Author: Michael Baranowski

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | PocketCasts | Overcast | Stitcher | RSS

Mike & May open the episode with an in-depth discussion of the latest indictment against Donald Trump. Neither of them sees the case against the former president as particularly strong, with Mike expressing discomfort for using the criminal justice system to punish a political opponent who has done things that may be bad, dumb, and even unethical, but not clearly criminal. May thinks that, contrary to some theories on the right, special counsel Jack Smith is acting about how one would expect any special counsel to act.

Next, they move to the 2024 election and a recent NYT / Sienna College poll that has Trump and Biden in a dead heat. May doesn’t believe Donald Trump has much of a chance to return to the White House, and while Mike hopes she’s right, he has his doubts after thinking the same thing in 2016.

They close with a look at the recent downgrade of the US credit rating by Fitch. Mike argues that there aren’t likely to be significant short-term consequences, which both Mike and May see as a long-term problem for a political system that doesn’t have anything approaching the political will to address unsustainable spending. (May makes the case here that deficit spending is immoral.)

What if We’re the Bad Guys Here? David Brooks, New York Times

The Politics Guys on Facebook | Twitter

Listener support helps make The Politics Guys possible. You can support us or change your level of support at patreon.com/politicsguys or politicsguys.com/support. On Venmo we’re @PoliticsGuys.

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | PocketCasts | Overcast | Stitcher | RSS

Mike & Jay open the episode with a discussion of the new charges and additional defendant in the federal indictment related to Donald Trump’s retention of classified documents and alleged attempts to obstruct the documents investigation. Mike doesn’t think this will have much of an effect on Trump’s strong likelihood of winning the Republican presidential nomination. Jay, who is less certain of Trump being the eventual nominee, largely agrees on its minimal impact on GOP primary voters, but believes it could hurt Trump in the general election.

Next, they move on to the Hunter Biden plea agreement, agreeing that the judge was right to not accept it. Mike contends that far from being a sweetheart deal, Biden may have been treated more harshly because his father is President. Jay somewhat agrees in relation to the gun charge but has more of an issue with Biden’s failure to pay taxes.

They close with a discussion of record-setting heat and the Biden administration’s attempts to minimize its impact. While Jay doesn’t have big problems with any of the recently announced efforts, he’s more skeptical of some of the claims of climate scientists than Mike is, and has more faith in the ability of markets and technology to deal with the impact of climate change than Mike has.

The Politics Guys on Facebook | Twitter

Listener support helps make The Politics Guys possible. You can support us or change your level of support at patreon.com/politicsguys or politicsguys.com/support. On Venmo we’re @PoliticsGuys.

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | PocketCasts | Overcast | Stitcher | RSS

Trey and Ken continue their journey through the U.S. Constitution. This week they cover Article IV, Sections 3 and 4. They cover issues including the admissions clause, Congressional power over territory and property, and the guarantee clause.

The Politics Guys on Facebook | Twitter

Listener support helps make The Politics Guys possible. You can support us or change your level of support at patreon.com/politicsguys or politicsguys.com/support. On Venmo we’re @PoliticsGuys.

 

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | PocketCasts | Overcast | Stitcher | RSS

Trey & Ken start the show discussing Represenative Jayapal’s remarks on Israel. It includes a discussion of President Isaac Herzog’s speech. There is a historical overview of the modern Israeli state, along with a discussion of Palestine. Trey recognizes the inequality, but sees it coming from a historic battle for survival. Ken, while sympathetic, considers it apartheid.

Next is the ending of the Sea Grain Initiative by Russia. Trey points out that this grain is headed primarily for Turkey and China, indicating a potential additional fissure among these aligned countries. Ken agrees and both consider how this may have played into last week’s NATO meeting.

After that the pair discuss the Illinois Supreme Court’s ruling ending of cash bail. The discussion covers both the state law’s legality, but the guys also talk about the policy of bail in general. Ken suggests in a world with crowdfunding, bail has less meaning.

Then the guys cover the recent issue concerning the Georgia Congressional election map and speculate as to what might happen given the recent supreme court case of Allen v Milligan (2023).

Trey & Ken close the show discussing RFK’s testimony to Congress. Trey thinks RFK Jr represents a schism inside the Democratic Party that has not been noticed because of the tension in the Republican Party in the Trump era. Ken disagrees and sees RFK as effectively a sleeper agent for Republicans.

The Politics Guys on Facebook | Twitter

Listener support helps make The Politics Guys possible. You can support us or change your level of support at patreon.com/politicsguys or politicsguys.com/support. On Venmo we’re @PoliticsGuys.

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | PocketCasts | Overcast | Stitcher | RSS

Trey and Ken continue their journey through the U.S. Constitution. They finish up Article III looking at treason. Then the pair move on to Article IV, Section 1 and discuss full faith and credit.

