Don McGahn | Full Address and Q&A | Oxford Union

Share
Embed
  • Published on Apr 22, 2019
  • SUBSCRIBE for more speakers ► is.gd/OxfordUnion
    Oxford Union on Facebook: theoxfordunion
    Oxford Union on Twitter: @OxfordUnion
    Website: www.oxford-union.org/
    Former White House Counsel for President Donald Trump, Don McGahn is a recent departure from Trump’s administration. Previously serving as a Republican-selected member of the Federal Election Commission, he helped loosen regulations on campaign spending. In the presidential campaign, he managed all litigation, but resigned after an alleged improper prosecution request from President Trump.
    ABOUT THE OXFORD UNION SOCIETY: The Oxford Union is the world's most prestigious debating society, with an unparalleled reputation for bringing international guests and speakers to Oxford. Since 1823, the Union has been promoting debate and discussion not just in Oxford University, but across the globe.

Comments • 167

  • Kevin Sweeney
    Kevin Sweeney 3 months ago

    At 14:58 he brags about making Alex Acosta Labor Secretary.

  • Deborah Sailor
    Deborah Sailor 3 months ago

    wormy hands.

  • Tony Newton
    Tony Newton 4 months ago

    Very clever, very erudite, but he has an answer for everything, and it is usually along the lines of “you could write volumes about this law, it is really complicated”. Why is it all so complicated? It seems to me everything can always be interpreted one way or the other, so successive generations of both Republican and Democrat, plus individuals and groups in the US, simply just keep pushing stuff up the USSC in the knowledge that some day the majority will be sufficiently on one side of the debate that new precedent will be set. Keep trying long enough and eventually you will get what you want. Until the next change in majority.
    A few points I wish had been raised by the questioners.
    It is pretty clear his sole aim in life is to get 9 Conservative judges on the USSC, he was not really challenged on that, despite good questions around the Federalist Society. I would also have liked to get a view from him on why he feels it is a great achievement to appoint a person to a role in what is essentially US politics for life, for maybe 40 years. Surely this can’t be right.
    I had thought from the news, and from his own words here, that he was a 100% rule of law guy, yet he happily takes all the shit that Trump throws at him when he thinks He is turning on him, while refusing to testify to the Congress, who as he himself said is item 1, not 2 or 3, in the Constitution articles. I know he will have a legal opinion on why not doing so is fine.
    I find it telling that McGahn here specifically says the President never told anyone to fire Mueller, when he knows full well that had already testified to Mueller that the President had done so, to McGahn himself! Which one is the lie?
    Why did nobody challenge the view he himself raised, unprompted. That it is unconstitutional to force Catholic institutions to include contraception in their insurance schemes as this harms their religious freedom, yet Republicans seem to be on a mission to do the opposite with abortion, forcing women who don’t want to have a child to have one. How is this not infringing their personal, and perhaps even their own religious, freedoms?
    (Edited to correct spelling of McGahn!)

  • Luke Drumm
    Luke Drumm 4 months ago +1

    McGhan strikes me as an incredibly intelligent and well versed individual. That said, he is exactly the type of individual who buys a glass house and then complains about the view out the window.

  • Linda Smith
    Linda Smith 5 months ago +1

    You talked about The COURAGE of Charlie Wilson’s WAR do YOU have THAT COURAGE

    • Religious Talk
      Religious Talk 4 months ago

      He does, and he will fight the evil Democrats until the end

  • Linda Smith
    Linda Smith 5 months ago +2

    Mr McGAHN I’ve heard that you are a man of INTEGRITY if that is really the case you will willingly TESTIFY in front of CONGRESS if you really THAT MAN

    • Rick T
      Rick T 4 months ago

      no crime no Obstruct Justice how hard is that? be like me saying you are in your car parked so you are guilty of speeding.. you guys kill me you over look real crimes by democrats ..

  • Linda Smith
    Linda Smith 5 months ago +1

    If you are trying to be the HONEST BROKER why LIE about trump’s TELLING YOU TO FIRE ROBERT MUELLER OVER and OVER AGAIN Mr McGAHN??

  • Linda Smith
    Linda Smith 5 months ago +1

    Don McGahn talks trump SPEAK but without the more CRAZY 😝SPEAK. He was HAPPY about OUR COUNTRY pulling out of the PARIS ACCORD. He may sound SANE but is he really? He was influenced by Judge Scalia and I wonder what Scalia would think of The REPUGNANT FAKE president trump McGahn’s BOSS. trump does NOT seem to think much of McGahn.

