Latest / The Death Of Journalism / Episode One Hundred Forty Seven: The Price Of Selling Out

Transcript

Episode One Hundred Forty Seven: The Price Of Selling Out · The Death Of Journalism

0:00
Welcome to episode number one hundred and forty seven of the Death of the Journalism
0:03
podcast. My name is John Zigler. I'm your host on today's show.
0:07
Trump's first criminal trial finally gets started. Title nine gets revised outrageously by the
0:13
Biden administration, a major update in the NPR scandal, more evidence Tucker Carlson
0:19
has lost his mind, and as the tide finally turning at least a little
0:23
bit. We begin this episode with the start of Donald Trump's first criminal trial,
0:28
this one, of course, in Manhattan on the charges of having paid
0:34
hush money and creating fraudulent documents and potentially violating campaign finance laws, all related
0:43
to an affair with Stormy Daniels. This has already been marked by chaos,
0:48
with a man setting himself on fire and killing himself outside of the courthouse with
0:53
live media play by play, an awful, horrendous situation. The guy appears
0:59
to have been a whack jump. He sounds a lot like Tucker Carlson.
1:02
Frankly, more on Tucker later in this episode. I don't know what relevance
1:07
this will have as far as all this playing out in the courtroom. I
1:11
do think it plays into the narrative that this is all a circus and not
1:15
to be taken fully seriously, for whatever relevance that tragedy may have on the
1:21
trial itself. We also have the specter of maybe even Michael Avanatti testifying on
1:26
Trump's behalf, which he is now offered to do. I'm not sure I
1:30
buy the idea that that's gonna happen, or that the Trump team is even
1:34
seriously considering it. I'm always very skeptical when someone who wants to be part
1:38
of the circus says they've been in touch with someone's legal team. That could
1:42
mean anything. That could be emailing an intern and getting an auto response.
1:47
Who the hell knows, but that's out there. Could Michael Avenatti, Stormy
1:51
Daniel's former lawyer, who has been very supportive of Donald Trump as of late
1:56
in this particular situation former Trump and he who's now in prison, could he
2:00
actually testify on Donald Trump's behalf. But my whole thing on this trial has
2:07
been from day one that the facts the law who testifies who doesn't makes no
2:14
difference whatsoever, none, zero, And for the media to pretend otherwise is
2:19
frankly hilarious. They're all just pretending that oh, yes, this is going
2:23
to be a real trial. It's going to be about the facts, the
2:25
law, and you know, strategy and opening statements and all this really matters,
2:31
boloney. None of this matters to whether or not there's going to be
2:35
a conviction or not. My view is there's almost no chance of a not
2:39
guilty verdict given this jurisdiction, that the only chance Trump has is a hung
2:46
jury because at least a couple jurors hold out. Because obviously this is a
2:51
situation where you have a jurisdiction dead set against Donald Trump in New York City.
2:55
He is an incredibly divisive figure, even if he wasn't the Republican presidential
3:00
nominee. And it's just comical to pretend that you could possibly find twelve objective
3:06
people to be jurors in this case under the best of circumstances. But we
3:10
don't have the best of circumstances. We have OJ Simpson on steroids in both
3:15
directions here. It is lunacy, absolute lunacy that people think this can be
3:23
a remotely fair trial, especially during a presidential election. Now, the jury
3:28
selection process took all of last week. Frankly, I think it should have
3:31
taken longer. Trying to find twelve objective people here is basically impossible. It
3:37
appears to me as if most of those who are involved in this process have
3:42
at least tried to make a good faith effort to find twelve jurors who can
3:47
be objective. But it's an an inherent impossibility. Whether you are somebody who
3:54
follows the news, you can't be objective. And if you're someone who doesn't
3:58
follow the news at all, how could you possibly be trusted to be a
4:02
juror If you have no idea, for instance, who Donald Trump is or
4:06
have a strong opinion about that person, that almost makes you more untrustworthy than
4:11
if you do have a strong opinion about Donald Trump. But that being said,
4:16
there are some jurors whose descriptions, as have been reported, are a
4:21
little bit troubling, regardless of which side you're on, People who have no
4:26
clue about the news, people who have said that they have strong opinions about
4:30
Donald Trump but have not been open about what those opinions are, and the
4:35
judges just decided that they're going to believe them that they can be objective.
4:40
This is one description of the jury as a whole from the Guardian News organization.
