I was disappointed that neither man brought up what happened BEFORE the televised portion of discussion. The on camera portion was meant, in part, to seal the deal on rare earth minerals development between Ukraine and USA. This could be an ultimate security pact and economic blessing for Ukraine. Zelensky , after 30+ minutes of congenial on camera discussion, did an end run on Trump. He was counseled, obviously, to pull a “Trump” on Trump. Also remember that Zelensky obliquely supported Kamala at his PA appearance prior to the election. He’s no innocent and a poor diplomat/negotiator. The USA rightly supported Ukraine initially and adored their charismatic “cowboy”. Biden handled the conflict abysmally. Nobody wants to see this I war continue. Trump may be a rude bully but he will get the job done.
I may have missed this... but when it comes to affirmative action, the point stressed by Glenn and John seems to be that unqualified individuals are getting into elite schools, and that should not happen. Now that affirmative action is gone, is the goal to have zero less-qualified people admitted to elite schools? Or is it just more likely that a higher share of unwarranted admissions will go to white students? Also, could it be possible that there is a point of diminishing returns on academic qualifications at elite schools? Have there been studies to show the difference in academic outcomes for students with 1600s and 1550s on SAT or the equivalent difference on ACT?
Losing respect for Lowry over his Ukraine and Israel opinions. I usually appreciate his devil's advocacy and steel manning of the opposite take, but his apologism for Trump is getting ridiculous. What is the opposite of Trump Derangement Syndrome.
Agreed. 5:33 - "Did you hear when he [Trump] said Putin had suffered...?] and Glenn doesn't sputter and choke on that--he normalizes it. What the f&ck is wrong with you, Glenn? Just about ready to cancel my subscription, which is a shame, because I always enjoy hearing what John has to say. But I've pretty much had it with Glenn, after years of enjoying his thoughts and wit. What is this sh*t?
“Glenn, is there a part of you that kind of enjoys the strongman aspect of all of this?”
Trump provides a sanctioned, socially acceptable channel for aggression. His verbal attacks, his humiliations of opponents, his sneering contempt for norms—these acts serve as catharsis for those who feel socially or politically constrained. Trump acts out the desires his followers suppress, and it gives them pleasure.
It really saddens me to see Glenn turning into such a gushing Trump fanboy, falling over himself to rationalize every petulant outburst we see from the White House. It wasn’t that long ago that I remember becoming a fan of his because he stood up and said that he opposed affirmative action because of how corrosive it was to institutions that should prize *mastery* over everything else. Now he defends an administration made up of the likes of Kash Patel, Tulsi G, and RFK Jr. I can’t help but think that was a rather shallow commitment to competence we heard before.
Glenn would do well to listen to the recent Fifth Column interview with John Bolton, no slouch when it comes to defending American interests, the goal Glenn says he wants the president to pursue. But you can’t effectively pursue American interests if you’re an ignorant blowhard the way Trump is. Bolton recalled a meeting with leaders in the UK, where Trump revealed he didn’t know the UK was a nuclear power. That’s like sitting down to a high-stakes chess game and not understanding how the “horsies” move.
Glenn has to be aware that there’s a lot of game theory on the value (to you) of being seen as a credible partner. He says he understands that a world where Putin is allowed to do whatever he wants just because he has nukes can be a more dangerous world. And surely Glenn knows that no economists worth their salt take tariffs seriously as a means to achieve national prosperity the way Trump transparently does.
Glenn always counters these charges by pointing out, rightly, that Trump was elected by the people. But I know Trump is not ignorant of history—surely he’s read about the dangers that a demagogue can pose to a democracy or a republic, and not because they haven’t succeeded in securing the enthusiastic support of a majority of the demos. Does he think demagogues are an empty set, that they’re not dangerous, or that Trump isn’t one of them? Something else?
Like Glenn, it was no small part of me that was glad Kamala lost. But I can’t, for the life of me, see what anyone sees in Trump that makes him a palatable alternative worth defending. (Though I agree that lots of the criticism of Trump is overblown, I think Glenn goes way too far in dismissing a lot of very sound criticisms)
You are over the top about Glenn's sensible and moderate views of Trump. (gushing fan boy? I am truly offended you called him that - how old are you?) which I find most welcome after the extreme ( wish there were a stronger word) about Trump hatred, which poisons the well for everyone who can see what Trump does and place it serenely in to the way of the world. Considering he got at least half the country on his side. Just please think about that before calling GLENN names - of all people. Just stop please.
Easy with the pearl clutching, Bonnie. There are plenty of worse names out there than gushing fanboy; you should save your offense for those. (Just shy of 41 to answer your question.) And I’m sorry, but I don’t think Glenn’s views about Trump are sensible at all, which is why seeing them come from someone who I’ve relied on for sensible views on lots of other topics is so disappointing. Seriously, how can someone who spoke so highly about the need to create a culture where mastery is rewarded defend an administration made up of sycophantic clowns? Glenn says he was dismayed to see Ukrainian flags in the house after Putin invaded, so now he thinks that supporting Ukraine is putting that country’s interests above our own. Would he have thought the same thing of all the other countries that made symbolic gestures of solidarity with the US after 9/11? Allies are good, and they help you accomplish what you need to accomplish. Seeing Glenn stick up for the buffoons who currently hold office who don’t understand that obvious fact, and who don’t give a damn about America’s credibility in the world is just awful.
The problem I see with Glenn is that he seems to be letting his (correct) assessment that Trump has been the subject of a lot of unfair attacks cloud his vision to the fact that there are lots of very good critiques of Trump as well. Just because the left is wrong about most things doesn’t mean they’re wrong about everything.
Finally, you ask me to remember that Trump got half the country on his side. Well, if you read my post, you’d see that is exactly one of the points I made. Writers on classical politics, as well as our Founders, were *very* worried about the ability of a demagogue to win over the masses and corrupt republican politics. That’s exactly what I’m worried Trump is doing, so hearing the constant refrains that more than half of the people voted for him is not reassuring in the least.
Hi boo, you are correct that the fact Trump got so many votes does not mean the voters made the right choice. But what I meant by reminding you of it was to say, he won and so he has the right to carry out his policies. They will be carried out, so we will see how well they work, and although he and his workers are bound to make mistakes, nobody has ever done this before so who's to say what is the right way to do it?
