The Ricochet Podcast - The Squad

Episode Date: July 17, 2019

Due to some scheduling issues, we’re a couple of days early this week but that doesn’t mean we’re scrimping on the content. James is taking this week off, so Rob and Peter drive the bus themselves (as Peter mentions in the show, do check out James’ Twitter feed). We’re not scrimping on the guests either: we’ve got Washington Post chief political correspondent (and former Ricochet podcaster) Bob... Source

Blood clots can happen to anyone, at any age. Be particularly vigilant if you are going into hospital, have active cancer, or undergoing cancer treatment, are pregnant, or just had a baby, are in a leg cast or had a lower limb injury, are taking the combined oral contraceptive pill, or oral HRT. Ask your doctor for a blood clot risk assessment.

Visit thrombosis.ie. So Rob, you're going to drive the bus today, correct? I got it. Good. Ready to go? Three, two, one. I'm going to be put in a thing. I would rather be governed by the first 2,000 people in the Boston Telephone Directory than

by the 2,000 people on the faculty of Harvard University. As government expands, liberty contracts. It's funny, sometimes American journalists talk about how bad a country is because people are lining up for food. That's a good thing. First of all, I think you missed his time. Please clap. It's the Ricochet Podcast. I'm Rob Long. We have as our guest today Bob Costner from Washington Post and John Yoo from Berkeley, California.

Stay with us. Hello and welcome to the Ricochet Podcast number 456, which is an insanely large number. We never thought we'd get to number four, but here we are at 456. I'm Rob Long coming to you from New York City. Remember that salsa ad, New York City, with Peter Robinson of Palo Alto. Peter, how are you? I'm well. I'm very well, Rob. Midsummer here in Northern California hasn't been too hot, just lovely.

I don't know why I'm giving you a weather report. Yeah, I do know why I'm giving you a weather report. Because the big part of my morning every morning, California still does deliver on that regard. We should say why James is not with us, shouldn't we? Yes, we should say James Lilacs is off this week. He lost his father a week ago, and I think he's taking some time. And we wish him the best. We send him him our thoughts and his family our thoughts and prayers and if you haven't seen this robbie james tweeted sometime this morning a series of pictures from the funeral what a magnificent event it looks as though it was his dad owned a gas station operation and a tractor trailer operation and as part of the

cortege on the way to the graveyard of course there's a hearse but there were some big tractor trailers and they passed the station his dad owned and all the all the truckers who were there honked their horns at once it must have been just oh man sort of fun and moving and and deeply american one and and he tweeted a photograph where he posted on ricochet a photograph of his father and all i could think of was that guy was a badass and and also i mean and i would say this to james were he here there's something beautiful about that father and that son, because James is cerebral and thoughtful and he's a writer. And, you know, I would say this is a little bit nerdy, you know, all sorts of things that maybe his father had characteristics. I

never met his dad, but like there's something great. I mean, mean I cannot help but think great about America that your children can grow up so different from you but with the same values and the same connections. But they – we live in a country where you don't have to follow in the exact – If your dad's a cobbler, you don't have to be a cobbler. Yeah, you could be a poet. You could be a writer. You can be – and it's not a rejection of the life. It's not a rejection of the values. It's just you follow your own path, and that's, I think, a marvelous thing.

And that's what's great about America, Peter, which apparently is news to the progressive Democratic congresswoman, the squad they call themselves, who hate America so much. And Donald Trump tweets, go back where uh and uh donald trump tweets go back where you came a version of go back where you came from and everybody goes nuts and before we started the podcast peter you revealed to me your dirty secret my dirty secret is although i'm i'm meant in some slightly reasonable way to be a professional in these matters. I was busy the last few days, busy working. And it sort of hit a couple of people said, what did you think about Trump's last tweets? And I thought to myself there and then, I don't know, but I'm not going to read them. I've just had it up to here. I did not realize that whatever it was that he said was

going to dominate the news for the following, what is this, the third day since he tweeted? And it just is everywhere. I still haven't gone back and read the darn things. Have you read them? Have you taken the time to do it? And they were, look, here's the, I mean, again, it's my anguish, which is because I understand the reaction that some people had to them by reading into the tweets the idea that immigrants to this nation or people who come here when they're very young or they are first-generation American, you don't like it, go back home. And that's an impulse. It's a little – it's not – it's an ugly impulse, ugly thing to say. On the other hand, people like you who didn't hear – didn't read the tweets directly but heard about them, if I parse them for you, you might say – and you're a decent person – you might say, well, you know, he's got a point.

That's what we always – you and I often with, with gritted teeth, we find how often have we thought, how often have you, you're the prime example here because you have really disliked this guy from the beginning. I still do. And through gritted teeth, you over and over again,

you find yourself saying, well, yeah, but he sort of has a point. If he, if it's, and his argument is, if I were, if I listened to Ilhan Omar, Yeah, but he sort, just a swamp of nasty hatred and oppression. And it isn't. And there's nothing that leavens – the patriotism you get on that part of the Democratic Party is almost always, well, we've made some strides, but we need to do so much more.

And America is a place where we recognize how awful we are. Basically, that's the subtext, right? He's kind of saying, give me a break. It's 3 percent unemployment. The economy is growing. It's a pretty great place. And if you don't like it, no one's – don't let the door hit your ass on the way out. No one's don't the door hit your ass on the way out like no one's holding you here i mean i remember george will saying that the uh this is during the cold war that the health of a of a

country can be can be measured merely by one by two numbers how many people want in versus how many people want out exactly and so i don't know so here i am so but i want to ask you why so and you just you chose not to you basically chose not to read them i know but i've i've i've gone back on it because while you were chatting the blue yeti sent sent the tweets to me in a post he considers my education incomplete without reading them okay so what is there to say? It's Donald Trump. He said, in effect, go back where you came from. That was a ludicrous thing to say because three of them were born here. One of them is a duly naturalized. Ilhan Omar is the one I believe who was born in Somalia, but she's a duly legally naturalized American citizen.

Okay, and yet. Ilhan Omar comes from Somalia, and she was raised in Minnesota. She went to university at North Dakota State University. She was raised in, I don't want to become romantic, certainly James would tell us if he were with us this morning, that Minnesota and North Dakota, the upper Midwest, are among the most thoroughly decent and neighborly places to grow up in the United States, which means that they are among the most thoroughly decent and neighborly places in the world. She's had a good education, state university.

She's had a good education at the expense of the good people of North Dakota. She has been elected a member of Congress, and yet she denigrates this country over and over and over again. And Donald Trump says, in effect, it's a version of George Will. Well, wait a moment. What about Somalia? What about that? What is it about this country that led you to come here and become natural? That's a very valid point. He is making it in, as usual, the crudest possible way in a way that lets the left jump on him by saying go back where you came from when I think all the other three were actually born. It's crude. It's mistaken. It's in some ways laughable. But the central point is very serious. And I guess the point the question is racist. Or I don't see how rude he would he would have said something like this if someone had stood up from Albania. It is a love it or leave it argument. And I guess the thing about Trump that I don't know why, not like I'm hoping, but the thing that what I find so

unusual about the response to Trump is that he's just doing what, frankly, what I think is a very probably one of the smart political moves he's made. Everyone's talking about media talking about how this is a disaster and and and it's going to be it's gonna hurt him and it's not good but i suspect that he's drawing the thing about trump is trump succeeds when the line between trump and everyone else and then the liberal democrats is as bright as possible because the subtle distinctions are gonna hurt him because the subtle distinctions are where i'm gonna be wobbly where you know a candidate says look i agree with Trump about border security. I agree with Trump about taxes. I agree with Trump about, you know, a low regulation economy. But I'm not a

pig. I kind of like that candidate, whoever that candidate is. But if it's choice between somebody who's unceasingly furious about the deficiencies of 2019 America and somebody who isn't, I don't know. And it helps that they're calling him a racist like he cares. Like he cares. And then the other piece of this that I think is a dynamic that's been working in Trump's favor from the beginning, and of course everybody, including me, was very slow to work it out. There are a lot of people who are saying, whoa, they called him a racist for that? And yet I say some large but unknown number of Americans say to themselves, I sort of think he had a point. Does that mean they'd call me a racist?

