Jonathan Chait (2:51)

Thank you. I'm gunning for sixth man of the year in the Bulwark podcast.

Tim Miller (2:56)

So Tim Hardaway Jr people have strong thoughts about hockey. We're not going to talk about that. I want to start here. Who killed Jeffrey Epstein? Any thoughts on that?

Jonathan Chait (3:06)

Who killed every Epstein? If you're trying to get me to confess, I'm not going to do it unless you put me in the stand.

Tim Miller (3:12)

Until we find out who killed Jeffrey Epstein, we're going to keep talking about him on this podcast. Two things that are worth mentioning. I want to get into some other news of the day. Hillary Clinton is back in the news. She is testifying in a closed door interview which will be videotaped in Chappaqua. Jim Comer, Jamie Comer, very serious. Really. He's just, he's like O.J. he's out there searching for the real, real killer here, the real rapist. He's found Hillary. He's going to interview her about the Epstein situation simultaneously. More seriously to that, if you want to check out the Borg Takes feed, I was talking to Roger Sullenberger. There is a cover up happening. We don't know the veracity of the underlying information, but there was. She's a woman when she made the report. She was a girl. When the alleged event happened, she went to the FBI, said that Jeffrey Epstein and Donald Trump had assaulted her when she was underage. There are four FBI interviews. One of them was in the Epstein files. The other three are not notably. And I talked to Roger about that. You can listen to that interview on Bullet Takes. So any thoughts on the latest from the Epstein saga?

Jonathan Chait (4:20)

I mean, they were never going to release information that cast Donald Trump in a negative light.

Tim Miller (4:27)

Right.

Jonathan Chait (4:28)

What they were going to do was to release information that they had that was exculpatory or at least unrelated to Donald Trump that they could spin. But the end game of this was always some kind of COVID up. We don't know how true these allegations are because these are their leads, they're tips. It's a file. It's not criminal proof. But I always thought this was where it was going to go, was that they would find whatever was bad about Donald Trump and not release that to the public, that's what they're going to do.

Tim Miller (5:04)

The interesting thing with the Epstein omen is just the classic cover up. Part of it is, I think, a big part of the Trump vulnerability here. Like, this is a traditional politician scandal in some ways and very weird tabloid circumstances. It's, you know, the COVID up is sort of happening, right? And even within the Trump coalition, like, there's basic consensus that like Pam Bondi and Cash Patel are clowns, Right? Like, I mean, you have like the people on Fox or whatever who are just regime propagandists. They will not say anything. But anywhere in the kind of the mega appeal opinion space ranging from Megyn Kelly to the manosphere, there's essentially unanimity here that these folks are clowns, that they're covering something up. And in that sense, I do think this is not a real political vulnerability for him. As the ERA presses forward, it is,

Jonathan Chait (6:00)

I mean, sort of zooming out to a higher level. This was their issue, right? This was the rights issue. The Democrats didn't start talking about Epstein, the Republicans did. But what's amazing is that because Donald Trump is so singularly devoid of virtue, is bad in almost every way. A human being can be bad. He's also implicated in this, their handpicked issue. The thing they chose to talk about seems to implicate Donald Trump more than any other politician, which is kind of amazing, right? It's as if, you know, like Richard Nixon turns out to have been friends with Elder Hiss or.

Rocket Money Advertiser (6:39)

Right.

Jonathan Chait (6:39)

Like this is his thing. This was their issue. But like he. There's just almost no issue. You can pick where Donald Trump is a good guy. So it turns out this is just like another way in which Donald Trump is bad because he's bad in all the way.

Tim Miller (6:55)

I lied. I will say one more thing about the hockey team, okay? This is why he wants to talk about the fucking hockey team. The record is in tatters. And even on these core issues where you would have thought that the base would have been on his side, whether it be Epstein or immigration, right? Like the things that, like their media universe cared about, the Epstein thing is a total catastrophe for him. And on immigration, it's flipped. He's underwater. I mean, Abigail Spamberger talked more about ICE and CBP than he did.

Jonathan Chait (7:23)

But the hockey thing is also a problem for him because his FBI director just took a trip to Europe to watch hockey on the Taxpayer Die and

Tim Miller (7:32)

he's trying without arresting anyone. Has he arrested anyone? Who have they got?

Jonathan Chait (7:37)

Right, right. It's a Big sting operation. We're going to find out later. No. And he's claiming he was just there for meetings. And, well, while he's there, the hockey game just happened to be going on. Except they found a tweet from him last summer congratulating the hockey team and saying, I will be there last summer. I'll be there. You saw this, right? Cash Patel tweeted, I will be there to watch you guys in the Olympics. So now they're claiming it's just a coincidence that he was there when he was clearly planning it for more than a year.

Tim Miller (8:04)

No more hockey Joe Seck. Unless we're talking about Joe Seck and Peter Forsburg.

Jonathan Chait (8:08)

Right. Again, it's like all the stories are bad for him. Right. It's like he's pivoting to hockey. But, like, in a normal world, hockey would be the last thing you would want to talk about because his FBI director would be, like, on the verge of being fired over.

Tim Miller (8:18)

All the stories are bad for him to that point. I loved this. My friend Laksha Jain, who's a pollster and wrote this up for the argument. There's like, they have a longitudinal way to, like, verify the. The people that they're polling what they had said before. Right. Like, they're following the same people along. And so you can. You can match to see who they had said that they had voted for in 2024 to give you a baseline when you're getting information about them now, you know, so it's telling. And one thing that it seems like they stumbled on, that this was not intentional, that ended up just writing this article about this was that about 15% of Trump 2024 voters disapproved of his job performance. Yeah, that's a standard thing to pull. The interesting thing is among that group, among that 15%, about one in four did not admit to having voted for him when they asked again. 13% even falsely claimed to have voted for Kamala Harris. So maybe amnesia is happening. But I think that is about as telling as you can get as far as his political problems and the scope of his political problems that were like, not even to the midterm. We're a year and a month in to the presidency. And, you know, I mean, we're doing quick math here. What's a quarter of 15%? About 4%. So not a huge. But about 4% of the people that voted for him don't just disapprove of us. It's like Peter in the Garden. Who is. Who is Donald Trump? What are you talking about. I've never supported that, man.

