Latest news with #Pollyanna-ish
Spectator
26-06-2025
- Politics
- Spectator
Keir Starmer is seriously stupid
Sir Keir has returned from his worldwide statesmanship tour. Barely the edge of a photograph went ungurned in, not a bottom went unkissed, no platitude went ungarbled. Now – lucky us! – he was back in the House of Commons for a good long crow about his achievements. As always, there was an obsequious toad ready on the Labour backbenches The PM began with the usual Starmerite guff production. The man is a veritable Chinese Power Station of pompous pollution. This, however, was more smug than smog. It began with a round-up of how crucial he'd been in every negotiation and discussion. 'We're following in the footsteps of Attlee and Bevan,' crowed Starmer. Well, up to a point Comrade Copper. I mean, his cabinet hated each other too. Apparently, the G7 was going to 'follow Britain's lead' on controlling illegal migration. I genuinely think he didn't see the irony in this. What's next? The G7 to follow North Korea's lead on free speech? Nato to follow Spain's lead on afternoon productivity? Dick the Butcher, in Henry VI, Part 2, famously exclaims 'now let's kill all the lawyers'. It was this energy and spirit which Kemi Badenoch sought to channel as she stood to respond to the Prime Minister's 12-minute self-paean. 'What we need is a leader, instead we have three lawyers', she said, referencing the PM, Lord Hermer and the Sage of Tottenham, David Lammy. The PM's slavish following of legal advice was a major theme of her speech. A picture emerged of a man who, if some UN precedent could be found for it, would crawl up and down Pall Mall in a leather gimp-suit singing 'I'm a Little Teapot' and then claim it as a stunning victory for soft power. Dame Emily Thornberry also invoked the 'soft power' geopolitical sugar plum fairy. Perhaps to distract from her troublemaking over welfare cuts, she put on a sort of sickly-sweet Pollyanna-ish voice to ask her non-question. Normally her mode of delivery is like a buffalo that's just smoked 100 Superkings. More soft pitches were thrown in Sir Keir's direction by Sir Ed 'Babe Ruth' Davey, who, while ostensibly asking questions on behalf of the Lib Dems, had as his most used phrase today 'I agree with the Prime Minister'. As always, there was an obsequious toad ready on the Labour backbenches to perform the act of ego-stoking necessary to keep the leader's sense of self intact. Enter John Slinger, who decried petty party politics, then praised the Prime Minister for the unique 'human empathy' he had brought to international diplomacy. Slinger is apparently MP for Rugby. I had assumed he actually represented the underside of a rock somewhere in the deepest, darkest Amazon because that appears to be where he has been living for the past 12 months. There was even a gentle backscratcher of a question from Rishi Sunak about Iranian sanctions. Would anyone in the House follow Mrs Badenoch's lead and try to pop St Pancras's very own pig's bladder of pomposity? Step forward, Stephen Flynn. The SNP's Westminster leader resembles an apoplectic egg and is the only person in the chamber who appears to hate the PM more than Kemi Badenoch and Big Ange do. How could Sir Keir make his arguments about foreign policy on moral grounds when he was about to cut aid to the disabled, he asked? Cue more fleshy clucking from Starmer. At the end of his rant, Flynn was called what had become the word of the day in this nightmarish episode of Sesame Street: 'unserious'. For all his capacity to render himself ridiculous by his legalistic pomposity, there is always potential for the PM to add to it. He is particularly keen on affecting the air of a self-important substitute teacher when addressing the Leader of the Opposition; 'not angry, just disappointed'. Inevitably, the PM also accused Badenoch of being 'unserious'. Further irony there of course, because as every good comedian knows, nothing is more ridiculous than someone going about something innately stupid – self destructive even – with the utmost seriousness.
