October 2, 2024 • 37 mins
ICYMI: Hour Three of ‘Later, with Mo’Kelly’ Presents – Thoughts on the number of accusers coming forward against Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs topping 120, including minors AND the new CNN.com subscription plans for ‘access to premium features’…PLUS – A look at the life and career of actor John Amos, who has passed at the age of 84 - on KFI AM 640…Live everywhere on the iHeartRadio app
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
You're listening to Later with Moe Kelly on Demand from
KFI AM six forty.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
You might have heard Steve Gregory's report about the pending
litigation against Sean P. Diddy Combs. He left out one
important fact. He left out the part where I have
been trying to tell you. Tawala's been trying to tell
you that this was going to happen, that more people
were going to be coming forward, And now more than
(00:29):
a hundred victims or ledged victims have come forward, kind
of just validating what we said that there were other
people that are out there who are going to now
tell their stories and then of course the judicial system
will decide whether those.
Speaker 3 (00:43):
Claims have merit.
Speaker 2 (00:45):
But we were trying to tell you this was what
was going to happen next and whether Sean P. Diddy Combs,
whether he was innocent of everything. He would have to
be innocent of everything, every single claim, every portion of
every claim for him to actually be innocent.
Speaker 4 (01:05):
Disturbing new allegations of sexual misconduct against Shandy Combs, some
of them involving children as young as nine years old.
Speaker 3 (01:12):
Nine years old.
Speaker 2 (01:16):
We tried to tell you, We tried to tell you
that this was not about just freak off. This was
not about six parties and after a concert or something
at Diddy's mansion.
Speaker 3 (01:28):
It was something much more sinister, all the way criminal.
Speaker 4 (01:31):
Disturbing new allegations of sexual misconduct against Shan Didy Combs,
some of them involving children as young as nine years old.
A Houston attorney representing one hundred and twenty accusers says
he expects lawsuits will be foullowed in the next month.
Tony Buzby described the victims as sixty males and sixty females,
including twenty five who were miners at the time of
the alleged mist conduct. The attorney alleges the music mogul
(01:52):
sexually abused a nine year old boy at an audition
at Comb's Bad Boy Records in New York City. Busby
says a fifteen year old was drugged at a party
and in front of Combs was raped by other individuals.
An attorney for Combs calls the allegations meritless and says
the rapper denies any claims that he sexually abused anyone,
including my nurse.
Speaker 2 (02:12):
Tried to tell you Tony Busby as reference in that story,
had this to say, the biggest secret.
Speaker 5 (02:18):
In the entertainment industry that really wasn't a secret at all,
has finally been.
Speaker 3 (02:22):
Revealed to the world.
Speaker 5 (02:24):
The wall of silence has now been broken and victims
are coming forward. Our team has had at this point
more than three thousand and two hundred and eighty five
individuals contact us with people claiming people claiming.
Speaker 6 (02:38):
To have been victimized by Sean Combs.
Speaker 5 (02:41):
After vetting, we now represent one hundred and twenty individuals
who intend to bring civil claims in civil court against
Sean Diddy Combs. You should know in this group it
is evenly divided between males and females. There's sixty males
and sixty females who have joined us US to pursue
these claims. As plainish, the victims are from more than
(03:04):
twenty five states.
Speaker 6 (03:05):
Majority are from California, New York, Georgia, and Florida. When
you talk about the ages and the victims from its
conduct occurred, it's shocking. Her youngest victim at the time
of the occurrence was nine years old. We have an
individual who was fourteen years old, We have one who
was fifteen. Twenty five of one hundred and twenty individuals
(03:26):
who are plaintiffs in these cases were reminders at the
time of the acts complained of them.
Speaker 2 (03:33):
We tried to tell you that there would be more
and this was not unknown. People keep saying this was
not unknown, And then the response has always been, well,
why didn't they come forward sooner? Why didn't they say
something then? Because there was a threat of violence, There
was a real possibility that not only would they be harmed,
but they would be killed and their family members would
(03:54):
be harmed. It wasn't about worrying about, you know, what
would happen to their career, someone trying to ruin their career,
which was often what was said when we talked about
me too. Through the lens of television and movies, Harvey Weinstein,
he could ruin somebody's career. No one was talking about
Harvey Weinstein dangling someone off a balcony or beating them
(04:16):
up in their office and hitting them over the head
with a telephone. No one was talking about the possibility
of Harvey Weinstein, for example, blowing up somebody's car because
they dated Cassie for a moment. It's all together different
when you have someone who's so very powerful. And again
this was pre social media, for the most part, there
(04:38):
was no way to get out your story in any
meaningful way. No one was just going to take your
word for it and then run with that story. The
whole world has changed in a media sense. The reason
why the music Me Too took longer, and have to
say this again is because the stakes were higher, The
(05:01):
danger was more pernicious, the danger was more serious. Lives
were impacted, lives could have been ended, and I'm quite
sure all of these individuals were threatened at some point.
And until we deal with that, you're not going to
understand the difference or the reasons why one hundred and
(05:23):
twenty people are coming forward now as opposed to nineteen
ninety nine because it was under the threat of actual
physical violence.
Speaker 7 (05:33):
I know, it's interesting that there are individuals who and
I don't know if they've reached out to you, Mooh,
but individuals who have reached out me to me through
DMS and said, like, you know, while you were in
the industry, how come you didn't speak out? And I
would just say for myself, I, as a consenting adult,
(05:57):
chose not to go to any after hour. I went
to one mansion party just thinking at that time like,
oh man, y'all's invited to this mansion party, bunch of rappers.
Speaker 3 (06:09):
I want to go check it out.
Speaker 7 (06:10):
After I saw what was happening, and at the time,
what was offered to me as the party was winding down,
like hey man, you want to take your pick here,
and I'm like, nah, I'm going home. After that, I
said to myself, you know what, I have sense enough
for myself to say, I don't want to be a
(06:33):
part of this all of the music industry, you know, conventions.
I had sense enough to say, you know what, I'm
going to leave this bar now because I know where
this is going. But the lore and the attraction of
the music industry, of the and there's lots of times
this is the victims are individuals who want to be
(06:53):
a part of and are looking at these big, heavyweight
music moguls and entertainers, singers, rappers, producers and the like
as being a way for them to become famous, and
they're willing to do whatever it takes. And unfortunately that's
the lore and the draw of being in entertainment, and
what happens is they're victimized to a point that they
(07:16):
could not even understand what was happening at the time,
and this is what happens when they Just imagine you're
nine years old and you are a this is all alleged,
but at nine years old, just imagine going and meeting
a music icon only to be sexually assaulted.
Speaker 2 (07:36):
And how do you process being sexually assaulted at nine
years old? How do you communicate that to someone an adult,
that X, Y or Z happened to you. And a
common story that I would here is you have someone,
let's say, who's nineteen twenty years old of age, an adult,
and they meet someone the power of Puff Daddy at
(08:00):
the time or p Diddy, someone who could make or
break your careers, like you want to be in that
person's presence. You want to do it. It's like Puffy's
taken interest in me. He wants me to come hang
out with him at his party at his house. And
then all of a sudden, Oh, it's not what you
thought was going to be. And then all of a sudden,
and I do meet. All of a sudden, you realize
(08:20):
that you've been drugged and things have.
Speaker 3 (08:21):
Happened to you. But who do you tell? Who's going
to believe you? Now? To answer your questions talk, and
I keep trying to remind people.
Speaker 2 (08:28):
I did what I could where I was, what I
saw and could validate and verify. At the Grammys, the
National Academy Recording, Arts and Sciences, I spoke out, I
spoke to the LA Times. When it came to the
books of the Grammys, I spoke to the FBI. I
did what I could with what I had right where
(08:48):
I was a lot of things that I saw in
the music business. And I said this last night. You know,
a lot of the music companies were just this side
of the trade, and these are real killers, real killers.
And it's not enough for me to say, hey, I
think something happened to so and so.
Speaker 3 (09:10):
You're asking what I did.
Speaker 2 (09:12):
Are you saying that you would have done differently, because
I don't know about you. I've had a gun put
in my face, I've had my life threatened. And unless
you are ready to actually confront that or deal with
the reality of that. When we were talking about this
last night, it was a common experience where you go
to a recording studio or a record label and their
guns everywhere. We had armed security twenty four to seven
(09:34):
y because someone may come in and shoot up the
place and are you saying are you actually going to
really ask me? Or twalla, well, what did you do?
