Et Tu, Cooke?

An unwashed Charles C.W. Cooke returns to the Remnant for a predictably rank exploration of ...

By

An unwashed Charles C.W. Cooke returns to the Remnant for a predictably rank exploration of gun rights, criminal law, and electoral politics. There’s also a deep dive into linguistics prompted by Jill Biden’s taco gaffe, an discussion of America’s fondness for elderly political figures, and an examination of whether stop and frisk policies are constitutional. How is the 2024 presidential race shaping up? Should Trump be prosecuted for his actions on January 6? And what can we do about mass shootings?

Show Notes:

– Last weekend’s Ruminant

– Jill Biden’s taco blunder

Keep reading with a free account
Create a free Dispatch account to keep reading Get Started ALREADY HAVE AN ACCOUNT? SIGN IN
By
Comments (63)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Avatar photo
    Ben Connelly

    The audience won! No you won’t this is a podcast! Back by popular demand!

    Collapse
  2. Avatar photo
    Ben Connelly

    Brutus was right to kill Caesar! Long live the Roman Republic!

    Collapse
  3. Avatar photo
    Devin H

    I came here after I heard Jonah's comment about Biden working out a deal to pardon Trump expecting that to dominate the discussion. I'm pretty surprised there wasn't more of a dive into that. I've been telling my wife and some other close friends that I thought that was the best path forward for a while.

    Collapse
  4. Avatar photo
    Cthocas

    Guys, did you know that just four companies control 80% of the U.S. meat industry?

    Collapse
  5. Avatar photo
    Richard Grebenc

    One of the best Remnant interviews in some time. Two really smart and insightful guys hashing it out. I was not aware there was a matter of taking sides, at least among some listeners, between Jonah and Charlie. It is not "either/or" but "both/and" for me with these two. I am smarter for hearing this conversation.

    I hope Mr. Goldberg makes a point of having Mr. Cooke on more often.

    Collapse
  6. Avatar photo
    The Bell Tower

    Charlie was ironically very Julius Caesar in his strict insistence on due process regarding Donald Trump just as Caesar once defended the Catilinian conspirators against execution without a trial. Cicero and Cato - heroes to the founders - won the day and the Senate executed the conspirators without a trial anyway.

    I agree with Charlie’s point that neither the Populares nor the Optimates at that point in Roman history were very good choices to govern. Brutus was politically right to kill the tyrant although his personal betrayal of the man is quite another matter. In the end, the Romans just replaced one group of corrupt idiots with another group of corrupt idiots. Their liberties had long since died a silent death.

    Boy does all that sound familiar.

    Collapse
  7. Avatar photo
    Loganrjudy

    It took me an embarrassing amount of time to figure out how I was supposed to read that title in my head.

    Collapse
  8. Mikephil76

    Love your podcast. Think both you and Charlie are great. Seems like you are tougher on questioning Charlie than you normally are with your quests.

    Collapse
    1. Photo of Jonah Goldbergcircle-angle-nib
      Jonah Goldberg vertical-nib Author

      Maybe. But I know he can take it and I like listening to him respond. I love the guy.

      Collapse
  9. Avatar photo
    CynthiaW

    Always a pleasure to hear Mr. Cooke's darling little accent.

    Collapse
  10. MP

    Using free range magnetometers is an interesting idea. Charlie referred the case, without naming it, of Kyllo v. US, holding that thermal imaging on a home, where 4th Amendment rights are at their zenith, constitutes a search under the Fourth Amendment (and thus requires probable cause and/or an exception to probable cause). Although I'm an attorney, I'm just a country lawyer who does civil cases. I'm interested in the views of any attorneys with better Fourth Amendment knowledge whether the hypothetical use of a hypothetical free range magnetometer is a "search." I do know that United States v. Jones (2012) held that putting a GPS tracker on a car was a "search." Triangulating based on Kyllo and Jones, it could very well be that a free range magnetometer could result in a "search" under the Fourth Amendment. (But there are also cases on drunk driving checkpoints, holding them constitutional. Those may be analogous and cut in favor of public free range magnetometer use.)

    Collapse
Load More