    • Religious Talk
      Religious Talk 4 months ago

      you sound unhinged, you are all over the place

  • Cyd Oman
    Cyd Oman 5 months ago +1

    It is true the Roe v Wade decision has spawned a lot of issues for the Supreme Court for decades. Unwanted and unplanned pregnancies, on the other hand, have plagued women for centuries. Maybe eons. Just sayin'.

    • G Rou
      G Rou Month ago

      My wife told me, outside of rape, the best and only form of contraception needed is simply to say no. Life begins at conception, and we do not have the right to commit murder. Adoption is an alternative that does not require murder. Have a nice day.

  • Cyd Oman
    Cyd Oman 5 months ago +1

    I can understand the affection some lawyers feel for the exact adherence to the Constitution. I can understand, and, in many instances even appreciate, that McGahn and other Federalists, 'love the law'.
    What I can't understand - what I find so frightening - is why he and his party will not value their political opposition - the Democratic Party - is full of people who love justice as much as he loves the law, and often these days it feels like the former (justice) is being damaged by the latter (law).
    It is difficult for insiders in government to comprehend the vast and unbridged space that divides these two human affections when the love of the law is perceived - is actually leveraged - to triumph over the love of justice.

    • Tony Newton
      Tony Newton 4 months ago +1

      Religious Talk - Yet it seems that pretty much every major and minor decision made in the US these days ends up in the Supreme Court. Maybe these laws that Congress write are not clear enough. Or maybe given enough attempts at escalation people know that eventually they will get the ruling they want. I am sure that it is in no way a coincidence that now there is a conservative majority on the Court there are now dozens of cases being lined up by States on abortion.

    • Religious Talk
      Religious Talk 4 months ago

      feel like the former (justice) is damaged by the latter (law)

      do you know how much of a fascist you sound like right now?
      judges are not supposed to change the law based on their personal feelings, they are supposed to read the text of the law as it is
      you want to change the law? go through CONGRESS, that's their job
      using courts as a superlegislator is what a dictator would do.
      enough of this cowardly fascist tactics

  • Cyd Oman
    Cyd Oman 5 months ago +3

    McGahn could not be more wrong in his personal assessment regarding the views of the American public regarding stuffing the Courts only with judges passed by the insiders of the Federalist Society. It is noticed, talked about, worried about and in the minds of many viewed with suspicion.
    Is it seen as arrogance? Yes. Tyranny of the elite? Yes. Swampish? Oh my yes.
    His disconnect with this public sentiment is an astonishment when revealed so starkly.
    Arrogance is what happens when we become immune to the effects of our own ignorance. It's a lesson we all must learn.

  • Nikolay Nikolov
    Nikolay Nikolov 5 months ago

    And above all good guitar skills:
    tvclip.biz/video/zzVfRdWge9U/video.html

  • Rondalyn Reynolds
    Rondalyn Reynolds 5 months ago

    Hmmm, not sure what to think of him. 🤔 A little bit arrogant? What I don't understand is the reason he resigned was because the Commander-in-Chief was asking him to fire Mueller. He is supposed to be testifying on that very matter. And the Mueller report lists time after time when the orange man asked someone to get rid of Mueller and he was turned down. So......

    • Rondalyn Reynolds
      Rondalyn Reynolds 5 months ago +1

      @Justice Hussein That's not my understanding at all why he resigned.

    • Justice Hussein
      Justice Hussein 5 months ago +1

      No. He didn't resigned because of that. Typically White House's counsels don't finish a term and leave in two years or so. He did that. He's been with Trump since day-one running for 2016 Elections.
      He also helped tapping two Supreme Court judges.
      By the way, giving that Mueller said there was no conspiracy occurred, Trump reaction to a crazy investigation must be seen from these lens. Mueller finished his stupid investigation so any obstruction cry is laughable.

  • Glynis Joseph
    Glynis Joseph 5 months ago +1

    I don't know too much of mcghan, but I know he's supposed to testify on 5/22! My wedding anniversary! I had to look at this & prepare myself to c if he's going to say anything different!

