How Democrats Stole John Duarte's Congressional Seat

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
It's a rigged election, it's a stolen election. Here I
am John Girardi on the air attacking the very foundations
of democracy itself by calling into question this election. I
am talking, of course, about the John Duarte Adam Gray race.

(00:22):
John Duarte is the incumbent Republican in his House seat
that covers kind of the west side of the valley
up north, approaching towards Modesto. Adam Gray was a member
of the California State Legislature who is challenging Duarte for
this seat second year in a row. It's a very
tight race, and it looks like as of now Adam

(00:45):
Gray is very narrowly ahead of John Duarte, winning by
a couple of votes, winning by fewer than a thousand votes.
I think it's in kind of two hundred and three
hundred ballpark. Now, why do I say this is a
rigged election? Why do I say this is a stolen election.
It's rigged in several ways where basically I'm not saying

(01:12):
anyone's committed voter fraud that I know about, and that
is actually overturnable in court. What I think is that
the whole setup of how California does elections, and yes

(01:32):
to confirm Adam Gray is winning by less than two
hundred votes. I think the whole setup of how California
does elections runs contrary to the whole tenor in spirit
of American election practice and law. I think we are

(01:56):
set up in a way that inherently is going to
lead to eyebrow raised outcomes. It's set up in a
way where inherently Democrats have given themselves strategic advantages to
pull out victories that they would otherwise not get in

(02:17):
a close, disputed election. The combination of weird California election
law plus the democrats superior political machinery within the state
of California has stolen a House seat away from Republicans
and given it to Democrats. If our state law governing

(02:39):
elections was like that of most other states in the Union,
John Duarte would have won this race. So let me
explain the reasons for this. First, let's start with Jerry
pretending that we're not Jerrymans when really we are. Let's

(03:03):
start with how the district lines were drawn. Now, some
of this is not necessarily California specific, although there's a
lot of California stuff at play here. California has its
redistricting done for it by an allegedly non partisan redistricting commission,

(03:29):
Statewide Redistricting Commission. This is another wonderful legacy left to
us by the worst Republican governor in history, Arnold Schwarzenegger.
So Arnold what Arnold didn't like. Arnold didn't like the
fact that there was so much botherisanship in California. Arnold

(03:52):
didn't like the fact that there was a lot of
division within the state legislature when he was governor. He
thought there were too many extreme conservatives and too many
extreme liberals, and he proposed, because he was a moderate,
I guess that there should be more moderates elected to politics,
and we should change sort of the whole fundamental structure

(04:14):
of various aspects of how we elect people in order
to get more moderates in office, which is kind of
a who died and made you pope? Like, why do you,
Arnold Schwarzenegger, get to determine the kinds of people that
the people of California vote for. Regardless. The two main

(04:35):
mechanisms he employed for trying to ensure that more moderate
people got elected were the jungle primary, where basically it's
a primary where instead of a Republican primary over here
where the Republicans pick their candidate, and a Democrat primary
over there where the Democrats pick their candidate, and the
Green Party primary and the Libertarian Party primary, et cetera.

(04:59):
All the candidates who want to run for any given
seat House representatives, state Assembly, state senate, governor, senator, etc.
All of the candidates are in one big pool together.
And whoever the top two vote getters are in the

(05:19):
primary election, which is held in March, those two will
square off against each other in the general election in November,
regardless of party. This has not in any way resulted
in on Old's favored outcome of more moderate politicians. It

(05:41):
just hasn't. The left in California is far more left.
The right seems actually more solidly right than it was
back in the old days. Basically, all the Republicans just
kind of gather around one person, all the Democrats kind
of coalesced around another person, sometimes though in different districts.
What happens is if there are too many Democrats or

(06:02):
too many Republicans, either the Republicans or the Democrats are
completely shut out, or you have some stupid math conundrum
where you know it's a sixty to forty Republican advantage seat.
Four Republicans run for the seat and only two Democrats
run for the seat. Each of the Republicans gets fifteen
percent of the vote, two the Democrats each get twenty
percent of the vote. All of a sudden, this Republican

(06:24):
leaning seat is having to choose between two Democrats to
represent it for the state Senate. That actually happened in
twenty twenty two. So the jungle primary has not really
resulted though in more moderate candidates, and if anything, it
is just made It's led to fewer options, more people

