Bill Kristol: Republicans Are a Mess

Summary

THE BULWARK DAILY
Episode: "Bill Kristol: Republicans Are a Mess"
Date: August 10, 2026
Host: Tim Miller
Guest: Bill Kristol

---

Episode Overview

In this Monday edition of The Bulwark Daily, host Tim Miller and regular guest Bill Kristol dive deep into the chaotic state of Republican politics, the recent government funding fight, Ohio’s surprising swing-state potential, the Max Miller scandal, fractures on the far-right, and the ongoing Iran War. The episode is marked by a shared sense of frustration at Democratic passivity, outrage over Republican cowardice, and concern for liberal democratic norms in the face of mounting authoritarian impulses. Along the way, Tim and Bill balance insightful policy analysis with sharp wit, anecdotal history, and the occasional light-hearted tangent.

---

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. Government Funding Fight & Democratic Strategy

[00:32–06:57]

• Senate passes CR to prevent shutdown: The U.S. Senate passed a continuing resolution (CR) to fund the government through the midterms, 90–6. Only 5 Democrats and Rand Paul opposed.
• The problem with passivity: Tim expresses disappointment that Democrats didn’t seize the opportunity to negotiate, especially given the ongoing funding of ICE and the war.
• Potential for further conflict in September: Senate and House must now reconcile different bills; potential for renewed fights over defense and ICE funding.

“You and I have this in common, that we take a position, it loses 96 in the United States Senate and we're still thinking, hey, we're right.” — Bill Kristol [01:58]

• Democrats' prevent defense: Bill likens Democrats’ reluctance to fight to a sports team switching to ‘prevent defense’ too early, noting that previous government shutdowns benefited them politically.

“They’ve talked themselves into, I think, an excessively passive strategy. But not the end of the world.” — Bill Kristol [06:08]

2. The Max Miller Scandal and GOP Cowardice

[06:57–11:44]

• Republican silence on Max Miller: Discussion of Ohio Rep. Max Miller, credibly accused of domestic abuse. GOP leadership, particularly Donald Trump and Speaker Mike Johnson, refuse to push him off the ballot.
• Privilege and silence: Senators’ minimal statements were due to personal ties, not principle. House colleagues and the NRCC remain silent.
• Democratic opportunity in Ohio: Miller is vulnerable, his district less solidly Republican than it appears (“R+8 to R+12” territory). The scandal could spill over into Senate and gubernatorial races, reviving Ohio’s status as a swing state.

“If the victim here had been someone whose father was not a senator, I don't know that any senators would have spoken up.” — Bill Kristol [08:20]

• GOP fear of Trump: The silence is emblematic of the party’s fear and deference to Trump.

“Once Trump and Johnson are okay with it, they seem to be fine with it's amazing the excuses they find for not taking a position on something.” — Bill Kristol [08:20]

3. Emerging Right-Wing Fracture: America First Party?

[13:12–18:24]

• Talk of a far-right third party: Joe Kent, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Tucker Carlson, and Thomas Massie discussed forming a “America First” party, potentially as a 2028 vehicle.

• MTG quote:
  “Our argument is the two party system is a complete and total failure. I'm 100%, totally, completely disgusted with both parties.” — Marjorie Taylor Greene [14:16]

• Impact on GOP unity: Bill and Tim discuss whether these fissures could finally create a real split in the Republican Party.

• Trump’s personal glue: Trump’s presence continues to unify disparate factions; without him, a major fracture is possible, though not guaranteed.

“There is a personal character of his leadership. I hate to even give him credit, but it's true.” — Bill Kristol [17:05]

• Democrats likely to remain united: Despite media narratives about left-wing fragmentation, Bill’s contrarian read is Democrats may hold together while the GOP might come apart.

4. Trump, the Iran War, and Incoherence in Leadership

[21:36–24:11]

• Trump’s rambling on Iran: Tim reads an extended, meandering Trump quote about the Iran conflict from a Nevada rally, highlighting his incoherence and lack of clarity or plan.
• Escalating rhetoric: Trump bizarrely claims, “We're set for the biggest attack since World War II...But at some point we're going to.”
• Public confusion & mismanagement: Bill and Tim note public confusion and lack of confidence concerning the administration’s handling of Iran and foreign policy.

“How can you listen to that and think that this person has any at all grasp on what's happening? Or any plan or any idea.” — Tim Miller [22:09]

“There's enough mismanagement combined with the lack of any strategy combined with the fact that the war's unconstitutional, illegal, combined with the fact that it's just super foolish and has been executed badly...” — Bill Kristol [24:11]

5. Defense Department Dysfunction & Procurement Corruption

[27:31–32:35]

• Corruption in defense contracting: Lockheed and Raytheon refuse to license missile production to Ukraine, fearing competition.
• Dysfunction under Trump: Ongoing exodus of competent officials, replaced by loyalists. The military’s professional culture at risk.
• Trump’s loyalty test: Even as inefficiencies mount, Trump prizes “yes men” like Hegseth, making real reform impossible.

“Good people leaving, bad people sucking up to their political masters to get promoted...The defense bond already needed to be reformed...going to be a huge task in 2029 to sort of rebuild it...” — Bill Kristol [27:31]

• Imitation of authoritarian militaries: Trump is politicizing the military, firing generals, promoting loyalists, and intimidating the ranks.

6. Continued Degradation of GOP Character

[32:35–35:46]

• Capitulation on core values: Discussion of the recent confirmation of Todd Blanche as Attorney General, despite Blanche’s record of politicizing justice and covering up abuses (e.g., Epstein). GOP senators like Bill Cassidy show “pathetic” self-delusion.

“A major moment of pathetic capitulation to transcendental Trump.” — Bill Kristol [32:47]

“Utter disgrace. That's the right word.” — Tim Miller [35:46]

7. Immigration Atrocities: Haitian Deportations & The Wall

[35:46–41:02]

• Mass removals to Haiti: The administration is deporting Haitians despite the dire conditions in Haiti. ICE’s actions are harsh and traumatizing even for hard-working, law-abiding migrants.
• Personal stories: A Miami business owner losing his staff, Ohio communities shaken. Some deportees even voted for Trump, shocked at the betrayal.
• Big Bend wall boondoggle: Billions spent to build a border wall through an inhospitable section of Texas’ Big Bend National Park—few if any crossings take place there, and even MAGA sheriffs oppose it. The project seizes land, damages the park, and paradoxically helps smugglers.

