The Bulwark Podcast - Special Indictment Podcast: Adam Kinzinger, Mona Charen, Will Saletan

Episode Date: March 31, 2023

Trump faces a 34-count indictment in New York and more charges may be on the way. But will it hurt him politically, or propel him to the GOP nomination? Adam Kinzinger, Mona Charen, and Will Saletan join Charlie Sykes for the weekend podcast. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Welcome to the Bulwark Podcast. I'm Charlie Sykes. This is our special indictment Bulwark Podcast. Later in the program, we'll be joined by my colleagues Mona Charon and Will Asalatan, but we are joined for the first half of the podcast by former Congressman Adam Kinzinger. Adam, how are you? Charlie, it's good to be with you. What a day. What an unexpected evening. What a day. What an extraordinary moment. You know, I wrote this morning, you know, two things can be true at the same time. You know, that the indictment of Donald Trump on multiple felony counts is an historic vindication of the principle that nobody's above the law, but also that our democracy and our

legal system are about to face a hugely dangerous stress test. So I think a lot of people have mixed feelings about this. So I'm anxious to get your take on all of this. You've spent the last several years dealing with the threat that Donald Trump poses to this country. So the morning after his indictment in New York, what do you think? Well, I mean, I have such mixed feelings because I think like, you know, like you've been talking about for a while, I really wish this wasn't the first to go. I think a lot of my colleagues are too quick, obviously, to jump the gun and say, this is political. It's nothing. It's a nothing burger. Obviously, I don't even think Donald Trump's read the indictment, so I don't see how they could have. But, you know, it's going to depend how the indictment

reads. I mean, if it truly is just a matter of campaign finance that has been stretched into a felony, boy, that's, you know, yeah, on the one hand, you look at it and say, well, nobody's above the law, but that's going to be a real test, a real test for our country. Now, hopefully, by, you know, Alvin Bragg moving forward, he's done so with solid evidence. And I think there could be some surprises in here, but again, it's, it's, I can't find like a perfect position to settle on because I'm so conflicted on this thing. And, you know, I'd heard somebody yesterday say something like, well, it's a very sobering moment because regardless of your opinion, we are now a country that hasn't

died at a former president. And we had taken pride in that. I think that's a very sobering moment. So I find myself conflicted on this, honestly. And I guess I would cheat to the side of nobody's above the law and he should be held to account for it. Yeah. And next week, we're going to have this extraordinary scene, you know, speaking of being uncharted and not knowing where we're going on all of this. New York Times had a little blurb like, what will happen when Trump is arrested? He will be fingerprinted. He will be photographed. He may even be handcuffed. No, he won't. And the former president of the United States will be read the standard Miranda warning. He will be told he has the right to remain silent and the right to an attorney. I mean, that is going to be a hell of a show, Adam. Yeah. And the one thing that we should have learned over the last eight years is that for Donald Trump, everything is a show. And I'm guessing that right now,

he's down there in Mar-a-Lago and he's mugging. He's planning how he's going to do it. What should we expect? What is it going to be like, do you think? Yeah. I mean, here's where I'm kind of, I guess, confused is, does he actually just do some tweets or truths or whatever? What was the term you used on that? Bleats. I'm calling them bleats. Yeah. I like to bleat. So, you know, whether he's just going to bleat or whatever, or if he's going to go out and give a show. Now, I, you know, I've heard some people talk about the fact that it's possible that the judge in this case could put a gag order on him if he's out trying to stir up trouble, you know. In theory, and he won't, let's be clear, but in theory, he could have bail revoked or denied if he's out there trying to stir something up. But look, there is no doubt he's going to use this

to every part of his advantage. I think this, short of what could happen in the future, if this is the only indictment he gets, the only thing that comes his way, I think this has made him the Republican nominee for president. I think people are naive to think any otherwise. Now, granted, there is still the Georgia case. There are still the January 6th and the documents case. Those are the things that I think can take him down and finally get Lindsey Graham to dry up his tears on TV and not, you know, beg people for money for poor Donald Trump. If those things come forward and actually become cases, this one itself, though, I don't think this is going to be anything that turns around. I think Donald Trump is going to look at this as an opportunity to solidify his endorsement. And

frankly, Ron DeSantis dutifully obliged, it appears, yesterday. Yeah, Ron DeSantis, you know, declaring Florida a sanctuary state when it came to Donald Trump was kind of an interesting flex for somebody that's actually running against Donald Trump, saying he won't cooperate with the extradition, which, of course, I mean, it means things politically. It doesn't mean anything legally. Constitution requires him to extradite someone accused of a crime. Can I just jump in on that, though? Yeah, please do. How bananas is it, okay, that we are at a moment where, let's just, you and I go back to 10 years ago when we were good, dutiful Republicans, right? When we, you know, we had moments we disagreed with our party, but mostly we were proud of it. We thought we were kind of the grownups in the room. And

now imagine somebody comes down from outer space, you know, sweating, like, dude, I came from the future. We're here to tell you what's going on. There's a former president that was a Republican. By the way, it's Donald Trump. You just like witness that Donald Trump. No way. But and by the way, he's indicted.

