The Three Whisky Happy Hour: Making Child's Play of Everyone's Files

Among the revelations of this week's episode that were entirely predictable when you think about it: "Lucretia" was a child TV star in Mason City, Iowa, on the local non-PBS kid's show "Bart's Clubhouse"; John Yoo confesses he was bad at sports as a schoolkid; and as everyone can guess, in childhood Steve merely aspired to be a walking historical analogy when he grew up. Meanwhile, poor Phil Munoz, last week's drive-by guest, is still in therapy. . .

So what's all this about the Epstein Files? Does Richard Epstein still have any unexpressed thoughts at this point. . . Wait. What's that? You mean Jeffrey Epstein's files? Never mind. Anyway, we weigh the evidence and circumstances as to whether Epstein's exploits merit elevation to the status of plausible conspiracy or not. 

And this week saw the fulfillment of Glenn Garvin's classic 1983 article, "How Do I Hate NPR? Let Me Count the Ways." And Steve offers his favorite recipes for how he'd like to see Big Bird cooked.


Other name checks on this episode include Zohran Mamdani, Upton Sinclair, Tony Podesta, Jasmine Crockett, and Craig Masback (bonus points if you know that name). And some exit music in a minor key to bring listeners back donw after this extra-exuberant episode (and also to annoy Lucretia. . .).

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:02):
Well whiskey coming fame my pain.

Speaker 2 (00:10):
Why think alone when you can drink it all in
with Ricochet's Three Whiskey Happy Hour, Join your bartenders, Steve Hayward,
John Yu and the International Woman of Mystery Lucretia.

Speaker 3 (00:25):
Where the slapped it up and David ain't easy on
the should tap out.

Speaker 2 (00:30):
A giving.

Speaker 1 (00:33):
Welcome everybody to another episode of the Three Whiskey Happy Hour,
and I'm happy to report that it is Phil Munyo's
free We are still recovering, still recovering. I am uninvited
incursion into the territory of Steve Hayward, Lucretia, the internationals,

(00:55):
I think, and myself.

Speaker 2 (00:56):
It's probably a hip of violation for me to tell
listeners that Phil is about to start week two at
the Betty Ford Center in his therapy from being on show.

Speaker 1 (01:07):
He wishes, he wishes, he and all these other Straussians
just begging, wishing to get onto this podcast. We turn
away them by the droves, by the ones and twos,
which are the only numbers of Straussians left who begged
to get onto the podcast. I'm not even sure where
that's true. I'm not a Straussian, but Steve, how are
you where are you and what are you drinking? You

(01:28):
were actually while I was talking, Steve was chugging. What
is that you're drinking? Steve, I'm home.

Speaker 2 (01:34):
It'smila froid ten. Because I haven't gotten to the store.
I did get some really great wines and shipped in this.

Speaker 1 (01:39):
Week like where, like what? Where?

Speaker 2 (01:42):
Well, I hope this is really boasting, but I ordered
up from the library at stags Leap Wine Cellars. Their
premium release. It's the Cast twenty three. That's their premium release.
It's very expensive, but I want to get these. In
addition to being the year two thousand and five, they're
one of the last bottles that warn whinni Arsky's signature
on the label a Straussian by the way, just you

(02:03):
know it's Straussian.

Speaker 1 (02:04):
Wine, So a Straussian wine maker? What would that even be?
Are is the wine hidden inside a separate bottle? Inside
the bottle?

Speaker 2 (02:13):
You never know what's going to be.

Speaker 1 (02:18):
The jokes. I'm so brainwashed now I'm even making stupid
esoteric jokes.

Speaker 2 (02:23):
Now, okay, I've got I've read a ton of articles.
I've got several more coming out the next few days
on substack and elsewhere.

Speaker 1 (02:31):
He's writing up a storm.

Speaker 2 (02:32):
Well one. I'm writing partly to annoy Lucretia because that's
you know, a bonus always, right, is can God time travel?
And you'll just have to read it when it shows up. Uh.
By the way, for those of you who do read
a substack, uh, you know, we've got Anthony Hates Mayo
Anthony Lucido and I don't know if you've read him,
but dang, I think that guy is the next Dave Barry.

Speaker 1 (02:52):
He is really funny, funny, and you've posted for and he's,
oh yeah, you have put him on our website, yes, yeah.

Speaker 3 (03:00):
Right, and he's he's obviously incredibly sound in every possible
aspect because like me, he hates Mayo.

Speaker 1 (03:13):
All right, what are we doing, Krisia, Lucretia, where are you?
What do you drink?

Speaker 3 (03:17):
I'm home and I'm drinking woven honor orphaned barrel one
hundred and what is it? What is the proof here?
It's it's a cast strength, but I can't find it
right now because it's too little. But it's really wonderful
and so that's what I'm drinking. And I just sent
Steve a picture of the entire Lucretia experience on this

(03:43):
both of you on this podcast.

Speaker 2 (03:46):
Oh that's going up on that, that's all?

Speaker 3 (03:49):
Oh yeah, sure is so? So I think you should
post that, Steve.

Speaker 2 (03:56):
I will post it, but I want to make sure
John gets to see it while we're doing this that
John listeners, you won't be able to see this, but
it's it's pretty glorious.

Speaker 1 (04:03):
So what is that? Oh my gosh, well you know
this should have you know, the Supreme Court should strike
down any age verification to be able to look at
that picture.

Speaker 3 (04:20):
Okay, you know what I'm missing, guys, quickly, you know
what I'm missing because it doesn't really count. A candle
doesn't count for tobacco, or I could be my own
atf right, go ahead, Sorry.

Speaker 1 (04:35):
No, no, So, because Steve Munos isn't here, we don't
have to get when I say, Steve Mano, see how
I'm thinking about I think of all the all the
Straussings as one giant person. But surrounds here we can
return back to discussion of real politics and not strange,
esoteric originalist discussions of the free exercise clause. So the

(04:57):
first thing I want to ask you guys about, what
the hell is this stuff with Epstein and I'm not
talking about Richard Epstein, although you can have a whole
episode about what's wrong with Richard Epstein? What is going on? Yes,
the Epstein files? My god, wait wait, but what is
going on with the Epstein files?

Speaker 3 (05:17):
Well, I have to stop you when you said we
had so so listeners, it's a wonderful thing. Our week
is usually filled with a three way converse text conversation,
and sometimes I sort of sit out because they're really
talking to each other. They don't need me. But anyway,
today you put in there about we should discuss the
Epstein Epstein files, and I'm thinking, what did Richard do? Now,

(05:41):
I'm swear to god, that was like, what are you
talking about? What's what?

Speaker 2 (05:46):
What? What?

