Bulwark Takes: Joe Rogan CALLS OUT Trump’s Cruel Immigration Crackdown

Date: October 10, 2025
Host: Tim Miller (The Bulwark)
Featured Voices: Joe Rogan, Duncan Trussell

Episode Overview

In this episode, Tim Miller dives into Joe Rogan’s recent public criticism of Donald Trump's proposed immigration crackdown. Miller explores why Rogan’s empathetic stance on the issue could resonate with audiences not usually reached by mainstream or left-leaning media, and what this might mean for the broader political conversation on immigration. Through discussion and selected Rogan quotes, Miller argues that high-profile, non-progressive voices challenging cruelty in immigration policy could have a significant impact—potentially encouraging Democrats, and anyone with a conscience, to take a firmer stand.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

Joe Rogan’s Moral Clarity and Influence

• Tim Miller emphasizes Rogan’s reach to an audience outside of traditional news sources (00:00):
  • "A lot of people who aren’t reading the New York Times...are getting their information from Rogan or Schultz...Maybe some of them will also be woken up to the fact that, holy shit, they signed up for something that was a lot more cruel than they wanted."
• Miller points out how seeing Rogan speak with such moral clarity might stiffen the spines of Democratic politicians and possibly influence some Republicans or independent voters.

Immigrant Stories and Empathy

• Rogan discusses the lives of long-time undocumented immigrants, stressing the inhumanity of deporting them after decades in the US (01:26–01:53):
  • "If you’ve been here for 25 years, you have a family, your kids go to school here...and you’re about to ship them to a country where they’ve never been, they haven’t been since they were four—this is crazy." – Joe Rogan [01:26]
  • "Any kind person would look at that and go, there’s—this can't be the only way to do this." – Joe Rogan [01:53]
• Miller comments on Rogan's emotionally driven, empathetic response, noting it's not a technical policy debate but a human one (02:11):
  • "This is about just a human that lives in this country saying, no, I do not want to be part of the team that is...harassing and arresting and shackling people who have been productive members of society in front of their kids."

The Good Guys vs. the "Baddies"

• Miller explores the notion that most people want to see themselves as good, not cruel (02:11–05:12):
  • "Most people want to be on the side of the good guys...And this is maybe something that they don’t appreciate, which is that most people want to be on the side of the good guys. Like, most people don’t want to be the baddies. They don’t revel in other people’s pain."
  • Miller theorizes that, though Trump’s administration has emboldened cruelty, many supporters have rationalized their stance by focusing on other issues—crime, drugs, inflation—not out of a desire to be cruel.

Shocking Visuals and Their Impact

• Miller references the powerful influence of brutal images—like families being torn apart or clergy arrested at gunpoint—on public sentiment (03:30–05:12).

Rogan's Further Policy Perspective & Emotional Appeal

• Rogan draws a line between national security and outright cruelty, advocating for a rational, humane approach balanced with border security (05:12–06:45):
  • "But when people been here for 20 years, like, come on, come on, that’s crazy…If they’ve been productive members of society for 20 years, no criminal record, they work the entire time, they paid taxes, find them a pathway to citizenship." – Joe Rogan [05:45]
  • "Throwing women to the ground, handcuffing people just for existing on the wrong side of the dirt…Not a criminal. The only crime they ever committed was coming over here as a kid…they could get sent back." – Joe Rogan [06:34]
• Miller notes that such "libertarian-ish" skepticism toward government force aligns with a broad American skepticism of state overreach, even among those with concerns about border security.

The Political Stakes & Strategic Messaging

• Miller warns that the Trump team is escalating, not de-escalating, with more ICE funding and tougher propaganda; argues effective counter-messaging is needed, especially from persuadable figures like Rogan (06:45–end):
  • "The pressure needs to be kept on because what this administration is planning is not dialing this back, not trying to appeal more to Rogan...They’re stepping on the gas, they’re escalating."

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• Joe Rogan expresses empathy for long-term undocumented residents:
  "Any kind person would look at that and go, there’s—this can't be the only way to do this." [01:53]
• Joe Rogan on the horror of family separation:
  "The immigration thing, the way it looks is horrific. It looks—when you’re just arresting people in front of their kids and just normal, regular people that have been here for 20 years…that can’t be right. That can’t be the only way to do this." [05:12–05:29]
• Tim Miller’s take on most voters' morality:
  "Most people want to be on the side of the good guys...They don’t revel in other people’s pain." [Approx. 02:35]
• Rogan on the border issue and having 'a heart':
  "Yes, we have to have a border. But...have a fucking heart. Because if you don’t, you’re not going to get anybody on your side if you’re doing this stuff publicly, throwing women to the ground, handcuffing people just for existing on the wrong side of the dirt." [05:44]
• Miller on the importance of counter-messaging:
  "Effective counter messengers are these folks that were for Trump and that are visible. So we’ll keep highlighting it." [06:45]

Timestamps for Key Segments

• [00:00] Tim Miller sets the scene and introduces Rogan’s comments
• [01:26] Rogan’s empathy for longtime undocumented immigrants
• [02:11] Miller on empathy and the motivation of most voters
• [05:12] Rogan’s impassioned commentary on deportation and family separation
• [06:45] Miller discusses the current political landscape & need for strong messaging

Conclusion

Tim Miller argues that Joe Rogan’s strong, public critique of Trump’s plans for mass deportations—rooted in simple empathy for real people—has the potential to challenge the growing cruelty around immigration enforcement and influence voters who may not otherwise hear this perspective. By highlighting these moments and engaging an audience outside standard partisan silos, Miller hopes to encourage more humane, effective opposition and energize counter-narratives as Trump-era rhetoric intensifies ahead of 2025.