To mark this historical day, we’ve assembled a panel that we think reflects all sides of the new Trump administration — a mashup of the Ricochet Podcast and Need To Know with Charen and Nordlinger with a dash of Victor Davis Hanson thrown in for flavoring. It’s a bracing conversation that really gets into the weeds on the election and what may lie ahead.

Public service announcement: if you’re not a member of Ricochet and enjoy this podcast, be one of the 1,500 and join today.

Music from this week’s podcast: Orange Crush by R.E.M.

The ALL NEW opening sequence for the Ricochet Podcast was composed and produced by James Lileks.

Yes, you should absolutely subscribe to this podcast. It helps! And leave a review too!

@EJHill took an oath.

Please Support Our Sponsors!

Like this podcast? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s growing community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

Members have made 196 comments.

  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5
  6. 6
  7. 7
  1. Profile photo of Ario IronStar Coolidge

    Blue Yeti (View Comment):
    @arioironstar Call me names, insult Hoover, attribute phrases to Jay that he never said — it’s all very persuasive. I can see why you admire the President so much.

    By the way, just from the comments in this thread, if you think that I admire Trump “so much”, you have a cognitive problem.

    • #121
    • January 22, 2017 at 2:07 pm
  2. Profile photo of I Walton Member

    EB (View Comment):
    VDH’s reply to any criticism of Trump is, “The Democrats do it, too.”

    I can just hear his mother now, “Victor, you shouldn’t have done that.” “Well, Suzy did it, too!” I guess his mother never said, “If Suzy jumped off a cliff, would you do that, too?”

    You didm’t listen to much of what he said.

    • #122
    • January 22, 2017 at 4:10 pm
  3. Profile photo of Petty Boozswha Member

    I share Jay’s passion. He was asked to comment on the speech, he complemented Trump on not varnishing or obfuscating, then unloaded with both barrels.

    He and I are both still unforgiving of those that had an obligation to stop this fundementally unfit con artist but refused to do so. I do not think he begrudges those, like VDH, who accepted Trump after all alternatives were exhausted.

    I will go to my grave thinking the 168 standing members of the RNC were quislings for allowing Trump a platform after his birther nonsense, then continuing to offer him a stage after he said, in the first question of the first debate, that he would not support the ultimate nominee. Instead they let him walk up and grab them by the Reince Priebus because he was a billionaire celebrity. The man disgraces our country. Those that worked harder to rationalize accepting him than fighting him when we had the chance deserve our uttermost contempt.

    • #123
    • January 22, 2017 at 4:43 pm
  4. Profile photo of Bryan G. Stephens Reagan

    I think it is unseemly for staff to be snarky with paying customers, no matter the provocation. More so for the boss.

    I also think the CoC should apply to everyone.

    • #124
    • January 22, 2017 at 6:00 pm
  5. Profile photo of Umbra Fractus Coolidge

    Ario IronStar (View Comment):
    However, Jay’s behavior is beyond the pale. It would be one thing for Jay to thus attack Trump while being charitable to his supporters as misguided. But he is equally vicious to Trump’s supporters, even very reluctant supporters. He even lashed out at James, who is to a great extent on the same side (James is evidently insufficiently uncivil).

    I’m not surprised that an NR writer has a negative view of Trump supporters. One can only imagine the sort of abuse Jay and other NT’s have received over the past year and a half. David French gave us just a taste of it. Yeah, you can say, “Not all Trump supporters…” but that’s small comfort when your friend is getting pictures of his daughter in a gas chamber.

    • #125
    • January 22, 2017 at 7:10 pm
  6. Profile photo of ToryWarWriter Member

    I am sad that this thread ended in name calling after it started with such intelligent discourse. SAD!

    • #126
    • January 22, 2017 at 8:37 pm
  7. Profile photo of Patrick McClure Member

    Ario IronStar (View Comment):
    @peterrobinson

    The position of your employees with regard to the members is that contributors can insult members with impunity. Is the site you wished to build?

