Speaker 1: Hello, everybody, Happy Saturday. It's Saturday morning here, and we
Speaker 1: got the long awaited Trump Rogan interview clocked in at
Speaker 1: exactly three hours long. There's quite a few let's just
Speaker 1: say the weave was in full effect for the entire thing.
Speaker 1: We both now listened to the entire interview. They ended
Speaker 1: up dropping it around what was it like, ten o'clock
Speaker 1: last night. It's got about ten million views now on YouTube.
Speaker 1: So we pulled some of the sections that were the
Speaker 1: most newsworthy that we thought, and we're going to go
Speaker 1: ahead and start with some of them. The big, big
Speaker 1: one that you're probably gonna hear from most media and
Speaker 1: others is this one on the election from twenty Twentygan
Speaker 1: asked Trump about specifically some of these quotes stolen election claims.
Speaker 1: So let's take a listen and make sure the two
Speaker 1: point speed's not on, and let's take a listen to
Speaker 1: how that all went.
Speaker 2: I want to talk about twenty twenty because you said
Speaker 2: over and over again that robbed in twelve totally. How
Speaker 2: do you think you webbed? Everybody always cuts you off.
Speaker 3: I'm gonna do.
Speaker 4: It, well, they not only cut you up.
Speaker 5: Well, what I'd rather do is we'll do it another time,
Speaker 5: and I would bring in papers that you would not believe,
Speaker 5: so many different papers that election.
Speaker 4: Was so crooked. It was the most crooked election.
Speaker 3: Okay, but give me some examples of how.
Speaker 4: Well, let's start. Let's start the top and the easy ones.
Speaker 3: Okay.
Speaker 5: They were supposed to get legislative approval to do the
Speaker 5: things they did, and they didn't get it. In many
Speaker 5: cases they didn't get it.
Speaker 3: What things anything they made approval like.
Speaker 5: For extensions of the voting, for voting earlier, for this,
Speaker 5: all different things. By law, they had to get legislative approvals.
Speaker 5: You don't have to go any further than that. If
Speaker 5: you take a look at Wisconsin, they virtually admitted that
Speaker 5: the election was rigged, robbed, and stolen. They wouldn't give
Speaker 5: access in certain areas to the ballots because the ballots
Speaker 5: weren't signed, they weren't originals they were We could go
Speaker 5: into this stuff. We could go into the ballots, or
Speaker 5: we could go into the overall.
Speaker 4: I'll give you another one.
Speaker 3: Are you going to present? Like? Do you do you think?
Speaker 5: Let me just give you one before fifty one intelligence agents?
Speaker 1: Should I stop it there? Because that's that's basically.
Speaker 6: It, Yeah, are you going to present this ever? Well,
Speaker 6: actually so it came.
Speaker 1: Back to it twice. So there was more at the
Speaker 1: end as well that they went into. But I mean
Speaker 1: I thought that was, you know, in terms of that's
Speaker 1: the one mainstream media and others are going to be
Speaker 1: picking up on, and I mean genuinely was. It's a
Speaker 1: problem for him because what you see there is that
Speaker 1: even in a setting where Rogan's like, I won't even
Speaker 1: cut you off, like you could just go into it,
Speaker 1: he's like, well, I still have to look back. I mean, look,
Speaker 1: I don't want to say this is like the entire interview.
Speaker 1: This is obviously three hours, but we're trying to pick
Speaker 1: out the most newsworthy bits here and specifically also the
Speaker 1: ones that the campaign will try to highlight from the
Speaker 1: Kamala Harris side, and because this is a political vulnerability
Speaker 1: for Trump, that was, in my opinion, one of his
Speaker 1: weaker moments.
Speaker 7: Yeah, I mean it was also I mean, this was
Speaker 7: maybe the most even like theoretically adversarial part of the interview.
Speaker 7: Most of the interview was just kind of like bullshitting
Speaker 7: about whales, psychologists and windmills, enjoy the one whatever, And
Speaker 7: most of the interview too, As you said, this wasn't
Speaker 7: the only place where stop the Steal came up. And frankly,
Speaker 7: Rogan was like pretty sympathetic in most of the interactions
Speaker 7: where he was like, oh yeah, like it's just like
Speaker 7: Hillary totally deny the results. This is not unusual. Putting
Speaker 7: the framing around what you're doing, which involved fake elector
Speaker 7: slates and January sixth and you know, trying to get
Speaker 7: the National Guard to seize ballot boxes, et cetera, is
Speaker 7: just the same as Hillary, who conceded literally the next day.
Speaker 7: So the framing overall was very like friendly. He also,
Speaker 7: you know, indulged a lot about of course the Hunter
Speaker 7: Biden laptop, and indulged a lot about well, of course
Speaker 7: voter fraud is real and it's non zero blah blah blah.
Speaker 7: But even within that context of a very friendly interviewer
Speaker 7: and an audience that is overwhelmingly friendly too, you know,
Speaker 7: he still kind of he still comes off looking like
Speaker 7: a fool and a madman because he cannot explain anything
Speaker 7: that makes sense about why he thinks there's fraud. He
Speaker 7: just you know, throws a bunch of stuff out there.
Speaker 7: It's relatively incoherent, says this thing about they were making
Speaker 7: legislative changes, but they didn't go through the legislature.
Speaker 3: I know.
Speaker 7: One of the things I don't even know what he
Speaker 7: was talking about with Wisconsin, but with Pennsylvania, one of
Speaker 7: the things that they were pointing to is they had
Speaker 7: changed some of the rules. You know, it was during
Speaker 7: COVID to try to enable more mail in balloting. It
Speaker 7: was a pencil, it was a Republican legislature that passed
Speaker 7: those rules. So in any case, obviously there's no there there,
Speaker 7: and Trump continues to insist that there is. There was
Speaker 7: another interesting moment Sagra. I'm sure you caught as well,
Speaker 7: where Trump said, like, you know, I lost by twenty
Speaker 7: two thousand VOTs like Gus Well, he didn't lose, but
Speaker 7: they said that I lost by twenty two thousands.
Speaker 1: It was very Lex Friedman esque. Yeah, I mean the
Speaker 1: reason why I think, and I'm sure Trump people will
Speaker 1: be furious they're even starting on this, but look, this
Speaker 1: is first of all consequential, right in terms of whatever
Speaker 1: happens and what is it ten days now? But it's
Speaker 1: just like if you've had four years, don't you think
Speaker 1: you would come up with something better than I would
Speaker 1: love to come back and.
Speaker 6: Present with so many paperpers It's.
Speaker 1: Like, come on, man, and like this again, this is
Speaker 1: the part where it just is. It demonstrates the fundamental
Speaker 1: weakness of trying to actually play in this in a
Speaker 1: serious manner. At the end, he's like, well, there's this
Speaker 1: phenomenal book by Molly Hemingway. But again, if you actually
Speaker 1: read that Molly Hemingway book, or if you're familiar, the
Speaker 1: Molly Hemingway book is specifically about big tech and influence
Speaker 1: on the election. And by the way, that's a very
Speaker 1: different conversation than talking about mailings or fraud or whatever.
Speaker 1: So right, you know, but let's particulate that properly. So
Speaker 1: I was like, bro, and look.
