Welcome back, everyone to a new episode of You're Wrong with Molly Hemingway and
David Harsani. Just as a reminder, if you'd like to email the show,
please do so at radio at the Federalist dot com. We love to
hear from you. Molly, how are you doing? I'm doing great.
David, why do you ask? You don't sound like you're doing great.
I feel Oh, I'm really not feeling well. Yeah, I'm sick.
I just wanted to tee you up for that. I might, I might
not make any sense during this podcast more than normal, So the usual.
I'm in there. Well, let's start today by talking about a Supreme Court
decision that just came down as we were preparing for the show, Murphy v.
Missouri, which is a I think a pretty important free speech case.
Do you want to explain a little about what it was about. Yeah,
I actually think we should maybe do a show at the end of the Supreme
Court term where we go through all of the important cases this term and just
kind of revisit what happened on the court, what the left's attacks were on
the court. Super important case Murthy v. Missouri, which was formerly named
Missouri v. Biden I think dealt with a wide ranging censorship scheme engaged in
by the federal government against people who said things that the regime did not agree
with. It was a case looking at, you know, mostly how on
the basis of COVID debate, our government silenced people from saying things that criticized
or questioned or even like just discussed or debated issues that the government had taken
positions on. It is so important because of the many horrific things that happened
in response to the COVID pandemic, the restrictions on civil liberties and speech were
really important. And so there was this case. It went through how all
of these people had their First Amendment rights utterly destroyed violated, and it was
really important to get the government to stop censoring speech. And so this really
really important case. Unfortunately, the only justices on the Court who stood up
for First Amendment rights are Justice Alito who wrote the dissent, Justice Thomas,
who's got a very good track record on the First Amendment, and Justice Gorsuch
who's also very good on the First Amendment. Amy Coney Barrett worked with Brett
Kavanaugh, Chief Justice John Roberts, Alana Kagan, Sonya Soda may Or Taji
Brown Jackson to write the majority decision that the people whose First Amendment rights were
violated did not have standing to do anything, thus allowing the government to continue
to destroy the First Amendment. This is a really bad outcome for people who
care about the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and free speech in general.
Yeah, I haven't been able to look into it. It seems very
unfortunate. Hopefully it's just some technical decision on standing and allows maybe another way
to enter it. I don't know. I mean, I haven't read it.
That may be true. But justice delayed is justice obliterated. And people
needed to be able to debate COVID response at the time that it happened,
not even at this point, but to say, oh, you might have
a means in the future next time. Well not even next time. We
have a government that is engaged in wide spread censorship unlike anything we've experienced in
our country, against people who do not share like Democrat party philosophy. It
is constant. It is a very like fascistic thing they're doing. You've got
the government agencies working with social media companies, working with outside groups, all
to suppress news and information that the regime does not want you to have.
It's a really like a horrific crisis. This is like republic threatening stuff.
And so today's decision is extreme, you know, just just ruling that there's
no standing in particularly that three giants on the Court Alito, Thomas, and
Gorsuch didn't agree with these other six does not look good for them. Yeah,
and it is worth also mentioning this constant effort to delegitimize the court and
pretend they're corrupt and that they're Lockstepp being owned by Republicans and Conservatives. It's
so obviously untrue, and yet they'll go back to doing it in the next
case. You know that we discuss when when it doesn't go their way,
but this is it is. I mean, the First Amendment obviously is almost
supremely important in a free society, and not allowing this to go forward is
distressing. And I hope maybe the decision won't be as bad as it was,
but I'm probably, like we said, we have to read it,
so maybe be maybe there'll be some glimmers of hope. But the excerpts I
read from the descent thus far indicated that Alito thought it was just as bad
as it seems. It's bad news. Let's talk about something else. You
want to talk about debates that's coming tomorrow. Well, sure, but let's
also just like looking back, we also this morning, well, I guess
some people went to bed with the news, but some people woke up to
the news that Jamal Bowman, who is known for saying ridiculous things and conspiracy
theories and pulling the fire alarm to stop a vote from happening during Congress,
was that earlier this year, last year, I can't remember, anyway,
he lost his reelection bid and he was a Squad member, and there was
a lot of effort put in by the squad to make sure that progressive Jamal
Bowman would keep his seat, and he did not keep his seat. I
don't even close right, seventeen point loss I think because of last I saw.
