January 6th Hearings: The Cassidy Hutchinson Domino

TOPICS DISCUSSED

Thank you for being a part of our community! We couldn't do it we do without you. To become a financial supporter of the show, please visit our Patreon page, subscribe to our Premium content on Apple Podcasts Subscriptions, purchase a copy of our books Now What? How to Move Forward When We’re Divided (About Basically Everything) and I Think You're Wrong (But I'm Listening), or share the word about our work in your own circles.

Sign up for our newsletter to keep up with all our news. Follow us on Instagram, Twitter, and Facebook for our real time reactions to breaking news, GIF news threads, and personal content. To purchase Pantsuit Politics merchandise, check out our store or visit our merchandise partners: TeePublic, Stealth Steel Designs, and Desert Studio Jewelry. Gift a personalized message from Sarah and Beth through Cameo. You can find information and links for all our sponsors on our website.

UPCOMING EXCITING PROJECTS AT PANTSUIT POLITICS

EPISODE RESOURCES

January 6th Hearings

1st Hearing

2nd Hearing

3rd Hearing

4th Hearing

5th Hearing

6th Hearing

Succession

TRANSCRIPT

Beth [00:00:00] People from Trump world are deliberately trying to influence these witnesses in the way they interact with this committee that there is crime in progress. That's what Liz Cheney said, that there were crimes then, there are crimes continuing, and we are aware of all of it. And so I strongly encourage you, as Bennie Thompson always says, that to walk through this open door to our committee if you do not want to be part of the culmination of our work. 

Sarah [00:00:31] This is Sarah Stewart Holland.  

Beth [00:00:33] And this is Beth Silvers.  

Sarah [00:00:34] Thank you for joining us for Pantsuit Politics.  

Beth [00:00:50] Thank you for joining us for a new episode of Pantsuit Politics. We're so glad you're here with us as we take a different approach to the news. Today, we're going to talk about the hearing conducted on Tuesday by the House Select Committee to investigate the January 6th attack on the U.S. Capitol. We will do that for the first two segments of the show, and then we always end by talking about what's on our minds outside of politics. We do not promise that segment will be particularly timely.  

Sarah [00:01:16] The first two are. The first time two are very timely.  

Beth [00:01:19] The outside of Politics segment, we are going to catch up on Succession season three because I just finished it and it has felt surprisingly relevant as I've taken in the January 6th hearings. And what is timely about this is that this week they started filming season four of Succession. So, there's a hook. There's a hook.  

Sarah [00:01:35]  There we go. Now, before we get into this week's hearing, we want to thank all of you so much for the way you responded to and shared our episode about the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe V. Wade. We know that this is a very sensitive time and that this topic impacts all of us in a deep, personal way. It means a lot to us that you let us be a part of your thinking and that you find our conversations valuable enough to share with the people in your lives.  

Beth [00:02:09] Sarah, on Monday we found out that the January 6th committee was going to reconvene on Tuesday. So just here we go.  

Sarah [00:02:16] Can I tell you-- so I'm watching Gaslit the Starz show about the Watergate hearings features John Dean prominently. And so I guess John Dean's like a friend of mine. And he tweeted like, listen, if you're going to have a surprise hearing, it better be good. The standard is so high when it's a surprise hearing. And so I was checking, literally, like hourly was it really good enough for John Dean. Was it good enough? It was. It was. He tweeted and was like they exceeded the standard. This surprise hearing was amazing. I was like, okay, good. It's good enough for John Dean. That's what matters. I don't know why I was so obsessed with his reaction, but I was.  

Beth [00:02:53] That's funny. I'm not sure I love that posture. Feels a little consumerist to me, but whatever. It was a very captivating hearing any way you look at it. So a little bit before the hearing, we learned that the witness is going to be Cassidy Hutchinson, who is only 26 years old but has done a lot with her time. So while she was in college, she interned with Ted Cruz and Steve Scalise and at the White House. After college she went to the White House Legislative Affairs Office and she became a very close aide to Mark Meadows. And the reporting on this has been interesting. Brendan Buck, who is a longtime aide to Paul Ryan, has commented to pretty much everyone, seems like, that Mark Meadows had her in every meeting. Like, meetings where everyone else it was just the principal, he insisted that she be in the room with him. And he said  it looks like that's not turning out too well for him right now. But so when Mark Meadows goes to the White House to be Trump's chief of staff, she became his top aide, and she was everywhere. And they opened the hearing with a diagram of the Oval Office Wing of the White House and and showed her physical proximity to everything was intense. And so she just heard and saw a lot.  

Sarah [00:04:12] Yeah, I thought the opening package that showed her with all these people and how essential she was and how just basically proving her bona fides.  

Beth [00:04:22] Yeah. She's not a rhino this is a new Republican's Republican.  

Sarah [00:04:26] Mm-hmm.  

