Latest / The Death Of Journalism / Episode Two Hundred Twelve: I Am Keyser Soze

Transcript

Episode Two Hundred Twelve: I Am Keyser Soze · The Death Of Journalism

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Welcome to episode number two hundred and twelve of the
• 0:02
  Speaker 1: Death of Journalism podcast.
• 0:04
  Speaker 2: MI name is John Zigler. I'm your host on today's show.
• 0:07
  Speaker 1: President Biden completes the most obvious lie in presidential history
• 0:11
  Speaker 1: by giving his son Hunter an outrageous full pardon. Trump
• 0:16
  Speaker 1: creates a new controversy with his pick to be FBI
• 0:19
  Speaker 1: director when we already have an FBI.
• 0:21
  Speaker 2: Director that he hired.
• 0:23
  Speaker 1: A huge Thanksgiving football weekend provides a ton to talk about,
• 0:28
  Speaker 1: and my review of the smash box office hit movie Wicked.
• 0:34
  Speaker 1: Hope you had a great Thanksgiving weekend. The Zigler family did,
• 0:39
  Speaker 1: and we're now into the Christmas season. I'll talk a
• 0:41
  Speaker 1: little bit about that later on in this episode of
• 0:44
  Speaker 1: the podcast. I want to begin, though, with a reminder
• 0:48
  Speaker 1: about one of my rules for life that the truth
• 0:52
  Speaker 1: will almost always finally come out, usually after life changing
• 0:58
  Speaker 1: events like a divorce, a firing, a retirement, a death,
• 1:05
  Speaker 1: a court case, or a major election. And we had
• 1:10
  Speaker 1: a massive news story that occurred late over the weekend
• 1:13
  Speaker 1: that certainly fits under this category when Joe Biden.
• 1:18
  Speaker 2: President Joe Biden.
• 1:19
  Speaker 1: Issued a full, complete and comprehensive pardon to his son Hunter,
• 1:26
  Speaker 1: dating all the way back to twenty fourteen, when Hunters
• 1:30
  Speaker 1: started to work at Barisma, which is very, very interesting,
• 1:35
  Speaker 1: this indirect contradiction of multiple statements that he and his
• 1:40
  Speaker 1: press secretary had made during the presidential campaign that he
• 1:44
  Speaker 1: would never pardon Hunter, that he would respect the rule
• 1:48
  Speaker 1: of law, that no one is above the law, and
• 1:52
  Speaker 1: that was obviously the act of a man of character,
• 1:57
  Speaker 1: a man who believed in our judicial system, and that
• 2:00
  Speaker 1: this was a dramatic contrast to the man who was
• 2:04
  Speaker 1: trying to become president again, Donald Trump, who clearly did
• 2:07
  Speaker 1: not respect the judicial process. Well, shockingly, this all turned
• 2:13
  Speaker 1: out to be obvious bullshit.
• 2:14
  Speaker 2: This was the most.
• 2:16
  Speaker 1: Predicted lie probably in presidential history.
• 2:19
  Speaker 2: I don't even think he's close. I predicted it.
• 2:22
  Speaker 1: In fact, I think I said that Hunter Biden was
• 2:26
  Speaker 1: one of the winners after the election because it was
• 2:31
  Speaker 1: much better for him for Trump to win, because it
• 2:35
  Speaker 1: would force his dad to realize that there was no
• 2:39
  Speaker 1: choice but to pardon him, because who the hell knows
• 2:43
  Speaker 1: what Trump was going to do, and obviously, you know,
• 2:46
  Speaker 1: there wasn't going to be a democratic.
• 2:48
  Speaker 2: President for four years.
• 2:50
  Speaker 1: My guess is that the plan probably had been for
• 2:54
  Speaker 1: Harris to win and then if Harris wins, maybe she
• 2:58
  Speaker 1: gives the pardon so Joe doesn't have to do it,
• 3:01
  Speaker 1: or who knows. But obviously after Trump won, there became
• 3:06
  Speaker 1: much more of an imperative to do something because this
• 3:09
  Speaker 1: was going to be the last chance, and most importantly,
• 3:12
  Speaker 1: there was no longer any real political risk. I said
• 3:16
  Speaker 1: at the time, and many other people said this, it
• 3:18
  Speaker 1: wasn't really a great prediction on my part.
• 3:21
  Speaker 2: It was almost so obvious to be ridiculous.
• 3:24
  Speaker 1: But Joe Biden's at the end of his career, he
• 3:27
  Speaker 1: has no political future.
• 3:29
  Speaker 2: He's probably gonna pass away fairly soon. What does he care.
• 3:33
  Speaker 1: There's no damage done to him that he really cares about.
• 3:37
  Speaker 1: He doesn't care about his post presidency situation. He cares
• 3:42
  Speaker 1: about his son, So of course he's going to pardon
• 3:46
  Speaker 1: his son, especially if Trump wins. The news media, I've
• 3:52
  Speaker 1: always say, is absolutely terrible. Of all the things that
• 3:56
  Speaker 1: the news media is awful at, number one is probably
• 4:00
  Speaker 1: determining how people respond to self interest.
• 4:05
  Speaker 2: They are awful at this.
• 4:06
  Speaker 1: They are terrible at understanding incentive structures.
• 4:11
  Speaker 2: Conservatives are much better at this in.
• 4:13
  Speaker 1: General, and since most people who run the mainstream news
• 4:16
  Speaker 1: media are liberal, I think it's a massive blind spot
• 4:19
  Speaker 1: for them, and that's of course giving them the benefit
• 4:22
  Speaker 1: of the doubt that they just weren't lying on behalf
• 4:25
  Speaker 1: of Joe Biden, pretending that somehow this was the.
• 4:28
  Speaker 2: Truth when it was an obvious lie.
• 4:30
  Speaker 1: But conservatives were able to see this, you know, post election,
• 4:35
  Speaker 1: there's nothing to lose for Joe Biden.
• 4:38
  Speaker 2: He's going to pardon his son.
• 4:40
  Speaker 1: This was always very clear to anybody who wasn't an
• 4:45
  Speaker 1: ardent Democrat and or member of the legacy news media.
• 4:49
  Speaker 1: But that didn't stop this lie from going a long way.
• 4:54
  Speaker 1: And there have been all sorts of videos that have
• 4:56
  Speaker 1: been put out in the half a day's and Biden
• 5:01
  Speaker 1: made this announcement that he was pardoning his son that
• 5:04
  Speaker 1: have gone viral online. Just for the record, I want
• 5:09
  Speaker 1: to play a compilation of Press Secretary White House Press
• 5:13
  Speaker 1: Secretary Karine Jean Pierre, and Joe Biden making declarative statements
• 5:18
  Speaker 1: during the presidential campaign and before and after Hunter Biden's
• 5:25
  Speaker 1: conviction that he would not be pardoned by President Joe Biden,
• 5:30
  Speaker 1: just to make it absolutely positively clear that this was
• 5:32
  Speaker 1: a blatant and clear lie that liberals went along with
• 5:37
  Speaker 1: the media went along with pretending that this was not
• 5:41
  Speaker 1: an obvious lie from the beginning, even though most people
• 5:44
  Speaker 1: with a brain understood that it was.
• 5:46
  Speaker 2: And here's that proof.
• 5:48
  Speaker 3: One with a president partner or commute his son if
• 5:52
  Speaker 3: he's convicted.
• 5:52
  Speaker 4: So I've answered this question before.
• 5:54
  Speaker 3: It was asked of me not too long ago, a
• 5:55
  Speaker 3: couple of weeks ago, and I was very clear and
• 5:57
  Speaker 3: I said no, We'll go back to the.
• 6:00
  Speaker 2: First question of the briefing. I know you said not
• 6:02
  Speaker 2: a lot of changes yesterday, and it's a personal matter,
• 6:05
  Speaker 2: but from a presidential perspective, is there any possibility that
• 6:08
  Speaker 2: the president would end up pardoning his son? No, we did.
• 6:12
  Speaker 3: You've lost said seven times when the president would not
• 6:15
  Speaker 3: pardon or community sens for his son Hunter. I want
• 6:19
  Speaker 3: to make sure that that is not going to change
• 6:20
  Speaker 3: over the next six months.
• 6:21
  Speaker 4: The President's say, it's still a no, It's still an
• 6:25
  Speaker 4: I will always need it's still a no.
• 6:27
  Speaker 2: It will be a no.
• 6:28
  Speaker 5: It is a no.
• 6:29
  Speaker 4: And I don't have anything else to add.
• 6:31
  Speaker 3: Will he pardon his son?
• 6:32
  Speaker 5: No.
• 6:33
  Speaker 4: As we sit here in Normandy, your son Hunter is
• 6:36
  Speaker 4: on trial, and I know that you cannot speak about
• 6:39
  Speaker 4: an ongoing federal prosecution but let me ask you. Will
• 6:44
  Speaker 4: you accept the jury's outcome, their verdict, no matter what
• 6:47
  Speaker 4: it is. Yes, And have you ruled out a pardon
• 6:50
  Speaker 4: for your son.
• 6:51
  Speaker 2: Yes? He has overcome an addiction.
• 6:54
  Speaker 1: He is. He's one of the brightest, most decent men
• 6:57
  Speaker 1: I know, and I am satisfy that I'm not going
• 7:01
  Speaker 1: to do anything I should.
• 7:03
  Speaker 2: I advide by the jury decision, and I would do that.
• 7:06
  Speaker 2: I'll not part in him.
• 7:10
  Speaker 1: So that was a blatant lie. That's as bad as
• 7:14
  Speaker 1: it gets. We now know because of the fact that
• 7:17
  Speaker 1: Biden did exactly that, and he didn't just provide a pardon.
• 7:21
  Speaker 2: I mean, there's all sorts.
• 7:22
  Speaker 1: Of things he could have done that would have been
• 7:24
  Speaker 1: less comprehensive than what he did. And by the way,
• 7:29
  Speaker 1: it was offensive on so many different levels. And I'm
• 7:31
  Speaker 1: somebody who know Joe Biden fan, especially as president, I
• 7:36
  Speaker 1: thought he was gonna be a little less harmful than
• 7:39
  Speaker 1: he turned out to be, because I think he turned
• 7:42
  Speaker 1: into a completely different person as he got older and
• 7:45
  Speaker 1: he got controlled by other people, and he became super woke.
• 7:49
  Speaker 1: And the person that Joe Biden was was never a
• 7:52
  Speaker 1: great person, but he was much worse as president than
• 7:56
  Speaker 1: he was in previous iterations of his political life, but
• 8:00
  Speaker 1: there were so many elements of the way he did
• 8:02
  Speaker 1: this that were absolutely outrageous. One is the fact that
• 8:07
  Speaker 1: it's a full part and comprehensive goes back to twenty fourteen,
• 8:10
  Speaker 1: which a lot of people are picking up on as well.
• 8:13
  Speaker 2: That's interesting because that's.
• 8:14
  Speaker 1: The year that, as I mentioned, Hunter started working at Barisama.
• 8:17
  Speaker 1: And I'm somebody who has always said that those bigger
• 8:21
  Speaker 1: corruption allegations, while they make some sense, they make some
• 8:26
  Speaker 1: sense because of the incentive structure that Biden had at
• 8:29
  Speaker 1: the time.
• 8:30
  Speaker 2: Because remember, you know.
• 8:32
  Speaker 1: He knew he was not going to be the nominee
• 8:34
  Speaker 1: in twenty sixteen, right, he thought his political career was
• 8:38
  Speaker 1: over then, so his incentive structure was, well, you might
• 8:42
  Speaker 1: as well make Hay well you can before you retire.
• 8:47
  Speaker 1: So while that doesn't prove corruption, that certainly, in my mind,
• 8:51
  Speaker 1: always made it make some sense as to why Biden
• 8:55
  Speaker 1: might start taking some chances when it comes to issues
• 8:59
  Speaker 1: related to corrupt and brivery what have you. Again, I
• 9:02
  Speaker 1: don't think any of that stuff has ever been proven,
• 9:03
  Speaker 1: but I've always been on the side of, well, it's
• 9:06
  Speaker 1: not proven. I don't really trust the right wing media
• 9:09
  Speaker 1: who jumps to all sorts of faulty conclusions. Yes, the
• 9:12
  Speaker 1: incentive structure is there for Joe Biden to engage in
• 9:16
  Speaker 1: his kind of behavior. But now, but now, I think
• 9:20
  Speaker 1: the benefit of the doubt is gone. I think now
• 9:23
  Speaker 1: we have to presume guilt because of the nature of
• 9:27
  Speaker 1: this part and going all the way back to twenty fourteen,
• 9:30
  Speaker 1: and then there was the philosophical justification for it, which.
• 9:36
  Speaker 2: Was that this was a politically motivated.
• 9:39
  Speaker 1: Prosecution against Hunter Biden. Now, look, I understand that there
• 9:43
  Speaker 1: are people who have tried to make this argument. Dan
• 9:47
  Speaker 1: Abrams from News Nation has somewhat made this argument before,
• 9:52
  Speaker 1: so you know there might be something to this idea.
• 9:56
  Speaker 1: But Joe Biden never made that argument before. He never
• 10:00
  Speaker 1: made the argument when the conviction happened. You never made
• 10:03
  Speaker 1: that argument during the election. He only made it after
• 10:07
  Speaker 1: the election and while giving a pardon that goes against
• 10:12
  Speaker 1: exactly what he said he was going to do. There
• 10:15
  Speaker 1: was no new information that came forward to change his mind.
• 10:20
  Speaker 1: I mean, I've seen some liberals say he changed his mind.