4:46
The jury is made up of seven men and five women who live in
4:49
different parts of Manhattan, including the Upper East Side, Harlem, Hell's Kitchen,
4:55
and the West Village. They come from a range of personal backgrounds and
4:59
employment in histories. Several jurors said they had no strong opinions on Trump,
5:04
which by the way, might be almost as troubling as people who have strong
5:08
opinions about Trump, and a few said that they do not closely follow the
5:13
news. The exact racial makeup of the jury and the ages of the jurors
5:17
is unclear. As I read through the bio of the twelve people who are
5:23
currently on this jury, and you know, the chaos surrounding this case means
5:28
that anything's possible. There's a very good chance that the twelve people currently on
5:30
the jury are not the twelve people they are going to decide Trump's fate.
5:34
But as I read the makeup, there aren't any blatant examples of Okay,
5:40
this jur is clearly going to be trouble for one side or the other.
5:44
They're a couple whose bio and it's very difficult to tell, well, you
5:47
can't tell who the person is. You don't know their age. You only
5:51
really know their gender and their job background, and maybe a little bit about
5:56
what they think about Trump. So there's a lot of information that would be
6:00
very helpful and trying to determine which jurors are likely to go in one direction
6:08
or the other. But there are at least a couple that if you're from
6:10
the Trump side of this equation, you look at and the go okay,
6:14
that person could least be objective and maybe willing to hold out for a hung
6:20
jury. Because that again, I really don't have much of a rooting interest
6:25
in this other than justice. I actually I don't want Trump to be convicted
6:29
here, mainly because I think the case is bullshit, and because I think
6:32
it would be too disruptive to our electoral process. I just also think it
6:36
would be an affront to do process to have this kind of a trial in
6:41
the middle of an election year. So my basic sense of fairness is rooting
6:46
for there to be a hung jury, mainly because I don't think there's any
6:49
chance that realistically Trump can get out of this without being, you know,
6:57
being acquitted on everything. There's no chance. Twelve jurors in New York City
7:01
are gonna quit him of every single charge that he faces here. I just
7:04
don't think that that's realistic given the nature of humanity and the circumstances at play
7:11
here. So, if you're Trump, you're looking for a hung jury,
7:15
and there are at least a few jurors there whose basic bio says, Okay,
7:20
that's possible, but you probably need two or three of them to be
7:26
able to hold hands in order to maintain themselves under the pressure that they're going
7:30
to be under, because assuming this goes as expected, you're gonna have a
7:34
majority of jurors at least who are thirsting for at least some convictions, and
7:41
the charges that are being brought against Trump, you're gonna have a judge who
7:44
desperately wants there to be a verdict. So it's not going to be a
7:48
situation where realistically one person could hold out for a Donald Trump acquittal. That's
7:55
possible if somehow a Trump cult member got on the jury, but it seems
7:59
pretty clear to me that the chances of a Trump cult member in Manhattan being
8:03
able to get through the vetting process and get on this jury is basically zero.
8:07
So you're gonna need two or three people and I don't know how realistic
8:13
that is. I think there's a reasonable chance that Trump does get convicted at
8:18
least on some of the charges here, and it's basically all because of jurisdiction,
8:24
all because of the nature of the judge, all because of the nature
8:28
of the jury pool. And it's just not fair. It's clearly not fair.
8:33
And I'm not the only person that believes this who's anti Trump. Bizarrely,
8:41
I have found myself in the same side of things with a lot of
8:45
people recently that normally I loathe or even worse than that, and certainly don't
8:50
agree with politically. And that has happened again in the most recent days with
8:54
regard to Stephen A. Smith of ESPN. Stephen A. Smith, one
9:00
of my many nemesis on the Penn State Joe Paterno Jerry Sandusky case, a
9:05
guy with whom I disagree on almost everything, although I will acknowledge he's not
9:09
dumb and he does have some basic common sense, especially for a liberal,
9:13
but he's an obvious liberal. He's also happens to be a black man,
9:18
which is relevant to this particular topic for reasons they'll become obvious in a second.
9:22
But he went on Fox News Channel, which is weird to begin with.
9:26
I mean, he's an ESPN personality, and he went on Fox News
9:31
Channel for obvious reasons given the content of what he was clearly put on the
9:35
set. But he made two statements are going to play for you. The
9:39
first one deals with this issue of basic fairness and whether or not he is
9:43
a Democrat, a lifelong Democrat, a liberal thinks that it's fair from a
9:50
due process perspective to be putting Donald Trump in this particular situation in an election
9:56
year. And here's what Stephen A. Smith said on Fox Newschanne, When
10:00
I think about Donald Trump, I think about this case in New York.
