« Commentary Magazine Podcast

Commentary Magazine

2016-10-07 | 🔗
On this week's second podcast, we discuss the latest revelations in the Hillary Clinton email scandal, including the eerie assurance of White House officials that they could quash questions on Sunday-morning chat shows about the matter. Two notable brothers get mentioned. Also, can there be reconciliation in the GOP after a Trump defeat, as our Noah Rothman suggests in his much-discussed blog post here? Listen, your guess is as good as ours, but you'll only be able to guess if you listen!
This is an unofficial transcript meant for reference. Accuracy is not guaranteed.
Welcome to the Commentary magazine podcast on John Podhoretz today is October, seventh, two thousand and sixteen. As always, I ask you to join our conversation of commentary magazine dot com to like us on Facebook at commentary to follow us on Twitter at commentary. I'm at Jpodhoretz with me is always at a green Old, our senior editor high Abe High John and at no a sea Rossman nor Rossman our system on whenever high. Now I just so
the election. Thirty two thirty three, days away the revelations about Hillary Clinton and the emails and the behaviour of the Obama illustration do not cease and whether or not they have any material effect on the outcome of the election is really beside the point at this point, because we are seeing a kind of endemic corruption, self dealing and effort to quash any serious reckoning in relation to the question of the compromising of national, Secure by Hillary Clinton, homegrown home brew e mail server in the latest batch of freedom of Information ACT. Email releases secured, I believe, by judicial watch this time that suggest intimate white house in
Haldeman with the management and handling of the email story from the very beginning, just after Hillary Clinton, disastrous March twenty fifteen press conference at the United Nations, of which she claims that there was no server. There was a server should there been a server. She hadn't done anything wrong, maybe something wrong and happened. She didn't know it wasn't. Her was buffer pay great. It was below her pay great and the big question, of course, in the subsequent year, a year and a half is that the congressional committees investigating have been pushing and pushing and pushing to try to find too to make a kind of comprehensive timeline of what happened
see what possible violations of not only the law but of national security took place as a result of this reckless behaviour and more and more its clear that the Obama administration from the beginning took up the matter because it had to and took it up in a way that was designed from the get go to quash any possibility of anyone being held to account for this behaviour. Noah Rossman, you been following this pretty closely. What up? What can you tell us about all this yeah, the and the most damning l So this most recent release overall step back a little bit. Thirty thousand square feet there. Thirty thousand feet, rather, is that Hillary Clinton NASA campaign was coordinating with the White House in order to make sure that there is some uncomfortable questions about this thing: work asked, and they were all on the same message and that court
action was going on with the White House Communications director at the time Jennifer Palmary who went over to the Hillary Clinton campaign shortly thereafter and became my Hillary Clinton campaigns to cover the communications official, the most damning email. I think in this exchange that was releases between palmary and then state support, currently, actually State Department, spokeswoman, Jennifer, Saki, actually now she's, not stay departments will somebody more. She used to be famously of the hashtag campaigns right yeah who who had right, who was no bomber? Twenty. His well he's jam, pain, spokesman, who came across a little bit like like a valley girl, grave added that the Russians are not abiding by the promise of hashtag. I believe
but anyway they were communicating and one of the emails to palm tooth Saki from Palmary said between us on the shows, referring to the Sunday shows think we can get this done so that he, he being Secretary of State John Kerry, is not asked about email. And that didn't happen. John Kerry appeared on the Sunday shows and he was not asked about Hillary Clinton, email scandal. Despite being the Secretary of State, succeeding Hillary Clinton that position a day afterwards, Saki emails, palmary good to go on killing CBS idea, CBS face the nation was this, we shall carry appeared and we are going to hold on any other tv options. Just given the swirl of crap out there
now there? Nobody knows why John Kerry was not asked about this particular issue, despite it being very noisy and relevant, and it's not clear. According to the Wall Street Journal reporting how Jennifer Zaki could in some influence CBS needed so that she can execute her will and make sure that nobody asked these uncomfortable questions, but I think everybody listening can put two and two together. You have the two and two are: the roads, brothers Ben Roads being Brok, Obama's chief foreign policy adviser and David roads, his brother being president of CBS News and, as we know, Ben Roads is not about bragging that he can pull the strings of the media like a merry you're like a puppeteer and they Marian. That's
she did that in David Samuels, now notorious piece about the selling of the Iraq of the Iranian Nuclear deal. So we don't know who did what? We also know that the kind of General Lee rule view of the email scandal was that it was a fake, it was a phoney was a fraud. It was gender by right, wingers who are obsessed with the Benghazi and and they stumbled on this, and it had nothing to do with anything, and you know that it was outrageous that anybody we are on the one hand they had to investigate it, because, of course, the the Obama administration prosecutes. People for behaviour like this is prosecuted. Seven people in the world in the course of its administration for security violations of this and indeed attempted at one point to sort of while loop.
