« Commentary Magazine Podcast

Commentary Podcast: Who’s to Blame for the Imbroglio at the Border?

2018-05-29 | 🔗
The first COMMENTARY Podcast of the week examines the firestorm that erupted over the weekend involving the treatment of unaccompanied minors at the Southern Border, and who is to blame for their condition. We examine the rediscovery of 2014’s border crisis among pro-Obama partisans, and the extent to which Donald Trump’s supporters have internalized the wrong lessons from that episode.
This is an unofficial transcript meant for reference. Accuracy is not guaranteed.
Netflix welcome. Commentary magazine podcast today is Monday, not Tuesday, May 29th, two thousand and eighteen after memorial day, I'm John Podhoretz, the editor of Commentary magazine the seventy some odd year, old, monthly of intellectual analysis, political probity and cultural criticism. From a conservative perspective, we invite you to join us a commentary magazine dot com where we give you a few free reasons. Ask you to subscribe. Ninety, ninety five digital subscription, two thousand nine hundred and ninety five all access subscription, including are beautiful, monthly magazine in your mailbox.
Eleven times here with me is always a win: Waldersee rather high hi, John no Ross men are associated high, no hi and storable Mari. Our senior writer has or a project. I am attempting to get it so that if you listen to this podcast at double speed, you will not be able to understand me. That is my new I had the experience of listening to bench. Podcast. Last week I put it on, two times It was literally like the guy from the commercial in the eighties John Machito, who went by there are other than that. I, like a good bike, barely understand he talks but so does our own. No, I mean you wouldn't if a if you had our podcast on a double speed and then know what chimed in you'd, be you right. That's a compliment by the way. It's the skill able to unintelligible. If no, no clearly now can speak clearly at high speeds. Ok, so we had a freak out this week and at the beginning of the memorial day weekend when
somebody, I don't know where tweet it out of photograph of even child in a cage photograph from the Arizona Republic first image of children separated from parents at the border or something like that and uh The world went insane and said United States was nazi. Germany, we're keeping people in cages and separating children from their parents and. What kind of monsters are we in all this and then grad? really turned out gradually could have been five seconds into, whoever the first person was who tweet it out. It turns out that the photo after from twenty fourteen was from the first
a sustained period of border crisis with separated children during the Obama administration summer of two thousand and fourteen, where you may remember fifty five that I think it was fifty five thousand people flooded across the border from Mexico and totaly overwhelmed, I ice and the border patrol they had to set up some encampments because there was no where they were easily seized and there was nowhere to put them. The images. Were Second depressing. The fact that the system was overwhelmed became a major national story and in no small measure? I think Contri headed to the wave that led the Republicans to win. Agra. Nine Senate seats in twenty fourteen and and take over the Senate from the from the Democrats.
No, you wrote a lot about this at the time and I wrote about it. Are you right by recently to so? You are just the man on the points yet, okay, so the freak out on the part of liberals, Democrats and numbers, the Obama who were implying as though this is a brand new way in which immigrant children crossing the border retreated and- All these children were exclusively separated from their families, as opposed to coming over. The border by themselves was sort of disgraceful and weird I mean, maybe they just weren't aware but Jenn. Play though I I mean it. It did look like an opportunity to, for just political positioning The way I encountered this wasn't that image. It was actually some somebody onto a report that was published in the New York Times about two weeks ago about Hhs having
manage approximately seventy eight thousand one hundred and eight thousand children annually with about one hundred children of them being lossed lost in the system. Now, there's been some corrections that have come out in the in the interim. Not corrections, I suppose but elaborations on the situation I would say they were corrections. The clear is clear, question until the tions was that the United States, from it had literally separate add children from their parents an then lossed the children in America, so that the parents would never be able to find them again. This is uh really wrong. In almost every particular, every one of these children came as a nun but mine, are in two thousand and fourteen they were placed in foster care and what uh and was when Hs did followups to try to you know and how they were in one hundred of the families that were that you know, with
these children have been placed did not? on to HSS repeated phone calls to find out what was going on. But what they don't know is why those people haven't called back I do actually, according to the Hhs statement, which is its own self defense. Is that a lot of these people who we place these children with, are vetted for criminality, but are illegal immigrants themselves and are does wary of interacting with federal officials. If anybody can by the contradiction in that statement, I'm open to hearing it. I think I think it's pretty self evident further. They do say that. Well, we've all these four hundred children aren't really lost. We just can't find them, or rather we'll have our hands on right immediately. They do say that thirty or so do run away, get lost and might just go underground, be subject to human trafficking. What have you that strikes me as an acceptable level, but it seems perfectly acceptable to defenders of this
