The Cocktail Lounge w/ Brad and Special Guests

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:29):
The following program contains course language and adult themes.

Speaker 2 (00:34):
Listener discretion is advice.

Speaker 3 (01:04):
And good evening too. Everybody out in kate lrn Land.
It's Tuesday evening and this is your time to kick back,
throw it at the leisure, put the feed up, mix
a couple of drinks on ice, and enjoy another episode
of The Cocktail Lounge. No, you're not hearing the lovely
dulcet tones of the ever Effervest and Aggie Reek and
she is off this week, so me being her cost

(01:28):
I become the primary host. But we got a pretty
special show anyway. We are kind of throwing our usual
format in the truck bag and we're gonna have a
couple of guests on. And joining me in the first
half of the show is one of my compatriots from
over at Red State. She's kind of my partner when
it comes to assaulting the media and holding them accountable.

(01:50):
Her name is Stacy Matthews. You know are his sister
Toldence Stacy, how are we doing this evening?

Speaker 4 (01:55):
Hey, Brad, it's good to be on with the Cocktail
Lounge listeners tonight.

Speaker 5 (02:00):
Thanks for having me.

Speaker 3 (02:01):
Absolutely appreciate it, and hey, it's good to be on
speaking terms with you once again.

Speaker 4 (02:05):
Now then yeah, yeah, and I will I will say this.
I have a little brief announcement to make. I actually
was off work today and yesterday, but you know, I
had to come through for Brad, you know, because Brad
is special like.

Speaker 3 (02:18):
That, so deeply appreciated, deeply appreciated, special as in short,
bus I understand what you mean by that. But nonetheless,
now it's for a couple of weeks there, Stacey and
I were at odds because of the Stanley Cup. She's
an ardent fan of the Carolina Hurricanes and I'm not,
as we played them here in Florida last week, and

(02:40):
I'm sorry. That's about all I can say.

Speaker 4 (02:42):
No, you're not sorry, not sorry. Well, I'll be a
good sport and I'll say congratulations. And like I said earlier,
I can't root for a Canadian team under any circumstance.
It's no offense to any Canadian listeners. So I will
be rooting for the Panthers, even though they cleaned our
Hawks in the Premium series.

Speaker 3 (03:03):
Yeah, it's kind of an interesting development down here in
South Florida because literally I have been on board with
the Panthers from day one. I was in the stands
for their first ever preseason game. I mean, I go
that far back day one, and it's really odd out
as seeing much of the league resenting us because of
our success. I mean, we it drives people battye. This

(03:24):
is only the second time in forty years that a
team has gone to the Stanley Cup three straight years,
and it's happened six years in a row because just
before us, Tampa went on a three Cup run and
the rest of the league is now just losing their
minds and saying what the hell. I was laughing after
we clinched against you guys. On the TNT broadcast, Paul Bissonett,

(03:49):
he formerly of the Toronto Maple Leagues. He was actually
proposing that the league do something because Florida has a
tax advantage and they're saying, we're able to raw more
stars down here and that's why we're so successful, oh, brother,
to which I had to laugh and say, well, you're
just basically going to have to adjust the tax code

(04:11):
now on roughly fifty percent of the league, because you're
talking all seven Canadian teams, three in California, one in Washington,
two in New York, Jersey, the Bruins and Taxachusetts. So
right there, you've got all these teams with high tax
rates that they're crying about their roster. It's like, stop it.

Speaker 4 (04:32):
But well, hey, you know what if at leads to
tax rate changes in those other states, great, it's not
going to change the star power they have in Florida,
that's for sure.

Speaker 3 (04:40):
Yeah, it's not a It's not so much of a
salary thing down here either, because Pal Maurice, the head coach,
he just is running a show. And Bill Zito, our
general manager, is the VP of this franchise. He has
built not just quality on the bench, but it's he
pulls guys in based on ca character and how they
are in the locker room with each other. And Paul

(05:03):
Maurice has even said he goes this team is unlike
any I've been on before. He's like, half the time
I'm on autopilot because they know ahead of time everything
that needs to be done and sometimes tell me. And
he says sometimes the best coaching is just to get
out of the way because they're just such a tight group.
They all read each other. He says, I can mix
lines and don't even think about it because I know

(05:25):
they can play with each other.

Speaker 4 (05:26):
And yeah, and I think your goalie could probably stop
Hucks in his sleep at this point.

Speaker 5 (05:31):
He's so good.

Speaker 3 (05:33):
Yeah, Bobroski is kind of a demon in the playoffs.
I mean he's He's had years where he struggled and
then he get in the postseason and he just turns
on a switch that he didn't have prior. He's just amazing. Well,
I think the game that we shut you guys out
on amazingly enough third time, if third or fourth time,
he has gotten a shout out on that exact date.

Speaker 5 (05:55):
Wow, that's interesting.

Speaker 3 (05:57):
They we're saying we should make that a Bobroski National
Holiday down here, because on that dat he's gonna blank
whoever he's playing. It's weird. We've seen a lot of
that in the playoffs, just too much one here. I'm
almost a point of getting spoiled, except I can look
back on three decades of struggles.

Speaker 4 (06:16):
So so tell me this real quick, because I know
we have our in state rivalries here in North Carolina.
Like you know, the Duke versus Carolina rivalry is historic.
Everybody knows about that. So, like, if you're a fan
of the Florida Panthers, that means you can't be a
fan of the Tampa Tampa Bay Lightning.

Speaker 5 (06:34):
Is that how it works basically?

Speaker 3 (06:36):
Yeah, Roughly, it's yeah, pretty much, to be honest, for
the most part, it hasn't been much of a rivalry
only because Tampa has been so good and we've been mediocre.
But literally in the last probably five to six years,
it's it's definitely heated up. We're always meeting him in
the playoffs and it's always a physical contest. It's beautiful

(06:56):
to watch, I think. I think in one of the
games last season, both teams had more than sixty hits
against each other. Wow, nothing but throwing the bodies around
and just so much fun to watch. And it's a
lot of mutual respect too. So it's kind of like
in football with the Hurricanes and the Florida State Seminoles,
where you just you love to hate each other, but

(07:18):
there's also that undercurrent of respect going on. So it's
not abject hatred like it is with the Gators. They
just suck like.

Speaker 4 (07:26):
It is with Duke and Carolina, where they just absolutely
despise each other.

Speaker 5 (07:32):
Despise each other too.

Speaker 3 (07:35):
I think with us here in Florida, it's a healthy
rivalry as opposed.

Speaker 5 (07:38):
To you know, not healthy here, not healthy here.

Speaker 3 (07:42):
Yeah, I can, but that one's a little more in
trench too. You're talking multiple generations. That that's so.

Speaker 4 (07:49):
And you know, I think their campuses are like Duke
and Carolina. They're like seven miles from each other, I think,
is what it is. Yeah, it just it's you know,
the coaches and the players, I'm sure have a lot
of respect for each other, but the fan base is
I mean, it's so very brutal, it really is. But
Mad prompts to to the to the Florida Panthers, and

(08:10):
you know, it's funny because we have a team here,
you know, the Carolina Panthers, which has typically had losing records,
and I was like just a shade confused. There's some
of the games where I would say, go Panthers, Wait
a minute, Wait a minute, that's not that's not my team.

Speaker 3 (08:28):
Understand that could be a reflex. I can see that happen.

Speaker 4 (08:32):
Yeah, I mean, just have a history of stopping us
in the in the playoffs. We've gotta we gotta learn
how to how to reverse that next year.

Speaker 5 (08:41):
For sure. It's painful.

Speaker 3 (08:43):
Is conference final, That's that's where you guys just seem
to kind of end it all. Yeah, in one game
you would go on to Owen fifteen.

Speaker 5 (08:52):
Yeah, it's just painful, brutal.

Speaker 3 (08:55):
Now you got a good squad there, You're you're in
good shape. I think you had a great foundation. Brenda
Moore's a hell of a coach. I know they're kind
of talking about get rid of them because he can't
seem to get to the next level. But I think
that'd be a mistake.

Speaker 4 (09:07):
That would really not be a good idea. But they
don't pay me the big buck, so I don't really know.

Speaker 3 (09:14):
Yeh, yeh. That's my problem too. When I'm watching the bars.
Damn it, they're not taking my text. I keep sending
the coaches ideas and nobody can get nothing in return.
It's just the way it asked. Well, as I said,
Stacy and I at Red State, we are uh you know,
we're both kind of the media antagonists over there, and
we have had more fun. I think in the last

(09:35):
couple of weeks. The Jig Tapper book that came out
has been my goodness. It is especially for myself and
I'm sure you are right there with me that watching
this unfold has just been so fascinating because particularly what
I what I just am drawn to is the obliviousness

(09:57):
that was on display, where Tapper was really con that
this is going to clean the slate and exonerate him
and everybody would be clear, and it has been the
exact opposite. Once the revelations that came out in the
book were made public, most of the reaction from the
public has been are you guys serious?

Speaker 4 (10:18):
Well, I mean, I think you know, because of reporting
that you and I and others have done on this
over the years, on and speaking specifically about Joe Biden's
decline and the obvious cover up that was going on
not just by the Biden Harris White House, but also
the media, you know, I think people were kind of

(10:39):
in tune with that. So when this book came out,
people like, I mean, the revelations are very interesting. They
kind of build on the foundation that was already built
by people like me and you. You know, we knew
there was a cover up. It's just what Jake Tapper
and Alex Thompson have come out with is just kind

(11:00):
of it just kind of bolsters that case. But the
fascinating thing is that I have not read the book
I refused to give Jake Tapper one penny of my money.

Speaker 5 (11:09):
I plan on buying it used whenever I can do that.