Because that is just all wrong. Right. And, of course, the answer to that question is yes. Yes. Which diminishes the term. But also. Exactly right. Once again draws a bright line between them and you.

And you find yourself bizarrely uncomfortably on the Trump side. And that is not – now, on the other hand, it's – their position is – their gambit is if we can energize people of color and recent immigrants to go out and vote, if we can make this their Flight 93 election, then maybe that's a good gambit. I still suspect that – I mean maybe I'm just too old and too essentially – basically moderate. I still think America is in the middle.

Be in the middle. Middle is not bad. Yes. Speaking of the middle, this is a terrible segue, but we've done 456 of these, Peter, and one of the reasons we can do them is because we have very, very fine products to advertise and fine companies that are partners with us. And one of them is Calm. Are you struggling to sleep these days? You're not alone. One in three U.S. adults doesn't get enough sleep.

And if you're not sleeping enough, it can affect your cognitive functions during the day, like learning, problem solving, and decision making. And that's why we are happy to have, as our partners, Calm, the number one app for sleep. Sleep deficiency does serious damage, not just to your brain, but your body as well. People who go through sleepless nights are more prone to accidents, weight gain, and depression. With Calm, you'll discover a whole library of programs designed to help you get the sleep your brain and body needs, like soundscapes and over 100 sleep stories narrated by soothing voices like Jerome Flynn from Game of Thrones and Stephen Fry. So if you want to seize the day and sleep the night, get Calm. Right now, Ricochet listeners get 25% off a Calm premium subscription at Calm, C-A-L-M dot com slash Ricochet. That's C-A-L-M dot com slash Ricochet.

40 million people have downloaded Calm. That's a lot, actually. Find out why by going to Calm dot com slash Ricochet, and we offer Calm our sincere thanks. I use it. It's great. I don't do the stories because that's too much going on for me, but the noise is great, Uh, and it's fantastic on airplanes. Um, and we thank them for sponsoring the Ricochet podcast. All right. We are joined now

by Bob Costa, the national reporter for the Washington post political reporter for Washington post covers the white house Congress campaigns. And he's the host of Washington week on PBS. He's, you know, he's now he's one of the media elite. Um, all of the stunning successes due to the fact that there were brief times several years ago. He had a podcast right here on Ricochet. We made you, Bob. You can follow him on Twitter at Costa Reports. So, Bob, how bad is this going to be for Donald Trump? He's going to be impeached and he's a racist. This morning, Al Green from the House floor is giving notice to offer privilege resolution on articles of impeachment against Donald Trump.

Is Nancy Pelosi, is she like breathing into a paper bag right now or is the hammer going to come down? She's trying to cut deals with this administration. She wants to do something on trade, USMCA. She knows that debt limit is going to need to be increased perhaps by September, according to the Treasury Secretary. She's got a lot on her plate. So she's not moving on impeachment. It's Congressman Green who's moving on impeachment. The price the president could pay at this moment is very small with his own party. You only had four Republicans break on the House vote last night. But you look at who voted with the Democrats, someone like Brian Fitzpatrick from my home district in Pennsylvania, Philadelphia suburbs, a swing

district, Will Hurd from a swing district in Texas, an African-American veteran. So you see some cracks in the GOP side, not significant cracks, but there is a worry that as much as the president's rhetoric is seen and his racist comments are seen as a way to drive out his base by casting the Democrats as the party of the so-called squad, the Democrats did well in a lot of the suburban districts in 2018 and could do so again with high turnout. So the political fallout here is a little bit TBD. The White House and President Trump's allies are saying, oh, it's not that big of a deal. But Democrats think it could play into a larger narrative. So I got one.

So we were just talking before you got on. So Trump's calculus, or I should say the Trump world's calculus is wrap the Democrats up in Ilhan Omar and the squad, the Pelosi-Omar Democrats, the way Clinton ran against Bob Dole a million years ago where you were probably still in Cub Scout uniform. But he said – he didn't run against Bob Dole. He ran against Bob Dole Gingrich. he kept saying, Dole Gingrich. That's his strategy, and their strategy is to turn, to awaken their traditional base, which kind of sat out 2016, and say, hey, this is your Flight 93 election. Turn the Klansmen out of the White House. Is that kind of the broad, ugly, crass way to put it? Identity politics at the front and center of the campaign, no doubt about it. And the White House,

they have had alarm privately in conversations with me and other reporters in recent months about Vice President Biden, about even someone like Elizabeth Warren with her populist message. Senator Sanders was able to win a lot of working class voters in 2016 in his primary race. They see someone like Buttigieg speaks the language of the Midwest, can connect with voters in places like Indiana. They know the president with the economy doing well is in a strong position, but they much rather, as you say, run against the Dole-Gingrich model of 96 and make it, as you said, Pelosi-Omar. But the challenge is for them, it's easy to do that in the summer of 2019. But once the Democratic standard bearer really gains traction and starts to define

the party more than the House of Representatives, this White House argument may see a bit of frame. So, Bob, Peter Robinson here. Thanks for joining us. You interviewed Senator Sanders just, what, a couple of days ago? Have I got that right? Yesterday, for an hour. All right. So, I guess the obvious question to ask a very good political reporter is, what are the headlines? But what I'm interested in is just below the headlines, what's his sense of morale? Do you feel you're talking to a guy who really thinks he can pull it off or who's going through the motions out of some sense of duty or

some sheer sense of inertia? He's been doing this all his life. He can't stop. What do you feel about him? He can't stop. That's for sure. At this age, at this point in his career, he's not going to stop. He really believes himself to be a revolutionary. But he also, his confidence is not just spin. He believes, when you talk to him, that he has a base out there, and that as much as Senator Warren, Senator Harris, and others are taken away from his kind of left of left base, the progressive Democrat. He thinks they could still come to him eventually. And what he's trying to do right now with this strategy is be a giant killer. In the same way Senator Harris went after Biden in the debate last time over segregation and busing.

Now you have Sanders this week giving a big speech today and Wednesday, Tuesday about Medicare for all. And then you have he's attacking Biden on every front. The 94 crime bill, the Iraq vote, NAFTA support. He's saying to himself, if I can take down Biden, I can redefine this race and really make it much more of a battle between Warren. And he doesn't want to take on Warren directly in many ways right now. It's about taking on Biden. And that tells you a lot about his strategy. And so fair or not, I sit here in California, you're right there in Washington in the midst of it, that there's a big five roughly that has emerged among the Democrats

already. It's not early in the campaign for them. It's relative. We're middle of the campaign. Five have emerged. Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, Pete, pronounces Labuta judge. I still can't pronounce it. Is that close enough? And then of course, there's Joe Biden. Now I sit here in California and say, wait a minute, four of those people are going after roughly the same vote, the left vote. They're leaving Biden a large part of the vote. It's not as large in Democratic primaries as it would be in the general, of course, but nevertheless, they're leaving him the centrist, more moderate lane all to himself. Is there something about this that I'm just missing? I mean, Buttigieg is running more of a generational campaign.

