Latest / The Death Of Journalism / Episode Three Hundred Two: All Too Human

Transcript

Episode Three Hundred Two: All Too Human · The Death Of Journalism

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Welcome to episode three hundred and two of the Death
• 0:03
  Speaker 1: of Journalism Podcasts. My name is John zigleram your host
• 0:05
  Speaker 1: on this week's show. Senator Lindsey Graham has passed away.
• 0:10
  Speaker 1: Is Mitch McConnell, next, the amazing Tyler Robinson, Charlie Kirk.
• 0:15
  Speaker 1: Preliminary hearing has proven me dead right about the Alliance
• 0:19
  Speaker 1: of Lunacy, an Ivy League scandal involving AI is not
• 0:23
  Speaker 1: getting nearly enough attention, and a very revealing final part
• 0:28
  Speaker 1: three of Ask John Anything. A programming note to start
• 0:35
  Speaker 1: this episode of the podcast, We're taping about twenty hours
• 0:38
  Speaker 1: or so earlier than normal, So if something really dramatic
• 0:41
  Speaker 1: happens on Tuesday night or Wednesday morning, I'm not going
• 0:44
  Speaker 1: to know about it. We'll talk about it obviously next
• 0:47
  Speaker 1: week on the podcast. But as the war in Iran
• 0:50
  Speaker 1: continues to seemingly escalate, one of its prime proponents from
• 0:54
  Speaker 1: the United States perspective at least, has suddenly died. You're
• 0:58
  Speaker 1: probably aware by now that Lindsey Graham, longtime Senator from
• 1:03
  Speaker 1: South Carolina, has passed away suddenly at the age of
• 1:06
  Speaker 1: seventy one, after coming back to the United States from
• 1:09
  Speaker 1: a trip to Ukraine, and this was very, very shocking.
• 1:14
  Speaker 1: It appears as if his a order basically just collapsed,
• 1:17
  Speaker 1: and he had very very little time between when he
• 1:20
  Speaker 1: realized there was a problem and when he passed away,
• 1:25
  Speaker 1: a relatively young man for the Senate and a lot
• 1:28
  Speaker 1: to live for, and his loss is going to be
• 1:31
  Speaker 1: monumental on a lot of different perspectives, or from a
• 1:34
  Speaker 1: lot of different perspectives. Lindsey Graham is someone about whom
• 1:38
  Speaker 1: I am extremely conflicted and a bit confused, because I'm
• 1:45
  Speaker 1: not certain I know or anybody really knows, who the
• 1:49
  Speaker 1: real Lindsey Graham was. As you probably aware, I don't
• 1:53
  Speaker 1: like people in general. I really don't like politicians or
• 1:57
  Speaker 1: public figures. But for a while, well I really, really
• 2:01
  Speaker 1: really liked Lindsey Graham. He came to public notice during
• 2:06
  Speaker 1: the Bill Clinton impeachment saga. He was just a congressman
• 2:10
  Speaker 1: then from South Carolina. This is how he became famous.
• 2:13
  Speaker 1: This is why he has been a longtime senator because
• 2:17
  Speaker 1: of his performance, and I do use that word on purpose,
• 2:21
  Speaker 1: his performance during the Clinton impeachment trial and during that saga.
• 2:28
  Speaker 1: As you probably are well aware, I was vehemently of
• 2:32
  Speaker 1: the belief that Bill Clinton was guilty of impeachable offenses. However,
• 2:37
  Speaker 1: I also knew there was no chance he was going
• 2:39
  Speaker 1: to be convicted in the Senate because I didn't think
• 2:41
  Speaker 1: that Republicans had the balls, and it turned out that
• 2:44
  Speaker 1: they didn't. They also didn't have the votes in the Senate.
• 2:48
  Speaker 1: And I was a huge fan of Lindsey Graham at
• 2:51
  Speaker 1: that time because nobody expressed righteous indignation with a little
• 2:56
  Speaker 1: bit of Southern charm better than Lindsey Graham did. He
• 3:00
  Speaker 1: was absolutely spectacular during this time period, and so I
• 3:06
  Speaker 1: became a big fan of his until a few years
• 3:10
  Speaker 1: later when I'm in Los Angeles as a radio talk
• 3:13
  Speaker 1: show host in KFI, and there is a congressman and
• 3:17
  Speaker 1: a former congressman by the name of James Rogan, who
• 3:20
  Speaker 1: was one of the Republican House impeachment managers during that situation,
• 3:25
  Speaker 1: during the Clinton impeachment, and he wrote a book after
• 3:29
  Speaker 1: he had been bounced out of Congress in part because
• 3:33
  Speaker 1: of his part in the impeachment of Bill Clinton. And
• 3:38
  Speaker 1: when we met for an interview, he came into studio,
• 3:42
  Speaker 1: I told him about my admiration for Lindsey Graham, and
• 3:45
  Speaker 1: he gave me kind of a weird look, and he said, well,
• 3:48
  Speaker 1: do you want to know the real story? I said, well, sure,
• 3:51
  Speaker 1: tell it to me. Now. I don't think he had
• 3:54
  Speaker 1: been public about this at the time, but he later
• 3:56
  Speaker 1: became very public about this. So it's not like I'm
• 3:59
  Speaker 1: telling anything that hasn't been already said publicly by former
• 4:04
  Speaker 1: Congressman Rogan. But he made it very very clear that
• 4:07
  Speaker 1: the Lindsey Graham behind closed doors was very, very different
• 4:11
  Speaker 1: than the Lindsay Graham in public, specifically when it came
• 4:14
  Speaker 1: to how to handle the Senate trial of Bill Clinton,
• 4:19
  Speaker 1: because according to James Rogan, I have no reason to
• 4:22
  Speaker 1: doubt his sincerity and he clearly was there. It was
• 4:26
  Speaker 1: Lindsey Graham who led the charge to take the dive
• 4:29
  Speaker 1: in the Senate trial, and that Lindsey Graham clearly made
• 4:33
  Speaker 1: a correct calculation that we can't win this trial and
• 4:37
  Speaker 1: I've already won this. From a pr perspective, I'm going
• 4:41
  Speaker 1: to be the next Senator from South Carolina if I
• 4:43
  Speaker 1: don't take this too far. And Lindsey Graham was the
• 4:46
  Speaker 1: first one to cut the legs out from underneath the
• 4:49
  Speaker 1: House impeachment managers. Now was that the correct decision politically
• 4:55
  Speaker 1: for Lindsey Graham. Absolutely. I don't think there's anything Lindsey
• 4:59
  Speaker 1: Graham could have don that would have facilitated the conviction
• 5:02
  Speaker 1: of Bill Clinton in the impeachment trial. I'm a realist
• 5:07
  Speaker 1: above everything else. I'm a realist, but I'm also not,
• 5:11
  Speaker 1: as much as it used to be a bit of
• 5:13
  Speaker 1: an idealist and someone who believes that you fight for
• 5:16
  Speaker 1: something if it's important enough to the end, even if
• 5:19
  Speaker 1: you know you're going to lose. And Lindsey Graham didn't
• 5:22
  Speaker 1: do that because Lindsey Graham realized it was in his
• 5:24
  Speaker 1: own self interest to take the w and translate his
• 5:30
  Speaker 1: newfound fame into a Senate seat from South Carolina, and
• 5:33
  Speaker 1: that's what he did. So I lost a lot of
• 5:36
  Speaker 1: respect for Lindsey Graham at that time. Now, does that
• 5:39
  Speaker 1: make him evil? No, that doesn't make him evil. That
• 5:41
  Speaker 1: makes him all too human, And especially when you're grading
• 5:45
  Speaker 1: on a scale of modern politicians, it's basically par for
• 5:49
  Speaker 1: the course. But that was kind of a wake up
• 5:51
  Speaker 1: call for me. For politicians in general, I've been burned many,
• 5:56
  Speaker 1: many times, especially in my younger years, when I wanted
• 5:59
  Speaker 1: to believe the best about certain people or institutions, and
• 6:02
  Speaker 1: it turned out that I was naive, and I think
• 6:06
  Speaker 1: I was a little bit naive when it came to
• 6:08
  Speaker 1: Lindsey Graham. And then came the twenty sixteen presidential election,
• 6:13
  Speaker 1: where Lindsey Graham for a while was the strongest or
• 6:17
  Speaker 1: maybe one of at least the strongest opponents of Donald Trump.
• 6:22
  Speaker 1: Lindsay Graham had stupidly run for president. He had no
• 6:25
  Speaker 1: chance of winning whatsoever the Republican nomination in twenty sixteen,
• 6:29
  Speaker 1: but when he dropped out, he quickly became an ardent
• 6:33
  Speaker 1: anti Trumper and made all sorts of very dramatic statements,
• 6:37
  Speaker 1: including the fact that if we nominate Donald Trump, we
• 6:40
  Speaker 1: will get destroyed and we will deserve it. Weirdly, he
• 6:44
  Speaker 1: never took down that post from what was then known
• 6:47
  Speaker 1: as Twitter, and once again I respected Lindsay Graham. I thought, Okay,
• 6:52
  Speaker 1: this is the Lindsey Graham from the impeachment saga, standing
• 6:56
  Speaker 1: up for what is right, even against apparent self interest.
• 7:00
  Speaker 1: So he once again rose in my esteem. But then
• 7:04
  Speaker 1: once Trump got elected, nobody kissed his ass more and
• 7:07
  Speaker 1: more effectively, I think, than Lindsey Graham, so much so that,
• 7:12
  Speaker 1: based upon Trump's own statements, after Lindsey Graham's death. I'm
• 7:16
  Speaker 1: not even sure Trump remembers that Lindsey Graham was an
• 7:21
  Speaker 1: anti Trumper. He probably does, but he does still remember that.
• 7:24
  Speaker 1: On January sixth, Lindsey Graham, I think, at that point,
• 7:28
  Speaker 1: thinking that Donald Trump's political career was over. January sixth
• 7:32
  Speaker 1: of twenty twenty one, Lindsey Graham was once again wiping
• 7:36
  Speaker 1: his hands almost literally clean, of Donald Trump and saying
• 7:39
  Speaker 1: how awful he was, and I'm done with this. I'm
• 7:42
  Speaker 1: not doing this anymore. But of course, once Trump became
• 7:45
  Speaker 1: the nominee in twenty twenty four, Lindsey Graham was right
• 7:48
  Speaker 1: back at his good graces. So Lindsey Graham was very
• 7:51
  Speaker 1: good about protecting Lindsey Graham, and his self interest changed
• 7:56
  Speaker 1: and his actions changed. He was basically a shape shifter,
• 8:00
  Speaker 1: the best I can tell. But when he was on
• 8:02
  Speaker 1: the right side, there was nobody better than Lindsey Graham.
• 8:08
  Speaker 1: The best example of this was the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation situation,
• 8:13
  Speaker 1: which we've discussed many times in this podcast. Brett Cavanaugh
• 8:17
  Speaker 1: was absolutely railroad, or at least there was an attempt
• 8:21
  Speaker 1: to railroad him via a totally false and fantastical fictional
• 8:26
  Speaker 1: allegation of sex abuse, and nobody defended Brett Cavanaugh more
• 8:31
  Speaker 1: strongly and more effectively than Lindsey Graham. That was the
• 8:36
  Speaker 1: public impeachment trial version of Lindsey Graham. He was absolutely fantastic.
• 8:43
  Speaker 1: A lot of people have called it his finest moment,
• 8:46
  Speaker 1: and I agree with that, and he was successful in that.
• 8:49
  Speaker 1: Without Lindsey Graham, Brett Cavanaugh in all likelihood does not
• 8:54
  Speaker 1: survive that confirmation hearing for better for worse. I mean,
• 8:57
  Speaker 1: you could argue now that maybe Republicans could do better
• 9:00
  Speaker 1: than Brett Kavanaugh they had allowed his nomination to be torched,
• 9:05
  Speaker 1: although the circumstances of the time were such that they
• 9:08
  Speaker 1: might not have been able to get anybody else in.
• 9:10
  Speaker 1: But the reality is that, you know, Brett Kavanaugh was
• 9:15
  Speaker 1: salvage because in large part of Lindsey Graham and Donald
• 9:18
  Speaker 1: Trump's backing of him. But I'm not even sure Trump
• 9:22
  Speaker 1: could have done this without Lindsey Graham. And so that's
• 9:27
  Speaker 1: why I'm so conflicted about the legacy of Lindsey Graham.