Jonathan Chait (9:52)

Yeah. But what makes it so amazing is that traditionally the amnesia goes the other way. People falsely remember having voted for the winner. This is a well established fact in polling. So it's not the level, 4% is low. But it's the direction that's so surprising. People usually claim to have voted for the winner and not to have voted for the loser. So I'm not sure like that's ever happened before.

Tim Miller (10:19)

A well built wardrobe is about pieces that work together and hold up over time. That's what Quint's does best. Premium materials, thoughtful design and everyday staples that feel easy to wear and are easy to rely on. Quint's has the everyday essentials I love with qualities that last. Organic cotton sweaters, polos for every occasion, lighter jackets to keep you warm in the changing seasons. The list goes on. Quince works directly at top factories and cuts out the middleman. So you're not paying for a brand markup. Everything is built to hold up to daily wear and still look good season after season. I'm wearing quints right now. Look at this. You like this? Got a little piping here. Sorry, audio folks. You might have to have to pop over to YouTube just to see how handsome I look with this white piping, this little short sleeve button up shirt. I think I'm looking good. Thank you. To Quince. Refresh your wardrobe with Quince. Don't buy the same shirt as me though and wear it to the show. Okay, that might. That might feel a little weird. All right. I hope to see you in Austin. Go buy tickets to austin bloke.com events but you know, get something else. Get something similar to me. Get some other quints things. Show me that you bought some quints but we don't want to match. Refresh your wardrobe with quince. Go to quince.com the bulwark for free shipping on your order. 365 day return. It's now available in Canada too. What's up Canada? That's Q U I n c e.com the Bulwark. Free shipping and 365 day returns. Quince.com TheBullwerk Want to go through a couple other news items and then get to some of your recent columns. So we may be going to war with Iran.

Jonathan Chait (11:46)

Yeah.

Tim Miller (11:46)

There was a story in Politico this morning that is like I just mind boggling. It's a brain fuck for me because I can't decide whether the Trump advisors that are the sources for this story are the stupidest political advisors in recent memory to work at the White House. Or if it's like a savvy attempt to sabotage the plans inside the White House. It could be either. Here's the story. Senior advisers to President Trump told Politico they would prefer Israel strike Iran first in the hopes that Iran would retaliate against America or American assets in the Middle east, which would then help muster support for American voters for a full scale war in Iran. That was two White House sources to Politico.

Jonathan Chait (12:35)

Yeah. Do you remember before the Iraq war or during the Iraq war? Sorry, the Gulf War in 1990, the first Iraq war going all the way back. This is, this is. You're pretty young man.

Tim Miller (12:46)

I don't remember that.

Jonathan Chait (12:47)

Saddam Hussein launched missiles at Israel hoping to draw Israel into the war so he could rally Arab states to his side after he had invaded Kuwait. So we're sort of trying the Saddam strategy here.

Tim Miller (13:01)

So we're in the wrong word is enough.

Jonathan Chait (13:03)

Well, I mean we've got the two. We've got Uday and Kuse already, you know, doing deals.

Tim Miller (13:09)

The design aesthetic is very. Udai and Kousse. Exactly.

Jonathan Chait (13:14)

Yeah, yeah.

Tim Miller (13:15)

I mean there have been some other examples as plenty over his in history, you know, Gulf of Tonkin or whatever. But you know, remember the main. A lot of times though, that was a post hoc thing, you know, like this happened and then we're using it as a rationale. Right. I can't tell if it's a hope, a wish casting or baiting. Even if this went out as they said, the advisors think that us getting drug into a Middle east war by Israel is going to make it more popular. I truly don't understand. I've been talking about this for like a week now and I'm asking every guest, I'm grasping, I don't understand what they're doing. I don't understand why he's doing it. All of the logical things people say like, oh, it's going to distract from Epstein or oh, machismo, or maybe there's a corrupt deal. I don't know. Maybe Jared wants to build something in Tehran. None of it makes sense.

Jonathan Chait (14:07)

Right? What is the actual motive? Right, because on the surface motives are so comically transparent. Right. They claimed to have destroyed the Iranian nuclear program. In fact, that anyone who said that it wasn't completely destroyed forever was a fake news liar. So now we've got to redestroy the Iranian nuclear program that we'd already permanently destroyed. So we know that they're lying. But what is the Actual reason? It's really hard to say other than, you know, so there's post Venezuela and then Trump deciding he's never gonna win a Nobel Peace Prize so he might as well go for the war prizes.

Tim Miller (14:44)

So he's high on his own supply off Venezuela and it's just like, I can just do this now. I can just put in new friendly dictators everywhere, right?

Jonathan Chait (14:51)

Like I've got a new, I've got a new tool, like I've got a new thing I could do, I could do it without Congress, right? So like, you know, tariffs were won, like, let's just see what I can do with my new toy.

Tim Miller (15:02)

You mentioned the nuclear program logic and I saw this bopping around social media and it tickled me. So I'm going to play it, you know, the rationale for war. The stated one could have a nuclear weapon any minute. Here's some clips of Bibi talking about the Iranian nuclear program between the dates of summer 1995 and this week.

Benjamin Netanyahu (15:26)

If not stopped, Iran could produce a nuclear weapon in a very short time. It could be a year, it could be within a few months. They have the wherewithal, the stored up, preserved knowledge to make a bomb very quickly if they wanted to do it. Iran is so dangerous. Weeks away from having the fissile material for an entire arsenal of, of nuclear bombs. They're very close. They're six months away from being about 90% of having the enriched uranium for an atom bomb. Iran is gearing up to have to produce 25 bombs, atomic bombs a year, 250 bombs in a decade. Ladies and gentlemen, time is running out. Iran will be capable of producing alone, without importing anything, nuclear bombs within three to five years.

Tim Miller (16:14)

For 31 years they've been a few weeks away and in this case they're a few weeks away after we obliterated it. It's hard to take that. I don't think that's going to land with people, I don't know. What about you, Jonathan?

