Trump’s MAGA Loyalty Test Heads to the Ballot Box

At John Lewis Money, we know your home is more than an address. It's the sunlight pouring in. Well, sometimes. The coffee on tap and the best spot on the sofa. It's why our home insurance is thoughtfully designed with three levels of flexible cover for the home you've created. Because when you notice the details, you notice the difference. Search John Lewis Money. Terms and exclusions apply. John Lewis Finance Limited is authorised for insurance distribution and credit-broken by the Financial Conduct Authority. What's up, y'all? I'm Skyler Diggins, seven-time WNBA All-Star, Olympic gold medalist and mom. And I'm Cassidy Hubbard, host and reporter for nearly 20 years, covering the biggest names and stories in sports and mom. And this is AmMom, a community for athletes, game changers and moms of all kinds. Dropping May 14th. Tap in with us. Welcome, Raging Moderates. I'm Scott Galloway. And I'm Jessica Tarlev. If you want to support us, please click that subscribe button. Jess, are you coming to the PropG Markets Live tour? On the second? Yes. Yes, in New York, good. Yes, I'm very excited about it. I assume you're excited. I am excited. I think New York... San Francisco's sold out. I think New York is almost sold out. Is there a guest that we know about? Is that something we can talk about? Yeah, it's a... We're doing the mooch. We're doing Ted surround us. I'm great. Yeah. Well, I love Anthony. Well, there you go. So, Anthony Scaramucci. So, all right, let's get into it. The Department of Justice has announced the creation of a $1.8 billion anti-weaponization fund designed to compensate Trump allies who claim they were unfairly targeted under the Biden administration. The fund is part of the settlement of Trump's $10 billion loss against the IRS and acting Attorney General Todd Blanche is on Capitol Hill today facing questions. And in classic Trump fashion, the amount itself, $1.776 billion, to be exact, is a not so subtle reference to 1776 in the nation's founding year. Let's listen to Trump explain the logic. Justice Department has this new fund that was announced today, $1.7 billion. Yeah. Why should taxpayers pay for the January? Well, it's been very well received. I have to tell you, I know very little about it. I wasn't involved in the whole creation of it and the negotiation. But this is reimbursing people that were horribly treated, horribly treated. It's anti-weaponization. They've been weaponized. They've been, in some cases, imprisoned wrongly. They paid legal fees that they didn't have. They've gone bankrupt. Their lives have been destroyed. And they turn out to be right. First of all, hands off our Independence Day, right, that he turned this into the 1776 fund. But what do you think Mark Cuban was thinking? Like his face, he's just like stone cold there, like, okay, I showed up at the White House because Trump Rx might get people cheaper drugs. And I think that's important. And I've dedicated the last several years to making sure that people can get affordable drugs. And now I'm standing behind the president as he makes one of the most beautiful arguments for January Sixers, who, by the way, after their pardons, a number of them have reoffended, have gone on to commit more crimes because, guess what, criminals reoffend. Are we in, is it like another, like in the matrix? Or is this all a simulation? Because, I mean, a Treasury lawyer actually quit over this. So kudos to him for that. He was like, I cannot possibly sign a lawsuit. So kudos to him for that. He was like, I cannot possibly sign off on something like this. But like, how is this real life? But that's part of the strategy is if you commit one offense or do something outrageous, everyone's all over you. But if you normalize depravity, corruption, criminality, in general weirdness, people become numb to it and just decide that it's your personality and your charisma or your cult that they've signed up for. I mean, everything is one thing after the other and they sort of, they overwhelm you with information. And there's a great line in the Exorcist where the devil will overwhelm you with information. Some of it will be true, some of it won't. And a playbook out of the GRU's handbook around propaganda is to just overwhelm them with information so everyone gets just totally confused. But the notion that the president filed a suit against the IRS or someone at the IRS for leaking his tax documents, he was the first president to not voluntarily release his documents, his tax filings, and then sue his own administration and then decide to settle the case brought by him. I mean, this is just, it's so circular and weird and it's such blatant corruption that I think Putin is just in total awe and admiration at this guy right now. And the notion that they tried to soft pet a little bit by saying it's a compensation fund, it's a slush fund for him to do what any good autocrat does and that is reward as allies and punishes enemies. And this gives him $1.8 billion to go dole out money to people who are willing to commit crimes in support of him. It also creates a real atmosphere of danger around 2026 and 2028 because there's got to be a general feeling that people think, if I show up to a polling booth and start harassing people in democratically strongholds, if I show up to the inauguration and refuse to swear in a Democrat, if a Democrat wins and I commit crimes and I create a series of intimidating actions, criminality, that the president will save me and bail me out because he's now got a $1.8 billion fund to even reward