some guy, What the commentary magazine podcast, I'm John Paul words, the editor of commentary, the seventy two world monthly of political analysis, cultural criticism. Overall intellectual property from a conservative perspective, join us a commentary magazine dot com where we give you a few free reeds, and then we ask you to subscribe Ninety ninety five for a digital subscript, and while twenty nine, maybe ninety five get too and all access subscription, including our beautiful monthly magazine in your mailbox eleven times a year with me, is

ways: no Rossman are associated or high Noah Hygiene and a green. Our senior editor high, a hygiene. Okay. We a lot to talk about, and we don't have much time. So we could just jump in by pointing out that the nightmares mere scenario of the french first round of the french elections that might have led to the national front, winning the election and or were warm prevailing significantly in the election. Such that, such that this very problematic extremist party might actually end up with the present c in the hands of marine. Le Pen did not take place, and it appears that the manual Micron A never elected.

Industrialist hedge fund, the banker guy, is probably going to be the next president. He is I was not a candidate of a major of one of the two major parties that have dominated french politics since the origin of the fifth republic in the late Nineteenth Fifty's. So this is a very significant result that the both the socialist them of conservative parties have are not going to have control of the country for the next some odd years pierce. It strikes me as remarkable that I'm sure there are some people listening to this who were offended by might description of the national front Marine Le Pen's party as extremist, and that its of victory might possibly be a nightmare scenario.

Has over the last couple of months. There seems to have been a bizarre softening of attitude on among american conservatives who want to treat Lappin, including by the by the President, United States, as though she were some kind of proto trump until Trump fans looked at her and seemed to think that she was maybe a sort of french trump. Where is in fact she is a Putin apologist and somebody who is literally, you know the recipient of direct support from blood in your Putin and is the daughter of a man who serve deserves to have been called a NEO Nazi, whose party this was and who As you know, who I am so it doesn't have a conservative born in her body right. I thought, as chairman of platform. Yes

the state, is cheese that she's a nationalist. She is. She opposes standard issue, international agreements and And basically the party is an unsavory collection of attitudes about race, nationalism and Judaism. That should be of deep offence to any civilised person. Despite the fact that the President said she was really strong, borders which I was unaware was a particular issue with the French. You know in general seem perfectly strong on their their borders, no matter what number, no matter, what party therein, an understanding of french national pride is not a problem for anybody. In France, where their socialist sword or or anti socialist, I think by them but nonetheless, here we are so. I just want to posit too

as the idea that this presumption that there is an international worldwide movement towards Trump ISM is yet to be demonstrated by the dutch election by the french election. There seems to have been an effort to imagine that breaks it, which, of course, the election for which was five months before the American. Action was got some kind of prediction of trumpets and whereas, in fact the United Kingdom has was pretty steadfastly opposed to membership in the European Union from the time the European Union was first proposed and had there been a referee I'm I'm England's entry into the European Union, it would have lost and that such and such a thing was not did not happen before the Maastricht Treaty was signed by the british and mighty. Maybe three so you know

I don't think that that qualifies either is a pretty human impulse. I guess TAT makes sense of things by applying them to your own into the unique circumstances, but we know it and it's very overly simplistic and chauvinist stick to see this, the french election or any election for that matter, or referenda outside the United States as a proxy for support for Trump. It's just a ridiculous proposition. The these damn completely unique characteristics in the french election particular had absolutely nothing to do with it. The conditions that brought Donald Trump to power. And you know what, with what we see in the headlines, the United States are events of terrorism in the in France, but those those didn't seem to me to be the unique factors:

which this particular not at all rings. Jack turned not in fact, in all the pulling the french attack on the bump on the police officers in the week before before the election seems to have had either no a factor might actually have pushed a couple of people away from LE pen. Oddly enough, I mean she, she ended up in the low end of her appalling number around twenty one percent, whereas mccrone end up in the very high end of his pulling number at around twenty. I percent actually think it has a bit to do with with how we define Trump ISM. If we talk about Trump ISM as national reserves forward, leaning nationalism and agrees populist campaign in it in and of itself than ye, I think you're right. But if we talk about Trump is a man the kind of frustration with the status quo and the Serbs will Smith almost no among populations for this room deserve change. Things

well whatever that means them. I its various rhythm Morpheus. Idea, even among voters- and I think I think, there's a case to be made, including in the french election, because as because, as you said, bertha- that the Socialists in the far right work were sidelined. That's we were talking about this in the back office and that sort of seems like the through line. If you could make one, but it's a very roundabout way to suggest that there's there's a certain contingency in american political commentary. That's not unique to the United States that is very frustrated with the status quo and resentful of political elites and the institutions to which they belong and have shepherded and to see them destroyed, or at least shaken up a lot and to the extent that Marine Le Pen or breaks it or Trump or any good wielders or, however many people represent threats to that institutional status quo than they are welcomed by these individuals. Who are so restless. However, you could make the case that a manual mccrone himself is actually a representative of the

