How did President Biden do at his press conference? What went on at the Journal of the American Medical Association that will horrify you? Most important, how abjectly did I apologize for criticizing my colleagues wrongly the other day? Give a listen.
This is an unofficial transcript meant for reference. Accuracy is not guaranteed.
Welcome to the Commentary Magazine Daily podcast today is Friday March twenty six, twenty twenty one. I am John POD words. The editor of Commentary nor Rossman is out for the week before today, then, most of next week, with me as always, executive editor able Remould high Abe, our job and in her first dig as the producer of the podcast senior writer Christy. Rose and high Christine, I John, if it's terrible, I apologise in advance harmlessness Now it is very good at as well. I hope you won't have to crow, because I have to crow. Today I did a whole showy thing on the last podcast on Wednesday. I didn't do one yesterday about how the Biden Press conference was going to lead with
guns gun control, the the tissue things in boulder em at and I was wrong in a green world- was correct- that the press conference would begin with talk of republican obstruction. In fact, the first question said: republicans are obstructing all of these things. There obstruct voting rights in this and that the other thing, what are you gonna do about it? Mr President, so Abe Crow has beneath you are a wiser man than I look in fairness. The first question was like a kitchen sink question: It was the guns might have been in there. I thought you said gods, yet there were five. What they are a body wound up with so Now the weeds announced that three may five major issues facing us what're, you gonna do about these. Damn Republicans fixed exactly so
it was a very interesting and telling press conference listen to it, as I was driving from New York to Chicago, and so it was that I was very focused on its since otherwise I would just have had to focus on the trucks. What I was passing on the left so. Once again, I am startled by the political skill that I think Biden has been displaying writ pretty much since he started running for president in twenty. nineteen and that he displayed in the press conference, I know that I'm not talking about the substance of what he is talking about, most of which I have very violent disagreements with I'm talking about the political skill. He is using all the tools at its disposal, including his reputation, the
meant that he has been projecting of being a nice kind. You know avuncular grandfather, league person, why to make deals. Politics is the art of the possible he's just there to get things done for the american people, and you know he did- this all very important to him, and I I found it. It's like they don't underestimate, what's going not here, there's a reason did approval ratings are high and are likely maybe to get a little higher than its about just he's, throwing trillions of dollars of people it is there is deploying a series of arguments and giving up. But he is his employing positions that
resonate not only with Democrats but with people who are all that especially political and you haven't a la lined up dead, certain against him and And that is them as opposed to Donald Trump, who of course spend his press conferences. Creating conflict with the media complaining about his treatment you now and and and and and being- lingering of hostile, not that he didn't have some reason to be belligerent hostile but that he impeded the advice. Of his own message, with this constant cycle drama, that Biden refused to get into so that that was I take, wouldn't get it to some other. You now get into the nitty gritty. What did you guys back
I'm in a push back a little bit on that description. I think you're you're correct to say that his demeanor is that a start In contrast to how Trump ahead in these situations, I actually found it too far in the other direction, though it seemed incredibly scripted, an incredibly controlled and environment an end. Combination of that, just how controlled inspected it seemed on his end, along with the fact that he's talking, extremely sweeping proposals as three extremely challenging complicated things: the issue at the border, the ongoing pandemic in violence in this country and his Strangely disconsolate, a kind of losing his train of thought. You no going back harking back to stories from when he was younger. Sometimes that worked but other times I felt like it really did not do Told demeanor actually seem to reinforce. It is not up to that challenge, and I think I mean that the
the cruellest, although hilariously insightful summation of that, I thought was from our friend, Dominic greeted the spectator, who said it was It was in reality, tv show in a care how get other there is the sense in which she was being put up there to fulfil. The role that you described on, which work very well when he was a candidate, it was me personally. I didn't find it reassuring now that he's president in phasing out these challenges that justice, his demeanor was, did not inspire confidence and his words didn't matches demeanor critically when he talked about the filibusters will go until later, so that with this report in my initial pressures I think I'd generally agree about the political skill I mean. I I thought I guess I was impressed along the same lines. I'm such a treaty- that is an issue slightly apart from his ability to who convey thoughts. Speaker fluidly bob up, but I have to say
whatever success, that political skill is attaining, has a lot to do with the press that it is coming up against and in this this press conference that was very evident. I mean the kind of questions they cheat up for him and we lack of follow up and push back on the types of statements he made help facilitate the success of his of his approach to pop talking up. politics now, ok, I want to push back on you and this, because that was the point that I made on Wednesday that he was gonna, be CASA. Them the had, supported and lifted up by the press and I I was struck him at least the two occasions by the pointed nature of the question thing, one about the filibuster and one question about the border, so Caitlin Collins of CNN said to him,
Morocco by Mr Jean Louis, his funeral filibuster, was a relic of Jim Crow. Do you agree and Biden said yes, and so she said well, if you agree, why don't you, I get rid of the filibuster, and this I think, speaks to both the fact that the press was willing to press him. I'm contradictions in his own camps, views of things, and he spoke full scale, because there was a long pause you know. I was listening to about watching it, so I dont know what it felt like watching up it. There was a long pause and and he said Paul it. This is the art of the possible that was, extraordinarily clever answer what I mean when I say you can underestimate his form stability, because he was put on the spot. He said this thing that is now so controversial was born and evil.