Why did you do more? F oh fo capital h.
Speaker 7 (09:49):
I remember all of the condemnation I received when my
station was leading the charge and trying to bring light
to the charges that were levied against R. Kelly at
the time, and at this time these were just allegations.
There were no actual trench just allegations of what had happened,
(10:10):
and us having individuals on the air, our Afternoon Drive personality,
myself making a decision to back off of the music.
These were things that at the time they said, you
are literally throwing your career away for taking this stance
on not supporting R Kelly at the height of his career,
because this is what he was. I can fly R Kelly.
Speaker 2 (10:32):
I remember I had a column with euur web dot
com and I was one of the lone voices, the
lone voices who wrote out and wrote and spoke out
against R. Kelly in his first child pornography case. And
I caught a lot of hells like how dare you
she was of age, she knew what she was doing.
Victim blaming when it was not This was ten years
(10:54):
pre Me Too movement. Okay, whatever that first case was,
and I was one of the lone voices come him.
Articles are still out there, and I caught hell for it,
and so I really bristled when people say, why didn't
you do more?
Speaker 3 (11:07):
No, I was the one doing more.
Speaker 2 (11:09):
You're one of the people who either weren't paying attention
or didn't believe us. And then when we were trying
to let you know this was going on, I have
the receipts to prove it. So anyone wants to ask
me what I didn't do more, you obviously weren't paying
attention to let me just say one more time. Foh
are y'all? Foh go ahead? Mark asked me what that means.
(11:31):
I have some ideas. I have the concepts of an idea.
It's Later with mo Kelly Camfie AO six forty. We're
live everywhere on the iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 1 (11:41):
You're listening to Later with Moe Kelly on demand from
KFI AM six forty.
Speaker 2 (11:46):
And as we talk about these streaming platforms, the different
ones from Max to Amazon Prime to Disney Plus to
Peacock Paramount, doesn't matter. There is one basic idea that
I think we should all agree upon we keep the
streaming services that we find value in.
Speaker 3 (12:08):
It's real simple.
Speaker 2 (12:09):
I'm not going to pay five ninety nine nine ninety
nine twenty nine ninety nine for something that doesn't have
any value, or I'm not going to pay the twenty
nine ninety nine if I don't think that there is
an equal amount of value in programming.
Speaker 3 (12:23):
Can we agree on that? Good? Okay, let's move forward.
Speaker 2 (12:26):
So when I see that CNN dot com is offering
once again, because they've tried this before, subscription plans premium content.
It ranges from two ninety nine a month to twenty
nine ninety nine a year, and you would some people
may argue, I'm sure Warner Brothers Discovery would argue, two
(12:46):
ninety nine a month is not that much.
Speaker 3 (12:48):
No, it isn't.
Speaker 2 (12:50):
You should be able to afford two ninety nine a month.
Yes I can, But do I want to spend three
dollars a month on something, as far as I'm concerned,
which doesn't offer any value? And when we talk about
streaming platforms, it has to offer something that you want
and that you can't have normally and justifies you paying
(13:11):
money for it. Now we know that CNN is the
lowest rated cable news network, So right there, the demand
for the free programming is the lowest of the major
cable networks. And now you want to say that's okay,
we can go lower. We're going to ask you for
money for content that you've already let us know over
(13:32):
many years now that it's not something that you want
even for free. We're going to ask you for money
for something that you don't even want to see consistently
for free.
Speaker 3 (13:44):
This is what CNN had to say. Quote.
Speaker 2 (13:46):
The hope is that these are our first, very early
steps to building a direct to consumer business, and that's
Alex McCallum, executive vice president of Digital Products and Services
for CNN Worldwide. We want this to be a very
robust business line that complements the affiliate revenue we have
and our advertising revenue to be fair. And I say
(14:08):
this as someone who's done at least one hundred CNN
hits no exaggeration, so I kind of know how it
goes on behind the scenes. To some level, CNN is
not just what you see here. That's the domestic channel.
When you turn on your cable news and you see CNN,
that's called CNN Domestic, but if you've ever been at
(14:29):
an airport around the country or around the world, you're
most likely watching CNN International. If you watch the domestic
channel after midnight West Coast time, it usually switches over
to the CNN International feed. It's less opinion and editorial
and more straight news. And CNN does have bureaus around
(14:50):
the world, unlike Fox News which does not, and unlike
NBC News which has bureaus, but it's not cable focused.
CNN has content creating sources all around the world.
Speaker 3 (15:04):
So there is.
Speaker 2 (15:05):
Something theoretically which could be offered of value. But right
now in America they are focusing obviously on CNN Domestic,
and CNN Domestic has already tried.
Speaker 3 (15:20):
I think it was Mark what was it called CNN
Plus or something like that.
Speaker 8 (15:22):
It was CNN Plus and it lasted exactly one month
in twenty twenty two, from March twenty ninth to April
twenty eighth, and even then.
Speaker 3 (15:30):
They had the news of bring it Over Chris Wallace.
Speaker 2 (15:34):
There was new content which they were offering as a
carrot for people to sign up. But this what I'm seeing,
there's not anything that they can even point to to say, Hey,
you're gonna be getting this and this and that and
this exclusive that, and we know you want that, but
we're gonna make you paying for that. They can't even
make the honest argument that this two ninety nine a
(15:57):
month is justified.
Speaker 8 (15:59):
Maybe that's where you get the fact checking. You have
to pature for that. Oh we all want that. Uh huh.
Speaker 2 (16:07):
Now, according to CNN, CNN dot Com already has a
robust user base that executives hope can be converted over time.
Speaker 3 (16:15):
Quote, we have this massive audience.
Speaker 2 (16:16):
Over one hundred and fifty million every month, and millions
and millions of people come to us through CNN dot
com many times a week, if not many times a day.
The idea here is to take a product that already
exists and add some more bottom to it. Well, you
can't add more bottom if you're already the bottom. What
does that mean add more bottom to it? It doesn't,
(16:38):
it does, It defies, It defies logic. Now, I understand
your job as a media company, especially if you're in
digital marketing, is to create some sort of revenue stream.
Any type of money that they can get for this,
I would say, is basically free money because it doesn't
seem like they're really putting out any money for new content.
(17:00):
It's not like they're hiring new hosts. It's not like
they're creating new shows like they did try with CNN Plus.
It seems like they're just giving you added content, maybe
behind the scenes content, maybe some video podcasts or some
of the hosts, you know what I mean, Just kind
of adding nibbling around the edges, but not doing anything
extravagant or anything really special to justify you coming out
(17:23):
of the pocket for two ninety nine to twenty ninety nine,
two ninety nine a month or twenty nine ninety nine
a year.
Speaker 3 (17:30):
And I get it.
Speaker 2 (17:31):
They're gonna make the argument, it's like, it's only two
ninety nine. It's not that much. We all can afford
two ninety nine a month. It's it's less than a
Starbucks a cup of coffee, which it is. But I
don't drink Starbucks and I and I'm very specific about
where I spend my money. There's certain streaming platforms I
don't have anymore. Why because there's no value in it
(17:53):
for me.
Speaker 3 (17:54):
Either.
Speaker 2 (17:54):
I can get the content elsewhere, like on TV, like
on Plex TV or some other platform which streams for free,
or I can do without it all together, and unless
CNN can demonstrate that there's a demand, I'll put it
in other terms, Fox News, even though it's the number
(18:15):
one rated cable news network by a lot for a
long time, Fox Nation has never taken off, and that
had different hosts, It had added programming, but people were
not interested in that extra monetary layout for Fox esque
sounding content which was inferior to the main channel. Fox
(18:40):
Nation was not special and it has not done well.
I don't know if it's even still around anymore that platform.
I have to look it up. But if Fox Nation
can't do it, why in the hell would CNN Plus
the second Goal Round be anything.
Speaker 8 (18:54):
They really bet a lot on people being lured by
the charisma and magnetism of Chris Wallace to CNN Plus,
did they?
Speaker 3 (19:02):
He was supposed to be the basically the anchor for
the whole platform.
Speaker 8 (19:07):
Yeah, I don't have any problem with him, but I
sure wouldn't roll the dice on him to that degree.
Speaker 2 (19:12):
And since that was unsuccessful, and I would not blame
Chris Wallace, I believe the whole rollout was flawed and
faulty because I thought originally he was supposed to be
on the broadcast network and all of a sudden he
ended up on the digital platform.
