← Bulwark Takes
Loading summary
Transcript47 lines
- [00:00]
A
Asicomaxiste Genteel Fort maverick, top pick, the Consumer Reports.
- [00:30]
B
Hey, everybody, Tim Miller from the Bulwark here pumped to welcome back Congressman Richie Torres from New York. Have a bunch of stuff wanna talk to him about like who killed Jeffrey Epstein and other matters. But before we get to that, Congressman, there's a shooting in Manhattan yesterday. Four dead, including an immigrant police officer. The gunman, I guess, claimed that he was targeting the NFL because of cte. He had CTE from his time playing football, not professional football. What do you know about the situation? Do you have any kind of takeaways from what we've learned so far?
- [01:03]
A
What's the worst active shooting, active shooter incident that we've seen in recent memory? And you know, the officer who was fatally shot was from my district. I mean, he represents public service at its best. He leaves behind two children and a pregnant wife. And he was only 36 years old. He's younger than I am, so he had his whole career, his whole life ahead of him. And he was an immigrant, which is a reminder that, you know, for all the demonization of immigrants, you know, New York City is a city of immigrants. And our city represents, the nypd, represents, you know, America as a multiracial, multi ethnic, multi religious democracy. So every New Yorker should just be thanking every member of the NYPD who are putting their lives on the line to protect all of us.
- [01:50]
B
Yeah, I agree with that. All right, let's turn to kind of the national news. What? Boy, there's so many ways to go with this Epstein story. I'm wondering from your perch in the House at this point, when this controversy started, this sort of self imposed controversy, frankly, when they put out that DOJ memo, a lot of the message that we're hearing from Democrats like Hakeem Jeffries, I remember, stands out, was talking about how, well, either they were lying then when they were talking about how they had information, or they're lying now. And I kind of feel like we're past that point now. And they have executed what is pretty obviously a cover up of at least some type of information they don't want to get out. Do you see it that way? And, and if so, like, what do you think the House's obligations or opportunities are to deal with it?
- [02:35]
A
Look, the cruel irony here is that Donald Trump has become the very evil that he has set out to resist. You know, I think of MAGA as a cult, as a religion that worships Donald Trump as the chosen one. Right? He was chosen to release the Epstein files as though it were a form of revelation and destroy the deep state and drain the swamp. But here's the problem with the MAGA cosmology. How can you drain the swamp when you are part of the swamp? Like, it is likely the case that Donald Trump himself is in the Epstein files. There is no one in Washington, D.C. who has closer and longer ties to Jeffrey Epstein than Donald Trump. Right. There's the 2002 New York Magazine profile of Jeffrey Epstein in which Donald Trump is the only public figure to go on record acknowledging Epstein's sexual interest in young women. Right. There's Mar a Lago, which was one of the recruitment sites for the Epstein sex trafficking ring. And then there was the appointment of Alexander Acosta, who gave a sweetheart plea deal to Jeffrey Epstein as the Secretary of Labor, which has jurisdiction over human trafficking. All of these facts and many more demonstrate that there's literally no person on earth who has less credibility on the subject of Epstein than Donald Trump. And so he has been stoking the fires of conspiratorial politics, and now those fires are threatening to devour his administration. And the issue shows no signs of disappearing from public view, no matter how desperate he is to distract the issue.
- [04:20]
B
A couple thoughts on that. So you mentioned Acosta, for example. That guy's in the witness protection program right now. We haven't heard from him in a minute. So thinking about this, we're, you know, in a best case scenario for the Democrats, you guys take back the House next November, you get the gavel in 2027, you know, 18 months from now. At that time, you know, is this going to feel like old news, or do you feel like this is such an important cover up at this point that, like, there will be a special committee that would call Alex Acosta and subpoena them and call other relevant folks? Like, how do you see this playing out?
- [05:00]
A
I feel like it's. The Epstein story lies at the core of the MAGA movement. It's, it's, it's a sanitized, aestheticized version of, of the QAnon theory. I think David French has described it as a thinking man's QAnon. And, and for the MAGA movement, you know, the, the Epstein story is not about Epstein. It's actually a theory of how the world works.
- [05:26]
B
Yeah.
- [05:26]
A
And so I feel like the issue is unlikely to go away and it's fair game. You know, Donald Trump. The slogan of Donald Trump is promises made, promises kept. He made a promise to release the files. He should keep it. You know, the American people have a Right. To know what is in the files, who is in the files, and whether the who includes the President of the United States, Donald Trump. One thing I found odd about the sweetheart plea deal, the non prosecution agreement that Alec Costa Alexander Acosta gave Jeffrey Epstein, is that it granted immunity not only to Epstein, but to an infinite universe of potential unnamed co conspirators.