Stration the past administration, because this is constant- this happens every year. It's just it's something that we live with and finally the notion here is that that I think is is worth criticizing. The Trump administration for exclusively and not just the Obama administration, is that General Kelly and others have suggest that this should be a means of deterrence that we're not separating the children for their families, which does happen in court rooms as a means of you know, of just keeping one in one courtroom, one in the other or for their own safety, but also as a means of deterrence to prevent families from coming across the border, all together, and in order to do that, he says he said explicitly. Hs the Department of Health and Human services has to do, humanely they do. They do a great job of it yeah. I was helping him in service with that. It's not dh. I think it was a check. Ok, so either way is clearly not the case that they do this perfectly humanely and efficiently, with maximum concern for the welfare of
children so, of course Hs for DHS there. I believe it just has to be preserved. The viability of this program has to be preserved in to see serves just shed all skepticism about a federal aid, transforming itself into yet another law enforcement agency is very disconcerting. In my view, yeah. That's the only thing that we should discuss I mean it clearly, there is a sense of panic. I think That's too strong a word in Trump world about the fact that, despite the fact that he is president was supposed to build a wall and all of that border crossings are up in twenty fourteen and two thousand and eighteen and not down, we've had reports of him of Trump screaming at the homeland Security Secret. Christian Nelson, he doesn't speak to Jeff sessions. The attorney General Anne
but one of the ways in which they clearly sought. They thought they could do something about. This was to make a quite shockingly cold hearted statement, I'm not now sizing the general gist of the same, The idea of, if you come here with your children, we will take, We will send you back and we will separate you from. You will be separated from your children, and they we processed in a different way and they will be taken from you, the border, so don't come at all. Now it's horrible right sounds horrible. It's. On the other hand, weather supposed to do I mean that's the interesting problem if you're going to tighten at the border- and you have tens of thousands of people decide, they want to see, come to America to seek a better life with their children, and you want to A way to get them not to come in. The
this place you want to scare the crap out of them. You don't want to reassure them. I would assume so I mean that's. Well one of the things that we talked about in twenty fourteen when this really piqued, but basically on privative sites, conservative media outlets it was story elsewhere, but it was a big conservative story was the to which an incentive structure had been created and misconstrued abroad by the President's adoption of Daka Daka itself represented the incentive structure does ship your children through Cody is in a very harrowing journey from Honduras all the way n North through Mexico, to the border and the only reason anybody would do. That is because they think they're going to receive safe harbor in the United States. I think that's a valid. I think that was true at the time. I think it's it's true now doctor remains on the books and we
can't seem to get rid of it. Selling can't seem to make it law either. So I I I I believe that there is some incentive structure. There look. I said I I actually will come down on on the opposite side from from the the Trump administration on this one. I think I don't. I I think the with the on the whole, the US should try to avoid doing gravy evil for even a legitimate moral and that I think cell go on the separating children from parents, even if it acts as a deterrent. I guess I suppose, we'll see if they stick to the policy is, is just that you know it. Conservatives should oppose it because it
runs against natural law and it again such as our kind of our sense of who we are as the american people, and then there must be other ways to deter. I mean: can you can you say that there is absolutely zero chance that you'll you'll be you'll, be detained, maybe as a family? Together? I think that's fine you'll be immediately deported. I think that's fine you'll be fined and Jay you name it, but but the idea of separating children from some parents. It is just that it doesn't seem right and by the way, the way, I think I I remember General Kelly defending the policy and raises very crude in heartless terms is not, but this is what I wrote about in on Friday, which was full never trump
any of the extent to which this is a debate. That Democrat Republicans had was an intramural debate in two thousand and fourteen, but one side has totally one in two thousand and fourteen the pundit class, the real mainstream of the conservative movement green this as a humanitarian catastrophe and treated it as such said that this wasn't really a policy issue. Although we should talk about Daca and we should campaign This is the dead the campaign here, but that which this is and in crisis, and we should treat it as such and we should be compassionate with these people and Glenn Beck went and sent toys down to the to the border and there was a action on the right. That was really active, pretty much in like a hard line blogs that bright Bart, somewhat happy. That said, amounts to as much of an incentive is Daca your by by giving these kill children, toys and food and keeping their families. And what have you are creating incentives for this sort of behavior to continue from more lawbreaking? the consensus on in twenty fourteen shifted on its head in twenty fifteen two thousand, and sixteen we had a very high stakes.