And now the cool thing is to say that in Florida, you're not going to cooperate with his extradition. And by the way, the guy that's doing that is running against him for president. I mean, I wouldn't even know how to compute any of this. I wouldn't even know how to compute the fact that Lindsey Graham, one of, you know, John McCain's, this is 10 years ago, us, by the way, one of John McCain's closest allies is now crying on behalf of Donald Trump on television and raising money. I wouldn't know how to compute, you know, the fact that Donald Trump put out a statement that said, this is the darkest day, the darkest day, Charlie, in American history. It wasn't Antietam. It's not 9-11. It's not Pearl Harbor. This is the darkest day in American history. Well, when you're a narcissist of that level,

everything does center around you. But I thought that was interesting tweet that you have. You know, America has had some pretty dark days. Yesterday is not going to be in the top like 10,000 worst days we've ever had. It was not a great day for Donald Trump. Maybe it will be a good day for him politically, but it's going to be a bad day for the country. You know, the damage that this whole thing will inflict. Now, you said a couple of things that I wanted to come back to. So you think that this

indictment, you think it makes it much more likely that Donald Trump will be the nominee? How will it play out with the base? What are the polls going to look like? What's the fallout? What are the other candidates going to do? Yeah, so let's assume now that there is no Georgia indictment and there's no DOJ indictment, because I think that could change the whole game plan. Okay. This one's serious. Those can be way more serious. And plus it just piles on. I think, look, if you look at this from a base voter, what is the one thing that Donald Trump does really well? He's the best victim ever, right? I mean, for as tough of a guy as he tries to pretend like he is, he had the most powerful job in the world and still happened to be the biggest victim out there,

like they just simply couldn't control his environment. And he will use that to great effect. I mean, the only way to defeat Donald Trump at this moment is with somebody to come forward and to have the courage to say, look, Donald Trump, this is not a guy that represents, frankly, our religious values. This is not a guy that represents our political values. Here's why I will take him on. I'll take the names that he's going to throw at me and I'll look and make him look stupid on stage. That kind of person may have a prayer to at least wedge some folks away from Donald Trump. But what you're seeing is Donald Trump's biggest opponent is, you know, arguably Ron DeSantis, who just completely acquiesced to him, just completely not only said

what he said a few weeks ago, something to the effect of, well, I don't know about hush money to porn star. And it's kind of like, oh, wow, Ron's pulling out his big boy pants. And now his response is just this massive, like, I will not extradite anybody to New York. I'm on Donald Trump's side. You cannot defeat Donald Trump, Charlie, by kissing his butt. You can't defeat Donald Trump by telling him how great he is. And you can't defeat Donald Trump by telling the base that's supposed to vote for you that he was the best president in the world and nobody could ever hold a light up to him. And so I think he's solidified his position in the party, assuming that, you know, more stuff doesn't come forward. Well, also, you know, DeSantis is trying to posture as the fighter, right?

As the tough guy, as the winner. And apparently his strategy is to have one of his aides monitor Charlie Kirk's podcast and whatever Charlie Kirk tells him to do, he's like, we just have to put it out. We have, you know, Donald Trump or some, you know, F-list MAGA influencers, you know, demands that I do something. Let's absolutely do whatever. That's supposed to project strength. So the two dynamics that you're familiar with, you know, we talk a lot about what

the Republican base is going to do and how they'll rally around Donald Trump. You also have the Republican elites, you have the country club elites, the you know, the anti anti Trumpers, the people who have been, you know, sitting back and saying, okay, well, we would like to move on, but, you know, we just, we deplore this in private. But if demanded, we will put out tweets using the same script, using the word weaponized or weaponization, should be a drinking game. And so you have the Republican elites, the elected leaders of the party, including Kevin McCarthy and others, who have decided that they're going to go along. So is this bottom up? Is it top down? If one of them came out and said,

okay, maybe we ought to hold our fire and wait until we find out what the criminal justice system is doing, would that change the trajectory this party's on right now? No, and I think you're right, not really. And I think what's happened is, I want to caveat this by saying, I think in the long run, long run's not within the next couple years. Within the long run, the party will come back. I mean, it's going to take a whole number of things. Come back to what? I don't know. I mean, back to something that's mature, because I just don't think this can survive.

I mean, right now you have so many of our angry bases, like 70, 75 years old, what replaces them? I mean, you know, not to get on the Second Amendment issue, but I try to tell people, look, young people, if you're a Second Amendment defender, which I am, by the way, you've got to be the ones coming forward with fixes, because the next generation has no compunction about, you know, their view on guns. But so, you know, to get back to this, is it top? I think it's bottom up. And I think the top, so to speak, the, you know, the Republican leaders, the elite donors, whatever that is, have been so beaten down over the last six to eight years that they don't dare stick their head up anymore. And there's no leadership. I mean,

how many times have we lived through somebody having the courage to say something about Donald Trump only to lose a primary or only to have all their fundraising dried up or only to be extradited or ashamed from the party? And so I think that's what's happened now. Nobody has the courage. Kevin McCarthy's chief among those, of course, but nobody has the courage anymore to stand up and say this is wrong because, I mean, look, take Liz Cheney and I, and I'm not saying this for any kind of sympathy. I don't want it, but we stood up, we said the right thing, and it didn't really change that many minds. I think it made an impact in the country, but I don't think it changed that many minds in the party. So yeah, it's ground up.

And by the way, we all know these wealthy donors, the ones surprised us in 2016 when they turned to support Donald Trump. And you're shaking your head like, wait, you were a big Rubio guy. They're all going to do it again if Donald Trump ends up winning this nomination. Well, they will. That's a safe prediction. All right. You can look at the calendar as well as I can. We're coming up on 27 months after the January 6th insurrection. And, you know, you were talking about, you know,

time travel. Imagine talking to your January 7th self and describing what happened that the Republican Party would revise the entire history and decide they're okay with it, that Donald Trump would continue to have his lock on the party, that Donald Trump would actually stand down in Waco, Texas, with his hand over his heart and join in an anthem with some of the rioters who had attacked the Capitol and police. I don't mean to laugh here, but you and Liz Cheney spent so much time on that committee. Here we are, coming up on 27 months, no charges from the Department of Justice