Nor Lasso James rose in the Fox NEWS into one of these investigations into a leak. In the question of whether or not there was an unauthorized exchange of information or aid, we now have the mishandling of classified information. I think, as I wrote a couple weeks ago, that should Hillary Clinton lose, which may or may not be a likely proposition. Democrats will have to ask themselves very straightforward lie whether or not they're a bubble mentality about how just because right, wingers were upset about Benghazi and then discovered that Hillary Clinton had a had put national security risk, made the put Hillary Clinton putting national security risk issue, a right wing conspiracy problem to be dealt with the way liberals do with all right with conspiracy, problems with just to mock them and the poo poo them and roll their arm eyes and not do much investigating
into them whether or not that that this is the thing that will bring Hilary down if she is brought down and it will have brought her down legitimately. There's you know that The secondary point I want to make is that, when call me the FBI director came out and said he talking to indict Hillary Clinton, because no one no prosecutor would indict her on behaviour like this. That was, Self evidently at that moment, patently false. There have been multiple prosecutions of people for the mishandling of classified information summit. Went to jail for five years, the Bush administration for having driven a document. Twenty to his country house in West, Virginia and how There is opposed to his house in Arlington Virginia because his house Virginia, was beyond the twenty five mile limit established by the law.
As being the acceptable distance from which you could bring a classified. You could carry a class my document away from, angli away from CIA headquarters. So what he said was preposterous, and he also said that you know it, and now we have immunity being granted to machines, we have the refusal to supply anything and that's what we needed to have. The fullness of this picture is that a cup more information has come out of the course of this week, which you alluded to regarding immunity, deals, fur Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson in order for them to receive a laptop, the had a lot of information on which they agreed. They wouldn't search after January thirty, first of twenty fifteen before any of this came out in the public and also wish they would destroy, despite having obviously evidence on it. If you extended immunity deal to somebody beauty,
that they're a witness to something that could possibly be a crime, and yet they were allowing her to serve as Hillary Clinton Council that also prevented our oil mills. That's Russia, mills and then also prevented them from investigating this whole bleach bit thing which is Paul combat at whose technology contractor and he used some software to erase so that this information from the Airbus uh, that's forensically unreadable will that's the mean. The amazing thing about this overall. Is that it's not like we're too talking about one each one, one misstep! That's now being handed over and over its its growing tentacles it It goes into, starts, have been gazing, and then it involves the these. These white has indications and then and then the emails themselves, implicated Clinton Foundation and then there's then there's the big. The call me statement, which, the Justice Department involved as well and and and and everything that went on with with
rattle mentioned prior price to call me statement, and now we have the tv networks involved as well, and then there's the private firms and bleach bit it's this. It's it's become this we'll leave sort of scandal. Well, it appears that the reason machines was a deliberate decision by the Justs format of the Obama administration, not to impose by the Justice Department of the Obama administration, not to an panel, a grand jury that could in fact issue the subpoena request to empower grand jury to help along with the investigation that the FBI I was attempting, so it turns out that all this was going on without a grand jury and so for the FBI to get information. This information had in some sense to be given up voluntarily, since there was no compulsion, nothing. No no effort was made to compel witnesses either to testify or to provide evidence. It was all
oh by request. So when they preemptively say ok, we'll let you look at my laptop as long as you destroyed afterwards, this who is made to agree that add entered into immunize. The information on the laptop because there is a deliberate decision, has been made by the Obama administration. Make sure that dough criminal proceedings are going to follow from this investigation. That is the only way to look at this, and this of course follows the refusal to do a serious criminal investigation into the behaviour. I was learner at the IRS and the destruction of emails on her part and the refusal to do serious investigating into the fast and furious scandal the gun walk
