Welcome to the Commentary magazine podcast for Thursday December nineteenth nineteen, I'm John Ports, the editor of Commentary magazine the twenty seven, the odd seventy foremost seventy five year old, Monthly of, is losing your analysis. I now I know that that that the lot of filler there's a lot of filler some Botox, A magazine of intellectual analysis, political property and cultural criticism from a conservative perspective, we invite you to join us. A commentary magazine we'll give you a few free reads: ask you to subscribe. One thousand nine hundred and ninety five

your subscription twenty nine. Ninety five for all access subscription, including our beautiful monthly magazine in your mailbox eleven times a year and later today, I believe later today we will the contents of our January issue up at commentary magazine that come including, are closing package on the twenty tens. The decade, as I said the decade with no name since no one can come up with a good terms, I agree all the with me senior senor at her high, I jump author of a peace on the decade of anti exceptionalism, nor ass would associate editor, I melanesia peace on the decade of fracturing steam Rosen senior writer in Washington, high Christine, I John, who the peace on the decade of social media and I have a p. He's on the on the decade in which revealed that nobody really knows how to do anything we have.

Caught many on the populism decade and rob long on the decade defined by stars who are nobody's cultural so are as who you ve never heard of, but who make tens of millions of dollars and Our famous to some people, and not everybody else- and this is an entirely new thing anyway, it's a pretty great package. We have some faint, other stuff in the magazine grid, essay by Jonathan Chance or on on the gathering war between Israel and the proxies of IRAN, we have a piece by Ruth Weiss, our longtime contributor, about at the moment when she found herself being silenced at a conference at barred college by by anti zionist agitators, Jesse Kellerman, the novelist on Wired, Jews, Buddhists and a bunch of other stuff? So it's a really good issue.

You know I. I am sorry that I sound baby little frivolous today with the botox everything, because this is this is a very solemn, it's a solemn day, and we can beside the pledge of allegiance. Do we need? We are what we we we will bring. It's a pleasure. We will sing the national anthem we will read. Psalms we will commence the the lash himself of self lashing because of the incredible solemnity of this day. I am, I am moved by the protests. Patients are people who say that this impeachment that happened. Yes, families to count had to be done. Future generations, neither need to know where, where we were, where you were on the day in how you felt about this, and then I was thinking back to do so.

Burke twenty, I, as it happens, twenty one years ago yesterday or the day before ass. They, when Bill Clinton, was impeached, and you know I was then the editorial page other than your post I've. We wrote probably two hundred at its that year about the Lou ski matter in production and all of that and finally came down to this. We did not in fact support, impeachment and finally came down to it. Damn I have literally no memory. Not only do I have no memory of the day. The Clinton was impede So the debate when Clinton was impeach, I dont remember the impeachment trial at all. And so this notion that somehow you know future generations all they're going to care about is where you stood on. Trumps behave her

I mean I remember the issues I remember everything about Lewinsky gave me. I actually have a vivid memory of reading the star report when it was released on a Friday afternoon, four hundred page report that you know you that had to print out because it was too difficult to read on screen. So I had to wait by the printer as it was jamming pull papers emerald, but I have no memory of the impeachment and largely because, of course it was in effect, which is which this will be as well, but I so, but we are told that were supposed to be incredibly sound, so I hope you guys are all properly solemn on this. On this podcast day, Are you feeling solemn Abe oh you're, sick, child sex abuse, so I already have the builtin solemnity. Yes, knowing this does go both ways at the risk of dead air. When my be important for us to hold a moment of silence, further sixty three million trump voters who are disenfranchised yesterday

Will they weren't disenfranchise? Yet I don't I don't know I don't know they were they were inheritor? How dare you actually How dare you trivialize experience? I actually feel like Jesus on the cross myself and that's that appropriately at the very least nuts, I'm feeling well yeah. I mean we're. Ok, so I was out of the hat, honourably hyperbole on both sides. Yesterday, my sister is. It is conceivable that somebody sometime during the Clinton impeachment compared him to Jesus. Also it's a thing that happens in America in our advice: these terms. But I thought what we might do is I want to go through, I'm going to offer you some statements and then we're gonna go round the table, and we react to the to these statements, Christine. You haven't, had discussed the solemnity How solemn are you really very sound

and I just want to say, unlike the rest of you, like Nancy Policy, if you, my sartorial choice, is gonna signal, my solemnity and although our listeners can't see me, I am, am wearing all black and wearing a lax, but what s really ever Bro, often where all black I usually we're back. Let's do that's enough, I'm constantly Solomon, my dress! Yes, where is she doesn't mean? I don't think black is in her color we'll right. You know ass red she's, more modern cages ring or something at this. So I read. If I read it, just didn't, read the peace, but in passing I saw there was something some liberal blog about how men obsess over the fashion statements of female politicians and it's just dehumanizing and grow. Cask and then at the same day, there were features about not only Nancy Pelosi's choice of of dress but the brooch. Would she watched the end. She also wore, which signaled a little less solemnity. I think, then it was. It was sort of a subtle signal to the Americans who feel that the

A political victory that they can celebrate, but quietly this is so unfair, because this is so unfair of whoever wrote that peace, because, of course, the great horror of of Many men me included is when the women in our lives say things like. Did you hear that a fit, I wore last Friday. Do you think I should wear it semite to the here, like What our dear and had light your member? We read the remember where the mall and I tried on three things, and you say in your life now I dont mapping out the idea that that that, having having so little ability to conjure up the the clothing that you know like the people that I absolute love, the most that closer to that I am harshly judgmental or interested in the clothing of the women, politicians in America is belied by the actual reality of the way.

I mean, maybe it very men, think about clothing, which say that they paid no attention to enable you to get such a sordid practice that nobody confess to you how much they obsess over this stuff. Could be because these are. I would generally say that men are more drawn to the with the eyes of men more often than not are drawn to women. Sartorial you presentation, the few were inches of clothing. There are on her body so therefore the fact that way, Politicians are largely closed. Head to toe would mean that you would pay almost no attention, let's just say so having having gone back now, I'm gonna you now have to go put in.