And she's like well, if you're a minute, let's born of evil, how on earth can you not oppose its extirpate I'll give you that, even though the softball questions, thirty and rob because it's the Democratic Party is, the only party has been using the filibuster recently and they ve been using it eagerly to to block you know everything, the Republicans. What did you do when they were in the majority? The real, the tough media, question followup? Wouldn't it then what are you gonna do about? It went back. Let's have it. explain how your own parties been aggressively using it for years. Like that's the questions you should have, as I think what so he answered it with your answer before the words like he said by saying politics is the art of the possible what he met- was we're not living in a world in which we can just say things that we don't like can simply be gotten away with. We have to live in the real world in which there are long standing You know habits of behaviour, things like that. We can reform if we could make it more painful and all that, but we have to live in the here and now
the things that are so. I take your point about saying that it was a question that was framed in a way to make to really push to the wall, but she did gotcha him. It was a cut, an effort to got to him she jumped on his answer and she Perry that effectively. So there was there But I take your point I mean I just think it was written interesting moment and then the other was Cecilia. Vague of ABC knows who said mister Mr President, you say that you know you are responsible for, though the surge in unaccompanied children crossing the border?
We talk to a mother in Honduras who sent her nine year old with another kid on foot to the border, and she said that she had done it because she heard that you were going to let them cross. How do you respond to that? And that was wearing it out? The the the press? think of the question on the border, which also has, of course solely within one ideological cap, which is why aren't you being nicer, you're, not being nice enough. Why are you being nicer? Mostly? He? He did not have an effective answer for and he was I. I think it was the there's. No one Argument that wind Celia Vegas said this mother said present by there's gonna, let him into America so that that's why we took this chance with him. That's a pretty studying. He couldn't come up with anything, so I think the press was alive.
tough round in the nice, but but even I have to say about. I take that point, but even the framing of of that whole issue was established. by Unita Cinder when she should have asked the question: isn't it problem here that you were too good and kind and decent person a hum to be tough on the border and and having broadcast you're. Decent nurse and your kindness, you have now created a problem. Well. You know you could also say that, under those circumstances that that you could, if you wanted to be nice about it say she was putting you know, a ship in Velvet glove, Mister Brett. You are known for being so kind. Now here all this is happening because of your kindness. What are you gonna do about it? That's a kind of interesting
it would be a good idea, but upon the spot, coming from like Fox. If they had been right, look there's something get right. I don't I don't get it She was doing anything said. Tell me I'm gonna flatter him relentlessly This is her want when it comes to democratic politicians, and actually I his answer that the first Did he revelled in the air and the fact that me I'm, I'm not gonna apologise for being a good guy and I'm just gonna shit them all of two Thorpe. Let sport what sport list was the answer to everything, unlike that doesn't solved the problem. The packet a bunch of kids you're here illegally without adults of airlines, amateurs about if your pack even attended the border repackage omitted the other an army. The basic problem is the problem. He did he never. Answered satisfactorily at the question. some other things, different vision reporter who send isn't your messaging part of the problem here like the art? Is your administrations messaging since January, been actively encourage There's nobody ass much about the cartels were trafficking people and across the board. I mean nothing. details, but not the kind of stuff, either during the press conference
suppose, hearted and mainstream media that we used to see after a truck press conference. I mean look with interesting here, is that an ox is being gourd, which is that this political issue was- Jim UP and created during the trumpet ministration to make the case the trump was uniquely cruel and monstrous. and some kind of a demon. For this. You know horrible treatment of of of chilled unaccompanied children at the border, and now we have a new administration and guess what the treatment is almost exactly the same, because the problem is the same: its children, asking the border and, as he said in interesting thing, by the way he said very cautiously, because he was trying to make more trouble for himself. He said what is it we're supposed to do?
