Latest / The Death Of Journalism / Episode Two Hundred Ninety Nine: Epstein Killed Himself

Transcript

Episode Two Hundred Ninety Nine: Epstein Killed Himself · The Death Of Journalism

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Welcomed episode two hundred and ninety nine of the Death
• 0:03
  Speaker 1: of Journalism podcast. My name is John Zigler. I'm your
• 0:05
  Speaker 1: host on today's show. With the Iran peace agreement looking
• 0:09
  Speaker 1: very fragile, we do an extensive interview with former Trump
• 0:12
  Speaker 1: advisor and ardent war critic Steve Cortes, a return for
• 0:17
  Speaker 1: another live interview on CNN, But something really weird happened
• 0:22
  Speaker 1: behind the scenes. Get this. The Legacy Media concludes that
• 0:26
  Speaker 1: Jeffrey Epstein really did kill himself. Who would have thunk it?
• 0:31
  Speaker 1: And a review of the US Open Golf Championship. We
• 0:35
  Speaker 1: begin this episode of the podcast with two quick programming notes.
• 0:39
  Speaker 1: The first is that episode three hundred comes next week,
• 0:44
  Speaker 1: which means that we're doing a special episode of Ask
• 0:47
  Speaker 1: John Anything. That means you are invited to ask me
• 0:50
  Speaker 1: any legitimate question, and I will be happy to provide
• 0:53
  Speaker 1: the best answer I can. You can ask me that
• 0:56
  Speaker 1: question in a variety of different ways. You can post
• 0:59
  Speaker 1: your question on the Ptreon app, you can direct message
• 1:02
  Speaker 1: me on social media, or you can email me and
• 1:05
  Speaker 1: I will get to as many of those, at least
• 1:07
  Speaker 1: the good questions as I can. In our next episode
• 1:10
  Speaker 1: three hundred of the Death of Journalism podcasts. Also for
• 1:14
  Speaker 1: logistical reasons, we are taping a day early this week,
• 1:18
  Speaker 1: so any late breaking news, unfortunately we will not be
• 1:21
  Speaker 1: able to get, which could include some significant Supreme Court rulings,
• 1:25
  Speaker 1: And if in fact that does transpire, as many anticipate
• 1:29
  Speaker 1: that it will, we'll talk about it in the next
• 1:31
  Speaker 1: episode of the podcast. In the last episode of the podcast,
• 1:35
  Speaker 1: I did most of my analysis before we had any
• 1:37
  Speaker 1: of the details between with regard to the peace deal
• 1:41
  Speaker 1: between the United States and Iran, which really was an
• 1:45
  Speaker 1: agreement to make a piece deal, and I was very
• 1:47
  Speaker 1: down on what appeared to be the perception of the
• 1:51
  Speaker 1: deal and what was presumed to be the deal because
• 1:54
  Speaker 1: of the way that the different actors were reacting to
• 1:57
  Speaker 1: the situation. And the more the more the details came out,
• 2:01
  Speaker 1: the more obvious it was that this does appear to
• 2:04
  Speaker 1: be a very very bad deal for the United States
• 2:07
  Speaker 1: and a very very good deal for Iran, at least
• 2:10
  Speaker 1: when you consider the fact that by all accounts from
• 2:13
  Speaker 1: a military perspective, the United States dominated this war. But
• 2:17
  Speaker 1: for reasons that we've discussed for months, Iran is still
• 2:20
  Speaker 1: in a very leverage position, partially because they don't really
• 2:23
  Speaker 1: care about dying, partially because they don't care about lying,
• 2:26
  Speaker 1: and partially because they're able to shut down the strait
• 2:29
  Speaker 1: of her moves, which creates enormous amounts of chaos and
• 2:32
  Speaker 1: disruption with regard to the world economy. So in that context,
• 2:37
  Speaker 1: I asked Steve Cortes, our favorite guest on the Death
• 2:41
  Speaker 1: of Journalism podcast. He comes on usually about twice a
• 2:44
  Speaker 1: year to talk about various political topics, to come on
• 2:48
  Speaker 1: to discuss that and a whole lot more. Steve is
• 2:51
  Speaker 1: a former Donald Trump advisor. He's a conservative and maga commentator.
• 2:57
  Speaker 1: He's a good friend of mine. Although we've never actually met,
• 3:00
  Speaker 1: We've had a couple of plans to do so, but
• 3:01
  Speaker 1: they've never come to fruition. But this is a really
• 3:04
  Speaker 1: interesting interview. It's extensive. It's about an hour and a
• 3:08
  Speaker 1: half long, and we begin discussing the details of what
• 3:12
  Speaker 1: is known regarding the attempt to end the war between
• 3:17
  Speaker 1: the United States, Israel, and Iran. Steve Cortez, Welcome back
• 3:22
  Speaker 1: to the Death of Journalism podcast.
• 3:24
  Speaker 2: Thank you, John.
• 3:25
  Speaker 3: As I always say, I'm a very avid listener, pay
• 3:28
  Speaker 3: a lot of attention to your work. So it's an
• 3:30
  Speaker 3: honor to be on your show.
• 3:32
  Speaker 1: And we always love having you and we can do
• 3:35
  Speaker 1: it usually about twice a year. And there's a ton
• 3:38
  Speaker 1: to get to because there's a lot that's happened since
• 3:40
  Speaker 1: the last time we spoke to you. I want to
• 3:42
  Speaker 1: begin with the situation with Iran, and as we tape this,
• 3:46
  Speaker 1: we supposedly have a very tentative piece deal, but there
• 3:50
  Speaker 1: are signs that that might be breaking apart before we
• 3:54
  Speaker 1: get to the deal. Before we get to the deal,
• 3:56
  Speaker 1: I want to talk to you about the war itself,
• 3:59
  Speaker 1: because you are a vocal critic of the war, and
• 4:03
  Speaker 1: I want to understand exactly why and why you think
• 4:07
  Speaker 1: Trump decided to do this in the first place. So
• 4:10
  Speaker 1: what is your position on why at the beginning of
• 4:14
  Speaker 1: this whole situation it was a bad decision for the
• 4:17
  Speaker 1: United States to go to war with Iran.
• 4:20
  Speaker 3: Well, first, I do not believe that Iran, while it
• 4:23
  Speaker 3: is a threat, I don't believe it's an existential threat
• 4:26
  Speaker 3: to the United States. I think it is an existential
• 4:28
  Speaker 3: threat to its neighbors, clearly to the Gulf Arab States
• 4:32
  Speaker 3: and to Israel. But they at least at present, do
• 4:36
  Speaker 3: not seem to have the capability to directly strike the
• 4:39
  Speaker 3: United States.
• 4:39
  Speaker 2: And given that reality, and given that I am a.
• 4:43
  Speaker 3: Total you know what you might call foreign policy restrictionist,
• 4:45
  Speaker 3: meaning that we should not be interventionist in any way,
• 4:49
  Speaker 3: we should be extremely reticent to get involved in any
• 4:52
  Speaker 3: interventions abroad, but particularly across the oceans and especially in
• 4:55
  Speaker 3: the Middle East. That this reality did not justify another
• 5:00
  Speaker 3: US war in the Middle East, where we have a
• 5:02
  Speaker 3: disastrous track record, unfortunately. And you know, furthermore, you know
• 5:05
  Speaker 3: I mentioned Israel in the Gulf States. You have in
• 5:07
  Speaker 3: Israel a very formidable military, one of the most formidable
• 5:11
  Speaker 3: in the world. And in the Gulf States you have
• 5:13
  Speaker 3: the most intense concentration of wealth in the entire planet.
• 5:18
  Speaker 3: When you combine those two forces, both of which have
• 5:21
  Speaker 3: a serious problem and are immediately threatened by Iran, I
• 5:24
  Speaker 3: just do not see this, And this might seem simplistic,
• 5:26
  Speaker 3: but John, I do not see this as America's problem.
• 5:29
  Speaker 3: I see this as their problem, the Saudi's, the UAE, Israel,
• 5:33
  Speaker 3: all of whom are more than capable of handling.
• 5:36
  Speaker 2: This threat, at least as it is presently constituted.
• 5:39
  Speaker 1: And I think that's well stated, and I totally get
• 5:41
  Speaker 1: where you're coming from. But where you and I start
• 5:45
  Speaker 1: to differ is in the practicality of the situation. And
• 5:51
  Speaker 1: my counter question is, so are we supposed to just
• 5:55
  Speaker 1: stand back and allow Iran to get a nuclear weapon?
• 5:59
  Speaker 1: And I, because I assume you agree, the world would
• 6:03
  Speaker 1: be a lot worse off if Iran got a nuclear weapon?
• 6:06
  Speaker 1: So are we just supposed to let things happen without
• 6:09
  Speaker 1: us getting involved?
• 6:11
  Speaker 3: Now, Listen, I think there's a lot we can do.
• 6:13
  Speaker 3: There's a lot financially, there's a lot, probably covertly, we
• 6:15
  Speaker 3: can do.
• 6:16
  Speaker 2: But it doesn't mean that we have to go to full.
• 6:18
  Speaker 3: Scale, at least air war against the Iranians. So I'm
• 6:23
  Speaker 3: not saying that we do nothing, but what I am
• 6:25
  Speaker 3: saying is not massive intervention. But here's the other issue, John,
• 6:29
  Speaker 3: is what I think is relatively obvious.
• 6:31
  Speaker 2: I mean, now it's of course obvious post facto.
• 6:33
  Speaker 3: But the idea that we were going to affect regime
• 6:37
  Speaker 3: change only through air bombardment of a regime that is
• 6:41
  Speaker 3: extremely entrenched, right, which is extremely fanatical, which actually welcomes
• 6:46
  Speaker 3: to some degree those kinds of attacks. I thought that
• 6:48
  Speaker 3: was illogical and somewhat fanciful. And if you look at
• 6:52
  Speaker 3: the history. I'm no military expert, but if you look
• 6:54
  Speaker 3: at the history of military interventions, if you want to
• 6:56
  Speaker 3: topple the regime, if you want to decapitate the regime,
• 6:59
  Speaker 3: you need to invade, right and can America pull that off?
• 7:02
  Speaker 3: Of course we can do. But do we have the
• 7:04
  Speaker 3: political will? Does the population of the United States want
• 7:07
  Speaker 3: to do that? Are we willing to make the sacrifices
• 7:09
  Speaker 3: of another Mid East invasion and toppling a regime? Absolutely
• 7:14
  Speaker 3: not not even close, you know, not even a little bit.
• 7:18
  Speaker 3: And so given that political reality, which is as important
• 7:21
  Speaker 3: as the strategic reality, what's possible? And I think what
• 7:24
  Speaker 3: the Trump administration did here, which I think was foolhardy,
• 7:27
  Speaker 3: certainly in retrospect, but I was saying this ahead of time,
• 7:30
  Speaker 3: is they effectively made a bet that we can engage
• 7:33
  Speaker 3: in a really click quick sort of blitz creek all
• 7:36
  Speaker 3: out air attack and we are going to decapitate the
• 7:39
  Speaker 3: Iranian regime. That obviously did not work. You know, That's
• 7:42
  Speaker 3: what Netzin Yahu said would happen. It's what the United
• 7:45
  Speaker 3: States believed, I guess would happen, or hoped would happen.
• 7:49
  Speaker 2: But once it doesn't happen.
• 7:51
  Speaker 3: Is my point, you know, regardless of who's to blame,
• 7:53
  Speaker 3: you know, or how dumb or not dumb that strategy was.
• 7:55
  Speaker 3: Once it doesn't work right, once the gambit fails, we
• 7:59
  Speaker 3: need to get out because the American people have no
• 8:01
  Speaker 3: stomach for this. They have no time, no inclination to
• 8:05
  Speaker 3: engage in serious suffering to topple the regime across the
• 8:09
  Speaker 3: world that they don't believe overwhelmingly is an immediate threat
• 8:12
  Speaker 3: to the United States.
• 8:14
  Speaker 1: Well, as it turned out, you were obviously right, and
• 8:18
  Speaker 1: you know, it's clear that either the administration didn't think
• 8:21
  Speaker 1: this all the way through, or or maybe there was
• 8:25
  Speaker 1: just a miscalculation in retrospect, and this was pretty clear
• 8:30
  Speaker 1: at the time. This really is an all or nothing proposition, right,
• 8:33
  Speaker 1: I mean, because what the administration has ended up doing
• 8:36
  Speaker 1: is pleasing almost literally nobody. I mean, we're win every
• 8:40
  Speaker 1: military battle, and we have pleased nobody. I mean, the
• 8:43
  Speaker 1: pro Israel factions are upset that we can go far enough.
• 8:48
  Speaker 1: Your faction is upset that we even went into this
• 8:50
  Speaker 1: to begin with. The Liberals are hating this because it's
• 8:52
  Speaker 1: Trump in general and their economic implications. So I don't
• 8:56
  Speaker 1: know that there's anybody on the country. It's please with
• 9:00
  Speaker 1: the way this happened, even though militarily we pulled this
• 9:03
  Speaker 1: off pretty much exactly as we wanted to. That's pretty
• 9:06
  Speaker 1: much the definition of a bad plan, isn't it.
• 9:08
  Speaker 3: Yeah, you're exactly right, John, And to that point of that,
• 9:11
  Speaker 3: I'm glad you pointed out too, the military aspect of it,
• 9:14
  Speaker 3: because again I'm not a military aspert, but you know,
• 9:16
  Speaker 3: the reality is militarily, I mean, we absolutely bludgeoned them, right,
• 9:20
  Speaker 3: I mean, killed all of their leadership, decimated a lot
• 9:23
  Speaker 3: of their armed forces, and in a lot of ways.
• 9:25
  Speaker 3: Guess what, it didn't matter. I mean, it really didn't
• 9:28
  Speaker 3: matter in the end, which is a fascinating paradox right
• 9:31
  Speaker 3: in a way, and teaches us something about asymmetric warfare,
• 9:34
  Speaker 3: right and particularly what small, relatively weak countries can now
• 9:38
  Speaker 3: do with drones. When you think about the damage that
• 9:40
  Speaker 3: they inflicted on the Gulf States with really inexpensive drones
• 9:44
  Speaker 3: that are extremely hard to counter. Very similar by the
• 9:46
  Speaker 3: way to what Ukraine is doing to Russia, right, a
• 9:49
  Speaker 3: vastly superior economic and military power that has been stymied,
• 9:53
  Speaker 3: you know, mostly by drones. So this is something for
• 9:55
  Speaker 3: the United States to think about really broadly too, being
• 9:58
  Speaker 3: the big, powerful with extremely advanced weaponry might not be
• 10:03
  Speaker 3: the advantage that it used to be in a world
• 10:04
  Speaker 3: with drones. But even putting that aside to the in
• 10:07
  Speaker 3: terms of the political calculation, you're exactly correct that it
• 10:10
  Speaker 3: seems like almost nobody is happy. However, having said that,
• 10:14
  Speaker 3: if we can get to a piece, and that's a
• 10:17
  Speaker 3: huge if, obviously, but if we can get there, if
• 10:19
  Speaker 3: we can get a deal, and I don't even at
• 10:21
  Speaker 3: this point, to be honest, I don't care if it's
• 10:23
  Speaker 3: a bad deal. We just need to get out, Okay,
• 10:25
  Speaker 3: like the bet failed. When the bet fails, you have
• 10:29
  Speaker 3: to then play the hand you have. We don't have
• 10:30
  Speaker 3: a good hand. We need to get out.
• 10:32
  Speaker 2: If we get out and we get back to.
• 10:35
  Speaker 3: A focus on domestic concerns here in the United States
• 10:38
  Speaker 3: and growing our economy and getting back to an economic
• 10:40
  Speaker 3: trajectory that we were on pre war, which was mostly
• 10:43
  Speaker 3: really really good. If we get back to that, then
• 10:46
  Speaker 3: I think this will be forgotten. I really do. Americans
• 10:48
  Speaker 3: have short memories. However, if this continues, and I'll tell
• 10:52
  Speaker 3: you this specifically to put a date on it, if
• 10:55
  Speaker 3: we are over there, fully engaged in a raging war
• 10:58
  Speaker 3: on the fourth of July, the two and fifty anniversary
• 11:00
  Speaker 3: of the United States, A country that is already in
• 11:02
  Speaker 3: a bad mood is going.
• 11:04
  Speaker 2: To really, really be beyond angry.
• 11:08
  Speaker 3: Blame Republicans, blame Trump, and I think then we're talking potentially,
• 11:12
  Speaker 3: if this drags on for weeks and months into the future,
• 11:15
  Speaker 3: god forbid, years, then we're talking something that is.
• 11:18
  Speaker 2: Destructive for the big picture.
• 11:20
  Speaker 3: I mean, you know, for the macro environment of the
• 11:22
  Speaker 3: United States, and something that I think, unfortunately has the
• 11:25
  Speaker 3: potential to be the only thing that defines Trump's legacy.
• 11:28
  Speaker 3: I hope that doesn't happen. I don't think it will happen,
• 11:31
  Speaker 3: but we're at risk of that right now. I mean,
• 11:33
  Speaker 3: these are really volatile, risky times for America, for Trump,
• 11:37
  Speaker 3: and obviously for the midterms.
• 11:40
  Speaker 1: This is such a frustrating situation because, as you've stated,
• 11:43
  Speaker 1: and Trump has stated many times, you know, traditionally, when
• 11:46
  Speaker 1: you win a war militarily, you win it in the
• 11:49
  Speaker 1: end diplomatically. That's clearly not the case here. And I'm
• 11:55
  Speaker 1: struck and I've not heard anybody else put it in
• 11:57
  Speaker 1: this way. So maybe I'm wrong, but I'm struck by
• 11:59
  Speaker 1: the act that here Iran was willing to play as
• 12:02
  Speaker 1: dirty as you possibly can closing the strait of her
• 12:05
  Speaker 1: moves in a situation where I don't let me ask
• 12:09
  Speaker 1: you this specifically, Do you think that we didn't fully
• 12:11
  Speaker 1: understand their leverage point with the straight or is this
• 12:14
  Speaker 1: something that maybe even Iran didn't realize they had such
• 12:17
  Speaker 1: a leverage point until it actually happened. What is your
• 12:20
  Speaker 1: view on that, because that seems, obviously hindsight, being twenty twenty,
• 12:23
  Speaker 1: to be a clear miscalculation that this is really all
• 12:26
  Speaker 1: about the strait. If Iran wasn't able to close down
• 12:29
  Speaker 1: the strait, we would have a hell of a lot
• 12:31
  Speaker 1: more leverage. So what do you think happened there?
• 12:34
  Speaker 3: No, I think we did not understand it and Iran
• 12:36
  Speaker 3: did because if Iran also didn't get that, In other words,
• 12:40
  Speaker 3: if they didn't fully understand their leverage, then once we
• 12:43
  Speaker 3: killed the Ietola, once we decimated their leadership, once we
• 12:46
  Speaker 3: had full air superiority over their country right knocked out
• 12:49
  Speaker 3: their radar.
• 12:49
  Speaker 2: We could literally do anything we wanted from the air.
• 12:51
  Speaker 3: If Iran didn't recognize that it had that leverage, then
• 12:56
  Speaker 3: I think Iran wou would have negotiated, right, and probably
• 12:58
  Speaker 3: would have you know, to some degree, surren They wouldn't
• 13:00
  Speaker 3: have called it that, but you know, in other words,
• 13:01
  Speaker 3: they would have reached to and said, boy, we're in trouble. Okay,
• 13:04
  Speaker 3: you know, we don't all want to die, let's negotiate.
• 13:06
  Speaker 3: They didn't do that, not at all. They doubled and
• 13:08
  Speaker 3: dribbled down right, and they said, okay, here's our new Ietola.
• 13:11
  Speaker 3: We just replaced all the leaders you killed and and
• 13:13
  Speaker 3: we welcome your attacks right to some degree. So that
• 13:17
  Speaker 3: really that tells me, you know, just analyzing the situation,
• 13:20
  Speaker 3: that tells me that.
• 13:21
  Speaker 2: Iran was very aware of the leverage.
• 13:23
  Speaker 3: They had and that they knew. Listen, they're not dumb.
• 13:26
  Speaker 3: They're evil, the Iranian regime, but they're not dumb the IRGC.
• 13:29
  Speaker 3: They understand us stimistic politics, They know our polls, right,
• 13:32
  Speaker 3: they realize what's going on here.
• 13:34
  Speaker 2: They know that we have midterms coming up.
• 13:35
  Speaker 3: The Republicans are in a very tenuous position headed into
• 13:38
  Speaker 3: the midterms, that Trump is deeply unpopular right now in
• 13:40
  Speaker 3: Americans hate inflation. And guess what they also know that
• 13:44
  Speaker 3: what closed the straight over moves does is immediately spike inflation.
• 13:48
  Speaker 3: The one thing that American politics cannot stomach right now
• 13:51
  Speaker 3: that the American public can't stomach right now, and again
• 13:55
  Speaker 3: especially for something that the public doesn't view as existential,
• 13:58
  Speaker 3: this would be different, you know, John, Like, let's if
• 14:00
  Speaker 3: we were in Israel situation, what they faced with Lebanon,
• 14:02
  Speaker 3: if we faced that with Mexico, and we have a
• 14:04
  Speaker 3: lot of problems in Mexico. But let's say the drug
• 14:06
  Speaker 3: cartels were sending missiles into California, right, I think then
• 14:09
  Speaker 3: the American people could stomach a sustained war high prices.
• 14:13
  Speaker 2: We would view it as extential the United States.
• 14:16
  Speaker 3: And you can say the public's wrong on this, but
• 14:18
  Speaker 3: the public clearly does not view Iran as that kind
• 14:21
  Speaker 3: of threat, and I think part of why they are
• 14:24
  Speaker 3: unwilling to view around that way. And this is one
• 14:26
  Speaker 3: thing that the sort of hawks get wrong is the
• 14:30
  Speaker 3: same crowd that was so forceful in pushing this war
• 14:33
  Speaker 3: have pushed every Mid East intervention for decades now, and
• 14:37
  Speaker 3: Americans overwhelmingly believe that those interventions have been terrible for
• 14:42
  Speaker 3: this country, that they haven't made us safer, they've cost
• 14:45
  Speaker 3: us any more enormous amount in blood and treasure, and
• 14:47
  Speaker 3: in some ways maybe have actually made us more dangerous. So,
• 14:50
  Speaker 3: in other words, our track record, the track record of
• 14:52
  Speaker 3: the Washington foreign policy establishment, the track record of interventionism abroad,
• 14:56
  Speaker 3: especially in the Middle East, has been terrible. You know,
• 15:00
  Speaker 3: it's a boy who cried Wolfe's situation where even if
• 15:02
  Speaker 3: this time is justified, and I don't think it is,
• 15:05
  Speaker 3: but even if it is, Wow, is that a hard
• 15:07
  Speaker 3: sell John to the American people because of what's happened previously?
• 15:12
  Speaker 1: I get it, Although when was the last time you
• 15:14
  Speaker 1: heard anything bad from a rock? I mean, you know,
• 15:17
  Speaker 1: we haven't had a problem with the Rock in quite
• 15:19
  Speaker 1: a long time, and so I do think it's a
• 15:21
  Speaker 1: little unfair to paint the past with such a broad bridge.
• 15:25
  Speaker 1: But I look, I get perception is reality, But I
• 15:27
  Speaker 1: want to get back to the point I was going
• 15:28
  Speaker 1: to make with the Straight and playing dirty. So to me,
• 15:32
  Speaker 1: I find this kind of interesting. So they're willing to
• 15:36
  Speaker 1: shut down the Straight and put the entire world economy
• 15:39
  Speaker 1: into tormoil, right, Yet we're not willing to keep their
• 15:44
  Speaker 1: soccer team from playing in the World Cup in the
• 15:46
  Speaker 1: United States, right, I mean, that would have been a
• 15:49
  Speaker 1: huge point of leverage, right, it would have been dirty pool.
• 15:53
  Speaker 1: We would have taken a lot of hate for it.
• 15:55
  Speaker 1: But to me that that diconomy shows why we're in
• 15:58
  Speaker 1: an impossible situation. They're allowed to play dirty, but if
• 16:02
  Speaker 1: we even considered keeping them from coming to the United
• 16:05
  Speaker 1: States to play in the World Cup, we would have
• 16:07
  Speaker 1: been the bad guys. You see where I'm going from
• 16:09
  Speaker 1: on that.
• 16:10
  Speaker 3: No, it's a great point, right, I mean, we would
• 16:12
  Speaker 3: have never allowed the Nazi team during World War Two
• 16:15
  Speaker 3: to come to the United States, right, I mean in
• 16:17
  Speaker 3: some sporting contest. But why do you think we were
• 16:20
  Speaker 3: unwilling to do that? That's great, it's a great point.
• 16:22
  Speaker 3: You always bring up things that connect seemingly unrelated events.
• 16:26
  Speaker 3: You do it so well. Why do you think we didn't.
• 16:29
  Speaker 1: I don't know. I think because Trump. And this is
• 16:33
  Speaker 1: getting me my next subject, because I'm very curious as
• 16:37
  Speaker 1: you as a former Trump advisor, and you understand Trump
• 16:39
  Speaker 1: very well. Trump does seem to have some lines he
• 16:42
  Speaker 1: will not cross, and for whatever reason, like he's mentioned,
• 16:47
  Speaker 1: you know, not attacking certain targets and iron because he
• 16:50
  Speaker 1: doesn't want to do too much damage to the economy,
• 16:53
  Speaker 1: to the oil, to the people, and and for whatever reason,
• 16:57
  Speaker 1: this was off limits. This was a line that want
• 17:00
  Speaker 1: to cross. And I don't get it because you know,
• 17:04
  Speaker 1: in some ways you think of Trump as the guy
• 17:05
  Speaker 1: who doesn't care about those kind of lines, and for
• 17:09
  Speaker 1: whatever reason, he does here. But that gives me the
• 17:12
  Speaker 1: question I wanted to ask you is, Steve, why do
• 17:14
  Speaker 1: you think that the principle of preventing Iran from getting
• 17:19
  Speaker 1: a nuclear weapon is so clearly dominating Trump's mindset? I mean,
• 17:25
  Speaker 1: you know me, I'm a Trump critic. I don't think
• 17:27
  Speaker 1: Trump believes in all that much philosophically, So what is
• 17:31
  Speaker 1: it about this particular subject where he's willing to stand
• 17:35
  Speaker 1: on principle something which I actually admire, even if he's
• 17:38
  Speaker 1: wrong on this, Even if he's wrong, Even if he's wrong,
• 17:42
  Speaker 1: I think it's great that Trump actually has a principle
• 17:45
  Speaker 1: that he seems to be willing to figuratively politically die on.
• 17:49
  Speaker 1: But why is it this one? Why is he so
• 17:52
  Speaker 1: feeling so strongly about this?
• 17:53
  Speaker 2: Steve?
