February 9, 2026 • 35 mins
Don Lemon faces a reckoning, Boston Mayor Michelle Wu gets caught pandering, and more people get caught having partied with Jeffrey Epstein. Lot of exposes this week in our "did they really just say that" clips.
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 (00:00):
Don Lemon faces a reckoning, Boston mayor Michelle wou gets
caught pandering, and more people get caught having partied with
Jeffrey Epstein. There are lots of expose this week in
our Did they really just say that clips I'm Nancy.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
Shack, I'm jeff Brown.
Speaker 3 (00:13):
This is news bite.
Speaker 4 (00:27):
Last night.
Speaker 5 (00:27):
The djson a team of federal agents to arrest me
in the middle of the night, and I will not
be silent.
Speaker 6 (00:34):
Every person, every human being, has the legal right to
come to the United States and seek asylum or shelter.
Speaker 7 (00:40):
And Epstein was conspiring with a writer for me to
lose the election. So right there, you know that I
had nothing to do with this guy.
Speaker 4 (00:55):
Parrying with Epstein.
Speaker 1 (00:57):
That seems to be the uh, the theme going around here.
And President Trump says, uh uh.
Speaker 2 (01:04):
All the kids did it right.
Speaker 4 (01:06):
Yeah, yeah. And in fact, there was a deputy A G.
Speaker 1 (01:10):
Todd Blanche on Fox. He basically said, just wanted to
call to everybody's attention that partying with Epstein is actually
not a crime.
Speaker 8 (01:22):
Is there any chance that any of these individuals who
partied with Epstein and engaged in, you know, relations with
minors will be prosecuted?
Speaker 9 (01:33):
Well, chance, I'll never say no, and we will always
investigate any evidence of misconduct. But as you know, it
is not a crime to party with mister Epstein, and
so as horrible as it's not a crime to email
with mister Epstein. And some of these men may have
done horrible things, and if we have evidence that allows
us to prosecute them, you better believe we will. But
(01:54):
it's also the kind of thing that the American people
that need to understand that it isn't a to party
with mister Epstein.
Speaker 1 (02:02):
I would point out to the Deputy Attorney General that
if your name is Andrew Montbotton Windsor, I think it
probably was.
Speaker 2 (02:08):
Yeah, but there's also backup photos and other issues of it.
Speaker 4 (02:12):
But boy, did you see the new photos? I don't
think so, Prince Andrew, I didn't see that.
Speaker 2 (02:17):
You did see that? I mean look, I mean where
there's smoke, there's fire obviously, and there's a huge fire
going on because you know, I think everybody knows that
things were going on with Jeffrey Epstein that shouldn't have
been going on. And the other thing that I will
point out is two things that I will point out
is yes, there will be a fall guy or a
(02:41):
fall person. In addition to Gillan Maxwell, there will be
one fall person. And I would also point out that
whoever is whispering in President Trump's ears should tell him
to keep his lips zipped, because every time he talks
about this is that there's something there, something there there.
(03:02):
I mean, we're at the point where the more he says,
you know, it just proves that I was, Yes, there's
something there, and we all know it, and we all
understand that he's gonna get away with it, as will
most of the rest of the people associated with well
that even John Stewart was listed.
Speaker 1 (03:19):
I know, well, I think, well that's what they're saying.
That's why the AG is saying it's not wasn't legal
to party with him. It it depends on you know,
were you on the lead express or going to the island.
Speaker 2 (03:28):
And it's not no. But you know, when you when
when many people associated say the things that they're saying,
and you know, people just kind of, you know, listen
and talk amongst themselves. I mean, you know that these
people were involved in something they shouldn't have been.
Speaker 4 (03:46):
Known without a doubt.
Speaker 1 (03:47):
But don't you think that one of the reasons why
President Trump keeps mentioning is that he keeps getting asked
about it.
Speaker 4 (03:52):
He's not.
Speaker 1 (03:52):
I mean, that's what's happening over and over and over again.
But you Kelyn Collins was like a dog with.
Speaker 4 (03:57):
A bone in the Oval office.
Speaker 2 (03:58):
I mean, he's oh my, have you of all people
being being a lawyer counsel know that I forget what
I was going to say.
Speaker 4 (04:09):
Okay with Kaitlyn Collins and CNN.
Speaker 2 (04:13):
No, what I was going to say is is the
response is uh, you know to President Trump asked and
answered yeah.
Speaker 4 (04:20):
But he doesn't get away with that. He can't do
as of course.
Speaker 2 (04:22):
He does, come on, he doesn't. He can get away
with anything.
Speaker 1 (04:26):
But here's a problem, like for instance, yesterday with Kaitlyn
Collins from CNN, she asked the same question five different
ways over and until eventually he just went move on.
But he has I think a a a good point.
I mean, there's many in the mainstream media and not everybody,
but there's many in the mainstream meta who are trying
to make this about Donald Trump, and he he just
(04:49):
has had.
Speaker 9 (04:49):
It with that.
Speaker 1 (04:50):
This is him in the Oval after Caitlyn Collins asked
her a third question regarding the Epstein list.
Speaker 7 (04:56):
If you look at the dj they announced, you know,
they released three median pages. It's like, this is all
they're supposed.
Speaker 10 (05:03):
To be doing.
Speaker 7 (05:04):
And frankly, the DOJ, I think should just say we
have other things to do, because that whole thing has
turned out, I mean other than Bill Clinton and you know,
Bill Gates and lots of people that have there are
a lot of questions about it, but nothing on me.
But it was even sort of better than that because
they found that Jeffrey Epstein and this leasbag writer named
Michael Wolf were conspiring against Donald Trump to lose the election.
(05:28):
So Epstein was conspiring with a writer for me to
lose the election. So right there, you know that I
had nothing to do with this guy.
Speaker 1 (05:39):
So that is true that it did come out in
the documents. But then you have people like Congressman Ted Lou.
I want to play a cut from him.
Speaker 4 (05:47):
Where he just makes stuff up.
Speaker 1 (05:49):
And the reason why I'm saying he's making stuff up
because if what Tedlo says is true, why did Joe
Biden sit on this. They were desperate to knock Donald
Trump out of the presidential race. So the point where
they tried to imprison him for the rest of his life.
One and two Kamala Harris, they looked they would. There
is nothing they didn't try to get her elected. So
(06:11):
this is what Ted lu says is in the new release.
Speaker 11 (06:15):
So why are Republicans so interested in Bill Hillary Clinton
is because they're trying to distract from the fact that
Donald Trump is in the Epstein files thousands and thousands
of times. In those files, there's highly disturbing allegations of
Donald Trump raping children, of Donald Trump threatening to kill children.
(06:39):
So I encourage your press to go look at these allegations.
Speaker 1 (06:43):
So, I mean, that's a bizarre statement to make because
if that were even remotely true the Biden administration, the
Democrats sat on the and they went over it with
hundreds of people. If there was any way to substantiate that,
that would have been done because they tried every think
but a machine gun to stop Donald Trump from becoming
from you know.
Speaker 2 (07:03):
The whole problem that I have with this is that,
you know, first of all, with the Supreme Court ordering
the release of the files, to what purpose for public digestion,
for public knowledge? I mean, maybe so, but I think
the whole point really boils down to will there be
cases prosecuted connected to this? Or will there not be
(07:24):
cases prosecuted connected to this?
Speaker 4 (07:26):
Yea?
Speaker 2 (07:27):
And I mean how long has it been? Six years?
Speaker 4 (07:29):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (07:29):
Six years? It's been for years since his death, now, right,
So you know, Pooper, get off the Can I say that?
Can I say, shit ter get off the pot?
Speaker 7 (07:37):
Right?
Speaker 4 (07:37):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (07:38):
I mean that's really where we are with this. And
the more that it continues to sit there, you know
as well as I, the more it's gonna stink.
Speaker 6 (07:47):
Well.
Speaker 1 (07:47):
Donald Trump keeps saying move on. Yet yes, yes, it
is the mainstream media that keeps.
Speaker 4 (07:52):
Bringing it back. Yes, because and now we have and
in this case, there.
Speaker 1 (07:56):
Was a Supreme Court decision, so it was a rational,
reasonable response to look at the stuff again.
Speaker 2 (08:01):
Right, But don't you think that between in the seven
years that since his death and even beyond when he
was accused, convicted once and then continued under suspicion to
do these.
Speaker 4 (08:13):
Is out there hanging out, don't.
