Latest / Pod Save America / “A jury of Trump’s peers.”

Transcript

“A jury of Trump’s peers.” · Pod Save America

0:01
Speaker 1: Language supposedly has all these rules.
0:04
Speaker 2: Most of us never have to think about those rules,
0:07
Speaker 2: but the hidden hand of language guides nearly every interaction
0:10
Speaker 2: we have with other people, determining whether we connect, entertain, confuse, insult,
0:15
Speaker 2: or dazzle the people we communicate with. In Radio Lingo,
0:19
Speaker 2: the new podcast from Duolingo and Crooked Media, we explore
0:23
Speaker 2: how language shapes our world and how our world shapes language.
0:27
Speaker 2: I'm Amad El-Yakri. I'm an audio journalist and James Beard
0:30
Speaker 2: Award winning writer.
0:32
Speaker 1: I am in awe of.
0:33
Speaker 2: Language, its complexity and its simplicity, the way we can
0:36
Speaker 2: use it to create both distance and understanding. I'm going
0:40
Speaker 2: to be your guide. Join us as we take you
0:42
Speaker 2: on a linguistic journey. From Crooked Media and Duolingo, this
0:47
Speaker 2: is Radiolingo. New episodes of Tuesdays on your favorite podcast apps.
1:14
Speaker 3: Welcome to Pod Save America. I'm Jon Favreau.
1:16
Speaker 4: I'm Jon Lovett. I'm Tommy Vitor.
1:18
Speaker 3: Gentlemen, Merry Impeachment.
1:19
Speaker 4: Thank you. This is the week.
1:21
Speaker 3: This is the week that Donald Trump becomes the third
1:23
Speaker 3: president to be impeached by the House.
1:24
Speaker 4: We're going to talk all about it.
1:26
Speaker 3: We're also going to talk about the state of the
1:27
Speaker 3: primary as we head into a Democratic debate that may
1:31
Speaker 3: or may not happen right here in Los Angeles later
1:34
Speaker 3: this week. Before that, love it, how was the show
1:37
Speaker 3: this weekend?
1:37
Speaker 1: Great love it or leave it.
1:39
Speaker 5: John Hodgman, Amanda Seals, my friends Dan Hernandez and Benji
1:43
Speaker 5: Samet came by to talk about the science of Star Wars.
1:46
Speaker 3: Dan and Benji were on?
1:47
Speaker 4: They were. They, uh.
1:49
Speaker 4: Finally got a yes from the publicist. And the one,
1:52
Speaker 4: the only, Brian Boitler did a rant. Of course.
1:55
Speaker 1: Brian Boitler did a rant, too.
1:57
Speaker 5: He did a great impeachment rant. Sorry, I slipped my
1:59
Speaker 5: mind for one second. But he made a really important point,
2:01
Speaker 5: which I think, and he's been making on Cricut.com, which is.
2:03
Speaker 4: Trump is bad.
2:03
Speaker 5: Trump is bad. And it can't be said often enough.
2:06
Speaker 5: But also that the impeachment inquiry should remain open regardless
2:09
Speaker 5: of the vote because of the potential of the president
2:12
Speaker 5: to continue to commit crimes and the fact.
2:14
Speaker 1: That there may be subpoenas that are still up in
2:15
Speaker 1: the air.
2:16
Speaker 3: Wouldn't it be great to impeach him twice? I'm not
2:19
Speaker 3: going to go there.
2:20
Speaker 5: All right.
2:21
Speaker 3: A little announcement from us. With 2020 coming up, your
2:24
Speaker 3: friends here at Crooked Media and Pod Save America and
2:26
Speaker 3: Vote Save America wanted a way to send you the
2:28
Speaker 3: most important information about the election directly. So we're trying
2:32
Speaker 3: something new. We have a new phone number. The number
2:34
Speaker 3: is 323-405-9944. If you text us to that number, we'll
2:42
Speaker 3: answer your questions. We'll send you some of the stuff
2:44
Speaker 3: we're paying attention to in politics.
2:45
Speaker 1: No backsies on this thing.
2:46
Speaker 3: Love it. We'll tell you his best jokes.
2:49
Speaker 4: Okay.
2:50
Speaker 3: So again, our number is 323-405-9944. Save it and shoot
2:55
Speaker 3: us a text. We're excited to hear from you.
2:57
Speaker 4: Probably.
2:58
Speaker 3: The kids tell us this is going to be great.
3:01
Speaker 4: It's going to be a lot of three bubbles, then
3:04
Speaker 4: they disappear.
3:04
Speaker 3: So yeah, that's exciting. Finally, if you need a reminder
3:10
Speaker 3: about why protecting voting rights is the most important thing
3:12
Speaker 3: we can do right now to win in 2020, think
3:16
Speaker 3: about the news in Wisconsin today. late last week where
3:19
Speaker 3: a judge ordered as many as 234,000 names to be
3:22
Speaker 3: taken off the voter rolls in that state. We were
3:27
Speaker 3: talking to Ben Wickler, chair of the Wisconsin Democratic Party
3:30
Speaker 3: there over the weekend. It's very bad that the court
3:33
Speaker 3: has done this, but now he thinks that the Democratic
3:38
Speaker 3: Party will be able to at least get a list
3:40
Speaker 3: of the people that they are taking off the rolls
3:42
Speaker 3: who may have moved or they just may have been
3:44
Speaker 3: taken off the rolls accidentally. And the good news about
3:48
Speaker 3: Wisconsin is it does have same-day registration. And so, you know,
3:51
Speaker 3: we can be able to find these people and register them,
3:54
Speaker 3: but because of shit like this, it's going to take
3:56
Speaker 3: a lot more work. And we need to fight voter
4:00
Speaker 3: suppression everywhere. You've heard us talk about the work we're
4:03
Speaker 3: doing to support Stacey Abrams and her team at Fair Fight. Well,
4:05
Speaker 3: apparently right now, Tanya just notified us this morning, we're
4:09
Speaker 3: less than $ 150, 000 away from our goal. Very close.
4:10
Speaker 4: We're at $ 1. 859 million.
4:16
Speaker 3: That's big.
4:17
Speaker 4: It's a lot of money.
4:17
Speaker 1: So close.
4:18
Speaker 3: We're so close to two.
4:19
Speaker 4: So close.
4:19
Speaker 3: So we're trying to get to two million so you
4:22
Speaker 3: can get these organizers and these teams on the ground
4:24
Speaker 3: fighting voter suppression as early as possible. You can't do
4:27
Speaker 3: it a couple months before the election. You've got to
4:29
Speaker 3: do it early. So please chip in. And we'll probably,
4:33
Speaker 3: you know, we're trying to get there before the end
4:34
Speaker 3: of the year.
4:35
Speaker 4: Got to do it.
4:36
Speaker 3: VoteSaveAmerica.com slash Fair Fight to chip in.
4:39
Speaker 1: Okay.
4:41
Speaker 4: Let's get to it.
4:42
Speaker 3: On Friday, the House Judiciary Committee voted 23-17 along party
4:46
Speaker 3: lines to approve two articles of impeachment against Trump, and
4:49
Speaker 3: they released a report today that says Trump also committed
4:52
Speaker 3: multiple federal crimes, including bribery and wire fraud.
4:56
Speaker 1: How about that?
4:57
Speaker 4: Wow. Yeah.
4:58
Speaker 3: The articles now go to the full House for a vote,
5:00
Speaker 3: which is expected to happen on Wednesday.
5:03
Speaker 1: Wire fraud.
5:04
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's a communications thing because he was talking to
5:08
Speaker 3: people over. He's talking to Sondland on the phone as
5:10
Speaker 3: he was trying to commit bribery.
5:13
Speaker 1: It just feels like it's an old-timey crime.
5:16
Speaker 3: It's a good throwback.
5:19
Speaker 1: It evokes words like racketeering.
5:21
Speaker 3: He is very mafia. As a few last undecided members
5:28
Speaker 3: make up their mind about this vote, polling from CBS
5:31
Speaker 3: and Fox News over the weekend showed slight increases in
5:34
Speaker 3: support for impeachment from last month. CBS found that 46%
5:36
Speaker 3: of respondents believe that Trump deserves to be impeached compared
5:39
Speaker 3: to 43% in November. And Fox, Fox News, found that
5:44
Speaker 3: 54% now believe he deserves to be impeached with 41% opposed.
5:50
Speaker 3: Let's start there. What was your take on these numbers?
5:54
Speaker 3: And did you see any other interesting stats or numbers
5:57
Speaker 3: that stuck out at you guys in all the polling
5:59
Speaker 3: that came out this weekend? I think there were a
6:00
Speaker 3: few more this morning as well.
6:02
Speaker 1: You know, no.
6:03
Speaker 5: There has been a slight uptick, but the point I made,
6:05
Speaker 5: I think, about the polling last week or the week before,
6:08
Speaker 5: I think, remains true. If we had come to a
6:11
Speaker 5: place where 54% of the country favored impeaching Donald Trump
6:16
Speaker 5: over the course of many months of this unfolding, it would,
6:20
Speaker 5: I think, be a shock to the system. I mean,
6:22
Speaker 5: these are the kinds of numbers that Nixon had toward
6:25
Speaker 5: the very end, right before he was forced to leave office.
