April 14, 2026 • 32 mins
On this episode of Normally, Mary Katharine Ham and Karol Markowicz break down the collapse of the Iran ceasefire and what it signals for U.S. foreign policy as tensions rise in the Strait of Hormuz. With negotiations failing after high-stakes talks involving J.D. Vance, the conversation shifts to whether economic warfare—not diplomacy—will define the next phase of the conflict.
MK & Karol also dive into the political chaos back home, including the growing scandal surrounding Eric Swalwell and how it could reshape California’s gubernatorial race. Plus, what Viktor Orbán’s election loss means for Europe’s political future—and whether the “populist wave” is really over.
To close, Mary Katharine and Karol tackle a cultural debate that’s lighting up social media: should unmarried women have a voice in conservative spaces? It’s a candid, funny, and insightful conversation about modern expectations, marriage, and the evolving role of women in politics and media.
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 (00:05):
Yeah, we are back on normal with normal kicks.
Speaker 2 (00:08):
But when the news gets weird and it won't stop
being weird. I am Mary Catherine Camp.
Speaker 1 (00:12):
I am Carol Markowitz. How was your weekend, Mary Catherine.
I know you're trying to stay offline and your haters
do not like that.
Speaker 3 (00:20):
They don't appreciate you taking breaks.
Speaker 4 (00:22):
They don't They're like, all these people come out of
the woodwork when you step away from Actually you haven't
commented on this, and I was like, yeah, I told
you I was not gonna be doing that. That's that's
what I said. I'm going to watch the Masters, so
deal with it.
Speaker 1 (00:37):
Yep. Yeah, I watched The Masters against my will because
my husband turned on the TV and I don't know
how to turn it off, so and then he like
left and I was just on in my living room.
Speaker 3 (00:47):
It was good though.
Speaker 1 (00:48):
I like that Rory guy. He's got some charming personality.
Speaker 2 (00:53):
Amazing is this amazing?
Speaker 3 (00:54):
I kept all the ball. I don't know following. Where
does that ball go?
Speaker 2 (01:01):
It's very small. They have graphics now that help you
understand that.
Speaker 3 (01:07):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (01:08):
Yeah, I have never been a golfer, which is silly.
Speaker 4 (01:12):
I should learn. But I do like watching golf, which
I think is the opposite of most people. They enjoy
praying but maybe not watching. But I find it very soothing. Yeah,
Sunday nap on the last day of the Masters, Like
how you can't do better than that? With a Pomeno cheese.
Speaker 1 (01:25):
Come down to Florida and let's learn how to play
golf together.
Speaker 2 (01:29):
Okay, I've been.
Speaker 1 (01:30):
I've been one time, and it happened to be a
very cold day in Florida and I almost froze to
death on that golf course.
Speaker 4 (01:36):
Yes, it was very It's very tragic. I can imagine
that the two degrees was rough on you.
Speaker 3 (01:45):
It really was.
Speaker 4 (01:46):
It was a slight breeze that day.
Speaker 2 (01:49):
Yeah, you know, skills acquisition is very easy in your forties.
So I think we'll be great.
Speaker 1 (01:54):
I believe in us. Actually, who does it want? And
come on, wouldn't you want some like normally golf gear?
Because my problem with golf, more than anything else is
the outfits are very bad for women, very bad.
Speaker 4 (02:06):
I think they're improving, isn't it a bit of a situation.
Speaker 1 (02:10):
Again on a cold day, and I know, I know,
I don't believe that we have those I was dying,
all right, you know what, you.
Speaker 3 (02:17):
Could laugh at me.
Speaker 4 (02:18):
That's okay, get you some fleece lined golf.
Speaker 1 (02:22):
Were all right, I think we're just you know, like
our haters say, we just don't want to get.
Speaker 3 (02:29):
To talk about the real topics.
Speaker 2 (02:31):
That's what it is. Stick to the news, alrighty, there's
all right.
Speaker 3 (02:35):
There is news. The Iran ceasefire is off.
Speaker 1 (02:41):
I think a week ago today we recorded a podcast
where I said I didn't think we was gonna hold
You said the same. We just both didn't have a
lot of optimism that Iran was willing to make peace.
Speaker 3 (02:57):
And JD Vance, which by the way, we never really
talked about.
Speaker 1 (03:00):
Why was a JD Vance going to Pakistan to talk
to the Iranians?
Speaker 3 (03:05):
What do we think about that?
Speaker 4 (03:06):
Yeah, so it is different from the crew that usually
goes and it's very presumably a very high stakes it
really is, yeah, negotiation from the point of view of
the White House. And so they send this new guy in,
not to say that he's not a smart guy who
knows things, but like it's Ben Kushner Kushner or wikkough
(03:26):
on every other thing and sometimes Rubio.
Speaker 2 (03:29):
In the mix.
Speaker 4 (03:30):
And since Vance and I'm kind of of the mind,
particularly after I saw that in an almost literal split screen,
Trump was at a UFC fight with Marco Rubio.
Speaker 3 (03:42):
He just wanted to hang out with Marca.
Speaker 4 (03:44):
I felt like maybe Vance was sent because Trump was like, hmm,
I don't.
Speaker 2 (03:50):
Love how this is feeling right now. Why don't you
go give it a try?
Speaker 1 (03:53):
J D.
Speaker 4 (03:53):
Because you had some thoughts about how this wasn't going
to work out, right, Go deal with the Iranians. You
tell me what they say about being peaceful and reasonable, and.
Speaker 2 (04:02):
Marko and I are going to go to the fight.
Speaker 3 (04:04):
Could luck with this?
Speaker 2 (04:05):
And then you report back. That's what it feels like
to me.
Speaker 1 (04:08):
Yeah, look, you know, I feel like we'll see about JD.
Speaker 3 (04:13):
Vance.
Speaker 1 (04:13):
I'm very on the fence about him. I was a big,
big fan in the past. I am kind of mixed
on him now. But I do think a lot of
unfair things are attached to him, like.
Speaker 3 (04:23):
For example, like Joe Kent, who.
Speaker 1 (04:26):
You know, famously step down from the counter terrorism position
because he didn't support this war.
Speaker 3 (04:35):
He's sort of attached to JD.
Speaker 1 (04:36):
Vance, which I don't know necessarily that there's evidence that
they have a relationship or that they are even on
the same side, but they're sort of seen as united
on the same side of the what we would call
the people who are on the right but have really
turned on Trump.
Speaker 3 (04:53):
Now, sending Vance might have been kind of.
Speaker 1 (04:58):
A gift to those people, like, Hey, look, we're going
to send the guy you do trust to try to
make peace.
Speaker 3 (05:03):
You say you don't want war. Here comes JD.
Speaker 1 (05:06):
Vance to figure out if we could really make this
cease fire happen. And you know, the idea that they
fell apart because the Iranians were like, we are not
giving up our nukes. And Joe Kent had told Tucker
Carlson that there was a fatwah against developing nuclear weapons
in Iran. There's a lot of kind of humor to
(05:27):
that because they were so against developing nukes that they
won't give up the nukes after you know, twenty plus
hours of negotiations with JD. Vance and they're unwilling to
discuss any kind of give part of giving up any
part of their nuclear program.
Speaker 2 (05:42):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (05:42):
So Vance is there for twenty one hours in Islamabad,
sitting down face to face along with Kushner and Witcuff,
and he comes out at the end and this is
what he had to say briefly about the progress there.
Speaker 5 (05:53):
We've been at it now for twenty one hours and
we've had a number of substance discussions with the Iranians.
That's the good news. The bad news is that we
have not reached an agreement, and I think that's bad
news for a Ran much more than it's bad news
for the United States of America. So we go back
to the United States having not come to an agreement.
We've made very clear what our redlines are, what things
(06:16):
were willing to accommodate.
Speaker 1 (06:17):
So one of the points on the fifteen point plan
was that the US had presented to Iran. It included
assistance to them in advancing and developing a civilian nuclear project.
So there's this argument that, like no, Iran doesn't want
nuclear weapons for war or to attack other countries. They
want it for electricity generation, which you know is simply
(06:39):
untrue because they are unwilling to give up any uranium enrichment,
even if we provide them.
Speaker 3 (06:46):
With already enriched fuel.
