Offset and the State of Hip-Hop in ATL. Plus, Trump’s Ceasefire in Iran

Yo yo yo, thought warriors. What is up? How are learnings on? Is Ivan and Lathan Jr.? And it is me, Rachel and Lindsay. Two guests. Akbar Shahid Ahmed. He's going to talk to us about Iran. It's all caught up. What's going on over there? Mark Cassin. Mark Cassin, my friend. Political thriller out. Premieres, well, by the time you guys get it, it'll be out. But pH1, we have a great, use the word you love to use, robust conversation, not just about the movie, but also just about the political landscape. Nice back and forth there. Nice back and forth. Those two interviews are pretty lengthy and in depth. There's stuff to talk about, but most of this other shit is bullshit. We're going to start with some of it right now. Donnie. Jade today. Whatever. Oh, Jade, happy, happy to have you in trowing the topics today. Thank you. All right, so we got some quick hitters with us today. First off, Jake Paul is once again at the center of controversy this time for suggesting the idea of using blackface as a comedic response to Drewsey's last skit. He spoke on an episode of this past weekend asking whether he should be allowed to flip it and do the same in reverse, framing the idea as a matter of fairness, asking essentially if playing the field is equal when it comes to race based satire. We do have a video for you, so let's go ahead and watch it. I want to ask you something because. I've been over the last couple of days. Calling makeup artists, and I was going to do a response to this and like go and do like the full on darker. Yeah. Mm hmm. And do it and just do it back because why not? Yeah. Like are we on the same playing field? Like I think if you if there's a way to do it. Oh, this thing in in well this even the sentence. But if there's a way to do it, I've been here many times. If there's a way to do it, I think, yeah, I think there needs to be some black support for the character, I think. Like I'm saying like, say if Druski or I'm trying to think of somebody else. Charles Barkley, Charles Barkley. If you got one of those guys to be like, hey, do you want you to do this skit with me? Let's do this. But but still, that's that's pussy now. You think it is? Yeah. To me, there's a level of like, doesn't that make. Us more. Like prejudice, like more prejudice. That makes us if we have to partner with someone, Druski just dropped this and he's done it a couple of times. Exactly. I fucking love it. Just you already pussy now, just do it. That's exactly how you already pussy now. You already pussy now, just do it. Don't talk about it. But can be about it. And don't do it with no fucking makeup artist. Do it the fucking old school way. Go fucking Al. Jocelyn, Jassie, 100 percent. Burn the fucking court. Just do it. Take it. Put it on your fucking face. Throw fucking caution to the wind. You too fucking stupid to see any type of daylight between the white face and black face. You guys want to have the argument you don't understand. Every time you fucking ask a white person about something that a most genius in the world, we invented the airplane type shit until it comes down to black face or the N word. And then it's Lenny from Mice and Me. Like I'm telling you straight up. It's like I'm just like for real. Just do it. We can't have the black face, white face, which is not even a thing conversation anymore. It's the same stuff. We've done it over and over again. I'm exactly with you when I saw this. It was like when Delroy Lindo was like when the guy was talking about saying the N word, he goes to say it. That's not just do it. Just do it. And I don't think it's them not being smart enough to get it. I just don't think they care. Right. In the same way that they fight so hard to say the N word. Why can't we say it? You say it. It's the same kind of thought that goes towards this. It's like they don't like being told they are not allowed to do something. They don't care about the history. They don't care about the way it makes certain a certain group of people feel. All they care about is that they are told no and they are not used to being told no. And so they want to find ways that they can do it. And so just do it. Don't sit here, which it sucks, because we were literally having a conversation about Joe Rogan and Theo Vaughan. And not that we were given really me, not that I was giving him so much, but was. Interested in hearing him take a stance up to Joe or standing up to Joe Rogan and putting humanity first. But there's a line there because when it comes to black people, he obviously doesn't care about putting our humanity first. So just do it. I don't need to hear you say I need black people on my side because some somebody would be stupid enough to do it. I don't need to hear you say you've been researching for makeup artists. I don't need to hear how you would reason this, how you like what you did, how you see the comedy in it. I don't need just do it. You pussy. Stop. Just do it. Like, look, yeah, I don't I don't think that anyone doesn't understand. I mean, I can't rule it out that Theo Vaughan and Jake Paul don't understand the difference. I can't. That can't be ruled out. I can't rule that out. I can't rule out that those guys don't understand. They don't care. I mean, it's look, there's it doesn't really matter whether or not they understand it or not. I'm so sick of it. Just do it. Yeah, do it. And then, you know, we going to boycott Netflix when your fight comes on. Just do it and just just let's have the fight. Fuck it. There's nothing else to do. Do the fight in blackface. No, just do the fight. All the way. Just just do it. Like we just just do it. OK, sitting there talking. You know what? Your ancestors are disappointing. Because they didn't play around like that. No, your ancestors are up there right now going. Now, why are they all in jake? Beating around the bush with these niggers. Like they just you're disappointing. Your ancestors just do it. Sit around fucking podcast. About act like you trying to find the right way. Do it. What's the right way that we do this and make it make black people on our side? You niggers out here. Think about what they think of y'all. They don't think shit of y'all because they know somebody. Kind of black support. We get and one of y'all is possible. And we got to get some blacks just do do it. Yeah, next time. Next time, though, I'm not next time. Now look now. Do it now. Just go ahead. I'm sick of it. Like sitting around aggravated the shit out of me. Right. Offset with this nigga up to. So offset was shot outside of Florida Casino at the Hard Rock Hotel in Florida. The valet area in the valet area on Monday evening. Police say the injuries were not life threatening and offset is in stable condition. The incident followed a physical altercation before gunfire broke out. Officers responded quickly and detained two people. Rapper Lil T.J. was also arrested in connection with the fight leading up to the shooting, but not charged with the shooting itself. He faces a misdemeanor charge and some disorderly conduct. Thoughts. Um. I mean, now apparently like offset is they got all kinds of different gambling debts. Everybody came out and said they got gambling debts with offset. Des Bryant said offset. Oh, like $8000. Yeah, there was some casino. Apparently fact check me on that. That came out and said that offset was into them for $100,000. Academics is some about like $900,000 for something else. It there could be a situation where offset. It seems like it's pretty evident that just based upon all of the circumstantial evidence used that you heard that a while you would do your little burp or whatever. You probably had some pork this morning. It seems like offset has a gambling problem. It seems like there's a gambling issue here. And it seems like he's tried to run off on a gambling plug a couple of different times. And that may be the case, but violence is not the answer. Right. Because people are saying, like I'm not familiar with Lil T. J., but I guess like he borrowed money from him. And this is stemming from like over a year ago. I don't know. But violence is the answer. He shouldn't have been shot. Shouldn't have been shot. Is there a more tragic hip hop story than than the Migos? I know. Like, I mean, there are tragic stories. Well, what I mean, OK, guys, obviously, I'm podcasting. Let me let me say that again. Rewind. Where the Migos are right now in 2026. Well, they don't exist. When you thought about or when you think about the heights of Bad and Boozy, where that group had gotten to me, the Migos became one of the most significant rap groups in hip hop history. They were holding down shit, getting busy. And with the tragedy that has been falling them, losing a group member, the animus between Offset and Quavo, Offset's personal life being and shambles more tabloid fodder than music. Quavo not really having any type of focus or penetration musically. Like, if you'd have told me in 18, 19, 17, if you'd have told me that this is where things were going, I wouldn't have believed it. Yeah. It's that that is a tragedy to your point. I wouldn't have believed it either. Yeah, it's just I don't really have much to say on this. It's just I mean, yeah, it's like, you know, what the fuck, man? Like, by the way, what what is the state? You know what I want to talk to? I want to talk to someone who can come on the podcast and have a conversation about the state of Atlanta hip hop. I argue that when I look, huh? That's your guy, right? Kill the mic. Yeah. Yeah. But kill the mic wouldn't kind of a part of that movement of Atlanta hip hop. Kill the kill the mic is an elder statesman in that regard, but he could probably still start. But he's not going to really. He's very, very, very Atlanta first, so he wouldn't give us anything legitimate on the state of Atlanta hip hop. He's going to be very supportive of his brothers and all of that stuff like that. When do you think it took a turn? What you talking about? The state of state of Atlanta hip hop. When do you think it took a turn? That's a good question, because. QC had it. Thug had it. Savage had it. They got they had all their future. They had all different types of acts. Maybe they're going to jail. Maybe the pandemic. I actually don't know. That's why I need. That's why it would be good to have the kids, children, the Wonder Twins over here. Like Atlanta seems like right now things are not as popping. On the like what happened, J. You're a rapper. Um, I kind of I kind of agree with you on the the thug tip. I mean that I mean young thug is like, you know, especially before he got locked up, hot as hell. Like I think I mean, Lotto's doing her big thing, you know, shout out to her. She's coming out with stuff. But I do think Atlanta goes through phases. Because it wasn't I feel like it wasn't necessarily like 2000s. They were up and then a little bit like in the middle before thug came out before Lotto got popping before, you know, it was kind of on the on the down end. And they got back up again. Man, I was kind of down again. Atlanta Atlanta started popping with outcasts and they didn't take a breath a breath since the trap shit was all the way through the 2000s. Gucci and everybody was going crazy. I will admit that before the rise of QC, maybe. It wasn't to the fever pitch. Yeah. But their presence hadn't gone anyway because anywhere because at that point, the classic runs of your Gucci's T.I. Well, Gucci might have been locked up, but your classic run of those guys were kind of petering out like that. And then as soon as those classic runs was over, here comes the here come the Migos. Drake was a big part of that because city girls, city girls, all of that stuff. Like I said, all the QC stuff, Yati, all of that stuff was popping, but different levels. And then it was other people out that was that was having hits out of Atlanta that were just like almost like one off. You're to me, your city is really popping in hip hop when you have a legacy artist, a legacy, like that would be your future, like a legacy artist, like a. Top. This guy is the sound of a generation type guy. Then after that, you got A plus rap superstars. Those are your thugs and your savages. After that, you got like kind of working man rappers to have hits and shit. Then you have people that pop off on one offs like my Conan. Come through like seriously, like people like that. The sound is so potent out of the city that like everybody can kind of eat off what's going on. The infrastructure is so good that everybody is getting a little taste of it. And really the money is getting that's like gone. It'd be interesting to cover. You're right. We should have somebody come in and kind of talk about it. So have somebody come and talk about what's going on. But like Mike, Tip, all of those guys, those are the elder states, they're not going to be like good on the convo like that. If you want to have a. Even to you. Well, I mean, look, if you want to have a convo. What about Ludacris? You think Ludacris too? I mean, he be he be tapped in. I know these guys are like these these guys are my favorite guys. OK, first of all, it sounds like. So he's basically said they can't be so they need the person needs to be what age group? Well, they got to be somebody that had they. I mean, Tip did have his label, but it would have to be somebody that was a part of this whole thing. It would have to be somebody that's quality. You see coaching coaching P. But but like they're not going to talk about it. But just like somebody that was around like a hip hop journalist of some sort. Yeah, you need to come on and talk about that. Like what's going on in Atlanta? Because I tell you. That's important. Atlanta's health in hip hop is important, man. It's very, very important. And people are talking about it. Let's see what happens. See if they if everybody kind of gets back together. Who's there's new guys coming, cats coming out. But like who's behind the thug generation? Y'all tell me. Y'all supposed to know who's behind the thug savage? Who's the hottest 23 year old, 24 year old rapper from Atlanta right now? Yeah, who's the hottest? Who's the hottest 23 year old rapper? Period. Who's the hottest young rapper in Atlanta? I don't know. Period. Period. A young rapper. Pop Smoke. Yeah, he's my he's like one year older to me. He did. Pop Smoke is dead. Yeah, I know, but he's still. OK, you know, I know. You know, like Bernard Nucar. Like that. That's it. Pop Smoke. I covered how it is gonna. How does gonna. Oh, gonna. Gonna. Gonna. Yeah. But gonna is still a contemporary. Those are how little baby. Little baby. Little baby is a contemporary. You know, see, we even mentioned a little baby. Like think about what he's gonna do. All of that stuff. Those guys were it was it was up. It was it was crazy. And now it's kind of like maybe it's a little quiet. But where's boy Cardi from? I don't know where Playboy Cardi is from. He was. I think that's Atlanta, too. I'm not sure if I'm on mistaken. Because at school. The young folks, they don't know shit. And y'all definitely I should be in the conversation. Rest in peace. Atlanta. Huh? Playboy Cardi from Atlanta. Look at that. A whole lot of red. Like it like they don't, you know, what's like guys. Come on, man. Like we you guys are the younger generation. I'm 46 next week. You guys are a younger generation. We got to lean on y'all for like what the fuck is going on? And you talk about some shout out to pop smoke. Well, you talk. I don't know on that too. But I don't Atlanta rappers. Like I listen to a lot of older Atlanta rappers, but new I couldn't tell you. Y'all don't like them. Well, not that I don't like them. I just couldn't tell you. Well, that's what it took a turn. See, it took a turn. It took a turn. All right. We got to talk about Iran. Akbar, do it. The happenings in Iran. It's happening too quick for us. We have to bring in the big guns here. We have to bring in the big guns. OK, we have Akbar Ahmed joining us on higher learning. He is a friend of the show. You know, we have to talk about