Speaker 1: Join us if you want. We're actually gonna go a
Speaker 1: gonzo podcast. Oh and you not can be on it. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's exactly what I was gonna ask you.
Speaker 2: Whiskey coming Thames Payne, Oh Whiskey, don't.
Speaker 3: You leave me?
Speaker 4: From power Line blog dot com and produced by Ricochet
Speaker 4: dot Com. This is the Three Whiskey Happy Hour with
Speaker 4: your bartenders Steve Hayward, John You and power Lines International
Speaker 4: Woman of Mystery Lucretia.
Speaker 5: You gotta giving let that whiskey blow where you're being
Speaker 5: in love down in low.
Speaker 6: We glad you might have guessed from that little teaser
Speaker 6: before the bumper music, this is not going to be
Speaker 6: a normal episode of the Three Whiskey Happy Hour. We're
Speaker 6: missing Lucretia, who's away on some secret mission for the
Speaker 6: army or something like that. Uh and John, You and
Speaker 6: I are at the annual convention of the Federalist Society
Speaker 6: where it became impossible to actually schedule a time to
Speaker 6: try and do something sensible, So we just picked a
Speaker 6: corner of one of the reception rooms during cocktail hour
Speaker 6: and opened our table to all comers, and we had
Speaker 6: several commers. So among the people who joined us for
Speaker 6: a completely unscripted and unplanned episode included Ilia Shapiro and
Speaker 6: Rothel Manguel from the Manhattan Institute. Our old friend had
Speaker 6: the arcis, of course, Roger Palan emeritus from the Cato Institute,
Speaker 6: the noted appellate lawyer Eric Jaffey, and a retired Republican
Speaker 6: attorney from Utah, and a faithful listener to the Three
Speaker 6: Whiskey Happy Hour, Jacob minus John You dropped in and out.
Speaker 6: The intention was to have John surrounded and outnumbered on
Speaker 6: the natural law question, but some of my interlocutors disappointed me.
Speaker 1: But in any event, pull up. This is pretty crazy.
Speaker 6: But we were told by a number of lawyers and
Speaker 6: people attending that they didn't have their regular episode, they
Speaker 6: were going to be very cross with us. So we
Speaker 6: like to deliver when we can, So strap in, put
Speaker 6: yourself a drink.
Speaker 1: Here we go.
Speaker 6: All right, everybody, this is a special edition of the
Speaker 6: Three Whiskey Happy Hour. Here comes Ilia Shapiro. Now, John,
Speaker 6: you and I are at the Federal Society Conference.
Speaker 7: Steve John, you sent me specifically to speak to you here.
Speaker 8: Yes, okay, Well I didn't agree to be on it
Speaker 8: with him.
Speaker 6: Well you know what, See, we don't have the Cretia
Speaker 6: with us tonight because she's doing some secret army thing.
Speaker 6: But we're here with a whole bunch of eminent lawyers.
Speaker 6: Rafa m Manuel to my right for the Manhattan Institute.
Speaker 6: Eric Jaffey, a prominent appellate lawyer.
Speaker 1: Is that a correct description?
Speaker 6: Ilia Shapiro a colleague of Raphael's at Manhattan Institute. So
Speaker 6: the Manhattan Institute is overrepresented here and from the Mountain
Speaker 6: States area. Jacob Minus of the Salt Lake City Lawyers Chapter,
Speaker 6: who we meet up with every year at the Western
Speaker 6: Regional Summit.
Speaker 9: I'm an unemployed ski bomb.
Speaker 6: John You is out trying to wrangle a couple of
Speaker 6: more people and get a drink from the bar.
Speaker 1: So hey, cheers, gentlemen. Let me start with the you,
Speaker 1: Raphael the uh he goes by Ralph. I don't ray
Speaker 1: for rison't it right? I know? I just I'll answer
Speaker 1: to almost anything.
Speaker 7: Especially if there's a cocktawnall that's right?
Speaker 1: Right? Yeah, Well you're reaking the home with that one.
Speaker 9: Ah who.
Speaker 6: So everybody here is all carry smiles or mostly smiles,
Speaker 6: except maybe for the Attorney General designate. That's the only
Speaker 6: one that's getting a lot of frowns, but everyone's excited
Speaker 6: about the election. I think Raphael'll start with you. M
Speaker 6: I mean, I guess I can ask a question, but
Speaker 6: you can say anything you want, which is we actually
Speaker 6: saw Trump improve his showing in deep blue cities around
Speaker 6: the crime and crime is one of your beats, and
Speaker 6: it does seem like that was a big factor.