me. I mean, we're not only talking about pardons for these people, we're talking about giving them money. Oh, totally. And I mean, 2020 on all of our minds, what happened in that election and then Project 2025 and how we're just kind of zooming through that. But all of the crackpot lawyers that showed up in court with their false suits about election-regging and fraud, they will also be eligible for this compensation pot, Clark Eastman, Jenna Ellis, and Todd Blanchett's testifying as we're taping right now. I've seen some clips of it where he says, no, no, no, you misunderstand. This isn't a partisan thing. It's for people who have been unfairly targeted and good on Jim Comey. He was on PBS with Jeff Meddit and he said, well, I'll be picking up my check where, right? I mean, all of these lawsuits that the Trump administration has brought against their political enemies, Tish James, Jerome Powell, Jim Comey, they've been laughed out of court. So those people then, I guess, should be eligible to get some money for their time and the damage committed to them in terms of reputation, time spent, et cetera. But I'm sure there's not a dime for the likes of Jim Comey. Once he gets through the latest seashell fight that Kashpatel spent nine months building the case for, I guess if you think about it, like every day we get on here, right? To your point, there is some new outrage and it's supposed to distract from the thing that was upsetting you before or really just from the Epstein files. And the big money question is what can really be done? You know, we're trying to safeguard our elections as best as possible. I was already concerned about ICE coming out to the polls. This adds a whole other layer, like you were referencing that there is no Mike Pence left, right? There are JD Vance is not Mike Pence. Mike Johnson was already an architect of what happened in 2020 and would surely do it again. And when they control the court system at this level, what can you do if you are in opposition to this? You have to lay out a very clear plan of how it would never be allowed to happen again and what you're going to do on day one to safeguard the American Constitution and our democracy. But you feel a little bit at sea, I guess, when you see headlines like this and a slew of the most powerful people in the world just standing behind President Trump defending the honor of January Sixers and says that they're owed money and it's going to be yours and my money. People talk about the end of America happening with some sort of revolution or something very cinematic. And I wonder if ultimately it happens more with a thud where you effectively have a contested constitutional crisis around an election similar to with some of the dynamics you proposed and essentially New York refuses to ratify, the Northeast refuses to ratify what they see as an illegitimate election. The South goes along with it. The West refuses, the Midwest refuses, and we kind of split into sort of four sovereign nations, almost like the EU, the South is an oil and gas economy very loyal to Republicans and white evangelical Christians. The Northeast is a finance economy that does a lot with Europe, much more liberal. The Midwest is somewhat centrist manufacturing economy and the West is a tech, kind of a tectopia with strong relationships with Asia and they develop their own currencies, they develop their own laws, states rights become much more important and effectively we have what is the disassembly or the disarticulation of the United States, not with a boomer or a revolution, but with this kind of a thud. And basically we kind of split into a number similar to what's happened in the EU. I think that this is, I think unless there is a swift reckoning and the Democrats do a better job of creating an incentive system that makes it clear to people handing out this money or engaging this type of corruption at the Department of Justice and people receiving this money, that they will not be exempt or shielded by a presidential pardon. I think there needs to be more robust and specific articulation via videos, legal cases, who they're going to subpoena, drafted legislation they obviously couldn't propose now with a Republican controlled house. But I think there has to be some sort of signaling around what is going to happen if they try to do this and starting to create a different incentive system because it feels like the outrage from the left isn't much of a disincentive for these folks. And it also feels as if it's just strange that this could, I'm shocked that the Supreme Court wouldn't somehow this wouldn't be taken to the Supreme Court. But my favorite thing about this administration is that it's shocking but not surprising. And that as I read about this and I thought anybody else, it would be shocking and surprising. This guy is just, it's just shocking. So speaking of a loyalty test inside the Republican Party, it's a huge primary night across the country. The headline races in Kentucky were Congressman Thomas Massey is fighting off a Trump-backed challenger and the most expensive House primary ever. We're also watching key races in Georgia where Republicans are choosing who could take on Senator John Ossoff and in Pennsylvania where Democrats are battling in a critical swing district primary that could help decide control of the House. Jess, this is kind of what you, this is your ballywood. Give us a rundown. Well, I'm not going to be able to do everything because, you know, I don't know a lot about the 105 legislative seats that are up in Idaho, but I want to win them. So if you're