6:28
Speaker 3: That Fox number was almost exactly the same as the
6:31
Speaker 3: number that Gallup found for Nixon on the eve of
6:34
Speaker 3: his resignation, right before the tapes came out.
6:37
Speaker 4: Yeah.
6:37
Speaker 5: And, you know, regardless of what it ultimately means for
6:40
Speaker 5: the Senate trial, it is worth remembering that Donald Trump
6:46
Speaker 5: is still, despite the attempts of the right-wing media to say, oh,
6:50
Speaker 5: he is basically kind of beyond reproach, he's a deeply unpopular,
6:55
Speaker 5: divisive president.
6:57
Speaker 3: He is definitely within reproach.
6:58
Speaker 4: He is.
6:59
Speaker 1: He is reproachable. The reproachables.
7:04
Speaker 5: And, you know, his approval rating has has been just
7:09
Speaker 5: glued to 41, 42 percent for such a long time,
7:13
Speaker 5: in part because the of the kind of fundamentals around
7:16
Speaker 5: the economy being ones that would traditionally mean a president
7:20
Speaker 5: was favored for reelection. But due to his let's call
7:23
Speaker 5: him peccadillo's, he is very weak.
7:27
Speaker 3: Yeah.
7:27
Speaker 4: And look, I think the most important thing to remember
7:29
Speaker 4: is we're playing a long game that's about educating voters
7:32
Speaker 4: in advance of the 2020 election. And from that perspective,
7:35
Speaker 4: I think impeachment has been successful. A lot of people
7:38
Speaker 4: know about what happened in Ukraine. We got a lot
7:40
Speaker 4: of information that we would not otherwise have been able
7:42
Speaker 4: to get because of impeachment. And so I think that's
7:45
Speaker 4: a success. I don't think any of us ever thought
7:47
Speaker 4: he was going to be impeached and removed. And I
7:49
Speaker 4: also think that, look, if you're going to poll people
7:51
Speaker 4: on whether you should impeach and remove a president, it
7:53
Speaker 4: does sound drastic. So I'm not surprised that there's you know,
7:56
Speaker 4: a bit of a delta between people who support impeachment
7:59
Speaker 4: and removal. But the other thing that I think is
8:03
Speaker 4: just a reminder that we need to always think about
8:06
Speaker 4: what's achievable because convincing Trump's hardcore Fox News only watching base,
8:12
Speaker 4: it's impossible. It just is. We're past the point of
8:15
Speaker 4: no return. They lie for him. They spin for him.
8:16
Speaker 4: When the IG report came out about the FISA application
8:21
Speaker 4: on Carter Page, they literally just made shit up and
8:25
Speaker 4: parroted Trump's spin. So we're never going to get to
8:28
Speaker 4: those people. So look, I mean, there's a lot of
8:31
Speaker 4: debate right now about whether this is smart politically, whether
8:33
Speaker 4: it's dumb politically, is this going to hurt Democrats? Is
8:35
Speaker 4: it going to help Democrats at the risk of being
8:38
Speaker 4: in the prediction business? My guess is it's going to
8:39
Speaker 4: feel like ancient history by the time we get there.
8:42
Speaker 4: But now whoever runs against Donald Trump has a whole
8:46
Speaker 4: bunch of evidence, video testimony to use against them as
8:51
Speaker 4: we prosecute that case in an election. Yeah.
8:53
Speaker 3: I mean, Dan spoke about this a little bit on Thursday,
8:56
Speaker 3: but I think, you know, something that's been sort of
8:58
Speaker 3: undercovered here is Donald Trump and his campaign team and
9:03
Speaker 3: the Republican Party wanted to use this time to start
9:05
Speaker 3: making the case for his reelection.
9:06
Speaker 4: Right.
9:07
Speaker 3: And last week, you know, they they were running around saying, oh,
9:09
Speaker 3: it was one of the best weeks of his presidency
9:11
Speaker 3: because he got the trade deal and and the China
9:14
Speaker 3: deal and all this kind of stuff. None of that
9:16
Speaker 3: was really covered because of impeachment. He has impeachment has
9:18
Speaker 3: sort of taken over the news cycle and he's losing
9:20
Speaker 3: time to make a case. And he, like you said, Tom,
9:23
Speaker 3: he does, he needs to make a case for his
9:24
Speaker 3: reelection because, you know, his approval rating is higher in
9:27
Speaker 3: some of these battleground states that he needs. But he's not,
9:31
Speaker 3: you know, his campaign team isn't happy where he is
9:33
Speaker 3: right now, right? Like he's definitely could win this election,
9:37
Speaker 3: you know, but he's not, he's not in a strong
9:39
Speaker 3: position right now. And he's, and impeachment is causing him
9:42
Speaker 3: to lose time on this. And he's going to continue
9:44
Speaker 3: to lose that time through January. I also thought that
9:46
Speaker 3: it was interesting in the Fox poll, a new high
9:48
Speaker 3: of 45% of independents favor impeachment up from, 38 in
9:52
Speaker 3: late October. I mean, some of these numbers, 53% believe
9:57
Speaker 3: he abused the power of his office, 48% think he
10:00
Speaker 3: obstructed Congress. 45% of voters say he committed bribery in
10:03
Speaker 3: a Fox News poll. The president of the United States,
10:06
Speaker 3: 45% believe he committed bribery.
10:07
Speaker 4: That's a lot. And no one believes his spin that
10:10
Speaker 4: he was doing this because he cares deeply about corruption
10:13
Speaker 4: in Ukraine, right? And like, look, we know he's not
10:15
Speaker 4: happy about this because Donald Trump tweeted that Fox News
10:18
Speaker 4: polls are always inaccurate and are heavily weighted towards Dems.
10:21
Speaker 4: So ridiculous. Yeah. I mean, he's having a little temper
10:24
Speaker 4: tantrum here.
10:25
Speaker 3: And even if you don't even if you don't think
10:27
Speaker 3: it's impeachable, which like, you know, like you said, Tommy,
10:29
Speaker 3: you can see some people saying, OK, well, it's bad
10:32
Speaker 3: what he did. But there's the election coming up. 60
10:35
Speaker 3: to 24 percent voters say it's wrong for Trump to
10:38
Speaker 3: ask leaders of foreign countries to investigate political rivals so
10:41
Speaker 3: that there is no no one's buying this Republican defense.
10:44
Speaker 4: Right.
10:44
Speaker 1: It's not only do they think it's wrong.
10:46
Speaker 5: They also recognize that it is not normal, that it's
10:48
Speaker 5: not something presidents traditionally do. The other just it's sort
10:51
Speaker 5: of taken for granted that, OK, 85 percent of Democrats
10:54
Speaker 5: support it. 85% of Republicans oppose it. And then, you know,
10:57
Speaker 5: the battle takes place amongst independents. And John just ran
11:00
Speaker 5: through the numbers. I will say 85% of Republicans is
11:02
Speaker 5: not as consolidated as it could be for Donald Trump.
11:05
Speaker 4: It just isn't.
11:05
Speaker 5: A different Republican president in different circumstances, you could see
11:08
Speaker 5: that number being much higher. So the lack of full
11:11
Speaker 5: consolidation amongst Republicans is, I think, still a little interesting.
11:14
Speaker 3: Do you guys think the media narrative reflects where the
11:17
Speaker 3: polling is? There was another New York Times analysis piece
11:21
Speaker 3: over the weekend that literally- used the phrase both sides
11:25
Speaker 3: four different times in the piece.
11:27
Speaker 5: I've run out of whatever super soaker filled with rage
11:32
Speaker 5: I have for the New York Times political desk and
11:35
Speaker 5: their complete failure to appreciate the magnitude of this moment
11:38
Speaker 5: and their role in it.
11:40
Speaker 3: Even as the editorial board, by the way, has a
11:41
Speaker 3: great editorial calling for Trump's impeachment.
11:45
Speaker 5: And it's a kind of luxury. They're operating with a
11:48
Speaker 5: comfort that this kind of coverage is fine and sustainable
11:52
Speaker 5: and kind of the normal course of business, as if
11:55
Speaker 5: we're not in an emergency, as if they will be
11:58
Speaker 5: rewarded for the largesse they've shown these Republicans in some
12:02
Speaker 5: future confrontation, as if there's any hope that they'll be
12:05
Speaker 5: able to prove to the Fox News viewers and to
12:08
Speaker 5: the Republicans in Congress that they are fair arbiters of
12:12
Speaker 5: politics if they were to be more honest in some
12:15
Speaker 5: future story.
12:16
Speaker 1: I just.
12:17
Speaker 4: Yeah, I mean, you know, look, there's just been weeks
12:21
Speaker 4: and weeks of credulous reporting about Republican complaints about the
12:25
Speaker 4: democratic process. And then Mitch McConnell goes on TV this weekend.