    This was one of the things I thought immediately after reading what @Blueyeti said. Along with wondering why the CoC doesn’t apply to contributors who pay nothing, but does apply to members, who are the sites monetary support. It should apply to both.

    • #127
    • January 23, 2017 at 4:54 am
  8. Profile photo of Fred Houstan Member

    I’m unsurprised at how active this thread is, though I haven’t read it yet. I loved this episode and it reminds me of why I prefer this side of the aisle. Thoughtful, respectful, engaging, informed, yet aggressive debate. I’d love to hear more Mona and Jay with Peter and James.

    • #128
    • January 23, 2017 at 5:58 am
  9. Profile photo of Patrick McClure Member

    Petty Boozswha (View Comment):
    He and I are both still unforgiving of those that had an obligation to stop this fundementally unfit con artist but refused to do so. I do not think he begrudges those, like VDH, who accepted Trump after all alternatives were exhausted.

    I think he very much begrudges people who voted for President Trump, including VDH, whether we voted reluctantly to stop Hillary or enthusiastically because we thought he would be the best person for the job. And no one had any obligation to you, or to anyone else, to vote the way you wanted them to vote. But go ahead and remain unforgiving of those who owe you nothing.

    • #129
    • January 23, 2017 at 6:00 am
  10. Profile photo of Blue Yeti Admin

    Patrick McClure (View Comment):

    Ario IronStar (View Comment):
    @peterrobinson

    The position of your employees with regard to the members is that contributors can insult members with impunity. Is the site you wished to build?

    This was one of the things I thought immediately after reading what @Blueyeti said. Along with wondering why the CoC doesn’t apply to contributors who pay nothing, but does apply to members, who are the sites monetary support. It should apply to both.

    The CoC applies to contributors and to podcasters. There are no exceptions.

    • #130
    • January 23, 2017 at 7:21 am
  11. Profile photo of Karl Nittinger Coolidge

    EB (View Comment):
    VDH’s reply to any criticism of Trump is, “The Democrats do it, too.”

    I can just hear his mother now, “Victor, you shouldn’t have done that.” “Well, Suzy did it, too!” I guess his mother never said, “If Suzy jumped off a cliff, would you do that, too?”

    I agree but would modify your insight a little. My observation is that Prof. Hanson’s most frequent reply is, “They started it…” which, apparently, makes the Trump reactions/responses/attacks OK in his view (I would also note that I don’t buy his assertion that “they started it” can be shown to be true in all cases).

    • #131
    • January 23, 2017 at 9:01 am
  12. Profile photo of Bryan G. Stephens Reagan

    Blue Yeti (View Comment):

    Ario IronStar (View Comment):
    However, Jay’s behavior is beyond the pale. It would be one thing for Jay to thus attack Trump while being charitable to his supporters as misguided. But he is equally vicious to Trump’s supporters, even very reluctant supporters. He even lashed out at James, who is to a great extent on the same side (James is evidently insufficiently uncivil).

    If a member persistently behaved insultingly as Jay has, he would have been banned long ago. Jay certainly does not think we are on the same side here. He has said so explicitly, persistently, over an extended period. If you are serious, then a quiet conversation with Jay is in order.

    I disagree with your contention that Jay’s behavior “is beyond the pale.” He has criticized Trump. He has made general observations about some Trump supporters. That’s it. Listening to Jay on a podcast is optional. Many of you in this thread have said you stopped listening to his show months ago. Your choice.

    More importantly, Jay Nordlinger is not a Ricochet member. He’s not interacting with other members, he’s not breaking any of the rules here. You don’t like him? Don’t listen to him or read him. Easy.

    Blue Yeti (View Comment):

    Patrick McClure (View Comment):

    Ario IronStar (View Comment):
    @peterrobinson

    The position of your employees with regard to the members is that contributors can insult members with impunity. Is the site you wished to build?

    This was one of the things I thought immediately after reading what @Blueyeti said. Along with wondering why the CoC doesn’t apply to contributors who pay nothing, but does apply to members, who are the sites monetary support. It should apply to both.

