OOPS! GOP Hypocrites Caught on Tape

Summary

Bulwark Takes: "OOPS! GOP Hypocrites Caught on Tape"

Date: August 27, 2025
Host: Tim Miller (with Nicole Wallace, other guests and panelists)
Theme: GOP hypocrisy, Trump administration's retributive politics, high-profile Trump controversies (including the Fed, Epstein files), and the shifting landscape of Republican principles.

---

Episode Overview

This episode dives into recent news exposing Republican hypocrisy, particularly with respect to federal power and the conduct of Trump administration officials. Key stories include the attempted firing of Fed Governor Lisa Cook, the fallout from Bill Pulte’s actions as head of the Federal Housing and Finance Agency, the implications of redistricting, the Alex Acosta/Jeffrey Epstein files, and notable GOP reversals on federal election authority. Host Tim Miller and panelists discuss the implications for democracy, the risks to institutional independence, and the increasingly transactional nature of Republican politics under Trump.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Trump’s Autocratic Moves & the Lisa Cook Episode

• [00:00–02:49] Tim Miller describes how efforts to fire Lisa Cook from the Fed were less about actual wrongdoing and more about signaling loyalty to Trump:

  • The "attempted firing" is framed as a move generated by Bill Pulte, a Federal Housing and Finance Agency official, who is likened to a "Laura Loomer inside government," targeting Trump’s enemies with dubious paperwork accusations.
  • Quote [02:49] – Tim Miller:

    “This is death of Stalin stuff. You have some random apart chick, some random part of the government that wants to get in the autocrats good graces. And so he starts going after the witches and the dissidents inside the administration to get a pat on the head from Trump.”

• Lisa Cook’s targeting indicates broader risks for public service workers doing their jobs impartially.

• The alleged basis (technical mortgage violations) is widely viewed as a pretext.

2. Retributive Incentives and the Erosion of Institutional Norms

• [01:37–05:26] Nicole Wallace and Tim Miller discuss how Trump-era fights create a feedback loop, emboldening further retributive actions and undermining the independence of institutions.

• They draw a parallel to historical autocracies, warning of the implications for US democracy.

• Quote [05:26] – Nicole Wallace:

  “...every person that doesn't go to court and fight the illegality of his conduct makes it easier for him to take more illegal retributive action.”

3. Legal Pushback and Judicial Dynamics

• [05:26–07:22] Discussion on the courts as a venue for challenging Trump’s actions:
  • Tim underscores that Trump has suffered notable legal defeats, especially on immigration, even if he’s stacked the judiciary with loyalists.
  • He suggests that “delay is a victory against Trump, just as Trump used delay in courts as a victory for himself.”

4. Political Risk and ‘Owning’ the Economy

• [07:22–09:17] Nicole Wallace floats the notion that Trump’s direct control over economic policy (e.g., attacking Fed independence) may politically backfire.
  • Quote [08:25] – Tim Miller:

    “I think that he's a bully, wants to have power, said he can intimidate people and that is kind of an end in itself for him... If Fed independence is completely obliterated, which is the possible trajectory that we're on... that could be an economic calamity.”

5. Alex Acosta, Epstein, and the Cabinet’s Dark Shadows

• [09:17–14:34] The panel revisits Trump’s ties to Alex Acosta (Epstein's sweetheart deal architect) and the broader Epstein scandal.

  • Nicole outlines the non-prosecution agreement, explaining its breadth and secrecy, and questions Acosta’s role and motives for testifying.

  • Tim Miller suggests Trump chose Acosta because he was willing—a recurring theme of loyalty trumping qualifications.

  • Quote [11:31] – Tim Miller:

    “If you suck up to him, he'll go for it. So I think that is probably the simple answer to the Alex Acosta question... The fact that Trump picked him for Labor Secretary is bad optics for sure.”

  • [12:53] Nicole Wallace:

    “...the Trump cabinet... confirmed in multiple news organizations that Trump's name appears in the Epstein files a thousand times. I mean that's, that's the answer to the Trump piece.”

• The episode notes the right-wing’s own conspiracy theorizing about Epstein, and how the “cover-up” encompasses both Republican and Democratic administrations.

6. Federal Power Over Elections: ‘Caught On Tape’ Hypocrisy

• [15:29–16:04] Panelists replay soundbites of top Republicans (McConnell, Rubio, Ernst, Thune) vociferously opposing federalization of elections—precisely what Trump is now pursuing.
  • Quote [16:04] – Nicole Wallace (introducing clips):

    "But what they want is a federal takeover of the elections. I do not want a federal takeover of our election system. I oppose it. How about them apples?"