Speaker 4 (06:48):
So the idea that they're super interested in playing power
to the people of Iran, it is somewhat undercut by
the fact that they cut out the Internet and all
sorts of things for the last.
Speaker 2 (06:57):
Forty exactly days.
Speaker 4 (06:59):
The Times called it a remarkable conclusion to a high
stakes diplomatic trip for mister Vance. I didn't think it
was that remarkable. You're sitting down with Pakistan and Aron like,
Pakistan's like the good cop in the room. We think
we're gonna get something good out of this. The thing
about Trump is that in the past, yes, something like
(07:20):
this would have been extremely orchestrated. For any other president,
it would have been extremely high stakes. Every single word
that came out of every person's mouth would.
Speaker 2 (07:29):
Have been a huge deal. And everybody's reading the tea leaves.
Speaker 4 (07:33):
It simply doesn't work that way with Trump. Trump is like, yeah,
give it a try. Yeah, and if it doesn't work,
come back and then we'll do something else, Or at
least that's how it feels to.
Speaker 3 (07:43):
Me certainly, right, And you know Trump again, and in.
Speaker 1 (07:47):
The past, a president going to a UFC fight while
this was going on would have been some sort of tell.
But here it's like, Nah, Trump just likes UFC. It's
like he's just interested in that sort of thing. There's
a good thread on x by somebody named Miad Malechi,
a senior fellow at FDD, and it's just about how
(08:08):
the current blockade of her moves straight by US could
easily destroy the Iranian economy completely. They rely on the
trade through that straight to such an extent that it
can really decimate them, and Trump's hitting them where it hurts.
Speaker 3 (08:27):
You know, I sent this to you last night. Somebody posted.
Speaker 1 (08:31):
A still from one of my favorite movies of Bronx
Tail and it was chas pumentary saying now you can't leave.
And that's what it felt like when you know. Iran's like,
We're going to block the strait of her moves, and
Trump's like, no where going to block the strait of
her moose.
Speaker 4 (08:45):
I mean, there is a part of this where yes,
they can exact pain and it will have knock on effects,
even though we don't get most of our crudal from.
Speaker 2 (08:53):
That area in your way get it from my places.
But it will have effects.
Speaker 4 (08:58):
But we also have we have agency, we have Trump
at the head who's not afraid to use American power.
Speaker 2 (09:05):
So this has moved a little bit.
Speaker 4 (09:07):
From a military operation to an economic war, which by
the way, Trump is very comfortable with, despite the fact
that you know it could have knock on effects and
people will feel it here through trade and all sorts
of things.
Speaker 2 (09:22):
He's very happy to dust.
Speaker 4 (09:24):
It up in these areas, and that is what makes
it tricky for the Iranian regime because they don't know
how long he might stick it out doing this.
Speaker 1 (09:33):
Right, It's like they thought he was in there with them,
and it turns out there there with him.
Speaker 3 (09:41):
We'll see.
Speaker 1 (09:42):
Last week, Clay Travis, you know we're on the Buck
Sexton and Clay Travis podcast network. He tweeted, Iran doesn't
control the strait of her moves. Are simply threatened to
blow up ships there, something the US and dozens of
other countries could also do.
Speaker 3 (09:56):
So far, we've allowed Iran's oil to leave the straight.
We could stop that immediately, and maybe we should. Now.
Speaker 1 (10:01):
Trump is a big fan of Clay and Buck, and
he has responded to things that like their callers have
called in and suggested before. So it's actually not even
crazy to imagine. Trump saw this Clay Travis tweet and
was like.
Speaker 3 (10:14):
Ugh, oh yeah, I could do that, right, we could
do that.
Speaker 4 (10:18):
By the way, I want to give also a perspective
from the New York Times, just to an idea of
like how this is reported on.
Speaker 2 (10:25):
At the end of their piece on JD.
Speaker 4 (10:27):
Vance not getting a deal with the Iranians, they say
it turned out after twenty one hours on the ground
in Islamabad, not much had happened to bring a lasting
piece between the United States and Iran. Well, yeah, that
much has happened since nineteen seventy nine to bring a
lasting piece between the US and America. It's just what
they liked was the detante that was Iran hitting US
(10:49):
and our assets with impunity.
Speaker 2 (10:52):
That's what they like.
Speaker 4 (10:53):
They don't like this version where you actually punish bad behavior,
and as the FDD expert point out, it might actually
move the regime.
Speaker 3 (11:03):
Right if there's a regime left.
Speaker 1 (11:06):
We also have just no idea who's in charge there
and where that like, who what level of these people
even at at this point.
Speaker 3 (11:14):
But this is what also dealing with these kinds of
states is like.
Speaker 1 (11:19):
And Israel has had this experience firsthand, and I think
the US largely hasn't. And so here we are trying
to make deals with irrational, stubborn actors who don't have
the best interest of their people, so they don't really
care if you destroy their country and their economy and
kill a bunch of their people. They're just sort of
like that just is how it goes. It's very hard
(11:42):
to have sane conversations and to make actual deals with
those people. So this is a kind of a gearshift
for Trump too. He loves the deal making.
Speaker 3 (11:51):
But he's also like, I will do what I have
to do here.
Speaker 4 (11:54):
A thing I appreciated about this and the Vance clip
is that Vance, despite being definitely more of a restrainer
and someone who probably raised issues with this particular engagement,
he comes out not like a Georgetown Foreign Service grad
right the opposite and just says like they're being intransigent,
We're not getting a deal.
Speaker 2 (12:12):
Instead of ah, talks are moving along, good.
Speaker 4 (12:16):
Stuff, and we're gonna just like Mealy mouth this thing
until we collapse on a bunch of stuff. He makes
it clear that we're not doing that, and I appreciate
hearing that from him, even though he has issues with
the engagement to begin with, or the engagement site.
Speaker 3 (12:33):
Yeah, I feel like it's something we just don't know.
Does he have issues with the engagement?
Speaker 1 (12:37):
We hear it so anonymously source second and third hand.
I kind of try to give him the benefit of
the doubt that he's on Trump's team, but you.
Speaker 4 (12:46):
Know, yes, but I think he's hesitantly on Trump's team.
And I take that from his own words in the
Yemen signal chat where everyone was like, we're gonna hit
the hoogies because they keep hitting us like one hundred
and thirty times in the past two years, and he
was like, I don't know about that, and it's Trump
fully briefed onne this. That's where That's where my shift
on him happened. And I'm like, oh, he seems quite
(13:08):
committed to the idea that we shouldn't be exerting power
in these ways.
Speaker 1 (13:12):
What happened to him though, Like, is this an actual
change in JD. Van's Have we seen a real because
he wasn't this guy just a few years ago.
Speaker 3 (13:21):
So well, I think, like it's difficult to understand here.
Speaker 4 (13:25):
This is where I'm I want to be very generous
to him, because I think his opposition comes from having
served and having known a bunch of people who lost
limbs and lives, and you know, watched American treasure go
overseas and watched Obama and Biden through withdrawal fred or
both Afghanistan and Iraq gains a way to a great extent,
(13:51):
and I understand that point of view. I don't think
it's solved by restraint all the time. I don't think
that that issue is solved, but I get where it
comes from, and I think he wants to be in
the corner of which I kind of am most of
the time, which is like I don't want a giant project,
but I do want effective strikes and use of American
(14:12):
military might. So there's a place in there where he's
honestly coming to the point of view that's like any
of the president's in charge. I don't think this is
going to end quickly, So I'm very worried about it.
Speaker 1 (14:23):
Yeah, that is, I mean, it's it's it's the charitable take,
and well we'll give it to him.
Speaker 4 (14:28):
Well, he The thing that also concerns me is that
restrainer ism that also hangs out with Tucker Carlson.
Speaker 2 (14:36):
It ends up taking a turn. I don't know where
he is on.
Speaker 1 (14:41):
That right, right, we don't know where he is on that,
And he is kidding himself if he thinks he's not
going to have to face that at some point, because again,
everybody has this speculation about him, and he's not like, no,
you guys are all crazy and wrong.
Speaker 2 (14:54):
He doesn't do that.
Speaker 4 (14:55):
And I should note also because Trump very notably turned
the podcast Cruise the other day in a true social
where he blasted Trump, Tucker and Megan Kelly and Candice
Owens by name in his uh signature, and.
