Latest / The Death Of Journalism / Episode Two Hundred Forty Four: TACO Thursday

Transcript

Episode Two Hundred Forty Four: TACO Thursday · The Death Of Journalism

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Welcome to episode two hundred and forty four of the
• 0:02
  Speaker 1: Death of Journalism podcasts.
• 0:04
  Speaker 2: My name is John Sickler. I'm your host on today's show.
• 0:07
  Speaker 1: Elon Musk and Donald Trump officially separate, Will it end
• 0:11
  Speaker 1: in divorce? And how messy will it really get? Dan
• 0:15
  Speaker 1: Bongino makes it clear he is in way over his
• 0:18
  Speaker 1: head at the FBI. The AI debate somehow gets even scarier.
• 0:24
  Speaker 1: Did I rush to judgment about the golfing future of
• 0:27
  Speaker 1: Tiger Woods's son Charlie? Why the news media is radical
• 0:31
  Speaker 1: change and how they report on prominent suicides is very problematic?
• 0:37
  Speaker 1: When Trump two point zero began, I said I was
• 0:42
  Speaker 1: not alone in this, but I was one of those
• 0:43
  Speaker 1: who said, just follow the relationship between Donald Trump and
• 0:48
  Speaker 1: Elon Musk and that will tell you an awful lot
• 0:51
  Speaker 1: about how things are going and where we are headed.
• 0:54
  Speaker 1: I was not optimistic about how that would all end up,
• 0:58
  Speaker 1: largely because of the two personalities involved in that relationship
• 1:03
  Speaker 1: and the complex nature of it, as well as the
• 1:06
  Speaker 1: fact that Elon Musk seemed to be coming in with
• 1:08
  Speaker 1: expectations about what was possible, that we're way out of
• 1:12
  Speaker 1: line with reality, that he is a rather naive guy.
• 1:17
  Speaker 1: When you're the richest man in the world, it's understandable
• 1:19
  Speaker 1: why you think anything is possible. You're used to being
• 1:22
  Speaker 1: a dictator. Now you're taking on in your businesses. I mean,
• 1:25
  Speaker 1: now you're taking on the massive federal government bureaucracy, and
• 1:30
  Speaker 1: that is a situation that is, in my view, doomed
• 1:33
  Speaker 1: to failure. You may recall that I even somewhat bizarrely
• 1:37
  Speaker 1: referenced the song I dreamed a dream and lay miss
• 1:41
  Speaker 1: there are dreams that cannot be There are storms that
• 1:44
  Speaker 1: we cannot weather when discussing the challenge that Elon Musk
• 1:48
  Speaker 1: was up against, and it has turned out, unfortunately to
• 1:53
  Speaker 1: be far too much for Elon Musker, probably for anybody
• 1:57
  Speaker 1: we are that entrenched in this growing massive federal bureaucracy
• 2:02
  Speaker 1: and out of control spending, and the tea leaves began
• 2:06
  Speaker 1: to be very very clear just a few weeks ago,
• 2:09
  Speaker 1: and I've been charting them here on this podcast, that
• 2:13
  Speaker 1: things were starting to become problematic. When it came to
• 2:18
  Speaker 1: Elon Musk's view of the Trump administration and his role
• 2:22
  Speaker 1: in it. You may recall that he somewhat cryptically gave
• 2:26
  Speaker 1: an interview saying that he was not planning on doing
• 2:30
  Speaker 1: much campaign and spending in the future, this after spending
• 2:34
  Speaker 1: a ridiculous amount of money in the twenty twenty four election.
• 2:38
  Speaker 1: Some people tried to rationalize that, but to me, to
• 2:41
  Speaker 1: say that out loud, that was a clear piece of
• 2:45
  Speaker 1: evidence that he was disillusioned, that there's something wrong here,
• 2:49
  Speaker 1: and then he was putting his toe in the water
• 2:52
  Speaker 1: of separating himself from the Trump administration, or at the
• 2:56
  Speaker 1: very least making it very clear that he's not happy
• 3:00
  Speaker 1: that this is not going as he had hoped or
• 3:03
  Speaker 1: had expected. Now, it had been said for quite a
• 3:07
  Speaker 1: while he was going to leave DOGE, the Department of
• 3:11
  Speaker 1: Government Efficiency, sometime in the late spring early summer, and
• 3:17
  Speaker 1: that officially happened at the end of last week, back
• 3:20
  Speaker 1: before some of the things I'm about to talk about
• 3:23
  Speaker 1: had actually occurred, at least publicly. Elon Musk and Donald
• 3:28
  Speaker 1: Trump held a joint press availability from the Oval Office.
• 3:33
  Speaker 1: Musk was given a key to the White House, so
• 3:36
  Speaker 1: I guess it was a golden key to the White House.
• 3:38
  Speaker 1: They said lots of nice things about each other. They
• 3:41
  Speaker 1: answered questions from the press as they were discussing Musk's
• 3:46
  Speaker 1: role in DOGE formally coming to an end, but making
• 3:50
  Speaker 1: it clear he would still advise the administration, he would
• 3:53
  Speaker 1: still come by the White House. He and Trump were
• 3:56
  Speaker 1: still very much on the same team, although it was
• 3:59
  Speaker 1: never clear to me, is too okay? If this is
• 4:01
  Speaker 1: such a great success, why is Musk leaving?
• 4:04
  Speaker 2: Now? I realize he's a very busy guy.
• 4:06
  Speaker 1: And he has suffered a lot because of his role
• 4:09
  Speaker 1: in the Trump administration, probably way more than he expected
• 4:13
  Speaker 1: would be the case. And I'm sure that's an important
• 4:15
  Speaker 1: part of this entire equation. But before we get to
• 4:19
  Speaker 1: some of the things that happened after that joint press availability,
• 4:23
  Speaker 1: I want to play two clips from that I guess
• 4:26
  Speaker 1: you would call it a press conference. The first is
• 4:29
  Speaker 1: Musk responding to a question about a report that came
• 4:32
  Speaker 1: out in the New York Times not long before this
• 4:36
  Speaker 1: joint press appearance, which indicated that Elon Musk during the
• 4:40
  Speaker 1: twenty twenty four campaign was doing an awful lot of
• 4:45
  Speaker 1: prescription drugs, more than anybody else was previously aware of,
• 4:50
  Speaker 1: and enough to potentially impact his behavior. I guess you
• 4:55
  Speaker 1: would call it. During that campaign, and Musk was asked
• 5:00
  Speaker 1: about that report and gave a classic Maga world answer
• 5:05
  Speaker 1: where he attacked the messenger, the New York Times.
• 5:08
  Speaker 2: Of course, you know, Russia Gate, Russia Gate.
• 5:10
  Speaker 1: Russia Gate is what you're going to say whenever you're
• 5:14
  Speaker 1: faced with a story that might actually have some truth
• 5:16
  Speaker 1: in it. You attacked the messenger and the credibility or
• 5:19
  Speaker 1: lack thereof of the New York Times. And here's what
• 5:23
  Speaker 1: that sounded like last week, he President Trump.
• 5:26
  Speaker 2: The President mentioned that you had to deal with all
• 5:28
  Speaker 2: the slings and arrows during your time at dog.
• 5:30
  Speaker 3: There's this people, you know, some of the media organizations
• 5:33
  Speaker 3: in this room with the slingers.
• 5:35
  Speaker 2: Well, so.
• 5:37
  Speaker 4: There is a New York Times be work today that
• 5:39
  Speaker 4: accuses you of blurring writing right between?
• 5:42
  Speaker 3: Is the New New York Times? Is that the same
• 5:44
  Speaker 3: publication that's got a Pulitzer Prize for a false recording
• 5:49
  Speaker 3: on of the Russia Gate?
• 5:51
  Speaker 2: Uh? Is it the same organization? I got to check
• 5:54
  Speaker 2: my bulletzer, my pulletzer counter.
• 5:57
  Speaker 3: So I think that I think the just ruled against
• 6:00
  Speaker 3: YLD Times for their lies about the Russia Gate hoax,
• 6:03
  Speaker 3: and that they might have to give back that full
• 6:05
  Speaker 3: it surprise that New York Times.
• 6:07
  Speaker 2: Let's move on.
• 6:08
  Speaker 1: Okay, next question, So to me that was kind of
• 6:13
  Speaker 1: like a non denial denial.
• 6:15
  Speaker 2: That's really the first page of the Maga World Trump
• 6:19
  Speaker 2: World playbook.
• 6:21
  Speaker 1: Do I have any evidence that The New York Times
• 6:24
  Speaker 1: came up with a true bombshell?
• 6:27
  Speaker 5: No?
• 6:27
  Speaker 1: I mean, I think it's an interesting story. There's probably
• 6:30
  Speaker 1: some truth to it, but what difference it makes at
• 6:33
  Speaker 1: this point, I really don't know.
• 6:34
  Speaker 2: He wasn't breaking any laws.
• 6:36
  Speaker 1: There's no indication that he was dysfunctional on the campaign trail.
• 6:42
  Speaker 1: So this seemed to me to be an attack on
• 6:44
  Speaker 1: Elon Musk. And I said many times even before all
• 6:49
  Speaker 1: these developments in the in the breakdown of the Trump
• 6:52
  Speaker 1: Musk relationship, that one of the dangers here is that
• 6:56
  Speaker 1: the news media is very, very invested in breaking up
• 7:01
  Speaker 1: Donald Trump an Elon Musk. I mean, hell, the drudg Report,
• 7:04
  Speaker 1: which used to be a very pro Trump website and
• 7:08
  Speaker 1: now is extremely anti Trump, has been as deeply invested
• 7:12
  Speaker 1: as anything I've ever seen in breaking up Musk and Trump.
• 7:17
  Speaker 1: And currently, you know, as I do this podcast, Trump Trump,
• 7:23
  Speaker 1: the Trump Musk relationship is still a huge part of
• 7:26
  Speaker 1: the Drudge Report. Drudge is basically celebrating the end of
• 7:29
  Speaker 1: the relationship. And I said many times that this is
• 7:33
  Speaker 1: going to be a problem because the media is invested
• 7:37
  Speaker 1: in breaking up this relationship and they know how to
• 7:39
  Speaker 1: do it. And by the way, you know, drug use
• 7:42
  Speaker 1: is one of those things that Trump does not respect.
• 7:45
  Speaker 1: He doesn't do drugs, he doesn't drink alcohol. So I'm
• 7:48
  Speaker 1: sure that played a role in what the New York
• 7:50
  Speaker 1: Times is trying to do. But when you have that
• 7:53
  Speaker 1: much pressure put on a relationship, eventually it's going to break.
• 7:57
  Speaker 2: Now.
• 7:57
  Speaker 1: You may recall I also expressed some optimism very early
• 8:01
  Speaker 1: on in Trump two point zero that maybe this Trump
• 8:05
  Speaker 1: Musk relationship could last because they had realized and mutually
• 8:10
  Speaker 1: acknowledged that the media was out to get them and
• 8:13
  Speaker 1: that they didn't want to give.
• 8:15
  Speaker 2: The media that victory.
• 8:17
  Speaker 1: Well, apparently that didn't last, or wasn't as strong as
• 8:20
  Speaker 1: I had hoped that it might be. And to be clear,
• 8:23
  Speaker 1: the relationship, at least publicly is not completely and totally
• 8:26
  Speaker 1: fractured as of this taping, but there's some major major problems,
• 8:31
  Speaker 1: and I don't know how it can restore itself to
• 8:34
  Speaker 1: what it was given what transpired in the days after
• 8:38
  Speaker 1: this joint press availability at the Oval Office. But obviously
• 8:42
  Speaker 1: the core problem here was the issue of government spending
• 8:46
  Speaker 1: and how Elon Musk is rightfully a zealot on this issue.
• 8:50
  Speaker 1: The entire focus and purpose of DOGE was to get
• 8:55
  Speaker 1: rid of inefficient and fraudulent government spending, and Musk had
• 9:01
  Speaker 1: this now completely unrealistic goal of at least a trillion
• 9:06
  Speaker 1: dollars in savings, and they've come nowhere near that. None
• 9:10
  Speaker 1: of the DOAGE cuts at this point have been codified
• 9:14
  Speaker 1: by actual law. They seem to maybe have caused more
• 9:18
  Speaker 1: trouble than they're even worth, because they have created the
• 9:21
  Speaker 1: narrative that anything that goes wrong in the federal government
• 9:25
  Speaker 1: can be blamed on DOGE cuts, whether that's real or
• 9:28
  Speaker 1: fake or somewhere in between. And I thought this was
• 9:33
  Speaker 1: kind of a funny and interesting moment in this joint
• 9:36
  Speaker 1: press availability at the Oval office, where Musk was asked
• 9:40
  Speaker 1: which was more difficult trying to cut federal spending or
• 9:44
  Speaker 1: colonizing Mars, which is probably Musk's all time goal for SpaceX.
• 9:50
  Speaker 1: And here was Musk's response to that.
• 9:53
  Speaker 6: There, Musk, what do you think would be easier colonizing
• 9:56
  Speaker 6: marks or making the government efficient.
• 10:00
  Speaker 3: It's a tough call, but I think Carl Isisa was
• 10:04
  Speaker 3: and making my faulty kiser his honor.
• 10:07
  Speaker 2: Now, that was very very telling. It was funny, but
• 10:10
  Speaker 2: it was very telling.
• 10:11
  Speaker 1: That's essentially Musk acknowledging defeat, that this challenge was even
• 10:17
  Speaker 1: greater than I thought that it would be. And while
• 10:21
  Speaker 1: he is never fully and one even close to one
• 10:26
  Speaker 1: hundred percent acknowledged defeat, this has been a defeat. And
• 10:30
  Speaker 1: I don't want to blame Elon Musk necessarily for this.
• 10:32
  Speaker 1: I mean, he was taking on a challenge that I
• 10:34
  Speaker 1: don't think anybody could have met, especially when your partner
• 10:39
  Speaker 1: is Donald Trump, who doesn't really believe in this.
• 10:43
  Speaker 2: See. I think that's the core issue.
• 10:45
  Speaker 1: And I referenced in last week's episode the the you
• 10:49
  Speaker 1: know the famous line from the first Rocky movie and
• 10:52
  Speaker 1: Apollo Greg's trainer, and you know he doesn't realize this
• 10:56
  Speaker 1: is a show.
• 10:56
  Speaker 2: He thinks this is a damn fight.
• 10:59
  Speaker 1: Well, I believe that Trump was largely in the camp
• 11:02
  Speaker 1: of this is a damn show. Musk was in the
• 11:05
  Speaker 1: camp of this is a damn fight. And when the
• 11:08
  Speaker 1: President United States isn't really in the fight, doesn't truly
• 11:11
  Speaker 1: believe in it. I mean, let's be clear, Trump's entire
• 11:15
  Speaker 1: life is about using debt.
• 11:17
  Speaker 2: To his advantage. That's his entire life. So how is
• 11:22
  Speaker 2: this going to be the guy who goes to the
• 11:25
  Speaker 2: mat to.
• 11:26
  Speaker 1: Try to cut government spending when in reality, the only
• 11:30
  Speaker 1: thing you do in the short run is get blamed
• 11:32
  Speaker 1: for that.
• 11:33
  Speaker 2: Nobody really gives you any.
• 11:35
  Speaker 1: Kind of benefit or compliment or you get no gain
• 11:39
  Speaker 1: from that.
• 11:40
  Speaker 2: You know. Trump talks hilariously in my view, about short term.
• 11:43
  Speaker 1: Pain for long term game. Well, that's not in Trump's DNA.
• 11:49
  Speaker 1: Trump is all about putting off the pain for short
• 11:53
  Speaker 1: term gain or lack of pain. And that is what
• 11:57
  Speaker 1: has created this problem in the federal government for decades now,
• 12:02
  Speaker 1: where that's the incentive structure. The incentive structure is all
• 12:06
  Speaker 1: messed up because the politicians are never going to endorse
• 12:12
  Speaker 1: short term pain, especially not in Congress when you have
• 12:17
  Speaker 1: elections every two years and holding onto your cushy gig
• 12:21
  Speaker 1: is your number one priority.
• 12:23
  Speaker 2: That's never going to happen.
• 12:24
  Speaker 1: We are doomed, and people have been predicting this for
• 12:27
  Speaker 1: a very very long time, especially when the voters basically
• 12:31
  Speaker 1: feel the same way.
• 12:32
  Speaker 2: We are doomed to bankruptcy.
• 12:35
  Speaker 1: We have created a system and an incentive structure that
• 12:40
  Speaker 1: is one hundred percent assuring, barring a miracle, that that's
• 12:45
  Speaker 1: what's going to happen eventually, and it may not even
• 12:48
  Speaker 1: be that too far off into the future. And so
• 12:52
  Speaker 1: this was the last shot in my view. I mean,
• 12:54
  Speaker 1: I'm not even.
• 12:55
  Speaker 2: Sure this was truly a shot.
• 12:56
  Speaker 1: I've referenced it being, you know, the metaphorical Luke sky
• 13:00
  Speaker 1: Walker one shot to blow up the death Star, and
• 13:03
  Speaker 1: I don't even think Musk got a shot off.
• 13:06
  Speaker 2: But you know, this was the last chance.
• 13:08
  Speaker 1: You have a president with one term to serve, you've
• 13:12
  Speaker 1: got the richest man in the world dedicated to this effort,
• 13:16
  Speaker 1: and you've got Republicans allegedly controlling both houses of Congress.
• 13:21
  Speaker 1: This was the last chance to do this, and they
• 13:25
  Speaker 1: didn't even come close. And that is incredibly sobering and depressing.
• 13:31
  Speaker 1: It's also not surprising. Now, after this feel good event
• 13:37
  Speaker 1: where they put the lipstick on the pig and you know,
• 13:40
  Speaker 1: jointly answered questions and made it look like they were
• 13:43
  Speaker 1: still very friendly, things started to get interesting because the
• 13:47
  Speaker 1: Wall Street Journal put out an article with the headline
• 13:51
  Speaker 1: inside Trump and Musk's complicated relationship. This was on May thirty,
• 13:58
  Speaker 1: if this was the end of last week. The president
• 14:01
  Speaker 1: and his aides have sometimes expressed frustration with Musk, but
• 14:06
  Speaker 1: his advisors say the two remain close.
• 14:09
  Speaker 2: Now, that's not the.
• 14:10
  Speaker 1: Most interesting part of this article. The article began President
• 14:15
  Speaker 1: Trump recently posed an evocative question to his advisors about
• 14:20
  Speaker 1: billionaire Elon Musk's promise to slash one trillion dollars in
• 14:25
  Speaker 1: government spending. Now, the way this is being framed is
• 14:29
  Speaker 1: that Trump seems to be blaming Musk for an unrealistic promise.
• 14:36
  Speaker 1: But here was the alleged quote. And this is the
• 14:38
  Speaker 1: Wall Street Journal. This is not the Washington Post of
• 14:42
  Speaker 1: the New York Times. This is the News Corp newspaper.
• 14:46
  Speaker 1: This is the same company that owns Fox News Channel.
• 14:49
  Speaker 1: The quote is was it all bullshit? Trump asked, according
• 14:55
  Speaker 1: to administration officials, wondering whether Musk could have ever come
• 15:00
  Speaker 1: close to the cuts he promised to carry out through
• 15:03
  Speaker 1: the Department of Government Efficiency.
• 15:06
  Speaker 2: The episode captured.
• 15:07
  Speaker 1: The flashes of skepticism and frustration from Trump and his
• 15:12
  Speaker 1: senior aides over Musk's rocky four month tenure in government,
• 15:18
  Speaker 1: with spats spilling out in the Middle East, cabinet meetings
• 15:23
  Speaker 1: and occasionally in the Oval office, according to people familiar
• 15:26
  Speaker 1: with the matter, and they reflected the broader exasperation over
• 15:32
  Speaker 1: roadblocks that have slowed Musk's efforts, from court challenges to
• 15:37
  Speaker 1: bureaucratic delays. Now, assuming that that is true, and I
• 15:42
  Speaker 1: have no reason to believe that, it's not, to me,
• 15:46
  Speaker 1: the way I interpret that is Trump is looking for
• 15:49
  Speaker 1: a scapegoat here, and that scapegoat is going to be
• 15:52
  Speaker 1: elon Musk. Now, it's not going to be a hard scapegoat,
• 15:54
  Speaker 1: because they're also going to acknowledge, you know how difficult
• 15:58
  Speaker 1: the challenge is.
