Podcaster
Episoden
26.11.2025
57 Minuten
Between the pardoned turkeys and those running loose on Capitol
Hill, controversy over insubordination and sedition seem to be on
the menu this holiday. The six Democrats who posted a video
addressed to service members sowed chaos and confusion about
the proper chain of command and lawful military orders. It is
crucial to understand the constitutional framework that
distinguish lawful military action, legislative and executive
powers, crime, and war. In today’s politics, rhetoric can make it
difficult to discern the line between war and crime. John
Yoo reminds us that not everything that harms society constitutes
a war or justifies the use of military tools. That being said,
where is the line drawn, and who draws it? And what is the
proper role for members of Congress?
John Yoo is a nonresident senior fellow at the American
Enterprise Institute, the Emanuel S. Heller Professor of Law at
the University of California, Berkeley, and a Senior Research
Fellow at the Civitas Institute at the University of Texas at
Austin. Professor Yoo has served in all three branches of
government. He was an official in the U.S. Department of Justice,
where he worked on national security and terrorism issues after
the 9/11 attacks. He served as general counsel of the U.S.
Senate Judiciary Committee. He has been a law clerk for
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and federal appeals Judge
Laurence Silberman. Professor Yoo has published almost 100
scholarly articles on subjects including national security,
constitutional law, international law, and the Supreme
Court. Professor Yoo’s latest book is The Politically
Incorrect Guide to the Supreme Court.
Read the transcript here.
Subscribe to our Substack here.
Mehr
20.11.2025
1 Minute
For Donald Trump, China has served as a major justification for
economic protectionism, highlighting our dependencies and need to
onshore products with national security implications. But that’s
the talk. The reality is more dismal: a less-than-hawkish trade
deal this month, with tariffs that seem to isolate allies and,
inversely, reshore production on China’s mainland. For Team
Trump, three camps have merged into one contradictory mess within
the administration. Members of these camps look to use tariffs as
leverage for trade deals, as a source of revenue, and to protect
domestic industry. No single tariff can achieve all three and
brief, ambiguous trade deals do little to decouple with China,
friend-shore, and rebuild American industry. Where do we go from
here? How will these tariff camps shake out? And how can we
improve our strategic approach to global trade and protect
America from the very real China threat?
Scott Lincicome is the Vice President of General Economics the
Cato Institute’s Herbert A. Stiefel Center for Trade Policy
Studies. He writes on international and domestic economic issues,
including international trade; subsidies and industrial policy;
manufacturing and global supply chains; and economic dynamism.
Lincicome also is a senior visiting lecturer at Duke University
Law School, where he has taught a course on international trade
law. Prior to joining Cato, Lincicome spent two decades
practicing international trade law at White & Case LLP, where
he litigated national and multilateral trade disputes. He also
authors a column for The Dispatch entitled, Capitolism.
Read the transcript here.
Subscribe to our Substack here.
Mehr
13.11.2025
1 Stunde 12 Minuten
The legislative filibuster is one of the most important
guardrails against the tyranny of the majority that exists in the
United States Senate. Despite this critical function, both
parties have, at various times, entertained the idea of
eliminating the filibuster and with it, bipartisan compromise.
Such an act of unbelievable shortsightedness would transform the
Senate into a mirror image of the House of Representatives. This
change would result in drastic policy reversals as party control
shifts and could permanently disadvantage Republicans from ever
again controlling the chamber. With gridlock and polarization so
commonplace, how can we ensure the survival of the filibuster
while addressing constructive suggestions for change? How likely
might a permanent, constitutionally protected filibuster be? And
what would the Senate look like if either party was successful in
getting rid of it?
Martin B. Gold is a partner with Capitol Counsel, LLC. With over
50 years of legislative and private practice experience, he is a
recognized authority and author on matters of congressional rules
and parliamentary strategies, and U.S. policy in Asia. He
frequently advises senators and their staff and serves on the
adjunct faculty at George Washington University. Before business,
professional, and academic audiences, he speaks about Congress as
well as political and public policy developments. He has authored
several publications including, The Legislative Filibuster:
Essential to the United States Senate as well as Senate Procedure
and Practice, a widely consulted primer on Senate floor
procedure.
Read the transcript here.
Subscribe to our Substack here.
Mehr
07.11.2025
1 Stunde 12 Minuten
The fever swamps of the alt-right have crept upstream. Fringe
figures are making their way onto increasingly mainstream
platforms, spreading ideological contagion to impressionable
young audiences. Having long covered the creeping antisemitism of
the Left, the fight now unfolding on the Right is an inspiring
and essential one. With his debut WTH appearance, Eli Lake
reminds us that this isn’t a question of free speech, it’s a
question of policing one’s own coalition with moral clarity. If
the Right doesn’t get this right, what will 2028 look like for
the Republican Party?
Eli Lake is a veteran journalist with expertise in foreign
affairs and national security who has reported for Bloomberg, The
Daily Beast, and Newsweek. He was the senior national security
correspondent for the Daily Beast and covered national security
and intelligence for the Washington Times, the New York Sun and
UPI. Eli is currently the host of Breaking History, a new history
podcast from The Free Press, where he regularly publishes.
Read the transcript here.
Subscribe to our Substack here.
Mehr
06.11.2025
58 Minuten
Europe’s center of gravity has shifted eastward, and few
political leaders stand out as capable of leading the necessary
changes to revitalize, rather than regulate, the aging West. The
Washington Post’s new editorial vision hopes to address these
concerns, shaping how we think about ourselves and our allies in
the coming years. The first step in avoiding Europe’s fate here
at home is confronting the complacency that assumes we could
never backslide. And part of that responsibility rests with the
media. What can we learn from Europe? Which policies should we
avoid imitating? And how will a more diverse editorial page
report on them?
Adam O’Neal currently serves as the Opinion Editor at the
Washington Post. Prior to that, Adam worked as a correspondent
for The Economist, as an Executive Editor for the Dispatch, and
as a Wall Street Journal editorial page writer. Previously he
worked as a Vatican correspondent for Rome Reports and as a
political reporter in Washington, D.C.
Read the transcript here.
Subscribe to our Substack here.
Mehr
Über diesen Podcast
The American Enterprise Institute’s Danielle Pletka and Marc
Thiessen address the questions we’re all asking in their podcast,
“What the Hell Is Going On?” In conversational, informative and
irreverent episodes, Pletka and Thiessen interview policymakers and
experts, asking tough, probing questions about the most important
foreign policy and security challenges facing the world today.
Kommentare (0)