I see. Always talking about win the era. He's running a leftist center campaign, to be sure, but he's not just about leftist politics. He's running as a generational candidate. I see him much more in the Biden competition lane, even more left wing in his politics. His profile is much more. He's of the Trump state. He's from Indiana, South Bend, industrial Midwest. his profile is much more he's of the he's of the trump state he's uh from indiana south bend

industrial midwest i'm interviewing cory booker this week for an hour or two and you gotta think in a big field somebody beyond that top five still has a shot and someone like booker who has a career in in urban politics being mayor of newark uh has a major profile is very good at social media, even if you don't like his tactics, he has a huge following. You can't count him out. And these people who are raising between four and six million compared to Buttigieg's 20 plus and Biden's near 20, et cetera, they're still in it. Some like Swalwell have already dropped out. It's going to be tough for someone like Beto O'Rourke from Texas to stay in if you really can't pick up traction.

Hey, Bob, when you said you were going to meet with Cory Booker, you were going to interview him for an hour, am I just being unfair to Cory Booker because I started to laugh? What are you going to talk about for the 50 minutes? Is he not a lightweight? Am I underestimating him because he feels like the lightest weight on that. He's in a race with Marianne William his friends for being a little too nice in his message, but he's not light as a person. I've covered him in the Senate. I mean, this is someone who knows urban politics. He knows New Jersey politics, and he has some real questions to answer. Is he going to be backing capping drug prices or regulating drug prices, going after the pharmaceutical industry if he was president with his Department of Justice? On big tech, he's someone who's worked close with Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook. He's tried to bring tech into places like Newark. Is he going to be with the Democrats across the board now on the left who say regulate it all, make them all utility?

Does he really want to break up tech, having been someone who worked with them closely? Those are the kind of questions I'm going to ask him about, because he has been known in the past for being a business friendly Democrat. And even though he's running now as kind of this nice, powerful, upbeat Democrat, very happy in his message, forward lookinglooking. He's been business-friendly. And does that still exist, that version of Booker? I'll try to find out. Well, I'm trying to think about the Democratic Party historically and their nominees historically.

And I keep centering on or dilating on this one poll question who can beat trump and biden always leads that by a handy margin and then the you know what we say is well i mean you still got to get out the primaries but what isn't that a powerful powerful arrow in his quiver i mean the democratic party hasn't actually actually nominated a a crackpot or a or a difficult or a harder candidate since i don't know mondale maybe when people thought that gary hart should be should have been the nominee um when when is when is the party you know besides all of its chaos and its noisy mess, when is it not picked the person who's going to probably give the opponent the best run for the money? The Democrats often, you're right, come back to the center with their nominees. I mean, you think about Gary Hart almost being the nominee.

Mando was the nominee. McGovern, everyone talks about. But you look at Carter, a former businessman from Georgia, Bill Clinton, the third way, and all of that in Arkansas centrism. I don't need to go over every example. But the Democrats, when I'm talking to them in places like South Carolina, I went to Historically Black Church in Charleston recently, and they said their biggest goal down there is to defeat President Trump. And they love Biden. And they think he has a legacy with President Obama. They're not worried about his handsiness on different things. They're not worried about his comments about segregation. Some of them don't like it, but they want to beat President Trump. A lot of those voters I spoke to

in South Carolina, which reminded me of your point, which is as much as the conversation in Washington is often about how far to the left is this or that candidate going to go, many rank and file Democrats just want to win. And that helps Biden weather a lot of these storms. But let's be clear, Biden is under attack right now from all sides. Senator Harris on race. Senator Booker attacked him on race. Senator Sanders on Medicare for all. I mean, his record is in the spotlight. This is going to be a hot summer for him. If he survives it, he emerges stronger. And how long has it been since you spent any time with Biden, Bob? How look, just to put it bluntly, how old does he seem at this stage? They call it running for office for a reason.

I mean, look, I asked Sanders about this ageism question. I mean, and Sanders acknowledged it's a factor, but it shouldn't be the factor. You look at Biden on the trail. I mean, he's not like someone who's out of shape. He's moving around. He's marching in parades. He's in good physical shape, but he is up there in age. And so for people who think age is a factor, I mean, Senator Sanders is right. Senator Sanders outpaces many reporters covering him. He's one of these older guys who just has a ton of energy. President Trump has a ton of energy at his age, even if he's not Mr. Going to the gym every day. So I's does that I don't I haven't heard ages of big, big question for Democrats about Biden, only because it's not like he would be running against a young Republican. It'd be generationally the same as President Trump. Right. Hey, Bob, one, one more sort of

big, big open ended question. I'm going back to Trump. Rob and I opened the show by talking, agreeing with each other that this tweet storm for which he's now being denounced could actually not do him that much harm. There are a lot of ordinary Americans who say, wait a minute. If the choice is between those people and that guy, reluctantly maybe, but I'll take that guy. Okay. The dynamic that seems to get missed outside Washington a lot, but seems obvious to people out in the country. However, I noticed Henry Olson wrote a piece the other day in which he said that in these matchup polls, many of which Trump is losing, put him up against Biden, he loses. Put him up against Sanders, he loses.

Put him up against Harris, he loses by one point, but he loses. The striking thing Henry noted was that Trump in these matchup polls is underperforming his own already pretty low approval ratings. And that is not a good sign. All of this to say, I think back, let me think way, way back, because the comparison will be sharper than 1984. Reagan leads Mondale all the way through the race, you get a feeling that it's very stable, you know what Mondale has to do, and he just doesn't do it. It's relatively easy to sit in a chair and watch that race unfold. 88 in the summer of 88, Bush trails Dukakis by 17 points. But you know, wait a minute, the Republicans have their nomination. They start spending. They start advertising. Here's what could happen. It did happen. Bush wins. Now, the feeling of sheer

open-endedness, unpredictability, are the polls going to be reliable in Trump's case? What on earth do you do when you've got four people running to the left, one guy who calls himself the centrist, who's running in a center that is pretty far to the left? It just feels to me, the old rules, here's what I'm trying to get at. All the rules of thumb that everybody in Washington lived by for years and years and that you, young as you are, grew up with seem to be breaking down. We're entering into something that is totally open ended. I feel. What do you feel? I think it's remained open ended since 2016. I mean, you look at the latest polling, President Trump's in a very strong position relatively with his approval rating. His disapproval ratings are always very high because of his conduct.

I mean, that's been the state of his polls since the campaign. What's going to matter is the key states. I mean, that's the thing about President Trump. He's running an electoral college campaign in every sense. He knows much of the country dislikes him. Many of them people in California, New York and other blue states are going to come out in droves against him. But it's all about keeping that map together from 2016. So the national polls really don't matter as much to this White House because they know if he loses 90-10 in California, so be it. He'll lose the popular vote again, probably by a dramatic margin, but he'll still be president. That's the way the system's set up. And so that basic outlook hasn't pushed President Trump, his friends tell me, to really try to gin up his base

in the center of the country and just make sure they're coming out in Florida, Michigan, and Ohio, and Wisconsin. Hey, Bob, last question. Is there anybody that you know, I mean, is there anybody in the White House right now that's a professional warrior? A warrior, not warrior, but warrior? Is there walking in every day and thinking you people live in a bubble, we're in big trouble, or is it kind of upbeat? It's pretty upbeat because of the economy and the stock market hitting these record highs. And the biggest worrier, I'm told, is President Trump, and not about the Democrats, but about the Federal Reserve. And you guys are the experts more on monetary policy, but he really just wants that Fed to be cutting the interest rates as much as possible. He thinks that more than anything, more than a tweet about the squad, more than who he is.

And that's what worries him at night, that somehow interest rates go up. But every model says that. Isn't he right? That's right. I mean, he's right. He is. He believes the Fed's not going to raise rates at this point. Right. Hey, Bob, thank you very much for joining us. Really appreciate it.