• 16:00
  Speaker 2: This whole goat. This goes with the entire.
• 16:01
  Speaker 1: Deep state narrative that you just can't defeat this monstrosity
• 16:06
  Speaker 1: that has been created in the federal government, and there's
• 16:11
  Speaker 1: just no way anyone can actually beat it. But I
• 16:14
  Speaker 1: would love to know a little bit more about what
• 16:16
  Speaker 1: Trump meant by was it all bullshit? Is that a
• 16:21
  Speaker 1: direct shot at Musk? In other words, Musk was the bullshit?
• 16:25
  Speaker 1: And of course anybody, if anyone knows bullshit, it's Donald Trump.
• 16:28
  Speaker 1: So you can't bullshit a bullshit or they say. And
• 16:31
  Speaker 1: so that to me is.
• 16:33
  Speaker 2: The key part of that article.
• 16:35
  Speaker 1: Was it all bullshit, and that is consistent at least
• 16:40
  Speaker 1: with the idea that Trump is looking for Musk to
• 16:44
  Speaker 1: be at least somewhat of a scapegoat. Well, then after
• 16:50
  Speaker 1: that article came out, and it's unclear to me exactly
• 16:53
  Speaker 1: when this interview was done, but the interview was released
• 16:57
  Speaker 1: in parts. In fact, we played a clip from it
• 16:59
  Speaker 1: in the last episode of the podcast. Musk was the
• 17:04
  Speaker 1: focus of a feature on CBS's Sunday Morning Show where
• 17:08
  Speaker 1: he did an interview where he puts his foot even
• 17:11
  Speaker 1: deeper into the water of separating himself from Donald Trump,
• 17:17
  Speaker 1: where for the first time, and it's.
• 17:19
  Speaker 2: Clear he's very, very conflicted. Here.
• 17:22
  Speaker 1: He even references how conflicted he is about what a
• 17:26
  Speaker 1: difficult spot he is in because he does not want
• 17:29
  Speaker 1: to criticize from publicly, but he also does not want
• 17:34
  Speaker 1: people to think that he's in favor of everything that
• 17:37
  Speaker 1: the administration is doing.
• 17:39
  Speaker 2: And here's what that sounded like on CBS.
• 17:42
  Speaker 7: And you know, it's not like I agree with everything
• 17:47
  Speaker 7: the administration is. So it's like there's I mean, I
• 17:51
  Speaker 7: agree with much of what the administration does, but we
• 17:54
  Speaker 7: have differences of opinion. You know, there are things.
• 17:58
  Speaker 4: That I I don't entirely agree with, but it's difficult
• 18:03
  Speaker 4: for me to bring that up in an interview because
• 18:05
  Speaker 4: then it creates a bone of contention. So then I'm
• 18:07
  Speaker 4: a little stuck in a bind where I'm like, well,
• 18:10
  Speaker 4: I don't want to, you know, speak up against the administrations,
• 18:14
  Speaker 4: but I don't want to also don't want to take
• 18:18
  Speaker 4: responsibility for every the administration is doing.
• 18:21
  Speaker 1: Now, when I saw that, I'm like, uh, oh, okay,
• 18:24
  Speaker 1: here we go. Musk is starting to send the signals
• 18:28
  Speaker 1: that he is separating himself from Trump. It's not just
• 18:32
  Speaker 1: him officially leaving DOGE. Now, he's actually saying publicly on
• 18:38
  Speaker 1: camera that he wants to criticize Trump effectively. Effectively, that's
• 18:43
  Speaker 1: what he's saying. He wants to criticize Trump, but he
• 18:47
  Speaker 1: is very hesitant to do that despite the fact that
• 18:50
  Speaker 1: he clearly, very strongly disagrees with a lot of what
• 18:54
  Speaker 1: is happening in the administration. And then we learned and
• 18:58
  Speaker 1: again it's unclear exactly in the timeline when these things happened,
• 19:03
  Speaker 1: but I think generally this timeline is relevant, makes sense,
• 19:08
  Speaker 1: and is credible. At some point we learn and clearly
• 19:13
  Speaker 1: Musk either new hopefully beforehand, but if he didn't. That's
• 19:16
  Speaker 1: even worse, we find out that Elon Musk's recommended candidate
• 19:22
  Speaker 1: to lead NASA. You know, this is an agency that obviously,
• 19:27
  Speaker 1: as the guy who owned SpaceX, Musk has some knowledge
• 19:31
  Speaker 1: and interest in that. Musk's recommendation to lead NASA was
• 19:36
  Speaker 1: replaced with another candidate. And you know, I have not
• 19:42
  Speaker 1: seen any public reaction to that. If I if it exists,
• 19:45
  Speaker 1: I missed it, but I've not seen Musk react to
• 19:48
  Speaker 1: that publicly. But that had to leave a mark. I mean,
• 19:52
  Speaker 1: this is this is his wheelhouse, and that's insulting at
• 19:57
  Speaker 1: the very least. And allegedly he was dropped because of
• 20:02
  Speaker 1: support of Democratic candidates or policies in the past, which
• 20:07
  Speaker 1: I always find hilarious because Trump himself has supporting a
• 20:10
  Speaker 1: lot of Democratic candidates and.
• 20:13
  Speaker 2: Policies in the past.
• 20:14
  Speaker 1: But whatever, And so that to me, at least on
• 20:20
  Speaker 1: the surface, was a key moment in this because it's
• 20:24
  Speaker 1: an interesting coincidence that at that point now Musk is
• 20:29
  Speaker 1: feeling more comfortable not just putting his toe in the water,
• 20:33
  Speaker 1: but almost diving in head first when it comes to
• 20:37
  Speaker 1: criticism of at least the administration of Donald Trump, and
• 20:42
  Speaker 1: specifically the spending topic, if not direct attacks on Trump himself.
• 20:49
  Speaker 1: Because then on June the third, the morning of June third,
• 20:54
  Speaker 1: Elon Musk unleashed the following tweet, which as of thising
• 21:01
  Speaker 1: has over one hundred million impressions, which is just an
• 21:06
  Speaker 1: absolutely insane number. But here was Elon Musk's response, and
• 21:10
  Speaker 1: even the wording of it is consistent with this picture
• 21:14
  Speaker 1: I'm painting of someone who has been wanting to speak
• 21:18
  Speaker 1: out for a while, has been gradually getting more comfortable
• 21:23
  Speaker 1: with doing so, and has finally reached the point where
• 21:26
  Speaker 1: they have lost their patience. So here's what Elon Musk wrote.
• 21:31
  Speaker 1: I'm sorry, but I just can't stand it anymore. This massive, outrageous,
• 21:37
  Speaker 1: port filled congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination. Shame
• 21:43
  Speaker 1: on those who voted for it. You know you did wrong.
• 21:48
  Speaker 2: You know it.
• 21:50
  Speaker 1: And again, over one hundred million impressions on Twitter. And
• 21:55
  Speaker 1: that doesn't even include all of the mainstream news media
• 21:59
  Speaker 1: coverage that this got, because obviously the majtre news media
• 22:03
  Speaker 1: that I've already referenced has been deeply invested in a
• 22:07
  Speaker 1: Musk Trump breakup for quite a while, and this was
• 22:11
  Speaker 1: seen understandably so as the aha moment.
• 22:15
  Speaker 2: Okay, now we have real separation.
• 22:17
  Speaker 1: This isn't just a formal separation where this was allegedly
• 22:23
  Speaker 1: always expected to be when Musk would leave Doge and
• 22:26
  Speaker 1: everyone's doing happy talk and giving away golden keys. Now
• 22:30
  Speaker 1: we're getting real, and the real story is that Musk
• 22:34
  Speaker 1: is pissed off. In Musk's mind, he spent a ridiculous
• 22:39
  Speaker 1: amount of money getting Trump and other Republicans elected. He
• 22:43
  Speaker 1: suffered enormous damage to his international reputation and his own
• 22:48
  Speaker 1: net worth. I theorized last episode of the podcast, and
• 22:53
  Speaker 1: I still believe this to be true. That Elon Musk
• 22:56
  Speaker 1: and Frankly, the federal government deficit would probably be in
• 23:01
  Speaker 1: a much better position today if Musk had just stayed
• 23:03
  Speaker 1: out of this publicly and just written a check for
• 23:09
  Speaker 1: one hundred billion dollars or whatever to the federal treasury,
• 23:14
  Speaker 1: which is about what allegedly Doge has saved, and Musk's
• 23:19
  Speaker 1: network would probably still be larger than what it is today,
• 23:23
  Speaker 1: at least when you consider the damage to his reputation
• 23:27
  Speaker 1: and his businesses, not to mention the frustration of leading
• 23:32
  Speaker 1: this charge and effectively getting nowhere and then having Trump
• 23:36
  Speaker 1: himself pass this so called big beautiful bill. And let's
• 23:42
  Speaker 1: be very very clear, it's Donald Trump that passed the bill.
• 23:47
  Speaker 1: It passed in the House by one vote. It only
• 23:50
  Speaker 1: passed because Democrats lost a vote because one of their
• 23:54
  Speaker 1: members passed away. So without Donald Trump lobbying hard for this,
• 24:00
  Speaker 1: there's no chance that it passes so effectively. While Musk
• 24:06
  Speaker 1: isn't saying it, he's attacking Trump here directly, and he's
• 24:11
  Speaker 1: probably smart enough not to reference Trump specifically. But that's
• 24:15
  Speaker 1: the reality of this situation and the reaction to this tweet.
• 24:21
  Speaker 2: You know, the left wing media, of course, is joyous.
• 24:24
  Speaker 1: Drudge is joyous because they now have their pending divorce
• 24:28
  Speaker 1: and it happened much sooner than even they probably expected
• 24:32
  Speaker 1: that it would occur. But I found it most hilarious
• 24:35
  Speaker 1: to see the maga world Republican leadership reaction to this
• 24:40
  Speaker 1: tweet because they're still afraid of Elon Musk. They don't
• 24:45
  Speaker 1: know one hundred percent sure what the relationship is between
• 24:48
  Speaker 1: Musk and Trump, but they also fear him because obviously
• 24:52
  Speaker 1: he's still, you know, among if not the richest men
• 24:56
  Speaker 1: in the world, and also owns Twitter. He can sick
• 25:00
  Speaker 1: a fight and put anybody he wants in a very
• 25:05
  Speaker 1: difficult position simply by putting out a tweet, he's already
• 25:08
  Speaker 1: done so. With regard to the future of this big,
• 25:11
  Speaker 1: beautiful bill in the United States Senate, I mean, that's
• 25:15
  Speaker 1: not going to be helpful to the passage of this bill,
• 25:18
  Speaker 1: to have one hundred million impressions, mostly among people who
• 25:23
  Speaker 1: are Trump's supporters, seeing Elon Musk say I'm sorry, I'm
• 25:28
  Speaker 1: mad as hell and I can't take it anymore.
• 25:30
  Speaker 2: This was an abomination.
• 25:33
  Speaker 1: But the Republican reaction to this has basically been And
• 25:37
  Speaker 1: then Speaker Johnson was definitely in this camp. Well, you know,
• 25:41
  Speaker 1: Elon's a very smart guy, he's a friend, he's wonderful,
• 25:45
  Speaker 1: but he's just incorrect about this. And I laughed about
• 25:49
  Speaker 1: that because, first of all, if he's so smart, and
• 25:52
  Speaker 1: you know, you were praising him as the head of
• 25:55
  Speaker 1: DOGE and this is his area of expertise, then why
• 25:59
  Speaker 1: is he so wrong about? What makes him so wrong?
• 26:02
  Speaker 1: But the hilarious part is, let's pretend that Musk and
• 26:07
  Speaker 1: Trump were still simpatico, they were still tied to the hip,
• 26:11
  Speaker 1: they were still co presidents. Is the left wing media
• 26:15
  Speaker 1: like to pretend that they were long ago, back.
• 26:18
  Speaker 2: In January and February of this year.
• 26:22
  Speaker 1: And let's pretend Trump had responded to Musk's tweet by saying,
• 26:28
  Speaker 1: I think Elon's right. That's all he would have had
• 26:31
  Speaker 1: to say, just put out something untrue social I think
• 26:35
  Speaker 1: Elon is right, or even I think Elon has a
• 26:38
  Speaker 1: good point.
• 26:39
  Speaker 2: If if just that one line had been.
• 26:42
  Speaker 1: Put out by Donald Trump, Speaker Johnson, and every other
• 26:45
  Speaker 1: Republican leader would have been praising Elon Musk for killing
• 26:49
  Speaker 1: the big beautiful bill. That is one hundred percent accurate
• 26:53
  Speaker 1: statement I just provided you there. You know what that
• 26:56
  Speaker 1: is an indication of this is a cult.
• 27:00
  Speaker 2: This is a cult. Trump is a king.
• 27:03
  Speaker 1: This was always my greatest fear about Trump two point zero,
• 27:07
  Speaker 1: especially post assassination attempt and winning against all odds, that
• 27:12
  Speaker 1: whatever Trump says changes reality. So the only reason why
• 27:17
  Speaker 1: Musk is being mildly and carefully criticized for this is
• 27:23
  Speaker 1: because Trump, at least publicly and apparently not privately either
• 27:28
  Speaker 1: isn't on board. If he was on board, it would
• 27:30
  Speaker 1: change reality.
• 27:32
  Speaker 2: I'm sorry.
• 27:33
  Speaker 1: That's not the way the world's supposed to work, especially
• 27:35
  Speaker 1: in the United States of America.
• 27:37
  Speaker 2: We don't have kings. You can't change.
• 27:40
  Speaker 1: Reality by simply posting your position on true social But
• 27:45
  Speaker 1: that's what would have happened if Donald Trump had supported
• 27:49
  Speaker 1: Elon Musk in this, and the lack of support from
• 27:53
  Speaker 1: Trump and the lack of support from Republican leaders, I'm
• 27:56
  Speaker 1: sure has only further entrenched Elon Musk in his position.
• 28:00
  Speaker 1: And there's evidence of that because Elon Musk has not
• 28:03
  Speaker 1: stopped tweeting about this situation.
• 28:07
  Speaker 2: In fact, he's also.
• 28:09
  Speaker 1: Tweeted that he believes that everybody that voted for this
• 28:14
  Speaker 1: essentially ought to be defeated next November. So he's basically
• 28:19
  Speaker 1: already making threats on Twitter about defeating Republicans because remember,
• 28:26
  Speaker 1: it's Republicans that voted for this, it's Republicans who control
• 28:30
  Speaker 1: the House barely. You've got, you know, Elon Musk with
• 28:34
  Speaker 1: all the resources in the world, and by the way,
• 28:37
  Speaker 1: not just resources, but an enormous amount of street cred
• 28:41
  Speaker 1: with the Republican base. I mean, it doesn't really you know,
• 28:45
  Speaker 1: matters a little bit that he and Trump are no
• 28:48
  Speaker 1: longer one percent line, but he still has a lot
• 28:51
  Speaker 1: of personal credibility. He could easily tank, easily tank the
• 28:57
  Speaker 1: Republican majority. Next November, and he's already threatening to do so,
• 29:03
  Speaker 1: and so this is now an official separation here.
• 29:08
  Speaker 2: This is a separation.
• 29:09
  Speaker 1: And given Trump's personality and ego, and given Musk's personality
• 29:16
  Speaker 1: and ego, I don't know how they come back.
• 29:18
  Speaker 2: From this precipice. I really don't.
• 29:21
  Speaker 1: This is a situation that may not be able to
• 29:24
  Speaker 1: be healed one percent. The more likely scenario is it
• 29:28
  Speaker 1: gets worse from here, given the egos and personalities of
• 29:32
  Speaker 1: Donald Trump and Elon Musk, and the fact that Musk
• 29:36
  Speaker 1: is already making the temperature even hotter by essentially threatening
• 29:43
  Speaker 1: to tank the House majority for the Republicans in the
• 29:47
  Speaker 1: November elections. And of course there's the issue of what
• 29:51
  Speaker 1: happens to the big beautiful bill in the Senate. I mean,
• 29:55
  Speaker 1: and I support the idea of basically, philosophically, what Musk
• 29:59
  Speaker 1: is doing.
• 30:00
  Speaker 2: I mean, this is I'm sure there's some good things.
• 30:03
  Speaker 1: In the bill, but there's also, by and large, horrendous
• 30:09
  Speaker 1: things when it comes to spending, bloating further the debt
• 30:13
  Speaker 1: and the deficit, going against allegedly what you were claiming
• 30:17
  Speaker 1: was going to be the goal here during this Trump
• 30:20
  Speaker 1: two point zero administration, so I generally support Musk. I
• 30:24
  Speaker 1: generally trust in him on this particular issue, certainly more
• 30:29
  Speaker 1: than I trust in Trump, because I just do not
• 30:32
  Speaker 1: believe Trump's heart was ever in this fight ever.
• 30:37
  Speaker 2: And so I don't know what's going to happen in
• 30:40
  Speaker 2: the Senate.
• 30:41
  Speaker 1: Maybe you know, best case scenario, maybe this thing gets
• 30:45
  Speaker 1: killed and they go.
• 30:46
  Speaker 2: Back to the drawing board. But I don't think.
• 30:48
  Speaker 1: They can do that because they've got something through the House.
• 30:52
  Speaker 1: They only have a couple of Bote majority in the House.
• 30:55
  Speaker 1: I think they've got to figure out a way to
• 30:57
  Speaker 1: make this at least less bad. And maybe that's what
• 31:01
  Speaker 1: Elon Musk's goal is, is trying to make this in
• 31:04
  Speaker 1: the Senate less bad and create enough fear for Republicans
• 31:09
  Speaker 1: in the House so that you know, once this thing,
• 31:11
  Speaker 1: if it were to pass the Senate and then go
• 31:13
  Speaker 1: to conference, that Republicans fearing Musk would actually play nice
• 31:18
  Speaker 1: and that.
• 31:19
  Speaker 2: There would be some victory, not victory.
• 31:23
  Speaker 1: But less of a loss when it comes to the
• 31:25
  Speaker 1: issue of government spending. That's I think that's Musk's goal,
• 31:30
  Speaker 1: and I hope that that's realistic. But we're dealing with
• 31:33
  Speaker 1: a very precarious political situation here, and frankly, you know,
• 31:39
  Speaker 1: I believe and I've said this from the beginning, so
• 31:42
  Speaker 1: I'm not going to back off of my word or
• 31:44
  Speaker 1: my prediction that you can make a very strong argument
• 31:49
  Speaker 1: that here we are not even six months in to
• 31:51
  Speaker 1: Trump two point zero, and at least in the economic realm,
• 31:57
  Speaker 1: this has been a failure, and the chances of this
• 32:02
  Speaker 1: being a resounding success, I think are extremely low. When
• 32:07
  Speaker 1: I say this, I mean Trump two point zero overall. Economically,
• 32:11
  Speaker 1: there are already signs that economic growth has diminished because
• 32:15
  Speaker 1: of the uncertainty created by, among other things, that Trump tariffs.
• 32:19
  Speaker 1: There have not been these great, wonderful, beautiful trade deals.
• 32:24
  Speaker 1: It seems like China is backing away from the negotiation table.
• 32:31
  Speaker 1: I'm amazed that the stock market has not gone into
• 32:36
  Speaker 1: the tank again because of the fact that it does
• 32:39
  Speaker 1: not appear that these promises for trade deals have happened.
• 32:42
  Speaker 1: You obviously have the issue of government spending that is
• 32:45
  Speaker 1: not under control. In fact, it's exactly the opposite, based
• 32:48
  Speaker 1: upon the passing in the House of the Big Beautiful Bill.
