GOP facing 2026 nightmare as Trump spirals

Summary

The David Pakman Show — Episode Summary

Episode Title: GOP facing 2026 nightmare as Trump spirals
Date: February 17, 2026
Host: David Pakman
Guest: Ruth Ben-Ghiat (historian & expert on authoritarianism)

---

Overview

In this episode, David Pakman analyzes the mounting sense of panic within the Republican Party over the upcoming 2026 midterm elections, driven largely by Donald Trump’s increasingly erratic behavior and his negative impact on GOP prospects. The episode covers Republican anxieties about losing both the House and potentially the Senate, Trump’s recent public lapses (including forgetting a major endorsement), internal GOP conflict, approval ratings decline, and a deep-dive interview with professor Ruth Ben-Ghiat on the slide toward authoritarianism and the risks inherent when a cult-like leader’s grip loosens.

---

Episode Structure and Key Discussion Points

1. Republican Panic Ahead of 2026 Midterms ([00:00]–[08:22])

• Main concerns: GOP senators fear Trump may cost them control of both the House and possibly even the Senate in upcoming elections.
• Thin margins: Republican control of the House is razor-thin; the party is internally divided and struggling to legislate.
• Lack of accomplishments: Republicans have little recent legislative success to campaign on. Their talking points on the economy and immigration are unconvincing to voters.
• Trump’s liability: Trump dominates the news cycle with constant scandals, distracting from policy issues and putting GOP candidates on the defensive.
• Midterm dynamics: Instability and scandal tend to hurt the president’s party in midterms, and the internal divides among Republicans amplify this risk.
• Pakman’s analysis:
  • “Trump is maybe the least disciplined president we’ve ever had... Every single controversy, every investigation, every scandal, every chaotic moment puts the attention on Trump.” [~05:30]
  • “They can’t distance themselves without angering some of the base that loves Trump. They can’t fully embrace Trump because they risk a lot of voters who are increasingly sick of Trump. So they are kind of stuck.” [~07:20]

---

2. Trump’s Endorsement Gaffe and Cognitive Lapses ([08:22]–[12:28])

• Forgetting endorsements: Trump, asked about the race for Marjorie Taylor Greene’s seat, claims he still “has to choose” a candidate, forgetting he recently endorsed Clay Fuller.
• Media and public concern: This public memory lapse raises questions about Trump’s cognitive health.
• Pakman’s commentary:
  • “He can’t do it anymore, folks. Before our very eyes, he is crumbling and mumbling and stumbling and glitching.” [09:01]

---

3. Internal GOP Succession Talk ([12:28]–[14:00])

• Debate over ‘heir’ to MAGA: Speculation over whether JD Vance or Marco Rubio should carry Trump’s “MAGA” mantle post-Trump.
• Trump’s noncommittal stance: Trump speaks favorably about both, but does not endorse one over the other.
• Pakman’s take:
  • “Our goal should be to make Trump’s endorsement irrelevant or even something that would hurt people.” [13:00]

---

4. Trump’s Response to Scandals and Cognitive Health ([14:00]–[14:15])

• Trump denies knowing about Kristi Noem/Corey Lewandowski rumors, says he’ll “look into it”, highlighting his selective attention to scandals and further raising questions about his awareness.

---

5. Marjorie Taylor Greene Turns on Trump ([18:54]–[20:59])

• Greene’s critique: Now outside Congress, MTG criticizes Trump and blames him for fostering a toxic, bullying culture within the Republican Party.
• Quote:
  • Marjorie Taylor Greene:
    “If you want to win the midterms, why don’t you stop calling all of us names and accusing us of horrible, ridiculous things... the leader of our movement bullies people. And we need to be honest about that.” [18:54]
• Pakman’s analysis: Notes the irony of Greene’s critique, given that her rise was built on the same tactics she now denounces.

---

6. The Dangers of Personality Cults and Authoritarian Dynamics ([20:59]–[32:00])

• Movement instability: When a party is built around a single dominant personality (Trump), disunity and internal conflict are inevitable.
• Pakman:
  • “The politics of Trump thrive on conflict... But the circle of adversaries keeps growing, growing, growing—it comes to include even people that used to be in your circle, like Marjorie Taylor Greene.” [21:00]
• Approval ratings drop: Trump’s approval plunges to –19 net approval (34% approve, 53% disapprove).
  • “This is a disastrous number for a president at any point of their presidency. Barely out of the first year of a term. It is really, really bad.” [22:57]

---

7. Polling Data and Voter Sentiment ([22:57]–[33:32])

• Issue breakdown:
  • Trump’s numbers are most negative on the economy, cost of living, and inflation.
  • Republicans have lost ground on key issues: economy, cost of living, immigration, and threat to democracy.
• Blue shift:
  • Democrats now lead the generic congressional ballot by 7 points.
  • Even Trump voters who are struggling economically are moving away from him.
• Pakman:
  • “The economic issue that delivered Trump the presidency... is pushing voters away.” [31:00]

---

8. Conversation with Ruth Ben-Ghiat on Authoritarianism ([33:32]–[57:55])

Autocracy Playbook: Should America Feel Safe? ([33:32]–[37:31])

• Ben-Ghiat's assessment:
  • “We’re on a continuum. If [autocrats] come into office via elections... it’s a process of tearing the democratic rights down... One of the things autocrats do is they hollow out government institutions to make them work for the leader.” [35:12]
  • U.S. institutions have held up so far, but “they are doing their best to try and wreck our democracy.” [36:50]

What Would Cross the Line? ([37:31]–[40:42])

• Warning signs:
  • Militarization of elections, direct repression via DOJ, use of ICE or armed agents at polling places.
  • These changes tend to come slowly (“death by a thousand cuts”) but can enable “big things” (major shifts in power structure).

Autocratic Legacy and Succession ([41:29]–[56:21])

• Trump’s focus on legacy: Acts to secure irreversible achievements (physical and policy).
• Ben-Ghiat on autocratic legacies:
  • “There’s movements to alter, to rewrite the historical memory of these dictatorships... regimes go after historians…” [41:46]
• Succession problems:
  • True autocrats resist succession planning (TINA: There Is No Alternative).
  • Trump’s apparent plans for dynastic or loyalist succession (e.g., Don Jr., JD Vance) echo this dynamic.

Fracturing of Trump’s Coalition ([51:22]–[53:59])

• Elite defection matters:
  • When figures like Greene break with Trump, it is significant for their followers and signals deeper instability.

Risk of Violence ([56:21]–[57:38])

• Civil resistance: Ben-Ghiat notes the effectiveness of U.S. non-violent protest in keeping the resistance broad-based and discouraging elite support for violence.

---

9. Dan Bongino, Epstein Scandal, and Right-Wing Narrative Control ([58:30]–[62:03])

• Bongino’s reversal: Former deputy FBI director and conservative commentator Dan Bongino, after years hyping Epstein conspiracy theories, now claims there is no client list, no coverup, and the evidence doesn’t exist.
• Pakman:
  • “Did the facts change or did his incentives change?... Inside government, the job is protecting institutions. Outside government, the job is shaping narratives.” [62:03]
  • Right-wing media is now engaging in “narrative control to help Donald Trump,” replacing old conspiracies with calls to trust the process and end investigation.

---

10. Trump’s Online Meltdowns and Political Vulnerability ([62:03]–End)

• Wild social posts: Trump posts erratic, lengthy rants on Truth Social, reflecting personal fear of losing power in the upcoming midterms.
• Example quote:
  • “There will be voter ID for the midterm elections, whether approved by Congress or not. Also, the people of our country are insisting on citizenship and no mail in ballots with exceptions for military, disability, illness or travel.” [63:10]
  • Pakman: “This is a terrified, cornered individual who realizes that if the elections in eight and a half months don’t go his way, he may lose everything.” [64:30]
• Continued focus on personal grievances: Trump attacks public figures like Bill Maher and Governor Wes Moore with fantastical stories.

