Are America's Supreme Court justices facing an unprecedented wave of political intimidation?
On this episode of Normally, Mary Katharine Ham and Karol Markowicz examine the growing security threats against Supreme Court justices, including the swatting of Justice Amy Coney Barrett and renewed calls for increased protection after years of escalating political violence. They discuss whether threats against public officials are becoming normalized and why stronger enforcement may be needed.
The conversation then shifts to New York's controversial decision to halt new AI data center development. Is the Empire State driving away billions in investment, high-paying jobs, and America's AI future? Mary Katharine and Karol break down the debate over data centers, electricity, water usage, and why they believe the U.S. can't afford to fall behind China in the AI race.
Follow Clay & Buck on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/clayandbuck
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Listen
Watch
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:04):
Hey, guys, we are back on normally the show with
normal it takes for when the news gets weird.
Speaker 2 (00:08):
I am Mary Catherine Ham and I'm Carol Markowitz. Mary Catherine.
I'm going on vacation. I'm very excited about that. I
know and give you by yourself, but I gotta go.
Speaker 1 (00:19):
Well, I I you raise the bar so much for
guest hosting and putting together great shows, you know, I
gotta I gotta meet up with it.
Speaker 2 (00:26):
Yeah, you gotta find some good guest hosts. But I
believe in you and I think you will, you know,
do a great job with in my absence.
Speaker 3 (00:34):
Thank you so much.
Speaker 1 (00:34):
I'm excited for your vacation, so enjoy I'm actually going
to North Wisconsin to do do a speech, but it's
at a cool resort, so I'm gonna extend my stay
a little bit and hang out up there and just
enjoy the mild weather as opposed to where I live.
Speaker 2 (00:52):
I love it. Yeah, that's awesome. I have never been
to Wisconsin. It's gonna have to get on that list.
Speaker 3 (00:57):
To mark it off.
Speaker 2 (00:58):
Girl. Alrighty, okay, what is going on in the news.
What's happening?
Speaker 1 (01:06):
Will the Supreme Court justices went up to the Hill
this week to speak in front of a congressional gathering
about security for skudas judges.
Speaker 2 (01:20):
They discussed for fourteen million dollar increase in security funding
and to just discuss the Court's overall budget.
Speaker 1 (01:28):
Right, And it turns out, you know that funding is necessary, guys,
because the climate in which the Supreme Court justices operate
has become more and more hostile. And you'll remember, as
we talked about on this show, the plot against Kavanaugh's
life that was luckily disrupted, there have been numerous other threats.
(01:54):
Amy Cony Barrett was swatted several weeks ago with a
false call about gunshots on her prot She spoke at
this hearing about the tolls that that takes on a family,
So we'll hear a little bit from her about what
that looks like in her house.
Speaker 4 (02:10):
They have required me, to my children to think about
and see things that children should not have to see
or think about. One example is when threats to my
life were particularly intense a few years ago, around the
time of the dobs Leek, my security detail sent me
home with a bulletproof vest and I carried it into
my house, put it into my bedroom, dropped it down
(02:31):
on a table, turned around, and my twelve year old
son was standing in the doorway of my bedroom and
he wanted to know what it was and why I
had it. And I didn't know how to respond, because
maybe I lack imagination, but I didn't expect that performing
this service was going to put me in the position
of explaining to my children what a bulletproof vest was
and why I had to wear one. It's also been
(02:53):
reported in the news that roughly six weeks ago, I
was the victim of a swatting incident. At that point,
my teenage son, one of my teenage sons, opened the
door to go out with friends and saw in our
street it was full of police cars who had responded
to a false report of gunshots and raised voices in
(03:15):
my home. I was very, very grateful that I had
Supreme Court police outside my home because they were able
to stop and meet with and explain to the County
police that it had been a false alarm, and so
the police did not actually attempt to enter our home.
Many of us, me included, have received threatening, anonymous deliveries
(03:36):
designed to intimidate and harass us. They are often sent
in the name of Judge Sallas's son, who I think,
as you mentioned in the beginning, mister Chairman was is
deceased because he was killed by a disgruntled lawyer who
showed up at Judge Sallas's home intending to kill her,
but her son, twenty years old at the time, opened
(03:56):
the door and took the bullet instead. Her husband standing
behind was seriously injured. So I think the message on
these deliveries being sent in his name is clear, as
Justice Kagan said, frederal judges across the country throughout the judiciary,
including the Supreme Court, continue to do their jobs without
fear or favor. But the threat level is really high.
Speaker 2 (04:20):
You don't ever want to have your kids be afraid
and think that something is going to happen to mommy.
And that's you know, a big part of it here
is that she has small children. I'm sure it's a
giant concern. I think I hear a lot of like
you know, Clarence Thomason's scared. He doesn't have small kids
in the home, and I think that really does make
a big difference. But the thing is they're all under
assault and it's a real problem. It's become something that
(04:44):
is just ignored largely that our public officials and people
who get into public life are routinely threatened and have
you know, real death threats directed at them. And it
hasn't even been a year since Charlie Kirk was murdered.
Being in the public eye speaking out, taking a positions
that people that might not like is a scary thing
(05:06):
to do right now. And you know, I was thinking
about this. There was a clip of Schumer from a
few years ago, I think it was right around the
Dabbs decision where he named checks, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh and
says they've released the whirlwind and they will pay the price.
How is that an okay thing to say? And how
come nobody talks about that. That's like a threat? Well,
you can't what did he mean? He was gonna, you know,
(05:29):
not re elect them? The No, there's only one way
to deal with Supreme Court justices reaping the whirlwind and
paying the price. And that's not going to be an
election and it's not going to be forcing the resignation
or anything like that. I don't understand how stuff like
that became okay to say.
Speaker 1 (05:45):
The truth is that there's a not small and not
particularly extreme like pretty accepted part of the left constituency
who is aligned against what they see as an ill
legitimate conservative court and views threats of political violence and
actual political violence as a utilitarian way to mess with them,
(06:10):
to terrorize them, to hopefully make punish them for decisions
that they have made, perhaps influence decisions.
Speaker 3 (06:18):
Right.
Speaker 1 (06:19):
And it's not as if the folks who advocate this
point of view are subtle about us right.
Speaker 2 (06:25):
There saying it's to influence them.
Speaker 1 (06:27):
Yeah, they're very clear about it. And I appreciate all
of the justices for taking on this job, which does
come with significant threats. Unfortunately, it should not be the
price of admission, and if it is, it will discourage
many in the future, very good people from taking taking
these kinds of jobs. You have to you have to
(06:47):
be really strong, you have to be very unafraid to
take this on, and to any extent that we can
protect them, we should because we want their real, unfiltered
decisions put before the public.
