This is a rush transcript from "Media Buzz," December 22, 2019. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
Howard Kurtz, host: On the Buzz Meter this Sunday, as House Democrats impeach President Trump without a single Republican vote, the media are consumed by praising or pummeling the process.
[BEGIN VIDEO CLIP]
Laura Ingraham: After countless hours, oh my gosh, this is so tedious these speeches and panels of liberal academics and hearsay witnesses and bitter foreign service officers, fewer Americans, not more, believe that Donald Trump committed an impeachable offense.
Male Speaker: Donald Trump is now a marked man in history. He will wear the scarlet letter I forever in history. The impeached Donald Trump.
Jason Chaffetz: Wait until he's the first president impeached by House Democrats, this is very important distinction, to then be re-elected by the people.
Gregg Jarett: By America.
Female Speaker: It's an indelible mark on Donald Trump's legacy and he knows it and that's why he has been so crazed.
Sean Hannity: The 2016 election has now resulted in one of the most, if not the most, pathetic, divisive, disgusting, repulsive, and frankly dangerous political stunts in American history.
Male Speaker: It's also a night that is going to not only leave a stain on President Trump's presidency, but I wonder what it's going to do to his psyche.
[END VIDEO CLIP]
Howard Kurtz: Most pundits baffled by Nancy Pelosi as she refuses for now to send the impeachment articles to the Senate.
[BEGIN VIDEO CLIP]
Female Speaker: Hard to really see what the benefits necessarily are to sort of dragging it out a bit here.
Tucker Carlson: This might be the end of impeachment. It would be kind of half an impeachment.
[END VIDEO CLIP]
Howard Kurtz: Why the press which usually praises Pelosi now says she's paralyzed the process. News outlets pounce on the president for his blistering letter calling the speaker a selfish partisan whose process is less fair than the Salem Witch trials.
[BEGIN VIDEO CLIP]
Male Speaker: I am incapable of expressing how crazy this letter is, how unhinged in its rhetoric, in its claims, in its factual inaccuracy and lies.
Male Speaker: It's going to go down as a, you know, a letter from a two-bit dictator in a Banana Republic.
Male Speaker: Mr. Trump today rebuked the radical Dems and their continued efforts to subvert his presidency to remove him from office.
[END VIDEO CLIP]
Howard Kurtz: Rudy Giuliani gets hammered on the airwaves with most conservatives avoiding the subject after he admits to two news outlets that yes, he tried to get Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch fired. Plus, some 2020 Democrats beat up on Mayor Pete and he punches back in a PBS debate but are these faceoffs now utterly overshadowed by impeachment? I'm Howard Kurtz and this is Media Buzz. It was yet another split screen moment with sky-high stakes. Nancy Pelosi bringing down the gavel on the two articles of impeachment. Her Democratic members approved on abuse of power and obstruction and President Trump denouncing that vote along with the media at a rally in Battle Creek, Michigan.
[BEGIN VIDEO CLIP]
Nancy Pelosi: Article one is adopted.
President Donald Trump: This lawless partisan impeachment is a political suicide march for the Democrat Party. Crazy Nancy Pelosi's House Democrats -- [booing] --- have branded themselves with an eternal mark of shame and it really is. It's a disgrace.
Howard Kurtz: NBC's Kristen Welker asked the president about being branded with what he's called a very ugly word.
[BEGIN VIDEO CLIP]
Kristen Welker: What does it feel like to be the third president in U.S. history to be impeached?
President Donald Trump: Well, I don't feel like I'm being impeached because it's a hoax. It's a setup. It's a horrible thing they did.
[END VIDEO CLIP]
Howard Kurtz: Joining us now to analyze the coverage Mollie Hemingway, senior editor at The Federalist and a Fox News contributor, Susan Ferrechio, chief congressional correspondent for the Washington Examiner, and Jessica Tarlov, a Fox News contributor and Outnumbered panelist. Mollie, how are the media covering the actual party line vote to impeach President Trump and do you see some spiking of the political football?
Mollie Hemingway: Well, this was technically a vote done by Democrats, but really was always a media-led impeachment, really going on for the last several years. Within hours of President Trump's inauguration, you have The Washington Post beginning the drumbeat, saying “now the march to impeachment begins.” And the idea was clearly to use the Russia collusion narrative as a means to impeach. When that fell apart, everyone kind of quickly rolled into this Ukraine situation. So even though it was Democrats voting and only Democrats voting, it really was a media-led effort, a media-animated effort and so they do feel --
Howard Kurtz: Why does the Democrat Party do whatever the media wants?
Mollie Hemingway: Well, I think that it used to be joked that the media were the PR arm of the Democratic Party and I think now some people would say it's the media who leads that party more than anything. They did feel that they probably had no other choice because of the way that the media coverage had been, their people were so needing this improvement.
Howard Kurtz: Well, Susan, all but three Democrats voted for impeachment with one Independent. As we said earlier, not a single Republican vote. Is that as big a story as the two articles of impeachment? And do you agree with Mollie that media pressure, media persuasion, the media climate, was a factor here?
