Bill Kristol: The Tough Guy Really, Really Means It This Time

It's called soccer. It's called football. Uh, soccer. Football. Domino's best deal ever lets you get any pizza, including stuffed crust, with any toppings for $9.99. Okay, we can agree on that. Yeah, fully. So pineapple?

Don't ruin it. Get any pizza including stuffed crust with any topics for $999. Finally something everyone can get behind. And if the rest disagree, that's between them and Domino's, which means the only thing. left to fight over is who's ordering. Dom. Mnove. Price is higher for some locations.

Excludes Excel and specialty pizzas. Select this offer from 615 to 726. Online only. Size availability varies by crust type. Max seven topics. Six per pan and New York style crust. Minimum purchase required for delivery. Price's participation delivery area and charges may vary.

Hello and welcome to the Bullwark podcast. I'm your host Tim Miller. It is Monday. So we have editor-at-large Bill Crystal. I want to wish a happy 420 to those who celebrate it for, you know, marijuana reasons. A cursed 420 to those who celebrate it because it's Hitler's birthday. Yeah. Many of the rest of you don't notice it at all.

Bill, what about you? Do you have a 420 tradition that you like to? I'm sort of in the don't notice it at all kind of. don't notice it all. Okay. Well, something to think about. All right, well, I'll be celebrating tonight on the live stream. I'm streaming again, taking your questions at 8 p.m. Eastern on YouTube or substack. And to celebrate the day, I'll be having a Louis-Louis, THC beverage. And we'll have a good time. So come hang out with us eight o'clock tonight. On more responsible notes, tomorrow, the people of Virginia, which includes you, Bill Crystal,

need to get out and vote on the redistricting referendum. I have a couple of thoughts on that, but you're a Virginia resident. Have you voted yet? Have you decided how to vote? I voted early. It was late last week. They said at the polling place that, you know, given that it was a week before the election and turnout was high.

And I think that's generally people have the sense that it turn out is comparable to the governor election last November. I voted for the referendum. And I wasn't that close to call for me. In 2020, we all voted for a constitutional election. Amendment, passed by two to one in the state, to have nonpartisan sort of professional, unbiased redistricting. And in fact, it worked well here. And they came up with districts that were, it was six to five Democratic, which is kind of what the state is, right? I mean, six to five

Democratic and Republican. They had continuous districts. They tried to keep communities together, all the kind of things the political scientists want you to do. They did here. But you also have to adapt to circumstances. And if Texas and these other states are going to go ahead and tilt it in one way, you got to tilt it back the other. And interestingly, at one last point, it's only for four years. I mean, I give the drafters of this credit. It's not a permanent redistricting. It lasts until 2030, and it takes care of the problem of Trump and Texas, so to speak. You know, this is where I'm at. Some of the discourse around this, I feel, makes me want to roll my eyes, particularly among the kind of high-minded, nonpartisan types. I'm just like, yeah, it's unfair.

The map that you're voting on in Virginia tomorrow is unfair, and that's the fucking point for it to be unfair, right? Like the only way to get back to a place where we have, you know, fair districts and a democracy that is representative of everybody is for, you know, both sides to play hardball on this. You know, like there's a national anti-geremandering bill in the House. Only Democrats are for it. There are no Republicans that are for that. There, you know, there were a couple of Republicans. We should shout them out in Indiana and a couple other states where they said, hey, we're not going to go along with this system. We're not going to go rig the system anymore.

and good on them. But in a bunch of other states, they tried during the system to keep Donald Trump in power, to prevent Donald Trump from having accountability. And so good on Abigail Spanberger and Louise Lucas. And like you said, in 2030, it will revert, as my understanding, to the constitutional amendment system where there'll be a nonpartisan redistrict. And, you know, God willing, that will be in a place in 2030 where that can happen in Virginia and elsewhere. Because there are a bunch of red states that need that, too. And there are a couple of blue states. It's Illinois. It's a dumb system. We should fix it. But it doesn't do any good to live in disreality and let one side try to rig the system while the other side doesn't. So go out and vote for the Louise Lucas bill tomorrow. Everybody, if you're in Virginia. Let's do an update on the Iran War. So since we last got together with Ben Rhodes on Friday, things are looking a little diceier than maybe the president had portrayed. I don't know if you'll be surprised by that. President Trump. Trump, you know, trying to sell a deal that wasn't actually done. We've seen that movie a million times before. And I think that Ben and I put it out on Friday even, like in the early moments of this, like there's a bunch of reasons why this deal might be unstable, not the least of which, you know, what the interests are of our partner in this war in Israel and they're misaligned from the U.S. and who knows in Iran, if like the negotiators actually are in charge and, you know,

can negotiate and who knows if Donald Trump's telling the truth like for a million reasons. You know, there were reasons to be skeptical. Those reasons were right. Since we last talked, Iran was unhappy with the United States blockade and with the ways in which Donald Trump was misrepresenting the deal that was coming together. So they fired on at least two, maybe three ships in the straight merchant ships, which caused a bunch of other ships to turn around, like reclosed the Strait of Hormuz, despite Donald Trump saying on Friday that the Strait of Hormuz was open forever, and that Iran had agreed to keep it open forever. They would never use it again. That lasted less than 24 hours. The U.S. responded by seizing an Iranian ship. It was trying to bypass the U.S.

naval blockade in the Gulf of Oman. So we boarded and seized that ship. Iran right now is saying that they don't trust Trump. We're getting kind of mixed reports on whether they'll even participate in the talks. I think the most recent report is that they are going to participate in the talks. and Trump is escalating his threats. Once again, he posted this yesterday. If Iran doesn't accept a deal, the United States is going to knock out every single power plant

and every single bridge in Iran. No more Mr. Nice Guy. So there you go. No more Mr. Nice guy is the new position from Trump. Trump. I mean, Andrew has a good piece in Winni trust this morning. I sort of thought of this when Andrew was writing. I think literary critics call this an unreliable narrator.

