Power Line
About
Available on
Community
507 episodes
Well, a forensic miracle recovered the lost or rogue audio file for this week's episode, which feature just John Yoo and Lucretia because Steve was in some kind of second-hand smoke daze over in Amsterdam. John and Lucretia do their usual spirited tour through the second Trump assassination, the stubbornly close polls (you can just imagine what Lucretia thinks of "low information" voters), Kamala's embarrassing appearance on Oprah, the latest news about just what happened with President Trump's request for national guard troops on January 6, additional reflections on "Operation Grim Beeper," and finally a philosophical excursion into Lucretia's first contribution to our new "Political Questions" Substack https://stevehayward.substack.com/p/christianity-equality-and-constitutional. Warning—no prudence, but Machiavelli is involved!
The whole gang is back together this week with a rousing review of the week's highlights, including a post-modern take on the Trump-Harris debate, and the dogs-and-cats-living-togther-before-being-eaten memestorm out of Ohio that is driving the left out of its mind (or what little mind they have left). Trump may not have won the debate on any of the usual scoring metrics, but maybe it isn't simple as that. But the heart of the episode is the serious business of Merrickl Garland's tone-deaf speech (even John thinks so) claiming politics never enters into Justice Department decisions, which wouldn't even convince his own mother. Then on to a brief discussion of Steve's recent article on the revival of the common law https://lawliberty.org/the-return-of-the-common-law/, in which the term "prudence" is not mentioned (though he does use the term "Zeitgeist," mostly to annoy Lucretia). John is skeptical, while Lucretia is merely her contrary self (default: Steve is wrong! What's the question?) Note to listeners: We have tried with this episode to take control of of the timing of ad placements (thought not specific content!) so that ads stop appearing randomly or in the middle of sentences. We'll just have to see how it turns out. It's a laborious process.
With Steve stuck on an ice floe somewhere up around the Arctic Circle, John and Lucretia run wild (also long!) with the microphone in his absence, riffing along about ther latest in lawfare—did Judge Marchan blink by postponing his sentencing of Trump? Is a Hunter Biden pardon in the works? And what the hell is Jack Smith up to now? Etc. And are we really going to do Russia Hoax 2.0? Gee—if only there was someone on the episode who could offer an analogy from Russia Hoax 1.0, but the usual supplier was banished. Just imagine how long this episode would have been with some historical analogies, which, let's face it, are the "more cowbell" of the Three Whisky Happy Hour.
After some preliminary discussion of hot dogs and Kamala's stolen fast food valor, this special episode gets down to serious business—a seminar on the topic of political prudence for a thoroughly recalcitrant and skeptical John Yoo. This topic grew out of a long text thread we had following a Power Line post https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2024/08/principle-and-prudence-a-tutorial.phpof Steve's passing along a substantive exchange on Twitter between the Babylon Bee's great Seth Barron and Lucretia on the subject of abortion and prudential politics. In what ways do the parallels between slavery and abortion apply today? Trump's equivocations are causing considerable distress among many Pro-Life advocates, who point to Lincoln as a superior example—as is quite right to do. But is that example correctly understood? Lucretia thinks not. But the prudence Lucretia and Steve impute to Lincoln is hard to define in bright line ways, because at the summit it can't be defined by any abstract rules beyond being able to proportion means to ends, which assumes a lot already, since there are always multiple competing ends, each subject to deliberation. But one big thing gets in the way of clear thinking about this difficult matter: utilitarianism. And our resident Bethamite and McRib consumer is dug in on the matter, and we wander into a lot of historical examples for illumination. It gets pretty lively along the way. We'll let listeners decide if Lucretia and Steve make the case adequately. The poet Randall Jarrell once supposedly said, "If only we could get our hands on this person named 'Society,' we could fix everything." We could easily offer the obvious paraphrase of this for John, and call it a day.
John Yoo hosts this week, and adds to his appalling hypocrisy with his admission that he is teaching a class this summer on the Law of the Sea treaty, even as he continues to embargo any and all discussion of the Clean Air Act! Otherwise the gang in is happy spirits because we're resupplied with good spirits this week, as a fine whisky and wine outlet (Grapes and Grains—they don't even have a website up yet https://ggmerchants.com) has at last opened a superb branch nearby Steve's remote location. How fine? Steve has his eye on a 75-year-old single malt that is for sale at the mere price of $89,999. He decided to fill up his gas tank instead (this being California). The big news of Friday was RFK Jr's endorsement of Trump, about which we have some actual to offer listeners, along with our evaluations of the Democratic convention, which was anything but or . It was pure . Lucretia and Steve also smack John around a bit for his USA Today article https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/voices/2024/08/23/law-school-yale-berkley-campus-protests/74861885007/ on how the leftism of law schools threatens the survival of the Constitution was defective because it didn't go far enough!
