Speaker 1: The fate of the country rests in the hand of
Speaker 1: the twenty thousand stupidest Pennsylvanians. We're going to be waiting
Speaker 1: around for two months to determine whether Donald Trump or
Speaker 1: Kamala Harris will be president, and the whole thing will
Speaker 1: ultimately come down to the opinions of the twenty thousand
Speaker 1: or so Pennsylvanians who still remain unbelievably undecided. How can
Speaker 1: you still be undecided about Donald Trump after nine years
Speaker 1: at this point, Like, what new information do you need
Speaker 1: to have? Anyway, the thing I'm realizing is that so
Speaker 1: much of politics is dominated by dumb people who happen
Speaker 1: to have attained positions of power. And the next great
Speaker 1: example of this that I have is something coming out
Speaker 1: of the RNC. Now, I will note that so much
Speaker 1: of the electorate is voting for stuff based on vibes,
Speaker 1: and most of the Republican electorate just likes Trump. They
Speaker 1: just like him, And if you criticize him, even if
Speaker 1: it's for the same kind of thing that you would
Speaker 1: have gotten mad at any other Republican for, then you're
Speaker 1: a bad guy. If mint Romney had watered down the
Speaker 1: Republican platform with regards to abortion. Probably most conservatives Republicans
Speaker 1: would have blasted him, but Trump doesn't.
Speaker 2: No one seems to care.
Speaker 1: This is not to say that I love Mitt Romney
Speaker 1: or hate Donald Trump, but I do think that there
Speaker 1: is a kind of loyalty to Trump that we just
Speaker 1: did not have with prior Republican presidents or presidential candidates.
Speaker 2: So I'm going to do this.
Speaker 1: Test before you realize, because I don't know how many
Speaker 1: people exactly know who the head of the RNC is.
Speaker 1: For those of you who know who the head of
Speaker 1: the RNC is, you might react a different ways. So
Speaker 1: I'm just gonna say I want you all to test
Speaker 1: your reactions. Those of you who are listening to this
Speaker 1: who don't know who the head of the Republican National
Speaker 1: Committee is and the head of the Republican National Committee,
Speaker 1: what is their job. Their job is raising money and
Speaker 1: helping Republicans get elected. That is the job of the RNC.
Speaker 1: So if you're the RNC chair right now should be
Speaker 1: the literal busiest time of your life, the busiest There
Speaker 1: is no busier time for the RNC head than we're
Speaker 1: two months out from the election. You've got to be
Speaker 1: pedal to the medal, working to fundraise for all of
Speaker 1: your candidates, all of your House candidates, all of your
Speaker 1: Senate candidates, and you're trying to get a president elected.
Speaker 1: All right, So if you're the head of the RNC,
Speaker 1: that's really import Now the head of the RNC has
Speaker 1: released a music video. I'm not gonna say the head
Speaker 1: of the RNC is man or a woman, but this
Speaker 1: head of the RNC is a singer, and the head
Speaker 1: of the RNC has released a music video for a
Speaker 1: song called Hero. This song is a tribute to firefighters
Speaker 1: and first responders. Now, I like firefighters, I like first responders.
Speaker 1: I like cops.
Speaker 2: I think they're swell guys.
Speaker 1: My job, though, is running Right to Life es Central
Speaker 1: California and hosting a radio show.
Speaker 2: If my board of directors learned.
Speaker 1: That I was releasing a music video for a song
Speaker 1: I'd written to promote a music video for a song
Speaker 1: I'd written about firefighters, and I was trying to promote it,
Speaker 1: my board of directors at Right to Life might say
Speaker 1: things like, Hey, why.
Speaker 2: Are you doing that? What is this that you're doing?
