Latest / The Death Of Journalism / Episode Three Hundred Seven

Transcript

Episode Three Hundred Seven · The Death Of Journalism

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Welcomed episode three hundred and seven of the Death of
• 0:03
  Speaker 1: Journalism podcasts. My name is John Zigler. I'm your host
• 0:05
  Speaker 1: on this week's jam Pack Show. Academic fraudster Jason Arday
• 0:10
  Speaker 1: commits suicide and the Left reacts exactly as you would expect. Love,
• 0:17
  Speaker 1: an update on the twenty twenty eight presidential race, and
• 0:20
  Speaker 1: our Gavid Newsome fear Factor rating, the backstory on my
• 0:24
  Speaker 1: latest live appearance on CNN should not be missed, and
• 0:29
  Speaker 1: lots of sports related news sort of, including the official
• 0:34
  Speaker 1: end of live golf. On last week's episode of the podcast,
• 0:40
  Speaker 1: I spent quite a bit of time on academic fraudster
• 0:44
  Speaker 1: Jason Arday, who had become the youngest black professor in
• 0:49
  Speaker 1: the history of Cambridge University, who was immedia darling, and
• 0:55
  Speaker 1: it turned out that most, if not almost all of
• 0:59
  Speaker 1: his life was at least somewhat have not completely fabricated,
• 1:03
  Speaker 1: and that efforts to try to bring the truth to
• 1:05
  Speaker 1: light about him had been curtailed at every turn, including
• 1:11
  Speaker 1: by even law enforcement. But there was clearly an intimidation
• 1:16
  Speaker 1: campaign to keep anybody from telling the truth about Jason
• 1:21
  Speaker 1: our day because he was literally too big to fail,
• 1:24
  Speaker 1: being a black man. With a remarkable personal story, a
• 1:29
  Speaker 1: personal story that was far too remarkable because it was
• 1:32
  Speaker 1: clearly not true and huge elements of it were disproven.
• 1:39
  Speaker 1: Some other parts of it are still at least somewhat ambiguous,
• 1:42
  Speaker 1: but you must, if you use your brain, conclude that
• 1:46
  Speaker 1: they are at best highly suspicious, because once you've lied
• 1:50
  Speaker 1: about significant portions of your life, your credibility is gone,
• 1:55
  Speaker 1: and so when you're claiming other things that don't make
• 1:58
  Speaker 1: a lot of sense, a rational person can conclude that, oh, yeah,
• 2:03
  Speaker 1: those things aren't true either. But here we now have
• 2:06
  Speaker 1: a major development in the last week which in my
• 2:09
  Speaker 1: view completely and totally proves that the vast majority of
• 2:14
  Speaker 1: not the totality, of the allegations against Jason our Day
• 2:18
  Speaker 1: are in fact accurate, that he is and was a fraud.
• 2:23
  Speaker 1: Because we have effectively a guilty plea, at least in
• 2:28
  Speaker 1: the rational world. We have a guilty plea because in
• 2:32
  Speaker 1: the midst of this media firestorm that was taking place
• 2:37
  Speaker 1: not just in England, but also at least in part
• 2:40
  Speaker 1: here in the United States, because of what Jason Arday's
• 2:43
  Speaker 1: story meant for the issue of DEI, meant for the
• 2:47
  Speaker 1: issue of academic credibility and whether we have a massive
• 2:52
  Speaker 1: crisis in education. It also goes to the issue of
• 2:55
  Speaker 1: whether or not it's possible to be a fraud and
• 2:58
  Speaker 1: become a made your success in areas of life, especially
• 3:03
  Speaker 1: if you fit a certain demographic. Jason ar Day was
• 3:07
  Speaker 1: found dead in what appears to be very clearly a suicide,
• 3:13
  Speaker 1: and in the semi rational world that we no longer
• 3:17
  Speaker 1: live in, when a Jason Arda commits suicide after having
• 3:22
  Speaker 1: resigned from Cambridge University, that is a guilty play. That's
• 3:29
  Speaker 1: the only way to interpret that, because it's not as
• 3:33
  Speaker 1: if he didn't have supporters and a support system. He
• 3:38
  Speaker 1: literally had a book that somehow Simon and Schuster was
• 3:42
  Speaker 1: still publishing, which I think may have actually helped facilitate
• 3:46
  Speaker 1: a suicide. We'll get to that more in a second,
• 3:49
  Speaker 1: but there is absolutely positively no way to interpret his
• 3:56
  Speaker 1: suicide as anything other than a guilty plea for the
• 4:01
  Speaker 1: allegations against him. That is the only way it can
• 4:04
  Speaker 1: be interpreted in a semi rational world. I fully acknowledge
• 4:10
  Speaker 1: we do not live in that world anymore, especially when
• 4:13
  Speaker 1: it comes to the mainstream news media, and the reaction
• 4:18
  Speaker 1: to his suicide has basically proven that it has gone
• 4:22
  Speaker 1: down basically exactly as anyone who's been following this story
• 4:27
  Speaker 1: would have predicted. Now, in the last episode, I went
• 4:31
  Speaker 1: through a series of comparisons of other people, other fraudsters
• 4:36
  Speaker 1: that I thought Jason Arday reminded me of. I left
• 4:41
  Speaker 1: one off the list, and I think it was mostly
• 4:44
  Speaker 1: because of host Era, because I did actually think about
• 4:48
  Speaker 1: this comparison, but I failed to share it on the podcast,
• 4:51
  Speaker 1: and that was Millie Vanilli, obviously, the famous I Guess
• 4:56
  Speaker 1: music duo that turned out to be lip syncing everything
• 5:00
  Speaker 1: won a Grammy and then it all fell apart. Well,
• 5:03
  Speaker 1: one of that duo committed suicide, and so clearly the
• 5:07
  Speaker 1: Milli Vanilly comparison is valid. Some people actually think that
• 5:11
  Speaker 1: Jason ar Day kind of looked like one of the
• 5:13
  Speaker 1: members of Milli Vanilly, but that's not the suicide that
• 5:19
  Speaker 1: I was reminded most of. When I learned that Jason R.
• 5:22
  Speaker 1: Day had killed himself, that was a situation that I
• 5:27
  Speaker 1: was intimately familiar with and actually played a I think
• 5:30
  Speaker 1: a not an all too small role, although I don't
• 5:33
  Speaker 1: think I had anything to do with why this person
• 5:36
  Speaker 1: killed themselves, but it was certainly timing wise, very close
• 5:40
  Speaker 1: to a situation where I was intimately involved. What I'm
• 5:44
  Speaker 1: referring to is a claimed author, David Foster Wallace. Now,
• 5:49
  Speaker 1: those who have followed my career may already know most,
• 5:53
  Speaker 1: if not all, of this story, but I'll quickly review it.
• 5:56
  Speaker 1: David Foster Wallace, not unlike Jason ar Day, although they
• 6:00
  Speaker 1: when Foster Wallace was a white guy, was an absolute
• 6:04
  Speaker 1: darling of the left wing media because he wrote this
• 6:08
  Speaker 1: book called Infinite Jest, which was incredibly long. I never
• 6:13
  Speaker 1: even read it. I'm assuming it must have been at
• 6:16
  Speaker 1: least somewhat good because a lot of people loved it.
• 6:18
  Speaker 1: But boyle boy, in the literary world, this was like
• 6:22
  Speaker 1: the indication of the second Coming of Jesus. I mean,
• 6:26
  Speaker 1: he was considered to be almost a godlike figure, especially
• 6:31
  Speaker 1: since he was young and he was a savant. And
• 6:36
  Speaker 1: again there are some parallels to the Jason Arday situation,
• 6:40
  Speaker 1: and David Foster Wallace, when I first came to Los
• 6:43
  Speaker 1: Angeles as a talk show host at KAFI Radio, contacted
• 6:48
  Speaker 1: me via letter. Now, remember this is the early two
• 6:51
  Speaker 1: thousands and I'm just basically coming into Los Angeles. I
• 6:55
  Speaker 1: don't think very much of myself. I've just been fired
• 6:58
  Speaker 1: at Louisville. I'm doing late nights in Los Angeles, and
• 7:04
  Speaker 1: the letter I got was on academic letterhead from a
• 7:09
  Speaker 1: local college, not even a prestigious college in the Los
• 7:12
  Speaker 1: Angeles area. So I didn't really think very much of
• 7:14
  Speaker 1: this request that David Foster Wallace had sent me to
• 7:18
  Speaker 1: ask me whether or not he could shadow me for
• 7:22
  Speaker 1: an extended period of time to write an article. I
• 7:25
  Speaker 1: didn't know anything about where this was going to end up,
• 7:28
  Speaker 1: and I stupidly didn't even bother to research David Foster Wallas.
• 7:32
  Speaker 1: Now my defense, Google was not really as a thing
• 7:35
  Speaker 1: at that time. It existed, but it was nowhere near
• 7:38
  Speaker 1: as ubiquitous as it is now, and I just said, sure,
• 7:42
  Speaker 1: go ahead, I don't care. I was very naive and
• 7:46
  Speaker 1: very dumb. Long story short, David Foster Wallace followed me
• 7:51
  Speaker 1: in my job for at least two or three months,
• 7:54
  Speaker 1: and I was incredibly unimpressed with this guy. Again, not
• 7:59
  Speaker 1: knowing who he was, I had no idea how big
• 8:04
  Speaker 1: a deal he was. And he didn't look impressive, he
• 8:08
  Speaker 1: didn't sound impressive, he didn't smell impressive. He was not
• 8:13
  Speaker 1: very clean. His eating habits were disgusting. I didn't you know?
• 8:18
  Speaker 1: And I feel like most people do. But I think
• 8:21
  Speaker 1: my record is pretty good. I am a pretty good
• 8:24
  Speaker 1: eye for talent, right, I can see talent around me,
• 8:28
  Speaker 1: and I think my record is very strong on that.
• 8:31
  Speaker 1: I did not get any sense at all hanging around
• 8:34
  Speaker 1: David Foster Wallace that I was around some sort of
• 8:37
  Speaker 1: tremendous talent at all, and a long time when Biaty
• 8:43
  Speaker 1: stopped following me around. In fact, the only side I
• 8:48
  Speaker 1: had that something might have been different than what I
• 8:51
  Speaker 1: anticipated initially occurred when we had our final meeting where
• 8:56
  Speaker 1: he took me to a very nice steakhouse to do
• 9:00
  Speaker 1: a final cleanup interview after you and followed me around
• 9:03
  Speaker 1: for a couple of months. I thought, where's he getting
• 9:05
  Speaker 1: the money to do this? Because I almost thought the
• 9:07
  Speaker 1: guy was homeless, That's how bad this was. And I
• 9:11
  Speaker 1: thought I was doing basically charity work to let this
• 9:13
  Speaker 1: guy follow me around, not knowing that he was this
• 9:16
  Speaker 1: super huge acclaimed author. And many months go by, and
• 9:22
  Speaker 1: it might have been like even more than six months,
• 9:24
  Speaker 1: maybe even close to a year go by, and I
• 9:27
  Speaker 1: haven't heard anything about this article. I remember contacting him
• 9:30
  Speaker 1: and him saying, oh, it's coming out soon, trust me.
• 9:34
  Speaker 1: And I'm like, okay, whatever, and then this is the
• 9:38
  Speaker 1: story's already going on longer than I anticipated, but it's
• 9:40
  Speaker 1: such a good story and it does relate to Jason
• 9:42
  Speaker 1: our day. So then, much to my shock, all of
• 9:47
  Speaker 1: a sudden, it's the cover story for Atlantic Monthly Magazine,
• 9:50
  Speaker 1: which back then was a big deal. And it's not
• 9:53
  Speaker 1: just the cover story. It's twenty three pages long, and
• 9:57
  Speaker 1: there's like three or four blatant inaccuracies in the first paragraph.
• 10:00
  Speaker 1: Literally the first paragraph, there're three or four blatant inaccuracies.
• 10:06
  Speaker 1: And I remember having been called by their fact checker,
• 10:10
  Speaker 1: and I only got like, asked like three or four questions,
• 10:15
  Speaker 1: like what this is gonna be a very short article
• 10:18
  Speaker 1: because we spent months together. You asked me three or
• 10:21
  Speaker 1: four questions. One of them was, I'll never forget this.
• 10:24
  Speaker 1: Is it true? You were the Bucks County Courier Times
• 10:28
  Speaker 1: golfer of the year in nineteen eighty four in high school?
