Next News Network

If late-night comedy had a hall of fame, Jon Stewart’s recent interview with Ken Buck would be an instant classic for its contentious banter. Just when you thought Stewart and Buck couldn’t see eye-to-eye on any issue, the conversation took a surprising turn during their discussion of ex-President Donald Trump’s recent New York conviction.

Buck, a former rep who isn’t exactly known to fanboy Trump, voiced his disdain for the trial, arguing that the entire process stank of political bias. Despite Stewart’s attempts to dunk him as a Trump apologist, Buck stood his ground. Steering clear of linguistic acrobatics, he put his point across – Trump was explicitly targeted, regardless of whether you’re a fan of him or not. That, according to Buck, makes it a bad precedent. The scales of justice shouldn’t tip based on who is in the dock, he argued, concluding that Trump was more of a political target than a legal one.

Stewart, however, wasn’t having any of it. He attempted to trip Buck up, questioning how Trump was targeted. Buck clarified that the previous District Attorney (DA), Cyrus Vance, had refused to prosecute the case, but the new DA, Alvin Bragg, resurrected it despite the statute of limitations having expired on the misdemeanor. He argued it smelt of political influence, something the justice system should remain impervious to.

Stewart, still not convinced, pointed a finger at Trump’s belligerent calls during his presidency to prosecute Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden. He accused Trump of being a hypocrite – baying for others’ legal demise while crying foul when the ball swung back his way.

To this, Buck offered a simple analogy – comparing the situation to apples and oranges. He clarified the significant difference between a prosecutor lying during a trial and a political figure making grandiose claims. The former, according to him, has legal consequences while the latter barely escapes the realm of grandstanding.

While Stewart credited Buck for disagreeing with him, it was apparent he held his ground despite mounting pressure from the show host and audience. Interestingly, he underscored that despite his campaign rhetoric against Hillary, Trump didn’t follow through with his threats while he was president.

Summing it up, it’s clear, while late-night comedy can be a rollicking ride, it can also be a space for insightful, substantive discussions. Despite the jabs and laughs, Jon Stewart’s showdown with Ken Buck reflects the necessity of dialogue in the face of disagreement. It’s a timely reminder that while comedy can provide an escape from reality, it can also pull us right back into the thick of it. Maybe, just maybe, late-night comedy is meant for more than just laughs.

SOURCE