enforces, adjust the Trump and his nationalist people, don't didn't seem to know enough about. What's going on to pay attention to this committee is a guy who was now have been elected to office whose main qualification was that he left the government of social France, while on the grounds that it was too left wing that he was a deregulatory force in that government and that he knows about business in a way that other people do not because he went in to invest banking and made an enormous deal trompe in deal to sell a baby food company tenacity which needed him. Some a norm Samantha money, like twenty million dollars or forty billion dollars, or something like that Oddball he's married to us, but he's married to his high school teacher, whose twin

for years is that shutting year at just french voluntary animals, there was an interesting level. Yeah, but they do it's true. There is, of course, the right now we don't see. Doesnt seem to have a mistress which makes them different, whether we don't know, but I mean usually there's the wife and the mistress. You now get hooked who got the few world together. He's no win win win the war political leader dies, but haven't you could just met? You could easily made the case that microbial once did once wants to laid modernize of the french economy him. As of enemy of the status quo, since he invented a new political force to to win the elections you now in the yeah. I know, but he showed a lower list, but by the way not hostile towards the supranational institutions that have become the subject of so much consternation for the populist right

yet now I mean from what I gather and I'm not really an expert on this were Roy gather here he's serve one of these guys. He is sort of like a Davos man. You know he loves. He loves TED talks at ease. You know he is too high. Programmes I and we now know what they're, what they all that stuff and that he is kind of like of post, modern political figure, and Either either will.

Take a serious look at deregulated, the french economy, which trance very much needs it's a ridiculously and always has been a ridiculously over regulated. If you, we think that Russell's imposes absurd restrictions and regulations on the on on Europe. You know from its central position is the governing force of the European Union. I mean in France, you know if you own, if you own a piece of property, the government can tell you what you can and can't grow on it. You know if you, if you want to grow certain kind of grape outside of the region in which the grape has grown, you're not allowed to you'll, be arrested, burn your build burn your finger down or something like that. So you know this is not understanding private property, as we see it in the United States and it's a very you know very serious business, so

All I'm saying is that the the notion that people are frustrate with politics is clear. Very true that people all over the world are frustrated with politics but big deal. So people are frustrated politics. That doesn't mean that you then automatically assume that every action that takes place by people or frustrated by politics has the same route in the same place in the same way and their representatives, Some of you know the disintegration of of of of all either that the creation of rational standards or the introduction of new radical populist standards. It matters what

ideas, as are that under girded em, if you and if, in fact the french election we go into the french election, run off with Micron thirty thirty five points ahead of rain the pen. This means that the notion that trumpets leading a world wide movement in this strange pro Putin Anti Globalists direction. Like being a supporter Putin's or a friend, the pollutants doesn't make your globalist snakes, globalist and along direction. Matt drudges beside him. Today. He is why what is what it was mad drugs, I'm quoting the macrian flying cars. Madame number, one in tv news welcome to Hell Matter was number one, Rachel Meadow number one I don't know apparent

hey, I don't enable news ratings in a war, but they make sense because that that's the side of the letter that energized exactly well off the only so much of their choice, then we may do further, can follow really ponderously sloppiness syllable. Some solemn says. Logistic thing S, monologues, don't get to the point until your scooped right. Well, here's what I would say- and we can then move this into our next topic, which is a discussion of trumps first hundred days. That has been remarked all over the place, that there is a new engagement with political news in the United States right and we ve had Commentaries had a surge of attention subscriptions Ninety per cent gain for five months. New York Times in a sort of a record. Cable ratings all over the world ideological map from Fox on the right.

To see a man in the centre left to Amazon. We see on the left. Left publications tell us. Why is that so here's my my present my presumption is that there was actually flattening of an in relation to news from twenty eleven onward and maybe really from twenty twelve onward, when it became clear that we were in a period of policy stagnation, the likes of which I don't think we have ever seen right, I mean no major peaceable. Legislation passed the Congress in the last six and a half years. You know the old The thing that ever happened were unilateral presidential action, in foreign policy droning stuff that went on in Libya. Failure to do things in Syria, Iran deal stuff that you know irritated

nor the right kind of please liberals and may the left was not very happy, but basically the illegal audio conduct. It was. A kind of them was like a trench warfare frozen battle right in which no one was, everyone was in their trenches and no one was fighting because It was just a treasure. Nothing was gonna happen, so Trump comes along he'll regard, Trump comes along and now all all the battlements, we are now in a new everything is in a new order and we have We don't understand that nobody gets it. Nobody understands what the whether what the Her battle is who's gonna fight who who's on this line, whose on that line and that's interesting and its unexpected, and anyone who is interested in the future of the country and in the present condition of the country is gonna wanna red and pay attention to. What's going on, because you know it's that It's a lot of drama. We don't know who was

the republican side whose dominating in the White House what's gonna happen with the Democrats and the car and the and the general ideological battle between left and right, and between Democrats, republican is is just its unclear and and When else does one pay attention to news, but when you don't understand, what's going on and need the facts- and I would add that during these serve official policy, stand off political position of the culture did not stop. The people were merit. The american people were very politicized sums, overly politicized, and so did the But the time you ll action head, it was sort of Indians right bitter picture brought all that. After all that you ahead, you could almost imagine that the two are in are in a kind of seesaw relationships of if politics would rain where politics as was take place, freezes then.