Susan Ferrechio: I think the media and the political parties feed off each other and I think the media is -- mostly the mainstream media is liberal-leaning. And so there's some truth to that sort of ecosystem where they feed off each other and that they had to go forward with impeachment because the media stories surrounding it would've been too hard to back down. The media always grabs onto the impeachment story, no matter what president it is because it's an exciting story. It's a major political story. And so that is true. I think the fact that only three Democrats voted for it and that it was a very divided impeachment just reflects what was going on in the polls where it's a very divided impeachment support and the polls have Republican supporters don't like it.
Howard Kurtz: Right.
Susan Ferrechio: Democrat voters do like it. And so that was part of the story.
Howard Kurtz: Right. You meant only three Democrats voted against it. Jessica, I want to get your reaction on the coverage of impeachment. First let me play a soundbite from the Battle Creek rally because the president in defending himself on impeachment also is beating up once again on the press.
[BEGIN VIDEO CLIP]
President Donald Trump: How do you know the New York Times is totally dishonest or the Washington Post or ABC is so bad? CBS, so bad. NBC, I made a lot of money for NBC with "The Apprentice," right?
[END VIDEO CLIP]
Howard Kurtz: Your reaction on that and the impeachment coverage.
Jessica Tarlov: He says the same thing no matter what. I really don't think that we can find any circumstance where the president wouldn't say it's a hoax, it's a witch hunt, it's a disgrace. He has like 10 words that he loves to put out there and that's the way he's going to do it. It was obviously intentional to have a rally going on at the same time. I mean, the split screen was really profound, right, to see Nancy Pelosi up there gaveling that impeachment had gone through and the president bashing John Dingell at the same time. But I would say about the media coverage that I disagree that this was media-led insofar as there were Democrats that came around to the -- especially those who had worked in the intelligence community and served our country, the veterans, who wrote that op-ed in the Washington Post about the Ukraine case specifically and said it was a very hard road to get here. This was not something that we thought should have been done about Bob Mueller and his report but the times have found us, which is a phrase that Nancy Pelosi used. I don't think anyone can accuse Max Rose or an Elissa Slotkin or Mikie Sherrill of being pushed to come to this decision because of media coverage.
Howard Kurtz: All right.
Jessica Tarlov: The Ukraine case was unique and the fact that it had a national security element to it made it very different.
Howard Kurtz: Let me turn to the post-impeachment battle or argument or debate because as everyone here knows, Nancy Pelosi told reporters, and she didn't want to take a lot of questions on it, but she's not ready to send the articles of impeachment to the Senate. She's not ready to name House managers. She called Mitch McConnell a rogue leader. Is the press buying her argument that she's trying to pressure Mitch McConnell into a fair Senate trial?
Mollie Hemingway: I think this was the first time you actually did see some break with the media seeming to think that she was kind of embarrassing them with this approach that she's taking. She had said that this impeachment was very urgent. There are claims that there was obstruction of Congress and so then she sits on it and obstructs the Senate from doing their part of the job. It was not the best line of argument for what they had been saying all along leading to that.
Howard Kurtz: Is this a dilemma, Jessica, for the press? Because Trump's tweet, one of the several White House reactions to Pelosi's maneuver here, "Pelosi feels her phony impeachment hoax is so pathetic that she's afraid to present it to the Senate which can set a date and put this whole scam into default if they refuse to show up.” It seems to me that she did provide a kind of a talking point to the Republican side.
Jessica Tarlov: She provided a talking point, but I don't believe anyone realistically thinks that Nancy Pelosi is afraid of anything, let alone what Donald Trump is going to be saying on his Twitter feed or at a rally. I personally think that this should move as quickly as possible, because no matter what you want, you're not going to get a fair trial in the Senate, and Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham have both been clear about that. We are heading into an election year --
Howard Kurtz: So, the media are puzzled because they don't think she has any ability to influence McConnell.
Jessica Tarlov: No, what they're looking for, and Chuck Schumer has said now that he's on the same page as Nancy Pelosi, is for Republican senators to say, “Yes, we would like to hear from witnesses as well,” which is a key element to having a trial.
Mollie Hemingway: Actually, that's a really good point, though. McConnell was just saying he wants to do the trial in the same way they did the Clinton trial. That's where you hear the evidence for and against, and then you hear -- or you hear the cases made for and against, and then you decide whether to have witnesses. The idea that you would jump the ship there and move forward without first having the cases made would be an outlier from how previous impeachments [unintelligible].
Howard Kurtz: As we heard at the top of the show, Susan, some pundits -- a number of commentators absolutely ripped the president for that six-page letter to Nancy Pelosi. “She's selfish.” “It's an illegal coup.” “Salem Witch trials.” How should the press deal with such personal political rhetoric?
Susan Ferrechio: Well, first of all, if you're just part of the press, and you're a pundit, you should cover the letter, cover what his defense is of sending a letter like that. He is a president who people have been trying to impeach, talking about impeaching him, since the day he was sworn into office, and I think that was reflected in the letter he sent to Pelosi, that “this has been a witch hunt, and this has been an attack on my presidency.” That's the way I read the letter.
Howard Kurtz: [unintelligible]?
Jessica Tarlov: Don't you have to be a little bit objective in looking at the letter? I agree, cover it, but, you know, the witches in Salem -- they got burned, right? So, that ended up a little bit worse than what happened to you.
Female Speaker: Yeah.