Speaker 3 (15:12):
Alex Jones, Yeah, and Alex Jones.
Speaker 1 (15:14):
And it's so funny that all the like blisters of
that crew were like upset that they weren't mentioned, right, right,
That's all they need, that's all they want, right. All
they're here for is the hits. So Trump really did
them a disservice by not throwing them in there.
Speaker 3 (15:31):
Well, here we.
Speaker 1 (15:32):
Are, here, we are Okay, We're going to take a
short break and be right back with more on Normally.
We are back on Normally where Eric Swallwell, who was
running for governor of California, has dropped out of the
race facing just a litany of sexual harassment and possible
(15:56):
assault allegations. You know what drives me absolutely crazy about this,
I mean, among other things, that everybody knew. It was
the same thing with Harvey Weinstein. It was like, oh yeah,
everybody knew. I'm like, I didn't know. If you knew,
you should have said something, because I know a big deal.
Speaker 3 (16:16):
I don't know.
Speaker 1 (16:18):
I did not know, actually, so you should have said
something if everybody knew.
Speaker 3 (16:23):
It's like this way of like I'm in the know,
but you didn't do anything about it. You've absolute coward.
Speaker 1 (16:30):
So that's where I get really pissed off about stories
like this.
Speaker 4 (16:34):
Yeah, the San Francisco Chronicle is the first one that
ran with us, and we should note that the allegations
are pretty serious. This is a woman in the first
San Francisco Chronicle story. It was a woman who went
Her name is not on the record. She is anonymous,
and she says she was a staffer for him, and
he repeatedly sent her nudes, initiated contact over Snapchat, which
(16:57):
is like sketchy in and of itself. Yeah, solicited nudes
from her, tried to kiss her in a car, you know,
solicited her for oorals, ex in a car, like, you know,
all all things while she was his employee. And then
eventually they hung out she got very drunk. Says she
does not remember the encounter, but felt that she has
(17:21):
been violated. And this happened a couple times. Yeah, so
that's that's where that's what kicked everything off. And then
several other women came forward and said, oh yeah, he
was very skeasy with me reaching out way.
Speaker 2 (17:31):
I believe he was married during all of this, right right, Yeah.
Speaker 3 (17:34):
What a guy.
Speaker 1 (17:36):
The New York Times is saying that New York has
opened a criminal investigation. I believe based on that staffer
that you mentioned in the San Francisco Chronicle.
Speaker 3 (17:47):
It's multiple women have accused him of misconduct.
Speaker 1 (17:50):
It's like, really, I mean, it goes from like just
inappropriate chatter to some very serious allegations, like you said.
Speaker 3 (17:59):
What's really particularly crazy.
Speaker 1 (18:01):
To me is that in twenty twenty, Axios reported that
Eric Swalwell had a relationship with a Chinese spy and
he's still in our political system.
Speaker 3 (18:14):
Yes, what in the world is going on?
Speaker 1 (18:17):
Apparently he had an extended relationship with a Chinese spy
who goes by Feng Feng and was, you know, from
the Chinese intelligence agency.
Speaker 3 (18:28):
And again it was Axios breaking this story.
Speaker 1 (18:30):
It wasn't like, you know, National Review finding out, which
I would believe anyway. But if you want to question
whether these stories are real, these are liberal outlets coming
after him and of course, it's like, well why now, why,
why is this information coming to light now? He's been
around for so long and this story is from twenty twenty.
(18:52):
You know, what does that mean? Does it mean that
they actually want Katie Porter to win or you know
the Yeah.
Speaker 4 (19:00):
That is important, As our podcast stier, as our podcasting
friend John Ashbrook says on Ruthless, no story like this
comes out and certainly doesn't become banner headline news unless
it is beneficial to another Democrat.
Speaker 2 (19:15):
So what is happening.
Speaker 4 (19:17):
What is happening right now is that in the gugnatorial
race in California, which.
Speaker 6 (19:22):
You would imagine should be one hands down by a Democrat,
they got a little problem because they have a jungle primary,
which means that whoever the top two finishers advance to
a runoff, those.
Speaker 4 (19:33):
Two could be two Democrats, which is what usually happens.
Usually say they're guaranteed to win. But what's happening right
now is that the people in California have become a
little ticked off at the Democrats and there are two
Republicans running at the top of this field.
Speaker 2 (19:47):
Those are Steve Hilton, former Fox host Great Guy, and
Chad Bianco, sheriff in California. Now Trump has endorsed Hilton,
which I don't think was a great strategic move because
I would like both of those guys to move on.
Speaker 4 (20:01):
But in the meantime, Democrats have Swallwell as their leader
at this point, but it's a poultry like twelve percent
or something. And then they have Katie Porter who has
all sorts of abuse issues, also.
Speaker 1 (20:15):
A lot of abuse baggage, something involving mashed potatoes on
her ex husband's.
Speaker 2 (20:19):
Has had much of it on video.
Speaker 4 (20:22):
And then who's the thro Oh Tom Styr, who just Tomstire,
spends a bunch of money and never wins.
Speaker 2 (20:26):
So that's their situation.
Speaker 4 (20:28):
So they realize, if we don't winn oh this field, right,
we're gonna split too much and the two Republicans will
move on.
Speaker 2 (20:35):
So that is why, yeah, everything is coming out now right.
Speaker 1 (20:40):
Well, tom Styr, according to Polymarket, has spiked into a
fifty three percent chance to win that thing. I you know,
I have heard Tom Stier speak. He has zero personality
and no charm at all. But again, if Katie Porter
is the other Democrat in the race, he might run
away with that. For the Democrats, like you said, it
(21:02):
doesn't mean he's going to be in the top two,
but we'll see what happens.
Speaker 3 (21:05):
A Swallow was in pole position to win that election,
even though Republicans were in the lead.
Speaker 1 (21:11):
It just there were a lot of people in the
race and he was sort of considered the guy that
was going to take it.
Speaker 4 (21:18):
Our friends embarrassing entire state, hugely populous, which with a
giant economy, and the three people y'all are pulling are stire,
Katie Porter, and Eric Swolwell.
Speaker 2 (21:33):
Come on politics.
Speaker 1 (21:34):
Yeah, as our friend Lisa Booth points out about billionaire
Tom Styer, who's really trst trying to buy this thing.
I thought billionaires were bad, and of course only millionaires
are bad.
Speaker 4 (21:45):
Just like only credible allegations or even incredible ones. The
credible allegations only count, right or like in danger of
endangering other Democrats, that's when they count.
Speaker 2 (21:57):
I do have a running.
Speaker 4 (21:58):
List of men who were on CNN twice as much
as I was when I worked there who ended up
becoming hugely flame out, disgusting pods.
Speaker 2 (22:10):
So he's won. We had Michael Avanati who ended up
in jail. Yep, yeah, he he.
Speaker 3 (22:15):
Was going to be president Mary Catherine.
Speaker 4 (22:17):
And the thing is that each one of these people,
our friends on the left and most of the media
I review myself, are perfectly willing to believe anything out
of their mouths and hold them up as beacons of
trust YEP, as long.
Speaker 2 (22:31):
As they hate Trump enough.
Speaker 3 (22:33):
Exactly.
Speaker 1 (22:33):
It's a bad standard, right, And the way that these
people say that they want democracy, but when the billionaires,
their billionaires try to buy that democracy, that's okay.
Speaker 3 (22:44):
So switching gears to Hungary we have.
Speaker 1 (22:49):
Last night there was an election in Hungary and Orbon,
who had been the leader of Hungary for the last
sixteen years, was defeated. He was frequently referred to as
a Dixon or an autocrat, sometimes a fascist. But he
lost the election, he conceded, he stepped down, and he
did the same when he lost in two thousand and two. Meanwhile,
(23:10):
the billionaires on the left, the Alex Soros for example,
is like, the people of Hungary have taken back their
country a resounding rejection of entrenched corruption and foreign interference. Meanwhile,
Soros has given like close to one hundred million dollars
to various groups in.
Speaker 3 (23:27):
Hungary to cause this result. That is now, you know,
democracy in action.
Speaker 4 (23:32):
Well, and by the way that the uprising is not
led by a lib I mean, he's not liberal, he's
conservative in many of his views.
Speaker 2 (23:40):
Also, I just like.