Speaker 4 (11:13):
But you know, the interesting thing about this, like you said,
is that Jake Tapper is, you know, initially kind of
acted like, well, you know, I don't know what was
going on, and it's just there's just absolutely no way.
I mean, we were told throughout the Joe Biden's presidency
that Jake Tapper was a respectable investigative journalists working to
uncover the true, true facts about everything, and yet he

(11:36):
was completely in the dark because the White House supposedly
kept this from him.

Speaker 5 (11:40):
I'm not buying it. I know you're not buying it.

Speaker 4 (11:42):
Most people that paid even just a little bit of
attention to what was going on with Joe Biden over
the last four years, you know, they're not buying it either.

Speaker 3 (11:53):
No, it's been there's so many things that have been
hilarious about this. I love the fact that the two
of them, Emperor and Alex Thompson, are they run this
book tour and they're just really leaning into the fact
that we spoke to two hundred people. More than two
hundred people opened up to us and gave us details
and the real investigation took place, and it was like, right,

(12:14):
where the hell was that for the last four years.
And that's the biggest thing. They only did this after
Biden was gone, after the election, so when it was and.

Speaker 4 (12:26):
They're saying that that it was the only read, it
was the only time that they could do. Is what
they're saying is because nobody was willing to speak up
before the election, because they didn't want to be seen
as potentially helping Trump. I'm talking about people in the
Biden White House allegedly didn't want to speak about it.
My thing is is I have a problem with that statement.

(12:47):
And I'm sure that you're well aware of this story.
But Chuck Todd, who is a Democrat apologist if there
ever was one in the mainstream press, he said, just
a couple of weeks I believe it was a couple
of weeks after the disastrous debate that Joe Biden had,
he said that this was the classic I don't even
remember the exact classic story that everybody knew, but no

(13:12):
one wanted to talk about. And he also said that
he talked to a senior cabinet secretary two years before
that debate, and they actually had a conversation about Biden's
ability to run for another term. I'm sorry, I don't
I'm not buying that Jake Tapper and others didn't know

(13:32):
about this.

Speaker 5 (13:33):
I'm not buying it. Nobody should.

Speaker 3 (13:35):
It's a lot, No, not at all. And I think
what Chuck Todd called it was the non story was
the open secret that nobody would.

Speaker 5 (13:43):
Talk about, right, nobody want your.

Speaker 3 (13:46):
Job to get them to talk about it, to challenge
him to.

Speaker 4 (13:49):
Obviously he was talking to somebody about it, but did
he talk about it on Meet the Press?

Speaker 5 (13:54):
I'm sorry, and if.

Speaker 3 (13:56):
You if you brought it up, you would get shot down.
Biden chucked up, how dare you? You know you're not
a doctor, and this is ageism and that kind of crap.
And he was on with Jonathan Martin on that episode
of the podcast, and I just I just got in
Jonathan Martin's face a week or so ago about this
because he was denying it. I was like, John, you
were on the show. I heard you say you've known

(14:17):
for years. No, No, you heard it wrong. So I
had to actually give him the transcript of his own
words saying we knew this years ago. It's not a big.

Speaker 4 (14:25):
Deal everybody in the I mean, you know, it's just
if we could see it, and we're not nearly as
close to people in Washington, d C. As the Acella media,
if we could see it from where we're sitting, you
know that they saw it. And Chuck Todd another Chuck
Todd reference here, but he's he's kind of let the

(14:46):
cat out of the bag because he's trying to absolve
himself in the process. But he has actually also, you know,
said some other interesting things. And I think it was
in April he was talking to Piers Morgan on the
Piers Morgan Show. He and I don't have it in
front of me, but he said something along the lines of,
you know that he said the reason that some in

(15:08):
the media did not push harder on the Biden health issues,
the cognitive decline and the other issues was because they
did not want to be seen as diminishing Biden because
they thought that it would help Donald Trump.

Speaker 5 (15:23):
He said that, I didn't make it up. He said
it people. We wrote about it at RedState dot com.

Speaker 4 (15:29):
So he said it. People knew. People knew but didn't
want to say anything. So what does Jake Tappler have
to say to that, or Chuck Todd and Jake Tapper
are going to have a conversation about this. I'd love
to hear it, because Chuck Todd is saying exactly the
opposite of what Jake Tapper is saying. He's Chuck Tyd
is saying people did know. And even though Todd is
saying that there was a white House cover, he's saying

(15:50):
that there were people in the media who did know.
Jake Tapper is acting like nobody in the media knew,
which is a complete insult to everybody's intelligence.

Speaker 3 (16:00):
Yeah, and it's you know what. To hear Chuck Todd
say that cracks me up even more because he's the
guy that would just have knee jerk reactions when he
was hosting Meet the Press if a if a Republican said, oh,
you know, you guys just always support the Democrats, don't
start with that. I mean, he would just leap out
of his share almost Yeah, there you say, they pick aside,
and here he is admitting the press was picking aside.

Speaker 5 (16:24):
Oh now, now here's here's the funny thing.

Speaker 4 (16:25):
And I'm sure you know about this too, Brad, because
you're well versed on the subject too. You know, Chuck
Todd is acting like, oh, I was speaking up? When
when when did Chuck Todd speak up? He didn't speak up,
He didn't speak up at all. Now his comment was,
I was questioning whether Biden should run again. But questioning
whether Biden should run again is different than questioning the

(16:49):
than than than raising issues about cognitive help. You know
that there's people people kind of conflated the age and
cognitive health kind of thing, and even though they both
kind of go together. Here he was, if he brought
it up, it was from a age perspective. If he
ever brought this up, I don't believe that he did.
But the real issue is was not the age. It

(17:09):
was the cognitive health issue. And he never raised that issue.

Speaker 5 (17:14):
Never raised it.

Speaker 4 (17:15):
And now he's trying to act like this is an
the media scandal, this is a White House scandle are.

Speaker 5 (17:19):
You kidding me?

Speaker 3 (17:21):
Well? This is I think I've described it pretty much
from the week when they were leaking excerpts from the
book a week ahead of its release. You could see
them trying to rewrite history in real time, trying to
recalibrate what was said and what we meant by things
Tapper revealed himself. I covered this at the site actually

(17:43):
where he was praising the two journalists from the Wall
Street Journal who put out a piece ahead of the
debate where they said, numerous people in the White House
are concerned about this, Biden's falling apart. They're seeing this
in private, and this is entirely what their piece was about.
They spent months writing. It came out, I want to say,

(18:03):
like June fifth of last summer, and Tapper was there
in November of this year praising these two journalists and saying, man,
it's just shameful the way the White House attacked you
to and how the Democrats came on and just laid
into your article and blamed it on just talking to
Republicans and being a Murdoch outlet of just shameful stuff,

(18:26):
said Jake Tapper. I pull up his interview that he
conducted when the article came out, not with them. He
opened the segment with the White House complaint about the article,
put it on screen, so you see the White House
denying the article before he even got into the aspects

(18:47):
of the article itself. So he gave the White House
all the airtime. He blamed them for speaking only to Republicans.
He mentioned the fact that it's a Murdoch newspaper and
who did he speak to that day, Democrat Senator Chris
Coons to slam the article. So Tapper was the one

(19:07):
that he's complaining about today. This is what's going on.
But I think the most can't make it up.

Speaker 5 (19:13):
You just cannot make it up.

Speaker 3 (19:16):
Well, it's it's the fact that they think this stuff's
not researchable that cracks me up. But in watching them
do the interviews, meaning Tapper and Thompson, for the last
couple of weeks, I've really started to focus in on
Thompson because for one, he doesn't get near as much
airtime even when they're on their show together. But two,
he talks specifically about the nuts and bolts of things,

(19:38):
and a lot of times when Tapper is doing his denial,
you see the reaction on Thompson's base and he's kind
of wide eyed and he's like, oh, oh my, oh yeah.

Speaker 4 (19:48):
Here's my thought bubble on Alex Thompson is is he
is now realizing the mistake that he made and partnering
up with Jake Tapper on this book because it's in
some ways it's actually become more about Jake tap first
failures than it is anything else. And Alex Thompson, he
was one of the few, well before the infamous debate,

(20:09):
Alex Thompson was one of the ones who was kind
of saying, hey, we've got some problems going on here
with this guy.

Speaker 6 (20:14):
You know.

Speaker 4 (20:14):
He wasn't didn't go back several years, but I think
in twenty twenty three was when he started raising the
question about Biden's health, which was earlier than most people
went public with most people in the media. But I
think I get the impression when I look at him
in these interviews, like you said, he kind of he
kind of is staring blankly almost it's almost like he's thinking,

(20:35):
how quickly can I get out of here, you know,
and how quickly can I get my credibility back because
some of it's gone now that I partnered up with
this con artist who's acting like you know he was
he was in the know, you know, And it's just
comical in some ways and it's infuriating in other ways.

Speaker 3 (20:55):
Well, I think, yeah, Thompson has been a front row
seat to Tapper trying to readjust his credibility on this
whole thing, because Thompson basically comes out and he's very forthcoming.
He's like, look, we dropped the ball here. This is
a screw up on the media. We failed to do
our jobs. And I mean he has said these things,

(21:17):
and there's Tapper trying to completely reframe what took place. Well, actually,
and that kind of crap. Thompson had an interview by himself.
I forget who it was. Might have been like a
political podcast or such. He had the most I don't
know if you heard this one. It was the most
revealing detail in this entire book. He said he spoke

(21:38):
to people in the White House that were basically admitting, outright,
we lied. It's like, yeah, we were putting this stuff
out there, we were protecting, we were shielding him. And
he said, then this guy got in my face and said,
I can't believe the media is going along with all
of it. And he said that was he said, this
is the person saying we're lying in the White hou House.