“They're doing fine. They're working hard. No one in Springfield wants them to leave. No one in Miami wants them to leave.” — Bill Kristol [37:06]

8. Tangents & Lighter Moments

• Banana facts & the legacy of United Fruit: Tim ties the United Fruit Company's economic imperialism and its infrastructure dominance to modern AI corporate power (banana oligarchs vs. tech oligarchs).
  [42:07–44:52]
• Chris Hayes’s pink tank top: Social media abuzz over Chris Hayes’s fashion on Pod Save America. Bill bats away the suggestion that he’d sport a similar look.
  [44:52–45:34]

---

Notable Quotes and Memorable Moments

• On Democratic timidity:

  “They've talked themselves into, I think, an excessively passive strategy.” — Bill Kristol [06:08]

• On GOP’s refusal to hold Max Miller accountable:

  “Once Trump and Johnson are okay with it, they seem to be fine with it's amazing the excuses they find for not taking a position on something.” — Bill Kristol [08:20]

• On far-right 3rd party potential:

  “The odds are not nothing that there's a genuine third or fourth party on the right…maybe it's not ultimately the Republican party splits in half and we have a sort of 1912 type situation.” — Bill Kristol [14:37]

• On the future of both parties:

  “There's been so much publicity about the Democratic socialists…It's the Republicans who might, beneath the surface, finally sort of start to come apart at the seams.” — Bill Kristol [17:08]

• On Trump's incoherent Iran policy:

  “He doesn't even really have a coherent story to tell his fans right now on Iran.” — Tim Miller [24:11]

• On GOP abdication of decency:

  “A major moment of pathetic capitulation to transcendental Trump…really, really horrible.” — Bill Kristol [32:47]

• On banana companies and tech oligarchs:

  “We should learn from the countries that allowed the fruit companies to get out of control to such a degree that they were more powerful than the governments themselves. I think that's a good lesson for us on the banana front.” — Tim Miller [44:38]

• Fashion forward?

  “No.” — Bill Kristol, on whether he’d wear a pink tank top and gold chain [45:32]

---

Timestamps for Important Segments

| Time | Segment/Topic | |------------|----------------------------------------------------| | 00:32–06:57 | Senate funding bill & Dem strategy | | 06:57–11:44 | Max Miller scandal & Ohio politics | | 13:12–18:24 | America First faction & GOP splinter risks | | 21:36–24:11 | Trump’s Iran war rhetoric, confusion & risks | | 27:31–32:35 | Defense Dept. mismanagement & military politicizing| | 32:35–35:46 | Senate caving on Blanche AG confirmation | | 35:46–41:02 | Immigration outrages: Haiti removals, Border Wall | | 42:07–44:52 | Banana imperialism, United Fruit analogies | | 44:52–45:34 | Chris Hayes’s pink tank top |

---

Tone and Language

Throughout, Tim and Bill deliver rapid-fire, substantive, and often darkly funny commentary. Their language is frank, sometimes biting, often incredulous—particularly when cataloging the GOP’s ethical collapse or the fecklessness of Democratic strategy. Colorful anecdotes (United Fruit, tailored pink tank tops) keep the tone lively amid the heavy politics, and both hosts exhibit the trademark Bulwark mix of exasperation, hope for liberal democracy, and gallows humor.

---

For further reading/listening:

• Recent Bulwark newsletter pieces on Ohio, Haiti, and the Defense Dept.
• Crystal Conversations interview with Eric Edelman (Defense/military deep dive)
• Bulwark Takes with Ike Saul (Border/immigration analysis)

Transcript

[A]

Foreign.

[B]

Hello and welcome to the Bulwark Daily. I'm your host, Tim Miller. It is Monday, so we are back with Bill Kristol. We're in the doldrums of August. And you know, there's still, there's still terrible news out there, though, in the doldrums of August. How you doing, Bill?

[A]

Yeah, I'm doing fine, but I agree that the news is not universally great.

[B]

We're going to run through some of the stuff I'm going to start here because it seems like me and Bill are the only ones who are upset about this. So I'm going to put it at the top of the podcast. The U.S. senate on Friday did pass a government funding bill that will prevent a shutdown through the midterm elections. The CR passed 90 to 6. So only 6, only 5 Democrats voted against it. Actually, Rand Paul always votes against this sort of stuff. The senators, according to reports from the Hill types notice and punchbowl senators seem to be gearing up for a bigger fight in December. Why? Why does. I don't know. Hard to say. I saw a silver lining. Bill. Saw silver lining. One silver lining I saw is that the CR does push back the ban on weed beverages, which I can't believe that they're going through with. It's just a disaster for small business people all over the country, including in red states and districts. But going to need our weed beverages to get through the midterms. So any delay on that, I guess, would be good. Besides that, I'm mystified why all the Democrats went along with this. I guess I should say forget the bill. It's not over yet or I wouldn't have led the show with it. The CR they passed in the Senate is different than the one in the House. Now the House has to vote on it again. So conceivably this, you know, if Hakeem Jeffries and the Democrats in the House decided that they wanted to pick a fight over something that is still possible, I encourage them to do so. Bill, what's your, what's your thoughts on the state of play over there on the Hill?

[A]

You know, you and I have this in common, that we take a position, it loses 96 in the United States Senate and we're still thinking, hey, we're right. You know, what are those? 44. Whatever they are. 41. I guess Democratic senators know that we don't know. I mean, look, it's a cr so there's some argument always for keeping the government open and not getting into a frantic September Bargaining where, which parts of it are going to be open and stuff. But they are funding a lot of banks, bad stuff. They're funding the ongoing operations of ice, the ongoing operations of the war, the ongoing operations of this and that. I at least would have made Republicans withdrawing the reconciliation bill a condition of the vote. Maybe they did that tacitly because the Republic or quietly because the Republicans did withdraw or have not moved on the reconciliation bill, which has the 60 plus billion dollars for defense and various other appropriations, most of which are probably bad. So that is a bit of a silver lining. And which means there still will be fights in September, as you say, partly in the House as they move to accept the Senate bill. Or if they don't accept it, then they have to go to reconciliation, not reconciliation. I'm sorry, to a conference committee. Wasn't that a thing that used to happen in the. And I kind of remember that for major pieces of legislation that seems not to happen anymore. But anyway, so it still is alive in that respect. And then, as I say, there still will be fights on reconciliation and on other, other issues as well. So.