Jonathan Chait (16:28)

Trump clearly believes that people don't like long wars. But I think he seems to have been persuaded that he can engage in some kind of short one off conflicts. And as long as there are no troops on the ground, there's no long commitment. It won't cost him any popularity. The question is whether he can actually do something like that in Iran. That's consistent with those parameters. The Wall Street Journal had a really interesting story about this last week and what they said was, again, I don't know if these are leaks from people who are against it and trying to stop it, or if these are actual leaks from people who are for it. But what this was. He's decided on the tactic, but he hasn't decided on the objective. Oh, the tactic is he's going to bomb Iran. He doesn't know if he wants to do it to stop the nuclear program, to stop the ballistic missile program, or to topple the regime altogether. And I've never heard of someone starting a war without knowing what their objective is first. Usually the tactic follows from the objective. Here's what we want to accomplish. How do we accomplish that? Not here's what we want to do. What do we think will happen as a result of this? We got to figure that out. It seems so unbelievably haphazard and stupid. And if you think behind the scenes there's actually some mastermind who's got some clever plan, there probably isn't.

Tim Miller (17:56)

Can I share with you a wrong thought? Even though this is public podcast, I mean, is it bad for me to root for the lose lose situation here? I don't like the Ayatollah. I don't know. Donald Trump getting himself into Iran. Quagmire does seem to be good for me, as I think that both the Ayatollah and Donald Trump would find themselves politically harmed by that. Is that wrong?

Jonathan Chait (18:24)

My skepticism about regime change is practical. It's not moral. Right.

Tim Miller (18:28)

So we might be able to get that, I guess, is what I'm saying. We might be able to get.

Jonathan Chait (18:32)

Get the Islamic Republic out and put in some kind of democratic regime in Iran. I'd be all for it. I'm just, you know, I'm skeptical that we can pull it off, but I would love that to happen. I do, you know, think that, like, it would be nice if we could, you know, replace all the dictators in the world with democracies. I don't think it's easy to do, and I don't think we should try, but maybe. Sure, if it worked, that would be great.

Tim Miller (18:55)

Just to be clear, Jonathan Chait against regime change. Not against set change, though. We had to move because we had some construction happening outside his house. So you're not going crazy if you're eating your weed gummies watching this on YouTube. He has changed locations, but the podcast continues. I want to talk about a couple of your recent pieces, including a couple of them about corruption, Trump administration. We've talked a lot about the crypto, so I'll get to that. But there is this other story about the Canada Bridge, and I believe Mentioned it on the podcast. Kind of in the context of Trump's stupid bleat about how if Canada and China work too closely together, I'm going to cancel this bridge and we're going to ban hockey. Here we are mentioning hockey again. But the story ended up being even more corrupt than just what we saw on its face. So why don't you talk about that a little bit?

Jonathan Chait (19:49)

So Michigan has a bridge to Canada. It's a key crossing point. For decades it's been privately owned by the Maroon family. And they've done everything they could to prevent competing bridges from being built so that they can collect these absorbitant tools. It's a huge economic sore spot for both Michigan and Canada because it's a key crossing point and it backs up, it's the only way for trucks to get across. And so they've, they've just spent millions of dollars basically paying off politic and just preventing any public bridge. But finally there was a workaround.

Tim Miller (20:30)

Love capitalism.

Jonathan Chait (20:31)

Love capitalism. Exactly. There was a workaround actually, under Rick Snyder, the Republican former governor of Michigan.

Tim Miller (20:38)

One tough nerd.

Jonathan Chait (20:39)

One tough nerd. And this was the best thing he ever did. Canada built the entire bridge. That was the way they got around the Michigan legislature, all being supplied by these donations from this monopolist. Canada paid all the costs of building the bridge and they are going to recoup their building costs by collecting the tolls until they've repaid the money they put in, after which point the tolls will be split. But in the meantime, the benefits of this new bridge and the faster passage time for trucks will be shared by everybody. So this is a giant boon for the economy in Michigan that's set to open imminently. And the Maroon family is panicked because they're, they're losing their monopoly. They won't have the only bridge. They won't be able to charge as much for people to go over their, you know, overpriced super long. Yeah. So like their whole business model is stopping competition. So what they did was they, they basically met with Trump. They gave a million dollar donation to one of his MAGA packs. And then Trump came up with this story about how the Canadians are ripping us off or whatever and he's going to block the bridge. So that's where it is right now. So he's, he's basically shutting it down. And you know, I don't know what his, his cover story is about hockey or China or, you know, hating Canada or what, whatever it is. And maybe Maroon, you know, pressed some of these emotional. Yeah, maybe emotional. These emotional buttons were pressed, you know, in this, in this meeting. But the zel just, apparently just a pure monopolist play to keep the bridge monopoly going.

Tim Miller (22:18)

The degree to which that this administration is acting like a third world island republic run by the one industrialist in the country or by a celebrity who is backed by the one industrialist in the country, it's remarkable. And there's this type of crony capitalism happening all the time, but just the shamelessness of it, the brazenness of it, the scale. This guy's just giving straight money into the pack. Somebody told me a story recently that the Trump aligned lobbyists like Brian Ballard out of Florida are literally going to people like the Maroons and saying, hey, we can solve this problem for you. You've got to pay us our fee, which is exorbitant. But then on top of that you got to throw in 5, 10, 20 million into the Republican Senate campaign, congressional campaign PAC, Trump's personal PACs type of behavior that was just totally unthinkable, even in the swampy, corrupt, whatever, Clinton, Bush, Obama years. And it just makes me think that Trump, during the State of the Union made this line about the Somalians. I don't have it right in front of me from memory. It was basically they are importing their bribery and corruption and lawlessness to our country. And it's like Trump is running a Somalian government if it's defined such as that. It's bribery, corruption and lawlessness. Those are the defining characteristic traits of the government.

Jonathan Chait (23:52)

And there's no conservative defense of any of this behavior of which I'm aware, other than sometimes they point to other things, which is the whataboutism. And that's what I think part of the Somalian thing is. And there's, they're activating racism, but it's also kind of what about ism, but their own corruption. I think all the insiders in the Republican Party are aware of the staggering levels of corruption that have been undertaken by this administration. And I just don't think they have any, any defense at all.