• 17:54
  Speaker 3: Yeah, No, it's a great and very central question. I
• 17:56
  Speaker 3: will tell you first of all, too though before I
• 17:58
  Speaker 3: answer you, and I will, it does seem as though
• 18:01
  Speaker 3: he's shifting pretty fast on this now right now that
• 18:03
  Speaker 3: he sees how unpopular it is, what a terrible position
• 18:05
  Speaker 3: in the United States is. So I don't think he's
• 18:07
  Speaker 3: nearly as adamant on this point as he was, but
• 18:09
  Speaker 3: clearly he was yes, and you're right, in a sort
• 18:12
  Speaker 3: of a typical way, he dug in on something that
• 18:15
  Speaker 3: had and paid little attention, sort of to the political
• 18:18
  Speaker 3: fallout from it.
• 18:19
  Speaker 2: So you know, why did he do it? I think
• 18:20
  Speaker 2: there are two reasons.
• 18:21
  Speaker 3: Number One, his interventionism previous to this in this term
• 18:25
  Speaker 3: was extremely successful, especially the Maduro capture, right, and it
• 18:30
  Speaker 3: was brilliant. And by the way, I'm far more interventionist
• 18:32
  Speaker 3: in the Americas. I believe in the Monroe doctrine, and
• 18:35
  Speaker 3: I think America should act like an empire. In the Americas,
• 18:38
  Speaker 3: I really do a benevolent empire. I don't mean, you know,
• 18:40
  Speaker 3: ruling over people, but that we should be very active
• 18:42
  Speaker 3: in our hemisphere. But I really think that early success
• 18:46
  Speaker 3: with you know, the first bombings of Iran, which seemed
• 18:48
  Speaker 3: to go very well, and then especially the Maduro capture,
• 18:51
  Speaker 3: right but blown up all these boats, And I think
• 18:53
  Speaker 3: there he developed the level of hubris, and the administration
• 18:56
  Speaker 3: developed the level of hubris.
• 18:57
  Speaker 2: So if you know, we can do what we want.
• 18:59
  Speaker 3: It's successful, has this vast superiority, there's no political fallout,
• 19:03
  Speaker 3: if anything, there's you know, there's benefits to it. And
• 19:05
  Speaker 3: so I think they got hebristic unfortunately, based on that success.
• 19:09
  Speaker 3: And then the second thing, and this is not you know,
• 19:11
  Speaker 3: this is controversial to say, but I don't mind saying
• 19:13
  Speaker 3: controversial things. There's a lot of very major donors who
• 19:16
  Speaker 3: are extremely close to Donald Trump who are adamantly pro Israel.
• 19:20
  Speaker 3: I think some of them to the point where they
• 19:22
  Speaker 3: are actually more Israel first than they are America first,
• 19:25
  Speaker 3: and they are in Trump's ear. A lot of them
• 19:27
  Speaker 3: are Merilago members and regulars. And I think that combining
• 19:31
  Speaker 3: that this happiness with you know, with the success of
• 19:37
  Speaker 3: sort of limited interventions and a very steady drumbeat of
• 19:41
  Speaker 3: American donors who are very closely aligned with Israel, who
• 19:44
  Speaker 3: are huge fans of NET and Yahoo pushing this agenda
• 19:47
  Speaker 3: on him, I think unfortunately convinced him to make this
• 19:52
  Speaker 3: big strategic bunder.
• 19:53
  Speaker 1: Do you think there was one person within the administration
• 19:56
  Speaker 1: that is, for lack of a better term, to blame,
• 19:58
  Speaker 1: for change or fixing Trump's mind on this.
• 20:03
  Speaker 3: No, I'm not sure that there's one, but you know,
• 20:05
  Speaker 3: I mean I think there are clearly and I you know,
• 20:07
  Speaker 3: I certainly know this just because of my closeness with
• 20:09
  Speaker 3: his White House. There are clearly two, you know, very
• 20:11
  Speaker 3: distinct wings right and factions that developed on this issue,
• 20:15
  Speaker 3: one led by JD. Vance, the non intervention wing, and
• 20:18
  Speaker 3: then another one really led by several different people. But
• 20:21
  Speaker 3: you might say it's roughly the Marco Rubio wing arguing
• 20:24
  Speaker 3: for intervention. But I don't think it was though the
• 20:27
  Speaker 3: internal White House battle that matters as much as outsiders.
• 20:30
  Speaker 3: And by outsiders, I mean both the donors but also
• 20:34
  Speaker 3: senators and especially Lindsay Graham, right. And I think Lindsey
• 20:36
  Speaker 3: Graham I have never understood why, but he has unbelievable
• 20:41
  Speaker 3: influence with Trump. And when Lindsay Graham goes golfing with Trump,
• 20:45
  Speaker 3: lots of bad things happen. And you know, Lindsay Graham
• 20:47
  Speaker 3: wants to go to war all over the world, and
• 20:50
  Speaker 3: nowhere more so than in the Middle East. He's a
• 20:52
  Speaker 3: childless person who wants to send your kids to war
• 20:55
  Speaker 3: and your kids to die. And unfortunately he somehow has
• 20:58
  Speaker 3: a lot of influence with Donald Trump.
• 21:00
  Speaker 2: I've never understood.
• 21:01
  Speaker 3: I've asked Trump about that publicly, literally, when I've interviewed
• 21:04
  Speaker 3: him on air, I've asked him about that. Why, I've
• 21:06
  Speaker 3: asked him privately, and I've never gotten a good reason.
• 21:08
  Speaker 3: But regardless, that's just you know, the reality. But look, ultimately,
• 21:13
  Speaker 3: you know, the President made the decision.
• 21:14
  Speaker 2: Now. What I want to credit the President with though,
• 21:16
  Speaker 2: is I think he has quickly realized how bad this
• 21:18
  Speaker 2: situation is. What's done is done, right. I mean that
• 21:21
  Speaker 2: milk is spilled, right.
• 21:23
  Speaker 3: I think the President is getting very real politique now,
• 21:26
  Speaker 3: and I think he absolutely understands how politically tenuous his
• 21:31
  Speaker 3: situation is. You know how limited the options are now,
• 21:34
  Speaker 3: and that we have to choose the least bad option
• 21:37
  Speaker 3: to get out and to get back to focusing on
• 21:41
  Speaker 3: domestic concerns here in the United States, all.
• 21:43
  Speaker 1: Right, Well, talking about getting out, As a referenced at
• 21:46
  Speaker 1: the beginning of this interview, there's allegedly this tentative peace
• 21:50
  Speaker 1: deal that may be falling apart even as we speak, right,
• 21:54
  Speaker 1: and so we don't really know what the future holds.
• 21:57
  Speaker 1: But give me Steve Cortes's analysis of just how bad
• 22:02
  Speaker 1: this deal as we've now learned about it, really is?
• 22:05
  Speaker 3: I mean, look, I don't know, to be honest, because
• 22:09
  Speaker 3: I don't really know what was possible, right, I mean,
• 22:11
  Speaker 3: and none of us know because those negotiations aren't public.
• 22:14
  Speaker 3: You know, how bad is It's? My hope is it's
• 22:17
  Speaker 3: the least bad option. There are no good options at
• 22:19
  Speaker 3: this point. However, if it's the Gulf States, put it
• 22:22
  Speaker 3: up a whole lot of cash, right and you know,
• 22:27
  Speaker 3: a promise not that it's worth much, but promise from
• 22:30
  Speaker 3: Iran to stop pursuing a nuclear weapon, or that it
• 22:32
  Speaker 3: never will pursue a nuclear weapon, you know, but cognizant
• 22:35
  Speaker 3: that the United States can attack again at any time.
• 22:38
  Speaker 3: Then this is probably the best we can do. I
• 22:40
  Speaker 3: just John, I don't have a good answer for it.
• 22:42
  Speaker 3: How do we get a quote good deal at this point? Again,
• 22:45
  Speaker 3: we took our shot, right, We tried to topple the regime.
• 22:48
  Speaker 3: We brought unbelievable force. We brought some of the most
• 22:51
  Speaker 3: impressive military success you could ask for, right, I mean,
• 22:55
  Speaker 3: killed their entire leadership, and it didn't matter.
• 22:58
  Speaker 2: Like then you have to evaluate we live in the
• 23:01
  Speaker 2: real world, Okay, people like Ted Cruz, they don't live
• 23:03
  Speaker 2: in the real world. I mean, what do you want
• 23:05
  Speaker 2: to do? Do you want to invade Iran?
• 23:07
  Speaker 3: I mean, do you realize how insane that idea is?
• 23:10
  Speaker 3: How else are we going to change that regime except
• 23:12
  Speaker 3: for invading? I don't see any other way, And the
• 23:15
  Speaker 3: American people will not even for one nanosecond consider doing that.
• 23:20
  Speaker 3: I don't even think they'll consider further war. I really don't,
• 23:23
  Speaker 3: because if the war heats up again and Iran starts
• 23:27
  Speaker 3: striking its neighbors again the Gulf States, and energy prices
• 23:32
  Speaker 3: spike again. Thankfully, energy prices as we're recording a relatively
• 23:35
  Speaker 3: under control. If they spike again, John, there is no
• 23:39
  Speaker 3: political will for that here in the United States, and
• 23:41
  Speaker 3: that matters, right. So in other words, we don't live
• 23:42
  Speaker 3: as a vacuum where we can just make military strategic
• 23:45
  Speaker 3: decisions irrespective of what's happening on the home front. This
• 23:48
  Speaker 3: is not a dictatorship. This is a republic. And a republic,
• 23:51
  Speaker 3: you cannot go to sustained war without the support of
• 23:54
  Speaker 3: the people, and if you do, you're going to face
• 23:56
  Speaker 3: dire political and electoral consequences.
• 23:59
  Speaker 1: This is kind of just a I guess, a physical
• 24:02
  Speaker 1: philosophical exercise, because I don't think it's all that realistic.
• 24:06
  Speaker 1: But it did occur to me that if instead of
• 24:09
  Speaker 1: going to war, we had gone underground to a rod
• 24:14
  Speaker 1: and said, look, we're aware of where you are on
• 24:17
  Speaker 1: your nuclear program, and we may decide to bomb the
• 24:21
  Speaker 1: crap out of you, but we've thought this through and
• 24:25
  Speaker 1: we realized that you have some leverage points. We have
• 24:28
  Speaker 1: some leverage points. Here's what we're going to do. Instead
• 24:32
  Speaker 1: of us expending all this capital and you know, creating
• 24:36
  Speaker 1: this international chaotic situation, We're just going to pay you
• 24:41
  Speaker 1: under the table to not pursue your nuclear ambitions and
• 24:45
  Speaker 1: to also not engage in in terrorist acts around the world.
• 24:52
  Speaker 1: And as long as you do not continue to pursue
• 24:55
  Speaker 1: a nuclear weapon and you stop the terrorism in the
• 24:59
  Speaker 1: region and around the world, well we're gonna we're gonna
• 25:01
  Speaker 1: pay you underground like a mafia. This is a mafia deal.
• 25:04
  Speaker 1: This is this is the old school mafia. We're gonna
• 25:07
  Speaker 1: pay you to behave, and as long as you behave,
• 25:10
  Speaker 1: we'll pay you. You stop behaving, we will stop paying you,
• 25:13
  Speaker 1: and we're gonna bomb the shit out of you.
• 25:15
  Speaker 2: Yeah, how would that have worked?
• 25:17
  Speaker 1: Do you think?
• 25:18
  Speaker 3: I don't think it would have worked because they're fanatics, right,
• 25:20
  Speaker 3: whereas you know, most mafias are not fanatics. They're just greedy, right,
• 25:23
  Speaker 3: They just want, you know, some near term power and money.
• 25:26
  Speaker 3: But it's interesting, I don't to my knowledge that wasn't offered,
• 25:30
  Speaker 3: but it would have made a lot of sense.
• 25:31
  Speaker 2: I like your idea. I like trying it absolutely, And they.
• 25:35
  Speaker 1: Do seem to care about money. They do seem to,
• 25:39
  Speaker 1: but they care about.
• 25:40
  Speaker 3: Money, and I think they're legit legitimate fanatics too though, right,
• 25:44
  Speaker 3: And this is the problem too with going to war
• 25:46
  Speaker 3: against hardcore Islamis right, is they do not have a
• 25:49
  Speaker 3: Christian or Western civilization mentality, right.
• 25:52
  Speaker 2: They simply don't value life the way we do. And
• 25:55
  Speaker 2: in fact, in.
• 25:56
  Speaker 3: Certain cases, in the extreme cases, they welcome the martyrdom
• 25:59
  Speaker 3: because they believe that it will bring such rewards in
• 26:03
  Speaker 3: the next life and it's very, very honorable. So it's
• 26:06
  Speaker 3: just an entire I think as Americans very often. There's
• 26:09
  Speaker 3: so many things that are amazing about America's exceptionalism. But
• 26:11
  Speaker 3: one of the problems is we presume that because it
• 26:14
  Speaker 3: works well so well for us our worldview, that the
• 26:17
  Speaker 3: rest of the world shares it.
• 26:18
  Speaker 2: And if, of course they don't right.
• 26:19
  Speaker 3: Over rightingly, and especially not those who truly believe in Islam.
• 26:23
  Speaker 3: I don't mean sort of milk toast is long, but
• 26:25
  Speaker 3: you know, hardcore islamis So I don't think it would
• 26:28
  Speaker 3: have worked for that reason, because they do care about money.
• 26:30
  Speaker 3: But I think even their love of money, it's not
• 26:32
  Speaker 3: because they want to go and have palaces in Monaco.
• 26:35
  Speaker 3: I think it's the money so that they can buy
• 26:37
  Speaker 3: more weapons and be more fanatical.
• 26:39
  Speaker 2: And that's a good pain.
• 26:40
  Speaker 1: That is a good point, although it is it's fascinating
• 26:42
  Speaker 1: to me that you and I completely agree on the
• 26:44
  Speaker 1: core problem. But to me, that core problem is why
• 26:48
  Speaker 1: they can't be allowed to have a nuclear weapon.
• 26:49
  Speaker 2: Wow, I understand me.
• 26:51
  Speaker 1: And so but look, I told you you turned out
• 26:54
  Speaker 1: to be right on this, and you know clearly the
• 26:57
  Speaker 1: path that we took did not end up being in
• 27:00
  Speaker 1: the best interest of the United States, at least in
• 27:02
  Speaker 1: the short run, and there's some political ramifications for that.
• 27:06
  Speaker 1: And I'm fascinated to hear your thoughts on JD. Vance's
• 27:10
  Speaker 1: role in all this, because obviously you're as close to Jdvans,
• 27:14
  Speaker 1: or haven't been as close to JD. Vance as any
• 27:16
  Speaker 1: political figure you admire him greatly. He's obviously not just
• 27:20
  Speaker 1: the vice president, but in many minds he's the presumptive
• 27:23
  Speaker 1: Republican nominee in twenty twenty eight. And here he is
• 27:27
  Speaker 1: in this incredibly bizarre and difficult situation where he is
• 27:33
  Speaker 1: essentially against the war, but he has also been given
• 27:38
  Speaker 1: the responsibility of both negotiating the peace and selling the deal.
• 27:44
  Speaker 1: So give me your assessment of where JD Vance is
• 27:48
  Speaker 1: and the difficult spot that he has found himself in here.
• 27:52
  Speaker 2: Listen, JD clearly is in a difficult position.
• 27:55
  Speaker 3: However, you know, like a lot of difficulties in life,
• 27:57
  Speaker 3: I think it brings opportunity.
• 27:59
  Speaker 2: In other words, if the peace lasts, JD will rightly.
• 28:03
  Speaker 3: Be able to take credit for that of saying, hey,
• 28:05
  Speaker 3: we got into a war that wasn't popular, I figured out.
• 28:09
  Speaker 2: A way to end it. And I have found it
• 28:11
  Speaker 2: very interesting.
• 28:13
  Speaker 3: JD is getting attacked by a lot of folks right
• 28:14
  Speaker 3: now on the right, a lot of Republicans, because they
• 28:18
  Speaker 3: view him from their point of view, sort of the
• 28:20
  Speaker 3: Mark Levin crowd, as sort of the sellout right. And
• 28:24
  Speaker 3: it's interesting to me, and I've said this publicly a
• 28:26
  Speaker 3: few times and posted this online that you are accusing
• 28:29
  Speaker 3: him of being the peacemaker, which is a kind of
• 28:31
  Speaker 3: fascinating accusation. To make you guilty as charged would be
• 28:35
  Speaker 3: my response. As jdvanced, Now, again, the piece may not last,
• 28:38
  Speaker 3: and then maybe he gets blamed.
• 28:39
  Speaker 2: Well, you know, your deal didn't last.
• 28:42
  Speaker 3: But the point is, especially for a Republican primary, and
• 28:45
  Speaker 3: I'm speaking mainly now in this context, not a general election,
• 28:48
  Speaker 3: but a Republican primary into twenty twenty eight, and that primary,
• 28:51
  Speaker 3: by the way, begins almost a minute. We can pass
• 28:53
  Speaker 3: the mentors, right, so it's really twenty twenty seven that
• 28:55
  Speaker 3: matters for the Republican primary, that primary voter. JD securing
• 29:01
  Speaker 3: the piece is not going to be viewed as a
• 29:03
  Speaker 3: negative by voters. Now, will it be viewed as a
• 29:06
  Speaker 3: negative by donors? Yes, And that's a problem, by the way,
• 29:09
  Speaker 3: all right, it's hard to win without the donors on
• 29:11
  Speaker 3: your side because Republican donors are way more hawkish than
• 29:14
  Speaker 3: I am or JD. Vance's, you know, the America First wing.
• 29:17
  Speaker 3: It's a problem for most media, especially legacy media, which
• 29:21
  Speaker 3: still loves war and is far far more interventionists. But
• 29:25
  Speaker 3: with actual voters, with on the ground, Republican primary voters,
• 29:29
  Speaker 3: they are still very, very non interventionists. Now, they were
• 29:32
  Speaker 3: also willing to give Trump a pass because they're so
• 29:35
  Speaker 3: loyal to Trump, sometimes to an excessive degree, clearly, and
• 29:38
  Speaker 3: I'll be the first to admit that, but they are
• 29:40
  Speaker 3: so loyal to Trump that they will give him a
• 29:42
  Speaker 3: leeway that they wouldn't give to other leaders in terms
• 29:45
  Speaker 3: of war making and interventionism. But the point is, at
• 29:48
  Speaker 3: its core, America First is still and it's not just
• 29:51
  Speaker 3: my opinion. I mean, Napoleon shows us the America First
• 29:53
  Speaker 3: voter is still very motivated by an anti war, non interventionist,
• 30:00
  Speaker 3: really America first worldview.
• 30:02
  Speaker 2: And given that reality, I do believe.
• 30:04
  Speaker 3: That there's all kinds of risks and all kinds of
• 30:07
  Speaker 3: potential political you know minds out there for JD for sure, however,
• 30:11
  Speaker 3: you know these are treacherous waters. But having said that,
• 30:14
  Speaker 3: I also think that for the Republican primary, at least,
• 30:18
  Speaker 3: he's in a pretty solid spot with a reputation and
• 30:22
  Speaker 3: with a public.
• 30:23
  Speaker 2: Projection of being the peacemaker in this scenario.
• 30:27
  Speaker 1: Well, let me let me push back a little bit.
• 30:30
  Speaker 1: And I know there's two parts to this. I want
• 30:32
  Speaker 1: to save the the Trump endorsement issue for the next question,
• 30:38
  Speaker 1: but it's certainly related to me. There's only one voter
• 30:42
  Speaker 1: that matters in the Republican primary in twenty twenty eight,
• 30:45
  Speaker 1: and his name is Donald Trump. And we have seen
• 30:48
  Speaker 1: time and time in history where you know, Trump gives
• 30:52
  Speaker 1: somebody a responsibility and it gets perceived as if it's
• 30:57
  Speaker 1: not a success for Trump, then he jettison's that person.
• 31:01
  Speaker 1: And it seems to me is if we're in a
• 31:05
  Speaker 1: classic situation where JD may have done the best job
• 31:08
  Speaker 1: he possibly could have negotiating this deal, selling this deal
• 31:11
  Speaker 1: in a war that he didn't even favor, but he's
• 31:14
  Speaker 1: in Trump's mind associated with a failure and that's going
• 31:19
  Speaker 1: to be a problem for JD. Because Trump's the only
• 31:21
  Speaker 1: voter that matters in the twenty twenty eight Republican primary.
• 31:25
  Speaker 1: Where am I wrong in that assessment?
• 31:28
  Speaker 3: You very well could be right, But where I suspect
• 31:31
  Speaker 3: you're wrong is and I know you and I don't
• 31:33
  Speaker 3: agree with this, because we've talked about this offline. I
• 31:36
  Speaker 3: do not believe ultimately, and look, it's obviously a volatile bet,
• 31:39
  Speaker 3: but I do not believe that Trump's going to endorse
• 31:41
  Speaker 3: I think he will say nice things about several candidates,
• 31:44
  Speaker 3: certainly both Rubio and JD.
• 31:46
  Speaker 2: If those are the two candidates.
• 31:48
  Speaker 3: But if he does indorse, if he in fact he
• 31:51
  Speaker 3: is going to endorse, and you're right, the endorsement would
• 31:53
  Speaker 3: be unbelievably you know, consequential, you know, perhaps determinative, and
• 31:59
  Speaker 3: probably would be you know.
• 32:00
  Speaker 2: Although we'll also see.
• 32:01
  Speaker 3: Let me tell you this also though, if the war
• 32:03
  Speaker 3: drags on, it may not be determinative, right. I mean,
• 32:06
  Speaker 3: in my polling right now, about a quarter of Trump
• 32:08
  Speaker 3: voters are very angry about the war, and that's up
• 32:10
  Speaker 3: from ten percent a few weeks ago. If that number
• 32:13
  Speaker 3: continues to climb, right, then Trump may not be the
• 32:16
  Speaker 3: sole king maker. He probably will be, right given his
• 32:20
  Speaker 3: you know how much goodwill he has them on Republican
• 32:22
  Speaker 3: voters still. But my point is too, that can shift
• 32:25
  Speaker 3: if the war, if the war drags on.
• 32:28
  Speaker 2: Here's the thing.
• 32:29
  Speaker 3: If the war doesn't, I guess it's if the war
• 32:32
  Speaker 3: drags on. I don't know what the trump en dorseman
• 32:33
  Speaker 3: means as much. If the war is done, then I
• 32:36
  Speaker 3: think whatever your role was in this war, you know, JD, Vans,
• 32:40
  Speaker 3: Marco Rubio, whomever else, Ted Cruz, I think Americans move
• 32:44
  Speaker 3: on pretty quickly, you know, and we get back to
• 32:47
  Speaker 3: I mean, I think we need to think about that.
• 32:48
  Speaker 3: As intense as the situation is right now. You know,
• 32:51
  Speaker 3: American voters have unbelievably short memories. And if things are
• 32:55
  Speaker 3: going well, if we're not fighting in the Middle East
• 32:58
  Speaker 3: and gas prices come down and the economy gets back
• 33:00
  Speaker 3: to growing real wages, we can be in a whole
• 33:03
  Speaker 3: different scenario by this November, you know, forget about by
• 33:06
  Speaker 3: twenty twenty seven. So and that's Look, that's my hope,
• 33:09
  Speaker 3: but I know, hope it's not a strategy.
• 33:11
  Speaker 1: Well, well, look, I think what you said is makes sense.
• 33:15
  Speaker 1: And if you're a JD. Vance fan, which I know
• 33:17
  Speaker 1: you are, you know that's the scenario you want. You
• 33:20
  Speaker 1: want this thing to be over as quickly as possible,
• 33:22
  Speaker 1: even if it's perceived as not a win and maybe
• 33:25
  Speaker 1: even a loss. Trump forgets about it, we move on
• 33:27
  Speaker 1: to something else. He as the vice president and in
• 33:31
  Speaker 1: the best case scenario, But it's hard for me to
• 33:34
  Speaker 1: believe Steve as I even try to articulate the best
• 33:37
  Speaker 1: case scenario. I'm just baffled that anybody thinks that Donald Trump,
• 33:42
  Speaker 1: even if he intends did not endoorse the twenty twenty
• 33:45
  Speaker 1: eight campaign, that there's any possible way that Donald Trump,
• 33:50
  Speaker 1: for a year at least a year, is going to
• 33:54
  Speaker 1: be asked every single day about the Republican presidential primary
• 34:00
  Speaker 1: and he's going to have to discipline to stay out
• 34:03
  Speaker 1: of it. YEA, what his thumb?
• 34:06
  Speaker 2: I understand.
• 34:08
  Speaker 3: Let me ask you this, John, Let me ask you
• 34:09
  Speaker 3: this as a counterpoint that if you're correct, and you
• 34:11
  Speaker 3: may be if you are correct, don't you think that
• 34:14
  Speaker 3: it would be very hard for Trump to say I'm
• 34:16
  Speaker 3: going to endorse somebody other than my own vice president
• 34:19
  Speaker 3: whom I selected to be my number two, right to
• 34:22
  Speaker 3: be my backup in case something happens.
• 34:24
  Speaker 2: I mean, isn't it a little tough for Trump and.
• 34:27
  Speaker 3: For a man of his ego to say to some
• 34:30
  Speaker 3: degree that would be an admission that it was the
• 34:32
  Speaker 3: wrong choice. Wouldn't it be like you chose him as
• 34:34
  Speaker 3: your number two, but now he's not your successor? I mean,
• 34:37
  Speaker 3: what do you think about that aspect?
• 34:38
  Speaker 1: I think we should ask Steve Pence about that. Mike Pence,
• 34:44
  Speaker 1: I'm white, Steve Petts, Why would I say, Steve pens See,
• 34:47
  Speaker 1: even I've forgotten his name, Mike Pence. Maybe maybe we
• 34:50
  Speaker 1: should ask Mike Pence, would I blow that line? It's
• 34:52
  Speaker 1: a great line, But how do you explain, Mike Pence?
• 34:55
  Speaker 3: No, Well, that's easy to explain because I mean the
• 34:58
  Speaker 3: election in jan six, I mean everything blew up, right,
• 35:01
  Speaker 3: I mean, I mean no, honestly though, that's a totally
• 35:04
  Speaker 3: different scenario, right, I mean they actually became enemies.
• 35:06
  Speaker 1: Right. But Mike, that destroys your entire argument because he
• 35:10
  Speaker 1: was his vice president. He threw him completely under the bus.
• 35:12
  Speaker 1: They don't even speak anymore.
• 35:14
  Speaker 3: No, I don't think destroys my argument at all was Okay,
• 35:17
  Speaker 3: had Trump prevailed and he was inaugurator for a second term,
• 35:21
  Speaker 3: like then we would know, okay, would he have endorse
• 35:23
  Speaker 3: Mike Pants at the end of that term?
• 35:25
  Speaker 2: And again, I guess my suspicion is it's difficult for
• 35:27
  Speaker 2: him to not. I mean, look, we'll see.
• 35:30
  Speaker 3: These are my my level of confidence if I have to,
• 35:32
  Speaker 3: if I was on poly market betting any of these
• 35:34
  Speaker 3: things A right about as far as you know, there's
• 35:35
  Speaker 3: there's some things I have high confidence in, But as
• 35:38
  Speaker 3: far as betting, you.
• 35:39
  Speaker 2: Know, will Trump indoors if he's going to doors who's
• 35:41
  Speaker 2: you go to doors.
