0:01

No one's going to say that to most Americans,

0:03

certainly not Tucker Carlson. Welcome

0:12

to Politicology. I'm Ron Steslow. This

0:15

is our weekly roundup where we invite a

0:17

rotating panel of experts to discuss the truth

0:19

you need to know behind the most important

0:21

stories of the week and how they are

0:24

shaping the political landscape. Joining

0:26

me today are Mike and Molly, and we

0:28

are not recording from a train

0:30

in Ukraine. It

0:34

sounds like a Dr. Seuss intro there. Mike

0:37

and Molly, are you on a train? Will

0:40

you from the plane? Senior advisor at the California

0:42

Latino Economic Institute, my fellow co-founder

0:44

of Lincoln Project. That's Mike.

0:47

He's now a senior fellow at the UC Irvine School of

0:49

Social Ecology. Mike, how's that going? It's

0:51

going great. That's a lot of senior fellowing

0:53

going on there in that introduction. More

0:56

senior than fellow probably, but

0:58

the School of Ecology is doing

1:00

some really remarkable stuff on political

1:03

demography and focusing on these areas

1:05

that balance between both parties.

1:08

I'll be talking about that, kind of look

1:10

ahead later. Really exciting stuff.

1:12

We'll be talking about it on the

1:14

show later. That other voice you hear

1:16

is Molly McHugh, the one and only.

1:18

Molly's a writer and researcher of Russian

1:20

influence and expert in information warfare. Her

1:23

excellent writing has been featured in Politico,

1:25

Wired, The Washington Post, Lawfare, among many

1:27

other publications. She's also an adjunct professor

1:29

at Georgetown and the lead author of

1:31

a great newsletter called GreatPower.US, Molly. So

1:33

good to have you back. Thanks

1:35

for having me. Good to see you both. Up

1:38

first this week, the Republican Party

1:40

continues devolving and makes a mess

1:43

all over the Capitol this week.

1:45

We'll take a look at that. Then

1:47

we're going to take a look at

1:49

Tucker Carlson's trip to Russia to be

1:51

Putin's mouthpiece and how we're thinking about

1:53

information warfare heading into this election. Then

1:56

we'll find out what other political developments our panel

1:58

are paying attention to. And why finally

2:01

our amazing politicalogy plus members will join mike

2:03

and molly and me for a close look

2:05

Into the money raised into and spent from

2:08

the array of presidential super PACs

2:10

supporting the primary challengers to donald

2:12

trump And what that spending data

2:14

can tell us about how gop

2:16

strategists have approached running against trump

2:19

If you're curious about why that matters, but you're not

2:21

yet a member Which by the way means you're

2:23

missing about 30 of the episodes

2:25

we release each week You can hear more

2:28

from our brilliant guests each week with a

2:30

politicalogy plus membership Which is your all access

2:32

pass to everything we published and

2:34

you get it all ad free and you'll

2:36

be joining a brilliant Thoughtful group

2:39

of listeners who help keep this show going

2:41

to get your members only podcast feed right now

2:44

Go to politicalogy.com/plus or just open up the

2:46

show notes for this episode in your podcast

2:48

player and click the link right at the

2:50

top The

2:54

Republican party has continued to devolve and

2:56

the nuclear fallout has been hitting capital

2:58

this week uh, the long

3:01

long awaited border deal for ukraine aid

3:03

fell apart because of pressure from donald

3:05

trump and defections from republican senators mitch

3:07

mcconnell's MAGA critics in the senate are

3:09

rattling their sabers once again as he

3:11

thinks about running again next year to

3:14

keep his post As republican leader in

3:16

the senate in the house,

3:18

which republicans control they suffered back-to-back

3:20

Embarrassments in their attempts to impeach

3:23

homeland security secretary. Alejandro Mayorkas

3:25

and An aid package

3:27

for israel and matt gates

3:30

Uh, you remember the guy who led the charge to

3:32

boot kevin mccarthy from the speakership Is

3:34

now endorsing kevin mccarthy to run the

3:36

republican party republican representative

3:38

ryan zinky tolaxios I

3:41

knew that we would have the ability

3:43

to block the democrat agenda We've exceeded

3:46

my wildest expectations on blocking because we

3:48

normally block the democrat agenda We block the

3:50

republican agenda. We don't have command of the

3:52

field So let's break down

3:54

what actually happened After four

3:56

months of negotiations. We finally got the

3:58

text of the border bill on Sunday night

4:01

President Biden and Senator McConnell both endorsed

4:03

the plan the union that represents workers

4:05

at the border patrol Which has twice

4:07

endorsed Trump for president also endorsed the

4:09

bill But because Donald

4:11

Trump wants to keep immigration as a campaign

4:13

issue because it is so potent Republicans

4:16

in both chambers tanked it Speaker

4:19

Mike Johnson said on Monday that the bill

4:21

was DOA in the house McConnell acknowledged that

4:23

the border bill would not become law was

4:25

Cheney ripped into Republicans for killing the deal

4:28

and said on Trump's orders Republicans

4:30

in Congress are rejecting the border security

4:32

deal They're also abandoning America's allies in

4:35

Ukraine Trump and the GOP are losing

4:37

the war on purpose in an

4:39

inexcusable Betrayal that will

4:42

strengthen America's enemies for years to come

4:45

Nikki Haley called the move to push border

4:47

security until after the election irresponsible And

4:50

in the house instead of taking up or negotiating

4:52

on the border deal The Senate worked

4:54

on Republican leadership announced that it was going to be done

4:56

at arrival and move forward with a vote To

4:59

impeach Secretary Mayorkas because he hasn't

5:01

detained every single illegal migrant They

5:04

went ahead with the vote on Wednesday night and

5:07

it failed They weren't

5:09

expecting Democrat Al Green to make the

5:11

vote because he'd been in the hospital

5:13

after having abdominal surgery But

5:16

he rallied made it voted against the bill

5:19

And there were also three Republican defectors Ken

5:21

Buck Tom McClintock and Mike Gallagher. So they

5:24

ended up with four no votes

5:26

from Republicans Then

5:29

they failed to get two-thirds majority They

5:31

needed to move their standalone 17.6 billion

5:34

dollar Israel aid bill and

5:36

after the failed votes Thomas Massey

5:38

tweeted that pushing McCarthy out

5:40

as speaker has been an

5:43

unmitigated disaster Quote

5:45

all work on separate spending bills

5:47

has ceased Spending reductions

5:49

have been traded for spending

5:51

increases. He continued warrantless spying

5:54

has been temporarily extended our

5:56

majority Has shrunk mitigated

6:00

disaster, Mike, I think is the

6:02

best way to put this entire

6:04

thing. But now

6:07

Republicans are for open borders, which was not

6:09

on any of our bingo cards. So

6:12

I think the best question here, politically speaking,

6:14

is, is border security

6:16

an issue where you

6:18

could actually get traction on the idea that Trump

6:20

is holding it up? And

6:23

we have a clip on Nikki Haley trying to

6:26

make exactly that case. You want to roll back,

6:28

CJ? They should not

6:30

leave DC until they get us a

6:32

border bill. And no, we are not

6:34

waiting until the general election to do

6:36

this. And it's irresponsible to say that

6:39

Congress has to wait until a general

6:41

election because Trump is worried that he's

6:43

going to lose. There's

6:45

a lot of reasons we got to worry Trump's

6:47

going to lose, but you don't sacrifice national security

6:49

to do it. Okay. Not

6:52

her harshest words toward Trump

6:54

that we've seen in the recent weeks, but is

6:57

there a way Democrats can turn this around

7:00

and hang it on Trump as opposed to just

7:02

Republicans in Congress? The

7:04

short answer is yes, but that's not what

7:06

tactically should be done right now. And

7:09

the reason why is if you, if Joe Biden,

7:11

the president of the United States were to elevate

7:14

Trump into this fight, he

7:16

squanders all of the political high ground

7:18

that he just secured. And

7:21

I know that's a different take, but

7:23

the nuance here is extremely important. And

7:25

as I've been saying loudly from the

7:27

mountaintop, what's different about

7:29

this immigration fight is the Democrats don't

7:31

know how to run offense on this

7:34

issue and the Republicans don't know how to

7:36

run defense on this issue. And

7:38

this is playing out exactly as I said. So

7:41

here's what the president should be doing.

7:43

The president should be going out and

7:46

making the case for the

7:48

policy solution. This

7:50

issue is where he is weakest. He's

7:52

weaker than the economy. He's weaker than

7:54

on foreign policy. This

7:56

is the worst issue for Joe Biden.

8:00

He's going to have to secure a

8:02

solution and fix the

8:04

problem before he fixes the

8:06

blame. I'm not saying there isn't

8:08

a time to run offense on Trump, but

8:11

right out of the gate is not that time.