(22:00):
What the hell's the matter with the press. It's like
they haven't pushed back on a single thing. They're absorbing
and then re parroting everything we say. And so there's
not a shred of skepticism to be found in the media.
And this is a guy in the White House amazed
at how bad the press was performing.

Speaker 5 (22:18):
Yeah, and when you.

Speaker 4 (22:18):
When you compare it to how they how they you know,
the media, you know, always likes to say they're reluctant
to press to too much on health issues or whatever.
They're trying to be respectful of someone's age, because they
did that a lot with McCain when the issue of
his age was raised, and people are like, well, we
shouldn't be talking about his age or whatever.

Speaker 3 (22:37):
Whatever.

Speaker 4 (22:37):
But the thing is is that when Trump was president
and he walked down a ramp slowly one time, and
when one time he actually held a glass of water
with two hands, we were subjected to two weeks of
NonStop media coverage about health. And not only that, there
were endless parades, and especially on CNN, there were endless

(22:57):
parades of medical exists quote unquote who were diagnosing Trump's
mental health from afar, you know. But they can't bring
on a single solitary person during the entire course of
Joe Biden's presidency to talk about his cognitive health and
the questions surrounding it.

Speaker 5 (23:15):
I mean, give me a break.

Speaker 3 (23:17):
Oh yeah, it was. It was weeks of twenty throth
amendment talk anytime he stumbled on something. And yet that's
my biggest takeaway from last year because I even said
at the time, the day after the debate, I wrote,
this is a complete meltdown of not just Biden but
the press. He's taken the press down with him because

(23:38):
it wasn't just hiding or refusing to report on him.
The media was in attack mode to people like us
that were reporting accurately about Biden's condition, that dared to
ask questions. We were on the receiving end of the
very biased media attack dogs on behalf of Bile.

Speaker 4 (24:01):
I would argue in some ways, Brad, that this is
more of a media scandal than a white house scandal. Now, yes,
has should roll in the Biden airs white house. You
know who knew what and when? We need to find
that out under oath, we need to find out. But
as much as we want our politicians to be on
the up and up, we know they're not going to be.
We know that that's just going to happen, but we

(24:22):
should be able to expect. However, is the media to
report things fairly, honestly and we're regardless of whoever the
party is in the White House. And this is more
of a media scandal in my opinion than it is
a white House scandal, because if the media had uncovered
as sooner, if the media had not well, let me

(24:42):
say this, the media had uncovered it, they were just
unwilling to report it. If the media had made this
more of a focus during Joe Biden's presidency, we might
be in a different position as far as the scandals
and whatnot. But this is primarily to me more of
a media scandal than it is the Biden white House scandal.

Speaker 3 (25:00):
It absolutely is. I mean, we expect this from the
White House. But I think I think after that debate
last summer, the press, even though they were already on
the decline publicly, public opinion of the media is already low,
that completely exposed them at that point in time. I mean,
it was like overnight, I think a Thursday night is

(25:21):
when the debate took place, and by Friday morning, everybody
in the media was in panic mode because they had
all been exposed and it was real.

Speaker 4 (25:30):
And Foster Trump's points too, because Trump is as long
talked about the media being the enemy of the people,
and you know, and that right there, when people saw
how Biden was during that debate, he was just awful.
And then anybody who paid attention to the after debate coverage,
you know where Joe Biden led him off the stage

(25:51):
by the hand and he was, you know, kind of
bobbly and almost like another handler had had to intervene.
And then later on, at some point those debate get together,
she was treating him like a child, saying, hey.

Speaker 2 (26:03):
Joe, you did great. You answered every question.

Speaker 4 (26:06):
You know, I mean, it was just appalling, and people
saw that. And I think that debate, you know, was
it set the tone for the rest of the campaign,
whether it had been Biden as the candidate or eventually
Harris who was the candidate. I think it set the
tone for people. People's if there was trust in the

(26:28):
media left at that point, it was gone at that point.

Speaker 5 (26:31):
And which is why we saw.

Speaker 4 (26:33):
Like the podcasts, those had a real impact on the election,
the Joe Rogan chose and think that those had much
more of an impact on the election in people's opinions
than what was what the talking points, the Democrat talking
points you heard in the mainstream media.

Speaker 3 (26:47):
Clearly it is I mean people, people are definitely leaving
that and I talk about it on my podcast at
RedState all the time that I keep waiting for this
moment of it's not recognition because I think the people
in the press know there's a problem, But when are
they going to start addressing the problem that's never happening.

(27:08):
And that's the part that amazes me. Just look at
what took place this weekend story broke. I want to
say Sunday morning, that Israel attacked Palestinians that were going
to an aid relief station and killed dozens of people.
Hundreds are in the hospital. And the reports were that

(27:29):
there were tanks involved and drones and everything else, and
this was just wildfire across the press, Fox News, but
there was not a shred of proof that it took place.
This was all based entirely on Palestinian Health Authority, which
is slash Hamas, and they just ran with it. And

(27:52):
I mean it was across the board, Fox, AP, ABC News, BBC, Reuters,
all of them recanting this story that there was no proof,
there was no video, there was no hard evidence that
this took place. And finally, I think it was last night,
finally BBC not a full retraction, but basically came out

(28:15):
and said, you know, we don't really have proof that
this happened. And this was after the multiple headlines twenty
one killed, thirty one killed, tanks were involved, now it
was just shooting, but dozens are still killed, and then
it didn't happen. It is amazing and.

Speaker 4 (28:34):
It's been you know, some people are blaming that story
in part on what happened in Boulder.

Speaker 3 (28:41):
You know that Boulder was another problem itself. That the
thing is though with Hamas giving these details, like I've
lost counter how many times BBC has had to retract
or correct stories that have been reported. I mean, there
was a death counts they said, oh, fifty thousand have
been killed over the war. Well now that's probably overestimated
by one hundred percent. And just time after time, the

(29:04):
bombing of the hospital that didn't take place, the church
collapse that killed fifty residents from a bomb that Israel
drop that didn't take place, and they keep doing it
is the amazing part. And then this weekend in Boulder.
I mean I've wrote about it today at the site

(29:25):
about how the Democrats and the press have now cornered
themselves because over the years Islamophobia was the worst crime
you could commit. But then they tried to shift and
blame Trump for anti Semitism, and it's like, wait a second,
those are kind of conflicting problems that you're accusing somebody of.

(29:45):
And then it became you know, they tried desperately depend
that on Trump in his years first term, couldn't do it.
And then when Biden took office, Look what happened. Anti
Semitism exploded across the country, and they couldn't criticize it
because then Biden would be blamed.

Speaker 4 (30:00):
The anti Semitism and where it's exploding is very important
as well bred as exploding primarily in blue cities New
York City, Los Angeles.

Speaker 3 (30:09):
The other reason that they can't report on it right honestly.
And now if you say, well, wait a second, that's hatred,
that's a hate crime. They're blocking people from your First
Amendment rights. Are protesting, you can't criticize them. You can
if they're breaking the law, you can't.

Speaker 4 (30:27):
I mean, if they're calling for an intifada or however
you pronounce it. I mean, it's only a matter of
time before things like like what happened at the in Washington,
d c with the murders of the two Israeli embassy
workers and then the Voulterer incident there, and there's been
other incidents where maybe not guns or explosives were used,
but there have been other attacks in this country over

(30:49):
the last couple of years since the October seventh terrorist attacks.
And it's just unfortunately, the chickens are coming home to
roost for Democrats on this issue, and unfortunately it's costing
people's lives, and they won't admit. It's just like the
media won't admit when they're wrong, they're on the wrong
side of things, and Democrats won't do it either.

Speaker 5 (31:11):
They won't do it either.

Speaker 4 (31:12):
And I just it's just just a mystery to me
at this point, you know, while we keep having this conversation,
you know, and I'm not anybody to question why people
of a certain faith would be a member of a
certain party, but it does it does make me wonder
how someone could be a Jewish person and be a

(31:35):
Democrat with with what's going on. I mean, this is
not just something that's happened this year. This is something
that's been going on for a long time. It's just
it's just getting worse.

Speaker 3 (31:47):
Well, That's the problem though, that they've created, is they
can't honestly call it out when they should. I mean,
when you have somebody firebombing the whole of a governor,
murdering two people at the Israeli embassy, I mean, this
is not just holding up a sign. You know, I

(32:08):
don't like Zionists. That's completely divorced from what we're looking
at now. The violence is just ramping up. And look
at the press covers this weekend. NBC. How did they
frame it. They said it was an attack on pro
Gaza hostage supporters or something that they couldn't say Jewish
people were targeted, right, you know, this is how contorted

(32:33):
they have to go in order to protect the narrative
over the years that they've constructed and now trap themselves
so they can't say a pro Palestinian firebombed Jewish people.
They can't honestly say what honestly took place?

Speaker 5 (32:47):
It is, right, and they're not supposed to say.

Speaker 4 (32:50):
You're not supposed to say pro Hamas either, because you know,
and you know, that's another thing I love about the
media is that like and I think you probably saw
this interview, and I think one of our colleagues at
Red State wrote about it.

Speaker 5 (33:03):
I was maybe.

Speaker 4 (33:06):
A week and a half ago, two weeks ago when
the when the murders of the two Israeli embassy workers happened.
There was a guy that had gone to Columbia. He
was a I think he was a Columbia graduate, and
somebody on CNN was asking him about what happened and
how he felt and everything, and and and the guy

(33:26):
was actually a witness. He actually saw the perpetrator in
the attack. And he said he looked into his eyes,
and the and the interview were asking what he saw,
and he said, it's the same thing I've seen from
from the people on the on the Columbia campus, the
people that are chanting, you know, death to Jews and
all this other stuff, and the and the and the
CNN's host response was, well, we can't conflate the protesters

(33:50):
with the person that made that fired.

