Latest / The Death Of Journalism / Episode Two Hundred Sixty Seven

Transcript

Episode Two Hundred Sixty Seven · The Death Of Journalism

0:00
Speaker 1: Welcome to episode two hundred and sixty seven of the
0:03
Speaker 1: Death of Journalism podcast. My name is John Zigler. I'm
0:05
Speaker 1: your host on today's show. President Trump declares this to
0:08
Speaker 1: be anti Communism Week and proceeds to act pretty much
0:13
Speaker 1: like a communist. He also completely whims out on the
0:16
Speaker 1: Washington Redskins name issue. Democrats think they finally have Trump
0:22
Speaker 1: implicated in the Epstein case, but they don't. There's a
0:26
Speaker 1: maga media food fight of epic proportions, and I'm just
0:30
Speaker 1: the person to properly explain it. Elon Musk continues to
0:34
Speaker 1: say super scary things about AI, British News TV, provides
0:39
Speaker 1: two very telling moments, and another betting scandal in sports.
0:46
Speaker 1: This episode of the podcast may set a record for
0:49
Speaker 1: the number of topics, So I say that both as
0:53
Speaker 1: a warning and as an explanation for why I may
0:55
Speaker 1: not be able to get as in depth on every
0:58
Speaker 1: topic as I normally do, because otherwise we'd have a
1:01
Speaker 1: four or five hour podcast. But there's tons to get
1:04
Speaker 1: to and I want to begin with a couple of
1:05
Speaker 1: good stories, good news stories. In our last episode, I
1:10
Speaker 1: interviewed my very good friend Cyrus and rosta film director
1:13
Speaker 1: who had a brand new movie out in theaters, distributed
1:17
Speaker 1: and produced by MGM and Amazon in theaters nationwide last week,
1:22
Speaker 1: called Sarah's Oil. I told you the movie is fantastic.
1:26
Speaker 1: I wouldn't tell you otherwise if I didn't really believe that.
1:29
Speaker 1: And it's not just because my good friend Cyrus directed it.
1:33
Speaker 1: But I was concerned about how the movie was going
1:36
Speaker 1: to be received at the box office, mostly because it
1:39
Speaker 1: seemed to me as if Amazon MGM were taking essentially
1:42
Speaker 1: a dive on the movie. They didn't think that it
1:45
Speaker 1: had much box office potential, and then they were essentially
1:48
Speaker 1: setting it up for streaming during the Christmas season. But thankfully,
1:53
Speaker 1: audiences responded to Sarah's Oil in a big way. The
1:57
Speaker 1: box office was fifty percent better than expect which is
2:00
Speaker 1: really remarkable in this day and age because these people
2:04
Speaker 1: they know how to predict box office almost down to
2:07
Speaker 1: the dollar, and for a film to exceed expectations by
2:11
Speaker 1: fifty percent the opening weekend is very significant. The audience
2:15
Speaker 1: scores were off the charts, like ninety eight percent. Even
2:19
Speaker 1: the critics liked it, even Variety gave it a good review.
2:23
Speaker 1: And now they're actually expanding the number of theaters in
2:26
Speaker 1: week and number two, so he didn't get a chance
2:29
Speaker 1: to see Sarah's Oil. It's still going to be in theaters,
2:32
Speaker 1: I hope for the next several weeks at least, and
2:35
Speaker 1: a lot of people are loving it, and I know
2:37
Speaker 1: Cyrus feel is pretty darn good about it, better than
2:39
Speaker 1: he did from that perspective a couple weeks before. So
2:43
Speaker 1: that's good news for Sarah's Oil. And it's good news
2:46
Speaker 1: that a really good movie can still try to find
2:49
Speaker 1: traction in the theaters that doesn't have any sort of
2:53
Speaker 1: franchise attached to it, and isn't a superhero movie, and
2:58
Speaker 1: is an original idea that was created by Cyrus and
3:02
Speaker 1: his wife Betsy, and is really well executed. So congratulations
3:06
Speaker 1: to my friend Cyrus. And once again, if you haven't
3:09
Speaker 1: yet seen Sarah's Oil, please go out and do so asap. Now,
3:14
Speaker 1: there's also apparently good news on the front when it
3:17
Speaker 1: comes to the government shutdown, the longest in American history,
3:21
Speaker 1: appears to officially becoming to an end as we tape
3:25
Speaker 1: this podcast. It is a schedule to be voted on
3:29
Speaker 1: in the House Representatives. The US Senate, where the main
3:32
Speaker 1: stubling locks had existed, have already agreed to end the shutdown.
3:37
Speaker 1: The House needs to confirm that it is expected that
3:40
Speaker 1: that will happen. If that does not happen, that will
3:43
Speaker 1: be a major, major news story that we'll be talking
3:45
Speaker 1: about in the next episode of the podcast. But it
3:48
Speaker 1: appears as if that will indeed happen, And the conventional
3:52
Speaker 1: wisdom as of right now is that this is a
3:55
Speaker 1: huge loss for Democrats. The Democrats in the Senate back down.
3:59
Speaker 1: They caved, and this happened literally just a week after
4:03
Speaker 1: a massive off year election victory, and a lot of liberals,
4:08
Speaker 1: especially in the media, are very upset about this. There's
4:11
Speaker 1: a lot of self flagellation among Democrats. Oh my gosh,
4:15
Speaker 1: we just had this great election victory and here we
4:17
Speaker 1: go and squander our leverage by caving in on the shutdown.
4:22
Speaker 1: What was this all about? And I get why people
4:25
Speaker 1: are perceiving it that way. However, I look at it
4:29
Speaker 1: kind of almost in one hundred and eighty degrees different direction,
4:32
Speaker 1: in that maybe the connection between the election victory and
4:38
Speaker 1: ending the shutdown was not Democrats caving after a great victory.
4:42
Speaker 1: Maybe they just waited to end the shutdown until after
4:46
Speaker 1: they had their great victory, especially in Virginia. From a
4:50
Speaker 1: strategic standpoint, it's obvious that the shutdown greatly helped them,
4:54
Speaker 1: especially in Virginia, where it doesn't make any sense since
4:57
Speaker 1: it was a state election, but you have tons and
4:59
Speaker 1: tons of federal workers who are directly impacted by the shutdown.
5:03
Speaker 1: They turned out in huge numbers to vote for Democrats.
5:05
Speaker 1: Now that the shutdown has served its purpose in Virginia
5:09
Speaker 1: and it doesn't appear to be working from a strategic
5:12
Speaker 1: standpoint and a negotiation perspective, we might as well end
5:15
Speaker 1: it because people are really starting to hurt. The impact
5:18
Speaker 1: is really starting to be felt, especially at airports and
5:21
Speaker 1: in other areas of life. So let's end it. So
5:25
Speaker 1: that's kind of the way I see the way this
5:26
Speaker 1: went down. And also, this appears to be yet another
5:30
Speaker 1: situation where the can has just been kicked down the
5:33
Speaker 1: road for a couple months. We theoretically could be going
5:36
Speaker 1: through this all over again just a few months from now.
5:39
Speaker 1: So I don't see this as a huge deal in
5:42
Speaker 1: either direction, either for Democrats or Republicans. I don't think
5:45
Speaker 1: there's any winner here. I don't know that all that
5:48
Speaker 1: much was lost, although there were a lot of people
5:50
Speaker 1: that were greatly inconvenienced, and if you're a Republican in Virginia,
5:54
Speaker 1: you got wiped out, at least in part because of
5:57
Speaker 1: the government shutdown. But I guess it is good news
6:00
Speaker 1: that that element of this whole equation has at least
6:03
Speaker 1: temporarily underlined, temporarily been taken care of. Now a lot
6:08
Speaker 1: of news involving Donald Trump over the last several days,
6:12
Speaker 1: and I got to premise my remarks by saying, look,
6:16
Speaker 1: I have tried so very, very hard to be fair
6:20
Speaker 1: to Trump. As you well know, I was very conflicted
6:24
Speaker 1: during the twenty twenty four election. I did not want Kamala.
6:28
Speaker 1: I worked as a minuscule paid consultant for a pro
6:33
Speaker 1: Trump super pack because my friend Steve Cortes was running it,
6:37
Speaker 1: and I thought that was the better option. I honestly
6:40
Speaker 1: thought that we were facing basically two choices metaphorically, either
6:45
Speaker 1: lobotomi with Trump two point zero or castration with Kamala Harris.
6:49
Speaker 1: I decided maybe lobotomy wouldn't be that bad, And unfortunately,
6:56
Speaker 1: it appears to me as if lobotomy is everything I feared,
6:58
Speaker 1: it would be everything I feared about Trump becoming a
7:02
Speaker 1: king no one telling him no, having no restrictor plates
7:06
Speaker 1: because he's not really running at least we hope for
7:09
Speaker 1: another term in office, and that this could end up
7:13
Speaker 1: from a conservative perspective, being a disaster and maybe paving
7:17
Speaker 1: the way for further disasters with a liberal comeback in
7:21
Speaker 1: the not too distant future. All that appears to be happening,
7:24
Speaker 1: maybe even worse than I feared. And this past week
7:27
Speaker 1: was a really I want to say great, but it's
7:31
Speaker 1: really terrible example of what I'm referring to. So Trump
7:35
Speaker 1: announced that this is anti Communism Week, which is already
7:38
Speaker 1: absurd for a guy who has caused the US government
7:41
Speaker 1: to take literal ownership of parts of major US companies.
