40 Burst results for "Donald Trump"
Fresh update on "donald trump" discussed on AP 24 Hour News
"President Trump is going the other direction with July 4th celebration. This has been a great honor After a rally and fireworks display at Mount Rushmore Friday night, he's planning to go big in the nation's capital. With a military flyover and fireworks display expected to draw thousands to the National Mall. The Interior Department says it will hand out 300,000 face coverings to Spectators. Meanwhile, the Trump campaign has confirmed that Kimberly Guilfoyle, a top fundraiser and the girlfriend of Trump's eldest son, Donald Trump Jr. Has tested positive for the Corona virus. Both Guilfoyle and Trump Jr have cancelled public events and are isolating themselves in major League baseball team said the gun working out in preparation for their abbreviated season is a great feeling to come back today for sure loss. Angeles Dodgers pitcher Clayton Kershaw of this three months taught me anything is that you know, I really I really miss the game. I love baseball..
Epstein's alleged accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell set to be arraigned next week
"Maxwell. epsteins closest associates. And helped him exploit girls. who were as young as fourteen years old? Mental played a critical role in helping Epstein to identify the friend and groom minor victims for abuse. In some cases, Maxwell participated in the abuse herself. Okay if you thought the Jeffrey Epstein case was over after his apparent suicide in his jail cell last year. Thank again you'll remember that Epstein was the disgraced financier and convicted sex offender who socializes powerful men like Prince Andrew Bill Clinton and Donald Trump on Thursday, his longtime associate d'alene Maxwell, was arrested and charged for allegedly helping Epstein recruit groom, and sexually abused girls as young as fourteen years old. She has denied any wrongdoing. Here's more of what the US attorney from the southern. District of New York had to say about it. Max will and Epstein had a method. Typically. They would befriend these young girls by asking them questions. About their lives, pretending to be taking an interest in them. They would take them to the movies. And treat them to shopping trips. Maxwell would encourage these young girls to accept offers from Epstein to pay for their travel and their education. Making these young victims feel indebted to Jeffrey Epstein. Developing a rapport with Victims Maxwell then try to normalize sexual abuse with a minor victim. Joining me now. Our our sisters in Law Maya Wiley Professor at the new school and NBC legal analysts Barbara Maclead, former US attorney and MSNBC contributor and Joyce vans, also a former US attorney, and also MSNBC contributor so ladies first I love the all female panel, but I will say starting out I used to be a field producer for America's most wanted, and my beat was covering missing and exploited children. On, this and ask you if you could. How important is the role of the person WHO's The enabler? The person who is recruiting these young girls and my experience, that person was integral to abuse cases when I was a journalist covering these types of cases so. What what say you on that? Yeah. You're absolutely right, tiffany. This is this person and the person who plays the role that. Just Lane Maxwell accused of playing is a Predator is just as culpable as. Jeffrey Epstein or anyone else who sexually assaults anybody? The reason it's so critical to have a person play the role maxwell is accused of is because it's manipulation gain. We have three hundred thousand young people in this country estimated to be sex trafficked domestically, and what that means is finding young kids met male and female. We shouldn't pretend that it's just girls here. In this country who are vulnerable, who need help who need the support of a system hasn't provided it. These are young women who were disadvantaged in many different ways, and what the role that Maxwell played was to play on their need. Get them to trust and being a woman who does that is particularly important, because if you're a vulnerable young woman, you're more likely to let your guard down and believe that the person who is offering you help means it so her role. Is Pivotal in enabling essentially the victimization of a lot of young women and girls, and it happens all over the country. One of the things that so important about this arrest is that predators who are powerful too often go unpunished. So something I found interesting reporting coming out of the Tampa. Bay Times highlighted that this case is actually being handled by the Office of Public Corruption Unit so I. WanNa ask you, Barbara. What does that say about the scope of this? Nation is that. Link to anyone in the current administration. Is it possible that Labor Secretary Alexander Costa's entangled in this break it down for those of us who don't necessarily know how the inner workings of the Southern District. It's a really interesting detail. Tiffany of the press release that was put out by this other district of New, York. This is also true when the case was originally just against Jeffrey Epstein that the public corruption unit is involved, that's a unit that has specialized training and expertise to deal with public officials who get charged there a lot of nuanced issues that arise when public officials are involved and so it says to me that this case. Case at least touches in some way public officials. Now as you said we know that Alex Kosta had some involvement with this. We don't know that he is a subject or a target of the investigation, but his involvement in negotiating sweetheart plea deal a number of years ago. With Jeffrey Epstein could be a reason. We also know that Prince. Andrew has been implicated as recently as last month Jeffrey Berman. The former US attorney recently ousted. Ousted was demanding an opportunity to talk with him and Prince Andrew was a dodging that request to be interviewed. It may be that he is only a witness and not a subject or a target, but this no doubt touches some people who have positions of power, and that could explain why the involvement of public corruption unit or could be others as yet unknown I think four names I be looking at immediately or not public. Public officials, but enablers as Maya, was talking about. If you look at the plea non-prosecution agreement that was negotiated with the Southern District of Florida back in two thousand eight. You'll see the names of four individuals that Jeffrey Epstein specifically wanted to protect. Those are very likely to be people who were enablers recruiters I'd want to get to the bottom of their role. and I think that this case is not done being charged yet. I want to turn the Joyce. Barbara brought up Berman and his abrupt firing. Do you see any connection here with what the dismissal of Berman and the FCC case? So, Tiffany I think it's very hard to know. We know that. The Attorney General Poll Day late Friday night effort to usher Berman out the door, unceremoniously in the southern district of New York and that didn't work became public when Berman refused to go along and instead of having the Attorney General's political appointee in place. We ended up with a woman who was. was already in the office, a career employee, a career prosecutor who will hopefully be playing things straight up so it's difficult to make any sort of direct political line there what we do know is that this is the classic type of an indictment that looks like prosecutors aren't done. It looks like they're headed in further direction, and that's something that there could perhaps. Perhaps be powerful. People who are interested in shutting off when I say it's a classic indictment. What I mean is this indictment comes in six counts, and there's a I can't. That's a conspiracy count and the maximum penalty. There is five years, but there are also substantive counts and conspiracy counts of enticement and transportation of minors, and those counts actually range from ten. Ten years to lifetime sentences, and so as MS Maxwell, is forced to confront the potential charges. She's looking out. Does she want to go to prison for the rest of her life, or is she willing to cooperate and become a witness and look at lesser charges? Perhaps five year sentence that I think will give some powerful people some reason to sleep poorly. All right. Am I GONNA? Go back to you. What do you think that gain maxwell will do you anticipate that she? Said they say. It's hard to know. We're looking at a case as both Barbara Jo of a choice have said where there are powerful people connected to Maxwell and Epstein. There's the mysterious death of Jeff Jeffrey Epstein that has still raised questions in people's mind. And I think the question becomes. Where do you feel more vulnerable? Do you feel more vulnerable from law enforcement, or do you feel more vulnerable other ways we don't really know. We're not going to know, but the one thing we do know and I think is important to remember is this is an over for the victims? This is only the beginning of what will be a very deeply difficult. Possibly re traumatizing process that they have really bravely stood up and faced down despite the fact that I don't think there's any illusion for them. They will have to protect themselves from further victimization in the way, in which the defense will be mounted for Maxwell. So if there's any decency at all left in this woman, she will certainly spare them.
Fresh update on "donald trump" discussed on Purity Products
"A L A CUMULUS STATIONS News Now news too. Good afternoon. I'm Heather Curtis as protesters around the country topple Confederate statues and others they find offensive President Donald Trump used his Beach last night at the Salute to America, Fourth of July celebration toe warn them under the executive order I signed last week pertaining to the Veterans Memorial Preservation and Recognition Act and other laws. People who damage or deface federal statues or monuments will get a minimum of 10 years in prison. Ah, week after two Maryland delegates asked for the prosecution of protesters if they tore down the city's Christopher Columbus statues, a group used rope last night to topple the Columbus statue in Little Italy. After they got the city owned statue down. They took it to the inner harbor and threw it in. They say the Italian Explorer is responsible for the genocide and exploration of Native Americans. Last month, delegates Kathy Chalet GE and Dino Man Joni called on Baltimore City's mayor and governor, Larry Hogan to protect the city's Columbus statues. An 11 year old boy is dead after being hit by a bullet in Southeast last night. Police chief Peter Duchin says five men started shooting around 9 30 the child identified this morning as Daven McNeil was hit in the head. It happened on theater. ST. Lucian says They don't have any suspects yet. One of the two women hit by a car while protesting police brutality in Seattle yesterday, has died. Washington State police identify the victim as 24 year old summer Taylor of Seattle. She and another woman were struck Saturday by a car driven by a 27 year old Seattle man who police say drove around several vehicles that were blocking.
Donald Trump Jr.'s girlfriend tests positive for coronavirus
"Pandemic has once again reached trump's inner circle Kimberly guilfoil trump campaign aide and the girlfriend of Donald Trump junior has tested. Tested positive for cove it, but the White House says Don Jr. tested negative and they claim neither has been in direct contact with the president.
Fresh update on "donald trump" discussed on WBBM Programming
"FM. W BDM NEWS Time. 12 40 President Trump's approval rating, according to America's religious groups. I'm Fred bottom er with report on religion. A few research centre asked that question amid rising Corona virus concerns and widespread protest over racial injustice issues. People of Donald Trump's performance in office as president is down lately across a variety of religious groups. And that includes white evangelical Protestants. They remain among his strongest supporters. But in our new survey, 72% of white evangelical Protestants say they approve of the way Donald Trump has been handling his job. That's down six points since we last asked that question in April few research centers Greg Smith, it's down four points, among other white Protestant from 60% in April 2. 56% today. Black Protestants have long been quite skeptical of Donald Trump's performance in office as president and the current survey, just 12% of black Protestant say they approve of the way Donald Trump is handling his job. That's down nine points in the last couple of months. His approval rating is down 11 points. Among Catholics, including eight points among white Catholics, 54% of whom now give this say they approve of the way he's handling his job as president. And today, 24% of those who have no religion say they approve of Donald Trump's handling of his job down four points. And what about the religious vote in November? The data shows that half form or of white Christians, including 82% of white evangelical Protestants, 61% of white Protestants who are not evangelical and 57% of white Catholics say they would vote for Donald Trump would lean toward voting for him if the election were held today. A variety of other religious groups lined up on the other side of the aisle, 88% of black Protestants and 72% of those who say they have no religion say they would back Joe Biden if the election were held today. With report on religion Fred BOTTOM or CBS News, Justus Americans were getting ready to watch fireworks displays that accompany Fourth of July celebrations. A massive explosion Friday at a factory in northwest Turkey that makes them has claimed several lives, the governor of the region said today. The death toll climbed to six with the discovery of two more victims. Rescue teams continue to search for at least one more person. Someone 114 workers have been treated and released, but six others remain hospitalized, including one listed in critical condition. The cause of the explosion is under investigation will check top trending stories and sports. Next W. B b m NEWS time. 12 43. Your total.
Ex-Donald Trump ‘fixer’ Michael Cohen could be sent back to prison after snaps show him out at New York restaurants
"Meal with friends at a fancy New York City bistro could send President Trump's former personal lawyer, Michael Kohn, Back to prison. This from the New York Post. They spied Michael Kohn and his wife, dining out El fresco at La Bilbo. Okay, That's a French restaurant around the corner from his Park Avenue apartment. This was Thursday night. They were with two other people. His lawyer, Jeffrey Kay, Levine, says Cohen did not violate the terms of his furlough. But the post report says, I'm quoting here. That I will that they quote the furlough paper says, quote. I will not leave the area of my furlough without permission, with exception to travelling to the furlough destination and returning to the institution, and Cameron Lindsay, a former warden at the federal lockup in Brooklyn, told opposed the cones. Restaurant visit doesn't look right. It could be considered a violation of his furlough conditions. 1
Fresh update on "donald trump" discussed on KNX Programming
"On Kate. Thanks People who don't like either Donald Trump or Joe Biden might have another choices fall if they like to sound off President Kanye West rapper marked the Fourth of July with a tweet, saying he's running for the White House is here because it's time to quote Realize the promise of America by trusting God unifying our vision and building our future. It's not clear whether he's actually doing anything yet to get his name on any ballots in November, and filing deadlines have already passed in many states. West also said back in 2015 that he would run for president this year but later dropped the idea. After expressing support for some of President Trump's policies, a former White House insider is speaking out about the way the president has handled the pandemic crisis. Former national security adviser, John Bolton spoke with Canaanites and depth. Bolton said it was early January when responsible staff of the National Security Council and Centers for Disease Control. We're raising red flags about what was happening in China, but as he put it, there was an empty chair in the Oval Office. He said. President Trump didn't prepare the country in a speedy manner to deal with a crisis for a variety of reasons he didn't want to hear about negative impact on the Chinese economy might disrupt trade negotiations and any project. Actually didn't want to hear the risk of what we've seen since then, and the disastrous effect it's had on our economy, which.
Much of US scales back on holiday, but Trump plans to go big
"While public health officials urging Americans to hold more muted celebrations this independence day given the spiking coronavirus cases president trump is going the other direction after a rally and fireworks display at mount Rushmore Friday night this is been a great opposite trump is planning to go big in the nation's capital the celebration will include a military flyover and fireworks display expected to draw thousands to the national mall the interior department says it will hand out three hundred thousand face coverings to spectators meanwhile the trump campaign has confirmed that Kimberly Guilfoyle a top fundraiser for the campaign in the girlfriend of trump's eldest son Donald Trump junior has tested positive for the corona virus with Guilfoyle and trump junior have canceled public events in isolating themselves Ben Thomas Washington
Fresh update on "donald trump" discussed on State of the Union with Jake Tapper
"Our folks like the Russians who are putting bounties Americans heads. There's a lot of problems. Donald trump is leaving and Biden is going to have to clean up and he'll pick the right person to help him do that. Senator thank you so much, thank you for your service. really appreciate it again especially on this holiday weekend. Thank you, thank you, senator and as Kobe. Nineteenth spikes across the country. Patriotism looks and feels very different this fourth of July weekend. That's next. Before we go, we know the fourth of July looked very different this year, but America has been through a lot since the nation declared independence, two hundred and forty years ago and we can do this to. Thanks so much for watching this morning. Parade IKARIA GPS starts, next..
