0:00

This podcast is part of

0:02

the Acast Creator Network. Hey,

0:08

I'm Ryan Reynolds. Recently, I asked Mint

0:10

Mobile's legal team if big wireless companies

0:12

are allowed to raise prices due to

0:15

inflation. They said yes. And then when

0:17

I asked if raising prices technically violates

0:19

those onerous two-year contracts, they said, what

0:21

the f*** are you talking about, you

0:23

insane Hollywood a*****e? So to recap, we're

0:25

cutting the price of Mint Unlimited from $30 a month to

0:27

just $15 a month. Give

0:30

it a try at mintmobile.com/switch. taxes and fees. Promo rate for new

0:32

customers for limited time. $45 up front for three months plus taxes and fees.

0:34

Promote for new customers for limited time. Unlimited more than 40 gigabytes

0:36

per month. Mint Unlimited slows. Millions of people

0:39

have lost weight with personalized plans from

0:41

Noom. Like Evan, who can't stand salads

0:43

and still lost 50 pounds. Salads

0:46

generally for most people are the easy button,

0:48

right? For me, that wasn't an option. I

0:50

never really was a salad guy. That's just

0:52

not who I am. But Noom worked for

0:55

me. Get your

0:57

personalized plan today at noom.com. Real

1:00

Noom user compensated to provide their story. In

1:02

4 weeks, the typical Noom user can expect to lose

1:05

1-2 pounds per week. Individual results may vary. Hello

1:18

and welcome to The Stand with Eamonn Dunphy.

1:22

Now, the United States at the

1:24

moment is in turmoil. As a

1:27

result of a decision

1:29

handed down by the Supreme Court

1:31

on Monday, passed by a

1:33

63 majority, which

1:35

of course is along partisan lines, there

1:38

are six conservatives and three

1:40

liberals on the court, the

1:42

Supreme Court ruled that

1:44

presidents are

1:46

immune, absolutely immune, from

1:49

official acts that they take.

1:52

There was a very strong dissenting

1:55

note from Justice

1:58

Sonia Sotomayor. who

2:00

signed off her judgment with

2:03

a blistering critique of

2:05

the findings of her six conservative

2:07

colleagues by saying, quote, with fear

2:10

for our democracy, I dissent.

2:13

And she earlier in her dissenting

2:16

judgment, she said,

2:18

and I quote, that the

2:21

president violate the law, let him

2:23

exploit the trappings of his office

2:25

for personal gain. Let

2:27

him use his official power for

2:30

evil ends, because if he knew

2:32

he might one day face liability

2:34

for breaking the law, he

2:36

might not be as bold and as fearless

2:39

as we would like him to be. That

2:42

is the majority's message today.

2:45

Order the Navy SEALs team

2:47

six to assassinate a political

2:49

rival, immune. Organize

2:52

a military coup to hold

2:54

on to power, immune. Take

2:57

a bribe in exchange for pardon,

3:00

immune, immune, immune,

3:02

immune. That is the

3:05

majority's message today. That

3:07

is, of course, the message of

3:10

the Supreme Court. It has shocked

3:12

legal scholars. It has shocked the

3:15

United States. And indeed,

3:17

it reverberates across the world.

3:20

And we're joined now from Washington by Niles

3:22

Stanich, Associate Editor of

3:24

The Hill newspaper, a brilliant

3:26

journalist who has been with us on

3:29

the stand since we began.

3:31

Niles, thank you very much for joining

3:33

us. The dissenting

3:36

message from Justice Sonia

3:39

Sotomayor is stark,

3:43

remarkable, unprecedented, I would have thought.

3:46

How are you feeling about it? How is

3:48

Washington and the United States feeling about it

3:51

this morning? Well, certainly the

3:53

dissent from Sotomayor is something that has

3:55

been seized on and much quoted by

3:57

people who are not just of a

3:59

liberal disposition. position, but otherwise sort of

4:01

appalled by the court ruling.