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• David Pakman on GOP panic:
  “They can’t distance themselves without angering some of the base that loves Trump. They can’t fully embrace Trump because they risk a lot of voters who are increasingly sick of Trump. So they are kind of stuck.” [07:20]
• Marjorie Taylor Greene breaks ranks:
  “The leader of our movement bullies people. And we need to be honest about that.” [18:54]
• David Pakman on Greene’s hypocrisy:
  “Her entire rise was based on confrontation. She defended Trump through everything. She amplified the rhetoric… for her to now say the movement is damaged by Trump’s behavior means that she was also someone who ruined the movement by virtue of doing a lot of the same stuff that she now criticizes.” [20:59]
• Ruth Ben-Ghiat on autocratic decline:
  “They start to believe their own hype, that they’re infallible... And then they make these unforced errors and they become more unpopular... instead of backing off, they double down.” [38:17]
• On Trump’s health being ‘seditious’ to question:
  • “Trump actually said that to inquire about his health is seditious... Because one of the canons of the personality cult is that they are omnipotent, they’re infallible.”
    — Ruth Ben-Ghiat [46:49]
• On narrative control:
  • “When someone moves from an institutional role back into political media, their function changes… Bongino is just one cog in the wheel of the cover-up.” [62:03]

---

Important Timestamps

• GOP midterm anxiety, overview: [00:00]–[08:22]
• Trump’s endorsement gaffe: [08:22]–[09:01]
• Marjorie Taylor Greene’s critique: [18:54]–[20:59]
• Approval rating analysis & voter polling: [22:57]–[33:32]
• Ruth Ben-Ghiat interview begins: [33:32]
• Discussion on autocratic tactics: [35:12]–[46:49]
• Succession dynamics and elite defection: [51:22]–[56:21]
• Dan Bongino’s Epstein reversal: [58:30]–[62:03]

---

Conclusion

David Pakman’s incisive breakdown of GOP turmoil heading into the 2026 midterms paints a picture of a party in existential crisis, hobbled by Trump’s chaotic leadership, poor messaging, and deep strategic vulnerabilities. Looming over it all is the threat of increased authoritarianism and the personal instability of Trump himself. Ruth Ben-Ghiat provides expert context on how democracies erode, how personality-driven movements eventually unravel, and the importance of elite defections in ending autocratic regimes. The episode closes with sharp observations on the crisis of narrative and accountability among right-wing figures and the broader implications for the future of American democracy.

Transcript

[David Pakman]

Republicans are starting to panic behind the scenes and the reason is what happens to them in November and what happens to them when Donald Trump is gone. There is new reporting about Republican senators, not members of the House, worried that Trump could cost them everything eight and a half months from now. Not just the House, but also the Senate. We're going to break down what is happening and why there is suddenly a major problem. Also, Trump forgets his own endorsement in a bizarre moment that raises new questions. And Marjorie Taylor Greene indicates that the Republican Party may be in trouble going beyond just Trump. We are also going to look at Dan Bongino now, having left the FBI back to podcasting suddenly. Says there is no Epstein client list and there is no evidence is anybody going to buy this? And by the way, he may be telling the truth. It was before that these people were lying incessantly. All of that plus Ruth Ben Ghiat joins me to talk about authoritarianism and what happens when the Dear Leader is gone. She's an expert on this. Going to be a fascinating conversation. Today. We are following growing panic in the Republican Party that Donald Trump might cost them not just the House of Representatives in November, but also the Senate now. It is less likely. The Senate looks way safer than the House, but there is a huge asymmetrical risk here. Imagine the consequences for Donald Trump and his legacy and for maga, the future of maga, if he ends up losing both the House and the Senate just eight and a half months from now. If you think Trump is triggered and unhinged and nearly daily now because he can't do whatever he wants, just wait until Democrats control the House and Senate and Trump and his friends and family are choked with investigation after investigation and oversight. But let's talk about how we would get there and whether we can make it happen. What's happening behind the scenes is that Republican senators are now openly warning Trump could cost us everything, not just the House but also the Senate. One senator said, are we doing enough? We're not doing anything. Which is not opposition messaging about how the Republican Party is failing to connect with voters. That's internal alarm. That's what do we say to voters to convince them to vote for us despite Trump? And it's a relatively simple problem, which is that Trump has a major political liability and it is hitting Republicans where they care most, which is power. What's driving this panic is that Republicans have the power, but they have almost nothing to run on going into 2026. Yes, they can say the economy is awesome, but that didn't work out particularly well for the Biden and ultimately Harris candidacy. Yes, they can say we're doing immigration. Except most of these Republicans know that the way that ICE and CBP and Border Patrol are carrying out the immigration fiasco is not popular with Americans. So they are wondering, what can we actually run on? Now, as far as the numbers, the majority in the House is razor thin. They've struggled to pass major legislation. They're divided internally. And Trump himself reportedly told Republicans, we've already passed everything that you need. You should be able to get yourselves reelected with everything that we've done, which is quite delusional. That is a disaster heading into a midterm because voters want results. Even Republican Senator John Kennedy basically admitted voters don't care about appropriations bills or the confirmation of nominees. They care about cost of living. They care about affordability. They care about what do my groceries cost. And even though I get messages from people going, david, my, my eggs are now cheaper, the totality of inflation and cost of living is that concerns remain high and prices continue going up. They're not going up insanely quickly, but they are still going up. We had a historically long government shutdown. They're not doing well on immigration, as I mentioned. And so that is going to put Republican candidates. Remember, Trump's not on the ballot directly, but Republican candidates are going to have to go back to voters and say what? In order to justify getting reelected. When you don't have real policy wins, you need at least message discipline. Trump is maybe the least disciplined president that we've ever had. And that's kind of a deeper problem here. Trump dominates the political environment and it crowds out everything else. Every single controversy, every investigation, every scandal, every chaotic moment puts the attention on Trump. Republican candidates can't talk about local issues. They can't talk about economic plans. But because Trump is hijacking the conversation mostly with scandals and pseudo scandals, the Epstein situation, I mean, forget about it. That is such a massive risk. And Trump's name appearing tens of thousands of times, hundreds, hundreds of thousands, somebody said a million, seems exaggerated. The messy response from the administration, the lack of transparency, the Justice Department controversy, whether voters ultimately care about the substance of is constant noise and constant instability. And Republicans are on defense. And midterms punish instability. The president's party almost always loses ground in midterms. That's the default. That's the expected. Except in very rare cases, you add internal Republican division to that. Weak legislative results, the anxiety over the economy, that voters still have the controversy every single day. And that's how Republicans end up panicking and saying, we might lose everything here. Now, lawmakers are trying to focus more on their individual campaigns, but ultimately they are going to have to make a decision. Do I separate from Trump? And what is the backlash from such a separation? We're going to see that in a moment with regard to Marjorie Taylor Greene's old seat. So this is a tension that is really becoming difficult to ignore. They can't distance themselves without angering some of the baseball that loves Trump. They can't fully embrace Trump because they risk a lot of voters who are increasingly sick of Trump. So they are kind of stuck. I don't feel bad for them. They created this problem by choosing this guy as their nominee back in 2016. They could have gone a different direction. But we need to think about it in terms of what can Democrats do to punish Republicans the most electorally? And as Republicans look at this landscape and they see this decimated party, limited policy achievements, fractures, vulnerable on the economy, scandal every single day, and a dominant figure that is only hurting them rather than helping, they are going to have to figure out what did they do. They're not so much afraid of losing an argument about policy, they're afraid of losing everything because there's not even an opportunity for those discussions. So I, I welcome this. I relish this. I'm enjoying the panic, while at the same time, I think it's important to acknowledge the most likely outcome is that Democrats don't take the Senate, Republicans keep the Senate, Democrats take the House. We should still do everything we can to try to take all of it from Republicans. And as I said before, if you think Trump is triggered now, just wait until he has to spend two years with Democrats controlling the House and maybe Democrats controlling the Senate. So it's an aspirational thought, but not a completely unrealistic one. Donald Trump had a scary brain fail just hours ago where he completely forgot his own major endorsement of a candidate. And it happened on camera. And people are noticing and they are getting scared. Let me explain what's going on here. Donald Trump was asked about the race for Marjorie Taylor Greene's seat. Marjorie Taylor Greene, of course, choosing to resign from Congress. Trump says there's a lot of good people and I might just have to endorse someone.

