James Van Der Beek's Legacy, Pam Bondi’s Brawl, WashPost’s Pathetic Protest, & Media’s ICE Narrative, with The Bedfords & Lionel Shriver

Summary

---

Podcast Summary:

After Party with Emily Jashinsky
Episode: James Van Der Beek's Legacy, Pam Bondi’s Brawl, WashPost’s Pathetic Protest, & Media’s ICE Narrative
Guests: Christopher Bedford, Sarah Bedford, Lionel Shriver
Date: February 12, 2026

---

Overview

This lively episode of "After Party" dives into the big stories shaping news and culture this week: the passing and cultural impact of actor James Van Der Beek, the explosive congressional testimony of Attorney General Pam Bondi, controversy engulfing the Washington Post, ICE and immigration narratives in the media, and a deep discussion with novelist Lionel Shriver about her new book on immigration. Host Emily Jashinsky is joined by frequent collaborators Christopher Bedford (Blaze News), Sarah Bedford (Washington Examiner), and author Lionel Shriver for candid conversation and sharp analysis.

---

Key Segments and Discussion Points

1. Remembering James Van Der Beek: His Life, Career, and Legacy

[00:59 - 12:52]

• James Van Der Beek’s Passing:
  Emily opens with a heartfelt remembrance of actor James Van Der Beek, who passed away from colon cancer at 48, leaving behind six children and his wife. She reflects on his outsized impact on the '90s monoculture through his iconic Dawson Leary role.
  “Like many, many women of my generation, James Van Der Beek was the A-plus list star of our teenage years.” – Emily [01:27]

• Personal Connection:
  Emily shares a story about secretly watching Dawson’s Creek and Friends as a teen and how Van Der Beek’s portrayal of Dawson Leary shaped her views on ambition, art, and the hopes of a connected monoculture.

• Van Der Beek’s Real-life Values:
  Cites his willingness to speak out politically, specifically his controversial call for a Democratic primary debate in 2023 – rare for a Hollywood actor with little financial cushion.

• Clip from the Today Show:
  Van Der Beek discusses his cancer journey and newfound faith:
  “Before cancer, God was something I tried to fit into my life… After cancer, I feel like a connection to God, whatever that is, is kind of the whole point of this exercise on this planet.” – Van Der Beek [12:41]

• Cultural Takeaway:
  Emily draws a parallel between Dawson’s Creek as a vessel of optimistic monoculture and Van Der Beek’s ultimate embrace of family over fame, noting the loss of such wholesome touchstones in today’s fragmented culture.

---

2. Pam Bondi’s Congressional “Brawl” and DOJ Politics

[17:33 - 38:00]

• Setting the Stage:
  With guests Christopher and Sarah Bedford, the group reviews viral clips from Pam Bondi's House Judiciary Committee testimony, describing it as one of the “wildest congressional hearings ever.”

• Bondi’s Epstein Dilemma:
  Sarah provides context on Bondi’s political isolation and the strategic blunders that led to her being grilled on Epstein file disclosures.

• Partisan Performance:
  Chris likens the hearing to a “clown show” and questions the value of televised congressional drama.

• Notable Exchange:
  “There’s a very good argument to be made that while transparency is good, cameras in congressional hearings are not.” – Chris [22:01]

• Bondi’s Transformation:
  Sarah recounts Bondi's shift from a serious Florida AG to a figure forced into media theatrics due to her mishandling of high-profile cases.

---

3. DOJ, ICE, and Jury Nullification: Law, Politics, and Media Framing

[38:00 - 49:40]

• Trump DOJ Frustrations:
  The panel discusses the right’s frustration with Bondi’s DOJ – both for not pursuing high-profile prosecutions demanded by the base, and for launching “side quests” like targeting Democratic senators over social media posts.

• Jury Nullification:
  Sarah and Chris lament the challenge DOJ faces in securing convictions in D.C. due to ideological juries and activist training.

• Real Crime vs. Political Showmanship:
  “There are left-wing terrorist groups organizing an insurrection against ICE in blue states right now… I’d like a January 6th-level investigation into that, not these side quests.” – Chris [37:57]

• Ilhan Omar Controversy:
  Brief discussion of Rep. Ilhan Omar’s tweet about “executing pedophiles” as a telling moment in the current climate.

---

4. Election Integrity and Fulton County, Georgia

[39:40 - 49:40]

• New Developments:
  Reporting surfaces that Fulton County verified 315,000 votes in 2020 without poll worker signatures, sparking fresh scrutiny.

• Media Silencing and Overton Window:
  Sarah explores how questioning 2020 election integrity was made taboo, even as real procedural lapses are exposed:
  “You were a crazy person if you raised any questions about the 2020 election from about January 2021 to, like, last week.” – Sarah [40:54]

• Legal, Logistical, and Political Hurdles:
  Sarah details complex failings in record-keeping and chain-of-custody in Georgia, and how courts largely punted rather than resolved core disputes.

• Public Sentiment:
  Chris notes bipartisan desire to restore election integrity and questions Democrats’ new “statute of limitations” talking points.

---

5. Washington Post Turmoil & Media Introspection

[49:40 - 57:15]

• Leadership Crisis:
  The hosts dissect the firing of publisher Will Lewis and Jeff Bezos’ scramble to manage beltway optics after layoffs.

• Staff Protest:
  Panel mocks the Tech Guild’s failed “right-to-work” protest:
  “Our plan is to walk into the building and show our right to work… They can just do it.” – Protesters [51:37]

• Elite Media Bubble:
  Chris and Sarah criticize the entitlement on display and lack of industry introspection:
  “All these tweets being like, Jeff Bezos is so rich, he should just absorb these tremendous business losses indefinitely… that’s a little bit wild.” – Sarah [56:04]
  “The illiteracy of rights in their nature, the illiteracy of job performance… you don’t have a right to be there.” – Chris [56:39]

---

6. Immigration, ICE, and Narrative: In-Depth with Lionel Shriver

[60:08 - 82:42]

• Reframing Immigration:
  Emily introduces Lionel Shriver and discusses how her new novel, A Better Life, addresses mass immigration from the often-ignored native population’s perspective.

• Media Misrepresentation:
  The group listens to a Rand Paul/Katie Couric clip about ICE statistics, highlighting how large numbers of violent criminals involved are downplayed.

• Shriver’s Human-Centric Fiction:
  Lionel explains why she wrote from the perspective of citizens impacted by immigration:
  “Fiction writers never address the experience of having huge numbers of people from somewhere else occupy your territory… those feelings, however unattractive, are pretty much a human universal, but Westerners are not allowed even to feel them.” – Lionel [63:27]

• Outrage and Media Reception:
  Shriver notes her novel has already sparked negative reactions in progressive media, which she anticipated.

• ICE Raids, Protests, and Narrative:
  Shriver critiques the performativity of protesters in blue cities, posturing as “main characters” for virtue points, rather than caring about immigrants themselves:
  “They cast themselves as the main characters of this story… not the immigrants.” – Lionel [71:07]

• Rule of Law vs. Victim Narrative:
  Discussion about media’s focus on the supposed cruelty of enforcement over the reality of law-breaking and its consequences.

• Satire vs. Serious Literature:
  Shriver objects to her books being dismissed as mere “satire”:
  “I do not write satire. I write serious literary fiction, which is sometimes funny… this book is quite specifically trying to give people who are concerned about the transformation of their countries a voice and a story.” – Lionel [80:24]

---

7. Show Announcement

[85:24 - End]

• Show Moves to Prime Time:
  Emily announces that After Party will now air live at 9pm ET on Mondays and Wednesdays to better serve East and West Coast audiences.

---

Notable Quotes & Moments

• On James Van Der Beek and Monoculture:
  “Dawson’s Creek was this absolute love letter to monoculture at its most positive manifestation… the hopes for the American monoculture, that it would be full of Dawson Learys who couldn’t care less about the money or the fame, but had this idealistic belief in Hollywood and film bringing people together.” – Emily [08:02]

• On Congressional Theater:
  “Maybe it’s having covered these for 15 years that I don’t give two hoops about televised congressional hearings anymore… you never get anything out of it except for a clown show on either side.” – Chris [31:07]

• On Election Integrity Gatekeeping:
  “You were alone if you raised any questions about the 2020 election from about January 2021 to, like, last week, if you brought it up, you were a crazy person.” – Sarah [40:54]

• On the Media’s Lack of Self-Reflection:
  “There’s been no introspection… it is always a sort of external locus of control. Like there isn’t anything they could possibly be doing differently to change that.” – Sarah [56:04]

• On Performative Protest:
  “These protesters cast themselves as the main characters of this story… the immigrants are simply an excuse for this display of goodness and concern and bravery.” – Lionel [71:07]

• On Immigration Narrative:
  “This book has already attracted a huge amount of negative media attention… The irony being that this is a novel that actually in many instances puts the progressive case for immigration very well. But the woke have absolutely zero tolerance for hearing the other side.” – Lionel [68:49]

---

Timestamps for Main Segments

• James Van Der Beek Remembrance & Monoculture: 00:59 – 12:52
• Pam Bondi’s Congressional Hearing: 17:33 – 38:00
• DOJ, ICE, Jury Nullification Discussion: 38:00 – 49:40
• Fulton County Election Update: 39:40 – 49:40
• Washington Post Protest & Media Introspection: 49:40 – 57:15
• Immigration in Art & Media (Lionel Shriver Interview): 60:08 – 82:42
• Show Announcement: 85:24 – End

---

Takeaways

• The episode blends cultural nostalgia with hard-hitting political analysis, making connections between cultural shifts and modern political controversies.
• Guests offer unique, personal takes and robust debate, especially on the legitimacy of institutional narratives and the limits of media orthodoxy.
• The interview with Lionel Shriver stands out as a nuanced, frank discussion of immigration anxieties and fiction’s underexplored role in reflecting native experiences.