So I'm obviously very happy about this, and so should every patriotic American
be. But a lot of hay has been made about how APAC came in
American Israel. What is it called. I don't know. The pro Israel
group. I think they dropped like seventeen million dollars into this race. But
the truth is that before they even cut an ad, Bowman was down I
believe seventeen points already, which actually it completely comforts from the end results.
But it is funny to me that when first of all, Ape's not be
in a republican group. This is a democratic primary. By the way,
there are two Democrats, and they make it sound like there's some right wing
conspiracy, but I mean pro Israel supporters who are American citizens have a right
to try to get involved and in foreign policy decisions made by politicians and affect
those elections. So I'm happy that APAC got involved. They are the most
kind of lobby milk toast a bipartisan group, like they're not some right wing
I think AOC called them a right wing insurrectionist supporting group, which is nonsensical.
So Bowman isn't just critical of Israel. He was a you know,
he said that the rapes that we saw in those videos were just Israeli propaganda.
He was just he's just a Hamas apologist. But aside from all that,
he's really dumb and he held that alarm. But he was a nine
to eleven truth or like there's just like a pile of stuff. I don't
even know, and then he had that Did you see the videos from that
rally he had with AOC and Bernie where he's talking about how the South Bronx
is going to show the world. That's not even his district. He's in
the North Bronx in Westchester County, which has tons of Jewish voters who decided
that they didn't want this guy representing them. They're going to vote for another
Democrat, you know, more moderate one. Anyway, I just want to
say, I think this is the first time a squad member is actually lost.
They've always sort of I think every election basically expanded that progressive faction,
and this might hopefully be uh you know, turn turn that around a bit.
I do wonder what do you think? What do you think? Do
you think that this is any kind of portent to like trouble for Democrats in
general over Israel or do you think this was just kind of like an isolated
incident. I don't know. I think this was good news for Democrats that
this happened. If they had to deal with a Jamal Bowman and they didn't
have this kind of brushback pitch uh interesting like they would. It's just it's
they've got they've got a problem with their base. They've got a bunch of
anti Israel, even anti Semitic, like radical progressives, and it's increasingly what
the party is. I don't think this guy who won will be that different
on policy, but he'll just sound a little bit more palatable to people.
So I think it was a big win for Democrats. But I did have
this thought, like last night, there were all these progressive activists being like,
the Jews defeated Bowman, and then people were getting mad that they were
saying that, like it was an anti Semitic trope, and I was like,
I think I think Jews should take credit for it. Absolutely. I
just read a piece doing that exactly. I mean, the idea that Jews
aren't allowed to like get together and try to get rid of a politician who
is, in my view, anti Semitic is insane. And you know this
is left wing. Well, left wing groups dropped dark money all over the
place. There are people who spent tons trying to destroy the Supreme Court to
try to go come into primary Republican races and try to put the more radical
person up so that the Democrats can beat them, Like, is that good
for democracy? It's perfectly legitimate for people to get involved in a race.
I don't even understand, like Chris Hayes is like if APAC didn't come in,
it would be you know, it would have been completely different. Oh,
we hadn't run. If he had run unopposed, he would have won.
