WALLACE STARTS RIGHT NOW. >> ALOHA AND NAMASTE.
IT’S 4:00 IN NEW YORK CITY.
I’M JOHN HEILEMANN IN FOR
NICOLLE WALLACE.
NICOLLE WALLACE. THIS TO FRIDAY WHEN WE SAW THE
LATEST INSTALLMENT OF DONALD
TRUMP’S LATEST RHETORICAL TROPE.
I HARDLY KNOW THE GUY.
IN THIS CASE, THE GUY IS THE
NEWLY APPOINTED ATTORNEY GENERAL
MATT WHITAKER FROM WHOM TRUMP
ALREADY SEEMS TO BE DISTANCING
HIMSELF.
HIMSELF. >> WELL, MATT WHITAKER, I DON’T
KNOW MATT WHITAKER.
HE WORKED FOR JEFF SESSIONS, AND
HE WAS ALWAYS EXTREMELY HIGHLY
THOUGHT OF AND HE STILL IS, BUT
I DIDN’T KNOW MATT WHITAKER.
HE WORKED FOR ATTORNEY GENERAL
SESSIONS.
SESSIONS. HE WAS VERY, VERY HIGHLY THOUGHT
OF.
OF. NOW IN ALL FAIRNESS TO MATT
WHITAKER, WHO AGAIN, I DIDN’T
KNOW, OKAY, OTHER THAN THROUGH
REPUTATION.
REPUTATION. MATT WHITAKER IS A HIGHLY
RESPECTED MAN BUT I DIDN’T KNOW
MATT WHISKER BUT HE’S A HIGHLY
RESPECTED MAN.
RESPECTED MAN. >> HE’S THE GREATEST GUY, THE
MOST WONDERFUL, MOST AMAZING
GUY, BUT I BARELY KNOW THE GUY,
I’VE NEVER HEARD OF HIM.
THAT SUDDEN TRUMPIAN
SKITTISHNESS COMES AMID AN
OUTCRY FROM TRUMP’S CRITICS OVER
WHITAKER’S PAST COMMENTS ON THE
MUELLER PROBE INCLUDING A
CASCADE OF NEWLY SURFACED AUDIO
THAT DEMONSTRATES HIS VEHEMENT
OPPOSITION TO THAT PROBE
SUGGESTING WHITAKER LONG AGO
DECIDED THAT THERE WAS NO
COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION AND
THAT WHITAKER IS RESOLVED TO
LIMIT THE INVESTIGATION.
>> THERE IS NO CASE FOR
OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE BECAUSE
THE PRESIDENT HAD ALL THE POWER
OF THE EXECUTIVE AND DELEGATES
THAT TO PEOPLE LIKE THE FBI
DIRECTOR AND THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL.
GENERAL. THIS HYPERVENTALATION OF, YOU
KNOW, WHAT WE SEE HERE IS, I
JUST DON’T THINK IT’S
SUSTAINABLE BASED ON THESE
FACTS.
FACTS. >> THE TRUTH IS, THERE WAS NO
COLLUSION WITH THE RUSSIANS AND
THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN.
THERE WAS INTERFERENCE BY THE
RUSSIANS INTO THE ELECTION, BUT
THAT IS NOT THE COLLUSION WITH
THE CAMPAIGN.
THE CAMPAIGN. THAT’S WHERE THE LEFT SEEMS TO
BE JUST COMBINING THOSE TWO
ISSUES.
ISSUES. THE EFFORT BY JIM COMEY TO GET
THIS, YOU KNOW, PUT IN PLACE AND
HAVE SOMEBODY THAT HE’S VERY
FAMILIAR WITH IN BOB MUELLER
CONDUCTING THE INVESTIGATION.
SO I THINK IT SMELLS A LITTLE
FISHY, BUT I JUST HOPE IT
DOESN’T TURN INTO A FISHING
EXPEDITION, BECAUSE I WILL BE
ONE OF THE ONES JUMPING UP AND
DOWN MAKING SURE THAT THE
LIMITATIONS ON THIS
INVESTIGATION CONTINUE BECAUSE
THAT’S THE WAY IT’S SUPPOSED TO
BE.