it. He has a book crossing the red line is the book. This book is the definitive the definitive account of the Binds administrations disastrous policymaking. A big reason why things have worsened under Trump. I guess this book. Akbar, thank you for joining us on the show. It establishes the framework for sort of how we got to where we are right now. Right. A lot of the choices that we see right now are linked to the military buildup under Biden, the empowering of Netanyahu that happened under Biden. And the fact that, you know, my title is crossing the red line. The fact that every single red line of the international system was crossed in Gaza. There were no consequences. And in fact, we see that model now being repeated in Lebanon, in Iran and still in Gaza. I mean, there's still not really peace, which has to say. So what I talk about in the book is how this is a bipartisan and really systemic failure of US foreign policy that we're now seeing the seeds of the seeds were sown. And we're seeing the fruit of that now. And it's it's just it's requiring a lot of reflection and reckoning that to me doesn't look like it's happening yet among Democrats or even Republicans. So our audience knows you, senior diplomat correspondent at HuffPo, like you have just the entire region in your mind. And we got to get to the bottom of this. OK. So since we've been gone, Kelly Clarkson type of situation, so much has changed. OK. There was a ceasefire that was agreed to, apparently, between us and the Iranians. I say us. It's not me. God damn it. It's the Trump administration. The administration, it's this regime's war on the Iranians. But that ceasefire seems to already have fallen apart. Already, the ceasefire has fallen apart. Why is the ceasefire fallen apart? Agbar. So there's a lot of reasons why the Trump administration has failed to clinch the deal here. We know they want to get out of the war to an extent. But the two big reasons are, number one, they're still not approaching this with any kind of professionalism or strategy. Right. So the actual issues that they have with the Iranians about Iranian uranium, about Iran's influence in the region, its ballistic missiles, all of these goals, they still don't quite know what compromises they're willing to make. And so that makes it really hard to have any kind of deal with the Iranians who are, you know, of course, an oppressive regime, a difficult regime to deal with, but are at least clear about what they want from a negotiation that Trump administration has gone back and forth on this about 50 times. The second aspect is Israel. And this gets back again to the book and to the kind of longstanding failure. Just like Biden before him, Trump is proving really unable to handle the U.S.-Israel relationship in any kind of humane or strategic way. He hasn't been able to get Netanyahu to stop the massive bombing in Lebanon. And for the Iranians, that's a red line. They need to feel that Lebanon is part of that ceasefire too. So those are kind of the two big reasons. And so when we're here now looking at the Trump administration saying, J.D. Vance is going to go there, Jared Kushner is going to go there, see Whitcoff, OK, but the underlying issues are still not resolved. I mean, I'm a Pakistani. I look at the negotiations happening in Pakistan. And I think it's an important moment. And it's a big role for Pakistan as the mediator between the Iran and the U.S. But we haven't seen either the Iranians or the Americans kind of show that willingness to reach a settlement. Yeah, it just seems like it's all just it feels like a headline, you know, after after Trump put these these wild tweets out there where it seemed like he was trying to escalate to possibly deescalate. Maybe I don't know if that was his what he was trying to put out there or not, but or a strategy, I guess I should say. And then all of a sudden we have this ceasefire that's announced. But to your point, one of the the non negotiables for the Iranians is what's happening in Lebanon. And Wednesday, what was it? Two hundred people were killed and a thousand people were injured. And now I'm looking at updates right now, and it looks like that Bibi Nanyahu has issued an instruction to start direct negotiations with Lebanon. But when you have this happening, when there's this ceasefire, is it all? Like I said, a headline, is there anything real even happening? Right. And to your point, Rachel, that Nanyahu has said, when we just start talking to the Lebanese, the Lebanese government asked Israel more than a month ago to start negotiations. That option has been on the T-Bullies. The Israelis didn't take it then. The Americans didn't put pressure on them to take it. And Israel has not indicated that they will stop the bombing. So the bombing essay on Wednesday, I was talking to folks on the ground. It was terrifying, right? It was the worst bombing Lebanon has seen since 1982. And this is one of the most war-torn, fractured, vulnerable countries in the world. So when you have the Israelis saying, yes, we'll start talks with Lebanon, but we're not going to start bombing, nor are we going to pull back from our positions. And you still have this historic US military buildup across the region. And again, I've talked to service members who are posted. Their service members were on their way there. There's a lot of confusion. There's a lot of why are we being sent out here? Are we safe? Are we vulnerable? No, the Trump administration has put these troops still in harm's way, still in a position to attack Iran further. And I'm not hearing from sources inside the government any kind of plan or strategy to translate this from more than a headline, more than a PR announcement, which, as we know, Trump often makes these announcements with economic considerations at hand. Is this about getting the markets to calm down? Or is this about real peace, real dignity for Iranians, for Lebanese? For others? Vice President Vance said that it would be stupid for the Iranians to hold this ceasefire up because of what's happening in Lebanon or because Israel is into it with Hezbollah. Is there any scenario to you, any scenario where the Iranians cut bait with Lebanon, with Hezbollah and let Israel let them go it alone and say, we're going to take this deal with the Americans and not care about what's happening over there? I would say that analysis is a little it's both outdated and hubrisick, right? And what I mean by that is, yes, the Iranians have in some previous moments. They have not joined Hezbollah. Hezbollah launched a war with Israel after October 7th in support of Hamas and Gaza. The Iranians didn't really help Hezbollah then. And when there was a full Israeli assault into Lebanon, they didn't really do much about it. They launched one big barrage of missiles. But that was before Iran felt that the US and Israelis were at their neck, right? Now it's been turned into an existential moment for Iran. And this question of can they retain that network? Can they retain the appearance of loyalty, friendship, solidarity across the region? That's really important. And from the Iranian standpoint, they're coming into this from a narrative of defiance. Right? That's where it gets to the hubris. I mean, the US is not walking into this, despite what the Trump administration says as a winner or as the strongest side. The Iranians feel they are walking into the talks as the side that's proven after six weeks of really advanced bombing and three thousand people at least killed just horrors in Iran. The Iranians still feel we show you we got you to the table. And Trump was the one who was kind of weak and folded. So I do think that France is kind of misreading the situation that I don't see a scenario in which the Iranians cannot Hezbollah to try, especially since they're not only looking at Hezbollah, they're also looking at the Houthis and Yemen, another important ally at the strategic waterway. And they're kind of thinking about a bigger strategic picture shift, right? For them, they want to speed a moment where they're reassert in the region. Straight of Hulmuz is now a weapon they use all the time. And then looking at that by saying, we also don't want Israel to be the regional hegemon so that I don't see them doing that. There's a lot of talk about this taco theory, I guess, that was coined last year. And some people had predicted, OK, well, once Trump put out those tweets, that he always chickens out, right? And then all of a sudden you see the ceasefire, you see this deal that's proposed, which favors the Iranians as it's presented. How likely, based on what this is already doing, not just to the US, but globally, how it makes the United States look when it comes to economically and politically, the impact that this could have on Trump, how likely do you see him agreeing to the deal that's presented to him? And if there are certain things that you think that are non-negotiable, what do you think those things are? Yeah, I think he definitely feels that economic pressure a lot, Rachel. I mean, you can see you see this in not only US inflation, but the European Union is slowing down, Asia is slowing down. That's why China got involved to kind of encourage the deal at this moment. He doesn't want to be presiding over a global recession or be blamed for it. But I don't see shifting around him the kind of culture of yes, man. So again, talking to people inside the administration who have painted the picture to me of like, what these discussions look like around the president. People are not really telling him you should change course in his how. Maybe JD Vance might try to do that in this moment, looking at his own political future. I don't think Trump cares that much about JD Vance, his political future. The non-negotiables for him, could I see him agreeing to some of Iran's demands? Yeah, a little bit more than a standard American president might. For instance, you've seen him come out and talk about maybe the US and Iran could have a joint venture to charge the ships crossing this strategic trade of Hormuz, which is just unreal to think about both as a possibility, given their rivals and be this was an open straight. It was free a month ago. I could see Trump trying to make concessions on those things. But there I think he's overstating how easy it would be for him to do that in Washington. I mean, I'm sitting here at DC. You are surrounded by Iran Hawks, by people who are creatures of the military industrial complex and are going to push back really, really hard. If, for instance, Trump tries to make any concessions on the sanctions relief that the Iranians want, the Iranians want every American sanction pulled off. I don't know how Trump can realistically make that happen. And I do think people in Congress would very quickly slap on more sanctions. Oh, now Congress would get involved in something. Now this is all I mean, this is consistent thing on Congress, right? Do you see them a certain sense for more war, very rarely for less war? Of all of the demands that the Iranians are making, are there any of them that you think they would be flexible on? They have said they want to continue in enriching uranium. The administration says that's a red line. They want to continue their relationship with Hezbollah. The Israelis are going to say that's a red line. Like the straight. It seems like there's nothing but goddamn red lines in the entire deal. And it would almost have to be the United States that will be willing to eat a little crow here. Is there any to you? Anything that the Iranians are going to go, OK, we didn't get obliterated. Our regime is still intact. Will like will declare victory and get back to some degree of normalcy. What do you think? I think the enriched uranium one, which is again, this is it's so interesting. How did that was the fundamental issue between the US and Iran for so long? And Trump hasn't addressed it at all with this war in any way. It has not changed. I do think the Iranians, if the US were willing to respect their right to enrich uranium, which is something really important for them, they feel, why should we be singled out as a country that cannot do this? Given that we said we won't build a nuclear weapon. If the US would recognize that the Iranians have indicated for a long time, they would be open to a regional enrichment consortium. So some kind of structure with some of their neighboring countries, maybe the Saudis, maybe the UAE, maybe Qatar, maybe Kuwait and do it that way. And I think that could be a media. But again, I think the Trump administration and the Iranians should accept have made that a lot harder than it was before this war, because as you've seen the footage, I mean, the Baye, Doha, Kuwait, they have been attacked, decimated in some parts by the Iranians. So the mistrust with Iran's neighbors is also very high in a way that wasn't before the war. But that's a place where I could see them maybe come towards a concession. I could see them maybe come towards a concession on limiting influence to some degree in the region, but they're not going to be willing to pull back the way that the US and Israel are saying. It seems that any enrichment in any way, shape or form would just be a remarkable political defeat for Trump. It seems like he has said zero, your uranium uranium, your enrichment, zero, zero. And he wants it to be zero because he wants to defeat the narrative around the JCPOA, which set enrichment level limits and stuff like that. And they were still doing it. They were they had a secret clandestine operation to build nuclear weapons. And Obama was too fucking stupid to see it. All of that stuff like that. And it seems like he the Trump would be opening himself up to that type of scrutiny if he allowed them to enrich with me and Rachel like with anyone, right? If he if he allowed it in any way, shape or form, it seems like that one is the biggest non-starter. You don't think so? He made that test for himself, right? I mean, he did not have to make this a line. And that also speaks to this question of why did he send Steve Wittkopf in and eventually Dan Chai Kushner instead of any kind of technical expert, right? There are people who have been working on this, as you say, going back to the Obama era, non-partisan, professional career people. It would be a climb down from Trump. It would be a U-turn again of his own creation. And again, a Netanyahu's creation, because don't forget he went into this war with Netanyahu. Netanyahu would have to accept that he was out there saying, we are going to get rid of Iran's stockpile of enriched uranium, hasn't been touched, hasn't changed at all from the war. Instead, thousands of people again are dead and many Israelis have been traumatized. Some Israelis have been killed and the country as a whole is just rattled. It would be a climb down. I don't see what else Trump could do because for the Iranians, that is core. I mean, that is kind of the central issue here, where they feel not only is it about their respect on the world stage, it's about their self-defense at this point. And this gets to the broader question of what message has the US sent now from this war? It's a message of maybe this wouldn't have happened if you had nuclear weapons. And that's something that, you know, Kim Jong-un, who hasn't been attacked ever by the Trump administration or the US, can sort of turn around and say, Pakistan, again, a nuclear power, has all faced these kinds of attacks. So maybe the Iranians, from that standpoint, are feeling, I do think that's still firm on this. We will not build a nuclear weapon, that's in that ten demands. But there are certainly elements in that system who feel the ultimate safety we do not have to consider it. Maybe we need to keep this in radium and this right to enrich because one day we might need them all. Hmm. I keep thinking, and I was trying to look at this, Operation Epic Fury started in the February, February 28th. And when it started, it was all about the message that was being told. And we talked about it here and the way the Iranian people across