[Donald Trump]

Sorry. Tell us about your trip to Rome, Georgia on Thursday, your trip to Marjorie Taylor Greene's old district. Well, we have a lot of people that want to take Marjorie Trader Green's place and many, many candidates. And I have to choose one. And they say Whoever I endorse is going to win.

[David Pakman]

I have to choose one of the people that wants to replace Marjorie Taylor Greene. They say whoever I choose, future tense is going to win. But there is a little, tiny problem with that. Donald Trump has already made an endorsement in that race. Just 13 days ago, Donald Trump endorsed Craig Clay Fuller, posting to Truth Social, quote, it is my great honor to endorse America First Patriot Clay Fuller, who is running to represent the wonderful people of Georgia's 14th district. He says a lot of stuff about him and then says, Clay Fuller has my complete and total endorsement to be the next representative from Georgia's 14th congressional district, and he will not let you down. What a strong, powerful, energetic endorsement. And Trump has absolutely no memory of it whatsoever. Someday I'll have to make a choice there, and I think whoever I end up endorsing is going to do really well. He can't do it anymore, folks. Before our very eyes, he is crumbling and mumbling and stumbling and glitching. He can't do it anymore. And a lot of people looking around going, sir, you did endorse. All right, let's move on. Trump is asked a very interesting question. J.D. vance is the kind of assumed heir apparent to the MAGA throne, and that would usher in this sort of techno fascist, techno libertarian, Peter Thiel type ideology. But a lot of people who accurately have identified that JD Vance is a little doofy and that Marco Rubio seems far more reasonable have started to say, you know, maybe Marco Rubio, the current Secretary of State, would be, would be a better heir to the Maga throne. I'll be very honest with you. If my two choices are J.D. vance and Marco Rubio, I'm voting for Marco Rubio, right? If, if I don't vote in Republican primaries, but there's no doubt that Rubio is less insane. Trump says, well, we've got a long time before I got to figure that out. So Hillary Clinton said in an interview today that she and her husband are getting pulled into the Epstein matter to divert attention from you and that your administration has something to hide. What's your response?

[Donald Trump]

I have nothing to hide. I've been exonerated. I have nothing to do with Jeffrey

[David Pakman]

Epstein, and I apologize. This is the Jeffrey Epstein clip. Are going to get in a moment to the Marco Rubio clip. This is Trump wrongly claiming he's been exonerated. He hasn't been exonerated.

[Donald Trump]

They went in hoping that they'd find it and found just the opposite. I've been totally exonerated in Fact, Jeffrey Epstein was fighting that. I don't get elected with some author, a sleazebag, by the way. And I've been totally exonerated. No, no. They're getting pulled in and that's their problem. I don't know. They're going to have to see what happens. But I watched her in Munich, and she seriously has Trump derangement syndrome.

[David Pakman]

She should publicly test.

[Donald Trump]

You know, I've been totally exonerated on Epstein.

[David Pakman]

All right, Anyway, Trump has not been exonerated. He's in The Epstein files 10,000 times, 20,000 times, 100,000 times. We don't even know how many times he's in those files. The more implicated he is, the more he yells that he has been exonerated. But he has not been exonerated. All right, now, Rubio, would you consider endorsing Rubio for rather than JP Mandel? JD Vance, here's what Trump says

[Ruth Ben Ghiat]

received really positive reviews in Munich. Is there very good. Is there a scenario in which you

[David Pakman]

would support him at the top of

[Ruth Ben Ghiat]

the ticket in 28?

[Donald Trump]

Something I don't have to worry about now. I've got three years to go, so it's something I don't have to burn. JD Is fantastic. And Marcos, they're both fantastic, I think. Really. And I think Marco did a great job.

[David Pakman]

So, listen, I. On the one hand, Trump's not really saying anything one way or the other. There's a lot of assumptions built in here. The first assumption is that Trump is going to be politically stable enough when the Republican primary gets going to even have the political power to crown someone. And part of what our job needs to be over the next, whatever period of time there is between now and when the Republican primary of 28 starts is to diminish Trump's power such that he isn't even in a position to make an endorsement of any kind of value. But putting that aside, he used to call him Little Marco and make fun of him, and now he's considering at least the possibility that he might support Marco Rubio over his own vice president in a Republican primary. And I've got to tell you, it's the smartest thing Trump could possibly do, because Rubio is far more sensible and far less controlled by techno fascist instincts like that of Peter thiel than is J.D. vance. So a very interesting kind of question there. But our goal should be to make Trump's endorsement irrelevant or even something that would hurt people. It would be great if Trump's reputation is so destroyed by the time this next primary gets going that an endorsement from Trump is actually something that is damaging. Finally, Donald Trump asked, as far as I know for the first time about the alleged romantic affair between Kristi Noem and Corey Lewandowski, Trump says he's never heard anything about it, but he's going to ask.

[Ruth Ben Ghiat]

Recent news reports have discussed the possibility that Kristi Noem and Corey Lewandowski are in a close personal relationship. Is that a bad look? And do you think she'll be in the job much longer?

[Donald Trump]

I don't know about that. I mean, I haven't heard that. I'll find out about it, but I

[David Pakman]

have not heard he's going to look into it. Have Corey and Christie had an affair? Please, someone let me know. And how should that affect whether they should be working for me or whatever the case may be? For a guy who says he knows everything that's going on and that it was Sleepy Joe who was not in the know, he certainly seems in the dark about a lot of things going on. But the scariest part? Trump completely forgetting about a big endorsement. Big, thick, powerful endorsement that he made just 13 days ago. He can't do it, folks. His brain simply isn't up to the task. Cold weather is sometimes when simple meals matter the most and during the winter there is nothing like pulling a warm bread out of the oven at home. It'll change the mood with the smell alone, never mind the taste. Our sponsor, Wild Grain is the first bake from frozen subscription box for sourdough breads, artisanal pastries and fresh pastas already in 25 minutes or less with no prep. Wild Grain uses simple ingredients and a slow fermentation process which will add flavor and can be easier on digestion. No preservatives, no shortcuts. Lately I've been reaching for the Wild Grain sourdough loaf for quick dinners. Their cranberry pecan rolls are great for the weekends. Everything comes out perfectly browned and fragrant. Wild Grains boxes are customizable. They include gluten free, vegan and protein box options so it fits whatever you've got going on. Delivery is reliable. Baking is hands off perfect for cozy brunches or easy week weeknights. Nothing like having an artisan bakery in your freezer to chase away that winter chill. Get $30 off your first box plus free croissants for life at wildgrain.com/pacman when it was time for a new mattress, I didn't want to gamble on something generic. I had heard about Helix. I liked that they customize the mattress based on how you sleep. I'm mostly a stomach sleeper, so I took the quiz and ended up with a model that felt tailored to me. I've had it for years. What I notice is I don't wake up with back stiffness. I don't wake up with shoulder pain. I don't toss and turn looking for a comfortable position. It's just better than my old mattress. It's more supportive, but it's still comfortable. Another thing I like about Helix is that there's no one size fits all approach. It's really tailored to you in terms of firmness as well. It's made a difference for me and I'm thrilled to be partnering with them right now. Helix has a special offer only for my audience get 27% off everything on their site when you go to helix sleep.com/pacman the link is in the description I need your help growing the David Pakman Show Podcast. I'm going to ask you for something, but it costs nothing. It's 10 seconds of your time. Please make sure that you subscribe to our podcast. Yes, on Apple Podcasts and if you've got Spotify on Spotify as well. But maybe even more importantly, Apple Podcasts lets you rate the podcast immediately even if you don't listen to it. On Apple Podcasts, Those ratings hopefully 5 stars listen rate fairly. But hopefully you consider this a 5 star podcast and those ratings can push the podcast to the front of discovery. We want 2026 to be the year of the David Pakman Show Podcast. So no matter where you listen or watch or anything, remember the daily podcast is free. Subscribe on Apple Podcasts, subscribe on Spotify and leave a beautiful, powerful rating. Very much appreciate it. And of course you can also support us directly by signing up@join pacman.com Former Trump ally Marjorie Taylor Greene has just called out Donald Trump again and fascinatingly blames Trump for turning the right into a movement built on bullying. She is completely correct. Here is Marjorie Taylor Greene giving advice. If Republicans want to win in the midterms, which we know they are increasingly panicked about, what do they need to do? And Marjorie Taylor Greene says, well, what about maybe not having the guy at the top bullying everybody? I got to tell you, she's completely correct about this.

