Yes, Mona and Jay talk about Kate Smith, recently the victim of a terrible injustice. But they don’t play “God Bless America” at the end. They have Kate Smith in “I’ll Be Seeing You,” that classic (1938) by Fain and Kahal. In the course of the ’cast, they talk about Venezuela, Trump, Mueller, Bernie, and other topics that seize attention.

Subscribe to Need to Know in iTunes (and leave a 5-star review, please!), or by RSS feed. For all our podcasts in one place, subscribe to the Ricochet Audio Network Superfeed in iTunes or by RSS feed.

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

There are 20 comments.

  1. JuliaBlaschke Coolidge

    Sorry Mona, but I much prefer Jay’s analysis of Barr and Mueller. You are upset that Barr didn’t call Trump out for all the stupid things he says and does. Well that’s not his job. He released the pertinent information from the report – that there was no evidence of conspiracy with the Russians and that there was insufficient evidence to recommend indictment for obstruction. Then he waited to make sure that grand jury testimony and sources were protected in very limited redactions and released the entire, damning, report. It does indeed show that Trump is everything you (and I) believe he is. That he is a very foolish, vain, arrogant man. But we already knew that. The voters already know that and they voted for him anyway. And with a booming economy that would certainly not have happened under Hillary – they were right! 

    Now you say you want a decent conservative to emerge to replace Trump. Well so do I. But, unless Trump resigns, we sure as heck aren’t going to get one in 2020. I agree with Jay that there is not one of the many Democrats running that I could vote for. Biden is the best of them and that’s not saying much! I will not vote for a lunatic, socialist, anti semite, trans gender crazy, infanticide tolerating, ignorant fool and that is how I see the Democrats running. I’d rather have Trump with all his craziness and pray that the “C” team can keep him in line and 3.6% unemployment than that parade of horrible people. You said they are not all like that. Pray tell, which one isn’t?

    As it stands I will vote for Biden in the Democrat Primary as he is the least bad and then Trump in the General. I don’t see that I have any other choice.

     

    • #1
    • May 3, 2019, at 7:40 PM PDT
    • 6 likes
  2. I Walton Member

    I wanted to give her another chance, so I listened, but she is who she is. One point she makes early provides insights; she points out that leadership is key and that it requires education and sophistication which ordinary folk lack, then she goes over recent historical monsters, all sophisticated leaders who spoke for the people. No connection drawn by either of them. Both express the view that Trump should be supportive of Maduro because he gets along so well with other dictators. They simply do not grasp who Trump is or what he is doing. I think there is an intellectual blindness among many, especially the very bright, who have always been writers who have never worked in the real world making things or doing things that require some degree of hands on or working with ordinary folks who do what they do well and competently. President’s Trump lacks their articulate sophistication, like a great many very successful doers in contrast to writers. Thinkers and writers should be able to bridge the gap, but these two don’t seem to.

    • #2
    • May 4, 2019, at 5:38 AM PDT
    • 4 likes
  3. Franco Member

    JuliaBlaschke (View Comment):

    Sorry Mona, but I much prefer Jay’s analysis of Barr and Mueller. You are upset that Barr didn’t call Trump out for all the stupid things he says and does. Well that’s not his job. He released the pertinent information from the report – that there was no evidence of conspiracy with the Russians and that there was insufficient evidence to recommend indictment for obstruction. Then he waited to make sure that grand jury testimony and sources were protected in very limited redactions and released the entire, damning, report

    …..

    But we already knew that. The voters already know that and they voted for him anyway. And with a booming economy that would certainly not have happened under Hillary – they were right!

    Now you say you want a decent conservative to emerge to replace Trump. Well so do I. But, unless Trump resigns, we sure as heck aren’t going to get one in 2020. I agree with Jay that there is not one of the many Democrats running that I could vote for. Biden is the best of them and that’s not saying much! I will not vote for a lunatic, socialist, anti semite, trans gender crazy, infanticide tolerating, ignorant fool and that is how I see the Democrats running. I’d rather have Trump with all his craziness and pray that the “C” team can keep him in line and 3.6% unemployment than that parade of horrible people. You said they are not all like that. Pray tell, which one isn’t?