Speaker 4 (23:42):
Many of the people who claim that Orbon and Trump
are the same and that these are existential crises in
both countries. They just seem to blip right by the
fact that like, Okay, well the guy just lost and
then left right, and so yeah, so you're telling me
that a re elected some guy that you didn't like
for a while, and then they elected a different guy
(24:04):
that you like slightly better.
Speaker 3 (24:05):
Right exactly.
Speaker 2 (24:07):
That sounds okay to me. Yeah, so then I will
never forget.
Speaker 4 (24:10):
By the way, all of them telling me that Maloney
was a fascist, Like, I'm done.
Speaker 3 (24:14):
That's up there for sure. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (24:17):
So the new guy is named Peter Magar. He is
socially conservative. He's really a big immigration restrictionist. He wants
to according to Jason Kenny on X, he wants to
cut taxes and double the defense budget. He criticized Orbon
for admitting too many guest workers. Wants to increase Hungary's
already generous pronatal incentives. I mean, I watched a video
(24:39):
of him today and I think the most liberal thing
about him is he wants to rejoin the International Criminal.
Speaker 3 (24:45):
Court, which is really too bad.
Speaker 1 (24:47):
I don't think that ICC should have any kind of
power or any any of that. But other than that,
I kind of see him as just as conservative as Orbon.
So I'm not sure what the Democrats or liberals think
they want here remains to be seen. But Hungary has
been in pretty good shape and I hope that it
stays that way.
Speaker 4 (25:06):
Well, certainly it doesn't seem, at least on the immigration front,
that that populist strength I will be losing anytime soon
in most of Europe. I mean, it does seem like
something that is, whether it's the opposition or the party
in power. Now, that's a line of a line of
attack that is salient to most many, many, many European voters.
Speaker 6 (25:28):
Right.
Speaker 1 (25:28):
Well, again, what remains to be seen what happens there,
and maybe MegaR is this great liberal hope, But so
far it doesn't seem that way, and we'll have to
keep an eye on that. We're going to take a
short break and be right back with more on Normally.
Speaker 4 (25:45):
All right, we are back on Normally with a little
bit of a story about marriage.
Speaker 2 (25:50):
We like to talk about marriage here.
Speaker 3 (25:52):
Doo. Yeah, we're really big fans of marriage.
Speaker 2 (25:54):
In this case.
Speaker 4 (25:55):
Alex Clark, who is a Turning Point USA person, deals
with health and wellness in the MAHA universe. And someone
tweeted the other day Alex Clark has some good ideas,
and I've enjoyed listening to her podcasts in the past,
but I don't think it's wise for her to have
a prominent role at tpusa's Women's Leadership Conference considering that
(26:17):
she's still unmarried at age thirty three.
Speaker 2 (26:20):
And then there was a response to that, you think
you have that?
Speaker 1 (26:24):
Yeah, So it's interesting because Alex Clark is quite good.
She is, she's young, she's smart, she makes some good points.
The idea that she shouldn't have a prominent role at
TPUs USA Women's Leadership Conference because she's still unmarried in
her early.
Speaker 3 (26:41):
Thirties is obviously absurd.
Speaker 1 (26:44):
And let me just tell the women that are listening
to this, don't think that married women in their thirties
don't get the same kind of crap we do. We
get the like, why are you here not at home
with your children? So, Haley Coronia, she responded to this,
he's got a podcast called Scrolling with Haley. She's also
(27:04):
a very interesting person. She writes, I'm a Christian, unmarried
woman in her thirties. I'd love to get married and
have children. Just because I haven't experienced these things yet
doesn't mean I don't know that they are good or
women should strive for. I do want to ask, though,
what should unmarried Christian women do in their waiting season?
Settle shut up, be utterly boring and unsuccessful, Live at
home off our parents until we meet someone to take
(27:24):
care of us, work less hard so that men will
be more apt pick us up. What does that say
about what men want? Why would a masculine man be
threatened by a woman who is passionate about her career
and hobbies. And why is it that the assumption that
a woman's passion and skills aren't transferable to motherhood. Most
working women I know are feminine and would love to
be traditional, stay at home moms. It's a real tough
(27:47):
question of what should women who want to be married
be doing. But that's not what these people are saying.
They're saying that you shouldn't even listen to women unless
they are married. And again, as you and I know,
we get the opposite kind of Hey, if.
Speaker 4 (28:02):
You're Erica Kirk and you are married with children and
then you become tragically not married and still have children,
they will go after you for that as well. Okay,
this is a situation where some of them just simply
don't think it is the place of women. You speak up,
and you and I came up in a conservative movement
that didn't have those takes. Yeah, yeah, And I think, look,
(28:27):
a lot of this is a pendulum swing culturally, because
the left asserted that marriage and normal families were bad
and that you'd be ruining your life by engaging it.
It's right, swing back to like, let's do it the
more traditional way. Yeah, but Alex Clark has plenty to offer.
Women have plenty to offer, and by the way, they
(28:47):
should be engaged in politics because if you don't have
them there, you're going to lose because they have to
be like voting end things.
Speaker 3 (28:55):
That's right, yep.
Speaker 1 (28:56):
Yeah, And you know Republicans do a problem with women,
and the problem is this kind of thing. I will
say that the account that commented on Alex Clark, you know,
maybe she shouldn't be in a tp USA leadership role
is called white baby factory.
Speaker 7 (29:10):
So you know, take it, which is the origin of
the country on that take it with a giant, humongous
grain of salt that this person even has, you know,
the best, the best hope online I just checked the country.
Speaker 3 (29:23):
It's Canada. You got convenience.
Speaker 2 (29:25):
But here's you're supposed to be polite.
Speaker 4 (29:28):
But here's the thing is I think that on the internet,
it so often gets polarized into this ridiculous excuse the
Obama phrase false choice m hm, between hardcore boss babe
with zero children and never just didn't getting married and
the opposite and like the big modern life actually, and
(29:51):
of course it comes with downsides and we make exchanges and.
Speaker 2 (29:54):
Trade offs because that's what life is.
Speaker 4 (29:56):
But there are so many more options available to us
as working mo of putting everything together than there were
when my mom was raising me.
Speaker 3 (30:05):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (30:06):
Yeah, And I think there's also you know the thing
that just because of what you're doing now, whether that's
staying at home with your kids or not married or whatever,
is what you're always going to be doing is insane.
I mean, you could you could be a stay at
home mom for a few years and then go back
to being a full time working mom, or you could
work part time or you know. And I always hated
this idea, like, oh, the single women, like that's a
(30:27):
temporary state. And you know, as you said about Erica Kirk,
marriage could be a temporary state. It's all in flux
and you're doing your best. And women should not have
to be at each other's throats or being told that
they shouldn't be. They should be left out of the
conversation whether they're married or single or whatever.
Speaker 4 (30:44):
By the way, women who do want to get married
and have kids, they should have people to listen to
who are both married and unmarried, people who are going
through that season, and people who are not. And I
also just want to shout out Alex Clark for having
been very courageous very early in calling out kandases yeah,
and very unabashed about it when she had stuff to lose,
just as others did when it comes to like that
(31:06):
that's right the audience or cloud or what have you,
and she was like, no, this is bad, and she
was very clear about it.
Speaker 3 (31:13):
Yep, yep.
Speaker 1 (31:14):
And I think that's when I started following her. And
like I said, I've enjoyed following her. And I think
that she's smart and has a lot to say. The
idea to dismiss her because she's not married. And you know,
I just celebrated my seventeen year anniversary and I post
every year on my anniversary that I, at age thirty
was a disaster. I mean, I was nowhere near you know,
(31:35):
these girls are all doing a lot better than I was.
Speaker 3 (31:38):
I was really in a bad place.
Speaker 1 (31:40):
And by thirty one, I was married and at the
start of the best decade of my life.
Speaker 3 (31:45):
It's just things can change very quickly. Again, don't see
these as permanent states.
Speaker 1 (31:50):
And you know, I thought I was never getting married
for sure, so you know, things could really change.
Speaker 2 (31:56):
Yep, life changes all the time. That's the only thing
that is constant.
Speaker 3 (32:00):
That's right. Well, thanks for joining us on Normally.
Speaker 1 (32:03):
Normally airs Tuesdays and Thursdays, and you can subscribe anywhere you.