10:03
I mean, I'm looking at the Democrats right now, and again primarily I
10:07
have voted Democrats throughout my life, but I'm utterly disgusted with what I'm seeing
10:11
because it seems to me that they're trying to use the law in the courts.
10:15
They've clearly politicized this thing with Donald Trump because they can't come up with
10:20
a strategy to offset the momentum he's clearly gained and at least five polls he's
10:24
up. He's up in the polls over by and at least five polls that
10:28
I counted. That's the reality of the situation. Despite the counts against them,
10:31
the indictments against them, being impeached twice, and all of this other
10:35
stuff. He is the presumptive GOP nominee and you don't seem to have the
10:41
issues in your favor. You believe so because of that, you're going to
10:45
manipulate the system as best as you possibly can to avoid him possibly running for
10:50
re election again. That appears to be their strategy, but I'm here to
10:54
tell you it's not working now. I couldn't agree with that more. I
10:58
have said that consistently on this podcast. Even though I loathed Donald Trump,
11:01
I loathe what is happening with regard to due process here even more. I
11:07
think it's more dangerous than certainly anything that Trump is accused of having done in
11:13
this particular case. And to be clear, I do think that Donald Trump
11:16
is guilty. I do think that this whole situation involving Stormy Daniels was a
11:20
scheme. It was a way to try to hide what was happening. He
11:24
was trying to keep her quiet during an election year. Of course, it
11:28
really wouldn't have mattered in retrospect whether or not she had come out and told
11:31
her story. That's the great irony of this whole situation is that I don't
11:37
think it would have impacted any votes at all. Stormy Daniels wasn't even paid
11:41
all that much money, but she was paid via Michael Cohen, Trump's personal
11:46
attorney at the time, in a way that was clearly done to evade all
11:52
sorts of situations, including campaign finance laws. And there was apparently some document
11:58
fraud that at least is alleged. Who the hell knows, but the essence
12:01
of the allegation I do believe to be true. I believe that Donald Trump
12:05
had an affair with Stormy Daniels, and I believe that he basically conspired to
12:11
cover it up. The idea that that is now a criminal trial the middle
12:13
of the twenty twenty four presidential election, where Trump is the Republican nominee,
12:20
is just beyond absurd. And kudos to Stephen A. Smith for saying it
12:24
now. He said it on Fox News Channel, so obviously he was going
12:28
to get a very warm welcome for that message. I don't know what's going
12:33
on with Stephen A. Smith. He has made some other comments recently that
12:37
are also seemingly, if not pro Trump, at least defending Donald Trump.
12:43
I still believe that when it comes down to it, someone like Steven A.
12:46
Smith is going to probably vote for Joe Biden. But he didn't stop
12:50
with just an attack on the whole idea of the court case against Trump.
12:56
He continued with what might even be a bigger issue when it comes to the
13:01
election itself, and that is the idea that Donald Trump facing ninety one criminal
13:07
counts and four different indictments, whether or not, somehow that has given Trump
13:13
some sort of a connection to elements of the black community, specifically the black
13:18
male community, and that there and there are liberals, especially white liberals,
13:22
who when they hear this, they just go bananas. Oh my god,
13:26
this is the worst thing they could possibly ever hear. How outrageous that Trump
13:30
could ever try to claim he has a connection to the black community because he's
13:33
under attack from law enforcement, which of course is hypocritical because you know,
13:37
based upon the liberal narrative about black people, especially black men, this makes
13:43
perfect sense. And it also seemingly makes perfect sense to Stephen A. Smith.
13:48
And here's what he said about that. But I got to tell you
13:50
something. As much as people may have been abhorred by Donald Trump's statement weeks
13:56
ago talking about how black folks he's hearing, that black folks find him relatable
14:01
because what he's going through is similar to what black Americans have gone through.
14:05
He wasn't lying. He was telling the truth. When you see the law,
14:11
law enforcement, the court system, and everything else being exercised against him,
14:16
it is something that black folks throughout this nation can relate to. With
14:22
some of our historic iconic figures, we've seen that happen throughout society. So
14:26
no matter what race, what ethnicity, you may emanate from, we relate
14:31
to you when you're suffering like that because we know we have, and that's
14:35
what he articulated. Now. I have no idea whether or not Stephen A.