Wash em in the washing machine and make bubbles come up and you know like fill the kitchen with bubbles, because I'm being so nineteen sixty mail about all this Ok. But let's move onto so of the statements that I want to address that, while this is some sort of eighties of yesterday or the or that were the serve lines and then go on the first Christine I'd like you to two to start with is the following: quote: Trump gave us, no choice but to impeach, which I think was said seven hundred two thousand times yesterday I mean maybe six hundred and eighty thousand, I'm being am exaggerating he wasn't seventeen fifty thousand, only six hundred and eighty thousand times anyway Trump. No choice but to impeach. What are you? What do you make of this? Some proof text?

well impeachment is always a political choice which we have discussed many times podcast. I do agree that his behaviour with regard to Ukraine crossed the law, and I think, given that there is not really much else in in the Wheel House of Congress to curb that kind of behavior except impeachment If the intent of that statement was to say he overstepped and in the council We should give only one remedy for president to overstep in this. In this way, then, yes, you could argue, he gave him no choice but, as we know, there's there's always a political calculation has to be made. Nancy policy made it for quiet long time by resisting impeachment and and figuring that this would not be good for her party? She was right that and I think kind of the chaos and confusion that emerged even after the the impeachment What about whether they're going to deliver these articles to the Senate shows that they really in some and have lost control of this process, but

I wouldn't say that there is in truth to that statement in the sense that what he did with regard to Ukraine was wrong, but he left us no choice that they always have a choice? It's their decision to impeach you're, not so they could have chosen not to do that. Instead seem defeated in twenty twenty Abe, no choice! Well, there was a choice as Noah's written about several times and and has done quite recently in a day or two ago. Yesterday, there yes there's there was censure, but- and I think that would have been more people,

a choice, but I do think it is so true. In this sense, the head many Democrats felt Trump had given them no choice but to impeach, and they felt that from the very start of his presidency, that doesn't make it true at all. Yet trumped didn't wasn't that answer this question we have been asked Ancona. Please get there wasn't trumpet, gave him no choice but democratic voters. Democratic voters wanted this democratic voters for putting pressure on lawmakers. There were more primaries directed at democratic lawmakers than at any point in recent history, and its policy was everywhere this she knew this is a political loser. She did her best.

Avoid it. The Ukraine scandal flipped the equation in the polls, everybody who didn't there, the others persuadable set portion of voters small but pretty, but enough to flip the poles from a majority this favouring impeachment to a slim majority or plurality favouring it. So the political condition changed a little bit, but it wasn't Donald Trump who who forced them to because, as Christine rose and said, there is a one remedy to curb this kind of behaviour. But everybody knew that no behaviour was going to be curbed by this choice of action. Even if censure were to pass and would have a heart of a four Republicans too, to avoid we don't have that would apply out, but most likely will played out in the same way, but nothing is going to be curbed here. In fact, most the most likely outcome, as the president is going to be involved, and especially, if you re elected to a second term and the

The remedy of impeachment is rendered essentially academic, because Democrats will believe it will have backfired and they will have been right. You know we keep hearing that he's. The only the third president would be impeach. Obviously there was the fourth President Nixon who resigned before he was a pizza. You could say that was the only successful impeachment drive that led to a pre emptive resignation before the system could again, but so there were three. There were three technical impeachment. There's never been. A censure? So what about how? He would be the first president history to be censured, and maybe that would be more historic. It doesn't have teeth in the sense that the censure is not. The legislation on, but whatever it is it's it would be. It serve a unique moment and that would have been the first if it would have passed. The Senate impeachment has far between has the virtue of being a censure that can essentially past

chamber. Okay. So let's game this out, so you think dot you creme. If the house had said in November, we are going to send her the Pratt. You know we are voting to send her President- and it was understood that the censure was in fact, a prudent political act by a party that was hungry for impeachment, but didn't really think that it was poor as a whole, and then it went to the Senate and all they needed was three three Republicans too to vote to censure. They would have been a hard vote for Corey, Booker M Lisa, more Caskey and them not Romney to vote for censure now, not for firmly summer asking it might have been hard or private Kory Kory gardener. I said Booker, I'm sorry now I mean it because we would have saved the scene, the same histrionics and theatrical displays of indignation from Republicans

on Donald Trump's behalf and that and that would have played out as it normally does, with the the base voters, who would have regarded this as the is the usurpation of presidential authority and a great offense against him and the longer the process went on. We would have been privy to exactly what were preventing. I can get you conceivably, although the whole point about centres that are, you could do it on the grounds that simply that the president in in interweaving foreign policy with some you know with a personal, the domestic political considerations had gone too far, and that then, that the legislator branch which had passed the aid to Ukraine had to say something and that it was deliberately going to be a modest effort to say something because it wasn't impeachment, but it would still be unprecedented.

So it would have been hard of republican and reporting suggest at the time that it even harder for Republicans to vote now, but at the same time it would have encountered a lot more resistance just more than we think it would have been in a wood and who knows how that would apply Eric okay, so moving on, we have come after the vote and we heard there been theirs rumbling about this for a week and lords tribe. The Harvard LAW School, professor suggested this and others to Nancy Policy suggested that she would not transmit the past. Articles of impeachment, too

Senate, unless and until she was convinced that they were noise can to conduct a trial that she thought was appropriate. Okay. So let's talk about what this ism I want to frame it as follows: imagined that Nancy Pelosi is Alec Baldwin, and this is the first seen of Glengarry Gary Glenn Ross and Alec Baldwin is walking before the Senate and he says these are the good impeach on articles. These are the Glengarry impeachment articles and you cannot have them. Who is? Who is she right now, in in Bulgaria. You want them, because if you don't get them, you're gonna be fired. Who is she threatening. With the idea that you won't transmit the articles of impeachment to the Senate she's threatening which were conall, who would Mcconnell Jack lemon in this.