Speaker 1: Is this interfering with your job at all? It's certainly
Speaker 1: I think one should ask this question of the head
Speaker 1: of the RNC, why are you doing this? Like, Yes,
Speaker 1: firefighters are good, we love we like firefighters. Firefighters are
Speaker 1: wonderful people. I get a little cringey when conservatives do
Speaker 1: this thing. Liberals and conservatives do this thing, by the way,
Speaker 1: where you take some job and you canonize them as
Speaker 1: everyone in that profession is saints. Liberals tend to do
Speaker 1: this about teachers. Conservatives tend to do this about military
Speaker 1: and cops. I think any job is filled with some
Speaker 1: people who are excellent, some people who are a lot
Speaker 1: of people who are okay, and some people who stink
Speaker 1: at their job. I don't think every firefighter is a saint,
Speaker 1: I think, but of course they are signing up for
Speaker 1: a job that involves some measure of risk and danger
Speaker 1: and self sacrifice, and I don't mind honoring the profession
Speaker 1: as such in that regard. Same with cops, same with soldiers.
Speaker 1: That doesn't mean every single cop, every single soldier, every
Speaker 1: single firefighter is a superhero. And I think no one
Speaker 1: would agree with that sentiment more than active cops, firefighters,
Speaker 1: and military personnel. Regardless, when you hear that the head
Speaker 1: of the RNC is spending time recording releasing promoting a
Speaker 1: music video two months out from the election. I think
Speaker 1: probably your first instinct as a conservative listener who has
Speaker 1: been skeptical of the RNC. Conservatives have been skeptical of quote,
Speaker 1: establishment Republicans my whole life, and with good reason. Establishment
Speaker 1: Republicans have often, I think, been phony and not really
Speaker 1: believed what they believed. Case in point, Michael Steele. Michael
Speaker 1: Steele was the RNC chair proximate. I think he was
Speaker 1: sort of RNC chair for sort of the Romney campaign
Speaker 1: era around twenty eleven twenty thirteen ish. Michael Steele is
Speaker 1: right now actively supporting Kamala Harris, which really shook.
Speaker 2: Me when I learned.
Speaker 1: That made me think this guy was in charge of
Speaker 1: fundraising for a publican candidates from Sea to Shining Sea,
Speaker 1: and apparently his principles, his convictions were so weak that
Speaker 1: he thinks it's okay to endorse, to actively endorse as
Speaker 1: a positive good Kamala Harris. Your first instinct hearing the
Speaker 1: head of the RNC is releasing a music video two
Speaker 1: months out from the election would probably be to say,
Speaker 1: that's ridiculous, What the heck is the RNC doing. This
Speaker 1: is why Republicans never win. We have idiots and incompetence
Speaker 1: running the RNC. That's ridiculous. But if I tell you
Speaker 1: that the head of the RNC is Donald Trump's daughter
Speaker 1: in law, Laura Trump, oh, does that change how you
Speaker 1: feel about it at all? Does that change things for
Speaker 1: you at all? Because basically what's happened is this young
Speaker 1: writer for National Review named Naton Ehrenreich wrote a short piece,
Speaker 1: a short little blog post on National Review's blog, Lara Trump,
Speaker 1: RNC co chair, prepares for the election with a new
Speaker 1: music video. All he's doing is stating this, he says,
Speaker 1: when Donald Trump installed his daughter in law Lara Trump
Speaker 1: as co chair of the Republican National Committee, he assuredly
Speaker 1: picked the best person for the job. Her qualifications to
Speaker 1: run one of the two major American political parties are impeccable.
Speaker 1: She studied at the French Kulinary Institute in New York,
Speaker 1: and her last name is Trump. Now she is vindicating
Speaker 1: her supporters by spending the crucial months ahead of the
Speaker 1: election by releasing fresh music videos. Alongside Madeline James. She
Speaker 1: recently released Hero, a moving, read cringe inducing tribute to firefighters.
Speaker 1: If you want to be inspired read inspired to stab
Speaker 1: your eyeballs and tear your ears off. Feel free to
Speaker 1: check the whole thing out up below. It's an important
Speaker 1: reminder of the amazing things our Republican Party leaders are
Speaker 1: up to in these pivotal times. For this, this clearly
Speaker 1: legitimate critique. Now he wanders into sort of attacking her
Speaker 1: credentials to be the head of the RNC in general,
Speaker 1: although I think that is fair. Her last name is Trump.
