Bill Kristol (2:34)

Yeah, sure. You had him on about six weeks ago after his big piece in the Atlantic, which is sort of pre war, obviously, on kind of what Trump was doing to our alliances and making the world much more dangerous. And I would say he views this war very much in that context. People should go back and look at your discussion with him and then look at mine if they want. And I capture the highlights in warning shots this morning. No, what he's so good at, I think Bob, is he puts it in the bigger context and it is striking. I mean, this war has damaged our relationship with all of our allies, basically. Europe not consulted. Can't believe we've gone into this. Now we're calling on them for help after rejecting their help early on or mocking the idea that they could help. They care about Ukraine, they care about Russia. And this war is helping Russia with the oil sales, the oil, the way you think of the sanctions. So from a European point of view.

Tim Miller (3:23)

And prices going higher.

Bill Kristol (3:25)

Right, Exactly.

Malcolm Gladwell (3:26)

Yeah.

Bill Kristol (3:26)

Which helps Putin to double. What it seems like is things were kind of rickety there. So from their point of view, it's like he didn't consult us. He's gone to war without a plan. It's helping Russia, which is really the existential threat we are having to deal with without Trump's help because he's not helping Ukraine these days. And so now he wants us to help in the strait. And the German defense minister this morning, Pretorius, who I know I met once, but I mean, I gather from people who know this stuff, is a very kind of pro American, hawkish. We've been hoping for a German defense minister like this, building up Germany's defenses and working with the other European nations. Helping Ukraine just basically said, forget it. I mean, pretty stunning rebuke from a very close ally.

Tim Miller (4:07)

It's the German defense Minister, not the French.

Bill Kristol (4:09)

Yeah, right.

Tim Miller (4:10)

Those pansy French start cutting and running. Right? That's notable.

Bill Kristol (4:13)

It deepens the rift that was already there that you and Bob discussed six weeks ago and just makes it even harder to fix it. I mean, it's, you know, Iraq, the Germans and the French I remember well, did not agree with our decision. We tried very hard to get them on board. We had endless meetings. Two UN Security Council votes. We got a lot of other European nations on board. On board. And we respected, in a sense, the German and French decision. I mean, there were members of Congress who made fun of the French with, you know, the French fright was the Freedom Prize. But, you know, the bush was polite. They. We continued to meet with them. They didn't go out of their way to cause trouble for the other European nations. That were helping us. So that preserved the alliance despite that pretty important rift. Right. We're in the opposite situation now where, you know, where we're really deepening the rift in the alliance, almost making it irreparable. Asia. The Trump people sold themselves, as, you know, they're going to be tough on China. And now Trump's asking for help from China actually to open the strait and pulling troops out of the China theater to, I don't know what, maybe do a land operate, ground operation in, in, in Iran. And if the Chinese are watching this, it's like we can't keep the strait open. You know, the strait between Taiwan and China is, it's a lot tougher to deal there with the Chinese military than the Iranian military. So I don't think they're getting very intimidated by what we're doing here in Iran.

Tim Miller (5:30)

We talked about this a little bit in a couple of the shows last week, too. And the Japanese, South Koreans, we were moving troops. We're also moving weapon systems now to the Middle East. And also they are going to feel the energy costs spike even more acutely than we will because that's where they're getting their energy from.

Bill Kristol (5:51)

Right. They get almost all their energy, Japan, certainly from abroad anyway, and a lot of it from the Gulf. So, yeah, totally. They're losers on this. And again, consulted Japan's kind of an important ally. We're not going to make a decision on the Gulf based on Japan. And they wouldn't expect us to. Would they expect to get a phone call at some point saying, hey, the heads up. And you know, so again, just treating them as if we don't care what they say, which Trump doesn't, I suppose. One point Bob makes that I hadn't really thought about is the, the Gulf states themselves. I mean, they've sort of cast in with us, they've cast in with the Trump family. There's a lot of deals, let's just go on there, which have tried to cement that relationship in ways that are not entirely, you know, legal or maybe or appropriate. But still, whatever you think of it, it was a way of buying, I guess, getting them to invest with us. They have a huge stake now at American investment there, tourism and all, owning

Tim Miller (6:41)

our TV networks, you know, our golf.

Bill Kristol (6:43)

I know.

Tim Miller (6:44)

It's like, yeah, I mean, we're kind of like the junior partner to Qatar in a lot of ways. Like we're borrowing their used planes and

Bill Kristol (6:51)

now they're getting pummeled, some of them, UAE especially, and we're not protecting them much, apparently. And they've got to be thinking, I don't know, the whole point of this was to make sure that big bad us was kind of behind us as we cut all these corrupt deals and do our business dealings. And they've got to be thinking, was that really worth it? I see all that reporting that MBS has been for this war and behind it, which I guess must be true. But I don't think he speaks for the other Gulf states honestly. And I wonder, I don't know what his foreign policy judgment is either. Anyway, so basically it's weakening us around the world. I think this is Bob's core insight that people, we look at these things so much in regional terms it's understandable obviously, and that is the primary effect presumably. But the degree to which right now, two weeks in, we look like we don't know what we're doing. We went to war without a plan. It's not going well. We keep saying it's going better than it is. We keep saying it's going to be over soon. But also we could be doubling down and sending in ground troops. And people look at this as the us this is a superpower. If you're an ally you're supposed to depend on and if you're an enemy you're supposed to be scared of. And in both cases we've eroded that.

Tim Miller (7:56)

Just really quick on the Saudis. I don't want to pretend to be an expert on this stuff. I did do some work a couple years ago for some Saudi Arabian dissidents who were being targeted by the regime. So I have a decent amount of familiarity with the politics there. I don't think it's crazy that there could end up being a little bit of inconsistency or incongruity between what they want and what UAE and others want. Because the big article in the Times over the weekend about how Dubai like might ever recover from this, you know, the types of people that move to Dubai are not really keen like they have plenty of money and resources and it's not really worth the risk that a missile is going to hit their high rise condo, you know, to live there. There are other fancy places in the world they can live. And so the Saudi and Iran, you know, geopolitical kind of competition is, is at play here. So I, you know, I, I don't think it's impossible that MBS is kind of working back, chatting with the President's son in law supportive of this and that maybe the other Gulf states were initially kind of supportive and are starting to get weak. I don't think that's a crazy development, potentially. Just one other thing on the Kagan conversation, in addition to the strategic problems that Trump has created throughout the rest of the world, is just like he now is kind of at a decision point a little bit about what to do. I mean, I think that many of us thought, just based on Trump's past behavior, that he was gonna do what he's done before, which is kind of like declare victory. There's a guy I fell online who said one of Trump's great political superpowers is he can always just say, hey, we did it. You know, and he'll have a base of supporters that will believe him and go along with him. That's the advantage of having a cult of personality. And so kind of a lot of folks, I think, assume that was gonna happen here. I think Bob points out that that is getting a little tougher to do now, certainly, than in the 12 Day War for various reasons. And potentially, at some point, they're going to have to have kind of a shit or get off the pot decision here that they both carry different types of consequences and ramifications. Just talk about that a little bit.

