57 Commas

On this edition of The Remnant, Jonah went around the (metaphorical) corner of the (also ...

Published December 8, 2020

On this edition of The Remnant, Jonah went around the (metaphorical) corner of the (also metaphorical) office and got colleague Sarah Isgur to come on the program for all sorts of legal-beagle nerdery. Sarah explains the constitutional provisions kicking into effect that are helping to slow down the chaos surrounding the November election results, what on earth is going on in Texas, and much more. Classic Remnant wonkery is then balanced out in the latter half of the show, as Jonah and Sarah both share their spiciest takes on The Queen’s Gambit and why it may not live up to the hype.

Show Notes:

–Sarah’s podcast with David French, Advisory Opinions

–Sarah’s newsletter, The Sweep

–Texas’ original jurisdiction suits against other states

–“The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes”

–Centennial Crisis: The Disputed Election of 1876 by William Rehnquist

–AEI’s After the People Vote

–The “witchcraft” of signature matching

–The Bailey Cranberry Separator

–Colorable argument

–Jonah and Queen’s Gambit

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Listen on your player of choice

Jonah Goldberg

Jonah Goldberg is editor-in-chief and co-founder of The Dispatch, based in Washington, D.C. Prior to that, enormous lizards roamed the Earth. More immediately prior to that, Jonah spent two decades at National Review, where he was a senior editor, among other things. He is also a bestselling author, longtime columnist for the Los Angeles Times, commentator for CNN, and a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. When he is not writing the G-File or hosting The Remnant podcast, he finds real joy in family time, attending to his dogs and cat, and blaming Steve Hayes for various things.

Please note that we at The Dispatch hold ourselves, our work, and our commenters to a higher standard than other places on the internet. We welcome comments that foster genuine debate or discussion—including comments critical of us or our work—but responses that include ad hominem attacks on fellow Dispatch members or are intended to stoke fear and anger may be moderated.