Everyday life and cultural order of the nation which has not we're politics is supposed to take place, becomes politicized because it's the outlet myopic instincts right are no longer so clear right. So so Oh, you have a you, have a you had a president who was unwilling or unable to figure out any way to make common to move the ball forward in terms of finding common ground, with some Republicans and Republicans, who were equally Dugan to simply destroy the presidents and make him as ineffectual is possible because he had done way too much when he had a gigantic majority in Congress to help him and had spent two and a half trillion dollars and had passed legislation of very far reaching effect without any input you now just just simply from a democratic perspective. So was not like the debates of policy or any less accurate or passionate.

They were totally acrid that they were pointless. I mean everything. Became a secondary battle, so you can battles over the shutdown of the government which were actually battles over polycentric actual legislation and in the hundred eleven Congress. Let go back that far and actually think of might really serious legislation right, but there No, but there was no one, but the Democrats could pass legislation at will and they have a democratic present, a good sign it well. So now we have the hundred first hundred days of tromp and, of course, the great story. The first hundred days of tromp was that nothing got done, I mean gorse, which was nominated, but anyone would have been nominated, write em in the open sea tell someone would have impact in. Hearings would have been held and that would have happened. Or can we stop right there

We are aiming at because conservatives are gonna, see they're, gonna bulk at that and say this is a really big accomplishment. It's one that would not have happened if Hillary Clinton were elected in it's one of the things that people who were opposed to quote unquote, never trappers and the campaign here. Her first and foremost Gore such the fall on your knees and thank Trump for gorgeous failure, and any you're gonna, make this point too, and that's it. It's actually true to the extent that he read this off a list in its have really good pick. It is really good pick and got it got a confirmed, but it's not like this was a cost free proposition the rules of the sun and had to be changed. Fern nominees. That is not something that ever gonna go back. That's something Republicans will regret have not to date in the next day, and all this was done in order to maintain the status quo. We just maintain the ecological balance and the court status quo into the death of dove Antonyms Scalia. Conservatives did not, the ball forward here. This is all lateral, ultimately

You have to say that if you really think that this was a fantastic strategic victory, the person who deserves credit for it as much Mcconnell and not for to not because Mcconnell very lethargic Lee intelligently and an end with utter com. You know prevented our garland, from having a hearing and kept the seat opened and inner basically was a jump. Ball had been so Garland didn't get a hearing and a failure in one she would have gotten her guy through and whoever was, and Trump got his guy through and gas. So so course, which is a good peck I'm just saying that anyone, one probably would have a perfectly good peck, and so that's the virtue of trumps election. That's not the virtue of trumps governance. Ok, I mean it's. A virtual term Sarkozy didn't pick his sister and he didn't pick. You know Alex Jones to be on the survey ports are, there would have challenged legitimacy of any of any such such decision, but so this is a good thing.

It's not something that were mere poohing It's a value and a benefit, but what there has been no real conservative movements in legislation or reform of anything that's permanently, and we ve seen Brok Obama appeal to I'm sorry, don't drop appeal to break almost pennant phone strategy, which he's just basically undoing all that Brocklebridge did with the stroke of a pen, rather the extent that it can and and Donald Trump successor will do precisely the same thing. These it does a written sand. I mean when were the last paragraph I believe as well: The last paragraph of my book from hell of a right which is written in the age of eighty three points out. The bill Clinton came into office and, as George W Bush George H, W Bush was taking off in the plane to leave washing after leaving Bill Clinton voided. All of his executive orders does that what you can do as president and that one of the problems

the pen and phone strategy of Brok, oh Mamma, in passing executive orders is that it was actually quite ineffectual. I mean not only did the orders that we haven't even really heard over pay that much attention to one's involving certain declarations of ads. For the EPA and the c, the CDC and other things which were simply avoided as a matter of deregulatory effect by the Trump agency, but the one but the ones that he really you know. Suffered over writer like had eaten dreamer thing and some their things like court, stop them. So that's the other thing. Is there not least we talk about? It is, though, it's beyond unconstitutional aggregation of a thought. To the president. But the fact is that it's not one of the three coequal branches of government appealed to

stopped the imposition of various executive borders, a Brok Obama's stopped over the course of his hesitancy, various assertions of executive power to appoint people who were not in our inner to certain jobs that they should not have been appointed to because of the separation of powers problem and Here's trump peep two drafts of the executive order on on on immigration and and they're. Both stayed one thing that you have just mentioned, which I think is not correct as yet said: Dhaka, which is still on the buck stock. As the verdicts action deportation of children right of it, and that's actually a really important point, because executive actions that are made in service to some

a social good or something that's viewed as economically critical, like down from capacity deregulatory executive without action, which Democrat will run on not repealing and won't, because the effect of it would be to draw Conan and that sort of What happened with Daca Daca is probably never going away, even though it'll never be law just because two to really repeat all that through enforcement would be such a terrible set of headlines for this White House that I can't They would never do that. So is it just depends on what kind of headlines you're going to incur, and that's that's where we're at for governments governing by by press right, but that is really I mean that's what most characterizes the first one hundred days of. Is it's not policy, but in it's process is the ineptness. I mean it's, so that's what that's the story and You know that is obviously a lot of sort of mythical oh silliness around first hundred days in general, but I would say in trumps Kay