8:14

Let the Republicans fight. Let them knife

8:16

each other as they've already begun to

8:18

do. Don't step into the

8:20

middle of it and immediately partisanize it and

8:22

elevate this fight to make it Trump versus

8:25

Biden. That's what Donald Trump

8:27

wants. Don't give him what he

8:29

wants. Go and say, fix

8:31

the border now. Blame the

8:33

congressional Republicans and let them fight

8:35

between Donald Trump. Once

8:37

you make this Biden versus Trump as the

8:40

president erroneously, in my estimation, just did, you

8:42

literally sacrifice all of the political

8:44

leverage that you just built into

8:46

this process. It drives me

8:49

absolutely crazy, but it's happening because again,

8:51

Democrats have not been able to run

8:53

offense in 30 years on this issue.

8:56

Republicans, I'd say they don't know

8:59

how to run defense. They don't know how to run anything right

9:01

now. Why

9:03

the White House is helping them is beyond

9:06

me. Unleash

9:09

the cavalry, charge down the

9:11

hill, divide their ranks, swing

9:14

your swords, open the cannon and just

9:16

decimate these guys. But no,

9:18

they just squared up the field again. This

9:21

is between Biden and Trump. It's

9:24

maddening because if Biden

9:26

can actually close the gap

9:29

on this issue, the pathway

9:31

to reelection

9:33

gets significantly, significantly wider and better. He

9:35

gets a hell of a lot stronger.

9:38

A lot stronger with all the right

9:40

constituencies that he needs. Then

9:42

Trump is on the defense. Let him play

9:44

defense with his own base, with his own

9:47

constituency. Let the Republican

9:49

leadership and rank and file

9:51

in the House and the Senate squirm and hand

9:54

ring and stab each

9:56

other in the back. Well, and embarrass themselves to

9:58

their own constituencies if they can. They can't even

10:01

rally their own votes to pass their own bills.

10:05

I mean, it's... Precisely. You never interfere

10:07

with the enemy while he's in the process

10:09

of destroying himself. And what has

10:11

happened is the White House has given them equal

10:14

footing again. They've literally stepped in

10:16

and said, oh, this is about

10:18

Trump blowing up this deal. And

10:21

Trump was on stage saying, blame

10:24

me. Blame me. I dare you.

10:26

Throw me into the briar patch. I dare you. I

10:29

dare you. And they did it like the White House. Yeah.

10:32

Biden did it that good. White House does that. I'm

10:34

like, ooh. And again, it's

10:36

because Democrats don't have... I'm not saying

10:38

they can't also reclaim this ground. But

10:41

as I've been saying for months now,

10:43

the biggest dynamic in this debate, this

10:45

fight that's different, is the Democrats

10:47

have no idea how to run offense, and that's

10:49

bearing out. And the Republicans

10:51

have no idea how to run a defensive

10:54

position, also bearing out for bigger issues,

10:56

bigger reasons. That is a very

10:58

strong position, though, for Biden last week to just

11:00

say, send me something. Go

11:02

on, send me something. This is your job. Say

11:05

it again. Yeah. Say it again. Like,

11:08

I'm waiting. And while I'm waiting, look what's

11:10

happening at the border. That's right. I

11:13

would go to the border to stop this

11:15

today. Give me a bill and I will

11:17

sign it now. This bipartisan compromise that we've

11:19

come to, we can stop this crisis today.

11:21

And that, leave it at that.

11:23

Just keep running offense on the policy. Fix

11:26

the problem, not to blame. There will

11:28

be plenty. Let the other Republicans blame

11:30

Trump. Don't

11:33

elevate him to the stature of the president on this. I

11:36

mean, okay, we're laughing, right? At

11:39

the incompetence of Republicans,

11:42

the clowning themselves in Congress. But

11:44

the inability to actually get a

11:46

deal done is having

11:48

a real impact in the war in

11:50

Ukraine and on Ukrainians fighting for

11:53

our values, as we've discussed many times. So can you

11:55

talk about that? It's so painful

11:57

to watch all of this for all the, all the imagined

12:00

reasons, but it's

12:02

also really hard to see this is

12:05

sort of the end process of darn

12:08

near 40 years of the

12:10

GOP turning themselves into this

12:12

strange totalitarian party. And

12:16

it's so bad for the country. It's

12:18

so bad for any, I mean, totalitarian

12:20

as an internal thing, but

12:23

it's bad for the country. It's

12:25

bad for states. It's bad for cities and municipalities. And

12:27

we're seeing that play out in countless ways on issues

12:29

that I don't want to have to care about most

12:31

of the time, because I am selfish and just want

12:34

to think about foreign policy. But

12:36

watching what it's done in Idaho and

12:38

other places that I care about is

12:40

pretty, it's

12:42

pretty amazing that when you decide

12:44

to stock your national caucus full

12:47

of zero sum clowns, you suddenly

12:49

can't get anything done even amongst

12:51

yourselves. And I think what Mike was just

12:53

saying in terms of why is

12:55

it that the Democrats can't effectively

12:57

use, divide and conquer in the same

13:00

way that the Republicans have managed to

13:02

do even while they are atomizing as

13:04

a party is

13:06

actually quite a significant question. And

13:10

it's a moment for someone to step

13:12

into folks in the Democratic Party. On

13:15

this bigger question of

13:18

what is this actually doing to us? It's

13:21

that the clip you played earlier

13:24

of the inexcusable betrayal is, I

13:26

think, really the point

13:29

we need to be focused on. And

13:31

I'm working on a piece

13:33

that hopefully will be up

13:35

on Saturday that is essentially

13:38

about this thing where no one

13:40

seems to be very focused on

13:42

the fact that the

13:45

war in Ukraine, meaning Russia's war

13:47

against Ukraine, meaning Russia's war to

13:50

finally destroy the concept of

13:52

the rules-based international order that

13:54

emerged from World War II,

13:58

is the last war in the Four foreseeable

14:00

future where the United States

14:02

gets to win stability. All

14:05

this other crap we're doing right now is just

14:08

defense. It is batting

14:10

down the whack-a-mole of

14:12

disruption and chaos that

14:15

a variety of adversaries are taking

14:17

advantage of the moment because we

14:19

have shown we don't

14:21

want to be anywhere doing anything. We

14:23

just want to be here setting ourselves on fire. And

14:27

until we can project a different image

14:29

on any singular issue in

14:32

the world, but particularly on

14:34

Ukraine, if

14:36

we cannot show that we will back

14:39

an ally and defeat

14:42

an adversary in a very

14:44

clear-cut way, then

14:46

all the stuff is going to keep getting worse

14:48

and the disruption is going to get worse. And

14:52

adversaries like Russia who know how

14:54

to do things like weaponize immigration

14:56

and have

14:58

been using migrants to flood all sorts of

15:00

places where things are bad are going to

15:03

see the disruption and the chaos and find

15:05

moments to continue

15:07

to exploit that. And

15:10

there are so many, and we'll talk about this

15:12

more later, I think, in

15:14

the show, but there's so many places

15:16

where there is just

15:18

fertile ground for getting the

15:20

brain worms into Americans and

15:22

making us make bad choices

15:24

about our things, our

15:27

lives, our policies, how

15:29

we are voting, how we are perceiving

15:31

ourselves and the threats against us. We're

15:35

just failing ourselves right now as

15:37

a nation on every single aspect,

15:39

foreign and domestic. And for me,

15:42

this is this critical point where

15:44

we can actually regain momentum. And

15:47

the fact that Congress can't say

15:50

that, that the White House can't

15:52

say that, that nobody is

15:54

clear about doing it, that even people like

15:57

Mitch McConnell who have been good on this

15:59

and have tried to get the work done

16:01

are kind of like, people can vote however

16:03

they want, whatever. Like, this is really the

16:06

point that we're at where we know how

16:08

important stuff is, but nobody is gonna actually

16:10

try to do the work to get the

16:12

work done. It's pretty mind

16:15

boggling to me. And I think we

16:19

really need to, all of us, it's

16:22

not just a Republican problem, but it's

16:24

an all of us problem now. But

16:27

we really need to see clearly what is happening and

16:30

that everything we think we're worried about gets

16:32

10 times worse if we fail this moment,

16:35

which is not just about Ukraine, it is

16:37

also about us. But

16:39

the Ukraine component of it is

16:41

so absolutely critical in

16:46

resetting our engagement with

16:48

all of these things, if that makes sense.