Bill Kristol (10:05)

Yeah, that was the second big point Bob made. And I see the New York Times is making this point this morning, too. We're getting to a decision for it. I guess Trump can delay it, but you pay a price for that, too. I mean, do we go in in a serious way and try to secure the strait? I mean, the original goal, remember the grant, the big goal was regime change. You don't hear much about that anymore. Now the real big goal would be securing the strait, which is kind of pathetic because the strait was open until

Tim Miller (10:29)

two weeks ago, and getting rid of their missile capabilities. I think that's the other thing that they keep saying now.

Bill Kristol (10:34)

Right. But that we probably have done. So I've assumed he would cut and run. I assume Taco was the more logical thing for him to do from his own personal point of view, which is always his main point of view. I kind of still think it's slightly more, I guess, than really going all in with Marine Expeditionary Forces landing on the Iranian side of the strait and all the risks that entails. And then basically, once you go that far, you can't really just get out without caring about what happens in Iran. Do you get out then, short of regime change? You have troops there on Iranian soil when the IRGC is still running the country. There's so many risks, and that's such an escalation. So I still am 60, 40 that he doesn't do that. Bob is more 60, 40 the other way. I would say he just thinks Trump has gone so far down the road of bellowing about how, you know, this is so important and fundamental and it's going to be such a great victory that a little harder for him to back down. I don't know. You can't make a judgment about the war till we know which of those decisions he makes and then what the effects of each of those decisions is. Both are bad. Both are bad. He could have bugged out, honestly, after the first 48, 72 hours. And I think taking credit, and I don't think it would have been more like June, and he could have done a huge amount of damage to the missiles and all this. And he could have just said, you know, we have made the world safer. We're the area safer. We weakened this horrible machine. We killed a huge number of their top leaders. Thank you. Goodbye. Little harder to bug out two weeks in, but I still think he could. And the damage, though, making us look weak would be real. The damage of getting involved, obviously, with ground troops and everything that that implies is higher risk and more fundamental. What I said to Bob, I guess I did push him a little on, well, do you really think he's going to stick with it? It's so risky. And Bob then sort of played the final card on that side, which is nothing, which is, are we sure that Trump doesn't see the advantages of having a war go on for a while in terms of his domestic authoritarian agenda? Presidents have used wars to crack down on free speech and crack down on dissent, and clearly they're interested in doing that. And they got elections coming up, and the national security sort of excuse can be used to do all kinds of things. And that was the slightly dark note that the conversation closed on.

Tim Miller (12:40)

Yeah, I definitely think that you can't rule anything out on this front. When you get a little bit more into what they're kind of threatening right now, though, it's been a lot of empty threats on this front. I think, too, we should also just be honest about. Right, everybody, it is seafood season at a shrimp po Boy. Last night. That was pretty yummy. I'm still able to find some crawfish in Louisiana, even though the Donald Trump regime's immigration crackdown is creating some challenges there. But if you're finding some challenges in your life, finding good, fresh seafood in your community, you should turn to our friends at Wild Alaskan The Wild Alaskan company is the best way to get wild caught. Perfectly portioned, nutrient dense seafood delivered directly to your door. Trust me, you haven't tasted fish this good. I love the Wild Alaskan delivery. I love it so much. I've been even like I'm getting more fish than I can cook and so handing it out to the neighbors. The neighbors are loving Wild Alaskan so it's like a triple endorsement here. But we're getting back into fish taco season. I might do that. Should I do that? Oh, shoot. I got a dinner tonight. I'm going to do that though. Soon. I'm going to make my daughter some fish tacos. We got some fish Wild Alaskan fish tacos. We use a Pacific rockfish for that. But there's a bunch of other stuff. I love their Pacific halibut as well. They got the coho and sockeye salmon. It is super easy to get delivered to your door and to cook. It's 100% wild caught, never farmed, nutrient rich and full of flavor and sustainably sourced. You can try it risk free with 100% money back guarantee. If you're not completely satisfied with your first box, Wild Alaskan company will give you a full refund. No questions asked, no risk, just high quality seafood. Not all fish are the same. Get seafood you can trust. Go to wildalaskan.com bulwark for 35 bucks off your first box of premium wild caught seafood. That's Wild Alaskan bulwark for 35 bucks off your first order. Thanks to Wild Alaskan Company for sponsoring this episode. Back to the straight really quick. And the coalition of the unwilling that we're creating. You mentioned the Germans who rebuffed Trump. Just kind of pulling this up here. Italy rejected Trump. Spain rejected Japan. France is hesitant. Norway, no. Canada no. Australia, no. Germany, no. You mentioned UK is out this morning. Keir Starmer kind of saying we're still looking at it. We're going to give it another look. We'll see in two weeks. Netherlands, no response. South Korea, no confirmation. That's a pretty big rebuke for the United States on this one and I think speaks to what you and Bob were talking about, about how there's no work at all done on the front end to get these folks involved and now Trump just thinks he can boss them around. I would assume maybe some of them might look at Trump and say, hey, instead of us, maybe you should be calling your friends at the board of peace to keep the straight open. What about Kazakhstan? Can they help? Belarus Maybe those folks are in and it's pretty noteworthy. Who knows how things go in a week or two. But just that even the Trump administration is kind of hedging on now with the ask, is saying, well, maybe it'll just be after hostilities end that we're asking for this help. And then meanwhile, Trump was on the phone last night with the ft, called him and he's back to making threats at NATO. And it's just, it's not, not a lot of evidence that he's in control of the situation.

Bill Kristol (15:56)

No, absolutely. And they've mocked the allies, including, especially the UK which that was. And I mean, he has gotten away with mistreating them, if I can put it that way, for an awful long time because they, look, they still depend on us, they still want the US to be involved. They all sucked up to Trump in different wars, many of them have in different ways and pull their punches. Let's say you get the sense here that this is maybe the moment of, look, I'm sorry, when a. They don't want to do it. They don't. As the German defense said, we wouldn't even want us for. I mean, you got the US Navy, right? If you can't open this, we can't help you open this. And so again, but, but specifically with Trump and Hexa's rhetoric, this is the mightiest military force the world's. Obviously, we're overwhelming, we're intimidating, we're crushing. We only fight pipsqueaks that we can crush. But hey, could you guys all help? And it's the number one country on that list. When he had that tweet or whatever it was five or six countries he was asking for was China. How pathetic does that look? And if you're Japan, you think, really, wait a second, are we supposed to be like he's INV China to come into the Strait of Horrors? I mean, I don't know, it's just the degree to which this has a sort of spiraling out of control, fiasco effect, I think is what strikes me.