And I do not agree that all the people he has successfully gotten confirmed as his Cabinet are a bunch of "sycophantic clowns". I see them as independent thinkers who share Trump's conviction the the government MUST be reduced in size so as to be less oppressive to the people, and they MUST reduce its cost so it will be less of a burden to the people.
I am very optimistic because I am so certain this objective is essential to America's very existence (the US dollar is in grave danger of collapsing and losing its status as world currency due to the overwhelming debt we carry) --- and because his Cabinet is such an interesting collection of intelligent people with a wide range of both experience, education and success among them. I truly have waited decades for this very expedition.
It is the left wing press (which I do read) that consistently smears these people as "unqualified", despite the fact no one has done this properly before, so - unqualified for what? A huge century-old endeavor to roll back a gigantic bureaucracy created and perpetuated by some innocent people but also by crooks and thieves and traitors. What have we got to lose? And who and how otherwise would you choose for this feat?
No upside? Look at his approval numbers. The voters spoke, and unlike far too many Presidents in the past (lookin at you Biden), he is doing exactly what he campaigned on, what he promised to do, and what the people elected him to do. What is YOUR problem?
In a cult because I see value in some of Trump's policies? I could just as easily throw similar or worse names your way. It is offensive. And in fact, your unstinting hatred of Trump is evidence that it is you who is in a cult.
Trump has been in office only a few weeks. Many good policies take time to have a desired effect. And a majority significantly poll great favorability for his major policies.
He won by ONLY 1.4 percent?? He won:
- the electoral vote
- the popular vote
- all seven swing states
- 89% of all counties in the country collected more votes for Trump in 2024 than in 2020, ie, they moved red.
THAT is a mandate and you are in the cult that believes that the Democrats should be perpetually in power, when the Democrat Party is at 30% favorability, its lowest in history. They are blindly and stupidly doing exactly the wrong thing.
It is Trump's turn. Too bad you don't like it, and if you want to cancel Glenn, you will not be missed.
Nothing you posted creates a mandate.. He won by 1.4% of the total vote.
I said nothing about Democrats being perpetually in power.
I don’t expect to be missed, I simply voice my opinion.
Trump is incompetent. His appointments make complaints about Blacks and DEI ridiculous. Let’s see how RFK handles the flu vaccine and how ending cybersecurity aimed at Russia works out.
Edit to add
Today we observe “Bloody Sunday” as the Orange entity in the White House is so angry about Civil Rights that pictures of Tuskegee airmen were scheduled for removal from DOD.
Everything together makes it a mandate. Even if it is not, he won definitively , his favorability was and remains higher than Kamala or Biden, and when Trump's individual policies are polled ( cut govt size/waste, secure borders, removing illegals, ending endless wars, supporting Israel over Hamas) all of them have majority approval. That alone makes him deserving of winning and continuing to hold office.
I find a curious similarity in who is doing the most handwringing about what transpired between Presidents Trump And Zelenskyy. Mostly from the highly educated types that I suspect have a personal preference for quite discourse and find impersonal conflict very uncomfortable. While that form of communication has its place, it is not the only form of effective communication. A
Combative tone is a natural response in an adversarial relationship. Most of us who live in the real world having to deal with conflict were not offended by the meltdown that happened. Was it the best proper form, no. Was it real and what happenes in closed doors negotiations? Potentially. I find peoples reactions to this whole thing a reflection of their own character and the level of their Trump Derangment Syndrome. I do take one offense from John’s pronouncement that to be anti Trump is a sign of intelligence. What an arrogant phrase to utter. It makes me dismiss his critiques outright. Because it allows the “othering” of those that disagree as stupid. Highly disrespectful.
Absolutely! Reflecting on your comment, I thought of T. Boone Pickens in the 1980s. The oil company execs did things the polite way, the right and proper way. In other words, they gleefully wasted shareholder money. T. Boone, with the help of Wall Street backers, came along ready to perform hostile takeovers. The CEOs soiled themselves. The point being quite often "doing things the accepted way" means being used for a doormat. Those in power can't defend their inept actions so they try pearl-clutching outrage.
I saw the "meltdown" as lively discussion. Those who freaked out, as you said, revealed something about themselves.
Did John really say being anti-Trump was a sign of intelligence? I'm going to have to replay the podcast. John should listen to the people who call C-Span every morning. Few of the anti-Trump callers come across as intelligent.
Glenn, we started this war, it was our policies which got Ukraine into this war since 1990s. We are largely responsible for putting Ukraine in this position, now we want to end it fine. But Ukraine has lost territories and has lost well over 100,000 men-you want him to go back to his people and except a peace where Ukraine losses territory. Well of course he says he wants to fight to the end. John is right, this all can be said off Camra. I can even agree with Trumps policy but it's execution will do damage to America beyond this. We are not a moral leader in a world, we lower ourselves to the level of Putin. I was no fan of Biden's policy in the least, I blame him for this mess. The damage Trump is doing to our image is beyond repair.
You blame Biden, but it is Trump's policies that are "beyond repair"? I suggest you give his policies the four years he has won and therefore deserves, before you claim his actions are "beyond repair".
The best peace that Ukraine can realistically hope to achieve here would involve a loss of territory. I think the problem for Ukraine is that Putin wants all of Ukraine, so any cease fire or peace agreement made now will just be broken later.
Putin wants NO NATO COUNTRIES next to Russia. He has been consistent about this since the 1990's. Zelensky held up the red flag to the bull when he keeps insisting he wants to get Ukraine into NATO. That is how he, in fact, triggered the latest Russian invasion.
Great episode guys. Loving your pivot away from race talk and towards geopolitics. Just refreshing to listen to genuine and smart disagreement amongst friends on these topics.
"This morning, Ted Hesson and Kristina Cooke of Reuters reported that the Trump administration is preparing to deport the 240,000 Ukrainians who fled Russia’s attacks on Ukraine and have temporary legal status in the United States. Foreign affairs journalist Olga Nesterova reminded Americans that “these people had to be completely financially independent, pay tax, pay all fees (around $2K) and have an affidavit from an American person to even come here.”
