>>> WELCOME BACK. PANEL IS HERE.
MATTHEW CONTINETTI, FORMER
CONGRESSWOMAN DONNA EDWARDS OF
MARYLAND, ELIANA JOHNSON FROM
POLITICO AND "NEW YORK TIMES"
COLUMNIST DAVID BROOKS.
WELCOME.
WELCOME. HAPPY SUNDAY AFTER THE MIDTERMS.
DAVID, I WANT TO ASK THIS, DID
THE MIDTERMS CHANGE ANYTHING?
LET ME PUT UP THESE NUMBERS
HERE.
HERE. 46% WAS THE PRESIDENT’S POPULAR
VOTE TOTAL IN 2016.
46% WAS THE HOUSE VOTE FOR THE
REPUBLICANS IN 2018.
AND 45% AND IT PERHAPS GETS TO
46% WILL BE THE PRESIDENT’S JOB
RATING.
RATING. I THINK I SENSE A PATTERN HERE,
BUT I GUESSID THE MIDTERMS
CHANGE ANYTHING?
CHANGE ANYTHING? >> I THINK THEY ENTRENCHED
THINGS.
THINGS. WE’VE GOT A BIG WALL, A BIG
BARRICADE AROUND THAT 46% AND
THAT’S TRUMP BASE AND THEY COME
OUT FOR HIM.
I DON’T SEE ANYBODY LEAVING THAT
WALL OR GOING INTO THE WALL.
SO WE’RE SORT OF STUCK WITH THE
WALL.
WALL. THIS ELECTION WAS NOT A
REALIGNING ELECTION, IT WAS A
REENTRENCHING ELECTION.
REENTRENCHING ELECTION. BUT THE THING THAT LEAPT OUT AT
ME IS HIS PEOPLE DID SHOW UP.
THE SURGE IN REPUBLICAN TURNOUT
WAS NOT AUTOMATIC AND THAT TELLS
ME THE WORKING CLASS IS STILL
HURTING, DESPITE THE ECONOMY.
AND THE DEMOCRATS, THERE’S
ALWAYS A SPIN DEBATE WAS IT THE
PROGRESSIVES WHO DID REALLY WELL
OR THE MORE MODERATES.
THE MORE MODERATES HAVE A GOOD
STORY TO TELL.
THEY FLIPPED 23 RED SEATS WITH
PEOPLE EMBRACED WITH THE
MODERATE DEMOCRATS, SO THERE IS
SOME MODERATION STILL IN
AMERICA.
AMERICA. IT’S A LOT OF REPUBLICANS WHO
USED TO BE ORTHODOX REPUBLICANS
WHO ARE NOW MODERATE DEMOCRATS.
>> I WANT TO PUT UP SOMETHING
THAT RICH LOWRY WROTE.
MIDTERM LOSSES TYPICALLY HUMBLE
A SITTING PRESIDENT OF THE
UNITED STATES BUT DONALD TRUMP
IS BEYOND HUMBLING.
IT WILL BE A HIGH-STAKES COMBAT
OF THE SORT THAT HE LIVES ON,
THE MORE INTENSE, PERILOUS AND
DRAMATIC, THE BETTER, BECAUSE HE
WILL BE AT THE CENTER OF IT ALL.
ELIANA.
ELIANA. >> I THINK WHAT WE’VE SEEN FROM
THE PRESIDENT OVER THE PAST TWO
YEARS, THERE WERE QUESTIONS
ABOUT WHETHER HE WOULD BECOME
PRESIDENTIAL IN THE JOB.
I THINK WHAT WE’VE SEEN IS HE’S
A SKILLED COMMUNICATOR, BUT HE
DOESN’T HAVE A LOT OF RANGE OR
ABILITY TO SWITCH GEARS, SO WHAT
WE GET FROM HIM IS A NUMBER OF
MEDITATIONS ON AMERICAN CARNAGE,
WHETHER IT’S ON IMMIGRATION OR
POST MIDTERMS, DEMOCRATS
STEALING THE VOTE IN PLACES
WHERE HE LOST.
THAT’S WHAT WE’RE GOING TO GET
FOR THE TWO YEARS FROM HERE
UNTIL 2020.
UNTIL 2020. AND AS DAVID MENTIONED, THAT
DOES GET THE PRESIDENT’S BASE
OUT, BUT IT DOESN’T EXPAND THE
ELECTORATE.