Speaker 3 (32:06):
Get your podcasts.
Speaker 1 (32:07):
Get in touch with us at normallythepodat gmail dot com.
Thanks for listening, and when things get weird, act normally
Yeah, we are back on normal with normal kicks.
Speaker 2 (00:08):
But when the news gets weird and it won't stop
being weird. I am Mary Catherine Camp.
Speaker 1 (00:12):
I am Carol Markowitz. How was your weekend, Mary Catherine.
I know you're trying to stay offline and your haters
do not like that.
Speaker 3 (00:20):
They don't appreciate you taking breaks.
Speaker 4 (00:22):
They don't They're like, all these people come out of
the woodwork when you step away from Actually you haven't
commented on this, and I was like, yeah, I told
you I was not gonna be doing that. That's that's
what I said. I'm going to watch the Masters, so
deal with it.
Speaker 1 (00:37):
Yep. Yeah, I watched The Masters against my will because
my husband turned on the TV and I don't know
how to turn it off, so and then he like
left and I was just on in my living room.
Speaker 3 (00:47):
It was good though.
Speaker 1 (00:48):
I like that Rory guy. He's got some charming personality.
Speaker 2 (00:53):
Amazing is this amazing?
Speaker 3 (00:54):
I kept all the ball. I don't know following. Where
does that ball go?
Speaker 2 (01:01):
It's very small. They have graphics now that help you
understand that.
Speaker 3 (01:07):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (01:08):
Yeah, I have never been a golfer, which is silly.
Speaker 4 (01:12):
I should learn. But I do like watching golf, which
I think is the opposite of most people. They enjoy
praying but maybe not watching. But I find it very soothing. Yeah,
Sunday nap on the last day of the Masters, Like
how you can't do better than that? With a Pomeno cheese.
Speaker 1 (01:25):
Come down to Florida and let's learn how to play
golf together.
Speaker 2 (01:29):
Okay, I've been.
Speaker 1 (01:30):
I've been one time, and it happened to be a
very cold day in Florida and I almost froze to
death on that golf course.
Speaker 4 (01:36):
Yes, it was very It's very tragic. I can imagine
that the two degrees was rough on you.
Speaker 3 (01:45):
It really was.
Speaker 4 (01:46):
It was a slight breeze that day.
Speaker 2 (01:49):
Yeah, you know, skills acquisition is very easy in your forties.
So I think we'll be great.
Speaker 1 (01:54):
I believe in us. Actually, who does it want? And
come on, wouldn't you want some like normally golf gear?
Because my problem with golf, more than anything else is
the outfits are very bad for women, very bad.
Speaker 4 (02:06):
I think they're improving, isn't it a bit of a situation.
Speaker 1 (02:10):
Again on a cold day, and I know, I know,
I don't believe that we have those I was dying,
all right, you know what, you.
Speaker 3 (02:17):
Could laugh at me.
Speaker 4 (02:18):
That's okay, get you some fleece lined golf.
Speaker 1 (02:22):
Were all right, I think we're just you know, like
our haters say, we just don't want to get.
Speaker 3 (02:29):
To talk about the real topics.
Speaker 2 (02:31):
That's what it is. Stick to the news, alrighty, there's
all right.
Speaker 3 (02:35):
There is news. The Iran ceasefire is off.
Speaker 1 (02:41):
I think a week ago today we recorded a podcast
where I said I didn't think we was gonna hold
You said the same. We just both didn't have a
lot of optimism that Iran was willing to make peace.
Speaker 3 (02:57):
And JD Vance, which by the way, we never really
talked about.
Speaker 1 (03:00):
Why was a JD Vance going to Pakistan to talk
to the Iranians?
Speaker 3 (03:05):
What do we think about that?
Speaker 4 (03:06):
Yeah, so it is different from the crew that usually
goes and it's very presumably a very high stakes it
really is, yeah, negotiation from the point of view of
the White House. And so they send this new guy in,
not to say that he's not a smart guy who
knows things, but like it's Ben Kushner Kushner or wikkough
(03:26):
on every other thing and sometimes Rubio.
Speaker 2 (03:29):
In the mix.
Speaker 4 (03:30):
And since Vance and I'm kind of of the mind,
particularly after I saw that in an almost literal split screen,
Trump was at a UFC fight with Marco Rubio.
Speaker 3 (03:42):
He just wanted to hang out with Marca.
Speaker 4 (03:44):
I felt like maybe Vance was sent because Trump was like, hmm,
I don't.
Speaker 2 (03:50):
Love how this is feeling right now. Why don't you
go give it a try?
Speaker 1 (03:53):
J D.
Speaker 4 (03:53):
Because you had some thoughts about how this wasn't going
to work out, right, Go deal with the Iranians. You
tell me what they say about being peaceful and reasonable, and.
Speaker 2 (04:02):
Marko and I are going to go to the fight.
Speaker 3 (04:04):
Could luck with this?
Speaker 2 (04:05):
And then you report back. That's what it feels like
to me.
Speaker 1 (04:08):
Yeah, look, you know, I feel like we'll see about JD.
Speaker 3 (04:13):
Vance.
Speaker 1 (04:13):
I'm very on the fence about him. I was a big,
big fan in the past. I am kind of mixed
on him now. But I do think a lot of
unfair things are attached to him, like.
Speaker 3 (04:23):
For example, like Joe Kent, who.
Speaker 1 (04:26):
You know, famously step down from the counter terrorism position
because he didn't support this war.
Speaker 3 (04:35):
He's sort of attached to JD.
Speaker 1 (04:36):
Vance, which I don't know necessarily that there's evidence that
they have a relationship or that they are even on
the same side, but they're sort of seen as united
on the same side of the what we would call
the people who are on the right but have really
turned on Trump.
Speaker 3 (04:53):
Now, sending Vance might have been kind of.
Speaker 1 (04:58):
A gift to those people, like, Hey, look, we're going
to send the guy you do trust to try to
make peace.
Speaker 3 (05:03):
You say you don't want war. Here comes JD.
Speaker 1 (05:06):
Vance to figure out if we could really make this
cease fire happen. And you know, the idea that they
fell apart because the Iranians were like, we are not
giving up our nukes. And Joe Kent had told Tucker
Carlson that there was a fatwah against developing nuclear weapons
in Iran. There's a lot of kind of humor to
(05:27):
that because they were so against developing nukes that they
won't give up the nukes after you know, twenty plus
hours of negotiations with JD. Vance and they're unwilling to
discuss any kind of give part of giving up any
part of their nuclear program.
Speaker 2 (05:42):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (05:42):
So Vance is there for twenty one hours in Islamabad,
sitting down face to face along with Kushner and Witcuff,
and he comes out at the end and this is
what he had to say briefly about the progress there.
Speaker 5 (05:53):
We've been at it now for twenty one hours and
we've had a number of substance discussions with the Iranians.
That's the good news. The bad news is that we
have not reached an agreement, and I think that's bad
news for a Ran much more than it's bad news
for the United States of America. So we go back
to the United States having not come to an agreement.
We've made very clear what our redlines are, what things
(06:16):
were willing to accommodate.
Speaker 1 (06:17):
So one of the points on the fifteen point plan
was that the US had presented to Iran. It included
assistance to them in advancing and developing a civilian nuclear project.
So there's this argument that, like no, Iran doesn't want
nuclear weapons for war or to attack other countries. They
want it for electricity generation, which you know is simply
(06:39):
untrue because they are unwilling to give up any uranium enrichment,
even if we provide them.
Speaker 3 (06:46):
With already enriched fuel.
Speaker 4 (06:48):
So the idea that they're super interested in playing power
to the people of Iran, it is somewhat undercut by
the fact that they cut out the Internet and all
sorts of things for the last.
Speaker 2 (06:57):
Forty exactly days.
Speaker 4 (06:59):
The Times called it a remarkable conclusion to a high
stakes diplomatic trip for mister Vance. I didn't think it
was that remarkable. You're sitting down with Pakistan and Aron like,
Pakistan's like the good cop in the room. We think
we're gonna get something good out of this. The thing
about Trump is that in the past, yes, something like
(07:20):
this would have been extremely orchestrated. For any other president,
it would have been extremely high stakes. Every single word
that came out of every person's mouth would.
Speaker 2 (07:29):
Have been a huge deal. And everybody's reading the tea leaves.