12:28
Speaker 4: He's like, yep, conspiring with Trump to make sure this
12:31
Speaker 4: thing is rigged. And Lindsey Graham's out there saying, I
12:33
Speaker 4: don't care. I'm not going to be impartial in voting
12:35
Speaker 4: against it. I mean, I'm just, I'm very frustrated and
12:38
Speaker 4: done with the reporting where there's a Republican quote and
12:42
Speaker 4: a democratic quote side by side and no effort to
12:44
Speaker 4: adjudicate the factual nature of those two quotes. It's deeply,
12:49
Speaker 4: it's also, and by the way, this is, This has
12:51
Speaker 4: been true lately for a lot of reporting on Trump,
12:54
Speaker 4: especially on trade like USMCA, the new NAFTA. As of
12:58
Speaker 4: this morning, there's a huge monkey wrench in the thing
13:02
Speaker 4: because the Mexicans don't support this provision that would allow U.S.
13:05
Speaker 4: inspectors to go into Mexican plants. Right. So that's not
13:09
Speaker 4: a done deal yet. Trump manufactured a crisis with the Chinese. Right.
13:13
Speaker 4: There are all these underlying trade issues with China. Trump
13:16
Speaker 4: threw a bunch of tariffs at it, created a crisis.
13:19
Speaker 4: alleviated a portion of that crisis, and that's getting reported
13:22
Speaker 4: as a win. I mean, he's able to get the
13:26
Speaker 4: press to play into these narratives time and time again,
13:29
Speaker 4: despite the fact that the guy's got nothing done.
13:32
Speaker 3: There is zero reason for any reporter to write the sentence,
13:37
Speaker 3: Democrats and Republicans can't agree on the same set of facts.
13:40
Speaker 3: You are in the business of telling us what the
13:43
Speaker 3: facts are. That actually is your job.
13:45
Speaker 4: Right.
13:46
Speaker 3: So tell us, both sides can't agree on the side effects.
13:48
Speaker 3: That's technically true. Now tell us what the facts are. Well,
13:52
Speaker 3: I would even go— And it's not impossible. Like, look,
13:54
Speaker 3: the Washington Post, I think, has been doing a fantastic
13:57
Speaker 3: job in their reporting, in their news analysis. It's not
14:00
Speaker 3: news analysis that is slanted towards Democrats. I don't read
14:02
Speaker 3: them and think, oh, this is really good for us.
14:04
Speaker 3: But they sort of get that the main story of
14:07
Speaker 3: impeachment is the Republican Party's decision to— to either act
14:11
Speaker 3: as an accomplice for Donald Trump or to finally stand
14:14
Speaker 3: up for him and to stand up to him. That's
14:16
Speaker 3: really the story of this impeachment. There's no other story here.
14:19
Speaker 5: It's also not about whether or not Democrats and Republicans
14:22
Speaker 5: can agree to a set of facts. It's whether Democrats
14:25
Speaker 5: and Republicans will say out loud that they agree to
14:28
Speaker 5: a set of facts, right? There's no, even we've started
14:32
Speaker 5: to see from in the Senate trial that that some
14:36
Speaker 5: Republicans are floating, that actually what you're going to see
14:39
Speaker 5: is a lot of agreement about the facts and just
14:41
Speaker 5: a disagreement about the gravity of what's at stake, because
14:44
Speaker 5: I think that there are more Republican adults in the Senate,
14:47
Speaker 5: which isn't hard to beat the number of adults in
14:51
Speaker 5: the Republican House chamber, which is zero.
14:55
Speaker 3: Yeah. Well, let's talk about the Senate trial. Tommy, you
14:57
Speaker 3: started talking about this. You know, Mitch McConnell, the Senate
15:00
Speaker 3: is supposed to.
15:00
Speaker 4: Be the jury.
15:01
Speaker 3: So, of course, the jury foreman, Mitch McConnell, has just
15:05
Speaker 3: announced that he's been conspiring with the defendant and his
15:07
Speaker 3: defense team. Everything I do during this, I'm coordinating with
15:11
Speaker 3: the White House counsel. There will be no difference between
15:13
Speaker 3: the president's position and our position as how to handle this.
15:16
Speaker 3: That's Mitch McConnell speaking about the rules of the trial.
15:20
Speaker 3: And then, of course, Lindsey Graham went even further. Quote,
15:23
Speaker 3: I'm trying to give a pretty clear signal I have
15:25
Speaker 3: made up my mind. I'm not trying to pretend to
15:28
Speaker 3: be a fair juror here.
15:30
Speaker 5: This is like if that Demi Moore movie, The Juror,
15:33
Speaker 5: was two minutes and 30 seconds long.
15:36
Speaker 4: The other great quote from him is, the best thing
15:38
Speaker 4: we can do is deep six this thing. Oh, okay.
15:41
Speaker 4: Got it.
15:42
Speaker 3: So I think McConnell and especially Lindsey Graham screwed up
15:46
Speaker 3: a bit here because in response to all this, Chuck
15:49
Speaker 3: Schumer sends a letter to McConnell on Sunday night saying
15:51
Speaker 3: he expects a fair trial with the ability to call
15:54
Speaker 3: witnesses like Mick Mulvaney and John Bolton and and get
15:56
Speaker 3: documents from the White House, and ask for the same
15:58
Speaker 3: trial rules that Mitch McConnell already voted for during the
16:01
Speaker 3: Clinton impeachment. What did you guys think of the Schumer
16:04
Speaker 3: move here?
16:05
Speaker 4: I think it's really smart. I mean, look, I am
16:07
Speaker 4: not surprised by McConnell or Graham's sentiment. I am surprised
16:11
Speaker 4: that they said it out loud. And what it says
16:12
Speaker 4: to me is that Mitch and Lindsey Graham would rather
16:16
Speaker 4: get praise from Fox News and get donations from MAGA
16:21
Speaker 4: people than give a shit about even... seeming fair. So
16:25
Speaker 4: I do think from that perspective, there's probably a political
16:29
Speaker 4: goal here for them. I do think they just muddied
16:32
Speaker 4: up the thing in a big way. I want Democrats
16:34
Speaker 4: to pivot to a cover-up message in a big way soon.
16:39
Speaker 4: I mean, I'm glad that Schumer put forward this gambit
16:42
Speaker 4: to get real testimony from Mulvaney and Bolton and some
16:45
Speaker 4: of the other folks who actually worked in the White House,
16:47
Speaker 4: who spoke to Trump, who understand his mindset, who could
16:50
Speaker 4: undercut all these hearsay arguments they keep complaining about. And
16:53
Speaker 4: I think we need to put pressure on Trump and
16:55
Speaker 4: McConnell to put those witnesses forward. But we also need
16:57
Speaker 4: to put pressure on senators like Cory Gardner and Susan
17:00
Speaker 4: Collins to agree to a process that would allow those
17:03
Speaker 4: people to be subpoenaed by the Senate process. Yeah.
17:06
Speaker 3: So here's where I think McConnell sort of slipped up
17:09
Speaker 3: by saying this out loud on Fox. He has 53
17:14
Speaker 3: Senate Republicans in his caucus, right? he has a lot
17:17
Speaker 3: of power to shape the rules in this trial. But
17:20
Speaker 3: to do that, every decision Mitch McConnell makes, he needs
17:22
Speaker 3: 51 votes, which means that basically to have a fair trial,
17:27
Speaker 3: Democrats need four votes, four Republican votes to have a
17:30
Speaker 3: fair trial. And so Mitch McConnell really can't lose that
17:32
Speaker 3: many Republicans. And, you know, so Schumer goes and demands
17:36
Speaker 3: this fair trial, demands witnesses, all this kind of stuff.
17:39
Speaker 3: And McConnell's response to Schumer is, you know, as, as
17:43
Speaker 3: was scheduled previously, we're going to talk about this. If
17:45
Speaker 3: McConnell had the votes to do whatever he wanted for
17:49
Speaker 3: that trial, McConnell would have told Schumer to fuck off.
17:52
Speaker 3: He does not have the votes, which is why he's
17:54
Speaker 3: in a bit of a pickle right now, because Susan Collins,
17:56
Speaker 3: like the people you just named, Tommy, Susan Collins and
17:59
Speaker 3: Tom Tillis and Martha McSally and Corey Gardner, who are
18:04
Speaker 3: up in 2020. And then you have people like Murkowski
18:06
Speaker 3: and Romney who've made some noise in this too. they
18:09
Speaker 3: have to decide, right? Like, it's one thing to say,
18:12
Speaker 3: we heard all the evidence, we heard all the witnesses,
18:13
Speaker 3: and we just don't think this rises to the level
18:16
Speaker 3: of an impeachable fence, right? Which they might end up doing.
18:18
Speaker 3: It's another to say, we helped Donald Trump and Mitch
18:21
Speaker 3: McConnell rig the trial. We decided there would be no witnesses,
18:24
Speaker 3: no testimony, no nothing, and we're going to sweep the
18:27
Speaker 3: whole thing under the rug. That's a harder thing for
18:30
Speaker 3: someone who's up in a purple state like Susan Collins
18:33
Speaker 3: or Cory Gardner to do.
18:35
Speaker 1: It's interesting.
18:36
Speaker 5: I mean, Lindsey Graham has been kind of off the
18:38
Speaker 5: rails for a while. But the McConnell thing was strange
18:42
Speaker 5: in that usually he kind of recognizes the need to
18:46
Speaker 5: pretend that there's a kind of distance between him and
18:50
Speaker 5: the White House. And part of me wondered watching what
18:52
Speaker 5: he was doing is, is this a kind of an
18:54
Speaker 5: opening gambit he screwed up because there are negotiations going on, right?