against anyone in the Trump orbit or Trump himself. Are you disappointed? Are you frustrated? What do you think? Yeah, I mean, I'm obviously disappointed in the party. I mean, DOJ, I got it, you know, Jack Smith and, you know, they're taking their time. They want to do this right. And we never want to rush an investigation. But it has been almost two and a half years since January 6th. And DOJ is maybe somewhat further along now in their investigation on this. You know, look, the day after January 6th, I'd actually had a conversation with a few

members of Congress like, hey, should we do a vote of no confidence against Kevin McCarthy? Because he caused this moment, you know, by opposing the certification and everything else we know he did. And I remember thinking that I actually had a shot to get that. I'm like, it may be close, but I actually have a shot to get a vote of no confidence through against Kevin McCarthy. I mean, today, obviously, you wouldn't even be able to even bring it up at the microphone. Yeah, it's extremely disappointing. And I think what disappoints me the most is not Donald Trump. It's not the base. It's not the donors. It really is the fact that my colleagues in the House of Representatives, who I assumed all had a red line they wouldn't cross somewhere in their soul didn't.

You know, even some of the people, there was a couple of people that survived impeachment. You know, they voted to impeach Donald Trump. They survived that. They're in Congress now. I haven't heard a peep from them. It's like now all of a sudden it's like we need to go in and just be quiet because thank God we survived that impeachment. And now I can't do

anything else, you know, to stand up to Donald Trump. Yeah, it is very disappointing. And I think it's disappointing from the perspective too of this country had so many, we could stand up around the globe and we could talk to people about democracy and how to make democracy work and what it means to be a loyal opposition and what it means for two different parties, you know, to come together to not hate each other and work to make a better country. And I feel like we've gone beyond that now. And there's a lot of countries that are desperate for our example that can't look at us as that anymore. And again, I don't think it's the end of America's road by any means. I think, you know, it's a bad moment that we have to learn from. But until people stand up, Charlie, and have the courage to say this is bad or wrong,

it's not going to organically fix itself. And I think that's what bothers me more than anything. Hey, folks, this is Charlie Sykes, host of the Bulwark podcast. We created the Bulwark to provide a platform for pro-democracy voices on the center right and the center left for people who are tired of tribalism and who value truth and vigorous yet civil debate about politics and a lot more. And every day, we remind you folks, you are not the crazy ones. So why not head over to TheBullWork.com and take a look around? Every day, we produce newsletters and podcasts that will help you make sense of our politics and keep your sanity intact. To get a daily dose of sanity in your inbox,

why not try a Bulwark Plus membership free for the next 30 days? To claim this offer, go to thebulwark.com slash charlie. That's thebulwark.com forward slash charlie. We're going to get through this together i promise so some people think that i'm being snarky when i say that in private the republican elite strategy about donald trump is you know humana humana humana maybe a meteor maybe he dies you're absolutely right and i've tried to explain people i actually am not making this up i think there's magical thinking because they're waiting for something else to happen.

Somebody to take care of this. But if they're hoping that maybe deep in their recesses that these indictments will solve the problem for them, but they'll still come out and attack the indictments and still come out and provide ammunition to Donald Trump that somehow that he is a victim here. So they are unwilling to do even the barest minimum to make happen what they claim that they want to happen. So how do they think this ends? Give me your sense of what their expectations are. I'm not being snarky in saying this. I think their expectation is that somebody's going to come along, ride in on a white horse and fix it. I mean, honestly, and here's the problem. You know, there's a moment when you make it, I'll say make it like you're in the house, you're in the Senate, you know, whatever, you know, even if you work for the president,

and, you know, all our lives, there's always somebody kind of above us that can come along and make things right. You know, when you're growing up, it's your dad, you know, or it's your teacher or whatever. And there's a weird realization when it gets to the point when you realize you are in that class of people that are supposed to come in on the white horse, you know. And when you're a member of Congress thinking that somebody, maybe it's Ron DeSantis, maybe it's whoever, is going to come in and do this victorious battle for you against Donald Trump. And you're waiting and waiting. And these people don't realize it's actually them. Like they are the, you know, the barn of white horses and jockeys that are supposed to come in with their weapons. And they're all sitting around like, well, I can't wait till somebody from the white horse barn comes in and saves us. And they're in the white horse barn. I mean, that's exactly what's happening where they're hoping that i am on a text chain some of them are former members

of congress and you know we're all kind of anti-trump and i had made a comment about like look if something doesn't happen like donald trump will be the nominee again and this other member said like oh no power of positive thinking you know he's a great guy but he no, power of positive thinking. You know, he's a great guy, but he did say power of positive thinking. And I said, dude, this power of positive thinking is exactly why we are here. Because you can have positive thinking, but you have to marry that to action. And so every time Charlie says, you know, the sweet meteor of death or whatever comes along, he means it. It may sound funny. You may chuckle.

I chuckle when you say it, Charlie. but that's exactly the strategy of the GOP. And that is the scariest part about all this. So you spent more than a year working on that January 6th special committee, and you poured through so much of the evidence, the incredible volume of evidence that we had about what happened, the damage. We had the testimony from the police officers. We know how many people died. We know how many police officers were injured. And yet, Donald Trump and Fox News have been leading a campaign of historical revisionism that is actually kind of breathtaking in its audacity when you think about it, that they're actually trying to turn something that we saw with our own eyes. We've seen the pictures, we've heard the audio, we've listened to the testimony, and they're trying to turn it into either a peaceful tourist rally or a completely legitimate political protest

