The Commentary Magazine Podcast: "Trump, Year Zero"
Release Date: March 19, 2025

Introduction

In the "Trump, Year Zero" episode of The Commentary Magazine Podcast, host Jon Hor, alongside executive editor Abe Greenwald, Washington commentary columnist Matthew Continenti, and senior editor Seth Mandel, delve into a comprehensive analysis of current geopolitical tensions, domestic political upheavals, and the evolving dynamics of the Trump administration. The discussion offers nuanced insights into international conflicts, especially focusing on the Israel-Gaza situation and the ongoing war in Ukraine, while also exploring the intricate challenges within the U.S. political landscape.

Israel and the Gaza Conflict

The episode opens with a critical examination of Israel's intensified military actions in Gaza, marking a significant escalation not witnessed since the early weeks of the 2023 conflict. Jon Hor notes, "Israel is now pounding Gaza in a way that it has not really pounded Gaza since the early weeks of the war in 2023" ([00:46]). The discussion highlights Israel's reliance on aerial bombardments rather than ground invasions, indicating a strategic shift in their approach. They mention the use of "knock knock bombs" aimed at evacuating civilian populations and the government's meticulous targeting to minimize casualties.

Abe Greenwald adds depth to this analysis by emphasizing Hamas's maneuvers during the ceasefire period, stating, "Hamas was rearming. Hamas was recruiting. Hamas was selling the aid it steals, feeding off of it" ([04:33]). This strategic patience allowed Hamas to strengthen its position, ultimately undermining the cessation of hostilities and reigniting the conflict.

The conversation further explores the internal Israeli political turmoil, with opposition factions accusing Prime Minister Netanyahu of leveraging the conflict to distract from corruption trials and potential governmental collapse. The absence of a formal constitutional framework in Israel complicates the political landscape, as noted by Abe: "There is no written constitution, and courts are literally saying... you're not allowed to fire him unless you can show a good reason to fire him" ([04:24]).

Trump Administration's Foreign Policy

Transitioning to U.S. foreign policy, the hosts scrutinize the Trump administration's stance on international conflicts. Seth Mandel observes, "And Trump is dead set, it seems, on ending this war in Ukraine and exerting a lot of political capital in what I believe to be futile negotiations with Vladimir Putin" ([07:26]). The discussion underscores Trump's focus on concluding the Ukraine war, contrasting it with his administration's robust support for Israel against Hamas.

Abe Greenwald elaborates on the complexities of Trump's approach, highlighting the delicate balance between supporting allies and managing direct confrontations with adversaries. He reflects, "Hamas was milking this interregnum for all it was worth... Hamas was benefiting from the ceasefire, especially the period at which the hostage releases ended and we end the resumption of the war 24 hours ago" ([07:26]).

Furthermore, the conversation touches upon Trump's diplomatic engagements, such as his discussions with Putin aimed at negotiating ceasefires and addressing energy infrastructure disputes. However, Abe expresses skepticism about the efficacy of these negotiations, fearing they may only serve to bolster Russian economic recovery without resolving the underlying conflicts.

The War in Ukraine

The podcast delves deeply into the ongoing war in Ukraine, examining American public opinion and the strategic implications of potential ceasefires. Jon Hor remarks, "But Ukraine regaining lost territory means the war is on hot and heavy and we give Ukraine weapons and we help them regain their lost territory, which is something that... we've all kind of regrettably conceded is unlikely to happen" ([10:04]).

Abe Greenwald provides statistical insights, citing recent polling where a plurality supports Ukraine regaining its lost territories over a mere ceasefire: "One question asked, would you rather have the war end with a ceasefire or with Ukraine regaining its lost territory? And a slight majority favored or plurality? I should say Ukraine regaining lost territory" ([10:04]). This suggests a public preference for a decisive resolution that restores Ukraine's territorial integrity, even if it prolongs the conflict.

Matthew Continenti attributes this sentiment to effective Ukrainian diplomacy, noting Zelenskyy's strategic appeals that resonate with American values: "He always, very specifically says, the American people, the Ukrainian people thank the American people. I thank the American people. He tries to sort of put the cause in the hearts of Americans as opposed to, you know, just appealing to the leadership. And I think it's been effective" ([11:07]).

Seth Mandel further explains the American public's nuanced understanding of their role, distinguishing between direct involvement and supportive actions: "I think the American people get that this is not a war, a ground war between the United States or NATO and Russia. And therefore, if the United States pulls out of the war, the two combatants are still in the war" ([13:05]).

Domestic Political Controversies

Shifting focus to domestic politics, the hosts analyze the Trump administration's confrontations with the judiciary and internal governmental conflicts. Jon Hor discusses the administration's aggressive policy implementations, often perceived as "year zero" governance where traditional norms are disregarded: "Trump has come into this administration as though not saying he's Robespierre, but as though it is year zero and all precedents are null and void" ([22:16]).