7:45
Speaker 1: So right there, he's a hypocrite on the communism issue.
7:49
Speaker 1: But let's just very quickly review before we get into
7:52
Speaker 1: the details. So he puts forward this less than half
7:56
Speaker 1: baked idea of expanding mortgage from thirty years in their potential,
8:03
Speaker 1: the longest mortgage you can legally have is thirty years
8:06
Speaker 1: currently to fifty years on a home mortgage, while praising
8:11
Speaker 1: FDR as a great president Franklin Dellan and Roosevelt, who
8:16
Speaker 1: by the standards of the time, was clearly a socialist,
8:19
Speaker 1: somebody even say a communist. But so Trump proposes via
8:25
Speaker 1: social media this fifty year mortgage idea. By the way,
8:28
Speaker 1: there was also put out there the idea that you
8:30
Speaker 1: could extend car loans to fifteen years, which would be
8:34
Speaker 1: actually maybe even a worse idea than fifty year mortgages.
8:38
Speaker 1: You got Trump saying he's going to give ten thousand
8:41
Speaker 1: dollars for all air traffic controllers who didn't betray the
8:45
Speaker 1: country during the shutdown, although he admits he has no
8:48
Speaker 1: idea where the money's going to come from. And then
8:50
Speaker 1: the biggest proposal that Trump came up with is two
8:54
Speaker 1: thousand dollars for every non rich person. But you can't
9:01
Speaker 1: give it to rich people who have actually paid the taxes. No, no,
9:04
Speaker 1: we're going to have a tariff quote unquote dividend of
9:06
Speaker 1: two thousand dollars for every non rich person. And he
9:11
Speaker 1: also tried to intimidate the Supreme Court of the United
9:14
Speaker 1: States into not invalidating his tariffs at the very same time,
9:20
Speaker 1: seemingly pretending that public opinion and maga expressing outrage should
9:26
Speaker 1: have some impact on what the Supreme Court decides in
9:28
Speaker 1: the tariff case. He also defended in an interview with
9:32
Speaker 1: Fox News Channel the idea of sixty not sixty six hundred,
9:37
Speaker 1: six hundred thousand Chinese communists coming into America as students
9:43
Speaker 1: and attending American schools because to not do so would
9:46
Speaker 1: be bad for these woke colleges, specifically historically black colleges,
9:52
Speaker 1: which I didn't even understand what that connection was. But this,
9:57
Speaker 1: this is an extraordinary list. This is all within just
9:59
Speaker 1: a couple of during Anti Communism Week, just a couple
10:03
Speaker 1: of days. This is your republican allegedly anti liberal, anti
10:07
Speaker 1: woke supposedly, I guess, although he's never really called himself
10:11
Speaker 1: a conservative president of the United States, all doing things
10:15
Speaker 1: that if a liberal Democrat, a Kamala Harris, for instance,
10:19
Speaker 1: had she won the election, if she did any of
10:21
Speaker 1: these things, the maccabase would be rightfully going bananas and
10:27
Speaker 1: the maga media would be screaming rightfully bloody murder. So
10:31
Speaker 1: let's go through these items with a little bit more detail.
10:35
Speaker 1: I want to start with this interview that Trump gave
10:39
Speaker 1: to Laura Ingram from Fox NewsChannel. And Laura Ingram is
10:43
Speaker 1: as maga as it gets. She's a Trump sickophant, and
10:47
Speaker 1: yet she actually did a pretty darn good interview, maybe
10:50
Speaker 1: almost by accident. There are a lot of Trump fans
10:53
Speaker 1: who think this might be his worst interview as president
10:57
Speaker 1: for a whole lot of different reasons. But I'll give
11:00
Speaker 1: Laura Ingram a little bit of credit where she does
11:02
Speaker 1: push back against Trump on some of this stuff, specifically
11:06
Speaker 1: the fifty year mortgage idea. Now I almost feel stupid
11:10
Speaker 1: even bothering to talk about why the fifty year mortgage
11:14
Speaker 1: idea is insane, And I will say that there've even
11:17
Speaker 1: been some MAGA media members who have pushed back pretty strongly.
11:22
Speaker 1: Glenn Beck surprised me by all of a sudden turning
11:25
Speaker 1: into the twenty sixteen version of Glenn Beck and attacking
11:29
Speaker 1: this idea with great ferocity, And I thought he was
11:33
Speaker 1: dead on in his analysis of why it's a horrendous idea.
11:36
Speaker 1: First of all, apparently, according to Politico, this all came
11:39
Speaker 1: about because of basically a ten minute meeting that Trump
11:44
Speaker 1: had where he was handed a poster of FDR and
11:50
Speaker 1: himself under the label great Presidents, and he shared it
11:54
Speaker 1: on social media. Again, I cannot even I cannot emphasize
11:57
Speaker 1: enough how utterly insane it that Trump is comparing himself
12:03
Speaker 1: to FDR, as if FDR is the bastion of great presence,
12:08
Speaker 1: an avowed socialist who completely changed America in that direction.
12:13
Speaker 1: And it was FDR who first proposed the thirty year mortgage,
12:18
Speaker 1: which is currently law as far as the limit for
12:20
Speaker 1: how long a mortgage can go, and now he wants
12:24
Speaker 1: to extend it to fifty years. After no discussion, no vetting,
12:29
Speaker 1: no none of his advisors even knew he was going
12:32
Speaker 1: to do this. He just went off and did it
12:34
Speaker 1: on his own. And you would think you would think that, Okay, well,
12:40
Speaker 1: Trump's a real estate guy, right at least this is
12:43
Speaker 1: an area where Trump himself has expertise. He can handle this,
12:48
Speaker 1: he understands the issues. Well, clearly he does not, because
12:53
Speaker 1: a fifty year mortgage would be asinine on so many
12:56
Speaker 1: different levels. I'll just go through it very quickly. If
12:59
Speaker 1: this ever became law, the first thing that would happen, right,
13:03
Speaker 1: if it became popular and people got duped into buying
13:07
Speaker 1: houses with a fifty year mortgage, you would increase the
13:10
Speaker 1: demand for houses, which would therefore increase the price for
13:13
Speaker 1: everybody trying to buy a house, regardless of how long
13:19
Speaker 1: you wanted your mortgage to be that's number one. So
13:21
Speaker 1: everyone would be negatively impacted. Everyone trying to get into
13:25
Speaker 1: the housing market would be negatively impacted. Maybe the bigger
13:29
Speaker 1: issue is if you decided to get a fifty year mortgage,
13:33
Speaker 1: in the end, it would cost almost twice as much
13:37
Speaker 1: money to finally own your home. And oh, by the way,
13:41
Speaker 1: and Glenn Beck made a great point here, if you
13:45
Speaker 1: have a fifty year mortgage, you got to understand what
13:47
Speaker 1: happens to a house over fifty years. By the end
13:51
Speaker 1: of the fifty years, not only are you probably dead,
13:54
Speaker 1: but it's not really even the same house anymore because
13:57
Speaker 1: you've had to repair all the nuts of the bar
14:00
Speaker 1: and the guts of the thing. So you're paying the
14:04
Speaker 1: bank almost twice as much money for a house that
14:07
Speaker 1: you essentially rebuilt. So it's utterly ridiculous on its face,
14:14
Speaker 1: and you save almost no money in the short run.
14:17
Speaker 1: You save a few pennies in the short run figuratively,
14:20
Speaker 1: but in the long run you get completely screwed. But
14:24
Speaker 1: maybe in my mind, the worst part of this came
14:28
Speaker 1: out during the Laura Ingram questioning. She pushed back on
14:31
Speaker 1: him on this issue, where Trump inadvertently reveals he doesn't
14:36
Speaker 1: even understand what the law currently is. He appears to
14:39
Speaker 1: think that it's forty years, and Laura Ingram has to
14:44
Speaker 1: politely correct him that it's thirty years. And here's what
14:47
Speaker 1: that exchange sounded like on Fox News Channel.
14:50
Speaker 2: Housing costs are still out of reach. And another thing
14:53
Speaker 2: that your administration is trying to tackle many Americans the
14:57
Speaker 2: average age of first time home buyers and now up
14:59
Speaker 2: to age forty, which is sad the country you.
15:02
Speaker 1: And I inherited that.
15:03
Speaker 3: Look, you have to understand, right, But how's you.
15:05
Speaker 2: Get to the Quinn question though? Because your Housing director
15:08
Speaker 2: has proposed something that has enraged your MAGA friends, which
15:12
Speaker 2: is this fifty year mortgage idea, so a significant MAGA backlash,
15:17
Speaker 2: calling it a giveaway to the banks and simply prolonging
15:21
Speaker 2: the time it would take for Americans to own a home. Outright,
15:24
Speaker 2: is that really a good idea?
15:26
Speaker 3: It's not even a big deal. I mean, you know,
15:29
Speaker 3: you go from forty to fifty years, and whatever is
15:32
Speaker 3: is you pay, you pay something less from thirty that
15:35
Speaker 3: some people had a forty and then that now they
15:37
Speaker 3: have a fifty. All it means is you pay less
15:39
Speaker 3: per month you paid over a longer period of time.
15:41
Speaker 3: It's not like a big factor. It might help a
15:44
Speaker 3: little bit. But the problem was that Biden did this.
15:47
Speaker 3: He increased the interest rates, and I have a lousy
15:49
Speaker 3: fed person who's going to be gone in a few months.
