06-03-26 Part One - Adios Scott Pelley

Click on the banner and the mid-reve bonus for the fourth time program of the Reve App, self-to-match winner.

Winner of your mid-tadueel with Bo, the strongest Reve Torvath all time.

“And you have to follow your name with your fan coupon, like the Chance of Attractive sacht price. So let's start now with your fan bonus in the Reve App, just at the mid-tadueel 2017.”

Now it's Red Eye Radio, Gary McNamara, and Eric Hurley talk about everything from other text-to-social issues and news of the day. Whether you're up late or you're just starting your day, welcome to the show from the Relief Factor studios. This is Red Eye Radio.

All across America, we are Red Eye Radio. He is Eric Hurley and I'm Gary McNamara. Hi, hello!

All right, just looking at real quick here. What do you got? Again, the final results of California for the primary might not come in until early in November, but right now with 53% of the vote in, Steve Hilton with the lead for California governor, 26.8% of your Bashara, 25.8% and Tom Styer, 19.7% for LA Mayor, Bass Leads, 36.6% Prat 29.8% and Ron and 20.5% so yeah. A lot of people making, you know, you see making a big deal.

Bass can't even get 50%. She can't get 50%. That means the majority wants somebody else in there. And the same going on in California, and it's like, you've got to look at it, you know, you look at Steve Hilton that is 26.8% and you take the amount that Bashara and Styer have, and you look at it and you say, can he reach 50% in a general election, but that's the problem that Steve Hilton has. Right. And the same thing for, for Prat, it can he go head to head.

For example, the, the, the, the, in third place, ramen is a complete, you know, leftist nut case.

You think any of them are going to vote for Prat? You know, so again, you never know. I mean,

it's, it's still here. And, you know, just to have just to have Republicans in the race in the final two will be big. But again, 53% in a 51% I don't know. And I don't think anybody knows what Prat sings haven't been counted. And what's which Prat sings will go, you know, majorly Democrat or majorly, you know, Republican for that case. The majority of the district would be Democrat. So still a long way to go in that and who knows. Yeah, you know, it's, um, it's, it's, it's off in the case, uh, when, uh, what's his name, uh,

ran for governor and, um, in New York, and he did, uh, young, right? Was it, yes, yeah. >> No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, I can see it's face and I go like me too.

“>> No, I can see his name, but he, you know, we were saying, look, that's a great showing, right?”

So, the GOP doesn't win in blue states and blue cities and blue areas, but they make a great showing. What does that tell you? Is there, I don't believe there's going to be a turnaround in terms of them actually winning. And a big way, California going red is not going to happen unless you're talking communist. If you're talking that kind of red, then the red wave already happened, but it's, I don't see it happening in my lifetime. Now, God willing, I have a long life like my father and years from now, so because I see you're wrong, it happened and I'd be happy to be wrong.

But I don't think it's going to happen, but then it starts, you know, it gets back to, you know, somebody said this, I was listening to some comedy the other day and it was from back in the day.

“Did you listen to planners campaigns? Yes, yeah. And some of the defense, all the defense of him and everything else, yeah, how'd you know?”

Exactly what I was listening to. And he was watching what Pete Colberg interviewed Joe Biden and then all of a sudden Joe Biden steps in, it was that kind of comedy. No, I was listening to the comedy channel, we'll get to that later. I was listening to a comedy channel and I'm listening to a comedian talk about gay marriage.

This is how far back it goes. Remember, it was on the ballot twice and defeated twice and defeated twice in California.

And she mentioned another state. It was Kathleen Madigan at the comedian. I love her. She's great. She's not on the right, clearly not on the right, but she's very funny. And and and she, there was some like Midwestern state where the voters had approved it before California, I forget what which state it was that she was talking about. But I thought to myself, you know, that's you and I've seen that. We've seen it where the voters go on the ballot issues. On whatever prop is up there, all of a sudden they go, they'd lean right.

And then, you know, but on the big stuff on people, they're going full on left.

And that's the way we brought that up just about 10 days. Yeah. Well, we'll look back at 2020 we weren't sure it was was 2020 when there were three different, you know, referendums on there or three or four that that the the population of California. You know, look at you and I looked at it. I mean affirmative action. Remember they they said no to affirmative action in California. Yeah, and it's just like whoa and and so you you look and that's again, this is what we have said this is the frustrating part for us.

Lee Zeldin, by the way, Lee Zeldin, I could see this when you when you take the when you take the personalities out of it and just ask people where they stand on the issues.

Right. Maybe I'm exaggerating a couple of points, but I don't think I am.

The Republicans should be winning every race with no issues. 65 to 35. Yeah. I was going to go 70 30 and I'm like, okay, that might be going too far, but on the major issues. Okay, I'll say 60 40.

