← The Majority Report with Sam Seder
The Majority Report with Sam Seder
3607 - Farmers Turn on Trump; Far-Right SCOTUS Poised to Gut Voting Rights Act w/ Elie Mystal
01:02:59
It's an Emmajority Report Tuesday on the Majority Report On today’s show: U.S. Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins blames decades of farm consolidation for the rising cost of beef — an issue the Biden administration tried to address through an...
Loading summary
Transcript178 lines
- [00:00]
Emma Vigeland
You are listening to a free version of Majority Report with Sam Steater. To support this show and get another 15 minutes of daily program, go to Majority FM please.
- [00:14]
Ellie Mistahl
The Majority Report with Sam Cedar.
- [00:19]
Emma Vigeland
It is Tuesday, October 21, 2025. My name is Emma Vigeland in for Sam Seder and this is the five time award winning Majority Report. We are broadcasting live steps from the industrially ravaged Gowanus Canal in the heartland of America, downtown Brooklyn, usa. On the program today, Ellie Mistahl of the Nation magazine joins us to talk about the Supreme Court appearing poised to gut the Voting Rights Act. Also on the program, Israel has already broken the Gaza Sea ceasefire, predictably killing dozens of Palestinians. And Trump buys their BS and blames Hamas. Trump's pick for the Office of Special Counsel is the latest 30 year old Republican infant to be caught calling themselves a Nazi in a group chat, among other slurs. He's just learning how to walk. How can you be so mean?
- [01:30]
Sam Seder
Babies are all Nazis.
- [01:33]
Emma Vigeland
Isn't that even what form of Christianity is? When you're born impure and then have to. Whatever. This is.
- [01:41]
Mark McCarg
All of it.
- [01:42]
Emma Vigeland
All of it. At least four Republican senators, including the Majority leader Thune, signaled they will not support this avowed Nazi guy in his nomination. It is day 21 of the government shutdown and no Democratic. No more Democratic senators than before have caved yet. But there's a report that they're considering it on November 1st. Marjorie Taylor Greene calls out Mike Johnson for refusing to bring the House back in session unless Democrats unilaterally agree to their demands. And they're afraid of this Epstein discharge petition, too. The Atlantic reports that ICE is struggling to find applicants who can pass personal.
- [02:40]
Unidentified Female Co-host
Fitness tests that is run 1.5 miles.
- [02:46]
Emma Vigeland
Well, we've seen the videos.
- [02:49]
Unidentified Female Co-host
Apparently going across the parking lot does not prepare you for running 1.5 miles in one go.
- [02:55]
Emma Vigeland
This is the toughest America has to offer. A federal appeals court panel allows Trump to deploy National Guard troops in Portland pending litigation. By the way, the two out of three judges on the panel that sided with Trump. Trump appointees. This seems bad. The US army has invited major private equity firms to fund $150 billion in infrastructure updates. The merging of finance and the military is a hallmark of fascism.
- [03:32]
Unidentified Female Co-host
Yeah. Do they like, own the bases that they build?
- [03:35]
Emma Vigeland
It's unclear.
- [03:37]
Unidentified Female Co-host
And how much money? Yeah, I was just gonna say, like, how much money do we give them?
- [03:42]
Emma Vigeland
It's the. The point is to merge the finance financing with the state. I mean, I think. But the military is very socialist. Yep.
- [03:51]
Unidentified Female Co-host
Why Would the military want that?
- [03:53]
Emma Vigeland
We'll discuss it later. Trump has begun demolishing the east wing of the White House to build his $250 million ballroom. In a metaphor, North Carolina Republicans vote to add a Republican seat to their congressional maps. Stein doesn't have the veto power to override it. And lastly, one of the January 6th participants who Trump pardoned was just arrested for threatening to assassinate Hakeem Jeffries. All this and more on today's Majority Report. It's a majority report Tuesday. Sam is out. He just should have touched down yesterday in Vegas for the tort conference. So tomorrow in and Thursday, we are going to have. Hopefully, Sam will have some interviews lined up, unless he's up too late gambling, which, you know, I can understand.
- [04:52]
Unidentified Male Co-host
She was offered a tour. Sushi and poker with the boys.
- [04:56]
Unidentified Female Co-host
Hopefully, Sam gets some time for some poker with the boys.
- [04:58]
Emma Vigeland
The boy Sushi.
- [05:00]
Ellie Mistahl
Boyce don't eat Vegas sushi, though. It's too far from the ocean.
- [05:05]
Emma Vigeland
It is, right? See, that's what I'm saying. Would you feel more comfortable with Vegas sushi or West Virginia sushi? Sushi.
- [05:12]
Mark McCarg
West Virginia sushi.
- [05:13]
Emma Vigeland
Because of proximity. Yeah. Okay, well, you're less snobby than I am. You're just thinking about the geography of it. I don't know if. I don't know if I would make that call, but anything's better than gas station sushi. Don't go for that, guys. So a day or two ago, Trump announced that the White House is trying to cut a deal with Argentina to import more Argentine. Argentine. Argentine beef to increase supply here in the United States. And farmers, ranchers, rather, on this front in the US Are like, okay, so we're importing Argentine beef now? Weren't the tariffs supposed to be about making sure that America is producing everything and on shoring this capacity? And ranchers were already hurting. The Biden administration had many flaws, but one of the strengths was Lina Khan and antitrust and Jonathan Kanter. And in late 2024, there was an article in Farm Aid talking about how the Biden administration had been fighting consolidation in the food systems, explaining here, our food system has become more consolidated and less competitive over the past several decades. This consolidation means just a few companies control most agricultural inputs like seeds and fertilizer, as well as how and where farmers can sell what they produce. This issue is particularly dire in the livestock industry, where four large meat packers, companies that slaughter, process, package, and distribute meat control over 80% of the beef market. This consolidation has led to lower prices paid to farmers and higher prices paid by consumers. While the farmer share of the price of beef has dropped by 14% over the last five years, the price of beef in the supermarket has increased. So do you see what's happening there? Because of the monopoly power, this consolidation allowed to rip off both farmers and consumers on that front.
- [07:28]
Unidentified Female Co-host
Because money bags gets the benefit.
