Speaker 1: Well whiskey.
Speaker 2: Coming from Powerline blog dot com and produced by Ricochet
Speaker 2: dot com. This is the three Whiskey Happy Hour with
Speaker 2: your bartenders Steve Hayward, John You, and power Lines International
Speaker 2: Woman of Mystery Lucretiative where You're in love Down.
Speaker 3: Hello, Welcome everybody to another quiet episode and a three
Speaker 3: whiskey happy hour, and nothing at all in politics happened again.
Speaker 3: We're gonna have to spend the whole time talking about
Speaker 3: esoteric political theory. No, in fact, in fact, that's all untrue.
Speaker 3: It's been another crazy week in national politics, and we
Speaker 3: couldn't have better people to discuss it than my co hosts,
Speaker 3: Steve Hayward, Hi Steve, Hi, John and the International Woman
Speaker 3: of Mystery, Lucretia.
Speaker 4: Hi, Lucretia, Hi John, How are.
Speaker 3: You what a crazy I spent all day today and
Speaker 3: yesterday teaching Law of the Sea, believe it or not,
Speaker 3: so I've missed everything everything. I only am reading the speeches.
Speaker 3: I've not been watching the DNC. I have been reading
Speaker 3: the speeches late at night, and I totally missed today's
Speaker 3: big news, on which we have a three whiskey how
Speaker 3: happy Hour scoop from Steve Hayward. Well, the RFK drop
Speaker 3: out of the race and endorsement at Trump. Steve, what
Speaker 3: is this big scoop.
Speaker 2: That we have?
Speaker 1: Well? Maybe, but first of all, John, really, you've been
Speaker 1: teaching the law of the sea and you heck will
Speaker 1: be about the Clean Air Act? Are you kidding? Well,
Speaker 1: I don't think about it.
Speaker 3: I just want to explain to people I'm out of it.
Speaker 1: Look what I've been Listeners can't see that I'm holding
Speaker 1: up Chep Melnick's great book, Regulation of the Courts, The
Speaker 1: Case of the Clean Air Act. I'm going to like
Speaker 1: make you read this someday, John, like you know, like
Speaker 1: Roddy McDowell and clockwork Orange with your aisles peeled open.
Speaker 1: It's a great look. You know, it's a great book.
Speaker 3: It is the only book of Chut Melnicks I refuse
Speaker 3: to read.
Speaker 1: It's a great book. It was a dissertation.
Speaker 3: Okay, but you know, by the way, by the way,
Speaker 3: you're right, Steve, I am or miss. I forgot to
Speaker 3: ask both of you before we talk about this quiet
Speaker 3: week in politics. What are you drinking? Steve?
Speaker 1: Well, you know, it's actually a Friday night for change
Speaker 1: because we often lose Tuesday. Mark I've got a Telliskir
Speaker 1: ten year old, which is a you know, isle of
Speaker 1: sky uh single malt, which I I've been planning for
Speaker 1: a couple of years now that here in another remote
Speaker 1: bucolics central coast, I don't have good liquor stores. Well,
Speaker 1: I can tell listeners that a fantastic, maybe the greatest
Speaker 1: liquor store I've ever seen, has opened in Passer Rubbles.
Speaker 1: It's called Grapes and Grains. And without going through the
Speaker 1: whole thing about how great it is, they have lucretia.
Speaker 1: I have to get this for your birthday. They have,
Speaker 1: for example, a seventy five year old McCallen single malt
Speaker 1: for sal behind a glass case for eighty nine ninety
Speaker 1: nine dollars.
Speaker 4: That's when we went to well, when we stopped in
Speaker 4: London on our way to join you guys in Milan,
Speaker 4: that I went to the McCallen store and they had
Speaker 4: a bunch of really nice bottles behind glass, but that
Speaker 4: they had like a set I almost want to call it,
Speaker 4: of different ones. And that the week before the saleswoman
Speaker 4: said that some rich guy from California had come in
Speaker 4: and bought two hundred and fifty thousand dollars worth one
Speaker 4: of the sets of all the different bottles of Scotch
Speaker 4: from the London from Heath Airport.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it wasn't me.
Speaker 3: I don't get is Steve's in this great store with
Speaker 3: eighty nine thousand dollars bottle McCallum and he buys a
Speaker 3: talliskir tenure, which usually get two for the price of
Speaker 3: one on Civic Well.
Speaker 1: I was also getting some I was also getting some
Speaker 1: Spanish red wine and very fond of that's hard to find.
Speaker 1: But here's the point for listeners, which is I keep
Speaker 1: tightening this. But now I think I'm going to try
Speaker 1: and organize a Ricochet meet up for the Central Coast
Speaker 1: sometime the next year, and I'm going to see if
Speaker 1: I can get this store to have a special event
Speaker 1: for us. Now they won't break out. They have several
Speaker 1: cases of you know, whiskeys that are anywhere from two
Speaker 1: to five thousand dollars on their sticker price, and plus
Speaker 1: stuff that if we pull the too a collection and
Speaker 1: all that, we might be able to get one bottle. Okay, anyway,
Speaker 1: So Talian, that's what I'm having, Lucretia, what do you drink? I, on.
Speaker 4: The other hand, have this great your store a couple
Speaker 4: hours away from me, which everything is called Costco, And
Speaker 4: I bought another bottle of the cask of a Monteado
Speaker 4: and it's lovely, the you know, the the whiskey aged
Speaker 4: in the cask of a Montiado. So that's what I'm drinking,
Speaker 4: and it just makes me take one to take revenge
Speaker 4: on all of my enemies, which I have a lot
Speaker 4: of lately.
Speaker 3: That's a lot of booze.
Speaker 4: A lucky thing. I can buy it at Costco.
Speaker 3: John One, I am drinking a Costco bottle too. It's
Speaker 3: a my will It bourbon pot still in the gigantic size.
Speaker 4: That cool bottle. You know, I bought that once. John.
Speaker 4: It's good because I like the bottle.
Speaker 3: Yeah, the bottle is really cool. The bourbon's not bad either.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 3: So anyway, so let's start with this this week's news.
Speaker 3: The first, Steve, you promised some kind of scoop or
Speaker 3: inside story about RFK Junior's decision today to withdraw from
Speaker 3: the presidential race and to endorse Donald Trump and an
Speaker 3: in person lollapalooza in Phoenix and Lucretia's neighborhood in Lucretia's
Speaker 3: back here. They might have been her at her house.
Speaker 3: She may well have broken this sweet deal.
Speaker 4: Steve have pictures.
Speaker 1: Well, there are two steps to this or three steps. Really.
Speaker 1: Someone who is a listener and reader who I don't
Speaker 1: know but Bona Five's check out just called me up
Speaker 1: and to say, look, I just want to tip you off.
Speaker 1: I've been a volunteer for the Kennedy campaign for several
Speaker 1: months now in a key Eastern state. And he said,
Speaker 1: I'm not senior in the thing. But on the other hand,
Speaker 1: the Kennedy senior people are calling around to all of
Speaker 1: us saying, I hope you will all please get ready
Speaker 1: to or consider signing up to join the Trump campaign.
Speaker 1: And he told me a lot of details. This is
Speaker 1: really going to happen, is what he told me. And
Speaker 1: sure enough, it did happen today in two stages, Kennedy
Speaker 1: gave a speech that look, I've always thought the guy
Speaker 1: was a clown, demagogue and all kinds of crazy things.
Speaker 1: But I watched the whole thing today forty five minutes
Speaker 1: or so, and I found it absolutely riveting. Another part
Speaker 1: you might quarrel with, although not many, I have to
Speaker 1: say I was utterly captivated and I thought it went
Speaker 1: on too long, because I think most speeches go on
Speaker 1: too long. But he said three things. First, I am
Speaker 1: absolutely outraged at the way the Democratic Party is anti
Speaker 1: democratic and is the party of censorship. And he went
Speaker 1: through all the things that we've talked about a lot. Second, John,
Speaker 1: and this is the part that you would not have liked.
Speaker 1: He talked about the Ukraine War and foreign policy, and
Speaker 1: he says we have to end the neo cons forever wars.
Speaker 1: And he gave an account of the Ukraine War that
Speaker 1: is much closer, shall we say, to Lucretia than yours, surprise, surprise, surprise,
Speaker 1: although he did it very well, I have to say.
Speaker 1: And then third, he talked about the health crisis in America,
Speaker 1: especially with the children, and obesity and a whole lot
Speaker 1: of things, leaving out the whole vaccine stuff, where he's
Speaker 1: been kind of dodgy over the years, and by the way,
Speaker 1: he said a number of things that I thought were
Speaker 1: very shrewd. He said, Look, I don't agree with Donald
Speaker 1: Trump about a lot of things, but we do agree
Speaker 1: on some of the most important things, and that's why
Speaker 1: I'm for him. And you know, we've agreed to disagree
Speaker 1: on some things but I'll be in the room. He said.
