Transcripts Whispering Quid Pro No

Listen to this episode

S1: Does a political vendetta. Mueller. To me was the final authority on everything Trump. I’ve read the transcript for myself. I made up my own mind. VOLKER The special envoy said there was no quid pro quo. Sunderland has changed his testimony to say he presumes there was what I can tell you about the trump policy toward Ukraine. It was incoherent.

S2: Talk to the average person ask the next 100 people who come in here if they care about this impeachment process and they will tell you almost to a person that they do because they find it to be a charade.

S3: It’s an absolute sham no matter what no matter who ends up testifying whether it’s behind closed doors or in public. The fact won’t change that the president did nothing wrong.

S4: Hello and welcome to Trump cast. I’m Virginia Heffernan. You know today I want to try something different something kinder and more compassionate a kind of Trump cast metta meditation like pampered children. Let’s give President Donald Trump the benefit of the doubt. New reports say yes that he asked the attorney general of the United States Bill Barr to flamboyantly and preposterously lie and say what’s patently untrue that there was no quid pro quo in his interactions with you. OK. I just say we blow past this whole linear oppressive Western narrative and get compassionate look to Trump’s character. Look through the pale grim folds of his eyes into those poor seen little balls and ask that man ask a lawyer to lie for him. I mean a broken old cognitively impaired autocrat racist grandpa raped Eugene Carroll. Would he ask a lawyer to lie for him.

S5: You know what.

S6: After that refreshing moment of mindfulness and a gentle loving review of past lie and lawyers like Cohen again Giuliani and Barr I’m going to say yes yes I think he asked Barr to lie and Barr said no we’re told but Barr’s lies are piling up and rejecting this one invitation to mendacity does not make up for his nation compromising lies.

S4: So far maybe Barr with his fancy background and institutional ism just didn’t listen to two bit coolie lawyer Michael Cohen. But I did and he should have say it with me like a mantra while you’re in Lotus.

S7: Never lie for Mr. Trump My guest today is Ross Garber.

S6: Trump cast a favorite contrarian and America’s preeminent impeachment lawyer. There’s no one better to test wits with. He’s the guy who says Trump’s not over till he’s over and it’s all gonna be a lot longer haul than we think. But I’m going to give Ross a run for his money because I’m nothing if not an overzealous and unschooled prosecutor and to the naked eye these last 10 days have looked bleak for Mr. Trump. I’ll be back with Ross in just a minute but first something I’m really excited about. You just got to join the women of Slate. November 20th that’s just a couple weeks off 7 p.m. at the Bell House in Brooklyn. It’s 149 Seventh Street in Brooklyn. In case you’re taking notes let Slate woman play in the election to you. Join our amazing roster of women journalists the colleagues I live for. They’re going to do a deep deep swan dive into the state of the election followed by the ultimate debate watch party. Christina Carter Richey Julie craven Ashley Feinberg Mary Harris Dahlia Lithwick Nicole Perkins and me. Virginia Heffernan will explain the ups and downs of the primary shed light on the candidates their policies and their media coverage. Visit Slate dot com slash live for tickets.

S7: Slate Plus members get a discount. Go to Slate dot com slash live for tickets to the women of Slate for us. Welcome back to Trump cast. It is good to be here.

S6: So just to provide some backstory Severin knows the dramatis personae here of our duet. I am almost always coming to you saying well we really got Trump this time. There’s no way he can slip the knot and you say hold your horses.

S8: Yeah I’m the reasonable one. Yeah I yeah a reasonable end but I am the passionate one I am passionate I am crazy passionate about being reasonable.

S6: Well OK that still means that I call you buzzkill. But I like to test my wits against you who doesn’t like to say with Ali Hoenig or showing up and just express your prosecutorial zeal.

S9: But if you’re really as you say in it to get to the truth to try to understand what’s happening it’s nice to have someone who provides some dynamic tension like you.

S8: Yeah I love those guys I love you. I hate to see you guys disappointed. I don’t want to see that just yeah.

S5: So there’s a couple things. One is the last time you were on believe it or not I think I was about to watch. We were all about to watch Robert Mueller testify and you thought I might be getting a big screen TV and writing all over all my powers and I was I don’t even know what you thought of that Mueller performance.

S8: I thought it was sort of I think well what we previewed it went nowhere right. I mean we knew we knew the most that he would say because it was all in his long extensive report. And then I think we pretty much knew that he wouldn’t say everything that was in that report and definitely wouldn’t say much of anything beyond the report. So he came in he did his thing and and and so that happened that I think most people have already forgotten about it.