[Marjorie Taylor Greene]

So if you want to win the midterms, why don't you stop calling all of us names and accusing us of horrible, ridiculous things like that's absurd and stop being a bully. You know we got mad at the Democrats years ago when when Hillary Clinton called us deplorables. But look at what the right has become. And it's become this way, Owen, because the leader of our movement bullies people. And we need to be honest about that. Like, why do we want to become what we saw? The Democrat, the Democrats called us Nazis. They called Trump Hitler. They called us deplorables. They called us all types of horrible names. They looked down on us, those of us that refused to do the lockdowns and refuse to wear a mask and refuse to get the vaccine, that they accused us of killing people. People that said the election was stolen, people that walked in open doors in the Capitol, they called us insurrectionists. They put me on trial in Georgia and tried to take my name off the ballot in 2022, accusing me of insurrection. I mean, the amount of things that all of us went to, by the

[David Pakman]

way, all completely reasonable things came on

[Marjorie Taylor Greene]

us in hate and judgment from the left is now what we have seen the right turn into name calling, accusations. Bullying is not this. This is how you push us away and make us go. You excuse my language. You. I don't want to vote for you. I don't want to support you anymore. I, I still have my policies and my America first beliefs. But you're not going to have me stand over here and help you when you're treating me this way. And you're certainly not going to pull in the independent vote that you got in 2024. And if you don't follow through on America first and a domestic agenda and Maha and, And all of the things that we, We. Doge. My God, Doge, I thought was great. If we don't come through on those things that were promised in 2024, well, then are you really going to be shocked when you lose the midterms in 2026? Because you better expect it.

[David Pakman]

You know what is most interesting about this? Her critique is, like, mostly good, although all the stuff she says, oh, they criticize for this, us for this and that, those were valid criticisms. I mean, Marjorie Taylor Greene was primarily saying things that were cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs when she was a member of the House of Representatives. But what's fascinating is that her entire political identity and rise to power was built on not only loyalty to Donald Trump, loyalty that she now has renounced, but her entire rise was based on confrontation. It was based on outrage. She defended Trump through everything. She amplified the rhetoric. She normalized the tone, the bullying tone that she now admonishes Trump for. She was a perpetrator of. She perpetuated it. So for her to now say the movement is damaged by Trump's behavior means that she was also someone who ruined the movement by virtue of doing a lot of the same stuff that she now criticizes. Now, if we zoom out for a second not to make it about Marjorie Taylor Greene's hypocrisy, she is describing the problem with personality driven politics. When a political movement revolves around one dominant figure, loyalty becomes the main rule in the primary rubric for evaluating who's doing well and who's not doing well. The leader attacks, attacks critics. The leader demands obedience and defines who belongs in the movement and who doesn't belong in the movement. That's, you know, the term rhino that Trump uses, Republican in name only. It is about defining and excluding. And that can create really intense unity at first, as people get excited about being part of something where people are so ramped up about being part of it. But over time, it makes the movement unstable because the attacks never stop. Your allies shift in their alliances, they become targets. That is the system that Donald Trump has built. And Marjorie Taylor Greene has shifted from being on the beneficiary end of it to being on the sort of like victim or detractor end of it. Now there's also a strategic calculation. Marjorie frames this as an election problem. She's worried Trump's behavior is going to cost Republicans support and threaten them in the midterms. That tells you something about what Republican insiders are seeing, which is they see that the chaos and the internal fighting and the brand of Trump is turning voters off, unless they are really deeply in the base, really deeply in the cult. And then there's also the contradictions. Within maga, the movement built around dominance and strength. But a political culture based on dominance creates these power struggles. And if politics becomes about who humiliates who, who out competes for closeness to Trump, that can destabilize the base and actually hurt the movement. And I believe that that's what we're seeing right now. The politics of Trump thrive on conflict. And maybe Trump personally benefits from the conflict. He attacks opponents and then allies and former allies, and he tells it like it is, and he's strong and all of that. But the circle of adversaries and enemies keeps growing, growing, growing. And it comes to include even people that used to be in your circle, like Marjorie Taylor Greene. And then all of a sudden you have a problem because they've turned against you. When someone like Marjorie Taylor Greene breaks ranks, as wacky as she is, it goes beyond a personal dispute. There is A strain inside this movement as it tries to keep itself together. And Marjorie Taylor Greene is pulling in the opposite direction right now. They need stability. They need to build a coalition. They need shared goals. And when you have a personality driven movement, even if the leader is orange, it doesn't even matter the color of the leader. In this case, he's orange. It could be any color. That tension is going to produce fractures, and that's what we're seeing it right now. And again, the irony is I agree with a lot of Marjorie Taylor Greene's critique today, but she built it. She participated and built the political culture of bullying and attacks, the normalization of outrage, the normalization of personal attacks. Now she says it went too far. Okay, well, the whole thing is breaking down, and that's why she's doing this. And historically, when core insiders become important critics, that is a sign that the movement may not be able to hold itself together. And boy, do I hope that it can't hold itself together. All right, let's talk about the approval numbers. I hope you're sitting down for these. Actually, you can stand. It's fine. Donald Trump's approval ratings are collapsing, and not just a little bit. We're talking about another massive drop. And the most important takeaway, if you take away nothing else from this segment than this, it's that Trump's core campaign issue is what is pushing people away. The economy, one of his core campaign issues. Let's go through the numbers. There is a new national poll that shows Trump's net approval is negative 18. Negative 18. In fact, I can pull up a bunch of this stuff so that we can look at it. You take a look at. Let me find the right ones here. Here it is. You take a look at Trump approval and you see that Overall, Trump has 34% approve, 53% disapprove. That's actually minus 19. Trump is minus 19 on approval. Only 34% approve of his job performance with 53% disapproving. This is, this is a disastrous number for a president at any point of their presidency. Barely out of the first year of a term. It is really, really bad. Now, what is fascinating is that if you look at the economy. Let me find exactly where this is. Economic concerns here. If you look at Trump on, on the economy, he's not doing particularly well. And as you look at all of the issues and how he is doing, economy is sort of down in the lower half and he is in negative territory. On the economy, he is still doing okay on immigration and border Security, as well as crime and public safety, although you have to remember that those have worsened dramatically. You might say, well, I thought that he was doing poorly on immigration. He's doing way worse than he was because he's not carrying it out in a way that most people actually want to see him want to see him do. And fascinatingly, if you look at on all of these issues, who is expected to do a better job? On every single issue, voters have moved away from Republicans and towards Democrats Sometimes it's not a huge change. On the economy and jobs, it has gone from plus 10 for Republicans to only plus 3. Republicans have lost 7 points on the economy. On cost of living, they've lost eight points. On immigration, they've lost 11 points, 11 points on threat to democracy. It was already so bad. But he's lost a little bit more there. Republicans have lost a little bit more there. So what you have to understand here is when you go and you talk to a voter and you say, hey, how are things for you right now? If they're sort of okay economically, they are way more likely to say they are satisfied with the job Trump is doing than if they are struggling economically. When you look at people struggling financially, Trump's support completely collapses. And the most damaging part of this politically is that it's even happening within Trump's own voters. If you say, okay, let's now only look at the people who voted Trump, how are you doing economically? Even Trump voters who today say they are not doing well economically, they are moving away from Donald Trump. So there is an erosion inside of Trump's own coalition that is very, very dangerous now on the economy. The reason that the numbers are souring for Trump are cost of living, inflation, food prices, gas prices, jobs and everyday expenses. This is a massive concern to all voters, including Trump voters. Yes, Trump's numbers on immigration have worsened, but immigration is cited as a less important issue. Yes, Trump's data on foreign policy points in the negative direction, but that is not as important to voters as cost of living and affordability. And when you look at likely voters, Democrats now have a seven point lead in a generic ballot. That is not a good number for Republicans. Eight and a half months from the midterm elections. Now, this is not only something that can happen to Republicans. You look at 2024, Democrats increasingly struggled because of the perception around the economy. Telling voters under Biden the economy's great didn't convince people who were struggling that the economy was great. It certainly wasn't great for them. But the shift here is Eight points on the economy, away from Republicans, away from Trump and towards Democrats right now. And the trend is very clear. The culture war crap. You may get people worked up about it, you may get a lot of posts about it on social media. But as far as what voters want from their administration, it's not about the culture war stuff. It's not about men and women's sports or any of that crap. It's the economy and the economic issue that delivered Trump the presidency, which was things suck under Biden. I'm going to make it better is pushing voters away. And it is an important reversal. There's a lesson to be learned here. It's really easy to make populist economic promises. Really easy. It is a lot more difficult to deliver on them. You can campaign and say, I will bring prices down, but doing that requires negative inflation and it's really difficult to get that. You can't command prices to fall unless you absolutely destroy the economy and set off a deflationary spiral. And so the expectation and the promise is crashing into reality and the approval numbers are following it down. So Trump won power on economic promises and now he is losing support based on the failure to achieve that which he promised. There is no perfect moment to start taking your health seriously. Waiting for the right time usually means you just never do anything. And our sponsor, AG1 is just a really practical place, place to begin. A lot of times, sustainable health isn't so much about perfection, it's about consistency. And what AG1 does is it just really simplifies things. It's one scoop a day. You get multivitamins, pre and probiotics, some superfoods, some antioxidants. You don't have to juggle a complicated routine. AG1 is the opposite of complexity. It takes 20 seconds. One scoop, eight ounces of water. Done. I drink it in the morning before my world famous cappuccino and it's just an easy habit. That's what I love about it. AG1's new next gen formula has more vitamins and minerals than ever and it comes in a number of flavors. Original citrus berry Tropical. My favorite is Berry. AG1 has over 50,000 verified 5 star reviews and a 90 day money back guarantee. And for a limited time, you'll get a free AG1 duffel bag and free AG1 welcome kit with your first subscription order. Go to drink ag1.com/pacman. The link is in the description. Trump allies are now openly talking about federalizing elections, putting armed agents at polling places and using government power against political opponents. Now, there are some of you who are saying, relax, we still have a constitution. We still have checks and balances. America isn't Russia. It's not North Korea. It's not Hungary. But history shows democracies don't collapse overnight. They tend to erode more slowly. The institutions get hollowed out. The rules start being bent in the favor of the dear leader. And often by the time people realize what's going on, it is often too late. So how close are we really? That's what I spoke about with Ruth Ben Guyot on my Substack Live.

