Speaker 1: Welcome to today's podcast sponsored by Hillsdale College. All Things
Speaker 1: Hilldale at Hillsdale dot ed or I encourage you to
Speaker 1: take advantage of the many free online courses there, and
Speaker 1: of course I listen to the Hillsdale Dialogue all of
Speaker 1: them at Q for Hillsdale dot com or just biogle,
Speaker 1: Apple iTunes and Hillsdale Glory and Immigration America.
Speaker 2: I'm Hugh Hewett.
Speaker 1: On this Thursday, Jacksmith, former special prosecutor of Donald Trump,
Speaker 1: had his day being prosecuted by the House Oversight Committee. Today,
Speaker 1: here's Jim Jordan of Ohio talking with America Javert Jack
Speaker 1: Smith cut number two.
Speaker 3: Due and Miss Trimer Yo Beeck to you. Jenlmal yields back.
Speaker 4: Mister Smith is Cassidy Hutchinson a liar. She was their
Speaker 4: star witness January sixth committee, their star witness in one
Speaker 4: of those staged and choreographed hearings they paid the former
Speaker 4: president of ABC News to put together. She was in
Speaker 4: fact the only witness at this special prime time hearing Tuesday,
Speaker 4: June twenty eighth, twenty twenty two, eight o'clock in the.
Speaker 3: Evening, and she told some stories. I mean these were
Speaker 3: these were some stories she.
Speaker 4: Talked about President lungsed across the back seat, grabbed the
Speaker 4: steering wheel, tried to drive the car to the Capitol.
Speaker 4: And I just want to know you think she was lying?
Speaker 5: Chereman Jordan. My assessment of that particular issue is that,
Speaker 5: with respect to the testimony about someone lunge of the
Speaker 5: president lunging towards the driver, my recollection of her testimony
Speaker 5: about that is that it was secondhand. She said she'd
Speaker 5: heard that from somebody.
Speaker 4: You familiar with the name of Tony Ornado? I'm sorry,
Speaker 4: Do you familiar with the name Tony Ornado?
Speaker 5: Yes?
Speaker 4: White House Deputy Chief of Operations, Deputy cheap of Staff
Speaker 4: for Operations, right.
Speaker 3: You know you remember what he said.
Speaker 5: About it, as I said here right now, I do not.
Speaker 4: Yeah, he said it didn't happen. How about Bob, you
Speaker 4: familiar with that name? Yes, I am Secret Service agent
Speaker 4: who was actually in the car that day. You know
Speaker 4: what he said, He said it didn't happen. And they
Speaker 4: both said the first time they ever heard this story
Speaker 4: was when miss Hutchinson testified in the prime time hearing
Speaker 4: as their star witness of the January sixth committee. By
Speaker 4: the way, do you ever confirm her testimony about this
Speaker 4: particular incident.
Speaker 5: We conducted, as I said before, our own independent investigation
Speaker 5: of all aspects of the case that we thought was relevant.
Speaker 5: We attorneys from my office.
Speaker 3: Did you ever confirm it?
Speaker 6: That's a simple question.
Speaker 5: Well, we interviewed her, I should say, attorneys in my office.
Speaker 4: Bill, do you ever confirm the president leaping across the seat,
Speaker 4: grabbing the steering wheel, this whole concoction she brought up
Speaker 4: in the January sixth hearing, Do you ever confirm.
Speaker 5: That we interviewed another firsthand witness who was in the
Speaker 5: car who did not confirm that that could happen.
Speaker 4: But also your deposition to the committee last month, mister Smith,
Speaker 4: you said this my recollection with miss Hutchinson was a
Speaker 4: number of the things that she gave evidence on were
Speaker 4: secondhand hearsaying your remembers making that statement to us last
Speaker 4: month in the deposition, I.
Speaker 5: Did, and I was referring particularly to what we're talking
Speaker 5: about now.
Speaker 4: Yeah, And you also said miss Hutchinson regarding this particular
Speaker 4: claim was a second or even third hand witness. We
Speaker 4: ask you, if you were a defense attorney, how would
Speaker 4: you handle cross examining her if she was on the
Speaker 4: witness stand, And you said, if I were a defense attorney,
Speaker 4: Miss Hutchinson were a witness, the first thing I would
Speaker 4: do was seek to preclude her testimony because it was
Speaker 4: here say you remember saying all that.
Speaker 5: Yes, that's correct, sir, that's correct?
Speaker 7: Right?
Speaker 4: Were you gonna put her on the witness stand if
Speaker 4: you ever got to trial.
Speaker 5: We had not made final determinations as to who we
Speaker 5: were going to call as a witness. We had a
Speaker 5: large were still considering her. We had a.
Speaker 4: Large ar choice of witnesses in this Are you familiar
Speaker 4: what Washington Post reporters Carol Lenning and Aaron Davis said
Speaker 4: in their book? They did his book three hundreds on
Speaker 4: pages book on chronicle and the whole investigation of the
Speaker 4: Justice Department, And.
Speaker 3: Here's what they said.
Speaker 4: On page three to ten, they said Jack Smith had
Speaker 4: wondered whether some of Hutchinson's claims might be relied upon
Speaker 4: a trial. Still, at one point, Smith told the elections
Speaker 4: team he wasn't ready to give.
Speaker 6: Up on Hutchinson's account.
Speaker 4: Ultimately, however, Trump administration officials uniformly fiercely disputed her accounts
Speaker 4: under oath. Prosecutors on your team told Smith they wouldn't
Speaker 4: want to use Hutchinson as a witness in court, and
Speaker 4: Smith agreed. Are Carol Lennig and Aaron Davis who wrote this?
Speaker 8: Are they? Lion?
Speaker 5: My recollection is that I certainly had not made any
Speaker 5: final determinations about in who we were going to call.
Speaker 3: And that's the point.
Speaker 6: That is the point, the fact.
Speaker 1: That point check Brandon Gill, Congressman from Texas made more
Speaker 1: points cut number three.
Speaker 3: Yes, sir, we did, Yes, you did.
Speaker 9: And the subpoena covered the time period between November twenty
Speaker 9: twenty and January twenty twenty one.
Speaker 3: Is that right?
Speaker 5: I'm sorry, sir, Could you say that again?
Speaker 9: We're not going to delay like this. The subpoena covered
Speaker 9: the time period between November of twenty twenty and January
Speaker 9: twenty twenty one. How many days after Kevin McCarthy was
Speaker 9: sworn in his speaker did useupoena his records?
Speaker 5: I don't recall, but those two things had nothing.
Speaker 9: It was well sixteen days after becoming the highest ranking
Speaker 9: Republican in the House of Representatives, usubpoenaed his toll records.
Speaker 9: Do you agree that that might reasonably be considered a
Speaker 9: violation of the speech or debate clause.
Speaker 5: I do not, and I want to be clear that
Speaker 5: the toll.
Speaker 9: We were collecting month's worth of phone data on the
Speaker 9: Republican Speaker of the House, the leader of the opposition,
Speaker 9: right after he got sworn in his speaker, all around
Speaker 9: the time of a major vote. That sounds like a
Speaker 9: flagrant violation of the speech or debate clause to me,
Speaker 9: and I think most people agree with me. And Speaker
Speaker 9: McCarthy had no recourse, did he, because you issued a
Speaker 9: non disclosure order ensuring that neither he nor any of
Speaker 9: the American people knew about the subpoenas.
Speaker 8: Is that right?
Speaker 5: The toll record, the non content toll record subpoena is
Speaker 5: we did secure non disclosure orders for those subpoenas.
Speaker 2: You did.
Speaker 9: And let me ask you, mister Smith, at the time
Speaker 9: you secured those non disclosure orders.