BE. >> THOSE SOUND BITES AND SEVERAL
JUST LIKE THEM HAVE COME TO
LIGHT IN THE LAST 24 HOURS
RAISING POINTED QUESTIONS ABOUT
WHETHER WHITAKER’S ANTAGONISM
TOWARD THE MUELLER PROBE WAS A
FEATURE AND NOT A BUG AND MAY BE
A PREREQUISITE FOR WHITAKER’S
APPOINTMENT WHICH UNDER NORMAL
CIRCUMSTANCES COULD HAVE GONE TO
DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL ROD
ROSENSTEIN.
ROSENSTEIN. THE OTHER QUESTION, WHETHER
WHITAKER MAY HAVE BEEN PROMISED
TRUMP SOME ACTION AGAINST THE
MUELLER PROBE IN EXCHANGE FOR
BEING ELEVATED.
BEING ELEVATED. TRUMP RESPONDED TO THOSE
QUESTIONS THIS MORNING WITH
ANOTHER OF HIS FAVORITE TACTICS,
AN ADHOMINEM ATTACK ON A
REPORTER.
REPORTER. >> DO YOU WANT TO REIN IN ROBERT
MUELLER?
MUELLER? >> WHAT A STUPID QUESTION THAT
IS.
IS. WHAT A STUPID QUESTION, BUT I
WATCH YOU A LOT.
YOU ASK A LOT OF STUPID
QUESTIONS.
QUESTIONS. >> MAN, ALL RIGHT.
FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL
JOYCE VANCE, JEREMY BASH, FORMER
CHIEF OF STAFF AND THE CIA AND
PENTAGON, JENNIFER RUBIN AND THE
GREAT MIA WHILEY.
EVERY ONE OF THEM, THANK GOD,
ARE MSNBC ANALYSTS.
JOYCE, MY FRIEND, ALABAMAN, YOU
LOOK AT THE THINGS THIS MAN, MR.
WHITAKER, HAS SAID BEFORE TAKING
THIS JOB.
THIS JOB. MOSTLY ON CNN.
HOW PROBLEMATIC ARE THOSE THINGS
IN A NORMAL UNIVERSE AND MAYBE
IN THE UNIVERSE WE LIVE IN FOR
THIS APPOINTMENT?
THIS APPOINTMENT? >> IT’S A CONFLICT OF INTEREST,
AND HE SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO
RECUSE FROM OVERSEEING THE
RUSSIA INVESTIGATION.
RUSSIA INVESTIGATION. IN FACT, I SUSPECT THAT THE
ETHICS PROFESSIONALS THAT
ATTORNEYS IN THE JUSTICE
DEPARTMENT GO TO FOR ADVICE ON
ETHICAL MATTERS WILL ADVISE HIM
HE MUST RECUSE.
HE HAS IF NOT AN ACTUAL
CONFLICT, CERTAINLY THE
APPEARANCE OF A CONFLICT, WHICH
IS THE STANDARD THAT PEOPLE IN
DOJ USE.
DOJ USE. AND, JOHN, IT’S REALLY IMPORTANT
TO NOTE THAT THE DOJ CONFLICT
STANDARDS REQUIRE LAWYERS TO
RECUSE IF THEY HAVE A PERSONAL
OR POLITICAL RELATIONSHIP WITH
SOMEONE WHO IS INTERESTED IN THE
OUTCOME OF A CASE OR SOMEONE WHO
IS INVOLVED IN A CASE.
AND WHITAKER HAS GOT BOTH.
HE HAS A PERSONAL RELATIONSHIP,
A POLITICAL RELATIONSHIP WITH
SAM CLOVIS WHOSE CAMPAIGN HE
RAN.
RAN. CERTAINLY HE APPEARS TO HAVE A
POLITICAL RELATIONSHIP WITH THE
PRESIDENT WHO HAS AN INTEREST IN
THE OUTCOME OF THIS
INVESTIGATION.
INVESTIGATION. SO IN NO WAY, SHAPE OR FORM
SHOULD HE REMAIN IN THE CASE,
BUT IT’S CLEAR HE’S GOING TO.
IN FACT, IT’S INCREASINGLY CLEAR
THAT’S WHY HE WAS BROUGHT ON
BOARD.
BOARD. >> SO JEREMY, I WANT TO ASK YOU.