You know, it's like the, you know what I mean? The narrator of the story is not telling the truth. And, of course, there are times when you shade the truth in diplomacy, but that's not what Trump's doing. He's just making up things. I think the Iranians wanted to make the point that you think over the weekend that they have the ability to close the straight when they want to. And they want people to remember that going forward. I assume they're going to ultimately agree to something and we're going to agree to something since we're in full-fledged desperation for an agreement mode, or Trump is, that, you know, that will basically open the straits with both sides. But I think Iran wants everyone to remember that if Israel attacks again, or if we do something they don't like, or if,

the UAE does something they don't like, or if they just don't like, you know, they want to make a point in general, they're there and they can do it. I mean, that was sort of interesting. I thought that was what's behind probably what they were trying to do. Otherwise, they're getting a ton out of this deal. Looks like they're getting total sanctions relief. I mean, I'm old enough to remember what people hawks on ironically. He screamed and yelled about Obama giving some sanctioned relief and a little bit of money that they had over here back. You know, Trump's like trumping that manyfold. And of course, then I'm not. going to get, it looks like the nuclear material is going to sit over there and allegedly be inspected by us. So, and it turns out there's a very good, this very interesting report from our own defense intelligence agency, the report to Congress, or at least the Congress has a copy of,

saying that Iran has a ton of ballistic missiles and drones left. We haven't degraded them as much as Trump has been claiming. So it's not a good outcome for the United States. Yeah, to your point on these Trump threats and how kind of hollow they are, and it's such a, I guess it's not boy who cried wolf because the boy who cried wolf the wolf is kind of like it's like boy who's pretending to be the wolf you know over and over again it's like I'm going to end your civilization and then you did nothing it's like uh you know we're going to obliterate you then you do nothing and you know we're going to take out all the leadership and then you do nothing and now it's like no more mr nice guy for real this time it's like okay buddy dan Josh Shapiro the former investor

at israel from Biden it's like i think a real kind of middle-the-road guy on all of this and no fan of the Iranian regime. I was interested in his take on this over the weekend. He wrote, Trump spent all day posting on truth social things that had not been agreed to, trying to will them to be true by saying them. This is a crazy way to do diplomacy on something this consequential, and it has to be telling the Iranians that he's desperate for an off ramp, which only increases their leverage. And that goes, I think, to what you're saying. Iran is trying to continue to increase their leverage, and they want more money out of this deal. Like, you're going to give us full sanctions relief? Okay, maybe we also want a toll on the straight, or maybe we're

we also want, you know, this, that, or the other thing. And I, I think that is what's happening in the moment. And the argument for a deal coming together is that both sides kind of want it to, right? Like both sides do want an off ramp. But just from the outside analysis perspective, it looks like our side wants it more. You know, it looks like our side wants it more. And the Iranians obviously can sense that as well. So, I mean, you get us into a situation where you started this war of choice, making all of these grand pronouncements about complete surrender. And then you get into it five weeks and you're kind of like begging for a face saving off ramp. It's pretty humiliating, really. Seven weeks now, I think. Trump said four to six weeks, but now it's running a little long. He wants to get on to other things, I guess.

Maybe I can just mention here that I read a little thing for Morning Shots of just noticing what was in the Wall Street Journal piece over the weekend that other people have commented on too, that they purposely excluded Trump on the Friday that the airmen were shot down, the plane were shot down, and they were scrambling and devising and thankfully devising a successful plan to extricate them and this was a major military effort and meeting in the White House, they managed to keep Trump out of the meeting, basically. Occasionally they gave him updates because senior officials, it doesn't say who,

but I assume these are senior military officials, maybe a couple of his own, maybe the civilian ones are intelligent enough to know this too, thought that Trump's presence there would make it impossible to have reasonable and sound decision-making, as he's so impatient and impetuous and reckless and so forth. I'm now elaborating a tiny bit on what the journal said, but that's the point of what they're saying. Kind of unbelievable. Keeping the president.

Two journal stories over the weekend about all the drama happening here. You know, and there's the one story where he's, you know, screaming at people and becoming very impatient, you know, during this period where there are, you know, two airmen in Iran. It was interesting. The other interesting part of that story is the Trump is an unfrozen caveman from the tabloid era of the 80s like thing. You keep being reminded about that. In this case, I guess he was just really remembering, you know, Carter and the hostage crisis and how bad that was for him politically. It's like, you know, they're like these, these, the, in the pop culture references and the history lessons of political lessons. Trump is always like recalling how things were in the 1980s.

So you have that kind of drama behind the scenes. Commander Chief basically kicked out, you know, because he's agitating people too much during this recovery. And then we have the other Wall Street Journal story on Pete Hegseth and Driscoll. feuding, Secretary of Army and Secretary of War in a pretty kind of a hot feud right now in the middle of this conflict. Driscoll went out of his way when he was testifying on the Hill Thursday to praise former Army Chiefs Staff, General George, whom accepted unceremoniously fired. You know, you drove up with his family to see him and they hugged and there's no finer man. I think Driscoll may be quite well being sincere here. Everything else I've heard about General George is very

flattering. And Driscoll seems like a reasonably sane person by Trump administration standards. But, I mean, to go out of your way to praise the person that you're sort of your boss, I mean, your superior of the Secretary of Defense just fired two weeks before. It's pretty striking. So there's just out and out war between Pete Hegseth and Driscoll. Driscoll is a very close friend of JD Vance, was put there by JD Vance, basically. One presumes sex sets a little bit on thin ice.