Well, that's the question right I mean the quite. The question is the real Yes, the real issue is: is this an express panic. Are they seeing data that suggests that the public that the turn of the public, which is measurable? is so significant that they would actually prefer there not be a trial and that they're gonna try to not have a trial. They're gonna have passed the impasse when articles they're not going to transmit them. There won't be a trial. They will get the asterisk against trumpet the history books. He will not be acquitted because that, because the momentum is gone,

away from them. Or is this a serious thing? That's happening, it's not a serious thing, so there has to be a trial. It's in the constitution. There is no mechanism to compel the house tests in the constitution to send the articles to the Senate because nobody had ever conceived of that actually happening, but the Senate actually has to have a trial. Nancy policy has no say over anything that happens in the upper chamber. But again, I think this is more. A response to Democrats is comes from people like Lawrence tribe and a variety of other opinion makers on the left. Who are saying that the you know this

gonna be a fair process, so we should allow it to proceed as though they have any control over events. At this point, their job is done. Ok, political mission as a political message here is very odd. I mean we spent now two weeks in the house during the inquiry phase, when Democrats were saying that we had to speed this long and we couldn't wait for the court cases which are now pending against proxies for people who represent Mulvaney an John Bolton, both of whom an anti policy has had explicitly. She wants to see testifying the Senate trial phase, but couldn't wait for that because this was too important and it had to move forward immediately, probably because of a political calendar, bigoted Subpoena Bolton Now, I'm sorry going through their going through his and an attorney, an attorney representing him, which was supposed to be a proxy somewhat yeah. I did family subpoena John Bolton

In other words, him ass too happy to reject the of basically have him refuse to cooperate with a with a subpoena from the House of Representatives. They had to move strike while the iron was hot, really quick, because it was relevant then, but now we have to slow the process down to achieve the stuff that they didn't even try to achieve in the house, and there is also the weird at the strange rhetoric about how we have to prevent the Senate from starting a trial Mitch. Mcconnell is proven himself he's, not an impartial observer, he's not supposed to be an impartial observer. That's what the chief justice is role is in running the trial in the Senate, and this is just not in even the rhetoric about impartiality, which I think they want to see Upon narrative, where you know, fix is in in the Senate, but of course it is look at wheat with all known this all along I mean this, isn't news to it to most people, I'm also a

they're doing this in response to public opinion. What do they think public opinion will be about this? That the bigger the PA going to look at their beholding up, sending it to the to the seventh. What what is now? What is this nonsense? I thought I thought we I per week they had no has no choice but to impeach was pressing and now what? What? What comes shenanigans is this I mean to answer my question: because it seems to me there are a couple waste look at this, so she's floating, this is a trial balloon to get some kind of a dynamic going between her and Mcconnell one. The Republicans. Or, like I say, look gallop came out with a pole two days ago. That said that since October, which is when the Ukraine story started, trumps approval raving- and this is over two months- has gone up six points. We have right now, Trump support

braiding in the five hundred and thirty eight poll tracker, which is been notably more unfriendly to trump a couple of points. Then the Rcp poll tracker, because they wait told differently and stuff like that is now at the highest point. It has been since March, two thousand and seventeen, so Trump is at the highest watermark after two and one slash two months of Ukraine Right, Dave Wasserman, who is with the cook political report and is a liberal and a totally sort of convention was on morning Joe this morning saying that this is not going well for Democrats, particularly in the swing state, the states that will decide the election that we know there was a mark

universally Paul. A couple of last week that has impeachment underwater in Wisconsin, which is the decisive state in this selection like it serve if it I was the other way than probably others will to forty to fifty two. So in fact, the data points that we have suggest that this is boomerang. This has this has backfired now, maybe a tiny backfire, and I suspect it is a time ice. I suspect that by June everything reaches equilibrium. We have exactly the election we were going to have before and it's you know it's if it's a one or two point race, now you could have a situation which of its one or two point race and impeachment goes against Democrats by one percent in some of these states. One percent is the deciding factor in a state where you know Trump loses by one by twenty two thousand votes, her

Democrats lost by forty thousand votes or something like that. One percent is a big number. It may not even be one percent like that? That is the story of the last three years. Is that everything phase, No one remembers anything, nothing! Nothing sticks because it's all a kind of giant, glum glop. But I'm not sure that's the way. Nancy Pelosi is reacting. I mean he's doing there. She is done there. She agreed she moved from being anti impeachment to problem parchment and is being ended, papers and documents and stuff that we don't see that they pay or privately that may be scaring the budget out of her. I don't know how else to look at the, but couldn't she still have not look. Obviously their message was we just. We want to take home to voters over the holiday break that we'd impeach tromp yea yea us. There is no. There was really no reason for her to float this idea that they won't send the articles she could have just said. Ok, when we're

backward, we're move ahead and it could have been less egg, all of her all of the power playing she's doing with Mcconnell, could have gone on behind the scenes over the brake. It's it's a very strange thing that she reacted as no. I said to this kind of less, left leaning, democratic message that you know a woman to have a meaningful acquittal, as I think the phrase that tribe using his up at which is ridiculous, a meaningful acquittal means that you know we have to make sure that all the processes are set up. The way we want them to be set up All unnecessary Emmy policy simply could have not given specifics about when they would deliver the article seven goes home for a week or two and they

fresh in the new year I just want to bring. This is totally far afield, but so John, when you said, was constant, is the pivotal stay here? So I went to one of those maps and you know just plugged in all the states that are just sort of toss up at the point. Just real quick Wisconsin goes Republican and probably p. Pennsylvanian Michigan go back to the democratic column, and then you just give Trump all the other states that he one and then the default furthers. Those states that break it up like means, second, which is already leaning republican as their main in public and in the browser you should say: rallies first main, maim and Nebraska both assign electoral votes by district grandma and it's not state winner takes all so theoretically in these states you could have the electoral vote broken short so and so courting to this. The leans already built into these states in the brass as second his lean, democratic and means second is leaning. Republican self Wilkes was constant, goes to Republican and then

everything goes where it leans right now, it's to sixty nine to sixty nine very often So we may have a brokered convention and we'll have in the house in the house outside the house. Is president and they're there for the present will be the Democrat in this way. The demagoguery nominated. Now, I can't remember, is it by state. This is the we're getting the delegations ain't delegation right, ok, anyway, so ok, so the not transmitting. So I'm looking at this- and I am saying there's some panic going on, but then of course I live in the conservative bubble so I'm more aware than other people might be of Vienna know serve tiny shifts in terms favour and all that I do. I think that there are in general, over the last two or three weeks as I'm looking at this thinking,.