    The CoC applies to contributors and to podcasters. There are no exceptions.

    Those two statements (in bold) appear to say different things. I am not sure I agree that Jay has violated the CoC. However, the first quote appears to have understood by more than one person to say the CoC does not apply to contributors. In the second one, you say it does apply very clearly. Can you please clarify your first statement, so that we can have a better understanding of what your meant?

    • #132
    • January 23, 2017 at 11:57 am
  13. Profile photo of Karl Nittinger Coolidge

    There are actually people in this comment thread proposing that there be a code of conduct for commentators on podcasts because the opinions expressed by some commentators on the podcasts are in opposition to their own? Is this The Onion or something? That was really just parody, right? I mean, right?

    • #133
    • January 23, 2017 at 1:05 pm
  14. Profile photo of Patrick McClure Member

    Karl Nittinger (View Comment):
    There are actually people in this comment thread proposing that there be a code of conduct for commentators on podcasts because the opinions expressed by some commentators on the podcasts are in opposition to their own? Is this The Onion or something? That was really just parody, right? I mean, right?

    I missed seeing that request. Care to point to the comment where the member asked for the special code of conduct for commenters?

    • #134
    • January 23, 2017 at 1:11 pm
  15. Profile photo of Hugh Member

    I think the CoC should be the same for everyone (members and commentators) in the comments section. In an actual recorded podcast I am inclined to loosen the reins somewhat. I rarely hear anyone being really obnoxious in a podcast although you do hear people being provocative fairly regularly. I trust the management of the site to pull or edit anything that is truly over the top.

    Being provocative has it’s benefits. Kurt Schlichter, for example, is provocative most of the time. That is his thing. When he is a guest on a ricochet Podcast I look forward to his particular view of things (colourful, though it be). That I happen to agree with his politics is just a bonus. I agree less with Jay although I admire much of the content that he has created especially around music and history.

    If I don’t want to listen I can just turn it off. There are plenty of other choices.

    • #135
    • January 23, 2017 at 1:57 pm
  16. Profile photo of Non nobis, Domine, non nobis, … Inactive

    Ario IronStar (View Comment):

    Blue Yeti (View Comment):

    To that end, some of what I’ve read here is not conducive or exemplary of smart and civil conversation. Let’s not forget that basically, we’re all on the same side here. Can we please strive more to act like it?

    I understand your call to keep things civil. Comments can be blunt and sharp even when not prompted by the incendiary.

    However, Jay’s behavior is beyond the pale. It would be one thing for Jay to thus attack Trump while being charitable to his supporters as misguided. But he is equally vicious to Trump’s supporters, even very reluctant supporters. He even lashed out at James, who is to a great extent on the same side (James is evidently insufficiently uncivil).

    If a member persistently behaved insultingly as Jay has, he would have been banned long ago. Jay certainly does not think we are on the same side here. He has said so explicitly, persistently, over an extended period. If you are serious, then a quiet conversation with Jay is in order.

    Has anyone seen Zubrin lately?

    • #136
    • January 23, 2017 at 2:41 pm
  17. Profile photo of Concretevol Thatcher

    I’m going to comment on the podcast without reading the 5 previous pages so forgive me if I repeat what others have said. I figured it would be easier to give my opinion of what I heard without coloring it with any discussion taking place here already. (I know everyone was waiting to hear my opinion!)

    I thought the podcast was great….especially having Jay and VDH on together. It was almost too crowded at times, I would like to hear James or Peter mediate a one on one with those two. Both of them are calm, thoughtful, and well reasoned. Both of them fall into the small group of people who’s opinions (or intellect) I respect so much that when I disagree with them I question my own thinking. It’s easy for me to listen to either of their arguments in complete good faith and when they disagree it can be very interesting and entertaining. I do believe Jay would not be quite so hardline in his distaste of “Trumpism” if he had not joined Twitter before the election and suffered so much abuse at the hands of the “alt-right” such as it is….. but he is far from mean himself. To me, having a podcast where several people on the same “side” politically can still discuss differences of opinions without using bumper sticker slogans is worth the price of admission.