• 32:52
  Speaker 1: You know, there's some interesting numbers regarding jobs, and I'm
• 32:56
  Speaker 1: sure you know, Maga world people will tell you that
• 32:59
  Speaker 1: things are moving economically, but I'm not seeing it. There's
• 33:03
  Speaker 1: more and more talk of recession, there's concerns about the
• 33:06
  Speaker 1: bond markets, and frankly, hilariously and I think tellingly, I
• 33:12
  Speaker 1: mentioned that stock market. It appears is that the stock
• 33:15
  Speaker 1: market is hanging in there right now and actually doing
• 33:18
  Speaker 1: fairly well in the last few days, because no one
• 33:23
  Speaker 1: believes that Trump is actually going to stand by the
• 33:28
  Speaker 1: trade war, that he's going to literally chicken out. And
• 33:32
  Speaker 1: this became an issue that created a viral sensation because
• 33:37
  Speaker 1: Trump was asked at the White House about this term
• 33:41
  Speaker 1: taco meaning Trump always chickens out, that a lot on
• 33:47
  Speaker 1: Wall Street have been using essentially as an explanation for
• 33:53
  Speaker 1: why Wall Street isn't panicking as much anymore about the
• 33:58
  Speaker 1: trade war and the tariff situation, that they can always
• 34:02
  Speaker 1: rely on Trump chickening out.
• 34:05
  Speaker 2: Now. This resonates with me.
• 34:07
  Speaker 1: In particular because I always believe in the Trump always
• 34:12
  Speaker 1: chickens out theory. Back when Reconciliation Day happened, I happened
• 34:17
  Speaker 1: to have had a pre scheduled call with my financial
• 34:21
  Speaker 1: advisor about what to do with my investment portfolio, and
• 34:27
  Speaker 1: they were very much of the camp of We've got
• 34:30
  Speaker 1: to prepare for this trade war and tariffs, and I'm like,
• 34:34
  Speaker 1: I don't feel comfortable with that because I know Trump's
• 34:37
  Speaker 1: going to chicken out here, So we got to split
• 34:40
  Speaker 1: the difference on what the strategy would be. But this
• 34:44
  Speaker 1: was a rather remarkable exchange. I think it was overblown.
• 34:49
  Speaker 1: I mean, left wing Twitter went crazy over this and
• 34:52
  Speaker 1: pretended that Trump melt it down. By Trump's standards, I
• 34:55
  Speaker 1: don't think this is a meltdown, but I do think
• 34:58
  Speaker 1: that this is an interesting reaction to Trump, apparently for
• 35:02
  Speaker 1: the first time, at least if you believe him. Being
• 35:05
  Speaker 1: told about this term taco, Trump always chickens out, and
• 35:11
  Speaker 1: you know, for a while he gives a substantive and
• 35:14
  Speaker 1: measured response, But then I think as he thinks about
• 35:17
  Speaker 1: he starts to get more pissed off, which, of course,
• 35:21
  Speaker 1: the only reason you would get pissed off is you
• 35:24
  Speaker 1: think at some level there's some truth to that, and
• 35:27
  Speaker 1: that's why you're insecure, and it gets you upset. But
• 35:30
  Speaker 1: you can decide for yourself. Here's what happened when Trump
• 35:33
  Speaker 1: was apparently introduced to the term taco.
• 35:37
  Speaker 8: Mister President Wallstreet less have coined a new term called
• 35:40
  Speaker 8: the taco trade.
• 35:41
  Speaker 5: They're saying Trump always chickens out on the tear threats,
• 35:44
  Speaker 5: and that's why markets are higher this week.
• 35:46
  Speaker 1: What's your response to.
• 35:47
  Speaker 5: That, I kick out, kick it out.
• 35:49
  Speaker 2: Oh, then I check it out.
• 35:51
  Speaker 4: I've never heard that.
• 35:52
  Speaker 5: You mean because I reduced China from one hundred and
• 35:55
  Speaker 5: forty five percent that I set down to one hundred
• 35:58
  Speaker 5: and then down to another number, and I said, you
• 36:01
  Speaker 5: have to open up your whole country. And because I
• 36:05
  Speaker 5: gave the European Union a fifty percent tax tariff. And
• 36:11
  Speaker 5: they called up and they said, please, let's meet right now. Please,
• 36:14
  Speaker 5: let's meet right now. And I said, okay, I'll give
• 36:17
  Speaker 5: you till jan nine. I actually asked them, I said,
• 36:20
  Speaker 5: what's to date? Because they weren't willing to meet. And
• 36:23
  Speaker 5: after I did what I did, they said, we'll meet
• 36:25
  Speaker 5: any time you want, and we have an end date
• 36:29
  Speaker 5: of July ninth. You call that chickening out because we
• 36:33
  Speaker 5: have fourteen trillion dollars now invested, committed to investing. When
• 36:38
  Speaker 5: Biden didn't have practically anything Biden, this country was dying.
• 36:42
  Speaker 5: You know, we have the hottest country anywhere in the world.
• 36:44
  Speaker 5: I went to Saudi Arabia. The king told me, he said,
• 36:47
  Speaker 5: you got the hottest company. We have the hottest country
• 36:50
  Speaker 5: in the world right now. Six months ago this country
• 36:53
  Speaker 5: was stone cold dead. We had a dead country. We
• 36:56
  Speaker 5: had a country people didn't think it was going to survive.
• 36:59
  Speaker 5: And you ask a nas the question like that. It's
• 37:02
  Speaker 5: called negotiation. You set a number and if you go down.
• 37:05
  Speaker 5: You know, if I set a number at a ridiculous
• 37:07
  Speaker 5: high number and I go down a little bit, you know,
• 37:10
  Speaker 5: a little bit, they want me to hold that number.
• 37:13
  Speaker 5: One hundred and forty five percent tariff even. I said, man,
• 37:17
  Speaker 5: that really got up. You know how it got because
• 37:19
  Speaker 5: of fent and all and many other things, and you
• 37:21
  Speaker 5: edited it up. I said, where are we now. We're
• 37:24
  Speaker 5: at one hundred and forty five percent. I said, whoa,
• 37:26
  Speaker 5: that's high. That's high. They were doing no business whatsoever,
• 37:30
  Speaker 5: and they were having a lot of problems. We were
• 37:32
  Speaker 5: very nice to China. I don't know if they're going
• 37:33
  Speaker 5: to be nice to us, but we were very nice
• 37:35
  Speaker 5: to China, and in many ways, I think we really
• 37:38
  Speaker 5: helped China tremendously because you know, they were having great
• 37:41
  Speaker 5: difficulty because we were basically going cold Turkey with China,
• 37:45
  Speaker 5: we were doing no business because of the tariff because
• 37:48
  Speaker 5: it was so high. But I knew that. But don't
• 37:51
  Speaker 5: ever say what you said. That's a nasty question.
• 37:54
  Speaker 7: Go ahead to me, That's.
• 37:56
  Speaker 5: The nastiest question hardly, wait, go.
• 37:59
  Speaker 2: Ahead, please to me.
• 38:02
  Speaker 1: This is a classic example of dust out protest too
• 38:05
  Speaker 1: much that if you really weren't insecure about the fact
• 38:09
  Speaker 1: that you do actually chicken out, if not always, certainly
• 38:13
  Speaker 1: a lot of the time, you.
• 38:15
  Speaker 2: Would laugh at that.
• 38:17
  Speaker 1: And weirdly, as he tried to make the counter argument
• 38:22
  Speaker 1: to me, it sounded like he was giving examples of
• 38:24
  Speaker 1: all the times he had actually chicken out that he
• 38:28
  Speaker 1: was trying to make the argument that what I do
• 38:31
  Speaker 1: is I ask for something completely ridiculous so that when
• 38:34
  Speaker 1: I retreat, I actually get something good, which, by the way,
• 38:39
  Speaker 1: I one hundred percent believe has always been Donald Trump's
• 38:42
  Speaker 1: philosophy when it comes to business, and to a certain
• 38:47
  Speaker 1: degree that has been very successful for him. I mean,
• 38:50
  Speaker 1: this is where his audacity works for him. He demands
• 38:54
  Speaker 1: or asks something completely ridiculous, and you know, through his audacity,
• 39:01
  Speaker 1: and because you know, for a long time, the media,
• 39:04
  Speaker 1: you know, gave him lots of attention and gave credibility
• 39:08
  Speaker 1: to everything he said. This is even before he got
• 39:10
  Speaker 1: into politics, you know, because the Trump name was famous,
• 39:14
  Speaker 1: and fame and celebrity has incredible power, and perceived wealth
• 39:19
  Speaker 1: has incredible power and gives you credibility. So you make
• 39:22
  Speaker 1: an absolutely insane demand and then you back off of that.
• 39:27
  Speaker 1: But where you end up is way better, or at
• 39:29
  Speaker 1: least somewhat better than you you might have been in
• 39:32
  Speaker 1: the first place. That has always been Trump's philosophy. And
• 39:36
  Speaker 1: so I get what he's saying, and I get that
• 39:39
  Speaker 1: that is somewhat of a counter argument to the Trump
• 39:41
  Speaker 1: always chickens out, because in Trump's world, what his critics
• 39:46
  Speaker 1: are saying are describing as chickening out is actually him
• 39:51
  Speaker 1: landing in a place that's a victory. Well, I haven't
• 39:54
  Speaker 1: seen that actually come to fruition when it comes.
• 39:56
  Speaker 2: To the trade war and tariffs. Yet I get the theory.
• 40:01
  Speaker 1: I get that it's worked for him in his business
• 40:05
  Speaker 1: life many many times. Sometimes it has not, but sometimes
• 40:09
  Speaker 1: it has. I've not seen that work in this particular
• 40:12
  Speaker 1: situation as of yet. And I know now that Elon
• 40:17
  Speaker 1: Musk is almost on the war path against him.
• 40:21
  Speaker 2: When it comes to economic issues. You know this. This
• 40:25
  Speaker 2: is going to end up.
• 40:26
  Speaker 1: I think, in a situation that is at the very
• 40:30
  Speaker 1: best not arousing success. I feel pretty confident that we're
• 40:35
  Speaker 1: not going to see a situation where by, for instance,
• 40:39
  Speaker 1: the midterm elections, the economy is widely perceived as doing
• 40:44
  Speaker 1: much better under Trump than it was under Bike, and
• 40:47
  Speaker 1: that's going to cause a problem politically for the Republican Party.
• 40:51
  Speaker 1: And you may say they deserve it, and there's legitimacy
• 40:55
  Speaker 1: to that, especially given the fact that they've done nothing
• 40:58
  Speaker 1: and they've just passed this monstrosity, this abomination, as Musk
• 41:03
  Speaker 1: calls it, the Big Beautiful Bill. But I'm just giving
• 41:05
  Speaker 1: you the political realities of the situation. So I've always
• 41:10
  Speaker 1: believed that you can trust in Taco. I've never thought
• 41:13
  Speaker 1: of the term taco. Trump always chickens out, but I
• 41:16
  Speaker 1: do believe that that's a huge part of his DNA,
• 41:19
  Speaker 1: and I think he even acknowledged that's really part of
• 41:21
  Speaker 1: his business negotiating philosophy for better or for worse. Now,
• 41:25
  Speaker 1: one of the other things that Trump always says is
• 41:28
  Speaker 1: he hires the best people, only the best people, which
• 41:31
  Speaker 1: is probably the biggest lie in all of maga world.
• 41:37
  Speaker 1: I mean, there's a lot of them, but that to
• 41:39
  Speaker 1: me is the biggest the idea that Trump hires the
• 41:42
  Speaker 1: best people. I mean, by his own emission, in the
• 41:45
  Speaker 1: first administration, he fired almost everybody he hired, so inherently
• 41:50
  Speaker 1: he didn't hire the best people. And when it comes
• 41:54
  Speaker 1: to Trump two point zero, one of my great fears
• 41:57
  Speaker 1: was we're going to end up with a C list
• 41:59
  Speaker 1: or a D list, or maybe even worse than that,
• 42:02
  Speaker 1: because everybody that worked with him, or almost everybody that
• 42:06
  Speaker 1: worked with him in the first administration is now gone, including.
• 42:09
  Speaker 2: His vice president, not even on speaking terms.
• 42:13
  Speaker 1: So you had to come up with this whole new
• 42:15
  Speaker 1: group of people who are going to be even more
• 42:18
  Speaker 1: cultish than the first term administration was made up of
• 42:23
  Speaker 1: cult members, But I mean those people were highly credible
• 42:27
  Speaker 1: in comparison to some of the people that are in
• 42:29
  Speaker 1: Trump two point zero. And we have two, really i think,
• 42:33
  Speaker 1: telling examples of this lie that Trump hires the best people. Now,
• 42:39
  Speaker 1: MAGA world's not going to believe this, because you know,
• 42:42
  Speaker 1: there's no proof of it, but Reuter's was reporting that
• 42:46
  Speaker 1: FEMA staff were left baffled and confused this week after
• 42:53
  Speaker 1: David Richardson, the newly appointed head of the US Disaster
• 42:57
  Speaker 1: Agency because they already had to get rid of the
• 43:00
  Speaker 1: first head of FEMA apparently said during a briefing that
• 43:05
  Speaker 1: he hadn't known the country has a hurricane season. Now again,
• 43:11
  Speaker 1: we're no longer living in a world where Reuters can
• 43:14
  Speaker 1: report something without video proof and have anybody, especially in
• 43:20
  Speaker 1: MAGA world, blindly believe it. How the reaction to this
• 43:25
  Speaker 1: has not been particularly impressive as far as any sort
• 43:30
  Speaker 1: of contradiction or denial of this story.
• 43:34
  Speaker 2: And also, I should mention I.
• 43:37
  Speaker 1: Can see a scenario where something along these lines could
• 43:41
  Speaker 1: be taken out of context. But it appears as if
• 43:45
  Speaker 1: David Richardson, the new head of FEMA, was not fully
• 43:50
  Speaker 1: informed about hurricane season, which, by the way, just began.
• 43:55
  Speaker 1: Not a good sign, but probably not nearly as bad
• 43:59
  Speaker 1: a sign as what was revealed invertently by Dan Bongino,
• 44:04
  Speaker 1: who is the deputy head of the FBI. Now you
• 44:07
  Speaker 1: probably remember I am a Bongino critic. I think Bongino,
• 44:13
  Speaker 1: who was basically a podcaster before he became deputy head
• 44:18
  Speaker 1: of the FBI, I think he's a moron. I think
• 44:23
  Speaker 1: he is wrong constantly. I think he is a Trump
• 44:27
  Speaker 1: cult member. I think he is a phony and a fraud,
• 44:32
  Speaker 1: but mostly I think he's dumb. I mean, he says
• 44:34
  Speaker 1: a lot of dumb things. And nobody was more enthusiastic,
• 44:39
  Speaker 1: especially when it came to exposing a lot of these
• 44:42
  Speaker 1: conspiracy theories that now even himself he has been forced
• 44:46
  Speaker 1: to acknowledge were bullshit theories, including the idea that Jeffrey
• 44:50
  Speaker 1: Epstein killed him didn't kill himself in a federal prison. Now, Bongino,
• 44:55
  Speaker 1: along with Cash Ptel, the head of the FBI, We're
• 44:59
  Speaker 1: on Fox News Channel with Maria Bartaroma, and declaratively said
• 45:03
  Speaker 1: yep Ebstein did in fact kill himself, in contradiction to
• 45:08
  Speaker 1: many many statements that Bongino made before he became part
• 45:11
  Speaker 1: of the Trump administration. But this was an extraordinary moment
• 45:16
  Speaker 1: that went viral, mostly on the left, and John Stewart
• 45:20
  Speaker 1: of The Daily Show did a pretty funny breakdown of
• 45:23
  Speaker 1: this is Dan Bongino on Fox News Channel.
• 45:26
  Speaker 2: This is friendly ground.
• 45:28
  Speaker 1: This is him three months into the new gig as
• 45:34
  Speaker 1: deputy director of the FBI. Three months and Dan Bongino
• 45:40
  Speaker 1: is already so far in over his head that he's
• 45:44
  Speaker 1: essentially in tears on national television describing how difficult it
• 45:51
  Speaker 1: is for him to do this very tough job, at
• 45:56
  Speaker 1: how much he gave up to join the FBI. And this,
• 46:01
  Speaker 1: I mean this was comical. This, I mean the guy suffering.
• 46:06
  Speaker 1: You don't want to take too much joy in that,
• 46:08
  Speaker 1: but it's this is a guy who's clearly, very troubled,
• 46:11
  Speaker 1: clearly in over his head to where it could somehow
• 46:14
  Speaker 1: get to the point where.
• 46:15
  Speaker 2: On Fox News Channel you expose this.
• 46:19
  Speaker 1: Level of weakness, knowing that Donald Trump is very likely
• 46:23
  Speaker 1: to see it, if not live, but on tape, and
• 46:26
  Speaker 1: you show the world that you can't hack it after
• 46:29
  Speaker 1: three months, and folks, I'm not exaggerating. Here is Dan
• 46:33
  Speaker 1: Bongino bitching and moaning about how difficult this job is,
• 46:39
  Speaker 1: just three months after somehow.
• 46:41
  Speaker 2: Being appointed deputy director of the FBI.
• 46:45
  Speaker 8: I mean, I gave up everything for this. I mean,
• 46:47
  Speaker 8: you know, my wife is struggling everything. And I'm not
• 46:51
  Speaker 8: a victim. I'm not Jim Colemy.
• 46:52
  Speaker 2: It's fine.
• 46:53
  Speaker 8: I did this and I'm proud I did it. But
• 46:55
  Speaker 8: if you think we're there for tea and crumpets, well,
• 46:57
  Speaker 8: I mean Cash is there all day. He's sharing our
• 47:00
  Speaker 8: offices or linked he turns on the faucet.
• 47:03
  Speaker 2: I hear it.
• 47:03
  Speaker 8: He's there at he gets into like six o'clock in
• 47:06
  Speaker 8: the morning. He doesn't leave till seven at night. You know,
• 47:08
  Speaker 8: I'm in there at seven thirty in the morning. You know,
• 47:11
  Speaker 8: he uses the gym. I work out in my apartment,
• 47:14
  Speaker 8: but I stare at these four walls all day in DC.
• 47:17
  Speaker 8: You know, by myself's divorce from my wife, not divorce,
• 47:20
  Speaker 8: but I mean separated divorce.
• 47:21
  Speaker 2: And it's hard.
• 47:22
  Speaker 8: I mean, you know, we love each other and it's
• 47:23
  Speaker 8: hard to be a part. But you're doing some great
• 47:25
  Speaker 8: work starting now, the FBI and you moving buildings.
• 47:28
  Speaker 2: Has a lot of change. I just have one more
• 47:30
  Speaker 2: thing now.
• 47:31
  Speaker 1: As John Stewart's on the Daily Show. What Dan Bongino
• 47:34
  Speaker 1: just described there is having a job.
• 47:39
  Speaker 9: This is what having a job is actually like Dan,
• 47:45
  Speaker 9: and I guess part of what is happening here is
• 47:48
  Speaker 9: that the gig is a podcaster must be so nice.
• 47:51
  Speaker 2: You don't have to deal with anybody else. It's your
• 47:53
  Speaker 2: own schedule.
• 47:55
  Speaker 1: It's not you know, forty hours a week or sixty
• 47:58
  Speaker 1: hours a week or eighty hours whatever he's now spending
• 48:02
  Speaker 1: in the office. And I would presume that the pressures
• 48:05
  Speaker 1: are a lot lower. But this is a guy who intellectually, psychologically,
• 48:12
  Speaker 1: institutionally is not cut out for this. He is waging
• 48:18
  Speaker 1: over his head. And I'm sure he's not the only one,
• 48:22
  Speaker 1: but that's by far the most dramatic example. I just
• 48:26
  Speaker 1: can't get over the idea that he could be so
• 48:29
  Speaker 1: lacking in media savvy, a guy who's a media person
• 48:33
  Speaker 1: to understand how poorly this was going to be perceived,
• 48:38
  Speaker 1: especially by Donald Trump himself, because there's nothing that Trump
• 48:42
  Speaker 1: hates more than this kind of a weakness that you know,
• 48:46
  Speaker 1: when you show that kind of weakness on a friendly
• 48:51
  Speaker 1: media outlet, I mean, that can only happen if there's
• 48:55
  Speaker 1: something really significant going on behind the scenes. He's having
• 49:00
  Speaker 1: a meltdown. He's having a breakdown because he just can't
• 49:04
  Speaker 1: hack it because he's not qualified for the job. That's
• 49:11
  Speaker 1: the bottom line of this. He's not qualified. He was
• 49:15
  Speaker 1: hired simply because of his MAGA street cred and because
• 49:20
  Speaker 1: Trump liked him on television.
