This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/14/us/impeachment-reaction-talk-radio.html

The article has changed 6 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Impeachment Testimony Sends Talk Radio Shows to Familiar Sides Impeachment Testimony Sends Talk Radio Shows to Familiar Sides
(about 3 hours later)
CHICAGO — They all watched the same hearing. They just saw it differently. Very differently. They all watched the same hearing. They just saw it differently. Very differently.
A day after the first public testimony in the House impeachment inquiry, Americans had plenty to say. But whether the hearing in Washington was seen as a partisan charade or a damning blow to President Trump depended largely on a person’s pre-existing political sympathies.A day after the first public testimony in the House impeachment inquiry, Americans had plenty to say. But whether the hearing in Washington was seen as a partisan charade or a damning blow to President Trump depended largely on a person’s pre-existing political sympathies.
To better understand how the hearings are playing across the nation, reporters for The New York Times are listening to callers and hosts on talk radio shows on both ends of the political spectrum. Some shows are national, some local. They are playing in markets across the country. This is what is being said: To better understand how the hearings are playing across the nation, reporters for The New York Times listened to callers and hosts on talk radio shows on both ends of the political spectrum. Some shows were national, some local, playing in markets across the country. This is what was being said.
The evidence? Compelling, listeners agreed. The witnesses? Impressive. The president’s conduct? Impeachable without a doubt.The evidence? Compelling, listeners agreed. The witnesses? Impressive. The president’s conduct? Impeachable without a doubt.
But would it — could it? — end in Mr. Trump’s removal from office?But would it — could it? — end in Mr. Trump’s removal from office?
“Some are saying that there are some Republican senators that are, believe it or not, ready to throw him under the bus to protect their own,” said Cliff Kelley, a former Chicago alderman who was filling in as the morning host.“Some are saying that there are some Republican senators that are, believe it or not, ready to throw him under the bus to protect their own,” said Cliff Kelley, a former Chicago alderman who was filling in as the morning host.
Roosevelt, the first caller, was not as sure. He predicted that there would not be enough senators to remove Mr. Trump from office. But perhaps there would be “enough to raise eyebrows” and doom the president politically.Roosevelt, the first caller, was not as sure. He predicted that there would not be enough senators to remove Mr. Trump from office. But perhaps there would be “enough to raise eyebrows” and doom the president politically.
“His re-election, to me, is over,” Roosevelt said. “That middle is going to get shifted over to the Democratic side.”“His re-election, to me, is over,” Roosevelt said. “That middle is going to get shifted over to the Democratic side.”
All through the morning drive, callers on Chicago’s liberal talk station voiced outrage about the president, but offered mixed views of what impeachment would mean. All through the morning drive, callers on Chicago’s liberal talk station voiced outrage about the president, but they offered mixed views of what impeachment would mean.
Brad from Elk Grove Village said he was “doing good — and better every day now that we’ve finally got this in front of the public.” Ronald said Democrats should stay focused on other priorities, too. Louis said the Democratic presidential candidate platforms had been overshadowed by the impeachment hearings. Brad from Elk Grove Village said he was “doing good — and better every day now that we’ve finally got this in front of the public.” Ronald said Democrats should stay focused on other priorities, too. Louis said the Democratic presidential candidates’ platforms had been overshadowed by the impeachment hearings.
In addition to disgust for Mr. Trump, many callers shared one nagging concern: That the other side was unlikely to be persuaded.In addition to disgust for Mr. Trump, many callers shared one nagging concern: That the other side was unlikely to be persuaded.
“Impeach Trump: the evidence is already there,” a caller named Pam said. “It’s just a matter of exposing it to the public. We won’t change Republicans, Cliff. Maybe independents, perhaps.”“Impeach Trump: the evidence is already there,” a caller named Pam said. “It’s just a matter of exposing it to the public. We won’t change Republicans, Cliff. Maybe independents, perhaps.”
Mark Levin had a message for the listeners of his nationally syndicated show on Wednesday evening. There was no quid pro quo, he told them. No bribery. Nothing at all worthy of impeachment. As far as Steve from Duluth is concerned, the impeachment public hearings should not proceed until the identity of the anonymous whistleblower who started the whole inquiry is revealed.
“The Republicans did a fantastic job,” Mr. Levin said. “Ignore the phony media. Ignore the phony legal analysts.” If there is actually a whistleblower, he said.
Mr. Levin, whose program airs on hundreds of stations nationally, dismissed both the style and substance of the impeachment inquiry. He said the accounts of the witnesses were unreliable. And he claimed the real corruption was being perpetrated by Democrats. “My statement would be, you won’t tell us who this whistleblower is, so this so-called trial is over because how do we know there is a whistleblower, just cause you say there is a whistleblower?” Steve asked in a call to “Sound Off,” a weekday radio program in Minnesota. “How do we know there is one?”
