Stay ConnectedSteven Hayward, John Yoo, and “Lucretia” bring you a whisky-sodden perspective on the week’s big headlines, and occasional deep dives into law and philosophy.
Listen to the Three-Whisky Happy hour, along with more than 40 other original podcasts, at Ricochet.com. No paid subscription required.
Copyright: © 2022 by The Ricochet Audio Network
This isn’t our normal 3WHH; John isn’t here, just Steve and Lucretia. So maybe a 2WHH. The occasion for today’s extra episode—since we moved up our usual weekly offering on account of the latest weekly Trump indictment, is to take note of two related items.
First, did you know that Italy’s new and very popular prime minister Giorgia Meloni recently visited Washington and had a brief meeting with President Biden? I missed this too, as the meeting took place behind closed doors, probably to cover up the fact that Biden either fell asleep or sniffed PM Meloni’s blonde hair, and there was apparently no press availability or public photo op. Of course, Biden called Meloni a fascist when she was first elected, so I expect there was no enthusiasm for noting her visit.
The second item is an article in National Review ("The Italian Option") recently on Meloni, where Dalibor Rohac argues that Meloni is a better model for nationalist conservatives than Hungary’s Viktor Orban, because Meloni’s positions on various matters are more congenial to Americans. Maybe so, though I note Rohac’s article neglects to mention that Meloni is fond of Orban, having met with him a number of times. And Rohac is a defender of the European Union, which makes us suspicious right there.
Leaving aside the whole Hungary question for another day, this seems like an occasion to roll out at last a conversation Lucretia and Steve had recently with one of our favorite Italians thinkers—and part-time opera singer—Edoardo Raffiotta. Edoardo is professor of law at the University of Milan, where we first made his acquaintance last year at a conference. He specializes in European constitutional law, and especially the problems of emergency powers (hence is occasional interest in Carl Schmitt). He is also actively involved in legal issues pertaining to cyber-security and the fast-moving field of artificial intelligence, which of course are specialities of Lucretia. We wanted to hear first hand from Edoardo about Meloni and other topics—including opera. Stick around after we finish with Edoardo, because Lucretia and I will come back with a “postgame” show of sorts where we offer some additional reflections about the wider scene—and make a small news announcement.
And we manage to sneak in a few bars of Edoardo's favoite Puccini opera, La Rondine, at the end.
Our normal weekend rendezvous at the whisky bar was convened early this week to get out our fresh reactions to the Trump indictment for his role in the events of January 6, and our general reaction after reading the filing is—is this all there is? Where is incitement? Where is conspiring with violent groups like the Proud Boys and Barbie and Ken? There is very little if any new evidence or facts in the filing, and there are some stunning assumptions of fact that will surely fall apart in the courtroom.
More seriously, John Yoo rightly describes this filing as the most serious political-criminal trial since the trial of Aaron Burr way back in 1807—a trial that, keep in mind—acquitted Burr on the charge opf treason. And the timing, coming amidst a lot of new revelations of Biden corruption this week—seems suspicious.
Where do we go from here? Should the GOP House move right away to an impeachment investigation of Biden, before the Justice Department names a special counsel that would ironically lock down a House investigation into an "ongoing investigation" by Justice?
We do, finally, get back to our leisurely summer stroll through best books, this week laying out criteria for what makes a good biography, with each of us offering up some representative picks, such as Lord Charnwood's Lincoln, Jean Edward Smith on John Marshall, and Plutarch. You'll have to listen to see which of us recommended what book or author—you may be surprised!
After clearing the decks of the latest headlines from the week involving Biden trials and Trump tribulations, we get down to business discussing John's new book The Politically-Incorrect Guide to the Supreme Court (co-authored with Robert Delahunty). Naturally Steve and Lucretia have some issues to pick with John.
Steve manages to annoy everyone by noting the Statute-That-Cannot-Be-Named-On-This-Podcast (rhymes with Lean Fair Fact) and connecting it to the "L-Word," meaning the Lochner case. You thought it meant something else? How old fashioned and quaint in this Age of Infinite Pronouns.
And did Kamala Harris set a new low in hypocrisy and bad faith this week with her attack on Florida's African-American history standards? Let us count the ways. . .
I knew when I saw news of Vice President Kamala Harris claiming that Florida's new African-American history standards for public schools taught that "enslaved people benefitted from slavery," I knew instinctively that this was a lie of unusual medacity even for her. Don't take my word for it: read the curriculum guide for yourself, especially page six, where Harris and the rest of the race-obsessed educrat-complex twists one sentence in the most grotesque way imaginable.
The real sin of the curriculum guide, from the left's demented point of view, actually can be seen page eight, where the curriculum mentions including the history of slavery before 1619. Ah—there's the rub. The real reason Harris attacks the Florida curriculum is that it dares to correct the distortions and omissions of the 1619 Project, which has become the platform for saying that America was, and is, purely a slavocracy, and that American capitalism practically invented slavery.
One of my principal teachers in graduate school (and a past guest on this podcast), William B. Allen, was one of the authors of the new Florida curriculum guide, and he's been in high demand this week refuting the calumnies of our vice president. I managed to catch up with him this morning to note the obvious irony that the party of Calhoun would be reviving Calhounism just now, but trying to deflect it onto the other party. (Because of course the real reason for this attack is that Joe Biden might face Ron DeSantis as a candidate next year, so better start calling him a racist now.)
