Latest / The Death Of Journalism / Episode Sixty Eight: The High Road to Low Numbers

Transcript

Episode Sixty Eight: The High Road to Low Numbers · The Death Of Journalism

• 0:00
  Welcome episode sixty eight of the Death of Journalism podcast. My name is John
• 0:04
  Ziggler. I'm your host on today's program. It sure seems like Donald Trump
• 0:09
  is getting get another post indictment polling bounce. Why won't Ron de Sanders take
• 0:15
  up Gavin Newsom on his offer to debate him? A Joe Rogan debate offer
• 0:21
  goes super viral, and the US Open Golf tournament exposes just how broken the
• 0:26
  corporate media really is. I'm known as the Dutch Digital marketing Man. I'm
• 0:33
  a digital advertising SEO and EMO marketing specialist that also happens to be a big
• 0:38
  fan of John Ziggler and the Death of Journalism. Do you need help preaching
• 0:43
  your target audience? Let me help you develop the right messaging and confaded message
• 0:47
  and the best channels for your business. Please visit my website, the Dutch
• 0:52
  Digital marketing Man dot com and let me help you tell your story. The
• 0:57
  website is the Dutch Digital Marketman dot com. If you want to grow your
• 1:02
  business, Peter can help. That's the Dutch Digital Marketingman dot com. And
• 1:07
  hey, thanks for sponsoring the show. In episode number sixty seven of the
• 1:11
  Death of Journalism podcast, I talked a lot about how Tucker Carlson, former
• 1:17
  Fox News talk show host in the Evening, has essentially been Donald Trump's MVP
• 1:26
  when it comes to the twenty twenty four presidential campaign on the GOP side.
• 1:30
  And this has manifested itself in numerous ways, and I believe I have documented
• 1:37
  them far more accurately than anybody else that I'm aware of has done so in
• 1:42
  various different platforms. The most recent example is number episode number three of I
• 1:51
  Guess you would call it The Tucker Twitter Files, where he has now taken
• 1:53
  his former Fox News channel show and taken it to Twitter against the objections of
• 2:00
  News channel lawyers. But an episode number three, he did a commentary which
• 2:05
  essentially echoed Dwight D. Eisenhower's famous Military Industrial Complex speech, which then many
• 2:14
  years later became the essence of the Oliver Stone conspiracy movie JFK about the JFK
• 2:21
  assassination. He used that concept to explain away the most recent federal indictment against
• 2:30
  Donald Trump that essentially Tucker Tucker Carlson's argument was Trump is being indicted here because
• 2:38
  the establishment is so afraid of him because he is anti war, and an
• 2:44
  episode sixty seven. I took issue with every aspect of that. I'm not
• 2:46
  going to go through that again. If you're interested, go back and listen
• 2:49
  to episode sixty seven. But since that time, Donald Trump, who understands
• 2:57
  like I do, the value of what Tucker Carlson is doing for him,
• 3:01
  has gone way out of his way to try to use Tucker Carlson's words not
• 3:07
  just to help him politically, but also as a fundraising mechanism. I have
• 3:14
  received, as I'm sure millions of other people, numerous, not just one,
• 3:19
  numerous fundraising emails from Donald Trump using the Tucker Carlson commentary on the so
• 3:29
  called military industrial complex as a way to plea for funds for his campaign.
• 3:38
  And he Trump even did a video highlighting and I believe bastardizing what Tucker Carlson
• 3:45
  said about him and how he explained away his federal indictment. So Trump has
• 3:52
  jumped all over what I've already pinpointed, and frankly, I've pinpointed this entire
• 4:00
  situation many months ago as something that works extraordinarily in Donald Trump's advantage, because
• 4:06
  the real problem here is not just the historical inaccuracy of this analysis and the
• 4:13
  absurdity of it. It's the damage that it does. It's the danger that
• 4:17
  it creates by facilitating this false narrative that is so incredibly enticing to so many
• 4:26
  Republicans that somehow Donald Trump must be the Republican nominee or else the left will
• 4:36
  have proven that they can get away with anything, and we will have lost
• 4:40
  our country, We will have lost the Republic. And that has now become
• 4:45
  a cause greater than Trump to make sure that Trump is the nominee, not
• 4:50
  just to stick it to them in a visceral sort of way, but to
• 4:56
  defend the essence of the country. That is at the heart of what Tucker
• 5:00
  Carlson and others have been selling ever since the first indictment against Donald Trump.
• 5:06
  The first indictment against Donald Trump was garbage. I was among those who said
• 5:11
  this very same thing. The second indictment of the federal indictment is not garbage.
• 5:15
  And if it happened against the Democrat with the same fact pattern, Republicans
• 5:17
  would be screaming bloody murder and right for le So so it's wrong on the
• 5:23
  facts, it's wrong on the logic, it's wrong on the law, it's
• 5:26
  wrong on every single level. But the worst part of this is it.
• 5:30
  Tucker Carlson, a guy who is on record in the Dominion Voting System's lawsuit
• 5:34
  Discovery as having said he hates Donald Trump passionately, has become the MVP of
• 5:42
  the Trump campaign by being the most prominent person to create and promote this enticing
• 5:48
  narrative that gives a permission slip to Trump voters more than a permission slip.
• 5:56
  But that's about as good analogy as I can come up with. But it
• 5:59
  gives a permission slip to people who might be on the fence. People kind
• 6:01
  of like Trump, voted for him obviously a couple times in the past,
• 6:05
  if not more so, and wouldn't mind seeing him renominated, and would love
• 6:11
  to see him back in the White House. But they think, you know
• 6:13
  what, maybe his time has passed, Maybe there are better options, Maybe
• 6:16
  he's got too much baggage. No, no, this is now the principal
• 6:20
  argument. This is something greater than Trump himself. This is for the country.
• 6:25
  This is to save the country. We must nominate Donald Trump, and
• 6:30
  we must take on the deep state and the establishment. This establishment, pro
• 6:35
  war establishment is so powerful that they somehow got Jack Smith and a grand jury
• 6:41
  to indict Donald Trump on federal charges related to classified documents, but when Joe
• 6:47
  Biden pulled out of Afghanistan, they didn't do anything to him at all.
• 6:53
  The whole theory is this crackpot doesn't make any sense. It's consistent with what
• 6:57
  I have continually said about Tucker Carls and that he has become a conspiracy theorist
• 7:02
  to an extraordinary degree, buying into all sorts of nonsensical theories about how the
• 7:09
  world works and what our history is, and it has caused him to come
• 7:15
  to faulty and false conclusions. And of course there's the great irony in the
• 7:18
  frustration that this is a guy who's on record saying that he hates Donald Trump
• 7:23
  passionately. You're probably aware that when the first indictment happened and it was obvious
• 7:29
  to me what Tucker was doing, I texted him and was furious and basically
• 7:33
  told him he was going to elect Donald Trump. And he said that he's
• 7:36
  just a talk show host and that it's not his fault what happens, and
• 7:41
  he's just telling his version of the truth. Well, I texted him again
• 7:46
  with some of these fundraising pleas from Trump using his words, very very prominently,
• 7:53
  and I simply said, Tucker, you must be so proud. I
• 7:56
  did not get a response this time, and I was not surprised that I
• 8:00
  did not get a response this time, because Tucker knows. Tucker knows exactly
• 8:03
  what he's doing. He may not fully accept the impact that he's having because
• 8:09
  he doesn't want to. He's just telling what he believes to be the truth,
• 8:13
  which it isn't. But it's having a devastating consequence. And the devastating
• 8:18
  consequence is that it is coming very very close to sealing the Republican nomination for
• 8:24
  Donald Trump, which may, and I'm not as certain of this, may
• 8:30
  seal the general election for Joe Biden, who or whoever or else might be
• 8:35
  the Democratic nominee. Because we'll get to this later on in this episode.
• 8:39
  There has to be at least some Democrats who are getting very worried about whether
• 8:43
  or not Joe Biden's going to be able to get this across the finish line
• 8:46
  from a purely mental and physical perspective. But Tucker Carlson is, without a
• 8:50
  doubt the MVP of the Trump campaign. Tucker Carlson revisited and revised the history
• 8:58
  on January six, with the videotapes that he got from Kevin McCarthy, the
• 9:03
  Speaker of the House. He was the first to create this narrative, and
• 9:07
  Glenn Beck helped him out of the first indictment. He definitely I think even
• 9:11
  his firing helps Donald Trump from the whole standpoint of debilitating Fox News Channel,
• 9:18
  taking away their leverage, making it impossible for them to stand up against Trump,
• 9:22
  especially once Trump became the clear leader in the polls. And now we
• 9:26
  have this second indictment, and Tucker has all this cache, this anti establishment
• 9:31
  cache, because he got fired by Fox News Channel, So he simultaneously diminishes
• 9:37
  the power that Fox News Channel has to take on Trump, while also now
• 9:41
  using his street cred within the Republican ranks to help the guy. He has
• 9:48
  said he hates passionately, and I know that to be true. Everyone who
• 9:52
  knows Tucker knows that to be true. But that's just how completely upside down
• 9:56
  everything is in today's world. That's how broken every element of the news media
• 10:01
  is not just the left wing media, but the right wing media as well.
• 10:05
  And as is almost always the case, the person who gets helped here
• 10:09
  is Donald Trump, and it hurts the country in various ways, And if
• 10:16
  you're wondering whether or not this second indictment was going to cause a surge for
• 10:22
  Donald Trump and the polling, it certainly appears as if it has still a
• 10:26
  little bit early for people to fully understand and comprehend and put into context what
• 10:33
  has happened last week in the previous week with the indictment and the arrayment and
• 10:37
  everything else. Usually takes a couple of weeks for this to cycle through,
• 10:41
  especially as we've head into the summer months and things don't happen quite as quickly.
• 10:46
  But we've gotten some polling data that certainly indicates that Trump has not at
• 10:52
  all been hurt and, in the much more likely scenario, has been greatly
• 10:56
  helped. How greatly we don't know yet, but the evidence is pretty overwhelming
• 11:01
  that Trump is getting yet another bounce thanks to this second indictment, far more
• 11:07
  serious indictment. The most glaring evidence of that came in the Harris Harvard pole.
• 11:13
  I guess it's Harvard Harris pole, which is considered to be a credible
• 11:16
  pole. It is a national poll. I know a lot of people hate
• 11:20
  national polls when it comes to primaries, because that's not how primaries are decided,
• 11:24
  but it is still an important indication of how the Republican base is thinking.
• 11:30
  And frankly, you know, I'm not convinced that when on a state
• 11:35
  the state basis, there's really that much difference anymore in the way that the
• 11:41
  Republican base is thinking. The Republican base has kind of been homogenized and nationalized
• 11:48
  under in the Trump era for a variety of reasons. So I'm not even
• 11:52
  positive that the old wisdom, conventional wisdom, which I think used to be
• 11:58
  true, which is that national polls are irrelevant. All that matters is Iowa
• 12:03
  New Hampshire and then after Iowa New Hampshire people will make up their minds.
• 12:07
  I'm not buying that in the realm of Trump, even though some people still
• 12:11
  are. But this Harris poll is just absolutely horrendous. If you're in my
• 12:16
  camp, which is you don't want Trump to be the nominee and you favor
• 12:20
  strongly Rhoda Santis, because right now Donald Trump is leading by forty five points,
• 12:28
  forty five fucking points nationwide over a shrinking Rhonda Santis. And the most
• 12:35
  bizarre part, the most maybe the most damaging part. If you're Rhonda Santis
• 12:41
  of this poll is that Trump is leading Biden by six points and the Santis
• 12:48
  is not. Now, this is a pole that previously has shown Trump defeating
• 12:54
  Biden, but I think it was seven points previously, so it's basically unchanged
• 12:56
  post indictment. So right there, I don't know how you get around that
• 13:03
  when you're up forty five points nationally and you can't make an electability argument because
• 13:07
  somehow Donald Trump is leading over Biden and Ron De Santis is not. I
• 13:16
  mean, other than that, Missus Lincoln, how was the play. I
• 13:20
  just don't know. I don't know how you get around that. There's there's
• 13:24
  just no way. And there are other polls, both on the state and
• 13:26
  national level, that are backing this particular poll up. Although this I think
• 13:31
  is the most dramatic and the most credible when it comes to this concept.