Trump must be self-aware enough to know that this whole Iran thing was a mistake and that Pete Hegseth was one of those who sold him on it and pumped it up in those early days and weeks. and I don't know. Is Trump self-aware enough to realize that he should want to get rid of Pete Hegseth? I don't know. I don't think so. Maybe you're right. Maybe I'm wrong about that.

It depends who he's talking to, right? And it depends how many people are telling him that Pete Hegseth is a boob because he is very susceptible to peer pressure. The other types of reporting that you're getting out of this is that Trump is really doing a kind of classic politician, world leader mistake throughout all of history, which is like only listening to Yes, Men. And like the one thing that was true, has always been true about Trump is he kind of likes the drama. Like, he comes from reality TV show world where he like wants the two sides to be feuding and wants to hear from both sides. And in a, the most unhealthy way imaginable, he's at least getting different perspectives like through that like process. And I just, it's hard to tell if that's still happening, you know? And like,

there was some, so the one report of somebody who was like, you would be shocked at how much time he's spending like watching the AI. videos of himself on truth social. I don't know. I mean, you know, so I just don't know exactly if he's getting enough negative information about Pete Hegseth. And Pete Hegseth has been the biggest yes man of all, it sounds like, with the cost of the war. So I don't know, maybe if things start going worse, that blows back on him.

The other thing that he is seeing that is creating some hedge on his decision-making is what's happened with the economy. It did get a big boost Friday when people thought. the thing that this thing might be over. We're back down a little bit this morning. Let me just pull this up. All this stuff is very fluid. You know, I mean, the Dow and S&P are only down a little bit.

I think that there's a, what was JVL call it? The Madman Theory of the Economy. Javio had a great newsletter over the weekend. People should go read just about how the investors are just basically like, any sign of normalcy means we should buy. And so there's that. But oil prices are up another 5% this morning. They went down slightly below the landman line that I like to say where Billy Baum Thornton's character says we want to keep it between 60 and 90.

It went slightly down below 90 over the weekend. Now it's back up. So I think the economic impact of this is real. We also have the UAE over the weekend asking us for a bailout. They want the Argentinian deal, you know, on the dollar swap. All of that stuff is pretty shaky right now. And I think that like if it kind of tips a little bit worse than this. that will even create less leverage for us in these negotiations,

seems like to me. And that is, I mean, the Iranians know that's the pressure they have on Trump. This is just mathematics in ways. It's not, you know, psychology. I mean, the longer this trade's closed, the more, the less oil there is available to use and the less other products. And there are now shortages in some countries

of what's used to make plastic bags and a million other things, drugs, I guess, pharmaceuticals. So, no, I think it's getting real. I mean, everyone said ahead of, we've discussed this once or twice. Everyone said beforehand, you know, 10-day closure of the straight. Not great, but you survive 30 days, getting a little problematic. You get into the 45-day range, and I guess we're getting pretty close to there. I can't remember how quickly Iran closed the strait, but it was a couple weeks into the war.

You're getting serious supply chain issues. Now, that should pressure Trump to come to a deal this week or maybe next. Maybe it pressures him, though, does he tie one more spasmodic use of force, kind of go out with a Nixon kind of 72 Christmas bombing showing he's a third, tough guy. I wouldn't put it past him. But then if he does that, you know, then, of course, you're into a situation where you can't, you don't know how Iran reacts, et cetera. So I don't know. I don't know. The one last spasm feels Trumpy to me. Yeah. I think there's something to it. A lot of people, I think everybody feels like they're a little bit better at predicting him than

people are. You know, like there's some trends that you do see. Like, you can kind of predict him pretty good in the medium term, but like what crazy stuff he'll do in the short term to get there. I was pretty struck when I had Alster Campbell on from the rest of politics last week. His co-host, Rory, I was listening to their shows to kind of prep for it. And Roy had gone on a vacation, Rory Stewart. And he was like, I just wanted to test myself where I didn't, I forget where he went, but he went somewhere where he didn't have good Wi-Fi. And it's like, for a week, he just didn't read the news.

And then he came back and read the newspaper one day at a time to see if he could predict what's coming. He's like, I was kind of surprised by how bad I was at it. You know, like, I felt like it was better than I would be. And it is like Trump's, you can notice trends. Like in the short, he's just so erratic, right, that it is a little bit in the short term, hard to say. But that said, I, the one more spasm kind of feels Trumpy. Yeah, just at one point on that, I mean, he's erratic, but it's erratic in the two extremes. So the one thing he doesn't do is really good on the middle of the road, you know. It's either I'm doubling down, then I'm backing off. Yes, right. I'm doing one, I'm doing one two hours after the other. I mean, exactly. All right, everybody, I've told you my origin story with the old Ridge wallet. They're going to come sponsor the podcast. They're going to send me a sample wallet.

I was a little concerned it was too butch for me. Thought that something as sleek and powerful as the Ridge Wallet would be more appropriate for Sarah. There was a little lesbian gay joke there. And then literally that day was out with the other gay dads at school. One takes out the wallet to pay. the bill. There it is, Ridge wallet, talking about how great it is. I'm over here just stereotyping myself. Now, when it turns out that the Ridge wallet is right for people of all sexualities and gender identities, losing your wallet is the worst, but with the Ridge

tracker card, this is another reason I like the Ridge wallet, because I lose everything, right? And the Ridge tracker card, make sure you'll always know where your wallet is, even before panic mode kicks in. They also create premium, day carry essentials like power banks always be charging key cases suitcases and rings all built with a sleek and durable design no matter what you pick ridge has a free shipping 99 day risk free trial and a limited warranty on all of their products so for limited time our listeners get 10 percent off at ridge by using code the bulwark at checkout just head to ridge.com and use code the bulwark and you're all set after you purchase they'll ask you where you heard about them please support

our show and tell them we sent you. I want to talk about a couple of the geopolitics impacts and kind of how things are changing already. The result of the last seven weeks, literally as we're talking, Trump posted this, which is a little bit of a she doth protest too much possibly. But here's a bleat this morning. Israel never talked to me into the war with Iran.