in particular, it actually is more meaningful because hook The sense that anything that is days going forward are going to be any different. I mean, I think, it's sort of you, really serve laid out. What the problem, with this administration. Reading this long interview that he gave with the Associated presses Julie Pace this weekend on the subject of the first hundred days and various other things, one is hard pressed to look. Tromp himself, not his administration, but trump himself in his own view of what has happened and think that what we are doing, about nine hundred people are going to start getting angry me again, cuz, I'm not being nice, and I should be nice and he's crying and all this is that he is a he is. The first and serious president that we ve had in my lifetime. I'm just turn fifty six so get out. That means from cattle the onward he's, not a serious person. His view of the job of President

is not serious, there's! No consistency of purpose. He talks a lot of as palsy talks about a lot of what he seeing on tv when asked about. The evolution of his views a NATO. He said openly when I said that NATO is obsolete. I didn't really understand what it was and now I'm getting a better sense of it. So maybe it's not obsolete, but what a y know I mean you know I predicted, a lot of terrorist attacks. And when NATO started Oh terrorism was on the agenda. Now it's on the agenda, so he says there. Altogether in one statement and it's like listening to a the ramblings of a guy. Giving and after dinner speech who had three scotches and doesn't doesn't know what the subject of the paragraph was that he started speaking. We are attempting we have been attempting from the beginning to impose an and over

arching order on Trump ISM M there. Magazine starting out with this and see Baron is trying to spell it out dim Byron York at the washings amateurs trying to figure it out at various people. Ben dominates the Federalist. Destroy figured out and you cannot impose order on chaos chaos is just chaos. This is not a serious person. He doesn't view what he is doing in any kind of overarching context. He doesn't have prim proceeding ideas, he does We have a policy basis on which he wants to take those ideas and put them into practice. We had the spectacle this week of him. Saying that there was going to be a tax bill and there were a tax plan was going to be released when there is no tax plan and that they would vote on healthcare this week, which Paul Ryan said they're not going to do

because there is no difference to trumpet appears between announcing that you have a tax plan and having attacks plan might risk. I mean credibility aside, might risk by trying to call this in Tropic process something else, and you know graft onto it, meaning and purpose and broader grander scale than than it really is. You might miss, what's actually happening, which a sort of the decoupling of the White House and credibility like that, the speaker of the House just basically said don't listen to the White House. Why doesn't know what he's talking about? That's remarkable! That's crazy! That's a sort of stuff that doesn't normally happen. If we're not talking about it, because to do so is to admit that what we're seeing is unpredictable and now I'm predictable in a good way, with unpredictable in a runaway train kind of way, we'll look at what look at what happened after the the strike on Syria right to the hole

would the week after we and other people and everybody re met. The said: look this. This could be a real moment of you know a moment at which the press, then see begins in earnest, because we did something it was isolated contained, but it might have had a message for North Korea might be theirs in Syria. Don't do that. Proven. That is unpredictable, and they will act quickly and he's not gonna like sit in tat. Tears, hair out in all this and his behaviour since has made clear its almost as though he saying to us, don't Take me seriously. What I did on Syria was not serious. I've just like saw some pictures of of of beautiful children dead. I figured I needed to do something, and now I'm done, and now I'm back sitting for three hours watching morning, Joe and complaining about some unnamed persons, hair style and clothing, who I hope It's not me I mean it might be. I think I look perfect. The fine and my we now. I think I look relatively

but it could be me that they didn't say in the New York Times, didn't SAM political. Who was that he called Joe Scarborough to complain about, but you know I figure. It's probably not me. It's probably This guy Gerardo Sue I was on with once was a big we head of hair, but I could be wrong. But I mean, if that's why I use my hot. It's probably could me, because I wasn't invited to the conservative, the meaning of conservatives at the White House today of obviously about would not be a favorite in the, Tromp white House by a meeting of conservatives in the White House would be a rather hostile gathering. Well, you know, conservatives bright Bart, some other people, so that's funny way, but the, but I hope we have

but I think I'm relatively well groomed now I just. I would hope that, as you say that you stick in the president's crackers rather be remembered, poorly, then not be remembered at all no fair very much. I think I'm not remembered at all, but that's ok, the impasse all situation here, though, is that so Trump is in, and unserious person do dealing today in the most serious matters, a mean. So so watching him will you still have to? derive some meaning from it. It's not even its I'm just a human impulse it that it these affecting very seriously. Why do you have to, though? That's that's, giving us and a false negative here we're getting bad results, because, where we're ceases its being results from these experiments, it has been: aren't there, okay, so being there's a novel by years, Kosinski, which was turned into a movie with Peter Sellers, directed by how Ashby enlightened seven nine in which a in which simple gardener, one,