• 13:37
  There was a Daily Mail poll which kind of backs up my whole theory about
• 13:41
  what's happening in the polling, which is that, basically I'm summarizing here that
• 13:50
  in this poll both Trump and the Santists barely lead Biden by basically the same
• 13:56
  amount, but so no real ability to make an elect stability argument yet DeSantis
• 14:01
  is leading Independence by a ten point margin over what Trump does. In other
• 14:07
  words, De Santis does ten points better with independence nationally than Trump does against
• 14:15
  Biden, yet yet it makes no difference in the overall number. So how
• 14:20
  could that be? Well, that can be because of something that I theorized
• 14:24
  about months ago, where I told you whether it was by a genius design
• 14:31
  or by simple luck of being Donald Trump, or somewhere in between, that
• 14:37
  what Trump was doing in his attacks against Rhonda Sanctimonious was that he was signaling
• 14:46
  both consciously and subconsciously to his most ardent cult members to not tell posters that
• 14:52
  they're going to vote for Rhonda Santis against Joe Biden. Because the only way
• 15:00
  the Santist can be outdoing Trump by ten points among independents against Joe Biden and
• 15:05
  not doing any better against Biden head to head overall is if a lot of
• 15:11
  hardcore Republicans are simply saying they're undecided or maybe even saying that they're they're favoring
• 15:18
  Joe Biden over rhn to De Santis. And this poll really illustrated that in
• 15:24
  very dramatic terms. But the whether whether it's happening because of my theory or
• 15:28
  for some other reason that's beyond my grasp. It almost doesn't matter because the
• 15:33
  reality is you can't make the electability argument when there's no data to back this
• 15:41
  up. And that's the situation right now. I mean, if you're not
• 15:45
  going to make the COVID argument, which I've talked about previously and will again
• 15:50
  shortly because of something that Gavin Newsom did, that should be the greatest thing
• 15:54
  that ever happened to the Santist campaign. But apparently it's not going to be.
• 15:58
  If you're not going to make the of an argument. You're not going
• 16:00
  to go after Trump on these indictments or just as general incompetence as a leader
• 16:07
  or whatever. There's all a million different things you can go after Donald Trump
• 16:11
  on. If you're not going to do that, and you're just simply going
• 16:14
  to take the high road and you know, point to your record and say
• 16:18
  I'm more electable. Okay, that might theoretically work in a rash of the
• 16:22
  world, except you have no data to back that up there, and there's
• 16:26
  no perception of the population that is even open to that. All the polls,
• 16:33
  all the focus groups, all the anecdotal evidence is the most Republicans think
• 16:37
  that Trump is well positioned to be Biden, largely because Biden is so weak,
• 16:42
  but also because somehow the magic of twenty sixteen still hasn't worn off.
• 16:48
  I mean, Ben Shapiro talks about this quite a bit, where where somehow
• 16:56
  you know Trump is a wizard still twenty twenty three because of this fluke that
• 17:02
  happened in twenty sixteen and defeating a very unpopular Hillary Clinton by pulling an inside
• 17:07
  straight losing the popular vote but being able to win the three Midwestern states was
• 17:11
  consint Michigan, and Pennsylvania in a basically a miracle. And by the way,
• 17:17
  since then, Trump has done absolutely positively nothing in Wisconsin, Michigan or
• 17:23
  Pennsylvania. Has had numerous defeats in all three of those states in the twenty
• 17:30
  eighteen, twenty twenty, twenty twenty two elections. And so it was a
• 17:33
  miracle, but somehow it hasn't worn off. He's still the wizard of Oz
• 17:40
  and not the man behind the curtain to the majority of Republican voters. And
• 17:45
  so I don't know how you make that argument. And I am now ready
• 17:51
  to actually make a call. I'm not going to make a call in the
• 17:55
  general Republican nominating process yet, although I'm tempted to do so. But here's
• 18:00
  here's a call I'm gonna make. I believe that New Hampshire is over.
• 18:06
  I believe that there is no chance. I mean, this always has the
• 18:11
  caveat of Trump's not in a hospital or he's not in a prison cell,
• 18:15
  which is not going to happen by the time the New Hampshire primary comes around
• 18:19
  in early twenty twenty four. But Ron de Santras is not going to win
• 18:23
  New Hampshire, period end of sentence. And there are many reasons why he's
• 18:30
  not going to win New Hampshire. I will outline them briefly here since I'm
• 18:34
  a quote unquote officially making this call. But number one is they're putting everything
• 18:41
  into Iowa, which I agree with because that's the only hope at this point.
• 18:44
  You know, they're putting this massive effort and door to door knocking in
• 18:48
  Iowa, and that kind of organization theoretically matters in Iowa. Okay, So
• 18:52
  you put everything to Iowa and you win Iowa, You're not going to blow
• 18:56
  Trump out of Iowa. By the way. You're losing dramatically currently in Iowa
• 19:00
  based upon the most recent polls. But okay, whatever, people aren't paying
• 19:03
  attention yet. I guess that's the theory. So I'm gonna give you the
• 19:07
  idea that you're gonna win Iowa. But you're not gonna win Iowa even under
• 19:11
  the best of circumstances by a blowout that completely changes everyone's mind about Trump being
• 19:15
  the alpha male. At best, you're going to sneak out a win in
• 19:18
  Iowa. That's the best case scenario. Well, having watched these situations for
• 19:25
  over forty years as a political junkie, I gotta tell you, with a
• 19:32
  hundred percent certainty, on both the Democrat and Republican side, there is a
• 19:37
  phenomenon in New Hampshire that they always try to reverse what happens in Iowa.
• 19:44
  It's remarkable. I don't know what the percentage of New Hampshire fights who believe
• 19:48
  this or think this way, but there is something going on there, whether
• 19:55
  it's five to ten percent of the population that just decides, you know what,
• 19:59
  screw Iowa. If they go one way, I'm going to go the
• 20:02
  other way. So historically it is almost impossible unless it's a blowout situation to
• 20:10
  win both Iowa and New Hampshire. So you've got that going against you if
• 20:14
  you then win Iowa if you're the Santis. So you have this this idea
• 20:18
  that New Hampshire rights aren't going to want to end the process by voting for
• 20:23
  De Santis over Trump, who obviously has a cult following and won New Hampshire
• 20:30
  significantly in twenty sixteen. And there's at least two poles that have come out
• 20:36
  in the last couple of days that indicate that he is blowing the doors off
• 20:40
  of New Hampshire right now. So there's no indication, even post indictment,
• 20:45
  that his popularity there has waned at all, and in fact seems to be
• 20:48
  on the increase. So there's the reverse Iowa effect. Then there's the RFK
• 20:55
  Junior impact, which I have stated previously but which is now becoming more and
• 21:00
  more obvious and more and more dramatic because Arka Junior is starting to get a
• 21:06
  lot of traction on the right, especially after this interview he did on Joe
• 21:10
  Rogan's podcast, which I'll get to momentarily. But I've always felt that r
• 21:15
  K Junior was a major problem for the Santis in New Hampshire because of the
• 21:19
  way that New Hampshire does their primaries where if you are undeclared, you can
• 21:25
  choose, and most of the state is undeclared, you can choose which primary
• 21:29
  you want to vote in. And because it appears as if Biden's not even
• 21:32
  going to be on the ballot, there are going to be a lot of
• 21:34
  people who are going to make a protest symbolic principle in their minds vote for
• 21:41
  RFK jor in that New Hampshire primary. And a lot of those people are
• 21:47
  people that should be on paper the Santis voters voting against Trump for his support
• 21:53
  of the vaccines and voting Ford to Santis for his opposition to COVID tier Ernie.
• 22:00
  Those are natural potential De Santis voters who are going to vote for RFK
• 22:06
  Junior. And I've been sounding this alarm for months, and now it's more
• 22:10
  and more obvious as Fox News Channel embraces RFK Junior and Joe Rogan embraces RFK
• 22:15
  Junior and Elon Musk is playing foot see with RFK Junior that De Santis has
• 22:22
  completely lost that portion of the voting population, at least in New Hampshire.
• 22:29
  And then there's the issue of Chris Christie. Now, the biggest threat to
• 22:34
  RHNDO Santis's campaign, at least in the short run, was always not clearing
• 22:41
  the non Trump field one from a clutter standpoint, because if you have all
• 22:48
  these people taking up five to six seven percent, that starts to add up.
• 22:51
  And you know, Trump can win with forty two percent like he did
• 22:53
  in twenty sixteen. But the biggest threat was that somebody actually threatens him for
• 23:02
  second place. And even before his most recent media blitz, Chris Christie is
• 23:08
  already getting traction in New Hampshire, and he's getting traction in New Hampshire.
• 23:15
  Now, he has no chance of getting traction nationwide because he hated but New
• 23:18
  Hampshire is a very independent minded state, and you know New Jersey's not far
• 23:22
  away. And you know this is a guy who ran in twenty sixteen and
• 23:27
  torpedoed Mark Rubio in New Hampshire. And I'm not suggesting Chris Christie is gonna
• 23:33
  win New Hampshire or even finished second in New Hampshire, but he's got enough
• 23:37
  traction, largely because Chris Sun, the very anti Trump governor New Hampshire,
• 23:45
  has officially decided he's not running. So he's not in the polling anymore,
• 23:49
  so they sun no vote, which should have gone to the Santis in a
• 23:55
  rational world, is clearly breaking for Chris Christie based upon these two post indictment
• 24:00
  polls that have just come out in New Hampshire, and with Chris Christie now
• 24:06
  being a legitimate force in New Hampshire, and with the field not going to
• 24:11
  be cleared, the field will not be cleared by New Hampshire. Everyone on
• 24:17
  the De Santa side thass all these people will drop out. They don't have
• 24:19
  the money. There's nothing to force them out. I mean, vavak Ramaswami's
• 24:23
  in there to help Trump. Mike Pence is unemployed. Nicky Haley is unemployed.
• 24:30
  You know, Tim Scott's got a job in the in the sentities a
• 24:33
  black guy, no one's going to force him out. He's the only black
• 24:36
  guy in the race. Chris Christie is getting enough media attention on the left,
• 24:41
  and he's not really been trying to win, so he's not going to
• 24:44
  spend a lot of money. He's just there to try to get into the
• 24:45
  debates. So there's no there's no scenario where any of these people have any
• 24:52
  reason to get the hell out until maybe South Carolina. When they don't they
• 24:57
  stop. You know, they're getting embarrassed by single digit performances in Iowa,
• 25:02
  New Hampshire, Nevada. And you know, if you're Nicky Hanley and Tim
• 25:04
  Scott, it's your home state. You don't want to be humiliated there.
• 25:07
  See you get out, but you're probably going to endorse Trump if he's the
• 25:11
  guy who's winning, or endorse nobody. So the reality here is that the
• 25:18
  field is not going to be cleared. And if Christie has enough traction to
• 25:22
  where he has the Chris Sinnuno vote and the anti Trump vote where he is
• 25:29
  clearly staking out that lane by being willing and able to attack Trump when no
• 25:33
  one else is willing or able to do so, then all those things combined
• 25:38
  make it literally impossible for Ronda Santras to win New Hampshire. The reverse Iowa
• 25:44
  effect, the RFK Junior effect, and now Chris Christie getting traction in New
• 25:48
  Hampshire. I realize people say it's so long now between now New Hampshire.
• 25:53
  No, nothing's going to happen in the next couple of months except maybe Trump
• 25:56
  getting indicted again, which means another bounce for Trump until the debates. I
• 26:02
  don't believe Trump's even going to do the debates. If he does, they
• 26:04
  will be very stunted, sabotaged events where it's impossible to lay a glove on
• 26:11
  Trump. And by then, you know, you start getting into the late
• 26:15
  fall and the holidays, and people aren't paying paying that much attention. All
• 26:19
  of a sudden, you're there and Santis has to focus so much on Iowa.
• 26:25
  There's just no chance. So I'm making the call right now, Ronda
• 26:29
  Santis will not win New Hampshire. And historically that is very bad news,
• 26:36
  because New Hampshire is a far better historical bellweather for who's gonna win the Republican
• 26:42
  nomination than Iowa is. And that's not even close. Now, that doesn't
• 26:47
  mean that it can't be done. I mean I even put out a theory
• 26:49
  on Twitter as to what you would do theoretically if you understood the desperate situation
• 26:55
  and you're to the Santist campaign, which they don't seem to understand. I
• 26:57
  mean, I theorize that, Okay, you abandoned New Hampshire, you put
• 27:02
  everything into Iowa and South Carolina. You make a deal with Tim Scott,
• 27:07
  the Senator from South Carolina to be your vice presidential nominee. You challenge Trump
• 27:11
  to determine who his vice presidential nominee is going to be so that people can
• 27:15
  make a determination, okay, to Santa Scott versus Trump and who I have
• 27:21
  no idea who that might be. Not the Trump would either do it.
• 27:23
  But you've got to do something. And you even make that you even make
• 27:29
  the pledge that if you don't win anything by the time South Carolina runs comes
• 27:34
  around, you get out and you and you urge everyone else to make the
• 27:37
  same pledge that they get out too if they don't win anything by South Carolina.