Los Angeles Times
01-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Los Angeles Times
Leighton Meester is more than the internet's boyfriend's wife
When Adam Brody became the internet's boyfriend a few months back, people started acting weird around Leighton Meester. Of course, long before audiences became obsessed with Brody's turn as a hot rabbi in 'Nobody Wants This,' both he and Meester were cemented in the pop culture firmament as teen drama icons. She was 'Gossip Girl's' Blair Waldorf. He was 'The O.C.'s' Seth Cohen. And it warmed everyone's cold little hearts that actors from two beloved mid-aughts shows had ended up together IRL. But when the couple — who have been married since 2014 — showed up at the Golden Globes in January, the vibes were off. Reporters on the red carpet couldn't stop fawning over Brody during interviews, to the point where he had to step in and attempt to make things less awkward. 'Your date is the Hot Rabbi,' an 'Entertainment Tonight' host gushed to Meester. 'And she's my real shiksa goddess,' Brody duly pointed out. On the 'Access Hollywood' podium, one journalist even grabbed Meester's face to ask if her husband kissed her as intimately as he did his scene partner on his new Netflix show. 'She taught me,' Brody chimed in again. 'I mean, she gets the good stuff. That's not even, like, the A material.' TikTok users zoomed in on their television screens that night, posting clips highlighting the odd energy being directed Meester's way. This was Queen B, after all. Show a little respect. But Meester herself swears she didn't even clock the gushy line of questioning. 'Wow, I don't remember that,' the 39-year-old insists. 'I understand that people are doing their jobs. I'm sure they're generally trying to be nice and supportive and rooting for us, and me.' From anyone else, this might read as frustratingly Pollyanna-ish. A politically correct answer from an actor trying not to offend the people who help her make her and her spouse's livelihoods. But Meester really is that unbothered. It's hard to square with the fact that she played a calculating, uppity bitch so well in the role that made her famous. But the signs have always been there. In the 13 years since 'Gossip Girl' wrapped, most of the paparazzi pictures snapped of her have been shot while she was surfing, appearing more concerned with sun protection — outfitted in a bucket hat and full-body wetsuit — than her appearance. Meanwhile, Meester and her husband, 45, have both continued to work steadily, often in independent films or as supporting characters in larger projects. Meester has played a country ingenue opposite Gwyneth Paltrow in the musical romance 'Country Strong,' done an arc on the short-lived 'How I Met Your Mother' spinoff and co-starred in an Elizabeth Meriwether-created sitcom that fizzled out during the COVID-19 pandemic. In other words, she's not overly precious about what she chooses to act in. Her latest role is in the comedic police procedural 'Good Cop/Bad Cop,' which starts streaming on Amazon Prime this month. The show has been airing on The CW since February but, despite earning strong reviews, has yet to become much of a talker. Australian actor Luke Cook — the male half of the sibling detective duo on the series — attributes much of that to the fact that the show was co-produced by a streaming company in his native country. 'There's a marketing budget in Australia, and there's not been one behind the U.S. launch,' says Cook. 'I have family members and friends over there sending me pictures of posters of the show everywhere, and over here, there's no sign that it's on other than on social media.' But if Meester is the least bit salty about the show's reception stateside — you guessed it — she doesn't let on. 'I'm super proud of this show,' she says. 'I just really hope that if people watch it, they enjoy it. It's my happy place.' It's February, about a week after the first episode dropped on The CW, and Meester is sitting in a booth at Casablanca, a dimly lit, vaguely divey Mexican restaurant whose decor is comprised entirely of memorabilia relating to the 1942 film. She's already sipping on a mezcal margarita by the time I arrive, passing a menu to recommend the enchiladas or ceviche. She's a regular here — her kids, ages 9 and 4, often ask to swing by after school — but doesn't know the origin of its ties to the Humphrey Bogart-Ingrid Bergman film. We ask the waiter. 'You know, like the movie,' he says, dropping a basket of chips on the table and walking away. That Meester and her family are gravitating toward the familiar right now makes sense. It's been just over a month since their home burned to the ground in the Palisades fire. She's still trying to find the right words to describe the loss. Devastating, of course. That's the first one she settles on. Painful. But then she starts talking about how lucky she feels in the grand scheme of things — that she hasn't had to face many crises in her life. She didn't think she needed a perspective shift, but the fire forced one on her, and now she feels surprisingly grateful. 'Loving something — or someone — so much that it would hurt so badly to lose it, and then saying I wouldn't have loved it any less? That's what I think I'm here for,' she says. 