the world were responding about this is going to be different. We're going to be free. There's going to be a regime change. And I'm looking at this 10 point plan, and I know we're far from that now, right, because there's really no way that the U.S. can really do that and claim success in the way that they want to. But nothing in the 10 part plan seems to be about the people. Can you speak to that? Yeah, there is no mention here about human rights. There is no mention about the maskers of the protesters. I mean, Trump said part of his reason for maybe even considering attacking Iran was to punish them or deter them from the maskers of protesters. Right. That hasn't happened. You haven't even seen you. I've written about a case of an Iranian American. There are several who are held in some of the most notorious prisons in Iran, really vulnerable, really worried. You haven't seen the Trump administration even make that an issue in the talks. So the human element is totally missing. Any kind of sanctions relief on specifically humanitarian grounds has not been proposed by the Iranian side. And you haven't seen even because the Iranians know this is kind of by the broader question of degradation of the world system, which really, I would argue, was sped up because of the Gaza example. All sides now feel it's a race to the bottom. Right. So if the Iranians were to say, let's open up calls for accountability for the U.S. strike on the school, right, for the U.S. Kenyans civilians, they would face their own scrutiny. And so the kind of tacit and dirty agreement in this entire negotiation is let all of us Iran and the U.S. kind of put that question of people's human rights, accountability, justice. Put that to the side. OK, forget about the political implications here. How is the world different fundamentally? From the time before this war began. Right now, how's the world different? We are all poorer because inflation is necessarily going to continue. And that's not changing. The EU economic chief came out today and said, great, thank you so much for the ceasefire, but we are still going to face a serious slowdown of our economic growth and a serious increase in our inflation. And the U.S. is just so much weaker strategically. And it's weaker strategically in a way, you know, people will say, well, the U.S. did the Iraq war or Trump has these things and there hasn't been that blowback. In my mind, and talking to a lot of European contacts in particular, the U.S., because of this policy has looked so unrestrained, unrestrained from international law, you saw the heads have come out and say, we are not dealing with any stupid law of war in this campaign, unrestrained from any sense of strategy or planning. So when you look at the world after this war, it's a lot harder for countries, for governments, even pro-U.S. people to make the case to their populations. Let's go along with U.S. foreign policy maneuvers. And that has implications for the U.S. competition with China. It has influence. It has implications for how any future government in the U.S., Trump or not Trump, will be dealt with by partners abroad. And how the world has changed, too, is that we are really, this is the biggest push, a big push of the Trump administration has been to pull us back from that kind of era of free trade, open integration, greater global integration. This is a big step away from that, because not only was it because of Trump, but now the Iranians have said, you know what, the whole trade system is totally different. We are going to continue controlling the state of Mughals, and we might even exert control over the state of Babelmandir on the other side. So your global energy supplies will never look the same. And so for anyone planning an industry, for anyone planning even in Asia, life is very, very different. Hmm. The parties are such far apart on core issues, as we've talked about in this conversation, is escalation inevitable at this point? I really worry that it is. I worry that at the end of two weeks, or even before that, we will be back into some kind of open conflict and probably an escalation because it will, in Trump's mind, what he's consistently shown is that he see, he only feels that pressure can get him open sessions, that he's not interested in detailed diplomacy or equal diplomacy. Right. I mean, and again, this goes back to the question of Iranian concessions, US concessions. Trump is not a compromise negotiator. He's a zero-sum negotiator, which the Iranians are not going to take in this moment. So I do worry that we'll be at a place of great escalation sooner or later. And the thing I can share too is, you know, I was talking with some sources on Tuesday when Trump was saying, I'm going to bring down the entire civilization. One of the most chilling things I heard from within kind of the US military establishment was the target list that they had developed that night. Before Trump did taco, as you say, but the targets he developed were there and they were huge. And what this personal led to was that they were global, right? They were really wide. They were beyond the Middle East, potentially targeting Iranian or Iran, link assets in all kinds of places. That person said, look, OK, maybe we'll be two weeks. The point is the plans are there, the troops are there and the real risk is there. And we're with the same people who got us into this. So I don't think the cavalry of a more rational, more peace-minded group is coming in anytime soon. Invading Iranian interests, where? Outside of Iran? Broadened under the Middle East, right? So there's Iran linked, for instance, cells. Certainly there are in Europe, in Latin America, even potentially in Southeast Asia. So maybe the US could target some of those through through intelligence operations. Of course, the Israeli factor comes into that, too. You've seen Israel previously target Iranian personnel, nuclear scientists. All over. So execute attacks. What do you mean? What kind of attacks are we talking about here? We talking about targeted attacks with special operators? Are we talking about CIA? Shed? We talking about direct military action on foreign soil to hit Iranian targets all over the world? My source of knowledge, not enough detail, but I would suspect it's more in that more narrow intelligence realm, right? Potentially even cyber realm or something like that, but not troops on the ground. Right. But just basically a broader, more versatile offensive that, OK, I see what you mean. All right. Before I let you go, at least for me, I don't know if I've raised my hand. When you say escalation, are you saying ground troops or are you willing to go as far as some people are with the tactical nuke option? I would say that certainly the tactical nuclear option cannot be fully ruled out. I do think that what they have prepared is more like ground troops. OK. And there are more troops heading to the Middle East right now as we speak, right? They dispatch more troops just before this. So again, they've positioned these places. And when you do, this is kind of a consistent problem with US foreign policy. When you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail. If you've just built up this huge force buildup and the Iranians are saying to you, by the way, we want to see the US withdraw from the region. We want to see bases withdraw. Then you add in that layer of Trump potentially feeling embarrassed. Then you add in the layer of Israel and some Gulf Arabs, particularly the UAE, who are really, really anti-Iran, saying, look, President Trump, you need to demonstrate a show of force. You gave the Iranians a chance. They didn't compromise. They didn't make concessions. That's where I think you have a recipe for a really scary, big escalation, which I don't think would be easy. But certainly military planning has been really hard. And saying no to the president and to Pete Hedzeff has become really, really hard. They've pushed out a lot of the people who are, again, our professionals, people who were in line for promotions. And you see a battle going on right now with the army chief of staff at Pete Hedzeff. So. Yeah, dissent is very hard inside this administration. A lot. One last question. Yes or no. Do you think the fire on the Gerald Ford was an act of sabotage? No, and I can't say more without more reporting. OK. OK. OK. There are some thoughts. If you guys haven't looked into this story, there was a fire on one of the ships and some the ship has been deployed for a long time. Some people are saying that perhaps the sailors on that ship could have potentially started that fire to take that motherfucker out of commission, which might indicate a morale issue or some dissension within the American fighting force, which would have to believe there will be some of that. Yeah, that would make sense. Very OK. Listen. Once again, the book, you guys got to get the book, even if it, you know, even if it pisses you off. All right, I know we we we we we we we supported the Kamala Harris ticket, but you guys got to get the information. Look, I'm just telling you what people are going to say. I'm telling what people are going to say. I want to read Akbar's book Crossing the Red Line, the definitive account of the Biden's administration, a Biden administration's disastrous policymaking. A big reason why things have worse than other Trump. We have to do it. We have to do the work, even if the answers some of you guys don't like. I already know what I think. Akbar, thank you for joining us. Thank you always. All right. Before we get to Mark, we speculate that this might happen to cancel the wireless festival. But it's how they why they cancel it. I think is the most interesting, Jane. All right, yeah. So wireless festival has been canceled after Kanye West was denied entry into the U.K. The U.K. government blocked his visa over past anti-Semitic remarks and controversies, deeming his presence not in the public interest. Kanye Ye had been scheduled to headline all three nights, making him central to the festival's lineup with no viable replacement on short notice and mounting backlash. The organizers opted to cancel the event entirely and issue refunds. I didn't see that one coming. What? That they would that they would deny him access into the U.K. Now, I thought, OK, if enough when we talked about enough sponsors pull out, they might not have the funds to do the concert. Someone who runs wireless festival came out about their disappointment and they stood behind having Kanye West. So it seems like they were never going to remove him. And this is when U.K. stepped in and said, well, then we just won't allow him access into the country. Yeah. Have you ever seen that before? Yes. For a rapper. For a singer. Who? We do a story at TMZ. And I think Chris Brown wasn't allowed to go to Australia. Hmm. And what was it because of domestic violence? Wow. I think if I remember correctly, Chris Brown denied. Entry into. Yeah, Australia. He was effectively banned in 2015. Yep. I'd have been at TMZ. He was denied visa to tour in Australia. So it happened before. I just. Oh, touring. Sorry. Yes. Yes. Yeah, it was to come in there and do to do stuff. I like I remember that it was based upon character. And they said Chris couldn't come in there. And it's 2015. It wasn't as far removed from the Rihanna thing as as people are now. I said the Rihanna thing. I mean, the brutal beating of Rihanna. Shouldn't say the Rihanna thing like that. But so. So, yeah, that I've seen this before. I'm interested in how you will respond to this. I don't think you will. Well, he responded in so far as saying that, like, he's willing to do whatever work that he has to, like, get to whatever healing point that he needs to get to. Prior to this. No, he said this. Oh, for this? Yeah. OK. I don't know if he had said this after, but he said this in response to all of this, OK, which for him is probably the best way that you can respond. Yeah, I mean, that's how that's what he said in his apology. Right. So if he responds in any way that's like hyper rebellious, which is his M.O., it might make people think that he's insincere. Sure. About what he said. Look, if Kanye is sincere about atoning and making amends, then he had to know that there will be some roadblocks around along the way and there will be some consequences. So stuff like this will take his sincere will test his sincerity. We'll say this. Just the way people are right now, it looks like he's being over persecuted. It's going to help him. If it looks like a gun. And look, I'm just telling you guys what the reality is, because right now there's this interesting thing that's going on online where people are having to remind people like the lengths that Kanye West went through. There's always happens, right? Like it always happens. The news cycle goes so fast that people forget. What was said or, you know, or, you know, they fall into the music or the concert or whatever it may be. And they water it down. They they excuse certain behavior. They move on past it. They compare it to somebody else's behavior. They reason it out however they want to. I don't see me. I don't see this gaining. Kanye, I think the people who want to support Kanye West, who are going to go to his concerts, I said this last time, are going to support him. I don't see this what's happening here. Making him or getting him more support. I don't see him garnering more support because this happened. I think it's the same people who are already down for him who feel like people should move on, who feel like people that he apologized are going to make a big deal out of this. I will say this, though. This is why I ask you if this is if this has happened before. I guess I think about precedent. Like what what are you like for the UK? Totally in your right to do what you want to in regards to your country. Blocked his visa over his past anti-Semitic remarks and the controversies and didn't deem that him being there and him performing was in the best public interest. All right, was not in the public interest of its citizens. Are you setting a precedent? Right, the next performer, will you be looking at now? Kanye West has all years and years history of being of the anti-Semitic remarks in the controversies. But are you setting a precedent to now every artist, every type of performer? You have to look into what they have done. What's the line? What's too far? What's too much? Like I just that's and I'm not here to litigate it. It just made me think of that when it comes to I'm banning this person for this. OK, well, is that something you're going to continue to do? Is like it's Kanye West the test? Is anything worse than Kanye gets banned from performing in the country? Is it like I just where did where did how far does this go? Well, they've done it many times. Wayne, Chris Brown, Busta Rhymes was not officially banned. Snoop. Black. Like they've done it. They've done it many times. What were their reasons? Tyler, the creator apparently. I feel like I remember the title. Like, like I've come. You know, just at TMZ, like they will ban you based upon this stuff. So we should have known this was coming then. And I mean, I mean, maybe I hadn't thought about it. I didn't know all these people. And the reason why I. The reason why I. I said that this could end up helping him is because. You know, what? Like this particular conflict. Is what Kanye West's rehabilitation actually needs. Because. It was going so swimmingly. I agree that people thought, OK, he's back. It's cool. And for him, the more rigorous the rehabilitation is. The easier it'll be for him when he's on the other side of it. All of this assumes that Kanye West isn't an anti black anti semi. This is the most charitable interpretation of that. Right. This assumes that he doesn't really have those views because somebody that really has those views can't over a long enough timeline hide them. You can't over a long enough timeline. That shit comes out. It just it seats out of your pores. Some of it will it'll it'll be intimated that you'll get into the music on a long enough