close these files down. Yeah. When this all started, I think Hakeem Jeffries' point was well taken, which was kind of like they're either covering up something about Trump in these documents or, you know, they're embarrassed because they're lying the whole

time about there being whatever Epstein files at all. It's not even really an either or for me anymore. It's pretty clear they're covering up something that... You have this Durbin letter to Cash Patel that's supposedly according... And I assume you got this information from people inside the Justice Department. They had FBI officials reviewing these documents and flagging mentions of Trump. Yeah.

So to me that signals that they have at least some mentions of Donald Trump in the files. I mean, not only that, but this is again, yesterday they announced, just a reminder, it's the president's personal attorney is the deputy attorney general. Also weird, just to say out loud. Isn't it stupid, but it's also like, let's just think about that. Isn't that suspicious at this point that he put his personal lawyer as minor of the entire

... It's personal criminal attorney too. It's personal criminal attorney as minor of the entire... That is like his campaign attorney or whatever, like his criminal attorney. Yeah. It's like, you know, I mean, for those of us who want to go into the way back machine of the Clinton era, it's like putting David Kendall, Bill Clinton's personal attorney, like as deputy to Janet Reno.

I think people would have found that really weird. So, okay. I mean, Trump makes everything weird, so like it just normalizes, but just now in the context of all of this, I think it looks really weird. So okay, I mean, Trump makes everything weird. So like, it just normalizes. But just now in the context of all this, I think it looks really weird. But so his personal criminal attorney, who is a deputy AG, announces yesterday that he's going to interview Maxwell, explain Maxwell, Maxwell, right? So just a reminder, they put out a memo two weeks ago saying there's no there there to this. There's no client list There's nothing to this scandal and it's clear that they never even talked to gasoline Maxwell in order to determine

The backing of that memo. So like this is what the problem is in a scandal is it's impossible to think ten steps ahead and I think you know, you were absolutely right at the beginning of the scandal it was like well I mean Pam Bondi was telling the truth she's telling the truth now or she's telling the truth in February but she couldn't be telling the truth both times now during all of that I was like of course why is Pam got Bondi going through any of this unless someone is ordering her to but now I think it feels pretty certain because of course you could just throw Pam Bondi

under the bus with this level of scandal, right? You could, you don't have to fire her, you could just say she's an idiot, she screwed this whole thing up, she could apologize, but they're not doing that. He's defending Pam Bondi, you know, it's not like he's known for loyalty. He's defending Pam Bondi.

Because she's doing what he wants. Yes, because basically, what's the most obvious answer here? They're all covering up Donald Trump in the files. That just seems like so, and you would not have the House just adjourn. Now these Republicans have to answer the question if it was really just an issue of Pam Bondi looking like a jerk. Like nobody would do that. Hence the spring in my step. I mean, I shouldn't, I'm not like, I mean, I'm not trying to be a total jerk, but it's been a rough six months. We need to take-

You got to take your wins so you can get them. You got to just take the joys where you have them. You know, I wish I could grow a beard. I did not shave throughout the entirety of my European vacation. Came home, was thinking, okay, maybe I can try out a new look. Maybe I can do the Pete Buttigieg, you know, come back with a beard for everybody. But you know, I just, I don't know. The good Lord doesn't want me to have a beard. I still couldn't do it.

I have huge, huge gaps all over my face where no hair emerges. And as such, I need a reliable grooming tool to make sure I'm looking fresh for y'all. And we've been turning to our new sponsor at Harry's. Harry's is your trusted partner for making a good first impression. And right now you can get a $10 trial set for just eight bucks, plus a free gift at harrys.com slash the bulwark an exclusive offer for our listeners I'm a traditional razor guy you know like a like a heavy razor the blades natural blades I don't I don't fucking know the terms am I supposed to know the terms also knows that it works well I don't

like the electric thing you know I want a nice shave. The Harry's razor does the job perfectly. German engineered blades. You know the Germans do things well. German engineered blades made in their own factory that stay sharp longer. Customizable delivery option for scheduled refills for as low as two bucks, half what you pay for other big brands.

