Speaker 1: Hello, Federalist Radio Hour friends. It's your amiable host and
experience Shirpa Matt Kittle. You know I have the good
fortune of talking to some of the most interesting people
thought leaders in politics and culture. Today there's shining light
on some very dark places in our government and fighting
for the foundational values of this republic, this last best
hope for liberty, and that's what we do every day
at the Federalist. We can't do that without you. The
Federalist Foundation is a nonprofit and we depend entirely on
our listeners and readers, not corporations. If you value fearless
independent journalism, please consider a tax deductible gift today at
the Federalist dot com backslash donate. That's the Federalist dot
com backslash. Donate. Your support keeps us going. Merry Christmas
in a blessed new Year from your friends at the
Federals and we are back with another edition of the
Federalist Radio Hour. I'm Matt Kittle, Senior Elections correspondent at
the Federalist and your experienced Shirpa on today's quest for knowledge.
As always, you can email the show at radio at
the Federalist dot com follow us on x at FDR LST.
Make sure to subscribe wherever you download your podcast, and
of course to the premium version of our website as well.
Our guests today are The Federalist owns senior legal correspondent
Margo Cleveland and Federalist co founder and CEO Sean Davis,
lovers of freedom and award winning journalist. Last month, The
Federalist received the coveted two thousand and twenty five Dow
Grand Prize for Excellence Investigative Journalism Award, thanks in large
part to the tireless work of Margo Sean and the
Federalist editor in chief Mally Hemingway. I know you've you've
heard of Mally Hemingway, that's for sure. The Dow Prize
is awarded by the National Journalism Center, a project of
Young America's Foundation and the Dao Feng and Angela Foundation.
And it really is the replacement and the much needed
replacement of the Pulitzer. As it was said at the
awards ceremony last month, Pulitzers are awarded to lies. The
Dow Award is awarded to the truth. Margo Sean, thank
you so much for joining us on this edition of
the Federalist Radio Hour.
Speaker 2: Well, thank you for having us.
Speaker 1: You bet, and thanks for your courage. As you mentioned, Sean,
I'll start with you in accepting the award last month,
you said.
Speaker 2: This is I think many people here know. Real journalism
is more than investigating or writing, or editing or publishing.
Real journalism requires real courage. It requires the courage to
follow the facts wherever they lead. It requires courage to
say the true thing, no matter who it offends. It
requires doing all this with the knowledge that one day
you might even get gunned down for it.
Speaker 1: That is exactly the commodity that is in short supply
in American journalism today. Courage and courage, I believe, is
what fueled the Federalist critical investigation into the Russia collusion hoax.
Speaker 2: What say you, sir, Yeah, obviously I agree. This was
a project of ours that was almost ten years in
the making. We started reporting on the Rush collusion nonsense
and very early of twenty seventeen. So I guess we're
at eight plus years here, and it's difficult to kind
of go back in time and understand the hysteria that
gripped Washington over this after Trump won. That's when the
operation really got kicked into high gear with the aim
of maybe preventing his inauguration, and it was just a
fevered hysteria in Washington, people thinking maybe he wouldn't even
become president because this information was so bad. Republicans were
losing their minds, the media were losing their minds. Obviously
that's a short trip. Everyone was going insane, and you know,
you could count on one hand the number of people
who weren't and several of them worked here at the Federalist.
And kind of what got us going on it was
that all the claims they just didn't add up. There
was a lot of innuendo and a lot of allegations,
but when you asked for actual proof, Okay, show me
this proof, it wasn't there until the key moment when
when BuzzFeed unintentionally became a big hero in the story
by publishing the Steele dossier. That's that's not what they intended.
They were hoping to fan the flames of the hysteria.
But when we actually got to see this document that
so much of the nonsense was based on, it was
clear at that point, well this is all a total hoax,
and now we got to go about unwinding it and
destroying it. And because there were so few outlets and
so few people working on it, it took a while.