“This has nothing to do with strategic necessity or geopolitics,” Russia specialist Tom Nichols posted. “This is just cruelty to show [Russian president Vladimir] Putin he has a new American ally.”
(Taken from Heather Cox Richardson's "Letters From An American"
The whole newsletter is worth a read. You can google her Substack, if interested.
I find these mass firings cruel. Sure, the government workforce could use a review for efficiency, but mass firings, often under false pretences (e.g. dismissing people for cause i.e. accusing them of not doing their jobs when they've had nothing but superlative work reviews ... this of course affects their ability for future work) is cruel.
Then, the icing on the cake is those who add salt to the wound by taunting these victims of unfair policy.
(e.g. "Trump adviser insults veterans as not 'fit to have a job.' It's disgraceful."
Being a civil servant is supposed to include SOME rights and due process prior to termination.
Civil service IS merit based. Everyone takes the same exams for qualifying for jobs and is subject to the same minimum qualifications.
Another example, flippantly blaming a plane crash on DEI ("because I have common sense") without any substantiation.
Mandating employees to return the office who were hired as teleworkers, is cruel. (I have a friend, who is an attorney with a federal agency. Her first year, she had to work 4 days per week onsite, then, based on her contract, she was able to transition to 100% remote work. She was hired with this understanding, so she endured a very long commute for that first year. The telework.gov website has had abundant resources and policies to support remote work, which, btw, save taxpayers a ton of money and inconvenience e.g. re: traffic congestion and pollution ... among a long list of benefits, which include increased productivity.
Why not work WITH these departments and employees to channel their skills into work that this administration agrees with? CREATE some jobs??
Here's an example of a more humane, considered and thoughtful way. With bipartisan support even.
"Fact Check: Clinton initiative cut over 377K federal jobs in the 1990s. It's not comparable to Trump's effort"
The glee ... the chainsaw ... the smirks ... at lives being ruined. Um, yup, I find that cruel. You've seen the MAGA T shirts "Mean Tweets. 2024". Cruelty is kinda their thing.
(I'm a No Party Preference, FYI ... so my criticism of MAGA shouldn't imply I have any less for the DNC.)
Really shameful stuff from Glenn. It is obvious he hasn't been following this war closely and gets his information from bad actors like Mearsheimer.
1. The Ukrainian front is not about to collapse. Trump and Vance exaggerate that. Vance literally admitted he gets his info from social media, and social media that is likely not friendly to Ukraine.
2. Russia has performed horribly and grows more precarious. It will take them over a century to take Ukraine at current pace. The casualty rate of Russian to Ukrainian is 7 to 1.
3. NATO on the border stuff is pure Russian propaganda. NATO is already on their border. This is not to threaten Russia, it is because the nations who lived under Russian rule suffered horrible atrocities and wanted that umbrella in case it happened again. WHICH IT IS IN REAL TIME TO A COUNTRY NOT PROTECTED BY NATO. Seriously, cut this NATO crap. Russia has been doing this to their neighbors before the existence of NATO and before the existence of the USA.
4. Russian economy grows more unstable by the day and while it may not fall apart, it will have to prioritize other things if they want to compete as world power instead of a regional one.
5. Ukraine literally signed a ceasefire with Russia in 2019. Putin broke it. Major shock.
6. The lands occupied by Russia have had unimaginable atrocities there. You name it, it has happened. Ukrainians remained trapped there and abused as we live and breathe
7. The US has national interests in seeing Ukraine succeed. Russia wants to destabilize Europe, our closest economic ally. Their security is our security.
8. It will be a hell of lot more expensive to clean up if the conflict expands, and the only thing that will make it expand is appeasement. You think the ~175 billion is bad, just wait to see the number after you refused to acknowledge reality.
9. Let's not forget Robert Mueller acknowledged the Russians had blackmail on Trump. It is a real thing. He just didn't pursue it further because it wasn't in his assignment.
10. Trump and Vance are fake tough guys. Zelenskyy is a real one without the tough guy front. He has a thousand times more bravery and integrity than they ever will. That insecurity played big time in them attacking him. They can't stand that a short improv comedian is more legit in that way.
11. Ukraine could be a tremendous ally is supported properly. They are the best and most innovative army in Europe and fought off a long time mutual foe. They are the type of friends you want.
Maybe a halt in the conflict is what's best if Ukraine can't move the line. But it should be done acknowledging the actual realities and not lazy and resentful ones, and they need to feel that we are on their side. Trump and Vance are idiots and they likely will not negotiate a successful end to this. Ukraine will likely do better than we think, and this will cement Trump as the Russian sympathizing bad actor that he is.
NATO on the border is EVERYTHING to Putin. Yes he does have other NATO countries on his border - that's the whole point! No more! If Russia set up military bases in Canada or Mexico, the US would go crazy . Same thing.
There must never be a Russia/USA war, the world would come to an end. So stop suggesting that Ukraine and the US keep poking the bear. Russians won't change their country for many years yet. Leave them be.
The idea that 'if Russia set up military bases in Canada or Mexico, the U.S. would go crazy' assumes a false moral equivalence between NATO and Russia—a classic case of projection. NATO expands through voluntary membership, while Russia expands through coercion, killing, and destruction. Pretending that all great powers behave identically reduces a complex issue into a simplistic power struggle, conveniently avoiding the uncomfortable reality that one side operates through force while the other operates through consent. If all sides are equally bad, then no hard choices need to be made—but reality isn’t that simple.
Nope. USA does not have the violent history with its neighbors that Russia does. If we did, you can be damn sure there would be Chinese missiles in Mexico, and they would be justified in having them
I don't quite understand your argument. I remember the Cuban missile crisis when Russia tried to set up missiles in Cuba. JFK went nuts. What's your point? What "violent history" would change America's attitude to missile next door?
We don't have a violent history with Cuba that goes back 300 years where we were the aggressors time after time. If we did, we wouldn't have much of a case for why they made an alliance with our adversary.
They made the alliance with russia because Cuba is a Communist country, and JFK would not tolerate russian missiles so close to the US. And we maintain largely good relations with Mexico because we both benefit from trade.