Lucretia hosts this week, which means 'Swift Boating' has a whole new meaning, as Taylor Swift's whirled tour on behalf of whirled peas has run into Islamic terrorism, but shhhh, you can't say that in Britain right now, so how can they let her concert series go forward? Too obvious a provocation. Of course we have our weekly update on Kamalamamadrama, dissect the meaning of the abrupt firing of Columbia's president (with Steve arguing she is a liar in any case), After reviewing some encourging recent legal initiatives, involving property rights, UCLA's tolerance of anti-Semitism on campus, and the ongoing legal tussle over the southern border, we finally get around to another rousing argument pitting Steve and Lucretia against John Yoo over his stubborn positivism. Is John just punking all of us? That's Steve's hypothesis. In any case, we went into overtime a bit on this one, but the episode offers some excellent improv bumper music at the end that we bet no one knows, for the hearty souls who hear us out.
John Yoo hosts this week's 500th episode of the Power Line family of podcasts, which turns out to have a common theme: dance steps. Kamalamadingdong (someone's—I won't say who but you can guess—new nickname for the Dem nominee) thinks she can Walz to the White House with a progressive twin, while the Olympics is trying to dance away from its cultural travesties with. . . break dancing?? Boeing is trying to dance around its DEI problems, and the stock market is suddenly doing the two-step around weakening economic signals, and the Biden foreign policy team is slow-waltzing us into a geopolitical dead-end in Ukraine and the Middle East. Meanwhile, Trump is keeping everyone, friend and foe alike, hopping in 6/7 time with his usual improvisations.
What do Trump's controversial appearance before black journalists, the Olympics controversy over the gender of boxers, and the protean identity of Kamala Harris have in common? Simple—they are all an aspect of what Steve believes is central political and moral-philosophical issue of our age: human nature. Everyone seems to think Trump blundered by questioning the authenticity of Harris's changing ethnic identity, but Steve and Lucretia—in rare heated agreement—think it was a masterstroke, albeit with Trump's usual heavy-handed and perhaps clumsy way. And we use for our article of the week the usually sound Abigail Shrier's Free Press article, "Republicans, You’re Going After Kamala All Wrong https://www.thefp.com/p/abigail-shrier-republicans-kamala," that we think gets the matter exactly backwards. But it when we turn to the controversy over gender identity in the Olympics that we deepen the story. Take in at your leisure the case of Caster Semenya https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caster_Semenya, a genuinely "intersex" South African 800-meter runner born with female genitalia who is not allowed to compete in the Olympics track and field competition because of high male testosterone levels. This is the same extremely rare anomaly as the Algerian boxer at the center of controversy right. (Also note the holder of the women's 800 meter world record, Jarmila Kratochvílová https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jarmila_Kratochv%C3%ADlov%C3%A1, set back in 1983—currently the oldest track and field world record. Kratochvílová is thought to have been heavily doped up, as was common with Eastern European athletes in those days, but it is hard to say.) Steve's theory about how the left's war on human nature also applies to why Harris is such a miserable boss—hardly a rare trait among leftists. John doesn't quite buy the metaphysical explanation, but we're used to this my now. Finally, Steve offers a brief homily about moral education drawn from a short passage from Leo Strauss's classic essay "What Is Political Philosophy" to make a point about what's wrong with the left's narrative about the Israel-Gaza War.