THE WAY IN WHICH, OR THE RECUSAL
THING WORKS AT THE DOJ, THERE’S
NO LAW OR EVEN REGULATION THAT
COMPELS YOU TO GO TO THE ETHICS
FOLKS AT JUSTICE AND SAY WHAT
SHOULD I DO HERE?
BUT BOTH LEGAL ETHICS AND
POLITICAL PROBITY NORMALLY MEANS
IF YOU THINK YOU HAVE A CONFLICT
YOU GO AND SAY -- ASK FOR
RECOMMENDATION.
RECOMMENDATION. IT APPEARS WHITAKER IS NOT GOING
TO DO THAT.
IN FACT, AS JOYCE JUST SAID, THE
REASON HE WAS CHOSEN IS
PRECISELY BECAUSE HE HAS THESE
CONFLICTS.
CONFLICTS. HOW DOES THAT RECUSAL QUESTION
PLAY OUT AS A MATTER JUST
PRACTICALLY SPEAKING OVER THE
DAYS AHEAD?
DAYS AHEAD? >> I THINK YOU’RE RIGHT.
I THINK THE PROPER THING WOULD
BE AS THE CHIEF LEGAL OFFICER OF
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FOR
HIM TO ASK THE PROFESSIONAL
ETHICS ATTORNEYS WITHIN THE
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE FOR AN
OPINION.
OPINION. AND IF THEY WERE TO COME BACK
WITH AN OPINION, I THINK THE
SUBSTANCE OF THE OPINION OF THE
OPINION WOULD BE EXACTLY WHAT
JOYCE JUST REFERENCED.
BUT THERE’S NO WAY IN HECK THAT
HE’S GOING TO DO THAT BECAUSE
THE TERMS OF HIS EMPLOYMENT WITH
DONALD TRUMP WAS THAT HE WOULD
NOT RECUSE HIMSELF BECAUSE, OF
COURSE, THAT WAS THE ORIGIN OF
TRUMP’S CONCERN ABOUT JEFF
SESSIONS.
SESSIONS. SO THE PROPER THING HERE, JOHN,
WOULD BE FOR ROD ROSENSTEIN TO
RETAIN AUTHORITY OVER THE BOB
MUELLER PROBE FOR THERE TO BE NO
INTERFERENCE IN THE BOB MUELLER
PROBE.
PROBE. THE DEMOCRATS TAKE CONTROL OF
ANY OF THE COMMITTEES IN
CONGRESS COME JANUARY.
THEY’LL PUT MARK WHITAKER UNDER
OATH.
OATH. HE MAY TRY TO ASSERT
PRESIDENTIAL PRIVILEGE OR
EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE BUT THE
PRESS THEN HAS TO ASSERT THAT.
WE’RE HEADING FOR SOME LEGAL
SPARKY TIMES HERE.
>> I WANT TO PLAY ANOTHER PIECE
OF SOUND BEFORE I COME TO THE
TABLE WHERE WE GET TO HEAR
WHITAKER TALKING ABOUT A SUBJECT
THAT, OBVIOUSLY, HAS BEEN REALLY
IMPORTANT OVER THE COURSE OF THE
INVESTIGATION INTO TRUMP WHICH
IS THE QUESTION OF HIS FINANCES,
HIS BUSINESS, HIS FAMILY, WHERE
THE RED LINE SUPPOSEDLY EXISTS.
LET’S LISTEN TO WHAT WHITAKER
HAD TO SAY ABOUT THAT
PREVIOUSLY.
PREVIOUSLY. >> IF THEY ARE LOOKING AT
UNRELATED TO THE 2016 ELECTION
TRUMP FINANCES, THEY HAVE
CROSSED THE RED LINE AND THEY
ARE OUTSIDE OF THE SCOPE OF
THEIR INVESTIGATION, AND
ESSENTIALLY THEY ARE ON A
FISHING EXPEDITION, WHICH IS
VERY DANGEROUS TO THE REPUBLIC.
>> JEREMY, COME BACK TO YOU FOR
THIS.
THIS. THAT IS BASICALLY LIKE NOT
JUST -- NOT TRUMP FRIENDLY.
DOESN’T ECHO TRUMP.