timeline. But if he truly was having this profound mental break and that is the reason why all of these things happen. Then this is actually an opportunity for him to be more rigorous. Like I said before about demonstrating that he's changed or that he's feeling better or whatever. So it's actually an opportunity. It's definitely a setback, but it's actually an opportunity. If, in fact, he's actually changed. And we'll we'll we'll see how they handle it. All right, Jay, before we get to Mark, Pete White mess, we don't really know much, right? We don't know anything. But Jay, go ahead. Give us a little bit. All right. So. New England Patriots, Mike Vrable and top New York Times NFL reporter Diana Rossini spotted at a hotel together. Photos published this week show Mike and Diana together at a luxury resort in Sedona, Arizona, including moments where they appeared to hold hands, hug and lounge by the pool. The images were taken March 28th at the resort and quickly went viral, drawing widespread attention and speculation on social media. Thoughts. They both denying it. They're both saying this is laughable. They're both saying they were not there. Just the two of them. There were a group of six other people. There haven't been photos of a larger group. That kind of stuff wasn't there. Now, you would know this better than me. From your TMZ days. But when I look at these photos, this looks like a P.I. was hired. That is exactly what's happening here. This is somebody hired. Whether or not they're fucking that a paparazzi. Actually, it doesn't matter. What matters is somebody thinks that they're fucking. OK, so for Vrable and Rossini, I don't know if they're doing a horizontal mambo. But I don't know whether or not he's taming the beast with two backs. I don't know whether or not he's getting a little slaughter. As my man, Bryant, would say whether or not he's striking. Be used to be like, yeah, I'm striking that. I like Diana. Be try to make it. Be tried to shout out to Brian Clark. Be tried to make striking catch on. But striking was too much even for the player approval. Like we can't call it strike. Yeah, so don't bring it in here. Like we can't call it strike. But that's a big man. He's probably striking. He told that to Ian. So he had his girlfriend and the girlfriend had a friend. And he was like, no, I don't think they do anything like that. And people was like, I need to probably strike in like ran out of the party. Yes, because striking sounds violent. Well, it looked OK. Football is a violent game. So look, here's the deal. Somebody thinks they fucking know. There is no reason. I had this conversation while we were doing the rewatchables live show in the beautiful city of San Francisco. The reality here is that we know who Mike Vrable is. We know who Diana is. We know these people. But if Mike Vrable walked into Sycamore right now, would you know who he was? Yeah, absolutely not. But aren't you would? Oh, but a lot of people and I know Diana, a lot of people. Oh, that's your friend. No, I know her when I was at ESPN. Did you ever see Brave Lord? Stop that. No, no, I did not. We're not friends, but like I know you. You heard what you were. Now, see, I shouldn't have said that. I should I know better. She had saved. I know better. She has. She had saved in the phone. She's super cool. Though she's super cool. She's funny. She has saved in the phone. And a great reporter, like a respective reporter, which her which the athletic came out and said they defended her professionalism. Look, I'm not judging her. I know I just have to say that I like I respect her. I'm saying she got saved in the phone. No, don't spit allegedly. OK, well, I'm just. It's a joke. I'm not any way shape or form. Hold on. I'm not in any way shape or form judging because y'all know I don't do that. These are like remember when the TJ Homes and Amy Robach pictures came out? Like it was that was clearly and it came out that was the case. Somebody hired. And that's what these look like. You're to your point, you don't just say like, oh, that's Mike Rabel. So that's Diana Rossini. Like you don't do that. So in this situation, I'll tell you another thing. Apparently this is some type of NFL. Get together. So they're not just at this hotel together. There's some kind of NFL get together where it's like the owners meetings or some kind of competition committee meetings or something like that. There's some kind of meeting that's happening at this hotel in Sedona. OK, so very beautiful. But this. Rendezvous or meeting is supposedly happening. Two or three days before everybody else was supposed to get there. Oh, that's what that's what they said. That is what's being said. Well, and so what they are saying is that perhaps somebody knew that, you know, she had him saved on her phone as McDonald's. And it's like, you know, and so she got to get a big Mac a couple of days early. No, no, no, no, no. Put under the warm. As you just said, Sedona is a beautiful place. People go there to vacation. They go there to escape. They go there to reset. It is a peaceful place. So it makes all the sense in the world when you're at a conference or you're at something, a work event that you go a few days early or a few days after to enjoy all of it before it all goes down. So it is very likely that. Both of them have that same idea because that's it's not like it's an uncommon thing of, you know what, I'm just going to get down there a few days early. Oh, shit, Mike, great to see you. You came down here early to just like relax and chill out. Yeah, yeah. Before before, you know, we start, um, OTs and all of that. Like before we get into it. Yeah, like Mason's all cool. All the known each other for years. Season coach, player, season reporter makes all the sense in the world. All the sense in the world to quote the athletic. These photos are misleading and they lack context. Don't be honest with you. Maybe they do. Hey, hey, guess what? Higher learning audience. Maybe they do. Maybe they do lack context. I can tell you what wouldn't want to be them. I wouldn't. It's tough. I wouldn't either. That's a tough one right there. Cause that's when I rest is poking around, looking at past things that you said. She said something about her husband. Her husband was average. But if you like, if you follow, but she did, but if you follow Diana, like her, like her on Mike camera personality, not when she's doing the reporting. She's very self deprecating. She's very sarcastic. She makes jokes like that all the time. So when I'm like, I just like nobody thought much of it when that, when she made that joke like four years ago, cause that's kind of her personality. Now they're doing it under a different lens. It's like that is, that's also kind of who she is. I'll tell you something. It's interesting. You know what's interesting? It's interesting who you defend. Cause I get in trouble for this. I'm giving context as somebody who has followed her career. You know what this is? I need, you know what I need? I need my effect because this is the house of love. You're doing a house of love. This is a house of love treatment you're giving to these people. You're giving it to them right now. They were in the house of love, maybe allegedly her, but you're, you're, you're, you're giving her a house of love treatment here. I got to say, and by the way, before we get out of here and get to the interview, I want to, I want to say this. I have gotten so much feedback and love from all of the people out there that said, Van, you are right. Oh, you got beef with the AKAs and, and you kept saying it and rage gaslit you for two years and then when it was time, we're rates saw the opportunity to put the knife in and watch the pink and green viscera of the AKAs pour out of their light skin bodies. Rachel took the first chance. Stereotypes my ass nigga. I've seen them. Like it is like it is like Rachel took the first chance. And did you see the AKAs in the comments that were none too pleased? First off, none too pleased with how you carried on about them. You stereotyping AKAs is only being light skin. It's wild. A lot of them are though. It's wild. It's wild. I'm just going to let that one sit there. I don't give a fuck. Stop trying to let that sit with it. None of that. That's a cook. That deal with your shit. Deal with your shit. Did you not spark up or elephant versus pro war? Guys, guys, guys, guys, guys. What I did was call a spade. That is please. Is that supposed to be elephant? This elephant. That's AK. What I did was call a spade a spade. Racist term. Like is it not really. I was like. I literally said nothing but facts, right? She's doing it again. That daddy performed. I know. His name is Trick Daddy. Okay. He was wearing your colors, but there is no like if this happened to the deltas first off we obviously I would try to come up and with something to reason it. I'm not even a lie. I would, but I would be laughing at the same time. So shout out to the AKAs who get it. Shout out to the AKAs who were like, damn, we got to take the L on this one. All right, not too much, Rachel. You know, it's all love. It's all love. Y'all would make fun of us. I'd have to laugh at us too and be like, damn, we messed up on that one. But the AKAs who took it to heart, who attacked my personal appearance, who attacked the divorce that I went through. This is what I'm talking about. What are these principles? We would never. She's doing it again. We would never do this. I mean, I couldn't even wear my wig today because of what happened. They snatched it. Not just to snatched it right off. I had to go all natural today. Just couldn't even. I mean, imagine being that upset over true daddy performance. You see, I love this. By the way, I just want to say something here. This is according to what I got on the internet, and this might not be true. But there was the 57th Delta Sigma Theta National Convention in July, 2025, and here is to perform. At the National Convention? Yeah. I'm going to say this. The Clark sisters. Oh, Michael Boone, LaCindemore, Jeffrey Lampkin, and they set a Guinness World Record for the largest wobble dance line. That's some wholesome ass shit. So like y'all can say what y'all want. I'm not, I'm remember, remember, I'm outside of it. I'm not a, remember this? You're not a part of it. You don't know. There's no rivalry. You don't know. You don't know. Not even talking about your motherfucking wig. It's like, it's like, I'll tell you what though. I'll tell you what though. I'll tell you what. I ain't got no dog in the fight except for, I got, except for one. What I got, I'll tell you what I got. That's HL. You come in race, you come at me. It don't matter that. Oh, it can come at me. It don't matter that she was on y'all's side when it was about, you know, and this Sigma. Shout out to all my Sigmas out there. Shout out to all of you. Shout out to the Zetas and SG Rose. They in the comments like, we just going to sit back and watch. Yeah. Shout out to the SG Rose too. Shout out to SG Rose, man. Shout out to them. All five of them. So it's, it's, I'm joking. It's all love. Me too. It's all, it's, I need everybody to lighten up and take a joke. I could joke. I love SG Rose. I'm going to do it again. Right? I'm going to do it again. See? I love it. It's funny. It's funny. I know that the audience, I know the thing is, is great to be like, I get it. It's great. I'm the punching bag of the pod. It's great to be against fan. I get it. I understand that. Can y'all just admit that I was right about this just one time? I admit what I'm wrong. Can y'all just admit that I was right about this? I just want this one. Can I just, just one, just give me one guys. Yeah. If there's an opportunity, we're going to take it. Boy, when I looked at this list of people I was expecting to see. At our convention? Yeah, at least here. Amen. But they had the clocksters, the legendary clocksters out there. Look. We over here, Clark's sister, legacy, doing the wobble, a y'all jumping on the dick. Jump on the dick. AKAs, man, shout out to the AKAs, man. The 23 convention had J.I.V., I'm telling you. Founders Day concert, Memphis had Angel Wimbush. When I went, they had Patty LaBelle. See? It's different. But look, the AKAs tried something different. They tried something different. Shout out to the AKAs, man. And if I had been there, I would have had a fantastic time. Right. I would have had a fantastic time. But it's funny. Should we do, on the next episode, should we do a member? Like can we stack up who's the AKA, who's the Delta and like get a definitive? If you want to. It's not if you want to. You didn't touch it off. You don't want to kick it off. I want to told you to do that. No one said, there was no reason. We were always going to talk about this trick, daddy, performance. I understand, but I just want to know before that was a gratuitous shot at the AKAs. And it was legitimately to me, some of the best work. You're such an instigator. Nope. I thought, I'm looking at this. Mad people hit me up like, they like sinister rage. They like petty ass rage. They do. They were so mad. Did y'all read the comments? They were so pissed off. But yeah. The wig will be back on Monday. Bring the wig back. Don't let them take your wig. No, no, they really did. And I just didn't have time. But I just didn't feel, I just didn't feel like working. Hey, seriously though, all just aside, I'll say it again, even though nobody cares when I say it, all of those organizations, all of them are absolute pillars and cornerstones of black cultural history. They are. They're not the biggest pillars. They're not the biggest cornerstones, but all of those organizations are very, very important culturally. They're meaningful. That's why I know about them. He wants to be in it. See, I don't. I definitely don't want to be a part of this. Now look at the fucking, I'll try. See how I tried to be. You know what? It's good. Now what you said was beautiful. Now we're going to get back to it. Now this is what I don't want to be a part of. This is a boulet battle royal between the Jack and Jill. See, you was in that shit. You was in that shit. You don't have that in the boulet. Your dad. We've talked about this. Oh man. It's crazy. Crazy. I will interview with Mark Hasson on the other side this break. All right. We have a treat in studio today. Someone, my friend, we'll start with that, but you're much, you're, you're so much more than just my friend. You are a Golden Globe and Emmy nominated filmmaker, director, playwright and actor from New York, Syracuse. I don't know. He can get into the sports part of that with you. You are here today to promote, well, you've done so much more. We were talking about it before. I mean, you've produced series, like I said, playwright, all of that, but we're here to promote your new movie. Thank you. Ph1. And are you say Ph-1? How do you say it? Ph1. Okay. So Ph1. Ph1, you're here to promote it. We're going to talk all about it. We're going to talk about everything. Let's go. Are you ready to go? I'm ready. Listen, there's a few people that were nervous for me, but I'm super psyched. Who was nervous for you? I'm just kidding. I was about to say, what are you guys going to? I shouldn't have started there, right? No, no, no, no. We're happy to have you. I mean, you guys have met before, but I feel like it was in like a really crowded room. So I don't know. My birthday party that the 40th. It was the 40th? It was the 40th. Oh, yeah. That's the 40th. Remember it took a turn after 10? It did take a turn. It took a turn. Everybody was on like one level. Yeah. And I think we went to the other level and then we left. I think that was... If I have a birthday, that will be happy. You were very well loved. It was, you were celebrated. Everybody was there. They were crazy. If I do it again, that won't happen this year. But yeah, you guys have met before. So we're happy to have you on. Thank you so much. Happy to talk all things about the film, which is great. Thanks. I was told to tell you that our friend, our friend who will remain nameless, loved the