And you can get that five blade razor, weighted handle, foaming shave gel and travel cover for just eight bucks plus a free gift at harrys.com slash the bulwark. Show everyone you mean business. Get Harry's. Normally their trial set is 10 bucks, but right now you can get it for eight plus a free gift at harrys.com slash the bulwark. That's our exclusive link.

harrys.com slash the bulwark for an $8 trial set and a free gift. As you mentioned, you've been on the incoming side of some select committees and some oversight committees and subpoenas and all that. So thinking about that, I mean, if the Democrats take back the House, we'll get to the politics system a little bit. Like, what are the tools, I guess, available for them, both right now and whether in the minority,

and then prospectively next year, if they were to take the majority back, as far as Epstein is concerned? Yeah, right now, I mean, I think the most important thing, most important tool they have is the fact that there is such bipartisan outrage about this stance and the lack of transparency that Republicans are feeling more pressure on this. I mean, it is a little ironic that they feel more pressure and Jeffrey Epstein then like cutting healthcare for millions of people.

That is like kind of a weird thing. Letting the poorest children in the world die. Yes. Agents grab people off the street and send them to foreign gulags. Yeah, sure. There are other things that you would think they'd feel pressure on, but okay.

Yeah, no, I mean other things that you would think they'd feel pressure on, but okay. Yeah. Yeah. No, I mean, I do think that's an unfortunate thing about their side, but whatever. So, that is obviously creating a lot of pressure when you have Josh Hawley, Tim Burchett, others saying, just get all the material out there, even though they all know Donald Trump does not want to get all the material out there. So I think their number one tool, which they are using is the discharge petition. It is to, they are using, and I just want to say in the rules committee, there are

not limits on amendments, so the threat of the amendments in the rules committee is really what's getting everyone scared to avoid a rule. So rules are necessary for, you know, bills that are not overwhelmingly supported. So any kind of any bill that has like, you would get 55 or 60% of Congress to vote for. So that's what's making them close down. Essentially, they don't want to face a vote in their rules committee. So I think the Democrats have been very strong and I will say, it does feel like they are bringing

a gun to a gunfight. They are saying out loud, release the files if Donald Trump has nothing to hide. I know that it's like a little weird for members, maybe they feel uncomfortable saying the strongest accusation here, but we have to make clear what we are fighting for and that is transparency about a case in which a man victimized lots and lots of girls and women and it is a case where you know it was a bunch of powerful men

who seemed to be victimizing people. Jeffrey Epstein got a sweetheart deal on his first interactions with law enforcement, in part, I think, really because he was so powerful and had a lot of friends. Just as a reminder, the prosecutor who gave him that sweetheart deal was in Donald Trump's cabinet as his first labor secretary. His first term, he had to resign because of all the interactions with Epstein. So I just think this is an area where you just have to prosecute the case aggressively, and it is having an impact.

The fact that Democrats are carrying this has made the Republicans go into freefall. But I will also say an important thing is if they take power next year, you know, they should commit to issuing subpoenas to release the files. Yeah, there should be a Benghazi style committee. Absolutely, absolutely. A giant public committee airing everything that happened with these files. And also, let's also, they will also should be going through the actions around this cover-up over the last or you know seeming cover-up over the last you know basically a couple of weeks. So, if you know the people that were reviewing these documents like if that's true.

So, if you know Pam Bondi to come forward you know I mean look they get Republicans could have Pam Bondi testified this week. They are not doing that. Why? Because they're scared what she will say. Okay. I have one loyal listener who'll be upset at me if I don't ask you this legit question, which is if Trump is in these files as much as it seems like he is, why didn't the Biden administration do anything about this? An administration you are in?

What do you think about that? Yeah. So this is what I'd say to this. I mean, I get this all the time. So I don't think you were not going to be expecting the question, but it is a question that merits asking. No, no. It's like literally, anytime I say anything I've seen, they're like, why didn't Joe Biden release Fossum? This is why I say, have you met Merrick Garland? And we're blaming Merrick Garland. Okay, great.

I mean, I'm just saying, first of all, I mean, like legitimately, the Joe Biden White House had nothing to do with enforcement on any topic. If anything, because of the abuses of the Trump administration, the White House, you know, didn't engage in any particular enforcement matter. We barely did engage in policy with the Department of Justice. They were so arms-like to us. So I mean, I can attest to that from my experience as DPC, Domestic Policy Chair. We in the White House had no idea.

So I can't really tell you why Merrick Erland didn't do it. I would say that he was hypersensitive about any perceptions of unfairness to a point where I think, you know, I'm not sure justice was always even done. And I can imagine he thought, you know, after he's doing January 6 and all the conservative blowback on that, maybe he wouldn't even look into Ghislaine Maxwell, but someone should ask him because I, Maxwell and Epstein, but someone should ask him. He could have been nice and bipartisan and now Bill Clinton and Donald Trump would have been okay with me. Yeah, exactly.