Speaker 1: You know, Donald Trump has said I'll be part of
Speaker 1: his administration. He left it vague, how I have thoughts
Speaker 1: on that. Okay, he did that, and I thought it
Speaker 1: was a fantastic speech for someone who's never liked the
Speaker 1: guy who's turned down two invitations to debate him twenty
Speaker 1: years ago. And then later in the day he appeared
Speaker 1: with Trump in I think Phoenix, and they had a
Speaker 1: rally with fireworks and all the rest, and Kennedy came
Speaker 1: up and gave five or six minutes with Trumps standing
Speaker 1: very patiently at the side. That was fabulous. And I
Speaker 1: you know, the pole data up to this point all
Speaker 1: suggests that if Kennedy dropped out, it would help Trump.
Speaker 1: So there we are. I think it's a master strock
Speaker 1: on Trump and Kennedy's part. The day after the Democratic
Speaker 1: Convention ends, and you know, talk about weird things happening
Speaker 1: this year, this is one of the weirdest ever.
Speaker 3: By the way, Lucretia, before we turn back, well no, please, Lucretia,
Speaker 3: go ahead. Then we got to find out did you
Speaker 3: know Steve slipped in that he was asked to pay
Speaker 3: RFK Junior and turned it down twice. We got to
Speaker 3: find out what that's about.
Speaker 4: About it before John environmental stuff, but remember there used
Speaker 4: to be a real environmental nut. But so I read
Speaker 4: the speech, and I'm going to be honest with you.
Speaker 4: That's much easier for me because I always I have
Speaker 4: this empathy for people that have uh sort of speech difficulties,
Speaker 4: and it kind of makes me anxious almost, So I'm
Speaker 4: much better off reading it. I don't. I don't hold
Speaker 4: it against him. I don't. It's not problematic or anything.
Speaker 4: It's just kind of anyway.
Speaker 3: Have you been hanging around with Steve all these years?
Speaker 4: Yeah, I know Steve. I'm used to Steve's little flights
Speaker 4: to fancy. What was I going to say?
Speaker 1: What was that?
Speaker 4: What was my next point?
Speaker 1: What was my next point?
Speaker 4: But I'm used to it, and Steve told me before
Speaker 4: when I kind of mentioned that that I that if
Speaker 4: I listened to RFK long enough I would get used
Speaker 4: to that too. But anyway, I will say, I don't
Speaker 4: need to add to what Steve said. He said it well.
Speaker 4: One of the things that he hinted at at the
Speaker 4: very end was if nothing else, what this has done,
Speaker 4: has it has popped the balloon. Sorry, I'm going to
Speaker 4: mix my metaphors here of the media gasm that was
Speaker 4: going over the top over calm a Lama ding Dong
Speaker 4: and her acceptance speech. Right, I mean, we were even.
Speaker 4: And though Beyonce did not show up as let's see,
Speaker 4: as the All Times put it, speculation of a surprise
Speaker 4: guest Taylor Swift, Beyonce turned out to be nothing but
Speaker 4: wishful thinking. No matter, Kamala Harris crushed it. Yep, oh God. Anyway,
Speaker 4: so that you know that went on. But and and
Speaker 4: they may not spend as much time talking about Trump
Speaker 4: and RFK, but nevertheless, then the excuse, the expression, narrative
Speaker 4: has changed somewhat. So that's that's what I'll say about it.
Speaker 4: You know, I'm trying to concentrate on the things about
Speaker 4: RFK that I like, and there are some, there are many.
Speaker 4: I try not to concentrate on the bear and the brainworm.
Speaker 4: And you know, some of those things that are weird.
Speaker 4: I mean, they're no worse than the things we know
Speaker 4: about walt assistant volunteer coach Waltz. And they brought out players,
Speaker 4: these these fat out of shape you know the kind
Speaker 4: of people that democrats love to make fun of who
Speaker 4: are Republicans. They bring out these football players from nineteen
Speaker 4: ninety nine to talk about how great assistant volunteer coach
Speaker 4: Waltz was. Why because they certainly don't want to talk
Speaker 4: about what Governor Waltz has done, so they have this
Speaker 4: absolutely fake attempt to make us all think he's a
Speaker 4: folksy all high school football coach. You took his team
Speaker 4: to a state championship. Oh my god, I just want
Speaker 4: to kill people when I hear them talking like that.
Speaker 4: I hate to be gaslighted so much like that. I'm
Speaker 4: not that stupid. Maybe fond, but I'm not that stupid anyway.
Speaker 3: Sorry, So, what effect do you think it'll have on
Speaker 3: the race? So the story I see say that at
Speaker 3: one point RFK Junior was pulling around ten percent, but
Speaker 3: that was before Biden pulled out, and now he was
Speaker 3: about four percent in the polls. But in a race
Speaker 3: that could be decided by seventy seventy thousand votes in
Speaker 3: the right states, could that make a difference.
Speaker 4: Yes, because it's not four percent in all the states either.
Speaker 4: It varies, and it also varies to some extent. John
Speaker 4: about where those votes might go, Well, go ahead, Steve's
Speaker 4: much better at this. Well.
Speaker 1: There was an interesting interlude in the speech. Today he
Speaker 1: has file paperwork to take himself off the ballot in
Speaker 1: many of the crucial swing states. Some of them he
Speaker 1: may be locked in. I'm not sure. But he said
Speaker 1: something very curious. He said, Look, you know, it's possible
Speaker 1: there could be a two sixty nine two sixty nine
Speaker 1: tie in the electoral College. This is true, it's realte,
Speaker 1: but it's possible in that case would go to the
Speaker 1: House Representatives. And if you know your constitution, you know
Speaker 1: that the House chooses from the top three vote getters.
Speaker 1: So he went on to say, so, look, if you're
Speaker 1: in a deep red state and you're for Trump, or
Speaker 1: in a deep blue state and you're for Viiden, but
Speaker 1: you kind of like me, vote for me, because then
Speaker 1: he would still be alive as a compromise candidate in
Speaker 1: the House of Representatives if they choose the president. That
Speaker 1: shows to me that he's you know, he's still in
Speaker 1: his back of his mind thinks there's some remote you know,
Speaker 1: what's what's the what's the famous movie scene with you
Speaker 1: know what's his name? I mean, one in a million,
Speaker 1: i'd you I still have a chance. Right, he still
Speaker 1: thinks he has a chance at all, this, which I
Speaker 1: think is kind of interesting. But look, you have to
Speaker 1: be a megalomaniac who think you're going to be the
Speaker 1: president to begin with, and so that comes with the territory.
Speaker 1: But that was a very interesting argument, I thought. So anyway,
Speaker 1: so he's going to stay on some ballots and try
Speaker 1: and get off the others and hope that Trump wins.
Speaker 1: But if it's a tie, hey, I'm still here, everybody,
Speaker 1: and I could be your president.
Speaker 3: Said there was some kind of deal with RFK maybe
Speaker 3: the next Secretary of Health and Human Services, and well
Speaker 3: that was charge of all the vaccines.
Speaker 1: No, well, no, that was implied. I think, uh, I think,
Speaker 1: I think one of two things will happen. I My
Speaker 1: own view is, I think it'd be great to make
Speaker 1: him the White House a Czar of declassification and then
Speaker 1: declassify the UFO documents that the JFK assassination documents. Oh, John,
Speaker 1: I mean, will you think about this? I would like
Speaker 1: to see the redacted parts of the nine to eleven
Speaker 1: Commission report that we all think, say the Saudi government
Speaker 1: had a lot to do with the nine to eleven plot.
Speaker 1: I don't know if that's there, but that's the speculation. Right,
Speaker 1: maybe you know something about that, and maybe you can't
Speaker 1: say because they would kill you.
Speaker 3: Okay, thanks for that.
Speaker 1: Or to put him in charge of some White House
Speaker 1: council on looking into health regulations and all the rest
Speaker 1: of that. H His talk with Trump today was all
Speaker 1: about we got to get corporations out of By the way,
Speaker 1: this is conservative regulatory capture language, right, we got.
Speaker 4: To finish the sentence, Stave, we got to Steve. We
Speaker 4: got to get the corporations out.
Speaker 1: Of dominating the regulatory agencies of the federal government. That's
Speaker 1: that's regulatory capture doctrine that conservatives understood fifty sixty years
Speaker 1: ago and they've kind of given up that language and
Speaker 1: now it's back. Courtesy of r of an unusual.
Speaker 4: Source heard I heard. I actually couldn't tell who it
Speaker 4: was because he was kind of a mushmouth, which a
Speaker 4: lot of Democrats are. On one of the Fox shows
Speaker 4: that one of the panels they brought together, Uh, they
Speaker 4: asked what the question you just asked us, John, which
Speaker 4: is what do you think this will do for the race?