16:51

It does make sense. And Mike, I wanna go

16:53

back to Mitch McConnell and Linger just a little

16:55

bit longer there because this is something he has

16:57

understood. Whatever you wanna say about

16:59

his politics, and

17:03

I think there is plenty of bad

17:05

and also plenty of good at turns,

17:07

he has been a savvy operator in

17:10

the Senate. And I think we should

17:12

pause here and discuss for

17:14

a minute this loss

17:16

for him in the context of the broader rift

17:20

between himself and

17:22

Trump and the MAGA Republican

17:24

Party, because I've sort of seen

17:27

McConnell as like, almost like

17:29

the last man standing in the establishment

17:31

GOP, the leadership figure that you thought,

17:33

okay, he hated by Democrats for lots

17:36

of reasons, but has been

17:38

at least a stable force on

17:40

a moderate Republican politics. Certainly when

17:42

it comes to America's

17:44

interests abroad and has understood America's leadership in

17:46

the world and the stakes of failing our

17:48

allies. He

17:51

seems now to be, that stability

17:53

seems to be faltering. We obviously

17:55

remember Rick Scott's run against him,

17:59

which was just a little bit of a shock. kind of like

18:02

ridiculous in how terrible it was,

18:04

how self-defeating it was. But

18:07

now, he seems a lot more vulnerable.

18:10

And I wonder how you think

18:12

about Mitch

18:14

McConnell being potentially the next man, or

18:16

maybe the last man to fall in

18:20

the Magas march

18:22

through the institutions. God,

18:26

such a great question. And also,

18:28

again, why I love being on

18:30

with Molly with that answer, just

18:32

how we are failing ourselves. Yesterday

18:35

was a tough day, just so many

18:37

pieces falling, and you realize that's exactly

18:39

what it is. There's this moment right

18:41

now, if we could just gather whatever

18:44

American-ness lesson our

18:47

mythology is to move forward

18:49

in Ukraine and start prosecuting

18:51

a case for the world,

18:53

we could reclaim ourselves, but

18:55

we can't. We can't even get these

18:58

votes off of the floor. And

19:01

there's no question that

19:03

this was a test of McConnell's leadership.

19:06

That's exactly what this was, just by

19:08

floating and putting the idea out there

19:10

that this bill was there, and then

19:14

leaving Langford, who was the negotiator,

19:16

on the budget deal out spinning,

19:18

out twisting, and then

19:20

backing off, McConnell backing off within moments.

19:23

He looked feeble. It's like

19:25

the master of the last

19:27

master of legislating had

19:30

been drawn, cornered

19:32

and checkmated. And it's

19:34

a very significant moment, because he

19:36

is the last one holding the

19:39

barbarians at the gate. And

19:41

he was doing it through his mastery

19:44

and knowledge and relationships, which

19:48

aren't serving him anymore. He

19:50

can't deliver a deal

19:53

to fund the fighters of the

19:55

free world. And

19:58

if he can't do it, who can't? when so

20:00

many in his own party are

20:02

basically saying we don't want to

20:05

move in a different direction here,

20:07

a dangerously different direction. And

20:10

so yeah, I think you look, you characterize

20:12

this right as it's not just a challenge

20:14

to his leadership, it's the turning of a

20:16

page in a new era in the

20:18

Senate, which was kind of like I said, the

20:21

only thing holding back these

20:23

House Republicans to whatever small

20:25

degree was some knowledgeable faction

20:28

of Republicans who were, who were, you

20:30

know, agree with them or disagree with

20:33

them standing up for

20:35

what is right and good policy

20:37

and in America's interest. We

20:40

saw that brought to its knees in this

20:43

last session. And that's McConnell's

20:45

not who McConnell was. You

20:48

could always count on him to pull something out of the bag

20:51

and twist arms to get

20:53

the votes. But to bring it

20:55

up the way they did, let it die so

20:58

unceremoniously and so embarrassingly, leaving

21:01

Langford out there to twist in the wind.

21:04

I think Mokowski said it best is who's

21:07

going to negotiate with us? Who's going to

21:09

be the negotiator for the Republicans on anything?

21:12

Like, why would you let alone, let alone the

21:14

opposition, the Democrats? It's like, whose word can you

21:16

trust on what you're going to be able to

21:19

deliver? You can't bring your caucus. You

21:21

can't bring it. It's

21:24

ungovernable. It's becoming ungovernable, which is

21:26

unfortunately the end game for a

21:28

lot of these people in, in both

21:30

houses. And yeah,

21:33

I just say what you

21:35

will about Mitch McConnell. He

21:37

could be counted on to professionalize

21:40

the actions of the house

21:42

and what he was moving on

21:45

and delivering. You could at least

21:47

understand the game and play the

21:49

game by those rules. If

21:51

he doesn't have control of it, no

21:54

one has control of it. And that's, that

21:56

was what was so defeating yesterday is we

21:59

are. a country now

22:01

failing ourselves when there's

22:06

nobody who is actually

22:09

driving the clown car.

22:11

Yeah. It's also, just to weigh

22:13

in quickly on what the other wonderful

22:15

MM has said, I

22:19

think it's really easy

22:21

to lose sight of the fact

22:23

that amidst this obvious chaos,

22:25

and I think the vast majority of

22:28

what's happening is sort of chaotic spin,

22:32

is purpose. And I think

22:34

that it is not an accident that

22:37

Ukraine aid was

22:39

linked to comprehensive border reform,

22:41

an issue that no one ever imagined could

22:44

possibly get done in an election year, as

22:47

like the anchor to think it. And it

22:49

just wasted so much time, four months, four

22:51

months of this freaking nonsense, and then being

22:54

like, well, we're not even, who cares? Like,

22:56

whoo, let's just throw it right in the

22:58

shredder. Like, it is very hard for me

23:00

understanding the pieces that were

23:02

involved in this, not to see

23:05

that as quite purposeful. And

23:08

just on so many different aspects,

23:10

but also I think it's worth

23:12

remembering in during the Trump presidency,

23:15

the border is an issue they made a lot

23:17

of money off of. There was the whole billion

23:20

dollar thing that got siphoned off by whatever friend

23:22

contractor of Trump, but I don't even know what

23:24

happened with that federal prosecution. There

23:27

was the multi-million dollar fund that

23:29

Bannon was raising to build the private

23:31

border wall, like how many politicians send

23:33

out hourly- Put that in air quotes,

23:35

please, Molly, to build the finer border

23:37

wall. I'm pretty sure that went into

23:39

his pocket. Yeah,

23:42

no, but I mean, it's not just that

23:44

they're raising campaign funds off of their

23:46

minute by minute annoying emails about the

23:48

border invasion, you know, but

23:51

there was serious billion dollar efforts to

23:53

make money off of this issue. And

23:55

I don't think it's one that, well,

23:58

one, I think they want to keep control of it. And two,

24:00

I just think it's worth remembering that

24:02

there's all these other aspects to

24:04

this that are not just

24:06

about the election. But

24:09

I do think this effort to tie

24:11

up Ukraine support

24:14

with absolutely unsolvable

24:17

American legislative problems is

24:20

on purpose. And there was an understanding that that's

24:22

what it was when it started. Yeah, there's one

24:25

other side note here that

24:28

listeners I think should be aware of on the

24:30

McConnell point, which is that Republicans are likely to

24:32

take the Senate in

24:35

this next election because they just have

24:37

a better map. By virtue of

24:39

the map, Republicans are likely to take control and those

24:41

Republicans who will be elected in

24:44

those seats are not gonna be

24:46

McConnell style Republicans. So I

24:49

actually wonder, Mike, if he sees his own

24:52

weakness, if he sort

24:54

of bows out graciously instead

24:56

of actually runs

24:59

for leadership and loses. McConnell

25:01

is the kind of politician I

25:03

think that would rather not run

25:05

if he knows he's gonna lose because

25:08

of the optics of that, but I don't know. Look,

25:11

I think you're right. I think he

25:13

tries to hand the baton over to Thune. But

25:16

even John Thune wasn't

25:19

there on this either. Right, right, right. And

25:22

so does this become a fight between a

25:24

Rick Scott and a John Thune for the

25:27

leadership? I don't know. I

25:29

mean, I don't think McConnell, and

25:33

I think again, this was a display that he

25:35

doesn't have control over

25:38

the Republican caucus. He doesn't.

25:41

And I

25:44

can't imagine that he tries to hold it out,

25:47

hold out to kind of hold on

25:49

to power when there's gonna have to

25:51

be another generation of people coming in

25:53

who are increasingly of a smaller minority

25:55

that are institutionalists,

25:57

that are Republicans who do blame.

26:00

believe that a functioning government

26:02

is still an okay thing. But

26:06

we'll have to wait and see. Tamali's

26:11

point about Bannon, by the way, he is being

26:13

sued by his lawyers because

26:16

he hasn't paid them, and he's

26:18

arguing that his bank information can't

26:21

be reviewed because there

26:23

might be evidence of a border

26:25

wall fraud scheme in his banking

26:27

history. When your crime starts to

26:29

overlap with one another, using

26:34

your protection from one time to another. I'm sorry, you

26:36

can't investigate that crime because other crimes would be revealed.

