Bernie’s Q&A: Clinton, Klobuchar, Romney, Sanders, and more! (10/25) — Premium Interactive ($4 members)

Welcome to this week’s Premium Q&A session for Premium Interactive members. I appreciate you all signing up and joining me. Thank you.

Also, thank you for getting your questions in early this week to accommodate my travel schedule (questions that came in later will be added to next week’s Q&A). I appreciate it. Next week, we’ll go back to the Wednesday night (at midnight) deadline.

Let’s get to your questions (and my answers):


With the exception of Bernie Sanders, most of the enthusiasm for socialism seems to be from the younger crowd, where capitalism is practically a four-letter word. Do you think this is mostly caused by the 2008 housing bubble and deep recession? It seems like free market capitalism took a P.R. hit that it hasn’t been able to recover from. — Steve R.

Maybe, but I’m not sure the “younger crowd” thinks about stuff like that.  More likely, in my opinion, is they want “free” stuff — and Bernie is offering it to them.

Bernie, if perchance, President Trump is impeached and removed from office, is their anything to prevent him from running for President again? — Charles B.

Good question.  If he’s impeached and removed from office that means he will have served (less than) one term.  You can serve two terms as president.  So yes, while I’m not a constitutional expert, I believe he could run again.

10 years ago, you wrote “Crazies to the Left of Me, Wimps to the Right: How One Side Lost Its Mind and the Other Lost Its Nerve.” If you wrote a similar themed book today, in which you assessed the current state of both sides, what title would you use? Maybe something like, “Both Sides are Crazy. Help.” — Todd S.

I like your title, Todd.  Or maybe, “Democrats Are Nuts — And Republicans Aren’t Exactly Sane”  The picture on the cover would show AOC … and Donald Trump.

Hello Sir Bernie: It seems that whenever a teenager commits a violent and brutal crime, liberals argue against draconian adult punishments, citing studies showing that teenagers’ brains are not fully developed to the point of actually comprehending the choices that they make, and that the age of development is around 26.

Okay, I get that, but then how is it that Bernie Sanders and many on the left also want to lower the voting age to 16? I mean, by their logic, people that young wouldn’t have brains developed enough to cast an intelligent and well-thought out vote to help shape our country, right? Can you explain this paradox to me?  — Maturing Regards to you, from The Emperor

Emperor, my friend, surely you jest.  They want 16 year olds to vote because they figure they’ll vote for Democrats. But, you say, they just told us that the brains of 16 year olds aren’t fully developed.  Yeah, So?  This is not about logic, Emperor.  It’s about politics.

Bernie: Very well done Off the Cuff on LeBron James. But, are we all surprised to find that another social justice leftist so willing to preach to the rest of us is a raging hypocrite? The terms social justice, leftist and hypocrite have become synonyms. It is always “I have a free speech right to tell you how to live as long as it doesn’t affect me. Live the way I tell you so I can continue to live the lavish lifestyle I have without any cost to me.” — Dennis C.

Social justice leftists, as you say Dennis, have a tendency at times to be authoritarian and hypocritical.  But let me point out that they don’t have a monopoly on hypocrisy.  As I’ve written, white evangelicals like to tell people about the correct way to live their lives … then support a man who has mocked their values his whole life.  So there’s enough hypocrisy to go around.  I can do without the sanctimony from the left and the right.

What do you think about Amy Klobuchar? As I’ve watched the debates, she’s been a moderating influence to those around her and seems less cataclysmic, and more realistic about incremental steps. But I don’t actually know enough to know how she would govern, only that she seems to have a sense of realism. I don’t agree with most Democratic moral values, so I’m not likely to vote for her, but if I had to vote for a Democrat, would you say she might be the least destructive? — Bill N.

You’re on to something, Bill.  Relatively speaking, she’s a lot more moderate than a lot of the others, including co-frontrunner Elizabeth Warren.  But the key word is “relatively.”  They’re all left of center and, like you, that’s not for me anymore.

Bernie, are you as frustrated as I am with these behind-closed-doors impeachment proceedings? We the people should be able to see these proceedings and judge for ourselves, but with the Dems and Schiff in charge, we’re supposed to believe everything is on the up and up?!!! And, they conveniently leak just enough “incriminating” info. Then there’s the most obnoxious, overbearing politician in history [beats Trump IMO] Hillary “the election was stolen from me” Clinton. Just go away all ready. I’d love for someone to ask her if she feels Trump stole Wisconsin (where she didn’t bother to campaign) from her as well. You know Hillary, the one you didn’t bother to campaign in! But no one will, and now she accuses Gabbard and Stein as being Russian assets!  — JM

There’s a line about this, JM, in a Rolling Stone article.  The line is, Hillary is nuts.

As for the behind closed doors proceedings.  Republicans obviously don’t like it.  And for good reason.  At some point, the proceedings will be open for all of us to witness.  If Democrats try to run roughshod over the minority, the American people will notice.  And it may very well backfire on Adam Schiff and his posse.

Is Hillary Clinton helping the Dems cause in any way whatsoever? What can possibly be her real mission? I don’t believe her actions are tact, they are mentally flawed behaviors IMO. –Scotty G.

Losing hurts, Scotty.  And she apparently hasn’t gotten over her loss in 2016.  Is she helping the Dems.  No.  If she thought she’d get the nomination, would she jump in.  Yes, I think she would.

Having grown up in the Boston area saturated with democratic liberals…. have the Democrats forgot about the history of Democrats from Massachusetts running for president? Teddy Kennedy could never get past Chappaquiddick. Mike Dukakis was a fine governor but was badly beaten. Mitt Romney, again a fine governor but badly beaten. Do you think the American voters can overcome their historic dislike and distrust of Massachusetts liberals and elect Elizabeth Warren? Thanks!! — Charles K.

It’s not the same country as it was back then, Charles. My gut response is that Senator Warren is too far left for the American people.  But if President Trump keeps alienating everyone except his base — especially independents — then anything is possible, including a President Warren.  If it needs to be said:  That is NOT a prediction.

King Bernard… what are your thoughts on carpet versus hardwood flooring?…and maybe a few words on marble countertops?…I’ve been watching cable news today…so much like the flooring…I’m off to lie………Greggo

Greggo, my friend, here’s what I think:  Take your meds and get some rest. That said, I prefer hardwood flooring. As for marble countertops:  I never understood how you could take marbles and make a countertop out of them.  Marbles be round.  Countertops be flat.