Immigration debate in the contest was between who could be the most hardline in the most hardliner one, and now it's a consensus on the right that just about any Hume comfort provided to illegal immigrants, young or old represents an incentive that is unacceptable and induces more but not trump himself, is not getting it out there and saying served touting. The separation of parents from children as a you know? A sort of a sign of of true trump is right because he had this strange tweet where he said on the the the Democrats have created a law that requires us to separate parents from their children or something wasn't at his yeah, which is not true right. Helpful. Obviously, yeah right: this is this policy. This is a lab or a policy by the executive branch. Using its power, the powers that it has under the security ACT of nineteen. Fifty two that's but was heavily trumpeted. He may
all by the Trump administration in granting it the right to read to the muscle back, but look if this becomes a talking point on the the television channels he watches and the people who who's blogs, get pushed into the on the resolute desk, and he reads then he will adopt that's how it always works. It starts with the blogs and then MR goes to Fox and then hit up the talking point of self. Anyway, the depressing part about all this aside from everything else, it's depressing is that we Have a circumstance in which. Everybody is irresponsible in different ways so the two policies are responsible in the sense that it a blot it. It obliges the United States to behave in a way that is, as rob said morally profound-
it's comforting to our sense of you know proper conduct it as a as a moral actor on earth. You know to sort of. Pro claim, a message of heartless. You know savage jury in out in an effort to you know in an effort to scare people off. And then and then, of course, not just to proclaim it, but I guess then, to to actually you know what actuated and then of course, have the opposite, which is how earth are we going to have a say, It's policy on this. If anything that is done by. The hardline administration is greeted with asterisks over
accusation, and the claim that you know we now live in Germany in the left- is now living up to the same model that was created to that created, put forward about how how the right should handle Trump's prevarications and that was remember, take him literally take him seriously, but not literally and now the left. Essentially saying when you see these tweets that are false. These images that have nothing to do with Trump in Polisy, but nevertheless razor anger. Take him serious, but not literally, is not quite exactly true that that child and want anyway, but that's what he would want to anyway so lame and for Heaven's sake this particular episode. The way it unfolded was very reminiscent of of this real, weird untrustworthy, propagandistic coverage of when things happen in is,
Through the use of the photos from from elsewhere. You know the winner would right, yeah, yeah, yeah, right right, yeah, yeah, you you, you you, you use images from from us bombed out. Syrian village yeah work with the Israelis are doing yeah and you pull them out of context, and then they can be anywhere about anything as long as they provoke the emotional response and you associate the image with the word. Trom bore the image or the whatever is really and and and the facts and figures are all wrong. Until later, when I was paying it, I saw. I mean the image from Arizona Republic which the article was from two thousand fourteen to be clear, and there was no, I It was no suggestion in that article of a separation of a forcible separation of parents and children. It was just the children had to write this. Was this hellish summer of chill arriving right and the images someone had posted. I don't know who was in some blue check mark, but you know there's all these blue check mark people now on a tutor who are let you you can't tell the
I will say, like singer actor activist reasons, yeah is you know where they are and they usually they'll have like one hundred and twenty thousand followers and they're following twenty thousand people. Have you know anyway, it was said Literally are running concentration camps in America and that image was there, but you can see it. There was no link. It was just emit screen capture that image, tens of thousands, I'm sure when we talk about twitter at the two people who aren't on twitter, they must think it's just this dystopian health skate and it is the most absurd conclusions about every issue in order just yet you'll be as maximalist absolutists as possible. A we. You should say that we've sort of forgotten the extent to which the twenty fourteen to be cut against the the try, the Obama administration pretty hardcore, even among its own Well, it was an election year. It was a rough year for Democrats and there were a lot of Democrats, mostly in the Senate as usual, but also in the house who turned the Obama administration's handling the crisis. They said it was black
and then they said it was excessive when they overdid did it and then in twenty fifteen, when they revise some policies, they said that was excessively. There was a lot of tension among Democrats with the Obama administration's handling of the immigration crisis Obama. Administration was very conscious of the fact that Republicans in the right we're scoring points on their supposed softap, on border it border and immigration issues, and so they were trumpeting the fact that they had turned back. I don't know a hundred thousand people in twenty fifteen say there were more deportations under Obama than under any other president. They were conscious of the political damage that Republicans were doing to Democrats to Obama by going at the illegal immigration issue, tried to counter it now, of course it's entirely gone from from the Democrats and the left they they have gone all in on on immigration.