Speaker 2 (08:14):
You think someone might have said hello, Yeah I do?
And so yeah, so I agree, I mean it's time
to or get off the part.
Speaker 1 (08:24):
I think it's time to move on. I think what's
happening and maybe you agree with me, maybe you don't.
But I think that the Democrats in particular, and not
even Democrats, but those who do not like Donald Trump,
are using the Epstein files as a way to deflect
from other catastrophic things that are happening. And in particular,
(08:46):
I think it is true of the Democrats, because the
Democrats have found themselves in a really bad position right
now defending illegal alien murderers and pedophiles. I happen to
agree that the worst of the worst should be being
arrested and deported, but that doesn't mean go after you know,
the mom and dad, who are.
Speaker 2 (09:06):
Law abiding citizens agree with you more.
Speaker 1 (09:08):
But I think the problem is in their zeal to
be against deportation. The Democrats have absorbed the pedophiles and
rapists and murders in that group and don't look to
see the same way the other side doesn't necessarily look
to see who's who they're arresting and deporting. I think
that the Democrats don't do it either. So the problem
(09:30):
is the Republicans are including people who shouldn't be included,
and the Democrats are excluding people that shouldn't be excluded.
And I think that what's happening is because they put
themselves in a bad position in defending criminals overall as
opposed to just the people that should be excluded they have.
They're trying to divert from that now, and so I
(09:52):
think one of the way they're doing it, besides painting
isis fascists, is to also bring issues like the Epstein
files in trying to divert from the horrible position they've
put themselves in.
Speaker 2 (10:06):
Let me throw this curveball at you, and I think
if you look at the Republican administration and who's in
charge of departments such as ICE and the FBI, I
think the buck needs to stop there, and perhaps even
the White House and Senate, where they've confirmed these people
who we all knew were not qualified to be in
(10:26):
these positions. So that's how you get a guy who
is running ICE who is not qualified and is trying
no longer no longer running ICE, right, But that's how
you get those people in those positions. Even Christy Nome's
been reassigned because that's not her area of expertise. Cash
(10:46):
Patel not his area of xts. Dan Bongino realized it
and went back to back out of it.
Speaker 4 (10:51):
Yeah, right, But that issue, I think is on both sides.
Speaker 1 (10:54):
I agree with you, but also on the Democratic side,
you have people like you just heard Ted Lou shooting
their mouth off who have no business ginning up the
immigration issue. And there was a huge example of that
this week with our very own Michelle Woo, Boston mayor,
because a viral video has gone out there it was her,
not this year, it was last year, March of twenty
(11:16):
twenty five five. But this is what she said in
March of twenty twenty five. You've got to be crazy
to say this.
Speaker 6 (11:23):
Every person, every human being, has the legal right to
come to the United States and seek asylum or shelter.
Speaker 1 (11:29):
And really everybody in the face of God's earth has
the right to come here. That is the open policy
and immigration that has created the problem we have now
and the reason why we have we're on this side
of a civil war over immigration and that particular attitude,
and that is what the Democrats have to answer for,
because she's not the only one, but you know, that's
(11:51):
an example of her, and she has not moved off
that position. She still believes that that is the problem.
So and my question is why why Knowing the havoc
and knowing the economic hardship that that puts on a
country and the security issues because you've let in murderers
and rapists and drug dealers. Now, why would you do that?
(12:13):
Is it just to get the vote? Is it just
to support the the the power base? I mean, because
that seems to me to be the only rational reason.
You can't tell me this is humanitarian.
Speaker 2 (12:24):
Well, I mean, I mean, we've spent as a as
a commonwealth, We've spent billions of dollars on this issue.
I don't want to say problem, but it's an issue.
You know, problem seems to connote one side or another.
So it's an issue. And you know, as far as
I am concerned, I think, you know, anybody can legally
(12:45):
attempt to come to the United States, but it really
be up absolutely, it would be up to the people
who are in charge of immigration and the courts to decide,
based on the current laws, whether or not you legally
can get in.
Speaker 4 (13:01):
I so agree with that. So that's exactly that is
the logical rational story.
Speaker 2 (13:06):
Don't understand the uh, the the misstep that you say
the mayor has made with that statement.
Speaker 1 (13:13):
Yeah, she's saying she's not saying you have a right
to apply for citizenship. She's saying you have a right
to be here. Yeah, so that that's completely different, and
that's that.
Speaker 2 (13:21):
Is your you are correct. That is completely different. And
you know a lot of people would say that's splitting hairs.
But when you're talking such a big game of politics, yeah,
you can't. You can't misspeak. I mean, that's just.
Speaker 1 (13:31):
Like Joe Biden during the during his debate before he
ran for president, saying surge, come on in, and they
took him out his word, and they did, and it
created one of the worst immigration issues we've ever had.
Speaker 4 (13:43):
But it's not closed.
Speaker 2 (13:45):
You don't have you didn't have the staff, you didn't
have the right people involved to maintain any control at
the border. And so all of these people, you know,
it's like, like I said, you think of that point, No,
it absolutely it absolutely is. But it's also your job
to protect your family at your home, right and so
when you do that at your home by putting a
special locks on the door, a security system, regardless of
(14:08):
all that, if a criminal or a person who doesn't
have a right to get into your home wants to
get into your home, they're gonna find a way.
Speaker 4 (14:18):
They're gonna find a way. I absolutely agree with you.
Speaker 1 (14:20):
But it's also like saying, you know to your neighbors.
They did this a little bit a couple of years
ago here in Massachusetts. In New York, Adams slaughtered this
briefly until he got his ass kicked, and that was
I'd like people to take in illegal aliens into their home. Really,
have you taken anybody in? Because that's what he was promoting,
and that's that's kind of what I'm hearing from. She
(14:43):
didn't say that. We did not say that, but that's
the mindset. The mindset is also that they they don't
think before they speak. Adams didn't think before speak with
Michelle who didn't And oh my god.
Speaker 4 (14:54):
Did you hear Jerry n Adler this week?
Speaker 2 (14:56):
I did not.
Speaker 1 (14:56):
Okay, So this is another case of digita think before
you speak. This is New York Congressman Jerry Nadler, who
said something that, to be honest with you should get him.
Speaker 4 (15:06):
I'll be honest with you, kicked out of Congress.
Speaker 5 (15:08):
What is really the major problem in this country today
is the fascism in our streets, the attacks on American
citizens by masked hoodlums. If you were attacked by a
masked person, you might think you were being kidnapped. You
be justified in shooting the person about attack yourself.
Speaker 12 (15:28):
But we see people being shot for what for driving
a car? We see people, we see these the ICE
goons break into people's homes without a warrant. We see
them drag out a man, an American citizen, in his underwear,
without even permitting him in the snow, without even permitting
(15:51):
him to get dressed. This is the major problem we
have today, along with the attack in our elections.
Speaker 1 (16:00):
So now they're just said it's okay to shoot ICE
agents said if that they're masked.
Speaker 4 (16:03):
Is basically what he said.
Speaker 1 (16:05):
And here's the problem. He's an elected congressman. So you
have people who are high profile elected saying outrageous things,
and that leads to people like this. This is a
Chicago area nurse. He has an idea how to deal
with ice too.
Speaker 10 (16:21):
Remember how much power nurses have in this country. One
of our own was just murdered in the street. So
we might be able to stop this somehow. Thoughts you
know as the type of ice you nurse, I was.
(16:42):
I was cardiac ice you nurse, and I did a
lot of time, lots of hours holding on a growing
that wouldn't stop bleeding. Let me tell you what that
themoral artery, those veins in the legs can't I can't remember.
It's late in my shift, Okay, I know it. I'm tired. Anyway,
(17:04):
the vasculator in the leg, it really bleeds, bleeds. Well,
someone could bleed out very quickly from that, probably like
a couple of minutes.
Speaker 1 (17:12):
Really, so he's intimate, and you can let ice officers
bleed out to do your part in the fight. And
apparently he's got a flat learning curve because he learned
nothing from the Florida nurses and the Texas nurse who
also suggested injecting ice agents with suckne colin and so forth,
who were fired, and the antesthesiologist who said he wasn't
(17:35):
going to give anesthesia to anybody who was a Republican.
Those people have been fired and two of them have
lost their licenses. This apparently he has no idea that
suggesting that you let an ice agent bleed out from
an injury is of the same Well.