26:41

Yes, that's how it works usually, actually. If

26:43

you haven't learned from Donald Trump, always pay

26:45

your lawyers. Yeah,

26:48

I mean, it's like the number one, don't

26:50

fuck with people. You end up with really

26:52

shitty lawyers and you lose. And

26:55

you lose, and they have all the information that you

26:57

had to disclose to them to use against you. And

26:59

they will. Yeah, next thing you know, you got a

27:01

Lena Haber representing you, of course. A

27:05

very costly mistake. Okay,

27:08

we are keeping an eye

27:11

on the potential, the likelihood

27:14

for Russian influence campaigns

27:16

heading into November. And

27:19

there's a major story on this from this week, which

27:23

is that former Fox News host

27:26

turned Russian propagandist Tucker

27:28

Carlson flew to Moscow last

27:30

week. He and his team tried to keep the

27:32

visit quiet, but news broke over the weekend

27:34

in Russia. And

27:37

then on Tuesday, Tucker posted a video on

27:39

X to explain why he was visiting to

27:41

interview Russian president Vladimir Putin. And

27:43

here's a clip of him from

27:45

that video. It's long, but it

27:48

also illustrates his ability to

27:50

weave, I think, fact and

27:52

fiction together really deftly

27:54

to create a completely different reality for

27:56

his viewers. And that is really

27:59

like... worth stressing. Let's listen to

28:01

this clip. This

28:03

war has utterly reshaped the global

28:05

military and trade alliances, and

28:08

the sanctions that followed have as well.

28:10

And in total, they have upended the

28:12

world economy. The post-World War

28:15

II economic order, the system that guaranteed

28:17

prosperity in the West more than 80

28:19

years, is coming apart very fast,

28:21

and along with it, the dominance of the

28:24

US dollar. These are

28:26

not small changes. They are

28:28

history-altering developments. They will define

28:30

the lives of our grandchildren. Most

28:32

of the world understands this perfectly well. They can

28:34

see it, ask anyone in Asia or the Middle

28:37

East what the future looks like. And

28:40

yet the populations of the English-speaking countries

28:42

seem mostly unaware. They think

28:44

that nothing has really changed, and they

28:46

think that because no one has

28:48

told them the truth. Their

28:50

media outlets are corrupt. They lie to

28:53

their readers and viewers, and they

28:55

do that mostly by omission. For

28:58

example, since the day the war in

29:00

Ukraine began, American media outlets have spoken

29:02

to scores of people

29:04

from Ukraine, and they've done scores

29:06

of interviews with Ukrainian President Zelensky.

29:09

We ourselves have put in a request for an interview

29:11

with Zelensky. We hope he accepts. But

29:13

the interviews he's already done in the United States

29:16

are not traditional interviews. They are

29:18

fawning pep sessions specifically designed

29:20

to amplify Zelensky's demand that

29:22

the US enter more deeply into a war

29:24

in Eastern Europe and pay for it. That

29:28

is not journalism. It is government

29:30

propaganda. Propaganda of the

29:32

ugliest kind, the kind that kills people. At

29:35

the same time, our politicians and media outlets have

29:37

been doing this, promoting

29:39

a foreign leader like he's a new consumer brand. Not

29:42

a single Western journalist has bothered to interview

29:44

the president of the other country involved in

29:47

this conflict, Vladimir Putin. Most

29:50

Americans have no idea why Putin invaded

29:52

Ukraine, or what his goals are now. They've

29:54

never heard his voice. That's wrong.

29:57

Americans have a right to know all they can. about

30:00

a war they're implicated in, that we have the

30:02

right to tell them about it, because we are

30:04

Americans too. Okay,

30:07

that was about a two-minute clip, and the reason I

30:09

wanted to play such a long sample from this video

30:13

is because of how

30:16

deftly he blends provocative

30:18

fact with fiction. Because

30:21

much of what he says in the setup

30:23

is true. There's some real undeniable stuff there,

30:27

and that sort of builds trust in this

30:29

narrative, and then that's when he slips in

30:31

the lie. It's

30:33

worth noting that Christiane Amanpour, CNN's chief

30:35

international anchor, immediately jumped in and corrected

30:38

him and said, journalists have

30:40

been trying to interview Putin since

30:42

he invaded Ukraine and have been

30:44

repeatedly denied. And then even a

30:47

Kremlin spokesperson noted that Tucker was

30:49

wrong, that the Kremlin had turned

30:51

down many requests for interviews with

30:54

Putin. Currently,

30:56

two US citizens who are

30:58

real journalists are being held

31:00

hostage in Russian prisons, Evan

31:03

Gurskovich of the Wall Street Journal and

31:05

Alsu Kermosheva of Radio Free Europe and

31:07

Radio Liberty, who's a dual US Russian

31:09

citizen. And also noteworthy, last

31:12

week Air Force General Timothy Howe took over as

31:14

the head of the NSA and the Cyber

31:16

Command in 2018. Howe led

31:18

the Cyber Command's National Mission Force,

31:21

which identified Russians conducting influence operations in the

31:24

2018 midterms. They

31:26

also took down servers run by Russian troll

31:28

farm. And the NSA expects Russia to

31:31

attempt to influence the 2024 elections, and

31:33

they're trying to determine whether China is

31:35

also going to increase its activity. We'll

31:37

come back to China, but there are

31:39

two big juxtapositions here that I wanted

31:41

to tease out with both

31:43

of you. One is about journalism and

31:45

how it's treated in Russia. You have real journalists

31:48

getting set to prison for asking

31:50

difficult questions, holding power to account, which

31:52

is the mission of journalism. And

31:55

then you have propagandists now like Tucker

31:57

getting the red carpet. And

32:00

the other juxtaposition, I think,

32:02

is the difference between covert

32:05

methods of information warfare that Russia

32:07

has historically used, like in 2016,

32:09

and now the overt perfectly legal

32:15

information operations that we're seeing carried

32:18

out with media personalities

32:20

like Tucker. We've

32:24

talked about the older method with Alex Gibney and

32:26

Kimi Francois. We've talked about that quite a lot,

32:28

but something new that seems to be happening is

32:30

this very overt...

32:32

There's enough public support within the US now

32:34

on the MAGA right to

32:38

legitimize this mouth

32:42

piecing for one

32:44

of America's enemies. So I'm

32:47

curious about how you see all of this, whether

32:49

you want to talk about Tucker's trip over there

32:51

specifically, or these

32:54

two juxtapositions as I've

32:56

outlined them. Mike, do you want to lead off? No,

32:58

actually, I want to defer my time to the expert on

33:00

this. I want to hear what Molly says. Let's

33:03

go, Molly. No, I

33:05

want Mike's thoughts too. But I mean,

33:07

there's one point that I would make

33:09

first, which will probably get lost, and

33:11

everybody's already quite lengthy commentaries

33:15

on Tucker's big

33:17

trip to Moscow. First

33:20

of all, you had the moment where

33:22

Pascov's, the Kremlin's box comes out and

33:25

is like, well, yeah, Tucker is wrong,

33:27

absolutely wrong. Tons of journalists want to talk

33:29

to us. We just don't want to talk to them because they're not going to

33:31

say what we want. And then the

33:33

fact that, of course, a Russian outlet put

33:36

out pictures of Tucker and his

33:39

charming production crew in Moscow,

33:43

arriving in Moscow, en route to Moscow.

33:47

And I think both of those things, which

33:50

Tucker probably also will not realize, are

33:52

reminders of how this works, which is,

33:55

you may think that you're the special guy

33:57

who now is the chosen apple of the

33:59

eye. of the baddies and they

34:01

do a really good job making you feel special,

34:04

Cece, Snowden, and others. But

34:07

then they remind you who is the boss in

34:09

the process, which is exactly what has just happened.

34:12

And I find that to be quite

34:14

fascinating that they're actually too dumb to see how they're

34:16

being used. But they'll still play the part because it

34:19

is obvious for

34:22

both Musk and Tucker, this is

34:24

good. His stupid little Twitter thing

34:26

when I looked at it two

34:28

days ago, whatever, already had 50

34:31

million engagements. And that's the only

34:34

statistic on there that Musk cares about

34:36

is how many people are

34:38

eyeballing the thing. This

34:41

is smart for them, right? Controversy

34:43

is smart and they love it.

34:46

So I think that's a point worth

34:49

remembering. But I also

34:51

think, look, Tucker is making himself complicit

34:53

on... He wants to talk about

34:56

complicity in the war. He's making himself

34:58

complicity with Russia's atrocities. And

35:00

no one will call him out on that. And

35:03

everybody, well, he's a journalist, but he's not a

35:05

journalist. He has made himself something different. I

35:07

think it was an end product of... It

35:10

was a truth that was going to have

35:12

to happen that Tucker would have to

35:14

leave Fox because Fox is no longer

35:17

extreme enough. And to maintain the control

35:19

that he had over his audience, he

35:21

would have to leave, which he has

35:23

done and is radicalizing his peeps even

35:26

more so than before.

