The Bulwark Podcast - Susan Glasser and Jared Polis: Shaking Up the Holdouts

Episode Date: October 11, 2024

Barack Obama made a direct appeal to people who don't like Trump, but may end up voting for him anyway. Team Kamala has to keep up the drumbeat: Make clear that Trump has been running a rogue foreign policy out of Mar-a-Lago, that he's campaigning on raw hate, and that he's ready to hand over government power to Elon—who's already getting billions in subsidies. Plus, Trump's depiction of Aurora bears no resemblance to the real city in Colorado.  Susan Glasser and Gov. Jared Polis join Tim Miller for the weekend pod. show notes Susan's latest column Heidi Blake's New Yorker piece on the disappeared Saudi princesses Tim's playlist

This message comes from BetterHelp. Can you think of a time when you didn't feel like you could be yourself? Like you were hiding behind a mask? BetterHelp Online Therapy is convenient, flexible, and can help you learn to be your authentic self so you can stop hiding. Because masks should be for Halloween fun, not for your emotions. Take off the mask with BetterHelp. Visit BetterHelp.com today to get 10% off your first month. That's BetterHelp, H-E-L-P, dot com.

This is an ad by BetterHelp Online Therapy. October is the season for wearing masks and costumes, but some of us feel like we wear a mask and hide more often than we want to. At work, in social settings, around our family. Therapy can help you learn to accept all parts of yourself so you can stop hiding and take off the mask. Because masks should be for Halloween fun, not for your emotions. Therapy is a great tool for facing your fears and finding ways to overcome them. If you're thinking of starting therapy, but you're afraid of what you might uncover, give BetterHelp a try.

It's entirely online, designed to be convenient, flexible, and suited to your schedule. Just fill out a brief questionnaire to get matched with a licensed therapist and switch therapists at any time for no additional charge. Take off the mask with BetterHelp. Visit betterhelp.com today to get 10% off your first month. That's BetterHelp, H-E-L-P.com. I'm your host, Tim Miller. We got a two-parter today in part two. Friend of the pod, Jared Polis, who, according to former President Trump, is having to flee his state because of the roving

band of migrants that have taken over Aurora. Trump will be in Aurora today, so it's not that scary, I guess, to talk about it. And we asked the governor what his thoughts were on the visit and the presidential race. The last time we paused on the pod, we were doing advice for the Joe Biden debate. So much has changed since we last spoke. But first, in segment one, another friend of the pod, Susan Glasser, staff writer at The New Yorker. She has a weekly column on life in D.C. She's also the co-author of The Divider, A History of Donald Trump in the White House, which she co-wrote with her husband, Peter Baker. How are you doing, Susan? Hey, great to be with you. Good to be with you, too. We have much, much to cover, unfortunately. There's a lot of dystopia out there and we have

to discuss our anxieties, which you were writing about in The New Yorker this week. But first, you have a deep reservoir of knowledge, both of Trump and Putin and Russia from your time over there. And so we had some new revelations this week about Donald Trump's relationships with Putin. I wonder your kind of top line thoughts on what we learned about the phone calls, COVID tests. Yeah, I mean, look, you know, a Bob Woodward book is always an event, especially a few weeks before an election. And, you know, it's really interesting. First of all, on the COVID test, remarkable. You saw Democrats rushing right away to cut an ad. In fact, it seemed to be so damaging. Woodward reported that Trump secretly sent COVID testing equipment to Vladimir Putin for his personal use at the height of the pandemic,

when those things were actually hard to obtain. And, you know, the quotes in Woodward book that really leapt out at me was just this idea that, you know, Putin is advising Donald Trump, don't tell anybody about this, you know, because it might hurt you. He was aware of the sensitivity for Trump of the political relationship. You know, Donald Trump might hurt you. He was aware of the sensitivity for Trump of the political relationship. You know, Donald Trump was vulnerable on the Putin issue. Putin could care less, right? You could say anything about him because he doesn't have any meaningful domestic opposition. What's notable is that the Kremlin actually confirmed the COVID testing equipment. Now, the other revelation... Just really quick, why do you think that was that the Kremlin confirmed it? I thought that was interesting. They didn't have to do that,

and that kind of hurts Trump. I thought it was interesting too. Maybe they figured that doesn't matter. Well, what would really hurt Trump would be if they confirmed that the two had been speaking in the four years since Trump left office. That's the other revelation in the book. It's based on a single source. Other people have tried, talked to numerous sources inside the U.S. intelligence community and in the Biden administration, national security types. Nobody has definitive proof that this occurred, although I did speak with one very senior official who said, you know, you might be surprised, but it's actually possible that we would not know about this. And, you know, you might be surprised, but it's actually possible that we

would not know about this. And, you know, the thing is, is that people believe it. I think that people will find it believable. And that's because Donald Trump has this obsession with Vladimir Putin. And he talks about him even in his rallies in 2024. It's so extraordinary to me to hear the guy. He never talks very much about foreign policy, but what does he always do? He always brags about his good relationship with Vladimir Putin and other of America's adversaries, Xi Jinping, Kim Jong-un, but always Putin. It's always Putin with Donald Trump. Yeah. I wonder what your sense is of the phone call thing, because you're right to point out it's one source. And it's a Trump staffer, which like you can never divine the motivations of these people.