- [07:30]
Emma Vigeland
Right. And with fewer meat packers, you know, bidding for the cattle here, that means that the ranchers with the cattle have less leverage. And the Biden administration was trying to correct that. Again, this is from 2024. President Biden has made it a priority to address competition issues. His executive order on promoting competition in the American economy included initiatives that empower USDA to stop abusive practices of meat processors and encouraged antitrust agents to focus efforts on agricultural markets in particular. Now, let's smash cut to today, or at least late August. Trump revokes Biden order targeting food system consolidation. President Donald Trump has revoked a Biden era executive order that tasked the U.S. department of Agriculture and FTC with curbing consolidation across the food system to improve fairness and competition for farmers and consumers. So that is the underlying systemic problem here, which is the consolidation of money and the monopoly power of these meat packers into J.D.
- [08:43]
Ellie Mistahl
Vance'S pocket.
- [08:44]
Mark McCarg
Oh, yeah, vested interest in consolidating farmland.
- [08:47]
Emma Vigeland
That's a great point. And so then you have the tariffs that has been absolutely devastating for farmers and ranchers. On top of that, bailing out Argentina to the tune of initially it was $20 billion, and then it was $40 billion because Trump's buddies are in bed with the psychotic anarcho capitalist libertarian. Definitely doesn't have sex with his sister, Javier Milei, down in Argentina. And their currency has been falling apart. And to protect the business interests of his friends, he's giving away billions and billions of dollars in taxpayer money to Argentina and then is screwing US Ranchers by importing beef from them. While he's Talking about America first, here is Nebraska Farm Bureau President Mark McCarg who is addressing and speaking out and saying, we're not too happy about this plan to import beef from Argentina.
- [10:05]
Mark McCarg
Hello, ag friends. Hopefully your fall is going well. You know, some days you feel like you just can't catch a break in agriculture, but the cattle sector is one of the real bright spots here in the industry and certainly in Nebraska, where we have a lot of mama cows. But unfortunately, we have an administration that thinks that they need to lower the price of beef. President Trump on Friday actually made a statement that said we should lower the price of beef and ultimately that's lowering the price of cattle. That's not something we need to do. I just want our members to know that Nebraska Farm Bureau is adamantly opposed to anything that would artificially lower the price of beef. We have worked hard to get our cattle market where it is. It's a supply and demand issue right now. But quite frankly, we need this bright spot here in Nebraska. So I have communicated with all of our federal delegation and let them know that we are opposed to any move that would artificially lower the price of beef cattle. They have worked that up to the leadership already today. And so stay tuned as we kind of follow this story. Hopefully we can get this tamped down. But just want to make sure that you know that I'm doing everything that I can as your president of Nebraska Farm Bureau and to ensure that our beef sector here in Nebraska, in the country continues to thrive. Until next time.
- [11:26]
Emma Vigeland
Dan Osborne, I would imagine, is already across this kind of thing, but thinking about his candidacy for Senate in 2026, leaning into this is important. And it's not just cattle ranch. It's not just cattle ranchers. It's not just the beef side of things. The soybean farmers are perhaps even more outraged by this because when I mentioned that bailout to Argentina a few days after he announced the initial $20 billion before upping it to $40 billion, Chinese importers ended up buying over a million metric tons of Argentine soybeans. And this was right as the harvest season in the United States began. And since, I think the middle of the year, China has not imported basically any zero soybeans from the United States.
- [12:27]
Unidentified Female Co-host
I think since like April, May.
- [12:29]
Emma Vigeland
Soybeans are 14% of all U.S. agricultural exports, and China is the biggest importer. So here is this Illinois soybean farmer speaking about this to CNN in a segment from a few days ago.
- [12:47]
John Baartman
John Baartman is a soybean farmer whose family has been working Illinois land since before the Civil War. Here in Marengo, a farming community where the land and sky feel endless, John sees a crisis on the horizon.
- [13:03]
Ellie Mistahl
So this is 4,134. That's roughly $40,000 worth of soybeans that we have harvested. And a couple years ago, that was easily $60,000. It's what we do in this country. We export food, and we can't do that right now.
- [13:24]
John Baartman
The price of soy dropped under the Trump administration, largely the result of the Trump administration's trade war with China. John's crops, diligently planted, meticulously cared for, are losing their Value. Are you angry?
- [13:37]
Ellie Mistahl
Oh, yeah. Oh, I'm totally mad. There's no reason for it. This is absolute stupidity. This is a man made crisis caused by Donald Trump, period.
- [13:46]
John Baartman
Soybeans are the largest agricultural export from the US last year the value was more than $24 billion. China bought 52% of those soybeans. Since May, the country has placed zero orders. Instead, China bought the bulk of its soybeans from South American countries like Brazil and Argentina.
- [14:07]
Emma Vigeland
And that Argentina piece is what I mentioned happening right after that bailout. So honestly, this is the kind of story that Democrats across the country, regardless even of ideology, can capitalize on here.
- [14:25]
Unidentified Female Co-host
Well, I mean it's, I'm from North Dakota, I mention it all the time. When I was growing up, North Dakota had two senators that were in the Democratic Party and one representative that was a Democrat. It was completely represented federally by Democrats. And it was entirely because farming requires central planning. It has for 100 plus years, and you should know that. And instead we've had people like Bill Clinton that have sort of loosened that sort of tight connection by orienting more towards the coast, more towards professionals. But fundamentally, as Kowalski mentioned, like farmers, they can be appealed to on the capitalist sort of line. But it's the government is the big show that requires, if you're gonna keep a small farm in existence, that requires government action.
- [15:18]
Emma Vigeland
And the reason Trump got elected in the first term in many ways is because he was so critical of, of the trade deals that had decimated farmers. I mean, you talk about Bill Clinton, that was an argument that Trump successfully made basically in 2016 in convincing the voters and farmers like this, ranchers like this, that he would be better on that. And now it's abundantly clear what he's doing. He's immiserating the industry and by the way, likely incentivizing further consolidation because the more farmers, the more ranchers, the more small businesses that fall by the wayside because they don't have the margins of these conglomerates, the more that that market share can get bought up by the donors to the Republicans and Trump's buddies. And speaking of Donald Trump, he was on Air Force One asked about this yesterday. Farmers are upset. The reporter asks and he says, don't worry, little girl, shut your mouth. Basically, question is, what do you have to say to us farmers who feel that the deal is benefiting Argentina more than it is them as they are?
- [16:29]
Sam Seder
Argentina is fighting for its life, young lady. You don't know anything about it. They're fighting for their life. Nothing is benefiting Argentina. They're fighting for their life. You understand what that means? They have no money, they have no anything. They're fighting so hard to survive. If I can help them survive in a few free world. I happen to like the president of Argentina. I think he's trying to do the best he can. But don't make it sound like they're doing great. They are dying. All right, they're dying.