• 9:32
  Speaker 1: Just be clear, I'm not at all conflicted about his death.
• 9:34
  Speaker 1: His death is a terrible thing, not just from a
• 9:36
  Speaker 1: human perspective, but politically as well, for reasons I'm going
• 9:40
  Speaker 1: to get into momentarily. But Lindsey Graham had a lot
• 9:43
  Speaker 1: of great moments, some of the best moments of any
• 9:47
  Speaker 1: politician in my lifetime, and I will always be thankful
• 9:51
  Speaker 1: to him for that, even if he wasn't one hundred
• 9:53
  Speaker 1: percent perfect, because that's as you get older, you learn
• 9:56
  Speaker 1: that's the nature of humanity. None of us are perfect,
• 10:00
  Speaker 1: but Lindsey Graham was a lot better than most. And
• 10:05
  Speaker 1: the human part of this is also quite striking. I
• 10:08
  Speaker 1: mean to think about being Lindsey Graham. You're seventy one,
• 10:12
  Speaker 1: You're seemingly in really good health. You are maybe the
• 10:15
  Speaker 1: most powerful person in the US Senate for all intents
• 10:19
  Speaker 1: and purposes, because Donald Trump clearly trusts you, and you
• 10:23
  Speaker 1: have his ear, and you have you're maybe one of
• 10:27
  Speaker 1: the last Republican senators at least you know that's a
• 10:30
  Speaker 1: real Republican that has some street cred with the Democratic side,
• 10:35
  Speaker 1: that can reach out to the other side occasionally. So
• 10:38
  Speaker 1: you have respect, you have some gravitas, and you're going
• 10:42
  Speaker 1: about your life doing big things. You're trying to help
• 10:45
  Speaker 1: Ukraine against Russia, You're trying to help Israel you're I mean,
• 10:50
  Speaker 1: there's all sorts of things going on in the world
• 10:53
  Speaker 1: that he's still very very much engaged in, obviously the
• 10:55
  Speaker 1: Iran War, where he's a big proponent of that, And
• 11:00
  Speaker 1: all of a sudden, not only are you gone, but
• 11:04
  Speaker 1: you aren't married, you have no kids, You weren't even
• 11:09
  Speaker 1: particularly wealthy at all, which I actually think is a
• 11:12
  Speaker 1: reason to respect Lindsay Graham, because he clearly didn't do
• 11:15
  Speaker 1: any significant grift. He didn't take advantage of his office
• 11:18
  Speaker 1: like virtually everybody else does to make a lot of money.
• 11:22
  Speaker 1: But you're gone, You're just erased. Now his sister still exists,
• 11:27
  Speaker 1: and his sister is going to be the interim Senator
• 11:30
  Speaker 1: from South Carolina because Donald Trump decided that that would
• 11:34
  Speaker 1: be the best course of action. Interestingly, Tim Scott, the
• 11:38
  Speaker 1: other Republican senator from South Carolina, had publicly endorsed Trey
• 11:43
  Speaker 1: Gowdy and then immediately switched his position simply because the
• 11:47
  Speaker 1: President of the United States posted on true social which
• 11:51
  Speaker 1: to me is abhorrent. That it has nothing to do
• 11:54
  Speaker 1: with whether not Lindsay Graham's sister should be the next
• 11:58
  Speaker 1: interim Senator from South Carolina, whether she'll do a good job.
• 12:00
  Speaker 1: I have no idea she's going to be in that
• 12:02
  Speaker 1: position for it looks like six months she could take
• 12:05
  Speaker 1: some very significant votes. But my concern about that is
• 12:09
  Speaker 1: that's a monarchy. I mean, some people are concerned about
• 12:12
  Speaker 1: the fact that his sister got the position, which seems
• 12:15
  Speaker 1: like a monarchy. I get that, but it's six months,
• 12:18
  Speaker 1: it's interim. This is a unique situation. I'm not really
• 12:21
  Speaker 1: all that offended by that. But I am offended by
• 12:24
  Speaker 1: Tim Scott switching his public position simply because the king
• 12:27
  Speaker 1: decided to post an edict that was concerning to me
• 12:33
  Speaker 1: and another indication that Trump does act, at least within
• 12:36
  Speaker 1: the Republican Party as a king. But from a human perspective,
• 12:40
  Speaker 1: I mean, wow, you know what a stark reality that
• 12:47
  Speaker 1: is about how life happens and often ends out of nowhere.
• 12:53
  Speaker 1: I mean, it reminded me a lot of the whole
• 12:55
  Speaker 1: Frank o'haris tragedy. Two days before the fiftieth anniversary of
• 12:59
  Speaker 1: the Acculate Reception, my friend, the late Great Franco Harris,
• 13:03
  Speaker 1: who died not of exactly the same thing, but seemingly
• 13:06
  Speaker 1: a failed heart, and he didn't even have any warning. Apparently,
• 13:09
  Speaker 1: apparently this essentially just died in his sleep. We'll never
• 13:13
  Speaker 1: really know what transpired there. But still, you know, an
• 13:16
  Speaker 1: older guy with lots of Gravi toss and amazing history
• 13:19
  Speaker 1: and still a lot to accomplish in life, and then
• 13:22
  Speaker 1: all of a sudden he's gone. It's a human tragedy
• 13:26
  Speaker 1: and it really is a stark reminder of the realities
• 13:30
  Speaker 1: of life and death. And I mentioned the fact that
• 13:33
  Speaker 1: he wasn't married and he didn't have kids, and of
• 13:37
  Speaker 1: course there's been a lot of rumors. Okay, does that
• 13:39
  Speaker 1: mean he's gay? And I get it. I mean, when
• 13:43
  Speaker 1: you live that kind of a life and you have
• 13:47
  Speaker 1: that much power and prestige and celebrity, and you know,
• 13:50
  Speaker 1: you're a decent looking guy and you're never attached to
• 13:54
  Speaker 1: any woman whatsoever, and you don't have kids, people are
• 13:58
  Speaker 1: going to ask questions. The only thing I would say
• 14:01
  Speaker 1: about this is what about in the opposite direction, Why
• 14:05
  Speaker 1: is there no evidence of a gay partner? I mean,
• 14:09
  Speaker 1: how do you keep that under wraps? For as long
• 14:12
  Speaker 1: as Lindsey Graham has been in the public life, in
• 14:15
  Speaker 1: public domain, and as much as liberals would have loved
• 14:19
  Speaker 1: to have outed him as hypocritical as it would be
• 14:22
  Speaker 1: as a homosexual. How does that happen? How does Lindsey
• 14:27
  Speaker 1: Graham keep that under wraps? That seems very difficult, not impossible,
• 14:33
  Speaker 1: but seems very difficult for me to comprehend. I'd love
• 14:37
  Speaker 1: a theory on that, because I don't even have one.
• 14:39
  Speaker 1: I don't know how in the world, let's pretend Lindsey
• 14:42
  Speaker 1: Graham was gay. How do you keep every gay lover
• 14:45
  Speaker 1: you've ever had for your entire life quiet? I just
• 14:51
  Speaker 1: maybe that's why he was so poor, he was paying
• 14:54
  Speaker 1: with gay lovers. I don't believe that. I just don't
• 14:58
  Speaker 1: have a good explanation for that. You know, it is
• 15:01
  Speaker 1: possible that you know he was asexual. There are some
• 15:06
  Speaker 1: people that are a sexual. I believe not to get diverted,
• 15:10
  Speaker 1: but I believe strongly that Jerry Sandusky is effectively a sexual,
• 15:14
  Speaker 1: which was a huge part of the entire Penn State
• 15:17
  Speaker 1: Joe Paterno saga that we've talked so many times about
• 15:19
  Speaker 1: in the past. So I don't know whether or not
• 15:21
  Speaker 1: Lindsey Graham was gay. I know that's been a rumor
• 15:23
  Speaker 1: for a very long time. But to me, the absence
• 15:26
  Speaker 1: of actual evidence might be strong evidence of absence here,
• 15:31
  Speaker 1: So I don't know, and I'm not sure how relevant
• 15:33
  Speaker 1: it is, but I get why people ask the question.
• 15:37
  Speaker 1: Of course, whenever something like this happens. Now we live
• 15:40
  Speaker 1: in a conspiracy oriented age, there are going to be
• 15:43
  Speaker 1: people that are automatically jumped to ridiculous conclusions and say, well,
• 15:48
  Speaker 1: my gosh, they're powerful entities that wanted Lindsey Graham dead.
• 15:51
  Speaker 1: He died suddenly, so he must have been murdered or assassinated.
• 15:56
  Speaker 1: And you know, there's some people that are half jokingly say, well,
• 16:00
  Speaker 1: maybe Candice Owens was behind it, and I say, come on,
• 16:03
  Speaker 1: that's ridiculous. We all know it would have been Tucker
• 16:06
  Speaker 1: Carlson that would have taken out Lindsey Graham right based
• 16:11
  Speaker 1: upon their view of Israel. And I mean, it's just
• 16:14
  Speaker 1: the alliance of lunacy knows no ends. We're going to
• 16:17
  Speaker 1: get to more of that in just a second. But
• 16:21
  Speaker 1: I don't see any signs of foul play here. There
• 16:24
  Speaker 1: was an FBI search of his home, and their Senator
• 16:29
  Speaker 1: Cornyn from Texas is raising questions about whether or not
• 16:33
  Speaker 1: we should wait for a toxic coology report. I get
• 16:35
  Speaker 1: you want to make sure you dot all your eyes
• 16:37
  Speaker 1: and cross all your te's. But as of right now,
• 16:40
  Speaker 1: this appears to have just been a fatal medical emergency
• 16:44
  Speaker 1: that was very poorly timed. Now, interestingly, Graham is not
• 16:50
  Speaker 1: the only Senator, a Republican, who has been in dire
• 16:55
  Speaker 1: physical states as of late. In fact, it's kind of remarkable.
• 16:59
  Speaker 1: Johnson Or did a little bit of a funny bit
• 17:01
  Speaker 1: on The Daily Show about this that somehow, some way,
• 17:05
  Speaker 1: Lindsey Graham, seventy one, fairly young for the Senate and
• 17:09
  Speaker 1: in good shape, is dead and at least as far
• 17:12
  Speaker 1: as we know, Senator from Kentucky, Mitch McConnell is not.
• 17:17
  Speaker 1: And that's kind of amazing just from a human perspective.
• 17:21
  Speaker 1: And it is just weird to me as I get
• 17:23
  Speaker 1: older and more and more people that I know die,
• 17:26
  Speaker 1: how little rhyme or reason there seems to be is
• 17:28
  Speaker 1: to when and how you die, and what kind of
• 17:31
  Speaker 1: shape you're in and how long you can hold on for.
• 17:34
  Speaker 1: I mean, it seems like people that are in absolutely
• 17:36
  Speaker 1: awful shape can hang on forever and ever, and then
• 17:39
  Speaker 1: some people that are seemingly in good shape go boom
• 17:42
  Speaker 1: and it's all over. And Mitch McConnell has basically been
• 17:47
  Speaker 1: mia for about a month, and it's been kind of amazing,
• 17:52
  Speaker 1: given the circumstances surrounding his health, that he's been in
• 17:55
  Speaker 1: very poor health for a long time, that someone as
• 17:58
  Speaker 1: important as Mitch McConnell, though he's not the jarity leader
• 18:00
  Speaker 1: of the US Senate anymore, but he's still, you know,
• 18:04
  Speaker 1: I believe, I think the second longest tenured US senator,
• 18:08
  Speaker 1: powerful guy from Kentucky, and somehow him disappearing for almost
• 18:13
  Speaker 1: a month doesn't really create a lot of news, but
• 18:17
  Speaker 1: it started to There started to be a lot of
• 18:20
  Speaker 1: talk about, Okay, where the hell is Mitch McConnell. You know,
• 18:24
  Speaker 1: he needs to be in the Senate for some votes.
• 18:27
  Speaker 1: It's very suspicious that we've not seen any sign of him.
• 18:30
  Speaker 1: Is he still alive, is he still cognizant? Is he functional?
