Latest / The Death Of Journalism / Episode One Hundred Forty: NFL Bans Tackling

Transcript

Episode One Hundred Forty: NFL Bans Tackling · The Death Of Journalism

0:00
Welcome to episode number one hundred and forty of the Death of Journalism podcasts.
0:04
My name is John Zigler. I'm your host on today's show. Donald Trump
0:07
gets some major economic relief. RFK Junior picks a veep, NBC caves on
0:13
Rona McDaniel, the NFL essentially bans tackling an alleged racial hate crime in women's
0:21
basketball, deserves some scrutiny, and an interview with the co host of the
0:25
Finding Matt Drudge podcast. We begin this episode of the Death of Journalism podcast
0:32
with some brief comments on the tragedy that occurred just outside of Baltimore, Maryland,
0:39
where the Key Bridge rather spectacularly collapsed overnight, resulting remarkably in the deaths
0:47
of only six people. I mean, it's absolutely amazing reality that thankfully,
0:53
only six people died as far as we know in the collapse of the Key
0:58
Bridge. The economic impact of this catastrophe is going to be immense and unknown
1:06
as of this moment. And obviously the video went viral because it's just a
1:11
remarkable video to see the bridge collapse so completely and so quickly in the way
1:17
that it did. From a media perspective, there are two things I want
1:22
to mention, both dealing with the right wing media losing their goddamn minds.
1:27
First of all, Maria Bartiroma on Fox News Business. You know, this
1:33
is a woman who used to be very credible in the mainstream when she was
1:37
on CNBC. She's become a Trumpster, and she got mocked on social media
1:42
for trying very bizarrely to turn this situation into an attack on the Biden border
1:49
policy. How this has anything to do with the border, No one seems
1:53
to know and understand. And then Laura Logan, another former mainstream heroin used
2:00
to be on sixty Minutes who has become a right wing nut job, a
2:05
pro Trump nut. She went on Steve Bannon's show and immediately claimed that she
2:12
knew this to be an act of terrorism, or at least certainly strongly implied
2:15
that she knew that. And there's absolutely no evidence nor logic to support that.
2:20
So the right wing media, at least in those two situations, embarrassed
2:23
itself once again when it came to the coverage of the Key bridge collapse.
2:29
But from a media perspective, it's not much else for me to talk about
2:31
on that except for the fact that it is amazing that only six people died,
2:37
and thankfully that appears to be the case. Now. As far as
2:42
political realities, the big story the last couple of days has probably been the
2:47
fact that RFK Junior has officially selected Nicole Shanahan as his vice presidential nominee.
2:58
Now, the reason why this is signific. I mean, I'm someone who
3:00
does not believe that rf K Junior has any chance of winning any state,
3:05
at least not as of right now, and I don't anticipate that changing.
3:09
But the reason why this is potentially significant For those who don't know, n
3:13
Cole Shanahan is the wife of one of the Google founders, and she's a
3:19
super lib but now she's also super rich because she married properly and divorced properly.
3:24
So now obviously RFK Junior is selecting her simply because she's his sugar mama,
3:31
and it's really frankly pathetic. But I think this is going to have
3:37
a potentially significant impact on the presidential election in a way that could end up
3:45
helping Donald Trump. Now I'm not positive about that as of yet. It's
3:49
been pretty clear for quite a while that RFK Junior's presence in polls tends to
3:55
help Trump by about a point a point and a half depending on where you
4:00
are. It's not always the case. Weirdly, there are some polls that
4:05
go in the other direction. But if you average everything out, there does
4:09
seem to be a slight pro Trump effect when it comes to what happens when
4:15
you throw RFK Junior and the other two progressive candidates West and Stein into the
4:25
mix on polling and so right now, I don't think that the RFK Junior
4:30
impact is very significant, except maybe in a super close state. But I
4:36
do think that the selection of Shanahan, if logic plays a role here,
4:42
and that's always a dangerous thing to be assuming in this day and age,
4:46
But if logic plays any role in this, Shanahan's selection should hurt RFK Junior
4:54
with people who might be considering Donald Trump. She is definitely not somebody that
5:00
any rational Republican or even libertarian or right leaning person or even moderate person would
5:10
get excited about, not just because she was chosen simply because of her money.
