September 27, 2024 • 35 mins
Can the wild world of celebrity parties conceal deeper, darker secrets? This episode uncovers the scandalous "freak off" parties hosted by Sean "Diddy" Combs, where allegations of sex trafficking and incriminating recordings loom large. With insights from Diddy’s former bodyguard, we explore how these tapes might tie into an ongoing corruption scandal in New York City politics, implicating local officials and revealing a hidden web of blackmail. Discover the strategies behind these high-stakes gatherings and the risks attendees take by staying silent.
Controversy doesn't end there as we unravel the unexpected drama between Michael Eric Dyson and Representative Nancy Mace. Following a heated CNN debate, Dyson's flirty texts to Mace added fuel to the fire, leading her to enter these messages into the congressional record. We dissect the implications of their interactions and the surprising nature of Dyson’s actions, juxtaposing his criticism of cancel culture with his personal behavior. This chapter reveals how personal attraction and political beliefs can clash in the public eye, creating a spectacle that’s anything but ordinary.
Lastly, we discuss the demise of high-end sex parties among the elite, stressing the importance of avoiding potential scandals through traditional social interactions. Highlighting the risks of being recorded and engaging in illicit activities, we critique figures like Diddy for their reckless behaviors. The conversation also touches on the legal consequences of misusing business funds for criminal endeavors, advocating for more conventional means of companionship to prevent reputational damage. Tune in for an eye-opening exploration of these complex and controversial topics.
Support the show:
https://www.buzzsprout.com/2003879/support
Follow our show's hosts on
Twitter:
twitter.com/@CoolTXchick
twitter.com/@Caroldedwine
twitter.com/taradublinrocks
twitter.com/blackknight10k
twitter.com/@pardonpod
Find Tara's book here:
Taradublinrocks.com
Find Ty's book here:
Consequence of Choice
Subscribe to Tara's substack:
taradublin.substack.com
Subscribe to Ty's substack:
https://theworldasiseeit.substack.com/
Support Our Sponsor: Sheets & Giggles
Eucalyptus Sheets (Recommended):
Sleep Mask (I use this every night)
Eucalyptus Comfortor
...
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:05):
yes, so we're going back into the wild world of um
sean, the alleged sex traffickercombs aka the diddler yes,
diddler's political parties, uh,sean diddy combs former
bodyguard revealed that thedisgraced rat mogul kept tapes
(00:25):
of politicians taking part inhis infamous freak off sessions
and claimed his arrest is tiedto an alleged corruption scandal
currently gripping New YorkCity politics.
Insider who protected Diddythrough the 1990s told the Art
(00:49):
of Dialogue podcast that theproducer's indictment could
expose high profile officialsand celebrities in New York.
So indictments coming down inNew York.
Speaker 2 (00:58):
So, yeah, the SDNY, as you know, they indicted Diddy
last week and ever since, Imean so it's been two things.
It's been extraordinarily quietin terms of, like, the number
of celebrities and mediapersonalities and politicians
that we know partied with diddyover the course of the past you
(01:19):
know, 25 years or so but it'salso been extraordinarily loud
in terms of the handful ofpeople who've always been
willing to kind of speak outagainst Diddy here, recently
taking like a victory lap in hisbodyguard as one of them.
Now, the suggestion here isthat politicians were attending
(01:41):
these parties and some of themmay have participated in some of
the activities that you woulddeem unscrupulous but not
necessarily illegal, and othersmay have engaged in such
activities in a fashion that youmight deem illegal.
And I would say, like, ifyou're looking for like members
of Congress, I don't get yourhopes up necessarily.
(02:02):
I don't get your hopes upnecessarily like that he's been,
you know, well-connected interms of New York City politics
over the course of the pastcouple of decades.
Speaker 3 (02:14):
I don't know necessarily how many like
members of Congress you're goingto find, having attended these
parties, rudy Giuliani over andover again, he did throw a lot
of parties in the.
Hamptons, he did throw a lot ofparties in the Hamptons.
In the Hamptons he did throw alot of parties in the Hamptons.
So you would expect that youknow New York elite, including
politicians, would have been.
Speaker 2 (02:33):
Yeah, but why is?
Speaker 1 (02:34):
everyone so quiet.
You're right D Where's thestring of?
I went to the white party buttweets.
Speaker 2 (02:41):
So, first of all, in terms of politicians and
political names, think statelocal party new york, not like
national politics.
Now, second of all, like, whereis everybody?
I think one of the thingsyou're gonna have is there are a
lot of people who attended thenormal party, right.
(03:02):
So diddy was famous for likethrowing these.
You know multi white parties, ascarol said well, not just the
white parties, but just ingeneral.
Like his parties would spanlike days, like you know, like a
24 hour long fest, but like theparty would start off say 11
o'clock, and then like thenormal shit would go to four and
(03:24):
then he would kick out all thenormies like oh yes, and then
the freak off began and then theweird shit would start.
But then you know that's yourcue.
If that's not how you kick itto get out of dodge now.
Yes, I'm assuming a massiveamount of people who attended
the normal party but didn't dothe freak off shit are probably
(03:46):
not gonna come out publiclyagainst diddy just because
they'd be associated with theweird shit, even if that's not
what they were doing now I wouldalso imagine that the people
pictures everywhere yeah.
Well, look, no, that's the thing, right.
So that's how you get cover fordoing the weird shit.
(04:06):
You have everybody at thenormal shit and then like, if
anyone wants to come out and saysomething about it is like, hey
, you party with diddy too.
It's really hard.
Like it's really hard to haveplausible deniability, even if
you didn't do anything, ifyou're at the normal party.
But the people who are engagedin the weird shit, who didn't do
any other criminal shit, theydefinitely can't come out and
(04:26):
say anything derogatory abouteven just being there, those
freaking motherfuckers that wantto like uh eyes wide.
Shut that shit and watch yeah,and we're talking about like not
criminal activity, just youknow weird sex king shit it's,
it's all.
Speaker 1 (04:43):
it's criminal.
Sometimes it sounds like noteveryone was consensual.
Speaker 2 (04:47):
Yes, but before we get to that, so people who were
at the parties not doinganything illegal or anything
with someone non-consensuallyLike, well, those people
definitely can't come out andspeak about Diddy.
Why?
Because he has tapes right.
So he's, you know, know, knownfor having recorded many,
numerous instances of peoplewhich I believe epstein did also
(05:10):
so yeah, now there is a likelywhat I imagine, a sliver of
individuals who came to thenormal parties and did the
freaky stuff, but who alsoengaged in activity that we
would probably deem criminal,who are also on tape, and those
people are blackmailable and Iimagine that's probably one of
(05:32):
the reasons he was alsorecording those tapes as well.
And again, like you got tothink about it, if you're diddy
like hey, why are you keepingthese tapes?
Dog like, if this isincriminating evidence, the only
thing this is good for isgetting you hemmed up in federal
charges if you ever get caught.
And the only other explanationlikely is that he was using
(05:54):
those tapes to either keephimself from getting caught yeah
, because they were importantpeople that would have been the
ones investigating, and he'slike hey, dog, this you.
Well, I don't know how manytapes he would have of law
enforcement officials that wouldpossibly be in a position to
(06:15):
investigate him, but that's apossibility.
But I would imagine largely it'slike people in the industry or
people in related industriesthat he would do business with
if we invite to these partiesand get them in compromise,
compromising situations, andthen you have this ability to
use these tapes for leverageover these people to get
favorable business deals.
(06:37):
Uh, and theoretically also, justlike people that you don't
fucking like, you always havesomething to hold over their
head just because you don'tfucking like them.
I mean it's let's not get ittwisted here uh, like diddy's
made a lot of enemies over thecourse of the decades and one of
the ways you disarm yourenemies is by well, you know,
sungzoo, uh, art, war, shit, um,but yeah, so don't necessarily
(07:04):
expect this to apply like any ofthe tapes that Diddy may have
had in his possession that arenow in the possession of the
feds to apply to, you know, likethe type of political figures
we talk about here on thepodcast Members of Congress and,
you know, national Republicans,or even Democrats, for that
(07:24):
matter, members of Congress andnational Republicans, or even
Democrats for that matter.