---

For New Listeners

This episode is rich in layered conversation—balancing emotion, nostalgia, and unapologetic critique. It’s a must-hear for anyone interested in the interplay of pop culture, media narratives, and politics in America circa 2026.

Transcript

[A]

You see where your business can go. To get there, you may need another 10 trucks. At Sentry Insurance, we put more than 115 years of industry experience to work to help protect you as you launch a new delivery service or expand into a new region and reach your business goals. Sentry right by you Property and casualty coverages and render written and safety services are provided by a member of the Sentry Insurance group, Stevens Point, Wisconsin. For a complete listing of companies, visit sentry.com policies, coverages, benefits and discounts are not available in all states. E Policy for complete coverage details. Avoiding your unfinished home projects because you're not sure where to start. Thumbtack knows homes so you don't have to don't know the difference between matte paint finish and satin or what that clunking sound from your dryer is. With thumbtack, you don't have to be a home pro, you just have to hire one. You can hire top rated pros, see price estimates and read reviews all on the app. Download today.

[B]

Hey everyone, welcome to afterparty. Thank you so much for joining us this evening. We have three guests and a big announcement on tonight's show. We're gonna be joined by Christopher Bedford, Sarah Bedford, and author Lionel Shriver over the course of the next hour. Plus, so thank you very much for being with us. It's, like I said, a night where we will be bringing you a little special announcement towards the end of the show. So please do stick around for that. And if you do have any questions, I will be answering them. I record the weekly edition of Happy Hour on Thursday afternoons. So if you want a question to get in this week, or if you want to get a question in this week, go ahead and email emilyevilmycare media.com roughly before tomorrow afternoon. And I'll work through those in the inbox. It's a sad night for me and I know for many of you as well. We're going to cover James vanderbeek's passing in just one moment. Pam Bondi was on Capitol Hill today for what has to be one of the wildest, wildest congressional hearings of all time. And that is a very, very high bar, of course. So we're gonna talk a bit about that. Sarah has some reporting on Fulton county to discuss with us. The Washington Post is crumbling and Lionel Shriver's new book is about immigration. So we talked to her about this fascinating debate Katie Kirk had with Senator Rand Paul and how the entire conversation needs to be reimagined and reframed for Just the sake of, you know, the, the human element that's involved in it. We talk a lot about why the media gets that wrong and why the left gets that wrong. So we are very, very excited about it. And that was pre recorded earlier in the day, which means I'm going to be in the chat. So make sure if you're watching this live, you head on over to the the YouTube chat. I will jump in when we have Lionel with us. Now, as promised, I do want to talk about James Vanderpeak who passed away today at the age of 48 after a battle battle with colore cancer. He has six children. He's leaving six children and a wife behind. The remembrances of James Vanderbeek are reflective of a man of, of great character, which is always very telling. I have a small personal remembrance of James Van Der Beek which blows my mind that I can even say that like many, many women of my generation, James Van Der Beek was the A plus list star of our teenage years. Now I'm a bit younger than the real like core Dawson's Creek era. I actually was not allowed to watch Dawson's Creek though I have a very viv a memory of when I was like 5 years old walking downstairs and seeing Dawson's Creek on the TV and being told I could not watch it go back upstairs. And that I think piqued my interest. So by the time I was, I don't know, like middle school age, the reruns had just started. TBS played a rerun every day and DVR had recently come out. So I would dvr. My parents, if they're listening to this, are going to throw a fit. But I would DVR the episodes of two shows that I was not allowed to watch, Friends and Dawson's Creek and both of which had recently ended and watch them and delete them. Before my parents got home, I had a small window between like soccer practice and my parents getting home that I would, I would watch and delete and they played them in sequence. So I got to watch both shows fully in sequence. And again, like many, many people, Dawson's Creek had a massive impact and it helped me sort of map my own thoughts about the world and, you know, where you can go after after high school and as an ambitious kind of young person, what that can look like. I just was. So again, like many people, this is not unique. Connected with the character of Dawson Leary. And even if you didn't know James Vanderbeek well or even if you didn't ever watch Dawson's Creek, or know of Dawson's Creek. There's a really important story to be told when it comes to James Vanderbeek. And my personal anecdote is that he was a huge Breaking Points fan. He was like a very dedicated Breaking Points viewer. And he. He did us a great favor of coming on the show back in 2023 to make a very prescient point. He decided to speak out and ask Joe Biden to hold a Democratic primary debate that proved to be so wise and prescient and brave. And it's obvious to many of us on the right, but to people in Hollywood world, that's not such an obvious point. And now we know that James Vanderbeek hardly had all the money in the world. His family does have a GoFundMe right now because they were doing everything they could to beat his cancer financially. You may remember he was auctioning off memorabilia from Varsity Blues at one point. It's expensive. And I think that just speaks to the fact that this guy wasn't. If you. If you know much about Dawson's Creek, you know that there were licensing problems and all of that. This guy was not, you know, rolling in residual dough like a lot of other people are from that era. And I think that, again, just speaks to the bravery of him coming out and saying, Democrats need to hold. Hold the primary debate. It was a very unpopular thing to say at the time. Very, very unpopular thing to say on the time, at the time on the left, let alone in a media. And he did it. So it was brave and it was smart and it was wise. And I think before or after the interview, Sagar and Crystal told James that I was beyond excited to have him on the show, and I was a huge fan. And he DM'd Sagar afterwards. And it just blows my mind. Like, if you think of the person who was like the biggest celebrity to you when you were a kid and then imagine them even, like, knowing a scintilla about you. He sent Sagar a DM that said, please give Emily my best and tell her to keep up the great work. Mind blowing. And he didn't have to do that. He didn't have to come on the show. He didn't have to speak out. But for me, it just is. Why this, this is the explanation of why so many people connected with James Vanderbeek is Dawson's Creek was this absolute love letter to monoculture at its most positive manifestation. Like the positive theory of monoculture, Dawson's Creek was the saccharine love story too. It was about popular art that brings everyone together. And if you remember, Dawson idolized Steven Spielberg. He famously, in his bedroom set, there are Spielberg posters, Jaws, Jurassic Park, ET all over the walls. And he saw Spielberg as somebody who pioneered this new technology to capture these very like ancient human emotions, the oldest human emotions, the most common human emotions. But he did it in these really groundbreaking ways, but for everyone. For everyone. And Dawson's Creek was a monocultural phenomenon, of course, right? This was for people in high school at the time, water cooler tv, appointment tv. You were out of the loop if you weren't watching Dawson's Creek. It connected with so many people while using in more elevated dialog. That was so ridiculous. I mean it was elevated to the point of being completely ridiculous. But I think what Vanderbeek brought to the character of Dawson was just this awe and this innocent in the most all American way where he loved his family and friends, but he wanted to project that love. He was ambitious enough to kind of project that love to everyone via the magic of a film and monocultural film. Film that was like big budget, appealed to everyone. The kind of thing that like Top Gun 2 was the only recent movie to really, really do. And as he went through life, Vanderbeek really came to realize that family and marriage would be more fulfilling to him than Hollywood or even work. And this is so funny again from the man who played Dawson, whose character was known for being ambitious and a careerist who's obsessed with making it big in Hollywood. Dawson wanted Hollywood, but eventually it seems like James Vanderbeek really just wanted family. And that's so fitting. I think that's so fitting. I think it mirrors an arc in the culture more broadly, especially for millennials and those that wide eyed wonder that he brought to Dawson Leary, I think mirrored a lot of our hopes for the American monoculture, that it would be full of Dawson Leary's who couldn't care less about really the money or the fame, but had this idealistic belief in Hollywood and film bringing people together in a way that was also beautiful and inspiring. So it did like, it mirrored a lot of our hopes for the American monoculture until it didn't. And until we realized that often great art and a great life can speak to smaller communities and that truth can get muddled sometimes on the global stage. And you can believe that Capeside, Massachusetts is a nice place and you can make a story about your first love that resonates without even trying to turn it into Jaws. Although Jaws is also really an ancient story. Emotionally. Monoculture doesn't have to be this tired. IP doesn't have to be the 25th Jurassic Park. It can be art. And we don't really have to be ashamed of that. That to me is one of the biggest big resonant messages of Dawson's Creeker was when I was younger, I saw like, I loved popular art and popular culture, and Dawson did too. And he was not ashamed of it. And he would get knocked down when he was defending his favorite films by the. The critics or people in academia who were eager to say, well, no, no, no, this French film or this is really what. What art is. And he would stand by Spielberg. I think he was completely right and completely vindicated. And that's one of the things that really resonated with me in a very meta sense, because Dawson's Creek itself was monoculture. And James Van Der Beek suffered and he embraced really the truth of humanity through his wife and his kids and through his suffering. I don't know if that would be true of Dawson, but I think it actually would. And what James Van Der Beek wanted at the end of the day is what Dawson wanted at the end of the day. It wasn't success or great movies. It was just love and fulfillment. And we saw that over and over again. So let's roll this clip here of James Van Der Beek recently on the Today show, looking like he was suffering. And we know that he was talking about God.

[A]

Really the biggest change, I'd say, would.