I wish they did. I mean, I wish he had looked into it. I mean, I kind of think this became like a, was an issue of the far-right that was really pushing it Yeah, with some kind of crazy allegations and it would have been better I mean like let's just remember Donald Trump was president when Jeffrey Epstein committed suicide It's not like he committed suicide in the Clinton White House or something in the Clinton administration So, you know, Bill Barr was attorney general when he's committed suicide and Bill Barr's dad gave him his first job Longtime friend of the Barr family.

So take that for what you will. I don't know. I don't know. You know, like when you see that meme. There's some missing minutes in the camera, that's all I know. I know, it's exactly. I'm just telling you what I know.

I mean, also what's weird is, you know, according to Wired, there are now three minutes missing. Like, does that not feel weird? Does that feel like a glitch? It does look weird. Three minutes missing in the camera? I don't know. I just think it's like... This takes me to my Pete Buttigieg question back to you though, thinking about Merrick Garland, which was if you had a time machine, if you had a DeLorean, you could go back to

the beginning of the Biden administration and you could sit down. I mean, Joe doesn't drink but you could sit down with the former president and you're in the Oval Office and he's just like, Nira, you have this wisdom having come from the future. Tell me one thing I should do different. Is Merrick Garland the thing you should do different or something else? Oh, I mean, I think Merrick Garland, yeah, I mean, I would have, I mean, Merrick Garland is a very nice man and has a lot of wisdom on a lot of topics, but I just think was not like living in the world that we are in today. You know, he just, I mean I think

it's a tragedy he moved on the special prosecutor around January 6th, so it took him so long to do that that it just became impossible to have real accountability. And I think that's, you know, we're kind of living with the results and that's a tragedy. And I think he thought, and, you know, I'd say, look, I think a real challenge is that in the Biden administration, there was this whole theory of like, we just need to restore institutions and order. And I think there was a just, you know just a broad misunderstanding that politics has fundamentally changed.

I don't think you should have a Department of Justice that's weaponized like the current one, but I also think you have to think about time horizons on accountability and go a little bit faster than rather go so slow. If you're like me and wish you'd listened to your dorkiest internet friend and had bought Ethereum or Nvidia before they boomed, well, there are other ways to break our generational cycle and secure you and your family's future. One way is through life insurance at selectquote.com.

If you're new to life insurance, you're not alone. Thankfully, I've found SelectQuote. For over 40 years, SelectQuote has helped more than 2 million Americans One way is through life insurance at selectquote.com. If you're new to life insurance, you're not alone. Thankfully, I've found SelectQuote. For over 40 years, SelectQuote has helped more than two million Americans understand their options and get the coverage they need. Over $700 billion in coverage and counting. SelectQuote takes the guesswork out of finding the right life insurance policy. You don't have to sort through dozens of confusing options on your own.

Instead, one of their licensed agents will find the right policy at the right price for you. Comparing plans from trusted, top-rated insurance companies to find a policy that fits your health, your lifestyle, and your budget. They work for you for free. You'll be covered faster than you think. SelectQuote works with providers who offer same-day coverage up to $2 million with no medical exam required.

SelectQuote makes life insurance simple, even if this is your first time thinking about it. Head to selectquote.com and a licensed insurance agent will call you right back with the right policy for your life and your budget. Life insurance is never cheaper than it is today. Get the right life insurance for you for less and save more than 50% at selectquote.com slash bulwark. Save more than 50% on term life insurance at selectquote.com slash bulwark. Save more than 50% on term life insurance at selectquote.com slash bulwark today to get started at selectquote.com slash bulwark.

All right, that takes us to the current day, whether we've learned any of those lessons. Let's talk a little bit about some democracy concerns. The redistricting stuff is out there. Obviously, Texas talking about redistricting, they think that they can potentially get five more seats out of there. I mean, I looked at that map, and it's a preposterous map that would go from like Houston to Amarillo or something. There'd be a district. So I don't know if they're really going to be able to get five out of there. But there's some

discussions about what the Democrats can do or can or should do. JB Pritzker in Illinois said earlier this week, we ought to play by the rules, but counterbalance might be necessary. Is that the right way to think about it as counterbalance, the right way to think about it, or should California and Illinois just start doing redistricting right now? I mean, I think it's hard to redistrict a little bit more out of Illinois since I don't really think they have many Republicans. They have very few seats there, but it's a little... We can't squeeze two more out of there? We can't squeeze two more out of there?