A lot of Trump people are going ape-sh*t over the discovery that Mitt Romney has had an anonymous Twitter account (since 2011), that he uses to read (and on rare occasion participate in) online political discussions (some of them having to do with him). Rush Limbaugh slammed Romney as a hypocrite (because Romney has criticized Trump’s tweeting) and said Romney is “thin-skinned, totally vain and, I now believe completely, totally jealous of Donald Trump.” Tucker Carlson called the account “a triumph of bourgeois passive aggression.” Dana Loesch tweeted “How does Romney have time for a secret Twitter account? Pettiness doesn’t count for less just because it’s done under an assumed name.

Now some facts: It takes like 30 seconds to set up a Twitter account, and Romney tweeted from his a grand total of 10 times over the last EIGHT YEARS. What on earth are these nutballz talking about? — Sam G.

I’m with you, Sam.  It’s all about one thing and only one thing:  The nutballz love Trump and will agree with everything he says and does.  That’s why they’re called nutballz, a term I believe you just coined.  Since Romney has been critical of their savior, Donald Trump, they must go after him.  #pathetic

Not a question- just a comment to let you know that we really enjoy your posts and the Q&A. It’s the only place we can get an accurate view of what’s going on politically. Thank you for all that you do. — Carolyn S.

A million thanks Carolyn, and I’m assuming you said that because you really mean it and not because I promised to send you a lot of money if you said it.  Seriously, your comment means a lot to me.  I appreciate it very much!

 


Thanks, everyone! You can send me questions for next week using the form below! You can also read previous Q&A sessions by clicking here.




Bernie’s Q&A: Shepard Smith, Project Veritas, Athletes & Politics, AOC, and more! (10/18) — Premium Interactive ($4 members)

Welcome to this week’s Premium Q&A session for Premium Interactive members. I appreciate you all signing up and joining me. Thank you.

Note to members: Due to some traveling I’ll be doing next week, I’ll need to have all questions for next Friday’s Q&A in before Tuesday, 10/22 at 5pm ET. Thank you.

Let’s get to your questions (and my answers):


Since the Mueller investigation was 2 years in the making, any chance the dems will delay and stretch impeachment investigation into late next year with hope of turning the senate and a chance to convict? — Beverly

I don’t think so, Beverly.  That would look way too political and likely to backfire on them.  I think there’s a good chance the president will be impeached and I think it’s likely to happen this year.  But anything is possible.

IMO, if you are in public life you should be required to accept an equal number of interview requests and not just pick and choose those who you know will be “friendly”. I applaud those who are doing it now, though they are few and far between, but c’mon, if you can’t stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen. Heard that said somewhere. For example, wouldn’t it be interesting for AOC to be interviewed by say, Bret Baier over at Fox. She’s maybe the loudest voice on the left but only accepts interviews from “friendly’s”. Get in the ring and field some tough questions for a change. I know, pipe dream. — John M.

Required?  How?  You want a law that says they must do an equal number of interviews with the right and the left? And what if they don’t?  Jail time?  That’s not to say they shouldn’t voluntarily do interviews with people who will ask inconvenient questions.

King Bernard…very easy and quick question…and only one word required in response…..who will win this year’s World Series?…and yes, I know the participants aren’t known yet, but I may not be alive next week….and you aren’t allowed to use the words ‘Yankees’..’Yanks’ or ‘Bombers’…and don’t try to give me that clever answer of NewYork either..even in Texas we know that’s two effing words….I’m off for BP (that’s blood pressure, not batting practice) — Greggo

Houston Astros, Greggo.  Hope you’re happy.  Guess who isn’t.

Over the weekend, CNN’s Brian Stelter had on three former Fox News people to talk about Shep Smith’s departure. One was “Campaign ” Carl Cameron, who brought up these points:

  1. FNC’s News department has “shrunk” in the Trump era, and journalists are now “vastly outnumbered by the opinion makers. And the opinion makers are more interested in playing to people’s bias than anything else. And it makes it very difficult for journalists to actually give people honest facts when the airtime is shrinking constantly.”
  2. “Over the years, there was not a history of Fox opinion hosts criticizing the journalists. And over the course of the Trump administration, more and more the opinion hosts have been criticizing the journalists. And so that really pits bias against straight journalism.”

What are your thoughts on these two things? — John D.

It’s the opinion people who bring in the viewers. And the money.  As long as they have ratings, they have the clout. Do opinion makers play to the audience’s bias?  Absolutely!  But I’m not sure it gives hard news journalists a tough time presenting facts.  As bad as Fox’s prime time sycophants are, I think the hard news side of FNC is pretty good, especially the Washington journalists.  Does opinion during the day as well as primetime squeeze out hard news? Sure.  But cable viewers tune in for opinion.  As I say, that’s where the money is.

Let me stray from the rest of your question to mention what I found troubling about the panel on CNN.  Everyone there praised Shepard Smith as the second coming of Edward R. Murrow.  Shepard Smith likes to tell anyone who would listen that he’s a hard news reporter, not a commentator.  Really, Shep?

Everyone knew how he felt about the president.  We’re not supposed to know how a reporter/anchor feels about the president or anything else.  Shepard Smith frequently blurred the line between news and commentary.  It’s what CNN, MSNBC and FOX do a lot.

He won’t be missed by Fox’s loyal pro-Trump viewers.  But he will be missed by liberal journalists who like Smith also blur the line between news and commentary — and detest the president.

As for the in-house fighting between Shepard Smith and Tucker Carlson.  Roger Ailes didn’t allow what he called “shooting inside the tent.”

If Shepard Smith left because he had had enough, good for him.  But I always found him to be sanctimonious.  He didn’t like the pro-Trump biases at Fox — while he was peddling his own anti-Trump biases.

Can’t make this stuff up.

If you missed this week’s edition of Off the Cuff, check it out.  It’s on this very subject.

A couple days ago ABC News ran a report on Turkey bombing Syria, but they used video footage from a Kentucky military-gun demo in 2017. I know mistakes happen, but how on earth can something as crazy as this happen? I don’t think this is political bias since the actual footage from Syria is plenty terrible, and a misleading video like that doesn’t make Trump look any worse. It just makes ABC look bad. — Andy D.

Good question, Andy.  How could this happen?  I have no idea.  But I hope the video editor didn’t want dramatic “bang bang” video — that’s what they call it in TV news — and figured, nobody would know the difference if he used hot action video from Kentucky.  But there’s no evidence of that. It’s just so crazy, as you suggest that it makes you wonder … what the heck went on over there.

If impeachment of Pres. Trump reaches the Senate, can Republican Senators require anyone they want to testify in this impeachment procedure? — Charles B.