But on the flip side here Idon't think we're done with sex
scandals in terms of nationalpolitics.
We did have that raid of that.
What was it so that outside ofDC a few months ago where they
(07:45):
raided the I don't know, it waslike a prostitution ring or
something oh yeah, I know yesand we never right.
We never heard anything aboutany of the individuals.
That shit came and went realfast yeah, it went real fast
like we never heard about any ofthe patrons.
They just like the two guysinvolved in trafficking,
(08:09):
basically the women asprostitutes.
But we didn't hear about any oflike the wealthy billionaires
or media personalities orpoliticians that were
frequenting that.
That just got totally buried.
I'm sure that might resurfaceat some point.
That's far more likely to takedown politicians than anything
(08:29):
Diddy was doing, or at least,like you know, national DC
politicians.
Um, although I guess fingerscrossed, you can always hope.
All right, ty, after you.
Speaker 3 (08:45):
All right, we've got.
Michael Eric Dyson shoots hisshot at Nancy Mace.
Michael Eric Dyson rantedagainst cancel culture during an
appearance on the View where heasked about flirty, where he
was asked about flirty privatemessages he sent to
(09:07):
Representative Nancy Mace.
Following a noteworthy clashbetween the two on CNN, mace
entered the messages from Dysoninto the congressional record
during a house oversight hearing.
In the messages, dyson toldMace the pair look good together
(09:28):
, but not to tell anybody.
He also sent a kissy face emojiwith this message.
When Mace sent a laughing faceemoji back, dyson complimented
Mace's gorgeousness all right.
Speaker 2 (09:45):
So Michael Eric Dyson is?
He's just a prominent figure interms of political analysis and
all this.
He just like it, he's.
I think he's currently yes,it's, laugh it up, it's funny.
So I think he's currently aprofessor here in Nashville,
where I currently reside atVanderbilt University.
(10:05):
And first of all, we'll justhave to play the clip.
Speaker 3 (10:10):
I always like that dude.
I mean I don't dislike him.
Speaker 2 (10:13):
No, I am extraordinarily fine and he's
not wrong.
Speaker 1 (10:17):
I mean, she's an awful person, but she's very
attractive.
Speaker 2 (10:22):
All right.
Speaker 1 (10:22):
First of all great rec.
Speaker 3 (10:25):
Thank you I was just going to say she got some good
titties.
You're right.
Speaker 2 (10:27):
All right, let's play the clip of Nancy Mace.
Speaker 4 (10:30):
I would like to also enter into the record a
screenshot of a text message Ireceived from the esteemed
professor from Vanderbilt,michael Eric Dyson.
Esteemed professor fromVanderbilt, michael Eric Dyson.
After my CNN interview, beggedme for photos.
In this text he says aftercalling me racist on CNN, don't
tell anybody.
(10:50):
We look good together and sentme a kissy emoji.
Speaker 2 (10:54):
Without objection.
Speaker 4 (10:55):
And the guy says I'm gorgeous in all these photos.
I don't think he's that bentout of shape on how anyone
pronounces Kamala and if we'regoing to have that, standard.
Speaker 2 (11:07):
you got to hold it to both sides, not just one or the
other.
Oh, and we also have a clip ofthe conversation between Dr
Dyson and Nancy Mace here on CNN.
It's the history and legacy ofwhite disregard for the humanity
of black people.
Speaker 4 (11:18):
So now you're calling me racist.
Speaker 2 (11:19):
I didn't say it.
I just said you weren't racist.
Speaker 1 (11:22):
That is complete.
Yes, you don't have to intendracism to accomplish it?
Speaker 3 (11:24):
No, no, no.
You are intending that I amracist?
Your disrespect of KamalaHarris is part of the racial
opportunity.
Speaker 2 (11:29):
What can you just say ?
Speaker 4 (11:31):
It's offensive Congresswoman.
What?
Speaker 2 (11:33):
can you just say I'm not calling you a racist, you
are.
You absolutely do it looks likea lover's qualm.
Speaker 4 (11:41):
Now, what's disgusting is?
Speaker 2 (11:42):
your disrespect of her Professor.
This gentleman said I didn'tknow her name.
You know what's?
Speaker 1 (11:46):
disgusting to women is her disrespect of women.
Speaker 4 (11:48):
She doesn't know what a woman is.
Speaker 2 (11:50):
And if, 25 years ago, I became White women, don't
have the ability to tell blackwomen, who paid the price of
blood to make this country whatit is, to tell them they're not
real women 25 years ago I becamethe first woman to graduate
from the citadel.
The military, as you can seethere, that was a lover's.
Speaker 3 (12:07):
That was a lover's spat you stopped ty.
Speaker 2 (12:09):
So, as you can see there, there was an
extraordinarily heatedconversation.
Oh now, like if you watch theentirety of that, uh, just, I
actually don't even know what tocall it.
I don't know what to score thatwas good, that was enough if
you watch the entirety of thatback and forth.
Uh, at no point did did dysonrefer to her as a racist.
(12:30):
He was talking about, uh, theway in which he intentionally
misstates kamala harris's name.
Even after she was corrected,she proceeded to do it again and
they called her out on that andthat's how they entered into
that discussion there.
Speaker 1 (12:46):
But his response is gross, but what should be noted?
Speaker 3 (12:52):
is when she was in her shoulder pads that she
pronounced Kabbalah Harris, hisname right, which proves that
she can do it.
Speaker 2 (13:02):
Yeah, that's the thing.
She's not getting it wrong outof ignorance, it's out of malice
and that was the whole pointand that's why a part of the
conversation.
Speaker 3 (13:10):
Those shoulder pads were distracting God damn Now
after that.
Speaker 1 (13:16):
They were acute angles.
Yeah, they were.
Speaker 2 (13:20):
She looks like she could start as, like a
cornerback for nfl team.
Um, no.
So after that, apparently theytook a picture, uh, and I think
they engaged in sending sometext messages back back and
forth to which it appears asthough dyson was flirting with
mace.
And now a lot of you like areprobably looking at this,
(13:43):
especially if you're a womanlistening to this podcast Like
in what world would a man whohad a conversation with a woman
like that then proceed to hit onher?
And you know, in thatassessment I would say, yes,
you're absolutely right.
That makes absolutely no senselogically.
But also men, so now he now yes,that part now there was a
(14:06):
period of time between thesending of those text messages
and then mace like publiclygetting into like a social media
spat and disparaging him in thehouse committee.
Whatever that aside, I wouldsay that like man it's as an
extraordinarily shallow man itpoints in my life.
(14:28):
Uh, I don't think I would stoopto the level of trying to flirt
and like.
Let's be clear here, themessages he was sending were
extraordinarily flirty.
He like tried to cover it upand like a like he tried to
explain it away in like a 10gorgeousness is a term of art in
the field of aestheticappraisal you know and I'm not
(14:50):
even gonna lie like I I wasreally surprised by this.
Speaker 3 (14:55):
I know that michael erick dysson has a penis and he
is a man, however, and he haseyes and they work Her.
I, I, I expected better fromhim than this, but that just
goes to show, like in my mind,the hold that those non
(15:19):
melanated women have on our men,hold that those non-melanated
women have on our men,regardless of how in tune they
are, or supposedly, for thecause.
Speaker 2 (15:29):
But I don't know.
Are you trying to say dr umaris right?
No, so now dyson did commentlike a 10 minute long social
media post about like how hisinteractions with numerous women
that he's got a workingrelationship with like do
occasionally involve himcommenting on their appearance
(15:50):
in like a you know, wait asecond, can I let me finish?
So, in his, in his perspective,the argument he was making is
that, like just a part of hiscommunication with women that
he's friendly with is, if it'snot in an appropriate, not in an
inappropriate fashion, he iswilling to comment on their
(16:13):
appearance and, you know, makeproclamations as to the level of
you know their their dress orattire or appearance and he gave
numerous examples and I willsay in some sense it's totally
understandable that the peoplehe's familiar with in the
messages that he read that hewants to fuck.