Right. I mean, they just lie all the time, which is why I really kind of hated the D.C. journalist. The like one anonymous Trump person says this and another says this. It's like they both can be like, you know, they're just the degree to which they lie is a category difference from how other political staffers lie and spin the truth. And so it's like, OK, so there's one staffer that says this. Trump slipped at one point relatively recently. We talked about talking to Putin, but it was Trump was typical Trump word salad. So it's kind of hard to tell whether it was like a false brag or whether he just it doesn't do English well or whether he did actually slip. Anyway, I don't know.

You've been calling around like what is your sense of the probability that this is happening? Like what would they be talking about? Well, listen, you know, Donald Trump is not very good at, you know, obscuring things in a way. And so often he will say in public very similar things to the things that he says in private. So what I would say is listen to what Trump has been saying publicly about Putin, about Russia, about the war in Ukraine. And you probably get a sense of what might be coming out of if he is having any interactions. Well, what's he saying? He's saying, oh, I can solve this war in 24 hours. Okay, fine. Dismiss that as bluster. But he's basically been advancing a version of Putin's own preferred endgame for the war, which is that Russia would get to keep all of

its stolen territory, that Russia basically, you know, could hold on to the land that it illegally got at the cost of, you know, hundreds of thousands of lives, disruption for millions of people, invasion of another country, outright flouting of the international order. Donald Trump thinks basically we should let Putin have, you know, what he can gobble up of Ukraine. And that's their version that they're going to try to turn around and sell as a, quote, peace deal. And they're going to pressure Zelensky for, you know, essentially to trade land for peace. And you saw this very uncomfortable moment, actually, at the UN General Assembly in September, where Trump met with Zelensky.

And even there with Zelensky standing by his side, what did he do? He talked about Vladimir Putin and how he has good relations with him. So I think that we do have an indication that they would have a lot to talk about since Trump seems like he might be carrying water for Russia in any future negotiation with Ukraine. So I know you're a reporter, not a guesser, but do you think that it's happening? I mean, I guess we can't be sure, but it seems all evidence points to the fact that it was happening, that they're really having back channel calls. Yeah, I mean, look, you know, history will show. Do I believe that a source told Woodward that this? Yes, absolutely. Bob Woodward, you know, is reporting accurately what he was told. You know, we'd all like to have more evidence because it seems pretty important, by the way, for the national security of this country and our allies that we should understand, you know, what is going on with Donald Trump running a rogue foreign policy out of Mar-a-Lago.

And because of the uncertainty, by the way, of our American domestic political circumstances, this is something that I think people don't really appreciate. Other countries around the way, of our American domestic political circumstances. This is something that I think people don't really appreciate. Other countries around the world, whether they're our allies or countries that aren't as close to us, they have been seeking out Trump. Trump has been talking with them, engaging with them for the last couple of years, and especially this year, as it's become very possible that he might return to the White House. People around the world, they get that we are so internally divided, that we don't speak with one voice anymore. And so they've had to go to Trump and his advisors to try to figure out what is the foreign policy

of the Republican Party. Because unfortunately, they have a foreign policy that's different right now than the foreign policy of the United States. They have a foreign policy of Trump. And so he's already been playing a role, you know, in speaking with many different international interlocutors, I've been told. And of course, there's a lot, by the way, of our European allies, you know, who are desperately been trying to work the levers that they have here in the United States to get to Republicans, to get to Donald Trump, to try to stop him from openly undermining our support for Ukraine or to stop him from openly undermining NATO, for example. And, you know, you're going to see that on steroids if Trump wins again. It is really crazy when you think about when you put it that way, thinking about it historically. It's not like during the Bush term, there were foreign hostile powers going to John Kerry's compound in

Massachusetts to try to like divine what the opposition party wants. This is a totally unique to Trump phenomenon in the post World War Two era between the parties. Absolutely. And Tim, you know, I'm glad you brought up John Kerry, because this is another point. On this issue of the phone calls that may or may not have occurred between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin after he left the White House, put the other hat on. If this was an allegation made about one of Trump's opponents, what would he do? He would be going crazy. He would be demanding an investigation. He would be demanding that the Justice Department arrest this person and try them for treason. Why do I say that? I'm not speculating. Donald Trump actually

did this with regards to John Kerry. He was obsessed when he was the president at complaining that John Kerry was allegedly speaking with the Iranians with whom he had negotiated the Iran nuclear deal. And Trump was constantly, according to our reporting, demanding of his advisors, you should try John Kerry for treason. It's illegal. He shouldn't be allowed to talk to the Iranians while I'm the president of the United States. And this was actually a running theme for Trump was the, you know, alleged, you know, treasonousness of John Kerry to even dare to speak with any Iranians once he was out of office as Secretary of State. Well, you know, it's pretty rich, isn't it, that Donald

Trump would have said that for four years and then actually have reportedly had repeated interactions with America's biggest adversary, arguably, on the world stage right now. Okay, one last thing on this. You mentioned at the top that there were ads already about the COVID revelation. I think it's been interesting that the vice president has spoken about it, I think three times since the revelation came out, which is pretty noteworthy, right? Because they don't have polling on this stuff yet. It's a little bit of a gut thing. And I think there's a sense of how powerful it is. Our friends at Republican Voters Against Trump have one of those ads that you mentioned. I just want to listen to this ad, which is mostly what Harris has been saying on the stuff.