Like an old 80s sitcom, this episode was taped before a live audience of about 90 regular listeners who carried on a vigorous commentary and questions in the Zoom chat, and we had a special guest at the very end—John Hinderaker in the (virtual) flesh! And since we actually recorded during happy hour for a change (and not Saturday morning as has been the case for the last several weeks), we rolled out several whisky choices for the episode. Listeners may know that Lucretia, this week's host, has been partial in the past to Glenmorangie, which the great Kingsley Amis noted "has been called delicate and mild, even faintly sweet." This is not a description anyone would ever use about Lucretia, making this a dubious match. Tonight she had two varieties of Glenfiddich on hand, which Amis called "fruity and well balanced." Maybe she's better matched with Macallan, which Amis says is "powerful yet smooth." That sounds more like it! By popular demand, we took up a news items we didn't get to last week in the crush of shocking news stories, namely Judge Aileen Cannon's ruling that special counsel Jack Smith's appointment as special counsel to torment Trump is unconstitutional. Steve invented a special judicial scale—the Silberman Scale from 1 - 10—for John Yoo to grade the opinion, and he gave it a solid 8, which is pretty darn good. From there—oh my! Lucretia unveiled her handcrafted tin foil cowboy hat, as we kicked around whether the loss of trust in key government institutions (cough, cough—FBI—cough, cough, or cough—Secret Service—cough) is because they are merely incompetent and negligent, or whether their carelessness is deliberate. From there John Hinderaker gave us an update on the FBI investigation of the firebombing of his office building back in January, and finally we all gave our predictions for Kamala Harris's running mate, but not until we rolled out the first of whiat is doubtless to be many weeks of ritual denunciation of Harris. So if you missed the live taping, pour yourself a nice, dry single malt and settle in.
Well that certainly was a week. Seems more like a year now since the news that Judge Cannon declared special DoJ prosecutor Jack Smith's appointment was unconstitutional, but it was only Monday. But we didn't even get into this issue in this episode, even though weekly defense of the Constitution is in our union contract. Is there anything new or original left to be said about the political events of the week, starting with the attempted assassination of President Trump, the nomination of J.D. Vance (allowing Lurcretia to say "I told you so!" yet again—isn't this getting monotonous by this point), and then Trump's near Castroesque-length acceptance speech? Why yes—yes there is. Steve, John, and Lucretia offer several observations we haven't yet heard from the legion of other pundits and analysts, which leads to a surprisingly sharp argument about free trade and potential tariffs under a Trump-Vance administration, which extends to a vigorous discussion of another substantial import of the moment—illegal immigrants. Steve also explains why, if you listened carefully to Trump's speech, you'll see that Reaganism isn't quite dead yet, why it was also a Jedi-mind trick on Biden, and why many of the news stories about Biden's possible withdrawal from the race have a implicit subtext that party leaders really really don't want Kamala Harris either, but can't say so publicly. We end the week with our shopping lists: more popcorn for John and Steve, and more tin foil for Lucretia.
The prolonged agony of Joe Biden is causing rifts in the political universe similar to what a black hole does—a vortex sucking everything into a void beyond which lie quantum unknowns. This episode ponders a number of those unknowns as best we can. First off, we note the sudden media/Democratic Party discovery of "Project 2025," and enumerate a few items we wish would be included, like year-round McRibs at McDonalds, and an end to the designated hitter rule in the National League. Then John provides an on-scene account of this week's National Conservatism conference where he was a speaker, and where he took note for the very first time of the "trad wives" movement, which really represents an implicit final rejection of immanentizing the eschaton. From there we take up some listener requests for "explainers" about the peculiar 12th Amendment (since Trump may choose a running mate from Florida, causing confusion and uncertainty), and then the workings of the 25th Amendment, which we all agree is unlikely to work on President Biden unless he actually lapses into a coma or something. Trump can render this moot, however, if he picks Steve and Lucretia's choices for Veep; John is going for a Florida veepnom. Beneath the surface of all these issues is the knotty problem of KAH-mala. We ponder a few possibilities on this that so far we haven't heard anyone else present. Exit music this week, once against chosen for topicality: "Rift" from Phish, since some aspects of it sound like they almost could be thinking of Kamala:
For your listening pleasure while you fire up the grill and align your fireworks today or over the weekend, the gang assembled for a special July 4 edition of the 3WHH, with extensive discussion—and disagreement—about whether President Biden will step aside and whether Kamala Harris will replace him. Steve says Yes, John says no, Lucretia is simply horrified at the whole scene. Meanwhile, there's a good dad joke going around (so naturally Steve told it, but you'll have to listen to catch it—this is a no-spoiler show note zone man!) that sets up a pivot to the last couple of decisions of the Supreme Court term just ended, especially the case involving presidential immunity. John explains why both sides of the issue are getting it wrong, while Steve and Lucretia trump John's legalese with some good old political philosophy, enlisting as an expert witness Harvey Mansfield. Picking exit music this week was a no-brainer, given the main topic: The Clash (fits, no?), "Should I Stay or Should I Go?"
Last month John Yoo and Steve Hayward, larping around central Europe in search of the rule of law, happened to make the acquaintance for former (and perhaps future?) Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott, who graciously agreed to sit down for a conversation about his broad gauge view of the world scene right now. We heard him give a terrific speech at the Danube Institute, which you can take in at the beginning of this YouTube video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PpC6u4w2J-A&t=35s. In our conversation Abbott ranges from the Ukraine War and the Middle East to the Climate Cult and the ruin of identity politics everywhere. We also digress to learn more about the origins of Australia's mandatory voting system, which reformers in the U.S. sometimes think we should try.