4:03

Now, obviously supporters of Mr Trump

4:06

are very impressed by the court

4:08

ruling and he has already

4:10

been enthusing about it

4:13

on social media. Basically what

4:15

the court has done is distinguish

4:17

between official and unofficial acts

4:20

by a present. And as

4:22

you correctly pointed out in

4:24

your introduction, official acts are

4:27

entirely immune from criminal prosecution.

4:30

Unofficial acts are not, but the

4:32

court has provided very little guidance

4:35

as to what an unofficial

4:37

act would be and quite expansive

4:40

definitions of what an official act

4:42

would be, which is one of

4:44

sort of my orders of objections.

4:46

Yes, and they have said that

4:49

it is the lower court which

4:52

initially should decide what is official

4:54

and non-official. Am I right about

4:56

that? Yes, in Mr Trump's case,

4:59

because I mean, this is the

5:01

whole set aside and we can

5:03

certainly get back to the legal

5:05

implications and the implications for American

5:08

democracy. But the political and electoral

5:10

implication of this, of course, is

5:12

by doing what you just said,

5:15

remanding that key question back to

5:17

the lower courts. The

5:20

chances of a trial

5:22

of Donald Trump on January 6th related

5:25

charges before November's election

5:27

are now very slight. In

5:30

fact, President Biden spoke

5:32

from the White House on Monday

5:34

evening, only for about five minutes,

5:36

but he himself noted that it

5:38

was in his terms highly, highly

5:40

unlikely that the American

5:43

people would find a criminal verdict

5:45

or would see a

5:47

criminal verdict on Trump on January

5:49

6th before November. Yes, and of

5:51

course, whatever a lower court

5:53

finds, it still goes back

5:55

to the Supreme Court on appeal if

5:57

that is what the accused person. so

6:00

desire. So it still goes

6:02

back to a Supreme Court

6:04

who has now ruled effectively

6:06

that the actions

6:08

Sotomayor defines such as

6:11

murder and a number of

6:13

other criminal acts cannot be

6:15

deemed criminal if it's

6:18

done in the President's official

6:20

capacity. And of course, then you'd

6:22

have arguments in the court ad

6:25

infinitum about what was official

6:27

and what was unofficial. And

6:30

that would apply to January 6th, wouldn't it,

6:32

Niall? It would, yes. I

6:34

mean, the argument will now be had over

6:36

January 6th, but you could of course apply

6:39

it to nothing. And of course, liberals

6:42

and some people on the left are

6:45

making the argument, well, so what if

6:47

Biden just had Trump

6:49

arbitrarily locked up as a sort of

6:51

danger to democracy or as a would-be

6:54

authoritarian or something? He'd say

6:56

that that was part of his

6:58

official duties as to

7:00

protect the laws of the United

7:03

States. Now, to be clear, there

7:05

is no suggestion that Biden will

7:07

in turn Donald Trump, but that

7:10

is where the sort of theoretical

7:12

elements of this lead.