“All right. Okay. To be safe. I'll see 60 40. I think that's a good. That's fair and balance. Good.”

On on the actual issues that you take the personalities out of it, which we have stated over and over again for God's sakes for Republicans. We had damn learn how to communicate. Well, remember when after Obama was done and Trump was in office, Trump was saying this deal with a ran that Obama made shouldn't have been Obama making the deal with a ran. It should have been Congress making the deal with a ran. Congress the representatives of the people should have some say so in this. So they did the poll.

Should the people's representatives have a say so and a deal like the deal with a ran. Yes, should Trump undo the deal with a ran that Obama put into place and send it to Congress. No, that actually happened. I know. Now, I don't remember if it was the same pollster or even in the same poll could have been the same pollster and different poll.

“But they were close. It was within days. I think it was the same pollster. I'm not sure if it was the same poll that they took.”

But that's exactly what happens over and over again. When you take the person, which, you know, gets back to my, my whole point in California. In other areas, you know, you, not all the blue areas. Some of the areas are the Davis of blue and you lived in one important one. We could love our listeners, a KXL. We love you. We do. And, but man, you know, you get into central Portland as you've always mentioned, you know, full on communist, but the further out you get an Oregon. It's, it's more and more conservative. I think it said anarchist.

Yeah.

“Well, I think now you know, I think you know where I'm going here. We need to throw in Nazis.”

Well, right, we got it. I'm going to have to reevaluate my Portland map angry Nazis angry Nazis because you know, because you can't have nice Nazis, right, because the justification is, well, he's a Nazi, but he's an angry. He did it because he was angry, and if you're angry, it's okay to be a Nazi. Right. You know, I remember I'm old enough to remember 1993, 1994, 1993. Remember, remember, remember, I remember the Democrats, the angry white male, the problem is the angry white male, and now Democrats are, well, if you're an angry white male, and you get a Nazi tattoo and you believe in a ton of Nazi communist stuff, that's okay, because you were an angry white man.

Because it's interesting to yesterday watching some of the politicians, you know, on on on on on the left, you know, try to spin their way out of the whole platinum thing.

Well, it's, you know, they, and she just, she just came out with support, but then again, Schumer has to because they want him gone, so Schumer has to go as far left as possible. Right. He has to, she wants to show the lives. Yes, exactly. He's going to, he's going to have to, you know, whatever flag the far left is carrying, he's going to have to take it and run with it.

“You know, he's, he's known for taking the burger off the grill way too soon, but here's the thing is, is that, you know, it's clear to me.”

I thought about this yesterday too. It's, it appears. They've got some internals within the party. And that the fallout from platinum is affecting the rest of the party. I don't, I just don't have any doubt about that.

And we may learn that at some point. Well, Harry, I was talking about it yesterday. I'll get to a final audio. Okay. Well, then that's, and I didn't see that. And, but it makes sense that their internals are showing that it cannot because it, because we, you and I've been doing this long enough to know that when it seems like the talking points change, especially on something like that, where they go from defending a Nazi to no end to all of a sudden going, oh, no, he's a problem.

And when that happens, it's almost always because their internals are showing this is not going to end well.

And let's say he did win November 3rd. It's not going to go well from there. And we can't carry, we don't want that baggage. Look, this is what was going on. I mean, you go back to Swallow.

You know, Swallow's well that ends well. Well, he's, here's the problem with him.

“Is that he was creepy? I mean, they, what they call him?”

The king of snapchat on Capitol Hill was like his nickname. They knew they knew all along. But when it started to become public, that's when it's a problem. They knew about Joe Biden all along. But you have one horrific debate performance.

And then everybody is pretty much to the point that, well, we can't deny it now. And now with Platner, it seems their internals are coming back at them and everything else is coming, you know, to the surface here. They're wondering at MS now. Is this over? Are we going to hear more and more things?

What's going to happen between now and November? What are we going to learn between now and November? And, and that's clear. Well, but it's good that Jill Biden Jill has come out and just, you know, really straighten and clarify everything. Oh, my God.

“I have to ask the question, who's going to buy the book?”

Because Democrats hate her. Republicans don't, you don't like her. In dependence, I don't, who's going to sit there, I need to get Jill Biden's book. Well, you know, what's funny is this, in this little, very awkward thing that happened when they're, when they're in this, they were in a theater somewhere, and they were doing this live interview.

I'm guessing they were streaming that, right? And so Jill is there. She's been interviewed by Whippy Goldberg on stage. And then, you know, I guess some point that they were going to do like a town hall or a couple of people ask questions. Joe just walks up with no, no microphone. The former president, Joe Biden, no microphone, walks up to the stage.