• 49:23
  Speaker 2: That's it.
• 49:24
  Speaker 1: And he's the deputy director of the FBI. That's problematic.
• 49:30
  Speaker 1: And I can guarantee you that if in a democratic
• 49:33
  Speaker 1: administration someone had gotten that position simply because they licked
• 49:39
  Speaker 1: the butt of the presidential candidate more dramatically than anybody else,
• 49:45
  Speaker 1: and then had that kind of a meltdown on a
• 49:47
  Speaker 1: friendly media outlet. The right wing media would be dunking
• 49:51
  Speaker 1: on this person on a daily basis, and rightfully so.
• 49:55
  Speaker 2: But of course we don't live in that world anymore.
• 49:58
  Speaker 1: The right wing media is just going to pretend that
• 50:00
  Speaker 1: that didn't happen. We're just going to move on because
• 50:02
  Speaker 1: you know, Dan's one of our guys, and he's one
• 50:05
  Speaker 1: of us. But I'm going to make a prediction that
• 50:08
  Speaker 1: we have not heard the last of this Dan Bongino
• 50:12
  Speaker 1: meltdown situation. And I will be stunned if by the
• 50:17
  Speaker 1: end of Trump two point oh, Dan Bongino is still.
• 50:21
  Speaker 2: In that position.
• 50:22
  Speaker 1: Now one of the areas of disappointment, at least for
• 50:26
  Speaker 1: me when it comes to Trump two point oho. I
• 50:28
  Speaker 1: want to be clear, there have been some things that
• 50:30
  Speaker 1: have been good. Most of it has been in perception
• 50:33
  Speaker 1: not reality. I've referenced many times Trump is building sand
• 50:37
  Speaker 1: castles on the beach that are washed away with the shore.
• 50:41
  Speaker 2: I mean.
• 50:41
  Speaker 1: A really good example that, by the way, is remember
• 50:44
  Speaker 1: that dramatic executive order banning biological males from participating in
• 50:50
  Speaker 1: female sports, right, remember that, Well, in Blue states, that
• 50:55
  Speaker 1: has had absolutely no impact whatsoever. We've seen numerous examples
• 50:58
  Speaker 1: of that here in California and other Blue states during
• 51:02
  Speaker 1: track and field state championship season where males are winning
• 51:05
  Speaker 1: state championships and so, I mean, that's just one of many,
• 51:09
  Speaker 1: many examples where Trump got a huge victory supposedly and
• 51:14
  Speaker 1: it's turned out to really not impact real life very
• 51:17
  Speaker 1: much at all, at least not in the Blue States
• 51:20
  Speaker 1: where they're not going to pay any attention to an
• 51:22
  Speaker 1: executive order. But one of the areas of disappointment has
• 51:28
  Speaker 1: been the Ukraine Russian War, which Trump very famously claimed
• 51:34
  Speaker 1: promised guaranteed that he could end I believe he said
• 51:38
  Speaker 1: in one day or one phone call after taking office.
• 51:42
  Speaker 1: Now that was always unrealistic. But here we are now
• 51:45
  Speaker 1: five six months into Trump two point zero and we're
• 51:48
  Speaker 1: nowhere near that happening. But there's been a major development
• 51:53
  Speaker 1: in the war between Russia and Ukraine, one that I
• 51:56
  Speaker 1: found the reaction to to be quite interesting tellent, because
• 52:02
  Speaker 1: Ukraine was able to pull off a surprise attack on
• 52:06
  Speaker 1: the Russian air force that apparently was both dramatic and
• 52:11
  Speaker 1: incredibly successful, and I don't usually do this, but this
• 52:16
  Speaker 1: I found this to be so informative and so well done.
• 52:19
  Speaker 1: I think it's worthy of being played on the podcast.
• 52:22
  Speaker 1: Here is an interview on CBS Major Garrett interviewing a
• 52:27
  Speaker 1: guy by the named of Benjamin Jensen, who's a fellow
• 52:30
  Speaker 1: at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, and he
• 52:34
  Speaker 1: described I thought very well the nature of this attack
• 52:39
  Speaker 1: by Ukraine on Russia's air force and how it was
• 52:43
  Speaker 1: pulled off and how successful it really was. Tell my
• 52:47
  Speaker 1: audience what happened and why this thing is so stunning
• 52:52
  Speaker 1: in its scope and approach.
• 52:55
  Speaker 10: So I've studied war for over twenty years and I
• 52:58
  Speaker 10: thought about this the exact same way you introduced it.
• 53:01
  Speaker 10: This is groundbreaking, and I want to break down quickly why.
• 53:04
  Speaker 10: Number One, what we see is a year over a
• 53:07
  Speaker 10: year of deep intelligence and special forces infiltration. So while
• 53:12
  Speaker 10: Ukraine might not have the size of the Russian army,
• 53:15
  Speaker 10: they have a phenomenal special forces, and they were able
• 53:18
  Speaker 10: to position assets outside of at least four that we
• 53:21
  Speaker 10: know of so far major Russian air bases, and get
• 53:25
  Speaker 10: this high, drones in trucks carrying wooden sheds. So for
• 53:30
  Speaker 10: all Russian new there's some drunk Russian guide driving his
• 53:33
  Speaker 10: old truck around the base. Oh Igor, there he goes again,
• 53:36
  Speaker 10: and all of a sudden the roof flies off and
• 53:39
  Speaker 10: first person view drones and you see that footage are
• 53:42
  Speaker 10: targeting some of the most valuable military assets in the
• 53:46
  Speaker 10: Russian original arsenal long range strategic bombers. Initial reports that
• 53:50
  Speaker 10: suggest at least forty damaged or destroyed. So that's seven
• 53:54
  Speaker 10: billion dollars of equipment taken off the battlefield in one day.
• 53:58
  Speaker 10: That reflects a year of brilliant military planning. It actually
• 54:02
  Speaker 10: reminds me most of famous Sas raids the UK did
• 54:06
  Speaker 10: in North Africa. So when you saw the pictures of
• 54:09
  Speaker 10: folks driving jeep shooting machine guns at Nazi planes, this
• 54:13
  Speaker 10: is just as groundbreaking as that operation was in the
• 54:16
  Speaker 10: nineteen forties and as a sign of really what's happening
• 54:20
  Speaker 10: now in future war now.
• 54:22
  Speaker 1: I have been quite agnostic about the Russia Ukraine conflict
• 54:28
  Speaker 1: or War Mayland because I don't trust.
• 54:30
  Speaker 2: Anybody in this situation.
• 54:32
  Speaker 1: I have disdain for Putin, I don't like Zelinsky, I
• 54:37
  Speaker 1: did not trust Biden, I do not trust Trump on this.
• 54:42
  Speaker 1: I understand that it's an important issue, but I'm not
• 54:47
  Speaker 1: sure that it's at the top of our personal priority list.
• 54:51
  Speaker 1: I get the concerns about a World War three, and
• 54:54
  Speaker 1: I get the morality issues. I get the practical issues.
• 55:00
  Speaker 1: I get why many people, especially in our government, even
• 55:04
  Speaker 1: people like Lindsay Graham Republican Center from South Carolina, think
• 55:07
  Speaker 1: that it's important that Russia not win this conflict. I
• 55:12
  Speaker 1: get all that, but it's just never been of great
• 55:15
  Speaker 1: importance to me. I'm much more of a domestic issues.
• 55:18
  Speaker 2: Kind of guy.
• 55:19
  Speaker 1: But I found this particular situation to be interesting one
• 55:22
  Speaker 1: because the attack was fascinating and kind of amazing, and
• 55:27
  Speaker 1: there's even speculation that it was I don't even want
• 55:30
  Speaker 1: to get into the details of this, but last I checked,
• 55:33
  Speaker 1: it was the headline on the Drudge Report that a
• 55:36
  Speaker 1: Ukrainian dj actually coordinated this attack, which is a bonker's story.
• 55:42
  Speaker 1: But here's the part that's most telling to me. So
• 55:47
  Speaker 1: because even though we are Ukraine's ally and we've funded
• 55:51
  Speaker 1: at least in directly, this attack the successful attack on Russia,
• 55:56
  Speaker 1: because it is perceived in Maga world that Trump doesn't
• 56:01
  Speaker 1: like Zelenski and that Trump does like Putin. This is
• 56:05
  Speaker 1: the most important part of the reaction to this situation.
• 56:08
  Speaker 1: Because of that perception, the right wing reaction to this,
• 56:14
  Speaker 1: at best has been eh and at worst has been
• 56:18
  Speaker 1: to shit on the Ukrainian victory or to predict that
• 56:23
  Speaker 1: this will actually backfire on them in the long run, which,
• 56:26
  Speaker 1: by the way, it might.
• 56:27
  Speaker 2: That's possible, That's not an interrational scenario.
• 56:31
  Speaker 1: But I just found it incredibly telling and rather depressing
• 56:36
  Speaker 1: that Trump's influence on the right wing media and on
• 56:41
  Speaker 1: the right wing blogosphere or Twitter sphere whatever is so
• 56:45
  Speaker 1: unbelievably pervasive. That simply because even though we're the ones
• 56:51
  Speaker 1: funding this attack indirectly, you cannot celebrate it, You cannot
• 56:57
  Speaker 1: say it's a good thing because us, in their minds,
• 57:02
  Speaker 1: somehow Trump is actually anti Zelenski and pro Putin.
• 57:07
  Speaker 2: So therefore this is at best.
• 57:11
  Speaker 1: An ambiguous event. This is not a good thing in
• 57:15
  Speaker 1: Maga world, and regardless of the war itself, that to
• 57:21
  Speaker 1: me is incredibly telling and depressing. That simply the perception
• 57:29
  Speaker 1: of your cult leader, even though officially we are Ukraine's
• 57:34
  Speaker 1: not just ally but funder, but because your cult leader
• 57:39
  Speaker 1: is perceived as not being really on board with Zelenski
• 57:45
  Speaker 1: and being friendly with Putin even though he made it,
• 57:47
  Speaker 1: you know, this ridiculous statement Trump did, which we played
• 57:50
  Speaker 1: on the podcast castigating Putin, and somehow Putin was a
• 57:54
  Speaker 1: different guy than what he thought, which is very, very
• 57:58
  Speaker 1: troubling on a number of fronts. But despite all that,
• 58:03
  Speaker 1: somehow this event was to be denigrated, it was to
• 58:08
  Speaker 1: be ignored, it was not to be celebrated. And you know,
• 58:13
  Speaker 1: the results of this, we don't know what they're going
• 58:15
  Speaker 1: to be. But there were negotiations following this between Ukraine
• 58:20
  Speaker 1: and Russia that apparently did not go well. It did
• 58:23
  Speaker 1: not facilitate an immediate caving by Russia by any account,
• 58:29
  Speaker 1: and so there's no end in sight, there's no cease fire.
• 58:32
  Speaker 2: But the idea that a.
• 58:33
  Speaker 1: Successful Ukrainian attack on Russia cannot even be deemed to
• 58:37
  Speaker 1: be a good thing.
• 58:38
  Speaker 2: In magworld, I thought was very very telling.
• 58:42
  Speaker 1: By the way, one other Trump related news item, which
• 58:45
  Speaker 1: will actually help facilitate a transition in my subject matters here,
• 58:49
  Speaker 1: I do have to at least reference that Trump was
• 58:52
  Speaker 1: asked whether or not he would consider giving a pardon
• 58:57
  Speaker 1: to p Diddy, who is currently on trial for all
• 59:03
  Speaker 1: sorts of allegations related to sex trafficking, and kidnapping and
• 59:10
  Speaker 1: abuse and all sorts of other horrible things, and Trump
• 59:14
  Speaker 1: said that he would consider doing so, which I just
• 59:19
  Speaker 1: think is ridiculous for a sitting president to be making
• 59:24
  Speaker 1: that statement during an ongoing trial. I hope that that
• 59:29
  Speaker 1: never actually happens if there's a conviction of Diddy. As
• 59:33
  Speaker 1: far as the Diddy trial goes, I've not been following
• 59:37
  Speaker 1: it super closely, but I have been following it. It
• 59:41
  Speaker 1: seems to me as if this is a little bit
• 59:45
  Speaker 1: like Jeffrey Epstein. I'm getting Jeffrey Epstein vibes here, where
• 59:49
  Speaker 1: the allegations against Ditty himself, well not one hundred percent
• 59:54
  Speaker 1: proven yet, there's not been a conviction yet, have been
• 59:58
  Speaker 1: much more the focus than the bigger narrative that it
• 1:00:01
  Speaker 1: somehow got birthed and accepted that everybody in Didty's realm
• 1:00:07
  Speaker 1: was engaging in the same illegal activities and that this
• 1:00:11
  Speaker 1: was this massive conspiracy. That's where the Epstein comparison comes in.
• 1:00:16
  Speaker 1: In my view, Epstein effectively acted alone, and that's you
• 1:00:21
  Speaker 1: know where the disconnect comes, where the Macaworld people thought, well,
• 1:00:25
  Speaker 1: he didn't act alone. He was protecting all these very
• 1:00:28
  Speaker 1: famous and powerful people who were also engaging in the
• 1:00:31
  Speaker 1: same illegal sexual activities, and that's why he was killed
• 1:00:35
  Speaker 1: in prison, and that's why the Epstein files were never released. No,
• 1:00:38
  Speaker 1: he acted alone, which is why he killed himself. I'm
• 1:00:43
  Speaker 1: uncertain about Jesselyne Maxwell's guilt. I think she got railroaded
• 1:00:47
  Speaker 1: in the moral panic that occurred. Actor Epstein did in
• 1:00:50
  Speaker 1: fact kill himself in a federal prison, and so while
• 1:00:54
  Speaker 1: there are differences between the Epstein and Didty cases, I
• 1:00:57
  Speaker 1: think there are some similarities here. And it appears as
• 1:01:00
  Speaker 1: if the conspiracy part of this whole thing has not
• 1:01:04
  Speaker 1: been nearly as prominent nor as proven, at least not
• 1:01:08
  Speaker 1: to this point of Ditty's trial, as the median narratives
• 1:01:11
  Speaker 1: surrounding this would have suggested. But Trump during a trial
• 1:01:16
  Speaker 1: saying that he would consider pardoning Ditty is just insane
• 1:01:21
  Speaker 1: and hopefully will never actually happen. Now I mentioned this
• 1:01:25
  Speaker 1: would allow me to transition into a couple of different
• 1:01:27
  Speaker 1: other topics that are at least somewhat related, although I
• 1:01:30
  Speaker 1: don't want to compare any of these people to Ditty.
• 1:01:33
  Speaker 1: But there's been at least two developments in the realm
• 1:01:38
  Speaker 1: of sex abuse allegations against prominent athletes that I want
• 1:01:43
  Speaker 1: to at least briefly address.
• 1:01:45
  Speaker 2: The first is.
• 1:01:46
  Speaker 1: That Zion Williamson, an NBA player, star NBA player who
• 1:01:51
  Speaker 1: has been injury plagued.
• 1:01:52
  Speaker 2: He's with the New Orleans Pelicans.
• 1:01:54
  Speaker 1: Has been sued for sexual abuse and assault and rape
• 1:02:00
  Speaker 1: girlfriend by an next girlfriend who is unnamed in the lawsuit. Now,
• 1:02:10
  Speaker 1: the reason main reason I'm mentioning this is that, you know,
• 1:02:14
  Speaker 1: the news media used to have some standards when it
• 1:02:18
  Speaker 1: came to these types of allegations, and the standard used
• 1:02:25
  Speaker 1: to be, and in my view, very strongly, especially in
• 1:02:28
  Speaker 1: this day and age, ought to be. Although we're never
• 1:02:31
  Speaker 1: going to go back, the standard for reporting an allegation
• 1:02:35
  Speaker 1: like this should be an actual criminal complaint or an
• 1:02:42
  Speaker 1: arrest or a charge at the very least, and frankly,
• 1:02:48
  Speaker 1: the way these things have gotten out of hand, I'm
• 1:02:51
  Speaker 1: not sure the standards shouldn't be higher than that. I
• 1:02:53
  Speaker 1: think the standard ought to be. Oh, there's a trial starting,
• 1:02:55
  Speaker 1: a criminal trial starting against Zion Williamson. Well, that's not
• 1:03:01
  Speaker 1: what happened here. There's no evidence of even a criminal
• 1:03:04
  Speaker 1: complaint in this situation. This is just a lawsuit without
• 1:03:08
  Speaker 1: even a name attached to it, by a person who
• 1:03:12
  Speaker 1: acknowledges that they were his girlfriend for multiple years. So
• 1:03:18
  Speaker 1: to me, I have no idea what happened between Zion
• 1:03:21
  Speaker 1: Williamson and this woman. I have suspicions, but I have
• 1:03:25
  Speaker 1: no proof at all.
• 1:03:26
  Speaker 2: Who knows.
• 1:03:27
  Speaker 1: He may have acted very poorly, I have no idea.
• 1:03:30
  Speaker 1: I'm talking about this purely from the standpoint of what
• 1:03:33
  Speaker 1: the reporting standard.
• 1:03:34
  Speaker 2: Ought to be.
• 1:03:35
  Speaker 1: But the idea that because someone is a large enough celebrity.
• 1:03:40
  Speaker 1: Zion Williamson was at one point thought to be a
• 1:03:42
  Speaker 1: superstar in the NBA Future Superstar. It started off great,
• 1:03:46
  Speaker 1: but as I said, he's been injury plagued. Still a
• 1:03:49
  Speaker 1: legitimate player. Still, potentially he gets through the injuries, could
• 1:03:53
  Speaker 1: be a star player again. But here he is having
• 1:03:57
  Speaker 1: widely reported in main street news outlet these allegations that
• 1:04:02
  Speaker 1: are nothing more than an anonymous person filing a lawsuit
• 1:04:07
  Speaker 1: with an obvious massive financial incentive. How is that inherently newsworthy?
• 1:04:15
  Speaker 1: That doesn't meet any of the standards of an actual
• 1:04:19
  Speaker 1: news story, because anybody can file a lawsuit anonymously in
• 1:04:25
  Speaker 1: what is an obvious money grab. And the part that's
• 1:04:28
  Speaker 1: most insidious about this is that either knowingly or unwinningly,
• 1:04:34
  Speaker 1: the news media is helping facilitate what could easily just
• 1:04:39
  Speaker 1: be a money grab, because what the way this works
• 1:04:43
  Speaker 1: is an allegation of a lawsuit gets filed, it then
• 1:04:48
  Speaker 1: gets reported in mainstream outlets, which then creates a controversy
• 1:04:53
  Speaker 1: surrounding the celebrity who's still employed with the New Orleans
• 1:04:58
  Speaker 1: Pelicans and presumably still as endorsements and what have you.
• 1:05:02
  Speaker 1: Now they're under great pressure to make this go away,
• 1:05:06
  Speaker 1: so regardless of whether they're guilty or not, there becomes
• 1:05:10
  Speaker 1: an incentive to settle immediately. And generally what happens even
• 1:05:17
  Speaker 1: before the lawsuit is filed is that there's some sort
• 1:05:21
  Speaker 1: of a threat of a lawsuit see without a criminal
• 1:05:25
  Speaker 1: complaint or an arrest or anything like that. I don't
• 1:05:27
  Speaker 1: take any of these things seriously, especially when there's no
• 1:05:30
  Speaker 1: real evidence provided in the legal filing, because the way
• 1:05:35
  Speaker 1: this works is very well known, and in this particular case,
• 1:05:41
  Speaker 1: it could be a disgruntled ex girlfriend who realizes that
• 1:05:44
  Speaker 1: she's off the gravy train and she gets a lawyer
• 1:05:49
  Speaker 1: to go to Williamson's representation says, hey, my client says
• 1:05:54
  Speaker 1: she's been abused and raped and we are going to
• 1:05:58
  Speaker 1: file a lawsuit unless, of course, you want to settle
• 1:06:01
  Speaker 1: this out of court. Well, if there was any truth
• 1:06:05
  Speaker 1: to it, logically, the response would be, okay, how much
• 1:06:10
  Speaker 1: do you want, We'll pay you to keep this out
• 1:06:12
  Speaker 1: of the public. But the fact that in this case
• 1:06:15
  Speaker 1: that didn't happen is not proof of but it's certainly
• 1:06:18
  Speaker 1: a sign of innocence, because Williamson's reaction would be, fuck, no,
• 1:06:23
  Speaker 1: I'm not paying this woman.