• 35:42
  Speaker 3: I would have very very low confidence, right, I would
• 35:44
  Speaker 3: put you know, five bucks on these bets. But I
• 35:46
  Speaker 3: think it's reasonable that he doesn't endorse.
• 35:49
  Speaker 2: I know you don't agree.
• 35:50
  Speaker 3: And if he does endorse, I do think the odds
• 35:52
  Speaker 3: on favor still is jd Vance. I also think jd
• 35:55
  Speaker 3: Vance just in the near term, has had a heck
• 35:58
  Speaker 3: of a week.
• 35:59
  Speaker 2: I really do.
• 35:59
  Speaker 3: I mean his media performances, the book rollout, I think
• 36:04
  Speaker 3: it's been on the whole super super impressied.
• 36:07
  Speaker 1: He is very very good. He is Jade Vance is
• 36:10
  Speaker 1: very very good in certain situations. And I agree with
• 36:14
  Speaker 1: you that in the media that he's done, he's been
• 36:17
  Speaker 1: very very effective. He's very articulate, he's a great debater,
• 36:20
  Speaker 1: very smart guy. I have no problem with any of that.
• 36:23
  Speaker 1: But I just I don't want to leave this Trump
• 36:25
  Speaker 1: endorsement thing because to me, this is the number one
• 36:28
  Speaker 1: political issue of the twenty eighth presidential campaign. And look,
• 36:32
  Speaker 1: even if Trump at the beginning, I get the showman, right,
• 36:36
  Speaker 1: the Trump the showman is going to like a show, right,
• 36:39
  Speaker 1: So you know this real world as well as anybody
• 36:43
  Speaker 1: for someone to enter the twenty twenty eight presidential campaign
• 36:47
  Speaker 1: as a Republican if it's Rubio or Vance or DeSantis, whatever,
• 36:52
  Speaker 1: They're at the very least going to seek Trump's blessing first, right,
• 37:00
  Speaker 1: not going to announce in this environment unless it Trump
• 37:04
  Speaker 1: at least says to you, I'm gonna stay out of it, right,
• 37:08
  Speaker 1: I mean, the best case scenario, j He tells JD.
• 37:11
  Speaker 1: Go ahead, JD. I'm gonna give you my blessing. I'm
• 37:14
  Speaker 1: gonna endorse you, which I doubt is gonna happen because
• 37:16
  Speaker 1: Trump likes the drama. He's gonna want the real, the
• 37:18
  Speaker 1: reality show aspect of this. He's gonna want to see
• 37:21
  Speaker 1: some show before he does it. My theory on Trump
• 37:24
  Speaker 1: is there's no possible way even if he intends to
• 37:27
  Speaker 1: do what you want to do, there's no possible way
• 37:29
  Speaker 1: he has the self discipline to get through a year
• 37:33
  Speaker 1: without answering the question who do you want to be
• 37:35
  Speaker 1: the Republican presidential nominy? And the proof of that Steve
• 37:39
  Speaker 1: is the the the antidote in this book by New
• 37:44
  Speaker 1: York Times reporters, including Maggie Haverman, who you know has
• 37:46
  Speaker 1: very good Trump sources, where they Trump is asked, what
• 37:51
  Speaker 1: will happen when your successor gets rid of all the
• 37:55
  Speaker 1: the accouterments that you've the glitz and glamour that you've
• 37:59
  Speaker 1: put on the White House, and Trump is quoted as
• 38:02
  Speaker 1: saying Cuban's love gold. Now, now it's possible that that
• 38:09
  Speaker 1: story is bull crap? Do you believe that story?
• 38:12
  Speaker 2: Steve?
• 38:12
  Speaker 1: Do you believe that that story in the Maggie Haberman
• 38:15
  Speaker 1: book is true?
• 38:16
  Speaker 3: You know, as you mentioned, generally, she's very well sourced
• 38:19
  Speaker 3: and pretty accurate.
• 38:20
  Speaker 2: So I tend to believe it.
• 38:22
  Speaker 1: Okay, So if it's true, putting on your your Trump
• 38:26
  Speaker 1: interpretation and thinking cap, your your decoder ring, does that
• 38:30
  Speaker 1: not indicate? First of all, does that not prove to
• 38:33
  Speaker 1: you that I'm right that he can't possibly get through
• 38:36
  Speaker 1: a year without giving hints as to who he wants
• 38:38
  Speaker 1: the nominee to be. Because clearly that's a nod to
• 38:41
  Speaker 1: Marco Rubio, because Marco Rubio is Cuban. So so that's
• 38:46
  Speaker 1: let me separate this into two parts. Do you do
• 38:48
  Speaker 1: not understand where I'm coming from when the self discipline
• 38:51
  Speaker 1: is you?
• 38:52
  Speaker 3: No, I understand, But also I think you need to
• 38:54
  Speaker 3: realize that you know, first of all, it's a pretty
• 38:56
  Speaker 3: funny joke right by the way Ted Cruise is also Cuban.
• 38:59
  Speaker 3: So and he's I think he's running for presidents. But
• 39:02
  Speaker 3: I think obviously he's talking about Marco.
• 39:03
  Speaker 2: Not Ted.
• 39:05
  Speaker 3: But but Trump is a jokester, right, and so it's
• 39:08
  Speaker 3: a funny comment.
• 39:10
  Speaker 2: It's you know, it's offhand.
• 39:11
  Speaker 3: That doesn't mean that he's serious about it necessarily, But
• 39:14
  Speaker 3: I guess I'm gonna say you're half right. In other words,
• 39:16
  Speaker 3: let's say he doesn't endorse I think he will drop
• 39:19
  Speaker 3: lots of lines like that all the way along and
• 39:21
  Speaker 3: are not endorsements. But he loves the playful aspect of that.
• 39:25
  Speaker 3: I mean, remember, he made most of his fame really
• 39:28
  Speaker 3: with The Apprentice, right, right, and he loves that aspect
• 39:31
  Speaker 3: of an entertaining competition, right sits as the judge.
• 39:36
  Speaker 2: This is you know, the Apprentice times, you know, on steroids, right.
• 39:40
  Speaker 1: So, but I think you're making my point the the
• 39:43
  Speaker 1: Apprentice doesn't end with Trump saying, well, I don't know
• 39:46
  Speaker 1: who won. Let the people decide. The Apprentice ends with you, Faian.
• 39:51
  Speaker 1: So I mean, so that's if this is the Apprentice,
• 39:55
  Speaker 1: Trump is not going to allow this process to go
• 39:58
  Speaker 1: without him being the determining.
• 40:00
  Speaker 3: Well, listen, let me say this, John, you have way
• 40:02
  Speaker 3: stronger views in this than I do. And I'm willing
• 40:04
  Speaker 3: to certain stand my ground when I think I have,
• 40:06
  Speaker 3: you know, a really strong view I don't hear. And
• 40:08
  Speaker 3: part of this may be and I'm just being fully
• 40:10
  Speaker 3: transparent here because I am so committed to j D.
• 40:13
  Speaker 3: And because I think he was such a great president
• 40:15
  Speaker 3: that maybe I'm just too you know, I want it
• 40:17
  Speaker 3: to happen. I can't see fully, you know, the range
• 40:21
  Speaker 3: of possibilities here. I'm totally willing to admit that because
• 40:23
  Speaker 3: I you know, I want, as much as I want
• 40:25
  Speaker 3: anything in politics, I want Jdvans to be the president
• 40:28
  Speaker 3: of the United States, and it's really important to me.
• 40:30
  Speaker 3: And you know, not only do I admire him publicly,
• 40:32
  Speaker 3: but I know him reasonably well privately.
• 40:34
  Speaker 2: I spent a lot of time with him.
• 40:36
  Speaker 3: I just I admire the man far more than I
• 40:38
  Speaker 3: admire anybody else in politics. So that could be that
• 40:42
  Speaker 3: could so color my judgment on this that I just
• 40:44
  Speaker 3: don't see the realities you.
• 40:45
  Speaker 1: See fair enough, And I'm glad you acknowledge that. And
• 40:49
  Speaker 1: I have no problem with that. I get that that's
• 40:51
  Speaker 1: human nature, and you're you're admitting you know a bias there,
• 40:55
  Speaker 1: but I'm pretty sure I'm right about this. In fact,
• 40:59
  Speaker 1: it's so obvious that there's no way Trump can get
• 41:01
  Speaker 1: through an entire primary without making an endorsement. I wonder
• 41:04
  Speaker 1: if somehow I'm wrong because it's just so clear, it's
• 41:07
  Speaker 1: so clear cut. But let's pretend. Let's pretend that there
• 41:12
  Speaker 1: is an endorsement of some sory. Who would your money
• 41:17
  Speaker 1: be on? As to who Trump would endorse.
• 41:19
  Speaker 2: No, it would be on JD.
• 41:20
  Speaker 3: And I think the main reason being again, I think
• 41:24
  Speaker 3: it's difficult for Trump it both in his own head
• 41:26
  Speaker 3: as well as publicly, to explain, you know, how did
• 41:29
  Speaker 3: your trusted number two, your top lieutenant, not make the cut?
• 41:34
  Speaker 3: You know, somebody who hasn't broken with you in any
• 41:35
  Speaker 3: way quite unlike Penn's right, and there's been no over
• 41:38
  Speaker 3: attention at all, quite the opposite.
• 41:40
  Speaker 2: Have been really, really publicly.
• 41:41
  Speaker 3: Supportive, done a great job defending you constantly, even in
• 41:44
  Speaker 3: some really tough situations alike, you know, the war negotiations
• 41:48
  Speaker 3: or peace negotiations. How do you I think Trump has
• 41:51
  Speaker 3: a hard time explaining how he then decided. Yeah, I'm
• 41:54
  Speaker 3: going to pass up this incredibly impressive media savvy you know,
• 41:59
  Speaker 3: young leader who I personally selected to be my replacement
• 42:03
  Speaker 3: should something happen to me, But I don't now want.
• 42:05
  Speaker 2: Him to be my replacement, Like, what's the what's the impetus, what's.
• 42:08
  Speaker 1: The reason I wish that that was a barrier to Trump?
• 42:12
  Speaker 1: I don't think they've given the Mike Bence example that
• 42:15
  Speaker 1: it is. But let's talk about JD some more, because
• 42:19
  Speaker 1: this is obviously the subject you're very passionate about. What
• 42:22
  Speaker 1: do you make of the theory that if JD. Vance
• 42:26
  Speaker 1: really wants to be president in the States, and clearly
• 42:28
  Speaker 1: you would think that he would. No one's ever been
• 42:30
  Speaker 1: vice president and had no interest in being president, and
• 42:35
  Speaker 1: he's a very young guy. What do you think of
• 42:37
  Speaker 1: the theory that maybe the best scenario would be for
• 42:41
  Speaker 1: Trump to either not endorse or or endorse somebody else.
• 42:47
  Speaker 1: Jad realizes he's not getting the Trump endorsement, doesn't run
• 42:51
  Speaker 1: in twenty twenty eight, so he doesn't lose. He's as
• 42:55
  Speaker 1: hands or as clean as they could possibly be, Newsom
• 42:58
  Speaker 1: or somebody else for the Democratics, it ends up winning
• 43:00
  Speaker 1: the presidency and then Vance is there to be the
• 43:03
  Speaker 1: nominee in thirty two in a situation where it might
• 43:06
  Speaker 1: be a much better environment, especially with a new electoral
• 43:09
  Speaker 1: college for a Republican candidate than in twenty twenty eight.
• 43:13
  Speaker 1: What do you make of that theory?
• 43:15
  Speaker 2: No, I think it's a reasonable theory. I do.
• 43:17
  Speaker 3: I think it will depend upon what happens with this war,
• 43:20
  Speaker 3: what happens with the economy. In other words, if it's
• 43:23
  Speaker 3: a status quo, right, I don't want to be the
• 43:25
  Speaker 3: Republican nominee right now. I don't care who it is,
• 43:27
  Speaker 3: you know, I don't think the Republican nominee is winning
• 43:30
  Speaker 3: given the awful mood of the country as things are now. Now,
• 43:34
  Speaker 3: if things improve dramatically, right by the time we're into
• 43:36
  Speaker 3: twenty twenty seven, then you do.
• 43:38
  Speaker 2: Want to be the republic Republican nominee.
• 43:40
  Speaker 3: But look, in general, after two terms as presidency in
• 43:43
  Speaker 3: the United States tends to go the other direction, right,
• 43:45
  Speaker 3: I mean, we tend to be somewhat self correcting, so
• 43:47
  Speaker 3: that's working against you anyway. If we still have intense
• 43:51
  Speaker 3: economic anxiety across the land, and god forbid, if we're
• 43:54
  Speaker 3: still at war, then.
• 43:55
  Speaker 2: I do not want to be that nominee.
• 43:56
  Speaker 3: And you know, certainly my private advice at that point
• 43:59
  Speaker 3: to Advance, even though I'm saying it here in a microphone,
• 44:02
  Speaker 3: but my private advances to JD would be, let's take
• 44:04
  Speaker 3: a pass so kind of exactly that process you're talking about,
• 44:07
  Speaker 3: that you have plenty of time. You're a young man,
• 44:11
  Speaker 3: and you can become more your own leader, not so
• 44:14
  Speaker 3: much Trump's deputy in time. That seems reasonable to me.
• 44:17
  Speaker 3: But again, I hope and I do believe, not just all,
• 44:20
  Speaker 3: I believe that we end this war, we get back
• 44:23
  Speaker 3: to what was a pretty good economic recovery trajectory pre war,
• 44:27
  Speaker 3: that things can look dramatically more bullish for the country,
• 44:30
  Speaker 3: for Republicans and hopefully for JD. Vance as well as
• 44:33
  Speaker 3: Trump's vice president into next year.
• 44:36
  Speaker 1: We're going to get to the midterms in this second,
• 44:38
  Speaker 1: because I know you've been doing a lot of work
• 44:39
  Speaker 1: on the midterms. But since we're talking about twenty twenty
• 44:42
  Speaker 1: eight presidential politics, I got to ask you about the
• 44:44
  Speaker 1: Democratic side. You know very well how much I fear
• 44:48
  Speaker 1: a Gaven Neuwsom presidency. I think that he is probably
• 44:52
  Speaker 1: the favorite to be the nominee, although I don't think
• 44:54
  Speaker 1: that's set in stone. You also know that I have
• 44:58
  Speaker 1: a little bit of a unique take on the Democratic
• 45:02
  Speaker 1: situation because I'm rooting hard for Kamala Harris because I
• 45:07
  Speaker 1: think she is a problem for Gavin Newsom in a primary.
• 45:09
  Speaker 1: I think that being from California, I think being a
• 45:13
  Speaker 1: woman of color, I think having been vice president, I
• 45:16
  Speaker 1: think she may effectively cock block him in a number
• 45:20
  Speaker 1: of ways. But that doesn't saying that's not saying that
• 45:24
  Speaker 1: he wouldn't win the nomination. Are you with me in
• 45:27
  Speaker 1: fearing a Gavin Newsom presidency more than any other leading
• 45:32
  Speaker 1: Democratic candidate?
• 45:33
  Speaker 2: Yes, I am.
• 45:34
  Speaker 3: I think you're exactly correct on this, and the reason
• 45:36
  Speaker 3: being that he has tremendous media skills, a lot of charisma,
• 45:40
  Speaker 3: great looking, great looking family.
• 45:42
  Speaker 2: I think he is persuasive. I think he's evil, but
• 45:45
  Speaker 2: he's very persuasive.
• 45:47
  Speaker 3: And I think that the amount of damage she can
• 45:49
  Speaker 3: do this country as president would just be severe. I
• 45:51
  Speaker 3: really do, because I think you combine in Gavin Newsome,
• 45:54
  Speaker 3: you know, a complete void of principles. The few principles
• 45:58
  Speaker 3: he does have are very left leaning, with a lot
• 46:02
  Speaker 3: of political skill, like a really Mackavelian figure who in
• 46:07
  Speaker 3: this media age and this digital age.
• 46:08
  Speaker 2: Can be can be fairly captivating.
• 46:10
  Speaker 3: So yes, I fear, you know, from from a good sense,
• 46:13
  Speaker 3: you know, right, I fear Gavin Newsom.
• 46:15
  Speaker 2: And but to your.
• 46:17
  Speaker 3: Point, if I had to bet today, and I don't
• 46:20
  Speaker 3: pretend to be an expert on the Democrat side, it's
• 46:22
  Speaker 3: hard enough for me to understand my side, right as
• 46:23
  Speaker 3: far as priories, that's really But if I had to
• 46:26
  Speaker 3: bet today, and you've said this several times on your show,
• 46:28
  Speaker 3: which I agree with, you know, number one, black women
• 46:31
  Speaker 3: tend to dominate the Democrat primaries. Number two, so many,
• 46:34
  Speaker 3: you know, tens of millions of Americans have already voted
• 46:37
  Speaker 3: for Kamala Harris and it seems pretty easy. You've said
• 46:40
  Speaker 3: that a lot, and that really struck me. I'm like, yeah,
• 46:42
  Speaker 3: you know, people generally, you know, unless something catastrophic has
• 46:45
  Speaker 3: happened and they've already voted for somebody, they're going to
• 46:47
  Speaker 3: vote for them again, right, unless they've somehow been massively
• 46:49
  Speaker 3: disappointed by that person. And she hasn't had the chance
• 46:52
  Speaker 3: to massively disappointing but because she lost, right, and she's
• 46:54
  Speaker 3: been you know, in obscurity, So uh, given that reality,
• 46:58
  Speaker 3: and isn't it crazy that you know, in my view,
• 47:00
  Speaker 3: you the most consequential and failing state in America is
• 47:04
  Speaker 3: probably going to produce the two front runners on the
• 47:06
  Speaker 3: Democrats side, at least it looks like it right now.
• 47:09
  Speaker 3: But to your point too about me fearing Newsom far
• 47:11
  Speaker 3: more than Kamala, both as an opponent and then certainly
• 47:14
  Speaker 3: as president, I'm doing all I can to try to
• 47:17
  Speaker 3: expose his actual California record.
• 47:19
  Speaker 2: And once this podcast gets.
• 47:20
  Speaker 3: Out, actually within days, my specific Palisades documentary on Gavin
• 47:24
  Speaker 3: Newsom's going to be released, I'm going to be doing
• 47:25
  Speaker 3: a lot of other content to try to get ahead
• 47:27
  Speaker 3: of this, to try to present the record to the
• 47:31
  Speaker 3: American people of what he has actually done in California
• 47:33
  Speaker 3: and what he would do for all of America. By
• 47:35
  Speaker 3: the way, just so the audience knows they might get
• 47:37
  Speaker 3: a kick out of this, I want it so badly
• 47:38
  Speaker 3: for you to be in that podcast. I film some
• 47:40
  Speaker 3: of it almost in your backyard, and of course I
• 47:43
  Speaker 3: come to your hometown and you're you're gone, and.
• 47:45
  Speaker 2: You couldn't be in it.
• 47:46
  Speaker 3: I wanted badly to be a Unfortunately there's no John Ziegler,
• 47:50
  Speaker 3: and he would have been perfect for it.
• 47:51
  Speaker 1: So well, my understanding is you may continue to do
• 47:55
  Speaker 1: new some related projects that more.
• 47:58
  Speaker 3: Yes, correct, No, for sure, the most important one to
• 48:01
  Speaker 3: grab first, both his his failures that caused the fire
• 48:05
  Speaker 3: and the failure to rebuild even worse in my view
• 48:07
  Speaker 3: ever since.
• 48:08
  Speaker 2: But yes, we do.
• 48:09
  Speaker 1: I think the most important part of that is, regardless
• 48:11
  Speaker 1: of when that you and I have actually finally meet,
• 48:13
  Speaker 1: which would be great, whether it's to do a documentary, film,
• 48:16
  Speaker 1: interview or not, is that it's clear that you and
• 48:22
  Speaker 1: the people that fund your work agree with us that
• 48:26
  Speaker 1: Newsome is a threat and needs to be dealt with now.
• 48:29
  Speaker 1: Is that that accurate?
• 48:31
  Speaker 2: Yes, that is correct.
• 48:32
  Speaker 3: So I certain I believe that, and you know, some
• 48:34
  Speaker 3: of the smartest people in right wing politics and some
• 48:37
  Speaker 3: of the biggest donors in writing publics believe that as well.
• 48:39
  Speaker 2: Yes, that we need we need to get ahead of this.
• 48:42
  Speaker 3: That he would be formidable as a nominee, he would
• 48:45
  Speaker 3: be dreadful as a president, but thankfully he does having
• 48:49
  Speaker 3: a miserable record, and you know, we just we need
• 48:51
  Speaker 3: to expose it as best we can and explain it
• 48:53
  Speaker 3: to the American people.
• 48:54
  Speaker 1: And I'm all for that one thousand percent with you.
• 48:58
  Speaker 1: But there's a part of me that also thinks, given
• 49:01
  Speaker 1: the fact that we live in this incredibly divided era.
• 49:05
  Speaker 1: Isn't it almost a better strategy to at least pretend
• 49:08
  Speaker 1: publicly that we're really afraid of Kamala Harns Because wouldn't
• 49:12
  Speaker 1: that be better for her in a Democratic primary if
• 49:15
  Speaker 1: it was perceived that Republicans were really afraid of her.
• 49:18
  Speaker 3: Yeah, I understand what you're saying, but I think often
• 49:20
  Speaker 3: those sort of sly strategies can backfire. But I get it, Yes,
• 49:23
  Speaker 3: I mean, right, because we want her to be the nominee,
• 49:26
  Speaker 3: do we act like, oh, well, there's no way we
• 49:28
  Speaker 3: can beat Kamala.
• 49:29
  Speaker 2: I also don't know.
• 49:31
  Speaker 3: I think she's so at least to a sort of
• 49:33
  Speaker 3: persuadable voter or somebody who's, you know, not just a
• 49:36
  Speaker 3: hard committed blue death right. I think it's a little
• 49:40
  Speaker 3: it's a hard sell to tell them, oh, we so
• 49:42
  Speaker 3: fear Comma. They're like, oh, come on, don't give me
• 49:45
  Speaker 3: that crap, you know, other words, like because she's.
• 49:47
  Speaker 2: So unimpressive, right, particularly on the stuff.
• 49:50
  Speaker 3: But I understand what you're saying, and certainly, you know,
• 49:52
  Speaker 3: there's a lot of that in politics, right of you know,
• 49:54
  Speaker 3: setting up, you know, pretending that you fear the opponent,
• 49:56
  Speaker 3: that you actually want, right, I mean, I get it,
• 49:58
  Speaker 3: and I think sometimes that can absolutely work.
• 50:00
  Speaker 2: In this case, I think it would be a hard sell.
• 50:03
  Speaker 3: And look, and maybe there's going to be other groups,
• 50:05
  Speaker 3: other people on the public side who will do that,
• 50:08
  Speaker 3: and maybe it works. It's not the lane that I've chosen.
• 50:11
  Speaker 3: I would rather expose Gavin Newson.
• 50:13
  Speaker 1: I get it. I'm not criticizing you, but I actually
• 50:17
  Speaker 1: think that what Newsom did last week goes to my point,
• 50:21
  Speaker 1: which is here he is telling the public I'm under
• 50:25
  Speaker 1: federal I guess criminal investigation by the Trump administration as
• 50:30
  Speaker 1: a way of effectively announcing his presidential campaign because he
• 50:36
  Speaker 1: wants the liberal voting base to look at him as
• 50:39
  Speaker 1: the guy that is feared most by Trump. That they're
• 50:42
  Speaker 1: using the DOJ to go after him. Doesn't that substantiate
• 50:46
  Speaker 1: the world, my view of the world we're living in now.
• 50:48
  Speaker 2: Yeah, No, it does. You're and you're right and no.
• 50:51
  Speaker 3: And it's interesting because I do think that looking at
• 50:54
  Speaker 3: what he and his wife have been doing, particularly the
• 50:56
  Speaker 3: nonprofit side, I think they're at the at the least
• 51:00
  Speaker 3: really unethical practices going on and probably rhymes and you know,
• 51:04
  Speaker 3: given that I believe in justice, I want him indicted
• 51:07
  Speaker 3: if there's crimes. However, the political side of me, the
• 51:09
  Speaker 3: campaign operative, absolutely does not want him indicted for exactly
• 51:12
  Speaker 3: what you're talking about, like, in other words, what the
• 51:14
  Speaker 3: Trump indictments did for him. It's Ron de Santis, which
• 51:17
  Speaker 3: was just making you know, a fade of complete right
• 51:19
  Speaker 3: that Trump was the nominee. The inverse could have or
• 51:22
  Speaker 3: the same, you know, but on the other side, could
• 51:24
  Speaker 3: happen here for Gavin Newsom if he's in fact and dieted.
• 51:26
  Speaker 3: Now I will also say this though, like let's say
• 51:28
  Speaker 3: there is no indictment, which again public political side of
• 51:30
  Speaker 3: me does not want that. This does bring up a
• 51:33
  Speaker 3: big point, and I think this is going to be
• 51:35
  Speaker 3: his achilles heel, and that is his wife.
• 51:38
  Speaker 2: She is nuts, and I mean beyond nuts.
• 51:42
  Speaker 3: I mean the tape of her that is out there,
• 51:43
  Speaker 3: and she's not just nuts, she's she's out there right.
• 51:46
  Speaker 3: I mean she's incredibly public about it. That's going to
• 51:49
  Speaker 3: be a really really big problem for Gavin Newsom when
• 51:52
  Speaker 3: you have a very high profile, extremely public, ludicrously radical
• 51:58
  Speaker 3: wife that even on the Democrat side, that's going to
• 52:02
  Speaker 3: be a problem. When you put on top of that
• 52:04
  Speaker 3: he's white he's rich, he's straight. I mean, those are
• 52:07
  Speaker 3: a lot of points against him and in favor of
• 52:10
  Speaker 3: Kamala Harris. So I mean, if I had to bet today,
• 52:13
  Speaker 3: you know, I think probably Kamala Harris is the smarter bet.
• 52:15
  Speaker 3: But who do I fear as a Republican and hopefully
• 52:18
  Speaker 3: somebody wording for Jdvance. I hope with the nominee, I
• 52:21
  Speaker 3: fear New some more because I think he's an easier
• 52:24
  Speaker 3: sell to those battleground.
• 52:26
  Speaker 2: State voters that are going to side the next election.
• 52:29
  Speaker 1: Will said, all right, let's talk about the midterms. I
• 52:32
  Speaker 1: know you've been doing a lot of work on the midterms,
• 52:35
  Speaker 1: a lot of it, you know, outside of public view.
• 52:37
  Speaker 1: Before we get to your analysis specifically of where things
• 52:41
  Speaker 1: are heading there, you do a lot of polling. And
• 52:46
  Speaker 1: I'm curious, is a MAGA guy through and through? As
• 52:50
  Speaker 1: you well know, MAGA doesn't believe poles anymore. I mean,
• 52:54
  Speaker 1: unless for some reason, the only polls MAGA seems to
• 52:57
  Speaker 1: believe are poles that have a liber name like a
• 53:00
  Speaker 1: Washington boast or a CNN poll that are somehow good
• 53:04
  Speaker 1: for Trump or Republicans. Other than that, there are no
• 53:07
  Speaker 1: polls that MAGA believes it anymore. Can you can you
• 53:11
  Speaker 1: give me in our audience your view of the status
• 53:15
  Speaker 1: of polling in general and whether or not it's still
• 53:17
  Speaker 1: a credible sources of information in twenty twenty six.