My overall take here is that democracy is really on the line. Let's just be clear what's happening. Donald Trump has called up the governor of Texas and said, I want you to squeeze five more seats because he thinks if he does not, if he has the playing field he has today, which is not even really level because North Carolina already did a post decennial redistrict and gained three seats, which again kind of- North Carolina map is absurd. That map is absurd.

And just to say, if they hadn't done those three seats, we could be like Speaker Jeffries one seat away from that or like right there any moment. So, you know, like I think the lesson, basically what Trump wants to do- Maybe had fewer Democrats died and North Carolina not redistricted. Maybe we'd have Speaker Jeffries. And for both of those things. Okay. Alive Democrats and Fairbats and who knows what's going on. Right.

Right. People not running who are that old. So I'd say, you know, if we just recognize what's going on, Trump thinks he's going to lose with the maps that we have. He's going to lose the House with the maps that he has. He's probably worried about accountability for Jeffrey Epstein and any other accountability. And so that's why he is asking to change the rules. And, you know, we had Beto O'Rourke at the Center for American Progress and, you know, he talked

about this issue specifically. And, you know, I think there's an incredibly persuasive case to make that the actual way to stop this race to the bottom, right? I mean, the fundamental problem we have is Republicans are willing to squeeze out more seats and Democrats are, Democrats, you know, blue states have kind of traditionally done these commissions. So what does that create?

It's an imbalance where Republicans can put power above process or due process or norms or right, like the right thing to do or morality and just gain power. And I think unfortunately we live in a world right at the moment where you have to fight fire with fire. The only thing we can do to stop at Texas from going through an ugly redistricting is a threat of blue states doing the same. And if they go and proceed, you know, blue states are going to have to do that. And it will be hard in California but I mean I think they should undertake the process of you

know like re-looking at their constitution, their proposition on their commissions because that's you know California is going to be an important counter to what happens in Texas. Are there other states besides California that could do that? I know there's some talk in Wisconsin but they're getting stymied by the state Supreme Court or there are other places that could do that? I know there's some talk in Wisconsin, but they're getting stymied by the state Supreme Court or other places that could potentially... Kirsten Khire, Ph.D. New York had a map. They went through an interaction with their courts. Maryland has a map, has potential of a map. They've had some challenges with their courts. I do think there'll be a question of how courts look at these redistricts, even in blue states,

if they are looking at Texas and redistricting in the middle to do it. So you know, I like, unfortunately we live in a world that some of us argued like in a decade ago that maybe blue states shouldn't go through these commission processes because Republican states could do things like this. And I remember really, you know, like good people, good government people saying, no, no, no, we have to role model. But this is exactly why you need national legislation that prohibits gerrymandering because otherwise you do get this asymmetry.

Like blue states go through these independent commissions. Like that's the problem in California. They have an independent commission. Red states almost illegally draw lines that now there's essential lawlessness around because the Supreme Court has exited this area. That is the fundamental... I mean, we just live in a world where if one party is going to put power above everything else, the only way to address that is really strong countermeasures. I have another strategic question for you about Texas that's maybe a little touchy. And so I want to give a long preamble to it to be nice to people.

Because you had Beto at CAP yesterday. I love Beto. It seems like he's thinking about running. I don't know if he's going to. I like Colin Allred a lot. He's running for Senate in Texas. This guy, James Tallarico, I don't know him, but he seems like a good person. And his Joe Rogan interview is nice. You look at Iowa, Zach Walls is running. Great guy. All these people seem like good people. They also all seem like different flavors of vanilla Democrat to me. And the Democrats, like really need to win Texas or Iowa if they ever want to take back the Senate again.

And so I don't know, you're kind of more in these meetings than me. I say it about myself, like, I like me as well, but I wouldn't pitch me as the solution for winning back a Louisiana Senate seat from Bill Cassidy. I don't think I'd be the strongest candidate to put up for that. A gay guy, I don't think is probably going to win Louisiana even as a former Republican. So you got to be kind of hard headed about this stuff. Is there any effort to try to recruit people in these states that have a little bit of independence from the Democratic brand? Are those conversations happening?

Are there worries about this? Or is everybody just gonna kind of get on board with the horses that we got in these races? You know, I think the thing for all of us to think about is how do we have policies and ideas that can actually win in purple to red states. So, you know, I think this is like the big, you know, we have this big debate. Should we, there are lots of Democrats who are like, you should recruit like union members

who are independents in a bunch of these states. Sure. Dan Osborne style candidates. Like a Dan Osborne style. And look, John Bel Edwards won the governorship of Louisiana and he is pro-life. He's anti-choice. But he did a Medicaid expansion or Andy did a Medicaid expansion and did a lot of good in that state, right?

