The Churning Rumor Mill

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Six six eight six eight is the number here. This
is Sandy shack In for Jeff Cooner. Our rumor went
around the internet that President Trump was dead. Who would
believe that, you ask well Democrats who wanted it to
be true, and Republicans who were afraid that it was true.
The problem is the lies of the government and the

(00:22):
mainstream media in the past four or five years, specifically
during the Biden administration, made anything possible because they destroyed
trust with the American people, and the media did not
learn from their mistake. They got caught ling CBS and
ABC and both had to pay a huge amounts of
money for lying and for misrepresenting things. Yet they've done

(00:44):
it again this weekend, Christy Nome, Secretary of Homeland Security,
Christine Nome was doing an interview on Face the Nation,
and they edited her response to make it appear less
comp comprehensive. She was explaining about Abrego Garcia and why

(01:05):
he was a danger, and they cut it all out
so that nobody would know why he was a danger.
Wouldn't you think that they would learn their lesson? I
I was kind of shocked that, especially after all the
money they paid out, that they didn't The text line
is seven zero four seven zero two oh seven. On
the text line says a rule of thumb is reality

(01:26):
is the opposite of what the media says it is.
I'm beginning to believe that more and more. To be
honest with you, Let's go to the phone line six
one seven two sixty six sixty eight sixty eight, Julie
in Florida. Julie, welcome to WRKO. How are you? Thank you?

Speaker 2 (01:46):
Hi?

Speaker 1 (01:46):
Can you hear me?

Speaker 3 (01:48):
I can now?

Speaker 1 (01:49):
Okay? All righty? So do you trust the media when
you when you when you hear anything? These days?

Speaker 3 (01:57):
I know I don't trust the media even a little bit.
But what I wanted to know was is Christy going
to do anything about this like Trump did? Has she
talked about suing them?

Speaker 1 (02:11):
Well, one of the differences when President Trump sued over
that with CBS, it was because was election interference. It
was in an election they edited Kamala Harris to make
her appear better than she was in order to swing
the election. And it was just before the election, so
there was you could point to damages. That's why that worked.

(02:34):
Christy is not running for election, nor is there an
election running right now, or you're not close enough to
make that possible, so and you know, so the answer
is no. What she did was expose them. I don't
know if there's any legal recourse besides just showing people
what they did. To be honest with you, that's.

Speaker 3 (02:55):
A good thing. And ol, why I have you on
the line. What's going on with Jeff?

Speaker 1 (03:01):
Jeff was in Croatia for taking He took his son
Ashton to Croatia back to visit the land of his
you know, of his family. And while he was there,
there was some kind of incident with a bus. He
was on a bus going to visit his aunt and
apparently the bus stopped short and Jeff was injured when

(03:24):
it did, and so he he's he came home yesterday
from and he was in a little discomfort and so
he wanted to really see his doctor today. So we're
just giving him an extra day's grace period to get
you know, make sure everything's okay before he comes back.
But we're fully expecting back tomorrow.

Speaker 3 (03:46):
That's great. Well, I'm glad you're reporting on this because
I did hear Christy talk about what they left off
and I I mean, what is the point of the
news if they're not telling you the whole story, and
the story that they do tell you is a lot
ninety percent of the time.

Speaker 1 (04:04):
So what's the point, Well, you know, to be honest
with you, one of them. As somebody who's dealt with
news and talk radio for a long, long period of time,
I have a rule of thumb, and most of the
people I've worked with have agreed with me on it.
I will not do on the air taped interviews. Everything
that I have ever done, whether it's a show I've

(04:27):
produced or a show that I've hosted, it's a live interview.
I don't want any edits. I don't want any misrepresentation
of anything. So, whether I'm a guest on somebody else's show,
or whether I am having somebody a guest on my show,
or whether I'm booking a guest, if it's if they
will not do it live, then we don't do the interview.
And this is one of the reasons why so that

(04:48):
people get full unfettered access to whoever it is you're presenting,
and it's not a skewed point of view. So I'm
just saying, you know, I understand why they can't necessarily
do that for face the nation, but you know, don't
hand me this. I edited for time and took out
the stuff that you don't like.