Tim Miller (24:23)

I was thinking about this going back even to like the tax bill, you know, like even the more traditional things that Trump has done. I you haven't had in this second Trump administration like what we who have been around Washington have traditionally seen, you know, like Obama has a plan for the aca. There is a bunch of think tanks behind it doing white papers. There's a bunch of bloggers, you know, your ezra Klein and etc. Who are supporting This a bunch of media, you know, commentators who are making the case for it on the merits. Trump doesn't have.

Jonathan Chait (24:55)

That was one of them.

Tim Miller (24:57)

Yeah, sure. There you go. Sorry. Just to snub you, Jonathan Chase the matter. Glacier says Jonathan Cohn. Yeah, yeah. Jonathan Cohen here at the Bulwark. You don't have that for basically anything that Trump is doing, actually, except for immigration. You know, Heritage has like some fake Potemkin support for some of this stuff, but, like, there isn't like a big substantive apparatus behind all this. It's basically just like Trump gets to do what he wants and, like, we'll talk about we want and just support him. It's cultish.

Jonathan Chait (25:29)

Yeah. No, I mean, there are traditional conservative policy goals that have been advanced and that tax bill was the main example of it.

Tim Miller (25:37)

But who was the biggest. Grover Norquist that came out of the Bush and Tea Party era, who was the big advocate for the tax bill that was like, we really need to run up some deficits more. And like, it's critical right now that we decrease the top rate even a little further. Like, who are the big advocates, like Bannon? I could think of the big opponents of it in the MAGA media.

Jonathan Chait (26:02)

I think if you polled members of Congress, professional Republicans, people who were Republicans before Trump, they would say that was their favorite moment of the Trump administration. That was the top thing he did. Like, they really believe in. That's policy.

Tim Miller (26:18)

The border, they'd say the border.

Jonathan Chait (26:19)

I think Republicans in Congress, I think they care about the border, but I think they care about the taxes more.

Tim Miller (26:25)

I didn't sense a ton of enthusiasm for the big, beautiful bill. Really? No.

Jonathan Chait (26:31)

Oh, I think, I think they were. I mean, I, I think there's a kind of deal between the, the traditional Republicans who have stayed in the party, that is most of them under Trump, they're getting a payoff from it, and their payoff is the advancement of their traditional priorities. They would rather have slightly lower taxes in an authoritarian right wing government than higher taxes and a democracy.

Tim Miller (26:57)

This is. Now we're into a psychological exercise. And so it's not really knowable, I guess, unless we gave truth serum to John Thune. I don't know who is your representative person for this. Sure.

Jonathan Chait (27:08)

Thune's a perfect example. I think he was enthusiastic about this. Yeah, I think he was actually, like, really excited about it.

Tim Miller (27:14)

I think it's lib hating that motivates them. I think it's teen Jersey lib hating and media hating. I mean, I don't think that they were, like, opposed to the tax bill. I just, there wasn't a ton of enthusiasm for it.

Jonathan Chait (27:28)

So why did, why did he do it? I mean, it was unpopular. They spent political capital to get this done.

Tim Miller (27:33)

Yeah, right. So inertia. I mean, they had to do something via reconciliation. I, Donald Trump did everything else via fiat. They had to do something via reconciliation. And, you know, like, well, we got to do something. We're Republicans. What should we do? I guess. I guess we'll do a massive deficit spending tax cut. I think there's more excitement for Doge. Actually, it didn't work. I loved that story. I loved that story about the Wall street. The. Our buddy Alan Cole, who bet against Doge working. He bet on Kalsh. I don't support betting on calcium, but he bet on Kalshee that the government would spend more in 2025 than they did in 2024. After Doge. He won like $100,000 on the bet. Good on him. Yeah. So I don't know. I think they're more excited about Doge.

Rocket Money Advertiser (28:19)

The number one resolution for people last year was to save more money, but nearly half gave up by February. Don't let that be you. Download Rocket Money to reach your financial goals this year. Track your spending, cut, waste, and automate savings in one simple app. Rocket Money shows you all your expenses and categorizes them so you know exactly where your money's going and where you're overspending. From there, the app cuts waste by canceling your unused subscriptions and lowering your bills. No customer service needed. With that money freed up, the app will automatically set some cash aside for your goals. Whether it's an emergency fund, paying off debt, or saving for vacation, Rocket Money's got you covered. Users love the app with over 186,000 five star ratings. And on average, users can save up to $740 a year when using all the app's premium features. Make saving money a priority this year. Go to rocketmoney.com cancel to get started. That's rocketmoney.com cancel. Rocketmoney.com cancel just really quick, while we're

Tim Miller (29:21)

in the corruption space. You also wrote about the crypto story. Like, what stands out to you the most? Is it the geopolitical side of the corruption or just the scale of how much money they're making?

Jonathan Chait (29:30)

Yeah, they really opened a trap door into just direct payments to the president's family. Right. Like, in the first term, they could collect hotel bookings and some licensing, which wasn't nothing. Right?

Tim Miller (29:43)

I mean, they were charging a lot for their hotel bookings, but they've like

Jonathan Chait (29:47)

a thousand X the scale of the payments they're able to collect through. Through crypto.

Tim Miller (29:52)

Yeah.

Jonathan Chait (29:52)

Which is also, you know, it's the main use of crypto as opposed to normal currencies is just for criminals. So it's just another way in which they're just tied into scammers, criminals, the world's worst people. Just all the most natural Trumpian constituencies all come together. It's almost over determined that they would be heavy into crypto.

Tim Miller (30:14)

Relating this to our favorite topic of how Republicans don't actually believe at all what they say and how this is all just kind of team sports, negative partisanship all the way down. But the China element of this, literally, they would talk about nothing else for a generation on Fox. If a Democratic president pardoned a Chinese national criminal who then proceeded to put a quarter of a billion or a half a billion dollars into the president's family's pocket, President's family's business at least. Right. And then as a result of that, the Chinese end up getting access to American made AI chips as part of like a geopolitical deal related to the payoff to the president that was also related to the pardoning of the Chinese national. It's insane. Like the Hunter Biden's paintings or whatever. I mean it's like think about the stuff that on Fox. I thought there's some legitimate critiques of the Clinton Global Initiative payoffs while Hillary was still in secretary of state. It wasn't even going into their pockets. That was going to a charity, to a charity. And here like we have money going straight to the Trumps.