(06:47):
being kind of totally shut out from their option in
the general election. It hasn't really improved anything in any way,
shape or form. But the other big thing Arnold did
was the non Partisan Redistricting Commission. Now, the redistricting the

(07:08):
role of drawing new district lines for congressional seats and
for the various state Assembly and state Senate seats. That
job in most states, and historically in America, that's job
has always been given to the state legislatures. So in

(07:32):
most states, the state legislature every ten years, following the census,
every ten years, we have a census here in America,
so we had one in twenty twenty ten and in
twenty twenty. Following the census, the state legislature gets together
and they draw new maps, and it's governed by the
political process and is largely not subject to judicial review

(07:57):
or oversight. Historically, that has been the case now at
various times and places in history, African Americans in the
South in particular, have been disadvantaged by redistricting, where basically
an African American community has its political power decimated by
various kinds of redistricting shenanigans where maybe you have one

(08:23):
black neighborhood and it's all of a sudden, it's sort
of split up, like into slices of pizza, where this
one African American neighborhood becomes apart. Little bits of this
one small area become a part of you know, five
different congressional districts, and in none of those five congressional

(08:44):
districts do African Americans really have any voting power or
say or maybe all of the African Americans are shoved
into one district, leading them to have power just in
this one district, but no power in any of the others.
Stuff like that happened to African Americans all the time.
In fairness, though, stuff like that would happen to groups

(09:05):
of people based on their political affiliations. Also, in a
Democrat controlled state, where the Democrats state legislatures drawing the
redistricting lines, Republican neighborhoods or cities or areas would be
split into a million pieces like slices of pizza, or
shoved into one district so that Democrats could have an advantage.

(09:27):
And that's a totally legitimate thing. California. Now, so California thought, oh,
we can solve the problem of unfair jerry mandered districts
with a non partisan redistricting commission. Don't have the state
legislature do it, where these politicians trying to make political deals.

(09:49):
No no, no, no no. Let's have a non partisan
redistricting commission do it. And the idea being well, there's
also the practice that happens in redistricting called jerrymandering, where
people will draw a district for a certain congressional or

(10:10):
state legislative seat that is very bizarrely shaped, that is
not really representing any kind of natural region of the state,
some natural kind of community. Instead it's this very bizarrely
drawn thing that's connecting kind of disparate communities, but it's
done so in a way to advantage one party or another.

(10:35):
That's called a jerry mander. It was named after some
politician from Massachusetts. I think his name was Jerry and
the Massachusetts legislature created a seat that benefited him that
looked like a salamander kind of, and so people called
it jerry mandering, and that's how the term entered the
American lexicon. So the idea was, all right, we want
to ensure that nothing racially discriminatory happens. We want to

(10:58):
make sure that no ridiculu as gerrymandering happens. So we'll
hand this over to the California Independent Redistricting Commission. And
what do we get? The same old crap. For a
couple of reasons. One, California's Voting Rights Act and certain

(11:20):
aspects of the federal Voting Rights Acts have been interpreted
to prevent district line drawing that has racially harmed, that
stems from racially motivated motivations, or that results in poor

(11:43):
outcomes for a racial group. So you might be totally
looking at a map of a given community in a
colorblind way where you're not actually caring about the fact
that people are African American or Latino. You're just looking
at people politics and you could be saying, well, we're

(12:04):
in power. We Republicans are in power, so this neighborhood
is heavily Democrat. We're going to kind of diminish the
power of Democrats here because we're redistricting. We're controlling the
redistricting and that's our prerogative as the party in power.
So we're going to draw these lines in this way.
And someone will object, well, what this Democrat neighborhood is

(12:27):
an African American neighborhood. You're just trying to diminish the
power of minority voters here to take away the political power.
When the response from the Republican might be, we don't
care about the color of these people's skin. We're talking
about politics here, We're talking about Republican versus Democrat outcomes.
So the blurred lines between well, I'm redistricting in a

(12:49):
way that's advantageous to my political party, totally legitimate within
the American tradition, when does that intersect and how does
that intersect with racial issues? Well, in California, because we
have so many people who are deemed to be a
historically oppressed racial minority who, for purposes of the Californian

(13:09):
and Federal Voting Rights Act, have to be protected. Latinos
get to be part of this group, I guess in perpetuity.
I'm not sure if the Chinese still do. I'm not
sure if certainly Italians and the Polish don't count for this,
or Germans or you know whatever. But basically, because we

(13:32):
have so many Latinos and so many Latinos lean Democrat,
the redistricting Commission just winds up producing a heavily Democrat
favored electoral map all up and down the state. And
nowhere is this most obviously just a Democrat favored gerrymandered map.