People? I know we're starting to people. I know who really want trump out and I'm telling my friends of mine stuff. They are starting to panic a little bit the jobs report. You have three point: five percent unemployment. All of the you know that stuff going into an election year. He now has a higher approval rating than Obama had at this point in twenty eleven there negative pieces of data, like forty eight percent of those polled by NBC Wall Street Journal this week say they're, definitely voting against him. Now that that number was thirty, seven percent without bomber. So if you in it at the same point twenty eleven, so that meant that there were persuadable right and in the words of the number wasn't you know. Fifty percent so they're not going to vote for a bomber. There were

people who already saying maybe I could maybe I couldn't than theirs, and almost nobody saying that about trumped up. Maybe that's true. Maybe it's not true. Maybe it's a pole of all adults, so you don't know who the vote with the voters are gonna do, but there is a. There is a bizarre fact, which is that we have been focused on trumps. Miss behaviour in Ukraine for two and a half months, and not only it hurt him right away and then the hurt receive. And suddenly there is a kind of shift, and it is as I if it's scaring deserve elite demo That's an liberals that I know it must be scaring Pelosi. You know also, I think, between the impeachment and before authority Russia investigation there was this sense before before these things got resolved or semi resolved that the evil that trump

would do or had done was unknown. It was lurking out, there was gargantuan it would it would God does what it would do to us, and these processes are put it put them in in boxes. You know, it's like one up turns out he's, not a russian agent. So what were we were passing ok, he's he's been impeach by the house. That's that its there's, no so ethic attack. The sting out of this large looming danger this this. This threat that everyone was worked worked up over going into the election. There will be a different sense of urgency impact on the left. But the question is the sting is removed, ok, but there may be some thing else going on like

the of this it it's all trumpets, terrible, terrible, terrible and people of sort of them. You may say that people have a kind of accepted a lot of the critique of Trump but that there looking at this and saying enough already stop like enough already what what's wrong with you. People, yes, theses. Terrible, so will will have an election and decided or he's terrible, but I like, in way or whatever? Now you know this is the other point that Trump Trump goes around Trump said You know the bill o at the Superbowl twenty seventh human rallies, and why are you so nice to Putin? And he said what why we're so we we have Kill people were not murderers and all that that trumps I'll thing is: let's let let's talk. Turkey, ok, like dont, be dont, be sentimental and don't be ridiculous. Why their bill and Hilary? My wedding, that's what you do when you, when you're, like a powerful person, we want power

people there. You know we do this of course. Of course I want to benefit my business. Of course, I, like my kids, have all that speaking that quite stuff out loud What are we now? So we know Bill Clinton lied about having sex with Monica Lewinsky lied about probably lied about, trying to get her a job at Revlon just to buy her silence so that she would Monica Lewinsky herself told whatever that Tub Amy last last year that that the Clinton sent her to somebody who tried to get her to sign the affidavit saying that she had relationship with him and nothing had happened right. So we know this and we know that then he was eventually. This party eventually admitted that he'd. Hence the you now the deed had oral sex with hurried in all this, and yet he was he was acquitted. M goes on like that and other

residents have done terrible things- I'm looking here not. This is just the sex thing about this. The famed this affair that J F K had you know with some with me- we Alford, who was nineteen years old in the White House. At one point they were in the pool and he and Kennedy directed her. To perform a sex act on his aid. Dave powers, because Dave was nervous and upset. This is from Mimi Alfred Zone Memoir right, so these are things that we know about pray, I mean we know many other things about many other presidents and weird behaviour and bad things if they ve done all that so trumps like so then the public knows this voted trumpet knowing who he was and he's like. This is fine, so This is not a line and well known, I'm not saying find it. I mean that the conditions are presenting his position here because he spoke with with

Pulitzer and said get no bill. Clinton was peach, do impeached over nonsense. The lying under oath and deposition on camera was nonsense, whereas Nancy. Blowsy should have impeached George W Bush, because he lied onto or which is all I'm talking nonsense garb. I am not defending raising a little bit and has to be a good republican and twenty nineteen means embrace all this horse s nonsense from democratic talking points from two thousand six that we spent the last decade and a half refuting open ended frustrates meal. Ok, but I What I'm saying is that the voters looking at the Trump impeachment say yes, so we try to hold up aid. You know they do that. All the time that's what they do. That's who they are there all they're, all terrible, they're, all bad all politicians and so Trump,

as it. So, what so fine, so you know I like him because he doesn't like kind will not prevent a toxic cynicism is now is also not just king correct, it's just flat out false, but it's also really material to the national eat those the social costs not defending it. I'm using it as a description of why Trump is There has been resilient, by ok, you're, being moralistic and I'm being well add ascribe fanatic. Descriptive cannot connect Can I just say one other thing that baffles me about this. This Policy not delivering the articles of the Senate thing. That's been bugging me, which is that part of their spam moral high ground have been part of the moral high ground that the Democrats have tried to stake out for themselves in this whole procedure, is it they follow the rules they follow the process, that's the whole basis of their obstruction charge against Trump and yet not seeing from them, you know the correct me if I'm wrong. But in when Clinton was impeached by the house that same day had they named