coloring of the pot. Like, love the way it was shot. That means a lot. Love the color of it all. Made, wanted me to make sure that I tell you that. Thank you. I want to know what originally inspired you to do this film? And was there like a specific moment or issue that you were like, I need to tell this story? Well, most of the things that I've made tend to use a couple of things. Media as a character. You know, I did a play years ago called Little Willie, but the story of Adolf Hitler's nephew, true story about Adolf Hitler's nephew, hilarious. But it dealt with this guy who was obsessed with the character of himself and how propaganda was used towards him promoting himself first to his uncle, then to America. And then how that was sponsored and sold and these lectures were sold. I'm always obsessed with that and how people get their message out and figure out who they are through the media. And then how that message is used and then propagated both by the people who watch it and the sponsors and people who make money from it. So that's an interesting thing to me over time. And I think that's timeless. And then in the last seven years, five years it's been up. I have a civic engagement website called the starting point nonpartisan. And we've interviewed probably about 500 members of Congress, a couple of presidents, members of cabinet, excuse me, excuse me. And in that time, and we cut ourselves out, me and Chris Evans, my partner and some of the folks who work on it, we cut ourselves out because it's not really about us. We use our media to highlight and give access to other people. But I've gotten to see a lot of stuff from when people get elected to the time they get reelected. And then the dance between them and the characters they play, well, I would say their mission and then the characters that they play to enact their mission. And then there's this kind of interesting sort of chart that happens where those two things split because, well, how do you pass something? How do you get your mission if no one's paying attention? Right. And so things like this, things like social media, you guys are not a stranger to this as well. You know, getting your message out and hyperbolic speech and behavior is useful, but also just turns on you. And oftentimes by the time some of those people get reelected or go to get reelected, the character in the message takes precedence over the thing. And people tend to kind of become like a shell sometimes of themselves, not that they mean to, but I think some of the things they want to do gets a little bit lost in the process. And so this is my dramatic, hopefully entertaining interpretation of a version of that. It's interesting because a politician with a promising future is held hostage by an unseen captor and forced to watch his reputation collapse in real time as social and traditional media weaponized speculation, spinning virtual outrage. In that, who is the captor representing? Who is capturing our politicians and forcing them to watch their reputations disintegrate? I mean, you know, there's a literal captor that is the engine of the film. We don't know who it is, you know, or who, how many people it is, but the captor would be the media and I would argue yourself. Right. So again, in this dance between getting your message out, whether you're a politician, you're a CEO, you're an actor, you're selling knitting from Tecumseh, you're trying to get known, right? And you're using the media to do that. And these days, the media to me is also technology, right? I mean, we're on Spotify. The technology is delivering that. And so that sort of owns us, you know? And I think the captor in this is the thing that owns him, the thing he's most trapped by is the media. In the beginning of the film, he's very obsessed with his image. All these things are going great. He's loving it. He thinks he's gaming the system. It's all going great. Like many people do. And then something turns and the thing that he thinks he has a handle on, has a handle on him. So more than the person to your point that's capturing him, it's really the media that's trapping him. Well, that's why I meant more broadly was this seems to be an allegory for what you feel like has our political figures arrested. And because of the work that you do, the fact that it's bipartisan and you're trying to have a conversation that sort of broad, it seems like the movie is trying to say something about maybe prescriptive about how you get out of that capture. What? How do you? How does a politician that's promising and has his or her entire future ahead of her avoid being captured by the people that could leverage their relationship or excuse me, leverage their reputation to make them do what they want them to do. Yeah, I think for me, what I hope, you know, I like movies that ask questions and force you to ask questions and then hopefully debate by the time you're done and kind of wonder who in where in lies the fall in this one for me. It's like, you know, he who has no sin cast the first stone, you know, so we all have a part in it and everyone in it has a part in it rather than sort of placing a specific blame. And, you know, if we've done our job remotely well, everyone's a little upset or feels for somebody throughout the journey of the film. But I think, you know, my personal opinion is we, the audience have a big part to blame, you know, look, you could say back in the day, you got Fox, you got MSNBC, and depending on what you pay attention to, that's where you're going to get your information from. But you are making that choice. Nowadays, that choice is partially being made for you, not because it thinks that that's just what you want or those are who you want to those people are what you want to hear. But how you'll stay engaged with the device, how you'll stay engaged with the media. And so, you know, we are captors, but we're not choosing to go anywhere else as well. I mean, look, I love Spotify, but I am also well, and that's not not because I'm on it, but I that's what I use. But I am a lazy listener. I got an awesome record collection that gathers dust, you know, and that's my fault, you know, that I am on the same 15 playlists because I'm a lazy listener. It's a little more dangerous when it's like your information, you know. We had Dr. Butch Ware on the podcast, who's running for governor here in California, and he used the phrase, whoever funds you runs you. And there's and I don't want to say too much because I want people to see the movie, but like there's a moment where you're having this conversation about, you know, private money and, you know, like there's an intention from the politician, but then there's this conversation of like, well, you have to, you know, engage with private money in order to do the work that you want to do. Were you trying to send a message with that? Because, you know, without saying too much, it's like, it doesn't quite go. Like things don't happen the way that he thought that they were happening. Like, were you trying to make a message about private money when it that policy or how what funds politicians? I mean, the system, right? I mean, all of us are subservient to something that pays us. And we all make these faustian bargains. And I don't think that any of this stuff happens in these grand gestures. It's usually death by a thousand paper cuts. You know, you get what you need to get somewhere and you believe that you can manage the cost of what it is to get what you need to do. What you believe is the greater good or even what you want for yourself. That cost oftentimes really reveals itself the deeper you get into it. And I would say the more successful you get, and I would think that, excuse me, that all of us know this, the more successful you get in almost any industry, whether you're a CEO or an actor or whatever, you have less people around you to actually keep it real with you. And so they only help you recognize the best of what something could be. Right. And then as you get into it, they kind of go away once there's real problems, you know, because the choices are yours. And I think that's kind of what you're watching. The system of politics or government is tough, man. When we would go and you go to DC, they fly in usually on Tuesday and they fly out usually by Thursday night or Friday. And those nights, at least one, if not two of those three nights, they're at a fundraiser and you could be cynical about the politician, but they also have to stay elected. So Congress is two years, you know, so two years, how long do you have to do something to when you got to start keeping your job to do something? And so that is the system, right? How do you get a movie like this funded? It, it. A lot of people out there are listening and they want to be filmmakers. This is not a, this film has something to say. And a lot of times when you're trying to get your movie funded, you're trying to get your project funded. They want a film that they feel like is a Blumhouse a 24 model. That's not a shot. I'm just telling you guys, you make the horror movie for three million. It has a high premise. They're like, we're going to make 30 million. And that's how we stay in business. Right. This film seems like it's weighty. It's serious. It's almost there. It seems like they're now ton of characters. It's got a play field to it. One 25, which I love. Okay. I love that runtime. Like, how do you get someone to see the vision of what you're trying to say and get this movie made? Well, I'll, I'll reverse that. So first, uh, hopefully it's massively entertaining. It's a thriller, you know, and I've been, we've been going to these screenings. And I got to tell you, there's nothing more satisfying than like the last, I say 25 minutes watching everybody lean for you, sneak in, you know, you watch them lean forward and then you got them. Oh yeah. And audible gas, audible gas. You know, we've been screening at Sagittarius and to see a hundred and twenty people scream at the same time is maybe one of the most satisfying things you can get as a filmmaker. So first there's that you got to make. So it's this is so for people that think that think this is going to be something that's this is a thriller, thriller popcorn. You're going to love how it's a thriller. Okay. It's a fast, fun ride. It's about something. And I, you know, I tend to make things that are about something, but I don't think, you know, you got to ask the audience to bear with you to take a lesson and stuff like this, you got to entertain them. So that's got to be first. Then back into your next question, your first question, you make it and you get a friend in any way you can. For whatever reason, most of the movies I've made, no matter how big the actors have been, no matter some have done extremely well, you know, and been nominated for all sorts of things and some no one will ever hear of most likely or should hear of maybe, but they're all made usually through independent money. Okay. And, you know, now you're always at a fundraiser. Well, yeah. I mean, I've raised film funds a couple of times. Of course. Yeah. You know, and, and I've done that based on a few different things and a couple of models that I've used, but the goal has always been to empower artists, me and others, I know I've helped fund as many more people, more films that I didn't make as a director as an actor than I have. Right. Um, I'm a huge community guy. I come from theater. I believe in the community of artists raising each other up, um, and finding ways to do it. Um, if you believe there's an audience for that and the wonderful thing now about technology and independent money that can participate in technology is that you can find these audiences all over the country and the world now in a way, there's a lot of problems right now in our industry in terms of giant companies gobbling up a lot of the distribution outlets. But the audiences are just as big, if not bigger. And so there is a way to find independent money to play with good movies that can reach audiences if you know who you're talking to. So the answer to your question is know who you're talking to, know what you want to say, and then raise money based around the idea that you can know that there's an audience for you, believe there's an audience and not just like, this is going to be great. It's going to be cool. I'm just going to love it. Got to be specific. Right. I mean, you guys are. Yeah. I mean, certainly. Yeah. I think the internet is just like gigantic place. But there's a lot of protein in the specificity of it. Right. That's right. Because I can find now 200,000 people that liked a show that came out in 1996 and only ran for nine episodes. That's right. 10, 15 years ago, 30 years ago, I was never finding those people to show came in and went, but now there's such a, it's a grand swath of people to find something that's, that's like, people are loyal to it, but the group might not be as big. And you can like have community and sell and work with those people. Which is great. And look, on the plus side of it, like you want to go from like, you know, Twitter in his old days, our X, you know, whatever you want to call it. You know, that helped overthrow Tunisia. Right. That's a bunch of people were able to gather to do something. Right. On the more fun side, I grew up in Fayetteville, New York, and I used to either have my parents give me a ride or eventually when I was old enough to ride my bike into this town to go to video king, there was this shelf in the back called the manager shelf where the good movies were, you know, and the manager would tell me these films that wouldn't, I wouldn't be exposed to that shelf now exists in a massive way. Right. So like it's not just the kid who has to be given a ride or get being allowed to ride their bike. It's there for you. Now there could be some problems with that and some, you can talk about that in another conversation or if you want, but that's a great thing. And that shows that there's value in different kinds of stories. And as a result, if you can articulate that value, you can find money. This, this film and the issues that it kind of brings up, like you said, you want people to ask questions or, you know, I don't know, maybe develop their own questions or whatever after watching this. And when, when the word trust is what I feel like I keep coming back to as I watch the film and something that we talk about, about, I know you talked about this media in this film, it's institution, it's the politician itself, which is something we explore on this podcast. But when I watched it, I thought, are you trying to say, is this film a warning? Is it a call to action or is it like a reflection? How do you want the audience to, to, to walk away with or what do you want them to walk away with? I mean, it's definitely a reflection. It's absolutely a reflection. I mean, I think that from the conversations we've had after the, the Q and A's, people really relate to the cause and effect of both the decisions that the people in the movie make and the technology and the media that people are subservient to, including the people who are in the media who are asking the questions. Um, I also think it's a cautionary tale. You know, call to action. I don't know. Like I'm not here to judge people because like I said, you know, I'm a part of this too, right? Like I, I love technology and all kinds of media and I live in the benefits of it and I'm terrified of the problems with it. Um, if there's any hope that people could feel a little bit more agency or choose some responsibility or acknowledge the responsibility in their choices, you know, and not just say, well, the algorithm fucked me with this or told me to do that. Like you are making choices. You know, there are people who I follow, who I don't agree with, who I watch become really divisive, who I make sure to click on their stuff. Cause I want to make sure I know. I want to, I want, I want a viewpoint, a window into their viewpoint, you know. And, and also there's people who I do agree with who roll in a way I do not agree