[David Pakman (interviewer segment with Ruth Ben Ghiat)]

We're going to continue our conversation today with Ruth Ben Ghiat, who's chatted with us before. Ruth, great to see you. Really appreciate your time as always.

[Ruth Ben Ghiat]

Nice to be back with you, David.

[David Pakman (interviewer segment with Ruth Ben Ghiat)]

You know, since we last spoke, a lot of things have happened, both domestically and internationally. And I wanted to kind of maybe first open to get your idea as to how dangerous you believe the current circumstances are in the context of authoritarianism and some of the authoritarian movements we've seen in the 20th century. And I'll kind of set it up this way. We nominally have a democracy here. If you check, the First Amendment is still there. The Second Amendment is still there. Interestingly relevant after some of these recent killings, including the one involving Alex Preddy in Minneapolis, we are hearing a lot from the administration that sounds not very Democratic. Talk about militarizing and federalizing elections, talk about putting armed ICE agents at polling places, what we've seen around the deportation schemes and how that all has gone. And some people react by saying, yes, David, the rhetoric sounds pretty bad from Donald Trump. But we have a democracy. We have checks and balances. We have a system that is different than that which we have under Putin or Bond or if we go back further into history, what do you make of that? The idea that the system we have is a sort of bulwark against what Trump really wants to do.

[Ruth Ben Ghiat]

That's a great setup. Great question. You know, when we think about we look abroad, if we're in the States and we look at Putin and Orban and Erdogan, we have to remember that they've been in power a really long time. Putin's been in power longer than Mussolini at this point. And they've had time to do stuff, and the stuff they're doing now was not the things that they could do 10 years ago. So it's always on a continuum. If they come into office via elections in a democracy, whatever that looks like in their country, it's A process of tearing the democratic rights down, let's say. And we're on that continuum. One of the things autocrats do is they hollow out government institutions to make them work for the leader. And they kind of, there's a form of authoritarianism which we're in called personalist rule, where like for example, the Department of Justice ends up, you know, trying to penalize or go after, have vengeance against the leader's personal enemies. And government is a way, and this has happened in Hungary, for the leader to enrich himself and not just him, his family and his officials and the families of those officials. So we see that with Howard Lutnick, the cronies come in, the Jared Kushners, the sons in law also play a role. So there's these structures and processes that we see abroad are happening here. But we've had a huge amount of pushback. There have been over 330 legal cases, many of them like ruled upon by Trump, appointed judges that have either slowed down or turned back what Trump's trying to do. So that's going on. And then of course, we're here. We wouldn't be here in some countries, all the independent media people, we wouldn't be able to speak frankly the way we do. And so there are many indications that democratic elements are still with us for sure, but they're doing their best to try and wreck our democracy. And it's been very fast over the last year.

[David Pakman (interviewer segment with Ruth Ben Ghiat)]

Is there one area where you would say if this happens, that would be a significant change? And I'll give some examples of what I mean. I'll sometimes get emails from folks who say, you know, if the military were to clearly fall in line with his worst authoritarian instinct, that would be like the straw that breaks the camel's back. Or others might say if instead of being this sort of indirect approach from the DOJ to make the lives miserable of his political opponents, if it were a more overt sort of trumped up charges in kangaroo courts kind of thing, or, you know, whatever is, is there like a one thing or is it a kind of death by a thousand cuts sort of thing we have to worry about?

[Ruth Ben Ghiat]

So it's, it's kind of both, which it maybe isn't a satisfying answer. It is death by a thousand cuts that sets up institutions and the public to accept or it makes possible the big things if the big things happen. So obviously bringing the military in for domestic use, which they test ran that with the Marines last June in la, they were so threatened by the sight of ordinary people coming and helping people threatened by ice. And that was one of the first cities that this resistance, this remarkable resistance that we have across the nation has, that was the first place. So they sent the Marines in. So that would be one thing, obviously fooling with elections, nationalizing elections, whatever that would mean having a junta style ICE thugs who are taking the place of other kinds of thugs who used to be the poll watchers, which, who were a problem, armed militia members and stuff like that. But this would be done by the state, so that would be a problem. And there is a pattern where I wrote a piece for the New York Times recently about autocratic backfire, as I call it, where these leaders, they, they do a lot of bad things. They surround themselves with sycophants and sons in law and people who just praise them and they start to believe their own hype, that they're infallible, that everything they're doing is great. And then they make these unforced errors and they become more unpopular. But when there's reaction like we're seeing in Minneapolis and many other places, the sports world is waking up, things are going on to resist, to push back. Instead of backing off, they double down. And that's when obviously they're more dangerous. And so unfortunately, personalities like Trump's and the people around him, the Miller respat, they don't back down. They become more aggressive. And, and that doesn't mean that we won't prevail because resistance remains. But that's a kind of. So it's death by a thousand cuts. Then you can have a big thing happen in response to popular opposition.