5:15
I mean, that's number one, and of course how she got her
5:17
money. It's not like she's she came up with this tremendous business idea and
5:21
she's a genius and that's why she got rich. She has no qualifications for
5:27
the position other than the fact that she can fund RFK Junior's campaign and she
5:30
can get him on the ballot. Now, that right away is potentially good
5:35
news for Donald Trump because Shanahan has the resources to make sure RFK Junior gets
5:43
on the ballot in every place that matters. Right there, that's at least
5:47
a slight win for Trump because that was still in question whether or not RFK
5:53
Junior could get on the ballot as an independent candidate, because it's very,
5:57
very difficult to do that. You need a lot of money, a lot
6:00
of organization. Well, she seems to answer that question, So that part
6:04
is potentially good for Trump. But the fact that she's such a leftist,
6:10
I mean, she is right out of the far left wing progressive playbook.
6:15
It ought to turn off a lot of potential voters who were deciding between Trump
6:23
and RK Junior. Now I've seen some evidence of this online, not as
6:28
much as there should be, because I'm still seeing some evidence of Dessanta supporters
6:32
flirting with RFK Junior, which I just find to be astonishing, And some
6:38
of these people are are De Santa supporters who I liked and had some respect
6:43
for, and I'm just flabbergasted that I get, you know, looking for
6:48
some pathway here. I've been trying to find one myself. If you hate
6:54
Trump and you hate Biden like I do, who a you going to vote
6:57
for? But I was never going to pull the trigger on RFK Junior,
7:02
you know, barring a gun to my head to mix a metaphor. But
7:06
now that Nicole Shanahan is the VP nominee, I don't even know how you
7:12
can conceive of doing that. I mean, so I don't understand how this
7:17
is a thing. I don't know how large a thing it is. But
7:21
I am seeing some evidence online that this poured cold water on at least some
7:30
people who were in that limbo zone of not knowing which way they were going
7:35
to go, And now RFK Junior is no longer a viable option for people
7:41
who are not leftists. Again, it's really hard to know how significant this
7:46
is, how many people are in this category, but logic, if it
7:51
has any power at all, would certainly indicate that this move helps Trump at
7:59
least a little bit. It makes it more difficult, I think for people
8:03
who are not leftists but who don't like Trump to decide they're going to use
8:09
the RFK Junior off ramp. And there's some indication that Democrats are starting to
8:16
get more worried about RFK Junior because the Democratic reaction to the Shanahan pick was
8:24
quite negative, not in the way of not liking Shanahan because of her positions,
8:28
more along the lines of, holy crap, this is going to be
8:31
a problem, isn't it. So who knows what the reality is. We're
8:35
gonna have to wait several weeks to know if there's any impact in the polling.
8:39
There probably won't be that much because I don't even know how many people
8:43
even know that Nicole Shanahan has been now chosen as r K Junior's VP.
8:48
She was very unimpressive in her speech announcing this, and it's so obvious that
8:54
this is a money play and a further indication that r K Junior is not
8:58
to be taken serious. Of course, when you're running against Joe Biden and
9:03
Donald Trump, the bar for being taken seriously is very very low. But
9:09
this was not a move that the Biden team could be happy about, because
9:13
on paper, this is not going to help them. Whether it's determinative,
9:18
nobody knows at this point. But I would say that this was at least
9:24
a maybe not a capital letter W, but a lowercase W for the Trump
9:31
team. For RK. Junior to go in that direction. Now there was
9:35
another W for the Trump team. Maybe this was a capitol W on the
9:39
economic front over the last couple of days. And that is on a couple
9:43
of different levels. Donald Trump's judgment regarding the bond that he had to post
9:50
to be able to appeal the civil fraud verdict against him in New York was
9:56
cut by about two thirds, from about half a billion dollars to less than
10:03
two hundred million dollars, and I personally thought that this was the correct decision
10:07
by the appeals court. I mean, that's still a ridiculous amount of money
10:11
to post a bond just to be able to appeal a highly dubious verdict bya
10:18
what seems to be an extremely biased judge and an extremely biased attorney general.