Has there been a worse week for the left in the last 25 years? First "Squadster" Jamal Bowman loses his House seat, then the Supreme Court delivers blow-after-blow to the foundations of the administrative state, and then Biden didn't show up for a debate. Oh, wait—he show up, though you had to wonder whether they really intended a sequel. John Yoo hosts this week's episode, and manages both to coax some cheerfulness out of Lucretia, but also skillfully avoiding the important Supreme Court opinion involving The Statute That Cannot Be Named on This Podcast. We break down the highlights and lowlights of both the debate and the Supreme Court opinions, with Lucretia offering some praise for Chief Justice Roberts for a change, while just about giving up hope for Justice Barrett, who seems to be angling to become the next David Souter on the Court. To be continued with a special July 4 episode next week.
If you follow news out of Israel these days—and who doesn't?—you may have caught the story early this week that Israel's Supreme Court issued a ruling https://www.jpost.com/breaking-news/article-807625?utm_source=ActiveCampaign&utm_medium=email&utm_content=Gantz%3A%20Israel%20can%20destroy%20Hezbollah%20s%20military%20in%20days&utm_campaign=June%2025%2C%202024%202 that the government may not exempt the haredim (Israel's ultra-orthodox community) from military service. The ruling went further, though, than just ending an exemption from service: the court ruled that government funding must be cut off from any yeshivas (schools) that do not comply with the ruling. Aside from the legal reasoning behind this ruling is the larger question of the continuing arrogation of power by Israel's high court. Last month John Yoo and Steve Hayward, overseas for a conference on international law, sat with with Simcha Rothman https://tikvahfund.org/faculty/simcha-d-rothman/, a senior member of the Knesset who, as chair of the Knesset's Constitution, Law and Justice Committee, has been deeply involved with proposals to reform and reign in the runaway judiciary. This controversy was roiling Israeli politics last year until the events of October 7 put it on the back burner, but we think Americans will be surprised to learn more about the peculiar circumstances of Israeli's judiciary. If you think America's judiciary can be activist and unaccountable, just wait till you hear from Simcha. Toward the end we also move on to a general discussion of the Gaza War.
We hadn't even planned to do a regular episode this week because John Yoo is over in Korea, Steve has been away at a three-day conference, and Lucretia is breaking in a new kitten. But we received urgent messages from listeners and readers asking us to decode just what the Supreme Court did this week, especially in the case that dealt with the income tax. Expert commentary seems divided on just what the Court meant, but as John filed an amicus brief in that case, he's the ideal person to break it down for us. But not before finding a new way to torment him with a successor to the Statute That Cannot Be Named—the nitrogen cycle! And really it fits if you think about it, since the Supreme Court seems to have hit the nitrous oxide a bit too hard in this week's rulings. Finally, a look at the latest campus news, including how Columbia University is surely going to regret that Alvin Bragg dismissed charges against Columbia students who occupied and vandalized university property. Prediction: there's a 50/50 chance that Columbia doesn't even open up for in-person campus life this fall.
No sooner do we have a "reunion" episode last week than travel schedules blow it all up again. With John Yoo away on another junket (supposedly teaching a summer law seminar somewhere, but really in search of more elusive McRibs), Lucretia and Steve decided to do a live episode where they pondered what might be called the "meta-narrative" (that would be "McNarrative" to John Yoo) behind the sharply differing constitutional views of left and right. Steve argues that behind the left's primal drive for power that can explain the outcome-oriented constitutionalism of the left on display since the Progressive Era lies a more sinister but less recognized aspect of leftist politics: American leftists are basically socialist revolutionaries, but rather than conduct direct revolution (with certain isolated exceptions), they prefer to use the rule of law to subvert the rule of law. Steve thinks an important clue to understanding this dynamic (about which too many conservatives and Republicans are clueless) can be found in a reconsideration of . . . the Spanish Civil War. (See Nathan Pinkoski's fine essay https://claremontreviewofbooks.com/arming-the-people-against-revolution/ reviewing the revisionist literature that essentially says everything you think you know about teh Spanish Civil War is wrong, and just imagine what Franco could have done if only he'd had some helicopters.) Lucretia as always is less convinced by Steve's historical analogies and, having had three espressos after lunch and before taping, offers her own special sauce to understanding the problem, yet somehow omitted the usual snark about Steve's whisky of the week, Laphroaig Quarter-Cask. Finally, in honor of Pride Month, some topical exit music this week from the great Jonathan Richman. And thanks to the many Power Line readers who tuned in for the live taping. Sorry we didn't get to more of your questions and comments.