15:52
Speaker 1: This could not be a better example of the Emperor's
15:57
Speaker 1: new clothes. That's a metaphor that many people used with Trump.
16:01
Speaker 1: I have used it to me. I think every child
16:04
Speaker 1: ought to learn the story of the Emperor's new Clothes,
16:07
Speaker 1: where the emperor has no clothes and everyone's afraid to
16:10
Speaker 1: call him out. But this was really one of those
16:13
Speaker 1: moments where in an area where Trump is supposed to
16:16
Speaker 1: be an expert, he clearly doesn't have a goddamn clue
16:21
Speaker 1: and he's totally wrong. Now, my guess is this is
16:23
Speaker 1: never going to happen. I think this is probably going
16:27
Speaker 1: to get killed. There's been enough MAGA backlash, and look,
16:32
Speaker 1: I don't think he can do this by executive order.
16:35
Speaker 1: You'd have to get the law changed, and so I
16:38
Speaker 1: just don't see this as happening. I think the intent
16:41
Speaker 1: was to try to do something to spark home ownership,
16:45
Speaker 1: because that's clearly a major issue. I get that this
16:48
Speaker 1: is an issue but this is not the solution in
16:51
Speaker 1: any way, shape or form. And again, bizarrely, kudo's to
16:55
Speaker 1: Laura Ingram for at least pushing back on that just
16:58
Speaker 1: a bit. I then want to talk about this issue
17:00
Speaker 1: of the two thousand dollars tariff dividend to non rich people.
17:06
Speaker 1: I'll talk about class warfare. So I don't know what
17:10
Speaker 1: the definition of rich would be here in theory. And
17:13
Speaker 1: this is regarding the whole idea that, well, we've made
17:17
Speaker 1: all this money on tariffs, and so we're going to
17:20
Speaker 1: give some of that money back to the American people,
17:23
Speaker 1: regardless of whether or not they paid any money because
17:26
Speaker 1: of the increased tariffs. It's just basically gonna be socialism, communism,
17:32
Speaker 1: the government paying money. That's just like they did during COVID.
17:36
Speaker 1: This is right out of the COVID panic playbook where
17:40
Speaker 1: Trump handed out checks to everybody with his name on it.
17:44
Speaker 1: I told you at the time that was going to
17:45
Speaker 1: create a horrendous precedent, and it did. And now here
17:50
Speaker 1: we have Trump deciding, well, we allegedly have all this
17:54
Speaker 1: tariff money. He's greatly exaggerating how much TERRFF money we have.
17:57
Speaker 1: And oh, by the way, we still have a guard
18:00
Speaker 1: Gansuan budget deficits. So this idea that somehow, wow, now
18:05
Speaker 1: we're in surplus so we can give out dimdend checks
18:08
Speaker 1: is just flat out completely and totally wrong. Not to mention,
18:13
Speaker 1: it would be extremely inflationary, which we learned during COVID.
18:17
Speaker 1: And thankfully I don't think this is going to happen.
18:20
Speaker 1: But here was Trump at the White House trying to
18:25
Speaker 1: pitch his idea of two thousand dollars in a tear
18:29
Speaker 1: off dimitant for every non rich American.
18:32
Speaker 4: We're going to issue a dividend to our middle income
18:36
Speaker 4: people and lower income people of about two thousand dollars,
18:39
Speaker 4: and we're going to use the remaining tariffs to lower
18:42
Speaker 4: our debt. We're going to be lowering our debt, which
18:44
Speaker 4: is a national security thing. So we were doing a
18:47
Speaker 4: lot of good work, and the numbers were reported so incorrectly.
18:51
Speaker 4: The real numbers are trillions of dollars have been taken
18:54
Speaker 4: in or have gotten in terms of investment from the tariffs.
18:59
Speaker 4: And you know, if that were ever reversed, it would
19:01
Speaker 4: be a disaster. Frankly, it would be a national security
19:04
Speaker 4: problem for our country. And nobody thinks it's going to
19:07
Speaker 4: be reversed. I think we had a very good court case.
19:09
Speaker 4: As you know, it's before the Supreme Court right now.
19:12
Speaker 4: But if that were ever reversed, you know, people are saying, oh,
19:14
Speaker 4: it's a billion dollars. Some people said, oh, it's stupid here. Well,
19:18
Speaker 4: that obviously we can handle very easily. But this is
19:21
Speaker 4: trillions of dollars we're talking about in terms of the
19:24
Speaker 4: tariff income and all the investment income that's come into
19:27
Speaker 4: our country.
19:27
Speaker 1: You know, now, not only is this really bad economics
19:31
Speaker 1: because of the inflation influtionary element of it, and because
19:36
Speaker 1: of the fact that it increases the depthit dramatically, iyban
19:39
Speaker 1: two thousand dollars for every non rich person in America.
19:42
Speaker 1: It's just a staggering amount of money that we clearly
19:45
Speaker 1: do not have. But there's also the element of this
19:48
Speaker 1: coming right on the heels of the teriff issue coming
19:52
Speaker 1: before the US Supreme Court, and it was very clear
19:56
Speaker 1: that at least two of the so called conservative justice
20:00
Speaker 1: Roberts and Barrett, we're having none of the Trump lawyer's
20:04
Speaker 1: arguments on this and appear to be ready to invalidate
20:09
Speaker 1: Trump's tariffs something he's simultaneously. This is just so crazy.
20:15
Speaker 1: In any other administration, this would be all anyone would
20:17
Speaker 1: be talking about. But with Trump, it's just par for
20:20
Speaker 1: the course. He's simultaneously talking about giving away two thousand
20:24
Speaker 1: dollars a tariff money while also posting on social media
20:28
Speaker 1: that it would be a catastrophe for the US Supreme
20:31
Speaker 1: Court to invalidate the terriffs because the money would have
20:33
Speaker 1: to be paid back in some way, shape or form.
20:37
Speaker 1: And so you never know. Is Trump just this schizophrenic,
20:41
Speaker 1: is he this incompetent? You know, the old argument over
20:44
Speaker 1: whether he's playing chess or whether he's playing shoots and ladders.
20:48
Speaker 1: You never know with Trump. But I do think it's
20:52
Speaker 1: possible if we try to give Trump some credit here,
20:55
Speaker 1: which I always attempt to do, even sometimes giving him
20:58
Speaker 1: more credit than he deserves, If you try to give
21:01
Speaker 1: him some credit strategically, it seems as if he might
21:05
Speaker 1: be trying to set up a situation where the US
21:08
Speaker 1: Supreme Court prevents the American public from getting two thousand
21:13
Speaker 1: dollars a piece. That would be logical, at least from
21:17
Speaker 1: Trump's perspective. That Trump is freaked out that the US
21:21
Speaker 1: Supreme Court may rule against him here, and he delusionally
21:26
Speaker 1: thinks that this is going to matter to Roberts or Barrett,
21:29
Speaker 1: that somehow, if he makes the argument that we're going
21:32
Speaker 1: to head for an economic catastrophe if the tariffs are invalidated,
21:36
Speaker 1: and oh, by the way, you're going to prevent every
21:40
Speaker 1: non rich American from getting two thousand dollars, that maybe,
21:43
Speaker 1: just maybe that will impact Roberts and Barrett in their
21:47
Speaker 1: decision as to how to rule on the tariff case.
21:51
Speaker 1: In Trump's mind, I guess that makes sense. I don't
21:54
Speaker 1: see how that's going to have any impact at all
21:56
Speaker 1: on Roberts or Barrett. I could be wrong about that,
21:59
Speaker 1: but I just don't see the logic in that. But
22:02
Speaker 1: if you're Trump, I guess I can see. Because Trump
22:05
Speaker 1: thinks that this is the way everybody else acts. Trump
22:07
Speaker 1: thinks he has no principles, So I guess he presumes
22:10
Speaker 1: Roberts and Barrett have no principles and don't give it
22:13
Speaker 1: damn about what their interpretation of the law is. That
22:16
Speaker 1: they're just going to be intimidated either by public pressure
22:20
Speaker 1: or this idea that they're going to send the nation
22:23
Speaker 1: into economic catastrophe or they're going to prevent non rich
22:26
Speaker 1: Americans from getting two thousand dollars. I don't know what
22:28
Speaker 1: it is, but that's the best explanation I could come
22:32
Speaker 1: up with for this incredible dichotomy between Trump at the
22:37
Speaker 1: one on the one hand, talking about how this is
22:40
Speaker 1: going to be a disaster from the terrorist perspective, but
22:42
Speaker 1: also proposing that he's going to give away all this
22:45
Speaker 1: tear off money which may not even exist to every
22:48
Speaker 1: non rich American. And again, the bigger picture is that
22:53
Speaker 1: this is as communistic as a gas. This is the
22:56
Speaker 1: government giving people money we don't have simp I guess
23:01
Speaker 1: to buy public opinion because Trump's approval ratings suck. The
23:06
Speaker 1: Republicans just got crushed in the off year election. We're
23:09
Speaker 1: going to have a midterm election and now just less
23:12
Speaker 1: than the year, and Trump's got to do something to
23:15
Speaker 1: turn the economy around, at least the perception of the
23:18
Speaker 1: economy around. And unfortunately, in Trump's world, since he's not
23:22
Speaker 1: a conservative and he's acting like a communist, the best
23:25
Speaker 1: and most efficient way to do that is just to
23:27
Speaker 1: pay people, even with money we don't have. And then
23:31
Speaker 1: there's the issue of speaking of communism, Trump being supportive
23:36
Speaker 1: of six hundred thousand Chinese students being allowed to come
23:42
Speaker 1: into America to attend American universities, based upon the idea
23:46
Speaker 1: that if we don't do that, American universities, some of
23:49
Speaker 1: these elite, woke schools will be in big trouble economically.