Speaker 4 (07:33):
It simply doesn't work that way with Trump. Trump is like, yeah,
give it a try. Yeah, and if it doesn't work,
come back and then we'll do something else, Or at
least that's how it feels to.
Speaker 3 (07:43):
Me certainly, right, And you know Trump again, and in.
Speaker 1 (07:47):
The past, a president going to a UFC fight while
this was going on would have been some sort of tell.
But here it's like, Nah, Trump just likes UFC. It's
like he's just interested in that sort of thing. There's
a good thread on x by somebody named Miad Malechi,
a senior fellow at FDD, and it's just about how
(08:08):
the current blockade of her moves straight by US could
easily destroy the Iranian economy completely. They rely on the
trade through that straight to such an extent that it
can really decimate them, and Trump's hitting them where it hurts.
Speaker 3 (08:27):
You know, I sent this to you last night. Somebody posted.
Speaker 1 (08:31):
A still from one of my favorite movies of Bronx
Tail and it was chas pumentary saying now you can't leave.
And that's what it felt like when you know. Iran's like,
We're going to block the strait of her moves, and
Trump's like, no where going to block the strait of
her moose.
Speaker 4 (08:45):
I mean, there is a part of this where yes,
they can exact pain and it will have knock on effects,
even though we don't get most of our crudal from.
Speaker 2 (08:53):
That area in your way get it from my places.
But it will have effects.
Speaker 4 (08:58):
But we also have we have agency, we have Trump
at the head who's not afraid to use American power.
Speaker 2 (09:05):
So this has moved a little bit.
Speaker 4 (09:07):
From a military operation to an economic war, which by
the way, Trump is very comfortable with, despite the fact
that you know it could have knock on effects and
people will feel it here through trade and all sorts
of things.
Speaker 2 (09:22):
He's very happy to dust.
Speaker 4 (09:24):
It up in these areas, and that is what makes
it tricky for the Iranian regime because they don't know
how long he might stick it out doing this.
Speaker 1 (09:33):
Right, It's like they thought he was in there with them,
and it turns out there there with him.
Speaker 3 (09:41):
We'll see.
Speaker 1 (09:42):
Last week, Clay Travis, you know we're on the Buck
Sexton and Clay Travis podcast network. He tweeted, Iran doesn't
control the strait of her moves. Are simply threatened to
blow up ships there, something the US and dozens of
other countries could also do.
Speaker 3 (09:56):
So far, we've allowed Iran's oil to leave the straight.
We could stop that immediately, and maybe we should. Now.
Speaker 1 (10:01):
Trump is a big fan of Clay and Buck, and
he has responded to things that like their callers have
called in and suggested before. So it's actually not even
crazy to imagine. Trump saw this Clay Travis tweet and
was like.
Speaker 3 (10:14):
Ugh, oh yeah, I could do that, right, we could
do that.
Speaker 4 (10:18):
By the way, I want to give also a perspective
from the New York Times, just to an idea of
like how this is reported on.
Speaker 2 (10:25):
At the end of their piece on JD.
Speaker 4 (10:27):
Vance not getting a deal with the Iranians, they say
it turned out after twenty one hours on the ground
in Islamabad, not much had happened to bring a lasting
piece between the United States and Iran. Well, yeah, that
much has happened since nineteen seventy nine to bring a
lasting piece between the US and America. It's just what
they liked was the detante that was Iran hitting US
(10:49):
and our assets with impunity.
Speaker 2 (10:52):
That's what they like.
Speaker 4 (10:53):
They don't like this version where you actually punish bad behavior,
and as the FDD expert point out, it might actually
move the regime.
Speaker 3 (11:03):
Right if there's a regime left.
Speaker 1 (11:06):
We also have just no idea who's in charge there
and where that like, who what level of these people
even at at this point.
Speaker 3 (11:14):
But this is what also dealing with these kinds of
states is like.
Speaker 1 (11:19):
And Israel has had this experience firsthand, and I think
the US largely hasn't. And so here we are trying
to make deals with irrational, stubborn actors who don't have
the best interest of their people, so they don't really
care if you destroy their country and their economy and
kill a bunch of their people. They're just sort of
like that just is how it goes. It's very hard
(11:42):
to have sane conversations and to make actual deals with
those people. So this is a kind of a gearshift
for Trump too. He loves the deal making.
Speaker 3 (11:51):
But he's also like, I will do what I have
to do here.
Speaker 4 (11:54):
A thing I appreciated about this and the Vance clip
is that Vance, despite being definitely more of a restrainer
and someone who probably raised issues with this particular engagement,
he comes out not like a Georgetown Foreign Service grad
right the opposite and just says like they're being intransigent,
We're not getting a deal.
Speaker 2 (12:12):
Instead of ah, talks are moving along, good.
Speaker 4 (12:16):
Stuff, and we're gonna just like Mealy mouth this thing
until we collapse on a bunch of stuff. He makes
it clear that we're not doing that, and I appreciate
hearing that from him, even though he has issues with
the engagement to begin with, or the engagement site.
Speaker 3 (12:33):
Yeah, I feel like it's something we just don't know.
Does he have issues with the engagement?
Speaker 1 (12:37):
We hear it so anonymously source second and third hand.
I kind of try to give him the benefit of
the doubt that he's on Trump's team, but you.
Speaker 4 (12:46):
Know, yes, but I think he's hesitantly on Trump's team.
And I take that from his own words in the
Yemen signal chat where everyone was like, we're gonna hit
the hoogies because they keep hitting us like one hundred
and thirty times in the past two years, and he
was like, I don't know about that, and it's Trump
fully briefed onne this. That's where That's where my shift
on him happened. And I'm like, oh, he seems quite
(13:08):
committed to the idea that we shouldn't be exerting power
in these ways.
Speaker 1 (13:12):
What happened to him though, Like, is this an actual
change in JD. Van's Have we seen a real because
he wasn't this guy just a few years ago.
Speaker 3 (13:21):
So well, I think, like it's difficult to understand here.
Speaker 4 (13:25):
This is where I'm I want to be very generous
to him, because I think his opposition comes from having
served and having known a bunch of people who lost
limbs and lives, and you know, watched American treasure go
overseas and watched Obama and Biden through withdrawal fred or
both Afghanistan and Iraq gains a way to a great extent,
(13:51):
and I understand that point of view. I don't think
it's solved by restraint all the time. I don't think
that that issue is solved, but I get where it
comes from, and I think he wants to be in
the corner of which I kind of am most of
the time, which is like I don't want a giant project,
but I do want effective strikes and use of American
(14:12):
military might. So there's a place in there where he's
honestly coming to the point of view that's like any
of the president's in charge. I don't think this is
going to end quickly, So I'm very worried about it.
Speaker 1 (14:23):
Yeah, that is, I mean, it's it's it's the charitable take,
and well we'll give it to him.
Speaker 4 (14:28):
Well, he The thing that also concerns me is that
restrainer ism that also hangs out with Tucker Carlson.
Speaker 2 (14:36):
It ends up taking a turn. I don't know where
he is on.
Speaker 1 (14:41):
That right, right, we don't know where he is on that,
And he is kidding himself if he thinks he's not
going to have to face that at some point, because again,
everybody has this speculation about him, and he's not like, no,
you guys are all crazy and wrong.
Speaker 2 (14:54):
He doesn't do that.
Speaker 4 (14:55):
And I should note also because Trump very notably turned
the podcast Cruise the other day in a true social
where he blasted Trump, Tucker and Megan Kelly and Candice
Owens by name in his uh signature, and.
Speaker 3 (15:12):
Alex Jones, Yeah, and Alex Jones.
Speaker 1 (15:14):
And it's so funny that all the like blisters of
that crew were like upset that they weren't mentioned, right, right,
That's all they need, that's all they want, right. All
they're here for is the hits. So Trump really did
them a disservice by not throwing them in there.
Speaker 3 (15:31):
Well, here we.
Speaker 1 (15:32):
Are, here, we are Okay, We're going to take a
short break and be right back with more on Normally.
We are back on Normally where Eric Swallwell, who was
running for governor of California, has dropped out of the
race facing just a litany of sexual harassment and possible
(15:56):
assault allegations. You know what drives me absolutely crazy about this,
I mean, among other things, that everybody knew. It was
the same thing with Harvey Weinstein. It was like, oh yeah,
everybody knew. I'm like, I didn't know. If you knew,
you should have said something, because I know a big deal.