Speaker 3 (07:04):
And not under some sort of weird threat.
Speaker 1 (07:06):
I also would note I think one of the ways
to deal with this with swatting and threats is if
they're really legally actionable, perhaps we need to be doing
more thorough investigations and raising the punishment because law enforcement
talks about this when armed bank robbery hit its peak
(07:28):
in like the eighties and nineties, it's come down like
eighty seven percent since then. And there's a couple things
that happened. One technology makes it easier to catch these folks.
To the federal sentencing guidelines meant that everyone who was
caught and convicted got at least a ten year sentence,
and three.
Speaker 3 (07:45):
Armed bank robbers are always prosecuted.
Speaker 1 (07:48):
So I think a combination of those things might be
helpful for death threats against public officials, particularly federal ones,
because then you could federalize that crime absolutely.
Speaker 2 (07:58):
And the swatting stuff, it's meant to cause violence. You
can't look at it as an inconvenient somebody called a
pizza delivery to your house, like that's annoying it. It's
not right. It's it's meant to have police come in armed,
ready to face some sort of hostage situation or something inside.
(08:19):
Everybody's on high alert. It's not a joke, and it
needs to be treated far, far more seriously. What I
really don't like is, and I saw this from conservatives too,
which was that Amy Cony Barrett's just stepped down if
she's afraid, and I don't understand how that's an acceptable
answer to this, Like her life is being threatened, therefore
(08:40):
she should resign because you don't think the next person's
life will be threatened. And what you don't think they'll
be afraid because they're a man, maybe, like men are
just as afraid as women of being murdered. It's a
whole thing.
Speaker 3 (08:52):
That's the whole thing is this is a horseshoe, right.
Speaker 1 (08:55):
This is the left thinking that it's utilitarian to terrorize
people in this manner, and then the right taking the
abuse of these people and turning it into a cudgel
against them, like she's merely stating facts. She didn't seem
afraid in that clip, by the way, she was regretful
that this happens to her family, as she should be.
She thinks it's a travesty, as she should But her
(09:19):
pointing out that this is happening to her and that
it is objectionable is not disqualifying from the bench, And
if it is, you are incentivizing the abuse of her absolutely.
Speaker 2 (09:29):
And the other thing is is that she was there
to request an increase in security funding. It's not like
she decided to go off on a tangent about how
afraid she is and how the threats that she gets.
And I feel like when you see a clip on
the internet, sometimes you don't have the background for that.
Maybe that's why these accounts are commenting like, oh, she
should step down if she's afraid. Like she's again not
(09:49):
telling us about her fear out of nowhere. She's saying
I'm afraid because I get threats and we need an
increase in security funding. It's also, you know, it makes sense.
Speaker 1 (09:59):
Libs do this people who live in cities all the time,
like oh, if you can't take the don't ride the subway.
Speaker 3 (10:04):
And it's like, no, we don't have to live that way.
There are tools we can use to discourage this kind
of thing, and we should.
Speaker 2 (10:11):
Yes, But you know, I get very sensitive about that
in New York in particular, because we had a number
of years where it wasn't a standard thing to have
a homeless guy pooping on your subway car, like it
was normal and safe and clean, and then they reverted
back to form to get leftist policies through. So it
doesn't have to be this way. Our Supreme Court justices
(10:32):
weren't always under threat. We didn't always need two hundred
plus million dollars of security funding for them, but we
do now because things are out of control. Yep.
Speaker 3 (10:43):
And I do think one of the reasons it's not
readily identified and talked about more often and bemoaned is
because this is a conservative court's right and therefore the
violence and the threats thereof are coming largely from the left,
and then the justification thereof coming from the right. Let's
not this is you know, or the political weaponization of
(11:06):
the threats is being used by those on the right
who are upset with Amy Coney Barrett, which again I
just recommend Sarah Isker's book about the Court Last Branch Standing,
because it does help for those who get mad about
an individual decision to understand what the alignments in the
court look like and how they're different and charged by
(11:26):
different intellectual paths than you would expect all the time.
It's not this six' three situation, constantly they have different,
philosophies and simplifying it doesn't help you when you're discussing
These oversimplifying doesn't help you in this. Situation so we have.
Speaker 2 (11:42):
A political story political violence story out Of britain that
yes highlighted what's going on over.
Speaker 1 (11:48):
There So Anne whittacombe's seventy eight year old former politician
in THE. Uk she was in The Conservative party at
one point and Then REFORM. Uk she was a Big
brexit voice and anti unlimited immigration, voice socially. Conservative she
later became a REALITY tv contestant in THE, uk so very,
(12:08):
famous and she was found Dead thursday in her home
at the edge Of Dartmore National park in Southwest, england
after sustaining what police said were serious. INJURIES i think
she was beaten and this is interesting obviously because she's
a bit of a firebrand and initially the local police were,
like there's no chance this is.
Speaker 3 (12:29):
Political moving, on.
Speaker 1 (12:32):
They now have a suspect in custody and the More
National Force terrorism specific has taken over this. Case so
that suggests that there actually is what one might have
assumed from the beginning there would, be which is a
political terrorism part of. This and some have speculated that
whoever went after her thoughts she was more vulnerable as
(12:54):
a former person and a party as opposed to a
current because of what she would have less, security who
are currently in charge Now, farag and SO i.
Speaker 3 (13:04):
Just this speaks.
Speaker 1 (13:06):
Too we'll see what comes out of, it but it
speaks to even with a really famous person In britain
who it's pretty obvious that this might be in the
mix and it might be political, violence the extent to
which local police will just be, like, nah that's not
what you obviously see with your.
Speaker 3 (13:21):
Eyeballs that doesn't help you change this problem at.
Speaker 2 (13:24):
All, right when they say, terrorism my mind goes to foreign.
Terrorism do they have any idea yet who that?
Speaker 1 (13:31):
Is they are not releasing a ton of information about
this twenty six year old suspect as of, now BUT
i think that the force involved deals with terrorism as
in politically motivated crimes in addition to domestic and.
Speaker 2 (13:45):
Foreign All, right we'll stay on top of that and
see what happens With whittacomb's. Killer we're going to take
a short break and be right back with more On.