Trump signs extension of COVID-19 relief fund for businesses
"Donald Trump signing extension of the Paycheck Paycheck protection program into law this morning. The House unanimously passed the extension less than a day after the programme shuttered PPP now remaining open to application through August 8th. This is good news for the small businesses who will help them keep employees on their payrolls amid nationwide closures. We've
President Trump vows to protect Mount Rushmore from any changes
"The Fourth of July beneath the huge Mount Rushmore bus. Donald Trump took on what he claims our ongoing efforts to a race or change US history. I am here is your president to proclaim before the country and before the world This monument will never be desecrated. Thes heroes will never be defending speaking there of George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt. Their achievements will never be forgotten on Mount Rushmore will stand forever as an eternal tribute to our forefathers on to our freedom, not against a background of calls and actions elsewhere to remove statues of other figures. In history, most of them of the Confederate secession. Tom
Kimberly Guilfoyle tests positive for coronavirus
"Sheared in the shadow of Mount Rushmore. An American president sees enemies within for the eyes. Americans declare again as we did 244 years ago. We will not be tyrannized. We will not be demeaning, and we will not be a gym it dated by bad evil people. President Trump declaring war on what he called a new far left fascism, making few references to the covert pandemic. Even his Trump campaign official, Kimberly Guilfoyle, who's Donald Trump Junior's girlfriend, tested positive in South Dakota just before that event. Trump Jr reportedly tested negative
Donald Trump Jr.'s girlfriend tests positive for coronavirus
"Is the number of Corona virus cases continues to climb. More big names continued to test positive, including seven time NASCAR champion Jimmie Johnson. He won't race this weekend and Kimberly Guilfoyle she's the girlfriend of Donald Trump Jr Both were in South Dakota, but not in contact. Back with the president. Trump campaign groups as the president's eldest son tested negative but will self isolate
Donald Trump denounces 'merciless campaign to wipe out our history'
"President Trump has used a speech celebrating Independence Day to condemn what he called a merciless campaign to wipe out America's history under famous heroes. Thousands of people attended the event, with few wearing masks despite the raging Corona virus pandemic. David Willis is in Los Angeles. In a fiery speech, Donald Trump sought to draw a stark contrast between himself and his Democratic rival, Joe Biden going into November's presidential election. In the shadow of a monument depicting four former presidents. He took issue with recent instances of lawlessness and branded protests about police brutality and racial injustice. The product of what he called a left wing cultural revolution. He went on to condemn angry mobs that by toppling the statues of Confederate leaders were seeking to in his words eradicate the nation's
Trump 'not welcome' at Mt Rushmore: Native American leader
"Fox's Martin MEREDITH at the White House with details on President Donald Trump's plan to begin his fourth of July weekend. President Trump has a long day ahead of them. He and the first lady will be making that trip out to Mount Rushmore this evening for the fireworks celebration will be coming back to DC Overnight. And while this building a celebration, there is also a little bit of controversy with the chairman of the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, issuing a blistering statement overall this thing nothing stands as a greater reminder to the great nation of a country that cannot keep a promise to treaty than the face is carved into our sacred land on what the US called Mount Rushmore. Native tribal leaders say Mount Rushmore is a great sign of disrespect, saying they believe it should be
Joe Biden tops Donald Trump in fundraising for second straight month
"Been a big week in fundraising terms for Joe Biden. It was this week for the second straight month that he has managed to out fundraise President Donald
U.S. donating 100 ventilators to Pakistan
"The trump administration is donating one hundred ventilators to focused on to help the country respond to cope with nineteen the U. S. embassy in Islamabad says of the ventilators deliver on president Donald trump's generous offer of these critically needed supplies the shipment is valued at around three million dollars the announcement comes days after Pakistan said it started producing locally designed ventilators the government now says it has enough of them to tackle the crisis Pakistan is supported seventy eight more deaths from the front of our raising virus related fatalities just over four thousand five hundred I'm Charles that that's my
U.S. Unemployment Rate Fell to 11.1% in June
"The president wasted no time heading to the cameras to the record jobs gain in June. There's not been anything like this record setting shattering all expectations, our economy is roaring back. It's coming back extremely strong. These are all historic numbers. A record never had a number like that an all time high think of that that's the largest increase in the history of our country. That's a tremendous number a phenomenal number so these are numbers that are not numbers. Of, the presidents would have. This has been a tremendous success. We've done an incredible job we've done a historic thing likes of which nobody has ever seen before in my opinion. Donald? Trump got to use all the superlatives today talking about the job number, but it's important to look deeper into those numbers. CNBC points out one big contributor to the decline in the jobless rate was those returning to work from temporary layoffs? This comes as a new report from the Congressional Budget Office that says the unemployment rate is expected to stay above pre pandemic levels through. Through the end of twenty thirty worth US more, we welcome to the broadcast policeman senior economics reporter with our sister network CNBC. In an old friend of Mine Steve. Great to see you. Thank you for being with us. I mean it kind of was humor listening to the president as I said us all the superlatives, because there's a big piece of context here these are. These are jobs in many cases that people were not working at. As opposed to the creation of new jobs. These aren't jobs created and what the president has missing. There is the historic job losses that happened just a couple of months ago. That were multiples of the jobs that have been brought back in fact alley. I think the best way to think about this. As it was really a bittersweet number, the president was right. It was several times. It was just about double the expectation for point million. It was indeed a record, but let's just do the math. We've lost twenty two million jobs since the corona virus hit the US economy. We brought back seven. Seven and a half million, so everybody can do the math at home. That's fourteen and a half. Million jobs still not return. We brought back about a third. It's a bit quicker, but the other bittersweet part about this thing Ali is that with these renewed shutdowns? You have two things going on. You could have businesses that have shut down and won't we open now? Because of these new infections, but you have businesses that didn't even close before because those places were not affected by the virus, and those workers unfortunately could join the ranks of the unemployed. Let's talk about the more important thing that people like you. And I think about, and that is structurally what has happened to the job market? How much has been destroyed? That won't come back when we return to some version of normal the the the the congressional. Budget Office talks about not getting back to these particularly low unemployment rates that we were at before coronavirus until twenty thirty. That seems uniquely pessimistic, a lot of people talking about two to three to four years. How what does that look like long term return to normal? The best forecast I've seen have been my two or three years. I think that the CBO is extremely pessimistic. But we're looking for Ali is something that economists are now calling scarring in other words we've we had a lot of people. Go on temporarily. A lot will come back, but for some of these places the business may not be there anymore. The job may not be there anymore. On the plus side, there may be new jobs if people continue to get more stuff online rather than in retail stores, but. But some of those retail stores they may never reopened some of the restaurants. They can't survive at fifty percent capacity until we go back to one hundred percents of there's going to be scarring the economy. The extent of which I think the CBO may be too pessimistic, but the idea that we're going back to the way. It was a couple months ago. In short, order is almost certainly to optimistic. Stevens. I know it's something you think about it. Because I know you talked about it a lot of CNBC. How do you reconcile the record stock market performance? We're in very strong territory of Martian popped into earth and looked at the stock market. They'd say all our problems are over. Well it's something that you know. If I had another eyebrow I'd raise that up, but and if I could raise them higher than my forehead. I would do that, too. It's a curious thing to watch. There is an awful lot of the liquidity from the Federal Reserve. In the system. Interest rates are very low. If you're looking to have a return on your money, you can't do it in the charter market. You've gotta go into stocks I think that's one thing. I think there's a belief among some among many investors right now that the economy will return something normal in short order in a six month or one year timeframe. So I think those two things kind of combine the other thing Ali is if you look certain stocks have done very well and pushed up these indices, but some of the stocks and some of the industries that we've been talking about. Have not done well ahead of not come back, so so the market is correctly I. think discounting that and this changed economy that we're gonNA half example with the airline. Airline, so it is curious to watch this market think that things are going to get better as quickly as I think. The market's a little bit optimistic when it comes to discounting the uncertainty of this virus, and as you know Ali, the Fed has been all over this idea saying, wait a second. We don't know if this thing's GonNa come back and I think they've been proven right on that score.
Former GOP candidate Herman Cain hospitalized with COVID-19
"12 GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain is being treated for the Corona virus at an Atlanta area hospital. That's according to a statement posted on his Twitter account on Thursday. It's not clear where Cain was infected. The 74 year old was hospitalized less than two weeks after attending President Donald Trump's campaign rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma. The statement says. Cain was hospitalized Wednesday after he developed serious symptoms, but he is awake and alert. The former pizza company executive, had been an outspoken backer of the president and was named by the campaign as a co chair of black voices for Trump.
Jeffrey Epstein confidante Ghislaine Maxwell arrested by the FBI
"Breaking news today. A longtime girlfriend and confidante to Jeffrey Epstein is under arrest in New Hampshire. G. Lane Maxwell is set to appear at the federal courthouse in Concord, New Hampshire. Sometime this afternoon, Maxwell was a girlfriend to Epstein and allegedly served as a sort of conduit for Epstein to sexually assault Young girls, the U. S attorney for the Southern District of New York a short time ago, laying out Maxwell's alleged roles played a critical role in helping everything to identify a friend and groom minor victims for abuse. In some cases, Maxwell participated in the abuse herself. Epstein committed suicide last year is he was facing a number of federal sex abuse charges. Now, Both Epstein and Maxwell had high connections. They were known to socialize with people in high places of power around the world, including Bill Clinton and Donald Trump before he was an office and even some members of the Royal Party of England, Of course. Maxwell last year was also believed to be staying under the radar in Manchester by the sea locally. Some neighbors say she was there. Briefly. Nevertheless, she is now under
Appeals court lifts restraint against Trump book publisher
"There's a prominent a new chapter face in on the fox legal drama news will be over disappearing a tell all from the book network by president Donald trump's ed niece ed Henry to the list of prominent a day men after who have a lost judge put their a jobs temporary after restraining an investigation order on of publisher sexual misconduct Simon and Schuster at work to the network hold off says on Mary it has trump's fired book about the daytime her uncle news president anchor Donald after Trump looking another into a court complaint that has he got a week lifted ago that about restraining the alleged order misconduct at issue in the ruling fox is says whether it hired Mary an outside trump had investigator a confidentiality and based agreement on the results not of that to probe spill the beans Henry about family was fired matters the in network an opinion is not providing supporting details the ruling of the the appellate complaint court that resulted says while in Henry's parties being are let free go to enter only to such say agreements that it took place the courts quote are years not ago necessarily his obliged lawyer denies to the allegations enforce them and says her the client judge writing is confident the opinion added that that he any will be legitimate vindicated public of the claims interest against in trump him family Henry business had been the co may anchor be higher of the fox now show because America's trump is president newsroom and which is seeking at from nine re election AM to noon the book on weekdays too much and never I'm enough Oscar wells Gabriel how my family created the world's most dangerous man is due in stores July twenty eighth I'm Oscar wells Gabriel
Biden Takes Lead Over Trump in 2020 Presidential Poll
"Election Day is still more than four months away an eternity in American politics. And yet every major poll indicating Democrat Joe Biden is currently ahead. His voters consider another four years of Donald Trump or a change in the White House. What is this campaign all about? Jerry Side executive Washington headed for the Wall Street Journal says the candidate of change this time is actually the incumbent. The person in this race is going Try. Hardest to be the change agent is actually going to be the incumbent. Ironically, Donald Trump more of our
Poll: About 7 in 10 white evangelicals approve of Trump
"A new poll shows about seven in ten white evangelicals approval president trump a new survey from the nonpartisan pew research center shows about seven in ten white evangelical Protestants approve of how president Donald Trump is handling his job that's support from a cornerstone of his political base has remained strong following a polarizing church visit any Supreme Court ruling on LGBT discrimination that disheartened some conservatives trump seventy two percent approval among white evangelicals in June represents a fall of six percentage points since a similar survey two months ago the survey's findings are in line with the ball in his general approval among all Americans which declined from forty four percent in April to thirty nine percent in June I'm Walter Ratliff
"donald trump" Discussed on The Signal
"Off. The back of that. You have this admission on Monday. Right that from the president himself he has been taking this anti-malaria drug as a as a covert nineteen preventative measure. What exactly did the president say and given that context? What do you think was the motivation for saying? It is so let's stipulate that it's a claim we don't actually know if the president is taking the drug in easy getting lost that he that he just he's actually not taking it. Well you know this conversation with reporters and he said well actually actually. I'm taking it and so far. It's so far so good When reporters pressed him on it he doubled down and said he discussed it with the White House. Doctor White House Doctor. Subsequently released a letter Very carefully worded. That did not say the president in prescribed Hydroxy Corcoran. The letter said that It had been discussed with him so we don't actually know and it may not matter it except that it's again an example just like seizing on the drug in the first place in a month ago. It's an example of the president. Who's very skilled at distraction? And in a lot of the things I think. Donald Trump is not given sufficient credit for is his real cunning and crafty instinct. Unlike anything I've ever seen in politics whenever he is accused of something wild in outrageous he finds a way to embrace it and claim it. And say what's the problem here? That's exactly what he no has done with I observe this behavior as an elaborate and quite bold deflections technique. What is he trying to deflect attention away from think there's there's deflections and then there's assertion that deflection is from the mounting pile of evidence of the corruption of the basic scientific public health apparatus of the United States? But the thing the president is trying to do what she's done in other ways is to weaponize this disagreement with the CDC as yet another episode in an ongoing culture war. This is a president who has spat in face of scientists before on issues like climate change. This is a president who has made a career out of being an anti intellectual and attacking establishment news media. And so on. It's a way of continuing this campaign of anti intellectualism of polarization of making seemingly apolitical and neutral issues into symbols of a big cultural gap. That can galvanize frankly alienated white. Voters watching people in the media. Talk down a potentially lifesaving medicine because a politician they don't like has endorsed. It is probably the most shameful thing is someone who's done this for twenty years. I've ever seen hydroxy. Chloroquine is a very safe drug. It has been given to tens of millions of individuals in the world since since approval and the media seems to be almost rooting for it not to work. I guess the follow up questionnaires you know. Do you think it's going to work? Well there's a lot that we don't know yet And you know this strategy is sometimes worked for the president and sometime not sometime not I will say that thus far social solidarity has been winning but this president is quite adept at deflecting at keeping himself the center of attention and add at hopelessly confusing public debate by throwing all kinds of false information. This season these are not just the rantings of an out of kilter mind. This is a coherent and consistent strategy by the president designed to convince many voters that the whole game is meaningless and to drive people if not into his campaign to drive them to give up on. Arctic's give up on participation and leave the field clear for highly motivated Republican voters. That's that's the long term gain. And then that plays into this president's idiosyncratic psychology and his a quick fix solution.