'I don't want to feel unhappy loving another human and thinking, 'Well, you could leave me tomorrow. You could die.' That's the horrible truth of this life. But it's also the amazing thing of the day-to-day, and most days, I'm fortunate enough to say, are pretty damn good.' It has been a time of stark contrast. The fires started just over 36 hours after the Golden Globes. Shortly after, the second season of 'Nobody Wants This' started filming, so Brody began traveling across town from the couple's new rental house on the Westside to go to set. At Casablanca, Meester has just arrived from a table read for the Netflix rom-com, for which she'll shoot a cameo in a few weeks. She says her scenes are mostly with sister characters Kristen Bell and Justine Lupe, rather than her husband. But they've acted together before — she thinks this is the seventh project for them — most recently on 'Good Cop/Bad Cop.' 'When the camera wasn't on her and we were doing his coverage, I would be like, 'Leighton, you're not acting. You're just watching Adam with a big smile on your face,'' recalls John Quaintance, the show's creator. 'They're so supportive of each other that it's both heartwarming and a little sick.' They've never played an onscreen couple, but Meester says she'd be down for it. 'I really like hanging out with him and working with him,' she says, her eyes getting that gooey look she had watching Brody take home the actor in a comedy series prize at the Critics Choice Awards in early February. (His speech ended with this ol' heartstring-puller: 'And my darling, darling, darling wife, Leighton. Thank you. Thank you for sharing this life with me, and this journey with me. Thank you for our family. I love you with all my heart.') Those who've worked with Meester would love for her to have her own renewed moment in the sun. 'I don't think enough people have seen how great she is at comedy,' says Quaintance. ' I think that first huge role probably hangs over her in the form of expectations that people think, 'Oh, I'll go see her on some sort of nighttime soap.' And I think the real Leighton is a lot more fun than that.' Meester acknowledges that she and her 'Gossip Girl' character share startlingly little in common. She's definitely not into headbands. But you know that saying about ducks? They look calm on the surface of the water, but their feet are anxiously paddling away underneath. That feels like the thread connecting Meester and Blair Waldorf — they're both ambitious, the latter is just unabashed about showing it. As a girl, Meester did local theater in Marco Island, Fla. The only stage in town was a church, so the venue moonlighted as the host of Girl Scout meetings, potluck dinners and local productions. In fifth grade, Meester got a part in a play and went there every day after school for rehearsal. She loved it so much that she convinced her mother to let her attend a modeling and acting convention in Georgia. After performing a made-up commercial for a handful of talent representatives, one urged her to move to New York for the summer to try her hand at professional auditions. So at 11, she and her mother decamped to the city. She enrolled in junior high at Manhattan's Professional Children's School and soon landed a role on 'Law & Order.' She got to act with Jerry Orbach and Benjamin Bratt, and the costume director liked her grape-juice-stained shirt so much that she was ordered to keep it on for her scene. She spent her high school years in L.A. but returned to New York City for 'Gossip Girl.' The show ran from 2007 to 2012, when she was in her 20s, and it's a period she still feels tender about. 'I feel so close to that person, almost now more than any other time in my life,' she says. 'I feel very in touch with her, and I feel for her.' There has, of course, been a lot of speculation about the turmoil of the 'Gossip Girl' years, particularly among the suddenly-famous young and beautiful cast members. In January, after Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni entered into a public and contentious legal battle, clips resurfaced online of Meester and Lively. It has long been rumored that the two did not get along, and old interviews posted online purported to spotlight steely interactions between the two of them. Asked how she felt about being brought up in relation to the Lively drama, Meester demurs. 'Oh, I — I don't want to talk about any of that,' she says. At the moment, she's focused on making her life as low-stress as possible. This summer, she'll stay in L.A., partly because of work: She's booked a recurring role on HBO's forthcoming 'Untitled Rachel Sennott Project.' But that's about all she knows about how the next few months will go. After the fires, she's focused on trying not to plan too far ahead. Her kids help with that. Lately, they've been fascinated with something called Stick Nation, a subculture of people on TikTok who upload videos showcasing unique sticks they've found in the wild. 'My son will see a stick and be like, 'Can I take it home? It's special.' To see the world like that is pretty amazing,' says Meester. 'I'm trying to spend those moments with them and absorb it. I was going to say trying to focus on the joy of the moment, but even sometimes the pain of it. It sounds strange, but I've really been enjoying this time.'
Yahoo
25-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Joe Oliver: Trudeau redux or Poilievre for real change?
