Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Richard Epstein examines efforts by the new Republican Congress to restrict the power of federal regulators, and explains the history of how unelected administrators came to hold so much political power. At the conclusion of this podcast, Professor Epstein states that President Trump is “heading for disaster” and calls for him to resign.
Subscribe to The Libertarian 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.
Well, this comment section is sure to be uncontroversial.
Note:
Personal attack.Someone’s unhinged.I see Ricochet has officially jumped the shark.
Unelected Professor Epstein is “heading for disaster”. He should resign.
By the way, is there an official Ricochet endorsement of Professor Epstein’s call for resignation or is this just an exercise in providing fun and laughs for their membership?
Epstein is not Ricochet. I’m sure Ricochet could stop publishing his podcasts without it doing even a scrap of harm to him.
I haven’t listened to the podcast yet, but Epstein always has valuable things to say. Responses to the substance of his comments would be much more interesting — and, if persuasive, also helpful in changing people’s minds — than attacks on Ricochet.
From what? His job as a law professor and senior fellow at the Hoover Institution? How is he heading for disaster for making a podcast setting forth his views on the EO? That is exactly his role as an intellectual. He is not a politician or even a journalist. He is an academic.
Ricochet does not make official endorsements (or, if it ever did, it predates my time here).
Fair enough.
Ricochet doesn’t officially endorse Prof. Epstein’s views or your comment. But we host them both.
I don’t understand the purpose of calling for Trump to resign. He’s clearly not going to do this. The respect I had for conservative pundits is largely gone (VDH is an exception to this).
Was there a purpose in calling for Obama to resign as many did?
Just to let everyone know, we also just posted a VDH podcast.
Excellent podcast! It’s nice to hear a plurality of views on the current political issues of this weekend from podcasts all hosted by this site. I’ve listened to the Three Martini Lunch, Commentary Magazine Podcast, and the Libertarian podcast so far today and all three of them have presented very different points of view on these events. Very helpful for me to weigh, together with my own personal opinions and feelings, to help me make sense of everything that’s been going on these crazy last few days.
It was a problem for Obama since so many liberals called for him to resign (yes, that was a sarcastic remark).
I don’t understand why the source of the calls for resignation matter.
Wow,I’ve never heard Richard so angry. I enjoyed the podcast, though I think he’s dreaming about Trump resigning. He’s either staying the full four years or he’s getting forcibly tossed out on his rear. I wouldn’t bet on the latter happening, though.
I honestly don’t remember anyone ever calling for Obama to resign, although I’m sure it happened. I certainly don’t think that I ever did. Why would he resign? He was the president. I did think there was grounds for impeachment.
I think it does matter, though, that conservatives are kicking at Trump’s shins constantly. I find it very disheartening. I think there’s a huge difference between VDH and Larry Kudlow calmly expressing honest policy disagreements with Trump and the completely unhinged reaction to Trump from some on the Right, accusing him of all manner of crazy things. There’s a way to be taken seriously and there’s a way to be dismissed as a reactionary kook. I should know — I usually opt for the latter. :-/ (Hey, I’m passionate and I get angry! I still love you all.)
I agree. It’s nice to see that there is still a healthy amount of debate on the right.
How is “I think he should resign” a serious intellectual position?
There has never been a President in history who has considered resigning within 2 weeks of being elected. Particularly not while pursing policies that his voters support.
I think this is going poorly and he should change course is a reasonable position.
I think this is going wrong so he should resign, is hyperbolic and would never actually occur. It is an unserious statement.
I haven’t listened to the podcast, so this is based on the description. I’ve always considered myself libertarian-leaning. I’ve always voted third party, often but not always Libertarian Party. I didn’t vote this year because I felt Gary Johnson was (how do I say this without it being labeled a personal attack?) less than desirable.
That said, I’ve always been aware that libertarianism is a philosophy primarily targeted toward domestic and size-of-government-issues. It has no coherent arguments for either foreign-policy beyond “if we leave them alone they’ll leave us alone” or immigration beyond “let the world in and may the best man win.” I’m pretty much a “leave them alone” person, but I’m aware the world doesn’t function the way I’d like. And I’m as much for competition as anyone, but mass immigration into a welfare state is insanity, even if you’re willing to happily allow large swaths of your citizenry to flounder, which Americans won’t do and thus is why we have a welfare state in the first place. And that’s not even addressing the issue of letting in people who want to do Americans physical harm and who cannot possibly be vetted.