"donald trump" Discussed on Worst Year Ever
"If only President Obama would put America First. Well this president is all about making America safe again it no president ever accept Donald Trump ever acted faster so those are fun fun and good fun. Good in great interesting that Powerfully erotic powerfully erotic quotes from the powerfully erotic Jesse watters Complaining ABOUT OBAMA IMPORTING Bola Socialism to America. So this is a bit frustrating. I would say Compared to their reaction now to an actual disaster. That's way worse than what they were talking about again. Very few cases in America during the OPOLE outbreak that we're taking care of variously response reading a headline the US cases. Now top nine hundred and fifty. Oh good twice what I said in the right up California good number panicking officials. Anyone not finished because there's so many more than we know we just don't know because we don't have testing yeah just a quick This is a quick quote from Mr Obama after the fact when it was taken care of and sort of the message that he put forth was actually finding good in the twenty first century. We cannot build moats around our countries. There are no drawbridges to be pulled up. We shouldn't try some worried about bringing the disease to our shores that we had to But then he commented that we had to make the decisions based on fear but on science. You recall October three weeks in which all too often we heard science being ignored in cessation. Just it's just very nice to hear a president listen to science and and like Obama. Well I'm here Netflix. No insane nope Obama anyway. The person that was most upset about a bullet during his period as Robert alluded to was Donald J trump. I think it's it can get a little tiresome. There's a tweet for everything and that's because there's a tweet for everything every single every single every single thing. It's like this whole experience. There were having was written by somebody to drive us. Mad Every single thing in Donald Trump's case for this potato specific instance. There are a hundred tweets for this metered about this so much because again he was so obsessed with Jonathan exactly. So I'm just constant tweets. I know for sure that our leaders are incompetent. Obama just appointed in a bowl czar with zero experience in the medical area and disease control a total joke. I wonder who he referred to today about that President Obama has a major meeting on the NYC bowl outbreak with people flying in from all over the country but decided to play golf. He literally did that yesterday. He's needs to relax. You need to go to the club and shake some hands and relax with his Gulf There's just one more tweet from Donald Trump. Because I think it's perfectly. I forgot to read it quote. Ebola has been confirmed. Nyc with officials frantically trying to find all of the people and things he had contact with Obama's fault a total incompetent We we don't need to read more of them. There are and I'm not exaggerating hundred tweets about this exaggerating so Just a little compare contrast on how an actual like competent administration with a scientifically literate considerate president deals with the situation and what the media does and the reaction and now he for that depressing comparisons. We gotta take a quick break. Yes things that we do for these products that unlike the trump administration.
"donald trump" Discussed on Rubicon: The Impeachment of Donald Trump
"Susan Susan Hennessy. Welcome to Rubicon. Thanks for having me. So we're at a bit of a disadvantage in that. We're recording this episode on Thursday but the key vote on whether we're going to have anything anything like a fair trial in the Senate for Donald Trump's impeachment won't happen until Friday and we may not even know how that vote is going to shake out until it actually happens so for the purposes of this conversation I wanNA focus for the most part on the proposition. Trump and his lawyers have put forth and how Republicans in particular Picula have reacted to it because it bottom Republicans seem prepared to accept it whether there are witnesses or not at eventually. The story ends without sixty seven votes to remove Donald Trump from office. How would you characterize the proposition that that? They're preparing themselves to affirm mm-hmm so nobody ever wants to be considered naive in this town. And so I say this with with a risk of being proven wrong in pretty rapid order. I'm still just refuse to believe that the Senate would actually be willing to not even call John in Bolton as a witness because that would be an expression that impeachment is not a genuine constitutional remedy. It's not a real check on executive give power it's just a raw measurement of how many members of the president's own party sit in the Senate and I think what we're seeing play out right now. I'm is the terrible terrible choice. The Republican senators have created for themselves because on one hand they want to be perceived as you undertaking. A legitimate should image investigation a legitimate trial. Even though they know full well that they intend to quit the president at the end of this and and of course I think something like seventy five percent of Americans say `I I they believe that additional witnesses should be called. I'm but the senators have a really big problem because John Bolton has come out and he's said I have a story to tell and it's really bad and it shatters a lot of the implausible deniability that you've been clinging to an. I'm going to tell that story eventually. I'm gonNA tell it in a book. I'm going to tell it in an interview. This this story is coming out and so what Republican Senators have to decide is do they want to be confronted with that story under oath and then have to actually cast a vote wrote not a furrowed brow in a Senate hallway. Not a disapproving tweet about being gravely concerned but an up or down. Vote on the question of whether or not this is acceptable. Whether or not this tolerable and I think if we get down to it and the balance of fears between between Senate Republicans of being perceived perceived as a not undertaking legitimate investigation versus the consequence of undertakings illegitimate investigation. I think that's the anguish that we're seeing. I'm playing out right now I continue to think I too hope that there will be four senators who realized that this is just not not that this that this impeachment trial simply would not be perceived as legitimate by the American public. If John Bolton doesn't come to testify but for the purposes of this recording. I think that we have to you know we're in the dark for the next twenty four hours As to how this is actually going to play out and by the time people listen to this. That question will be answered one way or another Either we're going to be in a world where John Bolton is going to testify or we're going to be in one where this is all gonna and we're going to figure out what his stories later. I just think that whichever happens. There's one more vote after after that. which is a a a quitter convict and even today? I think I count enough. Republican senators who have essentially said. Even if what Bolton's book is purported to to claim is true. I'm we're just not going to convict trump and so if we just Liba ahead to the assumption that he's acquitted what do you interpret Republicans to be saying by having acquitted him. Does that make sense. Yeah I interpret Republicans to be saying that it is tolerable. Acceptable for the president of the United States is to use the powers of his office to extort a foreign leader into becoming an opposition researcher for his political campaign. I I would say that these senators senators are voting to say that it is acceptable to have a president and in this really goes sort of the core argument. We loud in this book but a president in who does not view the interests of the office of the presidency as in any way distinct from the interests of the occupant that those are completely completely merged in political interest in financial interests. And and this really goes to the heart of trump's vision of the presidency this sense that the purpose of the presidency she is to serve the president and it serves the public only coincidentally or when convenient or as an afterthought and that isn't a question of you've expanding the edges of executive power the ordinary sort of areas in which we're used to debating limits of presidential power it it goes to the very core and it says that the president can use the these really astonishingly Empowering Authority ordeal that the constitution vests in him. I'm for his own purposes and not on behalf of the country and and if that is true and if the Senate is willing to tolerate hollering that that has long term structural ramifications across lots of different axes and and the Senate may may try to sort of kid themselves by saying. Oh No. We're making a very narrow vote about the nature of this form of an impeachable offense or that form. But but this is a blunt instrument you're either impeaching and removing the president has an or you aren't and so they really are fooling themselves if they don't think that the ultimate statements that they're making is. This is acceptable acceptable and they are accepting. I'm glad you brought up John Bolton for this reason because you're a you could in theory imagine a situation in which for plus Republican senators not enough to convict him but enough to say. There's a real problem here get together and say look like we're not going to there's no reason to To to draw this proceeding indefinitely but we acknowledge something terrible happened here and so we're interested in is in. What can we do as legislators power to say okay? We're not going to remove him from office office but we are going to take some steps to make sure that this doesn't become the norm at least in our Party and censoring him. Yo ramping ramping. Up a regular oversight activities and that's just not in the cart. Nobody's even discussing that as an option Which is why I feel like take the emergence of Bolton and and and what we believe we know he is in his book is so revelatory Is like most trump scandal seem to follow this pattern where he and all of the principals deny whatever their alleged to have done outright. Then say it didn't it didn't happen but if it did happen it wouldn't be so bad and then finally I did it and it was awesome and to me what striking about the role. The boat revelations have played is how how quickly they moved us from step two to step three where where Republicans and trump's lawyers have been kinda stuck saying could pro quos normal but even here Democrats Kratz haven't proved that trump ever explicitly linked Ukraine aid to Sham Biden investigations. Bolton's you know book the details of what's in Bolton's book book come out and he says that's bullshit and actually trump did exactly that almost overnight. We we get to trump and everyone around him kinda claiming dictatorial power to cheat in his own election which leaves no space for any kind of intermediate remedy. Does that make sense. I think it does look. I think what has been happening. Is You know the idea that there were there were senators who And you know in good faith were looking at the the record produced by the House and they saw this evidence and some of it was somewhat troubling. And Gosh Gosh it really does look like the president did one investigations into his political opponent. Joe Biden and his son or at least the announcement of those investigations. And Gosh. It really does look like the President United States frozen military aid to Ukraine and then lied about it in an head why he did it from Congress but shucks. I just don't know how we could possibly tie those. It's two things together. which by the way what people like? Kurt Volker attempted to testify to a while. We knew there was this one bad thing happening knew there. Was this other bad thing happening. But you're telling me see these two bad things were actually about the same thing or it's a whole game has been this completely implausible story. That's how these two things were not connected. And here's John Bolton coming forward and saying they're connected and I can testify to what the president actually said putting both of these things in the exact same sentence and what that does is it pops sort of implausible deniability that we've seen so many actors operating an in bad faith and we should acknowledge that they're pretending right it's not that they actually. They're actually stunned by this new revelation. They're pretending because they know that they eventually are going to vote to quit. The president of the United States and so the problem is is that that now requires a pivot right. You can't just say well. Of course it would be incredibly disturbing if the president tied military aid to abusive investigations nations. Something that Lindsey Graham and many others actually said at the outset of the revelations of this scandal you know but we're not going to call a witness before for the Senate who is who is a person who's imposition actually. Tie those two things together. You can't make that argument plausibly. And so instead you have to move into this really astonishing initiative constitutional argument and and really that is the heart of the argument. The heart of the argument is that the president of the United States is allowed to use the powers of his office for any purpose. He'd like so long as he can articulate at least some rationale for why it was in fact on behalf of the public interest even if there's also a corrupt motive present present and it doesn't matter how how implausible or contradicted by the documentary record. That sort of that rationale of why he was doing on behalf of the public might be so long as you can say something and really what we're talking about here is is a completely unconstrained unconstrained executive an executive that does not need to in fear impeachment and removal and the exercise of his office so long as he knows that the Senate is controlled by members. I have his own party so in researching on making the presidency. Were you struck by any historical examples of the presidency. Changing alarming ways but in ways. That didn't didn't ever stick in hindsight we can kind of say. We dodged a bullet entered. Johnson is probably the best example of this so Johnson actually is impeach although not removed. She's the first president to be impeached. And he's sort of trumpy figure right he's He's a demagogue. He've he allies. He you you know. He insults his political opponents. He's actually one of the articles of impeachment is. It's for the way he speaks and sort of his language. I'm in search for for being a little bit like a like a trump rally actually was one of the articles of impeachment and of course for ignoring the log knowing the constraints of the law ignoring ignoring the The legislature as a CO equal branch. And he's impeached. And it's kind of a blip People talk about Johnson now but but just as a negative example for rape kind of president that you don't WanNa be and so you know.
"donald trump" Discussed on Rubicon: The Impeachment of Donald Trump
"It's complicated because in ordinary trial. You're completely right that the prosecutor would say and you will hear evidence that one thing. The prosecutor can't do in a trial title because it's not lawful is to say in the opening statement in front of the grand jury the witnesses already said thus and such and so therefore the guy is guilty because you can't in ordinary trial refer to evidence that was gathered outside of the trial. The whole principle of due process of law is that the evidence has to be brought to bear right there in front of the jury. So that's not what happens in ordinary trial at all the prosecutors here. The house managers had no choice but to do that because they may not have a chance to call any witnesses but they did have more leeway than an ordinary prosecutor would because they can refer freely to all of the evidence that was gathered in front of the House House which you could not do it in a criminal trial. The Way I think about all this is that there are signals the Senate can and has in the past provided to indicate to the public. I guess that the trial outcome ref would reflect impartial. Justice like one is through. Consensus is if if senators agree on the trial rules. One hundred zero like they did in the in the Clinton case. That's a pretty strong indication that the Senate believes it's equipped to to render judgment fairly and another. would be like the completeness of the record you know if the question is has it received or sought all the information it needs to make decisions about guilt. Answer's yes that's a pretty strong indication that the public whether they're happy with the outcome or not should treated treated as legitimate. Yeah you're right and I know what you're saying which is completely true and correct raises a really fascinating question to me which is is given that the Republicans in the Senate no they ninety nine percent likelihood have the votes to vote not to remove Donald Trump from office purpose and given that they could get the legitimacy you're describing by having farrow and agreed upon procedure and then listening to the witnesses and then voting. Why aren't they doing it? I mean that really is a hard question and I don't mean to ask that in some. You know purely rhetorical by saying. Why aren't they doing that? I'm trying to force them into doing it. I'm actually asking a genuine question. What is it that they're so concerned about? I mean if John Bolton testifies and says his worst do we. I really think that that's GONNA move enough senators to change the outcome to get us to a two thirds majority necessary to remove Donald Trump. I would be stunned if that were the case. Yes so I mean. Imagine the worst thing that John Bolton can say yes I went into Donald trump and I told him. This violates national security and it's an impeachable offense and he said to me I don't care you know I wanna get reelected Ima- imagine that that was the testimony. Do we really believe that would get us. Two thirds majority of centers. I kind of don't and so I don't don't really understand at a deep level. Why the Senate majority is taking the risk of the whole trial being seen as illegitimate? Unless you think that the the answer is that they are so committed to the idea that the whole process is illegitimate. They're so committed to Donald Trump's narrative. The whole impeachment is as he keeps on saying a hoax. Folks you know fake that they think there's nothing wrong with doing it their way as a hoax and as a fake and then they'll just say yeah well they did a hoax. We did a hoax. I do think that Jr on a cer- like working on a on a completely different plane that there is something important about trying to get Congress to win in this basic question of whether these people have to testify whether these documents have to be produced in an impeachment that's in part about obstruction of Congress that that whether it has any bearing on how the senators ultimately vote or if senators enters ultimately vote to acquit on charges. Anyway I if this process ends with the obstruction both having been You know Attempted and then be having been successful and see he gets acquitted. Anyway that's just a roadmap for future presidents to engage in wholesale cover-ups like this and I mean maybe that's Maybe that's a kind of argument that that the house managers should be making about. Why testimony is important even though there's already enough to convict But that's one thing that's actually worried me about how what's going to happen if they get to the end of all this they Vote not to hear any more witnesses see anymore documents and then quit and then I have you know in a in a trial that was about obstructing congress in part. That's a great point and I'm also worried about that. You know one thing that I have been saying. All along about the obstruction of Congress articles of impeachment is the reason you know that it was appropriate to impeach the president as if Congress starts impeachment inquiry in the present. stonewalls says. I'M NOT GONNA cooperate in the end. The only remedy left that saves us from a presidency. That's completely above. The law is impeachment. Like that's the only thing you can do if you're the house right you say you're gonNA impeach and and the President says I won't cooperate you know you can't go to the courts and compel it not realistically and frankly it's entirely possible that the courts would've said not our problem impeachment is your soul power. Not Ours is an all you can do is to impeach under those circumstances and if you know the president is then nevertheless. LS Not removed from office. It does send that message as you say that the president can just get away with it. And that's very worrisome. For the basic structure basic structure of our government. Some future presence might not want to be impeached and I will say that. The second article of impeachment was unnecessary from the president's perspective. Active he could have fought the individual witnesses one at a time without announcing in that grand way that he did that he wouldn't cooperate in any way and if he had done that he would have escaped that second article of impeachment. So you know that was I would call that an unforced error. I actually think he was an unforced error that should be attributed it at least in parts of the White House counsel who wrote that letter and signed that letter and who is now defending the president so apparently the president doesn't think it was an error because he's relying on the same guy right now to defend him. That's a separate question. Like why is that. Okay but bottom line there is a serious serious danger that if president think they can get away with two stonewalling that the congress congressional power to impeach will just eroded to nothing. Let's let's wind down on on that point because I think think it's right to say this will be the first time the Senate has used it so power to try impeachment to conceal rather than consider evidence period. Right I think so. Oh Yeah I mean. I can't think of any prior example. Where they're where they're not trying to get witnesses not trying to get more information so just taking it as a given that impeachment supporters and Democrats and you know hopefully a growing list of people as time goes on Talk about it that way and try to leave an asterisk next to this trial l.. What will the consequences for the impeachment? Power be going forward or can we even say anything about that before the next election. We'll as you say. The election is hugely significant and we will interpret events in light of that election after the fact even if there's no good hard scientific reason to think they ought to be so. If trump is not removed from office as seems probable and is then reelected right we end the judgement of history will be boy. Impeachment has completely lost the Umph that historically had you know the idea that you know bill. Clinton's legacy was seriously tainted anted by impeachment. The idea that Richard Nixon resigned rather than being a running the risk of being impeached not just removed but but impeach that will look like a a very faint relic of a of a lost time if on the other hand trump is not convicted and then loses in the election even if he would have lost the election anyway. You know people will say well you see. Impeachment is vindicated. Maybe you weren't able to remove the president from office but the taint of impeachment was so significant that it had an impact on the presidential election. And we'LL WANNA tell ourselves that story because we want to legitimate our existing institutions creaky old constitution. You know two hundred and twenty five plus plus years old and there's a way in which you know no other country in the world still runs its affairs in this way since we enacted our Constitution. France has been through five reboots right Francis on what they call their fifth republic. That's their five point. Oh their version. Five point oh of their constitution at a time that we're still stuck doc with basically the same thing although with you know at the reconstruction amendments added in but when it comes to impeach him. We've got the exact same creaky thing we've already had always had and it's possible that it just doesn't work anymore and that's something that's painful but we need to confront that reality. I want to offer you a close on on a happier. Thought of you have on for for listeners. Or if if there's any sort of optimistic side to how you you see these events playing out well there is. There is because right right now whether you and I are speaking. We're we're in the middle of events and I think you know it's appropriate for us to be honest. I think you've been and I'm trying to be also about the genuine threat to structure of our institutions that exists but we are not speaking right now at a point where those institutions are destroyed. You know the president of United States took actions agency that to my mind at least are clearly at the core of what the framers thought should be impeachable and he was impeached. So in that sense offense. The institution is working correctly as we speak. The institution is working correctly in that impeachment occurred. The trial may insert raised illegitimate the non-removal of the president. If that's what happens in certain ways be a legitimate. They're all these problems they're real. We've been talking about them but it remains possible still that our democratic institutions will be robust enough to save us. You Know Donald Trump could lose the next election and then we will be able to tell ourselves with some credibility we got through it. You know our long national nightmare there will then in some way over. We shouldn't be naive about it. Even if that happens we should go back and look at what we can do better but that is still a possible outcome..