Scandal in which weaponry seized somehow makes a hands into a mexican drug dealers and importer agents get shot. There is eight, there is eight, a pat parent lay. There was apt to justice to power I went, and one wonders why was, I would only have been the justice or many deliberate decision to assume that any that it was legitimate any investigation that involved congressional committees getting all HUN bothered. Republican Conway, committees was to be stymied, blocked, slow walked, delayed and impeded
probably never gonna, get the answers out of this that we need, but we have at least three cases now in which this is self. Evidently, the case. It is a very, very disturbing and it is very frightening and if you think the whole point about the misuse of executive power is that when it is misused, it creates a new precedent for its misuse by
future administrations that that will say well, they did it. So I guess we get to do it, no and stop them so who's gonna, stop us and the backdrop of all this is Americans are in the midst of a crisis of confidence in their institutions, and those institutions are destructive displaying every day. Why that crisis of confidence is prudent right, where there are two different forms of this crisis, where one is the belief that the authorities are incompetent and handling things made most plain by the horrific in our first two weeks are first three weeks of the roll out of the Obamacare health exchanges. When the websites didn't work, and all of that which was some kind of you know, libertarian fever dream of what was would happen when government gets involved in anything. So that's the incompetence thing, and then there was the malfeasance there is that there is the symbol.
Question of whether or not rules are being made that make it possible for people in power to cover up for themselves and others, and in this case I think what makes it different from previous corruption matters and other administrations and don't say governments is that those are usually kind of venal in the sense that thereabout, you know, hiding money laundering or bribery or email, personal aggrandizement knowledge this and a lot It just seems to be nakedly, partisan and maybe a logical that is republican, say acts. Not only are we permitted to say why, because they say acts even if that were excess true, but we are then permitted by the nature of how bad we think they are and how untoward we think they are to behave. The list
Lee, because there, because we believe there investigation is illegitimate. Therefore we are allowed to use whatever means we can t stymie their investigation. That is a terrifying precedent they won't say that. That's what they're doing, but you can't look at Commies Behaviour and say that that's not what happened call me was basically blinking s o s and that press conference he was saying you know, I'm not going throw the election year. You can't look at me, I'm standing here, I'm not going to be responsible for changing the Corso caregiver history by myself, I'm here alone. I got us I got it, I got it. I got a letter, general, whose meeting with husband of the target of this investigation six days ago six days you don't wanna tarmac work. Balls and ned. Then it's like. Ok, you do it, so
I didn't you know you can't I mean I know I just don't think you can blame combeferre for being the person. Who said? Look I'm I'm. I can do this by myself. That was so the same dynamic that I mean you can't really prove us, but it's my inclination that that same dynamic informed the decision, one of the various decisions deciding the constitutionality of the individual mandate to a bomb care in the Supreme Court is that they didn't want, interfere in the political process by Judah. Getting that case as it should have been strictly on the matter. The line instead of doing so rewrote the law. He said, I mean the decision all, but sets that which is a decision says at the end of that there is an election. You know like it vote. Somebody else is precisely that is one. That's how that's how John Roberts ended ended, the I'm scared to sit. So the headlined all this, of course, of the Obama years, is that we're compromise
our self or constitutional duty and our institution service to the idea that the sovereignty of the american people can't be violated even if their sovereignty is elected, a series of corrupt officials, it's pretty dark, of course, you know the fact that the end result of all this is a republican nominee who has literally no interest in separation of powers or the first amendment or with straining restraining that role of government in our lives is itself a kind of Tsar emanation of the same result, words like you know it's like. Ok, none of you could do anything to stop the Obama people. So we need to do. Is you know, make a gull em out of her I'd? That will definitely make a monster who defend us from this monster. Basically, global, I mean, and the thing is it.