(13:54):
Then in the San Joaquin Valley of California, Duarte is
supposed to lose this race his congressional district, the thirteenth
Congressional district. It is clearly, very carefully drawn in such

(14:15):
a way as to advantage Democrats. But I don't know
that it really makes any natural kind of sense. It
goes all the way south. It basically covers a stretch
of I five and a big stretch of the ninety

(14:35):
nine and the areas in between, So a lot of
the west side Kerman, Mendota, Fireball, most of Maderra, chow Chilla,
Merced Atwater, Livingston, Turlock, South Modesto, but then going up

(14:58):
even further near like Trace, near near Mantica, Los Banos.
So it's basically all the way south to Kalinga, all
the way north to like Tracy, all of these west

(15:19):
side farms. It's this huge geographical area where he's representing
a ton of different counties Fresno County, Maderra County, Merced County,
San Joaquin County. But he's not really the craziest. The
real craziness that impacts this district is actually Vince Fong's districts,

(15:44):
which you used to be Kevin McCarthy's district. So Vince
Fong's district is the twentieth California Congressional district. And basically
the whole setup for what the Redistrict and Commission did
with Central California was this, they shoved all the Republicans
humanly possible into just one district, so that all the

(16:07):
other districts in Central California would lean Democrat. Vince Fong's
district is like a plus thirty registration advantage for Republicans.
It's insane. McCarthy's old district that he used to have
before the twenty twenty census was moderate. Maybe it was
a pretty safe Republican district. I think it was like
something like plus fifteen Republican registration. This new iteration of

(16:30):
it is plus thirty. It's basically a number three. It
gets Clovis Lamore with the naval base, more conservative, and
then the most conservative parts of Bakersfield and Kerrent County.
So it's this absurd map where all the Republicans get

(16:50):
shoved into one district and then all the other districts
lean Democrat and give Democrats the opportunity to win them.
David Valadeo and John Tarte really bucked the trend by
winning their elections, but still the whole setup of this
is sort of artificially designed for Democrats to win in

(17:12):
spite of the fact that we have a system that's
purportedly not supposed to do stuff like this, but it
one hundred percent does all right. When we return, we'll
talk about California ballot curing and how that has led
to this seat getting stolen. Next on the John Girardi Show.
Just another note on the John Doirte Adam Gray race

(17:32):
before I get into the vote the ballot curing thing.
It's just the fundamental reality of how redistricting has happened
for the San Joaquin Valley where it used to be
we would have a couple of seats in the San
Joaquin Valley that were Republican leaning, that Republicans would naturally win,
and that was given to us in an era where

(17:53):
Democrats still controlled the process. They openly controlled the process,
but you could have multiple seats held by Republicans. I
guess what just galls me is in this era where
we allegedly have a non partisan commission drawing the redistricting lines,

(18:16):
whose whole purported goal, it's this purported like liberal pretending
to care about good government, like some kind of third
way objective good governance. Always be on the lookout for
people like this, people who try to act as though
you're a partisan and they're above the fray of partisanship.

(18:40):
What they care about is just good governance, whatever that means.
Because the notion of what quote what constitutes quote good
governance usually requires you to make some kind of partisan
judgment or other regarding politics. Newspaper editorial board. It's put
on this posture all the time, and I always think

(19:02):
it's silly where the Fresno b sort of tries to pretend, oh,
we're not a bunch of aggressive liberals. They don't. They'll
never just say yeah, the presno Be editorial board is
very liberal and so we support very liberal things, and
our default postures that we support Democrats. In fact, no,
they always try to cloak it in some sort of
attitude as if they are above the fray somehow, as

(19:24):
if there's some kind of third way. There's right and
there's left, but they have some sort of third way
that that is only available to them, that's above the clouds,
above the fray, and what they just curb or there's
good governance, and it's just a quinkie dink that none
of the Republicans are good at good governance and all
the Democrats are. And the only time they will actually