  • Debbie Singh
    Debbie Singh 5 months ago +1

    WOW! EXCELLENT!
    VERY EDUCATIONAL AND CLASSY!
    EXACTLY HOW ALL OPINIONS, LEGAL POLITICAL OR OTHER, SHOULD BE PRESENTED!
    VERY UNLIKE WHAT I HAVE BEEN LISTENING TO IN THE MEDIA!

  • Steven Pringle
    Steven Pringle 5 months ago +4

    We get a bit of a glimpse about Mcghans character. He says the President has no desire to fire the Special Counsel. Yet he testified in the Mueller report that's what the President ordered him to do.

    • Steven Pringle
      Steven Pringle 3 months ago

      @Religious Talk have you read the report?

    • Religious Talk
      Religious Talk 4 months ago

      that's not what he testified
      he said Trump told him to go to Rosenstein and raise the issue of conflict of interest
      and he gave 3 versions
      Mueller's partisan team chose the version that best suited their narrative

  • Steven Pringle
    Steven Pringle 5 months ago +5

    Trump was elected on technicality. He didn't run this ingenious campaign where the majority of Americans wanted him to be President. Clinton still got 3million more votes.

    • Philip Myers
      Philip Myers 5 months ago +1

      The game is won by points not by yards or hits accumulated.

  • Nick Fielden
    Nick Fielden 5 months ago +3

    McGahn's view of the Federalist Society, that it seeks to "restore the role of judges to reading the law as law, and not as social policy" is firstly, with unabashed conceit, to arbitrarily reserve to that clique superior wisdom about the nature of the law that is apparently not available to others of a different persuasion; and secondly, to set the law in stone and thereby stifle one of the essential elements of a fair legal system, namely that it should develop and adjust alongside changes that take place over time in the society within which it functions. What was Magna Carta if not an instrument of social policy?

    It's also appalling that McGahn, without the least irony, openly advocates the Federalist Society as a cabal of cronies whose membership should conveniently serve as a pool of homogeneous policy-makers for the purpose of stuffing Trump's cabinet.

    • Religious Talk
      Religious Talk 4 months ago +1

      judges are not the ones who should "develop" the law you fascist clown, that's the job of Congress, judges are supposed to read the text of the law as it is

  • Pololo
    Pololo 5 months ago +1

    Oh wow he is very smart.

  • penni4laser
    penni4laser 5 months ago

    Boss guitar shredder and helmsman

  • Karl Von
    Karl Von 5 months ago +1

    Don McGahn is a pompous asshole

  • Zai Adams
    Zai Adams 5 months ago

    Hey dick head Mcgahn...this is Oxford University,,,not ignorant Americans ( some)..if u xpect them to believe ur Bull Shitttt,,,,I have nice fucking bridge to sell u...
    The reason he didn't face Mueller,,,,,u ready yyy,,,it's bc Mueller was going to tear into his ass,,,& tear him a new ONE,,,,u no that,,,we no that,,,,,,it's not that he's giving depositions B4,,,,he would not pass bc he's fucking guiltyyyy...I assur uuu he would b wearing an orange suit,,,,,& u know that.

  • Nathanel Macon
    Nathanel Macon 5 months ago

    There are more pedophiles at Nellis Air Force Base then there are in the Catholic Church and in Hollywood put together. Robert Justin Alford green has proof

  • Joe Porta
    Joe Porta 5 months ago +2

    Alexander Acosta was probably one of President Donald Trump's least controversial Cabinet members. But now he is facing rising pressure over his handling of a sex offender case involving a well-connected billionaire. Involving underage girls? Something got to do with a plea deal - yeah a real nice guy Don!

  • Joseph Harder
    Joseph Harder 5 months ago +1

    Reading these comments from The Left is indeed a delicious experience. I have rarely seen so much arrogance and ignorance. None of you could pass the community college course in American Government I teach. (Incidentally, I have an earned doctorate in American Government from the University of Virginia. I also, ( hiss, boo) attend a Church and am one of those evil, evil people who does *not* believe in abortion on demand/) But hey , folks, keep it up! You are simply hastening the day when two more constitutionalists are added to The Supreme Court. I can hardly wait to see your faces turn a whiter shade of pale.

    • Tony Newton
      Tony Newton 4 months ago

      Can you just point to the bit in the Constitution that says “thou shall not have an abortion”?
      And why do you think people have abortion on demand. I really, really hope nobody you know gets raped by one of those rapists Trump says are being sent to America by Mexico. And I really hope none of your kids’ embryos don’t get a congenital heart defect at 3 months. And clearly due to your job it is clear you would never be in a position where there is simply no way you could afford another child.
      You are very lucky sir.