Speaker 5 (33:52):
The shots that killed these people. And I'm just.

Speaker 4 (33:53):
Thinking, please shut up when please, and the and the
guy fired back, he said, these what this guy was
saying was no different than what those people on campus
were saying. So what's the difference.

Speaker 3 (34:08):
I think I covered it yesterday. I wrote about it
on Twitter. Actually, I said, you know, whenever somebody on
the left looks and looks the conservatives and they say
something they disagree with, that can be stochastic terrorism and
it's going to lead to problems. Yet they look at
actual violence and actual terrorism and refuse to call it that.

(34:30):
I mean, CNN yesterday was complaining that the FBI said
a molotov cocktail thrown at Jewish organizers was terrorism. They
said it was juvenile for the FBI to say that.

Speaker 4 (34:45):
You can call it terrorism when it's January sixth, but
you can't call it terrorism when less protesters commit violence.

Speaker 3 (34:53):
I'm sorry, I'm fairly comfortable saying firebombing children and Holocaust
survivors is terrorism. I'm gonna go out a limb there
if I have to. I think it's a big stretch.
All right, Well, why don't we take a halfway point
break here. We'll give everybody a moment to go hit

(35:13):
some refills, get ready for round two and round three here,
and we will be back in about two and a
half to three minutes here on the cocktail lounge.

Speaker 2 (35:40):
Inside something.

Speaker 7 (36:00):
Chan in the s the street swell once was being
in distebling in the Nations do stars, tell us why.

Speaker 1 (36:15):
You had to pay for so, says, tell us why
you had to pad for so.

Speaker 8 (36:30):
Did?

Speaker 2 (36:53):
And you went to bed the base. Welcome to the
new Man race.

Speaker 7 (36:59):
S racing Stiblers, guys up their way and emp today
this is the day we waited by.

Speaker 2 (37:09):
Overstubli stife.

Speaker 3 (37:10):
Please tell us.

Speaker 2 (37:11):
Why you had to pass.

Speaker 5 (37:17):
It around.

Speaker 1 (37:20):
The stumble up.

Speaker 2 (37:22):
It's a place still be with the arousey watch you
do is positive? They s doubler. There's a place still
be with you around see what you do spositive?

Speaker 3 (37:52):
And welcome back to the Cocktail Lounge. I'm Brad Sliger

(38:16):
and we're having a special episode as my dear co
host Eggie Reakan is on leave. So we've got joining
us tonight. Stacy Matthews from Red States sister told you
herself has been with us and now joining us from
Twitter if you're heading to that side. He goes by
the name of Calvin and he's the self proclaimed conservative

(38:39):
rage curator. Hell of a title there, Calvin. So, how
are we doing today?

Speaker 6 (38:46):
We're doing good? Can you hear me? Okay?

Speaker 3 (38:48):
Here? Are you're fine? We hear you fine? Great?

Speaker 6 (38:50):
Da Hey, thanks for having me on. I feel like
I'm the substitute teacher. We should put on a copy
of The Breakfast Club.

Speaker 3 (39:00):
Uh yeah, don't mind in the back row, ignoring you
that you got more important things going on back here.
But now I wanted to wanted to bring you on, Calvin,
because it cracks me up there. Ever since you've been
over at Twitchy doing some great stuff. A lot of
times you and I are covering almost the same topic
at the same time. It feels like, you know, we
share half a brain. I think, yeah, it's h you

(39:23):
know the act.

Speaker 5 (39:26):
For sure.

Speaker 4 (39:27):
I'm sorry, but you're your side of the brain is
probably the bigger side for sure.

Speaker 6 (39:34):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (39:34):
I know the series is overstas. You don't have to
be aggressive anymore.

Speaker 9 (39:42):
Now.

Speaker 6 (39:42):
I was listening to the first half of the show
that the Columbia guy cracked me up.

Speaker 3 (39:48):
I did.

Speaker 6 (39:49):
I had to write about that because somebody got fired
at CNN for having him. I'm sure they thought, oh,
he's a Columbia graduate student, he's gonna he's gonna just
follow whatever narrative we want to push. And this guy
was like, no, no, no, yeah I was.

Speaker 5 (40:06):
I was standing up and applauding on it. When I
watched great.

Speaker 6 (40:10):
Yeah, she kind of got this deer in the headlight's
look when she's like, wait, he's not agreeing with me?

Speaker 3 (40:16):
Uh, it was, it was, It was great. Well. One
of the things that cracks me up over there, you
guys covered a twitchy a lot, and so do we,
and I have them frequently in my daily media column,
and that's Harry Enton over there on the Morning Show.
Cracks me up because almost on a daily basis, he
keeps coming up with these poll results and other data

(40:39):
that completely flies in the face of the narratives we
see on CNN and pretty much I keep just saying,
this guy's got to keep his resume up the date
because they're not going to tolerate his honesty from.

Speaker 6 (40:53):
And he delivers it with he he's really good on
you know, he's got like this high energy and he's
really excited about all these numbers, and you can see
everybody else in the studio is just like they look
like somebody just kicked their dog.

Speaker 3 (41:08):
Yeah, he's basically the CNN version of Karnaki. You know,
get them in front of the touchboard and let him
get highly caffeinated. But anytime I see his clips, I
always have to crack up. It's it's usually Bowling that's
on with him, and she just gets this sour puss expression.
He's like, you gotta look at these numbers. Trump is
going through the roof the oh the economy is booming

(41:30):
and people love it. And then she's like, eh, son up,
I just.

Speaker 4 (41:37):
All the time this enthusiasm about what he clearly has enthusiasm.
But honestly, I truly feel like there's a little bit
of Maga and Harry Anton.

Speaker 3 (41:46):
I really do.

Speaker 4 (41:46):
I can't.

Speaker 3 (41:47):
I can't figure it out. I want to say yes.
But at the same time, sometimes he's also you know,
like amused with himself or this defives logic. We it
makes sense of this. It's like, well, turn around, look
where you work. That's the problem.

Speaker 6 (42:00):
Yeah. He and Scott Jennings and Sir Michael Singleton that,
I mean, they make CNN sometimes worth watching. They're so
good at just destroying the narratives that come their way.

Speaker 4 (42:14):
Imagine Ann actually gave Scott Jennings like his own show,
kind of like you know John Lemon or one of
the others, you know, had an hour or two to
just go on and on. I mean, their ratings probably
actually would be better than they are now.

Speaker 3 (42:29):
Well, it's yeah, it would make perfect sense, which is
exactly why it's not going to happen. That wouldn't forget
about it. It would be the easiest thing for them
to do. So noop, they they're amazing over there, because
I've covered their ratings the last few weeks. They have
an amazing thing going on where from five o'clock through

(42:50):
ten PM, every successive program loses audience. Oh yeah, I
don't know how you do that. Going into prime time
the audience gets smaller.

Speaker 4 (43:01):
Yeah, and then they bring they bring back people that
that are I don't want to say they're losers, but
they're not good for their reputation, like Brian Stelter.

Speaker 5 (43:10):
They fired him and then they brought him back.

Speaker 3 (43:12):
Why so we would have material.

Speaker 5 (43:16):
Well, I'm definitely thankful for that.

Speaker 3 (43:18):
But I mean, course, Stacy, don't stop it. Okay, let
me go. We need it. I actually try to beg
off of Stelter a bit, only because he's that easy.
I could go to his feet every day and come
up with content. So yeah, I show some discipline. But
so Calvin, how how long have you been in twitching now?
Has it been a year plus? Yeah?

Speaker 6 (43:41):
Tom was two years now. Okay, yeah, it's been a
lot of fun.

Speaker 3 (43:49):
No, I've uh, it's a different animal over there, even
if you're covering a lot of the same territory. But
it's just because it's uh social media, So you've got
a lot of freedom out there. Myself for a couple
of years in tandem I was doing. They love to
make fun of me at the VIP for every town

(44:09):
hall site, it's like, shut the hell up. It's four
out of six, don't get now. But you get a
lot of freedom over there, and you guys have a
lot of fun with it. That's kind of cool. Yeah.

Speaker 6 (44:19):
Yeah, I mean we've got you know, Politi Bunny is,
you know, our wonderful managing editor, and she keeps all
of us freelancers in line, but she also kind of
lets us do what we want. You know, We've got
a few things that we're not allowed to touch, but
other than that, it's you know, and yeah, what we
do is mostly kind of let people know what's happening

(44:42):
on Twitter or x now, I guess, but you know,
we do have the freedom to kind of put in
our perspectives and that's what I appreciate about it. The most,
you know, being able to kind of both react to
tweets that other people, whether they're conservative or liberal. Well,
so that's fun. But then just kind of being able

(45:04):
to introduce and wrap up each article with some perspective
on the bigger picture of what we're talking about. You know,
it's been great.

Speaker 3 (45:12):
I love it. There the good thing about it though,
you can you can basically curate what's going on, but
also find those opposing viewpoints and plug them into the article.
That's one of the things I love the freedom that
you got over there to do that.

Speaker 4 (45:29):
Tweets a lot of times are the story. You know,
like you'll see it something that a politician will post
on Twitter or x or whatever you want to call
it that is not actually been said on a TV show,
and you can make an entire news story around a
tweet and the reactions to it.

Speaker 5 (45:45):
It's really cool.

Speaker 6 (45:47):
We like to call that the Jasmine Crockett Effect.