And Donald Trump secretly sent COVID test kits to Putin, an adversary to the United States, because he admires dictators when the American people are dying by the hundreds and in need of relief. That is just the most recent stark example of who Donald Trump is. And what I see, people are coming together of all different backgrounds to say, you know what? Do we want a president who's going to abide by the oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States or someone who is full-time engaged in flattery from Vladimir Putin and sending COVID testing kits over to him when Americans are dying every day. Between part of that, is this the powerful kind of story into the frame that Donald Trump cares about himself and his autocratic buddies rather than you?

It also is like they really are speaking to the Nikki Haley voters. You know, like there was a period of time where Linus Cheney wasn't going to campaign together with them. It's going to be separate. She wasn't at the convention. It seems to me like there is a belief inside the Harris team that there are national security Republicans that are gettable. Yeah, that's right. Liz Cheney Republicans or Nikki Haley Republicans who have been actually critical of Joe Biden, you know, from the right and the view that he wasn't doing enough to support Ukraine. Well,

that is literally almost incompatible with support of Donald Trump, right? If you are a Republican who believes that we're not doing enough to support Ukraine, then it seems to me that Harris's campaign's job is to point out that it should be inconceivable for you to support Donald Trump. So I've always thought that Putin particularly was this kind of political liability for Trump in this election year. I feel like foreign policy more broadly, I can understand why Democrats aren't engaging on it as much. You have the problems in

Biden's own record with the withdrawal from Afghanistan. You have the Israel-Gaza questions that they do not want to stir up anymore. But on this particular issue of Trump's obsession with Putin, of his preference for dictators and strongmen over America's allies, of his indifference to Americans. Like, this is a really, like, it just happened that this Woodward revelation about the COVID test, you know, was the perfect marriage of, you know, two of the themes of the Harris campaign. One, as you said, was the theme that he doesn't care about you. But then the other theme is just that he is an aspiring strongman who loves other strongmen.

Last night, I want to move on to Barack Obama and Josh Shapiro had an event for the vice president in Pittsburgh. And there was a segment of the Obama speech that he was getting emotional. Here I am, of all the things here we are in 2024, I got Barack Obama getting me emotional. So who knows what the future holds. I want to play, it's a little bit longer of a clip than i usually play but i think it's important to hear the full context here's barack obama talking about what trump has been saying in response to the hurricane you're gonna have leaders who try to help and then they're you have a guy who will just lie about it to score political points and this has consequences because people are afraid

and they've lost everything and now they're trying to figure out how do I apply for help and and and someone may be discouraged from getting the help they need the idea of intentionally trying to deceive people in their most desperate and vulnerable moments. And my question is, when did that become okay? I'm not looking for applause right now. I want to ask Republicans out there.

You know, people who are conservative, who didn't vote for me, who didn't agree with me. I had friends who disagreed with me on every issue. When did that become okay? Why would we go along with that? Susan, for podcast listeners, that pause in the remarks is Obama getting overcome with emotion. You can sense it throughout the clip just about how just flabbergasted he is that there's just a total absence of Republicans, a lot of Republicans that he knew and served with speaking out about this. Yeah, Tim, I was really struck by Obama's speech last night. I thought it was very powerful. In some ways, it was a better speech and more visceral and raw than his

convention speech, which was also an excellent speech. Obama's an excellent speech speaker. But yeah, last night in particular, I really felt like that was the Obama that felt like the essential Obama, the one that we needed to hear from. I worry a little bit that it's late in the day to hear that. But what he succeeded in doing in that speech that I think is not easy for us is recapturing the kind of necessary outrage and incredulity that we are where we are. And that's very hard to do because these are not fresh outrages in some ways. And I think for me as a writer, I'm sure for you in doing your work, like we're nine years into this, we're nine years into this Trump era. And, you know, how do you kind of be in the moment, but also be clear and articulate exactly what

the stakes are? And I just think that that's been, for me, one of the big challenges of this 2024 campaign. Yeah. And I think that particularly for the campaign and for its surrogates, there is an advocacy here. On the one hand it's emotionally satisfying right to do the shame on you republicans because they deserve the shame on you and and i like to be emotionally satisfied but they're also it like there is an element up

to your point of this we're nine years in of like there's a category of people out there that do not like donald trump they show up in every sarah longwell focus group in every poll but uh might vote for him anyway or might just stay home and not vote for kamala harris and like you need to find ways to reach these people with appeals either emotional appeals or visceral appeals or scare scare them in a way that can kind of shake it free in the last month. And like, they need to do it, right? And giving just sort of a paint by numbers critique of Trump, like that just is white noise at this point. Yeah, I think that's, you summed it up. It can't be white noise. People have to understand in an election as close as this, in the states where it matters, at least, it's not enough just to sort of shrug and go along with the herd. And Barack Obama was essentially trying to separate folks from the herd, you know, say like you matter, you need to take action here, you have agency is your choice not some choice you know that you're

just going to sleepwalk into there's one thing he said not during the speech that got a lot of attention i guess it was at a stop before hand that i want to talk about because he was speaking to younger black men and um you can sense in his quote here his frustration i think the concerns are a lot of concerns, which will get us to your story next in the democratic world about bleed among black men and Hispanic men. Well, here's what Obama said, describing why he thinks that some of these men are becoming Trump curious. Part of it makes me think that you aren't just feeling the idea of having a woman as president, and you're coming up with other alternatives or other reasons for that. You're thinking about sitting out or supporting

somebody who has a history of denigrating you because you think that's a sign of strength because that's what being a man is, putting women down. That's not acceptable. That wasn't on the teleprompter. So you knew that was something that he was trying to get off his chest. Do you have any, I guess, kind of thoughts about the message, but also thoughts about how I think that's reflective of a very real concern in democratic world right now? Yeah, I mean, you know, you can see how much there's a fear, whether it's quotes from activists on the ground in cities like Detroit talking about turnout there, whether it is, you know, a politician like Obama, right? He's America's breakthrough president.