• 10:31
  Speaker 1: I said, yeah, but how the hell is that getting
• 10:34
  Speaker 1: into the article? So I was stunned when this inaccuracy
• 10:42
  Speaker 1: laced a twenty three page cover story came out in
• 10:46
  Speaker 1: Atlantic Monthly Magazine. I was also incredibly pissed off when
• 10:50
  Speaker 1: David Foster Wallace refused to do an interview on my
• 10:52
  Speaker 1: radio show about it because he claimed that he had
• 10:57
  Speaker 1: already done his one contractually. Oblow Gate did interview surrounding
• 11:03
  Speaker 1: the twenty three page cover story, and I went off
• 11:06
  Speaker 1: on him. I mean I went ballistic. I was at
• 11:10
  Speaker 1: a twelve. I think I might have even called back
• 11:13
  Speaker 1: to apologize, but I scared the living daylights out of
• 11:17
  Speaker 1: David Foster Wallace because I just thought that was complete bullshit.
• 11:21
  Speaker 1: I give you two or three months of my life
• 11:24
  Speaker 1: a twenty three page story, and you can't even come
• 11:27
  Speaker 1: on the show to discuss this. Now, the reality was
• 11:30
  Speaker 1: he was terrified. He was terrified to come in on
• 11:33
  Speaker 1: the show. And I think that he had originally intended
• 11:36
  Speaker 1: to do a hit job on me and on talk
• 11:38
  Speaker 1: radio as a liberal elitist member of the media, and
• 11:42
  Speaker 1: then he kind of liked me, and so the story
• 11:45
  Speaker 1: in Atlantic was only like a half a hit job.
• 11:49
  Speaker 1: But that ended our relationship when he refused to do
• 11:52
  Speaker 1: an interview with me. And then he releases Consider the Lobster,
• 12:00
  Speaker 1: which is a series of essays, and the last chapter
• 12:05
  Speaker 1: of Consider the Lobster. Is this essentially a slightly different
• 12:09
  Speaker 1: version of this twenty three page story he had done
• 12:13
  Speaker 1: on me for Atlantic Monthly Magazine well after Infinite Jest,
• 12:19
  Speaker 1: and consider The Lobster and other literary works he was
• 12:24
  Speaker 1: considered this savant and this incredibly towering literary figure. Well,
• 12:30
  Speaker 1: consider The Lobster turns out to be his last book,
• 12:33
  Speaker 1: because David Foster Wallace ended up committing suicide. I don't
• 12:39
  Speaker 1: remember exactly how much time had passed after the Atlantic
• 12:43
  Speaker 1: Monthly Magazine story came out, but it wasn't all that long.
• 12:46
  Speaker 1: And like I said, that story ends up being the
• 12:50
  Speaker 1: last chapter in his last book, considered The Lobster. And
• 12:56
  Speaker 1: I was not that surprised that he committed suicide because
• 13:02
  Speaker 1: I felt as if David Foster Wallace was terrified of
• 13:07
  Speaker 1: being revealed as not being who he was perceived to be,
• 13:13
  Speaker 1: that he was essentially a fraud. And if you're considered,
• 13:17
  Speaker 1: especially in the literary world and in the academic world,
• 13:19
  Speaker 1: if you're considered a genius but you know you're not,
• 13:23
  Speaker 1: and you're especially a young person, and you're faced with
• 13:27
  Speaker 1: a situation where it's gonna be it's gonna be proven
• 13:32
  Speaker 1: that you're not who people think you are. The only
• 13:35
  Speaker 1: way out if you're truly concerned about how people perceive
• 13:40
  Speaker 1: you and what your legacy is, is to kill yourself.
• 13:45
  Speaker 1: If you kill yourself, it's a get out of jail
• 13:47
  Speaker 1: free card. It is you are forever etched, at least
• 13:52
  Speaker 1: in the minds of a lot of people, as a genius,
• 13:55
  Speaker 1: because that's what torture geniuses do. They kill themselves. So
• 14:00
  Speaker 1: oh again, I don't know for sure this is exactly
• 14:03
  Speaker 1: what was going through David Foster Wallace's mind, but I
• 14:06
  Speaker 1: felt pretty confident that at least part of why David
• 14:09
  Speaker 1: Foster Wallace killed himself was because he was essentially afraid
• 14:15
  Speaker 1: that he wasn't what people thought of him. He really
• 14:18
  Speaker 1: he had gotten lucky, I guess, with infinite jest, and
• 14:22
  Speaker 1: that there really wasn't anything else there and he didn't
• 14:26
  Speaker 1: want people to know that. And I got absolutely crushed
• 14:31
  Speaker 1: for saying this publicly. I tried to say it as
• 14:34
  Speaker 1: nicely as I could. I'm sure I didn't do nearly
• 14:36
  Speaker 1: a good enough job, because I'm not nearly as sensitive
• 14:40
  Speaker 1: as I need to be on these types of subjects,
• 14:43
  Speaker 1: and I often tell the truth as it is unvarnished.
• 14:47
  Speaker 1: And I got so much criticism for having the audacity
• 14:51
  Speaker 1: to say this about David Foster Wallace after he committed suicide.
• 14:55
  Speaker 1: And then something remarkable happened. They did a movie about
• 14:59
  Speaker 1: Davidvid Foster Wallas. Jason Siegel, pretty prominent actor, played David
• 15:05
  Speaker 1: Foster Wallace, and in the trailer. In the trailer for
• 15:10
  Speaker 1: the movie, the David Foster Wallace character says quote, the
• 15:16
  Speaker 1: more people think you're really great, the bigger the fear
• 15:21
  Speaker 1: of being a fraud is. And I was like, holy cow, wow,
• 15:30
  Speaker 1: that's not only in the movie. That's in the trailer.
• 15:33
  Speaker 1: The more people think you're really great, the bigger the
• 15:36
  Speaker 1: fear of being a fraud is. Now, in my mind,
• 15:40
  Speaker 1: I couldn't have been vindicated more fully. If the movie
• 15:43
  Speaker 1: about David Foster Wallace, which was, by the way, a
• 15:45
  Speaker 1: very pro David Foster Wallace movie, actually has that in
• 15:49
  Speaker 1: the trailer, then clearly I'm not off base. Yet I
• 15:53
  Speaker 1: still to this day people dredge up what I said
• 15:57
  Speaker 1: about David Foster Wallace is somehow evidence that I'm this
• 16:01
  Speaker 1: horrible person. No, I'm just telling you what I think happened,
• 16:05
  Speaker 1: based upon some rather significant and intimate interaction that I
• 16:11
  Speaker 1: had with David Foster Wallace, and I play as clearly
• 16:15
  Speaker 1: a role in his life. I'm the subject to the
• 16:17
  Speaker 1: last chapter of his last book. And again I'm not
• 16:21
  Speaker 1: claiming I know exactly why David Foster Wallace killed himself,
• 16:25
  Speaker 1: but I think that there are some similarities to what
• 16:31
  Speaker 1: happened with Jason R. Day, because Jason R. Day was
• 16:35
  Speaker 1: exposed far more than David Foster Wallace had. David Foster
• 16:39
  Speaker 1: Wallace prevented that from ever happening effectively, but Jason Arday
• 16:44
  Speaker 1: did it because he knew he had been exposed as
• 16:49
  Speaker 1: a charlatan, as someone whose life story was not in
• 16:53
  Speaker 1: its essence true. And as far as the suicide part
• 16:58
  Speaker 1: of this, I have a great deal of passion on
• 17:01
  Speaker 1: this particular topic for a lot of different reasons. And
• 17:05
  Speaker 1: I don't usually quote myself, but here's what I wrote
• 17:08
  Speaker 1: on X about the news of Jason R. Day's suicide
• 17:13
  Speaker 1: from the perspective of how we are now viewing killing
• 17:19
  Speaker 1: yourself in a very very different way than we ever
• 17:23
  Speaker 1: have previously. And that's one of the many elements of
• 17:26
  Speaker 1: the Our Day story that is really just I think
• 17:29
  Speaker 1: incredibly significant and being overlooked here. But here's what I
• 17:33
  Speaker 1: wrote on X. The part of the Jason our Day
• 17:36
  Speaker 1: suicide that I've not heard anyone mention is that he
• 17:40
  Speaker 1: was the father of two children. By the way, David
• 17:44
  Speaker 1: Foster Walls also had a family. As someone who many
• 17:48
  Speaker 1: years before I became a father, once contemplated suicide, there
• 17:53
  Speaker 1: has always been a very clear demarcation point when it
• 17:56
  Speaker 1: comes to taking your own life. There is no scenario
• 18:01
  Speaker 1: where a physically healthy parent of a non adult child
• 18:04
  Speaker 1: committing suicide is anything other than an abhorrent act of
• 18:09
  Speaker 1: extreme selfishness and cowardice. It should be the prism through
• 18:15
  Speaker 1: which everything you did in your life is viewed slash perceived.
• 18:21
  Speaker 1: In our Day's case, it is effectively a guilty plea
• 18:25
  Speaker 1: to every allegation of fraud, theft, and deceit made against
• 18:32
  Speaker 1: him in life. And obviously, I truly one believe that,
• 18:39
  Speaker 1: And that might be the part of the reaction to
• 18:42
  Speaker 1: this suicide that has bothered me the most. Yes, there's
• 18:47
  Speaker 1: the whether or not Our Day was a fraud that
• 18:51
  Speaker 1: got away with it because of DEI and the super
• 18:55
  Speaker 1: wokeness of elite academia. That's important, But there's another l
• 19:00
  Speaker 1: meant to this where we are now going to places
• 19:04
  Speaker 1: that I've never seen before when it comes to prominent
• 19:07
  Speaker 1: people killing themselves because he is being celebrated. This is
• 19:15
  Speaker 1: not an exaggeration. He is being celebrated for having killed himself.
• 19:23
  Speaker 1: There are rallies throughout England celebrating him and justifying his suicide,
• 19:31
  Speaker 1: blaming his suicide on the media, the media, because I mean,
• 19:41
  Speaker 1: I guess can't even comprehend this. But you know, we
• 19:43
  Speaker 1: clearly don't live in a world where sticks and stones
• 19:45
  Speaker 1: can break my bones, but words will never hurt me anymore.
• 19:48
  Speaker 1: I mean, there are nutshobs who are prominent people who
• 19:54
  Speaker 1: are publicly saying that this was essentially an assassination, that
• 20:00
  Speaker 1: these attacks were such that no one could possibly have
• 20:03
  Speaker 1: been endured them, that his suicide was effectively justified because
• 20:08
  Speaker 1: of all the criticism that he was getting, that this
• 20:10
  Speaker 1: criticism was based in racism, based in racism. We are
• 20:16
  Speaker 1: living in an upside down world here, folks. And that's
• 20:19
  Speaker 1: the part of this story that, in the global perspective,
• 20:23
  Speaker 1: I think is the most important. We are living in
• 20:26
  Speaker 1: alternative realities now, and this story proves it more than
• 20:33
  Speaker 1: almost anyone I can think of in recent history. Let
• 20:36
  Speaker 1: me give you an amazing example. I had a phone
• 20:39
  Speaker 1: conversation with a media member of a major mainstream news
• 20:46
  Speaker 1: outlet and I happened to mention Jason our Day. This
• 20:53
  Speaker 1: was after the suicide. They had no idea what I
• 21:00
  Speaker 1: was talking about. I was flabbergasted, what how is this possible?
• 21:11
  Speaker 1: And I played it off like, wow, this really does
• 21:12
  Speaker 1: show what different worlds everyone's living in now we're all
• 21:16
  Speaker 1: on our own, separate silos and bubbles. But this was
• 21:19
  Speaker 1: an extreme case because this story had gotten massive amount
• 21:24
  Speaker 1: of coverage worldwide, especially on X but even in some
• 21:29
  Speaker 1: major American mainstream outlets, most of it was poor coverage.
• 21:34
  Speaker 1: Although I will say that The New York Times has
• 21:37
  Speaker 1: done a surprisingly good job on this story, even after
• 21:42
  Speaker 1: our Day's suicide, But they are the exception that proves
• 21:46
  Speaker 1: the rule, because CNN has been awful, the BBC has
• 21:50
  Speaker 1: been absolutely completely pathetic. The general narrative seems to be, oh,
• 21:58
  Speaker 1: did we go too far in criticizing our Day? And
• 22:02
  Speaker 1: was this based in racism? Was this anti r Day
• 22:06
  Speaker 1: coverage based in racism and not wanting a black man
• 22:11
  Speaker 1: to be successful? What? That's exactly the opposite of this story.
• 22:16
  Speaker 1: The whole reason why our Day was allowed to get
• 22:20
  Speaker 1: to where he was was because the media was terrified
• 22:23
  Speaker 1: of criticizing him. And I think that his suicide, and
• 22:26
  Speaker 1: at least in some mainstream liberal media circles like the
• 22:31
  Speaker 1: BBC and like CNN, may have a further chilling effect
• 22:36
  Speaker 1: because now they're afraid that they might have blood on
• 22:39
  Speaker 1: their hands if they criticized someone and they kill themselves,
• 22:44
  Speaker 1: even if the criticism is one hundred percent validated by
• 22:49
  Speaker 1: the facts and reality. It's just unbelievable all the different
• 22:55
  Speaker 1: elements that this story exposes as being an incredibly shaky ground.