• 27:41
  And then you live in Iowa and South Carolina because New Hampshire is a
• 27:48
  lost cause. You must you must have banned in South Carolina. I mean,
• 27:52
  you must have banned in New Hampshire. If you're round to Santas,
• 27:53
  you need to live in Iowa and South Carolina. Now, I have zero
• 27:57
  indication the Santist campaign is even aware of the level of despair and desperation that
• 28:06
  they should be feeling and in order to even be thinking along the lines of
• 28:10
  doing something as outside the box as I just suggested. But you know that's
• 28:15
  part of the problem. They don't understand how much trouble there is. They
• 28:18
  seem to be remarkably comfortable with what's happening, and none of it is good,
• 28:26
  and all of it seems as if the handwriting is more and more on
• 28:30
  the wall. And I have to say that it's interesting to say to note
• 28:34
  that even Chris Christie seems to be taking I mentioned this in the last episode
• 28:40
  of the podcast, seems to be taking veiled shots at the Santist campaign by
• 28:44
  saying, hey, look, you know, if you're going to beat Trump,
• 28:47
  you go out. I have to go after him a little bit.
• 28:49
  And Christie has has done it. Now Christy has nothing to lose. I'll
• 28:55
  defend the Santis in that regard, where you know, at least the Santis
• 28:59
  has something to lose, although it's less and less to lose. Christie has
• 29:03
  nothing to lose. He only gains by doing this. He gets traction in
• 29:07
  New Hampshire, he gets liberal media attention, he increases the chances that he'll
• 29:11
  get rehired in the news media. Actress campaign is done. After he flames
• 29:15
  out, you know, maybe a third place finish in New Hampshire. I
• 29:19
  don't know how long he'll go after that. But the reality is Chris Christie
• 29:23
  has nothing to lose and everything to gain. But that doesn't mean he's wrong
• 29:29
  about Hey, look, how do you beat Trump without going after him?
• 29:32
  And it was fascinating to me that Chris Suu, the governor of New Hampshire,
• 29:37
  anti Trumper, who considered running for president, decided not to and was
• 29:42
  thought to be a natural Desantist. Ally, he came out and basically made
• 29:48
  the Chris Christie argument, which seemed to be an attempt to communicate with the
• 29:55
  Desantist campaign, at least that's how I interpreted it, wherein no certain uncertain
• 30:00
  terms, he bludgeoned what he referred to as the non Trump candidates. But
• 30:06
  it's obvious that he to me that he means de Santis, since DeSantis is
• 30:08
  the only one who has a chance to win. He bludging their strategy of
• 30:15
  effectively allowing Trump to go unscathed them at times seeming to support him. And
• 30:22
  here's what he said about that. I think there's a completely inconsistent message from
• 30:29
  them as a group, even individually, they seem to be wavering in their
• 30:32
  messages. I feel like there's a lot of political consultants whispering in both their
• 30:36
  ears at once, and they depending on what time of day it is,
• 30:38
  you get it kind of a different message. So I don't know. I
• 30:42
  just I think there's a huge opportunity to have a clear and consistent Republican message
• 30:48
  from all of the candidates running for president. That's not happening right now,
• 30:52
  and I think it it allows Donald Trump to stay, you know, well
• 30:56
  ahead in the polls and you know, keep rallying more Republican support to behind
• 31:03
  him, as opposed to getting the Republican Party the average voter to really appreciate
• 31:07
  that the Donald Trump is for Donald Trump doesn't really represent the pillars of the
• 31:11
  Republican Party. And if they would all talk in that concert with a lot
• 31:15
  with the specificity and the clarity that I think they could be doing, I
• 31:18
  think they'd be a lot stronger movement away from Donald Trump and all of them
• 31:22
  rising tide kind of floats all votes, all of them would be doing much
• 31:26
  better in the polls. But by them not hitting him hard, by not
• 31:29
  them not calling the truth of this and the severity of this matter to bear,
• 31:34
  it allows him to It almost looks like they're defending him at times.
• 31:38
  I don't think they need to do that. But I think they if you're
• 31:41
  not coming down hard on the guy that's the forty points ahead of you in
• 31:44
  the polls when he's being indicted, what's going on, Like, I don't
• 31:48
  know, if you know, they do realize they're running against him, right
• 31:53
  Obviously I agree with Chris Sanunu there, and I think that he put it
• 31:57
  in very effective terms. I think that the fundamental problem for the Desantist campaign,
• 32:06
  if you look in the big picture, their largest, most significant big
• 32:12
  picture mistake was not even specifically abandoning the COVID issue, which have come up
• 32:19
  again shortly in this podcast, But in the big picture. Here's the way
• 32:23
  I look at it. The Republican Party basically breaks down into three groups.
• 32:29
  Right now, you have the Trump cult. You have the anti Trump people
• 32:35
  who will do anything they can for Trump not to be the nominee and might
• 32:38
  not even vote for him in a general election. And then you have in
• 32:43
  the middle of that, you have a group of people who like Trump but
• 32:47
  are open to another scenario. They're open to another option, but they really
• 32:54
  have to be convinced. They have to be given good reason to abandon Trump
• 33:01
  and to go with somebody else. And the fundamental desantist problem slash mistake is
• 33:09
  he hasn't picked the lane. You have to pick a lane first. You
• 33:15
  need a base of support, and desantists is really only appealing if you think
• 33:23
  about it in broad terms, He's only appealing to that group in the middle,
• 33:29
  the group in the middle of Trump fans who are open to somebody new
• 33:35
  but really need to be convinced. But he's not convincing them, and they
• 33:42
  don't want to be convinced because they're so enraged by the left's attack on Trump
• 33:47
  and these indictments against Trump, so they're no longer really listening. And so
• 33:54
  desantists, in a shorter way to put this is he didn't clear the non
• 34:01
  Trump field. The first thing he should have done is to make sure it
• 34:08
  was clear he is the non Trump guy. If you are not a fan
• 34:15
  of Donald Trump, if you don't want him to be the nominee, if
• 34:17
  you fear how he'll do in a general election, I'm your guy. And
• 34:22
  he could have done that in a million different ways, but you needed to
• 34:27
  shore up that lane. You needed to own that own that first so that
• 34:34
  those people are with you no matter what. That's your base and they don't
• 34:37
  go scurrying off to Chris Christie or or who somebody else, because, as
• 34:44
  I referred to them many months ago, you know, this is like hurting
• 34:46
  cats. You need to have that base of support. And the Santists either
• 34:54
  took those people for granted, or his campaign did, or tried to build
• 35:00
  a bridge that may not be buildable. Because I understand why the the Santist
• 35:06
  campaign has been unwilling to pick a lane, because they know they need all
• 35:09
  these people to eventually become president if he wins the nomination. You cannot,
• 35:15
  in their minds, piss off Trump supporters to the extent where a third or
• 35:21
  whatever it is, thirty to forty percent of the Republican Party base doesn't support
• 35:27
  you in a general action because you have attacked their cult leader, and so
• 35:32
  the fear of that has created a situation where the Santist is now appealing to
• 35:38
  a very small group of people, and the people that has campaign are targeting.
• 35:45
  The people in the middle aren't interested because frankly, I don't think they're
• 35:50
  even open minded anymore, at least not in the short run, because they're
• 35:53
  so enraged by what is happening to Trump by the so called establishment left or
• 36:00
  whatever conspiracy they want to make up in their brains, and so you know
• 36:05
  it. Trump's portion of the vote, while it's increasing slightly, is not
• 36:10
  the biggest problem. The biggest problem is that the Santists support is shrinking.
• 36:15
  And I really think it's because of this particular issue that I just articulated that
• 36:22
  the Santists didn't pick or his team did not pick a lane. He did
• 36:25
  not clear the non Trump field first. He did not make sure everyone knew
• 36:31
  if you don't like Donald Trump, I'm your guy, and let me prove
• 36:36
  it to you by going after him on what would have obviously been the most
• 36:40
  the most clear cut and most effective issue would have been the COVID response,
• 36:46
  and he has not done that, despite numerous opportunities to do so. I
• 36:52
  mean, can you imagine, I mean, if you had told me before
• 36:54
  the campaign began, when before the Santist finally got in, if you would
• 37:00
  outlined, okay, John, what's a dream scenario for de Santus here and
• 37:04
  you forget about the Twitter announcement debacle? John outlined for me a realistic dream
• 37:10
  scenario it would have been for De Santis. It would have been very difficult
• 37:15
  for me to come up with something better than the following series of events.
• 37:21
  Well, wouldn't it be awesome if right after de Sandus announced, Trump did
• 37:25
  something really stupid like putting out a video where he declared that Andrew Cuomo's COVID
• 37:34
  response in New York was better than Rhoda Santas's COVID response in Florida. Wouldn't
• 37:40
  that be awesome if that happened? And wouldn't it be great if Cuomo then
• 37:46
  backed up Trump's efforts to condemn Florida's response so that Cuomo disgrace former governor of
• 37:54
  New York, guy who killed people in nursing homes, that he would be
• 38:00
  tied to Donald Trump. Wouldn't that be great if that happened? And wouldn't
• 38:06
  it be awesome if not Long after, Trump had praised Gavin Newsome, super
• 38:15
  woke governor of California with Tucker Carlson and Fox News Channel, said that he
• 38:21
  was so nice to him, especially during COVID that he couldn't hit him,
• 38:25
  and so he was, you know, and this is a guy who was
• 38:28
  kind of already in his tribe because he's his former wife, is Donald Trump's
• 38:35
  favorite sons fiance Kimberly Gilfoyle. I mean, so, so it's very easy
• 38:39
  to tie Trump and Newsom together. Wouldn't it be great if Trump did that?
• 38:44
  And oh, you know what, I know this is crazy, but
• 38:46
  wouldn't it be even better if in an interview with Sean Hannity. I know
• 38:51
  this is crazy that this whatever happened, but that an interview was Sean Hannity,
• 38:55
  Gavin Newsom would praise Donald Trump on COVID. Wouldn't that just be awesome?
• 39:01
  If that? Ever? I know this is insane to even contemplate the
• 39:06
  possibility of this occurring, but wouldn't that just be an incredible opportunity to take
• 39:12
  advantage of the main reason for why the de Santis campaign exists? And I
• 39:15
  know this is this is really off the charts, This is really off the
• 39:19
  charts. But just for it, because this is a fantasy, right,
• 39:22
  I'm going to throw in what if Hannity offered to host a debate between Gavin
• 39:30
  Newsom and Ron DeSantis? Yeah, what if Tannity did that? And what
• 39:37
  if Newsome enthusiastically said yes? Now, that would be a scenario that would
• 39:45
  just be manna from heaven. I mean, I just can't even imagine something
• 39:50
  that would be better than the timeline of events that I just articulated. Of
• 39:55
  course, it's all fantasy, you would never happen. Except everything I just
• 40:00
  told you has happened, every single word of it. I may even be
• 40:07
  under playing some of it. And despite all of that happening, that the
• 40:12
  Santis campaign has essentially, somehow inexplicably taken a pass for those that you,
• 40:22
  of you who may not be aware of the last part of that scenario that
• 40:27
  I outlined, I want to play a couple of clips for you, because
• 40:30
  I gotta tell you, this debate situation has gotten so little attention that even
• 40:37
  I, who live on Twitter and who am deeply, deeply interested in everything
• 40:45
  the Santas and everything Newsome and everything media, even I was not fully aware
• 40:52
  of this until a couple of days after it happened. And the only reason
• 40:55
  why I became fully aware of it was that the Waltz Journal wrote a column
• 41:04
  championing the idea of this proposed Newsome de Santist debate, and it was my
• 41:12
  father in our Father's Day call. My father is not a very political person.
• 41:15
  He's not very conservative. He is not a covid hawk by any stretch
• 41:21
  of imagination. His wife is basically a covidiot, but he knows my feelings
• 41:27
  on COVID, and even he thought that it's absolutely insane that the Santists is
• 41:34
  not taking on Newsome on the COVID issue in general and taking him up on
• 41:40
  a debate in particular, because he even he realizes that this would be potentially
• 41:46
  very effective in a Republican primary. And so the amount of attention that this
• 41:52
  has been getting has been bizarrely low, I think mainly because the Santis fandom
• 42:01
  doesn't really know how to react to this, especially since their leadership has given
• 42:07
  no indication that they want to take Newsom up on the offer. But before
• 42:10
  I get to De Santis's reaction to this, here is the actual offer that
• 42:17
  Hannity made to Newsome to host a debate between Newsome and DeSantis, and how
• 42:28
  Newsome made no bones about the fact that he is all in. I guess
• 42:32
  because he's just that confident after having slayd Sean Hannity, which wasn't very difficult
• 42:37
  because Handity's an idiot, that he could somehow do the same with Rohn De
• 42:42
  Santis. And here that was on Fox News Channel. Here's my question,
• 42:45
  Nabe, I have an idea that you'd agree with. I want to start
• 42:50
  a series of debates and get some of the best, brightest, leading conservative
• 42:57
  minds and some of the best rightist left wing minds or a liberal mind and
• 43:04
  I put you in that category. And I want to call it like the
• 43:07
  great debates. Love it. And the first one I want to do is
• 43:12
  with you and Governor DeSantis. Great, I've offered it. I've been trying
• 43:15
  to debate. Here's how this debate format will go good. I'll say,
• 43:19
  Governor Newsom, Governor DeSantis, economy. That's the only word I'm going to
• 43:23
  throw out you minute minute. Then you go out at next topic, right,
• 43:29
  and I'll moderate it that way, and you have my word, I'll
• 43:30
  moderate it that way. I'm all in count you would do a two hour
• 43:35
  debate was run to say, I would make it three three hour debate?