managers for the trial It was the same day, so I feel like there. This process arguing, which actually is fairly compelling. I would assume to a lot of Americans where we want our system to work. We are fairly cynical about how Congress is operating right now. Obviously, trumpet the rules, but there were some power in that argument, in particular, when Pelosi made it consistently that that she cares about process. She cares about the institutions and she's gonna shepherd this process through, even though she'd resisted for well she's blow and an argument right out of the water with this behaviour in and with this signalling about not delivering the articles right. So you know- and this is where the cynical view of american politics that I just delineating is finding some purchase in milk Since the way the Democrats have conducted this matter, I've been weather and I as a little different from subordinating american national interests abroad to domestic political concerns,

and learning the disbursement of congressional authorized funds as a teen disparity where in the kind of equation that we're going ok now here here is the I think I have said this before. But let me let me just pose this to you as there were. This discussion was going on and when Republicans were being more serious unless you know I don't know just you know, defend him at all costs and whatever way, cannon. What will with whatever is to hand so the line was okay. Democrats would say I would say: well, the aid wasn't interrupted in the end, the net, the next tranche of the payment that he had suspended, went through according to the schedule and as you know, I have said many times because of the whistle blower right because of the whistle blower Trump and his people understood that they were that he was in jeopardy of being impeached and removed from office. Should this go public and

Oh the aid that the spigot was back on before there was any cessation of aid little cessation of eight. So one of the serious arguments would be well in the end. You know you're going impeach him over something that ultimately didn't happen. The aid went through. He did not in fact, suspend he suspended the aid as the process was, but it does get online wrong now, but what the Congress mandated an authorized happened. Ok, so he did not in fact interrupt. You know that duly legislated aid to Ukraine. Then the argument that it was made is, but he wanted to. Wanted to and he tried to, but in the end he didn't, but he wanted to and therefore that is attempted,

I'm sorry I just gets the it just gets its just wrong. I mean that's, not the right that was being made. The argument was that there was suspended, give got word of it began to change its behaviour as a result, yeah comport, with the demands that weren't residents, so it was effective. In that sense, I know- who I am, ok! Let me just I don't want to get honest. I don't want to get into the weeds on this. What I'm saying is that what they, what they said was it, is sort of immaterial. Whether or not the aid was ultimately suspended. As he we know from the from everything that wanted to and he tried to but that in the end it was an and therefore this was an attempted crime and that's bad enough. Ok and That's where this is where I come a cropper on this whole matter, which is attempted murder is The same is murder. Attempted robbery is not the same as Robert. You don't try them. They do not

have the same. You know that the result that the punishment is not the same in those cases and you do. If the balance If the balance sixty three million people voting for a guy that we present a United States, it was duly and legitimately elected according to the electorate. Elegant every system that we have and This question of whether his bad conduct, a crossing a wine doing all that justifies the at extreme and that has never been of which the trigger has never been pulled in american history, and I don't think it is ices too, that I think it would have risen to that. Had the aid been so had the actually flowed on that day which it was supposed to flow, but it did the whistle blower- should have waited,

the other whistle blower, the whistle blower built allotted to suit, built up his tranche of evidence, and we are so where I was going with us, but that that's that's where that where I am on this and and the thing is, I think that the I think not I want. I think, that the american people, or whoever is persuadable in this matter, listened to the extent that they could and said I not entirely sure. I see what the practical results out of this scheme was. No words he had a scheme, but it didn't Zoltan anything except one thing that the Democrats gave him by making a huge issue which is now Bereavement Hunter Biden and Joe Biden, our crooked. They are crooked Hilary he is job, I'm gonna get the nomination and he's gonna run on Burma.

Until November. Maybe it won't work, but he wanted. He wanted a word. He wanted something for his greatest hits to return to his greatest. It's because that's what he used in TWAIN. Sixteen and he's got it every the American those bereavement somewhere on Biden, wasn't Hunter rule Hunter of them and they had no idea before nobody who lives. First, they literally describing a successful effort on transport too. Per Congress. The will Congress in order to achieve a domestic political objective justice, but he didn't subvert Congress. The attempted to end, but here at Rio has not waiting on whether or not the failure to disperse constitutes a crime its GEO doesn't determine. What's a crime woods the whose than she how the Jews, mud and law enforcement agency not tonight that the government of IRAN Inspector many candidate has our job but both of your corrected. It did this that strategically

suggest that it would have been wiser for the house to let this be to run up the clock a little longer and not rush this because of the coming out of the courts, the subpoenas of top officials. This gone into the early part of the new year. You could see in and more there is more evidence there. It would be hard to make the case they did John. I think you're arguing some people are making in their minds about. You know justifying everything I don't really know. The extent to which the public has turned on this thing. They did they average of poles on five. Thirty eight still shows it favoured We must limit tribe as of today, their time. It's a point in favour of heard. Heard them say on the podcast they did later. Ok, they haven't updated for seventy forty seven point five to forty six point. Three: that's not what they said this morning so lad. They said late last night, so, as I say, maybe they have an updated on their site. That's now tied anyway. Who cares?

it's not a good number four impeachment which were for removal, which requires sixty seven senators. Therefore, two thirds of the country. If you want to apply at logic, that's too, Thirdly, the country should be in favour of impeachment and removal, if you're gonna impeach in the first place, otherwise you're doing something, as I said in my blog posts yesterday, you're doing something that is doomed earlier, generally speaking, politicians do not make for a feudal at don't do something for no built in order to engagement was doomed from the start. The guy had a seventy three percent job approval. Reading, at the height of the impatient scandal, that's correct labour bidding knew was doomed to failure, Eleanor an act that was animated by the fact that he broke no. That is not what animated, as I was, what Anna