Speaker 4 (05:06):
You know.

Speaker 1 (05:06):
That's that to me is just is just one more
nail and CBS's coffin. Thank you for the call, Julie.
I appreciate it very much. Let's go to Kevin in Stoneham. Kevin,
Welcome to w r KO.

Speaker 5 (05:17):
How are you, heydannyw are you? How are you going?

Speaker 1 (05:22):
I am fine, Kevin. So did you hear the rumor
about Donald Trump over the weekend?

Speaker 5 (05:27):
I did. I just really didn't really pay much attention
to that. But when I do see the posts, I
don't watch CD the news anymore. I got the chord,
so I get most of my news from Twitter these days.
And when I when I do see and talk right you.
When I when I do see something from CBS or

(05:49):
ABC or CNN or any of those, I really don't
trust them at all anymore, especially after Are you familiar
with the speech that Obama gave in April of twenty
twenty two before Stamford, in which he says that as
long as you can flood the public square with enough

(06:10):
raw sewage, you can make people believe anything you want
them to believe that's snifty.

Speaker 1 (06:17):
What a colorful metaphor for what Democratic Party and the
mainstream media have been doing to the American public.

Speaker 2 (06:28):
Right.

Speaker 1 (06:29):
I'm sorry, Kevin, you got cut off there what I said.

Speaker 5 (06:32):
You're familiar with that speech.

Speaker 1 (06:33):
I am not familiar with that speech.

Speaker 5 (06:35):
No, well look it up. It's hard to find out
on YouTube, but it's a speech he gave before Stamford
in which he states that quite plan way. He says,
you can if you've flooded the public square with enough
raw sewage, you get people to believe, to not know

(06:57):
what to believe, then you've won. Was his his basic sentiment.

Speaker 1 (07:02):
And let me ask you something when he said that,
was he saying that he was doing it or was
he accusing the other side of doing it?

Speaker 5 (07:10):
He was talking in general, I think, and I think
he was probably talking about about the other side, because
that's ah, that's a tactic that they doing what you're.

Speaker 1 (07:23):
Doing exactly whenever they whenever they accuse a Republican of
doing something, the Trump of doing something that I look
behind said, well, they have to be doing that themselves.
That's the only reason why they would they would have
mentioned it. I think that's fascinating and explains a lot,
don't you think.

Speaker 5 (07:37):
I think it's co joined to the Smith Month Modernization Act,
in which they he allowed the mainstream media to be propagandized.
And that's I think that's what we see in the
press even still today. That needs to be repealed.

Speaker 1 (08:00):
Yeah, I don't disagree with you. I think it needs
to be repealed as well. But no, that's a very
colorful analogy, and I can see where he was basically
drawing a roadmap for everybody as to what, you know,
where he was going.

Speaker 5 (08:17):
I think it's arrogance. He absolutely, He's just put it
right out there and said this is what we're doing.

Speaker 1 (08:24):
Absolutely, it is arrogance. Thank you so much for the call, Kevin.
I appreciate it very much. We need to take a break.
Six one seven two six six six eight six eight
is the number here of This is Sandy shack In
for Jeff Cooner here on the Kooner Report. Media lied
continuously during the Biden administration and a peer, you have
learned nothing from failing ratings in lawsuits and settlements they've

(08:47):
had to pay out because of those lives. Instead, they
seem to be, you know, getting worse as opposed to
better and they don't have to do deceptive editing in
order to uh to misrepresent something. There's a I have
an example for you of something that wasn't necessarily deceptivating,

(09:08):
but out and out Fibruary. Really, it's a story out
of Washington State where the story is that's going around
both the local news, the newspapers there and the internet.
And the story was that Ice, in order to catch illegals,