Jonathan Chait (31:33)

There was a Gore fundraising scandal from the second Clinton term. And maybe you're a little too young to remember this, but like the Buddhist monks and he was raising monies, but they had some connection to the Chinese government. It was a gigantic scandal, but it wasn't going into his pocket and he wasn't pardoning criminals. I mean it was like, you know, 1% as bad as this. But that was on front pages for months and months.

Tim Miller (31:56)

We took a poll of Brett Baier's viewers and said, are you aware that Donald Trump pardoned a Chinese national, then went into business with him and made hundreds of millions of dollars and that same business did a deal that resulted in the Chinese getting AI chips that they didn't have access to. What percentage of Bret Baer's audience do you think knows that that happened? I would think less than 10%.

Jonathan Chait (32:21)

I would think Agreed.

Tim Miller (32:23)

Great work, Brett. You're just knocking it out of the park over there. Speaking of Fox, you wrote a kind of an interesting column with some. Maybe a counterfactual, you might say, a different timeline where you put me into a different role. You did not ask me for my permission or approval about this Tim Miller fan fiction.

Jonathan Chait (32:42)

It's a great genre.

Tim Miller (32:42)

Yeah, you did some Tim Miller fan fiction. Explain that story and the context and kind of how it relates to Fox and what we're seeing at cbs.

Jonathan Chait (32:50)

I've been very critical. I've written some critical stories about Barry Weiss's tenure at cbs. And the context that you simply can't ignore is the obvious ones. And I'm sure your audience is well aware of it, right. That there was a merger involving Paramount. And the payoff to this merger approval is essentially Barry Weiss being put in charge of CBS and changing its ideological character. So all the people who are trying to defend her tenure there are just focusing on the discrete steps of, like, hey, maybe this story she held up needed more approval, or maybe this person she pushed out wasn't that great, or maybe this person she wants to put into the job has some good ideas. None of those things.

Tim Miller (33:32)

There is one script that Tony Ducopel read, right?

Jonathan Chait (33:35)

The individual decisions aren't the point. The point is the corrupt circumstances under which she is there as part of a payoff to the president. That is the story. So I just imagined, you know, as a. As a kind of counterfactual, that you have a AOC as a Democratic president, and she somehow leverages the ownership of Fox News and finds some business pressure point for Rupert Murdoch and says, if you want this business deal to go through, I want some changes at Fox News. And the changes I came up with were to put you in charge of Fox News.

Tim Miller (34:11)

Me, Tim Miller. Not you. The people.

Jonathan Chait (34:12)

Correct. Tim Miller. I'm not drawing an equivalent between you and Barry White. I think Barry Weiss is talented. Not as talented as you, but I was. I was thinking of. Of. Of someone who was just kind of an ideological apostate, Right? She was. She was kind of a liberal who's kind of realigned to the. On the right. And you're kind of the opposite. But, you know, so she kind of calls herself a centrist or a former liberal, whatever she is. But. But functionally, she's. She's on the right side now. And functionally, you know, even if you still have your Republican DNA, you're. You're on the left of center in coalitionally anyway.

Tim Miller (34:47)

And so the theory of the case here is if that happened, if AOC came in and forced a deal where she put me in charge of fox. And, you know, as part of that, I gave myself a primetime interview show where I would interview members of the administration fawningly. I don't think that that'd go over very well with Republicans, right?

Jonathan Chait (35:10)

No, no, the conservatives would be out in the streets. They would. I mean, they would. They would say that the government has fallen, that this is the worst dictatorial act in the history of the United States of America, and instead they're simply acting as if it's not even worthy of discussion that you can defend what's going on at CBS without even referencing that fact.

Tim Miller (35:30)

I appreciate the comment because I get into this argument, obviously we're in media circles, people want to talk about this a lot. The media gossip and people are like, leaks out of the morning meeting at cbs. Every time I say this, I'm like, I don't actually care that much whether. I mean, I played a little bit of Tony yesterday. I like to make fun of, you know, silliness across the media spectrum, but, like, it doesn't matter meaningfully, like what this anchor of the CBS News is saying on night to night basis. Like it doesn't. That is not what is gonna make or break, you know, our democracy, our democratic republic. But it does matter a great deal that the President of the United States is able to bully media corporations into getting friendly voices across a wide variety of media and social media networks. Like, that matters a lot. I get messages from time to time from people who are, who, like some of the folks that Barry has brought in to cbs, they're like, they are individually people that are acting in good faith. And I might disagree with them on this issue or that issue, but they're honorable. They're people that are with integrity. And my response to that is maybe they are, but they signed up for a corrupt program. The deal was corrupt. Getting Barry in there was corrupt. And so everything that happened as a result of that is part of that corruption. Whether or not each individual action or each segment on the news is accurate.

Jonathan Chait (37:01)

That's right. And that was the Orban playbook that you leverage the, the, the high points of business and media and you make sure that your loyalists can control all those spots. And they're literally following this, you know, step by step. So it's incredibly serious and incredibly concerning. And the fact that CBS isn't Fox News, now that it's, you know, it's still doing real reporting, is I suppose slightly reassuring. But that doesn't mean the process by which they've arrived at this is legitimate. And it doesn't mean we shouldn't be afraid about where it's going. I mean, maybe they're just taking it slowly and going step by step and walking us to a place where CBS becomes like fox news in five or 10 years.

Tim Miller (37:51)

I mean, it went slowly in Hungary, right? It wasn't like overnight that all of the media outlets became Sputnik.

Jonathan Chait (37:59)

Exactly.

Rocket Money Advertiser (38:00)

Let's do the 60 Second Savings Challenge. Step one, download Rocket Money. Step two, link your accounts and see every subscription you're paying for. Tap one you don't use and cancel it. That's money back every month. Step three, create a financial goal, $50 every paycheck. Or let the app automatically move small amounts of cash. When you can afford it in a week, you'll forget you set it up. In a month, you'll see real dollars piling up. In a year, you'll be shocked at how much money you've saved. Bonus, upload an Internet or phone bill and let Rocket Money try to lower it. You only pay if they find you savings. On average, Rocket Money members can save up to $740 a year when using all the app's premium features. Users love the app with over 186,000 five star ratings. Make saving money the resolution you actually keep. Start the 60 second savings challenge@rocketmoney.com cancel. That's rocketmoney.com cancel. Rocketmoney.com cancel.