  • Sukhbir Sekhon
    Sukhbir Sekhon 5 months ago

    Are there any non-Americans in the audience?

  • Heather Mimi Wahlquist
    Heather Mimi Wahlquist 5 months ago +1

    Creepy guy..

  • Gina Hagg
    Gina Hagg 5 months ago +3

    yeah, this is also the a..hole who stayed until he made sure his conservative judges made it to the supreme court.

    • Brian Bozo
      Brian Bozo 5 months ago

      Why bother even coming to Oxford when the entire audience appears to be American. Are there no Russian, Greek, Chinese ,English students in Oxford? I would have thought that the idea of bringing a representative of government is to humanise the government official. There is no energy, drama, emotion from the speaker or audience.

    • Joseph Harder
      Joseph Harder 5 months ago +1

      Wow! Double plus ungood thought crime! We must continue to keep the constitution safe for infanticide1 Idiot.

  • Bazzzinga Punk
    Bazzzinga Punk 5 months ago +6

    The Mueller report says that Trump asked McGhan to Obstruct Justice.

    • Kevin Sweeney
      Kevin Sweeney 3 months ago

      @Rick TIf you do a good job obstructing justice, you prevent a conviction. It's like committing a foul in basketball while an opponent is attempting to score. The "crime" is obstructing the shooter from making the basket and whether or not the shooter makes the basket is irrelevant.

    • Tony Newton
      Tony Newton 4 months ago

      Rick T - My god, you are smart enough to watch the Oxford Union on TVclip but don’t know what obstructing justice means. Sad.

    • Bazzzinga Punk
      Bazzzinga Punk 4 months ago

      @Rick T Simple, by getting in the way of an investigation. An investigation is to determine if a crime has taken place. So obstructing the investigation, whether or not a crime is found is OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE. Justice in America is presumed innocent until proven guilty. Therefore the investigation is part of the judicial process. Good Luck.

    • Rick T
      Rick T 4 months ago

      how do you Obstruct Justice without a crime in the 1st place..

    • TheMaryam1891
      TheMaryam1891 5 months ago

      Yes

  • Bazzzinga Punk
    Bazzzinga Punk 5 months ago +2

    "Impeach the Mother Fucker"

  • original Bantu
    original Bantu 5 months ago +1

    Another TRUMP hack! Pathetic

  • Cyd Oman
    Cyd Oman 5 months ago +2

    If a President is sincerely convinced we face a climate change emergency but his Congress will not take any but the most minor of actions, and will deliberately refuse to engage in any faithful compromise, what is the President to do?
    The Paris Accord was the best way to start. It basicly asked the people of the world to set some goals and make a good faith effort to meet them and reconvene after a period of years and discuss again what the situation required.
    McGahn dismisses the problem blankly, without reference to the problems in our nation of his political party - the GOP - which is in control of the legislative power and believes no legislation is the way to correctly govern.
    The Republican Party has convinced itself all government is too big. The merit of a government task in Republican speak can only be viewed as how small the effort can be made and if too small to matter, then how fast the problem can be dismissed.
    The GOP is a snake devouring its tail, unaware it is consuming the nation's opportunity as it dines on itself. What a disappointing performance, and one in which the presenter said something we now know from the Mueller Report is untrue.
    Trump was an adult man, educated and rich when he announced. He cannot be free from criticism that he should have known what the job required when he asked for it. Nor is he to be shielded from his mistakes made in campaigning for the job. The citizens, who are the governed and therefore the rightful masters, must not be abused by public employees who, once in power, use their power to disenfranchise voters and pass unholy laws that give rich and powerful entities greater access and decision-making in government than other citizens of less rank and far less wealth.
    McGahn in this life is absurdly unaware of what is happening on Planet Earth. Respect for the law does not come from studying dots and dashes and semi-colons but from the meritorious results generated in the greater perfection of the Union which laws must serve. He understands nothing if he does not understand this.

    • Tony Newton
      Tony Newton 4 months ago

      Yep, as with his other answers he avoided the question to hide behind the law. Sure, if he is right that the USA’s signing of the agreement was not rightfully done by the laws then I guess that needs to be rectified. But there is no way this is why Trump pulled out. Fix the authority bit but stay in, do something about the problem, don’t just run away. Thank heavens for California and other states that are just carrying on regardless.