Speaker 4: And what did you think about his speech? And you know,
Speaker 4: most of the most of the panelists had good things
Speaker 4: to say that whoever the Democrat mushmouth was said, well,
Speaker 4: you know, his whole talk about censorship was just nonsense,
Speaker 4: because his complaint was that, uh, you know, he only
Speaker 4: had two two interviews on mainstream media out of all
Speaker 4: the mainstream media, but that they otherwise spend all this
Speaker 4: time of slamming him, you know, saying these untrue things
Speaker 4: about him, et cetera, et cetera. It's because he was
Speaker 4: so unimportant. Why does he think he deserves these, you know,
Speaker 4: any more than two interviews, because he was never going
Speaker 4: to win the presidency. Except you know, the other side
Speaker 4: of the argument that that RFK made quite rightly was
Speaker 4: if he wasn't that important, why did they spend so
Speaker 4: much time and effort trying to demonize him and so forth?
Speaker 4: And so I think that the only reason I brought
Speaker 4: that up. Who cares what a stupid mushmouth Democrat says.
Speaker 4: But I think they're worried, well, except worried about the
Speaker 4: things he brought up. Sorry, so go ahead.
Speaker 1: Well he did mention again, you know, he mentioned that
Speaker 1: Ross Pereat in nineteen ninety two got something like forty
Speaker 1: interviews with leading news organizations too, the three major networks
Speaker 1: and so forth, and he says I got two or
Speaker 1: almost none, right, and he says that's the media can cooperate. Okay,
Speaker 1: you get the point.
Speaker 4: But again, as he pointed out, lots of negative things
Speaker 4: about him, So if he wasn't important, yeah, why they
Speaker 4: ignored There.
Speaker 1: Was not this attempt by either party the truck to
Speaker 1: try and block ross Pro's access from the ballot. And
Speaker 1: he got twenty percent of the vote that year. So yeah,
Speaker 1: a good point I think he made.
Speaker 3: So well, it's uh, not exactly the work of the
Speaker 3: Party of Joy, is it.
Speaker 2: So?
Speaker 3: By the way, which is the next topic.
Speaker 1: But Steve, Well, here's well, I'm anticipating you. I have
Speaker 1: a summary point that I'm very proud of that Lucretia
Speaker 1: will be horrified, which is why I want to make it.
Speaker 1: Of course, Look, they're trying to recreate Obama in two
Speaker 1: thousand and eight, talk about media gasms, Lucretia, right, And
Speaker 1: you know people have said this that you know Obama,
Speaker 1: and I think this is true in a pop culture
Speaker 1: or pop culture level, Obama was Bulemania, right, people are
Speaker 1: crazy for this guy. Well, they're trying to recreate with camel.
Speaker 1: But I think she's the monkeys. In other words, the monkeys,
Speaker 1: because people can't see if this is while lucretious stroping
Speaker 1: the cat that's draped around her.
Speaker 5: Neck like like blow felled right, more like look, I mean,
Speaker 5: in other words, if if Obama can be said to
Speaker 5: have been Paul McCartney and John Lennon, well Michelle is
Speaker 5: no better than Mickey Dolan's and Peter Tork right.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's a it's a pale shadow of the
Speaker 1: real thing.
Speaker 3: I have no idea who those people are.
Speaker 1: Of course you don't. You know, you're young and foolish
Speaker 1: and all that stuff, but you know they The point
Speaker 1: is the media. Well, the Monkeys were a total creation
Speaker 1: of media marketing, whereas.
Speaker 3: Take advantage of the Beatles creation.
Speaker 4: They're still playing their songs, Steve.
Speaker 1: Are they. I don't believer. Yeah, well I'm not a
Speaker 1: believer that this will work in twenty twenty four. But okay,
Speaker 1: but that's my no.
Speaker 4: I mean, now, was seven, I wanted to marry Davy Jones,
Speaker 4: and then when I was eight I was taller than him.
Speaker 6: So let's turn to the next topic, which is, Okay,
Speaker 6: the other big event was the Democrats formally nominated Kamala Harris.
Speaker 3: I don't know if you know this. There was a
Speaker 3: a session on the last day of the convention on
Speaker 3: how to pronounce her name Kamala?
Speaker 4: Did they say Kamala me ding dong No?
Speaker 3: I think I saw Steve there trying to throw that in,
Speaker 3: but he was quickly hustled out of the arena.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 3: So, what do you guys think about the Democratic Convention?
Speaker 3: We think first, actually, what do you think of her
Speaker 3: speech and her the last day which was devoted to
Speaker 3: her Lucretia.
Speaker 4: You know, I'm I'm not a good person to ask.
Speaker 4: I just find everything about her foul and despicable and
Speaker 4: disgusting in every other word you can say, I I do.
Speaker 4: So I'm gonna I'm sorry for this total, total sideline here,
Speaker 4: But I've told you guys before that I'm the elector
Speaker 4: at my church and if there's a new prese that
Speaker 4: comes in, he always thanks me. You know, you're the
Speaker 4: best lector I've ever heard. Why because I've been a
Speaker 4: professor for forty years trying to keep students interested in
Speaker 4: Aristotle in the Federalist papers right when I read them.
Speaker 4: So I'm good at inflection. I'm good at you know,
Speaker 4: the just because of practice for a very long time.
Speaker 4: But not a lot of people are and they don't
Speaker 4: really have qualifications. So the advice that are that is
Speaker 4: given to people who are not necessarily good public readers
Speaker 4: is just speak very slowly and enansi eight every word,
Speaker 4: and you know, the congregation finds that completely annoying. And
Speaker 4: I had the exact same impression when Commaluma ding Dong
Speaker 4: talked about how our dreams cackle, cackle, cackle. Uh, you know,
Speaker 4: it was just really annoying. Now that being said, she
Speaker 4: didn't lose it. She didn't cackle, she didn't screw up
Speaker 4: reading the teleprompter, she didn't screw up reading the speech
Speaker 4: that she did not write, that was written for her.
Speaker 4: That's you know, that's not uncommon. By the time they
Speaker 4: got around to her, it was late, same as what
Speaker 4: happened with Biden. I'm to understand that because it was
Speaker 4: so late, James Taylor didn't get to sing, oh, what's
Speaker 4: this song? My friend?
Speaker 1: You've got a friend, you got a friend?
Speaker 4: Yeah, you know, the ultimate Kumbaya song. So he was
Speaker 4: not happy. And even without Beyonce, there wasn't time for
Speaker 4: James Taylor because too many people had to talk, and
Speaker 4: they talked too slow.
Speaker 1: I think, well, and some of them were bad, like
Speaker 1: your Senator Mark Kelly was really a dud.
Speaker 4: I mean, I told her he's a troll.
Speaker 1: I don't yeah, all right, all right, all right, I
Speaker 1: got it. So, by the way, you know, early in
Speaker 1: the evening, I watched the whole evening and I kept hearing, Oh,
Speaker 1: they think Beyonce's here. I'm told Beyonce's here, and I thought,
Speaker 1: what a terrible idea to have Beyonce come. She would
Speaker 1: overshadow here. I think this was a bait and switch
Speaker 1: on the part of Democrats. They thought that that's going
Speaker 1: to attract some of Lanni Oldsry I don't know who,
Speaker 1: but it's going to track more viewers to listen to
Speaker 1: the because if she had come, she would have overshadowed
Speaker 1: the speech because all the headlines would have been Beyonce
Speaker 1: highlights last evening with Campwar and Kambella Harris accept the
Speaker 1: nomination and I would anyway. And then in the middle
Speaker 1: of or maybe it was right before, but beyonce spokesperson
Speaker 1: put out a statement saying Beyonce was never scheduled to
Speaker 1: come speak. I thought that was interesting, right in the
Speaker 1: middle of the events, right to talk about a diss uh.
Speaker 4: Yeah, even as I think or maybe it was T
Speaker 4: would ever t T TMX. What's the tmzz our fault?
Speaker 4: We leaved that we were wrong.
Speaker 1: Right, yeah, I think you know, but I think that
Speaker 1: was planted with TMZ because they're an outlet that would
Speaker 1: put the Okay, Look, what I thought about the speech was,
Speaker 1: I say a lot of things stylistically like Lucretia did.
Speaker 1: I thought there were four parts of substance that were notable.
Speaker 1: One is the attack on abortion, even though she distorted
Speaker 1: badly Trump's position in the court case. I thought that
Speaker 1: she landed the line about the Republicans have lost their
Speaker 1: minds uh, and you know that got a big rousing cheer,
Speaker 1: and of course it's fan service. The other thing she
Speaker 1: said was Donald Trump is an unserious person. I think
Speaker 1: that's wrong. On the other hand, there's lots of things
Speaker 1: like his crazy tweets and stuff, which, as the old
Speaker 1: saying goes lens vermilicue to an otherwise unconvincing and bald narrative.