We are coming to the border little children coming to border unaccompanied. Are we supposed to send them back across the border to die in the heat and starved to death? No one no no administration could no one could do that except the Trump administration which which did it trumpet wins. patient didn't? Do it? That's why the children work in the camps across the border right between Bavaria is a child, a child standing there knocking on our door found not there. You go, go here, go back into this. No man's land, You're gonna go back across the Rio Grande by yourself, like that's, not the way it's gonna happen, so that was pretty unjust actually and then he said, of course, that the surge we are seeing is simply seasonal, because no you're, not gonna die in the heat in January February when you come across. So it's three small and it's the same as it was under Trump and then
the facts of the matter is that, if it doesn't stop in the next couple of weeks, the surge is going to be there larger than any search that was seen in twenty nineteen it or twenty twenty, so either that the number it doesnt simply free is in place it out just because the press conference happen him. He could claim taking a snap. At this moment that the numbers were equivalent to trumps numbers. They're gonna be larger and considerably larger and the situation remains the same, which is that we have nineteen hundred mile border, it's an interact. no problem approach, Home is the regimes. central and South America that are corrupt and inefficient and you know in the pay of criminal gangs, things and who are making people's lives. Horrible enough that they said
their children without them to go into the United States. so that may be something better can happen for that. But we should also talk about the fact that he was questioned about allowing media access to what's going on at the border, and his answer was like? Come back I believe my room, welcomes the athlete exactly that I told you the right right over. Ok. Thank you, Mr President. In a really good, I've been out what year Let you see it when yeah, that's right, we'll, let you see it when my policy is in place, admitting only has moved on and when will that be and he's like, I don't know I was very interested figure again soon You could say that she, but this one travesty, like I think, given they give,
And the indifference ability or the impossibility of making a positive case for what is happening except the case that look. I just came into office, you we were just getting our sea legs. You know Gimme a break, which was one thing. He could say that doesn't answer the question of how his rhetoric and now a hundred my orchestras rhetoric, the head of the homeland here The apartments rhetoric may have control it had to their surge right and an even if he could say. You know, we said some things that may be had unintended consequences that we're just lock and say them anymore. Only other thing you said by the way is look most of these unaccompanied minors aren't really minors. That was an interest thing point raised at most of them are not minors theirs. sixteen seventeen eighteen years old at them. We turn back. Then we throw back across the Rio Grande gotta eat, Betsy, that's an exam!
well of him. Historic gets himself in these weird little prayer. Relations verbally. That get him in trouble. Rather, look there's a very clear and he could say it would anger the progressive that its coalition, but it would reach that ass middle. He could say we, u, we the president was you didn't want. Emigrants in this country was inhumane about in his rhetoric and in his policies. We're gonna humane border policies and by that we knew we still have a border. We can't not everybody just can't come over, but we have wording put strategies and place to deal with these issues and we do have a crisis right now, that's very clear, but here the humor the strategies we are going to lay out, and even just mention one or two, but she gets hit. You he blamed trompe kept me focus a lot about until the Trump administrations policies, and then he started on these rear tensions about you, Don T, dangers that are still children there not eating their children. Ok but here's my point which was-
We need to separate out the two rubbing conversations on parallel tracks here MA, I'm simply talking about the political effectiveness of what he did yesterday, If we want to talk about substance, the substance was horrible in many many different, realms I don't even mean horrible. Just because we're conservatives- and we don't like liberal policies and stratagems- I mean the policies- were horrible- the quick and ended- and the question is: did he handle himself in a way that that advanced his interests and aims and harnessed or either either harnessed or em or accentuated the popularity that these poles or showing that he has an. I think, you're lookin in saying he's weird he gets into where tangents and stuff like that. Some of that I just don't know that hurts them. What we're looking
it doesnt saying. Oh, my god, he's lost the step. He seventy eight look away talks he got lost, he got lost in the thickets of a couple of questions and all that assume that people know that he, seventy eight, including all the people, voted for him who make up enough fifty one and a half per cent of the electorate. They knew it was seventy eight. They know who he is the date. They have accepted this they are not there. have made allowances for it and therefore doesn't harm him. To show a little age that's where I disagree, I think actually, I think, you're right for a certain kind of voter, but there's a equal at. I would argue in equal number of voters who are looking at that challenges just country faces and that's actually not reassuring to them. like you need a man for the moment kind of reaction, and there are a lot of serious crises facing this country right now, and the idea that he might he's
popular somewhat confused grandpa might not actually be reassuring to some people. Even after four years of truck. That's very plot. We don't right. I've thing why so that that time, only time can tell that We can only tell whether he retained support or whether people seem relatively answers. He asked about him how the opinion of the general opinion of the Democratic Party fares in in the of generic measurements, of whether you like Democrats and Republicans law at that. That's what will see over the next couple of months. I think that, in terms of their lot of crises, his answer. Which is, I got all this stuff coming down the pike. I got infrastructure. I gotta I've got voting rights, I've got you know what a great things coming down the pike- and I want to work with publicans. They it's a question of whether they want to work with me or not.