Tim Miller (17:07)

It's also in pretty big contrast to the whole, how long ago was it that there was like a lot of high minded foreign policy analysts talking about how Trump was changing the world order. And we're going to do the Don Row doctrine and spheres of influence are all the rage now. And we're focused on Greenland because of its strategic importance, importance on our side of the globe. And it's like, well, okay, well how did the spheres of influence down road doctrine turn out? Because now we're in a quagmire in the Middle east, and Trump wants help from people in Asia and Europe, and they're not going to give it to him.

Bill Kristol (17:41)

I mean, the JD Vances of the world, if they would say what they really think would say, I guess, I mean, truthfully, I guess, look, hey, that all depended on us bossing around little countries in the Western Hemisphere or maybe Greenland sort of in the Western hemisphere, I guess. And you know, and that's kind of what that whole Don Row doctrine was. This is why Vance, in a way, is more consistent. If you're America first, you shouldn't get involved in these things in the Middle east, but you can't really pull this off in the same way. But Vance has been kind of quiet, hasn't even. You've been following it closely there.

Tim Miller (18:12)

JD has been quiet. Greenland is in the Western Hemisphere. Right. You have me for a second. Just because of the time.

Bill Kristol (18:18)

I don't know, I'm a little confused about. Those maps are very misleading.

Tim Miller (18:22)

It's that curving thing I was pretty good at at the Geography Bee in third grade. I was like, I think that that's right, but, you know, your memory starts to fade. Yeah, JD's been pretty quiet. Let's talk about the maggot response to this a little bit. And I want to come back to the economic stuff too. JD gave one kind of speech where he was doing like the condescending JD thing where he was talking about how, you guys want me to tell you what I really said to the President in our private repartee in the, you know, in the skiff. And I would not do that because it would be illegal. And, you know, he needs to get good guidance. And we're not the same as the liberals that, you know, that tell everything to the New York Times. And so I know it was like what he tried to do. He hasn't been, he hasn't been fighting on social media. You know, I mean, I just, I think all you have to do is point to the gap between this and what happened after the Alex Freddie and Renee Goode murders. I mean, Renee Good got killed by a government agent. And J.D. vance was at the White House briefing room the next day insulting the victim, insulting the people that were concerned about it, insulting local law enforcement and talking about how good and right it was that we had mass people in the streets, like, cracking down on free citizens. So JV saw that as a political victory that he was in line with, like, and he was arguing with people on social media about it, like, A random troll. Not now. You don't simultaneously do that in this intro. Right. Feud. Have you been following Megyn Kelly versus Mark Levin?

Bill Kristol (19:53)

I just saw one or two tweets. It's not the most elevated discourse, I would say, on the Internet. And that's saying something.

Tim Miller (20:01)

Well, you've got Mark Levin saying that Megyn Kelly is a shill and doesn't know anything and is stupid. Megyn Kelly said that Mark Levin has a micropenis and is wrong. Marjorie Taylor Greene this morning said this. I wholeheartedly support Megyn Kelly telling the world that Mark Levin has a micro penis. It's the most deserved insults and I don't care if it's vulgar. And Trump's gigantic defense of Levin only enraged the base. More people are done. All caps MAGA destroyed by micropenis. Mark. So that was mtg. She's a little bit sharper on the nicknames. Trump's nicknames are starting to kind of taper off. But I think there's something there from mtg, you know, how much these people matter, how much influence they have. And we see in the polls that Trump does have a cult of personality. There's a big group of people who go along with him with whatever. But it's pretty telling that, like Trump is out there complimenting Mark Levin, who was the Never Trumper was all in for Ron DeSantis was not a Never Trumper in the sense of like voting for the Democrats, but within the Republican fighting, he was always anti Trump. Now Trump is complimenting on how great Levin is. The more MAGA folks, traditional MAGA folks, are attacking Levin and at least with mtg, Trump himself, JD Is kind of hiding in the Bushes a little bit. And I think that just all tells you what you need to know about the weak political position he's in.

Bill Kristol (21:17)

And one dark reason why I think the back of split could be more serious this time is that the America first stuff dovetails with anti Israel stuff, which dovetails with some anti Semitic stuff. And gee, Mark Levin, what a coincidence, they're going after him. Who's seen us?

Tim Miller (21:32)

Yeah, and Ben Shapiro for that night.

Bill Kristol (21:33)

And Ben Shapiro. Yeah. And those are the guys who on the one hand, on the other hand, it's mtg, I guess, and Tucker Carlson and their true, I mean, they are truer America first ish people. They also are pretty vitriolically against Israel and against. Pretty into sort of conspiracy theories about Israel and the US and the Jews and the Jewish lobby. And so this could go into a very dark place. But I think unfortunately there is support for that in some chunk of MAGA

Tim Miller (22:00)

world, so particularly among younger folks. And there's a little bit of a young old split. And I think you see also this is the strategic thing that what Megan and, and Tucker doing. I don't, you know, I can't get inside Megan's heart. But this doesn't all seem authentic to me. And you know, you just look at the polls, I don't have it in front of you, but somebody did a Gen Z poll of MAGA the other day and it's like a shocking number. I believe in Holocaust denialism, believe that Jews are bad for the country. Like, they also think that Muslims are bad for the country, by the way, but some other groups too. But I think that for people who don't follow this closely, they might assume that, like, it's the older MAGA Republicans who are more bigoted. Right. Just because that's kind of like the stereotype, like older generations and, you know, but that's like not, not true, actually. It's the inverse. If you look at the numbers, our

Bill Kristol (22:48)

friend Nick Fuente is there that guy who you follow, you've keep an eye on him, right? He's probably.

Tim Miller (22:52)

I keep an eye on Nick Fuentes, but Nick Fuentes is falling on the. Again, like he's anti Semitic and he's fallen on the Megan MTG side of this and been very high.

Bill Kristol (22:58)

So it makes sense. I mean, you could have a really nasty stab in the back by bb, kind of ruining maga, ruining America, dragging us into this war. It's the Jews. We're one step from that. I mean, that narrative is out there already, obviously in Fuentes, where all the question is, could it permeate into sort of more political, elected official world? I think we're a bit away from that, but I don't know how far.

Tim Miller (23:21)

Yeah, I agree.

Malcolm Gladwell (23:25)

Hello. Hello, I'm Malcolm Gladwell, host of Smart Talks with IBM. I recently spoke with IBM's new director of research, Jake Mbeta. We discussed his vision for the future

Jake Mbetta (23:36)

of quantum computing at IBM Research. What we always do is answer, what is the future of computing? Whether it's coming up with new algorithms, coming up with better AI, coming up with quantum, or coming up with just how do different accelerators go together? It's our DNA to answer the question of what is the future?