Speaker 3: Was Speaker McCarthy a flight risk?
Speaker 5: The non disclosure order was based on concerns about it.
Speaker 3: Was Speaker McCarthy a flight risks?
Speaker 5: He was not?
Speaker 2: He was not.
Speaker 9: Then why did your non disclosure order refer to him
Speaker 9: as a flight risk? It says right here the court
Speaker 9: finds reasonable grounds to believe that such disclosure will result
Speaker 9: in flight from prosecution.
Speaker 5: Sir, when securing a non disclosure order, the risks don't
Speaker 5: have to associated.
Speaker 9: I think the Speaker of the House is a risk
Speaker 9: this question? No, this is not your time. This is
Speaker 9: my time. You think the Speaker of the House is
Speaker 9: a flight risk? You think he's going to hop on
Speaker 9: a plane and leave the country.
Speaker 3: No.
Speaker 5: What I was trying to explain is, with respect to
Speaker 5: a non disclosure order, the risks aren't necessarily associated with
Speaker 5: the subscriber to the phone, the risks to litigation.
Speaker 9: I think that you were using this is clearly in
Speaker 9: reference to Speaker McCarthy, and you were using clearly false
Speaker 9: information to secure a non disclosure order to hide from
Speaker 9: Speaker McCarthy and from the American people the fact that
Speaker 9: you were spying on his toll records. But I've got
Speaker 9: more more, so let's move on. And May of twenty
Speaker 9: twenty three, you also issued subpoenas for toll records of
Speaker 9: nine US senators.
Speaker 3: And an additional representative is that.
Speaker 5: Right in May of twenty three, we did issue.
Speaker 9: You did, and there were non disclosure orders in conjunction
Speaker 9: with those subpoenas as well.
Speaker 5: That's correct, consistent with Department policy law.
Speaker 3: So again, nobody would know what you were doing.
Speaker 9: The Senators would, and the representatives would, and the American
Speaker 9: people wouldn't know what you were doing.
Speaker 3: Is that right?
Speaker 5: The toll records that we secured in the non disclosure
Speaker 5: orders were consistent with policy.
Speaker 9: And you knew whenever you were doing that that there
Speaker 9: was a risk you were violating the speechure debate clause.
Speaker 3: Is that right?
Speaker 5: The toll record subpoenas that we secured. Where with the
Speaker 5: concurrence of the public.
Speaker 9: Context, your own analysis says that you knew there was
Speaker 9: a risk you were violating the speech or debate clause.
Speaker 3: I have it right here.
Speaker 9: This is an email from John Keller at Public Integrity
Speaker 9: Section to your team. As you are aware, quote, as
Speaker 9: you are aware, there is some litigation risk regarding whether
Speaker 9: compelled disclosure of toll records of a member's legislative calls
Speaker 9: violates the speechure debate clause in the DC circuit. That's
Speaker 9: from your own analysis right there. So you did know,
Speaker 9: didn't you.
Speaker 5: So with respect to the item you just put up
Speaker 5: on the screen, the last sentence states.
Speaker 9: Uh, oh, we're going to get to the last sentence. Okay,
Speaker 9: We're going to get to the last sentence, and you
Speaker 9: signed case long here. Quote the bar on compelled disclosure
Speaker 9: is absolute, is right?
Speaker 7: Is that right?
Speaker 9: Or do you think that you didn't have to abide
Speaker 9: by that precedent?
Speaker 5: To be clear, this is not this statement is not
Speaker 5: from my office. This is the statement.
Speaker 9: This is This is your justification for those subpoenas and
Speaker 9: indios that you ordered. This was part of your analysis.
Speaker 9: It's a cursory analysis. I think it's worth noting. Let's
Speaker 9: get to that last sentence then. Quote, given my understanding
Speaker 9: of the low likelihood that any of the members listed
Speaker 9: below would be charged, the litigation risk should be minimal here.
Speaker 9: In other words, you're using a novel legal theory, which
Speaker 9: you knew was novel, has never been tested by any court.
Speaker 9: You're not charging any of these members. Nobody is going to.
Speaker 3: Know about it because you issued INNDOS.
Speaker 9: Nobody is going to sue about it, So sue this,
Speaker 9: So who cares?
Speaker 3: We're going to do it.
Speaker 9: Anyways, You walked all over the Constitution throughout.
Speaker 3: This entire process, the gentlemen's times led members.
Speaker 9: Of Congress, and you know it. It's absolutely disgraceful.
Speaker 1: It is absolutely disgraceful. It goes on and on. Jack
Speaker 1: Smith was a rogue prosecutor who did great damage to
Speaker 1: the constitution in the political process of the United States.
Speaker 1: He is the javert from Ley Mees.
Speaker 8: He is.
Speaker 1: He never to prosecute anyone again. He never to prosecute
Speaker 1: at President Trump, he was unconstitutionally appointed. It was as
Speaker 1: was held by the District court in Florida. Never appealed
Speaker 1: because the case was dismissed after President trump one reelection.
Speaker 1: Jack Smith and his team a disgrace to justice in
Speaker 1: the United States. I'll be right back on the huge
Speaker 1: US show quarter Back of America. I'm Hugh Hewittt. Noah
Speaker 1: Rothman is with National Review, where he's a senior writer. Noah,
Speaker 1: I'm going to go from least important and most important
Speaker 1: subjects today. First, the Oscar nomination came out. I want
Speaker 1: to run through the list of the best pictures and
Speaker 1: just get a yes or no from you whether you've
Speaker 1: gone to them. Frankenstein, no Hamnet, No the Secret Agent,
Speaker 1: no sentimental value.
Speaker 10: No, you might be detecting a trend of sinners.
Speaker 3: Nop F one.
Speaker 2: Believe it or not. No, trained dreams what I guess
Speaker 2: Trained dream nope, Marty Supreme.
Speaker 10: Unsadly no, and I kind of do want to see
Speaker 10: that one one battle after another.
Speaker 2: Nope. And finally Bogonia.
Speaker 7: A big no.
Speaker 2: So you're over ten. You're over ten. I've got a
Speaker 2: lot of.
Speaker 10: Gu Lastly, if I've seen the same television show I've
Speaker 10: watched ten times with my wife if on the couch
Speaker 10: at nine o'clock, I know, but I tell you everything
Speaker 10: that happens in that one show.
Speaker 1: I don't think you're the problem. I think Hollywood's the problem.
Speaker 1: And I'm gonna I'm going to test that. I have
Speaker 1: you Eleana Johnson, Jim Talent, Josh crossh Hour, and Jim
Speaker 1: Garrity to ask today and me and I only saw
Speaker 1: IF one Formula one race.
Speaker 10: I want to see I want to see Sinners, I
Speaker 10: want to see IF one, and I do want to
Speaker 10: see Marty Supreme.
Speaker 2: But you have a passed. This is why the movie business. Well,
Speaker 2: I'm culturally illiterate.
Speaker 10: That's it really is on me too.
Speaker 1: Well, no, it's not. You're on every day on the editor.
Speaker 1: You're right about stuff. They have not drawn you into
Speaker 1: the theater. That's the problem. You make taste all right. Now,
Speaker 1: second second, big issue Greenland and the deal. I think
Speaker 1: it's significant, but a lot of people want to say
Speaker 1: it's nothing. I think, and I'm going to tell you
Speaker 1: this before you answer. I think they're putting there, dislike
Speaker 1: the President, ahead of the realities of the Golden Dome.
Speaker 2: What do you think.
Speaker 10: Yeah, well, listen, it's not nothing, but it doesn't really See,
Speaker 10: it does not seem to.
Speaker 3: Be what the President retailed.