about a stolen election. So what were your thoughts when you saw Donald Trump singing along with some of the rioters who were incarcerated in the jail, or when he was down in Waco and he had his hand over his heart while they played a basically insurrectionist anthem? I mean, as somebody who has been so immersed in what actually happened, what is your reaction when you see what Donald Trump is pulling off in terms of rewriting that entire history of this with the cooperation of your old friend, Kevin McCarthy? Kevin's the biggest disappointment because he just he knows better and all he cares about is himself. All he cares about is, you know, is being the speaker. And, you know, look, let's use this Waco theme because I think there's no way, and maybe Donald Trump himself didn't make this decision, but somebody very close to him knew exactly what they were doing by going to Waco on the 30th anniversary. First off, it's worth reminding people that David Koresh was not a hero that stood against the federal government on behalf of his Second Amendment rights. He was a guy that was building automatic weapons. He had grenades, all of which are banned in this country. Even Second Amendment advocates don't think that's right,

to have grenades and everything. He had those. He was a child rapist. He was a real pedophile. He wasn't one of these, like everybody's a pedophile that disagrees with me. He was an actual real pedophile. And Donald Trump on the 30th anniversary went down there to celebrate David Koresh's life with his followers. And it's like, given that I've always wondered, you know, these people that either survived, you know, 30 years ago through that fire, or maybe had left the branch Davidians prior to this attack. I always wondered what they thought kind of like looking in on those last days of David Koresh or when they think back, what do they think about? And I now have not a full sense, but a little bit of a taste because I got to watch my former

party, my party technically, but I don't feel like I belong to them at the moment. I got to watch my party put their hand on the heart and sing along with the January six people. I got to see my party worship Donald Trump at the place of Waco, Texas. I got to see my party, and I've been seeing my party have this new, I call it the Trump as Jesus movement, where they put him. He's basically the parallel to Jesus Christ who died on the cross for our sins. And Donald Trump is dying at the divine altar of justice for you and I. Watching that, I feel like I have been rescued from a cult because I don't

know how in the world, I don't think it was this bad when I was there, but I don't know how in the world these people have fallen so far. Honestly, such good people, Charlie. A lot of these people are great people. They have fallen so far. I get pressed on this every once in a while. It wasn't the party always like this. And the answer is no, it was not always like this. There are people who would describe me as people that I've known for years and years who are normal, rational, reasonable people, who something has broken in them, something in their brains have broken.

I've used the analogy for many years. It is like, and I borrowed this from Jonah Goldberg actually stole it from him. You know, this is like invasion of the body snatchers since 2016, you know, watching, you know, normally reasonable people who in any other part of their lives would be decent and honorable and truthful. Yet they get sucked into this vortex and they become something that's almost unrecognizable and watching people somehow conflate Donald freaking Trump with Jesus Christ. It's like, I'm sorry, I feel like I've taken crazy pills just watching them. So the celebration of the insurrection by Donald Trump, that he's embracing it,

you know, he's sending signals that he's going to pardon people who engage in this sort of thing. How worried are you about a repeat of January 6th or something different, some other act of violence? I mean, how concerned should we be check somewhere in Donald Trump that he will go so far, but no further. You know, maybe he can cause a January 6th, but he's not going to tell his supporters like, hey, kill members of Congress or occupy the floor and overthrow the government. And, you know, and our assumption is like either he's dumb and doesn't know what he's doing or he'll go a little bit further than we would but not too far i'm not convinced of that anymore when i've read him say things like for all the constitution yeah terminate the constitution terminate the constitution he talks about violence over and over the guy obsesses about violence more

than anybody i know except he's just one of the weakest guys, you know, personally, which typically, by the way, people that obsess with violence are ones that actually feel very weak inside, just a quick aside. But let's presume he doesn't have the check we think he has. Let's say he makes a statement like, let's fight. Like, let's actually fight. Let's fight. I think people are assuming that the military, the police force, and everybody is going to follow the orders of their commanders. But let me tell you, as a member of the military, it is drilled into you that your loyalty is to the Constitution of the United States, not to any one person. Well, if somebody convinces you that the Constitution demands you to leave the military and fight on the side of the rebels. So my whole point is, I am very concerned because

I'm not sure that Donald Trump really cares about anything except himself. And even if it's not a call to a full civil war, he very well, especially if he sees his freedom as threatened, could tell America, you know, boy, this is the darkest day in history. I mean, if we were willing to go to war over slavery, well, if this is even darker than slavery, certainly there are people willing to go to violence then. Well, this is the thing about Donald Trump that should be so obvious, you know, even though he wraps himself in this mantle of the flag and of patriotism, this is a guy who's prepared to burn the country down in his own personal self-interest. And I'm trying to think, we've had some pretty awful politicians in the past, but you contrast with even Richard Nixon in 1960 decided he was going to concede the election, even though it was very close, because he didn't want to rip the country apart. Al Gore conceded an election that was razor thin because he didn't want to tear up the country. You think about all the men and women in positions of honor and trust

who really, when push came to shove, weren't willing to destroy their own country. Donald Trump is one of those guys where it is completely clear that if he does foment, directly or indirectly, death and destruction, and it benefits him and it helps him avoid accountability or get power, he's willing to go along with it. He's willing to do this. Nobody should doubt that. No. Nobody should doubt that. I mean, maybe a couple of days ago, he was praising Vladimir Putin and saying that, you know, it's Mitt Romney and Ron DeSantis that are ruining this world. This is a guy that worships people in his mind that kill people.

That's why he loves dictators, because they're tough. And inside his heart, he's still five-year-old Donald Trump who feels, you know feels scared and feels unloved. And I mean, I feel bad for him for that. I don't mean to make fun of that, but that's what he's acting out of, this scared five-year-old kid that has these powerful tools at his disposal and is not afraid to use them because it makes him feel strong. Now, he's afraid to use the U.S. military to defend U.S. interests, but he's not afraid to, you know, stoke the fires in people's hearts to defend his own ego. And I think that's a frightening moment for us. Frankly, it's a frightening thing. No, I've actually written about this.