where's to american politics and says totally no mission. That's straight on things about gardening, and everyone takes them to be metaphors about the american life and he serve ends up as a presidential candidate. So Trump is obviously not chance. Chauncey Gardner chance, the gardener from me because you know he is much too aggressive and you now obviously uses hostility and rage and then end and open anger and know that as a weapon, where's where's, Chauncey Gardiner just a site. Four. But in that sense, what's going on, as he says, things like we need water for the plants to grow, and people who see he's talking about the import them dearly importation tax in, like that's how its that's, how it could be like being where somehow we'll get a I? But it's also, but let us not be there in that, just

become statutorily, whether or not he is serious. He he headed the everything he effects, is serious in there and there are serious consequences too to his unserious actions. I think we would have, much better presidency. If the people, the president, listens to weren't trying to him to create for him an alternate reality in which he super effective in a really good president We would get a much more introspective, cuz he's this guy is not a he's, not a. I guess, he's not a really deep thinker, but he's not completely off, so the world around him. He does consume this material, particularly people who he respects likes it usually right. Good things about that sort of incentive structure has created a proliferation of people who say good things about him, but that doesn't mean he's in the east. It completely ignorant of criticism about him and he reflects on and seems to react to and changes behaviour as a result of those criticisms. So people who are fighting Donald Trump in a way He doesn't deserve our doing him no favours well,

you never do anybody favours, except if you're trying to Brown knows somebody by saying what he wants to hear, which is that you're doing just you're doing just great, that's absolutely fantastic, but we would get a better class of commentary and maybe a better presidency if we were no longer trying to him What was their vision on this thing because they really really want the elites to suffer a little bit. I mean look, who does want the elites, the suffering that the least in America deserved to suffer like their foolish. They come up with foolish ideas about what's going on a leak college campuses have become in a nest of anti intellectual hostility toward you know, ideas that are deemed unconventional, You know liberal shibboleth, don't tell us very much in outcomes. The policy solutions that date back to well Reagan. Don't really speak to our! You notes the problems of arm of our time. They just there just serve the same application of the same poultice.

On the same wounds, and so it's good that elite suffer. It feel insecure So we get back to this notion that you know something new was going on in America that nobody yet understands and trump himself doesn't understand it, and we are all attempting to pose prove priors to tip, make some sense out of it and can be that there is no sense to be out of it and the sense we have. I can only will only happening in retrospect if Trump so as reactive as you suggest, Noah then hit it will be his reactions that will tell us something about what matters and what doesn't matter over the next four years. Paris, because world will know what hit him that he has to react to write the thing is that he well. He may well be totally unmoved by the by the challenges to call two orthodoxy, that you know that that were so

citing and thrilling to Obama. You know that or or the Bauman's know the notion that we were that we're beat up progressed, the leading America in a wonderful direction to the future by you know, by advancing bathroom laws and by going after bakers and by going after the people left aside winning contracts and all this thing, and that here just won't care about any of that and so he'd. That's not what he'll react to. What will react to is the idea that he's failing or that he doesn't know what he's doing or that you know, there's no, you now future for him in his caught. His incompetence is going to run your him impotent at something which we should speak to because of an meeting letting him for you, so exciting. There was a crucial meeting we did discuss.

Presidential visions for the country and to the extent that we can identify a vision for the future of the United States of America in for eight years that exists in dung trumps head. It's It's one in which Donald Trump is really well liked, but there's not much substantive that he wants to accomplish. We can think of a presidency that is less focused on some sort of a concrete achievement beyond Donald from one country to be successful and prosper but that sort of vague, like we're not does not really any significant reform a place that he wants. Country too, I mean I give you an example. Before nine eleven George W Bush said he was going to be the education president right, and so he devoted the first six or seven months of this presidency, to the advancement of the no child left behind act working with Teddy Kennedy across the aisle to get this thing through? The Senate right and a lot of people on the right, hey, no child left behind and think it was a failure and all of that fine. But if you voted for Bush

anyone. We didn't vote for Bush. You knew in the absence of after after before eleven. You knew that his presidency was going to be about doing some tax cuts and education reform. All we know about Trump is that he wants to make Amerika great again and that he said he was gonna, build the wall and that he was what else gotta stop find out what the hell was going on and stop immigration from muslim countries, or something like that beyond that. It's very hard to say at NAFTA was a bad deal. Iran was a bad deal so, but that didn't tell you what he would want to do in their place. That's part of the problem with the news that came out about how He was affirming that the Iranian was still within he. He let it go through for another six months, based on the deal that Congress,

past right, which is and then everyone is now trying to say I you see, but he did it, but you see in the letter that was written. You can see the contours of how he's gonna get out of the IRAN deal putting my notice going to this is gonna. Do that other thing? Fine, but you can't get out of the IRAN deal the getting the Iranian requires you to have any incredibly detailed, set a policy prescriptions to do what comes after. How are you going to prevent them from getting a bomb? Your back to the status quo ante? Here's the you pass, anything is it. I agree that I think his main motivation is to be light, but even in going about them he doesn't do that in a sort of standard politician. Why isn't his his interest in wanting to be like does not lead him to sort of pole tested palace As you know, he's not he's not sort of like Hilary. In that way, you know Gina, making sure that he's in keeping