And we're going to be dragging you back here because this is going to get really interesting, isn't it? Fascinating race already. Just remember what Rob said at the top of this segment because we really believe it. We made you, Costa. You owe us, baby. you owe us baby you owe us we gave you a look at you now you're supernova eight o'clock on a friday thanks bob bob thank you uh it is interesting isn't i mean i i mean i remember we ran uh uh blue yeti and i were having a dinner or drink in New York City

in 2016 and at the bar If it's dinner or drink, Mike I'm going to guess it was a drink Yeah, it was dinner and at the bar, having his burger was Bob Costa and he's tired and he's exhausted

and so we like waved to him and like, come on, if you sit with us we'll buy you dinner but we understand if you don't want it like you just want to be by yourself but he sat with us and he was he was covering trump now he was on the trump plane on the trump campaign every day 24 7 he was tired and exhausted but uh he looked like he had the best job in journalism yes and he does one of the best jobs in journalism without a doubt. And it was just so much fun to see somebody really be in the center of everything and be covering it and really – I mean I think he was enjoying it in the way that you enjoy something that makes you really tired. But I did like the fact, Peter, that you and I kept referring to the 1984 general like Costa has any memory of that.

There's an app now called the Face app where you can make your face look old or young. And I apparently told him by the Russians or people are saying now don't do it because how the Russians are going to record your face features. But you can make yourself look old or young. And I did it last night to make myself look old. And it was so shocking and horrible that I before I was going to delete the app before I did it, I looked at see how I looked like when I was young. And I it was so different that I thought, oh, well, the app doesn't really work because it should be able to show what you look like when you're young.

Because, of course, as you know, the past is very interesting to us. This is the worst segue ever. And every now and then we like to know what we look like or what maybe our relatives look like or maybe what our distant relatives look like. And if you ever wonder those things or wonder where your family comes from, you can discover more about them and learn about your story by combining the Ancestry DNA test with billions of historical

family records. I did that with a family. We family did it on Christmas time and it was, it's great. I keep going to the app all the time. They're adding new people. It's, it's just really interesting to see. They have a great map that shows where you came. The whole thing is fantastic. Ancestry DNA gives you so much more than just the places you're from. Ancestry connects you to the places in the world where your story started using precise geographic detail and clear-cut historical insights. You can even trace your ancestors' journeys over time following how and why your family moved from place to place. And to amplify your results, you can start a free trial on Ancestry and build a tree so your ancestors become more than just a name. My cousin's doing that. It's loads of fun. They've combined DNA results with over 100 million family trees

and billions of records to give you more insight into your genealogy and origins. Only Ancestry can tell such a rich story with unique features that give a more complete picture about a person like events that shape them, how they made a living, what they excelled in. Ancestry's unique features and record collections can give a more complete picture of people from your past, like the events that shape them, how they made a living, even how long they attended school. It's so easy to get started. You get a little kit, you spit it in a little bottle, you put a cap on it, and you put a

label on it, and you send it away, and in a couple weeks, they send you a note on email or on your app. And it is endlessly fascinating. And you discover how many third cousins you have. You have a lot of third cousins, I've got to say. So go to Ancestry.com slash Ricochet today for 20% off your Ancestry DNA kit. That's Ancestry.com slash Ricochet. A-N-C-E-S-T-R-Y dot com slash Ricochet for 20% off your Ancestry DNA kit. That's Ancestry.com slash Ricochet, A-N-C-E-S-T-R-Y.com slash Ricochet for 20% off your Ancestry DNA kit. Ancestry.com slash Ricochet.

And our thanks to Ancestry.com for sponsoring the Ricochet podcast. They've been supporters for a long time. And it's actually a fun thing to talk about because it's a really fun thing to do. Speaking of fun thing to talk about, we are joined right now by, frankly, a second-tier, third-tier guest. John Yu is a professor of law at Berkeley's Bolt Hall Law School where he heads up the token conservative chair and a visiting scholar at the Enterprise Institute. And he's a visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution. He's also, as you know, he's Barney to Richard Epstein's Fred Flintstone on the very popular Law Talk podcast with Epstein and You, which is right here on Ricochet, and we are always delighted to have him, even if he's a difficult person. Not really.

John, how are you? That was all a preventative strike because you know I'm coming after you, Rob. I do. I know. The way, you know, if I'm Barney and Richard's briefly retired Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens died at 99 years old. What's the legacy of John Paul Stevens? What's the elevator pitch for his time at the Supreme Court? Well, one is I'm glad – I'm sorry. I'm sorry to say he's passed away. I'm glad we have time to think about his legacy and talk about him. But I don't think he has a great jurisprudential

legacy. I don't think he's going to be remembered as one of the great chief, great justices. If anything, we're going to remember him as probably the poster boy for the idea that Republican presidents, like the one Peter worked for and the one that Rob wanted to work for but was never allowed to work for, appointed people was just the one of a long legacy of people like powell blackman o'connor kennedy unfortunately suitor they're more than earl warren start at the start yeah who are appointed by conservative presidents republican presidents who promised to appoint conservatives to supreme court and they appoint people with very little record and very weak jurisprudential rule thinking, principles, rules. Stevens was kind of the opposite of a Scalia. I think Stevens, unfortunately, he came to the bench. He was an antitrust lawyer.

He was a good practitioner in Chicago, an appellate judge. But he didn't have strong view. So once you get to the Supreme Court, once you're in Washington, D.C., and the media and the academy start working on you, all of those justices drifted to the left. And Stevens maybe drifted farthest to the left. He became the leader of the liberal wing of the court in the last 15 years. Okay. So this is really interesting and a really profound point. And I at least have never had the chance to say, john take us into this why did so let me set it up you did a good job let me reset it slightly the notion that republican presidents do the best they can to nominate justices to the supreme court who are more or less conservative and then find that they've gotten it wrong. All of that was going on until very recently.

Reagan, Sandra Day O'Connor, Antony Kennedy moved to the left. Reagan would be, probably did spend some time rolling in his grave over decisions that those two joined. George H.W. Bush, of course, Gerald Ford nominated John Paul Stevens. George H.W. Bush nominated two justices, Clarence Thomas, I think we can agree he got that one right, and David Souter, who turned out to be just appalling. Question number one is, why did it happen? What were the incentives or pressures to move ordinarily regarded as centrist or conservative judges to move them to the left once they

became justices? And why has it stopped? So one more piece of data we left out, and it undermines the point of people who say, ah, it's just random. You can't predict what people will be like. That's just the way it is, is Democrats, right, have had the same number of appointments roughly since the LBJ days. And as far as I can tell there's only one

justice and all of those who ever became conservative and actually it was more because the court moved rather than him and that's byron white from the kennedy administration yes so the democrats have had a perfect record of picking justices ever since 1962 uh so it can't just be randomness it's all of it moves in one direction. So what are those pressures? I think part of it comes from the media and sort of the inside the beltway cocktail party circuit. If you're a liberal justice, you're praised. I mean, if you're a conservative justice, you become liberal, you're praised for famously, the New York Times said, when justice was growing in office or becoming a judicial statesman.

It appeals to the vanity of some of these justices. I think that's one. And then the second is on top – and it's what you guys talk about on the podcast all the time about culture being first and then politics flowing down from culture. Or was that crazy – it was that Breitbart guy that used to go drinking with Rob all the time. I get them confused whether it was Rob or Breitbart. They merge. Rob and Breitbart merge into the same person. Yeah. Imagination. I just know there's a lot of alcohol and other substances around whenever I saw the two of them together. You just – that's your imagination. And so there's that. And then the academics come on board after that. And that's even a stronger pull, I think, because then it gets them thinking about how they're talked about by scholars, taught about in the law schools, where there'll be portraits of them in law schools, where they get invited to the fancy talks in the United States and in Europe.

