The NPR Politics Podcast - Roundup: Yes, Biden And Trump Are Going To Debate

Episode Date: May 17, 2024

Michael Cohen, a former Donald Trump attorney and central witness for the prosecution, testified against the former president in court this week. His appearance is a sign the case could soon reach its conclusion.And President Biden and Trump will meet for at least two debates before November's election. Also, Maryland's expensive primary race has ended, and Democrat Angela Alsobrooks will face Republican Larry Hogan, a popular former governor whose candidacy could flip a Senate seat in the blue state to GOP control.This episode: White House correspondent Asma Khalid, political reporter Ximena Bustillo, senior political editor and correspondent Domenico Montanaro, and congressional correspondent Deirdre Walsh.This podcast was produced by Jeongyoon Han, Casey Morell and Kelli Wessinger. Our editor is Eric McDaniel. Our executive producer is Muthoni Muturi. Listen to every episode of the NPR Politics Podcast sponsor-free, unlock access to bonus episodes with more from the NPR Politics team, and support public media when you sign up for The NPR Politics Podcast+ at plus.npr.org/politics.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

Support for this podcast and the following message come from Autograph Collection Hotels, with over 300 independent hotels around the world, each exactly like nothing else. Autograph Collection is part of the Marriott Bonvoy portfolio of hotel brands. Find the unforgettable at AutographCollection.com. Hi, this is Miranda in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. This week, I just started my internship in the Attorney General office, and I'm super excited. This podcast was recorded at 10.39 a.m. Eastern Time on Friday, May 17th of 2024. Things may have changed by the time you hear it, but I'll still be here trying to learn the most from my internship.

Okay, here's the show. That can be such a hopeful, good feeling to be able to land that first job. And really, good luck to her because that's a great accomplishment. Also, a lot of young legal listeners because we had those law school graduates earlier this week, too. Congrats. Hey there, it's the NPR Politics Podcast. I'm Asma Khalid. I cover the White House.

I'm Ximena Bustillo and I cover politics. And I'm Domenico Montanaro, senior political editor and correspondent. And today on the show, we're going to begin our Friday roundup with the latest in Donald Trump's New York criminal trial. Ximena, this is the case, of course, that centers on payments allegedly authorized by Trump to three people, including adult film actress Stormy Daniels, apparently all in an effort to keep damaging stories out of the press in advance of the 2016 presidential election. This week, the trial centered on the testimony of Michael Cohen. Can you remind us who he is and the role that he played in all of this? So Michael Cohen was Trump's former lawyer. He

called himself Trump's fixer. He called himself Trump's protector, a really close ally of Trump. But he is no longer. And this business records are payments that Trump made to Cohen. Cohen had paid adult film star Stormy Daniels. And these 34 business records are the reimbursements. The district attorney's office is saying that these were falsified, that they concealed the real and true nature of what the payments were actually for. All right. And one of the things you have been watching is essentially how Cohen would be perceived in the courtroom, because I think it is fair to say he is not seen as the most reliable narrator, right? He has this past that I think some would say pokes holes into his credibility as a witness. Absolutely. And that has been the theme and

the messaging from the start. So for about five weeks, you know, the jury has listened to questions, priming them for a witness that is not credible, questioning and hearing testimony about this Michael Cohen, who is not great to work with. So that has been an open secret. And now, finally, this week, the guy that we've been hearing about for several weeks is on the stand. Can you give us any specifics on like why people don't think he's credible? Yeah, absolutely. I mean, he has previous convictions of felonies of perjury, lying in front of Congress during congressional hearings while under oath, lying to federal investigators, lying while on the stand while pleading guilty to other crimes.

And how was his testimony perceived? His testimony was pretty calm. You know, the first two days were the prosecution laying out their chronological order of the payments that were made, the records, conversations he had with Trump. Cohen maintained, even through the defense, questioning a really calm demeanor, very short answers. With the defense, you know, Trump's attorney, Todd Blanch, was very animated. You know, the very first questions that Trump's lawyer, Todd Blanche, asked about was expletive name calling that Cohen has used in social media posts on TikTok, in his podcasts to describe Trump, to describe the Trump team. At one point, they actually played a cut of one of Cohen's podcasts. And the reason this was played in court was to show that Cohen might have a vendetta or a grudge against Trump and continue to paint him as an unreliable witness.

