CRAZY ‘Hardball’: Hearing Had ‘Patriotic Goosebumps’ Featuring ‘Outstanding’ Goldman

Listen to the Article!

The crazy train was more like a Japanese bullet train on Wednesday’s Hardball following the first round of House impeachment hearings. Why? Well, MSNBC host Chris Matthews and his panel of Resistance cheerleaders gushed that the hearing gave them “patriotic goosebumps” led by the “calm” “great,” and “outstanding” Democratic counsel Daniel Goldman (who was a former MSNBC contributor). 

In contrast, they lambasted Republicans as “bull[ies]” who are disobeying their oaths of office by not supporting the removal of the Trump administration. And as for their counsel, they determined GOPer Steve Castor was a “dunce.”

 

 

MSNBC legal analyst Glenn Kirschner asserted that he “love[s] all the facts” and “an overarching story and an inclusive tale being told by heroes like Bill Taylor” that gave him “patriotic goosebumps” that showed the President’s assertions to be “a lie” like how there was collusion and obstruction (in his mind).

Matthews added that “the witnesses were excellent” which led Kirschner to reiterate that Taylor and George Kent gave him “patriotic goosebumps” because “[t]hey don’t have a dog in the fight” and “are not Never Trumpers.”

As for Goldman, Matthews hailed “the battle of the counsels” with their pal having been “great” making “every word...important” while “[t]he other guy was a dunce” and “got nothing done.”

Meanwhile, the always dramatic Cynthia Alksne boasted that “the great, epic battle is being set up with Goldman” facing off next Wednesday against EU Ambassador Gordon Sondland. 

Showing just how overly invested she is in impeachment, Alksne told viewers to “[t]ake off work, get your, you know, fire going in your popcorn because that is an epic showdown between Goldman and Sondland, the liar.”

Before a break, Matthews claimed that Republicans “were really an unpleasant group today” with “a bully thing going on” and referred to “that guy with his shirt off all time.” 

So unless he was referring to Ohio Republican Jim Jordan’s habit of not wearing a sport coat or mistook someone for former Congressmen Chris Lee (R-NY) or Aaron Schock (R-IL), he knows something we don’t.

In the next block, the lionizing of Goldman and mockery of Castor continued (click “expand”):

MATTHEWS: What do you make of his presentation — the Republican counsel there? Cause I get the feeling he was a down beaten staffer who was afraid he was going to look like two big a big shot, so he avoided that. So he’s kind of low-keying it. 

ALKSNE: Low-keying it.

MATTHEWS: Whereas the other guy, Danny Goldman, had tremendous confidence and he had, obviously, the support of the majority members. He was willing to be the tyro [sic?].

MATTHEWS: Danny Goldman was outstanding. He kept it focused. He was calm. He moved it along and this guy was sort of all over the map. He can do amazing things with his facial expressions. Have you seen?

MATTHEWS: Yeah.

ALKSNE: He can move his whole face around. He's maybe in the wrong business. 

MATTHEWS: He had no notes either. Did you notice that? He was winging it. 

Kirschner took particular interest in mocking Jordan (click “expand”):

I don't think the Republican attacks worked. When you look at the Jim Jordan, he's doing the Jim Jordan garble thing where “you talked to four people in six days and three levels of hearsay and a partridge in a pear tree.” And, you know, I don’t think of that was effective and, at its core, here’s what Jordan was complaining about. He was saying, “look this is all hearsay information, secondhand, thirdhand.” Well, yeah, President Trump is prohibiting the first-hand witnesses, the direct witnesses from testifying, so you can't complain about hearsay information. It's like the old line about you can't kill your parents and then cry and complain that you're an orphan. And that's what Jordan was doing. So if you peel back the Jordan garble, it's a bunch of nonsense.

In the block after the bottom of the hour, Republican Congressman-turned-liberal MSNBCer David Jolly ruled that Republicans were “not interested” in fulfilling “their oath” of office by “acting as defense attorneys for the President” and not being ardent impeachment supporters.

Giving his new party some unsolicited advice, he implored them to make a “political case” to voters that Donald Trump has been the person who’s been trying to steal the 2020 election.

Try not to laugh.

Closing out the show, Matthews harkened back to advice his father had from his career as a court reporter, which was that if one is guilty, a jury trial provides the best option while the innocent should aim for a bench trial. 

For why he told that story, Matthews determined that, in the impeachment inquiry, he’ll side “with the judge,” which he symbolized as “the straight reporters of the major newspapers, the wire services, and the best political journalists.”

Whatever, Chris.

To see the relevant transcript from MSNBC’s Hardball on November 13, click “expand.”