10:24
But Trump is going to be able to meet that bond, he says,
10:28
via cash, which his supporters loved. Trump's statement that he would be able
10:33
to do this via cash, and so it seems as if Trump's economic position
10:39
is no longer in a potential catastrophe circumstance where he's going to have to sell
10:46
a property or have his properties seized, in a situation where he simply wants
10:50
to appeal these verdicts, for instance, the Eging Carroll situation and the civil
10:56
fraud trial with regard to whether or not he overestimated the value of his properties
11:03
to get better loan conditions. And so I think that was the right decision
11:07
by the appeals court, and it certainly helps Trump from a money standpoint.
11:13
I don't know whether that's going to give him any more cash to actually spend
11:16
on his campaign, which he always claims he's going to do but never seems
11:20
to actually do it. And the Republican Party seems to be paying most of
11:24
his legal bills. So there's all sorts of problems still in this realm.
11:28
But there's another part of this equation that happened this week, and that is
11:33
that Trump's media company has officially gone public, and has done so at least
11:39
as of this taping, in a very big way that has its valuation at
11:45
astronomical levels, absurd levels given the meager amount of money that it's generating and
11:52
the debt that it has, But it seems to be one of those novelty
11:56
situations where people are buying into it, and on paper, on paper,
12:03
it has increased Trump's net worth or whatever hell you want to define it,
12:09
his worth to the highest level it's ever been in his life, and at
12:13
least on one list for the first time, he's in the top five hundred
12:16
in the world as far as most wealthy people, which I simply don't believe,
12:20
no possible way Donald Trump is one of the top five hundred richest people
12:26
on the planet. Now, you know, Trump has always been a master
12:31
at being able to create situations where the perception is that he's far richer than
12:35
he actually is, and this media company seems to be a perfect example that,
12:39
for instance, he has no ability to cash this out. So it's
12:43
not as if he could all of a sudden, have you know, several
12:48
billion dollars to be able to spend on his campaign. It's purely on paper
12:52
and based on what's currently happening. It's only based on perception and so look,
13:00
I mean, good for him, but it's not going to change the
13:03
reality of how much cash he has to spend on anything, for instance,
13:09
on his campaign, but at least on paper, it makes him look a
13:13
lot better than he was looking even just a few days ago. So you
13:16
know, perception is reality in this world, and I think that is at
13:20
least potentially significant. Speaking of money, Oh, by the way, there's
13:26
one other thing that's going to really help Trump's financial situation. He's now selling
13:30
Trump Bibles. Did you hear that? Just in time for Easter? He's
13:35
now selling Trump Bibles, so that I'm sure we'll make him a whole boatload
13:41
of new cash that he can squander on whatever way he's going to do it.
13:46
But I found that to be particularly amusing. Now, one other story
13:50
related to money and Trump, at least indirectly and the news media. There's
13:56
a story out in the last twenty four hours that new Newsmax, the Newsmax
14:01
network, which is a very very very pro network, a network on which
14:07
I appeared several times many years ago. I'm not sure how you defined many
14:11
years ago, but certainly certainly several years ago, and in which at one
14:16
point I thought I was going to try to do a documentary film for them
14:20
and maybe even work for them. But that was clearly never ever going to
14:24
work out. The story about Newsmax is that during the Trump presidency there was
14:28
a prince from Qatar that invested fifty million dollars into Newsmax. Now, Newsmax
14:37
is not a large network, and so fifty million dollars is a very significant
14:43
sum of money, especially several years ago, and that as part of this
14:48
deal, the staff at Newsmax was told to go soft on Cutter when it
14:56
came to news stories, which is unfortunately par for the course. But there's
15:00
also elements of this story involving Trump, because Trump was president of the time,
15:05
and Cutter was lobbying pretty hard for some treatment or special treatment by Trump,
15:13
and so it's not difficult to see where this was. If not a
15:18
quid pro quo, this was certainly a situation where there's a win wink,
15:22
nod nod, or at least potentially that situation. It's clearly a very fishy
15:28
circumstance where you have this prints from Cutter spending fifty million dollars on this small
15:37
Newsmax television network, the owner of which Christopher Ruddy is incredibly close to Donald
15:45
Trump at least likes to think that he is in Chris Ruddy's mind, he's
15:48
very close to Donald Trump. And so you have this situation where whether it
15:56
was by design or whether or not it was just for access or just to
16:00
show Trump. You know how much they were willing to play ball, It's
16:03
impossible to know. But when you have a cutter print spending fifty million dollars
16:11
on a pro Trump network while he's president, that's a conflict of interest.