The results of October 7th added to my lifelong opinion that Iran can never have a nuclear weapon did. It's not a great sentence. But I watch the fake news, da-da-da-da-da-da. Then he goes down to this. Just like the results in Venezuela, which the media doesn't like talking about, the results in Iran will be amazing. And if Iran's new leaders, parentheses, regime change, exclamation point, are smart Iran can have a great and prosperous future. Trump obviously feeling the heat on this question, following the news that BB was in the situation room and, you know, feeling like he has to come up with a post-talk rationalization for why he wanted to do this, even if it wasn't.

for Israel's coaxing. And it's just like, he was already president once. Like this idea that like, he's had this lifelong opinion. It's just really, it's hard to buy. And I do think it's interesting that he's still contra what, you know, Marco Rubio will say, or even Pete Hegseth or anybody else in the administration, you ask them what the goals and objectives are. Like, he's still kind of on the Venezuela beat.

He's totally on the Venezuela beat. The degree to which I think historians will decide that Venezuela gave him this, insane megalomaniacal sense of what he could do and something with the U.S. military could do. And he sort of forgot the difference between Venezuela and Iran, which is kind of a big difference in so many ways like Venezuela is right near us. And it's a reasonably small country and other big powers don't have a huge interest. And Israel's not involved in a million other things, right? And even China, Russia will vaguely like Venezuela. I weren't going to do anything over here, whereas Iran is a little different kettle of fish. But he desperately wants a world in which

he can do Venezuela as every six months. And that's it. And no one asked too many questions after. And it's not real regime change, but it's not nothing exactly because you got rid of a guy who's particularly disasteful. And it makes him beat his chest. Makes me think he really wants, don't you think he will want to do Cuba and Greenland after this? I mean, this is a big question getting into our maximalist thing. Is his lesson from Iran? Got to stay away from that stuff, back to, you know, back to ice and domestic stuff.

Or is his lesson for Iran? Got to do Cuba or Greenland. Yeah, drug addict needs another hit. Yeah. You know, I need another hit. or a gambling addict that, you know, it was like, I was on the hot craps table. I was almost there. And then the table went cold.

Like, now I got to go back to the ATM and pull out a couple hundred more dollars to get that high back. It's not something that ever happened to me. I can't relate to that at all. Yeah, no, I think that's what's coming. The China element of this is also kind of interesting. For the first time today, China said, like, publicly, like, the straight needs to be opened. And I kind of engaged in this in a formal way. They were talking to their pal and BS about that.

who knows how that shakes out, like with the Gulf states that had tried to bribe us, and now it seems like they're starting to reassess some of their investments, you know, at least Saudi is and UAE asking for a bailout. Now they're looking back to China and wondering, you know, who they should make a deal with, maybe both sides, maybe not pick a side. And then I saw this poll as a Politico poll, which is pretty remarkable, asking the citizens of these four countries are, you would maybe say, is our four biggest allies, at least in the post-World War II era, China, Germany, France, and the UK.

I don't maybe throw Aussie in there. I don't want to hurt anybody's feelings or Mexico, but like, you know, four pretty of our top allies asking them whether it's better to depend on China or the U.S. under Donald Trump. So this is specifically about Trump, not necessarily about the broader U.S. Canada, 57 to 23 in favor of China. Germany, 40 to 24 in favor of China. France, 34 to 25 in favor of China. China. Britain, 42, 34 in favor of China. I just think that there are some, who knows about how long lasting, but some calculations are being made in the Gulf states and among our allies that feels like it's emboldening China. And ostensibly, some in the administration were like China Hawks and talking about how that was the real threat when Trump went in. Yeah, totally. And Pakistan and Stanley,

which is getting all the statures, they're the middleman, the host of these talks, they're very close to China. So, I mean, then they're not doing this without consulting with China. They said that, I think, at times. And now China, I think, wants to say publicly they want the straight reopen. They think it will be reopened. And they want to position themselves. We weighed in when it was all kind of a bit of a chaos. And we're the big guy.

And we're not irrational and erratic like Trump. We wait in. We said, we want it opened. And you know what? A week later, when it opens, China's going to say, see, we can be helpful in these crises. You know, everyone should listen to us. This episode is sponsored by Better Help. Financial stress can affect us more than we know.

Financial stress affects far more than our bank accounts. It takes a serious toll on our mental health and relationships with 88% of Americans feeling some form of financial stress at the start of this year. Money worries often bring anxiety, sleep disruption, and even depression. They're one of the leading sources of conflict for couples. This month, we want to normalize the emotional weight of financial stress. Remind people that struggling with money doesn't mean they failed. sometimes it's just about accessing the right kind of support.

I think I mentioned this last time. We've been there. I was like in a mid period. We're trying to move. Selling one house, buying another house. Saw the house we liked. We bought it. Figuring the other house was going to sell.

Didn't sell for one week. Didn't sell for two weeks. It's kind of like the Iran war and starts to drag out and you're looking at your bank of code. You're like, oh, fuck. And, you know, there were some, there was some tension in the house. household around this. It was definitely leading to mental health problems and stress. And I think probably rather than making passive aggressive comments, seeking professional help would have benefited us at this time. I should have turned to my friends at better help. Better help therapists

work according to a strict code of conduct. They're fully licensed in the US of A. They do the initial matching work for you so you can focus on your therapy goals. Short questionnaire helps you identify your needs and preferences. And they're 12 years of experience. an industry leading match fulfillment rate means they typically get it right the first time, but if you're not happy with your match, you can switch to a different therapist at any time from the tailored wrecks.