So I think we have to do really two things. One is we have to give grace to people who have different positions than other people in states that they are running in. But I also think we need a fundamental rethink of how we have policies and ideas that can appeal to people in a place like Iowa, as well as a place like Illinois or California.

And I will say, you know, this is maybe to get to it, you know, this is one of the ideas behind our immigration plan. We know Center for American Progress put forward an immigration plan that secures the border. It ends the abuse of the asylum system. We do believe there was misuse and abuse of the asylum system over the last four years, longer actually, since 2017. Started really 2015, 2016, grew in 2017. The smugglers figured out the system back over almost a decade ago. So we fix those parts and also believe we should expand legal immigration and I think and provide a path to citizenship for people who've been here 10 years or longer.

And I think that plan, you know, that plan is broadly supported in the country. It's as 60, 70 percent and can be a plan that you could talk about in Iowa and California. And that is what I think actually the party needs to do. It has to have ideas. I mean you can ask candidates to go into states and run against the party, right? Like or you can expand the tent of the party so that it's actually welcoming of ideas that are a little bit more broadly expansive than where we have been. And my view is that,'s important to offer ideas out there that a person running in Iowa doesn't have to run away from, but could actually strongly embrace and say this is kind of a mainstream view.

Because the truth is we live in a hyper-polarized world and you can have a great candidate, but if basically they have to say, I'm going to fight the party, then if you really want to fight the party, you'll just go with the Republican. So, like, that kind of thing, you have to actually engage in a broader effort to kind of recenter ideas. And the party and our immigration plan is one step in doing that. You know, we also have to have ideas that excite our base and other things, you know, we're not like fighting with the base every day, but we're trying to create ideas that can unite people to get

to a better, higher ground and not create those conflicts. Also, just to say one last word, and in Iowa and other places, I think if you have a plan, if a Democrat, even in Iowa, has a plan where they can, you know, talk about a secure border, it allows them to go on offense against Republicans who right now are like eliminating due process or ignoring due process to pick people off the streets who have been here 10, 20 years, eliminate the legal status people have so you can deport them. I mean, people have been here 30 years, 25 years, 30 years, under legal status from temporary protected status because they were fleeing a communist regime.

They got that status. This administration's policies are so extreme, they're getting rid of that status so they can deport them to countries they don't even know. So I think Democrats should be able to go on offense on these issues, but they probably feel more secure if they have a big plan that does that. I mean, I think that you're right exactly on the immigration stuff. I guess I would ask, I mean, if there are any other of those types of policies you want to talk about, about like what might make sense for the Democrats in a proactive policy platform, but also just think about it in the context of, I mean, I'm with you.

I mean, I'm a moderate squish, so let's put out a policy platform that's going to appeal to 60% of the country. That's probably going to appeal to me more. But that's not really what MAGA did, right? Like they put out their Project 2025 plan that had a lot of deeply unpopular things in it, but they were able to kind of offset it because Trump like did run against the party, not against the Trump party, but against the Bush party, basically, on like wars and entitlements, essentially. And so, I don't know, is there not room to kind of do both, right? Like have a, you know, have a broader, more appealing agenda, but also run against whatever people perceive to be some unpopular parts of the party over the last decade? Yeah, but you could embrace our immigration plan

and be a critic of what happened in last administration. That's a way to also think about it. Trump did attack where I think lots of people thought the George Bush administration had gone wrong, which is the Iraq war was a disaster, and he was willing to say that. So future Democrats could say say maybe we handled this problem badly, that's fine.

And like, I think that's like important and good. I think it's like, do you think people want candor and it's important to be honest about those things? I guess I'd say, you know, when it comes to project 2025, I think we should be really clear, like the Trump campaign was lying, but did say that Project 2025 wasn't their agenda. And so, you know, I do think there's an important role for people to do actually a version of Project 2025, which was go agency by agency. And our version, we would, and we will do this at the Center for American Progress

You know go agency and aid by agency and actually think about how we can rebuild them to actually meet people's needs Which it's kind of the inverse of what project 2025 did but it is like a similar kind of detailed plan Over the next year, you know, we're gonna be putting out ideas on a whole cry on a whole slew of issues You know, and I think again we think of to be putting out ideas on a whole slew of issues. I think, again, we think of these as issues that can attract a broad majority, but they won't necessarily always be like squishy bit, moderate, or whatever. I think there's really bold ideas on housing that we can do that get to supply, but also take other steps.