listening in Idaho, get out there and vote. Yeah. The Thomas Massey primary is obviously the really big one that everyone is paying attention to. $35 million spent there. I mentioned yesterday, the average primary cost between $100,000 and $500,000. Obviously there have been very expensive ones. I think there was 24 million spent and the Jebald Bowman, George Latimer, won a few years ago, but this is really out of control. Cal-Shay right now, though, has the odds at 45% that Massey wins versus 55% for Gallerine, which is not what I want to see. I want Thomas Massey to be able to retain his seat, especially because he has been consistently the same person. He's not someone that waffles on his values. There have been Republicans pointing out, J.D. Vance gave this really gross speech about Thomas Massey, where he talked about, you know, it's fine to be in a new seat. You know, it's fine to be independent, but it can go too far. And if you're bucking the administration this much, and yes, he has bucked the administration more than in past years, but guess what? The administration has gotten crazier than in past years. So if you are a constitutional conservative and a libertarian and you look at what the administration is doing vis-a-vis tariffs or war or the Epstein files, guess what? You're going to have more disagreement than you did when they were kind of behaving like normal people and Mark Milley was around. So Massey matters a lot. On the Democratic side, though, there's a big primary for the Senate candidate to take over Mitch McConnell's seat. A Dem hasn't won in 25 years that seat, but Amy McGrath, remember the fighter pilot who was the nominee six years ago? She's in that primary. So that's an interesting one. It also makes me think about the hundreds of millions of dollars that we've spent on unwinnable races, which is always in the back of my mind. Georgia, you know, John Ossoff is predicted that he's going to be able to retain that seat. He's been running an incredible campaign, but the competition for, yeah, just fantastic, like threading the needle all over the place. John Ossoff, we salute you. But who's going to be running against him on the Republican side? They're doing that today as well as the primaries for governor. And there are two state Supreme Court seats. Obama weighed in on them. We're looking to flip two of them. And Brian Kemp, the outgoing governor, very, very popular term limited, is backing the two sitting Supreme Court justices. And there goes a little Obama action there, which is always good to see how much his weighing in matters. It's still Georgia, but, you know, it's a purplish state at this point. Really exciting though. Pennsylvania, there are a number of seats that are potential pickups for Democrats. Big, big targets. Pennsylvania's seventh. That's where this guy Bob Brooks, who is the head of the firefighters union, is running on, this is the Democratic primary. And what's interesting about that race, he's going up against this guy, Ryan Crosswell, who's a former Marine. He resigned from the DOJ over this order to drop a corruption probe into Eric Adams. And it's really the, like, cost of living versus more traditional Beltway. We talk about democracy and upholding the rule of law, no kings, et cetera, a battle that's going on within the primary. And then in Philly, for the third congressional seat, it's a three-way primary. All of the candidates are super progressive. But one of them, Chris Rabb, is the most outspoken about Israel. And Hassan Piker has come to campaign for him. And AOC has come to campaign for him. And even though they all hold basically the same positions on things like, you know, healthcare, immigration, et cetera, the Israel component is what's making that race very interesting. And how far the endorsements from the DSA, Wing of the Party, will go in pushing Chris Rabb if he does win across the finish line. Thank you for coming to my election TED Talk. I am done now. No notes. I thought that was great. It'll be really interesting to see what happens tonight and to get your analysis of it. Let's take a quick break. Stay with us. Hi, I'm Maria Sharapova, host of the Pretty Tough Podcast. Each episode, I sit down with high achieving women to discuss the pursuit of excellence without apology. This week on the show, comedian and bestselling author Chelsea Hamler gives her tips on independence and aging gracefully. I would argue that 50, now that I am 50 and I understand life more than I did when I was 30 or 40, is that you get so much more wisdom and you get so much more experience that you actually feel like you're beginning again. Check out Pretty Tough, new episodes on Wednesdays. You can watch it on YouTube or listen in your favorite podcast app. Where exactly do U.S.