    • #137
    • January 23, 2017 at 2:43 pm
  18. Profile photo of Non nobis, Domine, non nobis, … Inactive

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):
    I think it is unseemly for staff to be snarky with paying customers, no matter the provocation. More so for the boss.

    I also think the CoC should apply to everyone.

    My left eye is starting to twitch. Better take cover.

    • #138
    • January 23, 2017 at 2:44 pm
  19. Profile photo of Non nobis, Domine, non nobis, … Inactive

    I was disappointed there was no discussion of the Trump Reality Distortion Field causing the Canadian Prime Minister Justin Biberdeau to begin self imploding through ethics violations and political faux pas reminiscent of Black Jacques Shellac blowing up the Hoover Dam in that Bugs Bunny episode.

    (Reuters) – Canada’s ethics watchdog is investigating whether Prime Minister Justin Trudeau violated conflict of interest laws by taking a New Year’s vacation on an island in the Bahamas owned by the Aga Khan, the first such probe of a sitting prime minister.

    Trudeau has faced repeated questions from the opposition about his trip to Bell Island, the Aga Khan’s private island, which sits in a national park in the Bahamas. He said last week that he had flown there by private helicopter.

    In a letter to a Conservative lawmaker dated Jan. 13, Mary Dawson, the federal conflict of interest and ethics commissioner, said she has “commenced an examination” to determine whether Trudeau’s trip contravened the Conflict of Interest Act.

    • #139
    • January 23, 2017 at 2:48 pm
  20. Profile photo of Blue Yeti Admin

    Concretevol (View Comment):
    I’m going to comment on the podcast without reading the 5 previous pages so forgive me if I repeat what others have said. I figured it would be easier to give my opinion of what I heard without coloring it with any discussion taking place here already. (I know everyone was waiting to hear my opinion!)

    I thought the podcast was great….especially having Jay and VDH on together. It was almost too crowded at times, I would like to hear James or Peter mediate a one on one with those two. Both of them are calm, thoughtful, and well reasoned. Both of them fall into the small group of people who’s opinions (or intellect) I respect so much that when I disagree with them I question my own thinking. It’s easy for me to listen to either of their arguments in complete good faith and when they disagree it can be very interesting and entertaining. I do believe Jay would not be quite so hardline in his distaste of “Trumpism” if he had not joined Twitter before the election and suffered so much abuse at the hands of the “alt-right” such as it is….. but he is far from mean himself. To me, having a podcast where several people on the same “side” politically can still discuss differences of opinions without using bumper sticker slogans is worth the price of admission.

    This is an extremely perceptive comment. Thanks!

    • #140
    • January 23, 2017 at 2:54 pm
  21. Profile photo of Blue Yeti Admin

    Hugh (View Comment):

    If I don’t want to listen I can just turn it off. There are plenty of other choices.

    This.

    • #141
    • January 23, 2017 at 2:55 pm
  22. Profile photo of Non nobis, Domine, non nobis, … Inactive

    CALGARY, Alberta, Jan 23 (Reuters) – A top adviser to U.S. President Donald Trump will meet with advisers to Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau this week as his Liberal government gathers to plan a response to a possible renegotiation of the NAFTA trade accord.

    Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law, will travel to Calgary, Alberta, where the Canadian cabinet is meeting on a two-day retreat, according to a source, who requested anonymity given the sensitivity of the matter.

    • #142
    • January 23, 2017 at 2:56 pm
  23. Profile photo of Blue Yeti Admin

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Blue Yeti (View Comment):

    Ario IronStar (View Comment):
    However, Jay’s behavior is beyond the pale. It would be one thing for Jay to thus attack Trump while being charitable to his supporters as misguided. But he is equally vicious to Trump’s supporters, even very reluctant supporters. He even lashed out at James, who is to a great extent on the same side (James is evidently insufficiently uncivil).