Speaker 3 (19:26):
But if that didn't work, why would this work.
Speaker 2 (19:31):
And I know you have to generate revenue somehow, some way,
but this seems like a failed proposition out the gate.
If you're going to announce this, at least announce it
with something that people might be interested in. It can't
even tell me anything that I'm getting, which is supposed
to be over and above better than new fangled anything.
Speaker 3 (19:53):
Connected to it.
Speaker 2 (19:55):
There's nothing new except you'll be able to get all
of CNN's regularly scheduled content on the streaming site, plus
some added extras.
Speaker 3 (20:03):
Okay, okay, you know what.
Speaker 2 (20:06):
Thank you for the offer, but I'll pass, and I
think most people will pass.
Speaker 3 (20:10):
You're not going to get Mark Ronner's money.
Speaker 8 (20:12):
It seems to feel like I'm terribly cheap, especially when
it comes to news product. They struggle to fill their
schedule as it is. They're running recycled Bill Maher. They're
recycling a show called The News Show, the comedy news
Show from Britain. I forget the name of it, but
with American stars in it. They don't know what to
do with the time they have on their normal network.
(20:33):
Why would I pay extra to watch them struggle to
fill that?
Speaker 2 (20:36):
They say they're going to augment the offering with lifestyle
content that might include projects in the vein of what
Anthony Bourdain did, or a popular CNN personnel like doctor
Sanjay Gupta did focusing on health.
Speaker 8 (20:50):
That doesn't sound like two ninety nine a month. Oh
and the name of that show, by the way, was
Have I Got News for You? The British version is
really good. What was it called, Have I Got News
for You? The British version? Yeah, it was the same title. Yeah, oh, okay,
is it worth two ninety nine a month? The British
version you can see for free on YouTube and there
we go. I've been watching it for years that way,
that's my point.
Speaker 2 (21:10):
Yeah, you know why, by the cow, when you can
get the breast milk for my can'f I Am six
forty we're live everywhere in the iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 1 (21:19):
You're listening to Later with Moe Kelly on demand from
KFI AM six forty.
Speaker 2 (21:28):
Caf I moch Keller. We're live everywhere on the iHeartRadio app.
And we found out today that John A. Must the
TV writer turned Emmy nominated actor. He starred as James
Evans on Good Times. You know, that iconic television theme.
He was also the older version of Kuta Kinte in
(21:49):
Roots Died That The news was released today that he died,
but he died back on August twenty first, as it
was reported of natural causes. And growing up, John Amos
and my father were almost about the exact same age,
and he was and my father were very similar the
(22:11):
on screen persona of James Evans. The father and my
father were about exactly the same. They were very, very
very strict. They were very very very focused on making
sure that their kids went to school. And he was
a physical disciplinarian, and he put the fear of God
in you. It was almost like an exact match. And
(22:34):
to meet him later in life, John Amos said, is
he was the nicest guy. He was the warmest person
that you'd ever want to meet, very much unlike the
type of character he played on Good Times. But for
many people before there was Bill Cosby, especially in African
American families, John Amos was America's dad. He was that
(22:58):
archetype of a father who would do anything in everything
to care for his family. And although I had all
sorts of problems with the imagery and some of the
messages and the character development of the Good Times characters,
as far as the stereotypes, there were some things that
I think you could draw upon as John Amos's James
(23:20):
Evans was one of the stronger characters ever written in television,
even though it was it was kind of a caricature
on some level. But John Amos was an actor who
back then was breaking down barriers. Some people were introduced
to him through the Mary Tyler Moore Show. Maybe you
(23:42):
were introduced him obviously through Good Times, which was a
spin off of Maud. But he was a very versatile actor,
and when I was working in my last job in radio,
I had a chance to book him a few times
and he would come in and talk to me. He
was just he was wonderful to to be around. And
depending on how old you are, you may not remember
(24:06):
what a different time in America it was. In the
nineteen seventies, shows like All in the Family, which led
to the spinoff of the Jeffersons, and All in the Family,
which led to Maud, which led to Good Times. All
these Norman Lear shows were related on some level. But
Good Times let me just play this clip for you,
(24:28):
and this is from I think the third season of
Good Times. Think about if this clip, this show, this content,
this dialogue were used today.
Speaker 7 (24:41):
I went with Belona to one of those meetings where
women talk about their problems, you know, all that.
Speaker 2 (24:46):
Silly talk about trying to better themselves.
Speaker 3 (24:49):
One of them women's groups PROD.
Speaker 9 (24:51):
I'm surprised that you're wasting your time at a crazy.
Speaker 3 (24:53):
Ladies meeting like that.
Speaker 9 (24:56):
Look at you sitting here bumping your gumbs when you
ought to be in there making dinner.
Speaker 3 (25:02):
James, you asked me to sit down.
Speaker 9 (25:05):
I think you said he.
Speaker 3 (25:06):
Now, Well, there's one thing. I ain't got no patience
with us women trying to push in and take over
a man's job. James, that is not what women. I
have to tell me, flord I see it every day.
They're taking the food.
Speaker 2 (25:15):
Right out of my mouth. I think you said enough, Hey,
woman's wrong with you?
Speaker 3 (25:18):
You don't tell me when to talk. See, you don't
have been the one damn meeting right away?
Speaker 2 (25:22):
You flying in my face, James, That's not what it's
all about.
Speaker 3 (25:26):
I'm gonna tell you've.
Speaker 9 (25:27):
Been driving everybody crazy running around here.
Speaker 3 (25:29):
Now you're going in women's meetings. I'm gonna tell you
something Uncle Ed used to say it. Maybe he was right.
Speaker 9 (25:33):
There's only two places a woman belonged to.
Speaker 2 (25:37):
James. Don't say it, kitten in the bedroom, fire the kitchen,
in the bedroom.
Speaker 3 (25:48):
You're gonna say something I said, Ain't you gonna say something?
Speaker 9 (25:52):
Huh?
Speaker 3 (25:54):
It was a different time in America.
Speaker 2 (25:56):
Let me tell you that would not have gone over
well today, and you would not have received even the
fact of a of a studio audience. You would have
not had that same type of reaction, even though it
was a comedy. It was just a different time in America.
And maybe you didn't know John Amos as far as
good time, so maybe you're introduced to him more recently.
(26:17):
And this goes back to our conversation last night about
John Ashton and why you have sequels, because thanks again
to Eddie Murphy, you had the sequel to come into
America where we had one last look at not only
James Earl Jones, but John Amos. And if you know
anything about coming to America, you know this look seeing
a McDonald's.
Speaker 9 (26:37):
People got just a little misunderstanding see they're McDonald's, I'm McDonald's.
They got the Golden Archers minus the Golden Arts. I
(26:58):
say they got the big Mac. I got the big make.
We both got two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles,
and onions. But they use a sesame seed vine.
Speaker 3 (27:10):
My buns have no seats. We don't get a sequel
to come into America.
Speaker 2 (27:16):
I think if we don't get that sequel, we're probably
having a different conversation tonight saying, hey, all that time
they're talking about doing a sequel, they missed the opportunity.
We've lost James Earl Jones, we've lost John Amos. Match Sinclair,
who played a Keem's mother is no longer here. You know,
all those opportunities would have been gone and we would
(27:38):
have never seen an update of those characters. Now wasn't great.
It wasn't great. It was more nostalgia than anything. But
for me, it was enough. It didn't need to be
a theatrical release, but I got to see Khleil McDowell,
John Amos's character one last time. Like we said last night,
it was one last ride. Now we didn't get that
(28:02):
with good times. They had the live versions, and also
John Amos did play a part in one of the
live versions.
Speaker 3 (28:09):
But sometimes you can't go back.
Speaker 2 (28:12):
Obviously, Estra role is gone, Janet Dubois is gone, Bookman's gone,
Johnny Brown who played Bookman, So most of that cast
is gone, with the exception of Thelma, Michael and JJ.
Speaker 3 (28:25):
Yeah.
Speaker 7 (28:26):
Wow, so many different roles that I appreciated. John amoson
I thought he was great, and beast Master I thought
he was great in die Hard two. I did not
know he had still had the action chops in him
because he was a football player and he was showing it.
Speaker 3 (28:43):
In Diehard too.