(19:49):
do something to sort of uphold some kind of sense
of being not just partisan hacks, is we David Valadeo
runs against the obviously corrupt TJ. Cox, So, as far
as I can recall, like the Fresno B's endorsements in

(20:09):
local races. The only time there was a competitive Republican
versus Democrat race where they endorsed the Republican was when
David Valadeo ran against TJ. Cox. And it was so
obvious that TJ. Cox was corrupt, that he had tax
problems and this problemly sleazy business practices and this and that,

(20:30):
and did he actually even was his primary residence actually
California or was it Maryland? Like like, just just thing
after thing after thing, issue after issue after issue. And
of course TJ. Cox then subsequently got indicted for various
kinds of federal fraud charges and has pled guilty. Since

(20:50):
only then did the President be endorse David Valadeo, but
never again has to be endorsed him. Okay, I mean
even though David Valadeo voted to impeach Donald Trump, an
act which by the way, for a Republican took no.

(21:12):
You may agree with it, you may disagree with it,
but that's a death sentence for a Republican politician to
have voted to impeach Donald Trump. I don't think there's
a single Republican left in the House other than David Valadeo,
who voted to impeach Trump and the Bee base the
President b basically gave him zero credit for it. They
still endorsed Adam Gray this year, and the last time,

(21:38):
excuse me, Rudy Sallas, they endorsed Rudy Salace this time.
I mean they endorsed Rudy Salace two years ago. They
gave David Valadeo no credit for it whatsoever. And that's
what I hate. I hate when people purport to be neutral,
to be somehow nonpartisan, to be somehow above the freight,
when really they're just a bunch of liberal hacks like
anyone else. I think liberals engage in this self delusion,

(22:02):
maybe more than conservatives too. I don't think there are
too many conservatives out there who walk around with some
sort of delusion that they're just right smack dab in
the middle. Tons of liberals walk around thinking that they
are right dead smack in the center of politics, that
they are absolutely moderates, and that there's a no, it's
just not truth. So I think so many liberals have

(22:22):
this sort of self delusion. And that's what I hate
about our redistricting commission. It's just a Democrat dominated Redistricting Commission.
It is producing incredibly unnatural gerrymanner districts that are clearly
designed to give massive political advantages to Democrats. And that's

(22:47):
why I argue it contributes to the notion of the
Duarte race being kind of stolen. Duarte's district doesn't make
a ton of sense. His district was just the greater
Modesto area. That would make some sense. If his area
was just I don't know this or that, maybe it

(23:10):
would make more sense. But it's this huge, sprawling thing
where you know, are are the interests of the southern
suburbs outside of Stockton really the same as the interests
of Kerman or or Fireball or going all the way
down to Coalinga. No, not really so. And certainly the

(23:39):
Vince Fong district is ridiculous. Why am I a Clovis
voter being represented by a congressman from Bakersfield. So that's
what I hate, is this pretending like we're not doing
gerrymandering when we one are, and we've designed these Central
California races specifically so that Democrats can win all of

(24:01):
them except the Vincewong district. When we return explaining the
California ballot curing process and how it has led to
the stolen House seat of John Duarte. That's next on
the John Girardi Show. Let's talk about the John Darte
race being stolen by means of the California ballot curing process.

(24:23):
As I said, I'm not saying the Duarte race has
been stolen through provable fraud. I think the setup of
this election is unfair and runs counter two how election
law is governed in most other states. The ballot curing

(24:45):
process is exhibit a of this. Now, and by the way,
let me just say this, I've never been actually that
big of a fan of John Duarte. I mean, as
Republicans go, he's about as waffling as you can get. Frankly,
you know, if I'm comparing him with David Valadeo, I
know there are a lot of people and a lot

(25:05):
of Republicans locally who are a little mifted, still miffed
at David Valadeo for voting to impeach Trump. I'd rather
take David Valadeo over John Duarte any day. Duarte has
undercut pro life Republican efforts on a number of things.
He's got a very mediocre rating from different national pro
life entities. I've just been very nonplussed with him. To

(25:30):
quote Tony Soprano, if it was drowned, I'd throw him
a cinder I can't even do it. Tony Soprano accident.
If he was drowning, I'd throw him a cinder block.
All right, not that bad, But I can't say I'm
like that much of a John Duarte enthusiast to begin with. However,
I think he's getting a raw deal, and the ballot
curing process is the main reason why. So let me
explain it again. The general norm in America for how