Howard Kurtz: It's an inexact analogy. In 1999 -- in 1989, I wrote a story about Donald Trump writing a blistering letter to hotel queen Leona Helmsley, calling her a disgrace to humanity. So, he has been doing this for a while. Look, the media argument now is, “Well, impeachment was inevitable.” Here's a New York Times news story. “Is anyone really surprised President Trump was impeached? His defiant disregard for red lines arguably make him an impeachment waiting to happen.”
Mollie Hemingway: I actually do think people are surprised this is happening. I think that when he was elected it was surprising to a lot of people. It was understandable that people would take a few days to deal with it. We are on year three-plus of a temper tantrum where norms are being violated. This is the first time we've had an impeachment with no crime --
Howard Kurtz: Wait --
Mollie Hemingway: There's no accusation --
Howard Kurtz: -- a temper tantrum on whose part?
Mollie Hemingway: You have a resistance that's self-labeled as a resistance that has done everything in its power, whether fighting the electoral college, trying to do a 25th Amendment, doing all sorts of investigations that did not --
Howard Kurtz: And you see the media as part of that resistance?
Mollie Hemingway: Of course, they are. Proudly so they are.
Howard Kurtz: Jessica, the flip side of arguing that Democrats have wanted to impeach, and they tried to do it with Russia and --
Jessica Tarlov: Is that they voted against it numerous times?
Howard Kurtz: Well, until you --
Jessica Tarlov: I mean, it's been available. Al Green and Maxine Waters have been pushing it --
Mollie Hemingway: That is a --
Jessica Tarlov: -- and Democrats have waited until a clearly impeachable offense.
Howard Kurtz: This is --
Mollie Hemingway: That's actually not true. There have been so many investigations --
Jessica Tarlov: How many voted for impeachment?
Mollie Hemingway: No, no, no, you can't look at -- the six committees in the House have been investigating Trump for everything, and his family, for years and --
Howard Kurtz: Let me --
Mollie Hemingway: -- hunting around until finally -- finally -- they got something.
Jessica Tarlov: Is that really --
Howard Kurtz: Can I finish my question?
Mollie Hemingway: That's what's been going on. They're watching him.
Howard Kurtz: The second part of the question was the argument here is that many in the media believed he deserved impeachment for the last three years, going back to Russia, Stormy Daniels, all the other things that were thrown at him, and then when Ukraine came along -- and I'm not minimizing the seriousness of these allegations -- it was like, “A-ha, now we've got him.”
Jessica Tarlov: I understand that argument. I spend my days with enough conservatives that I have heard it before, and I give weight to it. I mean, people are entitled, obviously, to their opinions, but I think it does matter that Democrats have not brought articles of impeachment before, that it were outliers in the party like Al Green and Maxine Waters who have been running around and saying that. And frankly, when the Mueller report came out there were a number of people who were not members of the media, but lawyers and constitutional scholars who said you could make a clear case that there was obstruction of justice from the special counsel report, and if not for the OLC guidelines, that Robert Mueller would have actually recommended that we move forward.
Howard Kurtz: All right --
Mollie Hemingway: No, he said he wouldn't do that. He said it had nothing to do with [unintelligible] --
Jessica Tarlov: Well --
Howard Kurtz: I want to close on this, which is that Washington Post reporter Rachel Bade posted a photo, a tweeted photo, of her and some colleagues right after the impeachment vote. The headline was “Merry Impeachmas from the WaPo team.” A lot of people online said this looking like they were celebrating impeachment. She said it was misinterpreted; they were just getting a break for the holidays. The Washington Post editor Marty Baron told CNN the tweet was ill-considered, but also thought it was misconstrued.
Susan Ferrechio: Reporters go out for drinks after big news events. The problem now is there's Twitter, and we get ourselves in trouble by tweeting this out in the environment now where there is a perception that the media is biased.
Howard Kurtz: Right.
Susan Ferrechio: That's a bad mix.
Mollie Hemingway: Well, not just a perception. There's just the reality that they're biased. And of course, it's fine to go out and have a drink after you've had a hard time. Nobody thinks that if Barack Obama had been impeached that there would have been this tweet with this festive hashtag.
Susan Ferrechio: That is a good point.
Howard Kurtz: Well, they might still --
Susan Ferrechio: That's a good point.
Howard Kurtz: -- have gone out for drinks and guacamole, but there probably would have been a different caption. I've got to get a break here. I've got a hard break coming up. When we come back, Rudy Giuliani makes a striking admission about his Ukraine work to two major news outlets. And later, we'll look at cable interviews with Andrew McCabe and Lisa Page. Did they get off easy?
[COMMERCIAL BREAK]
Howard Kurtz: Rudy Giuliani went to Ukraine with a reporter for One America News, functioning almost as a cohort as she backed, quote, “America's mayor” in language not usually heard in a news report.
[BEGIN VIDEO CLIP]
Female Speaker: We talked to witnesses who destroy Adam Schiff's baseless impeachment case. Together, we waded through a dark and murky swamp of deep-state collusion, Democratic impeachment delusions, and nefarious charges against Giuliani. Giuliani debunks some central premises.
[END VIDEO CLIP]
Howard Kurtz: In a lengthy interview with The New Yorker. Giuliani acknowledged he led an effort to oust Marie Yovanovitch as ambassador to Ukraine because he viewed her as disloyal and needed to get her, quote, “out of the way.” The president's personal lawyer confirmed to the New York Times he gave his information to Mike Pompeo and believes she should have been fired. As for the New Yorker story --
[BEGIN VIDEO CLIP]
Laura Ingraham: Now this hit piece, and it's a hit piece --
Rudy Giuliani: Of course.