Speaker 2 (17:48):
I mean, you know and before you I mean, see
this is what happens. I mean, unless you have unless
you can look at the problem, the issue from fifty
thousand feet and let's attempt to do that. I mean,
if you are looking at this purely from a I
don't have a dog in this fight situation, I mean
you would look at ice agents that are untrained, pretty
(18:13):
much unsupervised by unqualified people running rampant on streets, namely
Minneapolis right now. But you are also witnessing protesters who
are taking their right to protest beyond bounds. Because when
you and I'm not saying that this should lead to
(18:33):
anyone's death, but when you purposely get in the face
of someone trying to keep the peace and speak and
smack to them, you know that, even though people are
trained to ignore and move on, you've got a job
to do. And so you know, I don't I'm not
(18:55):
condoning what happened in Minnea with the deaths. I'm not contoned.
But but if.
Speaker 1 (19:00):
Ben Parker would say, play stupid games, win stupid prizes,
if you put yourself in harm's way, Yeah, that's that's what's.
Speaker 2 (19:07):
God exactly it. And you know, I mean, you can't
fix stupid, No, just can't fix stupid.
Speaker 1 (19:14):
It's my parents always told me growing up when, especially
when I was in college and a teenager and apt
to do stupid things at that age, and they're like,
you know, if there was a protest or right, they say,
do not go to that. And even after a sporting
but they're like, do not go to that. If it's
after eleven o'clock at night, you know, you may not
go because nothing good happens at that time. And that
lesson was driven home to me when the Red Sox
(19:36):
won the World Series and that little girl in Kemore
Square was killed by a by a rubber bulletet and
my parents like, this is what we were talking about.
She was not doing anybody any harm, but she had
to be a group of part of a mob, and
mobs can make things happen, and that's why you don't go.
Speaker 2 (19:52):
Well, that's why there's the phrase mob mentality.
Speaker 1 (19:55):
Exactly, they take on it. They become a different entity.
I have a friend who had he was very concerned
a friend of his who had was up on criminal charges.
Nicest guy in the world, and he goes, I don't
understand how this happened, as it was in a crowd,
a mob, Because yeah, I said, that's what happened.
Speaker 4 (20:11):
They for some.
Speaker 1 (20:12):
Reason, people will do things that they would never do
on their own if they're in a group of people.
Speaker 2 (20:18):
But that also applies to the thousands of immigration agents
it does that are working.
Speaker 4 (20:23):
It's the exact same thing, right, Yeah, it's a human thing,
and it's.
Speaker 2 (20:26):
It goes into the vortex of negativity when you know,
when one thing happens, it creates a cascade effect and
then it gets up.
Speaker 1 (20:34):
I blame the politicians who've been pandering, them pandering to
their own party. They're pandering to the worst element in
the crowd. That's what's happened.
Speaker 2 (20:41):
There is a lot of that going on. But the
way and I will bite the hand that feeds me.
The way the media handles this. Yeah, Now, because there
are so many outlets that need a unique angle, they
will poke the bear. You know, more often than not,
the bear is going to take a nibble and sometimes
(21:03):
you know, the teeth and claws, right, Sometimes the bear
is not interested and walks away. Most of the time
they're going to say something that you're going to run with.
Speaker 1 (21:11):
There was a really interesting example of that, especially in
regard to broadcast media, and in my opinion, a really
bad example of pandering, and that was. I call him
failed CNN anchor Don Lemon. Some people just call him
Don Lemon. I'm not a fan of Don Lemons because
he seems to me to be a little arrogant and patronizing.
Speaker 4 (21:30):
But he, uh, he.
Speaker 1 (21:32):
Basically got himself arrested because he went in with anti
ice protesters into a church. Now, he tried to pretend
that he was a journalist, but I'll be honest with you.
When he was working for CNN, you may have classified
him as a journalist. But now he's a podcast guy
fighting for for a podcast time, which is, you know,
a very.
Speaker 2 (21:51):
Competitive and you're not supposed to have it.
Speaker 1 (21:53):
Agen he knew where to go, he knew the people involved.
He brought them donuts and coffee from Starbucks. He was
knew exactly what they were doing. He went in with
them into the church. He, according to testimony that was
given to the grand jury that eventually indicted him, he
stopped people from leaving. He was actively involved with what
was going on in that church. And so he's been
(22:16):
indicted for ginning up what happened and for violating people's rights.
Speaker 4 (22:22):
And the Dems would have you believe.
Speaker 1 (22:25):
That holding him to account is a violation of freedom
of the press and freedom of speech are so, says
Senator Schumer actually on the floor of the Senate.
Speaker 13 (22:38):
Last night, federal agents arrested journalist Don Lemon in Los
Angeles after he recently covered protest activities in Minnesota. Once again,
the administration is behaving so differently differently from police states
and authoritarian regimes across history. They've arrested a journalist for
the crime of doing his job. And let's be very clear,
(23:01):
this arrest is not just about one journalist in one incident.
The arrest is a dark message to journalists everywhere. If
you dare criticize this administration, watch your back. That's not
a democracy, that's a police state. And if that is
pure authoritarian bile, democracy will suffer if the government chokes
(23:24):
our civil liberties. Under this administration, the Department of Justice
has all too often become the Department of vengeance. Don
Lemon should be released at once and the frivolous charges
against him dropped.
Speaker 1 (23:38):
Except they're not frivolous, and not everybody with an iPhone
is a journalist, And just because you call yourself a
journalist doesn't make you one. And this is the problem,
and so what the press has been trying to do
is see where was the line that he crossed, because
that's important in this I mean, he didn't cross the
line when he landed in Minneapolis. He didn't cross the
(23:58):
line because he brought them donuts and coffee. That wasn't
you know, It just showed his affinity. It didn't show
he didn't cross the line at that point. Where was
the line cross That is the big issue that's being
debated now.
Speaker 14 (24:08):
So when do you believe that mister Lemon crossed the
line from reporting on what was going on to criminal activity.
Conveniently missing from what you just showed, George is the
appellate court and a judge on the appellate court who said,
just a few days later, there was clearly probable cause
and it wasn't even a close question. So and by
the way, a grand jury, which is what our system
(24:29):
has set up to determine whether probable cause exists, concluded
that there was probable cause. That indictment is now public.
Everybody in this country can pull it up and read
for themselves and see what the grand jury found that
mister Lemon did. I am not going to comment on
the charges specifically because it's not appropriate, but it's interesting
that we talk about the first mimum or right. You
have a right a freedom of religion, which is just
(24:52):
as important as any other right that we have. And George,
I don't know if you've watched the videos or read
the indictment about what it's led that mister Lemon did,
but if anybody in this country thinks that that is
quote independent journalism, I would like to have a conversation
with you.
Speaker 1 (25:08):
And that was George Stephanopflis on ABC, along with the
guy we heard earlier, Todd Blanche who's the Deputy Age.
But interesting thing to me is that then this argument
was taken up over on CNN by Abby Phillips and
along with a New York Post reporter by the name
of Lydia Monaghan, and Abby Phillips refused to believe, even
(25:30):
with the Grand jury indictment that in fact she denied
it on the air, which was a mistake, that Lemon
had crossed any line at all.
Speaker 15 (25:39):
The question is is he a protester or a journalist?
And the indictment obviously suggested that he posted himself at
the main door he prevented people from exiting, but.
Speaker 16 (25:49):
Ultimately it does not say that. The indictment says that
protesters it did that. Other people act that did that.
Speaker 4 (25:58):
And then well it's one more cut. That's really short, because.
Speaker 1 (26:01):
Then Abby Phillips, who apparently hadn't read the indictment.
Speaker 4 (26:04):
No, no, it never said that.
Speaker 1 (26:05):
This is not the first time I've heard these people
deny something happens to Scott Jennings over there all the time,
and you go here it is and they refuse to
even look at it. And if that isn't pandering, I
don't know what is. But this is Lydia Monaghan standing
up for herself.
Speaker 15 (26:20):
I just want to respond because you accuse me of
mischaracterizing the indictment. This is actually a quote from the
indictment that lemon posted himself at the main door of
the church, where he confronted some congregants and physically obstructed
them as they tried to exit, challenging them with facts
about US immigration policy. So that is what the indictment says.
I'm not stating whether I agree with that, but that's
what the indictment says. So look, you know they.
Speaker 16 (26:39):
Also characterized him as intimidating a pastor who he was
calmly interviewing, so I think we also have to the
characterization of him conducting journalism is also something to be questioned.
Speaker 1 (26:51):
Yeah, accept that I saw that interview with the pastor
and he did exactly what the indictment said he did.