Beth [00:04:27] Her only work experience has been during this Trump era, where she has been part of the most influential decision making that has happened. So that made her testimony particularly compelling. Sarah, I tried to make notes about her testimony more chronologically than it came across at the hearing. I found that part of the hearing a little difficult. They kept jumping around in time to make different points. So the first thing that jumped out at me when I was just thinking about the chronology of it is that she told us about Trump's temperament in a general way. That wasn't surprising, but it was still poignant in the detail of it.  

Sarah [00:05:08] Stephanie Grisham talks a lot about this in her book, just the way that he would scream at people. Now, she does not mention throwing objects at people, which is a new detail we got from Cassidy Hutchinson that when the AP story ran that Bill Barr came out and said the Department of Justice found no evidence of election fraud, Donald Trump was furious and threw his lunch at Mark Meadows in the Oval Office dining room, which is right next to the Oval Office, and that this was not the first time that he had thrown plates at people. And to me, the only reason that the jumping around in time and that where they placed that temper, is it helped me put together as we continue to learn from Cassidy Hutchinson, that Mark Meadows was really checked out. Just checked out, like, scrolling his phone, not paying attention to the warnings. When Pat Cipollone was like, "We have to go talk to the president." His vibe was very much like, Why? And I thought, well, of course he was like that. He was afraid something was going to get thrown at him. Like, he was exposed to a lot of his temper and violence. I mean, it's not just temper when you're throwing things at people. And so, to me, that part helped me put that piece together. , I mean, it's not surprising in a way. And it also starts to make sense about why people reacted the way they did, tiptoed around him the way they did, because, I mean, nobody wants to get screamed at. Nobody wants to get stuff thrown at them. Like, just I don't want to overstate the obvious here, but that is traumatic and just a terrible experience as a human to be screamed at.  

Beth [00:06:50] I think it begs the question that I always come back to when we're talking about Donald Trump and the people around him. With Mark Meadows, I cannot decide what percentage of him being so checked out, which I think is a good description based on her testimony and the testimony of others where he knew what was unfolding, he knew what was going to unfold and he did nothing. And how much of that is not wanting to deal with Trump's wrath? And how much of it is true believerism? How much did he just agree with Trump about this? I don't know. I can't tell. I'm not sure it matters.  

Sarah [00:07:25] How can you be a true believer when Trump's not a true believer? That's what I'm always-- It's very obvious to anyone, I would think, that he's not a true believer. So is it just an ends justify the means or that's always struggle. It's not like he is a revival preacher where you're like in it and you believe that he believes the things. Like, it's so obvious he doesn't believe the things. That's where I really struggle.  

Beth [00:07:49] And I think that's true. In any organization where you have a Trump like figure, watching people dance through their cognitive dissonance about that figure is a fascinating exercise because people do it in a lot of different ways, and I feel like that's got to be part of the Mark Meadows story. Like, how did he justify to himself all of these machinations to support this person who didn't even believe his own version of events half the time.  

Sarah [00:08:16] But, listen, this is why they organize it differently, because we're several minutes in and we have buried the lead because the throwing the dishes were crazy, but that was not the historical part of this hearing.  

Beth [00:08:27] So we also learned that before January 6th, Meadows is meeting with Rudy Giuliani in the White House. Cassidy Hutchinson walks out with Rudy Giuliani. He asks her if she's excited about the 6th. Meadows tells her things could get real, real, bad. And I think what this established, if you're just looking at the broader-- instead of thinking about this hearing as its own spectacle, which it was, if you're looking at the broader case this committee is building, this testimony makes it so clear that no one was surprised by what happened on January 6th. That they understood what they were dealing with, who was coming, what they were bringing with them and what their intentions were.  

Sarah [00:09:09] Yeah, because we hear a lot of testimony, not just about the discussions the day before, but lots of detail about the day of January 6th and the morning on the way to the Ellipse. What happened at the Ellipse at the rally, specifically backstage. We hear conversations that Donald Trump was furious that the crowd size wasn't what he wanted to be back to that old classic. And when they expressed to him, well, there are lots and lots of armed people who do not want to pass through the metal detectors and have their weapons confiscated, he furiously demanded that they abandoned the metal detectors because the people were "Not here to hurt him" and they could follow him to the Capitol. And they had this really powerful moment where the Secret Service telling each other, okay, this guy in a tree has a gun. This guy in a tee has a gun. These people walking down independence have AR-15. This person has a gun. Like, spotting the people in the crowd with all the weapons. And I just thought, how many times have they dealt with this? They won't pass through the metal detectors because too many of them have weapons. It felt to me like they understood what was happening and that's why the crowd wouldn't come in, because they dealt with it before, which is shocking in its own right. But to know that, it puts everything he said at that rally in a whole new light when you understand that minutes before he was screaming about abandoning the metal detectors because so many people in the audience had weapons.  