14:39
Smith is correct in his assessment of what level of connection this may or
14:45
may not create between Donald Trump and elements of the black community. However,
14:50
I do know that the poll indicayed that Stephen A. Smith is correct here.
14:56
Now, whether those polls are going to hold out until Nove is a
15:01
very open question. One of the reasons I have been skeptical, probably more
15:05
skeptical than any other conservative adea that Donald Trump is a significant favorite to win
15:11
the presidency because of current polling. And of course I've always found it hilarious
15:15
that Trump fans, who don't trust any poll at all, they don't trust
15:18
election day polls, suddenly believe that the same polls that they derided in twenty
15:26
sixteen, at twenty twenty two, at twenty twenty that you many of which
15:31
turned out to be accurate, all of a sudden they have very fervent belief
15:35
in all these polls and that somehow Donald Trump is in fact the favor.
15:39
Since I've been skeptical of that narrative is that I believe that there's a good
15:45
chance that to whatever extent the polls are showing that Donald Trump is doing much
15:50
better with minority voters, specific men, than any Republican has done in honern
15:56
history, is that that in the end was not going to turn out to
16:00
be reality. That a lot of these people either are not going to vote,
16:04
or they may vote for RFK Junior, or they may come home and
16:08
vote for Joe Biden. That to me has been part of the reason for
16:15
my skepticism that that that that narrative. I don't I don't I need more
16:19
of a reason for the black community and the abandoned Joe Biden than simply the
16:25
fact that you know, Donald Trump is under attack from the criminal justice system.
16:30
To me, that's an entree for Trump potentially, But I just don't
16:34
see how that's going to work out when it comes to the final vote.
16:40
And I have been in the camp that Joe Biden is still the favorite to
16:45
win this thing for a whole host of reasons involving incumbency as well as what's
16:49
going on Trump's legal troubles. I do believe that Donald Trump has to at
16:56
least get a hung jury in this New York case in order to maintain his
17:03
position as either a slight favor in perception or somebody with a fifty to fifty
17:08
chance of winning. Now, I don't think that if he gets convicted in
17:12
this particular case that it's going to be devastating to his chances. In fact,
17:17
there in some elements of the voting population, it could backfire that they
17:22
This could be seen very much the same way that Stephen A. Smith sees
17:26
it, that this is unfair and that there could be theoretically some rallying around
17:33
because of a conviction especially if it's seen as not being legitimate. So I'm
17:38
not going to pretend that the election is over if Trump gets convicted in this
17:44
particular case, but it certainly would behoove his chances very very much for him
17:48
to at least get a hung jury in this particular case. And I think
17:53
it's important to at least take a look at the state of the race before
17:57
we head into this actual trial, so that we have a mark on where
18:03
things are. And as I look at the current state of the race,
18:10
I am still of the belief that the data is drifting somewhat significantly towards Joe
18:15
Biden and away from Donald Trump before this trial ever even begins. Most recently,
18:22
just over this past weekend, there are two extremely similar and also rather
18:29
confusing polls from mainstream outlets. One's the NB poll, the other is the
18:33
NPR Marris Poll, and both of these polls are showing very similar things.
18:38
Nationally. The first thing that they're showing is that Joe Biden slightly ahead of
18:45
Donald Trump. But that's not the worst of it if you are a Trump
18:51
fan. The worst part of this is that the RFK Junior effect, which
18:56
has always been slightly in Trump's favor. I won't say always, but almost
19:02
always in Trump's favor. When you look at the averages, especially in these
19:07
state poles, almost every single sitution, every single state has Trump with a
19:14
slight advantage a point and a half, maybe even two points. When you
19:18
add in RFK Junior and the other fringe presidential cadates West and Stein as opposed
19:25
to going Trump versus Biden head to head, well in both of these most
19:30
recent polls, the RFK Junior effect is in the opposite direction that RFK Junior
19:37
actually seems to harm Donald Trump with Joe Biden. Now, you know,
19:44
one poll could be an anomaly, two holes could just be a coincidence.
19:48
But if you start to see more than two this, then you have to
19:52
wonder is something going on here? Now I will be the first to acknowledge
19:56
this is in exactly the opposite direction that what I would have expected in what
20:00
I predicted, because when RFK Junior chose his very liberal Sugar Mama vice presidential
20:07
nominee, I thought that for any rational Now let's be clear, they're lotional
20:12
voters, especially those that are considering RFK Junior, but in a remotely rational
20:18
and logical world, that that would mean that anybody who was in a liberal
20:22
would basically cross r K Junior off their list, that if you were a
20:26
moderate or center right Republican who was looking for another option, that that would
20:33
basically disqualify RFK Junior. Well, these two poles give no indication of that.