Speaker 10: I think it was absolutely a big factor. And I
Speaker 10: think you know, if you look at the blue cities
Speaker 10: and states, that tells a compelling story, right, and can
Speaker 10: take a look at California, look at what happened. He
Speaker 10: had George Gascone get absolutely wiped out by Nate Hawkman,
Speaker 10: who ran an unabashedly pro law and order campaign. You
Speaker 10: had Prop thirty six, the statewide ballot proper position, which
Speaker 10: sought to undue parts of Prop forty seven past seventy
Speaker 10: thirty seventy thirty.
Speaker 1: I mean that's amazing. And Caamwa Harris wouldn't take a position, right,
Speaker 1: You got to ask yourself who.
Speaker 10: Is it that she was trying not to alienate with
Speaker 10: that silence?
Speaker 11: Right?
Speaker 10: You know, you go up north, you got Pamela Price
Speaker 10: in shang Taw and Oakland both getting recalled. I mean,
Speaker 10: that's incredible.
Speaker 7: That's and that's just California.
Speaker 2: You can imagine what's happening in America.
Speaker 1: Well, you can move a little a little bit east.
Speaker 1: You look at Colorado.
Speaker 10: You had ballot propositions funding police to the two to
Speaker 10: three hundred and fifty million dollars in the state. You
Speaker 10: had a truth and sentencing regime done through ballot initiative.
Speaker 10: You had a bail reform amendment to the state constitution,
Speaker 10: getting rid of the right to bail the murder cases.
Speaker 10: You go to Arizona, you had a ballot proposition in
Speaker 10: Arizona that will now make citizens eligible for a tax
Speaker 10: refund if the government fails to clean up homeless encampments,
Speaker 10: and forced laws against public intoxication, defecation, urination. I mean,
Speaker 10: it really was in many ways a law and order election.
Speaker 6: I noticed there's an a mission of fornication in that's
Speaker 6: a tax reform for.
Speaker 1: Okay, that's right, that's right.
Speaker 6: Roger Poalan has joined us. Where's John Hugh? He was
Speaker 6: just here a minute ago.
Speaker 7: I want to think he's getting more kimchi.
Speaker 3: He brought me over for this boondog.
Speaker 6: We are taking a live podcast. Roger really, yes, it's, uh,
Speaker 6: what's the issue? Whatever we want to be although one
Speaker 6: of the issues is most weeks we do this every week.
Speaker 6: Most weeks it's me and a third host who's not
Speaker 6: with us because she's busy beating up on John for
Speaker 6: his legal positivism.
Speaker 1: And I know you'll be on my side on that argument.
Speaker 9: Oh, I'm a natural rights man.
Speaker 1: Of course you are law two steven.
Speaker 3: But I'm not a natural law man.
Speaker 1: Well, the natural rights man.
Speaker 3: There is a difference between the two.
Speaker 1: Yeah, but you know what's a gun the law man.
Speaker 6: Yeah, but you know what, Roger, Yes, I understand that distinction.
Speaker 6: There's also a.
Speaker 3: You're one of the rare people who does understand that.
Speaker 6: Yeah, are you you fall out of this?
Speaker 1: It's not a dumb debate, but it's.
Speaker 2: You know, it's this is above my pay grade. You know,
Speaker 2: this is I'm a simple constitutional lawyer. This kind of
Speaker 2: metaphysics and philosophy is I can only talk about simple
Speaker 2: things like the dormant commerce clause.
Speaker 6: All right, So, Eric Chaffey, Uh, you do a lot
Speaker 6: of appellet law, which means you're not going to distract
Speaker 6: yourself with natural law unless you want to.
Speaker 12: But I'm very positivest.
Speaker 1: You are you're dang well.
Speaker 8: But I'm positivest in the sense that I recognize that
Speaker 8: the Framers were naturalists, and so.
Speaker 12: I think that was incorporated.
Speaker 6: Okay, oh, you're you may be redeemable. We better get
Speaker 6: have the arcist here fast. One is completely underwater. Okay,
Speaker 6: well they should do decently.
Speaker 8: Yeah, underneath it all and just a hobsy And I'm
Speaker 8: a simple poe.
Speaker 2: Okay, well, but Steve, you've got you always have been nasty, brutish, and.
Speaker 3: You've got to have a touchstone grounded in reason. Otherwise
Speaker 3: you're a drift with a pure theory of will, and
Speaker 3: violence can take you anywhere. And so what you need
Speaker 3: is some grounding. And that's exactly what the Declaration gives
Speaker 3: us when it sets forth in that justly famous second paragraph,
Speaker 3: that we hold these truths to.
Speaker 1: Be self evident. No self evident.
Speaker 3: Truths are truths grounded in reason, correct, which is available
Speaker 3: to all mankind and every place and every time. It
Speaker 3: stands for the idea that there's a higher law of
Speaker 3: right and wrong from which to derive the positive law
Speaker 3: and against which to criticize that law at any point
Speaker 3: in time.