Beth [00:10:40] One hundred percent.This to me was the critical moment of her testimony for everything that might come after these hearings, that he knew people were armed, that he verbalized, that he didn't care that they were armed because they were with him and he didn't care what happened to anybody else. If you're thinking about whether he has some responsibility for what happened on January 6th, criminally or civilly, that to me is the line. And worth noting, she heard that with her own two ears. That was not passed along to her from someone else. She was in the tent and heard it herself.  

Sarah [00:11:17] Well, and I was also very interested in the testimony where she said as it starts to escalate, the raiders are getting closer. Mark Meadows is totally checked out. At one point she tries to talk to him during the rally, goes to open the door to his vehicle and he pulls it back closed on her. And I thought, who was he talking to that he didn't even want her to hear? .  

Beth [00:11:37] She did it twice.  

Sarah [00:11:39] And I thought that Liz Cheney put that in with the information that Roger Stone had bodyguards in the Oath Keepers. I thought, oh, Liz, what else do you know? Where are you taking us? Where is this going? That's something I want to say really quickly about her. I listen to all this reporting from The New York Times and lots of big news outlets who are just shocked and appalled. And I'm happy because that reporting gets people's attention. It was shocking. I heard a commentator say this wasn't a hearing, this was history. And I think that's accurate. But I thought, well, Liz Cheney, better than probably a lot of people, including most people in Congress, understands that what gets reported and that what people understand happens in the White House is not the full story. So with the rest of us, we're watching the video of that day we think we understand. Well, of course, the daughter of Dick Cheney knows there's way, way, more to the story. Even with all the transparency and visitor logs and call logs, there's way, way more going on in the Oval Office and the offices surrounding the Oval Office during these historical moments that we have to get the bottom of it. And thank God that she understood that and had that instinct, because that's what we're all putting together. Like, we thought we got it. He stood up there and said, "Let's go down there. I'll be with you". And now we're getting all this extra understanding of, well, he wasn't just trying to rile them up. First of all, he thought he was really going to go with them. He really believed he was going with them.  

Beth [00:13:16] And that was a huge part of her testimony that he really, really, wanted to go with them and told everyone to make it happen. And there was a story that to me-- I'm interested in how you feel about this, Sarah. It gave a lot of color to her testimony to hear her recount the telling of Trump grabbing the wheel of the vehicle and lunging at his Secret Service agent and insisting that he is the effing president, take him to the Capitol. It also feels somewhat unnecessary in the big picture to me and has become more of the story as it's been reported out over the next couple of days than I think it really merited. I don't really understand why they pursued this line of questioning in this hearing, if I'm being honest about it.  

Sarah [00:14:03] Well, let's talk about the reporting on the hearing and the reaction to the hearing next. I struggle with that moment. I do think it's incredibly impactful. It's the first thing I've told everyone in my life who I know was not watching the hearing, but who I want to pay attention to understand that things are coming out that we didn't understand. Because it is a very human moment to say he wanted to be with them so badly he lunged for the steering wheel. Like, to me that is not just color, but it's like conveying (along with sort of those temper tantrums) that he was unhinged, angry and when he said, "I'm going to be with you," he meant it. Somebody prevented him from going. I think he honestly planned on walking into the count and the certification with his little cadre of Republican congressmen and just intimidating people. And I think it might have worked. I think his physical presence there-- even Hillary Clinton talks all the time about the power of his physical presence because he's a big guy. He's charismatic. He'd be the president of United States walking in. God save us if that had actually happened. So I do think it's important to emphasize in the most impactful way possible. He wanted to be there, he wanted to follow the people he knew had weapons to disrupt that certification and steal the election.  

Beth [00:15:34] Yeah. And go yell at Mike Pence himself. I think that's what kept occurring to me, that he wanted to be in the room to yell Mike Pence down himself.  

Sarah [00:15:41] Yeah. And that would have been hard. I mean, maybe Mike Pence would have stayed strong, but we don't know. We don't know. I think we spend a lot of time thinking like, okay, this could have been so much worse, but like it could have really been. There's a universe of possibilities that we would have to contemplate if one person had done one thing different. If Pat Cipollone hadn't clearly been going out of his way to prevent this, I wish he'd go out of his way down and talk to Liz at the committee hearings. But there's lots of testimony from Cassidy Hutchinson that she heard him saying, like, "If you let him go, we will all go to jail." Like people are going to get hurt. Yelling at Mark Meadows, why don't you go talk to him? That's where we get the powerful moment where Mark Meadows said, "You heard him. He doesn't think they're do anything wrong. He thinks Mike Pence deserves it." And here's something for that specific moment, though, that I want to talk to you about. It's that there's been a lot of reporting afterwards that she's not shared these. And I'm talking about the committee like it's just Liz Cheney. The committee has not shared these testimonies with the DOJ, that they didn't reach out to the Secret Service beforehand. And I thought, I wouldn't if I was her either because every leak reduces the impact of these testimonies. If we hadn't already heard that, that he said Mike Pence deserved it, which we heard weeks ago from a leak, that would have been one of the most powerful moments of this hearing. And I have to believe, to a certain extent, they just came to a point where they're like, we're not sharing saying anything. I'm sure the the TV producer was is like, it has to hit at once. If it trickles out like that, it's not going to have the same impact.  