I want to work with them now. This is an interesting game, but also because of course, he doesn't want to work with them. He wants them to surrender to him and do what he wants but the republic line is we're not going to work with him. We're not working with him. That's Mitchell Conall like we're, not we're, not gonna corrupt ourselves by war with him, I dont know as a public messaging issue, whether that's a good message. I mean I don't know what a good message is because he has to hold his coalition together and to say we are not going to cooperate with war. Give in to policies that we think are bad and the animal hurricane and all of that. But if wine is understandably or wanted to work with you guys and you're. Just given me the high hat- and you know
what, after a while, if there's just as he said, chaos and walk down, then my general terms. But you know the full buster is a good thing in the way that the building of compromises as they bear over the course of the two centuries or whatever that's gonna, change, again to me. That seems pretty effective. If you're not have, it would be if he had been agreed instantaneously to the Jim Crow stuff, because you did the preface to all of this. Is it's not just at the other side will cooperate and compromise in real and deal with us, it's that their racist, their bad people, and I can't work bad people, that's a message. I think a lot of voters here when they hear that, like we have to get rid of elvers visits, relic of Jim Crow and the only people who want to cover Republicans me that that had a broad sweeping stuff, I think, undermine with you you're describing John, and I agree that probably more, whereby ones to do but he's kind of cotton,
himself in a little bit of a trap with awaited is to filibuster she's been framed in particular okay. So we should talk more about the filibuster, but first I want to talk to you about this new chair that I got, I got this chair. They started to make us there they wanted to advertise. They wanted me to try it and see if I liked it is called the x chair, The I have at my home. It is fair to take its the exchequer. I've never had not his chair. That looks your feels so amazing it so comfortable. I've been sitting four hours. I never feel uncomfortable the secret, not only its patented dynamic, variable, lumbar support, which offers unbelievable lumbar supports. My lord back, but now thanks to their new ex h, M T technology- I get seed, a massage therapy, while I'm sitting at my desk
don't set of my old uncomfortable office chair. I can look for spending our sitting in the ultimate therapeutic, massage her and I do. The Ex h emptied delivers heat, a massage technology right to my core, helping increase blood flow muscle, recovery and energy. All Parkes that make working from this chair in my home. But if I my office, the same a joy, it has four different massage modes and fast warming. He technology four therapy? What I'm sort? You won't believe the exchequer difference until you feel the exchequer difference for yourself. Trust me, this is the luxury super car of office chairs chair is no one cell for one hundred dollars off, go to axe, chair commentary, dot com? Now that's the letter Ex chair commentary, dot com or call one eight for four four x chair ex chair has a thirty day guarantee of complete comfort and you can finance your purchase for as little as thirty dollars a month.
Go to Ex chair commentary. Dot com now amused code Ex Wheels Ex w h e, alas, for free ex we'll bled castors. That's Ex chair commentary dotcom. Now, let's talk about the filibuster, so Rosville buster, I'm sure most everybody was listening knows the filibuster is the is. The way is the way that you can use. The unlimited debate rule in the Senate to prevent a vote to close debate, which requires a three fifths. Majority to close debate on all bills accept bills that have a budgetary. component reconciliation component, which cannot be blocked, were with filibuster. Basically up up up.
Rule that came in place about forty years ago, but otherwise you need sixty votes to close debate and bring a bill to the floor of the Senate for a final vote, and the issue here, of course, is that the Democrats have It's a fifty fifty Senate. The vice president can break a tie answer the Democrats can work there will at will, if only there were no filibuster and the filibuster exist. As a means of creating a robot back in the Senate. To majority Marian impulses not to get to fancy pants but That said it is an anti majority marian institution. It grants to vote to every state, regardless of
population, size, location, everything all states have equal representation in the Senate, so called were you with thirty eight million people who sellers and why arming, which has at an old six hundred and fifty thousand people, has two senators. It is by structure, a definition and anti mature tarried institution that represents the interests of states and not of populations at this is maddening to people who live in. address, the hates which happened. How to be overwhelmingly democratic, blue and so they want to work. There will claiming that look. They have majority These voters large majorities of voters, in these states, and yet they can't get there will through now the house which has one vote for four hundred and thirty five thousand people, or something like that-
is totally with area and the presidency, it's not totally majority during the electoral college, but it largely majority barium. But the Senate. Was created to be an anti majority or an institution fact said it wasn't even voted on by the public until nineteen thirteen senators we're not vote. It were not elected high by voters. They were chosen by state legislatures until nineteen. Thirteen and the Philippines you're exists as an outgrowth of that, even though its a relic of Jim Crow ad block all of that stuff, it was used to block progressive legislation project Leon, civil rights throughout the first half of the twentieth century and even into the second half, but it but it, but it's an outgrowth of the same principle, which is that the Senate does not operate according to majority voting rules. It's not fifty plus one per.
sent. That gets you a majority in the side of the Senate doesn't operate on that understanding and therefore its much more consensus, based way that you get legislation through the sad it through compromise and by almost of necessity, except at certain times in american history, by partisan participation and by. partisan support where I was asked what out? That's exactly, but the founders explicitly said they said this is like the cup in other saucer that the hot liquid spilled over it cause. It's decidedly designed to have cooler heads prevailed. Negotiation and compromise in a way that even the House of Representatives was bad and that's all That's why the djinn crowing vocation drives me mad, like it's actually designed to stop the majority from having its will go on I'm all by these were a roadblock said, among other things, the fact that the activist laughter number What the largely left wants to get rid of it now.