Speaker 1: But then more interesting to me was she said Israel
Speaker 1: by name, no one mentioned Israel the rest of the
Speaker 1: entire convention because of their problem, and she said, and
Speaker 1: as she'd always said this, we'd say, gosh, we're going
Speaker 1: to give it to her. She said that we will
Speaker 1: always defend Israel's right to defend itself from attacks like
Speaker 1: October seventh. Then she might, of course she did all that.
Speaker 1: But the fact that she said that, I think no
Speaker 1: other speaker could have said that the Prophomaque people were
Speaker 1: not going to boo Kamala Harris in her speech. They
Speaker 1: would have boot anybody else who said that. But then
Speaker 1: the other one was I don't know if you caught this, lucretia.
Speaker 1: She said the one word to use the I forget
Speaker 1: exactly the words, but the adjitive. I remember she said,
Speaker 1: the American military will, under me, will always be the
Speaker 1: most lethal fighting force in the world. Now, of course
Speaker 1: we doubt her sincerit, you know, and all the rest,
Speaker 1: and you go through the substance. But the fact that
Speaker 1: she said that, I thought was curious.
Speaker 4: Well, however, she certainly didn't think that's important though to
Speaker 4: some ex sense, Steve, I don't think she would have
Speaker 4: ever written that speech.
Speaker 1: But but you're right, I don't disagree with you about
Speaker 1: any of that, But the point is what's on the
Speaker 1: surface sometimes, you know what did Strauss say? Sometimes it's
Speaker 1: the surface of things is the heart of things. She
Speaker 1: had to say that. And by the way, if a
Speaker 1: Republican says something like that, we could call the war
Speaker 1: mugger a neo con and you know, all, okay, right,
Speaker 1: I'll stop there.
Speaker 4: Only Nixon can go to China. The other thing I'd
Speaker 4: add to that is that despite the demands from that creature,
Speaker 4: rush sheeted to leave and others that they have a
Speaker 4: pro hamas they said, prot pro hamas speaker of the DNC,
Speaker 4: resisted it and correct, you know, and even though the
Speaker 4: protesters outside created some havoc, caused you know what, seventy
Speaker 4: five million dollars it costs the city of Chicago to
Speaker 4: sort of keep that all in line. Amazing how the
Speaker 4: stupid twit Kamalama ding Dong calls for defunding the police
Speaker 4: and rethinking policing and how many police did they have
Speaker 4: out there? But anyway, that the protesters really didn't do
Speaker 4: the damage that was being predicted to the you know,
Speaker 4: the the overall public face of the of the convention,
Speaker 4: you know, and and of course the media wasn't really
Speaker 4: great about pushing the narrative of the protesters. But I
Speaker 4: don't think that the protesters hurt much.
Speaker 1: No, not.
Speaker 3: They were a non story in the end, because they
Speaker 3: know they've got the potential for an ally in the
Speaker 3: White House of Kamalowins.
Speaker 4: They're smart enough to think that. All the moss they're not.
Speaker 3: Smart so well.
Speaker 1: But here, Lucretia, I think it's two things I think
Speaker 1: are what happened here. One is the numbers were lower
Speaker 1: than expected. I think partly, Lucretia, it might have been
Speaker 1: that they got the word from George Sorow, Sendak Blue
Speaker 1: and others, don't screw this up. If you make a
Speaker 1: big fuss, you're going to help Elect Trump. Go ahead
Speaker 1: and protest. But the other part, John, I think is
Speaker 1: u and Lucretia is I do think and I heard
Speaker 1: stories about this, credible stories that the Chicago police had
Speaker 1: organized to nip this in the bud. And all the
Speaker 1: clips I saw on YouTube, are on Twitter and elsewhere
Speaker 1: showed that whenever there was some little coterie protesters wanting
Speaker 1: to make trouble, there were a lot of police at
Speaker 1: the point of attack, and prevented it from getting out
Speaker 1: of hand early.
Speaker 4: So I think they reimagined the police.
Speaker 1: Oh no, no, they were in riot gear and in
Speaker 1: big numbers, and they they were. I think they prepared
Speaker 1: for this and figured out what they had to do.
Speaker 1: I mean, John, I mean, I think we've talked about this.
Speaker 1: I remember talking to people in the Chancellor's office at
Speaker 1: Berkeley after the milout Unanapolis riots and said, why didn't
Speaker 1: you send out under police inside Cellar Black Hall? They said,
Speaker 1: because we were outnumbered, and when you're out numbered it's
Speaker 1: bad for the police and everybody else. You have to
Speaker 1: have a superiority of numbers and a tactical plan. They
Speaker 1: didn't have that in February twenty seventeen, and I think
Speaker 1: they learned from that at Berkeley and elsewhere. And so
Speaker 1: if you know what to expect, then nowadays I think
Speaker 1: police tactics have gotten a lot better.
Speaker 4: And Okay, well, without taking us completely off track, I
Speaker 4: wonder if if what Steve said is true and the
Speaker 4: powers that be sores or never put that message out. Yeah.
Speaker 4: My understanding still our classes start next week, is that
Speaker 4: you know, universities all across the country have actionable intelligence
Speaker 4: that these protesters are going to be very serious. Have
Speaker 4: you heard that too, Yes, John.
Speaker 3: I haven't gotten any special things, but you know, at
Speaker 3: the beginning of the year we usually don't get much
Speaker 3: of any messages. But we've gotten several messages from the
Speaker 3: chancellor and university administration about the right to free speech.
Speaker 3: We usually don't get those in the beginning of the year.
Speaker 3: I'm sure they're worried, but on the Berkeley hasn't been
Speaker 3: as crazy as most of the other colleges, So for
Speaker 3: us it's just regular work. You got protesters, So you
Speaker 3: think you guys think putting aside the merits the substance
Speaker 3: of our policies, of which there were few. Do you
Speaker 3: think that she's actually doing their smart thing from her perspective,
Speaker 3: which is, don't talk about policy, just make it about personality. Right,
Speaker 3: the A lot of the speeches just went after I
Speaker 3: was surprised actually had the Obamas when at hominem at
Speaker 3: against after Trump, there's very little discussion of what policies
Speaker 3: the Democrats would propose. But if they make the election
Speaker 3: all about Trump there, that's their path to victory. I
Speaker 3: guess that's the path of everything they think they have.
Speaker 3: So maybe they're doing the smart and of course you're
Speaker 3: going to say the press is helping them, and the
Speaker 3: press is helping them, but is this not the smart
Speaker 3: thing for them to do?
Speaker 4: It's a twofold question, John. I think one is question
Speaker 4: is is it the smart thing? And the other is
Speaker 4: will it be successful? And the reason that I say
Speaker 4: that is you have to say absolutely it's a smart
Speaker 4: thing because A kamalamaeding Dong is the most unlikable politician
Speaker 4: since Hillary Clinton, no doubt about that. I mean, seriously,
Speaker 4: anybody that gets near enough to her dislikes her. Her aids.
Speaker 4: I mean, I guess Dougie doesn't, but I don't know.
Speaker 4: Maybe he does who I don't know. But she's a
Speaker 4: very dislikable person. She's not a nice person, she doesn't
Speaker 4: treat people well. She's dumb as a board. She has
Speaker 4: an annoying voice, she has an annoying cackle, on and
Speaker 4: on and on. So it's smart to put her in
Speaker 4: absolutely scripted situations where she doesn't go off at all
Speaker 4: into her word salad, she doesn't go off into the cackle,
Speaker 4: she doesn't say stupid things. And then the other part
Speaker 4: of that also is not only is the ugly, dumb, stupid,
Speaker 4: in every bad word that Lucretia can bring up from
Speaker 4: her large repertory of negative adjectives, every single one of them.
Speaker 4: She's also a far leftist who has a record both
Speaker 4: in the Biden Harris White House and as Attorney General,
Speaker 4: et cetera, of being a far left nut. The policies
Speaker 4: that she believes in are not the policies supported by
Speaker 4: most Americans. Now, one more thing, then I'll give it
Speaker 4: over to Steve Was for some real analysis. But I
Speaker 4: you know, listened, of course to some of it's excuse me,
Speaker 4: probably Jesse Waters, but I don't remember for certain. Had
Speaker 4: people inside the convention talking to Kamala Kamalama Dingdong supporters,
Speaker 4: what's your favorite policy that Harris supports? Not one single person. Now,
Speaker 4: they probably edited the ones who had intelligence answers, I'm guessing.
Speaker 4: But the fact that anybody who is a delegate to
Speaker 4: a Democratic delegate to the convention cannot give one single
Speaker 4: policy with which they agree that is supposedly a policy
Speaker 4: of Kamalama ding Dong's is really telling to me. So smart, yes, successful,
Speaker 4: It remains to be seen smart because there's no alternative
Speaker 4: that's why I say it go ahead, Steve, Steve.