Laura Ingraham: --- also has you on the record admitting that you forced out Marie Yovanovitch.
Rudy Giuliani: Of course I did.
Laura Ingraham: You said you needed her out of the way but you're a personal attorney for the president. So why do you need her out of the way?
Rudy Giuliani: I didn't need her out of the way. I forced her out because she's corrupt.
[End video clip]
Howard Kurtz: So, Mollie, with Rudy Giuliani confirming that he forced her out because of his problems with Ambassador Yovanovitch, doesn't this show at least on this one point that the media were right?
Mollie Hemingway: Well, I'm not sure about that. First off I just want to say that that language that you showed in that news report, it's exactly what you hear in a lot of news reports. It's just usually not done in favor of a Republican. It's usually done in favor of a Democrat. But as for what he's saying, I feel like he's said stuff like this before. It definitely matches some of the testimony that we heard about his opposition to this ambassador. But really it just gets back to the main issue. Does the president have the right to handle foreign policy to have people in positions as he wants them or not? Some people seem to think that the bureaucracy should be in charge of foreign policy. That is not constitutional. And that's what this whole impeachment debate is about.
Howard Kurtz: Well, Jessica, Giuliani's detractors say this was a smear campaign, that in fact there's no evidence that Yovanovitch was corrupt or disloyal and that he needed -- he disputed this with Laura Ingraham but it was an on-the-record quote from the former mayor that he needed Yovanovitch out of the way.
Jessica Tarlov: Out of the way. Rudy Giuliani goes on TV regularly and confesses to the -- if the -- I'm going to say “crimes” but confesses to the things that he's been accused of and then he tries to --
Howard Kurtz: Won't say crimes.
Jessica Tarlov: That's why I put it in quotes. I'm saying whatever he's being accused of there is a TV clip of him admitting to doing it. He does this regularly. He did it with Ed Henry a few weeks ago.
Howard Kurtz: So, he's transparent. He's --
Jessica Tarlov: He's transparently corrupt, yes, and the president's personal lawyer has no business doing this. It is important that there was a central plank of the intel committee hearings where Adam Schiff was overseeing and the conversation we're having about Marie Yovanovitch, about there being a formal foreign policy channel and then a back channel that Rudy Giuliani was running, which is wholly inappropriate. He's not a government employee. He is a personal fixer for the president.
Howard Kurtz: Right, okay, but so other presidents have had people from the outside --
Susan Ferrechio: There are three Trump administration officials who were involved in that. So, it's a back channel involving --
Howard Kurtz: Let me ask you, Susan. Some in the media, not just liberals, have said that why did Giuliani take an OAN camera crew to Ukraine because regardless of whether you like the report, didn't like the report, that he was generating more press as President Trump was in the process of being impeached?
Susan Ferrechio: I don't know. I don't know why he gives interviews to the New Yorker. It's baffling. What's really important, though, for the media, though, is to -- this is really crazy how he just -- it's all about what Rudy Giuliani is doing and not about what he's talking about, which I think deserves more scrutiny. As you just said, he's being transparent. About what? That he thinks there was something there with Yovanovitch getting in the way of them examining potential corruption involving 2016 and the Trump campaign and the DNC. He wants to find out more about that. Yovanovitch, he thought, was getting in the way. That gets no attention from the media. It's dismissed outright as a fabrication when there's been reporting showing there may be truth to that.
Jessica Tarlov: But Susan --
Susan Ferrechio: And that is a part of this, the neglected part of this.
Howard Kurtz: Okay.
Jessica Tarlov: This is --
Susan Ferrechio: It's very disturbing to me.
Jessica Tarlov: This is a dangerous road to go down. This is why Senator Kennedy had to apologize after he was on Fox News Sunday.
Susan Ferrechio: No, then he came back on and --
Jessica Tarlov: Chris Wallace called --
Howard Kurtz: Hold on. Hold on. [CROSSTALK]
Jessica Tarlov: And Marco Rubio and everyone who was on Senate Intel including Republican -- really to tell -- [CROSSTALK]
Jessica Tarlov: -- lies about what happened in 2016.
Howard Kurtz: Jessica -- [CROSSTALK]
Howard Kurtz: Stop for a second because we're short on time.
Jessica Tarlov: Ukrainians --
Howard Kurtz: Giuliani blames the media for -- he sees they're out to get him and he blames the media for not sufficiently covering the Hunter Biden scandal. So he says he has to push it out there. I need a brief response.
Jessica Tarlov: It's not about the Hunter Biden scandal. Everyone knows what happened with Joe Biden carrying out the foreign policy that was decided upon by the U.S. and our allies in the west to push out a corrupt -- and I hear you breathing heavily when I say this, Joe Biden was executing western foreign policy here. The issue at play is that the president of the United States of America leveraged the United States power, congressionally appropriated money for personal gain.
Howard Kurtz: Okay. I want to --
Jessica Tarlov: Because Joe Biden was his rival.
Howard Kurtz: I want to stick with the media on that. I'm going to read Mollie a New York Daily News headline. "Rudy Giuliani hatched the Ukraine scheme that got Trump impeached and he's not done yet."