I believe so, within reason.  The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court presides, so if the GOP says they want to call someone who’s in Antarctica and won’t be available for 6 months, the Justice can (again as I understand it) rule against that request.

Hi Bernie, I’d love your take on the recent tapes that have come out from Project Veritas showing how Jeff Zucker has been dictating the daily news cycle to all of his reporters and news personalities (Russia, racism, Ukraine and now impeachment). Of course a very similar story came out recently regarding Dean Baquet at the NYT. Seems to me that it’s bad enough when reporters slant the news to fit their own bias as you outlined in your book, but openly dictating and mandating a narrative feels like the death of journalism to me. What say you? — Keith M.

I’m with you Keith but I have a great big problem with hidden cameras and microphones.  I’m no fan of the guy who runs Project Veritas.  I don’t like what he’s doing at all, despite the information we get from it.  Did he edit the footage to make CNN look worse than they already look?  Who knows?  Does he have the same enthusiasm to go after conservative bias? No!  To your main point, Zucker is running a corrupt operation.  But he’s not alone in the world of cable news.

I guess I just don’t understand why Trump’s “trash talking” bothers you so much. I don’t believe you’re a snob, I’m from the same streets you are; it don’t bother me. Is it possible, that working in the eastern corridor media establishment so long maybe just a little elitism rubbed off? Just a question Bernie, it’s not personal. — Ralph P.

Ralph, trust me on this one … I’m the least elitist guy you’ll ever meet.  Trump’s trash talk bother me because he comes off like a thug, a low class jerk — not the President of the United States.  And as a friend of mine puts it, “It’s always amusing to me how the MAGA crowd thinks it’s ‘elitist’ to criticize a billionaire celebrity president for not showing people common decency.”  That’s what it’s about for me, Ralph — common decency, a quality missing in this man.

Hello Bernie, Firstly let me get my admiration for you as an Honest Opinion person said and out of the way. My question is. I look forward to the show Real Sports on HBO. The stories are informative, entertaining and sometimes sobering. But I have come to feel a malaise when Bryant Gumbel does his… well how should I say… Pontifications. It seems to be more pronounced with a Politically Correct bent over the last few years. So my question is. Is Real Sports a News Sports show or an opinion show by the host? Thanks for reading this and thanks for continuing some sanity in your Blog, etc. — Paul (just an old sports fan)

Real Sports is a news magazine show … with opinion thrown in by Bryant at the end in what is clearly commentary.  The problem some people have with that part of the show — and trust me, you’re not alone — is they disagree with the more political of his opinions. I do.

I find a great irony from the attacks by many against LeBron James as well as the whole NBA/China Syndrome. Since when do we really take the political opinions seriously of mega-rich athletes? Washington post, and others, who have been highly critical of Trump’s crusade against unfair and ruthless regimes, seem to have jumped on the bank wagon full of criticism with this one. This whole episode is packed with ironies from sneaker companies full fledged support of athletes who take a knee in our country but manufacture products in dictatorships. To Off-the-Cuff remarks about freedom and money in the NBA. I guess the media and others support a more dangerous enemy; Trump. — Tim H.

I’m sure this is my fault, not yours, but I’m not grasping your point.  I read it several times and I just don’t get it.  My bad.  As to your one question … about taking political opinions seriously coming from mega rich athletes:  Sometimes they’re worth listening to, sometimes not.  When Arthur Ashe or Billy Jean King talks about civil rights, they;re saying something we should consider.  When Dennis Rodman talks about his pal Kim of North Korea … not so much.

Have you read O’Reilly’s book, The United States of Trump? If so, any thoughts? — Joseph V.

I have not.  And there’s a reason:  If Bill went easy on his friend the president, it will affect how I view him.  I may at some point read it, or a review, but not yet.

Hi Bernie, What are your thoughts on Trump pulling out our troops from Syria, with the consequence that, if you believe the media, the Kurds seem to be pairing up with Russia and Iran? — Terry

There’s something seductive about his reasoning:  We don’t want to be engaged in endless wars. But like everything else, his move went against the judgment of people who understand these things.  He’s impulsive — shoots first asks questions later.  The Kurds have been good to us.  They’ve done a lot of the fighting against ISIS.  You can’t blame them if they feel betrayed.

Mr. G . Can you tell me how to get in touch with Chuck Schumer so that I can buy him a pair of properly fitting bi-focals? He’s driving me nuts. Thanks. — Lee K.

Yes.  I have his private cell phone number.  917 IMA Lefty.

Greetings Sir Bernie: While I know that the Syrian situation is very complex, I have to say that it was a very dumb thing for Trump to not only abandon the Kurds to the Turkish military, but to then FURTHER INSULT our most reliable Islamic allies by quipping that they didn’t help us in WWII is especially ripe for ridicule. Nonetheless, I have to wonder, what should the U.S. be doing in Syria? I mean, regime change, in my opinion, is unnecessary since the Assad regime really isn’t much of a threat to the U.S. Any chance that the Kurds would forgive us and help us again after this foolhardy decision from Trump? — Kurdish Regards, From The Emperor

As I mentioned earlier in this Q & A session, more than a few Americans will buy into the president’s idea that we should not get bogged down in never ending wars in far off places.  But there is such a thing as loyalty to friends — a concept unknown to this president.  So, will the Kurds forgive us and help us again.  Why should they?  Why should they put their lives on the line for a country that threw them overboard when they became an inconvenience.  Just asking’, Emperor.

 


Thanks, everyone! You can send me questions for next week using the form below! You can also read previous Q&A sessions by clicking here.




Bernie’s Q&A: Trump and Syria, Chuck Todd, Elizabeth Warren, James Harden, and more! (10/11) — Premium Interactive ($4 members)

Welcome to this week’s Premium Q&A session for Premium Interactive members. I appreciate you all signing up and joining me. Thank you.

Editor’s note: Just a friendly reminder to please try to keep your questions relatively short. Thank you.

Let’s get to your questions (and my answers):


Hi Bernard, This whole impeachment mess….DEMS appear not to be legislating, just investigating. The impeachment inquiry will lead to impeachment but there won’t be votes to convict. I think this will backfire on the DEMS in 2020! Your thoughts? — Gary N.

You’re right that the inquiry almost certainly will lead to impeachment but there won’t be votes in the Senate to convict.  That said, I think it’s too early to tell who will be hurt more, Democrats or Republicans.  Check out the column I posted this past Monday.  It concludes with the idea that while Democrats in Washington and on the blue coasts may think impeachment is a great idea, moderate swing voters in Middle America may not.  Stay tuned.