We will be offering ideas on, I know, I think how we ensure public safety in the country. I want to just remind everyone that working class people experience crime at a much higher level than, you know, college educated folks. And sometimes if we're feel impervious to crime, we can communicate that it's really not that big a deal. I think that's a problem. So but you know, I also think it's wrong that Republicans kind of, and Trump does this every day, he creates a straw man between improving public safety and caring about people's civil rights.

And we don't have to choose. We can actually lower crime and maintain or do process rights and respects for people. So, and I think, in my view, I think we have to answer the mail across the board. I think a big challenge is sometimes we don't engage in these ideas, these debates. We just retract, and I think that is a huge problem. So you're not worried about the recruitment like me? We got into policy. You're not worried about the...

You don't have to feel like... That's okay. This is a fine position to have. I don't think there's a clear answer, right? I don't, going out and recruiting eight Dan Osborns, I don't know, that might not work. But it's different, it's something different, and the Democrats haven't won in these states in a while,

in the Florida, Texas, Ohio, Iowa type states, and so I'm kind of open to different ideas, but where are you at on kind of the recruitment side? I mean, I guess my take is I'm open to different ideas too. And I actually think honestly, I mean, like if independents want to run, I think that then it like puts pressure on Democratic candidates to actually prove that they can win. I mean, I think my take in the Trump era is we should do whatever it takes to beat back the assault on democracy. And if that's a Dan Osborne in a state or others, but you know, I also think let's give people some chance

to show that they can get a strong majority, you know, that they can actually win. Thinking of different ideas, you know, I have to ask you about Zoran mania. You haven't always been the darling of the Zoran wing of the party I wouldn't say face some Mentions Your big tent so you're cool

What what what were your observations about the Zoran campaign? What do you think about my basic take is like we should learn lessons Where we can get them right he communicated he communicates in a great way. He's very candid I do think, like, the lesson, you know, one of the things I draw from his videos, which I find very entertaining, honestly, is that he is taking on, like, elephants in the room. He talks about, you know, the New York, like, basically New York Post out to get him. He jokes about it. He's funny. I think he does understand politics is also a little bit about entertainment.

He's gotten a lot of young people to support him. I mean, I have, I have some, you know, I, I do think he should condemn just clearly globalizing intifada as an anti-Semitic term. And so, you know know but it does sound like he's moving in some direction or to me it's not that complicated to just say it's like anti-semitic it seems like an easy sentence but you know I think we should be candid that we are kind of in a shit storm honestly and we have to learn a lessons of victory wherever we can get them. I also think New York City is a big, complicated place, and people in our party or in the Democratic

Party, I shouldn't say our party, where I'm a 5-0 with C-3, but in the Democratic Party, on the Broad Center left should recognize New York has elected Republicans multiple times in the last couple of decades. So I think if I were advising the Mamdani campaign, I would say, like, you also have to demonstrate. There's a lot of talk about, you know, why aren't Democratic leaders embracing him? I could say they're not embracing him because there are some, like, deep concerns about some of his stances. But he should also recognize he has to reach out, not just in talking to people, but in some of his policies if he wants to have a broad coalition to defeat his opponents

in the election, some of whom, you know, I think Cuomo did not run a good campaign. In fact, it was kind of a horrifying campaign in that he didn't actually campaign. But you know, he is also like I think he's a tougher candidate than some people think in a general election in New York. I've become anti-anti Zoran a bit, to steal a phrase from my old friends that are on the National Review who are anti-anti-Trump. I'm anti-anti-Zoran. I think it's kind of weird that some of the Democrats haven't embraced it.

Honestly, again, you can say, I think he has some policies I don't agree with, but he's clearly better than Eric Adams. I don't know. I mean, you don't see a lot of Republicans saying, like, formally saying, I refuse to endorse Marjorie Taylor Greene. I don't know. Maybe they should. I guess I'm not sure. What do you think? It's a little strange that people are not just like, you can say I prefer him with reservations, right? I don't know. Yeah. Look, I mean, I guess I'd say I think honestly what's happening, you're right, it

is just a mayor's race and because it's New York City, everyone thinks America is fixated on it. But I also think like, look, I think there's a delicate dance probably going on behind the scenes of where does he move on some issues? Where do leaders move on some issues? Where does the, where do leaders move on some issues? And where actual voters, you know? So my take is this is probably not the end of the story. It's probably the beginning of it where it is. And you know, we're not like Democrats aren't like Republicans.