[David Pakman (interviewer segment with Ruth Ben Ghiat)]

One of the things that seems to be a growing priority for Trump personally is legacy. And I think that we see this in a few areas where he's trying to seemingly do more that might be irreversible or less easy to reverse. So acquisition of territory, the Greenland and Venezuela stuff would be like one example, physically changing the White House, right? Knocking down a part of it and putting up a ballroom, which who knows if it will or won't happen. He seems to sort of be increasingly thinking of what is going to be left of my presidency after, after I'm gone. If we think about the legacies of authoritarians more broadly, maybe from 1900 forward, are there any who are looked back at in a general consensus as that was pretty good?

[David Pakman]

I mean, listen, I know you can

[David Pakman (interviewer segment with Ruth Ben Ghiat)]

find people on the Internet that say Hitler wasn't that bad, but I'm not talking about, like, extremists. I'm saying, like, generally do These individuals ever end up with a legacy that is seen as positive from, like, polite society?

[Ruth Ben Ghiat]

They can, and it depends. There's a lot. They, they keep their personality cults going, and obviously after they're dead, they have people who are doing that. Like in, even in Chile, the, the guy Jose Antonio cast who got elected as president, he's an open Pinochet apologist. Pinochet left. He, he, he, he was, like, doing experiments with neoliberal economics. The Chicago boys and, and the military. It was a military dictatorship, and thousands of military officers were prosecuted after he left. So it was a total disaster. And yet there are people like the current president who say, oh, Pinochet would have voted for me because I'm for law and order. And so we have to be very attentive to the way that today there's movements to alter, to rewrite the historical memory of these dictatorships. It's happening in Argentina with Milei. There's all, it's all kinds of things going in fascist Italy because there's a neo fascist prime minister that's going on. And so the memory can be fabricated and manipulated. And that's a huge problem. And this is also why regimes and aspiring regimes go after historians. There are people in Russia who are sitting in gulags because they're historians who were looking into things that Putin didn't want to be looked into.

[David Pakman (interviewer segment with Ruth Ben Ghiat)]

When we think about the next, I guess we could divide the next almost three years into the time, up to the November elections and then the time between the November elections and January 20, 2029, depending on what happens in November. My sense is that Donald Trump may become increasingly erratic and desperate in the sense of if he does lose control, if Republicans lose control of the House, any major legislation that would be politically oriented, not just like, oh, there's been a natural disaster. We all sign off nominally on funding, although even that maybe is not a guarantee.

[David Pakman]

But we'll come back to that.

[David Pakman (interviewer segment with Ruth Ben Ghiat)]

Any major legislation essentially is dead in the water. The House isn't going to go for it. Which to me concerns me that outside of that, Donald Trump's behavior will become increasingly more erratic, desperate and extreme. Are there historical analogies to that, even if they're not perfect? Because maybe they weren't democracies and the control of the House didn't really matter. But is there some historical analogy to that sort of scenario?

[Ruth Ben Ghiat]

There are analogies. And if the leader has plunged the country into a military conflict like Mussolini did, which bankrupted the country and backfired on him, then that is when the elites who have been propping him up and the party officials can. It takes a dire situation, like being bombed by the allies. But in Mussolini's case, finally they all woke up after many, many years and removed him. His own Grand Council removed him. But you're right that we can expect more erratic, desperate behavior, because the whole point of authoritarianism, and certainly Trump is in this mentality, is to get to power. And often including Trump, you run for office because you've got investigations and you've got legal problems, and you want to get into office so you can shut everything down for good. And Putin, Netanyahu, Berlusconi, there's Trump's part of this. And then you want to enrich yourself and you want to amass so much power that you become untouchable. And if you feel that you're losing these things, you're losing people who prop you up and you're losing popularity, then you become more erratic. And often that's when they do what we're already seeing this. I did not have. I've predicted a lot of stuff that's gone on, but I did not have on my bingo card the kidnapping of Maduro. I do have Stefan Strongman, my book on Greenland, because that's an old fixation of Trump that they're going to get Greenland, So that's even in my book. But here it comes again. So they become more aggressive, more imperialistic, and this turns more people off.

[David Pakman (interviewer segment with Ruth Ben Ghiat)]

Actually, there is a lot of speculation and growing speculation about Donald Trump's physical and cognitive health. You know, I don't know the truth of it, but what I'm interested in from a historical perspective is do we have examples of where the strong man being strong depends so much on their physical and cognitive health that it is a common occurrence that the true state of their health is sort of covered up or suppressed?

[Ruth Ben Ghiat]

Yeah, the, the best examples come from communism, the history of including, you know, in Soviet Union, where they had. Because it's like these kind of old relics would take office and then they would be ill. And there was all kinds of Kremlin. Ologists were scrutinizing every appearance to see where they really, you know, were they really just falling over? And then there's rumors even today of Putin having double body doubles. That comes from the communist thing. But I found it very interesting. The New York Times just published a piece on Trump's personality cult, and in it, there's a kind of mention that Trump said that people who inquire about his health, that's a seditious question. Yes, because the more they get older and they have health problems, it's not good for their personality cult. Because one of the canons of the personality cult is that they are omnipotent, they're infallible. So Trump stole Mussolini's slogan. Trump is always right. It used to be il Duce is always right, but he has to be all powerful physically, otherwise they're very afraid that somebody could come after them, that they live in fear of people smelling a weakness. And so I found that, really I hadn't seen that quote before, that Trump actually said that to inquire about his health is seditious. And I thought, oh, check that box too, because that's how, that's how invested they are with seeming perfect, perfect specimens of masculinity.

[David Pakman (interviewer segment with Ruth Ben Ghiat)]

That really goes to his desire, I don't know if control is the right word, but his desire for the media at large to only talk about certain things and to only talk about him in a certain sort of framing or light. What are the pillars that authoritarians want to control in the sense of you've got the media, you've got courts, you've got military and law enforcement. What are the various pillars which we would look at to say, okay, how much authoritarian control is there here?

[Ruth Ben Ghiat]

So the ones you mentioned, but also finance and business, and they often, sadly, they have a record of, as happened with Hitler famously, but also Mussolini, they sign on very early on. And these are called authoritarian bargains. So the bargain is, the deal is that they pledge support of the leader and they refuse to criticize him no matter what happens. And once they sign on, they stick to it for a very long time and they don't seem to care what happens to the nation. And in return, the leader gives them goodies or doesn't go after them, so they remain in good standing. And so that's very important. And then education and in Europe, where, like for example, in Italy, where most of the education system was state controlled, it was really easy to take it over, but they think long term authoritarians and they want to indoctrinate new generations. And so in our country, even during the Biden years and before that, the far right was very active with Turning Point. That was Charlie Kirk's, you know, that was all about campuses. They've had a whole plan for many years and now they're in power, they can activate it. So education, the military, and sometimes they say state security forces, because after we see with ice, that's an example, it's not only the military, there's like a whole assemblage of other forces. And ICE acts like a kind of militia or paramilitary. And then in some states, you also ally. They also ally with gangs. Like in Venezuela, in Philippines with Duterte, they use these gangs who actually work for the state, but they're private gangs. So there's a whole assemblage. You need all those people. And religious institutions are also very, very important. So you've got these pillars and autocrats need to keep them happy. And as resisters, what we try to do in history, what people have tried to do is get those people to defect. That's the word that political scientists use, elite defections, where they say, I've had enough. I'm not supporting this regime anymore.

[David Pakman (interviewer segment with Ruth Ben Ghiat)]

Along those lines, how much does it matter when Marjorie Taylor Greene abandons and denounces maga? Thomas Massie, who's still in the House of Representatives now, has just gone full blown, you know, Trump insulting Trump, et cetera. How much does that really matter in a situation like this?