-China relations stand? The Chinese side came in feeling as if they had figured out how to work both with and against Trump. He was inclined to try to create moments of crisis and then if they stood up to him, they were almost uniquely capable of making him back down. I'm Preet Bharara and this week, Evan Osnos of The New Yorker joins me to discuss the Trump-She summit, which he reported on from Beijing. The episode is out now. Search and follow. Stay tuned with Preet wherever you get your podcasts. Welcome back. Meanwhile, another horrific act of violence and murder is coming to the table. We're going to be talking about the long game wherever you get your podcasts. Welcome back. Meanwhile, another horrific act of violence in America, this time outside of Mosque and San Diego. Three men, including a security guard, were killed at the Islamic Center on the first day of a sacred period in Islam. Police are investigating the shooting as a hate crime. Jess, what do we know about this so far? We have had basically the same information for several hours at this point. The security guard, absolute hero, prevented many, many more from being murdered. Two teens, the police got there quickly because the mother of one of them called the police and said that her son had taken three of her weapons. I would like to talk about why there were so many weapons in the house that he was able to take three of them, which also implies that there are more that were in the house. And that she felt that he was suicidal and that he left in camouflage clothes with a friend. And they got in their car and they drove to the mosque. It was similar to Tyler Robinson, the guy who's accused of killing Charlie Kirk. And that they had written on the gun hate speech. And one of them left a suicide note. I'm unclear as to whether it's the kid whose mom called in or the other kid that he was with. They were 17 and 18 years old. There has been a big uptick in Islamophobia and Islamic hate crimes in the country. Obviously, that's happening with anti-Semitism and hate crimes against Jews as well. It's scary stuff. I mean, San Diego is isn't it like the number one place that people want to live in the country? San Diego, like perfect climate, you know, a really nice place and totally rocking the community there. And obviously, I want to talk about the gun violence aspect of this and, you know, taking weapons out of your house. If you have a depressed kid who you think might be suicidal and your weaponry is accessible, is she going to be held responsible for this to some degree? We have seen that happen. Like in the Michigan case, I'm not a lawyer. I don't know what's going to happen there, but certainly as a mom, that's where my mind goes. Like if you have a sick kid in your house, you know, I would do everything from put the knives away to certainly put my semi-automatic weapons away. Yeah, it'll be interesting if they charge the mom because you're starting to see a trend where parents are being held accountable or liable for gun violence. Obviously, this is this will be categorized as a hate crime. When I was at this gathering last year, we spent governors of Utah and Pennsylvania spoke. This was a gathering of billionaires. So they were all cosplaying Obama and talking about coming together and turning the heat down. That's bullshit. That's not going to do anything because when you have a group of mentally ill young men trying to regain their social status through what they see as a heroic act of violence and they have access to semi-automatic weapons, they will find something and someone to hate. It's just, you know, we need to address hate crimes, anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, but I believe you could get rid of all bigotry and you would still have this type of gun violence. They'd find another reason or another vessel for their hate for their and for the collision of their mental illness and their access to guns. We don't have a monopoly on hate in this country. We don't have a monopoly on young men who might be suffering from mental illness. What we have a monopoly on is hate young men suffering from mental illness who have access to weapons of war. And even in the U.S., I went out with a friend of mine, I'm sorry, in London and was saying about there was an anti-Semitic attack where two or three Jewish men were stabbed. I'm like, well, okay, I don't mean to sound like a sympathy. In the U.S., it would be a gun and they'd all be dead and more. And it's, for me, it just comes back to something very boring that we don't want to talk about. And that is, if you want to have a gun, you need to, in England, the local officer can show up at any time and demand to see where you're storing your guns and also do a mental health check. But everyone is so exhausted with this conversation. And by the way, I understand the rights of the Second Amendment. I think if responsible gun owners are actually less likely to commit a crime than most people, I know a lot of these people. Responsible gun owners are great citizens. But if you're someone who has semiotic weapons within readily accessible by a 17 or 18-year-old who I'm sure we're going to find out, it's always the same profile. He was a loner, wasn't doing well at school, felt socially ostracized, was struggling. And I don't think we know a lot about yet. But 93% of these shooters are one profile, young, male, isolated. And the nitron top of the glycerin here is access to weapons of war. And everyone will use it for the politicization, talking about one group hating the other and why it supports their political argument, as opposed to actually going after the real culprit here. And that is access to weapons of war. Well, to add to that, one thing that was sticking out to me and the producers, and I were going back and forth about this last night when it happened, is will people even know about this story? I mean, these things have become so commonplace that it's a blip on your timeline. And then everyone is back to being outraged, rightfully so, that Donald Trump has a 1776 fund for guys that came with zip ties and ropes to find Nancy Pelosi and AOC. And that's a horrifying state of reality to live in a country where a hate crime and a shooting like this that has such serious implications for what should be a change in gun policy, the mental health crisis, what's going on with young men, access to weapons, all of