Speaker 9: And without that touch or else, well.
Speaker 3: Without that touchstone, as I said a moment ago, we
Speaker 3: are adrift to the will, and all we are left
Speaker 3: with is a kind of democracy whereby the will of
Speaker 3: the majority, if you're lucky, carries the day. But as
Speaker 3: we've seen, that resolves into the will of those who
Speaker 3: are best able to work the system, and those are
Speaker 3: the special.
Speaker 12: Election was probably hold that thought.
Speaker 6: I do want to provoke Roger and say, just as
Speaker 6: Thomas Aquinas put it in question ninety four of his
Speaker 6: Treatise on Law, I'm just the bessing on that said.
Speaker 1: We're in a heated agreement on that last I know.
Speaker 3: But he also had a theory of the good gentlemen.
Speaker 7: This is all very enlightening with the capital E.
Speaker 2: But if we can get back to your original question
Speaker 2: about the election, I want to I want to propose that.
Speaker 9: What this was all about the election, that was the
Speaker 9: opening for it. Now as far from you can get, well.
Speaker 7: No, but it's it's not.
Speaker 2: It might be more Augustinian or something, but but look,
Speaker 2: here's the point.
Speaker 1: Here's the point.
Speaker 2: Could this be I'm about to posit kind of a
Speaker 2: cheeky take on the election. Could it be that the
Speaker 2: American populace or at least a majority of the voters
Speaker 2: in seeking a return to normalcy that they tried to
Speaker 2: get in twenty twenty until Biden started governing as FDR's
Speaker 2: woke grandson. Have now have now turned to Donald Trump
Speaker 2: for normalcy?
Speaker 1: Yeah?
Speaker 12: Are you suggesting that there's a certain absurdity.
Speaker 7: To this, a certain at least amusement.
Speaker 1: Or paradox or no.
Speaker 6: I was writing eight or nine months ago that if
Speaker 6: you believe and political science median voter theory, who's closest
Speaker 6: to the median voter?
Speaker 1: Oh my god, it's Donald Trump?
Speaker 3: I know.
Speaker 1: And and that, by the I think, well, the.
Speaker 7: Media queen's voter, certainly at Manhattan is too.
Speaker 2: We focus on New York and we analyze each borough
Speaker 2: for itself as representing different parts of the American character.
Speaker 1: Who are actually mattan.
Speaker 3: Now that Trump is going to be the president, it
Speaker 3: is important evermore to be an opposition. And we see
Speaker 3: this with the Attorney general nomination. We see it with
Speaker 3: Telsea Gabbard as the is that Herny the intelligence? I
Speaker 3: mean this, this is this is the one thing I'll
Speaker 3: say about the death's nomination is that it did prompt
Speaker 3: him to resign from the House, and so there's the positive.
Speaker 3: Does anybody have a theory about whether the fact that
Speaker 3: he was elected means that therefore he cannot resign from
Speaker 3: or he will have to come back into the again.
Speaker 7: He's already said he's not going to serve in the
Speaker 7: next term.
Speaker 12: Well that's good.
Speaker 3: So that's the good that's come from that. Of course,
Speaker 3: I doubt he'll get out of committee.
Speaker 6: Now, Roger, Well, now, Roger, I just have to say,
Speaker 6: because you're an old pal, you're showing your Cato Institute
Speaker 6: underwear with your going into opposition status.
Speaker 2: I didn't know, Well, Cato goes into opposition.
Speaker 7: Whoever wins any life, I know, I know that's right.
Speaker 8: I confess I'm somewhat with Roger, which is all government bad.
Speaker 8: I don't care if we're finding it right, and so yes,
Speaker 8: I'm you know, I used to joke.
Speaker 12: That government is not a client. They'll pray.
Speaker 3: Well, the Founders are right. It's a necessary evil. So
Speaker 3: necessary because in the state of nature there will be
Speaker 3: differences and if we can't agree over them, then either
Speaker 3: there will be injustice that is elected, or there will
Speaker 3: be force.
Speaker 2: But which founders? Has it turned out that the anti
Speaker 2: federalists were actually right.
Speaker 3: Oh, no, federalists went not right because they gave us
Speaker 3: a government it was too lean to address the three
Speaker 3: major problems that we faced. We were surrounded on three
Speaker 3: sides by powers greater than our own.
Speaker 12: We had a.
Speaker 3: Debt from the Revolutionary War that we didn't know how
Speaker 3: to pay, and states were electing terrorists and other measures
Speaker 3: they were leading to the breakdown of the free flow
Speaker 3: of commerce among the states. So to overcome those we
Speaker 3: needed a stronger, separate federal government, but one that was restrained.
Speaker 2: Well, yes, at the time, this is this, this is
Speaker 2: the argument at the time.
Speaker 9: But but but.