23:53
Speaker 1: This seemingly horrified Laura Ingram in her interview with Trump.
23:59
Speaker 1: And here's what that sounded like.
24:01
Speaker 2: Folks are not thrilled about this idea of hundreds of
24:04
Speaker 2: thousands of foreign students in the United States. We have
24:07
Speaker 2: about three hundred and fifty thousand Chinese. One point during
24:10
Speaker 2: COVID you were going to, you know, push to get.
24:12
Speaker 1: Them out, but that was pulled back.
24:15
Speaker 2: You've said as many as six hundred thousand Chinese students
24:17
Speaker 2: could come to the United States. Why, sir, is that
24:20
Speaker 2: a pro maga position when so many American kids want
24:24
Speaker 2: to go to school and there are places not for them,
24:27
Speaker 2: and these universities are getting rich off Chinese money.
24:30
Speaker 3: Sure, never said about China, but we do have a
24:33
Speaker 3: lot of people coming in from China. We always have
24:36
Speaker 3: China and other countries. We also have a massive system
24:40
Speaker 3: of colleges and universities. And if we were to cut
24:43
Speaker 3: that in half, which perhaps makes some people happy, you
24:46
Speaker 3: would have half the colleges in the United States school
24:49
Speaker 3: out of business. Oh well, I think that's a big deal, are.
24:52
Speaker 4: They You would have the the United.
24:54
Speaker 3: States, Yeah, but you would have as you know, historically
24:57
Speaker 3: black colleges and universities would all be out of business.
25:00
Speaker 3: That you would have a system of colleges and universities.
25:08
Speaker 3: But I think it's good to have. I actually think
25:10
Speaker 3: it's good to have outside countries. Look, I want to
25:14
Speaker 3: be able to get along with the.
25:15
Speaker 1: Word, not the French.
25:16
Speaker 2: They're the Chinese. They spy on us, they steal our
25:18
Speaker 2: intellectual problem.
25:19
Speaker 3: Where do you think the French are better?
25:20
Speaker 1: Yeah?
25:21
Speaker 3: Really, I'll tell you, I'm not so sure. We've had
25:23
Speaker 3: a lot of problems with the French where we get
25:26
Speaker 3: taxed very unfairly on our technology with you know, they
25:29
Speaker 3: put twenty five percent taxes on American products. Look, assuming
25:34
Speaker 3: everyone treats us badly, because that's the way I am.
25:36
Speaker 3: But we take in trillions of dollars from students. You know,
25:41
Speaker 3: the students pay more than double when they come in
25:44
Speaker 3: from most foreign countries. I want to see our school
25:48
Speaker 3: system thrive, but at the same time, I want to
25:51
Speaker 3: be I know you and I disagree. We're never going
25:52
Speaker 3: to agree on But that's okay. And it's not that
25:54
Speaker 3: I want them, but I viewed.
25:56
Speaker 1: As a business.
25:57
Speaker 3: We have millions and millions of people. Also, I want
26:01
Speaker 3: to get along with countries if possible. You know, people
26:03
Speaker 3: are shocked. Remember Hillary Clinton.
26:05
Speaker 1: Said will be in a war.
26:06
Speaker 3: I stopped eight wars in the last nine months. I
26:10
Speaker 3: don't want to be in worse.
26:12
Speaker 1: If I am in a war, We're going.
26:13
Speaker 3: To win the thing fast and it'll be violent. But
26:16
Speaker 3: I don't want to be in worse. But one thing,
26:19
Speaker 3: you don't want to cut half of the people, half
26:21
Speaker 3: of the students from all over the world that are
26:24
Speaker 3: coming into our country, destroy our entire university and college system.
26:29
Speaker 1: I don't want to do that.
26:30
Speaker 3: And don't forget Mega was my idea. Maga was nobody
26:33
Speaker 3: else's idea. I know what Mega wants better than anybody else,
26:36
Speaker 3: and Maga wants to see our country thrive.
26:39
Speaker 1: Now it's hard to dessert what the most telling moment
26:43
Speaker 1: of that clip was. First of all, there's the idea. Hey, look,
26:47
Speaker 1: I'm Maga. I'm the one who determines what's maga and
26:51
Speaker 1: what's not. In other words, I'm the king buzz off
26:55
Speaker 1: that was rather telling. But it's just remarkable how this,
27:00
Speaker 1: you know, this warrior against wokeism allegedly who has talked
27:05
Speaker 1: a really good game when it comes to attacking the
27:09
Speaker 1: woke universities and the elite colleges, that somehow that would
27:15
Speaker 1: be problematic. See Laura Ingram says, wait a minute, so
27:18
Speaker 1: what so what if these elite schools end up being
27:22
Speaker 1: in economic trouble? I mean, first of all, most of
27:25
Speaker 1: these elite schools have endowments that are absolutely acidine. I mean,
27:31
Speaker 1: they're not even really schools anymore. They're hedge funds with
27:34
Speaker 1: classrooms and football stadiums. That's basically all they are. And
27:40
Speaker 1: so yeah, it might put a strain on them economically,
27:44
Speaker 1: But so what. I'm one hundred percent with Laura Ingram,
27:48
Speaker 1: especially if you really believe, as I do, that they
27:52
Speaker 1: as an institution are detrimental to America. And I believe most,
27:58
Speaker 1: if not all, elite academic institutions are currently And so
28:03
Speaker 1: this was really an incredibly telling moment. I don't know
28:06
Speaker 1: what's motivating Trump here, I really don't it. I mean, again,
28:11
Speaker 1: if this was a democratic president making this exact same argument,
28:16
Speaker 1: MAGA would be rightfully having a fit. But because it's
28:20
Speaker 1: Trump and he's the one who's in charge. He's the
28:23
Speaker 1: godlike figure, he's the cult leader, and he says, look,
28:27
Speaker 1: I decide what's mecca. And it doesn't matter that Laura
28:32
Speaker 1: Ingram is sitting there horrified at a huge Trump supporter
28:35
Speaker 1: from Fox Newschelle. You would think she would have some
28:38
Speaker 1: street cred on this. By the way, similar to this,
28:41
Speaker 1: I'm not gonna play the clip, but Trump defended expansion
28:45
Speaker 1: of the visa program because he said that American workers
28:50
Speaker 1: aren't good enough. We need foreign workers. By the way,
28:53
Speaker 1: he even used the word you, not us when referencing
28:58
Speaker 1: to Laura Ingram the issue of American workers. You don't
29:02
Speaker 1: have those kind of good workers, basically making it sound
29:06
Speaker 1: like America's a shithole country with a bunch of morons,
29:10
Speaker 1: which I kind of understand where he's coming groups, especially
29:13
Speaker 1: given the nature of his cult like base. But I digress.
29:17
Speaker 1: I mean, this is just unbelievable. This is an incredible
29:22
Speaker 1: betrayal of the MAGA base and alleged MAGA principles, whatever
29:26
Speaker 1: the hell they are. And from the standpoint of this
29:29
Speaker 1: fight against wokeism and elite academic institutions, the most confusing
29:35
Speaker 1: part about this to me is that, and I have
29:38
Speaker 1: been supportive of Trump on this, some of the things
29:40
Speaker 1: Trump's doing by threatening to withhold federal funding is having
29:46
Speaker 1: an impact. He seemingly has elite academia on the run.
29:51
Speaker 1: There was remarkable evidence of that this past weekend on
29:56
Speaker 1: sixty Minutes when they interviewed a Harvard professor by the
30:00
Speaker 1: name was Stephen Pinker, who fully acknowledged on sixty Minutes
30:06
Speaker 1: he doesn't get more mainstream media than that that Harvard
30:10
Speaker 1: had gone too far to the left and had basically
30:14
Speaker 1: censored right wing voices, and that they needed more conservative
30:18
Speaker 1: perspectives for academic balance. And here's what that sounded like.
30:24
Speaker 5: Harvard and the federal government have been in settlement talks
30:27
Speaker 5: for months, and in a statement, the Department of Education
30:31
Speaker 5: told us the Trump administration is actively working toward a
30:35
Speaker 5: deal with Harvard that holds them accountable for egregious civil
30:39
Speaker 5: rights violations and discrimination on campus, while restoring generous taxpayer
30:44
Speaker 5: dollar support to the institution. Harvard, in turn says it's
30:49
Speaker 5: working to improve existing programs promoting ideological diversity.
30:54
Speaker 6: Harvard has not done enough to ensure a wide range
30:57
Speaker 6: of opinions being represented on campus.
31:00
Speaker 5: Harvard psychology professor Stephen Pinker has been a member of
31:04
Speaker 5: the faculty for twenty two years and has been outspoken
31:08
Speaker 5: about what he says is liberal bias on campus. In
31:11
Speaker 5: your estimation, where has Harvard gone wrong?
31:15
Speaker 6: I think there have been too many incidents in which
31:17
Speaker 6: someone has expressed a controversial opinion and has been shamed
31:22
Speaker 6: or canceled.
31:23
Speaker 7: President Trump has described Harvard as a liberal mess, that
31:28
Speaker 7: it has been hiring almost all woke, radical left idiots
31:32
Speaker 7: and bird breed. Yes, the language is what is a
31:36
Speaker 7: bit harsh, But does he have a point here?