S5: Buzzfeed has not forgotten about it. Jason Leopold America’s favorite FOIA filer managed with the help of others to pressure the government into turning over some of the documents or maybe even a huge amount of the documents from the Mueller investigation. But at this crazy slow pace. So I hope we’ve all marked our calendars that there’s a document dump expected the first of every month indefinitely to show us what Mueller and his team may have either been unable or unwilling to include in the Mueller report and some of it that stuff makes me think the thing that everyone was afraid to say until Judge Sugarman broke the silence that Mueller may have missed his chance at a lot of this.

S8: Well he drew his mandate very very narrow. He clearly wanted to kind of get in get out and let the country get on with its business. And so I think this is going to be susceptible to that kind of criticism that he you know he just looked at sort of very very narrow. Things may have gotten other leads either didn’t follow up on them or sent them off to the FDNY or elsewhere.

S5: I think that that we may see a lot of that that sort of sets up the other massive development that we’ve had since you and I formally talked on the show which is Ukraine. And the transcript left very Ukraine has been with us as to say it but that’s hard. I’m just gonna call it the Ukraine call.

S10: Yeah I think we got to stop speaking all stop the French the French and mostly stop the Latin. The whole quid pro quo with Donald Trump speaking Latin and other people speak. Yeah let’s let’s just do it in English. What do we call it extortion blackmail or this for that or exchange or whatever it is. But yeah yeah. Quid pro quo.

S6: US should be speaking Latin but you know what I think the French and Latin also on the other side we’re making an effort to dignify this bullshit with we don’t call it that we end up having to face what it really is which is just I don’t know. Do people say shit show anyway carrying on without quid pro quo. Where are the rest of us with our non jaundiced eye or American hopefulness. See the Ukraine.

S11: Even the edited transcript. Look at that and say this is a smoking gun. You wouldn’t even call a smoking gun a smoking gun if you saw it. You look at the transcript and see what.

S8: I would totally call a smoking gun a smoking gun if I saw it and I think the Ukraine stuff looks awful. I think it looks awful. I think in particular it it is. It is hard to justify explain or even understand what Rudy Giuliani was doing and to characterize that as as appropriate in any way. And so no on. On Ukraine you know we’ve got public hearings starting next week we’re starting to see transcripts from the Committee come out and I’m very interested to see what comes out of all of that and what we still haven’t heard is any sort of coherent cogent consistent White House Trump explanation for what’s going on with Ukraine I see some very potentially troubling stuff but I’m also feeling like we haven’t seen everything that there is to see and we know that’s the case because there’s been a bunch of testimony that’s been taken in private that we haven’t seen. We’ve got a bunch of witnesses who haven’t shown up. And so I think there’s a lot of stuff that may potentially matter that we just don’t know and so I’m not I’m not ready to kind of skip ahead to the last chapter in the last page and say I know what the book’s about the transcript was the.

S11: Well the whistleblower Misha Goss or whether we were going to ever hear from him. Someone has assured us that it’s him and then they released the transcript. But obviously there’s been so much since and the transcript was seen as so innocuous the edited notes on the call or whatever we call it. Memo we’ve seen so exonerating or at least benign that the president at the unsuccessful rally that he did stumping for his candidate in as Louisiana governor he had people behind him wear T-shirts that said read the transcript. I mean not exactly a kitchen table issue that all Kentuckians are thinking about all the time who reads the quote transcript and who doesn’t. But you know just to dial back at least a few days I think Trump or someone around him was advising him that that transcript which we now know to be fairly edited closed the case for him. He closed the case however that if you read the transcript you’ll see there was quote no this for that. Oh yeah. Remember that’s what I mean that’s why they released it. It was like the weird Don junior move of releasing his. If it’s what you say I it emails it somehow if it comes from you or if it doesn’t say would you like to do a quid pro quo said Donald Trump then it’s going to let him off the hook and he so much thinks that or at least that’s all he has right now is the transcript which many of us thought to be damning let alone what came after. But he thinks that it will affect even his base their red hats the ralliers will be able to walk around with instead of having the bitch T-shirts the slightly maybe less inspiring and heart pumping slogan read the trial transcript.

S10: Yeah. I think the thought on that is you know if you read the transcript he doesn’t say quid pro quo in the transcript right. There’s that. In fact I’ve read the transcript there is no Latin at all his script.