(09:30):
we're pulling firefighters away from fighting fires. In other words,
it's a huge safety problem. They're putting people at risk
by taking firefighters off the front lines. That's their story. Okay,
and I I you know, if that were true, that

(09:51):
would be horrific, right, that would be that would be
really really bad. So this is what a congress congresswoman
US Rep. Andrea Selina, she's a Democrat from Oregon. This
is what she said in her statement, you know, promoting
this story, Ice detained two firefighters who are working to
stop a wildfire. These people are risking their lives to

(10:14):
keep communities safe. How does this make Americans safer? Every
day this administration finds a new way to show how
backward and how inhumane it is. So that is what's happening.
Oh my god, people will die instead of of putting
out conflagrations and hilatious wildfires that are rounding up and

(10:35):
removing illegals on their way to church. You know, seriously,
this was the story that's being put forth by the
local news and by the congress woman there from Oregon.
You know, won't know what the truth of the story was.
I want to hear what that what it actually was happening.

(10:56):
You know, there's always a grain of reality in these lives,
and that's what makes them dangerous. So the US Costumes
and Border Protection put out this news release. So this
is what happened due to the Romanto. Due to the
remote location of a work site, the Bureau of Land

(11:17):
Management requested that the Border Patrol assists in verifying the
identities of the personnel that they subcot contracted for the
work crews. There were forty four people required identity verification
to ensure that the individuals on site matched the list
of people that were given to them by the contractor.

(11:39):
These are and they're not fighting a fire, by the way,
this is they're not fighting a fire there there. It's
a work camp and the Border Patrol is called in
by the Bureau of Land Management rate arrangers to make
sure that people that were hired were the people that
that they matched the list that they were given by
the subcontractor, and that's what they're supposed to do. Border

(12:02):
Patrol one of their jobs is to support rangers and
verify identity for the rangers. Now, while they were doing this,
they found several discrepancies and two individuals were found to
be present in the US illegally. One already had an
order of removal in other words, he'd already been deported
and come back. The two individuals were arrested and transported

(12:26):
to the Bellingham station on charges of illegal entry. Forty
two individuals were released from the scene and you know,
went about their business. So none of this had anything
to do with firefighting operations or the response to any
active fires, nor did pose any danger to the surrounding community.

(12:51):
In other words, this was preventative. This was they basically
were checking out the people that were being hired to
fight the fires, but there was no fire being fought
at the time. So the Border Patrol had been alerted
that there were illegal aliens had been hired by the
third party contractor who was out of Oregon. They were
firefighters on paper, but neither were fighting fires. And when

(13:16):
the Border patrol checked the records and the contractor records
didn't match the people on the site, the officials found
those two guys who had entered the US illegally and
detained them. They were not out on the fire line
stopping a fire. They weren't saving babies. They weren't rescuing puppies.
They were chopping wood. That's what they were doing. They
were chopping wood at the camp, and they were detained

(13:37):
and transported to a detention center. But the legacy media
turned the narrow narrative into border patrol and ice pulling
heroes away from the front lines who were fighting fires
and saving children. That's what I'm talking about, an out
and out lie. So there's a there's a grain of reality.
There was a there was a camp with fire, independent
contractor firefighters hired. They weren't fighting a fire. Nobody was

(14:01):
pulled off the front line. These guys were legal, and
they didn't match the roster. They were hidden in among
people who were legally there. That's what happened. What is worse,
do you is it the deceptive edit that did CBS
did with Christy Nome or is it out and out
falsehood from this congresswoman and the media in Washington State

(14:23):
and Oregon who were trying to portray illegal aliens as
as children saving firefighters when they were cutting wood at
a camp and were they're illegally? Which is worse to you?
Do you think? Let's go to Joan in Boston. Joan,
welcome to WRKO. How are you?