31:39
Speaker 6: Not there? No, I do not agree with that. I
31:42
Speaker 6: think there's a grain of truth in that. I think
31:44
Speaker 6: it's the grain of truth. I think there should be
31:46
Speaker 6: more voices on the right at Harvard. I don't want
31:49
Speaker 6: Donald Trump to decide who those people are going to
31:52
Speaker 6: be or how many we should have.
31:54
Speaker 7: You do have the president, and you have lots of
31:56
Speaker 7: supporters of the President who say we don't like what.
31:58
Speaker 6: They're doing there at Harvard.
32:00
Speaker 7: So why should my text dollars go to support its research?
32:04
Speaker 6: Do you want Alzheimer's to be cured? Do you want
32:06
Speaker 6: to have cancer treatments for kids? Do you want treatments
32:09
Speaker 6: for people with paralysis?
32:13
Speaker 1: So I really baffled by why Trump seems to be
32:18
Speaker 1: waving the white flag here or not tightening the screws
32:22
Speaker 1: further when it comes to this issue of six hundred
32:25
Speaker 1: thousand Chinese communists coming into elite American institutions. There's got
32:31
Speaker 1: to be something that I don't know about or that
32:33
Speaker 1: we don't know about that is motivating Trump here because
32:37
Speaker 1: he's clearly going to get blowback from his magabase and
32:40
Speaker 1: as I said, he already did from Laura Ingram, and
32:43
Speaker 1: he's got he's winning this battle. He's winning this battle. Maybe,
32:48
Speaker 1: as I try to figure out, okay, maybe this is
32:50
Speaker 1: all part of a negotiation that he's having with these
32:53
Speaker 1: schools that he's got to give in on the six
32:57
Speaker 1: hundred thousand Chinese students, but maybe he'll get something else
33:00
Speaker 1: in return. I'm never confident that he's going to actually
33:03
Speaker 1: pull off the deal like he claims that he is.
33:06
Speaker 1: You know, the guy wrote the book The Art of
33:08
Speaker 1: the Deal has never done a whold a lot of
33:10
Speaker 1: really great deals in my opinion. But maybe if I
33:13
Speaker 1: give him the benefit of doubt that this is all
33:15
Speaker 1: part of a plan. But to me, it feels like
33:19
Speaker 1: he's got the ball on the five yard line and
33:23
Speaker 1: he's punted. That's what it feels like when it comes
33:26
Speaker 1: to the battle against woke academia. But maybe the moment
33:30
Speaker 1: and I realize I'm in a very very very small
33:33
Speaker 1: minority here, But maybe the moment that infuriated me the
33:37
Speaker 1: most over the past week regarding Donald Trump happened when
33:42
Speaker 1: he attended an NFL football game in Washington, DC. It's
33:46
Speaker 1: actually outside Washington, DC. It was a Washington Commander's game.
33:50
Speaker 1: He was there as a part I guess of Veterans
33:53
Speaker 1: Day weekend. He was administering an oath to new members
33:58
Speaker 1: of the military.
33:59
Speaker 8: By the way, he got profoundly, profoundly booed, which is
34:04
Speaker 8: not a big surprise given the fact that he was
34:07
Speaker 8: a game in the Washington DC area, where he is
34:11
Speaker 8: extremely unpopular, especially with the government.
34:14
Speaker 1: Shutdown going on. But I forget about the booing. The
34:18
Speaker 1: part that really legitimately infuriated me was he was invited
34:25
Speaker 1: into the booth to be part of the Fox broadcast
34:30
Speaker 1: of the Washington Commander's game. Now you probably recall that
34:34
Speaker 1: on multiple occasions we have talked on this podcast about
34:38
Speaker 1: how Trump has unique leverage when it comes to the
34:42
Speaker 1: Washington Commander's football team because they want to move their
34:46
Speaker 1: stadium from outside Washington, d C. To back into Washington,
34:51
Speaker 1: d C on the side of the old RFK Stadium,
34:53
Speaker 1: which happens to be in part on federal land. So
34:57
Speaker 1: Trump has leverage over the washingt Commanders, and I had
35:01
Speaker 1: been urging for a long time him to try to
35:04
Speaker 1: use this leverage to get the Commanders to restore their
35:08
Speaker 1: nickname to what it ought to be, what God intended,
35:11
Speaker 1: which is the Washington Redskins, never thinking that that was
35:15
Speaker 1: really going to go anywhere, because I didn't think that Trump,
35:18
Speaker 1: even though some members of the conservative media had asked
35:21
Speaker 1: him about this. We played the clips on this podcast,
35:24
Speaker 1: it didn't seem like Trump got it. That he was
35:27
Speaker 1: philosophically not in favor of the Commanders, but he didn't
35:30
Speaker 1: really believe in the whole Redskins thing, and he hadn't
35:33
Speaker 1: put all the pieces together in his tiny little mind.
35:36
Speaker 1: And then all of a sudden, out of nowhere, he
35:39
Speaker 1: made a couple of social media posts where he made
35:42
Speaker 1: a big deal out of the Redskins issue and seemed
35:44
Speaker 1: to finally get it and seemed to indicate that he
35:47
Speaker 1: was going to do what it took to try to
35:49
Speaker 1: get the Washington Commanders to change their name back to
35:53
Speaker 1: the Washington Redskins. Now, I said at the time, I
35:56
Speaker 1: did not believe that Trump would have the four to
35:59
Speaker 1: two dude to take this all the way into the
36:02
Speaker 1: end zone. I think I said it was a thirty
36:04
Speaker 1: percent chance that he would actually take this fight all
36:07
Speaker 1: the way. I even had a disagreement with my former
36:10
Speaker 1: co host on this podcast, Liz Abebe, who now works
36:13
Speaker 1: for the Trump administration fairly closely to Trump has I
36:18
Speaker 1: don't know if she has interaction with him, but certainly
36:20
Speaker 1: she has an interaction with a lot of top people,
36:23
Speaker 1: and she was very confident, now living in Washington, DC,
36:27
Speaker 1: that Trump was going to succeed, that the Redskins thing
36:30
Speaker 1: was a done deal. I think was basically she told me,
36:33
Speaker 1: and I told her she was wrong, that this was
36:35
Speaker 1: never going to happen, that Trump wouldn't follow it all
36:38
Speaker 1: the way through. And so since that time, we've heard
36:41
Speaker 1: nothing about the Redskins name. But now we have a
36:45
Speaker 1: very unique situation. We have Trump being the first president
36:49
Speaker 1: to attend an NFL football game since nineteen seventy eight,
36:54
Speaker 1: first time maybe ever, because I don't think that Jimmy
36:58
Speaker 1: Carter when he was president nineteen six. I could be
37:00
Speaker 1: wrong about this, but I have no recollection of him
37:02
Speaker 1: actually being in the booth during that game. So essentially,
37:06
Speaker 1: for the first time in modern history, we have a
37:09
Speaker 1: US president in the booth for eight minutes live during
37:16
Speaker 1: not just an NFL football game. By the way, if
37:19
Speaker 1: he was at any NFL football game, it would be
37:21
Speaker 1: relevant to bring up the Redskins game. But he's at
37:23
Speaker 1: a Washington Commander's football game, and I'm like, Okay, is
37:29
Speaker 1: he even going to bring this up? Because this is
37:31
Speaker 1: the perfect time. Not only did Trump not bring this up,
37:37
Speaker 1: he clearly resisted multiple opportunities where it would have been
37:44
Speaker 1: completely and totally not just appropriate, but in my opinion,
37:49
Speaker 1: imperative that he brings up the Redskins name. The Fox
37:55
Speaker 1: play by play announcer incorrectly referenced the Commanders as having
38:04
Speaker 1: won multiple Super Bowls in their Washington history. Well that's
38:09
Speaker 1: not true. The Commanders have never won anything close to
38:12
Speaker 1: a Super Bowl. It was the Redskins that won a
38:15
Speaker 1: super multiple Super Bowls, and Trump said nothing. Then Trump
38:21
Speaker 1: references past great red skin coaches, specifically George Allen and
38:28
Speaker 1: Joe Gibbs, without ever even uttering the word redskins. He
38:33
Speaker 1: didn't have to bring up the red skin issue, although
38:36
Speaker 1: I certainly would have with one thousand percent certainty, But
38:41
Speaker 1: Trump doesn't even It seems like he was going out
38:43
Speaker 1: of his way not to bring up the red skin issue.
38:47
Speaker 1: Fox was almost inviting him to bring up the red
38:51
Speaker 1: skin issue, and Trump didn't do it at all. In fact,
38:56
Speaker 1: Trump was so oblivious to everything that was going on.
39:00
Speaker 1: The Color analyst and I'm actually surprised that this didn't
39:04
Speaker 1: get from from what I can tell, more attention online.
39:08
Speaker 1: But the Fox analyst, not once but twice, basically mocked
39:14
Speaker 1: Trump during this eight minute interview in the booth by
39:19
Speaker 1: using the six' seven. Meme, now if you don't know
39:24
Speaker 1: what six', seven is you clearly don't have young KIDS like.
39:28
Speaker 1: I do but the biggest thing in middle schools this,
39:31
Speaker 1: entire year and, IT'S huge, i mean it might be
39:34
Speaker 1: the biggest meme of. All time is this idea of
39:37
Speaker 1: whatever the words or the numbers six seven, get used everyone.
