Episode 210: TV Economics Are Broken, and Stephen Colbert Just Found Out

🎬 Stephen Colbert FIRED — But It’s Not Why You Think

We kick things off with the headline everyone’s talking about: CBS firing Stephen Colbert.
Some politicians are blaming it on his liberal politics — but Mark blows up that narrative with hard facts:

• The show’s massive financial losses
• How traditional TV is collapsing under the weight of high-dollar, low-return shows
• Why streaming and YouTube are the real game changers
  Mark and Krysty even tease behind-the-scenes details on their own upcoming network show — and how they’re planning to do it the smart, sustainable way.

🕵️‍♀️ Tulsi Gabbard’s Russia Collusion Bombshell

Tulsi just dropped a stunner: Could the entire Russia collusion case against Trump have been fabricated?
We break down:

• What we know
• Why this story is rattling D.C.
• And why the “get Trump at all costs” obsession could be doing permanent damage to American politics

🎤 Coldplay Jumbotron Affair Drama (With Ava’s Hot Take)

A couple caught on the Jumbotron at a Coldplay concert just got exposed for having an affair — and it’s gone viral.
Ava jumps in to give us the real lesson on how this could’ve been avoided (teenage wisdom for the win).

🎸 Steve Miller Band Cancels Tour — For the Craziest Reason Ever

Mark and Krysty break down the hilarious, unbelievable reason the Steve Miller Band just canceled their latest tour.
Prepare to laugh out loud.

🐻 Sunday Game Day: Game Cam Chaos in Angel Fire

Our Sunday Game Day segment features a furry visitor who literally tries to destroy one of our trail cameras.
Mark declares: This means war.
(You’re gonna want to see this footage.)

🎶 Krysty’s Streaming Pick: A Must-See Songwriter Documentary

Krysty wraps the show with a streaming recommendation on one of America’s most talented (and underrated) songwriters.
Perfect for your weekend watch list!

Website: https://www.nodoubtaboutitpodcast.com/
Twitter: @nodoubtpodcast
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/NoDoubtAboutItPod/
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/markronchettinm/?igshid=NTc4MTIwNjQ2YQ%3D%3D

Episode Transcript

Speaker 2 (00:07):
okay, it's go time, it's go time scout is verbal,
very verbose start of the show.
Here we'll kind of calm herdown a little bit I may record
her because we're I.

Speaker 3 (00:19):
I am producing right now a little opening for your
sunday game day.
It's not done for today's show,but I'm working on it right and
I've been trying to finddifferent sound effects for it.
Just a quick clip, yeah.
And then she comes in andgrowls and I'm like, hmm, maybe
I should be using Scout for thelittle bit of the growl off the
top.
Well, it's a husky talk.
She's really talking Like she'snot coming in growling at us.

(00:39):
Can't find those that I like,so I'm going to surprise you
with what I come up with, butanyway, I'm looking forward to
it.
Looking forward to that OK yeahlet's talk about we have a full
, full show again.

Speaker 2 (00:49):
Yeah, we've got a big time show, so we're going to
start with the Stephen Colbertbouncing at CBS, the late show.
The reason we're going to dothat is because a couple of
things I think there's somereally interesting discussion

(01:10):
points on it.
We happen to be in the middleof producing a TV show for a
national network where we cantalk a little bit about some of
what's happening in the changinglandscape of television, and so
it's easy to be like, oh my God, it's political.
No, it's not, and we will blowthat argument out of the water
with data and actual information.
But it's a really interestingdiscussion back and forth and we
want to talk about it and wewill about that.
And we're also going to hearfrom Johnny Carson, which I
think is a really interestingsoundbite from him.

(01:30):
And then we're going to getinto this developing story on
what Tulsi Gabbard has done.
She's the head of the DNI, whichbasically takes all the
intelligence information fromsources within the country and
say the CIA, which works outsidethe country, synthesizes them
and tries to basically helppeople coordinate.
This happened after 9-11.

(01:51):
That DNI was formed right sothat you don't have silos at the
CIA not knowing what's going onwith the FBI and vice versa, so
that we can't put together whothe real threats are against
this country.
And so that's a.
It's an interesting job.
It isn't as important as, say,head of the FBI or head of the
CIA, but it is interesting andshe does have a wide look at
things.
Well, she started to releaseinformation that I think is

(02:14):
going to be fascinating to seewhere it leads, and it has to do
with the whole Russia situationDid they try to interfere in
our elections?
And she started to release someof this information that says
no, no, they didn't 2016.
So maybe there were otherthings at work here, and there's
just a lot of steps to thisthat we want to talk about and
educate you on before this thingreally develops, and it's just
starting to do that as well.

(02:35):
And then we're going to getinto this Coldplay story.

Speaker 3 (02:39):
Oh well, why?
Why would we not it's?
Only all over the news.
It's all over any place youlook on in on social media, so
why would we not talk about it?

Speaker 2 (02:46):
oh it's, I mean, unbelievable.
So we'll get into that.
We got a couple emails for youon what we're talking about with
uh, our last show, and thensteve miller, the steve miller
band, who you and I actuallyback in another life, when we
were just friends way back ingrand junction.
We're probably in our early 20s.
Yeah, we went to go see him.

Speaker 3 (03:03):
At Country Jam.
At Country Jam we were bothreporters at Country Jam, yeah,
and the Steve Miller band came.

Speaker 2 (03:08):
Yeah, yeah.

Speaker 3 (03:09):
I do remember going to see that.
Yeah, okay.

Speaker 2 (03:10):
So we're going to talk about why he's canceled his
tour, and for a reason that youwill not believe.
And then we have, of course,sunday game day.
We've got a problem with thegame cameras and we've got
somebody.
We've got a fight on our hands,we've got an animal that has
decided that it's go time, okay,and so we're going to have a
fight on our hands and we'll getto that.
And then we're also going toget into a little aviation news

(03:32):
and, of course, ourrecommendation for one of the
best documentaries we've seen ina while, and we're only halfway
through it, but it's that good,we're bringing it to you that
good, we're bringing it to you.

Speaker 3 (03:44):
Yeah, we're talking about it.
Yes, so it's going to be good.
Let's start up with thisStephen Colbert letting you know
big news coming out that hebasically has been told you have
the to the end of your contract, which is next May of 2026.
They're going to end his partof it and the show itself.
So it's it's leaving foreverthe late show which was made
popular by David Lettermanoriginally.
The show itself is beingcanceled basically.

(04:04):
And it's kind of creating allthis.
Is this a political move?
Is it a rating situation?
Is it a money situation?
Is Trump involved?
It's got all these elementsthat are already cooking up
another conspiracy.

Speaker 2 (04:16):
Very true.
And I think the thing you needto know if you don't watch
Colbert is he slowly, over time,and really has always been this
way but turn this into ananti-Trump hating show.
Like every night, he justunloads and it is.
You know, if you start to watchhim over time he just slowly
went away from humor and thenwent toward political commentary
, one-sided political commentary, just unloading time after time

(04:38):
after time, which again we'vetalked about on the show a
million times.
When he does it and Kimmel doesit and, to a lesser degree,
Fallon really doesn't do it.

Speaker 3 (04:46):
But I think he's kind of the most a non-political of
the late night he tries to beright, right, except for when he
was nice to Trump once.

Speaker 2 (04:53):
He got just destroyed for it.
But any any other way you cutit.
You've got these guys at ABCand CBS and really NBC to all
cutting up the same piece of pie.
They're all saying the samestuff, right, and all cutting up
the same piece of pie.
They're all saying the samestuff, right, and they're all
one-sided.
But remember, back in the day,you didn't see that, you didn't
see that with Jay Leno, youdidn't see that with Johnny
Carson, you didn't see that withConan O'Brien, right, you saw

(05:14):
them go back and forth andthey'd comment on the issues of
the day, but not take sides andtrying to really push the needle
right.
So no one has been moreaggressive in that than Stephen
Colbert.
Okay, meanwhile, as you start tosee everything change and the
economics of linear televisionchange, it really becomes less

(05:34):
and less popular all the wayaround, right?
So you cannot afford to takehalf your audience and throw
them away.
You just can't do it, or youhave to do it in a way where you
just become more of a politicaloutlet, and that's what it is.
And so I want to start withChris Murphy, because he came
out.
Elizabeth Warren came out.
A bunch of people have come outand on X as well, come out and

(05:57):
said basically we've reached thepoint in you know, threats to
the democracy where if youcancel a show, you're now
threatening a democracy.
Ok, so this is what ChrisMurphy, senator from Connecticut
, had to say when he heard hisfavorite late night host would
not be able to continue to tryto put his thumb on the scale.