Speaker 1 (05:47):
Anyway, well let's talk about that. No, so uh, we're talking,
of course about Jeffrey Epstein, who has been dead now
several years. They died in twenty nineteen, committed suicide allegedly
in the Metropolitan Correctional Center in New York City, where
he was being held to await trial. We're probably all

(06:10):
familiar with the story surrounding Epstein that he had been
given a sweetheart deal by a fellow named Alex Acosta,
a Federal Society guy who was Secretary of Labor in
the first Trump administration, but was US attorney in Miami
under the Bush administration. And guess who represented Epstein? Ken

(06:30):
Starr and Alan Dershowitz and they got a sweetheart deal
out of the Aos attorney. And there are people who
claim today that the Justice Department, the FBI, and Donald
Trump himself might be concealing information about Epstein that allegedly

(06:50):
he has something called a client list of the rich
and powerful that he used to get off his first
of charges. I think he served like a year and
a half and was even allowed to leave his cell
and go to his office, which is incredible when you,
I mean, I've never heard of a sentence or a
plea deal like that ever, and then use this information

(07:14):
to black mail people in order to continue to get
protected by the government. This is I can't understand. This
is royaled right, Royal Republican politics, Royal Republican politics. So Steve,
let me start with you, what the hell's going on?
Why is this causing when Trump should be celebrating, right,

(07:37):
celebrating the passage of the Big Beautiful Bill, which we'll
talk about. When Trump has been succeeding in the Middle East,
when he's actually starting to reach trade deals where he's
starting to I think, get his way, and he's on
a roll, and all of a sudden, all this week,
all that anyone's talking about is is there a cover
up of the Jeffrey Epstein client list and whatever else

(07:58):
is involved? Totally I think been a strange stone that
has stalled Trump's momentum. Steve, what is going on?

Speaker 2 (08:08):
I don't think it's much, but the timing is odd.
You would think that even if they decided, even they
did decide that there's nothing here, we want to end
this story, you would have waited another two or three
weeks till summer vacation time in Washington, and you put
it out on a Friday evening, when you usually do
these things when you want to bury a story. But
two quick points, hopefully quick one is, you know, I

(08:28):
used to be very skeptical of conspiracies on the old
hat of theorem for a while, which was the likelihood
of a conspiracy being true is an inverse proportion to
the number of people would have to be involved, right,
And so because there's so many people swirling around the
Epstein story, it was unlikely, that it was really a conspiracy,
that he's an agent of a foreign intelligence agency, blah

(08:48):
blah blah. Now I have to say, after the last
few years, I'm starting to weaken on that point of view,
only because you've seen the way the group think goes
on with things like COVID lots of other things. You
can question all of that exactly right. And I'm still
I'm still skeptical that some of the frothier things about

(09:10):
Epstein are true, but I'm not sure that they're all unreasonable.
And apparently there was, I mean, a couple of people
who I think really have this nail down said one
of the reasons for giving him a sweetheart deal back
in what two thousand and eight, whenever it was is
that he had some intelligence connections. It was said, well
to who, I don't know, Gilaine's father, what was it?

Speaker 1 (09:33):
Robert Maxwell was a great old joke, the British publisher, right.

Speaker 2 (09:37):
You remember, he drowned in an accident on his yacht,
and I always loved the joke that his famous last
words were rose blob. Okay, that's really bad. But he
was a very dodgy guy. I'll just put it that way.
So I don't know. But the second thing is I've
always been skeptical that there would be a list, an

(09:59):
actual list that Epstein kept like a little black book
like Sam Malone and cheers. Right, That's not the thing
you would keep if you were that kind of a
sophisticated guy. However, if there was an investigation by the
FBI and you put together a list based on and
some of this, it sounds like it happened. They interviewed

(10:19):
victims and people who went there on the planes and
were around him, and this, and that it could be
that they have constructed a list of possible suspects who
were compromised or who you know, were pedophiles that Epstein
arranged young ladies for and so forth, but between possibly
files that are sealed the councilor are unreliable. It's a

(10:41):
list you can't make public because I think you just
don't make lists public when stuff isn't solid, because you'd
be ruining some reputations that might not deserve it. Right.
Another third thing, though, and this gets back to point one,
is where did he make his money? He never had
a Wall Street firm, He was never even Burnie made
off that we can see right, but there is some
circumstantial evidence that there was some Ponzi action going on.

(11:04):
And then finally, one of his biggest clients was what's
the guy's name, Leslie Wexner, Wexler or something.

Speaker 1 (11:10):
Like that, who ran Wexner, Yes, we.

Speaker 2 (11:12):
Ran with limited brands Victoria's Seers, and and lots of others.
And supposedly he paid Epstein one hundred and fifty million
dollars for tax advice or setting up a tax shelter.
That doesn't sound right, I mean that's you know, that's
even more.

Speaker 3 (11:28):
More, way more than that. The end that that guy Wexman,
whatever his name is, recovered from him one hundred and
fifty million dollars, which was a fraction of what he
actually what what uh Ebstein allegedly tricked him out of.

Speaker 1 (11:46):
It's you think there is something fishy here, but at
the same time you seem dubious that it's what people
in the Mega universe think it is.

Speaker 2 (11:58):
I don't yeah, yeah, I don't know. Yeah it's weird.

Speaker 3 (12:00):
So Victor Davis Hansen had a, as usual, a pretty
sober and compelling piece about this, and and and his
argument was that, yeah, the guy was just a scumbag
and some of the people involved that's better, Steve yea.
Some of the people involved with Epstein were probably also

(12:20):
involved with raping underage girls and so on. But that whatever,
And you're write not a list, not not not a
black book. But there's there's lots of evidence in the
files of people who were actually named by these poor
innocent girls and so on, and the ability to if

(12:43):
you put out a list of anybody who had associations
with Jeffrey Epstein, you are automatically by association, uh saying
that you know that they were pedophiles and child rapists
and things like that, and that that probably Trump too
many damn phone calls from those kind of people. Trump

(13:04):
himself was one of those people. You know, Trump is
not interested in fourteen year old girls. There's no evidence
of that, you know, there's but but you know, he
did have at one point a relationship with Epstein, like
many many other people did. And it's possible that the
release of names that could be gleaned from the various
files and so forth would be too inclusive of people

(13:27):
who were in fact just in the Epstein circle and
not necessarily like you know, the Prince, what's his name,
Prince what's his name?

Speaker 2 (13:38):
Andrew?

Speaker 3 (13:38):
And Andrew like Prince Andrew, you know who actually probably
was a pedophile and so on.

Speaker 1 (13:43):
Well, what I want to what I understand is everything
you say could be true, why what does it have
to do with Trump and his presence?

Speaker 2 (13:50):
Right very right?

Speaker 1 (13:51):
Like like this is all stuff that happened. Suppose Trump
was buddies with Epstein. I mean, I've seen videos of
them joking around, and there's of them together. But this
is what like twenty years ago, thirty or more than
it's like the late eighties, early nineties. Why does this
Why has this caused this huge fight within what should

(14:13):
be a very happy, successful Republican party right now?

Speaker 3 (14:17):
So Steve Steve hinted at this in his discussion just
a moment ago, and that is that there is a
very strong belief amongst the MAGA world that in fact,
we do have elites that get away with murder. I mean,
you know, Komi hasn't suffered. Hillary Clinton has never gone

(14:38):
to jail for all of her crimes, some of which
are probably even true, you know, and on, you know,
on and on and on. And part of Trump's appeal
was as the outsider who wasn't who wasn't beholden to lobbyist,
who wasn't beholden to massade whatever stupid conspiracy or you

(15:00):
want to throw out, there was going to you know,
open up the books and and and bring sunlight to
the despicable dealings of Washington, d C. Which all of
that is true. And Maga sees this refusal of the
Trump DOJ to open the books on Epstein as Okay,

(15:22):
they've just turned into the same sort of scummy Washington
swamp elites as everybody else, and they're going to cover
up for their friends because they're afraid too many people
they know will be swept away with whatever, you know,
revelations come out. I think that's the best way to
answer it, is that that you know, this is not
necessarily about Epstein only it's about a belief that that

(15:45):
a lot of these elites are in fact pedophiles, that
they they use their power and influence to engage in,
you know, pedesta like activities. I'll put it that way. Really, really, John.