Normally we are back On, normally Where New york has
become the first state to ban new data. Centers and
(14:06):
we were talking in the last segment about the. Horseshoe
this is sort of another horseshoe issue where the idea
that we should ban data centers is very very popular
on the far left and on the far, right and
as we're recording, This trump has actually released a truth
social coming out against this, move By hochel saying one
(14:30):
of the biggest driving forces in the future for jobs
or data. Centers they are, big, strong, bold and money
machines for the state in which they are. Built Governor Kathy,
holckle for political, reasons has terminated all data centers being
built or to be built In New York. State he
goes on that these companies are now being sought In, Alabama, Florida, Texas,
arizona and many other. States both the taxes and the
jobs amount to liquid. Gold New York state has made
(14:53):
a terrible. Decision all this income and other benefits will
be going to red states and some blue where data
centers are sought as cash cows with lower taxes and
record setting. JOBS i, mean on and. On but the
thing is he also says that they must pay their
own water and, power because that's become the kind of
the rumor here that, oh they steal all the water
from the local, area and, like, well, no they're going
(15:15):
to be paying for their own water and power and
often they don't take up more water power than an office.
Park so it's a really bad. Idea it is it.
Does he mentioned it seeds all this incredible new technology To.
China that's exactly the point THAT i think he should be.
Making if we're not building data centers and staying up ON,
(15:37):
ai Then china.
Speaker 3 (15:38):
Will, YEAH i think the populist messaging that these.
Speaker 1 (15:41):
Guys first of, all everybody has concerns ABOUT, ai And
i'm among, them BUT i also recognize that this brand
new technology that, offers in addition to creative destruction in
ways that it will affect our lives in some short
term negative, ways it also creates the opportunity for economic
development in incredible.
Speaker 3 (15:59):
Ways so it's not just a it's not a net.
Speaker 1 (16:02):
NEGATIVE i have, concerns BUT i think people have really
gotten whipped up by a very simple, message which is
they are hogs of all the things that we. Need
they're stealing the, electricity they're stealing the. WATER i do
think they should partly be responsible for bolstering electric, grids
because that's some of the rehab that we need in
(16:22):
a lot of places where these things are being. PUT
i think that we have to compete with The chinese on,
this and to stop your state or your country from
doing so is a. Mistake and then when it comes
to the water stuff in, PARTICULAR i tracked this down
and it originates from a paper done in twenty twenty.
Three so even the author of the paper has, said,
(16:43):
hey there's actually adjustments now because they're more. Efficient and
what the paper did was put in very journalist friendly
terms the amount of water being, used and they basically
said it's a bottle of water per inquiry In. Ai
well that's not really, true as you might, imagine and
even he at this, point the guy who came up
(17:04):
with is like a.
Speaker 3 (17:05):
It's more like a fifteen milliliters per fifty.
Speaker 1 (17:08):
Inquiries so it's one of those that just sort of
took off because it was a very useful way of expressing.
This but useful and simple does not mean. True and
so these places are taking up a lot less water
than something like nut, farming for, instance which far eclipses
the use of water from data. Centers SO i think
(17:28):
it's just important to keep that. Perspective it feels a bit,
like because this is the left right populism horseshoe situation
that some of it may be foreign, influenced AND i
think there's some that's.
Speaker 2 (17:39):
It it's like you want to see the psychop it's
always where they, meet and that's where Our china And
russia are getting their money's.
Speaker 1 (17:46):
Worth and there is some research behind that if you
look to where the money is coming from to fund
the local campaigns against data.
Speaker 3 (17:56):
CENTERS i want to be wary of land use and.
Speaker 1 (17:59):
All that, stuff BUT i THINK i do Think Blue
states are once again putting themselves in a situation where
they're not going to have a part of this really
beneficial economic activity that's going to go to other.
Speaker 3 (18:11):
Places.
Speaker 2 (18:12):
Right it reminds me actually of nuclear power plants and
How New york was so proud of itself for closing
their nuclear power plant and now every time they have
a heat wave they are like, whoa, whoa, whoa everybody
stop using the air. Conditioner, Yes and they did have
blackouts and brownouts during this last heat wave they, had
and if they had nuclear power to rely, on this
(18:35):
wouldn't be. Happening and they were talked into shutting down
that plant by exactly the same kind of you, know
foreign influence operations that get into the far left and
make them portray normal things as.
Speaker 3 (18:50):
Bad, yeah so just like keep it in.
Speaker 1 (18:53):
Perspective, guys the amount of water used is also comparable
to or less than golf, courses and we're.
Speaker 2 (19:01):
Getting somewhere, CORN i, mean BUT i don't want to
start that if you're running for president AND.
Speaker 3 (19:06):
I never talk about, corn but, yeah corn is, Faultless.
Carol we need all the.
Speaker 2 (19:14):
CORN i don't want people falling for. IT i. Have
you can have the concerns and about electricity for, example
or just about eye soreness or that kind of, thing
all acceptable things to be concerned, about and not want
it in your. Backyard AND i get that there's a
lot of THINGS i don't want in my, Backyard SO
(19:35):
i understand that, impulse but just don't fall For we
shouldn't be building any new data centers Like Kathy holkle
clearly fell for, it or is catering to that far
left flank that she continues to need and she's not
quite sure how to adjust, to.
Speaker 1 (19:50):
Or is just pausing so that she can get a
bunch of corporate payouts to give them what they. Want
like that's the other, Thing like we don't need to subsidize,
it BUT i would not like to in. It and
there's also research that suggests electricity, prices by the, way
are far more affected not by this relatively modest water consuming.
Speaker 3 (20:10):
Industry but by regulatory structures in your. State no, Way so,
yeah that's what.
Speaker 1 (20:17):
Happens SO i would imagine, that you, know she might
be planning some regulatory capture of her own up In New.
York so, anyway keep your eyes, open be be careful
with the, data because, man they really try to stack
the deck on these. Things and if everybody starts screaming one,
Thing i'm, like let, me let me dig a little
bit on.
Speaker 3 (20:35):
This that's.
Speaker 2 (20:37):
Right we're going to take a short break and be
right back with more on.
Speaker 1 (20:40):
Normally all, right we are back On normally with a
story close to Both carols And My, hearts which is
it's entitled cigarettes Are back In? Vogue how did this?
Happen AND i love the. Opening Delia kai remembers everything
about her first. Cigarette she and a friend were dining out,
door warm, air beautiful. Night there was a sense of
(21:02):
we survived this really terrifying pandemic where we all thought
about death a. Lot her friend offered her a cigarette
And kai couldn't find a reason to say, no and said,
quote it was unfortunately. PERFECT i was, like, OOH i
get it.
Speaker 2 (21:18):
Right nobody smoked because it was, bad you don't. Know,
yeah it was like full and. DELICIOUS i frankly can't
imagine having a cigarette right, now but we did enjoy
that quite a bit in our.