• 53:21
  Speaker 2: Yeah, listen, polling is absolutely credible.
• 53:23
  Speaker 3: And let me just start by saying my polling and
• 53:26
  Speaker 3: I pulled every month essentially sometimes even more intense selection season.
• 53:30
  Speaker 3: My polling in twenty twenty four, I got six of
• 53:33
  Speaker 3: the seven swing states correct and correct almost to the decimal.
• 53:36
  Speaker 3: In other words, it wasn't just that I said Trump
• 53:38
  Speaker 3: was going to win Arizona. We had Trump winning in Arizona,
• 53:40
  Speaker 3: but I think it was four and a half was
• 53:42
  Speaker 3: our final projection, and he won by four point two
• 53:44
  Speaker 3: or something like that. So like we were able to
• 53:46
  Speaker 3: identify in the summer of twenty four that the southern
• 53:50
  Speaker 3: of the sun Belt swing states Nevada, Arizona, Georgia, and
• 53:53
  Speaker 3: North Carolina were actually not really in play. They weren't
• 53:56
  Speaker 3: as swing stateys know, as advertised, and focused entirely on
• 54:01
  Speaker 3: the northern three swing states of Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania,
• 54:04
  Speaker 3: both in terms of our time as well as resources,
• 54:07
  Speaker 3: and I mean massive amounts of resources. Now that was
• 54:09
  Speaker 3: a bet obviously, and we didn't know that our polling
• 54:11
  Speaker 3: was correct, but it turns out it was. I got
• 54:13
  Speaker 3: Pennsylvania wrong, which still bothers me because I can't forge
• 54:15
  Speaker 3: out exactly how I had Trump slightly losing Pennsylvania and
• 54:19
  Speaker 3: he won. But regardless, I'm saying that not to brag,
• 54:23
  Speaker 3: but just to tell you that, you know, I'm stringing
• 54:26
  Speaker 3: on my methodology. We're trying as as hard as we
• 54:28
  Speaker 3: can to be scientific in our polling. We don't want
• 54:31
  Speaker 3: push polling that doesn't help us. We want real market
• 54:34
  Speaker 3: intelligence on where people are on issues and races and
• 54:37
  Speaker 3: you know, and where we can hopefully move them. And
• 54:39
  Speaker 3: so I believe in polling. I have a track record
• 54:41
  Speaker 3: of doing it really successfully. And when people say, you know,
• 54:45
  Speaker 3: polling is rigged, they're just wrong. Now I will say this,
• 54:48
  Speaker 3: I think it's a legacy bias, largely from twenty sixteen,
• 54:50
  Speaker 3: because there was a lot of bad polling in twenty sixteen,
• 54:53
  Speaker 3: because the electorate changed so much and Donald Trump brought
• 54:56
  Speaker 3: so many new voters into elections and and so a
• 55:00
  Speaker 3: lot of prominent polsters got things really really wrong in
• 55:03
  Speaker 3: twenty sixteen. But if you look at the tracker pulling overall,
• 55:06
  Speaker 3: if you look at you know, particularly look at averages, right,
• 55:09
  Speaker 3: you know, real clear politic averages and so forth. In
• 55:11
  Speaker 3: twenty eighteen, twenty twenty, twenty twenty two they did much
• 55:14
  Speaker 3: much better and then twenty twenty four. So I think
• 55:16
  Speaker 3: the industry as a whole is relatively robust. There's some
• 55:19
  Speaker 3: terrible outliers, right, like that ridiculous Iowa polls at Selzner.
• 55:25
  Speaker 3: You know, there's ludicrous outliers where people are clearly just
• 55:29
  Speaker 3: you know, biased and using you know, the guys of
• 55:31
  Speaker 3: polling to push an agenda. And I get it, like
• 55:34
  Speaker 3: and those make people I rate right and and they
• 55:36
  Speaker 3: should you know, it's understandable. But you know, I guess
• 55:38
  Speaker 3: my appeal to people on the right is, you know,
• 55:41
  Speaker 3: I would hope that given the work I've done for
• 55:43
  Speaker 3: the last decade, nobody suspects me of putting my thumb
• 55:46
  Speaker 3: on the.
• 55:46
  Speaker 2: Scale in favor of the Dems.
• 55:48
  Speaker 3: You know, I'm trying to get the best, you know,
• 55:49
  Speaker 3: so I'm not saying, well that means you have to
• 55:52
  Speaker 3: trust me. But I've got a pretty good track record
• 55:54
  Speaker 3: that's public you know that you can check and uh,
• 55:57
  Speaker 3: and we want and my to most specific answer your question, though, No,
• 56:00
  Speaker 3: In general, no, polling's always difficult. You never know what
• 56:03
  Speaker 3: changes around the corner that our current models aren't seen.
• 56:05
  Speaker 3: That's possible our new voter is going to come in
• 56:07
  Speaker 3: now and we're we're just not modeling. I don't see that,
• 56:10
  Speaker 3: but it's possible. But on the whole, and frankly, I
• 56:14
  Speaker 3: will tell you this, I'm surprised because I would have
• 56:16
  Speaker 3: guessed in a cell phone era right where people get
• 56:20
  Speaker 3: spammed too much and where they don't want to pick
• 56:21
  Speaker 3: up the phone, they don't want to talk to a stranger,
• 56:23
  Speaker 3: and we're relying mostly on text these days, you know,
• 56:26
  Speaker 3: text to web generally for polling, I would have guessed
• 56:28
  Speaker 3: that the industry would have accuracy problems. But we just
• 56:31
  Speaker 3: we really haven't seen that in general. And you know,
• 56:34
  Speaker 3: I have recent test cases, not just twenty twenty four,
• 56:36
  Speaker 3: in terms of recent primaries. My polling on these primaries
• 56:40
  Speaker 3: and most public pulling has been pretty accurate.
• 56:43
  Speaker 2: That's just the reality.
• 56:45
  Speaker 1: And I agree with you, and I'm glad that you
• 56:47
  Speaker 1: made that defensive polling because, as you know, I also
• 56:51
  Speaker 1: it's funny to me that people think that you know,
• 56:54
  Speaker 1: every poll has to be right. Otherwise the entire industry
• 56:58
  Speaker 1: is inherently discredit which is ridiculous. I mean, it's a
• 57:02
  Speaker 1: guide and if you use it properly, it can usually
• 57:05
  Speaker 1: give you a pretty good indication to where things are.
• 57:08
  Speaker 1: And with that in mind, my sense is that you
• 57:13
  Speaker 1: are not particularly optimistic about the twenty twenty six mid terms.
• 57:16
  Speaker 1: At least the last time we spoke, you were not
• 57:19
  Speaker 1: that you believe, and the funding that you are part
• 57:22
  Speaker 1: of is being used in a much more defensive situation
• 57:26
  Speaker 1: than it is an offensive perspective when it comes to
• 57:29
  Speaker 1: Republican candidates. So what is your assessment where we are
• 57:33
  Speaker 1: currently when it comes to the twenty twenty six midterms?
• 57:36
  Speaker 2: That is still accurate?
• 57:37
  Speaker 3: I mean right now, as things stand, it's an uphill
• 57:40
  Speaker 3: client for Republicans and we are more defensive than we
• 57:43
  Speaker 3: are trying to flip seats right now. Having said that,
• 57:46
  Speaker 3: I'm a bit more optimistic than I was when I
• 57:48
  Speaker 3: think when I spoke to you last at least I
• 57:49
  Speaker 3: suppoke you live. And the reason though, is not that
• 57:52
  Speaker 3: the polling has shifted, but some of the dynamics of
• 57:54
  Speaker 3: the racis assision, particularly regarding districts right in the House
• 57:57
  Speaker 3: so you know, there are three things that have significant
• 58:00
  Speaker 3: that have happened. Of Course, the Virginia Supreme Court negating
• 58:03
  Speaker 3: that ridiculous map redraw, the Voting Rights Act, Supreme Court
• 58:07
  Speaker 3: decision from the US Supreme Court, which is going to
• 58:09
  Speaker 3: be really consequential going forward, but I think it's a
• 58:11
  Speaker 3: it's a moderately consequential for this current election. And then
• 58:16
  Speaker 3: the last, the third part being the Florida redraw, which
• 58:19
  Speaker 3: you know will stand and was significant. So putting those
• 58:22
  Speaker 3: three things together, I believe the Republican odds for the
• 58:25
  Speaker 3: House had risen. It is still you know, still uphill,
• 58:28
  Speaker 3: and you know, I'm actually paying more attention to prediction
• 58:31
  Speaker 3: markets lately, and the prediction markets right now on Calshet
• 58:34
  Speaker 3: and polyymarket only have Republican odds in the House in
• 58:37
  Speaker 3: the lower twenties.
• 58:38
  Speaker 2: Twenty two percent.
• 58:39
  Speaker 3: I think it is right now to me, and I'm
• 58:41
  Speaker 3: a former trader, you know, I'm buying twenty two percent.
• 58:44
  Speaker 2: I think that's too low.
• 58:45
  Speaker 1: Really, now, you think there's a I do, so you, Steve,
• 58:50
  Speaker 1: you think there's a better than a twenty two percent
• 58:52
  Speaker 1: chance that Republicans hold the House in this midterm?
• 58:56
  Speaker 2: I do, I do now, why do you why do you?
• 58:59
  Speaker 1: Why do you? Is it purely because of the jerrymandering issue,
• 59:04
  Speaker 1: or I mean because that to me, I would I
• 59:07
  Speaker 1: would bet the under on that. I don't think there's
• 59:10
  Speaker 1: a twenty two percent chance that Republicans hold the House.
• 59:13
  Speaker 1: But I mean, look, I could be wrong. I've been
• 59:15
  Speaker 1: wrong before. I'm actually hoping that that's not the case,
• 59:18
  Speaker 1: but that to me seems overly optimistic.
• 59:21
  Speaker 3: Well, let me tell you this, though, I mean, just
• 59:23
  Speaker 3: to give you, you know, a glimpseing of my view
• 59:25
  Speaker 3: on this. And maybe I'm too much of a trader
• 59:27
  Speaker 3: on this trader with a tr D E R.
• 59:30
  Speaker 2: Not the other thing.
• 59:31
  Speaker 3: It was when it was, it wasn't that long ago
• 59:33
  Speaker 3: that it was in the forties, okay. And in the
• 59:35
  Speaker 3: forties I thought that was ludicrously too high for the Republicans.
• 59:39
  Speaker 3: So but I think the low twenties is too low
• 59:41
  Speaker 3: given these these districting issues recently. I will also tell
• 59:45
  Speaker 3: you this, the one thing that surprises me. And again
• 59:47
  Speaker 3: I'm not being Pollyanna here, okay, And I'm in a
• 59:49
  Speaker 3: defensive posture. And and on the Senate side, we can
• 59:52
  Speaker 3: talk about that certainly to the map there, uh, you know,
• 59:55
  Speaker 3: I think we're on defense, not an offense. But but
• 59:58
  Speaker 3: when I look at the House, one thing that does
• 1:00:00
  Speaker 3: surprise me is that Republicans, while they are down in
• 1:00:04
  Speaker 3: generic ballad, and they're typically down in generic ballad, that's
• 1:00:07
  Speaker 3: kind of normal.
• 1:00:07
  Speaker 2: Actually, just who do you vote for, generically not with
• 1:00:10
  Speaker 2: a name for the House?
• 1:00:12
  Speaker 3: Compared to the miserable economic numbers, and I mean they
• 1:00:16
  Speaker 3: are miserable, I mean they are Jimmy Carter malaise type
• 1:00:21
  Speaker 3: economic numbers, I would expect the polling to actually be worse.
• 1:00:25
  Speaker 2: And that tells me that if we can get any economic.
• 1:00:27
  Speaker 3: Improvement, and I realize the runway is getting shorter and
• 1:00:30
  Speaker 3: shorter every day for that right, but if we can
• 1:00:32
  Speaker 3: end the war, and if we can get any economic
• 1:00:34
  Speaker 3: improvement and throw in the redistricting gains, then I think
• 1:00:38
  Speaker 3: the Republican odds rise.
• 1:00:39
  Speaker 2: But again I'm not trimming Polyanna here. We are still
• 1:00:43
  Speaker 2: fighting uphill.
• 1:00:45
  Speaker 3: You know, by all indications, it's going to be a
• 1:00:47
  Speaker 3: Democrat victory, and there's going to be unfortunately a speaker Jeffreys.
• 1:00:51
  Speaker 2: Now I will say this.
• 1:00:51
  Speaker 3: Though too, it's important as disliked as the Republicans are
• 1:00:56
  Speaker 3: right now, the Democrats are more disliked. Right even in
• 1:00:59
  Speaker 3: my polling, Democrat brand is garbage. And the Democrats simply
• 1:01:03
  Speaker 3: cannot be normal. I mean they can't. They insist on
• 1:01:07
  Speaker 3: being so radical that even voters who are really turned
• 1:01:11
  Speaker 3: off by Republicans have a hard time voting. I'll give
• 1:01:13
  Speaker 3: you a specific example for somebody like James Tallerico. Right, So,
• 1:01:16
  Speaker 3: the Republicans have a problematic nominee who has sort of,
• 1:01:20
  Speaker 3: you know, some hair on him right in Paxton. A
• 1:01:22
  Speaker 3: lot of Texans are upset with the price of life,
• 1:01:26
  Speaker 3: right with the economy right now. But what do the
• 1:01:28
  Speaker 3: Democrats do. They nominate this guy whose mom pays his rent,
• 1:01:33
  Speaker 3: who you believes that God has thirty five genders and
• 1:01:36
  Speaker 3: calls God as in Texas. I mean, so the Democrats.
• 1:01:39
  Speaker 3: You know, one thing the Republicans have going for them
• 1:01:41
  Speaker 3: is fantastically bad opponents, and that is It's certainly true
• 1:01:46
  Speaker 3: in that race. It may be true in other races.
• 1:01:47
  Speaker 2: You know.
• 1:01:48
  Speaker 3: I'll give you the best chance of a Republican flipping
• 1:01:50
  Speaker 3: the Senate is Michigan, I believe, especially if l Saied
• 1:01:53
  Speaker 3: abdulah el say Ed is the nominee on the Democrat side.
• 1:01:57
  Speaker 3: This guy is a radical. He's literally pro a hotty.
• 1:02:01
  Speaker 3: He may win the Democrat primary. It's a three rate primary,
• 1:02:03
  Speaker 3: and he's in second place right now. And right there,
• 1:02:06
  Speaker 3: I just pulled it. I have Donald and four if
• 1:02:08
  Speaker 3: else I d is the nominee in Michigan, I think
• 1:02:10
  Speaker 3: Mike Rodgers takes that seat, and that's actually a plus
• 1:02:14
  Speaker 3: one GP flip if that happens. By the way, the
• 1:02:16
  Speaker 3: Dems can't can't take it because they can't find five
• 1:02:20
  Speaker 3: sets then, which they would need to hold.
• 1:02:22
  Speaker 1: Off on the Senate for just a second, because I
• 1:02:24
  Speaker 1: want to address that, because I do think they're very different.
• 1:02:28
  Speaker 1: Here's why I'm so pessimistic about Republicans holding the House,
• 1:02:32
  Speaker 1: although part of me thinks they deserve to lose the
• 1:02:34
  Speaker 1: House given the way they I agree, okay, but I
• 1:02:39
  Speaker 1: don't want to see a speaker Jeffries either. Right here,
• 1:02:42
  Speaker 1: Here's where I am. I have an Ockham's razor view
• 1:02:45
  Speaker 1: of this. Yes, I get that that the gairmandering issue
• 1:02:49
  Speaker 1: has somewhat helped Republicans. I think, you know, they're going
• 1:02:53
  Speaker 1: to get blown out here in California and and that
• 1:02:56
  Speaker 1: kind of stuff. But I agree that, you know, Ronda
• 1:02:59
  Speaker 1: Sandis once Aga again, is the one guy that comes
• 1:03:01
  Speaker 1: through in the clutch and gets shit done, and he
• 1:03:05
  Speaker 1: may have saved the day. At least he gives them
• 1:03:06
  Speaker 1: a chance. But here's where I am with Oukham's razor.
• 1:03:10
  Speaker 1: We already know how this works. We have the twenty
• 1:03:13
  Speaker 1: eighteen midterm election where Democrats dominated in the House off
• 1:03:18
  Speaker 1: year election, and the core reason it's not just the
• 1:03:23
  Speaker 1: history of the fact that incumbent presidents almost always lose
• 1:03:26
  Speaker 1: seats in the House in a midterm, but in Trump's case,
• 1:03:30
  Speaker 1: you have this unique dynamic where every liberal and every
• 1:03:35
  Speaker 1: Democrat in the country is chomping at the bit to
• 1:03:39
  Speaker 1: cast a ballot because they think they're voting against Donald Trump,
• 1:03:43
  Speaker 1: and Republicans don't have the same energy because the pure
• 1:03:48
  Speaker 1: Trump voter doesn't have Trump on the ballot, and so
• 1:03:52
  Speaker 1: in a midterm election, you're not going to have obviously
• 1:03:55
  Speaker 1: presidential turnout the Democratic turnout, even though they've got and
• 1:04:00
  Speaker 1: ask the problems on their side. They're voting against Trump.
• 1:04:05
  Speaker 1: This is a visceral, primal urge that they have to
• 1:04:11
  Speaker 1: vote against Trump, and the same impact is not happening
• 1:04:15
  Speaker 1: on the Republican side because Trump ain't on the ballot
• 1:04:18
  Speaker 1: and we vote. Know, Trump doesn't really give that much
• 1:04:21
  Speaker 1: of a shit about even though he should. He's not
• 1:04:25
  Speaker 1: going to get out there and do rallies all over
• 1:04:27
  Speaker 1: the place. You know, win one for the Gipper and
• 1:04:30
  Speaker 1: you're really voting for me. That's not going to happen.
• 1:04:32
  Speaker 1: So how do you how do you get passed if
• 1:04:35
  Speaker 1: you're a Republican in this midterm? How do you get
• 1:04:38
  Speaker 1: past that that dichotomy in the energy on the left
• 1:04:41
  Speaker 1: as opposed to the energy on the right. With regard
• 1:04:43
  Speaker 1: to MAGA voters.
• 1:04:44
  Speaker 3: No, listen, John, you're correctly making the case why they're
• 1:04:47
  Speaker 3: probably is going to be a speaker Jeffreys, right, And
• 1:04:49
  Speaker 3: I get that. And it's not just an enthusiasm level too.
• 1:04:52
  Speaker 3: It's also the demographic. In other words, this America First coalition,
• 1:04:55
  Speaker 3: which is amazing, right, and it won the popular vote
• 1:04:58
  Speaker 3: in twenty twenty four, which shocked almost everybody. It includes
• 1:05:01
  Speaker 3: a lot of very low propensity voters, people who do
• 1:05:04
  Speaker 3: not consider themselves political.
• 1:05:06
  Speaker 2: Who have to be really hyped up to vote. Trump
• 1:05:09
  Speaker 2: got them mind them to vote.
• 1:05:10
  Speaker 3: It's very hard to get and that's it's it's the
• 1:05:12
  Speaker 3: opposite of what the Republican Party used to be. We
• 1:05:15
  Speaker 3: now are the party of working class folks who tend
• 1:05:18
  Speaker 3: to be lower propensity, the non credential class, folks where
• 1:05:21
  Speaker 3: politics is just not an important part of their life.
• 1:05:23
  Speaker 3: They've overwhelming the vote for us. They're hard to turn out,
• 1:05:26
  Speaker 3: especially in non presential years. So no, you you made
• 1:05:29
  Speaker 3: the case effectively. If I'm going to give you the
• 1:05:30
  Speaker 3: counter and again I agree with you, all right, I mean,
• 1:05:32
  Speaker 3: that's that's the base case right now. It is you know, admittedly,
• 1:05:36
  Speaker 3: you know if I'm going to make those the counter argument,
• 1:05:40
  Speaker 3: you know, it's two things. It's one, the economy can improve,
• 1:05:43
  Speaker 3: but you know, we've got to end this damn war, right,
• 1:05:45
  Speaker 3: no control over that obviously. So let's see. So that's
• 1:05:48
  Speaker 3: the first one. Admittedly I think that's lower probability. But
• 1:05:51
  Speaker 3: the second, which is not low probability, is we're facing
• 1:05:56
  Speaker 3: super radical, awful opponents. And you when you have even
• 1:06:00
  Speaker 3: we have a you know, every coach, if you don't
• 1:06:01
  Speaker 3: have a good team, you sure want weak opponents, right
• 1:06:04
  Speaker 3: and uh, and we have the blessing of some really
• 1:06:07
  Speaker 3: really weak opponents out there. And given that reality, perhaps
• 1:06:12
  Speaker 3: you know we can pull that straight flush, right, even
• 1:06:15
  Speaker 3: though things don't look good with the you know, with
• 1:06:16
  Speaker 3: the initial the first couple of cards, we get like
• 1:06:18
  Speaker 3: a crap right, and then we you know, we we
• 1:06:21
  Speaker 3: pull a lucky deal in terms of the opponents.
• 1:06:23
  Speaker 2: So that would be the case. But again I'm with you,
• 1:06:26
  Speaker 2: I'm in a defensive posture. We are not.
• 1:06:29
  Speaker 3: If you'd ask me six months ago, I would have
• 1:06:31
  Speaker 3: told you all the seats were going to flip and
• 1:06:32
  Speaker 3: where we're going to fight. Very different scenario now, mainly
• 1:06:36
  Speaker 3: because of polling, which polling does work. It's not perfect,
• 1:06:39
  Speaker 3: but it works, especially when you use polling averages, and
• 1:06:43
  Speaker 3: especially when you when you pay attention to posters who
• 1:06:45
  Speaker 3: are careful about their methodology.
• 1:06:47
  Speaker 1: All right, so real quick, on the Senate, I'm much
• 1:06:49
  Speaker 1: more concerned about the Senate, and you know, as you know,
• 1:06:52
  Speaker 1: I'm a big Supreme Court guy, and with Thomas and
• 1:06:55
  Speaker 1: Alito at their ages, I think this is a very
• 1:06:57
  Speaker 1: underrated issue.
• 1:06:59
  Speaker 2: I mean, I I'm very.
• 1:07:00
  Speaker 1: Concerned about the health of Thomas and Alito, and I'm
• 1:07:03
  Speaker 1: a little disappointed they decided not to retire this year.
• 1:07:07
  Speaker 1: I'm guessing that there's a decent chance they will retire
• 1:07:10
  Speaker 1: sometime and then the last two years of Trump's presidency,
• 1:07:12
  Speaker 1: if Republicans hold the Senate. I you know, I haven't
• 1:07:17
  Speaker 1: done a deep dive yet, but I think it's going
• 1:07:19
  Speaker 1: to be razor clothes. I think we're talking fifty to
• 1:07:22
  Speaker 1: fifty to fifty one forty nine that kind of thing.
• 1:07:25
  Speaker 1: Where are you currently on, and I know you're doing
• 1:07:27
  Speaker 1: a lot of work on this. Where are you on
• 1:07:30
  Speaker 1: where you think the Senate's going to end up? Well?
• 1:07:34
  Speaker 2: Once again, and I'm not trying to give so many caveats.
• 1:07:36
  Speaker 3: You know, the warnings dand Okay, if the war continues,
• 1:07:39
  Speaker 3: you know, all the way into November and high prices persist,
• 1:07:43
  Speaker 3: then I think you're correct. However, let's assume that's not
• 1:07:47
  Speaker 3: the base case, because I think we are winding this up,
• 1:07:49
  Speaker 3: and I think Trump has been crystal clear about that
• 1:07:50
  Speaker 3: now is going to end tomorrow or two days, I
• 1:07:53
  Speaker 3: don't know, but Trump clearly has shifted to a posture
• 1:07:56
  Speaker 3: where he's looking for a way out, and I think
• 1:07:57
  Speaker 3: we'll get away out. So here's where I stand on that.
• 1:08:00
  Speaker 3: I think Michigan is a very likely flip for Republicans.
• 1:08:04
  Speaker 3: I think North Carolina is almost a sure flip for
• 1:08:07
  Speaker 3: the Democrats. But there's a chance that those two cancel
• 1:08:11
  Speaker 3: each other out. My strong guess is the rest of
• 1:08:13
  Speaker 3: the map from is status quo. Now I understand the
• 1:08:16
  Speaker 3: Republican vulnerabilities. You know, some people will say Texas is
• 1:08:18
  Speaker 3: vulnerable because of paston and his issues. Ohio could actually
• 1:08:22
  Speaker 3: be problematic, even though it's actually a very red state.
• 1:08:24
  Speaker 3: Now you have a totally unknown Republican senator there who
• 1:08:27
  Speaker 3: frankly has been miserable in his job so far. I
• 1:08:30
  Speaker 3: mean not that he's doing anything egregiously wrong, but the
• 1:08:32
  Speaker 3: point is he's doing nothing period, right, He's just an
• 1:08:35
  Speaker 3: unknown entity running against Sharon Brown, who's a very known
• 1:08:38
  Speaker 3: entity and has is a great politician and campaigner, you know.
• 1:08:42
  Speaker 3: So it's possible that Ohio's in play. It's possible that
• 1:08:44
  Speaker 3: Iowa is in play. Certainly Alaska and Maine are in
• 1:08:48
  Speaker 3: play right for the Democrats. But when I look at
• 1:08:51
  Speaker 3: the map, what the polling tells me and just my
• 1:08:55
  Speaker 3: own political analysis is probably it's status quo in all
• 1:09:00
  Speaker 3: the states except for Michigan and North Carolina.
• 1:09:05
  Speaker 2: I would tell you what I'm wrong.
• 1:09:06
  Speaker 3: Which stage do you think do you believe Island and Ohio,
• 1:09:10
  Speaker 3: for example, our flips for the.
• 1:09:11
  Speaker 1: D I am concerned the main thing that has me
• 1:09:16
  Speaker 1: concerns Steve is that you don't believe that Georgia can
• 1:09:21
  Speaker 1: be flipped. And I know you've done, you know, some
• 1:09:23
  Speaker 1: pretty good research on that, and the fact that you
• 1:09:26
  Speaker 1: don't think that Georgia can be flipped it tells me that, Okay, again,
• 1:09:32
  Speaker 1: I'm losing Ockham's razor here. If we can't if we
• 1:09:35
  Speaker 1: can't flip freaking Georgia.
• 1:09:37
  Speaker 4: Then okay, John, I've changed my mind on that, just
• 1:09:40
  Speaker 4: so you know, Okay, I literally just and for good
• 1:09:43
  Speaker 4: reason though, I think, uh, the fact that that we
• 1:09:46
  Speaker 4: have Jackson now as the gubernatorial comedy there, a multi
• 1:09:50
  Speaker 4: billionaire who spent one hundred million dollars in the primary.