Putin is like the US - he doesn't want a NATO country on his border. It is NOT pure propaganda, it is a threat to him. Of course he will use other excuses to go into Ukraine, but he will not face off with the US if we go in and start significant mining. As long as WE do not bring in military artillery along with US soldiers, Putin will leave us alone.
Zelensky is more than justified to be skeptical of any cease fire deal brokered with Putin by Anyone. Putins goal is to annex Ukraine. What cause the ruckus was his pushback on JD when he said no one has tried diplomacy until Trump came in the scene that caused, which is wholly unfounded. The Biden administration and European leaders have tried several times to get Russia to the table but to no avail. The fear is a Trump deal will be a bad one for Ukraine and a good one for Russia. This administration is just interested in posting a win. And the surprising part of all of this is they don’t know what Putins demands are yet. They have not had any discussions on any level, directly with Russia about a cease fire deal with Ukraine.
I applaud Zelinsky for holding onto his cards. Ukraine sits on some of the largest deposits of rare earth minerals in the world. If we let them fall to Russia then it will be China who is mining them. So he should hold tight on the mineral deal until Russia shows their hand.
allow me a to counter. Zelensky is an idiot. He needs to play for time and for at least TEMPORARY support. Whatever agreement is signed (with Putin) essentially means little to nothing. Also remember Trump will be gone in 4 years (and Putin is getting old himself. A very wise friend of mine (who was for a very long time very high up in the national security establishment has commented:
"....If you don't have the cards, you can still play them. Zelenskyy's best card was Trump's vanity, and he should have played it. He knew he was walked into a trap, but if you know that, you can use it to your advantage.
The agreement isn't worth the paper the Budapest Memorandum was written upon. So sign it, be thankful, praise the President for his leadership and tell the world that you completely trust the President, that he will always stand for Ukraine's freedom and that he's the only one who can keep Putin in check.
Trump is going to stiff you anyway, so just stiff him back later. Who cares as long as you get the support NOW......"
Agreed!, from a long term perspective. Absolutely. Zelensky did fumble at the one yard line because he’s an actor. He’s as much a true politician as Trump is. But in the immediate he needs to protect his position. And I think Trump overestimates his influence on Putin.
3 years is a long time waiting for God and Father Time to have their will be done with Trump and Putin.
It seems to me that Trump and Vance were angry because Zelensky double-crossed them. Chris Murphy said on twitter that he and other Democrats met with Zelensky, and they convinced him not to accept any compromise unless the US sends troops to Ukraine. I don't trust Zelensky after what happened at his meeting with Trump. At the least, Zelensky should agree to elections if he wants the US to send more weapons to Ukraine. Zelensky cancelled elections, and it's not clear whether or not Ukrainians support him.
1. Dr. Loury perfectly summed up my take on the White House meeting.
2. Joy Reid is an awful person in the public sphere. Even if she bakes you cookies in private. Megyn Kelly has a nice retrospective (starts about 1:30 in):
3. I didn't think the White House meeting was as big a deal as everyone else apparently did. The world isn't an ice cream social. We lived as if it were for a couple of decades, and we got a man winning the women's NCAA 500-meter freestyle swimming national championship trophy. Can't hurt anyone's feelings, doncha know.
If the kitchen is too hot for Zelensky, he should get out.
4. Anyone who thinks Ukraine 2014 was hunky-dory and not orchestrated by the US should read about the overthrow of Mossadegh in 1953. The reading's good because you can read the actual CIA papers detailing the plot.
I'll leave with this... John said Trump and Vance were contemptuous toward Zelensky. Well, Zelensky deciding to negotiate in public was contemptible. He brought it on himself.
not quite the same re your last short paragraph. Zelensky is a desperate man in a desperate situation. He deserves a little more grace than the Orange Man and his "vice" attack dog offered.
I'm not sure that John understands the situation. He indicated that the Ukrainian military is so strong that they can fight a war of attrition with Russia for the next 25 years if the US pays for weapons for Ukraine. It seems more likely that Ukraine's forces will be defeated in the next year or two unless the US sends troops to Ukraine.
I live for these conversations and they almost never disappoint. I also appreciated your linking more of the full exchange/conversation that has been shown in the mainstream media. Your footage "exposes" Zelensky a lot more IMO. I agreed with both Professor's arguments btw. But when you as Zelensky are coming to see your Sugar Daddy to ask for more sugar you should be far better cognizant of the personality and the view of your Sugar Daddy before you actively antagonize him in front of the TV cameras . I understand Zelensky is a desperate man in a desperate situation but this was a horrid misstep on his part. There's a way to "play Trump" now as the Professors mentioned. There is a playbook. Zelensky wanted to stay his proud (and I'm not using that as a cudgel or slur) self. but that attitude and act on his part is why you had the Ukrainian ambassador holding her face in her hand. Part of it may had been overall shame and embarrassment but I suspect a bigger part of it may had been her frustration over the act her President tried to pull. (because I am sure she know the Orange Man well and probably even gave advice and suggestions on how to interact with him (also mind you, it's been reported that Lindsay Graham, famously supportive of Ukrainian even warned Zelensky AHEAD Of the meeting "not to take the bait" (of TV cameras, proselytizing and antagonizing the Orange Man). This advice was obviously also ignored.
I was disappointed that neither man brought up what happened BEFORE the televised portion of discussion. The on camera portion was meant, in part, to seal the deal on rare earth minerals development between Ukraine and USA. This could be an ultimate security pact and economic blessing for Ukraine. Zelensky , after 30+ minutes of congenial on camera discussion, did an end run on Trump. He was counseled, obviously, to pull a “Trump” on Trump. Also remember that Zelensky obliquely supported Kamala at his PA appearance prior to the election. He’s no innocent and a poor diplomat/negotiator. The USA rightly supported Ukraine initially and adored their charismatic “cowboy”. Biden handled the conflict abysmally. Nobody wants to see this I war continue. Trump may be a rude bully but he will get the job done.
I may have missed this... but when it comes to affirmative action, the point stressed by Glenn and John seems to be that unqualified individuals are getting into elite schools, and that should not happen. Now that affirmative action is gone, is the goal to have zero less-qualified people admitted to elite schools? Or is it just more likely that a higher share of unwarranted admissions will go to white students? Also, could it be possible that there is a point of diminishing returns on academic qualifications at elite schools? Have there been studies to show the difference in academic outcomes for students with 1600s and 1550s on SAT or the equivalent difference on ACT?