Speaker 7: But how can you at this point when your biggest
Speaker 7: donor is explicitly running a big tech platform on your behalf,
Speaker 7: So like, spare me at this point your complaints about
Speaker 7: the Hunter Biden laptop when at your request, Elon Musk
Speaker 7: is censoring documents that you find to be unfavorable to
Speaker 7: your campaign and running the algorithm, et cetera to benefit you.
Speaker 7: So you know, if that constitutor stole an election last
Speaker 7: time with Hunter Biden, laptop, like, tell me about what's
Speaker 7: going on right now?
Speaker 1: Yeah, and I mean again, it's it is. Also this
Speaker 1: is too where like talent comes into play, like with
Speaker 1: JD you know, and look, people know Jade and I
Speaker 1: very vehemently disagree about this whole twenty twenty election thing,
Speaker 1: but he smartly usually comes back to tech and or
Speaker 1: censorhip because that's about as good as you're going to get.
Speaker 1: And me, we're still not going to look great, but
Speaker 1: that's good to get With Trump, as I always tell people,
Speaker 1: he believes it, all right, he actually believed it, and
Speaker 1: so this is the evidence.
Speaker 7: Well, the last thing I don't I actually don't agree
Speaker 7: that he believes it. I don't think that he really
Speaker 7: believes No, I don't think so. I mean all the
Speaker 7: people that told him over and over again that no,
Speaker 7: there's no there there. I think that I don't actually
Speaker 7: think that he believes this. But I think he just
Speaker 7: can't admit that he lost because it goes so against
Speaker 7: his image, et cetera, et cetera. The last thing I'll
Speaker 7: point out, and you gestured towards the saga, is that
Speaker 7: it's not just consequential because of what happened in the past.
Speaker 7: It's also consequential because there, and we're going to cover
Speaker 7: this this week. You know, they are laying groundwork for
Speaker 7: if the election is close, especially and Trump loses, to
Speaker 7: assert once again that it was stolen. I mean, he's
Speaker 7: already making comments in that direction. At the McDonald's photo
Speaker 7: op thing. He said, hey, you know, I'll accept the
Speaker 7: election results if they're fair. But and then goes on
Speaker 7: to say, hey, I'm I'm up in the polls and
Speaker 7: I've got a ninety three percent chance of winning, which
Speaker 7: is of course utterly preposterous. So you know, it's very
Speaker 7: possible that he is going to win. But if he doesn't,
Speaker 7: I think we're going to see another It's almost a guarantee.
Speaker 7: We're going to see another organized effort to gaslight and
Speaker 7: try to convince the country that it was stolen from
Speaker 7: him yet again. And you know what the consequences of
Speaker 7: that would be hard to say.
Speaker 1: All Right, So this next part, this was interesting to me.
Speaker 1: This was Trump on what he did wrong while he
Speaker 1: was president. Let's take a listen to that.
Speaker 5: The biggest mistake I made was I picked some people.
Speaker 5: I picked some great people, you know, but you don't
Speaker 5: think about that. I picked some people that I shouldn't
Speaker 5: have picked. I picked a few people that I shouldn't
Speaker 5: have picked.
Speaker 3: And neo cons, Yeah, neocons.
Speaker 5: Or bad people or disloyal people, or people that were
Speaker 5: just people that people that advice.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 4: I mean, look, I mean you're reading about him a
Speaker 4: little bit today.
Speaker 5: A guy like Kelly who is a bully, a bully,
Speaker 5: but a week a weak person.
Speaker 4: You know, you know more.
Speaker 5: About bullies than anybody around because you deal in a
Speaker 5: certain sport where the bullies are exposed very quickly.
Speaker 4: But you know, uh, he's bad.
Speaker 5: Bolton was an idiot, but he was great for me
Speaker 5: because I go in with a guy like a John Bolton.
Speaker 4: You know John Bolton.
Speaker 5: A friend of mine called called me up, I was
Speaker 5: picking Bolton. He's a very smart guy. His name is
Speaker 5: Phil Rouffin. He's a very rich guy from Las Vegas,
Speaker 5: one of the he's a great card player. He doesn't
Speaker 5: play cards, but he's a great part. You know, he's
Speaker 5: just a natural got poker sense, right, you know, a
Speaker 5: good old poker sense. And Phil Rouffin is very, very
Speaker 5: wise kind of a guy and very one of the
Speaker 5: richest people around and has had great success and understands people.
Speaker 5: So it was in that I was picking Bolton or
Speaker 5: I picked Bolton. He called up, he said, don't pick him.
Speaker 5: Why he's a bad guy. Now he wasn't in politics
Speaker 5: at all, He's in various businesses.
Speaker 4: He said, he's a bad guy. He's just it always
Speaker 4: works out with that guy. I said, I wish you'd
Speaker 4: told me this two weeks. I already hired him. You
Speaker 4: know he's here, and he was right.
Speaker 1: But all right, So I wanted to share that part
Speaker 1: because there's two things that go on here. Yeah. Number one,
Speaker 1: it gives us some insight into the hiring decisions. I
Speaker 1: guess of the past, which was basically like fielding calls
Speaker 1: from whoever.
Speaker 6: Phil is random rich people Phil.
Speaker 1: Whoever has card sense. By the way, he's looking for
Speaker 1: card sense is the terminology. But you know, second is
Speaker 1: this acknowledgment about how bad things went in the first
Speaker 1: administration and specifically you know Trump, you know Joe was
Speaker 1: actually trying to get him on neo cons and even
Speaker 1: to try to list people out. But this remains if
Speaker 1: Trump does win, there's a decent chance that he's going
Speaker 1: to win. This is the singular question around what is
Speaker 1: going to happen the next time around, because, as people
Speaker 1: saw by his own admission, he literally was like I
Speaker 1: got there and I didn't know what I was doing,
Speaker 1: and a bunch of people call me and they ended
Speaker 1: up wanting the job, and I ended up hiring them,
Speaker 1: And like this time around, it's like, well, what are
Speaker 1: the assurances that it is actually different? Here? You could
Speaker 1: look on two sides of the coin. You've got JD.
Speaker 1: You had Project twenty twenty five, but now they say
Speaker 1: they won't hire anybody from Project twenty twenty five. You've
Speaker 1: got Johnny McEntee, you've got Don Junior, but you also
Speaker 1: have this thing called the America First Project. And so
Speaker 1: I enjoyed this clip for a couple of reasons. The
Speaker 1: internal psychology of just like how exactly the staffing administration
Speaker 1: was made last night, which was obvious to everybody as
Speaker 1: we were covering it, and you know it always a
Speaker 1: fundamental question was people being like, hey, why do you
Speaker 1: keep hiring people who don't agree with you? And it's
Speaker 1: like this was a good view. If I recall with Bolton,
Speaker 1: he liked Bolton because he was on Fox News, but
Speaker 1: a huge part of the at least finally I will
Speaker 1: admit it now is one of the reasons why a
Speaker 1: lot of things that didn't get done last time that
Speaker 1: he said he wanted to get done was because he
Speaker 1: would hire people who actively did not agree with him.
Speaker 1: So whether he's learned or lesson not obviously is an
Speaker 1: open question. But I did think at the very least
Speaker 1: it was an interesting answer.