Speaker 7 (06:15):
I want to tell you why the cancellation of Stephen
Colbert's show matters so much.
We are on the precipice ofentering a censorship state in
which Donald Trump is using thepowers of the federal government
in order to erase criticismfrom the airwaves.
What's happening at CBS rightnow is bone chilling.

(06:36):
See, this is parent companyParamount is trying to get a
merger approved, and they needthat merger to be approved by
the Trump administration.
And so, in a variety ofdifferent ways, paramount is
providing monetary and politicalfavors to Donald Trump.
First, they settled a totallybogus lawsuit that they would

(06:57):
have won in a walk in court thatwas filed against them by Trump
.
They essentially just paid him$16 million personally them by
Trump.
They essentially just paid him$16 million personally.
Then Paramount went to 60Minutes, their flagship news
program, and told them to stopcriticizing Donald Trump so much
.
Why?
Because they need this mergerapproved.
And then, finally, they havenow canceled Stephen Colbert's

(07:17):
show, knowing that StephenColbert was a knightly thorn in
the side of Donald Trump.
This is all clearly designed toget their merger approved so
that their millionaire andbillionaire owners and investors
, who are already filthy rich,can become even more filthy rich
.
This is what happens when thesemassive corporations control

(07:39):
the flow of information at thesame time that you have an
administration that is shamelessabout using the official powers
given to them by theConstitution and by statute in
order to compel politicalloyalty from the owners.

Speaker 2 (07:55):
OK, this is just garbage in so many different
ways.
Oh my God, OK so he is painfulto listen to.
He is, but he was.
He's definitely a line ofthought that has come out right
after this whole thing happened,and so Elizabeth Warren did
some of the same stuff.
There are a bunch of otherpeople.
This is all political.
The ignorance in thosestatements is baffling to me.

(08:16):
On this subject, I want tostart with what the Wall Street
Journal said in the article.
I want to start with just purenumbers, and, as someone who has
lived in the television worldfor 25 years, let me tell you
something.
When you stop making money forthe company, you're done.
You're done.

(08:37):
You don't sit around and giveyou a cushy job to ride this
thing out.
Extra millions of dollars,you're finished, okay.

Speaker 3 (08:50):
They stick the knife in your back the second you stop
being valuable to them.
And it's happened for decades.
I mean, this is not new.

Speaker 2 (08:54):
They don't.
They don't put on shows thatlose money.
So here's the argument I wouldmake against Chris Murphy, and
what you're about to read, andthat is Chris Murphy is exactly
180 degrees wrong.
Stephen Colbert stayed on theair because he was a thorn in
Trump's side, Because hehammered Trump.

Speaker 3 (09:12):
He stayed around as long as he did Now let's go to
the Wall Street Journal and youcan read the first numbers on
this and some of the reasoningbehind what happened.
It says Colbert cancellationexposes the perilous state of
late night TV.
Cbs's decision to end its longrunning late show franchise
touched off of a firestorm andit's a grim sign for a challenge
television format.

(09:33):
The late show with StephenColbert was profitable as
recently as a few years ago.
Now it loses about $40 milliona year.

Speaker 2 (09:41):
Hold on right there.
It loses $40 million a year inthis guy Murphy's like.
Oh, I was all political.

Speaker 3 (09:48):
Yeah, it was all political.
Trump was like he put thefingers on and said I want
Stephen.

Speaker 2 (09:52):
Colbert.
I want him out of here.
Get him out.
Get Colbert out, I want him outright now.

Speaker 3 (09:56):
I mean it's like no, this is ludicrous.

Speaker 2 (09:58):
He doesn't even care about Stephen Colbert as a
matter of fact, stephen Colberttalks to an audience that will
always hate Trump.
Again, chris Murphy acts likeStephen Colbert is a thought
leader in the country.
Nobody cares.
Okay, really.
And if you look at his numbersand what happened to the numbers
and we're going to get into thenumbers on this, and again,
this isn't necessarily aboutStephen Colbert the numbers for
linear TV and for the late nightshows are going down Right,

(10:21):
they are, so we'll talk about it.
So are going down Right, theyare, so we'll talk about it.

Speaker 3 (10:25):
So I'm sorry, keep on going.
They lose $40 million a year.
Right On Thursday, cbs pulledthe plug on the show and an
entire franchise launched in1993, making it the biggest
casualty yet among late nighttalk shows.
Contending with cord cutting,changes, tastes among young
viewers and declining ad revenue, there you go the budget for
the show.
The budget for the show filmedin New York City's Ed Sullivan
Theater includes a live band, astaff the host said numbered 200

(10:47):
people 200 people work on theshow.
Right and an annual salary of$20 million for Colbert,
according to a person familiarwith the show's operations.
Okay, so this is obviouslygoing to be tough going forward,
right?
So it says.
By distributing their hostmonologues and comedy bits
across YouTube and social media,the late night shows kept a
foothold in pop culture andnotched their share of viral

(11:09):
hits.
But digital advertising revenuehasn't made up for the fall in
ad dollars going to traditionalbroadcast programming.
Spending on linear advertisingfor the late night segment on
ABC, CBS and NBC fell from $439million in 2018 to to 221
million in 2024.
So almost half.

Speaker 2 (11:27):
Okay, so hold on.

Speaker 3 (11:28):
So that's Almost a 50% cut in average.

Speaker 2 (11:30):
This is so critical right, okay, so you go back to
2018, they're pulling in 439million, that block of time each
evening, right, right, and thatnumber's cut in half.
And these guys at CBS have thegall to put on a show that costs
$100 million a year to run.
It's ludicrous.
Ok, you can't do it.

(11:50):
Things have changed.
You have to produce shows morecheaply.
Ok, you just can't do this.
So for Chris Murphy andeveryone else to say, oh, now,
this is all political, it'sidiotic.
And again, all it does is rileup their base, doesn't allow
them to realize.
Wait a minute here, this issomething we have to adjust to.
And this is.
We're in the middle of thisexact same thing, okay, so, yeah

(12:12):
, go ahead.

Speaker 3 (12:12):
Well, I just wanted to say before you start talking
about our show.
I would argue this point,though, about some of the late
night stuff.
Okay, so I just looked back onwhat, steve?
Because I've never likedStephen Colbert personally.
I just he drives me crazy.
But that being said, I lookedback to see what kind of guesses
he had in the last month.
Right, largely political, okay,like, and from one side.

(12:33):
So you've like governor Shapiro, governor Josh Stein, nicole
Wallace, uh, maxwell Frost, youhave Zoran, um, domi was on
there, the guy that's runningfor mayor out of New York, um,
senator Adam Schiff.
I mean, sorry, but like, evenif I like these people, I'm not
sure I want to watch that lateat night.
I feel like late nighttelevision is supposed to be
kind of this escape from reallife, right, so I just feel like

(12:53):
, when you're that heavy on thepolitical side of something, to
me I think you can get that onCNN or some of the other MSNBC,
for instance.
I think late night televisionis supposed to be more
entertaining and I think thatsometimes Kimmel, especially Ann
Colbert, have really dippedaway from that and I think it
used to be kind of fun talkshows, fun bands.

(13:14):
I'm not saying he doesn'tsprinkle those in still, but I
would argue that people are notas interested in heavy political
commentary on those shows.

Speaker 2 (13:22):
Totally true.

Speaker 3 (13:23):
Now I know, gutfeld, as you're going to talk about is
a commentary show.

Speaker 2 (13:31):
It is, but your point is still well taken.
I understand your point.
So both of our points are goingto be true, right?
So I think you're absolutelyright that he has gone out and
gone far left, and so is Kimmel,and they're trying to, and I
guess you'd say NBC2, althoughFallon's not as much, but still
the all three of them are goingfor the same audience.
They're just trying to divideup the same audience, and they
do it all the time.
These legacy media companies,they all fight each other for

(13:52):
the same small audience, and soI think that's a problem.
Like CNN is fighting MSNBC isfighting CBS is fighting NBC is
fighting ABC for the same viewer, right, and so therefore
they're just shattering allthese viewers.
Meanwhile, who's on theconservative side?
You have the conservativeindependent media, and then you
have Fox News, and then you havea little bit of Newsmax and
some of those other peripherybrands.