He is America's first Black president. And I think for him, of course, it must be personal. The idea that Black men would not turn out for this history-making moment to support a Black woman, you know, I think that that would be a personal tragedy for him, as well as I think he believes a tragedy for the country as a whole. So I understand the visceral nature of that appeal from him. And, you know, look, it's also, frankly, let's be real. Like, my God, what has happened to the

country that just because Donald Trump, you know, appears on a few bro podcasts, you know, we're like, oh my God, men love him. You know, this guy is campaigning on the most pure campaign of raw hate bias and just garbage. Most of it directed at people of color that I have ever seen. So the idea that people of color would want to support a man who vilifies law-abiding Black immigrants to our country, says they're eating dogs in Springfield, Ohio. I mean, you know, yeah, that's probably a moment for some visceral outrage. This message comes from BetterHelp. Can you think of a time when you didn't feel like you could be yourself? Like you were hiding behind a mask? BetterHelp online therapy is convenient, flexible,

and can help you learn to be your authentic self so you can stop hiding. Because masks should be for Halloween fun, not for your emotions. Take off the mask with BetterHelp. Visit BetterHelp.com today to get 10% off your first month. That's BetterHelp, H-E-L-P dot com. This message comes from BetterHelp. Can you think of a time when you didn't feel like you could be yourself? Like you were hiding behind a mask?

At work, in social settings, around your family? BetterHelp online therapy is convenient, flexible, and can help you learn to be your authentic self so you can stop hiding. Because masks should be for Halloween fun, not for your emotions. Take off the mask with BetterHelp. Visit BetterHelp.com today to get 10% off your first month. That's BetterHelp, H-E-L-P, dot com. And this takes us to your piece for the week. Headline in the New Yorker, the Harris-Trump endgame is on.

Is it time to panic yet? You talk about the traditional ritual of Democrats panicking while Republicans bang their chest. I want to talk about kind of the psychology of that in a second. But just speaking for myself, as I guess I'm emotionally a Democrat now, having not voted for a Republican for 10 years, because I'm panicking. And it ties directly to this group we're talking about. I just, I feel like I have a very good feel for how Harris is doing in my demo, the middle to high income college educated former Republican class. And I think that she's doing well enough to win. I have less personal visibility to non-college black and Hispanic men.

And I talk to pollsters, you talk to experts, but it's just like the numbers are the numbers. And she just is lagging with those groups. And that makes the map very tough when you look at Georgia, Nevada, Arizona. So anyway, what are the anxieties that you hear from Democrats? Is that at the top of the list or are there other things? Honestly, Tim, if you actually go and I made a little survey of this for my New Yorker column, if you actually go and look, what are the anxieties for Democrats right now? I mean, literally every single demographic group, you know, Democrats are clearly professional.

I made a list. Okay. In just the last few days, there have been articles worrying about Kamala Harris's problem with black male voters, with male voters, with Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin voters, with Arab American voters, with young voters. And on and on the list goes. You know, she has a Biden problem. She has a Bibi problem. She has a Biden problem. She has a BB problem. She has a hurricane problem. You know, there's the scaries are the way that Democrats, you know, it's like the opposite of self soothing. You know, there was one Democratic strategist, Simon Rosenberg tweeted the other day, he said, you know, I'm getting barraged with so many online fundraising ads from Harris and and all the other Democratic candidates warning that they're about to lose. It's like we're running a massive daily psyop on ourselves. So we're basically, it seems like the Democratic strategy is to scare the crap out of its own base and hope, you know, that that produces its own reaction and people showing up to vote or something like that. But, you know,

look, is it a scary moment? Should you be scared? Yes. Is it remarkable that after everything we know as a country collectively about Donald Trump, he has not moved at all in the polls from being highly, highly competitive and a serious contender to win this. On October 10th, the 538 polling average in the national surveys was 2.5% lead for Harris. That's pretty slim lead. It's behind where both Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden were at this point in the campaign. Okay, that's October 10th. Where was that polling average on September 10th, the day of the debate? It was the exact same. It was 2.5%. That means that the debate that everybody, even many Republicans agree, Kamala Harris won, didn't make a difference. It means that all the crazy stuff that Donald Trump didn't send since then didn't make a difference. And to me, that's a crisis. Okay, fine. So I guess we should panic about that. Yeah, I'm panicking, listening to

you talk about it the flatlining i guess i think there's a psychological question and a practical question to the practical question first i don't understand the argument that the the argument that it would help the democrats if everybody was walking around saying it's it's going great we're gonna we're gonna crush them i get this message all the time but i had one yesterday it stands out that's like why don't you have michael moore on your podcast he's yesterday that stands out that's like, why don't you have Michael Moore on your podcast? He's predicting a landslide. I'm like, I don't understand what the efficacy is of that, of everyone thinking that it's a landslide. I think it hurt Hillary. There's actual evidence that I don't just think it,

