Trump is the Revenge of the Mediocre | The Bulwark Podcast

Added: 2026-05-16

[00:00:00]There's not a big overlap between penile implant expertise and pandemic expertise >> because in one you want inflation and in the other in the government you don't.

[00:00:15]>> Hello and welcome to the Bullwork Podcast. I'm your host Tim Miller.

[00:00:18]Couldn't be more delighted to welcome back to the show professor of practice at NYU Law School. He served as lead counsel in Bob Muller's investigation of the 2016 election. He's also been general counsel for the FBI. Um he's on MS Now with me quite often. He's a frequent guest on our own illegal news podcast with Sarah Longwell. Sarah's stolen him from me. And uh now he's the author of a new book, Liars Kingdom: How to Stop Trump's Deceit and Save America, which will be released on Tuesday. Go pre-order it right now. Pause the podcast. Go pre-order it. And uh we're going to give you a good show. It's me and Andrew Weissman. How you doing, Andrew?

[00:00:50]>> It is really nice to see you. I mean, you're you're totally right. I actually I met you before Sarah, I think. So, you know, I I think I think you've been >> scooped, but it's it's my loss.

[00:01:03]>> We'll see. Um, the Illegal News Pond is is go check it out. They're doing a great job. I I listened to this last week's I got about 30 minutes in before dozing off, so I thought that was pretty good. Um, you know, I was I have a lot happening in my life, you know, so it's kind of hard to stay locked in.

[00:01:19]>> My my good friends say, you know, I listen to I listen to you on your podcast because I do this podcast. I'm like, "Oh, that's great." They go, "Yeah, when I can't get to sleep, it's really, really nice to listen to."

[00:01:31]>> Well, that won't be this podcast because we have a lot of exciting news to discuss. And at the very end, I get the sense that you're a little Are you a little bit of a hypochondriac? Are you a little Are you No, not really.

[00:01:42]>> No, I'm not.

[00:01:44]>> That's surprising.

[00:01:47]>> Why Why do you say that?

[00:01:49]>> Well, I don't know. I just You give offri energy. Um, you know, I have a lot of phobias and I have a lot of I have a lot of issues, >> but I've somehow managed to not have that one.

[00:02:02]>> All right. Well, we'll we'll learn a little bit more. We'll go a little bit deeper on that um in the end. Um, >> wait, are you you don't you I'm not at all. No, no, the opposite. No, Sarah gets mad at me for not washing my hands enough, but uh it might be it might be something we'll need to do do more.

[00:02:17]That's a little teaser for the very end of the show. There'll be some penile implant discussion. We'll just just stick around for the end. But first, we have some ser I'm like really actually genuinely genuinely [ __ ] pissed about this story that I want to start with you on.

[00:02:30]>> Uh this is ABC News last night reports that Trump poised to drop his $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS. You know, he had this emotional distress about his tax returns being leaked.

[00:02:41]Every other presidential candidate voluntarily released their tax returns.

[00:02:44]His got leaked and and this caused him such emotional distress that he felt like he deserved 10 billion of our dollars. Taxpayer dollars.

[00:02:51]>> Yeah. billion Bubba. Um, and the the report according to ABC is that the settlement between Trump and Trump uh is going to be taking 1.7 billion with a B of our dollars and putting it into a slush fund that will be given out to allies who were quote unquote targeted by the Biden administration.

[00:03:12]$1.7 billion of people who are out there working their ass off and and giving some of the money to the government.

[00:03:19]Trump is just going to hand it out to Mike Flynn and the shaman and his kids and whoever he wants. 1.7 billion.

[00:03:24]>> So Mike Flynn has already reportedly gotten his what is it? 1.2 million. But that's actually just a drop in a bucket, right? But this means, you know, there's a lawsuit by Jixers that um so you can see the writing on the wall as to what's going to happen there. But I mean this is what is the difference between this and theft? I mean, why not just go into Fort Knox, take the gold, and give it out?

[00:03:52]>> There is no difference.

[00:03:53]>> Yeah. Right.

[00:03:54]>> None. I mean, it's just it is unbelievable. So, you know that to put it in a legal frame when his lawsuit, the judge who oversaw it had a really good point. She said, "Before we continue, I don't know that you're properly in court, but to have because to have a court battle, there has to be adversity between the plaintiff and the defendant. There has to be what's called a case or controversy." And she said, "I need the parties to brief this because I don't see a case or controversy necessarily here. I need you to tell me why." And I could see the Trump administration going, you know what, we don't even need the case. like let's just get rid of it because the judge is not playing ball and who needs it? we can just settle our on our own without ever involving the court which is just another way of saying we're just going to write ourselves a check at pass on taxpayer money >> in addition to all the money that Trump is using to line his own pockets with and this is corruption at a scale that we've never even contemplated in the country like forget like you know I mean this is I Spiro Agnu spiru resigned over like like 20 grand in a in a brown paper bag or something 1.7 billion But Tim, doesn't it the thing that's so remarkable is could you I couldn't even think of of this as a possibility >> to come up with a scheme. Like you couldn't have had a law or regulation to prevent this. Like who you who would have thought like we need to pass a law through Congress, you know, that somebody in the 1960, you know, Tip O'Neal and Ronnie Reagan came together in ' 83 and like, you know, we need to make a deal here just to make sure that no future president can do it can sue the government and then settle with himself and give himself $1 billion.

[00:05:39]Like, how would you have even conceived that?

[00:05:41]>> What? Why doesn't he just give the money to his campaign um or to his children? And is it not an I mean I guess it it's an imolument kind of no >> amaluments amaluments are I mean to me I I I >> and that is a law still we don't follow it but it is a law >> yeah but we really don't follow it and it's also something that um Congress can improve and I I think that it's closer to think of this as theft that there because there is no good faith for the dispute and certainly the amount of money even if there even if there were good faith for for some kind of dispute.

[00:06:25]Um anyway, you know, it's sort of I think that Jamie Rascin has made this point which is he's giving himself over a billion dollars uh to use as he sees fit. Um you know who else has had personal information leaked? um the whole series of Epstein victims who the Department of Justice, you know, smeared um they're not getting any money. I mean, if you're if you're going to do this, how about people who are actually victims who had their bank accounts, social security numbers, photos released by the Department of Justice because they were careless. At at the very least, careless. I I know you're the legal guy and I didn't go to law school here. So just and I'm googling this. I'm just being fully transparent with everybody. I'm live googling this.