ALMOST AS IF SCRIPTED BY TRUMP.
TALKING POINTS, THINGS THAT
TRUMP HAS SAID TO "THE NEW YORK
TIMES" AND OTHERS.
DOES THAT NOT MAKE IT FEEL VERY
MUCH LIKE THOSE COMMENTS WERE AN
AUDITION FOR THIS JOB?
>> YEAH, THEY WERE JOB
QUALIFICATIONS EXACTLY RIGHT.
AND OF COURSE, THE REASON
THEY’RE CONCERNED ABOUT IT IS
BECAUSE THOSE FINANCES COULD
SHOW RUSSIAN LEVERAGE OVER THE
TRUMP ORGANIZATION.
TRUMP ORGANIZATION. AND TRUMP HIMSELF WHICH, OF
COURSE, IS AT THE HEART OF THE
NATIONAL SECURITY INVESTIGATION
THAT BOB MUELLER IS UNDERTAKING.
>> JENNIFER, LET ME ASK YOU.
YOU SEE THE WAY THIS HAS ALL
UNFOLDED.
UNFOLDED. AT THIS MOMENT WE DON’T KNOW
WHAT PRECISE CONVERSATIONS TOOK
PLACE BEFORE WHITAKER GOT THIS
JOB.
JOB. BUT THE PRIMA FACIE CASE IS
PRETTY STRONG.
PRETTY STRONG. WHAT DO YOU THINK, IF YOU LOOK
AT EVERYTHING HE SAID AS A CNN
CORRESPONDENT AND LOOK AT HIS
POSITIONS AND HOW MUCH THEY ECHO
TRUMP, WHAT CONCLUSIONS DO YOU
DRAW?
DRAW? >> FIRST OF ALL, I START WITH
THE CONSTITUTION WHICH SAYS HE
SHOULDN’T BE THERE TO BEGIN
WITH.
WITH. THERE’S A FUNDAMENTAL ISSUE THAT
GOES BEYOND THE RUSSIA PROBE TO
SIMPLY HIS APPOINTMENT.
WE HAVE A CONSTITUTION THAT
PROVIDES FOR ADVICE AND CONSENT
BY THE SENATE.
HE PICKED A GUY OUT.
YOU, IN THE BLUE SHIRT, COME ON.
BE MY ATTORNEY GENERAL.
YOU’RE NOT ALLOWED TO DO THAT.
WHEN YOU REMOVE SOMEONE YOU CAN
HAVE SOMEONE IN AN ACTING
POSITION WHO IS IN THE LINE OF
SUCCESSION.
SUCCESSION. THAT WOULD BE MR. ROSENSTEIN.
BUT HE DOESN’T HAVE THE RIGHT
WITHOUT SENATE APPROVEAL TO STIC
HIS CRONY IN THERE.
AND IF HE DOES, VIRTUALLY
EVERYTHING HE WOULD DO IS A
LEGAL NULLITY.
LEGAL NULLITY. HE WOULD BE SUSPECT.
SO PEOPLE WHO ARE BEING
PROSECUTED, ANY DOCUMENTS HE IS
SIGNING, ANY APPOINTMENTS HE
MAKES.
MAKES. ALL OF THAT IS INVALID IN
ESSENCE.
ESSENCE. SO YOU HAVE TO START THERE.
AND WHAT’S INTERESTING NOW IS
YOU HAVE SEEN REPUBLICAN,
CONSERVATIVE LAWYERS, INCLUDING
GEORGE CONWAY AND KELLYANNE’S
HUSBAND, COME FORWARD TO MAKE
THIS CASE.
THIS CASE. A PRETTY GOOD CASE.
AND, FRANKLY, A LOT OF PEOPLE
WHO COULD LITIGATE THIS.
ANYONE WHO HAS BEEN PROSECUTED
BY THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT.
ANYONE GETTING A SUBPOENA FROM
THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT.
LOTS OF PEOPLE CAN LITIGATE
THIS.
THIS. AS FAR AS THE RUSSIA PROBE GOES,
IT’S ANOTHER OF THE OUTRAGEOUS
STEPS, AND YOU’RE NOW HEARING
RUMBLING FROM THE JUSTICE
DEPARTMENT ITSELF.
