Watch Bill Maher’s show while you can

September 21, 2019 • 9:00 am

This, sent by reader Michael, is a video of Bill Maher’s show last night, featuring Andrew Sullivan and Sarah Haider, as well as Samantha Power, Timothy Naftali and Heather McGhee Watch it while you can, because these things are taken down soon. I haven’t even watched it in my rush to make it available here.

Haider is the special guest, and appears at 31:32.

I’ve now watched it. It’s a good show overall: there’s discussion of Justin Trudeau’s blackface, NZ prime minister Jacinda Arden’s unwise donning of a hijab after the Christchurch mosque massacre, Trump Derangement Syndrome, and much more.

34 thoughts on “Watch Bill Maher’s show while you can

  1. Haider is also (briefly) featured in the “overtime” portion. This is an official HBO video (not bootleg) – so it won’t be taken down.

    1. Good stuff. I was surprised to hear from Sullivan that the Brexit voters would be up in arms if it doesn’t happen. I held out the hope they were beginning to change their minds about leaving.

      1. I think opinion has shifted away from Brexit but not by a huge amount and the Brexiteers do seem incredibly desperate that it should happen. I’ve no idea why because not one of them will be able to give you a reason why there life will improve following Brexit.

  2. As usual new rules is the best part to me. Having serious conversations is not Bill’s best trait. Sullivan does not do much for me and he would do better to let others talk more.

        1. Unless you meant Kavanaugh, in which case I half agree and half disagree. Since it was a he said/she said, I think he’s kind of right, but also dismissive.

  3. Haider and Samantha Power were both impressive. The battle between Sullivan and McGee was interesting. It’s too bad the show format didn’t let it carry on a bit longer. I’ll have to check the Overtime segment to see what happens.

  4. Bill Maher doesn’t think that the Democrats will impeach Trump even with his latest outrage regarding the Ukrainian president. He may very well be correct. This is because Nancy Pelosi still doesn’t support impeachment and several Democratic representatives from districts Trump won in 2016 think supporting it would jeopardize their re-elections. They want to emphasize domestic issues such as infrastructure and health care. Pelosi and these Democrats may be correct. However, what is never discussed by the politicians is the underlying premise of this viewpoint, namely, that some people, perhaps a majority, don’t give a damn about democracy. They are only concerned about their own parochial interests. As such, they have no problem with authoritarianism or any other political system as long as the government delivers the goods. This is why democracy is never secure and is in jeopardy today. Pelosi is willing to abdicate the moral thing to do, which is to impeach Trump, for what she appears to believe is a greater good – keeping the Democratic majority in the House. It is debatable whether her political calculation is the way to go.

    1. My guess is Pelosi and others (me included) will change their minds now that the Trump administration has proven that they can block virtually all attempts at investigation and that Congressional committee subpoenas are almost useless (eg, Lewandowski) even when they honor them with their presence. The “investigate but don’t impeach” plan has failed. I also guess that formalized impeachment won’t help either. The idea that slapping an “impeachment” label on their investigations will give them extra weight with subpoenas and judges will also fail. Investigations will continue to do what they can but voting him out is really all we have left. Perhaps if people like this Ukraine whistleblower work up the guts to risk imprisonment by going to Congress directly something will shake loose.

      1. Pelosi hasn’t changed her mind even with these latest revelations, and she knows the score. https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/9/21/20877023/whistleblower-donald-trump-2020-election-interference-ukraine-nancy-pelosi-democrats-impeachment

        Sadly, I can’t see her standing up to this abominable situation and that grieves me because I thought that she was a woman with cojones. But we don’t need a Vox article to inform us on this matter. When does caution and prudence become lily-livered? To echo Richard Painter, former chief White House ethics lawyer for GW Bush, who’s had it with the Republicans:”Impeachment; @SpeakerPelosi needs to support it or resign.” https://twitter.com/RWPUSA/status/1175374504341712897.

        And further, I just saw that Trump is to speak with the President of the Ukraine next week!!!!! https://twitter.com/AFP/status/1175038618433392642…is this true or fake news? Only Trump knows.

        1. I doubt that Pelosi lacks “cojones”. I view it as purely a political calculation. We know that the Senate won’t convict and they will certainly spin that as some kind of victory. Certainly one can disagree with her judgement on this but I don’t see how one can cast it as a lack of fortitude.

          I also don’t agree that it is their duty to impeach. It is certainly their duty to investigate but they aren’t required to impeach. I find it ironic that many who insist that impeachment is a political process while maintaining that the House is required by law to impeach.

          That all said, I am starting to lean toward impeachment simply because there’s no other viable course. Still, notwithstanding this latest Ukraine-Biden-whistleblower episode, the only basis for impeachment is obstruction of justice while the obstructed crime can’t be proven. While such obstruction is a still a crime, it is pretty weak stuff in the eyes of the general public. It’s pretty easy to spin it into just partisan politics as usual.