[00:07:15]>> The domestic imalments clause article 2 section 1 clause 7 prohibits the US president from receiving any imalment beyond their fixed salary from the federal government or any state. The president cannot receive any other emalment from the United States federal government or state government.

[00:07:29]According to Alexander Hamilton, Federalist 73, this prevents Congress from using financial incentives to corrupt the president's integrity.

[00:07:35]That's a Is that not this?

[00:07:38]>> Yeah. The the problem is um you know this came up in in Trump 1.0 with the post office where and that fizzled um as a lawsuit.

[00:07:51]Um and >> uh the argument >> we should unfizzle it. Maybe we should fizzy it back up.

[00:07:57]>> Yeah. Look, I'm sure there will be a lawsuit here, but um I actually don't have the like I can't remember why the post office uh case fistled, but um one of the things that Congress uh can do is um in a monolu they actually have the power to approve it.

[00:08:19]In other words, even if it were an imolument, um I don't know if they have the power to unwind it. In other words, where they could say about this um this is the >> Yeah, exactly. Or or take it away from something. In other words, like, okay, if you want this, you know, this is a little bit like what Congress did to protect the Federal Reserve and Jerome Powell, which is they actually have levers to use that they just, you know, rarely rarely use. But they could do that. They could say, you know what, you want these people approved. You have people you're nominating. You have judges. Uh you have people who are um sort of subc cabinet level people.

[00:08:58]>> We're stopping. You want us to approve funding of things. Um you like your war in Iran. Well, you know what? And you're asking us for, you know, tens of billions of dollars for that.

[00:09:10]>> That's a lot of leverage.

[00:09:11]>> I want to get dark on this for one second. Do you know Andrew Paul Johnson?

[00:09:14]Does that name ring a bell for you?

[00:09:15]>> No.

[00:09:16]>> This guy uh plead guilty for climbing into the capital through a broken window on January 6th. He had a bullhorn. was shouting, "We have a [ __ ] job to finish." Uh, prosecutors pointed out during his sentence that he called himself an American terrorist and a proud Jixer. On his social media, he was sentenced to life in prison in March uh after he was pardoned by Trump. Uh he reaffended and he uh repeatedly sexually abused two children. Here's here's how it ties to the story. Uh, police reported that Johnson tried to keep the children quiet by telling them that he would share the millions of dollars in restitution money he expected to receive from the Trump administration in connection with the January 6 case.

[00:09:54]I mean, Matt, just enraging.

[00:09:57]>> Okay. So, the people the agents and prosecutors who worked on the case, they're fired and vilified.

[00:10:05]the people who were um charged, tried before a jury, found guilty or pleaded guilty, meaning they confessed out of their own amounts um after receiving due process. Those people are pardoned, including people who assaulted law enforcement, the sort of this is the back of the blue party. Um and and now it's again this falls into the you can't even conceive of um the idea that that this is going to happen but it's I think it's just part of the process of whitewashing history like you we I am going to tell you what the facts are. I am going to change literally reality is what I tell you it is. And even though we all saw January 6 on our TVs, on our computers, on our phones, it's like that did not happen. The people who were assaulting are the victims and the people who are trying to stop them are the bad guys.

[00:11:17]Um, and that's why we're paying this money.

[00:11:18]>> We're to pay them, me and you.

[00:11:20]>> Yeah.

[00:11:21]>> Yeah. Listeners, we're all paying guys like this. I mean, not this guy, Andrew Paul Johnson, because he got reconvicted, but other but his buddies, the people that were breaking down the windows with him that were attacking Fenown, they're going to they're going to get a payout.

[00:11:34]>> Well, it'll be interesting to see whether he I mean, you know, he this guy could get I mean, he if it depends how they structure >> the payouts. Um because if it's just going to be for >> the child sex predator could get could get a payout.

[00:11:46]>> Yeah. And just to be clear, he is not the only person who has reaffended.

[00:11:50]>> Oh my god.

[00:11:51]>> There have been like three dozen.

[00:11:52]Exactly. Um and >> it's just particularly interesting in his case that like the idea that he was using the idea this money was coming >> totally >> as like um as a weapon >> to intimidate kids that he was abusing >> horrible. Um >> so how would you like to be a somebody who is struggling uh this is what I don't get. So, you are a let's assume you're a MAGA Republican and you are struggling to um have ends meet. You're seeing uh the economy go into the tank.

[00:12:25]You're seeing us spend billions of dollars on a war that has not been explained to you. And now you learn that they're thinking of giving criminals money. and the president of the United States has given himself over a billion dollars of taxpayer money. Like at what point do you just say I've had enough?

[00:12:48]>> Well, I think that the uh we're seeing some of it and he's at his lowest um approval rating and that he's ever been.

[00:12:54]Um so I think that there is some movement. We should not ignore that. I think a lot of people aren't getting this news though, you know, and I think that's why the Iran war is so is so important. I mean, it's horrifying and all this, but but from a political standpoint, just talking about this from raw politics is like they can't, you know, just because Fox News, like Fox News isn't really going to tell them about the 1.7 billion, you know, or if they do, it's going to be framed up in a way of like this is needed retribution for the victims of the Biden Justice Department politicization. You should be happy that they're getting their restitution. They're not going to be like reminding people this is your money. Actually, you're it's not just the libs that are paying them. you this like they're not going to do that, right? So, but with the war it's like even if they aren't following the straight of Hormuz news dayto day, they're seeing the gas price.

[00:13:42]They're seeing the gas prices every day.

[00:13:43]And I do think that is why that has has penetrated somewhat. Not as much as I think some of us have hoped, but but that's my take on it. I I don't think that they're hearing that much about this the corruption. Um Sarah had a point about uh Alex Prey which is similar that she said it's that's one where everyone could just watch it on their phone and make their own judgment and it could break through because um you know it was just as horrific as Renee Good but but it was it was sort of simpler to see >> all the camera angles. Yeah.

[00:14:19]>> Right. Exactly.

[00:14:19]>> He was down.

[00:14:21]>> Right. And so whatever people were telling you, it's like I could go to the videotape. I could see it and it you didn't have the sort of problem of filtered media um where you know it's like everything's fake news. Well, you know, here you could see it and make a judgment. This episode of the Bullwork Podcast is brought to you by Wild Green.

