Episode 10: Dirty Lies and Old Debates

Claire and Neil discuss Republican lying, from whether JD Vance normalizes MAGA to Special Prosecutor Jack Smith's new filing in the Trump insurrection case.

Former President Donald Trump and Ohio Senator JD Vance at the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, July 15, 2024. Photo credit: Maxim Elramsisy/Shutterstock

---

Claire begins the episode by reporting on her work as a political volunteer, and a recent inspiring meeting with Senator Elizabeth Warren at a Worcester, MA phone bank. Then, Neil points viewers to two races in California that could help determine control of the House of Representatives on November 5 by flipping seats now held by Republicans. They are:

• The 13th district, southeast of SanFrancisco, where incumbent Republican John Duarte is in a tight race with Democrat Adam Gray.

• The 22nd, where incumbent Republican David G. Valadao is in a tossup race against former Democratic California Assemblyman Rudy Salas.

Next, we turn to the VicePresidential debate, which seemed unnervingly normal—that is, if you bracket the large number of lies told by Republican nominee JD Vance. But is Vance’s skillful lying, normative self-presentation, and mainstreaming of extremism easier to watch but more dangerous than Trumpism? Are debates even useful when the media is more interested in a candidate’s style than in the substance of their responses?

References in this section include:

• Julia Sonnevend’s Charm: How Magnetic Personalities Shape Global Politics (Princeton University Press, 2024).

• An interview with M. Gessen in the NY Times yesterday about how lying paves the way for authoritarianism.

• A Sweet Honey in the Rock song about Robert Bork’s failed Supreme Court nomination, “Our Side Won,” from the album Live at Carnegie Hall. The song was first performed on November 7, 1987.

Neil and Claire then shift the conversation to the District of Columbiawhere, the day after the debate, Judge Tanya Chutkan unsealed Special Prosecutor Jack Smith’s new filing. Viewers may recall that SCOTUS handed down a broad ruling last April affirming Donald Trump’s claim that as President, he was immune from prosecution for trying to overturn the 2020 election.

Here’s a summary of the brief from Politico, and here is the full document. Topics include:

• The 2000 Brooks Brothers riot, the Supreme Court case that decided the contested 2000 election in favor of George W. Bush.

• Rudolph Giuliani as a demented agent of election chaos in 2020.

• The Compromise of 1877, in which the Republican Party resolved a contested election in its favor by conceding the civil rights and ignoring electoral Black southern male voters.

• The Tea Party as an intermediate stage between “normal” Republican politics and Trumpism.

Here’s a sample of our discussion:

---

Your hosts:

Claire Potter is a historian of politics and media, a writer, a podcaster, and the sole author and editor of the Political Junkie Substack. Her most recent book is Political Junkies: From Talk Radio to Twitter, How Alternative Media Hooked Us on Politics and Broke Our Democracy (Basic Books, 2020), and she is currently writing a biography of feminist journalist Susan Brownmiller.

Neil J. Young is a historian of religion and politics, a journalist, and a former co-host of the Past Present podcast. His most recent book is Coming Out Republican: A History of the Gay Right (University of Chicago Press, 2024). 

These videos are a paid subscriber feature (although you can access them on YouTube one week later.) Don’t miss new drops from Claire and Neil by taking out a paid subscription! Only $5 a month, or $50/year and choose Neil’s Coming Out Republican or Claire’s Political Junkies as a welcome bonus.