(25:55):
you vote is you go to your local precinct and
you've vote in person on election day in a secret
ballot booth. That is the norm in America for how
we vote. That's the norm established through federal laws. That's
the norm that it sort of assumes. That's the norm
that most states in the Union have adopted. If there

(26:21):
are exceptions to that, that can be done. But we
all kind of acknowledge that anything outside of that norm
presents complications and vote integrity risk. When you vote in

(26:42):
person in your local precinct on election day at a
secret ballot booth, we know several things. We know that
there's going to be as perfect as it can be.
Custody as perfect as it can be. Chain of custody

(27:03):
over your ballot. You fill out your ballot, you immediately
give it to the election official. The election official holds it,
it goes to whatever the county office is perfect. There's
no no one else could have tampered. It goes straight
from the voter to the county election officials. Perfect, no
chance of something getting lost in the mail, no chance

(27:24):
of a postman messing with it, no chance of someone
messing with it in a box or something. Nope, straight
straight from the voter to the election officials. Perfect chain
of custody that we can track, we can document. It's
also we know perfectly that this vote wasn't in some
way unduly pressured or influenced. You voted in private. You

(27:49):
voted in a private booth. No one is allowed to
look over your shoulder while you do it. Your husband
can't stand there leering an election official. If a husband
stands there looking over as well shoulder to try to
see how she votes, some county election official would say, sir,
could you please move over there. She's supposed to vote
by herself. That's just how the system works. No one

(28:13):
is able to look over your shoulder and influence you.
There's no ballot harvester telling the ladies at you know,
at the retirement home. No, no, no, missus mcgillicutt, you
really should vote for this person, not this person. So
we know that you're gonna have and we know that

(28:34):
the ballot is going to apply to that local place.
When you're voting in your own local precinct rather than
just in some random box if it just goes to
some county wide box. If your ballot goes to some
county wide box, they got to sort it. They got
to make sure. Okay, well, this person is voting in
this precinct here where they're voting for, you know, Fresno
City Council District six, but Clovis Unified District this, and

(28:57):
Congressional District this, and Assembly District this, and State see
District this, and this county tax measure and this the
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. If you vote
in your local precinct, that simplifies things. So that is
the norm in America we all have accepted until like

(29:20):
ten minutes ago, we all accepted that that was the
ideal way to vote. Democrats realized, though, particularly in California,
that if they topsy turveyed some stuff, they could leverage
the fact that they have greater political organization, greater political apparatus,

(29:42):
more money to advantage themselves in elections, particularly in tight
elections like John Duarte versus Adam Gray. First, they kicked
our butts through ballot harvesting. Democrats were one election ahead
of us on the ballot harvesting issue. They absolutely kicked

(30:08):
our butts with ballot harvesting. Took us an election or
two to catch up. But the idea being that you
can just have your automatic vote by mail ballot and
you can have someone else pick up those ballots for you.
Have someone go to the nursing home pick up all
the ballots for you have someone go to this, to
your union office and pick up all the ballots of

(30:28):
all the union members. Go to this, go to your
that ballot harvesting is a good way to get out
more votes for more Democrats because again they have more
of a political apparatus for ballot harvesting than Republicans do. Similarly,

(30:49):
in this election, we're really seeing it this election and
also the election earlier this year, back in March, the
primary election, we've seen the outcome of the ballot curing
process US. So everyone gets to vote by mail ballot
in California, and basically you're in order for your vote

(31:11):
by mail ballot to count, you have to follow certain rules.
Now this is true even in states that follow the
sort of generic norm that in person at your secret
at your precinct on election day in the secret ballot
booth is the norm. States that have that as the

(31:32):
norm do have alternative ways for people to vote, an
extension that the state grants when someone might have an
extraordinary circumstance to not allow them to vote in person.
If someone is facing some extraordinary circumstance where they can't
vote in person, most states have for a long time

(31:54):
allowed for absentee ballots, but you have to follow the rules.
With an absentee ballot. You have to divide proper signatures,
it has to be mailed in by a certain date,
has to be received by the county elections office. And
if you don't follow those rules, we don't count that ballot.
I did that when I was in college, when I
was in college, my primary place of residence was California,

(32:17):
and this was two thousand and six to twenty thirteen.
When I was in college in law school, my primary
place of residence was still I still listed it as
my childhood home in California. I would vote absentee in
California elections, so I had to sign it, I had
to mail it in by a certain date, et cetera,
et cetera, et cetera. And the idea being look will