(14:13):
But the point being in thiswhole thing is, when you're
fighting over a smaller andsmaller piece of the pie, you're
not gonna be successful.
And your point obviously thenis, if you, on top of that, give
them crap content with ashrinking audience, you've got a
problem.
So if you have a shrinkingaudience, what you have to do is
expand who might want to watchyour show?
And your point is they're notdoing that.

Speaker 3 (14:34):
Yeah, I don't think it's working.
I don't think that the the waythat they've been positioning
these shows clearly are notworking, because I just think
people can get that informationsomeplace else, right, if they
really want to hear from AdamSchiff.
I mean no offense, but like Idon't know.
I don't even know who wants tolisten to him on either side,
who cares?
I agree.
It's like, especially at night,like you're looking for some
entertainment before you go tobed, right, or you're you know,

(14:55):
maybe he puts you to sleep.

Speaker 2 (14:59):
I don't know show.
We got John Barrasso fromWyoming everybody, everybody be
like.

Speaker 4 (15:05):
I mean John.

Speaker 2 (15:05):
Barrasso is a nice guy, but I mean, you know, come
on, not in that medium.

Speaker 3 (15:09):
I feel like the bookers should be looking at you
know what is happening, but Ijust think, in general, some of
those talk shows or some ofthose kinds of types of shows,
they're decreasing in interestbecause people can stream more
of what they want to you, ofcourse.

Speaker 2 (15:21):
Yeah, yeah, we're talking about the shattering
audience.
You're absolutely right andthey also live in a world where
it is they live with, withpeople who just think like they
do and they all get shift backon.
It's important that we hearfrom Adam.
Oh, yes, it's very important,very important that we know what
Nicole Wallace thinks.
She can't get an audience onMSNBC.
She sure is.
She's nickel.

Speaker 1 (15:41):
It's not going to get you one.

Speaker 2 (15:43):
She is not going to get you one on CBS, okay.
So here's the thing.
Put together a couple of littlenumbers here and again.
So we're ping-ponging back andforth.
I totally agree with yourpolitical point, but also just
forget the politics ofeverything.
The numbers don't work.
Look right here at theproduction cost for each show.
The four late night shows, okay, and this is amazing.

(16:03):
So the late show is right,around a hundred million.
Okay, that's what they cost.
I believe in these numbers area little dicey because it's not
like they give you the exactnumber.
So these are estimates.
All right, kimmel is supposedto be right, around 88, 89
million, something in there.
76 million or so for thetonight show, under 50 million
for Gutfeld on Fox, okay, okay,so that's number one.

(16:26):
Fox has it right in the respectthat, okay, if you're going to
go political and Fox's Fox,fox's show is political and they
try to combine humor with it,do the.
You know you don't love it.
Right, we've, we've.

Speaker 3 (16:37):
I don't dislike it.
I just you have to be in themood for it.
Right.
It's not like I mean.
I have good friends that theylive for that show and I can
understand I think he's got someinteresting guests from time to
time.

Speaker 2 (16:49):
Um, I used to watch the five years ago and I like
five.
I think it's a really good andI liked the five a lot.
It's an excellent show.

Speaker 3 (16:52):
I just think that you have to be in the mood for that
.
Okay, and that's it but I agreebut you but.
But again, I'm not trying to getyou in trouble with our for you
, I'm just saying it's not no,but I will say, the people that
are tuning into gutfeld, theyknow that that's what they're
getting right, right, I thinkwhen I'm turning into like if I
was to watch, I mean I neverwould watch kimball, I'd rather
just poke sticks in my eyes.

(17:12):
But if I was to watch kimball Iwould not be expecting hey,
this is gonna be a politicalcommentary show, like that's not
.

Speaker 2 (17:17):
That's what it's become.
You know that now right butlike that's what I'm.

Speaker 3 (17:20):
What I'm saying is like I just think the normal
viewer is looking for some humorand like me at night and I
don't necessarily need to hearabout politics.

Speaker 2 (17:26):
Yeah, no, no no, I understand, but my, I love
politics.
And my point on it, though, isthat just because you're
conservative doesn't mean youlove Gutfeld, it's just.
That's the, that's the realm.
They've gone in Right, whichmakes a lot of sense, so let's

(17:47):
go.
Much.
It costs to put the show on,okay, so we actually gave the
late show and and and Colbert alittle bit of a break here.
That wall street journal said20 million.
We did, we gave him 15 millionon this graph, okay.
And then you've got JimmyKimmel.
Similar tonight show with JimmyFallon.
He gets about 16, 17 million.
Greg Gutfeld gets 7 million.
Okay, again.
Another.
Just understanding where themarket is and how much money is

(18:08):
left there.
Then the most important thing,right, what are the ratings?
Who's winning?
Guess what?
Fox is winning, and it's notclose.

Speaker 3 (18:19):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (18:20):
Fox, on average, viewership every night is 3.3
million people, and so you'retalking about costs that are
much higher on these other threenetworks and they don't touch
them for audience.
Now, again, that gets back intohow you distribute your
audience, cause if you're goingto take a liberal audience and
you're going to add up theKimmel in the late show, that is
more than they're getting onFox, but they're just dummies
for turning into this Right.

(18:40):
And so as you look at thiswhole thing and you add it all
together, you say you've gonepolitical, you've, your costs
are way too high for what youproduce, your audience is way
too small to justify it and youcan't do it.
And so then, when you havepolitical, we'll say thought
leaders jump in and say oh, thisis all about Trump, trump,

(19:03):
trump, trump Again.
Just keep on going, brother,just keep on blaming Trump when
this has nothing to do withTrump.
It's unbelievable.

Speaker 3 (19:12):
Well and I didn't mean to cut you off, but you
were explaining a little bitbecause we are producing and
helping with or filming thiscurrent show right now for our
national network, and it's just-.

Speaker 2 (19:21):
Yes, we're helping with it.
We're helping or we're doing it, but however you want to frame
it Right.

Speaker 3 (19:26):
And so it is an interesting dynamic because that
that whole type of show, likean HGTV type show, is changing.
I mean because these shows usedto be produced for millions of
dollars and in the fact of thematter is a lot of those shows,
if you've noticed at home,they're disappearing, they're
not as available anymore andpeople might be like, well,
maybe they just run their course, Maybe or maybe it's the fact

(19:48):
that they're so expensive toproduce and they don't get that
rate of return back that theycan't keep producing the shows
in the same capacity.

Speaker 2 (19:55):
Right.
So when in their heyday, Chipand Joanna Gaines and get 2
million viewers on an HG show,and you're, you're half that now
and that's continuing to tocome down here.
So what we're having to findout is and you're right, I'll
come back to it, because I wasjumping into it and then stopped
so what we're finding out iswe're trying to redo this whole
economic calculus to say, can weproduce a show for a third the

(20:20):
price that you used to?
Can we do that?
I don't know yet we're trying.
We're trying right now.
We're going to producesomething.
I don't know how it's going togo at this point, but we are
looking at those numbers andwe're having to do things.
Like you know, you start lookingat okay, when do you bring up
big crews to shoot things?
How often do you do it?
Do you shoot some of ityourself?
Youtube is a huge factor in allof this, because what's

(20:43):
happened is the quality of theprogramming and the quality of
the shooting has gone down,because people understand you
can go to YouTube, grab yourphone, go like this, you can get
a, you can get a.
The most popular, one of themost popular guys on YouTube
just uses a GoPro, that's it.
He didn't have a mic on, hedidn't have anything, and he
just uses a GoPro.
It's called outdoor voice,incredible by the way.

Speaker 3 (21:04):
Oh my gosh Right, I knew you were gonna have to put
a plug in for outdoor.
It's tremendous.

Speaker 2 (21:09):
It is tremendous he is great, but but that has
nothing to do with with thisthing.
But that's who you're competingagainst, Right?
And so most people decide Iwant to watch what I want to
watch when I want to watch it.
So when we talk about linear TV, what that means is it's a
network that runs at eighto'clock, this runs at nine
o'clock, that runs at 10 o'clock, this runs.
That's linear TV, right?
That's your common thing we allgrew up with.
Well, fewer and fewer peopleare saying to themselves I got

(21:32):
to be there right at nineo'clock to watch this show or
that show.
No, they want to watch whenthey want to watch.

Speaker 3 (21:43):
So the show we're doing is for a linear network
right, and for a network that ison demand as well Right.
Streaming streaming networkright.
You can't do it unless you havea streaming option.