Speaker 1: Yeah, Well, look, the calculation here is because it's a
Speaker 1: short campaign, they think that she can what do the
Speaker 1: basement strategy essentially, and because we have what's seventy some
Speaker 1: days to the election, they may may be right. I
Speaker 1: don't think it will put it this way, if we'd
Speaker 1: actually had an open primary, either starting back in February,
Speaker 1: if Biden had dropped out when he should have, or
Speaker 1: if they have this sort of rapid fire mini primary
Speaker 1: after Biden dropped out six weeks ago, whatever it was,
Speaker 1: I don't think she would have got the nomination. She
Speaker 1: could not have hidden behind an image of joy and
Speaker 1: vibes and all the rest of that. But with the
Speaker 1: cooperation of the media, they're going to try it now,
Speaker 1: and I don't think it will work, but it could.
Speaker 1: My hunch about this, though, is in this upside down year,
Speaker 1: Kamala had her convention bounce before the convention. She got
Speaker 1: all of her boosts, all of her surge, and the
Speaker 1: polls happened before the convention started. I don't think she's
Speaker 1: going to get much of a statistical bounce that you'll
Speaker 1: see out of the convention over the next week. In
Speaker 1: the polls, especially with the RFK gambit today, which is
Speaker 1: going to royal things. Right now, the pole averages have
Speaker 1: a dead even with Trump with a slight edge in
Speaker 1: the battleground states. So he's still the favorite to win,
Speaker 1: I think, And so we'll just have to see. I
Speaker 1: think the two things that now are the black Swan events,
Speaker 1: except now there have been so many black Swan events
Speaker 1: this year. Yeah, right, black Swans are not rare anymore.
Speaker 1: But the two black Swan events are the debate on
Speaker 1: September tenth. Who knows how that will go, And we
Speaker 1: can hold that for later and then run up to
Speaker 1: it and after it's over, we'll talk about it. But
Speaker 1: you can see that going a whole bunch of different ways.
Speaker 1: And then second is Judge Mrchan going to sentence Trump
Speaker 1: to prison. I want to ask.
Speaker 4: He's not. That's already clear, right.
Speaker 1: He's not. No, he's already I mean.
Speaker 4: The Trump give me correct me if I'm wrong, John.
Speaker 4: The Trump lawyers requested a stay of the sentencing. Yeah,
Speaker 4: rest continuance, that's the word I'm looking for. Until because
Speaker 4: all they really have to do now is go to
Speaker 4: a federal court and ask a federal court to take
Speaker 4: on those federal issues that came out of the Supreme
Speaker 4: Court case, and that when this is what I what
Speaker 4: I understand, John, again, correct me if I'm wrong. When
Speaker 4: the lawyers went to Merchant, Bragg did not fight that.
Speaker 4: You have both the process acution and the defense asking
Speaker 4: Merchant to the licensing until after the election. That's my
Speaker 4: first question, Am I right?
Speaker 1: So Fi?
Speaker 3: So the uh yeah, the Trump You you haven't graded
Speaker 3: in law school lately. That's like an honors grade. So, uh,
Speaker 3: you're right in terms of what happened. The amazing thing
Speaker 3: is Bragg did not It's not that he didn't a post.
Speaker 3: He just took no position, which is quite shocking given
Speaker 3: how he was driving to get the whole case tried
Speaker 3: over the summer, which again reveals that the whole thing
Speaker 3: was political and was meant to affect the election. Because
Speaker 3: if Trump was really such a threat to the public
Speaker 3: that he had to be tried over summer, why is
Speaker 3: he allowed out running around and not being sentenced right
Speaker 3: away too? So that part is true, and that the
Speaker 3: problem for Trump is that he can't really go directly
Speaker 3: to federal court to try to stop the sentencing or
Speaker 3: get it overturned. He has to work it up through
Speaker 3: New York State Court and then get to the US
Speaker 3: Supreme Court there. So if Merchon and I totally persuaded
Speaker 3: that Murchon is trying to screw Trump over he wants
Speaker 3: to sentence Trump and not give him enough time to
Speaker 3: get up to the US Supreme Court to get the
Speaker 3: whole thing reversed. He should. If he were an honest
Speaker 3: sort of a full judge of integrity, he would know,
Speaker 3: having read the immunity decision, that the trial that he
Speaker 3: presided over is flawed now and he has to do
Speaker 3: it over again. And so if he's not going to
Speaker 3: do that, then I think he, you know, he's gonna
Speaker 3: try to screw Trump over again, which would be the
Speaker 3: sentence him to jail, and then that would be yet
Speaker 3: another day or two of several days of stories. It
Speaker 3: would be another negative added onto Trump in the mind
Speaker 3: of independence. And if he's doing it in late September,
Speaker 3: there's not enough time to get to the Supreme Court
Speaker 3: to get it to overturn. In fact, I believe absentee
Speaker 3: ballots in my home state of Pennsylvania become available two
Speaker 3: days before the sentencing. Yeah, Okay, so you're about half right.
Speaker 3: And then but the ability to go to federal court
Speaker 3: isn't really there so right away, so that gives Merchan.
Speaker 4: Well, I mean, but even if he just appeals it
Speaker 4: through the New York state courts, doesn't that automatically delay
Speaker 4: him actually being jailed if.
Speaker 3: He sends to Yeah, yeah, I think I don't. I mean,
Speaker 3: I think that what Merchan would do would sentence him
Speaker 3: to jail, but then say you're out during your appeals.
Speaker 3: But that still means, right that all the new stories
Speaker 3: facing a twenty year sentence, because remember the other thing
Speaker 3: Merchon allowed is that there's dozens of counts. Every time
Speaker 3: Trump wrote a check, they considered it an individual count,
Speaker 3: which you're not supposed to do. But you add those
Speaker 3: all all up for seeing and Trump's, you know, facing
Speaker 3: a lot of jail time.
Speaker 4: Let me ask a second question. Let's assume that that
Speaker 4: what I said actually turns out to be true, and
Speaker 4: that is that because Bragg did not complain, did not
Speaker 4: counter it, and Merchant looks at the situation, perhaps looks
Speaker 4: at the fact that every time he's done whatever he's
Speaker 4: done to Trump, he's become more popular as a result
Speaker 4: of it. And maybe he's not, you know, politically savvy
Speaker 4: to know.
Speaker 3: Who is more popular with Republicans become more popular.
Speaker 4: You know, that's true enough, but there are still you know,
Speaker 4: all of those Republicans for Kamala white guys for Kamala Medon.
Speaker 4: I digress. My second question is what if the sentencing,
Speaker 4: the sentencing itself is in fact continued till after the
Speaker 4: election and Trump wins. What I want interesting what happens then?
Speaker 4: And is there any what's what if Trump is sentenced
Speaker 4: to jail for a crime he committed in twenty seventeen, then.
Speaker 1: What this is all?
Speaker 3: You know, there's no certain legal answer because it's never
Speaker 3: happened before. But Trump would have to come in and
Speaker 3: ask for the sentence to be delayed until after he's
Speaker 3: done in office because it would interfere with his ability
Speaker 3: to perform his federal function as president. That would not normally,
Speaker 3: that would I'm trying to think that would not normally
Speaker 3: prevail if it was like an FBI agent, Right, if
Speaker 3: FBI agent gets convicted of some state crime, you don't
Speaker 3: get to say I stay out of jail because I'm
Speaker 3: an FBI agent. But you know this is you need
Speaker 3: the president is unique. Right, The executive branch can't function
Speaker 3: if the president's at prison.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I mean becomes president.
Speaker 3: No, No, I mean Trump's still president unless he resigns
Speaker 3: or impeach. He's impeached, so he so.
Speaker 4: It wouldn't be considered any ability to execute the office.
Speaker 3: I mean, if he's sitting in prison, they could, they
Speaker 3: could bring the mobile White House Oval office with him
Speaker 3: and Rikers. And I hate to say it, but he
Speaker 3: might be safer in Rikers than he is under the
Speaker 3: protection of the Secret Service these days.
Speaker 4: Well, he's almost We shouldn't be laughing, but it's funny,
Speaker 4: but it really isn't it.
Speaker 1: Stee. Well, Look, I mean I my hunch about this
Speaker 1: is I can't believe I'm a radical incre on this point.
Speaker 1: I think I think Judge Merchon sees a chance for
Speaker 1: himself to me go down in history as the person
Speaker 1: who stood up and stopped Donald Trump by ordering him
Speaker 1: to prison, either ordering the prison right away or the
Speaker 1: delayed sentenceil after the election, at which point it becomes
Speaker 1: Russia hoax ten point zero right on steroids. And and
Speaker 1: that's why I think it's gonna happen. Annie McCarthy thinks
Speaker 1: that too.