ELECTORATE. NOW THE QUESTION FOR DEMOCRATS
IS CAN THEY PUT UP A CANDIDATE
GOING FORWARD THAT EXPANDS
THEIRS AND EATS INTO SOME OF THE
OBAMA/TRUMP VOTERS WHO TURN OUT
FOR THE PRESIDENT AND ARE
PROVING EXTREMELY LOYAL TO HIM
AND WHO HE’S VERY SKILLED AT
COMMUNICATING WITH.
COMMUNICATING WITH. >> DONNA, WAS THIS A REFERENDUM
ON THE PRESIDENT?
>> I THINK IT WAS A REBUKE OF
THE PRESIDENT.
THE PRESIDENT. I THINK WE BEGAN THE WEEK ON
ELECTION NIGHT WITH A MODEST BUT
SIGNIFICANT VICTORY FOR
DEMOCRATS.
DEMOCRATS. BY THE END OF THE WEEK, IT HAD
REALLY CRESTED INTO A BLUE WAVE.
AND WHERE I LOOK AT PROMISES FOR
THE DEMOCRATS GOING FORWARD IS
IN STATES LIKE MICHIGAN AND
PENNSYLVANIA AND WISCONSIN THAT
WERE REALLY SIGNIFICANT
VICTORIES AND SOUTHERN VIRGINIA.
AND THAT TO ME SAYS WHERE THE
DEMOCRATS NEED TO PLACE THEIR
EGGS IN THE 2020 BASKET.
>> MATTHEW, WHAT DID YOU MAKE OF
THE PRESIDENT, IT DID SEEM AS IF
HE MOVED FASTER ON JEFF SESSIONS
THAN EVEN JEFF SESSIONS WAS
PREPARED FOR, TO THE POINT THAT
SESSIONS MADE IT CLEAR I WAS
ASKED FOR THIS RESIGNATION,
WHICH IS WASHINGTON SPEAK FOR
YOU NEED TO CALL IT A FIRING.
>> WE’VE SEEN THIS WITH DONALD
TRUMP SINCE HE DESCENDED DOWN
THAT ESCALATOR THREE YEARS AGO
WHEN HE’S HIT WITH A SETBACK, HE
IMMEDIATELY PIVOTS AND CREATES A
NEW CONTROVERSY WHERE HE MAY
HAVE MORE SOLID GROUND.
SO HAVE THINGS?
OF COURSE THEY HAVE CHANGED.
THE DEMOCRATS ARE GOING TO BE IN
CHARGE OF THE UNITED STATES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
THAT IS A BIG DEAL.
AND SO WE’VE ALREADY SEEN WITH
CHAIRMAN-DESIGNATE SCHIFF THERE
WILL BE INVESTIGATIONS.
THE CHANCE FOR CONSERVATIVE
LEGISLATION, NOT THAT THERE WAS
MUCH PASSED THIS YEAR ANYWAY,
BUT THE CHANCE GOING FORWARD IS
GREATLY DIMINISHED.
GREATLY DIMINISHED. WAS IT A REFERENDUM ON TRUMP?
YES.
YES. WHAT WE’VE SEEN AGAIN AND AGAIN
I THINK REALLY SINCE 1994 IS
THAT THESE MIDTERM ELECTIONS ARE
REFERENDUMS -- REFERENDA ON THE
PRESIDENT.
PRESIDENT. TYPICALLY THE VOTERS DON’T LIKE
WHAT’S HAPPENING, WHETHER THAT
PRESIDENT IS A DEMOCRAT OR A
REPUBLICAN.
REPUBLICAN. >> MATT WHITAKER, DAVID BROOKS,
WHAT DO WE MAKE OF HIM?
THE ARGUMENTS THAT HE’S EVEN
CONSTITUTIONALLY -- IT’S EVEN A
CONSTITUTIONAL APPOINTMENT?
CONSTITUTIONAL APPOINTMENT? >> I THINK ONE OF THE -- I WENT
TO 23 STATES THIS ELECTION, AND
HEARD THE WORD UNRAVELING OVER
AND OVER AGAIN, THAT THE COUNTRY
IS UNRAVELING.
IS UNRAVELING. ARE WE RACIALLY TOGETHER?
ARE WE ECONOMICALLY TOGETHER?
ARE WE MORALLY TOGETHER?
AND ARE OUR INSTITUTIONS
TOGETHER?
TOGETHER? AND DONALD TRUMP THREATENS OUR
INSTITUTIONS AND PERSONALIZES
POWER.
POWER. YOU DON’T SERVE THE INSTITUTION,
YOU SERVE DONALD TRUMP.
THAT’S NOT HOW THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL’S OFFICE IS SUPPOSED TO
ACT.
ACT. IT’S SUPPOSED TO SERVE THE
CONSTITUTION.