Speaker 2 (26:56):
So I will admit that this is one of the
stories that has been under my radar. So what exactly
are the charges against Don Lemon.
Speaker 4 (27:06):
Civil rights chargers.
Speaker 1 (27:08):
It's a violation of civil rights because it's a violation
of the First Amendment, the freedom of religion, and that's
what he did, and he did in fact, and also
I mean I saw the interview that specifically mentioned in
the indictment, and I've read the indictment and what he did,
and I was really surprised because he had talking to
the pastor, and the pastor was like, you know, we
(27:30):
actually was talking to one of the congregants there and
a lovely man who said, I don't necessarily agree with
everybody that's being pulled in, but I don't think you
interfere with law enforcement. You deal with it from the
other end, and you get these people out. You don't
necessarily do. I think there you've got to stop fighting
law enforcement because you're creating dangerous situations, and Don Lemon.
Speaker 4 (27:52):
Started arguing with him, well, how can you how can
you believe that? How can you do?
Speaker 1 (27:56):
And so he wasn't just interviewing getting opinions, he was
inserted himself and he stopped the guy from leaving. And
the guy is finally like, I don't want to talk
to you anymore because you're not being a journalist, You're
being an active.
Speaker 2 (28:07):
That's h And I read an op ed about this
in the New York Times or the Washington Post, God
Rest its soul about about, you know, what was going
on in that church and what he was doing. As
for lack of a better term, a rogue journalist, I mean,
he's an independent journalist. Let's let's call it what it is.
(28:30):
But uh, you know, I see this in my line
of work every day where there you know, almost every
story that we do needs to have some nuance written
into it, right because you know, you're you're, you're, there
are two sides to every story. But to get a headline,
(28:50):
it's it's only one side. And when in my line
of work, which on wb Z is more or less
you know, a headline style of news, you have to
be very careful about it. Oh my god, And I
don't you know, has it happens? Just like everybody says
that mistakes are made every day in every newsroom in
(29:11):
the United States, there are There is in every newsroom
in the United States, whether it's independent, whether it's an organization,
a formal organization, there is, uh, there is bias, for
lack of a better term, just because that's the nature
of the beast and the reason that you need to
have checks and balances that independent journalists do not have
(29:34):
because I'm assuming he doesn't have a newsroom that he
answers to editor, doesn't have any check and balance on
no editor. Yeah, and you know, and and the problem
is with all the cuts that are going on in
the media industry, namely with newspapers in the Washington Post,
that you're stripping away either a lot of the checks
(29:55):
and balances or a lot of the journalists who carry
I might say a nes bias.
Speaker 4 (30:01):
I think that's true. Yeah, I think that's absolutely true.
Speaker 1 (30:03):
And the best compliment that I ever got I was
I was anchoring on WBZ, and I I was using
a different name than I'm more known for talk shows,
and I have a particular name on a talk show
that used but I was using my own name on
WBZ and I got a call in the newsroom after
I got off the air, and this woman.
Speaker 4 (30:24):
Said, are you related to you? Know?
Speaker 10 (30:26):
Are you?
Speaker 4 (30:26):
Are you Sandy's sister?
Speaker 1 (30:27):
Just like you sound just like because you know my
own name Nancy Shack on BZ, But I go by
the name of Sandy. I'm when I when I was
doing talk shows and it was a nickname that was
given to me by so many many years ago. And
are you related to Sandy? And I said, yeah, that's me.
I'm Sandy and I'm just using a different name. And
she's like, I thought you were her sister or something,
and she goes, can I tell you something? I'm like, sure,
(30:49):
I had no idea from your broadcast. What's your political leanings?
And that's the goal, And she goes, I know what
they are because i've heard you on talk and talk radio.
Speaker 4 (30:59):
I had no idea.
Speaker 1 (31:00):
I thought you were a completely different person because I
had no clue.
Speaker 4 (31:03):
And I'm like, thank you.
Speaker 1 (31:04):
I'll tell my boss because that will make him very,
very very happy, because that is the purpose to present
things fairly into make be even handed in what you do.
Speaker 2 (31:12):
Yeah, and you try every day because that's what you're
there to do.
Speaker 4 (31:16):
But it's hard.
Speaker 2 (31:17):
I know. I know every day that there are turns
of phrase that I might.
Speaker 4 (31:21):
Use adjeative that right, be negatively.
Speaker 2 (31:25):
That somebody taken somewhere is going to say, yeah, you
know you're left leaning or you're too conservative on that.
Speaker 1 (31:32):
And then especially in your job too, I know that
you write a lot of your own things. You're very
you're very proactive about writing your own stuff. Not all
anchors are. And so I had a friend of mine
who is an anchor, and she would bitch because you know,
she did not write all her own stuff, and she
would get stuff written by people who had a political
bias that she did not share. And she was always like, uh.
Speaker 2 (31:55):
Yeah. The other thing is you have to pre read
the stuff too, because that's how you catch yourself.
Speaker 4 (31:59):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (32:00):
But it's it's a it's a you know, it's a
slippery slope. And you know, Don Lemon is serving a purpose.
I will said, like him or not, he is serving
a purpose, yes, And you know that op ed uh
described him as crossing that line.
Speaker 4 (32:15):
Yeah, and I believe I believe he did protest rather.
Speaker 1 (32:17):
Than and you know, what if you're a podcaster, that's okay,
go ahead and do it, except you gotta you gotta
take the lumps if you do it, because you are
an activist at that point, you are not a journalist.
Speaker 4 (32:29):
And all right, it's your choice.
Speaker 1 (32:31):
Because you are no longer a journalist, you are, in
fact an independent podcaster. The same rules don't apply to you.
Do what you want, but it also leaves you open.
You can't claim a journalist protection if you're not acting
like a But.
Speaker 2 (32:42):
I see this was where I would say that podcast
or whatever medium it is, it is your obligation to
present the other side.
Speaker 1 (32:50):
I think it's always your obligation unless you put right
up front there in the beginning, this is my personal opinion,
this is my political view.
Speaker 7 (32:57):
That's true.
Speaker 2 (32:57):
But then you then you become you can't cli you
become a columnist exactly.
Speaker 4 (33:02):
You cannot claim to be a journalist anymore. That's what
I'm saying. You go ahead and do that, but you
can't claim.
Speaker 1 (33:07):
To be a journalist if you're doing that, because you know,
now it's just about politics and your activism, and you
have a right to do that, but you can't do
that and be.
Speaker 4 (33:15):
A journalist at the same time. That's what it comes
down to. So we end every week with a truth
or troll.
Speaker 1 (33:20):
This week the truth or troll is because we've just
been talking about him Don Lemon and Don Lemon on
his podcast after he was indicted. Well, I'll let you
listen to it because I want to know is this
is he is this kind of like a troll bravado
or does he really mean what he says in this
particular case. And so normally we do we do a
(33:41):
lot of Donald Trump because he's just a world class troller.
But I really thought that Don Lemon may have risen
to that level too.
Speaker 4 (33:50):
This week.
Speaker 2 (33:51):
I have so many thoughts and what this did was
really open my eyes to a lot. So if you
think that I was outspoken before, this.
Speaker 6 (34:03):
Just wait.
Speaker 4 (34:05):
Sounds a little maniacal to me.
Speaker 1 (34:06):
But so the question is does he really mean to
push the envelope or is this just bravado because he
is scared out of his mind because he just opened
a hornet's nest and they are swarming right at him.
Speaker 2 (34:17):
Probably a little bit of both. But if he has
somebody advising him, that person would be wise to say
learn something from this.
Speaker 1 (34:25):
I think if he has a lawyer, which I'm assuming
he does, it's shut up. That is, that is basically
the best advice a lawyer can give to their clients.
Speaker 2 (34:33):
Shut But it doesn't go very far in your career.
I'm just I'm just saying that somebody has to say,
you got to learn a lesson here, and if you're
not learning the lesson, you're not doing yourself any favors.
Speaker 4 (34:44):
I think that's true.
Speaker 2 (34:45):
I think it was bravado, but I'm exhausted after I
fill in on these ships. By the way.
Speaker 4 (34:51):
I make you think, don't I. Well, thank you everybody.
Speaker 1 (34:54):
We upload a new episode every single Monday, so check
back next week and see what new offerings we have.
You can contact Jeff er I on x at news
Byte three or on Facebook at news Bite Stay well
for the coming week.