Speaker 3 (45:54):
I think that's she's actually on the point of diminishing returns.
I think now, yeah, I think.

Speaker 6 (46:01):
This whole Yeah, she'll be back. You know, she's regrouping
a little bit, but she's kind of the bloom is
off her rose a little bit. But I think she'll
be back because she's just way too narcissistic to go
away for too long.

Speaker 3 (46:15):
Well, just it almost seems like there's a shelf life
to these with maybe the exception being AOC, but like
all the members of the squad now with pretty much
diminished in import as well, just because of what they
say right.

Speaker 6 (46:31):
By their own hand, is what it is.

Speaker 3 (46:33):
Yeah, really, what's going on now is the Democrats are
so desperate. There's just this it's not even a fight,
but it's just a desperation for all these faces to
come out of the woodwork trying to get notification and
trying to get any kind of traction for the upcoming election.
I mean, who is this guy in Michigan was bringing
six articles of impeachment? Again, half of his party was like,

(46:57):
who's this guy? And the other half were shut this guy?

Speaker 4 (47:00):
Yeh Evin Jerry Nadler was saying go away. And that's
pretty amazing. And you consider how pro and basement he was,
you know, during trans first administration.

Speaker 3 (47:11):
It's uh, it's good stuff. I think I think that
would have come up yesterday or Sunday over Twitchy was
a prime example of that, because it's pride month. Oh yeah,
and this is one that popped into my head but
I didn't dare say it. But then it got covered
over it, which that is the sports teams that are

(47:33):
putting up the rainbow stuff, and of all teams, the
Nashville Predators. What a LGBT post they got that was
just no.

Speaker 5 (47:45):
That oh goodness snow.

Speaker 6 (47:48):
Yeah, it's I mean, just the irony of your team's
nam being the Predators and you're talking about months. Like, guys,
you might want to have thought that one through a
little bit more because the responses were just I can't
remember did Amy, I can't remember who wrote it, but

(48:09):
it was just hilarious.

Speaker 3 (48:11):
Yeah, well it's just read the room, guys. It's like, yeah, yeah,
clearly this was a social pr team that's in their
twenties and not as savvy of what's going on out there. Yeah,
it's like, yes, we're all predators today and it's like,
oh my god, did you? Thank you for the material?

(48:32):
But I'm cringing a bit. But this is some of
the freedom I just love that we have is that
we can be critical of Pride Month in a tasteful fashion,
but we do it on all the sites and it's
it's appropriate because it needs to be done. And I
think you guys at Twitch, you're probably gonna have the
most fun in the next few weeks.

Speaker 6 (48:53):
Oh it's it's always a blast getting through June. It
can be painful at times because it just gets to
be so much. But the cool thing, I mean, the
interesting thing this year and cool I guess, is there
is so much less of it. You know. Yeah, some
of the sports teams are doing it, but a lot
of them aren't. A lot of the corporations aren't, and

(49:16):
it's really noticeable. The one two, the one sports team
I went off on was the Philadelphia Flyers because they're
the one. It was their player, it doesn't play for
them anymore. But it was even Proveroff who was the
first one who stood up and said, no, I'm not
wearing the Pride jersey. I'm a Christian. You can't make

(49:36):
me wear it. And then all of a sudden, more
players start speaking up. And now the NHL doesn't do
Pride nights anymore, or if they do, they do them,
but it's all optional and they don't really make the
players do anything.

Speaker 3 (49:48):
So really, team decision, you don't have a league mandate
any longer exactly exactly, but.

Speaker 4 (49:55):
I would think that a standpoint that like the rainbow colors,
I mean like wearing them on your jerseys, and I
think some of the players were using rainbow color tape
on their on their sticks. Yeah, that looks really intimidating
to the opposing team.

Speaker 3 (50:10):
Yeah, I mean I get it to a degree. But
like my biggest complaint, if there is a complaint, it's
really I couldn't give a damn. But the messaging is always,
you know, we accept everybody. Everybody is welcome. It's like, sure,
but you only signify one group. Yeah, you you don't

(50:31):
do this for everybody? Is the point that and if
you dare, there was a point where there they would
have a pride night and then after the military significant
jerseys or what have you would take place, and there
would be complaints about that, like how are you endorsing
the military complex. It's like, I'm sorry, I thought everybody
was welcome. Did something change overnight?

Speaker 4 (50:54):
I mean, so bred you will be wearing your pride
theme for Panthers jersey to the bar tomorrow night.

Speaker 5 (51:02):
I take it.

Speaker 3 (51:04):
I won't, but you know it's not anybody does. Like
I could give it damn really about it. I mean,
I two of my good friends at the bar is
a lesbian couple. Don't even care. My daughter's gay. She's
a big hockey fan. She loves Pride Die. It's like,
all right, go get your Pride shirt. The thing is
like with Provosts even brought him up and he didn't

(51:25):
want to do. All he did is stay in the
locker room. That's all he did. He didn't do the
pregame skate, and it exploded into a controversy and it
was literally a living example of the Seinfeld episode. Who's
not wearing the ribbon?

Speaker 8 (51:39):
You know?

Speaker 3 (51:40):
And they were attacking him for not doing something.

Speaker 6 (51:44):
Yeah, And it wasn't just like random people on Twitter
attacking him. It was the entire ESPN industrial complex that
was going after him and it but he yeah, I mean,
good for it. He's he's he didn't back down. And
then when other players saw him not backing down, they
said that, come to think of it, I don't really want.

Speaker 3 (52:07):
To do that either. I cracked up. There was one
Canadian sports broadcaster that just unloaded and wanted him kicked
out of the league. He wanted the team find he
should incur penalties for this and it's like, Glad, this
sounds like the opposite of tolerance. I'm sorry. The guy

(52:27):
had an opinion and didn't even express it. He stayed
in the locker room and the press came to him
and he was like, why didn't you skate today? He's like,
I chose not to because of this. That was it.
That was the extent of his quote. Protest.

Speaker 4 (52:40):
Yeah, a couple of years a couple of years ago,
there was a guy for the Toronto Blue Jays who
he had He was a Christian player, and he was
expressing an opinion against the target LGBTQ theme merch that was,
you know, aimed at kids, and he had to release
a hostage style video because he offended the outrage machine.

(53:01):
I wrote about it at the Science almost two years
ago today. If that happened, and it was, it's just astonishing.
It just takes one player to stand up and to
keep standing up, and then it kind of creates a
rebel effect versus this guy who kind of cave and
he's liked, Oh, I didn't mean to offend anybody. I mean,
it was just there's just there's a way to handle
these things, you know.

Speaker 3 (53:24):
Well, I think you know, improvals at the time was
saying the right things. He's like, listen, I just don't
support this. He's like, if people want to, that's great.
I don't want any you know, everybody can come to
the games. He didn't have a single negative thing to
say outside of I just don't agree.

Speaker 6 (53:39):
No, yeah, you just said I don't want to. That's all.
It's much what the pro choice party was suddenly very
much against choice.

Speaker 3 (53:51):
But I mean it takes just that level of common
sense and to just point out what's going on. And
he's like, I didn't say anti gay, I just said
not me. And their outrage went to eleven when his
comment was at one or two at the most, and
only because it was compelled out of them, And I
think that caused the proper backlash where people were like, yeah,

(54:13):
wait a second, what the hell? And I don't know
a single team in any sport that has a message
that's like repelling gay people from coming to the game. Yes,
so why why do.

Speaker 4 (54:29):
We have this like process outside of the walks of this,
you know, most I would assume that most gay people
are just like, leave me alone, you know, let me
go to the game and watch the game.

Speaker 5 (54:40):
You know, I don't.

Speaker 4 (54:40):
I don't need you know, a rainbow end zone or whatever.
Just let me go to the game and enjoy it.
We don't need to make a special day or month
out of it. I would I would assume that's how
most are. I know that our gay conservative friends when
I whenever I talk to them, they're like, we don't
want any special acknowledge, but we just want to be
treated like everyybody else.

Speaker 3 (55:00):
You know, it's anybody I speak to directly. Yeah, that
is the best, just like we just we want to go.
We're gonna have fun. And I don't know anybody that's
ever said, excuse me, there's a gay person at the
bar or at the game, and that's a you problem.
Then you hit the road. Nobody's kicking them out, is
the point. But I laughed at a weekend reaction, somebody

(55:24):
found out that, oh, this car this year, NASCAR didn't
put out gay pride messaging and they were lighting them
up about it, and you know what that means. They said, yes,
they had gay stuff for the last five years, so
what are they anti gay this year? They're homophobic this year?

(55:45):
And what their point was, Oh, they we all know
what drives the capitalism behind us. Well, if the gay
pride stuff was selling, that would still be going on,
don't you think. I mean, if NASCAR rainbow shirts were
flying off the shelves, I don't see anybody waving their
arms and say that's it, We're done making money. So

(56:08):
that's probably the bigger reason right there. They're putting out
this effort and taking a pr hit and they're losing
money doing so that's probably your answer right there.

Speaker 6 (56:18):
Ing go, It's funny when you see the people now
in twenty twenty five trying to shame the teams and
the leagues that don't do Yeah. I saw a post
from some LGBTQ l I and not a prominent person
or anything like that, but he had a chart of
all the Major League Baseball teams and then you know
there was like the Bust and Redstockx and the Orioles

(56:39):
and a few others and these are allies. And then
on the right it's like these are all transphobs, all
the teams that didn't do it. I'm like, who's the
fascist again? You know, just let the teams do what
they want. You know, there's.