7:15

And Sotomayor makes a lot

7:17

of points in that dissent

7:19

about these kind of

7:22

seeming contradictions, referring

7:24

to, for example, the President's oath of

7:27

office. Sotomayor wrote that

7:29

there's a twisted irony, this is

7:31

a quote, insane as the majority

7:33

does, that the person charged with,

7:35

quote, taking care that the laws

7:37

be faithfully executed, unquote, can break

7:39

them with impunity. So that's the

7:42

danger, as she sees it. The

7:44

majority so

7:47

far as it goes is that

7:49

if you made or if you

7:52

underscored that a President would be

7:54

criminally liable for his official acts

7:56

or her official acts, you

7:58

would then They

8:01

would cease to function as

8:03

an executive as effectively because

8:06

they would have to constantly

8:08

have one be

8:11

looking over their shoulder for the possibility

8:13

of future criminal prosecution. Now, this was

8:15

a 6th, 3 majority. Two

8:18

of those 6 in the

8:20

majority are linked to January

8:22

6th and have two

8:24

of those justices to

8:26

some extent compromised, severely

8:29

compromised in making any judgment on

8:32

January 6th. This

8:34

is a reference to Clarence Thomas, first

8:36

of all, whose wife was

8:38

very actively involved in

8:40

the Trump effort to

8:43

overturn the election. Ginny

8:45

Thomas has been a pretty

8:48

hard conservative activist for many

8:50

years. And when her

8:52

things like her text to

8:55

Trump aides came out earlier,

8:58

much earlier in this process, some

9:00

Democrats demanded that Justice Thomas recuse

9:02

himself from him in January 6th

9:04

related, which he obviously didn't heed.

9:07

The other justice that you're referring to

9:09

is Samuel Alito, whose

9:11

house in Virginia, there

9:13

was an upside down American flag

9:16

flew around the time that we're

9:18

talking about. The upside down

9:20

stars and stripes is a sign

9:22

of distress and had

9:24

been taken around that time as

9:27

signaling a message of

9:29

some sort of fundamental

9:31

protest at President Biden's victory in the

9:34

2020 election. Alito

9:37

said that it was his wife's decision to

9:39

fly that flag and that it was part

9:41

of a neighborhood dispute with a neighbor who

9:43

had been verbally abusive to her. That

9:47

obviously, whether one believes his explanation

9:49

or not, obviously caused

9:51

more suggestions

9:53

that he should recuse himself, which he

9:55

also did not. We

9:58

should note him and perhaps that. Justice

10:00

Thomas and Justice Alito are not

10:02

among the three justices nominated to

10:05

the Supreme Court by Donald Trump

10:07

Himself, that's Amy Coney Barrett, Brett

10:09

Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch. Now

10:12

now where does the United States go from

10:14

here and in particular

10:16

there was and remains

10:19

the fallout from last Thursday's debate

10:21

between President Biden

10:23

and former President Trump. The

10:26

fallout from that is still

10:28

considerable it does seem

10:31

and it's important to be calm

10:34

about this and not to use rhetoric, but it

10:36

does seem that this is the scale

10:39

of this crisis has never faced the

10:41

United States before has it? Well,

10:44

it's certainly I think it's the confluence

10:46

of factors that are so dramatic right

10:49

now because within the

10:51

space of what was it four or

10:53

five days you had a disastrous

10:56

Biden debate performance which you and

10:58

I spoke about from Atlanta on

11:00

Thursday night which has

11:02

clearly increased Donald Trump's chances of being

11:05

elected President of the United States again

11:07

and then on Monday you had a Supreme Court

11:10

ruling that you

11:13

know opens the field very very

11:15

wide for such a second Trump

11:17

presidency to take an

11:20

enormous what

11:22

would you say, enormous view of his own

11:24

power just to cite one

11:26

specific example which might help

11:29

bring that home to our listeners and the

11:32

Supreme Court on Monday ruled essentially

11:34

that when it comes to the

11:36

Department of Justice a

11:39

president can really do whatever he likes. It's

11:42

very specifically mentioned

11:45

Trump's conduct regarding the Department of

11:47

Justice in the aftermath of the

11:49

2020 election as immune

11:51

from prosecution regardless,

11:54

and this is again a quote of

11:56

whether it was a sham or whether

11:58

they were quote improper motives

12:00

behind it. The reason that

12:02

that is relevant beyond the period

12:06

under consideration is that

12:08

Donald Trump has said that he would,

12:11

for example, consider firing

12:13

US attorneys who did not prosecute

12:16

people at his pest. He

12:18

has very clearly telegraphed that he wishes to

12:21

continue to use the Department of Justice

12:24

as a sort of instrument or extension

12:26

of his own power. And

12:29

the Supreme Court really appears

12:31

to say that he would be immune

12:33

from any prosecution for anything he did

12:35

in that regard if elected again. Now,

12:38

he has made it very clear, even

12:40

in the hours since that judgment,

12:43

that retribution is very

12:45

much on his agenda if he

12:47

is returned as President

12:49

of the United States. That

12:51

is an ominous warning, is

12:53

it not, for people

12:56

now considering this ruling?