S11: He does say we need to ask you a favorite though quid pro quo.

S10: But that’s right. That’s English. As we all know bribery you need a quid pro quo which presumably means you need to say it in Latin and there is no Latin in that transcripts right.

S12: Would you argue that. No kidding. But you do as a thinking with your impeachment defense attorney.

S9: KAPLAN You probably looked at the transcript and thought somebody with some legal or a PR skills thought this was exonerating or somehow extenuating or maybe even a perfect phone call like the president said. And if so why. And if so does this make it harder for Schiff and so forth again thinking just of the transcript. Would you have been happy to see that transcript and say let’s just get that out there and because he doesn’t say quid pro quo or because of somehow the way it’s phrased we can use this to our benefit.

S8: So no one was smart to get it out there because there were so many people who knew about this call. There were so many people who were on the call that it would have been impossible to keep the substance of that call quiet. Yeah and as we’ve seen you know we’ve seen a witness testify about the contents of that call. So it made sense to just get the transcript out to kind of deal with that issue. Then second I think Trump’s thought is Well again that you know the transcript doesn’t have that explicit. You know this for that it doesn’t say I need you to do this in exchange for aid. It doesn’t have that. And third and I think this is going to wind up potentially being the key I think where the White House winds up on this where Trump winds up on the is that he reasonably thought that corruption in Ukraine was a big deal and was a big enough deal to insist that corruption be addressed before aid got paid. And I think what Trump is going to say is emblematic of that corruption emblematic of it. Two things. Number one that Joe Biden then the vice president would hold up aid to Ukraine in exchange for the prosecutor that’s investigating his son’s company being fired. I think Trump is going to say that he had information to suggest that that might be true and he wanted that looked at. And that second that the notion that Ukraine potentially meddled in the 2016 election was potentially serious enough to insist that that be looked at before a be released putting aside putting aside whether those two things in particular are true. I think where the White House is going to wind up is that Trump believed those were true and maybe even justifiably believed that they were true number one because people told him people around him told him that. And number two because no one told him to not engage in this action and and that it’s a second part of that that I am very very interested in because we haven’t heard that any senior level official said hey Mr. President sir you can’t do this. It’s not okay.

S5: Well wait a second. The diplomats who test and including Sunlen including the whistleblower who at least heard about the call and you Ivanovich even though she wasn’t on the call saw this in the offing and we’re quite worried about it.

S8: Yeah they were quite worried about and we’ve heard that John Bolton the national security adviser was alarmed by it. The question is did anybody tell Trump. And I’m thinking it’s almost like an advice counsel defense. I know this is a dangerous place to be but I try to like get inside of Trump’s head. Yeah it’s scary in there. But I. But I want to be in there only short periods and bring mace yet to have a sense of what’s what is potentially going on. And so I imagine you know you’re Trump and people are telling you about this corruption involving Biden and to Paul you mean speaking of advice of counsel.

S12: Oh geez. Yeah.

S13: You mean Rudy Giuliani and that’s where the whole thought experiment runs into a little bit of a speed bump right. The speed bump being Rudy. And that’s why when we started I was saying I have a hard time figuring out any justification for what Rudy was up to in all of this. But if you’re Trump you got Rudy America’s mayor telling you all of these things and maybe there are others telling you. But you at least got Rudy telling you about all these things because Rudy’s around running around telling everybody about all these. Was he still on Fox News. He’s telling everybody who will listen so we can assume probably safely that he’s also telling Trump about these things. So you’re Trump and you’re getting all this information from America’s mayor Rudy who’s out looking for corruption all over the world and he’s finding it he he says in Ukraine in ways that potentially affect U.S. interests.

S8: And you’re hearing about all of this and you propose to deal with it in certain ways involving meetings with the president to Ukraine and U.S. aid to Ukraine and my question is and we don’t know the answer is did anybody tell you it’s not okay to do that. Did anybody tell you in particular getting back to Rudy. Because I think Rudy’s a big issue in all this. Hey Mr. President you cannot have Rudy your personal lawyer doing U.S. foreign policy. It is not okay. It is not OK to do. Now we know though that people are putting Rudy together with Ukrainian officials. Some people are are implementing what kind of Rudy’s role. And we’ve heard from a witness that you know the issue was raised with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Mike Pompeo rolled his eyes.