He's on the ground, you know, in the audience, but he's right there at the stage. I got a question, who do you love the most? And then Jill awkwardly says, "What be trying to be funny?" And it wasn't funny from the beginning because it was awkward. And then, as, you know, it, you know, it just kind of goes on and there's his back and forth and then,

Jill says, "To what be well does he, does he know this is my interview?" Or, you know, trying to be funny again, and it wasn't funny. As Joe was walking away, Whippy says, "Well, remember to buy the book, which is Jill's book, which is what they're there to promote." And then, Joe kind of shouts or elevates his voices.

And by my book, my book's coming out in September. It was the weirdest thing, this is yesterday. Yeah, was it yesterday or day before? Yeah, no, it's the weirdest story, unless you look at what's going on, then it becomes very sad,

because they all knew, including first and foremost, the former First Lady at the time, Jill Biden.

Yeah.

“But then she keeps coming out with stuff that everybody knows is BS.”

For example, that Jill Biden insisted, Jonathan Turley had the shester day.

Jill Biden insisted that the pardon was necessary. Because when Trump was elected, we knew he would target Hunter, just one problem. It was her husband's justice department and two different panel of jurors who convicted Hunter, all that remained by the time the Trump became president, was the sentencing.

Yeah. Yeah, it was yesterday. Well, but we all knew. We all said when Biden said he's not going to punch her hunter. I'm not going to punch her hunter.

I'm going to punch her hunter with a big kick in the, but we all said he's going to pardon. And we all know he is. Yeah. There I'll know he is. I mean, there was, but you know, think about Jill Biden right now.

It goes back to something and I thought about yesterday.

So I haven't said it in a while.

“It was sort of like the the former spokesperson for Biden.”

Uh, when we used to say about her, she knows she's lying. Yeah. The, the press knows she's lying. She knows that the press knows that she's lying. She knows that the American public knows that she's lying.

And she continues to lie anyway. Yeah. And so nobody's being fooled. And it's like you go through the process of, you know, doing these interviews. Uh, over and over again.

With that in mind, everybody knows that you're lying. Now, which one were you talking about? Because it applies to both Jen Sockie or Karin Shompier. Right.

Well, Karin Shompier was just so bad.

She was so, she was. She was just. No, it was just, it was just the word. Yeah. That just absolutely the worst.

Right. Yeah. I don't know what was in that book. But man, she needed a new one. Oh, the, the, the, the binder.

Yeah. That was horrible. That was. So bad. We are, right.

Radio brought to you by hot shot secret. Hi. I'm Jen Loomis, a transport safety expert at JJ Keller at a roadside inspection inspectors may ask to see supporting documents. These documents can include bills of lighting, itineraries, schedules, or equivalent documents that indicate the origin and destination of each trip. They can also include dispatch or trip records, expense receipts related to on duty slash not driving periods.

Electronic mobile communication transmitted through a fleet management system and payroll records, settlement sheets or equivalent documents that indicate payment to a driver. Drivers using paper logs must also keep toll receipts. Supporting documents must contain the driver's name, carrier assigned identification number or vehicle unit number that can be linked to the driver. The date, the name of the nearest city town of village and the time. This type was brought to you by JJ Keller and Associates.

Visit us at jakekaler.com. Coming up more with Gary McNamara and Eric Carley. It's Red Eye Radio. We are going to renew. He's our currently an I'm Gary McNamara.

There's Nate Silverman. I just saw this post here from yesterday.

“Like honestly, it's going to take a several weeks to tell you who won the election.”

That is failed state manure. He used the other word and should be much more stigmatized. Yep. Now that's absolutely garbage. And that's a quote from somebody who's state of California.

And think about it, you know, the Democrats run that state. And they're the ones screaming Trump is a threat to democracy. You can't even count your votes in one day. How hard is it? They every algorithm on the planet can tell you who's viewing what right now on what device.

And what location. Almost they spooked it with, you know, news to me even said it. He was going to get flack over it. He was like, we need, we need the counties to count the votes as quick as possible. Because it hurts the credibility of elections.

If it keeps taking so long on election day. Yeah. Well, you didn't say that before. You approved all these processes. You weren't, you weren't sitting there saying about it.

You weren't sitting there saying we need to count ballots and come in. You weren't criticizing. No. We need to count ballots. No.

If they were postmarked, if they come in past elect, you weren't. You weren't doing that. Hopefully the Supreme Court will straighten that all out. Yeah.

I'm Paula Penn.

I help people make the smartest money decisions possible.

If you don't control your money, it controls you. Yeah. You're not in control of your finances.

“And you have to look outside of yourself to live the life that you want.”

You're not in control. You're like, what is it that you actually want? Money should follow the dreams and goals. Because sometimes you make the dream and goal the money. And you've overworked yourself.

And you've exceeded what you've needed for the actual thing you want. And sometimes we forget like, what's the actual thing you want? A Ford anything. Follow and listen on your favorite platform. Catch Red Eye Radio Live every night on the Red Eye Radio App.