Speaker 3 (16:16):
I don't know.
Speaker 1 (16:18):
I did not know, actually, so you should have said
something if everybody knew.
Speaker 3 (16:23):
It's like this way of like I'm in the know,
but you didn't do anything about it. You've absolute coward.
Speaker 1 (16:30):
So that's where I get really pissed off about stories
like this.
Speaker 4 (16:34):
Yeah, the San Francisco Chronicle is the first one that
ran with us, and we should note that the allegations
are pretty serious. This is a woman in the first
San Francisco Chronicle story. It was a woman who went
Her name is not on the record. She is anonymous,
and she says she was a staffer for him, and
he repeatedly sent her nudes, initiated contact over Snapchat, which
(16:57):
is like sketchy in and of itself. Yeah, solicited nudes
from her, tried to kiss her in a car, you know,
solicited her for oorals, ex in a car, like, you know,
all all things while she was his employee. And then
eventually they hung out she got very drunk. Says she
does not remember the encounter, but felt that she has
(17:21):
been violated. And this happened a couple times. Yeah, so
that's that's where that's what kicked everything off. And then
several other women came forward and said, oh yeah, he
was very skeasy with me reaching out way.
Speaker 2 (17:31):
I believe he was married during all of this, right right, Yeah.
Speaker 3 (17:34):
What a guy.
Speaker 1 (17:36):
The New York Times is saying that New York has
opened a criminal investigation. I believe based on that staffer
that you mentioned in the San Francisco Chronicle.
Speaker 3 (17:47):
It's multiple women have accused him of misconduct.
Speaker 1 (17:50):
It's like, really, I mean, it goes from like just
inappropriate chatter to some very serious allegations, like you said.
Speaker 3 (17:59):
What's really particularly crazy.
Speaker 1 (18:01):
To me is that in twenty twenty, Axios reported that
Eric Swalwell had a relationship with a Chinese spy and
he's still in our political system.
Speaker 3 (18:14):
Yes, what in the world is going on?
Speaker 1 (18:17):
Apparently he had an extended relationship with a Chinese spy
who goes by Feng Feng and was, you know, from
the Chinese intelligence agency.
Speaker 3 (18:28):
And again it was Axios breaking this story.
Speaker 1 (18:30):
It wasn't like, you know, National Review finding out, which
I would believe anyway. But if you want to question
whether these stories are real, these are liberal outlets coming
after him and of course, it's like, well why now, why,
why is this information coming to light now? He's been
around for so long and this story is from twenty twenty.
(18:52):
You know, what does that mean? Does it mean that
they actually want Katie Porter to win or you know
the Yeah.
Speaker 4 (19:00):
That is important, As our podcast stier, as our podcasting
friend John Ashbrook says on Ruthless, no story like this
comes out and certainly doesn't become banner headline news unless
it is beneficial to another Democrat.
Speaker 2 (19:15):
So what is happening.
Speaker 4 (19:17):
What is happening right now is that in the gugnatorial
race in California, which.
Speaker 6 (19:22):
You would imagine should be one hands down by a Democrat,
they got a little problem because they have a jungle primary,
which means that whoever the top two finishers advance to
a runoff, those.
Speaker 4 (19:33):
Two could be two Democrats, which is what usually happens.
Usually say they're guaranteed to win. But what's happening right
now is that the people in California have become a
little ticked off at the Democrats and there are two
Republicans running at the top of this field.
Speaker 2 (19:47):
Those are Steve Hilton, former Fox host Great Guy, and
Chad Bianco, sheriff in California. Now Trump has endorsed Hilton,
which I don't think was a great strategic move because
I would like both of those guys to move on.
Speaker 4 (20:01):
But in the meantime, Democrats have Swallwell as their leader
at this point, but it's a poultry like twelve percent
or something. And then they have Katie Porter who has
all sorts of abuse issues, also.
Speaker 1 (20:15):
A lot of abuse baggage, something involving mashed potatoes on
her ex husband's.
Speaker 2 (20:19):
Has had much of it on video.
Speaker 4 (20:22):
And then who's the thro Oh Tom Styr, who just Tomstire,
spends a bunch of money and never wins.
Speaker 2 (20:26):
So that's their situation.
Speaker 4 (20:28):
So they realize, if we don't winn oh this field, right,
we're gonna split too much and the two Republicans will
move on.
Speaker 2 (20:35):
So that is why, yeah, everything is coming out now right.
Speaker 1 (20:40):
Well, tom Styr, according to Polymarket, has spiked into a
fifty three percent chance to win that thing. I you know,
I have heard Tom Stier speak. He has zero personality
and no charm at all. But again, if Katie Porter
is the other Democrat in the race, he might run
away with that. For the Democrats, like you said, it
(21:02):
doesn't mean he's going to be in the top two,
but we'll see what happens.
Speaker 3 (21:05):
A Swallow was in pole position to win that election,
even though Republicans were in the lead.
Speaker 1 (21:11):
It just there were a lot of people in the
race and he was sort of considered the guy that
was going to take it.
Speaker 4 (21:18):
Our friends embarrassing entire state, hugely populous, which with a
giant economy, and the three people y'all are pulling are stire,
Katie Porter, and Eric Swolwell.
Speaker 2 (21:33):
Come on politics.
Speaker 1 (21:34):
Yeah, as our friend Lisa Booth points out about billionaire
Tom Styer, who's really trst trying to buy this thing.
I thought billionaires were bad, and of course only millionaires
are bad.
Speaker 4 (21:45):
Just like only credible allegations or even incredible ones. The
credible allegations only count, right or like in danger of
endangering other Democrats, that's when they count.
Speaker 2 (21:57):
I do have a running.
Speaker 4 (21:58):
List of men who were on CNN twice as much
as I was when I worked there who ended up
becoming hugely flame out, disgusting pods.
Speaker 2 (22:10):
So he's won. We had Michael Avanati who ended up
in jail. Yep, yeah, he he.
Speaker 3 (22:15):
Was going to be president Mary Catherine.
Speaker 4 (22:17):
And the thing is that each one of these people,
our friends on the left and most of the media
I review myself, are perfectly willing to believe anything out
of their mouths and hold them up as beacons of
trust YEP, as long.
Speaker 2 (22:31):
As they hate Trump enough.
Speaker 3 (22:33):
Exactly.
Speaker 1 (22:33):
It's a bad standard, right, And the way that these
people say that they want democracy, but when the billionaires,
their billionaires try to buy that democracy, that's okay.
Speaker 3 (22:44):
So switching gears to Hungary we have.
Speaker 1 (22:49):
Last night there was an election in Hungary and Orbon,
who had been the leader of Hungary for the last
sixteen years, was defeated. He was frequently referred to as
a Dixon or an autocrat, sometimes a fascist. But he
lost the election, he conceded, he stepped down, and he
did the same when he lost in two thousand and two. Meanwhile,
(23:10):
the billionaires on the left, the Alex Soros for example,
is like, the people of Hungary have taken back their
country a resounding rejection of entrenched corruption and foreign interference. Meanwhile,
Soros has given like close to one hundred million dollars
to various groups in.
Speaker 3 (23:27):
Hungary to cause this result. That is now, you know,
democracy in action.
Speaker 4 (23:32):
Well, and by the way that the uprising is not
led by a lib I mean, he's not liberal, he's
conservative in many of his views.
Speaker 2 (23:40):
Also, I just like.
Speaker 4 (23:42):
Many of the people who claim that Orbon and Trump
are the same and that these are existential crises in
both countries. They just seem to blip right by the
fact that like, Okay, well the guy just lost and
then left right, and so yeah, so you're telling me
that a re elected some guy that you didn't like
for a while, and then they elected a different guy
(24:04):
that you like slightly better.
Speaker 3 (24:05):
Right exactly.
Speaker 2 (24:07):
That sounds okay to me. Yeah, so then I will
never forget.
Speaker 4 (24:10):
By the way, all of them telling me that Maloney
was a fascist, Like, I'm done.