it, is going to be something that's your fifth or sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth, tenth Apple news story, or however it is that you take in your information. I mean, this will be politicized. Both sides of the issue around Israel will try and use it to their advantage. I understand that, but no one wants to talk about the real problem. And from violence fueled by extremism to concerns about the misinformation online that drives a lot of that extremism, lawmakers are now turning their attention to how these tools could shape elections. Representatives Josh Gotthimer and Mike Lawler are pushing companies, including open AI, Google and Microsoft to ensure AI chatbots don't spread misleading election information. This I think is actually a really big issue and Greece, and this got no coverage, Greece is thinking about passing a lot or has passed a lot where there's no anonymity. I think anonymity has been so perverted by quite frankly some people on the left who think the First Amendment means that you can have anonymous accounts spreading misinformation funded by the GRU through an Albanian troll farm that we have totally played into this misinformation, Lala Palooza with anonymous accounts. And Tom Steyer, I don't know if you saw this, got in trouble or was called out for astroturfing. Now, what is astroturfing when they can connect you to efforts to create fake accounts that can out support or criticism and it's not legitimate. It doesn't come from an actual human being. And all I got to say is folks, everyone's doing it. Everyone is doing it. And I think Tom Steyer would be stupid not to engage in astroturfing back. Whenever I said anything about Mom Donnie when he was running, I'm not exaggerating. Dozens of not hundreds of accounts would weigh in saying all the same fucking word language. Love your stuff, but on this one you got it wrong or just and then you press on the account and it's dogmom331 with four followers. If you're running for office, you are stupid not to astroturf back because unfortunately, and what we will look back on this era is one of our biggest mistakes is we've decided to let algorithms, profit driven algorithms and bad actors shape our thoughts in the comment section because what do you do when you see a piece of content? You immediately look at the top three or four comments to see how you should feel about what you've just seen. And so folks, be clear until the platforms decide. And by the way, if someone wants to show up and say, you know, mRNA vaccines, Altair DNA, I'm down with that as long as it's a real person. And as long as they have, they're willing to put their identity out there. It's just that that's the thing I like about LinkedIn and why LinkedIn has very little conspiracy theory and quite frankly, the discourse is a lot less course because people have identity there. They do a better job of enforcing identity also because everyone's hoping that someday this person might give them a job. So it's more civil. But the level of astroturfing taking place across, you know, our comments yesterday on Spencer Pratt go into those comments, find out how many of those are fake accounts. I mean, it's just you would be stupid if you were running for an office not to engage in some sort of defensive astroturfing back because great, you'll have your virtue and hundreds of accounts will convince people going to your content that you are awful and undermining your credibility. But this we will I've said for a while, I think when we look back on this age, we're going to regret income inequality. We're absolutely more than anything and regret having let this happen to our children. But I don't think we even understand the extent to which our views are shaped by bots and anonymous accounts being fueled through AI misinformation trying to get you to think, oh, that piece of content is right or wrong based on what you see in the comments section. Any thoughts? Yeah, not just the comment section, but how popular a post is. I mean, this takes us right to the 2016 election and Bob Mueller indicting all of the bot farms, right, that were Russian based. But they knew exactly what they were doing. And yeah, a lot of people feel like you've got to keep up right if you want to stay in the competition, you have to play by the rules or I should say what isn't regulated yet in order to get into a position of power so that you can then regulate it relates directly to the conversation over what type of money you should take right if you're running for an election. And now the big thing is no corporate PAC money, right, that it has to be grassroots donors. But it is hard for somebody who's just starting out, you know, without a ton of name recognition to get themselves front and center for people through completely organic means. And it's a big conundrum for people in elections and just for your regular life because now it feels like everybody has to have a brand, no matter what it is and LinkedIn provides that for folks who might not make it as a podcaster, or someone who can have a big social media following in a traditional sense but they can be posting stuff on LinkedIn that's very powerful and that people connect to and then hopefully hire them down the line. I love the idea of this bill. I love that it's bipartisan. I think we should see more of that and AI feels like the space that is ripe for cooperation. And then young people going back to the commencement address that we were talking about yesterday, young people are mad. They're mad because you're telling them you just spent hundreds of thousands