16:17
I mean that this is very similar to what I talk about all the time
16:19
with regard to the live golf circumstance and Trump renting out his golf courses for
16:26
an undisclosed amount of money clearly way above market price, that where he is
16:33
effectively directly paid by the Saudi royal family. And so that's even in my
16:37
opinion, that's even more obvious, more direct, and more troubling because it's
16:41
going directly to Trump. But here you have it going to a Trump ally
16:45
to fund a pro Trump network, with obviously Christopher Ruddy being very close to
16:52
Trump himself. Now, as far as news Max itself, I don't like
16:57
them because they're very pro Trump. I also don't like them because during COVID
17:02
they had an absurd position on the COVID vaccine mandates. They backed off of
17:08
it only when they got caught, but they were actually pro vaccine mandate at
17:12
one point. They also, I think, are in a whole load of
17:18
trouble because of a lawsuit by Dominion Voting Systems very similar to the lawsuit that
17:23
resulted in Fox News Channel spending hundreds and hundreds of million dollars millions of dollars
17:30
in a settlement with them, something I don't think Fox News Channel should have
17:33
done. But Newsmax is, in my opinion, far more vulnerable than Fox
17:37
News was. I even have a theory, It's just a pure theory.
17:41
I have nothing to back this up. I actually wonder whether or not part
17:45
of what Fox News Channel did in paying that ridiculous settlement to Dominion Voting Systems
17:53
in that lawsuit when I think they could have won the case. I do
17:57
wonder whether part part of that equation that Fox News Channel made was, Hey,
18:03
look, if we do this and we set the price for this circumstance
18:10
involving the twenty twenty election and allegations of fraud and vote fixing and Dominion voting
18:15
Systems being at the heart of that, if we set the price this high?
18:21
Are we not going to put Newsmax out of business again? I'm not
18:23
suggesting that was the primary motivation for what Fox News Channel did, but effectively,
18:30
it seems like that may be the result because Newsmax is in big trouble
18:37
based upon what happened with Fox News Channel regarding the ongoing lawsuit with the Minion
18:44
voting systems. And you know, I don't really have a lot of sympathy
18:47
for Newsmax. I mean, as far as my own personal you know it,
18:52
exchanges with them, I was, I was on their air a few
18:56
times. Christopher Ruddy reached out to me a few times to see whether or
19:00
not I was being asked on. He seemed to like what I was doing,
19:03
and he invited me to an event that Newsmax was doing. This was
19:07
a couple of years ago, just as COVID was starting to end in Beverly
19:12
Hills at a nice hotel. I brought my wife. It was a very
19:15
rare situation for us to even be out in the evening, and my wife
19:21
was happy that she went only because she got to meet and take a picture
19:23
with Fabio. True story, I have no idea what Fabio was there.
19:29
I guess Fabio is a big Newsmax fan, But so that was the only
19:33
positive that happened there, although I did finally meet Christopherrotty, talk to him
19:37
a little bit, and had what I thought was a very good conversation with
19:41
I guess you would call them their news or program director, where I thought
19:47
that there was a pretty good chance we could do a documentary film about,
19:52
ironically enough, the COVID panic and everything that really went on there. That
19:56
was my goal. That seemed as if Newsmax was very well suited to doing
20:03
that kind of thing. But it became obvious to me that whatever interest they
20:07
had either wasn't legitimate, or there were conflict problems, or you know,
20:11
all sorts of other issues happened, and it just never went anywhere. Even
20:15
though they indicated that they were very interested, it would have never worked out
20:19
because philosophically, obviously my view of Trump and their view of Trump is very,
20:25
very different. But I did find that this story involving the Cutter Prints
20:30
investing fifty million dollars into Newsmas was not at all surprising and certainly consistent with
20:36
what we know with how foreign governments deal with Trump. They understand it's much
20:42
like dealing with a mob boss. That's the kind of mentality, right,
20:47
you want him to do you a favor, You do a favor for his
20:49
buddy, or you do a favor for him by helping fund his pro Trump
20:56
news network in newsmas. And that's the way things are done in the Trump
21:00
era, and it's obviously got major, major problems on numerous levels. Of
21:06
course, the right wing media is not much better than the left wing media.
