What A Day - The Hitchhiker's Guide To Impeachment

Episode Date: January 10, 2020

US and Canadian officials think the plane that crashed in Iran was struck by a surface-to-air missile. Further investigation will require lots of countries and agencies working together, and the current circumstances aren’t perfect for a group project.  Reports say Nancy Pelosi could send the articles of impeachment to Mitch McConnell by the end of the week. We discuss what comes after that.  The magical disappearing act of former Nissan chairman Carlos Ghosn in a segment we call "The Cold Read.”   And in headlines: bipartisan action in Kansas, wax wars in Great Britain, and the transport workers strike in France.

It's Friday, January 10th. I'm Akilah Hughes. I'm Gideon Resnick. And this is What A Day, the Jeopardy! All-Stars of Daily News podcast. You don't have to do this, Gideon. You really don't. I'll take terrific podcasters for 500, Alex. On today's show, developments in the airline crash in Iran, all the questions about what an impeachment trial will look like that you were always afraid to ask, and as always, some headlines. Earlier this week, amid the ongoing crisis between Iran and the United States,

we mentioned that a Ukrainian plane carrying around 176 passengers and crew crashed near the airport in Tehran, killing everyone on board. On Thursday, American and Canadian officials said that they had reason to believe that the plane had been struck by an Iranian surface-to-air missile and that the crash was not due to a mechanical malfunction. We have intelligence from multiple sources, including our allies and our own intelligence, the evidence indicates that the plane was shot down by an Iranian surface-to-air missile. This may well have been unintentional.

This new information reinforces the need for a thorough investigation into this matter. That was Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau talking about the tragedy. So the crash happened just hours after Iran launched those ballistic missiles at U.S. bases in Iraq, which resulted in no casualties, thankfully. And according to reporting in The New York Times from Thursday, U.S. officials believe that the missiles that were fired at this plane came from an Iranian air defense system. It's called the SA-15. So there's some speculation therein that that could have been brought out at this moment to defend the airport if Iran thought that the United States would target it in this sort of back and forth that occurred,

meaning that there was reason to believe, at least at this point, that this whole tragedy may have just been accidental. Right. Meanwhile, Iran has rejected these theories about a missile strike causing the crash, even though there was allegedly no distress call from the plane before it burst into flames, which raises a bunch of questions. Yeah, of course. I mean, one of the things people were flagging on Thursday was the fact that, you know, if there were a malfunction, you would probably hear the pilots talk about it. Yeah, yeah, something like that. On Thursday, a team of Ukrainian experts came to Tehran to investigate the crash.

And part of this sort of broader investigative commission that's reportedly been put together includes specialists who have unfortunately had to deal with something like this not so long ago on a similar investigation in 2014, obviously, when a Russian-made surface-to-air missile shot down a Malaysian Airlines flight over eastern Ukraine. The passengers on board this plane this week were primarily Iranians, but also included Europeans and Canadians. Yeah, the investigation of all of this is going to be really tricky. It's going to involve a lot of countries and agencies working together. And I would say that there could be better circumstances, you know, to have a group project between these countries right now, considering. So this certainly won't be the end of the story. But in other Iran news, in Congress, there was some movement on Trump

and his war powers in Iran. Gideon, can you tell us more about that? Yeah, so this was the vote that we were talking about on a show before today's show. Basically, the House voted like we expected, 224 to 194, to force Trump to seek congressional authorization before he takes any additional action in Iran. And like we've talked about, the way that this has been framed is that most but not all of the Republicans in Congress are saying that if other members support this check on the president, this congressional check, which is what is supposed to happen, that they're effectively aligning with the country's enemies by even questioning when and how the president should have this authority. Crazy argument we could save for another day. But this resolution in and of itself is basically going to amount to

a slap on the wrist for Trump, primarily for one wonky reason. And it has to do with the structure of what they actually passed. They passed what is referred to as a concurrent resolution, which means that only the House and the Senate have to pass it for it to exist in the world and be enforceable. It doesn't go to Trump to get signed, so it doesn't become a law. So that's the kind of downside of it. It's obviously weaker. They decided to go for it in this capacity instead of doing a joint resolution, which would actually go to Trump's desk and get signed because the assumption is that why give him something that he's just going to veto and send back anyway? Yeah. So there's a sense from some Democrats in the House that this was the best way