Speaker 10: Yesterday he was stipulating that and attributing to Mark Ruta,
Speaker 10: a NATO Secretary General, that they had secured some deal
Speaker 10: for functional sovereignty to be seated in parts of Greenland
Speaker 10: to the United States. And I was on with the
Speaker 10: Times of London today. I've been serving international media for
Speaker 10: long for a while today and Mark Ruta denies it.
Speaker 10: The Danish government strenuously insists that they had not and
Speaker 10: would not agree to such a deal. Nobody can confirm that,
Speaker 10: so or left with minileral rights and new basing and
Speaker 10: the deployment of anti missile technology, all which is very
Speaker 10: important and very valuable. I struggled to see how we
Speaker 10: couldn't have gotten that through a process that was much
Speaker 10: less hostile, much more deliberative, and not so injurious to
Speaker 10: America's reputation with its allies in Europe.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I like the process.
Speaker 1: I like I don't mind injuring allies in Europe because
Speaker 1: I don't think we did. I think they're they're pressed
Speaker 1: people did well.
Speaker 2: Then we do agree.
Speaker 10: Hugh, you're not saying you like being hostile to Europe
Speaker 10: for hostility's sake. You're saying that that's just simply not
Speaker 10: the case.
Speaker 7: Yeah.
Speaker 1: I think it's simply not the case. I think that
Speaker 1: they've got a lot of people who are wringing their hands,
Speaker 1: and in fact they're glad they don't have to get
Speaker 1: into a fight with Trump because Trump would have won,
Speaker 1: and he just did it the developer way. Developers are
Speaker 1: not new to me. I've represented in my whole life.
Speaker 1: That's the developer way. Now, the most important thing, do
Speaker 1: you believe President Trump is going to order a strike
Speaker 1: on Iran?
Speaker 2: And should he?
Speaker 7: I think he should.
Speaker 10: I think the odds are better than even that he will.
Speaker 10: I wrote about this today. The President said, you know,
Speaker 10: at the Davos conference during the Peace Board presentation that
Speaker 10: they want to talk. Aran wants to talk, and we're
Speaker 10: going to talk to them. And we've heard that before,
Speaker 10: but it doesn't come to anything, and it does strike
Speaker 10: me as a faint given the amount of hardware that
Speaker 10: we're sending into the Gulf region. We have the Ibraham Lincoln,
Speaker 10: which is deployed from the Western Pacific. It's going to
Speaker 10: be joined now apparently by the Gerald, the George W. Bush,
Speaker 10: which left Norfolk on its way allegedly to the Mediterranean.
Speaker 7: So we're going to have a lot of hardware as well.
Speaker 10: As support aircraft and combat aircraft like at fifteen. So
Speaker 10: if there are talks, then we're going to have a
Speaker 10: lot of hardware to back it up.
Speaker 7: But what is there to talk about.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I've been cautioned by the program that the Bush
Speaker 1: might be out on c trials and might not be
Speaker 1: going in the med So I want to make sure
Speaker 1: that people understand there's a question about that. I want
Speaker 1: them to strike simply because a punitive strike they're not
Speaker 1: going to get regime change. But we ought to set
Speaker 1: up a standard. If you murder fifteen thousand of your
Speaker 1: own people with machine guns in the street, you're going
Speaker 1: to get hit by asked. Because we're the West, that's
Speaker 1: why I don't think we'll get regime change. But I
Speaker 1: think we ought to set a standard. What's your argument
Speaker 1: for doing it?
Speaker 10: Well, I'm typically leery of messaging strikes like that. I
Speaker 10: think they should have a strategic rationale as well as
Speaker 10: a tactical rationale, and I think these strikes would have
Speaker 10: a strategic and tactical rationale. Beyond that, the president has
Speaker 10: a self set red line. He has said many, many
Speaker 10: times that one of Barack Obama's biggest mistakes was not
Speaker 10: following through in his self set red line in twenty twelve,
Speaker 10: and I think Barack Obama might even agree with the
Speaker 10: President on that assessment. So he is obligated, in my view,
Speaker 10: to do what the Wall Street Journal observed when it
Speaker 10: published Oragachi's op ed this week to make note of
Speaker 10: the fact that Iran his thumbing its nose at Trump's
Speaker 10: red line, and it's incumbent on him to enforce it
Speaker 10: or sacrifice his prestige in America's in the process. But
Speaker 10: I don't think that this is just a messaging strike.
Speaker 10: If we were to attack the siege ier GC installations,
Speaker 10: the objective there would be to weaken the regime and
Speaker 10: reignite the protest movement, which is part of America's overall
Speaker 10: grand strategy which is collapsing this regime.
Speaker 2: Well, I think the regime's going to collapse on its own.
Speaker 1: I would blow up carg Island, but I am not
Speaker 1: a military target Chare and there are people who study
Speaker 1: where their weakest points are. I don't know what the
Speaker 1: target listed, but I would do.
Speaker 10: But wouldn't that royalty oil markets. Wouldn't that teriphy the administration?
Speaker 2: It would that they're sixty dollars the town.
Speaker 1: And we've got new sources coming on in the United
Speaker 1: States from Venezuela and from Canada, and I don't think
Speaker 1: that they set to China primarily. The one response I
Speaker 1: got from again an unnamed person, was that you could
Speaker 1: invite China in to Iran if you did that, because
Speaker 1: they rely so much on Iranian oil, and that that's
Speaker 1: a major escalation with China.
Speaker 2: I understand. That's why I'm not.
Speaker 1: Coming up with it. But I do believe in a
Speaker 1: purely punitive strike. When a non nuclear nation mows down
Speaker 1: fifteen thousand people, you know, the American equivalent.
Speaker 2: If we had a.
Speaker 1: Real fascist, a real authoritarian that did something like this,
Speaker 1: that would be sixty to seventy thousand people it's astonishing
Speaker 1: how many people they killed.
Speaker 10: Yeah, no, it's a massacre and unspeakable massacre. And then
Speaker 10: maybe ongoing. We just don't have a lot of information
Speaker 10: still coming out of Iran. But I struggled to see
Speaker 10: how these protests that there were so vehemence last week
Speaker 10: have been completely pacified. So the atrocities are ongoing. But
Speaker 10: back to carg Island, there are side effects, unintended consequences
Speaker 10: that can result from the decimation of the Iranian oil program.
Speaker 10: If we're taking Venezuela offline and we take a Ran offline,
Speaker 10: and that is the goal of our strategy, if it
Speaker 10: collapses regime, we don't want a regime that's selling oil
Speaker 10: and energy products to our competitors like Russia and China.
Speaker 10: Eventually China will be squeezed and starved. If our policy
Speaker 10: is successful, it will be starved of energy. So we
Speaker 10: should be contemplating what that looks like and not afraid
Speaker 10: of the outcomes of what that looks like, because that
Speaker 10: is the objective here. Is it not well be starting
Speaker 10: energy of regimes.
Speaker 1: I think they would have to buy energy on the
Speaker 1: white market, and that the price of oil might increase marginally,
Speaker 1: and it might help our balance of trade, and there's
Speaker 1: no reason to think that it will become Japan nineteen
Speaker 1: thirty seven to nineteen forty one.
Speaker 3: That's the big fear.
Speaker 10: Yeah, that we've shortened the window of opportunity for action
Speaker 10: in the South Chancy.
Speaker 1: And there is no need for that because China. A
Speaker 1: war would be China's choice, and they have not done
Speaker 1: the things. They're not ready to go to war with us,
Speaker 1: and they're not ready to take Taiwan, no matter how
Speaker 1: many demonstrations they have.
Speaker 2: Vandillah Rothman.
Speaker 1: I'm glad that you are Oh for ten because it
Speaker 1: can't get any worse today for Hollywood.