there's substantive evidence that it hurt Hillary, that people assumed that she was going to win. And so some of this is like the Harris campaign wants people to think it's close, right? Like, isn't that part of this? Like there's Democrats online that want people to think it's a blowout, but the Harris campaign wants people to think it's close. Isn't that right? Look, fear is a motivator. And the very real possibility of Donald Trump has been the greatest motivator to get Democrats out to vote for this entirety of

the Trump era. And I think that it is going to be a major reason for Harris's victory. It will be because she convinced enough of the electorate that Donald Trump was an unacceptable threat to the country. If she wins, that's going to be the reason. So yeah, of course, this is the strategy. But believe me, it makes for a lot of sleepless nights. And I think it's not puffery, by the way, though. There is a real basis for it. And I'll tell you, I had a chilling conversation the other day with somebody whose opinion about politics I really respect, who's covered, I think, campaigns going all the way back to the 1980s, and who said to me very bluntly, I just, you know, kind of,

hey, what's going on? What do you think? He said, if the election were held today, Donald Trump would win in just that kind of flat, categorical, you know, unequivocal way. And, you know, I've not stopped thinking about it ever since. Yeah, I'm not sure that's the case. But on the other hand, I just I look at the map, and and i'm like i can get to 276 for her which is just way too close i mean biden was over 300 electoral votes and uh and she would be at 276 with michigan pennsylvania wisconsin and nevada like that's kind of it that's kind of what it looks like to me right now and that's that's way too close for comfort the psychological side of this it's way back a couple months ago i had ezra klein on and there

was a big kerfuffle because he said that he was talking to a couple private democrats who were like coming to terms with trump this was during the bad times and that it wasn't as big of a crisis as as everybody says and that we can survive it and that made a lot of me in particular but also lots of other people outraged and And while I think that was true, like I think Ezra was talking to people that told him that. To me, like the reason for this psychological gap between Republicans and Democrats isn't so much about the makeup of Republicans and Democrats and like their traits. It's more about the fact that most elite Democrats are genuinely freaked out and worried and panicked about Trump, while most elite Republicans really

don't care, like fundamentally don't care and think that frankly, they might be better off if they lose. And so what would they have to be freaked out about? Like if there's no stakes, you know, and so to me, like that explains the gap that there's on one side legitimate stakes and on the other side, fake stakes. But is that what do you think? And you talk to these people privately? Do you think that's a, you talk to these people privately. Do you think that's a fair assessment or am I being Pollyanna? I mean, look, there's certainly a segment of the non-MAGA Republicans

who probably really want Donald Trump to lose. You know, they want to get their party back. They don't care. But I think once again, it's informing potentially disastrous calculations. You know, if that's the reason why Mitt Romney isn't endorsing Kamala Harris, because he thinks that Trump is going to lose and he wants to, quote, maintain his viability within the system. Well, you know, we've seen what happens when

people assume that Trump is going to lose and then he doesn't. And I just think that you have to, there's no substitute for doing the right thing. And by the way, it's never too late to do the right thing. And that is my maybe anodyne takeaway from the last eight years of this crisis in American democracy. Like, okay, you know, we aren't where we want to be, but it's never too late to do the right thing. And I think that's where the power of Obama's speech actually last night came in, you know, like, take a moment here, look in the mirror, like, you know, this is not okay. This is not a man that you would hire for your company. This is not a man that you would let in your house to talk to your children. Okay. And you can't let him be the most powerful man in the world again. And just to the point about, you know, Ezra's Democrats who think it'll be fine if Trump comes back. You know, I have to say that doing the reporting for the divider, and we spoke to nearly 300 former officials.

These are, by and large, almost all Republicans who worked closely with Donald Trump, Republicans who are willing to take appointments in the Trump administration or nonpartisan career national security people. And what they told us, and I think the conclusion is very clear, that A, a second term is not going to be like a first term because the constraints will be largely removed on Donald Trump, first of all. Second of all, that rather than the Pollyannish view

that, oh, well, actually everything was just fine in the first term and it worked out okay because the country survived and democracy didn't end. You know, to me, it's the opposite conclusion, which is that the institutions actually were revealed to be far more vulnerable than we understood them to be. And that actually we were really just dependent on a very small handful of individuals to prevent a truly catastrophic outcome, that we were one vice president, one attorney general, one chairman of the Joint Chiefs away from a disaster that is

almost inconceivable in our country's history. And so, you know, I just think that, you know, beware the Pollyannas in this season. Amen to that. Landlord telling you to just put on another sweater when your apartment is below 21 degrees? Are they suggesting you can just put a bucket under a leak in your ceiling? That's not good enough. Your Toronto apartment should be safe and well-maintained. If it isn't, and your landlord isn't responding to maintenance requests, RentSafeTO can help. Learn more at toronto.ca slash RentSafeTO. I want to talk about a time story this morning about how Elon Musk is going all in to help Trump.