- [16:56]
Ellie Mistahl
What do you mean by.
- [16:58]
Emma Vigeland
What do you mean make it sound like they're doing great? That's not the question. That's not the question. Mr. America first and we should ask why are they doing so poorly? This is from nine months ago. I cite this a lot because Milei went on stage with Elon Musk with a chainsaw and the implication was they're going to try to do what they did to Argentina. Here in the United States, this gutting of the administrative state and open corruption. On Monday, this is again from nine months ago, the National Statistics Agency announced that Argentina had exited the severe recession, blah, blah, blah, with GDP growing. But Malay's severe spending cuts have hit the poor hard. Statistics show that for the first half of this year, this is 2024. Almost 53% of Argentina's 45 million people were living in poverty, a two decade high, up from 41.7% in the second half of 2023. Some 18% of people were living in extreme poverty While more than 6 out of 10 of under 14s lived below the poverty line. So just to repeat that, that was over half of Argentina's 45 million people living in poverty, a two decade high, up 41.7% in the second half of 2023. That's why they're in trouble. Donald Trump it's because of right wing policies like yours, libertarian economics.
- [18:29]
Unidentified Female Co-host
And people might say like why is Argentina benefiting and not America? Neither is benefiting. This is not actually a nationalist issue. This is a class war that's being waged both on Americans and Argentinians. And the people that are benefiting in Argentina are not the manufacturing sector which is being destroyed. Employment is collapsing in Argentina. What's benefiting is extractive industries that are interested that foreign capitalists are interested in like commodities like beef or mining and that sort of thing. And so, and so this is not helping Argentina either, but we're, it's helping a certain class of capitalists that makes money with money and doesn't care about anything else that happens in any society.
- [19:20]
Emma Vigeland
And before we end it here, I just want to show how this is impacting the consumer a bit. I don't know if this chart is included in the archived article here from the Wall Street Journal. I put it in the Slack, the screenshot of it, which might be easier to use, but the Wall Street Journal last week had an article about the price changes for consumers in the United States. And coffee, it's okay, we don't need to put it up. Coffee just is exploding right now because of the tariffs. But ground beef continues to increase and increase and increase, in part because in terms of what we were importing, many of that, much of that was from Brazil. And Trump's trade war with Brazil is predicated on his personal anger towards the Brazilian government for and and their legal system for prosecuting Jairo Bolsonaro successfully and convicting him for trying to do a coup. Because, like, for, you know, there's rumors right now, and I don't know if this will end up being the case, but that Trump is considering pardoning P. Diddy. And people are saying, well, why would he do this? Why would he? And who knows if he will end up doing it? But just like, say, say he does, right?
- [20:45]
Unidentified Female Co-host
Elite sex criminal, right.
- [20:46]
Emma Vigeland
It's this, but it's the same thing here. Like, it's not about, he's not appealing to democracy. He's not appealing to the will of the people. He's doing this as a show of I am pro rapist. I am. No, these are my guys, the rapist.
- [21:03]
Unidentified Female Co-host
And it's to all of our.
- [21:04]
Emma Vigeland
The crooks. These are my guys. Millay. This is my guy. This is about getting his folks out of power and showing to the rest of his movement that you can operate with impunity.
- [21:19]
Unidentified Female Co-host
And it's to all of our detriment because places like Brazil are responding by just deepening their relationships with the people that we consider enemies, like China.
- [21:28]
Emma Vigeland
Yep. In a moment, we will be speaking with Elie Mistahl. But first, a word from our sponsors. Right now, the headlines are chock full of data breaches and regulatory rollbacks, making us all vulnerable on the Internet. But there is something that you can do about it. Delete Me is here to make it easy, quick, and safe to remove your personal data online. I've said this many times before I started using Delete me, before I even joined the show, before I even knew that they were a sponsor. When I started doing this job, I had to be a little bit diligent about my personal information being out there on the Internet, especially because I try to keep my private life private to that degree. And Delete Me was essential in allowing for me to do that. And it makes it easy because it catches things and then sends you a report so you know that it's constantly working for you. Deleteme does all the hard work of wiping you and your family's personal information from data broker websites. Deleteme knows that your privacy is worth protecting. Sign up and provide Deleteme with exactly what information you want deleted and and their experts take it from there. Deleteme sends you regular personalized privacy reports showing what info they found, where they found it and what they removed. Deleteme isn't just a one time service. DeleteMe is always working for you, constantly monitoring and removing the personal information that you do not want on the Internet. Thanks to Deleteme for sponsoring the Majority report and just doing good work for me over the past, I don't know, nine, 10 years that I've been doing this. Take control of your data and keep your private life private by signing up for Deleteme NOW at a special discount for our listeners. Get 20% off your delete me plan when you go to www.joindeleteme.com majority and use promo code Majority at checkout. The only way to get 20% off is to go to www.joindeleteme.com majority and and enter code majority at checkout. That's www.joindeleteme dot com majority code majority link down below in the video and episode Descriptions and at Majority FM. Again get 20% off your Delete Me plan when you go to www.joindeleteme.com Majority and use promo code Majority at checkout. And lastly a word from one of our favorite sponsors, Sunset Lake Sebede. I have the sign here. If you use the code left is best. You should know this by now but if you don't you get 20% off if you use the code left is best@sunsetlakesebede.com Sunset Lake is a great company with a great product. You not that crap you're getting at a head shop or anything like that. This is Sebadeh that has been third party tested. They use regenerative farming practices they use. They have a vertically integrated farm that helps them produce the best product. It's your one stop shop for all of your hemp and Sebadeh needs. They they provide testing paperwork with every order by the way so you know what you're getting. They have products that help you relax after a long day of work. You don't need to have a cocktail or if you're not interested in that. You can just have some comfort with Sebade. They've got gummies and tinctures to help with sleep, which I'm basically a nightly user of. They've got topicals for sore muscles. They've got lotion I've got right here on my desk, including the relaxed gummies, which I'll sometimes pop before my walk home. They even have products to help your pets relax. If your order is over $75, Sunset Lake Sabade can ship your order for free. And you can feel good about the products that you're purchasing. They have employee practices where they pay a living wage. They have participated with us in terms of fundraising for things like refugee resettlement, strike funds, more and more great causes. So it's the kind of company you can feel good about supporting and quality product, and you'll know exactly what's in it. Go to sunsetlakesebae.com and use the code leftisbest for 20% off. That's sunsetlake set.com use code left is best for 20% off. Quick break and when we come back, we'll be joined by Ellie Mustall. We are back. And we are joined by the great Ellie Mistahl, justice correspondent, columnist at the Nation, and Alfred Knobbler, fellow at the Type Media Center. Ellie, thanks so much for coming on the show.