Even though we knew we had the truth, we knew
we had the facts, it took a while, and it
took years and years and years before I think we
had full of vindication. But it was worth all of it.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's it's funny. In her speech, Molly Hemingway had
talked about what an instrumental role CNN's Jake Tapper wittingly played,
and I wanted to.
Speaker 3: Give just just a couple special thank yous, first of
all to Jake Tapper who accidentally, who accidentally revealed to
me in January twenty seventeen that not only was the
hoax a hoax, the Russia collusion hoax, but that CNN
were active participants in it. Without him accidentally revealing that
to me, I don't know if we would have had
the courage to do what we needed to do over
the next couple of years.
Speaker 1: And you know, it seems so clear now low these
eight years later, but it wasn't, as you mentioned, Sean, wasn't.
It wasn't clear to a lot of Americans because the
psyop was in full swing, Margo, how difficult was it
to round up the documents to chase down the sources
that this exposed story now required.
Speaker 4: So it took a lot of time because many of
the source documents were ones that remained classified. So for me,
what first kind of got my eyebrows lifted were when
then Representative Devin Nunis released his memo. And as a
lawyer who had worked on hundreds of criminal cases where
there were issues about whether warrants were supported by cause,
it just struck me as outrageous that the Visa court
would issue a surveillance warrant based on what Devin Nunits
had summarized there. So from that point on, there were
little bits and pieces that came out. And then after
at least this administration, you know, we're starting to get
a lot more of it. But it took some time
during Trump War for documents to be made public, for
documents to be released, so that we could put some
of the details together. One of the documents or a
collection of documents that was extremely helpful. Where when the
PISA warrants were or applications were released, even though those
were in redacted form. One of the things that I
did is I want and compared them and you could
tell what new information was added and what wasn't, And
that to me was extremely informative because it showed even
though the FBI now knew that some of this information
was false, they never updated the PISA coord on it. So,
as Sean mentioned, this is a long process, almost a
decade long to get this all. I think we actually
are not even finished with all of the dirty games
that were playing. In a sense, the Russia collusion hoax
just kept, you know, pivoting a little bit to another hoax.
So the entire Arctic frost was just the latest way
that they were trying to take Trump out.
Speaker 1: Yeah, we've obviously learned so much thanks to that reporting,
principally from the Federalist. But Sean, you said that fairly
early on things didn't add up. There was a stink
to this whole hysteria that was pushed out there by
the hysterical pushers. When did you get a sense that
this was as huge a story involving the deep state players,
involving the Obama administration, involving all of these parts and
the principles.
Speaker 2: It's a really good question. Also I think I I
knew it almost immediately, to be honest, Hopefully I'm not
looking back in time through rose color glasses. I had
spent a fair time doing following James Comy, looking at
his career, reading his books, reading books about him, and
he always struck me as an extremely dirty character. So
the fact that he was one of these key figures
who was doing this fake briefing of Trump that he
could then leak to CNN so they could use it
as an excuse to talk about the Steele dossier, which
no one else wanted to talk about because they knew
it was nonsense, so they needed a pretext to talk
about it, and why not use the FBI director briefing
Trump on the most salacious aspects of it as the pretext.