Speaker 1: Does she have any other qualifications for doing this? This
Speaker 1: is Eric Trump's wife. Why is she the head of
Speaker 1: the r NC other than her last name is Trump? Now,
Speaker 1: it's one thing, you know, I am not as suspicious
Speaker 1: of nepotism as I think a lot of Americans are.
Speaker 1: I've seen lots of family businesses, particularly here in the
Speaker 1: San Laquin Valley. Among there are various families who have
Speaker 1: supported right now to life, and it's sort of you
Speaker 1: have the dad or grandpa or instead of brothers who
Speaker 1: started the business and it goes down to their kids.
Speaker 1: And what I've seen in these different family businesses has
Speaker 1: actually been that the succeeding generation who begins to take
Speaker 1: on more and more of the business. I've always been
Speaker 1: extremely impressed by the next generation. I'm not saying that
Speaker 1: nepotism is inherently bad or or and it's not even
Speaker 1: really nepotism. It's passing on this business that you established
Speaker 1: to your children to carry on. I've actually seen that
Speaker 1: the children in those situations tend to be, at least
Speaker 1: in my experience, remarkably hard working, successful, accomplished people themselves.
Speaker 1: But the RNC might be kind of a different kind
Speaker 1: of ballgame. And it would be one thing if Laura
Speaker 1: Trump was absolutely killing it and the Republicans were raising
Speaker 1: more money than the Democrats.
Speaker 2: They're not.
Speaker 1: The Democrats are kicking our butts in fundraising. Democrats are
Speaker 1: kicking Republicans' butts when it comes to fundraising. And here
Speaker 1: she is, two months out from the election, releasing a
Speaker 1: music video, and you've got conservative talking heads, conservative talk
Speaker 1: radio hosts, conservative commentators, all very firmly in the Trump
Speaker 1: camp blasting not Lara Trump, but this kid writer from
Speaker 1: National Review who had the temerity to say, what the
Speaker 1: hell is Lara Trump doing. She's the head of the RNC,
Speaker 1: We're two months out from an election, and she's releasing
Speaker 1: music videos with songs because she's kind of like a
Speaker 1: singer or something, songs about firefighters. Why is she doing this?
Speaker 1: Is she trying to set up her next gig once
Speaker 1: she's done being the RNC chair, to sell mediocre music
Speaker 1: to conservatives. You know, alongside their maga hats, they'll have
Speaker 1: a CD of Lara Trump songs. What are we doing?
Speaker 1: This is ity again. We're two months out from the election.
Speaker 1: Her job as the co chair of the RNC is
Speaker 1: to fundraise from Shining Sea doing a music video about firefighters.
Speaker 1: As nice as that would be if she doesn't have
Speaker 1: a job, if her job was just being a musician,
Speaker 1: if her job was just being a singer, if she
Speaker 1: wasn't the RNC co chair, that's great, But I think
Speaker 1: it's this thing of in any context outside of the
Speaker 1: current context. If you heard the RNC chair was releasing
Speaker 1: a music video about firefighters too out from the election,
Speaker 1: you would have said, these Republicans are such idiots, these
Speaker 1: Republicans are such mores. But when it's a Trump, all
Speaker 1: of a sudden, people are like, oh, why are you
Speaker 1: focused on that? Why are you undercutting the cause. I'm
Speaker 1: not undercutting the cause. She's releasing a music video and
Speaker 1: her job is to raise money for Republicans two months
Speaker 1: out from the election, clearly trying to set herself up
Speaker 1: for her whatever enterprise she is going to engage in
Speaker 1: after the election. And this is the stuff that drives
Speaker 1: me crazy is that I think so many people in
Speaker 1: American politics are just choosing these things based on how
Speaker 1: they feel and not really based on anything having to
Speaker 1: do with reason or policy. You know, people like Trump.
Speaker 2: They like him.
Speaker 1: Republicans like Trump. They think he's funny, they like his personality.