Malcolm Gladwell (23:56)

Isn't it a perfect problem for IBM because you kind of need to have a legacy of building stuff, building actual physical machines.

Jake Mbetta (24:05)

Yeah, it's why I came to IBM. I wanted the experience the culture of building hard things that others have not done before.

Malcolm Gladwell (24:16)

Where do you imagine we are in the timeline of this technology? There will come a point when it will mature, right?

Jake Mbetta (24:24)

Yeah.

Malcolm Gladwell (24:24)

My cell phone is a mature technology at this point. How far are we from that point

Jake Mbetta (24:29)

with Quantum, by 2029 we'll build the first fault tolerant Quantum computer that is one that can run a very, very large, large problem.

Malcolm Gladwell (24:39)

To learn how IBM is building the future of computing, visit IBM.com Quantum

Ashley (24:48)

Reese's Peanut Butter cups. They go perfectly with music, podcasts and welcome back to the show. Even nature sounds thing where someone crinkles tissue and whispers at you.

Tim Miller (25:02)

Hello.

Ashley (25:03)

Look, I'm not here to judge what you listen to. I'm here to judge you for not eating Reese's while you listen to it. Reese's? Ashley, go back to the nature sounds nice. Yeah, that's really nice.

Tim Miller (25:19)

Speaking of Tucker, see what he his little monologue this weekend.

Bill Kristol (25:23)

No, I just said it's good that you keep an eye on this. You and Will Summer, you and Will Sommer are really indispensable for this.

Tim Miller (25:28)

It seems to me that like Tucker is at the highest level of doing geopolitical negotiations with our foes. So it is kind of important to check in on him. Unfortunately, it's not just, you know, he's not just ranting from his main basement or whatever. Again, it's important. I just want to say anytime I say something that Tucker said, I like to caveat. Like Tucker has demonstrated himself to be just a liar and a fabulous. Like not just a conspiracy theorist. Like he just lies and makes up stories, exaggerate stories to suit himself. And so, so I assume the story is exaggerated, I guess is where I'm starting at. But he does a big monologue about how the CIA, he says that he got a call from doj. They're looking into his conversations he was having with Iranian nationals before the war started and the CIA. You know, Tucker says that the CIA has hacked his phone and was looking through his text messages and they had information about his text messages that led to like a series of people on the right saying that like maybe Trump was like using him as a useful idiot and like back channeling bad and information to the Iranians. Our old friend Mark Caputo reported that that is not what happened. Like that Trump was not doing 40 chess with Tucker when Tucker came to visit him and try to convince him not to do the war. But I don't know, I guess it's noteworthy if it's a lie that you Have Tucker now doing a full frontal attack against the Trump deep state. Because that could set up something down the line in 2028 for Tucker or some other, you know, vassal candidate for Tucker. And it's also noteworthy. It's true. I don't want to weigh it, like, totally eliminate the possibility that there is some. And I guess I think it would make sense that the intelligence agencies would be spying on Tucker. I mean, he's talking to Putin, he's talking to the Iranians. Apparently he said that he's talking to the Iranians. We're at war. I don't know. Do you think that's crazy?

Bill Kristol (27:20)

Well, especially given, I mean, who knows which intelligence agencies, given that Tulsi and. And Patel are running them, you know, all the normal constraints on spying on American citizens or whatever, metadata, all those stuff we once knew, I once knew better because they were actual legal constraints and one had to think about those things. One assumes they're all gone. So who knows? I agree. I really thought about this till you brought it up. The degree to which you have a Tucker mtg, younger groiper, anti Israel, anti a semitic America, first thing that could build up on the right, I don't know. Is that trivial in Republican primaries in 28. Is it right now it's presumably 10 or 15% against a JD Vance, Marco Rubio field, but I don't know. It could be 25, 30%.

Tim Miller (28:06)

It's trivial as long as Trump is around because of the cult of personality element. I don't want to overstate the degree of the splintering. I think that it's at an elite level and at a younger activist level more than among the electorate. I forget who I was talking to about this, but if you look at the internals of the polls about Iran, it's kind of strange. People who say I'm a MAGA Republican are more supportive than people who just say I'm a Republican. Right. Because it's like if you say you're a MAGA Republican, that's basically saying, I'm part of a lifestyle brand and I support anything Donald Trump does. So it'll be interesting to see. Assuming Trump leaves and there's a lot of potential ifs, ands or buts, but in theory I think that. But if there was a vacuum on the right, I think it would be a very significant force to Tucker MTG Wing. And I think that the idea that he's laying the groundwork that the Trump government went after him, I'm not saying I think Tucker's going To run for president would be a favorite or anything. But to me, that is laying the groundwork for an actual whatever pincer attack on the Trump part of MAGA at some level. So anyway, we'll keep monitoring that. Just really quick while we're talking about crazy right wing stuff, I do think it's important for our listeners also to just be a little vigilant about. I don't even know if I would call this crazy left wing stuff, but crazy conspiracy stuff that gets into the left pipeline, including, for example, this weekend, the idea that BB was dead. I had several people, regular people, normals in the, in my life, not, you know, not randoms on the Internet, like texting me, asking me, is BB really dead? They had been following influencers that were like, doing the Pruder film style, like looks at these videos that BB put out that did look kind of weird, I would say, but like, you know, kind of saying you had a sixth finger when it was just a shadow. Or, you know, doing deep analysis about his coffee, like why it didn't spill. It's just like, I just want everybody, like, if you're following an influencer that is doing a frame by frame on why BB's coffee didn't spill, like, I think you should be a little bit skeptical about the material that they're providing. And I know we have some legitimate complaints about the MSM these days. But, like, there's a reason why there's, you know, editors out there in some of those outlets. So I don't. BB's alive.

Malcolm Gladwell (30:27)

Hello.

Tim Miller (30:27)

Hello.

Malcolm Gladwell (30:27)

I'm Malcolm Gladwell, host of the podcast Smart Talks with IBM. I recently sat down with IBM's chairman and CEO Arvind Krishna, and I asked him, how can companies use AI to its fullest potential to create smarter business? My one advice to them, pick areas you can scale. Don't pick the shiny little toys on the side. For example, if anybody has more than 10% of what they had for customer service 10 years ago, go, they're already five years behind. If anybody is not using AI to make their developers who write software 30% more productive today with the goal of being 70% more productive.

Jake Mbetta (31:14)

Yeah.

Malcolm Gladwell (31:16)

So we are not asking our clients to be the first experiment on it. We say you can leverage what we did. We're happy to bring out all our learnings, including what needs to change in the process. Because the biggest change is not technology. It's getting people to accept that there's a different way to do things. To listen to the full conversation, visit IBM.com smarttalks.

