Back to episode — Episode 2679 CWSA 12/04/24
Context —
er somebody did a crime. I don't think you're going to find flexibility on whether to be a racist or not. The people who are racists are going to be racist, and that's going to be their vote. They're going to vote against him because he's white. And those in the trial who recognize it as a racial prosecution are going to say, I don't even care if he did that. I don't even care if he did murder him…
← Previous segment →rnia. This is the current situation and has been for decades.
Do we really need a bill? Now, maybe it's a pushback against the anti-DEI stuff because Trump might do away with that stuff. So if that's what it is, then it makes a little more sense. But I think it should be noted that this is the current situation and has been for decades.
Well, meanwhile, District Attorney Fani Willis — some call her Fannie — has to release all of her communications with special counsel Jack Smith and the January 6 committee. Alex is talking about this on the X platform. And the thinking is if we find out that Fani Willis has been coordinating with them, it would look more like a RICO coordinated lawfare situation than if she were just doing her own job and unconnected to anybody at a federal level. What do you think we're going to find? Do you think that Fani was dumb enough to do something that would be coordinated with the feds that she would have to know could be discoverable at some point for some reason? Do you think any of that would be in writing? I feel like the only thing that might be in writing would be something like, hey, can we have lunch, or can you do you have a minute to talk, or something like that. I feel like they would be too smart to put anything, especially a lawyer. If you're an attorney, if you're a district attorney, don't you know not to put any illegal stuff in your messages? That's just sort of district attorney 101 stuff. So I don't know that we'll find anything, but I'm glad they're looking.
I love the fact that MSNBC has now completely transformed from being what we thought was a news network that you know we just made us mad because it didn't agree with us all the time to nothing but comedy. So every single day now I go in and I look at the clips where somebody on MSNBC is acting stupid, and it's always funny. So today's stupidity, there's a compilation by Grabin. I always see their compilations and I just want to give them a shout out. So somebody, Grabin. I wish I could give them a better plug because they do good work. Some of the best compilation clips that are funny come with this label on it. But in 2019, MSNBC, the compilation is they're talking about whistleblowers, and it sounds like this. I'm making this up. It's like, whistleblowers are the heroes of the country. Oh, those whistleblowers. Thank goodness for the brave, brave whistleblowers who are taking a risk to help the country. It's part of democracy. That was 2019. That's when the whistleblowers are saying things they want them to say. What do they call the whistleblowers when the whistleblowers are opposite their interests and whistleblowing on things that are on their team? Well, I've told you that MSNBC is not just humorous, it's theater. And I swear they all act like they're professional actors or actresses in the play. You know how a play is always overacted? Like a movie could be sometimes subtle because the camera can get right in there. But if you're in a play, sometimes you go big and it's just a little bit more theatrical. That's what MSNBC did with the whistleblowers. So as soon as the whistleblowers were not positive for their narrative, they all did the same thing. The way they talk about it: and then they've got the so-called whistleblowers, the what they're calling whistleblowers, or some people that some people are saying are whistleblowers. The whistleblowers, so-called.
All right, apparently I don't do a good imitation, so you have to watch it. MSNBC as a humor source is pretty rich. It looks like clown college.
And then of course Scott Jennings continues to embarrass his CNN co-workers by simply being a voice of reason and being good at what he does. So Jennings, he's their rare right-leaning Republican type of voice. Now I give them credit. So again, I'll go CNN credit. They give a very capable person who very much disagrees with theirists full time. They don't cut him off. They let him do his thing, and I very much appreciate it because then it turns CNN into also a comedy show because you have to watch the reactions of the panel when Scott Jennings is laying down the truth and look at all their faces. And they all do this kind of where their mouth is kind of pinched because they're hearing things that just make them look like idiots, but they don't want to break in yet. They're like.
So today I saw a clip where Scott used the really technique. Now this is one I teach you on my live stre
Context —
ams. Now he didn't use the word really, but he uses the same technique. The technique is this: when somebody makes a claim that is preposterous, rather than going through all the work of explaining why it's preposterous, you simply restate it and you go, really? So that's what you think? So you think that the president of the United States with full forethought stood in front of the American peopl…
Next segment → →