20:38
In fact, they give the opposite, And so the RFK Junior effect
20:42
now suddenly seems to be advantaging Joe Biden also, and this might even be
20:49
more concerning if you're in the Trump camp, the more likely you are to
20:55
vote. In other words, if you just consider the most likely voters in
20:59
these two poless, Biden does much better with those voters than he does with
21:06
the voters who aren't less likely to vote. Now, you think, with
21:08
Trump's cult and the enthusiasm that they have, although there's some indications that there's
21:14
not quite as much enthusiasm in twenty twenty four as there was certainly in twenty
21:18
sixteen, but that you would think that Trump would advantage among likely voters.
21:26
But in both of these polls is exactly the opposite, and in fact the
21:30
most concerning part of one of these polls that I saw. Again, if
21:33
you're looking at this from the true perspective is that if you take voters who
21:37
actually voted in twenty twenty in twenty twenty two, Biden cleans Trump's clock.
21:45
But if you take theoretical voters that didn't vote in twenty twenty or twenty twenty
21:52
two, Trump crushes Biden. Well, okay, first of all, I'm
21:57
wondering how could that be. I guess it's possible. I guess this might
22:02
be the burn it to the ground people that I've referenced in the past many
22:06
times who seem to like Donald Trump simply for entertainment purposes. But if you
22:10
didn't vote in twenty twenty or twenty twenty two, what are the chances that
22:15
you're going to vote in twenty twenty four, an election which the NBC poll
22:19
indicates Americans have less enthusiasm about than any other preetial cam modern history. So
22:27
if you votivated to vote in twenty twenty or twenty twenty two, and this
22:33
campaign is America is the least enthusiastic about, the least interested in for obvious
22:38
reasons, because you've got two terrible candidates in a repeat election for twenty twenty
22:44
If you didn't vote in either of those last two elections, why would you
22:47
suddenly vote in this one. So all of that is exceedingly good news nationally
22:55
for Joe Biden. Now, I also want to make sure people understand it's
22:59
almost most absurd, almost absurd to even be talking about national polls anymore.
23:06
National polls mean very, very little when it comes to who's actually a selection
23:11
in the electoral college. Except there is a phenomenon, and I have never
23:15
understood this, although I've talked about it previously in the podcast, where national
23:21
polls tend to be the first polls that show some sort of a change or
23:26
a trend. We saw it in the Republican primary process, where the national
23:30
polls went to Trump first, and when DeSantis started to fade, and there
23:36
were DeSantis fans that kept holding on to well, what about the you know,
23:38
Iowa, what about this state or that state? And I was like,
23:44
no, that those are going to fall eventually, because that's the way
23:47
this works. There's this inexplicable phenomenon where the national polls go first, the
23:52
state poles are still holding pretty steady. The key state polls, the only
23:56
ones that really matter North Carolina, Georgia, Ara in the Wisconsin, Michigan
24:00
and Pennsylvania. Those are the only states that really matter. If you count
24:04
only those, Trump is still doing well enough to win, assuming that the
24:08
polls are accurate. However, I'm of the belief that eventually that's gonna shift,
24:15
because the history is shown, the national polls go first, and the
24:19
national polls are shifting in Biden's direction, not badically, but significantly and very
24:26
very clearly. Now, if you want to look at the other side of
24:30
this, there's usually another side, especially when it comes to polling. It's
24:34
interesting to point out that both of these last two polls I've referenced, NBC
24:38
and NPR, show that Joe Biden's approval rating has increased dramatically in a very
24:45
short period of time. Now, this is something for which there's no rational
24:51
explanation. Why would that happen? Really, no reason for it. I
24:56
mean, I mean, if you stretch, I don't know what you could
24:59
find. You know, maybe, up until recently, the stock market has
25:03
been doing exceedingly well. So that's theoretically, I guess, a possibility if
25:07
you talk about suburban voters and what they care about. Who knows. But
25:12
there's also the possibility that the high approval rating in relative terms for Joe Biden
25:18
dimly, an indication that these were bad samples. See. I always look
25:23
at the approval rating that they give Biden an any national poll, because that
25:27
will tell you the nature of the sample, because they're asking the same people
25:33
the question, do you approve of Joe Biden as they are who would you
25:34
vote for president? And if you get a sample where Joe Biden's approval rating
25:40
is a you know, somehow all the way up to forty five percent,
25:42
which I think one of these polls had them in that range, then you
25:45
have to wonder, okay, as something happened and Biden's approval ratings suddenly increased
25:52
pretty significantly for no apparent reason, or did you get a bad sample of
25:57
voters, in which case now you have to question the entire result. And
26:03
the fact is still pretty close. Only a couple points either way between Trump
26:07
and Biden indicates that, Okay, you know, maybe that's really not that
26:10
bad a poll for Trump. So I don't have an answer to that.