• 10:23
  Speaker 1: What a load of crap that is. He didn't change
• 10:25
  Speaker 1: his mind. The incentive structure changed post election. But to
• 10:30
  Speaker 1: make the political argument, first of all, it's you know,
• 10:33
  Speaker 1: obviously Biden's own Department of Justice, and you have to
• 10:37
  Speaker 1: understand a very complicated timeline. I don't think that that
• 10:40
  Speaker 1: argument really carries a whole lot of weight, but it's
• 10:44
  Speaker 1: it's irrelevant to me because of the fact of the
• 10:47
  Speaker 1: massive hypocrisy that Biden is making this argument in this
• 10:53
  Speaker 1: very same year in which his own Department of Justice
• 10:57
  Speaker 1: has been going after Donald Trump on two different fronts
• 11:01
  Speaker 1: at the federal level, and where he kept calling Donald
• 11:05
  Speaker 1: Trump a convicted felon because of a completely bullshit, obviously
• 11:09
  Speaker 1: politically motivated case where in New York City, where Donald
• 11:14
  Speaker 1: Trump was convicted of thirty four felony counts for something
• 11:20
  Speaker 1: that nobody would ever be tried.
• 11:22
  Speaker 2: For if their name wasn't Donald Trump.
• 11:25
  Speaker 1: And that's the exact argument he was trying to make
• 11:27
  Speaker 1: with his son, Hunter Biden.
• 11:29
  Speaker 2: Holy hypocrisy, Batman.
• 11:31
  Speaker 1: That really I think threw me over the edge was
• 11:35
  Speaker 1: why don't you just acknowledge that you're doing You're lying,
• 11:39
  Speaker 1: You lied during the campaign, and now that the incentive
• 11:42
  Speaker 1: structure has changed, you're going to do a solid for
• 11:45
  Speaker 1: your son in the waning moments of your long political career.
• 11:50
  Speaker 1: Don't give me this bullshit that, well, it was a
• 11:53
  Speaker 1: politically motivated prosecution when the guy you were running against
• 11:58
  Speaker 1: before you were forced out by Nancy Pullup had to
• 12:01
  Speaker 1: endure four four different indictments, all of which were at
• 12:07
  Speaker 1: least somewhat not all, but at least somewhat politically motivated. Obviously,
• 12:14
  Speaker 1: the fact that Donald Trump was trying to be the
• 12:16
  Speaker 1: twenty twenty fourth presidential nominee and they wanted to try
• 12:19
  Speaker 1: to discredit him as much as possible played at least
• 12:22
  Speaker 1: some role in these prosecutions, especially the non federal prosecutions,
• 12:28
  Speaker 1: the one in New York and the one in Georgia,
• 12:30
  Speaker 1: not to mention the civil case out of New York.
• 12:32
  Speaker 2: I mean, it was all obviously.
• 12:34
  Speaker 1: Politically motivated, and Biden never said a goddamn thing about that.
• 12:38
  Speaker 1: So the hypocrisy here is literally off the charts, and
• 12:43
  Speaker 1: I think we have to reevaluate everything, everything we think,
• 12:48
  Speaker 1: or or at least I thought about the whole situation
• 12:53
  Speaker 1: involving the Biden's corruption allegations, because now we have new information,
• 12:59
  Speaker 1: we have to see everything through the prism of the
• 13:02
  Speaker 1: fact that Biden led his ass off and provided the
• 13:06
  Speaker 1: most extensive parton he possibly could on the way out
• 13:10
  Speaker 1: the door.
• 13:11
  Speaker 2: What's he protecting here?
• 13:13
  Speaker 1: And let's not let the media off the hook. There
• 13:16
  Speaker 1: is a fantastic I guess you would call it a
• 13:22
  Speaker 1: master cut from the Grabbian Clip service. The guy the
• 13:27
  Speaker 1: name of Tom Elliott, I think runs that he has
• 13:30
  Speaker 1: a really good Twitter feed. He put out a nine
• 13:33
  Speaker 1: minute super cut of the news media claiming that this
• 13:39
  Speaker 1: was a act of character by Joe Biden, that he
• 13:43
  Speaker 1: was clearly telling the truth, that he was never going
• 13:47
  Speaker 1: to pardon his son, and that this was a fantastic contrast.
• 13:52
  Speaker 1: The word contrast is probably used at least another dozen
• 13:56
  Speaker 1: times or more in this nine minute clip.
• 13:59
  Speaker 2: I'm not going to play nine minute clip.
• 14:00
  Speaker 1: I thought about doing so because it's so good and
• 14:03
  Speaker 1: so important. But if you get a chance, especially if
• 14:05
  Speaker 1: you're on Twitter, check out Tom Elliott's Twitter feed. I
• 14:09
  Speaker 1: tweeted it out twice myself, so you can go to
• 14:12
  Speaker 1: my feed as well if you want to watch this
• 14:16
  Speaker 1: nine plus minutes of mainstream news media, mostly on MSNBC
• 14:21
  Speaker 1: and CNN, talking in glowing terms about how amazing Joe
• 14:28
  Speaker 1: Biden is for not being willing to pardon his own
• 14:33
  Speaker 1: son because he believes in our judicial system, that.
• 14:37
  Speaker 2: He believes in the rule of law.
• 14:40
  Speaker 1: Now, one of the more hilarious parts about this super
• 14:43
  Speaker 1: cut is that there's only one person or maybe two,
• 14:48
  Speaker 1: but one that really stood out that is shown who's
• 14:52
  Speaker 1: standing up and going, are.
• 14:54
  Speaker 2: We sure he's telling the truth?
• 14:56
  Speaker 1: And that's Chris Wallace from CNN, which is really hilarious
• 15:00
  Speaker 1: because you know, Wallace is no conservative. He's in the
• 15:04
  Speaker 1: process of leaving or I guess he's already left CNN.
• 15:08
  Speaker 1: And and here Chris Wallace was the voice of reason and
• 15:12
  Speaker 1: some level of cynicism and truth by being willing to
• 15:16
  Speaker 1: stand up and go are we really sure he's telling
• 15:19
  Speaker 1: the truth when he says that he's not going to
• 15:21
  Speaker 1: pardon his son, because it was so obvious to anybody
• 15:24
  Speaker 1: with a brain that of course he was going to
• 15:27
  Speaker 1: pardon his son. And as I was watching this this
• 15:31
  Speaker 1: super cut, and how naive all these media members were,
• 15:36
  Speaker 1: major media members were about who Joe Biden really was
• 15:41
  Speaker 1: and how they interpreted him, and they, you know, basically
• 15:44
  Speaker 1: see him as this gentle, harmless, crippled old man who
• 15:50
  Speaker 1: is standing up for good. And then it turns out
• 15:53
  Speaker 1: in the end that he was actually totally full of
• 15:57
  Speaker 1: crap and he was evil. It kind of reminded me
• 16:02
  Speaker 1: of the movie The Usual Suspects and Kevin Spacey's character
• 16:09
  Speaker 1: Kaiser So Say So.
• 16:11
  Speaker 2: It turned out in the end Joe Biden.
• 16:13
  Speaker 1: Was Kaiser So Saying, this person that was totally underestimated
• 16:19
  Speaker 1: and seemingly harmless, and in the end he was the
• 16:22
  Speaker 1: bad guy. And it was at only at the very
• 16:25
  Speaker 1: end of the movie when we suddenly finally are forced
• 16:28
  Speaker 1: to realize, but was always obvious that Kaiser So Say
• 16:34
  Speaker 1: Joe Biden was kaiser So Say and he was the
• 16:36
  Speaker 1: bad guy.
• 16:36
  Speaker 2: It might not be the perfect analogy, but it's pretty good.
• 16:40
  Speaker 1: And in the media's minds, they're the naive law enforcement
• 16:45
  Speaker 1: having no clue that the guy who's the bad dude
• 16:50
  Speaker 1: is right underneath their noses and they're looking at him
• 16:55
  Speaker 1: has harmless because their vision of Joe Biden is the
• 17:00
  Speaker 1: storted by, among other things, their own political ideology.
• 17:05
  Speaker 2: They so badly want him to be the good guy
• 17:09
  Speaker 2: that they.
• 17:10
  Speaker 1: Disregard all information that in the case otherwise. So the
• 17:15
  Speaker 1: media looks horrible here, as if it's possible for them
• 17:19
  Speaker 1: to look worse than they already did look post election,
• 17:23
  Speaker 1: but their credibility, already in an all time low, has
• 17:27
  Speaker 1: been shot in a significant way because Joe Biden did
• 17:32
  Speaker 1: them dirty in a way that Conservatives always knew he
• 17:36
  Speaker 1: was going to do so. And Joe Biden, I mean,
• 17:42
  Speaker 1: I've been hesitant to buy into this theory that Biden
• 17:46
  Speaker 1: really wanted Trump to win, he hated Kamala, and he
• 17:50
  Speaker 1: was sabotaging his own party. Well, you know what I
• 17:54
  Speaker 1: always say about Trump up until this election where he.
• 17:57
  Speaker 2: Suddenly became a winner again.
• 17:59
  Speaker 1: If Donald Trump was a Democratic plant, there's not a
• 18:02
  Speaker 1: whole lot he would have done differently up until winning
• 18:05
  Speaker 1: this election. Well, if Joe Biden was actually working against
• 18:11
  Speaker 1: his own.
• 18:12
  Speaker 2: Party, there's not a whole lot he would.
• 18:13
  Speaker 1: Have done differently in the last certainly the last several months.
• 18:18
  Speaker 1: And one of those things is announcing this on Sunday
• 18:23
  Speaker 1: evening of Thanksgiving weekend. This is the most bizarre and
• 18:28
  Speaker 1: hilarious part of this whole pardon situation, which is you
• 18:34
  Speaker 1: could have easily announced this, say on Thanksgiving Friday. I mean,
• 18:40
  Speaker 1: especially when people are in a forgiving mood and no
• 18:44
  Speaker 1: one's paying attention. People are traveling and watching football, and
• 18:48
  Speaker 1: by the time Monday comes around, it's already old news.
• 18:51
  Speaker 2: I mean, if you want.
• 18:52
  Speaker 1: To hide this thing, you do this on Thanksgiving Friday,
• 18:56
  Speaker 1: or Wednesday, or maybe even Thanksgiving itself. I mean, there's
• 19:00
  Speaker 1: all sorts of opportunities for you to bury this story. Instead,
• 19:05
  Speaker 1: you do it on Sunday night. So now we're going
• 19:08
  Speaker 1: into the first week in December with very little news
• 19:11
  Speaker 1: to talk about, and now the entire cycle is dominated,
• 19:17
  Speaker 1: rightfully so, by this outrageous decision to go back on
• 19:21
  Speaker 1: your own word and pardon your own son. Now, I'm
• 19:26
  Speaker 1: not pretending that this is going to have a massive
• 19:30
  Speaker 1: political implication.
• 19:32
  Speaker 2: I mean, Biden's going out the door, you know.
• 19:36
  Speaker 1: I'm not pretending that all of a sudden people are
• 19:38
  Speaker 1: gonna have an epiphany and realize that the Democratic Party
• 19:42
  Speaker 1: is a bunch of lying bastards and they're never going
• 19:45
  Speaker 1: to vote Democrat again because Biden pardoned his own son.
• 19:49
  Speaker 1: I don't think it's going to go down that way.
• 19:51
  Speaker 1: And you know why it's not going to go down
• 19:53
  Speaker 1: that way. I blame Bill Clinton. I really believe that
• 19:58
  Speaker 1: when Bill Clinton got away with the Monica Lewinsky and
• 20:02
  Speaker 1: the Paula Jones lies, under oath during that impeachment saga
• 20:07
  Speaker 1: when the media thought he was toast and he survived,
• 20:12
  Speaker 1: and it was a blatant lie.
• 20:13
  Speaker 2: I mean, there are many blatant.
• 20:14
  Speaker 1: Lies there, but the most obvious was, I did not
• 20:17
  Speaker 1: have sexual relations with that woman Monica Lewinsky when he
• 20:21
  Speaker 1: did that, and it was proven to be a lie
• 20:23
  Speaker 1: and he was forced to admit it, and there were
• 20:26
  Speaker 1: basically no ramifications. There were a few ramifications for impersonally
• 20:31
  Speaker 1: lost as law license, paid a fine, you know, he
• 20:34
  Speaker 1: did get impeached, that kind of stuff, but politically he
• 20:39
  Speaker 1: actually benefited from that entire scandal in Saga in the
• 20:43
  Speaker 1: long run, although al Gore probably lost in two thousand
• 20:47
  Speaker 1: because of it, but there were very limited ramifications. That
• 20:51
  Speaker 1: to me was when the floodgates of lying opened. That
• 20:55
  Speaker 1: was when we decided as a culture, as a society,
• 21:00
  Speaker 1: especially in the realm of politics, that lying no longer mattered,
• 21:04
  Speaker 1: that it was actually expected, sometimes even preferred for.
• 21:09
  Speaker 2: People to lie in certain situations.
• 21:11
  Speaker 1: Now I'm not pretending that politicians never lied before Bill Clinton,
• 21:15
  Speaker 1: but that was a really significant test for our society,
• 21:20
  Speaker 1: our media, our politics, our culture, everything, and we all failed.