Any remotely articulate republican candidate could could take, could look at all this and and deliver an effective message that, while this is trumps, try inarticulate messages out of this is this. Is all fixed, everything's rigged, but you know once again. There is a very legitimate scary and depressing argument to make about about how things actually do need to be cleaned up and and and all these unsavory interconnection. But I also think that you have to blame a Brok Obama in this sense more Twenty fifteen, a rational, Whitehouse thinking about its responsibility not only to its country but to its party and to the future, and you know of its legacy and all of that. Looking at Hillary Clinton at that press conference should have said. Oh man, we are in big trouble. This is big trouble. The server is big,
trouble there's a lot of big trouble ahead here. Maybe we ought to do something about not coordinating Hillary Clinton. Maybe we ought to try to help create some realistic alternatives and, as it was in primitive, came up out of nowhere that are almost beat her and I got forty five percent of the democratic vote is seventy four year old socialist from you know from Vermont. So you know if that had been Biden, if that'd been you know of successful democratic governor or something, that and the White House have made it clear that it wanted a race it didn't. On a coronation and that it even hinted that one of the reasons was that this whole issue had to be a Jew decade publicly to make sure that the party was not compromised. That would have been rational and sober and responsible thing to do as it is. If Hillary Clinton, winds and November there will be
giant shadow over her coming administration. I don't care what people say it. This doesn't wash away, doesn't go away. The stories are go away. These court cases are continuing on the foyer request him on on, and material and information, There are cases there can be heard after November. You know Then she not out of the woods. I mean she's out of the woods in terms of the Obama just Superman. She, certain chrome, just Herman, isn't get indict her. But who knows what could happen? You know point about the Obama Whitehouse moment of sobriety is interesting, because I think, to my mind, if you see the the most, if you Barack Obama looks so completely unsure of self. In that moment, when he is first asked, when did you know about the home brew server? And he says I found out about it with the rest of you, as we then came to find out is not the case because he has
it enables each in their under under well. We don't we don't know what's the case, so he may. He has evidently a Sudan email address of appeared in that appeared in the Hilary email release.
That said that he has a sudatta was email. Address doesn't mean that he has a homegrown, sir, that he know where the email was going. It just means that he has a Sudan Amis email address. So I think some of this is being over. Read I mean you know, which is the idea was he has to have a way of commitment by the way he's the present United States, if he, this is where these things complicated. All power of the executive branch and the rights reserves, the executive branch and the co equal status of the executive branch resides in the person of the president does not reside in the executive branch. The the executive branch emanates from the president, who was an elected who was the one elected official voted on by all the people? If he chooses to have a pseudonymous,
email address. Moreover, if he chooses to have a private homegrown server or to use a well, he is permitted to do so. That is not a violation of law. He is the person from whom all things like you know how documents are classified. It's all it's all invoked in the name of the present United States over. That's why he can declassify anything by saying declassify. It. He is not ruled by classification measures. Hillary Clinton is, she is The presidency is not elected by the bye. She is HIV, responsible to Congress in a way that he is not responsible to Congress. Her departure, overseen by Congress, committees. She is not a co equal of Congress. He is a colleague of Congress and of the judiciary
if he wishes to choose to treat her such that's all well and good is simply not the case. It's not the way. The was done now with all that highfalutin stuff, going down into the raw nitty gritty of politics, Ardour Rossman roadie. Post earlier this week. That is crucial unusual manner buzz about what happens should dynamically. I write things and they don't go anywhere Well as Malta, we all do that's. The whole point is that you know it's like how many, how many hit Syria recording album other fourteen songs on one's ahead, so So your post is about what the Republican Party should do in the event of a trump defeat you want,
sort of laid out will yeah. I was thinking about this over the holiday and been thinking about it since January. I suppose in writing on the theme for some time, because it with the writing was pretty much on the wall. That down trumpets, go and have a very tough time of the selection, and it does look likely that he's going to lose in the event that he looks. There's a lot of fantasies on the right, the anti trump right, the pro trump right about purging elements within the party that they dislike and that's a fantasy and a noxious one and it needs to be abandoned. The party is itself, is not a national league viable a vehicle unless it's a national coalition? That means every single member of turns out needs to be a part of that coalition, and there needs to be some sort of reconciliation and, as a result of that necessity that everybody is going to have to discover terms upon which they can reconcile, at least at the grassroots level, and that essentially is going to be very late
I don't think that there is anything that anybody can demand, save for the fact that we acknowledge that Donald Trump's, nomination and his approach to governance was a mistake and that everybody involved in that mistake needs to accept that acknowledge it and on those terms we can have truth and from truth, we can have reconciliation. Some examples will have to be made. Those who gave aid and comfort to white nationalists, for example, members of the K Street establishment, who thought Donald Trump, would be a more safe steward of the comfortable order of things than somebody like TED crews and some conservative performance artists who have shielded him from a lot of criticism that he deserves.