Well, you know, everybody knows kind of, you know, Cohen's credibility problems. You know, he, as Jimena talked about, he lied before Congress, served time in jail. Of course, Cohen says that he did so at the direction and for the benefit of Donald Trump when he was still an ally of Trump's, although there have been other things that he's been caught in as well. But really what's important about Cohen's testimony is the facts, documentation, and corroboration of his story. And there have been a lot of other witnesses that have testified to some of the things that Cohen did say happened. Of course, the defense yesterday was trying to create confusion with a timeline sort of jumping around. And confusion can really perhaps plant some seeds of doubt with a jury. And that's kind of the idea. But I think the prosecution is, we're going to see how they wind up making their closing argument at some point,

maybe next week, about, you know, trying to bring this story back all together and how it ties back to the former president himself. Domenico, you mentioned the former president there. I mean, one thing that struck me this week is that we've seen Republicans show up in the courtroom, right, to offer their explicit support of the former president and essentially join in with his attack of this judicial process. This week, a very notable GOP leader, the Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson, was there. What do you make of his appearance? I think it's so interesting.

I think it just shows you how much Donald Trump is really in charge of the Republican Party, that you had so many people essentially wanting to show up to give him support, to show their own personal fealty to the man, to say that they've got his back and that they're casting doubt on the entirety of the legal system and to exert a degree of political pressure. These are high profile people who are going to need security in a situation where it's already kind of chaotic and just super secure as it is at the courthouse. I was really struck by this

photo of seeing someone like Speaker Johnson, North Dakota Governor Doug Burgum, Congressman Byron Donalds. And it just struck me that there's, to a degree, different political interests for why these folks showed up. Someone like Burgum, it was really fascinating considering he ran against Trump. He said that he wouldn't want to ever do business with somebody like Donald Trump. And now, because he might be under consideration for VP, he's putting all that behind him. All right. Well, what happens next in this trial? When can we expect to see everything wrap up?

Well, New York Judge Juan Marchand told both parties to be ready to give their closing statements on Tuesday, which is already really soon. That means that the case could go to the jury by mid next week. And then it's up to them how quickly we have a verdict. But in terms of arguments, we're likely to wrap that up early next week. All right. Well, we will be keeping an ear out for all of that. I'm sure you will as well. Humana, thanks so much for joining us. Thank you. All right. Let's take a quick break and we'll be back in a moment. This message comes from WISE, the app for doing things in other currencies. Send, spend, or receive money internationally and always get the real-time mid-market exchange rate

with no hidden fees. Download the WISE app today or visit WISE.com. T's and C's apply. And we're back and we're joined now by congressional correspondent Deirdre Walsh. Hey there. Hi, guys. So let's start with the news that we got this week that there are going to be at least two presidential debates this cycle. Domenico, give us a rundown of what we know. Yeah, this week really produced a bit of whiplash because within a few hours, we went from wondering whether there were going to be any debates at all to now having two debates on the calendar, one on June 27th on Presidential Debates, which is a nonprofit that was set up to put on debates on TV in a nonpartisan way, that that regime is now over. Both of these candidates don't agree on much, but they agreed to ditch the debate commission because they had their own set of grievances against how they were run. That's really interesting. And Domenico, the format is what seems like it's going to be different this time.

There's not going to be a live audience, right? You're not going to have people presumably in the crowd there to cheer or jeer, whatever it is they want to do. This is going to be two men in kind of a quiet, static environment. I, for one, cheer this, because I don't think that audiences reflect the whole, and sometimes they can, you know, skew what the, you know, the people who analyze debates think of what happened during the debate, because they play into it so much. And it's really a recognition that the real audience for this is not in the room, but on the other side of the camera. And that's been the case for as long as there have been debates. And this is taking us back in a bit of a retro way to the 1960 Nixon-Kennedy debate, where people who listened on the radio

thought that Nixon had won, but people who watched them thought that Kennedy won because Nixon appeared sweaty and all of this stuff. And I think it's going to be interesting to see something new, something different, yet old, right? I mean, vintage is back, right? I mean, Asma, you're the fashionable one here. Yeah. And I would say to echo what you were saying, Dominique, at least from my perch of covering the Biden campaign in this White House, they have been eager for voters to have a clearer

