Congressional and political experts Norm Ornstein, David Frum, and Elliot Williams join Harry to analyze the probable workings – from the broad strokes to the nitty gritty – of the expected upcoming impeachment trial in the Senate. Will Mitch McConnell control all aspects with an iron fist, and what if anything will make him part company from President Trump? Will it all be a strictly political affair or will broader considerations of country and Constitution hold some sway? And how many votes for conviction can we expect the Republicans?
Impeachment Academy
The impeachment process moves to the Judiciary Committee, beginning with a panel of scholars addressing constitutional standards for impeachment and applying those standards to the set of facts that the testimony in the Intelligence Committee established beyond reasonable doubt. We engage the historic moment with a two-part episode featuring a remarkably high-powered group of commentators exploring the political and the constitutional considerations of the prospective impeachment. First, David Frum, Jill Wine-Banks, Liz Holtzman, and Harry analyze and appraise the Democrats’ strategy, including serious consideration of whether opening with a panel of scholars is a blunder. Next, we reissue portions of a previous episode in which Professor Larry Tribe, Dean Erwin Chemerinsky, Congress (and Judiciary Committee) member Jamie Raskin, and Harry undertake a deep dive into the meaning of the pivotal constitutional term “High Crimes and Misdemeanors.”
The Impeachment Week That Was: If an avalanche of evidence falls in the Congress, can Republicans hear it?
It was one of the most dramatic and consequential weeks in the history of the Presidency, as the testimony of a series of witnesses before the House Intelligence Committee appeared to establish conclusively that President Trump had engaged in a corrupt and illegal course of conduct in his dealings with President Vlodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine. Yet at the end of this series of seismic hearings, it appeared that the House Republicans were prepared to continue to stand unanimously with the President. Feds Matt Miller, Frank Figliuzzi, and Natasha Bertrand join Harry to assess where things stand and what if anything could force Congressional Republicans to acknowledge and come to grips with the President’s outrageous misconduct
Sondland Testifies: The Answer is Yes
Feds Jill Wine-Banks, Elie Honig, and Barb McQuade huddle for a deep dive on today’s blockbuster testimony from Gordon Sondland acknowledging that Pres Trump conditioned the White House meeting and the release of military aid on the announcement of investigations of Burisma/the Bidens and the 2016 Election. Is there room for Republicans to continue to argue there was no quid pro quo? And will there be a public drumbeat for testimony and documents that the Administration has so far managed to withhold?
The Impeachment Hearings Begin
In this Special Talking Feds Now! Episode on the first day of impeachment hearings, Harry, Barb McQuade, and Glenn Kirschner assess the performances of the Members of Congress, starting with Adam Schiff and Devin Nunes; the staff counsel; and the two opening witness, William Taylor and George Kent. Schiff plainly approached the hearings as the accomplished prosecutor he used to be, and the Feds use that vantage point to explain what the Dems strategy was and how well they executed it. They likewise evaluate the strategy and tactics of the Republicans and consider what they can credibly hope to achieve given the hand they’ve been dealt. The Feds close with some thoughts about what to expect as the hearings unfold.
Deja Vu: The Trump Impeachment Through the Prism of Past Impeachments
With Congress poised to begin public impeachment hearings, the Feds consider the coming historic juncture through the prism of the impeachment investigations of Presidents Nixon and Clinton. Eyewitness participants in those dramas spell out key distinctions that shed light on the Trump impeachment and bring into relief some of the high hurdles facing the House Judiciary committee right now. The episode brings together Judiciary Committee members and players from all 3 impeachment dramas—Elizabeth Holtzman, a Committee member and then the youngest woman ever to serve in Congress; Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee, a member of the House Judiciary Committee during the Clinton impeachment and a senior member today, and Congresswoman Mary Gay Scanlon, the current Vice-Chair of the House Judiciary Committee, and a member of the House Committee on Rules. Joining them is Lanny Breuer, former head of the Criminal Division at DOJ and special counsel to President Clinton during the 1998 impeachment trial.
Read the full episode transcript [LINK TO TRANSCRIPT HERE]
The Troubled State of Voting Rights Heading into the 2020 Election
The last 15 years have ushered in a series of daunting obstacles to voting rights in this county. It turns out that the supposed principle of "one person one vote" falls short in the field to a series of impediments, beginning with three 5-4 Supreme Court opinions that have scaled back on the ability of minority voters in particular to participate on equal footing with other voters. Returning Fed and Distinguished Visiting Lecturer in Law at the University of Alabama Joyce Vance, Congress Member (and manager of his brother's presidential campaign) Joaquin Castro, President of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights (and former Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights) Vanita Gupta, and Federal Election Commission Chair Ellen Weintraub join Harry to break down the state of voting rights in the country, analyzing the Court's actions and also poll closures, bogus charges of voter fraud, and the emasculation of section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. They close with some hopeful developments on the horizon, beginning with proposed HR1, which would enact a laundry list of improvements and mitigate some of the harsh effects of the Court's decisions.
Read the full episode transcript [LINK TO TRANSCRIPT HERE]
“Is the Dam Breaking?” Part 2-- LIVE from Politicon in Nashville, Tennessee
Charter Fed Barb McQuade joins David Frum and Malcolm Nance for a deep dig of two other issues circling the impeachment crisis. First, the Feds discuss the crazy wild card that is Rudy Giuliani, including his prospects for indictment from his old US Attorney’s office. Is he at the end of the day a serious risk to the President, and will Trump cut him loose or try to hold him ever close? Turning to the prospective drafting of articles of impeachment, the Feds consider whether and how to integrate into the basic charges the President’s term-long record of grave damage to national security and to the rule of law.
Read the full episode transcript [LINK TO TRANSCRIPT HERE]
“Is the Dam Breaking?” Part 1--LIVE from Politicon in Nashville, Tennesse
Former Clinton Press Secretary Joe Lockhart (who served Clinton during his impeachment trial) joins Feds Maya Wiley Jill Wine-Vance, and Harry Litman for a discussion of a number of facets of what is suddenly an impeachment crisis for the White House. What (if anything) is the White House doing right and what is it doing wrong? How does its efforts compare and contrast with the Clinton White House’s strategy in 1998? Turning to the Congress, the Feds consider whether the Republicans “no due process” argument is getting any purchase and speculate on how both the House and the Senate Republicans will approach the coming crisis.
Read the full episode transcript [LINK TO TRANSCRIPT HERE]
The Federal Death Penalty
The Feds take up the most sober, and one of the most controversial, topics in the federal criminal justice system -- the federal death penalty. There are currently 62 offenders on federal death row, a small fraction of the numbers in the state system, and the federal government has executed only 3 federal prisoners since 1963. So why do we have, and why do we need, a federal death penalty? Given the different approaches to capital punishment in the states, should the federal system work to ensure uniformity among all federal capital defendants or should it reflect the variations in local communities? As a practical matter, how does the decision whether to seek the death penalty work in the federal system? Finally, how does the Department of Justice approach the trials of capital crimes? Feds Rod Rosenstein, Johnny Sutton, and Carmen Ortiz – 3 former U.S. Attorneys who have extensive personal involvement in federal capital cases – unpack all these questions and detail the personal experience of seeking the ultimate penalty.