Mollie Hemingway: Right. I mean, it's clear that the media do not want to actually deal with the underlying issues in play and there are two separate really interesting issues. One is the role that the -- that Ukrainian officials played in 2016, how they did not want Trump elected, how they had something to do with the Manafort ledger that got put into the New York Times.
Howard Kurtz: Some of it's in dispute.
Mollie Hemingway: The other thing is just the corruption of the Biden family. The Biden family benefited financially while Joe Biden was the point person in Ukraine and it's not just Ukraine. It's actually China. There's been a little bit of reporting but nowhere near we need to have for someone who could literally be the next president of the United States of America.
Howard Kurtz: Well, there has been some reporting and it's certainly arguable whether there should be more. On that note Jessica Tarlov, Susan Ferrechio, and Mollie Hemingway, have a great holiday. Ahead we'll talk to a top Republican and a top Democrat about the coverage of impeachment but up next, two former FBI officials talk to CNN and MSNBC in the wake of that IG report. We'll take a closer look. [COMMERCIAL BREAK]
Howard Kurtz: Two former FBI officials who were at the center of the Russia probe have now stepped into the cable news spotlight. Lisa Page, the FBI agent who wrote those incriminating anti-Trump texts with her boyfriend and fellow agent Peter Strzok, has been repeatedly attacked by President Trump and got a very sympathetic hearing from MSNBC's Rachel Maddow.
[BEGIN VIDEO CLIP]
Rachel Maddow: Why speak now on your own terms?
Lisa Page: When the president, you know, finally did that vile sort of simulated sex act in a, you know, rally in Minneapolis, I just finally had to accept it's not getting better.
[END VIDEO CLIP]
Howard Kurtz: Maddow did ask about the infamous text message to Page from Strzok who said they would provide an insurance policy against Trump's election.
[BEGIN VIDEO CLIP]
Rachel Maddow: Can you explain to us tonight what was meant by, for example, the insurance policy text message?
Lisa Page: We're using an analogy. We're talking about whether or not we should take certain investigative steps or not based on the likelihood that he's going to be president or not. Right? Do I wish he hadn't sent it? Yes. It's been mutilated to death and it's been used to bludgeon an institution I love.
[END VIDEO CLIP]
Howard Kurtz: Page was rather fortunate to be questioned by Maddow. Andrew McCabe, who was fired as the FBI's deputy director and came under criminal investigation, is now a CNN contributor. So, after the IG found many instances of FBI misconduct in the FISA warrant process, Wolf Blitzer had some hard questions.
[BEGIN VIDEO CLIP]
Wolf Blitzer: This is very serious misconduct on your watch. This wasn't just sloppiness. These were brutal mistakes, deliberate errors, concealments involving search warrant surveillance activities of an American citizen.
Andrew McCabe: The biggest mistake I think is the process that was in place essentially left so much responsibility on the lowest level of FBI agents and supervisors --
[END VIDEO CLIP]
Howard Kurtz: Wolf asked very solid questions, but it didn't last long; a few segments -- a few questions at the end of a segment, excuse me.
Wouldn't CNN have done a long interview with McCabe if he wasn't on the network's payroll? And now that the New York Times is reporting that a federal prosecutor is examining the role of former CIA director John Brennan in the Russia probe; will he be grilled by his network? Well, not so far. Brennan, who's defended his conduct, is an MSNBC contributor. Ahead, Pete Buttigieg and Elizabeth Warren mix it up one day after the Trump impeachment. Is the PBS debate having an impact? But first, top presidential aide Tony Sayegh with the White House view of the battle over impeachment.
[COMMERCIAL BREAK]
Howard Kurtz: Joining us now from New York with the president's perspective is Tony Sayegh, senior White House adviser, former Treasury Department spokesman, and onetime Fox News contributor. And, Tony, Nancy Pelosi, as you know, has been holding back the articles of impeachment, saying she wants to pressure the Senate into a fair trial. Even the press has been skeptical. Not clear what she's trying to accomplish. How does this affect the president, and how does it affect your planning?
Tony Sayegh: Howie, it's good to be with you. Thanks for having me.
Howard Kurtz: Sure.
Tony Sayegh: Look, I think what Nancy Pelosi has done is two things. Number one, she's exposed what we've been saying all along, which is this is a complete sham, and impeachment has been weaponized by the Democrats on a hyper-partisan basis to be a political tactic against the president, not what the Constitution and our Framers had all intended for impeachment, number one. Number two, after completely controlling the process in the House, completely depriving the president of any rights in that process -- no rebuttal evidence allowed to be introduced by our side; they controlled all the witnesses, okay? They still could not prove their case. They advanced two of the weakest articles in the history of impeachment that don't even have in them the crimes they alleged throughout the entire hearing in the House that he committed bribery, extortion, quid pro quo. So, now she's stalling this after completely convincing her caucus that they have to rush to vote to this by Christmas. And you know what, Howie? I heard a lot on Wednesday from House Democrats that no one is above the law, but they're treating the president like he's beneath the law. Nobody in this country deserves this type of unfair treatment, including the president.
Howard Kurtz: Let me jump in. The president said -- we played this earlier -- that it doesn't really feel like he's being impeached, but even though it was clearly a party-line vote, the media are certainly acting like this is a crucial and a stark moment, and democracy is at stake. So, is the president trying to create a kind of alternative reality?