[B]

Well, these guys don't work, really. And so the House is not back until September, right.

[A]

I think very end of August, and I think The Senate is September 14th right now. It's unbelievable.

[B]

So this could be one of these situations. I mean, we're being a little glib about it, but as I recall, the last shutdown fight, or maybe it was two shutdown fights ago, was really, it was the events of Minnesota that caused it. The Democrats were on path to kind of doing this continuing kicking the can thing. And then there's this righteous outrage for good reason over the behavior of ICE that then gave a kick in the pants to the Democrats who are like, okay, well, we can't fund this government right now. And that kind of led to the last fight. Long time till September, I guess. Now who the hell knows what's going to happen, what horrors the Trump administration will inflict upon us between now and then. But I do think that anything that kind of extends that timeline creates the possibility that there's another galvanizing kind of event to organize around. I agree. Just like the facts of this is that this is kind of continuing the status quo through December versus a reconciliation bill would have given them more money for the stupid war and for the stupid war at home in deportations. But to me, even still, the status quo is like a no. The status quo is a no anyway. And I just, I don't see just stimulating the argument of the Democrats, I guess it would say we don't want to give them anything going ahead to the midterms. We feel good about the midterms. We don't want to give them the opportunity of saying that we're shutting down the government and that that is harming people. I just don't see how that would be an effective argument for the Republicans.

[A]

I think that is their private political argument. We're winning. Let's not rock the boat too much. I always get worried. This is like teams going into prevent defense much too early. You know, I feel like. But psychologically it's a bad sign that in a sense went along with this. The Democrats won the previous two fights politically. Right. First was at the end of September. Right. It was September, October, the government shut down, which coincided with Trump dropping some more in the polls and extremely good election results last November in Virginia and New Jersey. And then the second fight, as you say, was after Minneapolis on dhs. Ultimately, they got that funding back through their earlier reconciliation bill. But that fight did really help. I think it brought home that there was a split between the two parties on this fundamental question of mass deportation.

[B]

And substantively, they had to use the reconciliation to fund it. You know what I mean? So again, that could have been something else that the Republicans had done to pass and the Democrats successfully got that funding out of the broader budget. Republicans had to use reconciliation. So again, this is like a minor win in the grand scheme of things. But the Democrats are in the minority. And so minor wins are what you're going for.

[A]

Right. They had two wins in a row. And God forbid they should pursue the same strategy the third time. That's kind of too complicated for the Democrats. So they've talked themselves into, I think, an excessively passive strategy. But not the end of the world.

[B]

No, not the end of the world. But I'll note again, it's our people. This is really why I feel like it's incumbent upon us to do it, because it's like, who are the no votes? Warren Sanders, Tim Kaine. Shout out to Tim Kaine was the one guy that I saw in the bill from more of the mainstream party

[A]

that was, I think on the war probably was what moved him. He's been very outspoken on the war powers stuff. And he's right to be, incidentally. And they couldn't demand a vote from Republic. I guess they don't need to demand a vote. I guess those resolutions are privileged. They get votes anyway. Anyway. That's why there have been so many of them. But they really need to be ready to fight on the war and on ice and on everything else in those two weeks that they're back in September.

[B]

Some of this is just messaging and positioning, and this is just my view on the war thing Overall. This isn't 2003. You don't need to do the thing where, like, we're worried that if we fight over war funding, the people are going to be mad at us because we're not funding the troops. It's like, nobody wants this. The president doesn't even want the stupid war. Nobody wants a stupid war. Plant your flag in the ground, you know, and make an argument on the funding side of this that you're not going to provide another penny for this thing, this thing that nobody wants. It's hurting people in America, that's hurting our standing abroad, and it's achieving no results. So we're going to get back to the war. Sorry, there's my war rant. But let's just stay on the Hill for a second. Maximilian, because you wrote about this this morning for the newsletter. Today is like, ostensibly the deadline for Max Miller, the very credibly alleged domestic abuser that the Republicans are running in an Ohio House seat for him to get off the ballot and be replaced by somebody else. You pointed out to me that technically he had to write a letter by Saturday. Actually, the deadline might already be passed. But ostensibly, today is the final day. The Republicans, Donald Trump and Mike Johnson in particular, the nrcc, have not done anything to push him aside. They've stood beside him, they've continued to enable him. And man, and I just think it's just another pretty stark example of just the weakness and cowardice of these guys.

[A]

Yeah, it's amazing a few senators have spoke that up, but only because their colleague Bernie Moreno, who's the father in law, ex father in law of Miller, the father obviously of Emily Moreno, who was married to Miller and abused by her, she says, quite credibly, only because they were sort of supporting their colleague. If the victim here had been someone whose father was not a senator, I don't know that any senators would have spoken up. But more to the point, the House members, who are actually Miller's colleagues, have been incredibly silent, led by their leaders, if you can call them that, Speaker Johnson, who's busy giving interviews about how, you know, life is complicated. What did he say? We're all flawed human beings? Something like that. I mean, it's really a little philosophy there from the speaker. You know, we said, God forbid we should actually do anything about someone who's been charged for this and speak out against him, really urge him to resign from the House or at least not run for reelection. Say you wouldn't the NRCC shouldn't provide funding for him, et cetera, et cetera. But no, they're so passive. And once Trump and Johnson are okay with it, they seem to be fine with it's amazing the excuses they find for not taking a position on something.

[B]

His opponent in that House race, Brian Poindexter, I don't want to pretend like I know a ton about him, but I do want to read to you the lead of the New York Times story about him from over the weekend. Brian Poindexter, until recently, a little known Democratic candidate in a solidly Republican House district lit a Marlboro cigarette and jammed a screwdriver screwdriver into the latch of a shed door he had built. He ignored his phone which had been blowing up because of the Miller scandal. Quote, it's crazy to have him running for Congress, said Poindexter's father, Bob, who had made bolts for a living until he retired last year. He was watching his son work. What would be really crazy if he won. You know, Democrats looking for guys that are smoking cigarettes and fixing shed doors. So that's a good start. And I we've been flagging this from before, you know, the Times flag. This is a solidly Republican House district. It was always in that, that kind of batch of House districts that I've been really focused on that we included in our list put again here in the show notes if people missed it a couple weeks ago, these kind of R 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 seats that sure in a good Republican year are solid R. But it was kind of in that next edge of vulnerable seats even before this scandal.