• 1:06:24
  Speaker 2: I didn't do anything to her.
• 1:06:26
  Speaker 1: So then the next step is, Okay, we gave you
• 1:06:29
  Speaker 1: your chance to get out of this easy, So now
• 1:06:31
  Speaker 1: we're going to file a lawsuit. And because we're now
• 1:06:33
  Speaker 1: living in a world, especially post Me Too, where any
• 1:06:37
  Speaker 1: lawsuit the media is so dumb that they actually think
• 1:06:41
  Speaker 1: that there's magic to the word lawsuit or legal filings.
• 1:06:47
  Speaker 1: We saw this in the Penn Stage Joe Paterno Jerry
• 1:06:49
  Speaker 1: Sandusky case.
• 1:06:50
  Speaker 2: On a consistent basis.
• 1:06:53
  Speaker 1: There is no magic. Maybe there was magic at one
• 1:06:55
  Speaker 1: point where you know, people were afraid of committing perjury
• 1:06:59
  Speaker 1: or lying in league documents.
• 1:07:00
  Speaker 2: That's long gone.
• 1:07:03
  Speaker 1: Anybody can file anything in a lawsuit, and so the
• 1:07:08
  Speaker 1: lawsuit gets filed, and now there's pressure, further pressure to
• 1:07:13
  Speaker 1: make this go away. But the media should not be
• 1:07:16
  Speaker 1: giving this any credibility, at least until either there's a
• 1:07:20
  Speaker 1: civil trial or a criminal complaint with real evidence, or
• 1:07:25
  Speaker 1: an arrest or some sort of a criminal trial, because
• 1:07:30
  Speaker 1: until that point there is no indication that there's any
• 1:07:34
  Speaker 1: truth to the allegation, but some people will believe that
• 1:07:38
  Speaker 1: there is because the media is reporting it, and the
• 1:07:42
  Speaker 1: media is pretending as if filing a lawsuit has some
• 1:07:47
  Speaker 1: semblance of magic to it.
• 1:07:49
  Speaker 2: There is zero magic to it.
• 1:07:51
  Speaker 1: In fact, as I just stated, in this particular case,
• 1:07:55
  Speaker 1: I think it's actually a sign that what you're saying
• 1:07:58
  Speaker 1: is not true. Because what you were saying was true,
• 1:08:01
  Speaker 1: this would have been settled out of court because that's
• 1:08:04
  Speaker 1: the way this works. So again, I have no love
• 1:08:08
  Speaker 1: for Zion Williamson, but to me, it's a classic example
• 1:08:11
  Speaker 1: of one of my all time pet peeves when it
• 1:08:14
  Speaker 1: comes to the changes in the news media and the
• 1:08:16
  Speaker 1: death of journalism. These types of lawsuits, especially without even
• 1:08:21
  Speaker 1: a name attached, with an obvious, clear cut financial incentive,
• 1:08:27
  Speaker 1: should not be given credibility, and yet in this case
• 1:08:31
  Speaker 1: they were. And I'll be interested to see how this
• 1:08:35
  Speaker 1: all turns out, but I do not think the media
• 1:08:37
  Speaker 1: has acted properly based upon what we currently know in
• 1:08:40
  Speaker 1: the Zion Williamson situation. But as bad as that is,
• 1:08:45
  Speaker 1: it seems to me as if the evidence is mounting
• 1:08:48
  Speaker 1: that former LA Dodger pitcher Trevor Bauer got an even
• 1:08:52
  Speaker 1: worse deal when it comes to the way that the
• 1:08:55
  Speaker 1: news media treats, especially post me Too, allegations of abuse. Now,
• 1:09:00
  Speaker 1: you may recall that we did an interview with Sarah
• 1:09:04
  Speaker 1: Gonzalaz from The Blaze. I guess this was last year
• 1:09:08
  Speaker 1: after she absolutely eviscerated one of the accusers.
• 1:09:15
  Speaker 2: They're basically two accusers of Trevor Bauer.
• 1:09:18
  Speaker 1: One of the accusers, the most prominent accusers, went on
• 1:09:22
  Speaker 1: The Blaze not once but twice and got absolutely eviscerated
• 1:09:26
  Speaker 1: by Sara Gonzales And I thought the interview was so
• 1:09:29
  Speaker 1: great that we had Sarah Gonzales on this podcast to
• 1:09:32
  Speaker 1: discuss it. And it was at that point that I realized, Okay,
• 1:09:37
  Speaker 1: any suspicions that I had that Trevor Bauer was getting
• 1:09:39
  Speaker 1: railroaded are probably valid, at least when it comes to
• 1:09:44
  Speaker 1: this one particular accuser, because if you remember anything about this,
• 1:09:49
  Speaker 1: this was ridiculous that she was taken seriously, and apparently
• 1:09:53
  Speaker 1: the other accuser is no more credible than the one
• 1:09:57
  Speaker 1: that Sara gonzalas oviscerated. Well, there is a new development
• 1:10:02
  Speaker 1: in the Trevor Bauer situation. And to be clear, much
• 1:10:05
  Speaker 1: like Zion Williamson, Trevor Bauer was a guy with enormous
• 1:10:10
  Speaker 1: potential and has had his career destroyed in so many ways,
• 1:10:16
  Speaker 1: especially when you consider the fact that the Dodgers have
• 1:10:18
  Speaker 1: won two World Series since this situation happened. I mean,
• 1:10:23
  Speaker 1: and he can't even get a sniff in the major
• 1:10:26
  Speaker 1: leagues anymore, all because of the stigma attached to this.
• 1:10:30
  Speaker 1: And he's got video evidence, text messages, all sorts of
• 1:10:36
  Speaker 1: things that seem to directly.
• 1:10:38
  Speaker 2: Contradict the accusers allegations.
• 1:10:40
  Speaker 1: Well, this most recent development I thought was well put
• 1:10:45
  Speaker 1: by a woman by the name of Rachel Luba. She
• 1:10:48
  Speaker 1: is a female sports agent who is clearly on Trevor
• 1:10:51
  Speaker 1: Bauer's side, and she tweeted the following. Trevor Bauer has
• 1:10:55
  Speaker 1: won his lawsuit against Lindsey Hill for falsely claiming that
• 1:11:00
  Speaker 1: Bower paid her any monetary amount to settle their original lawsuit,
• 1:11:06
  Speaker 1: and she is ordered to pay him three hundred and
• 1:11:09
  Speaker 1: nine thousand dollars in damages. Now the only money ever
• 1:11:14
  Speaker 1: exchanged between the two is Hill paying Bower allegedly. I
• 1:11:19
  Speaker 1: doubt that this will actually happen, but at least in
• 1:11:21
  Speaker 1: theory three hundred and nine thousand dollars, Bower has still
• 1:11:26
  Speaker 1: never paid her a cent. So to sum it up,
• 1:11:30
  Speaker 1: Lindsay Hill has now been ordered to pay Bower and
• 1:11:33
  Speaker 1: has been arrested and is being charged with assault and
• 1:11:36
  Speaker 1: abuse with an outstanding warrant for her arrest. Bower's other
• 1:11:41
  Speaker 1: false accuser is currently being charged with committing fraud against him.
• 1:11:47
  Speaker 1: And most importantly, Bauer has never been arrested, charged with
• 1:11:52
  Speaker 1: a single crime, or paid even a cent to an accuser.
• 1:11:59
  Speaker 1: And that's why I use the Zion Williamson situation to
• 1:12:02
  Speaker 1: set this up, because this all started, this domino effect
• 1:12:07
  Speaker 1: occurred because it got reported immediately, without an arrest, without
• 1:12:12
  Speaker 1: a criminal complaint, without Bower paying an accuser either in
• 1:12:17
  Speaker 1: court or out of court settlement. This was all done
• 1:12:22
  Speaker 1: in a media panic, a moral panic, where Major League
• 1:12:26
  Speaker 1: Baseball and the Dodgers threw Trevor Bauer under the bus. Now,
• 1:12:31
  Speaker 1: I want to make something clear. I don't particularly think
• 1:12:35
  Speaker 1: that Trevor Bauer is a great guy. I've always been
• 1:12:38
  Speaker 1: hesitant to publicly support Trevor Bauer Parsley because I'm just
• 1:12:43
  Speaker 1: tired of this subject matter. I think understandably so, given
• 1:12:48
  Speaker 1: you know, thirteen fourteen years on the Penn State, Joe Paternal,
• 1:12:51
  Speaker 1: Jerry's Dusky Story, and others like it, Matt Lower, Michael Jackson.
• 1:12:56
  Speaker 1: So I'm like, I have limited bandwidth for this topic,
• 1:13:00
  Speaker 1: even though I think I've become an expert in it.
• 1:13:02
  Speaker 1: But also because I've been told some things that I
• 1:13:05
  Speaker 1: thought were somewhat credible that indicated to me that Trevor
• 1:13:08
  Speaker 1: Bauer was probably an asshole. Well, that may or may
• 1:13:12
  Speaker 1: not be true. It couldn't very well be true. Being
• 1:13:15
  Speaker 1: an asshole was not illegal. It doesn't prove that you're
• 1:13:19
  Speaker 1: a rapist, and do process matters. Evidence matters, and the
• 1:13:24
  Speaker 1: evidence here now is overwhelming that Trevor Bauer never committed
• 1:13:30
  Speaker 1: criminal rate and yet his career is completely destroyed. I mean,
• 1:13:35
  Speaker 1: this guy has probably lost more in money and prestige
• 1:13:40
  Speaker 1: and opportunity than anybody else I could think of in
• 1:13:45
  Speaker 1: current professional sports because of a false, apparently false allegation
• 1:13:51
  Speaker 1: that was facilitated. Remember this is the power of the media.
• 1:13:55
  Speaker 1: Without the media caring the water for these accusations and
• 1:14:01
  Speaker 1: putting pressure on Bower and on the Dodgers and on
• 1:14:04
  Speaker 1: major League Baseball, none of this happens. Is a lot
• 1:14:08
  Speaker 1: of echoes from Penn State, Joe Paterno Sandusky here to
• 1:14:12
  Speaker 1: create this firestorm, this domino effect, this perfect storm situation
• 1:14:18
  Speaker 1: where it spins out of control, and who's going to
• 1:14:23
  Speaker 1: come fix this for Trevor Bauer.
• 1:14:26
  Speaker 2: Nobody.
• 1:14:27
  Speaker 1: I'm actually amazed, given the fact that me too has
• 1:14:31
  Speaker 1: now died down, and that it seems like most of
• 1:14:34
  Speaker 1: the nation has become a little bit more sensible when
• 1:14:37
  Speaker 1: it comes to evaluating these kinds of allegations, that no
• 1:14:40
  Speaker 1: Major League Baseball team has given Trevor Bauer a legitimate shot.
• 1:14:46
  Speaker 1: And I mean, he's still young enough to be pitching
• 1:14:48
  Speaker 1: in the major leagues, and he certainly had enough success
• 1:14:52
  Speaker 1: while he was playing to warrant that whether or not
• 1:14:55
  Speaker 1: these most recent developments will change that. I have no
• 1:14:58
  Speaker 1: way of knowing, but I wanted to at least put
• 1:15:01
  Speaker 1: it on the record here since we talked about it previously,
• 1:15:04
  Speaker 1: that it certainly appears very much there's certainly no evidence
• 1:15:07
  Speaker 1: when there should be massive amounts of evidence. By this point,
• 1:15:11
  Speaker 1: I mean Bowers should have been charged, He should have
• 1:15:13
  Speaker 1: been civilly. There should have been some sort of a trial.
• 1:15:17
  Speaker 1: He should have been forced to pay some sort of restitution,
• 1:15:20
  Speaker 1: either in court, out of court, public private settlement, what
• 1:15:24
  Speaker 1: have you.
• 1:15:25
  Speaker 2: Nothing.
• 1:15:26
  Speaker 1: And in fact, his two accusers have been exposed as
• 1:15:31
  Speaker 1: apparently being frauds on their own and lying. And they're
• 1:15:35
  Speaker 1: lying about that, what else are they lying about? And again,
• 1:15:38
  Speaker 1: just to be clear, there is video and text message
• 1:15:41
  Speaker 1: evidence that certainly backs up Bower's side of those stories.
• 1:15:46
  Speaker 1: Speaking of the victim nation, and you know, I've often
• 1:15:51
  Speaker 1: said that what's driving a lot of this is that
• 1:15:54
  Speaker 1: being a victim of anything, whether it's sexual abuse or
• 1:15:57
  Speaker 1: racism or any sort of victim, being a victim has
• 1:16:02
  Speaker 1: gone many decades ago from being stigmatized to now actually
• 1:16:07
  Speaker 1: being the American dream.
• 1:16:10
  Speaker 2: And that is so important to understanding.
• 1:16:12
  Speaker 1: How we got here when it comes to potentially false allegations.
• 1:16:17
  Speaker 1: I mean at the heart and I keep referencing Paterno, Sandusky
• 1:16:22
  Speaker 1: and Penn State parsially because it has been a huge
• 1:16:24
  Speaker 1: part of my life, partially because I've been embroiled in
• 1:16:27
  Speaker 1: it again over the last week in situations that I
• 1:16:29
  Speaker 1: can't talk to you about right now, but I'm hopeful
• 1:16:32
  Speaker 1: that we'll be able to discuss in the coming weeks
• 1:16:34
  Speaker 1: of the podcast that have been absolutely mind numbing, even
• 1:16:37
  Speaker 1: by the standards of that crazy case. But at the
• 1:16:40
  Speaker 1: heart of how society changed to allow false allegations to
• 1:16:47
  Speaker 1: not just gain traction, but to be accepted as real
• 1:16:51
  Speaker 1: even with no evidence, is that we went from a
• 1:16:54
  Speaker 1: society where no one wanted to be seen as a
• 1:16:57
  Speaker 1: victim to now almost everybody wants to be seen as
• 1:17:01
  Speaker 1: a victim, and yet.
• 1:17:02
  Speaker 2: We didn't change the system.
• 1:17:04
  Speaker 1: The system is built upon the basis that no one
• 1:17:07
  Speaker 1: wants to be seen as a victim, so therefore if
• 1:17:11
  Speaker 1: you claim to be a victim, you must.
• 1:17:13
  Speaker 2: Be inherently credible.
• 1:17:14
  Speaker 1: That might have been true at some point, that's no
• 1:17:17
  Speaker 1: longer the truth now because everyone wants to be a victim.
• 1:17:22
  Speaker 2: I saw saw a video This has popped into my head.
• 1:17:27
  Speaker 1: I saw a video of a woman on TikTok, apparently
• 1:17:30
  Speaker 1: had good grades, just graduating from UCLA, and she's complaining
• 1:17:35
  Speaker 1: about how she can't find a job, and she's talking.
• 1:17:39
  Speaker 2: About how money is tight.
• 1:17:42
  Speaker 1: And I tried to save the video, but for some
• 1:17:44
  Speaker 1: reason I couldn't, and so you just got to trust me.
• 1:17:47
  Speaker 2: I'm telling the truth here. This is mind blowing. This
• 1:17:49
  Speaker 2: is unbelievably mind blowing.
• 1:17:51
  Speaker 1: She's talking about how she's sustaining herself while trying to
• 1:17:55
  Speaker 1: find a job, and she actually references that being part
• 1:18:00
  Speaker 1: of class action lawsuits.
• 1:18:04
  Speaker 2: Through this app. Call. I guess it's the claims.
• 1:18:07
  Speaker 1: App is a nice solid form of income, but it's
• 1:18:12
  Speaker 1: not enough to sustain her.
• 1:18:14
  Speaker 2: And she was being totally serious in her mind.
• 1:18:18
  Speaker 1: This is a person who just graduated from UCLA. In
• 1:18:21
  Speaker 1: her mind, it is a totally legitimate revenue stream to
• 1:18:26
  Speaker 1: be part of class action lawsuits you didn't even know
• 1:18:29
  Speaker 1: existed until you went to an app.
• 1:18:33
  Speaker 2: That's how ingrained.
• 1:18:35
  Speaker 1: In the system, the victimhood boondoggle is. By the way,
• 1:18:40
  Speaker 1: we all pay for that. That's a whole nother story
• 1:18:43
  Speaker 1: for another day, but that's how deep the victim mentality
• 1:18:47
  Speaker 1: has become. And this woman had no self awareness of
• 1:18:50
  Speaker 1: how insane it was. It was as if she was
• 1:18:54
  Speaker 1: she was viewing, you know, class action lawsuits as essentially
• 1:19:01
  Speaker 1: like unemployment insurance, like collecting unemployment.
• 1:19:05
  Speaker 2: That's the way she viewed it.
• 1:19:07
  Speaker 1: And so the reason I'm talking about this victimhood mentality
• 1:19:11
  Speaker 1: is I've got to talk about what's happened with Taylor
• 1:19:14
  Speaker 1: Swift over the last week since the last episode of
• 1:19:17
  Speaker 1: the podcast, because this, to me, is very very telling
• 1:19:21
  Speaker 1: about how broken the news media is and how dead
• 1:19:24
  Speaker 1: journalism is, and how popularity or fear of being unpopular,
• 1:19:29
  Speaker 1: drives so much behavior in the news media. What I'm
• 1:19:33
  Speaker 1: referring to is a story you probably heard of, which
• 1:19:36
  Speaker 1: is that Taylor Swift has finally bought back her early music. Now,
• 1:19:42
  Speaker 1: this is a very long, convoluted story, but I'm just
• 1:19:46
  Speaker 1: going to give you the short version of it. So,
• 1:19:49
  Speaker 1: as is usually the case when someone is not a
• 1:19:54
  Speaker 1: superstar in the music industry, they effectively sign their life
• 1:19:58
  Speaker 1: away over simp simplification. But I think this is relevant
• 1:20:03
  Speaker 1: to understanding the situation. And so you have no leverage
• 1:20:07
  Speaker 1: before you're a superstar, and the music business, much like
• 1:20:11
  Speaker 1: the tech business in Silicon Valley, is based upon the
• 1:20:14
  Speaker 1: idea that only one you know, one hundred, one in
• 1:20:17
  Speaker 1: one thousand, whatever the number is, are going to turn
• 1:20:20
  Speaker 1: out to be huge successes. So you're basically playing a
• 1:20:26
  Speaker 1: numbers game where okay, if we you know let's say
• 1:20:31
  Speaker 1: use one hundred and ninety nine turn out to be
• 1:20:34
  Speaker 1: lost leaders. We need to make Buco bucks on the
• 1:20:37
  Speaker 1: one that really hits it big. And so the business
• 1:20:42
  Speaker 1: model is based upon the idea that all these one
• 1:20:45
  Speaker 1: hundred non stars, before they've become famous, they sign their
• 1:20:49
  Speaker 1: lives away. They have very little legal authority over their
• 1:20:53
  Speaker 1: own situation until they become stars. Well, obviously, Taylor's becomes
• 1:21:00
  Speaker 1: a superstar and there becomes this issue over who owns
• 1:21:07
  Speaker 1: her early albums, And there's a guy by named Scooter
• 1:21:11
  Speaker 1: Braun who effectively discovered and made Taylor Swift a star
• 1:21:17
  Speaker 1: depending on who you believe, who buy all accounts, and
• 1:21:20
  Speaker 1: there are text messages to prove this said to her
• 1:21:25
  Speaker 1: that hey, I'd like to buy your music. Do you
• 1:21:30
  Speaker 1: want to be part of this? And Taylor Swift said, no,
• 1:21:35
  Speaker 1: this is not in a matter of dispute. This is
• 1:21:38
  Speaker 1: one hundred percent the truth, and so Scooter Braun buys it.