Ashley (31:44)

Reese's Peanut Butter Cups. They go perfectly with music, podcasts, and welcome back to the show. Even nature sounds. Oh, and the thing where someone crinkles tissue and whispers at you.

Jake Mbetta (31:57)

You.

Tim Miller (31:58)

Hello.

Ashley (31:59)

Look, I'm not here to judge what you listen to. I'm here to judge you for not eating Reese's while you listen to it. Reese's. Ashley, go back to the nature. Sounds nice. Yeah, that's really nice.

Tim Miller (32:15)

Do you want to talk about the Hill first or the economic stuff? Why don't we talk about the Hill, then we'll go to that in the economy. I saw this from Punchbowl this morning. This jumped out to me and I think it does kind of relate to the conversation we're having about MAGA and the factioning on this. Pudgeful is the Capitol Hill insider newsletter rag there it does. The White House, Pentagon and congressional leaders have begun talks about a supplemental funding bill for the Iran war. We've had several sources suggest the package may carry a price tag of 100 billion or more. Lawmakers see this as potentially the last must pass bill of the year. It's March 16th, isn't it? March? Aren't we in March? And. And they may try to attach their own costly proposals to it as well. Wow. I just think that there's a lot to unpack there about. It kind of relates to what Kagan was talking about, about how they're planning for a more extended conflict that they would have, I think, I don't know. It would create questions for the Democrats on what to do about this. I think talks about just how neutered Capitol Hill is. I mean, have there been less powerful same party leaders in the history of Congress and Thune and Johnson that they're like, this is the only thing we might do all year anyway. So go ahead and riff on any of those elements.

Bill Kristol (33:29)

Two obvious points. What is as Trump launched the war, some of us thought, gee, well, some before the war, some of us thought Trump should get approval if he's going to do this as he was threatening to do it. He did it. We saw, gee, Trump should get approval now that he's begun to do it. Or at least there should be a War Powers act type vote, 30 day, 60 day kind of deadline. Now we're talking the Marine Expeditionary Force. I think the 31st MEU is heading towards the Gulf. The serious talk about the war's not letting up. Tegsev boasts that it's more intense each day, literally. Now we're going to fight what, weeks, months, with no Congressional authorization or no even fresh appropriations. Just nothing, I mean no testimony incidentally from them on the Hill either, except in a couple of secret sessions with some committee leaders. A, it's a new level and just cutting them out entirely. And the Republican leadership is obviously totally pathetic. And at some point is one of these people who's allegedly privately very concerned, you know, the Roger Wickers of the world and all these characters, are they going to say something? Are they going to conceivably vote for a war powers resolution type thing? I mean probably not for a while, but it is pretty astonishing.

Tim Miller (34:34)

How did the Democrats handle this traditionally? Like there have been, you know, the Democrats have even when they opposed wars. Like let's saw this in Iraq. Like there would be Democratic senators who opposed the war, but they did, they would vote for the funding because you didn't want to seem anti troops. You didn't want, you wanted to make sure the troops had the resources if we're going to be in the war. I don't like, I don't, I don't feel like this is that situation, particularly on this first vote. Right. Especially if you're not going to have a war powers vote. I feel like the Democrats have to be aligned just hard enough on this.

Bill Kristol (35:06)

Yeah, hard dough. With the caveat that the hard dough should be obviously we'll appropriate funds for 30 days to make sure our people can exit this area safely or we will consider appropriating funds if a, there's a 60 day deadline, B, there's a plan submitted, C, you know, there are things they can do to make it. They have to be bent over backwards a little bit. Probably not to undercut the troops who are actually in harm's way. But I think, you know, you could easily, pretty easily say 30 days, 60 days to get them out of harm's way or let Trump come back in 30 days and say he really needs the money. There's this case for keeping them in harm's way. But yeah, I think a pretty hard no on extending the war. I mean he's fought for 16, 17 days now already. I mean, I think Democrats just have to say no blank check for ground troops in the Middle East.

Tim Miller (35:52)

That's what I think. I mean I don't disagree with those caveats you offered for the behind the scenes negotiations. I just think that the Democrats need to be a little bit better at having the top line message be absolutely not. And I think you see some Democrats who are good on this. Rubin's Geico's been good. He was on recently, Chris Murphy, there have been some others. But I just, I feel like every time I see Chuck Schumer talk, he's like starting with the caveats and it's just like, give me the top line, which is that this was war. They didn't come to us to support. It's illegal. Like they did not come to Congress for approval at the beginning and they haven't offered a rationale. And it's been a total shit show. And we're against. The details can come after that.

Bill Kristol (36:31)

I totally agree with you about the top line and the need to be very firm on that and sharp on that. And I think the phrase that maybe does that is end the war. End the war is not the same as undercutting the troops or a backward looking. You should have come to us, which is Schumer spends too much time talking about, you know, just end the war. It's not working. We're risking more the war. We digger, we deep. The digger. I can't even say what I said. The deeper we dig this hole.

Tim Miller (36:56)

We dig.

Bill Kristol (36:57)

Yeah, stop digging this hole, Dirk Diggler.

Tim Miller (36:58)

We deep exactly whatever we dig.

Bill Kristol (37:00)

Yes. So I think end the war is a good thing that they need to say over and over. And I think that's. Incidentally, that's honestly their view. I take it. It's honestly my view. So just say it.

Tim Miller (37:12)

On the economic consequences, you do hear, especially from the more rah rah folks about the war and about the way that we've annihilated the Iranian capabilities. When it comes to the economic part, there's a lot of, oh, this is a short term thing. This is a shock. It's going to take a few months. We'll be back down to normal by the end of the year. I wonder if any of those people were awake during the COVID inflation situation, which spiraled out of control and ended the Biden presidency, basically. And it happened years after we already had the jab and supply chains. This stuff just doesn't remedy itself overnight. You shared this. It was on cnbc, I believe Jeff Curry from Goldman Sachs, who's a commodities analyst. And I thought it was pretty compelling. I just want to play it for everybody.

Bill Crystal (38:02)

This is not just a disruption. Oil, it's gas, it's fertilizers, it's metals, it's petrochemicals. The list goes on and on. And then you've disrupted supply chains in countries all over the world. The ships are in the wrong places, the insurances have been canceled. You've taken the Pressure out of the fields that you've shut in in places like Saudi Arabia or Iraq or even in the uae. I can just. The list goes on and on. The damage is going to take months to unwind. But I want to bring it to the immediate. There is no policy response that can stop this ascent in crude. None. And yes, you heard this 400 million barrel headline. Flow rate is what matters. You know, the maximum sustainable flow rate is 2 million barrels per day. So 400, that will take them 200 days to get that out. And you put that in the context of a disruption of, you know, let's net it out of this. It's got to be somewhere around 18 million barrels per day right now. You're just miniscule in terms of offsetting it. So again, there's not many options here.