[Ruth Ben Ghiat]

Well, the wild card, in fact, I wrote down in my notes, wild card, gop. The gop, as we all know, was completely domesticated by Trump. Even by 2020, it lost any identity ideologically. You know, it didn't even have a party platform for 2020 election. The only platform was we support Trump like zombies. And then we had January 6th, of course, and he sent a violent mob after Republicans as well as Democrats, and that broke them psychologically. So what they do as things get worse in America is going to be really important. So Marjorie Taylor Greene and Massie are, in a way, outliers. Massey's very allied with Russia. He's a special case. And Marjorie Taylor Greene used to always parrot Kremlin talking points. Actually, it does matter for their constituencies who see them breaking. So whatever is motivating them, let's put it this way, whatever's motivating them, there is an effect because they have constituencies who elected them and who like them. And those people in civil society see that something has happened and they're not supporting Trump anymore. And so maybe they start thinking differently.

[David Pakman (interviewer segment with Ruth Ben Ghiat)]

Last thing I want to ask you about, as we start to think about 2028 and beyond, there was this leaked plan that if it was Trump's say so to speak, JD Vance would be the next president. And it was like either Charlie Kirk as VP or Don Jr. And then they would do that a couple of terms, and then it would be, Charlie Kirk becomes president with Don Jr. As VP or vice versa.

[David Pakman]

It doesn't really matter.

[David Pakman (interviewer segment with Ruth Ben Ghiat)]

But the whole point is like they had this whole idea of how it was going to go. What tends to determine whether the Dear Leader can successfully choose the heir and kind of keep the line of succession going. Is it as simple as well, if Republicans come to believe that an association with Trump is bad for them beyond Trump, then it's that simple. Or what is likely to set the table for that?

[Ruth Ben Ghiat]

You asked such good questions. It's a very interesting question, the idea of succession. Because if you look around the world like these guys, the Erdogans and the Putin's, they don't allow any talk of succession because of their egos. And in fact, I wrote a piece for my substack lucid about this. The acronym is Tina T I N A There is no alternative. And so the personality cult is about there being no alternative. Only the great Trump or only the great Erdogan can rule. And so they do think each one finds his own way to keep people away who would either they jail like opposition leaders. That's what Erdogan did. The guy who could beat him for the presidencies and sitting in jail. Putin did that with Navalny, killed him. We just got news he was poisoned.

[David Pakman (interviewer segment with Ruth Ben Ghiat)]

It was like a South American dart

[Ruth Ben Ghiat]

frog poison which is not found in Siberia. So that's an extreme. They do. But the Trump example with Don Jr. Et cetera, that's the dynastic thing because we're talking about oligarchy, what you described before, where, okay, it's going to be Vance, who Vance is there representing Peter Dealers and Musk and all the techno fascists. That's why he's there. We all know that. And then he's associated with the Trump family. And so they could just do musical chairs and keep going. And at that point we are in an official like oligarchy. Right. It's just that it's all very sensitive because. And this goes back to why Trump was like, it's seditious to ask about my health. Because asking about his health opens the door to either his mortality or the fact he'll just be to he'll get older and not be as competent because he's human. Everybody gets older, but they can't hear about that. So having the son mentioned, that's what Ferdinand Marcos did. And now Bong Bong Marcos is in power. So sometimes they do that and that way they can keep all their goodies and corruption going through the family. But we're going to have to keep our eyes on this issue because it's A really interesting issue. If you study autocrats, this, who's going to succeed?

[David Pakman (interviewer segment with Ruth Ben Ghiat)]

Is there anything about the election that's now just a few months away that makes you worry that it could become a violent situation?

[Ruth Ben Ghiat]

Not too much because I have to say that it's extremely important for successful civil resistance that it remain nonviolent. And the fact that we've had virtually no violence in very dire situations. People who, you know, during the civil rights era, people took non violent training so they wouldn't react to being provoked by the thuggish police in the south at that time. And here we have ice. So there's been very, very few examples of violent retaliation. And that's very good. That's why the resistance is able to spread. And when we talked about elites before and trying to get elites to defect, if you start with violence, you lose those people. Then the, for example, the coaches of the warriors and the mfl, they can't support anything that's, that's violent. Nobody, nobody would. So that's, that's why it's. I don't, I don't. So far, judging from what's gone on, I'm not worried about that right now.

[David Pakman (interviewer segment with Ruth Ben Ghiat)]

We've been speaking with Ruth Ben Guyot. Please make sure to check out her substack lucid. We've also got a list of her books on our website. Ruth, always great to talk to you, really appreciate your time.

[Ruth Ben Ghiat]

Yeah, it's a great conversation always. David, thank you.

[David Pakman (interviewer segment with Ruth Ben Ghiat)]

We'll talk to you soon. Take care.

[Ruth Ben Ghiat]

Bye bye.

[David Pakman]

Quick break. One useful thing to share. I thought TikTok was just dances. Turns out it's where I learned how to save money, fix stuff and get real tips, short videos, real people. Download TikTok. Now the David Pakman show is an audience supported program and the best, most direct way to support the show is by becoming a member. @join pacman.com you'll get the daily bonus show, the daily commercial free show and plenty of other great membership programs.

[David Pakman (interviewer segment with Ruth Ben Ghiat)]

Perks.

[David Pakman]

Get the full experience by signing up@join pacman.com as many of you know, Dan Bongino quit his job as deputy FBI director, went back to podcasting and has immediately started singing a very different tune about Jeffrey Epstein. And the question is very simple. Is anyone going to fall for this? Now, I'm not saying that, implying that what Bongino says today isn't true. It very well may be true, but it exposes that what he was doing for years was nonsense, lying. You might remember that for many years Dan Bongino And Cash Patel as well would go on air on different shows. Bongino on his. Cash Patel is a guest on different shows. And they would say, oh, the Epstein case. Massive elite corruption, hidden networks, powerful clients, secret evidence, institutional cover ups, tons of crime, criminals who need to be charged, the biggest scandal imaginable. And now all of a sudden, Dan Bongino, having been deputy FBI director and quit and gone back to podcasting, says he agrees that the FBI no longer has the evidence that they thought they had. They don't have the tapes of powerful men abusing minors. There is no Epstein client list. The redactions are all justified to protect innocent people. His explanation for all of this is basically, it's just different. It turns out that things are a little bit different now. So let's listen to Dan Bongino, fresh off of his brief tenure as deputy director of the FBI.

[Dan Bongino]

Disturbing case with a bunch of level, level 10 decisions where there's a shitty decision and a shittier one. Do we redact these four guys in a lineup knowing people are going to speculate about, gosh, who were these four guys? Were they part of this ring? Were they part of a cabal of people? Or don't redact them and then, you know, innocent people get outed. These were the decisions that had to be dealt with every day. Shitty decisions and shittier ones. That's what President Trump has to deal with every single day of his life. And everyone else at that principal level, everyone. Mike Davis. I can't, I can't tell you about this tweet enough because it describes everything, but this is an early tweet, by the way. Mike was on this from the start. This guy's a fantastic lawyer. Mike Davis nailed this from the beginning about what the problems were going to be on the case. If anyone wants kind of a rational reason based part, put that tweet up. I thought that was a hint. The Mike Davis tweet. I got him. He says, here's the problem with the Epstein mass. The FBI doesn't have the evidence many thought it did. You can see the emails on that when we're querying, hey, is there an uncharged third party here? There are not tapes with powerful men raping kids. There is not a list. Epstein's Rolodex is already public. The file is largely unreleasable for many reasons, including grand jury materials. Correct. 6e material. Court records under seal was correct. Child pornography and pornography in general. I explained that victims who need to be protected, they don't want their names out there. And unsubstantiated, even double or triple hearsay, and some. Some bogus claims which would permanently destroy the reputation of innocent people if released. That's it. Summed up. That's how it goes.