• 18:35
  Speaker 1: And there was kind of a speaking of the Daily Show,
• 18:39
  Speaker 1: there was a funny bit that they did involving an
• 18:43
  Speaker 1: interview by conservative commentator on CNN, Scott Jennings, and Scott Jennings,
• 18:48
  Speaker 1: if you don't know, used to work very closely with
• 18:51
  Speaker 1: Mitch McConnell. I'll get to that more in a second,
• 18:54
  Speaker 1: because that involved me pretty significantly in my life. But
• 18:59
  Speaker 1: you know, Scott Jennings is still very close to Mitch McConnell,
• 19:03
  Speaker 1: and when all these questions started to arise about what's
• 19:07
  Speaker 1: going on with Mitch McConnell, Jennings went on CNN and
• 19:11
  Speaker 1: gave a very almost bizarrely detailed account of a phone
• 19:16
  Speaker 1: call that allegedly came from Mitch McConnell to Scott Jennings,
• 19:21
  Speaker 1: and The Daily Show had some fun with this. Now,
• 19:23
  Speaker 1: this is before. This is important to point out this
• 19:25
  Speaker 1: is before, and this might have even been part of
• 19:28
  Speaker 1: what provoked. A photo of Mitch McConnell from his hospital
• 19:33
  Speaker 1: bed was produced along with a newspaper to try to
• 19:37
  Speaker 1: show what the date was, to prove I guess, proof
• 19:40
  Speaker 1: of life. So it's important for that context that you know,
• 19:43
  Speaker 1: we now have at least some evidence, although it's not
• 19:45
  Speaker 1: particularly good evidence that Mitch McConnell is indeed alive. But
• 19:49
  Speaker 1: here's how The Daily Show handled Scott jennings testimony about
• 19:55
  Speaker 1: just how alive and alert and aware Mitch McConnell his
• 19:59
  Speaker 1: former boss us currently.
• 20:01
  Speaker 2: Is we need real proof, Scott Jennings, you used to
• 20:06
  Speaker 2: work with Mix McConnell. Is he all right?
• 20:09
  Speaker 3: Yeah? He called me this morning before I did my
• 20:12
  Speaker 3: radio show. We talked for about seventeen minutes.
• 20:14
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I'm sorry, I got called bullshit. Seventeen minutes is
• 20:20
  Speaker 2: way too specific of a number. When you describe phone calls,
• 20:25
  Speaker 2: you say fifteen minutes or twenty minutes. Anything else is
• 20:28
  Speaker 2: like a deposition. But okay, Scott Jennings, tell us more
• 20:31
  Speaker 2: about this extremely real conversation you have with a very
• 20:34
  Speaker 2: live person.
• 20:35
  Speaker 3: We talk a lot about the situation where Iran, talk
• 20:38
  Speaker 3: a little bit about Ukraine and what's going on in Europe.
• 20:42
  Speaker 3: I told him I had been to the Teddy Roosevelt Library.
• 20:44
  Speaker 3: We talked a little bit about the history of the
• 20:45
  Speaker 3: vice presidency and how Roosevelt had transformed that in the
• 20:50
  Speaker 3: modern presidency. Little history of the Senate.
• 20:53
  Speaker 1: Yeah, of course you did.
• 20:54
  Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah. We talked about Teddy Roosevelt's contributions to our
• 20:58
  Speaker 2: national park system, and then said that McConnell said, actually,
• 21:01
  Speaker 2: tend he's writing with me. He's hovering beside my beat.
• 21:05
  Speaker 2: Should I put him on real quick now?
• 21:08
  Speaker 1: I played that one because I thought it was funny.
• 21:12
  Speaker 1: Two because I agree, especially at the time, that there
• 21:16
  Speaker 1: was a lot to be skeptical about in Scott Jennings
• 21:19
  Speaker 1: description that seemed way, way too detailed to me, because
• 21:24
  Speaker 1: if that was an accurate representation of a phone call
• 21:26
  Speaker 1: that came from Mitch McConnell to Scott Jennings, then why
• 21:31
  Speaker 1: can't he get himself to the US Senate or why
• 21:34
  Speaker 1: can't he make it very clear via some sort of
• 21:37
  Speaker 1: a video or what have you that he's doing just fine.
• 21:40
  Speaker 1: I'll get out of the hospital soon and get back
• 21:43
  Speaker 1: to work. I'm not saying that Scott Jennings lied. I
• 21:47
  Speaker 1: think Scott Jennings at the very least exaggerated. I think
• 21:50
  Speaker 1: it's possible that Scott Jennings completely lied, largely because of
• 21:57
  Speaker 1: my experience with Scott Jennings and Mitch McConnell reference before that,
• 22:02
  Speaker 1: I am almost positive that when I got fired in Louisville, Kentucky,
• 22:07
  Speaker 1: that a large part of, not the most important part
• 22:11
  Speaker 1: of the equation was Mitch McConnell and Scott Jennings seeing
• 22:16
  Speaker 1: an opportunity to take out somebody that they thought was
• 22:19
  Speaker 1: a problem. And I'm not going to go through the
• 22:21
  Speaker 1: whole story again, although it's a fascinating story, but Mitch
• 22:24
  Speaker 1: McConnell at one point did try to lobby me pretty
• 22:28
  Speaker 1: hard because I was in a position that was perceived
• 22:30
  Speaker 1: as very influential in the Louisville, Kentucky media, at a
• 22:36
  Speaker 1: heritage talk radio station. But they also could tell that
• 22:39
  Speaker 1: I was a different breed, a cat, and I wasn't
• 22:42
  Speaker 1: a reliable Republican. In fact, I had attacked the incumbent
• 22:46
  Speaker 1: Republican congresswoman and northup quite a bit. And I was
• 22:50
  Speaker 1: invited to a Louisville football game by Mitch McConnell and
• 22:54
  Speaker 1: by David Williams, who was the head of the Kentucky
• 22:57
  Speaker 1: Republican Senate at the time, and they really tried to
• 23:00
  Speaker 1: schmooz the hell out of me, and I didn't buy it,
• 23:03
  Speaker 1: and it clearly didn't work, and then I got myself
• 23:07
  Speaker 1: in trouble. And Scott Jennings had previously lied to me
• 23:11
  Speaker 1: on Mitch McConnell's behalf very blatantly, and so when the
• 23:17
  Speaker 1: whole thing went down the way that it did, because
• 23:19
  Speaker 1: I thought I had survived, everyone thought I had survived,
• 23:22
  Speaker 1: and then there was clearly a second attack that ended
• 23:26
  Speaker 1: up causing my termination. And I even have some I
• 23:32
  Speaker 1: wouldn't call it evidence, but secondhand, I've been told by
• 23:36
  Speaker 1: someone who knows Scott Jennings that he's kind of bragged
• 23:39
  Speaker 1: or at least expressed concerned about my thoughts about him,
• 23:42
  Speaker 1: which further facilitates my very strong intuition that it was
• 23:47
  Speaker 1: Scott Jennings and Mitch McConnell who effectively, after I had
• 23:52
  Speaker 1: injured a leg, chopped off my head in Louisville, Kentucky.
• 23:57
  Speaker 1: And so I don't trust Scott Jennings, and I don't
• 23:59
  Speaker 1: trust Mitch McConnell. Even though I respect the hell out
• 24:02
  Speaker 1: of Mitch McConnell and his work in the Senate, especially
• 24:04
  Speaker 1: when it comes to confirming judges. I think he's been
• 24:06
  Speaker 1: an absolute hero on that front. But I have skepticism
• 24:11
  Speaker 1: about the Scott Jennings account of his call with Mitch McConnell,
• 24:15
  Speaker 1: not as much skepticism as I have about Democratic Congressman
• 24:20
  Speaker 1: wrote Conna's very Jessy Smalleett like a trip to Israel,
• 24:25
  Speaker 1: which has been taken apart on the internet. I'll talk
• 24:29
  Speaker 1: more about that maybe in a future episode of the podcast,
• 24:31
  Speaker 1: once we have more facts, but it certainly does appear
• 24:33
  Speaker 1: to me as if ro Conna was making up or
• 24:36
  Speaker 1: exaggerating a story, much like Scott Jennings. I would put
• 24:39
  Speaker 1: both of those stories in similar categories. But I have
• 24:43
  Speaker 1: more skepticisms even about Conna's trip story than I do
• 24:47
  Speaker 1: about the depiction that Scott Jennings created of his call
• 24:51
  Speaker 1: with Mitch McConnell, especially since in the aftermath of that
• 24:55
  Speaker 1: we did get this photograph of Mitch McConnell, And it's
• 24:59
  Speaker 1: kind of a hilarious his photographed because McConnell's in a
• 25:02
  Speaker 1: hospital bed. He's clearly out of it, but they're trying
• 25:06
  Speaker 1: desperately to make him look as happy as they possibly can.
• 25:09
  Speaker 1: His wife is sitting next to him, and he's got
• 25:12
  Speaker 1: a copy of that day apparently that Day's Washington Post
• 25:17
  Speaker 1: on his lap, Like this is literally a proof of
• 25:19
  Speaker 1: life hostage photograph. I mean, that's what it's come to.
• 25:23
  Speaker 1: You have to show the newspaper to prove that you're
• 25:27
  Speaker 1: actually still alive. Well, I believe that he's still alive,
• 25:31
  Speaker 1: but I'm not bought buying the idea that he's fully
• 25:35
  Speaker 1: with it, because if he was fully with it, we
• 25:38
  Speaker 1: have these things called cell phones, and it's incredibly easy
• 25:42
  Speaker 1: to do a thirty second video saying, hey, everybody heard
• 25:46
  Speaker 1: about your concerns I'm going to be just fine. Just
• 25:49
  Speaker 1: give me a few more days and I'll be back
• 25:50
  Speaker 1: in a sentate. It's not difficult unless there's a bigger problem.
• 25:55
  Speaker 1: So I have no problem with those who are surmising
• 25:58
  Speaker 1: that Mitch McConnell is in far bigger trouble physically than
• 26:03
  Speaker 1: his office would like you to believe with that proof
• 26:06
  Speaker 1: of life photograph that they released, or with Scott Jennings
• 26:10
  Speaker 1: at the very least exaggeration, if not fabrication of the
• 26:13
  Speaker 1: phone call that they had just a few days ago.
• 26:17
  Speaker 1: But back to the issue of what impact this is
• 26:21
  Speaker 1: all going to have with the loss of Lindsay Graham
• 26:24
  Speaker 1: and apparently the looming loss of Mitch McConnell. The first
• 26:29
  Speaker 1: thing is confirming, judges. I mean, you lose, You're going
• 26:34
  Speaker 1: to lose two warriors right now, You've lost Mitch mcconnald's vote,
• 26:40
  Speaker 1: and you're soon going to I mean, he's not long
• 26:42
  Speaker 1: for this world. I have no idea. I mean, I've
• 26:44
  Speaker 1: said before people in this kind of situation can linger
• 26:47
  Speaker 1: for a very long time. But it seems pretty clear
• 26:49
  Speaker 1: Mitch McConnell is going to be gone soon. And when
• 26:53
  Speaker 1: you lose Lindsey Graham and Mitch McConnell in a very
• 26:56
  Speaker 1: short period of time. Again, I think I'm proved my
• 27:00
  Speaker 1: objectivity here because I have huge problems with some things
• 27:04
  Speaker 1: Lindsey Graham has done, and Mitch McConnell, I believe played
• 27:07
  Speaker 1: a very significant role in my life, for better for worse,
• 27:10
  Speaker 1: seemingly negative in the short run, and yet I have
• 27:14
  Speaker 1: great praise for both of them, especially when it comes
• 27:17
  Speaker 1: to the issue of judges, because without them, the our
• 27:22
  Speaker 1: situation with regard to the judiciary, both in the Supreme
• 27:25
  Speaker 1: Court as well as Circuit court judges, would be way,
• 27:29
  Speaker 1: way worse than it is today. And there's still a
• 27:32
  Speaker 1: lot of work to be done there. Because it looks
• 27:35
  Speaker 1: like you're not going to have the Senate majority for
• 27:37
  Speaker 1: much longer. It's quite possible that in the next next
• 27:42
  Speaker 1: session in twenty twenty seven, once the midterm elections are over,
• 27:47
  Speaker 1: that we're going to see a situation where Republicans may
• 27:49
  Speaker 1: only have forty nine or fifty votes, and a couple
• 27:52
  Speaker 1: of those are going to be very weak Republicans who
• 27:55
  Speaker 1: knows what Lisa Mkowski does so and it looks like
• 27:59
  Speaker 1: now Susan conn is going to hang on in Maine
• 28:01
  Speaker 1: thanks to the incompetence of Democrats. But the time's are wasted.