12:59

And indeed, for people who are

13:01

considering in any way doing things

13:03

that Donald Trump doesn't like.

13:07

You would think so. I mean,

13:09

it's he is very clear about

13:11

sort of seeking revenge. Now, he

13:13

sometimes softens that to say he's

13:15

seeking, I think it's the

13:17

revenge of success or the retribution

13:19

of success or something along those

13:21

lines. But I

13:24

mean, it's, you know,

13:26

clearly he is someone who

13:29

does as a general rule and, you

13:31

know, throughout his life has sought vengeance

13:35

against people who have criticized him even

13:37

in his business career. Now you fuse

13:39

that with someone with

13:41

the enormous and apparently expanding powers

13:44

of the presidency.

13:46

And clearly there is a, you

13:48

know, cause for liberals

13:51

and people who have opposed Trump generally

13:53

to be critical to that exact point.

13:56

There was just very recently,

14:00

like within the past day or so, he

14:02

retweeted on social media someone

14:04

else's message suggesting that Liz

14:07

Cheney, the daughter of Dick

14:09

Cheney, is guilty of treason

14:11

and that he retweeted this

14:14

thing, or retruth this thing on

14:16

his truth social site that included

14:18

the message that you should retweet

14:21

it if you want televised

14:23

military tribunals with

14:25

a picture of Liz Cheney. So that's

14:28

a pretty clear suggestion that he would like Cheney

14:30

before a military tribunal and

14:32

he will presumably could

14:35

very well have the power to do that. Now

14:38

AOC, the liberal democrat

14:40

from New York, has

14:42

said she intends to

14:44

initiate impeachment proceedings against

14:46

the Supreme Court. Is

14:48

the legal, is that, is

14:50

she out on a limb or

14:53

is that legally possible? Is there any

14:55

appetite for that? Because it does appear

14:57

now and now from where

14:59

I'm sitting that we are

15:02

looking now at a nation

15:05

that has passed from democracy

15:07

to autocracy and that

15:09

is heading rapidly in that direction.

15:11

And whilst before people were saying

15:13

democracy would be on the ballot

15:16

in November, it most certainly is

15:18

on the ballot now because

15:21

the Supreme Court, which is the

15:23

most powerful institution in America, arguably,

15:26

has Robert stamped it? Yeah,

15:29

I mean the AOC issue

15:31

or the push for impeachment is

15:34

she is completely entitled to introduce

15:36

articles of impeachment. The chances of

15:38

it going anywhere are extremely, extremely

15:40

limited because the House of Representatives

15:42

has a narrow Republican majority and

15:44

in any event it's not clear

15:46

that all Democrats would support

15:49

it. I

15:51

mean I think largely because there's

15:53

a big and widening gap at

15:55

times between the left of the

15:57

Democratic Party, which AOC can do.

16:00

clearly represents at

16:02

a more centrist tendency, which has been

16:04

more cautious and frankly more corporate friendly.

16:08

On the Supreme Court thing, I should

16:10

perhaps have mentioned earlier just to underline

16:12

how surprising,

16:16

or the surprise is the wrong

16:18

word, how startling some of this

16:21

really is. There was

16:23

one instance where Amy Coney

16:25

Barrett, who's a frankly very

16:28

conservative person, actually

16:30

aligned herself with Sonia Sotomayor because

16:32

she believed that the majority had

16:34

gone too far. The

16:37

issue being that the Supreme Court majority

16:39

has ruled that you cannot even use

16:44

evidence from unofficial

16:46

acts to prove

16:49

criminality in unofficial acts.