[C]

Be this journey of self love.

[A]

What I realized was, is I'm still worthy of love, my own love, God's love.

[B]

It also sounds like this diagnosis helped you find some sort of new perspective on faith.

[A]

Before cancer, God was something I tried to fit into my life as much as possible.

[B]

After cancer, I feel like a connection.

[A]

To God, whatever that is, is kind of the whole point of this exercise on this planet.

[B]

I don't know what James Vanderbilt's personal beliefs, personal faith was at the end of his life, but you can see what was pulling on him towards the end of his life. He talked a lot in his. His final years about really finding ultimate fulfillment in his wife and his children. And he loved art. You know, I remember in that Breaking Points interview he did back in 2023, he was. He was worried about what was happening to it. And he talked about just loving art because it allowed you to work with other people and find the human element in life. We talked about the coarsening of our culture after the super bowl and it is probably true that Dawson's Creek contributed to that. You may remember the moral panic over Dawson's Creek at the time. I think they were like organized calls to the network probably from evangelical Christian groups. And yeah, I think it's true. It was part of that slippery slope. There was a lot of challenging of sexual norms on Dawson's Creek and many people are grappling with that now. Culture's grappling with that now. But wow, was it comparatively wholesome in the age of WAP or whatever else. And we can't do, we can't really do monoculture like that anymore. We lost our ability to do that. And I worry that the next generation won't have a real positive fictional character like Dawson Leary and then somebody to bring the wide eyed wonder and love and goodness to the character that somebody like James Van Der Beek did. So like I mentioned, they do have a GoFundMe. They're, they obviously do need money. He has six children. They said they're trying to keep their house. You can go look up that GoFundMe. It's connected with his wife. He's got six kids. So prayers for us for James Danderbeek and Press for his kids, prayers for his wife and prayers for the the rest of us as well. On that note, we're going to take a quick, quick break and we'll be back with Chris Bedford and Sarah Bedford right right after the break. Investing should not feel like a gamble With Stash's Smart portfolio. Your money is guided by experts giving you peace of mind while it grows. Stash isn't just another investing app. It's a registered investment advisor that combines automated investing with expert personalized guidance so you don't have to worry about gambling or figuring it out on your own. Stash's Smart Portfolio helps you invest in a diversified balanced portfolio and on a regular schedule which can help you build wealth over the long term. Don't let your money sit around. Put it to work with stash. Go to get.stash.comemily to see how you can receive $25 towards your first stock purchase and to view important disclosures. That's get.stash.comemilies and get.stash.com emily paid non client endorsement, not a guarantee nor representative of all clients. Smart Portfolios are discretionary managed accounts and subject to additional fees. See the Advisory Agreement and Deposit Account Agreement for details. Investment advisory services offered by Stash Investments LLC and SEC Registered Investment Advisor. Investing involves risk.

[A]

You see where your business can go to get there, you may need another 10 trucks. At Century Insurance, we put more than 15015 years of industry experience to work to help protect you as you launch a new delivery service or expand into a new region and reach your business goals. Sentry Right by you Property and casualty coverages and render written and safety services are provided by a member of the Sentry Insurance group, Stevens Point, Wisconsin. For a complete listing of companies, visit century.com policies, coverages, benefits and discounts are not available in all states. E Policy for complete coverage details. Imagine relying on a dozen different software programs to run your business, none of which are connected and each one more.

[D]

Expensive and more complicated than the last. Fast.

[A]

It can be pretty stressful. Now imagine Odoo. Odoo has all the programs you'll ever need and are all connected on one platform. Doesn't Odoo sound amazing? Let Odoo harmonize your business with simple, efficient software that can handle everything for a fraction of the price. Sign up [e-mail] that's o d o o.com.

[B]

Happy to be joined now by Christopher Bedford, senior politics editor for Blaze News and author of the Beltway Brief, and Sarah Bedford, investig editor for the Washington examiner. Both two huge Dawson's Creek fans. You couldn't find two bigger Dawson's Creek fans than Chris and Sarah. Thanks, guys.

[D]

I'm glad to be here.

[A]

Emily.

[E]

You know, I actually like James Vanderbeek's like two episode arc and how I met your mother. That is why I'm the biggest fan of his.

[B]

So I'm hearing lots of people say that today. But you know, your husband Sarah is basically from Capeside. He's from the fictional town that Dawson's Creek took place in. And this is his generation because he's an old, old man.

[D]

I, I think the TV shows that I sneaked growing up were the Simpsons and Batman, the Animated series.

[B]

You had pink hair at the time.

[D]

Actually, it was blue. Never a pinko.

[B]

Not quite.

[D]

I did spike the front because I saw Blink 182 contemporarily. Oh, Sarah, that's not a good look.

[B]

God bless you, Sarah. Well, while we're having fun here, I'm gonna roll a bunch of clips of this wild congressional hearing. Both of you have have covered politics for a long time and have been around Capitol Hill. You've seen these types of hearings. I don't think anybody was shocked by the tone of Pam Bondi's appearance before the House Judiciary Committee today. But this has to be in the history books as And I'll be curious to see if you guys agree. Is one of the wildest congressional hearings ever in the existence of the United States of America. So here you have the attorney general facing questions about Epstein. She has, as she did when she was in the Senate, prepared research on the. She's like a binder in front of her with prepared research, including possibly the searches that people like Pramila Jayapal made in the redactions at the DOJ of the Epstein files, according to a photographer who caught a glimpse at what was in her preparation materials. And they're going back and forth. Obviously, Pam Bondi has a very serious job and it's not all about Jeffrey Epstein, believe it or not. But we're spending a moment going through a little bit of what happened. So let's go ahead and roll this first clip. And guys, we are. We're live, we're on camera. Our marks, our mics are going to be turned on. So let's have a little fun and enjoy it while we're watching. Time belongs gentlemen from New York.

[C]

We will give you a few more seconds. We will do that. But when you ask a question, you.

[B]

May not like the answer, but she gets to. Oh, sorry guys, I accidentally hit the button. I'm sorry, I didn't mean to hit the button. Let's, let's, let's go to the, let's go to the next clip. You got a flavor of that. That was Jim Jordan trying to hold down the fort as Pam Bondi was being like accosted by the Dems. Next clip is going to be similar. Mr. Chairman, I would yield back.

[E]

May I answer train.

[B]

Gentlemen can respond.

[E]

I find it interesting that she keeps going after President Trump, the greatest president in American history. And if they could maintain their composure. This isn't a circus. This is a hearing. I find it interesting. She keeps going after Donald Trump. She doesn't say how much money she took from Reid Hoffman. Hoffman did you and nor Mr. Chairman, regular order, please. She wrote nothing on her ex account, on her Twitter account during the Biden years. Gentle lady, question.

[B]

Let's pause here for a moment and get your reactions.

[D]

This whole hearing from start to finish reminded me a great deal of Sean Spicer's first press conference.

[B]

Oh, that's perfect.

[D]

When he just went out there and was like the Dow Jones biggest audience ever, the best audience ever. He was like, he was ready to. He's like, well, I saw it. I'm pretty sure I saw the boss throw a chair at Rand Paul on the under the base day. So I'm going to try doing that at the press and I'm going to yell and I'm going to talk about the stock market and audience sizes and it's. I know we've got a lot more clips, but watch the. I think watch it with this in mind. There's a very good argument to be made that while transparency is good, cameras in congressional hearings are not.

[B]

Sir, were you at that first Spicer presser? I don't remember.

[E]

I might have been because I was a White House reporter then. It's all put together. I was certainly at many Sean Spicer Press. I was there for the one about the Russian salad dressing.

[B]

Oh, yeah, that's a classic, infamous one.

[E]

But I don't remember that one. But he's right. It's kind of the same vibes. Performing for an audience of one thing, it gets better.

[B]

It does get better. But that's. I think, what Sarah just said, performing for an audience of one is very interesting because we saw Trump accidentally post his DM to Pam Bondi publicly on Truth Social. Not that he cared. He was happy to have done that. Right, Sarah? That's actually what happened.

[E]

Yeah. It was about prosecuting people. Like, why don't you get on these prosecutions? Which is basically the only exonerating thing that those defendants, like, would need. It'd be like, short of a DM from the President himself, you're not going to get off of this prosecution. But, you know, they actually.

[B]

But that's a really important point because Pam Bondi is not just under fire from her own party over Epstein. Like, that's actually. Obviously, it's a part of it, but there are a lot of people who would prioritize prosecutions of John Brennan, for example, over Epstein. So part of the performance is to show that she's a loyal foot soldier. And before we roll the clips, I want to get both of your reactions to that because you're very well sourced on the right. And in the administration, I have to imagine that's behind her strategy. That's like the driving force behind her strategy.

[D]

She's pretty isolated at this point. And the broader American right. I'm sure she's got a lot of strong allies in Florida. One Florida allies in a very important position in this White House. She has some people who like her and trust her, but there's a lot of discontent with how the DOJ has been handled for this entire administration. The misfires, the embarrassments, the terrible rollouts, the. But we saw this presser, and just like Sarah Said it is a. It is an audience of one. And maybe, maybe it landed. Trump's obviously not going to give up someone. He's like the opposite of the mob boss in the Departed. He doesn't give up people who are going down. If they're going down because of Democratic attacks, kind of sides with them. They could be busted having a very close relationship with Epstein, but that's not what's going to push him over. It's just going to piss him off. And she's managed to survive, I think, in part because of that. But this press conference was like another job interview.