sense that this election is a choice between Joe Biden and Donald Trump. And, you know, you look at poll after poll, it doesn't look like President Biden's particularly popular with a good swath of the electorate. What you hear in Biden circles is that many folks have not yet fully understood that Trump is the choice on the other side. And so by having a debate, they think that this will present a clear contrast to viewers and voters, and they don't think that contrast has yet existed in many people's minds. There is a palpable frustration in the Biden camp, no question about it, in not understanding why this race is so close, why they're behind in most swing state polls, considering just how

extreme some of Trump's rhetoric has been during this campaign, and that they feel people just aren't seeing what the real choice is. And they do, as you say, think that this is going to highlight and underscore that. On the other side of this, you have the Trump folks who are also frustrated with how close the race is, the fact that they're being so woefully outspent on the airwaves by the Biden campaign. And they want to highlight the differences where they feel that they're going to be able to show this huge optical difference between Trump and Biden, Trump showing more vigor, they believe. And let's be honest, if you watch conservative media, almost daily, they're painting Joe Biden as somebody who has dementia, which isn't the case, that he doesn't know where he is, which isn't the case and all of this, you know, which can really lower the bar for Biden to a point where he easily crosses it as he has at many State of the Union

addresses. But the Trump people really feel like they can mop the floor with him because they're going to be able to show this, you know, difference in vigor and understanding. I think the timing is really interesting, too. They're so early, these debates. I mean, typically, voters aren't tuned into the presidential campaign that early in June, right? I mean, we will not have even had the political conventions. We don't know who Trump's running mate is going to be. We don't know whether we will know that by the time of either of these debates. Obviously, there is a vice presidential debate in the works as well that they're negotiating now, which we tend to think would

happen. I sort of wonder, like, who's going to be paying attention to televised debates on traditional media? And secondly, a lot of voters, the base has made up their mind, right? And you talked about this, the Biden campaign trying to paint this election as a choice. The people who are going to make the choice, who are going to decide this election, are independents in a handful of swing states. And are they going to be tuning into these debates? Like, who is the audience? I'm sort of wondering whether the strategy behind the Biden campaign is they need to rally their base because they are deflated right now. There's a lot of division inside the Democratic Party on some key issues like the war in Gaza. And so I wonder whether it's a way of trying to juice

enthusiasm going into the stretch of the campaign that follows the conventions and the more traditional fall campaign, and maybe the more people will be interested in the second debate, or maybe if there's a third. But I just am sort of skeptical about the audience. I want to shift gears totally for a moment here and talk about the fight for control of the Senate. Since you are with us, Deirdre, and you obviously cover Congress, you've been watching Maryland, which I would say is not necessarily a top competitive state, I think, when people think of where the most competitive Senate race is. But they just had, I would say, a rather bruising Democratic primary.

Bruising and expensive. This was the most expensive political contest in Maryland's history. The Democratic primary and the Republican primary took place on Tuesday. The Democrat who won, Angela Also Brooks, is the Prince George's County executive. She is an African-American candidate who ran against David Trone, a three-term House Democrat, who is the co-founder of Total Wine. So he poured, pun intended, more than $60 million of his personal fortune into this primary, and he lost. Things got negative towards the end of the race. There was really no ideological difference between these two candidates, both progressive Democrats. They immediately started painting this as a fight for the control of the Senate and all the issues that are at stake in the country, like abortion rights,

like defending democracy. You mentioned reproductive rights. And so did Democrats think having a woman as their nominee would sort of juice their odds in a general election? I think some Democrats thought that because on the Republican side, the reason why this race is on the map, literally on the Senate map, is because of the Republican candidate. Larry Hogan won the Republican primary. He is a super popular former governor of Maryland, not a traditional Republican in the sense that he has battled with

Trump. He has criticized the MAGA wing of his party. He thought about running for president himself and challenging former President Trump, and instead decided to run for the Senate. After Hogan declined to run two years ago to run against Chris Van Hollen, Mitch McConnell just kept at it, kept at it. And he got Hogan to jump into this race, which really changed the map for Senate Republicans. The factor that made Trone attractive as a candidate for National Democrats was the fact that he was a self-funder. They weren't planning to spend money in Maryland. And here they had a very rich Democrat who was willing to spend all of his own money. But he lost badly. Angela Also-Brooks really got the Democratic machine in the state.