Speaker 3 (21:33):
Youth So carol AND i were.
Speaker 1 (21:36):
Social we were social cigarette buddies back in the, day.
Speaker 2 (21:41):
Regular, smokers, right which was part of the appeal for, us,
right had we become, addicted that would have been less
fun very. Quickly, Actually so in you, know the nineteen
hundreds When, Mary catherine AND i, met actually we didn't
we met after we met after nine to. Eleven, so
but in the in those early, days a long time,
(22:04):
ago the thing was that there was this thinking that
if you smoked a little, bit you were definitely going
to become. Addicted AND i think it was, freakonomics or
maybe it Was gladwell who did a whole thing on
most people can't not become addicted to, cigarettes but some
people did it, successfully like me and, You and it
was so it was. Fun it wasn't this big. Problem
(22:26):
it wasn't something terrible Because we only did it, occasionally
but it became bad for a lot of people and
it lost its. Coolness for. Sure we weren't allowed to
smoke indoors. Anymore that used to be a thing that
everybody did. Everywhere imagine, it kids smoking everywhere in. Malls
Waffle house was like the last place to hold on to.
Speaker 1 (22:48):
It, No When North carolina Waffle house finally said no,
SMOKING i was, like, well that's that's the end of, that.
Speaker 2 (22:55):
RIGHT i REMEMBER i already wasn't, smoking like with any
regularity at, all BUT i. WAS i was In West
virginia and the waffle house allowed, it AND i was, like,
WELL i have to go across the street to the
gas station to get.
Speaker 1 (23:06):
So so smoking is obviously extremely bad for.
Speaker 3 (23:10):
YOU i come from a tobacco. TOWN i lived In North.
Speaker 1 (23:12):
Carolina but there's this interesting thing that's happening where because
the smoking cessation campaigns and the public health campaigns were so.
Speaker 3 (23:21):
Successful, yeah people.
Speaker 1 (23:24):
Now view smoking versus, vaping which they find sort of
antiseptic and uncool looking. Cool smoking cigarettes is viewed as
like a bad habit from the good old. Days is
what this case, says where it has nineties nostalgia AND
i dare you to find somebody like looking cooler than
(23:44):
like several generations Ago hollywood stars with cigarettes hanging from their.
Speaker 3 (23:47):
LIPS i, mean it's just, Right it's.
Speaker 2 (23:49):
Indisputable Pete, Moss Brad pitt like walking Around Johnny.
Speaker 1 (23:55):
Depp, yes so people because they are nostalgic for the,
nineties and young people who didn't experience the nineties.
Speaker 3 (24:02):
Are somewhat nostalgic for.
Speaker 1 (24:03):
It this is their way, of perhaps in a more
anti alcohol environment to.
Speaker 3 (24:09):
Go this is my little rebellion.
Speaker 2 (24:11):
So, well hand in, hand, Kid.
Speaker 3 (24:16):
It's. True it's. TRUE i was.
Speaker 1 (24:17):
SURPRISED i saw some celebrity wedding and NOW i can't
remember which one.
Speaker 3 (24:20):
It, was.
Speaker 1 (24:23):
Where they had a picture in their photo dump of
the wedding of cigarettes laid out for people at the after,
party AND i, thought oh my, gosh this is coming
from a different. Place this piece Notes Kylie jenner lit
a cigarette on Her March Vanity fair. Cover Hailey bieber
has a cigarette sticking out of her. Smile In April's interview.
Magazine he did Rivalries connor's story posing with a cigarette
(24:46):
perched in his pouch while prepping for the Met. Gala IN,
gq which that does seem like a bit of a sea.
CHANGE i, mean this has been happened an anti smoking
nation for quite some.
Speaker 3 (24:56):
Time this has looking Like.
Speaker 2 (24:57):
Europe they are actually all still smoking In. Europe when
we went To france last, summer my kids were, like
what the hell's going? On and then when we came,
back my ten year old saw somebody smoking and he was,
like smoking In.
Speaker 1 (25:10):
Florida, YEAH i like, YOU i can't even imagine having
a cigarette right. Now that's Like i'm past that.
Speaker 3 (25:16):
Point in my.
Speaker 1 (25:17):
Life but here's WHAT i will, say in every Major american,
city IF i smelled cigarette smoke instead of, Weed.
Speaker 3 (25:24):
I'd be a happy, lady right, right be a much happier.
Speaker 1 (25:28):
Lady AND i think also cigarette smoking being banned is
one of those things that from a libertarian, PERSPECTIVE i was,
like that's. Bad these businesses should be able to decide
if they want cigarettes. Indoors and then in practice it
was so nice to come home and smell, normal right.
Speaker 2 (25:44):
Right, yeah that was. TOUGH i also thought, like, oh
you guys can't ban. CIGARETTES i also thought like their
businesses would really suffer because of, It like who go
to bar if.
Speaker 3 (25:54):
You can't smoke a.
Speaker 2 (25:54):
Cigarette but what ended up happening was everybody cool went
outside and had their own thing going. On you, know
it was a good.
Speaker 1 (26:02):
Time, also there is a lot to be, said AND
i Know i've mentioned this about drinking before and that
reason piece about how it leads to creative thinking and
all these social bonds.
Speaker 3 (26:12):
That you don't get.
Speaker 1 (26:13):
Otherwise there is something to be said for that bond,
created whether you're in a newsroom or a group of,
friends by two people going out and, saying, oh we've
got this thing to do together while we have a
little chat about the.
Speaker 3 (26:25):
Universe that's.
Speaker 2 (26:26):
Right that Was we had a good time doing.
Speaker 3 (26:28):
That, also my kids should never do. It so if
any kids.
Speaker 2 (26:32):
Are listening to, this never. Smoke i'll make you smoke
the whole.
Speaker 3 (26:34):
Pack oh that is What that was the old school
remedy for.
Speaker 2 (26:38):
That. Yeah, yeah but now it's, like you, know if
you catch them, vaping what are you gonna? Do make
the smoke the whole.
Speaker 3 (26:43):
Babe, YEAH i don't think it works the.
Speaker 2 (26:45):
Same thanks for joining us on normally normally Airs tuesdays And,
thursdays and you could subscribe anywhere you get your. Podcasts
get in touch with us at normally theepod at gmail dot.
Com thanks for listening and when things get weird act
normally
Hey, guys, we are back on normally the show with
normal it takes for when the news gets weird.
Speaker 2 (00:08):
I am Mary Catherine Ham and I'm Carol Markowitz. Mary Catherine.