39:42
Speaker 1: Goes bananas and on two occasions the analyst used six'
39:48
Speaker 1: seven clearly, referencing The meme and trump had no idea
39:54
Speaker 1: what he. Was talking about trump has to be the
39:57
Speaker 1: Last media consuming american who has no idea whatsoever what. Six.
40:03
Speaker 1: Seven is now no one knows, what it means but
40:06
Speaker 1: most people at least know that. It's a thing trump
40:09
Speaker 1: didn't know that. It's A thing and i didn't see
40:12
Speaker 1: as Much mockery of trump OVER that as I expected
40:15
Speaker 1: once i, Saw the clip but that paled in comparison
40:18
Speaker 1: to Me to what trump did not Do. Regarding the,
40:22
Speaker 1: Redskins to me trump. Completely wimped out trump. Is a
40:29
Speaker 1: fraud trump at his core is. A fucking pussy that's
40:33
Speaker 1: what pisces me off. More than anything he pretends to
40:37
Speaker 1: be this great warrior against wokeism, and political correctness and
40:43
Speaker 1: you know that's in all of, his is, persona the
40:46
Speaker 1: imagery even, the you know the, social media, posts c
40:50
Speaker 1: megs and it's. All a facade it's. All a fraud.
40:56
Speaker 1: He's a wimp. He wimped out he did. Have the
41:01
Speaker 1: balls that. Was the moment and, BY the way i
41:04
Speaker 1: should be POINTING out that espn had reported just a
41:08
Speaker 1: few days before This appearance that trump has Said he
41:13
Speaker 1: wanted washington to name the. Stadium after. Him, after him
41:22
Speaker 1: now it's impossible to know the truthfulness. OF that story espn.
41:28
Speaker 1: Had multiple sources it Certainly. Sounds like trump there's been
41:32
Speaker 1: no real. Confirmation of that but if, that is true
41:37
Speaker 1: now all, of a sudden we have an explanation in
41:41
Speaker 1: Theory for why trump so completely whimped out on. The
41:46
Speaker 1: redskin issue is he playing ball Because he thinks washington
41:53
Speaker 1: may name the. Stadium after him there's no chance they're,
41:56
Speaker 1: gonna do that but it Only matters that trump thinks.
41:59
Speaker 1: That they might And so is trump playing ball for?
42:04
Speaker 1: His own purposes is he selling out the red skin issue,
42:09
Speaker 1: because he thinks or once or Dreams that a washington
42:14
Speaker 1: football stadium is gonna Be Named. FOR donald trump i
42:18
Speaker 1: just don't think there's any way. That's GONNA happen the
42:20
Speaker 1: nfl has made it very clear for a long time
42:24
Speaker 1: ago they Have Disdained. For donald trump that's why he
42:29
Speaker 1: was INVOLVED. IN the, usfl i mean there's a long
42:33
Speaker 1: Standing feud between TRUMP, and the nfl and there's No, WAY,
42:37
Speaker 1: in washington dc the commanders are gonna name their stadium
42:42
Speaker 1: for a guy who's going to be out of office
42:43
Speaker 1: in a, couple of years who the vast majority of
42:47
Speaker 1: the residents of their city and their fan base hates that's.
42:50
Speaker 1: Not gonna Happen but does trump really think, That that's
42:54
Speaker 1: possible and is that why he's Completely Abandoned the. RED
42:58
Speaker 1: skin issue. I don't know my gut tells me it's
43:01
Speaker 1: actually just because, he's a pussy because he had his
43:03
Speaker 1: moment and. He blew it there will never be. A
43:07
Speaker 1: greater moment, by the way even if you could never
43:10
Speaker 1: actually Win on the redskins name issue from, a principal
43:15
Speaker 1: standpoint if you really believe in it and you really
43:19
Speaker 1: are a. Warrior against wokeism when the play by play
43:22
Speaker 1: announcer Says that the commanders have a great history and
43:26
Speaker 1: Have Won, several super, bowls, you go. No they haven't
43:30
Speaker 1: they haven't Won. Any Super Bowls the washington Redskins Won.
43:35
Speaker 1: Multiple Super bowls joe Gibbs Won. Multiple Super bowls george
43:41
Speaker 1: allen Went To a super Bowl as, a redskin Coach Just.
43:45
Speaker 1: LIKE joe, GIBBS i, mean i mean anybody would Say
43:49
Speaker 1: that if and, by the way this. IS a guy.
43:53
Speaker 1: I love this this is my favorite part of what
43:55
Speaker 1: was an incredibly infuriating moment FOR me is i think
43:58
Speaker 1: you can already tell about this, On SOCIAL media and
44:02
Speaker 1: I had many trump fans seemingly seriously Tell me that
44:06
Speaker 1: trump was actually using good decorum and that this was
44:11
Speaker 1: not the appropriate time in place for him to bring. Up,
44:14
Speaker 1: the issue Yes Because if donald trump is, about nothing
44:19
Speaker 1: else he's about decorum and picking the appropriate time in
44:25
Speaker 1: place to say things and not doing anything that might,
44:28
Speaker 1: disrupt you know generally. Accepted good behavior that's Really what's
44:34
Speaker 1: All trump and trump. Is all, about, Come on people
44:38
Speaker 1: his entire persona, is about, being you know the bull in,
44:42
Speaker 1: the china shop and here the. Bull was castrated the
44:46
Speaker 1: bull has no. Balls at all the bull. Is a
44:49
Speaker 1: pussy the bull's. Not A bull donald trump is a complete.
44:54
Speaker 1: And total fraud we've, always known this but when you see,
44:57
Speaker 1: it in action and you see it actually ending, the
45:01
Speaker 1: last chance this golden opportunity to reverse this Horrendous moment
45:05
Speaker 1: in american history where somehow we all DECIDED, with the
45:11
Speaker 1: nfl decided to screw over one of, their great franchises,
45:16
Speaker 1: not to mention piss Off Millions of native americans who
45:20
Speaker 1: actually Liked the nickname redskins for. NO purpose, WHATSOEVER i
45:25
Speaker 1: mean i don't even know who. They were placating nobody
45:28
Speaker 1: was actually pleased except, for you know white female liberals
45:32
Speaker 1: who aren't even football fans. To begin with that we
45:34
Speaker 1: got rid of The redskins and trump goes down without. Even,
45:38
Speaker 1: a fight again Part of why i'm making a big
45:43
Speaker 1: deal about this is he. Posted about it trump did.
45:46
Speaker 1: On multiple occasions and when it came time to stand,
45:51
Speaker 1: up and, actually you know take the FIGHT, to the
45:55
Speaker 1: nfl take The fight the fox in, A perfect opportunity
46:00
Speaker 1: trump didn't even, come up tiny he. Didn't even exist
46:05
Speaker 1: he revealed himself as a complete fraud. And a Pussy
46:09
Speaker 1: That's who. Donald TRUMP is and i realized to some
46:12
Speaker 1: people that why is this so big a? Deal to?
46:15
Speaker 1: YOU to me i do think the redskin. ISSUE matters
46:18
Speaker 1: symbolically i think it's way more significant than. Most people
46:21
Speaker 1: understand but it's Mostly about who, trump really is because
46:25
Speaker 1: if he's wimping, out on this what else is he?
46:28
Speaker 1: Wimping out on in, very dramatic ways he IS not,
46:32
Speaker 1: A pc WARRIOR he's. A pc wossy and this is,
46:37
Speaker 1: HAVING an, impact i, think in. Many many ways and
46:41
Speaker 1: we've already seen it this week in many Other topics
46:43
Speaker 1: that i've already gotten into details on, NOW as otherways
46:48
Speaker 1: i still try to Be, fair to TRUMP even though
46:51
Speaker 1: i have disdain for him in a very, very deep
46:55
Speaker 1: way especially this week for All the reasons, i've Already
46:58
Speaker 1: stated and I'm gonna defend trump one more time when
47:02
Speaker 1: it comes to a story that exploded just before we
47:06
Speaker 1: started to tape this episode, of the podcast and That
47:09
Speaker 1: is that, democrats now think or at least are pretending
47:14
Speaker 1: That they have trump Implicated In the jeffrey epstein scandal
47:19
Speaker 1: because They have released democrats have three Different Emails involving jeffrey,
47:26
Speaker 1: epstein that appear at least in their minds To Implicate
47:32
Speaker 1: somehow Donald trump. In, epstein's, crimes now look my view
47:39
Speaker 1: on this has. Been very clear. Epstein was guilty epstein killed.
47:43
Speaker 1: Himself in prison the story has gotten completely out of
47:46
Speaker 1: control because of a perfect. STORM of circumstances i don't
47:50
Speaker 1: believe there was any massive. Sex trafficking organization i'm not
47:54
Speaker 1: even sure, That His, companion glene maxwell who's in, a
47:58
Speaker 1: federal prison. WAS actually guilty i know she didn't get.