• 1:09:53
  Speaker 2: My one of my main reasons it.
• 1:09:54
  Speaker 3: Wasn't so much the issues, it was more the money.
• 1:09:57
  Speaker 3: That I didn't believe Mike Collins could take on John
• 1:09:59
  Speaker 3: Ossa's money and also has already a massive war chest
• 1:10:02
  Speaker 3: and it's going to only grow.
• 1:10:03
  Speaker 2: He's an unbelievable fundraiser.
• 1:10:05
  Speaker 3: I think he's a miserable radical senator, but he's a
• 1:10:08
  Speaker 3: very very strong fundraiser and a lot of Democrats have
• 1:10:10
  Speaker 3: their eye on him to be president.
• 1:10:11
  Speaker 2: So he's kind of got this rising star stick going.
• 1:10:15
  Speaker 3: However, given that Jackson is the gubernatorial nominee and has
• 1:10:19
  Speaker 3: said he will spend whatever it takes to win, and
• 1:10:21
  Speaker 3: I think he will win if he spends two hundred
• 1:10:24
  Speaker 3: three hundred million dollars, which is very possible, that will
• 1:10:27
  Speaker 3: have such wonderful effect for Mike Collins as well in
• 1:10:30
  Speaker 3: terms of getting out the vote in Georgia.
• 1:10:32
  Speaker 2: So I'm not saying it's likely. You know.
• 1:10:34
  Speaker 3: Again, I'm not saying that he belongs at fifty to
• 1:10:35
  Speaker 3: fifty if we were betting on it, But I'm saying
• 1:10:37
  Speaker 3: I think the odds have at least risen there now,
• 1:10:40
  Speaker 3: will Assoff win probably.
• 1:10:41
  Speaker 2: I think he probably wins.
• 1:10:43
  Speaker 1: Okay, But and look, I understand the power of incumbency
• 1:10:45
  Speaker 1: as well as anybody, but just it's hard for me
• 1:10:48
  Speaker 1: to understand how, you know, a state like Georgia could
• 1:10:54
  Speaker 1: not flip against a guy like Osof who's terrible and
• 1:11:00
  Speaker 1: Republicans to maintain a fifty three forty seven advantage. That
• 1:11:05
  Speaker 1: seems impossible to me when there are so many vulnerable seats. Yes,
• 1:11:10
  Speaker 1: Platner looks like a loser in Maine. Not that Susan
• 1:11:13
  Speaker 1: Collins is really a Republican to begin with, but I
• 1:11:15
  Speaker 1: prefer heard over Platner. But to me, there's so many minefields.
• 1:11:20
  Speaker 1: I guess that's my concern. There's a minefield in Maine,
• 1:11:22
  Speaker 1: there's a minefield in Texas. There's a minefield in Ohio,
• 1:11:25
  Speaker 1: there's a minefield in Iowa. There's a minefield in Alaska. Right,
• 1:11:30
  Speaker 1: we can only afford a couple of those to go off,
• 1:11:33
  Speaker 1: and if they if they all go off, it's over.
• 1:11:38
  Speaker 1: It's understanding.
• 1:11:39
  Speaker 3: By the way, Alaska is the one other than again,
• 1:11:41
  Speaker 3: I think North Colin's gone.
• 1:11:43
  Speaker 2: Other Russ I've already exceeded.
• 1:11:44
  Speaker 1: It's North Carolina has gone.
• 1:11:45
  Speaker 3: There's no The one that I'm most worried about is
• 1:11:47
  Speaker 3: Alaska right now because that Democrat and I don't know
• 1:11:50
  Speaker 3: Alaskan politics that well, and it's its own world, it
• 1:11:52
  Speaker 3: really is.
• 1:11:52
  Speaker 2: It's very different for the rest of the country.
• 1:11:54
  Speaker 3: So I don't think anybody in the lower fortyation pretend
• 1:11:56
  Speaker 3: to be an Alaska expert, and I'm certainly not.
• 1:11:59
  Speaker 2: But as just as campaign guy and a media guy.
• 1:12:02
  Speaker 3: Uh. The Democrats have a pretty sane, pretty normal, likable
• 1:12:05
  Speaker 3: woman nominee there at least presents a sane and uh
• 1:12:10
  Speaker 3: and Sullivan is largely unknown in his own state, so
• 1:12:13
  Speaker 3: you know, And and again, Alaska's just kind of peculiar anyway.
• 1:12:16
  Speaker 3: It's a right wing state that doesn't mind electing Democrats.
• 1:12:20
  Speaker 3: And uh so I'm concerned about that one, you know.
• 1:12:23
  Speaker 3: But again, let's say I'm all right, let's say I'm
• 1:12:26
  Speaker 3: wrong on Michigan, you know, and let's say they don't
• 1:12:28
  Speaker 3: nominate LSI ed and uh and so there's no flip there.
• 1:12:32
  Speaker 3: It's still that you're talking, you know, minus two between
• 1:12:35
  Speaker 3: North Carolina and Alaska. I just I firmly believe that
• 1:12:39
  Speaker 3: Susan Collins, who I believe is a you know, average
• 1:12:41
  Speaker 3: at best senator, is an unbelievable.
• 1:12:43
  Speaker 2: Campaigner and is and is very beloved in Maine. I
• 1:12:46
  Speaker 2: think in the end she wins.
• 1:12:48
  Speaker 3: And again, as I've been saying several times, blussed with
• 1:12:50
  Speaker 3: a super flawed, super radical opponent. But look, is it
• 1:12:54
  Speaker 3: possible if this war persists, and let's say we get
• 1:12:57
  Speaker 3: a spike back in oil? You know, is impossible that
• 1:13:01
  Speaker 3: that Alaska, Maine, North Carolina are all gone, Michigan's unwinnable.
• 1:13:05
  Speaker 2: Ohio, Iowa are actually in play. Texas is actually in play.
• 1:13:09
  Speaker 3: Again, I don't see it that way, but sure you
• 1:13:11
  Speaker 3: know it's possible.
• 1:13:12
  Speaker 2: For them to run the table.
• 1:13:13
  Speaker 3: And by the way, to your point earlier to me
• 1:13:16
  Speaker 3: and I have such just admiration for both of these men,
• 1:13:20
  Speaker 3: but on the Supreme Court, the fact that Thomas and
• 1:13:23
  Speaker 3: Alito didn't step down, you know, being aware of this
• 1:13:26
  Speaker 3: and allow our replacement now, I think is really disappointing,
• 1:13:30
  Speaker 3: you know, and from two guys again, whom I have
• 1:13:32
  Speaker 3: so much admiration for, especially Clarence Thomas, the kind of
• 1:13:35
  Speaker 3: life he's had and the what he gets faced in
• 1:13:38
  Speaker 3: his life, both as a child right in terms of
• 1:13:40
  Speaker 3: the discrimination he faced and then as a non a
• 1:13:43
  Speaker 3: knee the absoluteest unfair your propaganda, you know, smear campaign
• 1:13:47
  Speaker 3: that he faced.
• 1:13:48
  Speaker 2: I mean, wow, what an amazing man in so many ways.
• 1:13:50
  Speaker 3: But maybe there's just something about once you attain that
• 1:13:53
  Speaker 3: level of power, you can't be objective enough about it
• 1:13:56
  Speaker 3: or humble enough about it to say, you know what,
• 1:13:58
  Speaker 3: I'm going to step aside for the good income I
• 1:14:00
  Speaker 3: really wish they had. And it's a scary proposition.
• 1:14:03
  Speaker 1: To me, and I wonder, I wonder whether or not
• 1:14:06
  Speaker 1: they were just overly optimistic. You know, they looked at
• 1:14:09
  Speaker 1: it and said fifty three forty seven. And you know,
• 1:14:13
  Speaker 1: this isn't going to be a big issue for the
• 1:14:14
  Speaker 1: next couple of years. We have some time here. I'm
• 1:14:16
  Speaker 1: trying to give them the benefit of the doubt, but I.
• 1:14:19
  Speaker 2: Say, I don't mind. They live in Washington, d C.
• 1:14:23
  Speaker 2: And they're professional political figures.
• 1:14:24
  Speaker 1: I mean maybe, I guess I look, I wish at
• 1:14:28
  Speaker 1: least one of them. I would have been felt a
• 1:14:30
  Speaker 1: lot better if one of them had retired this particular year,
• 1:14:34
  Speaker 1: and you know one of the other one waited, and
• 1:14:36
  Speaker 1: if we held onto the Senate, we're still in decent
• 1:14:38
  Speaker 1: shape to get a good replacement. But that that worries
• 1:14:42
  Speaker 1: me greatly. And bottom line on this, and I'm sure
• 1:14:45
  Speaker 1: we'll talk about it again before the midterms. But if
• 1:14:48
  Speaker 1: you gave me fifty one forty nine right now, I
• 1:14:51
  Speaker 1: take it. Fifty one Republicans, I take it. I might
• 1:14:56
  Speaker 1: even take fifty to fifty. I might even That's how
• 1:14:59
  Speaker 1: pessimistic I am, because I'm worried about Iowa and Ohio.
• 1:15:05
  Speaker 1: And look, Republicans are gonna have a lot of money
• 1:15:08
  Speaker 1: to spend. That's about you know. One of the good
• 1:15:10
  Speaker 1: things I think on the Republican side, but Democrats will
• 1:15:14
  Speaker 1: as well. And you're right, it's probably going to come
• 1:15:17
  Speaker 1: down to whether the war is distant memory or not.
• 1:15:19
  Speaker 1: And if it is, and if there's some economic recovery,
• 1:15:22
  Speaker 1: then I'll be more optimistic. But right now, if you
• 1:15:24
  Speaker 1: gave me fifty one, I take it. A couple of
• 1:15:27
  Speaker 1: other quick things before we let you go. You as
• 1:15:29
  Speaker 1: always very generous with your time. I want to ask
• 1:15:32
  Speaker 1: you about Fauci AI and football. So you made an
• 1:15:37
  Speaker 1: appearance on News Nation the other day where you eviscerated
• 1:15:40
  Speaker 1: doctor Fauci over the most recent revelations released by Tulca
• 1:15:45
  Speaker 1: Gabbard on her last day in power, where we now
• 1:15:50
  Speaker 1: have more information about Fauci and the Wuhan Lab and
• 1:15:55
  Speaker 1: hiding the funding of the Wuhan Lab. And you have
• 1:15:58
  Speaker 1: some strong opinions about that. You what do you make
• 1:16:01
  Speaker 1: of that story?
• 1:16:02
  Speaker 3: I certainly do and no, listen, I think this is
• 1:16:04
  Speaker 3: a bombshell. I'm curious why Tulca didn't release his until
• 1:16:08
  Speaker 3: her last day. I'd love to know that explanation, and
• 1:16:10
  Speaker 3: hopefully we will in time know why. But regardless, I'm
• 1:16:13
  Speaker 3: glad she did. I'm bumped she's not there anymore, by
• 1:16:15
  Speaker 3: the way, But I'm glad that she released this information.
• 1:16:17
  Speaker 3: And this isn't, you know, just her theory or her supposition.
• 1:16:19
  Speaker 3: These are the actual receipts, including a lot of email evidence,
• 1:16:23
  Speaker 3: that Tony Fauci, you know, funded the Wuhan lab among dozens,
• 1:16:28
  Speaker 3: I think, actually even hundreds of such labs across the world,
• 1:16:31
  Speaker 3: and that he even worse than that, or as bad
• 1:16:34
  Speaker 3: as that, that he hid that information, that he knowingly
• 1:16:37
  Speaker 3: went in front under oath, in front of the US Congress,
• 1:16:40
  Speaker 3: lied about it, that he solicited the cooperation of a
• 1:16:44
  Speaker 3: lot of people within the public health apparatuses of America
• 1:16:47
  Speaker 3: to join him in this obfuscation campaign, in this propaganda
• 1:16:51
  Speaker 3: deceit campaign, that he also enlisted the US intelligence community
• 1:16:55
  Speaker 3: to back him in covering up not only for the
• 1:16:58
  Speaker 3: fact that we were funding that very lab, but also
• 1:17:00
  Speaker 3: the reality that, of course the virus came from that lab, right,
• 1:17:03
  Speaker 3: of course it did. It didn't just coincidentally come from
• 1:17:06
  Speaker 3: the city of Wuhan, you know, a couple hundred yards
• 1:17:08
  Speaker 3: away from the virology lab. Didn't come from the wet market.
• 1:17:11
  Speaker 3: And no reasonable person ever believe that story. But I
• 1:17:14
  Speaker 3: think even suspicious people didn't realize, oh my gosh, we
• 1:17:18
  Speaker 3: helped to create this in the first place. And so
• 1:17:20
  Speaker 3: you know, yes, I have nothing but contempt for Tony Fauci,
• 1:17:25
  Speaker 3: who I believe is the most harmful, malicious, monstrous character.
• 1:17:29
  Speaker 2: In all of American history.
• 1:17:31
  Speaker 3: And I don't think that's exaggeration to say when you
• 1:17:33
  Speaker 3: look at the damage that was wrought by this man,
• 1:17:36
  Speaker 3: that a virus that he helped to create in the
• 1:17:38
  Speaker 3: first place, once it was unleashed upon the world, Rather
• 1:17:41
  Speaker 3: than acting like a medical professional and saying, Okay, how
• 1:17:44
  Speaker 3: do we handle this virus in a responsible but reasonable way,
• 1:17:47
  Speaker 3: what did he do? He did two things simultaneously. He
• 1:17:49
  Speaker 3: both covered up his role in the virus and tried
• 1:17:52
  Speaker 3: to cover up, you know, similarly, tried to cover up
• 1:17:55
  Speaker 3: the fact that it did in fact come from China
• 1:17:58
  Speaker 3: and that it was created, that it was concocted by
• 1:18:00
  Speaker 3: this place he was.
• 1:18:01
  Speaker 2: Helping to support.
• 1:18:02
  Speaker 3: But then Number two used the virus as the pretext
• 1:18:06
  Speaker 3: to create a panic, a panic that was not based
• 1:18:08
  Speaker 3: on science, that was based on politics because he viscerally
• 1:18:12
  Speaker 3: hated Trump and he saw this as an opportunity, correctly so,
• 1:18:15
  Speaker 3: as an opportunity to take down Trump. And he didn't
• 1:18:17
  Speaker 3: care what kind of collateral damage would happen, and so
• 1:18:21
  Speaker 3: he used misinformation and propaganda to gin up a panic
• 1:18:24
  Speaker 3: which resulted in the country at least for a period
• 1:18:26
  Speaker 3: of time following almost every one of his ridiculous edicts
• 1:18:30
  Speaker 3: that crashed our economy, that dispirited the people, that harmed
• 1:18:35
  Speaker 3: and abused children in a particularly cruel way, and which
• 1:18:38
  Speaker 3: has lasting effect to.
• 1:18:39
  Speaker 2: This very day.
• 1:18:40
  Speaker 3: I mean, part of the reason we are still dealing
• 1:18:42
  Speaker 3: with inflation now years later is because of what Tony
• 1:18:45
  Speaker 3: Fauci did then, and we now have, courtesy of Tulsa Gabbard,
• 1:18:48
  Speaker 3: the receipts on this now. We can't prosecute him federally,
• 1:18:51
  Speaker 3: or at least it's very difficult given the blanket part
• 1:18:53
  Speaker 3: of that he got. I would still like to see
• 1:18:54
  Speaker 3: the Trump administration indict him, and I've spoken to very
• 1:18:57
  Speaker 3: senior people the administration about this.
• 1:18:59
  Speaker 2: By the way, I said, indict him anyway, even.
• 1:19:01
  Speaker 3: If it gets dismissed. You can still send the FBI,
• 1:19:03
  Speaker 3: you can cuff him, you can purb walk him. And
• 1:19:05
  Speaker 3: the point that I would make, though, if legally, is
• 1:19:07
  Speaker 3: that the indictment's not valid on the autopen argument now
• 1:19:11
  Speaker 3: I think we lose that probably in court, but let's
• 1:19:13
  Speaker 3: go down that road anyway. I mean, let's make things
• 1:19:15
  Speaker 3: difficult for this monster who did this to us, who lied,
• 1:19:18
  Speaker 3: And I think there are other avenues. For example, you know,
• 1:19:21
  Speaker 3: we saw what the States did the Trump in terms
• 1:19:22
  Speaker 3: of indicting him. Those were ridiculous, sham indictments. But can't
• 1:19:25
  Speaker 3: the state of Florida take a look at hey, plenty
• 1:19:28
  Speaker 3: of damage done to Florida. Don't we have cause to
• 1:19:30
  Speaker 3: indict Tony Fauci. I also have already started to talk
• 1:19:34
  Speaker 3: to some folks on the right about what can we
• 1:19:36
  Speaker 3: do in terms of civil litigation, in terms of suing
• 1:19:39
  Speaker 3: Tony Fauci? Right, given this new information he's a wealthy man,
• 1:19:42
  Speaker 3: can we at least cause him some personal pain? Because
• 1:19:46
  Speaker 3: you know, the lover of justice and me says, we
• 1:19:48
  Speaker 3: can't just know this. It's good to know it, but
• 1:19:51
  Speaker 3: we can't just know it. There's got to be actual
• 1:19:52
  Speaker 3: retribution and accountability here. And at the least what I
• 1:19:56
  Speaker 3: can do is, you know what you can do we're
• 1:19:58
  Speaker 3: media guys, is use our platforms to inform the world
• 1:20:02
  Speaker 3: who may not know exactly what Tulsea revealed and just
• 1:20:05
  Speaker 3: how deep and manifold the treachery and criminality of Tony
• 1:20:11
  Speaker 3: Fauci was as proven not in theory, as proven by
• 1:20:14
  Speaker 3: the receipts.
• 1:20:15
  Speaker 1: Well. As you know, I'm much more passionate about the
• 1:20:18
  Speaker 1: COVID panic part than the Wuhan lab part, although I
• 1:20:21
  Speaker 1: think both are important, and I guess my biggest question
• 1:20:27
  Speaker 1: will always be involving doctor Fauci is, how is it
• 1:20:32
  Speaker 1: to Donald Trump, a guy who I actually think has
• 1:20:35
  Speaker 1: tremendous instincts about media and about people in most cases,
• 1:20:42
  Speaker 1: how did he get Fauci so wrong? How did he
• 1:20:45
  Speaker 1: not see the Fauci threat the first day that he
• 1:20:49
  Speaker 1: put Fauci on national television in front of a massive audience,
• 1:20:53
  Speaker 1: as the COVID panic was beginning. How is it possible
• 1:20:56
  Speaker 1: that that happen?
• 1:20:58
  Speaker 3: Yeah, I don't know. I wish I did. It was
• 1:21:00
  Speaker 3: clearly the biggest mistake of his political life. I hope
• 1:21:03
  Speaker 3: Ron doesn't become an even bigger one, but so far,
• 1:21:05
  Speaker 3: that's clearly the biggest mistake of his public life. What
• 1:21:07
  Speaker 3: I can tell you, John, is contemporaneously, at that time,
• 1:21:11
  Speaker 3: I was begging him, I was speaking of the prison
• 1:21:13
  Speaker 3: Trump quite frequently, and I was begging him to get
• 1:21:16
  Speaker 3: Tony Fauci off that podium. And you know, he said, well,
• 1:21:20
  Speaker 3: he's going to do media interviews anyway. I said, fine,
• 1:21:22
  Speaker 3: let him do his interviews, but not from the White
• 1:21:24
  Speaker 3: House podium and not next to you, not.
• 1:21:26
  Speaker 2: With the gravitas and authority of the White House.
• 1:21:29
  Speaker 3: I was a media guy, and I understood then all
• 1:21:32
  Speaker 3: of America's home with nothing to do. Every channel is
• 1:21:36
  Speaker 3: showing Tony Fauci from the White House podium make pronouncements
• 1:21:39
  Speaker 3: that have no basis in reality, all of which are
• 1:21:42
  Speaker 3: actually undermining you. Right, you're handing your political assassin the
• 1:21:46
  Speaker 3: dagger and say, okay, stick it here, right. But I
• 1:21:49
  Speaker 3: will just tell you that I know because it was
• 1:21:53
  Speaker 3: me he at least heard that advice.
• 1:21:55
  Speaker 2: He clearly didn't take it. I don't know why.
• 1:21:57
  Speaker 3: I wish I knew, And you know, I could have
• 1:21:59
  Speaker 3: changed everything if he had just said, hey, you are
• 1:22:01
  Speaker 3: relegated back to your office over there. That was it
• 1:22:05
  Speaker 3: usiad or whatever is the initials worrying of you're back
• 1:22:09
  Speaker 3: over there, And yeah, I mean, I can't stop you
• 1:22:11
  Speaker 3: from doing media interviews, but you're not going to do
• 1:22:13
  Speaker 3: them with the impromtra and the authority of the White House,
• 1:22:16
  Speaker 3: and we won't be afraid to criticize you. By the way, also,
• 1:22:19
  Speaker 3: right when we say we think you say something incorrect
• 1:22:21
  Speaker 3: but clearly just a massive funnel, well.
• 1:22:24
  Speaker 1: You were one hundred percent right at the time, And
• 1:22:27
  Speaker 1: you know I was screaming to the television that this
• 1:22:29
  Speaker 1: is an idiotic move to let this guy who was
• 1:22:32
  Speaker 1: a clear narcissist and egomaniac Fauci I'm talking about, have
• 1:22:37
  Speaker 1: that kind of credibility and effectively become for all intentsive
• 1:22:40
  Speaker 1: purposes president of the United States and Trump just sitting
• 1:22:43
  Speaker 1: there and not realizing the damage that that was going
• 1:22:46
  Speaker 1: to do to the country and do his re election chances.
• 1:22:49
  Speaker 1: So you and I were on the exact same page
• 1:22:52
  Speaker 1: on that front. I think we have some similar situations
• 1:22:56
  Speaker 1: going on with regard to the future of AI. You
• 1:22:59
  Speaker 1: and I have talked a lot of about this offline.
• 1:23:02
  Speaker 1: You have an interesting perspective on artificial intelligence, partially because
• 1:23:05
  Speaker 1: your daughter is very involved in the AI industry. So
• 1:23:10
  Speaker 1: what is Steve Cortez's public view of where we are
• 1:23:14
  Speaker 1: on AI, both from the perspective of a potential economic
• 1:23:18
  Speaker 1: stock bubble as well as the societal impact that could
• 1:23:23
  Speaker 1: incur because of AI taking over our lives.
• 1:23:27
  Speaker 3: Sure, and John just uh, for the record, I have
• 1:23:31
  Speaker 3: not said much about this publicly because although I'm studying
• 1:23:34
  Speaker 3: it deeply, I certainly don't consider myself to be an expert.
• 1:23:37
  Speaker 3: And you know, you're very good about this. You know,
• 1:23:39
  Speaker 3: you don't opine on something or you don't feel you
• 1:23:41
  Speaker 3: have expertise. But I'm trying to learn a lot about
• 1:23:44
  Speaker 3: it because I think it is so consequential. And yes,
• 1:23:46
  Speaker 3: thankfully I happen to have a daughter who is just
• 1:23:48
  Speaker 3: deeply in this world works and it just got a
• 1:23:50
  Speaker 3: graduate degree and basically they don't call it AI, but
• 1:23:53
  Speaker 3: basically an AI in data science, and you know, and
• 1:23:55
  Speaker 3: it's truly I think, you know, a young expert in
• 1:23:57
  Speaker 3: this field. So luckily I have in the family a
• 1:23:59
  Speaker 3: lot of advice and on this and from my reading
• 1:24:03
  Speaker 3: and from my conversation is what I can tell you know,
• 1:24:05
  Speaker 3: there is promise in peril right extreme on both sides,
• 1:24:08
  Speaker 3: but it seems like more peril and more risks than
• 1:24:11
  Speaker 3: the promise side. And I'm very concerned about the potential
• 1:24:15
  Speaker 3: for AI and what it can do to us societally,
• 1:24:19
  Speaker 3: particularly the aspect of what it's already doing to young
• 1:24:21
  Speaker 3: people in the job market, right, So we can already
• 1:24:23
  Speaker 3: see it in a real sense with young folks, many
• 1:24:26
  Speaker 3: of whom used to do tasks that work while white
• 1:24:29
  Speaker 3: collars somewhat menial, right, and things that are increasingly getting.
• 1:24:33
  Speaker 2: To be automated.
• 1:24:34
  Speaker 3: That's really really worrisome to me because idle people, especially
• 1:24:38
  Speaker 3: idle young men, that's a recipe for disaster. And people
• 1:24:42
  Speaker 3: like Elon Musk and you've been so adamant and I
• 1:24:44
  Speaker 3: think correct about this. You know, when they talk about
• 1:24:46
  Speaker 3: universal income, is that people are going to be happy
• 1:24:48
  Speaker 3: just you know, getting a check and doing nothing. Now,
• 1:24:50
  Speaker 3: the exact opposite happens. Actually, that kind of dependency breeds
• 1:24:54
  Speaker 3: all kinds of you know, social ills and and just
• 1:24:57
  Speaker 3: you know, and really recklessness, quite frankly, and I think
• 1:25:00
  Speaker 3: we already have too much of that in society. By
• 1:25:01
  Speaker 3: the way, we already to some degree have universal basic income.
• 1:25:04
  Speaker 3: I mean, it's not hard for people, for example, to
• 1:25:05
  Speaker 3: be on disability right in America today, and we see
• 1:25:08
  Speaker 3: disabillity rolls explode, you know, beyond anything that's reasonable regarding
• 1:25:12
  Speaker 3: actual medical problems. Uh, And I think that explains a
• 1:25:15
  Speaker 3: lot of the pathologies in our society today already. Well
• 1:25:18
  Speaker 3: that can get massively, massively worth with AI. But the
• 1:25:21
  Speaker 3: other thing is one reason I don't talk about a
• 1:25:22
  Speaker 3: lot of public is I'm not sure the answers exactly
• 1:25:25
  Speaker 3: because one one conundrum of this situation is that if
• 1:25:29
  Speaker 3: even if the US starts to responsibly regulate AI, and
• 1:25:33
  Speaker 3: I think we need to, and it seems like the
• 1:25:34
  Speaker 3: term administration, by the way, is starting to move this
• 1:25:36
  Speaker 3: way after being very lais a fair on it previously.
• 1:25:39
  Speaker 3: I think they're starting to move to the side of
• 1:25:41
  Speaker 3: wait a second, we need some some guardrails here. But
• 1:25:44
  Speaker 3: the problem is there will be no such guardrails in China, right, Uh,
• 1:25:48
  Speaker 3: you know, a very sophisticated nation that is chasing AI.
• 1:25:50
  Speaker 2: You know, every bit as fast as we are now.
• 1:25:52
  Speaker 2: They don't.
• 1:25:52
  Speaker 3: They don't have the smarts and the resources we do, thankfully.
• 1:25:55
  Speaker 3: But the point is, you know, they will not put
• 1:25:57
  Speaker 3: those kinds of guardrails on it. And is there their
• 1:25:59
  Speaker 3: potential that because we have self restrained, right, we end
• 1:26:02
  Speaker 3: up the situation where holy crap, now trying to can
• 1:26:05
  Speaker 3: do things and can do things to us where we
• 1:26:08
  Speaker 3: have no effective response. And I'm talking to know, militarily,
• 1:26:11
  Speaker 3: business wise, you know all of it.