Bernie: Lots of references in the news today about whistleblowers. Did you consider yourself a whistleblower when you wrote your famous original Wall Street Journal column and subsequent book, “Bias”? If so, do you think it’s ironic that Dan Rather took such huge exception to your commentary since he pretty much made a living celebrating and utilizing whistleblowers on 60 Minutes? — Steve R.

Bing-Freaking-O, Steve.

I could leave it there, because you nailed it, but let me briefly explain.  While I didn’t consciously set out to be a whistleblower, that’s what I was.  And yes, I found it ironic that Dan — and others — who as journalists looked down everyone else’s throat, didn’t like it when one of their own looked down theirs.  If I had done what I did, but worked for a drug company, they’d feature me on 60 Minutes and portray me as a great big hero.  But because I wrote about them, and the news business, I became radioactive.  I stayed at CBS for 4 and a half years after the WSJ op-ed, then left to write Bias.  Who got the last laugh?

Elizabeth Warren is dealing with another controversy about her bio. Despite long saying that she was fired from a teaching job because she got pregnant (a story she uses when campaigning on certain policies), it appears that the job was hers to keep, but she left it by choice. 5 years ago, I think this type of thing (and the Native American fiasco) would have ended a presidential campaign. But with Trump showing that one can regularly make up all kinds of crazy stuff, and still win the presidency, do you think voters are now just conditioned to accept this type of thing as normal/acceptable? — Jen R.

Once again Jen, I think you’ve hit on something.  First, yes, Trump has lowered the bar regarding honesty … so Elizabeth Warren’s BS doesn’t quite have the impact it might have a few years ago.  But also, Ms. Warren is one of THEM.  Journalists share her values (by and large).  They protect their own.  And if that’s a tad harsh, then how about this: Journalists always salivate more when going after a (conservative) Republican than a (liberal) Democrat.

What are your thoughts on Chuck Todd’s outburst on Senator Ron Johnson last Sunday, where he accused Johnson of spreading, “Fox News conspiracy propaganda stuff” and then started shouting over him? Johnson was definitely deflecting a lot of direct questions, but I’m wondering if Todd went overboard by yelling at a sitting senator. Your thoughts pls. — Norm

I don’t think either of them looked good.  But I find it interesting that Chuck Todd accuses the senator of spreading Fox News conspiracies when he’s got a show on MSNBC — a channel that spread Trump colluded with Russia conspiracies for more than two years.  Senator Johnson should have pointed that out … but he was too busy answering a question he wasn’t asked.

Greetings Sir Bernie. I’m curious if you’ve seen any of the following plays and what opinions you may have about them: “Hamilton” “Book Of Mormon” “Angels In America” and “Rent.” If you have not seen these, is there a particular reason why you avoided them? — Theatrical Regards From The Emperor

I have not seen “Hamilton” because I was close friends with Aaron Burr who didn’t like Hamilton.  Nor have I seen “Book of Mormon” because we Mormons didn’t think it was as funny as those godless liberal theater critics did.  As for “Rent” … missed that one too, but I did rent an apartment in Miami a long time ago. Does that count?

You’re a strange cat, Emperor.

Curious if you ever used a ghostwriter for any of your books, and what your general thoughts are on public figures (especially media people) using ghostwriters. If those thoughts are negative, don’t worry… I won’t tell O’Reilly. 😉 — Barry L.

Never used a ghostwriter.  If anyone doesn’t like the words, blame me.  If a TV type or a politician can’t write and uses a professional writer, the publisher probably won’t want it acknowledged.  Takes a bit of the authenticity away. And in case you’re wondering, Barry … yes, I did write this answer all by myself.

Years ago, you told Bill O’Reilly (on his show) that Whoopi Goldberg was your cousin. Was it flattering that Bill had so much faith in you as a truth-teller that he actually seemed to believe you for a moment? — John D.

Obviously, Whoopi is NOT my cousin.  She’s my sister.

How’d it go, John D, at your gig last week doing standup for 5 year olds at Chuck E Cheese in El Segundo?  I heard you killed.  Oops, that could be read the wrong way.

I have defended Trump on a number of things but I see no defense of what he just did in Syria. He impulsively moved a hundred U.S. troops to a different part of Syria to allow Turkey to slaughter the Kurds (who we vowed to support and who helped us big-time against ISIS). The larger result, by all the experts’ estimation, will be more Middle Eastern instability, lots of ISIS prisoners being set free, and ultimately additional ground wars involving Americans. But somehow, the pro-Trumpers are defending what Trump did by saying “it’s time to end the endless wars”? WHAT ARE THEY TALKING ABOUT? This reckless pullout stuff is what we got all over Obama for doing! — Jack S.

You’re right, Jack.  It is a seductive message … that “it’s time to end the endless wars” … a lot of reasonable people believe that.  But actions have consequences and this president is, as you say, impulsive.  He doesn’t think things through.  And you got another point right:  If Obama had done this … the Trump sycophants would be all over him, calling him a traitor … and worse.  As the president might tweet: #verysad

Hello, Bernard: Gregg Popovich, Steve Kerr, ESPN and the rest of the NBA social justice warriors love to speak out against Trump, their supposed authoritarian president. But they seem, curiously enough, to have no strong opinion when the true authoritarians in China tell the NBA to knock it off with Daryl Morey’s support for Hong Kong and human rights. How embarrassing that James Harden apologized for an American voicing support for democracy. I guess I’m sadly amused, but not surprised. You? — Gary

James Harden should have never apologized.  Let’s leave it at that.  As for the others, I don’t want to be too tough on them.  Some stay in touch with the news, some don’t.  They may not know enough about the situation in Hong Kong to intelligently comment. Of course, there’s the elephant in the living room:  money.  They’re walking a fine line — if they condemn China they’re putting the entire league in a financial tight spot. It’s easy for you and me to want the same guys who talk about social justice here in the USA to speak out about China, but we don’t have money in the game.

This would be an acceptable answer, if asked about Hong Kong:   “We agree with Commissioner Silver:  We have American values, and free speech is high among them.  Daryl Morey has the right to say what he did.”

While that would have fallen short of an outright endorsement of the Hong Kong protestors, it would have been good enough, for now, for me.

There are many who despise Trump, however, unless you’re a far left loon, you have to see that the Dems are a bunch of clowns led by the likes of lying Shiff and Pelosi, etal lying through their teeth doing whatever they can legally or not to have this impeachment inquiry kicked off well prior to the 2020 campaign. For Schiff to lie about not having any contact with the whistleblower and mouthing a parody of what he believes Trump “really” was saying when he spoke with the Ukrainian President I mean, c’mon. At one point do people who believe in honesty and the rule of law, regardless of political affiliation say “I don’t like Trump, but I don’t like what the Dems are doing even more”? Hopefully there are more of them out there than we know. — John M.