Tony Sayegh: Look, I think he's expressing what a lot of Americans are saying, which is that people understand this has unfortunately become a completely hyper-partisan sham process, not what impeachment should ever have been. It's an abuse of Congress's power that Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff have put on the country, and the president is focused on doing his job, serving the American people. Think about the last month alone, Howie, what we've had by way of the job market, record stock market, wages and paychecks going up for the first time in 10 years, two major trade deals with our biggest trading partners. And when you talk about the media and the media coverage, there was an analysis done in November that showed 96 percent of the coverage on the evening news networks were negative stories on impeachment. Okay, there was a poll -- Morning Consult poll in November --
Howard Kurtz: Hold on. It's kind of hard to write a lot of positive stories when a president is being impeached for the third time in American history, which is not to say there's not another side, and certainly the Republicans' arguments --
Tony Sayegh: We're not --
Howard Kurtz: -- of unfairness need to be covered, but, you know --
Tony Sayegh: We're not talking --
Howard Kurtz: -- it is a huge story.
Tony Sayegh: They don't have to be positive; they have to be fair and balanced, and they're not. It's completely skewed. In that -- in another poll in November, Morning Consult, 60 percent of Americans -- this is important to the media, who wants -- if they want to have the credibility to deliver news to the American people. Sixty percent of Americans said that impeachment was more important to the media than to them. In that same poll, 66 percent said it was important to politicians more than them. So, they basically think that the media and the Democratic politicians are basically together on this. That's a very bad way to be perceived by the American people who you have to have the credibility with to deliver the news.
Howard Kurtz: That might explain why the president continues to beat up on major news organizations whose coverage he believes to be unfair, and sometimes he's taken some shots at Fox as well. I want to turn now to what -- something the president said that's drawn a lot of criticism at the rally in Michigan, where he talked about Debbie Dingell, House Democrat who voted to impeach him with the rest of her party, in reference to her late husband, the late Congressman John Dingell. This is the president describing a phone call they had after John Dingell's death.
[BEGIN VIDEO CLIP] President Donald Trump: “Thank you so much. John would be so thrilled. He's looking down; he'd be so thrilled. Thank you so much, sir.” I said, “That's okay. Don't worry about it.” Maybe he's looking up, I don't know.
[END VIDEO CLIP]
[BEGIN VIDEO CLIP]
Debbie Dingell: I love my husband, as you well know. We had a love affair most never have, and it's going to be -- it's been a hard holiday season. He said what he said, and it hurt, and I'll leave it at that.
[END VIDEO CLIP]
Howard Kurtz: Now, Tony, Brit Hume said that the comments were gratuitous and politically dumb; Neil Cavuto said, “Beyond cruel.” Even some of the supporters in politics -- former senator Rick Santorum on CNN said he should apologize; Lindsey Graham said it wasn't funny. So, why did he say this about a congressman who's no longer with us?
Tony Sayegh: Well, Howie, let's not forget what he was talking about. He had the flag flown at half-staff to honor the death and the legacy of Congressman John Dingell. We obviously respect his memory and his legacy. We respect the service of his wife, who now has his congressional seat. Howie, you see what's happening. The president has been attacked relentless for over five -- since he came down the escalator at Trump Tower. We say the last three years; it's actually been longer than that. And you know, he was at a rally, and the president, you know, speaks his mind. That's what we've come to expect of him. You don't have to like everything he says, but he's at least authentic, and that's why I think so many American people feel a connection to him, and they know that he's always going to speak what's on his mind.
Howard Kurtz: You know, the press has also been very critical lately of Mitch McConnell, Senate Majority Leader, for openly saying that he's working very closely with the White House and people like you on the Senate trial, and there's not going to be any difference between the two sides, and the criticism from the media is that he's hardly an impartial juror. Your thoughts?
Tony Sayegh: Look, I think that it's going to be pretty hard to believe that Chuck Schumer is an impartial juror either. Clearly, there is going to be an opportunity in the Senate to grant the president a fair process that he was deprived in the House. I believe we'll get there. Don't forget, in 1999, the precedent set by the Clinton impeachment had a hundred senators voting for it, and I do think that Leader McConnell wants to have a bipartisanly approved process, something, again, that did not happen in the House, and one that gives the president his real rights and opportunity to have a fair trial.
Howard Kurtz: And finally, Tony, would the president of course he's had this battle with what he calls fake news pretty much from the campaign on, but the continuing attacks on the media and the media coverage of impeachment, is he now running in 2020 as much against the media as he is against the Democrats and against impeachment, which the campaign is advertising about? They think it helps your side.
Tony Sayegh: Look, I mean, I do think I would turn that question on the other side. You have to really look at the media coverage of this president since the very beginning and really try to figure out is it beyond just bias? Has the media given the president and his supporters a reason to believe that they're part of the resistance against them? In some instances, I think that that could be an argument that the president certainly could make. But at the end of this whole thing, what Donald Trump does is directly communicates with the American people? That's why he is as successful as he is and that's why you see the support for him increasing throughout this entire impeachment process because people know the president is fighting for them.
Howard Kurtz: Right.