Okay, fine, anyway, anyway, that was good news. So
thank you for bringing that up. That cheered me up after that Supreme Court
decision. Yeah, you're right, though it does actually moderate the Democratic Party
a little bit. I mean, he was such an embarrassment in so many
ways, so probably does help them. And I guess for the country that's
good, right in a way, gets slightly more. I mean, Democrats
are going to win that district no matter what. So and I don't know,
we'll have to see what the effect is on the squad caucus, like
will they be more upset at the convention or less upset or what exactly will
happen. But yeah, i'd cut you off because you wanted to talk about
the debate tomorrow. So are you just so excited about the debate? I'm
not excited. But so someone asked me the other day I was on the
radio, if I was you know what to look forward to? And I
said nothing, But then I actually thought about it, and this is kind
of entertaining stuff, right. Trump is an entertaining debater. Sometimes he's not
always great. I mean, I think he is a very strong debater in
general, but he's not always you know, at the top of his game.
I'd say, but I look for I haven't seen him in action in
a while. Is it like to c him look forward to seeing what Biden
does. Here's one thing that pops into my head every time I think about
it. Let me know what you think about this. Expectations for Biden are
low because he's basically incoherent most of the time, wandering off all that stuff.
Do you think or do you believe that expectations are so low that he's
actually going to do well because he usually shows up for these kind of moments,
or does it not matter? So yesterday I was on the Laura Ingram
Show and they were talking about how the Democrats say that what Biden is doing
with his week off of work to prepare for the debate is like going through
all these policy books and like do it being on a movie set and reviewing
his answers and there are all these people like in his ear and everything,
and I was like, that may be true, that may be true.
I suspect this week is all about getting the drug cocktail right and all about
getting the circadian rhythms in order so that he can be up at nine pm
at night until ten thirty pm. I listen. I know people get mad
when you say it, but I definitely think he has a little help.
Sometimes I would say, you're I think you're definitely right about trying to get
him the rest and getting him in in the rhythm to be ready at night.
I don't even care that he's getting help necessarily, but if he weren't,
why would his eyes be like saucers, and why would he be speed
talking like he's high on cocaine. Anyway, Sorry, that actually isn't the
most important part. What I was going to say is I actually think we're
in a really weird moment. We've been in a weird moment for a few
cycles now. So normally presidential elections come down like to a lot of voters
who can go either way, and they make a decision based on likability,
and so it's really weird that Trump won in twenty sixteen, because his likability
numbers were not good, Like, his favorability numbers were not good. It
is only because he ran against Hillary Clinton that he was able to overcome that.
What's interesting is that in twenty twenty, his favorability deficit was much worse,
I think, than it had been in twenty sixteen, and Biden had
pretty good favorable numbers, like he was kind of well liked, and still
Biden only won by like forty thousand votes across three states. It was so
close, given that it should have been a blowout for Biden based on this
historic tracking of favorability. Well, now you have a situation where Biden's favorability
gap is even greater than Trump's. So he went from like I don't even
know what it is, like six points up on favorability spread to fourteen points
down. He's had a twenty point drop. Trump has come up a little
bit, but like the drop with Biden is epic, and I kind of
feel like, at this point, we're five months out or whatever it is,
I don't know, very early, but still I just don't see people's
feelings about these two men changing that much. I think the policies are cooked
in the personalities are cooked in. We kind of know what it's like to
have a presidency under Donald Trump, we know what it's like to have a
presidency under Joe Biden, and it's if they keep it focused on that,
I think that it'll basically be lights out for Biden and Trump will kind of
cruise. Yeah, I totally agree with that. I think it's weirdly a
debate between two incumbents in some ways, and we all know. I just
for me, I think on the fringes, maybe you change some independent minds
here or there, but I just don't think that any of these debates are
going to matter enough to affect the election in a big way. I also
think Donald Trump just needs basically to hold serve. Like, I still don't
believe a lot of the polling that I say. I'm just going to say,
I'm very skeptical about what I'm saying could be true, could could not?
Did fed chair j Pal have a Freudian slip? The watched Out on
Wall Street podcast with Chris Markowski. Every day, Chris helps unpack the connection
between politics and the economy and how it affects your wallet. How do we
have read hot jobs numbers? While the unemployment rate continues to rise. Jay
Pall admits that payrolls are a bit overstated. Is he covering for Biden's failures?