• 23:02
  Speaker 1: Our entire society seems to be falling apart. We can't
• 23:06
  Speaker 1: even get the basics right. And I don't want to
• 23:08
  Speaker 1: leave the suicide part of this out. Oftentimes it's not
• 23:13
  Speaker 1: even referred to as suicide. Oftentimes it's just referred to
• 23:17
  Speaker 1: as he died, well, well, he just suddenly died. How
• 23:20
  Speaker 1: did he die? He killed himself. By all account, there's
• 23:24
  Speaker 1: no evidence at all that he did anything other than
• 23:27
  Speaker 1: commit suicide, So why don't we even use the word?
• 23:32
  Speaker 1: But how are we celebrating, celebrating the fact that he
• 23:37
  Speaker 1: killed himself? And look, I'm not saying this is conscious,
• 23:41
  Speaker 1: but at least subconsciously. I think a lot of people
• 23:45
  Speaker 1: on the left, and especially the liberal elites and in academia,
• 23:50
  Speaker 1: are actually thrilled he killed himself. Why well, because it
• 23:56
  Speaker 1: eventually will end this story which they hate, and it
• 24:00
  Speaker 1: gives them back what they think is their moral high
• 24:05
  Speaker 1: ground or their victim hood. The left desires greatly victimhood status.
• 24:14
  Speaker 1: It's basically as good as it gets, and I think
• 24:17
  Speaker 1: that might have been part of what our days motivation was.
• 24:21
  Speaker 1: Who knows, we'll probably never know. That Apparently wasn't even
• 24:23
  Speaker 1: a suicide note, which is kind of amazing for a
• 24:26
  Speaker 1: guy who's in academia and he writes a resignation letter
• 24:32
  Speaker 1: that apparently was written by AI. He couldn't even have
• 24:34
  Speaker 1: AI write his suicide note for him, apparently. I mean,
• 24:37
  Speaker 1: we don't know that for sure, but there's no sign
• 24:39
  Speaker 1: of a suicide note. But victimhood I think played a
• 24:45
  Speaker 1: role here. Jason Arday had only one card left to
• 24:50
  Speaker 1: play if he was going to remain the victim, and
• 24:57
  Speaker 1: that was to kill himself. He has permanent victimization into perpetuity,
• 25:05
  Speaker 1: and a lot of people in his world will buy it,
• 25:10
  Speaker 1: even though it was an incredibly selfish move with two
• 25:13
  Speaker 1: fairly young children that we know almost nothing about. No
• 25:18
  Speaker 1: one seems to care about that anymore because on the left,
• 25:22
  Speaker 1: in elite circles, they're actually glad he killed himself. He
• 25:26
  Speaker 1: took one for the team. Again, this is mostly subconscious.
• 25:31
  Speaker 1: He took one for the team. In the minds of
• 25:35
  Speaker 1: the liberal elites. We elevated him when he didn't deserve
• 25:39
  Speaker 1: to be elevated. Most people will probably admit that at
• 25:41
  Speaker 1: some level the right went crazy. They attacked him unfairly,
• 25:46
  Speaker 1: they exaggerated, even though there's no evidence of that, and
• 25:52
  Speaker 1: he did the right thing and resigning, And thank goodness,
• 25:55
  Speaker 1: this story is now going away because this is a
• 25:57
  Speaker 1: very uncomfortable story for us, and we're actually going to
• 26:01
  Speaker 1: use it because now we have a little bit of
• 26:02
  Speaker 1: moral high ground back because he killed himself. We can
• 26:06
  Speaker 1: now use it to attack those who were actually right
• 26:09
  Speaker 1: about the story. That's how upside down everything is. I mean,
• 26:15
  Speaker 1: everything is completely upside down in this story, including the
• 26:20
  Speaker 1: role of Simon and Schuster. I mean, how Simon and
• 26:24
  Speaker 1: Schuster is getting away with all this. The publisher of
• 26:27
  Speaker 1: his book is beyond comprehension. They put out a statement
• 26:32
  Speaker 1: after his suicide saying Simon and Schuster is deeply saddened
• 26:38
  Speaker 1: by the news of Jason our Day's tragic death. Tragic death.
• 26:47
  Speaker 1: Was it a car accident? What happened? Tragic death? That
• 26:53
  Speaker 1: would be a tragic death. You got killed in a
• 26:54
  Speaker 1: car accident just as your book was being published, That
• 26:57
  Speaker 1: would be tragic. He wasn't a home invasion, right, he
• 27:02
  Speaker 1: didn't get murdered. Right, No, because I think they would
• 27:05
  Speaker 1: have told us that, right, That would have been a
• 27:06
  Speaker 1: big part of the story. So tragic death. Boy, that
• 27:11
  Speaker 1: leaves a lot of unanswered questions. Tragic death, And we
• 27:15
  Speaker 1: send our condolences to his family during this devastating time.
• 27:20
  Speaker 1: You mean the family that Jason Darday didn't give a
• 27:22
  Speaker 1: shit about. You mean the two kids that now have
• 27:26
  Speaker 1: to suffer the rest of their lives because their famous
• 27:30
  Speaker 1: dad killed himself in the middle of a massive scandal.
• 27:37
  Speaker 1: That family, that's the one you're sending your condolences to,
• 27:41
  Speaker 1: as you presumably still are making money, or at least
• 27:46
  Speaker 1: recruiting some money by having his book out there, a
• 27:51
  Speaker 1: book that is apparently based mostly, if not totally in fabrications.
• 28:00
  Speaker 1: I just I'm gobsmocked. I don't even know if that's
• 28:03
  Speaker 1: the right word. I'm I'm I'm completely flaw mixed. I
• 28:07
  Speaker 1: don't even know how to fully explain what is happening
• 28:11
  Speaker 1: here other than through the prism of the collapse of
• 28:16
  Speaker 1: society as we've known it. I mean, it was not
• 28:20
  Speaker 1: that long ago when the rule of the news media was,
• 28:25
  Speaker 1: if you commit suicide, unless you're a super famous person,
• 28:32
  Speaker 1: we're not going to talk about you anymore. You ceased
• 28:36
  Speaker 1: to exist. That's not an exaggeration. Those were the rules,
• 28:40
  Speaker 1: and that was understood. It was understood because if you
• 28:45
  Speaker 1: did it any other way, you were incantivizing suicide. If
• 28:50
  Speaker 1: people knew that they would be treated the way Jason
• 28:53
  Speaker 1: Arday has been treated after killing themselves, they're going to
• 28:56
  Speaker 1: be far more likely to do so. How do people
• 29:00
  Speaker 1: not see this? I mean, and it's getting worse on
• 29:07
  Speaker 1: a regular basis. But the Art daycas is the worst
• 29:11
  Speaker 1: I've ever seen at every level. So my conclusions on
• 29:16
  Speaker 1: the Jason our Day story are in the biggest picture,
• 29:22
  Speaker 1: this story proves we are so incredibly divided, not just
• 29:28
  Speaker 1: on race, but race is obviously a key component to
• 29:30
  Speaker 1: this particular story to the point where we are living
• 29:33
  Speaker 1: in alternative realities. Alternative realities, that's the only way to
• 29:39
  Speaker 1: put it. Where you either know about the Jason our
• 29:42
  Speaker 1: Day story or you don't, and there's a darn good
• 29:46
  Speaker 1: chance you don't. I don't know what the percentages are
• 29:49
  Speaker 1: in this country, but based upon my conversation with that
• 29:52
  Speaker 1: mainstream news media member, my guess is well over half
• 29:55
  Speaker 1: of the country doesn't even know who Jason our Day is.
• 30:01
  Speaker 1: And that's probably a conservative estimate. Even though the Jason
• 30:04
  Speaker 1: du Dat story ought to be known by everybody because
• 30:08
  Speaker 1: it exposes so much about the fundamental problems in academia
• 30:14
  Speaker 1: and how we're dealing with race, and how easy it is,
• 30:18
  Speaker 1: in certain circumstances for someone who's a complete fraud to
• 30:22
  Speaker 1: reach incredibly high levels of quote unquote success and look
• 30:31
  Speaker 1: to a large portion of people who are probably already
• 30:34
  Speaker 1: convinced this our Day story further proves that we're right.
• 30:41
  Speaker 1: But I don't know how much value that really has
• 30:43
  Speaker 1: because I don't think very many minds are being changed
• 30:46
  Speaker 1: by this, and the Left understands that if you mute
• 30:50
  Speaker 1: the allegations, you try to minimize them as much as possible.
• 30:54
  Speaker 1: You claim he was only accused of plagiarism, and that
• 30:57
  Speaker 1: he was actually exonerated on plagiarism, which is not true.
• 31:01
  Speaker 1: He was accused of hell of a lot more than
• 31:03
  Speaker 1: just plagiarism, and the exoneration on plagiarism was basically like
• 31:06
  Speaker 1: OJ Simpson getting acquitted. It was for the basically the
• 31:10
  Speaker 1: same reasons. It was all about race. It was a
• 31:13
  Speaker 1: self fulfilling prophecy. We're gonna give the black guy all
• 31:19
  Speaker 1: the benefit of the doubt because to do otherwise would
• 31:22
  Speaker 1: be racist and would also expose all of us as
• 31:26
  Speaker 1: having a major DEI problem. And so you know, the
• 31:32
  Speaker 1: left is going to muddy the waters, claim victimhood, blame
• 31:37
  Speaker 1: the media. I actually do think that in some areas
• 31:41
  Speaker 1: of the news media, there will be more hesitation, not less,
• 31:46
  Speaker 1: the next time a similar situation comes around. I don't
• 31:50
  Speaker 1: know how much, but I think that's a plausible scenario
• 31:55
  Speaker 1: where that the backlash to our Day's suicide among elements
• 32:02
  Speaker 1: of the liberal elites. Maybe not here, but certainly in England,
• 32:06
  Speaker 1: because I've seen already there's even people apologizing for having
• 32:10
  Speaker 1: been so critical of our Day. I mean, are you
• 32:13
  Speaker 1: fucking crazy? Are you fucking crazy. You were right. The
• 32:18
  Speaker 1: suicide is a guilty play. I can't leave that part
• 32:24
  Speaker 1: of the story either. You can not interpret the suicide
• 32:29
  Speaker 1: any other way than as a guilty police. Don't give
• 32:32
  Speaker 1: me he was actually innocent, because if he was actually innocent,
• 32:36
  Speaker 1: he would have fought back hard because he had more
• 32:40
  Speaker 1: than enough platform to do so. He was well known,
• 32:44
  Speaker 1: he had a book out by Shiman and Seuster. Everybody
• 32:47
  Speaker 1: would have wanted to interview him. They would have wanted
• 32:50
  Speaker 1: to hear his side of the story. Instead, he killed
• 32:53
  Speaker 1: himself with two non adult children. So I think the
• 33:01
  Speaker 1: Our Day story is one of the most significant of
• 33:03
  Speaker 1: the year so far, and yet huge portions of the country,
• 33:09
  Speaker 1: at least in America, are not even aware of it, including,
• 33:12
  Speaker 1: as I've said now three times, a prominent member of
• 33:15
  Speaker 1: the main street news media. Now, all of this clearly
• 33:21
  Speaker 1: is an indictment of our elite academic system, and it
• 33:25
  Speaker 1: was not an aberration. Our Day situation was just you know,
• 33:30
  Speaker 1: real life on steroids. Because this is happening throughout academia
• 33:36
  Speaker 1: in America from top to bottom, not just at elite institutions,
• 33:42
  Speaker 1: and as schools getting started here, as we start to
• 33:46
  Speaker 1: come to the end of August. Today was the first
• 33:49
  Speaker 1: day of school for my two kids and my wife's teacher.
• 33:54
  Speaker 1: This is going to be a big year for us,
• 33:56
  Speaker 1: our last year before shit gets real, because our fourteen
• 33:59
  Speaker 1: years Grace is in eighth grade and she's being taught
• 34:03
  Speaker 1: by her mom, and my younger daughter, Diana's in fourth grade.