I think he has a kink not with war criminals, a fascination with the, you know, the Philippine president Duterte, you know, who had killed thousands of people in extrajudicial murders, you know, Vladimir Putin, who, you know, kills people. He, you know, he said that the Chinese government at Tiananmen Square, you know, showed what strength looked like. And for him, strength is if you kill someone, if you crush someone. And the anecdotes he would tell about, you know, shooting Muslims, shooting them in the head with bullets dipped in pig blood. I mean, there is this weird kink of brutality. And unfortunately, he injects that into the body politics. And, you know, when we talk about violence, I just keep coming back to the numbers,

you know, Adam, I mean, what percentage of the country does it take to have real chaos in a country with people with guns and bombs, and who are being convinced that, you know, this is Armageddon, this is the final fight. I mean, even if you're talking about 1% of his supporters, that's hundreds of thousands of people. That's 3 million people. In a country of 350 million people, basically, that's 3 million people. And by the way, probably 1% of the country thinks they were personally abducted by aliens. And so it's not hard to get to 1% in this country at all. Okay. One last comment. We touched on Ukraine. There was some good news this week, Finland

joining NATO, which is one of those moments where you think, you know, Vladimir Putin, you know, geopolitical genius has managed to, you know, blunder his way into, in many ways, has got to be his worst nightmare, you know, Sweden and Finland joining NATO, inconceivable, even a couple of years ago. Yeah, absolutely. And it's interesting, because there's, I think this war is going to grind on unless, frankly, the United States and the West, you know, is willing to dip below what we consider our reserve stocks. We have to give Ukraine everything they need. Look, Russia's not going to nuke us unless they're invaded. That's their actual plan. That's their actual like, you know, op con, let's get this war over with. But when this is all said and done, whether it's in a month or whether it's in two or three years, you know, NATO will come out of this so much stronger. And to watch Finland, who, you know, I think a lot of people assumed out, I at one point just assumed that Finland was in NATO, you know, probably 10, 15 years ago, to realize it's not and now it is, holy cow, that's a huge border with Russia. So Vladimir

Putin, i think if he had a time machine he could go back in time he probably would not have pulled the trigger on this invasion or would have done it differently because he's going to come out of this way weaker but this is the time charlie for us to not be scared of escalation to quit you know hyperventilating into a paper bag that if we send high mars we're going to start world war three and then it's a tacums and then it's f-16s, and just give Ukraine everything they need when they can handle it to win this war and get it over with, because we're all sick of it, and we all want it to end in a Ukrainian victory. Adam Kinziger, thank you so much for joining me on this special indictment podcast. It is

always great to talk with you. Have a great weekend, Adam. You bet. Coming up, I'm going to be joined by two of my colleagues from The Bulwark, Mona Charan and Will Salatan, to break down what this indictment means and what happens now. Welcome back to The Bulwark podcast. I am joined now for our special indictment Bulwark podcast for the weekend by my colleagues, Will Salatan and Mona Charon. Thank you both for joining me. I appreciate it.

Pleasure, Charlie. Let's reset this whole issue. I'm going to read you what Peter Baker writes in the New York Times this morning that America is really about to be tested. For the first time in American history, he writes, a former president of the United States has been indicted on criminal charges. It is worth pausing to repeat that. An American president has been indicted for a crime for the first time in history. So many unthinkable firsts have occurred since Donald J. Trump was elected to the White House in 2016.

So many inviolable lines have been crossed. So many unimaginable events have shocked the world that it's easy to lose sight of just how astonishing this particular moment really is. For all of the focus on the tawdry details of the case or its novel legal theory or its political impact, the larger story is of a country heading down a road it has never traveled before, one fraught with profound consequences for the health of the world's oldest democracy. For more than two centuries, presidents have been held on a pedestal, even the ones swathed in scandal, declared immune from prosecution while in office, and effectively even afterward, no longer. That taboo has been

broken. A new precedent has been set. Will it tear the country apart, as some feared about putting a former president on trial after Watergate? Will it be seen by many at home and abroad as victor's justice, akin to developing nations where former leaders are imprisoned by their successors? Or will it be a moment of reckoning, a sign that even someone who was once the most powerful person on the planet is not above the law? Okay, a lot to absorb there. Mona Charon, you have been something of a contrarian on this. So how are you feeling this morning on indictment day plus one? I have profoundly mixed feelings, Charlie. On the one hand, with everyone who has been living through this nightmare in a constantly appalled and aghast state of mind,

dying for some sort of accountability, dying for him to be held accountable finally for something. At the same time, I am distressed that it is this particular prosecution that is the first one, or maybe even being brought at all. Now, we don't know what's in the indictment. And we've heard there are 34 counts. There was something like 12 payments to Michael Cohen regarding the hush money. So it's something beyond that, no doubt. And so we have to put that caveat. We don't know what the nature of the crimes are. And it's possible that it's more than hush money. But what I'm worried about is that this is too easy to characterize as a situation in which a prosecutor went looking for something. And, you know, there's a rule that, you know, you prosecute the crime, not the man. And when it looks like you're just sort of, you know, going through the trash, looking for anything you can

get him on. That's much easier for the bad actors, namely Fox and the whole Republican Party, to characterize as illegitimate. And I'm very worried about that aspect of it. Okay, Will, where do you come down on this? So I agree with Mona that this is not my favorite case among the Trump cases. And my reason is that it's about sex, right? It's about covering up an affair. And obviously, Bill Clinton did this. John Edwards did this.