I'm going on vacation. I'm very excited about that. I
know and give you by yourself, but I gotta go.
Speaker 1 (00:19):
Well, I I you raise the bar so much for
guest hosting and putting together great shows, you know, I
gotta I gotta meet up with it.
Speaker 2 (00:26):
Yeah, you gotta find some good guest hosts. But I
believe in you and I think you will, you know,
do a great job with in my absence.
Speaker 3 (00:34):
Thank you so much.
Speaker 1 (00:34):
I'm excited for your vacation, so enjoy I'm actually going
to North Wisconsin to do do a speech, but it's
at a cool resort, so I'm gonna extend my stay
a little bit and hang out up there and just
enjoy the mild weather as opposed to where I live.
Speaker 2 (00:52):
I love it. Yeah, that's awesome. I have never been
to Wisconsin. It's gonna have to get on that list.
Speaker 3 (00:57):
To mark it off.
Speaker 2 (00:58):
Girl. Alrighty, okay, what is going on in the news.
What's happening?
Speaker 1 (01:06):
Will the Supreme Court justices went up to the Hill
this week to speak in front of a congressional gathering
about security for skudas judges.
Speaker 2 (01:20):
They discussed for fourteen million dollar increase in security funding
and to just discuss the Court's overall budget.
Speaker 1 (01:28):
Right, And it turns out, you know that funding is necessary, guys,
because the climate in which the Supreme Court justices operate
has become more and more hostile. And you'll remember, as
we talked about on this show, the plot against Kavanaugh's
life that was luckily disrupted, there have been numerous other threats.
(01:54):
Amy Cony Barrett was swatted several weeks ago with a
false call about gunshots on her prot She spoke at
this hearing about the tolls that that takes on a family,
So we'll hear a little bit from her about what
that looks like in her house.
Speaker 4 (02:10):
They have required me, to my children to think about
and see things that children should not have to see
or think about. One example is when threats to my
life were particularly intense a few years ago, around the
time of the dobs Leek, my security detail sent me
home with a bulletproof vest and I carried it into
my house, put it into my bedroom, dropped it down
(02:31):
on a table, turned around, and my twelve year old
son was standing in the doorway of my bedroom and
he wanted to know what it was and why I
had it. And I didn't know how to respond, because
maybe I lack imagination, but I didn't expect that performing
this service was going to put me in the position
of explaining to my children what a bulletproof vest was
and why I had to wear one. It's also been
(02:53):
reported in the news that roughly six weeks ago, I
was the victim of a swatting incident. At that point,
my teenage son, one of my teenage sons, opened the
door to go out with friends and saw in our
street it was full of police cars who had responded
to a false report of gunshots and raised voices in
(03:15):
my home. I was very, very grateful that I had
Supreme Court police outside my home because they were able
to stop and meet with and explain to the County
police that it had been a false alarm, and so
the police did not actually attempt to enter our home.
Many of us, me included, have received threatening, anonymous deliveries
(03:36):
designed to intimidate and harass us. They are often sent
in the name of Judge Sallas's son, who I think,
as you mentioned in the beginning, mister Chairman was is
deceased because he was killed by a disgruntled lawyer who
showed up at Judge Sallas's home intending to kill her,
but her son, twenty years old at the time, opened
(03:56):
the door and took the bullet instead. Her husband standing
behind was seriously injured. So I think the message on
these deliveries being sent in his name is clear, as
Justice Kagan said, frederal judges across the country throughout the judiciary,
including the Supreme Court, continue to do their jobs without
fear or favor. But the threat level is really high.
Speaker 2 (04:20):
You don't ever want to have your kids be afraid
and think that something is going to happen to mommy.
And that's you know, a big part of it here
is that she has small children. I'm sure it's a
giant concern. I think I hear a lot of like
you know, Clarence Thomason's scared. He doesn't have small kids
in the home, and I think that really does make
a big difference. But the thing is they're all under
assault and it's a real problem. It's become something that
(04:44):
is just ignored largely that our public officials and people
who get into public life are routinely threatened and have
you know, real death threats directed at them. And it
hasn't even been a year since Charlie Kirk was murdered.
Being in the public eye speaking out, taking a positions
that people that might not like is a scary thing
(05:06):
to do right now. And you know, I was thinking
about this. There was a clip of Schumer from a
few years ago, I think it was right around the
Dabbs decision where he named checks, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh and
says they've released the whirlwind and they will pay the price.
How is that an okay thing to say? And how
come nobody talks about that. That's like a threat? Well,
you can't what did he mean? He was gonna, you know,
(05:29):
not re elect them? The No, there's only one way
to deal with Supreme Court justices reaping the whirlwind and
paying the price. And that's not going to be an
election and it's not going to be forcing the resignation
or anything like that. I don't understand how stuff like
that became okay to say.
Speaker 1 (05:45):
The truth is that there's a not small and not
particularly extreme like pretty accepted part of the left constituency
who is aligned against what they see as an ill
legitimate conservative court and views threats of political violence and
actual political violence as a utilitarian way to mess with them,
(06:10):
to terrorize them, to hopefully make punish them for decisions
that they have made, perhaps influence decisions.
Speaker 3 (06:18):
Right.
Speaker 1 (06:19):
And it's not as if the folks who advocate this
point of view are subtle about us right.
Speaker 2 (06:25):
There saying it's to influence them.
Speaker 1 (06:27):
Yeah, they're very clear about it. And I appreciate all
of the justices for taking on this job, which does
come with significant threats. Unfortunately, it should not be the
price of admission, and if it is, it will discourage
many in the future, very good people from taking taking
these kinds of jobs. You have to you have to
(06:47):
be really strong, you have to be very unafraid to
take this on, and to any extent that we can
protect them, we should because we want their real, unfiltered
decisions put before the public.
Speaker 3 (07:04):
And not under some sort of weird threat.
Speaker 1 (07:06):
I also would note I think one of the ways
to deal with this with swatting and threats is if
they're really legally actionable, perhaps we need to be doing
more thorough investigations and raising the punishment because law enforcement
talks about this when armed bank robbery hit its peak
(07:28):
in like the eighties and nineties, it's come down like
eighty seven percent since then. And there's a couple things
that happened. One technology makes it easier to catch these folks.
To the federal sentencing guidelines meant that everyone who was
caught and convicted got at least a ten year sentence,
and three.
Speaker 3 (07:45):
Armed bank robbers are always prosecuted.
Speaker 1 (07:48):
So I think a combination of those things might be
helpful for death threats against public officials, particularly federal ones,
because then you could federalize that crime absolutely.