26:12
I don't know whether or not Joe Biden's approval really is suddenly improving fairly significantly
26:19
for no apparent reason, or whether or not these polls got a bad sample.
26:23
It could be somewhere in between. But the bigger issue here is that
26:30
the data not just these two poles. The data is drifting in Joe Biden's
26:33
favor as we head into this first Trump criminal trial. There are indications,
26:40
though I mentioned the RFK Junior effect, that the Biden team is still very,
26:45
very concerned about the RFK Junior effect, and that was proven a few
26:49
days ago when, rather laughably hilariously, the Biden team put out a basically
26:56
I guess you'd call it a campaign commercial, with these testimonials for members of
27:03
the Kennedy family, making sure that everyone knows how important they think it is
27:07
to vote for Joe Biden, how Joe Biden is the RFK of this generation.
27:14
Basically the messages don't be fooled by the Kennedy name on RFK Junior,
27:19
He's not really one of us. We're totally with Joe Biden. And I
27:25
found this to be laughable on numerous levels. The first is, does anybody
27:30
really believe that any votes are going to be impacted by members of the Kennedy
27:37
family in twenty twenty four? Really? Really, I mean, the entire
27:41
Kennedy name is based upon two men who were assassinated six decades ago. I
27:49
mean, the number are still that enamored with the Kennedy name is at this
27:55
point is minuscule. And I guess there could be a handful full of people
28:00
who think that RFK Junior is a viable candidate because of his last name.
28:06
See to me, it's gonna be a weird Ziggler analogy. To me,
28:08
the Kennedy name in this situation is not relevant related to the Kennedy political legacy.
28:18
It's related to what give a shit at who he is? And the
28:22
analogy that I'm gonna use is it's a bit like Kim Kardashian. Kim Kardashian
28:26
became famous because why, well she did she made a sex tape. Why
28:32
did anyone care about the sex tape? Well, they cared about the sex
28:34
tape because their last name was Kardashian and we all remembered her dad, Robert
28:38
Kardashian, from the O. J. Simpson Bronco Chase, where he dramatically
28:41
read OJ Simpson's suicide note to a national television audience. So the Kardashian name
28:48
made Kim Kardashian relevant. That's why we have the Kardashian family to this day.
28:53
By the way, more on her when we talk about Taylor Swift later
28:57
on in this episode of the podcast. They look forward to but in a
29:02
weird way, that's the only relevance to the Kennedy name. Oh, it's
29:06
basically like Kardashian, Oh oh, we care about this person a little bit.
29:10
They're somewhat relevant because of the fact that their last name is Kennedy.
29:15
It's not because they are somehow inheriting this significant portion of the voting population.
29:23
Because there's still a lot of people who vote Kennedy out there. That's just
29:27
laughable. And the other hilarious part of this is, you know, liberalism
29:32
in twenty twenty four, especially in the woke era, is based upon this
29:37
entire concept what that white people don't match, that white legacy is bad,
29:42
that we really shouldn't give a shit what people think simply because you know,
29:48
they are lucky in the DNA department that they just happen to be descendants of
29:55
famous, rich white people. I mean, this goes against everything that the
29:59
Democratic Party is allegedly in favor of. You're trotting out these old Kennedys as
30:06
if they're important, as if what they say matters, as if we should
30:11
really vote based upon what they say. Well, hold on a second.
30:15
None of these people have accomplished anything in their own lives. The only relevance
30:19
is that they come from Kennedy DNA. That's it. These old, rich
30:25
white people. We thought those were evil. I thought rich, old white
30:29
people were evil. Now you're using them to tell me to who to vote
30:33
for because or not to vote for in this case, Really that's the message.
30:37
Don't vote for Ark Junior, even though he has the Kennedy last name.
30:41
I just found the whole thing to be hilarious, laughable, absurd.
