Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
So happy to have back my good buddy Leland Vindort.
He hosts on Balance on News Nation weeknights at seven pm.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
Subscribe to his.
Speaker 1 (00:08):
Fantastic War Notes daily email comes out each afternoon five
oh five pm. Mountain Timewarnotes dot com for that, and
of course his book Born Lucky. You can find it
Bornlucky dot com.
Speaker 3 (00:18):
Hi, Leland, always good to be with you, Ross.
Speaker 1 (00:22):
I enjoyed the debate you're having, Perhaps unsurprisingly, I'm leaning
your way on this, the debate you're having with Chris
Cuomo about whether the Epstein vote and all this stuff
is significant. I'm inclined to think that it's not going
to be particularly significant. But maybe that's just what I'm hoping,
(00:43):
not for partisan reasons, but because I'm sick of it.
Speaker 3 (00:46):
I think we're all sick of it. But I think
it's gonna end up.
Speaker 2 (00:50):
Being a whole lot of nothing.
Speaker 3 (00:52):
That is where it comes, because there's not going to
be anything in these file that are so significant that
they change the course of the story in that like,
we're not going to all of a sudden learn, oh
my god, you know X, or why happened and it
(01:15):
is now provable beyond a reasonable doubt, and on and
on and on. It's going to be a lot of salacious,
some some true, some untrue details, and that is going
to end up just sort of further turning this into
a just kind of a mess.
Speaker 1 (01:32):
I think it's pretty obvious that Donald Trump changed his
mind and told Republicans to go ahead and vote for
it because he knew he was going to lose and
he doesn't want to be on the other side of that.
But I'm wondering if you have a theory, and I
know you're you're not a mind reader and not a psychiatrist,
but do you have a theory as to why Trump
went from Lukewarm's support of releasing this stuff to opposition.
Speaker 2 (01:55):
Against releasing this stuff.
Speaker 1 (01:56):
But before his recent change a couple of days ago,
why do.
Speaker 2 (02:00):
You think he didn't just say, yeah, let's just get
it out.
Speaker 3 (02:04):
Well, first of all, Russ, as a friend, I feel
like you're selling me a little short. Not being a
psychiatrist or a mind reader. I did stay at a
holiday and expressed a few months ago, but thank you.
Speaker 2 (02:16):
I don't know. The one thing I do know is that.
Speaker 3 (02:23):
There is going to be a lot of things that
come out in this that are objectively untrue. So these
are going to be first interviews by FBI agents of
witnesses or suspects or people who were tangentially involved with
Epstein or whatever, and there's going to be things that
(02:45):
are said in there that are objectively untrue that the
FBI later found out not to be true. I personally
think that this is a very bad standard to set
of all of a sudden, having investigative documents released to
the general public of things that were never proven and
(03:08):
were never charged. That to me does not seem to
be American because it means now that anyone can say
anything to an FBI agent during an investigation, and one
they have to sit there and think, well, now this
might become public even if there's no crime committed or
no crime charged. But b it all of a sudden
(03:30):
says well, maybe I shouldn't say anything to the FBI
because everything that's going to be said is going to
be made public. It's a terrible standard to set, and
I don't think there's anybody who actually understands this that
thinks there is going to be evidence beyond a reasonable
doubt or even beyond the preponderance of a doubt for
(03:51):
a civil case of crimes being committed by people other
than what we already know.
Speaker 2 (03:58):
Yeah, I agree with you.
Speaker 1 (04:00):
And one of my concerns about this is, you know,
what if somebody's name shows up in these files. Who
happened to, let's say, socialized with Jeffrey Epstein six years
before anybody knew what a scumbag he was, And this
guy shows up in the emails and what had nothing
to do with Epstein's plane or island or girls. Maybe
(04:21):
it was a business conversation. And yet his name's going
to be out there. I'm saying his. I guess there
could be women, but I think it's mostly going to
be men, and his reputation is going to be damaged unfairly.
Speaker 2 (04:32):
And I really don't like that at all.
Speaker 3 (04:36):
No, I think it's real. I think it's really bad.
I think it's really it's really not the way America
is supposed to work.
Speaker 2 (04:45):
I do, and I don't like.
Speaker 3 (04:47):
I don't want to sound holier than now by saying that,
but that's not the way America is supposed to work, guys.
