Ken Buck Explains MAGA’S Control Over the GOP - podcast episode cover

Ken Buck Explains MAGA’S Control Over the GOP

Jul 02, 202425 min
--:--
--:--
Listen in podcast apps:
Metacast
Spotify
Youtube
RSS

Episode description

Jon Stewart sits with former Colorado Representative Ken Buck to discuss his early departure from Congress, his disagreement with the MAGA component of the Republican Party, and the precedent set by Trump’s criminal trial and verdict.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Transcript

Speaker 1

You're listening to Comedy Central.

Speaker 2

Hey there, it's Michael Costa.

Speaker 1

The Daily Show's on a break this week, but don't worry.

Speaker 3

We handpicked some of our favorite recent moments from the show in case you missed him.

Speaker 2

We'll be back with brand new episodes next week.

Speaker 1

Until then, enjoy today's episode. What About the Program? My guest tonight a Republican who used to represent Colorado's fourth District in Congress for nine years until his resignation in March. Please welapon in the program, Former Congressman Ken Buck, How

are you now? For those in the aunis you might not know so, sir, you are a congressman for nine years, conservative bona fides, I mean, impeccable and yet not strong enough in fealty to the Trump world that you were immune from the pressure and the penalties that they might place on you.

Speaker 2

Well, Donald Trump's not a conservative.

Speaker 1

Exactly, but now you're the rhino you with and you and I probably disagree on most things.

Speaker 2

Hopefully everything.

Speaker 1

Well done, sir, well done? But what is the pressure? Like? You know, I see so many Republican stalwarts who are on the record as saying this man is a con man, this man is not worthy of the highest office of the presidency. This man defiles our great country. I'm supporting him in twenty twenty four. What is the mental process of that.

Speaker 2

Well, it's really pretty simple.

Speaker 3

In order to get elected, you've got to get fifty one percent of the vote, and so there's this combination of wanting to do the right thing. So you run for office, and then you need to be popular in order to win. And the Republican Party now a majority of Republican primary voters are MAGA supporters, and so you don't want to make the man mad who is really in control or strongly influencing the MAGA voters. So those folks are making a calculation.

Speaker 2

They want to stay in office.

Speaker 1

What is there in your mind? What's the percentage of that? How much of it is cynical calculation, and how much of it is people like yourself leave And they are filled in by real ideologues who believe in that message, the message of it's really whatever Trump wants, having nothing to do with conservative principle.

Speaker 3

I think that there's one hundred percent of the folks who are running for office who recognize that if they're going to win, a Republican primary.

Speaker 2

They need to be Trump supporters.

Speaker 1

Right, and that's what's happening. Was there discussion behind the scenes in Congress where people would say, I want this to end. Do they feel hostage to that?

Speaker 2

I'm in both parties, honestly, in both parties.

Speaker 3

There is a real problem with the folks who are at the head of the ticket.

Speaker 1

Right.

Speaker 2

Obviously Dean Phillips felt that way on the left.

Speaker 1

Sure, no, I was a big Phillips supporter. I really thought he was going to go all the way. Remind me again, who is Dean Phillips now? But you've said so you've watched this process play out with Donald Trump. Would you say it's fair that it literally drove you from Congress.

Speaker 3

I would not win a primary in the next election, or if I want a primary, it would be because there were so many people who wanted to run against me that they split.

Speaker 1

And what was the crime that you committed? Because your positions hadn't changed, So tell me the crime you committed.

Speaker 3

So I don't know that it's a crime. Now that we're talking about verdicts and things like that, let's just trying.

Speaker 2

To stay away from whatever crime you.

Speaker 3

Are not under oath in Anyway, whatever crime I committed, the statute of limitations probably hasn't run, so I want to make sure I'm clear there. But my goal in leaving Congress was to leave undefeated and unindicted, and I have accomplished that goal.

Speaker 2

So I'm very happy about.

Speaker 1

You gotta aim higher next time, you gotta. But you do have a frustration and complaints about the process of this Donald Trump trial. I think you called it shameful president. No, shameful president, is that correct? A shameful precedent?

Speaker 3

I think it is a bad precedent. And I was a prosecutor for twenty five years.