Available in the App Store. Red news. All right. Radio. And he is here crawling.

I'm hearing Matt Lamar and download our Red Eye Radio App today.

You can listen when you choose coming up in just one minute. The Plattener tax. It's being referred to as all coming up.

“You know, many of us suffer with pain every single day, including George from Oregon.”

Here's his relief factor story. George. He's a hardworking guy. He spends 10 hours a day working on a garbage truck. It's tough. And he says it made it even tougher when all of a sudden.

His knee wouldn't bend. He had a lot of pain, but George started taking relief factor. And he said, quote, "I can bend my knee again with very little pain." And quote, "George, thank you for writing in and we appreciate the feedback. I've had great results myself with relief factor.

My back. I was just thinking about it just during the break about how different it is before.

Relief factor and after relief factor, I want you to experience the same.

And you can do it with a three week quick start. It's only 1995. And it's very quick. You do this. You go to relieffactor.com.

Relieffactor.com. Choose Red Eye in the drop down. Or call 800-the-number-four relief. 800-four relief for relief factor. We'll update you every hour on this, but I mean,

we're not going to know, you know, likelihood tonight who knows when we're going to find out. But in California for the Governor, California Governor's race, Steve Hilton still leaves Harvey R. Bechera, 26.9% to 25.8, which means there would be a runoff of those two. And a vast, beating Pratt for Los Angeles mayor,

36.6% to 29.5. If it ends that way, there would be a runoff for the LA mayor for those two. So just to keep you updated there. Now, on the whole planet or situation, we were talking about yesterday, because this is, I thought it would, I thought it would probably be pretty too soon

to see any type of significant movement in any way. And then you've got to realize, though, people really, if you're, you know, to everybody we're talking to now, you're listening to us, you're listening to talk radio in general, which means you're most likely more informed.

Yeah. And so we sort of live in a different world. Yeah. And I know that from my frequent, when plane trips over the years, I'm amazed how little people that I meet know.

Hmm. I really am. Yeah. Every single, totally amazed how little that they know. Right.

But they think they know a lot, but they don't have a clue as to what's going on. And I'm not saying they're stupid. They may be ignorant. Ignorance is not stupidity. Ignorance is a lack of the facts.

“But I think what gets to me is not that somebody has,”

doesn't have the facts behind them. But they're arrogant in their opinion without having the facts. Ah. That's what gets to you. But here's Harriet.

And I mentioned you that, Harriet, did some analysis yesterday on CNN. Here's part of it here about a Platner in Maine. Yeah. I've been looking. There have been a lot of revelations about Graham Platner as this campaign has gone on from

Tattoos to sexually explicit text. But this one might be different. And the reason I say that is take a look here. Google searches for Graham Platner in Maine up significantly over the past few days. We're talking about up 275 or send the last three days versus the three-month average.

And more than that, more people search for him on Sunday in Maine. That at any point that I could find even given the past revelations about the tattoos as well. So it seems to me that this time may, in fact, be different where mayors focus on Graham Platner is higher. This is interesting because people might say, "Oh, there have been so many scandals that are not collated to it."

Nothing new to see here. This might indicate otherwise. This might indicate otherwise.

And the search is way up first.

Okay. How is the prediction market changed? Okay.

“So one of our first glimpses into how this might affect Platner's electoral fortunes is from the prediction market.”

So you can see this right here in the casual prediction market. Chance to win the Maine Senate race. Now, of course, there's still that Democratic primary that Graham Platner is heavily favored to win. So we have Dems. Republicans are likely Republican nominee, of course, being Susan Collins.

The incumbent. You go back. You go back, you know, May 22nd was about 10 days ago. Democrats had a 70% chance. That's essentially Platner had a 70% chance of win the general election.

Now, that number has fallen. It's fallen rather significantly. Look, he is still the favorite according to prediction markets of 59% chance.

But you're basically going from about a 7 in 10 shot to about a 6 in 10 shot.

This is now a race that if you were projecting it out, I would say would be with well within the margin of error. I dare say too close to call, although Platner still favored. But his chances have gone down significantly in conscience have gone up significantly. And part of the reason this number here will make Democrats in May nervous.

“I think it's because of the incumbent Susan Collins her history.”

She's been very resilient, despite being seen as vulnerable for decades. Despite being seen as vulnerable for decades, what she was first elected back. I believe in 1996. But if you look at the last three times that she has run, take a look at the polls under estimate counts in May.

In 2008, the polls under estimated her by 8 points. In 2020, the polls estimated her by 12 points. Oh, my goodness gracious. And she was down about 10 points before any of the revelations came out this weekend. Which according to the past pollinators, she would be well positioned to make it quite the race.