48:01
Speaker 1: A fair Trial i know prince Formerly Known as prince
48:05
Speaker 1: andrew Now just regular andrew is, almost certainly innocent which
48:10
Speaker 1: is why he was never. Charged with anything the story
48:12
Speaker 1: has gotten completely out of control For reasons that i've
48:16
Speaker 1: talked about many many times, in the Past and so
48:20
Speaker 1: democrats understand that this is an. Extremely combustible environment they
48:24
Speaker 1: know anything new or quote unquote new With regard to
48:28
Speaker 1: epstein They can Connect epstein to trump is going to
48:32
Speaker 1: get massive amounts of attention, and media coverage which IS
48:36
Speaker 1: partially why I have said i Don't think, the epstein
48:39
Speaker 1: files to whatever, extent they exist should even ever be
48:42
Speaker 1: made public because people are going to misinterpret. What's in
48:47
Speaker 1: there it's, nuclear powered now and people that are totally
48:52
Speaker 1: innocent are going to have. Their lives destroyed well we
48:55
Speaker 1: saw evidence of. That this morning when these three emails
48:59
Speaker 1: are over several years, period of time we're released, with
49:03
Speaker 1: no context no chain Whatsoever that are epstein. In an
49:10
Speaker 1: exchange one of the Exchanges Is, with michael wolfe who
49:16
Speaker 1: is an ALLEGED journalist that i have never had. ANY
49:19
Speaker 1: trust For I think michael wolfe is is as sketchy
49:24
Speaker 1: as it gets when it comes to a, so called journalist,
49:26
Speaker 1: A book author he's written A, lot about, TRUMP you,
49:30
Speaker 1: know i mean the, media loves him especially when He.
49:33
Speaker 1: Goes after trump, but TO me when i looked, at
49:36
Speaker 1: these emails maybe the most significant thing is that we
49:40
Speaker 1: now Have Proved that michael wolfe Is Essentially advising jeffrey
49:46
Speaker 1: epstein back in twenty fifteen about How To, manipulate donald
49:52
Speaker 1: trump because in twenty fifteen he was running For president
49:55
Speaker 1: and epstein was facing these allegations, and you know you
50:00
Speaker 1: might Be able to, i'm paraphrasing here you might be
50:03
Speaker 1: able to manipulate Your relationship with trump if he gets
50:06
Speaker 1: elected to help. You, out here now that's completely and
50:11
Speaker 1: totally inappropriate for. An alleged journalist this is right Out
50:15
Speaker 1: Of the, sarah gannam playbook maybe even worse in some
50:19
Speaker 1: Ways From The Penn State Joe paternal, jerry sedusky scandal
50:22
Speaker 1: where the woman Who Got the pulitzer prize is essentially
50:25
Speaker 1: recruiting accusers and accusers' parents during a critical moment. In
50:31
Speaker 1: THAT investigation, But i digress michael wolf, Is a scumbag
50:35
Speaker 1: AND so when i look at this from, a journalistic
50:38
Speaker 1: perspective that's the real headline from, this these, email these
50:42
Speaker 1: emails that got Released by the Democrats in The. House
50:46
Speaker 1: of representatives but With regard To, Epstein, And trump yeah Epstein,
50:53
Speaker 1: refers to trump and He refers to trump in a rather.
50:57
Speaker 1: Vague WAY away and i even got manipulated by the
51:02
Speaker 1: way that the emails GOT released because i woke up
51:07
Speaker 1: at six point thirty, in THE morning like, I normally Do,
51:10
Speaker 1: i CHECK twitter and i See that the democrats have,
51:13
Speaker 1: released These emails and i'm, reading the emails and two
51:17
Speaker 1: Of them have epstein seemingly use the word victim. In capital,
51:24
Speaker 1: letters i'm like how does that make? Any goddamn Sense
51:27
Speaker 1: why would epstein be using the word victim? In capital
51:31
Speaker 1: letters AND stupidly because i didn't look at, it carefully
51:35
Speaker 1: enough and it's. Not made clear it's definitely. Not MADE
51:38
Speaker 1: clear and i think this is. Done on purpose by
51:41
Speaker 1: The way the democrats. Release the email epstein does not
51:45
Speaker 1: use the word victim in capital. Letters or otherwise he,
51:49
Speaker 1: uses somebody's name but we don't know, that person's name
51:53
Speaker 1: and so they redacted that person's name and they put
51:56
Speaker 1: in the word victim. In, capital letters well we have
52:00
Speaker 1: no idea. What that means on what basis are they using,
52:07
Speaker 1: the word victim who is it and why is? That being,
52:10
Speaker 1: Redacted you know i've talked about this, many many times
52:13
Speaker 1: where this whole idea that we must protect the identity
52:18
Speaker 1: of accusers even when they are, adults in very very
52:22
Speaker 1: high profile and serious situations where people's freedoms are on
52:27
Speaker 1: the line or the reputations, on the line is. Just,
52:29
Speaker 1: totally absurd okay you can't evaluate the nature of an
52:36
Speaker 1: allegation or, in this case the context of an email
52:39
Speaker 1: Without knowing who. Epstein's referring to so we're just supposed
52:43
Speaker 1: To trust the democrats that this person is a quote
52:47
Speaker 1: Unquote victim when epstein never even. WENT to, trial i
52:54
Speaker 1: mean who knows what who? That PERSON is and i
52:58
Speaker 1: will acknowledge that at least one of the emails is
53:02
Speaker 1: Odd in that Epstein, refers to trump although you could
53:06
Speaker 1: argue that he's actually making The case that trump was
53:11
Speaker 1: trying to get him to, knock it off because He
53:13
Speaker 1: says that Trump Essentially told glene maxwell. To stop it
53:19
Speaker 1: so in, a weird way That's Exculpatory. For donald trump
53:23
Speaker 1: i've Never Believed that donald trump had anything to do
53:26
Speaker 1: with the Crimes Committed. By jeffrey epstein none of the
53:29
Speaker 1: Accusers in the epstein case have ever said anything but
53:32
Speaker 1: Positive Things. About Donald Trump, even virginia jeoffrey who just
53:37
Speaker 1: killed herself and then, released this book even though she
53:41
Speaker 1: claims to have been trafficked Out Of, mar a lago
53:44
Speaker 1: she had very nice things To Say about donald trump,
53:48
Speaker 1: in her book which never made any. Sense to me
53:50
Speaker 1: but THAT'S the. Fact, i mean so none of these
53:52
Speaker 1: accusers have ever been on the record saying Anything Negative.
53:55
Speaker 1: About donald, trump in fact they've only. Said positive things
53:59
Speaker 1: so here we have these VAGUE emails where i don't
54:04
Speaker 1: Even understand what. EPSTEIN is saying i acknowledge. That they
54:08
Speaker 1: were they are certainly weird enough, to warrant questioning Questioning,
54:14
Speaker 1: maybe of Trump. Ideally of epstein, But guess what. Epstein
54:19
Speaker 1: is dead, SO you know i go through this, every
54:25
Speaker 1: single time Not, just with epstein but other cases similar
54:29
Speaker 1: and especially in situations. Where They're Suicide and virginia geoffrey
54:33
Speaker 1: is a really good example of this with. Their new book,
54:36
Speaker 1: that's you know the media has been touting as if,
54:38
Speaker 1: it's the gospel which. Is completely ridiculous when, someone is
54:43
Speaker 1: dead that means they. Can't, be questioned obviously there used
54:49
Speaker 1: to be a time when the news, media understood this
54:52
Speaker 1: and the, attitude, was basically, well you, know it sucks
54:57
Speaker 1: but we can't question this, person about this therefore we
55:02
Speaker 1: can't give it. Very much credibility but that. Doesn't exist, anymore,
55:07
Speaker 1: in fact weirdly the dead person all of a sudden.