Tim Miller (39:07)

Talking about the strategic oil reserve offset choice there, I think you should listen to those guys. It's like even if he did take the fork in the road out now, I mean that's months and months and months and 200 days to get it back to where it was. Right?

Bill Kristol (39:23)

And I mean even that fork in the road, he probably has some face saving ceasefire negotiations. So we're probably a week or two from that. But yeah, I guess the other point I'd make is just two weeks is a pretty long time. Four weeks is twice as long as two weeks. Eight weeks is four times as long as two weeks in terms of the disruption. Right. I mean it is a Covid type situation where, yes, you can manage these things as a short term spike, but I think that's what the markets are telling us they're looking at and thinking this could be much longer. God knows I can't really judge it. I've talked to a couple of economists and they're a little cautious because these things are pretty hard to judge in real time. But the economy was slowing anyway. And I've got to wonder if six months from now, when people look back at this first quarter of 2026, they say economy was slowing, big oil shock,

Tim Miller (40:09)

recession, just to put a finer point about it, because sometimes you're following this and it's like, oh, there's the one day it goes up, it goes down and you can be overly responsive to just sort of movements in the market. I just pulled this up like the Brent oil barrel price on February 17th. So one month ago it was 66 bucks. Right now it's 101. And that's not quite double, but a very significant increase that has just tons of ramifications through an economy that, as you mentioned, was already kind of shaky. All of the jobs numbers, they've been doing the corrections. Looking back at the last few months, it's like, turns out there are fewer jobs created than we thought. It's a dicey situation. And I guess that's why Carolyn Levitt just posted that Ben Shapiro praised Trump Strike as the single bravest foreign policy move of my lifetime. Because it is pretty brave to just absolutely hammer your own domestic economy and the rationale for your presidency on behalf of a project internationally that doesn't have, like, a clear outcome. It does take some courage to do that, I guess in some ways, reckless

Bill Kristol (41:24)

is one step over from brave.

Tim Miller (41:26)

Half step, I think. Half step.

Malcolm Gladwell (41:30)

Hello. Hello. I'm Malcolm Gladwell, host of Smart Talks with IBM. I recently spoke with IBM's new director of research, Jake Mbetta. We discussed his vision for the future

Jake Mbetta (41:41)

of quantum computing at IBM Research. What we always do is answer, what is the future of computing? Whether it's coming up with new algorithms, coming up with better AI, coming up with quantum, or coming up with just how do different accelerators go together? It's our DNA. To answer the question of what is the future?

Malcolm Gladwell (42:01)

Isn't it a perfect problem for IBM because you kind of need to have a legacy of building stuff, building actual physical machines.

Tim Miller (42:10)

Yeah.

Jake Mbetta (42:10)

It's why I came to IBM. I wanted the experience, the culture of building hard things that others have not done before.

Malcolm Gladwell (42:22)

Where do you imagine we are in the timeline of this technology? There will come a point when it will mature, right?

Jake Mbetta (42:29)

Yeah.

Malcolm Gladwell (42:29)

My cell phone is a mature technology at this point. How far are we from that point?

Jake Mbetta (42:34)

With Quantum, by 2029, we'll build the first fault tolerant Quantum computer. That is one that can run a very, very large, large problem.

Malcolm Gladwell (42:44)

To learn how IBM is building the future of computing, visit IBM.com quantum

Ashley (42:54)

Here's a quick podcast for all you true crime fans. The case of the missing Reese's. It was me at the store with my mouth. Motive. Um, they're Reese's. What was I gonna do? Stop myself? Tune in next time to see if I do it again. Spoiler. I will. Wow, that had everything. Reese's, Suspense, Reese's.

Tim Miller (43:25)

So Brendan Carr was out talking about threatening the network TV licenses for supposed misinformation about the Iran war. Trump posted that media companies wrongly reporting on the war should be charged with treason. There's some death penalty threats for journalists wrongly reporting on the war. I'm not shaking in my boots personally on that one, but it is something that the president said, we talked last week to the secretary of war. Or he was talking about how excited he was for CNN to be taken over by his friend. The degree to which they're trying to manipulate the media, crack down on free speech is pretty stark. Try is the key word there. I mean, they've had some success obviously in the private sector with the purchases and the takeovers from the Ellisons. The using the force of government power has been not that effective so far, actually. I have a caveat in that. But why don't you go first?

Bill Kristol (44:21)

Well, just, I mean, the next no Kings protest is in just under two weeks now. They tried to discredit the one in October, remember? Very, you know, that was during the government shutdown. So that was the militants, the rabid militants. I think I used the word terrorists will be out there demonstrating anti American and stuff. I take it part of the no Kings protest will be anti war protest. And in any case, there'll be other anti war protests. I think there you will have real, you know, Joe McCarthy I or 1919, depending on what historical. It's not. This has happened before where people, you know, presidents who are fighting wars label everyone who's opposing them, but certainly anyone who's protesting them as, you know, on the side of the. Your enemy and kind of on the side of terrorism. I suppose since Iran is a sponsor of terrorism on the side of and is treasonous and stuff. It's been pretty ineffectual so far. It certainly was for the first no Kings protest. The attempts to either sell that or to weaponize it. It mostly there have been executive orders and attempts to begin to lay the groundwork for really going after people, but I don't know. We're in a real war now and sort of on the one hand, not quaking my boots, but on the other hand taking it a little more seriously than I would have just a month ago.

Tim Miller (45:28)

There's a ton of evidence out there that Trump and this administration has had success intimidating people in the private sector. I was having a conversation over the weekend about this, about somebody who's working on projects that two years ago would have been approved for, you know, that are in the politics, space news, documentary type stuff that's just like they don't want to do it. Like it's just not worth the risk of, you know, backlash from Trump and these Hollywood studios. So, like, there's been a chilling effect. Like there's been success in that. Like the most robust effort that they had to try to silence people directly was over Jimmy Kimmel, when Brendan Carr was basically going to the local stations and saying, I'm going to threaten your licenses. And you would think that they would be less able or willing to handle this kind of economic assault from our government than Disney or whatever, some big multinational corporation. And that didn't work. And it worked for a couple days. He was off the air for a couple days, and then everybody pushed back. So. So we'll see, I guess. I just think it's important to note that while he's making these threats, they've been pretty empty threats in the past. But I think also just looking at it more globally, and this was the Hungary playbook, and it took time for Orban to kind of take over these various companies. Trump made a post on Truth Social that's simultaneously intimidating and mockable, which is. It's a meme talking about how he's reshaped the media. And at the top, it's like, gone, you know, and there's some things that are really, like, serious PBS defunded, you know, but then it's like Joy Reid and Terry Moran fires. It's like, okay, I don't know. I don't know. Poor Terry, man. He's been on the show, he's doing great on Substack. But it's like, okay, you know, Chuck Todd out at NBC. It's like, there's some of these things and then the reforms. It's like Trump is doing a lot of interviews, you know, news bias ombudsman at cbs. So, you know, know, Disney ends key DEI practices. It's like, there's like. It's this mix of, like, things that have happened that have changed and ways that the media has accommodated itself to the Trump regime that's chilling. And then it's tied in with other kind of silly stuff and Trump's, like, personal beefs with people on the stories that he watches on tv. But, like, that took time. It took time in Hungary. I don't know. I'm of two minds about it. On the one hand, it's like, it took time in Hungary, and there is a lot of power and danger in government, censorship and control of media. On the other hand, in this brave new world, like, reality kind of does end up finding a way. Not in the way that we want. It's like the old Jurassic park about how life finds a way. Like, I don't know. I mean, their efforts to intimidate the media into silence over the Iran war don't seem to be working based on the polls. So I Don't know. Which side of that do you kind of fall on?