Speaker 2: Thank you do.
Speaker 1: I'll be right back in America. Stay tum, Welcome back in America.
Speaker 1: I'm Hugh Hewitt. For the first time, I don't know
Speaker 1: in years, I've missed two commentary podcasts back to back.
Speaker 1: So my next guest Eleana Y Johnson, who's a regular
Speaker 1: contributor to Commentary, I haven't heard her voice in three days.
Speaker 1: Eleon is also the editor in chief of the Washington
Speaker 1: Free Beacon, which you ought to be reading every morning
Speaker 1: at Freebeacon dot com. Eli On a three parts to
Speaker 1: today's interview part number one ten yes or no questions
Speaker 1: because the Oscar List came out number one.
Speaker 2: Have you seen Frankenstein?
Speaker 11: I Hugh, I'll spare you time. I haven't seen anything.
Speaker 2: You're zero for ten. I make up for my.
Speaker 11: Zero for ten by having seen the Oongebob movie three
Speaker 11: times with my four year old.
Speaker 2: Okay, that's about it. Okay, I'll make it different. Have
Speaker 2: you heard of the following movie Frankenstein?
Speaker 11: Yes, Hamnet No, never heard of it.
Speaker 2: The Secret Agent.
Speaker 3: Heard of it.
Speaker 2: Sentimental Value never heard of it. Sinners heard of it.
Speaker 2: F One never heard of it. Trained Dreams never heard
Speaker 2: of it. Marty Supreme heard of it for sure.
Speaker 11: My colleague John Ortz gave it a rave review. We
Speaker 11: did talk about that one on the podcast.
Speaker 1: Okay, one battle after another, Nope and Bogonia. Now, how
Speaker 1: bad is Hollywood marketing when you haven't even heard of.
Speaker 2: Six of the ten best pictures of the year?
Speaker 11: I mean, Hugh, the one movie I will say that
Speaker 11: I can't. I have to say, I can't even tell
Speaker 11: you if it was this year was the Bob Dylan movie.
Speaker 2: I saw Bob Dylan too, that was two years ago.
Speaker 8: That's it.
Speaker 11: Tears the only movie that I've seen in the theater
Speaker 11: in recent.
Speaker 2: Memory to the kids are too young for Zootopia? Is
Speaker 2: that the problem?
Speaker 11: A little bit young? I've been trying to nudge my
Speaker 11: daughter there and she's been saying, no, I want to
Speaker 11: go back to SpongeBob and I did look it up
Speaker 11: and it said it's more like a sixth.
Speaker 2: Seventh do so No. I took two three year olds
Speaker 2: to it. Do not do it, do not do it?
Speaker 2: All right?
Speaker 1: Yeah, three films focused on Gaza war and hostage crisis
Speaker 1: nominated for oscars, Israel's butcher staying children know more where
Speaker 1: and are gone?
Speaker 2: And then one.
Speaker 1: Called, uh, the voice of hin Rajab about the death
Speaker 1: of a five year old Palestinian.
Speaker 2: Do you want to bet which wins?
Speaker 12: Oh?
Speaker 2: Can all three walk away with the wards?
Speaker 11: Because I think that's what would happen if the oscars
Speaker 11: could do it. And I look forward to the demonstrative
Speaker 11: protests by the winners while they're up on stage and
Speaker 11: the absolute silence on the butchery of the Iranian regime.
Speaker 2: Yeah, fifteen thousand.
Speaker 1: I'm coming to, in fact, out reverse order of my
Speaker 1: question because you brought it up. Should President Trump strike
Speaker 1: as a purely punitive measure. I do not have hopes
Speaker 1: for regime change. I don't want a bombing campaign. I
Speaker 1: just want to strike them, because you shouldn't mow down
Speaker 1: fifteen thousand of your people.
Speaker 11: And will he strike, well, I think he should strike
Speaker 11: in an effort for regime change in Iran, not simply
Speaker 11: as a punitive measure, but because it's in the American interests.
Speaker 11: And for about the past ten days, you I've believed
Speaker 11: strongly that the window for American action is not closed.
Speaker 11: In the days after President Trump issued his threats and
Speaker 11: the Iranian leaders were sort of thumbing their noses, and
Speaker 11: there are a lot of people saying he drew a
Speaker 11: red line, he's not enforcing it. That may yet turn
Speaker 11: out to be true, But I think we're working on
Speaker 11: a bit of a longer timeline. There's enough fifteen squadron
Speaker 11: and aerial refueling tankers heading to the region, and I
Speaker 11: tend to think President Trump is waiting for the right
Speaker 11: time here. And at the same time, the conditions that
Speaker 11: led to these protests, the economic emiseration and the fact
Speaker 11: that the Iranian currency is not worth the paper that
Speaker 11: it's printed on, are.
Speaker 7: Not changing.
Speaker 2: Now we've got real.
Speaker 11: Problems, and I think I do think the President is
Speaker 11: going to pick his moment, and I hope he does.
Speaker 2: I think he's going to.
Speaker 1: But we have to do different kinds of strike punity,
Speaker 1: meaning there's a guardrail here.
Speaker 2: You don't machine gun your own people, and.
Speaker 1: Then regime destabilization paps change as with Serbia, as with Libya.
Speaker 1: That would be a sustained air campaign. Do you think
Speaker 1: he's got the.
Speaker 2: Will to do that.
Speaker 1: I mean, he's got iron will, but I don't think
Speaker 1: he's in the bombing campaign.
Speaker 2: Business, do you.
Speaker 11: I'm not sure. You know. Predicting the actions of this
Speaker 11: president is tough. The latter, the regime destabilization, regime decapitation
Speaker 11: is obviously more difficult than the former, but I wouldn't
Speaker 11: put it past this president. And Hugh, I would note
Speaker 11: the Wall Street Journal report last night that this regime
Speaker 11: is looking that this president Trump is looking at regime
Speaker 11: change in Cuba.
Speaker 3: So I think it's totally.
Speaker 11: And I think the two are connected because what underlies
Speaker 11: both of these things, as well as the maduro rate
Speaker 11: in Venezuela, is that we can totally discard the notion
Speaker 11: that this president doesn't is not concerned with matters beyond
Speaker 11: our shores. I think he's looking at legacy building, and
Speaker 11: I think he knows that the way he acts on
Speaker 11: Iran is intimately connected with his legacy. And when he
Speaker 11: went out and did that press conference on Maduro announcing
Speaker 11: that they had captured him, he cited it in a
Speaker 11: line of foreign policy actions, including the killing of custom
Speaker 11: Sulimani and Operation Midnight Hammers. So I would say, now,
Speaker 11: those three things are the things he's proud of, st Off,
Speaker 11: and he may be looking to add a fourth and
Speaker 11: a fifth with another strike on Iran and in Cuba.
Speaker 11: It's clear this is where his mind is though, and
Speaker 11: you could add Greenland to that too.
Speaker 1: I am going to I think is a big deal, Elianna,
Speaker 1: and I want your quick take on it, because Noah
Speaker 1: Rothman doesn't think it's a big deal.
Speaker 2: I think it's a big deal.
Speaker 11: Oh you know, I don't know if we know yet, Hugh.
Speaker 11: On the one hand, the president may have seen the
Speaker 11: doo and the markets and climb down with some kind
Speaker 11: of phony deal. I think that's the point no On
Speaker 11: some of his colleagues at National Review we're making. On
Speaker 11: the other hand, it may be that Rubio and the
Speaker 11: Vice President and others negotiate American sovereignty over bases in Greenland,
Speaker 11: and we really do get a dear deal for rare
Speaker 11: earth minerals. I myself, I don't have a real knowledge
Speaker 11: of where this is going to end up, but I'm
Speaker 11: for it. I'm for the sovereignty over the basis.