30:47
Of course, no one in the media will call the Kennedy family or the
30:51
Biden administration out for this. I mean, because the entire philosophy of this
30:56
campaign tact that goes against a whole lot of what the Democratic Party claims to
31:00
stand for in twenty twenty four. I also don't know how effective it's going
31:04
to be. I really don't. I mean, I just I again,
31:07
this happened. These last two polls were not impacted by this effort by the
31:12
Biden administration because it happened way after those perceptions would already be set. So
31:17
I think it's a coincidence that these last two polls have gotten the results that
31:22
the Biden team has been trying to get, which is to stop Democrats from
31:29
voting for RFK Junior in larger numbers than potential Trump voters are voting or at
31:36
least supporting RFK Junior. And so the RFK Junior issue is set. Yet
31:41
it's exceedingly important. He's going to be RFK Junior is going to be on
31:48
the ballot in Michigan, which increasingly looks like it's going to be the key
31:52
state because even if Trump wins North Carolina, Georgia, Arizona, Nevada,
31:57
which I think he's failed to win all four of those right now, gun
32:02
to my head, I think Trump wins all four of those states North Carolina,
32:07
Georgia, Arizona, and Nevada. That could change because of criminal cases
32:10
or what have you, But right now, if the election were today,
32:14
I'd feel pretty confident Trump would win all four of those states. That doesn't
32:19
get him an election win unless you're willing to bet on a two sixty nine
32:23
two sixty nine tie involving the electoral college votes in Maine and Nebraska, which
32:29
is very much up in the air, and we have very little polling data,
32:30
no polling data that I'm aware of in Nebraska, which is baffling to
32:35
me because that won Nebraska electoral College vote in that congressional district in Omaha could
32:39
determine the whole thing. But anyway, under the scenario I just outline,
32:43
where Trump sweeps all those what I call the southern swing states, he still
32:49
doesn't win the election. Necessarily. He needs at least one more Wisconsin,
32:54
Michigan, or Pennsylvania. And I think Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. The polls in
32:59
Pennsylvania are all over the goddamn place. I am you know, I'm just
33:02
going buy my gut that Trump is probably not going to win Pennsylvania. I
33:07
think the data in Wisconsin doesn't look particularly good for Trump, although there's some
33:12
indication he has a chance there. The data is looking best for Trump in
33:15
Michigan, and there's at least some logic there because Biden's trouble with both the
33:22
black vote and the Muslim vote, and so RFK Junior is now on the
33:27
ballot in Michigan. And so based upon the conventional wisdom of a week ago
33:31
that would be good for Trump. That might not be good for Trump now
33:36
because of what seems to be an alteration kind of when it comes to whether
33:40
it is being advantaged or disadvantaged by the presence of R. K. Junior
33:45
on the ballot. Now, as far as Donald Trump is concerned, you
33:50
know, look, I have tried to be exceedingly fair to him in all
33:52
sorts of ways, even though I loathe him and what he has done to
33:57
conservatism and to the conservative media, and how all the problems I have with
34:02
a potential Trump's second term. I loathe Joe Biden, I loathed Donald Trump.
34:08
I have no one to root for in this particular situation. The only
34:14
thing that Trump gives me is maybe the replacement for Clarence Thomas is going to
34:19
be a lot better than if Clarence Thomas were to die or retire with Joe
34:22
Biden or Kamala Harris being president. That's really about all that comes down to.
34:27
But there's all sorts of other potential problems that Trump brings to the table.
34:30
And I have to say that, boy, Trump really dodged a bullet,
34:37
largely because we are desensitized towards his insanity and because the Conservative media is
34:43
so in the tank for him. You know, the greatest narrative, the
34:45
most prominent narrative, the most dangerous narrative about Joe Biden is what that he's
34:52
got some semblance of dementia. His mental acuity is not up to the standards
34:58
of the job. It's only going to get work in a second term.
35:00
He's too old, right, You have no idea what he's going to say
35:04
at any time. He has maybe very little clue of what he's actually saying
35:08
or doing. He makes a lot of very strange statements. I agree with
35:13
all that. I agree with all that, But can you imagine if Donald
35:19
Trump had ever made a public statement on video, or let's even reverse it
35:23
further. Let's pretend that Joe Biden. Let's pretend for a second that Joe
35:29
Biden did what I'm about to tell you Donald Trump did on truth Social.