Speaker 1

Why do you think it's a bad president.

Speaker 3

It is a bad precedent because Lady Justice, blindfold, scale sword, the image of Lady Justice.

Speaker 1

We went out in the seventies. I'm very familiar.

Speaker 2

In this case.

Speaker 3

The blindfold came off, the blindfold is on because people shouldn't be targeted and the system is flawed.

Speaker 2

I'm not saying that doesn't happen.

Speaker 3

People shouldn't be targeted because they're white or black, man or woman, Republican Democrat, rich Poor. The bindfold came off and Donald Trump was targeted.

Speaker 1

Now, how was he I'm curious how he was targeted.

Speaker 3

So Cyrus Vance was the previous DA declined this case. Alvin Bragg brought a case where the misdemeanor had the statute of limitations that expired, found a felony to extend that statue limitations, and then brought the case.

Speaker 1

I found a felony or there was a felony.

Speaker 3

Well, there wasn't a felony for the previous district attorney.

Speaker 1

I mean many times district attorneys will say, I don't think the evidence gets to that standard, but another district attorney might come in and say, oh, no, that's a felony. He's doing that in order to manipulate an election. That's a felony.

Speaker 3

So this district attorney declined the case. Alvin Bragg declined the case and then brought the case. And there was significant political pressure to bring the case. And that's something that our justice system needs to be insulated from, and the federal system has done a fairly good job of being insulated. You've got Hunter Biden, you've got special counsel appointed on.

Speaker 1

But Hunter Biden wouldn't be up against charges if he wasn't Hunter Biden, he'd be just some dude who brought a gun somewhere, he wouldn't be facing the charges he's facing.

Speaker 3

Well, we probably disagree about that. I think that hopefully Hunter Biden.

Speaker 1

You think Hunter Biden would be facing rather than like a rehab stint or something along those lines. You think the attention on Hunter Biden would be occurring whether his name was Hunter Biden or not.

Speaker 3

I prosecute hundreds of gun cases, some of them because drug dealers, drug users, drug addicts had purchased a gun.

Speaker 1

Yes, but doesn't that say more about this country's view on drug cases and how we prosecute them and how we excuse white collar crime. We basically have a bargain with white collar crime where we say, how about if you give us like five percent of it and everything I'll be calling like, isn't isn't that not speak to political targeting? But the way that we diminish white collar crimes. I mean, two thousand and eight, the financial system collapsed and one dude went to jail for like three months.

I mean I think Martha Stewart did a longer stint, which.

Speaker 3

Was a white collar crime, by the way, But yeah, I think that I was a white collar prosecutor for much of my twenty five years. Absolutely, a black kid walks into a bank, robs a bank. Twenty years a white guy at a bank steals millions of dollars compared to twelve hundred dollars, gets off with probation or goes to a camp in Florida for a few months.

Speaker 2

Absolutely inequitable. Absolutely in Congress.

Speaker 1

And so couldn't you look at this as actually not a shameful president, but an unbelievably positive step in sending a message that the low level of corruption that seems to be the center of our political life is unacceptable. I mean not the way out of workout it. But I was not talking to I didn't think that was company apologies. No, no, you all get bonuses, yes, exactly.

Speaker 3

So it is a dangerous president in my mind because when we start charging former presidents, and I'm not saying that. Look, you think what Donald Trump did in Atlantic City with the casinos and other things, there was fraud and it maybe went beyond civil fraud. And there are plenty of things that people could look at and say that that's a criminal case.

Speaker 2

I think when you look at a former president and.

Speaker 3

He has gone up, how many civil cases now and for criminal cases.