  • Cyd Oman
    Cyd Oman 5 months ago +6

    Again McGahn's memory needs some restoration. I am reminded of at least one of the judges on this current Supreme Court publicly saying he was most proud of his work on making abortions illegal. Since the justice said that in a public setting I am taking it as proof that SCOTUS has on its team at least one judge personally committed to the destruction of women's control over their own bodies and their own reproductive health. Looks like Mueller was very smart to get evidence while it was still fresh. Judges and lawyers can and do forget what they do not like to remember. Unlike the wronged citizens.

    • G Rou
      G Rou Month ago

      Roe v Wade is legal nonsense. From a biological point of view: (1) life begins at conception, (2) to claim a right of privacy as the fetus is a part of a woman's body is irrelevant, since the body of the fetus and life it maintains belongs to the fetus. The notion of viability is purely a function of technology; one day a woman's body with not be required as the vessel to incubate a human life. At that point, does the test tube have the right of privacy to the growing fetus? Don't bother flaming about equating a woman's body to a test tube -- the point is that the DNA and life of a fetus belong's to itself not the woman.

  • Cyd Oman
    Cyd Oman 5 months ago +9

    My goodness Mr McGahn. Have you no memory of the zeal with which President Obama pursued his infrastructure projects - the shovel-ready projects, the high speed rail that would have been such a boon to the rust belt? And the silence and then contempt that greeted his proposals from your party? No feeling for the poor people of the nation could move Republicans to work on Obama's infrastructure bill. All we got was the ACA and the GOP has done everything it could to slice and dice it to death.
    Mitch McConnell vowed to do everything he could to make Obama a one term President. Making an Obama infrastructure plan a complete no-go was a Republican vow and they did whatever they could to bury it.
    How much we could have saved back then in 2009. Prices were cheap because of the Great Recession and yet the Republicans would not budge. Our existing infrastructure is now a demanding expense. No money available for any new projects. The legacy of the GOP is still one of bad decisions, made in critical times, and applauded by blind sycophants who, much like you, have such poor memories.
    For millions of Americans would it not be as useful for them to insist Congress do the same to Trump? So many want him to be a one term President, but we cannot depend on Mitch to help us out. Is it not justice for the Democrats now to refuse Trump's desire to have now what your party would not allow for our President then, when it would have meant jobs and much lower costs?
    What does the lawyer think of equal justice for all of us? Since you seem to have limped your way through a corrupt Presidency, philosophize what is equal justice for us who have had to mourn all the lost opportunities for our Nation from the obstructionists led by dear multimillionaire Mitch.

  • Cyd Oman
    Cyd Oman 5 months ago +1

    Don't know what McGahn's talking about re: Catholic run for-profit and/or non-profit businesses that employ regular employees, but I am positive the Catholic Church DOES believe in birth control and does offer it to their members. It is called the rhythm method and it is taught in Catholic Schools and to Catholic converts (and not always free). It is marred by a high error rate. It has been in use for decades. The Catholic Church might even be using its work in the spread of its chosen ( read preferred and required) birth control method as an additional tax exemption on its for-profit businesses.
    Giving some for profit and/or tax exempt non-profit businesses the right to tell their employees what medical treatment they must use in health coverage is hardly a settlement to brag about.
    The Catholic Church DOES believe in birth control and has directed its adherents to use it exclusively. And other religious organizations have used similar methods, like abstinence, as their preferred method (read required and exclusive of all othrrs) and have received government funds to indoctrinate their followers in it.
    How is McGahn's glorification of DEREGULATION of the choice of women for health care guaranteed by the ACA not really a government support for religiously applied forced treatment?
    What has been taken away is the full spectrum of legal choices given to others. What is left is error-filled and overt religious indoctrination. Both Trump and McGahn are asking women to be stupid to the reality of the theft of their right to equal treatment under the law.
    "Deregulation" is more open to corruption and theft because it is done in darkness and the money to fight darkness is hard to find. Remember that when the entrenched servants of the powerful try to sell deregulation no matter what.

    • G Rou
      G Rou Month ago

      So Oxford, in its concern for democracy is pre-screening posts before they appear on youtube? Previous posts vanished, how disturbing.