- [27:00]
Ellie Mistahl
Hi. Thanks for having me. Sorry my dog is being annoying, so we're just gonna have to deal with.
- [27:05]
Emma Vigeland
It not being annoying to me. I would like to know a name and I would like to see a face.
- [27:10]
Ellie Mistahl
Oh, it's Cassandra. Like me, she sees the future, but nobody believes her.
- [27:16]
Emma Vigeland
Oh, so she's a left. So she's a leftist. It's about being right too early.
- [27:21]
Ellie Mistahl
Mm, that's right.
- [27:22]
Emma Vigeland
All right, well, good to know that she's a comrade. Well, we'll get right into it here, Ellie, because I'd covered this a few weeks ago prior to the oral arguments, but the oral arguments where last week the Supreme Court heard arguments in Louisiana versus Calais, which is basically centered around Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. But maybe let's just back up really quickly to speak about how the Supreme Court in recent years has already gutted the Voting Rights act to give us some context as to where we are with this case.
- [28:00]
Ellie Mistahl
Yeah. So, Emma, it really goes back to John Roberts. People need to understand that John Roberts has made his entire career to oppose the Voting Rights act and oppose the equality in voting. He's got his start as a Reagan lawyer arguing against the expansion of the Voting Rights act back in the 1980s. Now, he lost that fight because the Voting Rights act used to be a bipartisan issue. Even Republicans realized that they couldn't be so openly racist to the concept of a full and equal government. But then he became. Then he got onto the Supreme Court, and for the past 20 years, that this year is his 20th year as chief justice, he has been a consistent enemy of the Voting Rights act and has done everything in his power to take it down. This case last week is just the latest example of that. But there's a. But there's a long history here with Roberts and his opposition to black voting rights. I've argued that Roberts has been the biggest enemy to black people and their equality in this country since Chief Justice Roger Taney was who authored the Dred Scott decision and famously said that a black man has no rights the white man is bound to respect. Roberts is that guy updated from the modern age. People think, oh, it's Sam Alito, because Sam Alito is always running around with his flag hanging out of his pants or whatever. And I get that. And Roberts is a more genteel version of it. But make no mistake, Roberts is the guy in the matrix kind of tautology. He is the guy guarding every door and holding every key. Preventing black people from voting equally and fairly in this country.
- [29:43]
Emma Vigeland
And the previous attacks on the Voting Rights act are in many reasons why, are many ways why we are where we are today. Basically because it made it easier to undercut the law. When essentially the premise from the Supreme Court in previous cases, if you don't mind explaining this a bit, was just like, it's been enough time. Racism's kind of done. So it's been enough time. We don't need this anymore.
- [30:15]
Ellie Mistahl
Yeah. I argue that you can draw a direct line from John Roberts gutting the Voting Rights act in 2013 and Shelby County Beholder to the election of Donald Trump and our current eruption of white supremacist fashion. There is a linear progression from what Roberts did in 2013 to where we are now. And, Emma, you're exactly right. The core argument from Roberts and other conservatives has been racism has been solved, that we are beyond this, that we don't have to continue to worry about protecting black voting rights because white people are over their racism. And it fails. That argument fails every time. It never survives its first contact with reality. I like to. To think of it, I like to use the Ruth Bader Ginsburg phrase, that throwing out things like the Voting Rights act is like throwing away your umbrella in a rainstorm because you're not getting wet yet. Like, that's kind of what the conservatives want us to do, the Republicans want us to do, because these laws and these policies have been effective. They say that we don't need to use them anymore. And to get to the current case that came up directly in oral arguments in this voting rights that happened last week, where Brett Kavanaugh essentially argued that we don't need Section 2 of the Voting Rights act anymore because white people are over their racism, that there should be a sunset provision to the Voting Rights act, which was a wild thing for Brett Kavanaugh to say, because Congress passed the Voting Rights act and did not put in a sunset provision. They did not put in a time limit when they passed the 1965 Voting Rights Act. They do for other laws. There are laws that Congress passes with what's called a sunset provision, where they say after a certain amount of time, if it's not reauthorized, then this law lapse. Like that is a thing Congress does all the time. Not with the Voting Rights Act. So Brett Kavanaugh saying, like, well, there should be a sunset. Well, that's great that you think so, Brett, but nobody elected you to make that call, right? You're not in the legislative branch. You're in the judicial branch. You're supposed to follow the law, and this law has no sunset. But Brett Kavanaugh, like John Roberts before him, they always want to say that, oh, racism is over and so we don't have to be concerned about. About voting rights anymore. It is. It is. It is how conservatives win, it's how Republicans win. Because if you don't protect the Voting Rights act, if you don't protect the ability of black people to vote, there's no version of events where the Democratic Party wins. And that's hard for Democrats, I think, sometimes to get their minds around. But there's no version of events where the Democrats exist as a national party without robust support from black and brown individuals.
- [33:09]
Emma Vigeland
And the estimates about if they rule to overturn section 2 of the Voting Rights act, in this case, about the amount of seats that Republicans could add, essentially eliminating Democratic representation in Southern states. It's up to 19 that they could add.
- [33:27]
Ellie Mistahl
So to get into the specifics of the case, the case involves a Louisiana congressional map that had. That was initially made with five majority white districts and one majority minority district. Now, that makes no mathematical sense. Louisiana is 56% white, not 83% white. In fact, Louisiana is 30% black. So, again, simple math would tell you, if you have third of the population, you should probably have a third of the congressional districts, which means you should have two majority minority districts, not just one. So a court under the Voting Rights act ordered Louisiana to draw a second map with two majority minority districts. They did so, and that is the map that got challenged and is up at the Supreme Court right now. Because white folks, white voters in Louisiana argued that the second majority minority district violated their constitutional rights to equal protection. White people in Louisiana are literally arguing that they have a constitutional right to be overrepresented in Congress, to have more representation than their population would allow as a constitutional principle. And that's the case that went up to the Supreme Court. Specifically, what stopped Louisiana's initial racist map was section 2 of the Voting Rights act, which critically does not look at intent. Right. Other sections of the law, other sections of the act, you have to prove, you know, that somebody intended try to be racist. Section two does not. Section two looks only at outcomes. So Louisiana can run around and say, I don't have a racist bone in my body and I have lots of black friends or whatever they want to say. It doesn't matter. If. If the outcome of your map is racist, then Section 2 of the Voting Rights act is allowed to operate. And that core is what the Republicans want to take away. They want to change the analysis so that you have to show intent to be racist in order for the Voting Rights act to operate. And obviously, Emma, I mean, I don't think I'm seeking out a school here to say that for the most part, white people don't admit to being racist. They don't confess to being. There's always some other reason that they're doing these racist things. Right. And so you're never gonna get that kind of proof, that kind of. As Janae Nelson, who argued the case for the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, put it, you're never gonna get that confession or admission of racism. They're always gonna say, oh, we had some other reason.