[00:14:40]Wild Green is the first baked from frozen subscription box for sourdough breads, artisal pastries, and fresh pastas. Unlike many store-bought options, Wild Grain uses simple ingredients you can pronounce at a slow fermentation process that can be easier on your belly and return nutrients and antioxidants. Plus, all items conveniently break in 25 minutes or less with no thawing required. Wild Grains boxes are fully customizable in addition to the variety box. They have a vegan and a new protein box if you're weightlifting. Um, we love the Wild Grain breakfast foods in our house. Uh they got them croissants, they got that bakery quality bread and you know it just it takes me back to the childhood, you know, when they could just get up on a Saturday or Sunday morning and know that it was my mom was down there making something yummy for me. So's birthday, by the way. Happy birthday, Mom. We love you. And um you can do this yourself right there. It's in the freezer. You don't have to worry about going down to Starbucks, waiting in line or doing whatever, you know. You can have it if you're a mom, you're a grandma, can stick those croissants in the oven. Stick some of those yummy pastries in the oven and you'll have something that tastes like a French bakery in 20 minutes. When those little munchkins come down the stairs, they'll remember you. Imagine having that fresh bakery quality bread, pastries, and pasta at home without any trips to the store. And don't just take my word for it. They have over 40,000 fivestar reviews and have been voted best food subscription box by USA Today for three years in a row. For the limited time, Wildgrain is offering our listeners 35 bucks off your first box plus freequissants for life when you go to wildgrain.com/thebullwork to start your subscription today. That's 30 bucks off your first box and free quissants for life when you visit wildgrain.com/thebullwork or you can use promo code the bullwwork at checkout. Happy birthday, mom. And happy Mother's Day post Mother's Day to all other moms out there. We're talking about the whitewashing of history. Uh we also have uh the Voting Rights Act decision we've been obviously talking about at Nauseium. This should not dampen anyone's rage or determination for action at all. What I'm about to say and I should just note actually tomorrow is the national day of action for road and voting rights. Yeah. And their events in a lot of places and especially in the south. So so take >> Selma and Montgomery. But yes, you can participate and do things everywhere virtually. Um but there is a physical uh rally in those two cities. And so I'm hoping I hope and expect that there will be um big turnout for that. Um I I I do think that like just on the pure politics of this. Um it's just it did happen late enough that I think that a lot of these southern states like don't have their [ __ ] together in time to do the maximum damage. I think there was like a moment last week when I was talking about this with Adam Ser where it like looked like I mean [ __ ] they might eliminate every majority minority district in the south outside of Georgia and for this midterm and and and that would have impact on the chances of the Democrats winning the midterm. Um there's some horrific things happening. We've discussed Tennessee and Louisiana here a bunch. Um and there's happening in some other states but like there's just they've hit some political hurdles. I think there's that it's going to minimize the damage a little bit just for this cycle. But I'm wondering what your what your kind of take is on the legal side of it on like whether there's any path forward or if it the only path forward is like maximum race to the bottom and and Democrats trying to 51 to1 California or if there's any legal path forward.

[00:17:57]>> Um so I think there is no legal path forward given what the Supreme Court did. Um and in many ways uh they are really doubling down. I mean they they did uh sort of sumearily vacate a a case which was was not based on the voting rights act where they said we're getting rid of your uh finding of intentional discrimination based on the 14th amendment. It is possible that in that district that uh the judge maintains uh uh uh what happened in Alabama, finding there was there was intentional discrimination and basing it not on the Voting Rights Act, but as they originally did, on the Constitution, meaning the Louisiana versus Cala decision was horrendous, but there's still a a if you actually can find intentional discrimination, there is a small window. Um, it's not clear that the Supreme Court was going to allow that because they could easily say, "We disagree with your finding. It's intentional discrimination. We find that it was based on politics, not on race."

[00:19:08]>> And the Tennessee thing is just like, for example, it's so it's like, how do you how do you not argue? How could you not look at that and see intentional discrimination? They divided Memphis evenly into three districts. They divided the black voters in Memphis evenly into three like different districts. Uh, but sure.

[00:19:23]>> Yeah. Look, I agree with you. Alto has already sort of said his view on this which is yeah that has nothing to do with race that has to do with with Republicans wanting to win. Um and so even though there's a complete uh one's a proxy for the other. In other words, it's like a twofur. It's like I get to increase the Republicans chances and I get to discriminate. And as far as this this Supreme Court seems to uh to be ruling, that doesn't matter. Um, so I mean the Voting Rights Act is so completely gutted except for uh white people who want to sue over what they view as racial discrimination um by trying to rectify past discrimination. I mean, that's the whole theory of this, which is that >> it's kind of like how only white South African refugees can get here.

[00:20:14]>> Yeah. Exactly. So I I had a political question for you because I don't I think that the the answer is in in voting and having an enormous turnout and I mean obviously what's happening is not going to affect the Senate as in the same way that it's obviously going to affect the House because the that's what's being gerrymandered. Um but I have a question for you. To what extent do they do Republicans have enough time to do this smartly? Because if the if there is are there are districts now that are purpleish or and and you do this where you se you are separating out instead of putting all of the Democratic votes in one district, right? Solidly Democratic votes there, you separate them out. Don't you risk tipping some of those other districts?

[00:21:08]>> This is the dummy mander question. Um I think >> yes, yeah, the answer to that is is like yes and no, right? Like in the micro that is definitely a risk and specific Republican members I think are going to be more at risk. You look at the Tennessee thing for example, I I I mean, you know, they're they're they're good at this. They're not dumb. And they carved up the state in such a way that like there's one district that goes from Memphis all the way to exurban Nashville and there's not really any district that Trump won by less than 20. I don't think maybe 19 or something.

[00:21:39]>> So they can afford they can afford to do it.

[00:21:43]>> That said, you know, I mean there are like two particularly horrible candidates in Tennessee just off the top of my head. Scott Deja and Andy Ogles who like in a wave year a really bad Republican candidate you know like that going from plus 30 or whatever it was before to plus 19 it's in play and that's possible I think in Florida in particular if you look at what Dantis did Florida's much bigger state much more you know many more urban areas right so it's a little harder to gerrymander than Tennessee where every all the votes are in two places um and uh you know I think that the the Florida math to my eye was Ronda Santis kind of being like, I don't actually really care that much about Donald Trump's 2026, but I want to maximize future. U you know, like if this is going to be a Democratic wave year, we might let the Democrats take a couple of districts to like shore up other it was more of like a long-term play. We're like in a median year where it's not a Democratic wave year, >> this will be great for us because we moved we spread everybody around, but in a wave year it might cost us one or two.