"donald trump" Discussed on Rubicon: The Impeachment of Donald Trump
"The GAO report that you mentioned earlier. You know this finding finding that yeah the military hold violated the law All of that in a political sense is giving an enormous amount of momentum and I think you know whether it'll break the damn on Senate Republicans holding trump accountable. I mean I still people are pretty pessimistic. But the pressure is just like Ruben. Ratcheted up and ratcheted up. I think way more than had none of this come out in the interim from the time that the articles were voted on and then if they had been transmitted right away I think in the space that was created by Polisi holding them back and the amount of shoes that have dropped in the meantime have you know. Put the pressure on you know just made it feel more urgent and I think for the trump administration must make them feel incredibly really nervous. Because I don't think they know when the next shoe will drop. I think they know what shoes could drop because they know exactly what happened. But they don't know when they'll drop in like for example today Robert Hyde who's this Republican who's running running for Congress in Connecticut who was the one who was texting with I love Parnasse about possibly serving Marie Ivanovich in Ukraine. And you know whether or not they were like contemplating depleting a hit on her as it sounds like but that they've both denied sense His house was raided today by the FBI. So like who knows knows what's coming next is is how I see it i. I'm really glad you put it that way. Because you're scoop underscored to me exactly why. The trump administration obstructed congress in the first place in by Republicans particularly the Senate have done have signaled that the desire many of them have to keep as much new information from coming to light as possible but also I think illustrated a lesser disgust. Piece piece of the wisdom of Nancy Pelosi's decision to hang onto the articles for a few weeks Like we we tended to discuss that tactic through the lens of weather. It would force Mitch McConnell till admit defeat in some way or or or whether Senate Republicans individually would come out and say you know I'm I'm GonNa Not Vote for any motion. That doesn't allow us to call witnesses. And so you know now that the trial is getting underway and you know sure ince's of that sort have been made You see a lot of You Know Post Game Analysis of this decision. The policies gambit failed in some sense. But I think that's totally wrong right In part because this this flood of information that's coming out is is so unsettling that it seems like like it will make it very difficult for fifty one republicans to vote to shutdown new factfinding But also so because Pelosi kind of created as window right like that irrespective of what Republicans were going to do with their votes or how they were going to allow the trial to be structured assured the there was just this opening she created for people with information to to come forward right like. There's a strong indication that the Republicans in the Senate are leaning towards not allowing witnesses not allow documents To to come to light so in this limited period that Pelosi created stuff has started to come out Do you see. Do you see it that way or did you see it when you were reporting out your story that this was like an effect of of her having created some sense of uncertainty about when the trial would be allowed to start. I definitely didn't see it when I was reporting my story. I was sort of head down and you know oblivious because it's the holidays I'd his own I don't I'm not can't get in her head so I don't know how much I mean. She certainly didn't know in to some extent what was coming down the pike. I mean in terms of my own reporting I can see. That's for sure the partners I mean left parts had certainly indicated before that I believe if I'm remembering correctly like I'm GonNa Talk to Congress and I'm GONNA turn stuff. He might have already turned some of his documents over. So I think that and everybody's aware that this documentary evidence is out there So it I mean. In retrospect it seems like it was you know a wise move move on her part Trying to think there was something else you said but I'm now Oh I was thinking about how you said about Mitch McConnell and the Republicans like at this point they basically have to you know. New evidence has come forward and it now when they if they don't call witnesses and if they don't subpoenaed documents you know it'll look like they're not acting upon you know new evidence that's come forward that you really need you know. Oh you should be required to investigate and it reminded me you know on the one hand you think. Well they now have to do that like how could they their backs up against the wall but it reminded me as you're you're talking of the cavenaugh hearings and you know new. Witnesses came forward. And you know there was all this pressure to open up the FBI investigation. And they did did the sham process and call today so it's certainly not beneath them to do so do the question. What's the political cost? I I guess of doing it right right. The I mean the the Parnasse case. I'm I'm glad you mentioned it. I think it's like the most irrefutable refutable testament to the withholding the article strategy. Like he didn't his lawyer produce these incredible documents to the impeachment. Investigators and I think they like literally within hours of the House. Vote to refer the articles of impeachment to the Senate so like barely in time to be included in the factual record. And I wasn't aware that that your article had also gotten looped into the same factual records. So it you know the there. There is a quantifiable amount of information. That just was not known and to the impeachment investigators after they voted to impeach trump that became known to them before the trial began. And I think that makes it like fairly irrefutable refutable that the strategy strengthened the case itself completely apart from the question of how Republicans will vote destructor the trial or whether they'll allow allow any of this new information to affect their strong inclination to acquit trump. Did Gao finding. Today I mean I would put it in the same category gory it. It makes it really uncomfortable for the Republicans know violating the impoundment contract was not part of the you know was not an article of impeachment mint. But you now have this independent body saying the trump administration violated the law in connection to this story and you see already today today. Republicans sort of saying well the GAO's not that independent. which is you know? If that's your argument gets a losing argument And or you see them avoiding reporters they. Don't I want to comment on it. It's too it's too awkward And so the I will say from the time that the that the House voted on the articles to to where we are a day right now it is different information environment and it's a different a different political environment. I think for Senate Republicans that were already feeling a little bit uncomfortable up with just like cleaning their hands and making this go away as fast as they could. Yeah I think it was earlier today. Chuck Schumer tweeted something to the effect or said something to the effect of like you know. God Forbid Republicans. You know try to see all this information Render judgment against trump one way or another based on the incomplete record and then after they've already cast their votes to cover up whatever equipped trump the the whole truth comes out and not only have they voted for the cover it but the cover up fails retroactively and I'm watching. At least the Republican publican leadership grapple with this essential question. Like they must be aware now like it's like I think that they probably thought once the House House had voted to impeach trump that they would have a lot more control over the information environment Then they did when the house was running the show and the last two or three weeks have proven that they really don't right like there are still they're still foy they're still leakers. They're still witnesses. There's court cases that are ongoing and And these bombshells will continue to drop like in in the middle of the trial after the trial and so they are actually weighing this basic question. It's not cover up or no cover up it's it's Should we let all this information. Come out at once in the trial and then rip off the band aid and be done with it or let let it all Kinda dribble out slowly after we've already communicated with our votes our intention to to not let the public see this stuff. Yeah I'm two things I think they have to continue to obstruct because on you know I the information that's coming out is so damning and I can only imagine the information information that's being most closely protected like the Blair Duffy emails or whatever. The State Department e mails show are even worse. Like that's why we haven't haven't seen them And that's why you know the witnesses that haven't been allowed to testify Mulvaney. Blair Duffy John Bolton you know they have the worst stories to tell and so I can't imagine they take all right. Actually you know just that we can control. It will let everything come forward because it's You know it's like president. The president shooting someone Fifth Avenue. Like it's all GonNa be right there for us to see I think the other thing. That's a little tricky maybe for Democrats. It's not tricky but on the one hand there is plenty of evidence to explain what happened. between trump and Ukraine. And and you know him soliciting foreign interference in the election on that phone. Call the ties between asking for that investigation to Joe Biden and holding the military aid. The evidence is there that said. Is there more evidence out there absolutely so I think there's like this. Tricky thing that Republicans are also playing on where it's like. Well if you don't have the complete clete picture how on Earth Are you impeaching him. If there's all this stuff that still remains out there then you didn't do due diligence and so both things can be true. You can both have enough. Evidence is to move forward and there can also be plenty of evidence that still being obstructed and I think some of the allegations that Parnasse has raised just raise completely new questions like up until now the physical safety and the circumstances of Maria von riches being removed from Ukraine weren't part of the story really and as the FBI raid today shows the that's a new avenue investing of Investigation that cannot be you know just ignored or forgotten like we. I think the American public has a right to know Whether she was being threatened and back whom and where did it stop. How high up did it go? So a couple thoughts on that one is the this talking with the Republicans really have taken to about how this information coming to light just underscores that the house didn't do a very thorough job in its impeachment. Went totally allies. The point that trump has been impeached for obstructing the inquiry. Right like there's a reason. The House's factual record is incomplete complete and it's almost entirely because donald trump refused to cooperate with the inquiry. And so now he's they're going to have to vote on that article of impeachment and you the logic of what they're saying is that basically they're going to they're going to neuter their own institution and its power to compel executive branch disclosure of information. And I'm not sure for the trial will allow the impeachment managers to confront Senate Republicans with that contradiction that internal contradiction. And I'm curious to see like how how individual Republicans Republicans as a whole grapple with it The second thing is that I you know the the environment is uncertain enough that the White House is preparing for defections or at least is claiming to be preparing for defections on the question of witnesses and documents and trump himself after kind of pretending for awhile to want a fair trial. Trial now says that he might claim executive privilege if witnesses appear normally fights over that are resolved by AH accommodation between Congress and the executive branch or by courts..
"donald trump" Discussed on Rubicon: The Impeachment of Donald Trump
"I have been directed by the House of Representatives to inform the Senate. The House has passed h read seven nine eight a resolution appointing and authorizing managers but the impeachment trial of Don. John John from he has been held accountable. He has been impeached. He's been impeached forever. They can never erase that. There's conventional wisdom in Washington. That goes like this. Nancy Pelosi delayed the start of Donald Trump's impeachment trial for several weeks to four Senate Republicans. Not to rig it. And since it's Mitch. McConnell didn't agree to hear from witnesses or subpoenaed documents that means she lost but the conventional wisdom is wrong. She one to see why imagine policy referred the articles of impeachment right after the House passed them. McConnell could have buried the trial in the Christmas holiday or convenient right after the New Year Senate. Republicans have dismissed the charges or acquitted trump based on the bad faith argument that the house didn't hear from firsthand witnesses. All of whom of course trump ordered not to testify testify instead Pelosi created uncertainty. There'd be no trial until we know whether Republicans plan to engage in a cover-up or not what and that left every Republican senator hounded by a simple question would they allow witnesses or would they block them. McConnell didn't quote quote Unquote Cave but it sure seems like his members did Maine Senator. Susan Collins told reporters on Friday that she's working with a small group of fellow all over Republicans on ensuring witnesses in the trial. I can't imagine that only two witnesses that our democratic colleagues would WANNA call would would be called. Sally should the Senate consider new evidence as part of the impeachment..