S5: We’ve been told that people like some of the littered ex cabinet next advisers along the way like I remember Gary Cohn saying he did say Mr. President that’s against the law. And some of the anonymous senior White House officials you know anonymous is coming out with his or her book about the internal soft coup or whatever it was who tried to curb Trump’s impulses.

S6: But what did that look like and what does it have to look like in order to count as a prising him of the dangers. Right.

S8: Yes. At the end my end question is about impeachment is you know is it treason bribery or another high crime and misdemeanor that justifies having Trump being the first U.S. president in history removed from office. That’s my. And question. And so to get there the issue is well if Trump legitimately thought that what he was doing was appropriate and furthered U.S. policy. National interests and of course obviously there might be some collateral benefit to his campaign. Yep sure. But if he legitimately thought that there was some U.S. interest at stake I think then it becomes very hard to justify removing him from office. Oh my God.

S6: But as you know it is impossible.

S9: Everybody the Ukraine military aid as a defense between Putin’s obviously imperial ambitions in Crimea in the war with Ukraine and beyond with Europe and NATO makes it. It’s been in our interests.

S6: It’s a bedrock as we keep hearing from Veneman and Taylor of U.S. foreign policy in the region that we supply them in their defense against Russian incursions and that the only interests served by withholding defense making them somehow take the fall for Russian interference in the election and also contradict the findings of our own intelligence as Barr reportedly is trying to get UK intelligence to do do damage to our own intelligence so that they can discredit the Muller report and to have sanctions relief because of the sanctions brought up when the Russians did interfere in our election. That’s not a question. And all those things look so Kremlin to me it’s like they have Kremlin etched on every page and to make the case that that was in our national interest. Seems impossible.

S8: So a couple of things. Number one is I agree with you on the policy issue. Number two I also think that what happened here was inappropriate. And if I were advising Trump I would tell him he couldn’t do it. Let’s make those two assumptions right. The issue though is whether Trump thought withholding aid not for a long time but for a short period in order to accomplish some national objective Allah. By the way. You know Joe Biden right. The Obama administration through Vice President Biden threatened to withhold aid to Ukraine unless certain domestic things happened and that was successful. And so I again can envision a scenario where if there were some national interests at stake that threatening to withhold aid to advance that national interest might be appropriate. Sure. And yes you and I agree on with the national interest is but neither one of us are or at least in my case will ever be president of the United States. And you know under the Constitution it is the president who who does U.S. diplomacy. So it is great that you and I and man and you know maybe lots and lots of others disagree with the president’s foreign policy. But it is up to the president to affect foreign policy. He can have advisers but you know we get opinions. He actually makes the decision.

S5: Well I mean then we’re back into the classic you know kind of bar tautology or the tautology that it’s come down to the defense come to his defense every time which is when the president does it it’s not a crime it’s not against our national interests. It’s not quid pro quo.

S8: And I wouldn’t say that Virginia. The question is I think the fundamental question is was Trump motivated by national interests U.S. national interests or was he motivated solely by personal and partisan political interests.

S5: That’s where I come out personal partisan and also possibly beholden to a hostile foreign power that he will not be named.

S8: Yeah. Well that’s that’s why I clarified U.S. national interests.

S9: Got it. And he has tried to make it clear and some and his base seem to agree that Russia’s interests and American interests or at least Putin’s interests and Trump’s interests are aligned. I mean he hasn’t been especially shy about that at least that there’s some friendship he’s forming which makes everybody every sane person very squeamish but seems to interest the base and maybe even Moscow Mitch. Speaking of Congress I’m surprised and maybe you have sort of an analogy to this in Europe in your past practice but that defiance of Congress in withholding support and when weapons briefly from Ukraine that that didn’t bother the lions of the Senate.

S8: Yeah. We don’t know whether they were bothered very much again. I think what we’re gonna be hearing over the next few weeks is that the pause on aid was so short and ultimately wound up coming through that there wasn’t time enough to get anybody wound up. And the second thing and thing that I’m very interested in knowing is what we’re going to find out about the reason why the aid was ultimately released. What information we’re going to get about that. The White House says hey look pretty calm down the aide went through buddy relax. And in fact Ukraine didn’t even know there was a you know any sort of real condition on the aid which you know we’re hearing may not be really the case but I think we’re probably going to learn more about what was going on inside the White House and what motivated the decision to release the aid ultimately.