Speaker 4 (35:06):
I'm Nancy Shack, I'm Jeff Brown. This is a news
Bite
Don Lemon faces a reckoning, Boston mayor Michelle wou gets
caught pandering, and more people get caught having partied with
Jeffrey Epstein. There are lots of expose this week in
our Did they really just say that clips I'm Nancy.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
Shack, I'm jeff Brown.
Speaker 3 (00:13):
This is news bite.
Speaker 4 (00:27):
Last night.
Speaker 5 (00:27):
The djson a team of federal agents to arrest me
in the middle of the night, and I will not
be silent.
Speaker 6 (00:34):
Every person, every human being, has the legal right to
come to the United States and seek asylum or shelter.
Speaker 7 (00:40):
And Epstein was conspiring with a writer for me to
lose the election. So right there, you know that I
had nothing to do with this guy.
Speaker 4 (00:55):
Parrying with Epstein.
Speaker 1 (00:57):
That seems to be the uh, the theme going around here.
And President Trump says, uh uh.
Speaker 2 (01:04):
All the kids did it right.
Speaker 4 (01:06):
Yeah, yeah. And in fact, there was a deputy A G.
Speaker 1 (01:10):
Todd Blanche on Fox. He basically said, just wanted to
call to everybody's attention that partying with Epstein is actually
not a crime.
Speaker 8 (01:22):
Is there any chance that any of these individuals who
partied with Epstein and engaged in, you know, relations with
minors will be prosecuted?
Speaker 9 (01:33):
Well, chance, I'll never say no, and we will always
investigate any evidence of misconduct. But as you know, it
is not a crime to party with mister Epstein, and
so as horrible as it's not a crime to email
with mister Epstein. And some of these men may have
done horrible things, and if we have evidence that allows
us to prosecute them, you better believe we will. But
(01:54):
it's also the kind of thing that the American people
that need to understand that it isn't a to party
with mister Epstein.
Speaker 1 (02:02):
I would point out to the Deputy Attorney General that
if your name is Andrew Montbotton Windsor, I think it
probably was.
Speaker 2 (02:08):
Yeah, but there's also backup photos and other issues of it.
Speaker 4 (02:12):
But boy, did you see the new photos? I don't
think so, Prince Andrew, I didn't see that.
Speaker 2 (02:17):
You did see that? I mean look, I mean where
there's smoke, there's fire obviously, and there's a huge fire
going on because you know, I think everybody knows that
things were going on with Jeffrey Epstein that shouldn't have
been going on. And the other thing that I will
point out is two things that I will point out
is yes, there will be a fall guy or a
(02:41):
fall person. In addition to Gillan Maxwell, there will be
one fall person. And I would also point out that
whoever is whispering in President Trump's ears should tell him
to keep his lips zipped, because every time he talks
about this is that there's something there, something there there.
(03:02):
I mean, we're at the point where the more he says,
you know, it just proves that I was, Yes, there's
something there, and we all know it, and we all
understand that he's gonna get away with it, as will
most of the rest of the people associated with well
that even John Stewart was listed.
Speaker 1 (03:19):
I know, well, I think, well that's what they're saying.
That's why the AG is saying it's not wasn't legal
to party with him. It it depends on you know,
were you on the lead express or going to the island.
Speaker 2 (03:28):
And it's not no. But you know, when you when
when many people associated say the things that they're saying,
and you know, people just kind of, you know, listen
and talk amongst themselves. I mean, you know that these
people were involved in something they shouldn't have been.
Speaker 4 (03:46):
Known without a doubt.
Speaker 1 (03:47):
But don't you think that one of the reasons why
President Trump keeps mentioning is that he keeps getting asked
about it.
Speaker 4 (03:52):
He's not.
Speaker 1 (03:52):
I mean, that's what's happening over and over and over again.
But you Kelyn Collins was like a dog with.
Speaker 4 (03:57):
A bone in the Oval office.
Speaker 2 (03:58):
I mean, he's oh my, have you of all people
being being a lawyer counsel know that I forget what
I was going to say.
Speaker 4 (04:09):
Okay with Kaitlyn Collins and CNN.
Speaker 2 (04:13):
No, what I was going to say is is the
response is uh, you know to President Trump asked and
answered yeah.
Speaker 4 (04:20):
But he doesn't get away with that. He can't do
as of course.
Speaker 2 (04:22):
He does, come on, he doesn't. He can get away
with anything.
Speaker 1 (04:26):
But here's a problem, like for instance, yesterday with Kaitlyn
Collins from CNN, she asked the same question five different
ways over and until eventually he just went move on.
But he has I think a a a good point.
I mean, there's many in the mainstream media and not everybody,
but there's many in the mainstream meta who are trying
to make this about Donald Trump, and he he just
(04:49):
has had.
Speaker 9 (04:49):
It with that.
Speaker 1 (04:50):
This is him in the Oval after Caitlyn Collins asked
her a third question regarding the Epstein list.
Speaker 7 (04:56):
If you look at the dj they announced, you know,
they released three median pages. It's like, this is all
they're supposed.
Speaker 10 (05:03):
To be doing.
Speaker 7 (05:04):
And frankly, the DOJ, I think should just say we
have other things to do, because that whole thing has
turned out, I mean other than Bill Clinton and you know,
Bill Gates and lots of people that have there are
a lot of questions about it, but nothing on me.
But it was even sort of better than that because
they found that Jeffrey Epstein and this leasbag writer named
Michael Wolf were conspiring against Donald Trump to lose the election.
(05:28):
So Epstein was conspiring with a writer for me to
lose the election. So right there, you know that I
had nothing to do with this guy.
Speaker 1 (05:39):
So that is true that it did come out in
the documents. But then you have people like Congressman Ted Lou.
I want to play a cut from him.
Speaker 4 (05:47):
Where he just makes stuff up.
Speaker 1 (05:49):
And the reason why I'm saying he's making stuff up
because if what Tedlo says is true, why did Joe
Biden sit on this. They were desperate to knock Donald
Trump out of the presidential race. So the point where
they tried to imprison him for the rest of his life.
One and two Kamala Harris, they looked they would. There
is nothing they didn't try to get her elected. So
(06:11):
this is what Ted lu says is in the new release.
Speaker 11 (06:15):
So why are Republicans so interested in Bill Hillary Clinton
is because they're trying to distract from the fact that
Donald Trump is in the Epstein files thousands and thousands
of times. In those files, there's highly disturbing allegations of
Donald Trump raping children, of Donald Trump threatening to kill children.
(06:39):
So I encourage your press to go look at these allegations.
Speaker 1 (06:43):
So, I mean, that's a bizarre statement to make because
if that were even remotely true the Biden administration, the
Democrats sat on the and they went over it with
hundreds of people. If there was any way to substantiate that,
that would have been done because they tried every think
but a machine gun to stop Donald Trump from becoming
from you know.
Speaker 2 (07:03):
The whole problem that I have with this is that,
you know, first of all, with the Supreme Court ordering
the release of the files, to what purpose for public digestion,
for public knowledge? I mean, maybe so, but I think
the whole point really boils down to will there be
cases prosecuted connected to this? Or will there not be
(07:24):
cases prosecuted connected to this?
Speaker 4 (07:26):
Yea?
Speaker 2 (07:27):
And I mean how long has it been? Six years?
Speaker 4 (07:29):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (07:29):
Six years? It's been for years since his death, now, right,
So you know, Pooper, get off the Can I say that?
Can I say, shit ter get off the pot?
Speaker 7 (07:37):
Right?
Speaker 4 (07:37):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (07:38):
I mean that's really where we are with this. And
the more that it continues to sit there, you know
as well as I, the more it's gonna stink.
Speaker 6 (07:47):
Well.
Speaker 1 (07:47):
Donald Trump keeps saying move on. Yet yes, yes, it
is the mainstream media that keeps.
Speaker 4 (07:52):
Bringing it back. Yes, because and now we have and
in this case, there.
Speaker 1 (07:56):
Was a Supreme Court decision, so it was a rational,
reasonable response to look at the stuff again.
Speaker 2 (08:01):
Right, But don't you think that between in the seven
years that since his death and even beyond when he
was accused, convicted once and then continued under suspicion to
do these.
Speaker 4 (08:13):
Is out there hanging out, don't.
Speaker 2 (08:14):
You think someone might have said hello, Yeah I do?
And so yeah, so I agree, I mean it's time
to or get off the part.
