JD Vance vs Trump: Simon Marks' analysis

Let's cross stateside to get the very latest on the fallout from Tuesday's midterm elections on both the Democrat and the Republican side of the congressional aisle. Simon Marks joins me, LBC's Washington correspondent. Simon, a very good morning to you. Firstly, and most importantly, have you caught up on some sleep since Tuesday night? Because my goodness, you deserved it. I actually had a solid, I think, eight and a half hours last night. So I'm fresh as a day for you, Ben. Good man. What a trooper you were on Tuesday. And it was a phenomenal listen. So well done to Simon, as always. I was tuning in for quite a lot of it. Where should we start, Simon? Should we start with a Republican circular firing squad as they try to work out what went so disastrously wrong for them on Tuesday? Even Donald Trump's own son piping up to have a pop at the war in Iran. Yes, absolutely. Endorsing the view of J.D. Vance that was expressed in a social media post yesterday, the vice president saying it was the war in Iran that lost the election. And Donald Trump Jr. absolutely endorsing that message that was published on Elon Musk's X. By the way, it's just worth underscoring, this was a catastrophic election for Elon Musk. And for the tech industry more broadly, if you look at what happened today on the Nasdaq and the tech heavy index up in New York, a disastrous day for tech stocks. Because, of course, what this election showed to the tech bros was that American voters don't want data centers littering the country, at least without getting a considerable say in planning them and granting the tech industry permission to build them. aspect of all of this. We've seen today a very aggressive video published by Pete Hegseth, the Secretary of War, insisting that he absolutely is not going to pay any attention to what he referred to as sham articles of impeachment that have been prepared against him by one Democrat already in Congress. And of course, there'll be scores more Democrats in Congress once the The new chamber is sworn in on January the 3rd. Donald Trump. and J.D. Vance. I mean, there is potential tension there. The president yesterday was asked about that view of J.D. Vance, that it was the war that did the Republicans in. And he said he sort of agreed with it, but then it became apparent that he didn't entirely agree with it. He didn't think it was the decision to go to war and the conflict itself. It was, said President Trump, the rise in gas prices that turned Americans against him. So I think there's definite tension there between the two men, although apparently, according to the reporting of the New York Times today, Donald Trump in the run-up to the elections had been... Calling around friends and talking to strategists and saying, if I hadn't gone to war on February the 28th against Iran, how do you think we'd be doing? And the answer may well be that the Republicans would have done much better. I mean, there were clearly all sorts of other issues fueling voters, particularly those voters and 88 percent of them. ...told a Fox News survey just a couple of weeks ago that they were motivated to turn out because they were concerned about corruption in government. So that's another big issue. This wasn't, I think, a single-issue election, but it's absolutely a repudiation of Donald Trump and members of his inner circle. And we're already seeing Pete Hegseth questions about his future. The president said today he doesn't understand where they're coming from. He thinks Pete Hegseth is doing a terrific job. Now that video from Hegseth trying to tie himself firmly once again to Donald Trump. Look, there are obviously going to be some changes, but whether they occur immediately or whether it takes a little bit of time for the Republicans to try and figure out the way forward, I suspect it'll be the latter rather than the former. And of course, you can't help but wonder whether J.D. Vance has got one eye on the 2028 presidential nomination. Oh, absolutely. He's now trying to distance himself from a man who has become relatively politically toxic. So let's move to the other side. You touched on the Democrats there and all this sort of conjecture about impeachment hearings and congressional investigations. We are starting to get a bit more of a sense of how the Democrats are going to use their new majority in both the House and the Senate. What are you picking up? Well, look, I mean, there does not appear to be sufficient appetite within Democrats to launch an impeachment investigation of President Donald Trump. They've done that twice. They were unable to convict him at trial in the Senate. There is no reason to believe that that situation meaningfully has changed because you need a two-thirds majority to secure a conviction. They are definitely going to tie all sorts of senior Trump officials up in knots, including the aforementioned Pete Hegseth. Remember that they have investigative powers in the House of Representatives. And we saw the man who is almost certainly going to be the chair of the House Oversight Committee putting out basically a two-word statement to Republicans and telling them it's time to lawyer up. So there's no question that for a lot of these people, life is about to become miserable, but... Hakeem Jeffries, the man likely to be the next Speaker of the House of Representatives, has been saying over the last 24 hours that he believes that Democrats were sent to Congress by the voters to solve the nation's affordability crisis, and he is pledging to the nation that Democrats will solve the country's affordability crisis, bring down the price of groceries, bring down the price of gas at the pumps, petrol at the pumps, and diesel. But how exactly are the Democrats going to do that? That is a huge question, because if President Donald Trump Can't resolve the war on Iran or chooses not to. That means the Strait of Hormuz is going to remain blocked for the foreseeable future. That means that oil prices are going to remain high. And if President Donald Trump ignores Congress when Democrats try to exercise control, for example, over tariffs, he said yesterday he's prepared to be Mr. Veto going forwards. Then again, it's hard to see how the Democrats can actually solve. The affordability crisis. So I think there's danger here for them in over-promising, because in two years' time, when we get to 2028, they're going to own this issue as much as President Trump, having promised to resolve it. They are, and it might fall in the lap of the next president who could well be a Democrat like someone, potentially like Gavin Newsom, the governor of California, who has had a very interesting announcement this evening, Simon. Tell us more. Yeah, and an announcement almost certainly tied to his intent to seek the presidential nomination for the Democratic Party. At the stroke of a pen, the soon-to-be former governor of California, Gavin Newsom, has commuted All 548 death sentences for those inmates living on California's death row. These are, of course, men and men, not just any women, certainly men who have been convicted of the most violent crimes in California. They have all now been told that those sentences are being commuted. ...to life in prison without any possibility of parole. Gavin Newsom saying that he personally found the death penalty morally objectionable. Now, there hasn't been an execution in California for 20 years because there is a moratorium in place on the imposition of the death penalty. The most extraordinary thing about this, Ben, is the realization that by commuting 548 death sentences... Sentences. Gavin Newsom has commuted the death sentences for a quarter of all those people across the country who are on death rows in various states. So absolutely astonishing, you know, and clearly it's going to be much, much appreciated and supported by grassroots Democrats who will be very important if he tries to see. But I mean, I'm slightly sceptical because he's been governor since 2019, as I understand it. So why has he suddenly done this now? Absolutely. You've got every reason to be sceptical. How could it possibly have taken this long if you are indeed so morally opposed to the death penalty? I mean, he's doing it now because he's about to leave office. And so this is one of his final acts. But yes, I think that there will be many people who question the timing of it, why it took him so long. And also, there is no question that the Republicans will be pouring over. The list of those killers whose sentences he has commuted and they will immediately start using that against him by simply telling the stories of some of the most heinous crimes for which those sentences were imposed. But, you know, he's done it for some. It will have come for some Democrats. They will argue it's come too late, but it's certainly a big move that perhaps indicates he is running. Simon, as always, pleasure to have you with us. Thank you very much. Indeed, Simon Marks, you know who he is. He's LBC's Washington correspondent. You don't need me to tell you that.