Gives the lie to the idea that they are against populism right there. There there against right wing populism right. Well, look the other way of looking at the the the break out. The break out of these three bodies of elected officials is that the house represents local interests wherever they are. Those operators by the way can be contradictory depending on what State Europe no words like you're upset New York, your interest as a whole, Some member may be radically different from the ale, see representing queens of Brooklet right totally different, that's their local interests. The Senate is there to represent state interests, that's why state has the same representation in the Senate the presidency represents actual interest because, as the only office on which every one in the country boats finals obviously, and these of course our
divergent interests. They are not an end. This is the point, about legislation. It is supposed to be difficult because these interests are divergent. You are not suppose be able to steamroller your way through. By saying I have one more than you that's why we are republic and nodded them. a procedure. That is why we are not a democracy, even though we use the word democracy if a whole complicated reason that we a brace the word democracy to describe the United States caused at democracy. You know in in it in a classic terms in like a terms what, tomorrow, she was so radically person my person by person that you have. The leaders were drawn by lot like shoe it. You know you at anyone could become. You know the council or whatever the hell, you want to call it.
it didn't matter who you were you couldn't you could be elevated to being somebody who ran the place only day function that way there s. No, we don't In that way we have it. We have a different system, and yet, when you have an activist agenda and lets say Republicans have negative of one activist agenda. Have one passionate this agenda over the last thirty forty years, which is the judiciary when You have an activist agenda that, were you wanted to get things done in order archer sees the high ground or do whatever it is. You have to do that? you things, although of course it was not the Republicans who lifted the filibuster. Fur judicial nominations. it was Harry, read the last democratic set a majority leader before trucks humor, and he did it because he wanted to ran through judges and Mitchell
Tal said at the time and twenty thirteen you will rule the day that you did this. I don't want you to do this, but if you do this, we are gonna eat your lunch. The minute We get into power and you know what else it's not just gonna be for lower court. You nominations we're good, get em we're gonna do over the Supreme Court, and LO and behold they did Well, in the same principle, holds true for this argument about why they need to get a nuclear filibuster to get their own legislative agenda. That's great, but then, once Republicans control the Senate again, look at all the they're gonna get suddenly it doesnt. It's not very forward thinking. It assumes a permanent democratic majority going forward, which one should never assume given our recent political history right, and you know that that look at that is of vital point because, of course, when you have pent up. Dim policy demand from one side of the Isle that has been stymied over. You know of a period of
for years are, however long they might feel they have been stymied at they get into office. They are both thrilled because power is in their hands again and they are desperate because they, because, been in a position of powerlessness. Suddenly they are in a position of power and the ideas we gotta go everything done as fast as possible because they may pull the cup away from us again, and so you have this equal parts, the kind of thing it should lead you to self confidence and say you know what? If we have this right for careful and slow and deliberate and we do what it? What will we do and we go our things done. We show how good our policies are in all of this week. please solidify our position of power expense that increasing and grow this overtime incrementally and lead the people. in our direction. But that is not the way american politics works. Now, it's like you get it. If you
Republican are Democrats, then you're gonna push everything you can as fast as possible until they pull the rug out from under you, which is the opposite way of building concern, and majorities of your views. It's like care screw. You we're gonna, do what do and then you actually created conditions under which powers removed from you. Two years later, you know your Clinton. You went with forty three percent of the vote: started dancing national health care without We know national consensus that this is a good idea and euro area increases at midnight, basketball, Whatever the hell else. Does it you're pushing? Because you don't you got forty three percent of the vote anyway, you're litter, we create conditions under which Republicans take the house for the first time in forty years. You know I'd like an end at that's. What's gonna that my be what's happening. Now, though, it doesn't feel that way, the so interconnected
John Dear First assertion earlier assertion about burdened, doing something impressive politically. Here I think, to the extent that he's doing something impressive politically, it's it's it's his, really to extend this period during which he maintains deserve equal distance, position between the kind of activists, politics that you're dead are now hold, sway and version of the old establishment politics. This is both the filibuster and on the border. You know he sort of kitchen continued load out there in between the those did the two poles and not yet have to worry about. paying a price on one side or the other of the of the question and that's it The point, because he's also the other thing he has going form currently is the guy higher conservative cited? The aisle, including the Republican Party, is continuing to be in some form of disarray, not kind of knowing the ipod
lot of the blame. John varied for that diagnosis, the Republicans could A belt and b that party, the ones who say. Ok, look tromp was found, an aberration was this something that we need to learn from? You know think about when our coalition should look like going forward. I mean there are a couple Republicans here and there have talked about that's. How do we keep working class the voters. How do we get more minority voters in our coalition like how do we or we want our party to look like in ten or twenty years? Not just in two but their origin Republicans having that conversation and conservative intellectuals in general. Having that conversation, because this I mean it's, it's pretty early on That's the converse usually has to happen on the right is well, otherwise I think it is divided and the Democrats advantage that it does it because they are, as I said, able to kind of right that rail, but they ve been writing since you left right guy, so it is one shopping day and if you're, so, if you keep
Sabbath, only several hours left to get yourself that copy. This is the last that I'm doing this month for that remarkable book about pass over and the pass over her got out the telling by Mark person, because the sailor starts tomorrow, night and telling is, of course, this remarkable buckling study, examination of the themes, the ideas, the structure and the and the historical importance of the. Ass over bark tells the story in a hundred different ways. I, with a lot great detail. You know the sailors coming. If you are somebody who has a sailor, you know that it can be boring. You know that you run out of things to say but saying the same thing every year. Over and over again same stuff, you forgot certainties types of hunger. Doubt your book,
making the same points that are the footnotes about the war sign than the subtle doesn't know how to ask handed them. What Diana was about. All of this, you need fresh, mature you're gonna get it from the telling go download it right now I'm your ten dollar. You know where I books or whatever it is that you read get some. Brush material look at this very interesting book has all kinds of fun things. You can talk about at the same beginning tomorrow, night and Sunday night, the telling by Markers- and we thank him very much for sponsoring the podcast over the course of this month, and I hope that we have made some sales because let's face it. Having engaged sector is one of the most wonderful things that anyone can do for anyone, in my experience, so guys Talking about the Republicans in disarray- and we have two- things: have happened: yes right, Christine trampling on the law,