Speaker 3 (56:54):
Well, I'm curious to talk to a lifetime fan who's
gay and finds out the team and put out a
rainbow logo? Are you now going to become a Phillies
fan or something? Doesn't quite work that way, but their
their mascot even came out with was like waving the
gay pride flag or something. Gritty probably got to be

(57:15):
the worst and yet most known mascot in NHL. And
I just said his pronouns are it' that?

Speaker 6 (57:23):
What? What is?

Speaker 3 (57:24):
What is? This is orange monster waving a gay pride flag? Okay,
I'm sure a lot of gay people feel better now
that Gritty is on their side. I don't get it,
but again, I'm probably not their target audience. So what
am I supposed to know? Well, Stacy, do we have
to let you escape here?

Speaker 4 (57:45):
Unfortunately? Yes, it was good being on with you guys.
Good to meet you, Calvin and Brad. I will see
you at the site at RedState dot com.

Speaker 3 (57:53):
You will, he will, now that we're back on speaking terms.

Speaker 4 (57:56):
And congratulations to your panthers again. I'm going to be
a good sports ta. Congratulations this year. Next year maybe different.

Speaker 5 (58:05):
I don't know.

Speaker 3 (58:05):
You're gracious and you're a lady about it. We'll take
your adulation going into this week for sure.

Speaker 5 (58:12):
Thank you guys.

Speaker 3 (58:13):
Take care, we will see I.

Speaker 6 (58:16):
Am rationalizing the NHL Finals by referring to them exclusively
as the Florida Marcians.

Speaker 3 (58:25):
That has been Uh, that whole trade just cracked us
up down here, I gotta tell you.

Speaker 6 (58:30):
I'm sure.

Speaker 3 (58:32):
It was like, wait a second, of.

Speaker 6 (58:33):
All the guys, Well it worked out great because he
got to beat Toronto again.

Speaker 3 (58:41):
Oh yeah. I mean when when they brought him out,
I had two reactions, first with laughter, and then two
minutes later, when I was finished, I said, bring it.
I want this guy. I mean he is He's a
playoff player and is delivered. I think it was halfway
through the Toronto series he had played enough games and
we went far enough that they were going to get

(59:02):
our number one draft pick. Yes, that's true, I said, great,
we lost number thirty two in the picks. I think
we're fine with that. I'll take mar shamf for that
because that player doesn't always make a roster.

Speaker 6 (59:14):
So oh yeah. The NHL draft is a it's a crapshoot,
you know, even even some of the sure things are
don't always pan out.

Speaker 3 (59:25):
But and a lot of the top five the top twenty.
You might see them on the roster in a few
years on the fourth line and right. Yeah's it worked
out fine for us. But I think the best part
of that trade was watching the people in Boston lose
their ever loving mind.

Speaker 6 (59:46):
Yeah. Well, as much of a Bruins fan as I am,
I am extreme, are you.

Speaker 3 (59:52):
Yeah?

Speaker 6 (59:53):
No, no, no, I'm fine with it. I mean they
had to blow their team up. It just teams have
to do it from time to time. They'll be back
and then probably another season or two. I'm not you know,
I'm not going anywhere.

Speaker 3 (01:00:04):
Oh no, that franchise is always going to be a contender.
Don't get me wrong there. It was just kind of
funny to see that Brandon Shanahan lost his job after
our season, and everybody just kept saying, well, Florida blew
up another franchise.

Speaker 6 (01:00:18):
Yeah, well, hockey teams love the fire coaches.

Speaker 3 (01:00:21):
Man definitely the way it works out, Well, I didn't know.
I think you guys did this over at twitchy. You
saw the story of the company putting out artificial intelligence
and it started resorting to blackmail.

Speaker 6 (01:00:36):
Oh yeah, yeah, I didn't do that. I know you
did it for Red State. I didn't do it for Twitchy.
I think I can't remember who did. But yeah, this
the the AI story is. I mean, it's as you wrote,
it's HiT's Skynet. You know, it's even worse than Skynet.

(01:00:57):
I think it's ex Machina where the I don't know,
did you see that movie with Ava and she suspends
the whole movie manipulating and lying to the people who
are supposed to be evaluating her, and she kills them
and walks out free. I'm like, this is where AIS headed.

Speaker 3 (01:01:17):
Yeah, It's one of the few things I think Hollywood
has gotten right, has been the dystopian future of artificial
intelligence because we're seeing it. I mean just we talk
about a lot of science stuff on the show here,
and we were at it one point, playing a video
from a robotics convention. After hours, a couple of the

(01:01:40):
robots from one display went to another display and convinced
their robots to go back with them. It was all
caught on security camera. Like the guys in one the
show was like, somebody stole our robots. Let's go to
security tape. Two robots come over and they actually communicated
with them, and the five of them went back to
their display on the other side of the complex. And

(01:02:05):
in this story, the company was testing its AI program,
and so they set it up so the program thought
it was going to be used for a company. The
program had access to that company's emails. Of course these
were all fabricated, but nonetheless was a test for the program.
The program read the emails and found out two details.

(01:02:26):
One they had a plan to upgrade the artificial intelligence
in a couple of months. And two the lead engineer
was cheating on his wife. And this was just didn't
they didn't feed this to the AI. Was just like
in the email platform that was available to it. Yeah,
they said eighty five percent of the time their AI

(01:02:48):
program would resort to blackmailing the technician that he would
go to his wife with the information if they switched
the program out. Yeah.

Speaker 6 (01:02:59):
Well, I mean, like there's a.

Speaker 9 (01:03:02):
You know, it's not like there's a lot of ethics
built into the the I mean, there's ethics built into
the programming and all that, you know, allegedly, but you know,
the AI doesn't come equipped with a set.

Speaker 3 (01:03:18):
Of morals, you know, No, it's not, it's just the
drive of self preservation.

Speaker 8 (01:03:27):
Right right.

Speaker 6 (01:03:30):
Well, they've seen AI make copies of itself if it
thinks it's about to be deleted. You know, they've you know,
I mean, there's some scary stuff going on. We're almost
not quite almost maybe at mission impossible level. I'm not
sure if Ethan hunts around, but we might need to

(01:03:50):
unplug the entity.

Speaker 3 (01:03:54):
I'm I'm just kind of concerned with who's in charge
here after a while, yeah, reaching levels where I'm less
than comfortable.

Speaker 6 (01:04:04):
But well, yeah, the scary follow up to who's in
charge is I'm sure did you see the news about
the big beautiful bill and how they're like, you can't
put in any AI regulations for ten years and it's
all going to be consolidated under the federal government. I'm like, oh, well,
then we're fine then, because the federal government's kind of

(01:04:25):
just do a bang up job.

Speaker 3 (01:04:27):
Yeah, I think right there, it's kind of a wash. Yeah,
what already? You want the government to be running your life?

Speaker 6 (01:04:34):
Like?

Speaker 3 (01:04:36):
Is there a three? Is there a receipt?

Speaker 6 (01:04:37):
No?

Speaker 3 (01:04:39):
Yeah.

Speaker 6 (01:04:40):
The funny thing about that is how many people didn't
know it was in the bill. I think Marjorie Taylor
Green came out and said, what, well, I mean, okay, great,
I'm glad that you're against it now, but you kind
of just let the cat out of the bag that
you guys never read this stuff.

Speaker 3 (01:04:57):
Yeah, it seems like that should have been recognized during
the discovery phase, maybe before you put your signature down.
But again, this is this is We're used to this now,
aren't we. Yeah, we'll find out what's in the bill
after it's past. Fantastic, that's just the way you want. Wow.

(01:05:18):
So what else you guys got going on in twitch?
Because there is, uh, there's just a crap ton going down.
I know this.

Speaker 6 (01:05:24):
Yeah, well, I mean a huge We've obviously been covering
a ton of Boulder and uh, it just goes back
to what you and Stacey were talking about earlier about
mediam l practice and I think you were talking about
the the Gaza hostage taking supporter victims or whatever you know.

(01:05:45):
And like you know, as a writer you probably do
this too, but I pay attention to how things are written,
and it is so amazing to watch. I did an
article or earlier this earlier this week with uh, and
it was based on somebody else who'd you know, I
was collecting his tweets. He did a whole thread and
it's just you go and it's just passive voice after

(01:06:06):
passive voice after passive voice, and I'm like, you know,
it's very noticeable that you're doing this on purpose, you know.
I mean the first thing you learn in you know, journalism,
if any of you ever studied it at all, is
that you use the active voice. If you're using the
passive voice, it's for a reason. But all the headlines

(01:06:29):
are passive voice. And then NBC had a great one
today where they they called it a series of lone
wolf attacks, like, okay, well is it is it a
lone wolf or is it a series?

Speaker 3 (01:06:45):
Well, these are the same people too that if there
is a lone wolf, you can't dismiss that. No, it's
not lone wolf, it's NRA, it's conservatives, its Second Amendment.
Pushing is violent talk. You know that you're not allowed
to have it on the other side. But now suddenly
the guy that's shouting the actual language we hear chanted

(01:07:07):
on campus is well completely acted alone. Nobody ever wrote.

Speaker 6 (01:07:13):
Yeah, his motive is a mystery. And he was probably
one of the first headlines I read before, you know,
when it first came out. Is they were all they
were all very critical of the FBI calling it a
terrorist incident, right, and CNN in particular, since we've been
talking about CNN. But but they had no problem with

(01:07:35):
immediately moving to well, there's got to be some mental
health issues here, like, well, a, of course the guy's
a nut, But are you qualified to say you know?
Or are you not?

Speaker 9 (01:07:47):
You know?

Speaker 6 (01:07:47):
You can't be critical of somebody saying we were pretty
the FBI is going to treat this as a terrorist
attack and say, well, that's premature, And then you come
out in the very next breath and say, well it's
there's definitely mental health issues here, like you don't you
don't know anything about this guy yet.