But it was Comy's involvement from the beginning, in his
centrality to it, that I just knew it was dirty
because that man had just such a long career of
this type of nonsense. A lot of people probably won't
remember he was at DIO in the very early two
thousands during the first Bush administration, during his first term,
and this was post nine to eleven. They had just
started doing this kind of warrantless wire tapping stuff, and
these new authorities I think, which came in either in
the Patriot Actor right on the heels of it, were
about to expire. And at the time John Ashcroft was
having some health issues and was in the hospital, and
Comy took it upon himself, I believe he was DAG
at the time, the Deputy Attorney General or the number
two at DOJ, took it upon himself to declare that
Ashcroft was not able to discharge the duties of his office,
effectively made himself temporary AG by FIAT, and then himself
reauthorized this new massive warrantless spy program. And it was
interesting that when you go and read James Comy's book
about it, he's got this tick. He has to let
everyone know how smart he is and how in command
of the situation he is, and so he's including all
these little details about things that was happening in the
hospital room as he was briefing Ashcroft and shortly before
he decided he needed to be ag for these powers,
and he talks about how, oh yeah, Ashcroft, he had
total command of the situation and he knew these facts,
and you know, he clearly thought we needed to do
this thing. Well, James, if that was the case, he
sounds like someone who was mentally in charge to me,
and not at all, not in control of his faculties
or unable to discharge the duties of his office. So
to me that it's just such a perfect story about
Jim Comey who goes and takes charge of the Hillary
Clinton investigation just so he can exonerate her. Then he
makes sure he's the one who goes and briefs Trump
on something he knew was nonsensical and he knew was false,
that he knew was paid for by the DNC and
the Hillary campaign, and then he does it to leak
to CNN. And then after all this happened and some
things aren't going his way, he cooks up these memos
he leaks about them, several which had classified information. And
this was all done to get revenge on Trump after
Trump fired him, when Trump understood he was a rat.
So to me, the fact that he was involved from
the beginning was the red flag I needed knowing this
entire thing was crooked. Now, I didn't know at the
time how far reaching and broad it had been throughout
the government, but from the beginning because of James Comy.
I smelled a.
Speaker 1: Rat, James Comy, the l hag l Hague of the
DOJ right standing up, I'm in charge here. Let me
ask you this, as a follow up sewn, how close
do you think that pillow in that hospital got to
John Ashcroft's face that James Comy was handling.
Speaker 2: Yeah, who knows. He did not mention a pillow in
his discussion of it, as I recall.
Speaker 1: Yeah, he said, I'll I'll just take it over anyway.
Concentrational authority be And that's really what this story is
all about. Constitutional authority, The constitution be damned, Margo. What
did it feel like to all of a sudden peel
back the layers of this onion and see, for instance, that,
oh yeah, all of this this spying stuff, this intelligence
that is supposedly coming from you know, these these deep
state experts, really was all about opposition research for Hillary
Clinton and the Democratic Party.
Speaker 4: It hit me at a different level because, and I've
said this to many people, I'm not a libertarian. I'm
actually a conservative. And when I saw this, it basically
left me hanging on by my fingernails, with the libertarians
kind of pulling my legs, you know, trying to get
me away from that, because it was explosive to me
to think that our government could be so corrupt. And
when I say our government, I mean throughout the government.
This could not have happened if it was not from
high level to low level. And also it couldn't have
happened without the media going along for it. So from
my perspective, what was most shocking was it really pulled
the curtain back that the government is not acting in
the best interest of the public, and in fact it
thinks it's it's duty to protect the public from Trump,
who the public elected.
Speaker 5: Could this latest jobs report be an election decider? Who
watched Out on Wall Street podcast with Chris Markowski every
days helps unpack the connection between politics and the economy
and how it affects your wallet. New jobs reports show
that numbers fell way below expectations and small businesses are
laying people off. The real job engine is companies that
are less than five years old. 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.
Speaker 1: John As you noted the Federalists and its staff attacked
repeatedly during this particularly early on, and then it was
part of the call from the establishment, if you will,
to try to silence the Federalist. You talked about being
attacked by the most powerful people on earth. You were
threatened constantly with lawsuits, blacklisted by advertisers, talked about moral
blackmail by senators, called you in your office and said,
oh listen, now, yeah, you you you I think you
think you have something here, but you're embarrassing yourself. Is
that how the conversation went, and how did you deal
with all of that?
Speaker 2: Yeah, that little operation was more of a well, obviously,
you know how much we like you all and you
do such great work. But I'm I'm just really concerned
you might be getting out over your skis a little bit.