• 1:26:12
  Speaker 1: So Steve, let me stop it, and Steve, let me
• 1:26:14
  Speaker 1: stop you there for a second, because this I hear
• 1:26:16
  Speaker 1: this all the time. We got to win the race,
• 1:26:18
  Speaker 1: We got to win the race against China. Why can't
• 1:26:22
  Speaker 1: we win the race underground? And this is a little
• 1:26:25
  Speaker 1: bit like my theory on maybe we should have done
• 1:26:28
  Speaker 1: the mafia thing with a rod. Why can't we continue
• 1:26:32
  Speaker 1: to do all the development, the research, the technology underground
• 1:26:38
  Speaker 1: and let Shine to destroy itself with AI. And if
• 1:26:41
  Speaker 1: we get in a situation where they're now a threat
• 1:26:44
  Speaker 1: because of the way AI has developed technologically, we're still
• 1:26:48
  Speaker 1: right there with them. Is that an unrealistic view on
• 1:26:52
  Speaker 1: my part? Because to me, just because we can win
• 1:26:55
  Speaker 1: the race without it's a lot like the nuclear weapon.
• 1:26:59
  Speaker 1: We don't have to use the freaking nuclear weapon, but
• 1:27:01
  Speaker 1: we have the technology if we need it. You see
• 1:27:04
  Speaker 1: what I'm saying.
• 1:27:05
  Speaker 3: Yeah, First of all, I think we should pursue your
• 1:27:07
  Speaker 3: strategy exactly a Manhattan Project effectively for AI right now.
• 1:27:10
  Speaker 3: The risk there though, is, you know, the Manhattan Project
• 1:27:13
  Speaker 3: is the anomaly.
• 1:27:14
  Speaker 2: For the most part, amazing innovation in.
• 1:27:16
  Speaker 3: The United States comes from a private sector not the
• 1:27:18
  Speaker 3: public sector, right, it's just our mentality, it's a structure
• 1:27:20
  Speaker 3: or economy. That's not the case in China because there
• 1:27:23
  Speaker 3: is no division anyway, right, and there is no differentiation
• 1:27:26
  Speaker 3: between public and private sectors. So in other words, they
• 1:27:28
  Speaker 3: can be really effective as one. That's just not how
• 1:27:30
  Speaker 3: America operates.
• 1:27:31
  Speaker 2: Now.
• 1:27:31
  Speaker 3: That doesn't mean that we can't operate with urgency and
• 1:27:34
  Speaker 3: you know, seriousness in this case, and I think we should,
• 1:27:37
  Speaker 3: I know, and that's actually to me, Yes, of any solution,
• 1:27:41
  Speaker 3: I think it's perfect obviously, that's probably the best one
• 1:27:43
  Speaker 3: that you know, we will control at a government levels
• 1:27:47
  Speaker 3: as a public asset effectively this research and try to
• 1:27:51
  Speaker 3: do it in a responsible way. But you know, some
• 1:27:53
  Speaker 3: parts of it are amazing, right, I mean, like I
• 1:27:55
  Speaker 3: think the thing for example, I think the things we're
• 1:27:57
  Speaker 3: going to be doing in medicine. And I don't mean
• 1:27:58
  Speaker 3: way off, I don't mean ten or twenty years. I
• 1:28:00
  Speaker 3: think maybe in one or two years, the things we're
• 1:28:01
  Speaker 3: going to be doing in a medicine are going to
• 1:28:03
  Speaker 3: be just incredible, Uh, you know, the diseases that we
• 1:28:06
  Speaker 3: can cure and that sort of thing. I think on
• 1:28:08
  Speaker 3: the economic front, to me, the only answer to the
• 1:28:10
  Speaker 3: current and debtedness of the United States. I do not
• 1:28:14
  Speaker 3: believe at sort of current, in our current regular sort
• 1:28:17
  Speaker 3: of economy, I do not believe.
• 1:28:19
  Speaker 2: We can grow our way out of this debt. It
• 1:28:21
  Speaker 2: is so stiflingly large.
• 1:28:23
  Speaker 3: To me, the only possible escape route is through a
• 1:28:26
  Speaker 3: productivity surge that results from AI.
• 1:28:29
  Speaker 2: But the problem is, you know, as you've been talking.
• 1:28:31
  Speaker 3: About so eloquently, that product servy surge probably means a
• 1:28:34
  Speaker 3: lot of idle people, right, and that brings about such bigger,
• 1:28:37
  Speaker 3: such other, you know, intense other problems.
• 1:28:40
  Speaker 2: That is it even worth it?
• 1:28:41
  Speaker 3: Who cares about the debt because society's faught apart because
• 1:28:43
  Speaker 3: people are having.
• 1:28:44
  Speaker 1: To do well. You are an expert in finance, You're
• 1:28:48
  Speaker 1: you're I mean, that's really your your stock and trade.
• 1:28:50
  Speaker 1: You're a finance guy. And when again, look, I know
• 1:28:55
  Speaker 1: only enough to be dangerous. I know a lot of
• 1:28:56
  Speaker 1: people in the in the finance world, and and I
• 1:29:00
  Speaker 1: have my own small portfolio that I've been taken care
• 1:29:02
  Speaker 1: of for decades. When I look at the AI topic
• 1:29:06
  Speaker 1: from the economic stock perspective, and whether or not it's
• 1:29:09
  Speaker 1: a bubble, to me, it's so obviously a bubble. It
• 1:29:13
  Speaker 1: makes me think I might be wrong because it so clearcut.
• 1:29:17
  Speaker 1: I'm curious, do you agree that it's at least from
• 1:29:21
  Speaker 1: a technical perspective, if you just look at the numbers, right,
• 1:29:24
  Speaker 1: it is so obviously a bubble waiting to burst that
• 1:29:28
  Speaker 1: it's astonishing to me that the stock market currently is
• 1:29:31
  Speaker 1: where it is. What is your take on that?
• 1:29:34
  Speaker 2: Yeah, Well, I think there's two things.
• 1:29:37
  Speaker 3: One thing is that I think all equities are elevated
• 1:29:40
  Speaker 3: to degrees.
• 1:29:40
  Speaker 2: That wouldn't be normal in normal times.
• 1:29:43
  Speaker 3: However, if we're in a sustained inflationary period, which we
• 1:29:48
  Speaker 3: haven't seen in the United States since the nineteen seventies,
• 1:29:50
  Speaker 3: then asset inflation is real. In other words, people want
• 1:29:53
  Speaker 3: to be in assets that, particularly wealthy people and certain
• 1:29:57
  Speaker 3: institutions that can benefit from inflation rather than just suffering
• 1:30:00
  Speaker 3: from inflation, putting your money in the bank where it
• 1:30:02
  Speaker 3: becomes worth less and less over time because of the
• 1:30:04
  Speaker 3: ravages of inflation.
• 1:30:05
  Speaker 2: So that's one thing. But specifically the AI.
• 1:30:08
  Speaker 3: By traditional metrics, you know, absolutely, I mean, it's you know,
• 1:30:12
  Speaker 3: it is clearly a bubble. But the bet, and it's
• 1:30:14
  Speaker 3: a massive bet, right, is that No, But we're at
• 1:30:17
  Speaker 3: the cusp of a true productivity revolution. And if that's
• 1:30:21
  Speaker 3: the case, then these prices are justifiable. I have no
• 1:30:26
  Speaker 3: idea if it's the case or not, but what I
• 1:30:27
  Speaker 3: will tell you this, this worries me from.
• 1:30:29
  Speaker 2: A policy perspective.
• 1:30:30
  Speaker 3: Put in the sort of the market trader in the aside,
• 1:30:33
  Speaker 3: but from a policy perspective, the entire United States has become,
• 1:30:37
  Speaker 3: in many ways now a levered ai bet.
• 1:30:39
  Speaker 2: And the reason I say that is because we have
• 1:30:41
  Speaker 2: forty trillion dollars.
• 1:30:42
  Speaker 3: In debt that for now is somewhat manageable, but only
• 1:30:46
  Speaker 3: because we have such insane asset inflation that the wealthy
• 1:30:49
  Speaker 3: are doing very well, and the wealthy are the ones
• 1:30:52
  Speaker 3: paying the tab essentially right, because our government revenues overwhelmingly
• 1:30:55
  Speaker 3: come from the wealthy. However, if that a bubble bursts
• 1:31:00
  Speaker 3: even a little bit, it hits the wealthy unbelievably hard,
• 1:31:03
  Speaker 3: which in turn means we can't finance this debt at
• 1:31:06
  Speaker 3: these current rates, and rates skyrocket the debt it's even worse.
• 1:31:10
  Speaker 2: All of a sudden, we're in a vicious downward cycle.
• 1:31:12
  Speaker 3: So the entire country, not just the stock market, the
• 1:31:16
  Speaker 3: America has made a massive not that not purposefully.
• 1:31:19
  Speaker 2: Not like somebody laid out. I think this is the
• 1:31:21
  Speaker 2: game plan, but this is where we ended up. And
• 1:31:23
  Speaker 2: that's really scary to me, right, really scary.
• 1:31:26
  Speaker 1: I could not agree more. I mean, it's not just
• 1:31:31
  Speaker 1: you know, in the Internet era, obviously we had an
• 1:31:34
  Speaker 1: Internet bubble burst and the stock market went down significantly,
• 1:31:38
  Speaker 1: but we didn't go into a depression or even a
• 1:31:41
  Speaker 1: you know, a super recession. But to me, it feels
• 1:31:44
  Speaker 1: like the bet is bigger this time around. Now there
• 1:31:47
  Speaker 1: are some difference, There are some differences you know, these companies.
• 1:31:50
  Speaker 1: A lot of people like to say, well, these companies
• 1:31:52
  Speaker 1: aren't They're actually making money, unlike what was happening with
• 1:31:56
  Speaker 1: the the Internet bubble bursting. So there is that, Yeah,
• 1:31:59
  Speaker 1: I get it. But the part of this that bothers
• 1:32:03
  Speaker 1: me the most is the what I've called another people
• 1:32:06
  Speaker 1: called the circle jerk of all these companies just basically
• 1:32:10
  Speaker 1: giving each other stock uh to increase each other's stock prices,
• 1:32:15
  Speaker 1: to create this perception of momentum and inevitability, and it
• 1:32:18
  Speaker 1: all becomes basically too big to fail. And and and
• 1:32:22
  Speaker 1: I'm part of me wonders whether or not you know,
• 1:32:25
  Speaker 1: we saw anthropic now asking for government regulation, and part
• 1:32:28
  Speaker 1: of me thinks, are these people wanting the government involved
• 1:32:31
  Speaker 1: so that they're going to get a bail out if
• 1:32:33
  Speaker 1: and when they fail? Right? In other words, if we're owning,
• 1:32:36
  Speaker 1: if we if the if the government, if the people
• 1:32:39
  Speaker 1: own part of this, we're also on the hook for
• 1:32:41
  Speaker 1: the losses, right, I mean so, and you've you've outlined
• 1:32:46
  Speaker 1: even a darker scenario than one that I think about.
• 1:32:50
  Speaker 1: And and that's and that to me, still the AI
• 1:32:54
  Speaker 1: could be successful from a technological perspective, and we could
• 1:32:57
  Speaker 1: still have these economic impacts. It doesn't end up coming
• 1:33:01
  Speaker 1: to the fruition and the fantasies that a lot of
• 1:33:03
  Speaker 1: these people have. So I don't know, is there anything
• 1:33:06
  Speaker 1: Is there anything in there you want to respond to
• 1:33:07
  Speaker 1: before I want to.
• 1:33:08
  Speaker 3: Because I think one apt historical analogy there would be
• 1:33:11
  Speaker 3: the south Sea bubble right where if people look back, uh,
• 1:33:15
  Speaker 3: you know, the British stock market got so and then
• 1:33:17
  Speaker 3: other EU pre mart Superman and the Britige got so
• 1:33:18
  Speaker 3: overextended about the potential right for.
• 1:33:21
  Speaker 2: Riches in the New World. Well, those riches actually were.
• 1:33:23
  Speaker 3: Real right in the New World, especially America, was that valuable.
• 1:33:27
  Speaker 3: But that so, even though there was there was an
• 1:33:29
  Speaker 3: actual underlying economic reality. The point is the financial markets
• 1:33:33
  Speaker 3: got so far ahead of themselves that there there was
• 1:33:35
  Speaker 3: a bubble bursteam anyway, and that could be the case
• 1:33:37
  Speaker 3: here and I could both work and be that productive
• 1:33:40
  Speaker 3: enhancing and we're in a we're in a financial bubble regardless.
• 1:33:44
  Speaker 1: That's kind of where I am, which is almost the worst,
• 1:33:47
  Speaker 1: you know, element of both worlds. But of course I'm
• 1:33:51
  Speaker 1: not known as being an optimist. Let's end on an
• 1:33:54
  Speaker 1: optimistic note. Because you you were a football player at
• 1:33:59
  Speaker 1: are Alma Modern Georgetown University. You and I have talked
• 1:34:02
  Speaker 1: a lot about football, both on and off the air
• 1:34:05
  Speaker 1: in our friendship over the last few years. That's actually
• 1:34:08
  Speaker 1: how you became aware of me was because of the
• 1:34:11
  Speaker 1: whole state with the benefit of Hindsight podcast. And this
• 1:34:16
  Speaker 1: particular coming fall should be very exciting, I'm assuming for
• 1:34:20
  Speaker 1: you because your son, who had been at the University
• 1:34:24
  Speaker 1: of Miami as a recruited football player, is now going
• 1:34:27
  Speaker 1: to be at Georgetown University. And I'm presuming by the way,
• 1:34:32
  Speaker 1: it must have been the nil money that allowed Georgetown
• 1:34:35
  Speaker 1: to steal your son away from Miami. But that must
• 1:34:39
  Speaker 1: be very very exciting for you for your son to
• 1:34:42
  Speaker 1: not only be going to your alma manter, but apparently
• 1:34:44
  Speaker 1: be playing football for Georgetown as well. Tell me about that.
• 1:34:48
  Speaker 3: No, thank you, You're very kind to bring it up.
• 1:34:50
  Speaker 3: He's actually already there, by the way, So he's there
• 1:34:52
  Speaker 3: at summer school and when immediately, you know, finish up
• 1:34:55
  Speaker 3: the spring semester at Nurish in Miami and went to
• 1:34:57
  Speaker 3: Georgetown to start summer classes and to start lifting and
• 1:34:59
  Speaker 3: run with the program.
• 1:35:01
  Speaker 2: So he is as of.
• 1:35:02
  Speaker 3: Today already Ahoya, and we'll be playing in the fall
• 1:35:05
  Speaker 3: and we hope, you know, back on the field and
• 1:35:07
  Speaker 3: kicking butt for Georgetown football.
• 1:35:08
  Speaker 2: So no, it's super exciting, you know, for me, for him, and.
• 1:35:13
  Speaker 3: A very different program of course than the University of
• 1:35:14
  Speaker 3: Miami in a lot of ways.
• 1:35:17
  Speaker 1: But Ley is your son, the first person to have
• 1:35:20
  Speaker 1: ever transferred from the football team at Miami to Georgetown.
• 1:35:24
  Speaker 1: I can't imagine, have to think.
• 1:35:26
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I have to think so.
• 1:35:28
  Speaker 3: But you know, listen, so far, he loves it, loves
• 1:35:30
  Speaker 3: the culture of the team, and my son is an
• 1:35:32
  Speaker 3: excellent football player.
• 1:35:33
  Speaker 2: But he has no illusions he's going to the NFL. Right.
• 1:35:35
  Speaker 3: He wants to use football as it means to achieve
• 1:35:37
  Speaker 3: other He wants to keep playing number what. He loves
• 1:35:39
  Speaker 3: the game, loves the camaraderie, loves the physicality, but wants
• 1:35:42
  Speaker 3: to use.
• 1:35:43
  Speaker 2: It to achieve other things. He knows he's not going
• 1:35:45
  Speaker 2: to make his living on Sundays in the NFL.
• 1:35:47
  Speaker 3: And and there were some great aspects in Miami, but
• 1:35:49
  Speaker 3: there were some not great aspects.
• 1:35:51
  Speaker 2: This is a better fit for him.
• 1:35:52
  Speaker 3: Got him into a you know, fantastic school that he
• 1:35:54
  Speaker 3: probably doesn't get in without football, a team with a
• 1:35:57
  Speaker 3: great culture. This is I don't know if you know
• 1:35:58
  Speaker 3: this part, but this is a neat aspect of it. Two,
• 1:36:00
  Speaker 3: just by you know, by luck, by good fortune. Rob Scarlatta,
• 1:36:04
  Speaker 3: who is the head coach at Georgetown University, is my
• 1:36:06
  Speaker 3: teammate my year at Georgetown University. So my teammate is
• 1:36:10
  Speaker 3: now coaching my son at our combined program. So just
• 1:36:13
  Speaker 3: you know, a lot of levels. It's really fun, I
• 1:36:15
  Speaker 3: will say, one of you know folks. Obviously not many
• 1:36:17
  Speaker 3: Georgetown football fans out there by definition, but I will
• 1:36:20
  Speaker 3: tell you this. We have the smallest stadium in Division One. However,
• 1:36:23
  Speaker 3: it's really cool. I mean, it's a really neat field
• 1:36:26
  Speaker 3: that is right smack in the middle of campus. And
• 1:36:28
  Speaker 3: because it's small. It actually does tend to get pretty full.
• 1:36:32
  Speaker 3: We played football in the Patriot League, so play schools
• 1:36:34
  Speaker 3: like Lehigh and Fordham and holy Cross, and you know what,
• 1:36:37
  Speaker 3: there's there's real rivalries there. Now, you know, it's not
• 1:36:39
  Speaker 3: it's not going to ever make game day and you're
• 1:36:40
  Speaker 3: not on television. But there are positives to that too, right,
• 1:36:43
  Speaker 3: there really are to have.
• 1:36:46
  Speaker 2: It is still in some.
• 1:36:47
  Speaker 3: Ways a purer game, still more about brotherhood, you know,
• 1:36:51
  Speaker 3: not about showmanship. There's no players showing up in a
• 1:36:53
  Speaker 3: ferrari and you know, it just doesn't have it's not
• 1:36:56
  Speaker 3: afflicted with those problems.
• 1:36:57
  Speaker 2: And I think it was neat for my son, GUYCT.
• 1:37:00
  Speaker 3: You get to see both sides of the fats, right,
• 1:37:02
  Speaker 3: So he did experience a top, top program that literally
• 1:37:04
  Speaker 3: went to the National Championship game and saw both of
• 1:37:07
  Speaker 3: the advantages and disadvantages of that. Now in a very
• 1:37:09
  Speaker 3: different kind of program. But no, thank you for asking.
• 1:37:12
  Speaker 3: I'm you know, I'm super proud of him, and I'm
• 1:37:14
  Speaker 3: super grateful. I've also been one thing you might appreciate, John,
• 1:37:17
  Speaker 3: I've been super harsh on Georgetown over the years for
• 1:37:20
  Speaker 3: a lot of silly nonsense at that university. And I
• 1:37:23
  Speaker 3: think I've been fair. Frankly, I think it's deserved the heat.
• 1:37:25
  Speaker 3: But there is part of you says, you know what,
• 1:37:27
  Speaker 3: I'm a Hoya dad, Now I'm a Hoya fan. I
• 1:37:30
  Speaker 3: should probably ease up on my smears of Georgetown.
• 1:37:35
  Speaker 1: Well, it's given me a rooting interest now for for
• 1:37:38
  Speaker 1: this coming football season, so it'll be fun to see
• 1:37:42
  Speaker 1: how that transitions and what happens. And in fact, you'll
• 1:37:45
  Speaker 1: be going to apparently Georgetown games home and away, so
• 1:37:48
  Speaker 1: that'll be that'll be fun to watch and and I
• 1:37:51
  Speaker 1: look forward to that. But let's let's let's finish on
• 1:37:54
  Speaker 1: the broader picture of college football college athletics. Obviously, the
• 1:37:59
  Speaker 1: Trump imminished has been trying in various ways to get
• 1:38:03
  Speaker 1: involved in fixing these self inflicted problems. I have been
• 1:38:08
  Speaker 1: very supportive of President Trump and almost everything that he
• 1:38:10
  Speaker 1: has said and tried to do. I actually think it's
• 1:38:13
  Speaker 1: one of the areas where Trump has shown the greatest
• 1:38:16
  Speaker 1: understanding of what the problems are and what the potential
• 1:38:19
  Speaker 1: solutions are. But I've also been skeptical that there can be,
• 1:38:23
  Speaker 1: especially via executive order, any sort of solution here. I
• 1:38:27
  Speaker 1: think there has to be a law and I have
• 1:38:29
  Speaker 1: expressed that unfortunately there's political realities that make a law
• 1:38:34
  Speaker 1: almost impossible. Where are you, and I know this is
• 1:38:38
  Speaker 1: a big question, but where are you on how big
• 1:38:41
  Speaker 1: this problem has become and bigger than even I anticipated
• 1:38:44
  Speaker 1: it becoming, and any potential solutions coming from government?
• 1:38:49
  Speaker 3: Yeah, well, for i'nswerting with you that it would have
• 1:38:52
  Speaker 3: to be legislation. But I understand your rationale for how
• 1:38:54
  Speaker 3: difficult it is to get that legislation through the Congress.
• 1:38:58
  Speaker 3: You know, particularly because some of the existing winners, essentially
• 1:39:02
  Speaker 3: in college football, you know who who actually do well
• 1:39:04
  Speaker 3: for now, at least at the aniol era, their senators
• 1:39:07
  Speaker 3: and representatives have no reason in the fixes, right, So
• 1:39:11
  Speaker 3: I mean, I get, I get how difficult this situation is,
• 1:39:14
  Speaker 3: but I think we have to try. And this is,
• 1:39:15
  Speaker 3: by the way, I can't stand Ted Cruz. I rippon
• 1:39:17
  Speaker 3: him all the time. I think he's actually really smart
• 1:39:19
  Speaker 3: of this issue. I appreciate his leadership. I appreciate that
• 1:39:22
  Speaker 3: Donald Trump is at least trying is and then going
• 1:39:24
  Speaker 3: to get done, you know, certainly not this year, that's
• 1:39:27
  Speaker 3: for sure.
• 1:39:27
  Speaker 2: I mean they're done, they're out campaigning. You know.
• 1:39:30
  Speaker 3: If we keep the House and Senate. Could something potentially
• 1:39:32
  Speaker 3: get done next year? I think potentially, at least I.
• 1:39:34
  Speaker 2: Will tell you this. Jd.
• 1:39:35
  Speaker 3: Vance understands the issue. I've talked with him about it
• 1:39:38
  Speaker 3: at length. Of course, he's in Ohio State grad, massive
• 1:39:40
  Speaker 3: Ohose State fan. He understands the bigger risks to the game,
• 1:39:44
  Speaker 3: and not beyond the game, to American society. And I
• 1:39:46
  Speaker 3: don't think it's the exaggerations say that college football is
• 1:39:48
  Speaker 3: so important to our culture.
• 1:39:50
  Speaker 2: As a country.
• 1:39:50
  Speaker 3: It's part of what makes America so exceptional that losing
• 1:39:54
  Speaker 3: it and losing its specialness, which I think is already happening,
• 1:39:58
  Speaker 3: is not just bad for football, beat for America. So
• 1:40:01
  Speaker 3: I do think this has yet another reason to have
• 1:40:03
  Speaker 3: a president of MATS at some point. But look, it's
• 1:40:07
  Speaker 3: easy to be pessimistic on the state of things, and
• 1:40:10
  Speaker 3: you make this.
• 1:40:10
  Speaker 2: Point very eloquently, very often.
• 1:40:12
  Speaker 3: Unfortunately, there's you know, because you've had one hundred years
• 1:40:17
  Speaker 3: of really just overwhelmingly positive experience right in college football.
• 1:40:21
  Speaker 3: It has been so important and so glorious with this
• 1:40:23
  Speaker 3: country for so long that even when things are turning,
• 1:40:26
  Speaker 3: it's hard to see it because people still love it.
• 1:40:28
  Speaker 2: Right, So the ratings are still for the most part good.
• 1:40:31
  Speaker 3: You know, there are there are some problems that you
• 1:40:33
  Speaker 3: pointed out, particularly in the playoffs, in the National Championship
• 1:40:36
  Speaker 3: Game and so forth, you know, but on the whole,
• 1:40:39
  Speaker 3: by the metrics, the game seems relatively healthy, right. Stadiums
• 1:40:42
  Speaker 3: are packed, people love it, they love the pageantry. Still,
• 1:40:44
  Speaker 3: it's hard for people in the middle of it to
• 1:40:46
  Speaker 3: see that turn right of how quickly things can can dissipate.
• 1:40:50
  Speaker 3: What I worry about, too, is that the pro game
• 1:40:54
  Speaker 3: and I can't stand the NFL the way it's run.
• 1:40:57
  Speaker 3: I'man a massive Bears family still watch all the games rudgingly, really, right,
• 1:41:01
  Speaker 3: but the beneficiary of college football's decline, at least for
• 1:41:07
  Speaker 3: the mere term, will be the NFL because college football
• 1:41:10
  Speaker 3: is in some ways becoming a JV pro league. Well,
• 1:41:14
  Speaker 3: if you're just a JV pro pro league without regionalism
• 1:41:16
  Speaker 3: and without pageantry, we'll just watch the pros, watch the
• 1:41:18
  Speaker 3: real pros, not the jvs, right, Unfortunately, and I think so.
• 1:41:22
  Speaker 2: I think this makes the NFL, at least.
• 1:41:24
  Speaker 3: For the near to medium term, even stronger, And I
• 1:41:28
  Speaker 3: hate that because I just think it's one of the
• 1:41:29
  Speaker 3: most corrupt and insidious organizations, the NFL as an org
• 1:41:34
  Speaker 3: really frankly, in America, I think it does so much
• 1:41:36
  Speaker 3: damage to our country, and so that's a huge bummer.
• 1:41:40
  Speaker 1: Is Steve Cortez still going to be a fan of
• 1:41:42
  Speaker 1: the Indiana Bears.
• 1:41:44
  Speaker 2: Yeah, it's a great question. I'm so torn on. I mean, yes, probably,
• 1:41:47
  Speaker 2: you know, but I'm going to hate myself for it.
• 1:41:50
  Speaker 2: I don't know one of your thoughts, what would you do?
• 1:41:54
  Speaker 1: It's unbelievable to me, It's just unbelievable. I mean, every
• 1:41:58
  Speaker 1: if you had said as a kid to me, you know,
• 1:42:02
  Speaker 1: someday the Bears are going to play in a dome
• 1:42:04
  Speaker 1: in Indiana. I mean, it's just thought that. There's no
• 1:42:09
  Speaker 1: way that people in Chicago will put up with that.