[A]

Yeah. And I think Miller in 2024, well Trump won it by fairly comfortably. But I think Miller got like 51 point something percent of the vote. There was some independent candidates. So his margins a little bigger, you know, is more than three points or something. But yeah. So he's never been super popular nor should he be, you know, unqualified. Trump staffer who was vaguely involved in helping to organize was involved not just vaguely helping to organize the January 6, the speech by Trump. I guess he was some kind maybe he's an advanced guy or something. I don't know helping arranging the speakers at that just terrible rally which incited the insurgent the storming of the Capitol. So he was involved in that. Then he wins in 2022, because Trump endorses him. He's the son of a very son, grandson, nephew, whatever. A very rich family in Cleveland, the Miller family, but has never been, so far as one can tell, particularly popular in the district. So I do think that's a winnable race, and I think all the Ohio races are winnable. I think this will spill over to the senatorial race, the gubernatorial race. It looks like the Democrats are at least even in both of those. Maybe Ohio will go back to being what it was in our youth, Tim, you know, when it was an actual swing state, the closest state in 2004.

[B]

Yeah, I'm glad you brought that up, because that's where I was going to go next, too, because I feel like I've given Ohio a little bit of short shrift compared to some of the other big Senate races, in part just because it's a little more. There's a kind of status quo with Sherrod Brown against John Husted. Husted did not handle this scandal with any sort of honor or integrity. And he spent days avoiding saying anything and then kind of put out the most tepid imaginable statement about Miller. And then over in the governor's race, you have Amy Acton running against Vivek, my old pal Vivek, who I followed around Iowa. Vivek. I didn't realize this till yesterday. I was kind of getting ready for the pod. Vivek's already spent like 40 million on that governor's race, and Acton spent basically nothing, at least on the airwaves. And it's tied. And he's spending a ton of money just to barely stay above water. The data center issue, massive in Ohio, one of the biggest states in the country, for the amount of data centers being built. And they gave this insane tax break to the companies that's causing a budget hole. And Vivek was out there cheerleading all that. So between the data centers and Max Miller and obviously all the economic wreckage Trump is bringing. Yeah, all of those feel winnable for the Democrats for the first time in a minute.

[A]

Yeah, I agree. Very much so. And it would be nice to have Ohio back as a real swing state. It'd be nice to have Ohio with Democratic governor and senator and a couple of extra members of Congress, perhaps the

[B]

other Republican politics thing that's just bubbling around. I just wanted to mention your old friend Tucker. You hired Tucker, right? You hired Tucker. You're supplying.

[A]

I did, I did. 1995, he was 31 years old. He was 24 years. He was 24 years old. I think 23 and did work for the Lucasana for five years and was a good reporter.

[B]

I think in 1995 I was sneaking liquor out of my parents cabinet at too young of an age. So we all make mistakes in 19. We all made some mistakes in 1995. There was I guess a meeting of the minds, if you want to call it that, between Joe Kent, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Tucker Thomas Massie talking about potentially creating a third party like an America first party, talking about 2028 coming out of that obviously will Tucker run? Is kind of the top line thing that people discuss out of that. I think that Tucker, the short of that I think basically is if Trump tries to get behind Rubio, maybe Tucker decides to get in. But I think Tucker would be pretty satisfied with Vance. But that's kind of where things stand now. But MTG is our quote, our argument is the two party system is a complete and total failure. I'm 100%, totally, completely disgusted with both parties. A lot of adverbs. This is not nothing. I'm not sure that this is a successful party. I don't think this is the beginnings of a successful party per se. But it's, it is a real political issue for the Republicans.

[A]

I mean, who knows where these people all end up and who knows what Trump does and does he run again? Does he try to get Don Jr instead of Vance or Rubio? But the odds are not nothing that there's a genuine third or fourth party on the right. Right. An MTG type America first party. Maybe it's not ultimately the Republican party splits in half and we have a sort of 1912 type situation or something. But maybe it is Buchanan, Right? What did Buchanan get? Two and a half percent or something in 2000? I mean, I don't think that's at all out of the question, especially if this war drags on and, and Trump can't end it and you know, things and Trump just seems generally unpopular enough that they don't feel intimidated by Trump or by the Republican establishment. They're certainly not intimidated by the Republican establishment in any case at this point. But Trump presumably could squash this personally. Maybe, or maybe not even. Who knows where he'll be a year and a half from now. It's a pretty, you know, sorry to

[B]

bring up bad memories for some of the listeners, but Buchanan, almost as a spoiler for Bush in 2000, that ends up being a spoiler for Gore because people accidentally voted for him on the butterfly ballot. He meant to vote for Gore in Florida. The point of that Story is you never know what kind of impact these kind of things could have. Right. Like, it might feel like a kind of silly gadfly thing on the side, but the thing they've got going for them is they have an actual base.

[A]

Right.

[B]

And I think that a lot of times I would get phone calls and you would, I know for years about why can't Jeff Flake and whoever, Joe Manchin start a third party? And it's like there just isn't a real support base for that. There are some people that might support that type of third party in a situational environment, depending on what the other two parties put up. But most people who would want that are either happy with the center left Democrats or are the tiny percentage of Nikki Haley Wall Street Journal Republicans who still exist. This group has a real potential base to build from that could cause a lot of problems. And obviously they have huge megaphones and Trump has made it possible for them. This would not have been possible if Trump had not made his own bed. By getting in bed with the tech oligarchs, covering up the Epstein files and starting the stupid war with Iran. Trump made this insurgency within the party possible.

[A]

Yeah. I mean, part of me wants to say no one who's anti Trump and anti Trumpism and anti authoritarianism should count on, on this. They could end up with a pretty unified authoritarian ticket party in 2020.

[B]

I mean, Tucker's like 10 point plan was pretty fasy.