And you know, it's just I just you know, you know,
I love you and we love the work you do,
but we're really concerned about your reputation. I mean, so
you should really think of it. It's that type of tone,
just such a patronizing know it all tone, and it's
it's you know, it's not fun when you're going through it,
or friends are going through it, or company's going through
it at the moment. But in hindsight, it's kind of
hilarious going back and thinking about how little these people
actually knew, and yet how arrogant they were in telling
you to stop doing it. I recall we reported I
can't remember if it was twenty eighteen or twenty nineteen
on a former Dianne Feinstein staffer, So Dianne Feinstein was
the ranking member on Senate Judiciary Committee at the time,
she might have even been chairman. I think she was
a ranker, and it was Judiciary that was overseeing so
much of the FBI and DOJ stuff, and we revealed
that it was a staffer of hers who was kind
of arranging all of this stuff happening in the background.
Hired Fusion GPS, the firm that commissioned the Steele dossier
in the first place, that they brought them on after
the election to do more, you know, Steele dossier justifying
in Russia collusion hoaxing. And I believe the day after
we published that piece, kind of just opening the guts
up for everyone to see this shadowy group and former
Democrat staffer who was behind it? All out of nowhere
there popped up this magical little twitter op against us,
where people just out of nowhere started demanding who funds
the Federalist, who funds the Federalists, trying to insinuate that
it was Russia or you know, some foreign entity that
was leading us to look at these facts and declare
that the whole Russian coclusion thing was a hoax. It
was so obviously coordinated, it was run by thousands and
thousands of bots. That was the beginning. It culminated with
our own state department, the own United States State Department,
spending our own money to censor us, to try to
get us blacklisted. It culminated in foreign governments across the
pond trying to use their power to come censor us.
The entire power structure in government in Western government was
deployed to try and destroy us, to try to bankrupt
us and try to discredit us. And it wasn't because
what we were saying was false. They were trying to
destroy us because they knew what we were reporting was true.
Speaker 1: Our guests today are the Federalist Owns senior legal correspondent
Margo Cleveland and Federalist co founder and CEO Sean Davis.
We're talking about the Russia collusion hoax and the excellent reporting.
I've only been at the Federalist for a couple of years,
but I religiously read the Federalist for years, you know,
following this coverage because I couldn't get it anywhere else.
That is why The Federalist is the twenty twenty five
winner of the Dow Prize awarded by the National Journalism Center.
On that topic, Margo, there were news outlets that, as
we talked about before, basically carried water for the left
and their narrative, their lies. New York Times, Washington Post,
winning Politzer Prizes for this stuff, and long after we
find out that everything they were reporting was a lie,
they're still holding on to their Politzers. What do you
think about all of that, after all the work that
you and your colleagues have done over the years.
Speaker 4: Well, it doesn't surprise me given that we're seeing that
the legacy media continue with the same mo that they
did during the russiacclusion hoax. They now are ignoring Arctic
frost and all of the news that is coming out there,
anything that they think that they can create a scandal
they're doing, for instance, when they went after the Department
of War Sacrit Harry for the supposed double tap, claiming
that they were trying to kill the survivors as opposed
to that they were targeting the still functioning boat. You're
seeing the media do the exact same thing that they
did under the Russia collusion hoax. They i would say,
haven't learned their lesson, but it's not the lesson because
they're in on it. They're purposely cooperating with a political
side in order to either attack the other political side
or thwart their ability to pass laws govern the country.
It's not shocking, but it is very destructive because if
you do not have a functioning media, the government is
able to get away with a lot of things that
it shouldn't. And unfortunately, we still have probably forty percent
of the public that depends on the legacy media to
know what's going on in the world.
Speaker 1: Do you think, Marco that the folks at the New
York Times, Washington Post, CNN are now, you know, thanking
whatever pagan idol they worship that the Maryland Man wasn't
on that boat along with the shipwrecked sailors.