35:28

And the thing that is so

35:30

frustrating is exactly what Ron outlined,

35:32

which is... And it's even

35:34

before the clip that Ron played. It is

35:36

worth watching, unfortunately, that entire stupid video he

35:39

posted. It is worth watching. But he

35:41

is correct that this is a war that

35:43

is reshaping the entire world. He is correct

35:46

that this is a human disaster. He is

35:48

correct that it is the

35:50

world order that we rely on

35:52

for our prosperity and security unraveling

35:54

before our eyes. Is

35:57

he correct that the thing we don't understand enough

35:59

is Putin? perspective on it? No,

36:01

but like that doesn't really matter

36:03

here. But

36:07

the, I think the point of it

36:09

is Tucker has become

36:11

an incredibly sophisticated

36:14

propagandist and there was good architecture for

36:16

this while he was within Fox. There

36:19

is better architecture for it now that he

36:21

is without Fox and

36:25

believing that this does not matter and

36:30

the way that we will all engage with it,

36:32

which is to amplify it more, to scream about

36:34

what a moron he is, which

36:36

is the continual process of amplifying all the bad things

36:39

that have been going on since 2016 is not going

36:41

to help anything.

36:43

We're in a really difficult

36:45

and challenging position

36:47

on the information side. And Ron,

36:50

you mentioned the change of command at

36:53

the NSA and cyber command. We

36:56

all know that I was a big fan of

36:58

Nakasone, the outgoing commander,

37:01

who I think was really a transformational

37:03

leader of

37:05

these institutions, particularly with this concept of

37:07

what is sort of mostly termed forward

37:09

defense. And that was to defend

37:13

against cyber adversaries, you can't just sit

37:15

at the borders of your thing and

37:18

bat things down with a tennis racket. You

37:20

have to go forward and disrupt,

37:23

dismantle a road, you know, in

37:25

every way you possibly can, the

37:28

capabilities of your adversaries to come at

37:30

you. And frankly, if

37:32

we thought the way that he thought

37:34

about cybersecurity and cyber defense about our

37:36

own national security and national defense, we

37:39

would be in a much better position

37:41

because everything we do is strictly reactive

37:44

and defensive and does not look at all at

37:47

the actual capabilities of the adversary and what they

37:49

are trying to achieve, in my view. So

37:53

I think there's like so much going on in the

37:56

space where we've gotten good at cyber, but in the

38:00

doctrine, information

38:02

security is both cyber

38:04

and information and psychological and all these topics

38:06

sort of lumped into one thing, which they

38:09

view as a national priority. And we

38:12

separate these things into different bins and

38:14

nobody's doing the other pieces like the

38:16

cyber stuff, A plus, like not concerned

38:18

about what's happening there. But

38:20

in terms of information

38:23

security, as we

38:25

conceive it, which is just the informational

38:27

bits and psychological defense,

38:29

which we don't even do in this country, I

38:32

think we're really exposed. And guys like

38:34

Tucker are just sitting right in that

38:37

space. And it's

38:39

like just RT, you know,

38:41

20 years later of don't

38:44

you just need to ask the question more

38:47

people just ask the question, why isn't anyone

38:49

telling you the truth? And

38:51

these guys are really effective at doing this. And we've

38:53

seen how it has given

38:56

brain worms to too many Americans on

38:58

both sides of the aisle, this

39:00

idea that no one is telling you the truth, capital

39:02

T, you know, and

39:06

there is a problem with our

39:08

news media, maybe not being the A plus iest all

39:10

the time. And it is

39:12

in fact correct to say that the

39:15

administration, people in Congress, other

39:18

national leaders are not really making the case

39:20

on what the war in Ukraine is about

39:22

effectively to the American people. That is 100%

39:25

the truth. And we've talked about that a lot on the show,

39:28

the three of us have talked about it, we've talked about it

39:30

separately. And

39:32

it's a really effective way to stick your

39:34

finger in the wound and wiggle it around,

39:37

which is where Tucker is going to get

39:39

a lot of space. And we all know

39:42

what the conclusions of his questioning

39:44

will be, which he was laying out

39:46

already in his teaser video, which is this

39:51

is a really damaging war, we're the ones

39:53

paying for it, that makes us complicit, maybe

39:55

we shouldn't. And, you know,

39:57

that separates out a whole bunch of different things. and

40:00

leaves out the parts that we really need to talk about in

40:02

this war. But he's

40:04

going to do it really effectively, and I have no

40:06

doubt about that. And it will probably

40:09

have impact on views about

40:11

Ukraine at this incredibly critical

40:13

moment when this deal needs

40:15

to get done in

40:17

the United States Congress, in the

40:19

United States Senate, to continue to

40:22

provide arms for Ukraine at a

40:24

critical point in the war. Because

40:27

right now, they have to shoot five times

40:30

less in a day than the Russians do,

40:33

because the rearmaments that they were counting

40:35

on have not come. So

40:38

yeah, we're complicit in

40:40

this war, but right now we're complicit in

40:43

losing the war. So all the stuff Tucker's

40:45

talking about, the war that's changing the

40:47

world, the world order is unraveling, it's

40:49

a human disaster. Right now we're

40:51

on the wrong side of that. And Tucker won't say that

40:53

as he buddies up with Putin. And

40:56

he's not really actually smart enough to understand how

40:58

his ego is being used against him, which is

41:00

really sad. And I'm sure all of his producers

41:02

are having a wonderful time in Moscow, and I

41:04

hope they get those videos later. But

41:07

I mean, but that is in

41:09

fact the truth, is right now

41:12

we're not on the right side of

41:14

this because we're letting whatever this political

41:16

nonsense is stall

41:19

doing the right thing. And

41:22

I hope it's just stall. I have a follow

41:25

up question that I'd love for you to answer briefly.

41:27

What, and you can think about it while Mike is

41:30

sharing his thoughts, because I can't wait to hear what

41:32

he's thinking. But really it's if

41:34

so many journalists have, and they

41:36

have lined up and requested an interview with Putin

41:38

and they've batted them all away and they haven't

41:41

offered any, what value

41:43

if any is there in a

41:46

long form interview of

41:49

Putin, you sort of streamed up,

41:52

what value is that content and

41:54

is there any merit to

41:56

Tucker's claim that Americans should

41:59

hear? Putin's

42:01

voice, which presumably is what the journalists

42:04

would do, is the substantive difference in

42:06

the questions that would be asked, the

42:08

way it would be edited. I

42:11

just, I don't want to tease that apart a

42:14

little bit, but Mike, I'm dying to hear

42:17

what you're thinking about all of this. This

42:19

all goes back to

42:21

the nature of war itself at this

42:23

moment in time. And I think Molly

42:25

did an exceptional job of kind of

42:27

laying out the parameters of what that

42:30

looks like. We're in

42:32

a war. These are acts of war. And

42:35

we have to start coming

42:37

to terms with that and understanding that.

42:40

And one of the great strengths

42:42

of American democracy during the

42:44

industrial age has left this gaping hole in

42:46

the digital age, which is all of our

42:49

freedom of the press. And

42:51

anybody who's got a microphone is a journalist,

42:53

as long as you get enough followers. And

42:56

this stuff is extraordinarily effective. And

42:58

the thing is, all you have

43:00

to do is be tenacious and

43:03

continue, as Donald Trump showed, and

43:06

as Molly said with

43:09

RT, the

43:11

tactic is to chip,

43:13

chip, chip, chip, chip away at people's

43:16

confidence in what they know to be right,

43:18

what they're seeing with their own eyes, what

43:20

decades of human history have told us, and

43:22

just ask the question, are you sure about

43:25

that? Do you think that

43:27

the media is really telling you what this

43:29

actually means? I had a fascinating dinner last

43:31

night with a friend, you know,

43:33

highly educated, who started

43:36

asking questions about Russia and said, do you

43:38

think the media has been telling us the

43:40

truth? Do you

43:42

think Ukraine's, you know, this is a lot of guys

43:45

really not corrupt, you know,

43:47

but what do you think

43:49

of the Nazi influence? Like, oh

43:51

my God, like, are you like,

43:54

this is a very, very intelligent

43:56

person. But there it

43:58

is, right? It's like, There's asking

44:00

questions which are very legitimate,

44:03

but then there's the seeping

44:05

talking points coming in, which

44:07

tells you that there's been this consumption

44:09

of media. As Molly said,

44:12

it's no longer just in the right wing.

44:14

It's especially pronounced in the right wing, but

44:16

the Russians are really, really, really good at this.