with about things I agree with, but I want, I want to hear how they act too. You know, and if I'm not careful, I'm only going to get the, the tiniest sliver. So yeah, I mean, like it's not, this is not a, uh, I'm not here to tell people how to behave and think, but maybe if there's a benefit from people watching the results of some of these actions, I might say, well, shit, man, maybe I got to take a little responsibility in how I digest my stuff. What's the benefit for you in watching stuff that's made by people you don't just, you disagree with? Like what, what do you get from it? Well, look, through, cause I do it all the time. Yeah. Yeah. Look through all, and I'm, I'm a fan of your show and I've, you know, I, I, I watch a lot of the conversations you have and how you have them with elected officials. I've met some of the same folks you do. And, uh, and I think it's. Critic, I believe in empathy overall, right? And I think there's a tremendous lack of empathy in the world. Oh, also. And empathy doesn't mean that I have to agree with you, but I do have to see you. And I think it's critical for me to be exposed to different viewpoints and cultures and backgrounds. We all come from wherever we come from, you know, we talk about it when we are friends, I know you come from a very different background than I come from in almost every way. Uh, I need to know about that. You know, one of the most interesting things I learned by, when I started, I'd say that I was enlightened to when I started interviewing elected officials was that they represent this group of people called constituents and constituents are just people. And oftentimes they do represent those people. Now they might do it in a way and maybe their hyperbolic behavior might not be the coolest way to engage or enroll other people, but they represent a group of folks. And if I don't understand what those folks are about and what their concerns are, I won't see them as people. And therefore I'm not concerned with the nuance of solutions because there's a lot of nuance and solutions. So I'm not sure if I answered your question or if I just went on. No, I mean, I think for me, there's a couple of things. Number one, I'm entertained by conflict. So if I'm watching conflict, if I'm engaging in conflict, if I'm a party to, like, I'm, I'm so like, when I'm watching someone and I disagree with them, I'm almost more entertained than watching someone that I, that I enjoy. I'm almost more entertaining. Right. Um, number two is when I'm watching something like that, I'm oftentimes challenging myself about whether or not I can contend in a conversation with this person. Right. They're saying something and I'm like, do I have enough in my mind to be able to push back on what I don't agree, but can I demonstrate that can like, in, if, if it was me and this person, whoever it might be, and they were talking about, like, obviously there's some people that aren't making good faith arguments. They're completely disgusting. And you don't waste time with that. But if it's someone that's, that thinks they're right, like legitimately thinks they're right and they're getting their shit off. What if I was right there? Would I be able to prove to a third person that I'm competing with in a marketplace of ideas, but I'd be able to tell that person and, and convince that person that I'm actually right, that my way is actually the way that benefits a people through a humanistic lens. And if I can't do that, then what I'm preaching is religion and dogma and it's not based on any ability for me to synthesize information and give it back to people. So that's a challenge for me. A lot of times. Well, can I say, can I say something about that? And then go back to the first thing you said, you sort of, I think became known because you did that. Like you were on TMZ. Kanye was in the, you know what I mean? And you spoke something that was important to you in a way that could have gone a number of ways. I can't imagine that that was planned or you planned on jumping out of a group. And by kind of, I don't want to say holding truth to power, but by speaking something you believed in a way that continued the conversation that benefited you towards probably having more of a career in this, right? And so that's a really, I think a great example of how you take your perspective. You challenge something that's dear to you and probably pretty emotional to you, but yet not in a way that stops the conversation and therefore it could be heard. So that to me is a great example of something like that. The first thing is that, but though being entertained by conflict, I think is a little bit of the rub because, because the world knows that we dig a cage fight. You know, we now reduce these things to the worst possible moments in terms of what gets put out, you know, some politician said to me once, you know, people don't report on the planes that land. You know, there's like a lot of things, a lot of hard work that people do to get to a yes on things, maybe less so right now, you know, but like this week. But, you know, I think it's, I don't know that the cage match approach is the most useful way for people to get along. It might be cool on like certain shows like Love is Blind or Love Island, you know what I mean? Like things like that, you know, but this is kind of the problem. Like we now are, now politicians are competing for the same space and in the same way as these folks because the media is, the media is paying attention to one or the other. You know, this medium and the social media platforms really is best designed for cat videos and love memes, right? This is what it's designed for. And that same platform is how we're getting news and news is now conflated with these cage matches of conflict. And therefore, what are we learning or how we participate? And by the way, again, no knock and don't have a solution, but that's the rub. I actually do have a solution. So let me clarify. Let's go. First of all, I'll give a quick, I actually said this on Balmany's podcast. I give a quick country boy analogy real quick. So I was, I hunted when I came up with my father, we will go honey. And when you're hunting, um, it's particularly deer. When you're hunting deer, there are ways that you entice the deer to come towards you. My father would hunt primitive, meaning he would hunt with a muzzleloader. He would hunt with a bow. So me, I would only hunt with the rifle, you know, you come within 100, 150 yards done. Right. But my father would have primitive, you would hunt with the bow. But if you're hunting with the bow, you got to get the deer to come close. So you do all kinds of things to get the deer to come close. You put deer piss on you. You know what I mean? You go by deer corridors, you set up your stand in the right way. But you know, one thing you can do to get the deer to come close to you. You can take two antlers and you can rattle them. You can put the antlers together and you can rattle a deer. Interesting. Why is the deer coming close when the rally? Because they think two bucks are fighting. Right. So they think two bucks are fighting. They think two bucks are competing for a doe. They want to come and they want to see what's going on. Part of this is a part of our makeup, right? Right. The question is whether or not that part of our makeup, I mean, when I say a part of our makeup, obviously that's a deer where human beings, we have the ability to reason, but people being attracted to conflict or wanting to see what happens or wanting to watch competition or be a part of that. That to me is somewhat, somewhat innate. Somewhat innate. The question is how do you deploy it? Now you can deploy it in a way that is, that has a tremendous amount of spectacle to where there's nothing nutritious about it at all. I know the audience loves when I use that word nutritious, but I'm trying to think of a better word, but that's the best word for it. Right. Like where it's not good faith where people are yelling, where it's about histrionics and performance. Or you can have a cage match or you can have a chest match. Now, if you have a chest match, then what you have are two high level thinkers that are sitting traps and trying to exploit weaknesses in one another. But they're doing it in the spirit of a game. They're trying to better one another. And so when I look at debate or conflict, I'm not necessarily talking about empty calories. I'm talking about a meal where two people can see two intelligent people, which is where I hope to be like on a subject, on something, have a clash of ideas, respectfully, but intensely. And then the audience walks away feeling like their worldview is a little bit better for it. I mean, I couldn't agree more, right? And, and again, like it's not on me to tell you or anybody else how to do that. Certainly. You know, but I think intent matters. Of course. Intent matters. And so there are people and the ones that I get the most frustrated with and I'll maybe I won't call out names. No, please do. Like if you know what you're doing, right, right, right, right. You know what you're doing. Like, come on, man. Like, you know, you know that you are just trying to get clicks and you're doing it under the artifice of useful information. Right. That fucking pisses me off. That's useless. And that I think, you know, but I'm a free speech guy first and foremost. So like, you know, and again, that's why I kind of put us on the, you know, uh, as the responsibility of the watcher, what people are busy and you can't expect too much, you know, uh, of them trying to just live their daily lives. But I think the intent of trying to do something within the conversation matters, and I'll tell you, I've seen more elected officials off camera, help each other out in terms of their messaging and wanting them to help push each other back and forth towards resolving something. But then why don't they, it's so interesting. I feel like we've talked about that. And then we've talked about that. Cause what I was, I want to hit on that, but what I was going to say is. I guess compare and contrast what Van is talking about on the challenge to kind of what you do with a starting point and, and how maybe, I don't know, you created it to maybe fill in, uh, a gap you saw in the discourse in, in regards to political conversation. But so if you could talk about that, but then also just what you just said about politicians helping each other off. And it's like, doesn't that frustrate you that you just don't do that publicly? Don't you think that that's kind of what we need to see more of than just you going, you standing on your ground because you're blue and you standing your ground cause you're red. So, uh, two things then. So first we started the starting point because we believe that, um, demystifying complicated things, people don't get involved because they feel silly or stupid. And they repeat facts because it's the easiest thing that was told to them. And they don't know where to start. So we thought by making like the obtuse and the opaque, a little less scary, you know, and a little like less, uh, see, like just a little more, give a little more meat to it, that people could then go off and make their own decisions. Right. So that was the goal. And we have different mechanisms in which we do that debate is one of them. A counterpoint is one of them. But the second thing I'll tell you a story, uh, I won't say who they were, but there's two, a Republican and Democrat. We do these things called counterpoints, which is a debate. And we do them, you know, we cut ourselves out. We often do them ourselves. Usually we leave them. Uh, and we do this thing because I think there's a problem in modern debate where they do it like this, right? Debate is done to the audience. I hear the question. I hear you. I acknowledge you a little bit. So we can say that we're having a debate. And then I give my statement to you, not to you. So there's no solving something through communication. So we try to do it. And I literally take, uh, two iPhones and we put them in about here so they can look at each other across the table, but it looks like they're looking at the camera. So they're communicating, right? And there's a set period of time. And we will let them, if they screw up, if they get flustered, go again. Cause the point is not that they, you know, give a perfect answer within the minute or two minutes that they have. It's that they get their point across and someone has a chance to really debate that point. And we were doing this thing and, uh, one person, uh, the Republic, the Democrat went first and they said their answer to this question. And then the Democrat went and he started to speak and he got flustered and stopped and the other guy said, um, Union minute, he goes, well, here's the problem. I want to say, I agree with everything that the representative from so and so just said, um, but he's an open board of socialists. That's the only argument that I have. And as a joke, and then the, uh, Democrat goes, the problem is when you go down the hall and you go talk to those cameras, that's exactly what you're going to say, right? You know, and they were joking, but he said, how else are they going to pay attention to me? And so they're in and go back to the original question is the rub, right? So I don't know. I mean, look, there was one guy who, uh, was, has been great to a starting point and given a lot of his time representative, uh, who I don't, uh, politically agree with, um, on many things, but as a good person, a really good person who, uh, I think, you know, is earnest in their beliefs. And, and I learned a lot from, and I said, man, you know, it was up for a, a tight reelection against who's being primaried. And, uh, I said, I wish I could support you because please don't, please don't because it will absolutely not help me in any way, shape or form. You know what I mean? Because his audience wouldn't stand for it and it won't help do the things that he's doing. So is that wrong? I don't know. You know what I mean? Like, I don't know. I think it goes back to the cage match thing, knowing that people want to watch the cage match that, you know, it's like, so what's the, what's the media's responsibility and asking us to have a better conversation. You've been around, you said you've done over like 500 interviews with a starting point, you feel better or worse about politicians being around them that much, being privy to what they do on camera and off camera. You feel better or worse. About a poll. My personal experience, uh, in doing it better, I don't think we could start a starting point now. You know, when we were starting and we made a video and we put it out there so that you could see this, but in the beginning we would go there and we were like, just literally knocking on doors. It wasn't anything fancy. Like you'd think, you know, we got a couple of famous people and whatever. And some kids, people would not talk to us. Right. We had 17 slots. We had three people sign up. Uh, one Republican eventually came, which was, um, Lisa Murkowski. And then Cory Booker came and, uh, and, uh, said, we need to get you some Republicans. And we said, get us some Republicans. So he called up, uh, uh, Tim, Tim, uh, Tim Scott, sorry, Tim Scott, sorry. And, uh, and got Tim Scott to come down. You know, I think he made Chris like tell him some Marvel secret or something to agree to come out off camera. Uh, no, he did not really. I don't know. You get Chris busted by the Marvel police. But, um, but, uh, he made Tim Scott come down and, or he asked him to come down. And that kind of partnership, asking him to participate was amazing. You know what I mean? It was amazing. You know, now did people say some things that were kind of rough? And I can say, cause you can, you can look it up. But, you know, we, we have these things called starting points where we're going to have three, at least three, if not more Republicans and three or more Democrats to find the same thing. So I can remember on DACA, for example, there were some Democrats that had