Speaker 4: Well, I think that the media wants to have a
target to attack Trump on, and it really doesn't matter
if it's the Marilyn Man or some drug traffickers. So
I think that they'll just look for the next person
to support. No matter who that person is or what
they did, they'll try to spin it.
Speaker 1: John, there were a lot of people, good people who
were ground under the wheels of this on constant tutional
witch hunt, the Star Chamber, and you know a lot
of them. Let's talk about some of the key players,
the whistleblowers, the key sources that we can talk about. Now,
there are other sources we can't because our currency in
journalism is trust, and so we we preserve that to
you know, to the fullest extent, whatever that means, going
to prison, whatever. But that said, there are folks like
Devin Nunan's and others who were just their lives were
torn apart.
Speaker 2: Right, you know, they try to get Devin Nunas thrown
off the Intel Committee and for a time had him
out of the way of running that investigation through just
a whole bunch of nu windows and lies. I will
say for me personally, I've never been a guy who
relies all that much on sources. They can be really
really helpful. I mean, so, don't get me wrong, they
can be invaluable. I've always been a document guy. When
I was a chief investigator for Tom Coburn, I generally
wanted to have all the documents. I would try to
see what story they were trying to tell me, and
then from there I would go talk to people who
might have had a hand in creating them or were
familiar with them or the system, and then they could
kind of give me an overlay of how they look
at them. And at times that would tell me, oh,
my understanding here based on these documents was wrong, or
sometimes it would say oh, they were directly right. But
I always started with documents, and so it was kind
of the same thing here. Once we saw the Steele dossier,
which was really the root document of all of it,
you see that and you're like, well, this is total nonsense,
and then you start looking for the various documents which
might impeach it. And that's what Devin Nunaz did so
well and why the regime freaked out the way it
did when he actually went and got the FISA application
and referenced it in his report. It's why they freaked
out it Chuck Grassley and tried to hide documents from
him because his investigators were going and getting the root documents.
And so for me, it's the documents that always tell
the story, and it's why one side was always desperately
trying to hide them, hiding behind claims of national security
risk and this and that and we can't have that
information out. Well, yeah, we know why you didn't want
that information out, because it proved you to be an
utter liar. For example, we had Adam Schiff, who's just
one of the most deceitful, disgusting people in politics out
there claiming, after NNA has put his famous memo out, No,
they didn't use the Steele dossier at all in the
FEISA warrant against Carter Page. That's a total lie. They
didn't use the Steele dossier. Well, Schiff had seen it.
He knew that they used the Steele dossier. He knew
that there wouldn't have been a warrant without it. He
knew that it was a primary foundational document in that
PEISA warrant. But because he presumed that that document would
never actually get out, he was happy to go out
there and lie about it. So I guess my message
to people who might be listening to this and thinking
about a career in journalism where they're getting started, is
that sources are extremely important. You are never going to
know everything about a story or a circumstance because it's
just impossible, and you're going to have to rely on
people who are closer to the events you're investigating to
better understand exactly what unfolded. But my advice would be
get really really good at finding and sifting through and
analyzing documents, because if you can do that, you're at
a much lower risk of being led around by sources
who might have a different motive than you, which always happens.
Everyone has different motives and different interests and equities, and
you have to consider that when you're dealing with sources.
But the more documentation and paperwork and records you have,
the better position you'll find yourself in to figure out
what the truth actually is.
Speaker 1: Well, here's the billion dollar question, and John, I'll start
with you on this. Will anybody ever be held accountable?
I mean, we look at the judicial coup that is
going on that's certainly playing a huge part in keeping
accountability at bay. James Komy so far is walking away,
Scott Free, no neck James Clapper, and no neck John
Brennan and weasel James Clapper, all of these folks. I mean,
there are a lot of Americans who have rightly understandably
lost all kinds of trust, all trust in their government
because of the Russia collusion hoax and the things that
happened beyond that. Will anybody ever be held accountable?