Speaker 7 (28:45):
Of course, mister McDowell is in all time great and
so much of his career has influenced an impact in
my life as far as entertaining and growing up watching
Good Times. It was always that that that right there
is what a father should be, as far as keeping
his children in check in a community and where that
(29:08):
is full of all types of struggle and strife, gangs
and all that.
Speaker 3 (29:12):
I said to myself that right there is how you
do it. That's my take.
Speaker 2 (29:16):
My favorite episode was when he took on mad Dog
who shot JJ. He showed no fears like, look, I'm
gonna protect my family at all costs. And despite the stereotypes,
there were moments where you could see there were lessons
to be gained. And if that's the enduring legacy of
John Amos as an actor, then I'm satisfied. He gave
(29:37):
us so much. And there was controversy surrounding the end
of his life. There was a question of whether there
was elder abuse. There were allegations made by his daughter
against his son, Casey Amos, and if you've ever seen
a picture of Casey Amios, he looks exactly like John
Amos exactly, so there's no denying the relationship there.
Speaker 3 (29:57):
That will come out.
Speaker 2 (29:59):
There's a question of why it took more than a
month for this information to be released to the public,
but we'll find out soon enough. But we needed to
make sure that we gave John Amos his due, as
we did with John Ashton and also James Earl Jones
and Chris Christofferson. It's been one hell of a month,
let me tell you that, one hell of a month.
Speaker 7 (30:16):
This is feeling like twenty sixteen all over again.
Speaker 1 (30:19):
Yes, sir, you're listening to Later with Moe Kelly on
Demand from KFI AM six forty.
Speaker 2 (30:26):
And before we get out of here, just want to
let you know about two other television offerings which are
coming down the pike, and I wouldn't say the near future,
but they're in development. We're big Reacher fans here, the
prime video series Reacher.
Speaker 3 (30:42):
Mark.
Speaker 2 (30:43):
What if I said to you that there is a
spin off already in the works on the side character Neely,
the private investigator, who was really developed in season two
of Reacher.
Speaker 8 (30:57):
Oh that's the that's the woman who was in the
Inhuman the show out. Yes, yeah, I'd watch that.
Speaker 2 (31:02):
I'd watch it too, but with a caveat, I still
would want a cameo from one of the two of
the team, at least because you got to have Reacher
himself show up well in the perfect world. But like
in the way that Reacher brings in his friends along
the way, well, Neely would bring in her friends along
(31:23):
the way. They would help each other out. It wouldn't
be always everyone coming to help out Reacher. You know,
they would have to help out yourself. Fare Yeah, I
doubt they would do that. I know he was the
leader of the team, but still, you know, you would
think that they'll be able to call on each other.
Speaker 3 (31:36):
But it's a series that I'd want to see. Absolutely.
Speaker 7 (31:38):
I'm looking forward to that one because that, to me,
is a character that deserves their own series. And I
think that she the actress, established herself as having a
solid enough leading woman quality for a show. She's got
the action chops, her action is realistic. I mean, she
took some serious ass whippings, but the fight choreographer her
(32:02):
was good. So it's not gonna be a bunch of
her flipping you know, cher sized dudes through windows. We're
not gonna say that she's she's brilliant, but how she
she operates.
Speaker 3 (32:10):
But they also.
Speaker 2 (32:11):
Developed her character enough. You got enough of her backstory.
You knew about her, her her it was her father
that she was caring for.
Speaker 3 (32:19):
You knew more about her that you want to know more, as.
Speaker 2 (32:22):
Opposed to, oh, let's just give him a spin off
where it's like, okay, then you have to start from
square one where you don't know anything about them, and
then you have to do everything that's expository where you
don't have to do that. You've already told enough about
the character where you have a sense of their world
and where they came from. And how she ended up
in Reacher's unit.
Speaker 3 (32:39):
That was wrong.
Speaker 8 (32:40):
The actress I was thinking of was Serendus Swan. No, No,
she's gorgeous. The actress who played Neely is Maria Sten.
She's frend Swan has enough going on Maria Sten's Danish.
Speaker 3 (32:52):
Yes, frenda Swan, she's m oh No.
Speaker 2 (32:56):
I follow her on Instagram? Yes that the right verb follow, Yes,
follow nothing more. It's a social media term. It's not
a euphemism. Follow her closely?
Speaker 3 (33:08):
Do you not? That closely?
Speaker 8 (33:09):
Frequently?
Speaker 2 (33:10):
Intensely had to make you weird?
Speaker 7 (33:14):
You find yourself exhausted at the end of a good
following shoot.
Speaker 3 (33:19):
That's mother.
Speaker 2 (33:22):
One series in development I'm not looking forward to, And
this is one where it's like why And I might
be wrong.
Speaker 3 (33:31):
You may disagree with me.
Speaker 2 (33:32):
There are plans underway to get a robo cops series going.
I don't have any desire to see a procedural robo
cops show, robo cop law and Order. Like basically, it's like,
you know, Adam twelve robo Cop.
Speaker 3 (33:50):
I just I don't see it.
Speaker 2 (33:52):
I don't think it lends itself to episode after episode
after episode, especially if it's gonna be one of those
shows where it's continuously about his family trying to figure
out whether that's their dead husband, dead father who died
on the job and has his memories of his family
(34:13):
and now in the end of that he got it
all back the family. It picks up supposedly after a
RoboCop where you know, he's everyone knows who everyone is,
and he's just going day to day living life as
a robot policeman who can no longer love his wife
or hang out with his kid anymore. So what happens
(34:33):
when the wife moves on and starts dating someone else?
Speaker 3 (34:38):
Police brutality.
Speaker 8 (34:42):
They already had a robocops series back in the nineties.
Speaker 3 (34:46):
I didn't see it. Oh that was hot, tras, I
didn't see it. I never watched it.
Speaker 8 (34:50):
But the problem with these things is that Paul vero
Verhoven's RoboCop was satirical, just like his Starship Troopers was satirical,
and a lot of people didn't get that it was set.
It's kind of like people who watch Watchmen and they
want to emulate Rose Shock. They don't realize he's really
not a good guy.
Speaker 3 (35:07):
Not at all, not at all. Neither is the comedian.
Speaker 7 (35:09):
What's name is involved in this series. So that's why
it has promise. Yeah, okay, well that's promising. That's that's promising.
They say, is going to be exactly what it was
supposed to have been when they try to do with
the series in the first place. You know, he stepped
away after the second movie. Uh, and then they did
that ungodly third movie and they did the even worst
(35:30):
series because he was away. He's like, I got the
other stuff to do, but he's back on this. They've
got to really they of course they always say that,
but they've got a really good idea as far as
to how to turn this into a series in the
same vein as the first two movies.
Speaker 3 (35:47):
But we'll see, we'll see. No, we won't.
Speaker 2 (35:49):
No, you'll see, and you'll tell me about it, and
then if there's enough momentum, then possibly I would watch it.
Speaker 3 (35:55):
But I'm not gonna watch it on my own.
Speaker 2 (35:56):
I wouldn't watch another RoboCop movie, much less a serious
I wouldn't buy that.
Speaker 3 (36:01):
No, I wouldn't say, hey, wait, that's the other running Man.
Speaker 2 (36:05):
No, No, that's doesn't that original robo cop.
Speaker 3 (36:09):
Are you sure positive? Yes, it was a recurrent. It
was a commercial which was played in Like the Liquor Store.
Speaker 2 (36:15):
When RoboCop came in and shout out the place trying
to get this guy.
Speaker 3 (36:19):
I'm sure, yeah, yeah, he's like a sales character.
Speaker 8 (36:23):
Yeah, I'm getting my dystopian satires all mixed up for
Hovian is eighty six now, and he's Dutch. And it's
always interesting to me to see how foreigners satirize Americans
with this kind of stuff.
Speaker 2 (36:35):
They don't know that they're making fun of us. We
don't know that they're making fun of us. No, we
think it's righteous. We think it's badass. Yeah, it's RoboCop.
He guys right.
Speaker 3 (36:44):
We knew that.
Speaker 2 (36:45):
We didn't need you to verify that Mark is frequently wrong.
We don't need your help to verify the's wrong. He's
always wrong. Man, Suddenly I'm against fact checking live everywhere
in the iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 1 (37:01):
If you already know what you want us to say,
you're probably in the wrong place.
Speaker 8 (37:06):
K S.