[David Pakman]

So Dan Bongino spend years. Spends years profiting from all sorts of different claims about Epstein. Trump's going to be the guy that finally reveals all of it. Goes into the FBI, goes, oh, it's actually different than I thought. Leaves the FBI, goes back to media, back to his podcast, and suddenly the message is, now, nobody's hiding the truth. All that stuff I spent years saying wasn't true. They're not hiding the truth. There is no truth to find. There's no institution we need to be suspicious of. Trust the process. It's closure. We finally got to the end of the story. A total reversal not only of the story he told, but of the world he built for his audience. So what changed? Did the facts change or did his incentives change? When someone moves from an institutional role back into political media, their function changes. Inside government, the job is protecting institutions. Outside government, the job is shaping narratives. And what Bongino is doing now is he is shaping another narrative. It's a different narrative. He's telling the audience ahead of time, don't expect revelations, don't expect names, don't expect accountability, lower the expectations. Narrative control to help Donald Trump. And the way he says it is very revealing. No detailed explanation of the evidence that was reviewed or what changed or what was disproven from the story that he built up years ago. Just like, yeah, you know, there's none of this stuff. And it's how it goes. Shrug. The kind of messaging that relies on loyalty to him rather than any actual proof. There's a bigger pattern here, and we talked about it earlier, in terms of. It's really easy to make populist economic promises. It's harder to make them a reality. Populist politics often runs on the idea of hidden enemies and secret corruption. The system's rigged, the elites are protected, the truth is being suppressed. That's the fuel that drives a lot of these populist movements. Movements. Once that movement holds power or becomes responsible for producing the evidence, something really awkward can happen, which is that either the proof appears, but if it doesn't, you need a new narrative. You can't keep running on that same populist narrative when you are now in power and you're going, we're not going to give you the evidence we promised. When the proof doesn't appear, the story Shifts to there was nothing there all along. The populist narrative is the system is hiding everything, the elites are keeping it from you. Now it's, oh, there was really nothing there all along. We've seen it before. The conspiracy energizes the base, the lack of results gets reframed and then the audience is told it's time to move on to something else. And what makes this moment striking is that Bongino is part of a bigger shift that's happening right now. Figures who spent years promising massive revelations about Epstein are now walking back expectations, defending the redaction, saying there's really no evidence here. And so they've got a credibility problem. If the scandal was as massive as they said, where did the evidence go? And if there was never evidence, why did they tell the public for years that this is the biggest scandal that there has ever been and Trump is going to put all the transparency forward for us to figure out what's going on. So that's how it goes. Feels a little bit weak to me. Now, there is a political risk here. The Epstein story has been one of the most mobilizing ones for a big segment of the right. It has shaped whether a lot of these magazines trust institutions, which media they consume, their political identity. And there is a risk here. After spending years building outrage around a story and then suddenly telling people there's nothing to see here and expecting to get away with it with no consequences, we will see if they get out of it with no consequences. But now I think we can comfortably say the goal was never to expose corruption. Corruption. It was to control the narrative around whose corruption is worthy of being exposed. And Bongino is just one cog in the wheel of the COVID up. Donald Trump exploded out of nowhere with a multiple just post after post after post on truth social truth central. Some know it as troth essential. Really a reminder that this guy is very unwell. Let's take a look. I'm not going to read all of these posts. It would take a long time. But just to give you a sense of what he's posting, quote, the Democrats refuse to vote for voter ID or citizenship. The reason is very simple. They want to continue to cheat in elections. This was not what our founders desired. I have searched the depths of legal arguments not yet articulated or vetted on this subject and will be presenting an irrefutable one in the very near future. There will be voter ID for the midterm elections, whether approved by Congress or not. Also, the people of our country are insisting on citizenship and no mail in ballots with exceptions for military, disability, illness or travel. I don't know what Trump has up his sleeve to just declare voter id. Just as a reminder, I don't have any problem with voter ID in principle. The problem I have is that because of how voter ID requirements are in many states, it's not that easy to get such an ID if you don't have one. It can require taking time off from work that people can't afford to take because the hours during which they can go and get their ID are limited. It can be free in theory, but require documents that people need to pay for in order to get the voter id. I've explained this before. I don't have a problem with voter ID in principle. I have a problem with the way that it would be executed by these Republicans who want to use it as a tool specifically to disenfranchise people more likely to vote for Democrats than to vote for them. Trump continuing, quote, we can not let the Democrats get away with no voter ID any longer. These are horrible, disingenuous cheaters. They have all sorts of reasons why it shouldn't be passed. And Trump goes on and on. I'm not going to read the whole thing on and on and on and on and says if Democrats get power, they will pack the court, they will do this, they will do that. This is a terrified, cornered individual who realizes that if the elections in eight and a half months don't go his way, he may lose everything. He may lose the ability to pass a single piece of legislation for the last two years of his presidency. He may lose everything that he is planning to do for legacy. He may lose even the opportunity and ability to declare the heir to the MAGA throne. Trump is terrified and that's why he's putting up walls of text that I won't even subject you to. Okay, Trump continuing. Happy President's Day. Prices and inflation are way down. The stock market and your 401ks are way up. Our military is strong and powerful. Our law enforcement is great. Our border is 100% secure. Murders, year 1900 and crime are at record lows. And our country is bigger, better and stronger than ever before. We're strong, ladies and gentlemen, most people don't believe this crap. And the reason I know that is I just reviewed copious approval polls and people are not happy with the economy. People don't believe that they are doing well economically overall. People don't believe Trump has improved the economy and people don't believe that Donald Trump has done the things he promised to do. So Trump can grunt and cheer as much as he wants, but people aren't falling for it. Okay. Trump continues ranting and raving about a massive ecological disaster in the Potomac, and he's going after our friend. He's my friend. Governor Wes Moore of Maryland. Trump is getting really triggered by Wes Moore. Again, I'm not going to read this entire post for you. It's got random capital letters all over it. I wouldn't subject you to these grammatical assaults because I respect you too much. But Trump is obsessed with Wes Moore. We recently had him on. Trump is angry that Wes Moore was won't bow down to him. Trump is angry that Wes Moore denied having told Trump that he's the best president ever, which Donald Trump actually said. Trump is furious with the mere existence of Wes Moore. And of course, we know why. Because Wes Moore is more intelligent than Trump, and Wes Moore is a better speaker than Trump, and Wes Moore is in better shape than Trump. And I think Wes Moore is taller than Trump's real height as well. All characteristics that really piss off Donald Trump. And then a bonus post from Trump triggered by Bill Maher. And he says the following. Sometimes in life, you waste time. TV host Bill Maher asked to have dinner with me through one of his friends, also a friend of mine, and I agreed. He came into the famed Oval Office much different than I thought he would. He was extremely nervous, had zero confidence in himself, and to soothe his nerves immediately, within seconds, asked for a vodka tonic. He said to me, I've never felt like this before. I'm actually scared. In one respect, it was somewhat endearing. Anyway, we had a great dinner. It was quick, easy. He seemed to be a nice guy. And for his first show after our dinner, he was very respectful about our meeting. But with everything I have done in bringing our country back from oblivion, why wouldn't he be? But then I noticed his show started to devolve into the same old story. Very boring, anti Trump, no mention of the perfect border, lowest crime in 24, 25 years, blah, blah, blah. So again, I won't read the entire wall of text and this is a doozy. But what I will tell you is that Donald Trump's singular and only focus is, how do you treat me? Are you nice to me? It's all that really matters. And if you don't bow down at the altar of Trump, he will turn on you no matter what you previously did. Trump's having a wild one. And this is an increasingly unstable, confused, and deranged guy. Now, as the authoritarianism continues, we have learned that Stephen Colbert says CBS blocked his interview with James Tallarico from airing and we will talk to you about the reason he given and what we really suspect is going on. We will also talk about the death of Reverend Jesse Jackson. And Colorado could become the first state to remove all criminal penalties for prostitution. Good idea, bad idea. All of those stories and more. Sign up@join pacman.com.