• 28:06
  Speaker 1: You've got to confirm as many of these judges as possible,
• 28:10
  Speaker 1: and so mcconnald's either got to get back on the
• 28:13
  Speaker 1: job or something's got to be done. But in the bigger,
• 28:18
  Speaker 1: bigger picture, the Senate has now lost an enormous force
• 28:26
  Speaker 1: in Lindsey Graham, and they're about to lose Mitch McConnell.
• 28:31
  Speaker 1: And effectively, the way I look at it is the
• 28:34
  Speaker 1: Senate in the is essentially losing a lot of institutional memory,
• 28:40
  Speaker 1: which I talk a lot about. I mean, once Graham
• 28:43
  Speaker 1: and McConnell are gone, think about all the history that
• 28:46
  Speaker 1: goes with them and all the knowledge that goes with them.
• 28:49
  Speaker 1: But losing Graham is like the Senate losing its pastor, right,
• 28:55
  Speaker 1: and losing McConnell will be like the Senate losing its accountant.
• 29:00
  Speaker 1: And you can't you know, if you're not the Senate's
• 29:03
  Speaker 1: of church. But if to use that analogy, you lose
• 29:06
  Speaker 1: your long time pastor, and you lose your forever and
• 29:10
  Speaker 1: ever accountant, You've lost a ton, including all sorts of
• 29:15
  Speaker 1: institutional memory and all sorts of knowledge and all sorts
• 29:19
  Speaker 1: of energy and how to get things done. So I
• 29:22
  Speaker 1: don't even know how you possibly replace that. But that's
• 29:25
  Speaker 1: essentially the situation where Republicans are in already, and that's
• 29:29
  Speaker 1: with Mitch McConnell seemingly at least technically alive. Now moving
• 29:34
  Speaker 1: on to other issues involving death in this very morbid
• 29:37
  Speaker 1: edition of the podcast, the preliminary hearing for the man
• 29:42
  Speaker 1: who assassinated Charlie Kirk, Tyler Robinson, occurred last week. Now,
• 29:48
  Speaker 1: I didn't really pay that much attention to any of
• 29:51
  Speaker 1: this leading up to it, because I already knew what
• 29:54
  Speaker 1: had happened. I mean, it was very clear that Tyler
• 29:58
  Speaker 1: Robinson was the person who killed Charlie Kirk, and it
• 30:02
  Speaker 1: was very clear to me that he did it at
• 30:04
  Speaker 1: least in part over the issue of transgenderism, and that
• 30:09
  Speaker 1: he was having this romantic relationship with a male that
• 30:14
  Speaker 1: was transgendering into a female, and there was a furry
• 30:19
  Speaker 1: element to this whole thing, and that was always just
• 30:23
  Speaker 1: very obvious. There was nothing really all that mysterious about it,
• 30:28
  Speaker 1: and so I never was all that interested, except for
• 30:30
  Speaker 1: the fact that I was hoping that Candace Owens would
• 30:34
  Speaker 1: be exposed as the fraud and an evil doer that
• 30:39
  Speaker 1: she is, and I was not disappointed. In fact, I
• 30:44
  Speaker 1: was almost overwhelmed by how much that happened and how
• 30:47
  Speaker 1: much the Internet, at least on X finally reacted in
• 30:52
  Speaker 1: very strongly rejecting the insanity of Candace Owens. Because Candis Owens,
• 30:58
  Speaker 1: almost from the beginning, has been trying to create desperately
• 31:02
  Speaker 1: this bizarre conspiracy theory. And I don't even call it
• 31:04
  Speaker 1: a conspiracy theory because she has no theory. I mean,
• 31:09
  Speaker 1: this is my number one rule for when it comes
• 31:12
  Speaker 1: to evaluating alternative theories or contrarian views of a topic
• 31:19
  Speaker 1: that is thought to be already well known. I'm very
• 31:23
  Speaker 1: open minded because I have a lot of contrarian theories
• 31:26
  Speaker 1: of my own. But guess what, they're fully formed theories
• 31:30
  Speaker 1: with alternative explanations in detail. And as always, doesn't even
• 31:34
  Speaker 1: try to do that. All she does is throw bullshit
• 31:38
  Speaker 1: up against the wall, most of it is revealed to
• 31:42
  Speaker 1: be complete bullshit and says, we don't know no, but
• 31:47
  Speaker 1: we know. Literally, that's all she ever does. We don't
• 31:50
  Speaker 1: know no, but we know no. You don't you don't
• 31:52
  Speaker 1: know shit. All you're doing is planting these tiny little
• 31:56
  Speaker 1: seeds poison in the rains of these fucking morons that
• 32:02
  Speaker 1: apparently are There are enough people that are in this
• 32:05
  Speaker 1: category to allow her show to be very popular and profitable.
• 32:10
  Speaker 1: That's the insanity of this. That's the real significance of
• 32:13
  Speaker 1: this is how many mentally ill people there are, seemingly
• 32:17
  Speaker 1: on the right, that are willing and able to consume
• 32:20
  Speaker 1: content that is based in absolute lunacy. Which is why
• 32:25
  Speaker 1: I call the Canics, Owens, Megan Kelly, and Tucker Carlson alliance,
• 32:31
  Speaker 1: the Alliance of lunacy. And I believe very strongly that
• 32:36
  Speaker 1: I have been one thousand percent vindicated in my description
• 32:40
  Speaker 1: of those three, if only because of what has happened
• 32:44
  Speaker 1: in the last week with this preliminary hearing, because the
• 32:47
  Speaker 1: evidence was beyond overwhelming, even more than I dreamed possible,
• 32:54
  Speaker 1: that Tyler Robinson was the person who pulled the trigger
• 32:58
  Speaker 1: and killed Charlie Kirk. There's literally, apparently, although it's not
• 33:03
  Speaker 1: been made public yet, there's apparently literally a video of
• 33:09
  Speaker 1: Tyler Robinson pulling the trigger, literally a video, And that's
• 33:15
  Speaker 1: just the tip of the iceberg. But I mean, you couldn't,
• 33:19
  Speaker 1: I mean, even Oj Simpson, if he was alive, would
• 33:21
  Speaker 1: be going Dan. There's a lot of evidence against Tyler Robinson.
• 33:25
  Speaker 1: This is the most overwhelmingly proven case that I can
• 33:29
  Speaker 1: even think of, and so all these conspiracy theories got
• 33:35
  Speaker 1: completely destroyed. It's very obvious we know what happened here.
• 33:41
  Speaker 1: If there's one downside to all of the very justified
• 33:47
  Speaker 1: dunking that happened on Candice Owens because he's been totally
• 33:53
  Speaker 1: wrong about this, I have one hundred percent applaud that.
• 33:55
  Speaker 1: But if there's one downside to it, it's that the
• 33:58
  Speaker 1: right is kind of lost the plot here. The plot
• 34:02
  Speaker 1: ought to be Charlie Kirk was assassinated because of his
• 34:07
  Speaker 1: view on transgenderism, a view that the vast majority of
• 34:13
  Speaker 1: the American people agree with. So from a political perspective,
• 34:18
  Speaker 1: I actually think that an opportunity is being lost here.
• 34:21
  Speaker 1: I don't think that that was the headline at all
• 34:23
  Speaker 1: from that preliminary hearing, even though it ought to be.
• 34:25
  Speaker 1: It's now as proven that that was the motive, as
• 34:29
  Speaker 1: it was proven that Tyler Robinson was the one that
• 34:32
  Speaker 1: committed the assassination. So that's my major criticism of the
• 34:38
  Speaker 1: right wing media. That kind of distracted themselves. And this
• 34:41
  Speaker 1: is the cost of having to put up with a
• 34:43
  Speaker 1: canvass Owens, because first of all, it makes you look
• 34:46
  Speaker 1: bad as a right winger, but also because you end
• 34:50
  Speaker 1: up having to spend so much time and attention and
• 34:54
  Speaker 1: energy debunking her bullshit that the biggest point of the
• 34:58
  Speaker 1: whole thing gets lost. But the person who was most
• 35:03
  Speaker 1: fascinating in their reaction to Candice Owens being exposed as
• 35:07
  Speaker 1: the total and complete fraud that she is was Megan Kelly.
• 35:11
  Speaker 1: And as you know, I've been a long time critic
• 35:14
  Speaker 1: of Megan Kelly because from a long time ago, long
• 35:19
  Speaker 1: time ago, for years and years, I've been saying she
• 35:23
  Speaker 1: is a sheep shifter, she is not to be trusted.
• 35:26
  Speaker 1: She will become whatever she perceives to be in her
• 35:30
  Speaker 1: self interest at that moment. And I think I've been
• 35:33
  Speaker 1: as vindicated on Megan Kelly as I was on Candis
• 35:37
  Speaker 1: Owens or Tucker Carlson. I mean, this couldn't have all
• 35:41
  Speaker 1: turned out anymore perfectly if I was concerned overwhelmingly, which
• 35:46
  Speaker 1: I'm really not about being vindicated. I'm more concerned about
• 35:49
  Speaker 1: trying to correct this fucking problem that the conservative media
• 35:52
  Speaker 1: industrial complex has, where these frauds and charlatans and scam
• 35:58
  Speaker 1: artists and grifters are dominating the entire industry to a
• 36:05
  Speaker 1: great negative impact, which has been proven in this entire
• 36:10
  Speaker 1: Charlie Kirk assassination thing. I mean, for no other reason
• 36:14
  Speaker 1: then Erica Kirk, this grieving widow who I have problems
• 36:19
  Speaker 1: with because I think she's a little bit weird, but
• 36:20
  Speaker 1: she in no way, shape or form deserves the attacks
• 36:23
  Speaker 1: that she's been getting, is somehow being in on either
• 36:27
  Speaker 1: the assassination itself or the cover up of this assassination.
• 36:31
  Speaker 1: I mean, that's just one element of all the harm
• 36:34
  Speaker 1: that Candace Owens has created and Megan Kelly has enabled.
• 36:39
  Speaker 1: We remember Megan Kelly, when interviewing Ben Shapiro at a
• 36:44
  Speaker 1: public event, denied Candace Owens had been doing this about
• 36:49
  Speaker 1: Erica Kirk, and then later cowardly called Ben Shapiro effectively
• 36:55
  Speaker 1: a liar for making an absolutely accurate claim. And it's
• 37:01
  Speaker 1: been absolutely baffling, even for me as someone who's a
• 37:05
  Speaker 1: critic of Megan Kelly. And again, to be clear, I
• 37:08
  Speaker 1: have an incentive to like Megan Kelly. I think she's smart,
• 37:11
  Speaker 1: she's attractive, she could be funny. I had a professional
• 37:15
  Speaker 1: relationship with her lawyer, Brian Freeman, who, by the way,
• 37:18
  Speaker 1: I have communicated with recently about Megan Kelly, which has
• 37:22
  Speaker 1: been kind of interesting that he responded to me because
• 37:25
  Speaker 1: he hadn't been doing that for quite a while. I
• 37:28
  Speaker 1: was along with Megan Kelly on Fox News Channel at
• 37:30
  Speaker 1: least once or twice that we had good exchanges. So
• 37:33
  Speaker 1: I don't have anything out against her. I'm just telling
• 37:36
  Speaker 1: you what the truth is, and she's not to be trusted,
• 37:40
  Speaker 1: and I don't fully understand why she has been in
• 37:44
  Speaker 1: the tank for Candice Owens. But being in the tank
• 37:49
  Speaker 1: you would think would end at this point because at
• 37:52
  Speaker 1: this point, you would think, based upon what we know,
• 37:55
  Speaker 1: that Megan would realize it's no longer in her self
• 37:58
  Speaker 1: interest to be protecting Candace. But that's not what's happened.
• 38:02
  Speaker 1: In fact, within one day during this preliminary hearing, Megan
• 38:08
  Speaker 1: Kelly went on her show and emphatically said, Okay, the
• 38:12
  Speaker 1: conspiracy theories are bull crap. It's time for the conspiracy
• 38:16
  Speaker 1: theorists to put up or shut up. She doesn't mention
• 38:19
  Speaker 1: Candace Owen's name, but it's obvious that she has to
• 38:23
  Speaker 1: be at least in some way, shape or form referencing
• 38:25
  Speaker 1: Candace Owens. She does not say her name. So that
• 38:29
  Speaker 1: happened on one day. The very next day, she's interviewing
• 38:35
  Speaker 1: two guys, two lawyers, Mark Murphy and Mark Gargos. Now
• 38:39
  Speaker 1: I don't like Mark Arragos at all. I kind of
• 38:42
  Speaker 1: like Mark Murphy. He's a smart guy, former Orange County prosecutor.