Speaker 2: Well, it depends on what you mean by held accountable.
Will all these people end up in prison? Probably not,
And it's probably because of how kind of cooked our
judiciary injury system is on high profile political cases. For example,
you know, if you if you try anything in the
DC circuit against a Democrat, forget it that that jury
pool will not convict a high profile anti Trump Democrat,
then then we'll go and indict Comby in the Eastern
District of Virginia. You might say, well, then there's going
to be a corrupt judge there who says, oh no, no,
I'm not going to let him indict get indicted because
I don't like the attorney who did it. So well,
these people ever see the inside of a jail cell.
Probably not, but I'm not going to be conclusive on that.
We don't really know what will happen. But there's other
forms of accountability. There is reputational accountability, which is what
so many of these people are are desperate for. James
Comey wants to be seen as the savior of democracy,
but his legacy is cooked. He will forever be the
guy who exonerated Hillary and then tried to run a
hoax against Trump. And look, I get that. You know,
forty five percent of the country, these Democrat who believe
the election was stolen, they'll believe that till the day
they die. But the majority of people now understand that
man's nature. They know that James Clapper is a liar.
They know that John Brennan is a liar. These people's
reputations are kind of sealed. So you might say, well,
that's a bit of a cope, but I really don't
think it is. It's as journalists and investigators, we don't
get to decide what happens to people after the facts
are out. It's not our job and not our role.
All we can do is get the facts out there
and the truth out there, and let the chips fall
where they may. So it can be really easy to
blackpill and be like, oh, well, nothing's ever going to
happen to them, and well where does that lead? So
we shouldn't find facts anymore, we shouldn't investigate anymore, we
shouldn't report anymore. I don't believe that, And I'm not
going to let the failures of politicians somehow cow me
into not doing my job, because our job is to
just get the facts out there and report it and
what happens happens, and that's what we did.
Speaker 1: You're absolutely right, there's nothing that we reporters can do
about that. We get the facts out there, we shine
light in some dark places, and the chips fall where
they may. But I have to tell you, I've been
in this business longer than I want to admit or acknowledge,
and it gets frustrating. And Margot, I want to ask
you that, as a reporter who did so much to
expose this hoax, are you frustrated that there isn't more
accountability for people you know absolutely trash the constitution.
Speaker 4: So that's a tough one because absolutely would like to
have these people held accountable, and not necessarily even with
a jail sentence, but their public reputation, which I agree
with Sean. They will go down in history that way.
It's what's frustrating to me, though, is that you still
have forty percent of the population who maybe doesn't see it.
But what I actually find, I guess more hopeful is
as this is coming out and more and more of
the conspiracy, because it really was a conspiracy between government
employees as well as the elected officials to pull this hoax.
As this is coming out, it is causing other whistleblowers
to come forward, and hopefully it's preventing this from ever
happening again because it is now clear that whistleblowers will
be protected, that you will have people in government who
will make sure that the truth gets out. So sort
of the mutually assured destruction that was in the eighties
I think we're seeing now, and I see that as
a hopeful a consequence, I guess of all of the
work that we did, even if it doesn't seem as
concrete as we might want.
Speaker 1: There are so many tentacles to the Russia collusion hoax.
I think about all that has sprung out of that,
all that has been revealed, thankfully to the good reporting
at the Federalist and to select few other news organizations
out there that are really doing the heavy lifting and
good work in this field. But I think about what
happened in twenty twenty another area that I think the
Federalist did amazing reporting on. Molly Hemingway wrote the book
on it, The Rigged Election of twenty twenty. Margot, how
much do you think that rigged election under the cover
of COVID played or was necessitated if you will, by
this collusion hoax and what the Federalist was exposing, That
is to say, how desperate do you think there was
a desperation in part caused by people who faced the
real threat of being exposed and ultimately perhaps held accountable.