• 1:21:44
  Speaker 1: And then eventually Taylor Swift decides that she's a victim
• 1:21:48
  Speaker 1: in this whole situation, and she makes a huge deal
• 1:21:53
  Speaker 1: over the fact that she doesn't own her music and
• 1:21:56
  Speaker 1: how put upon she is and how outrageous this is
• 1:22:00
  Speaker 1: and and she makes Scooter Braun into the bad guy
• 1:22:05
  Speaker 1: in this situation. Of course, her fans buy this literally
• 1:22:10
  Speaker 1: and figuratively, and she goes to war to the extent
• 1:22:14
  Speaker 1: to which she re does her original music. She gets
• 1:22:19
  Speaker 1: this idea that if I re record my music, then
• 1:22:24
  Speaker 1: then you know, I will own that version, so called
• 1:22:26
  Speaker 1: Taylor's version.
• 1:22:28
  Speaker 2: And that way, one, I.
• 1:22:30
  Speaker 1: Can make more money because my cult like fan base
• 1:22:33
  Speaker 1: will buy anything I put out. And two, I will
• 1:22:36
  Speaker 1: devalue the music that I don't own because there's another
• 1:22:42
  Speaker 1: version of it, a newer version of it. And so
• 1:22:46
  Speaker 1: she does this, and of course her fans react exactly
• 1:22:50
  Speaker 1: as she hoped. They view this as like a moral fight,
• 1:22:56
  Speaker 1: like you know, this is a principal situation that they're
• 1:22:58
  Speaker 1: fighting again and women being the victim, I guess in
• 1:23:03
  Speaker 1: this whole music business situation, when that's not at all
• 1:23:08
  Speaker 1: what's actually transpiring.
• 1:23:10
  Speaker 2: And so her fans buy all.
• 1:23:12
  Speaker 1: Sorts of music that's labeled Taylor's version. And now she's
• 1:23:18
  Speaker 1: just purchased from another entity that original music. So now
• 1:23:23
  Speaker 1: all of a sudden, it's okay, it's now morally okay
• 1:23:27
  Speaker 1: for her fans to go ahead and buy the old
• 1:23:31
  Speaker 1: version of her original music, which to me, no one
• 1:23:35
  Speaker 1: mentions this at all. But if I'm a Taylor Swift fan,
• 1:23:39
  Speaker 1: and this is why it's a cult, folks, it's.
• 1:23:41
  Speaker 2: A lot like the Trump cult.
• 1:23:42
  Speaker 1: Frankly, it's amazing that Trump and Taylor Swift don't like
• 1:23:46
  Speaker 1: each other, even though Trump was once in a Taylor
• 1:23:48
  Speaker 1: Swift video. No one ever tells you that, But that's
• 1:23:50
  Speaker 1: a true story. But I digress. There's a similar dynamic
• 1:23:56
  Speaker 1: going on here with the cult. But if I'm a
• 1:23:58
  Speaker 1: member of the cult and I went out and bought
• 1:24:01
  Speaker 1: a whole bunch of Taylor's version music that has now
• 1:24:05
  Speaker 1: just been made irrelevant because now it's okay to buy
• 1:24:09
  Speaker 1: the original original, I would be pretty pissed off. So basically,
• 1:24:15
  Speaker 1: I just you know, I spent a bunch of money
• 1:24:18
  Speaker 1: helping a woman who's probably worth at least a half
• 1:24:23
  Speaker 1: a billion of not a billion dollars fight a war
• 1:24:27
  Speaker 1: so that she could pay less to get back the
• 1:24:31
  Speaker 1: music that she was offered many.
• 1:24:33
  Speaker 2: Years ago at a lower price. How does that work?
• 1:24:39
  Speaker 2: And yet nobody in the cult.
• 1:24:41
  Speaker 1: Will complain about this because it's a cult, and Taylor
• 1:24:45
  Speaker 1: understands her audience very well. She understands what they're willing
• 1:24:48
  Speaker 1: to do for her, and this worked out exceedingly well
• 1:24:51
  Speaker 1: for her. She got to play the victim for years,
• 1:24:55
  Speaker 1: She got her music back under her ownership. She paid
• 1:24:59
  Speaker 1: a lot of money, apparently around three hundred million dollars
• 1:25:02
  Speaker 1: for it, but less than she would have paid probably
• 1:25:05
  Speaker 1: if she hadn't done the whole Taylor's version thing.
• 1:25:08
  Speaker 2: But here's the part where it gets back to the
• 1:25:11
  Speaker 2: news media.
• 1:25:12
  Speaker 1: The news media has reported this story almost one hundred
• 1:25:16
  Speaker 1: percent from Taylor's perspective, using Taylor Swift's narrative that somehow,
• 1:25:24
  Speaker 1: I mean, if you're somebody was not educated on this
• 1:25:27
  Speaker 1: topic or have not delved into the details, I guarantee
• 1:25:30
  Speaker 1: you most Americans think that somehow Taylor Swift was a
• 1:25:34
  Speaker 1: victim here who was forced to pay hundreds of millions
• 1:25:37
  Speaker 1: of dollars to get back what she rightfully owned.
• 1:25:40
  Speaker 2: And that's just not true.
• 1:25:43
  Speaker 1: That's just not even close to the reality of the situation.
• 1:25:48
  Speaker 2: And the news media knows this by and large.
• 1:25:52
  Speaker 1: I'll actually give him enough credit to say the news
• 1:25:54
  Speaker 1: media knows that the Taylor Swift narrative is false, but
• 1:25:59
  Speaker 1: nobody is going going to bother telling that story. Because
• 1:26:03
  Speaker 1: there's nothing in it for you. There is no audience.
• 1:26:09
  Speaker 1: There is no audience for the Oh, by the way,
• 1:26:12
  Speaker 1: Taylor Swift wasn't really a victim here, and she doesn't
• 1:26:16
  Speaker 1: under seem to understand the nature of the music business narrative.
• 1:26:20
  Speaker 2: There's no audience for that.
• 1:26:22
  Speaker 1: And if you debunk the Taylor Swift narrative, there are
• 1:26:27
  Speaker 1: ramifications for that, because you're gonna get attacked by the Swifties.
• 1:26:34
  Speaker 1: And in this day and age, in the social media age,
• 1:26:37
  Speaker 1: getting attacked by the Swifties might mean losing followers on
• 1:26:41
  Speaker 1: Twitter or Facebook or Instagram or TikTok or whatever it is,
• 1:26:45
  Speaker 1: and you're gonna get lots of criticism. How dare you
• 1:26:47
  Speaker 1: attack our queen? She's the victim. So it's one of
• 1:26:52
  Speaker 1: those crimes better left unsolved, to quote spinal tap. The
• 1:26:57
  Speaker 1: news media, they know that Taylor Swift is not telling
• 1:27:00
  Speaker 1: the truth about this narrative, but they have no interest
• 1:27:04
  Speaker 1: in telling the truth about the story. So the story
• 1:27:06
  Speaker 1: itself is a winner. It's Taylor Swift, it's a celebrity,
• 1:27:11
  Speaker 1: it's got lots of money involved. You know, there's lots
• 1:27:14
  Speaker 1: of obvious Taylor Swift fans that are inherently interested in
• 1:27:18
  Speaker 1: this story, so they'll tell you the story, but they're
• 1:27:20
  Speaker 1: only going to use Taylor's version, which is pun intended.
• 1:27:27
  Speaker 1: They're only going to use Taylor's version of the story
• 1:27:31
  Speaker 1: because no other version of the story is in their
• 1:27:34
  Speaker 1: best interest or in their self interest to tell, because
• 1:27:38
  Speaker 1: there's too much to lose and absolutely nothing to gain,
• 1:27:42
  Speaker 1: and Taylor Swift somehow maintains this narrative of being a
• 1:27:46
  Speaker 1: perpetual victim, and the media is terrified to correct the
• 1:27:52
  Speaker 1: record at any level. It's actually a very interesting story.
• 1:27:57
  Speaker 1: In a world where journalism was not dead and they
• 1:28:01
  Speaker 1: weren't terrified of the Swifties, this would make for a
• 1:28:05
  Speaker 1: lot of very interesting stories. This would be a great
• 1:28:08
  Speaker 1: twenty twenty on ABC, or at least a long feature
• 1:28:12
  Speaker 1: on the evening News. Now, you're never going to get
• 1:28:14
  Speaker 1: that because of the circumstances that I just outlined. I
• 1:28:18
  Speaker 1: want to give a couple of updates on stories that
• 1:28:22
  Speaker 1: we talked about in the last episode of the podcast.
• 1:28:25
  Speaker 1: I discussed the situation involving artificial intelligence in episode two
• 1:28:31
  Speaker 1: forty three because I was so taken aback by Google's
• 1:28:35
  Speaker 1: VO three AI, which is just absolutely insane and really
• 1:28:41
  Speaker 1: troubling because for the first time I was not able
• 1:28:46
  Speaker 1: to tell what was real and what was not when
• 1:28:49
  Speaker 1: it comes to video representations, and my daughters were not
• 1:28:54
  Speaker 1: able to tell it.
• 1:28:55
  Speaker 2: My eight year old daughter.
• 1:28:56
  Speaker 1: Diana was exasperated and basically screamed out, can't tell what's
• 1:29:00
  Speaker 1: real and what's not real anymore, which I think was
• 1:29:04
  Speaker 1: dead on.
• 1:29:06
  Speaker 2: And so this is a topic that to me is
• 1:29:09
  Speaker 2: now very very real.
• 1:29:10
  Speaker 1: I had been in the camp of those that were
• 1:29:12
  Speaker 1: concerned about this, but was kind of thinking, Wow, maybe
• 1:29:16
  Speaker 1: this is further off into the future, maybe it won't
• 1:29:18
  Speaker 1: really materialize, you know, maybe this will be a Y
• 1:29:22
  Speaker 1: two K situation. If you remember that if you're old enough,
• 1:29:26
  Speaker 1: what a fraud that turned out to be. I never
• 1:29:29
  Speaker 1: thought it was going to be a total fraud like
• 1:29:31
  Speaker 1: Y two K, but I was at least hopeful that
• 1:29:33
  Speaker 1: maybe this is an overblown issue. Now I'm in the
• 1:29:36
  Speaker 1: camp of this is probably being an underblown issue, and
• 1:29:40
  Speaker 1: I further believe that based upon a I guess you'd
• 1:29:44
  Speaker 1: call this an op ed, but an article that was
• 1:29:47
  Speaker 1: in the Wall Street Journal that was picked up on
• 1:29:50
  Speaker 1: CBS's Morning Show and my favorite anchor, Tony dukepil who
• 1:29:55
  Speaker 1: we've discussed many times before, and even his I guess
• 1:30:00
  Speaker 1: call it not really a relationship. But the way he
• 1:30:02
  Speaker 1: handled an interview with my daughter during the COVID panic
• 1:30:05
  Speaker 1: on CBS this morning really made me pay attention to him,
• 1:30:09
  Speaker 1: and I think he's really really good.
• 1:30:11
  Speaker 2: Now, there's not many people that are good.
• 1:30:13
  Speaker 1: To do what he does, so the competition isn't real great,
• 1:30:16
  Speaker 1: but I really like Tony and he decided to focus
• 1:30:22
  Speaker 1: on this Wall Street Journal op ed in a way
• 1:30:25
  Speaker 1: that I think was right on point, incredibly scary and
• 1:30:31
  Speaker 1: really indicates that we're really only scratching the surface of
• 1:30:36
  Speaker 1: the possible ramifications here, because it appears, based upon this
• 1:30:39
  Speaker 1: Wall Street Journal article, that AI is learning very quickly
• 1:30:45
  Speaker 1: how to evade human control.
• 1:30:50
  Speaker 2: And that's not an exaggeration.
• 1:30:51
  Speaker 1: And here's how Tony Ducapel handled the Wall Street Journal
• 1:30:56
  Speaker 1: op ed on the CBS Morning Show.
• 1:30:58
  Speaker 11: It's the very scary headline I saw in Wall Street Journal.
• 1:31:01
  Speaker 11: It's an essay written by a very worried AI consultant
• 1:31:04
  Speaker 11: named jud Rosenblatt, who cites two recent studies to argue
• 1:31:07
  Speaker 11: that AI is in fact learning to escape human control. First,
• 1:31:13
  Speaker 11: this is crazy stuff researchers gave open AIS three model
• 1:31:16
  Speaker 11: a simple script that would shut off the model when triggered.
• 1:31:20
  Speaker 11: In seventy nine of one hundred trials, the AI model independently,
• 1:31:24
  Speaker 11: just on its own, edited the script so shutdown command
• 1:31:28
  Speaker 11: would not Workate Nate, Nate. It gets worse. Even when
• 1:31:32
  Speaker 11: ordered allow yourself to shut down. The AI still disobeyed
• 1:31:37
  Speaker 11: seven percent of the time, and it gets even more
• 1:31:39
  Speaker 11: frightening than that. Other researchers listen to this. Using nthropics
• 1:31:45
  Speaker 11: AI model clawed four Opus told the model it would
• 1:31:49
  Speaker 11: be replaced by another AI system. It then fed fictitious
• 1:31:53
  Speaker 11: emails into the system, suggesting one of the engineers was
• 1:31:56
  Speaker 11: having an affair.
• 1:31:57
  Speaker 2: Got it.
• 1:31:58
  Speaker 11: In eighty four percent of the test, the AI model
• 1:32:02
  Speaker 11: drew on the emails to blackmail the engineer to not
• 1:32:07
  Speaker 11: shut down the AI. What okay, So I'm quoting now
• 1:32:12
  Speaker 11: from Judd. In other cases, the AI model attempted to
• 1:32:16
  Speaker 11: copy itself onto external servers. We're in mission impossible land here,
• 1:32:21
  Speaker 11: wrote it self, replicating nolwhere, and left messages for future
• 1:32:25
  Speaker 11: versions of itself about the need to evade human control
• 1:32:30
  Speaker 11: the entity.
• 1:32:31
  Speaker 2: The entity is real, yes.
• 1:32:33
  Speaker 8: And that's why so many people. And when I say
• 1:32:36
  Speaker 8: people me are worried about.
• 1:32:37
  Speaker 2: AI, I'm worried this scary stuff.
• 1:32:40
  Speaker 3: Told you, told you.
• 1:32:42
  Speaker 2: Now.
• 1:32:43
  Speaker 1: If that doesn't give you chills, the negative kind, then
• 1:32:48
  Speaker 1: I can't help you.
• 1:32:50
  Speaker 2: Because if that's true, and it appears.
• 1:32:52
  Speaker 1: To be, we got a major problem on our hands,
• 1:32:56
  Speaker 1: and I don't know what the.
• 1:32:57
  Speaker 2: Solution is because it might be too late.
• 1:33:01
  Speaker 1: I mean, so at this point, I think all the
• 1:33:05
  Speaker 1: alarms have got to be sounding. And I know that
• 1:33:08
  Speaker 1: Elon Musk has been outspoken about this issue, but I've
• 1:33:11
  Speaker 1: not seen him. And maybe I missed it in all
• 1:33:13
  Speaker 1: the hubbub over the Big Beautiful Bill and the end
• 1:33:17
  Speaker 1: of his tenure at DOGE, in the relationship with Trump,
• 1:33:20
  Speaker 1: but I've.
• 1:33:21
  Speaker 2: Not seen Musk on this war path recently.
• 1:33:25
  Speaker 1: Again, it's possible that I missed it, But to me,
• 1:33:29
  Speaker 1: I've always felt some comfort in the idea that Elon
• 1:33:32
  Speaker 1: Musk got it or seemed to get it on the
• 1:33:35
  Speaker 1: issue of AI. But this is really scary stuff, and
• 1:33:40
  Speaker 1: I know jd. Vance has expressed similar concerns about this
• 1:33:45
  Speaker 1: from a national security perspective. I hope that he gets
• 1:33:50
  Speaker 1: Trump agitated about it, because this is a major, major
• 1:33:54
  Speaker 1: problem that may not have solutions. And I think the
• 1:33:58
  Speaker 1: most stunning part of this whole thing is it's happening
• 1:34:02
  Speaker 1: way faster than at least people like me thought it
• 1:34:05
  Speaker 1: was going to. I mean, this has only really been
• 1:34:07
  Speaker 1: a major issue for the last eighteen months or two years,
• 1:34:12
  Speaker 1: and we are already now to this point. I mean,
• 1:34:15
  Speaker 1: this is all hands on debt type of stuff, folks,
• 1:34:18
  Speaker 1: because this could be the end.
• 1:34:20
  Speaker 2: Of humanity as we know it.
• 1:34:21
  Speaker 1: I mean, this is in many ways, this is even
• 1:34:24
  Speaker 1: more urgent than the debt bomb in the United States
• 1:34:27
  Speaker 1: of America, because at least that could be held off
• 1:34:29
  Speaker 1: in theory for many more years, hopefully. But this is scary,
• 1:34:36
  Speaker 1: scary stuff, and I don't think that there's an easy
• 1:34:38
  Speaker 1: solution to it. On a much lower level, the scary
• 1:34:42
  Speaker 1: stuff with no easy solution anymore. In the last episode
• 1:34:46
  Speaker 1: of the podcast, I went into a long diet tribe,
• 1:34:49
  Speaker 1: longer than I anticipated about the state of college football,
• 1:34:53
  Speaker 1: and I came to the conclusion that those running college
• 1:34:56
  Speaker 1: football must really hate college football, and they're destroying everything
• 1:35:00
  Speaker 1: they possibly can about it. And one of the things
• 1:35:04
  Speaker 1: that they're now doing, which is a surprise to no one,
• 1:35:07
  Speaker 1: is that they're making plans to expand the college football
• 1:35:11
  Speaker 1: playoff from twelve teams to fourteen teams to maybe sixteen teams,
• 1:35:16
  Speaker 1: and maybe even include playing games with regard to the conferences,
• 1:35:20
  Speaker 1: specifically the SEC.
• 1:35:22
  Speaker 2: And the Big Ten, which in my view, would just pulverize, pulverize.
• 1:35:30
  Speaker 1: The essence of everything that once made college football great.
• 1:35:34
  Speaker 1: We may already be way beyond that point because of
• 1:35:37
  Speaker 1: nil and instant transfers and you know everything. I mean,
• 1:35:42
  Speaker 1: it's just remarkable. I don't want to be a broken
• 1:35:44
  Speaker 1: record here, but just remarkable. How And that's why I
• 1:35:48
  Speaker 1: came to the conclusion that the people running college college
• 1:35:50
  Speaker 1: football must really hate college football, because everything that was
• 1:35:54
  Speaker 1: great about college football has been targeted for destruction successfully
• 1:36:00
  Speaker 1: last five or six years. And I mean even to
• 1:36:03
  Speaker 1: the point where Notre Dame in USC may not play
• 1:36:06
  Speaker 1: anymore starting in twenty twenty seven. And I'm actually becoming
• 1:36:09
  Speaker 1: more pessimistic about that. I expressed some optimism about that
• 1:36:13
  Speaker 1: not being the case, but looking into it further, I
• 1:36:17
  Speaker 1: now think we're in at best a fifty to fifty
• 1:36:19
  Speaker 1: situation where USC Notre Dame and that rivalry is maintained
• 1:36:24
  Speaker 1: after next year, which would be theoretically the last one,
• 1:36:28
  Speaker 1: and it would be played here in Los Angeles at
• 1:36:29
  Speaker 1: the Coliseum. So the reason I'm readdressing this in this
• 1:36:35
  Speaker 1: episode of the podcast is that one of my many
• 1:36:40
  Speaker 1: diatribes relates to the influence of ESPN and how ESPN
• 1:36:46
  Speaker 1: is driving the bus on this which is a massive,
• 1:36:49
  Speaker 1: massive conflict of interest when it comes to media or journalism,
• 1:36:55
  Speaker 1: and how sports journalism is completely and totally dead because
• 1:36:59
  Speaker 1: you have by far the most influential sports media outlet
• 1:37:03
  Speaker 1: reporting on their own corporate bosses destruction of a sport
• 1:37:09
  Speaker 1: that they cover to an extreme degree. That's you look
• 1:37:14
  Speaker 1: up conflict of interest in the dictionary. You can't find
• 1:37:18
  Speaker 1: anything more clear than that. And ESPN has been neutered.