And I have a real problem with now this this
new standard of all of a sudden, you can have
guilt by association. Because people's names were released, You're going
to have accusations that were made in FBI interviews that
were later not substantiated, and then everybody's going to breathlessly.
Speaker 2 (05:09):
Report on them.
Speaker 3 (05:10):
Yeah, it's really a bad thing.
Speaker 2 (05:12):
Right, And I'll just say one other thing.
Speaker 1 (05:14):
And I don't need you to respond to this, but
I do understand a lot of the frustration.
Speaker 2 (05:18):
You can respond if you want.
Speaker 1 (05:20):
I think a lot of people feel like the deal
that he got from alex Acosta years ago, like there
was something wrong there that really stunk, and anybody else
would have gone to prison for quite a long time.
And I think people feel like the system is protecting
the rich guys. And I do understand that. Do you
want to say anything about that real quick? And then
I want to ask you about something else.
Speaker 3 (05:41):
I think that's unquestionably true. And I think there's the
people who are going to look the worst in is
who I think should look the worst in this are
alex Acosta, are the Obama DOJ, are the first Trump DOJ.
Speaker 2 (05:55):
That there was not.
Speaker 3 (05:56):
More done about this, although the second front DJ did
go after but whether or not they should have investigated
and how strongly they investigated the other people associated with this.
Speaker 2 (06:05):
We're talking with Leland Vndert.
Speaker 1 (06:07):
His show for me, it's the best show on cable news,
is called On Balance with Leland Vndert. It's weeknights at
seven pm on News Nation, which is the whole network
is doing incredibly well and deservedly so. In War Notes yesterday,
you talked about something that you know, I've been talking
about a little bit as well, where Trump just a
couple of examples, backtrack on some tariffs, the flip flop
(06:30):
on the Epstein thing. He's also talking about this two
thousand dollars tariff dividend and a brief flirtation with fifty
or mortgages. And it feels to me a little bit
like Trump is kind of casting about or flailing.
Speaker 2 (06:44):
And I wonder how you see that.
Speaker 1 (06:46):
And I wonder just if by extension, you think that
he is at risk of losing any significant amount of
his political power, or if that's just if really his
base loves him so much much that nothing he does is.
Speaker 2 (07:02):
Going to impact them.
Speaker 1 (07:03):
I do wonder about whether Congress critters are going to
back away from him a little bit if they see
association with him maybe starting to become potentially even a
negative or at least less of a positive.
Speaker 3 (07:16):
Well, all great analysis by you, no surprise. But I
don't think it's if people will start moving away. I
think people already have.
Speaker 2 (07:26):
I think.
Speaker 3 (07:28):
The power of the presidency is of a persuasion. I'm
not nearly as famous of A Harvard graduate named Richard Neustadt,
who is the great Harvard political scientist, noted that other
than the most famous graduate of Harvard, of course, we
tell he was Bill O'Reilly, who we had on last night,
and I put this to him, and I said, newstat
famously said, the real power of the presidency.
Speaker 2 (07:48):
Is the power of persuasion.
Speaker 3 (07:50):
Donald Trump is losing the power of persuasion because he's
losing the economic discussion. Americans don't feel better. And when
Americans don't feel good economically, they are angry. That's just
the way the world works. And when they're angry, they
go looking for someone to tell them that it's not
their fault and it's going to be better. And that
(08:11):
is what is happening right now. And Donald Trump is
losing his hold on the American economy, and therefore he's
losing his hold politically. And that's why you're seeing Ted Cruz.
That's why you're seeing Marjorie Tailler Green. You're seeing people
start to say he doesn't have the kind of power
he used to because he's lost, in Bill O'Reilly's words,
(08:31):
he's lost the hearts and minds of the American people.
Speaker 2 (08:34):
Folks.
Speaker 1 (08:34):
Now, if you want to get some tremendous political analysis
and also analysis of other things as well, you must
watch on Balance. It's week nights at seven pm on
News Nation. For me and my wife Kristin, it is
the cable news show that we do not miss. Thanks
for making time for us as always, Leland, it's great
to talk to you.
Speaker 3 (08:55):
Always fun Ross.
Speaker 2 (08:56):
Thank you have a great Thanksgiving
So happy to have back my good buddy Leland Vindort.