And if in fact the prediction markets and the Google searches suggest that this race will impact Titan. Well, then Grand Platner's lead may very well be lower than the past errors that have been fact allowed Susan Collins to win. Like they didn't 2020, when she was trailing the pre-election pollinators.

It was always going to be difficult for Democrats to take the Senate in the selection.

But really any path to taking the Senate goes through Maine. So what are we seeing about the chances of taking the Senate right now? Yeah, if you take a look at the chance of getting the Senate right now, if you go back two months ago, it was about a 50/50 split right now Republicans again. It's close.

But Republicans are now slightly favored to take back the Senate. No doubt in part because of what is going on in Maine, which just makes that path, which is already difficult. A little bit more treacherous. This feels like a platinum tax. [Laughing]

Interesting though, it was 50/50 on April 2nd. And he said it's close with the Republicans having, you know, a slight lead. The Republicans have a 57% to 43% prediction market odds. I really don't, to be honest with you. And the odds stuff in politics.

Yeah. To me, I take with the grain of salt. Well, there are too many moving parts. It's, the prediction markets. It's, it is, it's almost like the gambling.

You know, it's like saying, okay, well, these are the odds. Well, but wait a minute, what constitutes those odds?

“That's why you get into the polling methodologies.”

And we look at, and you can only see it after each election. But which polster was most accurate, you know, on each election cycle. And they actually, now there's a website actually dedicated to showing it. They list them. And so when you look at that, you know,

they, what you and I do here, we've been doing for a while. As I said earlier, we, we know when there's a turnaround. When someone goes from hero to zero, where they start questioning, and it was last week to this week. Yeah.

We're not talking about like January of this year to this week. We're talking midweek last week to early this week. They were, there was a huge difference in the liberal activist media. Had changed its tone. And it was a very different, which told me that they're seeing exactly what the people,

the rank and file are seeing. And all the questions, and you know, as Harry Anton mentions, you know, Googling and searching, and people want to know more, as they look to find out more when people become curious. They learn things.

The left hates that because they were defending platinum up until now. Now, not that they, you know, need platinum. There are other Democrats. But they've got to make their choice. They're going to have to, again, if they don't want to.

This is, you know, they're getting down to the wire here. We're talking right now. The GOP has a slim majority. And both the house and Senate. But if they thought they had a new hero.

They can't afford to put all their eggs in the platinum basket.

Because it's a Nazi basket. Well, sorry. Nazi basket. You don't want to do that. What I'm told.

Pick up your Nazi basket on Amazon.com. Harry, all the Nazi eggs you want. I don't know what Nazi eggs would be. It doesn't matter.

“As long as you have the word Nazi in there,”

that's all that matters. Well, it's Nazi week on the history channel. It's always Nazi week. Well, I think that's the other day. We don't have to argue about how Nazi the tattoo was.

Oh, yeah. That was a former Republican Congressman who said that it was on CNN. Yeah. It's like, well, it's not a Nazi symbol. Okay, well, we'll argue later.

How Nazi a Nazi symbol is. But the best part is that drop real quick when it was like, Look, if you're saying it's not the official Nazi party symbol. Yeah. You know, if that's your argument,

the symbol is the symbol of the concentration camp. That's right. That's right. Yeah. So if you're trying to make that distinction, stop it.

Yeah. Because even on MS now, as we played yesterday, one of their analysts on MS now said. Don't make that analogy. Don't make that comparison that it's not a Nazi party symbol

because it's worse. That's the thing. You have to follow up. Right. And so the defenses think about this.

The defense from Democrats is they found something worse than a Nazi party symbol. That's right. And that's a defense of the candidate. Well, look, you guys were saying it's a Nazi party symbol. It's actually a concentration camp symbol.

“We know that's worse, but you must understand the distinction.”

And we're calling you on that. You're not going to win that. You're not. Yeah. But it's the gain of function debate.

It's the Fauciism. Yeah, you're right. But when you see it, the one thing you can get out of this with our question.

And this may be the first time this has been set in a while for Susan Collins,

but the momentum over the last week has really moved in her direction. Yeah. Yeah. And that's, but, but I look at this. I mean, this is what we said when we said the Republicans best chances.

The Republicans best chances of the Democrats. Yeah. Right now. Look, we got a Republican party. It's been written about almost probably most conservative analysts would say it right now.

You know, Trump is a Republican party and Trump is focused on everything. Laser focused on everything except with the public cares about it. And that's prices. Yeah. And that's the problem that the Republicans have.

Yep. And, you know, that's probably one of the reasons. You know, the whole weaponization fund got dropped. They, well, they couldn't sell it to their own party. Yeah.

They couldn't sell it to their own party. Right. And you can't, you can't, this wasn't one or two senators or members of Congress. This was a ton of the Republican members saying you've got to drop that and drop that now. Yep.

And we said from the very beginning,

especially when they came out, well, one million or one billion, seven hundred and seventy six million dollars.