Speaker 2: Is it the but but in the end, is it
Speaker 2: now that they've you know, won their uh, you know,
Speaker 2: ultimate victory, even if they were wrong at the time,
Speaker 2: or is it that kind of circle back to complete
Speaker 2: the circle and go all Claire monster that it's all
Speaker 2: Woodrow Wilson's fault.
Speaker 3: No, they founders got it right, as corrected by the
Speaker 3: Civil War amendments. But of course we've never lived up
Speaker 3: to the principles that we've articulated, which is not surprising.
Speaker 3: And there have been better or worse times, whether of
Speaker 3: course the Great Watershed, the progressive era when they fundamentally rejected,
Speaker 3: of course, the Framer's vision as corrected by the Civil
Speaker 3: War amendments.
Speaker 1: So John You has entered the chat. He's trying not
Speaker 1: to step. Oh, he's got his food flake. I'm winning
Speaker 1: at John.
Speaker 6: Don't don't go away here and finish.
Speaker 2: You know, Jonathan and I went to I'll fill a
Speaker 2: buster while he finishes his chew of his slider here.
Speaker 7: But we went to law school together.
Speaker 2: But you know, yesterday you were mentioned in several kind
Speaker 2: of side conversation as a contender for for SG. I
Speaker 2: don't know, are you are you? Are you going to
Speaker 2: go into uh government?
Speaker 1: You think they gave it to someone else.
Speaker 7: Well, I recognized that.
Speaker 3: I recognize that the SG was announced today.
Speaker 7: Last night last night, probably.
Speaker 12: To be reopened.
Speaker 6: Step on up, haadly we are we are in media address,
Speaker 6: as they say a Latin.
Speaker 1: We're rolling.
Speaker 6: And the problem is is I was hoping to round
Speaker 6: up enough natural lawyers to out number John You, and
Speaker 6: right now it's like fifty to fifty.
Speaker 1: Roger's pretty sound.
Speaker 6: Oh yeah, Eric, we're not sure about yet, But I
Speaker 6: want to talk.
Speaker 3: About it to himself A positive I did, But I'm
Speaker 3: a positivist who incorporates the sad delusions of the Framers.
Speaker 6: So I'm okay, well, you know now John's run away Roger,
Speaker 6: but I taunt him a lot, saying I still believe
Speaker 6: the two of the greatest books for modern constitutional thinking
Speaker 6: are Corwin's Higher Law Background absolutely and what's his name?
Speaker 6: The Constitutional Nation of Modern I'm blanking on the author's name,
Speaker 6: Charles Howard McElwain.
Speaker 1: I thought you said you were a fan of that
Speaker 1: book once. I remember you.
Speaker 3: Saying that twenty years I am a fan of the
Speaker 3: Corwin John. But you know Corwin, uh think out during
Speaker 3: the Roosevelt Revolution.
Speaker 1: Did you know that to Steve Yes, Yes, yeah he did.
Speaker 12: I don't understand why.
Speaker 1: I don't either. But but his other defects his.
Speaker 3: Book was was actually it was two essays in the
Speaker 3: Harvard Law Review that constituted that book.
Speaker 6: I still assign them to students again over John Hughes's objections.
Speaker 1: But why would you Eric Jaffy, that was trying to
Speaker 1: get away. I don't blame him. Why would John object
Speaker 1: to that because he's a positivist.
Speaker 13: What about you signed Harry's books. He's seeing the price
Speaker 13: of the house of album.
Speaker 6: Not the law students. But I want to change gears.
Speaker 6: We can come back to all this. I want to
Speaker 6: change gears a little bit while Derek's still with us.
Speaker 1: Uh. Terrific panel today.
Speaker 6: You weren't on it, but I think maybe you were
Speaker 6: there in the audience on administrative law, and usually that's
Speaker 6: a snoozer.
Speaker 1: Did you go to that panel?
Speaker 8: I went to the Q and A because you know,
Speaker 8: I was busy with the SCC panel, because right, I
Speaker 8: hadn't hear of the NAP, right, right, yeah, I know.
Speaker 3: I went to the the International Court of Criminals.
Speaker 9: That was I went to this hideous oh Richard. Richard
Speaker 9: was a classic for.
Speaker 1: The entire.
Speaker 12: And there's a certain history.
Speaker 14: No confusion, no, no, not really nice try but this
Speaker 14: guy said, of course, of course that should be arrested
Speaker 14: to of course violation.
Speaker 7: The panel was in general agreement with this guy.
Speaker 9: This guy, I.
Speaker 15: Would say, the arrest of panel, except for Epstein, was
Speaker 15: whether they were whatever the Republican or Democrats they were
Speaker 15: part of, like the Foreign policy established. And it was
Speaker 15: fitting to me because the last time I was in
Speaker 15: this hotel was thirty five years ago in high school
Speaker 15: for Model U N where we were brainwashed into the
Speaker 15: international and now I'm back.