Speaker 2 (37:07):
I'm k O S
Speaker 3 (37:08):
T H D Twos Angeles,
You're listening to Later with Moe Kelly on Demand from
KFI AM six forty.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
You might have heard Steve Gregory's report about the pending
litigation against Sean P. Diddy Combs. He left out one
important fact. He left out the part where I have
been trying to tell you. Tawala's been trying to tell
you that this was going to happen, that more people
were going to be coming forward, And now more than
(00:29):
a hundred victims or ledged victims have come forward, kind
of just validating what we said that there were other
people that are out there who are going to now
tell their stories and then of course the judicial system
will decide whether those.
Speaker 3 (00:43):
Claims have merit.
Speaker 2 (00:45):
But we were trying to tell you this was what
was going to happen next and whether Sean P. Diddy Combs,
whether he was innocent of everything. He would have to
be innocent of everything, every single claim, every portion of
every claim for him to actually be innocent.
Speaker 4 (01:05):
Disturbing new allegations of sexual misconduct against Shandy Combs, some
of them involving children as young as nine years old.
Speaker 3 (01:12):
Nine years old.
Speaker 2 (01:16):
We tried to tell you, We tried to tell you
that this was not about just freak off. This was
not about six parties and after a concert or something
at Diddy's mansion.
Speaker 3 (01:28):
It was something much more sinister, all the way criminal.
Speaker 4 (01:31):
Disturbing new allegations of sexual misconduct against Shan Didy Combs,
some of them involving children as young as nine years old.
A Houston attorney representing one hundred and twenty accusers says
he expects lawsuits will be foullowed in the next month.
Tony Buzby described the victims as sixty males and sixty females,
including twenty five who were miners at the time of
the alleged mist conduct. The attorney alleges the music mogul
(01:52):
sexually abused a nine year old boy at an audition
at Comb's Bad Boy Records in New York City. Busby
says a fifteen year old was drugged at a party
and in front of Combs was raped by other individuals.
An attorney for Combs calls the allegations meritless and says
the rapper denies any claims that he sexually abused anyone,
including my nurse.
Speaker 2 (02:12):
Tried to tell you Tony Busby as reference in that story,
had this to say, the biggest secret.
Speaker 5 (02:18):
In the entertainment industry that really wasn't a secret at all,
has finally been.
Speaker 3 (02:22):
Revealed to the world.
Speaker 5 (02:24):
The wall of silence has now been broken and victims
are coming forward. Our team has had at this point
more than three thousand and two hundred and eighty five
individuals contact us with people claiming people claiming.
Speaker 6 (02:38):
To have been victimized by Sean Combs.
Speaker 5 (02:41):
After vetting, we now represent one hundred and twenty individuals
who intend to bring civil claims in civil court against
Sean Diddy Combs. You should know in this group it
is evenly divided between males and females. There's sixty males
and sixty females who have joined us US to pursue
these claims. As plainish, the victims are from more than
(03:04):
twenty five states.
Speaker 6 (03:05):
Majority are from California, New York, Georgia, and Florida. When
you talk about the ages and the victims from its
conduct occurred, it's shocking. Her youngest victim at the time
of the occurrence was nine years old. We have an
individual who was fourteen years old, We have one who
was fifteen. Twenty five of one hundred and twenty individuals
(03:26):
who are plaintiffs in these cases were reminders at the
time of the acts complained of them.
Speaker 2 (03:33):
We tried to tell you that there would be more
and this was not unknown. People keep saying this was
not unknown, And then the response has always been, well,
why didn't they come forward sooner? Why didn't they say
something then? Because there was a threat of violence, There
was a real possibility that not only would they be harmed,
but they would be killed and their family members would
(03:54):
be harmed. It wasn't about worrying about, you know, what
would happen to their career, someone trying to ruin their career,
which was often what was said when we talked about
me too. Through the lens of television and movies, Harvey Weinstein,
he could ruin somebody's career. No one was talking about
Harvey Weinstein dangling someone off a balcony or beating them
(04:16):
up in their office and hitting them over the head
with a telephone. No one was talking about the possibility
of Harvey Weinstein, for example, blowing up somebody's car because
they dated Cassie for a moment. It's all together different
when you have someone who's so very powerful. And again
this was pre social media, for the most part, there
(04:38):
was no way to get out your story in any
meaningful way. No one was just going to take your
word for it and then run with that story. The
whole world has changed in a media sense. The reason
why the music Me Too took longer, and have to
say this again is because the stakes were higher, The
(05:01):
danger was more pernicious, the danger was more serious. Lives
were impacted, lives could have been ended, and I'm quite
sure all of these individuals were threatened at some point.
And until we deal with that, you're not going to
understand the difference or the reasons why one hundred and
(05:23):
twenty people are coming forward now as opposed to nineteen
ninety nine because it was under the threat of actual
physical violence.
Speaker 7 (05:33):
I know, it's interesting that there are individuals who and
I don't know if they've reached out to you, Mooh,
but individuals who have reached out me to me through
DMS and said, like, you know, while you were in
the industry, how come you didn't speak out? And I
would just say for myself, I, as a consenting adult,
(05:57):
chose not to go to any after hour. I went
to one mansion party just thinking at that time like,
oh man, y'all's invited to this mansion party, bunch of rappers.
Speaker 3 (06:09):
I want to go check it out.
Speaker 7 (06:10):
After I saw what was happening, and at the time,
what was offered to me as the party was winding down,
like hey man, you want to take your pick here,
and I'm like, nah, I'm going home. After that, I
said to myself, you know what, I have sense enough
for myself to say, I don't want to be a
(06:33):
part of this all of the music industry, you know, conventions.
I had sense enough to say, you know what, I'm
going to leave this bar now because I know where
this is going. But the lore and the attraction of
the music industry, of the and there's lots of times
this is the victims are individuals who want to be
(06:53):
a part of and are looking at these big, heavyweight
music moguls and entertainers, singers, rappers, producers and the like
as being a way for them to become famous, and
they're willing to do whatever it takes. And unfortunately that's
the lore and the draw of being in entertainment, and
what happens is they're victimized to a point that they
(07:16):
could not even understand what was happening at the time,
and this is what happens when they Just imagine you're
nine years old and you are a this is all alleged,
but at nine years old, just imagine going and meeting
a music icon only to be sexually assaulted.
Speaker 2 (07:36):
And how do you process being sexually assaulted at nine
years old? How do you communicate that to someone an adult,
that X, Y or Z happened to you. And a
common story that I would here is you have someone,
let's say, who's nineteen twenty years old of age, an adult,
and they meet someone the power of Puff Daddy at
(08:00):
the time or p Diddy, someone who could make or
break your careers, like you want to be in that
person's presence. You want to do it. It's like Puffy's
taken interest in me. He wants me to come hang
out with him at his party at his house. And
then all of a sudden, Oh, it's not what you
thought was going to be. And then all of a sudden,
and I do meet. All of a sudden, you realize
(08:20):
that you've been drugged and things have.
Speaker 3 (08:21):
Happened to you. But who do you tell? Who's going
to believe you? Now? To answer your questions talk, and
I keep trying to remind people.
Speaker 2 (08:28):
I did what I could where I was, what I
saw and could validate and verify. At the Grammys, the
National Academy Recording, Arts and Sciences, I spoke out, I
spoke to the LA Times. When it came to the
books of the Grammys, I spoke to the FBI. I
did what I could with what I had right where
(08:48):
I was a lot of things that I saw in
the music business. And I said this last night. You know,
a lot of the music companies were just this side
of the trade, and these are real killers, real killers.
And it's not enough for me to say, hey, I
think something happened to so and so.
Speaker 3 (09:10):
You're asking what I did.
Speaker 2 (09:12):
Are you saying that you would have done differently, because
I don't know about you. I've had a gun put
in my face, I've had my life threatened. And unless
you are ready to actually confront that or deal with
the reality of that. When we were talking about this
last night, it was a common experience where you go
to a recording studio or a record label and their
guns everywhere. We had armed security twenty four to seven
(09:34):
y because someone may come in and shoot up the
place and are you saying are you actually going to
really ask me? Or twalla, well, what did you do?
Why did you do more? F oh fo capital h.
Speaker 7 (09:49):
I remember all of the condemnation I received when my
station was leading the charge and trying to bring light
to the charges that were levied against R. Kelly at
the time, and at this time these were just allegations.
There were no actual trench just allegations of what had happened,
(10:10):
and us having individuals on the air, our Afternoon Drive personality,
myself making a decision to back off of the music.