Speaker 1: I'm for the Golden Dome, and I'm for protecting the
Speaker 1: two hundred and thirty mile exclusive economic zone, which US
Speaker 1: sovereignty over some of the bases would give us the
Speaker 1: right to.
Speaker 2: Patrol and protect.
Speaker 1: And that's something that I don't think a lot of
Speaker 1: people know about the law.
Speaker 2: They see.
Speaker 1: Hey, Eleana Y Johnson, follow on exit Eleana Y Johnson.
Speaker 1: Go see Bob sponge Pants again and again and again
Speaker 1: until you can repeat every line.
Speaker 2: In the movie.
Speaker 1: Because that's what I did when I was your age,
Speaker 1: Eleanor good to say you, thank you. I'll be right
Speaker 1: back in America. Stay tuned back in America. I'm q
Speaker 1: hewittt former United States Senator Jim Tallent. There's a senior
Speaker 1: fellow at the Reagan Institute for Peace through Strength.
Speaker 2: Hello, Jim, how are you?
Speaker 8: I am doing well. Mis she Ewett, how are you good.
Speaker 2: We're gonna play twenty question.
Speaker 1: The twenty questions have to do with the ten movies
Speaker 1: nominated for Best Movie of the Year by the Academy today,
Speaker 1: and the questions are have you heard of it? And
Speaker 1: have you seen it? For each each movie movie. Number
Speaker 1: one Frankenstein, have you heard of it? Have you seen it? No?
Speaker 8: And no? And I'm afraid a lot of my answers
Speaker 8: are going to be along those lines.
Speaker 2: All right. Number two Hamnet.
Speaker 8: Hamnet?
Speaker 2: Hamnet?
Speaker 8: Is that Hamlet misspelled?
Speaker 1: No, that's that's Hamlet with Hamlet, that's Hamlet with it
Speaker 1: in it Hamnet?
Speaker 8: No, definitely, no, and no.
Speaker 2: The Secret Agent.
Speaker 8: No, I like the song from the sixties Secret Agent.
Speaker 2: That doesn't count for hearing about it, So that's a
Speaker 2: no on the movie.
Speaker 8: How about I used to jog to that song?
Speaker 2: How about sentiment sentimental value?
Speaker 8: No, I haven't seen it, No idea what it is?
Speaker 8: No sinners, sinners, No sounds intriguing.
Speaker 2: No.
Speaker 8: Might catch it on streaming in a couple of years.
Speaker 2: Here's the best opportunity I've f one.
Speaker 8: Now. I didn't see it, but I recognized that my
Speaker 8: wife wanted to see it. Isn't that the one with
Speaker 8: Brad Pitt.
Speaker 2: Yes, there you go. You got one out of we
Speaker 2: got one thus far. Train dreams, train dreams.
Speaker 1: No, no, no, Marty Supreme, Marty Supreme.
Speaker 8: That's that draws another blank.
Speaker 1: No, no, one battle after another, and they're not talking
Speaker 1: about reconciliation.
Speaker 8: I've heard of that one.
Speaker 2: Okay.
Speaker 8: I saw a couple of articles. I saw a couple
Speaker 8: of articles, and I actually watched part of a video
Speaker 8: saying how terrible the movie was.
Speaker 1: That's two out of twenty, two out of eighteen. And finally, Begonia, Begonia.
Speaker 2: I'm making this.
Speaker 8: Wasn't that a country? Wasn't that a country? An old
Speaker 8: Marx Brothers movie?
Speaker 2: I don't know, but you're you are two under twenty.
Speaker 8: You're better, by the way as Fredonia.
Speaker 1: You're better than Eliotta Johnson and Noah Rothman. So at
Speaker 1: least you get heard of two of these movies. Jim,
Speaker 1: what's wrong with Hollywood?
Speaker 2: I used to go to.
Speaker 1: Two movies a week until like five years ago before COVID. Yeah.
Speaker 8: I think it's a combination of economics controlled by people
Speaker 8: who don't care about the quality of the movies. Whatever
Speaker 8: you think about the old Hollywood system, I mean the
Speaker 8: men who ran it were ruthless, but they really didn't
Speaker 8: care about producing good movies. And then of course the
Speaker 8: whole there obsession with woke topics and messaging and the
Speaker 8: rest of it has really interfered with the creative instincts
Speaker 8: that they used to have.
Speaker 2: Right now, it's let me get to the last movie
Speaker 2: I saw.
Speaker 8: The last movie I saw was god Zilla Minus one,
Speaker 8: which was very good.
Speaker 1: You guess Japanese I missed that too, all right, very
Speaker 1: from very silly Hollywood, very serious. Should President Iran strike Iran?
Speaker 1: And willie President President Trump?
Speaker 8: Okay, I think he should any any and I think
Speaker 8: he will. But let me let me go into the
Speaker 8: background or the reasoning for that. I mean, the reason
Speaker 8: to do it. There are two reasons to do it.
Speaker 8: One is because we said we would, and I think
Speaker 8: it's important to sustain our credibility. And the second is
Speaker 8: if it's done properly, it could further weaken the regime.
Speaker 8: The reason not to do it, you is that the
Speaker 8: rest of the Middle East is really going well now.
Speaker 8: I mean, we're in phase two, which I think we
Speaker 8: really have Hamas behind the eight ball. I mean, the
Speaker 8: Lebanese president just said, you know, Hesbala's got to disarm,
Speaker 8: got to leave. Syria and Israel are negotiating closer terms,
Speaker 8: and so you know the old legal saying, when the
Speaker 8: judge is going your way, you know, just be quiet.
Speaker 8: And so there's a danger that if we hit Iran
Speaker 8: it could disrupt some of those activities, which is one
Speaker 8: of the reasons evidently our allies and partners have urged
Speaker 8: us not to do it.
Speaker 2: Now.
Speaker 8: I think what the President's eventually going to do is
Speaker 8: hit them in some very targeted way, but something that
Speaker 8: will hurt them uniquely without disrupting the region, kind of
Speaker 8: when he took out Cassin Solomani when was that two thousand.
Speaker 1: And yeah, early early twenty memory of the talent.
Speaker 8: I think he'll do.
Speaker 1: I hope he hits carg Island, But people tell me
Speaker 1: their reason not to the A Meet Segal, very very
Speaker 1: serious Israeli analysts said one of the second order consequences
Speaker 1: of President Trump obliterating the Iranian nuclear program was to
Speaker 1: drive Saudi Arabia further away from the Abraham Accords because
Speaker 1: they no longer need them. I had not considered that before,
Speaker 1: but it meets a very good reporter. What do you
Speaker 1: think about that.
Speaker 8: Yeah, I think it's I think it's very possible. I
Speaker 8: believe Dwayne and I have discussed that on the pod
Speaker 8: that one of the ironic outcomes of the real successes
Speaker 8: over the last year is that is that the Gulf
Speaker 8: States have less of a reason. I mean, they're less
Speaker 8: afraidive Iran now, but personally, and you might want to
Speaker 8: ask him eat this is. You know, the Saudis are
Speaker 8: not stupid, and they know what President Trump wants. He
Speaker 8: wants the Abraham Accords to be expanded, and there are
Speaker 8: things they want and so by engaging in this kind
Speaker 8: of a tactic, being a very reluctant partner in that respect,
Speaker 8: they're probably hoping to get more. You know, there are
Speaker 8: other countries besides the United States that are good at
Speaker 8: pursuing their own interests. We don't see that very much
Speaker 8: in Europe, but we do see it in the Middle East.