[B]

I so admire you for not slipping into saying the Departed. That was. That was impressive. Yeah.

[D]

Well, I'm on my first drink.

[E]

Oh, yeah, give it, give it halfway down, guys.

[B]

I had like three before we even went to air. I was at a work dinner tonight, so we're doing great. Let's roll the next clip. And then I have more questions, of course, for Chris and Sarah.

[E]

They tried to impeach him twice. And you, Mr. Nadler, were one of the leads on the impeachment. I was on the other side. I lived that with you. During impeachment, you said the president conspired, sought foreign interference in the 2016 election. Robert found no evidence, none of foreign interference in 2016. Have you apologized to President Trump? The American people need to know this. They are talking about Epstein today. This has been around since the Obama administration. This administration released over 3 million pages of documents. Over 3 million. And Donald Trump signed that law and none of them.

[B]

He was so excited about it, too.

[D]

I know he loved it.

[E]

Garland, over the last four years, one word about Epstein.

[B]

The performance. I have to say, there are people who perform better. Right? Like that is it. It's so obviously right. Okay, so tell me, Sarah, because I. Pam Bondi was known before she became Attorney General as being. I mean, yes, she, like, co hosted Fox and no, it was the five while she was the AG of Florida. That was unusual. But she was known for being a fairly serious person who was also kind of hot. And. But it, but it was like. That was the secondary part of it. She was known as being, like, serious, and that was the novelty. This felt wildly unserious. And I just, I'm just curious. Sarah, it's not that she doesn't have a point, right? She's. She's right to call it the Democrats hypocrisy on Epstein. She's correct that this administration actually is ultimately the administration that released 3 million documents. True. But how did it get from Pre Admin. Pam Bondi to 2026. Pam Bondi, like, take us on that journey.

[E]

Well, she is in a prison of her own making on Epstein because if she had not put out that memo in, what was it, July 4th weekend, 2025, saying, we're actually done with Epstein here, we're wrapping it up, we're never going to release anything else, then we would not be here today. Because the outreach stemmed from her absolutely closing and locking the door on any further disclosures. There was no reason for her to do that. Right. No other previous administration had done that. Like she could have continued to produce documents on some sort of rolling basis, kind of like they're doing now, except without all the drama. But she chose not to do that. And you know, that was after she had the, the binders, right?

[B]

Oh yeah. Oh, I do like that. You look to your husband for affirmation.

[E]

Right, that's great. So the binders that she rolled out to the influencers, which are, by the way, the people who would know the most about whether you had new Epstein information or old Epstein information. Right. You gave that stuff to the most engaged audience that you possibly could. And so we wouldn't be here if it wasn't for Bondi's own missteps. And while it is true that Democrats were not interested in this before Donald Trump became president, this is completely not an organic uprising on the left of desire for information about the Epstein scheme or his victims. This was avoidable. And I do think that she's kind of allowed herself to be led by the nose by these Democrats into indulging the outrage over the Epstein scandal. It almost reminds me of the way that Jeff Sessions let his like entire short lived Attorney General and you're be bogged down by Russia because he caved and he lent legitimacy to a sort of mob outrage there that Cam Bondi never actually had to do, but for some reason she did that. And so I agree with you when you say that like it's a, it's a completely sort of manufactured outrage about the Epstein stuff the Democrats didn't have when the, when Biden was in charge. But she's also allowed that to proliferate.

[D]

You know, and I, I look at her reactions and.

[B]

Let's get a man's take here.

[E]

Yeah, sorry, I'll be quiet now.

[B]

Yeah, it's time.

[D]

You know, a friend of mine said this to me today and I know this is going to tick off some, some of my friends. He said, I'm extremely irritated. How many of these left wing Goons and totally botched liberals and people who are actually seriously partisan. They get up on that stage, whether they're representing the FBI or the Department of Justice or the US District or whatever, and they look extremely professional. They dress the part and they act the part. They may be doing completely insane Democratic stuff. They may be, as one of the guys you pointed out on Twitter today or on X, about to run for Democratic office. But when they're wearing that, when they're. When they're actually holding that office, they present in a way that presents authority and seriousness. I know he's extremely unpopular with a lot of the maga. Right. But I know this guy is extremely popular. I'm about to mention with the maga. Right. But I thought that Bill Barr's first congressional hearings were just a master class. He made them look stupid. Deeply, deeply stupid. Raising his voice once. Scott Besson got a little ticked off. But there was no question of who was the most serious person in the room when he was going against these questions. And to. To the AG's, to the Attorney General's point here, the questions that she faced, unserious questions from unserious people. It was a clown show through and through. And maybe it's having covered these for 15 years that I don't give two hoops about televised congressional hearings anymore. You never get anything out of it except for a clown show on either side. People change their opinions based on who's the President. People change their opinions based on who's in the majority. People try to forget who donated to them on this, who they backed on that, or what they've cared about before just to get those clicks, just to get on cameras to say, I represent my voters. I yelled on tv, and it's just so deeply exhausting by the end of it.

[B]

Well, Chris, I heard you say that this is a clown show, but I need to remind you that this is not a circus. It's not a circus.

[E]

It's not.

[B]

It's not.

[D]

The circus is more entertaining. Like, I would like to watch the circus again and go into this hearing. It's like, oh, man.

[B]

Well, let's roll the next clip.

[A]

The fact is, ice is, oh, Steve Cohen, and you are not investigating them. When they killed Mr. Pre Pretty and. And Ms. Good, that was an execution, and you did not investigate it. And you tried to investigate her. Ms. Good's widow, and you tried to investigate Mr. Preddy. They were executed like Christy Noem executed her dog. And that was wrong. And you should investigate those people and you should investigate anybody that uses a weapon in federal official or not. For civil rights.

[E]

Justice for cricket. Justice for cricket.

[B]

Justice for cricket. She should not have shot that dog. That dog was only, what, a year old?

[D]

Ridiculous.

[E]

Chris says I shouldn't tell that to people because he says it makes me sound like a serial killer.

[D]

It does. It's giving serial killer. But now she's the one who wants the dog. And I'm saying no, especially because you.

[B]

Have so many cats, so much worse.

[D]

Trying to find a place to work with a house with as many living creatures, schools close, nanny's stuck in. There was a lot going on in this at the Bedford home.

[B]

Yeah, no, nobody doubts that. But this raises the. The Bill Barr comparison is super interesting. It's not something I would have thought of. And maybe the difference is that Bill Barr was not, as Sarah pointed out, isolated in the same way that Pam Bondi is. Chris, you noted that as well. He'd never had that feeling of desperation. I mean, maybe in the last month of the administration when he seemed to break with the President on the election, you could say he had that. But just today, here's the announcement in the DOJ's effort and Jeanine Perro, who is of course U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, to charge Mark Kelly and Alissa Slotkin, two Democratic senators. We could put the chair sheet up on the screen in their insurrection or the alleged kind of insurrection scheme because they put out that video and those. The grand jury didn't bring charges. Now, this is a D.C. grand jury, so there's nothing surprising about this at all. But I guess it also maybe speaks to the base being frustrated not just with Pam Bondi on Epstein, but with Pam Bondi's Justice Department on that question of like, retribution, retributory justice. Is that a word? I'm making it up, but I feel like it feels right to me. Yeah.

[E]

You know, but I think two things are true. The DOJ has a serious jury nullification problem in dc. There are left wing groups that are well funded, that are training DC activists where if they happen to get called for jury duty, how do you return, you know, a. No true Bill, how do you reject these indictments? How do you equip people? I mean, the sandwich guy was like a funny thing. The guy who threw a hoagie or.

[B]

Oh, yeah, there are murals to him around the city.

[E]

Well, he's a hero, no pun intended. But, but it was, it was funny. But also it kind of showed that, you know, people who were swept up in the really aggressive January Six indictments in Washington, D.C. they went to jail for arguably less. I mean, hundreds of people were charged with felonies that the Supreme Court later overturned. That said, that's way too aggressive. You can't charge people with that. And that's a whole other bag. So it is true that the DOJ has a jury nullification problem in D.C. and also elsewhere. They run into that in other blue cities. But also some of these side quests from the Bondi DOJ about, like redeeming Bondi, maybe in Trump's eyes, whether you're talking about doing subpoenaing Jerome Powell, the Fed, because he won't lower interest rates. Right. These, these senators who put out this, I would argue irresponsible social media video, like, do you need to build and literally make a federal case out of it?

[D]

I, like the Department of the Department of War had the best response to that, which is, aren't you collecting pay, holding rank? Well, we're actually in charge of that.

[E]

But there are left wing terrorist groups that are like organizing an insurrection in blue states right now against ice. I mean, you have violent attacks against ICE facilities, you have federal law enforcement officers being injured. Like, what are you doing spending DOJ resources, going after these senators who like, probably didn't break any actual laws. Right. And so I think those, the side quests really undermine the credibility of the rest of the really important accountability agenda that the Trump DOJ needs to go on to sort of right the ship on the weaponization that we did see over the past four years of the Biden administration, I guess eight years, if you include the sanctions, neutered Justice Department as well. And I, I don't know what Bondi may be trying to save. Her own position is really undermining an agenda.

[B]

Will it work, Chris?

[D]

I agree with that completely. And like I said, I just, I, I think back to my favorite attorney general hearing. I think of all time when they were yelling about the priestess in charge of the church across from the White House complaining about Trump. And he just responds, was that before or after we put out the fire? And I wanted the bagpipes to just come in right behind him, you know.