These were things that at the time they said, you
are literally throwing your career away for taking this stance
on not supporting R Kelly at the height of his career,
because this is what he was. I can fly R Kelly.
Speaker 2 (10:32):
I remember I had a column with euur web dot
com and I was one of the lone voices, the
lone voices who wrote out and wrote and spoke out
against R. Kelly in his first child pornography case. And
I caught a lot of hells like how dare you
she was of age, she knew what she was doing.
Victim blaming when it was not This was ten years
(10:54):
pre Me Too movement. Okay, whatever that first case was,
and I was one of the lone voices come him.
Articles are still out there, and I caught hell for it,
and so I really bristled when people say, why didn't
you do more?
Speaker 3 (11:07):
No, I was the one doing more.
Speaker 2 (11:09):
You're one of the people who either weren't paying attention
or didn't believe us. And then when we were trying
to let you know this was going on, I have
the receipts to prove it. So anyone wants to ask
me what I didn't do more, you obviously weren't paying
attention to let me just say one more time. Foh
are y'all? Foh go ahead? Mark asked me what that means.
(11:31):
I have some ideas. I have the concepts of an idea.
It's Later with mo Kelly Camfie AO six forty. We're
live everywhere on the iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 1 (11:41):
You're listening to Later with Moe Kelly on demand from
KFI AM six forty.
Speaker 2 (11:46):
And as we talk about these streaming platforms, the different
ones from Max to Amazon Prime to Disney Plus to
Peacock Paramount, doesn't matter. There is one basic idea that
I think we should all agree upon we keep the
streaming services that we find value in.
Speaker 3 (12:08):
It's real simple.
Speaker 2 (12:09):
I'm not going to pay five ninety nine nine ninety
nine twenty nine ninety nine for something that doesn't have
any value, or I'm not going to pay the twenty
nine ninety nine if I don't think that there is
an equal amount of value in programming.
Speaker 3 (12:23):
Can we agree on that? Good? Okay, let's move forward.
Speaker 2 (12:26):
So when I see that CNN dot com is offering
once again, because they've tried this before, subscription plans premium content.
It ranges from two ninety nine a month to twenty
nine ninety nine a year, and you would some people
may argue, I'm sure Warner Brothers Discovery would argue, two
(12:46):
ninety nine a month is not that much.
Speaker 3 (12:48):
No, it isn't.
Speaker 2 (12:50):
You should be able to afford two ninety nine a month.
Yes I can, But do I want to spend three
dollars a month on something, as far as I'm concerned,
which doesn't offer any value? And when we talk about
streaming platforms, it has to offer something that you want
and that you can't have normally and justifies you paying
(13:11):
money for it. Now we know that CNN is the
lowest rated cable news network, So right there, the demand
for the free programming is the lowest of the major
cable networks. And now you want to say that's okay,
we can go lower. We're going to ask you for
money for content that you've already let us know over
(13:32):
many years now that it's not something that you want
even for free. We're going to ask you for money
for something that you don't even want to see consistently
for free.
Speaker 3 (13:44):
This is what CNN had to say. Quote.
Speaker 2 (13:46):
The hope is that these are our first, very early
steps to building a direct to consumer business, and that's
Alex McCallum, executive vice president of Digital Products and Services
for CNN Worldwide. We want this to be a very
robust business line that complements the affiliate revenue we have
and our advertising revenue to be fair. And I say
(14:08):
this as someone who's done at least one hundred CNN
hits no exaggeration, so I kind of know how it
goes on behind the scenes. To some level, CNN is
not just what you see here. That's the domestic channel.
When you turn on your cable news and you see CNN,
that's called CNN Domestic, but if you've ever been at
(14:29):
an airport around the country or around the world, you're
most likely watching CNN International. If you watch the domestic
channel after midnight West Coast time, it usually switches over
to the CNN International feed. It's less opinion and editorial
and more straight news. And CNN does have bureaus around
(14:50):
the world, unlike Fox News which does not, and unlike
NBC News which has bureaus, but it's not cable focused.
CNN has content creating sources all around the world.
Speaker 3 (15:04):
So there is.
Speaker 2 (15:05):
Something theoretically which could be offered of value. But right
now in America they are focusing obviously on CNN Domestic,
and CNN Domestic has already tried.
Speaker 3 (15:20):
I think it was Mark what was it called CNN
Plus or something like that.
Speaker 8 (15:22):
It was CNN Plus and it lasted exactly one month
in twenty twenty two, from March twenty ninth to April
twenty eighth, and even then.
Speaker 3 (15:30):
They had the news of bring it Over Chris Wallace.
Speaker 2 (15:34):
There was new content which they were offering as a
carrot for people to sign up. But this what I'm seeing,
there's not anything that they can even point to to say, Hey,
you're gonna be getting this and this and that and
this exclusive that, and we know you want that, but
we're gonna make you paying for that. They can't even
make the honest argument that this two ninety nine a
(15:57):
month is justified.
Speaker 8 (15:59):
Maybe that's where you get the fact checking. You have
to pature for that. Oh we all want that. Uh huh.
Speaker 2 (16:07):
Now, according to CNN, CNN dot Com already has a
robust user base that executives hope can be converted over time.
Speaker 3 (16:15):
Quote, we have this massive audience.
Speaker 2 (16:16):
Over one hundred and fifty million every month, and millions
and millions of people come to us through CNN dot
com many times a week, if not many times a day.
The idea here is to take a product that already
exists and add some more bottom to it. Well, you
can't add more bottom if you're already the bottom. What
does that mean add more bottom to it? It doesn't,
(16:38):
it does, It defies, It defies logic. Now, I understand
your job as a media company, especially if you're in
digital marketing, is to create some sort of revenue stream.
Any type of money that they can get for this,
I would say, is basically free money because it doesn't
seem like they're really putting out any money for new content.
(17:00):
It's not like they're hiring new hosts. It's not like
they're creating new shows like they did try with CNN Plus.
It seems like they're just giving you added content, maybe
behind the scenes content, maybe some video podcasts or some
of the hosts, you know what I mean, Just kind
of adding nibbling around the edges, but not doing anything
extravagant or anything really special to justify you coming out
(17:23):
of the pocket for two ninety nine to twenty ninety nine,
two ninety nine a month or twenty nine ninety nine
a year.
Speaker 3 (17:30):
And I get it.
Speaker 2 (17:31):
They're gonna make the argument, it's like, it's only two
ninety nine. It's not that much. We all can afford
two ninety nine a month. It's it's less than a
Starbucks a cup of coffee, which it is. But I
don't drink Starbucks and I and I'm very specific about
where I spend my money. There's certain streaming platforms I
don't have anymore. Why because there's no value in it
(17:53):
for me.
Speaker 3 (17:54):
Either.
Speaker 2 (17:54):
I can get the content elsewhere, like on TV, like
on Plex TV or some other platform which streams for free,
or I can do without it all together, and unless
CNN can demonstrate that there's a demand, I'll put it
in other terms, Fox News, even though it's the number
(18:15):
one rated cable news network by a lot for a
long time, Fox Nation has never taken off, and that
had different hosts, It had added programming, but people were
not interested in that extra monetary layout for Fox esque
sounding content which was inferior to the main channel. Fox
(18:40):
Nation was not special and it has not done well.
I don't know if it's even still around anymore that platform.
I have to look it up. But if Fox Nation
can't do it, why in the hell would CNN Plus
the second Goal Round be anything.
Speaker 8 (18:54):
They really bet a lot on people being lured by
the charisma and magnetism of Chris Wallace to CNN Plus,
did they?
Speaker 3 (19:02):
He was supposed to be the basically the anchor for
the whole platform.
Speaker 8 (19:07):
Yeah, I don't have any problem with him, but I
sure wouldn't roll the dice on him to that degree.
Speaker 2 (19:12):
And since that was unsuccessful, and I would not blame
Chris Wallace, I believe the whole rollout was flawed and
faulty because I thought originally he was supposed to be
on the broadcast network and all of a sudden he
ended up on the digital platform.
Speaker 3 (19:26):
But if that didn't work, why would this work.
Speaker 2 (19:31):
And I know you have to generate revenue somehow, some way,
but this seems like a failed proposition out the gate.
If you're going to announce this, at least announce it
with something that people might be interested in. It can't
even tell me anything that I'm getting, which is supposed
to be over and above better than new fangled anything.