Speaker 2 (21:47):
Correct, and I also think I think the network we're
going to be on is going to go toYouTube as well, so they're
going to have all of thosethings.
So so that's what.
But my point in all of this isevery one of us who's involved
in television puttingprogramming on has to adjust,
and your whole thought that youknow we can spend a hundred
million dollars a year on a showthat gets gets two and a half
million people to watch it isnuts.

(22:09):
Do you know how much it is perviewer?
It comes out to like 40 cents aviewer.
It's way too high, right?
It just doesn't work.
None of it works, and so,therefore, we're going to have
to see how it all shakes outhere.
But times have definitelychanged, especially then, when
you look back at people who usedto do this before, people like
Colbert right, like let's justtake a little.

Speaker 3 (22:30):
We I love this little clip of Johnny Carson.
I think he just, he just had itthe right um in, given he was
one of the pioneers in thismarket, right, so he could
really I mean you know, he andJack Parr?
Yeah, I mean, there was peoplebefore him, but I just feel like
at least in our lifetime,johnny Carson was the late-night
talk show host, right.
Well, he seemed really almostbefore our lifetime, really Well
, no he started, but I know, butwhen I was a kid, I mean, I

(22:52):
watched.

Speaker 2 (22:53):
Johnny Carson yeah, yeah, no, no, no, I just he kept
in mind when he was doing hisshow.

Speaker 1 (23:03):
And just so you know where this comes from.
It's an old 60 Minutesinterview with Mike Wallace.
People say he'll never take aserious controversy.
Well, I have an answer to that.
I said now tell me the lasttime that Jack Benny Red Skelton
Benny Comedian, used his showto do serious issues.
That's not what I'm there for,can't they see that?
But you're neither.

(23:24):
They think that just becauseyou have a tonight show, that
you must deal in serious issues,that's a danger.
It's a real danger.
Once you start that, you startto get that self important
feeling.
That's what you say has greatimport.
And you know, strangely enough,you could use that show as a
forum, you could sway people,and I don't think you should as
an entertainer.

Speaker 2 (23:45):
Yeah, and we used to have entertainers.
Even when those guys started,they used to be entertainers.
Kimmel used to be anentertainer on something called
the man Show.
Right, do you know how the manShow?
Do you know what the intro likejumping on trampoline, like
yeah, yes, okay, I can imagine,that's.
Jimmy Kimmel, but now he's theself-important scold that has

(24:08):
become a guy who's sheddingviewers like nobody's business.
So these guys have all becomeso self-important is exactly
what Carson said.

Speaker 3 (24:15):
Yeah, and we think the only one like they still
kind of argue a little bit onthat is um is is Fallon, because
I do think that Fallon is alittle bit of a nutball kind of
thing and he's tries these likeyou know, these games that he
plays with people.
For that I just think peoplehave run tired of it a little
bit, and that's the problem toois people's attention spans have
changed over time and you'dhave to keep their attention

(24:36):
with, you know, updated ideasand content, and I think he kind
of has a system in place.
He does the same thing over andover.
He does a lip sync or a singalong or game, you know.
I just think like some of hisideas are now kind of a little
old and they need to bereinvented, or he needs to
retire and say now, what's thenext season of my life?
Right?

Speaker 2 (24:55):
And I would agree, I think, creativity you've either
got to continue to bring newpeople in to keep you on that
cutting edge of creativity.
You've either got to continueto bring new people in to keep
you on that cutting edge ofcreativity, knowing what you're
competing against, which we'vetalked about YouTube and Tik,
tok and and X and everythingelse.
So you've got to keep thatstuff moving and keep fresh
ideas going, or, you're right,everybody runs their season.
I don't think there's any anyembarrassment in saying I've

(25:17):
done this for 10 years.
I I'm running out of the samestuff.
Yeah, and that's okay and you'reright.
I guarantee you Fallon willhave another season, you know, I
think he will.
The other two, I don't know.
But I mean, maybe I couldabsolutely see, you know,
colbert on MSNBC, but he's justmade so much money that I don't
know that he's going to want todo that.

Speaker 3 (25:37):
Right, but yeah, there's definitely a space and
time for him.
Okay, so big news story that'scoming out here is that Tulsi
Gabbard is basically going tostart releasing documents that
really kind of blow open thiswhole Russiagate kind of
situation.
Was it cooked?
Was it something that was justcreated out of?

(25:57):
You know, it wasn't actuallyreally happening, but people in
power wanted it to be like looklike it was.

Speaker 2 (26:03):
Yeah, we have to explain a little bit.
Going back, this goes back to2016,.
Right, this goes back to theelection between Donald Trump
and Hillary Clinton, where wewere all told by everybody in
the government that in 2016, theRussian, the Russians, tried to
weigh in and successfullyweighed in to help tip the
election to Donald Trump,because Donald Trump was in with
the Russians, they wanted himto win.

(26:23):
You know the whole, all thewhole deal.
Well, obviously they had amassive investigation where the
Mueller report came out.
They kept pushing, pushing,pushing the whole Trump Russia
thing and it turned out thatMueller basically found nothing.
There was nothing came of it.
They looked and could not find away and you know they tried to
pin everything they could on it,Okay, Well, now, now that Tulsi

(26:48):
Gabbard is head of the DNI,which you've talked about, so
she has access to all thisinformation, and so I want you
to just read a little bit.
She put out a memo the firstsort of shot to be fired in this
to say wait a minute.
By the way, the CIA, the FBI atthe time in 2016, after the

(27:10):
election, went to Obama and saidit didn't happen.
This did not happen.
We don't have any proof of this.
So let's start with the firstthing she she issued with this
news release.

Speaker 3 (27:22):
Right.
So this is the headline saysnew evidence of Obama
administration conspiracy tosubvert President Trump's 2016
victory in presidency.
On Friday, director of NationalIntelligence Tulsi Gabbard
revealed overwhelming evidencethat demonstrates how, after
President Trump won the 2016election against Hillary Clinton
, president Obama and hisNational Security Cabinet

(27:42):
members manufactured andpoliticized intelligence to lay
the groundwork for what wasessentially a year-long coup
against President Trump.
In the months leading up toNovember 2016, the intelligence
community consistently assessedthat Russia is quote probably
not trying to influence theelection by using cyber means.
End quote On December 7th 2016,after the election, keeping in

(28:07):
mind, by the way, just fortiming purposes, trump's not in
office at this point.
Right, this is still.

Speaker 2 (28:11):
Obama, not until January 21st.

Speaker 3 (28:12):
Right.
Obama is still the actingpresident.
Talking points were preparedfor DNI James Clapper stating,
quote foreign adversaries didnot use cyber attacks on
election infrastructure to alterthe US presidential election
outcome.

Speaker 2 (28:28):
Then, on December 9th , OK, so December 7th let's just
make sure you get this.
Sorry because there's a lot foryou to read at once.
So December 7th, basicallyClapper who who held Tulsi
Gabbard's job before TulsiGabbard back in 2016, says OK,
we got this information.
They did not try to to alterthe.

(28:48):
You know election results.
Election results or try toweigh in on them.

Speaker 3 (28:51):
OK, so we go to two days later two days later, then
it says, president Obama's WhiteHouse gathered top National
Security Council principals fora meeting that included James
Clapper, john Brennan, susanRice, john Kerry, loretta Lynch,
andrew McCabe and others, todiscuss.

Speaker 2 (29:05):
Russia.
Okay, just so you know whothose people are.
So you had the head of the CIAthere.
You had John Brennan there.
It was close to Obama.
John Kerry, you had the top,top echelon of the Obama
administration.
This doesn't get any higherthan this.
It's like Trump calling in JDVance.
It's like Trump calling inMarco Rubio.

(29:26):
It's like Trump calling in KashPatel, bondi, all of them.
Well, not Bondi necessarily inthis case, but still you get the
point.

Speaker 3 (29:34):
After this meeting, dni Clapper's executive
assistant sent an email to ICleaders tasking them with
creating a new IC assessmentquote per the president's
request.

Speaker 2 (29:44):
OK, so them not acting on this is now they're
asking them to change that, thatoutlook.

Speaker 3 (29:50):
Right.
It says that details the quotetools Moscow used and actions it
took to influence the 2016election.
It went on to say, quote ODODNI will lead this effort with
participation from CIA, fbi, nsaand DHS.
End quote.