• 43:37
  Yeah, make my hand more any one day notice with no notes. I
• 43:42
  look forward to that. We can talk now that it is an absolutely extraordinary
• 43:45
  clip. I mean, I can't believe Newsom agreed to do an interview with
• 43:50
  Hannity. I can't believe Hannity asked Newsom to do an interview that I mean,
• 43:52
  there's something going on there. I mean, obviously Hannity is tied at
• 43:55
  the hip with Trump, and Trump seems to like Newsom, a News seems
• 44:00
  to like Trump. And I already mentioned that Kimberly Girlfoyle, who has worked
• 44:04
  for Fox for many years, previously angle on this. There's something that is
• 44:09
  going on here that doesn't meet the eye. But the idea that Newsom would
• 44:15
  agree to go on Fox News Channel, apparently with Sean Hannity and debate Gavin
• 44:22
  Newsom is a scenario that is too good to be true. If you're to
• 44:28
  de Santis campaign, if you're thinking straight, if you understand reality, if
• 44:32
  you understand the circumstances you're in, if you understand that the nature of the
• 44:37
  narrative and what's going on in the Republican base, you could not possibly ask
• 44:42
  for a greater opportunity than this. But the De Santis campaign made no indication
• 44:49
  that they are going to take Newsom up on this extraordinary offer. Now,
• 44:52
  of course, the Santis was asked about it, and I want you to
• 44:57
  listen to the Santis' response very carefully. First of all, he gives no
• 45:01
  sign at all that he'll take Newsom up on his offer. He does make
• 45:07
  a decent point about Okay, Gavin, if you're really want to debate,
• 45:12
  why don't you get into the race? You know, why are you being
• 45:15
  a woos by not running against Joe Biden. I had the courage sort of
• 45:20
  to run against Donald Trump, even though I'm not going to criticize him.
• 45:22
  You don't seem to have the courage to go up against Joe Biden. Okay,
• 45:28
  I'm fine with that, But how in the world do you give a
• 45:31
  minute and a half response on the notion of debating Gavin Newsom and not mention
• 45:39
  the word COVID, which you're not going to hear in this clip from Rhonda
• 45:45
  Santis responding to the idea of debating Gavin Newsom. You know it's interesting,
• 45:52
  Um, he's got huge problems in his state. I mean, like huge
• 45:57
  problems in his state. We all know that. I mean, you see
• 46:00
  it in San Francisco, you see it in La you see it in the
• 46:05
  people fleeing California from its inception, gain population every single year until he became
• 46:12
  governor. I mean, California was probably the height of opportunity for middle class
• 46:17
  Americans for many many decades in this country, no one would leave there,
• 46:22
  you know, you would go people were drawn to there. And yet he's
• 46:27
  the first governor that's overseen a massive exodus out of California. And you know,
• 46:32
  you can kind of understand if somebody comes from Minnesota and moves to Naples,
• 46:37
  better winners, all this stuff. But if you're leaving like southern California
• 46:43
  to move to like Jacksonville, which is a great place, you're not doing
• 46:46
  it because of the weather, because they got probably of the best weather in
• 46:49
  the country. You're doing it because the place is so mismanaged and ill governed
• 46:54
  that you just can't take it anymore. And so and yet with all those
• 46:59
  problems, he has a real serious fixation on the state of Florida. I
• 47:04
  mean, I think it's just bizarre that he does that. But what I
• 47:06
  would tell what I would tell him is, you know what, stop pussy
• 47:09
  footing around. Are you gonna are you going to throw your hat in the
• 47:17
  ring and challenge Joe. Are you gonna get in and do it or are
• 47:22
  you just gonna sit on the sidelines and chirp? So, why don't you
• 47:23
  throw your hat in the ring and then we'll go ahead and talk about what's
• 47:28
  happening. So now I have talked previously on this podcast about my fear and
• 47:35
  my belief that there has now been a decision made within the highest realm of
• 47:43
  the Dessanders campaign to not make the COVID response a primary point of emphasis in
• 47:53
  the campaign strategy, which is just totally, incompletely bizarre to me. I
• 48:00
  do not understand it even a little bit, and I have a theory that
• 48:06
  is basically half baked as to how this may have happened. The only thing
• 48:12
  that makes any sense to me is that they got a really bad focus group.
• 48:16
  They seem to have done a lot of focus grouping, and I can
• 48:22
  see a scenario where if you put together a bad focus group on COVID,
• 48:27
  you know, let's say you had a couple of covidiots sneak in there and
• 48:30
  then and the non covidiot portions of the focus group were afraid to offend the
• 48:36
  covidiots and they just went along with what the covidiots and the focus group were
• 48:40
  saying. I could see maybe where you would get such a bad focus group
• 48:47
  that you, the person in charge of the focus group, would come back
• 48:50
  and say absolutely positively this is a bad issue for US. I would hope
• 48:54
  that that one bad focus group wouldn't be enough to determine the entire campaign strategy.
• 49:00
  But that's the only theory, and I have absolutely positively no evidence to
• 49:04
  back this up. This is just me thinking, Okay, what is a
• 49:07
  possible, plausible scenario that would explain this. But it's clear from that answer,
• 49:14
  at least to me, that was the strongest evidence yet that that's in
• 49:17
  fact the case. Because you can't it's on a silver platter there. And
• 49:22
  if you're not going to debate Newsom, I guess there are theoretically reasons why
• 49:28
  you wouldn't. I don't agree with them at all. But if you're gonna
• 49:30
  do this, I mean, wouldn't you at least mention COVID? I mean
• 49:36
  every single time you contract yourself with Gavin Newsom. That's the number one thing,
• 49:42
  that's the number one reason why the Santist lives in Newsom's head because it
• 49:46
  was the Santist that proved that Newsom's perspective on how to respond to the pandemic
• 49:52
  was completely wrong. That's why the Santist drives Newsom crazy, because without the
• 50:00
  Santist, Newsom would still be able to dictate in California the way that he
• 50:06
  was doing for two plus years over COVID, but Florida's response effectively eventually ended
• 50:14
  Newsom's ability to do that. It took away his kinglike godlike powers. And
• 50:20
  it drives Newsome nuts and so for the santist and not just dodge this incredible
• 50:27
  opportunity on Fox News Channel theoretically, I guess, or at least on Sean
• 50:30
  Hannity's radio show some I mean, you got somebody with conservative Trump Street cred
• 50:37
  and Sean Hannity hosting in a debate where you get the massacre maybe the biggest
• 50:45
  liberal boogeyman, certainly the biggest boogeyman on COVID. What should be your number
• 50:49
  one issue? I mean, again, you just cannot ask for this,
• 50:53
  You cannot ask for anything better than this. And to change the subject,
• 50:59
  I mean, you know, get it away from Trump's indictment. This allows
• 51:02
  you to contrast yourself with Trump without actually attacking him directly. You could have
• 51:07
  tied Newsom to Trump. It highlights the strength of your entire candidacy, the
• 51:15
  entire reason why at one point you were almost tied with Donald Trump in the
• 51:21
  polls, the reason why you won reelection in Florida by twenty points and turned
• 51:27
  Florida from a purple state to a red state. I mean, it's just
• 51:30
  this is this is simple stuff. I mean, it's just so obvious that
• 51:36
  it's just it's almost hard for me to be angry about it because it's so
• 51:40
  stupefying and so laughable and so absurd that you just have to find the humor
• 51:47
  in it at this point, because I do not understand it from a political
• 51:52
  standpoint, and I've had people on the Santa's people on Twitter completely backed the
• 51:59
  idea that this to be a bad move to debate Newsome. It elevates Newsome.
• 52:04
  He's not in the race. It's a distraction. What you're down forty
• 52:10
  points? This is, you know, to put in football terms, I
• 52:16
  mean, you've you've just been handed a situation where you got a wide open
• 52:22
  receiver down the field and you're not gonna throw the ball. Why what do
• 52:30
  you have to lose at this point? And so what when? And if
• 52:36
  this all turns out as badly as I anticipate it's likely to do, do
• 52:39
  so, I mean, this is the moment right here. I mean,
• 52:42
  this is this was the point of no return. You know, when you're
• 52:46
  when you're turning down debates with Gavin Newsom and your entire persona is never back
• 52:52
  down. That's the name of your pack and uh, and you're the guy
• 52:57
  who saved the country when it came to the COVID response and you're not going
• 53:01
  to go after Gavin Newsom when given this kind of an opportunity. I can't
• 53:07
  help you. I really can't help you. And it's really to the point
• 53:09
  where if there was another viable option to go up against Donald Trump at this
• 53:15
  point, I would definitely be in the market. I mean, I loved
• 53:17
  Ronda Santis more than anybody I know. But this is this is this is
• 53:22
  indefensible, This is absurd, and it becomes really hilarious when over this past
• 53:29
  weekend there was this event in the Vada where where the santist was and NBC
• 53:35
  News did a really nice and fair article, especially for NBC, with the
• 53:39
  general gist and even the headline of the article being, Hey, you know,
• 53:45
  there are a lot of people in Nevada that really were drawn to Ronda
• 53:47
  Santis because of his response to COVID. Imagine that. Wow, boy,
• 53:55
  there's a shocker NBC seemed a bit shocked by this, but wow, this
• 54:00
  is really odd. The people we spoke to and Nevada, they really liked
• 54:04
  A. Sandis because of what he did when it came to the response to
• 54:08
  COVID. And remember, Nevada borders California, so everything that was happening in
• 54:13
  California with Newsome had a major impact in Nevada because that's the way it was
• 54:17
  working back then, and a lot of people were fleeting. My family and
• 54:23
  I were one of those that fled California very early on before Nevada became completely
• 54:30
  shut down and went into Nevada and Utah to try to get away from the
• 54:36
  California insanity. But the reality here is here is NBC News, of all
• 54:42
  places, giving de Sandis some credit and also making the argument that I'm making
• 54:47
  that this is the reason why people are drawn to the Santis and you're just
• 54:52
  going to abandon that and instead, you know, there was another news article.
• 54:57
  I think it was political, but I'm not one hundreds insure, but
• 55:00
  but this was an article that the Santists war room twitter feed shared publicly that
• 55:07
  praise DeSantis for not getting into the intraparty fights and instead focusing on Biden.
• 55:17
  Now, what a load of crap. This is the idea that, well,
• 55:21
  you're gonna be above the fray in intra party fights. There is no
• 55:25
  intra party fighting. It's either you against Trump or you're not engaging. Now,
• 55:32
  look, I wish we lived in a world. I so wish we
• 55:36
  lived in a world where De Santis could just ignore Trump and say, here's
• 55:40
  my record, compare it to anybody else in this race. And you know,
• 55:45
  here's this, I can run for two terms. There's other people in
• 55:49
  this race that can't run for two terms. And I'm forty four years old.
• 55:52
  I can contrast. You know, my age, and you know,
• 55:57
  my situation with Joe Biden's better than anybody else in this race. I wish
• 56:02
  we lived in a world where that would do the trick. There's still the
• 56:07
  Santas people who think that that's going to do the trick. There's no evidence
• 56:10
  of that at all. Again, barring a hospital stay or a prison cell,
• 56:15
  I mean, there's just there's just no evidence of that. There's no
• 56:20
  logic after seven years of watching what is going down with Trump that this is
• 56:24
  a logical scenario. So you're going down a path that you know, you're
• 56:30
  just hoping for a miracle. That's what That's what the de Santis campaign strategy
• 56:34
  appears to be, stay the course and pray for a miracle. And you
• 56:38
  know, I'm not someone who believes in miracles, and especially in modern America,
• 56:42
  they don't seem to happen anymore in our favor, and so I just
• 56:46
  think this is a very naive and tragically flawed strategy and I don't, unfortunately
• 56:54
  see it changing until it's probably way too late, because, as I have
• 56:58
  said continually, I am the belief that we are much later in this process
• 57:02
  because of the unique nature of Trump than almost anybody else understands. That's the
• 57:07
  number one misunderstanding I have found with the Santis supporters. They think that it's
• 57:14
  June of twenty twenty three, and that that means this is a super early
• 57:19
  early stage in the process. It's not. It's not a super early stage.