(16:34):
No, in the way that he wascommunicating.
If you're familiar with him onthat level, you probably
wouldn't take anything from it.
But that's people you have aworking, longstanding
relationship with and, likeyou're very, and he was more
reserved.
Speaker 3 (16:50):
You're familiar with each other, so to speak.
Speaker 2 (16:52):
Yeah, but also those comments were a lot more
reserved than the comments thathe was making to Mace here.
And then he was using that ascover to suggest that, like this
is the way I communicate, likethis was not intended to be like
flirtatious with Nancy Macehere, and then he was using that
as cover to suggest that, likethis is the way I communicate,
like this was not intended to belike flirtatious with Nancy
Mace.
Now, that's an obvious lie.
He was trying to get his shitoff.
Now he might not havenecessarily been like, yeah,
(17:12):
girl, come on over to the crib,but what he was doing is trying
to see what was up he was tryingto see what was up he was
throwing that fish line outthere to see what he got back
yeah, now has she been like,yeah, what up?
he probably would have been likealright, let's go he would have
smashed that bitch.
Speaker 3 (17:29):
Yes, now, now.
Speaker 2 (17:32):
I just this is like a totally unimportant
conversation.
I just wanted to get my jokesoff about this because I thought
it was extraordinarily funnyand I like Michael Eric Dyson,
so it's kind of.
I mean, he doesn't know me, Iwould imagine, other than maybe
on Twitter, but like just tothrow shots at a dude, just a
little lighthearted ribbing, sir, if you happen to be listening
to the podcast.
Speaker 3 (17:53):
Please follow me back .
Speaker 2 (17:54):
I totally understand what you see in Nancy Mace from
a physical perspective.
I mean, it's difficult to justdeny that she's physically
attractive.
But in terms of her personality, I'd smash her if she wasn't
racist look I get it like what's.
Speaker 1 (18:09):
The worst that she could do is read it live on air
on some.
Speaker 3 (18:12):
TV show but the second worst that she could do
is reject you and the worst shecould do is boil his rabbit and
then, oh, she looks like thattype.
Speaker 1 (18:22):
That's rough um so just shoot a puppy.
I mean, she's the puppy shooter.
I personally just don't thinkthey gotta be yeah, close enough
.
Speaker 2 (18:32):
Her husband's into some weird shit too.
We might get to that on thenext podcast.
Stay tuned for the next episodeof weird shit in Marsha
Blackburn's little.
Yeah, so her husband engages insome activity.
Speaker 3 (18:47):
Well, anyway, we'll oh, oh yeah, we don't have time
for that today.
Speaker 2 (18:51):
I need to research that shit yeah, well, I mean,
you probably won't know unlessyou look at him or hear him talk
.
And then you're like, huh, Igot, I got some questions.
Well, we'll validate thosequestions next time.
But in terms of like, trying tohave a romantic encounter with
someone who presumably you hateeverything they stand for, that
(19:14):
ain't how I kick it.
Like, yeah, maybe there mightbe like a girl that we hate each
other, but because of like theantipathy, there's some kind of
sexual tension, but not someonewho I, just, you know, hate like
the ideals for which they standfor.
Like that a person like NancyMace is allowed to exist as a
(19:36):
person is kind of disgusting tome and it'd be a complete
turnoff.
I wouldn't be remotelyinterested.
I, I can't, I can't.
Now again, you know it may bein michael eric dyson's case.
He's got a little taste of thismara robinson here where he
wants to presumably um, well, he, I don't know, maybe he gets
(19:58):
off in some ways on subvertingsomeone who presumably is
interested in continuing theoppression of the black
community and subverting thatsexually.
I don't know what his deal is,maybe that's his bandicoot way,
like maybe that's what his is.
Speaker 3 (20:17):
Like I'm going to take this racist bitch and I'm
going to fucking flip her on herback or stomach or whatever the
fuck he wants to do and turnher the fuck out.
Maybe there's some kind ofweird ass.
I'm going to fuck this racistwhite bitch kink going on.
Speaker 2 (20:32):
Yeah, that's, that's what I was getting at Likelihood
, I have likely on a handful ofoccasions, probably engaged in
some romantic activity withsomeone who, if you looked at
their politics- Hate sex.
Speaker 1 (20:49):
You had hate sex, no.
Speaker 2 (20:51):
I was going to say could likely, if you looked at
their politics, be deemed awhite supremacist in some regard
, but typically their husbandswere there.
So before we, before we get outof here, oh interesting okay
(21:13):
before we get out of here, we'llyou know.
I guess we're done with ourshithole of the week phase until
post election, but we will doour we forgot one oh yeah.
Well, see, what happened was atie skipped on over it, and it's
getting late and of course youknow, okay, it's close to your
bedtime, so we'll just save thatone for next time.
And I want to have more sex withmy husband tonight, so yeah,
(21:35):
fair enough, you know, sincethis has been the raunchiest
part of the Insurrection podcastepisode ever.
Okay, really shortly.
So Olivia Newsy of the New Yorkmagazine you might be familiar
with some of her work andcovering politics over the
course of the last couple ofyears.
(21:55):
She apparently was engaged insome kind of private
relationship with RFK Jr thatshe alleges was not physical but
apparently did involve sendingRFK Jr some nudes, some nudes.
Now I of course, like, if youread some of her comments,
rather some of her articles interms of referencing RFK Jr, you
might be like, hey, this is areally weird political slant
(22:17):
that you might have in favor ofRFK Jr here, to the point where
you know she does the thing,where it's like, oh, the left is
bad, the right is also bad, butRFK Jr's our fucking hero.
Now you might look at that andbe like, oh, this is some weird
leftist shit that.
Or you're like, oh, she'shaving an affair with RFK Jr.
Because those are the only twoexplanations, and apparently she
(22:38):
was attempting to have anaffair with RFK Jr.
And I would just ask Becausehe's so sexy.
Speaker 3 (22:47):
Yeah, because he's so sexy.
Yeah, he's got that sexy voice.
Please whisper in my ear aboutthe time you cut that Wilhut's
off.
Speaker 2 (22:52):
Yeah, well you see, in the 90s I was hanging out
with the fellow.
Speaker 3 (22:57):
My brain worm is coming.
Remember when you fisted thatbear cub's head?
Speaker 2 (23:05):
Yeah, I was just going to say like over the
course of the past year whereyou're covering political
campaigns.
Like at what point was it youdecided, yeah, rfk Jr, give me
that dick?
Was it like abusing his wife?
Or like you know the weird drugthing, the drug habits?
(23:25):
Was it being a coke dealer whenhe was in college?
Was it the bear that he left inCentral Park?
Was it the whale head that hestrapped onto the top of his car
?
Like at what point were youlike, yeah, give me some of that
.
So before we get out of here,kamala Harris campaign heat
check how you guys feeling Tyyou feeling about here.
(23:45):
Kamala Harris campaign heatcheck how you guys feeling Ty
you feeling about the state ofthe Harris campaign.
Speaker 3 (23:51):
You know what I am feeling, absolutely invigorized
by the Harris campaign.
My concern is not with hercampaign, it's with the fuckery
that Republicans are doing, butI am energized for it.
People that we would not evenexpect in rural Texas, in rural
(24:13):
counties, I mean the fuckingvillages of all places, are on
board with Harris Waltz andthat's that makes me feel, that
gives me the warm and fuzzieslike all the way around shout
out to the villagers man, y'allhang in there.
Speaker 2 (24:31):
I know the hurricane is probably gonna be tough.
Speaker 3 (24:33):
I'm hoping they get the STD right down there.
Stop fucking everywhere.
I don't think the hurricaneclean that up but I think that
that is also why Republicans arescrambling to try and do
anything and everything they can, like Lindsey Graham, like
(24:55):
trying to get Nebraska to changetheir fucking rules, their
electoral college rules at thelast minute, et cetera.
But the thing is with thegerrymandering, they usually do
it around black and browncommunities, trying to suppress
the Democrat vote.
(25:15):
But because so many Republicans, so many independents are
behind Harris rooting for her,going to vote for her, that's
not going to fucking work.
