Podcast Summary: The New Yorker on Impeachment

The Political Scene | The New Yorker
Release Date: October 7, 2019
Host: David Remnick
Featured Guests: Susan Glasser, Joshua Yaffa, Jane Mayer, Jelani Cobb, Jill Lepore

Overview

In this episode, David Remnick convenes several New Yorker writers and experts to dissect the unfolding impeachment proceedings against President Trump. The discussion covers Washington’s turbulent mood, the reactions from Ukrainian officials, historical and political context surrounding impeachment, and the gravity of the current moment for American political institutions. Through multiple perspectives, the episode situates the Trump impeachment within a longer arc of presidential scandal, explores partisan entrenchment, and assesses the real stakes for democracy.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Mood in Washington and Partisan Shockwaves

[02:19 – 06:11] Susan Glasser

• Washington is in a state of palpable confusion and anxiety, lacking the typical sense of “conventional wisdom” that generally tempers political storms.
  • "You will run into people who will allow that they could see it both ways, that the beginning of impeachment could be the day that Donald Trump won reelection... you can get Democrats who tell you that and yet nonetheless feel they need to proceed." – Susan Glasser [02:56]
• Congressional Republicans lack a unified defense for the president. Instead, tactics center on distraction—attacking the whistleblower, talking of a "coup," and amplifying calls to investigate Joe Biden.
  • "Most of the Republicans right now, they aren't even defending Trump on the facts... they're not really defending Trump." – Glasser [03:50]
• Notable moment on Republican support:
  • A Monmouth poll shows “40% of Republicans believe that Trump raised the issue of investigating Joe Biden and his son in the phone call with the Ukrainian president, even though that is actually in the transcript that the White House itself released.” – Glasser [04:58]
• Lighter moment: Attempts to brand the scandal (“Moron Contra,” “Stupid Watergate”).

2. The View from Ukraine and the International Angle

[06:24 – 09:05] Joshua Yaffa

• The Ukrainian reaction is marked by confusion and disappointment; U.S. presidents have typically pressured Ukraine to clean up its system, yet Trump is perceived to be exploiting it for political gain.
  • “This sad irony wasn’t lost on anyone—that now it was an American president who apparently was using his office to put pressure on his Ukrainian counterpart to use that country’s judicial system for political ends.” – Yaffa [08:28]
• The episode highlights Ukraine’s precarious position—caught between US and Russian spheres of power, and now thrust unwillingly into a US domestic scandal.

3. Scandal, Impeachment, and the Erosion of Norms

[09:22 – 14:21] Jane Mayer

• Trump-era scandals are “wilder” than previous historical examples due to the president’s unfiltered, chaotic communication style.
  • “Usually when you have a scandal, you've got kind of an organized pushback coming back from, say, the White House. In this case, you’ve just got sort of a rain of crazy Twitters coming from the president calling his accusers names.” – Jane Mayer [09:52]
• Mayer notes the severity of presidential language: Trump’s tweets referencing "treason" are especially dangerous, conjuring images of severe, even lethal, consequences.
• Intelligence Community Response: There is backlash within intelligence circles, supportive of the whistleblower and threatened by Trump’s rhetoric. Mike Morell’s public endorsement is cited.
• If Pence were president: Policy differences and implications for the Republican party are discussed, with Mayer describing Pence as “an ideologue” shaped by religious right politics and big donors like the Koch brothers.
  • “Pence would be very different. He'd also work better with the Hill because he knows how Washington works.” – Mayer [12:41]
• On the Senate’s willingness to act: Republican senators dislike Trump but are bound to him by his control of the party base. Media infrastructure (specifically Fox News) sustains Trump’s base, contrasting with Nixon’s inability to do so during Watergate.

4. Threats of Violence and Historical Precedent

[14:42 – 18:14] Jelani Cobb

• Trump’s rhetoric, which includes talk of treason and civil war, is historically unprecedented for a modern president.
  • “You know, I've thought about this, and I can't really find anything that compares.” – Jelani Cobb [15:07]
• While Trump’s tendency toward hyperbole is acknowledged, Cobb stresses the importance of not dismissing the incitement of violence.
  • “We’ve seen in his campaign rallies that he has the possibility of riling people up into... committing acts of violence.” – Cobb [16:36]
• Cobb’s deeper worry: The president’s unpredictability could translate into dangerous, impulsive action if Trump feels sufficiently threatened or humiliated by impeachment proceedings.

5. Impeachment in Historical Context and the Constitutional Dilemma

[18:29 – 22:45] Jill Lepore

• Jill Lepore positions current allegations alongside previous impeachments—Johnson, Nixon, Clinton—and notes that impeachment is about constitutional violations, not merely presidential misbehavior.
  • “You can't be impeached for being a creep or a bad president. And that's, I think, one of the things that's been tricky.” – Lepore [18:59]
• On whether the current charges warrant impeachment:
  • “I do, without hesitation. I think in terms of the House, the Articles of impeachment are not really a choice, but I think a duty that members of Congress have, a constitutional duty.” – Lepore [19:22]
• Impeachment serves mainly as deterrent; Trump’s unique disposition means he is not threatened by it—in fact, he perhaps relishes the drama.
• When asked for hope or clarity:
  • “I wonder if we might gain, as an electorate, clarity about the powers of the presidency relative to the other branches of government... It's a really important moment to think about what are the checks against the power of the executive.” – Lepore [21:18]
• Even if the Senate refuses to convict, Lepore argues the investigation and articles themselves will be historically meaningful.

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• “Propaganda works. Telling a lie over and over and over again. At least enough people start to believe it.”
  — Susan Glasser [04:58]

• “The first thing I think [Ukrainian officials] feel is something between confusion and disappointment... now it was an American president who apparently was using his office to put pressure on his Ukrainian counterpart to use that country’s judicial system for political ends.”
  — Joshua Yaffa [08:04]

• “In this case, you’ve just got sort of a rain of crazy Twitters coming from the president calling his accusers names.”
  — Jane Mayer [09:52]

• “He has an alternative communications system, and Fox is a big part of that. When Roger Ailes founded Fox... he founded Fox partly in reaction to Watergate, saying, We're not going to let this happen again.”
  — Jane Mayer [13:50]

• “I can't really find anything that compares.”
  — Jelani Cobb on Trump’s threats of violence and historical precedent [15:07]

• “You can't be impeached for being a creep or a bad president. And that's, I think, one of the things that's been tricky.”
  — Jill Lepore [18:59]

• “It was still the principled thing to do. It was still the obligation of the House to send those articles of impeachment to the Senate. And it will be the burden of history that lands on the shoulders of those senators.”
  — Jill Lepore [22:20]

Important Timestamps

• Mood in Washington (Susan Glasser): [02:15 – 06:11]
• Ukraine’s View (Joshua Yaffa): [06:24 – 09:05]
• Impeachment, Scandal and GOP (Jane Mayer): [09:22 – 14:21]
• Violence, Rhetoric, and Precedent (Jelani Cobb): [14:42 – 18:14]
• History of Impeachment (Jill Lepore): [18:29 – 22:45]

Final Thoughts

This episode bridges the day-to-day chaos of Washington with the broader sweep of American political history, offering a sobering examination of how impeachment functions as both a safeguard and a stress test for democracy. The speakers reflect a consensus that the Trump impeachment represents an extraordinary—and deeply ambiguous—moment, raising hard questions about partisanship, constitutional obligations, and the future of political accountability in the United States.