Speaker 8: So that's what I suspect, because I think NBS wants
Speaker 8: economic development for the country, he wants stability in the region,
Speaker 8: he wants to modernize Saudi Arabia, and all of that
Speaker 8: is advanced by the right kind of agreements with Israel,
Speaker 8: which may or may not be a formal recognition. That
Speaker 8: doesn't matter that much all, I think if we just continue.
Speaker 1: So my last question is what do you make of
Speaker 1: the Greenland outline as the President describe it, Provided it's accurate.
Speaker 8: I like it and wrote a great column about it,
Speaker 8: you know, because he actually read the National Security Strategy,
Speaker 8: which in discussing Western hemisphere I think mentions five times
Speaker 8: critical supply chains, the importance of military readiness. This whole episode,
Speaker 8: this whole exercise for the last year, has been about
Speaker 8: sending a signal that we're very interested in the Arctic
Speaker 8: and we're going to pursue our claims there, that we're
Speaker 8: very interested in showing up our supply chains, and Greenland
Speaker 8: is an important part of that, and that we're going
Speaker 8: to protect our hemisphere and pursue our own interests. And
Speaker 8: we got an agreement. I don't know exactly what's in it,
Speaker 8: but we'll have more freedom to operate militarily. We'll have
Speaker 8: better access to the rare earths in Greenland, and that's
Speaker 8: more than we had. So, you know, I don't think
Speaker 8: President Trump ever really cared about getting sovereignty over Greenland.
Speaker 8: He wants to integrate Greenland into America's national security strategy
Speaker 8: for the Western Hemisphere. So you know, I'll wait to
Speaker 8: see exactly what's in it, but it's got to be
Speaker 8: better than what we had before, and I don't think
Speaker 8: we would have gotten it if we hadn't combined this
Speaker 8: pressure tactics with the negotiations.
Speaker 2: Jim Tallon always good.
Speaker 1: To talk with someone who actually thinks about national security
Speaker 1: on a daily basis. Jim Talent can be followed on
Speaker 1: x at Jim Talent follow me to the next segment
Speaker 1: of Today's Hewit.
Speaker 2: Welcome Back America.
Speaker 1: You Hewitt inside the Relief Factor Studio West. I don't
Speaker 1: have to deal with what's coming at Josh Cross. Are
Speaker 1: going to be a bad weekend in the Beltway, Josh,
Speaker 1: you're ready for it.
Speaker 12: You know, we haven't had a snowmageddon as they call
Speaker 12: it here in about a decade. So the way the forecasters,
Speaker 12: you guys know, you know in Ohio, you know that
Speaker 12: you're you're used to that kind of snow, but we
Speaker 12: haven't had more than a foot of snow in a
Speaker 12: long time.
Speaker 2: So I think the snow is better than icy rain.
Speaker 2: So take the snow.
Speaker 1: Uh.
Speaker 2: I have a drill, Josh, before we get.
Speaker 7: To the real story.
Speaker 1: I want to know if you have heard and then
Speaker 1: seen the ten movies nominated for Best Picture. So heard
Speaker 1: of and seen Frankenstein Yeah, No, no one.
Speaker 9: No, no, No, you're Hamnett.
Speaker 7: Hamnet never even heard of it.
Speaker 2: The Secret Agent.
Speaker 7: No, and No.
Speaker 1: Sentimental Value no one, No Sinners, no one, no f one,
Speaker 1: no one, No Trained Dreams.
Speaker 7: No. I also haven't heard of that one either.
Speaker 1: Marty Supreme, Yes, yes, and yes, Oh you've seen it.
Speaker 7: Yes, it's it's it's very good.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I've seen it too. Okay, so that's what. That's
Speaker 1: a hit though, one battle after another.
Speaker 12: No, but I actually that's on my weekend snow watch lists.
Speaker 2: So that's a yes. No, yes. And Bogonia no no.
Speaker 2: So you're three out.
Speaker 1: Of twenty and that's better than Noah Rothman, Eleana Johnson
Speaker 1: and Jim Tallon.
Speaker 2: So what's that tell you about Hollywood and movies?
Speaker 12: Well, the disconnect between what's nominated for the Oscars and
Speaker 12: what and I, Hugh, I actually try to see some
Speaker 12: of the artsier critically acclaimed, you and me both, but
Speaker 12: some of the ones I had not even heard of.
Speaker 12: At least half of the I think three or four
Speaker 12: of the ones you mentioned. I would want to make
Speaker 12: a shout out for a song. I'm surprised song song
Speaker 12: Blue was not nominated, because I like that was one
Speaker 12: of the better I know, I liked it.
Speaker 1: But they're not going to nominate things that people like,
Speaker 1: and therefore they're not going to get oscars and no
Speaker 1: one's ever going to hear of them. All right, let
Speaker 1: me move on if I can, Josh to the big story.
Speaker 1: Do you think President Trump is going to strike Iran?
Speaker 1: And should he?
Speaker 12: If you asked me that a couple of days ago,
Speaker 12: I would have been more bullish given the comments made
Speaker 12: by the President and a lot of his inner circle.
Speaker 12: But at Davos, Steve Woodoff seemed to suggest that they
Speaker 12: were going to be looking at a diplomatic option, and
Speaker 12: that rhetoric was echoed by the President this morning and
Speaker 12: announcing the Board of Peace.
Speaker 7: And you know, it just feels like Trump. Trump is very.
Speaker 12: Responsive to the headlines of the news, to the visuals
Speaker 12: coming out of social media, and it does feel like
Speaker 12: that even though we have moved military assets into the
Speaker 12: Middle East and were prepared more so than we may
Speaker 12: have been a week ago, it doesn't seem like right
Speaker 12: now the administration is ready to strike. I admit I
Speaker 12: could be surprised. The President had surprised me before, but
Speaker 12: it just doesn't seem based on public comments from both
Speaker 12: the President.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I was trying to ask you if you do
Speaker 1: not remember, because I also fell for the head fake
Speaker 1: last June when Midnight Hammer dropped, and I completely fell
Speaker 1: for the head fake on Operation Absolute Resolve in the Duro.
Speaker 2: I mean I just did.
Speaker 12: Yeah, Yeah, I mean, look, I I hesitate to make
Speaker 12: predictions for that very reason, and I certainly I mean,
Speaker 12: Trump has sort of gone back and forth in terms
Speaker 12: of his rhetoric in the last week on Iran. But look,
Speaker 12: there's every bit of evidence that that protesters continue to
Speaker 12: be killed, the human rights disaster, that the you know,
Speaker 12: the horrible atrocities that took place, that they're fresh in
Speaker 12: my mind. But I wonder, given all the news of
Speaker 12: the last week, whether it was Greenland, whether it was
Speaker 12: you know, all the all the Davos back and forth,
Speaker 12: whether that's not quite a quite its front and center
Speaker 12: in the White House's mind.
Speaker 1: Now, let me ask you about Greenland, Josh. There are
Speaker 1: lots of reactions. I'm I'm I thought Trump made Davos
Speaker 1: great again because it become kind of a joke and
Speaker 1: he actually made news there and made it relevant. What
Speaker 1: did you think about the Greenland deal and the Davos trip.
Speaker 12: Look, I this seems to be a pattern with Trump,
Speaker 12: and not always in the best of ways, foreign policy wise,
Speaker 12: where we kind of create a chaotic situation, end up
Speaker 12: backing down, coming up to some compromise, and kind of
Speaker 12: getting back as we were.
Speaker 7: You know, in square one, we're still kind of learning.
Speaker 12: About the negotiations and the contours of a deal that
Speaker 12: the US had been that Trump had been talking to
Speaker 12: Mark Ruta, the NATO Secretary General, about.
Speaker 7: Maybe we have more much more economy over.