Beth [00:17:20] That makes sense. I thought about this totally differently, but came to the same conclusion. When I saw these headlines about tension between the committee and the DOJ, I thought, good. There are two different branches of government, they're supposed to be tense. The DOJ is supposed to be independent. What would it look like if they were coordinating everything with the DOJ? That's terrible. Congress is not supposed to have the power of prosecution. The DOJ is supposed to have that and it is supposed to be separate. I want to see reports on tension between the committee and the DOJ because that separation is meaningful and should be upheld. And I'm sorry if it doesn't fit a narrative or if it makes DOJ's life a little bit harder, but that's absolutely appropriate and necessary and consequential. If we're conducting these hearings about fundamental aspects of how our country runs and they violate those principles in the course of conducting these hearings, we got a big problem. So I think you're right that some of it might be the PR side, but I also think that there is something very fundamental in terms of the legal aspects of this where that's just correct.  

Sarah [00:18:30] Now, you have said that this hearing in particular changed your perspective on the entire committee and their investigation.  

Beth [00:18:36] When I started watching these hearings, I really did not believe that there would be criminal charges for high level people coming out of them. I felt that it was important in terms of writing the history of this event, Congress doing its diligence, establishing a record for legislation, dealing with members of Congress who behaved in ways that violated their oaths. After this hearing, though, it is hard for me to see a world in which criminal charges aren't pressed against some very high level people, because those moments where they have been fully briefed on how dangerous the threat was and it's not even like they abandoned their responsibility to respond to that, but they increased the threat through their actions deliberately. That is a different calculus to me. We're no longer talking about freedom of speech and what constitutes incitement. We are talking about people who knew they had a weapon and pointed that weapon at the Capitol. And I just think it's a different rodeo now. And that, for me, doesn't even hinge entirely on her testimony.  

[00:19:47] But what her testimony tells me, and the fact that this testimony has already been shared before we are into the last primetime hearing, I think that her testimony came out now to do a couple of things. Number one, to get back the headlines because the Supreme Court had taken them. Number two, to serve as a domino that would knock other dominoes down because her testimony dramatically increases the pressure on more senior people to cooperate with this investigation. And number three, I think the ending, which we haven't even talked about yet, was possibly the most important part of this hearing where Liz Cheney shows evidence of witness tampering, that people from Trump world are deliberately trying to influence these witnesses in the way they interact with this committee that there is crime in progress. That's what Liz Cheney said, that there were crimes then, there are crimes continuing and we are aware of all of it. And so I strongly encourage you, as Bennie Thompson always says, that to walk through this open door to our committee if you do not want to be part of the culmination of our work.  

Sarah [00:21:02] Yeah. I mean, I've always been on this particular train. I have always believed that this would lead to criminal prosecution from the very beginning, because I think deep down I just knew that Liz Cheney is not going to throw away her political career to establish a congressional record. You feel me? Like, that's not her goal. Her goal is to take back the Republican Party to permanently handicap, if not imprison, Donald Trump which I do think she is doing. If nothing else, I think the likelihood that he wins the primary in 2024 is decreasing with every single hearing. There is a political cost already where people just don't want any more of this. They don't want to hear about the 2020 election, and they know that's what they're going to get if they nominate him. But I don't think that'll be good enough for her. I think it will be more and more-- and I think they're right. And I mean, not just her. Representative Raskin, who went through an incredibly horrific personal moment and then went to the January 6th certification and got retraumatized, and as a constitutional law professor, so I just think that there's so much passion. I thought The New York Times profile about Bennie Thompson, his devotion to voting rights. And all this, like, this is personal to people, not just because they were there that day, but because they understand the threat to our democracy and that people need to be held responsible for their behavior. And I think they still know more than we know. And we'll know more over the coming weeks. And I think it's like every hearing is like, would you like to charge them for campaign finance fraud? Would you like to charge them for intimidating local officials? Would you like to charge them for witnesses? I have a menu of options available to you, and it's like every hearing she just add something else to the menu.  

Beth [00:22:47] I will say I don't think Chairman Thompson is getting enough credit for the way he must be leading this committee behind the scenes. We talked about this a little bit when we were live during the hearing for the members of this committee to get almost no camera time in every one of these hearings is a very big deal. For them to forego making opening and closing statements at every hearing, for only one member to lead the questioning, for Liz Cheney to have had the cameras the entire time during Cassidy Hutchinson's testimony, which they knew would be the most explosive, these are enormous sacrifices. Now that sounds silly, but in Washington, DC, where careers are made by these moments when the public is actually paying attention, it is a very big deal. And I think it must speak to Chairman Thompson's integrity and humility and persistence behind the scenes. I mean, kudos to all of these committee members for handling themselves this way. But you got to have a leader to get people to this kind of focus. And I think he must be an exceptional one.  