Speaker 4: I think that we would have seen much of the
same reaction if it was merely from a political standpoint. Absolutely,
there were people afraid of being exposed, and they possibly
would have been exposed faster where justice could have been served.
But the Democrats always want to win the White House,
they always want to be able to have control of Congress.
So I think COVID would have been the excuse to
change these rules in order to rig the election. Whether
or not you had this in the background, They saw
that Trump could win and they wanted to make it's
virtually impossible for him to do it again by flooding
the system with all the boats that they could get,
whether they were legit or not. So I think that
they would have done everything that they did anyway. But absolutely,
I'm sure there were some deep sighs of relief after
Biden was declared president.
Speaker 1: Yeah, they were protected, and obviously, as we know from
his auto pen, many of them were pardoned in perpetuity,
so that at least the argument is they can never
truly be held accountable because of that pardon. I'll finish
with this because we are ultimately talking about this prestigious
award for excellence in journalism, and that raises the question
of where does journalism in America go from here? What
is journal what does it become? What is left of
the idea that you talked about, Sean, that journalism is
about courage, it's about exposing the truth, It's about making
sure that the people, not the powerful in Washington, are
ultimately responsible for this republic.
Speaker 2: Well, I'm super optimistic about the state of journalism, and
I don't say that because I'm optimistic about the New
York Times or the Washington Post or CNN cleaning up
their behavior because they're not going to. I'm optimistic because
they are a smaller piece of the whole journalistic world
now than they ever have been. The Internet democratized everything.
It's why they've been trying so hard to shut down
people on Twitter, to shut down outlets like the Federalists
because of our journalism. But I think about so many
of the we called them the a noons on Twitter,
the anonymous people who would go through and read every
document and they would be able to tell, oh, there's
this many characters behind this particular reaction. These are all
the people in that office at that time, and therefore
we think this person fits this particular reaction. Those guys
were amazing. They did so much more work than the
most overpaid, overhyped people in the New York Times newsroom.
And that's kind of what journalism is now. There's so
much great independent journalism. You don't have to have press credentials,
you don't have to be a W two employee, you
don't have to be on a masthead. All you need
is a desire to tell the truth, to find the facts,
and then the courage to do it. So I'm super
optimistic just because of how many people now kind of
understand what the playing field looks like, and how many
people just want the truth and want the facts out there.
So I'm optimistic. I'm excited. I'm not a doomer. I'm
not sitting around bemoaning the state because that just leads
to doing nothing. If you look at the situation and
you think, oh, well, this is terrible, then you have
an obligation to get up and do it, do something
about it, which is what we've been trying to do
for almost thirteen years now.
Speaker 1: As in journalism, no doubt, has been absolutely essential in
holding individuals in government accountable. Margot, I'll close with you,
what do you think about the state of journalism today.
Speaker 4: I would just echo everything that Sean has said. I
think that we are going to still have the legacy
media doing what they've done and will always do. But
between outlets like the Federalists and the anonymous folks who
what they do is they get out the truth and
the market answers to that. You see their followers jump
up very quickly because people value that truth. So I
would absolutely concur with Sean that journalism is moving forward
in a great spot, not because of the legacy media,
but in spite of them. Well.
Speaker 1: I have worked for a lot of news organizations over
the years, many of them no longer in existence. It's
been quite a change in what nearly forty years in
this business. That said it is it is emboldening to
know that there are reporters who still care about the story.
They still care about what the story is about and
why it impacts the average American. And they do it
because they still have a great passion to get at
the truth. Because, as Shawn said, they have courage. The
Federalist staff has that in space. Thanks to our guest
today the Federalist Owes senior legal correspondent Margo Cleveland, and
Federalist co founder and CEO Sean Davis, you've been listening
to another edition of the Federalist Radio Hour. I'm Matt Kittle,
Senior Elections Corps respondent at the Federalist. We'll be back
soon with more. Until then, stay lovers of freedom and
anxious for the Fray