President Donald Trump has severely undermined trust in the Canada-U.S. relationship but has not permanently altered its fundamentals. Our two countries are geographically inseparable, economically integrated and share deeply held values of democracy, human rights and the rule of law. This is a time for calm determination, not panic or further retaliation. Yes, Canada should diversify its trade, especially for energy resources, but we must not rupture our close economic relationship with the U.S., which buys over three-quarters of our exports. And in the great-power conflict between the U.S. and China, our security alliance with America cannot be jeopardized. Despite this strategic reality, Mark Carney is using the fear and antipathy President Trump generates to maximum partisan effect: Trump becoming the ballot issue dramatically moved poll numbers in his favour. The last thing he and his consigliere, Gerald Butts, would want is a pre-election U.S. trade deal with the EU, the U.K., Japan or South Korea that would reassure Canadians a reasonable deal is possible for us, as well. The EU has already offered to move tariffs to zero, which would give Trump an off-ramp to declare victory and revive global markets. The president began with a chaotic 'art of the deal' demand for the moon but likely will settle for something less one-sided. Despite his latest outburst, which seems designed to unsettle Canada prior to negotiations, and possibly to help Carney's electoral prospects, it is not Pollyanna-ish to suggest that a trade deal that reflects Canada's economic and security interests could also be to America's advantage and therefore acceptable to Trump. We need to be tough, however, which means strengthening our economic resilience. Mark Carney's economic and fiscal platform would do the opposite. Prior to the 2015 election, I was convinced, based on personal observation and Justin Trudeau's comments, that he would inflict on Canadians a high-tax, high-spend, performative, progressive, energy-hostile government, although I underestimated how dysfunctional the policies would be and how incompetently the government would implement them. Mark Carney is even more predictable, since he has written and spoken extensively, though he has become more evasive in his communications since the writ dropped. In spite of a cynical attempt to distance himself from his predecessor and mentee, Carney's ideological predispositions and policies are remarkably similar regarding the economy, global warming, free markets, the role of government and regulatory intrusiveness. Carney's political task is to convince the electorate of two dubious propositions: First, he is not ideologically akin with Trudeau, whom he advised for years and whose advisers are now his advisers and wrote his platform. Second, he can be a better negotiator opposite Trump. Even if that were true, the risk Carney poses is that he will perpetuate the progressive, big-government, energy-hostile policies of the Trudeau Liberals, who stymied economic performance, damaged national unity and undercut pride in our history and cultural identity. His elitist, globalist values would therefore weaken our bargaining position with President Trump and undermine Canada's great potential. So the choice comes down to Trudeau redux or Pierre Poilievre for real change. The shocking Liberal fiscal platform, released last weekend, reinforces that conclusion. It is a classic Trudeau financial document in what it reveals, what it tries to hide and what it misrepresents — massive new spending ($130 billion over four years) leading to $225 billion in additional federal debt, a promised $28 billion in undefined spending cuts, huge deficits, reliance on a mythical multiplier relationship between government spending and private-sector investment and $20 billion in revenue from counter-tariffs yet, without embarrassment, no accounting for the economic effects of Trump's tariffs. This program will generate ballooning interest obligations, another decade of no growth in real per capita GDP, insipid productivity and relative economic decline. On top of all that, are electors seriously supposed to believe this abandonment of fiscal prudence will not lead to further spending increases? Not just more of the same, this is actually worse. Indications are voters want to develop Canada's vast natural resources to generate economic growth, create jobs, increase productivity, enhance energy security, help our allies and reduce net global GHG emissions. But Carney has said he will not abrogate the laws and regulations that effectively preclude development. Pierre Trudeau won the 1974 election satirizing price controls ('Zap! You're frozen!'), then implemented them within a year. Jean Chrétien promised to introduce proportional representation and scrap the GST, neither of which came close to happening. Carney's promise to develop natural resources won't be the first broken Liberal promise, although this one is much easier to predict, based on his decades-long obsession with net zero. Opinion: Plant-powered Air Carney won't fly William Watson: This election's 10 dumbest economic proposals Donald Trump wants Canada weak and uncompetitive in overseas oil and gas markets and China's Xi Jinping prefers a compromised government in thrall of his basic dictatorship. It's not hard to guess which candidate they favour. In this moment of upheaval, Canadians need to cast their ballots with a clear idea, not just of their own priorities, but also of Canada's vital national interest. Joe Oliver was minister of natural resources and minister of finance in the Harper government. Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