    ..

     

    I’m not sure how any “decent” conservative can possibly emerge to replace Trump until this faction of conservatives, loyal primarily to decorum and artifice over policy and actual results, fades away.

    For such a person to “emerge” he will have to attack Trump. He can’t just be for pretty much everything Trump is for policy-wise ( perhaps different on trade – but good luck with that… and different foreign policy priorities – ditto) and expect to, you know, win.

    These people are hemorrhaging credibility as a) people who understand basic politics b) people who care about advancing conservative issues c) people who understand basic American civics ( the job of prosecutors for example)

    Any Trump alternative, regardless of when, or how, will naturally have the backing of the Bulwarkians and all the same people who were rejected and exposed ( and who also then threw in with the Democrat resistance movement, further aggravating their predicament) beginning with the Tea Party movement and culminating in the election of Trump, the retirement or defeat of dozens of establishment Republicans and the vindication of the tactics for which this faction begged for decades. Their suspicions will be rightly raised based on who promotes such a candidate. Do these people think we are that stupid? That BillKristols Jen Rubins Mitt Romney’s candidate will be worthy of our vote no matter what he promises us? And that such a candidate will win against a Democrat anyway? 

     

    • #3
    • May 4, 2019, at 6:38 AM PDT
    • 4 likes
  4. JuliaBlaschke Coolidge

    “And that such a candidate will win against a Democrat anyway?”

    Someone like Nikki Haley? Yes, I believe she would win in a landslide against the rogue’s gallery the Democrats are coming up with. But she would need Trump to resign and bestow his blessing and Trump would never do that. 

    • #4
    • May 4, 2019, at 8:49 AM PDT
    • 2 likes
  5. Ida Claire Member

    JuliaBlaschke (View Comment):

    “And that such a candidate will win against a Democrat anyway?”

    Someone like Nikki Haley? Yes, I believe she would win in a landslide against the rogue’s gallery the Democrats are coming up with. But she would need Trump to resign and bestow his blessing and Trump would never do that.

    I’ll happily support Nikki Haley in 2024, but until then I look forward to 4 more years of Trump! Mona (and others) may not wish to share their Chablis with him, but he has not trespassed against the Constitution and America is humming along tikety boo.

    • #5
    • May 4, 2019, at 11:04 AM PDT
    • 4 likes
  6. Profile Photo Member

    Franco: “this faction of conservatives, loyal primarily to decorum and artifice over policy and actual results, fades away.”

    Love that phrase – great job. 

    • #6
    • May 4, 2019, at 11:13 AM PDT
    • 3 likes
  7. Franco Member

    Ida Claire (View Comment):

    JuliaBlaschke (View Comment):

    “And that such a candidate will win against a Democrat anyway?”

    Someone like Nikki Haley? Yes, I believe she would win in a landslide against the rogue’s gallery the Democrats are coming up with. But she would need Trump to resign and bestow his blessing and Trump would never do that.

    I’ll happily support Nikki Haley in 2024, but until then I look forward to 4 more years of Trump! Mona (and others) may not wish to share their Chablis with him, but he has not trespassed against the Constitution and America is humming along tikety boo.

    I think I’m going to be supporting whoever the likes of Mona Charen despise the most who’s still on the right. I might not even have to qualify it that way, because they will probably never despise a lefty as much as they would someone who threatens them from the right. 

    They clearly would take Hillary over Trump, even after he’s proven to be a defender of faith, the unborn, the Supreme Court and lesser judges, and Israel while cutting taxes and regulations. This tells us all we need to know.