And so I think the judge I clerked for, Larry Silberman, gave this famous speech. I think he's the one who first identified this dynamic, and he famously called it the greenhouse effect because Linda Greenhouse was the New York Times Supreme Court correspondent. And you would see, I think, things which would be completely and probably just the most outrageous appeals, I think, to the vanity of some of these justices. And so the question actually is interesting is more to ask, what kind of people resist all of the things that the culture and media and the academy can lather on if you do the kind of things they agree with? If you say Roe versus Wade was correctly decided, That was the most famous incident was when Roe versus Wade came up in 1992 for a reexamination, a case called Casey. This is the most extraordinary thing. The three Republican-appointed justices, no one knew what they thought about abortion. Conner and Kennedy issued a strange joint opinion where they basically said because everyone keeps a tacking row, we're going to uphold it and heal the land.

That's not their job. But they got lavished with praise by the standard mainstream – what we now call the mainstream media outlets and the academy. So, John, I have a, you ask what kind of character does Justice have to have to stand up to all these insidious little pressures, getting praised at a Georgetown cocktail party, like those that Rob is always attending, getting praised in the columns of Linda Greenhouse in the New York Times. And of course, clearly one answer to that is character. Justice Scalia just didn't care and made it clear he didn't care what those people thought of him. Mr. Justice Thomas, same kind of thing.

He is an immovable man. He's so certain in his own character. But here's what I would put to you. It also has made a big difference that the Federalist Society has come into being because now with the Federalist Society, which has its own publications, its a therapy group, but you've got a structure that offers support to the good guys where they can find some kind of validation in the larger culture. were making terrible mistakes. Now it exists and A, has the manpower, person power, whatever the correct phrase is, to engage in very thorough, deep vetting of the kind that didn't take place before. And B, you've got this structure. You've got an audience now that applauds when our guys do the right thing right that's important well you know first uh let me in the interest of full disclosure say that both my parents were psychiatrists so we're in favor

of more and more therapy for more people you know rob when we go on these nr cruises keeps asking for the family discount whenever he talks to my mom i i say just no by the way i say charge them 15 yeah like that's too much work we got to charge them well and by the way i'm only asking for a prescription i'm not even asking that's right rob has no interest in the talking cure i like the talking like the uh go to the CVS cure. But I think you're right. I think, Peter, not about the CVS. I think you're right about the Federal Society and a lot of the allied think tanks. So it's not just Federal Society, but places like Hoover, like Heritage, like AEI started studying law and bringing legal scholars on board.

So you created this alternate ecosystems. Yes, that's it. That's the way to put it. It's really therapeutic. Although it is. It's more, I think, what happened is that the law schools and the universities went so left that actually had this huge vacuum in the marketplace of ideas, conservative legal ideas. And you started seeing places like the Federal Society, think tanks start pumping them out, new ideas. Actually, the radical exciting ideas mostly come

from conservative scholars now, whereas the liberal scholars are all playing basically prevent defense to protect the Warren Court's legacy. And you have more of the excitement, you have conferences, you have young scholars, you have books, articles being produced by this other system that looks at the constitution as one that's interpreted based on the original understanding of its writers. And so I think it's not really therapy, it's more like you have an alternate university system almost that comes to exist, an alternate intellectual network. And that allows the ideas to germinate, allows the ideas to be tested because it shouldn't

just be about producing ideas in an echo chamber. There's a lot of vigorous debate. You test the ideas. And then the judges who go out and are appointed, and then the federal side plays this alternate sort of professional role too, like the ABA, where they help identify young talent and try to move them forward in the profession and ultimately to become judges or high-ranking staffers in the White House and the Justice Department. And that's all come to fruition. So whoever funded the Federal Society back in 1981 or 82, they've gone the most bang for their foundation in the history of nonprofits.

It's an incredible story. So, John, I would like to revisit the never-Trumper sneer toward those of us who were open to Trump. Reluctantly, though, we were. The sneer was but Gorsuch, meaning

Trump is a catastrophe and you you you pro-trumpers are saying yeah yeah yeah but we got a supreme court uh a nominee who's a good guy and and the implicit argument not implicit the explicit argument was that is not nearly enough to make up for all the and you know what after this spring's decisions came down i'm saying damn right but gorsuch or but but gorsuch and bachavano but especially gorsuch i'm putting this to you to see if you agree or you want to correct me adjust my thinking once again gorsuch's opinions beautifully written correct from beginning to end he is anton Antonin Scalia without the hot sauce. He's not going to be taking on – he won't be high-handed with his fellow justices.

He's not going to include the sharp wit. There's nothing cutting about his decisions, but they are strong. They are beautifully written. They are accessible to ordinary readers. This guy is going to make a big difference over the long term. And by the way, it's not just Butt Gorsuch. Now it's Butt Gorsuch and Kavanaugh. And to those of you who were however fleetingly never Trumpers, John, I would have to say, yeah, damn right, Butt Gorsuch and Kavanaugh.

John, you may recant publicly right now. Well, you know, first of all, if it was Scalia, it would be Scalia without the Calabrian hot peppers. Hot sauces. Come on. You know the man. Ethnically correct. That's right. I'm PC.

I'm right here in Berkeley. I have to be PC. I can't misappropriate Mexican hot sauce for Justice Scalia. So I was one of those people. I wrote an op-ed. By writing an op-ed, I'd still- I know. I know you were, John. I'm giving you this chance to retent. I still think we got to see how the rest of the term works out. But I think you're right on the facts. I hate to say it, but I think Trump has been the best president in the history of the Republican Party in appointing not just Supreme Court justices, but lower court judges. You look at the lower court judges, the people who will best president in the history of the Republican Party in appointing not just Supreme Court

justices, but lower court judges. You look at the lower court judges, the people who will become Supreme Court justices in 15 years, 20 years, they are leagues better than George W. Bush, H. W. Bush. I hate to say it, even Reagan. There's no political compromise, no senators, roommates being appointed to the appellate bench. They are all conservative intellectuals. They're all like Scalia's. It's incredible. I've never seen anything like it.

So the liberals, the Democrats have never done anything like this. So you're right, Peter. But granting that that's true, the piece I said – in my argument, I said, well, this is like saying, well, it would have been great if we beat FDR because we would have stopped the Supreme Court appointments. That's not what's important. What's important to me is Trump is in control of foreign policy and he's got his feet up. Stop. Stop. I gave you a chance to – you did so. Stop there, John. Can we narrow that a little bit there, John?

It's a tradeoff. I got a question for you, two questions now because you raised one here. The first question is just handicap it. We live in the real world. You understand – you actually gave a brilliant description of the process by which a Supreme Court justice gets all squishy and wobbly. So Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, which one is going to wilt? Oh, well, the, the,

the one who's more like, I actually don't think either of them will in the end, but I think the one is more likely is Kavanaugh, you know? And I think this goes to he, you know, he, um, it's not really, I would have thought

because he's Yale, let's just say it. It's because he went to Yale, not law school, but undergrad. That was his undue. Oh yeah, that's the worst. You know, all those secret societies and drinking cocktails in the squash courts with people massaging you. It's just, I have to

go there. Probably Dartmouth grads are the ones serving the drinks. But anyway, look, Kavanaugh, you would think after that confirmation hearing would be – he would have nothing that he would want out of liberals, no willingness to want to appeal to them. But I think he's also bred as a creature of DC. He grew up there. He's a political animal. If anybody, and his judicial hero was Kennedy. Kennedy's the one who employed him as a clerk. I think Gorsuch being out from Colorado, and this was something I think that actually Silberman in this greenhouse effect speech might not have been right about. The idea used to be if you were from inside DC and used to all the attacks, if you were like

a Clarence Thomas or an Antonin Scalia, there's nothing else the liberals could do to you after you'd been in DC for so many years. But actually, I think maybe it's better nowadays to bring the judges out from the provinces, as it were,'re not – the kind of train-the-swamp mentality kept people swamped to be judges. I just want two follow-ups here. One is about Kavanaugh. When he was first announced before the Trou troubles. The ABA gave him a huge – Like he's Ireland. Yeah, it gave him a huge – well, it did feel like Ireland. They gave him a hugely high rating. He was a very highly rated, kind of looked like a very down-the-middle pick.