Sarah [00:23:55] Yeah, I agree. I agree. And I look forward to more leadership from him and the entire committee through the month of July.  

Beth [00:24:01] So just like a minute on the counter-narrative, because we started down this path and didn't finish it. People from the Secret Service are associated with them, who knows? Because they are under oath testifying.   

Sarah [00:24:13] Or even putting their name on it.  

Beth [00:24:14] There is a media narrative that there is dispute about whether this happened with Trump in the car grabbing the steering wheel. He says it didn't happen. But who cares what he says? He says this guy is not blue some days. So there is that issue. There is a little dispute over whether Cassidy Hutchinson wrote a note that had some talking points for the president or whether Eric Hirschman actually wrote that note. He says he wrote it. So there are detail issues with her testimony that will get fleshed out somewhere. I don't know how significant any of them are. Again, I don't think that scene in the car matters much if you're thinking about criminal charges or legislation-- the purposes of this committee. I don't think that scene in the car matters a lot, which is why it feels a little like an enforced error to me that they spent so much time there. The other thing that is being pumped out is that her testimony is all hearsay. And, Sarah, this lights me on fire. I don't even know if I can talk about it.  

Sarah [00:25:15] You don't think people have a really complex, legalistic understanding of evidentiary standards?  

Beth [00:25:21] Can I just have a moment here and say that the past week and a half has to be how a lot of physicians have felt during COVID. Like that sense of everyone is suddenly a constitutional lawyer. I am struggling. I am struggling with people believing they have expertize on what the Supreme Court has done and then this hearsay dimension. Look, I went to law school. I passed two bar exams. I practiced law. I conducted evidentiary hearings. If I had to sit down today and take a test on the rule against hearsay, I don't know that I could pass it.   

Sarah [00:25:57] Yeah. It is so complicated.  

Beth [00:25:59] It is  so complicated. There are like 27 exceptions under the federal rules of evidence to the rule against hearsay. It doesn't even apply in a congressional hearing to start with. And the purpose of the testimony matters a lot when you're assessing whether it's hearsay here. I mean, I just feel like you have no idea what you're talking about. Please stop.  

Sarah [00:26:20] My favorite are the people who cite the Johnny Depp-Amber Heard hearing as they're like, well, we learned this about hearsay. And I was like, no. Absolutely no, good sir. Exit this thread. See the exit sign, and get out of here using that horrific example of public consumption of a legal hearing. To talk about this congressionally?  I cannot. No. No, good sir, not today.  

Beth [00:26:45] I know. And I hate to be ugly like that. I never want to be snobby. I never want to be like, the general public can't possibly understand this. What I'm telling you is that lawyers don't understand how the rule against hearsay works. You often are doing research in real time to argue these matters because it is just hard. So that really frustrates me. Again, all to say I hope that the committee really did its diligence around her. I cannot imagine that they didn't, given the way that they've conducted all of these hearings. But, again, I do not think the purpose of her testimony was to establish the complete factual record here as much as it was to put pressure on other people to come forward.  

Sarah [00:27:25] Yeah, I agree. I agree. And I think Liz's response is right. When you want to come swear an oath and testify before the committee, we'll talk. Until then, sit down. I think that's about right.  

Beth [00:27:39] And the risk to this person of doing this is enormous. Like, I don't need to say she's a hero. We've talked about this before. Resist this idea of, like, anyone who does something good, we're going to put them on a T-shirt. Now, I think that's bad for us and we should stop it. I also think it's worth acknowledging, especially when you think about the people who've been unwilling to testify, the risk that a 26-year-old woman takes by putting herself out there like this. She understands the people who are going to be mad at her a lot better than you or I do. 

Sarah [00:28:15] No, and she set her career on fire. She just set it on fire. I just feel like I both do not want people turned into T-shirts. And also the idea that we cannot praise them because they participated in the Trump administration, I also reject because that offers no space for anyone who has ever voted Republican to be convinced or persuaded, which is the name of the game in a democracy. And so I would like to leave open the door to persuasion, because I do think that is still available to us. And if it's not, I'm not really sure what we're doing here and our democracy in 2022. So the idea that like, well, the people who roll in will-- don't forget who she is or don't forget [Inaudible] still vote for Trump. I just think that's a point of persuasion. Don't see that as a negative say. He says he'd still vote for him and he's still testifying that this is what he did. You can still not feel like I'm calling you the worst person in the world for ever voting for Trump and be persuaded that he needs to be held criminally responsible for what he did. We have to leave that space for people to change their minds on him and not feel like we're saying also you're the worst person ever for voting for him. It's just we have to. I'm sorry. I wish there was another way, but there is not. And to leave space for that, like, believe that I'm up here talking about Liz like she's my best friend and she also put out a statement praising the Supreme Court for overturning Roe v Wade. Both things exist, guys. Both things exist simultaneously. That's the reality.  