Speaker 2 (30:07):
Okay, so what this basically?
Now, we don't know where thisis going, so we want to say this
we're not going to get into theveracity of how true this is
yet, because it's got to playout I don't know, right.

Speaker 3 (30:18):
And Tulsi is saying that she's going to be releasing
more information.

Speaker 2 (30:21):
So we'll hear from her in a second.
She's got she says she's got alot more receipts, but but make
no mistake, she is in a positionto be able to say okay, here's
how it all went down.
Now, what she also releasedwith this.
Not just that, she didn't justrelease a news release that said
this, she released all sorts ofdocuments that show it as well,
and she tweeted this.

(30:41):
This is where she gets backinto the 7th and the 9th and how
they change things, she says.
The next day, the top nationalsecurity officials, including
FBI Director Comey and CIADirector Brennan and DNI James
Clapper, gathered at the ObamaWhite House to discuss Russia.
Obama directed the IC to createa new intelligence assessment,
a new one.
Pull one out of thin air.

(31:01):
I don't know.
Obama's going to say no, no, no, no, it's just some other
information and whatever we'llsee.
Okay, we'll find out, but thisis the way it looks.

Speaker 3 (31:09):
And so then, to create a new intelligence
assessment that detailed Russianelection meddling, even though
it would contradict multipleintelligence assessments
released over the previousseveral months.
Okay, that's the finish.
You're absolutely right.

Speaker 2 (31:21):
No, no, no, you're absolutely right, and then she
releases some of the documents.
So here are some of thedocuments.
Ava, we can go in on theDecember 9th email from the ODNI
leader, okay, and you can see.
Sorry to the other side, kiddo,there it is.
Yeah, so the IC is prepared toproduce an assessment per the
president's request.
So, again, these are actualemails that come from this.

(31:43):
Okay, so this is the kind ofstuff you start going whoa.
So I want to hear again.
We're going to continue tobreak this down, but let's hear
from what Tulsi Gabbard had tosay.
She was on Fox today, okay,this morning with Maria
Bartiromo, which Bartiromo's, bythe way, suit that she has on
classic.
I mean, I'm just loving this,by the way just look at
Bartiromo suit as you're, asyou're watching this Bartiromo

(32:04):
suit is is just, I mean,unbelievable.

Speaker 4 (32:07):
All right, so anyway, listen to why Tulsi Gabbard
says this is so dangerousQuestion in my mind that this
intelligence communityassessment that president Obama
ordered be uh uh published,which contained a manufactured
intelligence document.
It's worse than evenpoliticization of intelligence.
It was manufacturedintelligence that sought to

(32:28):
achieve President Obama and histeam's objective, which was
undermining President Trump'spresidency and subverting the
will of the American people.
So, yes, next week we will bereleasing more detailed
information about how exactlythis took place and the extent
to which this information wassought to be hidden from the

(32:49):
American people, hidden fromofficials who would be in a
position to do something aboutit.
And that's really the pointhere that I think is most
important, maria, and you saidit in your opening
Accountability is essential forthe future of our country, for
the American people to have anysense of trust in the integrity
of our democratic republic.
Accountability, action,prosecution, indictments for

(33:14):
those who are responsible fortrying to steal our democracy is
essential for us to make surethat this never happens to our
country again.

Speaker 2 (33:22):
OK, that is some serious talk.
So remember a couple of thingshere.
She's saying they fabricatedthey completely.
Okay.
Know this about Tulsi Gabbardshe's already seen what she's
talking about.
She's seen what we haven't seenyet, Right?
So if you're thinking, oh, shedoesn't really have the goods or
whatever, I don't know, OK, sowe'll have to wait and see on

(33:43):
this.
But remember what this led to.
This was designed to basicallycreate a massive snare for Trump
the second he got in office.
Push it, push it, push it.
Get all the intelligenceagencies combined with the media
and attack, attack, attack andit worked.

Speaker 3 (33:59):
It's all we talked about for a year.
It's more than year of hispresidency, More than that.

Speaker 2 (34:03):
this stretched way beyond a year, right, and this
went on and on and on until theycouldn't find anything else.
And so the reason it's sodangerous is because, if you
make up details of somethingthat never occurred just to
create problems for the otherpolitical party, we are dealing
in a world now which isdevastating, and so and remember
, this all happens.

(34:24):
And then you get in Trump losesin 2020.
And then what do they do?
Legally?
They go after him every waythat they can't try to get him
in Georgia, convict him of 34felonies or whatever in New York
ridiculous stuff.
Well, guess what?
Now look where we are.
You've got your politicalopponents, people who went and

(34:46):
did this, democrats on the otherside of the aisle who went
after trump this way, and guesswhat they've got?
They've got access toeverything.
At least it's still there, ithadn't been destroyed.
They've got access to it.
And so this is now created a, apolitical environment that
includes going after legallyyour political opponents.
Some would argue they deserveit and they may.

(35:07):
Well, we don't know yet.
On this Right, we need to learnmore.
Ok, but my only point isbecause of Trump how Trump has
been dealt with, because he'sbeen treated as if he is the
most devastating, dangerous, outof control politician that
these people have ever seen.
They've overstepped in amassive way and now we are

(35:30):
creating a political and legalenvironment which is pretty
perilous and it's really scary.
And I think you look at thisand I'm concerned for where this
country goes.
I have to get to the bottom ofit.
But have you seen this story onthe mainstream news at all?
No, cbs covered it.
Nbc covered it.
No, abc covered it.
Wall Street Journal Post Noneof them.

Speaker 3 (35:52):
No, no, it was touching this, except for
Newsmax.
It's on Newsmax and on Fox Newsand then some on X.

Speaker 2 (35:57):
Okay.
So here's the other thing.
This isn't about coverage onthe news, this is about charges.
Okay, so listen to what shesaid there.
At the end she said this isabout charges.
This is about holding peopleaccountable legally.
Okay, tulsi's laying all thisstuff out.
And then Tulsi did the ultimatelay this thing out, right.

(36:18):
She said now it's on Pam Bondi.
Just listen to what she sayshere and then we'll get to what
a big deal this is.

Speaker 4 (36:27):
So, at the end of the day, we need to look at Pam
Bondi.
Is that the person who, at theend of the day, is going to
bring us accountability?
Pam Bondi, attorney General,pam Bondi, fbi Director Kash
Patel?
It is their responsibility togather all of the evidence, both
that we have released, thefacts that have already been
known previously, theinformation that will continue

(36:50):
to come out and move forwardwith this prosecution and these
indictments.

Speaker 2 (36:56):
Okay, I mean.
So, if this gets back to ourpoint, you're going to talk
about Epstein in a minute.
Okay, this gets back to thatpoint.
You're going and laying outthis stuff, saying we got the
goods here, that they they didstuff that really was designed
to hurt this country in aterrible way.
If it's all true which again,we'll wait and see Right, but if

(37:19):
you're going to go set thatexpectation amongst your base,
you better deliver.
Yeah, there are people that aregoing to go set that
expectation amongst your base,you better deliver.
Yeah, there are people that aregoing to need to be charged
here.
Is that how this is going to godown?

Speaker 6 (37:29):
Yeah, do we?

Speaker 2 (37:29):
charge.
Obama Bondi's like right, Do youcharge?
Like what's going on?
I mean I don't know.
I don't know what they have, Idon't know what's on the others,
I have no idea yet Right upisn't necessarily because of the
particular details yet, butbecause of where we are as a
country and, in the things thathave happened because of Trump
derangement syndrome, whatpeople have done to say we will

(37:52):
stop, we will do whatever we.
We'll break the law, we'll dowhatever we, okay, or we're
going to try to get him in jail,we're going to do everything we
can to get him in jail, okay.
These actions have consequencesand we are seeing them right
now, and especially when TulsiGabbard talks this way if you're
Pam Bondi and you don't chargeanybody, what does that look

(38:13):
like?

Speaker 3 (38:14):
Well, it looks like the Epstein case.
I mean I'm saying you know,it's like.
I just feel like you know,listening to Tulsi Gabbard
talking about.
We need transparency, we needto make sure that these people
are held accountable, thatthere's charges brought, all
these things.
Yeah, that's why people arestill talking about the Epstein
file.
I know that you and I disagreeon this a little bit.
You think it's taking up toomuch oxygen.
There's bigger fish to frythings of that nature.
I understand where you're goingwith all that.