25-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Dan Goldman looks to be ‘the man in the arena' against Trump
Rep. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.) wasn't planning to run for Congress after his stint as the lead counsel on President Trump's first impeachment. If anything, spending months as a staffer had discouraged him from seeking office, even as he felt assured the public would weigh details unearthed during Trump's impeachment trial as they decided whether to return him to the White House. 'I had hoped that Joe Biden would win and that Donald Trump would ride his golf cart into the sunset,' Goldman said. Instead, Trump denied his 2020 election defeat and a mob of his supporters attacked the U.S. Capitol — events that inspired Goldman's run for office in 2022. 'I'm somebody who lives by the Teddy Roosevelt quote that it is better to be the man in the arena than the person outside, criticizing the man in the arena,' he said. With Trump back in the White House for a second term, Goldman is now going deeper into the arena. In a little more than a month in office, Trump has fired 18 inspectors general, threatened to defy a court order, overseen the gutting of agencies like the U.S. Agency for International Development, fired scores of federal workers and vowed to take over various other countries. The House Judiciary Committee is sure to be the epicenter of activity in hashing out partisan battles over the wisdom and legality of Trump's actions. And it's one Democratic leadership has stocked with new faces. Goldman is one of a trio of first-term lawmakers who followed Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) from the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee to the Judiciary panel as he took over as ranking member this year. Reps. Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.) and Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas) were also seen as effective voices for Democrats as they confronted the GOP investigation into the Biden family. Moskowitz frequently used humor to needle Oversight Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) and GOP witnesses, while Crockett gained prominence for her unique blend of well-placed one-liners and well-timed clashes with some of Congress's most notable conservatives. Goldman's niche in that group was different: He was the lawyerly one. It wasn't that the others don't have law degrees — they do — but Goldman's approach, by his own admission, mirrors the way the former prosecutor would dive into cross-examination when he worked in the Southern District of New York. 'I may be Pollyanna-ish, but I do believe that the American people ultimately can see through misinformation, and if provided with credible facts and evidence, can understand what the truth is. And I view that to be my role on the committee is to use my experience in cross-examination to question Republican witnesses and to expose them when they don't tell the truth,' he said. 'And that is certainly what I intend to do on the Judiciary Committee.' That task appears more daunting than ever. Democrats pushed to make the 2024 race a referendum on what they said was the risk Trump posed to democracy, highlighting both his efforts to thwart the peaceful transfer of power in 2021 and their concerns he might blow past guardrails imposing limits on presidential power if elected a second time. But many voters either downplayed those warnings or rejected them outright. To Goldman, the challenge is to find a way to make that resonate with the same people that cast aside those concerns just months ago. 'We did not do a good enough job in connecting that to people's everyday lives. And I think there were a lot of voters who said, 'Yes, that is a concern, but it's simply just not a concern I can afford to focus on right now. And I have to figure out how I'm going to pay for groceries, rent, and health care this month. I can't bother focusing on the possibility that a corrupt president usurps power for his own benefit,'' he said. The heir to the Levi Strauss fortune pointed to Trump's directive to freeze all federal grants and other government spending — risking upending funding for things like health care services, child care, and food stamps. 'Our task is to connect the lawlessness to everyday lives,' he said. It's one that is quite literally keeping him up at night. Asked about the mental toll it takes to be in the arena at a time when Democrats deem the president to be a threat to America's democratic traditions, Goldman paused before acknowledging it's had an impact. 'The hardest part is being present for my family and my kids when I'm with them, because it is all consuming to be thinking about and strategizing about everything that is going on. And I feel a tremendous responsibility to stand up for everyday Americans against what is an administration that wants to use the government to benefit the wealthy,' said Goldman, a father of five. 'The way that I often deal with a lot of the emotional aspect of this is to channel that into action. But that is all consuming. And I am not sleeping that well. I'm waking up in the night thinking about different angles to expose the lawlessness, different things that we can do in the minority where we have very little power to push back and to stop what I think is incredibly dangerous for our entire country.' Though largely optimistic about his ability to do so, Goldman wavered at some points. Americans remain as divided as ever, including in how they get their information and who they trust. The fractured media landscape means a growing number of Americans are turning to social media, where misinformation abounds, and a growing right-wing media market has drawn viewers from other sources. 