  • This section drives home the episode's titular theme of hypocrisy; past warnings about federal "overreach" are being discarded to accommodate Trump’s agenda.

7. Republican Principles and Political Survival

• [16:04–end] Tim Miller and panel reflect on the total disposability of GOP principles for the sake of Trump:
  • Miller spotlights Mike Pence as a rare example of holding fast—contrasting him with the rest of the GOP, who rationalize or ignore personal humiliation for self-preservation.
  • Quote [17:17] – Tim Miller:

    “I mean, I don't even think they get humiliated by it anymore is really the sad part. I just think that they've accepted and rationalized that this is what they need to do for survival... unless they, like Mike Pence, get pushed out.”

---

Notable Moments & Quotes

• [02:49] Tim Miller (on Pulte and retribution):

  “This is death of Stalin stuff... You can be targeted by, like, these random hacks who see, like, getting scalps as a way to advance in MAGA.”

• [08:25] Tim Miller (on Trump & Fed):

  “If Fed independence is completely obliterated, which is the possible trajectory that we’re on… that could be an economic calamity.”

• [11:31] Tim Miller (on Acosta):

  “If you suck up to him, he'll go for it. So… that is probably the simple answer to the Alex Acosta question.”

• [12:53] Nicole Wallace (on Trump in Epstein files):

  “...the Trump cabinet... confirmed in multiple news organizations that Trump's name appears in the Epstein files a thousand times.”

• [16:04] Nicole Wallace (introducing GOP hypocrisy montage):

  “But what they want is a federal takeover of the elections... How about them apples?”

• [17:17] Tim Miller (on GOP rationalization):

  “I don’t even think they get humiliated by it anymore…”

---

Timestamps & Important Segments

• 00:00 – Tim Miller sets the stage: new threats to democracy, "feisty" energy, topics to be covered.
• 01:37 – Nicole Wallace challenges Tim on how Trump’s retributive actions embolden further abuses.
• 02:49 – Tim’s detailed breakdown: Bill Pulte and the pattern of targeting public servants.
• 05:26 – Legal context and the importance of court resistance.
• 07:22 – Discussion of Trump’s economic/political risks.
• 09:17 – Introduction of the Epstein/Acosta topic and historical outline.
• 11:09 – Why Acosta wound up in Trump's cabinet.
• 12:53 – Trump’s own connections to Epstein.
• 15:29 – GOP leaders’ old rhetoric against federalizing elections is contrasted with current actions.
• 16:04 – The hypocrisy segment, with soundbites.
• 17:17 – Reflection on the demise of GOP principles and the Pence exception.

---

Summary Conclusion

This episode of Bulwark Takes is a pointed, at times biting, dissection of mounting GOP hypocrisy under Trump’s ongoing influence. The hosts link recent attempts to purge independent officials like Lisa Cook to a wider pattern of retributive MAGA governance. They also highlight the rank opportunism behind the party’s reversals on federal authority, especially regarding elections, and the willingness of most Republican leaders to abandon previous principles for survival—drawing a sharp contrast with the ostracized but steadfast Mike Pence. The discussion underscores growing risks for democratic norms, institutional independence, and the basic coherence of American governance.

Transcript

[A]

Hey, everybody. Tim Miller from the Bulwark here. I had another hour with my friend Nicole Wallace. I was a little kind of feisty today. I was a little spunky. Maybe feisty is the wrong word. I was a little spunky, a little bit of a troublemaker. I made reference to what might happen if Nicole broke bad and went with Donald Trump. So you can get to watch our reaction to that counterfactual. But we covered a lot of super important stuff, including this Lisa Cook attempted firing from the Fed Board of Governors. And I really leaned in on something I talked about in the podcast too, but I wanted to get into more of which is this Bill Pulte character inside the government who is doing a Laura Loomer, but from inside the government, trying to target foes of Donald Trump to get inside his good graces and how that was the origin of Lisa Cook getting pushed out, essentially, or attempted to be pushed out based on some alleged issue with our mortgages. I just, I think it's very telling and I think that it is an important indication of where things are going with this administration and what the incentives are and what we can expect to see more of. So I think learning about Bill Pulte is important. We also hit on the redistricting stuff. I give a little love for Mike Pence. We talked about Alex Acosta and the Epstein files because we're not distracted. We're going to talk about that. It's a great combo. There are some other folks around too, who are pretty good, so stick around for that. Nicole Wallace, me, cadre of other panelists and subscribe to this feed because I got a bunch of other shit coming for you. We'll see you soon.