• 34:07
  Speaker 1: So this is hopefully going to be a really good
• 34:10
  Speaker 1: year for us, and then things start to get very
• 34:12
  Speaker 1: serious when Grace goes to high school next year. But
• 34:16
  Speaker 1: there is no question that our education system, from top
• 34:21
  Speaker 1: to bottom, is in complete crisis, and living here in California,
• 34:26
  Speaker 1: I think we see it sooner than the rest of
• 34:29
  Speaker 1: the country. This tends to be the case because obviously
• 34:33
  Speaker 1: liberals have such a chokehold on everything here that things
• 34:37
  Speaker 1: tend to happen here first, and then they go throughout
• 34:40
  Speaker 1: like a tremor's on an earthquake, they go throughout much
• 34:44
  Speaker 1: of the rest of the country, and academia is certainly
• 34:48
  Speaker 1: no exception to that. I mean, speaking of my wife,
• 34:51
  Speaker 1: she spent two days in meetings getting ready for the
• 34:54
  Speaker 1: first day of school today, and basically all the meetings
• 34:59
  Speaker 1: for these teachers were about mental health of the child
• 35:04
  Speaker 1: or the student and making sure that the student is
• 35:09
  Speaker 1: allowed to avoid discomfort at all costs. Now, this is
• 35:16
  Speaker 1: my interpretation, my wife's interpretation, but I think it's pretty
• 35:22
  Speaker 1: darn accurate. It's all about figuring out a way for
• 35:26
  Speaker 1: discomfort avoidance among kids, not an exaggeration hours of discussion
• 35:34
  Speaker 1: with teachers. That seems to be the baseline premise. The
• 35:40
  Speaker 1: foundational principle of education is to make sure that school
• 35:48
  Speaker 1: children of all ages are able to avoid discomfort as
• 35:54
  Speaker 1: much as possible. And my view of that is, holy fuck,
• 36:00
  Speaker 1: we upside down. The entire point of school, or at
• 36:04
  Speaker 1: least a large point of school, was to get kids
• 36:09
  Speaker 1: used to discomfort so that they understand how to deal
• 36:14
  Speaker 1: with discomfort, so that when they come out of school
• 36:17
  Speaker 1: they're at least somewhat prepared for the real life, which
• 36:22
  Speaker 1: is going to have lots of discomfort. But instead we've
• 36:26
  Speaker 1: decided no, no, no, before we go into the real world,
• 36:29
  Speaker 1: we need to make sure that these younger years are
• 36:33
  Speaker 1: as free of discomfort as possible, and if your mental
• 36:39
  Speaker 1: health isn't in jeopardy, that needs to be taken care of.
• 36:43
  Speaker 1: We saw very high profile story parts of the University
• 36:47
  Speaker 1: of Michigan aren't even going to be giving incoming freshmen
• 36:50
  Speaker 1: in college grades in the first semester because they want
• 36:54
  Speaker 1: to avoid discomfort, They want to protect the mental health
• 36:58
  Speaker 1: of the vulnerable freshmen. This is pervading all of academia
• 37:04
  Speaker 1: and the implications of this are massive, and we're seeing
• 37:09
  Speaker 1: all sorts of stories and viral videos related to people
• 37:15
  Speaker 1: within academia starting to sound the alarms all over the country. Now,
• 37:23
  Speaker 1: as someone who has been predicting this ever since the
• 37:26
  Speaker 1: COVID panic, hid you know, I would like to say that, Okay,
• 37:31
  Speaker 1: I warned you. I told you this was going to happen.
• 37:34
  Speaker 1: If you shut down school for at least a year
• 37:37
  Speaker 1: depending on where you were in the country, and up
• 37:40
  Speaker 1: to almost two years here in California, guess what's gonna happen.
• 37:45
  Speaker 1: There's going to be massive, irreversible, unintended, hopefully unintended consequences
• 37:53
  Speaker 1: for that. For one thing, not only are kids going
• 37:57
  Speaker 1: to be missing massive amounts of education that can ever
• 38:00
  Speaker 1: be recouped, but you're sending a message and this was
• 38:04
  Speaker 1: always the most important part to me regarding school in
• 38:07
  Speaker 1: the COVID panic, You're sending the message to an entire
• 38:12
  Speaker 1: generation of parents and students at school doesn't fucking matter.
• 38:21
  Speaker 1: That's the message you sent that can't be reversed, That
• 38:26
  Speaker 1: bell cannot be unwrung. That has massive implications, including the
• 38:34
  Speaker 1: fact that kids will stop going to school whenever they
• 38:37
  Speaker 1: don't feel like going even and parents will sign off
• 38:41
  Speaker 1: on that because after all, school is not that big
• 38:43
  Speaker 1: of a deal, and they won't take the whole thing seriously,
• 38:47
  Speaker 1: and then it creates this mental health crisis that liberal
• 38:52
  Speaker 1: academics think that they need to playkate and deal with
• 38:55
  Speaker 1: that they caused. But there's also just fundamental, you know,
• 39:02
  Speaker 1: bricks and mortar, dotting eyes and crossing t's lack of education,
• 39:08
  Speaker 1: and we're seeing evidence of that everywhere. There was a
• 39:12
  Speaker 1: viral post from a male teacher I'm to be Black,
• 39:17
  Speaker 1: who was talking about how he's he was in tears
• 39:21
  Speaker 1: because none of his students can do the basic work
• 39:25
  Speaker 1: and he knows they're all screwed into the future. This
• 39:29
  Speaker 1: was a high school teacher kids allegedly that he's teaching
• 39:33
  Speaker 1: going to college completely and totally unprepared. College teachers, especially
• 39:38
  Speaker 1: hearing in California, saying that they're stunned by the lack
• 39:42
  Speaker 1: of preparation of their students. Again, how are we not
• 39:46
  Speaker 1: connecting this to how we handle the COVID panic first?
• 39:50
  Speaker 1: But this goes beyond just a COVID panic. This is
• 39:53
  Speaker 1: something that has been brewing for a very very long
• 39:56
  Speaker 1: time because our education system has been bad broken for
• 40:01
  Speaker 1: at least a generation and now we're just reaping what
• 40:06
  Speaker 1: we've sowed. And while there's more awareness of it, I
• 40:11
  Speaker 1: don't think anything's actually going to be done about it
• 40:14
  Speaker 1: because liberals will never admit they're wrong. They control the
• 40:18
  Speaker 1: education system, they double and triple down. All they ask
• 40:23
  Speaker 1: for is more and more money, more and more control,
• 40:27
  Speaker 1: and other than in the Mississippi where they figured it out,
• 40:30
  Speaker 1: because it's a red state, Mississippi, they were calling it
• 40:33
  Speaker 1: the Mississippi Miracle. Where guess what they did. They went
• 40:36
  Speaker 1: back to basics and shockingly they went from like forty
• 40:40
  Speaker 1: ninth or fiftieth in the country to some by some standards,
• 40:44
  Speaker 1: fourth of the country in education. If Mississippi can figure
• 40:49
  Speaker 1: it out, why the hell can't California, for instance, or
• 40:52
  Speaker 1: other major blue states. But we are in a whole
• 40:56
  Speaker 1: heat blow to trouble when it comes to our education system.
• 41:01
  Speaker 1: And since this was the first day of school here,
• 41:04
  Speaker 1: for us in California. I figured I would mention that,
• 41:06
  Speaker 1: but of course I'm sure that will be a theme
• 41:09
  Speaker 1: of the podcast as the school year goes along. Now
• 41:12
  Speaker 1: I want to shift into what's been going on politically,
• 41:16
  Speaker 1: specifically with regard to the twenty twenty eight presidential election,
• 41:20
  Speaker 1: which we have not talked about in the last couple
• 41:22
  Speaker 1: of episodes, but I think there's been some significant developments
• 41:26
  Speaker 1: that I wanted to mention, and a lot of them
• 41:28
  Speaker 1: surround AOC. Alexandria Acossio Cortes, the Democratic congressman from New York,
• 41:37
  Speaker 1: who is perceived as maybe the front runner now to
• 41:43
  Speaker 1: be the Democratic presidential nominee in twenty twenty eight. And
• 41:48
  Speaker 1: to that, I say, please please please please please please
• 41:53
  Speaker 1: please please please please please please please please please please
• 41:57
  Speaker 1: please please please please have AOC be the nominee. Now,
• 42:02
  Speaker 1: I say that not because I think AOC is to
• 42:06
  Speaker 1: be taken lightly. She is a threat. She could win
• 42:11
  Speaker 1: the nomination, but I think she has some major major
• 42:16
  Speaker 1: problems in a general election, and it's not unfortunately, because
• 42:22
  Speaker 1: she's a socialist and Bernie Sanders protege. I wish that
• 42:28
  Speaker 1: was the reason why she would be doa that AOC
• 42:31
  Speaker 1: would be doa in a general election, but it's not.
• 42:36
  Speaker 1: I think she's in big trouble in a general election
• 42:39
  Speaker 1: for other reasons, because I believe that our politics has
• 42:44
  Speaker 1: completely changed that policy means almost nothing. Now that's my
• 42:49
  Speaker 1: view of where we are politically. I think politics is
• 42:53
  Speaker 1: all about demographics and branding and vibes. That's really all
• 42:59
  Speaker 1: it is. Policy means almost nothing. It's only relevant in
• 43:05
  Speaker 1: as far as it defines your brand. Maybe a little bit.
• 43:09
  Speaker 1: But the demographics you represent, what your brand is, and
• 43:16
  Speaker 1: what the vibes surrounding you are are like ninety eight
• 43:20
  Speaker 1: ninety nine percent of the equation. And I totally see
• 43:26
  Speaker 1: how in a Democratic primary a lot of that is
• 43:30
  Speaker 1: good for AOC. And she's been doing some things though
• 43:35
  Speaker 1: that I think are to maneuver herself to win the nomination,
• 43:41
  Speaker 1: but aren't particularly great for her to be a general
• 43:45
  Speaker 1: election candidate. Now she's getting a lot of publicity because
• 43:51
  Speaker 1: she said that Woke one was crazy. In other words,
• 43:57
  Speaker 1: you know, she was at the forefront of Woke one
• 43:59
  Speaker 1: and boy was that crazy, Like we had a crazy
• 44:02
  Speaker 1: night that night. But now we've learned when that hangover
• 44:05
  Speaker 1: was crazy, and that we've learned our lesson. We're growing
• 44:08
  Speaker 1: up a little bit, and Woke two is not going
• 44:11
  Speaker 1: to be as crazy as Woke what. That's actually probably
• 44:16
  Speaker 1: decent branding. It's a nice attempt. It's gaslighting. I don't
• 44:21
  Speaker 1: know how effective that's going to be. I think Republicans
• 44:25
  Speaker 1: are right to try to nip that in the bud,
• 44:28
  Speaker 1: because it's absolutely ridiculous that you could be in favor of,
• 44:33
  Speaker 1: for instance, defunding the police as an adult and that
• 44:36
  Speaker 1: not be a position that should define you for forever.
• 44:41
  Speaker 1: You can't just change your mind about that just because
• 44:44
  Speaker 1: you realized, oh oops, that's not as popular as I
• 44:48
  Speaker 1: thought it was. That doesn't work that way. And that's
• 44:52
  Speaker 1: just one example of many. But I actually think that
• 44:56
  Speaker 1: there's a couple other things going on with AOC that
• 44:59
  Speaker 1: are more significant. And you're probably aware that she put
• 45:04
  Speaker 1: out a video where she described how she's freezing her eggs.
• 45:09
  Speaker 1: She's I think thirty six, maybe almost thirty seven years old,
• 45:14
  Speaker 1: which barely makes her eligible to run for president, but
• 45:16
  Speaker 1: she is eligible, and that she's freezing her eggs. So
• 45:21
  Speaker 1: she's not been married, she has no kids. She's going
• 45:24
  Speaker 1: to freeze her eggs, and that's very interesting that she
• 45:28
  Speaker 1: chose to do this in a very public way. Now,
• 45:31
  Speaker 1: of course, in her generation, everything's public, nothing's private. You're
• 45:36
  Speaker 1: a very social media focused person as AOC is, you're
• 45:40
  Speaker 1: going to share or overshare everything. But the fact that
• 45:44
  Speaker 1: this came in connection with the news that she's no
• 45:49
  Speaker 1: longer engaged to her long time boyfriend, I thought was
• 45:54
  Speaker 1: really interesting and possibly very significant. Now, the part of
• 46:00
  Speaker 1: the fiance say that's most bizarre is apparently that relationship
• 46:06
  Speaker 1: ended maybe a couple of years ago. How in this
• 46:09
  Speaker 1: world this could possibly happen with the tmzs and everyone
• 46:13
  Speaker 1: else covering this and a big a figure AOC has
• 46:16
  Speaker 1: been is just beyond my comprehension. But it appears as
• 46:22
  Speaker 1: if she hasn't been with her fiance for quite a
• 46:24
  Speaker 1: long time and no one knew it and no one
• 46:27
  Speaker 1: reported it. So she's now not dating anybody, and she's
• 46:33
  Speaker 1: freezing her eggs at thirty six, at thirty seven, and
• 46:37
  Speaker 1: she's clearly going to be a presidential candidate because the
• 46:41
  Speaker 1: socialist surge within the Democratic Party is just too great
• 46:46
  Speaker 1: for there not to be someone who's going to carry
• 46:49
  Speaker 1: that banner into the Democratic presidential primary. And she is
• 46:53
  Speaker 1: by far the best position to do so, So what
• 46:58
  Speaker 1: does this have to do with the general election? Well,
• 47:01
  Speaker 1: I told you I'm all about demographics now and branding
• 47:06
  Speaker 1: and vibes, and in a Democratic primary, being a young, attractive,
• 47:11
  Speaker 1: hip female who's freezing her eggs and doesn't even have
• 47:15
  Speaker 1: a boyfriend, that'll work. That dog will hunt in a
• 47:20
  Speaker 1: Democratic primary because there's a lot of very young women
• 47:25
  Speaker 1: that are going to relate to that story. And she's
• 47:29
  Speaker 1: a lot more exciting than Kamala Harris's and she hasn't
• 47:33
  Speaker 1: lost Donald Trump previously like Kamala Harris has. So when
• 47:38
  Speaker 1: you're looking at the female vote in the Democratic primary,
• 47:44
  Speaker 1: I think AOC hurts Harris rather significantly, and maybe in
• 47:50
  Speaker 1: a way that could become fatal for Harris. That's possible,
• 47:54
  Speaker 1: and so I totally get it from a Democratic primary perspective.