'I worry that we're in a post-factual world,' he said. 'And part of what I am intent on doing is continuing to bring up the facts with the hope that they will matter.' That leaves Goldman hammering Trump on the president's promises to lower prices while looking down the road at confrontations yet to be had. 'The reality is that I — over the last five years, starting with impeachment — I probably know Donald Trump as well as anyone on the Democratic side,' he said. 'Part of being a prosecutor and being a trial lawyer is learning how to think several steps ahead. And by now I really understand how Donald Trump operates. I understand his MO, and I use a lot of that experience of thinking several steps ahead to be more strategic about how we're going to fight him and not necessarily chasing every outrage, every outrageous thing he says.' But for someone who has seen so much of his time in Congress defined by impeachment — either as impeachment counsel or combating the GOP probe into Biden — Goldman does not see impeachment as inevitable. 'I think Donald Trump has already broken the law, and I do think it's inevitable that he will — and is — trying to usurp all of the power of the federal government for his own personal revenge and retribution and his own personal interests. And invariably, there will be numerous abuses of power that make the Ukraine conduct seem quaint,' Goldman said. 'The question that we will have to decide on is: What is the best strategy to use to hold him accountable? And it's not clear to me, right now, that impeachment is the best strategy.' Trump has already survived two impeachments — efforts ultimately quashed by Senate Republicans and rejected by an electorate that just put him back in power. And while Trump was convicted on 34 counts in his New York hush money case, his federal cases unraveled in the wake of the Supreme Court's decision determining former presidents still retain broad immunity, raising questions about the extent the courts will rebuff unlawful actions taken by Trump or his administration. To Goldman, that means Republicans will have to play a key role in holding Trump accountable. 'Donald Trump is effectively trying to co-opt all of Congress's power … and we will certainly aggressively do everything we can to push back on his excessive power grab,' Goldman said of Democrats. 'But ultimately, if Congress is going to have any power or any authority, the Republican members of Congress are going to have to stand up for the institution and for the Constitution, which means they are going to have to stand up to Donald Trump,' he added. 'I am not optimistic that the Republicans who have so consistently bent the knee to Donald Trump will do that, but that is really the primary way — the only way — for Congress to properly execute its role.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Hill
25-02-2025
- Politics
- The Hill
Dan Goldman looks to be ‘the man in the arena' against Trump
Rep. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.) wasn't planning to run for Congress after his stint as the lead counsel on President Trump's first impeachment. If anything, spending months as a staffer had discouraged him from seeking office, even as he felt assured the public would weigh details unearthed during Trump's impeachment trial as they decided whether to return him to the White House. 'I had hoped that Joe Biden would win and that Donald Trump would ride his golf cart into the sunset,' Goldman said. Instead, Trump denied his 2020 election defeat and a mob of his supporters attacked the U.S. Capitol — events that inspired Goldman's run for office in 2022. 'I'm somebody who lives by the Teddy Roosevelt quote that it is better to be the man in the arena than the person outside, criticizing the man in the arena,' he said. With Trump back in the White House for a second term, Goldman is now going deeper into the arena. In a little more than a month in office, Trump has fired 18 inspectors general, threatened to defy a court order, overseen the gutting of agencies like the U.S. Agency for International Development, fired scores of federal workers and vowed to take over various other countries. The House Judiciary Committee is sure to be the epicenter of activity in hashing out partisan battles over the wisdom and legality of Trump's actions. And it's one Democratic leadership has stocked with new faces. Goldman is one of a trio of first-term lawmakers who followed Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) from the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee to the Judiciary panel as he took over as ranking member this year. Reps. Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.) and Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas) were also seen as effective voices for Democrats as they confronted the GOP investigation into the Biden family. Moskowitz frequently used humor to needle Oversight Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) and GOP witnesses, while Crockett gained prominence for her unique blend of well-placed one-liners and well-timed clashes with some of Congress's most notable conservatives. Goldman's niche in that group was different: He was the lawyerly one. It wasn't that the others don't have law degrees — they do — but Goldman's approach, by his own admission, mirrors the way the former prosecutor would dive into cross-examination when he worked in the Southern District of New York. 'I may be Pollyanna-ish, but I do believe that the American people ultimately can see through misinformation, and if provided with credible facts and evidence, can understand what the truth is. And I view that to be my role on the committee is to use my experience in cross-examination to question Republican witnesses and to expose them when they don't tell the truth,' he said. 