Speaker 1 (08:24):
I think it's time to move on. I think what's
happening and maybe you agree with me, maybe you don't.
But I think that the Democrats in particular, and not
even Democrats, but those who do not like Donald Trump,
are using the Epstein files as a way to deflect
from other catastrophic things that are happening. And in particular,
(08:46):
I think it is true of the Democrats, because the
Democrats have found themselves in a really bad position right
now defending illegal alien murderers and pedophiles. I happen to
agree that the worst of the worst should be being
arrested and deported, but that doesn't mean go after you know,
the mom and dad, who are.
Speaker 2 (09:06):
Law abiding citizens agree with you more.
Speaker 1 (09:08):
But I think the problem is in their zeal to
be against deportation. The Democrats have absorbed the pedophiles and
rapists and murders in that group and don't look to
see the same way the other side doesn't necessarily look
to see who's who they're arresting and deporting. I think
that the Democrats don't do it either. So the problem
(09:30):
is the Republicans are including people who shouldn't be included,
and the Democrats are excluding people that shouldn't be excluded.
And I think that what's happening is because they put
themselves in a bad position in defending criminals overall as
opposed to just the people that should be excluded they have.
They're trying to divert from that now, and so I
(09:52):
think one of the way they're doing it, besides painting
isis fascists, is to also bring issues like the Epstein
files in trying to divert from the horrible position they've
put themselves in.
Speaker 2 (10:06):
Let me throw this curveball at you, and I think
if you look at the Republican administration and who's in
charge of departments such as ICE and the FBI, I
think the buck needs to stop there, and perhaps even
the White House and Senate, where they've confirmed these people
who we all knew were not qualified to be in
(10:26):
these positions. So that's how you get a guy who
is running ICE who is not qualified and is trying
no longer no longer running ICE, right, But that's how
you get those people in those positions. Even Christy Nome's
been reassigned because that's not her area of expertise. Cash
(10:46):
Patel not his area of xts. Dan Bongino realized it
and went back to back out of it.
Speaker 4 (10:51):
Yeah, right, But that issue, I think is on both sides.
Speaker 1 (10:54):
I agree with you, but also on the Democratic side,
you have people like you just heard Ted Lou shooting
their mouth off who have no business ginning up the
immigration issue. And there was a huge example of that
this week with our very own Michelle Woo, Boston mayor,
because a viral video has gone out there it was her,
not this year, it was last year, March of twenty
(11:16):
twenty five five. But this is what she said in
March of twenty twenty five. You've got to be crazy
to say this.
Speaker 6 (11:23):
Every person, every human being, has the legal right to
come to the United States and seek asylum or shelter.
Speaker 1 (11:29):
And really everybody in the face of God's earth has
the right to come here. That is the open policy
and immigration that has created the problem we have now
and the reason why we have we're on this side
of a civil war over immigration and that particular attitude,
and that is what the Democrats have to answer for,
because she's not the only one, but you know, that's
(11:51):
an example of her, and she has not moved off
that position. She still believes that that is the problem.
So and my question is why why Knowing the havoc
and knowing the economic hardship that that puts on a
country and the security issues because you've let in murderers
and rapists and drug dealers. Now, why would you do that?
(12:13):
Is it just to get the vote? Is it just
to support the the the power base? I mean, because
that seems to me to be the only rational reason.
You can't tell me this is humanitarian.
Speaker 2 (12:24):
Well, I mean, I mean, we've spent as a as
a commonwealth, We've spent billions of dollars on this issue.
I don't want to say problem, but it's an issue.
You know, problem seems to connote one side or another.
So it's an issue. And you know, as far as
I am concerned, I think, you know, anybody can legally
(12:45):
attempt to come to the United States, but it really
be up absolutely, it would be up to the people
who are in charge of immigration and the courts to decide,
based on the current laws, whether or not you legally
can get in.
Speaker 4 (13:01):
I so agree with that. So that's exactly that is
the logical rational story.
Speaker 2 (13:06):
Don't understand the uh, the the misstep that you say
the mayor has made with that statement.
Speaker 1 (13:13):
Yeah, she's saying she's not saying you have a right
to apply for citizenship. She's saying you have a right
to be here. Yeah, so that that's completely different, and
that's that.
Speaker 2 (13:21):
Is your you are correct. That is completely different. And
you know a lot of people would say that's splitting hairs.
But when you're talking such a big game of politics, yeah,
you can't. You can't misspeak. I mean, that's just.
Speaker 1 (13:31):
Like Joe Biden during the during his debate before he
ran for president, saying surge, come on in, and they
took him out his word, and they did, and it
created one of the worst immigration issues we've ever had.
Speaker 4 (13:43):
But it's not closed.
Speaker 2 (13:45):
You don't have you didn't have the staff, you didn't
have the right people involved to maintain any control at
the border. And so all of these people, you know,
it's like, like I said, you think of that point, No,
it absolutely it absolutely is. But it's also your job
to protect your family at your home, right and so
when you do that at your home by putting a
special locks on the door, a security system, regardless of
(14:08):
all that, if a criminal or a person who doesn't
have a right to get into your home wants to
get into your home, they're gonna find a way.
Speaker 4 (14:18):
They're gonna find a way. I absolutely agree with you.
Speaker 1 (14:20):
But it's also like saying, you know to your neighbors.
They did this a little bit a couple of years
ago here in Massachusetts. In New York, Adams slaughtered this
briefly until he got his ass kicked, and that was
I'd like people to take in illegal aliens into their home. Really,
have you taken anybody in? Because that's what he was promoting,
and that's that's kind of what I'm hearing from. She
(14:43):
didn't say that. We did not say that, but that's
the mindset. The mindset is also that they they don't
think before they speak. Adams didn't think before speak with
Michelle who didn't And oh my god.
Speaker 4 (14:54):
Did you hear Jerry n Adler this week?
Speaker 2 (14:56):
I did not.
Speaker 1 (14:56):
Okay, So this is another case of digita think before
you speak. This is New York Congressman Jerry Nadler, who
said something that, to be honest with you should get him.
Speaker 4 (15:06):
I'll be honest with you, kicked out of Congress.
Speaker 5 (15:08):
What is really the major problem in this country today
is the fascism in our streets, the attacks on American
citizens by masked hoodlums. If you were attacked by a
masked person, you might think you were being kidnapped. You
be justified in shooting the person about attack yourself.
Speaker 12 (15:28):
But we see people being shot for what for driving
a car? We see people, we see these the ICE
goons break into people's homes without a warrant. We see
them drag out a man, an American citizen, in his underwear,
without even permitting him in the snow, without even permitting
(15:51):
him to get dressed. This is the major problem we
have today, along with the attack in our elections.
Speaker 1 (16:00):
So now they're just said it's okay to shoot ICE
agents said if that they're masked.
Speaker 4 (16:03):
Is basically what he said.
Speaker 1 (16:05):
And here's the problem. He's an elected congressman. So you
have people who are high profile elected saying outrageous things,
and that leads to people like this. This is a
Chicago area nurse. He has an idea how to deal
with ice too.
Speaker 10 (16:21):
Remember how much power nurses have in this country. One
of our own was just murdered in the street. So
we might be able to stop this somehow. Thoughts you
know as the type of ice you nurse, I was.
(16:42):
I was cardiac ice you nurse, and I did a
lot of time, lots of hours holding on a growing
that wouldn't stop bleeding. Let me tell you what that
themoral artery, those veins in the legs can't I can't remember.
It's late in my shift, Okay, I know it. I'm tired. Anyway,
(17:04):
the vasculator in the leg, it really bleeds, bleeds. Well,
someone could bleed out very quickly from that, probably like
a couple of minutes.
Speaker 1 (17:12):
Really, so he's intimate, and you can let ice officers
bleed out to do your part in the fight. And
apparently he's got a flat learning curve because he learned
nothing from the Florida nurses and the Texas nurse who
also suggested injecting ice agents with suckne colin and so forth,
who were fired, and the antesthesiologist who said he wasn't
(17:35):
going to give anesthesia to anybody who was a Republican.
Those people have been fired and two of them have
lost their licenses. This apparently he has no idea that
suggesting that you let an ice agent bleed out from
an injury is of the same Well.