18:58
Speaker 5: Is it that his actual intention is to get a
19:01
Speaker 5: vote in which there are literally no witnesses in the Senate, quote, trial,
19:04
Speaker 5: end quote, which wouldn't be a trial, be opening, closing statements.
19:07
Speaker 1: That's all it would be.
19:08
Speaker 5: And or is it an understanding that he went out
19:11
Speaker 5: there to say my opening position is no witnesses. Schumer's
19:14
Speaker 5: position is many witnesses, although Schumer proposed, I think he's
19:18
Speaker 5: doing it in a very smart way because he's he's
19:20
Speaker 5: not he's talking about a a, you know, a limited trial,
19:24
Speaker 5: a trial where witnesses aren't allowed to be witnesses are
19:27
Speaker 5: called for no more than eight hours. It is a
19:29
Speaker 5: it is very clearly that they are both trying to
19:31
Speaker 5: figure out how how much they can get out of
19:34
Speaker 5: those three or four Republicans.
19:35
Speaker 4: Or maybe Mitch just knows that he can respond with
19:38
Speaker 4: a letter of his own and the headline will be
19:40
Speaker 4: dueling letters sent. Not sure what they say besides hello
19:44
Speaker 4: to a new era of partisan rancor. Yeah. Both sides
19:48
Speaker 4: to fucking death.
19:49
Speaker 3: I do. think I think I think it puts it
19:51
Speaker 3: puts these senators that are up in in a tougher spot.
19:56
Speaker 3: And I think they have to decide because, look, Greg
19:59
Speaker 3: Sargent made this point of The Washington Post I thought
20:01
Speaker 3: was smart. The White House, when it was in the House, said,
20:05
Speaker 3: we're not letting anyone testify or sending over any documents
20:08
Speaker 3: because this whole thing is illegitimate. Mitch McConnell can't take
20:12
Speaker 3: the position that his own trial is illegitimate.
20:14
Speaker 4: He can't do that.
20:15
Speaker 3: So what's Mitch McConnell's excuse going to be on why
20:18
Speaker 3: they shouldn't have any documents or evidence or witnesses for
20:21
Speaker 3: a trial? What's his actual excuse?
20:23
Speaker 4: But I mean, can he just say the inquiry is illegitimate,
20:25
Speaker 4: thus we're moving forward as fast as possible? Like, I
20:28
Speaker 4: think that Mitch is the most cynical motherfucker on the planet.
20:30
Speaker 4: And he'll say whatever he has to say to get
20:32
Speaker 4: through this.
20:33
Speaker 1: He will.
20:33
Speaker 3: But I think, I don't know that Mitt Romney or
20:35
Speaker 3: Susan Collins or Corey Gardner can stand saying the whole
20:39
Speaker 3: thing is illegitimate. I think they can say it didn't
20:41
Speaker 3: rise to a level, but I think it's hard for
20:42
Speaker 3: them to say no witnesses should be called. We'll find out.
20:45
Speaker 4: I mean, just Susan Collins has a long history of, uh,
20:48
Speaker 4: taking totally irrational, illogical positions and getting away with it. Yeah.
20:52
Speaker 3: Well then she's free to do that. And then it
20:54
Speaker 3: will look even worse to her. I mean, the, We've
20:56
Speaker 3: had a whole bunch of stories now about how this
20:58
Speaker 3: is all, this is a tough vote for the moderate Democrats.
21:01
Speaker 3: Time to have a bunch of stories about how this
21:02
Speaker 3: is tough for people like Cory Gardner and Susan Collins.
21:04
Speaker 5: I'm also curious what Mitt Romney says in the next
21:07
Speaker 5: couple of days, because one of the roles he played
21:11
Speaker 5: early on, although no one really followed him, was to
21:14
Speaker 5: signal what a serious, not anti-Trump, but whatever, middle of
21:20
Speaker 5: the road between Trump and anti-Trump position could sound like
21:23
Speaker 5: to give some space for people to follow him to
21:25
Speaker 5: a uh, a compromise.
21:27
Speaker 4: Yeah. The problem with that though, is in those early days,
21:31
Speaker 4: I mean, even like one of the morons on Fox
21:33
Speaker 4: and friends was saying, boy, if he traded military aid
21:36
Speaker 4: for dirt on Biden, that would be real bad. And
21:39
Speaker 4: then they learned the facts. He has every right to
21:41
Speaker 4: pretend we didn't say that. So, yeah, I mean, I
21:44
Speaker 4: think the key point though is, uh, Hey, major publications,
21:47
Speaker 4: send your beat reporters to Colorado and Maine and start
21:49
Speaker 4: talking to. Yeah.
21:59
Speaker 3: We should also briefly talk about Representative Jeff Van Drew,
22:02
Speaker 3: who told staff that he's switching parties and becoming a Republican.
22:06
Speaker 3: Van Drew is one of only two House Democrats who
22:08
Speaker 3: opposed the impeachment inquiry, and he reportedly had internal polling
22:11
Speaker 3: showing him potentially losing his next Democratic primary because of
22:14
Speaker 3: his anti-impeachment stance.
22:16
Speaker 4: Cool guy, huh?
22:17
Speaker 3: I do. Yes.
22:19
Speaker 4: I mean, he's very cynical. A completely cynical decision. Obviously shameful.
22:23
Speaker 5: There is a very funny thing that happens, though, whenever
22:26
Speaker 5: someone switches parties, which is... You know, three days earlier,
22:29
Speaker 5: they're like, you know, we're waiting for him to make
22:31
Speaker 5: his decision and we hope he does the right thing.
22:32
Speaker 5: And then two days later, he switches like that motherfucker.
22:35
Speaker 5: I hated him from a goddamn jump.
22:37
Speaker 4: I think Van Drew. Although people have hated him. No,
22:39
Speaker 4: I know.
22:39
Speaker 5: I know.
22:40
Speaker 4: But it's just a.
22:41
Speaker 5: Anyway.
22:42
Speaker 4: I've never thought of Jeff Van Drew before this weekend.
22:45
Speaker 4: I'll never think of him after today. I mean, the
22:47
Speaker 4: idea that you could. Vote with Trump only 9% of
22:51
Speaker 4: the time and then switch to his side and go
22:54
Speaker 4: to a meeting with him in the Oval Office about
22:56
Speaker 4: protecting him from impeachment in this era. It shows that
22:59
Speaker 4: you only care about having the job. You don't give
23:02
Speaker 4: a shit about anything you're supposed to do when you
23:04
Speaker 4: get there.
23:04
Speaker 3: I don't even think it's that shrewd of a political move.
23:07
Speaker 3: I don't either. Like you said, the guy only votes
23:09
Speaker 3: with Trump 7% of the time. There's a bunch of
23:12
Speaker 3: other Republicans in this primary. Would you rather someone who's
23:15
Speaker 3: really like Trump or someone who just pretended to be
23:17
Speaker 3: like Trump so he could avoid a tough primary if
23:19
Speaker 3: you're a Republican voter? On the other side, like, what
23:23
Speaker 3: does this say about impeachment? It should have been safe
23:26
Speaker 3: for Jeff Van Drew to come out against impeachment in
23:30
Speaker 3: a district that voted for Trump by five points. It
23:33
Speaker 3: is clearly not because he looked at polling saying that
23:35
Speaker 3: Democratic voters would punish him for this stance.
23:38
Speaker 5: Right.
23:38
Speaker 3: Like and that that should. that should actually buck up
23:40
Speaker 3: a lot of other Democrats who are voting for impeachment
23:42
Speaker 3: in tough districts.
23:43
Speaker 4: And by the way, last month he vowed to remain
23:45
Speaker 4: a Democrat. I mean, as of last month, he was
23:47
Speaker 4: publicly saying that he wouldn't do this. It is true.
23:51
Speaker 5: Like, you just step back for one second, like, okay,
23:54
Speaker 5: I guess you really need this job.
23:56
Speaker 4: Right.
23:56
Speaker 1: You need it so bad.
23:59
Speaker 4: So bad.
24:00
Speaker 1: So bad.
24:01
Speaker 5: Not clear you'll be able to keep it regardless, but
24:04
Speaker 5: my God, to look at the world... and say, this
24:07
Speaker 5: is what I want my footnote to be. I'm going
24:10
Speaker 5: to be a footnote, and this is the footnote I
24:12
Speaker 5: want to be. The guy that switched parties to protect
24:16
Speaker 5: Donald Trump from a clearly justified impeachment. It is a very,
24:23
Speaker 5: what a pretty dark and embarrassing decision.
24:26
Speaker 3: So finally, before we move on to 2020, House Democrats
24:29
Speaker 3: have to decide which members they'll appoint as impeachment managers
24:32
Speaker 3: who essentially act as prosecutors. who present the case against
24:36
Speaker 3: Trump during the trial. On Sunday, the Washington Post reported
24:39
Speaker 3: that 30 freshman Democrats are trying to convince Nancy Pelosi
24:42
Speaker 3: to appoint Justin Amash, the only former Republican member of
24:45
Speaker 3: the House who's come out in favor of impeachment, as
24:47
Speaker 3: one of their impeachment managers. One of those Democrats, Dean
24:50
Speaker 3: Phillips from Minnesota, said that Amash is willing to consider
24:53
Speaker 3: the final decision is Nancy Pelosi's. What did you guys think?