     

    • #7
    • May 4, 2019, at 11:33 AM PDT
    • 2 likes
  8. JuliaBlaschke Coolidge

    Ida Claire (View Comment):

    JuliaBlaschke (View Comment):

    “And that such a candidate will win against a Democrat anyway?”

    Someone like Nikki Haley? Yes, I believe she would win in a landslide against the rogue’s gallery the Democrats are coming up with. But she would need Trump to resign and bestow his blessing and Trump would never do that.

    I’ll happily support Nikki Haley in 2024, but until then I look forward to 4 more years of Trump! Mona (and others) may not wish to share their Chablis with him, but he has not trespassed against the Constitution and America is humming along tikety boo.

    I’d happily support her in 2020.

    • #8
    • May 4, 2019, at 1:54 PM PDT
    • 2 likes
  9. Eugene Kriegsmann Member

    The glass is half empty or half full. With Mona the glass has finger prints all over it. I can’t listen to this podcast anymore.

    • #9
    • May 4, 2019, at 4:28 PM PDT
    • 2 likes
  10. Jim Wright Coolidge

    I still find value in the show; the Kate Smith segment, for example, was excellent. You don’t have to love Trump to find the Trump-bashing tiresome, and I agree with @Julia that Jay’s take on Barr is closer to mine.

    If there’s a silver lining, it’s that Jay and Mona can disagree with each other, often vehemently, with civility. I think civility is a good thing. I like Arthur Brooks’ efforts in this regard. But when politics is a cesspool, we do sometimes need a Mike Rowe on our side, willing to do the dirty jobs that keep the town running.

    We can wince at Trump’s insult-comic demeanor. But in hardball terms, is Mitch McConnell or Mike Pence any less of a villain to the Left? Trump has the bizarro virtue of being willing to embody whatever smears the Left applies to all Republicans, and revel in it. The Left didn’t just cry wolf; they cast him in the role. And to their horror, he won. And keeps on winning.

    • #10
    • May 4, 2019, at 6:01 PM PDT
    • 4 likes
  11. Zafar Member

    Regarding Venezuela – people need to take into account why Chavez was so popular in Venezuela. Not to take away from criticism of economic mismanagement or the unrealistic approach of non-market-based solutions, but there was a reason that so many people in Venezuela voted for him in the first place, and why he remains so highly thought of in the country. 

    What the American Left (or Right) thinks about him is irrelevant compared to that.

    From a letter published in the NYT:

    There is a reason why he was elected president; why poor people believed in him with passion and devotion. The signs were there in front of us. We were blind or simply did not want to see them.

    • #11
    • May 4, 2019, at 8:29 PM PDT
    • Like
  12. Steven Iverson Member

    No Mona, Barr did not lie about Mueller’s reasoning in not deciding to find Trump obstructed justice.

    Barr explained to the Senate Judiciary Committee that “Special counsel Mueller stated three times to us in that meeting in response to our questioning that he emphatically was not saying that but for the OLC opinion, he would have found obstruction,”

    talkingpointsmemo.com/news/barr-reveals-new-details-meeting-mueller-about-obstruction-case

    • #12
    • May 4, 2019, at 10:13 PM PDT
    • 5 likes
  13. EtCarter Listener

    Ida Claire (View Comment):

    JuliaBlaschke (View Comment):

    “And that such a candidate will win against a Democrat anyway?”

    Someone like Nikki Haley? Yes, I believe she would win in a landslide against the rogue’s gallery the Democrats are coming up with. But she would need Trump to resign and bestow his blessing and Trump would never do that.

    I’ll happily support Nikki Haley in 2024, but until then I look forward to 4 more years of Trump! Mona (and others) may not wish to share their Chablis with him, but he has not trespassed against the Constitution and America is humming along tikety boo.