• 21:25
  Speaker 1: We all failed and I always talk about the ramifications,
• 21:30
  Speaker 1: the unintended consequences, the slippery slope. And I knew at
• 21:34
  Speaker 1: the time, which is why I was so incensed by
• 21:37
  Speaker 1: the entire Bill Clinton situation. I knew that society wide
• 21:44
  Speaker 1: lying was going to become far more accepted and ramped
• 21:47
  Speaker 1: and rampant after Bill Clinton got away with it. That
• 21:51
  Speaker 1: was the real damage that was done there, and I
• 21:54
  Speaker 1: think we're seeing that here. I really do not believe,
• 21:58
  Speaker 1: I truly do not believe that if Bill Clinton had
• 22:02
  Speaker 1: either resigned from office, which is what he should have done,
• 22:05
  Speaker 1: he should never have forced the country to go through
• 22:07
  Speaker 1: that insane saga. That was absurd, I mean, and I
• 22:11
  Speaker 1: don't think any president previously would have even had the
• 22:14
  Speaker 1: audacity to put the country through that. But if he
• 22:17
  Speaker 1: had resigned from office or been forced out of office,
• 22:21
  Speaker 1: and we had held the line on lying, I do
• 22:25
  Speaker 1: not believe Joe Biden could possibly have gotten away with
• 22:29
  Speaker 1: what he just did, because I think it would have
• 22:31
  Speaker 1: been seen in a much different light. It would have
• 22:33
  Speaker 1: been much more forbidden that it would have been. The
• 22:37
  Speaker 1: line of the sands still would have been there. There
• 22:39
  Speaker 1: would have been so much outrage, the media outrage would
• 22:43
  Speaker 1: have been greater, even in the left wing media, and
• 22:47
  Speaker 1: the public would have been far more agitated by this,
• 22:50
  Speaker 1: But now we're desensitized to it, especially in the era
• 22:54
  Speaker 1: of Trump. Everybody lies all the time. And by the way,
• 22:58
  Speaker 1: this goes way beyond politics. I truly believe in society
• 23:02
  Speaker 1: as a whole, and this is subconscious. I don't think
• 23:04
  Speaker 1: people are going around thinking, well, Bill Clinton lied, so
• 23:06
  Speaker 1: I can lie too. I just think it's now part
• 23:10
  Speaker 1: of our DNA now that lying is not a mortal sin,
• 23:15
  Speaker 1: even big lies, even declarative lies, the demonstrative lies where
• 23:20
  Speaker 1: you go on national television and your press secretary goes
• 23:24
  Speaker 1: on national television on multiple occasions and say, without ambiguity,
• 23:30
  Speaker 1: this is not going to happen, and then it does happen.
• 23:33
  Speaker 1: And oh, by the way, you know, I should have
• 23:36
  Speaker 1: mentioned this previously with that nine minute to Grobbian super cut,
• 23:41
  Speaker 1: I referenced even I forgot how much the media tried
• 23:45
  Speaker 1: to use this as a political wapin.
• 23:48
  Speaker 2: This was a political.
• 23:49
  Speaker 1: Weapon during a presidential campaign to show the difference between
• 23:55
  Speaker 1: Democrats and Republicans. Democrats respect the rule of law. No
• 23:59
  Speaker 1: one is above the law. Joe Biden tweeted that and
• 24:05
  Speaker 1: Donald Trump is the opposite. That was a political weapon.
• 24:09
  Speaker 1: This whole idea that Biden was gonna do the right
• 24:13
  Speaker 1: thing and not pardon his son, well, that all turned
• 24:16
  Speaker 1: out to be bullshit.
• 24:18
  Speaker 2: In fact, the entire Democratic presidential campaign in retrospect.
• 24:23
  Speaker 1: Now though we suspected at the time, those with us,
• 24:26
  Speaker 1: those of us with clear lies and functioning brains, understood
• 24:31
  Speaker 1: at the time that the entire Democratic presidential campaign was bullshit.
• 24:36
  Speaker 1: The idea that Joe Biden was was physically capable of
• 24:41
  Speaker 1: serving another four years, which they went with until they
• 24:44
  Speaker 1: couldn't go with.
• 24:45
  Speaker 2: It any longer, that was bullshit.
• 24:47
  Speaker 1: The idea that Biden is a good and honest man
• 24:50
  Speaker 1: and contrast to Donald Trump.
• 24:52
  Speaker 2: That was bullshit.
• 24:54
  Speaker 1: The idea that Democrats will defend democracy while putting up
• 24:58
  Speaker 1: a candidate that never received one vote to be president
• 25:02
  Speaker 1: in a highly undemocratic.
• 25:04
  Speaker 2: Process was bullshit.
• 25:07
  Speaker 1: The idea that no one is above the law, which
• 25:10
  Speaker 1: they kept telling us about Donald Trump, was bullshit.
• 25:14
  Speaker 2: You are above the law.
• 25:16
  Speaker 1: If your name is Hunter Biden and your father is
• 25:20
  Speaker 1: the President of the United States and his party is
• 25:23
  Speaker 1: about to be kicked out of office, and he feels
• 25:26
  Speaker 1: perfectly free to pardon you in a very expanse of fashion.
• 25:33
  Speaker 1: So to me, we have learned so much now hasn't
• 25:37
  Speaker 1: been shocking. Those of us with a brain understood that
• 25:41
  Speaker 1: this was very likely going to be the scenario as
• 25:45
  Speaker 1: it played out here. The media was incredibly naive at best,
• 25:49
  Speaker 1: or corrupt at worst, maybe a combination thereof.
• 25:53
  Speaker 2: But we now have it all out in front of us.
• 25:55
  Speaker 1: And I really think the biggest impact of this from
• 25:59
  Speaker 1: a political perspective is not that, you know, the Democratic
• 26:02
  Speaker 1: Party's approval rating is going to take a nosedive. It's
• 26:06
  Speaker 1: now that in light of this, in the aftermath of
• 26:10
  Speaker 1: this outrage, Trump can now get away with almost anything,
• 26:15
  Speaker 1: especially in the realm of pardons. Much like Hunter Biden
• 26:21
  Speaker 1: was one of the winners when Donald Trump won the
• 26:24
  Speaker 1: election because it forced his father's hand to pardon him.
• 26:29
  Speaker 1: Maybe one of the big winners of the Hunter Biden
• 26:33
  Speaker 1: pardon are those that were convicted in regard to the
• 26:38
  Speaker 1: January sixth insurrection or whatever you want to call it,
• 26:42
  Speaker 1: because it now seems very obvious that Donald Trump is
• 26:46
  Speaker 1: going to do what his impulses would have been anyway,
• 26:49
  Speaker 1: but he'll easily be able to get away with it now.
• 26:52
  Speaker 1: Is to pardon probably virtually everybody related to the January sixth.
• 26:58
  Speaker 1: How far an expansive that will go, I have no idea,
• 27:02
  Speaker 1: but I will be stunned if Donald Trump doesn't do that,
• 27:07
  Speaker 1: probably very early on in his presidency, maybe even on
• 27:11
  Speaker 1: the first day, and the media will have a conniption
• 27:15
  Speaker 1: about it, but they'll have no credibility. Democrats will have
• 27:19
  Speaker 1: no credibility. And it's very disturbing how we're going in
• 27:25
  Speaker 1: this downward spiral here, where one side does one thing,
• 27:29
  Speaker 1: then the other side says, Okay, well you did that,
• 27:31
  Speaker 1: so we can go even further, and then you know
• 27:35
  Speaker 1: the slippery slope, and it's just a race to the
• 27:38
  Speaker 1: bottom to a third world country. And I've never been
• 27:43
  Speaker 1: a fan of the pardon power to begin with. I
• 27:45
  Speaker 1: don't think that our founders ever intended presidents to go
• 27:49
  Speaker 1: as far with it as they have, because I think
• 27:52
  Speaker 1: they presumed that the public would be a guardrail against this,
• 27:58
  Speaker 1: that presidents wouldn't want to be ashamed, that shame would
• 28:03
  Speaker 1: actually matter, that your reputation would matter, and so you
• 28:08
  Speaker 1: would self regulate when it came to pardons. But we
• 28:13
  Speaker 1: don't live in that world anymore, and Biden just proved it,
• 28:17
  Speaker 1: and I'm sure Trump's gonna prove it when it comes
• 28:19
  Speaker 1: to January sixth pardons. But I don't see how Democrats
• 28:25
  Speaker 1: have a leg to stand on anymore. Even someone like me,
• 28:30
  Speaker 1: an ardent Trump critic, I would have despised January six
• 28:36
  Speaker 1: blanket pardons before what Joe Biden did, and now I'm
• 28:40
  Speaker 1: kind of like.
• 28:41
  Speaker 2: Well, I guess that's the world we're living in.
• 28:44
  Speaker 1: Even I can't get outraged about the idea of blanket
• 28:47
  Speaker 1: January sixth pardons, even though I think that's bullshit, because
• 28:51
  Speaker 1: that's just the way the game is played now, and
• 28:53
  Speaker 1: it's just going to get worse and worse and worse as.
• 28:56
  Speaker 2: We downward spiral.
• 28:58
  Speaker 1: I even think Biden's pardon weirdly alters the view.
• 29:03
  Speaker 2: Of people like me.
• 29:04
  Speaker 1: I don't know, maybe I'm alone in this of Trump's
• 29:08
  Speaker 1: pick to be the next FBI director, Cash Patel, who
• 29:14
  Speaker 1: I think is a horrible pick. Cash Patel has no
• 29:18
  Speaker 1: business being the director of the FBI. And you know,
• 29:24
  Speaker 1: I was all prepared on this podcast to go on
• 29:28
  Speaker 1: a diatribe about what an awful and terrible pick it is,
• 29:32
  Speaker 1: and I'm not nearly as outraged anymore simply because Okay,
• 29:38
  Speaker 1: I guess this is the way things work.
• 29:40
  Speaker 2: These are the rules. Now fight fire with fire.
• 29:43
  Speaker 1: We're just we're just gonna all say fuck it to
• 29:47
  Speaker 1: what the country was supposed to be, what we were
• 29:49
  Speaker 1: built on. We're just gonna have this race to the bottom.
• 29:53
  Speaker 1: It's a never ending arms race of bullshit. You know,
• 29:58
  Speaker 1: I'm gonna one up you. I'm gonna abuse power. You're
• 30:01
  Speaker 1: gonna abuse power, and we turn into a third world country,
• 30:07
  Speaker 1: we turn into a monarchy. That's really what this is.
• 30:12
  Speaker 1: What Biden did is what a monarch does. That's what
• 30:16
  Speaker 1: Trump has always wanted to be. A monarch, a king,
• 30:21
  Speaker 1: and a king picks as his FBI director someone who
• 30:26
  Speaker 1: is overtly personally loyal to him, not even his political philosophy,
• 30:33
  Speaker 1: to him as a person. Let's be clear, Cash Ptel
• 30:39
  Speaker 1: has appeared in public events speaking in a red maga hat.
• 30:46
  Speaker 1: Now in any era of this country previously, that would
• 30:51
  Speaker 1: have disqualified him for even being considered as the FBI director.
• 30:58
  Speaker 2: But it doesn't even stop.
• 31:00
  Speaker 1: He wrote a children's book talking about monarchy. Patel wrote
• 31:04
  Speaker 1: a children's book, a children's book where.
• 31:08
  Speaker 2: He made Trump into a king figure.
• 31:14
  Speaker 1: Trump is a king figure in this child child's book
• 31:19
  Speaker 1: that Cashptel wrote, Can you imagine, I mean, if Kamala
• 31:25
  Speaker 1: Harris had won the election and chosen as her FBI director,
• 31:30
  Speaker 1: by the way, firing the current FBI director, who by
• 31:33
  Speaker 1: the way, was chosen by Donald Trump, so she fires
• 31:38
  Speaker 1: before his term is up.
• 31:39
  Speaker 2: I don't know people understand. I think people.
• 31:42
  Speaker 1: Think that the FBI director is like other positions. The
• 31:46
  Speaker 1: FBI director goes on.
• 31:48
  Speaker 2: Ten year terms.
• 31:50
  Speaker 1: It's supposed to be the one of, if not the
• 31:53
  Speaker 1: most a political positions in the federal government. And so
• 31:59
  Speaker 1: Trump the history here is incredibly important. Trump comes into
• 32:03
  Speaker 1: office mostly because of James Comey, the FBI Director, stepping
• 32:09
  Speaker 1: in it ten days before the election, reopening the Hillary
• 32:13
  Speaker 1: Clinton email investigation on what I don't think was solid
• 32:18
  Speaker 1: grounds Comy, who no one's ever been more in love
• 32:22
  Speaker 1: with their own virtue than James Comy, And I think
• 32:26
  Speaker 1: he thought that Hillary had in the bag and he
• 32:28
  Speaker 1: didn't want to have a situation where Hillary would win
• 32:32
  Speaker 1: and he would look compromised because he held withheld this
• 32:35
  Speaker 1: information during an election, and it backfired and Trump won,
• 32:41
  Speaker 1: and Trump for a while loved James Comy literally gave
• 32:46
  Speaker 1: him a hug Comy claims he was repulsed by that,
• 32:51
  Speaker 1: but then he realized that Kmy wasn't on his side
• 32:54
  Speaker 1: and that Camy had questions that were uncomfortable, and so
• 32:58
  Speaker 1: he fired James Comy under horrific circumstances. Well, then he
• 33:04
  Speaker 1: hires Christopher Ray, a Republican who's on a ten year term,
• 33:09
  Speaker 1: still has three years left. Can you imagine if Kamala
• 33:13
  Speaker 1: had won and she come during the transition promises to
• 33:18
  Speaker 1: fire Christopher Ray for no substantive reason and replace Christopher
• 33:25
  Speaker 1: Ray with someone who had been speaking publicly in a
• 33:30
  Speaker 1: Harris Waltz campaign hat and had written a children's book
• 33:35
  Speaker 1: where she was a queen. Can you imagine the right
• 33:39
  Speaker 1: wing outrage over that. It would be apoplectick, It would
• 33:45
  Speaker 1: be off the charts, and rightfully so. Well, that's what
• 33:49
  Speaker 1: Trump is doing here with cash MATEL. I don't think
• 33:54
  Speaker 1: he's qualified for the job, but he's most importantly, I mean,
• 33:57
  Speaker 1: he's marginally qualified for the job resume wise, but not
• 34:03
  Speaker 1: from a mentality perspective, not from an objectivity standpoint. He
• 34:09
  Speaker 1: is clearly overtly a political Trump partisan and sycophan. I mean,
• 34:16
  Speaker 1: this is much like the Matt Gates pick. It's a
• 34:20
  Speaker 1: Matt Gates redo. But even I can't get his exercise,
• 34:25
  Speaker 1: although I did a pretty good job of being exercised
• 34:27
  Speaker 1: there for the last couple of minutes. As much about
• 34:31
  Speaker 1: Cash Mattel in light of the Hunter Biden pardon by
• 34:36
  Speaker 1: President Joe Biden, I just can't. And part of what
• 34:41
  Speaker 1: bothers me about this whole FBI director's situation is one
• 34:46
  Speaker 1: people's ignorance.