Whether it's happening in DC or down on Wall Street, it's affecting you
financially. Be informed. Check out the Watchdot on Wall Street podcast with Chris
Markowski on Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcast. Oh,
since you brought it up, I get to fight you on this issue because
I listened to a podcast you did with Buck Sexton and you talked about polling
and how you don't believe in polling, and the example that you gave was
twenty twenty two polling, and you said that the polling was wrong, And
you're actually wrong. The polling was not wrong. What you what you mean
is if elections were being run like they normally are, the type of polling
that we saw ahead of the twenty twenty two election would have resulted in a
massive tilting of Congress and Senate to Republicans, and we didn't. That is
not because the polls were wrong. The exit polls matched up with the pre
polls, like everything was pretty much exactly what you would have expected, Like
the difference is that Democrats, and this is an important thing for this cycle
too, because the same thing could happen. Democrats have changed from running from
participating in elections as they're done, where you have candidates and they try to
persuade voters and you show up to vote based on like enthusiasm, and they
engage in ballot trafficking. And in twenty twenty two they picked key Senate and
House races to do ballot traffic, major ballot trafficking operations, and it was
a brilliant strategy, and they will be able to continue doing that in twenty
twenty four. The question is whether Republicans have enough of a ballot harvesting operation
to match what Democrats are doing. I don't not even match, but just
to compete. Because if all the Shenanigans of twenty twenty, including the Supreme
Court endorsed censorship regime, resulted in a narrow victory for Biden when he was
beloved in when people had reason to expect he would be moderate, it's going
to take a lot more for them to win this time. Well, let
me just concede you're right about that, let's say, But that still doesn't
change the fact that the polls. People shouldn't look at those polls and say,
boy, Donald Trump has it in the bag. I mean, if
it's all about ballot you know, getting people ballots in and all that,
Republicans need to do the same thing. I'm not sure that they actually have
the ability to do that in some Blueish states. But just because let me
rephrase it, then in a way, I think the polls that show like
thirty percent or whatever it is, black support or Jewish support or you know
that, I am very skeptical that the people who are participating in those polls
actually will go out and vote for Donald Trump. I've seen this stuff happen
before, and I just don't buy it. What I do buy and I
see is that when you go issue by issue by issue, Donald Trump's up
in trust in everything, the economy, form policy, all of that.
So I'm not saying I think it's his to lose right now, but I'm
just saying I wouldn't be as a lot of Republicans are talking like this race
is over, and I just don't think that's true. I think it's been
incredibly close. Absolutely agree with that, So I guess we don't disagree as
much as I thought we did based on your buck Sexton thing. I mean,
my point was only that, well don't matter, ballots and boxes matter
exactly. My only point about that was that everyone in twenty twenty two thought,
or many ech people thought that Republicans were going to run away with that
election, that was going to be a wave of election. And it wasn't,
and it was massively disappointing, and I think it took a lot of
air out of the Republican Party because the way we're doing elections now is kind
of an attack on democratic governance. I would just so like if these were
free and fair elections run like we've always run elections, we would not be
seeing some of these same results. Let's talk about another aspect of this I
heard. I don't know if it's true that there's a chance people think that
Donald Trump's going to drop the name of his vice presidential canet. Do you
think that's true or is there a chance that that might happen. I guess
there's a chance. I would assume he would do it around the convention so
he can get as much bang for his buck at the convention. But I
don't know who do you think it's going to be though. Well that's the
thing I wanted to talk about. So the names that have come up are
JD. Vance, Marco Rubio, Doug Burgham Burgham. Those are the three
names I think I've heard most. Are there any other names that you've heard?
Well? I would say that Trump is the master of surprises, so
you should put every name on the table. But I think Marco Rubio might
no longer be one of the more talked about ones. So now I feel
like it's down to JD and Bergham, And really I kind of think it's
Burgham. Yeah. I mean that's the feeling I get as well. Just
you know, I feel like it would be weird. I mean for the
Republican Party. I'm not a fan of JD. Vans, but if they
took him away from Ohio, that seems weird, like a weird thing to
do right now. And he doesn't seem like he has a ton of experience.