Speaker 12: Audience.
Speaker 3: If your audience, UH can go when this is available
Speaker 3: online to that session and listen to Epstein. They will
Speaker 3: be rewarded beyond belief.
Speaker 1: Was just remarkable.
Speaker 9: Tour four.
Speaker 6: Never never has Oh no, he I've heard him say
Speaker 6: that he can't even give the same lecture once.
Speaker 2: Of course, Well you can never step into the same
Speaker 2: river twice.
Speaker 9: Yes you can if you move with the current.
Speaker 2: Or if it's the Aga river on you were a metaphysician,
Speaker 2: not a physicist.
Speaker 9: Remember, Richard inst for me is going the bomb cars.
Speaker 9: I didn't talk.
Speaker 13: So he sits on the table with his legs dangling
Speaker 13: and he gives what economics said, This is the most
Speaker 13: coherent account he's ever heard of the logic of insurance.
Speaker 2: Well, you know he's taught every class in the University
Speaker 2: of Chicago, syllabus, every duct trintal class, and so we're
Speaker 2: not talking like poetry in the law. But you know,
Speaker 2: from antidiscrimination law to securities to whatever he's taught. I
Speaker 2: took them for Roman law. The court description was great.
Speaker 2: It said knowledge of Latin not required, but helpful. But
Speaker 2: you know I missed all of these Panels. I was
Speaker 2: at the campus free speech chaos because you know, I
Speaker 2: had to sell my book so Lowless now available for
Speaker 2: pre order about the illiberal takeover of legal education?
Speaker 1: Is that coming out January fourteenth?
Speaker 2: Now available for pre order wherever you fine and not
Speaker 2: so fine books are sold online.
Speaker 1: Well, we'll do a podcast about it when it comes.
Speaker 9: Back, Steven.
Speaker 1: How long does this go on?
Speaker 3: Because I want to get some.
Speaker 9: Food, Yeah, and I need another drink.
Speaker 13: Is this for the record, Yeah, we could raise the money,
Speaker 13: but it would be wrong for sure.
Speaker 1: You think if you want how the arcis is here listeners.
Speaker 1: By the way, I hadn't already figured that out, So
Speaker 1: can we have the excuse me? Your excuse me? And
Speaker 1: Juliana had a great article.
Speaker 3: Oh yes, smacking down her latest book on Jews and
Speaker 3: the liberalism.
Speaker 6: Yeah, I will shea it is this something new?
Speaker 12: Oh?
Speaker 3: This in the last year.
Speaker 7: I mean she she writes more books than I can read.
Speaker 12: Believe this or eighth book.
Speaker 9: Yes, that's great, Steve.
Speaker 1: We'll be all right.
Speaker 2: I tuned in another cocktail, so we'll be in touch
Speaker 2: when I'm back after renew my passport to come busy
Speaker 2: in California.
Speaker 7: Another steak you know.
Speaker 1: Yes, well, we have a consolate near us. We can
Speaker 1: help that out with excellent, excellent American consolate.
Speaker 3: It.
Speaker 1: We can do something.
Speaker 6: We're doing it now, we're.
Speaker 1: Rolling, we're recording.
Speaker 9: Okay, now let's get on the record.
Speaker 12: Okay, okay.
Speaker 13: No, No, I think I think we're the verts of
Speaker 13: something really important.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, I was asking, Sorrydrup, you send me an email.
Speaker 12: Uh.
Speaker 1: And then we had a brief conversation.
Speaker 6: And before you got here, Raphael Monguel for the Manhattan
Speaker 6: Institute was talking about the election results.
Speaker 1: So you said, and now go.
Speaker 13: I think the other side is so deeply dug in
Speaker 13: with their narrative.
Speaker 9: It's like Prince print the legend.
Speaker 13: So Letitia King James comes out say I'm here to
Speaker 13: I'm going to protect the New Yorkers.
Speaker 9: Wait, is Donald Trump? Donald Trump came after you or something?
Speaker 9: Donald Trump coming after it?
Speaker 13: Was it you who came after Donald Trump?
Speaker 12: Do you?
Speaker 15: But do you think she's deluded or saying what she
Speaker 15: thinks her voters want to hear?
Speaker 7: No.
Speaker 15: I think she ran on the basis of get Trump.
Speaker 15: I know it works, I know in terms of here
Speaker 15: getting elected, not getting Drump.
Speaker 13: No, but she's I think the narrative is taken hold
Speaker 13: with her like Prince Grew gets up. I'm gonna protect
Speaker 13: my people. I got they're playing into our hands because
Speaker 13: we say, what are guys gonna do? Is say, yeah,
Speaker 13: we're gonna deport. The worst case is we're gonna we're
Speaker 13: gonna deport they. We're gonna port the guys with cheese,
Speaker 13: and you guys can get up and now defend that.