It was exactly what animated this, which is that this was the appointment in some error for house Republicans. They spent a year on this. They had talk there and they had talked there there. This was the first moment of the big sort. They were all in these districts that they had one. They talk the public into thinking. That Clinton was a bad guy who deserve to be impeached and for them it was a safer vote to vote to page. Then not ok, and- and there was There- was a total crisis when the house leadership after the ninety eight election, Newt resign. Bob Livingston became speaker for five seconds and then didn't becomes speaker that leadership was very weak, because everybody was confused about what was going to happen and they had an impeachment vote and just, as was the case in this case, prudent calculation. That would say this is not. Why are we going to vote for impeachment when the country is against it for India,

to all members of the house in the republican majority, it was safer to vote for impeachment than to vote against it. Of course, a lot of them believed in it too, as I think, the overwhelming majority of broke the law he did not, he was average of alum and a deposition. As a Briton long, he was not found to have perjured himself in the deposition according to the Senate, right, not according to your own eyes, well, so he said it depends. He knew he said the most brilliant pit bit of off. The streets were Is it depends on what the meaning of is weird anyway, is for all I'm saying is sometimes there there is. This sum that this was the impeachment of Trump yesterday was the appointment mare with this was three years. It was gonna, be about something and if it wasn't about Ukraine after the incredible Disappoint the Mulder report. It was gonna, be about something else,

Your shake your head, it's true with the patent majority leader did everything in her power to stop the carcass from doing that, she didn't do everything over precariously. Dylan she'll get Ukraine revel. Yes, because, as you know, and as I've written and as if you written knave, all them might minor. Members have all wanted to pursue this for a long time and room unease that that's correct labour all put in their place until the Ukraine scandal broke, and they put there was a game wooden, but they wouldn't have gotten up. They wouldn't have had the votes to impeach bright. They wouldn't about the votes to impeach I don't really recharging, so wouldn't have happened. No, I'm saying if it hadn't been threatened. Ok, let's just stipulate that or let let, let's as a scenario matter this didn't happen. Ok, the Ukraine thing didn't happen.

And he gets real at whatever either gets reelected or there's a whole year. Without this, those people were going to do we're going to go crazy without impeachment, how much money has Tom style spent on his impeach now ads. Two hundred million euro before the Ukraine stuff popped up behind all aftermath of mothers speech. When is it pleased, speak funding? Was he's saying now we need to impeach he saying that that removing was beyond his girl right, but now he will he's peas, putting it in in in the hands of the of representatives to impeach. I mean they weren't. There was going to be ape on some grounds either way. I think that's absolutely true at some point, yeah ok Oh I'm just saying, there's now this whole

sparkle debate about was impeachment harmful in ninety eight. Ninety nine right, the piecemeal acquittal and there's a whole line about was. It wasn't really wasn't because in fact, probably entail onto the house, an AL gore- was hurt by Clinton, and but I do know that the impeachment was what hurt him. What hurt him was the star report, not impeachment he was you know he was acquitted in there. Was that famous S an l sketch right where it's like after a patron inclined, just walked the microphone says? I am bullet proof walks away and he wasn't. But but it was the only had two years left to go and then and then AL didn't know. Whether run with them a run against them or how to run or whether it in whatever but in this case you know, and by the way that the Clinton

impeachment was unemployment in some Arabic as there was white water, and there was that there was. There was the Lincoln Bedroom and there was this and there was that there was travel gate. And there were ten thousand scandals in the American Spectator magazine. You got two two hundred and fifty thousand subscribers by detailing all the evil stuff had done and was doing and that would serve the beginning of this world of legitimate nation of your political opponents in this way that turned out to have this in a large grass roots audience so there were seventeen reasons to impeached Clinton and by the way travel gate he could have been impeached and removed. Where then, if the house had not been controlled by the Republicans in the first two years of trumps presidency. Now, obviously, he behaved in certain ways because he had the house in the Senate,

but he would have been impeached and removed in the first year of office if he done half of the things that he had done and the Democrats had been in charge of the house, you know so this was going to happen. That's all I'm saying and that and by the way, and so, if the public that then its, then that's not gonna, be or enough for the public. Ok, whatever three, whatever whatever the persuadable numbers people haven't made up, the who were aren't gonna, walk on hot calls, either vote against a mob to vote for him. If they look at this, say well. This is just this is what they were gonna do, and so I dont really believed that it matters what the charges are. That was going to mean that it was going to be a mistake, well under the video going round today of receded. Leave grinning ear to ear issue we went to I swear to do her historic vote and the fact that that she was named checked in trumps.

Rambling letter. As having said, she was gonna impeach, the M S uniform from day one I mean got that that's a story that I think resonates with some voters. They think yes, yes, she was out to get him from day one and obviously her constituents elected her to do just that. But you know that one district in when he, of course it is. I mean this is just to set such disingenuous nonsense. Obviously, when you have a mature, you have a bunch of people who are back ventures who are terrible people they had Steve King delivered us yesterday he ripped off. Did he pay. What are they? Let him do that was curling. Has there even people ammunition? The only reason why this has become I wrote a poem for an embassy news about how the impeachment drives and the many efforts on the part of back ventures in the democratic Congress to impeach this precedent would allow Republicans the opportunity to dismiss this effort on its merits and that's exactly what they're doing, but let's not pretend its noble. Ok, let's stop for just a second, so I can

bring up our last r r r r last advertiser of the weak lending club look people if Europe. Bearing revolving dead and whose debt has not increased. As we approach the holidays that means you're not paying off your card every month in could be paying thousands of interest in the interest every year that you don't have to so with lending club. You can consolidate your debt or pay off credit cards with one fixed monthly payment, since two thousand and seven lending club has helped millions of people regain control of their finances with affordable, fixed rate, personal loans. No trips to a bank know my interest. Credit cards just go to lendingclub dot com, tell them about yourself and how much you want to borrow pick the terms of the right for you and if you're approved your loan is automatically deposited into your bank account for as little as a few days. Lending club is the number one peer to peer lending platform, with over thirty five billion dollars in loans issued, so go to lendingclub dot com.