four Ingram show and there was trouble I'm sorry I made that say that the transcript ravine then makes noise of disgust. Yes, he went on with money and he tried to act as if the insurrection is right. at the capital on January, sex was just some sort of like all you know. Where does ambling into the cap the cops love. We love them. It's all fine, when you don't many officers were grievously injured. One died as a result of his treated at the hands of a mob. There is destruction mayhem and for him soon to go on the air and act as if that didn't happen at six He is either demented. Dignan are experiencing some sort of the horses or he just really doesn't want to engage with the
the impact of what that meant, that a country and and certainly for the Republican Party, it was a despicable. That's the only word I can think of to describe it when I heard what he said so, even in wake up. The immediate week of January six, we there there there were conversations on the right right, which word, though he didn't. The first thing was it happen. But he didn't encourage it. It's not fair are, you did know was coming. He didn't mean when he said: let's walk down to the capital, you mean them to break into the capital and say that wanted to hang my pants and all that that's not fair. We are now down shifting into it didn't happen now, the very dangerous that the dangerous dashed it? I don't know how you downshift into didn't happen It's like saying nine. Eleven didn't happen: Euro! Ok, fine! So you don't you don't, show the falling bodies aftermath of the people
jumping out of the windows on nine eleven, no one's holding, back on the video footage of what happened in the capital building on January sex and the fact that Several hundred people now have been arrested for participating in violent insurrection, not just beating up, cops and stuff like that bitch going right chanting, hang my pants trashing liquor. Capital building nominally criminal trespass, but you know actual damage. You know who knows it would have had. but if they haven't gotten those electoral ballots out of the added the Ceta chamber, what? If those about what? If those what if those physical documents, had been seized by somebody which could very easily happened. We saw people wandering around the Senate chamber. He's I'm saying it didn't happen, and this is like that you know what you going to believe me or your own eyes like at people, are going to believe it, and I said that's because they want to believe it. That's because they want to pretend that it didn't happen and it did
but this is now connected to the fact that this morning, interestingly enough trampling on Lord Ingram Show and fostered, say what he said: dominion voting systems which ensued. Sidney Powell and that my pillow guy and a couple of other people has now formally soon Fox NEWS for one point: six billion dollars for defamation, for Having spread these it out false and crazy stories about how dominion was owned by Hugo Chavez and was was what you know had changed. the physical algorithm, so that book, but there's no physical, algorithm change the algorithm to change vote totals and did this and then to the other thing. I don't think this is a nuisance suit. I think that they have their this
a suit that has a high likelihood of some success whatever that means I mean it could be a gigantic settlement in the hundreds of millions of dollars it could mean if a fox decides. I can't do that. It could mean lose in a court of law, because it seems to me that free, open and shut case of defamation, cause defamation, Fox transmitted, the information it may or may not have known that it was false, but you know I'm not. I don't know and to what extent, that matters and add they have created a real harm to this business as well as I've said on this package. You know no state with a republican second are you state or no Republicans, taken higher dominion systems to help with their elections now, because, of course, the
grumpy in wing will you know come down on the elected officials? So it's not gonna happen, so they are, they are hurting. They're, they're gonna get much less business. They might otherwise, and that's because of the spreading of false and amatory stories about them, and you know a guy I think, into individual lawsuits are a much better way to go about attacking dangerous claims and piracy theories. Then you know of it the strait of decisions about who gets a voice in the in the public square, It's more fair and win more in keeping with our system. its things more are potentially could. If we were talking about the kind of numbers, that we want anything. What most importantly, that such a good point, because, as sure as we saw with the Sydney pal case, it immediately forces you to distinguish between ideological opinions and fat in a way that the public square does you know we mix the suffer all the time, especially for the businesses
telling our opinions, but when it comes to the defamation and actual harm in a court of law, we have to show improve it and there's a way to do that added their dominions. Doing that a good for them, I mean, I think it's gonna be hard for Fox to make the case that they were not too faint. I've been fought, foxes the defendant, so it doesn't have to Europe. If it's not the position, we have to make a difference, as you know, it only has to defend itself against. I mean how to criminal proceedings. These things are weird because I guess it's a torrent and they lay these have different. Standards and evidentiary standards in its stead and even different levels of proof from criminal court but criminal case. But you know that this is a tough one. because, as we saw in the city power case, her only defence is that she didn't mean it now
by the way, if she didn't mean it, and you should have known that you did me the cushions only expressing an opinion. That's bad for Fox, because Fox was the transmitter of the false opinion. Now she says you should have known that she didn't mean it, but I'm not sure that that works for foxes denied hell of its responsibility for the transmission of the false opinion that you should have done, and she didn't mean what we now millions of people believed that she meant it and that it was true, and all this does suggest a deep unhealthiness, a real issue here. Yet for this very important political fight is going on Biden is looking to expand the federal government in a way that we have not seen since the Nineteenth Thirty's he's not a three trillion dollar infrastructure investment, man,
of tax increases, of course, green stuff coming down the pike, and all of that this is no joke. The the is the worst parts to it needs to be serious and remorseless end and am focused endemic, David and we have all the ground, payments on our side here and we are getting we're. We're gonna be pushed into miss aghast and craziness by The decision that it Trump is obviously making to continue to push the people who follow him to argue untrue. Crazy nonsense that discredits them, rather than advances the cause of retarding, this advance of statism. That Biden is front
What worries me one of the things one of the words you didn't use, but I think, as implied here and really important, is we need a principled response to what the democratic left it is trying to do right now, and the problem is that true, He's trying to call off the idea of the principal response and make himself the prince, like you have to do it. You have to first embraced the principles of Tromp ism. If you're going to be a part of this, that's right wing and end. That's not a good litmus test for the cap permanent movement. We need principal political leaders who are we just say it actually was interesting that the eight I did note that Lord Ingram shut down Trump. When you started talking about the elections that we're not gonna realistic, something is already open, so they're dead, tiny shift, its, not seismic, but the more you, no kind of hundred to do that and on the programme side, the more political leaders who stand up and go. You know if this is done. Let's move on a better Europe wide.