He hosts on Balance on News Nation weeknights at seven pm.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
Subscribe to his.
Speaker 1 (00:08):
Fantastic War Notes daily email comes out each afternoon five
oh five pm. Mountain Timewarnotes dot com for that, and
of course his book Born Lucky. You can find it
Bornlucky dot com.
Speaker 3 (00:18):
Hi, Leland, always good to be with you, Ross.
Speaker 1 (00:22):
I enjoyed the debate you're having, Perhaps unsurprisingly, I'm leaning
your way on this, the debate you're having with Chris
Cuomo about whether the Epstein vote and all this stuff
is significant. I'm inclined to think that it's not going
to be particularly significant. But maybe that's just what I'm hoping,
(00:43):
not for partisan reasons, but because I'm sick of it.
Speaker 3 (00:46):
I think we're all sick of it. But I think
it's gonna end up.
Speaker 2 (00:50):
Being a whole lot of nothing.
Speaker 3 (00:52):
That is where it comes, because there's not going to
be anything in these file that are so significant that
they change the course of the story in that like,
we're not going to all of a sudden learn, oh
my god, you know X, or why happened and it
(01:15):
is now provable beyond a reasonable doubt, and on and
on and on. It's going to be a lot of salacious,
some some true, some untrue details, and that is going
to end up just sort of further turning this into
a just kind of a mess.
Speaker 1 (01:32):
I think it's pretty obvious that Donald Trump changed his
mind and told Republicans to go ahead and vote for
it because he knew he was going to lose and
he doesn't want to be on the other side of that.
But I'm wondering if you have a theory, and I
know you're you're not a mind reader and not a psychiatrist,
but do you have a theory as to why Trump
went from Lukewarm's support of releasing this stuff to opposition.
Speaker 2 (01:55):
Against releasing this stuff.
Speaker 1 (01:56):
But before his recent change a couple of days ago,
why do.
Speaker 2 (02:00):
You think he didn't just say, yeah, let's just get
it out.
Speaker 3 (02:04):
Well, first of all, Russ, as a friend, I feel
like you're selling me a little short. Not being a
psychiatrist or a mind reader. I did stay at a
holiday and expressed a few months ago, but thank you.
Speaker 2 (02:16):
I don't know. The one thing I do know is that.
Speaker 3 (02:23):
There is going to be a lot of things that
come out in this that are objectively untrue. So these
are going to be first interviews by FBI agents of
witnesses or suspects or people who were tangentially involved with
Epstein or whatever, and there's going to be things that
(02:45):
are said in there that are objectively untrue that the
FBI later found out not to be true. I personally
think that this is a very bad standard to set
of all of a sudden, having investigative documents released to
the general public of things that were never proven and
(03:08):
were never charged. That to me does not seem to
be American because it means now that anyone can say
anything to an FBI agent during an investigation, and one
they have to sit there and think, well, now this
might become public even if there's no crime committed or
no crime charged. But b it all of a sudden
(03:30):
says well, maybe I shouldn't say anything to the FBI
because everything that's going to be said is going to
be made public. It's a terrible standard to set, and
I don't think there's anybody who actually understands this that
thinks there is going to be evidence beyond a reasonable
doubt or even beyond the preponderance of a doubt for
(03:51):
a civil case of crimes being committed by people other
than what we already know.
Speaker 2 (03:58):
Yeah, I agree with you.
Speaker 1 (04:00):
And one of my concerns about this is, you know,
what if somebody's name shows up in these files. Who
happened to, let's say, socialized with Jeffrey Epstein six years
before anybody knew what a scumbag he was, And this
guy shows up in the emails and what had nothing
to do with Epstein's plane or island or girls. Maybe
(04:21):
it was a business conversation. And yet his name's going
to be out there. I'm saying his. I guess there
could be women, but I think it's mostly going to
be men, and his reputation is going to be damaged unfairly.
Speaker 2 (04:32):
And I really don't like that at all.
Speaker 3 (04:36):
No, I think it's real. I think it's really bad.
I think it's really it's really not the way America
is supposed to work.
Speaker 2 (04:45):
I do, and I don't like.
Speaker 3 (04:47):
I don't want to sound holier than now by saying that,
but that's not the way America is supposed to work, guys.