(38:35):
I'm not sitting here saying Ineed to personally see the list
of everything there isn't a list, right, right, okay, whatever.
I'm just saying the reason thatthis is a big deal is because it
was something that Trump didrun on.
Okay, it's the same argumentthat Tulsi Gabbard is now making
regarding this.
The Democrats that are thatthat are pushing this Epstein
file thing.
I disagree with him on that.

(39:10):
I think no, no, no, no, you ranon, I'm going to, I'm going to
clean the swamp, I'm going toget the deep state out, I'm
going to flush things throughand I'm going to be honest and
transparent with things, and Ithink that that goes down with
Epstein.
It happens with this, ithappens with what.
There's a lot of issues, right,that we still want.
I have no idea who shot that,who tried to shoot Trump a year
ago, right, like I don't knowwhat that story is.

(39:31):
These are things that I feellike are valuable for us to know
Now, given I understand thereare, like, security clearances.
There's national securityissues.
I'm not saying we have to diginto all that.
You know national securityissues.
I'm not saying we have to diginto all that, but if you could
at least come out and say giveus some more information about
Epstein and say he was actuallya government agent or whatever
you want to say whatever it was,right, I mean.

(39:53):
But that's how conspiracy starts, mark.

Speaker 2 (39:55):
No, I know Cause you promise.

Speaker 3 (39:56):
Hey, we're going to.
You know, you have Bondi outthere who says I'm, you know,
I'm going to deal with this, I'mgoing to be transparent with
this and we're going to go afterthem.
You have Dan Bongino and KashPatel talking on their own shows
, by the way, for years leadingup to this.

Speaker 2 (40:08):
Here's the argument.
I want to separate those twoout because you're exactly right
.
When Kash Patel and whenBongino were talking about this,
they were talking like we talk.
We have some information onstuff, but we don't have
anywhere near some informationon stuff, but we don't have
anywhere near.

Speaker 3 (40:24):
We have not seen the UFO files, by the way.

Speaker 2 (40:25):
But my point is they're talking, they're popping
off in stuff they think may ormay not be true.
Okay, tulsi Gabbard has thegoods Like it's her job.
She has them.
Okay, but so did Pam Bondi.

Speaker 3 (40:38):
So did Pam Bondi.

Speaker 2 (40:40):
I would argue this.

Speaker 3 (40:41):
I would argue she gets on there and she says I've
got the goods on my desk and I'mgoing to be telling everybody
about everything.
Yeah, that's a fair point.
And then it looks bad when it'snot, when we don't know more
information.

Speaker 2 (40:50):
Okay, but I will say this I think Tulsi Gabbard,
first of all, she was hired forthat job for this reason, for
what you're seeing right now,what happened here, and I think
Tulsi is looking into it.
I think Tulsi Gabbard I look, II'm not.
I've had my issues with her, noquestion.
Um, I have my issues on some ofthe things she's done.
However, I will say I thinkshe's competent.

(41:11):
I don't think she's a, I don'tthink she's looking to jump in
front of the camera the wayBondi does.
I think there's a differentlevel operator there, and so I
think it's going to be veryinteresting, and I was.
I just found I think the wholething's fascinating in the
respect that she just stuck iton Bondi.
I mean, she did, and you knowshe's got more stuff.
So just I don't know, I don'tknow how it's all going to go,

(41:33):
but but I just I just worriedthat it.
I think this is a much biggerdeal because I think the Ep, it
hurts Trump.
I don't think it matters.
I don't this.
This matters for the future ofthe country because it's how we
deal with each other.

Speaker 3 (41:50):
I will agree with you on that point that one of them
really deals with how we manageour country right and all that.
But what I would look at theEpstein case a little bit
differently, because you knowyou have all these murmurs of,
like human trafficking and sextraffic workers and you know
these like big wigs in thegovernment that are all part of
this.
We don't even know if that'strue.
Right, we don't have a clue ifit's true or not, because
there's been so much conspiracythrown at this thing that I

(42:13):
think, to some degree, they doneed to release some actual
information to shut this storydown and really shut it down,
Not be like we're not going totalk about it anymore.
I don't know why you care Likethat's the wrong answer, In my
opinion that Trump gave.
I don't think that answered thequestion and I think that he ran
on this.
So I think you you should giveus some more information on that
.
I don't think it shoulddominate the news cycle all the

(42:34):
time.
I'm not interested in talkingabout Epstein.
For the next six months of mylife I could care less.
I know you are, but I justthink I'm speaking for the
people who are not.
I know I get it and then youroll in this next story right of
you know, tulsi Gabbard's likesaying, ok, here you go, pam
Bondi, we want transparency, wethink there should be charges,
we want accountability.
Let's see what you got.

(42:54):
I think holy cow if Bondiquestion.

Speaker 2 (43:01):
I think that you have .
You have the backing of thewhite house in a massive way on
this.
This is Trump's number oneissue, like he has believed from
the very beginnings.
Like this is all garbage, it'sall garbage, and so far, he's
been a lot more right than wrongon this.
There's been a lot more in theway of smoke on the side, of
making stuff up, than there hasbeen on oh, here's the goods on
Trump and Putin, which doesn'texist, right.
So I agree.

Speaker 3 (43:21):
I just think it goes to credibility, like I don't
think that Epstein and Trump hadsome sort of like.
I just I don't buy all that.
I don't buy this stupid garbageletter that he supposedly wrote
for Epstein's party None ofthat stuff that's just dumb and
I don't care about it.
I just don't even think there'senough merit to it.
I think it just sounds likesalacious gossip, quite frankly.
But I do care about the fact oflisten, of listen.
If we're going to hold peopleaccountable and we're going to

(43:44):
give you know we're going toreveal the truth on things and
we say that, then I would liketo see a standby that is I
believe that adds to hiscredibility.

Speaker 2 (43:53):
I think you're, so I think you're making a ton of
sense.
I just I didn't vote for Trumpor I've never voted for anybody
on the basis of Epstein, I thinkit's-.

Speaker 3 (44:01):
No, I agree, I just don Epstein, I think it's.
I don't, I don't, but I do care.

Speaker 2 (44:03):
I mean, I care about those sorts of things, but I
just to me this is not doesn'tdeserve the level of of interest
that it gets from a lot ofRepublicans.
But we'll see.
But it is not hurting Trump'snumbers.

Speaker 3 (44:12):
We'll move on from this, though it is what it is
exciting thing Coldplay has donein quite a while.

Speaker 2 (44:24):
Oh, take it easy.
Take it easy.

Speaker 3 (44:26):
I like Coldplay, I'm just saying I'm not like jamming
to all their songs, but nowthey're coming back into
rotation.
I have to say so.
Okay, the Dumbotron.
We all know this story TechCEO's affair with an HR chief,
which I mean honest to goodnessof all the people you could
cheat on, cheat with the HR lady, like that.
It makes it triple.
It's a triple factor rightthere and it's exposed on a

(44:48):
Coldplay concert.
Jumbotron.

Speaker 2 (44:51):
We'll just show you this how it goes down, in case
for the 2% of you that have notactually seen this video yet
We'll go real quick.
We'll just show you what it isyeah, here it is.

Speaker 1 (45:02):
Oh, look at these two , Alright come on, you're okay.

Speaker 7 (45:05):
Oh what?
Either they're having an affairor they're just very shy okay.

Speaker 2 (45:13):
That is literally chris martin from coldplay
saying they're either having anaffair or they're very shy.
They're having an affair, okay.

Speaker 3 (45:21):
So and I actually.
What's interesting, I talked tomy friend shawna who went and
saw coldplay when they wereplaying in Denver Right and she
had an interesting point on this.
She said she remembers theJumbotron going around and like
the kissing cam and they werecatching people.
She said they were doing thefloor with that.
She said it's very clear thesepeople were in a suite.

Speaker 2 (45:46):
She said it's like 0% chance that this Jumbotron,
that this camera would have hita couple up in a suite.
She said it's highly unlikely,it's always a zero, but I mean
you got 70 000 people, 80, 80000 people in the stadium what
are the odds?

Speaker 3 (45:53):
oh, I think 0.0 until it actually happens.
And then you're like oh my gosh, like their faces, I mean, I
just think so yeah, no, it's so.

Speaker 2 (46:02):
Ava, you had an interesting take on this as
we're watching it, so we see allthis, we see it all blow up and
then I bet your reaction andyour take on it was was pretty
wise.

Speaker 6 (46:12):
Yeah, I said obviously, if they'd acted just
completely normal it would havebeen fine, there would be no
issue.