But those are very minimal. For the most part, there needs to be a lot of magnanimity here and coming to tat together, and that has that in that notion, very lenient terms. I think fur throwing a winnable election, but that notion has irritated particularly those who believe it downloads from his head on something that he's really speaking to those for whom the GEO Pews Agenda and Washington has left them behind the notion that tax cuts are ineffective. Idea of policy in they exist and on their own and are should be appealing to a grass roots coalition of conservatives is That is fine and demonstrably flood criticism corner to them, and I I don't think that's inaccurate, but at the same time and then there's also a lot of people who believe that, because I said said that Donald trumps.
Thirteen which had recommendations about minority voters and women and young people, the Obama coalition. They both there's a lot of people who here amnesty, and that is a bizarre pathology, which had recommendations about minority voters and women and young people, the Obama coalition they, but there's a lot of people who here amnesty, and that is a bizarre pathology. Nobody said anything about immigration reform which is likely to get done, and Hitler Glens First term, so Republicans need to get over their fear of quantum quote amnesty. They ve lost that fight, but the idea that reform conservatism has no place in this future, in which there is some sort of reconciliation between from voters in conventional traditional republicans in the belt it is not true it does. There certainly needs to be some sort of a policy consensus there, but all this needs to be predicated on the idea that Donald Trump was a flawed candidate that his attention to them. The nation was a mistake and everybody involved in that needs to accept that failure.
Ok, so, first of all that the performance artists that you talk about, meaning you know what Nathan we're tell causally entertainment way we're talking about. You know that Where do you talk, show hosts and people on fox and stuff like that they are not going to get punished. No one's gonna get punished there except commercially, except if their ratings go down, except if they, you know flip out in the wake of this and start getting nuts ii and having their audience run away from them and embarrassment or deciding that they ve been selling them a bunch snake oil and they turn away and get a better. So I think, first of all, one of your the people who need to need to observe be made an example if it's not gonna happen, at least in the way that will pay them. Secondly, the case to establishment that wanted trump instead of crews is the Senate Majority leader. Now, if the Senate loses, if the Republicans
lose the Senate in the course of a trump loss. Mitch Mcconnell will lose its leadership position. I won't be the same majority Lear porkers, Republicans one of the majority, and he will no longer be the leader of the Senate as he will be voted out. So that may happen, let's say, but Emma he's the object, lesson he's. The person who have personal peak said the TED crews was impossible, but maybe we could come to control trump. As for the white man, the people who helped the white nationalists see. This is where the real question of how you interpret trumps raw goes. Are we gonna say, let's say David from says in the Atlantic, that Trump saw something and that what he saw
effectively with a more moderate and liberal republican Electra. That's his line that that they, even though he's auntie trumpet you don't like Trump and he's written some very good stuff for us on some of these matters that he and about the whole question of Nixon and Trump and the connections there too. I've seen sixty eight. He says we're holdings are allowed, religiously used to be, and they want cradle the grave health care and they know they wanna, so they want to power more powerful social safety there not interested in tax cuts, but they don't like immigration, and you know that Ok, so that's him! I mean that's David, I don't know, maybe it's them, and maybe it's not them, but I see no indication based on any pole,
any data, any information that suggests that the Trump Coalition has any policy you know is backed by any hardline policy on anything except immigration in the wall, not nothing exemplified by the fact that that they defend him. No matter what site of any policy he's he's on what that's where it was said that that's the serve leadership that some people who have bought him, I'm don't touch him. Another grass roots support or other people are enthusiastic about him. We know that they like the wall, and we know that they think that America has gone down the tubes and that you know everything is terrible, so the debts will we know. We don't know that
one cradle to grave healthcare. We don't know that they want this and we don't know that they want that. We don't know that they want anything. We know nothing. All we know is that he is a resentment. He is a candidate of national resentment and sometimes can international resentment express something very potent and powerful that has Paula applications, but sometimes they don't and the notion that you can inner discern a serious set of policies to be to be pitched too. The trump voter to get them back into the republican Fold or to solicit I them in the Republican. Concerted fault is preposterous, because if what they want is cradle to grave health, air. Seventy five percent of the Republican Party or eighty or ninety percent of rolling party does not Obamacare wanted blown up does not believe in nationalization of health care is was the unit glue of the right