• 57:24
  We already know so much of what we need to know about how this
• 57:28
  is going to go down. The reaction to the indictments is incredibly telling.
• 57:34
  And the fact that in the key part of this, the reason why the
• 57:37
  polling is in fact significant, is that this is not a situation where Trump
• 57:42
  is just simply maintaining his lead that he always had because no one's paying attention
• 57:46
  yet, no one's really thought about the issues, and no one is you
• 57:51
  know, kind of trasted in their mind how Trump would do in a general
• 57:53
  election versus Biden and how the Sandis might do. No, this was almost
• 57:59
  a tie race three or four months ago, and now Trump's up by about
• 58:04
  forty points nationwide. That shows people are paying attention and they have changed their
• 58:09
  minds. And once you start to gravitate towards a challenger and what effectively would
• 58:15
  be a coup, and then you change your mind and you go back to
• 58:21
  Trump, I think it's even more difficult to get people to change their minds
• 58:27
  back. It was difficult enough to change them to begin with. But now
• 58:30
  the perception has been created that, Yep, we're really going to do this,
• 58:34
  because that was the big question heading into this year, are we really
• 58:37
  going to do this with Trump again? Seriously, former president twice impeached seventy
• 58:43
  seventy seven years old. By the time he'd be elected to go up against
• 58:46
  Biden, we already lost to We're really going to do this, guys?
• 58:51
  And the answer has been yeah, sure, what the fuck, let's do
• 58:52
  this again. And so now once that's the answer, then they really need
• 58:59
  a reason for being pole to reverse course again, And I don't know what
• 59:02
  that would be because I'm not buying the Well, it's theoretically possible the idea
• 59:08
  that the third or fourth indictment would suddenly make people too tired. And part
• 59:14
  of the reason why I'm not buying that is, once these indictments happen,
• 59:16
  it's gonna be months before anything really occurs. Like it's words dominating the news
• 59:22
  coverage where Trump is in a courtroom where where people are testifying I mean this
• 59:28
  classified documents case, because it's dealing with classified documents. My understanding is it's
• 59:34
  going to be incredibly easy for Trump to delay the thing because inherently having witnesses
• 59:40
  or jurors exposed to classifying documents is going to take an extremely long time with
• 59:47
  all sorts of opportunities for delay, and these things always take a long time
• 59:53
  anyway, and Trump's a master at delay. So I'm just I'm just not
• 59:58
  buying it. Look, would I would? I love to be wrong more
• 1:00:00
  than anybody on the planet. Would I love to be wrong. But I'm
• 1:00:04
  just not seeing it enough. To be clear, I'm not officially calling it
• 1:00:07
  yet either, not that my word on this matters, but it might matter
• 1:00:10
  to people who are listening to this podcast. I'm calling New Hampshire. But
• 1:00:15
  that's as far as I'm willing to go at this point, because I still
• 1:00:19
  think there is a theoretical scenario where this can be done. Whether it can
• 1:00:24
  be done effectively in a way that makes you viable for a general election,
• 1:00:28
  that's a completely different story. But I'm not totally giving up hope yet.
• 1:00:31
  But one of the major problems here is that Trump is able to get away
• 1:00:37
  with being so toxic in a general election because Joe Biden is just so incredibly
• 1:00:42
  weak. Just a couple of days ago, inexplicably bizarre, even by Biden
• 1:00:47
  standards, Biden ended a presentation by saying the words God saved the Queen Man.
• 1:01:00
  Had absolutely no relevance whatsoever to what he was saying, made no sense.
• 1:01:06
  People in the press were asking the guy who was in the press pool,
• 1:01:10
  who was the leading representative, what the hell was that all about.
• 1:01:15
  What was there a reason why he said God saved the Queen man? There
• 1:01:20
  was there was nothing that this person could come up with based upon their tweets
• 1:01:25
  and their and their statements publicly, it made no sense. Obviously, the
• 1:01:30
  queen is dead. There is no queen technically, and if you're for even
• 1:01:35
  whatever reason, you would even be referencing the Queen of England. But God
• 1:01:38
  saved the queen man. I mean, this is the type of thing that
• 1:01:43
  if the media wanted to, they could use, along with things like falling
• 1:01:46
  down at the Air Force graduation ceremony, as a very clear example that Joe
• 1:01:52
  Biden should not be the Democratic presidential now minee at the age of eighty years
• 1:01:58
  old, that he's just not up to it, that there's something wrong,
• 1:02:00
  and Democrats have to be worried, not just because of these events that keep
• 1:02:06
  happening on seemingly a weekly, if not sometimes daily basis, but also because
• 1:02:13
  the polling is really starting to suck, even in the general election against Trump.
• 1:02:16
  I mean, they have thought that that was there get out of jail
• 1:02:20
  free card? Was it? No matter what they did with Biden, nobody
• 1:02:24
  can lose to Trump, especially if he's under two or three indictments. He's
• 1:02:29
  so toxic, so unpopular, that there's no way that you can lose to
• 1:02:34
  Trump. Well, now, we haven't seen polling in Georgia or Arizona or
• 1:02:38
  Wisconsin that would provide a path to Trump getting two hundred and seventy electoral college
• 1:02:45
  votes. But in these national polls, which again we do not select the
• 1:02:50
  president by national polls. We do it by electoral college, the reality is
• 1:02:55
  that Trump is at least holding his own, if not beating Biden in most
• 1:03:00
  of these general election polls. And you know the averages. Right now,
• 1:03:06
  he's leading Biden by a little less than two points, which doesn't ensure victory.
• 1:03:13
  And it should be noted that there's a lot of undecided voters which who
• 1:03:16
  would probably decide begrudgingly to go with Biden at the last minute, because the
• 1:03:22
  media would do absolutely everything they possibly could to make sure that occurred. I
• 1:03:25
  mean, the left would pull out all the stops. And I don't think
• 1:03:30
  Republicans are fully understanding what would happen in a general election race where Trump was
• 1:03:37
  trying to get a second term, you know, for retribution. I mean,
• 1:03:42
  we haven't seen anything yet as far as what they would do. Now.
• 1:03:45
  They may not be able to do it simply because Biden is that weak,
• 1:03:49
  but I still think Biden would be the heavy favorite to win in the
• 1:03:53
  electoral college. But the reality is there's reason to worry if you're Democrats.
• 1:04:00
  But they're basically stuck. They're stuck because they can't do anything. They can't
• 1:04:03
  get rid of him, because he doesn't want to go, and because the
• 1:04:06
  Vice president Kamala Harris is so unpopular, Biden isn't going to resign from office.
• 1:04:13
  That's not going to happen unless something really dramatic health wise occurs. And
• 1:04:17
  that means that if Biden were to say he's not going to run for reelection,
• 1:04:24
  Okay, so then you have Harris. Obviously she would run, but
• 1:04:29
  because she's not president yet, that would at least make her somewhat vulnerable to
• 1:04:32
  Newsom. But that would be a brutal that would be worse, I think,
• 1:04:36
  in some ways than the Trump the Santist battle in the Republican Party,
• 1:04:41
  because then you'd have the whole issue over there of Okay, well, you
• 1:04:45
  have a historic black woman of you know, a black theoretical woman woman of
• 1:04:49
  color, not technically African American, but she's obviously a woman of color,
• 1:04:55
  and she would be historic Kamala Harris versus you know, a white, straight
• 1:05:00
  guy and Gavin Newsom, and that would cause all sorts of problems within the
• 1:05:04
  woke religion, not to mention that neither of those two candidates would be particularly
• 1:05:10
  popular in a general election, and that Trump could theoretically beat either of them.
• 1:05:14
  So Democrats are in an increasingly difficult spot. And I gotta tell you
• 1:05:19
  the fact that RK Junior is getting a lot more traction can't be making them
• 1:05:26
  feel particularly comfortable either. Now. I am not of the belief that RFK
• 1:05:30
  Jr. Is a threat to win the Democrat nomination against Joe Biden. That's
• 1:05:35
  just not going to happen. All right, Let's let's get that out of
• 1:05:39
  our heads right now. I mean, this is a party that a year
• 1:05:44
  ago was still basically demonizing anybody who was unvaccinated as being horrible people who should
• 1:05:53
  lose their jobs in their freedom, and that they were single handedly killing people
• 1:05:58
  and extending the pandem emmick because of their refusal to get vaccinated. They're not
• 1:06:02
  going to nominate a guy who is perceived as an anti vaxer. That's just
• 1:06:10
  not going to happen, especially a guy who whose voice doesn't allow him to
• 1:06:14
  speak, and who has a lot of other very wacky positions. But there's
• 1:06:17
  no question that r K Junior is gaining traction. I've already stated I think
• 1:06:23
  that helps Donald Trump way more than it hurts Joe Biden, especially in New
• 1:06:27
  Hampshire, because it's going to hurt the Santos's ability to compete there. But
• 1:06:31
  over the last few days, RFK Junior has definitely gotten a lot more attraction,
• 1:06:38
  mostly on the right, or what I would now refer to as the
• 1:06:41
  right. He did an interview with Joe Rogan, the podcasting superstar, and
• 1:06:46
  it went very well. From RFK Junior's perspective. Rogan seemed completely enamored.
• 1:06:53
  I am not a huge RFK Junior fan. I do think that he is
• 1:06:59
  a bit of a loon on vaccines. I understand why people are enthralled with
• 1:07:05
  him. I don't believe that there's a proven, an obvious connection between vaccines
• 1:07:11
  and autism. I realized that he has been misperceived a bit on the vaccine
• 1:07:16
  issue, and clearly when it came to the COVID vaccines, I think he's
• 1:07:20
  been more right than wrong. So I don't hate the guy, but I
• 1:07:24
  also know he's totally wrong about the assassinations of his father and of his uncle
• 1:07:30
  and who was responsible and how they went down, and so that to me
• 1:07:34
  loses a lot of trust in RFK Jure as far as his reasoning ability.
• 1:07:42
  And you know, it doesn't bother me that his own family thinks that he's
• 1:07:45
  Looney Tunes, because most of the people in the Kennedy family are Looney tunes.
• 1:07:48
  But the reality is that he's going to get a lot more traction now
• 1:07:55
  among people who would probably be considered more Republican than Democrat ad in today's environment,
• 1:08:01
  partially because Joe Rogan's podcast is that incredibly popular, and judging from Twitter
• 1:08:09
  over the last couple of days, people have really come to RMK Junior's defense.
• 1:08:14
  And Rogan had put out there an offer of one hundred thousand dollars to
• 1:08:19
  a so called pro vaccine expert guy my name of Peter Hotez, who was
• 1:08:26
  among the biggest vaccine lunatics, I mean, a complete covidiot who made numerous
• 1:08:32
  statements that were totally wrong about the vaccine and in a rational world would have
• 1:08:39
  gotten and kicked off the public stage for being not credible into being a total
• 1:08:45
  fraud. But because Hotez was offended by the fact that RMK Junior had gotten
• 1:08:50
  this platform to be on the Rogan Show. Rogan offered Hotez one hundred thousand
• 1:08:56
  dollars to debate RFK on Brogan's podcast, and Hotels didn't take it. So
• 1:09:05
  we've got all sorts of debate offers being made where people aren't taking them,
• 1:09:10
  you know. Somehow the Santists apparently not taking up Newsom on his debate offer,
• 1:09:14
  and Hotez, even with one hundred thousand dollars for charity Chicken down on
• 1:09:18
  this, saying that he didn't want to elevate RFKA Junior, which is ridiculous.
• 1:09:25
  Means a presidential candidate, for God's sake, and he's a Kennedy And
• 1:09:30
  if you're if you're really right, if you're really as right as you claim,
• 1:09:32
  then you should be able to kick his ass. But I'm sure he
• 1:09:38
  isn't confident that he can because he was wrong so often during the entire quote
• 1:09:43
  unquote to vaccine debate, which never even happened. There was no debate,
• 1:09:46
  there was no debate about it, hardly anything when it came to COVID,
• 1:09:49
  but certainly not when it came to vaccines. And then once the data finally
• 1:09:54
  came in. We just kind of forgot about it. Just move along.