[A]

Yeah. Totally fashy. Yeah. But not like Vance would be that much less so. So they could. It could be the threat. It remains very great. Having said that, under general contrarian principle that people are always, you know, kind of wrong and these kinds of things. There's been so much publicity about the Democratic socialists and the huge fights within the Democratic Party and God knows where they, you know, it's going to rip. Be ripped apart at the seams. I kind of assume just on contrarian principles that the Democrats will end up being reasonably united in 2028 and this fall for that matter. Actually. And it's the Republicans who might, beneath the surface, finally sort of start to come apart at the seams. There was so much wishful thinking. That's one reason I'm so hesitant to even say it for 2018-2020-2022-2024, even 2026. They're not really, as we saw with Max Miller, they're not coming apart at the seams. I mean, no one's denouncing him or an Epstein in the 50 out of 52 for Todd Blanch. One shouldn't expect it, but it does feel that there's more real tension on the Republican side. Trump has held together personally a lot, right? I mean, there is a personal character of his leadership. I hate to even give him credit, but it's true. It wouldn't be happening without Trump. And so ex Trump, if Trump does step aside or is forced aside, you know, just passed to step aside because he's 82 or whatever, it could begin to really fracture in a way we haven't seen since 2016, I guess.

[B]

You know, I agree with that. And what's the line? These things happen very slowly and then all at once. I think that's something to continue to monitor. Losing weight is one thing, but looking and feeling your best this August, that's the real goal. That's why weight loss by hims now offers access to FDA approved WeGovy pill and the WeGovy pen. WeGovy is designed to help you lose weight and keep it off so you can show up this summer feeling like yourself. With WeGovy at hims is up to 20% of your body weight when combined with diet and exercise. It's interesting you can also lose some without any exercise. I think if you ask the Vice president, it helps you regulate your appetite, eat less and keep weight off. Plus, WeGovy is the first ever GLP1 pill for weight loss, so there are no needles needed, which is great for me because I'm scared of needles. Really scared of needles. And you know, I think that served me well in life. But it's nice to know that there's a pill option. Through hims, everything happens online. You'll connect with a licensed provider who will determine if treatment is right for you. If prescribed, your medication is delivered right to your door. No insurance necessary. And it doesn't stop there. HIMSS makes hitting your Goals seamless by offering 247 messaging with your care team and in app lifestyle and nutrition support. Ready to reach your goals? Visit himss.com thebullwork to get a personalized, affordable plan that gets you that's H I M S.com thebullwork hims.com thebullwerk Weight loss by HIMS is not available in all 50 states. WeGovy is a registered trademark of Novo Nordisk as to get started and learn more, including important safety information, WeGovy clinical study information and restrictions, visit HIMSS.com the Iran War is, I just think clearly the instigator for all of this and has made something that was like there and like you said, bubbling was under the scenes. There were potential fissures that would have been exposed eventually. The war supercharged that. I was listening to one of the kind of America Firsty podcasts I listened to over the weekend. And they played this clip from Trump talking in Nevada. And we're just mocking him. And we don't play Trump's voice on here. Even though John Halloman broke that rule when he was guest hosting for me with Jill Kristol. We didn't warn him. We let the guest hosts do their own thing. Okay, everybody could be a little nicer to John. So I'm just gonna read it. The Trump quote. Get comfortable. Cause it's long. Here's Trump, I think, off teleprompter in Nevada. Cause it was supposed to be a messaging event about the economy. So I don't think Iran was supposed to come up at all. And then he does this Trump thing where he does an aside. And we're doing the same thing, by the way, in the lovely Islamic Republic of Iran. We're knocking the hell out of it. Knocking the hell out of them. I'd rather make a deal because I don't want to kill people. I do not want to kill people. But at some point we're going to. We'll not want to kill people, but at some point we're going to. We're set for the biggest attack of any attack. And we've hit them very hard the last few months, but we're all set for the biggest attack since World War II. And they called me and they said, please don't do it, sir. Let's talk. And then they said, we never said that. You know what the fake news knows? They did say that. But we are talking. Let's see what happens. But they respect us. They respect us. It's been 47 years, but really it's been 50. Because they've been saying 47 for three years. It's been 50. And no other president has done what you should have done a long time ago because Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon. Can't have it. But just last week, last week, Kamala Harris called for eliminating the Electoral College. That was Trump. That was Trump in Nevada on the state of play with the Iran negotiations. He also said it could open as soon as this weekend. It's Monday. It's not open. He called Axios and said, we are low keying. We are only semi negotiating with them. How can you listen to that and think that this person has any at all grasp on what's happening? Or any plan or any idea.

[A]

Plus, maybe threatening the biggest attacks since World War II is not a popular thing to do. Do people really want to have the biggest attack since World War II? I kind of doubt that you.

[B]

That's what Tim Dillon was saying. I was listening to his Dylan. He's like, this is crazy. The biggest attack since World War II. He's like, talking like a crazy person. Then he's like, oh, but we said we do it. But then the Iranians called me. And then they said, we didn't call me. And it's like, what? He's lying. He's obvious. He's just obviously lying and lost. Like, he's lost.

[A]

And the straight of Hormuz is closed. If we just come back. It's funny how much the press conference just kind of lost sight of this. They're busy covering the big back and forth. They should remind people occasionally the Strait is not open. And for all the talk, it opened briefly, sort of opened briefly. And now we're basically just saying, yeah, we hope Omar and Iran can work out a deal which is like 90% Iran telling Oman what they want the deal to be. Needless to say, where the Strait is open at Iran's sufferance. And that seems to be fine with Trump at this point. And plus the nuclear program, he's sort of talking about less. I mean, but Iran is making it hard for him to surrender because they kind of keep wanting to rub his face in it. And therefore it might. He might, I suppose, try to revert to force.

[B]

But yeah, I mean, the WSJ reporting says that Trump privately told senior aides he could just walk away from Iran if they open up the Strait of Hormuz. So, like, all he wants now is just back to status quo and he could just quit. And the Times is saying that Iran said Monday that the Strait is going to remain closed until the United States agrees to their demands on a variety of things that's going to be very hard for them to agree to. Iran took out an oil tanker in the Strait yesterday, last night, so they're still firing. It's just a disastrous situation. And I guess the point of reading his gobbledygook from Nevada is that he doesn't even have a story that he can tell about it. Right. Like, even, like his loss to Biden, like, the story that he was telling about the 2020 didn't make any sense to anybody who's in touch with reality, but it was like a coherent story for people living in his false reality. He doesn't even really have a coherent story to tell his fans right now on Iran.