for the last seven years at Obamacare was both a policy and in an acre constitutional abomination. They don't want, you know, you know they, so it's a cause of his intentional vagueness and contradictory statements that you can project onto him. All your priors, all your desires, to see conservatism, embrace Medicare expansion, which he does and that's we don't like you say, we don't know whether people actually like that are not only has it hurts Randal commentary, so there are two little compter parties, the it states, just as there are two ideological tendencies and United States of one is towards ever greater than ever a role, size and influence of government on american life and the other is less, and if the Thorp overcome poverty is not a party of less govern
involvement. That doesn't necessarily mean that you, then you know clothes, cabinet departments, that's been that's without and in a month for thirty years, and it doesn't happen. What it does mean is that win win rural start trying to use. You know title nine entitled ten to change should the poorest should change criminal justice procedure and suspend And suspend the idea that you know you're guilty your beer innocent until proven guilty then someone's got to stand up and say? No, if you, you know eminent domain, someone's got to stand up and say no, the government doesn't have the right to see your property. You know at will, which so something and Donald Trump does believe in. So if, if we go down the road of accommodating the Trump voter in power see terms you're going do destroy the end
our basis on which there is a nun liberal, non democratic tendency in the amounts. Here's a question and I'm trying to wrestle aside from white aside from white nationalism, which is which is way more important than people realize, if it weren't and his entire vote, wouldn't be white and may help you know well, can I mean conservatism has been the the philosophical ethos of the Republican Party for a while, but not for a long time. Historically, this was a progressive party, a party that didn't shy away from interventionism in the past, sector intervention is in the private sector from the public sector and progressive ISM, maybe its natural home. I don't think that's right see. I think that We're too tendencies in the Republican Party before Reagan, one was the serb growing raggedest tendency, which was a kind of anti communism mixed with a sense that got government was getting too big and that and that Liberty was what United
These ideas that govern was encroaching on our liberty at home. Just as communism was encroaching liberty in the world, but it was pose not by progressive ISM, and the Republican Party was opposed by Greece. I shaved budgetary seriousness. That is, we have to taken just as much as we can't spend more than we take in, and you have to be very careful, Poland very accountant driven and you know we need to be fanciful, so you don't need to be handing out tax cuts too much, but on the other hand, you have to make sure that the books or imbalance and those were the two forces main street republicanism, which was you know, small business banker. You know miss me town banker you know, I know how to be a sober and responsible and keep my books, imbalance, verses, thee. America is a grand glorious experiment. Experiment is and is in danger from you know, communism abroad and from encroaching leftism at home.
Those are the two now these may not really count anymore, certainly green eyes. Sadism ISM is so is totally out of favour, even though you would think with a twenty trillion. Dollar debt would maybe start coming back in what is it favour is any sense of a connection between America's role, broad and its condition at home that has been severed and so p, because they're saying they're saying we're so that we're looking at this. You know, half a million people dying in Syria and the wind and the vibrations and emanations of it spilling out all for the arab world and into Europe, and if America is not there to stop it, who is basically much of the country putting both candidates saying well week. We can't yeah. I mean we're going to try to help when we can says Hilary Europe down from says that we are now. We just want to ban the hell at ISIS
That's it. That's that's where things are different M weak pill, a reformer reforming this of Liberty Coalition. That's the thing that seems to me to be the sir Gargantuan hard sell. What was a couple of years that the sort of tying in what sort of national and international and in your search domestic greatness, was really largely result of cold war. I mean Russia is a threat abroad and communism was a thread at home and it was there was brought together in that sense. For a while and then the sixties. What, when the common, when this sort of Vienna, Mccarthy Esther, when general sense that we might be being undermined internally faded in the MID fifties, then Sixty came along and and and the leftist rat
arose and you did have actually some serious revolution activity inside the United States, not only from the sort of student revolutionary laughed, but from a black activists and the black Panthers them, and people like that in the list or regular cessation of crime and all stuff it. It came back, but it was very much of a condition of the cold war, but but but it's a longer called war does not mean it. We need better to nose posts in the idea. Being that it would be interesting, question is being in a, a post trump reconciliation. I get the I get these sort of hoo hoo. Back in who we forgive. We make an example of what, but I agree with you. John It doesn't seem to be. But no obvious core of ideas round which were then going to coalesce mothers one at that.