• 34:47
  Speaker 2: They don't understand about the ten year term.
• 34:49
  Speaker 1: They don't understand why jag Or Hoover was FBI director
• 34:53
  Speaker 1: for a million years. They don't understand, They don't they
• 34:57
  Speaker 1: forget the history with James call Me and how Trump
• 35:01
  Speaker 1: effectively re hired him and then fired him.
• 35:05
  Speaker 2: And then now Trump.
• 35:06
  Speaker 1: Is already saying effectively by naming Cash Mattel is the
• 35:11
  Speaker 1: next FBI director that he's gonna fire Christopher Ray.
• 35:14
  Speaker 2: Now this is.
• 35:16
  Speaker 1: Where the right wing media really has an impact, because
• 35:20
  Speaker 1: in Trump world, Christopher Ray is, you know, an evil character.
• 35:26
  Speaker 1: And I'm not saying that Christopher Ray has been a
• 35:28
  Speaker 1: fantastic FBI director, hasn't made mistakes. Some of the statements
• 35:32
  Speaker 1: he most made recently made most recently about the the
• 35:35
  Speaker 1: Secret Service. When it came to the Trump assassinations, I
• 35:38
  Speaker 1: thought were an indication that he's clueless.
• 35:40
  Speaker 2: So I'm not a.
• 35:41
  Speaker 1: Big Christopher Ray fan, but I don't see where the
• 35:45
  Speaker 1: standard for getting rid of an FBI director that you
• 35:48
  Speaker 1: yourself hired.
• 35:51
  Speaker 2: I cannot repeat that enough.
• 35:54
  Speaker 1: Trump is already gonna get rid of a guy he
• 35:57
  Speaker 1: hired as the FBI toctor to replace him with someone
• 36:02
  Speaker 1: who's far more loyal to him personally. And for those
• 36:06
  Speaker 1: who say, well, but John, you know all these things
• 36:09
  Speaker 1: Christopher Ray did and Russia Gate and everything else because
• 36:13
  Speaker 1: they bought into this mythology of the deep state that
• 36:17
  Speaker 1: Cashptel is big into. He's also big into the Epstein files.
• 36:23
  Speaker 1: Everyone's so excited that Cash Btel is gonna.
• 36:27
  Speaker 2: Release the Epstein files.
• 36:28
  Speaker 1: This feels a lot like the al Capones you Safe
• 36:33
  Speaker 1: Heraldo Rivera situation. It's going to turn out to be
• 36:36
  Speaker 1: a big nothing burger even worse. And Stnald Trump was
• 36:40
  Speaker 1: very close to Jeffrey Epstein at some point, So I
• 36:43
  Speaker 1: really don't buy the whole or even get or understand
• 36:46
  Speaker 1: the whole obsession with boy Cash Metel will be awesome
• 36:49
  Speaker 1: because we're gonna get to see the Epstein files. But anyway,
• 36:52
  Speaker 1: back to Christopher Ray. Here's what I do understand about politics.
• 36:56
  Speaker 1: If Christopher Ray was really that horrible, especially given the
• 37:02
  Speaker 1: fact that Donald Trump owns the Republican Party and has
• 37:06
  Speaker 1: never been more powerful, He's a mythical figure now after
• 37:10
  Speaker 1: having just won an election. If Christopher Ray was really
• 37:13
  Speaker 1: this horrendous, you could never find a prominent Republican incumbent
• 37:19
  Speaker 1: politician going on national television to strongly defend him. You
• 37:25
  Speaker 1: would never find that, even if it was true, it
• 37:28
  Speaker 1: would never ever happen. And yet this weekend, South Dakota
• 37:33
  Speaker 1: Republican Senator Mike Rounds went on I believe this was
• 37:39
  Speaker 1: ABC's Sunday Morning show and strongly defended Ray, who you
• 37:45
  Speaker 1: have to presume.
• 37:45
  Speaker 2: Is going to be fired.
• 37:46
  Speaker 1: He has to either resign or be fired by Trump
• 37:49
  Speaker 1: once he takes office for cash, buttel to even have
• 37:52
  Speaker 1: a position to be nominated for I mean, that's part
• 37:55
  Speaker 1: of this whole The most insane part of this whole
• 37:59
  Speaker 1: thing is that we're presuming that the the FBI director
• 38:03
  Speaker 1: is going to be fired. This is not the same
• 38:05
  Speaker 1: thing as some of these other positions. You know, the
• 38:08
  Speaker 1: Secretary of Defense, or Secretary of State or whatever. Those
• 38:11
  Speaker 1: are all understood that the new president selects them.
• 38:14
  Speaker 2: That's not the case with the FBI director.
• 38:18
  Speaker 1: And look, I mean, one guy doesn't prove anything, really,
• 38:23
  Speaker 1: but in the world in which we live, having a
• 38:25
  Speaker 1: Republican senator go on national television and strongly defend Christopher
• 38:31
  Speaker 1: Ray in this environment, given how much power Trump has that.
• 38:38
  Speaker 2: Interrational world says a lot.
• 38:40
  Speaker 1: Here's what Mike Brown, Senator from South Dakota, said about
• 38:44
  Speaker 1: Christopher Ray this past weekend.
• 38:46
  Speaker 3: Chris Ray, you know who the President nominated the first
• 38:49
  Speaker 3: time around, and I think the President picked a very
• 38:52
  Speaker 3: good man to be the director of the FBI when
• 38:55
  Speaker 3: he did that in his first term. When we meet
• 38:58
  Speaker 3: with him behind closed doors, I've had no objections to
• 39:01
  Speaker 3: the way that he's handled himself, and so I don't
• 39:04
  Speaker 3: have any complaints about the way that he's done his
• 39:06
  Speaker 3: job right now, and once again, the president has the
• 39:10
  Speaker 3: right to make nominations, but normally these are for a
• 39:13
  Speaker 3: ten year term. We'll see what his process is and
• 39:16
  Speaker 3: whether he actually makes that nomination and then if he does,
• 39:20
  Speaker 3: just as with anybody who is nominated for one of
• 39:23
  Speaker 3: these positions, once they've been nominated by the president, then
• 39:27
  Speaker 3: the president gets the benefit of the doubt on the nomination.
• 39:30
  Speaker 3: But we still go through a process, and that process
• 39:33
  Speaker 3: includes advice and consent, which for the Senate means advice
• 39:38
  Speaker 3: or consent sometimes.
• 39:40
  Speaker 1: Folks, I'm telling you it is not possible for an
• 39:44
  Speaker 1: incumbent Republican senator to say that on national television if
• 39:50
  Speaker 1: it was not based in truth. So I'm not a
• 39:53
  Speaker 1: big Christopher Ray fan, but we have left the gravitational
• 39:57
  Speaker 1: pull of the rational earth here. This is where the
• 40:00
  Speaker 1: Trump cult and the Trump mind virus plays a huge
• 40:04
  Speaker 1: role here, because so much of the Republican base, especially
• 40:09
  Speaker 1: on social media, has had their minds fucked by this
• 40:13
  Speaker 1: entire issue of Russia Gate and everything that surrounds it,
• 40:17
  Speaker 1: that they believe that the FBI is out to get
• 40:20
  Speaker 1: Donald Trump and that therefore he can fire the guy
• 40:24
  Speaker 1: he hired for no substantive reason, and there's no problem
• 40:29
  Speaker 1: with that.
• 40:30
  Speaker 2: And oh, by the way, it will be the second time.
• 40:33
  Speaker 1: It will be the second time that Donald Trump has
• 40:36
  Speaker 1: fired an FBI director for no apparent reason, no substantive reason,
• 40:42
  Speaker 1: that he had previously approved up.
• 40:46
  Speaker 2: He approved of Camy when he came in, gave him,
• 40:48
  Speaker 2: the hug.
• 40:49
  Speaker 1: The whole bit, praised him publicly, and that he hires
• 40:52
  Speaker 1: Christopher Ray and before his term is up. The presumption
• 40:56
  Speaker 1: here because I don't think I don't think Ray is
• 40:59
  Speaker 1: going to resign. Maybe he will, who knows, But if
• 41:03
  Speaker 1: he's probably going to force Trump to fire him, this
• 41:06
  Speaker 1: will be the.
• 41:07
  Speaker 2: Second time that'll happen. And I don't want to get
• 41:11
  Speaker 2: into the whole Russiagate thing.
• 41:12
  Speaker 1: I get that in the minds of Trump fans, this
• 41:15
  Speaker 1: was a total farce.
• 41:17
  Speaker 2: This was a coup.
• 41:20
  Speaker 1: There was nothing to it. That's not true. Russia Gate
• 41:24
  Speaker 1: was way way overblown. The media completely overplayed their hands.
• 41:31
  Speaker 1: I've gone through this many times before, but a lot
• 41:34
  Speaker 1: of the things that Muller found were very concerning. There
• 41:37
  Speaker 1: was a lot of legitimate smoke there, especially in the
• 41:41
  Speaker 1: realm of obstruction of justice. I will always believe that
• 41:45
  Speaker 1: the core of why this all went down the way
• 41:48
  Speaker 1: that it did was that Trump was trying to leverage
• 41:52
  Speaker 1: the twenty sixteen Republican presidential nomination into getting Vladimir Putin
• 41:58
  Speaker 1: to take him seriously enough you could finally build a
• 42:01
  Speaker 1: Trump Tower in Moscow. And that's why Michael Cohen lied
• 42:06
  Speaker 1: about the dates in which that ended, the time period
• 42:10
  Speaker 1: where that ended to Congress, Trump or Trump's lawyers suborned
• 42:16
  Speaker 1: Michael Cohen's perjury. It was actually a lot like the
• 42:19
  Speaker 1: Bill Clinton Monica Lewinsky scandal, with what Bill Clinton did
• 42:23
  Speaker 1: with his secretary Betty Curry subborning her perjury.
• 42:27
  Speaker 2: But Trump, in my view, or his lawyers.
• 42:29
  Speaker 1: Suborned Cohen's perjury because they were trying to protect They
• 42:33
  Speaker 1: were trying to cover that up. Now in retrospect, there
• 42:37
  Speaker 1: was nothing, no need to cover it up, because even
• 42:40
  Speaker 1: Trump underestimated how much power he had, at least within
• 42:43
  Speaker 1: the Republican Party and the right wing media.
• 42:47
  Speaker 2: But that was really how this whole thing began.
• 42:50
  Speaker 1: And the other thing I'll say on this is, look,
• 42:53
  Speaker 1: Russia Gate turned out to be mostly a fraudulent investigation.
• 42:59
  Speaker 1: I totally agree with that, and mistakes were made, and
• 43:02
  Speaker 1: some of it may have been nefariously motivated. I have
• 43:06
  Speaker 1: no problem with any of that. But if you don't
• 43:11
  Speaker 1: want to have the federal government the FBI investigating, or
• 43:16
  Speaker 1: in the words of Trump fans, spying on your campaign
• 43:21
  Speaker 1: when it comes to Russia Gate, maybe in the middle
• 43:24
  Speaker 1: of a campaign you don't publicly ask Russia to hack
• 43:30
  Speaker 1: into Hillary Clinton's emails. Your opponent maybe not do that,
• 43:36
  Speaker 1: which is exactly what Donald Trump did. So why he
• 43:41
  Speaker 1: did that, I don't know. I'd love to actually know.
• 43:44
  Speaker 1: I'd love to know whether that was just a weird
• 43:46
  Speaker 1: coincidence and the fact that there's strong evidence found by
• 43:50
  Speaker 1: Robert Muller that Russia tried to do exactly that the
• 43:54
  Speaker 1: night that Donald Trump made that public message. But if
• 43:59
  Speaker 1: you're conser learned about being vulnerable to a federal investigation,
• 44:04
  Speaker 1: maybe you don't ask Russia publicly to commit a crime
• 44:09
  Speaker 1: against your opponent. I mean, come on, people, this was
• 44:14
  Speaker 1: not a situation that was totally made up.
• 44:17
  Speaker 2: It was not. And so I don't buy this whole idea.
• 44:22
  Speaker 1: That Christopher Ray ought to be fired. I don't think
• 44:24
  Speaker 1: it's healthy. I think it's contradictory. It's hypocritical, especially since
• 44:28
  Speaker 1: Trump hired Ray to begin with. And I don't think
• 44:31
  Speaker 1: Cash Betel is the right person to replace him, if
• 44:34
  Speaker 1: only because he lacks even a semblance of political objectivity.