44:19

As much as they may be stalled and

44:22

didn't take even three days the way they

44:24

had planned and told the world, they're

44:27

winning the digital misinformation war

44:29

out here, or at least

44:31

they're making some very

44:34

significant strides. That's

44:37

what this is about. It's

44:40

not really, I don't think the nature or the

44:42

questions of what Tucker asks. It's

44:44

the fact that he's elevating Vladimir Putin

44:46

to this level to

44:49

have this discourse with millions

44:51

of Putin curious Americans

44:54

now. The groundwork

44:56

has been laid where enough erosion

44:58

in the confidence in our own

45:00

media, in our own government, in

45:03

our own intentions has been laid

45:05

meticulously, methodically. Now there

45:07

will be this other gentle

45:10

introduction of this other narrative

45:13

about NATO being the aggressor

45:15

here. This

45:20

is expensive, and why are we doing this when

45:22

we can't control our own borders? Why

45:24

are we financing

45:26

this unwinnable war? Why

45:29

is NATO bothering Russia? Because

45:34

there are enough Putin curious people after

45:36

a couple of years of really

45:38

hitting the Republican base hard with

45:40

this stuff, I think we're going to

45:42

start to see the nature of this conflict change in

45:45

public opinion. I believe that. And

45:48

let's be clear about what those

45:50

years of cultivating the Republican base

45:52

were, because a lot of it

45:54

was pulled right out of how the Kremlin has built

45:56

far-right crazy allies all over the place. It

45:59

is hate and gaze. all the

46:01

anti-LGBTQ stuff that the Kremlin has

46:03

leaned into for more than a

46:05

decade. You don't want Europe, if

46:07

you're, you know, the country's trying to join

46:09

Europe and NATO, Europe is the gaze. You

46:11

don't want the gaze, do you? Just overtly

46:13

leveraging this narrative. In

46:16

the U.S. they super leaned into the

46:18

anti-trans. It's the drag queens who are

46:21

the real enemy, bullshit. Tying

46:23

that into the border, tying that into

46:25

Ukraine. Like the way that

46:27

all of this stuff has been layered and

46:29

nuanced, which is to exploit elements

46:32

of overt hate in America.

46:35

And then with Tucker's guys especially, because let's

46:37

remember who some of his fired producers were,

46:40

but layering in the white Christian

46:42

nationalist traditional values narratives, which Tucker

46:44

has leaned into a lot in

46:46

sometimes subtle, sometimes overt ways, while

46:49

he was at Fox and after.

46:52

And they really hold up all these guys. Putin

46:55

in particular and Russia as the great white

46:58

hope. It's the last white Christian nation fighting

47:00

for the traditional values and the religious blah

47:02

blah blah, that will fight the drag queens

47:04

and all the things that you hate, gender

47:07

neutral bathrooms in particular. And the

47:09

fact that you've seen Lavrov and

47:11

Putin and his spokespeople and Russian

47:13

senators and whoever getting out there

47:15

making statements about things like gender

47:17

neutral bathrooms and drag queens, just

47:20

to make us crazy and that

47:22

people don't understand what that is, has

47:25

been so fucking painful to watch in

47:27

the progression of time. It's so effective.

47:29

Since 2014, but in particular. Yeah, absolutely.

47:31

In particular since Trump. So, like,

47:34

so wherever Tucker is now

47:36

with his, let's ask questions about Ukraine,

47:39

is being built on the hatred of drag queens

47:42

that the Kremlin has leaned into. And it just

47:44

makes me want to vomit every time I see

47:46

it. It's,

47:48

I think it's a point worth underscoring that you bring

47:50

up Christianity

47:52

because I just had this long

47:55

conversation, at least part one of which will

47:57

be out next week on Wednesday with Professor

48:01

David Gushy, who wrote

48:03

this fantastic book, Defending

48:06

Democracy from Its Christian Enemies.

48:09

And he coined a new term in

48:11

this book, authoritarian reactionary Christianity, which I

48:13

thought was super helpful. There's a lot

48:15

of very smart people talking about this

48:17

now. Christian supremacy is another term, but

48:20

in particular authoritarian

48:22

reactionary Christianity is

48:25

something he defines well, but the reactionary piece of

48:27

it is exactly what you're getting at. And I

48:29

think Mike has talked about this a lot, which

48:33

is this, it's a cultural, it's

48:36

a counter-cultural movement.

48:39

And he's observed this and he outlines

48:41

it carefully in Hungary, Russia, Poland, Brazil.

48:44

And one of the things I

48:46

thought was noteworthy is that in every instance, while

48:50

the animating issues are different in

48:52

all of them, anti-LGBT rhetoric is

48:55

consistent. It's sort of a through

48:57

line in all of it. And

49:00

I just wanted to underscore that. But I wanted to

49:02

also come back to that question briefly, Molly, of

49:04

maybe a simple way to put it is, what

49:06

is the difference between a long-form

49:09

Tucker Carlson interview with Vladimir Putin and

49:11

a long-form Christiana Montfort interview

49:13

with Vladimir Putin? I

49:16

think in the Tucker interview, there will be

49:18

some prepared, I am pushing back on you

49:21

questions that aren't really pushing

49:23

back on anything, but actually offering a

49:25

second opportunity to present narrative that is

49:27

being crafted. It

49:32

will be the lack of context, right?

49:34

The lack of critical context of what

49:36

Putin is saying, because look, Putin is

49:38

a fantastic storyteller. And this is true

49:41

with the media, where

49:44

he's not great, like he's not the best, you

49:46

know, on camera ever, like

49:48

he's a weird fucking dude. He came out of the

49:50

security services, it's hard to get over that. But

49:53

he's a really good storyteller. And you see

49:55

it in the way that people who have

49:57

met with him believe his crap, right?

50:00

Well, how many American presidents met

50:02

with Putin and had a moment where they decided they

50:04

had connected, right? And then realized later, in fact, no,

50:06

he's just knifing you in the eyeball. But

50:08

the stories that he's told about himself, which

50:11

are most likely constructs, right? The story about

50:13

his dead mother or his almost dead mother

50:15

under the pile of rubble and his father

50:17

like pulling her from the rubble and like

50:19

that was why he was born and blah,

50:22

blah, blah, blah, blah. All of

50:24

his stories about himself,

50:26

his origins, the fictitious,

50:29

I think, oh, look, I have it sitting here from class the

50:31

other week. But you know, the fictitious

50:34

autobiography he sort of did when he was

50:36

elected president, the stories of Putin about himself

50:38

that all pull on these narratives. He wants

50:40

Russia to believe about itself. We are a

50:42

great nation. We are the ones who beat

50:44

the Nazis. No one else defeated the Nazis.

50:46

It was only us. We suffered the most.

50:49

No one appreciates our suffering. While

50:51

we are invading other nations, actually we are the

50:53

victim of all. Putin

50:55

is really good at this, at

50:57

telling that fucking story over and over again until

50:59

people start to absorb and repeat bits of it

51:01

or question it as if it may be a

51:03

thing worthy of being questioned because maybe it is

51:06

the truth and we are just not reflecting on

51:08

the truth enough. And Tucker

51:10

will not do the work necessary

51:12

to directly

51:14

challenge what is construct in

51:16

this type of interview. And

51:21

sometimes that is what needs to happen, right?

51:23

Like sometimes you need to talk with

51:25

people to let them incriminate themselves with

51:27

their own words and then provide the

51:29

context afterward around it in how you

51:31

produce an interview like this that

51:34

shows, like, here is a guy sitting and talking about

51:36

how he is killing Ukrainians and stealing their children and

51:38

turning them into Russians so they do not have a

51:41

next generation. Like, sometimes that work needs to be done,

51:43

but that is not what is going to happen here

51:45

and he has made that very clear. I am presenting

51:47

you an opportunity to reflect for yourself on the words

51:50

of Vladimir Putin. And

51:52

this man is a liar. This man

51:54

is a liar who is a trained

51:56

liar who is trained in the arts

51:58

of confusing people with his words

52:02

and guys like Tucker are not

52:04

doing the work to do the

52:06

pushback. So here's why I think

52:08

his pitch has appealed to people.

52:10

And I mean Tucker's pitch. He's

52:13

promising to offer this entire interview

52:15

completely unedited, right? Completely unedited, which

52:17

is not something that CNN would

52:20

do or 60 Minutes would do.

52:22

Because when those journalists sit down

52:24

with someone like Vladimir Putin, they're

52:27

going to edit the material in

52:29

the most responsible way possible and

52:31

not allow lies and

52:35

fables to sort of eat up big

52:37

chunks of time. And they're

52:39

going to try and get up the most salient

52:42

information that he offers as positive. They're going to

52:44

ask some tough questions. They're going to air the

52:47

most important pieces

52:49

of what he says and they're going to put it in context

52:51

for their viewers to have a better picture of reality.