You know, most of the time that's a good thing. You know, we aren't like just fall in line with everybody, et cetera. Yeah, I agree with that. I like, like the question was out and halfway through the question I was like, wait a minute, I want Republicans to not endorse Marjorie Taylor Greene.

What am I doing? Why am I modeling that? Like that's a good behavior. I know, I'm like, are you like, we're supposed to like, I mean, and also you're making, I mean, even, I'm not saying them daddies like Marjorie Taylor Greene. I just wanna say you say.

I'm comparing him to Marjorie Taylor Greene? Well, I mean, they both have the same position on Israel. So they have that one thing in common. Okay, we're going to move on before I get in trouble. Speaking of the delicate dance by the scenes, Chris Murphy said something to me yesterday. Now that I'm a media man, I'm a podcaster, I'm like out of, I don't go to the conferences with the donors and stuff anymore. That's just not my world. It used to be my world. You're still in that world.

He was saying that he's still pretty concerned that like. Democratic donors are going to sit on the sidelines out of a combination of fear of retribution from Trump and a feeling of like, it's a fait accompli. The midterms are always good for that party. Why should I put myself on the line? Are you worried about that? Are you seeing that at all in your kind of convoes? I mean, I think an asymmetric asset that Trump has and is definitely using is that he uses

fear to intimidate people. So I think there are a range of institutions, not just donors, philanthropy, like the business sector, who's, you know, would have been in any normal world standing up a lot more to the insanity that we're seeing. And he's, they're actually a whole range of people who I think are just basically intimidated into not engaging in the fight. And I find that very frustrating as a person who's engaged in the fight every day and just you know can't like I'm definitely under right wing attack but like you have to I want to tell my grandkids that I did

everything I could in this moment to save the country and I definitely think that's what's at stake. So I feel like people the more outrageous Trump has become and the less popular he has become. And so it is important to remember, he, his, it's not like, you know, I think there's a discourse in democratic politics, a lot are in like the broad center laugh, like, you know, does politics, polling doesn't actually matter. It doesn't matter if people go into the streets, he's impervious to everything, but it really does matter. It is signaling to other people that you can stand up against him.

And when other countries that have gone through authoritarian threats like this, or Ban, others, when the opposition just goes to sleep because it's so ugly, that is when democracy fails. So I do think donors are kind of getting, a lot of people are kind of coming into the fight. There's obviously a need, a lot of people are kind of coming into the fight. There's obviously a need for a lot more. But we should also recognize that there is a kind of tremendous amount of fear. I mean, I've never had people raise to me issues like, could the administration come after me?

And they are now. And that is a deep concern. But it's also, it's important to remind people every day, he is a deep concern but it's also it's important to remind people every day he is a deeply unpopular president he's the most unpopular president at this time his actions on things that are strengths like immigration are unpopular with the country his positions are unpopular at the majority is against him I love that you're in the fight that's what I appreciate about you is there anything that you're hot under the collar about

that I didn't ask you about do you have have any rants you want to, you know, pop off on anybody? I feel like, I mean, we could go on Jeffrey Epstein for 10 or 15 more hours, but I feel like I might get in trouble. Everyone would sort of yell at me. The one thing I would say is you talk to a lot of leaders. A really important thing over the next six weeks into the August recess is for It was really important. We talked about Jeffrey Epstein. I'm not one of these people were like we shouldn't talk about this We should only talk about kitchen table issues

But we have to talk about both. It is really important in the August recess that Republican House members who voted for this and lied to their constituents that it would be only minimal cuts, you know, they would only vote for like 300 billion or 400 billion dollar, my favorite Mike Lawler who said he would absolutely not vote for more than 500 billion dollars in Medicaid cuts and voted for a trillion, you know, they have to get the lesson in the recess that it is unacceptable to take away people's health care for tax cuts for billionaires.

I agree with that. Okay, last thing. Do you ever look at JD Vance and think to yourself, man, in a different world, I could have been the vice president for a president that's only job was to Twitter, to quote, tweet our enemies? I feel like you would have been really good at that, Nira. If we had realized 10 years ago that that was the only qualification,

it could have been Biden-Tandan maybe, and your job would have just been shitposting. I would have been so good at that, let's just be clear. I know, so look at JD Vance, you're like, damn. You know, no? You know, look at JD Vance. You're like, damn. You know? No? You know, it's actually weird about, you know, like I was in government. I wasn't really shitposting. I really liked helping people.