Speaker 13: Just think I think, I think they are so dug
Speaker 13: into their narrative that that and and punch truck that
Speaker 13: we could come forth with all kinds of visions now
Speaker 13: that they wouldn't resist.
Speaker 6: Okay, Hatty, we have John you here for five minutes,
Speaker 6: and he has to go off to the Metropolitan Club,
Speaker 6: because of course he does.
Speaker 5: We're having a reception where I expect Steve will be
Speaker 5: and by being freely of our free Scott give me
Speaker 5: a free.
Speaker 6: Well this isn't improv free whiskey happy hour. Okay, Patty,
Speaker 6: I know you listen regularly.
Speaker 9: I'm a great fan of Lucretia.
Speaker 1: Well, yes, oh, you're a great man of Lucretian.
Speaker 9: I love tastes. I love you all, I love you all,
Speaker 9: I love you all. It's a great trio. Okay, Pantimax said,
Speaker 9: and lever.
Speaker 6: We have no time now for the complete case, but
Speaker 6: we have time for two brief bullet points and reputation
Speaker 6: of John's Benthamite utilitarianism and positivism.
Speaker 1: So give him too fast balls singing by the ear.
Speaker 9: No, that's true.
Speaker 13: If we just just confiscate the property of those Jews
Speaker 13: and everybody's income goes up, and you know, it's it's
Speaker 13: the best.
Speaker 9: It's a great utilitary farmer. What's the next problem?
Speaker 6: Well, yeah, we yeah, better off. Okay, we do have
Speaker 6: I think you about know this, and I should send
Speaker 6: it to you. We're doing online a sort of back
Speaker 6: and forth debate which I think we may turn into
Speaker 6: a book.
Speaker 1: I think it might once edited. It would be a
Speaker 1: nice book. I'm gonna write the next response because you gave.
Speaker 6: Well, I know, usual nonsense. It gets in the way,
Speaker 6: but I will do it soon. So and we can
Speaker 6: continue next week when.
Speaker 9: We're all, what's what's the book.
Speaker 1: Positive and debate something like that. Yeah, we're debating positive
Speaker 1: and natural.
Speaker 5: There have been references to you, Hadley, not all of
Speaker 5: them good. I'm just kidding, all very favorable references. Okay,
Speaker 5: the listeners can't see he had least arched eyebrow of anger.
Speaker 9: Then I just don't know. It's all good publicity. It's
Speaker 9: all good publicity, all right.
Speaker 1: John, you're excuse if you want to go absortion.
Speaker 5: I have to go set up the reception while Steve,
Speaker 5: Steve's just going from one free drinking station to another.
Speaker 1: He just polished off of martini.
Speaker 5: I think about thirty seconds before you go at the
Speaker 5: Metropolitan Club tonight, Well we might be able to interview
Speaker 5: someone else for the podcast, like that'd be fun.
Speaker 13: Okay, before you go, you think this was really a
Speaker 13: pivotal moment, that this could be something like thirty two,
Speaker 13: thirty six.
Speaker 1: Well, it depends on events.
Speaker 6: If you know, the economy goes bad, there's a war,
Speaker 6: you know, if something goes bad the election.
Speaker 13: Now, except first, the first moments are easy to deliver.
Speaker 13: You're going to get rid of the Green agenda, yet
Speaker 13: the Greens.
Speaker 6: I mean, there's a huge upside if the economy booms
Speaker 6: the world calms down, but.
Speaker 9: GM doesn't have to make cars.
Speaker 13: The people that want to buy, you know, hold them
Speaker 13: these impossible standards.
Speaker 9: We get rid of the deregulated prices are not coming. The
Speaker 9: things within reach are thinks are going to work. I
Speaker 9: don't think those are not the hard cases for him.
Speaker 1: Yeah, no, those aren't.
Speaker 6: But you know what's the old Harold McMillan line, events,
Speaker 6: dear boy and the things that can wreck you. Herbert Hoover,
Speaker 6: very able man got wrecked by the depression, and Anthony
Speaker 6: Eden got wrecked by the Suez crisis.
Speaker 9: And you know that nine eleven comes along for George W.
Speaker 9: Brook and you don't know what's coming.
Speaker 6: Right, that's right, and you know we okay, So no,
Speaker 6: I'm I'm yes. I think it's it's hugely significant the
Speaker 6: way the vote turned out. All the pieces are in place,
Speaker 6: and we'll just have to, as Trump likes to say,
Speaker 6: we'll just have to see what happens.