[B]

Oh, Bill Barr.

[D]

Yeah, this is Bill Barr. Back in the day. It was, it was a far cry from this. And Sarah's right. There are, there's a literal insurrection going on in an American state. And it's not a universal thing. It's not a mass uprising. It's organized, it's planned, it actually, it takes some serious investigative work, but just available to private citizens. To try to get into these groups and figure out what they're doing and how they're communicating. And I guess they, I guess ISIS arrested a few over 600 people in the last week involved with this for what, what they're able to do. But that's where I would like to see resources moving. I'd like people, I'd like them to be following the money. I'd like them to be dismantled. Canceling the non profits that are funding these insurrections and backing people up who are committing crimes. I'd like a January 6th level of investigation into that and not these. You know, if you're going to do a show trial, they're better at least being execution at the end of it. But they can't even get to an indictment.

[B]

Did you see what Ilhan Omar tweeted today? She said at least in Somalia, they execute pedophiles.

[D]

Yeah.

[B]

Based or not based, it's not a bad law.

[D]

Can we look at that? I mean, but I guess a rare good point from Elon. I think that whatever her name is, Elon, the other, the other point of it. Who is she talking about again? This, this came across my.

[B]

I think it was. I think it was Trump.

[D]

Trump's not a pedophile.

[E]

No.

[B]

Well, we don't need to quibble over Ilhan Omar's fantasy justice system, but something that Ilhan Omar would not be so pleased about is the investigation in Fulton County, Georgia, which Sarah Bedford is very, very familiar with. And you know, both of you have done election reporting that's significant and the type of stuff that a lot of the media has turned a blind eye to or activ. Tried to undermine. But here's a headline we can put up. F5. This is from Atlanta News. First, Fulton county admits to verifying 315,000 votes in 2020 without poll worker signatures. Without poll worker signatures. Also a CNBC headline here. This is from February 10th. So yesterday, this says former Trump campaign lawyers sparked FBI probe of Fulton county ballots, according to an affidavit. I do want to get both of your takes on this. I will preface it just by saying that Chris and I both worked at, at the Federalists, which was the forefront of reporting out problems. Margo Cleveland, for example, in Georgia in 2020. And a story that a lot of people don't know is actually that there were ballots cast in counties where the people didn't reside. Enough. That was more of the margin now. More than more than the margin in Georgia now. Does that mean it's fraud in the way most People think about fraud? Probably not. But Georgia had a disaster on its hand with its electoral system. Republicans were in charge of the electoral system at the time. And you've seen, like Raffensperger, I think, is Georgia secretary of the state back in 2020, go on to almost be vindicated, lionized by the legacy press. And there were, like, real legitimate problems in Georgia. So let me first go to Sarah, because she's a native, to explain a little bit of what we're looking at from these new headlines.

[E]

Yes, I'm from neighboring Cobb county, but close enough to Fulton, and the Democrats have succeeded so remarkably in putting any sort of questions about the 2020 election out of bounds of acceptable discourse. Right. You were alone. If you raised any questions about the 2020 election from about January 2021 to, like, last week, if you brought it up, you were a crazy person.

[D]

Molly Hemingway's book did some good work.

[B]

Yes, yes, yes.

[D]

And.

[E]

But I think her book focused a lot on the way that they changed the rules leading up to this election. Right. I mean, what we're learning more about Fulton county, and we've been some of this has been coming out over the past year or so as the state election board, it got some more Trump friendly members on the state election board had started looking more into this. And then, you know, the Trump Justice Department came last year and they filed a civil lawsuit and said, asked nicely, essentially, like, hey, could you give us these documents? And Fulton county said, no. And then they said, all right, we're gonna go get a warrant. And they did that. So. But Fulton County's election was a complete mess. And when, when Democrats or the media come out and say this has been looked at, this has been adjudicated because they had a hand recount and then they had a machine recount. That's really true. A lot of the allegations of impropriety have to do with the way the recounts were handled, not just the election night count. I mean, there are sworn affidavits from election monitors who participated in the hand recount that said they saw mail in ballots that had never been folded or put into an envelope but were being counted along with the other batches of mail in ballots. They saw volunteers who were not following any of the procedures that the rest of the volunteers were following. Right. They had boxes of ballots where the seals were broken. There were no chain of custody documents. Nobody in the State Farm arena where these were being counted could tell where the boxes had come from. Right. I mean, there were all sorts of anomalies that sort of compounded over the different recounts. Right. You have the election night count, which raised a bunch of questions. You had the hand recount about a week or so later where there were even more anomalies and allegations of ballots being counted multiple times and stuff like that. And then you had the machine recount where you had even additional allegations that in order to make the numbers match up from all three counts, more and more manipulation had to be done to get the numbers to line up to where you didn't see any evidence of fraud, at least in the top line numbers. Right. They counted 528,000 ballots in Fulton county or thereabouts every time they counted. And in order to make it 528,000 each time, some shenanigans allegedly had to occur. And that's. You had sworn affidavits to that effect. The idea that this has been looked at and adjudicated, the lawsuits that were filed in court, most of them were thrown out for lack of standing. Right. The judges were like, there's never been a lawsuit like this. We don't know if you're the.

[D]

You're threatening the election.

[E]

You're. We don't know if you're the type of plaintiff who's allowed to bring this, even if you were like, what am I supposed to do about it? I'm a superior court judge. I'm a district court judge. Like, can't overturn the election. What do you want me to do? So the courts didn't really look at it. They just said, procedurally, we don't know how to advance this. And the recounts that supposedly certified that nothing went wrong, she only served to deepen the questions. And I'm sorry that I'm ranting. I'm just saying that there is so much here that has not been looked into.

[B]

And you get this woman some benzos.

[E]

This. I'm sorry. The silence, though, of the media and the Democrats, I think, is telling you don't hear a lot of people saying this is a conspiracy, like, these are lies. I think there's a recognition, you know, that what you hear is nothing.

[B]

This is not a circus. Go on, Chris.

[D]

Weren't there also a bunch of votes cast by machines that didn't exist with none of the receipts?

[E]

Actually, at least there were 10 tabulators that, you know, count the ballots, that they didn't have a serial number in the record as having allegedly, according to some affidavits filed on The Trump lawsuits, 10 tabulator machines that they didn't have a serial number. Any record that Fulton county received those machines. I mean, it gets complicated because some of the allegations have to do with, like, taking memory cards out of some machines, inserting them into others, and sort of scrambling the chain. So you put up a headline earlier about not having signatures on the tabulator tapes that correspond with 315,000 ballots. So that's really important. The tabulator tapes are printed out at the end of the day of voting or tabulating, and it says, this is how many votes were run through this machine. Right. And at the end of the day, the number of votes for Biden, the number of votes for Trump that are counted on the machine, they have to total the number of votes that were run through the machine. And that's how you know that you don't have. Have, like, fake things that were stuffed into the machine after voting hours ended. Right, Right. Those documents don't really exist to show that the number of votes that came in matched the number of votes that were counted. And, in fact, there's quite a bit of discrepancy over whether the number of votes that came in matched the number of votes counted they did not have. So Fulton county is trying to say, you know, we don't really have good records about how many absentee ballots actually came in. And the number happened to double after midnight on election night, which was an anomaly that they never could quite explain. Right. At one point, I think they said from one location where thousands and thousands of them came, allegedly, according to the, you know, poll workers who were looking at all of this, that, well, they came in slowly because we were verifying signatures. Well, later on in the process, with the state election board and everybody looking at this, it turns out they never verified any signature, which itself is a violation of Georgia election law. So they've never explained how they didn't really understand why they couldn't keep track of how many votes actually came in versus how many they counted. It's been a huge mess. I'm so sorry. I will stop talking about it now.

[D]

Two things that make me think that Republicans and Democrats alike are kind of taking this seriously is, one, the presence of Tulsi Gabbard quietly there, even though she's a member of the administration who's under attack and could be out there screaming at Congressman all day. Instead, she's tried to lower her profile a little bit and focus on things that don't obviously piss off the CIA. I think that's good. But it also. Her teams have been working on this sort of these. These questions a lot. And that's because it's become an intelligence matter in a lot of different matter in a lot of different ways. And the second thing is Democrats are say I read today in Politico, well, the statute of limitations is up stuff, which is kind of the classic all the way back to the Clintons of it's not happening, it's not happening. It's a right wing conspiracy. You loon batten. What difference does it make that it happened? The statute of limitations is up and this is in the past. Now it's like, oh, that story changed. That's not saying this is an evil conspiracy. That's not saying this is evil retribution. That's saying, well, it's, it's already done. So why are you going to look into it? But it's extremely important to restoring American normal. Americans Trust in the Elections is trying to fix what's become very obvious, which is that whether you're living in Washington, D.C. or you're electing the president or you're living in any one of these states electing local government fraud is extremely real. And people have been afraid, it's been outside the Overton window to try and look at this and say, shouldn't our elections actually have some integrity as opposed to just new liberal laws being passed? Shouldn't they're actually why shouldn't you have to show your identification? Why should foreigners be allowed to vote? These are good questions and they demand asking and they demand answers. I'm glad this is something that I'm actually really excited. The DOJ has been working on big.

[B]

News Save act passed the House just in the last several hours. That is a huge again. But our friend Rachel Bovard is even in the pages of the Free Press demanding that the Senate do a make Democrats do a talking filibuster to call this Jim Crow 2.0, as Chuck Schumer has been out there saying. And I think that's we'll see if John Thune and Republicans have the stomach for that. It's obviously what the base wants. It is obviously politically worth doing. Total layout.