Speaker 2 (14:41):
I'm very disgruntled about this, Sandys, as are you. I've
worked in legacy media for a good part of my
career and when COVID hit, that's what really opened my eyes.
How about you? Is that when you realized that the
truth was not being told and it was being twisted
and they were serving a certain era.

Speaker 1 (15:00):
I think I knew a little bit before that, but I,
like I have said before this morning, Jone, I'm very naive.
So when I would see things before I thought they
were you know, basically, I would say exceptions to the
role and that most people that most of what we
were learning was still was still honest. And then you're

(15:23):
right COVID. COVID was a big wake up call for
many people.

Speaker 2 (15:27):
I think, Yeah, and the sad part about it is
since COVID, you can't get the truth out there. I
mean I call former colleagues from major news outlets with
stories and they'll say, oh, no, no, no, we can't report
on that. And one case in point, of course is
the Rivera family who had their five children taken by DCF.

(15:47):
They've been railroaded not only in the court system, but
they've been depicted as criminals in the media, and the
media does not want to hear the truth. Boston Broadside
is one of the only outlets that has actually reported
the truth. And Jeff is hosting a screening on Sunday
night at the Legacy Theater in Denham and we're inviting

(16:09):
Legacy media to come and meet Izzie Rivera, get the
truth from him directly from his attorneys, and then see
will you really report the truth? Are you going to
continue supporting this this horrible narrative that is depicting two
loving parents who've been together a dozen years raising five children.
They had their five children taken from them just for

(16:31):
standing up for their parental rights choosing not to give.

Speaker 1 (16:36):
Are there are a lot of similarities between the story that
you're telling the firefighters in Oregon and Washington who had
nothing to do with firefighting. Yet that's the story that
was out there. It's the exact same kind of misrepresentation,
don't you think, Joan.

Speaker 2 (16:52):
It's terrible And the worst part is, you know, these
were two parents who have at home businesses. They were
thriving supporting their family, and now they lost their work.
Their work is dried up, and they're depicted as criminals
that are guilty of five counts of kidnapping. It doesn't
say that they traveled out of the state with their
own five children. It says that they are facing criminal charges,

(17:14):
which are actually missed demeanor charges for kidnapping, and so
nobody wants to hire them. And the wife's previous employer said,
you can't have your job back until those charges are dropped,
and DCS says you can have your children back until
those charges are dropped. And meanwhile, the mainstream media is
depicting them as crazy as criminals. They were incarcerated and

(17:37):
Texas held on two point five million dollars bail, if
you can imagine, And these are the details that mainstream
media is consciously choosing to ignore.

Speaker 1 (17:47):
Yeah, and you bring a very important point in Joan,
and that is that these are not victimless lies that
are told by the media. They caught a great deal
of damage. And specifically you can point to in the
case that you're relating to a family that's being irreparably
harmed by the lives that are being told. But in general,

(18:11):
all of us, I think are damaged by lies that
the media brings because if nothing else, you know, people
tend to make big life decisions based on information they
get from people they trusted. In the past. They've trusted
the media, they've trusted the government, and now they can't
trust either, and they don't know where to turn. This
is Sandy Shack sitting in for Jack Kooner here on

(18:33):
the Kooner Report. The text number is seven zero four
seven zero. On the text line five oh eight, says Sandy,
I first noticed media bias during the two thousand and
eight race for the Democrat nomination. In the afternoon, I
heard the National Choir story regarding John Edwards a fair
and love child. I turned on the news that evening,
expecting to hear more crickets. It wasn't until two weeks

(18:56):
later that mainstream media reported on this. Apparently they could
hide it no longer. It was a great awakening to me.
Mainstream media was picking choosing your stories with a lot
of lies and obfuscation along the way. It seems that
this is a path they are still committed to. It
does seem that they are still committed to this path,
you know, editing the Gnome interview misrepresenting illegal aliens as

(19:19):
firefighters on their front line. And there was another one
from just this past week that was I thought very insidious.
But it's a story from legacy media and the left wing,
you know, alternate alternate news outlets, and it's basically it's