Beth [00:29:44] Well, the the toxicity and corruption of any party or government or organization happens when there is a decision that you are either with us or against us and there's nothing else. So just don't let that be part of your psyche. If I could plead with America about anything, that would be it. So in our last episode, Sarah, we were talking about how we cannot just be in a state of despair about the legitimacy of the court, the corruption of the last administration, voting rights, etc. We have to be willing to be action oriented. And in my mind, especially as I process what the Supreme Court continues to roll out, I mean, there's been a lot since the Dobbs decision from the court. As I process what they continue to roll out as I watch these hearings, I am doubling down on our conviction that participating as a citizen in these hearings by watching them and talking about them with other people is like action item number one as it relates to all of this. Because if our legislative branch is not willing to impose accountability on the executive and judicial branches, we don't have a path forward. The legislative branch is key to the path forward on everything else, and so that's where I am. What are you thinking about this?  

Sarah [00:31:09] I agree. I think post Dobbs there's been this desire in the same way there was after the 2016 election, that there's these quick things you can do. There's a lot of Instagram accounts that give you like 2 minutes or less things to do every day. And I understand the appeal of checking protecting democracy off your list in the morning and not having to think about it the rest of the day. Like, truly, I understand that. And I understand that these hearings don't present that opportunity that the action is to witness. And that is harder because it doesn't feel like you're doing anything and you're not checking off that easy action item, calling, sending a letter. I get it, and I'm not downplaying how important those things are. I think they made a huge difference on the bipartisan gun safety legislation we recently got. But I know that the hearings, when you're talking about hours and hours of watching difficult testimony, feels like a harder and bigger ask. But that's just the reality sometimes, is that the asks aren't always quick and the asks aren't always as simple as sending a text message or calling your representative's office. Although I think calling your senator or representative would be a great follow up on some of these hearings. But I do think the longer and more difficult task, the more nuanced task of just witnessing these hearings is truly essential.  

Beth [00:32:40] Before we leave you for the month of July, kind of, which we'll talk about in a second. Move to our last outside of politics today. If you're new to our show, we always end by talking about what's on our minds outside of politics. It's getting trickier to find something that's truly outside of politics. But we're whole people and we're watching more than just the January 6th hearings. I finally finished Succession season three. I took the advice of people when I started watching Succession not to binge it. That became harder for me in season three because I really wanted to know what was going to happen in season four.  

Sarah [00:33:08] I abandoned that season two. Season two I was like, "Forget it. I want to know what happens."  

Beth [00:33:15] Okay. So we will do spoilers in this conversation since this is almost-- well, it's at least six months old now.  

Sarah [00:33:22] Yes.  

Beth [00:33:23] Sarah, there were so many interesting character developments in season three, and I know that you went into season three very high on Shiv as like the best member of the Roy family. And I want to know if that held up through season three.  

Sarah [00:33:37] Okay. I do not think that Shiv is the best member of the Roy family. I just don't think she's the worst. And people are harder on her because she's a female.  And so that is what I reject. I think they all pretty equally have their good sides and their downsides. I have like ah moment basically across the three seasons where I got really upset with every sibling. But it's just a single moment and then I see their complexities. I feel like there's only, like, true moments of villainy every once in a while. And the rest of the times, you're like, okay, I get why she's doing that. Not that I would do it or I agree with it, but I understand it. I think that's the brilliance of these performances is that they are complex enough. There were moments with this season where I felt like Logan was just too simplistic in his evil actions that I did not enjoy, particularly the final scene. There was a parts of that, with the mom in particular, that didn't make sense to me. Why would she kill herself during the divorce to protect them and then sell them out on a dime? I think that that was some plot manipulation. Not mad at it, led to a great moment. But I don't think it makes a lot of sense on paper. Again, I think Shiv and Tom and the way they do this dance together is great. I'm not really mad at either of them. Tom kind of grew on me by season three. Figured that one out. Because I was more consistent like, Tom is the worst than any of the siblings. But by the end I was like, you know what, Tom? I take it back. You're out there. You trying to do what's right for you too buddy, keep living your life.  

Beth [00:35:11] I think Tom is just harder because we don't have his background to put his actions in context. He just looks like he is looking out for number one. And so he married for this opportunity and then he's trying to manipulate his way into it the whole way. I interpreted the mom differently. I interpreted the scene where Shiv and her mom are talking about her childhood, as here is this woman who really didn't want kids, really didn't want to be a mother, is on the other side trying to be both honest about that, but not really own all of it. So I didn't interpret her as having fought for the kids in the divorce agreement as much as that just being a way of it settled so that Logan could win. So that Logan won and got the kids and she had the kids voting interests as part of that concession. But it was always like transactional to her, not really this mother's instinct.  