- [06:05]
B
Yeah.
- [06:08]
A
Crazy strange.
- [06:11]
B
What do you say to people that are like, well, why aren't you guys looking into this last time when you were in the majority or when Biden was in office? What do you say to that pushback from folks?
- [06:21]
A
President Biden did not run on releasing the Epstein files. Donald Trump did. J.D. vance did. Dan Bongino did. Pam Bondi did. Cash Patel did. So you made it an issue and now we're going to hold you accountable for delivering on that issue.
- [06:36]
B
Speaking of Cash and Bungino, there are a lot of serious elements of this. Obviously the victims, sometimes their stories get lost. Another tangible issue that's not litigating what happened in the past, but is an ongoing, I think, issue for the country is whether we can trust the leadership of the FBI right now to kind of do their job to keep us safe. I mean, in this story you see that they had spent, I guess back in March, thousands of man hours of FBI agents going through these files and then they didn't release it. A lot of reports of them pushing out. I had Mike Feinberg on the podcast last week who essentially got pushed out of the FBI because he was friends with Pete Strzok. They're kind of crazy. They were going to give him a lie detector test about his friendship with, know, some personal friendship. How worried are you about, about the Bureau and, and the potential that like we might have some actual real public safety fallout from their strange prioritization. Let's, let's put it nicely.
- [07:42]
A
Look, I'm concerned that Donald Trump is fundamentally dismantling the ability of the federal government to govern not by accident, but by design, which will have profound implications for public safety and national security. And the mass shooting in midtown Manhattan is a sobering reminder that New York City and much of America remains a top target for terrorist attacks. You know, as of data that I saw back in May, you know, New York City had been the target of 67 terror plots since 9 11. Two thirds of those plots transpired in the last decade. And we are facing an average of one tera plot per day. And so instead of combating terrorism here at home and abroad, the FBI is spending much of its resources descending into Conspiratorial rabbit holes and weaponizing government against political adversaries like those seem to be the priorities.
- [08:38]
B
And going after immigrants. They're doing some. They're doing some, you know, security. Some security work for dhs, I think doing some perimeter work. Crazy. Okay, I want to get to. Is there anything else in Epstein you want to pop off on? I want to pick your brain a couple other things while I got you.
- [08:55]
A
No, it's just, for me, the outsider status of Donald Trump.
- [09:01]
B
Yeah.
- [09:01]
A
Is as fraudulent as the beauty of the big beautiful bill or the cleanliness of clean coal. You know, Donald Trump is in no sense an outsider. Like, he's the ultimate elite insider. He was inside the social world of Jeffrey Epstein. He was in the Epstein homes. He was at the Epstein parties. He was on the Epstein planes. And I feel like the controversy simply exposes the fraudulence of Donald Trump.
- [09:31]
B
Couldn't agree more. You've come to a safe space for that point of view. I had Chris Murphy on last week, and I wanted to ask you about this crypto bill, the genius act, and he made a pretty compelling case against it. You were supportive of it. Among the things was, was that among all of Donald Trump's corruptions, he's running a massive crypto grift right now where he could very well and is, I think it's safe to say, getting bribed by people foreign and domestic with personal wealth. And the genius didn't really do anything to combat that. Frankly, as Murphy would tell it, it basically gave him a carve out from oversight. So I wonder what you think about that critique and maybe just the broader critique of the fact that the bill is too friendly to the industry.
- [10:24]
A
Yeah. So, look, I feel every technology, for me, there needs to be a framework for regulating crypto. Right. The industry is dangerously deregulated, and so we have to create a federal framework for regulating crypto that will enable the best actors to innovate while filtering out the worst actors. And every technology, including blockchain, has constructive uses and destructive uses. And you should never judge any technology by its worst possible uses. If I were to tell you there's a technology that leads to the deaths of 40,000Americans every year, your average politician would immediately insist that we ban it. And then what if I tell you we're the automobile, and I think we all agree the benefits of the automobile far outweigh the cost, so the proper legislative response is not to ban it, but to regulate it to make it safer. We should regulate crypto. We should make it safer. Because it does have real world use cases. Right. There are a whole host of financial institutions that are harnessing the power of blockchain to tokenize real world assets. On, on the Trump issue, I mean, there's no question that Trump is engaging in massive crypto corruption. But just like there's more to money, the money laundering, there's more to crypto than crypto corruption.