Abe Greenwald highlights the constitutional battles arising from these actions, referencing specific legal disputes such as the Trenda Aragua case and the broader implications for executive power: "Andy McCarthy... says that what has been going on since the weekend with the Trenda Aragua case and the relations between the administration and Judge Boasberg are a constitutional calamity" ([28:48]).

The discussion also critiques the administration's handling of federal agencies, particularly USAID, emphasizing the chaos and legal ambiguities introduced by unilateral executive decisions: "This decision is just kind of very confusing... essentially hit the ground running and Matt said they want to have these, they want to have these fights" ([35:49]).

Jon Hor reflects on historical parallels, suggesting that aggressive judicial overreach by the administration could mirror past political crises, potentially serving as a catalyst for significant political shifts similar to those that fueled the Reagan Revolution: "the Supreme Court in the late 60s and early 70s got very radical... that helped create the Reagan revolution" ([49:23]).

Legal Challenges and Judicial Responses

The episode delves into the legal intricacies surrounding executive actions, particularly focusing on Trump's attempts to expand presidential authority. Abe Greenwald and Seth Mandel discuss the potential constitutional violations stemming from actions such as the removal of federal employees and the administration's refusal to comply with judicial orders.

Abe points out Chief Justice Roberts's stance on impeachment as an inappropriate response to judicial disputes: "Justice Roberts issued this statement yesterday that was very brief and it was, didn't mention Trump, it didn't mention the judge in question. It just said that impeachment is not the appropriate manner to resolve judicial disputes" ([35:49]). This underscores the judiciary's preference for legal appeals over political maneuvers to address administrative conflicts.

Seth Mandel emphasizes the ongoing chaos within federal agencies, using USAID as a case study to illustrate the broader impact of judicial interventions and executive resistance: "the chaos with USAID and similar situations is that people losing jobs are employees of contractors who have had their contracts with USAID cancel" ([41:25]). This highlights the cascading effects of legal challenges on government operations and employment.

Implications for American Conservatism and Future Outlook

The hosts explore the broader implications of the Trump administration's actions on American conservatism and public trust. Abe Greenwald reflects on the historical role of the Supreme Court and its evolving stance on independent agencies, suggesting that current judicial trends could fundamentally reshape executive authority: "the Supreme Court has pushed back against, too, in some of its rulings, whether it's on independent agencies or whether it's on Chevron deference" ([52:51]).

Jon Hor contemplates the potential political fallout if the administration continues to defy judicial rulings, positing that sustained conflicts could lead to a significant erosion of public support: "the podcast... the administration is allowed to attempt to advance policies. People are Allowed to sue it process goes forward. This idea that what Trump is doing isn't legitimate is ridiculous. However, that doesn't mean that the arguments that they're making on behalf of the things that they're doing are correct" ([53:48]).

Matthew Continenti adds that the resolution of these conflicts will likely hinge on public perception and the administration's ability to maintain political capital amidst growing judicial resistance: "depending on the resolution of these issues, the American people will either say, okay, enough with Trump trying to break everything and do things the wrong way... or they will say, all right, enough with this attempted governance by courts, by federal judges" ([57:17]).

Abe concludes by emphasizing the need for intellectual honesty and adherence to conservative principles beyond mere alignment with Trump: "intellectual honesty and consistency over what it means to be a conservative, I think, requires us to say things like, I don't know, you know, if there's one person on the trendy Aragua plane who was... that kind of invalidates the entire process" ([57:40]).

Conclusion

"Trump, Year Zero" presents a critical dissection of the Trump administration's multifaceted challenges, both internationally and domestically. The hosts articulate a complex interplay between executive actions, judicial authority, and public opinion, providing listeners with a thorough understanding of the current political zeitgeist. Through incisive commentary and expert analysis, the podcast navigates the turbulent waters of modern governance, offering perspectives that are both informed and thought-provoking.

Notable Quotes:

• Jon Hor: "Israel is now pounding Gaza in a way that it has not really pounded Gaza since the early weeks of the war in 2023" ([00:46]).

• Abe Greenwald: "Hamas was rearming. Hamas was recruiting. Hamas was selling the aid it steals, feeding off of it" ([04:33]).

• Seth Mandel: "I think the American people get that this is not a war, a ground war between the United States or NATO and Russia." ([13:05]).

• Jon Hor: "We are not in a constitutional crisis." ([53:01]).

• Abe Greenwald: "Intellectual honesty and consistency over what it means to be a conservative requires us to say things like, I don't know..." ([57:40]).

For more insightful discussions, subscribe to The Commentary Magazine Podcast on Ricochet.com.