Oh, yeah. If you look at Trump's Supreme Court list, he was probably the most moderate on that list. And then they dragged him through the town square, the liberals and the media. Do you think that's going to make him more conservative, or do you think it's going to make him more liberal, or do you think it's really going to have no effect? I think it's going to make him a little more conservative because he used to want the approval right he used to yeah harvard and yale and now he goes he can't have it ever not only can't have it but he sees what the the people behind that are really not to be trusted and without character and principle in their out to get i think that's what thomas saw you know same thing happened to justice thomas uh you know's 40. Can you imagine that happening when you're 42 when Justice Thomas went through? And he was, I think, very open-minded about constitutional law, but he could see right approval of the Washington, D.C. crowd and the network of universities and so on.

I don't think he was just interested in that at all. John, there's an obvious question here. What did it do to you? Me? Yes, you. No, but you were dragged through the town square. You were excoriated. I mean, what was done to you was shameful, shameful.

And what effect did it have on your thinking? People just don't realize I love it. I love this stuff. They don't realize that. I'm like Rob. I just like the attention. I was like, Rob's answer to every question is, it's spelled L-N-G. Yeah, right. Van Momey, you can say anything you want.

All right, so my last question, because you said something really fascinating. I can answer this seriously. Actually, the worst thing I ever had to deal with was actually arguing about affirmative action on campus. It was far worse than anything about working in the Bush administration and terrorism and so on. It was taking the position in California on the Berkeley campus about being for colorblind admissions. And I was really – I really didn't want to do it. And actually, I remember Justice Thomas called me. I don't know how he knew I was going to do this big debate on Prop 209 on campus. And he just said, once you go up against the left and you say your piece,

you'll find that actually they can't hurt you. So you should always just go out and say what you want to and ignore all the sound and fury that they can generate in the media because it really doesn't matter. And so since then, I've always thought he was right, and I didn't really – can actually kind of enjoy fighting with liberals and going to liberal campuses and debating issues. Can I tell one other great story? Of course. Fighting with liberals and going to liberal campuses and debating issues. Can I tell one other great story? Of course. I had to do a debate at Brown with the head of Amnesty International or something. Oh, my goodness. Human rights and the Bush administration.

So 2,000 people turned up. And so I used the Rob Long technique. I just started making fun of the guy. And so he goes, you know, when I was preparing for this debate this debate my team they told me you were going to try to use humor to attack my points and i just said well that's nice you know i talked to my team which is me about how to debate you and it took like five seconds rough rough hey john uh john before you go you said something kind of interesting I love stuff like that. Rough. Rough. Hey, John, before you go, you said something kind of interesting. By accident, I might add.

By accident, I think. That is sort of the opposite of what people think. And you're a court watcher. You're an officer of the court. You're a law professor. You said, when we talked about Trump, you said everybody's talking about the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court, that I'm more interested in foreign, all these other things. Why do you think we obsess on the left and the right about the court so much? And why do you not think it's as important as everyone else seems to think it is? It's a great question, and I think it is really important for domestic politics.

And so the reason why we all care about it is because – and this is something Scalia talked about in his opinions and political scientists of – even political scientists of Yale have noticed this. It's so obvious. The Supreme Court has expanded this jurisdiction to more and more issues of the day. So affirmative action, race, religion, you go on and on, guns, drugs. The Supreme Court really has become, even little things like the census, the court has become the last word on all these questions. So in a way, it has sucked all the political conflict over these issues into the institution of the courts, whereas before, we would have fights in elections and legislatures and even Congress and the presidency about the best, say, immigration policy.

But now it's clear. If you want to change immigration policy, you got to go through the courts. So the only way politically interested people who have a view about abortion, the most important issues they care about, abortion and race and so on, you have to fight over Supreme Court appointments. That's the only way to generate change. But the second thing why I think it's of second importance to the most important thing is because I just personally tend to think national security and foreign affairs are more important. Like here's how I thought of it is even though I didn't like FDR's appointments to the Supreme Court and they ruined constitutional law for – we're still within – Seven decades, right? We're still within 80 years. Still, I'm glad FDR was president because he realized that we should go to war with Nazi Germany and Japan. And so, you know, if suppose Trump has a temper tantrum and he nukes a country, I don't think that is outweighed by two appointments to the Supreme Court.

So that's what I argue. Well, I do. What? Really? It depends on the country, I guess. It depends on the country. The commerce clause does have to be worked out, let's be honest. Well, as long as it's Iran. If it's Iran, then we'll get Lochner. We can get Lochner.

John Gorsuch, that's a throw in North Korea, Iraq, Kavanaugh, it's even. John, we've got to have you back. We've got to have you back to answer the following question. But if you can give us 90 seconds on it now, I'd be really pleased. And the question is simply, the court has handed down a bunch of decisions this spring. There are a few more to come. Are you in general – I want to have you back to go into it in some detail case by case, but are you in general pleased? Is the chief justice, is he shepherding the court as you would wish, or is he turning into a swing vote? Is he turning into the new

Anthony Kennedy? What do you make overall of the decisions that have come down so far? So first, the chief justice is already the swing justice. So we shouldn't have any illusions about Chief Justice Roberts. But he is moving the court in a conservative direction. I wish it was more conservative. But the two things that come out of this term, which I think conservatives should be very happy with, you know, we're all obsessed about the census case. The census case actually, legally, is not that important. It's politically important. The two things that happened this term which concerns you really have one, the court will – the branches, and we're not going to tamper with that. That stops this huge effort to, again, have the courts expand their powers into politics. So that was a tremendous conservative victory that just got overlooked because of census. closely, but which actually the census cases apart, which seek to restore judicial power and congressional power over this out-of-control administrative state.

This has been an agenda item ever since the first Reagan term, and conservatives have never really successfully gotten their arms around how to stop the administrative state. There were four decisions this term where the court has suggested they might be willing to turn the clock back to 1937 and stop allowing Congress to give power to unaccountable bureaucrats to set most of the federal laws that we have to live under. That would be a huge change. And Roberts, even in all these cases like Obamacare, the two Obamacare cases, the census case, even when he's been doing – reaching liberal outcomes, he's been using this idea that courts should start smacking back the administrative state. That's something I think that could be the legacy of the Roberts court. If that's what happens, that will be something that escaped the Reagan and Bush and Bush.

It would be a great victory for individual Liberty. I mean, Rob will be able to smoke marijuana and drive 95 miles an hour down the Poughkeepsie. Thank you already. Come and get me copper. No, of course I don't do any,

either one of those things, but John, I got to thank you. Cause you, you know, you bring, I got one last question for you, but you bring good value.

This is really good value. While we're listening to this podcast, I would feel edified and uplifted and elevated by both you, John Yoo, and our previous guest, Bob Costa. So I'm going to ask you this question. What do you say to people who listen to this podcast and think to themselves, you know, I should join Ricochet? I was about to say that you should join Ricochet. What's wrong with you people? Yeah, because a lot of people hear this podcast and go, you know, a lot of people who hear this podcast think I'm never going to join. Forget it. But there's some people that think, you know, I probably should. I should do $te, but I only just in the last two months started using Apple Podcasts to download podcasts automatically.

And I finally figured out how to play them in my car stereo. And now I got Apple iPod – what are the things you stick in your ears? Ear pods. I don't – God knows what Richard would call them. Richard would call them white magic gods, which transmit information. I got Apple iPods, AirPods. Richard would call them white magic gods, which transmit information. I've been listening to podcasts all the time for the last two, three months now. And by far the best slate of conservative podcasts are in Ricochet.