Speaker 1

But let's be clear. I mean Donald Trump didn't come into office and boy scout, he was probably one of the most sued individuals in New York State history. I mean his first lawyer was Roy Cone. You don't hire roy Cone and say to him like and I want to make sure everything's done on the up and up. Like roy Cone, I think, was Donald Trump's lawyer, and Satan's lawyer. I think, and if I remember correctly, even Satan would say to him, like pick it down in Nottroya,

that's a little bit. But his bills. He did not pay his bills. But my point is this is a continuation of a process. So the targeting aspect of it. Look a healthy country would have viewed what Donald Trump did from the election day through January sixth, the way that he meticulously and relentlessly pursued all avenues to overturn a democratic election. That's what a healthy country would deal with. But a healthy country also looks at other aspects of

what seemed to be fraud. If you have a home office and you put it on your taxes, but you don't really have a home office, that's a problem for you is it not? Yes? Why isn't Why aren't they say like it's just a bookkeeping era of one hundred

and thirty thousand dollars. Donald Trump colluded with his lawyer and a publisher of a major tabloid to buy and bury stories not a crime that he would deem hurtful to his election and then use the finances that he paid for those stories and put them down as not that that is a crime.

Speaker 3

He didn't put him down. He put him down in a ledger as not a payment for it. But so what what would he Well, you can falsify your own books. You just can't falsify your books when you submit him to the I R s oh.

Speaker 1

So when he had sitted him, he said this is he.

Speaker 2

Said it was a legal expense. It wasn't a campaign expense.

Speaker 1

I understand the point you're making. So here's where this takes us. I think I don't believe Donald Trump is the sole threat to our democracy. I truly don't. I think he is a symptom of a dissatisfaction that people have with the democratic system where if you have money and you're powerful, you can go it was on my ledger, is a legal express it's not a real it's not a legal expers, it's not for my election. It's I think they see that his prescription of our system is correct.

The system is rigged, and people's dissatisfaction with that is what leads to Donald Trump being able to command that dissatisfaction. Where I would disagree with him is I don't think he wants to drain the swamp. I think he wants the deed to the swamp signed over to him so that he can turn America into just another subsidiary of the Trump organization. But I don't know. So my question to you would be, why is it bad precedent to

pursue that case legally? Donald Trump? If he pursued the election fraud cases through the courts and they impaddled a grand jury and then it went to a trial with a jury of peers and they decided on it, that's not illegitimate. And so why is this illegitimate? And by the way, that's my lawyer calling right now with a first of all, is that really your ring tone? Like? Is your ring tone? Baby? Go nappy? All right?

Speaker 4

Sorry, getting back to our democracy.

Speaker 1

Look, I just find all this high dudgeon really disingenuous. The prosecutor ran on getting Donald Trump. Well he's the DA. He runs on weeding out corruption, right?

Speaker 2

Can I answer that?

Speaker 1

Please?

Speaker 3

I was a prosecutor, uh ran five years twenty five, but I read three separate times. Okay, I ran on, we've got a combat violent crime. We've got to go after repeat offenders. Never ran on I'm gonna get that guy.

Speaker 1

But you could run on I'm getting white collar cruption. Alvin Bragg didn't say I'm gonna get Trump. What he said was, I'm the most qualified. This guy has a record in New York decades long of corruption, and it's I think it's Look, if you were Dick Tracy and you wanted to be the thing, wouldn't you be like, I'm gonna get Scarface or whoever one of the Dick

Tracy guys Like this was a guy pulling that. And the second point to that would be this in twenty sixteen, what was one of the platforms that Donald Trump ran on, let's get crooked Hillary.

Speaker 3

Thank god he is not a prosecutor, I understand, but do you get my point?

Speaker 1

The point is this guy ran on Hillary is crooked, and I'm gonna put her in jail, and then with buy and he said the Biden crime faily is crooked and I'm going to put them in jail. And then a prosecutor in New York said, I have evidence you've committed a felony, so we're going to put you on trial. And he's like, what how dare you? Sir? What are we talking about? That's only what is this? What are we dealing with? I'm about to go to jail, aren't I? Sorry?

Speaker 2

Respectfully, please apples and oranges.

Speaker 3

Because you've got someone in a political system, and how many people in America believe what a politician says?

Speaker 1

Sorry not hey, tickets are free. I will throw you out of here. Respectfully. We're having a conversation. This is not Rome.

Speaker 2

A prosecutor walks into a courtroom.

Speaker 3

And tells a lie, and that prosecutor loses a law license and probably goes to prison.

Speaker 1

Exactly.

Speaker 3

So the difference between Alvin Braggs saying I am going after that person and Donald Trump saying that person should go to prison is two different forums.