(32:46):
grant you this permission to vote outside of these the
normative measure, outside of the normative structure of in person
secret ballot, et cetera. But we acknowledge that inherently a
vote by mail ballot is not going to be as secure.
The chain of custody is not going to be as perfect.
We don't have the knowledge that someone wasn't looking over
your shoulder telling you how to vote when you voted,

(33:08):
when you filled out the absentee ballot, we just don't
have as much confidence in it. So we're going to
at least require certain kinds of minimal security standards. You
have to mail it in by a certain date, you
have to provide proper signature. The signature has to match
the signature you provided when you registered, et cetera, et cetera,
et cetera. The idea being again we know that this
is a non ideal option, will only afford it to

(33:31):
you for some extraordinary circumstance, and if you do it,
you have to do it right. What's happened in the
Duarte Gray race is Democrats have leveraged the fact that
they have this ballot curing scheme where basically Democrat voters
turn in their vote by mail ballots and they don't

(33:51):
follow the rules, They don't provide a signature, their signature
doesn't match, something is wrong with the ballot such that
the county election official disqualifies the ballot, says this ballot
cannot be counted. These people are provided with a week's
long window to quote cure their ballot, fix their ballot,

(34:17):
fix whatever the mistake was, fix whatever the problem was,
fix whatever the thing was where they didn't follow the
rules in order to quote correct it. And that is
how Duarte has pulled ahead, excuse me, that is how
Adam Gray has pulled ahead of John Duarte. Democrats have

(34:39):
a massive machine for curing ballots. Nancy. They sent Nancy
Pelosi's daughter down here to work on it, Christine Pelosi,
and they were getting hundreds and hundreds of ballots that
had been disqualified when they were received on or near
election day turned into all of a sudden, legitimate votes

(34:59):
for Adam Gray. Now, let's think of was is there
fraud happening there? I guess I find it highly suspicious
that somehow a ballot that had a signature that didn't
match can all of a sudden, somehow be cured to
have a signature that does match. But because the Democrats

(35:25):
have a greater machine than Republicans do, they're able to
get this done. So when I say that this race
is stolen, I'm not saying there was massive fraud that
John Dorte is going to be able to show and
demonstrate and prove in public. I highly doubt that's the case.
What I'm saying is that the whole setup and structure

(35:48):
for how California elections work are one based on the
phony idea that our district lines are drawn in some
way organically and naturally and fairly when they one dred
percent or not, this race is designed for a Democrat
to win. Democrats have a voter registration advantage Duarte has
punched above his weight. And two, the whole system of

(36:12):
ballot curing rests on a false assumption that we should
just treat vote by mail voting as just as good
as in person voting. And it just isn't. It just isn't.
It runs counter to the whole spirit of how American
law works with regards to elections. And this ballot curing

(36:34):
scheme is just something where Democrats can leverage their built
in advantages of money, infrastructure, personnel in order to cure
more votes than John Duarte can cure and thereby win
a race that they should have lost. When we return,
are Democrats going to retire this whole joy political messaging

(36:57):
that they use during the Harris campaign? Point to maybe no.
Next on The John Girardi Show, the Supreme Court today
is going to be hearing oral arguments for whether or
not a state government can ban transgender interventions on children.
Some states have limited it. I believe Tennessee is the

(37:19):
state at issue in the Supreme Court case. That oral
argument is being heard today or was heard today. The
thing that sort of made me laugh was I have
some different friends people I follow on Twitter who are
there at the Supreme Court this morning, And often the
morning of an oral argument at the Supreme Court, you know,
partisans for or against might wind up hanging out outside

(37:40):
the Supreme Court holding signs, trying to get media attention.
And there was a sign out there that says queer
trans joy is unstoppable. So are we really trying to
make this joy thing happen? After Kamala Harris lost, I
thought the whole joy thing was just gonna go away.

(38:02):
You know, all the messaging after Joe dropped out was, oh, yeah,
the Hairs campaign is so joyful, so naturally bursting with joy,
And these allegedly neutral journalists were just repeating this line, No,
there's nothing joy is about it. They stop trying to
make joy happen. It's not going to happen. That'll do it.
John Gerardi Show, See you next time on Power Talk