at the time. He doesn't it's more of a sort of entertainment industry approach. To being right, I'm going I'm gonna, say things and do things and appear in places and is to try to get people like me when, when they don't like me and an that's completely different, think it's worth saying that since we ve been spending the last fifteen minutes talking negatively about this, that the Democratic party is an horrendous condition. I mean we not them presume and look at this and say boy. The Democrats he's doing badly. So the Democrats are we now are just serb in peachy. King condition. You have Tom Perez, the the chair where the Democratic National Committee declaring this weekend that no candidate who will get support from the part. We can have a view. That is anything but pro choice on abortion. I didn't come out of the blue either no, its direct Instead, it is deranged, it was

only ten years ago that Rama Manual secured a congressional majority in the House for Democrats by running across the country Ro life candidates in house raises including Mirabile a dick to one young woman from upstate we worked in Jill Brand, who was Pro I've and programme at the time she is now neither, but you know so what I mean. They one thirty one seats in two thousand and six by running candidates appropriate for districts, who did not have conventional orthodox view. Democratic, liberal Urban Morning, Joe Rachel or not mortgage unwarlike, Rachel mad our views they're gonna win and twenty eighth eighteen candidates have to be able to report reflects the views of the disease.

Said therein, and I think it's probably fair to say that somewhere between twenty five and forty percent of the Democratic Party is hopefully functionally pro life, just as twenty five to forty percent of their democratic Republican Party is functionally pro Joyce. Something like add and therefore its about a forty five, forty five to M proposition, whether not your pro choice or pro life in the United States, that that about as a result of the fact that there is a somewhat pro life candidate who's running for a special action and Bernie Sanders was asked about him whether or not he was progressive enough and Bernie Sanders work held his judgment on that one ready but Nancy Pelosi who, as you know, as well as worth about Does you get said on television on Sunday? In response to this? Of course, you can me life and be a Democrat you, you can't declare that people who have

view that is held by more than forty percent of the american people cannot run for office in a given party. That's insane and if the guy was running. The party is gonna hold that position. The democratic party is not going to do very well. This is not the egg. I there's like, you're just saying that there is not really a lot of interest in the cultural battles from this presidency he's just kind of wants to change the name of the structure of the country. Literally found the foundational the structure actually infrastructure, that's about all he wants to do. But there is only interest in the cultural battles on the left. They have no real press prescriptions for anything resembling a truly foundational economic reform. All that was accomplished in hundred Eleventh Congress, as we said before, and now that's just exclusively about ginning up enthusiasm among the base and the donor

ass with cultural wars wet, but they have to live in these districts. They have to be able to win, but their their interests now isn't is in raising money and getting people in this right fair enough, an end, but by the way that that is important, and that is an in Nassau, sorry and they have all of the they have all of. Individual qualities there are necessary for there to be a way of election in their favour in time. Eighteen, assuming that the trump remains around where he is and the Republicans remain, is unpopular as they are. Except if they alienate action. Voters at an end and mistake: the crowds in the street for ordinary people who actually turn out to the polls in mid term elections which have not favoured them, except for two thousand and six and two thousand It was a great mid term elections for Democrats. They have not had a good mid term election, they did not

have any other good, mid term elections over the last twenty years, except for two thousand and six, and why? Because they had some under damning, that they needed to match candidates, two districts in which they could win, and if that is not what going on now, because the donor class is now in such control, the democratic donor classes in such control, the party, then then they're not gonna, get very far. Last topic, big store in the New York Times this weekend a year, long, Tik, Tok as we call them on James Comity, a director in his behavior decisions to how he handled the Hillary Clinton case before I M just before the election,

though we have a big dispute here, because having read the story, having thought this at the time, it is my view that the is a disastrous public official that he he arrogate to himself the responsibility for a unitary responsibility for figures, how what the American people should or should not know what it should be informed in order to protect the integrity and honesty of his agency, as opposed to live by. By a very simple proposition, which is that unless somebody is charged with crime. Investigation should neither be public, although this authority become public or that what the deliberations were in whatever the findings of fact were in the case should not be exposed to public view and right in doing that. He decided of July fifth to give a press conference in which he basically in debt.

Who Hillary Clinton and then said there would be no charges against her and, according to the New York Times in the story, it was the unanimous opinion of the people involved in this other investigation. The unanimous opinion that the charges did not rise to indict double standard, largely be as a decision made the previous year, not to indict or two years earlier, not to indict see a director of David Press for his handling of classified information, of a to a range of pleading because portrayal of actually shown intent acknowledge that he had shown intend in exposing class information to his mistress, whereas There is no evidence to prove that Hilary had the intent to hide or mishandle classified information, and so you could not indict her for something that you would already said was: okay, if David portrays

not entitle if David or Reed, I was not prosecutable of David craze. Did it because of a plea My assertion is that how are you Hillary's handling classified information that the FBI unanimously it did not have grounds to indict her, and yet he gave a press conference, saying that she was wilfully, reckless and horrible with the information, and that this was a shocking dereliction of duty on his part and a misuse of an office in which he has has investigatory powers. The Only protection against the abuse of those investigatory powers is the restraint that You must show, in the case of a decision not to indict Noah, thinks differently well. Well, there is, in my opinion, Democrats