The big questions. Are the one big idea around which the trip from people you can say coalesce is Annie. Immigration. Almost too, you know immigration to zero or immigration to the wall or immigration to you now the sense that debt or you know what, what buying trumps foreign policy. So you build a wall against Mexico and you Syrians out and somehow it's all the same, some that's all, she's of the same thing on here's. What I am a little less concerned about this- and I thank you guys are as far as coming back. Together in an invaluable in which only Republicans existed. Yet it would be difficult, but we're all gonna be back in the same foxhole, but the into twenty seventeen. Twenty eighteen is gonna around there's gonna be a lotta Hilary initiatives that are going to need to be blocked. The mid terms are gonna, be a substantial problem for the Republican Party. They got a really great map and there's gonna be a lot of people who are going to try to primary there there incumbents and create some sort of a trump infringe. I
in that process. So there will be some uniting and twenty seventeen just by virtue of the fact that it will be an opposition party again and they'll come back together on those terms, which is why I think we need to be thinking right now about how we reconcile the trembling deviation and that can of love? You acknowledging that it was a failure, but I totally agree but telling them to acknowledge its failure is is a is, is a that's a hard sell that p today now people are going to do it anyway, because no one ever known ever acknowledges tat. Gotta failure. I mean five people who said look I had to say that I was supporting him as you know there were thirty percent, my district there were forty percent of This review was gonna vote for him in what was I going to do like you? Don't like be be on the wrong side of my own voters. That's one thing, but I do think that in general terms that
reconciliation is fine, but if the Republican Party does not have a fight overboard, the party of small government does not fight for itself as the parties while government, as the liberal, progressive move of the planned administration will be on every front, but both by both by entropy Obama and am entropy, and then by what she's promise largely pushed left by centres. You know, well. That will be the urine as they may be. The implicit admission in acknowledging the deviation ISM of Donald Trump, but the easy way to go about that is to say that he was racially inflammatory. You can that's the entry level there. He said in his rhetoric was apparent that he alienated parts of this coalition that we need. That's the easiest thing you could possibly site. Then you can move on to the fact that he was a
rather than in Manhattan night Liberal, I just in every everywhere but yeah, but that's where glancing that's work. It's tricky, because one thing that I think that everybody has to acknowledge that we did not wish to acknowledge that we were disappeared. Discomfited by having to acknowledge was the fact that a naked white appeal appeal as a white against minorities M was a key element of what made this appeal real and you know it's not to do so don't count D. The rallies are not representative of the gigantic national actual, but there are their representative something and they the that the media from which he emerged. You know not just Hannity and Fox and friends, but the national choir.