Speaker 4: And you know Andy Spring is so always wrong on
Speaker 4: his predictions.
Speaker 1: Well, I don't know about that, But the point is
Speaker 1: the reasoning is I think this is I mean, I
Speaker 1: think merch on Seas has chance to go down. As
Speaker 1: you know, this great historic figure say.
Speaker 3: Stuck at the Trump. Every time he's had a choice, exactly,
Speaker 3: he has never showed any mercy, never showed any good sense. Yeah,
Speaker 3: it's been a partisan. I mean he is an elected
Speaker 3: I mean the New York judges are elected.
Speaker 1: And so you know, by the way, if Trump has
Speaker 1: to be will be frog March. Look, this is the
Speaker 1: great dream of the left, is Trump in an orange
Speaker 1: jumpsuit going to Rikers Island jail. And at that point,
Speaker 1: I mean the riots we thought might have happened if
Speaker 1: he'd been killed in Butler, PA might start after that happens.
Speaker 1: So that's your other black Swan event that may be
Speaker 1: looking at us in less than a month.
Speaker 3: So the only thing I would add is I don't
Speaker 3: think I could see Merchhn sentencing Trump to a jail sentence,
Speaker 3: even though I don't think he should on the merits,
Speaker 3: I don't think he would order him to prison right away,
Speaker 3: because that actually would drive out the vote for Trump,
Speaker 3: you know, drive Trump votes for Trump. So the best
Speaker 3: thing from from his perspective, I think is sentenced Trump
Speaker 3: to jail, but he doesn't have to start serving the sentence. Yeah, okay,
Speaker 3: that just knocks him takes It knocks him down a
Speaker 3: peg or two amongst independents. And I think, you know.
Speaker 4: The fact that we can discuss this as supposedly intelligent
Speaker 4: adults is just and I don't that's not intended to
Speaker 4: be you guys, it's it's it's appalling.
Speaker 3: That's what the that's what the New York court system
Speaker 3: has reduced us.
Speaker 4: To the alternative universe, that's for sure. I do want
Speaker 4: to ask you, John, if you had a chance, for instance,
Speaker 4: to look at what the Republicans put together in their
Speaker 4: impeachment attempt failed, I guess you could really call it
Speaker 4: an impeachment attempt against Biden.
Speaker 3: Yeah, let's discuss that for a second. Let me introduce
Speaker 3: that the So the House committee that've been investigating the
Speaker 3: Biden's issue to report recommending impeachment against Joe Biden. It's
Speaker 3: it's interesting. So I did look through it quite I
Speaker 3: didn't look at it really carefully, but I did read
Speaker 3: through it is quite long, it does show, i think,
Speaker 3: a good grounds to investigate Hunter and Joe Biden's brother,
Speaker 3: and it does make out a good case that the
Speaker 3: Biden family did benefit from all these funds being funneled
Speaker 3: abroad by foreign governments and foreign corporations through Hunter and
Speaker 3: Joe Biden's brother. It does ask this interesting question like
Speaker 3: how does the Biden family have all this money and
Speaker 3: houses and assets when no one seems to make a
Speaker 3: living in that family other than influence peddling. Here's one
Speaker 3: interesting thing is much of this conduct occurs when Joe
Speaker 3: Biden's vice president, and so there's an interesting legal question
Speaker 3: which is the same one that came up with Donald
Speaker 3: Trump's second impeachment, which is can you impeach Joe Biden
Speaker 3: for things he allegedly did as vice president when he's
Speaker 3: not vice president anymore. That's kind of interesting. And then
Speaker 3: a second question is they do try to make the
Speaker 3: case that Joe Biden could have committed impeachable offenses while
Speaker 3: he's president now by appointing people the Justice Department who
Speaker 3: allowed the investigation and charges into Hunter to be mishandled right.
Speaker 3: A lot of the things that he's that he was
Speaker 3: investigated for in this committee report. The Hunter was investigated
Speaker 3: in this committe report. The Justice Department can't actually charge
Speaker 3: Hunter for because the statute of limitation lapsed. That the
Speaker 3: US attorney, this David Weise fellow in Delaware, did not
Speaker 3: bring the charges fast enough and so that you know,
Speaker 3: a lot of the things that the whistleblowers brought to
Speaker 3: our attention. You know, potentially twenty million dollars in payments
Speaker 3: to Hunter and his failure to report them, his failure
Speaker 3: to pay tax can't be brought because they're just too
Speaker 3: long ago. That is just now once you could say,
Speaker 3: may that sharing confidence? The committee seemed to suggest no,
Speaker 3: that was in some way deliberate. And if it was deliberate,
Speaker 3: should Joe Biden be held responsible for it? It's interesting,
Speaker 3: there's an interesting these interesting lead questions. Certainly the ears
Speaker 3: should be more investigation into it. And you can see
Speaker 3: if the Republicans keep the House, maybe win the Senate,
Speaker 3: and or Trump wins, you would see more I mean
Speaker 3: you would see you would see more investigation of it.
Speaker 3: I think it would be warranted from what's in that
Speaker 3: impeachment report.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I haven't a chance to read any report however,
Speaker 1: I mean, Biden is already yesterday's news. I mean, is
Speaker 1: even still president. I mean, that's a serious question. However,
Speaker 1: there's one part of this that interests me. Part of
Speaker 1: the story about pushing Joe Biden out the door with
Speaker 1: Nancy Pelosi, Obama and whatever, is they told him that, Well,
Speaker 1: they told him two things. You can't win. Here's the data, now,
Speaker 1: Biden the wave. Obviously, I've got my own poll, damn you.
Speaker 1: The other one was, it was reported to several places,
Speaker 1: is they told him, look, we have Camelo's agreement to
Speaker 1: invoke the twenty fifth Amendment. Except we talked about that
Speaker 1: several times on this podcast. I'm doubtful about that. Biden
Speaker 1: could resist that. I'm not sure the cabinet would have
Speaker 1: gone along with it. It puts camel in a tough spot.
Speaker 1: But then the third thing you only saw reported one
Speaker 1: or two very sort of out there places, was that
Speaker 1: they passed along the word to him, we are going
Speaker 1: to step back from defending you and Hunter from the Republicans.
Speaker 1: In fact, we're going to expose more of than dirt
Speaker 1: and hand it to them. And so if you don't go,
Speaker 1: you're really doomed. I could have used the stronger word
Speaker 1: that lucretian anyway, And I'm sort of wondering this report,
Speaker 1: I mean, too bad it didn't come out a month
Speaker 1: ago or whatever. Who knows, but I'm now wondering if
Speaker 1: that wasn't the final blow against Biden was Democrats saying,
Speaker 1: you know what, We're just gonna stand back and let
Speaker 1: Republicans set you and here is this report, which we'll
Speaker 1: see if they want to chase after. It kind of
Speaker 1: looks like to me, if Biden's gone and all the
Speaker 1: rest of that, I don't.
Speaker 3: Know, sochiable do you think of it? What do I mean?
Speaker 3: Is it sort of yesterday's news? As Steve says, it's
Speaker 3: It would have made a difference that Joe Biden was
Speaker 3: still the candidate. But he's gonna, yeah, you know, leave
Speaker 3: ignominiously from office. So uh, maybe this was ended up
Speaker 3: being a waste of time.
Speaker 4: No, I don't think that what I find appalling is
Speaker 4: not just the slimy, whiny little Republicans who refused to
Speaker 4: back an actual impeachment effort. I do think it would
Speaker 4: be absolutely critical at this point to move forward right
Speaker 4: now with impeachment because I do think that it needs
Speaker 4: to be sometimes you you you prosecute people in the
Speaker 4: general sense to make a statement, and I mean, yes exactly.
Speaker 4: And so the idea that for all these years the
Speaker 4: Biden crime family got away with this, and and you
Speaker 4: know it's not just it's not just the fact that
Speaker 4: they that they got all of this money and so
Speaker 4: forth for selling influence. In many cases that influence was treasonous.
Speaker 4: What we know about the whole Ukraine situation, and then
Speaker 4: that Trump was impeached for it over a phone call.
Speaker 4: That's manipulation of our political system. That is just. It's
Speaker 4: that I have no words to describe how horrific it is.
Speaker 4: And so from it doesn't matter what I think, because
Speaker 4: we know that not only do we not have any
Speaker 4: Democrats at all willing to, uh for even a moment,
Speaker 4: stand up for any kind of ethics or principle, but
Speaker 4: we have slimy Republicans unwilling to do so as well.
Speaker 4: So yes, it is from to agree with Steve something
Speaker 4: of a point, which makes it yesterday's news. But you know,
Speaker 4: I think that Republicans should beat this drum beat and
Speaker 4: they should not worry about They should say, look, this
Speaker 4: isn't about about chasing down a poor, decrepit, old, corrupt pedophile.