Speaker 2 (46:18):
Nobody would have known.

Speaker 6 (46:18):
Their spouses aren't at home watching Coldplay
Jumbotron footage.
Yeah, watching ColdplayJumbotron footage.

Speaker 3 (46:22):
I'm sorry, but this was in their.
I believe this was near theirhometown in Boston, something
like that.
Somebody could have seen them.
Okay, so they could have, butnot to this degree.

Speaker 2 (46:29):
But this wouldn't have for sure happened.

Speaker 6 (46:31):
It wouldn't have.

Speaker 2 (46:32):
If they just sit there like this and they're just
like hey, we love Coldplay,let's do yellow.
And then they go right and thenthey go off of them.
Who records that and shows it?
And even if someone shows itonline, that person who shows it
online it doesn't go viral.
Right, right, no.
And so therefore, the familynever sees it.
She's exactly right.

Speaker 3 (46:53):
Yeah, I guess, cause I guess what I heard was that it
was just somebody in theaudience just happens to be
recording, along with the kisscam, and she's the one that
posted this.
Somebody recognized the coupleand that's how this thing went
crazy.
So in it, in just the fact thatChris Martin called it out.
So now, chris Martin, if you'reChris Martin, now what?
What are you thinking?
Are you thinking maybe weshould kill the jumbo kissing
cam?
Or do you think now, this guy'sa dirt bag?

Speaker 6 (47:14):
So it doesn't matter.
This is what's making ColdplayTalk about it again.

Speaker 3 (47:18):
Yeah Well, they're pretty relevant.
Actually, I love.
I guess my question was whywere we so fascinated with this
this week?
Like what?
What drove the fascination ofthis?
Is it because he was a CEO?

(47:38):
Is it because in corporateAmerica sometimes the HR that's
what one of my friends said theysaid oh please, I've worked in
corporate America forever.
The HR department thinks theyknow everything and they judge
you for everything accordingly.
So it made it like I don'tthink.

Speaker 6 (47:52):
kind, of the sweet moment.
Interesting because of the HRdepartment.

Speaker 3 (47:56):
You don't think it was that.
What do you think it was?

Speaker 6 (47:57):
I think it was.
Oh, these two people areobviously not supposed to be
here together.
And this guy slithered to theground at Coldplay.

Speaker 2 (48:04):
His reaction.
His reaction is what is whattouched it off.

Speaker 6 (48:09):
It doesn't matter what they do for work, it
matters that like, oh, they werenot supposed to be together.

Speaker 2 (48:13):
Like he's he's running.
He runs a concrete truck andshe's the she's the she's.
You know, working the scheduleat the concrete plant, that it
would be the same thing.

Speaker 3 (48:21):
I disagree with you.
I think the fact that he wasthe CEO of an AI company he was
a big, big deal, I guess it doeshelp.

Speaker 2 (48:28):
I guess you're probably right.

Speaker 3 (48:29):
I don't know if this is true or not, but people were
posting about how I guess he waskind of hard to work for.
You know some there was, ofcourse it's always the
disgruntled things.

Speaker 6 (48:44):
I don't even know if a different CEO.
Yeah, all the CEOs of the world, I guess the point is, it
probably all matters.

Speaker 2 (48:48):
Right, it all matters , but without their reaction it
never sees the light of day, andhere's.

Speaker 3 (48:53):
Another interesting part is that supposedly there
was a statement that Andy putsout right the CEO that gets
busted.
And people are just posting iteverywhere and it's a ridiculous
statement.
Okay, like it looks like itcould be real and from our we're
not sharing it because from ourresearch it turns out it's fake
.
It's fake, right.
So I wish the people that stillare posting it thinking it's
true.
The guy did not release astatement, as far as we can find

(49:15):
it and he's gone from thecompany, so one of the quick.

Speaker 2 (49:17):
We're running long here, so I want to get going a
little quick.

Speaker 7 (49:20):
No, we will, yeah, yeah, yeah, we will.

Speaker 2 (49:22):
Okay, so every?
Basically because baseball isthe big sport going right now,
the big stadium sport goingright now.
Every baseball team has beendoing the kiss cam and doing
jokes about it.
Take a look at the PhillyFanatic.

Speaker 3 (49:38):
Oh my gosh.
I mean, this thing's going tolive in infamy.
Oh it's unbelievable.

Speaker 2 (49:43):
It's hilarious.

Speaker 7 (49:43):
Oh God.

Speaker 2 (49:44):
Yeah, and then he gets back, he's still trying to
hide.

Speaker 1 (49:47):
He's still trying to hide.

Speaker 2 (49:49):
And then look at the people they show right after
this.
This is my wife.

Speaker 4 (49:53):
This is my wife.
They kiss that's funny.

Speaker 2 (49:56):
I mean it's just killing them.
Oh, it's everywhere, it'spretty funny.

Speaker 3 (50:02):
I feel terrible, honestly, for the spouses that
were cheated on and theirfamilies, like that's a terrible
way to find out.

Speaker 2 (50:08):
Well, it's a kick in the teeth, I mean, and what an
idiot.

Speaker 3 (50:11):
You go to an 80,000-person stadium with your
secret mistress.

Speaker 2 (50:15):
Well, it's just the arrogance of it.

Speaker 3 (50:18):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (50:18):
And taking your family and kicking them in the
face as well is not cool andkicking them in the face as well
is not cool, not so good.

Speaker 3 (50:23):
Yeah, okay, so do we have time for comments or are we
going?

Speaker 2 (50:24):
to move on.
All right, do some quickcomments.
Quick comments, let's go.
Do you want me to do?

Speaker 3 (50:26):
emails or do you want to skip emails?

Speaker 2 (50:27):
today.
No, get it, we got to read thefirst one at least.

Speaker 3 (50:29):
Oh, okay, Well, all right here we go.
Okay, this person is a huge fanof it says I usually do not like
you, but this was a good show,other than the first 10 minutes
that you wasted people's time,in my opinion.
I do not favor deporting allthe illegals in New Mexico, but

(50:51):
the cartels and criminals needto go and ICE has to be allowed
to do their job.
I was very impressed by thehousing analysis.
Keller was a very good stateauditor, but he's changed
immediately when he was electedmayor and then he goes on to say
that he had wanted to meet withmayor Keller and Keller won't
meet with him anymore.
So, sigmund, I'm sorry wewasted your time at the top of
the 10 minutes.
We appreciate your comments andyou just at least tuning in for

(51:11):
at least the last episode.
I don't know if he's still herewith us.

Speaker 2 (51:15):
I really don't know what Sigmund's doing but, I do
love the comment, though Iusually don't like you.

Speaker 3 (51:20):
I usually don't like you, which is fantastic.
It's very salty.
Thank you, sigmund.

Speaker 2 (51:23):
I do appreciate that.

Speaker 3 (51:24):
Yeah, and then let's go on to Husky Girl.
I put Husky Girl in herebecause she's got a husky in her
name.

Speaker 2 (51:30):
Yeah, that's cool, we like that, mark and Christy.

Speaker 3 (51:32):
I'd like to take this opportunity to express my
gratitude for the diligent workthat you and your daughters, who
are remarkable to acknowledgeyour advocacy on behalf of law
enforcement in Albuquerque.
The new officers at the APDexhibit a genuine dedication to
making a positive impact withinour community.
They face each workday withuncertainty of returning home
safely.
A reality is often overlooked,with many taking life for

(51:54):
granted, and amen to that we do.
We are big supporters of theAPD, the men in blue.

Speaker 2 (51:59):
We definitely back them, and women yeah.

Speaker 3 (52:01):
And women for sure.
Yeah, they're great and then wejust added Dan in here.
Dan said I'm sorry yourfamily's going through dementia.
It can tear a family apart, sohang tight to each other and
continue to pray.
The information you presentedis helpful, as is diet and
exercise.
Stay positive and you will findlaughter and smiles on the
other side of this, I promise.

Speaker 2 (52:20):
Great show as always and thank you so much, dan.

Speaker 3 (52:21):
That's really nice.
Yeah, the whole dementia thingnot easy, and I did share a
little bit about my motherhaving that now and my sister
really is the one that'scarrying the heavy load on that.
So I pray a lot for Vickibecause she needs it.
Yeah, okay.
So we're going to wrap up witha couple of fun happy stories.

Speaker 2 (52:34):
Yeah, yeah.

Speaker 3 (52:35):
Yeah, I mean other than the.