Commentary, check your eight minutes and borrow two forty thousand dollars. That's lending club that comes less commentary, lending clubbed outcomes, less commentary, all loans made by Web Bank member Fdi see equal housing lender. Okay, so. I'm I'm looking so Adam Shift, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee in the person who ran those impeachment hearings. Said yesterday in his impassioned each on why he was voting for impeachment that we cannot allow Trump to cheat in another election, and I think this talk about this before written about this- Here we have this bizarre effort to sneak in justification for impeachment. That is not in the impeachment charge,

which I think is the IMF, with which right that no one says he's dry. You cannot there no evidently cheated and twenty sixteen and there is no and there's no way so He would carry out a cheap and election again now you can say we he's given signs. He wants to cheat in the election by screwing around with them bereavement story and with Ukraine and getting Ukraine to do things form, but you can't say that he cheated in the previous elections, therefore, is been achieved in this election you can say every wants, but that is a decision that is where this turns into here. Actually not being impeached on the two grounds on which he is being impeached. He's being impeached, because Democrats think that he is a russian agent,

yeah, that's totally crew, who advocates or or they they they thinking, Or there they there so frustrated that he's not that I've gotta get em on something else, but yeah I mean it's as as you ve written it is. It's come fleetly fictitious. It's just a straightforward lie to say that he cheated on One election and, and and therefore we I mean it's not fictitious. The other way to put it is that you know I spent two and a half years trying to put me on the bones of the theory that there was collusion or conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the russian government, and you know with in and through a lot of well in jail and through Paul man in jail, for you know the rest of his life in order to get him to tell him and Rick gates

to cooperate in all these people to get them to tell him about this scheme, and, given the you know, incredible focus on this, and you know all the money that was spent all the time that was spent and the fact that they could put no mean on those bones means you have to say that it almost certainly didn't happen. So you know It's not fictitious in a weird wake. As we know, they had these meetings right at this meeting and from tower in June of twenty sixteen and as Rostova wrote in the Fantastic column in a part of this is this is, is that the did the hunger to view the world's greatest? conspiracy, as conducted by bumbling morons, an idiot, so they have this meeting and they have to sit there for an hour. Listening to someone yell about it that complain about Russia. The options and you know, and they startling solid? or on their phones, and somebody falls asleep in the meeting in this is the meaning

That's no change western civilization forever. It's a great harm by the way, if you can find it arouses column the other day about the cone brothers movie burned before reading, but ok so and the final and this is where No one, I really gonna part part company is the at now. They now notorious Mary impeach Miss photograph. So this is tweeted last night for reply it is for the Washington Post sitting at our survival person, was sitting at a cafe, eating together and it and that the slogan Rachel bade one of them put up and said Mary Impeachment and they're all likes grinning and smiling, and Noah thinks and and immediately. Of course, conservatives pounced right, it's like, ah so the people or covering peaceful to Washington Post are so thrilled that the impeachment

gone through, that they're having a celebratory dinner about, impede, and then Rachel bade. Finally, she believed the photograph where she deleted the tweet, where she'd photograph and then said we were only celebrating because we ve been working so hard, and and now we can, you know we don't have to work overtime anymore. So you can believe that you can choose to believe that or not or you could be extremely and veritable. Ok, I'm gonna be extremely uncharitable. I dont believe it. I think they were thrilled that had to happen than they were and they were toasting each other for the fact that it is, happened? And yes, and maybe they don't have to work? I don't know why you don't have to continue to work overtime. It's not like the stories going away and obviously there's going to be news. Every because policy but holler gonna have this fight quote National Republican Senatorial Council committee:

adviser, Matt Whitlock, who, among all people I interacted with over this issue, said quote: these are really good reporters to fair operate in good faith, do their jobs well and you would think that would lend them at least some benefit of the doubt, but because of the profession there in according to the people who defended this wildly reactionary response that they have a special responsibility to behave as though they are guilt. Do you have something they may not necessarily be guilty of personally and should therefore risk refrain from behaving inhuman, humanizing ways when I left for if they were real, quick, just just gonna finish. This thought: everyone in the union no matter. What you actually, but I'm not like guys aren't, will keep its about you're going to get my Nancy Pelosi. Look if you don't keep it so this platform it we're

here too. The point is whether this we're getting near to the point where media organisations, I think we're going to follow your advice and tell the reporters either get off too are entirely or just tweet only sanitary sanitized, professional headlines and nothing else and don't don't. She don't share your your your views on Twitter and I just think that makes the place worse. One of the value proposition The best thing is that a human eyes didn't and made accessible, otherwise lofty figures who were not reachable before now, there's a lot of downsides associated with the platform, but that was a really good one and we're losing that, because we reach for the least possibly irritable interpretation of events latch onto it, allow for no other alternative and and then impose this view on people and they therefore withdraw from this platform. That's not making them better,

making it more insular and crazier. Ok, if I were Marty Baron the editor of the Washington Post, I would be so furious with Rachel Bade and those people right now. Yes, because they have here, they now impeached their impeachment coverage with another. I'm number of people, a completely unforced error, whether or not people are being on charitable, which you can you can can describe as a Christmas dinner six day before Christmas. Yes, I think that's excusable very sad, marrying and sailing baby we're having our crusade made a port man too, because they had spent all day in Congress listening to impeachment. Ok, ok, look look what you're saying may or may not be true. I dont think industry out what I said. I will I will leave it. I will I will to stipulate that you correct- and they were, it- was all in innocence? It so Bonehead ITALY stupid, because now there are going there are a million people in this country who think that they are they they are they

where people who were dancing on the day of the impeachment and they're supposed to be covering it socio economic. Can, I say, all there's something else here: go there's something else here too, and I think I m to push back a little bit non. What noticing other greedy of there was something of an overreaction we ve been schooled, especially, since Trump was elected in the seriousness and moral purpose of the media right how its due to democracy dies in darkness. This is that this is what's Juno printed on on the post every day, so I dont think you can have it both ways. You can kind of have this, Slightly mocking fun, look at us we're just being human beings, sort of tone you have they have at their Dave constantly told us they have a special responsibility. Will then they have to exercise that it's like if it Doktor tweeted, a funny picture of a patient. We would say: look that was you know. Maybe they shouldn't lose their licence, but they should certainly be called to account for doing something untoward and we ve been told