Speaker 2 (07:58):
And the swatting stuff, it's meant to cause violence. You
can't look at it as an inconvenient somebody called a
pizza delivery to your house, like that's annoying it. It's
not right. It's it's meant to have police come in armed,
ready to face some sort of hostage situation or something inside.
(08:19):
Everybody's on high alert. It's not a joke, and it
needs to be treated far, far more seriously. What I
really don't like is, and I saw this from conservatives too,
which was that Amy Cony Barrett's just stepped down if
she's afraid, and I don't understand how that's an acceptable
answer to this, Like her life is being threatened, therefore
(08:40):
she should resign because you don't think the next person's
life will be threatened. And what you don't think they'll
be afraid because they're a man, maybe, like men are
just as afraid as women of being murdered. It's a
whole thing.
Speaker 3 (08:52):
That's the whole thing is this is a horseshoe, right.
Speaker 1 (08:55):
This is the left thinking that it's utilitarian to terrorize
people in this manner, and then the right taking the
abuse of these people and turning it into a cudgel
against them, like she's merely stating facts. She didn't seem
afraid in that clip, by the way, she was regretful
that this happens to her family, as she should be.
She thinks it's a travesty, as she should But her
(09:19):
pointing out that this is happening to her and that
it is objectionable is not disqualifying from the bench, And
if it is, you are incentivizing the abuse of her absolutely.
Speaker 2 (09:29):
And the other thing is is that she was there
to request an increase in security funding. It's not like
she decided to go off on a tangent about how
afraid she is and how the threats that she gets.
And I feel like when you see a clip on
the internet, sometimes you don't have the background for that.
Maybe that's why these accounts are commenting like, oh, she
should step down if she's afraid. Like she's again not
(09:49):
telling us about her fear out of nowhere. She's saying
I'm afraid because I get threats and we need an
increase in security funding. It's also, you know, it makes sense.
Speaker 1 (09:59):
Libs do this people who live in cities all the time,
like oh, if you can't take the don't ride the subway.
Speaker 3 (10:04):
And it's like, no, we don't have to live that way.
There are tools we can use to discourage this kind
of thing, and we should.
Speaker 2 (10:11):
Yes, But you know, I get very sensitive about that
in New York in particular, because we had a number
of years where it wasn't a standard thing to have
a homeless guy pooping on your subway car, like it
was normal and safe and clean, and then they reverted
back to form to get leftist policies through. So it
doesn't have to be this way. Our Supreme Court justices
(10:32):
weren't always under threat. We didn't always need two hundred
plus million dollars of security funding for them, but we
do now because things are out of control. Yep.
Speaker 3 (10:43):
And I do think one of the reasons it's not
readily identified and talked about more often and bemoaned is
because this is a conservative court's right and therefore the
violence and the threats thereof are coming largely from the left,
and then the justification thereof coming from the right. Let's
not this is you know, or the political weaponization of
(11:06):
the threats is being used by those on the right
who are upset with Amy Coney Barrett, which again I
just recommend Sarah Isker's book about the Court Last Branch Standing,
because it does help for those who get mad about
an individual decision to understand what the alignments in the
court look like and how they're different and charged by
(11:26):
different intellectual paths than you would expect all the time.
It's not this six' three situation, constantly they have different,
philosophies and simplifying it doesn't help you when you're discussing
These oversimplifying doesn't help you in this. Situation so we have.
Speaker 2 (11:42):
A political story political violence story out Of britain that
yes highlighted what's going on over.
Speaker 1 (11:48):
There So Anne whittacombe's seventy eight year old former politician
in THE. Uk she was in The Conservative party at
one point and Then REFORM. Uk she was a Big
brexit voice and anti unlimited immigration, voice socially. Conservative she
later became a REALITY tv contestant in THE, uk so very,
(12:08):
famous and she was found Dead thursday in her home
at the edge Of Dartmore National park in Southwest, england
after sustaining what police said were serious. INJURIES i think
she was beaten and this is interesting obviously because she's
a bit of a firebrand and initially the local police were,
like there's no chance this is.
Speaker 3 (12:29):
Political moving, on.
Speaker 1 (12:32):
They now have a suspect in custody and the More
National Force terrorism specific has taken over this. Case so
that suggests that there actually is what one might have
assumed from the beginning there would, be which is a
political terrorism part of. This and some have speculated that
whoever went after her thoughts she was more vulnerable as
(12:54):
a former person and a party as opposed to a
current because of what she would have less, security who
are currently in charge Now, farag and SO i.
Speaker 3 (13:04):
Just this speaks.
Speaker 1 (13:06):
Too we'll see what comes out of, it but it
speaks to even with a really famous person In britain
who it's pretty obvious that this might be in the
mix and it might be political, violence the extent to
which local police will just be, like, nah that's not
what you obviously see with your.
Speaker 3 (13:21):
Eyeballs that doesn't help you change this problem at.
Speaker 2 (13:24):
All, right when they say, terrorism my mind goes to foreign.
Terrorism do they have any idea yet who that?
Speaker 1 (13:31):
Is they are not releasing a ton of information about
this twenty six year old suspect as of, now BUT
i think that the force involved deals with terrorism as
in politically motivated crimes in addition to domestic and.
Speaker 2 (13:45):
Foreign All, right we'll stay on top of that and
see what happens With whittacomb's. Killer we're going to take
a short break and be right back with more On.
Normally we are back On, normally Where New york has
become the first state to ban new data. Centers and
(14:06):
we were talking in the last segment about the. Horseshoe
this is sort of another horseshoe issue where the idea
that we should ban data centers is very very popular
on the far left and on the far, right and
as we're recording, This trump has actually released a truth
social coming out against this, move By hochel saying one
(14:30):
of the biggest driving forces in the future for jobs
or data. Centers they are, big, strong, bold and money
machines for the state in which they are. Built Governor Kathy,
holckle for political, reasons has terminated all data centers being
built or to be built In New York. State he
goes on that these companies are now being sought In, Alabama, Florida, Texas,
arizona and many other. States both the taxes and the
jobs amount to liquid. Gold New York state has made
(14:53):
a terrible. Decision all this income and other benefits will
be going to red states and some blue where data
centers are sought as cash cows with lower taxes and
record setting. JOBS i, mean on and. On but the
thing is he also says that they must pay their
own water and, power because that's become the kind of
the rumor here that, oh they steal all the water
from the local, area and, like, well, no they're going
(15:15):
to be paying for their own water and power and
often they don't take up more water power than an office.