• 38:47
  Speaker 1: He's on ABC a lot. I thought, I mean, maybe
• 38:51
  Speaker 1: this is still the case that he was actually working
• 38:55
  Speaker 1: with Megan Kelly. But I have my doubts about that,
• 38:59
  Speaker 1: because he was very open about how strange it was
• 39:04
  Speaker 1: that he thought how strange it was listening to Megan
• 39:08
  Speaker 1: Kelly's monologue where she effectively was, for intens and purposes
• 39:13
  Speaker 1: afraid to attack Candace Owens. And this exchange is really amazing.
• 39:18
  Speaker 1: It's about three minutes long. It's mostly between Megan Kelly
• 39:22
  Speaker 1: and Mark Murphy, the guy I just referenced, where Mark
• 39:25
  Speaker 1: Murphy is laying out the obvious case that Candice Owens
• 39:31
  Speaker 1: is completely batshit crazy on this, and Megan Kelly still
• 39:38
  Speaker 1: still even as she sees the Internet dunking all over
• 39:43
  Speaker 1: Candace Owens and the entire facade finally totally and completely
• 39:49
  Speaker 1: indefensively frumbling that she is still defending Candace Owens, claiming
• 39:56
  Speaker 1: somehow that Candas is a good faith actor, which is ridiculous, ridiculous,
• 40:04
  Speaker 1: and then still desperately grasping it some sort of evidentiary
• 40:09
  Speaker 1: basis for an allegation that Israel might have been behind
• 40:14
  Speaker 1: the assassination, when she's already admitted that Tyler Robinson is
• 40:18
  Speaker 1: the one that did it. And here is what that
• 40:21
  Speaker 1: exchange sounded like. I'm Megan Kelly's on own show.
• 40:25
  Speaker 4: I've seen some insane things on the Internet, mostly championed
• 40:28
  Speaker 4: by Candace Owns that are It is so looney tinfoil
• 40:35
  Speaker 4: hat out there, and I think that's hard on the
• 40:38
  Speaker 4: victim's family. So I also want to commend the prosecution
• 40:41
  Speaker 4: for going through this even though it's five days, because
• 40:45
  Speaker 4: it really does change the public discourse on it. We're
• 40:47
  Speaker 4: about to separate those that are open minded to other
• 40:50
  Speaker 4: defense theories from the actual lunatics.
• 40:55
  Speaker 5: I mean, I don't agree with Kandace's theory of this case,
• 40:57
  Speaker 5: but I have to say I genuine believe she was
• 41:00
  Speaker 5: traumatized by watching her friend die. I can relate to it,
• 41:05
  Speaker 5: and I think she's in earnest and I think she
• 41:08
  Speaker 5: she distrusts authority. I don't agree with her, again, Matt,
• 41:11
  Speaker 5: but I just like and I know people have very
• 41:14
  Speaker 5: strong feelings about her. I just I think she's in
• 41:18
  Speaker 5: her own search for what she believes happened here, and
• 41:22
  Speaker 5: she has zero trust in official words on anything she's made.
• 41:26
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I'm not quite. She's making her for Erica Kirk
• 41:30
  Speaker 1: and the entire Kirk family.
• 41:31
  Speaker 4: She's also making things harder on the prosecution and I
• 41:34
  Speaker 4: and look, I don't know her. I've never appeared in
• 41:36
  Speaker 4: front of her. I got nothing against her, I got
• 41:38
  Speaker 4: no ax to grind. But she's she is making things
• 41:41
  Speaker 4: harder for the good guys on this. And Erica Kirk
• 41:45
  Speaker 4: asked her to stop with the stuff, and she said
• 41:48
  Speaker 4: she would, and then Erica Kirk asked her, I think twice,
• 41:51
  Speaker 4: and she's continued. She's she's quadrupled down on it, and
• 41:57
  Speaker 4: she sounds insane to me. And again, I don't know her.
• 41:59
  Speaker 4: I would I would debate her at any time on
• 42:02
  Speaker 4: some of this stuff because it's insane. Like the Israel
• 42:05
  Speaker 4: didn't kill Charlie Kirk, Sorry, they just didn't. This is
• 42:08
  Speaker 4: this is this is a murder case. It's a death
• 42:11
  Speaker 4: penalty case. This is what they look like.
• 42:13
  Speaker 1: This is what killers sound like.
• 42:15
  Speaker 4: This is how these things actually occur in reality.
• 42:20
  Speaker 5: Yeah, I me, if we're going to go down this lane,
• 42:22
  Speaker 5: then we can go down this lane. Because it was
• 42:25
  Speaker 5: Andrew Colvett of Turning Point who turned over to the
• 42:28
  Speaker 5: FBI Charlie's criticisms of his Jewish donors and his threats
• 42:34
  Speaker 5: to leave the pro Israel cause right before he was murdered.
• 42:38
  Speaker 1: That was Turning Point.
• 42:39
  Speaker 5: And I love Andrew Colvett, and he did that because
• 42:41
  Speaker 5: he's an honest guy. And he said, you know what,
• 42:43
  Speaker 5: they should investigate everything. They should investigate who else had
• 42:48
  Speaker 5: an ax to grind with Charlie and who else might
• 42:50
  Speaker 5: be motivated.
• 42:51
  Speaker 1: He's not some.
• 42:52
  Speaker 5: Conspiracy theorist like I was told this myself, and it's
• 42:57
  Speaker 5: been now been reported by her and others that there
• 43:00
  Speaker 5: were at least eleven there's a difference in eleven versus fourteen.
• 43:04
  Speaker 5: Israel Only cell phones on the campus of UVU that day,
• 43:07
  Speaker 5: like not from Israeli citizens. In other words, open accounts
• 43:11
  Speaker 5: open in Israel. And the NSA knew that shit within
• 43:14
  Speaker 5: two minutes because they lock those scenes down and they
• 43:16
  Speaker 5: can tell you exactly what cell phones were. Unseceene, you
• 43:18
  Speaker 5: should not be saying to her or anybody else, you're
• 43:21
  Speaker 5: not allowed to ask that question. And it doesn't necessarily
• 43:24
  Speaker 5: make them a nutcase to not trust the official government narrative.
• 43:29
  Speaker 1: To me, that exchange is absolutely amazing and definitely worth
• 43:34
  Speaker 1: all three minutes to be played on the Death of
• 43:36
  Speaker 1: Journalism podcasts. I honestly do not have a specific explanation
• 43:43
  Speaker 1: for what's going on there with regard to Megan Kelly
• 43:47
  Speaker 1: and her defense of Candice Owens and her unwillingness to
• 43:52
  Speaker 1: criticize her, I don't get it. I'm always of the
• 43:57
  Speaker 1: belief in these situations that the simplest explanation is ego
• 44:03
  Speaker 1: and celebrity. And Megan has dug herself too deep a
• 44:09
  Speaker 1: hole and doesn't want to admit that she was wrong,
• 44:11
  Speaker 1: and now she's desperately trying to come up with some
• 44:14
  Speaker 1: way to rationalize it. But that doesn't fully explain it
• 44:18
  Speaker 1: to me. It's unsatisfying to me, so I'm open to
• 44:21
  Speaker 1: other explanations. I don't have a great explanation in totality,
• 44:26
  Speaker 1: but what I am positive of is, once again I
• 44:31
  Speaker 1: called it when it came to the alliance of lunacy.
• 44:34
  Speaker 1: Cana Owens, Megan Kelly, and Tucker Carlson are the Alliance
• 44:39
  Speaker 1: of lunacy. I was the first one to call it out,
• 44:43
  Speaker 1: and I have been one thousand percent vindicated. I am
• 44:48
  Speaker 1: not perfect. I'm wrong a lot of times, mostly about
• 44:52
  Speaker 1: what will happen in the future. But when it comes
• 44:54
  Speaker 1: to figuring out what has happened in the past, and
• 44:57
  Speaker 1: when it comes to telling you who the good guys
• 44:59
  Speaker 1: and the bad guys are, my batting average is as
• 45:03
  Speaker 1: good as it gets. And I say that with great
• 45:05
  Speaker 1: humility and objectivity. I do have to say that I
• 45:10
  Speaker 1: took great pleasure in the way that the right completely
• 45:14
  Speaker 1: turned on Candae Owens, at least on X And I
• 45:18
  Speaker 1: also got a lot of enjoyment over Ben Shapiro dunking
• 45:23
  Speaker 1: harder online on Candace Owens than any short Jewish guy
• 45:27
  Speaker 1: has ever dunked on anyone in the history of man.
• 45:31
  Speaker 1: Because he deserves it, because he was right. I mean, now,
• 45:35
  Speaker 1: to be clear, he deserves some blame in all this,
• 45:37
  Speaker 1: because without Ben Shapiro there is no Candas Owens. He's
• 45:40
  Speaker 1: the one that made her a star. But he did
• 45:43
  Speaker 1: eventually get rid of her. I wish he'd be a
• 45:45
  Speaker 1: little bit more aggressive against Megan Kelly, because Megan Kelly's
• 45:48
  Speaker 1: the one that called him a liar for telling the truth.
• 45:53
  Speaker 1: But good on Ben Shapiro. Ben Shapiro ends up being
• 45:57
  Speaker 1: the victor here, and obviously Candas Owens, at least in perception,
• 46:02
  Speaker 1: is the loser. Now. I have no way of knowing
• 46:05
  Speaker 1: how much of any of her Looney Tunes base is
• 46:08
  Speaker 1: abandoning her. See that's part of the problem here with
• 46:11
  Speaker 1: regard to the business model. It doesn't matter what the
• 46:15
  Speaker 1: mainstream thinks of you if you hold on to your cult,
• 46:20
  Speaker 1: and there's a reasonable chance that that happens, because that's
• 46:24
  Speaker 1: all part of the conspiracy narrative, right. The reason why
• 46:27
  Speaker 1: they're attacking me so much is that I'm right, you
• 46:31
  Speaker 1: can't lose as a conspiracy theorist, and in fact, the
• 46:34
  Speaker 1: lack of evidence of your conspiracy is sometimes evidence of
• 46:37
  Speaker 1: your conspiracy. In this crazy worldview that they have, they
• 46:42
  Speaker 1: can't lose heads I win, tails, you lose. That's effectively
• 46:47
  Speaker 1: the way that a conspiracy theorist grifter works, and Candace
• 46:52
  Speaker 1: is seemingly very good at that. So I'm not convinced
• 46:55
  Speaker 1: that this is the end of candas Owens as a
• 46:58
  Speaker 1: commercial entity, but it was still nice to see most people,
• 47:03
  Speaker 1: at least most reasonable people, finally realizing, Okay, wait a minute,
• 47:07
  Speaker 1: this was a scab, this was not based in truth,
• 47:09
  Speaker 1: and what we thought we knew all the time is
• 47:11
  Speaker 1: actually the truth. Shockingly. So I do want to mention
• 47:15
  Speaker 1: one other element of the Tyler Robinson preliminary hearing. And
• 47:19
  Speaker 1: I've gone through this before, so I'm not going to
• 47:21
  Speaker 1: go into detail, but it's just so striking to me
• 47:23
  Speaker 1: that I'm literally the only person that I'm aware of
• 47:26
  Speaker 1: and I've searched on the planet that has connected some
• 47:31
  Speaker 1: of the elements of the Charlie Kirk assassination to the
• 47:34
  Speaker 1: JFK assassination. Interestingly, there's a pretty strong connection ballistically and
• 47:40
  Speaker 1: logistically to the Martin Luther King Junior assassination too, because
• 47:45
  Speaker 1: in both the Kirk assassination and the MLK assassination, very
• 47:50
  Speaker 1: similar guns and ammunition that hit MLK and Charlie Kirk
• 47:55
  Speaker 1: and almost not exact, but very similar areas of the neck,
• 48:00
  Speaker 1: and in neither situation was there an exit wound. Now,
• 48:04
  Speaker 1: there wasn't an exit wound because those bullets in part
• 48:08
  Speaker 1: hit the spinal column and that's what stopped and fragmented
• 48:12
  Speaker 1: the bullet. But that to me ought to at least
• 48:15
  Speaker 1: get some people to question, Okay, so what other high
• 48:19
  Speaker 1: profile shooting in history do we have with a very
• 48:25
  Speaker 1: similar rifle, similar ammunition, similar angle, similar distance, where someone
• 48:31
  Speaker 1: was supposedly shot in the neck. And that, of course
• 48:35
  Speaker 1: is the jfk assassination. And I am more convinced than
• 48:38
  Speaker 1: ever that just the video of Charlie Kirk's assassination, which
• 48:43
  Speaker 1: is horrific, basically completely disproves the single bullet theory almost
• 48:49
  Speaker 1: on its own. And I'm actually kicking myself. This is
• 48:52
  Speaker 1: a little bit weirdly, a little bit like the date
• 48:55
  Speaker 1: issue in the for the mcquery episode in the said
• 48:58
  Speaker 1: dusky case, I'm actually kicking myself for not thinking about
• 49:02
  Speaker 1: this way sooner and not figuring this all out. But
• 49:05
  Speaker 1: I mean, the human neck is full of veins and arteries.
