Jonah’s former National Review colleague and current AEI colleague Ramesh Ponnuru joins the Remnant to suss out what in the impeachment morass and the conservative internecine wars he does and doesn’t find highly illogical. Plus, the accent contest gets a surprise late entry.

Shownotes

The Dispatch 

How you can now subscribe to The Dispatch

-Door Dash app, promo code REMNANT

Ramesh Ponnuru 

The first Ramesh Ponnuru episode

Marco Rubio’s case for “common good capitalism

Ramesh Ponnuru on “common good capitalism” 

William F. Buckley on the war on drugs

Claremont’s “Tech New Deal” 

Reviewing the output of CRB

Elliott Capital Management responds to Tucker Carlson

-Madeleine Kearns on Young Americans (first on transgender youth, next on Brexit)

The Andy Smarick episode

Subscribe to The Remnant with Jonah Goldberg in Apple Podcasts (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 Apple Podcasts or by RSS feed.

There are 10 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. rgbact Inactive

    Trumpism has broken Tucker Carlson. He’s now questioning whether the US should be against Russian expansion and whether capitalism is all that great. Whats next for him? Are we sure he’s still pro-life? This is how your brain warps in a cult where facts increasingly don’t matter.

    His hit piece against Paul Singer/Ben Sasse reads at a grade school level understanding of how corporate finance works, which is weird considering Tucker is a trust fund baby and a business owner. And much like Amari, he couldn’t debate this topic for 5 minutes….so he’ll just stick with the hit pieces for his Trumpian fanboys

    • #1
    • December 10, 2019, at 12:50 PM PST
    • 2 likes
  2. Barry Jones Thatcher

    I am struggling to understand why these guys feel the “offense” is impeachable or worthy of removal. Strikes me as being a storm in a tea cup over something that ultimately didn’t occur (no aid was with held). Could be wrong, but no one has made the case to me at all. It seems to me that the Dems are just having a hissy fit over Trump being President (after all the calls for impeachment started in November of 2015 and the intervening years have just been a never ending search to a way to make that happen, evidence not needed). Also, just out out of curiosity, what happens if Trump is impeached and removed and then still wins the election?

    • #2
    • December 10, 2019, at 1:33 PM PST
    • 2 likes
  3. Brian Wolf Coolidge

    Barry Jones (View Comment):
    Also, just out out of curiosity, what happens if Trump is impeached and removed and then still wins the election?

    If someone is impeached and removed they can’t hold office again no matter what election result there is. The only consequence of an Impeachment is that a hearing on removal must be held. If removed Mr. Trump would never again be able to president barring a constitutional amendment.

    Barry Jones (View Comment):
    I am struggling to understand why these guys feel the “offense” is impeachable or worthy of removal. Strikes me as being a storm in a tea cup over something that ultimately didn’t occur (no aid was with held).

    That case would be with holding the funds was illegal, though a pretty standard practice, Trump used his leverage gained by illegally withholding funds to get a foreign government to attack a domestic political opponent. Trump released the funds after being caught, hearing of the whistle-blower report making him appear to know that he was wrong and doing something wrong. This is also what stopped the Ukrainian Government from attacking Biden. It would be like robber has pulled out a gun and pointed it the Cashier and tells him, “Give me your money.” A bystander yells, “Hey police!” outside the store and the robber quickly puts away the gun and walks away. When caught the robber says, “Hey nothing happened there was no robbery.”

    Using the power of the US government to force a foreign power to attack domestic political opponents is the “offense” and it is impeachable. 

    The case does not convince me that either impeachment or removal is warranted. But that is the case for impeachment.

    Barry Jones (View Comment):
    It seems to me that the Dems are just having a hissy fit over Trump being President (after all the calls for impeachment started in November of 2015 and the intervening years have just been a never ending search to a way to make that happen, evidence not needed).

    This weakness in character by the Democrats is why they will never be able to remove Trump and it is likely that if they impeach it will boomerang back on them and hurt them in the next general election.