of dollars and you're probably not going to have a job. They're mad because they weren't taught how to be normal human beings. Basically, they can't write by hand. I saw this really interesting article about how having good handwriting or actually just even being able to write by hand is going to be the new class marker in society. And a lot of public schools are doing this and more well off parents that use the public school system are taking their kids out because they're on screens too much. The nice white rich parents are saying keep my kids off those things. It's rotting their brains. And they have a much less chance of being happy or long term success if they're just glued to the things. So AI regulation, it is this big white space over 50% of voters don't have an opinion as to which party is better on the issue, which means like run on it. Put your ideas out there and speak to all of these concerns that obviously folks like Jonathan Haidt have been bringing up for years, but just regular parents like you and me having these concerns about what life looks like for our kids while they're in school and when they get out. Yeah, there's, your kids are too young, but you'll eventually have these moments where like, oh my God, the student has become the master. My son, my oldest son said to me, Dad, do you know a good coffee shop on Kensington High Street? And I said, no, just type it into AI. And he's like, no, I don't use AI for stuff like that. And I said, why not? And he said, I don't want to outsource my thinking skills to AI. And I thought, oh Jesus, aren't I supposed to say that to him? That's an 18 year old. That's an 18 year old. But here's the thing. I love it. His school teaches them that it says to them, we're not going to check your homework for AI. Actually, I think they do check it for AI now. But they said, you're screwing yourself. I mean, Derek Thompson had something really interesting around this. And he said that if we start outsourcing your ability to develop your critical thinking skills to AI, we're going to have a bunch of village idiots run by the algorithm that Darryl Amade or Sam Altman pick. I mean, you have to, you have to learn the friction and sorting through. I got to see in English my senior year in high school. And I was about to fail English one and my freshman year at UCLA. And if I failed English one, I would have then had to have taken, you'll love this. English is a second language, despite the fact English is my only language. And I have gone on my brain at some point started connecting stuff. And I now, I'll say this, I write well. I write good. The New York Times bestseller list would agree. So you write good. But part of getting there was a massive amount of frustration that I couldn't prompt AI to say write a paragraph describing the link between testosterone and risk aggressive behavior. I just, I had to figure that out that shit over 30 years for me. It took me a long time. I didn't write my first book until I was, until I was 50. And had I had AI or and lack the discipline not to use it, I just don't think I would have learned how to write well. And I'm really happy. And this goes back to again, everything reverse engineers to resources and money. Teachers in schools who don't have enough funding have a difficult time keeping kids off the screens because quite frankly, they need a teacher's aid and they need efficiency. And if you look at schools in America, the average expenditure on a public school kid is $15,000. The average private school spends $72,000 a year. So much of this comes down to money and our willingness to outsource the hard work to technology for not only the kids, but the teachers and the administrators who are just overwhelmed. I now believe that character AI and AI itself is as big a threat as social media. And I hope Jonathan, I hope Jonathan height as much success bringing this issue to the, to the four as he did around with social media. Speaking of information and traditional media and rich parents, Paramounts David Ellison and new CBS News Chief Barry Weiss are trying to shape one of the reshape one of the most iconic brands in television journalism. The backlash inside the industry is only growing now amid rating struggles, internal chaos and nonstop bad press. There are signs Paramount may be already rethinking just how much power Barry Weiss should have. Jess, how would you describe CBS or and Barry gate? It's not going well, right by the traditional metrics, which it's a ratings game, right? It's that that's how the business works. The Nightly News has been shedding viewers that that's generous to just say shedding viewers. And it's not happening across the board for the Nightly News broadcasts not happening to Tom Yamas or David Meir. So, you know, it's the things that it seems like she is really exercising a large amount of control over our suffering. In this new era, it is a complicated media landscape. I understand that there are rightfully so, you know, people are getting hired to try to future proof these brands and we've talked about that like what, you know, CBS Nightly News or 60 Minutes will mean to a Gen Z or a Gen Alpha. You know, in 60 Minutes has had their issues. They've had very high profile resignations like Bill Owens himself leaving the fact that that Seacot story got spiked and eventually made it to the air. I think it is a big negative spot on this tenure to say the least. I'm still happy that the story like we were trying to met it yesterday, all the work that they did for the episode on Sunday on the betting markets and poly