16:52

That was a bridge too far even

16:54

for Coney Barrett, who noted that a

16:57

charge of bribery, for example, would

16:59

be almost impossible to sustain because

17:01

you wouldn't be able to introduce

17:05

the evidence of what a president

17:07

had done in his official

17:09

duties in return for the bribe. Coney

17:12

Barrett was like, that's kind of ridiculous, we

17:14

can't have that. It is however

17:17

now the second law of the United States. So

17:22

that's quite a scenario that

17:24

we are facing now and

17:26

clearly it is something that

17:29

heightens those concerns about

17:32

authoritarian actions on Mr Trump's part if

17:34

he were reelected. There was

17:36

also a ruling last week by the

17:38

Supreme Court which suggested

17:41

that people who had been charged and

17:44

there are hundreds of them over

17:46

the January 6 riots at

17:49

the Capitol, the Supreme Court

17:51

ruled in opinion that these

17:54

charges were wrong and

17:56

that those defendants didn't get justice

17:59

more than 300 years ago. 50 people we're talking

18:01

about here. Also, this rule

18:03

has the effect of making

18:05

the Trump's, one of the most

18:08

egregious things he did on January 6th

18:10

and in the period building

18:12

up to January 6th, was put severe

18:14

pressure on his vice president, Mike Pence,

18:17

to refuse to ratify the

18:20

vote of the electorate, which was a

18:22

duty he was performing on

18:24

on January 6th. That

18:26

the pressure and threats that Trump

18:29

put on him and articulated

18:32

were not criminal, they were official

18:34

acts, it

18:37

looks like now, and that Pence

18:40

was not in any way or his rights were

18:42

not violated. Yeah. So

18:44

the suggestion from the Supreme Court,

18:46

more than a suggestion, the ruling

18:48

from the Supreme Court is that

18:51

Trump's action relation to Pence

18:53

should be presumptively a

18:56

part of his official acts, which would, of

18:58

course, render them immune from

19:00

prosecution and the government prosecution

19:02

would have to actively

19:05

prove otherwise. The

19:07

earlier Supreme Court decision from last week,

19:09

the juror of Herring to is a

19:12

finding that I find rather bizarre,

19:14

but it ruled that the offense of

19:17

obstructing an official proceeding is

19:19

really only the burden of field is

19:21

only met there. If you meddle

19:25

with documents or documentary

19:27

evidence or change documentary

19:30

evidence, therefore holding the

19:32

police by implication, that it's not obstruction

19:34

of an official proceeding if you merely

19:37

storm the building where the official proceeding

19:39

has taken place, which of course is

19:41

one of the reasons why so many

19:44

people were convicted or pleaded guilty to

19:47

that offense. So yes,

19:49

that's one more data point in

19:51

this whole picture. Millions

19:55

of people have lost weight with personalized

19:57

plans from noon, like Evan, who can't

19:59

stay. and still lost 50 pounds. Salads

20:03

generally for most people are the easy button,

20:05

right? For me, that wasn't an option. I

20:07

never really was a salad guy. That's just

20:10

not who I am. The noom worked for

20:12

me. Get your

20:14

personalized plan today at noom.com. Real

20:17

noom user compensated to provide their story. In four

20:19

weeks, the typical noom user can expect to lose

20:21

one to two pounds per week. Individual results may

20:23

vary. Helps

20:34

you sleep at a comfortable temperature? Sleep

20:37

Number SmartBeds lets you individualize

20:39

your comfort, so you sleep

20:41

better together. J.D. Power Rinks

20:43

Sleep Number Number 1 in

20:45

customer satisfaction with mattresses purchased

20:47

in-store. Shop the

20:49

Sleep Number SmartBed starting at $999 for a limited time.