• 1:42:11
  Speaker 1: There's no possible way. But here we are. It looks like,
• 1:42:15
  Speaker 1: I mean, it's not a done deal yet, but it
• 1:42:17
  Speaker 1: certainly looks as if we're in that direction and that
• 1:42:20
  Speaker 1: and frankly, that's the part, the dome part bothers me
• 1:42:22
  Speaker 1: more than anything. I mean, we're gonna we're gonna end
• 1:42:25
  Speaker 1: up eventually not too distant future where Green Bay is
• 1:42:30
  Speaker 1: the only team still playing on grass and the cold weather.
• 1:42:33
  Speaker 1: I mean, that's that's gonna be it and the only
• 1:42:36
  Speaker 1: reason why that'll happen. And to me, we're gonna off
• 1:42:39
  Speaker 1: this beaten path here. But I know you and I
• 1:42:41
  Speaker 1: have talked about the dangers of private equity before. The
• 1:42:44
  Speaker 1: only reason why the Green Bay Packers are protected from this,
• 1:42:48
  Speaker 1: and to me, this is a message that sports media
• 1:42:50
  Speaker 1: ought to be sending everywhere is they're owned by the city.
• 1:42:55
  Speaker 1: They're not owned by private equity. Effectively, they're not own
• 1:43:00
  Speaker 1: I mean, and it's one thing to lose these these
• 1:43:03
  Speaker 1: traditional family owners who end up, you know, dying, and
• 1:43:06
  Speaker 1: then their relatives end up selling, and then that's generally
• 1:43:09
  Speaker 1: win ends up happening in the NFL because these these
• 1:43:12
  Speaker 1: franchises have become so damn valuable. There's I mean, no
• 1:43:15
  Speaker 1: one ever anticipated that being worth the ridiculous amounts of
• 1:43:19
  Speaker 1: money that they are. The only thing that isolates green
• 1:43:22
  Speaker 1: Bay is the city literally owns the team. Every other
• 1:43:26
  Speaker 1: franchise is vulnerable to the exact same thing happening because
• 1:43:30
  Speaker 1: of the private equity mentality of we don't give a
• 1:43:34
  Speaker 1: shit about tradition or the fans or what happens next year.
• 1:43:39
  Speaker 1: We only care about what the value of our our
• 1:43:42
  Speaker 1: asset is in the next quarterly report, right, am I
• 1:43:46
  Speaker 1: right about that analysis, Steve.
• 1:43:49
  Speaker 3: You're a one hundred percent right and listen, even beyond sports,
• 1:43:52
  Speaker 3: I worry so much about our society with this private
• 1:43:55
  Speaker 3: equity quarter over quarter growth mentality, you know, as your
• 1:43:59
  Speaker 3: god right, Yes, it is a problem in so many ways, amen,
• 1:44:03
  Speaker 3: our society.
• 1:44:05
  Speaker 1: It's it's pervading everything. I mean, and to me, eventually,
• 1:44:11
  Speaker 1: you know, when you kill the golden goose, you know,
• 1:44:13
  Speaker 1: to use a cliche, it's it's got to you know,
• 1:44:16
  Speaker 1: to mix. Maybe it's got to come home to roost.
• 1:44:19
  Speaker 1: I mean it's a minor example, but we were just
• 1:44:21
  Speaker 1: talking about this last night. My favorite I won't name
• 1:44:23
  Speaker 1: him in my favorite Italian place in Chicago started expanding,
• 1:44:26
  Speaker 1: you know, got to four or five franchise.
• 1:44:29
  Speaker 3: It's just amazing places eight there all the time. And
• 1:44:31
  Speaker 3: I think Chicago's the best restaurant city in the world.
• 1:44:34
  Speaker 3: So obviously biased on that. Most of my life is Chicagoan.
• 1:44:36
  Speaker 3: But anyway, then they get up to I think about
• 1:44:38
  Speaker 3: twenty franchise as well. Private equity knows its right, Okay,
• 1:44:41
  Speaker 3: private equities bought them. I don't know how many branches
• 1:44:42
  Speaker 3: they have now. But guess what, the food's terrible. And
• 1:44:46
  Speaker 3: you know, we know some of the staff. Well, when
• 1:44:48
  Speaker 3: we go back to Chicago, talk to them, and the
• 1:44:49
  Speaker 3: reason why, well, what did private equity do. They started
• 1:44:52
  Speaker 3: buying crap ingredients because that's how they squeeze the numbers
• 1:44:55
  Speaker 3: and make sure that we can beat quarter over quarter, right,
• 1:44:58
  Speaker 3: And it was family owned. They made money, but they
• 1:45:01
  Speaker 3: didn't necessarily they didn't have to be last quarter, right,
• 1:45:04
  Speaker 3: and they might spend enough on ingredients to put forth
• 1:45:06
  Speaker 3: what they thought was the best product they could put
• 1:45:09
  Speaker 3: on that table. It's just a minor example, but I
• 1:45:11
  Speaker 3: think it's an important and illustrative one of the problem
• 1:45:15
  Speaker 3: of a private equity mentality.
• 1:45:17
  Speaker 1: Incredibly well said, especially from a guy from your finance perspective,
• 1:45:22
  Speaker 1: and I very much appreciate it. And it's always Steve,
• 1:45:24
  Speaker 1: it's great to talk to you. Thanks so much for
• 1:45:25
  Speaker 1: being generous with your time, and I'm sure we'll talk
• 1:45:28
  Speaker 1: to you again before the year is out.
• 1:45:30
  Speaker 2: John, I appreciate, Thank you so much.
• 1:45:32
  Speaker 1: Two quick notes about some of the content in that
• 1:45:35
  Speaker 1: very extensive interview with Steve, which is always very very interesting.
• 1:45:40
  Speaker 1: I really blew that what should have been a fantastic
• 1:45:42
  Speaker 1: line when Steve was making the argument that JD. Vance
• 1:45:48
  Speaker 1: would have to be the Republican nominee in twenty twenty
• 1:45:52
  Speaker 1: eight if he wanted to run, because otherwise Trump would
• 1:45:54
  Speaker 1: look really bad not picking his own vice president to endorse.
• 1:45:58
  Speaker 1: And I attended say, okay, well, why don't we ask
• 1:46:01
  Speaker 1: Mike Pence about that? And I said, Steve Pence, And
• 1:46:04
  Speaker 1: you're probably wondering where did Steve pens come from? And
• 1:46:08
  Speaker 1: it wasn't just a sinility moment. There was actually some
• 1:46:12
  Speaker 1: logic to that, because there are probably three of our
• 1:46:15
  Speaker 1: subscribers who know that Steve Pence was not a vice
• 1:46:19
  Speaker 1: president but a lieutenant governor of Kentucky while I was
• 1:46:23
  Speaker 1: in Louisville as a radio and television talk show host there.
• 1:46:28
  Speaker 1: So it's not the worst Freudian slip or slip of
• 1:46:33
  Speaker 1: the mind that you could have, especially when Mike Pence
• 1:46:36
  Speaker 1: hasn't been in the news as of late. So that's
• 1:46:38
  Speaker 1: where the Steve Pence thing came from, which was quite
• 1:46:43
  Speaker 1: both frustrating and humorous but also concerned because I was like,
• 1:46:46
  Speaker 1: oh wait a minute, hold on a second, am I
• 1:46:48
  Speaker 1: starting to lose my mind? How did I blow Mike
• 1:46:50
  Speaker 1: Peds so I had a great line and I blew it.
• 1:46:53
  Speaker 1: But that was the explanation. It wasn't out of nowhere.
• 1:46:56
  Speaker 1: Steve Pence, much like Mike Pen's, effectively a vice president
• 1:47:01
  Speaker 1: who was prominent in my career back in the early
• 1:47:05
  Speaker 1: two thousands in Louisville, Kentucky. Also I referenced there a
• 1:47:09
  Speaker 1: subject that I'm not sure Steve had even thought about before,
• 1:47:12
  Speaker 1: or at least he seemed to indicate that he was impressed
• 1:47:15
  Speaker 1: that I would raise this issue when no one else has,
• 1:47:19
  Speaker 1: with Iran being allowed to participate in the World Cup
• 1:47:22
  Speaker 1: in the United States. See to me, if we're going
• 1:47:25
  Speaker 1: to play dirty pool, if they're going to shut down
• 1:47:27
  Speaker 1: the straight of Ramus, then that's a leverage point for us.
• 1:47:32
  Speaker 1: Obviously Iran cares about playing in the World Cup, and
• 1:47:35
  Speaker 1: for us to effectively allow them into the country to
• 1:47:38
  Speaker 1: do so, I frankly thought was for lack of a
• 1:47:42
  Speaker 1: better turn, leaving money on the table. I did not
• 1:47:45
  Speaker 1: know at the time that Iran itself is actually pretty
• 1:47:48
  Speaker 1: ticked off that apparently we are at least causing them
• 1:47:51
  Speaker 1: some consternation when it comes to the World Cup, because
• 1:47:55
  Speaker 1: while they're playing games in the United States, they're essentially,
• 1:48:00
  Speaker 1: I guess, not being allowed to stay in the United
• 1:48:02
  Speaker 1: States and have had to travel back and forth from Mexico. Now,
• 1:48:07
  Speaker 1: to me, that's a minor issue in comparison to what
• 1:48:12
  Speaker 1: you might think would be the case, given the fact
• 1:48:14
  Speaker 1: that we're still at war and have this very very
• 1:48:16
  Speaker 1: tentative piece and the amount of leverage that keeping Iran
• 1:48:20
  Speaker 1: from playing in the World Cup at all would at
• 1:48:22
  Speaker 1: least theoretically have when it came to those negotiations. But
• 1:48:26
  Speaker 1: I at least wanted to add that context, because I
• 1:48:28
  Speaker 1: did not do so. During the interview with Steve Cortes
• 1:48:32
  Speaker 1: Now in last week's episode of the podcast, I referenced
• 1:48:35
  Speaker 1: that there was a pretty good chance that I would
• 1:48:37
  Speaker 1: be returning to CNN to do their late night show
• 1:48:41
  Speaker 1: with Alex Michaelson, who was a former guest on this
• 1:48:45
  Speaker 1: podcast and a person I considered to be we're friends,
• 1:48:48
  Speaker 1: but we're pretty strong acquaintances. We've had a lot of
• 1:48:51
  Speaker 1: communication on the phone and direct messages, starting back during
• 1:48:55
  Speaker 1: the COVID panic and me criticizing his coverage and him
• 1:48:58
  Speaker 1: being very diligent about responding to those criticisms, and a
• 1:49:02
  Speaker 1: couple of weeks ago they asked me to come on
• 1:49:05
  Speaker 1: and show Live with a Liberal guest to talk about
• 1:49:08
  Speaker 1: the Los Angeles mayor's race, and it seemed to go
• 1:49:11
  Speaker 1: very well, and I predicted that I would be a
• 1:49:13
  Speaker 1: ass back, which I'm fine about because I like Alex
• 1:49:17
  Speaker 1: and the format seems pretty cool, and as long as
• 1:49:20
  Speaker 1: they're willing to send me a car so I don't
• 1:49:23
  Speaker 1: have to drive myself to Burbank to the Warner Brothers
• 1:49:25
  Speaker 1: Discovery plot, then I'm fine with it. And that did,
• 1:49:30
  Speaker 1: in fact happen. We did do an appearance earlier this
• 1:49:33
  Speaker 1: week on Monday Night, and I'm going to play a
• 1:49:37
  Speaker 1: short clip. I wasn't real thrilled with the topic selection,
• 1:49:42
  Speaker 1: which A're going to get to in a moment, because
• 1:49:45
  Speaker 1: I think there's a really significant thing that occurred off
• 1:49:49
  Speaker 1: the air, which I'm still baffled by, completely baffled by
• 1:49:53
  Speaker 1: as we speak. But there was at least a few
• 1:49:57
  Speaker 1: moments that were worthy of play on this podcast, because
• 1:50:01
  Speaker 1: the first subject we dealt with was this controversy over
• 1:50:05
  Speaker 1: the reflecting pool at the National Mall in front of
• 1:50:09
  Speaker 1: the Lincoln Memorial, which has gotten a ridiculous amount of
• 1:50:13
  Speaker 1: news coverage, mainly because liberals love the idea that this
• 1:50:17
  Speaker 1: has gone very poorly, that Donald Trump made a big
• 1:50:20
  Speaker 1: deal about cleaning up the reflecting pool, making it look
• 1:50:24
  Speaker 1: like it was blue in honor of the United States
• 1:50:27
  Speaker 1: and obviously our two hundred and fiftieth birthday coming up
• 1:50:30
  Speaker 1: in a week or so, and liberals just loved the story,
• 1:50:34
  Speaker 1: and CNN loves this story. And so that was how
• 1:50:38
  Speaker 1: this discussion between me and this liberal Brian Tyler Cohen,
• 1:50:45
  Speaker 1: where we were talking about the reflecting pool issue, and
• 1:50:49
  Speaker 1: of course Brian was very excited about how disastrous this
• 1:50:54
  Speaker 1: has seemed to be for Trump because there's been alleged
• 1:50:58
  Speaker 1: damage being done to the blue tile, there's been alja
• 1:51:03
  Speaker 1: turning the reflecting pool green, and liberals are just, in
• 1:51:08
  Speaker 1: my opinion, way too excited about this, and the media
• 1:51:10
  Speaker 1: is giving this story way too much coverage. And so
• 1:51:13
  Speaker 1: here is a short clip from my most recent appearance
• 1:51:18
  Speaker 1: on CNN on Alex Michaelson's show.
• 1:51:21
  Speaker 2: Or as important as the rest of the issues that
• 1:51:23
  Speaker 2: he's failed at governing with.
• 1:51:25
  Speaker 5: Do you think this is sort of a bad community
• 1:51:28
  Speaker 5: theater because somebody on Fox News tonight, Sean Hannity said
• 1:51:31
  Speaker 5: that this is an example of the Democrats reflecting on
• 1:51:34
  Speaker 5: their lack of soul as a party.
• 1:51:37
  Speaker 1: I don't know about that, but look, I think that
• 1:51:40
  Speaker 1: there's this story is getting as from a media perspective,
• 1:51:42
  Speaker 1: as a critic of the media, way too much attention.
• 1:51:45
  Speaker 1: We have now gotten more analysis, more investigation of the
• 1:51:48
  Speaker 1: reflecting Pool than we did of Joe Biden's intellectual decline
• 1:51:52
  Speaker 1: during the first half of twenty twenty four. Now, as
• 1:51:54
  Speaker 1: far as the reflecting Pool itself, it's going to look
• 1:51:57
  Speaker 1: great on Saint Patrick's Day and for Christmas.
• 1:52:00
  Speaker 2: And you guys are a.
• 1:52:01
  Speaker 1: Little bit too giddy about this. That's the part I
• 1:52:03
  Speaker 1: find most interesting. You know, The Babylon Bee, the satirical website,
• 1:52:07
  Speaker 1: has a fake story out about a poll where the
• 1:52:10
  Speaker 1: reflecting Pool algae is now leaving the twenty twenty eight
• 1:52:12
  Speaker 1: Democratic presidential race. And I actually believe that would probably
• 1:52:16
  Speaker 1: be true if they put that in the ball because
• 1:52:18
  Speaker 1: that's how giddy you people are. You want you're rooting
• 1:52:21
  Speaker 1: against the pool?
• 1:52:22
  Speaker 2: Why?
• 1:52:22
  Speaker 1: But why are you rooting against the reflecting poole?
• 1:52:24
  Speaker 2: The reason two undred and fiftieth birthday.
• 1:52:27
  Speaker 1: The reason everybody is talking about this is because.
• 1:52:29
  Speaker 2: Trump himself inserted it into the zeitgeist.
• 1:52:32
  Speaker 3: Because he can't not talk about humanity if you are
• 1:52:35
  Speaker 3: enjoying the fact.
• 1:52:36
  Speaker 1: That this isn't working way too much, and it's exposing
• 1:52:38
  Speaker 1: the fact that you guys really don't like America.
• 1:52:40
  Speaker 2: You don't look I love America.
• 1:52:42
  Speaker 1: I don't love I don't like Donald Trump.
• 1:52:44
  Speaker 3: That's why I'm nay.
• 1:52:45
  Speaker 1: When you're letting Trump cloud your view America, anything.
• 1:52:48
  Speaker 2: Is clouded as the reflect it. And I don't like
• 1:52:50
  Speaker 2: I don't like algae. We're anti allergye here. That story
• 1:52:56
  Speaker 2: is still kind of silly.
• 1:52:57
  Speaker 1: But now that was pretty humorous enemy using, at least
• 1:53:00
  Speaker 1: I hope it was. The rest of the show, in
• 1:53:04
  Speaker 1: my opinion, was a little bit of a waste. We
• 1:53:06
  Speaker 1: talked about firings at the DNI, and then we talked
• 1:53:10
  Speaker 1: about the budding Gavin Newsom Kamala Harris race for the
• 1:53:15
  Speaker 1: twenty twenty eight Democratic nomination, which is a subject in
• 1:53:18
  Speaker 1: fact I actually suggested because I do care very much
• 1:53:22
  Speaker 1: about that, and I got in a few pokes regarding
• 1:53:25
  Speaker 1: Gavin Newsom and Kamala Harris. If you want to watch that,
• 1:53:28
  Speaker 1: you can check it out on my social media platforms,
• 1:53:32
  Speaker 1: whether it's on x or on Facebook. I posted the
• 1:53:34
  Speaker 1: full video there and maybe we'll post it in the
• 1:53:38
  Speaker 1: Patreon app as well. So there are some other elements
• 1:53:41
  Speaker 1: of that appearance that are worth checking out if you're interested.
• 1:53:45
  Speaker 1: But here's the most significant part of this whole thing,
• 1:53:48
  Speaker 1: which has me completely confused. So as we were discussing
• 1:53:54
  Speaker 1: topics for this, and I was given the opportunity to
• 1:53:58
  Speaker 1: suggest a topic because so there wasn't one overriding news
• 1:54:02
  Speaker 1: story that was going to take up the entire segment,
• 1:54:05
  Speaker 1: I said, Look, the New York Times and New York
• 1:54:09
  Speaker 1: Magazine both just late last week, i think, on the
• 1:54:14
  Speaker 1: same day, which was very odd and indicated to me
• 1:54:17
  Speaker 1: that they each knew about each other's investigation and they
• 1:54:20
  Speaker 1: wanted to make sure they got it out there as
• 1:54:22
  Speaker 1: fast as possible so that they didn't get beat on
• 1:54:26
  Speaker 1: the story. But it was very strange that both the
• 1:54:29
  Speaker 1: New York Times and New York Magazine released effectively on
• 1:54:32
  Speaker 1: the same day. Deep Deep, Deep Deep dives into the
• 1:54:37
  Speaker 1: issue of whether or not Jeffrey Epstein really did kill
• 1:54:41
  Speaker 1: himself in a federal prison during the first Trump administration. Now,
• 1:54:46
  Speaker 1: I'm pretty sure if you're an avid listener even sometimes
• 1:54:50
  Speaker 1: listener to this podcast, you know I feel very very
• 1:54:53
  Speaker 1: passionately about this issue and have for many, many years.
• 1:54:57
  Speaker 1: I have been positive that Jeffrey Epps did in fact
• 1:55:01
  Speaker 1: kill himself, and lo and behold, that was the conclusion,
• 1:55:05
  Speaker 1: the unambiguous conclusion of both the New York Times and
• 1:55:09
  Speaker 1: New York Magazine's investigation. And so to me this was
• 1:55:13
  Speaker 1: really important from a couple of perspectives. One, this story
• 1:55:17
  Speaker 1: is significant, and if we now accept that Epstein really
• 1:55:22
  Speaker 1: did kill himself, it should interrational world completely change the
• 1:55:27
  Speaker 1: context and the dynamic of the entire Epstein quote unquote scandal.
• 1:55:32
  Speaker 1: It also want to discredit a lot of people, especially
• 1:55:35
  Speaker 1: in the media, in all walks of media, right wing, wing,
• 1:55:39
  Speaker 1: legacy media, whatever it is, who have been holding on
• 1:55:42
  Speaker 1: to this bogus idea that maybe Epstein was murdered, and
• 1:55:46
  Speaker 1: I have explained time and time and time again why
• 1:55:49
  Speaker 1: that is impossible. And so I felt like this is
• 1:55:53
  Speaker 1: a really important story. I also felt like it's not
• 1:55:56
  Speaker 1: one that's getting enough attention. And I also knew that
• 1:55:59
  Speaker 1: I could bring a context to it and a passion
• 1:56:03
  Speaker 1: for it that no one else on CNN has ever
• 1:56:06
  Speaker 1: even thought about doing. So I pitched this to both
• 1:56:10
  Speaker 1: Alex and to the producers, and they seem to like
• 1:56:12
  Speaker 1: the idea. And when we got the first list of
• 1:56:16
  Speaker 1: topics for this, you know, eight or nine minute segment,
• 1:56:20
  Speaker 1: it was on there and then it got removed. Now
• 1:56:25
  Speaker 1: I don't know for sure why it got removed. I
• 1:56:28
  Speaker 1: will give the producers of Elex Show and Alex himself
• 1:56:32
  Speaker 1: a lot of credit because they were very transparent about this.
• 1:56:34
  Speaker 1: They did not try to pretend. Because I've been in
• 1:56:37
  Speaker 1: situations before where for whatever reason, people get nervous and
• 1:56:42
  Speaker 1: they just make up some bullshit reason as to why
• 1:56:45
  Speaker 1: they don't want to do a topic, because you can
• 1:56:46
  Speaker 1: always come up with a reason, right. They didn't do that.
• 1:56:50
  Speaker 1: It was made clear to me that this was not
• 1:56:52
  Speaker 1: an editorial issue. This was a legal issue, a legal
• 1:56:58
  Speaker 1: issue which doesn't make any sense to me at all,
• 1:57:02
  Speaker 1: and in fact didn't seem to make any sense to
• 1:57:05
  Speaker 1: the people I spoke to about this at CNN. But
• 1:57:09
  Speaker 1: this was so strange, so weird, so baffling, so inexplicable.
• 1:57:16
  Speaker 1: In an odd way, it took a little bit of
• 1:57:19
  Speaker 1: the sting out of my frustration. And Alex himself acknowledged,
• 1:57:26
  Speaker 1: you know that if this had happened as scheduled, it
• 1:57:28
  Speaker 1: would have turned into a viral moment. He actually used
• 1:57:31
  Speaker 1: that phrase, and he's right, because I would have gone
• 1:57:37
  Speaker 1: to an eleven. I would have gone to an eleven
• 1:57:40
  Speaker 1: on this maybe I I probably would have tried to
• 1:57:43
  Speaker 1: ratchet it down to a nine point five for the
• 1:57:45
  Speaker 1: sake of CNN, but I would have absolutely, for the
• 1:57:49
  Speaker 1: first time to my knowledge, made the point that, Okay,
• 1:57:53
  Speaker 1: if we are going to accept, which we now must,
• 1:57:57
  Speaker 1: especially if you're a liberal, if you're a liberal, you
• 1:57:59
  Speaker 1: must now accept did Epstein did in fact kill himself
• 1:58:02
  Speaker 1: in a federal prison? Because the New York Times and
• 1:58:06
  Speaker 1: New York Magazine, in deep dive investigations, came to the
• 1:58:10
  Speaker 1: exact same, unequivocal conclusion. If you accept that, now you
• 1:58:17
  Speaker 1: must if you're using basic logic, you must reevaluate your
• 1:58:23
  Speaker 1: view of the entire Epstein story. This is why I
• 1:58:27
  Speaker 1: had it out, you know, with Michael Tracy or you
• 1:58:32
  Speaker 1: probably recall that interview where we went sideways and I
• 1:58:34
  Speaker 1: basically screamed at him because he was not accepting the
• 1:58:37
  Speaker 1: reality that Epstein had in fact killed himself, and he
• 1:58:42
  Speaker 1: didn't seem to fully understand the significance of why that's
• 1:58:46
  Speaker 1: important and what an incredibly potent weapon that would have
• 1:58:52
  Speaker 1: been in his public battle because a lot of the
• 1:58:54
  Speaker 1: people he's going up against, including Julie K. Brown, the
• 1:58:58
  Speaker 1: Miami Herald reporter who was at the start of this
• 1:59:01
  Speaker 1: whole moral panic, would have been discredited if he had
• 1:59:05
  Speaker 1: put them on the spot and said, do you believe
• 1:59:09
  Speaker 1: Epstein killed himself or not? Because Julie K. Brown is
• 1:59:13
  Speaker 1: still not accepting this, she's not accepting the New York
• 1:59:16
  Speaker 1: Times and the New York Magazine investigation conclusions. In fact,
• 1:59:21
  Speaker 1: hilariously and tellingly in a moment, that she'd completely discredit
• 1:59:26
  Speaker 1: the number one reporter on this whole moral panic, Julie
• 1:59:29
  Speaker 1: came round. She's claiming on social media on x she's
• 1:59:35
  Speaker 1: claiming that there's so much evidence that Epstein was suicidal
• 1:59:40
  Speaker 1: that in her brain makes it impossible for him to
• 1:59:44
  Speaker 1: actually have committed suicide. I'm paraphrasing, but that's a fair paraphrase.
• 1:59:48
  Speaker 1: That's desperation. That's not logic, that's not reporting, that's not
• 1:59:54
  Speaker 1: being a good faith analyst. That's wish casting that you
• 1:59:59
  Speaker 1: have bought into a false narrative. You do not want
• 2:00:01
  Speaker 1: to admit you were wrong, and you don't want to
• 2:00:03
  Speaker 1: admit the implications of you being wrong, not just for
• 2:00:06
  Speaker 1: your credibility, but for the logic of the story. Because
• 2:00:10
  Speaker 1: if Epstein killed himself in a federal prison, the first
• 2:00:15
  Speaker 1: thing it does, and I would have said this on
• 2:00:17
  Speaker 1: CNN and it probably would have cost a minor earthquake.
• 2:00:22
  Speaker 1: That means Donald Trump is innocent. Donald Trump is innocent
• 2:00:27
  Speaker 1: in the Epstein matter because there's no fucking way a
• 2:00:32
  Speaker 1: guy is smart and is machiavellian and is resourceful, especially
• 2:00:38
  Speaker 1: financially resourceful, as Jeffrey Epstein was when he killed himself.
• 2:00:42
  Speaker 1: There's no way you're gonna kill yourself if you have
• 2:00:47
  Speaker 1: blackmail information on the sitting president in the United States
• 2:00:50
  Speaker 1: and you're in a federal prison, especially not a president
• 2:00:53
  Speaker 1: United States who is famously willing to play ball if
• 2:00:56
  Speaker 1: it's in his self interest to do so. So there
• 2:00:59
  Speaker 1: is there's no chance Epstein would have killed himself if
• 2:01:04
  Speaker 1: he had blackmail information of any value on Donald Trump.
• 2:01:08
  Speaker 1: And by the way, there's a separate report within the
• 2:01:10
  Speaker 1: last week that Epstein tried tried to tell investigators that
• 2:01:16
  Speaker 1: he had dirt on Trump and he had nothing. He
• 2:01:19
  Speaker 1: kept telling them he's a fraud, he has no real money,
• 2:01:21
  Speaker 1: and I'm sure they responded to him, will no shit, Sherlock.