[B]

Well, he says a lot of things, Tim, so I don't know that he. I mean, I think he says things with confidence that have no more to reality. He confidently talks about windmills and bleach inside one's lungs. So I, I understand that what he says, he says with confidence, but I think he said some pretty stupid and insane things with the same degree of confidence that I heard today. So I guess what I want to press you on is how much these fights fuel are sort of drafted off the fight that came before and then motivated by the fight ahead. I think Tyler makes an important point about this as part of a sweep of retribution that includes the law firms, the universities, and John Bolton. I think it's interesting that the capitulators wince and cringe when they become part of a democracy and autocracy story, but to Tyler Pager's reporting every person that doesn't go to court and fight the illegality of his conduct makes it easier for him to take more illegal retributive action. And I wonder how you see this move against Lisa Cook.

[A]

And it's definitely an autocracy story. Look. And I think it's important to kind of step back and go through the process of how this came to be. As mentioned by my co panelists, obviously a lot of this stems from Trump's frustration with the Fed. The fact that he wants interest rates lower. Whether or not that's in his interests, I think that some economists would dispute. But that's what he wants. And so that is what's at the core of this. But then how do you get to Lisa Cook? What happens here? How is she the Fed board governor? It's I guess important to note that as a black woman, she can be sort of pinned as a DEI target or something. And so I think that's one reason. But then you look at the process and there's this guy, Bill Pulte. Bill Pulte is the head of the Federal Housing and Finance Agency. Sorry, I had to look down and look at that. Because this is not somebody that's usually a public figure. The head of the Federal Housing and Finance Agency. Well within this little random agency in the government, he's running his own cash Patel enemies list. And he's referred now Adam Schiff, Tish James and Lisa Cook to the DOJ with essentially paperwork accusations of paperwork crimes related to their mortgages. It's important to say that none of them have been charged with anything. And so that is how this comes to pass. This is death of Stalin stuff. You have some random apart chick, some random part of the government that wants to get in the autocrats good graces. And so he starts going after the witches and the dissidents inside the administration to get a pat on the head from Trump. And who knows, maybe he'll be at one of these fawning cabinet meetings in two or three years. And that's what happens. And so the people who speak the truth, or who at least give their view, their honest view, like Lisa Cook doesn't want what the rate should be or people that speak the truth, like the Air Force chief of staff who got pushed out because he had said that he thought that the administration was too focused on China versus other threats, kind of an anodyne thing, or the intelligence officials and pushed out because they just said the truth, that Venezuela wasn't invading. You know, if you're in government. If you're a government service, you know, if you're in public service and you're just doing your job, you can be targeted by, like, these random hacks who see, like, getting scalps as a way to advance in maga. And, like, that incentive structure is awful. And it is a hallmark of, not a democracy or a federal system, but of, you know, what you see in banana republics.

[B]

Tyler made the point of all of Trump's victories in court, and it's true, a lot of authority does rest with the president and in the executive branch. But what is your sense, Tim, in terms of the lawsuit that Abby Lowell filed today?

[A]

Look, I mean, I'm not the Andrew Weissman to tell you about whether how that's going to go. I'll tell you this. He's lost a bunch, too. There's a great New York Times story this week about how the DOJ has empaneled three different grand juries against a woman who is protesting against ice. They wanted to target her for going after, you know, inappropriate behavior related to, you know, going after the cops at this protest. And it could have gone from a felony. Now they're marked down to a misdemeanor. So, like, there's, there is. Trump has executive, as broad executive authority in this case, you know, the only, like, the letter of the law is that he can only fire Lisa Koch with cause. Is this alleged having two prime residences on your mortgage a cause for being pushed out of your job as a Fed governor? I mean, I wouldn't think so. I don't exactly know what judges will say and what folks are going to say. But I think if you look at this, a judge, I guess, approved the John Bolton raid, for example. We don't know on what grounds yet. We don't know on what basis. So. So Trump is going to get leeway. Trump's put a lot of MAGA judges in there, but he's had a lot of Ls on, on this sort of stuff, too, on immigration issues in particular. So, I mean, I think that remains to be seen. And I think it's important to kind of, you know, continue to fight this stuff in the courts. And at some level, delay is a victory against Trump, just as Trump used delay in courts as a victory for himself in the past. I mean, that same tactic could be used against him.