have done themselves no favours by ignoring the role that Loretta Lynch has played in the position in which combing found himself Loretta Was the attorney general of the United dates under Brok Obama and was commies nominal boss, correct. She infamously took a, meeting on the tarmac with Bill Clinton well investigating Hillary Clinton, a fire storm ensued and in addressing this virus form, she essentially refused herself from the case she said, I will take one. Recommendation the F B. I director gives We learned prosecutors and justice, more pragmatic, just here, however, saying here personally and just him personally, but everybody, but also the FBI director, who is now acting in a prosecutor, boreal role, which is not the role of the FBI. The F b I gives evidence, creates evidence and provided to the Justice Department, adjust sperm and says we're gonna, indict or we're gonna put before a grand jury. They

make prosecutor aerial recommendations. All of a sudden. The FBI director is in charge of this case. Secondarily, the notion that this standard of of justice was established for David, betray us and just apply to Hillary Clinton rejects it. More is. Rather, the myriad of individuals who are now appealing to the Hilary defence who had simply mishandled classified information were prosecuted and convicted, because intent has nothing to do with it. If you giving up for the Navy man and specific case who put some information. Some drive that she shouldn't have moved from one computer to the next, and I was the extent of his offense and he was convicted of Miss Hand, and classified information. He had no intend to do anything badly with it, but because he was negligent with this, he was convicted of mishandling classified information in his attorneys appealed to the standard established by Hillary Clinton to appeal his

So it's not as, though that I think we're just sort of glossing over allow these facts in order to make Democrats feel better about their conviction, their personal belief that Jim call me in Sort of loose collusion with Moscow robbed Hillary Clinton of the elections, but I mean I do think that the Times peace makes clear. That call me was just way to preoccupy with the idea of the FBI and will have the public perceived it and the FBI. His role in the election is ongoing responsibility, to not be involved in the very things that he was completely preoccupied with an eye and- and I think it be he use of them It was a mistake from them from the start that it never went right the second he came out and gave that first press conference where he, where he essentially built a case against Hilary, only to say there's no actual final casing until he was busy It set off everyone

both sides in and did the exact opposite what he wanted to do to maintain the appearance. Of a red working, F B. I know you ll notice, by the way that I am not talking about the case about the matter, Dickens discussion over the weekend, which What he should have done when it was discovered that Hilary Females where I'm Anthony, wieners computer, wild wiener was being looked at. An apparently is still being looked at on potential child. You know what is some questions about his relations. Improper contact with with a minor he had told Jason chafed at the head of the has oversight me that he would inform the house had there any changes on the status of the investigation and there is an argument in the peace that call me in his deputies, panicked on the ground, that should have come out should before they found, what was going on should have.

Now after the election that they had known Hilary emails were on wieners hard drive and they had not informed Congress or made a public. They had not informed risk and that Hilary won the election, but that classified information had been improperly. Miss hat handle them was on was on winners, computer that rose to an indictable offence that they would have that their enact would have security election for Hillary Clinton and then she would have been indicted and that this this would have been talk about the fire storm of all fire storms that the Bill Clinton in our efforts, and I had basically decide to be silent about something that could have turned the election in the other direction. When she was being you know, and as we now know, it's not so easy to invite the president, by the way, as

himself has since discover, and along the same, I think that's a much better case now. He had said to Jason, shape its I'm out you know what this is? An investigation you're not gonna, you're, not going to know anything about what goes on in our investigations unless We indict it's not your business, but he didn't say that, but you ve missed another a piece of judgment. Perhaps you just made the case for what I think is a really important thing to say and Jim Commies defences that it is. It is within the purview of somebody in his position to think about their institution, its role in his three its role in american society and to consider it in that grand dark. You know in advance, in the terms of the entire existence of the country, where, if it's in society, and even if that the conflicts with your mission

a little bit. I don't think you have any eyes. I think you have a duty and responsibility to think about your institution and that fashion, because two to a purely focus on that decision, that one letter as something that you know just a wrote part of his role as the the FBI director- would have possibly led him to a disastrous decision I dont know. I just think that there is a case of being a would have removed. It had many other insane or those of their fathers. There's that there's also along the same lines. His concern that that russian hacking had reveal the emails from democratic officials saying things like don't worry. I don't worry, I'm I'm, I'm I'm. Certain that Loretta, which won't let this case get too far, and com concern was well if that gets out after after there's no indictment until area who becomes president, then than the the F b I will attend,

that's about, but yet, but I thought I mean over argument didn't come out rights that they they didn't, find it or something right nightmare. When I don't know who wrote, I don't know it was it was. It was very clear in the story, but I would say there is a case to be made. The James com is a monster of egotism that this is all about him personally, it's all about his own personal preening, virtue that he he is a good sign, and consumed with his own virtue, and that this was all an obsession with protecting his own reputation and gay. He was put in a very, very difficult position and ultimately the person was responsible. Really Clinton's defeat is Hilary Latin because she put those emails on a pro but server and she destroyed fifty thousand of them, and we don't know what they are and we know she got rid of them and we have no. We don't know, we don't know when the idea that we should presume that they were all at jealousies, wedding, is