- [36:07]
Emma Vigeland
I mean, this. I'm often bringing up the genocide in Gaza just when I can. But, like, it reminds me of the argument, it can't be a genocide because they didn't write I am committing genocide on some sort of paper. Like, they're not gonna admit that. I mean, this is part of how it works, at least in terms of, like, what's been written down. Which is also why, I mean, I want to continue to stay on this case, but just emphasizing how impactful Shelby is, you know, that that case from 2013 which destroyed Section 4 of the Voting Rights act, which required basically pre clearance from these Southern states from the federal government. When they were creating their congressional maps. It almost appears like they decided that case so that they could do what they're doing now. This like, ad hoc determination. Because as you write in your piece, their arguments, if they rule the way they're indicating in their oral arguments, it is completely contradictory to their own precedent in the 2023 case Allen vs. Michigan, where they sided the right way against a racist Alabama map. I don't understand how you can side with these white plaintiffs who are arguing basically reverse racism in Louisiana and have cited in the exact opposite way in Allen v. Milligan. Because it's, the facts are almost identical here.
- [37:35]
Ellie Mistahl
The cases are almost a carbon copy of each other. But what's different is the lawyering. And you know, people have said at the time when Alan v. Milligan came out, because it was a decision that upheld the Voting Rights act and upheld forcing Alabama to create a majority minority district, which was surprising from these conservatives, Roberts and Kavanaugh joining the liberals to uphold the Voting Rights Act. That's again, that is unusual for these guys. So why was it, well, Alabama lawyer, their case, I think particularly that, as I said, Roberts likes to pretend that racism doesn't exist unless people show up in his courtroom and are like, I'm doing some racism today. Right? Like, then Roberts is like, well, you're admit, like, and so this idea of like, do white people have to confess to being racist? In Alan v. Milligan, they kind of were right. They got as close as you possibly come to a confession of racism the way they argued. And lawyer, their case was not that, oh, Alabama is in compliance with the Voting Rights Act. They said, oh, we don't have to be in compliance with the Voting Rights act because the Voting Rights act is stupid. And that, I think was the bridge too far for Roberts and Kavanaugh. Right. In the Louisiana case, Louisiana is saying, no, no, no, we're still complying with the Voting Rights act even if we only have one majority minority district. For reasons. They're terrible reasons. They're bad faith reasons. They're, they're, they're incredible reasons, but they're giving reasons why they can still be seen in compliance with the Voting Rights Act. They're saying, we're not trying to be racist. The lawyer representing Louisiana literally said, and this honestly made me laugh out loud before I started crying, Louisiana would have drawn the exact same map in the exact same way even if the races were reversed. Right that their goal was to discriminate against Democratic voters, not discriminate against black voters. That argument is another Roberts special that comes to us from John Roberts in a 2019 case now called Rucho B. Common Cause, where Roberts said that political gerrymandering was okay, that as long as you're only discriminating to protect Republican incumbents, you're good. Right. And so Louisiana is saying we were only trying to protect Republican incumbents. But here's the thing, Emma, again, we have math here on our side to like, understand things better, right? And the math says in Louisiana in particular, but generally across the south, that white voters, white Democratic voters won't vote for a black candidate even if it's in the same party. Right. The numbers say that white Democrats in the south would rather vote for a white Republican than a black Democrat. That is a statistical reality.
- [40:36]
Unidentified Female Co-host
Right.
- [40:37]
Ellie Mistahl
So if you are going to have black representation in Congress, you. You literally kind of need majority minority districts because white people won't do anything better. Like white people won't go for it, even if you're talking about a person of color from their own party. That's the reality here that the Voting Rights act is trying to. Again, correct. And that's the reality that Robertson Kavanaugh won't let. Won't let happen.
- [41:03]
Emma Vigeland
Well, I mean, it's also just so pathetic to have an argument which is basically, trust me, bro, being enough to flatter the, you know, the Chief justice of the Supreme Court to get him to do what he already wanted to do. It's just there's no evidence to support this claim. I'm not even. Can you give me some insight into what the legal arguments are that would support their, Trust me, bro, it's not racist thing.
- [41:40]
Ellie Mistahl
It's their own testimony they're promising you.
- [41:43]
Emma Vigeland
But that's it. That's all they're providing to the court to support their claim.
- [41:49]
Ellie Mistahl
Roberts is saying that's all they need. Right? Like Roberts is saying that's all they need. Roberts is saying that you can, if you can show that you are trying to discriminate against Democrats and not discriminate against white against black people. By the way that they drew their map by the initial 51 map that was just protecting Republicans. Whereas when you draw the two majority minority district map, I mean, people are. This came up a lot with Alito because he was saying, well, the districts are not compact, right. That we want districts that are close together. To get your 2 majority minority district, you have to kind of split Louisiana kind of down the center, you have to kind of diagonally go across the state. There's like a black belt in Louisiana where black people live. So you make two districts in a kind of diagonal line. That's how you do it. And that doesn't look pretty to Sam Alito. I mean, that's, I mean, his argument was that it was make. No, you know, who cares the fact that the white districts are also all oddly shaped and weird. No, no, no, we don't care about that. We only care about the fact that the black districts look weird to Sam. And that's apparently enough to kill the Voting Rights Act. And again, as you've brought up a couple of times, if they rule this way, that immediately flips one seat from Democrats, Republican. Right. Like if you go back to the 5:1 map, that's taking one black seat out of Congress and putting it back in the white corner, and most likely that's going to be a white Republican who wins that seat. Right. Some analysts have said that if states can gerrymander fast enough after they release this decision, and we don't know when they'll release this decision, but if they, they're certainly going to release it before the midterms. And if states can move fast enough, some analysts say that as many as 19 seats across the south could be in jeopardy.