(19:43):
about US District Judge Sparkles Souchanan, she's in Washington, d C.
Has temporarily halted the move of deporting hundreds of Guatemalan
children and that were sitting on the tarmac and a
plane apparently ready to take off. Here is the headline

(20:05):
that you will see on places like Mediaite, Politico, the
Washington Post judges emergency halt dramatically blocks Trump from deporting
Guatemalan kids as planes were ready to take off. That
is basically the headline that you see, you know, and

(20:30):
essentially it was it was a group of Guatemalan kids
that were here without their parents. They had arrived unaccompanied
in the US, and they were being sent back in
a kind of a pilot program to their home country
in cooperation with the Guatemalan government. But they're represented as

(20:52):
removing minor children early mornings, sneaking them out they didn't
have a chance to contest their deportation, and the judges
riding to the rescue and protecting them from the big
evil Trump administration. Who's about to drop them off? I
don't know, somewhere maybe in the jungles of Guatemala. But

(21:12):
would you like to know what the real story is
behind that? Perhaps the Trump administration has begun removal flights
for Guatemalan kids because Guatemala has formally requested that these
children be returned home. These miners are not stateless, they

(21:36):
are not abandoned. All of them have self reported that
their parents live in Guatemala, and the Guatemalan government is
publicly asking for their unification. They want them back, but
you have democrats and their allies and the courts are
refusing to let them go. This is not a question
of children being left without guardians. Guatemala says, there are

(22:00):
kids give them back. We're taking responsibility for reuniting them
with their families. The reality is these children were smuggled
into the United States, usually by cartels, and they've wound
up stranded in federal custody if they're lucky here in
the States. Now, instead of being sent back to their families,

(22:21):
they are trapped in American shelters. And Judge, I don't
know how to pronounce your last name, I think it's
suck Nannon ordered. The judge's order blocks their deportation for
at least two weeks. And you have advocacy groups who
don't know what they're doing, are seeking a class action
expansion that could tie up this whole thing, this whole repatriation,

(22:45):
for months, if not years. I can't even begin to
explain how bizarre this is. Because you have a sovereign
government requesting the return of its children. What if this
were American children being held overseas somewhere, and then the
US governments, please send our kids back here, here's a plane,

(23:05):
send them back. Where are their families are here? We
want to reunite them, and that government said no, The
US had already arranged the flights to send them home.
And yet this judge, Yeah, she was a Democrat appointed judge.
Is standing the way forcing these miners to essentially remain
in limbo. That is what the true story is. But

(23:29):
you know, the headline made it sound like the Trump
administration is taking orphans and you know, and basically abandoning them.
Maybe you know, maybe them kicking out of the airport,
under the street. I don't know, doing one of those things.
Are you surprised? Are you surprised that one? I'm not
surprised that a judge would do this anymore because the judges,

(23:50):
we know a lot of rogue activist judges. But those
are the headlines as opposed to actually being a news
organization looking into what the truth of the matter is.
Those are the headlines that you're reading. Let's go to
John in Worcester. John, welcome to WRKO. How are you
doing today?

Speaker 5 (24:09):
For you?

Speaker 6 (24:10):
And by the way, thank you for all your good
work here while Jeff is gone. It's been great that
you can carry on the show.

Speaker 1 (24:18):
Well, thank you, I'm very kind.