Speaker 7: Well, so, you know, a lot of people are sharing
Speaker 7: this on the right of like see Trump regrets hiring
Speaker 7: these neocons, and it's like, it's actually, if you listen
Speaker 7: to what he says, Joe suggests was the problem that
Speaker 7: they're neocons and Trump times in Yeah, but they were
Speaker 7: bad and disloyal right for him. It's not about John
Speaker 7: Bolton had a you know, bad ideology that disagreed with him,
Speaker 7: or John Kelly or you know, Madis or Millie or
Speaker 7: Mike Pence. It's that they were disloyal that in the
Speaker 7: end they criticized him and they came down on the
Speaker 7: wrong side of the only issue that matters to Donald Trump,
Speaker 7: which is how do you feel about Donald Trump? How
Speaker 7: do I know that? Because in the same interview, when
Speaker 7: he's asked about, oh my cat just arrived, when he's
Speaker 7: asked about, you know, the releasing the JFK files. He
Speaker 7: goes on and on about how great and wonderful Mike
Speaker 7: Pompeio is and how much he loves Mike Pompeo, who,
Speaker 7: by the way, is the guy who wanted Julian Assans
Speaker 7: to literally be assassinated, and who is as much of
Speaker 7: a Neocon as.
Speaker 6: You could possibly get.
Speaker 7: But there's Kitty, that's Salem, I'm mister. But because he
Speaker 7: is correct on the only issue that ultimately matters, he's
Speaker 7: still in Trump's good graces.
Speaker 3: You know.
Speaker 7: Another example I'll give you is that they confirmed Tom
Speaker 7: Cotton is on the list of potential secretaries of Defense.
Speaker 7: Tom Cotton is the most hawkish Neocon person in all
Speaker 7: of elected Washington DC period. So that's why you shouldn't like,
Speaker 7: I'm not saying you, I'm saying people out there that
Speaker 7: are sharing this as like, oh, look, he understands we're
Speaker 7: not gonna have neo cons this time.
Speaker 6: Like you're fooling yourself. He's talking about.
Speaker 7: He's upset with these people because they ultimately criticized him.
Speaker 6: That's it. It had nothing to.
Speaker 7: Do with their ideology or you know, blocking him on
Speaker 7: something that was important to him. They got crosswise on
Speaker 7: the only thing that matters to him. And you know,
Speaker 7: so you should not have any expectations that he's not
Speaker 7: going to go ahead and chalk the next administration full
Speaker 7: of neo cons once again, because he's already floating knew
Speaker 7: neocon names to be part of the new administration.
Speaker 1: You should be very realistic, folks. As laid out in
Speaker 1: my monologue, the case again, the only case for why
Speaker 1: it wouldn't happen is if somebody inside actually tried to
Speaker 1: make sure. But the Tom Cotton thing on the list
Speaker 1: that was very, very disturbing. The next one that I
Speaker 1: wanted to share here was an interesting clip with Drogan
Speaker 1: talking about Kamala Harris and this was specifically Trump brought
Speaker 1: up here. He was like, can you imagine Kamala doing
Speaker 1: this interview with Joe Rogan? And he was like, well, yeah,
Speaker 1: I can. I actually think God would have a conversation
Speaker 1: with her. So this gets to the whole like should
Speaker 1: Kamala have done Rogan or not? Let's take a listen.
Speaker 4: Can you imagine Kamala doing this show? I could imagine
Speaker 4: he SA should be laying on the floor.
Speaker 2: She was supposed to do it, and she might still
Speaker 2: do it, and I hope she does. I will talk
Speaker 2: to her like a human being. I would try to
Speaker 2: put this.
Speaker 4: Interview with you. I hope she does, because it would
Speaker 4: be a mess.
Speaker 5: She'd be laying on the floor, She'd be saying, Colin
Speaker 5: the medics.
Speaker 2: I think we'd have a fine conversation. I think I'd
Speaker 2: be able to talk to her. I wouldn't try to
Speaker 2: interview her. I just try to have a conversation with
Speaker 2: her and hopefully get to know her as a human being.
Speaker 2: That was my goal having her on, trying to get
Speaker 2: her to express herself, just as I don't know if
Speaker 2: these I don't think these formats are good. I don't
Speaker 2: think that two people. First of all, I hate the
Speaker 2: idea of the presidential debates because I hate the idea
Speaker 2: of it.
Speaker 1: Okay, it goes into the debate there, but that was
Speaker 1: specifically about having Kamala on. So Kamala is also going
Speaker 1: on a podcast. She's going on the Shannon Sharp podcast,
Speaker 1: which actually is quite big. People might remember it from
Speaker 1: the the Cat Williams viral.
Speaker 6: Right, Yeah, it is actually have a big audience.
Speaker 1: No, it's it's very big, and obviously, look it's you know,
Speaker 1: it's a big blackmail audience. That's what's they're trying to
Speaker 1: go after.
Speaker 6: But okay, so the young men in general.
Speaker 1: Yeah, my take after watching the Trump Rogan interview actually
Speaker 1: was that Kamalas should have done it, because I mean
Speaker 1: it's pretty clear when he was like, let her have
Speaker 1: a conversation, he would let her just talk. I don't
Speaker 1: think it would have gone badly for her, you know,
Speaker 1: I still I really don't. I really believe that, especially
Speaker 1: look look at the posture you know that Rogan took.
Speaker 1: And in general with Rogan, like whenever he talks with people,
Speaker 1: he's not the most challenging person. He might ask a
Speaker 1: challenging question per se, but he's going to give the
Speaker 1: space to talk. And he's not Brett Baer at least
Speaker 1: is what I would say. So if I watching this
Speaker 1: how and how this went down, I actually don't think
Speaker 1: it would have gone badly for her. I'm curious what
Speaker 1: you think.
Speaker 6: Yeah, I agree, she should, she should do it.
Speaker 7: She I mean, it looks like they've turned it down
Speaker 7: and her dude Ian Sam's les on her campaign, he
Speaker 7: said they're not going to do it. I listen, I
Speaker 7: understand why because it's definitely more fraud and risky situation
Speaker 7: for her because I do think Rogan would be somewhat
Speaker 7: more adversarial with her.
Speaker 6: At least there's a risk.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean several things that he disagreed with her on,
Speaker 1: So the idea that it would be as friendly, I mean, look, Joe,
Speaker 1: he can whatever he wants. It's clear throughout this like
Speaker 1: there's a lot of things that he disagrees with the
Speaker 1: modern left about and he brought a lot of that
Speaker 1: out the Trump and it was sad.
Speaker 5: No.
Speaker 7: I mean, he came off as just like, you know,
Speaker 7: partisan pro Trump guy. That's how he came off. And
Speaker 7: I think that's probably pretty fair assessment at this point.
Speaker 7: And that's also who his audience is. You know, we've
Speaker 7: seen the polling. It's like sixty five percent of his
Speaker 7: audiences pro Trump. So you know, it's also like responding
Speaker 7: to where his audience wants him to be. But all
Speaker 7: that being said, you know, Trump and Kamala are engaged
Speaker 7: in tactically two different goals at this point. Trump's goal
Speaker 7: is to humanize himself to you know, try to buck
Speaker 7: the like. You know, multiple people who serve with him
Speaker 7: coming out being like, hey, this guy, he is a fascist,
Speaker 7: and also to undercut his own comments, like he just
Speaker 7: sent out a very you know, disturbing truth about the
Speaker 7: season assist and I'm going to go after all my opponents,
Speaker 7: donors and supporters, etctera, et cetera. So he's trying to
Speaker 7: soften that with hey, look at me, I'm just one
Speaker 7: of the boys, like hanging out on your favorite podcast, Kamala.