Speaker 3 (24:14):
That's up there for sure. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (24:17):
So the new guy is named Peter Magar. He is
socially conservative. He's really a big immigration restrictionist. He wants
to according to Jason Kenny on X, he wants to
cut taxes and double the defense budget. He criticized Orbon
for admitting too many guest workers. Wants to increase Hungary's
already generous pronatal incentives. I mean, I watched a video
(24:39):
of him today and I think the most liberal thing
about him is he wants to rejoin the International Criminal.
Speaker 3 (24:45):
Court, which is really too bad.
Speaker 1 (24:47):
I don't think that ICC should have any kind of
power or any any of that. But other than that,
I kind of see him as just as conservative as Orbon.
So I'm not sure what the Democrats or liberals think
they want here remains to be seen. But Hungary has
been in pretty good shape and I hope that it
stays that way.
Speaker 4 (25:06):
Well, certainly it doesn't seem, at least on the immigration front,
that that populist strength I will be losing anytime soon
in most of Europe. I mean, it does seem like
something that is, whether it's the opposition or the party
in power. Now, that's a line of a line of
attack that is salient to most many, many, many European voters.
Speaker 6 (25:28):
Right.
Speaker 1 (25:28):
Well, again, what remains to be seen what happens there,
and maybe MegaR is this great liberal hope, But so
far it doesn't seem that way, and we'll have to
keep an eye on that. We're going to take a
short break and be right back with more on Normally.
Speaker 4 (25:45):
All right, we are back on Normally with a little
bit of a story about marriage.
Speaker 2 (25:50):
We like to talk about marriage here.
Speaker 3 (25:52):
Doo. Yeah, we're really big fans of marriage.
Speaker 2 (25:54):
In this case.
Speaker 4 (25:55):
Alex Clark, who is a Turning Point USA person, deals
with health and wellness in the MAHA universe. And someone
tweeted the other day Alex Clark has some good ideas,
and I've enjoyed listening to her podcasts in the past,
but I don't think it's wise for her to have
a prominent role at tpusa's Women's Leadership Conference considering that
(26:17):
she's still unmarried at age thirty three.
Speaker 2 (26:20):
And then there was a response to that, you think
you have that?
Speaker 1 (26:24):
Yeah, So it's interesting because Alex Clark is quite good.
She is, she's young, she's smart, she makes some good points.
The idea that she shouldn't have a prominent role at
TPUs USA Women's Leadership Conference because she's still unmarried in
her early.
Speaker 3 (26:41):
Thirties is obviously absurd.
Speaker 1 (26:44):
And let me just tell the women that are listening
to this, don't think that married women in their thirties
don't get the same kind of crap we do. We
get the like, why are you here not at home
with your children? So, Haley Coronia, she responded to this,
he's got a podcast called Scrolling with Haley. She's also
(27:04):
a very interesting person. She writes, I'm a Christian, unmarried
woman in her thirties. I'd love to get married and
have children. Just because I haven't experienced these things yet
doesn't mean I don't know that they are good or
women should strive for. I do want to ask, though,
what should unmarried Christian women do in their waiting season?
Settle shut up, be utterly boring and unsuccessful, Live at
home off our parents until we meet someone to take
(27:24):
care of us, work less hard so that men will
be more apt pick us up. What does that say
about what men want? Why would a masculine man be
threatened by a woman who is passionate about her career
and hobbies. And why is it that the assumption that
a woman's passion and skills aren't transferable to motherhood. Most
working women I know are feminine and would love to
be traditional, stay at home moms. It's a real tough
(27:47):
question of what should women who want to be married
be doing. But that's not what these people are saying.
They're saying that you shouldn't even listen to women unless
they are married. And again, as you and I know,
we get the opposite kind of Hey, if.
Speaker 4 (28:02):
You're Erica Kirk and you are married with children and
then you become tragically not married and still have children,
they will go after you for that as well. Okay,
this is a situation where some of them just simply
don't think it is the place of women. You speak up,
and you and I came up in a conservative movement
that didn't have those takes. Yeah, yeah, And I think, look,
(28:27):
a lot of this is a pendulum swing culturally, because
the left asserted that marriage and normal families were bad
and that you'd be ruining your life by engaging it.
It's right, swing back to like, let's do it the
more traditional way. Yeah, but Alex Clark has plenty to offer.
Women have plenty to offer, and by the way, they
(28:47):
should be engaged in politics because if you don't have
them there, you're going to lose because they have to
be like voting end things.
Speaker 3 (28:55):
That's right, yep.
Speaker 1 (28:56):
Yeah, And you know Republicans do a problem with women,
and the problem is this kind of thing. I will
say that the account that commented on Alex Clark, you know,
maybe she shouldn't be in a tp USA leadership role
is called white baby factory.
Speaker 7 (29:10):
So you know, take it, which is the origin of
the country on that take it with a giant, humongous
grain of salt that this person even has, you know,
the best, the best hope online I just checked the country.
Speaker 3 (29:23):
It's Canada. You got convenience.
Speaker 2 (29:25):
But here's you're supposed to be polite.
Speaker 4 (29:28):
But here's the thing is I think that on the internet,
it so often gets polarized into this ridiculous excuse the
Obama phrase false choice m hm, between hardcore boss babe
with zero children and never just didn't getting married and
the opposite and like the big modern life actually, and
(29:51):
of course it comes with downsides and we make exchanges and.
Speaker 2 (29:54):
Trade offs because that's what life is.
Speaker 4 (29:56):
But there are so many more options available to us
as working mo of putting everything together than there were
when my mom was raising me.
Speaker 3 (30:05):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (30:06):
Yeah, And I think there's also you know the thing
that just because of what you're doing now, whether that's
staying at home with your kids or not married or whatever,
is what you're always going to be doing is insane.
I mean, you could you could be a stay at
home mom for a few years and then go back
to being a full time working mom, or you could
work part time or you know. And I always hated
this idea, like, oh, the single women, like that's a
(30:27):
temporary state. And you know, as you said about Erica Kirk,
marriage could be a temporary state. It's all in flux
and you're doing your best. And women should not have
to be at each other's throats or being told that
they shouldn't be. They should be left out of the
conversation whether they're married or single or whatever.
Speaker 4 (30:44):
By the way, women who do want to get married
and have kids, they should have people to listen to
who are both married and unmarried, people who are going
through that season, and people who are not. And I
also just want to shout out Alex Clark for having
been very courageous very early in calling out kandases yeah,
and very unabashed about it when she had stuff to lose,
just as others did when it comes to like that
(31:06):
that's right the audience or cloud or what have you,
and she was like, no, this is bad, and she
was very clear about it.
Speaker 3 (31:13):
Yep, yep.
Speaker 1 (31:14):
And I think that's when I started following her. And
like I said, I've enjoyed following her. And I think
that she's smart and has a lot to say. The
idea to dismiss her because she's not married. And you know,
I just celebrated my seventeen year anniversary and I post
every year on my anniversary that I, at age thirty
was a disaster. I mean, I was nowhere near you know,
(31:35):
these girls are all doing a lot better than I was.
Speaker 3 (31:38):
I was really in a bad place.
Speaker 1 (31:40):
And by thirty one, I was married and at the
start of the best decade of my life.
Speaker 3 (31:45):
It's just things can change very quickly. Again, don't see
these as permanent states.
Speaker 1 (31:50):
And you know, I thought I was never getting married
for sure, so you know, things could really change.
Speaker 2 (31:56):
Yep, life changes all the time. That's the only thing
that is constant.
Speaker 3 (32:00):
That's right. Well, thanks for joining us on Normally.
Speaker 1 (32:03):
Normally airs Tuesdays and Thursdays, and you can subscribe anywhere you.
Speaker 3 (32:06):
Get your podcasts.
Speaker 1 (32:07):
Get in touch with us at normallythepodat 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
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.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.
Betrayal Season 5
Saskia Inwood woke up one morning, knowing her life would never be the same. The night before, she learned the unimaginable – that the husband she knew in the light of day was a different person after dark. This season unpacks Saskia’s discovery of her husband’s secret life and her fight to bring him to justice. Along the way, we expose a crime that is just coming to light. This is also a story about the myth of the “perfect victim:” who gets believed, who gets doubted, and why. We follow Saskia as she works to reclaim her body, her voice, and her life. If you would like to reach out to the Betrayal Team, email us at betrayalpod@gmail.com. Follow us on Instagram @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.