    • Tony Newton
      Tony Newton 4 months ago

      A very good point. Abstinence and rhythm method are fine, therefore the Church must de facto be in favour of contraception. Just it seems, not a chemical or rubber form of it.

  • Cyd Oman
    Cyd Oman 5 months ago +5

    McGahn's incredibly dismissive attitude about the citizen take on an arbitrarily manufactured tilt of the Supreme Court is so arrogant.
    What matters is what the governed think. If we think the Supreme Court is stuffed with justices who will pick the side of unjust laws, then that is a problem for the Courts, the President and the Congress, not an action to be celebrated.
    Appointing two "illegal" justices - one who was nominated for a position which constitutionally belonged to President Obama and was stolen by Mitch McConnell, a mere Senator without any constitution right on his side, and the other who should have had a rigorous investigation for past errors and was not investigated sufficiently - permanently soured millions of citizens on the trustworthyness of any decisions by the Court for years and years.
    When over a million citizens prefer adding an age limit for candidates for high court appointments AND a maximum stay on the court AND a public impeachment process AND a confirming popular vote for all Senate confirmed Supreme Court Justices, then McGahn and the Federalist Society has a perception problem and the Supreme Court has a public trust problem.
    The idea ordinary citizens do not "care about the law" is wrongheaded and frankly a quite ignorant opposition of much of the Federalist Papers. A people who mistrust the merits of a Supreme Court decision because the nomination and confirmation process is viewed as too tainted to produce fairly arrived at decisions is not a legacy of valor, of bravery or of intelligence.

  • Ann Sunderman
    Ann Sunderman 5 months ago +14

    Just another political hack, but I appreciate his definition of what the Whitehouse Council means. Too bad he doesn't abide by it.

    • Tony Newton
      Tony Newton 4 months ago

      Joseph Harder yet despite all your erudition and wonderfullness you choose to have a go at someone who spells Counsel wrong. Then submits three posts with at least ten typos. First stone and all, dear boy!

    • Joseph Harder
      Joseph Harder 5 months ago +1

      Footnote. This Summer, I am turning to podcasting. I will be presenting a course called Everything You Ever Wanted To Know About Politics, But Were Afraid To Ask.* You might like to add it to your watch list. You will find by yourself learning a lot about many things.. I guarantee it.Oh, I almost forgot. I :did not: vote for Trump in 2016. I'm just a silly man who thinks critiques of public figures should be based on evidence, instead of insults and clichés.

    • Joseph Harder
      Joseph Harder 5 months ago

      I have been called many things during 15 years of teaching about, and writing about, American politics , and of years of doing research on American government, including African American political thought, the Presidency, (Particularly Lincoln, who was one of the two subjects of my doctoral disserttation,,and Washingtro n,, whose papers I helped to edit at the University of Virginia, and the Supreme Court and Constitutional Law,. However, there is ane thing I can assure I have never been called;:cute. It is nddeed a great honor to be called 'cute ' by a total stranger. What I have eencalled, in dozens of teaching evaluatons is "smart", "challenging", "scholarly", "fair", "open-minded", "eloquent" and " Charismatic". But what could those people know/ After al, all hey have done is to talk with me, and learn from me, in &real life!What Trump called McGahn-and tis this is a matter of public record-was , "Son of a Bitch". Again, obviously a Trump Toady.

    • Ann Sunderman
      Ann Sunderman 5 months ago +2

      @Joseph Harder Oh, sweetheart, you are so cute. Yes , I have heard many things that Trump has said or tweeted about him. However, you will have to be more specific about which day of the week and which hour of the day, and whether or not he has had a sufficient amount of Kentucky fried chicken or cheeseburgers. Ya know..
      brain food. Yes, I know much about original sources. I have a degree in history, Russian history, as a matter of fact. Now don't get me started on that.

    • Joseph Harder
      Joseph Harder 5 months ago

      Of course,. Any defense of any aspect of Trump or of his administration automatically earns The Scarlet Letter "T' for Trumpian. Did you read what Trump had to say about McGahn., after this supposed "sycpphant" : left his administration. Wait a minute! TRhat would require that you actually look at primary sources AND that make an effort to understand points of view other than your own. I forgot that you "progressive" types can't do tat.

  • Faith May
    Faith May 5 months ago +2

    Don McGahn is very impressive and I can see why President Trump would have had him in the position he was in. It's too bad our Members of Congress aren't as sharp as he is.