"donald trump" Discussed on Rubicon: The Impeachment of Donald Trump
"I am <Speech_Male> not going to depart from <Speech_Male> from <Speech_Male> what past people in <Speech_Male> the <SpeakerChange> Don. <Speech_Female> I just don't know the answer <Speech_Female> <Speech_Female> to the problem <Speech_Female> for Roberts <Speech_Female> on the precedent question <Silence> is that their presence <Speech_Female> both ways <Speech_Female> right there really. Isn't <Speech_Female> anything binding politically <Speech_Female> binding legally <Speech_Female> or or so <Speech_Female> forth on him. That <Speech_Female> two point two <Speech_Female> so <Speech_Female> one question is whether <Speech_Female> he's <Speech_Female> still in sometimes <Speech_Female> we think he does. <Speech_Female> I mean most recently <Speech_Female> gave some speech and he said look <Speech_Female> the <Speech_Female> courts not <Speech_Female> partisan and we should <Speech_Female> think about the court in partisan <Speech_Female> terms. Well <Speech_Female> <Speech_Female> sometimes <Speech_Female> cheese <Speech_Female> we infer <Speech_Female> partisanship and <Speech_Female> and policy <Speech_Female> agendas from the <Speech_Female> chiefs behavior and sometimes <Speech_Female> yeah <Speech_Female> the <Speech_Female> affordable care act vote. <Speech_Female> He clearly seemed <Speech_Female> care about building. A broad <Speech_Female> coalition <SpeakerChange> and <Speech_Female> not being the <Speech_Female> the institution <Speech_Female> that upset <SpeakerChange> the <Speech_Female> the the policy <Speech_Female> status quo. <Speech_Female> So which <Speech_Female> John Roberts is going to <Speech_Female> show up at that <Speech_Female> trial <Speech_Female> could depend as <Speech_Female> you said on the <Speech_Female> the impact of particular <Speech_Female> rulings at a <Speech_Female> time. <Speech_Female> tie-breaking vote of his <Speech_Female> would have <Speech_Female> could be <Speech_Female> doesn't WanNa make himself the story <Speech_Female> but it could <Speech_Female> be. He sees an opportunity <Speech_Female> to plant. Elliot <Speech_Female> straight down the line <Speech_Female> which <Speech_Female> you know. <Speech_Female> Sometimes <Speech_Female> he's got a record of <Speech_Female> having done that so <Speech_Female> I <Speech_Female> think that's why it's difficult <Speech_Female> to game out. <Speech_Female> How the chief? We'll we'll <Speech_Female> see his <SpeakerChange> role <Speech_Male> in these particular <Speech_Male> instances so <Speech_Male> Do you have <Speech_Male> any closing insights <Speech_Male> that you'd like <Speech_Male> Rubicon listeners. <Speech_Male> To hear before <Speech_Male> a <Speech_Male> cut you loose and <Speech_Male> we await the <Speech_Male> start <SpeakerChange> of this trial <Speech_Female> in the coming days. Well <Speech_Female> it just think <Speech_Female> it. I guess <Speech_Female> I'd leave with two <Speech_Female> thoughts. The <Speech_Female> point that there are a <Speech_Female> lot of procedural hypotheticals <Speech_Female> that that <Speech_Female> could happen <Speech_Female> but <Speech_Female> politically. <Speech_Female> It's in the hands <Speech_Female> of a simple majority <Speech_Female> the Senate and <Speech_Female> I think to some degree. <Speech_Female> We're just <Speech_Female> not used <Speech_Female> to seeing majorities <Speech_Female> the Senate <Speech_Female> partisan majorities <Speech_Female> in <SpeakerChange> the Senate. <Speech_Female> Having to take responsibility <Speech_Female> <Speech_Female> for the votes <Speech_Female> they cast because typically <Speech_Female> they duck behind <Speech_Female> super majorities. <Speech_Female> We could do it good. <Speech_Female> It's the other <Speech_Female> party's fault. <Speech_Female> Well <Speech_Female> we'll know who <Speech_Female> to hold accountable <Speech_Female> here this time <Speech_Female> which is somewhat rare <Speech_Female> in the Senate not <Speech_Female> least because they don't do <Speech_Female> anything in the fitted <Speech_Female> anymore <Speech_Female> so for US <Speech_Female> Congress <Speech_Female> watchers. <Speech_Female> Who've Kinda decry <Speech_Female> the fact that the <Speech_Female> Senate is the <Speech_Female> senators don't seem to want <Speech_Female> to be there or <Speech_Female> no one wants to run for I <Speech_Female> know wants to be there <Speech_Music_Female> This <Speech_Music_Female> sort of <SpeakerChange> the spotlight <Speech_Music_Female> <Advertisement> is on them. <Speech_Music_Male> <Advertisement> And <Speech_Music_Male> <Advertisement> <Speech_Music_Male> <Advertisement> that's it for this week <Speech_Music_Male> <Advertisement> by next week. <Speech_Music_Male> <Advertisement> Maybe even before <Speech_Music_Male> <Advertisement> you've listened to this mm-hmm <Speech_Music_Male> <Advertisement> we hope to <Speech_Music_Male> <Advertisement> know what Nancy <SpeakerChange> Pelosi <Speech_Music_Male> <Advertisement> chose to do with the <Speech_Music_Male> articles of impeachment. <Speech_Music_Male> <Advertisement> Send them to <Speech_Music_Male> <Advertisement> the Senate <Speech_Music_Male> <Advertisement> keep them on her desk. <Speech_Music_Male> <Advertisement> Hold them <Speech_Music_Male> <Advertisement> all the house. Subpoenas John <Speech_Music_Male> <Advertisement> Bolton incision <Speech_Music_Male> <Advertisement> will <Speech_Music_Male> <Advertisement> determine when the trial <Speech_Music_Male> <Advertisement> begins and thus <Speech_Music_Male> <Advertisement> what next <Speech_Music_Male> <Advertisement> week's episode will be about. <Speech_Music_Male> <Advertisement> <Speech_Music_Male> <Advertisement> This <Speech_Music_Male> <Advertisement> show is produced by crooked <Speech_Music_Male> <Advertisement> media <Speech_Music_Male> <Advertisement> it's written and hosted by me <Speech_Music_Male> <Advertisement> Brian. Boiler <Speech_Music_Male> <Advertisement> Steven Hoffman <Speech_Music_Male> <Advertisement> is our editor and producer. <Speech_Music_Male> <Advertisement> If you <Speech_Music_Male> <Advertisement> enjoyed this episode <Speech_Music_Male> <Advertisement> please subscribe rate <Speech_Music_Male> <Advertisement> and review US <SpeakerChange> wherever you <Speech_Music_Male> <Advertisement> get your podcasts <Music>
"donald trump" Discussed on Rubicon: The Impeachment of Donald Trump
"The story story of the impeachment as as we sit in it will conceptually it makes the this question for the Senate trial of weather? And when Howard whether to call witnesses it removes it from this. Realm of abstraction to there's John Bolton right and he's ready to go and this isn't this longer hypothetical but that at least so so long as McConnell leader has fifty one votes behind him to think he can defer the question of calling witnesses is then even with a live John Bolton Sam I'm here I'm ready. SPINNEY IT undercuts right. The ability of Pelosi try to use that as leverage keeping. Yeah Mine. She's still holding onto the article. And I mean maybe this is a question posed a constitutional lawyer or whatever but having said you know in his statement. I've weighed The competing you know commands on me. And and I if if I have a subpoena from the Senate Command from the White House to defy. I'm going to honor the subpoena having said that if if House Democrats now want to go to court uh-huh and say to a judge. Tell him to testify in the House. I mean they're gonNA have a very strong argument. It it would it. Would it would Extend You you know. Trump's agony about not getting this acquittal. Vote quickly and seems to me like you would maximize the chances that you actually get John. Bolton's testimony because otherwise you're kind of leaving up to fifty one republicans to decide whether anyone else will testify right. Yeah absolutely but I don't get the sense sense that there's a house democratic appetite for re-opening What Nancy Pelosi Democrats soda with impeachment. Last last month I don't like again we're in the well of legally constitutionally politically may be possible but I don't see the appetite on the Democrat side ride for reopening their investigation which in essence is what that would do although certainly in legal terms. I thought the idea that an individual's the the one to decide which is the hell subpoenas. Seems like Topsy Turvy. Bolton is you know say what you will about him and he's a controversial guy but he he's. He's a smart lawyer. Earlier he presumably would have some argument to make that that things are different in the house and the Senate. I don't know I just. I agree with you that the appetite is there air in the house to do more enquiring more of the impeachment inquiry. I just don't totally understand why. Yeah I I think it's a bit of a well. Let's let's put it this way again. Expect Pelosi to prolong it by keeping the articles. But I do think she. She still has a commitment to her her majority makers those Democrats in swing districts with whom without whom she cannot keep majority in twenty twenty twenty. I think there's implicitly if not explicitly a commitment to them to say look. We're GONNA stay focused on the issues that are gonna get you reelected and reopening the impeachment investigation investigation or really the investigation. Generally just it doesn't seem to be on the top of their list of priorities. Now perhaps that changes but I I don't get the sense that that's where they're headed. Okay so eventually the trial will begin. We think and it's shaping up to pit Republicans who want to conceal and seal information has already come out against Democrats who kind of want it all to come out and you know Mitch. McConnell hasn't even really been shy about saying that he's not a partial jury. He he wants to get this in and out of the Senate's quickly possible. He claims he's gathered fifty one votes to begin the trial but put off questions about witnesses and documents for future votes. So what does the resolution of the standoff look like from a procedural point of view Is going to be one vote in the future on whether to shut. Shut down the fact finding purpose of the trial or will be a series of votes how our viewers at home supposed to interpret what they're watching on. TV relative to this question of new information. So here's what we know and what we we don't know so. There is a set of Senate impeachment rules on the books and that McConnell has committed to the following because he can set aside whether or not he could get rid of them. But he's GonNa follow this set of inherited Rules now those are pretty bare bones. Own Own they tell us things about motions and who has rights. Procedure writes in appeals. And the the things the oaths people take but it doesn't have doesn't flush out of trial so meaning being. It doesn't tell us how long the managers have how long the presence lawyers have to defend what are the order in which we take particularly different types of motions. So this is what McConnell has been saying. I have fifty one votes for a set of procedures to elaborate the at least the opening sequence of events in the trial and of course. That's what the Democrats have tried to narrow in on which say let's make this a fair trial Let's hear from witnesses. who were blocked in the house and so forth? So what does McConnell have in mind here for this open resolution well I it would be a resolution that would have to be approved by a majority as he said. I I have fifty one. He has said what's fair is fair. Let's use that opening resolution from the Clinton impeachment trial twenty years ago and let's use it. Roughly he said for this impeachment trial so devils in the details here we can pull up an open. The first resolution that was the supplemental amount of rules for Clinton in one thousand nine and we can know what they said but the question is are they going to follow that to a T.. So a certain number of days and hours for each side to present and then this is what they voted on and nineteen ninety nine. There will be a motion to dismiss and then also on that original agreement emotion. Shall we call witnesses in the abstract. Basically so that's that in essence seems to be what McConnell connel's saying I have fifty one votes for but we don't know for sure but but it matters right. Is there a motion to dismiss locked in right and and will there be any republicans who are willing to vote with the Democrats not to dismiss the trial right which will be within a week or two probably depending on how this plays out. I don't hear a lot of talk about that. But in that's why presumably impart why McConnell has told Speaker Pelosi I'm not showing my resolution apparently the connell if we believe the stories yesterday stole the White House so I'm not showing you my resolution so we need to see what's in there and we need to see it in part to know. How does that trial play out? Procedurally now having said that the barebones own Senate Rules do allow any senator to really offer a pretty wide range of motions in writing. Send it up to the chief not to Mitch McConnell but to send to the chief who then reads the motion in can rule on it or allow the Senate to rule so damn could call for a witness long before we get right in the middle all of the presentation. So and then. That's the uncertainty. Here will their votes on calling witnesses even before the call has said he wants to have those so so I want to get to to the chief justice's role in this In a minute Before that though you know we set aside questions of whether this investigation is inquiry is analogous enough to the Clinton impeachment to merit using the same rules But if McConnell is committing to something along the lines of the Clinton impeachment process yes there'd be a a vote on a motion to dismiss but if if that motion fails there were witnesses called at at that stage of the Clinton impeachment is. He not locking himself into a situation where he's going to have to say. Oh well now we have to. We have to veer off the Clinton Process for whatever reason he needs to come up with to avoid. Oh you for sure. He's not committed to them. Self anyways not said he all his all his said for his own purposes. Here is well last question. We're going to defer to later. And the Clinton trial they did another resolution was a partisan version that couldn't get Democrats onboard for it but that laid out a very limited depositions of of three witnesses so those questions yet to be determined But it's entirely possible. We'll see those votes occurring during even before McConnell in essence of what I what I think I'm hearing from you is that there is no way for McConnell acting on trump's behalf or whoever's behalf to guarantee not that the trial surfaces new facts without making fifty one of his members vote to say you know John Bolton thanks but no thanks will will they would need to fifty one is everything right. He can't he can't he. Can't deter a vote on an early vote on a motion call a witness unless he's fifty one to shut it down so on the one hand right we're not really used to simple majority Senate's right right. We all say cough was just fifty one yards could do whatever they wanted but holding together those fifty one. He he may be able to do it. But I think there'll be a little dicey when it gets to particular questions About particular witnesses so I see this batted around. Democrats need four votes. If they I wanNA have a fair trial. McConnell can lose two and he gets fifty one what happens if three Republicans but with Democrats on these on these procedural questions witnesses and documents and we get a fifty fifty tie so I just assimilate this democrats stay together and they will seems reasonable especially on the witness questions. Joe Manchin is the was the sort of wild card and he was like. How can I have a trial without exactly exactly so fifty fifty so there are two issues here one of which is the chief but will come come to the chief second the first issue? What exactly is the motion right? Because because it's a motion to dismiss and it's fifty fifty that stalemate and stalemate vote loses so three defections on some types of votes this is a losing position for the Republicans a fifty fifty on a on a motion to dismiss. The motion fails sales. If it's left in John Roberts cannot. Aw this is the first edition so the first conditions it matters if the motion is calling witnesses depends on. Who wants who? Who which side is looking looking for fifty one so the first issue? What exactly is is the motion at play here? The second issue then is if it's a tie. Hi What does chief justice do as presiding officer in this is somewhere between. What's what's politically possible? What's in the chief justice's Head and then what's technically legally president here so we have episodes from the Johnson impeachment trial the nineteenth century where they were to opportunities where the chief justice is decided to vote to break a tie and after each one there was a senate motion to prevent the presiding officer or the chief from breaking ties in both of those failed. However the chief got the message we think in the next two opportunities back in the eighteen sixties? He didn't break ties he would he would strain with help. So there's no well there's no yes or no here they're right. He could decide whether or not he's going to break the tie dye. Can we divine anything precedential about those. Those two votes and Salmon Chase was the name of the right of the chief justice way back in the eighteen hundreds when he voted to break the tie was in furtherance of what we kind of conceive of as like moving the Senate trial closer towards what we imagine a courtroom trial be like was more partisan than that what it was his So that's a good question. Which would require me to bury renos back in the peach record to figure out what it what exactly they were? I don't believe they were as quite consequential as some of the potential titles that we're talking about here but I need to go back and figure out what precisely those were but the the question here is for Robert urge sent a lot of people trying to discern what will be his his incentive or his motives are his goals as presiding officer. And I think the answer is as we probably don't know yeah I I'll be responsible and just game out the okay. I mean He. I imagined he'll feel cross pressured. Because if if he's thinking about how his actions will reflect on the Supreme Court He's GonNa WanNa go with public opinion. which is I think? Clearly on the Democrat side in these is fair trial questions but he's also conservative and a Republican and it's no secret how his old party wants this all work out in the end So that's why I asked about past Intrusions by the Supreme Court justice and impeachments because if the idea is is that when the Supreme Court chief justice intervenes in an impeachment trial He does it to advance the cause of public information Then Robert's can just point to that and save precedent Kinda binds me here..