It's about affecting an election as well. I think we're all of us in agreement that Donald Trump is the worst president ever in the United States. But the reasons why Donald Trump is the worst president have to do with things like overthrowing democracy. Okay. So this is the least Trumpy of all the Trump cases. It just doesn't make him stand out enough from other politicians. I would much rather, and I believe that eventually there will be prosecutions on the other charges that are more substantive and more related to protecting the Republic. As I wrote in warning shots, today, two things can be true at the same time. The indictment of a former president on multiple felony counts is an historic moment. It's a vindication of the

principle that nobody's above the law, but also too, our democracy and our legal system are about to face a dangerous stress test. And I tend to agree with you that I would prefer this not go first, but this is the world we live in. This is the card that we have been dealt. And I think what's going to be interesting is to watch how Republicans react to this in the short term and the long term. I think, thumbnail sketch, this may be good for Donald Trump, but it is horrifically bad for the Republican Party. But to nobody's surprise, I mean, were you surprised by how fast and how uniform the defense was of Trump by Republicans from Mike Pence and Ron DeSantis on down? In fact, they actually regurgitate the exact same language. If you made a drinking game out of the use of the word weaponize or weaponization,

you'd be drunk by noon. So Mona, are you surprised? I mean, you know, once again, we're seeing the Republican Party cling as tightly as possible to Donald Trump, even at the moment when he's facing felony charges and might face multiple felony charges over the next several months. In a word, no, I am not the slightest bit surprised. And in fact, I predicted that this would be the reaction of the Republicans. They are a broken down cult of a former political party. It's funny, Ron DeSantis trying to look tough by saying he's not going to extradite Donald Trump to New York. Right. Which makes him look I am sorry. That doesn't make him look tough. That makes him look like a complete toady to Trump.

That statement made him look weak, hypocritical, and clueless. Because, I mean, here's Mr. Tufgar, and he's basically figured, I'm going to go along with any demand by any D-list Trump influencer who wants me to do this sort of thing. Also clueless because the Constitution makes it very clear that he has to turn it over, which we've talked about before. The strategy of Ron DeSantis saying, you know, yes, when it comes to Donald Trump, I'm going to declare Florida a sanctuary state. That's good, Charlie. Tweet that. Where is that? I did. I did tweet that. You know, it's like, here's the irony, the free state of Florida where Donald Trump can go and

avoid indictment. So speaking of Republicans, because I know that this is in your wheelhouse, Will, and I'm looking forward to your big piece on Lindsey Graham. Did you catch Lindsey Graham on Fox News? Did you catch him at all? I did. We could play a longer cut, but here's just sort of the end where Lindsey Graham is, I'm sorry, he has tears in his eyes. He's almost crying. And he decides that we must stand up for our democracy by sending more of your hard-earned dollars to billionaire Donald Trump. Listen to this, Lynn. Trying to bleed him dry. DonaldJTrump.com, go tonight, give the president some money to fight this bullshit. This is going to destroy America. We're going to fight back at the ballot box. We're not going to give in.

It goes on. They're going after this decent man. And it's just like, oh, my Lord. Will, what did you think of this? Ordinary people, if you're watching TV and you're seeing these Republicans, you think they're trying to make an argument to the public or to you. They're not. This is a fundraising operation. And what Lindsey Graham was doing there is raising money, right? And by the way, Lindsey Graham was just admonished by the Ethics Committee for twice, twice going on TV from a Senate office building and raising money in this way. So all of these Republican appearances on TV, a lot of them are just about talking to

the base and raising money for the billionaire who desperately needs it, right? It's silly. And just to back up for a minute, this whole Republican argument that you're seeing, as you point out, Charlie, uniformly, that this is a partisan weaponization of the Justice Department. It's not even the Justice Department, obviously, it's the Manhattan DA. But it's falsifiable. It's falsifiable because this didn't happen to other Republican presidents. This didn't happen to Ronald Reagan, didn't happen to either of the Bush presidents. It's happening to Donald Trump because Donald Trump is just different from other recent presidents, really from any president. He is a lifelong criminal. He has been engaged in various corrupt enterprises.

I mean, think about the history of Donald Trump, the things you've already heard on tape, him on the phone with the Georgia Secretary of State saying, just find me 11,000 whatever votes, him telling his own Justice Department, just say the election was corrupt, and me and the Republican Congress will take it from there, him on the Access Hollywood tape. We have lots of evidence that this guy is uniquely pathologically corrupt. So he wasn't targeted because he was a Republican. He was targeted because he's the most corrupt president in American history. Will is exactly right. But this is the reason it's really so worrying that this case is the one that's being brought, because the level of threat and disaster that Donald Trump is and remains in this country is so enormous. I mean, he is shaking the foundations of our democracy.

And for the full majesty of the law to come into this on a matter that is so tawdry and trivial as the Stormy Daniels payoff, if that's all there is to the indictment, and I repeat, we don't know what's in it. But if that's the issue where the courts are getting involved, where prosecutors are going to draw a line, that strikes me as inviting the people who are sort of not sure or in the middle, not in the Trump camp, but just kind of wavering to think, well, I mean, they say Trump is a massive threat to our democracy and they're bringing a criminal case about payoffs to porn stars. The very fact though has the word porn star in it tends to make us giggle and make us be stupid and silly about this when it's as serious as a heart attack, what Trump is and

has done. No, I don't disagree with that. But I do wonder, you know, three months from now, if there have been multiple indictments, will it matter which one went first? Will it matter in November of 2024, which one went first? Let me just push back a little bit on the things that both of you guys have said, though I generally agree. Number one, this is not about sex. This is about, you know, the use of the former president's resources to influence an election. He has not been singled out by Alvin Bragg, because I think people need to, you know, remember that under the Trump Justice Department, they charged and convicted and imprisoned Michael Cohen for exactly this behavior, for this payoff, for this attempt to influence the election. Now, why didn't they,

you know, charge Donald Trump with the same thing they charged Michael Cohen for? Well, two things. Number one, it was Trump's Justice Department. Number two, you know, they had that memo saying that you cannot indict a sitting president. You know, we've had a lot of cases involving payment of hush money and or, you know, falsification of business records in order to cover something up that have been criminally charged. I think it was Amanda who made the point that Denny Hastert, the former Republican speaker of the House, went to jail not for actually molesting young boys, but for trying to pay them off and then structuring it in a way that turned out to be illegal. So there have been a number of cases where people are not charged with the underlying crime, but people do recognize that paying this kind of hush money, using this kinds of resources, and then lying about it, recovering it up, is in fact a crime that other people have been charged with.