presume something about the Clinton's that you have no reason to presume fairly. I mean we're, not James call me and where you know we don't have to shoot standard according according, to which you know we candidate, because we no, obviously we can't, but you know if she had done the right thing and not try to hide as a government official tried to hide her official emails from public view. Who or from foyer requests or from the archives of the UN, Bob Administration, she president. Today, unless she was a crook, and though the showed crook active Mansvelt, Loretta Lynch had not taken that meeting with the husband of somebody who is under FBI Investigation and then reacted too? It is, though, she done something wrong and then behaved. A manner that was completely an almost unprecedented. I love it might have been totally unprecedented. Then the FBI

record would not have had to act an extraordinary fashion, but where there's another dimension to this time story we have touched on, which is that this whole idea about the different way in which call me treated the investigation is Donald Trump and Russia right. He didn't, he didn't come out and ends. You know reveal, there's investigation again can keep keep people a better, not now the his to his defence of it. I think this is actually sound is that he was talking about Maybe the Trump vacation was an ongoing investigation. He came out and discussed the end of the current investigation, this of the sort of final and product of it. I don't know. Why? Why do you think that this whole notion goes to the idea that it's not fair, that for investigation was made public, and his investigate, like like call me, is and was to be some kind of like a

the scales of justice. So I go. I guess this lower the bar for Hilary, so we need to do something that balance it for rent, for by you know, because otherwise it serve till they now either way. This shows that the american people or the pie, the two parties are complicit because they both nominated people in problematic little league. Odor? I mean Trump was under with ten thousand lawsuits against him during two twenty fifteen. Twenty six in the Republicans novel all the stuff, with rush all the weirdness of that Russia was going on, we knew in late two thousand and fifteen early, two thousand, and sixteen even before it was an investigation. Revelations made the nominee anyway and Hilary s emails were a matter of public record before she announced for the presidency and if Barack Obama warrant a feckless?

oh narcissist. He would have done something to try to help his party get away from her and into the hands of somebody who might have not been In this position, like Joe Biden or somebody else, and that it was left to Bernie, said terrorism in our a ridiculous figure to win twenty two. AIDS or something life. You know They have entered into being a bit over the head, if and what's more, if he hadn't Bernie Sanders in October at the first major debate between them, so You didn't care about her emails, but had basically spent his entire campaign going after the notion that she was dirty and crooked, which he we really started to do an earnest later. He might really have I mean, maybe he would have one. It was his his acceptance of the idea that it was unacceptable for any Democrat to to assert that Hillary Clinton had an email problem,

that largely probably cost him a real chance of winning the election. Nomination search, he's the one who is to blame. I'm just saying that call me is not a call me as a person who should not be viewed favourably after that story. In my view, what why couldn't? just it will be given as concerned as he was why Couldn t just have said. Okay, we might my job in this case is to conduct honest and thorough invested. Issues. Perry could have issued a memo. That said, we have concluded the investigation, Hillary Clinton and with a decision that we are not right or not bring charges against or for the mishandling of the of classified information pier. Yet not she was reckless, there were seven emails or seventy and some get Walsh was ruled. That was really bad. Like you know who the hell, I mean, what really gets me as like who the hell is he Who the hell is he to stand up and make a speech about how

he doesn't handle email well, either charge her. Oh, don't charge her. His opinion is of no value, it is of no value his pay. You know either either your guilty of. If you're a process Cuter or an investigator of criminal action either you cross the line into criminal action or not not for him to interpret her behavior short of her criminality. Can I can I tell you what this reminds you of it sits on a different topic, but it's related and it's something I hate for the same way: let her grades on restaurants in New York City, if the restaurant is found to to do not operate up to legal standard of of cleanliness. That's one thing: if it is that's another, I dont want critique, but Kay. That really should be binary right right. You live in New York. You should know that there are three letter grades maybe in sea and below sea. Your closed by the health department and

happens. There are many people who, because these letter rags now exist, will only go into a restaurant within a right and there on the windows like a big soviet sort of editing, really ugly, that's right, and it always started like two years ago when writers claim that they get bad grades because they're not they're, not paying off the inspectors. Well enough, further, not you know whatever the investigators feel like they're there being mystery, that there have been like crazy cases were clearly. You know. First rate, restaurants are getting weird letter grades because somebody shows up- and you know they find something on the floor- And they say it's a mouse dropping which isn't there something like that anyway, so aid is now needed is actually that should be ridiculous either as a sanitarium lies to eat, or it is not so you not deeds of great so either. Hillary Clinton is due to be charged or not there. That's right so you're there either opening your clothes. Ok, she gets it

So congratulations, everybody. You have now gone from the height of the low from the french election to the rating of local Chinese take out here in Manhattan. So we ve come to the end of another endless peroration here. Commentary magazine Ford nor Rossman agreement. I'm John ports keep the candle burning.