"donald trump" Discussed on Rubicon: The Impeachment of Donald Trump
"Need I mean what sort of What sort of technique are you envisioning? Are you talking about official stuff. I was just hoping you had an answer. Because because for me the the advantage the edge of this idea of holding onto the articles has nothing to do with holding onto him. If you hold onto them long enough Mitch. McConnell would be thrilled he doesn't have to. I don't have to take tough votes. You need to get the articles over eventually. I I worry about the The information environment in general but particularly at a time when people are tuned out because of the holiday and so I could see uh or real advantage in creating the expectation that you're going to have a trial in early January and then you know house. Democratic leaders say Republicans are insisting that they're going to help trump completed cover up and we're not going to send these articles Over until you know until the whole world watching sees that's what they're trying to do probably Mitch McConnell doesn't care and he gets his fifty one votes for the cover up anyway but then at least you've commandeered the You know the the bully pulpit and you've made clear that that's what's happening so that every Republican votes for the cover-up has to pay the price for it. That's the best I can think of but advertising could be a part of the mix Getting the Democratic Radic presidential candidates involved could be part of a mix mass politics can be part of a mix. I mean there were. There were nationwide impeachment rallies on Tuesday night There should be more in bigger ones Particularly around these key votes where Republicans are going to try to short circuit the trial. I mean that's where that's where I would try to take things if I were in charge of a broad left response to impeach man a- and the thing is on the advertising front in particular it's just baffling that. There's not a much more concerted and targeted advertising effort on this stuff. They should be hammering the shit out of these four or five senators right now. I mean it should have been going on for for weeks. Yeah right yeah I mean look at. This is not an easy situation for Susan Collins and Cory Gardner and and and Thom Tillis and Martha mcsally and then of of course you've got the ones that are actually sort of trying to adopt a principled independence from trump like Romney and I don't know if you would go at them I think that backfires Right and it gives them one of the complications to this. That I've I've heard Democrats talk about is and this is sort of an interesting thing to try and debate and figure out. I don't I don't really have a position on it. Yeah but sometimes if the attacks are to direct it gives them away and it. It almost gives like some of the senators. That are kind of on the knife's research easier way out. It's like when when John McCain voted against repealing the affordable care act it. There was this moment in the in the well. Well of the Senate where where a bunch of Democrats wanted to to applaud or just take a victory lap or whatever before before it was is all said and done and Chuck Schumer Shush them. Because right because you know. I don't agree with every strategic decision. Chuck Schumer's ever made but I think he's so wisely. Then that if you gloat when the when the deciding vote hangs in the balance and and you know John McCain and what the fuck does he care like. Don't do that you know in certain in certain cases You know a direct aggressive attack is not necessarily always the best. But I'm I'm thinking less about how you micro target each individual center and more how you tell America that a vote to acquit without any witnesses equals cover up and I. I can see the ways that I listed but if if there or any other if there are any other ideas I want the people listening to hear them I will I frankly feel a little bit A little bit hopeless about this aspect of it. I think that there's not any kind of meaningful way of pressuring the Senate At this point maybe maybe just making those marginals a little uncomfortable rebel but to me like I just hate to return to this but I think the big picture is what happens after this process. I mean I know that's not exactly satisfying but look. Here's the bottom line right. We've always known that this is going to come down to an election right and right and what's going to matter as weather progressive. Democrats mobilize properly no one really interesting thing. I was talking to the Democratic Sharon Wisconsin and they are cheaper focused right now on knocking on doors in Milwaukee right to them. That's the ballgame knocking on doors in Milwaukee and making connections in rural Wisconsin to keep the margins down for trump. And Right now. Oh that's all they're really thinking about. And so you know. I don't know I hate to say this but all we can do is just make our case. I mean this. A lot of this goes back to the problem that you raised earlier. which is that our gatekeepers are screwed up right? The media gatekeepers of the ones. It's not as one Chuck Schumer. Shush Chesa Shusha's down the partisans on his side in order to create space for the McCain's of the world to do the right thing right the things that actually actually gets them to do the right thing are the gatekeepers and if it again this of course goes back to your original challenge. How do you get the gate for two right? Yeah it's it's a bit of a message right I by the way there's one thing we haven't talked about which I think is really important. It's all these spin off investigations. The Gatien's that are going on right now in the southern district and so forth. Yeah I think that's part of it too is like you. Ideally leave the impeachment inquiry open. You promised to keep it aggressive. You do advertising you micro target the individual senators but you create a the climate of fear among Among Vulnerable Senate Republicans that they don't know what they're voting to cover up and And Yeah I think that's a big part of yeah That's sort of like what I would like to see. The broader Democratic Party Democratic Democratic affiliated brain trust thinking about because otherwise you have this situation where You know the process draws to a close and then maybe there's a cacophony of developments down the line and it's not all part of one story where Republicans covered up trump's crimes only to have the cover-up collapsed on them and now now their votes to quit him. are exposed as a cover up of these things that we've right and the thing about that is that that is actually a message that individual members and senators can carry very effectively. It's not something that maybe you would use pay. Dad's Ed's It's not quite clear how you would say you know Susan Collins had better watch out about what's going to emerge later right but that is really a point that I think senators and House members can make very forcefully and interviews. Not something they should say as often as possible right. I mean to to to draw the affordable care. Act back in the discussion discussion Rivera. Remember when in the last days when they were about to take the final vote on it. Mitch McConnell who was minority leader at the time. What like you gave a press conference where he made sure to strike a very ominous tone? Democrats think that they can put this behind them with by taking this final vote and yeah I just want to be very clear that this is all in front of them. They're gonNA take this threat in. Every every Republican running in the United States is going to remind nine voters. What happened When Democrats pass this bill and and and and a similar sort of like forward-looking messaging it didn't stop the affordable care? Act from from passing right and it might not stop trump from being removed from from office. Certainly won't but it but it would sort of channel the way the news media and voters who are very engaged. Think about everything that happens right and that actually. There's a way to do that. That I think supports your earlier. Point about keeping Democrats on much more institute a On a much more of an institutional war footing in the house right What they should be saying to put those two things together is you may vote? You may run a sham trial now which you hear from no witnesses but let me be clear we are going to get those witnesses. We're going to hear from those witnesses Mrs. We're GONNA fight in court until we hear from them. We're GONNA fight in court until we get his tax returns an and his finances and then what we're going to say is here's what you cover it up right. So I think the aggressive institutional war-footing it forms the underpinning of that kind of message that is the hopeful. Note that I think we we should end on it and I hope that Influential people in the Democratic Party are listening and they follow They Do as Greg just he said Greg Sargent thanks for joining us. Thanks Brian that's it. For this week I won't be back until the New Year but in the meantime I'd encourage everyone listening to keep in mind. How straightforward weird things? Look when you peel away. All the layers of obfuscation trump has been impeached for extorting vulnerable foreign government to interfere in the twenty twenty election on his behalf. The evidence that he's guilty is overwhelming and until he became president. Nobody would have disputed. The what he did is an impeachable offense. There are people out there closer to the president who have even more evidence but trump has ordered them not to testify and they have complied with his order. If their testimony were exculpatory skull Tori Republicans would be desperate to put them on the witness stand. Instead they're desperate to keep that information from ever coming to light that makes them accomplices. That's it that's the story. Tell your friends tell your family and if you representatives or new sources tell you otherwise. Tell them they're using their power to spread lies and that you won't forget. This show is produced by crooked media. It's written and hosted by me Brian. Boiler Steven Hoffman is our producer and editor. If you enjoyed this episode please subscribe rate and review US wherever you get your podcasts..
"donald trump" Discussed on Rubicon: The Impeachment of Donald Trump
"Greg Sargent thanks for coming back on the show. Thanks for having me on Brian. So by the time people listened to this episode. Donald Trump will be impeached beached He will probably be very upset about it But because of the holidays will be in this kind of little phase where the process is still underway. But nothing's is happening If you're vulnerable Senate Republican are you happy about the pause or would you rather get it over with sooner rather than later. Well I think a lot depends on how the break goes right. I mean if they start catching hell in their in their states about from constituents who are who are angry about the potential for a sham. I am process Sham trial. Then I think that they hate to have to wait. I mean it's GonNa be on democratic groups and pro rule of law groups to kick up a lot of fuss during that period and get some pressure on them along those lines. Those of us who supported impeachment from the outset have made the argument that there's this value in doing it even if Republicans are going to make sure that trump's days in office Because the process the forcing Republicans in the House and Senate to take votes it all those votes essentially constitute them his corruption their own. How do you think that proposition looks today? Well I think it looks really good and you can see that very clearly in precisely what Mitch McConnell is doing to try and turn this trial Ryland to a very quick little. Donald Trump was out there and I don't really think we should place much stock in this. But he was out there saying oh I want to turn this into a AH a festival of of baying for Hunter. Biden's head on a platter and Mitch McConnell Essentially shut that down pretty quick and said no and I think as you wrote somewhere Mitch McConnell was saving trump from himself. And doing this as well as saving his own marginal members from long drawn out trial. Point being though that Mitch Inch Mitch. McConnell understands as well as anyone else does that the more facts that are brought into evidence the worse it is for the marginal Republican senators and tough places like Susan Susan Collins and main Martha mcsally and errors in Arizona and so forth. I had direct experience of that earlier this week. I was able to get The video of Susan Collins in Nineteen Ninety nine during the Bill Clinton impeachment trial calling for more witnesses and evidence. I am willing to travel. The road owed wherever it leads whether it's to the conviction or the acquittal of the president but in order to do that I need more evidence. I need witnesses and further evidence to guide me to the right destination to get to the truth and I was surprised that they got back to me. Pretty quick with a quote from Senator herself saying I haven't made the decision on the witness issue in this particular case now. This is only a process question. You'd think thank right but it's a tough process question. Do you want to vote for the cover up or do you want to vote for transparency and truth and The fact that Susan Collins this is struggling with this I think shows that even just going through the motions is tough for them. Yeah I mean it's there's you know multiple all steps here right there's Probably going to be some sort of resolution to establish the ground rules of the trial and then at some point votes on witnesses and then the vote vote on whether to acquit or convict. And it's obviously Mitch McConnell's goal to make sure that the Republicans vote to convict and ideally the Republicans ever have to vote for any witnesses at all so that just that means he's going to try to around fifty one votes to basically basically dismissed the charges Before you even get to place where house. Impeach managers can request or demand Mick Mulvaney or John Bolton testify before the Senate every phase of that process the the cost to Republicans I think becomes higher her but that just means that at the at the early phase you know. Are we going to. Are we going to have a fair trial at all Mitch. McConnell can lose two or three senators give them a free free pass to say I want to hear from witnesses but if you get fifty one votes to dismiss they can say look. I tried tried to vote for A process where Where we heard from witnesses? My colleagues disagreed. So now I have to vote With what we have before us from from the articles articles of impeachment in the presentation of them by by the managers. And I don't think there's enough there to convict so I quit. And thus every Republican Senator Votes votes to acquit. And I. I don't think that that's like a highly unlikely outcome And I guess it just it gets to. It gets to my thinking about like like what more Democrats could do. I obviously votes to cover up Trump's crimes you know say no to any witness testimony are going to be bad for whichever vulnerable. Republicans have to take those votes but you know should Democrats have. I've been beating the drum starting in September that that Republicans need to be committing to a fair trial now should Democrats be withholding unrelated legislation education. Like the Defense Authorization Act or the The NAFTA UPDATE and just saying we're not going to play ball with you on on other things if what you're going to do is complete the cover up. Trump is asking you. Well I just want to return to something you said earlier about the scenario a scenario ruin which Mitch McConnell. Let's to two or so of the marginal senators Make fake noises about wanting a real trial and then still oh passing a quick Acquittal with fifty one or passing the initial steps to the acquittal by essentially getting past the process stuff with fifty one votes I think the calculation there becomes complicated for them right because even if they do that even if Susan Collins and Cory Gardner and Martha mcsally or whichever three you pick are allowed to to sort of make their fake noises. If the whole thing is a sham. It's still bad for Senate Republican. That's true right now. The the because I mean in this era of nationalized voting right everything turns on the national narrative and one really interesting thing will to track will be whether they're those marginal senators privately go to McConnell and say we really need a real We need a real proceeding at least something more or than just a quick fifty one vote now right and if that happens of course then they run more risks in addition right. That's that's really the spot they're in so I mean I guess the in terms of messaging it seems like the thing that Democrats can do that could be most effective. Active is just to continue to spotlight the facts right. I mean look how quickly the debate shifted when Schumer just sent that one letter now. I think there's an argument that that shows. They should have been doing it more more aggressively earlier but it just goes to show you that just one. There's if there's one thing that the press can get right on this stuff it's a cover up or not cover. I'm right right do house. Democrats have any substantive role to play with their own powers Going going forward now that they've passed the articles so I think there's all this talk about them holding onto the impeachment and not sending it over one thing one reason I'm a little skeptical optical of that and I'm happy to be told I'm wrong about this you know there's been a lot of criticism of leadership for doing it too quickly for doing it. Too narrowly and so forth. I was for for a broader impeachment. I would've been happy to have a little longer or somewhat longer but I really wonder whether there's a genuine risk of some of these moderate starting to drop off off if it if it drags on right now. I don't know what happens from the point of view of those moderate members. If you pass the articles through the House the impeachments done and then you hold it. I suspect that they'd still not like that right. Because what they want is for took pushed over to the Senate I mean they want the hot potato out of their exact hands. But I'm going to switch metaphors. There's no such thing as half pregnant with impeachment Schmidt right you can't vote for the resolution that sets the rules of impeachment And then learn all this horrible stuff and then vote against impeachment. Which is why you know you? You have a basically unanimous democratic caucus voting for the articles of impeachment. Having voted for them. If more bad news comes to light about trump nick more evidence that he committed further impeachable offenses comes too late. You don't get to you. Don't save yourself anything by ignoring them. You've already voted for the impeachment. If you're scared the the voters in your district are going to be mad at you for that. It's that that ship has sailed it's overwrite so there's an argument that I think leadership should make to them though like we should press what we have to our fullest advantage and if that means is Holding more hearings damage trump. That's good for all democrats If that means You know holding the articles impeachment in order to make a stink about About the fact that the Senate majority leader has already announced. He wants to read the trial. That's all all to the better like the the the hard part is over the you know they are already You know going to be Identified in ads ads or whatever and Republican campaigns in the fall has members who voted to impeach trump. It's already happened so it reminds me in a weird way of back when Congress was debating the affordable care act and in Democrats were agonizing over whether they should do a public option or not or a national exchange versus a state based health insurance exchange and it was just so beside. The point is like it's obamacare either. You're going to vote for Obamacare or against it so stop agonizing over the little details If you decided that you need to vote for this because it's the right thing to do but you're scared about the political consequences down the line. The picayune details details aren't GonNa be what what causes you problem. It's going to be the vote. Will the votes done. So now. Just you know. Make the most of it That's sort of how I see it I I guess. I'm curious for your thoughts on that. Well I just want to try and step back and and raise a bigger point about all of this. I think we're almost pinning too much on some of this process stuff we know he's getting acquitted. Right we know that's going to happen. Okay we would like there to be a trial that's real. I think we don't know whether even if that happened. How much we would get from Bolton and Mulvaney although I would love to see it tried right so I don't? I don't know that that we can actually expect too much of a range of options at the end of this chapter right here right to me what I think really matters. There's more as what happens after the impeachment on the equival. Right if the Democrats continue to prosecute this stuff in court if they try to you know get testimony from people. Oh and by the way to go back to the point you raised before the possibility of other things breaking. You know. There's this I think there's a sort of illusion out there that this ends with trump's trump's acquittal right it doesn't I mean all these Republicans who vote no on the articles in the House and all the Republicans who vote to acquit. The Senate and. I think it's almost certainly going to be near unanimous in both right. Yeah what really is going to end up mattering over the long. Longterm is what comes out after and I think there's a extremely good chance we're GONNA get incredibly big revelations down the line that are at least as bad as the ones we already know the trial unless something unexpected happens and who knows maybe by the time you listen to this We'll be in a very different place but the trials probably going to start Artan early January. So we're talking a couple of weeks to To communicate to as much of the country as possible that Senate Republicans are going to try to short circuit witness testimony to complete a cover up for Donald Trump. How do you get the message out there? If you're the Democratic Party you know everyone's going to scatter the four To the four winds in and people are going to be with their families on Christmas and new years. And how do you. How out of you before before Mitch? McConnell manages to get that vote done. How do you get the word out in this environment on the short timeframe well? I don't really have an answer to that and I don't think anybody does right. I mean the information environment is really screwed up right now unless you're running official proceedings. You can't really get the sort of punch that you need..