You do that she did that, because workers about sexual or not, we don't want to give dominion any more good said. So, that's why it's good of that principle, but I'm just saying we need right now. What's it regarding decide, Have you no sir? He says that the protocol them on January, saves through the crowd, people came and greeted the car Then they they laughed and it was all peace. One wonderful I don't know that what's happening here, is that since he sang it didn't happen. People believe it didn't happen. I think, is slightly different from that. I think he's saying and people are who support him. Our understanding, doesn't matter if it happened, we don't we don't that's it's what reality actually is actually unimportant. It's not that we were being lie to hear it said,
it doesn't even matter we get to keep pushing forward regardless. Absolutely and look you know I was talking about the this spending in other Biden effectively proposing to spend five trillion dollars between the stimulus and the and infrastructure whatever else is coming down the pike and Zack I mean macro economically. That's why you gotta go to our friends at the bonds and group. a daily and weekly follow this intersection of public policy markets and the and the and the macro economy, because if We ve been spending more than ten years waiting for an inflationary spiral from the first I'm a stimulus through various other things, including their from tax, that nothing has been pushing. The the to kill inflation in the early nineties. Eightys was so, while
very successful and an end so deep, and had such a deep, a fact that we are, we been effectively forty years into a period of low inflation or almost no inflation is that a continue. You got read the DC to data. I'm a dividend. Cafe that come from David Bunsen, I have the bonds of group in order to watch them. Gradually as we go forward, particularly in a period of potentially explosive economic growth apart from This government involvement in the economy, which could, as we ve been hearing real, to overheat things and bring us back to a to a period in which the cost of goods and the and that the cost of staples M worthy seeing inflation in the housing market. We are gonna, see inflation and gas prices, particularly with this grounded the Suez Canal blocking the Trans shipment of oil to them.
the world I saw driving The way yesterday from New York to Chicago gas prices up a dollar I think from where they were only a couple of ago and That's only gonna get worse. What is that? What effect this? Can I have not only on you and your household, your family, but what effect is a graph on your portfolio? What kind of investments duty to make in a period potentially rising inflation to protect husband and grow your assets? That is what you can get from the bonds and group from their products. The DC today, dot, com and dividend CAFE doc. I'm the bonds and group granted to the intellectual spaghetti of the financial services industry. so we have one other thing out one amazed and cancellation thing that is going on. That is, Go chilling that you know
So, even though that we have the vocabulary to deal with it, the editor of the Journal of the American Medical Association appeared on a pod cas produced by JAMA and the host of the pod cast said. He did not believe that there was structural racism and health in the inn. the world of public health or health or better sooner whatever, and that he did. He thought that most medical professionals that would not appreciate being called racists and that this was a terrible thing. The person who said this, the hosting package has resigned from a JAMA and the editor, who was on the pod cast, has himself been placed on leave while an investigation, administrative leave, while an investigation takes place, of whether or not it is even remotely permissible for this guy ever Livingston. The host the package to save many of us are offended by the concept that we are right.