Speaker 7: And this was why I want to give credit to
Speaker 7: Weigel who really laid out this dichotomy.
Speaker 6: It really landed with me.
Speaker 7: Kamala has to cross this threshold of like we can
Speaker 7: see her as commander in chief, and you know, for
Speaker 7: anyone who hasn't been president before, that's always a challenge.
Speaker 7: And of course because she is a woman, and you know,
Speaker 7: we've never had a female president, that makes the part
Speaker 7: of Americans imagining that even more challenging. And she also
Speaker 7: has not done herself any favors at certain points, is
Speaker 7: coming off as a lightweight and making it even harder
Speaker 7: for people to imagine her. So that was the decision,
Speaker 7: that was the thinking behind things like going on with Brettbaer,
Speaker 7: which you know where she's like, I'm tough, I can
Speaker 7: go into the lions Den and I can take whatever
Speaker 7: you have to throw at me. And I think doing
Speaker 7: a Rogan interview would send a similar message of you know,
Speaker 7: I know this is not friendly territory for me at
Speaker 7: this point. I know there's an audience here that's deeply
Speaker 7: skeptical of me, but I don't care. I'm not afraid,
Speaker 7: like I can go in. So for Trump, sitting with
Speaker 7: Rogan accomplishes his goal of like humanizing him blah blah blah.
Speaker 7: For Kamala, it could accomplish that goal of I'm not afraid.
Speaker 7: I'm tough, I can handle myself even in difficult circumstances.
Speaker 6: So I agree with you it's a mistake.
Speaker 7: We're going to talk a little bit more later after
Speaker 7: we get through all the clips about the sort of
Speaker 7: meta thing, meta like podcast election thing. But I do
Speaker 7: just have to say the podcast election has left me
Speaker 7: very depressed, because, look, it'd be one thing if, you know,
Speaker 7: conversation with Rogan and THEO Vaughn and Shannon Sharp and
Speaker 7: Alex Cooper and whatever, if that was part of an
Speaker 7: ecosystem in which many adversarial, difficult conversations were also happening.
Speaker 7: But especially on the Trump side, Like, when is the
Speaker 7: last time he sat for an adversarial interview if you
Speaker 7: don't count I mean the debate, which you know, it's
Speaker 7: a different thing, and he wouldn't agree to any more
Speaker 7: debates after the first one. I think it might be
Speaker 7: that back in what July when he did that National
Speaker 7: Association of Black Journalists event, that's the last time I
Speaker 7: remember him sitting for an adversarial interview. So that means
Speaker 7: that these things are not like compliments to you know, Oh,
Speaker 7: let's get to know them a little bit better and
Speaker 7: who they are underneath the hood. This is it, Like,
Speaker 7: so you're putting the you know, traditional roles served by
Speaker 7: like journalists whose job it is to learn how to
Speaker 7: you know, conduct adversarial interviews. And we've got all kinds
Speaker 7: of like, you know, grievances with some of these journalists
Speaker 7: and how they conduct themselves and what they focus on.
Speaker 7: But you know, I think it's fair to say, like
Speaker 7: Anderson Cooper on CNN, whatever we think of him, that
Speaker 7: town hall with Kamala included much more adversarial.
Speaker 6: It was much more edifying in terms of how she.
Speaker 7: Would actually conduct herself, what she's actually focused on, which
Speaker 7: included both audience questions and Anderson Cooper asked asking difficult
Speaker 7: follow ups that his own audience was honestly very unhappy with.
Speaker 1: They got furious this. Yeah, it's it's funny. You saw
Speaker 1: that with Charlemagne, right. I mean, look, yeah, if we
Speaker 1: want to talk to meta, it is true, you know,
Speaker 1: open kimono here. I tried very hard to interview Donald Trump,
Speaker 1: you know, as part of this whole podcast, you know thing,
Speaker 1: and at the end of the day, it just looks
Speaker 1: like it's not going to happen. And that's fine. I
Speaker 1: did point out, you know, I interviewed him on four
Speaker 1: separate occasions when I was a White House correspondent. But
Speaker 1: I mean, if I'm looking at it from their perspective,
Speaker 1: they don't really want that right because they want the
Speaker 1: humanization and you know, you know, you could call me
Speaker 1: partisan or whatever, but I would actually have asked some
Speaker 1: pretty serious stuff about Ukraine, foreign policy, social security, the economy.
Speaker 1: You know, I wouldn't commit necessarily like cut him off
Speaker 1: the way that NBC News or whatever would want me to.
Speaker 1: But I'm not going to just sit there and like
Speaker 1: let some of this stuff right go by. And it
Speaker 1: was clear I mean, it has become clear now that
Speaker 1: that that you know, they just didn't want that to happen. Again,
Speaker 1: I get it. I know if I'm running for office,
Speaker 1: probably what you want as well. Coming back to what
Speaker 1: you said, and I do think this is the most
Speaker 1: important analytical framework is that. And I brought this up,
Speaker 1: you know, credit to this guy Ruben who I stole
Speaker 1: it from. But you know, the Trump McDonald's thing and
Speaker 1: Rogan interview talking about whale psychology. You cannot imagine a
Speaker 1: person in the McDonald's interview and on Rogan just fucking
Speaker 1: around talking about ear scars as a hitlaryan dictator, like
Speaker 1: it's just simply not possible. And that is the card
Speaker 1: he Rubin calls it like Trump being a cartoon, and
Speaker 1: that really is like both his political superpower. And I
Speaker 1: think it fundamentally explains a lot of the you know,
Speaker 1: everyone's like, oh, well, nothing sticks to him. I'm like, yeah,
Speaker 1: this is why. It's because the camp, the celebrity, the
Speaker 1: humanization here now with the podcast format and others, and
Speaker 1: especially in the absence of some of the stuff that
Speaker 1: you were talking about, especially the averagar and also look,
Speaker 1: it's been gone for a long time. It has not
Speaker 1: been in office, so a lot of people don't really
Speaker 1: remember what it was like, you know, when behind the
Speaker 1: podium or in the in the oval or if they do,
Speaker 1: a very different perhaps view than what it was like
Speaker 1: to actually live through at the time. So I think
Speaker 1: that is one of the major things and one of
Speaker 1: the reasons why I think this will probably be his
Speaker 1: last podcast interview and from here on now it's just
Speaker 1: going to be a stretch get out the vote and
Speaker 1: the rallies. So and even at the rallies, you know,
Speaker 1: we see these these all these ave Maria and the
Speaker 1: opera and the dancing. I'm giggling because I mean, what
Speaker 1: else can you do? It's funny, and that is fundamentally
Speaker 1: not in line with what Kamala's closing message will be
Speaker 1: about January sixth, about fascism, and I do think it's
Speaker 1: very effective as a counter It's one of the reasons
Speaker 1: why I wouldn't do it if I were her, especially
Speaker 1: the closing argument. I mean, just based on all the polling,
Speaker 1: all that, you know, the stuff that Matt carp and
Speaker 1: all them have put out there, but they seem to
Speaker 1: believe it. I mean, I'm sure we'll cover in New
Speaker 1: York Times Sienna the final poll, Crystal. But I don't
Speaker 1: know if you saw, like you know, in terms of
Speaker 1: this strategy about getting Republicans not to vote for Trump,
Speaker 1: like there are less Republicans not voting for Trump, been
Speaker 1: Democrats not voting for Kamala Harris. I mean, what are
Speaker 1: we talking.