Speaker 13: But as people point out, never point out to me, Look,
Speaker 13: I told somebody, and I was writing to informac in
Speaker 13: Line to say, give me an anthropological report. I'm jewishly
Speaker 13: was in New York, and what they thought about this,
Speaker 13: Why they're still good wing to vote for for Harris
Speaker 13: and everything. The differences on Israel I try, I thought
Speaker 13: were paling, but at one.
Speaker 11: Point I found myself saying, look, Jamie Diamond I could
Speaker 11: could rightly consider himself a better person and a better
Speaker 11: businessman than Donald Trump.
Speaker 9: But even he has to concede he could not have
Speaker 9: brought forth what Trump had been best to accomplished in
Speaker 9: this last series. He couldn't have done it. He couldn't
Speaker 9: have me if he'd been in the candidate, I couldn't
Speaker 9: have done this kind if.
Speaker 15: You would have been a conuity type Democrat like a Normy.
Speaker 9: Right, yeah, I.
Speaker 12: Couldn't have done it. I'm the best person I.
Speaker 4: Know you could.
Speaker 9: I couldn't have done it.
Speaker 1: So, by the way, had it? Did you know?
Speaker 6: Trump won Beverly Hills and he also won a heavily
Speaker 6: Jewish Hills.
Speaker 1: He won Beverly Hills. First Republican Beverly Hills in sixteen years.
Speaker 6: Nixon won definitely Hills. I think Nixon did. I'm not
Speaker 6: sure about that. McGovern won Beverly Hills in the primary
Speaker 6: in seventy two. I'm not sure about the November election,
Speaker 6: but won Beverly Hills.
Speaker 9: Talk about how that is.
Speaker 6: That's a telling thing and also a very Jewish neighborhood
Speaker 6: in the San Fernando Valley.
Speaker 1: I forget which one.
Speaker 15: Then Sena or something like that, and you don't even
Speaker 15: know who won, because I would figure that liberal Jews
Speaker 15: would be the least likely to report honestly voting for Trump. Like,
Speaker 15: how do we know based on your dad, I imagine
Speaker 15: the exit polls underestimate.
Speaker 1: Oh, yes, correct.
Speaker 6: This was pointed out in actually nineteen eighty when Reagan
Speaker 6: the exit polls said one about forty percent of the
Speaker 6: thirty eight or forty, which was the huge number then
Speaker 6: because Carter had angered Jews.
Speaker 1: Well, John pot Harts and some other people.
Speaker 6: A commentary looked at some heavily Jewish precincts in Brooklyn
Speaker 6: where eighty five percent of the vote was for Reagan
Speaker 6: and traditionally Democratic thirty six. By the way, those same
Speaker 6: districts in Brooklyn, they're different now from forty four years ago,
Speaker 6: also went heavily for Trump.
Speaker 15: Of course, Orthodox, Yeah, I'm his Crown Heights in Borough Park,
Speaker 15: you know, the Beverly Hills Jews.
Speaker 6: I think, I mean, my mother grew up in Beverly
Speaker 6: Hills a million years ago.
Speaker 1: That was you know, they're not Orthodox.
Speaker 9: Jews, just think so.
Speaker 13: So he so he carried the land of Jack Benny Ronald.
Speaker 13: I think I'll drink that.
Speaker 1: All right.
Speaker 6: So Sorry, Jacob, what what's your practice area? You're in
Speaker 6: private practice.
Speaker 12: No, I'm retired.
Speaker 7: You're retired practicing.
Speaker 1: You weren't kidding about me.
Speaker 9: Too young to be retired, too young to say to.
Speaker 6: Old guys, we're carrying on? What the hell are we doing?
Speaker 6: It's ridiculous.
Speaker 1: Sorry, what was your well, I.
Speaker 9: Was just talking about something else.
Speaker 1: I was a corporate finance lawyer. But what's good stuff?
Speaker 1: You know?
Speaker 12: That's why he gets to retire.
Speaker 1: Yeah, but no wife or kids that I know of.
Speaker 6: But you, So you come to the Federal Society meetings
Speaker 6: for fun and interesting.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I'm like a lady who lunches.
Speaker 9: Now, who's the singer? Is saying that? Who's a great singer?
Speaker 11: Saying that the lady, the lad who runs from from
Speaker 11: the front of them from the seven.
Speaker 7: Kill us?
Speaker 12: Yeah, I'm going to a concert.
Speaker 10: You think I'm bad, Ladies, We're going to the Taylor
Speaker 10: Swift concerts and various places.
Speaker 1: I don't get it, but I get the people.
Speaker 7: I got it.
Speaker 15: I'm a disgruntled X member of the Church of Taylor.
Speaker 1: She's got to dump that guy. She belongs to me.
Speaker 1: We'll see you down there.
Speaker 9: Okay, So are you off to.
Speaker 1: We're going to the u C.