I think you’re on to something, John.  I think there are a lot of folks out there saying, “I don’t like Trump but I don’t like what the Dems are doing even more.”  I’m not at all sure that Democrats understand that.

I know everyone wants to talk politics, but I need to ask the really important questions. I shared my dad’s dream to see a baseball game in the House that Ruth Built. He was side-tracked by Adolf Hitler, and the two times I tried to take my family, we had to cancel. Neither of us made it. So, my question is: did my dad and I miss something special by not being able to watch the Bronx Bombers in the old stadium or not? And do you have a special memory there? I suppose why I enjoy your writings is I think you made a difference and changed things. Is there one special investigation where you went home and said Honey, break out the Scotch? And lastly, if Sean Coleman was sober and got into a fight with James Bond, who do you think would win? — Tim H.

Tim, I have one lasting memory of my first time at the old Yankee Stadium.  It was a twilight doubleheader.  I was with my father, who had to get up before dawn the next day to go to the factory.  So we were only going to stay for the first game, or maybe just part of it. We had bleacher seats — 75 cents each — that’s all my father could handle.  We walked from the darkness of the underground tunnel, beneath the bleachers, into the early evening open air. I will never forget the color of the grass.  It was emerald green.  I had never seen anything like it.  I’m not kidding:  It was like having a religious experience.  That image is ingrained in my memory.  And I’m glad it is.

Can’t remember any story when I came home and said “Honey, break out the Scotch.”  And not just because I don’t drink.  As a rule I don’t celebrate after stories.  I’m never out to “get” someone who’s done something wrong.  I just present the story and you can think whatever you want … and you can say, “Honey, break out the Scotch.”

As for your last question:

It depends on which Bond. If we’re talking about a straight fight (no razor-sharp, flying derby hats or other weapons), Sean could definitely beat up the Bonds played by Roger Moore, Pierce Brosnan, and Timothy Dalton. Likely Sean Connery’s too (sorry, Bond purists). Hard to say with George Lazenby (who wasn’t around very long, but seemed pretty tough), and I do think Sean would have a hard time with Daniel Craig.

That said, I of course liked Sean Connery’s Bond, but was a big fan of Roger Moore’s James Bond.  I liked the dry sense of humor Roger brought to the character.  And didn’t like Daniel Craig’s Bond.  No fun at all.

 


Thanks, everyone! You can send me questions for next week using the form below! You can also read previous Q&A sessions by clicking here.




Bernie’s Q&A: Schiff, Hunter Biden, Drudge, Watters, and more! (10/4) — Premium Interactive ($4 members)

Welcome to this week’s Premium Q&A session for Premium Interactive members. I appreciate you all signing up and joining me. Thank you.

Editor’s note: Just a friendly reminder to please try to keep your questions relatively short. Thank you.

Let’s get to your questions (and my answers):


Bernie, I’d like your take on my theory about the general public’s interest in the impeachment inquiry proceedings. Of course when I say “general public”, I mean NOT the Kool-Aid drinking folks who watch Fox, CNN, and MSNBC daily. My prediction is ratings on those networks or any other network televising the proceedings won’t increase that much….the general public is tuning this out due to 1) exhaustion over the last 3 years of non-stop media hysteria and 2) perception of just further political arguments and skepticism of the charges. What say you? — Jeff

I’m with you on the “exhaustion” point you make.  But in the United States of Entertainment, impeachment is a pretty good show.  I do NOT think the public will tune it out if it gets that far.  But as always, I could be wrong.

Editor’s Note: This next question came in last week, but after the Q&A deadline. Thus we moved it to this week.

Just finished watching Acting DNI Msguire’s testimony . Schiff now wants the “whistleblower” to testify. Well the whistleblower is not relevant. The relevant ones are the “numerous” people who “gossipped”. They are the whistleblowers. Do you think they will be exposed ? Or does Adam Schiff go down in flames again. — Joseph V.

I too would like to know who “gossiped” to the “whistleblower.”  When he testifies, he may very well be asked.  But I doubt he’ll answer.  As for Adam Schiff:  If he had an ounce of introspection he’d see how rabidly partisan he comes off.  IF.

California just passed a law that would permit college athletes to profit on their image and likeness. These seems, to me, a good compromise in the debate over getting paid or not. I don’t support paid athletes at the collegiate level. In my humble opinion, getting a 1st class education is worth much more. This approach would even help those athletes in the less profitable sports. Tennis players could endorse a local sporting goods store. Swimmers could endorse speedos (chuckle). Anyways, just wanted your thoughts on this. — Tim H.

Hey Tim.  First, I’m not at all sure how many athletes even want a so-called first class education.  Given the choice between that and cash for playing football, I think most would choose the latter.  But getting paid for the use of their likeness:  Sure, they should get paid.  Why should a billion dollar company be able to use their likeness to make money while the actual athlete gets nothing?

Hi Bernie, Left wing progressive You Tuber Kyle Kulinski (whom I respect despite often disagreeing with) reports that Saudi Arabia has been committing genocide in Yemen, that it was not Iran but Houthi rebels tho attacked the Saudi oil fields (with Iranian weapons) because of Saudi atrocities being committed in Yemen (with support from America), and now the Trump administration is sending American troops and ground forces to help defend the Saudis, bringing America & Iran closer to all Out war! Do you know if any of these claims are true, and what are your thoughts on these allegations? — Marching Orders Regards from The Emperor

It’s now obvious that Donald Trump isn’t the only one who exhausts me, EMPEROR.  I have no idea who Kyle Kulinski is and don’t want to know.  I barely know what You Tube is.  Since I’m not in Yemen, or Saudi Arabia, or Iran … since Donald Trump doesn’t personally tell me if he’s going to send ground troops to help defend the Saudis, all I know is what I hear on the news and read in the paper  — which is the same stuff as you hear and read.  I have many thoughts on the New York Yankees, none at the moment on your many scenarios.  But, next time the president rings me up, I’ll ask him about all your concerns.  I won’t tell him you’re the Emperor, though.  That would only make him jealous, being a mere president.

Hi Bernie. My assessment of why we have a sad group of candidates running for president is that the media and social media have destroyed our election process. They dig up dirt on candidates from when they were children that has nothing to do with how competent they are. They shred the candidates apart and tear up every word they say. I believe there are many great leaders out there (on both sides) who would a be great as president, but with the mutilation they have to go through- no thanks! Your thoughts? — Chris K.