24:56
Speaker 4: I'm in.
24:58
Speaker 5: Honestly, I look, there have been some people like, oh,
25:01
Speaker 5: why are you bothering to pretend, you know, no matter
25:03
Speaker 5: what you do, oh, you put a very conservative former Republican,
25:06
Speaker 5: it won't affect what the Republicans in the Congress do.
25:09
Speaker 5: I don't really care about that. I think it does
25:11
Speaker 5: send an important message about the fact that.
25:12
Speaker 3: And that's the point of this whole thing, to send
25:14
Speaker 3: a message.
25:14
Speaker 5: It sends an important message. The other thing, too, is
25:17
Speaker 5: Amash is smart. And he asks smart questions. And some
25:20
Speaker 5: of his critiques he's had of what hasn't been asked
25:22
Speaker 5: during the Judiciary Committee hearings, I think, were also very
25:25
Speaker 5: smart points.
25:26
Speaker 1: So I think it's a good idea.
25:28
Speaker 4: Yeah, it's certainly good messaging. It would be great to
25:30
Speaker 4: have it be a bipartisan prosecution team Ultimately, I just
25:34
Speaker 4: want someone to perform well. Like, I want an Adam
25:36
Speaker 4: Schiff up there that is incredibly competent, knows the rules, concise, like,
25:40
Speaker 4: drills down on the point.
25:41
Speaker 3: Schiff and Amash.
25:42
Speaker 4: Let's get them both.
25:43
Speaker 1: Nancy's five.
25:44
Speaker 4: Yeah, it'd be interesting. I mean, you know, I don't
25:46
Speaker 4: know enough about him to know how he would conduct himself.
25:49
Speaker 4: And that doesn't mean, I think, poorly of him in
25:52
Speaker 4: any way. I just, like, don't know if there are
25:53
Speaker 4: party lines he'd be asked to toe that he wouldn't
25:55
Speaker 4: be okay with that would maybe undercut impeachment. But certainly
25:58
Speaker 4: it would be, you know, it's a good message. And also...
26:01
Speaker 4: The bipartisan, the case against Trump is bipartisan. They just
26:04
Speaker 4: threw Amash out of the fucking Republican Party, right? It
26:08
Speaker 4: doesn't make it, doesn't change the fact that he believes
26:11
Speaker 4: the president should be impeached and removed. We just talked
26:13
Speaker 4: about the media stuck in their both sides narrative. And,
26:16
Speaker 4: you know, you can complain about the game, which we do,
26:18
Speaker 4: or you can play the game, which this would be. Yeah, exactly.
26:21
Speaker 4: This is, you know, the media that is.
26:23
Speaker 3: Obsessed with both sides of everything, if they see A
26:26
Speaker 3: House impeachment manager team that is Democrats and a former
26:30
Speaker 3: Republican together making the case against Donald Trump will give
26:33
Speaker 3: Democrats credit for that.
26:34
Speaker 4: I also know that's going to happen.
26:35
Speaker 5: I also do think, too, as we think about like
26:37
Speaker 5: the messaging around the trial itself, especially given what we've
26:40
Speaker 5: been talking about, this is sort of how how easy
26:43
Speaker 5: it is to kind of get this partisan critique into
26:46
Speaker 5: the into the political bloodstream. I think it's also fair
26:49
Speaker 5: to say. Democrats in the Senate do not want a
26:52
Speaker 5: partisan impeachment trial. No, they want a they want a
26:54
Speaker 5: bipartisan impeachment trial. And, you know, this is something that
26:57
Speaker 5: the Republicans in the House have known is a very
26:59
Speaker 5: useful cudgel. As long as none of them participate in
27:03
Speaker 5: the process, it is partisan. And as long as there
27:05
Speaker 5: is a partisan process, they can claim they won't participate
27:07
Speaker 5: in it. And that no matter the fact that they
27:09
Speaker 5: got to call witnesses, no matter the fact, as John,
27:11
Speaker 5: as you pointed out many times, that the most damning
27:13
Speaker 5: witnesses are people that have worked for or continue to
27:15
Speaker 5: be part of the Trump administration. no matter what they
27:19
Speaker 5: have been able to say, oh, this is a partisan impeachment.
27:21
Speaker 5: It has led to the headlines saying that this is
27:23
Speaker 5: all a bunch of partisan rancor. We should be just
27:25
Speaker 5: adopt that. Do not give it just because they claim
27:27
Speaker 5: the House portion of this was partisan does not mean
27:29
Speaker 5: we have to give up.
27:30
Speaker 1: This is very important.
27:31
Speaker 5: And I think fair talking point to say we do
27:33
Speaker 5: not want a partisan impeachment trial.
27:35
Speaker 4: But just one note. So over the weekend, The Times,
27:37
Speaker 4: one of their stories, wrote a small number of their
27:40
Speaker 4: conservative leaning members are deeply uncomfortable with the idea of
27:42
Speaker 4: taking part in a Democrat only impeachment vote and are
27:45
Speaker 4: spending the weekend torn over how to proceed. That's factually false.
27:48
Speaker 4: Justin Amash is an independent, so it's not Democrat only already.
27:52
Speaker 4: He's really a Republican. He just got tossed out of
27:54
Speaker 4: the party. So it's like, come on, guys.
27:57
Speaker 3: Well, that's another reason, too, because we may lose a
27:59
Speaker 3: few Democrats on the final vote.
28:01
Speaker 4: Absolutely.
28:02
Speaker 3: And if we lose a couple Democrats, but then Amash
28:05
Speaker 3: is one of the impeachment managers, that will highlight that
28:07
Speaker 3: there was a Republican who was for this, and he's
28:10
Speaker 3: now going to play a starring role in the trial.
28:12
Speaker 4: And even if he doesn't, We don't get to pretend
28:14
Speaker 4: that he was not a Republican. He's in the Freedom Caucus.
28:17
Speaker 1: He's a right winger.
28:20
Speaker 5: He was voting no because nothing was conservative enough for
28:23
Speaker 5: him for so long.
28:24
Speaker 4: Yeah, I just... Just.
28:26
Speaker 1: Another thing, too.
28:28
Speaker 5: Donald Trump, as a litmus test on human beings, has been...
28:35
Speaker 5: Imagine us talking about Justin Amash before Donald Trump became president,
28:37
Speaker 5: sitting here thinking whether Nancy Pelosi should appoint him to
28:40
Speaker 5: such an important position.
28:41
Speaker 1: Would never have been considered, but... But, you know, Trump
28:45
Speaker 1: reveals all.
28:55
Speaker 3: So let's talk about 2020. The last Democratic presidential debate
28:58
Speaker 3: of 2019 is scheduled to take place right here in
29:00
Speaker 3: Los Angeles on Thursday night. I say scheduled to because
29:03
Speaker 3: the candidates have all threatened to skip it in order
29:05
Speaker 3: to stand in solidarity with workers at Loyola Marymount University
29:09
Speaker 3: who are in a labor dispute with a food services
29:11
Speaker 3: company used by the college. So I guess we'll see
29:13
Speaker 3: what happens there.
29:14
Speaker 4: I don't know.
29:15
Speaker 3: Maybe they'll reschedule, relocate, hopefully solve the labor dispute in
29:19
Speaker 3: favor of the workers. I was looking at this last
29:21
Speaker 3: night preparing for the pod, and I thought by this
29:22
Speaker 3: morning we would have a resolution, and we do not.
29:25
Speaker 4: It's confusing, right? Because the labor dispute is between this
29:28
Speaker 4: food service company and then workers from, I think, like
29:31
Speaker 4: Unite Here, one of the locals. Loyola Marymount, I don't think,
29:34
Speaker 4: actually is a party to the dispute.
29:37
Speaker 3: Now they're just trying to help solve it, apparently.
29:38
Speaker 4: Their hands are kind of tied.
29:39
Speaker 3: Along with Tom Perry.
29:40
Speaker 4: Again, we move this debate from UCLA to Loyola Marymount
29:46
Speaker 4: to avoid another labor dispute. This feels like a rake
29:50
Speaker 4: to the face here for the Democratic Party.
29:51
Speaker 3: Do you guys think we could just put a few
29:53
Speaker 3: more chairs around this table and just get them here?
29:56
Speaker 4: Well, it depends on if the book or letter goes
29:57
Speaker 4: through or not.
29:58
Speaker 3: Well, that's next. So another issue with the debate. Over
30:02
Speaker 3: the weekend, candidates signed onto a letter circulated by Cory
30:05
Speaker 3: Booker calling on the DNC to loosen the qualification rules
30:07
Speaker 3: for debates in January and February, allowing candidates to participate
30:11
Speaker 3: who hit either the polling threshold or the fundraising threshold,
30:15
Speaker 3: but not both, as is currently the case. According to
30:18
Speaker 3: the letter, quote, candidates who have proven both their viability
30:20
Speaker 3: and their commitment to the Democratic Party are being prematurely
30:23
Speaker 3: cut out of the nominating contest before many voters have
30:25
Speaker 3: even tuned in. much less made their decision about whom
30:28
Speaker 3: to support. In response, Tom Perez and the DNC said no. Quote,
30:31
Speaker 3: What do you guys think about this one? It's a
30:32
Speaker 3: sticky wicket.