MSNBC’s Hardball
November 13, 2019
7:06 p.m. Eastern

GLENN KIRSCHNER: So yeah I think this phone call now with Sondland saying Ukraine is ready to move forward, how do we interpret that? Bribery successful, mission accomplished. That's what that is and I agree with Cynthia. I love all of the facts and I love an overarching story and an inclusive tale being told by heroes like Bill Taylor. 50 years, I get patriotic goosebumps listening to that guy, but now we need a message. We need to tell it like it is because what this is arms for political dirt. It’s arms for political dirt and I think — you know, we've heard no obstruction, no collusion, which was a lie. We’ve heard perfect call, perfect call which was a lie, but the truth is this is arms for political dirt. That's the message. 

(....)

7:08 p.m. Eastern

CHRIS MATTHEWS: I thought the witnesses were excellent and I like the — the human interest part of it. I like Tom [sic] Maloney of New York state when he said wait a minute, let's talk about you for a second since nobody knees who you are, Bill Taylor. You graduated from West Point. We all know what West Point is. It’s rigorous. It’s serious. It’s mostly engineers, serious, straight arrows come out of there. We know that you come in fourth in a class of 800 in any school is pretty amazing and we also know in the heat of the Vietnam War, ‘69 he graduated, he chose infantry. Not to go somewhere and become some egghead at the Pentagon. He went out in the jungle as opposed to guess who. 

KIRSCHNER: Yeah that's why — that’s why 

MATTHEWS: Guess who bone spur is? 

KIRSCHNER: Yeah.

MATTHEWS: Okay I think that was pretty smart. 

KIRSCHNER: And that's why he — these guys give you patriotic goosebumps. They don’t have a dog in the fight. The are not Never Trumpers. They're in there just telling it like it is. They've been doing the peoples work for, in George Kent's case, 27 years and, in Bill Taylor’s case, 50 years and that’s why I think the American people can put faith in what they say.

[SHOUTING]

MATTHEWS: By the way, the battle of the counsels. I want to get to this. There was two counsels up there today — 

CYNTHIA ALKSNE: Right.

MATTHEWS: Danny Goldman and this guy Castor. Okay. 

CYNTHIA ALKSNE: Right.

MATTHEWS: I think Goldman was great.

ALKSNE: I think Goldman was great too.

MATTHEWS: Every word was important. The other guy was a dunce. The other guy got nothing done. 

ALKSNE: But — but you know what he’s —

MATTHEWS: Nothing. This guy Castor —

ALKSNE: — the great, epic battle is —

MATTHEWS: — I don't even know what he was doing. 

ALKSNE: — being set up with Goldman because going back to the bombshell with Sondland —

MATTHEWS: Yeah.

ALKSNE: — and this phone call, Sondland is coming in next Wednesday. Take off work, get your, you know, fire going in your popcorn because that is an epic showdown between Goldman and Sondland, the liar. 

MATTHEWS: Well, let’s go. Democratic counsel Dan Goldman, as I said, also pushed back against the President’s claim that Gordon Sondland and others that there's no quid pro quo. 

(....)

7:14 p.m. Eastern

MATTHEWS: They were really an unpleasant group today, especially that guy with his shirt off all the time. The guy who wears with the shirt all the time. It’s a bully stunt. There’s a bully thing going on in there.

(....)

7:19 p.m. Eastern

MATTHEWS: What do you make of his presentation — the Republican counsel there? Cause I get the feeling he was a down beaten staffer who was afraid he was going to look like two big a big shot, so he avoided that. So he’s kind of low-keying it. 

ALKSNE: Low-keying it.

MATTHEWS: Whereas the other guy, Danny Goldman, had tremendous confidence and he had, obviously, the support of the majority members. He was willing to be the tyro [sic?].

MATTHEWS: Danny Goldman was outstanding. He kept it focused. He was calm. He moved it along and this guy was sort of all over the map. He can do amazing things with his facial expressions. Have you seen?

MATTHEWS: Yeah.

ALKSNE: He can move his whole face around. He's maybe in the wrong business. 

MATTHEWS: He had no notes either. Did you notice that? He was winging it. 

LARRY PREIFFER: Well, I think he also got undercut by the President —

ALKSNE: Right.

PFEIFFER: — when the President, you know, tweeted out what I did was good. 

ALKSNE: Yeah. He's not allowed to do the obvious defense which is it's not impeachable. 

MATTHEWS: You can't fall back with this President. 

ALKSNE: You can't fall back.

MATTHEWS: And all the — it seems to me — here's my question, television viewers you all watched this on television, very few people are in the room. Did it work? 

KIRSCHNER: I don't — I don't think —

MATTHEWS: I think it worked, yeah.

KIRSCHNER: — the Republican attacks worked. When you look at the Jim Jordan, he's doing the Jim Jordan garble thing where “you talked to four people in six days and three levels of hearsay —

MATTHEWS: He was cute like that.