Speaker 7: About here as an early critic of the Liz Cheney
Speaker 7: strategy like you know, and and since she has leaned
Speaker 7: into the Liz Cheney's strategy, is when the polls have
Speaker 7: started to you know, really tie down move against her.
Speaker 7: I do want to go back to what you were
Speaker 7: saying about, you know, why Trump wouldn't sit with you.
Speaker 7: And by the way, it wasn't even with me involved.
Speaker 7: It was like, you know, maybe with you and but yeah,
Speaker 7: I mean, they can go back and look at your
Speaker 7: interviews of other Republican contenders and see that you ask
Speaker 7: them real questions.
Speaker 6: Because because if you are a person.
Speaker 7: I don't care who you are, how much I like
Speaker 7: you or hate your what you can go look at
Speaker 7: my interviews with Bernie Sanders. Right, you are seeking the
Speaker 7: highest office in the land. You want to be the
Speaker 7: most powerful person on the planet. I don't care who
Speaker 7: you are sitting with that person at this point, you
Speaker 7: have responsibility to ask some some you know, challenging questions
Speaker 7: about how they intend to use that power and how
Speaker 7: they use that power in the past, in the case
Speaker 7: of Donald Trump and so.
Speaker 6: But in the like podcast.
Speaker 7: New media arena. Yeah, all the incentives are to not
Speaker 7: do that. Because let's say that the Trump people deluded
Speaker 7: themselves into thinking they could get a softball interview with you,
Speaker 7: and he sits with you and that's not what he gets.
Speaker 7: He's never coming back. Yah, he is never coming back.
Speaker 7: Or if you think in the by the come of
Speaker 7: people that that was never an even remote possibility that
Speaker 7: that was gonna happen. Right, And also, like think of
Speaker 7: in terms of Rogan's audience or any of the like,
Speaker 7: you know, right wing audiences that you know, he's been
Speaker 7: going to these these podcasts for if Rogan did do
Speaker 7: aggressive adversarial interview with Trump, his audience would be mad
Speaker 7: at him.
Speaker 1: Yeah, they would.
Speaker 7: There is no incentive for him or anyone else. And
Speaker 7: this is not you know, personal man, this is anybody
Speaker 7: in the ecosystem. We think a lot about corporate media
Speaker 7: incentives and where those lie, right, there is no reason
Speaker 7: for anyone in that sphere to be adversarial, because they
Speaker 7: will never get the interview again, and their audience will
Speaker 7: be pissed at them. And in some ways, I think
Speaker 7: the in centers are actually worse in the new media
Speaker 7: landscape than in the old media landscape, because number one,
Speaker 7: you're so much more there is so much more audience capture,
Speaker 7: because it's so much more direct, you know, like whether
Speaker 7: or not that video clicks or not, whether or not
Speaker 7: you lose premium subscribers or not, Like that's your whole thing,
Speaker 7: not to mention if you even think about the corporate
Speaker 7: part of it zooming out from the political lens, Like
Speaker 7: at least in traditional media, there's an alleged firewall between
Speaker 7: the people who are selling ads and the hosts who
Speaker 7: are on air and the journalists who are doing the work.
Speaker 7: Like in new media, there's none of that buffer, which
Speaker 7: is why we've decided not to do any direct adreads,
Speaker 7: never to interface with a corporate sponsor, because we don't
Speaker 7: want even the appearance of a conflict of interest. Now,
Speaker 7: if you're a comedian in general, there's no reason for
Speaker 7: you to worry about that as much. It's a different
Speaker 7: ethical quandary. But if you're gonna be the only game
Speaker 7: in town in terms of interviewing or would be presidential candidates,
Speaker 7: then that creates a very different ethical landscape. So in
Speaker 7: any case, I'm kind of, like I said the podcast election,
Speaker 7: it's it's very depressing to me because obviously we work
Speaker 7: in this space. I had a lot of hopes for
Speaker 7: new media, and I see it. I see the incentive
Speaker 7: landscape as at least as bad and corrupting as legacy media.
Speaker 7: And like I said, if it was if it was part,
Speaker 7: like if this Rogan interview was part of a broader
Speaker 7: framework where he's sitting for tough questions with New York
Speaker 7: Times editorial board, the Wall Street Journal, whoever. Oh, that
Speaker 7: was a relatively adversarial interview he did was with what
Speaker 7: was it Bloomberg? That was at least somewhat adversarial. So
Speaker 7: we'll give him credit for that, but it's by and large,
Speaker 7: not by and large, this is what we're getting. There's
Speaker 7: no other debate, there's you know, So it's that's why
Speaker 7: to me, it's very it's very depressing.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean, look, I don't want this to be
Speaker 1: too naval gazing, but it is certainly important, and it's
Speaker 1: what you're talking about too, is important for people to understand,
Speaker 1: like you were talking about there with incentives and incentives
Speaker 1: do obviously matter. And this is way bigger than Rogan
Speaker 1: because it's not just about him. It's so Trump has
Speaker 1: been on a million of these podcasts. In fact, the
Speaker 1: mystifying part to me is whenever he does much much
Speaker 1: smaller podcasts and you're like, Okay, this is literally just
Speaker 1: so you can feel good while you're talking. That's that's different.
Speaker 1: Like here I see the strategy with the rest planet Tyris,
Speaker 1: I'm like, what are we doing here?
Speaker 6: All right?
Speaker 1: So stick you know, sticking with that and just that
Speaker 1: general like theme of adversarial questions, incentives and all that
Speaker 1: I always tell people too, you know, in terms of
Speaker 1: why that matters. And we saw a lot of that
Speaker 1: during that whole insanity around Lauren Chen and the Russia situation,
Speaker 1: just about standards and like how you you know people.
Speaker 7: Yeah, just to refresh people's mind. That was the tenant
Speaker 7: media things where Lauren Chen was knowing, knowingly taking like
Speaker 7: some Russian government money and then lying to a bunch
Speaker 7: of creators like Dave Rubin and timpoole that this was
Speaker 7: some like French businessman or whatever, Eduardo Gregorian or whatever
Speaker 7: his name was, and they like, okay, I'll take them
Speaker 7: at their word. They didn't know that this wasn't some
Speaker 7: random French businessman. But the very fact that you would
Speaker 7: be like, sure, I'll just take in millions of dollars
Speaker 7: in certain cases for doing very little work and not
Speaker 7: ask any questions shows you how much like shady, sleaziness
Speaker 7: and lack of scruples there is in the business in general.
Speaker 1: Right, last thing I wanted to show here was this
Speaker 1: UFO clip, not just about UFOs, but was about the
Speaker 1: JFK files as well, and it revealed importantly what you
Speaker 1: talked about, Crystal, about the Mike Pompeio connection and kind
Speaker 1: of how that worked with government. Let's take a listen.
Speaker 5: Of interested in the people coming from space?