Speaker 6 (24:20):
You're welcome. I'm commuting right now, so I want to
make sure I don't lose the connection. But I wanted
to go back and talk about my distrust of the
media went all the way back to the dark days
of twenty twenty. During the woof Flu, I've been listening
to a lot of standard media, and I was pretty

(24:41):
clear that the numbers were being skewed and we were
being kind of railroaded down a path. And when they
opened up unlimited mail and ballots in Massachusetts, I knew
that the elections were going to pretty much be stolen.
So I have been listening to a lot of podcast
at the time, Ben Shapiro, And for me, the litmus

(25:05):
test was after the election, when it was pretty clear
that the election really was stolen. Who would report on
it and who would not report on it? And so
I stopped listening to Ben Shapiro. One of the local
guys in Worcester, Timpolito never commented on this, and I
actually called him on the phone one day. So my

(25:26):
sister told me about Jeff Cooner and w RKO, and
I got to say, that's when I switched over to
listen to RKO because he was dead on from way
back then, right, So that's November twenty twenty.

Speaker 1 (25:38):
Yeah, yeah, Well, you know what, Jeff, I will make
sure that he knows about that because he would be
very touched that you trust him, and I think it's
well placed trust he is. He's not afraid to he's
not afraid to make enemies when he goes on the air.
It's one of the best things about him and he

(25:59):
he and I don't always agree on everything, but there's
one thing I respect him for and that he tells
it exactly as he sees it, and he's not afraid
to do so. And it doesn't mean he's always right
in my opinion, but it means he is always sincere
and he gives you the best information he can at
any given moment, and I respect him a great deal

(26:20):
for that. So thank you so much for the call, John,
I appreciate it. And you know, it seems to be
a lot of people are putting their moment of disillusionment
with the press back to COVID. When they started to
lie to us about the Biden administration, started lying about
the effectiveness of the vaccine, about where the wuhan, where

(26:41):
it originated. A lot of issues like that were coming up,
So I think that's I think that's a good timeline
when it comes to serious I mean, there was there
were issues before ear earlier call mentioned Bernard Goldberg's book Bias,
which I too read. Did an interview with Bernie with

(27:02):
mister Goldberg regarding his tenure at CBS and how the
news wasskeued, and that made me frightened. His book did
at the time. And it was a very big deal
of that book when it came out, because it was
the curtain being lifted to see the man behind the curtain,
like in the Wizard of Oz, and it hadn't really
been done before Bernie, or nobody from inside Legacy Media

(27:24):
had done it before Bernie. So I think that was
when my suspicion started, but they really started to take
hold during COVID. I have to agree with you on that.
And as John Quiniceman was saying earlier, yes, she felt
the same way. The media's deception and manipulation of facts

(27:46):
can have pretty horrible consequences when people start to believe
what they're told without checking out the truth of the
matter asserted, and then they tell someone, and they tell someone,
and these maybe people who you trust who told you,
so you trust that they know what they're talking about,
and that's how it grows, and then soon everybody believes

(28:07):
it and sometimes reality will bust in and set the
record straight, but more often than not it doesn't. But
a funny, well to me, funny, maybe not to other
people funny. A moment happened with are you ready Rosie
O'Donnell This this Uh for some reason, I found this funny.
It's sad and funny. At the same time, Rosie O'Donnell

(28:31):
after the horrible shooting in Milwaukee went on uh. You know,
she posts these videos on x and she was posting
that the uh that the shooter, the transgender identifying shooter
who opened fire during a Catholic school mouse was a
Republican MAGA person and that's what she was putting out there. Well,

(28:53):
you know, I don't know whether she knew that was
a lie or not, whether she just thought people would
believe or not. But what happened was at social media,
even those who watch Rosie o'donnald or who follow Rosi O'Donnell,
that was too much for them, and they landed on
her like you would not believe, so much so that

(29:15):
she actually had to come back and apologize for lying.
I never thought i'd see the day cut number thirty two.
Please Mike.

Speaker 4 (29:27):
Hi, everybody it's Rosio o'donald Star the Flintstones. Listen, I
have a call sort I know happens get run down,
you know. Anyway, I know a lot of you were
very upset about the video I made before I went
away for a few days. I didn't go online and
haven't seen them till today. But you are right. I

(29:49):
did not do my due diligence before I made that
emotional statement, and I said things about the shooter that
were incorrect. I assumed, like most shooters, they followed a
standard m O and had standard you know, feelings of
you know, NRA love and kind of gun people. Anyway,

(30:14):
the truth is I messed up, and when you mess up,
you fess up. I'm sorry. This is my apology video,
and I hope it's enough.

