Ask JVL: On AI, Iran War, Populism and Should Sarah Run for the Senate?

Summary

Podcast Summary: The Bulwark

Episode: Ask JVL: On AI, Iran War, Populism and Should Sarah Run for the Senate?
Date: May 22, 2026
Host: JVL
Guest: Jasmine Green

---

Episode Overview

In this episode of Ask JVL, host JVL is joined by Bulwark colleague Jasmine Green for a rapid-fire Q&A session sourced from their listener community. The conversation covers a wide range of political and cultural issues, including the alleged $1.77 billion DOJ "slush fund," the political future of AI, partisan divides over crime, challenges facing democracy, and a playful discussion on whether Sarah Longwell should run for the Senate. The tone is candid, energetic, and laced with humor and moments of genuine concern about the state of American politics.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The DOJ "Slush Fund" and Efforts to Stop It

Timestamps: 00:24–03:19

• Listener Question: Can Trump and the DOJ be stopped from distributing a $1.776 billion "slush fund"?
• JVL’s Take: Judicial relief is unlikely, and once the money is transferred, “the American government doesn’t have control of the money anymore.”

  “This is a little bit like in a movie where somebody is moving dollars from one Swiss account to another ... Once you get to 100% and it’s transferred, it’s gone.” (A, 00:59)

• On Citizen Action: Jasmine asks if flooding the claims system with junk entries could help; JVL doubts this approach would be effective, predicting the process will be “pretty personally directed” and not a true open clearinghouse.

  “You will have to know somebody who knows somebody … everybody who is associated ... is going to get their beak wet because that's how this stuff works.” (A, 02:20)

2. Artificial Intelligence: Political Relevance & Personal Concerns

Timestamps: 03:30–10:15

• Listener Question: Will AI be a major 2028 election issue, and should The Bulwark cover it more?
• JVL: AI will continue to matter, but likely won’t be a decisive voting issue except perhaps locally (e.g., battles over data centers). He notes Bulwark’s tech coverage doesn’t get strong engagement, making it a tricky investment.

  “It’ll be something everybody mentions as part of their grievance, but … actual policies that get passed? I think probably not.” (A, 05:01)

• Jasmine’s View: Openly anti-AI, fearing its impact on independent thinking, especially among children.

  “I’m very passionate about the detriment that AI will have on human capacity to flourish and think independently. ... I just can’t stomach it. I think there’s very, very, very few upsides to AI. And I think the downside is, like, it’s tremendous and that it is actually rotting our brains.” (B, 06:34)

• AI Futures (Worst/Median/Best Cases):
  • Worst: Kids become so reliant on AI that they can’t think independently.
  • Median: Legislation restricts AI use (e.g., age limits like social media).
  • Best: The "AI bubble" bursts and people broadly reject the technology.

  “My worst case scenario is that children will be in school and relying so much on AI that they are genuinely unable to have original thoughts for themselves. … Already happening.” (B, 07:40)

• JVL on Tech “Inevitability”: Notes cultural backlashes can derail technologies (citing Google Glass as a failed “future” due to societal rejection).

3. Election Integrity: The Next Battlefront

Timestamps: 10:25–12:13

• Listener Question: If Democrats win the Senate, could Republicans block seating of enough Democrats to maintain control?
• JVL’s View: Unlikely the Dems win the Senate at all (too steep a climb); he worries more about the House.

  “I am more concerned about Republicans trying to prevent the seating of House members.” (A, 10:51)

• Scenario: Tightly contested House could see lawsuits challenging “majority-minority” districts, targeting the legitimacy of elected Democrats.

4. Partisan Crime Narratives: Blue Collar vs. White Collar

Timestamps: 12:13–15:26

• Listener Question: Why do some care more about shoplifting (“blue crime”) than billion-dollar white collar crime?
• JVL’s Analysis: Points to ingrained racism as a primary driver for disparity in outrage.

  “I find it hard to see this through the lens of anything other than racism. ... Concerns about crimes are all about, well, are the people who are doing it the people I hate already?” (A, 12:50)
  He acknowledges nuance but concludes “mostly racism.”

• Societal Framing: American politics prioritize in-group vs. out-group rather than principles-based outrage.