• 44:41
  Speaker 2: Not even close.
• 44:42
  Speaker 1: I mean, he's not even hiding it that he is
• 44:45
  Speaker 1: a Trump sycophant, which makes Trump a king, and that's wrong.
• 44:52
  Speaker 1: Regardless of your call if you call yourself a Republican
• 44:56
  Speaker 1: or a Democrat. Now, I don't know whether not Cash
• 44:59
  Speaker 1: matel assumes this all goes down as expected, where Ray
• 45:03
  Speaker 1: either resigns or is forcing Trump to fire him, and
• 45:07
  Speaker 1: then Patel officially gets nominated. I don't know whether or
• 45:10
  Speaker 1: he's gonna get confirmed by the Senate. I think it's
• 45:12
  Speaker 1: going to be a tough row to Hoe. I actually
• 45:16
  Speaker 1: think in a weird way, the Matt Gates situation going
• 45:20
  Speaker 1: up in flames probably hurts Patel because Gates didn't even
• 45:25
  Speaker 1: make it to a confirmation process when it came to
• 45:30
  Speaker 1: the next Attorney General. If Gates had gone through that
• 45:33
  Speaker 1: process and then been voted down by Republicans in the
• 45:38
  Speaker 1: US Senate, that would have used up a lot of
• 45:40
  Speaker 1: capital when it came to how much those Republican senators
• 45:45
  Speaker 1: are willing to endure from the Trump cult. Well, they
• 45:48
  Speaker 1: didn't have to do that because the Gates nomination imploded
• 45:52
  Speaker 1: on Liftoff. So I think that actually probably is going
• 45:55
  Speaker 1: to hurt Cash Pattel because generally I think the situation
• 46:00
  Speaker 1: like this the Republicans in the Senate that they really
• 46:03
  Speaker 1: feel strongly that someone doesn't belong in a position they
• 46:08
  Speaker 1: probably get one freebee. That's just my guess. They probably
• 46:13
  Speaker 1: get one freebee where they can vote against Trump if
• 46:16
  Speaker 1: they're by way. This is only they're only about ten
• 46:20
  Speaker 1: Republican senators, to which to whom this really matters. The
• 46:24
  Speaker 1: other forty three are going to do whatever the hell
• 46:26
  Speaker 1: Trump wants. But there's still a group, a small group
• 46:30
  Speaker 1: of people who are willing to go against Trump.
• 46:33
  Speaker 2: We saw that with.
• 46:34
  Speaker 1: Matt Gates, and it only takes three or four for
• 46:39
  Speaker 1: Cash Mattel's nomination to go down.
• 46:41
  Speaker 2: Because I don't think Cash.
• 46:42
  Speaker 1: Mattel is going to get any Democratic votes for FBI directors.
• 46:46
  Speaker 1: So my guess is that that's going to be the
• 46:49
  Speaker 1: big battle. That's going to be the big battle in
• 46:52
  Speaker 1: the Senate, because I do think Cash Mattel will probably
• 46:55
  Speaker 1: get through the conference, get to the confirmation process, and
• 46:59
  Speaker 1: it will actually get to vote.
• 47:01
  Speaker 2: That's my guess.
• 47:01
  Speaker 1: I think there will come down to a situation where
• 47:05
  Speaker 1: there will be a vote in the Senate as to
• 47:07
  Speaker 1: whether or not Cash would Tell will be the FBI director.
• 47:09
  Speaker 1: This is assuming that Trump doesn't try to do some
• 47:12
  Speaker 1: sort of shenanigans to get around the Senate, which I
• 47:15
  Speaker 1: don't think he's gonna be able to do. But I
• 47:16
  Speaker 1: think there will be a vote, and I think it
• 47:18
  Speaker 1: will be very, very close. And my guess is that
• 47:22
  Speaker 1: Patel probably loses that vote. But there's a lot of
• 47:25
  Speaker 1: time between now and then, and I'm not making an
• 47:28
  Speaker 1: actual prediction. It's more of a guess right now. So
• 47:31
  Speaker 1: that's the situation with regard to the FBI director. You know,
• 47:34
  Speaker 1: prior to the Biden pardon, it would have been possible
• 47:38
  Speaker 1: to be outraged by the fact that Trump announced that
• 47:41
  Speaker 1: Jared Kushner's corrupt father, who Trump already pardoned for some
• 47:46
  Speaker 1: pretty heinous crimes, has been named ambassard to France. How
• 47:52
  Speaker 1: about that, folks, Drain the swamp. Baby, we're gonna name
• 47:58
  Speaker 1: Jared Kushner's fire my son in law's corrupt father I
• 48:03
  Speaker 1: already pardon to be ambassador of France. And this is
• 48:06
  Speaker 1: the guy who's supposed to be draining the swamp. Well,
• 48:10
  Speaker 1: you know what, post Hunter Biden pardon.
• 48:14
  Speaker 2: Who cares? Who cares? It's the ambassador to France. This
• 48:19
  Speaker 2: is a new world we're living.
• 48:20
  Speaker 1: In, probably for the worst, but this is I'm accepting
• 48:24
  Speaker 1: that these are the new rules. And so you know,
• 48:27
  Speaker 1: it's even though it's hypocritical, even though it's absurd.
• 48:30
  Speaker 2: It doesn't matter anymore. By the way, ambassadorships.
• 48:33
  Speaker 1: It's kind of funny to me that we still even
• 48:35
  Speaker 1: have ambassadors. I guess there's some value to them, but
• 48:39
  Speaker 1: you know, ambassadors were created in a world where you know,
• 48:43
  Speaker 1: travel was almost impossible. I mean, traveling to France would
• 48:48
  Speaker 1: have taken weeks, you know, from the United States.
• 48:51
  Speaker 2: And now if need be the the you.
• 48:55
  Speaker 1: Know, the leader of France, the leader of the United
• 48:57
  Speaker 1: States can be on the phone in seconds or text
• 49:00
  Speaker 1: or whatever. So communication is completely kind of I think
• 49:04
  Speaker 1: made ambassadorship somewhat obsolete, but you know, that's the world
• 49:08
  Speaker 1: we're living in now. So Jared Kushner's corrupt father is
• 49:12
  Speaker 1: going to be the ambassador to France for a president
• 49:16
  Speaker 1: who is all about draining the swamp. On a four
• 49:20
  Speaker 1: more serious matter, I talked a lot last week about
• 49:23
  Speaker 1: Pete Hegsteth and his nomination to be the Secretary of
• 49:27
  Speaker 1: Defense and how there is a sex abuse allegation or
• 49:31
  Speaker 1: I guess you'd call it a rape allegation against him
• 49:34
  Speaker 1: from twenty seventeen. I went into great detail about why
• 49:37
  Speaker 1: I do not believe that that is a credible rape allegation.
• 49:41
  Speaker 1: I believe that there is a far more logical alternative
• 49:44
  Speaker 1: scenario for what really happened in that circumstance, and it
• 49:48
  Speaker 1: basically is that the woman involved was caught in a
• 49:53
  Speaker 1: very bad situation because her husband and child were in
• 49:57
  Speaker 1: the same hotel room.
• 49:58
  Speaker 2: She needed an explanation for why she was.
• 50:00
  Speaker 1: In Hexset's hotel room for over two hours, and she lied.
• 50:06
  Speaker 2: I think that's the most likely scenario. Is it provable?
• 50:09
  Speaker 1: Probably not, but I think the totality of the circumstances
• 50:13
  Speaker 1: make that a far more likely scenario than the idea
• 50:17
  Speaker 1: that Pete Hextat actually raped this woman. Although there was
• 50:20
  Speaker 1: an NDA and some sort of payment that was made
• 50:23
  Speaker 1: from Hextat to this woman, but I believe that was
• 50:26
  Speaker 1: probably because of the timing and all. This This event
• 50:29
  Speaker 1: or incident occurred in twenty seventeen, and so my strong
• 50:34
  Speaker 1: guess is that this NDA occurred when the.
• 50:39
  Speaker 2: Me Too movement broke out, when the me Too panic happened,
• 50:43
  Speaker 2: and hext was worried about his gigot.
• 50:46
  Speaker 1: Fox News Channel and his overall reputation and men being
• 50:50
  Speaker 1: canceled for situations involving alleged sexual abuse, and so I'm
• 50:56
  Speaker 1: willing to accept that the NDA at least makes sense
• 50:59
  Speaker 1: in that text. Well, there's been some new information that
• 51:04
  Speaker 1: has come out that's quite interesting. I'm not one hundred
• 51:08
  Speaker 1: percent sure what to make of it, but it is
• 51:11
  Speaker 1: in the form of an email that Pete Heex says
• 51:14
  Speaker 1: Mom sent to him in twenty eighteen.
• 51:18
  Speaker 2: So this is after the rape allegation.
• 51:21
  Speaker 1: He's been married a couple of times, He's had a
• 51:24
  Speaker 1: child with another woman who he was not married to,
• 51:28
  Speaker 1: at least not at the time he wasn't and and
• 51:31
  Speaker 1: that was you know, so there's all sorts of things
• 51:33
  Speaker 1: going on in Pete Heexstas's romantic life. Now important context
• 51:38
  Speaker 1: here is something I mentioned being key to why people
• 51:42
  Speaker 1: like Megan Kelly are very willing to defend Pete Heex's
• 51:45
  Speaker 1: death and why I think the general public is willing
• 51:47
  Speaker 1: to defend Pete Hexstaths, especially conservatives, is that Pete Heex's
• 51:51
  Speaker 1: death is a very good looking Studley military hero, and
• 51:56
  Speaker 1: so therefore I think people understandably presume an entirely different
• 52:01
  Speaker 1: set of circumstances when it comes to romantic interludes involving
• 52:05
  Speaker 1: Pete Hegstad than they would, for instance, Harvey Weinstein.
• 52:09
  Speaker 2: I made that connection or that.
• 52:10
  Speaker 1: Comparison in a previous episode of the podcast. So it's
• 52:15
  Speaker 1: twenty eighteen and Hegs's mom sends him the following email, son,
• 52:21
  Speaker 1: I have tried to keep quiet about your character and behavior,
• 52:24
  Speaker 1: but after listening to the way you made Samantha Field today,
• 52:27
  Speaker 1: I cannot stay silent, and as a woman and your mother,
• 52:31
  Speaker 1: I feel I must speak out. You are an abuser
• 52:35
  Speaker 1: of women. That is the ugly truth. And I have
• 52:40
  Speaker 1: no respect for any man that belittles, lies, cheats, sleeps around,
• 52:46
  Speaker 1: and uses women for his own power and ego. You
• 52:51
  Speaker 1: are that man and have been for years. And as
• 52:55
  Speaker 1: your mother, it pains me and embarrasses me to say.
• 52:59
  Speaker 2: That, but it is. But it is the sad, sad truth.
• 53:05
  Speaker 1: I am not a saint, far from it, so don't throw.
• 53:09
  Speaker 2: That in my face. But your abuse over the years
• 53:13
  Speaker 2: to women.
• 53:15
  Speaker 1: Parentheses, dishonesty, sleeping around, betrayal, debasing, belittling needs to be
• 53:21
  Speaker 1: called out. That's that's pretty harsh, coming from your own mom. Now,
• 53:28
  Speaker 1: this was published in the New York Times, and it
• 53:33
  Speaker 1: is interesting that the New York Times got this email.
• 53:39
  Speaker 1: I don't one hundred percent know how they got the email.
• 53:42
  Speaker 1: They didn't say how they got the email. I know
• 53:46
  Speaker 1: there's some conspiracy theories online, of course, because we're living
• 53:49
  Speaker 1: in the Trump world.
• 53:50
  Speaker 2: As to how they got the email.
• 53:52
  Speaker 1: But the most logical, the most logical Okham's razor explanation
• 53:58
  Speaker 1: for how The New York Times got the email is
• 54:01
  Speaker 1: that this must have been part of discovery in some
• 54:06
  Speaker 1: sort of legal case against Pete Hegstad.
• 54:10
  Speaker 2: Again, I don't know that.
• 54:11
  Speaker 1: I'm just going by the most logical and simplest explanation,
• 54:18
  Speaker 1: and to me, it's pretty obvious that that's the only
• 54:22
  Speaker 1: way that this would make any sense. So let's say
• 54:25
  Speaker 1: that that hegstap is hit with some sort of a lawsuit,
• 54:30
  Speaker 1: there's discovery in the lawsuit, they get an access to
• 54:33
  Speaker 1: his emails, and when they get the access to his emails,
• 54:37
  Speaker 1: they see an email from his mom, which is.
• 54:40
  Speaker 2: Clearly relevant right to an allegation of sex abuse.