Tim Miller (39:01)

All right. In that counterfactual, you imagined a President AOC, and so let's talk about that possibility. Obviously you think it's at least not crazy to throw it out there. What do you think is more crazier? The idea that AOC would become president or that the idea that someone would put me in charge of a major network, which seems less likely.

Jonathan Chait (39:21)

Boy, I could see both those things happening at some point.

Tim Miller (39:25)

I think me being in charge of a network is much less likely. Them trying to bully around and muck around to give me a show, maybe putting me in charge of people. I find that very hard.

Jonathan Chait (39:36)

Putting you in charge of. I think Fox News is unlikely, but I could see another network.

Tim Miller (39:41)

Okay, I don't think so. But I appreciate that you have that confidence in me, Jonathan. I was on with David Frum on his podcast which aired yesterday. We taped it a little bit ago and it was great show.

Jonathan Chait (39:50)

Everyone should listen.

Tim Miller (39:51)

It was off the news and so it was a little more meta about the bulwark and my personal ideological journey and sort of what we see as our mission and how our mission of fighting liberalism and fighting Trump meshes or doesn't mesh with the mission of some on the left edge of the coalition, particularly he particularly mentions Oran and AOC and kind of how we deal with that and how we cover them and how we talk about it. We talked about that for a while. So folks can go listen to my lengthy explanation for how I see all that. But I'm wondering, I used to be a Republican, but you've always been on more of the center left side of the existing Democratic coalition, even before we're all in a big fight against authoritarianism. So I'm wondering how you kind of think about that and coalition politics with the DSA types.

Jonathan Chait (40:44)

So I've been harshly, harshly critical of the Republican Party for my entire career, which is now a little over 30 years. I thought they were headed towards a very bad place. And it turns out they were headed to an even worse place than I thought they were when I was way ahead of everyone else and saying this party is pathological and cannot be trusted with power, which is what I thought for a very long time. The difference I have with some people on the left is they think that belief is in tension with criticizing Democrats and progressives when I disagree with them. And I don't think those things are intention. I think they go along together. It's like, you know, I the complaint I get is why are you complaining about one or two weeds in our front yard when the neighbor's yard is nothing but weeds? And my answer is that I don't want my yard to become like the neighbor's yard. That's why I want to stop the weeds now before they overtake the entire arc. And that's in some ways the most fundamental disagreement we've had on the left is that people who look at the Republican Party and its descent into fanaticism and authoritarianism, some people say, look how strong they are, look how successful they are. That's a model. Why aren't we doing what they are doing? And others are saying that's a cautionary tale. We can't allow ourselves to become that way because then even if you can win an election, which I don't think that helps you win elections, especially on the left, you can't govern. You can't actually make people's lives better. All you can do is spread anger. It's not a good tool for improving anybody's lives. These kinds of authoritarian methods that have been Overtaking the Republican Party are only good for shutting down dissenting in gaining power and corruption and self enrichment. They're not conducive to effective government. So that's really like a metaphilosophical debate I have. And so sometimes people on the left get frustrated that I will criticize the left and see that at odds with the anti authoritarian project. And I see it as part of the the authoritarian project.

Tim Miller (43:01)

Have a couple specifics for you on the AOC and Zoran of it, but just at this more meta level, two thoughts. One is just using the counterfactual you gave. Right. I think that some people would listen to this idea that says AOC comes in, uses some spurious regulatory power to bully FOX and shut down Fox or put me in charge of fox. And they would hear that and say, great, good. That would, now we're getting rid of a problem. Is that how you thought when you were imagining it? Were you thinking that was a good. Was that a recommendation or a cautionary tale?

Jonathan Chait (43:36)

It was not a recommendation. And I wasn't really trying to, you know, suggest that AOC has that authoritarian impulse in her. I don't see her as being, you know, really illiberal or authoritarian. I think she, she has some ideas I don't approve of, but I don't think she's. She's dangerous.

Tim Miller (43:52)

I don't either.

Jonathan Chait (43:53)

Yeah, I mean, I think there are illiberal currents on the left, but I don't really associate her with that.

Tim Miller (44:00)

Well, just one more thing and then I'll come back to aoc is the thing that I most heartily agreed with in that monologue about why it's important to make sure there aren't weeds in their own yard is, I would say the impulse to want to create a left cult that is powerful, I think is also actually, I think it's a misjudgment politically Right. And I think that you see this show this most clearly with Biden. Not that there was a culture on Biden, but like that a lot of times that the Democrats have done things that are politically damaging to themselves because they weren't willing to grapple honestly with the ways in which certain either policies or actions of Democratic leaders were harming their own mission.

Jonathan Chait (44:53)

You know, Donald Trump has won two out of three elections. The first one extremely narrowly with a negative national majority, and the third one somewhat narrowly but with a plurality.

Tim Miller (45:03)

And they've lost every other election when he's not on the ballot. During his era.

Jonathan Chait (45:06)

Yeah, he is not a popular politician. He's not a good politician. He's not a smart politician. I think to the extent that he's managed to be successful, he's been lucky and he has benefited from failings by the Democratic Party. And I think it's important to understand that because I think some people on the left think his success means everything he's done is smart and therefore should be emulated by the opposing side. Which is not the correct lesson.

Tim Miller (45:34)

I see this at the Senate level, especially where you see from Democrats like we need more firebrand candidates. Do we need to learn for Trump people that shoot from the hip, more people that are going to bring out new voters who don't vote otherwise I was like, wait a minute, that only worked for Trump. Kerry Lake isn't a senator or Governor. Herschel Walker isn't a senator. Doug Mastriano isn't a governor. We could go back even longer into our history. Christine o' Donnell isn't a senator. The Republicans have blown a bunch of races by putting Trumpy candidates up who just had the Trumpy baggage but not the Trumpy juice.

Jonathan Chait (46:09)

Right. So when I'm translating those arguments on the left, what I hear is Republicans get to nominate unelectable candidates. Why can't we nominate unelectable candidates? Why are you only complaining when we are nominating unelectable candidates? We should get to do it too. I mean if you actually think about it precisely that's what you're saying. When you're saying that we should be able to do all the things that they do.