• 49:10
  Speaker 1: It's just ludicrous, ludicrous that JK could have been hit
• 49:15
  Speaker 1: through the neck and it can't hit any bones because
• 49:18
  Speaker 1: he didn't have any damage to his spinal column and
• 49:21
  Speaker 1: come through a minuscule little hole in the front of
• 49:24
  Speaker 1: his throat, which I believe is a red herring that
• 49:27
  Speaker 1: came from the third shot and was later used as
• 49:30
  Speaker 1: a tracheotomy at Parkland Hospital. But it's just ludicrous that
• 49:33
  Speaker 1: that could happen, and they're not being massive amounts of
• 49:37
  Speaker 1: blood everywhere. But there was nothing, nothing, because that's not
• 49:42
  Speaker 1: what happened. What happened was that the bullet hit jfk
• 49:45
  Speaker 1: in the back and fell out. Was found by the
• 49:48
  Speaker 1: Secret Service agent Paul Landers, who just a few years
• 49:51
  Speaker 1: ago wrote a book about that with his startling revelation
• 49:54
  Speaker 1: which fit exactly with my theory that I've been positing
• 49:57
  Speaker 1: for many decades. And there's another element about the Kirk
• 50:01
  Speaker 1: assassination with regard to the bullet fragmenting and the fact
• 50:05
  Speaker 1: that this ammunition was unbonded and that that's partially why
• 50:11
  Speaker 1: there was no exit wound and why the bullet just
• 50:13
  Speaker 1: broke apart once it hit Charlie Kirk's spinal column. Because
• 50:17
  Speaker 1: this has been a big part of Candice Owen's conspiracy
• 50:20
  Speaker 1: quote unquote theory, and it's very easily explained if you
• 50:25
  Speaker 1: understand the nature of unbonded ammunition. Well, Oswald's ammunition well different,
• 50:32
  Speaker 1: very similar rifle, very similar distance very similar angle, although
• 50:36
  Speaker 1: from the opposite direction was also unbonded, which explains I
• 50:43
  Speaker 1: believe what may have happened with Connolly and the shots
• 50:46
  Speaker 1: hitting connall, the second shot hitting Connolly in the back,
• 50:50
  Speaker 1: hitting bones there, coming out of his chest, going through
• 50:54
  Speaker 1: one portion of his wrist, going out another portion of
• 50:57
  Speaker 1: his wrist, hitting bones there, and then eventually lodging into
• 51:01
  Speaker 1: his thigh and never being found in full well. The
• 51:07
  Speaker 1: only real flaw in my theory is I effectively don't
• 51:11
  Speaker 1: have a third bullet. I'm missing a bullet. Of course,
• 51:15
  Speaker 1: so is the warrants. Shit, they're missing a third bullet too,
• 51:19
  Speaker 1: And they came up with some klockamani theory about James
• 51:22
  Speaker 1: Tig being hit by the first shot that missed and
• 51:26
  Speaker 1: hit the pavement and then somehow magically hit him where
• 51:30
  Speaker 1: he wasn't even ever anywhere near the pavement. He was
• 51:32
  Speaker 1: at the underpass, which is much closer to where JFK
• 51:36
  Speaker 1: was shot with the third shot, And it's very clear
• 51:39
  Speaker 1: to me, I mean, I've watched interviews with Tige. He
• 51:42
  Speaker 1: describes himself as being very mildly injured by what he
• 51:45
  Speaker 1: described as a splatter or a spray actually spray. He say,
• 51:49
  Speaker 1: uses the word spray spray. Does that not sound like
• 51:54
  Speaker 1: what would have happened if you got hit by the
• 51:57
  Speaker 1: debris from the head shot from JFK which was wake
• 52:00
  Speaker 1: to where he was standing. That's to me what happened
• 52:03
  Speaker 1: with James Tige. But the point is I have a
• 52:06
  Speaker 1: third shot or a third bullet problem, and the fragmentation
• 52:10
  Speaker 1: issue of an unbonded piece of ammunition hitting Connolly in
• 52:14
  Speaker 1: various different places and all sorts of different bones, I
• 52:17
  Speaker 1: think goes a long way and at least potentially explaining
• 52:21
  Speaker 1: that problem. But it's just more importantly, it's almost more
• 52:24
  Speaker 1: important than whether or not I'm right that my theory
• 52:27
  Speaker 1: on JK is vindicated by some of the things we've
• 52:29
  Speaker 1: learned with regard to the tragedy that occurred to Charlie Kirk.
• 52:33
  Speaker 1: Actually are more outraged and more astonished that nobody even
• 52:38
  Speaker 1: bothers to make the connection. We don't have many videos
• 52:43
  Speaker 1: of someone being shot in under these circumstances, and so
• 52:48
  Speaker 1: when you look at what the horrible thing that happened
• 52:51
  Speaker 1: to Charlie Kirk, you go, if you're open minded, then
• 52:53
  Speaker 1: you have a half a brain, You go, wait a minute,
• 52:56
  Speaker 1: how does that make any sense? Visit VJFK and his assassination.
• 53:01
  Speaker 1: But nobody, nobody, literally nobody other than myself has even
• 53:05
  Speaker 1: mentioned this remarkably. I want to do a couple of
• 53:09
  Speaker 1: updates on stories we've talked about in the past very quickly.
• 53:13
  Speaker 1: Of course, the liberal media is taking no accountability for
• 53:16
  Speaker 1: how they blew the Grand Platner situation in Maine, specifically
• 53:20
  Speaker 1: the New York Times. The New York Times deserves all
• 53:22
  Speaker 1: sorts of scorn and criticism for what they did, effectively
• 53:26
  Speaker 1: doing a catch and kill on a woman by the
• 53:29
  Speaker 1: name of Lindsay for Field, who they did not believe.
• 53:33
  Speaker 1: The New York Times did because they said they couldn't
• 53:35
  Speaker 1: confirm her evidence and her sourcing. The problem for them
• 53:40
  Speaker 1: was she was a Republican or as a Republican, and
• 53:42
  Speaker 1: at that time they were still trying to defend Graham
• 53:45
  Speaker 1: Platner because they thought he could win a Senate seat
• 53:46
  Speaker 1: for Democrats in Maine. Well, this catch and kill, which
• 53:51
  Speaker 1: the Field immediately objected about when the New York Times
• 53:54
  Speaker 1: story came out, got blown up when it turned out
• 53:57
  Speaker 1: that at least one Democrat came forward with a very
• 54:01
  Speaker 1: similar allegation Now, to be clear, I want to make
• 54:04
  Speaker 1: this very clear. I don't see any evidence the Graham
• 54:07
  Speaker 1: Platner committed a clearly criminal act of rape. But that's
• 54:12
  Speaker 1: not the standard for being a nominee for US Senate
• 54:16
  Speaker 1: and Maine. It shouldn't be, and it isn't, especially if
• 54:19
  Speaker 1: you're going to be remotely consistent as a liberal Democrat.
• 54:23
  Speaker 1: Of course, there is no consistency. Hypocrisy is everywhere, but
• 54:25
  Speaker 1: that's another story for another day. The point here is
• 54:29
  Speaker 1: that The New York Times got exposed as really being
• 54:32
  Speaker 1: remarkably hypocritical on the issue of sex abuse against women,
• 54:37
  Speaker 1: and also when it came to the issue of protecting
• 54:40
  Speaker 1: a Democrat and not believing this woman who clearly was
• 54:43
  Speaker 1: telling the truth. And we now know she was telling
• 54:46
  Speaker 1: the truth, not just because of other women coming forward
• 54:49
  Speaker 1: saying the same thing. But CNN decided to do what
• 54:53
  Speaker 1: the New York Times said they didn't do or couldn't do,
• 54:56
  Speaker 1: and they verified the information that Field provided to The
• 55:01
  Speaker 1: New York Times, and they reported that publicly. So better
• 55:04
  Speaker 1: late than never. Good on CNN for doing that. But
• 55:07
  Speaker 1: The New York Times has not taken any real responsibility
• 55:11
  Speaker 1: for what they did in the whole Grand Platiner scandal,
• 55:14
  Speaker 1: and it really is a media scandal. It's a Democrat scandal,
• 55:17
  Speaker 1: it's obviously a Grand Platner scandal, but it's also a
• 55:20
  Speaker 1: media scandal as much as anything else. Also an update
• 55:25
  Speaker 1: on what's going on with the proposed merger between Paramount
• 55:30
  Speaker 1: and Warner Brothers Discovery. We discussed this quite a bit
• 55:34
  Speaker 1: from a number of different respectives, including the standpoint that
• 55:38
  Speaker 1: for years I was being misled that that might have
• 55:43
  Speaker 1: before that actually happened, that that might actually involve me
• 55:45
  Speaker 1: getting a job at CNN, which I never fully believed
• 55:48
  Speaker 1: and now believe was some sort of a bizarre, nonsensical
• 55:52
  Speaker 1: scam that I'll probably never understand. But the merger, as
• 55:57
  Speaker 1: it has happened, or is allegedly happening, is something that
• 56:00
  Speaker 1: the Bush administration has been seemingly in favor of because
• 56:04
  Speaker 1: the Ellison family has been playing ball with Trump, and
• 56:08
  Speaker 1: there is at least a perception I think it's overblown
• 56:11
  Speaker 1: that somehow the Ellison family wants, you know, Paramount and
• 56:14
  Speaker 1: CBS and CNN to be more right wing. I don't
• 56:18
  Speaker 1: believe that. I think they're just playing a game with Trump.
• 56:21
  Speaker 1: Maybe they want to be more middle of the road.
• 56:22
  Speaker 1: That's fine, but liberals are freaking out about this because
• 56:26
  Speaker 1: they think that somehow CBS and c and N are
• 56:30
  Speaker 1: going to become like Fox News Channel. I don't believe
• 56:32
  Speaker 1: that at all. Well, in the last ditch effort to
• 56:35
  Speaker 1: try to stave off this massive merger between Paramount and
• 56:40
  Speaker 1: Warner Brothers Discovery, twelve different democratically controlled states and their
• 56:45
  Speaker 1: attorney generals. Attorneys general have filed a lawsuit effectively to
• 56:53
  Speaker 1: try to stop this, and spearheading the effort is the
• 56:56
  Speaker 1: state of California, of course, because when anything from the
• 57:00
  Speaker 1: loony left happens, it's got to have a California connection,
• 57:04
  Speaker 1: and so California is leading the way to on a
• 57:07
  Speaker 1: state level try to prevent this merger between Paramount and
• 57:11
  Speaker 1: Warner Brothers Discovery, which would have massive implications. If it happens,
• 57:15
  Speaker 1: it's gonna have massive implications on all elements of our media, entertainment, television, movies,
• 57:21
  Speaker 1: and obviously news media with regard to CBS News and CNN.
• 57:27
  Speaker 1: If it doesn't happen, it's going to have a massive
• 57:29
  Speaker 1: implication as well, because Paramount is now threatening to leave
• 57:35
  Speaker 1: California if this merger is blocked and if that happens, wow.
• 57:43
  Speaker 1: Now I don't know about the logistics of how realistic
• 57:46
  Speaker 1: that threat is, but we've seen other companies do the
• 57:49
  Speaker 1: same thing, and in this day and age, I don't
• 57:53
  Speaker 1: think it's impossible. You would have said this twenty years ago,
• 57:58
  Speaker 1: said that's not possible because there's too much infrastructure in
• 58:00
  Speaker 1: Los Angeles. There's too much that's done in Los Angeles.