Park so it's a really bad. Idea it is it.
Does he mentioned it seeds all this incredible new technology To.
China that's exactly the point THAT i think he should be.
Making if we're not building data centers and staying up ON,
(15:37):
ai Then china.
Speaker 3 (15:38):
Will, YEAH i think the populist messaging that these.
Speaker 1 (15:41):
Guys first of, all everybody has concerns ABOUT, ai And
i'm among, them BUT i also recognize that this brand
new technology that, offers in addition to creative destruction in
ways that it will affect our lives in some short
term negative, ways it also creates the opportunity for economic
development in incredible.
Speaker 3 (15:59):
Ways so it's not just a it's not a net.
Speaker 1 (16:02):
NEGATIVE i have, concerns BUT i think people have really
gotten whipped up by a very simple, message which is
they are hogs of all the things that we. Need
they're stealing the, electricity they're stealing the. WATER i do
think they should partly be responsible for bolstering electric, grids
because that's some of the rehab that we need in
(16:22):
a lot of places where these things are being. PUT
i think that we have to compete with The chinese on,
this and to stop your state or your country from
doing so is a. Mistake and then when it comes
to the water stuff in, PARTICULAR i tracked this down
and it originates from a paper done in twenty twenty.
Three so even the author of the paper has, said,
(16:43):
hey there's actually adjustments now because they're more. Efficient and
what the paper did was put in very journalist friendly
terms the amount of water being, used and they basically
said it's a bottle of water per inquiry In. Ai
well that's not really, true as you might, imagine and
even he at this, point the guy who came up
(17:04):
with is like a.
Speaker 3 (17:05):
It's more like a fifteen milliliters per fifty.
Speaker 1 (17:08):
Inquiries so it's one of those that just sort of
took off because it was a very useful way of expressing.
This but useful and simple does not mean. True and
so these places are taking up a lot less water
than something like nut, farming for, instance which far eclipses
the use of water from data. Centers SO i think
(17:28):
it's just important to keep that. Perspective it feels a bit,
like because this is the left right populism horseshoe situation
that some of it may be foreign, influenced AND i
think there's some that's.
Speaker 2 (17:39):
It it's like you want to see the psychop it's
always where they, meet and that's where Our china And
russia are getting their money's.
Speaker 1 (17:46):
Worth and there is some research behind that if you
look to where the money is coming from to fund
the local campaigns against data.
Speaker 3 (17:56):
CENTERS i want to be wary of land use and.
Speaker 1 (17:59):
All that, stuff BUT i THINK i do Think Blue
states are once again putting themselves in a situation where
they're not going to have a part of this really
beneficial economic activity that's going to go to other.
Speaker 3 (18:11):
Places.
Speaker 2 (18:12):
Right it reminds me actually of nuclear power plants and
How New york was so proud of itself for closing
their nuclear power plant and now every time they have
a heat wave they are like, whoa, whoa, whoa everybody
stop using the air. Conditioner, Yes and they did have
blackouts and brownouts during this last heat wave they, had
and if they had nuclear power to rely, on this
(18:35):
wouldn't be. Happening and they were talked into shutting down
that plant by exactly the same kind of you, know
foreign influence operations that get into the far left and
make them portray normal things as.
Speaker 3 (18:50):
Bad, yeah so just like keep it in.
Speaker 1 (18:53):
Perspective, guys the amount of water used is also comparable
to or less than golf, courses and we're.
Speaker 2 (19:01):
Getting somewhere, CORN i, mean BUT i don't want to
start that if you're running for president AND.
Speaker 3 (19:06):
I never talk about, corn but, yeah corn is, Faultless.
Carol we need all the.
Speaker 2 (19:14):
CORN i don't want people falling for. IT i. Have
you can have the concerns and about electricity for, example
or just about eye soreness or that kind of, thing
all acceptable things to be concerned, about and not want
it in your. Backyard AND i get that there's a
lot of THINGS i don't want in my, Backyard SO
(19:35):
i understand that, impulse but just don't fall For we
shouldn't be building any new data centers Like Kathy holkle
clearly fell for, it or is catering to that far
left flank that she continues to need and she's not
quite sure how to adjust, to.
Speaker 1 (19:50):
Or is just pausing so that she can get a
bunch of corporate payouts to give them what they. Want
like that's the other, Thing like we don't need to subsidize,
it BUT i would not like to in. It and
there's also research that suggests electricity, prices by the, way
are far more affected not by this relatively modest water consuming.
Speaker 3 (20:10):
Industry but by regulatory structures in your. State no, Way so,
yeah that's what.
Speaker 1 (20:17):
Happens SO i would imagine, that you, know she might
be planning some regulatory capture of her own up In New.
York so, anyway keep your eyes, open be be careful
with the, data because, man they really try to stack
the deck on these. Things and if everybody starts screaming one,
Thing i'm, like let, me let me dig a little
bit on.
Speaker 3 (20:35):
This that's.
Speaker 2 (20:37):
Right we're going to take a short break and be
right back with more on.
Speaker 1 (20:40):
Normally all, right we are back On normally with a
story close to Both carols And My, hearts which is
it's entitled cigarettes Are back In? Vogue how did this?
Happen AND i love the. Opening Delia kai remembers everything
about her first. Cigarette she and a friend were dining out,
door warm, air beautiful. Night there was a sense of
(21:02):
we survived this really terrifying pandemic where we all thought
about death a. Lot her friend offered her a cigarette
And kai couldn't find a reason to say, no and said,
quote it was unfortunately. PERFECT i was, like, OOH i
get it.
Speaker 2 (21:18):
Right nobody smoked because it was, bad you don't. Know,
yeah it was like full and. DELICIOUS i frankly can't
imagine having a cigarette right, now but we did enjoy
that quite a bit in our.
Speaker 3 (21:33):
Youth So carol AND i were.
Speaker 1 (21:36):
Social we were social cigarette buddies back in the, day.
Speaker 2 (21:41):
Regular, smokers, right which was part of the appeal for, us,
right had we become, addicted that would have been less
fun very. Quickly, Actually so in you, know the nineteen
hundreds When, Mary catherine AND i, met actually we didn't
we met after we met after nine to. Eleven, so
but in the in those early, days a long time,
(22:04):
ago the thing was that there was this thinking that
if you smoked a little, bit you were definitely going
to become. Addicted AND i think it was, freakonomics or
maybe it Was gladwell who did a whole thing on
most people can't not become addicted to, cigarettes but some
people did it, successfully like me and, You and it
was so it was. Fun it wasn't this big. Problem
(22:26):
it wasn't something terrible Because we only did it, occasionally
but it became bad for a lot of people and
it lost its. Coolness for. Sure we weren't allowed to
smoke indoors. Anymore that used to be a thing that
everybody did. Everywhere imagine, it kids smoking everywhere in. Malls
Waffle house was like the last place to hold on to.