“You’re a liar, Schiff,” he said, referring to Representative Adam B. Schiff, the Democrat presiding over the hearing. “Take a lie-detector test. Or step down from the chairmanship.” Brad Bennett, the host of the three-hour morning show, quickly agreed. “Actually Steve, that is not a bad idea.” He noted that Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, has said that a Senate trial needed to expose the whistleblower’s identity to investigate whether there is any relationship between the whistleblower and Joseph R. Biden Jr., the former vice president and presidential candidate.
Mr. Levin, echoing the claims of Mr. Trump and other Republicans, said the impeachment was little more than a way to undermine the will of the people. He dismissed the possibility that Mr. Trump tried to bribe Ukraine. And he told his listeners to beware of other accounts of the process, to not trust the press, to think for themselves. “I thought it was an interesting theory,” Bennett said, adding, “For example, if they find out who the whistleblower is and they find out this guy was an operative, worked on the Biden’s campaign, was involved with him, maybe did some work with him, that would throw the whole thing out. Wouldn’t it?”
“They keep throwing around bribery because their base is stupid, the media is stupid and ideological, and they figure you are,” Mr. Levin said. “But you’re not.” On the show, Steve — one in a parade of callers who made it clear that they believed President Trump has been unfairly accused — insisted that the priority should be determining the existence of a whistleblower at all. “Yeah,” Steve told the host, “but I still think a statement should be put out there that questions, how do we know there is whistleblower if you won’t tell us who this person is?”
Others called after Steve.
Tom said he does not view a quid pro quo “as anything other than the president having the legitimate ability to maneuver on foreign policy. I am more concerned not with the government being for sale, but the president being handcuffed.”
And Mark, from Moose Lake, said he believes the whole matter has kept Congress from tackling national issues such as balancing the budget or working on the border wall.
“They are so busy on this impeachment hearing and all the concentration is going into that,” he said, “that the constituents of this country are being overlooked right now because they are not doing their job.”
There was little urgency to dissect the impeachment hearings during four hours of morning conservative talk radio in Montana. Aaron Flint, the host for KBUL in Billings, had plenty to say, but he felt he had already said it on Wednesday.
“If you want to hear my reaction to this impeachment circus yesterday, I think Adam Schiff blew it right with the opener,” Mr. Flint said, directing listeners to the station’s website where he blasted the Democratic head of the House Intelligence Committee.
“How about this, Adam Schiff?” Mr. Flint said in Wednesday’s recording. “Why don’t you come back to us when you actually have evidence? Why are you wasting our time right now? Why aren’t you working on important things like the United States-Mexico-Canada trade agreement?”
Impeachment, Mr. Flint declared, was a “childish endeavor” and a “coup attempt.”
And so he set aside the subject on Thursday, conducting interviews instead with a state senator who lives four miles from the Canadian border, a local historian who published a book about World War I veterans, and with a Democratic candidate for Congress who touted his upbringing on the family ranch.
The candidate, Matt Rains, fielded a few listener calls, but none asked him about impeachment, either.
“After everything the Democrats have done to this country the past three years, why should anyone trust a Democrat?” asked one of the callers, Matt from Columbia Falls.
“My frustrations are yours, Matt,” Mr. Rains responded.
“There is very little in government right now that is being productively done,” Mr. Rains had lamented on the air earlier.
National news briefs from Fox News Radio mentioned impeachment but quickly turned to other headlines. The big local stories involved an overturned fuel truck and the centennial convention of the Montana Farm Bureau.
A tease for Sean Hannity’s afternoon show promised plenty of impeachment talk, though. And when the airwaves moved on to The Rush Limbaugh Show, Mr. Limbaugh jumped right in.
“Ladies and gentlemen,” Mr. Limbaugh began, “the Schiff has hit the fan.”
For Arnie Arnesen, the host of a left-leaning talk show in Concord, N.H., the impeachment hearings were a civics lesson, a reminder of the strength of the government, an illustration of what it means to be American.
Of William B. Taylor, the top United States diplomat in Ukraine, and George P. Kent, a senior State Department official in charge of Ukraine policy, she said, “I wanted to be one of those two men. I so admired not only their intellect but their compass and their sense of moral outrage.”
“To me it was not about impeachment,” she said. “It was an education for me about a government that I didn’t ever quite appreciate.”
“Civic education,” said Russell Muirhead, a professor of democracy and politics at Dartmouth College and a guest on the show. “That’s what these hearings are all about. They’re secondarily about impeachment. Their first purpose is to educate people.”
But this is New Hampshire, so the conversation quickly shifted away from Capitol Hill and toward the presidential primaries. What did the entry of Deval Patrick, a two-term former governor of Massachusetts, mean for the race? If elected, could Elizabeth Warren really tank the economy, as the ultrawealthy have warned? Is Mr. Biden’s centrism appealing to New Hampshire voters?
And how do all these candidates deal with the impeachment proceedings in Washington, as they fly in and out of New Hampshire? “What I’m trying to figure out is, if you’re running for president right now, how do you run with this as your backdrop?” Ms. Arnesen asked.
She ended the show by playing a song introduced by Ken Barnes, her co-host, as “Trump’s theme.” It was “Liar,” by Queen.