[00:22:45]That's kind of how I looked at the Florida gerrymander and we'll see how it turns out. So, so you know I I think it's a mixed bag. I think the reality is like they can successfully eliminate Memphis from having a representative which is bad. They also might Yeah. You know what I mean? Horrible. Which is all they also might you know cost a couple of their members um who would have been in safe districts and and they end up getting caught in the blue wave. Like I think both of those things can happen. I should just say since we mentioned earlier that the website I forgot the name of the website is all roads lead to the south. That's the group that's organizing the the day of action on on this tomorrow if you want to get involved if anyone wants to get involved. So I don't know that it's pretty it's pretty rough though. The Virginia thing just as a quick legal matter. This is more of a legal news question but like that's done though, right? Like there's they don't have any any remedy for for um appeal.

[00:23:36]>> Yeah. Well, the the governor, hasn't she announced that it's sort of like >> everything's staying with the the Virginia map?

[00:23:44]>> Yeah. And the old maps are staying. I mean, there just I mean, just to be clear, there there is there is this application to the Supreme Court. I don't think it's going to go anywhere.

[00:23:55]But you now have the governor saying essentially it's all too late. Um we have a rule that we don't we don't we wouldn't be able to put these maps into place.

[00:24:03]>> It's crazy what's happening. like I'm going to have to go vote Louisiana tomorrow. Um it's our it's our the original primary day >> and like there there will be a house thing on the ballot that is that's been nullified. Like ballots were printed, people had voted.

[00:24:18]>> Like I had somebody message me that was like my daughter uh listen to the show like my daughter's one of the people who had voted. She got absentee because I don't know the email I forget if she was living overseas or something to that effect but she'd already voted like vote got nullified by saying >> Alito. No, absolutely. Um, and but the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court sort of actively pushed the case out to be as as fast as possible. And Justice Leo when uh Justice Jackson was accusing him of like, what are you doing? This is not the normal rules. You're speeding this along. And the Supreme Court has a case called PCEL, which is all about essentially not do doing something too close to an election. Um so that it it sort of saves the court credentially from being appearing uh to mess with an election and also just not cause the chaos here. It's going to effect during the election >> during >> during not it's like not too close. It's during. So that's sort of the sort of credential I think the the ideas that animated this case called PCEL are gone.

[00:25:25]Gone.

[00:25:26]>> I want to move on. Uh, let's put back on your FBI general counsel hat for a little bit. The current director of the FBI, Cash Patel, a new story from the AP yesterday, thanks to a FOYA request, uh, they got some emails that indicated that when Cash stopped in Honolulu, he went on a VIP snorkeling trip that was organized by the Navy, the military, uh, so he could see the remains of out around Pearl Harbor. Um, this is not a trip that's available to the public. Uh the the questions were raised because it was like why is he going to Honolulu and uh and the FBI pre this previous statement was that he he wanted to kind of check out how things were going at HQ Honolulu HQ. He was like I noticed it wasn't Fargo HQ he was interested in seeing what was happening at uh he wanted to kind of put his hands on the agents there in Honolulu. Um and then he also got a VIP snorkeling trip. Um, he also has done J uh at the Five Eyes meeting did a jet skiing sojourn. Uh, you know, famously took the plane to go see his girlfriend's country music concert, I guess we call it a concert.

[00:26:33]She sang a couple songs before a wrestling match. Um, I I don't know. I had Comey on this week and he was just like, "When I was FBI director, I it was a 24/7 job. Like I didn't take vacations and and Cash is doing like make a wish make a wish stuff."

[00:26:49]>> Yeah. Yeah, that was my first reaction, too. I was thinking about uh director Robert Mueller, you know, just to say it is to laugh. Could you imagine seeing Robert Mueller one just on vacation, but that two, the idea that it's like, oh, I need to go to Honolulu so I can go snorkeling. Um that he would be using the private plane for um any sort of like personal errands. I mean, he was he was so driven by the concern that his job was making sure that everybody was safe and not having another 9/11 on his watch. That was that was the number one thing. Um, so the only positive I could say is that if you are a serious person at the FBI, um, and this is the lot you have, which is this is the the guy who's now the director.

[00:27:47]>> Probably better if he's snorkeling.

[00:27:49]>> Is it having him out of your hair so that you can do as much work as possible? Serious work. I mean, this is Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying this is a good thing. It's just that if that's the given, you could see them thinking, let's put a bunch of shiny objects in front of him and if he wants to be drinking beer um at the Olympics and, you know, denying various stories in Congress, but then do snorkeling.

[00:28:19]It's at least at least he's not you don't have somebody who is immature and inexperienced dealing with adult matters, >> I guess. And on the other hand, he's fired a lot of people who are in charge of adult matters, which complicates that story quite a bit. Um, yeah. And I was just >> I'm saying what what do we what do you do if you're in this situation like that?

[00:28:40]>> You haven't been fired. You're one of the remaining people who's like, I'm take my job seriously of keeping people safe. It' probably be better if he's snorkeling and going to the gentleman's club and whatever. He apparently is just insensed by the idea that somebody could be telling the truth about what's going on and has, you know, has investigations and polygraphing to find out who is actually doing all of this.

[00:29:02]>> Like I was asking Comey about this, you know, and he was like, I never I I I did not drink ever, you know, I was never intoxicated. You can't drink on the job.

[00:29:11]It's illegal, actually. He said, the only time I ever drank on the plane was when they when Trump fired me. and he said there happened to be a bottle of pino noir sitting around and I had a couple glasses. He's like I figured I'm off the job now. Um and so you know for good reason obviously like what if there's an emergency you want to call the director. Um >> and the agents are armed. I mean that for them it's obvious because they you cannot have a a firearm and be drinking.

[00:29:35]>> Right. So I guess my question for you is in that same boat. I assume that as general counsel if they were doing the polygraph I I assume like internal polygraphs I assume that the general counsel would have been involved in like is that something that happened? I this this idea that there are dozens of polygraphs happening like seems obviously crazy but like was it is it a tool that was used at all? every five years uh within the bureau, you're supposed to be um polygraphed. Um so um unless that that changed, but those are standard that's just part that's not being done as part of an a sort of specific investigation into something.