Speaker 1 (16:08):
I have no idea what you're talking about. I don't know,
I don't I don't know if I want to know.

Speaker 3 (16:15):
There's a lot of evidence that Okay, let me I'll
ask you this way, John, would you ever decorate your
house with art that featured children being tortured?

Speaker 1 (16:29):
Why is that what Podesta has?

Speaker 2 (16:31):
Yeah, John Podesta, I mean, by the way, yes.

Speaker 1 (16:35):
Absolutely, I know if you've been to his house.

Speaker 2 (16:39):
This was all came out in a couple of years
ago in the press when his lobbying firm collapsed. But John,
I want to I know we're going along here, John,
I want to. You know, you worked at the Department
of Justice, not in the criminal division, but still you've
been inside the building. What do you make of it?

Speaker 1 (16:57):
I think people are crazy, Oh, I mean, I think
they really I think they're really crazy if they think
that this is all some kind of cover up by
the FBI and the CIA, who are all run by
Trump appointees. Now, I mean, right, this is Cash Prattel
and Dan Bongino who said this all had happened, and
now they're out there saying there's no documents, that no files,

(17:18):
or Pam BONDI I mean, and Donald Trump himself. I mean,
maybe you can always say there's some plausible case that
Epstein was murdered. And there's a plausible case, right, like
a non zero percent chance that all of these conspiracy
theories are true. But then the people in charge of
the agencies and the government are the people who who

(17:41):
claimed they were true, and now they're in the government,
they're saying, Nope, there actually isn't any evidence there to find.
I mean, who who, Well, how else could you write?
So here's what will happened. There's no way to disprove
people who still believe it at this point, because suppose
Trump says, okay, release the files, and they release the
files and there's nothing in it, They're gonna just say
it's still a cover up. They're still they destroyed all

(18:03):
the documents in the foss It's impossible to disprove. That's
why it's a classic conspiracy theory.

Speaker 3 (18:08):
But really quick, I have one quick point, Steve, and
I want you to finish. What's her name, does Layne Maxwell?
How do you say? Lane Maxwell is the only person
in the history of the United States to be convicted
for sex trafficking minors to nobody that What I mean

(18:35):
is she had hundreds of counts against her for sex trafficking,
not just to Jeffrey Epstein, who on his own could
have you know, been I guess it was like he
had to have sex with minors three times a day.
I don't know that's what Alan Dersh would said. But anyway,

(18:56):
but she was convicted on multiple counts of trafficking minors,
not just to Jeffrey Epstein.

Speaker 1 (19:06):
Oh yeah, but that doesn't that might mean that the
government didn't think it could win in court against.

Speaker 3 (19:11):
The Well, all right, but yeah, exactly, but there are others,
is the point.

Speaker 1 (19:16):
It's not the but it's the practice of the government
not to release the names of people who can't be
charged and convicted because you're just smirching their reputations and
they can't answer.

Speaker 2 (19:25):
I agree with that, John, But to answer your question directly,
I am I'm amazed that you, mister O g. Neocon,
would overlook the classic reasons of state and but that
I mean, one of the things that has come out
recently is the CIA had more what do you say,
eavesdropping or surveillance of Lee Harvey Oswald. Now I think

(19:46):
they were the Keystone cops, of course it was, you know,
but the point is is, you know, there's a decent
case for thinking that in the weeks that follow the
Kennedy assassination, Lynnon Johnson says, I need to commission. You
get the war and mission, and oh my god, what
if it turned out that we know Oswald went to
the Soviet embassy in Mexico City and he lived in

(20:07):
the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union sends over a couple
of defectors to say, you're you're in a sankle. Say no, no,
we had nothing to do with this, And maybe they're
telling the truth. I'm inclined to think they were, but
they were worried enough to send a defector over who
got handled very roughly by our CIA. Here's the point,
what if you'd said, oh, you know, Oswald was actually
dedicated communists. We think there's enough links here that he

(20:28):
might have been connected to the Soviet Union. If that
is what comes out of an investigation, it's World War
three because it would mean our adversaries were behind the
assassination of a president. I think it's kind of similar
if it turns out today, think of where we are
today with Israel in the Middle East. What if it
turns out then, oh, you know, he does have connections

(20:48):
with Masad. That's what Tucker Carlson people say. That causes
a huge geopolitical problem for Trump. And if I'm Trump
or anybody else, I'm gonna say, you.

Speaker 1 (20:57):
Know, that's Steve, that's great. I know it's really crazy.

Speaker 2 (21:01):
I don't know if it's crazy, you're not.

Speaker 1 (21:02):
This is like the last guy you would use as
an agent, some flamboyant multi you know, one hundred millionaire
who's flying down people to land on this jet like
that would be the last person you would pick. But
if you really look, if you really wanted the people,
then think about if you what you say is true.

(21:23):
I'm not saying you believe it, but if what this
is said is true, that the people who should have
taken advantage of this were was Biden. Biden is the
president and his attorney jobs in charge for the last
four years. They have all these files. They wanted to
create a break with Israel. Why didn't they release this
stuff then?

Speaker 2 (21:40):
Because I'm skeptical too, But John, I mean, you know,
one of the chief look actually back at World War Two.
I mean I think there's some circumstantial evidence that the
Nazis were trying to compromise the Kennedy family with uh,
you know, with women, right, maybe successfully. This is an

(22:02):
old tactic of adversaries of the United States and Great Britain.
So it's not that novel. I mean, I'm it's.

Speaker 1 (22:09):
Like the kind of guy you would use.

Speaker 2 (22:11):
Well, you know.

Speaker 3 (22:14):
Right, I mean, I don't think you're right about that,
but I want I do want to make one further point,
and that is that the MAGA, the ultra Mega call it,
people who are making the most noise about the Epstein files.
I actually worry a great deal, Steve. This will make

(22:34):
sense to you about their You know what, what's the
guy's name that that that Tucker Carlson is going to
have on his show tonight. I think it is who?

Speaker 1 (22:44):
Who? Who?

Speaker 3 (22:45):
You know argues that Hitler was a good guy.

Speaker 1 (22:49):
This person repeatedly, Actually and this whole actually a real historian.
He's just some kind of kook.

Speaker 2 (22:56):
Yes, this whole idea Ter Cooper.

Speaker 3 (23:00):
Yes, yes, that there are elements in the MAGA movement
who who are anti Semitic and anti Israel. Sorry they
go together. But who would love nothing more than to
find out that in fact it was Masade working.

Speaker 1 (23:15):
I didn't know there were Ivy League college presidents in Mega.

Speaker 3 (23:23):
But to be fair, there's a lot in common with
the far left and the far right when it comes
to those kinds of things. But this idea that that
we should stop looking what would it be nostalgically at
the great values fought in World War Two on behalf
of the Allied forces, and that you know that Hyler
was probably right, and all this other crap that's just

(23:46):
designed to sort of I guess it's designed to undermine
people like you, John.

Speaker 4 (23:53):
You know, no people the Holocaust happened, cons who think
like in your article that your article in.