Speaker 1: His personality is obviously extremely different from the buttoned up
Speaker 1: Romney's and McCain's and Bushes and all those people. They
Speaker 1: like him, and so they're willing to overlook his peccadillos
Speaker 1: left right and center, and the peccadillos of people in
Speaker 1: his orbit in ways that they simply wouldn't have done
Speaker 1: for Romney or for McCain or for Bush. And I
Speaker 1: just at a certain level, I just don't think that's
Speaker 1: great when the point of this enterprise is winning elections
Speaker 1: to change the laws to make this country a better,
Speaker 1: more prosperous, and more just place. If you actually care
Speaker 1: about winning this election, this is not how you should
Speaker 1: behave if you actually care about enacting solid legislation by
Speaker 1: winning elections. This is not how you would behave if
Speaker 1: you care about I mean, you know, I not to
Speaker 1: bring in my constant hobbyhorse about pro life issues. God forbid,
Speaker 1: I mention this thing that results in the intentional killing
Speaker 1: of a million human organisms every year. But if you
Speaker 1: actually care about the cause of life, it should concern
Speaker 1: you that every thing about abortion was taken out of
Speaker 1: the Republican platform. But I think people just don't really
Speaker 1: care about that stuff because they just happened. They just
Speaker 1: like Trump. They like Trump, or on the other side
Speaker 1: of it, alleged conservatives who are supporting Harris because they
Speaker 1: think Trump is so bad. Don't you cannot claim yourself
Speaker 1: to be a conservative and support Harris. We'll talk about
Speaker 1: those people in the next segment. This is the John
Speaker 1: Girardi Show on Power Talk. I'm convinced that most people
Speaker 1: just vote for vibes. They're not really voting for issues,
Speaker 1: and they they like whom they like. The heart wants
Speaker 1: what it wants, and this results in people being willing
Speaker 1: to overlook flaws in one party or the other's approach
Speaker 1: to things in ways that are that kind of baffle me. Frankly, certainly,
Speaker 1: I think Trump is for the life issues, is a
Speaker 1: better outcome than Harris. I anticipate he would govern in
Speaker 1: a better way, although his IVF proposal that he's given
Speaker 1: is so wild, it's beyond even what Kamala Harris is
Speaker 1: even pledged to do, and it's so wildly bad. But
Speaker 1: I want to instead of for those of you who
Speaker 1: think I'm just beating up on Trump supporters, which I'm not.
Speaker 1: I mean, again, I think Trump is a Harris would
Speaker 1: be a disastrous, disastrous outcome.
Speaker 2: I want to focus on.
Speaker 1: Alleged conservatives actively supporting Harris. Now, there are some people
Speaker 1: on the right, Liz Cheney, now, Adam Kinsinger, Michael Steele,
Speaker 1: the former R and C chair, who are enthusiastically endorsing
Speaker 1: Kamala Harris. And certainly there's been a lot of being
Speaker 1: spilled about commentators who have done this, Commentators who began
Speaker 1: endorsing Joe Biden, comment who you know, lifelong conservative commentators
Speaker 1: who all of a sudden turned to endorsing Joe Biden
Speaker 1: to endorsing Kamala Harris. But now we've got actual politicians
Speaker 1: doing it. And again, I just think these people are
Speaker 1: acting on the basis of vibes ideas sort of sentiments, attitudes,
Speaker 1: rather than anything that has to do with policy. Look,
Speaker 1: if you think Donald Trump is a some kind of
Speaker 1: betrayal of conservatism in some way, shape or form. If
Speaker 1: you think his character flaws are so bad that you
Speaker 1: don't want to vote for him, okay, I can. I
Speaker 1: might not one hundred percent agree with you, but I
Speaker 1: understand you, and maybe I on some level I do
Speaker 1: agree with you in certain respects. I certainly am not
Speaker 1: crazy about Donald Trump's character issues. I think maybe you
Speaker 1: know the days of you know it being an issue
Speaker 1: when Ronald Reagan was running for president because he had
Speaker 1: been divorced once those days are long gone. Clearly might
Speaker 1: have been a better Amarria. Those days weren't long gone.
Speaker 1: But I can understand a conservative saying I don't like
Speaker 1: Donald Trump. What I cannot understand is a conservative saying, therefore,
Speaker 1: I will vote for Kamala Harris.
Speaker 2: Let alone, I.
Speaker 1: Will enthusiastically support Kamala Harris and positively endorse her.