S5: Well then he had moved on. I mean I don’t know if you saw this but the far right figures are enough ski in Russia right after the election of Donald Trump said openly. Well now we can start to pursue our interests in Ukraine and Syria. And that you know the under there it’s like Ukraine and Syria are like Rumplestiltskin is first child when they come back to Trump the first time OK. Maybe he has to appear in Helsinki to pay back Putin but now we’ve got to. And now it’s coming time for the end of your first term and what we want is Syria and Ukraine and he did those two things in rapid succession. I mean if he restored he restored support to Ukraine and then a second later got on the phone a third one seems to me.

S8: Yeah I don’t know. It sounds like I could imagine reading about that in Seth Abramson’s Twitter.

S12: I knew you were going to say something like that. By the way OK. If by Seth Abramson you mean the person who made no mistakes in his last two books which you haven’t read or if by Seth Abramson you mean your weird projection of Seth Abramson as someone who makes up stories.

S6: I’m not sure but he did in rapid succession Do you know do these like have these sketchy exchanges with the Lansky and Irwin. I’m just putting it out there. I’m just putting it out there but everybody already knows that. I want to get to what you think of Schiff. So you always get because you’re thinking in the defense you’re you’re probably sizing sides right. OK. But you’re sizing up you’re you’re you’re taking the measure of quote both sides.

S7: If you had to showdown with Schiff what do you think his strengths and weaknesses are.

S8: It depends on the stage. So I was very critical about how Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler handled the Mueller non investigation. I think he got an F for that. I was very complimentary of how chairman Schiff and I am complimentary of Chairman Schiff’s handling of the investigation related to Ukraine. I think he’s he has made some very smart moves and I think he’s gotten some witnesses to talk who we didn’t expect necessarily to talk to him and he’s gotten some good information.

S5: I mean we haven’t heard you know I’m only going on Trump you know because Trump thinks about optics more than the law. But I’m only going on the the tee shirts in Kentucky but they were quite visible saying read the transcript every now and then he says hoax.

S6: He says do nothing Democrats. But he has done nothing to successfully discredit or even really address the testimony of Alexander Van der man Gordon Sandlin Taylor and so forth and the Ivanovich and these people I don’t know if he understands but they’ve become really dominant voices since they’re their opening statements always seem to leak and they’re very good witnesses and they’re in our in the heads of people you know. It’s Schiff has lined them up and Trump has nothing to say except to read the transcript which many of us thought was damning.

S8: Yes. So here’s what I think is going on. As we’ve seen the White House and the Trump camp has not really put out much of a defense at all on the substance. And I think the concern in the White House and on Team Trump is that they don’t know all the facts and there’s probably a reluctance to try to to potentially get out in front of things and have them be wrong or get out in front of things and be criticized and we saw what happened with with acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney where he came out and gave what I think is going to be pretty close to the ultimate defense here where we wind up and said get over it. And then it was roundly criticized and suffered probably some internal political damage at the White House. And so we haven’t seen much of a defense at all. But I don’t think we should necessarily think that’s because there won’t be a factual defense. I think the White House is being smart because they don’t know the facts in not kind of getting out ahead of things and being proven wrong. And number two they they might be also being smart by saying that the place to offer the defense is not in the context of closed door secret depositions and maybe not in the context of a kind of a one sided House investigation process but later. We pay attention to what goes on every day. But a lot of the American people are not paying attention and so there’s probably a balance on the one hand which you don’t want to do is wait to present your defense until opinion is totally locked in tight. Yeah. On the other hand you can keep your powder dry until people are really focused on it and then present your defense when no one you know more facts. And number two it’s going to be most effective but on. SCHIFF I said I you know I thought the first part of the investigation was very good. You know a lot but I think Schiff and Pelosi have really botched the past couple of weeks really botched the past couple of weeks. I think the vote that Pelosi took was both unnecessary and a real disaster. The notion of taking a vote and not being able to get a single Republican on board and even losing to Democrats was was really bad.

S5: You know you comparisons What about going forward with impeachment.

S8: Yeah. This was the vote about going forward with impeachment and adopting the process and procedure. You know you compare it to Watergate where by the time of that vote the House voted overwhelmingly I think they thought there were only four members who voted against going forward with an impeachment process in Clinton. Thirty one members of the president’s own party. That was an incredibly partisan right time and and very weak impeachment allegations. But thirty one members of the president’s own party voted to proceed with impeachment investigations. And the rules and processes were actually adopted unanimously and so did. Yeah. Compare it to now.