And I have a real problem with now this this
new standard of all of a sudden, you can have
guilt by association. Because people's names were released, You're going
to have accusations that were made in FBI interviews that
were later not substantiated, and then everybody's going to breathlessly.
Speaker 2 (05:09):
Report on them.
Speaker 3 (05:10):
Yeah, it's really a bad thing.
Speaker 2 (05:12):
Right, And I'll just say one other thing.
Speaker 1 (05:14):
And I don't need you to respond to this, but
I do understand a lot of the frustration.
Speaker 2 (05:18):
You can respond if you want.
Speaker 1 (05:20):
I think a lot of people feel like the deal
that he got from alex Acosta years ago, like there
was something wrong there that really stunk, and anybody else
would have gone to prison for quite a long time.
And I think people feel like the system is protecting
the rich guys. And I do understand that. Do you
want to say anything about that real quick? And then
I want to ask you about something else.
Speaker 3 (05:41):
I think that's unquestionably true. And I think there's the
people who are going to look the worst in is
who I think should look the worst in this are
alex Acosta, are the Obama DOJ, are the first Trump DOJ.
Speaker 2 (05:55):
That there was not.
Speaker 3 (05:56):
More done about this, although the second front DJ did
go after but whether or not they should have investigated
and how strongly they investigated the other people associated with this.
Speaker 2 (06:05):
We're talking with Leland Vndert.
Speaker 1 (06:07):
His show for me, it's the best show on cable news,
is called On Balance with Leland Vndert. It's weeknights at
seven pm on News Nation, which is the whole network
is doing incredibly well and deservedly so. In War Notes yesterday,
you talked about something that you know, I've been talking
about a little bit as well, where Trump just a
couple of examples, backtrack on some tariffs, the flip flop
(06:30):
on the Epstein thing. He's also talking about this two
thousand dollars tariff dividend and a brief flirtation with fifty
or mortgages. And it feels to me a little bit
like Trump is kind of casting about or flailing.
Speaker 2 (06:44):
And I wonder how you see that.
Speaker 1 (06:46):
And I wonder just if by extension, you think that
he is at risk of losing any significant amount of
his political power, or if that's just if really his
base loves him so much much that nothing he does is.
Speaker 2 (07:02):
Going to impact them.
Speaker 1 (07:03):
I do wonder about whether Congress critters are going to
back away from him a little bit if they see
association with him maybe starting to become potentially even a
negative or at least less of a positive.
Speaker 3 (07:16):
Well, all great analysis by you, no surprise. But I
don't think it's if people will start moving away. I
think people already have.
Speaker 2 (07:26):
I think.
Speaker 3 (07:28):
The power of the presidency is of a persuasion. I'm
not nearly as famous of A Harvard graduate named Richard Neustadt,
who is the great Harvard political scientist, noted that other
than the most famous graduate of Harvard, of course, we
tell he was Bill O'Reilly, who we had on last night,
and I put this to him, and I said, newstat
famously said, the real power of the presidency.
Speaker 2 (07:48):
Is the power of persuasion.
Speaker 3 (07:50):
Donald Trump is losing the power of persuasion because he's
losing the economic discussion. Americans don't feel better. And when
Americans don't feel good economically, they are angry. That's just
the way the world works. And when they're angry, they
go looking for someone to tell them that it's not
their fault and it's going to be better. And that
(08:11):
is what is happening right now. And Donald Trump is
losing his hold on the American economy, and therefore he's
losing his hold politically. And that's why you're seeing Ted Cruz.
That's why you're seeing Marjorie Tailler Green. You're seeing people
start to say he doesn't have the kind of power
he used to because he's lost, in Bill O'Reilly's words,
(08:31):
he's lost the hearts and minds of the American people.
Speaker 2 (08:34):
Folks.
Speaker 1 (08:34):
Now, if you want to get some tremendous political analysis
and also analysis of other things as well, you must
watch on Balance. It's week nights at seven pm on
News Nation. For me and my wife Kristin, it is
the cable news show that we do not miss. Thanks
for making time for us as always, Leland, it's great
to talk to you.
Speaker 3 (08:55):
Always fun Ross.
Speaker 2 (08:56):
Thank you have a great Thanksgiving
The Ross Kaminsky Show News
Popular Podcasts
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
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.
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.