Speaker 1 (22:48):
It, No When North carolina Waffle house finally said no,
SMOKING i was, like, well that's that's the end of, that.
Speaker 2 (22:55):
RIGHT i REMEMBER i already wasn't, smoking like with any
regularity at, all BUT i. WAS i was In West
virginia and the waffle house allowed, it AND i was, like,
WELL i have to go across the street to the
gas station to get.
Speaker 1 (23:06):
So so smoking is obviously extremely bad for.
Speaker 3 (23:10):
YOU i come from a tobacco. TOWN i lived In North.
Speaker 1 (23:12):
Carolina but there's this interesting thing that's happening where because
the smoking cessation campaigns and the public health campaigns were so.
Speaker 3 (23:21):
Successful, yeah people.
Speaker 1 (23:24):
Now view smoking versus, vaping which they find sort of
antiseptic and uncool looking. Cool smoking cigarettes is viewed as
like a bad habit from the good old. Days is
what this case, says where it has nineties nostalgia AND
i dare you to find somebody like looking cooler than
(23:44):
like several generations Ago hollywood stars with cigarettes hanging from their.
Speaker 3 (23:47):
LIPS i, mean it's just, Right it's.
Speaker 2 (23:49):
Indisputable Pete, Moss Brad pitt like walking Around Johnny.
Speaker 1 (23:55):
Depp, yes so people because they are nostalgic for the,
nineties and young people who didn't experience the nineties.
Speaker 3 (24:02):
Are somewhat nostalgic for.
Speaker 1 (24:03):
It this is their way, of perhaps in a more
anti alcohol environment to.
Speaker 3 (24:09):
Go this is my little rebellion.
Speaker 2 (24:11):
So, well hand in, hand, Kid.
Speaker 3 (24:16):
It's. True it's. TRUE i was.
Speaker 1 (24:17):
SURPRISED i saw some celebrity wedding and NOW i can't
remember which one.
Speaker 3 (24:20):
It, was.
Speaker 1 (24:23):
Where they had a picture in their photo dump of
the wedding of cigarettes laid out for people at the after,
party AND i, thought oh my, gosh this is coming
from a different. Place this piece Notes Kylie jenner lit
a cigarette on Her March Vanity fair. Cover Hailey bieber
has a cigarette sticking out of her. Smile In April's interview.
Magazine he did Rivalries connor's story posing with a cigarette
(24:46):
perched in his pouch while prepping for the Met. Gala IN,
gq which that does seem like a bit of a sea.
CHANGE i, mean this has been happened an anti smoking
nation for quite some.
Speaker 3 (24:56):
Time this has looking Like.
Speaker 2 (24:57):
Europe they are actually all still smoking In. Europe when
we went To france last, summer my kids were, like
what the hell's going? On and then when we came,
back my ten year old saw somebody smoking and he was,
like smoking In.
Speaker 1 (25:10):
Florida, YEAH i like, YOU i can't even imagine having
a cigarette right. Now that's Like i'm past that.
Speaker 3 (25:16):
Point in my.
Speaker 1 (25:17):
Life but here's WHAT i will, say in every Major american,
city IF i smelled cigarette smoke instead of, Weed.
Speaker 3 (25:24):
I'd be a happy, lady right, right be a much happier.
Speaker 1 (25:28):
Lady AND i think also cigarette smoking being banned is
one of those things that from a libertarian, PERSPECTIVE i was,
like that's. Bad these businesses should be able to decide
if they want cigarettes. Indoors and then in practice it
was so nice to come home and smell, normal right.
Speaker 2 (25:44):
Right, yeah that was. TOUGH i also thought, like, oh
you guys can't ban. CIGARETTES i also thought like their
businesses would really suffer because of, It like who go
to bar if.
Speaker 3 (25:54):
You can't smoke a.
Speaker 2 (25:54):
Cigarette but what ended up happening was everybody cool went
outside and had their own thing going. On you, know
it was a good.
Speaker 1 (26:02):
Time, also there is a lot to be, said AND
i Know i've mentioned this about drinking before and that
reason piece about how it leads to creative thinking and
all these social bonds.
Speaker 3 (26:12):
That you don't get.
Speaker 1 (26:13):
Otherwise there is something to be said for that bond,
created whether you're in a newsroom or a group of,
friends by two people going out and, saying, oh we've
got this thing to do together while we have a
little chat about the.
Speaker 3 (26:25):
Universe that's.
Speaker 2 (26:26):
Right that Was we had a good time doing.
Speaker 3 (26:28):
That, also my kids should never do. It so if
any kids.
Speaker 2 (26:32):
Are listening to, this never. Smoke i'll make you smoke
the whole.
Speaker 3 (26:34):
Pack oh that is What that was the old school
remedy for.
Speaker 2 (26:38):
That. Yeah, yeah but now it's, like you, know if
you catch them, vaping what are you gonna? Do make
the smoke the whole.
Speaker 3 (26:43):
Babe, YEAH i don't think it works the.
Speaker 2 (26:45):
Same thanks for joining us on normally normally Airs tuesdays And,
thursdays and you could subscribe anywhere you get your. Podcasts
get in touch with us at normally theepod at gmail dot.
Com thanks for listening and when things get weird act
normally
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show News
Hosts And Creators
Clay Travis
Buck Sexton
Show Links
WebsiteNewsletterPopular Podcasts
Betrayal Weekly
Betrayal Weekly is back for a new season. Every Thursday, Betrayal Weekly shares first-hand accounts of broken trust, shocking deceptions, and the trail of destruction they leave behind. Hosted by Andrea Gunning, this weekly ongoing series digs into real-life stories of betrayal and the aftermath. From stories of double lives to dark discoveries, these are cautionary tales and accounts of resilience against all odds. From the producers of the critically acclaimed Betrayal series, Betrayal Weekly drops new episodes every Thursday. If you would like to share your story, you can reach out to the Betrayal Team by emailing them at betrayalpod@gmail.com and follow us on Instagram at @betrayalpod and @glasspodcasts. Please join our Substack for additional exclusive content, curated book recommendations, and community discussions. Sign up FREE by clicking this link Beyond Betrayal Substack. Join our community dedicated to truth, resilience, and healing. Your voice matters! Be a part of our Betrayal journey on Substack.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com