Speaker 2 (52:37):
Steve Miller band.
I went to go see back in theday and fly like an Eagle, like
if you grew up in the seventies,eighties, you know you.
You know Steve Miller band hitsabracadabra, stuff like that.
Now Steve Miller is 80 yearsold, by the way, just so you
know.
So they canceled their tour.
Okay, it's crazy.
So Steve Miller band wasscheduled to perform at the New
York state fair and two otherconcerts upstate in August, but

(52:59):
on Wednesday the classic rockgroup abruptly canceled their
entire 2025 tour.
This is I hope he's OK.
I mean, I start thinking Stevegot a health problem here, and
they cited their reason as theweather, despite the fact that
their tour was happening acrossa wide range of days and have
different weather conditions.
The band made this announcementon social media.

(53:20):
In their note, they wrote theSteve Miller band has canceled
all of our upcoming tour dates.
The combination of extreme heat, unpredictable flooding,
tornadoes, hurricanes andmassive forest fires make these
risks for you, our audience, theband and the crew unacceptable.

Speaker 3 (53:38):
What are you talking?
About it is literally paranoiaat its peak.

Speaker 2 (53:42):
This is like there's still a strain of COVID out
there.
How in the world are you goingout to the grocery store in 2025
?
What are you talking about?
Steve Miller, and this is agreat one.
One of the reactions was loveyou, steve.
But this is rather strange.
Another fan remarked somehowall the other bands are managing
Maybe tour in the winter.
Hold on a minute, wait a secondon the tour in the winter.
We got winter.

(54:05):
Hold on a minute, wait a secondon the tour in the winter.
We got snowstorms, we have icestorms, we have wind, we have
wind chill.
We have all sorts of problems.
Steve could be dead in minutesif he tours during the winter.
This is outrageous.

Speaker 3 (54:11):
Get inside I think steve miller should just do a
recording, stick it on youtubeand call it a day.

Speaker 2 (54:17):
I mean honestly I mean just honestly, stop with
this.
I mean it's unreal the weather,oh, it's just the weather's
gonna get, yeah, okay here we goagain.

Speaker 3 (54:24):
That just sounds like oh no it is and it's that, it's
.

Speaker 2 (54:27):
It's you go and start .
If you start to believeeverything you hear, that the
weather's gonna kill you,everything's gonna kill you, no
matter what right you're gonnalive a life, you're never gonna
leave the front door.
But I thought it was just crazy.
So, by the way, in concert, atleast 20, 30 years ago they were
pretty good.

Speaker 3 (54:41):
Yeah, yeah, they were solid.
They were solid From what Iremember we saw a lot of people
that year.

Speaker 2 (54:45):
Okay, all right.
Game cams.
We got a problem right now.
There's been an attack on oneof the game cams and I'm going
to let you guys see it first.
We'll play it for you a coupleof times.
But our game cam below thehouse that we're building for
this TV show is under attack andwe have somebody that we're
going to.
You need to bring the sound upon this and start it again.
Here we go.
Yeah, try it again.

(55:11):
Yeah, here we go.
Yeah, that's a woodpecker.
That is a woodpecker goingafter my camera.

Speaker 3 (55:18):
You said that to me, I couldn't stop laughing.

Speaker 2 (55:19):
I mean, look at this guy.

Speaker 3 (55:21):
I mean this guy is he's on a mission, he is going
to I mean unbelievable, theseguys.

Speaker 2 (55:25):
And.

Speaker 3 (55:26):
I know that you will use this as a big excuse to
immediately drive up there tofix that game camera.
Like I know you, you'll be likeoh, I got to go check this out.

Speaker 2 (55:32):
Oh, there's no question I got damage on the
front of the camera If Woody,what Woody the Woodpecker has
done to your camera.
This guy he he's a star.

Speaker 3 (55:40):
I think I love this post.
I mean, he's in a good job.

Speaker 2 (55:42):
Oh, no, okay, the next guy, here's this guy that.

Speaker 3 (55:44):
I never want to see, but you continue to show these.

Speaker 2 (55:47):
Well, so then we got this black bear that's been
hanging around and he's goingfor something up a tree, and I
thought he was going to climbthe tree, but he didn't?
He just kind of was like, ah,now I'm good, so he the next
video of him.
Look at his.
His fur looks great yeah, hereally does.
Yeah, he looks really good.
The next one is he looks reallygood here.

Speaker 3 (56:07):
Let's hope that you're like in the next frame
it's not a guy coming down thattree.

Speaker 2 (56:10):
Yeah, yeah, oh, I know I know guys, it finally
crawls out of the trees likethank god that bear didn't get
me, okay.
So there we go.
So finally we'll end with oneof the things you want to see
one of these?
We've been watching and it'spretty awesome.

Speaker 3 (56:21):
Oh, yeah, okay.
So we love to share anytime wewatch a show, cause people are
always like oh, what are youwatching, um?
So I read about this new BillyJoel um documentary coming out
on max or HBO max whichever oneyou have at home it's called
Billy Joel and so it goes.
And whether or not you're a hisstart, I have never.

(56:47):
I really had no idea howtenacious this guy was
Unbelievable.
I mean, he got kicked in theteeth for a decade, at least a
decade before anything evenhappened to him, right, yeah,
and he just kept going for it.
He doesn't come from he camefrom a hardscrabble life, as you
like to say that he definitelyhad to pull himself up.
It is so well done.

(57:10):
It's a two part series and itis it's the first one just came
out last Friday and it was twohours, so we split it into two
nights.
The next part, which is thelast part, is, I believe,
another two hour episode, andthat comes out this Friday.
I can't wait to watch it.
I'm telling you he he'sbasically he's got health issues
now, and so what I read is thathe did this documentary as a
way to he had to cancel a tour.
He obviously did all thoseshows at Madison Square Gardens
for.
I don't know how long his debtwas there Years and years.

Speaker 2 (57:31):
But he finally named after his daughter Right.

Speaker 3 (57:33):
He basically has stepped away from touring right
now and so to give his fans alittle bit of insight and it's
so funny because I had no ideathat what a literal writer he
was in his songs.
Like you listen to these songsall the time that you know all
the words to right and then youfind out what he actually wrote
that song about and how literalit was.

Speaker 2 (57:52):
Oh yeah, some songs you're trying to read into what
they're saying Not Billy, noBilly.
I mean he's just like what'sthe matter with the clothes I'm
wearing?
Can't you tell that?
Your eyes, you know, like hegoes through everything and he's
, he's brilliant.

Speaker 3 (58:05):
He is a great magician, so I just think you'll
be.
It's interesting to hear likeeven the famous story, we won't
wreck it for you, but how hewrote the piano man and why, why
that became his anthem.

Speaker 2 (58:17):
And then how he got that job.
He was the piano man.
How did he get that job?

Speaker 3 (58:21):
And it, and it's amazing, it's fascinating and
just the fact that his firstwife was his muse for all these
famous songs that he thoughtthese are too mushy, Like she's
always a woman to me and some ofthe other ones that he writes.
She was his muse and he waslike I would never release these
songs.
She was like these are hits,you should put them out.

Speaker 2 (58:40):
And wow, should put them out and, wow, she believed,
she fought for him in a massiveway.
We haven't even reached christybrinkley yet either, which is
going to take him to a whole newlevel.

Speaker 3 (58:48):
Oh gosh, you know, I'm just saying you love models,
I mean what?
Yeah heidi klum, really, chris.
Okay, christy brinkley, heidiklum, oh, and l mcpherson look
what's the ranking there?
Do we?
It's a time, it's a time, timeit's a tough time.
All right, stop bringing upridiculous.

Speaker 2 (59:02):
All right, stop bringing up ridiculous things.
All right, we are done so.
Thank you so much for joiningus.
I'm sorry for Christie'sinappropriate comments there at
the end.
We'll we'll try to be betternext time and we'll see you back
here.

Speaker 3 (59:13):
Hey, like and subscribe to our YouTube channel
.
It's important to us, it helpsus with our algorithm.
So if just hit that like buttonand the subscribe button, it
really, really, really does helpus.
Thanks, you guys, have a greatweek and we will see you back
here on Thursday.

Speaker 5 (59:27):
You've been listening to the no Doubt About it
podcast.
We hope you've enjoyed the show.
We know we had a blast.
Make sure to like, rate andreview.
We'll be back soon, but in themeantime you can find us on
Instagram and Facebook at noDoubt About it podcast.