- [11:39]
B
Yeah, but as a Democrat, shouldn't you guys have been like, push, like holding back your vote and saying, I'm not going to support this bill unless it does something to deal with the Trump crypto corruption?
- [11:49]
A
I mean, we did the best we could, but let's keep in mind it's the dangerously deregulated status quo that enables him to engage in corruption. So I fail to see how maintaining that status quo actually solves the problem. And, but I agree the Republicans have been protecting him. I feel like the value of crypto technology and blockchain technology is larger than one person. But what Trump is doing is actually presently illegal. Like it is presently illegal to sell access to the White house to your 200 highest bidders. It is presently illegal to engage in market manipulation. It is presently illegal to engage in a pump and dump scheme. It is presently illegal to raise capital from the investing public without proper SEC registration and disclosure. The problem is not law. The problem is enforcement. Donald Trump refuses to enforce the law against himself. So passing more laws that simply codify the status quo will not solve the problem if you have a lawless president who thinks he either is the law or is above the law. So that's why I respectfully disagree with the senator.
- [12:51]
B
One more just critique of the bill I'd be interested in. Your response to is just his concerns that as part of regulation, this regulation, what we're doing more and more is getting crypto really integrated in the fiat financial system like the rest of the financial system. And for people who think that crypto is overvalued and that it's a bubble and that it will crash if it crashed in its own silo, that kind of limits the potential damage and fallout. But if it crashes inside the broader financial system, that could create a catastrophe. In the same vein, as we saw at the housing crisis, do you share those concerns, Dispel them. What would your reaction?
- [13:36]
A
And that strikes me as an argument for regulation, not for maintaining a deregulated status quo.
- [13:41]
B
Yeah. But maybe a regulation that does something that prevents it from. Or that doesn't to make. I mean, if you go back to Dodd Frank, for example, there are a Lot of rules around how banks can deal, deal with risky financial prospects. Right. Like maybe, you know, there should have been more.
- [13:59]
A
We passed out, frankly, at 60 votes in the Senate. So the, the solution is either to maintain a dangerously deregulated status quo or negotiate the best bipartisan framework we have for regular regulating crypto. But I feel like the status quo rewards.
- [14:15]
B
Are you worried that crypto is a bubble? Are you like a crypto guy? Are you invested in it? Do you have crypto?
- [14:18]
A
I have no crypto investments.
- [14:20]
B
You have no. Yeah. Do you like, are you intrigued by it or you don't, you don't. Do you have any, like I would personally.
- [14:25]
A
So I want to be clear, crypto does not refer to one thing.
- [14:28]
B
Yeah, sure.
- [14:29]
A
Whole universe of assets. So the best use case of crypto, which is the subject of the Genius act, is stable.
- [14:36]
B
Yeah.
- [14:36]
A
Right. Stablecoin effectively digitizes the dollar. Blockchain enables real time transactions. And the combination of those two technologies, the ability to move a digital dollar at the speed of the blockchain in real time, has the potential to create a better, cheaper and faster payment system. And I'll make one more point. As Americans, we take for granted a stable currency. A stable currency is accessible to us, so we barely think about it. But if you're in the global south, in Africa and Latin America and Asia, in many countries, access to a stable currency might be hard to come by. You might be susceptible to theft at the hands of a corrupt foreign governments. You might be susceptible to runaway inflation. And so access to a digital dollar in the form of a stablecoin can actually be a game changer. And in fact, there are hundreds of millions of people who have finally been able to access the stability of the dollar in the form of a stablecoin. Here's the problem. There's no regulation until the Genius Act. There's no legal requirement that the Reserves consist of 100% cash or cash equivalent, and that those reserves are verified by independent third party audits and that the customers have redemption rights, the rights to immediately redeem their stablecoins. Right. The Genius Acts provides for those protections. It is dangerous to have a world where hundreds of millions of people are using a product that has no regulatory protection for investors and consumers. And that's the void that's meant to be addressed by the Genius Act. But I consider access to a digital dollar in the form of a stablecoin among hundreds of millions of people in the global south to be honestly one of the greatest experiments in financial empowerment and inclusion that we've seen the proliferation of dollar stablecoins represents the projection of American soft power. It will actually reinforce the status of the dollar as the world's reserve currency in a time of de dollarization. And it will actually grow exponentially demand for US Treasuries in an age of de dollarization which will translate into cheaper debt for the American people. So, you know, we're going to live in a world where the largest purchasers of U.S. treasuries are probably going to be stable coin issuance.