The Politics Guys on Facebook | Twitter

Listener support helps make The Politics Guys possible. You can support us or change your level of support at patreon.com/politicsguys or politicsguys.com/support. On Venmo we’re @PoliticsGuys.

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | PocketCasts | Overcast | Stitcher | RSS

Trey & Ken admit to taking over the show! After that they get started more seriously with a look at the NATO summit in Lithuania. The two main points of discussion are Turkey, as it relates to Swedish membership, and NATO’s relationship to Ukraine. They also discuss the decision to send cluster bombs to Ukraine.

Next it is on to a pair of related stories: Justices Sotomayor and Thomas. Here Trey outlines the AP’s findings into the use of staff to promote Sotomayor’s books in comparison to other justices book writing. The pair discuss what, if anything, this means ethically. Then it is a discussion of the new revelations about Justice Thomas as it relates to payments via Venmo and activities when he first came on the court.

Trey & Ken close the show with an overview of June’s inflation data. This includes Trey noting that he was right in his long term inflation prediction and he makes additional predictions for the near term: specifically that there will be inflation variability over the course of the next few months. They also posit what this means for Biden, with both largely agreeing that it will not benefit Biden given that real wages are still depressed and any relief from inflation will not happen as soon as those numbers drop.

The Politics Guys on Facebook | Twitter

Listener support helps make The Politics Guys possible. You can support us or change your level of support at patreon.com/politicsguys or politicsguys.com/support. On Venmo we’re @PoliticsGuys.

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | PocketCasts | Overcast | Stitcher | RSS

Trey and Ken continue their journey through the U.S. Constitution in Article III. This week they cover Sections 1 and 2 including topics on:

• Judicial power
• Judicial review
• Federal court jurisdiction

The Politics Guys on Facebook | Twitter

Listener support helps make The Politics Guys possible. You can support us or change your level of support at patreon.com/politicsguys or politicsguys.com/support. On Venmo we’re @PoliticsGuys.

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | PocketCasts | Overcast | Stitcher | RSS

Trey and Ken begin the first of a three week show hosting! They get things started with the recent injunction stopping the White House from unduly blocking information on social media in ways that would not pass constitutional muster if it were done via a law. Ken argues it is yet another example of a corrupt court, Trey pushes back that it is selective targeting inconsistent with their user platforms.

Next it is on to NAACP’s lawsuit against legacy admissions in the wake of the Supreme Court’s Students for Fair Admissions v Harvard. Trey recaps the Mike and May’s positions from last week and then largely agrees. Ken agrees in policy, but doesn’t think it violates the Constitution. They then delve into the issue of legacy admissions and if it is Constitutional under the new framework or not.

They close with a look at the relationship between China and Russia and how it may have been influenced by the recent Wagner uprising. They specifically look at The New York Times recent suggestions that a split may be emerging and agree such a split is less likely than is being predicted.

The Politics Guys on Facebook | Twitter

Listener support helps make The Politics Guys possible. You can support us or change your level of support at patreon.com/politicsguys or politicsguys.com/support. On Venmo we’re @PoliticsGuys.

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | PocketCasts | Overcast | Stitcher | RSS

Mike and May open this all-SCOTUS episode with a discussion of the Court’s ruling in the big affirmative action case, Students for Fair Admissions v Harvard. Both Mike and May agree with the Court’s decision, with Mike pointing out that while like most liberals, he’s a big proponent of diversity, he doesn’t believe that Harvard and UNC’s diversity plans pass the strict scrutiny test that’s appropriately applied here.

Next, they move to the LGBT / 1^st Amendment ruling in 303 Creative LLC v Elenis. Mike sides with the dissenters who argued that Colorado’s antidiscrimination law only incidentally affects speech, while May believes that the majority got it right in viewing that the law unconstitutionally compels website designer Lorie Smith to promote views with which she disagrees.

Then it’s the Court’s pronouncement on the independent state legislature theory in Moore v Harper. Mike doesn’t think the Court should have taken the case in the first place for reasons of mootness but believes that the coalition of three conservatives and three liberals in the majority were right to rule against the theory. May points out that the Court didn’t provide that much guidance as to the scope of state judicial review of election laws which likely means more lawsuits going forward.

They close with Biden v Nebraska, in which the Court invalidated the Biden administration’s student debt relief plan. Mike is with the dissenters on this one, arguing that the administration was within the statutory authority granted by Congress, whereas May contends that the majority was correct in their view that the authority to ‘waive’ in the legislation does not give the administration the authority to simply forgive massive amounts of student loan debt. (More from May on that here.)

The Politics Guys on Facebook | Twitter

Listener support helps make The Politics Guys possible. You can support us or change your level of support at patreon.com/politicsguys or politicsguys.com/support. On Venmo we’re @PoliticsGuys.