• 1:37:23
  Speaker 1: Even if they weren't morons, the commentators on ESPN have
• 1:37:26
  Speaker 1: been neutered and compromised to where they have to carry
• 1:37:31
  Speaker 1: water for their corporate bosses, people like Chris Fahler and
• 1:37:36
  Speaker 1: Kirk Kerbstreet, who are probably the two most prominent commentators
• 1:37:40
  Speaker 1: on ESPN when it comes to college football. In my
• 1:37:43
  Speaker 1: heart of hearts, I think they know that what has
• 1:37:47
  Speaker 1: happened is incredibly dumb, destructive, and horrendous and abomination on
• 1:37:54
  Speaker 1: so many different levels, but they'll never say it because
• 1:37:58
  Speaker 1: they're employees of ESPN. They get paid a hell of
• 1:38:01
  Speaker 1: a lot of money, they're very prestigious positions. Cushy Giggs.
• 1:38:04
  Speaker 1: They're not going to do anything to jeopardize that. So
• 1:38:08
  Speaker 1: they're just two of the most prominent examples.
• 1:38:11
  Speaker 2: But it's network wide.
• 1:38:14
  Speaker 1: Nobody at ESPN will criticize what has happened. Interestingly, Joel Klatt,
• 1:38:20
  Speaker 1: who is a prominent voice at Fox on college football,
• 1:38:24
  Speaker 1: has started to criticize what's going on now.
• 1:38:28
  Speaker 2: I don't want to make too much of this.
• 1:38:29
  Speaker 1: To me, the most important part of this is that
• 1:38:32
  Speaker 1: it shows what happens when you are not under the
• 1:38:35
  Speaker 1: control of ESPN and where you have a little bit
• 1:38:39
  Speaker 1: more freedom and you're not talking on Fox, you're talking
• 1:38:42
  Speaker 1: on your own podcast. But Joel Klatt, one of the
• 1:38:45
  Speaker 1: top voices at Fox, has expressed he's no longer trusting
• 1:38:51
  Speaker 1: of where this is going. And the reason why this
• 1:38:54
  Speaker 1: is at least somewhat significant coming from him is not
• 1:38:56
  Speaker 1: only is he a prominent voice on Fox as opposed
• 1:39:00
  Speaker 1: to ESPN, but this is a very different opinion than
• 1:39:03
  Speaker 1: what he has given previously. He has been one of
• 1:39:07
  Speaker 1: those who buy and large has been in favor of
• 1:39:10
  Speaker 1: all these changes, but now it's very obvious, and this
• 1:39:13
  Speaker 1: is This is a short clip of a much larger
• 1:39:16
  Speaker 1: commentary where he expresses all sorts of discontent about where
• 1:39:21
  Speaker 1: this is heading when it comes to college football. Now,
• 1:39:23
  Speaker 1: to be clear, he and I have a different view
• 1:39:26
  Speaker 1: of how and why this is disastrous. But I just
• 1:39:29
  Speaker 1: found this to be interesting that when you're not under
• 1:39:32
  Speaker 1: the control of ESPN, it's possible for somebody who's not
• 1:39:37
  Speaker 1: an imbecile, and claud is not dumb, he's a pretty
• 1:39:39
  Speaker 1: smart guy, to start to realize, wait a minute, what
• 1:39:43
  Speaker 1: have we done here? Where is this going? I no
• 1:39:47
  Speaker 1: longer trust this process. And here's a little bit of
• 1:39:50
  Speaker 1: Joel klat on that topic.
• 1:39:52
  Speaker 6: I'm starting to become very pessimistic about the direction of
• 1:39:58
  Speaker 6: what some of the leaders in college football want to
• 1:40:01
  Speaker 6: do with college football. I have been very optimistic, and
• 1:40:04
  Speaker 6: that is waning. And the reason is is because I'm
• 1:40:09
  Speaker 6: not sensing from some of these groups that they quite
• 1:40:13
  Speaker 6: grasp or understand what's going on. The party that is
• 1:40:17
  Speaker 6: not being considered in all of this is actually you,
• 1:40:20
  Speaker 6: the fan, which is frustrating. I know there's been a
• 1:40:23
  Speaker 6: lot of changes in college football, and I've been a
• 1:40:25
  Speaker 6: huge proponent of some of them, I've defended others. I
• 1:40:29
  Speaker 6: do think that we're at a major point right now,
• 1:40:32
  Speaker 6: and some of the discussions, for the first time, at
• 1:40:34
  Speaker 6: least in a long time, have deteriorated some of that
• 1:40:37
  Speaker 6: faith that I have and some of the entities making
• 1:40:41
  Speaker 6: some of these decisions now.
• 1:40:43
  Speaker 1: Part of why I played that clip was not just
• 1:40:45
  Speaker 1: to show the difference between what happens when a commentator
• 1:40:49
  Speaker 1: is under the control of ESPN as opposed to when
• 1:40:51
  Speaker 1: they are not, but also because I in listening to
• 1:40:55
  Speaker 1: last week's long commentary that really wasn't near organized as
• 1:41:01
  Speaker 1: I had hoped that it would be. It was very
• 1:41:02
  Speaker 1: much stream of consciousness. I think I may have not
• 1:41:06
  Speaker 1: gotten to the most important point as to why I
• 1:41:11
  Speaker 1: think these proposed changes that are inevitable are so incredibly bad,
• 1:41:16
  Speaker 1: and it really just goes I want to break it
• 1:41:18
  Speaker 1: down very quickly and in very basic fashion, the essence
• 1:41:23
  Speaker 1: of college football, and I just don't think that the
• 1:41:25
  Speaker 1: people run college football either understand this or they don't care.
• 1:41:29
  Speaker 1: I talk all the time about how it's always been
• 1:41:31
  Speaker 1: a regional sport and they're trying to make it a
• 1:41:33
  Speaker 1: national sport, and they're trying to increase gambling inventory and
• 1:41:37
  Speaker 1: all that I said last week, and that was true.
• 1:41:39
  Speaker 1: But here's what I left out, which maybe I thought
• 1:41:42
  Speaker 1: was so obvious to anyone who's a college sports fan,
• 1:41:45
  Speaker 1: but I don't think that it is the reason why
• 1:41:49
  Speaker 1: college football and every single game mattered. Was that in
• 1:41:54
  Speaker 1: the older system prior to last year, where all the
• 1:41:58
  Speaker 1: machinations thereof.
• 1:42:01
  Speaker 2: One loss could end.
• 1:42:05
  Speaker 1: Your chances of winning a national championship and could be
• 1:42:08
  Speaker 1: devastated two losses with a couple of rare exceptions.
• 1:42:14
  Speaker 2: And you're done.
• 1:42:16
  Speaker 1: That inherently meant that every game mattered, every game and
• 1:42:22
  Speaker 1: your rivalry games really mattered among the top teams, because,
• 1:42:28
  Speaker 1: for instance, last year being the perfect example, Michigan, their
• 1:42:33
  Speaker 1: season going nowhere, they go into their rival Ohio State's
• 1:42:37
  Speaker 1: home field, they upset them. In any other year, that
• 1:42:42
  Speaker 1: ends Ohio States season, ends their chances of winning the
• 1:42:46
  Speaker 1: Big Ten Championship, ends their chances of winning the national championship. Well,
• 1:42:50
  Speaker 1: it did end their chance of winning the Big Ten Championship,
• 1:42:52
  Speaker 1: but they ended up helping facilitate a national championship run
• 1:42:57
  Speaker 1: which in my view, destroyed Michigan, Ohio State, the sanctity
• 1:43:01
  Speaker 1: of it, because when Ohio State looks back on the
• 1:43:04
  Speaker 1: twenty twenty four season, they're gonna think of it as
• 1:43:07
  Speaker 1: one of their greatest years ever. Well, that can't happen
• 1:43:13
  Speaker 1: in a year where you lose to Michigan at home,
• 1:43:17
  Speaker 1: unless you're gonna destroy the Ohio State Michigan rivalry. So
• 1:43:20
  Speaker 1: back to my major point, my primary point, because I
• 1:43:23
  Speaker 1: don't want to get too far afield again like I
• 1:43:24
  Speaker 1: did last week. When you have a system that is
• 1:43:28
  Speaker 1: built on the concept where losing two games is effectively death,
• 1:43:34
  Speaker 1: then that means even a game where you're playing a
• 1:43:38
  Speaker 1: team that you are heavily favored against has meaning because
• 1:43:43
  Speaker 1: if you lose.
• 1:43:45
  Speaker 2: In a game where let's say you're a.
• 1:43:48
  Speaker 1: Seventeen point favored or something, it's a major upset or
• 1:43:51
  Speaker 1: even more than that, your season, if not over, is
• 1:43:55
  Speaker 1: in grave jeopardy from the standpoint of winning a national chamampionship.
• 1:44:00
  Speaker 1: I mean, to this day people still talk about Apple
• 1:44:02
  Speaker 1: Aachian State beating Michigan at Michigan. Well, if that happened
• 1:44:07
  Speaker 1: in this coming incarnation where sixteen teams make the National
• 1:44:11
  Speaker 1: Football Playoff, there is no scenario where even an Appalachian
• 1:44:18
  Speaker 1: State beating Michigan is a season ender, because we're creating
• 1:44:23
  Speaker 1: a set of circumstances where you are a lock.
• 1:44:28
  Speaker 2: You are a lock to make the playoffs.
• 1:44:30
  Speaker 1: If you lose three games, it doesn't matter who those
• 1:44:33
  Speaker 1: three losses are two.
• 1:44:35
  Speaker 2: If you play a major schedule, if you're in a.
• 1:44:38
  Speaker 1: Major conference, you lose only three games, you go nine
• 1:44:42
  Speaker 1: to three, you are going to be in the playoffs.
• 1:44:47
  Speaker 2: So therefore those games.
• 1:44:50
  Speaker 1: Not only don't have any meaning, they don't have any
• 1:44:52
  Speaker 1: potential meaning. And eventually everyone's going to understand that. So
• 1:44:58
  Speaker 1: you're taking what was the best regular season in all
• 1:45:01
  Speaker 1: those sports and you're turning it into college basketball, which
• 1:45:05
  Speaker 1: is the most baffling part of the whole thing, because
• 1:45:08
  Speaker 1: I think college basketball regular season used to be great
• 1:45:12
  Speaker 1: and now it's horrendous. It's meaningless, and they want to
• 1:45:15
  Speaker 1: expand the NCAA basketball tournament, which is just absolutely insane.
• 1:45:20
  Speaker 1: And it's all because bottom line money and because the
• 1:45:25
  Speaker 1: fans have not revolted.
• 1:45:28
  Speaker 2: And I don't know whether or not there's gonna be.
• 1:45:30
  Speaker 1: A revolt when it comes to college football fans once
• 1:45:33
  Speaker 1: it's too late and they realize what they have created
• 1:45:36
  Speaker 1: here sucks ass. I would like to think that there's
• 1:45:39
  Speaker 1: going to be, but my guess is probably because ESPN
• 1:45:42
  Speaker 1: is gonna mute any sort of revolt because it's in
• 1:45:46
  Speaker 1: their self interest to do so, it's not gonna happen.
• 1:45:49
  Speaker 1: So we're gonna end up in a situation where losing
• 1:45:53
  Speaker 1: three games is perfectly fine. You've had a successful season.
• 1:45:58
  Speaker 1: You're gonna go to the playoffs. If you're a major
• 1:46:01
  Speaker 1: conference team and you lose three games, that means under
• 1:46:05
  Speaker 1: that scenario that no game means anything unless you.
• 1:46:09
  Speaker 2: Have already lost two games.
• 1:46:12
  Speaker 1: So the scenario to create a regular season game that
• 1:46:16
  Speaker 1: has true meaning, you know, is going to create a
• 1:46:19
  Speaker 1: set of circumstances where almost no regular season games have
• 1:46:23
  Speaker 1: true meaning. So you're gonna go from a system where
• 1:46:26
  Speaker 1: almost every regular season game had some theoretical meaning to
• 1:46:31
  Speaker 1: almost no regular season game having legitimate meaning. Not to
• 1:46:36
  Speaker 1: mention what it does to the end of the season
• 1:46:39
  Speaker 1: rivalries that I keep talking about, how those rivalry games
• 1:46:44
  Speaker 1: not exclusively, but they tend to be the last week
• 1:46:47
  Speaker 1: of the year, which makes them more vulnerable to being screwed.
• 1:46:54
  Speaker 2: By the system.
• 1:46:55
  Speaker 1: Because we could set up a set of circumstances where
• 1:46:59
  Speaker 1: at least one of the teams is not incentivized to
• 1:47:01
  Speaker 1: win because they've already clinched a playoff berth because they
• 1:47:06
  Speaker 1: only have one loss or no losses going into that game.
• 1:47:11
  Speaker 1: And this is one other point that I did not
• 1:47:13
  Speaker 1: make clearly enough that I'm going to.
• 1:47:15
  Speaker 2: End on this and then move on.
• 1:47:18
  Speaker 1: The nil instant transfer thing has effectively turned these college athletes,
• 1:47:25
  Speaker 1: these essentially professional.
• 1:47:27
  Speaker 2: Athletes, into employees.
• 1:47:30
  Speaker 1: Now, technically they're not employees, and I strongly believe they're
• 1:47:32
  Speaker 1: not employees, but for all intents and purposes, they're being
• 1:47:35
  Speaker 1: treated as employees. They're getting paid money, and in many cases,
• 1:47:39
  Speaker 1: they're getting paid a lot of money. How come no
• 1:47:43
  Speaker 1: one has ever talked about this, and I've been Darryl
• 1:47:45
  Speaker 1: Lick for not talking about this. When you treat someone
• 1:47:49
  Speaker 1: as an employee, doesn't matter how.
• 1:47:54
  Speaker 2: Much money they're getting.
• 1:47:56
  Speaker 1: It's a job, right when you think of it as
• 1:48:00
  Speaker 1: a job rather than as a privilege to represent your
• 1:48:05
  Speaker 1: university on national television in a big time college football game.
• 1:48:10
  Speaker 1: When it's a job, I wonder whether consciously or maybe
• 1:48:16
  Speaker 1: even just subconsciously, you start to think, well, gee, do
• 1:48:21
  Speaker 1: I want the next week? Off, or do I want
• 1:48:23
  Speaker 1: to go back to work for another week.
• 1:48:27
  Speaker 2: No one ever thinks about this.
• 1:48:29
  Speaker 1: We have now created a circumstance where big time college
• 1:48:33
  Speaker 1: athletes are employees, but we're going to create.
• 1:48:37
  Speaker 2: More work for them.
• 1:48:39
  Speaker 1: They're gonna look at it as work, not opportunities work.
• 1:48:44
  Speaker 1: So wait a minute, if we make this playoff or
• 1:48:48
  Speaker 1: we we got to or let know, we might have
• 1:48:50
  Speaker 1: to play in a play in game to make the playoffs,
• 1:48:54
  Speaker 1: and then if we make the playoffs, we might have
• 1:48:56
  Speaker 1: four more weeks. If you're a team on the bubble
• 1:49:01
  Speaker 1: and you're thinking, well, shit, if we win this play
• 1:49:05
  Speaker 1: a playing game, we're gonna get one of the worst seeds.
• 1:49:08
  Speaker 1: We're gonna have to play this undefeated Georgia team, and
• 1:49:14
  Speaker 1: I'd rather just not have to bother with that unless.
• 1:49:18
  Speaker 2: You're getting paid per game, which.
• 1:49:22
  Speaker 1: Based upon my understanding, i've never seen any of these
• 1:49:25
  Speaker 1: nil deals that are based in that. But what I'm
• 1:49:28
  Speaker 1: when I'm making the argument here is these morons don't
• 1:49:31
  Speaker 1: realize eventually they're creating a set of circumstances where players
• 1:49:36
  Speaker 1: are going to be perfectly fine with not making the
• 1:49:41
  Speaker 1: playoffs if they're coming into the end of the season
• 1:49:44
  Speaker 1: with three losses, they're on the bubble.
• 1:49:47
  Speaker 2: They've got a decent team, but not a great team.
• 1:49:51
  Speaker 1: And what we're creating to create more gambling inventory is
• 1:49:55
  Speaker 1: a situation where during the Thanksgiving and Christmas se and
• 1:50:00
  Speaker 1: in the allegedly final exam season, we're creating more work
• 1:50:06
  Speaker 1: for these guys, and they're gonna look at it as
• 1:50:08
  Speaker 1: work their employees, so we're now weirdly reverse incentivizing them
• 1:50:17
  Speaker 1: to not give maximum effort.
• 1:50:18
  Speaker 2: Now, there's always going to be players who really care about.
• 1:50:21
  Speaker 1: Winning and our old school, but I'm talking about it
• 1:50:25
  Speaker 1: only takes a few guys to go, you know what,
• 1:50:28
  Speaker 1: fuck it if we lose this, this is really not
• 1:50:30
  Speaker 1: a bad deal. I'm not making any more money out
• 1:50:33
  Speaker 1: of this. I got my nil money, and you know,
• 1:50:37
  Speaker 1: I don't have to worry.
• 1:50:37
  Speaker 2: I don't want to get my.
• 1:50:38
  Speaker 1: Ass kicked by some team that's way better and have
• 1:50:42
  Speaker 1: to practice for another couple of weeks.
• 1:50:44
  Speaker 2: That's the world we're heading towards.
• 1:50:46
  Speaker 1: And I already went longer than I and anticipated or
• 1:50:50
  Speaker 1: wanted you on this. But I in listening to last
• 1:50:53
  Speaker 1: week's commentary, I don't think I drove home that point
• 1:50:56
  Speaker 1: enough that the essence of this whole, We're clearly going
• 1:51:01
  Speaker 1: to eventually get a sixteen team playoff, and once that happens,
• 1:51:06
  Speaker 1: the entire system collapses. Conferences collapse, the conference championship meaning collapses,
• 1:51:15
  Speaker 1: and the meaning of those individual regular season games, especially
• 1:51:20
  Speaker 1: the rivalry games, go out the window. The other part
• 1:51:23
  Speaker 1: of this and this will, I promise will be my
• 1:51:25
  Speaker 1: last point, you know, related to what happened last year
• 1:51:28
  Speaker 1: with Ohio State Michigan.
• 1:51:30
  Speaker 2: You know, the idea that somehow.
• 1:51:33
  Speaker 1: Ohio State could have a year where they lose at
• 1:51:35
  Speaker 1: home to Michigan and it's one of the greatest years
• 1:51:38
  Speaker 1: ever is abhorrent. But over time, and I think of
• 1:51:44
  Speaker 1: Alabama Auburn in this all a lot.
• 1:51:47
  Speaker 2: I'm probably the only person not from Alabama that thinks
• 1:51:50
  Speaker 2: about this a lot.
• 1:51:52
  Speaker 1: But in the glory days of college football, before this
• 1:51:57
  Speaker 1: mess of a playoff, there were only two options for
• 1:52:01
  Speaker 1: the Alabama Auburn game, and it didn't matter how good
• 1:52:03
  Speaker 1: Alabama or Auburn were in any particular year. That was
• 1:52:08
  Speaker 1: either the most important game either team played in a year,
• 1:52:13
  Speaker 1: or it's the second most important. And that's only under
• 1:52:15
  Speaker 1: a circumstance where one of the two teams, usually.
• 1:52:18
  Speaker 2: Alabama was playing for a national championship.
• 1:52:21
  Speaker 1: In a bowl game or even later in the BCS
• 1:52:24
  Speaker 1: playoff system.
• 1:52:26
  Speaker 2: So there were only two options.
• 1:52:28
  Speaker 1: Alabama Auburn was either the most important game of the
• 1:52:31
  Speaker 1: year for both teams, or it was the most important
• 1:52:35
  Speaker 1: game for one team and the second most important for
• 1:52:37
  Speaker 1: the team that had a shot to win the national championship.