21:11
In fact, in the left wing media, maybe worse in some ways.
21:15
And further proof of that came when it came to the issue of NBC
21:19
and Rona McDaniel, the former head of the RNC, who had been hired
21:25
by NBC to be a news contributor. MSNBC went bananas. All the hosts,
21:33
both on air and off, had a temper tantrum, and they meet
21:37
the press even had to apologize basically and self flagellate over the idea that,
21:44
oh my god, NBC would hire as a contributor the former head of the
21:48
Republican National Committee and someone who at one point was a strong Donald Trump supporter.
21:55
They all claimed it was about her support for the January sixth uprise,
22:00
but that's just bullshit. That is a pure excuse that has no basis in
22:06
logic, and it's really just a lame way for those at NBC to get
22:11
around the fact that they hired people like Jen Psaki, the former White House
22:15
Press secretary, to do her own show, not just to be a contributor,
22:19
but to do her own show, which is a completely different animal,
22:23
because when you're a contributor, you basically have one or two hands tied behind
22:29
your back as far as when you're allowed to go on, what you're allowed
22:33
to say, what they're going to ask you. You have very little freedom.
22:37
But when you have your own show, you get to do whatever the
22:38
hell you want. So a lot of people have been making this Kasaki and
22:42
McDaniel comparison to show the hypocrisy of NBC, but I think it's way worse
22:48
than people are even giving credit for. Because of this issue that I just
22:52
referenced the difference between a contributor and a show host. Well, in the
22:56
last episode of the podcast, I told you that there was all this controversy
23:00
going on and that there was this divide between NBC and MSNBC, and that
23:07
it was filtering. The outrage of MSNBC was filtering over to NBC, and
23:11
that the Meet the Press situation with Chuck Todd and Kristen Welker was pretty much
23:17
I guess the last straw that it was basically an indication that this was untenable
23:22
situation, because I think if it was isolated to MSNBC, the liberal nutting
23:29
cable news network, it could have possibly been handled. But once it hits
23:32
Meet the Press, their premiere legacy news interview program on Sunday mornings, and
23:41
you've got Chuck Todd, the former host of Meet the Press, coming back
23:45
to criticize the network, and Kristen Welker basically apologizing for having to do an
23:49
interview with this new NBC contributor, Rona McDaniel. It was not surprising when
23:56
Monday, after I've taped the last of the podcast, NBC completely caved severed
24:03
ties with Rona McDaniel, handed a massive victory to the hosts at MSNBC,
24:11
and frankly, I don't know what kind of contracts you signed. If she
24:15
was smart at all, she has a hell of a lawsuit now. I
24:19
don't know if she was. She was being represented by CIA, you know,
24:23
very top talent agency, although now they've apparently dropped her after this.
24:29
I mean, this has really turned out right now, very poorly for her.