I can't even listen to all the ones I want to in any given month or week. So if you believe in this idea that conservatives should create their own infrastructure to generate the ideas that will become policy without falling under the sway of universities and the media, where else are you going to do it? But Ricochet, think about the bang for the buck question about saying, oh, the people invested in the federal side in 1982. Look what they did. For $2.50 investing in this network, dozens of podcasts with great hosts and sometimes great guests. Yeah, and sometimes great hosts, but not often. I mean, you could go buy some cheap Chinese plastic made thing in Walmart, or you could spend it on the generation of ideas. I don't even think it's a close call. You're my favorite guest.

Thank you, John. And John, that was really magnanimous of you because you did not pitch your own podcast, but I'm going to because I listen to it all the time. Law Talk with John Yoo and Richard Epstein, two of the finest legal minds in America, and yet there are moments when they are at least as enjoyable as Abbott and Costello. And I'm not going to say which role you play, John, but I listen to that. I enjoy it every single time, and I learn a lot every single time. And boy, that's a hard trick to pull off, Something that is truly entertaining and truly informative at the same time. John, you're a marvel.

Can I just say, Richard Epstein could be Abbott and Costello at the same time. As you know, my most famous line was to you in Uncommon Knowledge when you said, what would a Supreme Court of nine Richard Epsteins look like? And I said, I don't know, but I can tell you every decision would be five to four. But don't forget my other podcast, The Pacific Century. I started a new podcast with Misha Oslin at Hoover Institution. Misha is a scholar of deep learning, 20 years studying Asia, and a Yale professor once upon a time.

And I'm just on the podcast because I'm Asian, so inherently I know everything about Asia. I can at least say there are good places to eat in Asia. That's true. Although I was disappointed that you were confused. You didn't know what AirPods were. Well, that's what we call them in Asia. We call them magic white gods, which transmit noise.

Hey, John, thanks for coming. See you soon. Thanks, guys. John, thank you. Thanks, Peter. Enjoy yourself this summer, but not too much. Not too much. We've got to have you back.

Speaking of this summer. Look what a not too much we gotta have you back um speaking of this summer uh look what a good thing we did rob i i think i think john you is exactly right ricochet does have by far the best slate of podcasts going and look at that rob long and peter robinson over a bibulous dinner came up with his half cockcock scheme, and look, it's working. It's working, kind of. I mean, it'd be working better if you joined, if everybody joined. Correct. Because we've got to grow, and that's actually ultimately where I have this obsession with

reporting. I mean, I'm not a reporter. I'm not a journalist, but I listen to podcasts, and I read the newspaper, and I see there's a lot of stuff, a lot of reporting. Some of it is partisan. Some of it is not, supported by ProPublica. And ProPublica is an organization that was a nonprofit organization funded by a very wealthy couple in Northern California. And they decided that what they need to do is to sponsor reporting. And that was brilliant. That is a genius idea. They were very smart to do that.

Our side doesn't do that. We like where, you know, we want journals of opinion and journals of this and journals of that. And I think that's a lot of fun. And you and I do that. And that's great. And the podcast do that. But for us to raise money and to sort of grow and to be bigger and to have a real impact, we're going to have to eventually do the most expensive thing to do, which is reporting. And that's what our side should be funding. And I kind of sometimes think what we're really funding is Sean Hannity's next book. No disrespect to Sean Hannity, but it's not reporting. And their side – the other side is doing it and doing a great job of it.

And we're not even playing on the same field. So – but it is summer and summertime means barbecues and there we go and right now butcher box is offering juicy flavorful grill ready 100 grass-fed beef burgers perfect for any summer cookout butcher box burgers are ready to go third of a pound patties that can be simply tossed on the grill for an easy weeknight meal or doctored up to create a show-stopping bacon cheeseburger for the neighborhood barbecue right now new members will get six burgers for free in every box until october the 15th which i love because that is in my mind nearing the end of summer summer's not over till columbus day in my point so that's very generous of them i'm with you

every box until october 15th so you get summer's best offer before it expires. Here's how ButcherBox works. Choose from four curated boxes, including a mix of high-quality grass-fed, grass-finished beef, free-range organic chicken, and heritage-breed pork, or customize your own box so that you get exactly what you and your family love. Each box comes with at least 9 to 11 pounds of meat, which is enough for 24 individual-sized meals. All meat is delivered right to your doorstep with free shipping on those dry ice packy things. ButcherBox believes in a healthier food system where everyone has access to meat the way nature intended, free of antibiotics and added hormones and humanely raised, so you can cook with the peace of mind knowing you're feeding your family healthy, high-quality meat you can actually trust.

There's no easier way to get high-quality meat you can trust. ButcherBox delivers right to your door on dry ice. There's no commitment, and you can cancel any time by taking out the middleman, which is grocery stores, and purchasing directly from a collective of ranches. ButcherBox is able to buy meat at a lower cost and pass those savings along to you. The price is just $129 a month, which works out to less than $6 per meal. And shipping is free nationwide, except Alaska and Hawaii, which sort of makes sense. So for 20% off your first box and six burgers for free in every box all summer long until October 15th, go to ButcherBox.com slash Ricochet and enter promo code Ricochet.

That's ButcherBox.com ricochet that's b-u-t-c-h-e-r-b-o-x dot com slash ricochet or enter and enter promo code ricochet for 20 off your first box and six free burgers in every box all summer long and for them for butcher box summer lasts until october 15th which is incredibly cool our thanks to butcher box block for sponsoring the ricochet podcast they've been a advertiser for a long time. And we're really grateful that they are supporting us. And also grateful that

they're raising the flag. Powerful, powerful organizing force against veganism. Exactly. Oh, me too. I'm groaning because my 17-year-old daughter has announced that she's a vegan or a vegetarian. What?

I can't. I can never. Anyway. No, it's different. It's different. Do you remember that moment in the Joe McCarthy mythology in which Fred Friendly, the CBS producer, called all his reporters together in New York and and said and and they talked about it and he said gentlemen the fear is right here in this room all i can say is that veganism has entered my own house rob well it's about time there should have been some pushback in the robinson house it's

entirely too it's entirely too sanguine when i was over there. Everybody kind of nodding and agreeing and adding interesting points. You need a little revolutionary energy in that house. Be honest. Come on. The reality is people who declare themselves to be vegan, that's fine. They should just be forced to cook and eat vegan forever.

There's no going back. It's fine. You make a tattoo. You can't get rid of it you'll be eating this horrible bean paste and whatnot forever while the rest of us are enjoying delicious delicious succulent whatever hey rob i have a closing question and it's for you the entertainment professional my beloved wife and i just finished binge watching shetland the uh murder mystery series set in the shetland islands which by the way is extreme in my judgment at least beautifully written beautifully acted but oh my goodness those wide establishing shots of those barren barely populated islands it's all a

little a little a little depressing really as good as the show is. Anyway, the point is we need something new to binge watch. So I asked my friend Rob. I am the worst. I had a cup of coffee with a friend of mine this morning and he's in the business. He's in the industry. He's a fellow writer and he's talking about this and that. So what are you liking? I'm like I don't – I'm not – I don't know.

People love – Because nothing is any good or because that's just not your habit your premium no it's not like right now and also this i i i have this i'm itchy kind of discomfort with the idea of making a commitment to a show that has a million episodes and now you got to watch it and then some people say oh it's really it's terrible oh it's really good like um i remember i was working with the producers of the show Big Little Lies. Oh, really? Yeah, I had a project with them at ABC.