KIRSCHNER: — and a partridge in a pear tree.” And, you know, I don’t think of that was effective and, at its core, here’s what Jordan was complaining about. He was saying, “look this is all hearsay information, secondhand, thirdhand.” Well, yeah, President Trump is prohibiting the first-hand witnesses, the direct witnesses from testifying, so you can't complain about hearsay information. It's like the old line about you can't kill your parents and then cry and complain that you're an orphan. And that's what Jordan was doing. So if you peel back the Jordan garble, it's a bunch of nonsense.

(....)

7:24 p.m. Eastern

KIRSCHNER: They were building this brick by brick and it's a good start. And now they have to follow it up with some frankly more powerful, compelling, targeted witnesses who are going to give the American people something to grab onto like arms for political dirt, something. 

ALKSNE: Right, and you know what else? We're going to have a bombshell day when Sondland testifies because he has been lying. He's been saying, “I didn't know about the Bidens, I didn't know about the July 10th meeting. The President didn't say that.”

MATTHEWS: Yeah.

ALKSNE: The cross exam will be so dramatic, people will actually watch it. And you will see then, I predict because I think Danny Goldman's really good on cross. You will see that the White House has been lying about this. 

MATTHEWS: Okay

ALKSNE: And one thing Glenn and I know from trying cases the minute you prove the main witness is a liar, you've got ‘em.

(....)

7:32 p.m. Eastern

DAVID JOLLY: Yeah, let's deconstruct some of these — these arguments. You're right. Nunes was feeding the conspiracy base that works among some Republican circles. Nunes also opened by saying this is just the next step of what the Democrats tried to do to Trump during the Mueller investigation. Well, Devin Nunes, it wasn't the Democrats that launched the Mueller investigation. It was Trump's DOJ, and as for Jim Jordan saying that — that the — in the meetings with Zelensky Zelensky wasn't aware, the crime was not in Zelensky being aware, the crime was in the conspiracy, the crime was in the scheme and all of corroborating evidence supports the fact that Trump was scheming to withhold aid and as for John Ratcliffe, it wasn’t just about the Trump phone call. That is a distraction. It is about a pattern of behavior, a consciousness of guilt and an effort by Donald Trump that we now know was in direct contact with Ambassador Sondland to in fact extract this concession from the Ukraine president. What we saw today was not a GOP interested in their oath. Even when they were pursuing a case to try to deconstruct the witnesses, even when they were saying, chipping away, if you will, making the hearsay argument, they weren't acting as fact finders, Chris, they were acting as defense attorneys. That is not their role to defend the President of the United States. Their role today was to get to the facts of impeachable activity. 

(....)

7:35 p.m. Eastern

JOLLY: Look, they're playing defense to the 2020 strategy to prevent erosion of their base. They're trying to prevent any strong hit from being landed. Here's — here’s where I think there is an opportunity from Democrats that I saw today that may have been missing and it's this. An impeachment argument requires the constitutional case and political case. The constitutional case is the facts we’re hearing that the President wanted an investigation into the Bidens. And — and the constitutional case is about Trump. The political case is about the American people and about the voters and I think the case that Democrats could make to the voters is, look, Trump tried to steal the next election from you. He tried to cheat by this next election by using foreign aid to dig up dirt on his opponent and tip the balance of the election in his favor and secondly, voter, he jeopardized America's national security, not the Ukraine's and the reason is by withholding aid he emboldened Russian aggression and Russia is our enemy, and the President didn't care. Make the case about the American people as much as you make it about Donald Trump's behavior. 

(....)

7:58 p.m. Eastern

MATTHEWS: Our father, who worked in the Philadelphia court system for three decades, once gave me the remarkable advice. If you're guilty, he said, always ask for a jury because over 30 years as a court reporter, he found juries largely unpredictable, so if the evidence is weighing heavily against you, he said, the smart move, he came to realize, is simply taking your chances with those 12 people sitting together on the side of the courtroom. Now if you're innocent, he argued, just the opposite. Let a judge decide the case. A judge will look at the evidence and see it doesn't add up. He will see the argument being put forward by the prosecutors and know they're puffing up a weak case. If you're innocent, put your faith in a professional judge. As I was listening to Ambassador Bill Taylor and George Kent today, I thought these guys know what they're talking about. They answer questions without parroting the same words. They're calm, clear, and ready to sit there all day dealing with reality and they don’t strike me as knee-jerk partisans. So I'm going with the judge on this one, I'm going with the straight reporters of the major newspapers, the wire services, and the best political journalists. The President tried using the power of his office to extort some dirt he can use on his rivals and those are the facts.

NB Daily Congress Trump Impeachment Conservatives & Republicans Liberals & Democrats MSNBC Hardball Video David Jolly Chris Matthews Donald Trump
Curtis Houck's picture


Sponsored Links