to go. Yeah, well, we got to take the wins where we can. All right. Well, only three Republicans and Justin Amash, the only independent in the House, voted for the resolution and eight Democrats voted against it. Right. So in addition to keeping an eye on developments with the tragic plane crash and what happens with that investigation, we're going to be watching out for where this war powers enforcement actually goes in the Senate. Senator Tim Kaine has a similar resolution there that could be voted on next week. And like we said on a previous show, there were surprisingly two Republican senators saying that they would support it. And that came after they were really, really pissed about a briefing from the administration on Wednesday. Impeachment may finally be coming back from its midseason hiatus

after reports yesterday that Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi could send the articles of impeachment to Senate Majority Goblin Mitch McConnell by the end of the week. Yes. So McConnell is not super interested in hearing from additional witnesses before getting the trial underway. And with this hypothetical timeline, we might be consumed with impeachment sooner rather than later. So we're going to give you a primer on what to expect in the coming days and weeks. But first, Gideon, if the Senate impeachment trial is starting in a couple of days, how can there also be a debate next week? Great cue. There may not be, honestly, because we just don't know. Or the alternative after Tom Steyer got in is that it's going to be him and Joe Biden just staring at something 300 yards away for the entire three hours.

But, you know, the most important thing here is it looks like we may have to actually buy our own dinners. Oh, yeah. Side note, we typically get free dinner when there's a debate. Yeah, because we have to stay late. But fine. I get it. It's fine. But I digress.

Senate impeachment trial. It's a thing. It's happening. Do you want to go over some of the ground rules? Sure. So Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts will be presiding, but his role isn't a political one. It's a process one. He serves as a literal judge while the senators will assume the role of jurors, meaning they aren't asking questions directly to witnesses, although they can submit those questions to the respective lawyers in advance. But their role is really just to listen to the arguments presented and then vote. Right. And they're not allowed to talk for this entire

process, which is ridiculous. All the communication has to be in writing. I guess a silent Marco Rubio is better than a vocal one. Yeah, truly. But Roberts does have a lot of power here, even though the case will ultimately be decided by Senate votes. Among other things, House managers, which is a thing I'm going to get to in just a second, they're likely to ask Roberts to require testimony from former National Security Advisor John Bolton. And turns out Roberts has the power to allow it, regardless of Mitch McConnell's so-called rules. The only caveat is that if a senator of either party dislikes one of the chief justice's rulings, they can put it to an immediate vote on the Senate floor and majority rules. So this is less power than a typical judge has.

So, you know, like in a cinematic sense, when a judge would be like, objection sustained. You know, typically jurors don't get to say like, actually, we should vote on that sustenance. I don't know what you would call it. But yeah, they don't usually have the power to change those sorts of things. Yeah, that would really change the standard definition of like your typical jury duty that you get called for. Truly. Well, there's been speculation that Roberts will preside similarly to Chief Justice Rehnquist in the Clinton impeachment and basically do

nothing, which, you know, cool. But he might be pushed into a more substantial role. And that's because the Senate is more closely split than in the 90s. And because, again, the rules haven't officially been decided on in advance like they were in the Clinton impeachment. So he may not be able to really rest on his laurels in the same way. It's like they say, no laurel resting for the wicked. Yeah. So this means that Roberts can decide that he's going to rule specifically based on evidence. And with that in mind, he may ask to call witnesses. Also, it's hella unlikely that senators would want to challenge these sorts of rulings from him just because it's not a great look. It shows a lot

of disrespect to the high court. So, you know, it's kind of whatever he says is going to end up being the process. Yeah, right, right, right. Okay. So each side will have the opportunity to present their case, but the prosecutors are also known as impeachment managers or House managers. Now, you're going to be hearing these used interchangeably in the news because they are the same thing. And those impeachment managers will be handpicked by Nancy Pelosi to present the House's findings in the impeachment inquiry to the senators. President Trump will then presumably be represented by Cousin Vinny from My Cousin Vinny. I'm sorry, Joe Pesci, if you're listening, I do love you. And his personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani.