Really, here's my argument on the vice president. I don't think Trump
needs some political entity that will bring him more votes. I think he needs
a person who is more in the Cheney style, and I don't mean ideologically,
person who kind of like manages the administration. I think the big problem
with Trump was just looking you know, for Trump fans, what should have
been what they should have seen as the big problem is that there were too
many firing there was too much upheaval. You know, he needs someone to
manage that administration, to bring the right people in to keep him focused,
stuff like that. And I don't know that jd Vance or Mark or Ruby
or someone like that's really the person to do that. Well, I don't
know if Doug Bergham's the right person to do that. I don't think that's
another thing I don't wint of experience, you know, enacting conservative governance.
I don't know, it's weird. I don't really care who the VP is.
I, for instance, had always had problems with Mike Pence going back
to like twenty thirteen, twenty fourteen when he was bad on the Religious Freedom
Restoration Act issue in Indiana. So when but when he was picked, it
was like that seems like a smart pick. So I can separate my personal
feelings from whether I think something is a good pick or not. Personally,
I actually love JD. Vance. I think he's got, I think he's
brilliant. I think he's got a great mix of experience. I think he's
he's a very good strategy thinker, and he would be great at implementation.
So personally, that's who I would love. I what I see in the
Burgham pick is this is someone it's also kind of a danger. This is
someone who unquestionably like helps unite the Republican Party without going down the Nikki Hayley
route, which would be very toxic for a lot of people. He has
a ton of money that would be helpful in a race where you're taking on
a corrupt regime. And he does a really good job of talking to the
media, not as good as jd Vance. Jd Vance is like awesome,
and he understands like he's just a brilliant person. I really like listening to
him and would love to have him in a high position like VP or president.
But I don't know. I just kind of feel like I just I've
just said I sense for a while. I think I was the first person
on Special Report to put money on Doug Bergham for candidate Casino that we do
this game where you put like one hundred dollars in chips on different people for
who's going to be the nominee or who's going to be the vice president.
And I think I was the first person to put it on Bergham, So
there you go. Funny thing is, I don't really know much about Bergham.
I think, like, esthetically, he seems like a like a moderate
guy, and but but I've been told that he has you know, he's
been sort of on the left on many issues in yeah stuff, he's not
so is jd Vance. And you know, I think Jdvance would be disastrous
for the GOP. It's just his left wing economic policies would turn off the
entire middle class. But I don't want to argue about jd Vance right,
Oh he's terrible. I mean the other day he said that he had felt
kinship to Bernie Bros. That was the closest he felt kinship to Bernie Bros.
Because his ideas on the economy are awful. He meant that they see
a system that's broken and corrupt, and so do a lot of people on
the right. I could see whatever they want. That doesn't mean that basic
economic h you know, Irice fixing or the things that he is behind are
useful in America. But I don't really want to argue, I just want
to talk about the politics right now, and I don't know how jd Vance
is or isn't a market like in your perfect world, who would you like?
That's the thing. I don't really Let me put it this way,
Donald Trump should should actually put someone there who will uphold his vision for the
country, right who you know, he's for tariffs and all that. Yeah,
maybe jd Vance is better to implement those things. In my view,
I don't know. I'm like you, I don't think it matters. I
think after a week, no one cares who the vice president is, you
know what I mean. And it used to be that the vice president was
sort of the heir apparent, so you'd pick someone like, you know,
Al Gore or whatever who would run next time, And that hasn't really been
the case since bushed. I mean, I don't think Obama Obama so Biden
running for president in the future. It was more like just to make him
look more moderate for president. Yeah, I'm not sure that's why that's why
Trump picked him. I'm not sure he was sort of a Maga type to
begin with, But any event, I you know, I don't know.