• 1:09:57
  We're never going to admit that we were actually wrong. Now. One of
• 1:10:00
  the more interesting things about this Rogan debate offer for charity is that other people
• 1:10:05
  of the same political persuasion started to add money to the charity pot, and
• 1:10:11
  as of this taping, it's over two and a half million dollars now for
• 1:10:15
  charity for this debate to happen. And I think part of what's happening is
• 1:10:18
  that it became superviral on Twitter and people realize that Hotez was never going to
• 1:10:24
  do the debate. So there's no longer any downside offering one hundred and fifty
• 1:10:29
  thousand dollars for a debate that's never going to occur. You get some publicity
• 1:10:32
  out of it, maybe add some Twitter followers and curry some favor with Joe
• 1:10:38
  Rogan, but there's no downside to it, because this is never going to
• 1:10:41
  happen. Now. It's a shame it's not going to happen. I think
• 1:10:44
  it's an indication of just how broken our news media is that we've we're never
• 1:10:47
  going to get a debate. We're never going to get a legitimate debate between
• 1:10:54
  the two major sides of this argument, and it was specifically here with regard
• 1:10:59
  to vaccines. I mean, can you imagine how insane this is. People
• 1:11:02
  are willing to offer millions of dollars for charity simply for a debate on one
• 1:11:09
  of the biggest issues that ever faced America, the mandating of an experimental vaccine
• 1:11:15
  for a virus that didn't impact the vast majority of the American people. And
• 1:11:20
  we're never even going to debate that, even with millions of dollars going to
• 1:11:27
  charity over it. That's how broken the news media is because no one will
• 1:11:31
  ever go into an uncomfortable situation because they don't have to, because there's no
• 1:11:35
  downside in not doing so. Hotez has been defended on Twitter by those on
• 1:11:42
  the left. People have rallied to his side for ducking this debate. That's
• 1:11:47
  how insane things have gotten. I'm sure he has increased his profile, probably
• 1:11:54
  increased his Twitter followers. He's probably gonna do lots of interviews because this has
• 1:11:59
  becomes a big deal on Twitter, and the left will back and defend Hotez
• 1:12:05
  despite the fact that what he's really doing is exposing his cause as a fraud
• 1:12:10
  because he's unwilling to go in there and kick the ass of R. K
• 1:12:14
  JR. If he's really right, that should be easy. But now we
• 1:12:18
  are so tribal that someone can bail on a debate for charity and people will
• 1:12:27
  rally to their defense. And that's what's happening here. And by the way,
• 1:12:32
  I don't think it's a leap at all to make the jump to It's
• 1:12:38
  pretty hilarious and it's going to be rather ironic to see the right mocking Hotez
• 1:12:43
  for not taking this charity debate when the same people and the right, many
• 1:12:45
  of them, are going to defend Donald Trump when he decides to duck,
• 1:12:50
  bail, and or sabotage the Republican debates in a month or two. Because
• 1:12:56
  I'm firmly convinced that that will happen at some level, either bail, duck,
• 1:13:01
  or sabotage, or maybe some combination of the two. But they're not
• 1:13:08
  going to be real debates on the Republican side. With Trump up by forty
• 1:13:12
  points nationally, that's not gonna happen. You're not gonna have Chris Christie and
• 1:13:15
  Rond De Santis on the same debate stage with Donald Trump where he's vulnerable to
• 1:13:20
  them attacking him with a moderator. That is going to be fair about it.
• 1:13:27
  That's never gonna happen. But not with Trump up by this much.
• 1:13:31
  Yet. You know, the same standard that we're seeing in this Joe Rogan
• 1:13:35
  situation is not going to be applied to Donald Trump because people on the right
• 1:13:40
  will rationalize it. Well, of course he's not going to do. Biden's
• 1:13:43
  not debating RFK Junior. Why should Trump debate anybody else. He's got to
• 1:13:47
  basically the same kind of lead as Biden has over RFK Junior, and if
• 1:13:51
  he might say something about the indictments to come back to haunt him in the
• 1:13:55
  legal case. And Chris Christie has already claimed that he's lying to get into
• 1:14:00
  the debate because he wants to bludge in Trump. That's not fair, that
• 1:14:02
  would be stupid. This is not good for the cause of beating Biden in
• 1:14:05
  the general election. All that will resonate on the right and will play right
• 1:14:10
  into Donald Trump's hands, as it almost always does. Now. As far
• 1:14:16
  as the broader issue of COVID, I have said many times how incredibly depressed
• 1:14:23
  I am and even surprised because I'm as pessimistic as anybody, but even I'm
• 1:14:28
  surprised at how how much the pro COVID panic side has been willing and able
• 1:14:39
  to not accept defeat and to still declare victory. They still believe they were
• 1:14:45
  right, largely because people like Ronda Santis won't take an opportunity to crush Gavin
• 1:14:49
  Newsom in a debate, and because the news media is completely in the tank
• 1:14:55
  on this issue because they enabled the entire COVID panic from the beginning. So
• 1:14:59
  they're invested in not having been wrong, and so therefore they're not gonna accuse
• 1:15:03
  anybody of having been wrong that they were, that they were supporting and defending.
• 1:15:08
  And I think this is, in the big picture, the number one
• 1:15:10
  reason why the Santists can't be the next president, because if the media told
• 1:15:14
  the truth about the COVID response, De Santist would be seen as a hero,
• 1:15:17
  and instead he's afraid to use the issue for whatever goddamn reason. I
• 1:15:20
  guess because the public. Most of the public doesn't see it that way,
• 1:15:26
  and that's the media's vault, and it's very easily understood because the media is
• 1:15:31
  deeply, deeply invested in not having been totally wrong in the biggest story in
• 1:15:36
  the modern history of America. Well, there was another indication of just how
• 1:15:44
  batshit crazy things still are when it comes to COVID when Jerry Nadler went on
• 1:15:49
  the floor of the United States House of Representatives. Jerry Nadler longtime congressman.
• 1:15:55
  He is the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, arguably the most powerful congressional
• 1:16:01
  committee, at least one of them. He went on the floor of the
• 1:16:04
  House Representatives and declared that he believed that two year old children should have been
• 1:16:13
  forced to be masked. Two year olds should have been forced to be masked,
• 1:16:21
  presumably by the government, I guess. And here's what that sounded like
• 1:16:27
  from Jerry Nadler on the floor of the United States Congress. And when we
• 1:16:30
  have a pandemic like COVID nineteen pandemic that we had, two year olds should
• 1:16:38
  have been required to wear a mask. It would be child abuse for parents
• 1:16:42
  not to do that because there was no vaccination available for two year old I
• 1:16:45
  don't really even know what to say about that. I mean, it's outrageous,
• 1:16:49
  it's absurd, it's insane. There, of course, was no liberal
• 1:16:55
  media blowback of Okay, you know, wouldn't somebody in the liberal media say,
• 1:16:59
  you know, they're knock it off, You're wrong about this. This
• 1:17:01
  is insane, it's absurd. I mean, there's so many elements of this.
• 1:17:05
  One the notion that masks don't work. There's the notion that two year
• 1:17:09
  olds were not vulnerable. There's no evidence that two year olds were giving the
• 1:17:13
  virus to other people who were then dying. It's all just bullshit, it's
• 1:17:17
  all it's just a liberal fantasy. And the fact that this is being said
• 1:17:20
  in June of twenty twenty three and the floor of the House of Representatives,
• 1:17:26
  with no liberal media blowback, no liberal political blowback at all, is just
• 1:17:32
  a damning indictment of our entire society. Now, there were Republicans in the
• 1:17:38
  House who went apoplectic and let Nadler have it, so that should at least
• 1:17:43
  be pointed out. But the reality is that we're still living in a world
• 1:17:47
  where the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee can say that kind of utter bullcrap
• 1:17:55
  not have any repercussions whatsoever. And of course what that means is then next
• 1:18:00
  time this has happened, they're going to do the same thing again, only
• 1:18:03
  they're gonna do it harder because that's why they think that we didn't do better
• 1:18:12
  against COVID. They really think that if we had just locked down harder,
• 1:18:16
  had harder restrictions, more masking, more vaccines, more social distancing, more
• 1:18:21
  business shutdowns, more school closings, than we would have done better. It
• 1:18:27
  was only because we are a semi free society that they prevented us from a
• 1:18:30
  complete and total New Zealand Australian lockdown. That that's why so many people died
• 1:18:38
  of COVID. That is completely false, it's absurd. There's no evidence or
• 1:18:41
  logic to back that up. But that's what they believe, and they believe
• 1:18:45
  that because it's in their best interest to believe that, both from a political
• 1:18:47
  as well as a self preservation standpoint, because they don't want to admit they
• 1:18:50
  were wrong. But they also love the political power of telling other people what
• 1:18:55
  to do and the control of our society. That's what liberals are all about.
• 1:18:58
  It's basically a sexual response for them, and it's just so incredibly depressing
• 1:19:06
  that this is where we still are, that with all the facts on our
• 1:19:10
  side, we still have not really won the war at all. And now
• 1:19:14
  you know the santist isn't even willing to engage in trying to change that narrative
• 1:19:19
  by kicking Gavin Newsom's ass in a debate with Sean Hannity as the goddamn monitorator.
• 1:19:26
  It's unbelievable and and and so I just I want to move on from
• 1:19:30
  it because it's just it's just too depressing for me to think about further.
• 1:19:33
  Although there's a lot of other depressing things in the news. This week,
• 1:19:36
  we, I guess, celebrated Juneteenth, which um don't I didn't even understand
• 1:19:44
  was a real holiday. I was listening to the radio over the weekend and
• 1:19:48
  the DJ said, we've got a national holiday on Monday, didn't mention what
• 1:19:51
  it was. I was like, what, what national holiday is on Monday?
• 1:19:56
  I honestly thought, is it possible that this was like some a state
• 1:20:01
  that was on tape delay from a previous weekend where it was a three day
• 1:20:05
  weekend, And then it was no, he's talking about Juneteenth, and this
• 1:20:10
  is the celebration of I guess. Now, one hundred and fifty eight years
• 1:20:13
  later in Texas, the Emancipation Proclamation probably finally being enforced in the and the
• 1:20:20
  slaves being freed after the Civil War. Okay, great, I have no
• 1:20:24
  problem with the commemoration of that event. I can guarantee you that nobody who
• 1:20:30
  took part in that event thought in a million years that one hundred and fifty
• 1:20:34
  eight years from then what was happening would be the source of a national holiday
• 1:20:41
  in the United States of America. That would have been absurd. That would
• 1:20:45
  have been absurd maybe a couple of years ago. I mean, this is
• 1:20:47
  an event that Barack Obama, to my knowledge, never even mentioned in his
• 1:20:50
  eight years of being president. Now, all of a sudden, this is
• 1:20:55
  a de facto national holiday that just coming came out of the blue. Yes,
• 1:21:00
  post George Floyd. I mean, it's unbelievable the impact that the George
• 1:21:03
  Floyd situation had on almost every aspect of our society. But now on top
• 1:21:09
  of Black History Month, on top of Martin Luther King Day, now we
• 1:21:13
  get another holiday based upon this entire narrative, right in the middle of Pride
• 1:21:18
  Month. I mean, it's just it's just too much. I just don't
• 1:21:24
  it's just amazing. It's amazing that this can just pop up and then people
• 1:21:27
  accept it, the media latches onto it, and effectively. Now it's a
• 1:21:31
  de facto holiday, banks being closed, and you know, all sorts of
• 1:21:35
  things that are of official nature where we've got a real holiday now just added
• 1:21:42
  out of the blue. This came about effectively out of wokeness and political correctness,
• 1:21:47
  and you know, it's just it's extraordinary. But this is the world
• 1:21:51
  that liberals want to live in, where it's all about us making atonement for
• 1:21:58
  our past sins. We'll never atone for her COVID sins, but you know,
• 1:22:01
  when it comes to sins that they like. Of course, the ironies
• 1:22:05
  that the Democratic Party was a big part of the problem when it came to
• 1:22:09
  slavery, and Abraham Lincoln was a Republican, but you know, we don't
• 1:22:12
  want to confuse anybody with history. But in today's world, in the world,
• 1:22:16
  it's all about your racial identity, it's all about your gender identity,
• 1:22:20
  it's all about your sexual identity, who you are as a person, the
• 1:22:25
  makeup of your content, of your character, or your achievements, your intelligence,
• 1:22:31
  talents, none of that matters. It's all now about which boxes do
• 1:22:36
  you check? And that became exceedingly obvious. It's always been obvious, but
• 1:22:42
  it really came to a traumatic head in this short clip that I want to
• 1:22:45
  play for you. This is from Jeanine Jean Pierre, the incompetent White House
• 1:22:51
  Press secretary, a woman who clearly has her job for three reasons. She
• 1:22:59
  is black, she is a female, and she is not sexually attracted to
• 1:23:04
  men. She is a lesbian. Those are the three reasons why she has
• 1:23:09
  her job. She is terrible at her job. Everybody knows this. And
• 1:23:15
  she is the ultimate affirmative action higher, which is something that the Bide administration
• 1:23:19
  is all about. They brag all the time about they're the first administration to
• 1:23:24
  do this or that or this, and it's not about achievement. It's about
• 1:23:28
  about how many people are the right color, or the right gender, or
• 1:23:31
  the right sexuality. And jean Pierre, of course checks three of the most
• 1:23:38
  important boxes, which makes her historic. And it's not just other people claiming
• 1:23:45
  that she's historic. Listen to this in an interview that she just did where
• 1:23:48
  she refers to herself as inherently historic. Inherently historic, not based upon what
• 1:23:57
  you do, but based upon which PC boxes you check. You are now
• 1:24:02
  literally historic. A year in this role, there's been a couple of things
• 1:24:08
  that has made me incredibly proud, many things, many things that made me
• 1:24:13
  incredibly proud to be at that podium during this historic moment. Again, this
• 1:24:16
  is a historic administration. I'm a historic figure and I certainly walk in history
• 1:24:21
  every day, but this is also a historic making administration because of this president.
