Mollie Hemingway

That's not how the New York Times treated it or the Atlantic.

You don't see the creativity in the conservative legal movement or the energy or the passion from these people.

And perhaps that is because a lot of them are establishment-y in a way that they really just genuinely don't like Trump.

But in order to have accountability, which is important for everybody, you have to have that kind of outside counsel.

So maybe this is a good—

When you get creative as a conservative lawyer, you get disbarred.

Well, even on that point, I think one of the great scandals of recent years is that the constitutional lawyer, John Eastman, had to go through disbarment procedures without

any assistance from the conservative legal community.

And it wasn't just him.

There are other people who face this.

There was the Project 65, where left-wing donors poured millions of dollars into the project of just barring people who had legal arguments they didn't like.

And people say about John Eastman, you know, they'll say, I don't think he should have argued this for Trump.

But you do have to admit that Congress actually changed the law to deal with what he had

What he was proposing for Trump, meaning his argument was solid enough that Congress had to change the law about the electoral counting situation in Congress.

It's not just James Carville.

It's a ton of Democrats who are advocating getting rid of the filibuster.

The big problem as a fan of the filibuster, because it protects minority viewpoints, and I feel like I always have minority viewpoints.

The frustration is, why wouldn't the Republicans in the Senate nuke the filibuster and then do all sorts of good things with it?

You know, there are all sorts of things that should be done by the Senate that they claim they can't do because they can't pass this 60-vote threshold.

But if they were to nuke the filibuster and then actually get something done, I would be much more in favor of them doing it.