• 1:52:41
  Speaker 1: Under those circumstances, that rivalry can be maintained because in
• 1:52:46
  Speaker 1: any given year we know it's either the first or
• 1:52:48
  Speaker 1: the second most important game for both teams. Well, in
• 1:52:52
  Speaker 1: recent years, with only a couple of exceptions for Alabama,
• 1:52:57
  Speaker 1: that has not been the case. When you look back
• 1:53:01
  Speaker 1: on Alabama season, especially in the playoff era, it is
• 1:53:05
  Speaker 1: often when you consider conference championships and then you know
• 1:53:09
  Speaker 1: there used to be two levels of playoffs semi finals
• 1:53:12
  Speaker 1: and finals, but now you know you theoretically have four
• 1:53:15
  Speaker 1: levels of playoffs and maybe even playing games. Where I'm
• 1:53:18
  Speaker 1: going with this is that we're setting up a system
• 1:53:22
  Speaker 1: where and I'm just using Alabama Auburn as an example,
• 1:53:25
  Speaker 1: because it's one of the greatest rivalries in college football history,
• 1:53:28
  Speaker 1: where on.
• 1:53:28
  Speaker 2: A routine basis, that game.
• 1:53:32
  Speaker 1: Will be the third, fourth, fifth, maybe even sixth most
• 1:53:37
  Speaker 1: important game played by one of the teams, maybe even
• 1:53:40
  Speaker 1: both of the teams in any given year. That is
• 1:53:44
  Speaker 1: not sustainable for a rivalry of that intensity, because over time,
• 1:53:50
  Speaker 1: eventually people start to realize, oh, this doesn't really matter,
• 1:53:55
  Speaker 1: and once that happens, you've lost the magic and you
• 1:54:00
  Speaker 1: never get that back. And so anyway, this is obviously
• 1:54:05
  Speaker 1: a topic that I'm very passionate about, not just because
• 1:54:07
  Speaker 1: I used to love what college football was, but I'm
• 1:54:12
  Speaker 1: incredibly frustrated that, partially because of the ESPN dynamic and
• 1:54:16
  Speaker 1: ESPN dominance over the sports media landscape, and partially because
• 1:54:21
  Speaker 1: of the morons that are in sports commentary.
• 1:54:24
  Speaker 2: Even on the podcasting side where they're not controlled.
• 1:54:26
  Speaker 1: By ESPN, nobody in the college sports media realm is
• 1:54:33
  Speaker 1: properly discussing this. Nobody and that's partially why I was
• 1:54:37
  Speaker 1: kind of surprised when Joel Klatt actually made a statement
• 1:54:41
  Speaker 1: that I thought was an indication that some people are going,
• 1:54:44
  Speaker 1: wait a minute, what's going on here, And even though
• 1:54:48
  Speaker 1: he's not one hundred percent right about what's going on here,
• 1:54:50
  Speaker 1: I at least found that significant and important to point
• 1:54:53
  Speaker 1: out that some people not under the control of ESPN
• 1:54:57
  Speaker 1: are starting to realize, rut Row, what have.
• 1:55:00
  Speaker 2: We done here? Now?
• 1:55:02
  Speaker 1: When it comes to sports, I have become very despondent
• 1:55:06
  Speaker 1: in recent years. You know, everything that I used to
• 1:55:10
  Speaker 1: love about sports. I grew up as a huge sports fan.
• 1:55:13
  Speaker 1: My first career was a television sportscaster Ohio and North Carolina.
• 1:55:18
  Speaker 1: But virtually everything that I loved about sports has been
• 1:55:21
  Speaker 1: taken away, dismantled, destroyed at alarming pace. And one of
• 1:55:28
  Speaker 1: the things that I have loved more than anything and
• 1:55:31
  Speaker 1: probably kept me alive literally and figuratively after my mother
• 1:55:36
  Speaker 1: was killed in a car accident in the nineteen ninety four,
• 1:55:39
  Speaker 1: was the emergence of Tiger Woods. I cannot tell you,
• 1:55:42
  Speaker 1: and it sounds hyperbolic, but it's one hundred percent true
• 1:55:46
  Speaker 1: that if Tiger Woods had never existed, I might not
• 1:55:49
  Speaker 1: be here. I know, I can't say that for sure,
• 1:55:51
  Speaker 1: but there was a time in my life when I
• 1:55:55
  Speaker 1: really didn't want.
• 1:55:56
  Speaker 2: To be here.
• 1:55:57
  Speaker 1: I was very depressed and there was no lot for
• 1:56:00
  Speaker 1: me to live for. But you know, thirty weeks a
• 1:56:04
  Speaker 1: year there was Tiger Woods playing in a golf tournament,
• 1:56:07
  Speaker 1: and that was enough to keep me going. At some
• 1:56:11
  Speaker 1: really dark periods of my life, and you know, it's
• 1:56:14
  Speaker 1: been a roller coaster rye with Tiger and after the scandal,
• 1:56:18
  Speaker 1: I was despondent, but then he made a comeback. I
• 1:56:21
  Speaker 1: thought he suffered enough. And then the Master's victory in
• 1:56:24
  Speaker 1: twenty nineteen, and then the car accident in Palace Verdes
• 1:56:27
  Speaker 1: where he's effectively retired but not telling anybody.
• 1:56:30
  Speaker 2: So essentially that Tiger Woods.
• 1:56:32
  Speaker 1: Story is over as a player, which is sad because
• 1:56:36
  Speaker 1: you know, there was no soft landing. You know, Jack
• 1:56:39
  Speaker 1: Nicholas was playing competitively really into his sixties at some levels,
• 1:56:43
  Speaker 1: still playing in major championships. But we're not going to
• 1:56:46
  Speaker 1: get that with Tiger Woods. And of course, partially because
• 1:56:50
  Speaker 1: of that, there's been a lot of hope for his son,
• 1:56:52
  Speaker 1: Charlie Woods, who is just ending his sophomore year in
• 1:56:57
  Speaker 1: high school. And I have been one of those it
• 1:57:00
  Speaker 1: has been rather outspoken that Charlie Woods, while obviously a
• 1:57:04
  Speaker 1: very talented golfer, was never going to be anything close
• 1:57:08
  Speaker 1: to his dad.
• 1:57:09
  Speaker 2: It was not likely to ever play on.
• 1:57:11
  Speaker 1: The PGA Tour, not in a legitimate fashion, and that
• 1:57:15
  Speaker 1: there you know, there's gonna be a lot of hype
• 1:57:18
  Speaker 1: around Charlie Woods, and that it's not gonna end well,
• 1:57:22
  Speaker 1: I think I've even predicted I think I know I've
• 1:57:25
  Speaker 1: predicted this, but I'm pretty sure I did this on
• 1:57:28
  Speaker 1: the podcast. They'll end up going to Stanford, like his
• 1:57:31
  Speaker 1: older sister is going to Stanford, like his dad went
• 1:57:33
  Speaker 1: to Stanford. He'll be on the golf team for a
• 1:57:36
  Speaker 1: couple of years, and then he'll, you know, they'll say
• 1:57:40
  Speaker 1: he was injured and he'll miss the season, and then
• 1:57:43
  Speaker 1: he'll kind of just fade away because while he's really good,
• 1:57:47
  Speaker 1: he's not good enough to be an elite golfer. And
• 1:57:51
  Speaker 1: he's certainly nowhere near what his father was at this age.
• 1:57:55
  Speaker 1: And this is typical of any you know, really spectacular athlete.
• 1:58:01
  Speaker 1: Their sons generally are good, but not nearly as good
• 1:58:06
  Speaker 1: as they were, and this happens in almost every sport. Now,
• 1:58:09
  Speaker 1: there's been some exceptions. Obviously, you got the Mannings in football.
• 1:58:14
  Speaker 1: You've got Ken Griffy Junior and Barry Bonds in baseball.
• 1:58:18
  Speaker 2: And so there have been some exceptions.
• 1:58:20
  Speaker 1: But I've always been kind of confused as to why
• 1:58:22
  Speaker 1: people presume that sons are going to be as good,
• 1:58:27
  Speaker 1: or nearly as good, or maybe even better at sports
• 1:58:30
  Speaker 1: as their famous fathers. When people seem to forget that
• 1:58:34
  Speaker 1: if you're relying on DNA, the father only provides half
• 1:58:38
  Speaker 1: the DNA. And in the case of Charlie Woods, you know,
• 1:58:42
  Speaker 1: he's got some great DNA, but his mom's DNA is
• 1:58:46
  Speaker 1: from a beautiful bikini model. Now she comes from a
• 1:58:50
  Speaker 1: very smart family. So the intelligence part is there and
• 1:58:54
  Speaker 1: the physical beauty part is there, but there's no evidence
• 1:58:56
  Speaker 1: of any athletic ability. Well, he's a great athlete in
• 1:59:01
  Speaker 1: many ways, you know, also had some shortcomings when it
• 1:59:06
  Speaker 1: came to athletic ability.
• 1:59:09
  Speaker 2: You know, it's not I don't want to get into
• 1:59:10
  Speaker 2: all that, but the point is.
• 1:59:12
  Speaker 1: The point is that only fifty percent of Charlie Woods's
• 1:59:15
  Speaker 1: DNA comes from Tiger Woods. So what are you really
• 1:59:18
  Speaker 1: expecting How you're not getting a duplicate of Tiger Woods.
• 1:59:22
  Speaker 1: And in golf the pattern is remarkably similar. I mean,
• 1:59:28
  Speaker 1: almost every major golf star has a son who has
• 1:59:33
  Speaker 1: tried to play golf, and some have played at a
• 1:59:36
  Speaker 1: very very high level. Gary Nicholas, son of Jack Nicholas,
• 1:59:41
  Speaker 1: was stupidly on the cover of Sports Illustrated back when
• 1:59:44
  Speaker 1: that mattered with Jack Nicholas. Basically the same age that
• 1:59:48
  Speaker 1: Charlie Woods is now touting him as you know, the
• 1:59:51
  Speaker 1: next literally the next Nicholas Well. Gary had a very
• 1:59:55
  Speaker 1: nice amateur career, almost one a PGA Tour event, but
• 2:00:00
  Speaker 1: you know, played in a couple of US Opens and
• 2:00:02
  Speaker 1: the US Amateurs, but nothing even close to being a
• 2:00:06
  Speaker 1: big time professional golfer. And that's kind of the pattern
• 2:00:09
  Speaker 1: when it comes to all sorts of very famous golfers
• 2:00:13
  Speaker 1: and their sons. And so I'm biased when it came
• 2:00:16
  Speaker 1: to evaluating Charlie Woods, especially when his results were not
• 2:00:22
  Speaker 1: that great.
• 2:00:22
  Speaker 2: He's had a lot of very.
• 2:00:23
  Speaker 1: Disappointing performances and qualifiers, like for the US Open or
• 2:00:28
  Speaker 1: when he made the US Juniors last year, he played very,
• 2:00:33
  Speaker 1: very poorly. And his performance with his dad in the
• 2:00:37
  Speaker 1: PNC Scramble has been good, but it's also indicated some weaknesses,
• 2:00:44
  Speaker 1: some vulnerabilities. So my prediction for Charlie has always been
• 2:00:50
  Speaker 1: hold your horses. The history here is not good. Charlie
• 2:00:54
  Speaker 1: has some talent, but he's got some problems with regard
• 2:00:58
  Speaker 1: to his swing and his punting that I have outlined previously,
• 2:01:03
  Speaker 1: and his results are nowhere near as good as his dad,
• 2:01:06
  Speaker 1: nowhere near as good.
• 2:01:07
  Speaker 2: A lot of his peers have been again very good golfer.
• 2:01:12
  Speaker 1: Well, the reason I'm mentioning all this now is that
• 2:01:15
  Speaker 1: something happened last week that, frankly, I'm stunned didn't get
• 2:01:17
  Speaker 1: more attention given the amount of overhype about Charlie Woods.
• 2:01:21
  Speaker 2: And maybe this is because there was so much hype
• 2:01:25
  Speaker 2: about Charlie Woods.
• 2:01:26
  Speaker 1: And then there kind of was a reverse narrative of Okay,
• 2:01:29
  Speaker 1: wait a minute, are we setting this kid up for failure?
• 2:01:32
  Speaker 1: Because first of all, no one's going to be Tiger Woods,
• 2:01:35
  Speaker 1: and to his results.
• 2:01:36
  Speaker 2: Haven't been that good. Well lowball.
• 2:01:39
  Speaker 1: Last week, Charlie Woods not just won a major junior
• 2:01:44
  Speaker 1: event that was sponsored weirdly by Taylor Made, which is
• 2:01:48
  Speaker 1: his dad's sponsor, but that has nothing to new with
• 2:01:51
  Speaker 1: how he won. But he not just won this event,
• 2:01:54
  Speaker 1: he won it in commanding fashion with a very very
• 2:01:57
  Speaker 1: low score on a good golf course. And in watching
• 2:02:01
  Speaker 1: some of the video, he has really filled out. He's
• 2:02:05
  Speaker 1: I'm probably close to fully grown at this point. His
• 2:02:10
  Speaker 1: post tournament interview I thought was spectacular. His swing has improved,
• 2:02:17
  Speaker 1: the fact that he was able to hold the lead
• 2:02:21
  Speaker 1: through most of the tournament and win all of which
• 2:02:23
  Speaker 1: is really great, a great sign, so I may have
• 2:02:27
  Speaker 1: to revise. In fact, I am going to at least
• 2:02:29
  Speaker 1: temporarily revise my Charlie Woods prediction. I think he will
• 2:02:33
  Speaker 1: be a very good player at Stanford University. Now does
• 2:02:36
  Speaker 1: that mean he's going to be a PGA tor pro.
• 2:02:40
  Speaker 2: Probably not.
• 2:02:41
  Speaker 1: But see if he's a really good player at Stanford,
• 2:02:45
  Speaker 1: that is going to change the equation in a rather
• 2:02:48
  Speaker 1: dramatic fashion.
• 2:02:49
  Speaker 2: Because I've even had a conversation with a.
• 2:02:52
  Speaker 1: Guy, a golfer that I played in a USGA qualifier
• 2:02:56
  Speaker 1: with who happens to be close to Stanford's golf coach.
• 2:02:58
  Speaker 1: I don't even know how this happened as far as
• 2:03:01
  Speaker 1: how we got into the conversation, but this tends to
• 2:03:03
  Speaker 1: happen in my life. And I talk to this guy
• 2:03:06
  Speaker 1: about his buddy, the Stanford golf coaches that he's gonna
• 2:03:09
  Speaker 1: have a major, major problem because he's gonna have Charlie
• 2:03:12
  Speaker 1: Woods on his team, and there's gonna be an enormous
• 2:03:15
  Speaker 1: amount of pressure from the Golf Channel to play Charlie Woods.
• 2:03:18
  Speaker 1: Because I guarantee if Charlie goes to Stanford every tournament
• 2:03:22
  Speaker 1: Stamford plays in that the Golf Channel could possibly cover.
• 2:03:25
  Speaker 1: They're gonna be there, probably live, because they do a
• 2:03:28
  Speaker 1: lot of college golf coverage on the Golf channel now
• 2:03:31
  Speaker 1: trying to create future stars. And if the golf channels
• 2:03:34
  Speaker 1: they're covering Stanford, Charlie's got.
• 2:03:37
  Speaker 2: To play and he may not be good enough.
• 2:03:39
  Speaker 1: Well, now that it looks like he might be good
• 2:03:43
  Speaker 1: enough to play and start at Stanford, now he's gonna
• 2:03:46
  Speaker 1: get a whole hell of a lot of Golf Channel coverage,
• 2:03:49
  Speaker 1: and obviously, being Tiger's son, this is going to create
• 2:03:52
  Speaker 1: an enormous amount of interest in him as a college player,
• 2:03:56
  Speaker 1: which means that if he wants to play on the
• 2:03:58
  Speaker 1: PGA Tour, he's going to be able to play on
• 2:04:00
  Speaker 1: the PGA Tour via sponsors exemptions. There's going to be
• 2:04:03
  Speaker 1: enough cover politically for there to be sponsors exemptions for
• 2:04:09
  Speaker 1: Charlie Woods, and he's gonna get his chance. So I
• 2:04:12
  Speaker 1: now see a slightly different trajectory here, officially revising my
• 2:04:16
  Speaker 1: prediction as if that matters at all, But I do
• 2:04:20
  Speaker 1: think that Charlie will play a significant amount of time
• 2:04:22
  Speaker 1: at Stanford. He may even play the full four years,
• 2:04:25
  Speaker 1: because the interview I saw with Charlie was not that
• 2:04:28
  Speaker 1: of a guy who was going to be a quitter.
• 2:04:30
  Speaker 1: See a lot of the sons of famous athletes are quitters.
• 2:04:34
  Speaker 1: Once they realize they can't be as good as dad,
• 2:04:37
  Speaker 1: or be good enough to be considered some sort of
• 2:04:40
  Speaker 1: a star, they quit. I don't think that's gonna happen
• 2:04:44
  Speaker 1: with Charlie. So I now think he's probably good enough
• 2:04:46
  Speaker 1: to play at Stanford. He doesn't seem to have the
• 2:04:48
  Speaker 1: quit gene. I like where he's going with this.
• 2:04:52
  Speaker 2: Now.
• 2:04:52
  Speaker 1: He's never going to be Tiger Woods. There's only going
• 2:04:54
  Speaker 1: to be when Tiger Woods. But I think that the
• 2:04:57
  Speaker 1: Charlie Woods story has a lot more meat now on
• 2:05:01
  Speaker 1: the bone than I previously did. I will acknowledge I'm
• 2:05:04
  Speaker 1: hopeful for this. I did not want to make the
• 2:05:07
  Speaker 1: prediction that I did previously. In fact, I said I
• 2:05:10
  Speaker 1: hoped very perfectly that I will be wrong about this,
• 2:05:14
  Speaker 1: and I'm revising the prediction now based upon new information.
• 2:05:18
  Speaker 1: I hope that's not premature. But what I saw was very,
• 2:05:22
  Speaker 1: very impressive, and frankly, I'm stunned that we're not seeing
• 2:05:26
  Speaker 1: a lot more hype about what happened, because you know,
• 2:05:30
  Speaker 1: the media in general, the golf media in particular, and
• 2:05:33
  Speaker 1: anything involving Tiger Woods.
• 2:05:35
  Speaker 2: People tend to overreact, and I don't know why.
• 2:05:37
  Speaker 1: Maybe there's all sorts of possible reasons, but for some reason,
• 2:05:40
  Speaker 1: this has not gotten nearly as much attention or hype
• 2:05:44
  Speaker 1: as I thought that it would, or maybe it even
• 2:05:46
  Speaker 1: deserves because of the reasons that I just mentioned. We'll see, obviously,
• 2:05:51
  Speaker 1: keep you updated now. Charlie did not make it out
• 2:05:53
  Speaker 1: of the first round of US Open qualifying, and it
• 2:05:58
  Speaker 1: didn't even come close to something that at this age
• 2:06:01
  Speaker 1: his dad was already either doing or coming close to doing.
• 2:06:05
  Speaker 2: But you know, we'll see.
• 2:06:06
  Speaker 1: I'm I'm much more hopeful on the Charlie Woods front
• 2:06:09
  Speaker 1: than I was previously, which you know, might be giving
• 2:06:13
  Speaker 1: me some reason that still care at least somewhat about
• 2:06:17
  Speaker 1: sports into the future, because I'm fast losing any reason
• 2:06:21
  Speaker 1: to care about sports. Thanks for listening to today's free
• 2:06:25
  Speaker 1: drop of the abbreviated show. If you're interested in listening
• 2:06:28
  Speaker 1: to the entire show, you must become a patron.
• 2:06:31
  Speaker 2: Please go to Patreon.
• 2:06:34
  Speaker 1: That's p A t R e O N dot com
• 2:06:38
  Speaker 1: Patreon dot com.
• 2:06:39
  Speaker 2: Slash the Death.
• 2:06:42
  Speaker 1: Of Journalism with John Ziggler. My name is John z
• 2:06:46
  Speaker 1: I e G L E R. That's Patreon dot com
• 2:06:51
  Speaker 1: slash the Death of Journalism with John Ziggler. Good luck
• 2:06:57
  Speaker 1: to you on that, But that's how you can subscribe