          1. “Still, notwithstanding this latest Ukraine-Biden-whistleblower episode, the only basis for impeachment is obstruction of justice while the obstructed crime can’t be proven.”

            The Constitution specifies that a president can be impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors. Congress can pretty much interpret this as it will. Trump took an oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution. If the allegations are true regarding his request of the Ukrainian president to dig up dirt on Biden then it is clear to me that he violated his oath by attempting to undermine our system of elections. This is an impeachable offense.

            1. “If the allegations are true regarding his request of the Ukrainian president to dig up dirt on Biden then it is clear to me that he violated his oath by attempting to undermine our system of elections. This is an impeachable offense.”

              This conjecture I hope proves true, and is just the most recent in a very,very long list of impeachable offenses he’s committed.

              An additional speculation is that Trump might have attempted to extort cooperation from the President of Ukraine by threatening to withhold aid of some kind. That’s an impeachable offense that is also a crime. Given that extortion is his modus operandi for getting the things he wants that aren’t freely given, and if there are tapes to prove this true, then no conjecture.

              I now align myself with those who say that win or lose, impeachment proceedings must be brought or our country will lose what’s left of our credibility as a democracy.

              If we don’t, we may find that he’s shot somebody on 5th Avenue just for the heck of it, or as some would say ‘just because Trump.’

              1. Addendum — he doesn’t use extortion just to obtain those things he wants that aren’t freely given; he now threatens extortion before making any demands.

              2. Biden’s biggest problem is his son. it may be that Biden has exercised improper influence in his son’s success, or I suppose Hunter B is the luckiest person alive.

                Hunter B. was commissioned in the USN, after after a long history of serious drug use. How many of us little people could manage that?

                In 2013, Hunter B. managed to become a business partner with Jonathon Li of Bohai Capital. Several months later Biden flew to Beijing and met Li.

                in 2016, Four days before Biden is to arrive in Ukraine for a discussion on US aid, Burisma appoints Hunter B to it’s board. By odd coincidence, Biden threatens to withold US aid until Ukraine fires the prosecutor investigating Burisma for corruption.

                Those are some of the big ones, but Hunter B. has been appointed to all sorts of prestigious boards and partnerships. His two main qualifications seem to be his last name and his intimate knowledge of crack cocaine use.

                I would think Trump would benefit immensely from Biden being selected as the democratic candidate. I suspect the current controversy of an anonymous source without firsthand knowledge claiming Trump asked Ukraine to investigate is probably an attempt by a democrat to both bring attention to the Hunter Biden situation, and to try to tie Trump into the controversy.

                Or, Trump could actually be Hitler, as many have claimed.

                Or both Trump and Biden are completely corrupt.

            1. Yes, it takes balls to ignore the clarion call for impeachment. The easy route for Pelosi would be to go for impeachment and then cry foul when the Senate refuses to even consider it. This would allow her to forever say “At least we tried.” Her current route risks history regarding her as the Speaker who could have brought Trump to justice and thereby saved the Union.

    2. Of course I would have been impeaching long ago, Pelosi and other leaders will go down in history as gutless wonders for this term in the Congress. What they are doing so far is shameful. Putting politics above all else and it stinks. What did they make their oath to would be the first question and the second is, when is impeachment useful if not now? Maybe if he set off a bomb in the capital building.

      1. Yes, my contention is if this POTUS isn’t impeachable, then no POTUS will ever be impeachable again, and we might as well forget the term exists.

    3. This Tweet by former Obama speechwriter Jon Favreau is germane to this conversation.

      Trump is seeking foreign assistance to win another election but House Democrats are reluctant to impeach him because they’re afraid it will help him win another election.

  5. My take – Ms Haider is uncommonly courageous, a clear thinker and powerful voice. We should hear more from her – what a refreshingly rational and intelligent person.

    Ms Power is an accomplished politician. I’ll leave it at that.

    The other commentators said things that were hard to disagree with and their disagreements amongst each other were mostly just them talking past each other. But I was impressed by their arguments (and rather convinced now) that the Dems are making a serious strategic and moral mistake by not impeaching the motherfucker already.

    Maher was his usual acerbic and witty self. I always like his comedy, even if sometimes it is cringeworthy. This non-HBOer is thankful for the bootleg.

  6. What a courageous and impressive person is Ms. Haider! And so eloquent and precise.

    I am soliciting comments about this: there was a sharp exchange between Sullivan and McGhee over statistics regarding births and fatherhood among black people. I think they disagreed on statistics (what I was watching cut off suddently). Any thoughts on that exchange/statistics?

  7. It was a typical bill maher show,i enjoyed it laugh a lot,i especially enjoy his take down of trailer trash traitor trump,my favorite part of the show

Leave a Reply