[A]

You know, that's a good point, I think, and I've been struck by that. Just talking to some happened, I don't know, various functions, social occasions with people who are not that political and stuff. And yeah, it's like, what is this about the weapons? Don't they know how to use weapons so they don't run out of them? I mean, there's enough mismanagement combined with the lack of any strategy combined with the fact that the war's unconstitutional, illegal, combined with the fact that it's just super foolish and has been executed badly and hexassive buffoon. I just feel like altogether it's adding up to more maybe than you know, than just, oh, it's a foreign policy misadventure or you know,

[B]

we just made some changes in the backyard, you know, making it look a little less like a two lane frat house back there. And it's been great. But outdoor furniture is like really expensive and it's hard to figure out what's going to hold up in the weather and what's going to be actually comfortable. One of the things I went and bought on myself was a chair that looked really cool and broke in like eight days. So if you're like me and you ever fall head over heels for something online only to see the price and realize it's way out of budget, or only to get it and realize it's not as good as it looks, that's where dupe.com comes in. It's a tool that helps you find high quality, budget friendly versions of the expensive pieces you've been eyeing. Super easy to use. Just go to dupe.com and paste and any product URL, upload a photo or just type in what you're looking for and it shows you look alikes that won't drain your savings account. And these aren't shady knockoffs. A lot of the time they're made in the exact same factory. It's just sold under a different name with a much more reasonable price tag. Instead of giving you a bunch of sponsored results and ads disguised as recommendations, Dupe digs through the options and tells you what's actually good, what's overpriced, and what to avoid. Using dupe.com is insanely simple. Just go to dupe.com and paste any product URL, upload a photo and it'll instantly show you similar items for way less. There's also an app and a browser extension if you want to make it even easier? No account needed, totally free. Start saving money with Duke.com today. You had Edelman on the Crystal conversations over the weekend, which is pretty good. I was listening to that just because I'm trying to wrap my heads around what the particulars are about this story with our munitions being depleted. And this is something that Edelman knows. Well, I point people to that if they want a deeper dive. I was interested also in this story from the Atlantic saying that Lockheed and Raytheon are refusing to license Patriot missile production to Ukraine because they think the Ukrainian manufacturers are going to be more efficient. They'd be able to improve and produce them at scale and for less money. I think this is an interesting two stories to bring together, which is the corporate corruption of this White House in particular. Obviously this is something that goes this is not unique to this White House, but just the White House is totally for sale. These big D.C. interests can buy these guys off. And so we've gotten into a stupid war where we're getting dangerously low on material that we need simultaneously to the fact that the Ukrainians are doing what you would think that a free market, pro national security Republican administration would be excited about, which is innovating and coming up with ways to make weapon systems faster and more effective. And we're standing in the way of that, too.

[A]

Yeah. And in the conversation with Eric Edwin, but also the one I did when I was pinchoting for you, actually with Margaret Donovan, who served in the Defense Department the last decade as a jag and then yesterday with Pre Fram, who was kicked out of the Defense Department because she had transitioned 10 years before and had an honorable and distinguished career. But that's not good in the Trump exif world. You just go around finding people who literally transitioned 10 years before and that utterly spotless records and just purge them, you know, because they're transgender people. But we talked a little more broadly also about what's going on at the Defense Department. So she was until December. So she's in touch with a million lots and lots of people. And it's bad. I mean, I think the degree of just dysfunction, mismanagement, good people leaving bad people sucking up to their political masters to get promoted. The defense bond already needed to be reformed. It's going to be a huge task in 2029 to sort of rebuild it in a good way and reform it at the same time and get over and restore some culture, whatever the institutional problems. And you're right, the kind of interest group Lockheed Raytheon type Problems, procurement problems, I would say. Don't you think the culture of this military was pretty impressive? People respected the military in America for good reasons. There's a kind of professionalism, a kind of seriousness, sobriety, sometimes a little bit bureaucratic that's now, I think is at risk because of Trump and Hegseth.

[B]

I do think that it was like the Doge critique that Elon offered, right? Which is that there's all this waste in the Defense Department. And it's not something that despite him being awful in every way that he'd seen firsthand, he's like, I created a SpaceX and we can get into space and NASA can't anymore. And so that's a coherent critique. Right. And then they just botch it in every way possible by putting forth these buffoons and not actually really caring about the outcomes. But I do think on the Democratic side, it's funny, the story offers something both for the abundance efficiency Democrats and the Lina Khan Democrats that are like, hey, we need more competition. We should break up these big companies that are controlling defense contracting. And also we should be bringing people in that ensure that taxpayer money is being used. Those are all legit critiques of the old Defense Department that now have been totally exacerbated by these guys. Now it's worse than ever. And then you layer on top of that, getting back to your other point, just the buffoonery. There's no feeling of competence. There's no meritocracy, who's getting promoted, who's getting fired, why. And to me, it's like that last point is why you can't get rid of Hegseth. Right. Trump wants stooges in these positions. Trump doesn't care about that. Trump is embarrassed by the Iran war. He would rather win than not. But he doesn't care about military effectiveness for the purpose of that. He cares about it about in service of fluffing himself up. And so he needs people that will continue to do that.

[A]

That.

[B]

Right. And so I don't know. To me, it seems like maybe I'm wrong about this. The future will let us know, but I feel like he feels like among the safest.

[A]

And he's doing what Trump wants in terms of the politicization of the military. And he's been pretty aggressive and not incompetent exactly in that. I mean, he's been. Maybe some of the particular things haven't been good from a PR point of view, but he's got a lot of people intimidated, is what I gather. By firing the generals he fired by promoting the ones he's promoted, by making clear that he's willing to just reach into the ranks and politicize everything. It's not ineffective. I mean, it's a terrible way of being effective. Turning us into a third rate authoritarian military, which we're not, thank God, there yet or even maybe near there, but in that direction. So I agree with that. Trump doesn't care about any of that. If anything, he likes what Exit's doing. It's just a kind of Kristi Noem PR question. It's a Dan Bondi question for me at this point. Does he think he's better off with just the political side of it? But it's not so easy to find someone else. I mean, if you find someone. And also in that confirmation fight, if he waits till after November, really risks allowing a Democrat, certainly Democrats from the Senate. Right. Risks turning over a lot of rocks about what the heck was happening there in the Defense Department.