30:32
Speaker 5: Ha!
30:46
Speaker 1: There's no doubt about it. Okay.
30:50
Speaker 4: Bold stance. No, it is.
30:51
Speaker 3: It is.
30:52
Speaker 5: Because I'll tell you, you know, the point that Cory
30:54
Speaker 5: Booker made that I think is incredibly valid is candidates
30:58
Speaker 5: are being shut out of the debates before a lot
31:01
Speaker 5: of voters have tuned in. That is certainly true. One poll,
31:04
Speaker 5: I'm not sure which of the polls that came out
31:06
Speaker 5: this weekend, found that even now only, I believe, 24%
31:09
Speaker 5: of Democratic primary voters have made up their mind. That's
31:12
Speaker 5: a huge percentage of Democrats. who still are kind of
31:14
Speaker 5: trying to take a look at the field. I'm very
31:16
Speaker 5: sympathetic to that. At the same time, the point that
31:18
Speaker 5: Tom Perez and the DNC has made is very good
31:21
Speaker 5: as well, which is the thresholds are pretty low because
31:24
Speaker 5: keep in mind for Cory Booker, he has made the
31:26
Speaker 5: donor threshold. So what he is entirely focused on is
31:29
Speaker 5: the fact that he cannot reach the polling threshold. And
31:32
Speaker 5: that is after basically a year of campaigning. So I
31:36
Speaker 5: am torn about it because I also agree, by the way,
31:38
Speaker 5: we don't want two nights with so many candidates.
31:41
Speaker 1: It makes it.
31:42
Speaker 5: Incredibly hard to have a focused conversation to really adjudicate
31:46
Speaker 5: some of the frontrunners who at this point are more
31:49
Speaker 5: likely to be the nominee than some of the candidates
31:51
Speaker 5: who are performing lower.
31:52
Speaker 4: So, hence, sticky wicket. Yeah, I agree with my colleague,
31:56
Speaker 4: Benedict Cumberbatch. This is indeed a sticky wicket. And I
31:59
Speaker 4: wouldn't want to bowl this one. No, you're right, though.
32:02
Speaker 4: I didn't know it was a cricket thing. I like,
32:04
Speaker 4: I don't know if it is at all. I'm just
32:05
Speaker 4: being shut up. I like Cory Booker a lot. I
32:07
Speaker 4: like his team. I'm really sympathetic to their plight here
32:11
Speaker 4: because I mean, they keep getting, polls keep coming back
32:15
Speaker 4: that don't count in terms of the list of polls
32:18
Speaker 4: that qualified that would have gotten him into the debates, right?
32:22
Speaker 4: These polling firms keep polling states like Michigan and Corey
32:27
Speaker 4: hits the 4% threshold, but not early states that would
32:30
Speaker 4: have qualified. So like, it just sucks for them. I
32:32
Speaker 4: feel very frustrated on their behalf. That said, I don't
32:37
Speaker 4: know that you can change the rules at this point,
32:38
Speaker 4: because as much as you like Booker, as many people
32:41
Speaker 4: have been mad about the size of the debates as
32:43
Speaker 4: who has been in them. And so where do you
32:45
Speaker 4: draw the line? Does that mean that Booker, Castro, Tulsi, Bloomberg,
32:50
Speaker 4: maybe Marianne Williamson would all be in? I mean, how
32:53
Speaker 4: willing are we to open up this process at this
32:56
Speaker 4: point in the game when it's supposed to be shrinking?
32:59
Speaker 4: I hope Cory Booker makes it. You know, I'd love
33:02
Speaker 4: to see him on the stage. I think he's a
33:05
Speaker 4: valuable voice in the party. But Tom Perez is a
33:08
Speaker 4: tough job here.
33:09
Speaker 3: Yeah, I think the best argument on the Booker side
33:12
Speaker 3: is that all the other candidates who've made the December
33:15
Speaker 3: debate signed on to the letter. So it would just
33:18
Speaker 3: be changing the rules for one candidate because the other
33:22
Speaker 3: candidates have agreed to it.
33:23
Speaker 4: But they all felt forced. They're all backgrounding these outlets saying, ugh,
33:26
Speaker 4: prisoner's dilemma.
33:27
Speaker 3: Well, see, that's what I was going to say.
33:29
Speaker 4: God, I hope no one listens to this fucking letter
33:30
Speaker 4: I signed.
33:31
Speaker 3: I think it's tough because I think all of the candidates...
33:35
Speaker 3: knew the rules, knew the thresholds at the beginning, and
33:37
Speaker 3: all signed on to it. And it is hard to
33:39
Speaker 3: change in midstream, I think. And, you know, I'm sure
33:45
Speaker 3: from Tom Perez and the DNC's perspective, they're like, imagine
33:48
Speaker 3: going back to, you know, two nights, two different debates
33:52
Speaker 3: every night as we're trying, as so many people, like
33:55
Speaker 3: you said, Lovett, are still undecided and they're trying to
33:57
Speaker 3: make up their minds. And now we're saying to people,
33:59
Speaker 3: all right, there's gonna be more people on stage again.
34:02
Speaker 3: We're gonna get bigger. I think that's tough. I mean,
34:04
Speaker 3: I hate to say this because I think when initially
34:06
Speaker 3: they announced that they were going to do polling and
34:08
Speaker 3: fundraising thresholds so they didn't have two nights, one regular debate,
34:12
Speaker 3: one undercard debate, that was a good idea. Thinking back
34:16
Speaker 3: to it. maybe the undercard wouldn't have been so bad.
34:19
Speaker 4: I don't know.
34:19
Speaker 3: I hate to say, I mean, this is what people
34:21
Speaker 3: do who don't have to actually make the decisions. But
34:23
Speaker 3: so I feel for the DNC and I feel for
34:25
Speaker 3: the candidates here, but it's tough.
34:26
Speaker 4: Yeah. And sort of the other thing that I think
34:27
Speaker 4: would probably be unfair about changing the rules now is,
34:30
Speaker 4: you know, because of this donor threshold, you had a
34:33
Speaker 4: whole bunch of candidates and campaigns readjusting their spending priorities
34:37
Speaker 4: to get more donors, right? And not doing things like
34:41
Speaker 4: voter contact or running TV ads or all these other
34:43
Speaker 4: strategic choices. So you might really piss off a lot
34:47
Speaker 4: of people who would have run a different race if
34:49
Speaker 4: these rules had been changed at the time. And look,
34:52
Speaker 4: I think that if you're going to really get mad
34:54
Speaker 4: about these rules, unless you're one of the people actually debating,
34:57
Speaker 4: you have to come up with an alternative that's better
34:59
Speaker 4: because it's not fair to just kick the shit out
35:02
Speaker 4: of Tom Perez, who's an incredibly good guy, who's like
35:05
Speaker 4: as progressive as they come, who's a labor leader himself,
35:08
Speaker 4: who said he wouldn't cross the picket line to go
35:10
Speaker 4: to this event at Loyal and Marymount, just harkening back
35:13
Speaker 4: to our previous conversation so it's.
35:15
Speaker 3: It's tough also like there's been a lot of critique
35:19
Speaker 3: uh rightfully so of billionaires like tom steyer and michael
35:23
Speaker 3: bloomberg uh well not bloomberg because he's not gone on
35:26
Speaker 3: the debate stage but tom steyer essentially buying his way
35:28
Speaker 3: into the debate stage i think that criticism is fair
35:30
Speaker 3: but there's other candidates who are on that debate stage
35:33
Speaker 3: who didn't have a ton of advantages uh who've made
35:36
Speaker 3: it this far andrew yang andrew yang made it to
35:38
Speaker 3: the debate stage he didn't have a big name or
35:40
Speaker 3: a big email list or a lot of money when
35:42
Speaker 3: he started off. He just made it there. Amy Klobuchar
35:45
Speaker 3: is still there. There's a lot of people who, there's
35:48
Speaker 3: still people who made the debate. Kamala Harris made the
35:50
Speaker 3: debate stage. She just dropped out because she didn't have
35:51
Speaker 3: money to continue the campaign. So there are people who
35:53
Speaker 3: got to the debate stage the way that the rules
35:56
Speaker 3: told them to get there. Yeah.
35:57
Speaker 5: And it's also, I'm sympathetic to the Booker argument, but
36:00
Speaker 5: then I also think, well, this is someone who's been
36:02
Speaker 5: on the debate stage for every debate we've had up
36:04
Speaker 5: until this moment. And it isn't catching in the polling. Now,
36:09
Speaker 5: I don't know what a better standard is to demonstrate
36:11
Speaker 5: who's a serious candidate who deserves to be on that
36:13
Speaker 5: stage that wouldn't be immediately pilloried as being subjective.