[B]

You know, Tim, I keep thinking of all the control he had over Covid, and it's why he loses reelection. Like, Trump thinks he wants to be in charge of big consequential stuff. But when he does, he does such an incompetent job with those things that it hurts him politically. And I mean, there is, there's sort of a bare political analysis where he's better served with someone to blame. And it's the same argument for having Democrats in control of Congress, Congress that he's better served if he doesn't own anything. Right now, Trump, maga, Republicans own all branches of government. And I wonder if this is the sort of thing that you wake up after. Everyone in America sees you as solely responsible for the cost of everything, the price of everything, the inability to buy anything that used to be. I mean the prices are already going up on everyone out doing back to school shopping is already seeing the impact of Donald Trump's economy and it's terrible. What is your sense of the buyer's remorse they could end up experiencing right around the time of the midterms?

[A]

I agree with that assessment. I don't think it's in Trump's nature. Right. I think that he's a bully, wants to have power, said he can intimidate people and that is kind of an end in itself for him. But politically speaking, it seems to me that having Jerome Powell as a boogeyman, that he smears something that he's also good at, is probably a better political space to be in. Thanks. What could be an economic calamity if Fed independence is completely obliterated, which is the possible trajectory that we're on with. This is one step to it. So, and I agree with that assessment at some level we could say it's about a lot of issues, Nicole. Like if Trump had just golfed and renamed the Gulf of Mexico the Gulf of America and you know, done one or two other things right now, his approval ratings would probably be better than having done everything. I don't know that the actual. But maybe he doesn't care about that.

[B]

Last night, the House House Oversight Committee announced that that person, Donald Trump's former Labor secretary, Alex Acosta, will appear voluntarily. He has not been subpoenaed before the panel. On September 19th as part of their investigation into the Epstein case, Acosta, as the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of Florida, reached a secret non prosecution agreement with Jeffrey Epstein, who instead pleaded guilty to state charges in the state of Florida involving a single underage victim. He served 13 months in a Palm beach county jail where he was allowed to leave almost daily through a work release program and have his own private security detail. This is from 2018, facing a 53 page federal indictment Jeffrey Epstein could have ended up in federal prison for the rest of his life. But on the morning of the breakfast meeting between then U.S. attorney Alex Acosta and Jeffrey Epstein lawyer Jay Lefkowitz, a deal was struck. Not only would Epstein serve just 13 months in the county jail, but the deal, called a non prosecution agreement, essentially shut down and on ongoing FBI probe into whether there were more victims than other powerful people who took part in Epstein's sex crimes. According to Miami Herald examination of thousands of emails, court documents and FBI records, the pact required Epstein to plead guilty to two prostitution charges in state court. Jeffrey Epstein and four of his accomplices named in the agreement received immunity from all those federal criminal charges. But even more unusual, the deal included wording that granted immunity to quote any potential conspirators who were also involved in Jeffrey Epstein's crimes. As part of the arrangement, Acosta agreed, despite a federal law to the contrary that the deal would be kept from the victims. Tim, how does Alex Acosta end up in Trump's Cabinet after this?

[A]

Well, it wasn't exactly a competitive category, I think. I think Trump was scraping the bottom of the barrel for a couple of these positions. And you know how Trump is. Nicole, if you came out right now and said, you know, the scales have fallen out from my eyes, I'm going to put on a hat, Trump might make you his press secretary next year. So, you know, I think that he is very amenable.

[B]

Doubt it.

[A]

I think he, I'm just saying that's Trump. If you, if you suck up to him, he'll go for it. So I think that that is probably the simple answer to the Alex Acosta question, how he got in the Cabinet. I think, look, the Alex being in his cabinet does tie Trump to this story in a way that's unflattering. But I think that probably what I worry about is that his voluntary decision to testify is because, like the questions that people would have of him and of that plea deal, which in retrospect and based on everything I've read, just looks unbelievably shameful and misguided and who knows, maybe corrupt. But that doesn't really. None of that has to do with Trump, right? Like, the fact that Trump picked him for Labor Secretary is bad optics for sure. But like the Trump, the COVID up part of this about Trump's relationship with Epstein and what may or may not be in those FBI files that FBI agents flagged for Pam Bondi, who then flagged it for Trump, that now they're suppressing Alexa's not gonna have anything to say about that. So in some ways I think this might be something where like they feel like they're throwing some chum in the water, you know, that, that does not, you know, directly address Trump's actual vulnerability on this. Does that make sense?