At some level, we all knew this, but there are a couple of interesting revelations. One, these days in private conversations, Mr. Musk is obsessive, almost manic about the stakes of the election and the need for Mr. Trump to win. The campaign connected with Elon to prevent the circulation of links to material on the platform, including the leaked JD Vance oppo file. Twitter X did eventually block links to the material and suspended the reporter's account who posted it. And then you have the extent to how much the super PAC is spending and how Musk and Trump are talking, which like is illegal and nobody cares. I guess now we just don't have an FEC anymore because there used to be a wall between super PACs and campaigns where people on the super PAC side couldn't talk to the campaigns, but apparently the laws don't matter

if Elon Musk and Donald Trump are involved. So take any of those that you wish, but it's all pretty alarming. Yeah, I mean, look, I believe that one of the enduring images, whatever the outcome of this 2024 campaign will be, that image of Elon Musk on the stage with Donald Trump in Butler, Pennsylvania last weekend, as you said, you know, manically, you know, manically jumping up and down, you know, sort of cheering and adopting Trump's really dark, apocalyptic even view of the country and the stakes in the election, saying that essentially, you know, what Trump always says, which is that if Kamala Harris wins, we won't have a country anymore. And, you know, first of all, I think it suggests the kind of oligarchic turn, the oligarchic fusion between Trump and a small handful, it should be said, a very small handful of billionaires in this country

to whom he is signaling in every way possible, he's willing to hand extraordinary power over the government. Let's remember that Elon Musk is one of the largest government contractors in the country. Through his ventures, Tesla and SpaceX, he's getting billions and billions of dollars in U.S. government contracts. Subsidies are essentially what got Tesla jumpstarted a number of years ago. And Trump has proposed that Elon Musk should chair a government commission that would be charged with essentially reviewing all government spending. We'd be vesting extraordinary power in a campaign contributor, in a billionaire with an inherent conflict of interest. And where are those establishment Republicans that you talk about? Where's Mitt Romney and Mike DeWine talking about that? It's one of the most corrupt things I've ever heard a presidential candidate offer, by the way.

And I've also never seen the spectacle of the campaign's largest benefactor being invited up onto the stage to participate in the election year. Right. You know, this isn't just like kind of shouting out, you know, a kind of thank you to the hosts at a fundraising dinner. This is like a rally with tens of thousands of people. And here you're inviting the guy who paid for his slot on the stage. So I find this to be really, you know, we talked about Putin at the beginning of this conversation. I would just like to bring it back there.

You know, what I saw there was a system of oligarchic capitalism, a fusion between a small handful of very corrupt, wealthy people, you know, who both supported and bankrolled the political needs of Putin and his insiders, and also were used by Putin and his insiders for their projects to destroy democracy in Russia. It's fledgling democracy. And, you know, I don't think Americans want an oligarchy with an unelected Elon Musk determining what, you know, the government should spend money on. And I'm shocked that this has not become a bigger facet of the campaign. And frankly, I'm stunned that so many Republicans, all the ones that you and I know, Tim, who are just going along with Trump's reelection, even if they don't want him to win,

you know, what the hell happened to them? Yeah, earth to them, earth to our friend, Karl Rove, earth to the earth to the FEC. It is crazy. I to your point, it's like, it's like if George Soros would have been on stage with Obama and also been a military contractor and also been the head of Solyndra or something. And it's like, what? How is this? What is happening? At the end of the article, they point to Musk saying this. Unless Trump wins and we get rid of the mountain of smothering regulations that have nothing to do with safety, humanity will never reach Mars.

This is existential. It is kind of hard for me to decipher whether this is an op and there is like a corrupt inside game where Musk does want to control the government or whether he's lost his mind or maybe both. But I think they both might be happening in concert with each other. I mean, look, he's pretty visibly a man, you know, having some kind of a public meltdown. I mean, you know, the jumping up and down the cackling with Tucker Carlson on his X show or whatever you want to call it that that was pretty remarkable stuff. You know, let's just say that the world's richest man clearly seems to have some very, very extreme and radical political views as well that he is prepared to spend tens of millions, if not hundreds of millions of dollars on. Yeah, okay. Last thing, I saw that you tweeted it,

and it's in the New Yorker. It's an obsession of mine I don't ever get to talk about. There's a great New Yorker article that one of your colleagues wrote about the Texan doctor and the disappeared Saudi princesses. And again, this is like how this sort of corruption just gets normalized. People don't even talk about it. Trump, who I guess your reporter friend thinks is possibly the favorite to be the president again, or certainly very possibly the president again, his son-in-law has this huge billions upon dollars of infusion from the Saudis that are literally disappearing, imprisoning their political opponents. And it's not just these princesses. There's Omar and Sarah al-Jabri. It was a project that I worked on about five years ago. They're young teenagers that were kids of opposition leaders in Saudi

that were jailed. They're still jailed. They're now in their mid-20s. This is a bad person, another oligarch, autocrat that is on the inside if Donald Trump gets in again. Yeah, absolutely. And by the way, thank you for calling out my colleague, Heidi Blake. She's a fantastic investigative reporter. Her previous piece on Arab princesses being held prisoner, this is now a theme, sadly. You know, it won all the awards. It should. Please check out her reporting in The New Yorker about the Saudi princesses and and, you know, recognize that, you know, these are the kinds of stories that, you know, essentially the American oligarchy isn't isn't interested in. You know, that's where they go for for the money, for the business. And I know we all got exhausted in four years worth of Trump and his allies talking about Hunter Biden endlessly.