20:54

Prices higher in Alaska and Hawaii. For

20:56

J.D. Power 2023 award

20:58

information, visit jdpower.com slash

21:00

awards. Only at a Sleep Number

21:03

store or sleepnumber.com. Hello,

21:05

this is Danny Pellegrino, host of the

21:07

Everything Iconic podcast. And I'm here to

21:09

tell you all about splash refresher because

21:11

hydration is mandatory, but boring is not.

21:13

Now I love my water, but if

21:16

I don't spice it up, I'm not

21:18

gonna finish what I took out of

21:20

the fridge. That's why I love my

21:22

splash refresher, which is flavorful, delicious, bright,

21:24

hydrating in zero calories. The

21:27

wild berry flavor is my fave. No,

21:29

wait, is the pineapple mango flavor my fave? You

21:32

know what? All five craveable splash refresher

21:34

flavors are my fave because

21:37

they're so delicious. So get hydrated

21:39

and enjoy it with splash refresher. Wow.

21:44

Nice. Yeah. What

21:46

you're hearing are the sounds of people everywhere putting

21:48

on Bamba socks, underwear, and T-shirts made

21:51

from absurdly soft materials that

21:53

feel like plush clouds. And

21:56

the best part? For every item

21:58

you purchase, Bamba's donates another to...

22:00

someone facing homelessness. Bombas, big comfort

22:02

for everyone. Go to bombas.com/a cast

22:04

and use code a cast for

22:06

20% off your first

22:08

purchase. That's bombas.com/a cast code a

22:11

cast. Now,

22:15

now the fallout from Joe Biden's

22:19

performance in the presidential debate,

22:22

it's still falling out.

22:25

And it's very

22:28

serious with 72% of

22:30

people I saw in one poll

22:33

thinking he shouldn't run in November's

22:36

election and wasn't fit to run

22:38

the Democrats. Obviously in turmoil

22:41

and indeed the whole nation, I would

22:43

think after yesterday's judgment, where

22:45

is that going in terms of Biden

22:48

being replaced by

22:51

Democrats? So the

22:53

whole question really is whether

22:56

Joe Biden could be persuaded

22:58

to stand aside as the

23:00

nominee. The debate

23:02

performance was pretty woeful. It was

23:05

also rather sad, honestly. It

23:07

was an 81 year old man showing

23:10

his age at almost every moment. The

23:13

crucial opening half hour of the debate

23:15

was especially bad. Even the

23:18

moments when Biden wasn't speaking,

23:20

he looked like

23:22

someone who was honestly a little bit out

23:24

of it. So the

23:27

question is, could he or

23:29

his family or his very

23:31

closest advisors think it

23:33

is not worth a risk of repeating that,

23:36

or it's not worth ending your career like

23:38

that and step aside. We

23:40

don't know. He's a very proud man. He

23:42

feels often that he doesn't get his just

23:44

desserts or enough respect. And so

23:47

the indication so far is that he

23:49

probably won't, of course, I'm as

23:51

dramatic as that you wouldn't really get any

23:53

indications before it happens. He would be a

23:55

hundred percent in up until the time he

23:57

would be. If

24:00

he did step aside to make

24:02

a complicated picture simple, I think

24:04

there would be three people who

24:07

would mostly be being looked at.