Do we have any sort of details, though, on who the Democratic impeachment managers will be? No, not yet. So the hard thing, again, about impeachment happening so rarely is that there's not enough instance of it for there to even be a precedent. In President Clinton's Senate impeachment trial, the then Republican House sent 13 impeachment managers to make the case that Clinton should be removed from office. And one of those 13 was Senator Lindsey Graham. It's just a less than fun, but still interesting fact. Yeah, he is just around and around. Yeah. And part of Speaker Pelosi's reasoning for not sending the articles of impeachment to the Senate yet is that she doesn't know how many impeachment managers to appoint. She could appoint one. She could appoint 10. There's not really, you know, a rule about that. But she doesn't know because she hasn't seen in writing from Mitch McConnell what his plan is for the trial.

And all of this is according to a letter she sent to colleagues on Tuesday. So lots of analysts are betting on Representative Adam Schiff from California because he was so integral to the House inquiry. But the rest of what I'm seeing is just conjecture and educated guesses about who might be there. Right, right. Could be anyone. Well, we know that Chief Justice Roberts will preside. We know that there's going to be some familiar faces from the House presenting their argument against Trump. What else can we tell people that we know for sure right now? Really just the basic mechanics, meaning after both sides' arguments have been heard,

there's going to be a vote, and Democrats will need 67 votes, which is a two-thirds majority out of 100, to impeach and remove Donald Trump from office. In the history of this country, it has never happened. But hey, it could. It could. Anything. Anything can happen. It's right. And if you have any more questions, visit crooked.com slash impeachment. It exists specifically to keep you informed. Go there. Okay, so we don't have an ad today, and it is Friday after all,

so we want to do something newsy but fun before we get to the headlines. It's a segment we've done before that we're going to do again, and we call it The Cold Read. Wait, what? Okay. Okay, Akilah, we've given you some note cards. I have them. You've never seen them before, correct?

Yeah. And you're going to present this kind of crazy news story that's on them to me and all of our friends at WOD. Are you ready? I think I'm as ready as I can be. Let it rip. Okay. is a French-Brazilian-Lebanese businessman who was appointed CEO of Nissan in 2001 and through his cost-cutting methods helped rescue the company from the brink of bankruptcy

and turned it into the number two automaker in Japan. Good for him. Yeah, nice work, Bone. Wow. Bone. Bone. The country of Japan learned to love this smart and hard-working guy. He was given the nicknames La Coste Killer and 7-Eleven for the hours he kept and was even featured as a superhero in a manga comic book series.

All right. For comparison, the head of Ford is a man named Jim Hackett. And with all due respect, he could be anyone. Might be in this room. I mean, yeah. Listen. I don't know who it anyone. Might be in this room. I mean, yeah. Listen. I don't know who it is. Ghosn, Ghosn, Ghosn, was making a very fine living with houses all over the world and a $17 million salary in 2017.

This is a lot for a company chairman by American standards, but it's even more in Japan. It was 11 times the pay of his counterpart at Toyota. Japan's culture of egalitarianism and humility clashed with Ghosn's culture of big money. And then he was arrested in late 2018 when his private jet landed in Japan after allegations of financial crimes, such as underreporting his compensation to regulators. But like, do you blame him? You know, they don't appreciate it when he makes money. If you got those fat stacks, you know. All right. Ghosn went from the lap of luxury to a 16 by 10 foot cell in a facility that used to house death row inmates.

He remained imprisoned there until March 2019 when he paid a multi-million dollar bail. He got arrested for new charges in April, paid another multi-million dollar bail and was ordered to await trial in Japan where the conviction rate is 99 percent. Whoa. He's got a shot. So you're saying there's a shot. Those orders didn't sit well with our worldly friend, Mr. Ghosn. On December 29th, 2019, Ghosn fled Japan and headed for his ancestral home in Lebanon

to escape what he called, quote, injustice and political persecution. It's not known exactly how he made it out, though early reports said he did it in a box designed for musical instruments. He's, is he very small? Go and contest this saying, quote, I was not hidden in a musical box. Okay, so he's not small. The Wall Street Journal says he had in a black box used for concert equipment and escaped via private jet. He was definitely aided at certain points by an ex-Green Beret with a history of rescuing hostages. This is what Triple Frontier on Netflix is based on.

