Get the Ricochet app
Ricochet will work fine in a browser on your mobile devices, but for the best experience please download our app.
John Yoo hosts this week, and adds to his appalling hypocrisy with his admission that he is teaching a class this summer on the Law of the Sea treaty, even as he continues to embargo any and all discussion of the Clean Air Act!
Otherwise the gang in is happy spirits because we're resupplied with good spirits this week, as a fine whisky and wine outlet (Grapes and Grains—they don't even have a website up yet) has at last opened a superb branch nearby Steve's remote location. How fine? Steve has his eye on a 75-year-old single malt that is for sale at the mere price of $89,999. He decided to fill up his gas tank instead (this being California).
The big news of Friday was RFK Jr's endorsement of Trump, about which we have some actual reporting to offer listeners, along with our evaluations of the Democratic convention, which was anything but nomos or physis. It was pure nemesis.
Lucretia and Steve also smack John around a bit for his USA Today article on how the leftism of law schools threatens the survival of the Constitution was defective because it didn't go far enough!
Steve Hayward
Discussion (23)
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
--S. Hayward
That goes without saying.
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
I do now need a lawyer to tell me if I'm on sound ground:
As long as I do exactly as I am told, at home or abroad, in my car, my home, on or UNDER the sea, I will be able to enjoy ALL the freedoms to which, I am told by the modern Democrat Party, I am entitled... Correct?
If I am wrong I wasted a week of joy watching the DNC on parade!
What does Lucretia mean she does not celebrate Labor Day?
How more Communist can you get than spending the day drinking away your woe?
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
On Steve’s remarks on Robert F. Kennedy Jr’s long shot to be considered in the House of Representatives – if the election gets sent there under the constitution, the house can consider the top five people who received electoral votes (not popular votes).
So if the two top candidates receive 269 electoral votes (a tie), it means that there is no third candidate the house could consider, just Harris and Trump. If Kennedy manages to win a state, and no candidate receives a majority, then, under the constitution, his name would be considered by the house.
A few weeks ago (it seems longer) Kennedy gave an interview on Ben Shapiro’s Sunday program. One of his campaign promises would be, on his first day in office, to submit to congress a comprehensive bill with his laundry list of the rest of his campaign promises.
He would insist on an up or down vote on that bill. The way he phrased it, he seemed to think the president had that authority over congress. Unlike some state governors who can do this with their legislatures, the president has no authority to submit bills to congress. Under the rules of each house of congress, that’s reserved to their respective members.
And there is no way congress would give him that up and down vote. And given the naivete of that statement, it doesn’t surprise me that Kennedy thinks that all he has to do to be considered by the house would be to get a significant popular vote without receiving any electoral votes.
And Steve should have included that clarification when he mentioned it.
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
I agree with John Yoo that Judge Merchan won't be stupid enough send him directly to prison upon sentencing. And if he did, it would only be a few days. The federal court would get involved pretty quickly if the state appeal courts didn't.
Actually sentencing Trump to prison is probably going to happen. But the progressive lawfare gambit is having less and less effect.
You're seeing five of 23 comments. Sign in, or join for just $5 per month, to read them all and add your own.