     

    • #13
    • May 5, 2019, at 10:31 AM PDT
    • 1 like
  14. EtCarter Listener

    @juliablaschke,

    Some things that have made me happy so far include saving an untold amount of money by pulling out of “chicken-littles travelling weather and medicine show”, judicial appointments that will potentially be a stabilizing force for many years to come, and a person who desires to vigorously pursue Margaret Sangers eugenic goals via Planned Parenthood at the expense of tax-payers not the President of the U.S.A.

    I had rather be pondering the good versus the best choice for a conservative pres, than be those pondering whether to spend all the time and energy it takes to win an election on impeaching after the recent two year humiliation of the 24hour media. Truly, a tiger or the lady choice for the prog-left.

    • #14
    • May 5, 2019, at 10:44 AM PDT
    • 1 like
  15. Taras Coolidge

    @juliablaschke — You hit it out of the park with comment #1.

    I will only point out that the unwritten or virtual last sentence of the Mueller Report is “the prosecution rests“. And a biased prosecution as well: if Mueller testifies, perhaps Republicans will force him to explain why he did not select a more balanced, bipartisan team of investigators. (If the Democrats let them ask!)

    In other words, as a “juror” in this virtual trial, listen to both sides before you decide.

    • #15
    • May 5, 2019, at 10:14 PM PDT
    • 1 like
  16. contrarian Member

    I Walton (View Comment):
    Both express the view that Trump should be supportive of Maduro because he gets along so well with other dictators. They simply do not grasp who Trump is or what he is doing. I think there is an intellectual blindness among many, especially the very bright, who have always been writers

    I too found this ridiculous. There’s no reason to be surprised about Trump’s position on Maduro unless you just fundamentally misunderstand Trump. That everything comes down to flattery is just silly. Trump sees Venezuela as posing an immediate threat to America. That is the difference between this dictatorship and the others.

    JuliaBlaschke (View Comment):
    You are upset that Barr didn’t call Trump out for all the stupid things he says and does. Well that’s not his job. He released the pertinent information from the report

    I agree. I was appalled by what Mona said about Barr. The left and the media are attacking a good man and she’s joining in. This is like Kavanaugh. I disagree with Walton that you can attribute these mistakes to intellectual blindness. I think that what likely has happened is that she has largely withdrawn from having frequent and serious discussion with people sympathetic to Trump and instead speaks about politics mostly with other Trump critics.

    The critics developed a weird mythology about Mueller which turned out to be incompatible with his proper role. He was supposed to investigate Trump and his campaign, and then based on what they found determine whether there’s sufficient evidence to prosecute people. Mueller’s role was not to deal out a moral reckoning. He found no evidence of conspiracy or coordination with Russia. He should have said so without going into detail about all the connections to Russia and dealings that were ethically suspect.

    Mueller is law enforcement, not the ethics police. Similarly he should have said that there was insufficient evidence to pursue a case of obstruction. Instead, Mueller did the same thing that Comey did wrong (not counting adding intent as an element) with the Clinton e-mail investigation. He didn’t stop at saying that there wasn’t enough evidence to prosecute, but detailed all the things she did wrong that didn’t rise to the level of a crime. As you said, that isn’t his job.

    • #16
    • May 6, 2019, at 6:04 AM PDT
    • 3 likes
  17. milkchaser Member

    I Walton (View Comment):
    President’s Trump lacks their articulate sophistication, like a great many very successful doers in contrast to writers.

    I think his simple use of language is a persona that he uses because his intent is to communicate to the vast majority of speakers — not those who overvalue prose.

    • #17
    • May 6, 2019, at 6:40 AM PDT
    • 2 likes
  18. Joe D. Lincoln

    “Should have had measles as a child”? The vaccine has been in wide spread use in the USA since the early 60s (I think), so I would you would have had the measles vaccine back then. I don’t know if it wears out or anything though.

    • #18
    • May 6, 2019, at 6:48 AM PDT
    • Like
  19. contrarian Member

    Mona’s claim that Barr has been corrupted and lying about Mueller’s decision being based on DOJ policy is pretty ridiculous, although I’ve found that it’s a very popular talking point on the left.