• 1:24:27
  You know, in the country I grew up in, this would be
• 1:24:30
  mocked, and this would resonate, and people would have a negative reaction to
• 1:24:34
  this because it's not who we are. You know, we're we I thought
• 1:24:40
  were a country that believed in everyone having equal opportunity and then being judged based
• 1:24:45
  upon their achievements or who they are what they do, not these things over
• 1:24:50
  which they have no control and aren't really relevant to what happens in their job.
• 1:24:57
  But we don't live in that country anymore. Now. Is it possible
• 1:25:00
  that the majority of Americans still believe that but are just afraid to say it.
• 1:25:03
  Yes, But the left has been so good at intimidating people, and
• 1:25:08
  the media has been so good at intimidating people that most people are too afraid
• 1:25:13
  to express what they really think about this. And unfortunately, we've seen no
• 1:25:16
  evidence in the voting patterns where allegedly you know, you have the ability to
• 1:25:20
  vote anonymously. There is no silent majority that has risen up against this,
• 1:25:26
  Otherwise we would have seen that in the twenty twenty two midterm elections. And
• 1:25:30
  so as long as the left keeps getting away with it, they're going to
• 1:25:32
  keep doing it. And this is why I have always said that Republicans are
• 1:25:38
  underestimating Kamala Harris, because Kamala Harris is going to be historic. If Joe
• 1:25:43
  Biden wins reelection and resigns in twenty twenty seven, Kamala Harris will be the
• 1:25:48
  first female president. She'll be a female president of color. She's historic,
• 1:25:54
  and history for history's sake is sacred in the media minds, in the narrative
• 1:26:00
  that controls what I believe the majority of Americans still to this day believe.
• 1:26:06
  And I think that makes her very, very dangerous, because how do you
• 1:26:11
  attack that she's historic. History used to be You're actually doing things that changed
• 1:26:19
  lives or were worthy of praise, not just simply because you were given a
• 1:26:27
  job because you're a black female who's a lesbian. But that's that's now the
• 1:26:30
  world we live in now. I talk a lot about how broken the media
• 1:26:34
  is obviously this being the Death of journalism podcast and oftentimes I use the sports
• 1:26:39
  media as an example of this, And there are two examples I want to
• 1:26:45
  use in the last portion of the podcast today. The first deals with a
• 1:26:51
  sports talk show host by the name of Craig Carton who just got a major
• 1:26:57
  promotion. He's going to go from full time radio host in New York to
• 1:27:03
  a full time television host on Fox Sports Channel, and apparently he's going to
• 1:27:09
  make over a million dollars a year now to do this. Now, for
• 1:27:14
  those of you probably don't know who Craig Carton is, this may not be
• 1:27:17
  significant at all, but Craig Carton is literally a criminal and a complete and
• 1:27:25
  total fraud. He was sentenced to three and a half years in prison not
• 1:27:29
  long ago for securities and wire fraud in a ticket scam. As a sports
• 1:27:36
  and he also actually did news but mostly sports talk show host, and I
• 1:27:42
  believe that he actually used his friendship with then New Jersey Governor Chris Christie in
• 1:27:49
  order to pull off this ticket scam. Somehow Christie never got really brought into
• 1:27:56
  that story, but as I read the evidence, it was pretty obvious.
• 1:28:00
  Is that Carton in an effort to pull off the fraud was strongly implying that
• 1:28:05
  Christie was maybe not part of it, but certainly that his ties to Christie
• 1:28:10
  gave him a lot more credibility and that's why people were susceptible to his fraud.
• 1:28:15
  And this is a guy that I have had some pretty significant interactions with.
• 1:28:20
  I mean, first of all, he was one of the worst,
• 1:28:24
  one of the very worst when it came to the entire Penn Stage Joe Paterno
• 1:28:28
  Jerry Sandusky scandal. He was completely and totally wrong, and he was leading
• 1:28:31
  the charge against Joe Paterno. And I have offered many times to debate him,
• 1:28:38
  but of course he'll never do that. But even before that, well
• 1:28:41
  before that, this would have been in the early two thousands, we were
• 1:28:45
  working at the same sports talk station in Philadelphia, WIP, and I told
• 1:28:49
  this story more extensively in our podcast with the benefit of Hindsight with Liza be
• 1:28:57
  on the entire Penn Stage Joe Paterno Jerry Sandusky story. Going to go into
• 1:29:00
  all the details now, but this is what a scumbag Craig Carton is.
• 1:29:04
  I was a fill in host that would be put in basically wherever they needed
• 1:29:10
  somebody on w IP and Craig, I guess, was doing kind of the
• 1:29:13
  same thing. So he was, I guess, one notch ahead of me
• 1:29:15
  on the totem pole, and he was doing an overnight shift, which was
• 1:29:21
  a shift that I did a lot, especially during the summertime. And all
• 1:29:26
  of a sudden, it was about to thirty in the morning, I got
• 1:29:29
  a call from Craig Carton, I guess, during a commercial break, saying,
• 1:29:31
  Hey, John, can you come in and finish my shift for me?
• 1:29:35
  My wife is going into labor. And I'm like, okay, sure,
• 1:29:41
  no problem. So I got up out of sleep and I rushed into
• 1:29:45
  the studio and I was more than willing because this is a big deal.
• 1:29:49
  Obviously, he his wife is gonna give birth, and you know, it's
• 1:29:55
  the middle of the night. It's the middle of the night. There's no
• 1:29:56
  way to get approval from anybody else in management because everyone's asleep. I'll do
• 1:30:00
  this for you, Craig, no problem. And you know, he wasn't
• 1:30:02
  particularly thankful, but and he also didn't seem to be in a great amount
• 1:30:06
  of urgency or very nervous, which kind of got me a little bit skeptical.
• 1:30:11
  But I finished off the shift for him. He left, and then
• 1:30:15
  the next day I got a call from our asshole boss, a legendary asshole
• 1:30:18
  by name of Tom Bigbie. He's no longer alive, thank goodness. Of
• 1:30:23
  all the people I've ever hated in this business, Tom Bigbie is right at
• 1:30:27
  the top of the list. And Big Bigbe was unusual for him to call
• 1:30:30
  me. Usually had an assistant too, so and he said, what the
• 1:30:33
  hell were you doing taking over for Craig Carton last night? I said,
• 1:30:38
  well, he called me and said his wife was going into labor. He
• 1:30:41
  says, Craig Carton's wife was not going into labor. I said, well,
• 1:30:44
  how the hell was I supposed to know that? Well, you'd be
• 1:30:46
  stupid to believe anything that Craig Carton says, because he's a fucking liar.
• 1:30:51
  I said, So wait a minute, I'm the guy who got in trouble,
• 1:30:55
  so literally, I got in trouble because I in the middle of the
• 1:30:59
  night, I took a phone call from Craig Carton to go fill in for
• 1:31:01
  him. And somehow me believing him made me either dumb or the bad guy.
• 1:31:09
  And I don't even know what I was supposed to do, but in
• 1:31:11
  Bigbie's mind, I was the wrong one who did wrong, and Carton,
• 1:31:15
  to my knowledge, suffered no consequences. Well, this is the kind of
• 1:31:18
  scumbag that succeeds in the media business, esupposed to in the sports media business.
• 1:31:26
  And then later on he goes on and as I said, he commits
• 1:31:30
  this fraud, gets a sweetheart deal where he gets three and a half years
• 1:31:35
  in prison, doesn't even serve the three and a half years in prison.
• 1:31:38
  When he comes out, he somehow gets a plumb radio job. By the
• 1:31:45
  way, there's another element of this entire scenario where he's also in his rebirth
• 1:31:49
  story he's claiming to be a sex abuse victim, which to me sounded like
• 1:31:55
  bullshit, being based upon what I knew of Carton. And you know,
• 1:31:59
  he had written a book previously, and it's not in the book, and
• 1:32:01
  he claimed that the publishers of the book kept it out for whatever cockam any
• 1:32:06
  reason. But to me, I thought, okay, that means either this
• 1:32:10
  is a total excuse never happened, or the publishers realized the story was bullshit
• 1:32:15
  and that's why they kept it out of the book. But the bottom line
• 1:32:18
  is he's a pathological liar and a bad person, and yet here he is,
• 1:32:25
  even after being convicted on these very serious fraud charges, going to prison,
• 1:32:30
  he comes out, gets a New York radio job, and now he's
• 1:32:33
  peace making over a million dollars a year on Fox Sports Television. This is
• 1:32:39
  the world we now live in. This is how broken it is. This
• 1:32:43
  is ow upside down it is when Craig Carton is a massive success even when
• 1:32:47
  he's been completely and totally exposed in a court of law and given a long
• 1:32:53
  term prison sentence for something as serious as fraud. Right, I mean,
• 1:32:59
  as a talk show host, your word is supposed to be everything. Your
• 1:33:02
  credibility is supposed to be everything. When you get convicted of fraud, that
• 1:33:06
  should really put a massive hole in your credibility. But no, no,
• 1:33:12
  apparently not in the world we now live in. And there's another example in
• 1:33:16
  the sports world that just happened over this past weekend, dealing with the US
• 1:33:19
  Open golf tournament. Now, if you're a big fan of this podcast,
• 1:33:24
  you know that I'm big into golf. I've played at Georgetown, I've played
• 1:33:28
  in several national amateur championships, won club championships. I'm about a one or
• 1:33:32
  two handicap, even in my old age. I've been watching golf my whole
• 1:33:36
  life. Briefly worked for the PGA Tour a million years ago before getting fired.
• 1:33:42
  And the bottom line on the US Open is, to me, the
• 1:33:45
  golf media is really a great example of how completely and fundamentally broken all the
• 1:33:54
  corporate media is. It's just on steroids because they don't even pretend to care
• 1:34:00
  about substance. Like the news media sometimes still pretends to care about, you
• 1:34:08
  know, right and wrong and what the truth is, even though it's always
• 1:34:11
  biased in a liberal direction or in the right wing media in the right wing
• 1:34:15
  direction. But here's what happened with the US Open this past weekend. It
• 1:34:18
  was played here in Los Angeles. The course Los Angeles Country Club that I
• 1:34:21
  know pretty well. I played there several times. Another story for another day.
• 1:34:25
  I think I might be shadow band there's but I don't have time to
• 1:34:29
  go into why that is. But you know, it's a nice course.
• 1:34:32
  I don't dislike the course, but it's never had a US Open before,
• 1:34:36
  and the US Open is supposed to be the toughest test in golf, the
• 1:34:41
  only one time a year when the professional players can't expect if the weather conditions
• 1:34:46
  cooperate, that they're going to be punished. That it's going to be a
• 1:34:49
  survival test. And the easiest way to quantify that is that the winning score
• 1:34:57
  is not going to be much below par. Now, you know, most
• 1:35:02
  US Opens in the last generation or two, although this has changed in very
• 1:35:08
  recent history, only a couple of people were ever under par. The winning
• 1:35:12
  score was often overpar. But if you shot three or four under par for
• 1:35:15
  the tournament, you were probably going to win unless the weather conditions were such
• 1:35:19
  where they got a ton of rain. And that's basically kryptonite for modern golf
• 1:35:24
  courses. With as far as the ball goes and as good as these players
• 1:35:27
  are, there's nothing you can do if you get a lot of rain.
• 1:35:30
  Well, part of the reason why the USGA put the US Open in California
• 1:35:35
  again, as they've done previously Pebble Beach and Tory Pines and San Diego is
• 1:35:42
  they love California for two basic reasons. One and I'm not sure which is
• 1:35:45
  most important anymore. One, they know in June they're not going to get
• 1:35:48
  in any rain, so that would theoretically enable them to make the course pretty
• 1:35:54
  much as tough as they wanted to without fear of it going over the edge.