S5: OK. There are rules and processes were adopted so that we can move to public hearings. Right. Like everybody from Mueller to Pelosi has been trying to figure out how you enforce the law or enforce these procedures but also play to the cameras whether you know should one play to the cameras since Trump is always on camera. And I think she just wanted to move this stuff out of the public she knew that the procedures would pass and nobody noticed including me who voted and who didn’t we just know it got a majority and it’s pushing Oh you know who noticed you all right.

S8: Yeah. And Trump’s space and what we’re going to be hearing from now until the cows come home is what I think is actually a legitimate criticism of the process what Pelosi could have done is just adopted the rules that were adopted in Nixon and then the same exact rules were adopted unanimously in Clinton could’ve adopted those same rules could have and should have. But she didn’t. And that wound up giving the Republicans a legitimate reason to say you know what this process is is one sided. It’s not fair. And and to just criticize the legitimacy the process as a whole I think was a terrible move.

S5: Well if they didn’t pick up on that they won’t now because they don’t listen to Trump cast. But as usual I also think you are a much better thinker than Trump’s nondefense team which by the way when you say he doesn’t hasn’t mounted much of a fat defense yet he hasn’t managed to have mustered up the defense team. And it’s not clear who would be on that. He’s burned through so many people. Alan Dershowitz has its hands tied with this. You know sex Epstein thing. And CASA it says locked himself out Cobb’s gone Dowd’s gone. Emmett flood. The only one I thought was brainy or really brainy has gone no one’s approached you yet. Who else.

S6: Giuliani even Michael Cohen man that guy. He could have helped with his degree from Cooley and nobody with any experience. Who am I missing. Who’s around. Think of a defense. And. OK. And this two part question and probably more of a point than a question. But you know in trying to figure out what kind of case are they making you could look to Lindsey Graham and you can look to the T-shirts to say read the transcript but you can look to Lindsey Graham who all he can do is say Gordon Sand Land some giant giant donor to trump the one who recently recalled that there was quid pro quo that he is a Democratic operative. That kind of thing. I mean really they were clutching at straws last time with their strong stuff. But this is pathetic. But static and oh here’s another thing he doesn’t have a flood. He doesn’t have you. He doesn’t have Ty Cobb and he does not have a bill a bar. Right. Well we as we learned last night Trump approached bar and asked him to you know do what he always does suborning perjury from his own who he perceives to be his own lawyers and go say there’s nothing there to the Ukraine thing no quid pro quo or whatever. He wants to say now and bar for once said no. So I just don’t think he has anyone anymore.

S8: Here’s what I think he’s probably counting on. And we learned yesterday that he’s bringing on the former attorney general of Florida Pam Bondi to help out at least on the communications front.

S9: Right. Well that’s why I say the PR optics interest him.

S8: Yeah well I think he’s he’s counting on is the votes in the Senate because right now the House is going to do their thing. And if they want to the House Dems have the votes to impeach him. We know that. So the House is going to do their thing. But then if they actually do pull the trigger and impeach him then things move to the Senate where it’s flipped where the Republicans hold a very very comfortable majority. And the Republicans make the rules the Republicans decide what the trial looks like. The Republicans decide who if anyone testifies and the Republicans clearly have the votes to acquit him. And so I think Trump and his people probably aren’t that worried right now about how all this plays out. And the other thing the Senate Republicans do is they control the timing. They control how quickly or how slowly this is disposed of. And one thing I’ll note on that front is Trump tweeted out today that Joe and Hunter Biden have to testify. And that’s interesting because we know they’re not going to testify. They’re not going to be subpoenaed at the House level. But keep an eye on the Senate keep an eye on a push by Trump and his people. If this gets to the Senate to subpoena Joe Biden and Hunter Biden and remember the the first primaries and caucuses for Democrats come up in February not too far away. And and that is a point that I think is not going to be lost on Nancy Pelosi and lots of other Democrats as they look at how this process moves along and maybe Elizabeth Warren to still sort of notice that my guest has been Ross Garber Trump cast’s favorite contrarian.

S14: He’s also America’s preeminent impeachment defense lawyer and he teaches at Tulane. Thank you so much for being here Ross. It’s good to be here. Thanks for having me. That’s it for today’s show. What do you think. Come to Twitter. You can speak Latin to us and we don’t mind. I’m at page 88. The show is at real Trump cast our show today was produced by Melissa Kaplan and engineered by Merritt Jacob. I’m Virginia Heffernan. Thanks for listening to Trump cast.