    Steven Iverson (View Comment):
    Barr explained to the Senate Judiciary Committee that “Special counsel Mueller stated three times to us in that meeting in response to our questioning that he emphatically was not saying that but for the OLC opinion, he would have found obstruction,”

    Exactly. Consider what it would mean if If Mona were right. It would mean that Barr perjured himself, and everyone in the country will know he’s guilty of a crime as soon as Mueller gets asked about it by House Judiciary Committee members 9 days from now. Put aside that I think she slandered Barr regarding his character; does she think that being around Trump magically transformed him into a moron? There are legitimate reasons for everything Barr did that she objected to, but folks won’t know what those reasons are if they have only been engaging with people who hate Trump.

    Franco (View Comment):
    I’m not sure how any “decent” conservative can possibly emerge to replace Trump until this faction of conservatives, loyal primarily to decorum and artifice over policy and actual results, fades away.

    I’m willing to give the most charitable interpretation to their position. If one feels that Trump is very bad on foreign policy and/or trade, and if one or both of those take precedence over all the issues Trump is good on, then you can find him to be unacceptable without just being turned off by his personal behavior, demeanor, and objectionable statements. If you are rejecting Trump based on these latter things, as David French seems to do, then I think you’re being totally irrational – and frankly, pretty sanctimonious in deeming yourself more moral than all your friends who will vote for him in 2020. Jay and Mona, on the other hand, really do seem to prioritize foreign policy above all else. It’s possible that this (and not Trump’s personal failings) is what ultimately motivates Them. If so, I don’t agree with that position or think it’s the right one, but I do see it as a rational basis for opposing Trump

    Ida Claire (View Comment):
    I’ll happily support Nikki Haley in 2024, but until then I look forward to 4 more years of Trump!

    Agreed, although I’m really worried about 2020. If Trumwins the democrats can’t dismiss support for him as just an ultimately insignificant aberration that benefited from Russian interference. Instead, they would have to accept the support as and meaningful. If he loses… expect the left and media to try to ferret out Trump supporters and give them all the Covington Catholic treatment. Democrats I’ve known personally and respected have been radicalized the last 2.5 years. I have former friends who frighten me.

    • #19
    • May 6, 2019, at 6:52 AM PDT
    • 2 likes
  20. Taras Coolidge

    If I call Mona Charen the Madame Defarge of the Never-Trump movement, does that violate the terms of service? (I think I should get some points back for not using the phrase, “Lord Haw-Haw conservatives” ;)

    At some point every Never-Trumper comes to a crossroads, where he must decide either to make the bitter admission that he was wrong about Trump or, instead, double down on the Trump hatred.

    For some people, admitting they were wrong is almost impossible. Like conspiracy theorists, as plausible reasons to oppose Trump crumble, one after another, they substitute new, increasingly implausible reasons. Thus, the long article in the Weekly Standard, a few months before its demise, which argued that Trump’s words were more important than his actions.

    For Mona Charen, it’s that she would rather believe the entire Republican Party — now including Bob Barr — has been mind-controlled and corrupted by Hypnotrump. (In the sci-fi movie playing in her head, she, of course, is one of the few immune.)

    Jonah Goldberg — admittedly, not quite in the same category as Charen — names his podcast “The Remnant”, which tells us he is pleased to think of himself as one of the last men of integrity in a corrupt world. In his debate last year with Charles Kesler, he creates a new logical fallacy: the anonymous ad hominem. That is, he smears Trump supporters by association with lying hypocrites who, he says, privately revealed their lying hypocrisy to him, but which he will not name. (I also learned, for the first time, that Goldberg had a personal beef with Trump which — it doesn’t occur to him — may be affecting his judgment.)

    • #20
    • May 6, 2019, at 11:24 AM PDT
    • 1 like