Call wars world, the World Wrestling Federation. All of that stuff. These are the entertainments and the information serve. Convinces of you know what what might be called the White ones and proletariat totally ignored by people like us, totally ignored by most people, but the idea that you have ten eleven twelve million people are consuming the stuff every day every week and that you know five or six gears making yourself a household name with them and a friend to them and someone that they here all the time and who speaks to their concerns. That's a very serious thing. You can't just say: okay! Well, you know what he was racial inflammatory was. He writes racial inflammatory because the racial inflammatory part was a key element of this on the part of the problem of rebuilding and bring the trompe, and you know that the Trump peons in is, if they eat out, if If a not small number of them are racist, then there
I'm sure racist and then you're gonna, starting, ok and here come the Lahti and the Asians and other people, and they don't want them once air. That's the whole point the whole thing, and particularly in relation to Latinos, I don't know how you can look at the Trump agenda. And trump over sixteen seventeen months and all this and say that what he was doing was not saying that America is has been compromised by by the rise in the population of people who come from spanish speaking countries. I mean that is the ultimate that is the ultimate eat. They fix of trumpets em, and you know that's what he said. We can't be. Politically correct when he says we can't be so politically correct any more. What does he mean? He means I'm gonna say that this country is to Mexican and I'm gonna say that muslim stink and if those two
judges. Our messages you wanna hear you're gonna hear For me, I'm so politically I feel so politically correct that I can't even say it that directly say it in cold words even now, but you'll hear me I don't have an answer to this. I'm just saying that you know it's just it's just not so simple, but maybe like you're, going way them to meet as a resolution to identify it in that in those terms. But your key point is a key point, which is something that the right has had a problem with forever, which is that parties are about addition, not subtraction party, not in thought. Maybe illogical, organizing like had, which is not about numbers, but a party is about getting the most people. To agree go into it and the simple fact of the matter is the problem. Party has been shrinking, not growing it Richie parity in twenty, two thousand and four. It's now
seventy nine to ten points behind Democrats in terms of the way people identify themselves and twenty sixteen, that is, that path is the path of people who think it. I mean it's, not nice, it doesnt represent me. They don't talk, but I think that I am interested in I'm embarrassed to tell my friends that this is how I vote for and if the problem, It cannot be a place where people, if they have to do something where people slink into the voting booth about Forex without telling anybody, so they don't get yelled at that's the greatest advantage. The Democrats have the greatest invention that we're going to have is. If you go on Facebook, it's people saying if you tell me that you're for Trump I'm not going to be your friend, then, and they mean it, and you know maybe frumpy and say that about their liberal friends, but that's a very, very small group of people, but this is down, become an acceptable way to talk in social media and probably in life
and the there is another element here which something we discussed before, which is about how Republican Party when its winning is sick is made up of a successful conglomeration of coalitions due to different types of conservatives who want different things. And when its losing and post Trump lost GNP, is losing GNP these these dip The minutes of this coalition do not want to work with each other. They dare not. They see no benefit in the trade off sick that that come from there and that's and that's that's. A lot of these questions will come out on the watch. We don't. We have to see what the returns are like right on the member states. We have to do in order to fully diagrams what the problem is. So I guess we can't really say much of anything until we see with that graphic break. Rather, harmony is if we really really go signs virtual. You wanted foot this around and you say: okay, well, what happens if trumped wins and what happens to the party trump wins again. The impulse is going to be a purge
in this case it's gonna, be the trompe in purged of everybody else. Just at the moment, when trap and the Publicans can least afford to purge, they can afford to purge, they can afford to throw people out it will be a close one victory. You know. You're gonna, be very hard won, have a hundred percent media opposition to you and the notion that will you who was say all of you. Rhinos get the hell out of here is pretty crazy, number one number, two Democrats, what a Democrat say if they lose What are they gonna say? Well, the easiest and smartest thing for them to say is what the hell happened. Here we nominated the one person that Donald Trump could because she was morally compromise because she was all because she had nothing to they because she has no purpose. She had no purpose no vision and she's a crook so but that doesn't solve any of their ideological problems and then they'll be pushed way. The left and we'll have this
bizarre situation which we have waited left democratic Party, and a weight of the populist Republican Party and one on earth is the vast middle gonna. Do because that still because our politics is polarize doesn't mean that the country is polarized, the country isn't that polarized. I mean now everybody watches the Big bang theory. I don't know I mean, let's adapt pull. You know it's we're in a very strange political moment. So that's the other joke is to think about who's. Gonna deal with what and by the way, if the Democrats win, and they then feel comforted that
play really put it all together and everything's fine now, and they can just go on and be triumph list as they so deeply want to be, and she sort of waltzes off with her sense of the world on dimmed. God knows what Harshi is going to impose on people, not just any largely we just in terms of her own personal, behavior and bills, and what kinds of things they're going to generate that you know or go. Tear this country apart so with those wonderful sentiments, become To close, I hope everyone who is listening, who knows I'm talking about, has a wonderful and sweet new year whom to car, and that day you haven't. I any easy fast will probably too
before before we got to join Us Commentary magazine dot com, you get a few free reads and then and then we asked you to buy subscription for one thousand nine hundred and ninety five full on all of all points. Bulletin subscription for two thousand nine hundred and ninety five to get to your Ipad Subscriber Ipad and beautiful monthly magazine. Oh for Abe, bring while then no see Rossman. I am John put horrid, keep the camel burning
Transcript generated on 2020-02-27.