literal definitions of what DACA was. And then you had someone like Dan Crenshaw saying, you know, DACA is, uh, he defined DACA by saying, uh, DACA is a policy that allows parents to use children as a token for entry into the country. You know, now I think there is a value in making sure that people know that that's how that representative defines that policy. And that's up to you to decide where you want to go, uh, to agree or disagree with it. So, um, do you think people should have more non-negotiables politically or less? Yes. Like should non-negotiables and politics exist at all? Well, look, just as you agree in people, principles should agree. Right. Like I have principles and there are red lines as a human that I'm not going to cross. And I think politicians are people. And so that exists for them as well. You know, look, there's 37, I came in 37, 535 members of Congress right now, four hundred, 37, and, and that's a lot of districts, a lot of people, right? You know, uh, and, you know, I think that these people come from small areas and they may not, they may have never met anybody that's not like them. You know what I mean? And whether it's, you know, uh, from a different background, black or Jewish or whatever, like there's a good chance that someone lives in a small area that got elected to represent a larger community. And the first time they met someone who had a different, a very different background was when they got to DC. And so if they aren't open to understanding how other people live and what matters to other people, they may not be able to figure out how to support their people while including others. And I think given the chance better, more than not want to. They're just not given the chance. And they're, and I think the reward mechanism is not there. The reward mechanism is not there from the media's perspective. And then the reward mechanism is not necessarily there from the political mechanism, meaning the parties. Um, meaning the parties don't reward cooperation and collaboration. Not always. Yeah. Yeah. There's something called the problem solvers caucus, uh, which is less popular now, which is I came in with 12 or 14 Republicans and Democrats that try to vote as a block that lives sort of in the middle side of each other. And I remember when I got there, people used to call it the problem and causes caucus because they cause problems for each of their parties when they work together, uh, less popular now. From my perspective. Yeah. I'm sure. But I think that's a good thing, right? Well, it seems to me though, and this is kind of the, so I actually believe that there should be more non-negotiables. And because if I, if we all had, if the, if the three of us right now had, we were trying to figure out these things and I went, okay, these are the 10 things that doesn't even make any sense for us to talk about. Yeah. Straight up. Yeah. Right. We, we can agree to disagree. Sure. On these three things though, we can have really robust conversation and debate about it. A hundred percent. Like, so let's not even worry about fighting about these, like trying to have conversations because me and you disagree and I got to beat you. Right. But these are the three places I actually don't have to beat you. And I'm willing to give a little bit. Let's, let's deal with that. The only way, the only way that that could happen though, which would be is if I took my job seriously. And this is my issue with, with our elected officials sometimes we're talking about, we're talking about a lot of things that are about whether or not they can stay in power. And a lot of times to me that is paramount because if in fact it were about delivering for the people, which Congress right now is an incredibly useless tool. Right. No, the most effective times. Yeah. Like it's, it's, it's a completely useless tool. Yeah. Um, and the American people can agree that they're not getting anything from elected officials, but they can agree on what to do about it. Right. Right. Because there are, there would be ways if in fact we could have a political consciousness shift or we can have deeper, deeper conversations about how policy actually connects to your everyday life. Yeah. You could actually tell someone, Hey, this is what you want. Like it doesn't matter what color hair the person is. That get it gets it done for you. This is what you want. But if, if people got in the room and they were like, okay, our entire existence, our reason for existing is not to be elected, but our reason for existing is to figure out how Americans get affordable, free healthcare. We have to do it. Right. We have to do it. This is our purpose. A bird has to fly. Right. Van has to be long winded. We have to figure out how to deliver healthcare for people. If that was the purpose, something that's what's going on. Well, look, you said a lot there. So let me try and, and break down a few things. Long winded. Yeah. Listen, I mean, you got a show. So I suppose that's you're in the right place. But, um, I mean, this is why podcasts, again, look, the technology is better for your medium. If you had 42 minutes out of an hour with commercial break, you know, it's funny. When I'm on those shows, I'm better. Oh, you know, I can't do it. He knows. I know. Well, everybody else was, Hey, Van, when you're on the podcast, man, act like you're on Abby's show, man. 30 seconds to now we got time for that. But then I have to choose which one of those to answer. And I want to try to get all of them. Right. So, all right. So let me try to back up. So, you know, look, I, first of all, the difference in your approach is that you're going to pick the three that you can have a conversation on. You're not going to waste time on saying, you know, abortion for or against. You know, yeah, there's gray in the middle in terms, you want to get deep into this kind of thing of weeks or whatever, you know, there's like basic human right stuff. Right. But now you get into healthcare, right? And I'm happy to talk about my views on that, but like nothing everybody cares. But, you know, the, there's a, I think you're actually going to have a bigger problem than you think, because whether someone thinks that healthcare is a right, you know, and therefore society should make sure that it was healthcare, or you want to sell someone on the argument that it doesn't matter if you think it's a right, because you're going to pay for it anyway, because people are going to go to the emergency room and that's going to drain the system. And do you give a shit? Like there's levels to that argument that are hard to get people to engage with basic premises that come before that, which is should the government pay for other people's stuff? And what is the responsibility within the government versus the responsibility of private industry? And I would say the two issues that a lot of things kind of tend to boil down to, and it's wild right now with what's going on with the government now. It's usually industry versus government paying for it, or states rights versus federal rights. And on that one, it seems to have flipped pretty much, which is kind of crazy. Like, you know, suddenly the, we're talking about federal government taking over things that they used to brag about. It should be about states rights. But so like, if you boil it down into some of those things, you can have a conversation, but there are people that don't believe that the government should have money to pay for things for people that private industries take care of it. I don't. And I could give you some interesting examples of talking to some companies in step with government of how they try to take care of that and where that, where that balances. Um, sorry, I lost a non-negotiable thing. I'm the non-negotiable thing and sort of talking about the things that you can drill down on. I was thinking when you were speaking about your interview with Josh Shapiro, which I saw, right? And I, which I thought was great, you know, I thought was great. And like, you know, this is kind of what's wild. I'm not trying to give you guys a compliment about your show. Like you guys have a lot of fun. You talk about this things about in pop culture with the same severity and fun that you do with something like Josh Shapiro, which you do have. When we say, do you have a responsibility once you have that guy in your show, to your audience? And you had this very respectful dialogue, you know, while you clearly have some challenges that could come up, uh, in some of the things that he may stand for, right? And as a result, that's a great conversation. You know, and you didn't have to pretend to agree with him to explore those things. And to his credit, he didn't ask you to, right? He tried to explain and broaden his viewpoint. I thought that exchange was really useful to both of you. And therefore the viewer, that doesn't look like a non-negotiable. The non-negotiable is the insistence on a respectful dialogue. So it's the choice, what you talk about now, and then the way you do it. I'll tell you, in my experience, and I've experienced this both as a guest on places and then also in, like, you know, you go to these things, you get pictures taken, you meet different kinds of people. The shit that I've gotten by talking to certain people, how dare you take a picture with so-and-so who believes in this? How dare you even talk to someone? Now for me, I just talked, we just talked to elected officials. And my position is, well, someone voted for them. Don't you want to hear what they have to say so you can do something about it? But there's a problem with people even wanting to let you have that conversation because they're so armed with their frustration with certain people that by, they feel by giving them a voice, what are you doing? You know, and I think your profession has that a lot, right? There's a lot of podcasters that people gave shit to for having Trump on. And they would say, oh, well, you helped give him a pass or whatever. I don't feel that way. I think that, you know, you're going to not have a conversation with someone that you could that is going to affect people. You're not going to not have that opportunity to have a productive dialogue. Like, you know, we would say, I'll say, I'll speak for myself. I would say that we, we welcome, we welcome everybody to come on this podcast, conservative voices for me personally, except for Candice Owens. Okay. Like they would have her on. I do not want her on. She's my one non-negotiable. Right. Also, we should say that Candice has an audience is like five times. Correct. And our, correct. Van has been invited on her show before, but in the past. In the past, but I'm just saying that's like my one thing. We welcome conversations from, from the other side for what you were saying at the beginning, like we want to have that. We don't want to live in a bubble, but I would say the differences compared to the people you were saying who have had Trump on and everyone, and, and people were like, Hey, it was wrong for you to have this person on. You helped him get elected. We would say, or I would say the differences. They weren't, I did not feel they were prepared to have those conversations. It was more about week, the get of I have Trump here. And it was a friendly space rather than if I'm someone who wants to hear a perspective or, you know, like they weren't equipped to challenge him in certain ways where as if we had Trump here, we could have that, right. That conversation with them. Cause you would feel, you would feel prepared to have the actual, have the conversation. Correct. And I don't think, and that's why I've just a pushback, I would say for the people who would listen and say, or and say, why are you having this person on your platform? You helped him get elected. It's because of how they had the conversation. But then to that end, to your credit, it's why you would say you wouldn't be here if Candice owns or not, because you wouldn't be an effective person to have a respect, to have a dialogue because you would be, or no, it would be her intent. So we talked about intentionality. I don't trust that she would come in with good intentions. Like I don't, that, that, that's why I wouldn't have it. It would, it would be pointless in my opinion to have it. It would be for show. It would be entertaining if we had it. But then this is also, it would be effective. But this is also what you're talking about, the difference between, you know, chess and blood sport, right? Like in, in the responsibility of people who have a massive audience who know what they're doing. And that's where I get frustrated too. You're like, you know what you're doing. You understand the power of your mechanism and you're choosing to make sure that your audience is bigger than the effect you can have with it. And that does piss me off. Yeah. I think, um, I kind of accept that cynicism. Like I was just kind of born in it. So I kind of accept that cynicism and I know that's a part of things. I'll tell you this. Uh, I'll say this about, you know, broadly about the entire, uh, political back and forth we're having right now. I believe in people doing things that's in their own interest when they have the proper choice matrix. For example, if we were to come back to healthcare, when someone makes an argument that they're, they don't want to pay for somebody else's healthcare. They're making a cultural argument. What they're really saying is they don't want to pay for a niggas healthcare. They don't want to pay for some transgender reassignment surgery. They don't want to pay for the health of other people. The question though is, do they want to pay less for their health? Right. Would they like their healthcare to be free? The way that they get put in the trickback is someone says, Hey, well, just let you know, cause the history buried us out to for, for you to have this mechanism of healthcare for you. That means they got to get it too. That is the way that people are actually their biases. And like, you know, the history of this country is used to divorce people from doing things that's in their interest, right? For voting for a tax rate that will never benefit them. It will benefit somebody way up there because the American dream says that the, if somebody is, uh, has rich and is plentiful bounty, that they will sprinkle it down on you as your wages continue to like not grow and they get richer and richer and richer. So it's my belief even still that I say, Hey, you have a family. You have people. You have things that are going on with you healthcare polls, by the way. Obviously we all know healthcare polls crazy. It pulls really good. We're about to find out. Well, yeah, we, like, well, we'll, we're going to see just how elastic people are on all of these. And one of the, you know, without getting into her specifically too much, but, you know, one of the reasons Marjorie Taylor green probably left her job is because in her district, if you make $80,000 a year, you're going to spend 20,000 or $22,000 a year on healthcare. And so that's going to happen now with, with what just happened at the first of the year, you know, and it's going to get worse now with all the other things. So that is a small district that felt akin to all these other people. Like you were saying, they were probably not voting in their own interests in certain ways, but now we're going to feel the effects of some of the things that are happening. So what happens now? I'm so glad that you brought up MTK. Her name is Marjorie Taylor King. I'm like, I'm, I'm glad that you brought her up. I tried not to. I'm glad that you brought her up because that's the perfect example of kind of what I'm trying to talk. Yeah. So Marjorie Taylor green started saying things that were quote unquote, the right things like I am anti hiding pedophiles. Right. I am pro healthcare. I am pro affordability. I am pro having not having the executive branch abuse power. Those things are so non controversial. Like they're not controversial in the, yeah. Americans are spending too much on healthcare. The system is