52:55

But you can understand the appeal of

52:57

Tucker saying, I'm not going to filter

52:59

it or censor it. I'm going to

53:01

give you everything you can judge for

53:03

yourself. And in this moment where it

53:06

is so difficult to find truth increasingly

53:08

on the internet, there's

53:12

something emotional about that appeal. Everybody else is hiding the

53:14

truth from you. So I'm going to give it to

53:16

you completely uncensored when in fact, as

53:21

you said, he won't do the work

53:23

that's necessary to

53:25

provide a more real

53:27

picture of reality. Does

53:30

that make sense? It

53:33

makes perfect sense to me. I mean, the

53:35

through line through all

53:37

of this is this underlying

53:40

grievance, that

53:42

he's able to tap into and

53:44

articulate and it's

53:47

perfectly transferable to what's happening

53:49

here in the United States and throughout the

53:51

world. This is not a new

53:55

innovation. This is the roadmap

53:58

to the strong hands. Playbook for

54:00

for you know consolidating power and it's

54:03

it's hate is a great weapon and

54:05

that begins with grievance As

54:08

we've been done wrong by this small marginal

54:10

group of influential people who are destroying us

54:12

and destroying our culture And if

54:15

we just rally against that if we're the

54:17

bulwark against that we can rally great your

54:19

nations through force or

54:22

you know through through persuasion to Build

54:25

something bigger than ourselves and that's very appealing

54:27

to to a wide wide

54:29

swath of Americans listening to This

54:32

you know the the Eastern Orthodox Church,

54:34

which is an arm of the FSB

54:43

Christian nationalism and when they you

54:45

know stormed their own parliament building

54:48

after Bolsonaro fled basically There's

54:50

basically a big church service afterwards with

54:52

hundreds of people, you know Previously

54:55

of indigenous culture and spirituality

54:57

now now Christians pushing

55:00

for for the you know the

55:03

removal of the secular satanic government

55:05

that was destroying culture and That's

55:09

it's it's it's something primal in

55:11

us is Human

55:13

beings that they tap into but like so this

55:15

is not new. This is age age old And

55:19

it's just it's horrifying that we

55:21

can't wake more people up to say guys

55:24

We're not we're not spinning some weird new

55:26

theory about what this guy's doing This

55:28

has been written throughout the tapestry of

55:30

humanity since since the very beginning of

55:32

who we are Yeah, and

55:34

and an aspect of it that I think

55:36

is really sharp And it's funny cuz you

55:38

know I teach this this course on Russian

55:40

hyper warfare and I'm in the middle of

55:42

like the doctrine weeks where I make my

55:44

poor students Read all the stuff the Russians

55:46

write and say and it's terrifying to go

55:48

through But you every time you go through

55:51

them again You remember just like there's sort

55:53

of different things that resonate based on whatever

55:55

is happening at the moment But this piece

55:57

where the Russians have been really effective at

55:59

playing Which

56:01

I think is partially true and now

56:03

being exploited, but a

56:06

thing that they talk about a

56:08

lot is where Western alliances, the

56:10

EU, NATO, are delusional and

56:12

failing is the idea that the nation

56:14

state no longer mattered. And they're putting

56:16

so much, you know, putting so much

56:18

focus into the broader

56:20

supernational structures and actually

56:22

that does nothing to defend you in the end. That's

56:26

the space that the Russians have

56:28

been good at exploiting on this

56:30

traditional values thing. You know, yeah, yeah,

56:33

you might want these trade alliances, but

56:35

when it comes to defending your identity,

56:37

your culture, this ephemeral word, right? The

56:41

things that matter the most to your traditions

56:43

and what you believe you are and what

56:45

you stand for, you need to have control

56:47

of your little nation state because

56:50

that is the only place where you can defend

56:53

all of these things. Define XYZ,

56:55

right? And that's the space where

56:57

they're super effective at playing in and

56:59

have gotten countries that

57:01

are inherently anti-Russian like Poland to make

57:04

really terrible decisions by playing in that

57:06

space as well, right? Like

57:09

the polling on the traditional values

57:11

strings, the identity strings, the culture

57:13

strings and

57:15

the anti-gay hate stuff has

57:19

been the most

57:22

effective recruitment tool for the new

57:25

generation of allies for the Kremlin.

57:28

I mean, we talk a lot about the far right in Europe

57:30

and the United States, but

57:34

everywhere where because let's face it,

57:36

most of the world still not

57:38

really super pro-gay, pro-LGBTQ, pro-rights,

57:40

pro-whatever. There's

57:43

places where it's like zero to machete on

57:45

these issues still and those are the places

57:47

where Putin just weighs his little flag. We

57:50

also hate the gays and a whole

57:52

bunch of people who otherwise shared nothing

57:54

with the Kremlin five minutes ago are

57:57

like, yes, those Guys get

57:59

us. Defending the traditional values

58:01

that we care about. And.

58:03

Then it's a pathway to other

58:05

cooperation and watching how that has

58:07

worked so incredibly effectively in the

58:09

last fifteen years. Has. Been

58:11

really disappointing. And

58:14

it happens to have been the same

58:16

fifteen years were are your the United

58:18

States or countries that are more progressive

58:20

on these issues. Have. Leaned into

58:23

promoting inclusive values and how we engage other

58:25

nations and the ability to create that conflict.

58:27

The Kremlin has also be than to of

58:29

course but the America is showing up telling

58:32

you you must accept hey than we are

58:34

telling you that you can do whatever you

58:36

want. But this.

58:39

Not understanding or wanting to

58:41

book cat or believing any

58:44

of these things. Is

58:47

leaving Americans disadvantaged? You know,

58:49

Maybe you? legitimately? how's religious

58:52

or moral qualms with. Venus.

58:55

With the idea of same sex marriage

58:57

with giving people for rice. Or

59:00

x y z, whatever your thing, that. But

59:03

I don't care about that and yet you

59:05

care about that. But like I do care

59:07

if you don't understand how it's being spoiled,

59:09

is exploited by enemies of America, the make

59:11

you think things that are not true and

59:13

to make stupid decisions about your own country.

59:16

which is the whole point of everything. Russian

59:18

Intelligence that. Version: Getting you

59:20

to act against your own best interests

59:22

and that is happening in Asia and

59:24

Latin America and Africa in the United

59:27

States in Western Europe. Using

59:30

these issues of such simple

59:32

fertile heat. To. Make

59:35

people make catastrophic li bad decisions

59:37

about national security and ways of

59:39

the Kremlin is laughing at exploiting.

59:41

To. Unravel our alliances and the structures

59:43

that make us more wealthy, more

59:45

secure, more successful. On.

59:48

If you're not willing to look at those things and

59:50

yourself. Then. you

59:52

know you're part of a problem your

59:55

the thing making america week and a

59:57

subduing that no one's gonna say that

59:59

most americans Certainly not Tucker Carlson.