That's not going to fuckingwork.
That's not going to fuckingwork.
And now they are justscrambling.
Her vibe, her momentum isamazing and I am still holding
(25:39):
out hope that, despite all thefuckery that they're trying to
pull on the other side, that sheis going to pull this out.
Speaker 2 (25:47):
Man, I can't wait, yeah, no matter what chapel ron
says.
All right, carol, how youfeeling?
Speaker 3 (25:52):
harris campaign okay we'll talk about her on the next
pod, yeah we'll save that fornext episode she's doing great.
Speaker 1 (25:58):
I want to write postcards, but they still
haven't shown up.
From moms moms rising get me myfreaking postcards that were
free.
Speaker 2 (26:06):
So thanks, moms rising, um also subscribe to the
podcast and, if you, watch uson youtube.
Make sure you subscribe.
Speaker 3 (26:14):
Rate yes, give review , give us five stars, leave your
comments and, uh, leave yourthoughts in the comments unless
they're mean, only if they'regood comments, because if
they're not good, then we'regonna like, we're gonna take
them out, because like we likethat Leave, all the of the leave
, all of the ridiculous likeshit posting comments this is
(26:37):
YouTube, but it doesn't need tobe YouTube, you know.
Speaker 2 (26:41):
No, we'll take all the comments, even the bad ones,
are good for the algorithm.
So thanks, please, but yes, soyes, send Carol her postcards.
All the comments, even the badones, are good for the algorithm
.
So thanks, please, but yes.
So yes, send carol herpostcards.
Um, no, look, I mean, I thinkin terms of like what the polls
say, and I'm I know we'verecently gotten this uh, what is
it new york times siennapolling that suggests that trump
is now leading in a bunch ofswing states.
But if you look at, like theflip from where they leave it.
(27:04):
I'll get to that if you look atlike the flip from where they
believe it.
I'll get to that.
If you look at like the flipfrom where they were in the most
recent uh, new york timesseeing a poll, to where they
were the last time they polled,something like in arizona you
see a 10 point flip.
I mean, obviously that's notreal if you just take a look at
what's happening in reality.
So the way I look at pollingtypically is like I don't care
(27:24):
what the actual number is inregards to, hey, this number is
that what you kind of look for,because they're like snapshots
over time for one, and thenagain polling can be super
accurate, inaccurate rather, andin terms of predicting
elections, not very useful.
But I think one of the ways inwhich they're valuable is like
changes over time, right.
(27:44):
I think one of the ways inwhich they're valuable is like
changes over time, right, butonly in the sense that if you
can connect those changes toreal life events that you see
play out on the ground andappear to reflect the reality
that you see in real life, like,and what I would say is like if
(28:08):
you, if you're a fan offootball and you watch a
football team play.
And then you look at the statsafter the game you're like, oh,
that's surprising, it didn'tlike.
The way I saw the game play outin real time doesn't really
reflect what I'm seeing in thestats, like this team played a
lot better and that quarterbackquarterback played a lot worse
than the stats.
And I would like say you knowthat happens from time to time.
Typically a hallmark of that isKirk Cousins, where at the end
of the season you're like, wow,he's got like 4,000 passing
(28:31):
yards and 32 touchdowns.
It was an incredible season.
And if you watch the actualgames you're like, hey, kirk
Cousins not that good.
So in terms of these polls, that, like what you're seeing on the
ground, doesn't reflect thechange that you see in these New
York Times Sienna polls Maybejust take those polls with a
(28:52):
grain of salt, but typically inthese other polls showing her
either tied or having a lead inmost of the swing states and
leading nationally at this pointby anywhere from four to five
points, I would say in terms ofwhat the polling says, compared
to what we've seen since she'sbecome the nominee for the
Democratic Party, she's sittingin a good position.
Now obviously a lot of peopleare going to say hey, what about
(29:15):
Hillary Clinton in 2016?
The poll says she was up.
Well, technically, she won thepopular vote by millions of
votes and the polls weren'treally that far off.
It just happened to be that ina handful of swing states it
really mattered in terms of theelectoral college, she lost by
the tiniest of marginssuspiciously small if you
(29:35):
include, like, the fact thatRussians were meddling in our
election systems here in theUnited States.
With that aside, I would saylike part of the reason why
Hillary lost in 2016 is becausepeople looked at that polling
lead and they were like, well,she's going to win.
It's like how much does my votereally count on the left, and
(29:55):
there were a bunch ofconservatives who were like well
, you know, trump sucks, butHillary is going to win.
You know what?
What's the worst that couldhappen?
What's the worst that couldhappen?
I'll just go ahead and cast myvote and thereby Trump ended up
winning, even though he lost bytwo and a half million votes, by
the slimmest margin of like ahandful of thousands of votes in
(30:16):
swing states.
Speaker 1 (30:18):
What I would say is Jill Stein and everyone who
voted for her.
Speaker 2 (30:20):
Yes, also.
I mean this third partycandidate, jill Stein, won
enough votes in those swingstates that Trump won.
That would have been thedifference in Clinton winning.
So there's also that, andthere's also, you know, james
Comey showing up at the lastminute announcing he was
reopening and investing.
So there were a lot of factorsinvolved in 2016 that were novel
(30:41):
, that we won't have, likely, in2024.
But also, we don't live in avacuum, right.
We have voters who existed in aworld where that happened and
now they're aware of the context, of how much their vote
actually does matter, regardlessof what the polls say.
So you can't just say, justbecause that happened in 2016,
(31:02):
you can't be overconfident.
I would say, in terms of 2024,the way people need to look at
it is it's not don't trust thevote polls, turn out and vote.
It's like no, the polls sayKamala Harris is winning.
Let's turn out the vote andthen run up the score.
Right, beat Trump so bad, beatthe Republican Party so bad that
(31:24):
after this, that they go theway of the Whigs and also I like
that.
(31:45):
They go the way of the WhigParty.
Well, I guess that led to thecollapse of the Whig Party.
Depending on how you look at itwas eventually to follow.
Well, just repeat history inthat regard.
But also, if you happen to be a, a politician or you know a
(32:06):
celebrity or a music artist orsome kind of wealthy individual,
I would just warn you if, forsome reason, you're listening to
this podcast like the freak offis dead, that shit is over.
Like going to these.
Speaker 3 (32:19):
I want to go back to the days where freak off is not
in our vernacular, is not in ourvernacular and it's not a part
of a everyday conversation.
When I was watching the fuckingDOJ guy and he's saying freak
off, and every time I saw it andit's with a straight face it
(32:41):
was dead, ass serious what hewas saying.
And I'm thinking to myself,though this is where we fucking
are, where you're sitting hereand you're what he was saying,
and I'm thinking to myself,though this is where we fucking
are okay, you're sitting hereyou're standing.
He was like the freak off.
Speaker 2 (32:53):
I will delete.
I will delete freak off from myvernacular.
All right, so the high-end likesex party, that shit is over
with.
Like, if you have anything tolose politically or financially,
sex parties is done.
Right.
I'm sorry that you save thatshit for broke people Like learn
how to go out to the bar andhave a drink.
Speaker 3 (33:14):
Sex parties are for broke people Freak off.
Speaker 2 (33:17):
Well, sex party slash , freak off.
They're now for broke peoplewho don't have any social
standing, who ain't got to worryabout careers and being on the
line.
So learn how to go out to a bar, a drink, meet a girl the
old-fashioned way, because thesex party, that shit is dead.
Somebody's probably got you ontape and then y'all can't be
trusted not to like not engagein some sort of criminal
(33:39):
activity with, like the high-enddrugs and the narcotics and
having you know sex workers andforcing people to do things
outside and if you're gonna havean orgy, man don't.
Speaker 1 (33:53):
There's gotta be a no phones policy.
Speaker 2 (33:55):
They're all off in the box, geez I mean diddy was
having people sign an.
Nda is the problem is diddywould have his phone out or have
the camera out.
Speaker 1 (34:04):
Yeah, don't have it at did out.
Yeah, don't have it at Diddy'shouse.