Speaker 2: That I don't get. That is insane to me.
Speaker 1: If you purport to be a conservative, you cannot positively
Speaker 1: vote for someone else who has all of Trump's character flaws,
Speaker 1: I think, or many of Trump's character flaws on a
Speaker 1: personal level, and endorses wildly horrifically terrible policies.
Speaker 2: I can understand sitting it out.
Speaker 1: I can understand sitting the election out, and especially for
Speaker 1: people who I don't live in a swing state, I
Speaker 1: can understand sitting out the presidential election. What I can't
Speaker 1: understand is positively endorsing Harris. And I think just what's
Speaker 1: happening is people like the vibe of being part of
Speaker 1: the respectable crowd or well. And I think on both
Speaker 1: sides people like different kinds of vibes. I think enthusiastic
Speaker 1: Trump supporters who are willing to overlook policy changes when
Speaker 1: it comes to abortion or policy changes here there or wherever.
Speaker 1: I think they like the vibe of being a Trump supporter.
Speaker 1: In some cases, I think they like, you know, you're
Speaker 1: if you're going to say, if you're going to change
Speaker 1: your views on the abortion issue just in response to
Speaker 1: Trump changing his views on the abortion issue, then I
Speaker 1: question whether you really believed in those things to begin with,
Speaker 1: whether you really cared about those things to begin with,
Speaker 1: or if you just liked the vibe of being a
Speaker 1: Trump supporter, the anti authoritarian feeling, the anti establishmentarian feeling
Speaker 1: associated with the Trump campaign. Likewise, on the flip side,
Speaker 1: if you're a.
Speaker 3: Respected conservative pundit who likes buttoned up, suit and tie
Speaker 3: wearing conservatism, like Mitt Romney and John McCain and George W.
Speaker 1: Bush, if you're that kind of conservative and all of
Speaker 1: a sudden you're actually actively endorsing Kamala Harris, I think
Speaker 1: what you care about is the vibe, the attitude of respectability,
Speaker 1: more than you actually care about policy. You want to
Speaker 1: be part of the respectable crowd. You want people to
Speaker 1: think that you're a respectable, curious person who doesn't hold
Speaker 1: with Donald Trump's nonsense. I would rather have Donald Trump's
Speaker 1: nonsense and be correct on policy nine times out of ten,
Speaker 1: then be ReSpectacle and buttoned.
Speaker 2: Up any day of the week.
Speaker 1: But I think both sides are willing to compromise, jettison,
Speaker 1: get rid of their beliefs for the sake of maintaining
Speaker 1: this vibe that they like, this attitude, that they like,
Speaker 1: these characters or characteristics that they like, They like portraying
Speaker 1: themselves as this kind of a political supporter, this kind
Speaker 1: of an American, this kind of when it comes to media,
Speaker 1: when it comes to talking heads, this kind of a
Speaker 1: thinker or a talker, this kind of a politician. And again,
Speaker 1: I'm not trying to actually I'm some superhero, but I
Speaker 1: think it frustrates me that what I've always cared about
Speaker 1: is the policy, and I'm going to call it like
Speaker 1: I see it when it comes to how the policies
Speaker 1: are being promoted and promoted or not promoted. In his
Speaker 1: first term, Trump was doing really well on most things,
Speaker 1: not every single thing, but most things related to abortion policy,
Speaker 1: he was doing great, and he has changed his views
Speaker 1: on a lot of those things. I don't know how
Speaker 1: I can but react negatively to that. I'm not in
Speaker 1: it for the Trump vibes. I'm in it for the
Speaker 1: policies that I hope that this or that presidential candidate
Speaker 1: will bring about because I care about these fundamental issues
Speaker 1: of justice for my fellow man, and politics and law
Speaker 1: are the means to help establish justice. So anyway, again,
Speaker 1: I'm not trying to say I'm better than everyone else,
Speaker 1: but I am frustrated that we're so focused on personality
Speaker 1: and forgetting what's the point of this enterprise.
Speaker 2: The point of this exercise is law. And policy.