35:35
So let's pretend Joe Biden goes out in public and on video says what Donald
35:43
Trump actually did say on truth Social just a few days ago. If this
35:49
had occurred what I'm about to tell you with Joe Biden, the conservative media
35:54
would be in a five alarm fire. This would be the most important thing
36:00
that's ever happened. And oh my god, can you believe this guy's president?
36:05
And can you believe he might be re elected? This is dangerous for
36:07
the country, dangerous for the world. Blah blah blah. What I'm referring
36:12
to is an out of the blue Trump's Trump Social. There's a fortiing slip.
36:17
Truth Social might as well be called truth Social, the social media company
36:22
for Donald Trump, since he doesn't post on Twitter anymore unless he's got a
36:27
really cool mugshot to share, so he posts on truth Social. And this
36:31
is what he posted just a couple of days ago. Somebelievable folks. Again,
36:37
just for context, imagine if Joe Biden said this in public on video.
36:43
Stupid Jimmy Kimmel, who still hasn't recovered from his horrendous performance and big
36:47
ratings drop as host of the Academy Awards, especially when he showed he suffered
36:53
from TDS commonly known as Trump Derangement syndrome, to the entire world by reading
37:00
on air my truth about how bad a job he was doing that night,
37:05
right before he stumbled through announcing the biggest award of all Picture of the Year.
37:12
It was a classic choke, and we know it was a classic joke
37:15
because Trump wrote that in all capital letters, even spelled it correctly. Classic
37:19
choke, one of the biggest ever in show business. At top it off,
37:23
he forgot to say the famous and mandatory line and the winner is instead,
37:30
he stammered around as he opened the envelope. Supposedly his wife and even
37:35
management begged him not to do it. Don't read his truth, Jimmy,
37:39
Please don't do this, they said. He was made to look like a
37:45
fool, which he is, and at the same time go down in television
37:50
history as the worst host ever of the once vaunted Academy Awards. Exclamation point
37:57
in all capital letters. Now, that would be completely insane for a presidential
38:02
candidate with a lot going on in his world to be spouting off about weeks
38:07
after the Academy Awards had already ended. That would be insane. That would
38:12
be cuckoo for cocoa puffs on numerous levels. If what Trump had said was
38:20
remotely accurate. But it wasn't. Forget about the fact. Okay, yes,
38:27
Jimmy Kimmel during the Academy Awards did read a true social post from Donald
38:31
Trump. It was probably a dumb idea, especially since what he said wasn't
38:35
particularly funny and he politicized the entire broadcast. So I'm not even defending Jimmy
38:39
Kimmel. But so that part is true. What Trump says about Jimmy Kimmel
38:45
is true. But how in the world Donald Trump got the idea that it
38:50
was Jimmy Kimmel that botched the final award of the night for Best Picture,
38:55
I have no idea. I would love to know how Donald Trump got that
38:59
idea, because it wasn't Jimmy Kimmel that did that. It well Pacino,
39:04
al Pacino did that. So if you're gonna, for some reason go after
39:09
Jimmy Kimmel weeks after the Academy Awards out of the blue, when there's a
39:14
hell of a lot more important things going on in your world and in the
39:16
world in general, you should at least get the basic facts right. And
39:22
instead Trump is pretending that Jimmy Kimmel did what al Pacino did. To go
39:30
back to my premise here, if Joe Biden ever went after the host of
39:37
the Academy Awards for no apparent reason and then mistook Jimmy Kimmel for al Pacino
39:44
or vice versa. Every single conservative in the country would be going, my
39:49
god, the twenty fourth Amendment. This guy is insane. How in the
39:52
world could he possibly be president of the United States? How could he possibly
39:57
be re elected? Every single one? And yet what I just told you
40:02
made a little bit of a ripple on social media, but that was about
40:06
it. And Trump once again benefits one from desensitization. We're so desensitized to
40:14
everything about him that even that kind of level of insanity doesn't make a mark.
40:19
And two, because there's just so much else going on in his world,
40:22
specifically regarding criminal allegations, that I guess the media just doesn't have enough
40:29
time for it. It's just astonishing. So I gotta call it both ways.
40:32
Folks, thanks for listening to today's free drop of the abbreviated show.
40:37
If you're interested in listening to the entire show, you must become a patron.
40:42
Please go to Patreon. That's p A T R e O N dot
40:46
com. Patreon dot com. Slash the Death of Journalism with John Ziggler.
40:55
My name is j H z I E G L e R. That's patreon
41:00
dot com. Slash the Death of Journalism with John Ziegler, good luck to
41:07
you on that, But that's how you can subscribe