Speaker 2 (34:06):
Yeah, don't have it at Diddy's house.
Speaker 1 (34:08):
Now he won't be there , right.
Speaker 2 (34:10):
You're going to have to have, like normal one-on-one
sex.
Speaker 3 (34:13):
I think we should liquidate all of his assets and
give those to the victims.
All right?
Well, you say that.
Speaker 2 (34:19):
So the Department of Justice is part of this criminal
indictment.
If he's convicted because itwas a racketeering case in which
some of the proceeds from hislegitimate businesses were used
to fund the criminal activity,including the sex trafficking,
he will likely have to forfeit alarge amount of his company,
(34:43):
which could could again lead tothe end of bad boy entertainment
and numerous other ventures ofhis.
So that's you joke, but that'snot entirely off the table in
terms of possibility.
But yeah, learn how to go outto a bar, have a drink, meet a
girl, have a conversation andtake her home, because going to
these sex parties is just goingto get you in.
(35:06):
Well, don't do it, michael EricDyson style.
I mean, for God's sake, have aconversation with somebody that
actually likes you.
No-transcript.
yes, so we're going back into the wild world of um
sean, the alleged sex traffickercombs aka the diddler yes,
diddler's political parties, uh,sean diddy combs former
bodyguard revealed that thedisgraced rat mogul kept tapes
(00:25):
of politicians taking part inhis infamous freak off sessions
and claimed his arrest is tiedto an alleged corruption scandal
currently gripping New YorkCity politics.
Insider who protected Diddythrough the 1990s told the Art
(00:49):
of Dialogue podcast that theproducer's indictment could
expose high profile officialsand celebrities in New York.
So indictments coming down inNew York.
Speaker 2 (00:58):
So, yeah, the SDNY, as you know, they indicted Diddy
last week and ever since, Imean so it's been two things.
It's been extraordinarily quietin terms of, like, the number
of celebrities and mediapersonalities and politicians
that we know partied with diddyover the course of the past you
(01:19):
know, 25 years or so but it'salso been extraordinarily loud
in terms of the handful ofpeople who've always been
willing to kind of speak outagainst Diddy here, recently
taking like a victory lap in hisbodyguard as one of them.
Now, the suggestion here isthat politicians were attending
(01:41):
these parties and some of themmay have participated in some of
the activities that you woulddeem unscrupulous but not
necessarily illegal, and othersmay have engaged in such
activities in a fashion that youmight deem illegal.
And I would say, like, ifyou're looking for like members
of Congress, I don't get yourhopes up necessarily.
(02:02):
I don't get your hopes upnecessarily like that he's been,
you know, well-connected interms of New York City politics
over the course of the pastcouple of decades.
Speaker 3 (02:14):
I don't know necessarily how many like
members of Congress you're goingto find, having attended these
parties, rudy Giuliani over andover again, he did throw a lot
of parties in the.
Hamptons, he did throw a lot ofparties in the Hamptons.
In the Hamptons he did throw alot of parties in the Hamptons.
So you would expect that youknow New York elite, including
politicians, would have been.
Speaker 2 (02:33):
Yeah, but why is?
Speaker 1 (02:34):
everyone so quiet.
You're right D Where's thestring of?
I went to the white party buttweets.
Speaker 2 (02:41):
So, first of all, in terms of politicians and
political names, think statelocal party new york, not like
national politics.
Now, second of all, like, whereis everybody?
I think one of the thingsyou're gonna have is there are a
lot of people who attended thenormal party, right.
(03:02):
So diddy was famous for likethrowing these.
You know multi white parties, ascarol said well, not just the
white parties, but just ingeneral.
Like his parties would spanlike days, like you know, like a
24 hour long fest, but like theparty would start off say 11
o'clock, and then like thenormal shit would go to four and
(03:24):
then he would kick out all thenormies like oh yes, and then
the freak off began and then theweird shit would start.
But then you know that's yourcue.
If that's not how you kick itto get out of dodge now.
Yes, I'm assuming a massiveamount of people who attended
the normal party but didn't dothe freak off shit are probably
(03:46):
not gonna come out publiclyagainst diddy just because
they'd be associated with theweird shit, even if that's not
what they were doing now I wouldalso imagine that the people
pictures everywhere yeah.
Well, look, no, that's the thing, right.
So that's how you get cover fordoing the weird shit.
(04:06):
You have everybody at thenormal shit and then like, if
anyone wants to come out and saysomething about it is like, hey
, you party with diddy too.
It's really hard.
Like it's really hard to haveplausible deniability, even if
you didn't do anything, ifyou're at the normal party.
But the people who are engagedin the weird shit, who didn't do
any other criminal shit, theydefinitely can't come out and
(04:26):
say anything derogatory abouteven just being there, those
freaking motherfuckers that wantto like uh eyes wide.
Shut that shit and watch yeah,and we're talking about like not
criminal activity, just youknow weird sex king shit it's,
it's all.
Speaker 1 (04:43):
it's criminal.
Sometimes it sounds like noteveryone was consensual.
Speaker 2 (04:47):
Yes, but before we get to that, so people who were
at the parties not doinganything illegal or anything
with someone non-consensuallyLike, well, those people
definitely can't come out andspeak about Diddy.
Why?
Because he has tapes right.
So he's, you know, know, knownfor having recorded many,
numerous instances of peoplewhich I believe epstein did also
(05:10):
so yeah, now there is a likelywhat I imagine, a sliver of
individuals who came to thenormal parties and did the
freaky stuff, but who alsoengaged in activity that we
would probably deem criminal,who are also on tape, and those
people are blackmailable and Iimagine that's probably one of
(05:32):
the reasons he was alsorecording those tapes as well.
And again, like you got tothink about it, if you're diddy
like hey, why are you keepingthese tapes?
Dog like, if this isincriminating evidence, the only
thing this is good for isgetting you hemmed up in federal
charges if you ever get caught.
And the only other explanationlikely is that he was using
(05:54):
those tapes to either keephimself from getting caught yeah
, because they were importantpeople that would have been the
ones investigating, and he'slike hey, dog, this you.
Well, I don't know how manytapes he would have of law
enforcement officials that wouldpossibly be in a position to
(06:15):
investigate him, but that's apossibility.
But I would imagine largely it'slike people in the industry or
people in related industriesthat he would do business with
if we invite to these partiesand get them in compromise,
compromising situations, andthen you have this ability to
use these tapes for leverageover these people to get
favorable business deals.
(06:37):
Uh, and theoretically also, justlike people that you don't
fucking like, you always havesomething to hold over their
head just because you don'tfucking like them.
I mean it's let's not get ittwisted here uh, like diddy's
made a lot of enemies over thecourse of the decades and one of
the ways you disarm yourenemies is by well, you know,
sungzoo, uh, art, war, shit, um,but yeah, so don't necessarily
(07:04):
expect this to apply like any ofthe tapes that Diddy may have
had in his possession that arenow in the possession of the
feds to apply to, you know, likethe type of political figures
we talk about here on thepodcast Members of Congress and,
you know, national Republicans,or even Democrats, for that
(07:24):
matter, members of Congress andnational Republicans, or even
Democrats for that matter.
But on the flip side here Idon't think we're done with sex
scandals in terms of nationalpolitics.
We did have that raid of that.
What was it so that outside ofDC a few months ago where they
(07:45):
raided the I don't know, it waslike a prostitution ring or
something oh yeah, I know yesand we never right.
We never heard anything aboutany of the individuals.
That shit came and went realfast yeah, it went real fast
like we never heard about any ofthe patrons.
They just like the two guysinvolved in trafficking,
(08:09):
basically the women asprostitutes.
But we didn't hear about any oflike the wealthy billionaires
or media personalities orpoliticians that were
frequenting that.
That just got totally buried.
I'm sure that might resurfaceat some point.
That's far more likely to takedown politicians than anything
(08:29):
Diddy was doing, or at least,like you know, national DC
politicians.
Um, although I guess fingerscrossed, you can always hope.
All right, ty, after you.
Speaker 3 (08:45):
All right, we've got.
Michael Eric Dyson shoots hisshot at Nancy Mace.