• 1:35:59
  See, on the coast, they have to worry about thunderstorms, and
• 1:36:02
  so they can't. They're basically they have their hands tied. And if they
• 1:36:08
  count on the thunderstorms and they don't happen and the courses to dry, they
• 1:36:12
  could lose the course. But if they keep the course wet and then they
• 1:36:15
  get thunderstorms, then the courses is not up to championship standards. So on
• 1:36:21
  the West Coast they don't have to worry about that. They also and this
• 1:36:26
  may be the most important thing, and this, unfortunately is the way the
• 1:36:29
  media works. Now. The other thing that the California US Open does is
• 1:36:33
  it puts the Saturday and Sunday rounds and even the Thursday and Friday rounds the
• 1:36:38
  television coverage in prime time on the East Coast and in the Central time zones.
• 1:36:45
  So, in other words, the TV audience is going to be a
• 1:36:47
  lot larger because on the weekends you're going to have a situation where the prime
• 1:36:56
  moments of the tournament, where the leaders are coming down the stretch, it's
• 1:37:00
  going to be at nine ten or in this case even pass that on the
• 1:37:03
  East Coast eleven o'clock at night when there's nothing else to do, and it's
• 1:37:09
  a lot easier to get people in front of their television sets. So NBC
• 1:37:14
  and the USGA or business partners in this, they love that well. In
• 1:37:18
  this particular case, the USGA blew it on both counts. One from a
• 1:37:25
  timing standpoint, they made it way too late and on Saturday they actually finished
• 1:37:29
  in the damn dark. A couple of players complained about that it was done
• 1:37:33
  purely for television and it impacted play, But that's not the part that really
• 1:37:39
  bugged me the most. The part that bugged me the most is that because
• 1:37:43
  the inmates are now running the asylum in golf, and this is I think
• 1:37:48
  LIVE is partially to blame for this, that the power structure is completely changed.
• 1:37:53
  And that's really the part of LIV that bothers me most. Where it's
• 1:37:56
  basically like a teacher who has lost control of the classroom because the students have
• 1:38:00
  all the power now. The power structure has so changed to the players that
• 1:38:04
  the USGA no longer feels like they have the leverage or the power or the
• 1:38:12
  authority to punish the players on the course. Because if they go too far,
• 1:38:15
  too many players are going to complain, there might be a boy cat
• 1:38:18
  caught, and they could lose the tournament in the long run, where if
• 1:38:23
  top players stopped playing because they don't believe that the course set up is quote
• 1:38:27
  unquote fair, then the entire system could fall apart. And this power imbalance
• 1:38:34
  really showed itself when it came to this tournament because the USGA sided way way
• 1:38:44
  too much on the side of being safe and conservative and not doing anything to
• 1:38:49
  offend the players, and they overestimated how difficult the course was going to be,
• 1:38:55
  and they didn't get the weather they hope for. There wasn't as much
• 1:38:58
  sunshine, especially the first day, and the scoring was insane. On the
• 1:39:01
  first day of the tournament, the all time record was broken not once but
• 1:39:06
  twice within twenty two minutes, with two players shooting a sixty two eight under
• 1:39:12
  par all time record for the US Open. No one had ever shot below
• 1:39:16
  sixty three. Sixty three was a sacred number, and then two guys do
• 1:39:19
  it within twenty two minutes, and it wasn't even that exciting because it was
• 1:39:25
  obvious how easy the course was playing. You're like, this is not a
• 1:39:28
  US Open. This is not what the US Opens identity has been or is
• 1:39:31
  supposed to be what they claim it to be. This is a joke.
• 1:39:36
  This is basically like any other tournament we're just calling at the US Open now.
• 1:39:41
  In the end, the winning score was ten under par, which doesn't
• 1:39:44
  sound that bad if you're a golfer, except this is the part that no
• 1:39:46
  one wants to talk about in the news media just ignores. This is not
• 1:39:50
  a normal situation, lacc all. A country club is a par seventy most
• 1:39:57
  golf courses, or par seventy one or part seventy two. Inherently, a
• 1:40:00
  par seventy should make it far easier to protect par makes it much more difficult
• 1:40:06
  to shoot a large number under par by four shots over the tournament if it's
• 1:40:13
  a par seventy one versus a par seventy. Also, in previous US Opens
• 1:40:18
  where the scoring was this low, and this was as low as it's ever
• 1:40:21
  been from a number standpoint, both from the perspective of the total strokes as
• 1:40:27
  well as the number of players are under par. Eighteen players finished under par.
• 1:40:30
  Winning square was ten under. That has happened before, not too often.
• 1:40:35
  Occasionally, that's happened before but only in situations where they got crushed by
• 1:40:42
  rain, where they could not make the golf course as difficult as they wanted,
• 1:40:47
  they lost all control over it. This is the first time did anything
• 1:40:53
  like this has happened on a dry course that was a par seventy. You
• 1:40:58
  had no rain the entire week of the tournament. You had a par seventy,
• 1:41:01
  and the USJA still let the players crush the course and they And what
• 1:41:08
  really bugged me is there was almost no blowback from the pathetic sports and golf
• 1:41:13
  media. Just a few stray people willing to say, you know, whatever
• 1:41:18
  happened to the US Open, we fell in love with But because they're so
• 1:41:23
  afraid of pissing off their corporate partners, NBC isn't gonna do it. And
• 1:41:29
  most of these sports and golf media people are so afraid of going outside the
• 1:41:33
  herd and getting crushed and losing access, you know, not getting their credentials
• 1:41:39
  next year, whatever it is. They are terrified of going up against the
• 1:41:43
  man. And in this case, the man is the USGA or the man
• 1:41:46
  is the LA Country Club. They don't you know that. Heck, they
• 1:41:49
  probably all want to play there. They don't want to offend la country club
• 1:41:54
  that you know, and so everyone's in cahoots to maintaining this narrative that's bullshit.
• 1:42:00
  And I guess the part that bothers me most, and because this is
• 1:42:02
  happening throughout society where we've lost our balls and everything. It's one thing to
• 1:42:09
  lose your balls and become a whoos of fine society, but when no one's
• 1:42:14
  even willing to admit that that's what's happened, that's what really pisses me off.
• 1:42:17
  Can we at least admit that we're a bunch of whoosees now, that
• 1:42:23
  this is not the way things we're supposed to be. Can we at least
• 1:42:26
  admit that that would help me from a psychological standpoint in the closure process,
• 1:42:31
  that if if we're not going to have the US open anymore, can we
• 1:42:34
  at least admit that we're not going to have the US open anymore. And
• 1:42:38
  the other issue where the media and NBC in particular really carried the water for
• 1:42:43
  the USGA was on what they did with the crowds. There were no crowds
• 1:42:46
  there, and everyone knew that they had limited tickets because of traffic and lack
• 1:42:51
  of parking and lack of space in the golf course. Because this golf course
• 1:42:56
  is right in the middle of Los Angeles, right in the middle of Beverly
• 1:42:58
  Hills. From a traffic standpoint, it was going to be very difficult to
• 1:43:01
  get the normal number of people onto the grounds, so they limited tickets to
• 1:43:05
  twenty two thousand. Everyone knew that. But when we later found out is
• 1:43:09
  that apparently Los Angeles Country Club, and this has not been one hundred percent
• 1:43:13
  confirmed, but there's rampant rumors to this effect that LA Country Club basically took
• 1:43:19
  up all the tickets, either in an effort to be able to regulate the
• 1:43:26
  type of person that was able to go on their golf course, or to
• 1:43:29
  just eat the tickets and make sure that the numbers were so small that their
• 1:43:32
  course wouldn't suffer as much damage from all the gallery that should be there.
• 1:43:38
  Regardless of how and why, the atmosphere was nothing close to a US Open.
• 1:43:43
  It was almost a COVID like tournament, and NBC just ignored this,
• 1:43:47
  just pretend that it didn't happen. Now, there were a few people on
• 1:43:50
  Twitter who made mention of this, and people agreed with it, but by
• 1:43:56
  and large, the cover up continued because again their partners, And that's how
• 1:44:00
  you get news coverage in the same vein, that's how you get the pharmaceutical
• 1:44:05
  companies making sure that the news media doesn't do anything to disrupt their narrative and
• 1:44:12
  doesn't tell you the truth about that the vaccines not stopping transmission and maybe having
• 1:44:16
  potentially negative side effects. It's the same concept. It's just easier to see
• 1:44:24
  and golf when it's not life or death situation, but it is indicative of
• 1:44:28
  a larger reality, which is that corporate conflict of interests have destroyed the media's
• 1:44:34
  ability or willingness to tell the truth, even when it's as obvious as the
• 1:44:40
  US Open no longer being the US Open and the crowds there not even being
• 1:44:45
  remotely consistent with a major tournament. But you know what, we just all
• 1:44:49
  pretended that it was awesome, you know, one shot win. By the
• 1:44:54
  way, take this all out of theoretical into the practical. On the eighteenth
• 1:44:58
  toll there the guy who won Wyndham Clark, good player, came into the
• 1:45:05
  last hole with a one shot lead. If he bogi's the hole, he
• 1:45:10
  goes into a playoff with Rory McElroy, which would have been awesome. He
• 1:45:14
  probably loses that playoff. By the way. His te shot was terrible.
• 1:45:18
  He knew it immediately. He completely flared it off to the right, sliced
• 1:45:23
  it way right. In any other eighteenth hole in the history of the US
• 1:45:28
  Open, he no way shape or for him has a chance to make par.
• 1:45:31
  But because the USGA set the golf course up so easy and the fairways
• 1:45:36
  were so wide, even the eighteenth hole, his ball still stayed in the
• 1:45:41
  fairway. He put it on the green, two putted. Ho hum.
• 1:45:45
  He wins a tournament, no playoff, no real dramatic finish. Really,
• 1:45:48
  he didn't hit any great shot on eighteen. I mean, you know you
• 1:45:53
  should on the eighteenth hole of the US Open. To win by one,
• 1:45:57
  you ought to have to hit one really good shot. He had a crappy
• 1:46:00
  drive, a mediocre a second shot to the front of the green. He
• 1:46:04
  did it, a good lag putt and part and part the hall and that
• 1:46:09
  was it. Well, that's the usj losing their balls, and that's the
• 1:46:13
  real world impact of it. Where you know, in the past, I
• 1:46:16
  remember what happened to Phil Mickelson at Wingfoot. He went he sent one way
• 1:46:20
  right, made double bowgie in the last hole and lost the tournament. Now,
• 1:46:25
  it was a somewhat similar situation here, but we've now canceled the US
• 1:46:29
  Open. The US Open no longer exists. And by the way, for
• 1:46:31
  those of you concerned are curious, they are planning on bringing back the US
• 1:46:36
  Open to La Country Club in twenty thirty nine, which I think is absolutely
• 1:46:42
  hilarious. And I think this is hilarious not just because it's sixteen years into
• 1:46:46
  the future, but also because there is no chance, none, that Los
• 1:46:53
  Angeles or California are still part of the United States in twenty thirty nine.
• 1:46:57
  Yet I guarantee and nobody at the USGA it's even considered this problem or this
• 1:47:02
  this uh, you know, potential concern that that California may no longer hell,
• 1:47:10
  golf might not even be legal in California in twenty thirty nine. And
• 1:47:14
  I'm only being slightly facetious. If you gave me a bet whether or not
• 1:47:19
  the circumstances of the United States of America visivie California and Los Angeles and the
• 1:47:26
  rules surrounding golf will be the same in twenty thirty nine as they are in
• 1:47:30
  twenty twenty three, I would take the bet that they will not be and
• 1:47:34
  and so you know whether or not they'll I probably won't be allied to see
• 1:47:39
  it. Who knows, But my guess is that they're not going to be
• 1:47:43
  able to have a tournament, a golf tournament in California called the US Open
• 1:47:47
  at LA Country Club in twenty thirty nine, even if they still want to,
• 1:47:50
  that would be that would be my guest. I doubt this podcast will
• 1:47:54
  be around long enough for me to be held accountable for that prediction, but
• 1:47:58
  if it is, I promise I'll admit it if I'm wrong. Now,
• 1:48:02
  I did mention the last podcast that we have an interview coming up with Ian
• 1:48:06
  Miller, who is an author who has written two books about how the experts
• 1:48:11
  got it wrong on COVID. I absolutely positively promise that that interview will be
• 1:48:16
  prominently part of episode number sixty nine of the Death of Journalism podcast, because
• 1:48:21
  that will be the last episode before I take a week off for summer vacation.
• 1:48:27
  So if you're wondering whether the Ian Miller interview is, that'll be coming
• 1:48:31
  up in episode number sixty nine. Until then, thanks so much for listening
• 1:48:35
  to episode number sixty eight. Please remember to subscribe, rate and review this
• 1:48:39
  podcast. Share it on social media. If you do, make sure you
• 1:48:42
  tag me and I'll be happy to share it on Twitter and Facebook. Once
• 1:48:45
  again, this has been the Death of Journalism podcast. Thanks so much for
• 1:48:48
  listening. My name is John Ziegler.