  • curandero verde
    curandero verde 5 months ago +5

    Do away with the electoral college & gerrymandering then the vote of the people will be accurate....and the executive privilege might look a little different...ie instead of the wall maybe fix the roads in Michigan and Flint's water system...maybe instead of a wall use technology and strategic human assets...and maybe not traumatize children for starters...

  • P N
    P N 5 months ago +3

    Funny when he said “all things for all people” and he linked that to how trump won. Remember, trump pretty much promised everything but he only kept a few. Republicans don’t care about the rest as long as trump carries out one thing one their lists. Plus, trump won because there was a large number who wanted someone not political. What did they finally find out? He is more political than anyone else in DC, right?

  • mmldmm
    mmldmm 5 months ago +2

    congress makes the law not you.

  • mmldmm
    mmldmm 5 months ago +4

    was the audience told not to ask the tough questions? or was it stack

    • mmldmm
      mmldmm 5 months ago

      @Joseph Harder all colleges have their right and left. but somehow both sides were not represented.

    • Joseph Harder
      Joseph Harder 5 months ago +1

      Gee, perhaps they were intelligent and civil people, and not in thrall to Political correctness. Pay attention to this. You might actually learn something.

  • mmldmm
    mmldmm 5 months ago +8

    McGahn is a Trumpian in heart. we have had enough of them

    • Religious Talk
      Religious Talk 4 months ago

      no we didn't, we've had enough of bushes and Clintons though

  • mmldmm
    mmldmm 5 months ago

    obviously McGahn is a gerrymandican if he believe "We the People" decided in favor of current SCOTUS. time to start boycotting companies that bring their cases against employee/customer to SCOTUS

  • mmldmm
    mmldmm 5 months ago +5

    Interviewing a lawyer is like a dog chasing it tail

  • Jay Kienlen
    Jay Kienlen 5 months ago +2

    A typical narrow minded conservative thinker and personality. They all defend themselves with defending the constitution as "originally" intended? But this just opens the door for them to freely bend stuff their way. Bottom line, he comes acoss as the young guy you wouldn't trust or like and he would arrogantly dismiss you as he played his political positioning.

  • Joseph N. Pollaro
    Joseph N. Pollaro 5 months ago

    Those Brts sure did a lot for you Irish. didn't they Don.

  • DE
    DE 5 months ago

    Worst interview yet. Even Steve Bannon was more interesting. A bland personality. What a shame.

  • DE
    DE 5 months ago +5

    In Britain if you call garbage rubbish, then you should also refer to your federalist society as ‘the old boys network’ with full negative connotation. This guy came over as a privileged and sleazy, sprouting his GOP politics.

  • DE
    DE 5 months ago +4

    This man does not have a good heart, he has filled the US courts with right-wing judges, who will hold the country in the 1950s, determining over women’s lives and bodies.Continue the lack of lawlessness in the GOP, racism and keep blacks and brown citizens locked up so they can’t vote. Another Koch puppet. All in all a disgusting human being.

    • Religious Talk
      Religious Talk 4 months ago

      ah yes he should fill it with left wingers, so evil monsters like u can kill babies in the womb , would u be happy then ? Good argument

    • Sam Nguyen
      Sam Nguyen 5 months ago

      Why GOP determining women's lives?

    • Cent20buck
      Cent20buck 5 months ago +1

      Worse than 50s. Democracy hangs by a fine thread.

  • marinerosany
    marinerosany 5 months ago +1

    Don Mcghan sounds nervous and shy but I find that cute! I'm like that in talking to a crowd of people 😊