I think you’re right, Chris.  Who would want to run knowing that if they ever picked their nose in public, it’ll be all over the news?  Despite that, there are people out there who run anyway.  Last time around there were about a thousand Republicans running and this time the same number of Democrats.  So how do we account for that?  A sincere belief that they can lead the country in the right direction?  Sure.  That along with a massive amount of ego and a thirst for power.

Regarding impeachment, the Dems have put their last bullet in a pistol and stuck it in their mouth. Now they’re trying to decide if such geniuses as Jerry Nadler, Adam Schiff and the hysterical, intellectually arrested 12 year old girl running the House caucus should be allowed to pull the trigger. Plus, isn’t it at least a little fair to compare this to the felonies that Bill Clinton did in fact commit and the Dems didn’t think were a big deal? — Dennis C.

Dennis … I think you meant “isn’t it at least a little UNfair to compare this to the felonies that Bill Clinton did in fact commit … ”

Impeachment may in fact turn out to be a political mistake for the Democrats, as you say, but I think you’re way off base on the Clinton analogy.  Bill Clinton was impeached, technically, because he lied under oath.  But in the minds of millions of voters he was impeached over sex.  And his poll numbers went up, not down.

Donald Trump on the other hand is accused of inviting a foreign government to investigate a domestic political opponent.  That, in my opinion, is quite different from impeaching a president over sex.

But you’re right about Dems not thinking Clinton’s impropriety was a big deal.  And now Republicans don’t think Mr. Trump’s encouragement to investigate Joe Biden is a big deal.

I guess it depends on what team you’re rooting for, Dennis. Principles?  Who needs principles, right?

King Bernard… sorry I was absent last week…had a little legal problem concerning the Mann Act…all better now but something is bothering me…not sure if you’ll touch this porcupine…BUT…how did you make it all those terrific years with O’Reilly and never slapped Jesse Watters so hard it would jar his future grandchildren?…that dude just rubs me the wrong way and seems so crooked that if we swallowed a nail he’d spit up a corkscrew….I’ll hang up and listen….. — Greggo

Greggo, my friend, Jesse Watters annoys me more than he annoys you — if that’s possible.  He once put his foot in the door of a university president who didn’t want to talk to him.  It was at the guy’s house! I contacted Watters and said if he ever tried that at my house he’d leave with one foot.  I blame O’Reilly for this.  He’s responsible for this idiot.

On Tuesday President Trump tweeted, “Congratulations to President Xi and the Chinese people on the 70th Anniversary of the People’s Republic of China!

It upset many people. Jay Nordlinger responded with this tweet: “Disgusting. Stomach-turning. The Communist dictatorship in China is one of the most illiberal regimes of our time: murderous, enslaving, lawless — endlessly cruel. It stamps its boot on the face of the individual. It is the antithesis of everything that America stands for.”

I’m with Jay. Why do you think Trump does stuff like this? Is it just plain ignorance to history and foreign realities, or does he really somehow admire brutal regimes? — Andy

I don’t think he … thinks!  It’s not that he admires brutal regimes — though, he might.  It may be that he’s ignorant of history and foreign realities, as you say.  Or it may be that he needs a deal with China so he compliments the dictatorship.  He’s just not sophisticated — or a “stable genius” if you know what I mean.

Does the recent Hunter Biden discovery have the potential to finally blow the lid off of our politicians abuses of becoming super rich during their time in Congress and also getting extreme privileges for their children including preferential Ivy League educations and then unqualified for and ridiculously overpaying jobs? Ie. Chelsea Clinton and many others. Shouldn’t this all be part of “Draining the swamp”? — ScottyG

Most Americans know that if you have connections you’re way ahead of the game.  But liberals are the ones constantly telling us how the rich get away with all sorts of things.  And then Hunter Biden gets a big payday because his father’s the VP and Chelsea Clinton got a job as an NBC News correspondent, also with a hefty paycheck, because of her last name.  Yes, GOP kids also get advantages because of who their parents are, but it’s liberals, mainly, who portray the well off as a bunch of cheaters getting away with murder.  So when Hunter or Chelsea get a cushy job they don’t deserve, it irks us more than when the Bush girls or the Trump kids may benefit from their father’s position.

The media and Democrats are always saying that Trump has destroyed the norms and traditions of our government. It seems to me there is some truth to that. It also seems that the media, permanent government, leftists, and Dems have contributed a great deal to ending traditional norms. Since before Trump, the level of vitriol has amped up so high that there’s nowhere to go. He’s a treasonous criminal, nazi, white nationalist, and every other “ist.” His admin staff and appointed officials have been leaking from day 1, and everything that sounds a little off is blown up to be the next Watergate. Former Intelligence officials are paid contributors on cable news channels! My question: Who has changed traditional norms more; the establishment political and media class or Trump? — Dave E.

Why pick one, Dave?  I think you got it right.  Both sides have contributed to the polarization in America.  And it started before Donald Trump was elected.  The media, by and large anyway, have 20/20 eyesight when it comes to the president’s behavior, which in my view leaves a lot to be desired.  But they’re not good at all in analyzing the other side, the name-calling from the left.  They’re not good, in other words, at putting responsibility on themselves.  I’ll end where I began: Both sides have a lot to answer for.

In the 2020 election, I have a strategy the Dem candidate can use. Whomever the candidate is should totally ignore Trump, his nasty nicknames, and his antagonistic remarks. Just run on whatever the platform may be and point out why they would make a good President. Never mention Trump by name, and if specifics arise, always use the term “the current administration,” not Trump. Have televised town halls and do not debate Trump one on one. I think ignoring his name would drive him further up the wall than he is now. What do you think? — Warren K.

Interesting idea, Warren.  But if Donald Trump can’t control himself, you think the Democratic candidate can?  You think Biden or Warren can go 10 minutes without mentioning the president’s name?  But it would be fun to watch things unfold if they followed your advice.

I am not sure if you follow the Drudge Report, but I have noticed recently that the headlines he uses are not flattering to Trump and that he is linking to a lot of stories written by the New York Times and Washington Post. I am not saying that linking to these stories is bad, but those organizations certainly are not writing anything at all that favors the President. Do you think Drudge has soured on Trump, and could losing his influence hurt the President? — JM

I noticed the same thing, JM.  And wondered what you’re wondering:  Has Drudge soured on Trump.  I don’t have any inside information, but it’s either that — or he’s presenting both sides in a fair and impartial way.  That may not please a lot of folks on the right, but it would be a welcome change from partisan websites.