I wonder if either John or Glenn watched the whole press conference before commenting on incident
Losing respect for Lowry over his Ukraine and Israel opinions. I usually appreciate his devil's advocacy and steel manning of the opposite take, but his apologism for Trump is getting ridiculous. What is the opposite of Trump Derangement Syndrome.
Agreed. 5:33 - "Did you hear when he [Trump] said Putin had suffered...?] and Glenn doesn't sputter and choke on that--he normalizes it. What the f&ck is wrong with you, Glenn? Just about ready to cancel my subscription, which is a shame, because I always enjoy hearing what John has to say. But I've pretty much had it with Glenn, after years of enjoying his thoughts and wit. What is this sh*t?
John hinted at it at the 26-minute mark --
“Glenn, is there a part of you that kind of enjoys the strongman aspect of all of this?”
Trump provides a sanctioned, socially acceptable channel for aggression. His verbal attacks, his humiliations of opponents, his sneering contempt for norms—these acts serve as catharsis for those who feel socially or politically constrained. Trump acts out the desires his followers suppress, and it gives them pleasure.
It really saddens me to see Glenn turning into such a gushing Trump fanboy, falling over himself to rationalize every petulant outburst we see from the White House. It wasn’t that long ago that I remember becoming a fan of his because he stood up and said that he opposed affirmative action because of how corrosive it was to institutions that should prize *mastery* over everything else. Now he defends an administration made up of the likes of Kash Patel, Tulsi G, and RFK Jr. I can’t help but think that was a rather shallow commitment to competence we heard before.
Glenn would do well to listen to the recent Fifth Column interview with John Bolton, no slouch when it comes to defending American interests, the goal Glenn says he wants the president to pursue. But you can’t effectively pursue American interests if you’re an ignorant blowhard the way Trump is. Bolton recalled a meeting with leaders in the UK, where Trump revealed he didn’t know the UK was a nuclear power. That’s like sitting down to a high-stakes chess game and not understanding how the “horsies” move.
Glenn has to be aware that there’s a lot of game theory on the value (to you) of being seen as a credible partner. He says he understands that a world where Putin is allowed to do whatever he wants just because he has nukes can be a more dangerous world. And surely Glenn knows that no economists worth their salt take tariffs seriously as a means to achieve national prosperity the way Trump transparently does.
Glenn always counters these charges by pointing out, rightly, that Trump was elected by the people. But I know Trump is not ignorant of history—surely he’s read about the dangers that a demagogue can pose to a democracy or a republic, and not because they haven’t succeeded in securing the enthusiastic support of a majority of the demos. Does he think demagogues are an empty set, that they’re not dangerous, or that Trump isn’t one of them? Something else?
Like Glenn, it was no small part of me that was glad Kamala lost. But I can’t, for the life of me, see what anyone sees in Trump that makes him a palatable alternative worth defending. (Though I agree that lots of the criticism of Trump is overblown, I think Glenn goes way too far in dismissing a lot of very sound criticisms)
You are over the top about Glenn's sensible and moderate views of Trump. (gushing fan boy? I am truly offended you called him that - how old are you?) which I find most welcome after the extreme ( wish there were a stronger word) about Trump hatred, which poisons the well for everyone who can see what Trump does and place it serenely in to the way of the world. Considering he got at least half the country on his side. Just please think about that before calling GLENN names - of all people. Just stop please.
Easy with the pearl clutching, Bonnie. There are plenty of worse names out there than gushing fanboy; you should save your offense for those. (Just shy of 41 to answer your question.) And I’m sorry, but I don’t think Glenn’s views about Trump are sensible at all, which is why seeing them come from someone who I’ve relied on for sensible views on lots of other topics is so disappointing. Seriously, how can someone who spoke so highly about the need to create a culture where mastery is rewarded defend an administration made up of sycophantic clowns? Glenn says he was dismayed to see Ukrainian flags in the house after Putin invaded, so now he thinks that supporting Ukraine is putting that country’s interests above our own. Would he have thought the same thing of all the other countries that made symbolic gestures of solidarity with the US after 9/11? Allies are good, and they help you accomplish what you need to accomplish. Seeing Glenn stick up for the buffoons who currently hold office who don’t understand that obvious fact, and who don’t give a damn about America’s credibility in the world is just awful.
The problem I see with Glenn is that he seems to be letting his (correct) assessment that Trump has been the subject of a lot of unfair attacks cloud his vision to the fact that there are lots of very good critiques of Trump as well. Just because the left is wrong about most things doesn’t mean they’re wrong about everything.
Finally, you ask me to remember that Trump got half the country on his side. Well, if you read my post, you’d see that is exactly one of the points I made. Writers on classical politics, as well as our Founders, were *very* worried about the ability of a demagogue to win over the masses and corrupt republican politics. That’s exactly what I’m worried Trump is doing, so hearing the constant refrains that more than half of the people voted for him is not reassuring in the least.
Hi boo, you are correct that the fact Trump got so many votes does not mean the voters made the right choice. But what I meant by reminding you of it was to say, he won and so he has the right to carry out his policies. They will be carried out, so we will see how well they work, and although he and his workers are bound to make mistakes, nobody has ever done this before so who's to say what is the right way to do it?
And I do not agree that all the people he has successfully gotten confirmed as his Cabinet are a bunch of "sycophantic clowns". I see them as independent thinkers who share Trump's conviction the the government MUST be reduced in size so as to be less oppressive to the people, and they MUST reduce its cost so it will be less of a burden to the people.
I am very optimistic because I am so certain this objective is essential to America's very existence (the US dollar is in grave danger of collapsing and losing its status as world currency due to the overwhelming debt we carry) --- and because his Cabinet is such an interesting collection of intelligent people with a wide range of both experience, education and success among them. I truly have waited decades for this very expedition.
It is the left wing press (which I do read) that consistently smears these people as "unqualified", despite the fact no one has done this properly before, so - unqualified for what? A huge century-old endeavor to roll back a gigantic bureaucracy created and perpetuated by some innocent people but also by crooks and thieves and traitors. What have we got to lose? And who and how otherwise would you choose for this feat?