Speaker 1: When we return, everyone in media is getting paid off
Speaker 1: by a government, except for old Johnny g Next on
Speaker 1: The John Girardi Show, there's a fascinating couple of stories
Speaker 1: coming out about how many different people in media and
Speaker 1: in politics are being influenced by foreign governments. So a
Speaker 1: story came out after some indictments were enceealed on Wednesday
Speaker 1: that the Russians were paying off through a company that
Speaker 1: you have RT Russia today, which is this media entity
Speaker 1: controlled by the Kremlin. They funneled money through a Tennessee
Speaker 1: based company, which that company then paid money to various
Speaker 1: kinds of sort of political podcaster talking head.
Speaker 2: Types, sort of a.
Speaker 1: Somewhat right wing leaning stripe to influence them to back
Speaker 1: Kremlin positions on a variety.
Speaker 2: Of issues, including the war in Ukraine.
Speaker 1: This indictment unsealed on Wednesday alleges, and this is a
Speaker 1: story about it.
Speaker 2: In National Review written by David Zimmermann.
Speaker 1: The indictment unsealed on Wednesday alleges that two employees of RT,
Speaker 1: a Kremlin controlled media outlet, funneled nearly ten million dollars
Speaker 1: to a Tennessee based digital content company in order to
Speaker 1: sew division within the US and to weaken US opposition
Speaker 1: to Russian interests like the Ukraine War. The description of
Speaker 1: the company included in the indictment matches a recently launched
Speaker 1: outlet called Tenant Media T E N E T. The
Speaker 1: media startup paid well. One unnamed influencer was paid four
Speaker 1: hundred thousand dollars per month to produce videos, on top
Speaker 1: of a one hundred thousand dollars signing bonus. According to
Speaker 1: the indictment, two of Tenant Media's top commentators are Tim
Speaker 1: Poole and Benny Johnson, both of whom have millions of
Speaker 1: followers across YouTube and other platforms. Pool and Johnson issued
Speaker 1: statement Wednesday afternoon claiming they were victims of the alleged
Speaker 1: foreign influenced scheme and accepted the Kremlin provided funds under
Speaker 1: false pretenses, but maintained full editorial control of the content
Speaker 1: they produced. So these guys are getting paid off by
Speaker 1: the Russians. We then learned that we have also learned, though,
Speaker 1: that other media figures on the left or of the
Speaker 1: left have been paid off in other ways. Max Boot
Speaker 1: a columnist for Believe. Max Boot was calumnist for the
Speaker 1: Washington Post. He, through his wife Max Boot's wife was
Speaker 1: charged with violations of FARA Foreign Agent Registration Act charges. Basically,
Speaker 1: she was a spy on behalf of South Korea and
Speaker 1: was working with him to promote South Korean, to promote
Speaker 1: Korean interests. So that that's kind of kind of from
Speaker 1: the left. So here's kind of a summary. Jamal Kashogi
Speaker 1: was a calumnist for the Washington Post. He was taking
Speaker 1: money from Qatar. Max Boot's wife took money from Korea.
Speaker 1: Mehdi Hassan another talking at. It has been off and
Speaker 1: on Qatar's payroll his whole career. Qatar has invested fifty
Speaker 1: million dollars in Newsmax, the sort of TV news media outlet.
Speaker 1: The Biden's got money from Ukraine and China. The NBA
Speaker 1: ows a ton tea. All of these different media entities
Speaker 1: are getting money from foreign.
Speaker 2: Influence.
Speaker 1: And I'll just I just want to ask if there's
Speaker 1: any I want to put this offer out there, basically
Speaker 1: to any foreign governments who might be listening to the
Speaker 1: John Girardi Show. I am open for business, okay, Like,
Speaker 1: if you want to pay me ten million dollars to
Speaker 1: promote your country. And by the way, FBI, US government,
Speaker 1: I will do all the fara disclosures to let everyone
Speaker 1: know that I am being a shill on behalf of
Speaker 1: a foreign country.
Speaker 2: I will gladly take their money.
Speaker 1: If you turn on your radios someday and hear John
Speaker 1: Girardi talking about you know how wonderful, you know how
Speaker 1: wonderful tourism.
Speaker 2: Is to Latvia, you'll you'll know what's going on.