Ghosn is in Beirut now, but his problems aren't over. The Lebanese attorney general has barred him from traveling outside the country, and Japan has issued a new warrant for his arrest. Some Lebanese prosecutors want to investigate him because he did business with Israel in 2018. Or sorry, in 2008. Israel is technically Lebanon's enemy in war. And he also allegedly owes more than $175,000 to the air charter company that helped him disappear from Japan. Wow. Two words. Gone girl. So many things about that. He escaped in a box, a green beret, heard of his plight and helped him escape in a box. Yeah. And he was like familiar enough with what was going on that he was like, oh, this cello container contains a man that I need to smuggle. Wow. And he still owes money.

Like he got, he hitched a ride, not for free. Yeah. He's got some bills. Yeah. He has like debtors everywhere. So is he going to go to jail in Lebanon?

Like, I don't know. You know, I mean, if there are enough musical boxes in that country, this man could be anywhere in the world right now. If there's a symphony in the middle of Lebanon, he is like the wind.

Yeah. Well, congratulations, Akilah. You survived the cold read. Thank you. Wait, what? Okay. Let's wrap up with some headlines. The transport worker strike against a pension overhaul introduced by French President Emmanuel Macron is now in its sixth week, making it the longest strike in the country's history. Macron is seeking to consolidate France's 42 pension plans into one universal system for public workers. His plan would therefore eliminate special regimes for some workers that currently allow them to retire before the age of 62 with full benefits. It would also introduce incentives for workers to retire instead at 64,

and penalties for those who do not. On Thursday, hundreds of thousands of demonstrators took to the streets in the fourth nationwide march since protests began. London-based uncanny valley-slash-hell, Madame Tussauds Wax Museum, has already removed their statues of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle from their royal family display after they announced on Wednesday that they're stepping down from their senior duties. Wow. They're already getting cropped out of the photos. It's like this breakup is really heating up. The intent is to mirror Harry and Meghan's, quote, progressive new role within the royal institution, which is a direct quote from the couple's official announcement.

And they'll be moved to a different part of the museum. Guess this is all supposed to sting. I'm sorry, Harry and Meghan. You're terrifying. Wax tethers are not currently giving kids nightmares. What's the movie? Us is actually based on Kansas's Democratic Governor Laura Kelly and Republican Senate Majority Leader Jim Denning proposed a big Medicaid expansion yesterday, which would add as many as 150,000 people to

the state's public health insurance program. The bill is all but certain to pass when the legislature convenes on Monday, thanks to rare, I think, bipartisan support. Republicans were willing to get on board because it also outlines a program to drive down private health insurance premiums classic win-win good job kansas and now for the biggest headline news of the day we've got something new for you to listen to john favreau's podcast the wilderness is back for a second season in season one John looked at the state of the Democratic Party following the 2016 election. And now in season two, he's talking to voters, strategists, organizers and candidates in battleground states to figure out what a path to victory looks like in 2020. Hope it's easy.

The trailer is out now and the first episode launches on Monday. So subscribe now wherever you listen to your podcast. Listen to that trailer or find out more at crooked.com slash the wilderness. And those are the headlines. That's all for today. If you like the show, make sure you subscribe, leave a review, give us a rating, make wax figures of us and then be mean to them and tell your friends to listen. By the way, if you're into reading and not just stop signs like me, What A Day is also a nightly newsletter.

Check it out and subscribe at crooked.com slash subscribe. I'm Akilah Hughes. I'm Gideon Resnick. And that's how you skip town in a big musical box. That's not a double bass. That's the Mitsubishi chairman. What a day is a product of Crooked Media. It's recorded and mixed by Charlotte Landis.

Sonia Tun is our assistant producer. Our head writer is John Milstein, and our senior producer is Katie Long. Our theme music is by Colin Gilliard and Kashaka.