Speaker 1 (30:24):
I'm not even close to being enough to be honest
with you. But let's look at that for a little bit.
First of all, start the Flinstones house. Sad is that
that's her big claim to fame? How long ago was
that movie? Do you believe she went away? Did she
go away or did she stay at home and see
the messages popping up and then decide to ignore them

(30:44):
until they got to so many that she knew that
she was screwed unless she responded. I tend to think
that that's, you know, the latter, and what the hell
is this most shooters? Did she forget the other trans
shooters that have occurred, because I don't think there is
a most shooters A and or liberal shooters. They don't

(31:06):
have to be trans but liberal shooters. And then can
we also just talk about the fact for a minute
there that she she didn't mention anything about what the
background was of the actual shooter after lying about it,
because none of that, of course fit into her her
personal politics, so she didn't want to. She couldn't go

(31:28):
that far. But she was being called to account for
lying on social media. I think she if she hadn't,
if nobody responded to her, she wouldn't. She didn't care.
She didn't care one way or the other. Due diligence.
I didn't do She didn't do any diligence, never mind
due diligence. She just made assumptions based on her own
her own bias. And even I'm not even sure that

(31:51):
she did that. She may have just out and out
lied and got caught. I don't know. Only Rosie O'Donnell
knows for sure, but I think I was hopeful when
I saw that that people are starting to even people
who follow Rosie O'Donnell, who would be hardcore liberals, would
be going, wait a minute, something's wrong here. And that

(32:13):
gives me a little hope. Does it for you too?
Let's go to Marilyn in Norwood. Marilyn, welcome to WRKO.

Speaker 7 (32:20):
How are you fine, Sandy. You're doing a wonderful job
as always when Jeff is on vacation. I just wanted
to touch on a few points and then I'll hang up.
I think it's very sad that Congress voted a number
of years ago to eliminate the fairness doctrine, because it
seems like since the elimination of that doctrine, the sort

(32:44):
of mainstream television news has deteriorated and has contributed to polarization.
And I wonder if there would ever be any interest
in having it reinstated for TV, because television is very convincing,
and if information is distorted or misrepresented, it is shaping

(33:06):
voters understanding or perception of how the country is being managed.
Because most people no longer have time to read a newspaper,
and newspapers sometimes are not as relevant because of, you know,
the instant nature of how the news has changed over
a few years. And as for roso O'Donnell, I'm really

(33:26):
shocked because I think that her mistake also shows that
her inherent biases exist. And as someone who is in
the public eye, although she's not someone that I would
necessarily follow, it's irresponsible of her to, you know, to
make to project her biases and assumptions before all the

(33:49):
facts are in. So I will hang up now.

Speaker 1 (33:51):
Thank you, douncus. As I hang up, Marylyn, let's have
a discussion about this, first of all, because I think
that I'm not sure that she that that was so
much a fact of making a mistake. Is I think
she may have lied. I think that was I think
she didn't care. I think she knew and she thought
she could get away with it, so she put it

(34:12):
out there. But even her own followers, who are who
are very you know, liberal in their viewpoint and are
used to people lying to them, called her out on it.
That makes me hopeful. Does it make you hopeful?

Speaker 7 (34:27):
Yes? It does. But it's just years ago, I mean
many years ago, when when celebrities were really sort of
part of large. I guess Hollywood studios they were very
careful and then maybe it's because of how they were
managed and the stipulation of their contracts, but they seem
to be much more careful about, you know, what they

(34:49):
communicated to the public. And I also feel overall one
of the things I don't like about social media is
the way even some of the mainstream media now sort
of plays up er accentuates what these celebrities, you know,
viewpoints are in various issues. I have no interest. I'm
just interested in the facts, and I will base my decision,

(35:13):
you know, you know, based on hopefully the quality of
the facts, which seems to be very compromised. Many years ago,
I read a wonderful biography I think it was by
Sally Bettell Smith about CBS. It was once considered the
Tiffany of news networks. So it's really fallen in stature

(35:34):
since then, and back.