[00:30:12]Polygraphs can be used um on oneoff investigations. It's the security division that does that. Um the general counsel can obviously be involved. I should say that when I was the general counsel, the use of the plane was so unbelievably buttoned up. We had paperwork for every single time the director used the plane, what the purpose was. I had to sign off on that and then we submitted all of that to up to the Department of Justice, you know, because every single thing was sort of, you know, it's the bureau. It's like that's that's the way it it rolls is like everything is what's the business purpose, when is it being used? um if if a spouse was going, there was a reimbursement scheme. Um so that it was not the the taxpayer who was who was um footing the bill. Um as you know, remember famously Justice Alto said, "Oh, there was a free seat, so I could take it." Um and so we didn't have that policy.

[00:31:16]>> That's interesting. I mean, it makes sense, you know, obviously, but I just it's like I I feel like it's important to kind of just go through like what the actual SOP was just to sort of show the distance from that that we are now.

[00:31:28]>> Yeah. Well, you know, I I doubt that the plane is going through that same protocol. I I don't see how anybody would sign off on it.

[00:31:36]>> Do they even have a general counsel?

[00:31:39]>> They have to have a general counsel.

[00:31:41]What what um he's doing would be interesting to know. Um, so you can polygraph, but you have to polygraph for a legitimate goodfaith investigation.

[00:31:51]Um, if the information that is being disseminated is not classified information, it's not about some ongoing criminal investigation, what's your authority to do this? Um, and especially if it's true and the only reason you're doing this is because you don't want embarrassing stories to get out. That to me is completely misunderstanding that that you when you work in the government work for the public and the idea is not um I need to make sure that there are no negative stories that get out about me.

[00:32:25]It would be totally different if what we were talking about was, you know, a a leak of classified information or leak in an ongoing criminal investigation.

[00:32:33]I'm enough of a sort of former law enforcement person that I would take that very seriously. I would understand why there's an investigation, but this is just self-p protection.

[00:32:42]>> Speaking of self-p protection, you did something that upset me recently.

[00:32:46]>> What I do?

[00:32:48]>> Well, I was, as I mentioned, I I was listening to the illegal news with Sarah Longwell before I fell asleep. Um, you guys were discussing you being in France and you were in France and you were at a monastery and, uh, you were looking out at the sea. You're trying to meditate and separate yourself from the news and and what you claim to have seen, maybe it was it was kind of like a saintly vision, but what you claimed to have seen is is seashells that said 8647 in the sand there on the shores of France. And um you thought about taking a picture of that and posting it, >> but you did not do that. You obeyed in advance. You did not do that because you're worried that that is criminalizing now. And I wanted to say to you, Andrew Weisman, it's time to ballmax a little bit. Post the post the picture. Don't let them don't obey in advance.

[00:33:43]>> So that is what this is what I will say.

[00:33:46]So, you know, I'm going to take your comment seriously and say >> I'm only a little I'm not actually mad at you, though. I think you should post it, though.

[00:33:54]>> I do think you should post it.

[00:33:55]>> Well, it's too late cuz I didn't take the photo of it. Oh, actually >> I have to check. I might have. Um, so, uh, >> you have to come back through customs.

[00:34:04]Don't delete that picture, Andrew Wisman. Don't come through customs and delete that picture. Okay, >> I will not. That, by the way, you know that that is what's happening with like all sorts of people, which is when they're being screened for stuff, you have to give all of your sort of socials and your phone and they so they could sort of do a proctologology exam on you.

[00:34:25]um for not for sort of criminality but for your views.

[00:34:30]>> Yeah. So something about Trump or BB.

[00:34:33]>> So on the 8647 just to be clear, I don't think it's a I don't think what James Comey did is a crime and it's like I mean I think it's just all preposterous.

[00:34:41]It came down at the same time in the Southern Poverty Law Center case which I think it's it's hard to know which one is more frivolous. Um but it's still serious because these are criminal indictments. And my only point is I've had not one but two executive orders aimed at me. Um and I seem to have although maybe less now.

[00:35:02]>> So it's kind of like an easy for you to say podcaster. All right. It's like I have two executive orders targeting me.

[00:35:08]>> Wait I have two. How many do you have Tim?

[00:35:10]>> Yeah. Zero. Zero. I'm just out here 8647 left and right.

[00:35:15]>> I don't >> wondering if Todd Blanch is watching the show. So Tim, I you know, come back to me when you have the two executive orders.

[00:35:24]>> How's that for That's pretty good.

[00:35:26]That's pretty good. That's fine. I'll give it to you. And I still think you should have posted it, but I'll get I'll give it to you. It's a It's a much stronger much stronger case once you've had guilty with an explanation, right?

[00:35:38]Um the other thing that you said on that show related to cash that piqued my interest, the thoughts about how the Atlantic should handle the civil suit that they are um filing against him and uh I just I wanted to hear I wasn't satisfied from the amount of I wanted to hear the full pitch from Andrew.

[00:35:54]>> You wanted to hear from the the Andrew Weisman horse's mouth.

[00:35:58]>> His mouth. Yeah. Like if Jeff Goldberg called you right now, what would you say to him about how to handle it?

[00:36:02]>> I'd say this. Look, Jeff, your outside counsel is going to tell you to do the safe thing. Um, and in part, if I were outside counsel, it's like, you know, they they have an obligation to tell you the safe thing, and it's the thing that's going to be safest for them, too, which is we're going to file um motions to dismiss.

[00:36:26]We're going to say that it's not adequately pled, that they haven't um uh been able to show that there's what's called actual malice, which is that it was done sort of knowing or in reckless disregard of the truth. That we have a variety of ways to get rid of this case on on the papers. That's one strategy.

[00:36:48]That's the safe strategy.

[00:36:51]You are you are a news organization.

[00:36:54]You have said publicly that you are fully 100% sure that like this is was well well sourced.

[00:37:04]Why don't you call Cash Cash's bluff?

[00:37:07]He's going to continue doing this. It's a little like you saying why didn't you post the 8647?