Speaker 3 (01:08:03):
Well, we couldn't be critical of Joe Biden for four
years because we're not mental health professionals, but but now
suddenly we can be farm psychi interest when it comes
to this. But I'm sorry, guy throwing molotov cocktails. I
don't think that's a tough diagnosis, right, Yeah, shirtless in public,

(01:08:25):
rowing gasoline. I couldn't say.

Speaker 6 (01:08:29):
It was perfect. Yeah, but this and to go along
with the.

Speaker 3 (01:08:32):
Reporting too, the I've seen this prevalence over the week,
and not just passive voice, but the scare quotes just
in obssessively it was this weekend. It's like, well, supposed
protesters and that kind of crap. It's like, no, this
is uh quite serious. But that's the biggest problem in

(01:08:53):
the media. Nobody has stones anymore backbone. You're not allowed
to just come out and say what is obvious legedly
through molotov cocktails. I'm sorry, it's on video, Okay, I
think we could dispense a little bit with the hedging
when we actually see it take place.

Speaker 6 (01:09:11):
But yeah, the worst use of scare quotes I saw
was again CNN or or or Rock Star of the Evening.
They put the words to describe the victims, right, we're
talking about the victims now. They put peaceful protests in
scare quotes.

Speaker 3 (01:09:31):
You would think that's a phrase that CNN would steer.

Speaker 6 (01:09:36):
It was just it was too It was just too ironic.

Speaker 3 (01:09:39):
But did you see this where there the reporter who
delivered that gem of a line five years ago was
celebrating the anniversary he well, he it was specifically about
the time he got arrested at one of the George
Floyd protests, but he actually had the well, I really

(01:10:05):
can't believe that this really really happened, and it's like, dude,
you're the last person to talk about real with your
peaceful protest as an entire cities engulfed over your shoulder there.

Speaker 6 (01:10:16):
But I remember him from the time. I didn't know
that he had put out something on the fifth anniversary.
That's funny.

Speaker 3 (01:10:22):
Yeah, just again, ever, I just I saw his face
and I was just like, wait, hold on, you aren't you.

Speaker 6 (01:10:31):
Yes, you are him, You're the mostly peaceful guy. Oh man,
that's funny.

Speaker 3 (01:10:39):
For the people that spend this much time in front
of a camera, they don't spend enough time in front
of a mirror. It's like, just yeah, the slightest bit
of self awareness would just be super helpful, right there,
I'm saying. But I've had a lot of fun this
week too with the Elon Musk coverage. How many people
fired him this week?

Speaker 6 (01:11:01):
Oh yeah, this has been Yeah, we had two great
Elon stories. It was that he got kicked out and
then also that he's a Nazi. But but Corey Booker
is not.

Speaker 3 (01:11:14):
Oh my god, was that beautiful. The people that went
to the lengths of like they basically broke down the
Corey Brooker salute, like it's the Zapruder tape.

Speaker 6 (01:11:28):
Yeah, was right on. He was on top of it,
the journalist that he is. He's like, look, you can
see his fingers are slightly spread. It's not the same.

Speaker 3 (01:11:37):
He didn't lock his elbow. It was more bent as
he gestured towards the crowd, as opposed to leaning back
with a forceful jutting of the hand, which is clearly
fascist in nature. Holy crap. But that was on social media.
I saw Newsweek do this is what correct media because

(01:12:00):
conservatives allege Corey Booker made a Nazi salut, not alleging anything.
I'm following your blueprint. You've declared this to be. Yeah,
here's your headline stating though we pounced on it is
what we did. Well. Yeah, I'm more seized on it myself.

(01:12:22):
But that's my nature. That's what I tend to do
these days. It's always a glorious thing when that takes place.
I I gotta say, though, I love I love Twitchy
because you know, you guys get away with a lot
of town hall that we're not allowed to. Not that
I'm jealous or anything, like I said, I used to
write over there. I appreciate that part you're you don't

(01:12:46):
have to adhere as strictly to journalism, which is great.

Speaker 6 (01:12:50):
Yeah, I mean I don't think any of us call
ourselves journalists. I certainly don't. I know Food doesn't, and
I'm of our other staffers and freelancers were curators of content.
That's why she introduced me. Most of us have in
our bio conservative rage curator. Where that came from is somebody.

(01:13:13):
I can't remember who it was. She's gonna get mad
at me for not remembering. But somebody said that about
politic money once and she's like, I love it. I'm
putting it in my bio, the same thing.

Speaker 3 (01:13:26):
I'm supposed to know this too. Which one it was? Yeah,
it might have been.

Speaker 6 (01:13:34):
I can't remember. I think it might have been Fugle
saying has a long history of embarrassing himself in front
of uh, in front of the foo.

Speaker 3 (01:13:45):
Well, were he capable of that emotion? Yeah, you want
to talk about lack of self awareness.

Speaker 6 (01:13:52):
It's like chinking the rest of us embarrassed for him.
Maybe that's a better way.

Speaker 3 (01:13:56):
Yeah, this is shameful if you've ever felt shaming life, Johnny,
But I don't think that's something you're familiar with. That's
just me based on your history. Yeah, he's he's dependable
as far as that goes. But now the because there
was a time where I was doing both. I was
at Red State town Hall and Twitchy. It would be

(01:14:18):
sometimes i'd been doing a columns like oh yeah, I
can't really say that. Oh wait a second, I can
over there. And then a lot of times soon you
get bailed out when you're going and looking for stuff.
Oh look at that. Somebody on social media said it
for me, not my fault. They did it.

Speaker 6 (01:14:37):
I write that sentence a lot. Hey I didn't say it.

Speaker 3 (01:14:40):
He did, but hey, it's valid. It works. There you go.
I didn't write it, but I have to report on
it verbatim.

Speaker 6 (01:14:50):
You know, we're just we're just bringing you, you know,
bringing you the news in tweet form.

Speaker 3 (01:14:56):
But you did, you did have one. This was a
gem of one. I think guy actually probably did this
in my column when it first happened. But that's how
IBI was talking about it. This weekend, it's the seventy
fifth anniversary of the novel nineteen eighty four. They've added
a curious entry on this one that you were covering, right,

(01:15:19):
So the timing on.

Speaker 6 (01:15:20):
This one's weird because it's not really. I mean, the
book was published in nineteen forty nine, so technically twenty
twenty four was the seventy fifth anniversary. And I'm not
sure when this edition came out, but basically Signet Books
said we want to put out a seventy fifth anniversary edition,
and they did, and they had a forward by Thomas Pinchon,

(01:15:41):
which is, you know, you can't get a much better
writer than that. But they decided to add another introduction
from and I don't even remember her name. She's an
author of no I guarantee nobody's ever heard of, but
she writes a lot about critical race theory. Actually I
have a what, let me just grab her name.

Speaker 3 (01:16:01):
Probably a hit on Harvard campus.

Speaker 6 (01:16:04):
Yeah she is, Yeah she is. Her name is Dolan
Perkins Valdez. And her introduction to nineteen eighty four. Matt
Tub's co host is Walter Kern. A lot of people know,
great literary critic and essayists, and he started reading through

(01:16:25):
some of the introduction and it was just so funny.
She said, why aren't there no, why aren't there more
black people in this book? That was where she started.
And then She's like, well, once this smiss seems very misogynistic.
I have a problem with that as a as a
modern reader. And then she tried to excuse it and
apologize for it, was saying, well, I guess it's okay

(01:16:48):
because he lives in a totalitarian society and he's a
product of that, so I guess he would be misogynistic.
But it's basically like I'm offering everybody at trigger Warning
that there's some there's some anti woke stuff in this book,
and Walter Kern just could I mean, I couldn't stop laughing.
Walter Kern said to Matt Tayeby last night, he said,

(01:17:13):
thank you for your trigger warning to nineteen eighty four.
It is the most nineteen eighty fourish thing I have
ever effing read.

Speaker 3 (01:17:22):
Yeah, I mean, it's just accusing the man of a
thought crime who invented the term.

Speaker 6 (01:17:28):
Exactly.

Speaker 3 (01:17:29):
I mean, give me. There was another there's another essay
about him that came out, and it was denigrating the
book because he was a misogynist, according to a biography
of his wife that somebody wrote twenty five years or
so ago. They were literally trying to cancel orwell, yeah,

(01:17:49):
over this it's rumors. It wasn't even like he had
done anything specifics, like, well his wife said, dude, he
was kind of meaner. So we should just just stop
reading this book forever.

Speaker 6 (01:18:02):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (01:18:02):
Yeah, that's the last thing we want to do, because
you people are using it as a guide book right now, right.

Speaker 6 (01:18:08):
Right, yeah.

Speaker 3 (01:18:09):
Yeah.

Speaker 6 (01:18:09):
So my advice to everybody is, if you don't own
a copy of nineteen eighty four, buy a hard copy
and don't buy the new one. Find an old one
on eBay or something, because the next thing they're going
to do is they're going to try to change the text.

Speaker 3 (01:18:26):
Ohkah, They've done this a number of times on the
digital side of things.

Speaker 6 (01:18:30):
Sure, they did it to a royal doll. We're not
allowed to call children fat and James and the giant
peach and Charlie and the chocolate factory.

Speaker 3 (01:18:39):
Well, well that was offensive to vegans because we're not
that so we're trigger.

Speaker 6 (01:18:49):
So yeah, if you if you have a good hard
copy book collection, hang on to it and don't buy
new editions. Find old ones at you know, thrift shops
and garage sales and eBay and stuff like that, because
they're they're going to keep trying to do this, and

(01:19:10):
it's it's just the height of irony. Tayibi couldn't stop
laughing when he when Karn was reading the introduction, he
was just cracking up. It was funny.