- [43:39]
Mark McCarg
Right.
- [43:40]
Ellie Mistahl
I mean, you're talking, you're talking about majority minority districts. You're talking basically about the Congressional Black Caucus. And this case kills it. I mean, like, it's, it's designed to kill the ability of black people to be represented in Congress. And that has huge implications on the upcoming midterms. So in, in, into their legal strategy here. People need to understand the political strategy from the Republicans on the Supreme Court because let's be fair, they are politicians in robes. They are Republicans on the Supreme Court. There's a direct electoral strategy here. All of this talk that we have about gerrymandering and Republicans trying to protect themselves in the midterms, this case, this one case can flip the whole thing.
- [44:23]
Emma Vigeland
So in theory, does this give, say California passes the prop. Which I'm forgetting the exact. Is it 80. Prop 80 in. In the ballot referendum in the measure, does that in theory give them the ability to eliminate Republican districts from their maps?
- [44:45]
Ellie Mistahl
California is already trying that.
- [44:46]
Mark McCarg
Right.
- [44:46]
Ellie Mistahl
Like you don't need this case to do that. That's under again, the 1990, the 2019 Rucho v. Common Cause decision. California, according to Roberts, is allowed to gerrymander its state as much as it wants to, to discriminate Against Repub tripping up. California is its own 50.
- [45:05]
Emma Vigeland
50. I just want to correct myself, thank you.
- [45:08]
Ellie Mistahl
Is its own state law processes. That's why you have a voter referendum, because you need to change the state law. In New York, where I live, and I looked into this, like, pretty hard. You kind of can't change New York state law, and certainly not in time for the 2026 midterms. There's a chance. There's a possibility that you could change in time for 2028, but. Because. And, but that's not a Supreme Court issue. That's a function of New York state law and New York Constitution. One of the problems, and I think I've talked about this on the show before, one of the problems that we have is that we don't have one federal electoral system. We've got 50. Each state is generally allowed to do its own thing, and it becomes a race to the bottom right. When Texas decides to drop their drawers and show their ass, that almost forces Illinois to do the same thing, which then requires Tennessee and Florida to do something stupid, which then makes Californ, California also go to the bottom. And then New York is trying to catch up like it's. It's a race to the bottom. Because if political gerrymandering is the rule of the day, then if you are in charge of a state House, you are stupid. You are committing political non practice, you are hurting the country if you don't gerrymander your state as much as possible, using whatever means, to quote Louis Gossett Jr. Fair or unfair, to get what you want. Right. Like, that's. Yeah, that's where we're going.
- [46:41]
Emma Vigeland
Well, I mean, what's the. What the Voting Rights act was necessary but insufficient even in what we're talking about here. Like, there should have been, frankly, an effort by Democrats to say this is where we build off of things like the Voting Rights act, or at the very least, try to codify something stronger. Because without some movement towards, like, a standardized process of, say, proportional representation, this kind of game is gonna continue to get played. And we know that they have money, they have capital, and they've got the white supremacists on their side.
- [47:21]
Ellie Mistahl
Yeah, it's. Look, the Democrats tried to restore the Voting Rights act in 2021 after both of these decisions that we keep talking about, Shelby county and the Ruch decision. They tried that bill. You know that. That first Senate bill was scuttled by Manchin and Cinema. It was scuttled by Manchin and Cinema, and it was scuttled by the Democrats own refusal to break the filibuster. But they tried, arguably. Look, I don't know what else you could have done to Mansion. I don't know what else you could have done to Cinema. I would, I would have kidnapped their dogs. I mean like I would have, I would have gone the full monty to get them on board.
- [48:00]
Unidentified Female Co-host
But I don't.
- [48:00]
Ellie Mistahl
You know, they, they voted against it. Mansion and cinema would not let us restore the Voting Rights act when we had a t chance in 2021. And now this is a time of consequences. Now we are living with that failure, that inaction. And this is what you get. The Republicans understand. Look, I always say that it's an electoral strategy but, but understand the brass tax here. Republicans understand that if everybody who wants to vote can vote and has their vote counted, Republicans can't win. Republicans understand that they are the unpopular party, that they are the minority party, that they, that they can't achieve their goals through free and fair elections. And so their response to that is almost rational self interest to do everything they can to sully and muddy elections. The problem is that Democrats don't seem to have the same focus like they, they don't seem to have the same focus on protecting voting rights when they have the chance, knowing full well the Republicans are going to do everything they can to take away voting rights when they have the chance. And that is the asymmetry in the battle we're fighting. Democrats understand is in their political advantage if everybody votes. It's in their political advantage to have high turnouts, but they don't do the things that we need to do in order to have everybody voting and to have high turnouts. Like that's the, that's the problem. That's the core of the problem here and I don't see it getting solved anytime soon.
- [49:37]
Emma Vigeland
Lastly, before we let you go, Ellie, can I ask you about two cases separately from this that I just want people to keep their eye on. The.
- [49:47]
Ellie Mistahl
There's a good chance I read them.
- [49:51]
Emma Vigeland
On how many versus the verse us about that that's the gun case and then surrounding. I think really it was like the Hunter Biden usage of the drug charge to prosecute him and then Charles V. Salazar on the legality of conversion therapy which is immensely important for LGBTQ kids across this country.
- [50:15]
Ellie Mistahl
Yeah. So I'm a little bit of a contrarian on the guns case. I think it's a trap. I, I think it's a, it's a trap for the left because the, the at issue is Whether or not having a federal conviction for marijuana use is enough for somebody to take away your gun rights, this is how it can. This is how it gets wrapped up in Hunter Biden, because he's. Hunter Biden was a drug user and he had a gun and he was convicted. Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, Right? And so the left progressives generally are like, well, no, the hypocrisy here can't be allowed. Right. Like, if you can have a gun when you do other things, then surely you can have a gun if all you've done is smoke some weed, if all you've done is taken some as a habitual drug user, we shouldn't take guns away from people for habitual drug use. And the reason why it's a trap is that to get there, what the Supreme Court is going to do is expand gun rights even further and potentially say that being convicted of a federal crime is not enough for them to take away your guns, which is terrible. Which is not something that we should want. We should want people who have been convicted of federal crimes to not be able to have firearms. That's just intelligence. Right? That's just smart, right?