completely broken. Everything would be easier for a clean single payer system. Obvious, right? It's obvious that you should not want to cover up for a Epstein class that abuse their power. But it's all of that stuff is obvious. The question is, because that stuff is talking directly to the people in her district, you just said, and those things and things like that probably speak to those people more than anything, would she have been saying them? Yeah. If she was still in political favor, if she still had the favor of the president and the rest of the people in the far right, Magga movement. And that is the thing that is bothersome to me. Would Marjorie Taylor King or whomever else do what is politically expedient for them at the cost of the people that vote for her? Would you gaslight people in order to have direct access to the president? And to me, the only way you get at that, the only way you get at that with any of this stuff, and I wish I was better at it. I'm trying to add tools to my bag all the time. The only way you get at that is to be in front of these people and let people see this doesn't make any sense. Like legitimately, we, there are so many things. If you believe that, uh, in front of what people, sorry, in front of the people, right? If you believe that like a fetus is a human being and you think that that design comes straight from God, we just don't have that much to talk, to talk about. Like I just have to convince rest of the people. I got to beat you on that. But I should be able to sit down with someone and go, listen, this thing is affecting you. I agree. This thing that you think you don't want the people across town to have it. I'm letting you know you don't have it. Yeah, I agree. Like, and it's, and it's, and it's fragile for you and it's non-existent for them when there's a better way to do it, even if you don't love the Jenkins family. But my question to you is when you, when you're saying that about her specifically, are you saying that she is saying what she's saying now because she doesn't have, uh, it doesn't cost her anything politically, but if she still felt that she had political favor, she wouldn't. Is that what you're saying? Um, absolutely. Except, but, but. Okay. A couple of things here. Number one, I'm not sure it matters right now because the stakes are so high. And I know that's, you know, everybody wants to be able to have, we talked about this last week, everybody wants to be able to have, uh, energetic purity with the people that are in Foxhole with them. The stakes are so high right now. If you're willing to call the shit out, we at least got it. Like, we like the stakes are so high. Look, bro, we, I, if you would have told me the people that I nod yes to when I see them, like we're in the upside down place. Yeah. We're in the upside down place. I forget Marjorie Taylor King also brags about her voting record in Congress and how aligned she is with Trump. So it's like, so it's a Vance point. It's like, well, yeah, like they've turned against her, but at the end of the day, she's Magga through and through. Look, I'll say, I'll say, no, maybe I try not to say, I try not to say this, things like this, but I'll say it. Uh, the amount of people who have really problematic, like morally problematic, uh, records, like racially problematic records. That now I find myself agreeing with certain subjects is really troubling because I need them. I need them and their people on those things, but it's very hard because I want to make sure that that cosine has a wall that doesn't cross. Like it breaks my brain, you know, and it breaks my brain, you know. But look, if you want to, you know, if you want to give where I tend to go and again, like a lot of people don't feel this way, I try to give people the benefit of the doubt to where they're at versus what they're saying for the thing. Right. So like I'm prepared to believe that Marjorie Taylor green grew up in a place where she only knew a certain amount of people in a certain kind of way. And then as she kind of grew and like, let's go, I'm going to, let's, I'm going to go back to my movie. And as the media mechanism served her and she's got a reward mechanism, both from the government and from the media that probably both financially enriched her and enriched her ego in many ways and found like, you know, people like things that are working, right? And so now she's just kind of in this cycle. And once that continued to not work, maybe took a look around to the reality of what the effects of some of these things were, and at least on some of them made a shift. And for me, I'll take the shift. I don't need to take the rest, right? And this is to me, the only way we can possibly move forward. And I'm going to go back again to the movie, which is a thriller, right? And it goes in this way where things don't go that well for a bunch of people. And there's a bill that's being that the senator's trying to pass. And trying to pass it, it's a water bill. And I'll just say it comes off of basically, you know, a version of what happened in Flint, Michigan. And there are things that maybe in pursuit of doing something that someone believed to be true, because they had an expertise in an area that was dealing with the best of an industry that was financed by the best of an industry that would help a lot of people, perhaps didn't look at what was happening to some other people that didn't have the same influence. And in the movie, those two things do meet in a thriller like way. But like you're dealing with the ramifications of paying attention to feedback in one way and maybe having a convenient lack of acknowledgement of the individuals that might be affected that don't have the same access to you. And I think that is a version of what you're talking about with someone like her. I'm going to leave on one thing. You ever see the way white people cross the street? I mean, I'm trying to think as I am one, I'm trying to think of how I cross the street. You know how you cross the street? I usually in traffic. I usually don't pay attention to the signs. Do you know why? Why? Because you don't think anybody's going to hit you with a car. Do you know why you cross the street that light that way? Why? Because you feel safe. Fair. Now I want you to watch the way different. I walk around town and I watch the way people cross the street. Yeah. Why people cross the street as if the car would fucking explode if it hits them? Like I saw one dude, like I'm sitting in the thing. He's jogging. He's looking at me like, yeah, my bitch. It's like, even we talked about this. The go sign. Yeah. Oh, I noticed this is the kind of shit that I noticed the go sign when you're driving, like to, to in your car. Yeah. What color lets you know that it's time to go? Green. Green. What color is the guy that tells you it's time to walk when you have to cross walk? White. Right. Freedom of movement. Right. You get to walk like, so like the reason why you can believe that Marjorie Taylor Green, like had this change of heart and all of that is because she doesn't really make you feel unsafe. That's not true. That's not true. I'm sorry, but that, but that specifically isn't true because, you know, and we, if we're wrapping up, we probably don't have time to go there. We got in Los Angeles. But, but because I, I mean, again, I try not to go deep into this from myself personally, but there are things that are massively offensive that she said to me about that I find personally very offensive, you know, and I could say the same thing about Tim Scott and I found both of them to say things also that I think are great. And yet I could feel betrayed by certain things that are people on the left, uh, who she'll rename nameless that I thought that, you know, were champions of something that I thought was so disappointed in. And so I, I, I, I mean, I hear what you're saying. I hear what you're saying culturally in terms of, you know, like privilege at the deepest level and feeling safe and that all I get, but specifically in terms of agreeing with Marjorie Taylor Green, it's not that it's not because like I said, you know, I'm not over the shit that she's done that's offended me or any other person. I'm just interested in people finding a way to move forward. And so like you said, I'll take the kernels that I can to make a coalition of rivals. If it can like, look, here's the reality. The president, since I think Reagan has been elected by less than 2% of the vote. 2%. Right. So I think this last one was 1.6, 1.6% of the country. If you take all the little pieces. So like you said, I'm not trying to move the people on the 10% on one side or the 10% on the other. I'm looking at the 8% in the middle. And so if we want to do stuff, I look at the 8% in the middle and I think, all right, did that person who I don't agree with, get me a half a percent of the 8%. Right. Cause that it means I only need about, you know, 16, 15 and a half more. You know what I mean? Like that's how I look at it for me personally. And so let me tell you why it's important that you look at it that way. Um, it's important that you look at that way because I keep trying to convince everyone of this. What am I about to say? Everybody has different jobs. That's right. So I just keep, I have to be on top of that. So then everybody has different jobs. The thing that I think about when I think about Marjorie Taylor Green or anything, and I got a whole framework over the cross in the street. I've been observing this. I got a whole deal of what I crossed the way I crossed the street, the way Latinos here and Mexicans cross the street. I watch how people feel safe when somebody's behind the wheel and they think they might get hit by a fucking car. It's just totally different. It's the whole framework of America. Based on where you're from, but keep going. Could that do the whole thing? I spent a lot of time in New York. So to be fair. Well, once again, New York, different. I'm talking about what I see here. Yeah. Right. With people, even with me, I walk a lot. But the reason why I say everybody has different jobs is because, yeah, that's the way everybody has different jobs. And some of those jobs are based in who we are. Yeah. And so we got to let, I'm not going to trip for anybody, but what I will say is for me, the stakes, and this is not me trying to racialize this in the stakes are different, right? Yeah. So if Marjorie Taylor Green wins, it's shitty for you. It's deadly for me. Right. Right. Because my voting rights are gone. I can't do anything. Right. Right. Like, so, so, so, so, so like, voting rights are going, I got to drink. And so in this, what we can agree on is that I'm not going to trip for anyone. Anywhere at this point, I'm not going to trip for anybody that goes, you know what? I think people have deep. I can't put that much faith in trusting them. Yeah. Because there is a generations long trend line of intentionality. Yeah. That I have to let people know you're doing it on purpose. Yeah. I have to be like, Hey, it's not an accident. Cause it happened to me, happened to my goddamn daddy, having my goddamn granddaddy. This is on purpose. And so we have to have, I have to have conversations where they get sick of me. But they're happy to see you. But you got to be with me. I want to be like, I am with you. But on top of it, I couldn't agree with you more, but also like, look, man, I, I'm, I have a diverse group of friends and workers. And I'm very proud and conscious of my, not well, not well, but I'm from Syracuse. Oh, okay. And so I grew up, we could, if you want, I'll come back and we can just do that. We'll do the whole thing. Here's the thing. Since they broke up to big East, like a little piece of me died. You know what I mean? Like, remember McNamara? Yeah. You know what I mean? And, but that's all we had growing up. By the way, we go to talk about the NIT stuff because like, we wear circuits. Were you at Circus? I went to Ithaca. But you went to Ithaca. Okay. Yeah. But anyway, but what I'll say is, uh, you know, I think it's critical that people roll differently towards the same objective. Like I, as much as I, um, can talk to you guys and be supportive and knowledgeable about things that are not my background, but excited to learn and support. I'm not the best voice for some of them. Right. And so my job is, I think, to give space in whatever way I can for those that are. Right. And so I couldn't do with you more. Like, and that is, again, to your, both your credit, like it's critical. And I think honestly, just to say it, the left does such a shitty job at this. We just have so many circular firing squads. You know what I mean? Where you take people down for not agreeing with you the same way. You know, or loud enough or loud enough. Right. Whereas like you should do it the way you do it. And I should do it the way I do it. And together, like hopefully everyone gets acknowledged. You know what I mean? And that's it. Sorry. We know. No, spoken like the politician you are in the movie. The senator. I like, I kind of liked you as a senator in the movie. We could talk about that later. Uh, the movie is pH one. Tell everyone how they can support you. Uh, yes. pH one, uh, the premier's tonight. The movie comes out in theaters tomorrow. In Los Angeles, it's based in New York and D.C. The following week, you can pre-buy it on Apple and Fandango once it opens in the theater and then available digitally May 8th. Did I get it all in? That's what I'm talking about. Yeah. I know how people watch things, but in the theater, if you want to see some group screams and people leaning, we'll see it. Go see the theater. Want to come tonight? Yeah. What's on? The 7 30s, the show, 6 30s, the pre stuff. You're welcome to come. I love it. Yeah. Oh, that's exciting. Like I'm doing it. Yeah. No problem. Come on. Oh, you got Vanda come out. He really enjoyed this conversation. Mark, thank you. Oh, five times. Thank you though for being here. We appreciate you guys so much. All right. That's enough podcasting. It's up. Uh, who's who's the next AKA we're going to have on the show? We got a book. What is that? Hey, you gotta get Gisela. We gotta get Gisela. She didn't reach out. You know, I wonder if she's probably still waiting. No, no, no. Let's have, you know, we should have, we should have event Nicole Brown cause I saw what she wrote me to. What did she say? She was, you know, we, she was like, I love you, but you know, Holly Robinson, Pete. Got at you. I didn't know she was an AKA. No, of course, just like in the comments. I didn't know. No, neither one of them said anything crazy. I didn't even know. It's, you know what? I like, I didn't know some of these people were a part of the D nine. It's lovely. So now you're saying, now you're saying they not repping this shit. No, cause a lot of people didn't know I was a Delta. People were like, this is the way I found out Rachel was a Delta. Ooh. Can't wait. Take thin caps off, but do not stop learning. Pay all that money to have friends and get your ass beat. It's gravy. Gino, I know how hard it was on you. I still remember the day you cried when you crossed cap. I love you, dog. That's my, that's my God. It's meaningful. It's like, Gino was crying and everybody and he not going to act like he cried. It was meant so much to my Brian. Yeah. You said he wanted that his whole life. Like Gino always wanted cap. Gino used to. It was in him. What's the little high school capital group? What are you calling? Y'all know what I'm talking about? It's one in high school. Yeah. Yeah, a little cap of high school group. Because Delta's a little bit. I don't think Gino was in that shit though. Who was in that? My man, uh, Channing might have been in that and, um, Channing little brother was in it. What's Channing little brother name again? I think it was cool as fuck. We got to go. I'm fucking, I was on a flight for six AM this morning. I'm completely fucking my brain is fried. Oh, no, but no one would know. Did a fantastic job. Fucking right. Take the gaps up the guys. I'm not a fan. I'm Rachel and Lindsay.