Just that apparently saying that is enough to get every living fired and to get Frederick partner the the editor of JAMA suspended and put on leave and watch her of course forced to do. One of these Stalinist apologies said the common its were inaccurate, offensive hurtful and inconsistent with the standards of JAMA, something this this surely this is telling in the same way that that story from a week or so ago about the George Town University law, professors is chilling, the person who is supposedly committed the Rachel sin. I e questioning you know in the case of Georgia, the grades of african american students this case, be legitimacy of using structural racism as a category of analysis. Right, I mean it's not as if this guy
there's, no such thing as racism. What he's saying is this might not The best way in terms of how we talk about health and medical issues to analyze these situations, because it ends up offending people because they feel they are being called braces merely because of the color of their skin, which indeed, they are being call. If you read, I've read a fair amount into what's going on in medical schools with regard to antibiotics the south end its. It is generally the more chilling fact is that now, if you're, the person who happens to be on the other end of one of these conversations, your job is also at risk. If you dont immediately denounce that person's races. So with the georgian case, there was another professor. She was talking to you. He was play suddenly and theirs castigation ongoing in this case the guy who's. From the journal is now on leave, even though he had not all he was doing was sitting there listening, but because you didn't actively endorse. The ideological theory had issue here that he is suspect. That's a real shifted, its
It's one everyone should be concerned about, because of Europe. The next time you are forced by your large corporation, to sit in critical race theory dominated our training seminars. Someone says something like: I: don't: color that's not considerably if you don't speak up and announced that is races, maybe you're gonna be rest. It I'm not the sounds hyperbolic, but this is exactly what is happening and I probably look at this. What are we gonna write about it for early next week? There's a lot of stuff going on in the field of medicine right now that will have real life very dangerous consequences for patients in hospitals for for patients who got it the doctors. If this is allowed to continue to flourish in the medical field. You know it it's it's not hyperbolic at all and This is why, over the loved past summer, one when we what we described as the great unravelling- and I wrote about a revolution he said. It's not strictly about the fear that the violence,
the mass violent component that makes it an unravelling or or revolution. It is about the idea, Is that were advanced during those terrible. Once and those ideas have stuck they or their state. Thus they have grown, they have been further institutional. That's what we are seeing a just, because there are not riots at this moment, which is to say nothing of what What comfort it doesn't mean that their that what was advanced and has has not tat they ve held this ground by virtue of the muscle that was displayed back then, and it is very important to note that where these revolutions are happening or not, it's not a ground level. It's not gonna when every day relationships between while white people in black people, all this is happening, in the elites. It has all the elites making war on the elites.
As the Jolly Margaret Associations, Georgetown University gets Condi nasty. It's the New York Times. The the high ground of culture of the of American Culture Writ large or american society writ large being rewritten, as we speak, to reflect the priorities of a radical set of ideas about the structure and nature of him our can an end. What actually goes on in the lives of ordinary people is not yet entirely implicated. But the whole point is he's the high ground so that the high ground can then likes supply side economics trickled down to everybody else at that's. What's interesting, it's like come Freddie, the boar this some very interesting crazy, radical journalist on rights very interesting stuff on and has this
hang on and on sub sack who was saying you know all of these woken wars and journalism that have now created this weird new market on sub stack for individual. writers to get audiences because as they no longer, have hospitable fora in which too, sell their wares and right there pieces and There is a ready made it pretty large audience for them. This is because nobody actually knows or thinks that none of these was none of this woke revolution. has really popular support. Like readers, arms clamouring for the publications to be woke, its staff at the institutions that are clamouring from for them to be woke. People want to be told the truth about things they want to hear True things not false things for the most part, unless you are like a crazy activist, if you are
you, if you're on a certain type of temper, you want to hear what the Trump ass I bet, if you're, woke person you wanna hear only acts had not by and why is evil and has to be ground out end and this Tal terrible, but that is not what the overwhelming mass of people want we need or think that they should have and therefore it you can isolate it to the elites. Are uniquely susceptible to a certain type of bubble, false consciousness, where they think The world is shifted around them when it's only their zip code. That has shifted around them. What were you you? You are living in an entirely different set of realities and the cases that are most intriguing to that point, which is a really important point, is like the case that Smith College, where a walk privilege student who happened to be black
It means a right and a bunch of white working class people by calling them races with no evidence is made up a story and their lives were ruined, and there was recently, a whole bunch of black intellectuals actually issued a lead her saying do we need be fighting for the rights of these white working class people to not be deep races without evidence, so the leading the trickle down has started it, but it starts with the people who are who are working in a working class job. In these institutions, the people who are the support south the people who go home and have multi racial families and funny of multi racial interactions, to whom the idea that you can't have it where is open, honest discussion about race is is enough, but because they have them every day, they just don't have them in the critical Rais D returns deletes want them to have, and they their lives by principles and values of the elite. Something should be done, The principles are values, those cases I think we're gonna start to see more and more than hopefully will start baking becoming more critical
sceptical of the elite opinion about those cases, and I think this meant the Smet report The reporting by the New York Times about that's myth gates was really useful in that regard. Actually, ok, again my apologies to my colleagues for my glib pronouncement that our understanding of what can happen, the press conference was wrong and that I was right as I was wrong and they were right. I was also wrong. About the name of the editor of the purely mathematical sources. There was not Frederick partner but Howard partner, so I apologise for that. for those of you who are who are celebrating Passover, have one therefore pays off great sailors have inspiration and and a renewed commitment to to the Add to that the greatest miracle in jewish and possibly human history will be
back Monday for even Christine and the absolute no Rossman I'm John put words. Keep the candle burning.
Transcript generated on 2021-07-28.