• 54:44
  Speaker 1: So then that means that there's a whole bunch of
• 54:47
  Speaker 1: lawyers working for whoever the accuser is. This is all
• 54:51
  Speaker 1: speculation on my part, but I think it's rational and
• 54:54
  Speaker 1: informed speculation. There's a whole bunch of lawyers who are
• 54:58
  Speaker 1: privy this email? And then when Pete Hexstath becomes the
• 55:04
  Speaker 1: nominee to be the next Defense Secretary and the issue
• 55:07
  Speaker 1: of his sexual abuse comes out, all you need is
• 55:11
  Speaker 1: for one of those lawyers or somebody within the accuser's
• 55:15
  Speaker 1: camp to be a liberal and have it out for
• 55:19
  Speaker 1: Pete Heckstad and or Trump. They remember, wait a minute,
• 55:23
  Speaker 1: didn't we have an email in that lawsuit from Hexcess's
• 55:28
  Speaker 1: mom calling him an abuser? And then they leak it
• 55:30
  Speaker 1: to the New York Times. That is the most logical
• 55:35
  Speaker 1: explanation for what happened here, which raises a question of Okay,
• 55:39
  Speaker 1: what was the legal proceeding. Yeah, I'm not making a
• 55:43
  Speaker 1: prediction here, but it feels to me like there might
• 55:46
  Speaker 1: be underline, might be another shoe to drop here. Could
• 55:50
  Speaker 1: this have been part of the negotiations for the NDA
• 55:56
  Speaker 1: involving the twenty seventeen incident. It's possible, though the timing
• 56:02
  Speaker 1: and that doesn't seem to work out. I don't know
• 56:04
  Speaker 1: when the NDA was signed, but this email wasn't until
• 56:08
  Speaker 1: twenty eighteen. So I'm a little concerned here that there's
• 56:13
  Speaker 1: something else going on that we're going to learn more
• 56:18
  Speaker 1: in relation to how it is that this email became public,
• 56:22
  Speaker 1: because there are other ways this could have become public,
• 56:25
  Speaker 1: but Hexstas's mom didn't leak it.
• 56:27
  Speaker 2: She told The New York Times she.
• 56:29
  Speaker 1: Regrets writing the email, which might be the only thing
• 56:33
  Speaker 1: that saves hegseat in this situation. Now, part of this
• 56:38
  Speaker 1: is really farfield and a classic six degrees of John
• 56:42
  Speaker 1: Sigler situation. But the part of why I thought about
• 56:47
  Speaker 1: the legal proceeding and discovery issue is that I had
• 56:51
  Speaker 1: a remarkably similar situation happened in my civil trial defamation
• 56:58
  Speaker 1: trial in Louisville, Kentucky, almost twenty years ago. I've talked
• 57:02
  Speaker 1: about this child many times before, all no, I've never
• 57:05
  Speaker 1: told the full, extensive, bizarro world story of it, which
• 57:10
  Speaker 1: ought to be a movie someday but won't be. But
• 57:14
  Speaker 1: part of what happened, part of the insanity that occurred
• 57:18
  Speaker 1: during that situation, was that all of my emails became.
• 57:24
  Speaker 2: Part of discovery. And one of the emails and.
• 57:28
  Speaker 1: This is just so crazy that this made it into
• 57:30
  Speaker 1: a public court proceeding. In one of my emails, and
• 57:35
  Speaker 1: I can't remember to whom this was sent or whatever,
• 57:38
  Speaker 1: but I mentioned that my mother was concerned about the
• 57:47
  Speaker 1: influence that my father's and I don't want to say
• 57:50
  Speaker 1: the word abuse, but my father's treatment of my mother
• 57:55
  Speaker 1: might have on how I relate to women. And again
• 58:01
  Speaker 1: that's not a direct quote, but that was somehow became
• 58:05
  Speaker 1: a subject of one of my emails. And I think
• 58:08
  Speaker 1: the email was to radio talk show legend Terry Miners,
• 58:13
  Speaker 1: who's been on this podcast previously, because because Terry went
• 58:18
  Speaker 1: on the stand in this definition trial and this email
• 58:23
  Speaker 1: was brought into evidence and Terry was asked about it
• 58:29
  Speaker 1: under oath in a public trial with all sorts of
• 58:33
  Speaker 1: massive media coverage, and it was just so insane. I
• 58:38
  Speaker 1: was like, what the fuck is going on here? It
• 58:42
  Speaker 1: was so nuts. And this was on the first day
• 58:45
  Speaker 1: of the trial, when I had no idea how much
• 58:48
  Speaker 1: media coverage there was going to be. In fact, I
• 58:50
  Speaker 1: was kind of surprised, Well, there's no media in the courtroom.
• 58:53
  Speaker 1: Not that I cared. I was like, I was actually gratified.
• 58:57
  Speaker 1: I was, thank goodness, there's not a lot of media.
• 58:59
  Speaker 2: In this deal.
• 59:01
  Speaker 1: Well that was because there was a completely separate room
• 59:04
  Speaker 1: packed with me. They had their own room, and there
• 59:08
  Speaker 1: was a camera on me during the entire proceeding, which
• 59:12
  Speaker 1: I did not know, And so when Terry Miners was
• 59:15
  Speaker 1: asked about this email that I had somehow mentioned my
• 59:21
  Speaker 1: father's treatment of my then dead mother and how it
• 59:26
  Speaker 1: somehow related to my relationships with women, I turned around
• 59:33
  Speaker 1: to my then very good friend John Yarmouth, with whom
• 59:36
  Speaker 1: I had hosted a television show in Louisville, Kentucky. A
• 59:39
  Speaker 1: year later he would end up becoming the Congressman from
• 59:43
  Speaker 1: Louisville for many, many years Democratic Congressman from Louisville. I
• 59:47
  Speaker 1: turned around and I very clearly mouthed the words, this
• 59:54
  Speaker 1: is ridiculous, because it was beyond ridiculous. Well that on
• 1:00:00
  Speaker 1: the news in Louisville, Kentucky, the top story on every
• 1:00:04
  Speaker 1: newscast was the clip of me in court calling the
• 1:00:10
  Speaker 1: entire proceding ridiculous, as if I was calling the entire
• 1:00:15
  Speaker 1: trial ridiculous, which, by the way, it was. But of
• 1:00:18
  Speaker 1: course there was no context given at all to why
• 1:00:22
  Speaker 1: I was reacting to this, to whom I was reacting
• 1:00:26
  Speaker 1: to this, or you know, never got a comment from
• 1:00:29
  Speaker 1: me as to what the hell I actually meant. Now, thankfully,
• 1:00:32
  Speaker 1: they eventually, stupidly the plaintiffs put me on the stand,
• 1:00:35
  Speaker 1: and this.
• 1:00:36
  Speaker 2: Was their first question.
• 1:00:37
  Speaker 1: Their first question was the other day, mister Zicklar, you
• 1:00:40
  Speaker 1: you turned and you mouthed the words, this is ridiculous.
• 1:00:44
  Speaker 1: Do you believe that this proceeding is ridiculous? And I absolutely.
• 1:00:48
  Speaker 2: Eviscerted this lawyer.
• 1:00:51
  Speaker 1: I went through the entire history of my mother, my
• 1:00:54
  Speaker 1: father and the absurdity of the question, and how irrelevant
• 1:00:58
  Speaker 1: it was, how ridiculous the whole situation was.
• 1:01:01
  Speaker 2: I mean, I went off.
• 1:01:03
  Speaker 1: And I think it set the tone for the rest
• 1:01:06
  Speaker 1: of the trial, which we ended up winning unanimously.
• 1:01:09
  Speaker 2: But anyway, that's a side.
• 1:01:12
  Speaker 1: But it's a weirdly similar situation.
• 1:01:16
  Speaker 2: Although my mother never wrote that about me.
• 1:01:19
  Speaker 1: Where my spidey senses are telling me that's the only
• 1:01:23
  Speaker 1: way this makes sense that this email came to public
• 1:01:29
  Speaker 1: to the public domain through the New York Times, because
• 1:01:32
  Speaker 1: it must have been part of some sort of legal proceeding.
• 1:01:36
  Speaker 2: Now what that legal proceeding is, who knows.
• 1:01:39
  Speaker 1: It could have been something big, something harmless, something in between.
• 1:01:43
  Speaker 1: Maybe we'll never know, but that's what my gut is
• 1:01:46
  Speaker 1: telling me.
• 1:01:47
  Speaker 2: As far as the.
• 1:01:48
  Speaker 1: Significance of this, it's obviously going to come up during
• 1:01:53
  Speaker 1: his confirmation hearing and how he responds to that maybe
• 1:01:57
  Speaker 1: his mother even I don't know she'll be asked to
• 1:02:00
  Speaker 1: testify or not, but it'll be interesting. I would like
• 1:02:03
  Speaker 1: to see how hex s Deeth responds to that. Interestingly,
• 1:02:07
  Speaker 1: Megan Kelly, who I have used multiple times when it
• 1:02:11
  Speaker 1: comes to this story because I think she's a really
• 1:02:13
  Speaker 1: good barometer of this. I mean, she's really the perfect barometer, right,
• 1:02:17
  Speaker 1: I mean Megan Kelly, who's whose entire persona is wrapped
• 1:02:21
  Speaker 1: up in this whole idea of you know me too
• 1:02:25
  Speaker 1: and sexual abuse of powerful men, especially in the media world.
• 1:02:30
  Speaker 1: That was a big part of her narrative surrounding her
• 1:02:33
  Speaker 1: stint at Fox News Channel. She was played by Charlie's
• 1:02:36
  Speaker 1: Tarron in a movie about this regarding Fox News Channel.
• 1:02:40
  Speaker 1: Then she went to NBC and when that didn't work out,
• 1:02:43
  Speaker 1: she got fired. She claimed that Matt Lower, my good friend,
• 1:02:47
  Speaker 1: was a part of the entire environment, and you know,
• 1:02:51
  Speaker 1: the whole world of male domination, and and you know
• 1:02:56
  Speaker 1: that somehow the NBC, which is exactly the opposite of this,
• 1:02:59
  Speaker 1: was creating a pro male, anti female, misogynistic environment where
• 1:03:05
  Speaker 1: she wasn't allowed to succeed. That was basically her narrative
• 1:03:08
  Speaker 1: for trying to explain why she failed at NBC, she
• 1:03:11
  Speaker 1: went on a rampage against Matt Lawer demanded that NBC
• 1:03:16
  Speaker 1: release all the NDAs about Matt Lauer. When that happened,
• 1:03:20
  Speaker 1: there was crickets because there were no NDAs about Matt Lauer,
• 1:03:24
  Speaker 1: because Matt Lauer did not have a history of sexual
• 1:03:27
  Speaker 1: abuse or sexual harassment, despite what Megan Kelly wanted to
• 1:03:30
  Speaker 1: believe for her own selfish purposes as she tries to
• 1:03:34
  Speaker 1: rationalize her failure at NBC. She's worked with Pete he
• 1:03:39
  Speaker 1: Set before. I think, I think she's worked together. I
• 1:03:41
  Speaker 1: know she knows him, she clearly likes him. She's a
• 1:03:44
  Speaker 1: conservative now pro Trump commentator. So Megan Kelly really is
• 1:03:50
  Speaker 1: a significant person, both symbolically as well as from a
• 1:03:54
  Speaker 1: practical standpoint when it comes to whether or not support
• 1:03:58
  Speaker 1: for Pete Hegstad is going to be strong or not.
• 1:04:01
  Speaker 1: And she has strongly defended him, I think rightfully so
• 1:04:04
  Speaker 1: on the twenty seventeen allegation. And I was very interested
• 1:04:09
  Speaker 1: and eager to find out, Okay, what's Megan Kelly going
• 1:04:12
  Speaker 1: to say about the email from.
• 1:04:13
  Speaker 5: The mom right, because I mean I can just imagine
• 1:04:18
  Speaker 5: if if when the you know when NBC released all
• 1:04:22
  Speaker 5: of their documentation or the NDAs that didn't exist about
• 1:04:26
  Speaker 5: Matt Lower.
• 1:04:27
  Speaker 1: If there had been an email from Matt Lower's mom,
• 1:04:30
  Speaker 1: who by the way, is ninety five years old, still
• 1:04:33
  Speaker 1: alive and kicking and loves her son very much, If
• 1:04:36
  Speaker 1: there had been an email for Matt Lower's mom saying
• 1:04:39
  Speaker 1: anything close to Matt Lower what.
• 1:04:42
  Speaker 2: Pete Hexsas's mom said to him, Megan.
• 1:04:45
  Speaker 1: Kelly would have been all over it, all over it
• 1:04:47
  Speaker 1: is the smoking gun that see I told you so.
• 1:04:50
  Speaker 1: This is this is what NBC allowed to go on.
• 1:04:53
  Speaker 1: They enabled it, they covered it up. This is the
• 1:04:56
  Speaker 1: male dominated media culture that I'm fighting again. Well, I
• 1:05:01
  Speaker 1: have no doubt. I have zero doubt that that's what
• 1:05:03
  Speaker 1: Megan Kelly would have done in Matt lower situation. But
• 1:05:06
  Speaker 1: what did she do when it came to Pete Hexstad.
• 1:05:08
  Speaker 1: Here was her tweet in response to the Pete Hegstad
• 1:05:13
  Speaker 1: email from his mom.
• 1:05:15
  Speaker 2: Quote. Pete Xas's mom sent.
• 1:05:18
  Speaker 1: Him a you are behaving very badly, emailed during his
• 1:05:22
  Speaker 1: divorce parentheses She's a good mom exclamation point and the
• 1:05:27
  Speaker 1: New York Times.
• 1:05:28
  Speaker 2: Is all in on it.
• 1:05:31
  Speaker 1: Next we will hear from his aunt who accused him
• 1:05:34
  Speaker 1: of being late and sending his thank you cards after
• 1:05:38
  Speaker 1: Christmas six years ago. Womp, womp, womp. That's really revealing.
• 1:05:49
  Speaker 1: That's really pathetic. That is exposing Meghan Kelly for exactly
• 1:05:54
  Speaker 1: what I've told you she is. She is someone who
• 1:05:57
  Speaker 1: determines her position, especially anything related, based upon what her
• 1:06:02
  Speaker 1: self interest is at the time. And she has decided
• 1:06:05
  Speaker 1: because Trump's standing by Hegstad and she likes Pete Hegstad,
• 1:06:09
  Speaker 1: and I'm sure because Pete Hexstath is also attractive, and
• 1:06:13
  Speaker 1: attractive men get judged by a different standard in this
• 1:06:16
  Speaker 1: realm that it's all perfectly fine. She's mocking the email
• 1:06:21
  Speaker 1: from the mom. Now, I'm not saying that the mom's
• 1:06:24
  Speaker 1: email is disqualifying, but it is relevant, and if Megan
• 1:06:30
  Speaker 1: Kelly wanted to, she would have used it as a weapon.