market. Like that was fantastic. Right. That was like marquee 60 Minutes, you know, journalism, but I don't know watching Anderson Cooper sign off from 60 Minutes when I get the impression I don't know him. You do know him, but like it seemed like that was probably of all the jobs that Anderson Cooper does and he does a lot of jobs. That was probably his favorite except for New Year's Eve, maybe New Year's Eve number one and then 60 Minutes and watching him tearing up about it. Right. And what that job means and what telling those stories mean was very hard for me. So, you know, the merger is not finalized. So and I know the Trump administration, big fans of Barry Weiss. So imagine nothing is going to change like right away. But Puck did a big deep dive into the turmoil on it. Then Paramount released a statement that, you know, we're standing by Barry, etc. But I could definitely see a world in which her purview gets shifted and they bring more traditional TV folks there to oversee the TV aspect. What are your broad strokes or specific strokes actually? A lot there. So in sort of order. So Anderson is probably not only the most trusted journalist in the world right now, he's probably the most liked. And that is most journalists accidentally get assigned left or right and then people 50% of the world hates them. And Anderson hasn't suffered from that. Also, I think Anderson does a great job managing his own brand and he realizes something that Tim Cook realized and very few other people realize. And that is most people who are in that seat don't leave until they're fired or they're taken on a long walk and said you should think about stepping down. And Anderson realized that one of the best ways to burnish your brand is to leave too early as opposed to too late. So I actually think this is a really smart move on his part. With respect to Barry, I don't know her well, but I do know her. I'm not as excised about Barry Weiss as everyone else. And my sense is they needed to do something. They brought in an innovator. I think Barry built a great company, an interesting company with a free press. And media is just so self obsessed that anyone who's an outsider coming in with new ideas, I think there's just going to be automatic organ rejection. And there's so much news around this because media is self obsessed with itself. I think CBS is totally irrelevant. I think it's like arguing over RC Cola. Wow, did you see that segment on CBS Evening News said, you know, you're 90 year old. When I accidentally watched the Evening News, it's essentially a lesson in how much it sucks to get old. It's opioid induced constipation television, or you decide, oh, I must have restless legs. And it's hosted by a guy that every 90 year old wishes their daughter had married. And it's basically 22 minutes of sanitized news and then a heartwarming story about 90 year old woman who has a butterfly garden. It just so, it feels so passé and so dated and that business is literally dying. So they took a chance and they brought in who they perceived as an innovator. This is what they got wrong. Barry has no experience running a large organization. And what you realize is someone who has built small companies that have turned into medium sized companies. And then I have failed or at least had the self awareness to realize I don't, I get, I'm not the right guy. I can get something from A to F, but not from F to L. I've never built a company worth a billion dollars. I don't know how to do that. When you get into a large organism, it's less about leadership and mandating things than it is about building consensus and figuring out ways to keep the key players really happy. And when you have an innovator come in who's run small businesses, the reason they're small businesses were innovative and successful is they kind of do ready fire aim. That does not work at a place like CBS. You can't show up and say, you know, I'm worried about this story not having input from the White House. Let's delay it. A lot of people say she spiked it. You don't do that at fucking 60 minutes. Those people, those people think a lot of themselves and quite frankly that confidence has been well earned. Her job at a place like 60 minutes, her job, she's Phil Jackson and they're Michael Jordan. Phil Jackson's job was to get along with Michael Jordan and ask him what he wanted and how he could be, how I feel Jackson could be helpful to you. And I just think this is a case of someone who doesn't understand who I do think is an innovator. But quite frankly, doesn't understand how to run a large organization and unfortunately is kind of learning on the job. But I find all of this, the only reason this is in the news is that media is just obsessed with itself. And quite frankly, what happens to CBS? CBS is going to go away. That's not the question. The question is how slowly or how fast it goes away. And you know what? It doesn't fucking matter. It doesn't matter. CBS is totally irrelevant. And every time they make a change of anchor, it'll have a step change down because it gives people an excuse to find media sources elsewhere that do a better job, are less varnished, are less polished, and there is good media popping up everywhere. So the media itself likes to think they're really precious and if CBS goes away at some sort of human tragedy, no, it's not. The best journalists will go find a lower means cost of production with sub stack, with podcasts, with media companies like SEMIFOR, Axios, or Puck. Media is going to be just fine. This is the ecosystem staring at its own naval, excised by someone they see