The choice was democracy vs authoritarianism. The Cheneys sided with Kamala Harris because they recognized the danger.
The stock market is down because of tariffs and Trump siding with Putin.
Trump has no upside.
Black people are free to laugh when they are called DEI.
No upside? Look at his approval numbers. The voters spoke, and unlike far too many Presidents in the past (lookin at you Biden), he is doing exactly what he campaigned on, what he promised to do, and what the people elected him to do. What is YOUR problem?
You are in a cult. The market is down. Food prices are up. Approval of Trump decreased. Allies are criticizing our country. Trump only won by 1.4%.
Unemployment claims are up.
RFK is not preparing the country for flu season.
Those are just a part of my problem
Unqualified whites getting Black jobs is another. LOL
You are part of a cult.
In a cult because I see value in some of Trump's policies? I could just as easily throw similar or worse names your way. It is offensive. And in fact, your unstinting hatred of Trump is evidence that it is you who is in a cult.
Trump has been in office only a few weeks. Many good policies take time to have a desired effect. And a majority significantly poll great favorability for his major policies.
He won by ONLY 1.4 percent?? He won:
- the electoral vote
- the popular vote
- all seven swing states
- 89% of all counties in the country collected more votes for Trump in 2024 than in 2020, ie, they moved red.
THAT is a mandate and you are in the cult that believes that the Democrats should be perpetually in power, when the Democrat Party is at 30% favorability, its lowest in history. They are blindly and stupidly doing exactly the wrong thing.
It is Trump's turn. Too bad you don't like it, and if you want to cancel Glenn, you will not be missed.
Nothing you posted creates a mandate.. He won by 1.4% of the total vote.
I said nothing about Democrats being perpetually in power.
I don’t expect to be missed, I simply voice my opinion.
Trump is incompetent. His appointments make complaints about Blacks and DEI ridiculous. Let’s see how RFK handles the flu vaccine and how ending cybersecurity aimed at Russia works out.
Edit to add
Today we observe “Bloody Sunday” as the Orange entity in the White House is so angry about Civil Rights that pictures of Tuskegee airmen were scheduled for removal from DOD.
Everything together makes it a mandate. Even if it is not, he won definitively , his favorability was and remains higher than Kamala or Biden, and when Trump's individual policies are polled ( cut govt size/waste, secure borders, removing illegals, ending endless wars, supporting Israel over Hamas) all of them have majority approval. That alone makes him deserving of winning and continuing to hold office.
I find a curious similarity in who is doing the most handwringing about what transpired between Presidents Trump And Zelenskyy. Mostly from the highly educated types that I suspect have a personal preference for quite discourse and find impersonal conflict very uncomfortable. While that form of communication has its place, it is not the only form of effective communication. A
Combative tone is a natural response in an adversarial relationship. Most of us who live in the real world having to deal with conflict were not offended by the meltdown that happened. Was it the best proper form, no. Was it real and what happenes in closed doors negotiations? Potentially. I find peoples reactions to this whole thing a reflection of their own character and the level of their Trump Derangment Syndrome. I do take one offense from John’s pronouncement that to be anti Trump is a sign of intelligence. What an arrogant phrase to utter. It makes me dismiss his critiques outright. Because it allows the “othering” of those that disagree as stupid. Highly disrespectful.
Absolutely! Reflecting on your comment, I thought of T. Boone Pickens in the 1980s. The oil company execs did things the polite way, the right and proper way. In other words, they gleefully wasted shareholder money. T. Boone, with the help of Wall Street backers, came along ready to perform hostile takeovers. The CEOs soiled themselves. The point being quite often "doing things the accepted way" means being used for a doormat. Those in power can't defend their inept actions so they try pearl-clutching outrage.
I saw the "meltdown" as lively discussion. Those who freaked out, as you said, revealed something about themselves.
Did John really say being anti-Trump was a sign of intelligence? I'm going to have to replay the podcast. John should listen to the people who call C-Span every morning. Few of the anti-Trump callers come across as intelligent.
Glenn, we started this war, it was our policies which got Ukraine into this war since 1990s. We are largely responsible for putting Ukraine in this position, now we want to end it fine. But Ukraine has lost territories and has lost well over 100,000 men-you want him to go back to his people and except a peace where Ukraine losses territory. Well of course he says he wants to fight to the end. John is right, this all can be said off Camra. I can even agree with Trumps policy but it's execution will do damage to America beyond this. We are not a moral leader in a world, we lower ourselves to the level of Putin. I was no fan of Biden's policy in the least, I blame him for this mess. The damage Trump is doing to our image is beyond repair.
You blame Biden, but it is Trump's policies that are "beyond repair"? I suggest you give his policies the four years he has won and therefore deserves, before you claim his actions are "beyond repair".
Russia has been subjugating Ukraine before the existence of America let alone NATO. Don’t get hypnotized by the propaganda
The best peace that Ukraine can realistically hope to achieve here would involve a loss of territory. I think the problem for Ukraine is that Putin wants all of Ukraine, so any cease fire or peace agreement made now will just be broken later.
Putin wants NO NATO COUNTRIES next to Russia. He has been consistent about this since the 1990's. Zelensky held up the red flag to the bull when he keeps insisting he wants to get Ukraine into NATO. That is how he, in fact, triggered the latest Russian invasion.
Great episode guys. Loving your pivot away from race talk and towards geopolitics. Just refreshing to listen to genuine and smart disagreement amongst friends on these topics.
Fact check:
"Trump says Ukraine started the war that’s killing its citizens. What are the facts?"
https://apnews.com/article/ukraine-russia-trump-war-zelenskyy-putin-7fe8c0c80b4e93e3bc079c621a44e8bb
AND:
I agree with both of you here.
-Zelensky and Ukraine have been used by the EU and the US to badger Russia, just because. (ala Prof. Sachs and Mearsheimer.
US interference around the world to instigate conflict and to feed the military industrial conflict is ... sinful.
-The gotcha TV spectacle is f'ed up. The worst thing about the MAGA movement is the tolerance and promotion of cruelty.