5. Imagining “Normal” Politics: Policy Priorities in a Non-Trump Era

Timestamps: 15:26–18:44

• Prompt: If America returned to “normal,” what issues would Jasmine prioritize?
• Jasmine’s Top Issues:
  • Education: Deep concern over declining standards, over-reliance on technology/AI, and systemic neglect of students.

    “There is nothing more terrifying than the idea that kids are going to school and learning next to nothing … Education transformed my life.” (B, 16:35)

  • Racial Justice & Prison Reform: Long-standing interests.
• “Queen for a Day” Education Reform: Jasmine would mandate more tutors and assistant teachers to reduce class sizes and provide personalized help.

  “It is so difficult to be one teacher to manage a classroom of 30 students ... I would honestly make every school have colloquium [tutoring day].” (B, 17:18 & 18:33)

• Personal Connection: Jasmine shares that her father is a counselor for special needs students; sister and best friend are teachers.

6. (Lead-In) Sarah Longwell for Senate?

Timestamps: 19:04+
The excerpt provided ends just as the hosts pivot to a question about Sarah Longwell running for Senate, so no substantive discussion is included.

---

Notable Quotes

• On Tech Corruption:

  “Everybody who is associated with anybody getting paid is going to get their beak wet because that's how this stuff works.” — JVL (02:20)

• On AI’s Societal Impact:

  “My worst case scenario is that children will be in school and relying so much on AI that they are genuinely unable to have original thoughts for themselves.” — Jasmine (07:40)

• On Racism & Crime Narratives:

  “I think it’s basically all racism anyway ... [People ask], are the people who are doing it the people I hate already? Because if so, then I’m very concerned about crime.” — JVL (12:50)

• On Education Reform:

  “Education is power is one of those platitudes that is just very, very true.” — Jasmine (16:35)

---

Memorable Moments

• Jasmine’s Anti-AI Fire: A rare burst of righteous energy over AI’s threat to childhood learning and independent thought.
• Google Glass Parallel: JVL’s reminder that future tech is not always inevitable — cultural resistance can prevail.
• Educational Innovations: Jasmine’s pride in her high school’s “Colloquium” (tutoring day) as a model for real reform.

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

• 00:24 – DOJ “slush fund” question and futility of public interference
• 03:30 – AI as a political issue and whether The Bulwark should cover it more
• 07:40 – Jasmine’s AI futures: worst, median, and best-case scenarios
• 10:25 – Fears about Republican refusal to seat elected Democrats
• 12:39 – Crime, race, and partisanship—why blue-collar crime dominates conservative anger
• 15:26 – Jasmine on her real policy passions in a “normal” America, with a focus on education reform
• 18:43 – Jasmine’s educational background and family ties to teaching/community work

---

Tone & Style

The hosts blend earnest analysis with lively, informal banter. Jasmine is especially animated (and openly hostile toward AI); JVL brings steady, sometimes wry realism to even pessimistic predictions. The episode values good faith engagement, frequent humor, and honest takes.

---

For further information or to join their community, visit The Bulwark.

Transcript

[A]

Hello everyone. This is JVL here with my real life friend and colleague at the Bulwark, Jasmine Green. Jasmine and I have now met in meet space together. It was amazing. She is a tall person and as lovely as the day is long. Jasmine, it's good to see you.

[B]

It's nice to see you too.

[A]

Let's ask each other some questions.

[B]

Yes, let's do it. The top question this week is from Sue G. Who asks, is there anything that can be done to stop Trump and the DOJ from setting up the 1.776 billion dollar slush fund to benefit his criminal plans? Now, you just wrote a great triad on this and this question was asked before the triad.

[A]

So the short answer is, I don't think so. We're going to find out there. We have some people who have filed attempts to stop the process, but I think it's unlikely to work. I don't think there's any judicial relief available. And once the money is gone, I mean, this is a little bit like in a movie where somebody is moving dollars from one Swiss account to another and you know, like they, they push the button on their phone and you see transfer, transfer, transfer. Once you get to 100% and it's transferred, it's gone. The American government doesn't have control of the money anymore. And so I think it is highly unlikely that this can be stopped. Sorry, this, it's all, it's all very bad.

[B]

Well, some of the comments were suggested that the Bulwarkers should flood whatever, whatever website they use for filing the claims. What if we just inundated with like absolute garbage? Will that maybe slow things down a bit?