Legal elite altogether on the borders no borders, I think, is you know literally foolish, and I find it hard to believe that in sing a presidential campaign in twenty twenty, at least after the primaries that that will be something that a democratic presidential candidate eager to get those independent voters who are going to decide the election is going to be able to go along with comfortably. I mean not that not that you have to be bright, or you have to be. You know Joe are pie, but you at least have to be conscious of the fact that the President United States, you know, possible presidency should not say that massive breaking of us. It is something that he or she finds acceptable well yeah. I have a feeling that Democrats will go. There even
well they'll go there until they don't have to I'm saying that any sensible politician would not do that and it will all the and then how far to the left the primary process drives. Them am not just the you know, chattering college did the social media chattering class, but actually people who have to go out and get vote well. As I said in this blog post, you know that there is plenty of room to criticize this administration's approach to the image an issue on legal term, and just get on social norms. I I think the president's rhetoric has gone above and beyond when it comes to Latinos. Frankly, for a long time, the extent to which he believes the shared hive mind, which is racially suspect and you mentioned your Pio, the pardoning of a scofflaw ice raids, I have no warrants. It's occurred on several about places and Oregon. What have you it's a documented for now
and at this point it has nothing to do with the law. It's very much extralegal and I think that's something. Democrats could make some real hey over if they wanted to and by the way, speak to a certain libertarian frame among those Dependa voters, like you said, do you want DHS to become a law enforcement agency? Do you want everybody Ajax, age. Do you want? Do you want? The militarization and you know sort of the everyone arresting everybody. Is this the country you want to live in or are be more in a frame in which we are feeling somewhat uncomfortable about the latitude, we have been giving law enforcement. I think on both sides that. Yeah and I mean I guess it is harder to make the ace when you have a really low labor participation rate and the unemployment rate is pretty high, two thousand and fourteen. We still work just on the edge
the recovery and it's a different economic environment now, so I think you'll be a lot more. A less tolerant of excessive policies towards illegal immigrants when there's there's jobs to be had also. The question will come to the small businesses, small business owners, people like that who have been a reliable backbone of Republican Party for a long time, but and I'm sure have uh huh. Uh, the deregulation that's going on in the Trump administration, which is something that should gladden the hearts of small business owners, has really been at a higher level than small business number one and two, the main shoe for small. This is going to be the as the economy grows in his things, speed up or if things get better, their ability scale up with the workforce that they can afford, and that's where the idea that you know every elite, every person, You know, I understand my talking now by law breaking or not law breaking, but you are talking about people who are if they, if they have,
I pay twenty dollars an hour for a dishwasher, whatever benefit they get from Economic upturn is going to be washed away, so supply and demand may create that or it may not. But if you are, but if you are sitting in ISA, kind of terror force that that exists make it impossible for you to hire anybody 'cause, no one will be able to come out of the shadows. You're in you scare people and then you're going to have small dispensing will. This administration has not been good for me. I haven't been able to grow my business because I can't afford because keep arrest a work force me. I'm not saying that it was not where it's wrong to rest. The work force on that merely talking, but the political fact of policy the unintended the policy there are policy. There are certain industries that are so bound up with migrant
among them fruit, picking which is huge in Florida and California. I used to live in the the seven kind tip of Mexico, and you would see I mean these kids, the northern tip of Mexico. Sorry, as as the very southern tip, Texas apologies, these kids, who would that would be at the school for part of the year where I taught, and then you know, as as avocado season happened, they were they when they would migrate to California and they would come back and then whatever season happened, they would move around the country, and you know that there was no question in my mind that some of this case it's we're, not we're, not documented aliens. But the point is that I I just can't imagine I mean the people people keep saying if only there was less immigration. Americans do these jobs, and I just do I mean see that happening, but Maybe I mean we guess: it'll have yes, alright, so that is certainly a supply demand theory, as Americans will do this job, but they won't because the the the.