[00:37:13]Um, why don't you call his bluff and just say you want an immediate trial or you'll depose him, he'll depose your uh reporter, then you'll have an immediate trial. First, let's see if he caves. Um, because if you are right, this is now going to all spill out in the public and his audience of one, Donald Trump, is going to see all of this and it's going to be an unbelievable embarrassment. But you will be helping not just The Atlantic, but everyone in the media as a strategy to deal with this kind of lawsuit that you say is [ __ ] So that's my pitch to you is I know it's not the safest course, but we're not talking about a criminal indictment.

[00:37:59]We're talking about something that you know it's it's in Washington DC before a reputable judge. You are not going to be found liable if you are right. Um, and so you know that you're right >> or even if you had reasonable uh belief that you were right, right? Like even if you had sources that said this, right?

[00:38:17]Like like even if it turns out that one of the elements of the story was not true, but you have documentation that you had two sources that told you it was true. Like in Britain that's different.

[00:38:27]Yeah. In America. Well, that's what I meant by right meaning that you did not have you they cannot make the showing that they have to show not just that the story was inaccurate but that you knew it or were reckless as to its inaccuracy and you know that just you know what I see from the Atlantic that's not possible. I don't think that a jury or this judge is going to um believe that.

[00:38:51]So why not do a huge favor for yourself and the country and also expose um Cash Patel for and this lawsuit for what it is? It will it really will um help put an end to this tactic >> and probably cash because your point Trump doesn't want to all these stories about everything that Cash is doing.

[00:39:13]Like Trump doesn't mind stories about him.

[00:39:16]>> Uh you know what I mean? But like right but but this is not >> so maybe maybe it would get cash out of there which would be a plus >> and also look at the timing which is this you you do this now before the midterms um and you say you want this trial.

[00:39:31]>> I like that suggestion. I concur. Uh one other legal thing from uh yesterday I wanted to just to get your take on really quick. uh Scotas on Thursday stayed the fifth circuit ruling blocking the mailing and prescribing of myth of Pristo uh via tele health services while the Louisiana once again my people causing all this damage Louisiana case against the FDA uh proceeds.

[00:39:51]>> Um that means just practically speaking the drug will continue to be available for the time being. Uh Thomas and Al were sharp in descent. Thomas referred to the drug makers as committing crimes.

[00:40:00]Alto called them mailorder abortions. So that's the state of play. I don't know what if you have anything on that case.

[00:40:07]So the one is the irony of Justice Alto saying, "Oh, we're not applying the standard for um stays. We're not applying that um the law as it's supposed to be applied." This is a guy who's who's done that like day in and day out. I mean, the the idea that he could put that pen to paper and chastise the majority for the way it's interpreting or kind of loosely interpreting um when you get a stay is is just shocking cuz it's I mean does he does he not look at himself in the mirror and and have any sort of view that he has to have some principle or integrity?

[00:40:52]>> Thomas, I don't think he does. Yes, that was exactly. And then the Thomas what you quoted is a little bit of the tip of the iceberg. He basically said like I mean well he might as well have just said why are you not indicting um these companies because they're criminal actors engaging in a criminal scheme under the Commtock Act. Um which you know good luck finding that to be constitutional or not. Um, it's I thought it was a good sign that he was only one person, one of the justices saying that because it means that I really don't think he's going to have five people saying that the Commtock Act from the 19th century is somehow going to be um applicable. But, you know, here's my secret theory on this, Tam, which is, uh, Donald Trump, one of the only things that has not happened so far from the sort of grand plan that we all heard about, and Donald Trump was saying, "Oh, no, no, no. I have nothing to do with that. Don't worry. I'm not going to implement any of that. That's not me."

[00:42:00]And then he gets into office and all all of these things get implemented except we have not seen what I would say is overt implementation of an anti-abortion scheme yet. And I think post midterms it's going to be like, you know, the lid's off on that. Um, but I I do think that um that's one where I think if you were the Trump administration, you wanted this methopristine stuff to come up. Not now.

[00:42:37]It's like exactly you just don't want anything that's going to cause people to vote on that. Um, and so it's it's for the same reason I think that Alito and Thomas are not people are always speculating, are they stepping down? Are they stepping down? And I'm like, that's not going to happen until like a week after the midterms. Um, if it's going to happen, it's not going to be beforehand.

[00:43:00]>> It's a risk though. It's a risk if the Democrats take back the Senate.

[00:43:04]>> Democrats could pull the Merrick Garland rule and just sit on that retirement for two years.

[00:43:09]>> It it is a risk. You're you're absolutely right. But, um, at this point though, I mean, right now, it's like it'd be tricky to sort of rush that all through. Just while we're a couple of guys talking about guys making decisions on behalf of women, I I did want to flag one other thing. This was the managing director of the IMF posted this picture.

[00:43:29]Um, and she highlighted uh she called this we'll put up on the screen for you two people, a painting of the end of the meritocracy, a meeting of the two largest economies and not one woman at the table. It is a crazy [ __ ] picture and it is two dozen people. It's not like it was she and his two, you know, closest adviserss and Trump and and whatever, Marco. It's like it's 24 people at at this very long table, all dudes, all wearing ill-fitting suits, former weekend talk show co-hosts.

[00:44:02]Uh, and it is, you know, for all of the like backlash to me too and wokeness and and meritocracy and DEI, like that's this is a picture of what they want.

[00:44:16]>> Okay. So, we started by talking about racism.

[00:44:21]>> Yeah.

[00:44:22]>> And now we're talking about sexism. I mean, like this is like Yeah. Let's get the big crayons out as to what we're talking about, which is this is this idea that it's like the 1950s white male America with, you know, not black and brown communities, not women, nobody from overseas, uh, who's come here.

[00:44:46]>> We have a Cuban and I don't know, one gay. Scott Bessant was there. That's it.

[00:44:52]That's what we got. So, it's, you know, it's it it it actually looked worse than my first day, you know, going into the FBI and you sit for the down for the morning meeting and you look around the table and even the FBI was more diverse than that photo.

[00:45:11]2026, Andrew Wiseman. It's really It's really something. Um, let's talk about the book and then we'll get back to the the fun at the end. Um, the book could be the book could be fun, too.

[00:45:23]I should mention I should have mentioned at the top we have a discount code for bull work listeners because you know you're such a loyal partner with us at the bull work and we want everybody it's getting expensive out there. I don't know if you noticed prices are going up.