• 1:06:33
  Speaker 1: I can guarantemntee as she would have done that with
• 1:06:36
  Speaker 1: my friend Matt Louer. But because her career and political
• 1:06:40
  Speaker 1: self interest is very, very different when it comes to
• 1:06:42
  Speaker 1: Pete Hegstad, all of a sudden, she's mocking the email
• 1:06:47
  Speaker 1: from the mom, And that, to me is very very
• 1:06:50
  Speaker 1: telling about Megan Kelly, and it's also telling about the
• 1:06:54
  Speaker 1: Republican base in the Trump world, because I think the
• 1:06:58
  Speaker 1: support for Pete Hexstath is going to stay strong as
• 1:07:01
  Speaker 1: long as Trump's support stays strong, and the Trump Twitter account,
• 1:07:06
  Speaker 1: the Trump War Room, has been constantly tweeting supportive messages
• 1:07:10
  Speaker 1: about Pete Hexstath, so there's no indication yet that there's
• 1:07:15
  Speaker 1: any backing away from Pete Hexstath. I do think, however,
• 1:07:19
  Speaker 1: he's going to have to do well in his confirmation
• 1:07:22
  Speaker 1: hearing to be able to get through this. I think
• 1:07:25
  Speaker 1: if he does well, he'll get confirmed. But I think
• 1:07:28
  Speaker 1: he's the ice under his feet is pretty thin. If
• 1:07:32
  Speaker 1: there's any breakage in that ice, there's another shoot to drop,
• 1:07:37
  Speaker 1: like I've already implied there might be. With how this
• 1:07:39
  Speaker 1: email came into the hands of the New York Times,
• 1:07:43
  Speaker 1: then we may see a different outcome here. But I'm
• 1:07:46
  Speaker 1: still fairly confident that Pete Hex's death will be confirmed
• 1:07:50
  Speaker 1: despite the old email from his mom. Now turning to
• 1:07:55
  Speaker 1: a subject on which Megan Kelly and I absolutely agree,
• 1:07:59
  Speaker 1: which is one of the frustrating things about meccan Kelly,
• 1:08:01
  Speaker 1: because she's right about an awful lot of a lot,
• 1:08:04
  Speaker 1: especially when her self interest doesn't bastardize her own thinking,
• 1:08:08
  Speaker 1: I want to turn to this controversy that I have
• 1:08:12
  Speaker 1: not talked about previously, and I should have. It was
• 1:08:15
  Speaker 1: always on my mind. It was always something I thought,
• 1:08:19
  Speaker 1: I need to get to this because this is an
• 1:08:21
  Speaker 1: emerging story. Well, I'm talking about what's been going on
• 1:08:25
  Speaker 1: in the world of women's volleyball. It's weird how women's
• 1:08:29
  Speaker 1: volleyball has become on multiple occasions a major political news
• 1:08:34
  Speaker 1: story over the last couple of years, including that incident
• 1:08:37
  Speaker 1: involving BYU and Duke, that fake racial incident that we
• 1:08:42
  Speaker 1: talked an awful lot about at the very beginning of
• 1:08:44
  Speaker 1: the Death of Journalism podcast. But we've had another situation
• 1:08:48
  Speaker 1: that may even be a bigger deal, though the news
• 1:08:50
  Speaker 1: media is trying to pretend that it isn't involving the
• 1:08:55
  Speaker 1: San Jose's San Jose State women's volleyball team. And the
• 1:09:01
  Speaker 1: reason why this has become such a controversy and really
• 1:09:06
  Speaker 1: came to a head over the last few days, although
• 1:09:09
  Speaker 1: it did not get nearly the kind of attention that
• 1:09:12
  Speaker 1: it deserved, is that the San Jose State women's volleyball
• 1:09:15
  Speaker 1: team has a biological male playing on their team and
• 1:09:22
  Speaker 1: at various points during their season. Schools have forfeited regular
• 1:09:28
  Speaker 1: season games against San Jose State, citing in various ways.
• 1:09:35
  Speaker 1: Sometimes they did so rather vaguely, sometimes they did so
• 1:09:39
  Speaker 1: more overtly, but basically citing safety concerns because you've got
• 1:09:45
  Speaker 1: a male playing volleyball, and I guess the velocity of
• 1:09:48
  Speaker 1: the ball being spiked is a lot greater than they're
• 1:09:53
  Speaker 1: used to when it comes from biological male. I mean, look,
• 1:09:57
  Speaker 1: I'm not a volleyball player, but to me, that's not
• 1:09:58
  Speaker 1: the argument I would be making. I would just be
• 1:10:01
  Speaker 1: making the unfairness argument. But I think there's an understandable
• 1:10:04
  Speaker 1: hesitancy for a lot of these schools to be.
• 1:10:08
  Speaker 2: You know, all schools, or at least somewhat liberally biased.
• 1:10:12
  Speaker 1: It's just a matter of how much I mean college
• 1:10:15
  Speaker 1: academia it's in the DNA to be PC and liberally biased.
• 1:10:20
  Speaker 1: So it's going to be very, very very difficult to
• 1:10:22
  Speaker 1: get a school and a group of girls all on
• 1:10:26
  Speaker 1: the same page just to what they're going to say
• 1:10:29
  Speaker 1: when they decide to forfeit a game. They're not going
• 1:10:32
  Speaker 1: to come out and say we're not going to play
• 1:10:34
  Speaker 1: against the team that as a player with a Penis.
• 1:10:37
  Speaker 1: They're not going to say that, but that's that's what
• 1:10:40
  Speaker 1: they should have said. But there were multiple games. I
• 1:10:43
  Speaker 1: don't know how many, but it was multiple games. I
• 1:10:45
  Speaker 1: think it was in the realm of five games or
• 1:10:48
  Speaker 1: so that San Jose State ended up quote unquote winning
• 1:10:53
  Speaker 1: because of forfeits.
• 1:10:55
  Speaker 2: But it never made a lot of news.
• 1:10:57
  Speaker 1: In fact, like I said, it'd even make this podcast,
• 1:10:59
  Speaker 1: which I think was probably a mistake. I should have
• 1:11:01
  Speaker 1: mentioned this previously, but I kept watching this story to see, Okay,
• 1:11:06
  Speaker 1: when's it going to explode? It's kind of bubbling beneath
• 1:11:10
  Speaker 1: the service. This is an amazing situation. We have major
• 1:11:15
  Speaker 1: college teams forfeiting women's volleyball games, a sport that is
• 1:11:20
  Speaker 1: becoming much more popular than it ever has been before.
• 1:11:24
  Speaker 1: And you know, I've already referenced has been the subject
• 1:11:27
  Speaker 1: of major news stories before.
• 1:11:29
  Speaker 2: We have teams.
• 1:11:30
  Speaker 1: Forfeiting because of a transgendered player.
• 1:11:35
  Speaker 2: When is this going to explode? Well?
• 1:11:39
  Speaker 1: San Jose State is part of the Mountain West Conference,
• 1:11:41
  Speaker 1: and the Mountain West Conference had their conference tournament over
• 1:11:46
  Speaker 1: the Thanksgiving holiday and they had a team forfeit against them,
• 1:11:55
  Speaker 1: Boisey State from Idaho, and I think that's important.
• 1:12:00
  Speaker 2: Being a very very conservative.
• 1:12:02
  Speaker 1: State, Boise State decided, Okay, we're going to really put
• 1:12:08
  Speaker 1: our money where our mouth is because we're going.
• 1:12:11
  Speaker 2: To end our season.
• 1:12:13
  Speaker 1: We're going to end our chance to win the conference
• 1:12:16
  Speaker 1: tournament and any chance of making the NCAA tournament by forfeitting,
• 1:12:22
  Speaker 1: because we believe so strongly that it is wrong for
• 1:12:26
  Speaker 1: us to play against the team with a biological mail.
• 1:12:31
  Speaker 1: And I think it's important to take a moment and
• 1:12:34
  Speaker 1: just recognize how amazing that decision is. Not just from
• 1:12:40
  Speaker 1: the standpoint of Okay, this is way different than a
• 1:12:43
  Speaker 1: regular season game. A regular season game, it doesn't really
• 1:12:46
  Speaker 1: matter that much. But you are ending your season. You're
• 1:12:50
  Speaker 1: ending your career as a volleyball player. If you're a senior,
• 1:12:56
  Speaker 1: so you're you are, this is really where it matters.
• 1:13:00
  Speaker 1: Are giving something up in a big way, a chance
• 1:13:03
  Speaker 1: to win the conference title, a theoretical chance to make
• 1:13:05
  Speaker 1: the NCAA tournament, and you're ending your season, and if
• 1:13:10
  Speaker 1: you're a senior, you're.
• 1:13:11
  Speaker 2: Ending your career.
• 1:13:13
  Speaker 1: And to get a group of women, especially women, I think,
• 1:13:17
  Speaker 1: I think, I think getting a group of women to
• 1:13:19
  Speaker 1: all agree to do this.
• 1:13:21
  Speaker 2: To what I don't know if they took a vote
• 1:13:22
  Speaker 2: or how you know.
• 1:13:24
  Speaker 1: But clearly, since no one objected, there was nobody who
• 1:13:27
  Speaker 1: came forward with a statement and said, I think this
• 1:13:29
  Speaker 1: is wrong. I can't believe my teammates are doing this.
• 1:13:33
  Speaker 1: I can't believe the school was doing this. That didn't happen,
• 1:13:36
  Speaker 1: So there appeared to be unanimity among the team and
• 1:13:41
  Speaker 1: the school, and even elected officials in Idaho backed Boise
• 1:13:46
  Speaker 1: State for what they did in this remarkable act of
• 1:13:49
  Speaker 1: courage to make a stand and say we're not going
• 1:13:53
  Speaker 1: to play against San Jose State because they have a
• 1:13:56
  Speaker 1: biological male on the team. Well, at that point, the
• 1:14:03
  Speaker 1: news media could no longer keep.
• 1:14:05
  Speaker 2: The cover up.
• 1:14:07
  Speaker 1: The damn somewhat broke and there was actual, real mainstream
• 1:14:12
  Speaker 1: news coverage of this event, which had not existed beforehand. However,
• 1:14:19
  Speaker 1: most of the mainstream news media coverage of this was
• 1:14:22
  Speaker 1: a joke. Was like the Onion or the Babylon B
• 1:14:27
  Speaker 1: before the Onion went totally liberal. The Babylon B, the
• 1:14:31
  Speaker 1: conservative parody website, could not have possibly mocked the real
• 1:14:40
  Speaker 1: coverage of this in a way there was any more
• 1:14:43
  Speaker 1: hilarious than what, for instance, the Associated Press and ESPN
• 1:14:48
  Speaker 1: to very liberal woke news media organizations did in their
• 1:14:52
  Speaker 1: coverage of this. I thought about going through it all,
• 1:14:55
  Speaker 1: and it gets a long and tedious, mainly because the
• 1:14:59
  Speaker 1: point that I have and others made against the Associated
• 1:15:03
  Speaker 1: Press and ESPN. Let's be clear, the Associated Press still
• 1:15:07
  Speaker 1: has enormous way over how local news outlets cover any
• 1:15:12
  Speaker 1: story like this that's basically a copy and pay situation.
• 1:15:16
  Speaker 2: And ESPN dictates the.
• 1:15:17
  Speaker 1: Sports narrative and obviously in all of their platforms and
• 1:15:22
  Speaker 1: elsewhere when it comes to a sports story so ap.
• 1:15:25
  Speaker 1: Associated Press and ESPN are very influential within their respective
• 1:15:31
  Speaker 1: media realms. And in both cases, you needed a microscope
• 1:15:39
  Speaker 1: to find the reason for why Boise State was forfeiting
• 1:15:43
  Speaker 1: this game. You needed a literal microscope. They tried every
• 1:15:48
  Speaker 1: trick they could in their language and you know, and
• 1:15:52
  Speaker 1: putting it deep into the story and trying to ptend
• 1:15:57
  Speaker 1: pretend that My favorite part of this was they pretended
• 1:16:00
  Speaker 1: as if there was ambiguity as to whether or not
• 1:16:04
  Speaker 1: there was a biological male or a transgendered woman on
• 1:16:09
  Speaker 1: the San Jose State women's volleyball team. They use words
• 1:16:13
  Speaker 1: like alleged or a parent or wait a minute, you're
• 1:16:19
  Speaker 1: not even going to accept.
• 1:16:20
  Speaker 2: So you think, you think Associated Press and ESPN.
• 1:16:26
  Speaker 1: You think that a whole series of teams forfeitted games
• 1:16:31
  Speaker 1: during the regular season, and Boise State decided to end
• 1:16:35
  Speaker 1: their season based upon a fraudulent belief that one of
• 1:16:42
  Speaker 1: San Jose State's team members was a biological male. You
• 1:16:46
  Speaker 1: think that was false. But see, they were hiding behind
• 1:16:50
  Speaker 1: the fig leaf, which is kind of an interesting metaphor
• 1:16:54
  Speaker 1: to use given the subject matter. Here, they're hiding behind
• 1:16:57
  Speaker 1: the fig leaf that, well, we can't prove it.