24:09

That's Vice President Harris, Governor Gavin

24:11

Newsom of California and Governor Gretchen

24:13

Whitmer of Michigan. And

24:16

it would be up to

24:18

the Democratic Convention, the

24:20

nominating process there, to decide

24:23

who would be the nominee, assuming that

24:25

Biden would pull out before that. Yes,

24:28

and of course, the Vice President, Governor

24:30

Harris, is black. And

24:32

if she were passed over, for

24:34

example, it is said by

24:37

many observers that that would be

24:39

regarded as an insult, or at least will look

24:41

very bad to black voters who, of

24:44

course, make up a huge part

24:46

of the Democratic constituency. Yes,

24:48

that's right. I mean, that's the situation with

24:50

Harris is quite a vexing one in a

24:52

way, if Biden were to step down, because

24:55

she is a historic figure just by

24:57

virtue of already being the first female

25:00

black Vice President of the United

25:02

States. She would be seen

25:04

as the heir apparent, but she has

25:06

quite bad poll ratings. It's not that

25:08

clear that she would do better against

25:11

Trump than Biden would do. But if

25:13

you also threw her overboard, the likely

25:15

replacement would be a white person, Newsom and Whitmer

25:18

are both white. And that

25:20

would, for obvious reasons, I think,

25:22

antagonize at least some of the

25:24

Democratic Party's black supporters. So

25:27

where is the United States

25:30

headed now, Niall, in your view?

25:33

Well, I mean, it seems likely

25:35

that Joe Biden will lose the

25:37

presidential election for a long time

25:39

before that debate. Amen. I

25:41

posited the view that Donald Trump was a

25:44

slight favorite in the race, I think Donald

25:46

Trump is not quite a heavy favorite. Yes.

25:48

We know what he wants to do, because

25:50

he has said what he wants to do.

25:53

I mentioned the issue of potentially firing attorneys

25:55

who didn't go after people at his behest.

25:58

He also wants to... And attacking courts as well. In

26:00

course, he also wants to use

26:02

the military to deport illegal immigrants,

26:05

build deportation camps and things

26:07

of that nature. And

26:10

it seems likely that at this point that

26:12

he will be the next president

26:14

of the United States come next January when

26:16

he would be sworn in. That

26:18

would also give him the right to

26:20

tell the Department of Justice to simply

26:23

stop its prosecutions of them

26:25

for January, the 6th related offenses

26:27

and for the sensitive

26:30

documents found in Florida. And

26:34

he would presumably use these very expansive

26:36

powers to do what he said, what

26:38

he has said he was going to

26:40

do, including going after his opponents. Game

26:43

over, is it? Well, you

26:46

can say that, Evan. I mean, it

26:48

seems like it's a fairly bleak situation

26:50

from just separation of powers. Certainly unprecedented,

26:52

Niall, isn't it? I mean, this is

26:55

in the history of the United States.

26:57

This was to be anyway

27:00

the most important and consequential

27:02

presidential election in normal circumstances.

27:05

But since the Supreme Court's rulings,

27:07

and there are two of them, but yes,

27:10

it is, of course, is the most powerful.

27:12

You really, with a president like

27:15

Trump, you wouldn't be living in a

27:17

democracy, would you? No, I mean, if

27:19

you look back even to Richard Nixon,

27:21

who's the person who's often cited as

27:24

the closest recent example to Trump, I

27:26

mean, after Nixon left office, he was

27:28

pardoned by Gerald Ford, his Republican successor.

27:31

The pardon, of course, clearly

27:34

suggests that Nixon could have been

27:36

criminally prosecuted for his actions during

27:39

the Watergate scandal. That

27:41

just doesn't apply anymore. I

27:43

mean, Nixon presumably would be

27:46

immune if he were alive and did

27:48

the same thing now. So

27:51

that gives, I think, some

27:53

indication of how the guardrails

27:55

of American civic society have

27:57

really been removed by this

27:59

ruling. serve.

30:01

I know that Trump commented on

30:03

that and argued that he was

30:05

a political prisoner. The situation

30:08

now, Niall, how does it

30:10

move forward? Or are

30:12

you basically going to now have

30:14

four more years of Donald Trump?