Bill Kristol (48:16)

I tend to come down on the optimistic side of it with a caveat that people need to fight. And I do think, you know, the merger with Para, I mean, this is where people have to have a. If I could use a stupid term that I don't like normally, a holistic view of what's happening. You need to fight on many, many, many fronts. The merger stuff, which is a business story and not one that I personally paid much attention to, and the people in the media sphere that our thing, you know, unlike direct intimidation of Jimmy Kimmel or whatever, but it's kind of important if they're only allowing mergers to trump friendly people.

Tim Miller (48:44)

Oh, that part is super. Yeah, it's really important.

Bill Kristol (48:46)

They're so chaotic and so mockable and such jackasses, but they are pulling a lot of levers at once, I guess is the way I would say it. And we need. We. If I can say we, the Democratic opposition, small D Democrat, needs to be alert to that and pulling whatever counter levers at once. It can too. You know, I mean, it can't just be sort of. Well, the courts weren't gonna really like that one. And there needs to be an aggressive response on all fronts.

Tim Miller (49:08)

I agree. And I wanna caveat. My caveat just also, which is with technology, the degree to which reality can find a way might change. I think that in some ways this stuff is all progressing and changing. It's like a river. And in the 80s, crackdowns by fascist governments on media were very effective because there were so few media outlets. If you look at what was happening in the Soviet sphere of influence right now, and obviously the disinformation was effective enough to get Donald Trump elected twice. It's not like nothing. But right now there also is other information is getting out. It's just like a question of whether it's getting to people. Right. It's different than the type of censorship we've seen in the past from fascist regimes. And eventually again, Trump lost his second election and right now he's losing politically. So I just think that's important to deal with that reality. But as the technology changes with AI and these guys controlling TikTok, controlling the big tech companies, I think the threats get much, much greater. And to that point, I'll talk about some immigration stuff too. There's a federal case in Oregon where ICE officer said under oath, something we've known already. But number one is that they had the daily arrest quotas. But second is that they're using the Palantir app elite for like mass surveillance and targeting. And again for those of us who've been watching this have known this because like fucking little Greg Bevino was like taking his phone up and putting in people's faces and telling them that he was putting their face through a facial recognition app. But that technology is advancing very quickly and the government now using this with impunity. Targeting citizens. Not that it's be okay for them to do it targeting undocumented people, but they're doing it targeting citizens, protesters, people that are here legally, people that are suspected of being here illegally is pretty chilling.

Bill Kristol (50:53)

I mean libertarians have been upset for a long time. I've thought excessively but not crazily about the 702 program. I don't even the NSA, I don't even understand all that stuff. But pretty carefully monitored and restricted actually uses where the federal government thought they wanted to understand some conversations with foreign nationals like Tucker Carlson with Iranians and or Putin, but careful in how they getting FISA warrants, all that stuff. We are now totally blown by any of that kind of stuff. We're blown by the notion that we should have a debate about whether, well, maybe I shouldn't be allowed to do this. The Congress United States could actually pass a law saying they can't have such a register of terrorists. I want to ask you a question on the Republicans in Congress. We discussed it for a minute, but I mean do they just endlessly go on? There's no point. Do enough of them say wait a second that you really begin to get a crumbling. We've seen sort of hints of it and of course it's all been ultimately disappointing I think so far, but a little bit of crumbling in the ability for him to hold 50 Republican senators and 218 Republican House members. And again it was so infuriating of course is it would take a handful of them, right, to say no on a whole bunch of areas.

Tim Miller (52:01)

You know, look out to the midterms, who knows how do, how do people act when they're in the minority? How might they act in the Senate if it's really a one vote situation rather than three? Maybe you see some difference. I don't know. I just think it comes back to the short term incentives. This is why the Massie primary is interesting. Me and Sam talked about this last week. It's like we still now 10 years in, no one has really challenged Trump directly and won and survived. The caveat to that would be the Georgia guys, Kemp and Raffensperger. And so all credit to them, honestly. But like the state elections are a little bit different at the federal level, House or Senate. There hasn't really been anybody, you know, everyone that has challenged has either retired or won run quixotic primaries like Liz Cheney did. You know, nobody has really like dug in. And so the Massey primary in Kentucky, I think is a very important inflection point on that. But I just think it's like they decide it's not worth it. They said it's not worth it. And look at that. This is the primary in Louisiana, for example. So I get the TV ads for Bill Cassidy and Julia Ludlow, and you would think that Bill Cassidy was the biggest Trump fan in the universe if all you're doing is just watching basketball and seeing the ads and not getting any news otherwise. And that Julia Letlow, the Trump endorsed MAGA candidate, is Bill Kristol. Some woke, never Trump squish. If you're just watching the TV ads, that's what you'd get the sense of. As long as that's the case that they feel like they need to have the Trump halo to survive, I think I don't expect that we're going to see a lot of courage. My question back to you on the health stuff. You're out early on the Democrats needing to offer a middle ground on the DHS shutdown and just saying, hey, we're going to fully fund fema, tsa, these other elements, anything else that's related to domestic terror threats, et cetera, they've done that, but they haven't really done a big, big pressure campaign on it. I wouldn't say. Where do you think this stands? I mean, it's pretty crazy that DHS is still like, not funded, given the state of affairs.

Bill Kristol (54:13)

I actually got a call from a member of Congress. My staff showed me your tweets. And I want you to know we do agree with you that we're for no additional funding for ICE and Border Patrol. We're fine with funding the rest of it. So you need to make that point a little more emphatically, in my humble judgment. And this person said yes? Well, we're beginning to. Rosa Delora did have actual legislation. She's in leadership in the House. Patty Smith, Is that her name? The Smith. Patty Murray.

Tim Miller (54:41)

Patty Smith is a singer?