[00:45:36]So for bull work listeners there is a discount. It's in the show notes. Book is Liars Kingdom. Give us the little elevator pitch. God, I love the um I think as you know, I was a prosecutor for many many many many years and I was really thinking about the problem that we um or the discordancy that we have because I was thinking look at all of the people that either I have personally prosecuted or that I supervise prosecutions of who lied. Um, and uh, it could be leaders of Enron, it could be organized crime figures, it could be um, Roger Stone to Congress, Paul Maniffort to the Department of Justice and to banks. You have all of these ways in which lies in this country are criminalized. And then I started thinking about defamation suits. So Rudy Giuliani was sued for lying about Ruby Freeman and Sheay Moss um, as just one example. So you have just have so many ways in which when people lie there is civil andor criminal accountability. And then I was thinking about um our current president and the um I was thinking about like the Washington Post in the first term reported that they'd counted over 30,000 lies which they did the math which I don't usually do in public but they did it for me which came to over 20 lies per day. I think Sarah said that seemed a little low.

[00:47:10]>> That seems low to me, too.

[00:47:11]>> Yeah. So, but maybe, you know, they have to it's Washington Post isn't going to do it anymore for obvious reasons, but maybe in the current administration it would be. Maybe it's doubled. Um, and I just thought, why is it that we do not um, in the United States, at least at the federal level, have any sanction, civil or criminal, for candidates or politicians who lie to us.

[00:47:40]That that was sort of the genesis of it.

[00:47:42]And I was thinking >> because we have free speech because this is America. Because this is America, Andrew, and I can say whatever I want.

[00:47:48]So the answer to so I so I I most of my book is sort of walking through our free speech doctrines and then I look at what our states do. We I looked at a few other countries to get examples of what they do. The problem with the argument that oh this is we have free speech in America. Um and I'm not poo pooing it. I mean, there's some validity to how it affects. This is that's not applied when uh Roger Stone lied to Congress and he was convicted for it. Um it doesn't apply when Ken Lay and Jeff Skielling who were the leaders of Enron lied about the internal health of the Enron Corporation. They >> or false marketing laws or whatever.

[00:48:34]>> Exactly. And it doesn't it didn't um prevent Rudy Giuliani being found liable for tens and tens of millions of dollars for the lies he told and it was found to have told about Ruby Freeman and she Moss. So and and it turns out the answer to the sort of like oh it's free speech is that false speech is not protected in and of itself. Um and so it doesn't it doesn't really it's not really an answer to say oh we just don't do anything with respect to speech at all. Um we do in lots of different contexts. And the thing that was sort of fascinating to me is not just that France, Brazil, England deal with this issue in various ways in their country but so do the states in the United States. Um so uh there are various ways that come from New York.

[00:49:32]There are various ways that New York has laws to deal with um politicians who are found to have committed not just um a lie but fraud or any sort of crime.

[00:49:47]There are sort of two types of laws they have. One is if you're in office you are automatically removed like that. Um, and the other for other types of of crimes is you are, this was a little shocking to me, permanently prohibited for for running for to for office. So, just to be clear, there are lots and lots of permutations I'm not going to bore you with because this is this is one where it's sort of fraught with lots of issues. There are issues about abuse, but I was trying to figure out how do we get out of a situation where we have so much lying going on and the only answer we seem to have is oh well the public will sort of know that and vote correctly. And to go to your point that when we were starting Tim as you were saying well when you're listening to Fox News they're not going to tell you that the $1.2 2 billion dollar um is in this sort of collusive settlement. They're not going to point this out. They're not going to point out that the money came from you. Um and so the media bubbles that we have only exacerbates the concern that it's like, oh, don't worry.

[00:51:06]It'll all come out in the wash because we have a marketplace of ideas where everyone is exposed to the truth and it can be un you know it can be revealed to them and enough of the people know will sort of come to reason.

[00:51:21]>> Yeah. The Walter Kronite model.

[00:51:23]>> Exactly.

[00:51:24]>> Maybe it was different 50 years ago like you could lie. You could send out a newsletter that lied but you know the truth would would be on the actual news.

[00:51:31]Now people aren't getting that. So what that's tough to fix that part, the information bubbles. We talk about that a lot on here. Uh I I assume that's not you know where your focus is. So I'm wondering like what are the what are the potential legal remedies or things that could be part of a broader reform package is you know all this stuff is going to be bounced around if assuming we ever take back power from the fascists.

[00:51:54]>> Yeah. So, you know, it's interesting that you say because I didn't have and I don't have a way of figuring out what to do with the the media bubble problem.

[00:52:03]And I actually just think it is with us.

[00:52:06]Um, not that there can't be some regulation and ways to sort of help it, but it's you're fighting, you know, you're fighting um, you know, the wind.

[00:52:18]I mean, it's >> Exactly. It's an ocean of, you know, or being an avalanche, any of these nature things where you're just one person trying to shovel the snow out and it's like it's just you can't control it.

[00:52:27]There's too much.

[00:52:28]>> It reminds me of when I'm at law school and and we've had these discussions about AI and you know the consensus is like you don't just sit there and say like, oh, just prohibit it. It's people are going to use it. So, you have to sort of figure out how you're going to deal with that and how you're going to incorporate it into your teaching as opposed to just saying like, you know, people shouldn't use I'm old enough to remember when it's like people shouldn't use calculators. I mean, it's like really >> it's going to happen. Um, so, uh, there are various things that can be done.

[00:52:59]First of all, at the state level, there's a there's a lot fewer things to have to worry about um that you can do um than at the federal level. But at both the state and federal level, you can actually criminalize lying. And just to be clear, it um the current laws for lying, which is, you know, you said a false statement to the Department of Justice or to Congress, we're not talking about a mistake. it. This is you have to be able to show beyond a reasonable doubt that you intentionally lied. Um and so you're not going to be able to um say about a politician, oh, I I don't like that they are pro-abortion or anti-abortion. That's not >> or they said that their tax cut will lead to greater revenues because of the laugher curve. It's like, okay, well that there, you know, that's not a that's not a provable lie. Like we might know that that's not going to happen, but like that's not what you're talking about.

[00:53:59]>> Exactly. So a provable lie, the one that I use is sort of the because we're unfortunately in that world because normally you'd be going, is this really a problem? And my view is it is that it's like there was fraud in the election um in 2020. And it is what's crazy is that is a current lie. And that is a current lie that is a required prerequisite to entry into that world. Like you want to become a federal judge, you need you cannot under oath respond to Democrats asking you questions saying um you know there was there's no provable um material fraud in the 2020 election.