The Three Whisky Happy Hour bartenders are finally back in the same time zone, and Lucretia fills in Steve and John about what happened while they were away partying in Europe. We mostly skip over doting on Biden's dotage, and take up Jed Rubenfeld's argument https://x.com/kylenabecker/status/1798859839395013095 that Trump isn't technically a "convicted felon" yet, and might have strong case for immediate relief from the Supreme Court. We finally have a long-postponed update on the situation in Ukraine, where there have been a number of developments over the last two weeks that make the war more volatile. The French are sending in troops ('advisers,' but that sounds too familiar), while we have apparently greenlit Ukraine to attack inside Russian with our weapons—so long as we approve the targets. What could go wrong? (And why is Hungary opposing the NATO position on Ukraine? Not for the reasons you read in the American media. . .) Finally, for our Article of the Week we take up the issue of climate change litigation, which John wrote about a few days ago for and which Steve is working separately on an article about European lawfare in this domain.
BUDAPEST, June 5: This Sunday the member states of the European Union will be going to the polls to elect their members of the European Parliament. I don't exactly know just what the European Parliament does either, and it has become boring viewing ever since Nigel Farage departed the European Parliament after Brexit. But there is intense campaigning underway. The streets of Budapest are lined with campaign posters, and there was a campaign march last Saturday with tens of thousands turning out. Most of the polls suggest that right-of-center "populist" parties are likely to see the largest gains in this round of elections, though likely not large enough to command a coalition majority, but we'll have to see. But wait! There's more! On July 4—an auspicuous day for Americans obviously—Britain heads to the polls for a general election, and all of the polls indicate the Conservative Party is heading for an epic wipeout at the hands of Labour. What explains the Tories' dismal prospects just five years after their largest landslide win in 70 years? To say they have underperformed the last five years under Boris Johnson and his successors is an understatement. From COVID lockdowns to Net-Zero energy madness, who needs the Tories when you can get real socialism from Labour? And just how will the Tories dust themselves off and recover? I sat down a few days back with John O'Sullivan to sort it all out. John has had a long and distinguished career in journalism and politics, having served as editor of in the late 1980s and 1990s, and as chief speechwriter for Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher for a time. Nowadays he is the president of the Danube Institute https://danubeinstitute.hu here in Budapest, where he overseas an active program of visiting journalists, academics, and political figures from all over the globe.
Lucretia hosts this episode from her bunker in an undisclosed bunker in the desert southwest while Steve and John are still galavanting over in Europe. And as hinted in a Power Line post, she is thermo-nuclear furious about the Trump verdict. Rather than rehash the details of the case, which everyone has picked over thoroughly by this point, the whisky bar considers what at means, and what may or should happen next. Lucretia thinks the American republica died on May 30 (USA, 1776 to May 30, 2024, RIP), while Steve thinks this is another dismal turning point comparable to the way the demagogic attack on Robert Bork in 1987 poisoned and embittered our judicial politics ever since. The connecting thread between the two: Joe Biden, who may be the single-most destructive figure in American politics in the last 50 years—worse even than Obama, who was at least subtle in his contempt for the United States. It was Biden who gave in to the progressive left over Bork in 1987, and now giving in to the progressive left's Trump Derangement Syndrome and warping our legal order. John looks beyond the appeals in the New York courts to a possible motion for a writ of mandamus from the U.S. Supreme Court, while all three whisky swillers agree that gane theory tells us that the only way to stop this kind of partisan lawfare is for Republicans to teach Democrats that two can play this game. And Lucretia has a list! Do Republicans have the stomach for it? Doubtful.