When life feels overwhelming, therapy can help. Sign up and get 10% off at betterhelp.com slash the bulwark. That's better, help.com slash the bulwark. Let's move on to drunk Kash Patel. In the middle of all this, our FBI director is not just somebody that enjoys a few libations. in the past, we've had FBI directors at the end of the day, had a couple of bourbons to take the edge off. It's understandable, high pressure job.

It doesn't seem to be what we're talking about with this guy. Right. Before I read through the reporting here from the Atlantic, we should say that Casper Tell is challenging it. I'm going to challenge it in court. I'll be interested to see that discovery, if he goes through with it. Count me on the side of believing the many, many sources the Atlantic has, but we should acknowledge the cash's disputing it. And you would imagine that he would dispute it, given the details. Let me read from the piece. This is from Sarah Fitzpatrick. Several officials told me that Kash Patel's drinking has been a recurring source of concern across the government. They said that he's known to drink to the point

of obvious intoxication at the private club Ned's in Washington, D.C. He's also known to drink to excess at the poodle room in Las Vegas, where he frequently spends part of his weekends. Just the fact that the FBI director is spending his weekends at the poodle room in Las Vegas. It is itself somewhat concerning, even if he wasn't drinking to excess. Early in his tenure, meetings and briefings had to be rescheduled for later in the day as a result of his alcohol-fueled nights. Six current or former officials and others familiar with Kash Patel's schedule told me. On multiple occasions in the past year, members of his security detail had difficulty waking

Kash Patel because he was intoxicated. A request for, quote, breaching equipment, normally used by slot and a lot. hostage rescue teams was made last year because Kash Patel had been unreachable behind locked doors. They had to send the SWAT team in because dude hadn't taken his Z biotics and was so hung over that he was not listening to his phone vibrate. Like that is insane. I mean, I enjoy a good time.

Okay. I've never had to have producer Katie's send in the cops to make sure I was okay for our 9 a.m. Tapeings, always made it every time I've been here. that is wild. The FBI director needed the SWAT team to wake him up. Are you concerned? What's your level of concern about this? I mean, combined with we're firing the Iranian experts,

there's nobody in charge. And it's kind of similar, I guess, what you're thinking about Trump, about how that we, there are still responsible people in the bureau, and maybe they're just not including the director in meetings, and like we'll see how long that lasts. Well, except we know that he's actually getting the FBI to do things that it shouldn't be doing at Fulton County in Georgia. elsewhere. Now Michigan with

2026 related stuff. And obviously he's saying we're going to charge people criminally for the great conspiracy of 2020. He said that on Sunday on TV. I'm alarmed that on the one hand, they're so alarmed by him, all the people who talk to the Atlantic. And on the other hand, it seems like he should be weaker than he is as director. I mean, I'm worried that he's

going along and their culture is to go along. Or maybe there's some people who like having him there. I don't know. Maybe I'm being unfair. Maybe they are curbing him more than I realize. I hope they are. This is something serious, though, people in the government, some of them will have quit and some should quit, obviously, if they can't do in good conscience. Others really need to do what they can to mitigate the damage that's being done from Trump on down through Kash Patel and Pete Hegseth and others. I assume people are, they're intelligent, they're acting this way and, you know, within the bounds of the law, but there are plenty of things you can do to make things less bad, not tell him certain

things and have some meetings that he's not, you know, whatever invited to and slow walk some things is it fastwalk some other things and so forth. But I'm pretty worried. The DOJ, FBI, DOD situation, yeah, totally irresponsible and reckless leaders, getting some pushback, but also doing a lot. I mean, and they can do it in a ham-handed and heavy-handed way. It can still do an unbelievable amount of damage. Yeah, I mean, I'd love to hear from folks inside the Bureau and how they're navigating all of it,

because I do think it's tough. And I know for a fact there are some responsible people in there, you know, still via mutuals. but like it's really tough. On the one hand, I'm kind of, I'm of two minds about it. Like, in the one hand,

is somebody who's like pretty far down the enemies list, but on it somewhere, you know, on page 40 or whatever. It's nice to have a drunkard trying to go after the enemies,

right? He's been totally ineffective. Certainly does not seem like a coincidence that after this Atlantic story came out, he was out there this weekend saying they're going to be arrest soon in the 2020 election fraud theft.

It's like, okay, buddy, like we'll see. Good luck with that. On the other hand, for the broader, public safety, you know, given where potentially, you

would think, a time of heightened terror risk on the homeland, you'd rather have somebody, like, actually who knows what they're doing, running the FBI. Yeah, on the third hand, I mean, Todd Blanche replaced Pam Bondi, and Todd Blanche is more,

let's just say, I'd probably more qualified for the job than Pam Bondi and stuff. And he's ruthlessly going about DOJ's, you know, business of persecuting Trump's enemies and politicizing everything. thing. And they just, the career person who was trying to actually be responsible in Miami has now quit or been fired. It's not quite no which, I guess, or at least removed from the case, right? And they brought in Joe DeGeneva, an 81-year-old guy who's gotten kind of crazy in my...

Oh my God. Is that right? Is that who they brought in? I miss us. Joe DeGeneva is now the special assistant to Todd Blanche for the Miami prosecution of Clapper, of former D.N.I. James Clapper. So on the one hand, it's like idiot. and kind of comedy, on the other hand, Todd Blanche is pretty resolute and he kind of knows what he's doing. And now,

they're going to go after Clapper and they're going to intimidate a lot of other people and run up his legal bills. And Kash Patel says he's going to sue the Atlantic for defamation. I was in some quarrel with some of my liberal lawyer friends. Oh, that lawsuit's going nowhere.