Pretty much all the establishment Democrats in the state, people like Steny Hoyer, who's represented the Prince George's area for more than 40 years, got behind also Brooks. And it wasn't close at the end. You know, you hear from voters all the time that they want legislators who are willing to reach across the aisle, who are sort of more moderate. In theory, they say this is what they want. They don't always elect candidates like that. But you look at Larry Hogan. He was a wildly popular Republican governor in a fairly blue state of Maryland. And I do wonder, like, sure, he was popular as an executive branch leader, as a governor. But is there room for someone like him to pick up a seat in a Senate when it feels like you've always got to play to your team, whether it's Republican

or Democrat? It's been very hard. I don't feel like there are very many lawmakers left in the Senate who are willing to stand up independent of their party. There's a very different set of priorities for a governor versus a senator versus somebody who's creating federal rules versus state rules. And I think that something like abortion rights, for example, building coalitions, social issues, those aren't really things that governors generally are dealing with. And if they did try to do something on that, then the state's leanings would sort of keep somebody like that in check. They have no control over them, essentially, when they go to the Senate. And even if they did, they have the option

of putting in somebody who more aligns with their socially progressive views in that kind of state, or a very conservative person in a state like Louisiana, for example, where you could have a Democrat as a governor, but no chance that that person would be in the Senate. And the reason why Democrats are confident that they can do well here, Biden won Maryland by more than 30 points in 2020. And it's very difficult in this highly partisan environment to have that big of a percentage of people who are splitting their tickets, meaning somebody voting for Biden and Hogan, that's a huge percentage to have to do. All right. Well, that will be a fascinating election for us all to keep an eye on.

Let's take a quick break. And when we get back, it's time for Can't Let It Go. And we're back and it's time now for our favorite part of the show, Can't Let It Go. That's the part of the podcast where we talk about the things that we just cannot stop thinking about, politics or otherwise. And I'm going to kick things off today. So there is this Twitter account that I've sort of become obsessed with. I think you all know I love fashion. Pay attention to a lot of fashion advice online. You're styling. There is this guy. I think I pronounce his I like love fashion. Pay attention to a lot of fashion advice online. You're styling.

There is this guy. I think I pronounce his name as Derek Guy. Are you guys familiar with his Twitter account? I'm not. But what I love is that he is such the fashion connoisseur for men's fashion, which I think is necessary because you always see critiques of women politicians, women in public light about what they're wearing, what they're not wearing, how it's ill-fitting. But he does this for men. And it's just hilarious. You know, he has done complete rundowns of the best and worst dressed at the White House Correspondents Dinner. He has this comical photo of, sorry, New York Senator Chuck

Schumer saying they look like he was at a funeral. Talked about Donald Trump suits, right, which I've often been obsessed with. And I think now that we're talking about debates, I just think it's so interesting because you'll actually see this image of Joe Biden and Donald Trump. And whatever you may think of their politics, I would say their suits tend to fit in very different styles. Colors are different different too, right? I saw this story recently about the certain type of blue suit that Joe Biden, is that from this account? Maybe it's from this account. But I do think Washington is not really known for its fashion sense, right? Washington's evolved over the last, you know, couple decades from when I've moved here anyway. And when I first moved here, it felt like, you know, like decades from when I've moved here anyway. And when I first

moved here, it felt like, you know, like yellowed tuxedo shirt was kind of like the way that, you know, things were sort of the style here in fashion. And it just was kind of cringy and corny. And like, now I do think things have kind of, I think things have taken a bit more of a turn for a little bit more edgy, a little bit more modern. It's not quite as bad nerd prom as you might see. It's not quite on trend or as fashion forward as LA, obviously. I think it's easy to stand out in DC if you have a bit of taste. A bit of taste. I love that. And yeah. Well, on that note, Domenico, what can you not let go of?

Well, now I can't let go of this guy's Twitter account because that's pretty cool. And I'm going to be looking through it because previously... It's hilarious, actually. Get some tips. Previously, my only fashion critic was Asma, so... You jest, but I'm sort of. And you have changed me for the better, I would say. So what I can't let go of is this portrait that popped for King Charles, his first portrait that he sat for. And it's, there's one word I think that surmises this painting. Red. It's very unexpected.