Tim Miller (46:33)

How do you assess AOC and Zorin in particular as I kind of covered with from because my point to him, like the short the TLDR version of it was both of them are have been eschewing some of the worst impulses of their fan base and of their pasts recently. And I think that's pretty notable.

Jonathan Chait (46:53)

Yep.

Tim Miller (46:54)

Why don't we just do this just for fun? Here's I don't know if this is actually eschewing a problem within the DSA left, but I enjoyed it anyway. Let's listen to something that Zoran said yesterday that I liked considered or would you consider banning these crowdsourcing events because they can and sometimes do get out of hand.

Eric Adams (47:13)

So I'm not going to be banning snowball fights or organized snowball fights. I've shared my thoughts with New Yorkers and I continue to believe that what we are seeing in this response this winter blizzard from the city workers as a whole, and that includes the hard working men and women of the NYPD is part of why the city is getting back on its feet. And I'm appreciative, appreciative of that work.

Tim Miller (47:36)

So there you go. There we have an illiberal reporter wanting Zoran to ban the free association of snowball fights in the parks. And Zoran fighting that illiberalism, saying, I'm a defender of liberty in a free country. You can throw snowballs if you want. And also simultaneously, I appreciate the cops in a different click that we didn't play, said, if you're gonna throw snowballs at somebody, throw it at me. Don't throw it at the cops.

Jonathan Chait (47:59)

That was perfect.

Tim Miller (48:00)

That's great. That's good. Politicking from Zoron.

Jonathan Chait (48:03)

So both Mamdani and AOC come out of the Democratic Socialists of America, which I consider to be a crazy group

Tim Miller (48:12)

just based on their platform. If anybody questions that point, I would encourage you to just, rather than emoting in response, go to the DSA's website, read their platform. There's some crazy shit on there.

Jonathan Chait (48:23)

And it tends to be dominated, as a lot of far left groups do, by the craziest, most committed radicals within, within the organization. And you've had plenty of people who are, well, to my left who said, like, I can't deal with this group anymore. The, the lunatics are running the asylum. It's, you know, it's just life of Brian, left wing nuttery all the way down in dsa. However, I will say that both Mamdani and AOC have been pragmatic in office and especially more of late with aoc and all along with Mamdani, I think they both recognized that DSA is far to the left of even their constituency, their heavily, heavily blue districts that they represent. And they've been much more pragmatic in office and understand that the Democratic Party is a coalition of which DSA can be at best a small part. So I think they're both smart and I think while they have objectives that I don't really share in the sense that like my perfect world would look different than their perfect world, I think they've been impressive in their recognition. And Maubani hasn't made a bad move in office yet. Well, I mean those may come, but that hasn't happened yet.

Tim Miller (49:39)

So I didn't like the we're going to be enforcing fines on composting. You know, in a free country, I can do what I want with my apple cores.

Jonathan Chait (49:47)

Fair enough.

Tim Miller (49:48)

But besides that, it's a minor quibble. I'm a Coke coalition with them easily at this point. Maybe that changes at some point.

Rocket Money Advertiser (49:55)

Let's do the 60 Second Savings Challenge. Step 1 Download Rocket Money. Step 2 Link your accounts and see every subscription you're paying for. Tap one you don't use and cancel it. That's money back every month. Step 3 Create a financial goal $50 every paycheck. Or let the app automatically move small amounts of cash when you can afford it. In a week, you'll forget you set it up. In a month, you'll see real dollars piling up. In a year, you'll be shocked at how much money you've saved. Bonus Challenge Upload an Internet or phone bill and let Rocket Money try to lower it. You only pay if they find you savings. On average, Rocket Money members can save up to $740 a year when using all of the app's premium features. Users love the app with over 186,000 five star ratings. Make saving money the resolution you actually keep. Start the 60 second savings challenge@rocketmoney.com cancel. That's rocketmoney.com cancel rocketmoney.com cancel

Tim Miller (50:55)

okay, really quick. Two other things and I'll let you go because it is about this kind of self reflection and how we can help people in our coalition win. There are two things that you talk about that you've talked about that I just want to flag for people. One was you mentioned Newsom's California problem in an article and you went through his record. I kind of knew it an abstract way that California's past some crazy stuff while he's been governor. You actually read it and to the point we just laid out how Zoron hasn't really done anything crazy yet. It's kind of weird that Gavin has seen more as a mainstream, whatever, Democrat, but if you look at his record and it's much longer and so there's much more time for crazy stuff to happen. There's a lot more stuff that you can imagine in random Republican ads. So just give us the short version of that.

Jonathan Chait (51:38)

Right? I mean, he's done all these things that are basically, you know, reverse engineered from Republican attack ads into policy. Some of them he's had to like sort of face up to. Right? It's like giving Medicaid benefits to illegal immigrants. I'm for that on the merits, but politically that's absolutely toxic. I mean, you would just get destroyed on, on that if he was. He was the nominee. I think the whole governing record is filled with things on, you know, education, like every bad education fad hit Hit California so hard. The anti being good at school stuff basically, right. So that's the equity fads where we're going to basically take away algebra from high schoolers and eighth graders and slow everything down. And the, you know, the ethnic studies fads and the left wing pedagogy hit the schools hard.

Tim Miller (52:29)

Death row transitions you had on there, right?

Jonathan Chait (52:31)

Like all the things that Kamala Harris was on record, you know, he was for those things as well. The whole abundance agenda was basically Ezra Klein looking at a state saying like, why can't the Democrats in my state get anything done? And a lot of that stuff happened under Gavin Newsom. So it's a, it's just a really, really bad record that I think would. Would be extremely harmful if he's been nominated. It doesn't mean he couldn't win. Everyone's got weaknesses, right? So you know, if J.D. vance is the above, you know, he's not the greatest, so you could still beat him. But like, I think Democrats should be aware of the vulnerabilities they'd be taking on by having this, this record of governance be. Be saddling their candidates.