36:16
Speaker 1: But if the purpose of.
36:18
Speaker 5: Being on the debates is not just for the debate itself,
36:20
Speaker 5: but to kind of propel your candidacy forward, the fact
36:23
Speaker 5: remains that up until this point, the debates have not
36:25
Speaker 5: done this for Cory Booker, even though he's had some
36:28
Speaker 5: really strong debates. One other point about this too, which
36:31
Speaker 5: is about how, you know, what's the alternative. There are
36:34
Speaker 5: problems with an objective debate set of rules like this
36:37
Speaker 5: where all candidates basically know in advance these are the
36:39
Speaker 5: rules we have to meet. But one of the positive
36:41
Speaker 5: results is if it were to be subjective, I mean,
36:43
Speaker 5: we just went through a primary in 2016 where a
36:46
Speaker 5: lot of people walked away feeling as though Bernie Sanders
36:48
Speaker 5: was mistreated by that process, mistreated by the DNC. And
36:52
Speaker 5: whatever your views are on that fight, it was very
36:56
Speaker 5: important going into this primary that everybody understand that these
36:58
Speaker 5: were a fair set of rules applied equally to everybody.
37:01
Speaker 4: I mean, look, the billionaire's point, yes, it sucks that
37:04
Speaker 4: you can buy your way into a debate. But our
37:06
Speaker 4: campaign finance system is a joke and a disaster. And
37:09
Speaker 4: that's the problem. That's because of the Supreme Court, not
37:12
Speaker 4: Tom Perez. So I just think there's a lot of
37:15
Speaker 4: frustration and rage in the primary process, especially when you
37:18
Speaker 4: feel like your personal candidate is being mistreated. We just
37:21
Speaker 4: have to make sure we're focusing on the right people.
37:23
Speaker 4: And by the way, Cory Booker has got a hell
37:24
Speaker 4: of a team in Iowa. He's running hard there. Like
37:27
Speaker 4: he still has a chance. Yeah.
37:29
Speaker 3: Maybe the debates don't end up mattering.
37:30
Speaker 4: It's not over.
37:31
Speaker 3: So if this debate does happen, it'll be the smallest
37:33
Speaker 3: debate stage we've seen so far. with just seven candidates participating. Biden, Bernie, Pete, Warren, Klobuchar, Yang, Steyer.
37:40
Speaker 3: Let's talk a little bit about strategy here. Biden has
37:42
Speaker 3: been the national frontrunner since the beginning, even though he
37:45
Speaker 3: is considerably weaker in Iowa and New Hampshire. Lately, he's
37:49
Speaker 3: benefited a bit from Pete and Warren focusing on each other.
37:52
Speaker 3: Do you guys think, does anyone try to draw a
37:54
Speaker 3: contrast with Biden in this debate, knowing that he's still
37:58
Speaker 3: probably the candidate with the best chance to win?
38:01
Speaker 4: Slightly, I would say.
38:03
Speaker 5: Elizabeth Warren has been testing out some lines that target
38:08
Speaker 5: Pete and Biden. So I wouldn't be surprised if that's
38:12
Speaker 5: the tax she takes in the debate were it to happen.
38:15
Speaker 1: Hope it happens somewhere. So I wouldn't be surprised to
38:18
Speaker 1: see if she tries that.
38:19
Speaker 4: I think that if you're going to go after Biden,
38:21
Speaker 4: you have to make almost a purely electability argument. That
38:25
Speaker 4: is his strength. His strength is name ID and that
38:27
Speaker 4: people think he can beat Trump. And that is what
38:30
Speaker 4: a lot of voters in these early states who are
38:33
Speaker 4: paying attention more than the rest of the country are
38:35
Speaker 4: particularly seized with, especially in Iowa. So I think that
38:38
Speaker 4: if we get bogged down in another conversation about Medicare
38:42
Speaker 4: for all versus the public option or financing of it,
38:45
Speaker 4: I think it's a missed opportunity for all of these candidates. And,
38:49
Speaker 4: you know, if I were them, I would just want
38:51
Speaker 4: to make the case that I'm the one who can win.
38:53
Speaker 4: But one exception to that probably is Bernie Sanders, who's
38:56
Speaker 4: just been doing his thing, running this campaign that in
39:00
Speaker 4: some ways seems to like feel parallel to what the
39:03
Speaker 4: others are doing and just slowly, steadily gaining traction, doing well.
39:08
Speaker 3: He's another one who sort of benefited from the focus
39:11
Speaker 3: that Pete Buttigieg and Elizabeth Warren sort of have on
39:15
Speaker 3: each other. Someone noted that it's a similar dynamic, potentially,
39:19
Speaker 3: to what happened in 2004, which is, as we get
39:23
Speaker 3: closer to the Iowa caucuses, Howard Dean was at the
39:26
Speaker 3: top of the heap. Dick Gephardt was right behind him.
39:29
Speaker 3: John Kerry, I was on the Kerry campaign. Tommy, you
39:32
Speaker 3: were on the Edwards campaign. We were way down towards last.
39:35
Speaker 3: And because Gephardt and Dean went after each other so furiously,
39:39
Speaker 3: as you know, Iowa voters don't really love when people
39:43
Speaker 3: attack each other too much. And it left an opening
39:45
Speaker 3: for Kerry to come right through. And Edwards did a
39:48
Speaker 3: lot better than expected as well. Now, I think that
39:51
Speaker 3: the Pete Warren exchanges have been pretty tame so far.
39:54
Speaker 3: The supporters are getting a little feisty, but I think
39:57
Speaker 3: the two candidates themselves have been pretty tame with each other.
40:00
Speaker 4: So we'll see.
40:01
Speaker 3: What do you guys think about sort of Elizabeth Warren's
40:04
Speaker 3: strategy lately? She had a big speech last week. She
40:08
Speaker 3: was sort of on top of the polls. She's fallen
40:11
Speaker 3: a little bit behind. She's trying to come back now
40:13
Speaker 3: with a big speech. She took, you know, like you said, Lovett,
40:15
Speaker 3: she took a... sort of oblique shots at both Pete
40:19
Speaker 3: and Biden for being naive about the challenges that Democrats
40:24
Speaker 3: will face from both Republicans and rich people once we're
40:27
Speaker 3: governing again. Yeah.
40:28
Speaker 5: And she also, I think, said Bloomberg by name, which
40:31
Speaker 5: is a funny decision. It's funny looking at the landscape.
40:33
Speaker 5: You can see why she sees no cost to saying
40:36
Speaker 5: Bloomberg's name, but does worry about seeming too antagonistic to
40:39
Speaker 5: some people that are polling better than her. It's interesting,
40:42
Speaker 5: I think, for two reasons. One, clearly, I think she's
40:44
Speaker 5: trying to reset after six weeks, two months of kind
40:47
Speaker 5: of healthcare argument conversation that wasn't, I think, exactly where
40:54
Speaker 5: she wanted to be. There is something about calling them
40:57
Speaker 5: naive that I think must speak to her own liabilities
41:00
Speaker 5: that she's trying to address, right? That whether it's around
41:03
Speaker 5: Medicare for all or some of the big structural proposals,
41:06
Speaker 5: I think whether she's seeing it in polling or it's
41:08
Speaker 5: just a gut instinct about what's preventing her from kind
41:11
Speaker 5: of regaining the traction she had earlier is this idea that, oh, yeah,
41:14
Speaker 5: you know, let's not be naive. We just need somebody
41:18
Speaker 5: super safe, someone like a Joe Biden, right, to just
41:23
Speaker 5: get us over the finish line. And I think trying
41:24
Speaker 5: to say that he's naive about change is a way
41:27
Speaker 5: of addressing her own weaknesses while trying to project them
41:31
Speaker 5: onto others.
41:32
Speaker 4: Yeah, I mean, look, you never want to lose half
41:35
Speaker 4: your support in a lot of holes, right? Obviously, that's
41:37
Speaker 4: objectively bad. But like, if I were to be, if
41:39
Speaker 4: I were to spin this for them, I do think
41:42
Speaker 4: that there's probably a concern that she got hot a
41:45
Speaker 4: little too early. And once you start leading in the
41:48
Speaker 4: early States, you become the target and you're getting shot at.
41:51
Speaker 4: And now she is absolutely not the target. You're seeing
41:53
Speaker 4: Mayor Pete take a lot of incoming fire from other candidates,
41:56
Speaker 4: from folks on the, you know, on Twitter, from whomever.
42:00
Speaker 4: And just more scrutiny. Yeah, just more scrutiny generally. That's
42:03
Speaker 4: exactly right. And so I think that ironically, Warren could
42:07
Speaker 4: be better positioned, but it will take a lot of work. Now, like,
42:11
Speaker 4: The good news for her is that she's been in
42:13
Speaker 4: Iowa for a long time. She's been organizing hard, like
42:16
Speaker 4: they have a really good team there. And if your
42:19
Speaker 4: threshold for success goes from winning the Iowa caucuses to
42:23
Speaker 4: a strong second or a strong third, like if the
42:26
Speaker 4: expectations get managed in that way, then you can come
42:29
Speaker 4: out okay.
42:30
Speaker 3: I also think she is currently trying to reframe the debate, right?