Speaker 3 (19:53):
Connected to it.
Speaker 2 (19:55):
There's nothing new except you'll be able to get all
of CNN's regularly scheduled content on the streaming site, plus
some added extras.
Speaker 3 (20:03):
Okay, okay, you know what.
Speaker 2 (20:06):
Thank you for the offer, but I'll pass, and I
think most people will pass.
Speaker 3 (20:10):
You're not going to get Mark Ronner's money.
Speaker 8 (20:12):
It seems to feel like I'm terribly cheap, especially when
it comes to news product. They struggle to fill their
schedule as it is. They're running recycled Bill Maher. They're
recycling a show called The News Show, the comedy news
Show from Britain. I forget the name of it, but
with American stars in it. They don't know what to
do with the time they have on their normal network.
(20:33):
Why would I pay extra to watch them struggle to
fill that?
Speaker 2 (20:36):
They say they're going to augment the offering with lifestyle
content that might include projects in the vein of what
Anthony Bourdain did, or a popular CNN personnel like doctor
Sanjay Gupta did focusing on health.
Speaker 8 (20:50):
That doesn't sound like two ninety nine a month. Oh
and the name of that show, by the way, was
Have I Got News for You? The British version is
really good. What was it called, Have I Got News
for You? The British version? Yeah, it was the same title. Yeah, oh, okay,
is it worth two ninety nine a month? The British
version you can see for free on YouTube and there
we go. I've been watching it for years that way,
that's my point.
Speaker 2 (21:10):
Yeah, you know why, by the cow, when you can
get the breast milk for my can'f I Am six
forty we're live everywhere in the iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 1 (21:19):
You're listening to Later with Moe Kelly on demand from
KFI AM six forty.
Speaker 2 (21:28):
Caf I moch Keller. We're live everywhere on the iHeartRadio app.
And we found out today that John A. Must the
TV writer turned Emmy nominated actor. He starred as James
Evans on Good Times. You know, that iconic television theme.
He was also the older version of Kuta Kinte in
(21:49):
Roots Died That The news was released today that he died,
but he died back on August twenty first, as it
was reported of natural causes. And growing up, John Amos
and my father were almost about the exact same age,
and he was and my father were very similar the
(22:11):
on screen persona of James Evans. The father and my
father were about exactly the same. They were very, very
very strict. They were very very very focused on making
sure that their kids went to school. And he was
a physical disciplinarian, and he put the fear of God
in you. It was almost like an exact match. And
(22:34):
to meet him later in life, John Amos said, is
he was the nicest guy. He was the warmest person
that you'd ever want to meet, very much unlike the
type of character he played on Good Times. But for
many people before there was Bill Cosby, especially in African
American families, John Amos was America's dad. He was that
(22:58):
archetype of a father who would do anything in everything
to care for his family. And although I had all
sorts of problems with the imagery and some of the
messages and the character development of the Good Times characters,
as far as the stereotypes, there were some things that
I think you could draw upon as John Amos's James
(23:20):
Evans was one of the stronger characters ever written in television,
even though it was it was kind of a caricature
on some level. But John Amos was an actor who
back then was breaking down barriers. Some people were introduced
to him through the Mary Tyler Moore Show. Maybe you
(23:42):
were introduced him obviously through Good Times, which was a
spin off of Maud. But he was a very versatile actor,
and when I was working in my last job in radio,
I had a chance to book him a few times
and he would come in and talk to me. He
was just he was wonderful to to be around. And
depending on how old you are, you may not remember
(24:06):
what a different time in America it was. In the
nineteen seventies, shows like All in the Family, which led
to the spinoff of the Jeffersons, and All in the Family,
which led to Maud, which led to Good Times. All
these Norman Lear shows were related on some level. But
Good Times let me just play this clip for you,
(24:28):
and this is from I think the third season of
Good Times. Think about if this clip, this show, this content,
this dialogue were used today.
Speaker 7 (24:41):
I went with Belona to one of those meetings where
women talk about their problems, you know, all that.
Speaker 2 (24:46):
Silly talk about trying to better themselves.
Speaker 3 (24:49):
One of them women's groups PROD.
Speaker 9 (24:51):
I'm surprised that you're wasting your time at a crazy.
Speaker 3 (24:53):
Ladies meeting like that.
Speaker 9 (24:56):
Look at you sitting here bumping your gumbs when you
ought to be in there making dinner.
Speaker 3 (25:02):
James, you asked me to sit down.
Speaker 9 (25:05):
I think you said he.
Speaker 3 (25:06):
Now, Well, there's one thing. I ain't got no patience
with us women trying to push in and take over
a man's job. James, that is not what women. I
have to tell me, flord I see it every day.
They're taking the food.
Speaker 2 (25:15):
Right out of my mouth. I think you said enough, Hey,
woman's wrong with you?
Speaker 3 (25:18):
You don't tell me when to talk. See, you don't
have been the one damn meeting right away?
Speaker 2 (25:22):
You flying in my face, James, That's not what it's
all about.
Speaker 3 (25:26):
I'm gonna tell you've.
Speaker 9 (25:27):
Been driving everybody crazy running around here.
Speaker 3 (25:29):
Now you're going in women's meetings. I'm gonna tell you
something Uncle Ed used to say it. Maybe he was right.
Speaker 9 (25:33):
There's only two places a woman belonged to.
Speaker 2 (25:37):
James. Don't say it, kitten in the bedroom, fire the kitchen,
in the bedroom.
Speaker 3 (25:48):
You're gonna say something I said, Ain't you gonna say something?
Speaker 9 (25:52):
Huh?
Speaker 3 (25:54):
It was a different time in America.
Speaker 2 (25:56):
Let me tell you that would not have gone over
well today, and you would not have received even the
fact of a of a studio audience. You would have
not had that same type of reaction, even though it
was a comedy. It was just a different time in America.
And maybe you didn't know John Amos as far as
good time, so maybe you're introduced to him more recently.
(26:17):
And this goes back to our conversation last night about
John Ashton and why you have sequels, because thanks again
to Eddie Murphy, you had the sequel to come into
America where we had one last look at not only
James Earl Jones, but John Amos. And if you know
anything about coming to America, you know this look seeing
a McDonald's.
Speaker 9 (26:37):
People got just a little misunderstanding see they're McDonald's, I'm McDonald's.
They got the Golden Archers minus the Golden Arts. I
(26:58):
say they got the big Mac. I got the big make.
We both got two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles,
and onions. But they use a sesame seed vine.
Speaker 3 (27:10):
My buns have no seats. We don't get a sequel
to come into America.
Speaker 2 (27:16):
I think if we don't get that sequel, we're probably
having a different conversation tonight saying, hey, all that time
they're talking about doing a sequel, they missed the opportunity.
We've lost James Earl Jones, we've lost John Amos. Match Sinclair,
who played a Keem's mother is no longer here. You know,
all those opportunities would have been gone and we would
(27:38):
have never seen an update of those characters. Now wasn't great.
It wasn't great. It was more nostalgia than anything. But
for me, it was enough. It didn't need to be
a theatrical release, but I got to see Khleil McDowell,
John Amos's character one last time. Like we said last night,
it was one last ride. Now we didn't get that
(28:02):
with good times. They had the live versions, and also
John Amos did play a part in one of the
live versions.
Speaker 3 (28:09):
But sometimes you can't go back.
Speaker 2 (28:12):
Obviously, Estra role is gone, Janet Dubois is gone, Bookman's gone,
Johnny Brown who played Bookman, So most of that cast
is gone, with the exception of Thelma, Michael and JJ.
Speaker 3 (28:25):
Yeah.
Speaker 7 (28:26):
Wow, so many different roles that I appreciated. John amoson
I thought he was great, and beast Master I thought
he was great in die Hard two. I did not
know he had still had the action chops in him
because he was a football player and he was showing it.
Speaker 3 (28:43):
In Diehard too.
Speaker 7 (28:45):
Of course, mister McDowell is in all time great and
so much of his career has influenced an impact in
my life as far as entertaining and growing up watching
Good Times. It was always that that that right there
is what a father should be, as far as keeping
his children in check in a community and where that
(29:08):
is full of all types of struggle and strife, gangs
and all that.
Speaker 3 (29:12):
I said to myself that right there is how you
do it. That's my take.