DEPARTMENT ITSELF. YOU’RE BEGINNING TO HEAR LEAKS,
BEGINNING TO HEAR CRITICISM FROM
THE BLGD
THE BLGD THE BUILDING AND THAT WILL BUILD
IF HE’S ALLOWED TO STAY.
>> WE SAW THIS OP-ED PIECE.
KELLYANNE’S HUSBAND, A FORCEFUL
TRUMP CRITIC, MAKING THE CASE,
THIS IS AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL
APPOINTMENT BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO
BE SENATE CONFIRMED, NOT
NECESSARILY FOR THIS JOB BUT FOR
SOME JOB YOU TO VHAVE TO HAVE BE
SENATE CONFIRMED TO BE IN THIS
JOB.
JOB. WHAT’S INTERESTING IS NOT JUST
THE GEORGE CONWAY BUT ERICK
ERICKSON, EVEN ON FOX NEWS SOME
OF THE LEGAL ANALYSTS COMING OUT
AND SAYING, YEAH, THIS IS PRETTY
OPEN AND SHUT.
AND HOW COULD THEY NOT HAVE --
HOW COULD THEY HAVE MISSED THIS?
>> WELL, I THINK WHAT’S OPEN AND
SHUT IS THAT THERE’S NO QUESTION
THAT MATT WHITAKER MUST BE
RECUSED FROM THE INVESTIGATION.
FROM OVERSEEING THE BOB
MUELLER’S INVESTIGATION.
MUELLER’S INVESTIGATION. ACTUALLY, LAWYERS AND STEVE
LADDICK HAS A VERY GOOD
EDITORIAL PIECE ABOUT THIS.
I DISAGREE WITH THE ANALYSIS
THAT IT’S UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
AND THE REASON FOR THAT IS,
FIRST OF ALL, THERE’S AN 1898
SUPREME COURT OPINION DIRECTLY
ON POINT THAT SAYS ACTUALLY THE
PRESIDENT CAN APPOINT SOMEONE IN
AN INTERIM CAPACITY.
AND SECONDLY, GOVERNMENT
ACTUALLY NEEDS IT TO BE ABLE TO
FUNCTION IN THE EVENT THAT THERE
IS A -- THE NEED FOR CONTINUITY.
SO THERE ARE THREE VERY STRONG
CATEGORIES OF REASONS WHY MATT
WHITAKER SHOULD NOT BE IN THIS
POSITION THAT GO TO
QUALIFICATION, THAT GO TO THE
FACT THAT THIS IS A CREDIBLY
IMPORTANT POSITION AS BEING THE
CHIEF LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER
FOR THE NATION, NOT FOR THE
PRESIDENT.
PRESIDENT. THAT HE SHOULD RECUSE HIMSELF AT
A MINIMUM FROM THIS
INVESTIGATION AND, I THINK THEIR
ARGUMENT GOES MORE DIRECTLY TO
THE FACT THAT HE SHOULD NOT BE
CONFIRMED IF HE DOES COME.
BUT I ACTUALLY THINK IT’S
IMPORTANT TO PAY ATTENTION TO
THE LEGAL ARGUMENTS THAT SAY
THAT IT IS ACTUALLY
CONSTITUTIONAL.
CONSTITUTIONAL. >> IT’S INTERESTING THAT JUSTICE
THOMAS OF ALL PEOPLE HAS TAKEN
THE CONTRARY VIEW AND SINCE HE
IS THE FAVORITE JUSTICE OF THE
PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES,
PERHAPS HE SHOULD LISTEN TO HIM.
IT’S NOT COME UP IN EXACTLY THIS
CONTEXT BUT IT’S COME UP IN THE
CONTEXT INVOLVING THE NATIONAL
LABOR RELATIONS BOARD.
THE DIFFERENCE BEING IF SOMEONE
IS A SENIOR OFFICIAL, REPORTS
DIRECTLY TO THE PRESIDENT, YOU
DO NEED CONFIRMATION.
>> I WANT TO PLAY ONE MORE --
ANOTHER PIECE OF SOUND JUST
BECAUSE IT GOES BACK TO THE
BEGINNING TALKING ABOUT THE
NOTION THAT, HARDLY KNEW THE
GUY.