What cruelty? Please define and give examples. I don't see it.
Another example,
"This morning, Ted Hesson and Kristina Cooke of Reuters reported that the Trump administration is preparing to deport the 240,000 Ukrainians who fled Russia’s attacks on Ukraine and have temporary legal status in the United States. Foreign affairs journalist Olga Nesterova reminded Americans that “these people had to be completely financially independent, pay tax, pay all fees (around $2K) and have an affidavit from an American person to even come here.”
“This has nothing to do with strategic necessity or geopolitics,” Russia specialist Tom Nichols posted. “This is just cruelty to show [Russian president Vladimir] Putin he has a new American ally.”
(Taken from Heather Cox Richardson's "Letters From An American"
The whole newsletter is worth a read. You can google her Substack, if interested.
Cheers!
Well, just a quick response ...
I find these mass firings cruel. Sure, the government workforce could use a review for efficiency, but mass firings, often under false pretences (e.g. dismissing people for cause i.e. accusing them of not doing their jobs when they've had nothing but superlative work reviews ... this of course affects their ability for future work) is cruel.
Then, the icing on the cake is those who add salt to the wound by taunting these victims of unfair policy.
(e.g. "Trump adviser insults veterans as not 'fit to have a job.' It's disgraceful."
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/columnist/2025/03/04/veterans-alina-habba-trump-musk-government-layoffs/81396531007/ )
Being a civil servant is supposed to include SOME rights and due process prior to termination.
Civil service IS merit based. Everyone takes the same exams for qualifying for jobs and is subject to the same minimum qualifications.
Another example, flippantly blaming a plane crash on DEI ("because I have common sense") without any substantiation.
Mandating employees to return the office who were hired as teleworkers, is cruel. (I have a friend, who is an attorney with a federal agency. Her first year, she had to work 4 days per week onsite, then, based on her contract, she was able to transition to 100% remote work. She was hired with this understanding, so she endured a very long commute for that first year. The telework.gov website has had abundant resources and policies to support remote work, which, btw, save taxpayers a ton of money and inconvenience e.g. re: traffic congestion and pollution ... among a long list of benefits, which include increased productivity.
Why not work WITH these departments and employees to channel their skills into work that this administration agrees with? CREATE some jobs??
Here's an example of a more humane, considered and thoughtful way. With bipartisan support even.
"Fact Check: Clinton initiative cut over 377K federal jobs in the 1990s. It's not comparable to Trump's effort"
https://www.yahoo.com/news/fact-check-clinton-initiative-cut-140000196.html
The glee ... the chainsaw ... the smirks ... at lives being ruined. Um, yup, I find that cruel. You've seen the MAGA T shirts "Mean Tweets. 2024". Cruelty is kinda their thing.
(I'm a No Party Preference, FYI ... so my criticism of MAGA shouldn't imply I have any less for the DNC.)
Good conversation once again. The Joy Reid story comes down to nothing but ratings. She'd still be on the air if people were tuning in.
Joy Reid had higher ratings compared to Jen Psaki.
Really shameful stuff from Glenn. It is obvious he hasn't been following this war closely and gets his information from bad actors like Mearsheimer.
1. The Ukrainian front is not about to collapse. Trump and Vance exaggerate that. Vance literally admitted he gets his info from social media, and social media that is likely not friendly to Ukraine.
2. Russia has performed horribly and grows more precarious. It will take them over a century to take Ukraine at current pace. The casualty rate of Russian to Ukrainian is 7 to 1.
3. NATO on the border stuff is pure Russian propaganda. NATO is already on their border. This is not to threaten Russia, it is because the nations who lived under Russian rule suffered horrible atrocities and wanted that umbrella in case it happened again. WHICH IT IS IN REAL TIME TO A COUNTRY NOT PROTECTED BY NATO. Seriously, cut this NATO crap. Russia has been doing this to their neighbors before the existence of NATO and before the existence of the USA.
4. Russian economy grows more unstable by the day and while it may not fall apart, it will have to prioritize other things if they want to compete as world power instead of a regional one.
5. Ukraine literally signed a ceasefire with Russia in 2019. Putin broke it. Major shock.
6. The lands occupied by Russia have had unimaginable atrocities there. You name it, it has happened. Ukrainians remained trapped there and abused as we live and breathe
7. The US has national interests in seeing Ukraine succeed. Russia wants to destabilize Europe, our closest economic ally. Their security is our security.
8. It will be a hell of lot more expensive to clean up if the conflict expands, and the only thing that will make it expand is appeasement. You think the ~175 billion is bad, just wait to see the number after you refused to acknowledge reality.
9. Let's not forget Robert Mueller acknowledged the Russians had blackmail on Trump. It is a real thing. He just didn't pursue it further because it wasn't in his assignment.
10. Trump and Vance are fake tough guys. Zelenskyy is a real one without the tough guy front. He has a thousand times more bravery and integrity than they ever will. That insecurity played big time in them attacking him. They can't stand that a short improv comedian is more legit in that way.
11. Ukraine could be a tremendous ally is supported properly. They are the best and most innovative army in Europe and fought off a long time mutual foe. They are the type of friends you want.
Maybe a halt in the conflict is what's best if Ukraine can't move the line. But it should be done acknowledging the actual realities and not lazy and resentful ones, and they need to feel that we are on their side. Trump and Vance are idiots and they likely will not negotiate a successful end to this. Ukraine will likely do better than we think, and this will cement Trump as the Russian sympathizing bad actor that he is.
NATO on the border is EVERYTHING to Putin. Yes he does have other NATO countries on his border - that's the whole point! No more! If Russia set up military bases in Canada or Mexico, the US would go crazy . Same thing.
There must never be a Russia/USA war, the world would come to an end. So stop suggesting that Ukraine and the US keep poking the bear. Russians won't change their country for many years yet. Leave them be.
The idea that 'if Russia set up military bases in Canada or Mexico, the U.S. would go crazy' assumes a false moral equivalence between NATO and Russia—a classic case of projection. NATO expands through voluntary membership, while Russia expands through coercion, killing, and destruction. Pretending that all great powers behave identically reduces a complex issue into a simplistic power struggle, conveniently avoiding the uncomfortable reality that one side operates through force while the other operates through consent. If all sides are equally bad, then no hard choices need to be made—but reality isn’t that simple.