[A]

So I, I saw that and I admire the passion, admire the spirit. I love it. I do not think that's how this is really going to work. I don't think this is going to be like an open casting call for class action lawsuits where, you know, like, did you, did you eat asbestos in the 1970s near the camp Lejeune? If so, call us. Right? I don't think that's how this is going to work out. I, I suspect that in order to actually get your claim noticed, you will have to know somebody who knows somebody. And my guess is that the way these things work is that there will be various finders fees and that everybody who is associated with anybody getting paid is going to get their beak wet because that's how this stuff works. So I, I think these things are all going to be pretty personally directed and I would be surprised if there is a Legit just clearinghouse where anybody can walk in the front door and say, hi. I, Cletus Smith, was personally harmed in a material fashion by Joe Biden, Sleepy Joe Biden's Lawfare. I don't think that's how it's going to work. If it did, then you could do that. Like, people did this during the Doge stuff, right? And there were DOGE tip lines set up and resourceful citizens just sort of flooded them with fake tips to make it hard for them to disambiguate the genuine from the make. I don't think that this is how this is going to go.

[B]

Oh, so unfortunate.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

Even more unfortunate that I can't get a slice of this pie. Not to be greedy, but wow.

[A]

Sorry. I know.

[B]

$8 billion.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

Okay. The next question is from Kim z. Who asks one, do you think AI will be one of the main topics come 2028? And two, do you think it makes sense to have a bulwark content expert on AI?

[A]

Great questions, both of them. I think AI will be an issue. Whether it will be an issue that people vote on, probably not. Although you never know. I mean, data centers may be an issue that people vote on. If so, that is more likely to be at the state and local levels, though, where people can actually stop them getting built. I understand that Bernie Sanders is trying to create a national moratorium on the building of data centers. I understand that. But again, I just find it hard to believe that that's going to influence a lot of votes. It is possible. If there's an enormous disruption and you see what some of the doomsies are saying, well, you know, 25% of all white collar workers laid off within 10 years or something, then maybe AI could wind up being a big ticket political issue. I think it's unlikely. I think AI will be one of these incredibly important issues that has reasonably low political salience in terms of actual. You know, it'll be something everybody mentions as part of their grievance, but in terms of actual policies that get passed, you know, things to be done about it. I think probably not. Should we have somebody dedicated to AI? We have talked about this. We have talked about having somebody dedicated to tech stuff. I think it fits clearly within our mission. There are a couple people out there who I read all the time who I would love to absorb and who I just. I think their stuff is great and is a natural fit for us. The problem is I don't know how much real interest there is in a broad way. So, like, I'm super interested in this, Kim. Is it Kim who put this question in?

[B]

Yes.

[A]

Yeah, Kim is super interested in this. There are dozens of us. But when I write about tech, and here's the thing, I see all the data on how the things we. We publish perform, and I know that when we write about tech, foreign policy or business stuff, it just doesn't do as well as straight politics. And so, you know, you have to make sure that it's tiny thing that will be economically sustainable for us because everything we do is based around sustainability. So I don't know, but if Molly White wanted to come over to the Bulwark, I mean, I wouldn't care. I just say, let's do it, Molly, because I think she's amazing and there are. There are like two other people in that space who I think are fantastic.

[B]

Yeah, I agree with that.

[A]

Yeah. Would you want to do this, like, long term? Is it. Are you interested enough in this? You just spent 30 minutes trying to get your camera set up. So maybe not the most tech savvy of the people, but is then, I don't know, like, do you like reading about this stuff or do you just sort of glaze over and be like,

[B]

no, I definitely don't glaze over. I'm very passionate about the detriment that I will have on human capacity to flourish and think independently. I am. Like, it actually keeps me awake. And I was thinking about this genuinely last night, going to sleep. I was so stressed about it. I don't know. I feel like a lot of things that are written about AI are trying to in some way advertise it or look at the bright side or encourage people to use it. And I am a Luddite when it comes to most things, but especially AI and I kiss. I just can't stomach it. I just don't think there's. I think there's very, very, very few upsides to AI. And I think the downside is, like, it's tremendous and that it is actually rotting our brains.

[A]

All right, so what are your. Your.

[B]

Oh, jbl, I've.

[A]

So here. Okay, give me your. Your worst case scenario. Your, like, median scenario. And then you're like, okay, not great, but, like, we can live with this scenario for AI. What. What do those three things look like in. In your mind as you. As you look at what AI presents to us as. As possible futures?