Michael Eric Dyson rantedagainst cancel culture during an
appearance on the View where heasked about flirty, where he
was asked about flirty privatemessages he sent to
(09:07):
Representative Nancy Mace.
Following a noteworthy clashbetween the two on CNN, mace
entered the messages from Dysoninto the congressional record
during a house oversight hearing.
In the messages, dyson toldMace the pair look good together
(09:28):
, but not to tell anybody.
He also sent a kissy face emojiwith this message.
When Mace sent a laughing faceemoji back, dyson complimented
Mace's gorgeousness all right.
Speaker 2 (09:45):
So Michael Eric Dyson is?
He's just a prominent figure interms of political analysis and
all this.
He just like it, he's.
I think he's currently yes,it's, laugh it up, it's funny.
So I think he's currently aprofessor here in Nashville,
where I currently reside atVanderbilt University.
(10:05):
And first of all, we'll justhave to play the clip.
Speaker 3 (10:10):
I always like that dude.
I mean I don't dislike him.
Speaker 2 (10:13):
No, I am extraordinarily fine and he's
not wrong.
Speaker 1 (10:17):
I mean, she's an awful person, but she's very
attractive.
Speaker 2 (10:22):
All right.
Speaker 1 (10:22):
First of all great rec.
Speaker 3 (10:25):
Thank you I was just going to say she got some good
titties.
You're right.
Speaker 2 (10:27):
All right, let's play the clip of Nancy Mace.
Speaker 4 (10:30):
I would like to also enter into the record a
screenshot of a text message Ireceived from the esteemed
professor from Vanderbilt,michael Eric Dyson.
Esteemed professor fromVanderbilt, michael Eric Dyson.
After my CNN interview, beggedme for photos.
In this text he says aftercalling me racist on CNN, don't
tell anybody.
(10:50):
We look good together and sentme a kissy emoji.
Speaker 2 (10:54):
Without objection.
Speaker 4 (10:55):
And the guy says I'm gorgeous in all these photos.
I don't think he's that bentout of shape on how anyone
pronounces Kamala and if we'regoing to have that, standard.
Speaker 2 (11:07):
you got to hold it to both sides, not just one or the
other.
Oh, and we also have a clip ofthe conversation between Dr
Dyson and Nancy Mace here on CNN.
It's the history and legacy ofwhite disregard for the humanity
of black people.
Speaker 4 (11:18):
So now you're calling me racist.
Speaker 2 (11:19):
I didn't say it.
I just said you weren't racist.
Speaker 1 (11:22):
That is complete.
Yes, you don't have to intendracism to accomplish it?
Speaker 3 (11:24):
No, no, no.
You are intending that I amracist?
Your disrespect of KamalaHarris is part of the racial
opportunity.
Speaker 2 (11:29):
What can you just say ?
Speaker 4 (11:31):
It's offensive Congresswoman.
What?
Speaker 2 (11:33):
can you just say I'm not calling you a racist, you
are.
You absolutely do it looks likea lover's qualm.
Speaker 4 (11:41):
Now, what's disgusting is?
Speaker 2 (11:42):
your disrespect of her Professor.
This gentleman said I didn'tknow her name.
You know what's?
Speaker 1 (11:46):
disgusting to women is her disrespect of women.
Speaker 4 (11:48):
She doesn't know what a woman is.
Speaker 2 (11:50):
And if, 25 years ago, I became White women, don't
have the ability to tell blackwomen, who paid the price of
blood to make this country whatit is, to tell them they're not
real women 25 years ago I becamethe first woman to graduate
from the citadel.
The military, as you can seethere, that was a lover's.
Speaker 3 (12:07):
That was a lover's spat you stopped ty.
Speaker 2 (12:09):
So, as you can see there, there was an
extraordinarily heatedconversation.
Oh now, like if you watch theentirety of that, uh, just, I
actually don't even know what tocall it.
I don't know what to score thatwas good, that was enough if
you watch the entirety of thatback and forth.
Uh, at no point did did dysonrefer to her as a racist.
(12:30):
He was talking about, uh, theway in which he intentionally
misstates kamala harris's name.
Even after she was corrected,she proceeded to do it again and
they called her out on that andthat's how they entered into
that discussion there.
Speaker 1 (12:46):
But his response is gross, but what should be noted?
Speaker 3 (12:52):
is when she was in her shoulder pads that she
pronounced Kabbalah Harris, hisname right, which proves that
she can do it.
Speaker 2 (13:02):
Yeah, that's the thing.
She's not getting it wrong outof ignorance, it's out of malice
and that was the whole pointand that's why a part of the
conversation.
Speaker 3 (13:10):
Those shoulder pads were distracting God damn Now
after that.
Speaker 1 (13:16):
They were acute angles.
Yeah, they were.
Speaker 2 (13:20):
She looks like she could start as, like a
cornerback for nfl team.
Um, no.
So after that, apparently theytook a picture, uh, and I think
they engaged in sending sometext messages back back and
forth to which it appears asthough dyson was flirting with
mace.
And now a lot of you like areprobably looking at this,
(13:43):
especially if you're a womanlistening to this podcast Like
in what world would a man whohad a conversation with a woman
like that then proceed to hit onher?
And you know, in thatassessment I would say, yes,
you're absolutely right.
That makes absolutely no senselogically.
But also men, so now he now yes,that part now there was a
(14:06):
period of time between thesending of those text messages
and then mace like publiclygetting into like a social media
spat and disparaging him in thehouse committee.
Whatever that aside, I wouldsay that like man it's as an
extraordinarily shallow man itpoints in my life.
(14:28):
Uh, I don't think I would stoopto the level of trying to flirt
and like.
Let's be clear here, themessages he was sending were
extraordinarily flirty.
He like tried to cover it upand like a like he tried to
explain it away in like a 10gorgeousness is a term of art in
the field of aestheticappraisal you know and I'm not
(14:50):
even gonna lie like I I wasreally surprised by this.
Speaker 3 (14:55):
I know that michael erick dysson has a penis and he
is a man, however, and he haseyes and they work Her.
I, I, I expected better fromhim than this, but that just
goes to show, like in my mind,the hold that those non
(15:19):
melanated women have on our men,hold that those non-melanated
women have on our men,regardless of how in tune they
are, or supposedly, for thecause.
Speaker 2 (15:29):
But I don't know.
Are you trying to say dr umaris right?
No, so now dyson did commentlike a 10 minute long social
media post about like how hisinteractions with numerous women
that he's got a workingrelationship with like do
occasionally involve himcommenting on their appearance
(15:50):
in like a you know, wait asecond, can I let me finish?
So, in his, in his perspective,the argument he was making is
that, like just a part of hiscommunication with women that
he's friendly with is, if it'snot in an appropriate, not in an
inappropriate fashion, he iswilling to comment on their
(16:13):
appearance and, you know, makeproclamations as to the level of
you know their their dress orattire or appearance and he gave
numerous examples and I willsay in some sense it's totally
understandable that the peoplehe's familiar with in the
messages that he read that hewants to fuck.
(16:34):
No, in the way that he wascommunicating.
If you're familiar with him onthat level, you probably
wouldn't take anything from it.
But that's people you have aworking, longstanding
relationship with and, likeyou're very, and he was more
reserved.
Speaker 3 (16:50):
You're familiar with each other, so to speak.
Speaker 2 (16:52):
Yeah, but also those comments were a lot more
reserved than the comments thathe was making to Mace here.
And then he was using that ascover to suggest that, like this
is the way I communicate, likethis was not intended to be like
flirtatious with Nancy Macehere, and then he was using that
as cover to suggest that, likethis is the way I communicate,
like this was not intended to belike flirtatious with Nancy
Mace.
Now, that's an obvious lie.
He was trying to get his shitoff.
Now he might not havenecessarily been like, yeah,
(17:12):
girl, come on over to the crib,but what he was doing is trying
to see what was up he was tryingto see what was up he was
throwing that fish line outthere to see what he got back
yeah, now has she been like,yeah, what up?
he probably would have been likealright, let's go he would have
smashed that bitch.