Tim Miller (53:12)

I agree with that. That's someone who was just earlier this week was like leading the charge, defending Gavin against the people who were saying that he was being racist. When he said I'm just like you. I got a 960 on my SAT. I was like, what are you talking about? I was like, that was so stupid. Fake right wing outrage. In some ways, I don't know. I think maybe it might have helped Gavin. So it was like the Streisand effect where people were like, a bunch of people are now learning that Gavin was whatever also struggled in school.

Jonathan Chait (53:40)

And also side point of like, for all their outrage about like wokeism, Republicans will take the dumbest moves from the woke left and use them for themselves of like, oh, you, you're a racist. Because you know I'm, I'm gonna impute some, some hidden motive in behind your. Behind your remarks that was not in any way present in the, in the text of what you said. They'll do all the, all that crazy stuff when it suits them.

Tim Miller (54:05)

Fake racial grievance peddling. Of course they'll do it. The woke right is a menace. Last thing you mentioned education and you're on this a lot and I just wanted to give you a chance to pop off on it before we go because I was reading this Nick Kristof article whenever it was recently and I'm here in Louisiana just talking about the Mississippi Miracle that you've been reading about, but really kind of a Southern resurgence in education. That's Alabama, Mississippi, Tennessee, and you never have to hand it to Jeff Landry, but to a slightly lesser extent, Louisiana, to a slightly lesser extent, Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama are still crushing us, but they've made some changes their public education system. And it's like the stats are insane. And if talking about the two weeds in the yard, it's like, if Democrats and Democratic governors aren't shamed by this, they should be. Mississippi is running circles around Massachusetts, Oregon, California in education outcomes. Mississippi's down ninth in the country in reading. It is true across math and reading, if you're a black kid in Mississippi or Alabama, you are doing orders of magnitude better than black kids in California, Oregon, Massachusetts and other blue states. You've been talking about this. Democrats used to be the party that talked about making public education good and caring about public education. And that was helpful, both on the merits, because we should make our public schools good, but also politically, because there are a lot of moms out there who want good schools, and they've abdicated that a little bit, and it's time to recapture it. So I just want to let you cook on that for a minute.

Jonathan Chait (55:37)

Right. So Clinton and Obama were education presidents. They cared a lot about education as policy. They thought the politics worked well. That was a core Democratic Party promise. We will make the schools better if you vote for us. And they did make the schools better. But some of the things they did in order to make the schools better were upsetting to teachers unions, and teachers unions fought back. They won the war inside the Democratic Party on education reform, and they turned education reform into a kind of dirty word. And in doing that, they basically abandoned any aspiration to make the schools better. The only real thing they want to do with schools is just put more money into teacher salaries. Now, they don't have any kind of realistic plan to improve schools because any realistic plan to improve them does things that are upsetting to teachers unions. So the result of that, you can see it in the polls that people used to give Democrats enormous advantages on which party is going to do better for schools, and that advantage is gone. So I think people need to recognize that the change that the Democratic Party has undergone on education, going from Clinton, Obama reform to the Biden and post Biden era, where we just defer to teachers unions and everything, has had, in addition to a policy cost that you can see in this, in the Southern surge, in other places, it's got a political cost. As well. It was one of the Democratic party's best issues and now it's gone.

Tim Miller (57:08)

Kids need to learn how to read. I mean, part of it, some of this stuff is upsetting to teachers unions. But one other thing that Mississippi did is they said that you can't get out of third grade if you can't read, which I don't see how that could be upsetting to teachers unions. Maybe it is in some way, but it's pretty easy policy change. It forces you to actually work with the low performing kids. And they did actually put more funding in, in Mississippi for reading coaches to help teachers, to help low performing kids. And you know, the theory of the case is that if you just keep advancing kids that can't read, then they're not gonna be able to learn anything. They're not gonna be good at math because you can't read the math problems. Right. You know, it's, it's fundamental. And for some reason there's been this element, I think, particularly in blue states, really in a lot of places around the country where it's like, you don't wanna hurt people's feelings, you know, and you don't want to crack it. You don't want to give kids F's anymore. And now, now this is old man screams a cloud. But it's like, you know, sometimes you gotta hurt people's feel. You can't go on to the next grade with your friends if you can't read. So you got to learn how to read.

Jonathan Chait (58:08)

Right. So the unions are part of it. I was kind of oversimplifying. They're the biggest source of opposition, but there's also just a kind of larger superstructure of opposition to education reform and to academic rigor that is kind of, that the unions play into and have encouraged, but it exists outside of them as well. Part of that is social promotion, as you mentioned, but another part of what these southerners states are doing is just having a tight script for how you teach reading. There's a science of how you teach reading. There's a right way and a wrong way. And the thing the unions don't like about that is they believe in teacher autonomy. They don't want to have to say like you've got to go A, B, C, D, E, F, G through these following steps. They want to let everyone follow their own special journey of how they want to teach their classrooms. And that works with great teachers, but it doesn't work with bad teachers. And that's where the rub is.

Tim Miller (59:02)

And this is where they find and maybe it'll be more palatable as a political tool to not blame the teachers unions for this, but to blame the anti Common core right wingers. We can use them as the boogeyman too. Okay. Jeb had to deal with this. They didn't want government. Government shouldn't be telling me in my school how we teach. And it's like, no, actually when it comes to Reading.

Jonathan Chait (59:21)

Well, that was the right left coalition.

Tim Miller (59:23)

Yeah, right.

Jonathan Chait (59:24)

That was the pincer coalition against education reform that took over at the end of the Obama era. It was the the unions and the anti education reform left with the anti government right that weakened federal education standards and brought us to where we are now.

Tim Miller (59:38)

Jonathan Chaita, appreciate you very much. Thank you for coming on. Being the sixth man. Tim Hardaway Jr. Went to Michigan, right? Wasn't he Michigan?

Jonathan Chait (59:45)

Sure did.

Tim Miller (59:45)

So there you go. He's the Nugget six man right now. So that's you. You are Tim Hardaway Jr. I'll send you a jersey. I love it. Everybody else, we'll be back tomorrow with an old friend of the show. See you all then. Peace.

Jonathan Chait (59:57)

We don't need no education.

Tim Miller (60:12)

The Bulwark Podcast is produced by Katie Cooper with audio engineering and editing by Jason Brown.