Speaker 1

Who has the more power? Who has more a candidate, no, the president and someone running for president. This is kind of a crazy argument you're making no, no, no.

Speaker 2

No, let me finish Bill Barr.

Speaker 3

Great Attorney General Merrick Garland, Great Attorney General Merrick Garland appoints a special counsel and then puts the report out that says that Joe Biden should not be prosecuted because he's a kind gentleman with a bad memory, something to that effect.

Speaker 1

Mary Cowdy said, but okay, well it's close. What he said was he would present to the jury as a kindle jenneral which means I don't think we can win this case because I think he's too sympathetic a figure. Okay, yeah, okay, very different.

Speaker 2

I apologize. I'm not trying to slander.

Speaker 1

It's just day, no objection.

Speaker 2

What's the I don't know, all right, it's long a time to go.

Speaker 1

But the point being that if a candidate says I'm going to get this person, then that's all Alvin Bragg was at that time as a candidate. So why aren't you holding Donald Trump, who's running for president, to the same standard that you would hold Alvin Bragg? And not only that, when Donald Trump was president, he did in panel a special prosecutor to go after the Russian collusion hoax that John Durham Panel, and that was there to

try and get charges against Hillary Cullon. You can't be mad at the Democrats for committing murder just because your team only committed attempted murder Like that just doesn't fly. They were successful in their prosecution as opposed to those other cases where you just tried to get her.

Speaker 3

So Donald Trump never had the authority to request a search warrant, put handcuffs on somebody, prosecute somebody is always done by an independent Department of Justice. On the other hand, Alvin Bragg ran for office to get that authority to do those very things. It's two separate situations, not solely. And also those things come with a process. He can't just go in there and go arrest that guy. This isn't navalney.

Speaker 1

This is a grand jury was impaneled of normal New Yorkers, not Alvin Brack and he presented his evidence and they came back and said, yeah, there's a case here. So then they impaneled the jury and then both sides got to choose.

Speaker 2

You can indict a ham Sandwich, that's what a grand jury.

Speaker 1

Is, okay, but generally you wouldn't convict a ham Sandwich. Because at some point twelve New Yorkers would go, that's a the hand sandwich.

Speaker 2

And we will see what an appeals court does.

Speaker 3

Look, you're putting me in an unenviable position of defending Donald Trump.

Speaker 2

I've known in a long time.

Speaker 1

I'm putting you in a position of defending the process that he was put through. That process has standards. You said it yourself. An appeals court is going to look at this. There are many safeguards within our legal system, and he's getting the benefit of almost all of them in a way that poor New Yorkers will never get a sniff of.

Speaker 2

I agree both.

Speaker 1

So he's getting deuier process than anybody has ever gotten. So I don't understand just because you don't like the result. He doesn't like the result of the election. Our elections are a fraud and we're a third world country. He doesn't like the result of a criminal case. Our courts are a fraud. What would make them better if they did what I wanted? That's not our system. That's a monarch.

Speaker 3

I think what would make them better in his mind if they didn't convict him.

Speaker 2

That's my point.

Speaker 3

Yeah, but I don't think he wants justice in this country. I don't think he's standing up and saying we need justice. He said, I've been saying the election's stolen. So let's see if we can election in congress. I didn't win in the courts, so let's let's go to congresce. I wanted to certify those electors.

Speaker 1

By the way, you and I, you walked out here and you said to me, this is just fifteen minutes ago. I promised I wouldn't do this. You said to me, I'll bet we don't agree on anything, and yet sir, here you are agreeing daytime. If we could do this, sir, I just get repaired.

Speaker 2

I retrack my previous comments.

Speaker 1

I will have the snographer note those in the how do we My point in the first segment was the courts have been a really important stop gap. I think our courts are there is a two tiered system, and poor people without access get screwed. But I do think it's played an important role in holding up certain things in terms of corruption. I think the news media has

forgotten that that can be part of their role. Is that something that you think could bring a sense more of an established reality and earned authority from the media that could create some parameters that we can all sort of agree on. Is that something that you think would be possible.

Speaker 3

I appreciate the question. I'm no longer a defense attorney now I could go to that. So I think we went from Walter Cronkite and Dan Rather to entertainment.