1:00:02

Okay. Well said Let's

1:00:06

move on to our look-a-heads

1:00:08

and hopefully we have some

1:00:10

positive pieces of news

1:00:13

and observation Mike

1:00:16

what did you what did you bring? Well,

1:00:18

I don't know that it's positive, but I

1:00:20

think it's gonna be informative How's that? Okay

1:00:23

halfway there and all right with the sunshine

1:00:25

Molly mature to bring us home on the

1:00:27

positive optimism I'm

1:00:30

watching the New York 3 special

1:00:32

election the Let

1:00:38

me tell you why I think this is gonna

1:00:40

be fascinating this seat Is

1:00:45

one of the very few swings seats in

1:00:47

America. There's about a dozen or so It's

1:00:49

got a higher than national average of college

1:00:51

educated Voters Republican voters

1:00:54

by any estimation this couldn't can be and

1:00:56

should be anybody's seat the

1:00:58

Democrats Candidate is running

1:01:01

largely on abortion rights. The

1:01:03

Republican is running on illegal immigration

1:01:06

and border control This

1:01:08

is gonna tell us a lot a lot

1:01:11

and you know I'm not the person who's

1:01:13

the big predictor of saying off-cycle elections means

1:01:16

something at all. I'm not that person I'm

1:01:18

saying watch this race because

1:01:20

what you're gonna find out is if

1:01:22

that Republican does come You know within

1:01:24

less than five points of

1:01:26

the Democrat here Then I

1:01:29

think the Republicans have found a pretty good

1:01:31

foil to the Dobbs decision in this abortion

1:01:35

Intensity that has consumed the last few

1:01:37

election cycles and both but

1:01:39

make no mistake about it Both groups

1:01:41

are talking to women here with these

1:01:43

messages Democrats are trying

1:01:45

to bring back those independent conservative

1:01:48

leaning independents Republican women who have

1:01:50

had it with the party who

1:01:52

have shown That

1:01:54

they've reached the end of the line with

1:01:56

the GOP for the past three election cycles,

1:01:58

but specifically after the Dobbs

1:02:00

decision if there's anything that can bring

1:02:02

these folks back or prevent more leakage

1:02:05

It's the threat and the specter of

1:02:08

black and brown people screaming across the border

1:02:10

who are criminals drug dealers and rapists so

1:02:14

that's what I'm watching because the outcome of that race

1:02:16

is gonna I think give us a lot about how

1:02:18

this this The

1:02:20

the efficacy of both of these issues

1:02:22

heading into the 2024 election cycle. Okay,

1:02:25

and the election date is a Tuesday,

1:02:28

so what yeah next Tuesday 13th

1:02:31

so right February 13th. Yeah, it's

1:02:34

coming up. Yeah, it's coming up on the 13th Okay,

1:02:39

super good And

1:02:41

I think very instructive I

1:02:43

have well this was this one's

1:02:45

positive. Okay, so everybody knows I think by

1:02:48

now We

1:02:50

got a wow a

1:02:52

brilliant opinion But

1:02:54

a DC Appeals

1:02:56

courts three judge panel unanimous

1:02:59

decision Donald Trump

1:03:01

is not immune under no circumstances

1:03:03

as a president Completely immune from

1:03:05

prosecution after he leaves office for

1:03:08

acts while he is in office Because

1:03:11

it was unanimous three judge panel per

1:03:14

curiam meaning no individual judge signed it

1:03:17

And our good friend George Conway wrote about this

1:03:19

in the Atlantic I encourage you to go read

1:03:21

this piece, but he characterized the

1:03:23

opinion as unanimous no air tight as a

1:03:26

drum They dismantled

1:03:28

Trump's claims patiently

1:03:30

painstakingly and unsparingly He

1:03:34

had a lot of praise for the opinion

1:03:36

and here's why I think it matters by

1:03:39

George's reading and based

1:03:41

on what I've read from sampled

1:03:44

from this 53 58 page opinion It

1:03:48

is He says an

1:03:51

opinion that the high court could

1:03:53

would be hard-pressed to write better

1:03:55

themselves Meaning there's

1:03:57

really no reason for the Supreme Court to

1:03:59

read review this decision in his view. And

1:04:03

if that's the case, when Trump appeals

1:04:05

this to the court and they deny it, if they

1:04:07

deny it, that accelerates

1:04:10

the trial timeline, making

1:04:12

it more likely that

1:04:14

Trump is actually on trial by summertime

1:04:16

at the latest. So I mention

1:04:19

this because the likelihood that we have

1:04:21

Trump campaigning from a courtroom and

1:04:24

possibly convicted on this charge just became

1:04:27

a whole lot more likely before the

1:04:29

election. So

1:04:31

maybe at a future episode, we

1:04:33

can get into the politics of what

1:04:36

happens if Trump is convicted to

1:04:39

public opinion. The

1:04:42

other one is, and I don't have a whole lot to say about this right

1:04:44

now, but I'm right in the middle of listening to the oral arguments in

1:04:47

the Colorado Supreme Court case about

1:04:49

whether Donald Trump

1:04:51

is allowed to be on the ballot in

1:04:53

Colorado, which is

1:04:55

fascinating. We'll have more to say about that soon.

1:05:00

Molly, can you tell us

1:05:02

about the project you're helping with in

1:05:05

Ukraine? Yes.

1:05:08

So once again, Ron has been

1:05:10

kind enough to allow me to

1:05:12

plug a thing here for

1:05:14

you lovely political ge listeners who

1:05:18

in the past have been

1:05:20

enormously supportive on

1:05:22

our efforts to help Ukraine. We

1:05:26

all bitch and moan about how dumb the

1:05:28

politics are, but I think it's always important

1:05:30

to remember that there's a lot that we

1:05:33

can do. And in

1:05:35

particular for individual Ukrainian soldiers and

1:05:37

units, often the thing that is

1:05:39

going to help them not die

1:05:42

today or not have

1:05:44

their unit lose today or advance their

1:05:46

objectives in a pretty significant way is

1:05:49

real small. And I think that remembering

1:05:52

that there's that space where we

1:05:54

can be helpful in protecting as

1:05:56

many Ukrainians as we can is important. Some

1:06:00

of you know, and I've talked about it before on this

1:06:02

show, in some of my other

1:06:04

hats, I have the great honor and privilege

1:06:06

of helping to teach Ukrainians

1:06:10

on, Ukrainian soldiers on a

1:06:12

variety of issues. And

1:06:15

in that context have made good

1:06:17

contacts with a wide variety of

1:06:20

units where there is great expertise

1:06:22

in areas that

1:06:24

I am adjacent to, which some of you know. But

1:06:28

one of the units that I have

1:06:30

had the pleasure of meeting and getting

1:06:32

to know and working with in the

1:06:34

past two years needs

1:06:37

drones. They are deployed right now,

1:06:39

which is why I cannot say which unit it is

1:06:41

for, because where they are

1:06:44

is not supposed to be known.

1:06:46

What they are doing is not something that is

1:06:48

public. But like all

1:06:50

frontline units, they need

1:06:54

small drones, FPV drones to enable

1:06:56

the work that they are doing

1:06:58

for surveillance and for communications projects. This is

1:07:01

not for weapons purposes for those of you

1:07:03

who might be concerned about such things. And

1:07:06

so I have offered to help them raise

1:07:08

the money they need to replenish their drone

1:07:11

supplies. Any additional funds that

1:07:13

would be raised would go into helping them

1:07:15

finance the purchase of a truck for their

1:07:17

unit. And

1:07:20

I will post more details about that

1:07:23

in our little fundraising link, which

1:07:25

I think Ron has offered to put in

1:07:28

the politicalogy show notes. If

1:07:30

you would be inclined to contribute to

1:07:33

that, even small amounts are super welcome.

1:07:36

All this stuff goes directly to the

1:07:39

frontline support. And everybody

1:07:42

who supports it will get once the

1:07:44

aid is delivered. We

1:07:47

have been promised a video, thank you, from the

1:07:49

unit so you will know who it has gone

1:07:51

to and who you have helped. I

1:07:53

can't put it publicly right now, but in

1:07:55

the future we can talk about who those guys

1:07:57

are. So not now, but let's go.

1:08:00

later you can know what they were doing. But

1:08:03

it is for a frontline unit. They're deployed

1:08:05

right now. They need this equipment fairly urgently.

1:08:08

So I'm doing what I can to help them bridge that

1:08:10

gap. Any of you who would be

1:08:12

willing to contribute, I

1:08:15

would be extremely thankful in the past. You

1:08:17

guys have been great at coming to the

1:08:19

call. So thank you again in advance if

1:08:21

you would be inclined to

1:08:23

look at our little pitch there. Thank you,

1:08:25

Molly. Look

1:08:28

at that. We close with some optimism and a

1:08:31

little bit of agency too. Okay,

1:08:37

let's flip over to Public Apache Plus. We

1:08:40

got a great topic. We're

1:08:42

gonna talk about the money that the super

1:08:44

PACs supporting Donald Trump's

1:08:47

challengers spent and where they

1:08:49

spent it and what that tells

1:08:51

us. Before we do, where

1:08:53

are you on the internet these days, Mike? Still

1:08:57

on Twitter at Madrid underscore Mike

1:09:01

and Molly. Still on Twitter at

1:09:04

Molly McHugh and on Blue Sky.

1:09:06

Yes, Blue Sky. Trying

1:09:08

to make Blue Sky. I mean, there's gotta

1:09:10

be an alternative eventually, right? Like someday there

1:09:12

has to be something that's fixed. There's

1:09:15

a frustrating lack of functionality in all of

1:09:17

these alternative platforms. It's just, it is so

1:09:19

frustrating that Twitter is no longer Twitter, even

1:09:21

though Twitter sucked before. It is catastrophic

1:09:24

now. You know this

1:09:26

is the genius of Blue Sky actually, right? I talked about

1:09:28

this on a look ahead, I don't know, some months ago

1:09:30

last year, in that it

1:09:32

is a completely decentralized network and you can take your followers

1:09:34

with you wherever you go. Completely traversing

1:09:37

the model. Yes, but they need direct messaging. Yeah, yeah, yeah,

1:09:39

yeah, yeah. They need video. They need all these things. They'll

1:09:41

develop it. They need it. You can get there. I'm gonna

1:09:43

set up an account on Blue Sky. I'm not quite there

1:09:45

yet, but I will be. Do

1:09:47

you need an invite note? I have some.

1:09:49

Actually, it opened to the public, I think

1:09:51

last week, or this week. Yeah,

1:09:54

it did. Well, that's good. Now

1:09:56

I don't have to send people invite codes anymore. This

1:09:58

is Jack Dorsey's new startup, former. former Twitter

1:10:00

founder, I think

1:10:03

it's very promising. Okay,

1:10:06

that's it. Let's go. All

1:10:09

right, everybody. Thanks for listening today. If

1:10:12

you have questions about anything we discussed

1:10:14

today, you can reach us as always

1:10:16

at podcast at politicology.com. Whether

1:10:19

it's an episode idea, a topic recommendation,

1:10:21

or just a simple note about what

1:10:23

you thought, we love to hear from

1:10:25

you. And we might even use it on an upcoming episode.

1:10:28

Also, if you can head over to the

1:10:30

Apple podcast app and rate us five stars

1:10:32

and leave a review there, we'd really appreciate

1:10:34

it. This helps us rise in the rankings

1:10:36

so that new people can discover politicology organically.

1:10:39

I'm Ron Steslow, and I'll see you in the next episode.