Firms are used to paying a wage that is low because they depend on a workforce, shouldn't exist in America there for yeah. So you need an hour. You can get an avocado picker PAM eleven dollars an hour instead of instead of six right or something like that. But if you pay it out of Picker eleven dollars an hour your not going to make any money off your avocados. So it's a it's. A it's an interesting choice, whether or not to pick them or let them rot on the where they would on the condos grown, where they trees right, then there is there an avocado tree and they're really happy yes we are so unconnected, so they were in another state. That's fine, because they're so heavy it's a bush type. I thought it was a bush. Oh boy, I went strawberry picking, that's a bush, but I just want to say in regard to this
Orange is around a tree. I know that by the way is this not the perfect, like thing where you know some of our trumpian? Softram many claim they don't even look at those early great, but no yeah, yeah, sure yeah, I'm I'm sure the I'm sure, I'm sure people in Eagle River Wisconsin or at picking up picking their over Cotto's off their Bush's Whatever guys. Let me take a break because I want to talk to you guys, very importantly, but the quip toothbrush, which I am going to give you my quip this during the weekend family, we drove to Boston for the weekend, Saturday morning a brush my teeth with quip, I put my toothbrush into. Quip container. That is stuck to my mirror. I pull the equip container and the quip toothbrush off my mirror, put it in my toilet kit, drive to Boston, go to the hotel, get to the hotel over my toilet kit. Take the quip container holder.
Match it to the mirror in the hotel brush my teeth for two at pull it off, put it back in, take it home, put it back on the mirror. It's a travel toothbrush, electric, a good toothpaste it: it's it's the cleanest way to take her to travel with your. Do you have to put in a baggie, you don't have to put the baggy in your toy. The bag was in, the bag was in a bag, so it doesn't get all gross in the toilet. Cuz it's. Its own holder, okay, quip, travel toothbrush, truth is most of us are brushing our teeth wrong. Now, moving on to the more important stuff did you read the piece in the York Times about how Katie Couric is selling for Matt all the by so the blog is doing commercials like this. So I felt a real solidarity with the POD save America, people and Katie Couric, and people like that who have to read the same ads that I do so. That's just elevates me Into the pantheon of american respectability, because the truth
most of us are brushing our teeth were not for long enough and forget to change to Barb rush on time. That's what you're supposed to and focus on telling flashy gimmicks, rather than better brushing, but not quip. So what makes poop so different electric, your toothbrushes, a fraction of the cost of bulkier ones built in timer that helps you clean for the dentist recommended two minutes. It comes That Mount that suctions right to your mirror, just I talked about it. Finally, everyone loves clip. They were on Oprah's a list one times best inventions. The first subscription electric toothbrush accepted by the American Association and that thanks for your health, not just convenience. They deliver new brush heads on a dentist recommended schedule, every three months for just five dollars and backed by a network of over twenty thousand dentists and hygienists equip starts at twenty five dollars and if you go to, quip dot, com commentary right now, you'll get your first refill pack free with a quip electric toothbrush. That's your first refill pack free at
quip, dot com. Slash commentary spell g et Q. U I p dot com, slash commentary, I'm. So we're we're talking about the freak out over this story that was totally wrong and yet is Noah said. There's still plenty to criticize the Trump ministration about for its heartlessness in the way talks about this stuff, but the question is: did the free out discredit that the amid criticism or someone. The legitimate criticism such that it. It's very easy for Trump and his defenders and his quislings and all that to say. Well, you everything you say is just ridiculous and we're not going to pay attention or,
the is this of a piece with a phenomenon. That's been going on that we can elaborate yeah, but I think that the phenomenon that's been going on is, and this ties into even that the question I came up right before the the live read about that. Do you really want to damage your your prospects, fertile for business growth, with your with your hard line, immigration policy, hardline policy on illegal immigrants, but the the phenomenon that's going on is it. It seems to me that. Both sides are sort of embracing tro. Especially the pro trump side as a sort of making it the contents of its politics. It's almost it's almost as if they were It's now coming down to a question of: do you stand for compassion or or
