All Americans love when millionaire television hosts preach forced wealth redistribution from their ivory towers, right? This is the latest liberal cause late night host Stephen Colbert advocated for on Thursday’s Late Show, during an interview with CBS’s John Dickerson.
The conversation hit a litany of leftist talking points over the course of the night. However, Colbert’s giddiness over the demonization of billionaires was a particularly nauseating moment. He bemoaned:
There are only, according to Fortune magazine, 607 billionaires in the world. Why do we care what they think? Because there is a lot more of us, and they've got too much money. Give your money to people who need it, and collective distribution of your wealth is not anti-American, it's as American as Eisenhower.
Massive taxes are as American as Eisenhower? Perhaps Colbert missed the story of the Boston Tea Party in history class. Surely Colbert would be willing to apply that logic to the millions in his own bank account.
The discussion followed the announcement of billionaire Mike Bloomberg’s plans to join the ever-expanding 2020 Democratic field. Colbert pondered: “Why now?”
Dickerson responded with a somewhat disheartening message for Joe Biden:
…what he has decided -- they've looked at the polls and the concern is that the party's gone too far to the left. But they've decided -- the thinking is there's only room for one moderate and the moderate in the race right now, which is to say Joe Biden, isn't getting the job done, so Mike Bloomberg thinks there's a place for him.
Colbert shared in the worry over the Democratic frontrunner: “I had heard that he wasn't going to run because Biden was getting traction. But this just cuts him off at the legs, if people believe that Bloomberg's right. Then that's it for Biden.”
What would Colbert's show be if there was no mention of Impeachment? The liberal host allowed Dickerson, a 60 Minutes correspondent, to go on a drawn-out explanation for why the President is "wrong" any way you slice it:
Here's the problem, though, it seems to be though, if you say yes the President did what is alleged but it's not impeachable, what you then seem to be also signing up for, is well, the President said he didn't do it, so the President, if you buy this line of thinking, then the President lied to the public, to Senators and to American Ambassadors. So then you have to say, well, doing that is wrong but not impeachable. Then you have to say, well doing that is wrong but not impeachable
Colbert retorted by hurling a predictable insult at the President and Republicans’ “All they have to do is be okay with the President having lied, and after 11,000 lies, that's just a needle in a crap stack.”
There is no questioning what Colbert would like most for Christmas, as he eagerly questioned: “Are we going to have an impeachment underneath the Christmas tree on December 25th?” When Dickerson explained the unlikelihood of that outcome, one only could only imagine how dejected Colbert must have felt.
If Colbert thinks he knows American public policy best, why does he not throw his hat in the presidential ring to defeat his enemy, President Trump, for himself?
Transcript below:
The Late Show With Stephen Colbert
11/7/19
12:04:54 AM
STEPHEN COLBERT: Well, we have got big news to break to this audience, at least, because it broke while they were seated here. They don't know this. Let me just read this here, this just broke, Michael Bloomberg is expected to file to get on the Democratic ballot in Alabama's presidential primary. Why now?
JOHN DICKERSON: By the way, you only heard one "Woo." A single "Woo" candidate.
COLBERT: In New York.
DICKERSON: Yes, exactly, in New York, which we can talk about that in a moment. I think- so I called two people about this. One person said he's running -- and these are people who are close to Mike Bloomberg -- the other person said he's putting on his running shoes. He's done polling. And you know he's done this before, he's thought about getting in or not.
COLBERT: He actually put organizations in all the states. He's ready to go, right?
DICKERSON: He was ready to go. He was thinking about Vice President's. He was ready to go and decided that there were too many hoops in Democratic politics to jump through that he wasn't naturally associated with. He's not a died in the wool Democrat, which is why you only got one woo.
COLBERT: But he's been a Democrat. He's been a Republican and he's been an independent.
DICKERSON: Right. Exactly. But what he has decided- they've looked at the polls and the concern is that the party's gone too far to the left. But they've decided- the thinking is there's only room for one moderate and the moderate in the race right now, which is to say Joe Biden, isn't getting the job done, so Mike Bloomberg thinks there's a place for him.
COLBERT: I had heard that he wasn't going to run because Biden was getting traction.
DICKERSON: Right.
COLBERT: But this just cuts him off at the legs, if people believe that Bloomberg's right. Then that's it for Biden.
(...)
COLBERT: There are only, according to "Fortune magazine," 607 billionaires in the world. Why do we care what they think? Because there is a lot more of us, and they've got too much money. Give your money to people who need it, and collective distribution of your wealth is not anti-American, it's as American as Eisenhower.
DICKERSON: Well, and by the way, of those number of billionaires, there probably aren't many in the caucus states of Iowa and New Hampshire.
COLBERT: Right. Why is it a bad idea to attack billionaires, I suppose?
DICKERSON: I don't think in the Democratic party it's a bad idea at all. That's why Elizabeth Warren is doing pretty well. I think she's- because look- what her argument is, is look, capitalism has come to a problem, and it needs some management, as she would argue has always been the case with capitalism in America...
(...)
DICKERSON: But it's -- and if you think about one of the things that's extraordinary is we're about a month into this and there is still not a single line about what the President did or didn't do with respect to Ukraine.
COLBERT: You've asked this question several times on Twitter that I really like. Phrase this, like break down the question for us.
DICKERSON: Well, I think for me the main question is, is it that the President did not try to get Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden? Is that it? That it didn't happen at all? Or is it that he tried to do it, and it failed, and that that's okay? So it's either he didn't do it at all, or he did and it's okay. But we haven't- there are two different -- you're getting two different things. The President is saying he didn't do it at all, it wasn't his intent. Then you have other people, ”Wall Street Journal" editorial page for example, that says, sure it was self-serving but it's not worth impeaching him over. But there's still no single line. It seems to me that after a month, there should be one answer.
COLBERT: And there is Lindsay Graham's response which is, I don't know how to read.
DICKERSON: Here's the problem, though, it seems to be though, if you say yes the President did what is alleged but it's not impeachable, what you then seem to be also signing up for, is well, the President said he didn't do it, so the President, if you buy this line of thinking, then the President lied to the public, to Senators and to American Ambassadors. So then you have to say, well, doing that is wrong but not impeachable. Then you have to say, well doing that is wrong but not impeachable. Then you have to think of all the things that were done in defense of the President which includes besmirching the reputation of those people who have now been proved right, you have to say well that was wrong but not impeachable. So you're signing up for a lot if you say the actual conduct of the President was wrong but not impeachable, and I don't know if those who hold the wrong but not impeachable position understand the kind of basket of goods that they're signing on to if that's what they decide to do.
COLBERT: All they have to do is be okay with the President having lied, and after 11,000 lies, that's just a needle in a crap stack.
(...)
COLBERT: There are- experts are saying this could be wrapped up by Christmas. You're an expert. Do you think this will be wrapped up for Christmas? Are we going to have an Impeachment underneath the Christmas tree on December 25th?
DICKERSON: Well, I don't know, that would be about three weeks because they're going to take a week off probably for Thanksgiving, so that would be very fast...