    It is all so sad and stupid.

    • #3
    • December 10, 2019, at 2:31 PM PST
    • Like
  4. Barry Jones Thatcher

    Brian Wolf (View Comment):

    Barry Jones (View Comment):
    Also, just out out of curiosity, what happens if Trump is impeached and removed and then still wins the election?

    If someone is impeached and removed they can’t hold office again no matter what election result there is. The only consequence of an Impeachment is that a hearing on removal must be held. If removed Mr. Trump would never again be able to president barring a constitutional amendment.

    Barry Jones (View Comment):
    I am struggling to understand why these guys feel the “offense” is impeachable or worthy of removal. Strikes me as being a storm in a tea cup over something that ultimately didn’t occur (no aid was with held).

    That case would be with holding the funds was illegal, though a pretty standard practice, Trump used his leverage gained by illegally withholding funds to get a foreign government to attack a domestic political opponent. Trump released the funds after being caught, hearing of the whistle-blower report making him appear to know that he was wrong and doing something wrong. This is also what stopped the Ukrainian Government from attacking Biden. It would be like robber has pulled out a gun and pointed it the Cashier and tells him, “Give me your money.” A bystander yells, “Hey police!” outside the store and the robber quickly puts away the gun and walks away. When caught the robber says, “Hey nothing happened there was no robbery.”

    Using the power of the US government to force a foreign power to attack domestic political opponents is the “offense” and it is impeachable.

    The case does not convince me that either impeachment or removal is warranted. But that is the case for impeachment.

    Barry Jones (View Comment):
    It seems to me that the Dems are just having a hissy fit over Trump being President (after all the calls for impeachment started in November of 2015 and the intervening years have just been a never ending search to a way to make that happen, evidence not needed).

    This weakness in character by the Democrats is why they will never be able to remove Trump and it is likely that if they impeach it will boomerang back on them and hurt them in the next general election.

    It is all so sad and stupid.

    What about Alcee Hastings the federal judge that was impeached and removed and then elected to Congress? Not being pushy but looking to understand…

    And from what I recall of the “transcript” of the call, Trump was referring to what Biden had just bragged about. So wanting to find out the real deal is improper just because Biden is a potential political rival? Again, just attempting to work up enough angst to care…And the government routinely withholds money from other governments until they perform to some standard so not sure how putting pause on some aid (that the Ukraine never knew was paused) is a big deal. But perhaps we are getting into the weeds on something neither of us wants to get into the weeds about – although the Hasitngs thing really does confuse me – and annoys me that someone who was removed from office(for taking bribes on cases he ruled on, no less!!!) is considered by his constituents to be worthy of election.

    • #4
    • December 10, 2019, at 2:37 PM PST
    • 2 likes
  5. WilliamDean Coolidge

    Brian Wolf (View Comment):

    If someone is impeached and removed they can’t hold office again no matter what election result there is. The only consequence of an Impeachment is that a hearing on removal must be held. If removed Mr. Trump would never again be able to president barring a constitutional amendment.

    The Senate could choose to remove him from office and not disqualify him from holding future office, though this would seem an unlikely scenario in any impeachment imo. 

    https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/09/25/congress-should-remove-trump-from-office-but-let-him-run-again-228228

    • #5
    • December 10, 2019, at 4:16 PM PST
    • 2 likes
  6. WilliamDean Coolidge

    Barry Jones (View Comment):

    What about Alcee Hastings the federal judge that was impeached and removed and then elected to Congress? Not being pushy but looking to understand…

    That’s impeaching a federal judge, which is not discussed in the constitution. Same word “impeachment,” but different process, different resulting actions against the impeached.

    • #6
    • December 10, 2019, at 10:53 PM PST
    • 2 likes
  7. rdowhower Coolidge

    I knew Jonah’s teenage brain long ago had been turned to mush by the Donald, but it’s sad to see that Ramesh has been similarly affected. I always thought he was smarter than that. As I’ve observed before, Right-wing fanatic know-nothings such as Richard Epstein think there is no “there” there. I think I’ll take someone who is a real intellectual over the opinions of pundits like these two.