[E]

Emily, Everybody. It's an 8020 issue. 70% of Democrats. Right. I mean, it's most Americans.

[D]

And you see people like was it Lisa Murkowski coming out and saying Congress can't do this? Well, yeah, it can. It's in the Constitution. These are things that the state legislature gets the first crack at, except where Congress makes a rule or changes their decision.

[B]

Yeah, it's written down.

[D]

Let her do it in the Federalist Papers.

[B]

Let her do a talking filibuster. On that. That would be a hell of a time. Whatever Sarah has is diagnosable, by the way. But before we.

[E]

My. My disorder, my cancer cell or no.

[B]

Fixation, which has blessed all of us. Yes. Yeah, it truly has blessed all of us. But let's talk about the Washington Post, because we all love the Washington Post. We're also excited for the future of the Washington Post and so excited that the Tech Guild is standing strong in solidarity amidst the turmoil. Obviously, since last we talked about the story here on After Party, Will Lewis Bezos got tossed out. He resigned, technically, but the reporting suggests that Jeff Bezos was upset that Lewis was at the super bowl while people were being laid off. Absolute pro move. Didn't go so well for Will Lewis. It seemed like Bezos was starting to get heat. This is my theory from the beltway big business types that he spends time with and kind of needed a scapegoat, slash scalp to say this was, whoa, beyond the pale. This is not the Washington Post that we want. Even though Will Lewis. And I can say, like in my conversations with the Washington Post over the last year or so, I did another little thing about why I took myself out of the running for a job at the Washington Post that people can go look up. Over the course of conversations with Will Lewis, who I really liked, he was taking directions from Bezos. So this was a really, really sharp turn. Maybe suggests that Bezos is more interested in or responsive to the pressures of D.C. of course, this is Democracy dies in darkness. Jeff Bezos, who did a little turn in recent years. But the Tech Guild, I don't know that they're going to resonate so much with Bezos when this is their activism. We gotta roll the clip. Our plan is to walk into the building and show our right to work. Management has locked us out and let us show that them. They can't just do it. Let's go. They. They can. They can just do it.

[E]

Actually, they can.

[B]

Look at that. They're trying to get through the turnstiles. They're being rejected. There's a right to be in the building. It is a right to work, and it's a right to be inside the Washington Post. And that work means doing our jobs. And they're refusing to let us in.

[D]

They're not. This is ridiculous. And the outrage.

[B]

Jeff Bezos, formerly CEO, Will Lewis Vineet and Matt Monahan. We deserve to work in this building.

[E]

We'll be back.

[D]

We're coming back tomorrow.

[B]

Truly our generation. Cesar Chavez, I blown away by the power of what he Did Washington Post. Jobs are a human right. Chris. I don't think this is going to convince Mr. Bezos.

[D]

I loved. I loved the series of tragedies that befell them in this video alone, which they posted themselves. It's not like some journal. It's not like James o' Keefe was there secretly. We're coming into the building and immediately vaccine. Turns out they're not. It's like we're staying in the next scene. They're not. But they will be back. If. If the comedian Ryan Long did a skit about the Washington Post reporters, it would look like this. I think it's. It was hysterical. You know, as a guy from Massachusetts, I. I hate to make fun of too much of the way somebody talks, but the way the guy talks certainly added to the comedy of the whole thing. It. It didn't strike me as a coal miner. Exactly. Or some of the kind of guys you're used to seeing on the lines protest their rights to take care of their families. I wonder how many of them actually have families.

[B]

But he was also kind of doing coal miner drag. Right. Like he was in his Canadian tuxedo and like his red cold today. Yeah.

[D]

If this is the kind of content that they're putting out, I'm surprised they're not making a profit because I watched this video a couple times in a row and I just picked up on new things I loved every time.

[B]

Really? Oh, that's beautiful. I love that. It's like I Spy, like one of those books. Sarah, my question for you is basically I'm asking for you to agree with the statement I'm about to make. It's not a question, so at least I'll admit that.

[E]

Great.

[B]

It's amazing how in the last week the media who again said that the Secretary of State was going to beat the former host of Celebrity Apprentice in a presidential election, then said they were. They got it wrong. They're going to do better and then trust. The media had has declined to again, a record low, according to Gallup. They are blaming Jeff Bezos for this and not pointing their finger inward at all. Like it is all Bezos. Bezos should subsidize the Post. Bezos is super rich. This was so cruel of Bezos and Will Lewis. That has been the only narrative coming from the press since all of this went down.

[E]

Well, it's always somebody else. Right. It's Donald Trump's like, making fun of reporters at the podium or it's misinformation or it's Bezos.

[C]

Right.

[E]

I Got I gotta preface this by saying like, it's hard for me. Maybe call it like the soft heart of a woman. But I don't like to celebrate when anyone loses their job, right?

[D]

Like so soft.

[E]

Today it's them, tomorrow it could be me. You won't find me in the lobby of the Washington. But you're not gonna act like that for my job. No, I said, you know, and you're a good reporter.

[B]

You're a good reporter. You're not, you're not sewing distrust in the media.

[E]

I'm not saying that every individual fired was necessarily a bad reporter. I don't know, I just. I don't want people to dance on my grave.

[D]

I will.

[B]

Okay?

[E]

I just had to get that throat clearing out of my way. Thank you.

[B]

I will dance on your grave. Your professional grave, not your real grave.

[E]

That would be sad celebratory tweet if I'm ever fired.

[D]

Learn to code.

[B]

Sarah Lear to code.

[E]

Anyway, I. All of these like tweets, like lamentations from the people who are fired being like, well, Jeff Bezos is so rich, he should just absorb these tremendous business losses indefinitely. As if like the reason why he's so rich isn't that he doesn't absorb tremendous losses for like soft hearted reasons. Right. And so that was a little bit wild, but you're totally right. There's been no introspection. It is not confined to the Washington Post.

[B]

It's.

[E]

Most of the corporate media doesn't understand why they have no press. But it is always a sort of external locus of control. Like there isn't anything they could possibly be doing differently to change that. And so it, it is hard to take seriously some of those. And then the right to work thing, like a repurposing an anti union slogan is somehow like very central to their pro union push to go into the building. Was. Was really rich.

[D]

They're so entitled.

[E]

It sort of shows like political illiteracy that brought us to this moment.

[D]

You know, the illiteracy of rights in their nature, the illiter of job performance, the, the illiteracy of reality where you can just make losses after. No, you're not in mom's basement anymore. You're not. And, and dad's mean. Sometimes you got to go outside. You playing too many video games. You're not getting clicks. You gotta go. I'm sorry. Find a different job. You don't have a right to be there. It's so unbelievably entitled and I don't know, I, I just. The one thing I'll disagree with my wife on is I like it when bad things happen to bad people. It doesn't happen enough, honestly.

[B]

Beautiful. Well, that's a great note to end on. I knew this was going to be a long show because I can't just talk to you guys for like 20 minutes. It's always going to be longer than that. So thank you to Christopher Bedford of the Blaze and Sarah Bedford of the Washington Examiner. Also the cat that was tripsing around in the background.

[E]

Sorry.

[B]

Thanks guys.

[D]

Thank you.

[B]

That was awesome. All right. So glad to have them back on the show. Like I said, we have author award winning author Lionel Shriver coming up right after this. But first, if you finally want to fix your gut, make your hair healthier and stronger, and add some glow to your skin in 2026, you gotta add colostrum to your daily routine. Now. Today's sponsor, Cowboy Colostrum offers the highest quality bovine cow colostrum available in the U.S. cowboy colostrum is 100% made in America from 100% American grass fed cows. Unlike other Colostrum brands, Cowboy Colostrum is true first day whole colostrum rich in bioactives like immunoglobulins and growth factors. So don't worry, Cowboy Colostrum only collects the surplus colostrum after the baby calves have had their fill. We're all glad to hear that Cowboy Colostrum isn't processed or stripped down. Their Colostrum is whole, full fat and high in protein for ultimate nutrient density, making it the highest quality bovine colostrum you can buy. Cowboy is easy to drink and is made with delicious natural flavor in natural ingredients and no artificial flavor. You just add a scoop of their chocolate, Madagascar vanilla matcha or strawberry in your coffee or smoothie and feel great the entire day. I always say I like the strawberry and a glass of milk. So good. Not only will Cowboy Colostrum bring stability to your gut, the peptides and growth factors will make your skin and hair look amazing. For a limited time, our listeners get up to 25 off their entire order. Just head to cowboycolostrum.com afterparty and use code AFTERPARTY at checkout. That's 25 off when you use code [e-mail] afterparty if you your parent or.

[E]

Spouse served in the military, you could join our family. Our members saved an average of $70 a month on auto insurance when they switched. Tap the banner or visit usaa.com join today to check your eligibility restrictions apply.

[A]

Do you have $10,000 or more in credit card debt? Maybe you're even barely getting by making minimum payments. With credit card debt hitting record highs.

[E]

National Debt Relief offers real debt relief.

[A]

Solutions for people struggling to keep up. These options may reduce a large portion of credit card debt for those who qualify.

[E]

You don't need to declare bankruptcy and.

[A]

You may be able to pay back less than you owe regardless of your credit.

[E]

National Debt Relief has already reduced the.

[A]

Credit card debt for more than 550,000 consumers. So don't wait. If you owe 10, 20 or even hundreds of thousands of dollars in credit card debt, you can now take advantage of this financial debt relief as the cost of living increases. To find out how much you could save, Visit National Debt Relief.com that's National.