55:10
Speaker 1: Gets INFINITE credibility and i love this part of, this
55:14
Speaker 1: whole story where the obviously incredibly Duplicitous And, corrupt jeffrey
55:21
Speaker 1: epstein all, of a sudden his vague emails are taken,
55:26
Speaker 1: as highly credible like we can interpret them as being
55:30
Speaker 1: obviously truthful his private emails where he's being Advised To
55:36
Speaker 1: manipulate donald trump By Alleged. Journalist MICHAEL wolff so i Don't,
55:41
Speaker 1: understand how epstein who's dead and obviously a corrupt individual,
55:45
Speaker 1: at his core can be taken seriously. As a source
55:49
Speaker 1: the emails, are very vague the word victim being put
55:54
Speaker 1: in there is obviously an attempt that was, successful ON
55:57
Speaker 1: me as i was groggy, in the morning to pretend
56:01
Speaker 1: that the person being referred To is, an epstein victim
56:05
Speaker 1: as if, the implication, there of course and what the
56:08
Speaker 1: reader must Believe is that trump knew that the person,
56:13
Speaker 1: being referred to this anonymous person whose, name Is redacted
56:16
Speaker 1: that trump knew that they were a quote Unquote, victim
56:19
Speaker 1: of epstein which. Is obviously absurd that is really the
56:24
Speaker 1: biggest weakness in this email release is the use of
56:28
Speaker 1: the word victim. In a redaction we have No idea
56:34
Speaker 1: who epstein literally, is referring to or what that might
56:39
Speaker 1: mean With regard to trump having spent time, with this
56:42
Speaker 1: Person or what epstein. Is even meaning but forget about
56:45
Speaker 1: the details. FOR a second i go back to the
56:49
Speaker 1: core Of the, entire epstein issue which has been so
56:54
Speaker 1: incredibly frustrated to me because it's so obvious, from my
56:57
Speaker 1: perspective and the vast majority of the public and even
57:00
Speaker 1: the media just really do. Not understand this this is
57:03
Speaker 1: where The topic of epstein's suicide is. So incredibly important
57:08
Speaker 1: let's pretend that the democratic interpretation of these emails, is
57:13
Speaker 1: EXACTLY correct which i don't believe it, Is at all
57:16
Speaker 1: but let's just pretend for sake of argument that. It's
57:19
Speaker 1: completely correct, there's a massive massive problem with the logic
57:25
Speaker 1: because here you have, In twenty Fifteen Epstein and michael
57:29
Speaker 1: wolfe essentially for lack of, a better term conspiring to
57:34
Speaker 1: Figure out how trump might Be. Helpful to epstein that's
57:38
Speaker 1: my paraphrase of probably the key email of the three
57:42
Speaker 1: that got Released by the Democrats. In The, house all
57:46
Speaker 1: right in, a weird way if you, think this through
57:50
Speaker 1: this Actually, further exonerates trump unless unless You believe that
58:00
Speaker 1: epstein was murdered in. A federal prison because if you
58:04
Speaker 1: Don't believe that epstein was murdered in, a federal Prison Against, What, Bill,
58:10
Speaker 1: Barr Cash, mattel Dan bongino and pambondi, have all said and,
58:20
Speaker 1: not to mention four Years of THE biden do oj
58:24
Speaker 1: never said a Damn thing about so you've, Got You
58:27
Speaker 1: know bill barr is a huge part of This Equation
58:30
Speaker 1: because bill Barr. Is, anti trump now So You've, Got,
58:33
Speaker 1: Bill Barr, Pambondy Dan, bongino cash mattel And THE entire
58:38
Speaker 1: biden doj Effectively saying yep. Epstein killed himself so you
58:46
Speaker 1: have to believe, all those people for some. Reason aren't
58:50
Speaker 1: lying and you also don't, have A suspect which i've
58:54
Speaker 1: said a million times is impossible in this situation where
58:57
Speaker 1: you would know to within a couple of people who
59:00
Speaker 1: could have. Possibly done this it's, a federal prison you
59:03
Speaker 1: know where everybody is. At all times you can't just
59:05
Speaker 1: sneak into a federal prison that. You know there if this,
59:09
Speaker 1: had actually happened there would be a very very very
59:12
Speaker 1: clear suspect that it would be an. Incredibly easy. Crime,
59:15
Speaker 1: as All so if epstein did, not kill himself then
59:22
Speaker 1: you have an argument, because, all Right well obviously, epstein
59:27
Speaker 1: was silence but there's no, evidence Of that and i've just,
59:30
Speaker 1: told you why there's no reason. To believe That but
59:33
Speaker 1: if epstein, did kill himself it destroys the email Between,
59:39
Speaker 1: he and wolf because if the email Between him and
59:42
Speaker 1: wolf is to be Understood as somehow epstein having Some,
59:48
Speaker 1: dirt on trump he never would have killed himself in. A.
59:54
Speaker 1: Federal prison people it's it's. Either or now in order
59:59
Speaker 1: To believe that trump is Somehow implicated by, epstein in
1:00:04
Speaker 1: this you must believe in one of the most massive
1:00:09
Speaker 1: nonsensical conspiracies. Of all time you must believe he was,
1:00:14
Speaker 1: killed in prison because if, he killed himself it totally
1:00:20
Speaker 1: invalidates the entire Theory because if epstein really Has dirt
1:00:25
Speaker 1: On trump and trump is president and he's in a
1:00:29
Speaker 1: federal prison. Facing federal charges there's no chance in the
1:00:35
Speaker 1: world he's. Gonna kill himself he's a super rich guy
1:00:39
Speaker 1: with all, sorts of connections and he's got blackmail material
1:00:43
Speaker 1: on the President Of. The united states why would. He
1:00:46
Speaker 1: kill himself. That's completely absurd he would never do that
1:00:53
Speaker 1: because he would have, not only hope he would have
1:00:55
Speaker 1: An expectation that trump might help him. Out of this
1:01:00
Speaker 1: it might only take a wink wink and a nod
1:01:02
Speaker 1: nod or the very at the, worst case scenario all
1:01:06
Speaker 1: he's got, to do, is you know announce he's going
1:01:09
Speaker 1: to do an interview with some media outlet which would
1:01:12
Speaker 1: have been happy to do an. Interview with him and
1:01:16
Speaker 1: there's all sorts Of things that epstein could have Done
1:01:18
Speaker 1: to alert trump that he was about to give up The,
1:01:21
Speaker 1: goods On trump and trump, would have said, who whoa whoa.
1:01:24
Speaker 1: Whoa whoa whoa hold, on a second because he's President Of,
1:01:26
Speaker 1: the united states it still us to run for re election,
1:01:29
Speaker 1: At that point so that theory doesn't even make it
1:01:33
Speaker 1: out of. A batter's box so you must you Must
1:01:38
Speaker 1: believe that epstein WAS murdered because i, get you know if,
1:01:43
Speaker 1: that was true there would be Some logic To trump
1:01:46
Speaker 1: wanting epstein dead right if he had dirt on him
1:01:48
Speaker 1: somehow implicating him in a. SEX trafficking scandal. I get
1:01:54
Speaker 1: it i don't believe that it's, what would happen but at,
1:01:56
Speaker 1: LEAST in theory i understand that that. Makes some Sense
1:02:00
Speaker 1: but as i've said, a zillion times there's no, evidence
1:02:03
Speaker 1: for it and there's a massive amount of a lack
1:02:08
Speaker 1: of evidence that proves, it didn't happen including the PART
1:02:11
Speaker 1: that even i, don't mention enough which Is THAT the
1:02:14
Speaker 1: biden doj said nothing about this, for four years even
1:02:18
Speaker 1: when they Were running against. Trump for reelection how? Is
1:02:22
Speaker 1: that possible. It's completely RIDICULOUS so the bidendj was sitting
1:02:29
Speaker 1: On Evidence that donald trump engaged in Illegal Activity with
1:02:35
Speaker 1: jeffrey epstein in a massive, sex trafficking ring and they
1:02:38
Speaker 1: just decided never to leak that during, their four Years
1:02:43
Speaker 1: even when Trump got the, republican presidential nomination they indicted
1:02:48
Speaker 1: them on everything, they possibly could but they just never
1:02:50
Speaker 1: decided to Go down. The epstein, bat, come on people.
1:02:55
Speaker 1: Use your brains and so the bottom line to me
1:03:01
Speaker 1: of those emails is that this is yet another example
1:03:04
Speaker 1: where the media is going to take them. Out OF
1:03:06
Speaker 1: context and i have no doubt that this will actually
1:03:10
Speaker 1: further the Asenine theory that epstein was murdered in a
1:03:14
Speaker 1: federal president because that's what you. Have, to believe now
1:03:18
Speaker 1: that's the only way that miss. Makes ANY sense and
1:03:21
Speaker 1: i said that the emails Actually weirdly. Exonerate, trump further
1:03:24
Speaker 1: sure if you, use your, brain They Do because michael
1:03:29
Speaker 1: wolfe is planting The seeds in epstein's brain in twenty
1:03:34
Speaker 1: Fifteen that, If trump wins trump might be able to
1:03:39
Speaker 1: be manipulated. To help you and yet we're supposed To
1:03:45
Speaker 1: believe that epstein with that, obviously you know planted in
1:03:50
Speaker 1: His Brain by michael wolfe allegedly Having Dirt, on donald
1:03:53
Speaker 1: trump who. Wins The presidency, and epstein decides, YOU know
1:03:59
Speaker 1: what i. Haven't no hope i'm gonna kill myself in
1:04:02
Speaker 1: a brutal fashion in a federal prison because it's. Gonna
1:04:06
Speaker 1: be ugly you can't cleanly kill yourself in. A federal
1:04:09
Speaker 1: prison and that's What. Happened with epstein how does that make?
1:04:12
Speaker 1: Any goddamn. Sense it doesn't but this is just gonna
1:04:16
Speaker 1: be another example where everybody buys. Into a myth this
1:04:21
Speaker 1: is gonna further, the fairy tale the dark fairy tale of.
1:04:25
Speaker 1: This entire CASE and, here i am, in my opinion
1:04:30
Speaker 1: probably doing a better Job Of, defending DONALD trump, whom
1:04:34
Speaker 1: i hate with probably a GREATER passion than i, ever
1:04:37
Speaker 1: had previously than Anybody in the magamedia. Is gonna Do
1:04:41
Speaker 1: because the magamedia is. Hamstrung On this the magamedia Can't
1:04:46
Speaker 1: Fully defend donald trump because they've bought into This bullshit that,
1:04:50
Speaker 1: epstein was murdered which is just so, stupid to me
1:04:55
Speaker 1: not just because, it didn't happen but Because, obviously implicate
1:05:00
Speaker 1: trump at least didn't directly because he was President And,
1:05:03
Speaker 1: His Attorney general bill barr was in charge of the
1:05:06
Speaker 1: federal prison system. At the, TIME so yeah i actually
1:05:10
Speaker 1: take no joy in The idea that trump is being
1:05:14
Speaker 1: poisted on the pitard Of. His own magamedium, Morons and
1:05:18
Speaker 1: competence thanks for listening to today's free drop of. The
1:05:22
Speaker 1: abbreviated show if you're interested in listening to, the entire
1:05:25
Speaker 1: show you must. Become a patron Please go to PATREON
1:05:30
Speaker 1: that's P a t R e o. N dot com
1:05:34
Speaker 1: patreon Dot Com slash The death Of Journalism. With john
1:05:40
Speaker 1: ziggler my name is J HN Z I e G.
1:05:43
Speaker 1: L E r that's patreon Dot Com slash The death
1:05:49
Speaker 1: Of Journalism. With john ziggler good luck to. You on
1:05:53
Speaker 1: that but that's how. You can subscribe