'And that is certainly what I intend to do on the Judiciary Committee.' That task appears more daunting than ever. Democrats pushed to make the 2024 race a referendum on what they said was the risk Trump posed to democracy, highlighting both his efforts to thwart the peaceful transfer of power in 2021 and their concerns he might blow past guardrails imposing limits on presidential power if elected a second time. But many voters either downplayed those warnings or rejected them outright. To Goldman, the challenge is to find a way to make that resonate with the same people that cast aside those concerns just months ago. 'We did not do a good enough job in connecting that to people's everyday lives. And I think there were a lot of voters who said, 'Yes, that is a concern, but it's simply just not a concern I can afford to focus on right now. And I have to figure out how I'm going to pay for groceries, rent, and health care this month. I can't bother focusing on the possibility that a corrupt president usurps power for his own benefit,'' he said. The heir to the Levi Strauss fortune pointed to Trump's directive to freeze all federal grants and other government spending — risking upending funding for things like health care services, child care, and food stamps. 'Our task is to connect the lawlessness to everyday lives,' he said. It's one that is quite literally keeping him up at night. Asked about the mental toll it takes to be in the arena at a time when Democrats deem the president to be a threat to America's democratic traditions, Goldman paused before acknowledging it's had an impact. 'The hardest part is being present for my family and my kids when I'm with them, because it is all consuming to be thinking about and strategizing about everything that is going on. And I feel a tremendous responsibility to stand up for everyday Americans against what is an administration that wants to use the government to benefit the wealthy,' said Goldman, a father of five. 'The way that I often deal with a lot of the emotional aspect of this is to channel that into action. But that is all consuming. And I am not sleeping that well. I'm waking up in the night thinking about different angles to expose the lawlessness, different things that we can do in the minority where we have very little power to push back and to stop what I think is incredibly dangerous for our entire country.' Though largely optimistic about his ability to do so, Goldman wavered at some points. Americans remain as divided as ever, including in how they get their information and who they trust. The fractured media landscape means a growing number of Americans are turning to social media, where misinformation abounds, and a growing right-wing media market has drawn viewers from other sources. 'I worry that we're in a post-factual world,' he said. 'And part of what I am intent on doing is continuing to bring up the facts with the hope that they will matter.' That leaves Goldman hammering Trump on the president's promises to lower prices while looking down the road at confrontations yet to be had. 'The reality is that I — over the last five years, starting with impeachment — I probably know Donald Trump as well as anyone on the Democratic side,' he said. 'Part of being a prosecutor and being a trial lawyer is learning how to think several steps ahead. And by now I really understand how Donald Trump operates. I understand his MO, and I use a lot of that experience of thinking several steps ahead to be more strategic about how we're going to fight him and not necessarily chasing every outrage, every outrageous thing he says.' But for someone who has seen so much of his time in Congress defined by impeachment — either as impeachment counsel or combating the GOP probe into Biden — Goldman does not see impeachment as inevitable. 'I think Donald Trump has already broken the law, and I do think it's inevitable that he will — and is — trying to usurp all of the power of the federal government for his own personal revenge and retribution and his own personal interests. And invariably, there will be numerous abuses of power that make the Ukraine conduct seem quaint,' Goldman said. 'The question that we will have to decide on is: What is the best strategy to use to hold him accountable? And it's not clear to me, right now, that impeachment is the best strategy.' Trump has already survived two impeachments — efforts ultimately quashed by Senate Republicans and rejected by an electorate that just put him back in power. And while Trump was convicted on 34 counts in his New York hush money case, his federal cases unraveled in the wake of the Supreme Court's decision determining former presidents still retain broad immunity, raising questions about the extent the courts will rebuff unlawful actions taken by Trump or his administration. To Goldman, that means Republicans will have to play a key role in holding Trump accountable. 'Donald Trump is effectively trying to co-opt all of Congress's power … and we will certainly aggressively do everything we can to push back on his excessive power grab,' Goldman said of Democrats. 'But ultimately, if Congress is going to have any power or any authority, the Republican members of Congress are going to have to stand up for the institution and for the Constitution, which means they are going to have to stand up to Donald Trump,' he added. 'I am not optimistic that the Republicans who have so consistently bent the knee to Donald Trump will do that, but that is really the primary way — the only way — for Congress to properly execute its role.'