[B]

Debt Relief.com I'm jumping into the chat because Lionel Shriver is up next. Stay tuned. Very happy to be joined by award winning author Lionel Shriver, who is out with a new book. It's called A Better Life Tackling the Immigration Issue in Novel Form. Lionel, thank you for being here.

[C]

Oh, it's a pleasure.

[B]

You know, one of the things I think this book does, and you can correct me if I'm wrong about in the way that I'm thinking of it, but I feel like it reframes the conversation on immigration from a different sort of human framing than a lot of the media coverage approaches the issue of immigration. You yourself have said you're conflicted about immigration, that the book was sort of more conflicted even than you had intended it to be on immigration. So I wanted to to play this clip, actually of Rand Paul and Katie Couric because it made me think of how you approach the issue in the book. This is a recent conversation they had about a new CBS News report which we can put up on the screen that found 14% according to the Department of Homeland Security's data, it said less than 14 of ICE arrests involved those accused or convicted of violent crimes. Which of course, though means that 60% of immigrants who had been arrested according to this data, were accused or convicted of crimes. In general, only 40% were civil immigration crimes. But it was a lot of violent crime, but also things like drugs, those types of robberies, those types of things that don't necessarily fall into that basket. So let's roll. Senator Rand Paul being asked about these numbers by Katie.

[C]

Katie Kirk, less than 14% of nearly 400,000 immigrants arrested by ICE in President.

[E]

Trump's first year back in the White.

[C]

House had charges or convictions for Violent criminal offenses. So isn't all this talk about ridding.

[E]

The country of violent criminals a massive.

[D]

Overstatement when you come to Minneapolis, if.

[B]

They have a policy that says, oh, we're not going to turn over from.

[D]

Our jail nonviolent prisoners, people who are.

[B]

I don't know why you're in prison.

[D]

If you're nonviolent, but maybe you have.

[B]

A drug crime that's a non violent.

[E]

I think there are plenty of non violent people.

[D]

But the thing is, is that's not their policy. Their policy is we will turn no one over.

[E]

What about the 14%? Such a low percentage of 400,000 people.

[D]

If you're, if your daughter gets raped by the guy that gets back out and he's one of the 14%, I.

[B]

Don'T think you're an equivalent out, whether it's 14 or 64. And Lionel, that last part, when I read the CBS article, I just thought the lead had been buried in a very obvious way that seems common to me throughout media coverage of immigration. The lead would be, that's like 50,000 violent criminals who are not citizens of the country or in your country. It seems like a massive number anyway. All that is to say there's so much of a human framing of this, I think that gets missed in the media framing. I wanted to get your thoughts on that as we start this bigger conversation about how you explored the issue in the book.

[C]

Well, just turning to that particular statistical breakdown, the Democrats are trying to minimize what Trump is accomplishing. Actually 14% of that many people, I think he's deported about 700,000. Now, that's a lot of people. People that's making the world a safer place for Americans. But more to the point, we don't want any criminals of any sort. So why are Democrats suddenly assuming that people committing fraud or doing human trafficking or running a shoplifting ring. What we want them to. No, we want to get rid of them. And furthermore, the truth is Trump actually didn't just promise to get rid of the worst of the worst. He didn't just say he was going to get rid of criminals. He said he was going to do a mass deportation of people who don't have permission to be in the country. And even recent polls documented that over half the country still want to deport all illegal immigrants. Now, that's an unrealistic goal. Frankly, it's not going to happen. But it's interesting that it's indicative of very strong feelings and that's why I wrote about this subject. The strong feelings, I mean, that's what any novelist worth his or her salt is looking for, is an issue of a situation that arouses emotion, because that's the real currency of a novel. Not just. I like throwing ideas too. The novel is a great form because you can use. Everything is an unlimited form. And I was especially keen to not just do a kind of global survey of the issues, but also, for once in fiction, to express some sympathy with the native population. Because fiction writers never address the experience of having huge numbers of people from somewhere else occupy your territory. And I'm of the view that while a small number of people coming in from elsewhere, really nice, they've probably got interesting stories, maybe they'll establish a new ethnic restaurant. But when you have massive numbers of people coming in from a foreign country, it triggers something very anthropologically primitive that it's like, hold it, you know, you're crossing a line. Who are these people? This is not my home anymore. Frankly, it triggers resentment and hostility. Those are not pretty emotions. So they're hard to admit to. And furthermore, Westerner, Western native populations are told that though those emotions, however unattractive, are pretty much a human universal, when their territory is invaded, Westerners are not allowed. They're not only not allowed to express those feelings, but they're not allowed to feel them.

[B]

And really, nobody in the art space has tried to do this from that vantage point since Clint Eastwood. And it. I was reading the Atlantic's review, which I'm sure didn't surprise you one bit. Lionel, you've been through. You've been through this. But there was a passage, yes, there was a passage that stood out to me where the author says, sounding like a cranky 60. 60 something, the protagonist, Lionel's protagonist complains about the state of bike lanes. And Lionel, you wrote in the voice of the protagonist, they're overwhelmingly Hispanic. Riders didn't glance over their shoulders before overtaking or signal when they were making a end quote. And the Atlantic author goes on to say, many of these bikers are out making deliveries, of course. And then ads in parentheses. It's unclear why Nico thinks so many immigrants work these jobs when they are, according to him, given so many freebies by the city. And just reading that parenthetical, which is so smug, it's also so dumb because it just reflects a basic lack of understanding of the lives that these. These immigrants live. When they come to the United States, they're sending so much money in remittances, even when they're working their butts off, they are also getting freebies. From the government that is absolutely accurate. Both those things can happen at the same time. And just I wanted to ask Lionel, if you think maybe some of the reason that an Atlantic author wouldn't get this book has to do with their complete misunderstanding of the situation at hand? Anyway, way.

[C]

Well, this book has already, and it was only out as we're speaking yesterday, it has already attracted a huge amount of negative media attention on the progressive side. And this was completely foreseeable. I foresaw it. So I'm reaping what I sowed. I knew this would happen. The irony being that this is a novel that actually in many instances puts the progressive case for immigration very well. The thing is that the woksters have absolutely zero tolerance for reading the other other side. And they're spoiled, especially in literary fiction, because literary fiction has almost universally put the immigrant side of the story. That's. That's the story that gets told over and over again, and especially in the American context because, you know, nation of immigrants, et cetera. And it's, you know, it's. It's very saleable. It reflects well on the country. Ultimately, we welcome all these people and the native population in most of these novels that are told from the immigrant's point of view are just a kind of backdrop. And at best, they're warmly welcoming newcomers, and at worst, they're just a bunch of bigots who will get over. Over it.

[B]

Yeah. And it raises, for me, as I was thinking about this book, raises the Minneapolis specter surrounding the awful deaths of Renee Goode and Alex Preddy. Because I think what the book does is ask us who is a victim and then how should they deal with it? And it's. People can be victims on both sides of a conflict. Hypothetically, of course. I just wanted to get your sense of how you think about that. And in if that's maybe what animates so much of the organizing in different.

[C]

Blue cities around the country, what's animating the blue state and blue city protest is performative sanctimony. I just don't see a lot of real concern for the immigrants themselves. These protesters have, especially after these martyrdoms in Minneapolis as they're being portrayed. The protesters have cast themselves as the main characters of this story. They're the stars, not the immigrants. The immigrants are simply an excuse for this display of goodness and concern and bravery. You know, putting. And also frankly naivete because, you know, this business of putting yourself in the way of armed law enforcement is ignorant and foolhardy and expressive of a Kind of. However much these people are being cast as, you know, the Gestapo, none of these protesters really expect to be shot and therefore they regard themselves as bulletproof. Oh, I'm so good. Nothing bad can possibly befall me because I'm on the side of righteousness. What's frustrating about the whole ICE scenario is that, okay, I also have concerns about the, the justice of those shootings. I'm not sure that they stand up to scrutiny. And I also am not enthusiastic about the look of these raids. The way the ICE officers are dressed. And the whole spirit of it is it looks too military and too hot under their collar. Not methodical enough. But there's no reason that criticizing ISIS methods should impugn their purpose. So it doesn't mean that just because there have been some serious and fatal misjudgments on the part of individuals in the force, that does not mean that therefore we should never enforce American immigration law. And that is the way these incidents are being deployed to prove we shouldn't deport anybody. And if you don't deport anybody, you don't have an immigration law. It's impossible to seal people off completely, especially with, with airplanes and that. So even sealing the southern border doesn't take care of visa overstayers. You're going to have illegal immigrants in your country and if you're going to take your own law seriously, you're going to have to pick them up and put them somewhere else. And the appearance of these things is never going to be kindly the act of law enforcement. Enforcement, It's a law enforcement, it's about force. And using force is not attractive. It's not an exercise in charity. It can be pretty ugly. And that's just the nature of the animal. And I know that Americans support deportation in theory and I understand having discomfort in practice. And you know, when Trump won the election, I knew this was coming, that the Democrats would find all of these little heart rending stories of very nice people with, with lovely families, having daddy sent back to Guatemala and you know, and, and he was working two jobs off the books.

[B]

Which matters by the way, because it's rule of law, right?

[C]

And, and using Medicaid, but that's what was bound to happen, that the New York Times would be chock a block with. You know, these are lovely people, they're obeying the law, of course they're breaking the law, but no, they're. Otherwise they're law abiding. And how, how dare you deport these lovely people who just want to be good Americans. And that's, you know, that's what we've got. And it's been turbocharged by the. The shootings of these two protesters. And, you know, there's no question that the Democrats have the upper hand on the immigration narrative right now.