Bernie; I know you don’t like anyone saying the media is all fake news but it’s tough to accept since all media appear to have an agenda. When do you believe the media moved from reporting the news truthfully to creating the news for maximum profit? And… could that have been hastened by global news reporting… like the Israeli Palestinian conflict with all that fake news?  — Charles K.

I don’t know when it started, Charles, but I do know that cable news accelerated the spiral downward.  They’re not the only ones with an agenda.  Let me be clear about that.  But it’s more blatant in the world of cable.  I’ve said this before:  Cable news is not a journalism model.  It’s a business model.  Give the viewers what they want; validate their biases; throw them red meat so they’ll come back for more.  The culture is polarized and the news media both reflect that polarization and contribute to it — with their agendas.

Now that the emotions of the NFL-kneeling and Brett Kavanaugh stories have died down, I wanted to look more soberly at the subject of protesting. Other than outside of abortion clinics, conservatives just don’t think or act so vocally upon our side of social justice. Why do you think it is mostly liberals taking to the streets and the microphones to protest seemingly every action they disagree with? Regarding Kaepernick and the screeching masses at the Kavanaugh hearings: Free speech is enshrined in the Constitution, but our soldiers fight and die for the flag, and when they’re buried, their coffins are draped in the flag. In addition, the confirmation of a Supreme Court justice should be orderly and not subject to disruption. Every constitutional right has its limits. Shouldn’t protesting have its limits as well? — Steve R.

Protesting does have limits.  You can’t call for the imminent overthrow of the government … or take a microphone an call for the assassination of the president.  But the Constitution gives us a lot of leeway … we can say a lot without being silenced and we can protest any issue we want, as long as we keep it within reasonable bounds.  I’m guessing, Steve, you’d set the boundaries a lot tighter than I would.

What’s your take on this whole Ukraine thing? Sounds like fake umbrage again. It’s not wrong to want to find out what really happened. How would we find out if Biden and son did something wrong? Democrats won’t be investigating it. So Donald has to let it go? I think not. At the same time, you have to be careful to not have crossed a line. Seems to me he should have had the FBI or DOJ do the search and perhaps saved his bacon. It’s messy. What is different having the House trying to sway an election to find out if there was wrong doing on Trump, but Trump can’t find out in return? It makes no sense. Your take on this? — Bill N.

I’m pretty much with you.  But the president should not have asked a foreign leader to investigate a political rival.  That’s where he went wrong.  If he had stayed with his first request — to help the U.S. government find out what Ukraine’s role was in the 2016 election, no problem.  But he didn’t stop there.  And Democrats don’t need much of an excuse to yell, IMPEACH HIM!

 


Thanks, everyone! You can send me questions for next week using the form below! You can also read previous Q&A sessions by clicking here.




Bernie’s Q&A: Trump, Cronkite, O’Reilly, Incognito, and more! (9/27) — Premium Interactive ($4 members)

Welcome to this week’s Premium Q&A session for Premium Interactive members. I appreciate you all signing up and joining me. Thank you.

Editor’s note: A couple of questions we received this week came in after the Q&A deadline, so they will be added to next week’s Q&A. Also, we received some pretty long questions this week, thus some were shortened. Once again, in the future, please try to keep your questions relatively short. Thank you.

Let’s get to your questions (and my answers):


A New York Times link on Facebook documented the arrival of slavery as Slaves to Virginia in 1619, insinuating Whiteys involvement in importing African Slaves to America. I responded with the fact that the first African Slaves were brought to the Americas by the Spanish and Portugese after Columbus discovery. I am of Italian and Puerto Rican Heritage. Given the narrative promoted by the media my question is: Are Hispanics White Europeans or  “people of color”. Your thoughts? — Joseph V.

Please don’t take this the wrong way, Joseph.  But why should we care?  What difference  would it make — unless you were filling out a job application and you thought you might benefit from checking “person of color.”  I’ve grown weary of this identity stuff.  And I’m guessing, my friend, so have you.  Take care.

When I was too young to understand politics, I remember my uncle yelling at the TV that Walter Cronkite was a lying piece of sh*t. Now, as I read about the NYT’s continued problems with “integrity” and “credibility” (irresponsible reporting, so called “sources,” etc.), I’m thinking, who the hell really believes the Times, or Cronkite, Or Murrow, EVER had any “integrity” to begin with? We couldn’t fact check back then, we didn’t have access to the world in our pockets like today. So how the hell will we ever know these entities weren’t full of S*** for the past 100 years? I’m also finding out for myself that it’s not just the nefarious things they write or report, but what they omit! Where am I wrong? Because right now, I’m one pissed off American! — Respectfully “Right Wing Ralphy”

I’m curious, Ralphy:  How did your uncle know Walter Cronkite was a liar?  What inside, behind the scenes information, did he have? Could it be that Cronkite wasn’t giving your uncle the kind of biased news he wanted to hear.  Could it be the problem wasn’t Cronkite or Murrow — but your uncle.

Listen Ralphy, I believe there’s too much bias in the media just as you do. And yes, Murrow had a point of view which he expressed at the end of his show.  When we agree with a point of view, we like what we hear.  When we don’t, we think the person delivering the news is a liar.

Keep an open mind.  When they get it wrong, let’s call them out.  But let’s not suggest that they’re all a bunch of liars and always have been.  It weakens, not strengthens, our arguments against real bias.

Hi Bernie. I really look forward to the web site each week. Regarding your column from Monday, Trump Could Lose? To Biden…Maybe To Sanders or Warren….No Chance. The country might be sick of Trump and his mouth and his attitude… I find myself agreeing with you a lot. But the Country wont commit suicide either. — Michael C.

Good chance you’re right, Michael.  All I’m saying, is don’t bet that even someone like Warren or Sanders couldn’t beat Donald Trump.  It’s more than SIMPLY POSSIBLE.  A lot of moderates detest him — and may hold their nose and vote for a quasi socialist.  So let’s wait and see.

Regarding Monday’s column, everything you wrote about Trump is 100% true, but you keep leaving something out. Yes, Trump is bombastic, loud, egotistical etc. Have you taken a look at the Dems running for their nomination? Setting aside Trump and the policies being advanced by the Dems, this field isn’t exactly loaded with Lincoln quality candidates. Tell me which one of these dolts do you want to see replace him? In fact, as deplorable as she is, (love using that word for her) Hillary is still their best candidate. — Dennis C.

Easy question, Dennis:  Which one of those dolts do I want to see replace Trump.  None of them.  Someone’s got to win.  I prefer the Republican.  But it’ll be without my vote.  And just so you understand, I won’t be voting for the Democrat either.  That I’ll be sitting out the presidential vote is not on me.  It’s on Donald Trump and whoever his opponent is.