Sarah [00:36:08] See, I interpreted it as I can't imagine Logan would give that up without a fight. She had to fight for it. That doesn't strike me as something that Logan Roy would pass over willingly. And so I thought, well, if she went out of her way thinking this is the way to protect them. Now, maybe it's a difference between now they're grown and she thinks they need to protect themselves and she's tired of fighting for them and she wants something out of it because everybody in succession wants something out of all these .  

Beth [00:36:36] Well, and I think she was offended that they weren't supportive of this marriage. I mean, I think the way they conducted themselves at her wedding probably played into that, too.  

Sarah [00:36:43] Maybe. Maybe. I don't know. And the mother is not very likable. [Crosstalk]  

Beth [00:36:48]  Nobody is.  

Sarah [00:36:48] Right. I do think the scene in the road where Kendall finally confesses about the events at Shiv's wedding and they all sort of surround him. And I don't know if you noticed this, but in the road, Roman has his hands on Kendall shoulders. And then in the final scene, when Roman is on the ground, Kendall has his hands on Roman's shoulders in this very mirroring of their body image. And it's like stuff like that. So that's why I have my devotion of prestige television. I love those little moments where they visually are sending signals, not through the script, oh, I love it so much. And there was so much of that in that final episode. And I thought all of their performances were incredibly powerful, especially Shiv's. Just watching her face change, watching Kendall sort of be like, of course, this is what's going to happen. This is what was going to happen the entire time. And Roman, I think, being the most shocked and all of it, it just was incredibly powerful.  

Beth [00:37:51] Yeah, it was Roman season in a lot of ways. You got a lot more of him in that season than you had in the previous two. And just seeing the arrested development of Roman because of the way that he was parented, because the way his siblings have always treated him, I thought was really good. I went down kind of a rabbit hole reading about the filming of the finale, and was reading about how the actress who plays Shiv said they spent hours out there in the road. A lot of it is improv and they just do it over and over and find different ways. And then she said the director is so brilliant cherry picking them and putting them together. But she said it was over 100 degrees that day.  

Sarah [00:38:34] I know. I was worried about her skin the entire time. Every time she'd walk out in some halter top, I was like, you're too pale for that.  

Beth [00:38:39] She couldn't wear sunglasses, so the sun was directly in her eyes for a lot of it. She said it was physically-- she had on Spanx under that dress. She had on high heels. She couldn't move a whole lot with her body. So she was talking about how she just instinctually put her hand on his head in that shot. That was so beautiful. Of the three of them physically connected. And she said that it felt right to her because Shiv is both taking in Kendall's confession and what's going on with the business. And she feels more responsibility towards the business because she doesn't really know how to connect in a vulnerable way with the brothers. And so it's like she's not a frozen heart. She has some instinct to try to help him, but her mind and her body are also totally in this other scenario. And I just thought that came across beautifully, like, that intention came across perfectly.  

Sarah [00:39:33] I also read that Jeremy Strong like basically limited what they could do at the point that he sunk into that orange dirt because then it's in everything, it's in the clothes. And he was like, I knew that, but it felt like what he would do so I did it anyway. And I thought that was the right choice. It was very powerful. So how did you feel about Tom's betrayal or self survival? I don't know. Whatever you want to call it. 

Beth [00:40:03] They set it up so perfectly in a few episodes before that where he and Kendall are talking and Kendall's trying to flip Tom early in the season. And Tom says-- in more colorful language, I've never seen Logan lose. I think you're going to lose because I've never seen Logan lose. And I thought the whole season-- his willingness to be the one who went to prison.  

Sarah [00:40:29] It was so heartbreaking.  

Beth [00:40:30] Just the whole season was him coming to the fact that everybody in this family is incapable of real love, but Logan is capable of loyalty. And so it just seemed to me that Tom-- and now I don't think Logan is capable of loyalty. I think Tom has totally miscalculated here. But I understand. I thought they set up really well how he got there. And then I think Shiv gets the worst of it from viewers, in addition to being a woman, because she's the only one that's being shown in the context of a marriage. And the way she behaves in her marriage is so abhorrent. It's something that I think happens but doesn't get depicted very often. And so when she's looking at Tom saying I don't love you, you could see where it was going.  

Sarah [00:41:18] What other example of marriage has she seen? I mean, what would she even know about marriage except through the lens of her father and her mother? And I do think they're capable of love. I do think the siblings love each other. And there was a part of me that was so sad because I wanted their finally getting together. I wanted that to be what would finally get Logan. Like, I wanted to be like, that's it. That's what you guys have needed the whole time, is to really be in it together between that your powers combined. And so I was really bummed and thought it was a little plot manipulation the way he came back. I think it looks fine on paper, but in reality probably wouldn't work out that way. And I have to say, I love the show and I'm excited for season four, but I'm exhausted by the will they, won't they sell it. I need ya'll to decide. And maybe that's just the end of the show and that's fine. We don't have to stretch this out into six, seven seasons, because when you watch them all at once you realize like how little happens.  