CONSTITUTION. SO THIS IS A THREAT TO ANOTHER
INSTITUTION AND ANOTHER ONE IS
THE WAY WE BARK AT THE REFS ON
THE ELECTIONS.
THE ELECTIONS. WHEN YOU ACCUSE SOMEBODY OF
CORRUPTION WITHOUT ANY EVIDENCE,
YOU’RE DESTROYING THE SOCIAL
FABRIC TO SOME DEGREE.
WE’VE SEEN A LOT OF THAT THIS
WEEK.
WEEK. SO WE’RE SEEING INSTITUTIONAL
DECAY.
DECAY. >> WHAT DO YOU MAKE OF THAT?
>> YOU KNOW, I AGREE WITH DAVID.
I THINK THAT THE PRESIDENT HAS
GONE AFTER ONE INSTITUTION AFTER
THE OTHER, AND YOU SEE THAT IN
THIS CALL OF CORRUPTION IN THESE
ELECTIONS, NOT TO ALLOW AN
ELECTION TO BE SETTLED.
AND WHAT I SEE IS A PRESIDENT
WHO REALLY DOES FEEL THAT HE IS
UNDER THREAT.
UNDER THREAT. IF YOU LOOK AT HIS RESPONSE BOYY
FIRING SESSIONS AND APPOINTING
WHITAKER, WHO HAS MADE HIMSELF
KNOWN TO THE PRESIDENT SO THAT
HE COULD TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT,
AND THEN YOU LOOK AT DEMOCRATS’
RESPONSE, I THINK IT’S GOING TO
BE IMPORTANT TO BE REALLY
JUDICIOUS ABOUT HOW THEY
PROCEED.
PROCEED. >> THE WHITAKER APPOINTMENT TO
ME WAS REMINISCENT OF THE
ADMINISTRATION’S POLICY ON CHILD
SEPARATION, WHERE IT WAS
SOMETHING THAT THE PRESIDENT
THOUGHT ABOUT AND WANTED TO DO,
PUT IN AN ACTING ATTORNEY
GENERAL WHO COULD SIT THERE FOR
210 DAYS AND WHO WAS SKEPTICAL
OF THE MUELLER PROBE AND YET YOU
SEE THE PRESIDENT SKEPTICAL OF
IT AND BACKING AWAY BECAUSE HE
DIDN’T ANTICIPATE THE BLOWBACK
THAT HE WOULD GET FROM DEMOCRATS
AND REPUBLICANS ALIKE, AND IT
REALLY, I THINK, REVEALED HOW
EVEN THE BEST-LAID PLANS OF THIS
ADMINISTRATION AREN’T SO WELL
THOUGHT THROUGH AND THAT HIS, I
THINK, STATEMENTS HADN’T BEEN
REVIEWED BY THE WHITE HOUSE AND
TEND TO BACKFIRE.
THEN YOU HAVE A PRESIDENT WHO
ABANDONS THEM PRETTY QUICKLY.
>> I THINK ALMOST ANY ATTORNEY
GENERAL WHO SUCCEEDS SESSIONS IS
GOING TO HAVE A CRITICAL VIEW OF
THE MUELLER PROBE JUST BECAUSE
MOST REPUBLICANS HAVE A CRITICAL
VIEW OF THE MUELLER PROBE.
THERE ARE TWO SETS OF CRITICISMS
OF WHITAKER.
OF WHITAKER. ONE IS THE FORMAL CRITICISM, IS
THE APPOINTMENT EVEN
CONSTITUTIONAL.
CONSTITUTIONAL. THOSE, I THINK, ARE AT LEAST
DISPUTED AND PROBABLY EVEN WEAK.
THE MORE SUBSTANTIVE CRITICISM
IS, IS HE QUALIFIED FOR THE JOB?
LOOK AT THE RESUME AND HE’S ONE
OF OUR LESSER QUALIFIED ATTORNEY
GENERALS BEING CHARITABLE.
SO THAT, I THINK, IS A PROBLEM
FOR THE PRESIDENT AND THAT HE
HAS TO COME UP WITH SOMEONE WHO
REPLACE WHITAKER AND EMPHASIZE
THE TEMPORARY ON THE TEMPORARY
APPOINTMENT.
APPOINTMENT. >> THAT’S VERY INTERESTING.
IT SEEMS LIKE SOME OF THE
CANDIDATES ARE PULLING OUT
BECAUSE THEY’D LIKE TO WAIT TO
SEE WHAT MUELLER DOES.
I DON’T THINK THEY WANT TO BE ON
THE FRONT LINES.