Speaker 2 (29:16):
My favorite episode was when he took on mad Dog
who shot JJ. He showed no fears like, look, I'm
gonna protect my family at all costs. And despite the stereotypes,
there were moments where you could see there were lessons
to be gained. And if that's the enduring legacy of
John Amos as an actor, then I'm satisfied. He gave
(29:37):
us so much. And there was controversy surrounding the end
of his life. There was a question of whether there
was elder abuse. There were allegations made by his daughter
against his son, Casey Amos, and if you've ever seen
a picture of Casey Amios, he looks exactly like John
Amos exactly, so there's no denying the relationship there.
Speaker 3 (29:57):
That will come out.
Speaker 2 (29:59):
There's a question of why it took more than a
month for this information to be released to the public,
but we'll find out soon enough. But we needed to
make sure that we gave John Amos his due, as
we did with John Ashton and also James Earl Jones
and Chris Christofferson. It's been one hell of a month,
let me tell you that, one hell of a month.
Speaker 7 (30:16):
This is feeling like twenty sixteen all over again.
Speaker 1 (30:19):
Yes, sir, you're listening to Later with Moe Kelly on
Demand from KFI AM six forty.
Speaker 2 (30:26):
And before we get out of here, just want to
let you know about two other television offerings which are
coming down the pike, and I wouldn't say the near future,
but they're in development. We're big Reacher fans here, the
prime video series Reacher.
Speaker 3 (30:42):
Mark.
Speaker 2 (30:43):
What if I said to you that there is a
spin off already in the works on the side character Neely,
the private investigator, who was really developed in season two
of Reacher.
Speaker 8 (30:57):
Oh that's the that's the woman who was in the
Inhuman the show out. Yes, yeah, I'd watch that.
Speaker 2 (31:02):
I'd watch it too, but with a caveat, I still
would want a cameo from one of the two of
the team, at least because you got to have Reacher
himself show up well in the perfect world. But like
in the way that Reacher brings in his friends along
the way, well, Neely would bring in her friends along
(31:23):
the way. They would help each other out. It wouldn't
be always everyone coming to help out Reacher. You know,
they would have to help out yourself. Fare Yeah, I
doubt they would do that. I know he was the
leader of the team, but still, you know, you would
think that they'll be able to call on each other.
Speaker 3 (31:36):
But it's a series that I'd want to see. Absolutely.
Speaker 7 (31:38):
I'm looking forward to that one because that, to me,
is a character that deserves their own series. And I
think that she the actress, established herself as having a
solid enough leading woman quality for a show. She's got
the action chops, her action is realistic. I mean, she
took some serious ass whippings, but the fight choreographer her
(32:02):
was good. So it's not gonna be a bunch of
her flipping you know, cher sized dudes through windows. We're
not gonna say that she's she's brilliant, but how she
she operates.
Speaker 3 (32:10):
But they also.
Speaker 2 (32:11):
Developed her character enough. You got enough of her backstory.
You knew about her, her her it was her father
that she was caring for.
Speaker 3 (32:19):
You knew more about her that you want to know more, as.
Speaker 2 (32:22):
Opposed to, oh, let's just give him a spin off
where it's like, okay, then you have to start from
square one where you don't know anything about them, and
then you have to do everything that's expository where you
don't have to do that. You've already told enough about
the character where you have a sense of their world
and where they came from. And how she ended up
in Reacher's unit.
Speaker 3 (32:39):
That was wrong.
Speaker 8 (32:40):
The actress I was thinking of was Serendus Swan. No, No,
she's gorgeous. The actress who played Neely is Maria Sten.
She's frend Swan has enough going on Maria Sten's Danish.
Speaker 3 (32:52):
Yes, frenda Swan, she's m oh No.
Speaker 2 (32:56):
I follow her on Instagram? Yes that the right verb follow, Yes,
follow nothing more. It's a social media term. It's not
a euphemism. Follow her closely?
Speaker 3 (33:08):
Do you not? That closely?
Speaker 8 (33:09):
Frequently?
Speaker 2 (33:10):
Intensely had to make you weird?
Speaker 7 (33:14):
You find yourself exhausted at the end of a good
following shoot.
Speaker 3 (33:19):
That's mother.
Speaker 2 (33:22):
One series in development I'm not looking forward to, And
this is one where it's like why And I might
be wrong.
Speaker 3 (33:31):
You may disagree with me.
Speaker 2 (33:32):
There are plans underway to get a robo cops series going.
I don't have any desire to see a procedural robo
cops show, robo cop law and Order. Like basically, it's like,
you know, Adam twelve robo Cop.
Speaker 3 (33:50):
I just I don't see it.
Speaker 2 (33:52):
I don't think it lends itself to episode after episode
after episode, especially if it's gonna be one of those
shows where it's continuously about his family trying to figure
out whether that's their dead husband, dead father who died
on the job and has his memories of his family
(34:13):
and now in the end of that he got it
all back the family. It picks up supposedly after a
RoboCop where you know, he's everyone knows who everyone is,
and he's just going day to day living life as
a robot policeman who can no longer love his wife
or hang out with his kid anymore. So what happens
(34:33):
when the wife moves on and starts dating someone else?
Speaker 3 (34:38):
Police brutality.
Speaker 8 (34:42):
They already had a robocops series back in the nineties.
Speaker 3 (34:46):
I didn't see it. Oh that was hot, tras, I
didn't see it. I never watched it.
Speaker 8 (34:50):
But the problem with these things is that Paul vero
Verhoven's RoboCop was satirical, just like his Starship Troopers was satirical,
and a lot of people didn't get that it was set.
It's kind of like people who watch Watchmen and they
want to emulate Rose Shock. They don't realize he's really
not a good guy.
Speaker 3 (35:07):
Not at all, not at all. Neither is the comedian.
Speaker 7 (35:09):
What's name is involved in this series. So that's why
it has promise. Yeah, okay, well that's promising. That's that's promising.
They say, is going to be exactly what it was
supposed to have been when they try to do with
the series in the first place. You know, he stepped
away after the second movie. Uh, and then they did
that ungodly third movie and they did the even worst
(35:30):
series because he was away. He's like, I got the
other stuff to do, but he's back on this. They've
got to really they of course they always say that,
but they've got a really good idea as far as
to how to turn this into a series in the
same vein as the first two movies.
Speaker 3 (35:47):
But we'll see, we'll see. No, we won't.
Speaker 2 (35:49):
No, you'll see, and you'll tell me about it, and
then if there's enough momentum, then possibly I would watch it.
Speaker 3 (35:55):
But I'm not gonna watch it on my own.
Speaker 2 (35:56):
I wouldn't watch another RoboCop movie, much less a serious
I wouldn't buy that.
Speaker 3 (36:01):
No, I wouldn't say, hey, wait, that's the other running Man.
Speaker 2 (36:05):
No, No, that's doesn't that original robo cop.
Speaker 3 (36:09):
Are you sure positive? Yes, it was a recurrent. It
was a commercial which was played in Like the Liquor Store.
Speaker 2 (36:15):
When RoboCop came in and shout out the place trying
to get this guy.
Speaker 3 (36:19):
I'm sure, yeah, yeah, he's like a sales character.
Speaker 8 (36:23):
Yeah, I'm getting my dystopian satires all mixed up for
Hovian is eighty six now, and he's Dutch. And it's
always interesting to me to see how foreigners satirize Americans
with this kind of stuff.
Speaker 2 (36:35):
They don't know that they're making fun of us. We
don't know that they're making fun of us. No, we
think it's righteous. We think it's badass. Yeah, it's RoboCop.
He guys right.
Speaker 3 (36:44):
We knew that.
Speaker 2 (36:45):
We didn't need you to verify that Mark is frequently wrong.
We don't need your help to verify the's wrong. He's
always wrong. Man, Suddenly I'm against fact checking live everywhere
in the iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 1 (37:01):
If you already know what you want us to say,
you're probably in the wrong place.
Speaker 8 (37:06):
K S.
Speaker 2 (37:07):
I'm k O S
Speaker 3 (37:08):
T H D Twos Angeles,
Later, with Mo'Kelly News
Popular Podcasts
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
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.
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show. Clay Travis and Buck Sexton tackle the biggest stories in news, politics and current events with intelligence and humor. From the border crisis, to the madness of cancel culture and far-left missteps, Clay and Buck guide listeners through the latest headlines and hot topics with fun and entertaining conversations and opinions.