42:33
Speaker 3: She was pulled into the debate of, is the Democratic
42:37
Speaker 3: Party moving too far to the left, the left versus
42:40
Speaker 3: the center left, blah, blah, blah, because of Medicare for All.
42:44
Speaker 3: Now she's going around in this last week talking about,
42:46
Speaker 3: I mean, she put out her Medicare for All plan,
42:48
Speaker 3: and she's talking more about how she's offering people a
42:51
Speaker 3: choice to switch from their current insurance to a Medicare
42:53
Speaker 3: for All option during the transition period in her plan.
42:56
Speaker 3: And she's trying to reframe it from left versus center
42:59
Speaker 3: left to corruption versus anti-corruption, which is where she's strong,
43:04
Speaker 3: which is where she's always been the strongest. And she's
43:06
Speaker 3: trying to highlight, you know, other candidates' connections to wealthy donors,
43:10
Speaker 3: to fundraising. And she's trying to present herself as, I mean,
43:13
Speaker 3: I think the line in her speech was like, we
43:15
Speaker 3: want the most anti-corruption platform in history to take off,
43:19
Speaker 3: to take on the most corrupt president in history in
43:22
Speaker 3: the general, which in itself is an electability argument. And
43:25
Speaker 3: she said, and to do that, I want to unite
43:27
Speaker 3: not just Democrats, but independents and Republicans too. So She's
43:30
Speaker 3: finally trying to build an electability argument based around taking
43:34
Speaker 3: on corruption in D.C., which is where she's always been strong.
43:36
Speaker 5: And she also said it's not about big government versus
43:39
Speaker 5: small government. It's about who does government work for.
43:41
Speaker 4: Yeah. Which I think is the only thing that.
43:44
Speaker 5: Was striking about that line is if it came out
43:46
Speaker 5: of the mouths of Pete Buttigieg or Joe Biden, they would.
43:48
Speaker 1: Be ripped to pieces.
43:49
Speaker 3: Canceled.
43:50
Speaker 1: But it's interesting that like her strength.
43:53
Speaker 3: Yeah.
43:54
Speaker 5: Her strength is I think she has the confidence fairly of.
43:58
Speaker 5: the left of the party, maybe not some of the
44:01
Speaker 5: Twitter left, but the larger left of the party, that
44:04
Speaker 5: she can kind of make that anti-corruption argument in a
44:07
Speaker 5: non-ideological way, which I do think is a strength.
44:09
Speaker 4: Yeah. Michael Barbaro did an interview with her that came
44:12
Speaker 4: out last week, maybe on Friday, that went back to
44:14
Speaker 4: the financial crisis and the appearance she did on Jon
44:17
Speaker 4: Stewart's show at the time when I think it was
44:20
Speaker 4: like a big coming out party for her where she
44:21
Speaker 4: was seen as someone who was able to explain an
44:23
Speaker 4: unbelievably scary, complicated issue in a clear, concise way and
44:27
Speaker 4: actually made people feel better. And hearing that conversation just
44:32
Speaker 4: reminded me of this core strength she's had and how
44:35
Speaker 4: little we've actually talked about that set of issues, fixing
44:38
Speaker 4: the financial system, reforming big banks, like reigning in Wall
44:41
Speaker 4: Street because of this healthcare debate that really is frankly
44:45
Speaker 4: not something that she was focused on for most of
44:47
Speaker 4: her career. Yeah.
44:48
Speaker 5: I will say though, to Tommy's point about electability, one
44:52
Speaker 5: thing that was really striking in this Fox News poll
44:54
Speaker 5: was they looked at Elizabeth Warren's and Joe Biden versus
44:58
Speaker 5: Donald Trump in Wisconsin. And it found that there was
45:01
Speaker 5: basically a 15 point gap. Basically, if that the Joe
45:06
Speaker 5: Biden versus Donald Trump amongst women, Joe Biden and Elizabeth
45:10
Speaker 5: Warren perform the exact same way. That for women, they
45:13
Speaker 5: look at Joe Biden, they look at Elizabeth Warren, and
45:15
Speaker 5: they see them as the same kind of choice versus
45:16
Speaker 5: Donald Trump. But for men, there was a 15 point delta.
45:20
Speaker 5: And as someone who greatly admires Elizabeth Warren, as somebody
45:24
Speaker 5: who admires the kind of the leadership she's brought to
45:27
Speaker 5: the Democratic Party, let alone this campaign. To me, the
45:31
Speaker 5: electability conversation in favor of Joe Biden is one that
45:34
Speaker 5: has a mirror, which is what do you do to
45:36
Speaker 5: address the concerns of people that might support someone like
45:38
Speaker 5: Elizabeth Warren, might believe in her platform and her, but
45:41
Speaker 5: do you have this gut worry whether or not you
45:44
Speaker 5: believe it's fair? In fact, because it is rooted in misogyny.
45:47
Speaker 5: How do you answer that question? What is your fact-based
45:53
Speaker 5: or evidence-based response to people who say, I want you
45:56
Speaker 5: to be my nominee, but I'm afraid that you can't win.
45:59
Speaker 4: Yeah.
45:59
Speaker 3: And that's, and that's what's, it's a gut punch looking
46:03
Speaker 3: at numbers like that. But I think that's partly why
46:06
Speaker 3: I think she's trying to reframe sort of the Medicare
46:09
Speaker 3: for all stuff and the corruption stuff, because at some,
46:11
Speaker 3: at some level you say there's, there's a lot of
46:14
Speaker 3: sexism and misogyny out there and I'm not going to
46:16
Speaker 3: be able to change that, but I can go find
46:18
Speaker 3: voters elsewhere. Right. And I can find, and I can
46:21
Speaker 3: build coalitions elsewhere. And what I don't want it to
46:24
Speaker 3: be is pegged also with some far left candidate, you know,
46:27
Speaker 3: especially since like, you know, just saw another pullout this weekend.
46:32
Speaker 3: In the Fox poll, it had different policies and still
46:35
Speaker 3: the most popular policy of all, they had the wall
46:38
Speaker 3: in there, they had Medicare for all, they had all
46:39
Speaker 3: the other stuff, wealth tax. Like 67% of people agree.
46:42
Speaker 3: So her anti-corruption policies are very popular among the broader
46:46
Speaker 3: electorate and she probably wants to pivot back to that.
46:48
Speaker 4: I also think the good thing for her is that
46:50
Speaker 4: these electability questions are answered by winning a state. For sure.
46:55
Speaker 4: You know what I mean? It's just that simple. Now
46:57
Speaker 4: there's a lot of structural disadvantages that make it harder
47:00
Speaker 4: to get there. But when Barack Obama won Iowa, it
47:03
Speaker 4: told a whole bunch of people in South Carolina, in
47:06
Speaker 4: particular the African-American community, that white people would vote for
47:09
Speaker 4: him and then he could be a strong general election
47:11
Speaker 4: candidate and win the presidency. And it helped us take off. Okay.
47:15
Speaker 3: Well, so if the debate happens, then Dan will be
47:21
Speaker 3: here and we will, all four of us will do
47:23
Speaker 3: a post-debate podcast on Friday morning. The debate is supposed
47:26
Speaker 3: to be Thursday night. If the debate doesn't happen, stay tuned.
47:29
Speaker 3: We'll figure something else out.
47:30
Speaker 1: And I would also just say, I really, like, find
47:33
Speaker 1: a place without an audience. Find a place. Get this
47:36
Speaker 1: fucking debate to happen.
47:37
Speaker 4: It would be such a shame. It is LA.
47:40
Speaker 3: They could find a studio somewhere.
47:41
Speaker 1: Find a studio. Find some place to do it.
47:43
Speaker 4: You don't need the crowd.
47:44
Speaker 5: I do think, like, this would be one of the
47:46
Speaker 5: first debates that could have a real conversation to it,
47:49
Speaker 5: despite whatever criticism we've already discussed. And, like, I just
47:53
Speaker 5: want this debate to happen, especially because not only has
47:56
Speaker 5: impeachment taken the microphone away from Donald Trump and his
48:00
Speaker 5: best week ever, it's also, I think, taking the microphone
48:03
Speaker 5: away from these Democrats. So I just, I really hope
48:05
Speaker 5: it happens.
48:05
Speaker 3: No, I thought the same thing. We talk about impeachment
48:07
Speaker 3: all the time here, but I want to hear some
48:08
Speaker 3: Democratic debate. You know, we're going to be voting soon.
48:10
Speaker 3: All right.
48:11
Speaker 4: We'll talk to you later. Bye, guys. Bye.
48:25
Speaker 3: Pod Save America is a product of Crooked Media. The
48:27
Speaker 3: senior producer is Michael Martinez. Our assistant producer is Jordan Waller.
48:31
Speaker 3: It's mixed and edited by Andrew Chadwick. Kyle Seglin is
48:34
Speaker 3: our sound engineer. Thanks to Carolyn Reston, Tanya Sominator, and
48:37
Speaker 3: Katie Long for production support. And to our digital team,
48:40
Speaker 3: Elijah Cohn, Narmel Coney, and Yael Freed, and Milo Kim,
48:43
Speaker 3: who film and upload these episodes as a video every week.