heartless tests. Not we. You know how we we, we must embrace heartless listed to show to own the live. Yes right, yeah! Well, I mean it's not just that there was. You know, there's a poll out. That shows like a double digit majority, approve of Donald Trump going. Mattress is in calling MS thirteen animals and not human, and of course they do. Of course they do. Every person in America talks like that. There's a reason why presidents have not spoken like that and avoided speaking like that, there's a reason why George W Bush, after nine hundred and eleven wouldn't speak like that about terrorists, even though they deserve did amply, and everyone in every bar in America was speaking like that, it's it's beats and aloof and requires a fair bit of, active and detachment from the public to say that this is wrong, and this is what presidents don't do when there's a reason why they don't do it as very to to see somebody embrace those
no, that kind of conduct when people like us are out there, that this is wrong and dangerous and here's. Why? Because you feel like you're talking just into a void. Well, I hope the did not speaking like, like your average, you know, kind of bar stool jack is not the the out that that did not speak like that must mean your feet, but no I I mean I agree, I it, but I and it I agree in part. On the other hand, there's a a part of me. This is again, it always ends up sounding like I'm justifying trump, but I can see why our eight years of the Obama administration, where everything was easy. Indian, absurdly you from my eyes, were they literally did say major Nidal Hasan committed an active of workplace violence or the way they characterized been guys, the Benghazi Attack or
my favorite was the was the was the unwillingness to call the the shoot out at the at the hyper cut share the kosher supermarket in Paris and active and active anti Semites. It will because they could have been. Maybe they were. He was thinking about shooting Nana. What what was it was just it was. This kind of it was a different kind of manic. Carpenter is a book out called gas leading America about Trump, but Obama did a different kind of gas lighting. It was a kind of gas lighting by euphemism, where you kept saying Why won't you say Benghazi is terrorism. You know this is crazy. You know, because you You only not saying it's terrible, it's, you won't, don't want to say it's terrorism, because you for peddling this line that you would destroy Al Qaeda and then uh later after Benghazi. In October, at the foreign policy debate, Obama says I did call it: terrorism, Candy Crowley, go to the transcript and Candy Crowley.
Seriously, having the transcript right in her hand, reads this sentence that could be He construed as Obama, having said may be that it was an act of terror the day after all, right and like you said you mentioned Candy Crowley, it was a feted by I'm sorry, but the entire media establishment seem to be the way they would sort of just a talking point would about about about a rod, and everyone would suddenly say it's Obama says but that's fine c for them IRAN's practices antisemitism only at the margin. What what do you want to do that? All right see that there burning. You know, effigies of Jews in Tehran and right so anyway. My point is that that when wrist, when court in court, responsible politicians responsible parties- I like that over many years they empower these elements where people just want to bubble up and just tell the effing truth about terror and about his
I'm in about? You know bubble I'll, even if it we would. Where would you accept that I mean we were supposed? I said I think I agree with you in so far as Donald Trump managed to capture the hearts of thirty percent of the republican electorate by saying he's telling it like it is, even though he was just being a jerk most of the time, but that's allowing that accepting that as just a necessary part of the reciprocity here is that we have this rhetorical arms race and one side is going to you from my successively in the other. One is going to disguise being rude and crude as being honest, then we're going to find ourselves in really lamentable place, pretty soon, well we're there. So we're already and let me just put out a lot this bringing but think this. This relates to what you make of Donald Trump's memorial day tweet over the over the weekend. That was that was you know, tasteless I really was ignominious. I mean right right right, so So my question is in in a lot of this. In light of this conversation is that something that will now we'll be
behavior like that, be embraced by by his there's a guy who paints these oil portraits that are like the founders with the constitution in their hands and then like Obama, like spitting on it or something a Donald Trump taking Bob Muller by the lapels and holding magnifying glass up to him and forcing him to on and on Bob Marley's of these, like weird fantasy paintings, and that tweet read to me like one of those fantasy paintings of an image of deceased soldier is looking down from on high upon done right around as he graciously govern, the land