24:32
But if she had any kind of a decent agreement, she's going to
24:34
have a heck of a lawsuit. And anybody who has even two brain cells
24:40
to rub together knows that if you are a conservative and you are being hired
24:45
by a mainstream or liberal network, you have to you have to make sure
24:52
that the language is ironclad that they can't fire you without severe pun because this
25:00
has happened time and time again. We've had this occur numerous on numerous occasions
25:07
over the last several years, where somebody gets hired in a mainstream outlet and
25:14
they're a little too conservative or for whatever reason, they get the progressives on
25:18
the staff, their panties are in a bunch, and there's there is a
25:22
riot, there is outrage, there is a revolt, and then all of
25:26
a sudden, immediately the people in charge they cave, they curl into the
25:33
fetal position, and they fire the person, usually before they even appear,
25:37
either on air or in print, whatever the media outlet is. It's remarkable
25:42
how often this exact same pattern repeats itself. So if you know I don't
25:48
care about Ronald McDaniel, but hopefully, for her sake, her people understood
25:52
that this was a possibility. It seems to me as if the brass at
25:57
NBC completely misunderstood or missing misestimated underestimated how much outrage there was going to be
26:06
here, that they didn't even think this was going to be that big of
26:08
a deal. And by the way, part of the reason they didn't think
26:11
it was not going to be that big of a deal is that it's been
26:14
reported in numerous outlets that the head of n MSNBC signed off on this,
26:21
or at least didn't raise any objections, and then all of a sudden did
26:25
a one point eighty once they're on air, staff had a conniption, had
26:30
a temper tantrum, and then they had a full blown revolt on their hands,
26:34
all because of the concept of allowing the former head of the Republican National
26:40
Committee to come on occasionally to comment on what's happening in a presidential election.
26:48
I mean, it's absolutely astonishing and incredibly telling that this is what happened in
26:52
NBC. And I think the most remarkable part of this is that this is
26:56
basically like a school allowing the kids to run the classroom, and the MSNBC
27:04
hosts, especially Rachel Maddow, are so proud of themselves. Now, oh
27:08
my gosh, we stood up, We stood up, and we won.
27:12
Well, what did you stand up for? You stood up for your network
27:18
being perceived as nothing but a left wing propaganda outlet. That's what you stood
27:25
up for, both in perception and reality. You talk all the time,
27:30
the leftists do about diversity, but there's no diversity of thought. So you're
27:34
not even going to allow somebody to comment on your air, either an MSNBC
27:41
or NBC from the perspective of maybe being pro Trump, the person who is
27:48
at worst a fifty to fifty shot right now to be the next president of
27:52
the United States. That's how much you want to isolate yourselves. That's how
27:57
much you want to make yourselves look like complete and total partisans to almost at
28:03
least half the country to half the country. You're not allowed to have your
28:08
voice heard on our network, even in a contributor role. I keep going
28:15
back to that. That is so significant. Here she was not being given
28:18
her own show. She was just going to be a news contributor, and
28:25
that was too much and MSNBC and their hosts, they're all patting themselves in
28:30
the back that they stood up for journalism or truth or democracy of some bullshit,
28:36
and they really just exposed themselves as complete acts. Because Rona McDaniel,
28:41
she was never charged with a crime, she's not part of any of the
28:47
Trump indictments. I mean. It's just absolutely astonishing, I mean and very
28:53
very telling. So when people tell you who they are, you should listen.
28:57
And that's what not just MSNBC, but NBC itself has shown you in
29:04
the last couple of days here, and that might be, you know,
29:07
in the long run, the biggest impact of this situation, because there was
29:12
always at least a little bit of space between NBC and MSNBC that NBC still
29:21
considered themselves to at least be trying to be an objective major news outlet.
29:26
They did a Republican presidential debate this past cycle. Obviously didn't have Donald Trump,
29:33
so it wasn't a real debate, but they tried. There's been some
29:37
indication that NBC has been at least making some effort to appear open to the
29:44
other side of the political divide. And now that's all gone, that's all
29:48
been washed away because they let MSNBC drive the bus. It was always NBC
29:57
that was in charge. MSNBC was looked at as Okay, they're the that's
30:03
the fringe nut jobs, that's the far left progressives. We we'll let them
30:07
do their thing and we'll, you know, we'll pretend to be friendly with
30:11
our cousins. But now, for the first time in my memory, MSNBC
30:18
ran the show that it was the kids at MSNBC that had a revolt,
30:22
and the teachers over at NBC said, okay, fine, you win,
30:27
and we're going to make ourselves look bad in the process. We're going to
30:32
expose to Republicans everywhere that we really don't care about you, we don't respect
30:38
you, we don't consider your voice to be important. They put out a
30:42
statement saying they still believe in diversity of thought and they're looking for, you
30:48
know, diverse voices. But who can they hire? Now, See,
30:52
that's the other thing. The precedent that this sets is incredibly debilitating. How
30:57
can you possibly hire anybody If you can't hire Rona McDaniel, who could you
31:03
hire Because you're basically saying anybody that's been a big Trump supporter that you can't
31:10
hire them. So the precedent of the sets is devastating, and there's all
31:18
sorts of problems with this situation. And not only can they not hire another
31:23
Republican who's pro Trump in the future, because they've already set the precedent that
31:30
you know they will give in to a riot from their hosts. But what
31:34
other issues are their hosts going to riot about? I mean, this is
31:38
not the job of the hosts, the on air people to decide, Okay,
31:44
who's allowed on the network? Should they can they have a voice?