by the media, constantly that we should take them seriously. They have a moral purpose. Will then they did. This contradicts that I think for a lot of people, ok. Also, we also have the day the final thing which is and the has been true since the seventy cents, raw Bob electors? First, surveys we're talking about a press corps That is ninety percent democratic voting based on every piece of data that we have an, At a highly partisan moment in this country we have forty, seven forty, seven foreign against impeachment. You have five reporters seeing each other on the night of empty of of impeachment, thus appearing at least arguably too celebrating an event that is dividing the country, and that is- and if you are trying to make the case that we are to take the Washington Posts coverage as though it were something that was impartial or objective one

at least fair, that totally flies in the face of any realistic attack by somebody who wants to say I really am was the lambs was to read their what they write about Trump and take it and think that their being fair when their thereby they're looking for his removal from office. Ok, so that port man, too, is now availed expression of sympathy for Democrats and at because of that we should they'll, probably withdraw from Twitter, be less accessible, build more professional and have less engagement with conservatives which is going to affect their coverage in a more positive a fur conservatives. This is how they're going to impose more centralism and more responsible. I dont think any evidence that deed that the presence of of liberal Europe

Borders on Twitter has moderated their ideological conduct. I think they're in their re, singly insular and conservatives are increasingly insular, and why? Wouldn't you be because of this does the most absurd charitable rubber interpretation of a Christmas dinner six days before Christmas, did the longest working day over a two month. That I could possibly think of. If I were them, I would feel alone bitter towards conservatives to ok, well good, so feel emitter toward conservatives and not be stupid, and do I mean I note that knows that there is better try, don't know whether they are not problem just said, maybe you, I would add that the value of twitter is that it opens the liberal mine, too conservative ideas. I don't know- and I regret that I did not sound and I would add, makes you accessible. Otherwise, lofty figures which are Previously, we danced on play, you don't know how they now become human, which is a flawed condition and naturally comes with some foil.

And if we aren't tolerating of those, then we're gonna have a sanitized platform with a lot of interactions that are not genuine insincere and it'll become a worse place. For everybody, they already untrammelled ways letting it. I will be there in eight months, be handled because of this behaviour, because we have knows no acceptance of human foibles. We Matthew with the least charitable interpretation. You suffer the exact same thing, I'll, keep it in the charitable interpretation of somebody's into our interactions and as a maximum list positions about how to how to approach those infringements on the public on the public. A covenant here and it's just making everything works- and the only people who don't even where they are Cray everything's already, so the platform just becomes more insular, more circular centre right, so maybe so maybe God will be good and and and and this thing will blow up and disappear, which is which would be in our help to wall of Amerika.

I agree with you there back together. I keep telling you to get off you now you get you. Can you can bring yourself to do so? You don't know I mean I read it. I dont tweet because I see absolutely no value or benefit in in it and it's not because I feel sorry for me. It is actually that, if I were first, I'm not I'm not an objective reporter trying to make the case that you know Everybody should trust the things I salmon, I'm an person. With any views, and I express them and you can hate them are like them or whatever you want to do, but I think in the end, the polarisation of the country and the fact that everybody is uncharitable to everybody else is examined aided by twitter, because because it requires everybody,

distilled themselves into a caricature of it at some point or another, including particularly, if you want to be funny or cute or like Europe, have have personality, because people don't appreciate irony, don't necessarily see that you're you're being funny when you're being funny and- and you will tend to be of noxious, not you, I mean me or other there's something about the idea we had not just that helps lead that that that were of noxious. This becomes a kind of stocking trade, and there was something of noxious about that photo no class. You question: do you think, if this were Obama and Reporters had worked very hard, covering Obama impeachment thrown up to it, and then they went out to eat the night of what they have said, Mary Mary Impeach, based on their photo. I don't know I mean you have that's a big hypothetical has, probably not by

What are they being impeached? What is the impeachment process? How long ago over they any page, namely remained name it I mean, maybe not, but also they would probably also be having dinner, and because it's almost Christmas, they'd problem will be having a celebratory one. No one subjecting them. Having dinner there isn't a leper have dinner chest. I dont care whether they can have drinks, it could have dinner they get out. I hope they had deserted what what what I hope for all the trouble they needed, something they have a really deliver events that happened to overlap on the same day. In the same week, rather I mean

Just don't see that as being of unfairness expression, I not hale. I draw for democratic, Sl Conspiratorial, it's insane. It is not in say seconds hourly ever left, as they did in June. That site nobody's savings that I, as a dozen or where it's not a James, O Keefe snuck into the restaurant and secretly tail, but his citing their total ravaging say it has been, has been day. Emotive, guys been terribly bias consumer, I could say it goes. It were speaking about motive, we're trying to we're trying to understand their motivation for doing it, and I think, in that sense, apes, questions interesting, but I do think the apology they issued was kind of mealy. Mouthed was trying to signal O. Actually you misconstrued our motives here and I think that's. What no is defending is their right to say: oh, we didn't mean this to be true. In this way, and I think it's fair fur- and this is where Johns point is correct. Twitter doesn't really allow for that right. You get him gazillion tweets on the first badly handled.

Headline and then nobody retreats the apology. So I mean I do think it comes back to the platform, but these are also the only people. I'm sorry and then again you can see that the only people who are animals to say anything about other people who disagree or angry about it. So you get a distorted picture of what the actual right. Sponsor Mobile, that's twit, ample! You who thought that's how it works. So we're we're all right, we're all right, well, with that, in this paper, polarized atmosphere here, a commentary magazine, which you will wish. You were of a wonderful weekend and I hope you're not too disappointed with deep with others As of Skywalker Walker, seeing and said tonight, I'm saying tomorrow morning and I'm sure it's terrible but, however terribly can be, it can't be worse than the movie version of cats, which I also haven't seen yet, but which really does look like the worst.

Thing. That's ever been made cell with with that we're back Monday, and we are going to do a final show for for this a decade programmes, because the solemnity will not go away just because we are only a few days after you know so very impeachment. Every penny for a hip knowing Christina John Upwards, the camel burning.