Well, is it going to have an intimidating effect on others? Is it going to force the Atlantic to spend a lot of money? Are anonymous sources in the future are going to worry that if they talk to a reporter and then the magazine that the reporter works for get sued that they might have to reveal the names, you know, as part of their defense. I mean, I just think the whole intimidation stuff that's going on with the FBI and DOJ remains

very, obviously very bad. But I remember having this argument, Pam Bondi was still around. Maybe it's better to have Pam Bondi there, you know, she's unpopular and doesn't seem terribly competent. On the other hand, I don't know, as you say, it's a tough, it's on the one head on the other hand. Either way is bad. Either way is bad.

Because Trump is very bad. He's a bad man. Either way is very bad. Maybe you should make that point. Maybe you should make that point to some force. Okay. So Joe DeGeneva, who got brought in, you try your vest to see everything these days, but sometimes things squeeze by you.

I'm happy you mentioned it because I have some history with him. There's a little lore. Really? I did an article in the period between Biden beating Trump and January 6th. So January 6th hasn't happened yet. Right. And, you know, they are the stop the steel campaign is, you know, gaining momentum and, you know, et cetera.

and Newsmax was like the main home of this because remember Fox was losing ratings ground at Newsmax and I was like I need to watch Newsmax and so I sat in my bed this was during COVID so I didn't have to leave anyway and watched 24 hours of Newsmax with sleep in the middle so whatever 16 hours of newsmax but I wanted to watch every hour of the day

and at four I'm going to just read this I pulled up the article 434 p.m. Joe to Genova comes on the host says that he was brought on to talk about Obamagate. But this week that they're going to change things up and talk about Trump's attempt to overturn the election. Stick with me because I wrote this whole thing deadpan because everything was so crazy. It was the only way to do it. But it goes like this. DeGeneva says that the Durham report should come out to help give state legislators more incentive to stop Biden since he was involved in Obamagate.

So they start talking about that. And then he gets asked about Chris Krebs. and DeGeneva calls for the execution of Chris Cripps, which then we clipped and published since I was watching it, and then eventually DeGeneva after that had to like apologize and back off. So like that's the kind of mind you're dealing with, like somebody who is on the cable news show between the 2020 election and Biden's inauguration saying that the person in charge of Sisa,

who was protecting our elections, needs to be executed for treason because they were involved in some imaginary scheme. So now he's still on the beat, 81 years old, five years later. Now it's still trying to put somebody into jail for this imaginary crime. Totally insane. Yeah. So the lawyers I know are all like he can't prosecute the case and they don't have a case and it's not going to go anywhere.

It's not going to work. But I mean, you never know. You get some jury the wrong judge or jury in Florida. But probably won't work. But yeah, the legal defense, the cost and the intimidation factor. I think, again, they're just all. It's not an accident. I've forgotten your piece.

That was an excellent piece from November or December, 2020. Actually, yeah, I felt bad for you watching newsmax for 16 hours. Well, that was good. It helped me. It helped clever because there was a period of time where you and you were on this. And like a lot of other, even anti-Trump people are like, you guys are being a little too alarmist and whatever. And it was like, no, actually, if you watch the types of stuff that they're talking about,

you could feel the bloodlust. Like, you could feel it grow. And so it was kind of just even for my analysis. It was important to not watch the, you know, sane washed watered down depictions, but to like watch what the audience was getting. And it's not surprising that people watching a show like that would then turn up to the Capitol, right? It was much easier to predict. And that Trump was really going to try to do.

And I think now, again, let's just apply this to today. People need to be, you know, you have Michigan and Fulton County, Georgia, and you have to Geneva. And people need to be Syria. Yeah, we need to worry about 2026 and 28. Speaking of things we worried about, you had Ryan Goodman on the Sunday interview yesterday, just talking about this fight that's happening on the Hill over Section 702 and the spy powers that the government has.

For people who want the full sermon, they can go check that out, but do you want to just give a little bit of a TLDR? 702 is the authority that allows our intelligence agencies to listen in on and read communications among foreign nationals, but also from foreign nationals to American national, now Americans are protected, Fourth Amendment, First Amendment. So it's a complicated way in which they can't or can't look at what Americans have been doing. It was abused a little bit, honestly, but not too much. They did there, and they, be fair, the FBI kind of corrected its abuse, it seems like, with an internal report. But Ryan and I were both basically, I don't want to speak for him, but I think

this is true. National security professionals think this is an important part of our anti-terrorism, efforts. And so we've mostly been defending it. Some civil libertarians don't like it. And it has to reauthorize every two years. It was past F. 9-11. And the Congress, to its credit, said you've got to take a fresh look every two years. We're not going to give this a permanent kind of authority. So it's, you know, it's a tricky authority. And Ryan and I are both against a clean reauthorizations. They say there should be now make, make them get a warrant if Americans are involved and put in a few other safeguards, perhaps. Some people on the hill have been leading this fight. But it's very much similar to weirdly, I think, analogous to the Virginia

thing we were talking about, which is people say, well, you were for clean reauthorization in the past. Why aren't you now? Because Kash Patel is the head of the FBI now. And whatever you think of Chris Wright and James Comey and all these other characters, I'm sure they weren't perfect, God knows. They were not going to use the FBI the way Kash Patel could try to use the FBI and use this authority. The same with the Justice Department and same with the intelligence community under Tulsi Gabbard. So it's now bottled up on the hill. The House had a kind of meltdown Thursday night. Johnson couldn't get it through. the Freedom Caucus people actually did the right thing and voted against it, some of them.