Speaker 2 (17:48):
I mean, you know and before you I mean, see
this is what happens. I mean, unless you have unless
you can look at the problem, the issue from fifty
thousand feet and let's attempt to do that. I mean,
if you are looking at this purely from a I
don't have a dog in this fight situation, I mean
you would look at ice agents that are untrained, pretty
(18:13):
much unsupervised by unqualified people running rampant on streets, namely
Minneapolis right now. But you are also witnessing protesters who
are taking their right to protest beyond bounds. Because when
you and I'm not saying that this should lead to
(18:33):
anyone's death, but when you purposely get in the face
of someone trying to keep the peace and speak and
smack to them, you know that, even though people are
trained to ignore and move on, you've got a job
to do. And so you know, I don't I'm not
(18:55):
condoning what happened in Minnea with the deaths. I'm not contoned.
But but if.
Speaker 1 (19:00):
Ben Parker would say, play stupid games, win stupid prizes,
if you put yourself in harm's way, Yeah, that's that's what's.
Speaker 2 (19:07):
God exactly it. And you know, I mean, you can't
fix stupid, No, just can't fix stupid.
Speaker 1 (19:14):
It's my parents always told me growing up when, especially
when I was in college and a teenager and apt
to do stupid things at that age, and they're like,
you know, if there was a protest or right, they say,
do not go to that. And even after a sporting
but they're like, do not go to that. If it's
after eleven o'clock at night, you know, you may not
go because nothing good happens at that time. And that
lesson was driven home to me when the Red Sox
(19:36):
won the World Series and that little girl in Kemore
Square was killed by a by a rubber bulletet and
my parents like, this is what we were talking about.
She was not doing anybody any harm, but she had
to be a group of part of a mob, and
mobs can make things happen, and that's why you don't go.
Speaker 2 (19:52):
Well, that's why there's the phrase mob mentality.
Speaker 1 (19:55):
Exactly, they take on it. They become a different entity.
I have a friend who had he was very concerned
a friend of his who had was up on criminal charges.
Nicest guy in the world, and he goes, I don't
understand how this happened, as it was in a crowd,
a mob, Because yeah, I said, that's what happened.
Speaker 4 (20:11):
They for some.
Speaker 1 (20:12):
Reason, people will do things that they would never do
on their own if they're in a group of people.
Speaker 2 (20:18):
But that also applies to the thousands of immigration agents
it does that are working.
Speaker 4 (20:23):
It's the exact same thing, right, Yeah, it's a human thing,
and it's.
Speaker 2 (20:26):
It goes into the vortex of negativity when you know,
when one thing happens, it creates a cascade effect and
then it gets up.
Speaker 1 (20:34):
I blame the politicians who've been pandering, them pandering to
their own party. They're pandering to the worst element in
the crowd. That's what's happened.
Speaker 2 (20:41):
There is a lot of that going on. But the
way and I will bite the hand that feeds me.
The way the media handles this. Yeah, Now, because there
are so many outlets that need a unique angle, they
will poke the bear. You know, more often than not,
the bear is going to take a nibble and sometimes
(21:03):
you know, the teeth and claws, right, Sometimes the bear
is not interested and walks away. Most of the time
they're going to say something that you're going to run with.
Speaker 1 (21:11):
There was a really interesting example of that, especially in
regard to broadcast media, and in my opinion, a really
bad example of pandering, and that was. I call him
failed CNN anchor Don Lemon. Some people just call him
Don Lemon. I'm not a fan of Don Lemons because
he seems to me to be a little arrogant and patronizing.
Speaker 4 (21:30):
But he, uh, he.
Speaker 1 (21:32):
Basically got himself arrested because he went in with anti
ice protesters into a church. Now, he tried to pretend
that he was a journalist, but I'll be honest with you.
When he was working for CNN, you may have classified
him as a journalist. But now he's a podcast guy
fighting for for a podcast time, which is, you know,
a very.
Speaker 2 (21:51):
Competitive and you're not supposed to have it.
Speaker 1 (21:53):
Agen he knew where to go, he knew the people involved.
He brought them donuts and coffee from Starbucks. He was
knew exactly what they were doing. He went in with
them into the church. He, according to testimony that was
given to the grand jury that eventually indicted him, he
stopped people from leaving. He was actively involved with what
was going on in that church. And so he's been
(22:16):
indicted for ginning up what happened and for violating people's rights.
Speaker 4 (22:22):
And the Dems would have you believe.
Speaker 1 (22:25):
That holding him to account is a violation of freedom
of the press and freedom of speech are so, says
Senator Schumer actually on the floor of the Senate.
Speaker 13 (22:38):
Last night, federal agents arrested journalist Don Lemon in Los
Angeles after he recently covered protest activities in Minnesota. Once again,
the administration is behaving so differently differently from police states
and authoritarian regimes across history. They've arrested a journalist for
the crime of doing his job. And let's be very clear,
(23:01):
this arrest is not just about one journalist in one incident.
The arrest is a dark message to journalists everywhere. If
you dare criticize this administration, watch your back. That's not
a democracy, that's a police state. And if that is
pure authoritarian bile, democracy will suffer if the government chokes
(23:24):
our civil liberties. Under this administration, the Department of Justice
has all too often become the Department of vengeance. Don
Lemon should be released at once and the frivolous charges
against him dropped.
Speaker 1 (23:38):
Except they're not frivolous, and not everybody with an iPhone
is a journalist, And just because you call yourself a
journalist doesn't make you one. And this is the problem,
and so what the press has been trying to do
is see where was the line that he crossed, because
that's important in this I mean, he didn't cross the
line when he landed in Minneapolis. He didn't cross the
(23:58):
line because he brought them donuts and coffee. That wasn't
you know, It just showed his affinity. It didn't show
he didn't cross the line at that point. Where was
the line cross That is the big issue that's being
debated now.
Speaker 14 (24:08):
So when do you believe that mister Lemon crossed the
line from reporting on what was going on to criminal activity.
Conveniently missing from what you just showed, George is the
appellate court and a judge on the appellate court who said,
just a few days later, there was clearly probable cause
and it wasn't even a close question. So and by
the way, a grand jury, which is what our system
(24:29):
has set up to determine whether probable cause exists, concluded
that there was probable cause. That indictment is now public.
Everybody in this country can pull it up and read
for themselves and see what the grand jury found that
mister Lemon did. I am not going to comment on
the charges specifically because it's not appropriate, but it's interesting
that we talk about the first mimum or right. You
have a right a freedom of religion, which is just
(24:52):
as important as any other right that we have. And George,
I don't know if you've watched the videos or read
the indictment about what it's led that mister Lemon did,
but if anybody in this country thinks that that is
quote independent journalism, I would like to have a conversation
with you.
Speaker 1 (25:08):
And that was George Stephanopflis on ABC, along with the
guy we heard earlier, Todd Blanche who's the Deputy Age.
But interesting thing to me is that then this argument
was taken up over on CNN by Abby Phillips and
along with a New York Post reporter by the name
of Lydia Monaghan, and Abby Phillips refused to believe, even
(25:30):
with the Grand jury indictment that in fact she denied
it on the air, which was a mistake, that Lemon
had crossed any line at all.
Speaker 15 (25:39):
The question is is he a protester or a journalist?
And the indictment obviously suggested that he posted himself at
the main door he prevented people from exiting, but.
Speaker 16 (25:49):
Ultimately it does not say that. The indictment says that
protesters it did that. Other people act that did that.
Speaker 4 (25:58):
And then well it's one more cut. That's really short, because.
Speaker 1 (26:01):
Then Abby Phillips, who apparently hadn't read the indictment.
Speaker 4 (26:04):
No, no, it never said that.
Speaker 1 (26:05):
This is not the first time I've heard these people
deny something happens to Scott Jennings over there all the time,
and you go here it is and they refuse to
even look at it. And if that isn't pandering, I
don't know what is. But this is Lydia Monaghan standing
up for herself.
Speaker 15 (26:20):
I just want to respond because you accuse me of
mischaracterizing the indictment. This is actually a quote from the
indictment that lemon posted himself at the main door of
the church, where he confronted some congregants and physically obstructed
them as they tried to exit, challenging them with facts
about US immigration policy. So that is what the indictment says.
I'm not stating whether I agree with that, but that's
what the indictment says. So look, you know they.
Speaker 16 (26:39):
Also characterized him as intimidating a pastor who he was
calmly interviewing, so I think we also have to the
characterization of him conducting journalism is also something to be questioned.
Speaker 1 (26:51):
Yeah, accept that I saw that interview with the pastor
and he did exactly what the indictment said he did.
Speaker 2 (26:56):
So I will admit that this is one of the
stories that has been under my radar. So what exactly
are the charges against Don Lemon.