This week's special episode originates in Budapest, where John Yoo and I were presenting at a two-day conference on the decay of the rule of law in Europe. You think things are bad with the U.S. judiciary? It's much worse over here. (I'll post some video highlights when they are available.) In any case, because of the time difference and other challenges, Lucretia couldn't join us, so we have a guest host holding down her spot as the third host (and also to maintain the crucial two-against-John ratio), and we have decided to give him his very own Roman-inspired pseudonym, "Hadleius Arkesius." We indulge way too much time with our opening banter and general discussion of our experience pondering the problem of the decay of the rule of law before getting to the main event, with is a conversation with Prof. Eugene Kontorovich https://www.law.gmu.edu/faculty/directory/fulltime/kontorovich_eugene, who is professor of law at George Mason University's Scalia Law School, and head of the international law department at the Kohelet Policy Forum, one of Israel's largest think tanks. Prof. Kontorovich divides his time between the United States and Israel. A few weeks back Eugene wrote a bracing article in on "The Ugly Lessons of October 7 https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/ugly-lessons-of-october-7," and we review the article with him along with developments of the last week, such as the move of the International Criminal Court (ICC) to issue an arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Our conversation with Eugene begins around the 18 minute mark.
Listeners want to know from John: did Justice Clarence Thomas let us down with his ruling in this week's 7 - 2 decision upholding the unique funding structure of Elizabeth Warren's Consumer Finance Protection Bureau (CFPB), which she designed precisely to avoid congressional control as much as possible? John says no, and makes a persuasive three-part case for why Thomas's opinion is thoroughgoing originalism, and good history to boot. If we want to get rid of Warren's regulatory handiwork (AND WE DO!), it will be to be done directly by Congress, rather than indirectly by the courts. This week also marked the 70th anniversary of the decision, which we have deplored before on account of the poor reasoning for the halfway right result, but a our Article of the Week https://www.aei.org/research-products/report/brown-at-70-still-hazy-after-all-these-years/ from our friend Shep Melnick of Boston College draws our attention to some ongoing ambiguities of that still afflict our civil rights law. You'd think after 70 years we might have figured it out, but no—and worse, the ambiguity is likely on purpose, because it suits the shifting strategy and tactics of the identitarian left. Other topics covered briefly this week include the collapsing case against Trump in Manhattan, Trump's VP sweepstakes (you can scratch Kristi Noem from the list), the latest swimsuit edition and King Charles's ghastly portrait (hard to say which is worse here), Harrison Butker's cultural butt kick, and, finally, how to devise some tests to judge whether higher education is truly reversing its multi-decade slide into pernicious leftism.
This classic format episode features Steve in a one-on-one conversation with with Jeremy Carl, author of a dynamite (almost literally) new book entitled https://www.amazon.com/Unprotected-Class-Anti-White-Tearing-America-ebook/dp/B0CB1SSYG5/ref=sr_1_1?crid=PIBT078ZC6M9&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.S62JDP1frV0Riu1oqVfmn1VRiRq7K_V60YDxj9TSmBeWp5TxQ81w9eKOKY6O6DpJ.H8YtDYXhZh70iuWr3ocpxsd9JOG3M01uVex-dl1V0do&dib_tag=se&keywords=the+unprotected+class+jeremy+carl&qid=1715981350&sprefix=the+unprotcted%2Caps%2C173&sr=8-1Jeremy commits heresy in this book, offerng statistics that you aren't supposed to mention, and truths that, in an earlier age, might have got you burned at the stake. In publishing this book Jeremy joins the ranks of fellow brave souls such as Heather Mac Donald, Steve Sailer, Zach Goldberg, and a handful of others who do not shrink from challenging the enforced orthodoxy that approves of anti-white discrimination and scapegoating. It is, Jeremy rightly notes, a formula that if continued much longer will divide the nation so badly that we won't be able to live together. He thinks the old fashioned principle of basic human equality rightly understood, and old ethic of the "melting pot" that brought together different ethnicities into a common citizenship and shared national identity needs to be restored, and soon. He offers some suggestions, some difficult, some happily already starting to happen. One good sign: the book is getting a lot of attention. Maybe the ice is finally breaking.
John Yoo hosts this week's episode from exile in Austin, Texas, where he humors Steve and Lucretia's the extra-legal views on the Trump trials and tribulations in a Manhattan courtroom, and speculate how Trump's "Letter from the Rikers Island Jail" would read (though it will be more likely in the form of Tweets or TruthSocial posts). Have we discovered a trial judge who seems to have no judgment at all. Certainly we have a president without judgment, and we begin with pondering the question of just when it was that Bernie Sanders became president, because it is impossible to see how a Sanders administration would differ from everything the Biden administration has done. Steve notes a recent article https://www.theamericanconservative.com/the-hur-memo-and-the-tragedy-of-joe-biden/?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR210Uq8bbiiKWEeaQkEsrPn0UKKTe6f6GGaPlEF9YKf0iaFHpcNr1Ql_b4_aem_AQWE46PMx-5tyDhDktNhurgmg09uWKzYvfNRVbPvkEJRUXPHb4P0ROHmlPU9WRdyzXZolsfbWKkpO4OkzX88Wmtn that picks up on parts of the Hur report on Biden. While everybody focused on the parts of the report that dealt with Biden's senility, other parts of the report show that Biden has actually had terrible judgment for his entire political career. Finally, we look at Steve's article on the parallels between 1968 https://www.city-journal.org/article/a-1968-sequel and today, and wonder how it is possible for so many of our "leaders" in high education to have so little good judgment or common sense about what ought to be done. (Lucretia recommends pepper-bullets, which sound like some kind of high-velocity jalapenos.)