Speaker 1 (35:35):
In the days of Walter Cronkite fact.

Speaker 7 (35:37):
That's right, and even predating him, maybe Edward Rmorrow. I'm
not sure if he was connected with CBS, but at
one time these three major television networks were were considered
the gold standard in this country and now it's all,
you know, sort of been destroyed and everyone is projecting
their political biases and it's just sad and it's irresponsible,

(36:02):
and it's not in any way contributing to the betterment
of our society. And maybe this is intentional, you know,
maybe these organizations and the money behind it want this
kind of political destabilization and angst to exist. But it's
very it's just very disappointing because I feel we're being

(36:25):
dumbed down because the quality of our news is being compromised,
and I look online at news reports over the world
about what is happening in the US. So it's it's
very just very disappointing.

Speaker 1 (36:42):
I agree with you, I think it is. It is
very disappointing. But I don't think the answer is the
fitness doctrine. I am not a fan of censorship in
any form, to be honest with you, I think censorship
is a double edged sword. I think that while yes,
you can, you know, check out the truth of the

(37:03):
matter asserted on some some news stories and it might
make people tew the line a little bit better, it
depends on who's in power, how it's going to be used,
And so I think you saw that with the Biden
administration essentially killing stories they didn't want to hear. I mean,
the New York Post lost their ability to to put

(37:26):
anything on Twitter and Facebook because they had the temerity
to come out and tell everybody about the Hunter Biden
laptop story. That's the problem. As long as you're in power,
you can you can use something like the Fitness Doctrine
in truth meaning you can you can really you can
be assured of what the application is going to be,

(37:48):
that it's going to be truthful and down the down
the middle. But if somebody else is in power, they
could use it to censor you and to skew the news.
And that's why I don't think things like the Fitness
do doctor, which I view with out and out censorship,
as something that's that's good. I understand the issue with
lying in the media, We've been talking about it all morning.

(38:09):
But I think the answer is not governmental overreach and censorship.
I think the answer is people taking upon themselves to
find out what the truth is, and if enough people
do that, then the truth will out there. That's one
of the reasons why Donald Trump is successful. I think
Marylyn he went directly to Twitter and now the truth

(38:32):
social in his when he first decided to run for
president to talk to people, he talked directly to the
American people instead of through a media outlet, and he
got his message across through that. And I think there's
a lot to be said for that. And I think
censorship and of any kind is an incursion on the

(38:53):
First Amendment, and who's to say where it stops. And
it makes me very nervous. I think we need to
be responsible for for our own news intake, and some
people aren't, but I think more and poorant people are.
And I think that's why Rosie O'Donnell had to apologize
on her TikTok account or whatever account that was, because

(39:14):
she lied. Whether it was through negligence or deliberate, she lied,
and she had to apologize for it because her own people,
who were predisposed to believe her, essentially told her that
she had to apologize because they weren't going to stand
for that misrepresentation. And that makes me helpeful that we
can move forward with that censorship. Thank you so much

(39:36):
for the call, Marylyn. I appreciate it very much. Here's
the thing about these misrepresentations, they're not just obnoxious, you know,
like Rosie o'donna is every day of the week. They
are dangerous as well. They create a dangerous mindset where
people are already predisposed to think what they want to think,

(39:59):
to believe the law if they fit with their own
personal narrative. And sometimes the lies are so great that
they think it is reasonable to respond with violence. And
that is where these lies like the one that Rosie
O'Donnell told about the shooter in Milwaukee, and that is

(40:21):
why the lies of the judge saying that these children
were stateless Guatemalans that she was protecting