Speaker 4: You know, yes, and I know you're interested, oh.
Speaker 3: Very interested in that. How much do they tell you
Speaker 3: about that?
Speaker 4: A lot?
Speaker 3: Really? Well, they tell you how much can you tell you?
Speaker 3: So how's that work? Because it's like super top secret?
Speaker 5: Tell me well, based on Hunter Biden, I can say
Speaker 5: whatever the hell now, But I interviewed a few people
Speaker 5: it's never been my thing. I have to be honest,
Speaker 5: I have never been a believer. I have people that
Speaker 5: Area fifty one or whatever it is. I think it's
Speaker 5: a number one tourist attraction in the whole country or something.
Speaker 4: Area fifty one.
Speaker 3: You know that, Sure, I know what it is.
Speaker 5: It's a big tour secment. So I interviewed jet pilots
Speaker 5: that say they saw a something. If you saw them,
Speaker 5: you'd love to have them ass.
Speaker 2: I've had a couple in here, Commander David Fraver, Yeah,
Speaker 2: I had him and who had that sighting in two
Speaker 2: thousand and four, very very compelling with visual, visual, video evidence,
Speaker 2: radar evidence.
Speaker 4: I don't believe his name, but I jet pilots that.
Speaker 5: Were solid people, perfect, I mean, great pilots, and they
Speaker 5: said we saw things, sure that we're very strange.
Speaker 4: Like a round ball. But it wasn't a comet or
Speaker 4: a meteor. It was something.
Speaker 5: And it was going four times faster than an F
Speaker 5: twenty two, which is a very fast plant.
Speaker 1: You know. Okay, that was just the UFO section. I
Speaker 1: guess I hadn't pulled that full clip. But there was
Speaker 1: also a JFK section part of that specifically where they taught.
Speaker 1: He was like, well, why didn't you release the JFK
Speaker 1: files And he was like, well, Mike Pompeo and a
Speaker 1: few other people called me the only interesting part on
Speaker 1: the jf cancer is he said, well, there's addresses, and
Speaker 1: some of these people are still alive. And I was like,
Speaker 1: what some of these people still be alive in terms
Speaker 1: of the main conspirators, right, I mean this was it
Speaker 1: was nineteen sixty three, Like how I mean, theoretically, I
Speaker 1: guess it would be extraordinarily old. But anyway, he said,
Speaker 1: he was like, well, this time around you I.
Speaker 6: Can pull it up if you want.
Speaker 4: I got it.
Speaker 6: Yeah, hold on, let me.
Speaker 7: Pull up that part because the first while I'm pulling
Speaker 7: it up, what did you make of the UFO part?
Speaker 7: I mean to be, I have a rule of thumb.
Speaker 7: This is a Kyle and I rule of thumb. Every
Speaker 7: time he tells the story, that's.
Speaker 6: Like, sir, I'll tell you, yeah, every.
Speaker 7: Time it starts with sir, it's a lie, Like you're
Speaker 7: just making this up right now?
Speaker 3: Really?
Speaker 6: Yes?
Speaker 1: Well, okay, I will say that's the first time I've
Speaker 1: ever heard of this so called the so called interview
Speaker 1: with jet pilots I hope it did happen. I hope
Speaker 1: more of those jet pilots can come out be disc
Speaker 1: classified and speak to people. I mean, the unfortunate part
Speaker 1: for me was just like I'll believe it when I
Speaker 1: see it. So if I recall with Trump, there was
Speaker 1: this whole thing. People probably don't even remember this, but
Speaker 1: it was FISA D classification, and there was this Trump
Speaker 1: pledged to do. Fis a de classification. Okay, here we.
Speaker 3: Go, let's listen to it.
Speaker 6: You can finish.
Speaker 1: God, So fi's a declassification. And it was like Trump
Speaker 1: was like, I'm going to do it anything, you know.
Speaker 1: We just kept waiting and waiting, and I was covering
Speaker 1: the wine house. We would ask the secretary when isis
Speaker 1: the classification going to happen? And this and this, this,
Speaker 1: and then finally it just like never happened, and a
Speaker 1: lot of it came back to exactly this whole Mike
Speaker 1: Pompeo thing. In my opinion, I mean, it's kind of
Speaker 1: like with everything with the executive unless the executive really
Speaker 1: really wants something to happen and is willing to follow
Speaker 1: through on that every single day for his presidency until
Speaker 1: it finally does. Then it's not going to happen in
Speaker 1: terms of the deep state.
Speaker 7: So yeah, I mean, he could have done last time
Speaker 7: he did it, He could have done the files.
Speaker 1: He claims he said this time that he will do
Speaker 1: it now. Hopefully at this point he's.
Speaker 7: Been prim tell him not to again. Could be My hope.
Speaker 1: Would be that this time that you've had enough people
Speaker 1: and he's had enough times that he said it on
Speaker 1: the record that he might do it, So that would
Speaker 1: have at the I have a little bit more hope
Speaker 1: than I did last time, but not as much some
Speaker 1: people do.
Speaker 6: Okay, let's let me I'll play I'll play this part. Yeah.
Speaker 2: One of the things that I wanted to talk to
Speaker 2: you about is the JFK files.
Speaker 3: And one of the things that you.
Speaker 2: Said was that if they showed you what they showed me,
Speaker 2: this was your quote, you wouldn't want people that know
Speaker 2: it either.
Speaker 4: So I opened them up. Partially. I was met with
Speaker 4: from good people.
Speaker 5: I mean, you know, look, I mean good people, people
Speaker 5: that were well meeting.
Speaker 4: Mike Pompeo was one of them. He's a good person. Uh.
Speaker 5: They called me, they said, Sarah would rather have you
Speaker 5: not after and I did open him, but I was
Speaker 5: asked by some people not to open them. There's a
Speaker 5: Martin Luther King file too, by the way, that they'd
Speaker 5: like to see. I don't know if you know, but
Speaker 5: there is that. But but JFK in particular, So they
Speaker 5: called me. A lot of good people called me people
Speaker 5: that I you know that you would find reasonable.
Speaker 4: People, and they asked me not to do it.
Speaker 5: So I said, well, we'll close it for another time,
Speaker 5: but if I went, I'm going to open them up.
Speaker 5: I'm just going to open enough. A lot of times
Speaker 5: addresses people that are still living. They are ap people
Speaker 5: that are affected, and there could be some national security
Speaker 5: reason that for you know that I don't have to
Speaker 5: necessarily know about. But some very good, talented people asked
Speaker 5: me not to do it. I opened it up, and
Speaker 5: then they said, would it be possible for us to
Speaker 5: do that a different day.
Speaker 3: How much of it did you read into.
Speaker 5: I think it's going to be just fine to open it.
Speaker 5: Let me put it that way. I think it's fine.
Speaker 5: It's going to be time. It's a cleansing, you know,
Speaker 5: it's truly a cleansing.
Speaker 4: So I'm going to do it.
Speaker 5: I'm going to do it immediately, almost immediately upon entering office.
Speaker 3: Well, the thing when people look at it from the outside.
Speaker 7: All right, So anyway, what do you make of that?
Speaker 7: Because to me, I'm just I know people are like
Speaker 7: reading a lot and as well, he said there's addresses
Speaker 7: and people are still alive. I just think he's making
Speaker 7: it up, Like I think he's just coming up with
Speaker 7: an excuse for why he didn't do the thing last time.