There was a lot of listener and reader interest in our too brief comments on the Anti-Semitism Awareness Act in our last episode, and we realized this issue deserved keeping the whisky bar open after the usual 2 am closing time to extend our treatment of the issue, yielding this short special episode. To recap: Lucretia thinks it is a stupid idea (hence, "Don't murder a man who is committing suicide https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2024/05/podcast-the-3whh-on-never-murder-a-man-who-is-committing-suicide.php"), while John thought it was also unsound on basic free speech principles. Steve was, naturally, in the middle, ending up as road kill for his analysis of why Republicans thought there were some political mischief to be made. So we decided to order another round of drinks (or, in Lucretia's case, four margaritas to honor Cinco de Mayo) and try to go through the issue more thoroughly, especially taking account of David Bernstein's observations at National Review Online https://www.nationalreview.com/2024/05/what-people-are-getting-wrong-about-the-house-antisemitism-bill/ that there's a lot of disinformation about what the bill does and doesn't do. We also wanted to take up the argument Harry Jaffa argued more than 60 years ago that a free society could, under certain circumstances, curtail the speech of Nazis, Communists, and . . . anti-Semites? . . . in defense of a free society. Jaffa argued: “Does a free society prove false to itself if it denies civil liberties to Communists, Nazis, or anyone else who would use these liberties, if he could, as a means of destroying the free society? The answer, I believe, is now plain that it does not. Is saying this I do not counsel, or even justify, any particular measure for dealing with persons of such description. What is right in any case depends on the facts of that case, and I am here dealing only with principles, not their application. However, those who think every denial of civil liberties is equally derogatory of the character of a free society, without reference to the character of the persons being denied, make this fundamental error: they confuse ends with means. . . [But] it is seldom either expedient or wise to suppress advocacy of even inhuman doctrines in a community like ours, it is not for that reason unjust.” Does the current campus scene arise to this standard? What does prudence counsel? The normally quarrelsome threesome at the whisky bar arrive at surprising agreement on the matter. Hint: We rather like Jaffa’s conclusion to his classic essay: “The more we can accomplish by opinion, the less we will have to do by law.”
Lucretia hosts this week's episode, reminding us once again that Republicans are living up to their reputation as "the stupid party" with the proposed "Anti-Semitism Awareness Act" that seems to have overlooked this quaint old thing called the First Amendment. Steve gamely tries to defend the political strategy behind it, but Lucretia is having none of it (putting her in rare alignment with the https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/02/us/politics/antisemitism-jews-republicans-democrats-congress.html), wondering why anyone would want to distract attention away from Democrats tieing themselves in electoral hangman's knots over the anti-Semitism raging wild inside their party and their wholly-owned subsidiary college campuses. Republicans ought to impose a gag order on themselves, and crusade against the gag order on Trump in his current trial in New York. Concerning which, John has several observations. And about that campus scene: another week, and another data point for Steve's thesis that "it's going to get worse before it gets worse." About the only sensible conclusion is that somewhere in the Great Beyond, Tom Wolfe is behind the whole current scene. Maybe we can still get a sequel from him, .
Today is May Day, but also the Victims of Communism Memorial Day, and as such today is the prefect days for this classic-hybrid format podcast, featuring Steve Hayward in a conversation with Elizabeth Spalding https://victimsofcommunism.org/leader/elizabeth-spalding-phd/, chair of the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation. (Elizabeth is also Senior Fellow at the Pepperdine University School of Public Policy and Visiting Fellow at the Van Andel Graduate School of Government at Hillsdale College.) The Foundation has opened the Victims of Communism Museum in downtown Washington DC, and you should put it on your itinerary for your next visit to the nation's capital. We call this a "hybrid" format because it comes in two parts. Following the conversation with Elizabeth, this episode offers Steve's recent speech at the Victims of Communism Museum about Reagan and Churchill on the Cold War, a major part of Steve's book https://www.amazon.com/Greatness-Reagan-Churchill-Extraordinary-Leaders/dp/0307237192/ref=sr_1_1?crid=RRZAT4RHVZDI&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.sQBrunUd4h0v9ZacG8Uw0R5AHpJhbu3xn4BSzR_A_KpmIFWUaDlLgFR-2Qm-8FEylDQg0w03uGmzrLztMs4k4-L_8FIZ8W7G52DNVhST1gw.9zmDilDsvJQcvoA1utsHLqpCJhMNxVZzsPf_K5nt7bQ&dib_tag=se&keywords=Steven+F.+Hayward+Greatness&qid=1714590853&sprefix=steven+f.+hayward+greatness%2Caps%2C174&sr=8-1 about the two great statesmen.