Yes. So it's a patriotic thing. We just, you just told the public, this is bogus. It's a symbolism. Yeah.

You just told the public, this isn't about this is bogus. You just did that because there's no way that's the actual damages that a judge would find. Right. So it, that blew up in their faces big time. It was a horrible decision by Trump and the White House to do that.

And it backfired on them big time. And they really can't come out and scream at one or two members of the Republican Congress.

“Because all the, the, the, the, the fact is you and I've talked about this before.”

What is the public hate? The public hates politicians that don't pay their taxes. And they hate slush funds. Yeah. They don't like, if it's a civil case that you won't find.

And part of the, not like in slush funds is the whole sexual harassment. You know, sexual assault slush fund that Congress has for themselves. The public hates that. Yeah. Well, there's a lack of transparency.

We are not against civil judgments at all. Well, not anybody on January 6th who believes that they have a case. Go for it.

We have a process for that.

Yep.

“We have a process for determining what the damages are.”

But the Democrats, as you can see here right here, this is a perfect case of. Well, whatever, however bad the Republicans are, the Democrats are insane. Yep. We are ready. We'll be right back with more red eye radio with every currently and Gary McNamara.

We are when our video, he's our currently, and I'm Gary McNamara. So for the LA mayor's race, you say that the New York Times and Fox News. Calling it for bass. Calling it for bass, even though again, a pad has what 29.5% so the runoff is. What would be coming, right?

Yeah. Yep.

It is, in fact, they're both saying advances to the reelection runoff.

All right, so it's 36.5% for bass and a pad 29.5% with 53% of the votes in. Yeah. And Hilton's still leading with 54% of the vote in 26.9% to be sure it's 25.7%. So if it stays that way, they're both in the runoff. Yeah.

Right. Top of the our news is brought to you by House Products. Visit house products.com. This is Red Eye Radio on Westwood One. Now, it's Red Eye Radio.

Gary McNamara and Eric Hurley talk about everything from politics to social issues and news of the day. Whether you're up late or you're just starting your day. Welcome to the show from the Relief Factor Studios. This is Red Eye Radio. All across America.

We are Red Eye Radio. He is there currently. I'm Gary McNamara. Welcome. Good morning.

Hello. All right. So Scott Peli yesterday fired from 60 minutes. Shut. I'm not.

I know you were sarcastic. Yeah. I expected this to happen after the blowup. I, many thought he was trying to get fired in that meeting. He wanted that to be the basis of.

And in the world of, you know, heroes like Stephen Colbert and Jimmy Kimmel being cancelled. It would be greater than being cancelled by Barry Weitz.

“You know, it's just, that's what this is all about.”

Here's a guy who thought he was in control. You know, back in the Mike Wallace days. There's a movie about that era of 60 minutes. And Al Pacino played the producer. I forget what the name of the movie was.

But it was, you know, back then it Mike Wallace. I mean, you remember he used to smoke. He used to smoke during the interview. I mean, that just blows me away. How long before they're smoking weed?

You know, it's smoking cigars now on podcast. Oh, why not, right? But every, every time. I mean, it's, it's on probably not fair. But everything, every time I think of Mike Wallace, I think of the SNL bit.

Yeah. Yeah, with, with Martin Short. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

But he's not doing Mike Wallace. He's doing the, he's doing the cigarette company lawyer. Do, do, you know who he is. Immulating. Great.

“If you have Netflix, it's called Martin Life is Short.”

A great Martin Short documentary just came out recently.

There was a makeup and a makeup artist and hairdresser that used to always do that.

That she used to always, you know, she would, you know, have her cigarette and, you know, or whatever. And she'd be, and you'd say, well, you know, I got a little bit of a sunburn. You, you think I don't know that? What? What?

Is it me? You think I don't know that? So he was emulating her and used that to, to build that character. Um, and who was it? My, my, my, my, my, my, my, my palace. And it was just remember remember the, remember the loss, remember the wippy cushion.

[laughter] Why do you? It's that was, I mean, so much good stuff there. And, but when Martin Short would be interviewed as the lawyer defending the indefensible and smoking that cigarette.

And, but he would just, when he looked at the camera. Is it me? Yeah, right. But, um, the movie was the insider where, uh, we're out. Which was a, a great movie.

And, and it goes back to the, uh, the, and Russell Crowe. Uh, you know, the whole, uh, Jeffrey, why again, think. Um, and, but. Mike Wallace in that was portrayed as, you know, I mean, and then that, I, I don't know. I, there's, there's, there's, there's huge egos in television.

There's huge egos anywhere and everywhere. And, and in radio.

But, pelly always, to me, came off as arrogant as a viewer.

He just had that. He just really had that, he almost literally looked down his nose every time. But he was in front of it. But you know, I always saw the Scott pelly was the perfect definition of what Bernard Goldberg wrote about in bias.