No one ever seemed to have the appetite to investigate Jared Kushner while still a White House official on the staff of the White House, unlike Hunter Biden, who was trading off of his father's name clearly, but never had any official government position, Jared Kushner was a senior high-ranking official of the United States government. that began and essentially was seeded with this $2 billion investment at the personal direction, according to reporting of the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, Mohammed bin Salman. Again, if that's not one of the most straightforward conflicts of interest I've ever seen. We used to talk about the appearance of conflict of interest back in the day in Washington reporting. Well, that's not the appearance. That is an actual conflict of interest. Wake up on the wake up list. House Democrats or Senate Democrats, Congressional Democrats. How

did Jared Kushner not get brought before a hearing over the last four years? Unbelievable. Okay. Susan Glasser, always insightful. Great reporting. Check out her reporting, The New Yorker. Thanks so much for returning to the Bullard Podcast. up next, Jared Polis. We're back with friend of the pod, the best governor in America, Governor Jared Polis of my home state of Colorado. What's going on, Governor? Hey, Tim, how are you? It's good to see you virtually, and we enjoyed your visit to Colorado last summer. It was good to be home. I'll be back for Christmas. Though we have some concerns about your status as best governor in

America that we need to hash out. The former president, Donald Trump, is visiting the state today and he has been talking about things that are happening in Aurora that sound very different from the Aurora I remember. I guess there's just been a rogue gang of migrants that have taken over the whole city uh they have weaponry beyond the weaponry of the american government and you've totally lost control and and you might be fleeing the state so i just i'm looking to get a sense for the status on that yeah i mean i'm in aurora all the time i'll actually be at stanley marketplace tomorrow it's an awesome town it's our third biggest city uh it's fast growing i wouldn wouldn't be surprised if it's Colorado's largest

city sometime in the next couple of decades. A wonderful town. Crime is down two years in a row. In fact, you probably remember this, Tim. Really in the 80s and 90s, it did have a connotation of being a little bit seedier than Denver. It's kind of overcome that. It's now actually ranked safer than Denver. It's fast growing. It's a very dynamic economy. So this Aurora that the former president is talking about is not the Aurora that we know here. It doesn't make any sense to us because it's a great town. And as I said, I hang out there all the time.

And it bears no resemblance to what he's talking about. I pride myself in suffering through Donald Trump's delusions and his crazy and watching his speeches and trying to get to the bottom of it. But it's even been hard for me to follow. Like, what is the facts of the situation? There was some type of thing in an apartment building or something? Yeah. So our areas had a large influx of immigrants during, it stopped recently, but Governor Abbott was sending them up here and many were moving on to other places. But these were people fleeing the socialist dictator in Venezuela, Maduro. Almost all of them have legal work status, usually TPS and in some cases asylum. Some of them are, you know, chose to move to our area. And then I think the allegation was there's

some Venezuelan on Venezuelan violence. And obviously we take that very seriously if there is. But there's also an issue here of an owner kind of abandoning buildings, letting garbage pile up. And ultimately one of the buildings was shut down by the city of Aurora for kind of unsanitary conditions and garbage in the back alley and not fixing the plumbing and that sort of thing. So, you know, again, there's, it's no surprise that immigrants are going to often try to live in the most affordable, you know, lowest cost type of apartment situations. And some of them, the landlord, unfortunately, let them kind of fall apart. And I guess that's what this is based on, but I don't know how it went from that to, like, people taking over our city.

It's tragic that some of our Venezuelan immigrants were subject to any type of intimidation or violence from other Venezuelans, but obviously that's against the law, and there's actually been several arrests. Any reports of pet theft or consumption and eating of pets happening? No, I think that was a false allegation about another city. But I mean, it might as well be about ours. It's just as false as all this other stuff. So I, it's just bizarre. So how do you combat this? I mean, from a political standpoint, like in the Syria side, Trump is coming to your state. He has fashioned this totally delusional, you know, attack to try to

get attention, right, for this issue that he thinks is a winner for him, immigration. Well, it's really tough because, like, first of all, I think we all realize it's going to be so painful to white knuckle it the next four years over this lunacy. So please, let's let Kamala Harris, I mean, right, like, this is just insanity. But yeah, on the other hand, like, you debate this, I'm sure you do too,, Tim. Like how much, you know, do we want to give him air? We're talking about him. That's what he wants. Like I'm trying to shift to how great Aurora is. I mean, whether it's Koreatown or Stanley Marketplace or, you know, the new rec center that was actually funded by marijuana dollars. It has like a moving river and it's fun for kids and families.

I mean, Aurora's got a lot going on and I'd love to pivot to that and attract more businesses and families to our third largest city. Including Regis High School, my alma mater. I had a coffee with my Latin teacher who came to visit yesterday and he says all is well back in all parts of Aurora. Not only is all well, honestly, Tim, it's better than it was. It is a much better city than it was in the 80s and 90s. And frankly, it's even a safer city than it was two years ago. So it's just like this is an exciting time for Aurora. And like any city, of course, there's going to be crime like any city in the country.

But crime is down two years in a row. It's just a fun, better place than it's ever been before. So we want to make sure we get that narrative out there. Let's also pivot a little bit to what the vice presidents were talking about. There's something I want to talk to you about in particular. I had a little debate earlier this week with Dan Crenshaw, the Republican congressman from Texas, who's trying to make this pitch about how the Trump administration is going to look like the 2017 Republican Party, where Paul Ryan was the speaker, and they're going to look like the 2017 Republican Party

when Paul Ryan was the speaker, and they're going to cut regulations and taxes. And the reality of what he has put forth is these massive tariffs. He was yesterday at the Detroit Economic Club talking about up to 1,000% tariffs in contrast to what the vice president has put forth, which has some elements of it that wouldn't be my favorite policies. But on balance, it's about cutting taxes, it's about building more housing. Talk to me about that contrast from sort of a free market center left perspective. Yeah, I mean, what's really what scares me is obviously Donald Trump. And I don't know what Crenshaw was talking about, because, you know, we'd all be thrilled to have, you know, Paul Ryan in this race because there was a time when Republicans were the party of small government fiscal responsibility.