I think you're right though, Trump might go just off the board and pick
someone we don't expect who knows so on the debate, though, I remember
the first debate in twenty twenty was the worst debate I'd ever seen in my
life. It was just awful. The moderator was awful, both candidates were
awful. Trump was hospitalized with COVID a few days later. Make of it
what you will, and I hated that debate. The second debate was actually
all right, except it was hosted by this Democrat activist, Kristen Welker.
I'm so sick to death of debates being hosted by activists. I can't even
remember, like the last time a presidential debate was moderated by non activists.
It's frustrat we talk about that for a second. So you have Tapper is
going to be First of all, there was this CNN interview and I forget
the woman's name, who was like a Trump surrogate, was on speaking to
case Hunt. Is that any and she cut her off when she told people
to google something that was in the public record about how Jake Tapper's constantly comparing
Donald Trump to Hitler. Now I'm we've discussed this. I don't really I
think Trump is right to say I'll debate anyone. If I have to debate
the media, that's fine too. But having someone moderate a debate who called
one of the candidates Hitler seems problematic to me, just in the sense of
getting to getting to voters and letting them be educated on what the candidates really
feel. Obviously it's stacked against them. Why do Republicans constantly agree to do
debates there's people who are going to undermine them, do you think? I
mean, I just feel like I'm fine with a leftist bias from a moderator,
but if a guy's like working against you, it seems like it's counterproductive
for you. I don't know. I read a really interesting interview with of
Trump with Byron York and he was just talking about how he had this expectation
that what they were going to do was like create a situation of proposing a
debate with things that were so bad that they were expecting him to say no,
and then they would say that he refused to debate, so he just
decided to say yes to like literally whatever. And he was saying that he
feels like debate performance is more about attitude and common sense than like being like
trained for the particulars. And I think he's just like, what's the difference
between a mostly hostile moderator and a cartoonishly hostile moderator like Jake Tepper? You
know, I guess I'm not even that upset about him doing the debate.
I'm more upset that CNN can't even let a Trump surrogate in an interview just
describe. I I loved how that happened, though, I also loved when
they were like, we don't let people speak ill of our colleagues on air.
Is like, this is the this is the media outlet that got their
own CEO fired after bashing him NonStop for a year. Do you remember that,
Chris Lick? So, no, you're wrong that you don't bash people.
Also like Donald Lemon and Wuoma, like they were always like the cat
fighting among those people, and it's like a it's like a daytime soap opera.
But yeah, if you it just kind of cracked me up. Jake
Tapper made decisions to be fully engaged in perpetrating the Russia collusion scam, the
false and republic threatening lie that Donald Trump was secretly a Russian agent who had
stolen the election. You're allowed to talk about it. He's the one who
made the decision to do it. If he says Donald Trump is like a
super threat to the Republic and the regime, you're allowed to talk about it,
like if you don't want to, if you don't get to be the
way Jake Tapper and Dana Bash are without criticism. Yeah, I'm a small
fish, but I've never once interviewed anywhere and said, you can't ask me
about this opinion I had, or you can't ask me about this thing I
said. If I've changed my mind on it, I'll tell you right,
but you can ask me. And the idea that a journalist wouldn't let someone
bring up facts about a person who's moderating, it's kind of funny. But
I mean, she's an immense hack that one too, so it doesn't matter
anyway. So I guess the end of this, to wrap this all up,
is that, yeah, I am sort of interested in the entertainment value
of this debate. I want to see how Joe Biden is and how he's
looking what he's saying and now cohering he is. And Trump always likes to
spring some interesting, interesting accusations, and he's just a funny guy, so
I think it'll be fun. I think I've decided that I feel like I
should just enjoy the ride here. You know. I kind of like when
Trump ran in twenty sixteen. It made so I was just annoyed all the
time, and then finally I was just like, I'm just going to enjoy
the ride. Like whatever happens happens. You know. One last thing on
this I wanted to ask you. I've been asked this in numerous radio interviews.