the guy's door thanks. Apologies is like holding as front yes, yes, that is having a lot of other one. Will this continue to be thought of as taste list among a majority of those on the right, or is this now part of the politics of trolling? So it's it's! It's! Okay! It's it's! It's it's! I thought of losing the football again when he okay, so I don't know it, but you just to mention another thing this weekend, that was a bit of drove everybody crazy in the media, so so there's a background briefing at the White House where the background Briefer Hood man named Pottenger, whose name we're not supposed to know, said that it was all but impossible that we could get a sum it up with the North Koreans by June, twelfth think the phrase is all but impossible are next to impossible. So some of the New York Times tweets out or quotes in the story saying remove the White House here, officials said it was impossible, would be all but impossible to have. The briefing up
trump, then tweets times, made up a briefing that didn't exist, blah blah blah blah blah okay, so everyone, the media, goes what you mean. The briefing did we were all there. We're not how to say who it was. But we were there, we heard it. We have a tape you when you're the tape, here's a tape that than someone doubted that it was Paul, Patton, Jr and all of the So then the Trump friendly media says Well, wait a minute misrepresented what the guy said 'cause. You said he said it was impossible, but in fact he said it was next to impossible but impossible, but impossible and Oh, you misrepresented what he said so you're the liar now here simple fact twelve. This is we later by the way. This is all a winner. No, but then they were like a story: cesspool, okay, Trump tweeted The background briefing didn't exist. Okay,. That is not only a lie. It is
psychotic. Why? Because there were fifty people. In the background briefing on the phone or whatever the briefer, It happened so it's Benton happened, he said it didn't happen and then, in a day, Sprint effort to cover for him claim, is that the porting on it was inaccurate, which it really wasn't in an effort to say that Trump wasn't. You know! the media's fault for having me, reported something which it didn't and it's okay, that Trump tells the world that didn't dark times made up of background hold on there's another side of this, which was the liberal side of this, which freaked out at night Times reporter Maggie Haberman almost exclusively
as she and the New York Times have this policy against deciding to call things alive because you have to and, and you know no intentionality there, which is something that that we and I know from spring which you cannot now and that's the policies. So the left, speaking entirely to itself and focusing their ire on Maggie Habermann decided that she is the epitome of why we have Donald Trump, because the New York Times refuses to call out Donald Trump for saying a lie. He's saying he's mendacious, he's saying he's adopted conspiracy theories, that these are duplicitous statements, everything but a lie, but not saying lie is: was the the so everybody's really just talking into each other? is very small little conclaves right- and this was very funny actually because you had like she's. Having to battle all weekend magazine old friend of mine, I should say but she's looking bad all weekend, such tight Sanuk as on Q sack, you know who, like
call Zora to Di, don't know what he called her because Cusec blocked me on Twitter. A couple of years ago I know what he said, she said you're really ruining, say everything for me, which I thought was a pretty good line but they'll play. She said we don't know what Trump thinks is, and things is not real. That's the problems of writing about him in dealing with them? Is that you, you spend all your time interpreting what he knows what he knows to be true and what he knows to be untrue, and this is like your why they were you know if the if, if the, if you know we, in ten years. We are uh. You know we're a nazi country. Maggie Habermann will be at fault because she wasn't pastor Niemoller. Standing there saying you know they came for first, they came, for Amy Siskind in John Cusack, and I and I stayed silent. The whole point is that every he's driving each other crazy, and the question is: who is going to be the most crazy or he's crazy by twenty twenty, and you would have said last year, it would be very hard for the Democrats to end up crazier
then trump but not sure you can say that anymore, the weekend talking to people who are not deeply involved in politics to whom it is I'm to dawn that Trump might be reelected in twenty twenty to their horror, but as they're, watching this they're saying you know, I see the all's. I see this. I see that I see somehow that nothing is This is what was said to be. Nothing is sticking to him now that not true. Everything sticks to him reinforces how much he is disliked among the people who dislike him. What is increasingly not sticking to him? Is anything that would that last year, turned Republicans a lot of Republicans off to him, because the liberal counter attack is so. For the top that The tribal feel