We're going up a day earlier than usual this week, partly because our constantly irregular travel schedules complicated things again, but more importantly to be timely, as John, Steve, and Lucretia have LOTS of thoughts on the Supreme Court argument Thursday about whether ex-presidents should enjoy broad immunity for any or all acts they took while in office. Steve and Lucretia think the president does, while John thinks textual support for the proposition is lacking. Steve and Lucretia respond with an appeal to first principles, and enlist as an expert witness Harvey Mansfield, because of his unique book on the inherent ambivalence of executive power even in a constitutional republic, . As usual, we fought to a draw. Our second subject is the ongoing Kristalnacht on campus. There's not much new to say except to calibrate how cowardly university administrators continue to be, and note that even some liberals, like George Packer in (who provides our article of the week, "The Campus-Left Occupation That Broke Higher Education https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/04/campus-left-university-columbia-1968/678176/") are starting to figure out what conservatives have known about higher education for two generations now. It's as if no one ever bothered to notice .
This week's episode is probably better thought of as a Two Whisky Happy Hour, because John Yoo is away on a lecture- and Philly-cheesesteak-procurement tour back east, and Lucretia is out of action right now, too, though she appears in this episode by proxy, so to speak. So two whiskies it is. Last weekend, Lucretia and I offered a keynote session for Ammo Grrrll's annual CommenterCon conference in Phoenix, which is an annual gathering of Ammo Grrrll's best friends and devoted fans from around the country. My theme was "Will it get worse before it gets worse?", and Lucretia offered some thoughts on the future of free speech. We had some technical difficulties with our sound recording devices, so the recording has a sudden and noticeable quality shift right in the middle, and you can't always make out the audience questions perfectly, but we think listeners will still enjoy most of it.
Steve hosts this crisp episode despite his creaky voice from a springtime bug (and Lucretia is partly hobbled, too) covering a lot of ground, starting with a brief recap of the latest (unanimous!) property rights victory at the Supreme Court, but then moving quickly on to initial reactions to the outbreak of World War III yesterday. What to make of Iran's attack on Israel? Many things are not clear about this impetuous scene. Closely related, while the Biden Administration seems determined to tamp down the prospect of a wider war in the Middle East, it seems to be inviting one with Antony (Blank) Blinken saying a week ago that Ukraine should or would become a member of NATO. Are they trying to make Russia dig in, or draw the U.S. more directly into the war (which NATO membership would require)? We also ponder J.D. Vance's very clear-headed op-ed https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/12/opinion/jd-vance-ukraine.htmlthat reviews the grim math of the Ukranian battle scene, making us wonder whether the Biden Administration has any strategy at all beyond "fight to the last Ukranian." Then we ponder briefly the astounding scene of the anti-Semitic protests in the back yard of Berkeley Dean Erwin Chemerinsky, with Steve arging that to see this incident as a matter of the limits of free speech is woefully inadequate. But the bulk of the episode is devoted to analyzing the latest abortion controversies, starting with the Arizona Supreme Court decision upholding the validity of Arizona's pre-Roe statutes, and observing as usual the way this narrow and largely technical ruling is being mis-reported in the media and misrepresented by the left. The main portion of this segment, though, is devoted to Trump's announcement that he does not support federal legislation of abortion and wants to leave the issue iup to the states. Does this make him the modern-day equivalent of Stephen Douglas, as John Davidson argues in our Article of the Week https://thefederalist.com/2024/04/11/on-abortion-donald-trump-goes-the-way-of-stephen-a-douglas/ over at The Federalist? Lucretia will startle many regular listeners with her analysis of the matter, to which John and Steve largely agree. In fact, it is an amazing how much agreement we had this week, but perhaps because we recorded in the morning whisky, and with Steve and Lucretia ailing.