• 47:59
  Speaker 1: But then let's see what happens if AOC were to
• 48:02
  Speaker 1: win the nomination. I'm sorry, even as pessimistic as I am,
• 48:09
  Speaker 1: a late thirties, single, no kids, hip, attractive woman is
• 48:18
  Speaker 1: not going to play with certain elements of the demographics
• 48:24
  Speaker 1: that Democrats need to win a presidential election, specifically older women,
• 48:32
  Speaker 1: middle aged and older women, especially women who had kids,
• 48:36
  Speaker 1: who might not be at all in love with the
• 48:40
  Speaker 1: Republican Party, might be very pro to voting for the
• 48:42
  Speaker 1: Democratic Party. I'm just not buying that that's a demographic
• 48:48
  Speaker 1: that they're going to be comfortable with. The first female
• 48:51
  Speaker 1: president is going to be in her thirties and unmarried,
• 48:58
  Speaker 1: with no kids and no accomplishments. I'm going to have
• 49:04
  Speaker 1: a hard time buying that. I'm look, we're living in
• 49:07
  Speaker 1: an unprecedented time. All the old rules seed to be
• 49:10
  Speaker 1: in grave question, so I'm open to it. I'm not
• 49:13
  Speaker 1: saying it's impossible, because I've said many many times a
• 49:17
  Speaker 1: Republican candidate in twenty twenty eight is going to have
• 49:19
  Speaker 1: a massive problem because of Donald Trump in multiple ways.
• 49:24
  Speaker 1: So I'm actually mostly focused on the Democratic nominating process
• 49:29
  Speaker 1: here because i think whoever wins the Democratic nomination is
• 49:33
  Speaker 1: in the catbird seat, you know, obviously depending on how
• 49:37
  Speaker 1: the economy does between now and November twenty twenty eight.
• 49:41
  Speaker 1: But we're getting close to that being almost set in stone,
• 49:46
  Speaker 1: and so I'm not going to say that AOC can't win,
• 49:50
  Speaker 1: But of all the other options, I'll take her, yes, please, yes, please,
• 49:57
  Speaker 1: to AOC because she has massive vulnerabilities when it comes
• 50:03
  Speaker 1: to her persona and key voting blocks that are not
• 50:09
  Speaker 1: going to be attracted to her. That they that doesn't
• 50:13
  Speaker 1: mean that necessary going to vote for the Republican. I'll
• 50:15
  Speaker 1: tell you what if somehow you gave me Marco Rubio
• 50:19
  Speaker 1: against AOC, I'm very confident Marco Rubio wins because I
• 50:25
  Speaker 1: think he blunts a lot of her demographic advantages, and
• 50:30
  Speaker 1: he's a far more serious person, and he has some
• 50:34
  Speaker 1: crossover appeal, and he's not quite as tied to Trump
• 50:38
  Speaker 1: as for instance JD. Van says, because he's the vice
• 50:41
  Speaker 1: presidential nominee. All that being said, the Republican nominee, I've
• 50:46
  Speaker 1: said it before, I'll say it one hundred times again,
• 50:48
  Speaker 1: is going to be whoever Donald Trump wants it to be.
• 50:50
  Speaker 1: Although I should mention that a couple of Trump backed
• 50:56
  Speaker 1: nominees lost in Florida last night in their primary races.
• 51:01
  Speaker 1: So that's Florida, that's Ron De Santis territory. So if
• 51:05
  Speaker 1: there's one place where maybe Trump's grip isn't as strong
• 51:09
  Speaker 1: as it would be elsewhere, it might be Florida. But
• 51:12
  Speaker 1: there are at least some signs that Trump's grip isn't
• 51:15
  Speaker 1: quite as strong on the Republican Party as it used
• 51:18
  Speaker 1: to be. But my view is that Trump's endorsement, or
• 51:24
  Speaker 1: his perceived potential endorsement, is going to have a chilling
• 51:27
  Speaker 1: effect on the Republican race. In other words, no one's
• 51:31
  Speaker 1: going to get in that's a big name unless they
• 51:34
  Speaker 1: have some anticipation that Trump will endorse them, or at
• 51:39
  Speaker 1: least not endorse anyone else. Of course, that's almost impossible
• 51:43
  Speaker 1: to predict with Trump. But these are all smart people.
• 51:48
  Speaker 1: DeSantis is smart, Rubio is smart. They're not going to
• 51:52
  Speaker 1: launch a presidential candidacy, which is a massive undertaking, unless
• 51:59
  Speaker 1: they have so confidence that Trump's not gonna bigfoot them,
• 52:04
  Speaker 1: which he can do in one sentence. It's not gonna happen.
• 52:09
  Speaker 1: So I am. I am still of the belief that
• 52:12
  Speaker 1: there's not really gonna be a Republican race for the
• 52:15
  Speaker 1: nomination in twenty twenty eight. But if in theory you
• 52:18
  Speaker 1: gave me Rubio versus AOC, that would be, like I think,
• 52:22
  Speaker 1: the best theoretical matchup you could possibly have between the
• 52:26
  Speaker 1: most likely Republican candidates versus the most likely Democratic candidates.
• 52:32
  Speaker 1: Now it's my view that there's only five people right
• 52:36
  Speaker 1: now that can win the Democratic nomination, AOC, Harris Newsom,
• 52:42
  Speaker 1: Buddha Judge, and John Ossoff from Georgia. There's one guy
• 52:47
  Speaker 1: I have, I've said multiple times in this podcast and
• 52:52
  Speaker 1: on CNN who cannot win the nomination, and that is
• 52:56
  Speaker 1: Andy Bashier, governor of Kentucky. Good friend John Yarmouth, former
• 53:01
  Speaker 1: Democratic congressman, is a big fan of Basher. I've told
• 53:04
  Speaker 1: him on this podcast or I've basically asked him, so
• 53:07
  Speaker 1: give me the scenario where Basher can catch fire. And
• 53:11
  Speaker 1: I don't think I got one applausible answer, because a
• 53:15
  Speaker 1: straight white, non celebrity male from Kentucky who looks like
• 53:22
  Speaker 1: a Republican is not going to win the Democratic presidential
• 53:26
  Speaker 1: nomination in this environment. But the reason I'm mentioning Basher
• 53:30
  Speaker 1: right now is that he went on national television I
• 53:33
  Speaker 1: think it was Faced the Nation was one of the
• 53:36
  Speaker 1: Sunday morning shows, and he called for the abolishment of
• 53:40
  Speaker 1: the electoral college. And the reason I found this significant
• 53:45
  Speaker 1: was I thought, Wow, isn't this funny where AOC is
• 53:50
  Speaker 1: saying woke one is crazy, so kind of trying to
• 53:53
  Speaker 1: back off of you know, woke ism and Andy Basher
• 53:58
  Speaker 1: because of his person, his brand, his vibes. He has
• 54:03
  Speaker 1: to prove to the Democratic primary voter just how crazy
• 54:08
  Speaker 1: he is. He has to say me to me too him,
• 54:12
  Speaker 1: I'm crazy. Look, look how crazy I am. I'm going
• 54:14
  Speaker 1: to go on national television and say we should abolished
• 54:16
  Speaker 1: the electoral college, which, by the way, would be terrible
• 54:19
  Speaker 1: for Kentucky. I don't even understand the logic of that.
• 54:23
  Speaker 1: But and I'm not going to get into all this
• 54:26
  Speaker 1: ramifications of abolishing the electoral college. But I'll just say
• 54:29
  Speaker 1: this one thing, because this should end the argument. If
• 54:33
  Speaker 1: you got rid of the electoral college. No one ever
• 54:36
  Speaker 1: mentions this, but this is a slam dunk mike drop
• 54:41
  Speaker 1: argument against abolishing the electoral college. If you got rid
• 54:46
  Speaker 1: of the electoral college and we had a close election
• 54:51
  Speaker 1: on the presidential side, which we have on a regular
• 54:54
  Speaker 1: basis now and by the way, twenty twenty four probably
• 54:57
  Speaker 1: would have qualified as a close enough election. If you
• 55:02
  Speaker 1: have a close election, you're going to have to have
• 55:06
  Speaker 1: a recount. The electoral college means you only have to
• 55:11
  Speaker 1: recount the states that are closely contested. If you don't
• 55:16
  Speaker 1: have the electoral college and you go buy a general
• 55:21
  Speaker 1: popular vote, you have to recount every fucking precinct in
• 55:27
  Speaker 1: the country, and you will instantaneously incentivize massive voter count
• 55:35
  Speaker 1: fraud in the precincts that are highly partisan, because everyone's
• 55:41
  Speaker 1: going to know exactly what kind of number they need
• 55:43
  Speaker 1: to get to to win. It's gonna be total, complete chaos.
• 55:47
  Speaker 1: It's gonna be Florida in two thousand on steroids. It
• 55:53
  Speaker 1: would cost a civil fucking war. I'm not exaggerating. So
• 55:59
  Speaker 1: if for that reason and a load, it's absurd to
• 56:02
  Speaker 1: get rid of the electoral college. But to me, that
• 56:04
  Speaker 1: just showed the absolutely zany nature of the democratic primary
• 56:11
  Speaker 1: process already, where Bashir has to do something to get attention,
• 56:15
  Speaker 1: to show that he's part of the crazy woke club.
• 56:19
  Speaker 1: At the very same time, when AOC is saying, you know,
• 56:23
  Speaker 1: you know, maybe we stopped doing the harrow and we
• 56:26
  Speaker 1: just cut back to cocaine and weed, and but Sheer's like, no, no,
• 56:32
  Speaker 1: give me some of the hard stuff. And as far
• 56:36
  Speaker 1: as John Ossoff is concerned, he's having his moment. A
• 56:39
  Speaker 1: lot of the liberal elites are starting to maneuver around
• 56:43
  Speaker 1: John Ossoff from Georgia starting to fall in love with him,
• 56:48
  Speaker 1: and I understand it. I get it. He's a straight
• 56:52
  Speaker 1: white male because again, demographics, I think are like a
• 56:55
  Speaker 1: huge portion of this whole deal. He's part of the
• 56:58
  Speaker 1: straight white male lane, which is, you know, that's the
• 57:02
  Speaker 1: lane that Newsom is hoping to dominate because there's only
• 57:06
  Speaker 1: room for maybe two straight white males in a Democratic
• 57:12
  Speaker 1: presidential primary process, and it appears as if John Ossop
• 57:16
  Speaker 1: is going to be one of them. And I think
• 57:18
  Speaker 1: the most significant thing that's happened in the last week
• 57:21
  Speaker 1: with Asoff is not necessarily that the liberal elites are
• 57:26
  Speaker 1: starting to rally around him. It's that his comments have
• 57:30
  Speaker 1: made it very very clear he's running for president, or
• 57:33
  Speaker 1: at least intends to. And the reason I say that
• 57:36
  Speaker 1: is he's running for reelection in Georgia. And to me,
• 57:40
  Speaker 1: it's one of the worst signs for Republicans in the
• 57:44
  Speaker 1: midterm elections that not only is John Asoff going to
• 57:48
  Speaker 1: win apparently in Georgia, a state that Trump won in
• 57:53
  Speaker 1: twenty twenty four, and that, other than Atlanta, is a
• 57:57
  Speaker 1: rather conservative state. To this day, it's had a Republican
• 58:01
  Speaker 1: governor that's done very well for Georgia. The fact that
• 58:05
  Speaker 1: Osov is going to win is problematic, But the fact
• 58:08
  Speaker 1: that he's going to win so easily that he can
• 58:12
  Speaker 1: pivot towards a presidential campaign while running for reelection for Senate,
• 58:20
  Speaker 1: that to me is a massive red flag for Republicans
• 58:25
  Speaker 1: in the midterms. Massive And it's clear that Osof is
• 58:30
  Speaker 1: pivoting towards a presidential campaign because he is attacking Trump
• 58:35
  Speaker 1: in exactly the way you would do so if you
• 58:39
  Speaker 1: weren't running for reelection in the state that Trump won
• 58:42
  Speaker 1: in twenty twenty four and you were running for president.