Speaker 3 (24:03):
Sibtas today, that that you know, the United States can
be a force for good in the world, and oversimplifying that.

Speaker 1 (24:11):
But that's basically what it argued.

Speaker 3 (24:14):
Yeah, yeah, with a lot of really dumb examples in
controversial statement, conclusion, a good conclusion, A lot of dumb
examples get in there. I'll leave that alone. But my
point is is that that's ugliness, and the really big
part of that is being pushed by I'm very disappointed
in Tucker doing that. You know, I don't listen.

Speaker 1 (24:35):
To anything really, you know, it's changed from his usual
high standards of journalism. But with that last thing, and
let's take a ad break, and I think we're gonna
have to come back to f SE because I don't
know if we everyone has said everything we've they want
to ventilate. But we're going to take an ad break
now and we'll be back in a second. Speaking of

(24:58):
anti Semites, Steve had a piece in the Wall Street
Journal about Mom Donnie No, no, not you not you finished?
You guys are so busy going whoa that I didn't
finish the sentence, which was the anti semi So Mom
Donny right, speaking of anti Simmons. So I was on

(25:19):
an outnumbered over yesterday.

Speaker 2 (25:22):
Oh, I was going to ask about that later because
he was no.

Speaker 1 (25:25):
And that was the first. The second thing they asked
me about was what do you think about Mom Donny?
And I just said and I said, look, you because
when Donnie has now said, I will discourage people from
saying globalized the Intifada because Jewish New Yorkers have told
me it's hurtful language. And I said, does anybody actually

(25:46):
believe this guy is not anti Semitic? The only reason
he won is because he's anti Semitic. And he said
he's very proud of being a Marxist. Do people forget that?
Marx wrote an essay called on the Jewish question where
he said that Jews are all hucksters and that their
only God is money. I mean, do people not realize
that Marxism and anti Semitism are intertwined at the route? Anyway?

(26:10):
So Steve wrote a piece in the Wall Street Journal
a lot tamer than what I had to say on
Fox News Why. He said that the Mondami dilemma for
the Democrats actually reminded him of Upton Sinclair running for
a governor of California in nineteen thirty two, No.

Speaker 2 (26:29):
Four.

Speaker 1 (26:31):
And I got to confess I didn't even remember Upton
Sinclair had run for governor, and as Steve told us,
he didn't win. And part of the reason why might
have to do predictably, what's going to happen with Mondami.
So Steve tell us about this piece. I mean, for first,
how did you even think that Upton Sinclair had anything
to do with this Marxist anti Semite running for mayor

(26:53):
of New York.

Speaker 2 (26:54):
Well, first of all, I wrote that article chiefly to
annoyed Lucretia because it's a perfect historical analogy, right.

Speaker 1 (27:00):
I mean, I mean, Steve, your.

Speaker 3 (27:02):
Perfect perfect analogies, it's your lame, irrelevant ones that I
don't like Steve.

Speaker 1 (27:08):
I mean, think about all the hours you wasted when
all you have to do to annoying the creases just
show up on the podcast.

Speaker 3 (27:14):
Yeah, it's threatened to talk about Russell Kirk and Edmund
Burke in the.

Speaker 2 (27:19):
And progressive rock right progressive rock. Well, no, I mean
the reason I know about it is my dad was
in high school in nineteen thirty four in Hollywood, and
it was the first political campaign he paid attention to,
and he used to tell me all about it when
I was growing up and later on. And he even
had some artifacts from that campaign that he kept, some
of the Pamplin stuff. What happened there is Sinclair came

(27:40):
out of nowhere. He's very left wing. By the way,
I had to leave out of the articles some anti
Semitic statements he Sinclair made in the nineteen twenties, even
though he worked in Hollywood, which is very Jewish industry, right,
and it's Hollywood started was the Jews that came from
New York and elsewhere. And the main thing I was
trying to do with the article was you hear that
Wall Street to raise the money to fight Mondami, but

(28:02):
they're worried it might backfire on them. They don't know
what their strategy is. There's the you know, Colombo's gonna run,
and the parallels there are pretty close. The people who
were posted to Sinclair were above all the Hollywood studios who,
by the way, like Wall Street people said we're gonna
leave California for Florida if Sinclair wins. And they were
that alarmed about it and the whole story and I

(28:24):
think I may write a longer version for substack. It's
amazing what they did. It was the first modern media campaign,
including you know, pamphlets by the millions and then Hollywood.
This is quite amazing. They produced MGM Studios produced trailers
attacking Sinclair with all of his great quotes, as if
he'd had a twitter feed, you might say, and it

(28:45):
would run in theaters before all the movies all over California,
so political ads in the theaters that people went to.
Of course, by the millions in the twenties and thir
well thirties, it was right, and that was quite outraged
Democrats and anyway, Roosevelt was, oh, this is a parallel too.
Is Roosevelt and his people were torn about this because

(29:07):
you know, they were worried about Huey Long and his
craziness already, and they were worried at Sinclair would be
bad news. So Roosevelt remained aloof and his administration was divided.
Just this right now, you have Democrats like you know,
Governor Hockel and Chuck Schumer and you know Bill Clinton
and Obama. They don't quite know what to say and do.
They're scared to come out of against him, right although

(29:28):
I'm sure most of them, or maybe all of them,
oppose him, but are probably too cowardly as FDR was
to come out against him. So a few parallels and
we will see. And I wanted the article, I thought,
and they gave me a nice placement in the journal
I wanted. Hopefully it's stiff in the spines of Bill
Ackman and the Wall Street people say, dang it, we're
just gonna go after him hard. And if we lose,
we lose, and let's not wring our hands about what's

(29:49):
our strategy, and oh boy, we're worried about it might backfire,
and it might, but darn it, they need to step
up and have some courage and go after him hard.

Speaker 1 (29:58):
So that's all Kristia, were you in fact annoyed by
Steve's weird love letter to.

Speaker 3 (30:04):
You, like I say, I am used to.

Speaker 1 (30:12):
I mean, the whole article was a historical analogy, right.

Speaker 2 (30:15):
It was a thing.

Speaker 3 (30:17):
And and you know, Steve accused us, you and me
John on that lovely week we had together without Steve
and his historical analogies, of engaging in the historical analogies ourselves.
And I wrote back and I said, of course ours
are apt and yours are not. This one was apt.
And you know what, I'll be honest with you, anything,

(30:39):
anything at all that that criticizes that makes the case
for why this zimbabi mamwabbi wabbi is bad news for
New York, for the Democratic Party, for the future of
this country. Any I'm going to sell it. And Steve

(31:00):
did a fine job of you know, credit where credits
do I?

Speaker 1 (31:05):
I am.

Speaker 3 (31:06):
I saw an article yesterday. I guess it was that
said that Jasmine Crockett and AOC are raking in the dough,
that centrist Democratic candidates can't raise money to save their lives.
But those pieces of you know what, stupid, brain dead

(31:27):
ideological hacks, Jasmine Crockett and AOC are just raking in
money I don't know from whom, people who want to
destroy America. I guess I don't know, But that's just
scary to me because money is not the only thing
that determines victory in electoral politics in the United States,

(31:48):
but it's a big, big help. And the fact that
AOC's even given a dime to spout her nonsense, and
that that stupid, foul execrable Jasmine Crockett, everything about her
drives me crazy. Your stupid long fingernails or forty inch
long eyelashes her her you know, ebonics.