Speaker 6: Berkeley Federal Society reception down at the Metropolitan Club.
Speaker 1: And it's only there because John likes these fancy clubs,
Speaker 1: you know, he belongs to all of them and whatnot.
Speaker 1: So Donald, okay, while you hear it all tomorrow.
Speaker 9: Yeah, I'll be right, we'll catch up. Okay, continue, Yeah,
Speaker 9: just leave that.
Speaker 1: I'll take care of them. Okay, hopefully all work. I
Speaker 1: think they will.
Speaker 6: So I just felt like when I was standing over there,
Speaker 6: people were talking very softly and it's boomy, and you
Speaker 6: know how voices discibility, these things do really this thing
Speaker 6: especially does really well, even though the place I.
Speaker 9: Know those are really use this for your record? Yeah
Speaker 9: you you do? Someone that Berkeley did recording with.
Speaker 1: That, Yeah, I did. And that mind these two backups.
Speaker 15: But Steve, since you asked me for a story, let
Speaker 15: me tell you, I'm honored to be on this podcast
Speaker 15: with you.
Speaker 7: But let me tell you the podcast.
Speaker 15: And I listened to you on podcasts all the time
Speaker 15: now since since we met two years ago. But let
Speaker 15: me tell you about the podcast that I really wanted
Speaker 15: to be on with you. Is you had I think
Speaker 15: your hiszonion and you were talking about you know, you
Speaker 15: wanted to have like a throwdown of Locke versus you know,
Speaker 15: natural law, and I wanted to. I'm team Locke, man.
Speaker 15: I mean my mom wrote her PhD dissertation on the
Speaker 15: Second Treaties of Government?
Speaker 1: Really, what did you do with that? Clogo Harvard Radcliffe?
Speaker 9: Uh huh?
Speaker 15: And so, I mean the first thing when I just
Speaker 15: just to offer the feedback that whenever I deal with
Speaker 15: you know, the the natural law types or the you know,
Speaker 15: the more prescriptive you know, uh, common good constitutionalists, it's
Speaker 15: like we don't have.
Speaker 1: The votes for that.
Speaker 15: Like if we well, it's like you think you're gonna
Speaker 15: I mean, Christianity is declining, like you know you're not
Speaker 15: going to win.
Speaker 1: So yeah, So I mean Hozoniti, of course is anti Lock.
Speaker 9: Yeah, I know, that's why.
Speaker 1: That's why I wanted to throw down with.
Speaker 12: This, right. It's uh.
Speaker 6: And and Mule Actually, John, you and I are cornering
Speaker 6: Vermule a week from now in Italy. We couldn't get
Speaker 6: him to come to Berkeley, but he'll meet us in Italy.
Speaker 13: Well, yeah, I.
Speaker 1: Still want to take one of these guys on.
Speaker 12: Yeah.
Speaker 6: Yeah, Well, hopefully we'll make a podcast out of it.
Speaker 6: But okay, okay, Lap, thanks for dropping by. Okay, I
Speaker 6: think I think we're I think listeners.
Speaker 1: You want to say about something you've cared about me.
Speaker 8: No, I'm just a simple First Amendment lawyer who thinks
Speaker 8: that all governments.
Speaker 12: Sorry, you know, my friends are right.
Speaker 6: Yeah, I mean my favorite libertarian sticker and I you know,
Speaker 6: I'm a libertarian on Tuesdays and Thursdays and today is Friday.
Speaker 1: I think.
Speaker 6: My favorite libertarian bumper sticker is there's no government like
Speaker 6: no government.
Speaker 8: I mean, that's how I feel a lot of days,
Speaker 8: you know, But I'm too much of a foreign policy
Speaker 8: hawk to actually go that far.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well right, yeah, so there's that.
Speaker 12: Yeah, but you know, small government would work fine for me. Yeah.
Speaker 8: Government that didn't have public schools or anything like that
Speaker 8: would work fine for me.
Speaker 9: Yeah.
Speaker 8: But yeah, this is why I couldn't accomplished anything if
Speaker 8: I was up for election.
Speaker 12: Oh go to the crazy guy.
Speaker 1: Oh I'm a god.
Speaker 6: I mean if I thought about sometimes about running for office,
Speaker 6: only because the poor opposition campaign, their opposition researchers would
Speaker 6: have to read to four million words, that would be.
Speaker 1: Punishment, that would be conduct punishment. Apparently they only have
Speaker 1: to read until they find the bad one.
Speaker 8: Yeah.
Speaker 1: Well that, yeah, they can find that right.
Speaker 12: It wouldn't take very many words.
Speaker 1: All right, great to see you guys, Thanks for dropping by,
Speaker 1: Thank you.
Speaker 16: Yeah.
Speaker 10: Ricochet joined the conversation