No, you behaved while you were in government. I mean, I was really behaving. And you know, I liked, you know, I think a big difference between JD Vance and I. I think we're probably both pretty good at shitposting, but like I actually looked at government services and opportunity to help people and I just not tracking that as his top priority really at the moment. So I think there's some big differences. Although we both went to Yale Law School and we were both research assistants for this

very good kind of cratchety liberal, I shouldn't call him cratchety because boy, you're it, but professor. So I know a little bit about him and him that way. What about him? The thing about his Yale, since you have that experience together, the thing that annoyed me, I have so many things that have annoyed me about him, I find him repulsive across every possible metric. But he tells this origin story about going to Yale Law as a country boy, and he sat at some

fancy dinner that maybe that crotchety professor brought him to, I don't know. He didn't know which fork to use and how he felt like everyone around him did. This was really radicalizing about how the elites have a culture that they don't translate. I'm like, what are you talking about? We all went to college and didn't know shit. I don't translate. And I'm like, what are you talking about? Like, we all went to college and did no shit. I don't know, did you feel that way at all, Yale? Did you feel like the, you know, Oscar size for the elites about the fork usage? You know, I will say, I mean,

not that I'm trying to be sympathetic to JD fans, but I will say, you know, I went to public schools my whole life until I went to Yale Law School. And I loved Yale Law School, but, you know, there were a number of people there who, you know, gone to private school, like, from the time they were two, not like five, through, like, Dalton, Harvard, Yale Law School.

Like, it was a much more natural thing for them. I mean, the thing about JD Vance is that when he was at Yale Law School, this is what everyone says, he was Tim Miller. Like he was David Frum. He was positioning himself as an intellectual, moderate Republican who didn't like Obama at the edges and thought he was like, you know, had gone off, but there was like a reasonable middle in the country and

he was like for a strong national defense, like strong, you know, I mean, none of the gay friends and all that sort of stuff. Like he's you know, like his wife is Usha like none of the hard right hate your Kill your enemies like liberals are the monsters. I just want to eat them for breakfast It was all like can't we just get along in a slightly more moderate direction So, you know I personally and it wasn't like he came to Yale Law School at like 19, you know, he had fully formed views by then. So like, you know, I think that's good. You also, so you're saying you also felt a little socially isolated from the prep school dorks, but it didn't turn you into a fascist. So that's, yeah, I mean, I will say, let me tell you, so like one of my first dinners, I did go to a dinner where

I turned to somebody and I was like, Oh, where do you come from? And this guy turned to me and was like, when I was like, where do you come from? He decided to give me his private school lineage. And so he literally turned to and said, I went to Dalton, I went to Choate, then I went to Harvard, and now I'm at Yale Law School. And I said, I said back to him, I went to public school my whole life and we're in the same place. Yeah, you're like, I wanted to know if you were from Kansas City. I know, exactly! I was like, what state are you from?

And he's giving me his whole thing. I'm stateless, I just went from prep school to boarding school to prep school. That's a little bit of the global elite right there, I have to say. Anyway, I mean, he's a lovely person, but I definitely was like, my education cost a lot less than yours and we were in the same place.

So I took it as a point of pride. I didn't actually take it as like, I didn't take offense at it. I actually was like, wow, it makes me pretty cool because I didn't have all those advantages and I've shown up in the same place. But I also don't hate everybody. Yeah, right. It's a key difference, another key difference. Thank you so much for being in the fight. I love your tenacity. We'll be doing this again in a couple of months.

How does that sound? That's great. Always fun, my friend. All right. We'll see you soon, girl. Everybody else, we'll see you back here tomorrow for another edition of the Bullwork Podcast. Peace! Ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, I don't want your love, I just wanna fight We're on our way to the club Stupid as, stupid as Lemmezine, rockin' up Can't tell me, giddy up

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah Man down Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah Level up I know all too well just what you're like I don't want your love, I just want my fight He don't get pussy, get the boot I saw him sippingin' on dark fruit

This always happens late at night Some guy comes up, says I'm his type I just threw up in my mouth when he just tried to ask me out Yet don't approach me, I just wanna dance with my friends Yeah, yeah, yeah, mental Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, shh, yeah, shh, yeah Level up! I know all too well just what you're like I don't want your love, I just wanna fight I don't want your love, I just wanna fight I know all too well this is what you're like

I don't want your love, I just wanna fight The Bullork Podcast is produced by Katie Cooper with audio engineering and editing by Jason Brown.