Speaker 12: A military bases in parts of Greenland, but we are
Speaker 12: you know, this is something.
Speaker 7: That could have been handled diplomatically.
Speaker 12: There didn't need to be a rupture in the US
Speaker 12: European relationship to get to the point where we are today.
Speaker 1: And I don't think me let me might argue my case,
Speaker 1: there wasn't a rupture. There was an upset francois Accron,
Speaker 1: whom nobody cares about. There's an upset EU that has
Speaker 1: nothing to say about a NATO issue, and the eight
Speaker 1: members of NATO did not rupture. So I think there's
Speaker 1: a lot of tds on display here perhaps, and I
Speaker 1: think it was unfortunate.
Speaker 12: I mean, a lot of people are talking about the
Speaker 12: Canadian Prime Minister's Mark Karney's speech, talking about this rupture,
Speaker 12: and I can't help but think that he's already been
Speaker 12: trying to improve build business ties and economic ties to China,
Speaker 12: which is hard to square his comments the ideal the
Speaker 12: more idealistic and and strategic comments that Carney made with
Speaker 12: the Chinese relationship and the inattention to anti Semitism that
Speaker 12: Canada has been playing in recent in recent years. So
Speaker 12: you know, I do think there's a little bit of
Speaker 12: posturing and a little bit of kind of chest thumping
Speaker 12: from some of the Europeans, But I also think this
Speaker 12: is a totally needless provocation, and I think there's no
Speaker 12: national security Denmark and NATO and the eusually we're all
Speaker 12: on pretty much the same page, and I think we
Speaker 12: still are on the same page, aside from all the
Speaker 12: threats that that Trump made. That that freaked the heck
Speaker 12: out of the Scandinavians and the EU, and I don't
Speaker 12: think that was necessary.
Speaker 1: Well said Josh Cross is always following mine act at
Speaker 1: Josh Crosshower.
Speaker 2: Stay tuned, I'll be right back here on the to
Speaker 2: hew A Show.
Speaker 7: Oh Man, God its hosts bow he got hit bumps.
Speaker 7: But what do you say?
Speaker 3: Street got big.
Speaker 1: Gym welcome back in America. That music means big. Jim
Speaker 1: Garretty is in the house with us. Guaranty the indispensable
Speaker 1: Jim as. You are my cultural reporter. You're rite for
Speaker 1: the Washington Post, you're rite for National Review. You do
Speaker 1: the three Marbotini podcast. You're often on the editors podcast
Speaker 1: for National Review. So you're a man of culture. The
Speaker 1: Oscars were nominated. The nominations came out this morning. I'm
Speaker 1: looking for your reactions to the Best Picture, all right,
Speaker 1: number one, Frankenstein.
Speaker 6: I at least heard of that one. Didn't see it,
Speaker 6: don't expect to see it. Hamnet Okay, And I know
Speaker 6: that's not a typo. You're not mispronouncing it. It actually
Speaker 6: is an N, not an L. I have a big
Speaker 6: I remember seeing it on the box office display. Didn't
Speaker 6: see it.
Speaker 2: The Secret Agent.
Speaker 6: That's actually sounds good, but I haven't seen it.
Speaker 2: Sentimental value.
Speaker 6: You could be making up that one and I would
Speaker 6: not be able to tell you whether it's.
Speaker 2: True or not, not making it up. Wouldn't be wouldn't
Speaker 2: be prudent, not gonna do it, wouldn't do it, sinners.
Speaker 6: Okay, heard of that one. Haven't seen it. Heard people
Speaker 6: raving about it. It's about vampires in the Old South,
Speaker 6: So that one I'm not surprised by. At least it
Speaker 6: permeated some, you know, with Michael B. Jordan as opposed
Speaker 6: to the other Michael Jordan's.
Speaker 2: It received sixteen Oscar nominations. F one.
Speaker 6: Okay, actually saw that. I really, yes, really enjoyed it.
Speaker 6: Kind of almost felt like old fashioned movie making. It's
Speaker 6: not a groundbreaking story, but just really done. And I
Speaker 6: saw it right around my birthday and the themes about
Speaker 6: you know, pursuing greatness but also kind of passing the
Speaker 6: torch to the new generation. I'll be rooting for that one.
Speaker 6: I know it's never gonna win.
Speaker 2: Brad Pittson, It's not gonna win. Uh, trained dreams.
Speaker 6: Again. You can be making that up.
Speaker 2: No, not man, you haven't seen that. No, No, all right, no,
Speaker 2: Marty Supreme.
Speaker 6: Okay, heard of that one. Heard people saying good things
Speaker 6: about it, haven't seen it. I have only the vaguest
Speaker 6: idea of what it's about don't really unlikely to see it.
Speaker 2: I have seen it. They were lying to you one
Speaker 2: battle after another.
Speaker 6: Heard of that one. I hear from the likes of
Speaker 6: Kyle Smith, who used to be with us at National Review,
Speaker 6: now over at the Wall Street Journal. Just insufferably overhyped
Speaker 6: and overdone, and the heavy handed political metaphor and all
Speaker 6: that stuff. Leonardo DiCaprio, you know, to his credit, throws
Speaker 6: himself into whatever role he's doing. But you know it's
Speaker 6: about Trump being bad. So I figured that'll be I
Speaker 6: didn't know that.
Speaker 2: Another reason not to say it. I'd heard of it,
Speaker 2: But now that I've heard you say that, I won't
Speaker 2: see it and then begonia, I.
Speaker 6: Feel like I might have heard. So is this about
Speaker 6: the kidnapping of no idea?
Speaker 2: Never heard of it? All right, So that's the list.
Speaker 6: I have aig familiarity with it.
Speaker 1: So I've seen F one and Marty Supreme. I've seen
Speaker 1: two out of ten. I liked one out of ten,
Speaker 1: the one that can't win because Brad pitching it. You've
Speaker 1: seen none. You did see F one, you've seen one
Speaker 1: out of it's actually one of them, and you've heard
Speaker 1: of Center. So you've heard one more than I've heard of.
Speaker 1: So what's that say about the movies? Or what's that
Speaker 1: say about you? And what's that say about me?
Speaker 6: Okay, well, what it says about me is that I
Speaker 6: generally see action movies, superhero movies, you know, the summer
Speaker 6: movie types.
Speaker 7: Right.
Speaker 6: I am not the target audience for most Oscar bait.
Speaker 6: Doesn't mean I've never enjoyed them. But you know, we
Speaker 6: all know what oscar bait is. You know, where you're
Speaker 6: playing a character who's somewhat mentally challenged. And I won't
Speaker 6: use the line from that Robert Downey Junior did no,
Speaker 6: but nevertheless, the idea that, like, you know, often it's
Speaker 6: someone who's trying to stretch as an actor, historical dramas.
Speaker 6: You know, if you're playing anything with.
Speaker 2: Daniel Lewis in it.
Speaker 6: Yeah, yep, yeah, like and here's and if you if
Speaker 6: those movies are your taste, great. You know, very rarely
Speaker 6: have I seen a Oscar winner argo. I remember seeing
Speaker 6: a couple of years ago, which kind.
Speaker 2: Of you've got robot? Actually do your robot kids go
Speaker 2: to the movies?
Speaker 6: Not that often will go see superhero movies. And we
Speaker 6: actually felt pretty good about all three of the ones
Speaker 6: that came out this year, Superman, Fantastic Four, and Thunderbolts.
Speaker 6: We did not like the Captain America one did not work.
Speaker 6: But they're like, we're you know, we're of the general
Speaker 6: mainstream consensus. And for a long time the Marvel movies
Speaker 6: are about as much fun as you could have in
Speaker 6: the theaters. And then they did Endgame and it's been
Speaker 6: very hit and miss since then. They're way back in
Speaker 6: the day.