And they were in production. It was the first time they had done television, so I was kind of talking them through TV stuff. And then the show came out, and I watched one or two of them, and it was like – everybody loved it. And it was fine. It just felt a little soap opera-y to me. But the love of it was so extraordinary that then HBO decided, well, we've got to do more of these. So they dialed it up. They did more.

They brought the whole cast back. These are movie stars. Reese Witherspoon and Nicole Kidman. All the women in my house are watching that show. And then they got Meryl Streep. This is a big deal. And everyone, at least that I know of, hates it. So what am I watching?

I think even my wife would say it's just soap opera, but it's sort of fun soap opera. It's popcorn. Yeah, that's what she's fine, by the way. By the way, how do they handle the economics of that? I watched 20 minutes of it. And Meryl Streep, Nicole Kidman, Reese Witherspoon, there are big, big – who can afford to put on serial television and pay what those actresses command? No one. That's the problem.

No one. They're just kind of going on fumes right now. It's not a larger question, but it's very very very hard remember eight and that is a good news i think for i mean for a while anyway for conservatives because for a long time uh or people who don't live in cities right uh or people who are older than 50 there was this attitude like nobody cares about you you're not an important demographic because demographics are juicy slots of the population that you can charge advertisers more for. But you're $11 to Netflix, and your whatever HBO costs, it's the same. It's the same whether you're an evangelical Christian in a pickup truck or you're a hipster in Brooklyn holding a latte with a little latte art on it. $11 is $11.

Everyone's the same in the streaming universe. Every dollar is the same. So places like HBO and Hulu and all these streaming services that charge you by the month are going to have to, like, discover new areas of the country and new audiences that they never thought they'd have to go for because they're not selling ads anymore. Now, my theory is in eight to ten years, they'll all be selling ads.

You'll have ads on all of those services. You'll be paying plus watching ads. But for the period anyway, maybe I'm too optimistic, but my prediction is big media companies are going to discover this crazy place they didn't never really knew existed called america america because eleven dollars is eleven dollars hey so i said we just finished watching shetland i want very briefly i'd like to mention two other things that we've watched because they're sort of conservative and one was chernobyl did you have you looked at that rob i have i saw one episode i really liked it and i i promised myself i'd watch more of it but then i just didn't you could quibble i think you could more than quibble with various aspects of it they over dramatize certain bits

far fewer people actually died in the in chernobyl in the aftermath than they seem to suggest all of that. But it really shows what a mess you end up with if you institute a system in which nobody can tell the truth because everybody is concerned about what his boss thinks and if he disappoints his boss being put in prison. There is an aspect of Soviet life that comes through this hip, beautifully done British series, Chernobyl. I found it gripping from the dramatic point of view, but there's something that comes through. I thought to myself, ah, I want my kids to see this. And then the other one we've been watching is – or we watched was Chasing the Moon, which is a PBS miniseries on Apollo 11. Of course, we're coming up on let's see it's three days from today july 20th marks the 50th anniversary of neil armstrong's becoming the first human being to set foot on the moon it is a great moment james lilacs were he with us would wax romantic about it but uh chasing the moon they try to it's a pbs production they try

to introduce politics. They introduce – somehow or other, they mix up the moonshot with the civil rights movement and so forth. Nevertheless, even though that's done ham-fistedly, you do – the United States of America 50 years ago, there was a civil rights movement that hadn't been corrupted yet. It was still completely honorable. The technical prowess that was displayed in this moonshot, the, what is there? The sense of honorable competition.

Oh, and there's a moment when they play, they play a brief recording of John Kennedy on the telephone. And I thought to myself, I really have to have James Lilacs hear that because Kennedy's position is mine, not James's. Kennedy is agonizing over the hit to the federal budget of the space program. And John Fitzgerald Kennedy says, I'm not that interested in space. All that matters to me is that we can show the Soviets that we started out behind, and by God, we surpassed them. John Kennedy's position is

exactly mine. In any event, it does capture all the dynamism, the sheer spiritedness of the United States 50 years ago, and it is worth watching, Chasing the Moon, I think. All right. That's great. The only thing I can recommend to people is that if you have Apple TV or something, to get the Criterion channel. Oh, what's that? I've never even heard of that. It's old movies.

Oh. Just old movies. Some foreign movies, some American movies. They're old. They're great. Every time I turn on the TV, I think, oh, I'll watch all this stuff that I'm supposed to watch. All that stuff.

I end up going first to Criterion Channel and then just getting absorbed in some old movie. I watched a little bit more highbrow, but last week I watched Henri Clouseau, who's a French filmmaker, the movie The Wages of Fear. What decade are we got there?

Early 50s. It's an incredibly great, gripping thriller. A bunch of down-and-outers. They're living in some godforsaken plains part of South America. And they don't have any money, and they're kind of scrounging. They have just enough money to buy a couple of drinks and some cigarettes and maybe a plate of food every day. Not enough money for the $400

airplane ticket to go back to Paris or wherever they're going to go. They're all kind of misfits and exiles from wherever. There's an American oil company that kind of runs the town and the next town. 150 miles away or more, there's an oil well explosion

and the only way to cap the well is with nitroglycerin which they don't have over there but they do have in this little town and so these guys are paid five thousand dollars a piece to drive nitroglycerin on two rickety trucks across the rickety bad roads up and down hills and, of course, any wrong move, and they all go up. And they put them in two trucks. They basically say, look, you guys are probably not going to make it. It's pretty sure that at least one truck's not going to make it. But if the other truck makes it, we'll pay you five grand. And they're so desperate, they do it. And it's... I mean, it's great.

It's the wages of fear. Subtitled? Subtitled, that's sort of interesting, but most of it is just, I hope they don't hit that rock. It sounds crazy, but it's really, really good. It's super bleak. It's a bleak, bleak movie with a bleak, bleak ending, but it's great.

And the Wages of Fear, which is in French again? La Salere du Peur. The Salary of Fear. Yeah, Wages of Fear. And they say Ricochet is not a highbrow outfit. So highbrow. Speaking of highbrow, this podcast, which is highbrow, was brought to you by Calm, Ancestry.com, and ButcherBox. So you support them for supporting us, and they're great products. If you enjoyed the show, please take a minute to leave a review on iTunes.

Your review allows new listeners to discover us, and that keeps the show going. But, of course, the most important thing is please join ricochet.com slash join, uh, $2 50 cents, the podcast level. There are other levels too, but baby steps. Um,

and we are thrilled and honored to have you as listeners and we'll be even more thrilled and honored to have you as fellow members along with us. And of course, as always, we will see you in the comments next week, Peter next week Rob it's the same sad story love and glory

going round and round it's the same old cliche wanderer on his way slipping from town to town. Some fine piece here on the sweet streets, the sweet streets of home where kindness falls and your heart calls for a permanent place of your own I'm a wayfaring baby I drift from town to town When everyone's asleep

and the midnight bells sound the wheels are kissing up the highway Spinning round and round You start out slow in a sweet little bungalow Something too can call home The rain comes falling, bruise come calling, you're left with a heart of stone.

Some folks are inspired, sitting by the fire, slippers tucked under the bed. But when I go to sleep I can't count sheep For the white lines in my hair I'm a wayfairer, baby I roam from town to town

When everyone's asleep And the midnight bells sound The wheels are hissing Up the highway spinning round and round. Where are you now? Where are you now? Where are you now? Where are you now? guitar solo I'm a wayfarer, baby. I roam from town to town.

And everyone's asleep and the midnight bells sound. Wheels are hoisting up the highway, spinning round and round. I'm a wayfarer, baby. Ricochet. Join the conversation. Rob, that segue filled me with a kind of morbid fascination. It was. Hello. Morbid fascination.

Morbid fascination. You're talking about Stevens wondering if he got buried in his bow tie wait wait save it save it