GUY. IT TURNS OUT THAT ALTHOUGH TRUMP
SAYS I HARDLY KNEW THE GUY, NOT
THAT LONG AGO, HE HAD A SLIGHTLY
DIFFERENT PERSPECT IDENTIFYIVE O
IDENTIFY WITH MR. WHITAKER.
LET’S PLAY THAT.
>> I NEVER TALK ABOUT THAT, BUT
MATT WHITAKER IS A GREAT GUY.
I KNOW MATT WHITAKER.
BUT I NEVER TALK ABOUT
CONVERSATIONS THAT I HAD.
BUT, YOU KNOW, "THE WASHINGTON
POST" GETS IT WRONG A LOT.
THAT’S THE ONLY THING.
>> BUT THE CONVERSATION IS THAT
YOU ARE IN ACTIVE TALKS TO
REPLACE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF
THE UNITED STATES.
>> I’M NOT DOING ANYTHING.
I WANT TO GET THE ELECTIONS OVER
WITH.
WITH. WE’LL SEE WHAT HAPPENS.
>> SO, JOYCE, AMAZING, BREAKING
NEWS.
NEWS. DONALD TRUMP CONTRADICTS HIMSELF
AND HAS BEEN CAUGHT IN YET
ANOTHER LIE.
ANOTHER LIE. IT DOES SEEM RELEVANT TO ME TO
ASK THE QUESTION, IS THE FACT
THAT TRUMP IS BACK PEDALING AND
DISTANCING HIMSELF IN THIS WAY,
WHICH WE’VE SEEN HIM DO ON
COUNTLESS OCCASIONS IN THE PAST,
DOES IT SUGGEST TO YOU THAT HE
IS ATTUNED, PERHAPS, TO THIS
MAYBE NOT UNANIMOUS, BUT THIS
BIPARTISAN SENSE OF CONCERN AT A
MINIMUM IN SOME CASES OUTRAGE
OVER THE FACT THIS GUY WHO DOES
NOT REALLY SEEM QUALIFIED FOR
THE JOB HAS BEEN PUT IN THIS
IMPORTANT A JOB.
>> I’M NOT SURE THAT HE’S
CONCERNED.
CONCERNED. I THINK HE JUST WANTS TO GET
AWAY WITH IT.
HE’S BEEN VERY FACILE ON A
NUMBER OF OCCASIONS WITH PEOPLE
BEING CLOSE TO HIM SUDDENLY
BECOMING PEOPLE THAT HE’S NEVER
KNOWN BEFORE.
KNOWN BEFORE. HE’S GOTTEN AWAY WITH IT.
SO MAYBE HE THINKS HE CAN GET
AWAY WITH IT AGAIN HERE.
BUT WHAT’S VERY CLEAR IS THAT
WHETHER IT WAS AN EXPLICIT
AGREEMENT OR WHETHER WHITAKER
WAS JUST SORT OF WINKING AT
TRUMP IN THESE TELEVISION
APPEARANCES AND TRUMP PLUCKED
HIM OUT OF THE WILDS OF IOWA TO
COME BE THE STAFF FOR THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL WHICH MADE HIM
ELIGIBLE FOR THIS APPOINTMENT,
THERE’S BEEN A MEETING OF THE
MINDS ABOUT WHY HE’S THERE AND
TRUMP WANTS HIM THERE.
>> JEREMY, IN ADDITION TO BEING
A PERSON OF GOOD SUBSTANCE YOU
HAVE GOOD POLITICAL ANTENNA.
DO YOU THINK THAT DONALD TRUMP
IS, AT LEAST AT A VERY MINIMUM,
HEDGING HIS BETS HERE SO HE CAN
GO SCURRYING AWAY FROM MATT
WHITAKER IF IT TURNS OUT HIS
POSITION OR APPOINTMENT HERE
TURNS OUT TO BE POLITICALLY
UNTENABLE?
UNTENABLE? >> YEAH, I THINK HE’S VERY THIN
SKINNED AND SENSES THE
CRITICISM.
CRITICISM. HE THOUGHT HE COULD SNEAK THIS
ONE BY IN THE DAY AFTER THE
ELEXSE
ELEXSE ELECTION
ELECTION ELECTION.