Speaker 7: And the real reason probably is something more like like
Speaker 7: well like Pompeo's that I know that is the real reason.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I just want look, he said he would do it.
Speaker 1: Let's let's hold his feet to the fire. If he wins,
Speaker 1: let's get it done. Because it's funny, you.
Speaker 7: Know, because because the Mega Movement is really good at
Speaker 7: holding Trump's feet to the fire over his failed promise.
Speaker 1: And we'll try, we'll try our best. I'll bring it
Speaker 1: back to Jefferson Morley, who, Yeah, when we interviewed him,
Speaker 1: we were like why why And he's like, it's just
Speaker 1: all narrative. It's just that they can't have the information
Speaker 1: out there about the direct CIA involvement. I don't think
Speaker 1: it has to do with addresses or people alive, you know,
Speaker 1: Like he said, he's really is about mythos and about
Speaker 1: how the CIA and how foundational, you know, the assassination
Speaker 1: is to like the American myth and how they don't want,
Speaker 1: you know, the the imagery of the CIA to be diminished.
Speaker 8: Now.
Speaker 1: I mean the ridiculous part is that everybody knows, Like
Speaker 1: if you were to ask people, you know, the vast
Speaker 1: majority of Americans believe that it was a conspiracy. They
Speaker 1: believed it at the time, they still believe it today.
Speaker 1: If anything, they know even more than they've ever known.
Speaker 1: So yeah, we'll see, Uh, we'll see if it happens
Speaker 1: this time around.
Speaker 6: The last thing I wanted to show.
Speaker 7: I don't know, Sagara if you have it or I
Speaker 7: can pull it up, But is the I think it's
Speaker 7: reflecting on because I actually think there were some real
Speaker 7: insights here from Rogan when he was asked by Lex
Speaker 7: Friedman previously if you would interview Trump, and he was like,
Speaker 7: absolutely not. And I actually Lex to his car was like, no,
Speaker 7: You're gonna do it. And you know, I suspect that
Speaker 7: Rogan was reluctant to do it. But then once you
Speaker 7: see you know, the Ovon and all these other people
Speaker 7: doing it, saying all right, well whatever I guess this
Speaker 7: is just what we're doing now. But in any case,
Speaker 7: let's let's take a listen to this clip of how
Speaker 7: he previous.
Speaker 3: Trump supporter in any way, shape or form. I've had
Speaker 3: the opportunity to have him on my show more than once.
Speaker 3: I've said no every time.
Speaker 1: I don't want to help him.
Speaker 3: I'm not interested in helping the Knight is still young.
Speaker 3: We'll see if I have mon the Night is still young.
Speaker 3: You think I'll have I think you'll have them one. Really,
Speaker 3: why do you think that? Because you'll have Putina on.
Speaker 9: And you're competitive as fuck? No, I think ultimately, I
Speaker 9: mean you had You've had a lot of people that
Speaker 9: I think you might. You may otherwise be skeptical. Would
Speaker 9: I have a good conversation, which I think is geometric?
Speaker 9: You don't care about politics, so can I have a
Speaker 9: good conversation? And I think you had like people, people
Speaker 9: like Kanye on for example, and you had a great
Speaker 9: conversation with him. I think you I think, uh.
Speaker 3: But Kanye is an artist.
Speaker 8: But Kanye doing well or not doing well doesn't change
Speaker 8: the course of our country.
Speaker 9: Yeah, but you know, do you really bear the responsibility
Speaker 9: of the course of our country based on a conversation.
Speaker 8: I think you can revitalize and rehabilitate someone's image in
Speaker 8: a way that is pretty shocking.
Speaker 1: All right, that's the end.
Speaker 7: So yeah, what do you make of that, because I mean,
Speaker 7: I think he's I think he's pretty accurate there, Like
Speaker 7: you say, I don't want to help them. I mean,
Speaker 7: I think, for one thing, you know, Joe's politics have shifted, Like,
Speaker 7: you know, the guy who was like, I'll vote for
Speaker 7: Bernie Sanders is now like just pretty partisan, like pro
Speaker 7: Trump guy and happy RFK juniors in that camp and whatever.
Speaker 6: So that's one thing.
Speaker 7: But but yeah, I mean I think he was correct
Speaker 7: there that you look at Trump's approval rating now, it's
Speaker 7: the highest it's ever been. And I've been skeptical of
Speaker 7: how much these podcast appearances will actually like move voters
Speaker 7: that are watching, like in the audience, like young men,
Speaker 7: you know, many of whom probably just aren't really going
Speaker 7: to vote. They might they might be like, yeah, Trump's school,
Speaker 7: but then are they going to actually vote, Like I'm
Speaker 7: a little skeptical of it from that perspective, I'm not
Speaker 7: skeptical of the benefit is provided him in terms of
Speaker 7: raising his approval rating and undercutting the messaging of like,
Speaker 7: you know, rehabbing him post January sixth, and undercutting the
Speaker 7: messaging of like this is a dangerous person to put
Speaker 7: back in the White House. I think on that front,
Speaker 7: it has already been profoundly successful. And I think Joe
Speaker 7: is you know now also just accepted his part in
Speaker 7: playing a role in that rehabilitation.
Speaker 1: Yeah, if you interested, if you if you listen, there
Speaker 1: are a couple things that he says, and he said
Speaker 1: he changed his mind after Trump got shot, and he
Speaker 1: also said it's because of Dana White. That's the number
Speaker 1: one reason that this is happening. So clearly there wasn't
Speaker 1: a major effort from Dana behind the scenes to get Trump. Dana,
Speaker 1: by the way, doesn't get enough. It's funny if you
Speaker 1: look at the genesis of this podcast stuff, it's all
Speaker 1: Dana White. So, for example, Dana was the one who
Speaker 1: Trump told Trump to do the NLK Boys, which I
Speaker 1: believe is the very first podcast that Trump ever did.
Speaker 1: This was back in twenty twenty two if you listen
Speaker 1: to Trump with Aiden Ross. So Dana and Aiden Ross
Speaker 1: have gambled before together in previous interviews, and Dana and
Speaker 1: apparently Barren as well. We're the two who were like,
Speaker 1: you gotta do this, And obviously Dana and Job been
Speaker 1: friends for twenty three years and this was clearly an
Speaker 1: area of disagreement or whatever behind them. I also think,
Speaker 1: you know, you can't underestimate the fact we just brought
Speaker 1: up with Theovonne like it's not novel at this point.
Speaker 1: For like, this isn't the only podcast Trump's done. I
Speaker 1: believe that this is eighth or ninth. Obviously it's the
Speaker 1: biggest one, but it could be the one that more
Speaker 1: most people pay attention to than any others. But within
Speaker 1: the context and specifically because these guys are all friends
Speaker 1: with each other, this is not outside of the norm
Speaker 1: out of all of those podcast interviews. So that's like
Speaker 1: the last part. But then, yeah, I mean I think
Speaker 1: part of it too. And I guess, to Joe's credit,
Speaker 1: he said, I want to have Kamala Harrison, you know,
Speaker 1: and so he's like, look, you know, if I'm going
Speaker 1: to do Trump, it seems that he obviously extended a
Speaker 1: you know, like a Olive branch or whatever to Kamala
Speaker 1: to have her on, And I guess I'll just close
Speaker 1: with it. I hope she does it. I don't think
Speaker 1: that she will, but I do hope that she does.