• 58:03
  Speaker 1: Los Angeles is still too integral to the entire movie
• 58:06
  Speaker 1: and television making business. The studio space is all here.
• 58:11
  Speaker 1: Almost all of that has changed, and so logistically, I
• 58:15
  Speaker 1: think it is actually far, far easier for Paramount to
• 58:19
  Speaker 1: actually move out of California than it would have been previously.
• 58:23
  Speaker 1: And if they do that, California would lose a significant
• 58:27
  Speaker 1: number of jobs and a massive amount of tax money.
• 58:32
  Speaker 1: California doesn't seem to care about that, because California only
• 58:35
  Speaker 1: seems to care about promoting left wing politics. And this
• 58:40
  Speaker 1: merger is seen as bad on the leaf because of
• 58:43
  Speaker 1: what I just discussed regarding CBS News and CNN. I
• 58:47
  Speaker 1: have no idea whether or not this merger should be
• 58:51
  Speaker 1: legal or not. I really don't. I think I've seen
• 58:53
  Speaker 1: good arguments on both sides. I'm actually mildly in favor
• 58:59
  Speaker 1: of the merger, not just because I think it's possible
• 59:01
  Speaker 1: that it might bring CBS and CNN more to the center,
• 59:05
  Speaker 1: which I think would be generally a good thing, at
• 59:07
  Speaker 1: least in the short run, but I actually do believe
• 59:10
  Speaker 1: that it's the least bad of the current options. With
• 59:15
  Speaker 1: regard to trying to save Hollywood and to try to
• 59:17
  Speaker 1: save television and try to save movies. I would rather
• 59:21
  Speaker 1: Paramount be in charge of that than, for instance, Netflix.
• 59:25
  Speaker 1: I always talk about institutional memory. There's at least some
• 59:28
  Speaker 1: institutional memory still at Paramount regarding the way things used
• 59:33
  Speaker 1: to be, and there's none of that at Netflix. And
• 59:37
  Speaker 1: so while it probably doesn't have nearly the power that
• 59:39
  Speaker 1: it used to, I'll take a Paramount Warner Brothers Discovery
• 59:44
  Speaker 1: merger that stays in Los Angeles above some of these
• 59:47
  Speaker 1: other options that would occur, especially if the merger gets blocked,
• 59:51
  Speaker 1: and especially if Paramount does in fact follow through on
• 59:54
  Speaker 1: their threat to leave California. My sense is that that's
• 59:58
  Speaker 1: probably a bluff, But stranger things have happened, that's for sure.
• 1:00:03
  Speaker 1: Real quick on the World Cup Soccer tournament, as of
• 1:00:06
  Speaker 1: this taping, the semi finals have not yet happened, but
• 1:00:10
  Speaker 1: I am just really struck. And I know I talked
• 1:00:12
  Speaker 1: about this in the last episode of the podcast, so
• 1:00:13
  Speaker 1: I'm not going to blabor the point. I am really
• 1:00:16
  Speaker 1: struck by just how much even the World Cup has
• 1:00:21
  Speaker 1: allowed video replay to take over the very essence of
• 1:00:25
  Speaker 1: the game. And this really scares me, not just from
• 1:00:30
  Speaker 1: a sports perspective, because I think this has been a
• 1:00:32
  Speaker 1: rotten deal that has been made by sports fans, are
• 1:00:36
  Speaker 1: basically made by the associations that run sports on behalf
• 1:00:40
  Speaker 1: of sports fans, where we're going to decide we're going
• 1:00:42
  Speaker 1: to get everything absolutely right, even to the most ridiculous degree,
• 1:00:48
  Speaker 1: even if it means that the ball can sense the
• 1:00:51
  Speaker 1: brushing of somebody's hair that the human eye can't even see,
• 1:00:56
  Speaker 1: and it causes a key goal to be disallowed. And
• 1:00:59
  Speaker 1: yet somehow the same ball may or may not have
• 1:01:02
  Speaker 1: been able to sense hitting a wire in the England
• 1:01:06
  Speaker 1: versus Norway game. There's debate over what happened there, but
• 1:01:09
  Speaker 1: the video replay did not trigger a cancelation of that goal.
• 1:01:15
  Speaker 1: I'm not even not worried about. You know, which goals
• 1:01:18
  Speaker 1: are correct and which you're not to me, the worst
• 1:01:21
  Speaker 1: part of this. It's the killing of the joy. And soccer,
• 1:01:25
  Speaker 1: more than any of the sport, is defined by the
• 1:01:28
  Speaker 1: joy that occurs two or three, maybe four times in
• 1:01:33
  Speaker 1: a game where a goal is scored. But now it's
• 1:01:37
  Speaker 1: literally part of the process that you have to reserve
• 1:01:41
  Speaker 1: your reaction. You almost can't, under any circumstances fully react
• 1:01:46
  Speaker 1: to a goal because there's a darn good chance it's
• 1:01:48
  Speaker 1: going to get overturned. And oh, by the way, it's
• 1:01:52
  Speaker 1: the opposite direction too. You don't necessarily feel heartbroken if
• 1:01:57
  Speaker 1: your team is tied one to one with a couple
• 1:01:59
  Speaker 1: of minutes left to go in the game and the
• 1:02:01
  Speaker 1: other team scores, because there's at least a chance it
• 1:02:03
  Speaker 1: might get overturned, which I mean, not just to me,
• 1:02:08
  Speaker 1: kills the essence of sports. And everyone seems to be
• 1:02:12
  Speaker 1: or almost everyone seems to be okay with this. I
• 1:02:15
  Speaker 1: just don't get it. I see so many problems with this.
• 1:02:20
  Speaker 1: And you know, it's interesting to me that in one
• 1:02:22
  Speaker 1: of the semi finals it's going to be England versus
• 1:02:24
  Speaker 1: Argentina and maybe the most famous moment in modern World
• 1:02:29
  Speaker 1: Cup history occurred in a game between Argentina and England
• 1:02:33
  Speaker 1: where Diego Maradona scored the famous hand of God goal
• 1:02:38
  Speaker 1: where he clearly committed a foul with his hands and
• 1:02:43
  Speaker 1: scored a key goal to beat England and the referees
• 1:02:48
  Speaker 1: blew the call. Now, was it wrong that they didn't
• 1:02:52
  Speaker 1: get the call right? Yeah? But in the long run,
• 1:02:57
  Speaker 1: was it really the worst thing that ever happened? Because
• 1:02:59
  Speaker 1: it's an icon play, it's maybe the most famous play
• 1:03:03
  Speaker 1: in the history of the World Cup. It helped make
• 1:03:06
  Speaker 1: Maridona a legend. And so there are more important things
• 1:03:10
  Speaker 1: sometimes than getting everything exactly right. And the human element,
• 1:03:14
  Speaker 1: to me, has always been an important part of sports.
• 1:03:17
  Speaker 1: And I will say it one more time because I
• 1:03:19
  Speaker 1: went through this with regard to baseball, and it's not
• 1:03:21
  Speaker 1: as big a deal in soccer because being as soccer
• 1:03:23
  Speaker 1: rep is not nearly as taxing as being a homeplate umpire,
• 1:03:27
  Speaker 1: which is extremely physically and sometimes psychologically taxing. But how
• 1:03:31
  Speaker 1: in the world, if we're going to live in this
• 1:03:33
  Speaker 1: new universe, how in the world are we going to
• 1:03:37
  Speaker 1: get decent referees to be referees. Because you get all
• 1:03:40
  Speaker 1: of the negatives and none of the positives, you have
• 1:03:44
  Speaker 1: no power anymore, no real influence no prestige. All you
• 1:03:47
  Speaker 1: do is get negative feedback, and now you're refereeing defensively
• 1:03:54
  Speaker 1: at all times. You're just basically letting the play go
• 1:03:57
  Speaker 1: because you want video replay to be able to take
• 1:03:59
  Speaker 1: care of it. Who wants to do that? Eventually, there's
• 1:04:03
  Speaker 1: going to be a referee and apuire shortage in all
• 1:04:06
  Speaker 1: these sports if we're going to be really reliant on
• 1:04:09
  Speaker 1: video replay to this degree. But to me, the biggest
• 1:04:12
  Speaker 1: issue is the willingness of the public to go along
• 1:04:16
  Speaker 1: with this, and what it means about our reaction to
• 1:04:19
  Speaker 1: artificial intelligence and the takeover of technology in our lives. Now.
• 1:04:24
  Speaker 1: I realize that technically a lot of this is not
• 1:04:26
  Speaker 1: really artificial intelligence, but it's basically the same concept that
• 1:04:30
  Speaker 1: we're going to allow a machine to do a human's
• 1:04:33
  Speaker 1: job because we think a machine is better at it,
• 1:04:37
  Speaker 1: even though we're not gonna really consider all the downsides,
• 1:04:41
  Speaker 1: all the unintended consequences of that, and I believe that
• 1:04:45
  Speaker 1: there are many. So this is to me much more
• 1:04:48
  Speaker 1: significant than just aren't we destroying sports? This is a
• 1:04:53
  Speaker 1: canary in the coal mine situation with regard to how
• 1:04:56
  Speaker 1: humanity is likely to succumb to a technological takeover in
• 1:05:01
  Speaker 1: the age of AI, which is partially why our current
• 1:05:06
  Speaker 1: AI fear factor is at seven point five. Another reason
• 1:05:09
  Speaker 1: why our current AI factor is at seven point five
• 1:05:12
  Speaker 1: is I believe we're seeing a collapse in our society
• 1:05:15
  Speaker 1: and the foundations and the underpinnings of our society that
• 1:05:19
  Speaker 1: make us incredibly vulnerable for destruction in a world taken
• 1:05:23
  Speaker 1: over by AI. And I've talked many times before about
• 1:05:26
  Speaker 1: things that have happened in my own life and things
• 1:05:28
  Speaker 1: that I've perceived in public that would never seemingly happened
• 1:05:32
  Speaker 1: ten twenty thirty years ago, where the glue that's holding
• 1:05:38
  Speaker 1: us together has weakened, and now it feels like things
• 1:05:43
  Speaker 1: are just falling apart in many ways. And when we
• 1:05:46
  Speaker 1: get evidence of that, instead of going whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa,
• 1:05:49
  Speaker 1: what's happening, it seems like people are just pretending that
• 1:05:53
  Speaker 1: it doesn't exist and sweeping under the rug and moving on.
• 1:05:58
  Speaker 1: And there was an academic scandal that I think is
• 1:06:00
  Speaker 1: a perfect example of this in so many different ways
• 1:06:03
  Speaker 1: involving Brown University. Now, Brown University is an Ivy League school.
• 1:06:07
  Speaker 1: It's known for at least it used to be known
• 1:06:09
  Speaker 1: for where all the celebrity kids go. It's not at
• 1:06:12
  Speaker 1: the top of the IVY League, but you know, it's
• 1:06:15
  Speaker 1: in the IVY League. And so the fact that this
• 1:06:17
  Speaker 1: is in the IVY League to me is so indicative
• 1:06:20
  Speaker 1: of a massive problem because if it's happening here, where
• 1:06:24
  Speaker 1: the hell isn't it happening. And also, by the way,
• 1:06:27
  Speaker 1: when I tell you this story, I want you to
• 1:06:29
  Speaker 1: think about another aspect to it, and that is, how
• 1:06:35
  Speaker 1: is AI changing the way that certain students are becoming
• 1:06:41
  Speaker 1: qualified to be IVY League students. This is a part
• 1:06:44
  Speaker 1: of the story I'm about to tell you that's being lost,
• 1:06:46
  Speaker 1: I think because a lot of people that are focusing
• 1:06:49
  Speaker 1: on this are are you know, they're focusing on the
• 1:06:53
  Speaker 1: issue of the cheating and AI's role in that, and
• 1:06:56
  Speaker 1: I'm like, well, wait a minute. I think there's an
• 1:06:58
  Speaker 1: argument to be made that this goes way deeper, that
• 1:07:01
  Speaker 1: maybe AI is being used so much in high school
• 1:07:04
  Speaker 1: that we're getting the wrong students into these prestigious schools.
• 1:07:08
  Speaker 1: But let me just tell you the story. And this
• 1:07:10
  Speaker 1: is a description of the story of Brown from a
• 1:07:14
  Speaker 1: guy by the name of A. Kash Gupta, which I
• 1:07:16
  Speaker 1: thought was pretty good and he posted this on x SO.