    • #7
    • December 11, 2019, at 12:22 PM PST
    • Like
  8. Brian Wolf Coolidge

    Barry Jones (View Comment):
    And from what I recall of the “transcript” of the call, Trump was referring to what Biden had just bragged about. So wanting to find out the real deal is improper just because Biden is a potential political rival? Again, just attempting to work up enough angst to care

    Sure but he didn’t act like that is what he wanted. If finding out the real deal was what Trump wanted then he could have had Barr start an investigation, treaty obligations would have made Ukraine participate in the investigation and Trump could have still used his own people to pursue it. The downside is that people would have known that Trump started the investigation. By leveraging aid Trump was trying to make it look as if Ukraine started the investigation there by making the political hit more painful for Biden and giving Trump cover for his actions.

    So Trump was using foreign policy to hurt a domestic political rival. If truth of the affair was Trump’s goal he would gone about all of this a different way.

    Barry Jones (View Comment):
    And the government routinely withholds money from other governments until they perform to some standard so not sure how putting pause on some aid (that the Ukraine never knew was paused) is a big deal.

    Sure even what Trump did is fairly routine. However the aid had passed all the legal tests for corruption so Trump technically was in violation of the impounding law when he held it up, Ukraine knew the money was held up and they planned to announce an investigation as Trump asked until the whistleblower report about to be released. 

    The whole affair is pretty ugly because Trump is a clumsy politician but not impeachable. Many Presidents over centuries have flirted with the law like this. Trump was just ugly about it.

    Barry Jones (View Comment):
    lthough the Hasitngs thing really does confuse me – and annoys me that someone who was removed from office(for taking bribes on cases he ruled on, no less!!!) is considered by his constituents to be worthy of election.

    Agreed!

    • #8
    • December 11, 2019, at 1:43 PM PST
    • Like
  9. kedavis Member

    Brian Wolf (View Comment):

    Sure but he didn’t act like that is what he wanted. If finding out the real deal was what Trump wanted then he could have had Barr start an investigation, treaty obligations would have made Ukraine participate in the investigation and Trump could have still used his own people to pursue it. The downside is that people would have known that Trump started the investigation. By leveraging aid Trump was trying to make it look as if Ukraine started the investigation there by making the political hit more painful for Biden and giving Trump cover for his actions.

    So Trump was using foreign policy to hurt a domestic political rival. If truth of the affair was Trump’s goal he would gone about all of this a different way.

    Barry Jones (View Comment):
    And the government routinely withholds money from other governments until they perform to some standard so not sure how putting pause on some aid (that the Ukraine never knew was paused) is a big deal.

    Sure even what Trump did is fairly routine. However the aid had passed all the legal tests for corruption so Trump technically was in violation of the impounding law when he held it up, Ukraine knew the money was held up and they planned to announce an investigation as Trump asked until the whistleblower report about to be released.

    The whole affair is pretty ugly because Trump is a clumsy politician but not impeachable. Many Presidents over centuries have flirted with the law like this. Trump was just ugly about it.

    Barry Jones (View Comment):
    lthough the Hasitngs thing really does confuse me – and annoys me that someone who was removed from office(for taking bribes on cases he ruled on, no less!!!) is considered by his constituents to be worthy of election.

    Agreed!

    Well, he’s a Democrat. Just for starters. So, not that surprising, really.

    • #9
    • December 11, 2019, at 4:53 PM PST
    • 1 like
  10. kedavis Member

    Did I miss something? Near the end of Jonah talking to Ramesh, it sounded to me like Jonah asked Ramesh who he (Ramesh) would vote for next November, if it was Biden vs Trump. But Ramesh only said who he thought would WIN, if it was Biden vs Trump. Jonah either didn’t notice, or didn’t care.

    • #10
    • December 11, 2019, at 6:20 PM PST
    • Like