Speaker 1 (32:10):
Talk, You're getting me excited? What are you talking about?

Speaker 2 (32:14):
Yeah?

Speaker 1 (32:14):
Right, give me your.

Speaker 3 (32:17):
You're women, you have you like classy women, Okay, And
there's not one ounce of class in that that thing,
Jasmine jelly jelly with jellyfish. So so that really worries me.
And so I'm glad when Steve it's.

Speaker 2 (32:34):
Not a classic three whiskey? How are you a happy hour, John?
If we don't get some good look as im going
in it? So exactly we've checked off that box there
this week.

Speaker 3 (32:43):
Yeah, it might not be done. Yeah, I mean, anyway,
I do actually think it's an in your face kind
of thing with Jasmine Crockett at least she just you know,
she knows that she's she and just foul and every
and she pushes it.

Speaker 1 (33:04):
So that's you know, so one one thing that was
that I've heard some Republican political consultants, sy tell me
what you think of this, Steve firsty, it actually might
be great for the Republican Party nationally if Montdoney actually
wins the mayorship. Just like I'm sure Lucretius cry right,
AOC raises a lot of money, but the Republican Party raises

(33:26):
a lot of money off of AOC and the Squad too,
even though I think two of them lost reelection, right,
so there were there only two or three Squad members left.
But maybe this is a blessing in disguise for the
Republican Party because it puts on even a higher profile
than AOC or Jasmine Crockett, a real avowed Marxist who

(33:47):
is going to destroy the city of New York to
you know, to carry out his policies. Will make everybody
realize Republicans who believe in free markets and free minds
and free men and women.

Speaker 3 (33:59):
Right, So Steve's that's a Steve argument. Steve makes those
kinds of positive, optimistic arguments a lot, and I don't disagree,
but the warm hearted, soft lucretia, there is one worries.
Worries about the you know, the people that have no

(34:22):
ability to say, get up and move to Florida, the
people who are just going to see their lives destroyed
in New York because because we've given up on New York,
and we've given up on Los Angeles, and we've given
up on you know, Oh good, it's great for us
because look at how awful that is, and we don't
have to have it here. We'll vote for better people,

(34:42):
which we don't always. But I worry, I mean, besides
that New York, is this the financial capital of the world, guys,
and he's going to destroy it? Will it just move
somewhere else?

Speaker 1 (34:54):
What do you think? Well? I mean, Texas has opened
up its own stock exchange in the last ye and
they are making a big pitch to get corporations to
reincorporate there. They've even created a special Texas Business Court,
which promises to hold accelerated hearings and to dispense with
all this wocism and ESG business when they decide their cases. So,

(35:17):
you know, federalism will go to work, I say, But Steve,
you were about to say in response to that.

Speaker 2 (35:22):
Yeah, what you just said is I think, unlike say,
nineteen thirty four, when Upton Sinclair's running in California, the
self correcting mechanisms are so much faster now. And look,
I mean, if Republicans had a candidate in New York
even rooted Giuliani, you'd say's rally behind that person. But
they you know, this Curtis Sliel guy's not going to
make it. But look, I mean I Trump.

Speaker 3 (35:46):
Endorse Cuomo.

Speaker 2 (35:49):
I missed that. Did he actually do that?

Speaker 4 (35:50):
Yes?

Speaker 2 (35:51):
Well, okay, I don't know why he would endorse Adams,
but maybe he wants maybe he wants this guy to
when he wants Clomo to stay in, which is bad.
But look, here's the thing I will. This will perhaps
annoy Lucretia for the reasons she just stated, but this
is a no lose election for Republicans for the reasons
you just stated. John. Why did Roosevelt in thirty four

(36:11):
would be very nervous about Upton Sinclair winning because he
thought it would push the New Deal and Democratic Party
too far to the left, especially with Huey Long coming
you know, from the south in the same direction, right,
So this is going to push the democratic part to
the left unless.

Speaker 4 (36:29):
So.

Speaker 2 (36:30):
Here it should be noted that New York City has
what's known as a strong mayor system. Unlike some cities
where mayors have to get the city council to proof stuff,
the mayor in New York gets to shape the budget
with enormous power. He can't raise taxes without the governor's permission,
which is interesting, but he can name the heads of
all the various important departments in the government without the

(36:54):
ratification of the city council, which may not matter because
the City Council New York is also crazy. But the
point is if he disappoints progressives, they're gonna complain. So,
I mean, you know, I can sit back here and
watch them. I mean, Lucreatia is absolutely right. It's gonna
be bad for the people of New York. But when
this has happened before, what's happened you snap back and

(37:14):
elected rooted Giuliani, who fixed the city. And I think
that's what will happen here. By the way, you know, you.

Speaker 3 (37:19):
Know who the best.

Speaker 2 (37:21):
So I don't know if you pay attention to this.
Do you know who the Oh yes, under Dinkins. It
was terrible. Oh yeah, it was absolutely awful. And that's
why Giuliani won and then went to work and was
He was pretty not radical, but he was very tough
and he's not appreciated for how tough he was. He
reversed things on a dime. Now, last point about that.
Anybody want to guess of all the big cities in America,
who the best democratic that is, most conservative democratic mayor

(37:44):
in the country is what city? San Francisco. Nobody's paying
attention to this. And you know this lowery guy who's
not very political and needs the heir of what Levi
Strauss or something, and he's very quietly moving who makes
some sense? By I've been saying this for a while.
You know, if San Francisco was a stock, I'd be

(38:05):
buying it a year ago. Right, it was so far
down and it's too nice a place to completely fall
off the edge of the.

Speaker 3 (38:09):
Earth's place in the world.

Speaker 2 (38:12):
Well, New York's the same way. It's just too big
a thing to completely go down the drain permanently. So
San Francisco is coming back. They've turned the corner they've
quietly cleaned up the homeless, and they're cracking down on crime.
They're prosecuting car thefts and stop shoplifters, and it's turning
around fast. And the mayor, by the way, reporters say

(38:32):
what about Trump, he says, I don't want to talk
about Trump. That's not my job. He's staying out of
all that. He's not grand standing the way the other
mayors are. So what an amazing thing to think that
the mayor of San Francisco right now is the most
sensible mayor of the big cities that Democrats run, which
is essentially all of them.

Speaker 1 (38:48):
Well, somehow we got from anti semitism to you know,
the best blue city mayors. So why don't we take
another ad break and we'll be right back in a second. Well,
after we've talked about Steve and the Wall Street Journal,

(39:09):
and we've talked about Jeffrey Epstein, let's talk about something
real that happened in the last week, which was that
since we taped last the Big Beautiful Bill, which is
commonly called the Reconciliation Bill, passed I think on last
Saturday after we had taped our episode. But then this
week the Senate just passed the Recision Bill to cut

(39:33):
another nine billion dollars that had already been appropriated. It's
a currently awaiting House passage, which we all expect to
happen on Friday. And one of the most singular things
in this bill is that finally achieves one of the
great conservative goals of I think the last forty years,

(39:55):
which was to defund NPR and PBS. Now I have
to say, now.

Speaker 2 (40:03):
You're about to say something stupid, aren't you.