is between right and left, a Republican and Democrat are being ignited very strongly on the part of people who a lot of people, and now it doesn't mean that that I peeled peel back. It can be go back. It's whatever no is points that it can be peeled back. We saw it peeled back last year. He was at forty four percent in the polls in worry, and by the end of the year he was at thirty. Two percent in the polls in the entire withdrawal from him was among people who had voted for him. So can it be Yes, the question is whether the democratic behavior toward him, as he does fewer totally crazy as in policy terms, weather weather than he did in that in the first year of his administration, whether that b field, but he can he can lose his own support in the way you just described to me to a certain extent, but but can dams turn off their own similarly bike by going too far? That's what that
but I think the counter argument would be from people who don't agree with. That statement would be that the blogs and the activist class is hyper focused on Donald. And then the everything that happens bad in the world to Donald Trump, but candidates on this trail Democrats who are not by conventional primary, shying away from the conspiracy theory that that all trump all the I model in adopting more of a of a pragmatic approach, a platform hammering away at union issues and economics and have you in Donald Trump yeah. Those will spend some time hitting Donald Trump, but it's not all about Donald Trump. I think they would say that that the active this isn't leading the political class in that sense, The fascinates me is that every we that we go through this every time there is a a presidency right, so I've heard people, I heard Nate Silver say her other say that
no one has dominated the news. Like Donald Trump ever in history, there's never been anything like this. He crowds everything out, there's nobody, but him dead. This is so untrue Obama at this point, his presidency and past four Jai pieces of legislation he had been on the for of Newsweek things on the cover of Newsweek twenty out of the fifty two weeks of 20th, two thousand and nine George, W Bush two thousand and two was the largest figure on earth by a factor of a billion there, were, million protesters out in the streets against him and for him- and you know he single handedly swift. We have won the midterm elections for the Republicans. This is what it's like,
how to be. President. The president is the biggest person in the world that becomes the biggest person in the world, and the question is what the when the fatigue sets in and that's what we don't know. So you know Trump is. It turns out, both in Bush and Obama's case. There was an enormous amount of fatigue among the people, who didn't like him and really did do whatever they could defeat him, but there was no such fatigue among their supporters. At least MID midterms and then their support, then the bottom fell out. So. Democrats didn't go to vote in twenty fourteen Republicans and then go to the polls in two thousand and six and all that Trump look like he was through this in a way that even probably going to be like I just I can't take anymore it anymore. It's just. I can't take this anymore, get somebody else in here. I just can't handle it, but you know if he um when he generates these.
The drive democrats crazy, but don't drive, Republicans that that crazy, like I don't think Republicans particular like that when he attacks a gold star mother, but they don't care. If you text Maggie Haberman. You know I find a to see? Any of this is genuine. I think it's just the extent to which Donald Trump is an asset on the trail, or hindrance on the trail, and we don't have any way to gauge that really effectively until the mid terms at which point will know whether or not I trump is good or bad. Did pee, at which point he will become either. I trust the people try to distance themselves from or they will wrap their arms around him. But at this point the work were under the assumption that he is an asset, but it's just an assumption, I mean look important thing to remember? Is the Democrats numerically have an advantage in the United States? Some? They were the right forgets there are more. Craft. Some Republicans by a significant number of people identify as Democrats and Republicans Ann as we know, basically the democratic floor
our four votes is forty, eight percent. How do we know that, because that's what Hillary Clinton got and the Publican ceiling for votes has been around forty seven percent 'cause. That's what we know that Trump got forty six Romney got forty seven. What was What was Romney's the kill. The line that killed the forty seven percent, seven percent yeah, so Bush got forty. Eight percent in in two thousand got fifty one percent, two thousand four, but Democrats have a natural advantage? This is fact of the matter, and this idea that you know we're only owning the libs is going to win you. Elections is kind of crazy. It's just not true you, not you your own, the libs and then you push the lives buttons and then they'll drag themselves over over glass to go vote, and to you in november- and this is of course, the big question that were-
so they can comfortably. Smug is not going to be the best available consultant, comfortably smug, the greatest roller on twitter shoutout to comfortably smug. He loves to own the libs he'll. Be sorry. So we come to an end of this podcast for eight Greenwald know: Rossman Answerable Marie I'm John Podhoretz keep the candle burning.
Transcript generated on 2019-11-14.