ELECTION. HE’S NOT ABLE TO DO THAT.
HE’S REACTING TO THE FACT THAT
MATT WHITAKER IS NOT LONG FOR
THE WORLD IN TERMS OF THIS JOB
AND DONALD TRUMP HAS TO GO TO
PLAN "B."
PLAN "B." >> THE OTHER THING THAT I WANT
TO RAISE BEFORE WE HAVE TO END
THIS BLOCK IS THE WAY IN WHICH
WAYS BECAUSE I’M A DORK HAS
UPSET ME THE MOST ABOUT THIS
ENTIRE THING IS THIS Q&A THAT
WHITAKER DID WHEN RUNNING FOR
PUBLIC OFFICE BACK IN IOWA,
TRYING TO WIN THE IOWA SENATE
SEAT THAT ULTIMATELY WENT TO
JONI ERNST.
JONI ERNST. HE SAID THE FOLLOWING THINGS
ABOUT THE ROLE OF THE COURTS AND
ABOUT ONE PARTICULAR DECISION.
THE COURTS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE
THE INFERIOR BRANCH OF OUR THREE
BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT.
WE HAVE UNFORTUNATELY OFFLOADED
MANY TOUGH PUBLIC POLICY ISSUES
ONTO THE COURT AND THEY’VE
DECIDED THEM.
DECIDED THEM. UNELECTED JUDGES ARE DECIDING
MANY OF THE ISSUES OF THE DAY.
THERE ARE SO MANY BAD RULINGS, I
WOULD START WITH THE IDEA OF
MARBURY VERSUS MADISON.
FOR THOSE WHO ARE UNFAMILIAR
WITH THAT, I’D LIKE YOU TO JUST
GIVE A BRIEF EXPLANATION OF WHY
IT IS THE CENTRAL FUNDAMENTAL,
SEMINAL DECISION AS IT RELATES
TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE
UNITED STATES.
UNITED STATES. >> SUPREME COURT IS EXACTLY A
CHECK AND BALANCE ON THE
EXECUTIVE BRANCH.
EXECUTIVE BRANCH. VIOLATING THE U.S. CONSTITUTION,
IF YOU ESSENTIALLY TAKE AWAY
THAT POWER AND SAY THAT THE
COURTS DO NOT HAVE AN
INDEPENDENT ROLE, SUBJECT THEM
TO ELECTIONS BY THE WAY AND WE
HAVE STATES THAT HAVE ELECTED
JUDGES, WHERE WE POLITICIZE THE
INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW RATHER
THAN KEEP IT NEUTRAL AND FOCUSED
ON THE STRUCTURE OF OUR
GOVERNMENT, OF OUR DEMOCRACY.
WE ESSENTIALLY ERODE HAVING A
FUNCTIONAL DEMOCRACY THAT IS NOT
SUBJECT TO AUTHORITARIANISM.
>> JOYCE VANCE, MARBURY VERSUS
MADISON, THE THING THAT CREATED
JUDICIAL REVIEW.
JUDICIAL REVIEW. IS IT NOT THE CASE THAT IF A
PERSON WHO IS GOING TO BE THE
ACTING ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE
UNITED STATES SAYS THAT MARBURY
VERSUS MADISON IS WRONGLY
DECIDED THAT YOU CAN ONLY COME
UP WITH TWO POSSIBLE OPTIONS?
EITHER HE’S A CLOWN OR A STOOGE?
>> I’LL JUST SAY THAT WHITAKER
IS CLEARLY OUTSIDE THE
MAINSTREAM OF AMERICAN
JURISPRUDENCE.
JURISPRUDENCE. I COULD NOT AGREE WITH MIA MORE.
THIS IS THE MAN WHO IS NOW
OVERSEEING ALL OF THE CRIMINAL
AND CIVIL LITIGATION AND THE
APPELLATE LITIGATION, INCLUDING
IN FRONT OF THE SUPREME COURT ON
BEHALF OF THE UNITED STATES.
HE’S SAID THAT HE BELIEVES
JUDGES NEED TO BE GOOD
CHRISTIANS, THAT THEY SHOULDN’T
BE OUTSIDE OF THAT MAINSTREAM.
HE’S INDICATED THAT HE’S NOT A