[B]

And you have to find somebody that you can trust to be as loyal as Hagseth. And that also presents as slightly more competent than him.

[A]

Right.

[B]

It feels like that person could have pitched. Yeah.

[A]

The equivalent of Blanche or Jay Clayton, I guess. Yeah, it feels like it. But maybe not because military is a little more complicated. I don't know. I feel like there's a lot of pent up. A lot of people have been quiet who've left the military, been fired. I think too many of them have been too quiet, to be honest. If you get a lot of. But whatever, they have their own culture of that and they also have incentives not to talk, speak up in some ways. But I feel like there's a little pent up stuff beneath the surface there. And maybe the firing of Hegseth would unleash some of it.

[B]

You mentioned Blanche. We didn't talk about it because Friday I was so emotionally beaten down by the events. Do you want to share any thoughts about Thom Tillis and John Cornyn and Bill Cassidy?

[A]

I mean, they're pathetic. Cassidy, the vote's pathetic enough. But what he said on TV yesterday about how, you know, this is really why for the history books, when you really have one of these major moments, and I feel honored, privileged to have been part of this major moment, a major moment of pathetic capitulation to transcendental Trump. Trump having capitulated on Robert F. Kennedy Jr. 18 months before, having gotten assurances, having watched them all just violated as he himself even is acknowledged. Right. And then I'm just going to do it again with Todd. Blanche and not having met with the Epstein survivors, really, really horrible.

[B]

But 50 out of 50 self delusion, honestly, he should donate his brain to science for psychological testing because the self delusion here is remarkable. People get confused with a lot of things. I hopes and expectations and are different. Some people are like, tim, I can't believe you're surprised that Cassie did that. I was like, I wasn't surprised. I said at the top, I'm not surprised. When he decided to go speak because these guys have delusion of grandeur. I was like, I feel like there's an outside chance that the decision to speak is signaling that he wants to be seen in this historic moment as somebody that did do the right thing because Blanche was getting in eventually anyway. McConnell's either getting replaced or he's going to rise from the dead and be able to make the vote. Right. So Lance was getting in. So I was like, to go speak might mean that he wants to. And so I was kind of half right. It turns out he was speaking because he thought it was a historic moment that he wanted to get attention for. It was just that he thought that his moment was to totally cave to Donald Trump's corruption of the Justice Department.

[A]

And just one more point. I miss you. Right. I mean, neither of us was really surprised, but it wasn't crazy to think that maybe it's a different circumstance in this way. Our friend Greg Nunziata, who runs the Society for the Rule of Law, is a genuinely conservative lawyer, worked for Republicans on the Hill on judicial and confirmations and that sort of stuff. And say Trump to his credit, but still quite conservative, I'd say, in his jurisprudential views and all that kind of thing. Very much opposed to Blanche. And he made the point, There's a very good point. He said, look, they all voted for these horrible candidates in January and February. And we, we warned them that they were going to be horrible and they were horrible, and they deserve no pass for that. On the other hand, you could at least tell yourself then, well, we don't know, maybe they'll be better than I fear. Let's defer to the president. The new president on his first round of appointments. Todd Blanche has been deputy Attorney general and then acting attorney general. We have a record of how Todd Blanche is going to run the Justice Department under Donald Trump. It's not a speculation the way some of these other people. You could have said it first was a speculation. And Greg is very, very tough on this. He says it's such a disgrace, therefore, to have confirmed this guy, having seen what he has done on the politicization of justice, on everything else he's done there, on the dishonesty, on the Epstein cover up. And so they deserve the 50 out of 52 are still willing to go along. It really is extraordinary.

[B]

Utter disgrace. That's the right word. I want to do immigration a little bit. You guys have been covering this well in morning shots in part because Jim Swift is in Ohio and been able to go to Springfield. But the removal of the Haitians is just so horrifying. The situation back in Haiti is awful. Remember the Don Row doctrine, given that this is in our hemisphere of anything, that we should be trying to help the conditions in Haiti. Everybody made fun of Kamala Harris, that her job during the Biden administration was the root causes of immigration, which is a very challenging job. And it's like we don't have total control over what's happening in Central America. But I don't know, we could at least try to help the conditions in Haiti. Instead of that, we're planning on sending people back to it. I saw you posted one of these and there's so many now this really saddening video of a guy in Ohio, Haitian guy, getting an ankle bracelet put on him because the government wants to monitor all the Haitians now so they can't run away. And it's very Eastern European socialist in these images and the actions of the. Of the ICE officials. So I don't know what more there is to say about it besides the fact that it's horrifying. But I don't know if you have any thoughts.

[A]

No, just that, I mean, it's one thing to send people back to the country they came from or Mexico, let's just say. And if they're not a personal threat, you know, okay, it's. Maybe we should keep them. Maybe we shouldn't send them back. Shouldn't send them back if they've been here for 10 or 30 years, obviously, in my view. But here you are literally sending people who came here back to a place where they could well be killed. I mean, no question about it and totally unnecessary. They're doing fine. They're working hard. No one in Springfield wants them to leave. No one in Miami wants them to leave. And that. Didn't you. I think you retweeted or commented on this.

[B]

This guy made me so mad, I couldn't play. I thought about playing it, actually, and then I was just like, I'm so upset. He runs a chain of Creole, I guess, food trucks. Maybe there's some brick and mortar stores, too. It's like Haitian food in Miami. And the guy's like, my business is going to collapse because the people that work, the Haitians that work in the kitchen and that do other jobs are all going into hiding now. Or some of them are self deporting or doing other things. And he's like, and he voted for Trump. And he's like, I couldn't believe Trump said he was going to be a businessman. What is this doing to my business? I just wanted to scream at the guy. I was like, they did a whole thing about how your people were cat and dog eaters. What did you expect?

[A]

Right? Anyway, agreed.