30:17

All the dangers that

30:19

Sonia Sosomayor referred to in

30:21

her dissenting judgment, where Donald

30:23

Trump can do whatever he

30:26

wants. And we know that

30:28

he's a grifter, a liar,

30:31

somebody who has sexually abused

30:33

women, and somebody who has

30:36

committed fraud on a grand scale. This

30:38

is the president for

30:40

the next four years with these expanded

30:42

powers that you referred to conferred

30:45

on him by a Supreme

30:47

Court. Yeah, if Trump

30:49

is elected in November, he's going to

30:51

have absolutely enormous powers

30:54

because you've

30:56

mentioned and we've talked about the Supreme

30:58

Court and the way it has lifted

31:00

barriers to actions taken in any kind

31:03

of official capacity or which a president

31:05

could even claim are made

31:07

in his official capacity. The other

31:09

point regarding the power that Trump

31:11

will have if elected is if

31:14

he is elected, it is exceedingly likely

31:16

that he will have what we call

31:19

the unified government behind him. In other

31:21

words, he will have Republican majorities in

31:23

the Senate and the House of Representatives.

31:25

There's already a narrow majority for Republicans

31:27

in the House. Democrats are in a

31:30

situation of great vulnerability in the Senate.

31:33

And Donald Trump has clearly brought the

31:35

Republican Party really within his grip over

31:37

the time that he has been in

31:39

politics. There was resistance to him back

31:42

in 2016 and that resistance has been

31:45

defeated, really, including him

31:47

being endorsed this time round by Mitch McConnell,

31:49

who's well known to loathe him. So

31:52

Trump would have the power of the

31:54

presidency to start off with. He would

31:56

have enormous legislative power because his party

31:59

would be in a position control of

32:01

Capitol Hill and he would have enormous

32:03

power as you put it very well,

32:05

conferred upon him by the Supreme Court.

32:09

Now, I guess the caveat is,

32:11

unexpected things happen in politics all

32:13

the time. Perhaps there'll be

32:15

a different democratic nominee. Perhaps

32:17

the country will balk at some of

32:19

the things that we're talking about here.

32:23

I find it very hard to see Joe

32:25

Biden winning a presidential election in November at

32:27

this point but I could be wrong. So

32:32

we shall see but for the

32:34

umpteenth time since Donald Trump

32:36

came down those escalators in

32:39

2015 to begin his first presidential bid,

32:41

we are in uncharted waters. Okay,

32:44

Niall, we're very grateful to you for

32:46

joining us today. Now, Stanitch is an

32:48

associate editor of The Hill, a respected

32:50

Washington newspaper and he's

32:53

also White House columnist for The

32:55

Hill. We're very grateful to Niall

32:57

always, particularly recently. To all

32:59

of you for listening, that's all we have time

33:01

for now. We'll talk to you soon. Tired

33:15

of wrestling with complex data and

33:17

countless tools? Meet HURRY, your budget-friendly

33:19

AI-powered data analyst. HURRY transforms hours

33:21

of work into moments of insight,

33:23

automating your most complex analysis and

33:25

report building. It's designed for everyone,

33:28

no technical expertise required. Let HURRY

33:30

free your team to focus on

33:32

what truly matters, strategic growth. Ready

33:35

to simplify your analytics? Visit hurry.co.co.co

33:37

to get started. That's

33:40

H-U-R-R-E-E.co. trynow to

33:42

get started. Hi,

33:45

this is Paige from Giggly Squad and I

33:47

want to talk to you about Splash Refresher

33:49

and my water intake. Okay,

33:51

so you guys obviously know that I'm

33:53

a hydrated girly, but sometimes when you

33:56

drink that much water, it starts

33:58

to just taste bland. and you're just like,

34:00

I need something to spice it up. That's

34:03

why I love Splash Refresher. It

34:05

has zero sugar, zero calories,

34:08

and it's a splash of sweetness. And

34:10

they come in five different flavors. They're

34:13

so good. Wild berry, acai

34:15

grape, pineapple mango, lemon

34:17

and mandarin orange. My favorite is the wild

34:19

berry because I just love a berry. So

34:23

if you're like me and you're drinking water

34:25

all day, then try Splash Refresher. It's going

34:28

to absolutely change your water game and it's

34:30

good for you.