• 2:01:24
  Speaker 1: We already know that that's not going to get you
• 2:01:27
  Speaker 1: out of this this jam. And so Epstein had nothing
• 2:01:32
  Speaker 1: on Trump. The entire basis of the whole massive Epstein
• 2:01:38
  Speaker 1: sex trafficking conspiracy is that he was able to use
• 2:01:42
  Speaker 1: blackmail to get people to do what he wanted so
• 2:01:45
  Speaker 1: he can get away with this, and that's how he
• 2:01:46
  Speaker 1: made all his money, which is a narrative that never
• 2:01:50
  Speaker 1: made any sense to me, even without the suicide. But
• 2:01:54
  Speaker 1: a guy who's in that position, if he really has
• 2:01:57
  Speaker 1: blackmail information on all these incredibly power howerful people, including
• 2:02:01
  Speaker 1: the fucking president of the United States, and he's in
• 2:02:04
  Speaker 1: a federal president, and this particular president is more than
• 2:02:08
  Speaker 1: willing to look the other way if it's in his
• 2:02:11
  Speaker 1: self interest to do so. The last thing he's going
• 2:02:14
  Speaker 1: to do is kill himself. He's never going to kill himself.
• 2:02:18
  Speaker 1: It's impossible not to mention that if he's murdered, which
• 2:02:23
  Speaker 1: I've said a hundred times was logically impossible, there's no
• 2:02:29
  Speaker 1: evidence for that. It would have been impossible to pull off.
• 2:02:32
  Speaker 1: But if in fact that had happened, now you have
• 2:02:36
  Speaker 1: the nexus for a massive conspiracy, because in order to
• 2:02:39
  Speaker 1: pull that off, you would need an incredible amount of
• 2:02:43
  Speaker 1: power and influence and the ability to shut people up,
• 2:02:47
  Speaker 1: And it would be at the magnitude that would be
• 2:02:51
  Speaker 1: consistent with this narrative that has taken hold that Epstein
• 2:02:55
  Speaker 1: was running this massive sex traffic and conspiracy that involved
• 2:02:59
  Speaker 1: all sorts of very powerful and very rich people. That
• 2:03:02
  Speaker 1: would fit. But when you take murder off the table
• 2:03:07
  Speaker 1: and you confirm suicide, and to be clear, what the
• 2:03:12
  Speaker 1: New York Times and New York Magazine found was exactly
• 2:03:14
  Speaker 1: what I've been telling you for years. He was clearly suicidal.
• 2:03:19
  Speaker 1: He in my opinion, I've been saying this for a
• 2:03:22
  Speaker 1: very long time. I think he tried to do it
• 2:03:25
  Speaker 1: at least twice, or at the very least did a
• 2:03:27
  Speaker 1: trial run to see how we could get away with it,
• 2:03:30
  Speaker 1: make sure he could get away with it before he
• 2:03:32
  Speaker 1: did it for real. I mean, it's so unambiguous with
• 2:03:37
  Speaker 1: the Times and New York Magazine found, and it's a
• 2:03:40
  Speaker 1: thousand percent consistent with what I've been telling you for years.
• 2:03:44
  Speaker 1: And I've been in this bizarrely, this voice in the
• 2:03:47
  Speaker 1: wilderness screaming people, what are you doing this? Is all.
• 2:03:52
  Speaker 1: The epicenter of this case is did he kill himself
• 2:03:55
  Speaker 1: or was he murdered? And if he killed himself, you've
• 2:03:58
  Speaker 1: just blown up huge portions of your entire theory, specifically
• 2:04:03
  Speaker 1: with Donald Trump. So this exonerates Trump. But both the
• 2:04:11
  Speaker 1: right wing and the left wing media and the legacy
• 2:04:13
  Speaker 1: media now specifically CNN, are proactively ignoring this, even when
• 2:04:19
  Speaker 1: it came from the New York Times and New York Magazine,
• 2:04:23
  Speaker 1: the epicenter of the legacy mainstream news media and what's
• 2:04:28
  Speaker 1: left of credibility in their minds. I mean, doesn't get
• 2:04:32
  Speaker 1: more credible in the eyes of the liberal media than
• 2:04:36
  Speaker 1: the New York Times and New York Magazine. And this
• 2:04:39
  Speaker 1: story has gotten zero traction. And here I was in
• 2:04:43
  Speaker 1: a unique position to try to get it some and
• 2:04:46
  Speaker 1: even I wasn't able to do so for reasons that
• 2:04:48
  Speaker 1: I will probably never fully understand. As my wife said
• 2:04:53
  Speaker 1: when I told her the story, oh so that means
• 2:04:55
  Speaker 1: Epstein must have been murdered. She was joking, I think,
• 2:05:00
  Speaker 1: but her counter theory as well. The other reason why
• 2:05:04
  Speaker 1: CNN wouldn't let you talk about this is because they're
• 2:05:06
  Speaker 1: trying to preserve the narrative.
• 2:05:08
  Speaker 2: I don't.
• 2:05:09
  Speaker 1: I think I'm pretty sure she was kidding. I hope
• 2:05:12
  Speaker 1: she was kidding. And I'm not actually even blaming the
• 2:05:16
  Speaker 1: people that I was dealing with at CNN. They handled
• 2:05:18
  Speaker 1: the situation as well as they possibly could have. It
• 2:05:21
  Speaker 1: was some idiot lawyer apparently that put the kabash on this.
• 2:05:26
  Speaker 1: But to me, this shows so much about why and
• 2:05:29
  Speaker 1: how the news media is completely broken. This is the
• 2:05:33
  Speaker 1: most talked about story of the end of twenty twenty five,
• 2:05:37
  Speaker 1: at the beginning of twenty twenty six, in my opinion,
• 2:05:40
  Speaker 1: way way, way way overblown story, the whole Epstein affair.
• 2:05:45
  Speaker 1: And yet when we get finally a conclusion on one
• 2:05:50
  Speaker 1: of the most important facts crickets, nobody wants to reevaluate.
• 2:05:58
  Speaker 1: This is you know, this is one of those crimes
• 2:06:00
  Speaker 1: best left unsolved. To paraphrase final tab, We're just not
• 2:06:04
  Speaker 1: going to go back into this because it's uncomfortable. Because
• 2:06:09
  Speaker 1: if you use your brain and have even a semblance
• 2:06:12
  Speaker 1: of logic, you cannot get to any of these massive
• 2:06:17
  Speaker 1: conspiracies unless Epstein was murdered in a federal prison. If
• 2:06:23
  Speaker 1: he killed himself, which he did, then it cuts off
• 2:06:27
  Speaker 1: literally cuts off huge portions of the conspiracy theory, specifically
• 2:06:33
  Speaker 1: visivid Donald Trump. And why Trump himself hasn't tried to
• 2:06:38
  Speaker 1: make an issue of this, I don't know. I think
• 2:06:40
  Speaker 1: it's because so much of the magabase bought into this
• 2:06:44
  Speaker 1: mythology that he was murdered in prison, and it's just
• 2:06:48
  Speaker 1: not worth it to Trump to try to revisit it.
• 2:06:51
  Speaker 1: This is one of those rare stories where the magamedia,
• 2:06:54
  Speaker 1: the left wing media, the legacy media all got it
• 2:06:58
  Speaker 1: wrong in a f effectively the same direction. I can't
• 2:07:02
  Speaker 1: think of another story where that's actually happened for different reasons,
• 2:07:06
  Speaker 1: and the key to understanding how they got it and
• 2:07:09
  Speaker 1: why they got it wrong goes back to the beginning
• 2:07:11
  Speaker 1: of the story. For all intents and purposes, because if
• 2:07:13
  Speaker 1: Epstein doesn't kill himself, if he's still languishing in prison,
• 2:07:18
  Speaker 1: no one ever gives a shit about this story. It's
• 2:07:21
  Speaker 1: his suicide. His suicide is everything because it was misperceived
• 2:07:28
  Speaker 1: as inherently nefarious because he must have been murdered. And
• 2:07:32
  Speaker 1: once people buy that he's murdered, they'll believe any fucking
• 2:07:36
  Speaker 1: piece of bullshit that they want to believe. And that's
• 2:07:39
  Speaker 1: what happened here. That's where this whole situation left the
• 2:07:43
  Speaker 1: gravitational pull of the rational earth. And just like I
• 2:07:48
  Speaker 1: told you, I mean, folks, I'm wrong occasionally, but when
• 2:07:52
  Speaker 1: I'm positive, I'm right about something that's already happened. My
• 2:07:56
  Speaker 1: track record is better than anybody I'm aware of. It's
• 2:07:58
  Speaker 1: basically one hundred percent. And when I go to the
• 2:08:01
  Speaker 1: mat and tell you Epstein killed himself, I didn't do
• 2:08:06
  Speaker 1: so without a great deal of investigation and thought and
• 2:08:12
  Speaker 1: piecing it all together. I was positive and I was right.
• 2:08:18
  Speaker 1: But the vast majority of Americans are not going to
• 2:08:21
  Speaker 1: know that this was the overwhelming, unequivocal conclusion of the
• 2:08:25
  Speaker 1: New York Times in New York Magazine, and they're certainly
• 2:08:27
  Speaker 1: not going to understand the significance of it. I don't
• 2:08:30
  Speaker 1: think most people who have even thought about this case,
• 2:08:33
  Speaker 1: even those that have been very interested in this case,
• 2:08:37
  Speaker 1: have really thought through the implications of the issue of
• 2:08:41
  Speaker 1: suicide versus murder, because it's everything. And that's why I
• 2:08:45
  Speaker 1: went sideways with Michael Tracy, because he did not seem
• 2:08:47
  Speaker 1: to understand that it was everything, and he missed a
• 2:08:50
  Speaker 1: great opportunity. And the fact that Julie K. Brown, I
• 2:08:54
  Speaker 1: mean that to me wow. I mean she is Sarah
• 2:08:58
  Speaker 1: Ganham two point zero. She's a complete fraud and an idiot.
• 2:09:02
  Speaker 1: By way, we played a clip a few months ago
• 2:09:05
  Speaker 1: of her on a podcast, still on a major pocket
• 2:09:09
  Speaker 1: I think it was a New York Times associated podcast,
• 2:09:12
  Speaker 1: still pretending that she believes that Epstein was murdered, with
• 2:09:17
  Speaker 1: no evidence, no logic, and now in direct contradiction to
• 2:09:21
  Speaker 1: two massive liberal legacy media investigations concluding that shockingly, I
• 2:09:29
  Speaker 1: was right all along. Epstein did in fact kill himself.
• 2:09:33
  Speaker 1: But the mythology has gotten way too big. It's too
• 2:09:37
  Speaker 1: big to fail. At this point, the facts no longer matter.
• 2:09:40
  Speaker 1: And that's another indication of just how broken our news
• 2:09:43
  Speaker 1: media is. That is the death of journalism right there.
• 2:09:46
  Speaker 1: I can't possibly illustrate the death of journalism any better
• 2:09:50
  Speaker 1: than that whole story involving Epstein his suicide, what happened
• 2:09:55
  Speaker 1: with CNN, what's happening with Julie K. Brown, And how
• 2:09:59
  Speaker 1: the vast jart of the news media is just ignoring
• 2:10:02
  Speaker 1: the implications of this very significant, although not at all
• 2:10:05
  Speaker 1: surprising development with regard to the New York Times. In
• 2:10:08
  Speaker 1: New York Magazine investigation turning out to the topic of golf.
• 2:10:14
  Speaker 1: There's been several important golf stories over the last several
• 2:10:17
  Speaker 1: days because the US Open just finished in New York
• 2:10:20
  Speaker 1: at Shinnecock Hills. Obviously, I'm a big golf fan at
• 2:10:24
  Speaker 1: tournament golfer myself. Windom Clark ended up winning, which created
• 2:10:29
  Speaker 1: a bit of controversy because the crowd in New York
• 2:10:33
  Speaker 1: clearly did not want Windom Clark to win. And the
• 2:10:36
  Speaker 1: main reason there were a couple of reasons, but the
• 2:10:39
  Speaker 1: main reason why the crowd in New York did not
• 2:10:42
  Speaker 1: want Wyndom Clark to win is that he's considered to
• 2:10:46
  Speaker 1: be a jackass. And the reason why he's considered to
• 2:10:49
  Speaker 1: be a jackass is that a year ago, and this
• 2:10:52
  Speaker 1: is a remarkable turnaround in just a year. A year
• 2:10:55
  Speaker 1: ago at the US Open at Oakmont, when he left,
• 2:10:58
  Speaker 1: he was playing so poorly. He was so pissed off
• 2:11:01
  Speaker 1: that he did significant damage to the locker room at
• 2:11:05
  Speaker 1: Oakmond Country Club. Now, I think a lot of people
• 2:11:10
  Speaker 1: are misunderstanding why a large portion of the golf fandom
• 2:11:18
  Speaker 1: is upset by this. I found a real dichotomy in
• 2:11:22
  Speaker 1: the way that golf fans, at least in my experience,
• 2:11:26
  Speaker 1: both online and at my golf club have expressed their
• 2:11:30
  Speaker 1: opinions on this, and that I figured out. I think
• 2:11:34
  Speaker 1: what's going on here, And I'm not articulating this particularly well,
• 2:11:38
  Speaker 1: but I think there's a group of golf fans that
• 2:11:40
  Speaker 1: think it was bad but not that big of a deal,
• 2:11:42
  Speaker 1: and let's forgive and let's move on. And then there's
• 2:11:45
  Speaker 1: another group of golf fans. I would consider myself the
• 2:11:49
  Speaker 1: more part of this group who take what Wyndham Clark
• 2:11:52
  Speaker 1: did at Oakmont more seriously. And I think it has
• 2:11:56
  Speaker 1: to do with how you perceive those lockers. I know
• 2:12:00
  Speaker 1: this sounds kind of silly, but it's important. I think
• 2:12:05
  Speaker 1: people who don't understand the nature of the locker room
• 2:12:09
  Speaker 1: at Oakmont probably think this is not that big of
• 2:12:12
  Speaker 1: a deal. Okay, everyone gets upset. You know, he actually cares,
• 2:12:17
  Speaker 1: and yes he repaid the club for the damage. What's
• 2:12:20
  Speaker 1: the big deal? But if you've been in the Oakbot
• 2:12:24
  Speaker 1: locker room, as I have been, you know it's really
• 2:12:28
  Speaker 1: more of a museum. That's really what I see it as.
• 2:12:33
  Speaker 1: It's as if Wyndon Clark did significant damage to a
• 2:12:38
  Speaker 1: museum piece, not a locker, because these lockers have been
• 2:12:42
  Speaker 1: around forever. These are this. I mean, he was a
• 2:12:45
  Speaker 1: US Open champion. I'm sure he was given a special locker.
• 2:12:48
  Speaker 1: I mean, these are lockers used by Arnold Palmer and
• 2:12:51
  Speaker 1: Jack Nicholas in the nineteen sixty two US Open at Oakmind.
• 2:12:55
  Speaker 1: I mean, and well before that, these are really old,
• 2:12:59
  Speaker 1: old locker is this locker room is literally a museum,
• 2:13:04
  Speaker 1: and so for him to do that in a museum
• 2:13:07
  Speaker 1: like atmosphere, to me, is completely different than if this
• 2:13:10
  Speaker 1: was some sort of modern Trump golf course where it's
• 2:13:14
  Speaker 1: just you repair it, you repay the damages, and it's
• 2:13:17
  Speaker 1: really no harm, no foul. So I'm not sure people
• 2:13:20
  Speaker 1: fully understand the significance of what he did. And the
• 2:13:25
  Speaker 1: other reason why the crowd in New York was rooting
• 2:13:27
  Speaker 1: against him was that he's playing against Scotty Scheffler and
• 2:13:29
  Speaker 1: Scotti Scheffler was trying to win the career Grand Slam
• 2:13:32
  Speaker 1: on his thirtieth birthday on Father's Day. In Scotti Scheffer's
• 2:13:35
  Speaker 1: the number one player in the world and he's very popular,
• 2:13:37
  Speaker 1: so that makes sense as well. But this has now
• 2:13:40
  Speaker 1: created a big controversy because a lot of the woosies
• 2:13:44
  Speaker 1: in the golf media are wringing their hands and saying,
• 2:13:47
  Speaker 1: oh my gosh, the crowds got out of hand. It
• 2:13:50
  Speaker 1: was so inappropriate for them to be rooting against Wyndham Clark.
• 2:13:55
  Speaker 1: And you know, we've got to do something about these
• 2:13:59
  Speaker 1: rowdy golf And is there something going on in New York?
• 2:14:02
  Speaker 1: Because is this new York fans? Because this happened weirdly
• 2:14:06
  Speaker 1: back in nineteen eighty six to Greg Norman at the
• 2:14:10
  Speaker 1: same golf course, Shinnigok Hills on Long Island. And my
• 2:14:16
  Speaker 1: opinion on this is, as usual, pretty nuanced. Look, I
• 2:14:19
  Speaker 1: think golf should be different. I think there should be
• 2:14:21
  Speaker 1: decorum and golf, but I'm also very much against creating
• 2:14:27
  Speaker 1: a slippery slope situation where all of a sudden, any
• 2:14:30
  Speaker 1: kind of negative rooting whatsoever is foreboden to the point
• 2:14:35
  Speaker 1: where fans risk or fear getting kicked out of the event.
• 2:14:40
  Speaker 1: We've seen this happen previously. Rory McElroy has kicked out
• 2:14:44
  Speaker 1: fans for being negative. And to me, this is a
• 2:14:48
  Speaker 1: very very fine line. This is a very slippery slope
• 2:14:52
  Speaker 1: because there's a chilling effect and I've talked about this
• 2:14:54
  Speaker 1: in sports in general, where I really think we're heading
• 2:14:58
  Speaker 1: to a point where booing at all, even at football games,
• 2:15:02
  Speaker 1: is gonna be considered verboten, and fans are gonna be
• 2:15:06
  Speaker 1: so afraid of getting kicked out of the event that
• 2:15:08
  Speaker 1: they're gonna essentially self censor, and it's I think it's
• 2:15:13
  Speaker 1: going in the wrong direction. Frankly, I think that there
• 2:15:16
  Speaker 1: ought to be freedom when it comes to cheering, and
• 2:15:20
  Speaker 1: if a guy hits a bad shot, you know, you
• 2:15:23
  Speaker 1: shouldn't say something directly to him, But expressing some sort
• 2:15:28
  Speaker 1: of approval of that I don't see as a big deal.
• 2:15:31
  Speaker 1: The irony of the fact that Wyndam Clark did get
• 2:15:35
  Speaker 1: a lot of very negative treatment from the fans in
• 2:15:38
  Speaker 1: New York is that it was probably the greatest thing
• 2:15:41
  Speaker 1: that ever happened to him, because he's gotten sympathy and
• 2:15:46
  Speaker 1: empathy if that had not happened. Let me use myself
• 2:15:51
  Speaker 1: as an example. Prior to the US Open I thought
• 2:15:56
  Speaker 1: very little of Wyndham Clark as a human being, as
• 2:15:58
  Speaker 1: a guy, because to me, you do that at the
• 2:16:01
  Speaker 1: Oakmont Lockers. Yes, he apologized, Yes, he you know, made
• 2:16:06
  Speaker 1: reneunerations and and you know paid back the club and
• 2:16:10
  Speaker 1: he was actually banned from the property at Oakmne for
• 2:16:13
  Speaker 1: a while. Apparently that's no longer the case. So the
• 2:16:16
  Speaker 1: club's fine with it. They've forgiven him, let's move on.
• 2:16:20
  Speaker 1: I was not really really willing to move on because
• 2:16:23
  Speaker 1: this was not an isolated situation. He seemed like a
• 2:16:25
  Speaker 1: dick to me. But because he was able to endure
• 2:16:30
  Speaker 1: this difficult crowd, very difficult for a golfer. And you know,
• 2:16:35
  Speaker 1: I have a situation where you've got a six shot
• 2:16:37
  Speaker 1: league going into the final round, which is an incredibly
• 2:16:39
  Speaker 1: difficult spot to be you're leading the US Open by
• 2:16:43
  Speaker 1: six shots, and you're playing with the best player in
• 2:16:45
  Speaker 1: the world, Scottie Scheffler, who everybody on the planet is
• 2:16:49
  Speaker 1: rooting for so he can win the career Grand Slam.
• 2:16:51
  Speaker 1: And it's a difficult golf course, although not quite as
• 2:16:54
  Speaker 1: difficult as I would like to it like it to
• 2:16:57
  Speaker 1: have been. But that's a separate story. That's a tough
• 2:17:00
  Speaker 1: spot to be in because there's only one thing that
• 2:17:03
  Speaker 1: can happen. You can collapse and now you're the Atlanta
• 2:17:06
  Speaker 1: Falcons or the San Antonio Spurs, or you're Creig Norman
• 2:17:10
  Speaker 1: at the at the nineteen ninety six Masters against Nick Faldo.
• 2:17:14
  Speaker 1: I mean, it's infamy. It's infamy forever, that's a lot
• 2:17:19
  Speaker 1: of pressure, whether the crowds on your side or not,
• 2:17:23
  Speaker 1: and the fact that he was able to deal with
• 2:17:24
  Speaker 1: that and overcome adversity. He didn't play particularly well on Sunday,
• 2:17:28
  Speaker 1: but he made a spectacular birdie out of the brush
• 2:17:31
  Speaker 1: on number sixteen which essentially won him the tournament. He
• 2:17:35
  Speaker 1: ends up winning by one shot. I actually got some
• 2:17:38
  Speaker 1: respect for him. To me, he did his penance, he suffered,
• 2:17:44
  Speaker 1: he endured, he won. He deserves credit for that. Now
• 2:17:48
  Speaker 1: he got awfully lucky. This is the second major championship
• 2:17:52
  Speaker 1: this year where the tournament was effectively won earlier in
• 2:17:55
  Speaker 1: the week, and nobody in the golf meet he ever
• 2:17:58
  Speaker 1: really points this out because they're a bunch of idiots.
• 2:18:01
  Speaker 1: But I talked about this at the Masters. Rory McElroy
• 2:18:04
  Speaker 1: essentially won the Masters in an hour and twenty minute
• 2:18:07
  Speaker 1: period on Friday afternoon when he went ballistic playing in
• 2:18:11
  Speaker 1: very very benign conditions. Well, Wyndham Clark did exactly the
• 2:18:15
  Speaker 1: same thing on Thursday in about a two hour period
• 2:18:18
  Speaker 1: when the golf course had no defense because they were
• 2:18:21
  Speaker 1: expecting massive wins that didn't happen, and as they were
• 2:18:24
  Speaker 1: getting towards dusk, there was almost no wind at all,
• 2:18:27
  Speaker 1: The pins were all in easy spots, the greens were
• 2:18:29
  Speaker 1: slow and soft, and Windham Clark went to town and
• 2:18:33
  Speaker 1: that's how he got the six hunder par, and then
• 2:18:36
  Speaker 1: for the rest of the tournament he just held on
• 2:18:39
  Speaker 1: without that period of play where it was incredibly benign.
• 2:18:44
  Speaker 1: I doubt Windham Clark wins this tournament. Now, luck is
• 2:18:47
  Speaker 1: a big part of golf, as it is in life.
• 2:18:50
  Speaker 1: I get that, but it's awfully weird. I don't remember
• 2:18:53
  Speaker 1: this happening twice in one year where two major championships
• 2:18:56
  Speaker 1: were won by one shot, and it was as clear
• 2:19:00
  Speaker 1: his day that the winner won because they got a
• 2:19:03
  Speaker 1: break with regard to the conditions earlier in the week
• 2:19:07
  Speaker 1: on a Friday when it came to the Masters, or
• 2:19:09
  Speaker 1: a Thursday when it came to the US Open. But
• 2:19:13
  Speaker 1: Wyndam Clark has actually risen in my esteem, not that
• 2:19:16
  Speaker 1: it matters at all to what I think. I'm just
• 2:19:18
  Speaker 1: using myself as an example. I don't love the guy,
• 2:19:22
  Speaker 1: but I'm in favor of second chances. If you pay
• 2:19:27
  Speaker 1: your dues, you do penance, you show me that you're
• 2:19:30
  Speaker 1: deserving of a second chance. I'm all years and I
• 2:19:35
  Speaker 1: think Wyndom Clark deserves credit again even though he got
• 2:19:37
  Speaker 1: lucky with regard to the conditions, but he did endure
• 2:19:41
  Speaker 1: an awful lot of hardship on Sunday and when it
• 2:19:43
  Speaker 1: came down to it, he pulled it off and he won,
• 2:19:46
  Speaker 1: and he deserves credit for that. So, you know, the
• 2:19:50
  Speaker 1: golf meatinga is gonna, you know, get their panties all
• 2:19:53
  Speaker 1: in a bunch over of the crowd behavior. But when
• 2:19:56
  Speaker 1: it comes to crowd behavior, I am very very concerned
• 2:19:59
  Speaker 1: about the slip slope because how do you legislate that.
• 2:20:02
  Speaker 1: No one ever wants to tell me that. So what's
• 2:20:04
  Speaker 1: the line? How do you legislate? And if you do
• 2:20:07
  Speaker 1: legislate this, there is no way. It's a lot like
• 2:20:10
  Speaker 1: free speech. It's almost literally like free speech. Once you
• 2:20:13
  Speaker 1: start legislating it, there's no going back, especially in this
• 2:20:18
  Speaker 1: PC in which we live. So it's a very very
• 2:20:21
  Speaker 1: dangerous territory and I'm against it now. It's a little
• 2:20:24
  Speaker 1: bit like pornography. When someone goes over the line, you
• 2:20:28
  Speaker 1: understand it, you get it. They're drunk, they're using profanity
• 2:20:32
  Speaker 1: specifically at a player, or they're disrupting their play, either
• 2:20:37
  Speaker 1: in preparation to hit a shot or in the middle
• 2:20:39
  Speaker 1: of a shot, then that obviously is over the line
• 2:20:42
  Speaker 1: because you're directly impacting play. But anything other than that
• 2:20:47
  Speaker 1: has to be allowed to be fair game. Otherwise we're
• 2:20:50
  Speaker 1: going to end up in a very bad place, which
• 2:20:51
  Speaker 1: I think we're probably going to end up in in
• 2:20:54
  Speaker 1: almost every sport in the long run, for reasons I've
• 2:20:57
  Speaker 1: already stayed in. Any Way, thanks for listening to today's
• 2:21:01
  Speaker 1: free drop of the abbreviated show. If you're interested in
• 2:21:04
  Speaker 1: listening to the entire show, you must become a patron.
• 2:21:08
  Speaker 1: Please go to Patreon. That's p A t R e
• 2:21:12
  Speaker 1: O N dot com. Patreon dot com slash the Death
• 2:21:18
  Speaker 1: of Journalism with John Zigler. My name is j O
• 2:21:22
  Speaker 1: h N z I E G L e R. That's
• 2:21:25
  Speaker 1: patreon dot com slash the Death of Journalism with John Ziggler.
• 2:21:33
  Speaker 1: Good luck to you on that. But that's how you
• 2:21:35
  Speaker 1: can subscribe.