Speaker 1: If I say, come to Latvia, enjoy the pristine landscape.
Speaker 2: I'm literally googling Latvia as I do this.
Speaker 1: Flights from Boston to Riga on discount the Baltic What
Speaker 1: a beautiful place to visit. We are not taken over
Speaker 1: by Russia yet, Come to Latvia. Listen to our national anthem,
Speaker 1: diev vetti lats ju God blessed Latvia. Anyway, so if anyway,
Speaker 1: if any foreign governments want to pay me, please please
Speaker 1: do it does sort of really make you. And by
Speaker 1: the way, and I've heard other stories allegations too, of
Speaker 1: individual writers or outlets getting money from other kinds of
Speaker 1: foreign governments. The American Conservative, which is a conservative sort
Speaker 1: of journal publication, there was a time when they were
Speaker 1: taking a very sort of aggressive stance against most Republican
Speaker 1: foreign policy initiatives, and as a result, they had a
Speaker 1: writer who was publishing a bunch of stuff against the
Speaker 1: Republican position on Iran and in favor of actually Barack
Speaker 1: Obama's position with regards to Iran and the Iranian deal.
Speaker 1: Later we found out that the American Conservative was getting
Speaker 1: money from Iran. I guess, in short, there's not too
Speaker 1: much of a message to this segment, other than to
Speaker 1: realize how much media, how much opinion consumption, you're getting,
Speaker 1: especially when it comes to anything having to do with
Speaker 1: foreign policy that is or could be fueled by foreign money,
Speaker 1: that it involves foreign governments trying to influence you to
Speaker 1: think one way or another. And frankly, it's made me
Speaker 1: kind of want to ask some questions about my Ukraine
Speaker 1: skepticism now. I think, you know, I came to a
Speaker 1: position of sort of Ukraine skepticism, skepticism about American military
Speaker 1: funding and involvement with Ukraine. You know, I'd like to
Speaker 1: think I came to that fairly, honestly, without being too
Speaker 1: much influenced by too many other influencers. I don't think
Speaker 1: I had ever actually read any of these people who
Speaker 1: are you know, funded by the Russians, I've not really
Speaker 1: read any of their opinions. I don't really follow any
Speaker 1: of them. I don't listen to their podcasts, I don't
Speaker 1: read them, I don't follow them on Twitter, et cetera.
Speaker 1: I think my viewpoints on Ukraine and Israel are fairly consistent. Namely,
Speaker 1: I don't like the United States funding other people's wars.
Speaker 1: If you give military funding to Ukraine, if you give
Speaker 1: military funding to Israel, it means that you are involved, and.
Speaker 2: I don't know that we want to be. I don't
Speaker 2: know that.
Speaker 1: We want the undying enmity of Russia because we are
Speaker 1: funding the Ukrainians. I don't know that we want the
Speaker 1: undying enmity of terrorist organizations and much of the Middle
Speaker 1: East because we're funding Israel's war. Fundamentally, I don't know
Speaker 1: that it makes much of a difference for United States
Speaker 1: national interest who controls the Dnbas region of Ukraine. I
Speaker 1: feel bad for Ukraine. I don't like Russia. I don't
Speaker 1: support Russia. I don't think Vladimir Putin's a good guy.
Speaker 1: I think his invasion of Ukraine was monstrous in a
Speaker 1: war crime. I just don't know that America should be involved.
Speaker 1: And I think it's much more a question of Europe's
Speaker 1: security than ours, and the Europeans don't seem to want.
Speaker 2: To pay for it anyway.
Speaker 1: I'd like to think I come to all of those
Speaker 1: opinions honestly, but it is really making me question, like
Speaker 1: when I'm hearing a talking head or when I'm hearing
Speaker 1: a columnist, right, how much could be the result of
Speaker 1: influence pedaling, legal or illegal, or even flat out espionage.
Speaker 1: One of the other things we've been learning is Governor
Speaker 1: Kathy Hakul had a staffer who was arrested as being
Speaker 1: a Chinese spy. Dianne Feinstein had a Chinese spy working
Speaker 1: for Eric Swaalwell was had fell for a for a
Speaker 1: I believe it was a Chinese honey trap spy situation
Speaker 1: where he slept with literally was sleeping with the enemy.