Speaker 2

And I think the problem.

Speaker 1

Are you looking at me? I had nothing to do with this.

Speaker 3

I think the problem right now is everybody gets their news sources in silos, and they just keep getting reinforced with certain ideas. I went to a neighbor's house the day after the twenty twenty election. Their flag was upside down.

Speaker 1

We live next to the Alitos. That's crazy.

Speaker 3

I knocked on the door and asked them your flags.

Speaker 2

I thought they made a mistake.

Speaker 1

Oh gosh, but it was they were sending a message. Oh yeah, it's a crazy mess.

Speaker 3

There were kids playing across the street, the refrigerator gas in the tank, there was what's the thought?

Speaker 1

It was a dystopian like the Last of Us kind of it. Yeah, they were falling apart. I wonder too, if the algorithm, you know, has played a role. You know, people can say like, oh, they're in their silos, But I think also the algorithms of social media incentivize you to more and more radical content. They want to keep you engaged in the same way that the news media

needs kind of fear and urgency. I always say it's it's built for nine eleven, but in the absence of nine to eleven, they have to make you think like it's nine to eleven. And I think the algorithm, you know, plays a role in that as well, driving us into those holes lacking perspective. I don't know what you do about that.

Speaker 3

Well, one you create more competition. Facebook should have five facebooks that they compete with, and hopefully there would be a point where.

Speaker 1

What they do is they buy anything that even resembles a budding Facebook and stick it in their Facebook drawer. That's the tough part. Oh do you miss Congress in any way? Is there something about do you feel it was a job left undone for you? Do you feel what are your ultimate thoughts about about leaving the way you did and the unfulfilled potential of a government that is completely disconnected from the needs of its people, allowing demagogues like Donald Trump to rise.

Speaker 2

Well, I.

Speaker 3

Left because I couldn't tell the lie twenty twenty election wasn't Stone the January sixth defendants aren't political prisoners, on and on and so.

Speaker 1

That's him saying that, not me. I just want to make that clear. I don't I if I ever decide to run for Congress as a Republican, I just want to make sure that that's Ken Buck saying that, not me.

Speaker 3

Continue so so, not not telling the not agreeing to the party line.

Speaker 1

You're a victim of cancel culture.

Speaker 2

Well I am, I'm one. I'm not a victim of anything.

Speaker 3

I am absolutely blessed beyond belief, with six grandkids and plenty of six grandkids, six and a half grandkids, one on the way.

Speaker 1

Oh god, I'm sorry. I immediately went to like salamonic wisdom of like, no, you're not supposed to do that.

Speaker 3

No, but but you know, there's a lot of life out there besides, and it's about nothing and telling lies.

Speaker 2

And so I made a choice to go enjoy what I'm got left.

Speaker 1

What will break this fever in Washington?

Speaker 2

One?

Speaker 3

America does great with a crisis. Nine to twelve, America came together and we were a unified country. I hope we don't get here for like seven hours. I hope we don't get to that crisis point. But I think that there is a leader out there that will unify and help unify America. And it's somebody who I believe that great morals, somebody who has great leadership skills.

Speaker 2

A John F. Kennedy.

Speaker 3

You know, I probably wouldn't have said this twenty years ago that he was a great hero, but you look at what John F. Kennedy did in terms of bringing the country together during the Cold War and moving us forward. There is somebody there that will help America heal and move forward.

Speaker 1

You wouldn't happen to have a name, would you.

Speaker 2

I know it's not Buck, and I know it's not one of.

Speaker 3

The two, and it's leading the country in the in the polls right now.

Speaker 1

Well, I very much appre you coming back and having the discussion whether this will come back and say us again much appreciate it. Wish of best, famakowas will come back.

Speaker 4

Explore more shows from the Daily Show podcast universe by searching The Daily Show wherever you get your podcasts.

Speaker 2

Watch The Daily Show weeknights at eleven ten Central on Comedy Central, and stream full episodes anytime on Paramount Plus.

Speaker 1

Paramount podcasts,

Transcript source: Provided by creator in RSS feed: download file
For the best experience, listen in Metacast app for iOS or Android
Open in Metacast