    If a member persistently behaved insultingly as Jay has, he would have been banned long ago. Jay certainly does not think we are on the same side here. He has said so explicitly, persistently, over an extended period. If you are serious, then a quiet conversation with Jay is in order.

    I disagree with your contention that Jay’s behavior “is beyond the pale.” He has criticized Trump. He has made general observations about some Trump supporters. That’s it. Listening to Jay on a podcast is optional. Many of you in this thread have said you stopped listening to his show months ago. Your choice.

    More importantly, Jay Nordlinger is not a Ricochet member. He’s not interacting with other members, he’s not breaking any of the rules here. You don’t like him? Don’t listen to him or read him. Easy.

    Blue Yeti (View Comment):

    Patrick McClure (View Comment):

    Ario IronStar (View Comment):
    @peterrobinson

    The position of your employees with regard to the members is that contributors can insult members with impunity. Is the site you wished to build?

    This was one of the things I thought immediately after reading what @Blueyeti said. Along with wondering why the CoC doesn’t apply to contributors who pay nothing, but does apply to members, who are the sites monetary support. It should apply to both.

    The CoC applies to contributors and to podcasters. There are no exceptions.

    Those two statements (in bold) appear to say different things. I am not sure I agree that Jay has violated the CoC. However, the first quote appears to have understood by more than one person to say the CoC does not apply to contributors. In the second one, you say it does apply very clearly. Can you please clarify your first statement, so that we can have a better understanding of what your meant?

    What I meant is that Jay is not jostling in the comments section, responding to individuals. He’s making general statements describing voting blocks or other large groups. You amy be a Trump supporter and disagree with his descriptions. But that doesn’t mean he broke the CoC.

    • #143
    • January 23, 2017 at 2:59 pm
  24. Profile photo of Umbra Fractus Coolidge

    Karl Nittinger (View Comment):
    There are actually people in this comment thread proposing that there be a code of conduct for commentators on podcasts because the opinions expressed by some commentators on the podcasts are in opposition to their own? Is this The Onion or something? That was really just parody, right? I mean, right?

    I’m pretty sure the CoC discussion is based on the, “Beer hall,” comment, which was over the line.

    • #144
    • January 23, 2017 at 3:26 pm
  25. Profile photo of Petty Boozswha Member

    Patrick McClure (View Comment):

    Petty Boozswha (View Comment):
    He and I are both still unforgiving of those that had an obligation to stop this fundementally unfit con artist but refused to do so. I do not think he begrudges those, like VDH, who accepted Trump after all alternatives were exhausted.

    I think he very much begrudges people who voted for President Trump, including VDH, whether we voted reluctantly to stop Hillary or enthusiastically because we thought he would be the best person for the job. And no one had any obligation to you, or to anyone else, to vote the way you wanted them to vote. But go ahead and remain unforgiving of those who owe you nothing.

    At the beginning of the podcast Victor was described by Lileks as someone who supported Trump during the primaries. Later when he, Victor, explained that he supported Walker, then Rubio and Trump only when all the others were eliminated Jay’s demeanor was much more subdued.

    • #145
    • January 23, 2017 at 3:41 pm
  26. Profile photo of Blue Yeti Admin

    Umbra Fractus (View Comment):

    Karl Nittinger (View Comment):
    There are actually people in this comment thread proposing that there be a code of conduct for commentators on podcasts because the opinions expressed by some commentators on the podcasts are in opposition to their own? Is this The Onion or something? That was really just parody, right? I mean, right?

    I’m pretty sure the CoC discussion is based on the, “Beer hall,” comment, which was over the line.

    Perhaps, but it’s not a CoC violation.

    • #146
    • January 23, 2017 at 3:49 pm
  27. Profile photo of Mike LaRoche Thatcher

    Did I Make 6 Comments or Only 5 (View Comment):

    Ario IronStar (View Comment):

    Blue Yeti (View Comment):

    To that end, some of what I’ve read here is not conducive or exemplary of smart and civil conversation. Let’s not forget that basically, we’re all on the same side here. Can we please strive more to act like it?