Nope. USA does not have the violent history with its neighbors that Russia does. If we did, you can be damn sure there would be Chinese missiles in Mexico, and they would be justified in having them
I don't quite understand your argument. I remember the Cuban missile crisis when Russia tried to set up missiles in Cuba. JFK went nuts. What's your point? What "violent history" would change America's attitude to missile next door?
We don't have a violent history with Cuba that goes back 300 years where we were the aggressors time after time. If we did, we wouldn't have much of a case for why they made an alliance with our adversary.
They made the alliance with russia because Cuba is a Communist country, and JFK would not tolerate russian missiles so close to the US. And we maintain largely good relations with Mexico because we both benefit from trade.
Putin is like the US - he doesn't want a NATO country on his border. It is NOT pure propaganda, it is a threat to him. Of course he will use other excuses to go into Ukraine, but he will not face off with the US if we go in and start significant mining. As long as WE do not bring in military artillery along with US soldiers, Putin will leave us alone.
Zelensky is more than justified to be skeptical of any cease fire deal brokered with Putin by Anyone. Putins goal is to annex Ukraine. What cause the ruckus was his pushback on JD when he said no one has tried diplomacy until Trump came in the scene that caused, which is wholly unfounded. The Biden administration and European leaders have tried several times to get Russia to the table but to no avail. The fear is a Trump deal will be a bad one for Ukraine and a good one for Russia. This administration is just interested in posting a win. And the surprising part of all of this is they don’t know what Putins demands are yet. They have not had any discussions on any level, directly with Russia about a cease fire deal with Ukraine.
I applaud Zelinsky for holding onto his cards. Ukraine sits on some of the largest deposits of rare earth minerals in the world. If we let them fall to Russia then it will be China who is mining them. So he should hold tight on the mineral deal until Russia shows their hand.
It is Putin threatening/ playing with WWIII.
allow me a to counter. Zelensky is an idiot. He needs to play for time and for at least TEMPORARY support. Whatever agreement is signed (with Putin) essentially means little to nothing. Also remember Trump will be gone in 4 years (and Putin is getting old himself. A very wise friend of mine (who was for a very long time very high up in the national security establishment has commented:
"....If you don't have the cards, you can still play them. Zelenskyy's best card was Trump's vanity, and he should have played it. He knew he was walked into a trap, but if you know that, you can use it to your advantage.
The agreement isn't worth the paper the Budapest Memorandum was written upon. So sign it, be thankful, praise the President for his leadership and tell the world that you completely trust the President, that he will always stand for Ukraine's freedom and that he's the only one who can keep Putin in check.
Trump is going to stiff you anyway, so just stiff him back later. Who cares as long as you get the support NOW......"
Agreed!, from a long term perspective. Absolutely. Zelensky did fumble at the one yard line because he’s an actor. He’s as much a true politician as Trump is. But in the immediate he needs to protect his position. And I think Trump overestimates his influence on Putin.
3 years is a long time waiting for God and Father Time to have their will be done with Trump and Putin.
It seems to me that Trump and Vance were angry because Zelensky double-crossed them. Chris Murphy said on twitter that he and other Democrats met with Zelensky, and they convinced him not to accept any compromise unless the US sends troops to Ukraine. I don't trust Zelensky after what happened at his meeting with Trump. At the least, Zelensky should agree to elections if he wants the US to send more weapons to Ukraine. Zelensky cancelled elections, and it's not clear whether or not Ukrainians support him.
That's probably Senatorial bloviation.
My knee-jerk reaction...
1. Dr. Loury perfectly summed up my take on the White House meeting.
2. Joy Reid is an awful person in the public sphere. Even if she bakes you cookies in private. Megyn Kelly has a nice retrospective (starts about 1:30 in):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QogPGSzI-YY
3. I didn't think the White House meeting was as big a deal as everyone else apparently did. The world isn't an ice cream social. We lived as if it were for a couple of decades, and we got a man winning the women's NCAA 500-meter freestyle swimming national championship trophy. Can't hurt anyone's feelings, doncha know.
If the kitchen is too hot for Zelensky, he should get out.
4. Anyone who thinks Ukraine 2014 was hunky-dory and not orchestrated by the US should read about the overthrow of Mossadegh in 1953. The reading's good because you can read the actual CIA papers detailing the plot.
I'll leave with this... John said Trump and Vance were contemptuous toward Zelensky. Well, Zelensky deciding to negotiate in public was contemptible. He brought it on himself.
not quite the same re your last short paragraph. Zelensky is a desperate man in a desperate situation. He deserves a little more grace than the Orange Man and his "vice" attack dog offered.
I'm not sure that John understands the situation. He indicated that the Ukrainian military is so strong that they can fight a war of attrition with Russia for the next 25 years if the US pays for weapons for Ukraine. It seems more likely that Ukraine's forces will be defeated in the next year or two unless the US sends troops to Ukraine.
Russian Propaganda ^
I live for these conversations and they almost never disappoint. I also appreciated your linking more of the full exchange/conversation that has been shown in the mainstream media. Your footage "exposes" Zelensky a lot more IMO. I agreed with both Professor's arguments btw. But when you as Zelensky are coming to see your Sugar Daddy to ask for more sugar you should be far better cognizant of the personality and the view of your Sugar Daddy before you actively antagonize him in front of the TV cameras . I understand Zelensky is a desperate man in a desperate situation but this was a horrid misstep on his part. There's a way to "play Trump" now as the Professors mentioned. There is a playbook. Zelensky wanted to stay his proud (and I'm not using that as a cudgel or slur) self. but that attitude and act on his part is why you had the Ukrainian ambassador holding her face in her hand. Part of it may had been overall shame and embarrassment but I suspect a bigger part of it may had been her frustration over the act her President tried to pull. (because I am sure she know the Orange Man well and probably even gave advice and suggestions on how to interact with him (also mind you, it's been reported that Lindsay Graham, famously supportive of Ukrainian even warned Zelensky AHEAD Of the meeting "not to take the bait" (of TV cameras, proselytizing and antagonizing the Orange Man). This advice was obviously also ignored.