[B]

My. I'll start with worst case. My worst case scenario is that children will be in school and relying so much on AI that they are genuinely unable to have original Thoughts for themselves. And this worries me a lot. Which is already. Which is already happening. Already happening. My dad works in public schools. My sister works in public schools. My best friend works in public schools. And I talk to them all the time and they tell me they're so frustrated and concerned about their. The school. A Children who genuinely cannot answer basic questions. Like, basic questions like what is the first month of the year? I'm not sure. Let me ask AI like stuff like that. So that's my worst case scenario. The median case scenario is that hopefully there will be some kind of legislation passed that like severely restricts AI like age restrictions for AI the same way that some states are trying to do for social media so that only people 18 plus have like free reins to AI. I do not think children should have access to AI. And then the lukewarm scenario I think you said or like the one that's like meh, is that the AI bubble burst and everyone realizes one the AI bubble bursts like economics wise and like these companies are just no longer able to sell it because that's connected to the second thing, which I hope that people become so deeply frustrated with AI that they will actually like boycott it. There was a college graduation ceremony recently. I'm forgetting where I saw this. Did you see this? And the speaker was like, you all love AI. AI is great. And they booed him. They booed him to hell. That, that gives me so much hope. That is actually my bit of Hopium for today. Yeah, that made me feel so good inside. Yes, boo AI. Until no one ever wants to use it ever again.

[A]

Yeah, I mean these things can't. You are too young to remember Google Glass.

[B]

No, I'm not sure what that is.

[A]

So. So there was a moment when Google made the first wearable machine. Mass produced wearable. And they were glasses with like a camera in them that talked to the Internet and who it was like meta. Right? But this was early and there was a lot of like, hey, this is the future. No way to stop it. And the answer was like people just hated it. And so like all over San Francisco there were bars that outlaw like just said, if you have these things on your face, we're going to throw you out. We won't tolerate this shit. And I would like it if certain sectors took similar lines towards AI. It's not inevitable.

[B]

I totally agree.

[A]

It might be inevitable.

[B]

We'll see everyone revolt. AI, please join me. Please.

[A]

Okay, good. I like fired up Jasmine.

[B]

There's some things that truly just like they make me so mad and AI is one of them. The next question comes from Eric. If Democrats win the Senate, I, I expect Republicans will claim fraud and use every lever they have to prevent ceding enough Democrats to keep control. How can Democrats stop this?

[A]

A unlikely. The Democrats are going to win the Senate. I think that's a very, very heavy lift. It's not impossible, but it's probably like a 1 in 10 scenario, maybe a 1 in 8. I would be more, I am more concerned about Republicans trying to prevent the seating of House members. So. And one of the things I, I am worried about is if Democrats have like a three seat House majority, could Republicans decide they're going to launch a lawsuit saying, hey, these majority minority districts, they're unconstitutional. And this state over here, pick. Your state, has one of them. And so that person should not be able to be seated because they were elected to an unconstitutional district. So I think that is one of the things that we're likely to see. And I, I do worry more about the, the House than the Senate and this score. The, the size of the majority matters. If what Democrats are looking at is like a +12 majority or something like that, it becomes much harder if it's a narrow majority, if it's plus five, I don't know. So, I mean, all of the turnout stuff really will matter and all of the marginal, those marginal seats will play a big determining factor in whether or not Republicans feel like the juice is worth the squeeze.

[B]

So we're bringing it back down. That's okay.

[A]

Sorry.

[B]

It's all right. It happens. Our next question is from Becky G. Who asks, my friend's MAGA husband is more upset about shoplifting at target than a $1.7 billion slush fund to be handed out to convicted criminals. Is it possible to change the narrative of blue crime? Collar is bad, which is concrete, and white collar crime is so what, which is more abstract and often complicated.