"donald trump" Discussed on Rubicon: The Impeachment of Donald Trump
"We need to show that they can get things done in Washington but if you if you if you draw the like that like the fallacy is pretty obvious there right okay. So why don't they just pass everything that Donald Trump wants. It'll prove that they can get things done. Of course that means Donald Trump will become more popular and suddenly their ability to hold on to their districts. Democrats ability to hold the House Democrats ability to beat trump in the election and starts deteriorating right so like at some level down to how much of an emergency do you think we're in right and the frustration. Is that Pelosi and some of these other Democrats crats are not treating this like it's sufficient emergency right. It's an it is to my mind and emergency that overrides. All other policy goals right. We have eleven eleven months to decide whether we're going to continue to be a liberal democracy or not and whether or not you got a better deal in prescription drug prices the prescription drug prices are really important. But they're actually not as important as that. Yeah so I I actually think about this in almost the exact same way is that if Democrats rats are going to like cut if they're going to quote cut deals with trump They really ought to be a one shot deal. You're not gonNA have a second. The second chance to to get this done. That really advanced the ball on some progressive goal and They should also be issues issues. Sort of code as a Democratic Party issues so like I traced out a hypothetical that if trump were willing to pair a big minimum wage hike. Fifteen dollars minimum wage. Whatever in order to get this trade deal done like I'd probably get there? I think that that ends. You know you you get so much out of it that it might be worth it. And it's clear that trump gave some to get some and so it's not just a a straight victory for him but if you don't have that kind of You know situation at hand If the benefits are marginal or if you think that future Democratic president can do as well or better than you just don't do it right like this is not cutting the same trade deal with Mitt Romney it would be totally unremarkable of Democrats. were making this deal with Mitt Romney But in a world with democracy under threat and the US president is the single biggest part of that threat then handing him easily spun on victories. That validate key parts of his message. Seems like such an obvious mistake that I'm kind of stunned and I WANNA go back to this idea of despair that I was talking about about earlier because you know it's it's obviously not just me right. I mean I wrote this thing because I had this sort of ambien sense that it was happening The reaction to it was has got a ton of feedback from other people who are feeling the same thing. Recently I started reaching out to therapists to talk to them about what their patients are saying about trump I lasted this in the run up to the election I started talking to therapists about patients who had a lot of anxiety that trump would win the election. It's kind of heartbreaking. Because one way that they helped them manage that anxiety was to help them. See how unlikely that possibility was. She's obviously not possible anymore. Right so I've been talking to therapists pissed. You know in in blue parts of the country but who say that trump comes up in almost for some of them. Trump comes up in almost every session right and and I was just talking to somebody this morning. Who was telling me that She feels like people have moved from the state of hyper Hyper vigilance to a state of despair and that despair is I mean. It's dangerous for them but it's dangerous for all of us. We cannot ah go into election with are people feeling that By the way she was saying that some of the people that she treats they're having the hardest time with what's happening are are Holocaust survivors. And so I think that our people the people who are going to hopefully have a chance to save democracy In eleven months. They need to feel like they have a champion. They need to feel like there's somebody who recognizes the scale of the emergency who recognizes is. How terrified they are and who can stand up for them and inasmuch as we have everybody focused on this little tiny demographic slivers hours of these front-line districts? I don't think we have that and I think it's it's really really dangerous before wrapping it up. I did want to talk to little bit about the trial. What you anticipate it looking like stipulating that Sitting here we don't think that there's anywhere close to twenty the republican votes to remove him. What do you think it looks like? Are you concerned about these murmurings among moderate Democrats. They might prefer censure rather than impeachment. Of course I'm concerned terrified and I mean it's it's it's so self defeating it makes it makes my head want to explode. I mean I cannot fathom why they think that kind of getting to this point and then let essentially leading donald trump off the hook would be You know an a good idea not just for a good for the country but ultimately a good idea for them but the other thing that concerns me about the Senate trial With Bill Clinton's Senate trial. I think there was three witnesses called. I would be surprised if there's even that many I mean from what I've read there's you know there's trump who wants to turn it into a big circus and try to call hundred Biden and try to call all these other people in some sense. I feel like that would be the better situation for Democrats. Go find you call Hunter Biden but we're also calling Rudolph Giuliani and we're also calling. You know life partners and all these other figures a trial in which kind of nobody's but he's called and it's just kind of a bunch of Senate floor speeches seems really anticlimactic all right. Let's leave it there. Michelle Goldberg. Thanks for joining us. Thanks for having me. That's it for this week. By next week's episode. The impeachment of Donald Trump should be complete and we will be awaiting the trial of Donald Donald Trump in the United States senate. That trial probably won't begin until January But that doesn't mean everything will be on hold until then there's another transcript out there. The Democrats want to see this one between Ukrainian President Vladimir's Alinsky and vice president. Mike pence so the chase is on for that will also likely learn whether and when the supreme cream court will hear arguments over president. Trump's challenges to all these subpoenas of his financial records and one silver lining of a narrow impeachment investigation.
"donald trump" Discussed on Rubicon: The Impeachment of Donald Trump
"Some of you on this committee appear to believe Russia and its security services did not conduct campaign against our country and that perhaps Somehow for some reason you credit. This is a fictional narrative that has been perpetrated and propagated by Russian security services themselves. And there's a story about impeachment that goes like this. Democrats moved to impeach Donald Trump two months ago because unlike the Russia scandal the Ukraine scandal is simple easy for the public to understand if you've heard that story before you may have heard this one that actually there are no distinct Russia and Ukraine scandals. There's just one scandal through two weeks of impeachment hearings. We learned a lot about the Ukraine backstory. The hoops president trump and his subordinates jumped through before he hopped on the phone with his Ukrainian counterpart Vladimir Zelinski. And said. I would like you to do us a favor though but what the hearings left fairly murky is how and when trump came to view the allied government of Ukraine as a target for and partner in corruption. It's not as though trump had a normal relationship with Ukraine before he became nervous about the twenty twenty election and then pick Zelinski is name out of a hat to understand how we got here. We have to go back to the beginning long before Donald Trump became president. You were reportedly the closest political geyser American Political Adviser to victory on a coach of Ukraine. Frayne who is a close ally Vladimir Putin Russia. If you're listening I hope you're able to find the thirty thousand emails that are missing being. There's been some controversy about something in the Republican Party Platform. That essentially changed. The Republican Party's views when it comes to I Ukraine. How much influence did you have on changing that language? Sir I had none in fact I didn't even hear of it until after I convention was over. Where did it come from then because everybody on the platform committee had said it came from the trump campaign if not you and frankly that whole part of the world is a mess under Obama the people of Crimea me up from what I've heard would rather be with Russia than where they were? Let's talk about this new reporting from the New York Times this morning about Paul Manafort and his dealings in The Ukraine with Viktor Yanukovych. He was a consultant for Victor Yanukovych and apparently the times and investigators have gone back and found these handwritten ledgers breaking news. Here more changes at the very top of the trump campaign. I'm told that this morning. His Campaign Chairman Paul Manafort offered and Donald Trump accepted his resignation. Paul Manafort joined the trump campaign in March of twenty sixteen around the time. The campaign came came to learn that Russia intended to leak dirt had stolen from Democrats at the time. Manafort was deeply in debt to a modeling Russian billionaire named Oleg Der Pasta and yet he agreed to work for trump pro bono. By that point trump had already made a big bazaar showing his admiration for Vladimir Putin but Manafort's unexpected arrival on the scene brought someone who had been at the center of the struggle between Russia and the West over the future of Ukraine into the heart of the trump operation seven and he was firmly on Russia's side between trump's deference to Putin and Manafort's lasting influence trump's relationship with Ukraine crane has never really been on the level last year. The Ukrainian government froze all of its ongoing investigations of manafort including its cooperation. With special counsel. Counsel Robert Muller in an Echo of the current extortion scandal Ukraine took that action just as the US finalized the sale of Javelin missiles to strengthen Ukraine's hand in. It's hot war with Russia. The country's president time was pets report. SHANECO who was once a client of you guessed it Paul Manafort and pour a Shaneco who's going to manufacture dirt on trump's political enemies until he unexpectedly lost the presidency to an anti corruption. Political reformer named Vladimir's Alinsky Alinsky or consider the Russian conspiracy theories that Rudy Giuliani pedaled on trump's behalf about the Biden's and Ukrainian interference in the two thousand sixteen election election. The became the subject of the trump Zielinski call on July twenty fifth. Giuliani pluck those from Russian aligned. Ukrainian oligarch named Dmitri for Tush. who was once business partners with again Paul Manafort and where did for Tosh get those conspiracy theories we'll probably from any number of places but the vector who imported that disinformation into the United States needs no introduction metaphors former or deputy Rick Gates has testified that manafort began pushing it starting before the twenty sixteen election? So this question. Why did trump takes such a predatory Oy posture with the new government of Ukraine? The short answer is simple. He wanted to cheat in the election but why pick on Ukraine in the first place that is part of a much longer story. My guest. This week is frank four. He's written extensively about Manafort and Ukraine in the Atlantic Manic. We'll look back at the origins of the Ukraine scandal and how they disappear into a larger story of corruption Russian election interference and the two thousand sixteen election. I'm Brian Butler. And this is Rubicon. frank thanks for being here pleasure So for a while. Now I've thought that the best way to kind of place. The Ukraine scandal in the wider constellation of trump's corruption is to just try to answer the question. How did the Ukraine scandal start? Because when I tried to pinpoint an origin I realized that the DOTS actually extend way into the past and it didn't just begin at random in May of this year when trump I had a freak out about about his standing in the election and having to run against Joe Biden. So how is he as you understand it. Did the Ukraine scandals start so I go back to this core question that critics have always asked about Donald Trump which is is this guy vulnerable to foreign manipulation and and people ask that question because of the wide array of properties that he owned around the world and the way that his business interests were tangled up in places where you authoritarian governments who just weren't abiding by the same sorts standards that that we abide by it. So I think you kind of have to go go back and look at the long history of people from the former Soviet Union trying to manipulate trump in various area sorts of ways and some of the relation is is willing and trump is fully aware of. What's happened a lot of it is subconscious and I think when you have oligarchs from Russia or Ukraine they look at trump and they say oh? This guy is a totally familiar figure. We understand how his mind works. We understand how he can be. He can be influenced and so people were using various channels to try to to sway way Donald Trump. And you know I think the first time. We really started to acutely conceptualize what was happening. I think is with the Manafort Fort Scandal where you said. This guy came from came from Ukraine. He was working for the Pro Russian party. Why was he why did he descended on the trump campaign? But I look all the way through and I see I see you have oligarchs In Ukraine rain who have constantly been trying to figure out. What's the right channel? Is it the campaign chairman. Is it the personal lawyer They're hiring Fox. News commentators as their lawyers are getting columns placed in the hill by by columnist who they can pretty well be sure is going going to end up in Donald Trump's twitter feed and so there's also the sense of they know exactly how to rile him up. It's a look at that Ukraine scandal. You know the the the narrow question that shift is focus on is. was there a quid pro quo. Was He trying to extort Ukrainians wins in order to get dirt on his political opponent. But I look at it and I say if I look at the transcripts now look at the whole narrative of the scandal. I'd say the president was very actively in successfully manipulated by bad actors in this part of the world who who were very very successful in shifting the foreign policy of the United States to suit their aims. I'm glad you put it that way because you listeners. who heard the INTRO Will suspect that I think Paul Manafort is a big part of the origin story of the of Ukraine scandal. And I definitely believe that but there are these episodes is it. Don't quite fit the picture right like after After trump's been elected and MANAFORT's no longer in the in the middle of trump world. There's there's this story about this Ukraine peace plan right that that makes its way to Mike. Flynn who was then the national security adviser but it doesn't come from manafort directly comes uh-huh maybe not for Manafort at all. It comes from Michael Cohen and and Felix Seder. who were You know in league with the same same sort of shady people that you just described but on a sort of a different channel and even I wonder you know and I'm pretty pretty thick and all this like how critical critical Manafort is to the story. Because if you imagined he'd like never worked for trump Trump was still very much in Russia's debt When the election and ended He was singing Putin's praises long before Manafort joined the campaign. He was working on the Moscow. Tower project independently Manafort and and. It seems conceivable to me that we were always going to end up here. Because Russia help trump win and Russia's leverage over trump and so trump was going to side with the store corrupt factions actions in Ukraine rather than the pro-western reformers. No matter what I think. That's I think this would happen absent. Paul Manafort because you you have a lot of people in so I think that the the actually the crucial thing is the development of the relationship between Ukraine in the United States. It's and I'm just GONNA. I think this is a foreign policy story in addition to being a corruption story which is that Russia is a revolution in Ukraine in two thousand fourteen. The PRO Russian government. The Paul Manafort works for gets swept out of power they get replaced by By by a more liberal democratic regime albeit still oligarch kick and the United States starts spending a lot of money protecting Ukraine and that gives us leverage over Ukraine. So you have somebody. He like Ambassador Marie Ivanovich who's in Ukraine. All American ambassadors always wanted Ukraine to behave in a less corrupt sort of way they've always wanted presidents to challenge Ukraine's oligarchy system. But finally we had all this leverage over the government and the government starts taking actions to clean clean itself up and so you got a lot of oligarchs who were suddenly very much on the defensive. Paul Manafort's clients were on the defensive. You've Rudy Giuliani's kind of new clients and the people that he collaborated with in this extortion scheme were suddenly on the defensive and and so they needed to find a way to undermine the US embassy in Kiev and so they see that Donald Trump was a guy who they could manipulate into doing their bidding. They're and they're the way that they were able to entice. Donald trump to their side was to feed him a lot of bogus. This conspiracy theories that he bought into because they were They all adopted the kind of the memes of Donald Trump. They there were arguments about the deep state. They were arguments about how he was. His opponents. Were manipulating things that were arguments about. How Ukraine was the one manipulating the election? Not Russia and so they knew how they knew how to to to to to go him they knew his psyche..