Speaker 4: This is about cleaning up and making American, the American
Speaker 4: constitutional system the ideal of the world again, because right
Speaker 4: now it may as well be some corrupt third world
Speaker 4: South American dictatorship. It's just that bad. The idea that
Speaker 4: they're going to talk about putting Trump in jail for
Speaker 4: what didn't happen and made up crimes and then looking
Speaker 4: at what's very clearly a pattern of decades long pattern
Speaker 4: of project corruption, undermining, undermining our constitutional republic, our foreign policy,
Speaker 4: and they're not going to do anything about it. You know,
Speaker 4: I have no words, that's all. I don't know what
Speaker 4: to say about it. I almost given up. I had
Speaker 4: a little bit of hope in rfk's speech today, although
Speaker 4: he didn't address that correctly directly, he did say our
Speaker 4: government's corrupt, and he was. He made a very compelling
Speaker 4: case for it. Read it, John, when you get a chance,
Speaker 4: I think I think you'll find it compelling.
Speaker 3: Okay, we'll take a look. I will take a look.
Speaker 3: So let's we're nearing the end of the hour, believe
Speaker 3: it or not, and so I know we go ahead.
Speaker 3: Would be uh well, uh thoughts, hopes fears for the
Speaker 3: new academic year. We're all three of us professors, and
Speaker 3: we're all on campuses, and we're about to open a
Speaker 3: new academic year. I publish my thoughts in USA Today today,
Speaker 3: and I sent the article onto Lucretian Steve, and hopefully
Speaker 3: Steve will post him in the show notes. But basically
Speaker 3: made the argument that you are seeing an intolerance towards
Speaker 3: free speech in our law schools. There have been a
Speaker 3: number of stories of law school administrators turning down donations
Speaker 3: and programs from conservative donors who just want to have
Speaker 3: programs on free speech or invoking free speech rights. And
Speaker 3: this is apparently too radical for some of our law
Speaker 3: school leaders. And so I put this little piece out
Speaker 3: there saying, well, if this is what's going on law schools,
Speaker 3: and these are the people we expect to be at
Speaker 3: the front lines of defending our constitutional rights, what is happening?
Speaker 3: But I would open up more broadly, what are you
Speaker 3: both looking forward to afraid of? Maybe or your general
Speaker 3: plans for this new academic year? Call this maybe this
Speaker 3: week should have called this the three whiskey Appy Hour
Speaker 3: back to School episode.
Speaker 1: Well, you can do that a couple of weeks, Well,
Speaker 1: we can see what happens. I mean, I'm watching Columbia,
Speaker 1: which opens up the day after Labor Day, later than
Speaker 1: some schools do. Some schools are opening this week. Look, John,
Speaker 1: I thought so. First of all, you're being too modest
Speaker 1: as usual. Your article says we got a problem with
Speaker 1: the long term if our law schools teach a disrespect
Speaker 1: for the Constitution. I was grabbing onto not the pre
Speaker 1: speech part, as much as your data about a lot
Speaker 1: of law schools that don't require teaching the Constitution to students.
Speaker 1: There I pause and say, I'm not sure I want
Speaker 1: them teaching the Constitution because they do such a bad
Speaker 1: job of it. Right, They might, they might, you know,
Speaker 1: I know they might even teach positivism. Joy leave that
Speaker 1: inside for today. But no, there is this problem, and
Speaker 1: this requires a longer conversation than we have time for today.
Speaker 1: But I have been for several years now listening to administrators,
Speaker 1: presidents of colleges, and part of a task force I
Speaker 1: was on. Soy, Yeah, you know, we don't teach civics
Speaker 1: in high school and college at all, and that's why
Speaker 1: we have these free speech problems. And I always raise
Speaker 1: my hand. Actually I don't because it would be the
Speaker 1: hurt in the punch bowl. And what I always say
Speaker 1: is is, look, let's say let's have more civics instruction,
Speaker 1: and then you are handed as civics instruction the sixteen
Speaker 1: nineteen project. The Constitution's obsolete, the country sucks, we're evil,
Speaker 1: we're bad, we're a slaveocracy. And then why should we
Speaker 1: expect students to respect free speech or you free expression?
Speaker 1: And so the problem is not now. I do think
Speaker 1: last point, I do think John, that the problem is
Speaker 1: least bad. That's a relative term in law schools for
Speaker 1: two reasons. One is law school is both academic but
Speaker 1: also a professional program. You have a lot of conservative
Speaker 1: students go to law school because they want to be lawyers.
Speaker 1: They're going to be immune to all the crap that
Speaker 1: they're thrown at. And second, you have the Federal Society,
Speaker 1: which which is now really blossomed into this organized intellectual
Speaker 1: challenge to the left. In law schools, we don't have
Speaker 1: anything remotely like the Federal Society and other disciplines at
Speaker 1: the graduate or undergraduate levels. And that's a huge problem.
Speaker 1: That's a long story. I've long said, can't we replicate
Speaker 1: the Federal Society for other disciplines, and the answer is no,
Speaker 1: it's harder for a whole bunch of reasons, but no
Speaker 1: one's really tried it. And plus it took the federal
Speaker 1: society you want thirty years to reach critical mass, and
Speaker 1: so it takes long term thinking and no one's been
Speaker 1: able to figure out a plan for that.
Speaker 3: How is there not one in your guys, field and
Speaker 3: political theory where a lot of people who are drawn
Speaker 3: to it, I would think are instinctively conservative because they
Speaker 3: like reading old texts.
Speaker 1: Well, well, they had a.
Speaker 4: Lunch the other day, guys for deans to meet with
Speaker 4: new faculty. So I ended up talking to a new
Speaker 4: political scientists and blah blah blah, this and that. Yeah, well,
Speaker 4: so she studies indigenous policy making, you know, blah blah,
Speaker 4: gender blah blah blah. And what did you study, says
Speaker 4: I said, Well, you know, I got my degree in
Speaker 4: con law political philosophy in American institutions. And she says,
Speaker 4: political philosophy, you mean political theory And I said, well,
Speaker 4: I said not really. She says, well, they don't even
Speaker 4: have political They didn't even have political theory at any
Speaker 4: of the schools that I went to. That's so First
Speaker 4: of all, it's not being taught, John, and political theory
Speaker 4: is crap. Sorry, excuse my language, Family show. It's it's sorry,
Speaker 4: it's game. Theory is probably the best that you get. Mostly,
Speaker 4: it's just it's just this turgid most it's awful stuff. Anyway,
Speaker 4: go ahead, Steve good.
Speaker 1: Well, well, some other day, John Lucretian, I will walk
Speaker 1: you through the distinction that's crucial between political theory and
Speaker 1: politic philosophy. It is an actual serious distinction, and political
Speaker 1: theory is what dominates where they have it at all,
Speaker 1: and it's been taken over by the left.
Speaker 4: And my students don't want to study it.
Speaker 1: It's all right, Yes, that's right. They made it boring.
Speaker 1: I'm coming to a quick story about Harvard in a minute.
Speaker 1: What was I going to say about all that? Well,
Speaker 1: I forget now hard Harvard long story how this happened.
Speaker 1: But I was on a zoom call with a very
Speaker 1: eminent person I forget her name, it's but a very
Speaker 1: senior lady in political science at Harvard, and it was
Speaker 1: all about The subject was, well, we really shouldn't have
Speaker 1: these outreach efforts to try and recruit conservative professors. So
Speaker 1: I intervened and I said, okay, Harvey Mansfield has just retired.
Speaker 1: He brought real diversity in the serious sense of the
Speaker 1: word to the Harvard's curriculum to the student body. Or
Speaker 1: is Harvard going to replace him with somebody like him?
Speaker 1: And there's a long pause, and she said maybe, and
Speaker 1: I said another other words, in other words, no, and
Speaker 1: then it changed the subject. So there's the problem right there.
Speaker 1: I think, I mean, we will.
Speaker 4: But I would just say one thing John, you might
Speaker 4: find interesting, and that is that even Claremont political philosophy
Speaker 4: students understand that one of the most important call it
Speaker 4: avenues or venues into American political thought, American political thought,
Speaker 4: American political Yeah, that's the right word, American political thought
Speaker 4: is constitutional law.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 4: It's actually the legal profession in a serious way. So
Speaker 4: you will find, in my opinion, most of the really
Speaker 4: good political political philosophy professors scholars, at least at some
Speaker 4: point in their career, embracing also the study of constitutional law.
Speaker 4: And so I thought you might find that interesting. And
Speaker 4: they tend to be conservative, not always but.
Speaker 1: Well, or they're non leftists, like our great teacher Leonard Levy, right,
Speaker 1: who's now you know, we've gone thirty plus years, so John,
Speaker 1: I mean, and actually our friends in the political science
Speaker 1: department at Berkeley, which is ranked number five in the
Speaker 1: nation sort of center I won't say left, but sort
Speaker 1: of centered liberal, and you know a lot of them
Speaker 1: have said to me, and maybe they've said to you, Yeah,
Speaker 1: we used to have a really strong public law program,
Speaker 1: which meant what Lucreati's talking about, and now we don't anymore.