Speaker 1: And so you know, you know, it's it is difficult.
Speaker 1: And we've talked to him about this, like he never
Speaker 1: necessarily wanted to be a role which could move the
Speaker 1: country or whatever. He slowly found himself there, and I
Speaker 1: think maybe he's just shifted his mind of like, yeah,
Speaker 1: I'm in this position.
Speaker 7: It is what it is, right, Yeah, I just listen.
Speaker 7: I think that, as I said before, since this podcast strategy,
Speaker 7: you know, whether it's Alex Cooper or Theovon or Andrew Schultzer,
Speaker 7: Joe Rogan or Shannon Sharp or whoever the hell it is,
Speaker 7: on whatever side of the aisle they're on, Like, if
Speaker 7: this is going to be the bulk of the questioning
Speaker 7: and insight that we get into candidates, you do have
Speaker 7: some responsibility here, Like as much as you want to
Speaker 7: be like I'm just a you know, an influencer, an athlete,
Speaker 7: a comedian, whatever you know, or like a whatever you
Speaker 7: want to call Alex Cooper, I guess, like a cultural
Speaker 7: figure well or influencer, yeah, influencer. I mean, as much
Speaker 7: as you want to hide behind that of like, oh, well,
Speaker 7: no one should expect me. It's like, well, we kind
Speaker 7: of have to rely on you because this is all
Speaker 7: we're getting. So you do have to take on if
Speaker 7: you're going to interview Kamala, if you're going to interview Trump,
Speaker 7: you do have to take on some level of responsibility
Speaker 7: of like this is in terms of our like brittle,
Speaker 7: broken down, depressing democratic process. This is kind of all
Speaker 7: we're getting. So it does put maybe an unfair burden,
Speaker 7: but it does put an onus on you to do
Speaker 7: your best to you know, to get insights and to
Speaker 7: be a little adversarial and to push them in areas
Speaker 7: where they're not comfortable, especially like you know, you got
Speaker 7: three hours of this man's time. How precious is his time?
Speaker 7: How who was the last I mean, when has he
Speaker 7: ever given anyone three hours of time?
Speaker 6: And this is it? Like you said this, he's probably
Speaker 6: not going to do anything else. Yeah, the election, I.
Speaker 1: Think is that this is probably the last one.
Speaker 7: So this is your last chance to you know, get
Speaker 7: from him, Like what what are you going to do?
Speaker 7: And what about the failures of last time? And what
Speaker 7: about the Middle East? And yeah, you say none of
Speaker 7: it would have happened, but like, okay, it did so
Speaker 7: what now and so anyway, That's what I would say,
Speaker 7: is like, as much as it would be nice to
Speaker 7: just kick back and be like, let's chill and have
Speaker 7: a conversation, I think because of the direction that they
Speaker 7: I'm under no illusions that any of any of these
Speaker 7: influencers or whatever are going to shift their approach, because
Speaker 7: all the incentives are in the direction of doing the
Speaker 7: like you know, softball, let's hang out interview. It's easier,
Speaker 7: your audience likes it more, and you're more likely to
Speaker 7: get the candidates back. But I do think it's it's
Speaker 7: depressing and unfortunate and is further degradation of like our
Speaker 7: democratic process and the ability of voters to assess who
Speaker 7: they're voting for.
Speaker 1: I aw say, it's a tough position, especially if never
Speaker 1: had any experience doing this. You know, you and I
Speaker 1: came up in a more traditional background, so you know,
Speaker 1: you get kind of used to it, like in terms
Speaker 1: of pressing people, Oh so and so, Senator so and
Speaker 1: so is pissed off you, Okay, whatever, don't be a senator.
Speaker 1: Then you know it's one of those where yeah, it's weird.
Speaker 1: Trust me. It takes years of social conditioning to be
Speaker 1: able to push past that, and you need a certain
Speaker 1: personality type. And like you said, it's also not necessarily
Speaker 1: fair to expect people maybe who've been acting or doing
Speaker 1: like this for a lifetime and now are suddenly thrust
Speaker 1: into the position. So I do sympathize it's a very
Speaker 1: difficult kind of position to be in. And yeah, finally,
Speaker 1: you know, really what I would say, And this is
Speaker 1: to our audience as well and to everybody else who
Speaker 1: is out there. Is part of the issue with podcasts
Speaker 1: of people who are non political. It is conditioned people
Speaker 1: to think that you should quote let people talk, which
Speaker 1: is fine. My general theory is if you're an author
Speaker 1: or whatever, yeah, like the stakes they're not that high.
Speaker 1: But when you're a politician, I do think you should
Speaker 1: have fundamentally different standards, and specifically for when people are
Speaker 1: running for president. And part of the issue is that
Speaker 1: people will listen to a podcast or even maybe an
Speaker 1: interview that you or I have done with others where
Speaker 1: you just kind of like let them talk, like whatever,
Speaker 1: because again, the stakes are not necessarily all that high,
Speaker 1: but it should be very different. And there were different
Speaker 1: expectations for politicians that were there in the past and
Speaker 1: if it's complimentary, it's fine. I have no issue with it,
Speaker 1: like you said, But I don't think that. I do
Speaker 1: think that there are way too many people out there
Speaker 1: who only want to see this type of interview. And
Speaker 1: by the way, that doesn't work for you at all.
Speaker 1: It really doesn't, because you know, just flip it around
Speaker 1: and say for the person you don't like. You know,
Speaker 1: when I watch you know, that Alex Cooper thing or
Speaker 1: whatever with Comma, I'm like, what the fuck am I
Speaker 1: getting out of this?
Speaker 7: Like yeah, but I mean I feel the same way
Speaker 7: watching that. It's like, Okay, well this is like just
Speaker 7: a propaganda puff piece, waste of time, you know. Yeah,
Speaker 7: she's gotten much more difficult questions. Even the ladies of
Speaker 7: the view gave her more difficult questions then I've seen
Speaker 7: thrown at either candidate in like the podcast setting space.
Speaker 7: So yeah, I mean, if if it's part of a
Speaker 7: broader thing and then you can just like have the
Speaker 7: conversation and see see who they are on the inside,
Speaker 7: that's one thing. But that's not that's not where we are,
Speaker 7: and it's only going to go more in this direction.
Speaker 7: It's because if you're a politician and there's no public
Speaker 7: pressure on you to do otherwise, Why would you, like,
Speaker 7: why would you, as Kamala Harris, subject yourself to potentially
Speaker 7: difficult questioning from Joe Rogan and a hostile audience. Why
Speaker 7: would you do that outside of some you know, narrow
Speaker 7: tactical goal of proving that you can. For most politicians,
Speaker 7: we already see this trend like they'll just go on
Speaker 7: the partisan networks and friendly podcast circuits and never really
Speaker 7: get pressed. And that's that's just more and more of
Speaker 7: the direction that we're heading in. And now we've basically
Speaker 7: normalized having effectively no debates as well, so you know,
Speaker 7: that's that's where we are, all.
Speaker 1: Right, Buckle up, folks, ten days ago to the election.
Speaker 1: We will see you all on Monday.