Speaker 4 (27:06):
Civil rights chargers.
Speaker 1 (27:08):
It's a violation of civil rights because it's a violation
of the First Amendment, the freedom of religion, and that's
what he did, and he did in fact, and also
I mean I saw the interview that specifically mentioned in
the indictment, and I've read the indictment and what he did,
and I was really surprised because he had talking to
the pastor, and the pastor was like, you know, we
(27:30):
actually was talking to one of the congregants there and
a lovely man who said, I don't necessarily agree with
everybody that's being pulled in, but I don't think you
interfere with law enforcement. You deal with it from the
other end, and you get these people out. You don't
necessarily do. I think there you've got to stop fighting
law enforcement because you're creating dangerous situations, and Don Lemon.
Speaker 4 (27:52):
Started arguing with him, well, how can you how can
you believe that? How can you do?
Speaker 1 (27:56):
And so he wasn't just interviewing getting opinions, he was
inserted himself and he stopped the guy from leaving. And
the guy is finally like, I don't want to talk
to you anymore because you're not being a journalist, You're
being an active.
Speaker 2 (28:07):
That's h And I read an op ed about this
in the New York Times or the Washington Post, God
Rest its soul about about, you know, what was going
on in that church and what he was doing. As
for lack of a better term, a rogue journalist, I mean,
he's an independent journalist. Let's let's call it what it is.
(28:30):
But uh, you know, I see this in my line
of work every day where there you know, almost every
story that we do needs to have some nuance written
into it, right because you know, you're you're, you're, there
are two sides to every story. But to get a headline,
(28:50):
it's it's only one side. And when in my line
of work, which on wb Z is more or less
you know, a headline style of news, you have to
be very careful about it. Oh my god, And I
don't you know, has it happens? Just like everybody says
that mistakes are made every day in every newsroom in
(29:11):
the United States, there are There is in every newsroom
in the United States, whether it's independent, whether it's an organization,
a formal organization, there is, uh, there is bias, for
lack of a better term, just because that's the nature
of the beast and the reason that you need to
have checks and balances that independent journalists do not have
(29:34):
because I'm assuming he doesn't have a newsroom that he
answers to editor, doesn't have any check and balance on
no editor. Yeah, and you know, and and the problem
is with all the cuts that are going on in
the media industry, namely with newspapers in the Washington Post,
that you're stripping away either a lot of the checks
(29:55):
and balances or a lot of the journalists who carry
I might say a nes bias.
Speaker 4 (30:01):
I think that's true. Yeah, I think that's absolutely true.
Speaker 1 (30:03):
And the best compliment that I ever got I was
I was anchoring on WBZ, and I I was using
a different name than I'm more known for talk shows,
and I have a particular name on a talk show
that used but I was using my own name on
WBZ and I got a call in the newsroom after
I got off the air, and this woman.
Speaker 4 (30:24):
Said, are you related to you? Know?
Speaker 10 (30:26):
Are you?
Speaker 4 (30:26):
Are you Sandy's sister?
Speaker 1 (30:27):
Just like you sound just like because you know my
own name Nancy Shack on BZ, But I go by
the name of Sandy. I'm when I when I was
doing talk shows and it was a nickname that was
given to me by so many many years ago. And
are you related to Sandy? And I said, yeah, that's me.
I'm Sandy and I'm just using a different name. And
she's like, I thought you were her sister or something,
and she goes, can I tell you something? I'm like, sure,
(30:49):
I had no idea from your broadcast. What's your political leanings?
And that's the goal, And she goes, I know what
they are because i've heard you on talk and talk radio.
Speaker 4 (30:59):
I had no idea.
Speaker 1 (31:00):
I thought you were a completely different person because I
had no clue.
Speaker 4 (31:03):
And I'm like, thank you.
Speaker 1 (31:04):
I'll tell my boss because that will make him very,
very very happy, because that is the purpose to present
things fairly into make be even handed in what you do.
Speaker 2 (31:12):
Yeah, and you try every day because that's what you're
there to do.
Speaker 4 (31:16):
But it's hard.
Speaker 2 (31:17):
I know. I know every day that there are turns
of phrase that I might.
Speaker 4 (31:21):
Use adjeative that right, be negatively.
Speaker 2 (31:25):
That somebody taken somewhere is going to say, yeah, you
know you're left leaning or you're too conservative on that.
Speaker 1 (31:32):
And then especially in your job too, I know that
you write a lot of your own things. You're very
you're very proactive about writing your own stuff. Not all
anchors are. And so I had a friend of mine
who is an anchor, and she would bitch because you know,
she did not write all her own stuff, and she
would get stuff written by people who had a political
bias that she did not share. And she was always like, uh.
Speaker 2 (31:55):
Yeah. The other thing is you have to pre read
the stuff too, because that's how you catch yourself.
Speaker 4 (31:59):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (32:00):
But it's it's a it's a you know, it's a
slippery slope. And you know, Don Lemon is serving a purpose.
I will said, like him or not, he is serving
a purpose, yes, And you know that op ed uh
described him as crossing that line.
Speaker 4 (32:15):
Yeah, and I believe I believe he did protest rather.
Speaker 1 (32:17):
Than and you know, what if you're a podcaster, that's okay,
go ahead and do it, except you gotta you gotta
take the lumps if you do it, because you are
an activist at that point, you are not a journalist.
Speaker 4 (32:29):
And all right, it's your choice.
Speaker 1 (32:31):
Because you are no longer a journalist, you are, in
fact an independent podcaster. The same rules don't apply to you.
Do what you want, but it also leaves you open.
You can't claim a journalist protection if you're not acting
like a But.
Speaker 2 (32:42):
I see this was where I would say that podcast
or whatever medium it is, it is your obligation to
present the other side.
Speaker 1 (32:50):
I think it's always your obligation unless you put right
up front there in the beginning, this is my personal opinion,
this is my political view.
Speaker 7 (32:57):
That's true.
Speaker 2 (32:57):
But then you then you become you can't cli you
become a columnist exactly.
Speaker 4 (33:02):
You cannot claim to be a journalist anymore. That's what
I'm saying. You go ahead and do that, but you
can't claim.
Speaker 1 (33:07):
To be a journalist if you're doing that, because you know,
now it's just about politics and your activism, and you
have a right to do that, but you can't do
that and be.
Speaker 4 (33:15):
A journalist at the same time. That's what it comes
down to. So we end every week with a truth
or troll.
Speaker 1 (33:20):
This week the truth or troll is because we've just
been talking about him Don Lemon and Don Lemon on
his podcast after he was indicted. Well, I'll let you
listen to it because I want to know is this
is he is this kind of like a troll bravado
or does he really mean what he says in this
particular case. And so normally we do we do a
(33:41):
lot of Donald Trump because he's just a world class troller.
But I really thought that Don Lemon may have risen
to that level too.
Speaker 4 (33:50):
This week.
Speaker 2 (33:51):
I have so many thoughts and what this did was
really open my eyes to a lot. So if you
think that I was outspoken before, this.
Speaker 6 (34:03):
Just wait.
Speaker 4 (34:05):
Sounds a little maniacal to me.
Speaker 1 (34:06):
But so the question is does he really mean to
push the envelope or is this just bravado because he
is scared out of his mind because he just opened
a hornet's nest and they are swarming right at him.
Speaker 2 (34:17):
Probably a little bit of both. But if he has
somebody advising him, that person would be wise to say
learn something from this.
Speaker 1 (34:25):
I think if he has a lawyer, which I'm assuming
he does, it's shut up. That is, that is basically
the best advice a lawyer can give to their clients.
Speaker 2 (34:33):
Shut But it doesn't go very far in your career.
I'm just I'm just saying that somebody has to say,
you got to learn a lesson here, and if you're
not learning the lesson, you're not doing yourself any favors.
Speaker 4 (34:44):
I think that's true.
Speaker 2 (34:45):
I think it was bravado, but I'm exhausted after I
fill in on these ships. By the way.
Speaker 4 (34:51):
I make you think, don't I. Well, thank you everybody.
Speaker 1 (34:54):
We upload a new episode every single Monday, so check
back next week and see what new offerings we have.
You can contact Jeff er I on x at news
Byte three or on Facebook at news Bite Stay well
for the coming week.
Speaker 4 (35:06):
I'm Nancy Shack, I'm Jeff Brown. This is a news
Bite
Popular 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.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by Audiochuck Media Company.