  • ElPocho DelMundo
    ElPocho DelMundo 5 months ago +4

    22:56 "Trump's a business man, and even that, he's not from Wall Street, you know, he's used to doing things 'his way'. And he's been very effective at doing that, you know, doing things 'his way'."
    OMG, my jaw just hit the floor. This guy, Mc sounds like he's intelligent, and a gifted observer of the world around him. But I simply cannot compute how one can say he's been very effective in doing things "his way". Very effective. Six bankruptcies, several incidents of rape, 3 fairly broken miserable marriages, the lowest approval ratings of any president on record. Jared Kushner, the few times I have opportunity to listen to him talk about "Jared's world", he strikes me exactly the same way, like, how did you get that? What were you thinking? So the Pig has been very effective at deregulating a big bunch of corporate powers. He's so radical, so extreme that likely most of them will just get changed back the next time there's a turnover in the WH. Hmm, his way, effective. Like, with Russia? With N. Korea? Saudi Arabia? the border? sure very effective there, got that wall, Mexico paid for it, and geez, look at the children he's traumatized for life. Yeah, for sure, very effective. Oh the tax bill, that's another one that'll likely get re done as soon as we get Demos back. It's the difference between tax reduction and tax modification. God knows we need the latter. It was Paul Ryan's life ambition, he tells us, to do tax reform. He failed.
    Oh, there's this one. He moved the US embassy to Jerusalem and he's basically telling the world it's fine with America if Israel annexes the Golan Heights. I don't think they're expecting to pay anything for the real estate, like we did for La purchase or Alaska. Just pure brute "we took it". The Pig supports that. What was the effect? Lots of votes for Bibi N. Whoop teee dooo, that's effective.
    Watches Jamal K get sliced up, that's some points for journalism right? That's effective, get people to be happy when you say, "fake news".
    I would say all considered what things the Pig may have been effective at will get turned around, equally thoughtlessly, asap. Except for Jamal, can't bring him back.

  • ElPocho DelMundo
    ElPocho DelMundo 5 months ago +4

    11:00 It's sort of ironic to hear him laud the commendability of "taking the law seriously". Does Mitch McConnell, his Senate partner involved in stacking all the judiciary with Federalist members, but who used his position to block the single Supreme Court appointee Obama may have made, does McConnell "take the law seriously"? Well, he takes controlling all the courts in the USA seriously. What a hypocrite.
    I also have a PhD in philosophy, but I don't go around talking about it. I do think it says something about a person's value system, but it depends a lot on the person's family origins as well.

    • Skye 1
      Skye 1 5 months ago

      You have a PhD? Obama appointed Kagan and Sotomayor to the Supreme Court. Democrats have been stacking the courts with liberal activists for years as evidenced by the liberal 9th Circuit of Appeals. Guess that's okay with you liberal hypocrites.

    • Tim Pz
      Tim Pz 5 months ago +1

      ElPocho DelMundo I think you miss the point of what he said. Obama changed the rules regarding super majorities. They can’t complain when that rule gets used against his interest. Which they were warned about at the time. The republicans didn’t do anything wrong. They operated within the legal framework Obama established.

  • Colin Burnside
    Colin Burnside 5 months ago +3

    Hold on to your Balls fantastic interview. Young people at Oxford. Try to help people who are not as gifted as you. Education is for all.

  • QuasiRandomViewer
    QuasiRandomViewer 5 months ago +1

    This event was held on February 12, 2019. www.oxford-union.org/node/1873

  • M. Hughes
    M. Hughes 5 months ago +1

    OMG. That was time well spent. Don McGahn is smart, stable and solid. The left is just the opposite.

  • Dale Thomas
    Dale Thomas 5 months ago +13

    These Full Address and Q&A from Oxford, Yale, Harvard, etc. are hidden gems. Some are better than others but I'll tell ya, you can learn about all types of interesting topics from these. Conversations like these with questions at the end is probably the best way to educate a lamen like me.

    • niranjan gokhale
      niranjan gokhale 4 months ago

      Absolutely agree with you , even the talks at google are interesting , these kinds of conversations help us to understand world we live in and also maybe give us a glimpse of the future too!

    • Cyd Oman
      Cyd Oman 5 months ago +1

      Dale, thanks for your comment. I agree with you and I commend you for stating it. We citizen lay people must pursue our education about the government we have hired and empowered very generously. The positions we pay for are plum. We deserve more say in who gets them.

  • paingainmayn
    paingainmayn 5 months ago +2

    Some of the evasive answers sound a lot like Brett Kavanaugh's. You can see how he picked him for the SC. Prep school, Federalist Society ect. Just another Koch stooge.

  • Just lina
    Just lina 5 months ago +1

    This series is one of the best thing youtube offers.

    • Just lina
      Just lina 5 months ago

      @ElPocho DelMundo There. Clarified.

    • ElPocho DelMundo
      ElPocho DelMundo 5 months ago

      Uuuhh, does You Tube offer it, or does it just post itself onto You Tube?

  • donsknots
    donsknots 5 months ago

    Oh my god and they end it with
    "So what's your funniest story while working at the white house?"
    Oxford, you're TRASH. Can I get my fucking hour back?