And people like Thomas Massie, the kind of libertarian types. We'll see what happens. It's got a 10-day extension. So it's actually a live issue this week on the Hill. There's a totally obvious compromise to be done if you care about national security. I want to add some reasonable civil liberties provisions. Trump right now is for, of course, the clean extension. He doesn't want the civil liberties provisions.

the longest ever serving member of the Supreme Court. and I think that he wants that distinction because I'm sure that, you know, the folks at Holy Cross and we'll be excited to honor him for that when he achieves that, you know, the three most famous Holy Cross grads, John Favreau, Bill Simmons, and Clarence Thomas. But people have been thinking that Samuel Alito is going to do it

because he wanted to make sure that he could be replaced by a fellow hack and, you know, there's concerns if Democrats take the Senate next year, et cetera, that who knows what might happen. But the Crawford report is saying that he's going to day. Lauren Egan is a good newsletter for us last night, talking about how the Democrats aren't really buying this and are still really preparing for a big Supreme Court showdown this year. Who knows? Maybe it'll come next year. It's one of your thoughts on that. And it's pretty interesting.

Again, kind of similar to the redistricting question. I think that the Democrats, if Samuel Alito waits till after the midterms and the Democrats take the Senate, you know, for all of people's complaints about Chuck Schumer, I'd have it happy to beg on my face when we're wrong about this. I think that the Democratic senators are going to, you know, create a new Merrick Garland rule. Say, sorry, we'll wait to the next election, like not bringing up a new justice renomination. So you guys did and we'll, you know, we'll hold it as long as we need to hold it and we'll see what happens to the 2028 election. I think that's what would happen. So it'd be pretty significant if Samuel Alito decides to stay on past this midterm. Yeah, it's much more fraud now that it looks like Democrats could

either win the Senate or get very close, and then he just said he'd want defection, perhaps to stop someone. No. So I think it's a Jan Gawford's an excellent reporter. I've known her a long time. I'm sure she's accurately reporting what Samuel Alito and Thomas are saying to people. What I think Lauren has captured well, though, is that they've been saying it now just to, you know, keep their whatever, not look like a lame duck. I guess you could call it that or just to look like they're making their own decision, but they could change their mind. And also, Trump could pressure them. I mean, this is not, I think this is pretty important to Trump and to Trump is And especially in the case of Samuel Alito, I don't know, Samuel Alito may sort of think, I'd like to say I'm having a good time, you know, ripping out people's rights and so forth.

But what if Trump calls him? Says, you got to go, Sam. Well, the other thing is that they could, you know, look at what happens in the midterms and there could be the lame duck period. And this is what they did with Charlotte, right? So you look at, let's say the Democrats take the Senate in November. This shows the stakes. Totally. Really, the whole election, as far as I'm concerned about the midterms, is.

is Iowa, Texas, Ohio, maybe Kansas, maybe Nebraska, maybe Montana, May, Flores, whatever. These red states for the Democrats need, like, it's the whole ballgame. It's like, can the Democrats get to 51 in the Senate for the Supreme Court reason, but for others, for the nominations for replacing Todd Blanche after his, you know, if he's no longer the acting AG, if they try to keep him in his acting to next year, who knows, other confirmations. Like, that's the ballgame. And so if the Democrats succeed in winning in enough of those red states, two of those red states to get to 51, And then it's like, okay, well, could Samuel Alito retire really quick in November and have John Thune jam it through before the new Senate sits?

I mean, it would be tight, but it's possible, I think. That would be tough, I think. Or certainly in September, if it does become obvious, that it really is a massive wave and they have a better than 50-50 chance of losing the Senate. Yeah, I agree. And certainly, if Samuel Alito does retire, in the other hand, we have a huge confirmation fight, presumably the Republicans are in good shape for that fight. But Trump will nominate a right-wing justice. everyone I know who's plugged into that world at all, whether on the opposition side or a few people who talk to people who are on the Republican side, think that this is not going to be a kind of respectable-ish Amy Coney Barrett. We're talking right all the way.

One of those Judge Hoag types down in Texas or Eileen Cannon or what's his name, the guy they put on the court, Bovet or Todd Blanche himself or God knows what, right? Trump wants loyalists on this court. So he has a chance to put people on. So that's become a huge fight. Even they can't stop that person, the politics of that fight are very important, because it highlights how important the Senate is, right? And no one's guaranteeing even if people don't choose to retire, people get sick and so forth. So there could be another opening in their other district court,

and circuit court openings in 27, 28, which means Democrats have to do a better job than they've done in the past and explaining why the courts should be important to voters who might want to vote Democratic. Republicans have done a very good job on the courts as a motivating issue for their voters. Now, maybe post-Roe, post-Dobbs, that's different. It's easier for the Democrats. And I know Democrats, Lauren, reports on this or who are sort of ginning up on this. But the Republicans have had an advantage, don't you think, on the politics of court fights?

I think that's changing, though. But I think that they have for the last generation. But I think that's changing. So important for the Democrats, you know, politically to identify messages that allow them to succeed in red states. So I'd like to point out good examples of that when I can. Jon Ossoff had a big speech in Georgia over the weekend. I don't play for folks. And I keep coming back to this, the Kamala Harris conundrum question, which is, in part, was not her fault.

But I think that she got into the sour spot where, like, moderate voters, you know, thought that she was a California progressive and some progressive voters, like, who cared a lot about Gaza. I thought she was a corporate chill and independent voters didn't really trust her. The challenge is, how do you come up with? a message and a messenger where the progressive voters look at them. We're like, that guy works enough. I'll be excited for that person. And the moderate and independent voters look at them and say, yeah, okay, this person could appeal. John also has demonstrated an interesting model for that potentially in Georgia. And I thought it was interesting to hear

how he was talking about the Iran war and the corruption issues and the economy at his campaign stop over the weekend. Let's listen to that. While he and his family raking billions from foreign princes, while he plunders our health care to cut taxes for the rich.