Speaker 3 (17:29):
Yes, now, now.
Speaker 2 (17:32):
I just this is like a totally unimportant
conversation.
I just wanted to get my jokesoff about this because I thought
it was extraordinarily funnyand I like Michael Eric Dyson,
so it's kind of.
I mean, he doesn't know me, Iwould imagine, other than maybe
on Twitter, but like just tothrow shots at a dude, just a
little lighthearted ribbing, sir, if you happen to be listening
to the podcast.
Speaker 3 (17:53):
Please follow me back .
Speaker 2 (17:54):
I totally understand what you see in Nancy Mace from
a physical perspective.
I mean, it's difficult to justdeny that she's physically
attractive.
But in terms of her personality, I'd smash her if she wasn't
racist look I get it like what's.
Speaker 1 (18:09):
The worst that she could do is read it live on air
on some.
Speaker 3 (18:12):
TV show but the second worst that she could do
is reject you and the worst shecould do is boil his rabbit and
then, oh, she looks like thattype.
Speaker 1 (18:22):
That's rough um so just shoot a puppy.
I mean, she's the puppy shooter.
I personally just don't thinkthey gotta be yeah, close enough
.
Speaker 2 (18:32):
Her husband's into some weird shit too.
We might get to that on thenext podcast.
Stay tuned for the next episodeof weird shit in Marsha
Blackburn's little.
Yeah, so her husband engages insome activity.
Speaker 3 (18:47):
Well, anyway, we'll oh, oh yeah, we don't have time
for that today.
Speaker 2 (18:51):
I need to research that shit yeah, well, I mean,
you probably won't know unlessyou look at him or hear him talk
.
And then you're like, huh, Igot, I got some questions.
Well, we'll validate thosequestions next time.
But in terms of like, trying tohave a romantic encounter with
someone who presumably you hateeverything they stand for, that
(19:14):
ain't how I kick it.
Like, yeah, maybe there mightbe like a girl that we hate each
other, but because of like theantipathy, there's some kind of
sexual tension, but not someonewho I, just, you know, hate like
the ideals for which they standfor.
Like that a person like NancyMace is allowed to exist as a
(19:36):
person is kind of disgusting tome and it'd be a complete
turnoff.
I wouldn't be remotelyinterested.
I, I can't, I can't.
Now again, you know it may bein michael eric dyson's case.
He's got a little taste of thismara robinson here where he
wants to presumably um, well, he, I don't know, maybe he gets
(19:58):
off in some ways on subvertingsomeone who presumably is
interested in continuing theoppression of the black
community and subverting thatsexually.
I don't know what his deal is,maybe that's his bandicoot way,
like maybe that's what his is.
Speaker 3 (20:17):
Like I'm going to take this racist bitch and I'm
going to fucking flip her on herback or stomach or whatever the
fuck he wants to do and turnher the fuck out.
Maybe there's some kind ofweird ass.
I'm going to fuck this racistwhite bitch kink going on.
Speaker 2 (20:32):
Yeah, that's, that's what I was getting at Likelihood
, I have likely on a handful ofoccasions, probably engaged in
some romantic activity withsomeone who, if you looked at
their politics- Hate sex.
Speaker 1 (20:49):
You had hate sex, no.
Speaker 2 (20:51):
I was going to say could likely, if you looked at
their politics, be deemed awhite supremacist in some regard
, but typically their husbandswere there.
So before we, before we get outof here, oh interesting okay
(21:13):
before we get out of here, we'llyou know.
I guess we're done with ourshithole of the week phase until
post election, but we will doour we forgot one oh yeah.
Well, see, what happened was atie skipped on over it, and it's
getting late and of course youknow, okay, it's close to your
bedtime, so we'll just save thatone for next time.
And I want to have more sex withmy husband tonight, so yeah,
(21:35):
fair enough, you know, sincethis has been the raunchiest
part of the Insurrection podcastepisode ever.
Okay, really shortly.
So Olivia Newsy of the New Yorkmagazine you might be familiar
with some of her work andcovering politics over the
course of the last couple ofyears.
(21:55):
She apparently was engaged insome kind of private
relationship with RFK Jr thatshe alleges was not physical but
apparently did involve sendingRFK Jr some nudes, some nudes.
Now I of course, like, if youread some of her comments,
rather some of her articles interms of referencing RFK Jr, you
might be like, hey, this is areally weird political slant
(22:17):
that you might have in favor ofRFK Jr here, to the point where
you know she does the thing,where it's like, oh, the left is
bad, the right is also bad, butRFK Jr's our fucking hero.
Now you might look at that andbe like, oh, this is some weird
leftist shit that.
Or you're like, oh, she'shaving an affair with RFK Jr.
Because those are the only twoexplanations, and apparently she
(22:38):
was attempting to have anaffair with RFK Jr.
And I would just ask Becausehe's so sexy.
Speaker 3 (22:47):
Yeah, because he's so sexy.
Yeah, he's got that sexy voice.
Please whisper in my ear aboutthe time you cut that Wilhut's
off.
Speaker 2 (22:52):
Yeah, well you see, in the 90s I was hanging out
with the fellow.
Speaker 3 (22:57):
My brain worm is coming.
Remember when you fisted thatbear cub's head?
Speaker 2 (23:05):
Yeah, I was just going to say like over the
course of the past year whereyou're covering political
campaigns.
Like at what point was it youdecided, yeah, rfk Jr, give me
that dick?
Was it like abusing his wife?
Or like you know the weird drugthing, the drug habits?
(23:25):
Was it being a coke dealer whenhe was in college?
Was it the bear that he left inCentral Park?
Was it the whale head that hestrapped onto the top of his car
?
Like at what point were youlike, yeah, give me some of that
.
So before we get out of here,kamala Harris campaign heat
check how you guys feeling Tyyou feeling about here.
(23:45):
Kamala Harris campaign heatcheck how you guys feeling Ty
you feeling about the state ofthe Harris campaign.
Speaker 3 (23:51):
You know what I am feeling, absolutely invigorized
by the Harris campaign.
My concern is not with hercampaign, it's with the fuckery
that Republicans are doing, butI am energized for it.
People that we would not evenexpect in rural Texas, in rural
(24:13):
counties, I mean the fuckingvillages of all places, are on
board with Harris Waltz andthat's that makes me feel, that
gives me the warm and fuzzieslike all the way around shout
out to the villagers man, y'allhang in there.
Speaker 2 (24:31):
I know the hurricane is probably gonna be tough.
Speaker 3 (24:33):
I'm hoping they get the STD right down there.
Stop fucking everywhere.
I don't think the hurricaneclean that up but I think that
that is also why Republicans arescrambling to try and do
anything and everything they can, like Lindsey Graham, like
(24:55):
trying to get Nebraska to changetheir fucking rules, their
electoral college rules at thelast minute, et cetera.
But the thing is with thegerrymandering, they usually do
it around black and browncommunities, trying to suppress
the Democrat vote.
(25:15):
But because so many Republicans, so many independents are
behind Harris rooting for her,going to vote for her, that's
not going to fucking work.
That's not going to fuckingwork.
That's not going to fuckingwork.
And now they are justscrambling.
Her vibe, her momentum isamazing and I am still holding
(25:39):
out hope that, despite all thefuckery that they're trying to
pull on the other side, that sheis going to pull this out.
Speaker 2 (25:47):
Man, I can't wait, yeah, no matter what chapel ron
says.
All right, carol, how youfeeling?
Speaker 3 (25:52):
harris campaign okay we'll talk about her on the next
pod, yeah we'll save that fornext episode she's doing great.
Speaker 1 (25:58):
I want to write postcards, but they still
haven't shown up.
From moms moms rising get me myfreaking postcards that were
free.
Speaker 2 (26:06):
So thanks, moms rising, um also subscribe to the
podcast and, if you, watch uson youtube.
Make sure you subscribe.
Speaker 3 (26:14):
Rate yes, give review , give us five stars, leave your
comments and, uh, leave yourthoughts in the comments unless
they're mean, only if they'regood comments, because if
they're not good, then we'regonna like, we're gonna take
them out, because like we likethat Leave, all the of the leave
, all of the ridiculous likeshit posting comments this is
(26:37):
YouTube, but it doesn't need tobe YouTube, you know.