Beth [00:42:22] Oh, not much happens at all. That's right.  

Sarah [00:42:23]  You know what I mean? Especially with the business. And that part is getting old. I love the show, but that particular storyline is getting very old.  

Beth [00:42:31] But what is so brilliant about it is that is how it is. Like, when I catch up with friends from my old workplace, a lot of what's going on is the same. It's like a soap opera. It's the same stuff that was going on when I was there, like the big business aspects of it. And every single time something a piece moves, it feels like the world is ending. It's drama, tension. What's going to happen next? Oh my gosh, this is the end of the line. And then I check back in two years later and it's like the same stuff really. Some things are a little different, but not much.  I mean, life is just character development more than anything else. A lot more character development than plot. So one more quick thing. My favorite moment in this whole season was when Greg was talking with his grandpa. And his grandpa says to him, "You need to start taking yourself seriously." I thought that was the most brilliant moment of television that I've seen in a long time, just the way it was set up. What came after it. How that connected with me so much and really seemed to just kind of slide right off Greg.  

Sarah [00:43:37] Bless Greg.  

Beth [00:43:38] I thought it was just a perfect sentence. Just perfect.  

Sarah [00:43:43] I love Greg. I love Greg the most much like the rest of America. There is no betrayal or unethical behavior that Greg could engage in that would stop me from loving him. I just want to be clear on that.  

Beth [00:43:55] But I like that they started to test that a little bit in the season where they show you don't get to be in the pig pen without getting money. And I think that that's been a brave move to make Greg not 100 percent perfect and really good. So I got the season four logline for us just to end there. " The sale of media conglomerate Waystar Royco to tech visionary Lucas Mattson moves ever closer. The prospect of this seismic sale provokes existential angst and familial division among the Roys as they anticipate what their lives will look like once the deal is completed. A power struggle ensues as the family weighs up a future where their cultural and political weight is severely curtailed." So stay tuned.  

Sarah [00:44:39] Stay tuned. More of that sale. Let's talk about the sale of Waystar Royco. It's fine. I'll watch it. I'm going to watch it. And we have decided-- on announcemen, we decided we're going to do season four episode recaps on our Patreon and premium channels. Get excited, you guys.  

Beth [00:44:55] Yes. So Patreon, Apple Podcasts, subscriptions, if you would like to be part of that, we would love to have you join us. Plus, there's lots of other things going on there. Now we are planning to take some time off in July. Our time off calendar is tentative because we will stick with the January 6th hearings. That's how important they are to us. We say no to almost everything else in July, but the January 6th hearings we are going to stick with. So next week, if all stays the same as it is now, which is a terrible assumption, you will hear from Jason Kander on Tuesday and we'll have a really interesting conversation about the coasts of the United States on Friday. And then we'll have a week off and then new episodes for you in the last two weeks of July, but will be quieter on social media and in our premium spaces as we spend a little time with our families and allow our teams to do that as well. So we really appreciate kind of the gentle insistence our audience has about us taking these breaks. You guys are very, very, kind about this and supportive of seasons of rest. So thank you for that. And thank you for being here with us through a couple of really difficult weeks. As we're coming into the month of July, we are just so grateful that we have the opportunity to process the hard things that life throws at us with all of you, we will continue to do that when we're back. Until then, have the best July available to you.  

[00:46:29] Pantsuit Politics is produced by Studio D Podcast Production. Alise Napp is our managing director.  

Sarah [00:46:34] Maggie Patton is our community engagement manager. Dante Lima is the composer and performer of our theme music.  

Beth [00:46:39] Our show is listener-supported. Special thanks to our executive producers.  

Executive Producers (Read their own names) [00:46:44] Martha Bronitsky. Linda Daniel. Ali Edwards. Janice Elliott. Sara Greenup. Julie Haller. Helen Handley. Tiffany Hasler. Emily Holladay.  Katie Johnson, Katina Zugenalis Kasling. Barry Kaufman. Molly Kohrs.  

[00:47:02] The Kriebs. Laurie LaDow. Lilly McClure. Emily Neesley. The Pentons. Tawni Peterson. Tracy Puthoff. Sarah Ralph. Jeremy Sequoia. Katie Stigers. Karin True. Onica Ulveling. Nick and Alysa Villeli. Katherine Vollmer. Amy Whited.  

Beth [00:47:20] Jeff Davis. Melinda Johnston. Ashley Thompson. Michelle Wood. Joshua Allen. Morgan McHugh. Nichole Berklas. Paula Bremer and Tim Miller.  







Maggie PentonComment