- [16:53]
B
That worries me. You're making some compelling points. I'll get to the end and I'm like, it should worry you.
- [16:57]
A
If it's 100% cash or cash equivalent, that's a verifiable reserve. If it's regulated, it's a net good. If it's deregulated, then you're creating systemic risk.
- [17:06]
B
Yeah. All right. One more topic. After the October 7th terrorist attack, you were, I think, one of an important voice in the Democratic Party, one of the more vocal, who was, you know, talking about the importance of Israel's right to defend themselves against such a heinous attack and, you know, the importance of Israel's ability to want to remove this threat in the future from being on their doorstep. We're 18 months later. A lot of even pro Israel advocates are saying that what is happening now with regards to the humanitarian situation in Gaza is beyond the pale and that there needs to be a ceasefire and there needs to be a rethinking of the strategy and that Israel deserves some criticism or maybe some consequences for the way that they've carried out the war. What would you say to that?
- [18:00]
A
Look, war becomes a process of mutual dehumanization which we're seeing unfolding in real time. And there should be space in the American heart for the humanity of both Israelis and Palestinians. You know, I wrote on yesterday the following that it should be possible, indeed necessary, to hold two thoughts at once. Right. First, Hamas is the central cause of the war in Gaza and is primarily responsible for the suffering that has been unleashed since October 7th. I'm of the view that the primary responsibility for a war lies with its cause, Hamas. But it's equally true that the humanitarian crisis in Gaza is simply and morally unacceptable. And all parties, including Israel and the United States, must do their part to ease the hardship and hunger that has taken hold in the Gaza Strip. To me, it is wrong to deny or downplay the crisis if I have a constituent. I saw an Israeli official post on Twitter that there's no starvation because in Gaza. These are simply the lies of Hamas. If I have a constituent from the Bronx who comes to me who's not anti Israel, that says, congressman, I have concerns about the hunger crisis in Gaza, you expect me to tell my constituent that she's repeating the propaganda of Hamas like the proper response is not to deny it, it's not to downplay it, but it's to tell our constituents that we are doing everything that we can to ease suffering among Palestinian civilians and children, that the war is not against the Palestinian people. It's against Hamas, a terrorist organization that systematically murdered and maimed and mutilated and abducted and raped thousands of Israelis. You know, we should be able to draw that distinction.
- [20:03]
B
Yeah, for sure. I guess my question is, I agree with all that. I wonder, has your view, though, of the Israeli leadership evolved at all when it comes to the prosecution of the war? I do think that there's a way to look at this in December of 23 that is maybe different from how to look at it today.
- [20:23]
A
Look, I mean, Israel can be extraordinarily effective at prosecuting wars. It has been effective at degrading Hezbollah, which is a shadow of its former self. It was effective at degrading the Islamic Republic public. But, you know, I'm, I'm, I'm. I have concerns about the, the war in Gaza. I mean, I, I want to see Israel secure the release of the hostages and end the war. Because as long as the war persists, you know, there's a real potential. You know, our experience with Afghanistan and Iraq tells us that wars in the Middle east can morph into quagmires that have no clear end in sight, that have no clearly defined strategic objectives. And I feel like you should only send your children to die in a war when there are clearly defined strategic objectives. And I feel this is a quagmire that could persist indefinitely with no clear end in sight. And it's going to be a ceiling on the growth of the Israeli economy. It's going to be a ceiling on the momentum of the Ibrahim Accords. Like, I, you know, maybe there are clear objectives, and I look forward to the Israeli government.
- [21:34]
B
You would think if anybody would know them, you would. I think you would be towards the top of the list if there were.
- [21:39]
A
It feels like a quagmire reminiscent of the war in Iraq. And, you know, if, you know, these situations can persist indefinitely with no end in sight.
- [21:50]
B
I also want to thank the congressman. We did a fundraiser for Immigrant Defenders, the group that was the legal effort to protect defend Andre Hernandez Romero and other Venezuelans that were sent to Sukkot. Obviously, since that fundraiser, those, those young men have been released. Thank God. And among the people who, who participated, who jumped in and wanted to help that fundraiser in that effort was Congressman Torres. So I appreciate that. Appreciate him coming on the page. And we'll be talking to you soon. Come back soon.
- [22:24]
A
All right.
- [22:24]
B
Thanks, Congressman.
- [22:25]
A
Absolutely. Take care of.