Speaker 1 (40:05):
Now. I was gonna say that maybe NPR and PBS
will have to finally run ads that that is such
a dunk joke. Steve told me to say that joke,
and nobody loves But I actually there's a stupid thing
I'm gonna say, Steve, to just start you off, to
trigger you, is I love PBS. I watch it all

(40:29):
the time, I really do. I love British TV shows.
I love American TV shows, but I love British TV shows.
I think some of the greatest ones like I Claudius,
I love I Claudius and Brideshead Revisited and all these
shows I saw. I'm a big fan of PBS. However,
I have never given them a penny because the government
sponsored it. And so now Steve's costing me money because

(40:52):
now I'm gonna have to consider whether to actually give
money to these dang things which now that they've been
cut off by the federal government. No, Steve, Steve.

Speaker 2 (41:00):
You well, first of all, I have been waiting at
least thirty years to see big Bird deep fried in
Colonel Sanders thirteen Secret Herbs and Spices.

Speaker 1 (41:11):
Now, look, if you if you put some mcgribs sauce
on him and put a spam slice in there.

Speaker 2 (41:16):
It too okay, right, you know there's a I will
post this eventually on substack. I didn't get around it today.
There's a famous article, an article well remembered by certain
people from nineteen ninety three by a guy named Glenn
Garvin at the Miami Herald. I think it ran in
the City Paper in Washington when it was great, when
Jack Schaeffer launched it, and the title was how do

(41:38):
I hate NPR? Let me count the ways? And that article,
that article went viral before there was the Internet. I mean,
that article became a sensation because NPR has been a
you know, a ridiculous sewer for years. I have to
say I've been enjoying this. Catherine Marr, woman who's the president,
saying yesterday or midweek, gosh, I wish something could give
examples of NPR stories be biased. I mean, how she

(42:02):
doesn't just live in a bubble, she lives in a
freaking iron dome. I mean. And so Senator Kennedy and
lots of other people said, how much time have you got? Right?
It is unbelievable. Right, as I always call it, national
propaganda radio. The morning show is the morning sedition, in
the afternoon show all things distorted, or as I used
to or as I used to say in the eighties,

(42:22):
how do people in Washington get their first clue that
the Soviet leaders died? They hear solid music on National
Public Radio. So this is long overdue.

Speaker 3 (42:31):
Oh sorry, I mean, nobody gets anymore though I know that's.

Speaker 2 (42:35):
What I said. I said back in the eighties, Like
I said.

Speaker 3 (42:37):
I know, I know, but you should explain it just
so you guys know the Soviet Union, the state run
radio would play somber music when you know, there was
a period of time when every one of those uh
what octagenarian.

Speaker 2 (42:51):
Rights would die, right, would.

Speaker 3 (42:52):
Die, and they'd play somber music and that's how everybody
would know.

Speaker 2 (42:55):
That's what before the official and before the official announcements, say,
you'd hear announcement who died. Somebody died, usually the top guy, right, Okay,
a lot of our listeners. I suspected the older demographic
and Maide listener Steve I loved, I loved Catherine Meyers saying, gosh,
you know this is going to hurt those rural radio

(43:16):
stations where farmers get their crop reports in the weather forecast.
And I mean, seriously, really do think they need NPR?
And these are these are farmers who have these high
tech tractors with GPS and this and that and the
Internet working on their thing. And I mean, it's so
comically absurd that you can't you can't. You can't believe it, right, Okay.

Speaker 3 (43:37):
So Iowa Hawk, Oh yes, right, David Burd see that.
It was so funny. True story. I can't even reproduce it.
Maybe you can find it while I make my other comments, Steve,
because it was hilarious.

Speaker 2 (43:50):
I have it right here, okay, he said. True story
In nineteen seventy eight, after a lightning strike cost a
power outage at the NPR station in Sioux City, Iowa,
hundreds of farmers are driven mad by the loss of
sweeping price updates, resulting in mass cannibalism and the burning
of the city to the ground. That guy's a genius,

(44:10):
by the way, almost as great a genius as Anthony
hates Mayo.

Speaker 3 (44:14):
Almost almost. Yeah, because I thought I'm going to actually
tell you that that this, this whole story lately has
brought up an anecdote that I knew about before. But
that is especially I'll call it hurtful to me at
this time, uh, given all that's happening with my professional career.

(44:38):
The one of the the examples that is used to
prove just how far gone PBS and NPR are and
were and always have been is a children's show that
featured a drag queen by the name of little Miss

(44:58):
hot Mass who writes, who writes children's books, grooming them
to become LGBTQ plus plus plus whatever degenerate thing you
want to talk about. Why is this significant to Lucretia
because this particular little miss hot Mess, and they always

(45:19):
refer to as her, but it is an it or
a he, whichever you prefer, that happens to not only
work at my University, but was awarded last year over
my recommendation for a young Faculty scholar, the Early Scholar
Award Distinguished Faculty Award by the university for its scholarship

(45:46):
in the area of children grooming. And the reason that
significant is because he did a children's hour on PBS
wherein he sang song that was uh and the hips
go swish, swish wish and basically, you know, put out

(46:08):
as propaganda to try to turn every little boy and
girl into some sort of weird freak. And so that's
very upsetting to me. And I am so glad that
NPR and PBS will not get another penny of my
tax dollars. And I don't care if the farmers in
Sioux City, Iowa, I'll commit suicide or do whatever it

(46:29):
is that they do because they shut down the radio
programming and PBS in Iowa.

Speaker 1 (46:35):
Okay, done, Yeah, No, I just don't see I agree that,
I just don't see any case in this day and
age for any kind of government sponsor television or content,
given how many choices we have have. Many well, channels
are available, but of.

Speaker 2 (46:49):
Course, let's remember John that they've been saying for years.
You know, it's really not that much money. It's just
you know, it helps our local stations a bit. And
now they're seeing saying it's the end of the world,
which means they were lying through us all along. Second thing,
it's a general point, but reading all these stories lately
about by the way, I think only Trump could have
accomplished this or the Trump age. Right. You know, we've

(47:10):
been yelling about NPR and PBS for forty years. You know,
Reagan made a couple of runs at it, and what
happened was, well, briefly, bring.

Speaker 1 (47:18):
Oh yeah, why was Trump able to do what none
of these previous conservative presidents.

Speaker 2 (47:22):
Going, Well, there's a whole lot of reasons. One because
he's Trump. I come to the main point. But I
remember in the eighties the Reagan people wanted to cut
off NPR and PBS. The problem was the head of
the Corporation Public Broadcasting to oversaw both of them was
Sharon Rockefeller Percy. She was not only a Rockefeller, but
was married to Republican liberal Republican Senator Chuck Percy of Illinois,

(47:43):
and that's caused the political problem because he could lobby
all of his liberal Republican buddies and Senate to block it.
Now those kind of Republicans are gone, thankfully. And I
love all these stories that say, you know, Trump is
dominating the Republican Party. The subtext is, isn't that terrible?
And I go back to the New Deal and say
Roosevelt dominated the Democratic Party. Was there ever any press

(48:07):
covers and said, gosh, you know, Roosevelt's really a bully,
he's bullying. No, of course there wasn't any of those
kind of stories. It's another indication of the bias the
way the media does it.