I mean, there are all kinds of problems. First of all, again, there are legal problems here. This is a weak case in many ways. The fact is, you're right, the Trump Justice Department prosecuted Michael Cohen, declined to prosecute Donald Trump. But the Merrick Garland Justice Department, Biden's Justice Department, also looked at this case and declined to prosecute Donald Trump when they came into office. That is going to be a little bit of a problem for the prosecution if they are hoping to

lasso a federal crime, namely the campaign finance violation, to this misdemeanor count of falsifying business records. So let me put it this way instead. There are so many issues with the existing case, including statutes of limitations, tolling, and other things, that what I'm hoping and praying, Charlie, is that when we see this on Tuesday, which is the day he's going to be arraigned, apparently,

that we will see that it's far more than what we've been told. There is that possibility, but we would just be speculating. I mean, that is going to be, you want to talk about a circus, you want to talk about a show on Tuesday, what that's going to be like. You can certainly imagine that Donald Trump right now is down in Mar-a-Lago rehearsing his mugshot, rehearsing the way he's going to walk in and out of the courtroom. I mean, this is going to, he believes that he can turn this to his advantage. So Will, you've been a longtime Trump watcher. How do you think he's going to play this? Well, of course, Trump would love the idea of, he already posts on his social media, the images of himself in a sort of Christ-like posture being persecuted. So he would love

nothing more than to be cuffed. I saw somebody, I don't know if it was Preet Bharara or somebody else saying this weekend, if Trump wants cuffs, he's going to have to supply them himself because nobody wants to give him that kind of imagery, right? Basically anything that makes Trump look like the victim. But can I dig in here a minute on this question of how this is going to play as a sex case? So Charlie, I am not excited about the idea of this case being portrayed or understood as Trump trying to influence an election, trying to hide something from the voters. Politicians try all the time to hide things from the voters. And if it's an affair, it's just going to look like, you know, of course he had an affair.

He's trying to hide it. He doesn't want his family to be, you know, exposed to this, blah, blah, blah. I'm much more interested in the line of discussion you guys were just having about tax fraud. If this turns out, when we see the indictment to be a case in which the Stormy Daniels payoff is a particular version of something for which the Trump organization has already been convicted, which is faking business records, faking tax. It's basically to hide. So Trump pays off Michael Cohen. He claims this as a legal expense. It's a tax fraud case and falsification of business records and tax fraud. These are crimes that are prosecuted

all the time in every jurisdiction and particularly in Manhattan. So this takes the sex part away. This makes it a financial crime and it makes it much more like something that everyone is prosecuted for. And to not prosecute Trump would be exceptional. Sorry, I don't want to dampen anybody's enthusiasm, you know, but the other problem with this is that we are mixing up jurisdictions. So the falsification of business records is a New York state crime. And this is a New York state prosecutor in Manhattan, not a federal prosecutor. And so that's in his wheelhouse, but because it's just a misdemeanor and he doesn't want to charge him apparently, I mean, again, speculating, he doesn't want to charge him with just a misdemeanor.

He's trying to hook it to a federal campaign finance crime that the feds themselves did not choose to bring. That's problematic. And so, I don't know. I keep hoping that there's more to this. I mean, you know, we could have witness tampering. I mean, we know, God knows he's done that. You could have conspiracy. You could have witness tampering. I mean, we know, God knows he's done that. You could have conspiracy, you could have witness tampering.

And conspiracy, there are other things, you know, the tax fraud could be there. Of course, it would have to be New York state, not federal tax fraud for this prosecution. But I'm sure, I don't doubt that there could be evidence of that. But we're just going to have to, we're going to have to wait and see. Let's just pull back for a moment because we can talk about, and I don't disagree with you, these are the problems with these indictments, these 34 indictments that we have not yet seen. But I think the larger test, and now we're going to fast forward to assuming the Department of Justice might do something. Who the hell knows what Fannie Willis is doing? Remember, she was like, it's all imminent. It's

going to happen any minute now. And then she's going completely silent. So we just don't know. I know. But I guess one of the things that has to trouble us is that Donald Trump is not really counting on litigating these particular details in the court of public opinion. What he is trying to do is to delegitimize the entire justice system. And this is part of this larger campaign that he is waging as he is ginning up his supporters, you know, warning about death and destruction, talking about firing and stripping, you know, the deep state, the Department of Justice, the FBI or intelligence agencies, the Department of Defense. The real danger is at the end of the day, whether or not they have the

evidence or not, that Donald Trump will have convinced 40% of Americans that he in fact should be above the law, that it doesn't apply to him, that the whole rule of law thing is for cucks. And I mean, there's some real long-term damage that's being done right now that is almost certain to accelerate. Will, I mean, you see what I'm saying here that I'm leaving aside the particular details of this hush money case? Donald Trump, who has waged this incredible war against the whole concept of truth, is now waging an entire campaign against the concept of any justice that actually affects him or holds him accountable. Right, right. And this is why I want to encourage everyone to focus not on getting Trump. I know there's a lot of people who hate Trump.