    I understand your call to keep things civil. Comments can be blunt and sharp even when not prompted by the incendiary.

    However, Jay’s behavior is beyond the pale. It would be one thing for Jay to thus attack Trump while being charitable to his supporters as misguided. But he is equally vicious to Trump’s supporters, even very reluctant supporters. He even lashed out at James, who is to a great extent on the same side (James is evidently insufficiently uncivil).

    If a member persistently behaved insultingly as Jay has, he would have been banned long ago. Jay certainly does not think we are on the same side here. He has said so explicitly, persistently, over an extended period. If you are serious, then a quiet conversation with Jay is in order.

    Has anyone seen Zubrin lately?

    He’s binge-watching episodes of Hogan’s Heroes, no doubt.

    • #147
    • January 23, 2017 at 4:03 pm
  28. Profile photo of Fred Houstan Member

    It’s an admittedly trivial question, but I must ask. Why is Rob’s visage incorporated into the photo?

    Is this the sports-equivalent of, um, retiring a… face?

    • #148
    • January 23, 2017 at 4:36 pm
  29. Profile photo of Bryan G. Stephens Reagan

    Blue Yeti (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Blue Yeti (View Comment):

    Ario IronStar (View Comment):
    However, Jay’s behavior is beyond the pale. It would be one thing for Jay to thus attack Trump while being charitable to his supporters as misguided. But he is equally vicious to Trump’s supporters, even very reluctant supporters. He even lashed out at James, who is to a great extent on the same side (James is evidently insufficiently uncivil).

    If a member persistently behaved insultingly as Jay has, he would have been banned long ago. Jay certainly does not think we are on the same side here. He has said so explicitly, persistently, over an extended period. If you are serious, then a quiet conversation with Jay is in order.

    I disagree with your contention that Jay’s behavior “is beyond the pale.” He has criticized Trump. He has made general observations about some Trump supporters. That’s it. Listening to Jay on a podcast is optional. Many of you in this thread have said you stopped listening to his show months ago. Your choice.

    More importantly, Jay Nordlinger is not a Ricochet member. He’s not interacting with other members, he’s not breaking any of the rules here. You don’t like him? Don’t listen to him or read him. Easy.

    Blue Yeti (View Comment):

    Patrick McClure (View Comment):

    Ario IronStar (View Comment):
    @peterrobinson

    The position of your employees with regard to the members is that contributors can insult members with impunity. Is the site you wished to build?

    This was one of the things I thought immediately after reading what @Blueyeti said. Along with wondering why the CoC doesn’t apply to contributors who pay nothing, but does apply to members, who are the sites monetary support. It should apply to both.

    The CoC applies to contributors and to podcasters. There are no exceptions.

    Those two statements (in bold) appear to say different things. I am not sure I agree that Jay has violated the CoC. However, the first quote appears to have understood by more than one person to say the CoC does not apply to contributors. In the second one, you say it does apply very clearly. Can you please clarify your first statement, so that we can have a better understanding of what your meant?

    What I meant is that Jay is not jostling in the comments section, responding to individuals. He’s making general statements describing voting blocks or other large groups. You amy be a Trump supporter and disagree with his descriptions. But that doesn’t mean he broke the CoC.

    Thanks for the clarification.

    • #149
    • January 23, 2017 at 5:07 pm
  30. Profile photo of Concretevol Thatcher

    Did I Make 6 Comments or Only 5 (View Comment):
    However, Jay’s behavior is beyond the pale. It would be one thing for Jay to thus attack Trump while being charitable to his supporters as misguided. But he is equally vicious to Trump’s supporters, even very reluctant supporters. He even lashed out at James, who is to a great extent on the same side (James is evidently insufficiently uncivil).

    Dude, to use the word “vicious” to describe Jay Nordlinger is pretty laughable. He doesn’t seem to me to have a vicious bone in his body. Lol

    • #150
    • January 23, 2017 at 8:07 pm
  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5
  6. 6
  7. 7