Speaker 3 (48:17):
What you got to give it up. You know, I
agree with you, but it's you know, it's not even
it's not even a revelation. It's not cute, it's not funny.
It's just so so blase. Now that okay, the world
is a double standard.

Speaker 2 (48:37):
I guess I'm sorry.

Speaker 1 (48:38):
But why why was Trump able to succeed where Bush Bush,
and I mean probably Nixon start Nixon rat.

Speaker 2 (48:49):
No, actually Nixon ramped the darn thing up. But that
was a different time when you thought, oh it might
be a good idea to you know, in the years
when you only had three TV stations in a town
of three big networks, there was a thought that yeah,
why don't we have something that's educational television for children? Okay,
it actually starts under Johnson, but Nixon was a big
supporter of it, and the ne eh and all those things.

(49:10):
But who we should have known. We know now why
that is a bad idea. They should have known then.

Speaker 3 (49:15):
And anyway, and by the way, really quickly, there was
on my local affiliate station in Mason City, Iowa, a
children's programming called Bart's Clubhouse, and it came on at
three point thirty every day. And I was on Bart's
Clubhouse on multiple occasions because it was.

Speaker 1 (49:38):
On the show itself.

Speaker 3 (49:39):
Oh yeah, of course, because it was Mason City, Iowa.

Speaker 1 (49:43):
But it was it was it was did you go
around attacking all the adults like you do on the show?

Speaker 3 (49:47):
Here My most memorable I have to tell you, my
most memorable appearance was when I was in the Community Theater,
Mason City Community Theater as a I was the princess
in and of course you were, of course I was,
and so I was, you know, but but but my

(50:10):
friend Brad was his dad was Bart, and so anyway,
but my point is, and I was doing dregs.

Speaker 1 (50:18):
He never left PBS.

Speaker 3 (50:20):
No, it wasn't PBS, is what I'm telling you.

Speaker 1 (50:23):
It was a local and you know I came.

Speaker 3 (50:26):
On after after Bart's Clubhouse reruns of Star Trek.

Speaker 1 (50:31):
Well there, now you just saved it. Now you just
see that.

Speaker 3 (50:34):
I'm telling you. We had three stations. I don't remember
which one. If it was CBS, I don't remember which
one was on, but three stations, and they had educational
programming for children and it was wholesome.

Speaker 1 (50:47):
Point out one thing about the changing media landscape is
not only does Trump makes us happen. Maybe the other
part of the environment is cable TV, all the channel
streaming and a world in which this is incredible. I
think today CBS just announced they're canceling the Colbert Show, right,
the inheritor of the Letterman Show, and who himself was

(51:08):
supposed to be the editor, I'm sorry, the inheritor of
the Johnny Carson seat, although that eventually went to Jay Leno. Meanwhile,
I just this is incredible to me. I was just
reading a Fox News press release because I was hanging
around Fox a bit this week, and apparently this is incredible.
Fox News did better in the ratings than all the

(51:30):
primetime shows on the main channels. Now, so all these
you know shows where conservatives, yellow people do better than
primetime programming on ABC, CBS and NBC. And it's been
so first several weeks now and this Greg Gutfield Show,
which is a good, outright comedy show that's higher ratings
than any of the traditional late night shows. Now, explain

(51:53):
that to me, Lucretia.

Speaker 3 (51:55):
Because have you ever watched the Greg Gutfield Show? Now
that that awful cat Tins is off of it?

Speaker 1 (52:01):
Sorry, and I think she's back though she was baby. Yeah.

Speaker 3 (52:07):
I don't often get to see it, just you know,
but I'll often be in the car and listen to
Gregg's monologue, which is always hilarious. He's just yes, he
is in fact you know that. That is great. But
here I wanted to make one point John that makes
it even more interesting. I think Stephen Colbert's show was
the highest rate rated show on CBS.

Speaker 1 (52:30):
Oh my Gosh's that right?

Speaker 2 (52:31):
But it was so bad? I mean, first of all,
who I don't know what they're paying with something twenty
million dollars a year. Who thought CBS was going to
keep paying him that and all the other costs when
the ratings had tanked and the show is so political
right now.

Speaker 1 (52:45):
By the way, Greg, by the way, the thing I
don't understand is that is produced and shown on this
by the same company that makes these right wing shows
like Landsman and Right Yeah, Paramount owns that. Why all
these conservative shows which are wildly popular, right and then
on that broadcast show they're showing Colbert. I don't understand.

(53:08):
I just don't know.

Speaker 2 (53:09):
Well, that's that's because Taylor Sheridan is like the hottest
TV guy around right now. I have some criticism of
those shows, which we can do some other time, but quick, because.

Speaker 1 (53:18):
Steve and I are going to have a pop a
pop culture show where lupreciate. Does he get to participate?

Speaker 2 (53:23):
No, she can do. I'll just mention in passing that
Greg Guttfeld was a fellow intern of m. Stanton Evans
like me some years after me. I just want to
say we do the same thing. But uh yeah, I
mean they were going to keep that thing going. But
my favorite part of the follow of the story was
Adam Schiff saying, I think this is happening because of

(53:43):
Trump's intimidation of CBS, so you know, he's provoked the
paranoid left and default right away to Trump the tyrant
and fascists is causing this. That's not at all CBS
was not going to keep paying that kind of money
for a show that's losing them by now millions of
dollars every month.

Speaker 1 (54:00):
I can't Yeah, I can't think of a better time
to take our last at break. I can't think of
a better place for us to come right back and
close out the show. Well, I thought I would start
our close out of the show by talking about my

(54:21):
appearance on Outnumbered this week on Wednesday, and for the
first time ever, I think I got tweeted out on
the Outnumbered channel for a comment I made now Outnumbered,
if you've not seen it, Listeners is a show where
you sit on a couch, there's one guy in the middle,
and then for very how to a very charismatic, striking

(54:44):
looking Fox News hosts all women. So this is the
thing that, Yeah, this is the Fox version of the View,
but the people are much more articulate and much more
pleasant to look at. But there's one guy in the
middle who sometimes they beat up on, sometimes they don't.
So usually the first half of the show is serious
political news and they ask for comments and then this

(55:06):
is the part where I just don't do so well.
They second half is what I think of his lifestyle stories. So,
for example, the last time I was on, they said,
there's a new poll out that shows that most Americans,
one fifth of Americans would spend more on their pets,
on their dogs than on their spouses. And I said,

(55:27):
the first thing I blurred out was one fifth. That
ought to be a half at least. And then so
this time they said, they did this story on how
the use of ozempic and other GLP one, these weight
loss drugs have been rising amongst young people because of
an increase in juvenile obesity. So what did I say.

(55:50):
I said, I have I know about a secret ancient
medicine that also stops weight gain, and it's called sports.
I said, I went to a school where I was
forced to play sports every single day of the week
against my will. And I was a good and I

(56:11):
said this as a good Asian kid. I just wanted
the sports to be over so I could go back
to reading and studying for the exams. But I'm still
I'm still glad that I was forced to because I
still play sports like squash and things I learned to
play back then, even though I wasn't very good at it.
Now I was gonna say, and then the producers told
me not to say this. I was about to say

(56:32):
something like they even forced me to play basketball, and
you know how white men can't jump. I was like,
Asians really can't jump. Basically I should say that. I
don't know why, so I just said it on our
show instead.