Speaker 2: I mean, it's all I think.
Speaker 1: We don't want to believe that this stuff goes on
Speaker 1: because it sounds too much like a Tom Clancy novel.
Speaker 1: We we sort of don't want to, you know, we think, well,
Speaker 1: the Cold War's over, how much of this? Clearly a
Speaker 1: lot of this stuff is happening, and if we know
Speaker 1: about this much, it means I mean, presumably there's more
Speaker 1: of this stuff that happens that we don't know about.
Speaker 2: Anyway, consume your media carefully.
Speaker 1: But again I will say, if there's any small, impoverished
Speaker 1: third world country that would like to give me, you know,
Speaker 1: ten million ruples to promote tourism or whatever to their country,
Speaker 1: I am open for business. If you see me taking
Speaker 1: a lot of you know, suspicious vacations to Bosnia and Herzegovina,
Speaker 1: the folks at Power Talk will know what that's all about.
Speaker 1: When we return my ode to the undecided voter. Next
Speaker 1: on the John Girardi Show, I want to talk about
Speaker 1: the undecided voter for a minute. I just want to
Speaker 1: try to enter the mind. Yeah, I talked about that
Speaker 1: earlier in the show, that the twenty thousand, you know,
Speaker 1: for the next two months, we're all going to be
Speaker 1: waiting in anticipation about how the future of the country
Speaker 1: is going to go based on the decision of the
Speaker 1: twenty thousand stupidest Pennsylvanians. I really do think that if
Speaker 1: you're still undecided about someone like Donald Trump. Donald Trump
Speaker 1: has been in our lives now for nine years, since
Speaker 1: twenty fifteen, He's a known entity at this point, you
Speaker 1: either like him or you don't, or you're in the
Speaker 1: middle somewhere. But the idea that you're waiting on new
Speaker 1: and I gotta figure out, Well, I wonder what makes
Speaker 1: this Donald Trump guide tick? How are you still undecided?
Speaker 1: What is it about Kamala Harris that you still need
Speaker 1: to know? I just feel like deciding who to vote for?
Speaker 1: The idea that you can have these shifts in the electorate,
Speaker 1: even for something like the like the debate, like Okay,
Speaker 1: the Biden Trump debate clearly went terribly poorly for Biden.
Speaker 1: Biden looked like an idiot. Biden lost all these points
Speaker 1: in the polls. Did people not know he was? I mean,
Speaker 1: most Americans knew he was too old, But I guess
Speaker 1: it's just you actually see it. Maybe that changes, But
Speaker 1: I guess I just don't understand the big shift. Like
Speaker 1: I didn't change my opinion about anything because of that debate.
Speaker 1: I didn't change my opinion on any I guess I
Speaker 1: just don't don't understand how adult Americans who've known about
Speaker 1: Donald Trump for nine solid years could still just be like, gosh.
Speaker 2: Am I am I voting for this guy.
Speaker 1: I'm just I just don't know, it just baffles me,
Speaker 1: and it's a it's a limitation of democracy. I gotta say,
Speaker 1: the decision about to whom you extend the franchise is
Speaker 1: always one of the questions of democracy. Okay, the people decide,
Speaker 1: but obviously you don't let all people decide, So how
Speaker 1: do you qualify who you don't let kids decide? So
Speaker 1: how do we qualify who is a decider? And we've
Speaker 1: just basically decided, well, anyone is an adult, and is
Speaker 1: that the wisest thing in the world. And then the
Speaker 1: problem is when you start doing any sort of line drawing,
Speaker 1: you wind up having a bunch of people who are
Speaker 1: deserving on the don't get to vote side of the line.
Speaker 1: So we've just basically decided anyone is an adult. And
Speaker 1: that's a line that seems to work that people don't
Speaker 1: get upset about. I just really wish the fate of
Speaker 1: the country again did not rest in the hands of
Speaker 1: the twenty thousand stupidest people in Pennsylvania. That'll do it
Speaker 1: Andorari show see next time on Power Talk