Tony Sayegh: And what they see are the Democrats and in some cases members of the media who are attacking him. So, that's not a way you get support from the American people is to attack the guy who they think is standing up for them.
Howard Kurtz: Yeah. In some cases there's visceral hostility in some members of the media and I think others try to be fair and that's where the debate lies. Tony Sayegh, we very much appreciate your coming on. Happy holidays. Good to see you.
Tony Sayegh: Thanks, Howie, same to you.
Howard Kurtz: Coming up, a liberal radio host responds on the coverage of impeachment, Nancy Pelosi's slow walking maneuver, and the president's swipe at Debbie Dingell's late husband, and more. Stay with us.
[COMMERCIAL BREAK]
Howard Kurtz: Joining us now from New York with a different view is Chris Hahn, radio host, former Chuck Schumer aid, whose podcast is called, "The Aggressive Progressive." Chris, welcome and the president constantly now denouncing impeachment, denouncing the coverage of impeachment. You heard Tony Sayegh of the White House talking about that. They basically say that major media outlets are partners with the Democrats in pushing impeachment. Your thoughts.
Chris Hahn: I mean, look, they got to cover impeachment, right? It's a huge story. This is the first president -- this is a president who got impeached by more votes in Congress than any other president in the American history. Now, of course there were fewer members of Congress when Johnson was impeached but not fewer when Clinton was impeached. So look, it's a huge story. It has to be covered. It's not going to be a positive story for the president and I see a lot of pounding of the chest of the president and his supporters about this and how this is going to be good for them. I don't think it's going to be good for them. And you know, when we look back at Clinton, it wasn't really good for Clinton either. I mean, the impeachment happened after the midterms. His last mid-term.
Howard Kurtz: Right.
Chris Hahn: When Clinton was president and then he could not get Al Gore elected president despite a good economy and a good record of accomplishment for Bill Clinton.
Howard Kurtz: All right.
Chris Hahn: So, it's not always a good thing.
Howard Kurtz: Let me ask you about this editorial in Christianity Today, circulation about 90,000. It's created a bit of a storm, coming out for the president's removal saying he is morally lost and confused, saying his actions on Ukraine were profoundly immoral and the president responding on Twitter calling it a far-left magazine, saying he's done so much for Evangelicals. It's an Evangelical magazine, by the way, founded by Billy Graham, and then the president said, "Would you rather have a radical left non-believer who wants to take your religion and your guns?" I don't know what he means by take your religion, but does that editorial hurt him in the Evangelical community?
Chris Hahn: Yes. It definitely does. Look, I grew up as an Evangelical. My parents are both Evangelical ministers. They're at church right now as we speak. Here's the thing. The president needs all of the Evangelical vote and any crack in that vote hurts him. The margins of error for him and the margin of victory is very, very small. So, this absolutely will hurt him in the long run. And I don't know what they're saying about saying a far-left person. If the president is removed, Mike Pence gets elected -- become president. His Evangelical credentials are far superior to Donald Trump's Evangelical credentials.
Howard Kurtz: Well, that particular phrase was a reference to the --
Chris Hahn: Any crack in the --
Howard Kurtz: Let me just jump in. That particular phrase was a reference to Democratic candidates. Now the editor who wrote this editorial, who's stepping down, it turns out, Mark Galli, says he doesn't think he changed many minds and with support from Franklin Graham and others, there is still overwhelming support --
Chris Hahn: Right.
Howard Kurtz: --- if you know this community for the president despite the strong dissent from Christianity Today.
Chris Hahn: It amazes me the support the president has in the Evangelical community considering the casual cruelty of his presidency. We need not look further than his response about Congressman Dingell, which you just referenced in your last segment. The president is casually cruel. That is not the Evangelical community that I grew up in. That is not what Christ would've put up with. So, I don't understand how they are still so supportive of this man.
Howard Kurtz: Well --
Chris Hahn: They have sold their soul to the devil for a couple of votes on the courts.
Howard Kurtz: Well, that leads me to a larger question, which is when the president says something and he says a lot of things that makes the press go haywire like the comments about John Dingell at the rally, like the scathing letter to Nancy Pelosi --
Chris Hahn: Yeah.
Howard Kurtz: -- it never seeks -- seems to shake his standing with his supporters. It's almost like --
Chris Hahn: Yeah.
Howard Kurtz: --- they're immune to almost anything the press says probably in part because most of them don't trust the press.
Chris Hahn: Well, I think the president has done a pretty good job at getting his base to not trust the press. I think that that's bad for the republic. I think it's bad for the future of our country. The press is supposed to be -- is not supposed to be calling balls and strikes. It's supposed to be putting the facts out there and that's what they do. When the president says something ridiculous, the press calls him out on it, even Fox News and some conservative media outlets will say things are wrong. But his supporters in both Congress and in the general public refuse to acknowledge any wrongdoing most of the time --
Howard Kurtz: Chris.
Chris Hahn: --- by this president who is good --
Howard Kurtz: Chris, I got 20 seconds. I got 20 seconds. Do you think that none of the coverage of this president is unfair? That none of it is hostile to him?
Chris Hahn: I think that any politician can judge any coverage hostile towards them. That's what they do. Look, I worked on the -- I worked in politics for years. We used to be upset with the press sometimes. That's the way it is. You know this, Howie, you've been covering -- you've been in media a long time. You know that politicians always hate their coverage in the press.