They want to get Trump. Focus on trying to shore up, to restore the faith in the justice system. What Donald Trump is all about is tearing down, destroying American institutions. And the way to deal with Donald Trump is to protect and restore those institutions. So for example, when Asa Hutchinson, the former governor of Arkansas, who's apparently running for president, he issued a statement saying, you know, he's not so sure about the charges in this case, but let's let the case play out and let the evidence unfold and let the legal arguments play out. And Trump may end up not getting convicted at the end

of this, or he may win some motion to dismiss or something like that. But the distinction is exactly what you said, Charlie. It's don't try to attack the credibility of the entire justice system over this case. If you think this is a weak case, and there are legitimate reasons to make that argument, focus those arguments on the case and not on the integrity or the trustworthiness of the justice system as a whole. I haven't seen everybody's statement, but Asa Hutchinson, who by the way has no shot whatsoever winning the nomination, his statement actually came the closest to being, yeah, this is, I have this nostalgic memory of when normal politicians would have said something like this in this circumstance. I mean, I got to give him some

credit for that, Mona. I give him tremendous credit for that, Charlie. And I agree with you. It reminds us of a different era when people had respect for rules and norms. And even Republicans would say, you know, no, we have to respect the rule of law. And yeah, I mean, Will's and your comments are exactly right. The Trump game all along has been to discredit any institution that might hold him accountable, whether it's the press, or whether it's elections, or whether it's the courts. Back in 2015, when he said he wouldn't respect the ruling of a Mexican judge, that told us what we needed to know, that he was willing to break down every institution, had respect for nothing. And unfortunately, he has been able to drag the Republican Party with him.

And this snapback that we're seeing, you know, with all of them sort of saluting smartly and joining. Now they know the script. Now they know. They read it. It's like watching a hostage video where they, yes, we object to the weaponization of the criminal. Exactly. And, you know, the corrupt Soros-backed prosecutor and so on and so forth. So that, you know, the whole party has become infected with this sort of burn-it-all-down spirit that originally was sort of a weird, outlying trait of Donald Trump's, and now it has become institutionalized. It has.

And so it's terribly, terribly worrying. You know, maybe it will mean that the, you know, not huge majority, it should be 100%, but, you know, still the majority of Americans will recoil from this and say this party has sacrificed or forfeited its legitimacy. But, you know, I don't want to test that proposition. Well, we are going to test that proposition, unfortunately. So speaking of things that have almost become normalized, we haven't even talked about, you know, the potential of violence or sort of a January 6th type thing. What does Trump want, Will? What is he actually trying to gin up? I think it's very interesting that the New York Police Department

has ordered every cop of every rank to show up in uniform today. That's 36,000 New York cops. So in New York, they're thinking, okay, we are charging the former president with these felonies, and that is so dangerous. That creates the risk of so much civil disorder that we are charging the former president with these felonies. And that is so dangerous. That creates the risk of so much civil disorder that we are deploying 36,000 uniformed police officers. Where are we going on all of this? Well, I don't think Trump has any more idea where we're going than he did on January 6th when he told that crowd, we're going to march. I mean, it was just sort of, let's march down to the Capitol, right? And then we'll sort of see what happens. And he goes and he sits and watches it. And he wanted to go down there himself. Then he watches it on TV. And basically what he was hoping for was I want to

get a result. And I don't really care how it happens. If it happens through violence, fine. If it doesn't require violence, if it's just intimidation, that's fine. I'm sure Trump would be happy if this case were eventually dropped because of the, you know, the threat, never mind whether the violence actually happens, of a mass uprising. So, you know, there was some question as to whether Trump was running for president in 2024 as a way of stalling an indictment like this. Obviously, that hasn't happened. if you think that Trump is serious about trying to become president again, which I do. He's basically going to use this to try to galvanize Republican support, to try to unite the Republican Party behind him as the victim, and to make people like Ron DeSantis and Nikki Haley and the rest of them essentially irrelevant because the entire Republican apparatus will be up in arms to defend this one guy. I just can't help remembering at this moment,

as I picture those 36,000 New York cops confronting perhaps angry mobs of Trump supporters, I can't help remembering Trump's advice to a police audience one time where he said, don't be so nice to them. I wonder if he'd say that now. Okay, so lightning round here. After this, how much will Trump gain in the Republican primary poll? And do you still think that Ron DeSantis is running, Mona? He's already gained quite a bit just from the talk over the last two weeks of indictment. He jumped up vis-a-vis DeSantis in Republican polls. And I think this puts him back at 80 or 90%. But does DeSantis rethink the race because when these numbers come out? But DeSantis doesn't have any sort of clock ticking. You know, he doesn't have to make that decision now. So he probably... Fair enough. Will? DeSantis will run.

Trump will not be the Republican nominee. And you should never trust anything I say about this, because I've been saying for a long time that Donald Trump would not be elected or would not be nominated. Well, thank you both of you for coming on on short notice for this special indictment bulwark podcast. I want to thank Mona Charon. I want to thank Will Salatan and, of course, former Congressman Adam Kinzinger. And thank you all for listening to this weekend's special podcast. I'm Charlie Sykes. We'll be back on Monday, and we'll do this all over again. The Bulwark Podcast is produced by Katie Cooper and engineered and edited by Jason Brown. Hey, folks, this is Charlie Sykes, host of the Bulwark podcast.

We created the Bulwark to provide a platform for pro-democracy voices on the center right and the center left for people who are tired of tribalism and who value truth and vigorous yet civil debate about politics and a lot more. And every day we remind you, folks, you are not the crazy ones. So why not head over to thebulwwork.com and take a look around? Every day we produce newsletters and podcasts that will help you make sense of our politics and keep your sanity intact. To get a daily dose of sanity in your inbox, why not try a Bullwork Plus membership free for the next 30 days? To claim this offer, go to thebullwork.com slash charlie. That's thebullwork.com forward slash charlie. We're going to get through this together. I promise.