• 58:46
  Speaker 1: And he's gotten a lot of attention because he was
• 58:49
  Speaker 1: the first potential presidential candidate to raise this issue of
• 58:54
  Speaker 1: Natalie Harp. I don't think the Natalie Harp thing right
• 58:58
  Speaker 1: now is that big of a deal. But for those
• 59:00
  Speaker 1: that don't know, Natalie Harp is a young, attractive, blonde
• 59:04
  Speaker 1: woman who is a close aide to President Trump, who
• 59:07
  Speaker 1: is clearly obsessed with him to an unhealthy level. And
• 59:12
  Speaker 1: the evidence of this seems pretty overwhelming. And you know,
• 59:18
  Speaker 1: Osoff raised the specter that there's more going on between
• 59:22
  Speaker 1: Trump and Natalie than just a relationship between President and aid.
• 59:29
  Speaker 1: I have no idea Trump's eighty years old at this point.
• 59:33
  Speaker 1: I have no idea what his level of interest in
• 59:36
  Speaker 1: extracurricular activities is. I have no doubt that if he asked,
• 59:41
  Speaker 1: Natalie Harp would engage in anything he wanted to, based
• 59:44
  Speaker 1: upon what we know about her. But Asoff went there
• 59:49
  Speaker 1: and that got him a lot of attention, and to
• 59:52
  Speaker 1: me that was a sign of Okay, this guy is
• 59:56
  Speaker 1: intending to run for president. You don't do that. There's
• 1:00:01
  Speaker 1: no need to do that while you're running for reelection
• 1:00:05
  Speaker 1: in a state Trump won unless you're one super confident
• 1:00:10
  Speaker 1: you're going to win. And two, you're trying to use
• 1:00:14
  Speaker 1: your reelection campaign in Georgia to build the foundation because
• 1:00:18
  Speaker 1: you know this is where you're going to get attention
• 1:00:20
  Speaker 1: to build the foundation for a presidential campaign. And the
• 1:00:23
  Speaker 1: number one thing you need to do to win the
• 1:00:26
  Speaker 1: Democratic nomination in twenty twenty eight is to prove how
• 1:00:30
  Speaker 1: much against Donald Trump you are. You need to have absolute, total,
• 1:00:36
  Speaker 1: one hundred percent street cred on that issue. And so
• 1:00:40
  Speaker 1: I'm convinced that asof is running, I'm convinced that there
• 1:00:44
  Speaker 1: is a desire among a lot of liberal elites that say,
• 1:00:48
  Speaker 1: and I can understand the logic. They say, well, we've
• 1:00:51
  Speaker 1: got this guy who's going to win big in Georgia.
• 1:00:54
  Speaker 1: And you know, it's a red state, or at least
• 1:00:57
  Speaker 1: allegedly a red state, although I think it's more of
• 1:00:59
  Speaker 1: a purple state now unfortunately. But you've got a straight
• 1:01:04
  Speaker 1: white male from the South. You know, this can help
• 1:01:08
  Speaker 1: us with demographics we've done very poorly with in the
• 1:01:11
  Speaker 1: Trump era, and Osoft can win. I get that, and
• 1:01:17
  Speaker 1: I actually think that in a general election asof could
• 1:01:20
  Speaker 1: be very formidable. You know, a lot of people think
• 1:01:23
  Speaker 1: that he's got some Obama in him. I don't buy
• 1:01:27
  Speaker 1: that as far as being an orator, but he tries
• 1:01:30
  Speaker 1: to be Obama like and his demographics are straight white
• 1:01:36
  Speaker 1: male from Georgia, which is problematic, I think not it's
• 1:01:43
  Speaker 1: not devastating problematic in a Democratic primary, the Georgia thing,
• 1:01:50
  Speaker 1: I mean, because he's not gonna be He has to
• 1:01:52
  Speaker 1: prove to them he's not a moderate, because a moderate
• 1:01:55
  Speaker 1: is not going to win politically, at least in their
• 1:01:58
  Speaker 1: vibes the Democratic nomination in a crowded race. But he's
• 1:02:03
  Speaker 1: also got another demographic problem, and that is he's Jewish. Now,
• 1:02:10
  Speaker 1: I don't know for sure how big of a problem
• 1:02:13
  Speaker 1: that is. It's definitely not a help in a Democratic primary.
• 1:02:17
  Speaker 1: But and it's a tough one because how do you
• 1:02:21
  Speaker 1: get people educated that he's Jewish? Right? Because it's kind
• 1:02:25
  Speaker 1: of a very touchy subject, and I don't know how
• 1:02:30
  Speaker 1: his Democratic opponents are going to let the populace know
• 1:02:34
  Speaker 1: that he's Jewish. They're going to try, because it's not
• 1:02:37
  Speaker 1: going to help in a Democratic primary, that's for damn sure.
• 1:02:41
  Speaker 1: But while it's not impossible at all, I think it's
• 1:02:46
  Speaker 1: going to be a tough one for a straight white
• 1:02:49
  Speaker 1: male from Georgia who's Jewish to be the Democratic nominee.
• 1:02:54
  Speaker 1: It's possible. I want to emphasize that he's on the
• 1:02:57
  Speaker 1: top five list. He's one of the five people right
• 1:03:00
  Speaker 1: now that can win the Democratic presidential nomination. But that
• 1:03:06
  Speaker 1: demographic profile I think is at least somewhat, if not
• 1:03:12
  Speaker 1: very problematic for him. And he's not a big celebrity
• 1:03:17
  Speaker 1: right now. That that can change. He can become a
• 1:03:20
  Speaker 1: big celebrity when he wins in November. The liberal media
• 1:03:24
  Speaker 1: is going to go bananas. I mean, his victory speech
• 1:03:28
  Speaker 1: will be very early on election night twenty twenty six,
• 1:03:32
  Speaker 1: and it's going to get a lot of coverage, and
• 1:03:35
  Speaker 1: he can become a little bit like Obama did in
• 1:03:39
  Speaker 1: two thousand and eight, although the media environment is completely
• 1:03:42
  Speaker 1: different now and that's much much more difficult, But there
• 1:03:44
  Speaker 1: can be a little bit of that Obama phenomenon if
• 1:03:49
  Speaker 1: things go as I anticipate that they will. So I'm
• 1:03:52
  Speaker 1: not at all writing off John Assop, either for the
• 1:03:56
  Speaker 1: nomination or to be the next president. I'm just saying
• 1:04:00
  Speaker 1: that he's not a deadlock since even though the fact
• 1:04:03
  Speaker 1: is that the liberal elites clearly like him because they
• 1:04:06
  Speaker 1: think he's the most electable. But I am going to
• 1:04:10
  Speaker 1: make an alteration to our Gavin Newsom fear factor rating
• 1:04:14
  Speaker 1: because of all these developments. We currently have the fear
• 1:04:18
  Speaker 1: factor rating at six point five. I'm going to lower
• 1:04:20
  Speaker 1: it to six with hesitation because I'm always pessimistic, but
• 1:04:26
  Speaker 1: I think that John Assoff's rise clearly hurts Gavin Newsom
• 1:04:31
  Speaker 1: because that's the straight white male lane. And I think
• 1:04:36
  Speaker 1: that Osoff rising hurts Newsome. And I also think AOC
• 1:04:43
  Speaker 1: rising hurts Newsom because it hurts Harris. I've said many
• 1:04:47
  Speaker 1: times before I think that there's it gets a little complicated,
• 1:04:52
  Speaker 1: but I've always felt like Harris is number one. Benefit
• 1:04:59
  Speaker 1: from my perspect in this race is that she somewhat
• 1:05:02
  Speaker 1: cock blocks Gaven Newssom being from California, and if she
• 1:05:08
  Speaker 1: diminishes because of AOC, I think that that's a problem
• 1:05:14
  Speaker 1: in the long run for Newsom. Now again, it's going
• 1:05:17
  Speaker 1: to be a complicated race. There's going to be at
• 1:05:20
  Speaker 1: least five major candidates. I don't see anyone winning right
• 1:05:23
  Speaker 1: off the bat, and I'm certainly not saying the Gavenussam
• 1:05:27
  Speaker 1: is going to lose. Boy, I would be thrilled if
• 1:05:30
  Speaker 1: I could say for sure the Gavenussom was not going
• 1:05:33
  Speaker 1: to be the Democratic presidential nominee. But I am lowering
• 1:05:36
  Speaker 1: the fear factor as of right now to six point
• 1:05:39
  Speaker 1: zero out of ten. Now, speaking of Gavenussom in California,
• 1:05:45
  Speaker 1: you know, I think as part of his plan to
• 1:05:49
  Speaker 1: run for president, Gavin Newsom is actually against Proposition forty,
• 1:05:54
  Speaker 1: which is on the ballot in the midterm elections here
• 1:05:56
  Speaker 1: in California, which is the so called billionaires tax that
• 1:06:02
  Speaker 1: would tax billionaire's assets at five percent, allegedly in a
• 1:06:08
  Speaker 1: one time deal, which is just a force. There's no
• 1:06:12
  Speaker 1: way this is only going to happen one time, And
• 1:06:15
  Speaker 1: the way that it's written allows for the legislature to
• 1:06:19
  Speaker 1: basically do whatever they want with this in the future.
• 1:06:21
  Speaker 1: The whole thing is a farce. It's a fraud. It's
• 1:06:25
  Speaker 1: incredibly disturbing in my view, it's clearly theft, and it's
• 1:06:30
  Speaker 1: also logistically unworkable. But Newsom's against this, as is the
• 1:06:37
  Speaker 1: next governor of California, Javier Bsera, is also against Proposition forty.
• 1:06:43
  Speaker 1: But right now it appears as if Proposition forty has
• 1:06:45
  Speaker 1: a very very good chance of passing. And last week
• 1:06:51
  Speaker 1: I went on CNN, on Alex Michaelson's late night show
• 1:06:55
  Speaker 1: on CNN, which is out of Los Angeles, to do
• 1:06:59
  Speaker 1: two different segments. Now, I'm going to tell you this
• 1:07:03
  Speaker 1: story basically from two perspectives. That one there's the making
• 1:07:07
  Speaker 1: of the sausage, and then two there's the issue of
• 1:07:09
  Speaker 1: proposition forty. So the day that I'm supposed to go
• 1:07:14
  Speaker 1: on CE and N to do two segments, one on
• 1:07:16
  Speaker 1: the nine o'clock hour, one on the ten o'clock hour,
• 1:07:19
  Speaker 1: we get the subjects that we're going to talk about,
• 1:07:23
  Speaker 1: and I'm not that thrilled with the subject matter, especially
• 1:07:27
  Speaker 1: for the first segment, the nine o'clock segment, but I
• 1:07:31
  Speaker 1: realize I have almost no influence over changing that. So
• 1:07:35
  Speaker 1: I'm trying to figure out, Okay, how can I make
• 1:07:37
  Speaker 1: the first segment interesting? But I'm pretty confident about the
• 1:07:41
  Speaker 1: second segment because the second segment has as the third topic,
• 1:07:47
  Speaker 1: which is rare because we usually only do two topics
• 1:07:50
  Speaker 1: in a segment, proposition forty, and I inquired as to
• 1:07:56
  Speaker 1: whether or not it was possible to eliminate one of
• 1:07:59
  Speaker 1: the other two topics in the second segment because I
• 1:08:02
  Speaker 1: wanted to make sure we had enough time for proposition forty,
• 1:08:06
  Speaker 1: because I knew that's where my greatest passion was and
• 1:08:09
  Speaker 1: where I could probably make the largest impact. And you're
• 1:08:14
  Speaker 1: going to see in a moment that that's pretty much
• 1:08:16
  Speaker 1: when ended up happening. I was told that there would
• 1:08:20
  Speaker 1: be an effort made, but in the end they couldn't
• 1:08:23
  Speaker 1: change it because and this was key, because the segment
• 1:08:27
  Speaker 1: after us was going to be an interview with the
• 1:08:30
  Speaker 1: guy who was sponsoring proposition forty, and they wanted that
• 1:08:35
  Speaker 1: topic to lead into the next segment, which I totally
• 1:08:39
  Speaker 1: got and from a programming perspective, makes one hundred percent sense.