- [51:35]
Emma Vigeland
Well, you just hate freedom. You just hate freedom.
- [51:38]
Ellie Mistahl
The way to solve the Hunter Biden issue, the way to solve the marijuana use issue is to stop criminalizing habitual drug use, right?
- [51:46]
Emma Vigeland
Yeah.
- [51:47]
Ellie Mistahl
Smoking weed should not be a federal crime, and therefore, the people who smoke weed shouldn't have their guns taken away because they shouldn't have been convicted from a crime to begin with. But we can't fall into the trap of saying like, and therefore people who are federal criminals shouldn't have. Shouldn't have their gun rights taken away. No, no, no. Those were the first. People should have their gun rights taken away. Right. Like the focus on the criminalization of drugs, as opposed to how that's being played out in this particular marijuana case. So that's the gun case. And then really quickly, on Charles v. Salazar. Look, the Republicans have been trying to stamp out the LGBTQ community for at least 20 years, at least since Roberts came on the court, most likely very much longer. And this is the latest example of it. It is a case where their practice, where Colorado has a ban on conversion therapy, and a white Christian lady who wants to practice conversion therapy objected to the ban, saying that it violated her free speec rights. This is a credible argument. Right. We want therapists to be able to say what they want to say. The problem is that she's a licensed medical professional, and for the licensing to have any value. It is so that we know that when we go to a licensed professional, we are getting the license medically agreed on consensus therapies, not random Christian crazy fascist therapies. Right. And that should be the distinction here. And that's what the court is going to ignore. And let her preach convulsive therapy and bully gay kids and it will literally, their decision will lead to more gay suicides.
- [53:23]
Emma Vigeland
I mean, it's also, it's insane because these states have, this is, this should be 100% within the state's jurisdiction to ban this kind of thing. I don't know what the precedent would be that they're going to use eventually, as you say, to likely allow for this kind of abuse to happen. Like how they, how they're going to just justify infringing on states rights here to make, to litigate that or to draw legislation to combat this. It reminds me of Jordan Peterson complaining all the time about how he's been like canceled because he had to do some sensitivity training because he was advocating for like deeply anti trans abusive forms of therapy.
- [54:06]
Unidentified Female Co-host
He's calling doctors butchers.
- [54:08]
Emma Vigeland
Yeah. Talking trans affirming doctors butchers. Like that is, is that you should not be able to do, to say that kind of thing to a patient.
- [54:16]
Ellie Mistahl
That's if you want to practice conversion therapy, strap yourself to a sandwich board and go to the nearest street corner and do your business. Right. Like nobody is stopping you from doing that. Nobody's stopping a priest from telling some kid praying away, like whatever you want to do, that's fine. We're talking about licensed medical professionals here. And just like a licensed doctor is not allowed to tell me to, I don't know, take bleach to deal with COVID That's on a licensed medical practice.
- [54:43]
Mark McCarg
Right.
- [54:44]
Ellie Mistahl
When you, when you were licensed by a state, you were supposed to follow some basic form of standards. Conversion therapy has been shown to be bunk quack science. It's not science. It is just bullying. It is a form of child abuse and you shouldn't be allowed to practice that while under the imprint the imprimatur of expertise from a state licensing board.
- [55:07]
Emma Vigeland
Ellie Mostall, thank you so much for your time today. Always appreciate your insights. Justice correspondent and columnist at the Nation. You can check out his work there. It's great stuff. Thanks so much for your time today.
- [55:20]
Ellie Mistahl
Thank you so much for having me.
- [55:21]
Emma Vigeland
Of course. All right folks, with that we're going to wrap up the free part of this program, head into the fun part of the program where I believe we will take your calls today. If the computer is working the phone.
- [55:36]
Ellie Mistahl
I think it is.
- [55:37]
Unidentified Female Co-host
Well, knock on wood.
- [55:38]
Emma Vigeland
Toot, toot, toot. And we will, we will see. Yeah, I think I mispronounced it. It's more like Sam's potty humor is rubbing off on me, I guess. Matt, what's happening on Left Reckoning?
- [55:57]
Ellie Mistahl
As a guy who is focusing so much of my effort on ending human suffering on the planet Earth, that's what.
- [56:04]
Unidentified Female Co-host
We'Re focused on over at Left Reckoning tonight.
- [56:07]
Emma Vigeland
We're doing that self aggrandizing there.
- [56:09]
Unidentified Female Co-host
Exactly. I mean look, all human suffering. I don't know why you keep wanting to talk about Israel. I'm trying to talk about human suffering over here. One of my favorite writers slash podcast personalities, Dan o' Sullivan, who is on this show to talk about his, his program, the Outfit is going to be joining Left Reckoning tonight. We talk about Al Capone and the Outfit, which I'm interested in because it features prominently in the new Thomas Pynchon novel the Shadow Ticket. Also we get into Cuba and its relationship to organized crime, including potentially a little bit about the JFK assassination. And we also talked about the Kray twins for the Brits in the audience. So really Fun show tonight. Patreon.com left reckonings on YouTube at 7 o' clock Eastern Time time.
- [56:54]
Emma Vigeland
Awesome. All right, folks, as a reminder, this show relies on your support. Keeps us independent, keeps us alive in an era where there's a lot of precarity in media and the Trump administration says anybody that criticizes capitalism is a domestic terrorist essentially.
- [57:12]
Ellie Mistahl
So that is not Kentucky Fried French Fries.
- [57:16]
Emma Vigeland
French fries. We would love if you could become a member then you could IM the show and sometimes we'll read your IMs. I mean we read them sometimes we get a lot and we can't read all of them. But please become a member if you can join themjorityreport.com and I almost forgot. Thankfully I didn't. We've got emmajority report shirts. Can we pull up the merch store shop? Majority Reportradio.com I think that's it. Yes. Good. I should know that. Limited edition A Majority Report shirts. The one in blue is still up. We're going to get maybe another color shortly. Limited edition plus the gray hats. The M Majority Report shirts and hats are up. You can I believe it's through November 3rd. You can order these. I'm going to double check right here. Yeah, limited run orders begin. Will begin shipping a little bit before Thanksgiving but through Monday, November 3rd. You can get the Majority Report or a Majority Report shirts, limited edition.
- [58:34]
Unidentified Female Co-host
So there's a lot of beanie selection, too, for our folks who have some sort of pathology about not letting the top of their head be shown.