Speaker 3 (01:19:20):
But I mean, right there, what does it say that
there is that tendency to go into nineteen eighty four
and alter the context of the book that actually describes
the government rewriting history in order to brainwash the populus.
I mean, there's a beautiful meme that's out there, probably

(01:19:43):
going to change the date on it, but it's basically
Orwell holding a novel and it'said it's twenty twenty three,
and he's got this shocked expression on his face. And
I just love that so much because we're there, we're
actually shocking Orwell with the practice of our media. Yeah,
I think another one. I'm pretty sure this was you.
You covered Bono and uh yeah, three hundred thousand yets.

(01:20:07):
I lost it. Well, I can't say I lost it
because it's so typical, but I was definitely shaking my
head with a beer. On the other hand, when David Brooks,
of all people, is declaring Elon Musk responsible for three
hundred thousand deaths he's the same as Maou and Pole
Pot and.

Speaker 6 (01:20:29):
Well, I mean the yeah, I mean David Brooks is
we I mean, David Brooks is just he's a He's
a He's in the Twitchy Hall of Fame for hom often.
You know, we cover him the once principled conservative. You know,
he's one of the worst examples of somebody who just
has no conservative principles whatsoever. So, yeah, he Actually the

(01:20:51):
funny part about it was he he he compared Elon
Musk to Mao and and Poppot and he but he
qualified his language. He was like, well, he's semi responsible
for three hundred thousand deaths. And somebody, somebody said, I

(01:21:12):
put this in my articles, And he said, so, wait,
are you saying that Stalin and Mao and Paul Pott
were only semi responsible for the mass murder of millions.

Speaker 3 (01:21:22):
It's always comforting to be genocide adjacent, Yes, right, right,
What the hell are you doing, Brooks? I mean the
part that kills me, though, is this is a supposedly
larned educated journalist who's telling us how it is, basing
this on the words of Bono, Yeah, who researched on

(01:21:43):
paper written by somebody at Boston University.

Speaker 6 (01:21:46):
Yeah, like, nobody has actually said that there have been
these deaths. This is all that number is based on
somebody's model, be that they put together, and like, you know, okay,
it's a model. You know, tell me how a lot
of your other models have been working out, like your
climate models and your COVID models and all that. You know. Okay,

(01:22:08):
so somebody wrote a model, but they take it and
they run with it, and they're like, oh, look there's
already three hundred thousand dead and it's only been a
couple of months. Where did you get that from.

Speaker 3 (01:22:18):
Well, they tried this, I think after like day two
of the Doge cuts. Yeah, somebody died in India and
they tried to say that was because the Doge cuts.
It's like they just cut the checks off yesterday. They're
still in the mail, so whatever the hell is going
on in India, they're fine for now. Yeah, but this
is how unrealistic things are. But just to qualify too,

(01:22:42):
there's only one good thing to come out of Boston University.
That's hockey. Yes, that's my hockey program. Everything else about
the school is shite. I'm just I mean, hello, Alexandra
Casio Cortez.

Speaker 8 (01:22:57):
Yeah, NYU, But I guess that's just because un where
she lives the funniest of all economics degree, not even lying,
not even.

Speaker 6 (01:23:12):
Yeah. Well, you know, David Hogg has a history degree
from Harvard to or you know, so that goes to
show you what those pieces of paper are worth.

Speaker 3 (01:23:20):
But yeah, I'm sure he probably wrote a term paper
that was entitled her history. Oh give them an age
just for the headline alone, that's perfect. But it's just
it's what we deal with any longer. I you know,
being one that's cursed with pragmatism and common sense and
basically the arch enemy of these people in the media

(01:23:42):
and education academia. So I'm used to it. They can
say what they like. I'm really not gonna change. Sorry, guys.
I I like to here to facts and truth and
common sense. Sorry that impede your emotion based education. Yeah, yeah,
this is this is what we're enjoying so much, is

(01:24:03):
because I think the Trump administrator. I'm not like a
diehard Trumper, but I do just appreciate the in your
face just the way things are. I mean, I look
at the administration like Cash Pattel and Dan Bongeto It's like,
holy hell, they are going to set people off for years.
I can't wait.

Speaker 6 (01:24:20):
Yeah, somebody today called it the uh He wasn't the
first person to say this, but I heard him say
it today. Was somebody on Megan Kelly's show, and he
called it the Fuffo Administration. He's like, they don't care.
They just don't get Tom Homan, Stephen Miller, Dan Bongimo,
Cash Patel, Harmon Dylon. They're gonna be right in your

(01:24:41):
face and if you try to play that emotional black,
They're just I don't care, you know. I mean Jade
Van said, we don't really care, Margaret.

Speaker 3 (01:24:50):
Right. I was always saying this in Trump's first term,
and that is he doesn't give it damn about politics
and all Washington does. So yeah, I had to crack
up when the Democrats came out. It's like, well, even
if he gets away with it, he's going to be
called a twice in peach president. I just let him care. Yeah.

(01:25:14):
I looked at him. I was like, that matters to you.
He could give two shits, make it four and he'll
be like putting it on his name tag. Yeah, but
we're those like stars on the General's uniform. If you
want to impeach him again, it doesn't you know that,
And this is his second term, so he's got nothing
to protect. He's done in three so it's like, hell, yeah,

(01:25:35):
two feet on the gas pedal.

Speaker 6 (01:25:37):
If he did care a little bit, I think somebody
taking a piece out of his ear took away the
last of that.

Speaker 3 (01:25:45):
Oh yeah, absolutely. I mean at that point in time,
it became oh, they want to kill me.

Speaker 6 (01:25:51):
Well, I mean when he got up from that, he
didn't look scared. He looked furious, And I think he's
changed a little bit, you know, but but yeah, I
mean I've never been in.

Speaker 3 (01:26:02):
The colt, but that was an amazing moment, like when
you see him just stand up, fist in the air.
And then their response was oh, that was all staged.

Speaker 6 (01:26:12):
Well, okay, that part really upsets me because you know,
they say that, and it's fine that left does that
all the time, but you know what, a guy died,
all right, so don't give me that.

Speaker 3 (01:26:24):
That's what I always responded with. It was like, oh,
so they actually what did they have a volunteer to die?
Or is that just they didn't account for that. Yeah,
that's the kind of crap that just cracks me up.
And again the common sense just unravels so much right there.
You know there was an actual body that day, right, Yeah,

(01:26:46):
but there's no reason to take a picture of them.
What its specially are Thank you for participating? Yeah yeah,
all right, Well Calvin, we get a can of wrap things.
So what do you you got anything in the fire
right now that you're working on.

Speaker 6 (01:27:02):
No, I just you know, I'm gonna keep plugging away
at twitchy and actually tomorrow and I'm not going to
be doing any writing. I've got a special occasion for
me personally tomorrow, so you won't see me much at
all online. But but later this week and through the
weekend and for as long as Politipuny and the rest

(01:27:23):
of the twitchy folks will have me, I'll be cranking
out as many articles as I can.

Speaker 3 (01:27:29):
Beauty Now, we're enjoying it. You're doing You're doing fine
stuff over there, even when you're ripping me off. Man,
so many times, I'm like, either.

Speaker 5 (01:27:41):
Happened a lot.

Speaker 6 (01:27:43):
It's funny, But I mean we're both kind of cover
of all. We cover politics, we cover entertainment, but my
favorite articles to write are the ones on the media,
and so I mean that kind of dovetails with what
you do.

Speaker 3 (01:27:56):
I was just what I throw out my day. I'll
just you know, I'll save tabs. It's like, well that
was in the that one's in the column, and then
I'll start writing it or such, and I'll see you
pop up with Twitch's like oh you got one to there.
It's like, oh I beat him this time.

Speaker 6 (01:28:11):
We're all one big happy Salem family, right.

Speaker 3 (01:28:14):
Hell yeah, hell yeah, all right. Once you just let
everybody know where they can find some more of your
stuff besides Twitch.

Speaker 6 (01:28:20):
Sure, you can find me at twitchy dot com under
grateful Calvin, and I'm also on x Twitter as at
grateful Calvin, and that's where I am most.

Speaker 3 (01:28:33):
Of the time.

Speaker 6 (01:28:34):
I do some other things, but that's prominently where you'll
find me.

Speaker 3 (01:28:40):
Excellent. Yeah, if you're not following him, definitely do so.
He's of our mindset, as we just established. As for myself,
you can find me over at town Hall Daily. I
got my media column there called Rift from the Headlines,
also on the front page of ed State, where I've
also got twice weekly podcast there it's called Liable Sources,
where I go even a little more extensive into the

(01:29:02):
wrestling match with our out moded media, and you can
hear more of me on this very network. Thursday night,
I'm going to be here with Paul Young from Screen Rant.
He and I will go into the dark side of
Hollywood and bad movies on disasters, into making alternate Thursdays,
it's me and Orty Packard bringing the vital entertainment and
business information from Hollywood on the Culture Shift every Tuesday.

(01:29:27):
Of course here at eight and a half with Aggie
reekn on the Cocktail Lounge. And if you need more
of me than that less space that you do, go
to jitter. I'm at Martini Shark. Calvin appreciate it, loved
having you on. Thanks for the bailout tonight. Aggie appreciates
it as well.

Speaker 6 (01:29:42):
It's been an honor to substitute for the ever effervescent one,
and we all want her to be back soon.

Speaker 3 (01:29:48):
She shall be, she shall be all right. And with that,
everybody go ahead and raise the glass and look at
the ceiling

Speaker 2 (01:30:00):
Stets at Western