“And, um, almost as if someone wrote a character based on that, right?”

Yeah. Yeah. I always thought because Bernard Goldberg in, in the book, uh, uh, a bias. And, uh, he was funny because somebody accused him of being a right wing Trump supporter the other day and he's like, I'm not a Republican.

I'm, and, and, uh, Christopher Plummer on the insider played Mike Wallace. Okay. Yeah. Uh, but, um, uh, I forgot what I was going to do. Well, but he, he did.

It was, it was just like, you know, they had from the book. Had written a character to depict what the, you know, bias. What they, what that always was like. Right. The, the, the book, right.

Thank you for putting me back on track again. Uh, and in the book bias, he wrote about the fact that they don't believe They're on the right or left. Right. They believe they're right.

They just, they believe they're right.

And, and, and they get, and, and he always talked about when he told, uh,

When he told Dan Rather about the bias in that one, in that one article in the response, or the one, uh, show they did. The one piece they did on, uh, on the flat tax. Right.

“Because that's, that's how Bernard Goldberg sat there and went.”

Okay. You know, I have, I'm not a Republican. Right. Um, I've voted out, you know, so many, you know, liberal causes. But I understand what journalism is and this is in journalism.

Right. And it was a story that the 60 minutes had done on the flat tax. Steve Forbes flat tax. And they called it. They started out by saying the flat tax scheme.

And then they found nobody who supported it. And Bernard Goldberg said, I know people that support the, the, I know economists that support the flat tax over our current tax system. And how you should do is something like this is you don't throw in any type of adjective

to make it seem like it's a bogus concept.

You say this is Steve Forbes was running for president at that time. Remember back then in the mid 90s. Right. And he's got this flat tax proposal. He believes it's going to be better because of this, this, this, this, this and this.

We found an economist who disagrees. He found an economist who agrees. Well, when he brought it up, and this was because a contractor. This is what changed Bernard Goldberg was, I guess it was a contractor working on his house. Yeah.

Right. And he ended the contractor told him he said, you guys are biased.

“And Bernard Goldberg went, oh, what are you talking about?”

He goes next time your bias, I'll point it out to you and I'll point out why it's bias. And when that Steve Forbes thing came up, the contractor called him said, this is where your bias right here. And he said, you're right. We were.

Yeah. This is how we, this isn't how you do it. When he went to Dan Dan rather and told him, Dan, and then he was done, he was going to be done with 60 minutes. You can't, you can't do that.

You can't sit there and say, you're not a journalist. You know, Dan rather's response to him was, I served this country. Yeah. As if it was a patriotic thing. Right.

And he goes, that's where I'm going. So I think, again, I'm going back. I read the book. What 25 years ago. But he said he was surprised by that response.

But Michael Shellenberger. And remember Michael Shellenberger worked with Barry Weiss at, you know, for the Twitter files. Right. And he's not a Trump supporter when I know he's not a Republican.

No. But he is somebody who believes in journalism, which means you're not supposed to be a political activist. Right. Now, is there room for political activist in our society? Of course.

You know, is there room like somebody's allowing you? Right. No. Sorry. We've run out of room.

Yeah. Exactly. The room is full. You can do it longer. No.

Anybody can be a political activist? No.

If you wish to be, our point has always been, you claim your journalist and your not opinionated stuff.

If they're going to have an opinionated show presentation, anything like that. No.

“I think, in fact, you and I criticized what's his name from the discovery group who was buying”

at that time. They were taking over seeing CNN, John Malone, who said, "Well, I'd like to see CNN and go back to the headline news days." And you and I, basically, yawned almost literally on the air and said, "No." That's boring.

I don't mind the, the, the, the, the, it's not even bias. It's having a political opinion. That call it that. Well, I think people, you know, we get our political opinion every day. We have had in the past people call up and say, "I like it because, uh, you're not biased."

You're, you're, you're not biased. And it's like, well, of course we're biased. We're very biased. Of course we are.

But the one thing that we've always said is we're not going to form our opinion on something

that's untrue. Right. We're going to make sure that what we, when we lay out what the issue is. And that's the problem. The issues are being perverted.

But with whether 60 minutes or whether it's in the mainstream media, it's not that they're political activists. It's that they're telling you that they're not. They're telling you that they're fair and balanced. And as Bernard Goldberg said, in their view, he goes, "I actually believe they think

they are." No, they, it's, it goes that, that, that, you know, they look at it. They don't believe they're on the left or right. They just believe we know how things should be run. And I think that Scott Pellie is a perfect example of a Bernard Goldberg right about

the era, you know, and then I think it was the next book. They get to great examples of an arrogance or whatever. Yeah. And did, in, in bias, did he quote Walter Cronkide was that somewhere else separately? Because Cronkide said, you know, well, yeah, you know, I guess I did lean left,

but I believe we were fighting for the right thing, and we were doing the right thing. Right. Whatever.