Speaker 2 (26:41):
No, we'll take all the comments, even the bad ones,
are good for the algorithm.
So thanks, please, but yes, soyes, send Carol her postcards.
All the comments, even the badones, are good for the algorithm
.
So thanks, please, but yes.
So yes, send carol herpostcards.
Um, no, look, I mean, I thinkin terms of like what the polls
say, and I'm I know we'verecently gotten this uh, what is
it new york times siennapolling that suggests that trump
is now leading in a bunch ofswing states.
But if you look at, like theflip from where they leave it.
(27:04):
I'll get to that if you look atlike the flip from where they
believe it.
I'll get to that.
If you look at like the flipfrom where they were in the most
recent uh, new york timesseeing a poll, to where they
were the last time they polled,something like in arizona you
see a 10 point flip.
I mean, obviously that's notreal if you just take a look at
what's happening in reality.
So the way I look at pollingtypically is like I don't care
(27:24):
what the actual number is inregards to, hey, this number is
that what you kind of look for,because they're like snapshots
over time for one, and thenagain polling can be super
accurate, inaccurate rather, andin terms of predicting
elections, not very useful.
But I think one of the ways inwhich they're valuable is like
changes over time, right.
(27:44):
I think one of the ways inwhich they're valuable is like
changes over time, right, butonly in the sense that if you
can connect those changes toreal life events that you see
play out on the ground andappear to reflect the reality
that you see in real life, like,and what I would say is like if
(28:08):
you, if you're a fan offootball and you watch a
football team play.
And then you look at the statsafter the game you're like, oh,
that's surprising, it didn'tlike.
The way I saw the game play outin real time doesn't really
reflect what I'm seeing in thestats, like this team played a
lot better and that quarterbackquarterback played a lot worse
than the stats.
And I would like say you knowthat happens from time to time.
Typically a hallmark of that isKirk Cousins, where at the end
of the season you're like, wow,he's got like 4,000 passing
(28:31):
yards and 32 touchdowns.
It was an incredible season.
And if you watch the actualgames you're like, hey, kirk
Cousins not that good.
So in terms of these polls, that, like what you're seeing on the
ground, doesn't reflect thechange that you see in these New
York Times Sienna polls Maybejust take those polls with a
(28:52):
grain of salt, but typically inthese other polls showing her
either tied or having a lead inmost of the swing states and
leading nationally at this pointby anywhere from four to five
points, I would say in terms ofwhat the polling says, compared
to what we've seen since she'sbecome the nominee for the
Democratic Party, she's sittingin a good position.
Now obviously a lot of peopleare going to say hey, what about
(29:15):
Hillary Clinton in 2016?
The poll says she was up.
Well, technically, she won thepopular vote by millions of
votes and the polls weren'treally that far off.
It just happened to be that ina handful of swing states it
really mattered in terms of theelectoral college, she lost by
the tiniest of marginssuspiciously small if you
(29:35):
include, like, the fact thatRussians were meddling in our
election systems here in theUnited States.
With that aside, I would saylike part of the reason why
Hillary lost in 2016 is becausepeople looked at that polling
lead and they were like, well,she's going to win.
It's like how much does my votereally count on the left, and
(29:55):
there were a bunch ofconservatives who were like well
, you know, trump sucks, butHillary is going to win.
You know what?
What's the worst that couldhappen?
What's the worst that couldhappen?
I'll just go ahead and cast myvote and thereby Trump ended up
winning, even though he lost bytwo and a half million votes, by
the slimmest margin of like ahandful of thousands of votes in
(30:16):
swing states.
Speaker 1 (30:18):
What I would say is Jill Stein and everyone who
voted for her.
Speaker 2 (30:20):
Yes, also.
I mean this third partycandidate, jill Stein, won
enough votes in those swingstates that Trump won.
That would have been thedifference in Clinton winning.
So there's also that, andthere's also, you know, james
Comey showing up at the lastminute announcing he was
reopening and investing.
So there were a lot of factorsinvolved in 2016 that were novel
(30:41):
, that we won't have, likely, in2024.
But also, we don't live in avacuum, right.
We have voters who existed in aworld where that happened and
now they're aware of the context, of how much their vote
actually does matter, regardlessof what the polls say.
So you can't just say, justbecause that happened in 2016,
(31:02):
you can't be overconfident.
I would say, in terms of 2024,the way people need to look at
it is it's not don't trust thevote polls, turn out and vote.
It's like no, the polls sayKamala Harris is winning.
Let's turn out the vote andthen run up the score.
Right, beat Trump so bad, beatthe Republican Party so bad that
(31:24):
after this, that they go theway of the Whigs and also I like
that.
(31:45):
They go the way of the WhigParty.
Well, I guess that led to thecollapse of the Whig Party.
Depending on how you look at itwas eventually to follow.
Well, just repeat history inthat regard.
But also, if you happen to be a, a politician or you know a
(32:06):
celebrity or a music artist orsome kind of wealthy individual,
I would just warn you if, forsome reason, you're listening to
this podcast like the freak offis dead, that shit is over.
Like going to these.
Speaker 3 (32:19):
I want to go back to the days where freak off is not
in our vernacular, is not in ourvernacular and it's not a part
of a everyday conversation.
When I was watching the fuckingDOJ guy and he's saying freak
off, and every time I saw it andit's with a straight face it
(32:41):
was dead, ass serious what hewas saying.
And I'm thinking to myself,though this is where we fucking
are, where you're sitting hereand you're what he was saying,
and I'm thinking to myself,though this is where we fucking
are okay, you're sitting hereyou're standing.
He was like the freak off.
Speaker 2 (32:53):
I will delete.
I will delete freak off from myvernacular.
All right, so the high-end likesex party, that shit is over
with.
Like, if you have anything tolose politically or financially,
sex parties is done.
Right.
I'm sorry that you save thatshit for broke people Like learn
how to go out to the bar andhave a drink.
Speaker 3 (33:14):
Sex parties are for broke people Freak off.
Speaker 2 (33:17):
Well, sex party slash , freak off.
They're now for broke peoplewho don't have any social
standing, who ain't got to worryabout careers and being on the
line.
So learn how to go out to a bar, a drink, meet a girl the
old-fashioned way, because thesex party, that shit is dead.
Somebody's probably got you ontape and then y'all can't be
trusted not to like not engagein some sort of criminal
(33:39):
activity with, like the high-enddrugs and the narcotics and
having you know sex workers andforcing people to do things
outside and if you're gonna havean orgy, man don't.
Speaker 1 (33:53):
There's gotta be a no phones policy.
Speaker 2 (33:55):
They're all off in the box, geez I mean diddy was
having people sign an.
Nda is the problem is diddywould have his phone out or have
the camera out.
Speaker 1 (34:04):
Yeah, don't have it at did out.
Yeah, don't have it at Diddy'shouse.
Speaker 2 (34:06):
Yeah, don't have it at Diddy's house.
Speaker 1 (34:08):
Now he won't be there , right.
Speaker 2 (34:10):
You're going to have to have, like normal one-on-one
sex.
Speaker 3 (34:13):
I think we should liquidate all of his assets and
give those to the victims.
All right?
Well, you say that.
Speaker 2 (34:19):
So the Department of Justice is part of this criminal
indictment.
If he's convicted because itwas a racketeering case in which
some of the proceeds from hislegitimate businesses were used
to fund the criminal activity,including the sex trafficking,
he will likely have to forfeit alarge amount of his company,
(34:43):
which could could again lead tothe end of bad boy entertainment
and numerous other ventures ofhis.
So that's you joke, but that'snot entirely off the table in
terms of possibility.
But yeah, learn how to go outto a bar, have a drink, meet a
girl, have a conversation andtake her home, because going to
these sex parties is just goingto get you in.
(35:06):
Well, don't do it, michael EricDyson style.
I mean, for God's sake, have aconversation with somebody that
actually likes you.
No-transcript.
Popular Podcasts
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.