Speaker 1: That's true everywhere it has vanished. I've actually it's one
Speaker 1: of my many unfinished projects is doing a serious actual
Speaker 1: quantitative analysis but then qualitative analysis of the decline of
Speaker 1: public law in undergraduate and graduate political science and why
Speaker 1: that's bad, including for law schools. Because I'll just declare
Speaker 1: this and we can talk about it at some length later,
Speaker 1: that the sort of public law people in law schools
Speaker 1: talk and write and think differently than the public law people,
Speaker 1: say fifty sixty years ago. And then I'll just say,
Speaker 1: I'll put Jack Balcon. I'm ninety nine point nine percent
Speaker 1: of our readers will not know who he's talking about.
Speaker 1: You probably know Jack, right, was he? Yeah?
Speaker 3: Jack Balk.
Speaker 1: I will take Jack balk interesting guy, but his mode
Speaker 1: and writing and is completely different from say Edward Corwin
Speaker 1: or mcilwaine from the nineteen fifties, or Martin Diamond or
Speaker 1: any of the conservatives we can think of. And that's
Speaker 1: actually significant. But that's a long, long story. Someday maybe
Speaker 1: I will write.
Speaker 3: And we will go through. Maybe we'll talk about it
Speaker 3: some more later.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that'd be fun.
Speaker 3: So what about I thought you guys, well Steve briefly
Speaker 3: alluded to it, whether you think that we're going to
Speaker 3: have a lot of protests on campus this, yes, appreciate
Speaker 3: it's going to happen. Yeah, what's gonna happen in Arizona.
Speaker 4: Well, they came out today with one of your free
Speaker 4: namby Pamby free speech sort of die vibes. It was
Speaker 4: just offensive. It was it was weak, and for that
Speaker 4: reason it was offensive. However, I'm told by the people
Speaker 4: that I'm very close with who are actually responsible at
Speaker 4: the very basic sense for public safety on campus, that
Speaker 4: they are expecting the intelligence that they're expecting some pretty
Speaker 4: serious attempts at protests or doing everything possible to prevent
Speaker 4: that from happening. And by the way, my little college
Speaker 4: is helping with that. And I'll just leave it at that.
Speaker 4: But I don't want to be like Waltz's scumbag daughter
Speaker 4: and letting the protesters know that the National Guard won't
Speaker 4: be there for a couple of days. You know, I'm
Speaker 4: I'm hoping, I'm hoping that it's going to be too hot.
Speaker 4: It's one hundred and ten in Tucson, so who knows. Maybe.
Speaker 4: And actually one of the one of the triggers for
Speaker 4: law enforcement step in is watching somebody walk to the
Speaker 4: quiet area with a big old thing of water, you know,
Speaker 4: bottles of water, a big case of bottles of water
Speaker 4: on their on their shoulder. They will immediately go and
Speaker 4: find out what that person is doing and redirect them.
Speaker 7: But anyway, yeah, but my prediction, my prediction is the
Speaker 7: left is going to try to shut down Columbia University
Speaker 7: and is a smaller place than you know, Arizona, Berkeley, UCLA.
Speaker 1: But I think that's that's the place I'm watching in Columbia.
Speaker 1: That's the canary in the coal mine.
Speaker 3: Yes, okay, well we will have a very interesting show. Actually,
Speaker 3: next weekend is Labor Day weekend. I don't know if
Speaker 3: we'll do anything special that will be I'm going to
Speaker 3: be Steve and Lucretia, whether we're going to have a
Speaker 3: special Labor Day episode and what we'll be doing on it.
Speaker 1: But well, I'm going to be in Reykiavik, Iceland next weekend,
Speaker 1: although I should be available.
Speaker 3: But what really, Maybe you'll you'll run into my friend
Speaker 3: who I met and remember a few years ago. I
Speaker 3: was transitting through Frankfurt airport, so I just heard the
Speaker 3: sound of my voice. And since she was said he
Speaker 3: was a big Lucretia fan. Turned out he was from
Speaker 3: like Sweden or Norway, one could have been Iceland. It
Speaker 3: was one of those Nordic countries where I'm sure Lucretia
Speaker 3: has a humongous following.
Speaker 4: Careful, you know, be careful.
Speaker 3: And Iceland, well right, yeah, Lucretia, you have any interesting
Speaker 3: Labor Day plans, anything to anything to meet the high
Speaker 3: standard set by Steve going to Iceland. No pickled fish
Speaker 3: in your Labor Day future.
Speaker 4: No, I actually don't celebrate Labor Day because it's a
Speaker 4: Communist holiday, guys, true, too true. I just I take
Speaker 4: the day off because I need a day off, but
Speaker 4: I don't celebrate anything about it. I drank to forget
Speaker 4: my woes and I am ready whenever you guys are.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I go ahead, give us some bees.
Speaker 4: I do want to just mention that I thought it
Speaker 4: was hilarious the whole billionaire thing going on at the
Speaker 4: DNC convention, where Oprah of all people, has the unmitigated
Speaker 4: gall to talk about income inequality and Michelle Mike whatever
Speaker 4: her name is Obama talking about how you should only
Speaker 4: have what you need growing up. And you know how
Speaker 4: many mansions do they have, including one where they have
Speaker 4: no business having one, which is in Washington, d C.
Speaker 4: But that's a different story. We could have talked about
Speaker 4: the convention all day long. I have all sorts of
Speaker 4: to say about it, but I'm going to start with
Speaker 4: this one, which is, oh no, DNC abortion bus breaks
Speaker 4: down and four babies get to live.
Speaker 1: Another one about a person wait accidentally, never mind, I
Speaker 1: don't remember now I.
Speaker 4: Might see it, Steve when you get to it.
Speaker 1: I do want this one.
Speaker 4: Trump adds a Kennedy in hopes he will draw all
Speaker 4: the snipers. That's a little wrong, so disappointment as special
Speaker 4: d n C guest turns out to be carrot Top.
Speaker 4: Democrats encourage supporters to go to the polls by telling
Speaker 4: them Beyonce will be there. Yeah, it's pretty good. You
Speaker 4: have to. Oh, no, man at d n C thinking
Speaker 4: he was in line for food truck accidentally gets vasectomy.
Speaker 1: That's the one I was remembering, right, Yeah. I think
Speaker 1: my question was at the next d n C in
Speaker 1: four years, we're going to have an assistant suicide truck.
Speaker 1: I mean it seems to be the direction we're going.
Speaker 4: Yeah, absolutely, I think it's a good one. Oprah surprises
Speaker 4: d n C attendance with free gift under each seat.
Speaker 4: You get your own free level illegal immeric. You get
Speaker 4: your own free illegal immigrant. You get your own free
Speaker 4: illegal immigrant.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 4: I actually have never ever, ever watched a single episode
Speaker 4: of Oprah, so I only know that from some cultural references.
Speaker 4: And let's see, the final one was, oh sorry, I
Speaker 4: lost it. You're gonna have to go without me on
Speaker 4: this one? Oh too many?
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, well the week like this? Yeah?
Speaker 3: So John, well, Steve, do we have a sign off?
Speaker 3: Have you run the contest amongst the listeners?
Speaker 6: I haven't.
Speaker 1: I've got to somehow promote that more. I haven't gotten
Speaker 1: any good suggestions. I will if we want to escape,
Speaker 1: let's go, Brandon said, he's gone.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that doesn't make any sense.
Speaker 1: You know I always drink your whiskey neat, but I
Speaker 1: do think I'm going to use this at least for
Speaker 1: this week. Joe Biden left us with a bit of
Speaker 1: wisdom in his farewell speech the other day. He pointed
Speaker 1: out that the women of America have electrical power. To
Speaker 1: hear that electrical power, here's the electrical power embodied by Lucretia,
Speaker 1: and so many of our listeners are female listeners.
Speaker 3: Bye bye, everybody, oyebye, see you next, bye.
Speaker 6: Bye.
Speaker 1: I'm thinking it's his time with the freckles.
Speaker 8: In our eyes are mirror ilicious, and when we kiss
Speaker 8: there perfectly. I have to speculate that God sucks make
Speaker 8: uss into corresponding shapes, blake puzzle pieces. Fund True, it
Speaker 8: may seem like a stretch, but it starts like thisiness.
Speaker 8: Catch my trouble head when you're away, when I am missing,
Speaker 8: You're out there.
Speaker 1: For several weeks and shows.
Speaker 8: Will you scam lady? I hope this song would guide you.
Speaker 8: They see swa such.
Speaker 1: Trying to make the past time ricochet. Join the conversation.