My advice to libertarians (even very smart and learned ones) is to leave topics such as immigration and foreign policy alone. You just wind up embarrassing yourself.
delete
To me it seems like that is his position, but he has no faith that Trump will change things, thus expressing his opinion that he hopes the President would resign. I’m not calling for his resignation, but mobilizing so many people against you (mostly, but definitely not solely from people on the political right), when you campaigned on the position of getting Washington to work again sure doesn’t seem like a wise course. I think that is what Professor Epstein was getting at when he referred to the chaos that is going on. That and of course the perception that communication within the administration seems to be a bit clumsy and lacking to say the least (see the course reversals/clarifications regarding the immigration executive order).
Maybe, but it is his own unforced error. Once you decide to call for the Presidents resignation you have gone too far and will not convince people that you are making a serious argument. (I am assuming no impeachable offense).
It has never happened before and there is no reason to believe that it would actually happen now. If he is actually concerned it would be best to make a strong case for change and leave it at that. Taking the extra step of calling for resignation does not help the argument.
Funny, it’s a Ricochet hosted podcast or am I hallucinating? And I think calls for Trumps resignation after , what 10 days, might be just a little extreme, even for a “center right” website.
That’s a great point. It would surely be unprecedented and is probably unrealistic.
A lot of unforced errors seem to be going on all around Washington right now. :)
This argument is tiresome. Ricochet hosts your comments and any posts you decide to put up – does that make your position the official Ricochet position? Its a conversation site.
I agreed with Richard on a few points in his rant. His characterization of how the EO surfaced, however, is incorrect and my guess based on shoddy reporting in the NYTimes, WAPO and even the Wall St. Journal which indicated the DHS Secretary was surprised by the EO and upset by it – Kelly categorically denied that this morning. Richard says essentially that it was more or less an edict handed down by Trump without warning or crafting by some of the affected agencies. Secretary Kelly and his team at DHS pretty much shot the notion down at their press conference this morning (as did Sean Spicer later) when it became clear that the effort to craft the EO started right after the inauguration and was a collaboration with White House advisors, attorneys, DHS and Customs and Border Control and the DoJ’s Department of Legal Counsel who eventually blessed the language of the final version.
Aside from some of the issues on how the EO was initially implemented, I’m curious where Richard’s outrage was when Obama and other presidents before him instituted temporary halts to immigration from various countries, as well.
On the question of the National Security Council – Sean Spicer made it clear that any of the high-ranking generals would be welcome at any meeting of the NSC at any time. Further, other presidential advisors and chiefs of staff have had seats at these meetings in previous administrations but the news media has conveniently downplayed that fact. Again, Richard seems to be overreacting based on news sources that are ginning up phony controversies that Bannon, unlike other presidential advisors, will presumably have more authority in these meetings.
Finally, aside from Trump’s ceaseless boasting that Mexico will pay for the wall, Richard made the astounding remark that a wall on the southern border will do nothing to help secure the border and make it less porous…even though Congress in 2006 had agreed to strengthen the border and allocate the necessary funds to do so, but then failed on their own commitment. The vast majority of conservatives even prior to Trump’s announced candidacy had been demanding that before comprehensive immigration reform was enacted in Congress that the effort to secure the southern border had to be completed first. (or as Sen. McCain said “Build the dang wall!”) Now, that a President Trump wants to complete the effort, in Richard’s mind, it’s a waste of money because illegal aliens and drug runners – like Hamas has done and attempts to do in Israel – will simply dig tunnels under the wall. Interesting that Bibi Netanyahu articulated the other day that a wall on America’s southern border was a good idea. He ought to know.
A more enlightening podcast would have included regular John Yoo who I believe would have taken issue with some of Richard’s wilder assertions. Sorry, Troy but disappointed that you chose not to challenge Richard and let him essentially run amok.
We’re recording a live Law Talk this Friday at UC San Bernardino. I suspect this topic will be on the docket.