[00:54:42]None of nobody says that. Um like you have to tow the line on that lie. Um and that's one where it's gone to court. So we have sort of the uh the record that shows that. So one idea is that you can uh criminalize it. The other is that you could require politicians to certify as part of their filings that they have not made a material lie. That that filing itself is something that can be prosecuted. Um Sarah asked me about this, which is that I think that Donald Trump is keenly aware of the fact of where it is not a crime and where it could be a crime. And I my example of that is the impeachment proceedings where he not only did not testify, but he never submitted anything like it. He didn't submit a letter. He didn't submit a declaration, an affidavit, nothing in that proceeding.

[00:55:47]A false filing, false testimony is all something that is um covered by a criminal statute. And there's an open issue about whether a president can selfpardon. So he has to be thinking, I may not be able to get out of this like for all for all times and purposes. But he was willing to just simply say, which he's been very successful at, is I don't have to worry about the courts. I don't have to worry about the Department of Justice if I just do the lying in public because there is no um there's absolutely no way that anyone can do anything about it other than, you know, politics somehow having it come back and and haunt me. But he has he has solved that, you know, that that nut. Was there any particularly fun lies in there that you that you talk about or any reflections on lies that you've told in the past that you want to come clean on?

[00:56:41]>> Well, um while I was writing this uh I was I think I heard this live while I was sitting um at my computer.

[00:56:53]uh Donald Trump as an aside in the White House said, "Oh, and I've heard Weissman's all over those Epstein files."

[00:57:04]>> Yes, that's true. I think we've talked about this. You should sue him. You should take your own advice to the Atlantic and bring him to court.

[00:57:12]>> Um it's to be continued.

[00:57:15]>> Oh, okay.

[00:57:16]>> Um I like that. Uh it's nothing I I you know it is obviously false just in case anyone is sitting there even though I have friends who said hey Andrew what was the island like and I'm like and I'm like just too soon.

[00:57:30]>> Um but it's just >> anti-semitism you know a little wiseman you know >> living rentree in that hit.

[00:57:39]>> So that's a there's a there's a lie that's a little personal.

[00:57:42]>> Okay. Um well uh we had uh uh Congressman Garcia on yesterday's pod and we were talking about how half of the Epstein files are still yet to come out. So maybe we need to wait for all of them before you can lawsuit before you can sue just just in case just in case you forgot that time that you added on an email uh you know looped into an MIT conference email or something looping in Weissman.

[00:58:06]>> Yeah. Um, you know, that's not something that's This is where it's I should that this is like something that I should It's the same advice to the Atlantic, which is I know it's not true. Nothing.

[00:58:17]I'm not I'm not worried about the the other half.

[00:58:20]>> I'm not worried about it either.

[00:58:22]>> On the other, >> by the way, if I did if there were a lawsuit, I would get discovery.

[00:58:30]>> Well, I'm sure that we have some listeners who'd be happy to support that fund. the idea which is in other words they would have to say oh you know I want to say it's not true in order to show that I'd have to see all of the files >> I I am confident we could scrge up some scratch for the legal fund for that effort. So uh to be continued indeed.

[00:58:53]>> This podcast has just been so useful.

[00:58:56]>> Yeah. Yeah. I'm making everybody else do things. Jeffrey Goldberg can go after cash. You can go after Trump. Uh, and all I get to do is just sit in my hole and blab. Um, the final person I want to raise is a man named Brian Christine.

[00:59:11]Now, uh, for reasons that are about to become clear, I was not familiar with this person because no problems there on my my uh, for me, but uh, maybe others might be familiar with his work. Brian Christine is the health official who led the public response to the Havirus outbreak. You might expect that it's not, you know, he's not at the top of his game. So, uh, that's why I asked at the beginning if you were a hypochondriac cuz this has led me to be a little more concerned than I was previously about the hent virus. His background was as a penile implant specialist where he hosted a podcast where he questioned the 2020 election and compared the Biden administration to Nazi Germany.

[00:59:50]So, you know, I'm just wondering how that how that sits with you.

[00:59:57]Uh that sounds like a wonderful wonderful educational and work experience to bring to the table for this. Um, by the way, I I am giving myself I was raised by two parents who told puns non-stop like like it was it was and I just it was it was a grown grown grown and I am very proud of myself for not jumping in with there were so many like penile puns but I decided I'd keep this at a high level. Let's not. It's Friday's podcast. I know. Did you have one in particular that you wanted to jump in on?

[01:00:42]>> Yeah, I was I was just saying that's a hard act to follow.

[01:00:46]>> Um, you know, >> this Let's Should I leave it there?

[01:00:50]>> It's a grower, not a shower. No, don't leave it there. You have any others?

[01:00:53]>> Anyway, so that's you this. So annoying because you know this is one where we lived through co you this is like I mean this is this is fits with a cash patell story. It's like you're putting people in place to handle these things that are incredibly serious and they are they are not serious.

[01:01:17]>> It seems to me like Brian was doing more of a public service when he was doing the penile implants, you know, and I maybe should just go back to that. I just I I'd feel much better.

[01:01:26]>> I think he was that >> Yeah. He went back to his life.

[01:01:32]>> It's a growth industry.

[01:01:33]>> Yeah. His expertise, you know, where he's providing something for people who need a little bit of a pickme up. Um, you know, to help with their confidence.

[01:01:42]That's important. And that's that's where we need him over there. Not pandemic. I don't there's not a big overlap between penile implant expertise and pandemic expertise >> because in one you want inflation and in the other in the government you don't.

[01:01:58]>> That's the end of the podcast. Uh thank you so much to Andrew Weissman. Go get his book. It's about lying and liars and the liars that tell the lies. It's called Liars Kingdom: How to Stop Trump's Deceit and Save America. Big task. Appreciate you very much. I'm not at all bitter that you're hanging out with Sarah. And um I I I do hope though that the exclusive announcement of the lawsuit against Donald Trump will happen right here on the Bullard podcast. We'll leave it all there. Thanks everybody.

[01:02:27]We'll see you on Monday with Bill Crystal. Go by the book. Bye Andrew.

[01:02:30]Peace.