It's very red. I was going to say, in terms of fashion choices, you can't even see what he's wearing. It's like a floating head. It is a floating head. You have to squint. What did you all think of it? I don't think I liked it at all. My take is I don't like it on paper, but I feel like if I saw it hanging in a museum,

it would be far more interesting because you would see the the brushstrokes and maybe the different hues of red. So it might be more impressive. So what the artist said about this is he said that the king's military regalia subtly fades into the background, exemplifying the signature painting style where he places greater emphasis on capturing the character and essence of subjects rather than replicating their literal appearance. He said, as a portrait artist, you get this unique opportunity to spend time with and get to know a subject. So I wanted to minimize the visual distractions and allow people to connect with the human being underneath. Still going to have a lot of people asking a lot of questions about what he really meant. I'm not sure I could ever sit for a portrait artist and allow them to interpret what they perceive of me. That's a very daunting task.

And you'd be so conscious of what you're wearing. And then in this portrait, it's just the face. It's just your floating head. The king seemed to actually like it after initially saying, well, you know, I don't know about the color choice necessarily, but he's like, but he got it. And, you know, even Camilla, the queen consort, said he captured you. And what he was saying is that he wanted to capture his face. He's saying that that was the most important thing.

That's all you see is this. I mean I literally when I saw it was like – Maybe that's what he wants you to just look at his face. Is this a symbolism of something to say about the empire, right? I mean the empire has had a lot of conquest and colonialism over its years. It wasn't necessarily a very peaceful regime always. And so initially I was like, is that what the artist is trying to allude to? Yeah, there were people who said that this looked like a poster for a horror film.

Somebody else said that this looked like one of those oil protests where a can of tomato was thrown at it. Somebody else added to the portrait. We're talking about the colonization aspect of the empire, but that's not what the artist said that he was trying to get at. I say NPR sends us on a little road trip to check it out in person. I would do a story on it.

All right, Deirdre, what can you not let go of? The thing I can't let go of is a thing I didn't actually realize was a thing, and that's these NFL schedule release videos. So all the NFL teams put out these videos to try to gin up excitement about their season, and it sort of announces their schedule for who they're playing and the various matchups. I didn't actually realize this was a thing. My husband was telling me about the—

I confess I, too, did not know this was a thing. My husband was telling me about the... I confess, I too did not know this was a thing. I'm an NFL fan. I'm a Giants fan. So I have like no excitement about the season right now. But I am married to a long suffering Bears fan. And he showed me the video, which was a takeoff on Ferris Bueller's day off. And a receiver for the team basically plays the main character and takes you through, if anyone is familiar with the Ferris Bueller Day Off, it's very like a sort of love letter movie to Chicago. And it features a lot of the key scenes. It's shot in a high school. A lot of the team members are wearing the same kind of outfits. There's a classic part of the video where the main character from the team throws to the famous line from Ferris Bueller's Day Off.

The season moves fast. If you don't slow down once in a while, you'll miss it. There's also this other video. I'm not a Patriots fan, so it pains me to admit that they actually did a really good video. And theirs is a takeoff on Good Will Hunting, where Julian Edelman and Rob Gronkowski play the Matt Damon, Ben Affleck characters. And it's also very funny. You know, personally, I don't know that this gets anybody excited, but I'm kind of with Deirdre. The fact that I'm a Jets fan, and I'm embarrassed to say that,

means that I'm not that excited about the season anyway. But the thing that for me with the NFL this week that I was just like hit me was the fact that they actually arranged some of the dates of games around Taylor Swift's Eras tour. And I was like, wait a minute. So there's so much stuff in the offseason. Another way they're trying to appeal to a younger audience. I know. I mean all this stuff that kind of goes on in the offseason that I really wasn't even aware of that the NFL kind of did as they're trying to keep people locked in. All right. Well, on that note, that is a wrap for

today's show. Our executive producer is Mithoni Mathuri. Our editor is Eric McDaniel. Our producers are Jung Yoon Han, Casey Morrell, and Kelly Wessinger. Special thanks to Krishna Dev Kalamer and Ben Swayze. I'm Asma Khalid. I cover the White House. I'm Deirdre Walsh. I cover Congress. And I'm Domenico Montanaro, senior political editor and correspondent. And thank you all, as always, for listening to the NPR Politics Podcast. Support for NPR and the following message come from the Kauffman Foundation, providing access to opportunities that help people achieve financial stability,

upward mobility, and economic prosperity, regardless of race, gender, or geography. Kauffman.org