First of all, obviously, they're not the party of fiscal responsibility. Objective estimates show that Donald Trump's plans increase the deficit more than twice. Kamala Harris's plans. That's just objective math. It's not ideological. So clearly they're not the party of fiscal responsibility. And they're the party of big government. I mean, you know, to think that somehow he's going to be anything like, you know, Jack Kemp or Paul Ryan or Ronald Reagan, everything he says is totally

contrary. In fact, it's worse. Not only is Donald Trump represent big government, but it's also the politicization of government and wanting to use it at the whim of the commander in chief to go after political opponents or those that are not favored. So, you know, again, I strongly support, as you of government and wanting to use it at the whim of the commander in chief to go after political opponents or those that are not favored. So, you know, again, I strongly support, as you know, bringing down tariffs, more trade, and it's unequivocally shifts the balance for Kamala Harris on that issue alone. Donald Trump's terrorist plan, whether it's 10% or 20%, you know. A thousand percent, he suggested, up to that. Yeah, sure. Why not? He doesn't care. And the scary thing, this is a scary thing, Tim.

The president does have a lot of authority in this area. Congress cannot stop them. It's the president's authority. It will cause a recession that we haven't seen the likes of since the depression or the great recession of 2009. I mean, this is and raise costs for consumers on household items. It's just a disaster. That's true of the whole agenda, right? It's like

the deportations, the tariffs, the politicization of the Justice Department, that's all executive stuff, right? Like he isn't really even putting forth anything that is a traditional something to go through Congress. And I think that's where, you know, like you can throw around terms like authoritarian, but like where the proposals do speak to a person that wants to use his executive power in a lot of ways that are really pernicious. Well, yeah, exactly. So, I mean, there's the one argument, you know, should the president have that kind of power? And is he authoritarian? I believe the answer is yes. But then what are you using the powers for? You're using to impoverish our country, right? When you're talking about mass deportations and huge tariffs, that is impoverishing.overish our country, right? When you're talking about mass deportations and

huge tariffs, that is impoverishing. It destroys our GDP, destroys wealth, creates unemployment, creates inflation. I mean, you ask any economist, left or right, it really doesn't matter. It's a science, economics, and they can tell you exactly what that means. Are you going to get out there to your fellow Mountain West states, Arizona, Nevada? I'm a little bit nervous. I'm on the road for Kamala Harris. Absolutely. I'm going to be in Nevada. I'm going to be hitting some of the East Coast states. So I'm doing whatever I can. I'm doing media. So, you know, look, whatever I can do, Tim, to help save this country that I love from a disastrous presidency and also elect somebody that I think is going to be an incredible president, much better than Joe Biden, a new face, a new approach, open to attack and pro-growth

policies. I'm excited about Kamala Harris. Better than Joe Biden? Well, yeah. I mean, again, I think Joe Biden's been a fine president. I think Kamala Harris has the opportunity to be an excellent president. So I'm really excited about that. All right. I like that. I like that positive, optimistic view, future oriented. All right. Last thing, I guess, any house races or local races in Colorado, anything that jumps out you want to draw our viewers' attention to? Yeah. You look like Kamala Harris's agenda, the first thing she broke with Biden on small business opportunity economy agenda, right? Increasing tax credits for new business formation, removing

barriers to business formation, barriers to housing. That certainly excites me. We have a hot congressional race. First of all, we have nothing statewide. We don't have a Senate race. We don't have state offices. But we have a Democrat, Yadira Caraveo, running for re-election, 50-50 seat. That could go either way. It's one of those seats that will help determine control of the United States Congress. So that's what a lot of people outside of Colorado are watching. We are going to go for Kamala Harris. She's a solid lead here. And I'm excited to join many other Coloradans to support her. All right. Thanks for coming back on the Borg podcast. Good luck surviving Donald Trump's invasion of Aurora. And we'll hope to have you back here soon.

A pleasure. Hope to see you in person, Tim. Take care. Thanks so much to the great Susan Glasser, to Governor Jared Polis. Everybody have a wonderful weekend. I'll be in Baton Rouge on Saturday night. I get one more free night of fun before we just bear down for the final three weeks of this election. So go Tigers. And finally, hope to see some of you out next week. Reminder, Thursdayursday we will be

in philly friday and pittsburgh saturday in detroit these tickets are going to sell out go to the bulwark.com slash events it is going to be a very fun and hopefully meaningful trip through the swing states so we'll see y'all then have a wonderful weekend we'll be back on Monday with Bill Kristol. Peace. About things to do in Denver when you're dead I was working on a steak the other day And I saw a body in the Rattlesnake Cafe Dressed in black, tossing back a shot of rye Finding things to do in Denver when you die You won't need a cab to find a priest Maybe you should find

a place to stay Some place where they never change the sheets And you just roll around Denver all day The Bulwark Podcast is produced by Katie Cooper with audio engineering and editing by Jason Brough.