[A]

Yeah, I, I really struggle with this because I find it hard to see this through the lens of anything other than racism. And this is like a new thing for me. I mean, new within the last decade of my life. Um, whereas I previously, I could, I could sit and say, well, you gotta understand, like, there's violent crime, then there's nonviolent crime. There is the type of crime you can see with your own eyes because it's happening in your neighborhood, which leads to feelings of lawlessness and safety versus the abstracted crime of this thing that's happening on Wall street, you know, which you never actually see. I, I actually don't believe any of that stuff. I think it's basically all racism anyways. And I'm sure that's too reductive. I'm sure it's not all racism. I'm sure these things are complicated. But also it's mostly racism, right? I mean, the concerns about crimes are, are all about, well, are the people who are doing it the people I hate already? Because if so, then I'm very concerned about crime. And if the, the people doing it are people who I like, well, then I am not bothered by it. It's all like in group out, group stuff, and none of it is actually based in principle. All right, let me ask you a question. We're going to start doing this, I'm going to start doing mixing up. Okay, so we talked last, last time we did this. But how you have really come of age during Trump, you don't really know. A world of normal minus Trump where American politics was not involved in a conversation about, huh, should we have a democracy or not? But this is the thing which was most of my life, which was, you know, we had all this very robust and energetic politics and it was about stuff like how do we achieve greater healthcare coverage, what should regulation for businesses be like, how should educational standards be determined and how should schools be funded? These are the types of fights we used to have. If let's just pretend that we, some point in the future wind up in an America that is kind of normal. Again, I don't think that's going to happen. But we're pretending we're doing make believe. Jasmine, what sort of issues would you be really interested in if we lived in a normal America where you didn't have to have fights about, huh? The government is stealing almost $2 billion in order to give it to people who attempted to overthrow an election or the president is threatening genocide. If we lived like a normal, ish America again, what subjects and policy conversations would interest you and would you just love to sink your teeth into?

[B]

I think this is a really hard question to answer because you never lived there, right? Right. This is like trying to get me to imagine a different universe, which is a creative exercise. But if we lived in some normal America, I mean, the things that I'm most passionate about are education, racial justice and prison reform. These are just my personal interests. Education, especially now because of AI. Like I said earlier, I'm just very concerned that children are not being cared for when they're in school, that children are being given up on. I'm very concerned that, like teachers and, and states and school boards have truly given up on American school children. And I think there is nothing more terrifying than the idea that kids are going to school and learning next to nothing or being pushed through grades and like, they are struggling with reading or they're being told, hey, AI is going to solve all this for you. Like, it'll do everything that you, you were supposed to learn. Education is power is one of those platitudes that is just very, very true.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

And it. Education transformed my life. Like, truly, I would not be anywhere where I am today if I didn't. If one, I didn't have my parents who really encouraged me to read and to try my best in school and. And if I didn't have teachers who pushed me and saw my value and saw my potential. And I'm very worried that this is, this is a really multifaceted issue, but I'm very worried this is no longer happening in schools. So that's the first thing.

[A]

If you were queen for a day. I'm sorry, I'm gonna make you expand on this. If you were queen for a day and you could, you could pass one educational reform, like, what would, what would be the most important reform you. You would do?

[B]

Oh, I think I would make it mandatory for schools to have more tutors and more assistant teachers. I think it is so difficult to be one teacher to manage a classroom of 30 students and bear the responsibility of having. And you have no other help of all 30 other students, sometimes more than 30 students to pass your class. It is. I cannot, like I said, I have a lot of people in my life I'm close to who are teachers and I have so much respect for them because it is so hard to manage 38 year olds. And it's a lot easier if your school has after school has funding for after school tutoring, or if your school has funding for every five students, there's one assistant teacher. And I was very lucky that in my high school we had, you know, we had a whole day that was literally tutoring. It was called Colloquium.

[A]

Oh, that's really cool.

[B]

It was Lindblum Math and Science Academy in Chicago, Illinois is one of the most interesting schools in the country for a lot of reasons. And one of them is that on Wednesdays we would literally have a day that was just tutoring where you would go to your teachers and it wasn't graded and you would get help on the things that you learned throughout the week.

[A]

That's so cool.

[B]

Lindblum was one of the top performing schools in the state of Illinois and also in Chicago. And I really think that is why. So I would honestly make every school have colloquium.

[A]

That's really cool.

[B]

What does your dad teach?

[A]

You said it was your dad who teaches your dad.

[B]

My dad is. Yes. My dad is a counselor for students with special needs. So he doesn't teach. It's more like he manages. And then my sister is substitute teacher, and my best friend is an art teacher. And they are all saints who are doing the Lord's work.

[A]

That's awesome.

[B]

So this next question comes from Don G. Who asks, what do you think about Sarah Longwell running for Democratic the Democratic Senate nomination in Pennsylvania for 2028?