31:45
Sure, they can have a voice. I have no problem with that.
31:48
You're can to express your opinion. But the inmates should not be running the
31:52
asylum. And that's what's happened at MSNBC and at NBC, and it is
31:59
very, very about just how incredibly broken the news media is. This is
32:05
a situation where MSNBC was so afraid of their audience being exposed and by the
32:12
way they achieved in banned on MSNBC and then they still fired her at NBC.
32:16
But this was a situation where those at MSNBC were so afraid that somebody
32:22
watching NBC or maybe MSNBC would be exposed to a pro Trump thought that it
32:28
was untenable for them, that this was basically like therapy. You know,
32:32
you can't have someone disrupt our therapy sessions. I talk about this all the
32:38
time about it really has become therapy. That's what especially cable news has become
32:44
therapy for your targeted demographic. And we can't have anyone disrupting our therapy sessions
32:50
by giving an alternative point of view and in this case, a pro Trump
32:53
point of view. And again, of course I despise Trump. I have
32:58
no like for Rona McDaniel. I really don't, of course, you know
33:02
Trump. By the way, one of the reason I don't like Trump on
33:05
this is actually a great example of why I don't like Trump. So Trump
33:09
has actually taken NBC off the hook. Here. NBC would be on a
33:15
far bigger hook. They would be in much more difficult situation politically. If
33:22
Trump had decided to attack NBC and MSNBC for being the hacks that they are,
33:29
that's what he should have said in response to Rona McDaniel being fired.
33:32
But he didn't do that because Trump has to be Trump, and Trump has
33:37
to let his ego get the best of him at all times, and Trump.
33:40
Instead of targeting NBC, he spiked the ball in McDaniel's face because she
33:46
wasn't trumpy enough, because she had the goal to back away from her position
33:52
that the twenty twenty election was rigged against Donald Trump. And that's an unforgivable
33:59
sin by Donald Trump. And this is, you know, example one thousand
34:04
and one of where Trump lets his own self interest, in his own ego
34:09
get in the way of his own cause, but certainly the cause of conservatism
34:15
and the cause of media accountability. I mean, here, you have NBC
34:21
absolutely nailed to the wall. You have them nailed to the wall, and
34:25
Trump let them off the hook by spiking the ball in McDaniel's face, because
34:31
it has absolutely muted the pro Trump faction reaction to McDaniel being fired. Now,
34:38
they're still going to be outrage over it, but it's not at the
34:42
same level it would have been if Trump had done the right thing and focused
34:46
something Trump doesn't have focused on what NBC just exposed themselves as. But no,
34:54
it's got to be about McDaniel not being trumpy enough. And that's you
35:00
know, there's so many reasons why I can't stand Trump, but that is
35:02
really emblematic of a lot of them, and it doesn't help the cause.
35:07
I mean, this was a seminal moment proving just how unbelievably biased a major
35:15
television news network is, and the mud the water has been at least somewhat
35:21
muddied because of Donald Trump and his own ego. Thanks for listening to today's
35:25
free drop of the abbreviated show. If you're interested in listening to the entire
35:30
show, you must become a patron. Please go to Patreon. That's p
35:35
A t R e O N dot com. Patreon dot com slash the Death
35:43
of Journalism with John Ziggler. My name is j hn z I E G
35:49
L e R. That's patreon dot com slash the Death of Journalism with John
35:57
Ziggler. Good luck to you on that. But that's how you can subscribe.