- [58:41]
Emma Vigeland
We got West Virginia, for instance. We got Whoopsie. That's a. That's a favorite of everybody's. We've got the old school Majority Report radio logo, the Max Left T shirt, the Max Left hats, and of course, the good old trusty mugs.
- [58:56]
Unidentified Female Co-host
Got a lot of a huge product line. Got some skus over here, Q playing.
- [59:04]
Emma Vigeland
The game called capitalism. All right, guys, see you in the fun half second. Okay?
- [59:16]
Ellie Mistahl
Emma, please.
- [59:16]
Emma Vigeland
Well, I just. I feel that my voice is sorely lacking on the Majority Report.
- [59:21]
Ellie Mistahl
Wait, look, Sam is unpopular.
- [59:23]
Unidentified Male Co-host
I do deserve a vacation at Disney World, so. Ladies and gentlemen, it is my pleasure to welcome Emma to the show.
- [59:29]
Emma Vigeland
It is Thursday.
- [59:31]
Unidentified Female Co-host
I think you need to take over for Sam.
- [59:33]
Unidentified Male Co-host
Yes, please, sir.
- [59:34]
Ellie Mistahl
I'm.
- [59:34]
Emma Vigeland
I'm.
- [59:35]
Unidentified Male Co-host
I'm going to pause you right there.
- [59:36]
Sam Seder
Wait, what?
- [59:37]
Unidentified Male Co-host
I can't encourage Emma to live like this.
- [59:40]
Ellie Mistahl
And I'll tell you why.
- [59:41]
Unidentified Male Co-host
Someone's offered a tour. Sushi and poker with the boys. Tour, sushi and poker with the boys. Who was offered a tour? Yeah, Sushi and poker with the boys.
- [59:52]
Ellie Mistahl
What?
- [59:52]
Unidentified Male Co-host
Tour, sushi and poker.
- [59:54]
Emma Vigeland
Tim's upset.
- [59:55]
Unidentified Male Co-host
Twerk, sushi and poker with two boys. He was offered with twerk sushi and that's what we called biz Joy. Twerk, sushi and poker with two boys.
- [60:05]
Emma Vigeland
Right.
- [60:06]
Unidentified Male Co-host
Twerk sushi and we're gonna get demonetized. I just think that what you did to Tim Pool was mean.
- [60:13]
Emma Vigeland
Free speech.
- [60:14]
Unidentified Male Co-host
That's not what we're about here. Look at how sad he's become now. You shouldn't even talk about it. I think you're responsible.
- [60:21]
Emma Vigeland
I probably am in a certain way. But let's get to the meltdown here.
- [60:25]
Unidentified Male Co-host
Sushi and poker with the boys.
- [60:28]
Ellie Mistahl
Oh, my God. Wow.
- [60:29]
Unidentified Male Co-host
Sushi.
- [60:29]
Ellie Mistahl
I'm sorry.
- [60:30]
Unidentified Male Co-host
I'm losing my mind. Someone's offered a tour. Sushi and poker with boys. Logic. Tour, sushi and poker with boys. I think I'm like a little kid. I think I'm like a little kid. Think I'm like a kid.
- [60:42]
Unidentified Female Co-host
Tour.
- [60:42]
Unidentified Male Co-host
I think I'm like a little kid. I think I'm like a little kid. Add this debate 7,000 times.
- [60:46]
Unidentified Female Co-host
A little kid.
- [60:47]
Unidentified Male Co-host
Think I'm like a little kid. Think I'm like a dick. I'm losing my mind.
- [60:51]
Emma Vigeland
Some people just don't understand.
- [60:52]
Unidentified Male Co-host
I'm not trying to be a dick right now, but, like, I absolutely think the US should be providing me with a wife and kids.
- [61:00]
Emma Vigeland
That's not what we're talking about here.
- [61:05]
Unidentified Male Co-host
It's not a fun job. That's a real thing. That's a real thing. Real thing. Willie Walker. That's a real thing. That's a real thing. That's a real thing. That's a real thing. Real thing. That's a real thing. That's offered at work. Ladies and gentlemen, Joe Rogan has done it again. That's a real thing.
- [61:26]
Ellie Mistahl
I think he might be blowing it out of proportion.
- [61:27]
Unidentified Male Co-host
Real thing. That's got offered. That's a real thing.
- [61:32]
Ellie Mistahl
Let's go, Joey.
- [61:34]
Unidentified Male Co-host
Sushi and poker. Take it easy. Sushi and poker. Things have really gotten out of hand. Sushi and poker with the boys. Sushi. You don't have a clue as to what. What's going on live YouTube.
- [61:48]
Emma Vigeland
Sam has, like, the weight of the world on his shoulders. Sam doesn't want to do this show anymore.
- [61:53]
Ellie Mistahl
Anymore.
- [61:54]
Emma Vigeland
It was so much easier when the majority report was just you.
- [61:59]
Unidentified Male Co-host
Let's change the subject. Rangers and Nicks are doing great now.
- [62:03]
Unidentified Female Co-host
Shut up.
- [62:03]
Emma Vigeland
Don't want people saying reckless things on your program.
- [62:06]
Sam Seder
That's one of the most difficult parts about this show.
- [62:08]
Emma Vigeland
This is the pro Killing podcast.
- [62:10]
Unidentified Male Co-host
I'm thinking maybe it's time to bury.
- [62:12]
Emma Vigeland
The the hatchet left his best trump.
- [62:14]
Unidentified Male Co-host
Violet Twerk. Don't be foolish and don't tweet at me.
- [62:17]
Ellie Mistahl
And don't the way Emma has cucked all of these people. Love it.
- [62:21]
Emma Vigeland
That's where my heart is. So I wrote my honors thesis about it.
- [62:26]
Ellie Mistahl
She wrote an honest thesis. I guess I should hand the main mic to you now.
- [62:32]
Unidentified Male Co-host
You are to the right of the uniform policy.
- [62:34]
Emma Vigeland
We already found Israel.
- [62:35]
Ellie Mistahl
Dude.
- [62:35]
Emma Vigeland
Are you against us?
- [62:37]
Unidentified Male Co-host
That's a tougher question.
- [62:37]
Mark McCarg
I haven't ever.
- [62:43]
Ellie Mistahl
Incredible theme song.
- [62:45]
Emma Vigeland
Hi, bumbler.
- [62:45]
Sam Seder
Emma Viglin.
- [62:46]
Ellie Mistahl
Absolutely one of my favorite people, actually. Not just in the game, like, period.