Beholding the government-shutdown fiasco, Jay recalls an old term: “goo-goo.” He and Mona discuss “the wall and the cave,” the Democratic field so far, and “The Three Amigos.” They also ask if the U.S. remains serious about NATO. Mona recounts a personal experience of Roger Stone.

Music from this week’s show: Fazil Say plays his famous jazz version of Mozart’s “Rondo alla turca,” live and in concert.

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.

Podcast listeners: Now become a Ricochet member for only $2.50 a month! Join and see what you’ve been missing.

There are 7 comments.

  1. Member

    Good Show, Guys!

    I never did like Stone. What a nasty man. Peter somewhat defends him, because of the alleged nastiness that use to come his way. I say that it is great to defend yourself, and call out the people who are trying to hurt you. But that is you do it. Not Trump’s way. Or his defenders. Which is to be even nastier in return. Something one of you said on the Podcast: He doesn’t seem to realize he is President now. And a certain dignity is expected. That is probably the biggest thing I have against him. It is time to grow up!

    • #1
    • January 26, 2019 at 10:54 am
    • 1 like
  2. Member

    Technical problems. That’s what kept Mona from weighing in on the whole Covington Catholic/March for Life imbroglio.

    Jay, presumably, had no technical problems, yet he seemed to have no opinion about the whole thing either.

    An incident that exposed (as starkly as any in recent months) the rabid mania for social justice that so animates the Left, and yet Jay and Mona had nothing – – zippo! – – to say about it.

    Interesting.

    • #2
    • January 26, 2019 at 12:10 pm
    • 2 likes
  3. Member

    Actually, to be fair, if either of them had weighed in on the whole Covington Catholic thing, it would have been Mona, and the exchange would have gone something like this:

    “Blah blah blah blah the media was so quick to pile on and accuse those boys of racism blah blah blah blah and yes, some of the writers have since apologized and removed their tweets, but not nearly enough of them blah blah blah blah. It’s all so sad. What do you think, Jay?“

    ”I agree.”

    ”All right, let’s move on. Jay, you had something about a blind flutist who’s making her debut at the New Composers Festival in Vancouver?”

    “That’s correct, Mona. Her name is Dorothea Voss. She’s 26, and blah blah blah blah…”

    • #3
    • January 26, 2019 at 12:25 pm
    • 3 likes
  4. Member

    Did I hear Mona say that it’s great that we have a justice system that has maintained its integrity?

    VDH would disagree. (quoting)

    But what exactly are the federal criteria that adjudicate when and where lying under oath to Congress or to federal authorities is a prosecutable crime? Is it perceived useful only in Robert Muller’s hunt for incriminating evidence against Trump, as in the case of Michael Flynn?

    After all, nearly the entire Obama administration intelligence hierarchy not only lied under oath to Congress, but in some cases confessed to such.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/the-issue-is-not-roger-stones-lurid-personal-life-but-equality-under-the-law/

    • #4
    • January 27, 2019 at 7:16 pm
    • 1 like
  5. Lincoln

    Man criticizing the people who want to scale back the empire on the grounds of ‘what about never ending self defense’, while simultaneously not wanting a wall, complaining about no deficit hawks, etc. The defense budget is still at least 25% of federal government expenditures – and that number is probably low since I believe a lot of war spending is off books as well intelligence spending. Some of think that scaling back is a means to provide for future defense so that we have the ability to pay for future problems. We also think that the minuscule amount needed for a wall may aid in self defense.

    • #5
    • January 28, 2019 at 10:09 am
    • Like
  6. Lincoln

    filmklassik (View Comment):

    Technical problems. That’s what kept Mona from weighing in on the whole Covington Catholic/March for Life imbroglio.

    Jay, presumably, had no technical problems, yet he seemed to have no opinion about the whole thing either.

    An incident that exposed (as starkly as any in recent months) the rabid mania for social justice that so animates the Left, and yet Jay and Mona had nothing – – zippo! – – to say about it.

    Interesting.

    Jay did weigh in on it, on twitter, and subsequently deleted his post – read details here:

    https://www.steynonline.com/9148/the-drumbeat-of-the-mob

    • #6
    • January 28, 2019 at 11:47 am
    • 1 like
  7. Member

    Joe D. (View Comment):

    filmklassik (View Comment):

    Technical problems. That’s what kept Mona from weighing in on the whole Covington Catholic/March for Life imbroglio.

    Jay, presumably, had no technical problems, yet he seemed to have no opinion about the whole thing either.

    An incident that exposed (as starkly as any in recent months) the rabid mania for social justice that so animates the Left, and yet Jay and Mona had nothing – – zippo! – – to say about it.

    Interesting.

    Jay did weigh in on it, on twitter, and subsequently deleted his post – read details here:

    https://www.steynonline.com/9148/the-drumbeat-of-the-mob

    Just read it. A fascinating situation and here’s why: If Jay weighed in and then deleted his tweet — as he obviously did — then it stands to reason he has firm opinions about both the event itself and his (and his colleagues’) precipitous reaction to it, right?

    Of course it does.

    And yet, and yet …

    Jay said nothing about this on the podcast. Not a word to Mona along the lines of, “To be fair, Mona, I was one of the journalists who first leaped into the fray that day, and I quickly came to regret it, and here’s why …”

    Nothing about that.

    Crickets.

    He wouldn’t talk about it.

    Question: Has Jay since written about his hasty and — as it turns out — misguided reaction to what occurred that day?

    Because if he hasn’t — if he has neither written nor talked about it — then we are left with a rather unsettling truth that comes as no real surprise to those who’ve been listening to this podcast for the last couple of years:

    Namely, that the Jay of 2019 will quickly — happily — eagerly! — weigh in at the first sign of Right wing hatred and Xenophobia.

    The fire alarm sounds, and Jay is leaping onto the fire poles.

    But when it turns out to be a false alarm ginned up by Social Justice Warriors eager to find Nazi-level racism in every Right/Left encounter … Jay can’t bring himself to opine about it. Not the way the Jay of 2015 could.

    He is constitutionally incapable of offering more than (at best!) a Gary Cooper “Yup” or “I agree.”

    So he displays eager volubility when the Right screws up and shows its “true” hateful colors.

    …And (at best!) Gary Cooper-style taciturnity when the Left does it.

    Swell, Jay.

    Of all the things we “need to know” about this particular podcast, that one may be the most disturbing.

    • #7
    • January 28, 2019 at 2:02 pm
    • 2 likes