• 1:08:44
  Speaker 1: But I wanted to figure out a way to make
• 1:08:46
  Speaker 1: sure that we had enough time because I knew that,
• 1:08:51
  Speaker 1: although it was actually even worse than I thought it
• 1:08:52
  Speaker 1: would be, I knew I would be up against it,
• 1:08:56
  Speaker 1: especially with the guy coming on after me who would
• 1:09:00
  Speaker 1: sponsoring Proposition forty, which I'm vehemently against. So we do
• 1:09:04
  Speaker 1: the first segment. It goes fine, nothing all that memorable,
• 1:09:08
  Speaker 1: but it's fine. And as we're leaving the set, Alex
• 1:09:13
  Speaker 1: with whom I have a pretty good relationship, and he's
• 1:09:16
  Speaker 1: been on this podcast before, and that's why I ended
• 1:09:18
  Speaker 1: up getting asked on the show, and they seemingly like
• 1:09:22
  Speaker 1: having me on, so they keep asking me back. He
• 1:09:24
  Speaker 1: jokingly says something the effect of be nice to the
• 1:09:29
  Speaker 1: Prop forty guy in the green room, because he knew
• 1:09:32
  Speaker 1: even though he's on set, he's not in the green room.
• 1:09:34
  Speaker 1: He knew that this guy Don Reagan I think is
• 1:09:37
  Speaker 1: his name, who was going to be the guest on
• 1:09:41
  Speaker 1: after our second segment in the next hour, was going
• 1:09:45
  Speaker 1: to be in the green room, and he also knew
• 1:09:47
  Speaker 1: my opinion on Prop forty, and I think he jokingly thought,
• 1:09:51
  Speaker 1: you know what, I'll tell Zigler just to be nice
• 1:09:54
  Speaker 1: to him, and I kind of chuckled. I'm like, okay, fine,
• 1:09:57
  Speaker 1: no problem. So I go back into the green room
• 1:10:00
  Speaker 1: where all the guests are there. They're watching television, you know,
• 1:10:04
  Speaker 1: you get a coke or a bottled water or whatever,
• 1:10:08
  Speaker 1: and you're and we're waiting for the ten o'clock hour
• 1:10:12
  Speaker 1: to cop roll around so that we can do the
• 1:10:15
  Speaker 1: second segment, which is the one that has on the
• 1:10:18
  Speaker 1: agenda PROP forty. And sure enough, Don Reagan and his
• 1:10:22
  Speaker 1: assistant are in the green room. Now. Don Reagan is
• 1:10:26
  Speaker 1: on the other side of the green room, which is
• 1:10:30
  Speaker 1: a fairly large room, think about it as your living room.
• 1:10:34
  Speaker 1: And I sit down on the opposite side of the
• 1:10:36
  Speaker 1: room from him, and next to me is his assistant,
• 1:10:40
  Speaker 1: who basically looks like a washed up hippie, nice enough guy,
• 1:10:45
  Speaker 1: but you know, clearly to me he was very liberal
• 1:10:48
  Speaker 1: just from the way he was presenting himself. And we
• 1:10:53
  Speaker 1: started talking. I figured out he was there for the
• 1:10:57
  Speaker 1: Prop forty issue. And we had a as a short
• 1:11:01
  Speaker 1: conversation where I say to him, very matter of factively,
• 1:11:06
  Speaker 1: in exactly this tone of voice, I say something to
• 1:11:09
  Speaker 1: the effect of, well, you do know that this is theft, right,
• 1:11:14
  Speaker 1: That's what I said. Now, the assistant was not inherently
• 1:11:18
  Speaker 1: offended by that. He seemed to want to engage in
• 1:11:21
  Speaker 1: a discussion about it. But from the other side of
• 1:11:24
  Speaker 1: the room, the guy who was actually going on CNN
• 1:11:28
  Speaker 1: after me in the next segment is Don Reagan. He
• 1:11:33
  Speaker 1: says across the room without an introduction, we have not
• 1:11:37
  Speaker 1: been introduced. He doesn't know who I am. I don't
• 1:11:39
  Speaker 1: know for sure who he is, although I think I
• 1:11:41
  Speaker 1: figured it out pretty quickly. He says, you're an asshole.
• 1:11:47
  Speaker 1: I'm like, what what What did you just I think,
• 1:11:53
  Speaker 1: actually literally what I said to him? What did you
• 1:11:55
  Speaker 1: just say? I didn't do? Are you talking to me?
• 1:11:59
  Speaker 1: Are you talking to me? That's what I should have done. Well,
• 1:12:02
  Speaker 1: that's kind of what my reaction was. I was like, stunned.
• 1:12:05
  Speaker 1: This is highly unusual for a green room at a
• 1:12:09
  Speaker 1: major media outlet. And then he reiterates what he said, saying,
• 1:12:13
  Speaker 1: you're a professional asshole. I'm like, professional asshole. So I
• 1:12:19
  Speaker 1: think I was like, I was curious about what he
• 1:12:23
  Speaker 1: meant by professional. And then I'm not one hundred percent
• 1:12:27
  Speaker 1: sure what he said the third time, but he said
• 1:12:29
  Speaker 1: something to the effect of you're a professional amateur asshole.
• 1:12:33
  Speaker 1: There's something For some reason, he used the word professional
• 1:12:36
  Speaker 1: and amateur together and then called me an asshole for
• 1:12:40
  Speaker 1: a third time. Now, if I had been there and
• 1:12:47
  Speaker 1: I didn't have respect for Alex, and if Alex hadn't said, hey,
• 1:12:51
  Speaker 1: be nice to the prop forty guy in the green room,
• 1:12:55
  Speaker 1: there might have been fisticuffs. Instead, I basically just shut up,
• 1:13:02
  Speaker 1: although I did continue my conversation with the assistant, but
• 1:13:07
  Speaker 1: I clearly came to a conclusion about the essence of
• 1:13:12
  Speaker 1: this guy, which was not good. Now, if he thought
• 1:13:16
  Speaker 1: that he was intimidating me, because I think he knew
• 1:13:20
  Speaker 1: I was going on to talk about his proposition before him,
• 1:13:24
  Speaker 1: it clearly did not work. And this was a classic
• 1:13:28
  Speaker 1: situation where I was up against a lot of different factors.
• 1:13:33
  Speaker 1: I had everything going against me, which is not unusual
• 1:13:36
  Speaker 1: for when I go on, especially a liberal outlet on television,
• 1:13:42
  Speaker 1: but in this particular case, I had a lot against me.
• 1:13:45
  Speaker 1: I had a guy in the green room who was
• 1:13:46
  Speaker 1: going to follow me up, who's calling me an asshole.
• 1:13:50
  Speaker 1: By the way, the liberal who I was on with,
• 1:13:53
  Speaker 1: Dina dal was also there in the green room, and
• 1:13:56
  Speaker 1: I think she was a bit taken aback by the
• 1:13:58
  Speaker 1: whole thing, though she handled it pretty darn well. But
• 1:14:02
  Speaker 1: she's in favor of Prop forty and Alex clearly isn't
• 1:14:07
  Speaker 1: going to come out against Prop forty on the air.
• 1:14:10
  Speaker 1: And what I didn't know at the time was that
• 1:14:13
  Speaker 1: our already short amount of time to deal with this
• 1:14:16
  Speaker 1: was going to be taken up by Alex playing a
• 1:14:19
  Speaker 1: clip from the guy who just called me an asshole,
• 1:14:22
  Speaker 1: who's coming on live after me, So he gets to
• 1:14:26
  Speaker 1: have the word before me, he gets to have the
• 1:14:29
  Speaker 1: word after me. He gets to call me an asshole
• 1:14:31
  Speaker 1: three times in the green room. I've got a host
• 1:14:35
  Speaker 1: who's not going to be publicly siding with me. I
• 1:14:37
  Speaker 1: got someone who I'm debating with who's clearly against me.
• 1:14:42
  Speaker 1: I'm on CNN. I mean, I've got everything possible against me,
• 1:14:47
  Speaker 1: including the clock running out. And we're going to play
• 1:14:52
  Speaker 1: a little bit of an extended version of what transpired,
• 1:14:55
  Speaker 1: because I want to give you a little bit of
• 1:14:57
  Speaker 1: an insight into how do I try to deal with
• 1:15:01
  Speaker 1: these situations. So, because I knew we were up against
• 1:15:06
  Speaker 1: the clock, we were discussing just before we were going
• 1:15:11
  Speaker 1: to talk about Prop forty in California, we were discussing
• 1:15:15
  Speaker 1: President Trump's dismal approval ratings, and I could tell this
• 1:15:20
  Speaker 1: was going on too long because I wanted to get
• 1:15:23
  Speaker 1: to Prop forty, so I did something I almost never do,
• 1:15:27
  Speaker 1: partially because of the way the seats are positioned. It's
• 1:15:31
  Speaker 1: almost impossible for me to interrupt the person I'm debating
• 1:15:35
  Speaker 1: because I'm in what I call the rosa park seat.
• 1:15:37
  Speaker 1: I'm at the back of the bus. But I decided
• 1:15:40
  Speaker 1: to interrupt her in an effort to try to send
• 1:15:44
  Speaker 1: a bat signal to Alex Michaelson, the host, and that
• 1:15:49
  Speaker 1: bat signal was I accused her of class envy, and
• 1:15:55
  Speaker 1: I knew, at least I thought I did. I knew
• 1:15:58
  Speaker 1: that the words class envy would trigger in Alex the
• 1:16:05
  Speaker 1: next segment, because that's a lot of what Proposition forty
• 1:16:08
  Speaker 1: is about. So that was my effort to try to
• 1:16:11
  Speaker 1: get out of the discussion about Trump and get us
• 1:16:16
  Speaker 1: to Prop forty so that I would at least have
• 1:16:18
  Speaker 1: enough time to make my argument. And while it didn't
• 1:16:23
  Speaker 1: work perfectly, I think if you listen carefully to what transpired,
• 1:16:27
  Speaker 1: you're going to see Alex gets the message and does
• 1:16:32
  Speaker 1: transition into PROP forty. He then does send it to
• 1:16:36
  Speaker 1: a clip of a guy who he's going to have
• 1:16:38
  Speaker 1: on right after me, which kind of reminded me of
• 1:16:40
  Speaker 1: when I went on the Today Show the second time
• 1:16:44
  Speaker 1: to discuss, actually the first time, to discuss the Penn
• 1:16:47
  Speaker 1: State Joe Paterno jerrys Dusky case, and somehow Scott Paterno
• 1:16:51
  Speaker 1: got almost as much say as I did before I
• 1:16:54
  Speaker 1: even said what I was going to say. But this
• 1:16:58
  Speaker 1: is the this is what happens when you live life
• 1:17:00
  Speaker 1: with no leverage, and that's what that's my situation when
• 1:17:03
  Speaker 1: it comes to all major television appearances. I have no
• 1:17:07
  Speaker 1: leverage and I'm going uphill against the wind on ice
• 1:17:11
  Speaker 1: with lead bricks around my feet. But I'm doing the
• 1:17:13
  Speaker 1: best I possibly can now. So I want you to
• 1:17:16
  Speaker 1: listen carefully to the bat signal, and then I want
• 1:17:19
  Speaker 1: you to listen to Alex. You got to see the
• 1:17:22
  Speaker 1: video to fully appreciate this, which I've posted on my
• 1:17:26
  Speaker 1: social media and you can find it easily if you're interested.
• 1:17:30
  Speaker 1: But Alex, when he introduces me, you can actually hear
• 1:17:34
  Speaker 1: it in his voice that he's kind of bracing for
• 1:17:38
  Speaker 1: this onslaught that's going to come his way. And I
• 1:17:42
  Speaker 1: think he got exactly what he expected to get. And
• 1:17:45
  Speaker 1: here's what it all sounded like how it went down
• 1:17:48
  Speaker 1: on CNN last Wednesday night.
• 1:17:52
  Speaker 2: All the way with it.
• 1:17:53
  Speaker 1: I don't know, maybe old ideas. That's class envy. That's
• 1:17:56
  Speaker 1: what you guys are doing. You're playing on class end.
• 1:17:58
  Speaker 2: There's nothing about I mean, living healthcare.
• 1:18:01
  Speaker 3: It is, and credit to people that are bringing ideas.
• 1:18:04
  Speaker 3: A lot of the establishment Democrats are not. I mean
• 1:18:06
  Speaker 3: a lot of the progressive Democrats are. And a lot
• 1:18:08
  Speaker 3: of established Democrats have not laid out a plant and
• 1:18:10
  Speaker 3: many of them do not back the idea of medicare for.
• 1:18:12
  Speaker 2: All, and that's why a lot of them aren't.
• 1:18:15
  Speaker 3: But progressives in California, especially the Democratic Party, are now
• 1:18:19
  Speaker 3: behind the idea of a wealth tax. Let's put up
• 1:18:22
  Speaker 3: the information we're talking about up on the screen. This
• 1:18:25
  Speaker 3: is a one time THEEA five percent tax on assets
• 1:18:28
  Speaker 3: of all California billionaires. It is on the November ballot.