Are the anticipated coming Trump indictments serious? Defrauding the federal government? Obstructing Congress? Violating the Ku Klux Klan Act? This is indeed John McEnroe territory—"You cannot be serious!" But is it going to work?
Let's just say this episode revisits the events of January 6 with considerable disagreement among the panel about how it should be understood, what we still don't know, and how it is afftecting the next election cycle, concerning which, Luretia road-tests her latest outlandish theory. ("We're going to get comments on this one!", she promises.)
Then we assay the state of the widening Biden scandals, with Lucretia scorning Steve's "eternal infernal optimism" that sooner or later the media is going to jump on this scandal. Lucretia and John are skeptical. . .
Finally, are the dividends of the Harvard affirmation action admissions ruling already growing and spreading to the private sector? Have you noticed the news of the growing number of layoffs and shrinkages of corporate DEI offices? Who says there isn't any good news these days.
John Yoo is away overseas this week, so Steve and Lucretia are joined by Glenn Ellmers, author of the brand new book The Narrow Passage: Plato, Foucault, and the Possibilty of Political Philosophy. Do not be intimidated by the mention of Foucault or anything else in the title, as this crispy-written and very accessible book comes in at a reader-friendly 79 pages (Glenn admits that it began as an essay that grew a little out of control). It sheds a lot of light on our current culture war, which is really a continuation of the ructions in the country from the left that began in the 1960s but fooled us by receding briefly in the shadows for a time when the Cold War ended. More than that, though, the roots of our current contentions trace all the way back to Plato, and from whom we may also find some answers. As as we say, all this in 79 pages!
Steve and Lucretia also dilate the Farce of the Week in Washington, the latest lower court rulings that look like promising attacks on the administrative state, and why the Equal Protection Clause was such a mess at the Supreme Court for 150 years, contra Alan Dershowitz's argument that Earl Warren had it right all along. No sale!
You've heard of the Avengers. And the Incredibles. We at the 3WHH consider ourselves The Uncensorables. (Only because Justice League is taken.) In any case, just when you thought it was safe to pass by the courthouse and law library because the Supreme Court term has finished, along comes a bracing district court opinion slapping the Biden Administration hard for its collaborating with social media companies to censor COVID dissenters who turned out to be right about nearly everything.
We also work through the aftermath of the Harvard/UNC decision, which is forcing the left to transfer their hated for Citizens United to this case. And what's up with the left's complaint that the 303 Creative case was a phony case? What's phony is the left's argument, which John Yoo (this week's show host) dispatches with ease, while Steve reminds us that the left has been contriving phony cases for decades.
Finally, since it was Fourth of July week, we reflect on the holiday this year, Steve gives a foerboding prediction for the 250th anniversary of the Declaration in 2026, and we offer up recommendations for the best books about the Declaration for our slowly developing reading list of essential whisky-wisdom pairings.
It's over. The fat lady has sung. The Supreme Court ended its current term with a big bang, delivering a long-overdue smackdown of affirmative action that with any luck history will say was a turning point for restoring the proper understanding of equality in our Constitution, though the follow up to overcome ther massive resistance of universities and their epigones in HR and DEI departments everywhere will be crucial—and exhausting.
But wait! There's more! The Court also smacked down Biden's student loan power grab, and vindicated the principle of free speech the right of conscience in turning back the coercive identitarian demand that a Christian website designer must be compelled to produce offensive products.
The 3WHH hosts were actually together in person this week for this episode, and marked the end of the Supreme Court term with a several nice rounds of Makers Mark. Next week we'll be back to our more "diverse" (heh) scope of wine, whisky, and wonkery, and we'll also get back to our slow-rolling "best books" deliberation.
The submersible that is the Biden presidency looks to be under as much increasing pressure as the Trump reboot tour, and maybe both will implode? And when is the Supreme Court going to end the suspense and deliver the rulings on the big cases we've all been waiting for?
The Court did deliver a disappointment of sorts in U.S. v. Texas, which rejected the state challenge to the Biden Administration's complete implosion of border enforcement, ruling that while states along the border have indeed suffered injury, they lack standing to sue, and/or the Court lacks a remedy it can supply, so the Biden Administration wins this round. But we break down the convoluted reasoning of the majority opinion (can it really be right that if the executive branch arrested just one person crossing the border instead of zero, states would lose standing to sue, or the Court any remedy whatsoever?), and wonder whether the case is nearly as good for liberals as they think, and whether the next item on the agenda for conservative jurisprudence is to develop a new doctrine of standing, as it did with the "major questions doctrine" promulgated last year.
We also look at the latest attacks on Supreme Court justices from the left. Justice Barrett sold her house to—gasp!—a conservative! Can you believe it? And finally we explore the state of abortion one year after Dobbs.
By the end of the week when our three bartenders assembled, the Trump indictment had been pretty well munched and masticated, so there wasn't much left to say about the matter for the moment. But John Yoo has a wild idea to resolve the controversy: President Biden, he says, should pardon Trump right now, and say "Let's put everything before the voters next year on the issues."
Of course the last thing Biden wants to do right now is run on the issues, since he's doing such a dreadul job, and in any case there is no chance Trump will agree to any conditions for a pardon (such as admitting guilt or agreeing to drop out of the presidential election altogether). And it is doubtful Biden has either the statesmanship or the cynical wit to see the mischievous possibilities of a pardon.
From there the gang tries to read the tea leaves at the Supreme Court, which handed down another puzzling ruling this week regarding Indian adoptions, and finally we continue our "best of" recommended reading list with some nominations for best satirical fiction.
Our TOPPODCAST Picks 