• 1:16:59
  Speaker 2: We haven't seen this player's penis.
• 1:17:03
  Speaker 1: So therefore, I guess there's some theoretical ambiguity, which is
• 1:17:08
  Speaker 1: an obvious for obvious absurdity, and it's an obvious political
• 1:17:13
  Speaker 1: maneuver by the news media outlets to not have to
• 1:17:18
  Speaker 1: accept the premise, because once you accept the premise then
• 1:17:23
  Speaker 1: you can't defend it anymore. But you have to create
• 1:17:26
  Speaker 1: some level of ambiguity of some level of doubt, which
• 1:17:33
  Speaker 1: is just a it's absurd, it's insane.
• 1:17:38
  Speaker 2: So you're basically saying, so.
• 1:17:39
  Speaker 1: If that was the case, by the way, why aren't
• 1:17:41
  Speaker 1: there questions of the Boise State team as to Okay, well,
• 1:17:45
  Speaker 1: how do you know that this person is a biological
• 1:17:48
  Speaker 1: male or a transgendered female. Of course they don't do
• 1:17:52
  Speaker 1: that because they know this person is a biological male.
• 1:17:56
  Speaker 1: They're just using this as the only defense mechanism they can,
• 1:18:00
  Speaker 1: the only fig leaf they can find. But I guarantee,
• 1:18:05
  Speaker 1: I guarantee someone who had no idea this story had
• 1:18:09
  Speaker 1: been emerging for months and read the AP or the
• 1:18:14
  Speaker 1: ESPN stories, even if they read the whole thing, which
• 1:18:17
  Speaker 1: no one does, you would have had a very difficult time,
• 1:18:21
  Speaker 1: to the average reader, a very difficult time even understanding.
• 1:18:26
  Speaker 2: Why Boise State forfeited.
• 1:18:28
  Speaker 1: You would not have a clear cut understanding that, Oh,
• 1:18:35
  Speaker 1: so there's a biological mail on Santose State's team, and
• 1:18:41
  Speaker 1: that's why Boise State and many other schools have elected
• 1:18:45
  Speaker 1: the forfeit to them as a matter of protest. That
• 1:18:49
  Speaker 1: would have been I think beyond the average reader based
• 1:18:53
  Speaker 1: upon my interpretation to both the Associated Press and ESPN
• 1:18:58
  Speaker 1: and others.
• 1:19:00
  Speaker 2: But even they may.
• 1:19:01
  Speaker 1: Not have taken the prize for the worst media coverage
• 1:19:04
  Speaker 1: when it came to this whole situation. That has to
• 1:19:08
  Speaker 1: go to Nancy Armor USA Today sports columnist.
• 1:19:14
  Speaker 2: I would have figured this might have come from Christine Brennan.
• 1:19:16
  Speaker 1: My long time ago ex friand X girlfriend for fifteen minutes,
• 1:19:20
  Speaker 1: who's a USA Today columnist who actually thinks that she's
• 1:19:24
  Speaker 1: a political matter but actually is very much a liberal
• 1:19:27
  Speaker 1: and very much a virtue signaler and has been mostly
• 1:19:31
  Speaker 1: silent on this issue because you would think she would
• 1:19:35
  Speaker 1: be very much pro female, right, the pro female position
• 1:19:39
  Speaker 1: here would be to promote and elevate and lawed Boise
• 1:19:44
  Speaker 1: State for sticking up for female athletics. That should be
• 1:19:47
  Speaker 1: the liberal position on this. But because the transgender insanity
• 1:19:53
  Speaker 1: has so overtaken all of the liberal sports media and
• 1:19:58
  Speaker 1: the liberal media and general, they can't even think straight,
• 1:20:02
  Speaker 1: and they instinctively have to defend, not only defend San
• 1:20:06
  Speaker 1: Jose State, but they have to attack, they have to
• 1:20:09
  Speaker 1: attack those who have the audacity to stand up in
• 1:20:13
  Speaker 1: protest against this craziness. So here's what Nancy Armor wrote,
• 1:20:18
  Speaker 1: and this is before Boise State actually made this stand,
• 1:20:23
  Speaker 1: this act of courage, this active principle to give up
• 1:20:27
  Speaker 1: their season to make a point about how absurd it
• 1:20:31
  Speaker 1: is that San Jose State has a biological male in
• 1:20:34
  Speaker 1: their team. This is what Nancy Armor wrote in USA Today.
• 1:20:39
  Speaker 1: San Jose State is the number two seed in the
• 1:20:42
  Speaker 1: Mountain West Conference Tournament, which begins Wednesday.
• 1:20:45
  Speaker 2: This would have been last Wednesday.
• 1:20:46
  Speaker 1: The Spartans have a buye in the first round and
• 1:20:49
  Speaker 1: will play either Boise State or Utah State on Friday.
• 1:20:54
  Speaker 2: Those are two of the schools.
• 1:20:56
  Speaker 1: That forfeitted games during the regular season, which means we're
• 1:21:01
  Speaker 1: about to find out how committed to the bigotry those
• 1:21:07
  Speaker 1: teams are, how committed to the bigotry those teams are.
• 1:21:14
  Speaker 1: Now my interpretation that is, she's trying to make the
• 1:21:19
  Speaker 1: argument that we're about to find out that these women
• 1:21:22
  Speaker 1: didn't really believe in this, that when it really came
• 1:21:25
  Speaker 1: down to it, if you forfeited the San Jose State
• 1:21:28
  Speaker 1: earlier in the season, why wouldn't you forfeit to them
• 1:21:31
  Speaker 1: in the conference tournament? And she's incorrectly somewhat like the
• 1:21:37
  Speaker 1: media was wrong about Joe Biden not pardoning his son Hunter, Incorrectly.
• 1:21:42
  Speaker 1: In my interpretation, she's kind of predicting that they're gonna
• 1:21:46
  Speaker 1: cave because the stakes are gonna be too high.
• 1:21:49
  Speaker 2: But she goes on, she says, for all the.
• 1:21:52
  Speaker 1: Shrieking, shrieking, shrieking, imagine a conservative using that word to
• 1:22:00
  Speaker 1: describe women taking a principled stan shrieking would be considered
• 1:22:06
  Speaker 1: to be a misogynistic word, I guarantee you. But she
• 1:22:10
  Speaker 1: writes for all the shrieking there is about transgender women athletes,
• 1:22:16
  Speaker 1: it's the cis gender women, biological females in the real world,
• 1:22:22
  Speaker 1: the cisgender women pushing the forfeits, who cost their fellow
• 1:22:28
  Speaker 1: athletes opportunities to play and saddled their teams with losses. Again,
• 1:22:35
  Speaker 1: there's no evidence of that because to my knowledge, and we.
• 1:22:39
  Speaker 2: Would have heard it. I guarantee you, the liberal.
• 1:22:41
  Speaker 1: Media would have been all over this. There's been no
• 1:22:44
  Speaker 1: organized objection with any of the teams that forfeited games
• 1:22:48
  Speaker 1: the San Jose State. My guess is the way these
• 1:22:51
  Speaker 1: things work these whatever vote was taken probably had to
• 1:22:55
  Speaker 1: be unanimous, otherwise somebody would have objected. Public life, and
• 1:23:00
  Speaker 1: we live in a world where everyone has a Twitter
• 1:23:02
  Speaker 1: feed or Instagram or whatever where they can make their
• 1:23:06
  Speaker 1: voice heard, and the liberal media is going to amplify it.
• 1:23:08
  Speaker 1: They're looking, they're desperate to find somebody to push back
• 1:23:12
  Speaker 1: against this narrative, and yet there's been nothing so that
• 1:23:15
  Speaker 1: tells me it's been effectively unanimous. But then Armor finishes
• 1:23:20
  Speaker 1: by saying it's those women, not the San Jose State player,
• 1:23:27
  Speaker 1: who are the real threat, the real threat.
• 1:23:33
  Speaker 2: Threat. So get this, folks, the women standing up.
• 1:23:38
  Speaker 1: For women playing women's sports are bigots and the real
• 1:23:46
  Speaker 1: threats here, and they're the ones shrieking and they're taking
• 1:23:52
  Speaker 1: away opportunities from their fellow athletes. That's the USA Today.
• 1:24:00
  Speaker 1: That's a columnist in the USA Today. Now can you
• 1:24:05
  Speaker 1: imagine can you imagine if the situation was reversed, and
• 1:24:12
  Speaker 1: let's say Boise State. It's important to Boise State, I
• 1:24:16
  Speaker 1: think is important here because it's Idaho. We saw during
• 1:24:19
  Speaker 1: the women's basketball tournament how Idaho is perceived by the
• 1:24:23
  Speaker 1: media is a bunch of racist, conservative, Trump loving Hillbillies.
• 1:24:29
  Speaker 2: Right, So because it's Idaho.
• 1:24:31
  Speaker 1: That the sports media, especially has a very jaundice view
• 1:24:37
  Speaker 1: of everything that happens there in the political realm. But
• 1:24:40
  Speaker 1: can you imagine if this was from a school that
• 1:24:44
  Speaker 1: the news media liked, like for instance, happened in the
• 1:24:47
  Speaker 1: Duke Byu situation. News media loves Duke, right, a lot
• 1:24:53
  Speaker 1: of news media members went to Duke. Duke is in
• 1:24:56
  Speaker 1: the accepted, elite, mainstream, you know, woke schools, So we
• 1:25:02
  Speaker 1: liked Duke. But if it would have been somebody liked Duke,
• 1:25:05
  Speaker 1: a liberally elite accepted college, and they would made a
• 1:25:11
  Speaker 1: principal stand against something conservatives believe in.
• 1:25:16
  Speaker 2: I mean, who knows what the hell would have been?
• 1:25:18
  Speaker 2: Who knows?
• 1:25:18
  Speaker 1: Pick your cause, right, there could have been any number
• 1:25:21
  Speaker 1: of them had had made a principal stand to give
• 1:25:25
  Speaker 1: up their season to fight against what they perceived to
• 1:25:29
  Speaker 1: be an injustice, and it was an injustice that the
• 1:25:34
  Speaker 1: liberal media accepted.
• 1:25:38
  Speaker 2: My god, Boise State.
• 1:25:40
  Speaker 1: In this situation, if everything was reversed, they'd be all
• 1:25:44
  Speaker 1: household names. Every American would know about this story. This
• 1:25:48
  Speaker 1: would be a massive cause celeb Everybody in the news media,
• 1:25:53
  Speaker 1: especially the sports media, would be jumping all over it.
• 1:25:56
  Speaker 1: ESPN would be all over it. Instead, we get a
• 1:26:01
  Speaker 1: couple of perfunctory articles that try to hide what's really
• 1:26:04
  Speaker 1: going on here. They used all sorts of crazy language.
• 1:26:09
  Speaker 1: You get USA Today columnists turning this thing on its head.
• 1:26:13
  Speaker 1: And somehow the good guys are the bad guys. And
• 1:26:16
  Speaker 1: what's most amazing about all this that this is happening
• 1:26:20
  Speaker 1: in the aftermath of Trump's election, which the Harris campaign
• 1:26:25
  Speaker 1: truly believes turned rightly or wrongly on the issue of
• 1:26:31
  Speaker 1: transgender inmates and whether the government should pay for their surgeries,
• 1:26:38
  Speaker 1: and Kamala Harris being on record saying that the government
• 1:26:41
  Speaker 1: should do that, and a devastating commercial that the Trump
• 1:26:45
  Speaker 1: campaign put out there, so at least in perception, this
• 1:26:49
  Speaker 1: issue played a major role in why Donald Trump just
• 1:26:52
  Speaker 1: won the presidential election. And the sports media and the
• 1:26:56
  Speaker 1: news media is still so out of touch, clueless, so
• 1:27:01
  Speaker 1: biased that not only is Boise State women's volleyball team
• 1:27:06
  Speaker 1: not heroes, they're villains, And this story has now been forgotten,
• 1:27:11
  Speaker 1: And the NCUBA and the news media is breathing a
• 1:27:15
  Speaker 1: sigh of relief because it turns out that San Jose
• 1:27:18
  Speaker 1: State lost subsequently in the Mountain West Women's Volleyball Tournament,
• 1:27:25
  Speaker 1: so they're not going to the NCAA tournament. If they
• 1:27:28
  Speaker 1: had gone to the NCAA tournament, that would have been
• 1:27:30
  Speaker 1: a problem for the NCAA as well as the sports
• 1:27:34
  Speaker 1: and news media, so they are breathing a sire relief there.
• 1:27:37
  Speaker 1: But Boise State and other schools, but particularly Boise State,
• 1:27:41
  Speaker 1: deserve a lot of credit for standing up for female athletics,
• 1:27:46
  Speaker 1: and the news media has done them a great disservice
• 1:27:50
  Speaker 1: in the coverage of that controversy. Thanks for listening to
• 1:27:53
  Speaker 1: today's free drop of the abbreviated show. If you're interested
• 1:27:57
  Speaker 1: in listening to the entire show, you must be come
• 1:28:00
  Speaker 1: at patron.
• 1:28:01
  Speaker 2: Please go to Patreon. That's p A T R e
• 1:28:05
  Speaker 2: O N dot com.
• 1:28:07
  Speaker 1: Patreon dot com Slash the Death of Journalism with John Ziggler.
• 1:28:15
  Speaker 1: My name is j H N z I E G
• 1:28:17
  Speaker 1: L e R. That's patreon dot com. Slash the Death
• 1:28:23
  Speaker 1: of Journalism with John Ziggler.
• 1:28:26
  Speaker 2: Good luck to you on that. But that's how you
• 1:28:29
  Speaker 2: can subscribe.