Bill Kristol (54:42)

Yeah, Patty Murray, the Appropriations, I think ranking member in the Senate, asked for United's consent to do that. Actually, last week the Republicans blocked it. And this member of Congress said, look, we, we've had some internal debates Some people thought we had more leverage if we kept the whole DHS closed. I said, come on, really? That's not, it's negative leverage at this point with TSAs. And this person said, yes. You'll see this week we will make clear our position is we will not give additional funds to ICE and Border Patrol, absent the kinds of reforms they've demanded. We want to give these other funds and it's the Republicans who are preventing you. And I think it's a pretty easy argument to make. It's a true argument. And they just need to really hammer it home this week. And they say they're going to.

Tim Miller (55:25)

So we'll keep an eye on that. All right, final topic. There's a. A candidate that I want to highlight out in America. I sometimes have said some pretty negative things about Alabama on this podcast. And our Alabama listeners, who I appreciate have not always appreciated my stereotyping of Alabama, my use of the word Alabama as a slur. We have a candidate here that I think is interesting. His name is Jamel J. Brown. He's a pastor and an influencer who is running for governor of Alabama. Now Tommy Tuberville is running on the other side. I think that's an uphill battle. And so you gotta have some creative thinking. And on the podcast, I've been discussing how in red states we need heterodox Democrats. You know, I don't. They don't need to be squishy moderates, but they've gotta stake out some different points of view. And here's Jamel Brown's list of 20 executive orders that he is going to sign on day one to put the people of Alabama first. Legalize and tax marijuana for personal use. Pardon nonviolent offenders in state prisons. Eliminate state tax on groceries. That's good. Legalize and tax the lottery. Okay. $3,000 stimulus checks for those making under 100k. It's a little Keynesian for me, but okay. Restore law and order in crime ridden cities. All right, we're pivoting a little bit to the right here on law and order issues. Put parents back in charge of education, people like that. Number eight, legalize sex stores. Number nine, bring prayer back into school. It's an interesting pairing, but I like it. I don't, you know, and separation, church of state and all that. But I do think that the Democrats reaching out to religious people is important. Legalize sex stores and bring prayer break into schools. Number 10, invest in Alabama businesses for the chamber of Commerce. Class 11, pay raise for all state employees for the Public sector. That's nice. Number 12, make Montgomery a strip. Number 12, make Montgomery a strip club city. I don't know what that entails exactly, but I'm interested.

Bill Kristol (57:27)

Is that a thing you could be like some cities sanctuary cities.

Tim Miller (57:31)

Other cities are club cities.

Bill Kristol (57:34)

Sanctuary.

Tim Miller (57:35)

No, sanctuary cities. We should call his camp.

Bill Kristol (57:37)

Him he's seen very accessible, I think online. I think we can just direct DM him and ask him what exactly is 912 implies.

Tim Miller (57:44)

I've never been to Montgomery, for example, and I might consider it now. And I'm not a strip club guy myself. But just as a cultural thing, just as a curiosity, make Montgomery a strip Club City. 3 month grace period for utility bills. That's good. Support our veterans. Anyway, there goes more. I like it. I should say that Doug Jones is also in the governor's race and I think is the more prominent candidate for the nomination. And I don't want to disendorse Doug or say anything negative about him, but I just, I think that what Jamel is offering is something different. He's trying something and I, and I want to make sure I'm highlighting that. So that's all. Do you have any thoughts on the Jamelle Brown candidacy?

Bill Kristol (58:21)

It'll be great. When Doug, I know Doug some as you do. When Doug, who's a serious and kind of earnest guy. When Doug gets asked today, you know, after people watch, maybe they saw the original tweet by this other discover his rival. But maybe after they honestly, after they watch the show, when Doug gets asked where are you on making Montgomery a strip club city? You know, and then it becomes the big issue in the cadet Democratic gubernatorial primary in Alabama.

Tim Miller (58:45)

Why not? A lot of times, particularly presidential races, the niche candidates bring an issue to the fore and the more mainstream candidates co opt it because they see the popularity and maybe that could be making Montgomery a stroke club city. Okay, Bill Kristol, thank you. I don't even know what to expect for tomorrow's show. So we're going to see. It's going to be fun, I think, but it's going to be a little surprise for folks, so stick around for that. We have the next level podcast. Podcast also comes out on Tuesday. So a lot of, a lot of material. And then we're in Austin later. This is Dallas and Austin. We're in Dallas Wednesday night. Austin Thursday. We got a surprise guest in Dallas. Wednesday that'll be your Thursday podcast. Then Friday it will be me with a hangover after a night out in Austin with, with somebody. So that's the schedule for the week. It's going to be pretty good. Bill, thank you so much for doing it. And the tickets are still available in Austin. Thebullork.com tickets it's the biggest venue we've ever played. We already sold over a thousand tickets, so it's awesome how many people are coming. But if you want to pop in and go check us out. Anything else, Bill?

Bill Kristol (59:48)

If Montgomery becomes a strip club city, we need to do a bulwark event there, obviously. Right?

Tim Miller (59:52)

I agree.

Bill Kristol (59:53)

Don't you think? Not that I would go. I'm make that clear. It just absolutely as a kind of gesture of rewarding freshly outside the box thinking.

Tim Miller (60:02)

Totally agree. Montgomery. We'll see you in 2027. Everybody else, Bill, Chris will see you back here Monday. Everybody else will see you tomorrow. Bye. And if it's all right with you before I I get back on the train, I just want to see my gumry in the rain. The Bulwark Podcast is produced by Katie Cooper with audio engineering and editing by Jason Brown.

Malcolm Gladwell (60:35)

This is Jay Shetty from On Purpose with Jay Shetty. Push It, Bend It, Flex it Introducing the latest rule bending innovation from Brooks Running the new Glycerin Flex. Feel the freedom with a cushioned shoe made to move with you so that you can bend or flex the rules. Brooks new strategically segmented midsole works as an extension of your body, putting you in control of the run like never before. Want to feel the best parts of your run? Flex the rules in the new Glycerin Flex. Let's run this shop now@brooksrunning.com hi, this

Danielle Robay (61:09)

is Danielle Robay, the host of Bookmarked by Reese's Book Club, a podcast by hello Sunshine and I Heart Podcasts. I'm partnering with Simple Mills and I've just found my new go to Reading snack, Simple Mills Almond Flour Crackers. Think of this as a quick book style review because these crackers deserve it. The premise? A snack that feels light, not heavy. Made with almond flour, sunflower seeds and flaxseeds. Nutrient dense ingredients your body can use. Not empty carbs. And the taste? Crunchy, classic flavors that leave you feeling energized. For a good plot twist, try Popums Cheesy, airy, poppable Crackers packed with veggies. Final Verdict these are a shelf staple. Find simple meals at your grocery store.