Howard Kurtz: That part is true but the president seems to be particularly vociferous. Chris Hahn, very much appreciate your coming on. Happy holidays.
Chris Hahn: Thanks for having me, Howie.
Howard Kurtz: Still to come, PBS asks the Democratic debaters about the lack of minority candidates and candidates of color, a slew of liberal issues. That's coming up next.
[COMMERCIAL BREAK]
Howard Kurtz: The Democratic debate sponsored by PBS News Hour and Politico got zero buildup because of this impeachment thing that happened the night before. It was mostly a lowkey policy forum in L.A., but Elizabeth Warren did mix it up with Pete Buttigieg.
[BEGIN VIDEO CLIP]
Elizabeth Warren: The mayor just recently had a fundraiser that was held in a wine cave full of crystals and served $900-a-bottle wine.
Pete Buttigieg: I am the -- literally the only person on this stage who's not a millionaire or a billionaire. This is the problem with issuing purity tests you cannot yourself pass.
[END VIDEO CLIP]
Howard Kurtz: Joining us now from Charlottesville is Larry Sabato, who runs the University of Virginia's Institute of Politics. So, the wine-cave question for you. First, would you agree that Pete Buttigieg has generally gotten very positive press as he's risen in the polls, and the pundits were waiting to see whether he could take a few punches, as he did on that stage, and hit back?
Larry Sabato: That's absolutely true. In fact, it's been true since the beginning, Howie. If you go back to his announcement and the month or two afterwards, it was almost completely positive, which candidates rarely do, particularly ones who don't have much of a thick resume, and he certainly does not.
Howard Kurtz: Just for the record, Elizabeth Warren was wrong when she said it was a closed fundraiser. There was a reporter there. And also, the $900 bottle of wine -- the guy who runs that was interviewed by New York Times -- it's the size of four wine bottles, so it's not quite as expensive as it sounded. I want to go another soundbite from the debate where Andrew Yang was asked about the lack of diversity on the stage.
[BEGIN VIDEO CLIP]
Andrew Yang: It's both an honor and disappointment to be the lone candidate of color on the stage tonight. I miss Kamala; I miss Cory.
Bernie Sanders: I want to get back to the issue of climate change for a moment, because I do believe this is the existential issue.
Female Speaker: Senator, with all respect, this question is about race. Can you answer the question as it was asked?
[END VIDEO CLIP]
Howard Kurtz: So, like, what did you think of Bernie trying to change the subject, and in a broader way, this whole media debate among Democrats that somehow perhaps racism or sexism is involved because these are the candidates that have made it this far?
Larry Sabato: Look, the Democrats have sold this year's group of candidates as the most diverse ever. They mention it constantly, both as individual candidates and as a party. Don't be surprised when it comes back and bites you, as it did at that debate when they didn't have but one person of color on there. And the other thing, Howie, they forgot the lesson of 2016 -- the Democratic Party did. They have got, I think, a ridiculous standard, a polling standard which they change constantly, to get on the debate stage. Hey, what did we learn in 2016? Polls aren't gospel. These precise distinctions they're making between and among candidates probably aren't accurate.
Howard Kurtz: Well, standards or no standards, it's not the press that forced Kamala Harris to end her campaign. I'll just make that point. And also, I personally thought Bernie Sanders was tone-deaf in trying to duck that question and turn it back to climate change.
Larry Sabato: Sure, of course.
Howard Kurtz: Overall, this PBS/Politico debate was seen by six million people. That's the lowest of the season for these debates. I thought the moderators did a good job, but almost every question -- a couple of exceptions -- seemed to come from a liberal checklist: helping the Dreamers, helping transgender people, providing free college, fighting climate change. Your thoughts on that and whether it's been overshadowed by impeachment?
Larry Sabato: Well, it certainly was overshadowed by impeachment. Look, the Democratic Party is the liberal party. The Republican Party is the conservative party. I guess they asked most of those questions because they're the ones being debated by the candidates in Iowa, in New Hampshire, and in other states. You know, Tim Alberta was on the panel, and he was with National Review for a long time. He's with Politico now, but he was with National Review, so I think he added some diversity to the panel. The key thing is, Howie, in the general election it's really important to get balanced questions. Some should come from the left; some should come from the right; some should come from the middle.
Howard Kurtz: Well, I think it's a more provocative debate if every question is not from a liberal premise. But, Larry Sabato, love having you on. Thanks very much.
Larry Sabato: Thank you, Howie.
Howard Kurtz: And that is it for this edition of "Media Buzz." I'm Howard Kurtz. Merry Christmas and Happy Hanukkah to all of you. Hope you'll check out my "Media BuzzMeter" podcast. You can subscribe at Apple iTunes, Google Play, or FoxNewsPodcast.com. We also hope you'll like our Facebook page. We post my daily columns there, but I will warn you I'm going to take a couple days off in the next week. We hope you have a great holiday. We'll see you back here next Sunday with the latest buzz.
Content and Programming Copyright 2019 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of Fox News Network, LLC. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.
Fox News First
Get all the stories you need-to-know from the most powerful name in news delivered first thing every morning to your inbox.
By entering your email and clicking the Subscribe button, you agree to the Fox News Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, and agree to receive content and promotional communications from Fox News. You understand that you can opt-out at any time.