[B]

My favorite Lionel Shriver novel is Motion of the Body Through Space. And that book came out, I mean, you were paying attention to what came to be known as Wokeness when it was sort of treated as a curiosity. But that book came out. Out before the pandemic. It came out amidst the pandemic, meaning you had written it before the pandemic, is what. What I should say, because I remember doing. I did an episode of Federalist Radio Hour with you about the book, and it was over Zoom, which was unusual for us at the time back in 2020. And I love that book so much because it captured the motivations behind Woke in a way that I think you also tried to do in this immigration book. And I just wanted to ask if you think. Think how you think about, especially, like, female Wokeness as people, you know, talk about the awfuls and they talk about how white liberal women seem to be the, you know, seem to be unhappy, but also the most woke, if we could call it that, in the context of immigration, where you have like a. Renee Goode, how are you thinking about some of the same people who you. You wrote about in Motion of the Body Through Space and saw very presciently know, more than 10 years ago?

[C]

Well, already the mother in my novel, who is a. Yeah, I would say she's a pretty classic progressive, early 60s omni cause supporter. And she's come in for criticism as a, you know, as a cliche or as a, you know, I'm making fun of her, and I don't. Honestly, I don't think the book does make fun of her. I think it fairly represents her. And in fact, if. If anything, it's kinder to her than. Than my mind is. When I watch these women who are protesting against ice. I mean, you know, they're talking about, you know, ostensibly their positions are all about empathy and compassion, but the emotions they're expressing are rage, hostility, contempt, aggression. They use terrible language. They're incredibly insulting to these officers. They actually spit at them. They kick at their vehicles. You know, they look, they scream at the top of their lungs. They wear totally weird clothes. And, you know, these people are beyond parody, basically. My.

[B]

That's the challenge.

[C]

My character is way nicer than that, much more reasonable, doesn't scream all the time. And puts together plausible and rational reasons for supporting the position she does, including she's very pro mass immigration. So I think I have gentled the part.

[B]

And I thought you did the same. In Motion the Body Through Space with Gentling the. But also explaining and exploring the reactionary impulse that so many people had to this like cultural progressive, like, you know, soft fascism. That there was something that really triggered in people that could be unkind and irrational. But that I. I mean it's just, just it has to be so difficult to do, Lionel. And you do it so well.

[C]

Well, one of my points of sensitivity these days is that I find that A Better Life and in fact a lot of my other work is often described as satire. Now it's true that my book mania does have a very strong satirical side to it. But in general I do not write satire. I write serious literary fiction, which is sometimes funny. One can be over serious. And I think that calling A Better Life satire is an effort to diminish it and to suggest that my characters are puppets, that they are only walking position papers and that the drama is subsidiary to the politics that I'm merely trying to make a point. It suggests that the book is shrill and exaggerated, whereas this is basically a home invasion story. And it's perfectly plausible. This stuff happens all the time. So, you know, this book has been called a thriller. I'm perfectly happy with that category because unlike most literary fiction, this book has a plot and something actually happens and people do things. And I've been told it's a page turner, but it's also very specifically trying to give. Give people who are concerned about the radical transformation of their countries a voice and a story. I have actually centered the story of the native population.

[B]

Lionel Shriver, such a pleasure to speak with you. Everyone. Go out and buy the book that's making the Atlantic mad. It's called A Better Life. It's out now. Really appreciate you being here, Lionel. Thank you so much.

[C]

You're welcome. I figured that any book that the New York Times and the Atlantic hate this much can't be all bad.

[B]

Nailed it. What a great line from the great Lionel Shriver there. Thank you all so much for staying tuned. I do have a big announcement about the show actually coming up in just a moment. But first, small businesses are the backbone of the American economy. But getting funding from traditional banks is an uphill battle. Of the 36 million small businesses in the US over 70% report needing additional capital capital every year while revenue is at an all time high. Big banks are tightening standards and approving fewer loans than ever, leaving owners stuck with mountains of paperwork. But if you want bank rates without the bank delays, check out Cardiff Co Slash Emily for up to $500,000 in same day funding. Cardiff is the largest privately held small business lender in the US having funded over $12 billion since 2004. Their application takes less less than five minutes has no impact on personal credit, and approvals happen in minutes with same day funding. Banks try to lock out small businesses, but Cardiff has the key. Big banks may not want to approve your business loans, but Cardiff does. If you've been in business for at least a year and are pulling in $20,000 a month in revenue, apply now for up to $500,000 in same day business funding at Cardiff Co. Slash Emily again. That's Cardiff Co Emily Real growth, Fast.

[A]

Funding Cardiff Borrow better Confronting high credit card debt can feel scary. But the good news is if you owe $10,000 or more in credit card debt, financial relief options are now available. National Debt Relief is currently offering debt relief designed to reduce what you owe, fast tracking your way to being debt free. If you qualify for debt relief, you may be able to pay back significantly less than what you owe and save thousands of dollars. Imagine only paying one low monthly program payment you can afford and saving money as you become debt free. National Debt Relief has already helped bring debt relief to over 550,000 US consumers, earning thousands of five star reviews and an A rating with the Better Business Bureau. You're stronger than your credit card debt. Take the first step and visit nationaldebtrelief.com to see what debt relief you qualify for. That's nationaldebtrelief.com why have I asked my.

[B]

H Vac guy I found on angie.com to change my grandpa's trachea tube? Because I was so amazed by how quickly he replaced our air ducts, I.

[C]

Knew I could trust him to change.

[B]

Pop Pop's tube while I was on vacation.

[D]

Make it quick, young man.

[B]

Aw. See, Pop Pop trusts you.

[D]

I think we should call a doctor.

[A]

Connecting homeowners with skilled pros for over 30 years. Angie, the one you trust.

[D]

Define the ones you trust.

[A]

Find pros for all your home [e-mail].

[B]

All right, before we wrap tonight, I did say I promised. I teased a big announcement about the show. We've been going for a while now. We're going to come up on our. Geez, it's February. So we're we're more than half a year into this. We're Going to come up on our year anniversary before you know it. And the sun is going to be warm and we're going to be enjoying the thaw, hopefully around the country. But I don't know, I'm not optimistic. It feels like the snow is never going to go away here in dc, which we are not, not used to this far south. But all that is to say we're moving to prime time. Well, technically we're already in prime time, but the show is going to be starting at 9pm starting next Monday. And that is our plan for the foreseeable Future. Live at 9pm Mondays and Wednesdays. That's when you're going to get your afterparty. Nielsen says. Not that Nielsen is super relevant anymore because we're not chasing the same linear audience, linear TV audience. But they, they say the peak of prime time is between like 9:15 and 9:30. Maybe your television habits are translating to YouTube. I actually think some of that is true. But that is all to say, I wanted to make the announcement about prime time and I tried to pull data that would back me up because I just wanted to say that I thought it would be a fun way to announce that we're moving to 9pm and I'm calling it Peak Prime Time PPT. All right, maybe that's what we'll call it. But so excited, so gratified. We have big California audience. It's a huge chunk of our audience. And that just actually made us think, well, maybe if we moved it up a little bit, we would be able to expand on the east coast as well. Some people go to bed early, unlike me. I'm like going to bed like one or two in the morning, as our team knows, like sending messages so late. But that is when I thrive. Which is why we're doing a late night show here. Not so late anymore. Still late, but not quite that late. So make sure I. 9pm is when you're here for the live stream. I'm trying to jump in the chat a lot more. It's a ton of fun and of course, nothing's changing. You're going to be able to catch us whenever you want to catch us. It doesn't have to be Monday or Wednesday Night Live. It is a lot of fun live. We are trying to, I think live is a way that a lot of people like to get news, whether they're watching it contemporaneously. There's something nice about having something that is recorded live live, where you're getting totally raw, authentic reactions. We don't have a teleprompter on the show. We don't have scripts on the show and I think that's a a really fun way to do the news and a really, if you're like me, helpful way to do the news. I like seeing, I still like seeing live coverage even and especially when it doesn't look or feel like CNN, for example. So we're gonna be doing that at 9pm 9pm don't forget, forget live Mondays and Wednesdays, 9pm thank you all so very much for watching, for listening. Please do subscribe. It helps us so much and I'm really bad about reminding people to do it. So help me out and subscribe on YouTube if you haven't yet or wherever you get your podcast. We'll be out with a happy hour episode on Friday around 5pm EmilyCare Media.com is where you can send those questions in before tomorrow afternoon for this week's recording. Have a great evening. Good evening everyone. See you back here on Monday at 9:00pm.

[A]

Imagine relying on a dozen different software programs to run your business, none of which are connected, and each one more.

[B]

Expensive and more complicated than the last.

[A]

It can be pretty stressful. Now imagine Odoo. Odoo has all the programs you'll ever need and are all connected on one platform. Doesn't Odoo sound amazing? Let Odoo harmonize your business with simple, efficient software that can handle everything for a fraction of the price. Sign up [e-mail] that's O-O-O.com why have.

[B]

We asked our contractor we found on angie.com to be our kids legal guardian?

[E]

Because he took such good care when redoing our basement that we knew we.

[B]

Could trust him to care for our kids. We only met a month ago.

[A]

Angie the one you trust.

[D]

Define the ones you trust.

[A]

Find pros for all your home [e-mail].