Do you think Bien that there's any chances can to step down? I
do not. I think if he does really poorly tomorrow night, then yeah,
he might be forced out. I mean, he can't be forced out,
though he has to step down, because there's no way to force that
guy out. He's the company, he's the president. There's tons of money
he invested in him already. Another thing is who's going to take over.
It's not like Kamala's going to be like, oh yeah, I sure knew,
some just show up. I think they might just go with Kamala for
real. Well that would be disastrous for them too, I guess, so
yeah, but I don't know. I mean, we've got a really weird,
sad situation. You're not supposed to talk about it, but obviously he's
not performing very well. There are a lot of people who want him to
continue, but there are people who feel like too much is writing on this
race to allow him to continue. I don't know. I mean, we
haven't talked about the gas lighting over all, the videos of him acting like
a very old man, you know, and the media just saying that they
are doctored and all stuff when they're not. And then the funniest thing was
quickly Washington Post had another view of the thing that happened at I think it
was the G seven meeting, and it was worse than the original one.
He just wanders away while everyone's looking at this paratrooper like it's just insane.
It's such gaslighting. I can't remember which media outlet had a thing where they
were like, there are deep, fake, cheap fake videos being put out
by Americans to make Biden look bad, and then they had to delete the
tweet and the story because all the videos were real. I mean we were
like, oh, we had to delete that because we had the wrong video.
The real videos that you said were false because they make him look so
bad. They've been doing this now for years, where if you cut a
video they'll just say it's it's edited in a way to mislead viewers. Well,
every video they have is edited. Everyone has to edit a video.
You can't play a whole hours edited exactly. So we have to follow the
guy around his whole life and never miss any contexts. So anyway, I
found that pretty humorous. I don't think any American is actually falling for it
because it's very obvious enough of that junk. Let's talk about culture. You're
sick now, But have you watched anything? What have you done lately?
Okay? I haven't really watched anything except for Okay, so I went with
my family to Italy for a few weeks, and so I watched nothing.
But I did read. I read The Lincoln Highway. Did you read that
book? No? Aymar Tooles. He also wrote that Gentleman in Moscow or
whatever that book was it's about. It was good. It was like a
good sort of like that kind of you're on a trip and you just want
to read while you're sitting on the balcony of your hotel or whatever. And
then I also read Chaos. I can't remember who wrote it, but it's
that book about the Manson murders. Did you read that one? I started
it and then I stopped, not because it wasn't good and I just was
distracted. Okay. So I got both of those in a like English speaking
bookstore in Florence, and I liked them. They were good, And I've
continued to be reading my Bible very slowly. And then when we were in
Venice, we did one night we were just like utterly exhausted, and we've
been museumed out. We've seen so many museums and so many cultural things.
It was a wonderful trip. But we were in our hotel in Venice,
which was a place where Vivaldi used to live, which was amazing. And
we watched Kenneth Browna's what was it called Murder in Venice or something I don't
really remembering, Agatha Christie hall Ofen party, you know send episode. That's
allid Oh wait, I did see other things on the plane. What did
I watch? Oh? So I saw like a long ten hour flight back.
I saw boys in the boat. Highly recommend boys in the Boat.
I cried. I loved it. It was really, really bull done.
And it's like also a movie you can watch with the entire family. In
fact, my my youngest recommended the movie to me because the family had watched
it without me one night. Yeah. Actually, Sean Davis recommended that as
an excellent movie too. I'm not sure me or us, so I will
watch that anything else. I mean, I just went to all these beautiful
museums like the Vatican Museum and the Effeezi and went to Cienna and I saw
the Leaning Tower of Piece Like I have done nothing but culture. It was
real culture, deep culture. Yeah, I'm jealous. I learn a lot.
Have you ever Have you ever been there? Never been to Italy?
Okay, yeah, one day go with the wife do. I highly recommend
it. Wait, isn't isn't she Italian? Super Italian? Got a taker?