[B]

It does. I mean, and for me, I feel like the Trump question has been answered by the Trump cabinet who confirmed in multiple news organizations that Trump's name appears in the Epstein files a thousand times. I mean that's, that's the answer to the Trump piece. What I don't understand is how the MAGA base, which is so upset about the COVID up, the Epstein conspiracy again ferments on the right. And it is a conspiracy theory about a cover up that spans multiple administrations, Democratic and Republican presidents, to keep things secret. And I just want to read this line again. Epstein and four of his accomplices named in the agreement received immunity from all federal criminal charges. So the feds dropped it. Right. And then we've had Republicans, Democrats and Republicans in charge of the federal government. But even more unusual, the deal included wording that granted immunity, quote, to any potential co conspirators who were also involved in Epstein's crimes. I want to read one more piece from this story because this is, if you listen to Joe Rogan's early episodes about this, it's about, you know, I don't know, what is it called? Gigabytes and gigabytes of videos and evidence. So here's the evidence piece. Not only would Epstein serve 13 months in county jail, but the deal called a non prosecution agreement shut down an ongoing FBI investigation into whether there were more victims and other powerful people. The Miami Herald examined thousands of emails, court documents and FBI records. So somewhere in a deal that it costed us there thousands of emails and court documents. I wonder if turning those over will be part of Acosta's testimony.

[A]

I mean again, that goes way back and whether Trump would be involved in those, I don't know. And conceivably, I guess at least with Virginia Giuffre because of Mar a Lago and that was Acosta's region at the time. So our district rather. So I think potentially so. Yeah. And I think there are questions about that. I know a lot of weird coincidences and objects for the conspiracy theorists to chew over with Trump's first cabinet. You know, Bill Barr has some connections there as well to Epstein through his father. So, you know, and I think that all of that would be interesting and I think that it will give fodder for the MAGA base. I just don't. I don't think that. I guess my point is, I don't think Acosta would be volunteering to do this if he was going to say something bad about Donald Trump. What this is really about is an effort for the federal government to take over the way we conduct elections in this country. It is a solution in search of a problem.

[B]

This is all about consolidating power, a national power grab to take away the voices from our local elections officials and our state elections officials.

[C]

You think about the way that we've been doing elections in this country for over two centuries. The states have always been primary. They've been the principal entities when it comes to conducting elections across this country. This would consolidate, federalize, nationalize elections in this country and Washington, D.C. and that is not something, when the American people find out about it, that they're going to be for.

[B]

But what they want is a federal takeover of the elections. I do not want a federal takeover of our election system. I oppose it. How about them apples? That was Mitch McConnell, Marco Rubio, who has, like, 11 jobs in the Trump Cabinet, Joni Ernst and John Thune railing, railing against exactly what Donald Trump is doing right now. She was on the other foot. Republicans were attacking in 2021 and 2022, voting rights legislation championed by Democrats. We're back with Nick and Tim. Tim, it's amazing that none of those guys thinks that we have the tape, or I guess more amazing that none of them cares that all the principals, all the positions, everything is disposable at the altar of what Trump wants, a guy with a 35% approval rating.

[A]

For one second there, I got my hopes up that that John Thune clip was for this week. And I was like, there's John. John Thune is back. No, we don't. I don't. I don't think. Is he still on vacation? I think he's still on vacation, actually. No.

[B]

These guys, like, look for the Epstein files somewhere.

[A]

Yeah. I mean, I don't even think they get humiliated by it anymore is really the sad part. I just think that they've accepted and rationalized that this is what they need to do for survival, just go along with whatever Donald Trump wants, even if it is in stark contrast with everything they've argued for before. It's the one thing. And obviously we've had all of our disagreements to call with Mike Pence over the years, but it's one thing that's been refreshing about Mike Pence, obviously. January 6th. But then continuing to do it over the next four or five years that he is out there. I thought that was interesting. And Nick's reporting that Pence being from Indiana, maybe he's having some conversations behind the scenes, I don't know. Or maybe we're just loyal to him, that that has an impact. I think that's interesting. And he was out criticizing the tariffs this week. So I think that Mike Pence existence is a mirror up against these guys, that that's what they would be saying if it was not for the fact that they've decided to sell their soul for whatever power or position they have with Trump. And I don't think that, unfortunately, we're going to see any of them change unless they, like, like Mike Pence, you know, get pushed out.