Speaker 1: I know, I have young grandchildren, so my movie options
Speaker 1: are very limited. I used to be with the fetching
Speaker 1: missus Hewett, a two film a week person, when even
Speaker 1: when my kids are in the house we.
Speaker 2: Just loved movie. There aren't any movie.
Speaker 1: Jim My point is it's collapsed, and I think this
Speaker 1: list proves that am I making too much of a
Speaker 1: point of it.
Speaker 6: I don't know if the Oscar selections are the most
Speaker 6: natural measuring stick, but what is indisputable is what they
Speaker 6: used to call the middle class of movies, movies that
Speaker 6: had a budget from like about fifteen million dollars two
Speaker 6: hundred million dollars. A lot of comedies were in this category.
Speaker 6: A lot of romantic comedies were in this kind of category.
Speaker 6: That that's this basically has disappeared and that this was
Speaker 6: where you know, Will Smith in Hitch would be that
Speaker 6: kind of movie, you know with Kevin James or something
Speaker 6: like that, right.
Speaker 2: Like Kevin Goson movie Ever made?
Speaker 6: Yes, exactly western. You know that that basically movies are
Speaker 6: are either you know, small independent made with the almost
Speaker 6: the money, or they are giant blockbusters that are designed
Speaker 6: to have a theme park at you know, Universal or
Speaker 6: Disney or something like that. So I think we will
Speaker 6: miss these kind of movies.
Speaker 1: The movies used to form the culture, and it was
Speaker 1: my kids grew up on the movies. My grand kinswok
Speaker 1: grew up on the movies.
Speaker 7: I think.
Speaker 1: I think I took my daughter to see Titanic ten
Speaker 1: times when she was fourteen or thirteen. So we got
Speaker 1: a minute to the break. We'll come back after Oscar's
Speaker 1: something important. Are they dead dead dead dead dead by
Speaker 1: streaming and by consensus that the filmmakers have lost their mind?
Speaker 2: Or is it just a bad couple of decades.
Speaker 6: Quote Billy Crystal in The Princess Bride, He's only mostly dead.
Speaker 6: They're mostly dead because it now costs about twenty bucks
Speaker 6: ahead at least where I am to go to the movies.
Speaker 6: I you know, like you, I'd see movies maybe once
Speaker 6: a week, once every two weeks, but they only cost
Speaker 6: seven bucks. The more the ticket costs, the more the
Speaker 6: movies gotta be good. The more of the movies got
Speaker 6: to be something where you feel really good from the
Speaker 6: trailer or the commercial, or you like the book or
Speaker 6: something like that. Yeah, it becomes a much bigger risk
Speaker 6: at twenty bucks ahead.
Speaker 1: I'm coming back with a technical question for Garritty because
Speaker 1: his kids build robots.
Speaker 2: And there they're bound from the school on the Charles
Speaker 2: that actually learned the thing. So stay chimed.
Speaker 1: I'm back with Garrity the indispensable A. Gim is my
Speaker 1: tech consultant, Jim. I have here my iPhone which is
Speaker 1: many years old with my Cleveland Brown's orange on it.
Speaker 2: By the way, that Jets don't get a quarterback.
Speaker 1: Sorry, Dante Moore's going home rather than go to the Jets,
Speaker 1: and I'm gonna get it new one today. Can I
Speaker 1: say to the person at the Apple help desk, I'm
Speaker 1: sure this has been hacked and has malware on it.
Speaker 1: I want my contacts, I want my number, and I
Speaker 1: don't want any malware. Can they make that work?
Speaker 6: Probably not, but they'll try to upsell you something with
Speaker 6: the much higher caliber spyware.
Speaker 2: You're not going to have.
Speaker 6: They're not going to have that basic spyware. We're going
Speaker 6: to give you the premium plus spyware.
Speaker 1: Are you telling me I got to get a new
Speaker 1: phone number in order to dump the spyware because we
Speaker 1: are talking to the chicoms right now because it's in
Speaker 1: the studio, and I tell you there's a reason it's
Speaker 1: not allowed into any building.
Speaker 6: So second time that I was in Ukraine, I ran
Speaker 6: into Tim Mock, who writes a newsletter news site called
Speaker 6: The counter Offensive, great reporter. Everybody should fow him on Twitter,
Speaker 6: subscribe to his thing. And he said that, you know,
Speaker 6: he goes through He was in Ukraine, went to Taiwan.
Speaker 6: I think he was somewhere else, like Kazakistan or something.
Speaker 6: And they tell you if you're going to places like
Speaker 6: this your cell phone, you know, you figure this is
Speaker 6: where they're most likely to try to get spyware in there,
Speaker 6: and they can do it remotely through wireless signals and
Speaker 6: stuff like that. So Tim Mack tolds us, I told
Speaker 6: us he's getting you know, he goes to some professional,
Speaker 6: high grade caliber person who can find spyware by foreign
Speaker 6: intelligence or anybody else who's out there trying to put
Speaker 6: it onto your phone, and he goes, they do the
Speaker 6: full review, they do the scan, and he is he says,
Speaker 6: they comes back clean, and he was so pissed. I'm
Speaker 6: so disappointed that nobody thought he was worth listening in on.
Speaker 6: And I kind of feel that kind of way. I
Speaker 6: kind of feel like if you if you told my
Speaker 6: phone and you said, Jim, you've been to Ukraine a
Speaker 6: bunch of times, no Russian spyware, You've been to Taiwan,
Speaker 6: nothing Chinese, I'd feel a little insulted. I've been told
Speaker 6: by reliable sources that both of those countries governments have
Speaker 6: a file on it. That probably just means a file
Speaker 6: just means they have a paper.
Speaker 1: We don't like this guy, so they actually wrote, now, Jim,
Speaker 1: I know, I know I've got spyware. When people come
Speaker 1: to the house for dinner who are in the government,
Speaker 1: they make me put it downstairs under a bunch of
Speaker 1: wooden crates, and then they still.
Speaker 6: I believe that you interview the president fairly regularly. I
Speaker 6: assume that when they're doing that, they not only scan
Speaker 6: all your recording equipment, they probably frisk you. I don't
Speaker 6: know if you feel like you've been to the proctologist.
Speaker 6: I'm just figuring anything as a full check.
Speaker 1: But do the robot kids help do having robot kids
Speaker 1: help you figure this stuff out?
Speaker 6: This is not really their specialty, but I will point
Speaker 6: out so glad you mentioned it to you, because like
Speaker 6: we're now deep January, early January is when they get
Speaker 6: the assignment. So my younger son, I'm never going to
Speaker 6: get to see them until the first competition. They are building,
Speaker 6: they are designing. They got electrical stuff to worry about. Uh,
Speaker 6: I'll get to see them like maybe a month from there.
Speaker 2: Do the power fail? Does the light flicker in the
Speaker 2: house at times?
Speaker 6: Thankfully they're not doing it here. Basically, yes, in northern Virginia,
Speaker 6: the power goes out. I'm really certain AI will become
Speaker 6: you know, sentient, and it's going to happen because of
Speaker 6: one of these robot fronts.
Speaker 2: Are you by the way, ten seconds do all the
Speaker 2: robot kids get together? What do they do for fun?
Speaker 5: All this?
Speaker 6: They are into this and it's someone I may write
Speaker 6: an article that you've made.
Speaker 7: In the world.
Speaker 2: You need to write a book. You need to write
Speaker 2: a book called Robot Kids. Here's your title.
Speaker 1: Thank you, America, thank you, and and Adam, thank you, Harley,
Speaker 1: thank you generally. Shamli'm hu you have come back tomorrow
Speaker 1: to the next you at show