I know, David, we've been busy. I on, on the
other hand, did all low culture. Oh wait, yeah, just one
lessing Saint Mark's in I wasn't like the world's biggest fan of Venice, but
Saint Mark's in Venice is the most beautiful church I've ever been in. That's
it. I'm done. Now you say you weren't such a big fan of
Venice. In general, it was very hot, very smelly, and I'm
like a smell sensitive person. Yeah, and extremely crowded with tourists in a
way that the other places were not. Although I were crowded, but not
like where you felt like a cow walking through a herd or whatever. That's
kind of what is offpening to me. I'm nervous about going because I hate
crowds and it feels like everything worth seeing is going to be like a line
at Disneyland, you know what I mean. So I worry about that.
So maybe I'll go in the off season. I'm saying, yeah, I
would. I would recommend doing it in the off season. But doing it,
the beauty and the art were just truly, like I can't stop thinking
about some of the things I saw, pretty beautiful. It's amazing. Okay,
sorry, I'm going to follow this up with terrible low brow cultural picks.
So I watched a I don't now oh, and I think it's just
one. It was a documentary called Rats, made by Andrew McCarthy, the
actor from Pretty and Pink, about the brat pack. Oh yeah, I
saw that. That was that he did that? How was it? You
know? I'm I was like the perfect age for all this. I think
I was fifteen when The Breakfast Cloth came out, you know, so I
was just like perfectly slotted for these movies to appeal to me. Well,
angsty, So I was interested in it. I have to say. It
was okay, Like if you're sentimental about those years, like you probably enjoy
it. So he goes and tracks down some of the people in the brad
Pack and talks about this article in New York Magazine which kind of in essence
ruined some careers because all these people stopped working together because they didn't want to
be part of this thing, you know. So Rob lows on it and
yeah, but he didn't get Molly Ringwald. He didn't get jud Nelson.
Was that his name? Like Nelson from Yeah, I didn't get those guys.
But what I found interesting about it was like he, for instance,
Amelia estavisn't he hadn't talked since like the premiere of Almost Saying Almost Fire,
Like they didn't speak for like thirty years, and they weren't very close.
Yeah, okay, so it was somewhat thoughtful, but it was you know,
it was okay if you know you care about that. So I watched
something at your suggestion, Godzilla minus one? Was that what it was called?
Yeah, I liked it, and I was trying to figure out why
I liked it so much. And I think it's because the a lot of
the movie was done with obviously with models and like other kind of effects in
that cgi all the time, and I think that I'm so sick of things
looking uber realistic that aren't that. It was healing in a sort of weird
way. Yeah, I agree. I like that. I saw him movie
hit Man, which gets like rave reviews. I've heard about this movie since
it came out, I think almost two years or last year. It's by
Richard link Later letter I think his name is you did like yeah, says
done by it? Not everyone knows everything it's about it. It's like a
black comedy about this guy pretending to be a hit man. Whatever. I
did not. I did not think it like lived up to all all the
hype and the critical acclaim. But it was okay. And then I started
watching a show called Presumed Innocent. Did I mention this last time? It's
like a remake of the movie with Harrison Ford, but it has a movie.
But I don't know if you said it, I can't say his last
names, Jake, Jill and Hall, Jillen Hall, and uh, it's
it's uh, it's it's okay. I guess it's kind of dark, not
for kids, definitely not safe for work, so few have kids around.
Do not put that show on a lot of flesh. Also, start watching
the new Game of Thrones. Second season of that show. It's so boring.
It's got more incest born, but it is very boring. Nonetheless,
the disgusted face he gave I was a fan of Game of Thrones. I
can't help it. So that's all I have, Moley. I really hope
you feel better too, not good. Sorry, I'll be better next week.
No, you know, you're such a professional. I don't even think
anyone will have noticed. Yeah, next week you'll feel better and we'll be
back, and until them be lovers of freedom.