Meanwhile, rent, power, groceries, and health care have all hit all-time highs this year. This year. Ground beefs up 20% since Trump took office. Coffee, 40%. health premiums through the roof. And remember, while you pay more for everything, the first family's wealth is growing by billions of dollars. Because they're crooks.

And everybody knows it. I mean, that feels right. You know, I'd say there's a way to speak to the anti-Trump side of this and do a lot of never-Trumper friendly messaging, you know, but also tie it into kind of the populist economic case. Totally. I mean, it indicates the point you've made over and over and I admit occasionally, which is you can be, you know, somewhat moderate or centrist or big tent-ish in your issues and in your policies, but vehemently against Trump and especially in the corruption is the sweet spot here, right, and the kleptocracy. And incidentally, the Hungarian

election, that's what, that's what Magyar, who is too right winged for a lot of, lefties, not lefties, even just normal progressives, honestly, in Hungary, but he was so strong on, and he has been in the weeks since C-1, too, and I'm going to rip up this, rip out the corruption, the kleptocracy, the whole system. It's all, they're all crooks. That line is excellent to Vosov, incidentally. I don't know why, I guess maybe others have said it, but somehow the way. And he's sort of a mob. Asso's not actually a natural, you know, stem winder type, I wouldn't say, you know, and so it's impressive to see him do it. I mean, no, I very much think that, and tying the kleptocracy and corruption of Trump and his family and the oligarchs, pairing that with

the bad economic facts facing the middle class, I mean, seems to be the way to go. Absolutely. All right. I want to close with J.D. and the Pope. You commented on social media, something about that Pope Leo posted that you liked. I'd like that you self-identify as elderly because Leo posted this. Let us remember that the elderly first and foremost need to be listened to because they preserve the wisdom of a people. It's nice. a lot of humility, and you're thinking that I should be listening to you more based on the Pope's advice. And I'll take that note. J.D. doesn't like really share that humility about listening to the wisdom of other people.

He likes to listen to the wisdom of himself. And I just want to play one more time, J.D. talking about this at his event with Erika Kirk late last week. When the Pope says that God is never on the side of those who wield the sword, there is a thousand year, more than a thousand, year tradition of just war theory. Now, we can, of course, have disagreements about whether this or that conflict is just, but I think that it's important. In the same way that it's important for the Vice President of United States to be careful when I talk about matters of public policy, I think it's very, very important for the Pope

to be careful when he talks about matters of theology. And I think that one of these issues here is that there has been, again, hey, random dude screaming, I told you I'd respond to your point. I just want to respond to this question first. So there you go. JD Vance splaining, some JD Vance spaining there. I just like, I love that he's being condescending to the Pope, that like, it's the Pope that she needs to be careful with his rhetoric.

Has he ever talked about Donald Trump and he didn't be careful with his rhetoric? No, it's just the Pope. Jaddy JD Vance becomes a Catholic two minutes ago. And then he's like, you know what? The Pope needs to be a little bit more cautious with how he talks about the just war theory. Okay. Do you know about the just war theory? Because we just started a war of choice and started bombing a girl school, and that might be

just war. So shut up, Pope. And then he tells the kid asking the question, and you shut up too. And it's like, JD Vance and Volodymyr Zelensky, you shut up to. He just likes telling people to shut up. Trump should nonetheless be removed from office. I guess we'll have to put up with J.D. in 2027, 28, because he's less crazy and less likely to get us into some total reckless, insane debacle than Trump.

But JD Vance is really bad, too. I've got to say, what a pair. Trump and JD Vance, good. Really bad. Okay. I love that you're just going to take the Capitol I impeachment ground. You're there. You're just like, fuck.

Like, JD Vance is awful. And Trump is so bad that we need to be lectured and patronized to for two years in exchange for getting rid of Trump. I like that. That is what you would call the wisdom of the elderly. Yes, thank you. Well, you know, the reason I did that cute little, if I could say, thing on X or Susan right away, said, Tim calls you elderly every week. So that's just, you're just trying. I'm embracing.

I'm embracing my inner elderly. I don't think I call you elderly. I'm accused by our exchanges where you pretend that, Bill, you remember this from 48 years ago before everyone else in the bullwhip was born. And then, of course, I play along. By I play along by remembering that when I was in grad school, Nixon was, you know, impeached for war to get or something. So I embrace my inner elderlyness, and I'm glad the Pope respects it. And he's the Bullwork Pope, and I thought he was thinking of me, frankly. He presumably watches us.

He watches this, right? He's got some extra time there. And, you know, he thinks that, you know, Tim's being a little unfair to Bill sometimes. I think he's a committed watcher. That's my understanding from reports inside the Vatican. All right, that's Bill Crystal. We'll be back tomorrow. On Tuesday, we're going to the next level.

So if you just need to be politics junkie, you can tune into the next level tomorrow. I'm going to go a little bit off news on this podcast, bringing one of my buddies's got a new book out. So I'm looking forward to that. And I'm going to live streaming tonight before the Nuggets game, eight o'clock in the east. Come hang out with me.

I'll take your questions. I've got a lot of fun stuff to talk about. We'll see Bill Crystal next Monday. See you all tomorrow. I was going to go to class before I got high. Come on, y'all. I could have cheated and I could have passed, but I got high. I'm taking it next semester and I know why, man, yeah, because I got high, because I got high, because I got high.

The Borg podcast is brought to you thanks to the work of lead producer Katie Cooper, Associate producer Anzley Skipper and with video editing by Katie Lutz and audio engineering and editing by Jason Brown.