[B]

I covered this story on Bulwark Takes with Ike Saul over at Tangle News and similar to your conversation with Eric, if people want to deep dive on this, I'd encourage you to go check that out on the bulk takes feedback. His family is from kind of the Big Bend area of Texas and he has a house there and so has a really personal view on what's happening. And the story where Trump now the wall is still being built. It's hard to kind of keep all these stories in hand. And the wall wasn't completely built during the first term and they didn't build it in stupid places and ran out of time after four years. There's lawsuits, et cetera. And now they are putting the wa through Big Bend National Park. And you know, everything about this is outrageous and stupid. It's like the cost of it is insane. It's 10x what the proposed cost was. You know, 16, $18 billion of our money is going to be spent on this stupid thing. There's no crossings that happen here. It's the most desolate part of the border. It's mostly a tourist area where people go because it's beautiful, the national park and you can see the dark skies at night. If anything, they're going to make it easier to cross there because in order to build the wol, they got to build a bunch of roads to get the construction guys in there. And so now the tiny number of people that did cross the border here ended up in this kind of desolate national park. And a lot of times ended up having to just concede themselves to border patrol. Now, potentially they'll have roads to be able to get out. So it might actually help the coyotes that are trying to get people into the country illegally. And the most humiliating part of it, in addition to the fact that it's a waste of money, it's stupid. It's counterproductive. It's going to harm a national park. We're also ceding territory to Mexico as part of this project because just the way that they have to place the wall, there's land that had been American land, which I guess came from Mexico originally, that now is going to be on the opposite side of the wall. And some of this is eminent domain. We're taking private property from people, building a wall on their property and then giving some of their property to Mexico. So Trump has been talking about a lot of territory expansion, but so far only territorial concessions from Trump. So that's typical Trump story as well. Crazy.

[A]

It was a good conversation. I learned a lot from. I don't know how to think about Big Bend. I've never been there. But, yeah, it seems like a beautiful place. And totally. What's most striking is you say totally 100% unnecessary. Again, in other circumstances, you can. At least there's some argument on the other side. There's no one crossing. It's insane.

[B]

Yeah, the MAGA sheriffs down there are like, we don't want this. What are you doing? Didn't make me want to visit Big Bend because I actually didn't know a lot about it, but it's challenging to get to. Which I guess the point, okay, I had some listeners that gave me some negative feedback about something, which was that when I came back from vacation, I said, I promised banana facts because I was reading about Sam's Murray, who is a New Orleanian of some. I was about to say a great New Orleanian. Not sure about that. A New Orleanian of note who started a banana company, ended up up instigating a coup in Honduras on behalf of his banana company. Then he ends up taking over United Fruit, which is like kind of the big bad fruit company that is behind our phrase Banana Republic. Some of what United Fruit did was just unconscionable. So, anyway, I learned a bunch about bananas and I just wanted to. I felt like with Bill, with you here, you have surprising knowledge about things. I just wanted. Do you have United Fruit anecdotes? Do you have any thoughts about the fruits trade?

[A]

I used to work for them, you know, back in the day.

[B]

Were you born in the period where bananas were a delicacy?

[A]

I've encountered many neocon efforts. No, no, I know very little about them. Except this degree of American imperialism back then was a little bit surprising to those of us who wanted to believe maybe we were younger, slightly edifying, sanitized version of American foreign history. Of American foreign policy. But anyway that yeah, United, that's what, what United Fruit did I guess in a couple countries, maybe just a couple. And where the phrase banana republic's come from. No, I have no strong opinions about bananas. I'm not a big banana eater, honestly.

[B]

So I am a big banana eater. They were non existent in the country in like the late 19th century, beginning of the 20th century. But even before the middle of the 20th century the bananas became the most popular fruit in the country. We gave people a banana, United Fruit did. When they got off the boat at Ellis island it was like a welcome to America because Europeans had never seen a banana before. And so in some ways was like the most was a very American fruit at that time. The power that they got came not so much from the bananas. Here's an interesting relevant, I think a relevant lesson for our current day. I mean I guess it was the bananas but we ended up Zemuri and then United Fruit separately in Honduras and Guatemala and elsewhere there gained so much power because in able to get the banana from Central America here fast enough. You can get to people's grocery stores or local markets at that point. A lot of times it's still fruit and vegetable markets. You just had to create a ton of efficiencies. So they were going into these countries buying up tons of land, creating the roads, creating the railroad. Similarly to California now promising to create a railroad for the government and then only creating part of it so that the railroad doesn't make all the way through the country. They had their own ships, they had their own ports. And so this is how you get the power as a banana company to do a coup. Because it's not just from money, it's that you're controlling the infrastructure. So I'm stretching this very much to the AI oligarchs of today and what they're trying to do. Buying up all the land, controlling energy generation, drawing communications channels. We should learn from the countries that allowed the fruit companies to get out of control to such a degree that they were more powerful than the governments themselves. I think that's a good lesson for us on the banana front.

[A]

That's good. I like that. It's even worse today because of course the bananas presumably couldn't conspire against their human overlords and escape confinement. God knows what AIs could end up doing. Which I think the bananas are pretty in that respect.

[B]

The bananas have, well, well they have more interesting traits than you would think. But I'm not going to waste all my Banana facts on people on one podcast. So we'll save some more for later. Lastly, a lot of buzz on my social media about Chris Hayes going on to Pod Save America over the weekend in a pink tank top with a gold chain. And that was the outfit that he wore on the podcast. A lot of discussion. I think he looks great. That's just me. But it made me wonder and it made some others on my text chain wonder if you might ever consider that wearing a pink tank top and a gold chain onto this podcast on a Monday just to kind of give people a different look.

[A]

No,

[B]

that's Bill Kristol. We will not see him next Monday. He gets to have a little break. Thank God. Hardest working man at the Bulwark, Bill Kristol. So we'll have another one of our Bulwark friends standing in from him and we'll see you on August 24th.

[A]

Great.

[B]

All right, everybody else will see you back here tomorrow with one of our old friends.

[A]

Looking forward to it.

[B]

I'm the kind of girl that hangs with the guys like a fly on the wall with my secret eyes taking it in try to be filming them with my makeup bag watching all the scene misfit I said lit up working everybody else surrounded by the girls with the tank top. The Bulwark Daily is brought to you thanks to the work of lead producer Katie Cooper, associate producer Ansley Skipper, and with video editing by Dante DeCicco and audio engineering and editing by Jason Brown.