• 1:07:20
  Speaker 1: Forty out of eighty six Brown students scored a perfect
• 1:07:24
  Speaker 1: one hundred on their midterm. Forty out of eighty six.
• 1:07:28
  Speaker 1: That's pretty darn high. Then the professor moved the final
• 1:07:32
  Speaker 1: in person, and twenty two of those perfect scorers never
• 1:07:38
  Speaker 1: showed up again. So the first midterm was take home,
• 1:07:43
  Speaker 1: the second one was in person. Twenty two of those
• 1:07:47
  Speaker 1: that scored perfectly never showed up again. The professor suspected
• 1:07:53
  Speaker 1: AI cheating from the start. The take home midterm was
• 1:07:56
  Speaker 1: deliberately harder than usual, yet the class averaged ninety six
• 1:08:02
  Speaker 1: when the historical range is sixty five to eighty. Some
• 1:08:06
  Speaker 1: answers contained odd phrasing that matched with chat GPT produced
• 1:08:11
  Speaker 1: when he ran the questions through it himself. Robert Serrano,
• 1:08:14
  Speaker 1: the name of the professor, has taught economics at Brown
• 1:08:18
  Speaker 1: for thirty four years. He filed no accusations. He announced
• 1:08:23
  Speaker 1: the final would be in person count for half the grade,
• 1:08:27
  Speaker 1: and that if the two distributions didn't match, the final
• 1:08:31
  Speaker 1: alone would determine grades. Then the exodus. Twenty seven students
• 1:08:38
  Speaker 1: never showed up. Twenty two of them had perfect midterms.
• 1:08:43
  Speaker 1: That's astonishing of the fifty nine who did show up,
• 1:08:48
  Speaker 1: nineteen failed. Several signed the exam and turned it in flank.
• 1:08:56
  Speaker 1: The average fell from ninety six forty eight, exactly half,
• 1:09:05
  Speaker 1: the lowest in the course's history. He never needed a
• 1:09:10
  Speaker 1: plagiarism detector. The cheaters identified themselves by walking away. A
• 1:09:16
  Speaker 1: great distribution became a confession. Here's the part nobody's sitting
• 1:09:21
  Speaker 1: with Serrano proved it. He sent the distribution to Brown's
• 1:09:25
  Speaker 1: dean and provost. The provost never responded. The academic committee's
• 1:09:30
  Speaker 1: reply amounted to calling it quote a wake up call.
• 1:09:34
  Speaker 1: The students who bailed before the final walked away clean.
• 1:09:40
  Speaker 1: Every university in America is now grading two populations, students
• 1:09:45
  Speaker 1: and students plus chat GPT on one curve. The honest
• 1:09:50
  Speaker 1: kids in Serrano's class watched an eighty six average get
• 1:09:54
  Speaker 1: set by machines and then sat a real final against it.
• 1:10:02
  Speaker 1: The cheaters lost nothing. That's the incentive structure now, and
• 1:10:07
  Speaker 1: it grades itself. That's bone chilling that I would have
• 1:10:16
  Speaker 1: thought that was fake story, but it is by all
• 1:10:19
  Speaker 1: accounts real, and the fact that this is not getting
• 1:10:24
  Speaker 1: more attention to me is stunning and disturbing, because again,
• 1:10:30
  Speaker 1: this is Brown this is an Ivy League school. If
• 1:10:33
  Speaker 1: this is happening here, then where isn't it happening? And
• 1:10:37
  Speaker 1: by the way, there's evidence of similar things happening at Princeton. Princeton,
• 1:10:42
  Speaker 1: which is a top three Ivy League school, they had
• 1:10:46
  Speaker 1: to end their honor code that it has existed for
• 1:10:51
  Speaker 1: one hundred and thirty two years. One hundred and thirty
• 1:10:54
  Speaker 1: two years. The honor code basically was, we're going to
• 1:10:57
  Speaker 1: trust you and we're not going to put anybody in
• 1:11:02
  Speaker 1: to babysit your exams. That's the honor code at Princeton.
• 1:11:07
  Speaker 1: They had to end that because of AI and rampant
• 1:11:12
  Speaker 1: cheating at Princeton. At Princeton, again, there's so many issues here.
• 1:11:21
  Speaker 1: There's the use of AI, there's a rampant willingness to cheat.
• 1:11:26
  Speaker 1: There's how the academic institutions react once they get evidence
• 1:11:30
  Speaker 1: of massive cheating. But maybe the most important and clearly
• 1:11:34
  Speaker 1: the most underrated and underdiscussed element of this is are
• 1:11:39
  Speaker 1: almost all of the elite graduates from high school frauds
• 1:11:45
  Speaker 1: because they've been doing this all through high school and
• 1:11:50
  Speaker 1: they've just been good at it. They've they've trained well
• 1:11:53
  Speaker 1: to do it, they have the money to create a
• 1:11:56
  Speaker 1: fraudulent application and have the right connection to get into
• 1:12:00
  Speaker 1: an Ivy League school, and they haven't even bothered to
• 1:12:04
  Speaker 1: actually learn stuff, or they don't even know how to think,
• 1:12:07
  Speaker 1: or they've just relied on the machine. Now for a
• 1:12:10
  Speaker 1: long enough time, because this has been in existence for
• 1:12:12
  Speaker 1: a couple of years at least, so to me, the
• 1:12:17
  Speaker 1: whole system is rotten to its core. I mean, I
• 1:12:21
  Speaker 1: believe for a long time that academia is going to
• 1:12:23
  Speaker 1: implode in many ways, and some of me is desperately
• 1:12:27
  Speaker 1: rooting for that, because I think academia is remarkably and
• 1:12:31
  Speaker 1: irreversibly corrupt. But this is really very troubling on so
• 1:12:36
  Speaker 1: many levels, especially when it says about our culture and
• 1:12:39
  Speaker 1: our society, not just academia. So I'm not going to
• 1:12:43
  Speaker 1: put up the AI fear factor any higher than seven
• 1:12:46
  Speaker 1: point five right now, but it's on the rise. The
• 1:12:49
  Speaker 1: only thing that's keeping it seven point five is I,
• 1:12:51
  Speaker 1: in my own experience and continually unimpressed by the development
• 1:12:56
  Speaker 1: and the evolution of AI, actually think in many ways
• 1:12:58
  Speaker 1: it's getting worse, which might be our only hope for humanity.
• 1:13:02
  Speaker 1: But seven point five is still pretty darn high. One
• 1:13:06
  Speaker 1: last story, real quick before we get to part three
• 1:13:09
  Speaker 1: of as John Anything. This weekend is the final major
• 1:13:12
  Speaker 1: golf championship of the year. I feel an obligation to
• 1:13:14
  Speaker 1: at least comment on that. It's the British Open at
• 1:13:17
  Speaker 1: Royal Birkdale, although unfortunately I'm not particularly excited about it
• 1:13:22
  Speaker 1: because the weather forecast is absolutely perfect and in the
• 1:13:25
  Speaker 1: modern era, because of technology, because the players are so good,
• 1:13:29
  Speaker 1: and because the ball goes so far. If there's no
• 1:13:32
  Speaker 1: weather at the British Open, I don't care how tough
• 1:13:34
  Speaker 1: the golf course is, and Royal Barkdale is by all
• 1:13:37
  Speaker 1: accounts a very, very difficult golf course. You're not going
• 1:13:40
  Speaker 1: to have a true major championship test. I don't know
• 1:13:43
  Speaker 1: what the winning score is going to be, but without
• 1:13:45
  Speaker 1: weather it could be very, very low. And I've come
• 1:13:49
  Speaker 1: to view that kind of golf, even in a major
• 1:13:52
  Speaker 1: championship to be kind of boring. Golf on television has
• 1:13:55
  Speaker 1: become very boring to me because of lots of reasons,
• 1:13:58
  Speaker 1: but mostly because of technology taking away the recovery shot.
• 1:14:02
  Speaker 1: There's no need for it, the challenge, the fear, there's
• 1:14:05
  Speaker 1: no fear factor. It's just a birdie fest. It's a
• 1:14:08
  Speaker 1: putting contest. I hope that's not what's going to happen,
• 1:14:11
  Speaker 1: but I sense that's probably going to be most of
• 1:14:13
  Speaker 1: what will transpire at World Birkdale. I have no idea
• 1:14:16
  Speaker 1: who's going to win. I really don't, but I did
• 1:14:19
  Speaker 1: want to very quickly mentioned this is the first time
• 1:14:22
  Speaker 1: they've come back to Royal Birkdale since Jordan Speith one
• 1:14:25
  Speaker 1: in twenty seventeen. He's nowhere near the same player that
• 1:14:28
  Speaker 1: he was. I think he might be done winning major championships.
• 1:14:31
  Speaker 1: His putting has gone from godlike to basically being the
• 1:14:36
  Speaker 1: way I pought, which is pretty bad mediocre at best.
• 1:14:41
  Speaker 1: But as part of the preparations for this year's British Open,
• 1:14:45
  Speaker 1: they did a hype video where they had Jordan Spieth
• 1:14:49
  Speaker 1: narrated and it was all about the tradition of the
• 1:14:51
  Speaker 1: British Open and how long the thing's been being played.
• 1:14:55
  Speaker 1: It's the one hundred and fifty fourth edition. And the
• 1:14:57
  Speaker 1: first words that Jordan Spieth spoke in this clearly scripted
• 1:15:01
  Speaker 1: hype video where every year, in fact, he uses the
• 1:15:06
  Speaker 1: phrase every year several times to talk about, hey, you
• 1:15:10
  Speaker 1: can rely on the British Open or the Open Championship
• 1:15:13
  Speaker 1: as they call it, to always be there and to
• 1:15:15
  Speaker 1: be this unique test in all of golf. And whenever
• 1:15:19
  Speaker 1: I hear that, I almost literally vomit. Don't give me
• 1:15:23
  Speaker 1: fucking every year because just six years ago, in the
• 1:15:27
  Speaker 1: middle of a panic, you decided not to have a
• 1:15:31
  Speaker 1: men's British Open, but you had a women's British Open.
• 1:15:36
  Speaker 1: Why clearly because you figured out that you would make
• 1:15:41
  Speaker 1: more money or lose less money if you canceled the
• 1:15:44
  Speaker 1: men's because your insurance would cover it, but you apparently
• 1:15:48
  Speaker 1: didn't have insurance to cover the women's. So it wasn't
• 1:15:51
  Speaker 1: about COVID or whether or not anyone would have been
• 1:15:54
  Speaker 1: endangered by playing on a British Open golf, which is
• 1:16:00
  Speaker 1: probably the safest place you could possibly be during COVID.
• 1:16:04
  Speaker 1: It was ridiculous, It was even known to be ridiculous
• 1:16:07
  Speaker 1: at the time. They were cowards. And the fact that
• 1:16:10
  Speaker 1: they've gotten away with it and they can they have
• 1:16:12
  Speaker 1: the audacity to put out an eye video that starts
• 1:16:15
  Speaker 1: every year, give me a fucking break. I'm sorry. Everyone
• 1:16:18
  Speaker 1: else in the world will move on from this. I'm
• 1:16:20
  Speaker 1: the only person in the planet on the planet that
• 1:16:23
  Speaker 1: still cares. But I'm never gonna let this go because
• 1:16:27
  Speaker 1: that was that was awful. I lost a lot of
• 1:16:31
  Speaker 1: respect for the Royal and Ancient Golf Club because of
• 1:16:33
  Speaker 1: their cancelation of the twenty twenty British Open. But I'm
• 1:16:37
  Speaker 1: sure I'll still watch because you know, they got me,
• 1:16:40
  Speaker 1: and it's the last major championship of the year, and
• 1:16:43
  Speaker 1: hopefully it won't suck as bad as I think it might.
• 1:16:47
  Speaker 1: Thanks for listening to today's free drop of the abbreviated show.
• 1:16:50
  Speaker 1: If you're interested in listening to the entire show, you
• 1:16:53
  Speaker 1: must become a patron. Please go to Patreon. That's pat
• 1:16:59
  Speaker 1: r EO dot com. Patreon dot com slash the Death
• 1:17:05
  Speaker 1: of Journalism with John Ziggler. My name is j H
• 1:17:09
  Speaker 1: h N z I E g L e R. That's
• 1:17:12
  Speaker 1: patreon dot com slash the Death of Journalism with John Ziggler.
• 1:17:20
  Speaker 1: Good luck to you on that. But that's how you
• 1:17:22
  Speaker 1: can subscribe.