• 1:18:32
  Speaker 3: It is being sponsored and led by Dave Reagan and
• 1:18:36
  Speaker 3: the SEIU United Healthcare Workers. And he was interviewed by
• 1:18:41
  Speaker 3: Politico on stage in Sacramento yesterday by Jeremy White. Here's
• 1:18:45
  Speaker 3: some of what he said about how this would be
• 1:18:47
  Speaker 3: a national moment.
• 1:18:48
  Speaker 4: If Congresswoman Ocassio Cortes is watching, we would love your
• 1:18:54
  Speaker 4: support congresswoman. We you know, whatever we have to do,
• 1:18:58
  Speaker 4: we're ready to help you get there. Kidding aside, I
• 1:19:02
  Speaker 4: do think this is now a national campaign, this issue.
• 1:19:07
  Speaker 4: We knew this was provocative, we knew this would touch
• 1:19:10
  Speaker 4: a nerve. We completely underestimated how much interest and attention
• 1:19:15
  Speaker 4: that this would generate.
• 1:19:19
  Speaker 3: All right, John, your thoughts. Dave Reagan, by the way,
• 1:19:23
  Speaker 3: standing by in the green room, he's going to be
• 1:19:25
  Speaker 3: on to make his case.
• 1:19:26
  Speaker 1: Your thoughts. Well. First of all, to be clear, I
• 1:19:29
  Speaker 1: don't think any of the three of us are eligible
• 1:19:31
  Speaker 1: for this threshold. I know I'm not eligible. I know
• 1:19:33
  Speaker 1: cable news network television doesn't pay as much as us
• 1:19:36
  Speaker 1: in this time. Well, so I don't think that we're
• 1:19:39
  Speaker 1: talking about ourselves here. But to be more serious, this
• 1:19:42
  Speaker 1: is the most important issue on the ballot in twenty
• 1:19:45
  Speaker 1: twenty six in my opinion, and not just because your
• 1:19:48
  Speaker 1: next guest said this is going to be a national issue.
• 1:19:50
  Speaker 1: This is about who we are as a country, and this,
• 1:19:53
  Speaker 1: in my opinion, ought to be referred to not as
• 1:19:55
  Speaker 1: a tax, but as theft. This is stealing. This is
• 1:19:59
  Speaker 1: legal stealing from people who have already paid taxes on
• 1:20:03
  Speaker 1: their unrealized gains on an arbitrary threshold of a billion dollars.
• 1:20:09
  Speaker 1: This is as Unamerican as it gets claiming to be
• 1:20:13
  Speaker 1: a one time deal. I would ask anyone who has
• 1:20:16
  Speaker 1: ever found a spouse cheating who said it was only
• 1:20:19
  Speaker 1: one time whether or not they really believe that, because
• 1:20:22
  Speaker 1: that's what you're being asked to believe. This will only
• 1:20:25
  Speaker 1: happen one time, and that threshold will never get lowered.
• 1:20:28
  Speaker 1: If you believe that, you will buy anything. But this
• 1:20:31
  Speaker 1: is a sham, this is a farce, this is theft.
• 1:20:34
  Speaker 3: It does say in the legislation that it are in
• 1:20:38
  Speaker 3: the bill that it would be a one time thing,
• 1:20:40
  Speaker 3: would go.
• 1:20:40
  Speaker 1: Ahead, absolutely, so long luck with that.
• 1:20:42
  Speaker 2: I mean, the fact of the matter is most people
• 1:20:45
  Speaker 2: who have gotten to a billion dollars have not paid
• 1:20:48
  Speaker 2: ordinary income tax on their wealth. So if we're going
• 1:20:51
  Speaker 2: to start talking about fairness, the person who works a
• 1:20:54
  Speaker 2: nine to five job pays proportionally so much more in
• 1:20:57
  Speaker 2: tax than a venture capital fund who gets twenty percent
• 1:20:59
  Speaker 2: of capital gains. And also, once you get to the
• 1:21:02
  Speaker 2: billionaire status, you never sell your stock, you never pay
• 1:21:05
  Speaker 2: the tax, You just borrow and borrow. And a wealth
• 1:21:08
  Speaker 2: tax has been floated around for a very long time.
• 1:21:11
  Speaker 2: I do think nationally it makes even more sense than
• 1:21:14
  Speaker 2: the state. But the fact is we have a major
• 1:21:16
  Speaker 2: wealth disparity in this country and Congress is not coming
• 1:21:20
  Speaker 2: up with any problems. To your point, you know, nothing
• 1:21:23
  Speaker 2: is happening to really solve the problems of the American people.
• 1:21:26
  Speaker 2: And perhaps what the theft is is taking the hard
• 1:21:30
  Speaker 2: work of Americans and making them pay more taxes than
• 1:21:34
  Speaker 2: a billionaire.
• 1:21:35
  Speaker 1: That's never happens. That doesn't happen. It does.
• 1:21:39
  Speaker 3: We're out of time, But all right, John Dina, thank
• 1:21:44
  Speaker 3: you guys very much. We will talk more about this
• 1:21:46
  Speaker 3: with Dave Reagan and let him respond to what you
• 1:21:49
  Speaker 3: just said.
• 1:21:49
  Speaker 1: Coming up now under the circumstances that when pretty much
• 1:21:55
  Speaker 1: about as well as it could have, obviously did not
• 1:21:59
  Speaker 1: have enough time. I'm as you heard at the end there.
• 1:22:03
  Speaker 1: I just tried to get into the point that there's
• 1:22:05
  Speaker 1: a massive logistical problem for this proposition, not to mention that,
• 1:22:10
  Speaker 1: you know, all the other things, that it's theft, that's
• 1:22:12
  Speaker 1: un American, and it's going to be used as the
• 1:22:16
  Speaker 1: camel's nose under the tent, and this is going to
• 1:22:19
  Speaker 1: happen throughout the country. By the way, if they get
• 1:22:21
  Speaker 1: away with this in California, this is going to happen
• 1:22:24
  Speaker 1: throughout the country. In fact, that's going to be the argument.
• 1:22:26
  Speaker 1: The argument's going to be, well, the billionaire has escaped
• 1:22:30
  Speaker 1: from California, so now we've got to trap them elsewhere
• 1:22:32
  Speaker 1: and a Democratic president and Newsom has said this. Newsom
• 1:22:36
  Speaker 1: has said this, And if I had more time, I
• 1:22:39
  Speaker 1: would have said, you know, this is about the only
• 1:22:41
  Speaker 1: thing that Gavendussam and John Zigler agree on, which ought
• 1:22:44
  Speaker 1: to make it true. There ought to be a law somewhere.
• 1:22:48
  Speaker 1: Gavendussom and John Zigler agree on a controversial topic, then
• 1:22:52
  Speaker 1: that side is correct. But Gavenoussam has said that this
• 1:22:56
  Speaker 1: should be a federal issue, not a state issue. And
• 1:22:59
  Speaker 1: it's clear that this jackass that's sponsoring this wants to
• 1:23:03
  Speaker 1: make it a national issue, basically campaigning for AOC to
• 1:23:07
  Speaker 1: endorse it on a national level. So there's so many
• 1:23:13
  Speaker 1: problems with this, but I did not have enough time
• 1:23:16
  Speaker 1: to get into the logistics other than to just say, look,
• 1:23:19
  Speaker 1: it's insane. Interestingly, Mark Cuban, who's a I guess a
• 1:23:24
  Speaker 1: billionaire himself, although he doesn't live in California, has taken
• 1:23:28
  Speaker 1: on some of the proponents of proposition forty on X
• 1:23:33
  Speaker 1: and explained exactly what I meant by the logistics of
• 1:23:38
  Speaker 1: this being completely unworkable and insane, and without getting too
• 1:23:43
  Speaker 1: deep in the weeds on this, I mean, just do
• 1:23:46
  Speaker 1: the basic math and know people aren't very good at
• 1:23:49
  Speaker 1: basic math. But if you're a billionaire, first of all,
• 1:23:53
  Speaker 1: there's a very good chance you're probably a multi billionaire,
• 1:23:56
  Speaker 1: because that tends to be the way that it works.
• 1:23:58
  Speaker 1: I mean, very few people, you know, just get to
• 1:24:00
  Speaker 1: a billion dollars in assets, because if you've, if you
• 1:24:03
  Speaker 1: hit the jackpot to that degree, if you've, if you
• 1:24:06
  Speaker 1: if your oil oil well has hit in a gusher form,
• 1:24:10
  Speaker 1: it tends to be in the multi billions and not
• 1:24:13
  Speaker 1: just a billion. But let's just use so let's just
• 1:24:16
  Speaker 1: use as an example someone who's assets are somehow determined
• 1:24:21
  Speaker 1: to be worth two billion dollars. Now, determining that number
• 1:24:26
  Speaker 1: is gonna be ridiculous, especially when it comes to property, right,
• 1:24:32
  Speaker 1: I mean, what are they gonna do for unsold property?
• 1:24:34
  Speaker 1: Are they gonna go by how much it's worth on Zillow?
• 1:24:38
  Speaker 1: I mean what I mean, there's all sorts. I mean,
• 1:24:41
  Speaker 1: these are unrealized gains that for the first time ever,
• 1:24:46
  Speaker 1: will be I don't even want to use the word tax.
• 1:24:48
  Speaker 1: They're gonna be stolen. They're gonna be stolen. This goes
• 1:24:52
  Speaker 1: right directly at the heart of property rights in America.
• 1:24:57
  Speaker 1: But again, let's presume that somehow they can figure out, Yes,
• 1:25:02
  Speaker 1: your assets, including unrealized gains, are worth two billion dollars,
• 1:25:08
  Speaker 1: and we're gonna we're gonna steal five percent of your assets. Well,
• 1:25:14
  Speaker 1: that's one hundred million dollars. That's one hundred million dollars.
• 1:25:24
  Speaker 1: I mean, nobody has one hundred million dollars in cash.
• 1:25:28
  Speaker 5: Nobody doubt Elon Musk has a hundred million dollars in
• 1:25:31
  Speaker 5: cash or in something that can be easily transferred into
• 1:25:35
  Speaker 5: cash without causing a massive problem in the stock market
• 1:25:39
  Speaker 5: or in the real estate market or whatever it is.
• 1:25:42
  Speaker 1: I mean, there's all the mind boggles and all the
• 1:25:46
  Speaker 1: problems that this would create if it if it passes
• 1:25:50
  Speaker 1: and passes some sort of judicial muster, because clearly there's
• 1:25:54
  Speaker 1: gonna be a lawsuit about this on constitutional grounds if
• 1:25:58
  Speaker 1: it passes. But people aren't just doing basic math. There's
• 1:26:03
  Speaker 1: could be jobs that will be lost because of this.
• 1:26:06
  Speaker 1: There could be stocks that collapse, which means real people
• 1:26:11
  Speaker 1: lose money. Real actual people who have money in a
• 1:26:15
  Speaker 1: particular stock will lose money because the stock place goes
• 1:26:20
  Speaker 1: down because of a fire sale in order to pay
• 1:26:22
  Speaker 1: this idiotic theft tax. I mean again, I don't even
• 1:26:26
  Speaker 1: want to start going down this path because it's just
• 1:26:29
  Speaker 1: so crazy. It's just so insane. But that's that's where
• 1:26:33
  Speaker 1: I was going next if we had enough time. And
• 1:26:36
  Speaker 1: of course, you know this jackass who was calling me
• 1:26:40
  Speaker 1: an asshole, he gets a one on one after me
• 1:26:44
  Speaker 1: to get to respond to me, and I get no
• 1:26:47
  Speaker 1: rebuttal and you know, all of this was was very,
• 1:26:51
  Speaker 1: very frustrating, except for the fact that apparently the segments
• 1:26:55
  Speaker 1: did very well in the ratings, so so CNN apparently
• 1:26:58
  Speaker 1: was very happy with the the whole thing went down.
• 1:27:01
  Speaker 1: And my guess is that I'll probably be asked again
• 1:27:04
  Speaker 1: at some point in the future, and I'll continue to
• 1:27:08
  Speaker 1: give you the backcrap on how these things go down,
• 1:27:11
  Speaker 1: because sometimes that's more interesting than what actually happens on air,
• 1:27:15
  Speaker 1: and this was clearly one of those examples. Thanks for
• 1:27:19
  Speaker 1: listening to today's free drop of the abbreviated show if
• 1:27:22
  Speaker 1: you're interested in listening to the entire show. You must
• 1:27:25
  Speaker 1: become a patron. Please go to Patreon. That's p A
• 1:27:30
  Speaker 1: T R e O N dot com. Patreon dot com
• 1:27:35
  Speaker 1: slash The Death of Journalism with John Ziggler. My name
• 1:27:40
  Speaker 1: is j hn z I E G L e R.
• 1:27:44
  Speaker 1: That's patreon dot com slash the Death of Journalism with
• 1:27:50
  Speaker 1: John Ziggler. Good luck to you on that. But that's
• 1:27:54
  Speaker 1: how you can subscribe.