Sir, You are the rare voice of objectivity in media. I hope this venture is doing well as it is needed. In 2016 almost 63 million people voted for Trump. I’ve not seen a single Democrat running to replace him appeal to those voters. In fact they are pushing policies that drive those voters closer to Trump. At the same time many of the policies they discuss are too extreme for the voters they did get in 2016. How can any Democrat expect to beat Trump without attracting some of his 2016 voters and keeping the moderates that want to support them? — David E.

Excellent analysis and question, David.

I think some people who voted for Trump the last time around figured, lets give something new a try.  He’s not the same old politician we’ve been getting forever.  But I’m not at all convinced he’ll hang on to those voters.  If he loses just a few — in key states — that can cost him the election.  At the same time (and here’s where we disagree), I don’t believe anyone who voted for Hillary will now vote for Trump.  His only hope, the way I see it, is that all of his base turns out and more than a few Democrats sit out the election, because they’re moderates who won’t vote for Elizabeth Warren (should she get the nomination).  Stay tuned.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but a while back during one of your Real Sports stories, didn’t some football player suddenly pick you up over his shoulder (with you somewhat protesting) and start running with you? If my memory is correct, did you know ahead of time he was going to do that? And who was that? Thanks. — Albert

You’re half right.  It was not a football player.  It was a guy who holds the most Guinness Book of Records … records. And NO, I did not know he was going to do that.  And when I learned that my producer did know, I almost murdered him.  But it apparently was memorable and that, I hope, was a good thing.

Editor’s Note: It took a while to find, but here’s the video:

The Trump haters have now gone too far and have put his presidency in jeopardy, at least from the perspective of National Security and getting things done with foreign leaders. This whistleblower has made it almost impossible for a foreign leader to believe he’s having a confidential, private discussion with Trump. I’m betting when the transcript is made public (Editor’s note: This question was submitted on 9/25), like most of the other “evidence” of malfeasance, this will be about nothing. But the damage has already been done. What is Pelosi’s political theater [“we will begin looking into impeachment”] based on? No one has seen the transcript! Seems she had to appease her far left rabid dogs, led by that nutjob AOC. I think this will blow up in their faces and hope the American people will vote these Dems out of office. — John M.

Let’s see how this plays out.

Great “Off The Cuff” this week; but do you also believe Trump has had and now has implemented an “Impeach me” strategy that he hopes will totally blow up in the Dems faces? Hard to believe any President would use that play, but he seems ballsy enough to use it. — Scotty G.

I’ve heard the theory, Scotty, but I don’t believe it.  As you say, “Hard to believe any president would use that play …”  He’s nuts, but not that nuts.

Regarding your recent column on the growing antisemitism in this country, I’m curious how often you, as a Jewish public figure in the media, have had to deal with antisemitism. Thanks — Jen R.

There’s been some, but nothing serious.  But the goons on social media were all over my religion when I was on with O’Reilly, saying negative things about Donald Trump.  On that subject:  Trump can’t be responsible for everything his supporters say and do.  But he does attract a troubling number of out and out bigots.  Just sayin’.

Did your Real Sports story this week on Richie Incognito mark the first time you had an opportunity to ask an interview subject about their desire to cut off a dead person’s head for research purposes? And was that sort of a journalistic “bucket list” item that you’d secretly always hoped to be able to ask someone? Because that would totally be on my list. — John D.

Editor’s Note: Below is the exchange:

John, D … I’ll answer your question only after you tell me when I can catch your act at Chuckles the Clown Comedy Club or the Make Me Smile or I’ll Kill You Laugh Factory.  I saw your act at the Catch a Rising Comedian Ha Ha House in Akron, Ohio a few years back.  You were a riot.  I mean that literally.  The audience rioted when they found out that Seinfeld cancelled and you were standing in for him.

Bernie, if the media did its job and were equally tough on Democrats and Republics and held both parties accountable for their actions, which elected leaders do you think would have no chance of staying in office and which leaders do you think would have never been elected in the first place? — JM

That’s a tough one.  But let me focus on one current example.  The media are all over Trump’s connection to Ukraine.  The phone call and all that.  But not nearly as interested in Biden’s relationship with Ukraine — and how he might have used muscle to protect his son.  I’m writing about this and will publish very soon.

That said, here’s a general rule: They will (almost) always be tougher on Republicans than on Democrats.  They will (almost) always salivate more when going after a conservative than a liberal.  But you knew all that, right?

Over the years, since Bias came out, have you heard from many liberal-leaning journalists working for liberal-leaning news networks or papers who’ve told you, off the record, that you were absolutely right about everything? — Skip S.

No.

I’ve heard that the O’Reilly Factor was rarely aired live, and was almost always filmed earlier in the day. Because of that, were there times when (during your segment) you speculated on a developing story, only to have things change quite a bit (and your commentary undercut by new facts) by the time the episode aired? If so, wasn’t that pretty frustrating? — Steve

You’re right about taping early, Steve, but I don’t recall any times when upcoming events got in the way.  If Bill knew that there was going to be a late news conference, or something important might happen after the usual taping time, we’d just go live that day.  There were some frustrations, but not about that.

I’ve heard some interesting allegations via conservative websites about Christine Blasey-Ford:

  1. Her father supposedly approached Brett Kavanaugh’s father at the country club they both belong to, and he told Mr. Kavanaugh that he actually SUPPORTED the Kavanaugh nomination to the Supreme Court (thus casting doubt on his own daughter’s testimony).
  2. There’s a video showing Ms. Blasey-Ford’s attorney admitting NOT that Blasey-Ford committed perjury, but that she definitely was motivated because she feared Kavanaugh would help overturn Roe v. Wade.
  3. Blasey-Ford’s best friend, Leland Keyser, was pressured by a retired FBI agent to actually commit perjury so Blasey-Ford’s testimony would sound more credible during the hearings.

Are any of these stories credible? I question them because only right-wing websites tell them, and I don’t see much independent corroboration. And if they’re true, why hasn’t there been an FBI investigation into perjury and slander? — Sincerest Regards From The Emperor

I’ve heard them too, Emperor.  But I have no idea if they’re true.  And that’s a problem:  With so much partisan crap out there masquerading as news, we no longer know what to believe.

That said, when only right wing websites report smarmy allegations, I get suspicious.  Sure, you can make a case that liberal news organizations are so biased that they’d ignore such information.  But Fox News, the hard news part of Fox, is really good.  They’d report those stories, wouldn’t they?

 


Thanks, everyone! You can send me questions for next week using the form below! You can also read previous Q&A sessions by clicking here.