Speaker 2 (56:42):
Oh, I thought you were. I thought that was a
clever way of fat shaming John. And and by the way.

Speaker 1 (56:48):
Is this fat shaming? What do you mean fat shaming?

Speaker 2 (56:51):
Well? Sports, you know, tell people to exercise.

Speaker 1 (56:54):
Fat isn't fat. It's self a shame. I mean what
I don't understand.

Speaker 2 (57:00):
Yeah, what do we do with him? Lucre? You know?
All right? What was your best What was your best
mile time in sports? John? I gotta you know, it's
a mile.

Speaker 1 (57:08):
Oh was that when you ran four times around?

Speaker 2 (57:10):
Yeah?

Speaker 1 (57:11):
I sometimes I didn't even finish that one.

Speaker 2 (57:12):
It was okay.

Speaker 1 (57:14):
I was like, well, I was like, aren't there supposed
to be you know, water stations every lap? Likewise, I
just want you to know.

Speaker 3 (57:24):
That I often judge my own athletic prowess these days
against the military's uh uh standards, Oh yeah, what ones
are new ones? So but but here's the funny part.
I could almost not get out of bed and uh

(57:44):
max the standards for a woman my age in the military,
I think that a one and a half miles and
even two miles one and a half these are the
old standards before the new FAF. I'll leave that aside.
Was like one and a half miles was like twenty
three minutes or something like that. And twenty three minutes yeah,
it was so so yeah, I could walk.

Speaker 1 (58:05):
That fast, right, I mean we take a walk. Yeah, yeah,
if you're you know, if you're sixty good to get
to stop for ice cream halfway.

Speaker 3 (58:12):
Like sometimes you need to anyway. I don't know why
I got off on that, but my point is is
that I'm actually much more athletically fit at sixty five
than I was in high school because it's easier to
be that way when you get to be sixty five.

Speaker 2 (58:32):
Can be all for the record, I think I did
the mile and a half in high school in seven fifteen.

Speaker 1 (58:39):
Damn, that's what did you do?

Speaker 2 (58:41):
They're mile in four twenty nine?

Speaker 1 (58:44):
Oh my god?

Speaker 3 (58:45):
Was four six?

Speaker 2 (58:46):
Oh yeah, I was like you know almost.

Speaker 1 (58:51):
And that's when Steve had all that hair was slowing
him down. That was aerodynamic, like he's like a like
a stream RV. There.

Speaker 3 (59:00):
This whole episode has gone off the rail. So I
got to tell this story. So back when Steve and
I were together in graduate school, Steve ran a marathon
in the morning. It may have been a half marathon.
I don't remember for sure, but it was either one
or the other. And then we lived about two miles apart,
and he decided just to loosen up to run the

(59:23):
two miles to my house to just come over and say, Hi,
do you remember that, Steve?

Speaker 2 (59:28):
I do, Yes, that's right.

Speaker 1 (59:30):
So I went to law school with a friend of mine,
Frank Greig Masspack, who was supposed to run the nineteen
eighty Olympics, and he ran the mile in three fifty two. Yes,
And he told me that, and I was like, why
didn't you do it faster? Like, what's such a big deal?

Speaker 3 (59:46):
Three fifty two, three fifty two?

Speaker 1 (59:48):
What's that? Yeah? I just didn't know. I mean, I
didn't know that that was what the speed was. That
was so fast for.

Speaker 2 (59:56):
That that's way up there. I think at that time
the record was like three forty six, I want to say,
and that's a long way from three fifty two, believe me.

Speaker 1 (01:00:07):
So just looking it up, it says when he did
that in nineteen seventy one, he was he had eighty
one eighty one. He ran the sixth fastest mile in history.

Speaker 2 (01:00:16):
Yeah, that sounds right.

Speaker 1 (01:00:17):
Yeah, that's not fair.

Speaker 2 (01:00:18):
I mean when when Jim Ryan set the world record
in the late sixties, it was three fifty one.

Speaker 1 (01:00:24):
So wow, wow, all right, enough of you two.

Speaker 3 (01:00:27):
I have to do babon because because of this discussion,
I am not going to keep to my promise. I
have to do four because there's this one, actually five,
this one one hundred and fifty pound Jaba the Hut
denies using ozimpic oh, I.

Speaker 1 (01:00:43):
Saw perfect transition.

Speaker 2 (01:00:47):
Looks like the gecko frog.

Speaker 1 (01:00:49):
I'm not sure. But what about But what about Steve
in the position of Princess Leah with the metallic dog.

Speaker 3 (01:00:55):
Can't that's another transition? John Steady confirms it's all Steve's fault.

Speaker 1 (01:01:07):
Haven't they used that before?

Speaker 3 (01:01:09):
I do think that maybe Steve's David Diebel theory is
probably correct, but yes, that is a Babylon.

Speaker 1 (01:01:16):
I don't know ahead.

Speaker 3 (01:01:18):
David Diebel's a comedian slash writer for the Babylon.

Speaker 2 (01:01:23):
Bee Phoneshogler Magician.

Speaker 3 (01:01:26):
He's wonderful. I hope you're listening, David. Yes, okay, we
didn't even talk about the fact that I'm so thrilled.
Not that I drink coke, but still I'm thrilled at
any time they get artificial ingredients out of things that
people drink and eat. And as you probably know, coke
is now going to be made with real sugar and

(01:01:48):
not that god awful artificial corn syrup. Winning Trump announces
Mexican coke will now be made in America. Isn't that perfect?

Speaker 1 (01:02:02):
Isn't that really? The only thing that makes Mexican coke
taste better is that sugar.

Speaker 3 (01:02:06):
Yeah, yeah, it does taste better, but it's actually, believe
it or not, sugar is not that good for you.
But sugar is way better for you than corn syrup.
It's yeah.

Speaker 1 (01:02:17):
But anyway, you guys don't coke is even better.

Speaker 3 (01:02:20):
Than you guys drink diet coke, So like Trump, it
doesn't really matter to you.

Speaker 1 (01:02:25):
But I'm a coke zero man. I just take diet
coke because.

Speaker 3 (01:02:29):
It's I have a very good friend whose father owned
the biggest Coca cola producing plant in Mexico. So I drink.
I buy Mexican coke for my friends that come over
and drink rum and coke. Okay, I'm almost done, Biden
auto pen pleads the fifth.

Speaker 2 (01:02:50):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (01:02:53):
Okay, well this has been an exciting episode, So always
drink your whisky. Neat and Steve, what a new piece
of epic poetry from our Scandinavian chatchy particular ready for us?

Speaker 2 (01:03:07):
Because we're long tonight, as is typical lately, I'm just
gonna say thank you for your attention to this matter.
Why am I using words no more to say?

Speaker 3 (01:03:21):
Where the.

Speaker 1 (01:03:23):
Close the door?

Speaker 3 (01:03:25):
But the lord and go.

Speaker 1 (01:03:33):
Lay the night?

Speaker 4 (01:03:35):
In the night your shadow falls between us, never more,
never know.

Speaker 1 (01:03:45):
The memories all role when there's no tomorrow.

Speaker 4 (01:03:57):
Steve, boy, the sweet are bays my day.

Speaker 2 (01:04:05):
See you think of me with kind Please remember for
the day.

Speaker 3 (01:04:14):
Sweet the song

Speaker 1 (01:04:17):
Ricochet join the conversation