"donald trump" Discussed on Rubicon: The Impeachment of Donald Trump
"Jurassic. We'll discuss the dots left unconnected by the impeachment been increased so far and what we risked by not connecting them. I'm Brian Butler Quinta Jurassic. Thanks for being here. Thanks for having me so I guess. Let's just start with your global assessment of the impeachment process as it stands in specifically what you thought when you read Gordon. Silence is opening statement and then he washed his hearing and all of the revelations that came out of that Schorr. Well I remember seeing someone roads In the morning before silence hearing that it wasn't going to be very notable unless he went full semi the ball. Sammy the bull vulgar. No the famous mafia figure who flips turned on the Mafia gave testimony against them. And I think it's fair to say that he went full Sammy the He really turned on a dime from what he'd said during his testimony which there plenty of questions about that but he was was incredibly damning what he said about the extent to which everyone was in the loop I think was the exact phrase and that really just knocks down defense after defense after defense the Republicans had been road testing. She wrote a piece for the Atlantic earlier. This month about how it's folly. To assume career government officials will save us from the threat the trump and his supporters pose to democracy and the piece itself off is about I about Robert Muller and later about the diplomats Who testified at the first impeachment? Hearings I wonder how Fiona Hill's testimony that that ended search just before we record this fits into your view of that so my argument and the piece was that the first two civil servants who testified instantly kind of became name of online George Kent had the bow tie. Hi Bill Taylor had this great Walter cronkite voice and they sort of came forward as the voices of almost authority from a different time I'm of you know America Apple Pie and that's really appealing right now. In a sort of the bleak period in which we're living and the danger is that those civil servants are not there to be heroes. They're there to do their jobs. which actually Taylor in Kent kept saying over and over again? You know. I'm I'm nonpartisan. I'm telling you what I know. I've been called to testify and I felt it was my duty. I don't WanNa be here with Fiona Hill. She's a little bit differently differently. Situated than Kent in that she's technically was a political appointee in this administration but I think she does speak to that kind of ethos of public public service in the in the way that she was testifying and in the same way as you saw Taylor can't allow a lot of people right now. Said you know Fiona Hill Forever Fianna Hell Fan the club. You know I've been self you and a hill twenty twenty. It's like no there. Yeah right she unfortunately cannot run for president And there's a similar dynamic. There is the one that I I saw with Kenton Taylor. To that Fiona Hills job was to work in the National Security Council in Europe and Russia matters and her job now as she sees it as clearly to come before Congress and tell Congress what she knows she kept emphasizing again and again. I'm a fact witness. This is my purpose but she's not going to ride in and save the day and what I mean by that specifically is that she's actually she's she's been an incredible witness Just in terms of I mean her own performance. He's given these amazing speeches but however many speeches she gives they're not going to break through to the gym Jordan's of the world and so does it help the Democrats and the impeachment. The effort that they have this amazing witness Fiona Hill that she tells a clear story that matches up with everyone else's strobe -solutely but it's not going to solve the problem that you know at the end of the day Jim Jordan and Devin nunes are still going to be up there yelling about the steele dossier. So I've been struck a few times as the impeachment process. This is unfolded by so the flip side of this like th. They don't have a magic ability to convince Jim Jordan and they might not even feel like It it's their role all to involve themselves beyond whatever legal obligation to Congress is by how this process has revealed. How these conspiracies can fester and develop even as people of genuine integrity witness them unfolding get folded into them and they're still kind of no way for them to to do what we might imagine? The heroic thing is right like I think a Bill Taylor first and foremost in this. Because he knew something was up and he could resign Zayn and he could have blown the whistle but he worked through proper channels to try to stop the conspiracy from taking effect and he tried to help the people of Ukraine and yet from from his perspective. He prevailed right like the. The Republicans are so fond of noting that quid pro quo was never fully consummated and having succeeded why would he then speak up. Lose his post throw the Ukrainians that he clearly cares about to the very wolves he just save. Save Them From and so if it hadn't been for the impeachment process I don't think he would've ever said anything about this and then separately. There's this really dramatic matic testimony from Fiona Hill that we clipped played in the intro. A big part of what I think she was talking about. There was perception right from her perspective. There was this sort of wrong but limited meddling happening in Ukraine policy but then from Gordon silence perspective he was just carrying out policy what he believed the US policy to be and so the whole notion of conspiracy is kind of the wrong language for either of them to describe what's happening and so there's nothing thank really for either of them to do to alert the public right and so it's not just the bureaucrats can't save us because they can convince the broader public or they can't Stop Stop Republicans From acting in their own political interests but they can't save us because sometimes they just can't see that there's anything to save us from they have equities to protect attacked or they're just kind of in the fog of it and blind to all the dimensions of what they're living room. Does that make sense. I think the the best example of someone who's who's struck in the fog seems to have been Kurt Volker and in saying this I'm drawing not only on Volker's own testimony which seemed to me like he may have I've been trying to intentionally obfuscate his understanding of what was going on but The testimony of others including can't Ann Taylor who kind of indicated that they felt Volker may have been drawn a little too far in that. They didn't question his motives but that he was thinking a little too much. Sort of tactically step-by-step. How do I mitigate harm and that lost the sense of when you take a step back? This is really something wrong. That's happening and in that way. Volker is actually a really good example I think of the sort of the corruption of Donald Trump right the the way that people kind of get sucked in and and lose their perspective regarding the other people involved. Here you know Taylor Kent Hill would. Would we be hearing from any of these people. If the whistle blower complaint hadn't been filed. I don't know and I agree. It's a really disturbing bring thought not only because you know how many other instances have there been where a whistleblower complaint wasn't filed and we didn't find out what happened vend but also because I think it goes back to the same issue with Volker. You know this is a case study of how difficult it is has to be a moral person and serve your country which all these people really do seem to have that. We're doing under incredibly difficult. Circumstances in a government run by someone who's actively trying to undermine you they're all these people trying to do the right thing and some of them have even come out of it looking good and at the end of the day. There's just this lurking question of did they let themselves has get drawn into far. I mean we we can zoom back. To other controversies other officials. Who we were told were the adults in the room who were trying to keep trump on the rails keep policy in order in in many cases? It seems like what that ended up forcing them to do was try to cram a corrupt endeavor into a facially legitimate government action try to find a legal pretext text for it. Try to find a policy rationale for it that could be explained to Congress to the public to themselves probably as you know maybe not ideal policy and maybe not wise but acceptable within you know with you know on the rails in some sense and then they leave and we never get the full story because you know either they succeeded in cramming trump's corrupt objectives into whoa facially non-corrupt box in a bail or the try to stop it and they resign and they go back to their private lives and in almost all these cases with like like the one big exception being Jim Komi we just never hear from Jim. Mattis former defense secretary from DNA Powell former deputy national security adviser iser nature. mcmasters another good example of this and it makes me really worry about what happens on the flip side of this impeachment process is that we're going to go back to that. And trump is going to be at the apex of his corruption because he's going to have survived the one confrontation over it. The Democrats were willing to bring against the question should Democrats wrap this impeachment up without making some kind of maybe time-limited but serious effort to compel testimony from the principals. I suppose right. The bureaucrats won't save us with any of the political appointees. Have the information that's needed. If not to remove Donald Trump then to strip away the legitimacy from the things he might do as he abuses his power going forward. So I think that the clear implication of Hill's testimony is that John Bolton knew a lot more about what was happening in real time than she did and he tried to shield the National Security Council from it and Democrats haven't even issued him a subpoena. Is that a mistake Bolton. I don't understand what Game Baltin is playing to be completely honest with you. I mean it really seems like he can't decide Reid who he wants to go to the prom with he he kind of you know. He says he doesn't WanNa testify and then he dangles you know. Well I have all this information that I could give you sort of one step forward one step back so I'm going to be completely honest. I have no idea what game he is playing. I agree with you. That based on Hill's testimony it seems like he has a lot to say. Based on the testimony of two Morrison Hill. Successor is seems like he has a lot to say because Morrison Morrison was an incredibly frustrating witness. Not even talking about the public airing but just by his deposition. If you read the transcript. He basically says John Bolton you know went into this room and had this conversation and then he came out and he's asked what did he say to you and he basically Gli says I don't want to talk about that over and over again and so we get these kind of hints that John Bolton must have known more and must have. You've done more without that ever actually being fleshed out soon away..
"donald trump" Discussed on CNN's The Daily DC
"Hey, everyone. I'm David chalian the CNN political director, and this is the daily DC. Thanks so much for listening today on the podcast, Donald Trump's own words. This is a moment in time where it looks to me a baker's to hear of others agree that President Trump seems to be grasping for straws in finding his argument, his spin, his pushback on this moment after the Cohen, guilty plea and the Manafort guilty convictions that rocked his world this week. Now, I know that the president and his allies have repeatedly said this has nothing to do with Russia. There is no collusion fact, the president tweeted, no collusion and witch-hunt in all caps at one eleven AM this morning from from the White House. So he's clearly still focused on the fact that this doesn't get to what Muller's main mission is here. Which is investigating whether or not anyone in the Trump campaign or Trump associates were includes with Russia in Russia's efforts to meddle in the twenty sixteen election to harm Clinton's candidacy and help Trump's candidacy. But to just say that defies the facts on the ground. Now of people close to Donald Trump who are in significant legal and illegal peril or facing significant jail time and who potentially have significant information still to share one doesn't know. But what is clear to me if you listen to all the Republicans on Capitol Hill, either in their silence or when they do try to support the president of it this week, it is more on that notion that there's nothing here about Russia. They're still no public evidence about a conspiracy collusion scheme between the campaign and Russia, but that is quite different from dealing with that. The press. Isn't was implicated in a federal crime as we discussed yesterday and the podcast. So I thought if we listen to bits and pieces of his Fox News.
"donald trump" Discussed on Intercepted with Jeremy Scahill
"Tremendous respectful women have you ever had have respect for me and i will tell you know i have not it was that denial that comment from donald trump that spurred summers irvoas to speak out about her experiences with him i ran for fifteen minutes you tell mr trump emerged he hadn't sued on i stood up and he came to me and started kissing me open mouth as he was pulling me towards him i walked away down in a chair he was on a less seat across from me and i made an attempt at conversation then asked me to sit next to him i complied he then grabbed my shoulder and began kiss me again very gresley and pays places hand on my breast i pulled back and walked to another part of the room he then walked up grabbed my hand and walked me into the bedroom i walked out he then turned around and said leslie down and watch some telly telly put me in in brave in embrace and i tried to push him away i pushed his chest but space between us and i said come on man get real he'd be repeated my words back to me get real as he began thrusting his genitals he tried to kiss me again with my hands still on his chest and i said do your trip and right now attempting to make it clear i was not interested he said what do you want and i said i came to have dinner he said okay we'll have dinner after service went public donald trump began to systematically lay.
"donald trump" Discussed on Intercepted with Jeremy Scahill
"Yes they're concerned well that's their problem not ours are we going to wind up with with so many people's lives gone in south korea in seoul because we make that move ask you this how do you feel about dead americans john bolton's appointment as the national security adviser comes as wall to all news coverage details the multiple alleged affairs that donald trump had with stormy daniels or special you remind me of my daughter he's like you're smart beautiful and a woman to be reckoned with like you i like you with karen mcdougal he's very proud of ivanka essay shed bay i mean she's a brilliant woman she's beautiful she's you know that's his daughter and he should be proud her he said i was beautiful like her and you know you're smart girl and there's been a lot of comparing but there was some it might be hopeful to recall what happened the last time the country was in a similar situation with a sitting president and that was bill clinton in the late nineteen ninety s i want you to listen to me i'm going to say this again i did not have sexual relations with that woman miss lewinsky i never told anybody to live and not a single time never these allegations are false and i need to go back to work for the american people as the socalled monica lewinsky scandal intensified in nineteen ninety eight and nineteen ninety nine bill clinton seemed to find a new love for lobbing cruise missiles and authorizing bombing campaigns in afghanistan and sudan for seventy eight days at us led nato bombing of yugoslavia and of course iraq in operation desert fox which clinton authorized on the eve of the impeachment proceedings against him earlier today i ordered american forces to strike iraq are missile sent the following message to saddam hussein when you abuse your own people or threaten your neighbors you must pay a price.
"donald trump" Discussed on WSJ Opinion: Potomac Watch
"May shen for most of the american people and one came home to us i think was during that all of the fight over the tax legislation when a most of the american people thought they were going to get a tax increase from this legislation that was literally false but there was really no straightforward publicity being given out there to the broad american public and so in a kind of uh it was kind of like propaganda they came to believe the opposite of what was true and so the messaging burden now falls completely on the white house or these house republicans who were running to try to get reelected against both the democratic uh uh opposition is going to run donald trump at dumb uh as the reason why they should elect democrats on a media that's going to give them no help whatsoever i think this gets to what i what i believe bill is the biggest problem is president has and that's a matter of credibility uh he's uh made statements th starting i think with the ah assertions about the numbers of people at the inaugural and the long which were factually inaccurate he says a lot of things that are simply untrue or exaggerated he boasts in a way takes credit for things he doesn't deserve you search things that aren't true sometimes because he's i think dissembling other times because he's just ignorant doesn't really know when he makes assertions that are false that he thinks might be true and just five lives up to what he had called in private life uh uh what truthful hyperbole a tool he used to try to influence public debate but when you're in the white house and you start to do that again and again and again you have roading credibility and i think that it has reduced what is every presidents traditional stra of ability is to the the the power to persuade and if you can't persuade congress that it's hard to move your legislation and in particular i think trump does not scare democrat.