as an interlober and unwashed, mongrel coming in and storming the pristine gates of CBS. Who gives a fuck? Anyway, thank you for my TED talk. There you go. Okay. Let's take one last quick break. In two decades, the experience of using the Internet hasn't changed, which is to say when you want to do something, you go to Google, you type some words, you hit enter, and then you click on some links. But now Google in particular is really eager to change that. This week on The Vergecast, we're talking about all of the news from I.O., Google's big developer conference, including the ways in which it is going to change search completely and forever. All that plus what a Google book actually is on The Vergecast wherever you get podcasts. Welcome back. All right, before we go, the Wall Street Journal is issued an obituary for a cultural mainstay. Can you read about this? Dad books. These are books that are defined as serious nonfiction books in the areas of biography, current affairs, and business and economics. And sales are apparently cratering, thanks in part to a podcast. So Jess, the first serious book I ever read was a dad book. And I'm almost entirely sure you did not read it. The Winds of War by Herman Wook, my mom gave it to me because she wanted me to understand more about World War II and the Holocaust. And it sort of inspired a lifelong love of World War II media. My favorite actor is Hitler. I'll watch anything that Hitler stars in. As long as he dies in the end? I know how it ends and I like the ending. It's my favorite ending of any movie. Is anything starring Hitler? Only I wish we'd got to him first. But anyways, I found this really interesting and sad because I'm guilty of this and I'm curious if you are. I am reading less. I'm seeing fewer movies and I am becoming a victim to the clip economy. How about you? Well, job dependent also, which is, I'm not sure what my diet would look like or what I would spend my time doing if I wasn't part of something now that thrives if the algorithm is into you and dies if the algorithm decides that it likes the pod next door. I think that we're all suffering from this. I have been reading a lot about the signs of tech addiction and how your hands are even sometimes moving, like to go to scroll and go to your favorite apps without you even realizing that you're doing it. And I wish there was some way for me to take a proper detox, but we're all seriously damaged goods. And I feel a little guilty also. Like I just finished writing a book and I can barely read a book. I mean, I know how. But time wise to sit down and actually spend time with a novel, I started a book club at my daughter's preschool with other moms to force myself to actually read because I had to be the moderator and I was not going to be embarrassed at my own book club. I think it's really sad. Well, I'll use this as a bridge to talking about one of the myths or mistakes I made as a father and that is I got very into World War II and read a lot about it. And one of the mistakes you make, I think as a dad, I think, I don't think moms are as bad as this because they're a little just more in touch. But I naturally thought my dad wasn't around a lot. It was kind of like the thing that really resonated with me, the media, the media that resonated with me is that Manny and modern family is fascinated with his dad because his dad's never around and scarce. That was my dad. My dad wasn't around a lot. So when he showed up, I was just fascinated by him. He was tall and handsome and had a Scottish accent, was a great golfer. And I just couldn't get enough of him. And I used to go watch him play golf just so I could like hunt down his lost golf ball. But I just wanted to hang out with my dad because I saw him two or three times a year. And I assumed that my kids were going to be like that and that my boys were just going to be fascinated with everything I did and that they were going to want to go see World War II movies and do CrossFit with me every other day. And what you realize, and this is I finally figured this out, I was disappointed at first when I realized they're just not into that stuff. And I took it sort of like, well, they're just not that into me. If you're around a lot and you're doing your job as a father, that scarcity goes away and that's a good thing. And also what you have to realize if you want to be a good dad is it's not about figuring out how to get them into your stuff. It's about figuring out things they might get into and pouring fuel on that flame. My oldest made tiramisu yesterday for four hours. I cannot relate to that. You realize as a father, you're doing your job if your kids have to wear with all to be really into their own thing and not totally so fascinated with you because you're not around very much. And your job is to get super into what they're into and to pour fuel on it. And the biggest, one of the most frightening moments I've had was when one of my sons was younger, someone I thought to myself, it doesn't have any hobbies. So whatever the goal is to get your kids into what you're into, your goal is just to get your kids, find your kids into something and just facilitate it. That's the key. It doesn't matter what it is. They just need to be passionate about something. And for the dads out there that think that your kids aren't that interested in what you do, that's a feature, not a bug. It means you're around a lot and they don't see you as an aspirational brand or a luxury brand. They see you as a big part of their lives. All right. Let's leave it there. Jess, we will see you post-election. .