“That's what a journalist, where people say I'm going into journalism to straighten out the world.”

Right. No, no. Get into politics or get into the business world to do that. Journalism is where you're just supposed to tell the story. If you want to be a professional activist or you want to run for office or something

like that, or you want to write an opinion piece or be on an opinionated program. That's, that's one thing. If you're doing journalism, it's totally different. But I want to play this here from Michael Schellenberger because Michael Schellenberger, again, part of the Twitter files.

And remember, it was, you know, Barry Weiss and Michael Schellenberger, Matt Taibi. They were the ones. And none of them are Republican Trump supporters at all. Right. Right.

And they looked at it. And I think what they saw with the FBI and the censorship and the government influence

“to censor social media, I think it's clear the hell out of them.”

Yeah. But here's Schellenberger, after he lays out, he laid out everything about what's happened over the last couple of days and talks about 60 minutes. You know, and says, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. 60 minutes had a ton of problems and he lays them out here. Here we go.

But a review of the last two decades of 60 minutes by public shows that the program has been inaccurate and partisan on many major issues, including the border, transgenderism, climate change, species, extinctions, rush a gate in the Hunter Biden laptop. On the border, first pelly and then Alfonci framed the Trump administration's separation of roughly 4 to 6,000 children as a moral crime and then played down the Biden administration's migrant crisis.

Biden's open border policy allowed over a half million unaccompanied children

into the United States between 2021 and 2024. And many of those children ended up in brutal working conditions where some died. On climate change, 60 minutes has, for two decades, broadcast a steady stream of warnings about mass extinction and civilizational collapse, despite abundant peer-reviewed literature contradicting that alarmism.

In early 2023, pelly gave them all fuzzi and Stanford biologist Paul Ehrlich airtime to claim that humanity is not sustainable. He compared having children to illegally dumping waste. And on transgenderism, 60 minutes framed the controversy selectively. It focused on a female-to-male sports case, even a biological women posed little threat to men's sports

and glossed over the male-to-female cases like swim relief Thomas had penned. Now, it's not all bad, and 60 minutes deserves credit for nuance. Pelly noted on air that Ehrlich's 1968 prediction of mass famine had failed because the green revolution fed the world. Leslie Stoller drew attention to the potential harms of transmedicine, including by platforming detransitioners,

and 60 minutes did cover the problems with Biden's open border policy. But even in those cases, 60 minutes biased at segments.

in which she said, "We were concerned that the groups that opposed transgender people

“might try to weaponize our story and use it against transgender people."”

In it, Stoll interviewed an LGBT activist who claimed it was dangerous to platform the detransitioners because doing so might increase suicide. Stoll failed to mention a 2011 Swedish study of patients who underwent genital surgery and found that completed suicide rates were 19 times higher than the general population. After having conceded that Ehrlich was catastrophically wrong about overpopulation,

Pelly turned around and endorsed his next catastrophe. The claim that humans are causing a sixth mass extinction, which is simply false, given that the international union for the conservation of nature records, just 0.8% of assess species have gone extinct since 1500, and a mass extinction require something closer to 75%.

And 60 minutes ignored the environmental good news that complicates its apocalyptic narrative.

For example, North American fires are at record lows. The year of the biggest fires, 2020, saw just 6% of research site studied burned compared to 29% in 1748.

“As such, the recent increase in fires cannot scientifically be attributed to climate change”

and are in fact a major reduction from the past. Greater agricultural productivity has enabled the expansion of protected lands to an area larger than Africa undermining the six mass extinction hypothesis further and the natural gas revolution drove most of the 22% decline in US carbon emissions between 2005 and 2020.

Carbon emissions have been going down in Europe since the 70s. When you review 60 minutes, this coverage you discover bias everywhere. Its border coverage falsely framed by its policies as agonized choices in an impossible situation just months before Trump simply closed the border, preventing hundreds of thousands of unsupervised and undocumented children

among others from entering the US. Partisan bias was on display in 60 minutes as treatment of the Russia collusion hooks as real and the Hunter Biden laptop is unverified and perhaps false. Pele platformed and promoted the FBI official Andrew McCabe who had dismissed the Hillary Clinton emails which had suggested evidence of influence pedaling and who promoted the Russia collusion hooks

and the fake steel dossier. We had. Okay, and it goes into that, but you can see as he lays it out. You know, you can go, you can sit there and you go back and look at time after time after time, after time and again remember.

Shellingberger is not a Trump supporter Republican. He's somebody who believes in, in, in journalism and they just, you know, laid it out across the border. It is the, the bias. It's the political activism and we said yesterday political activism can be in the sense of not having the curiosity to challenge everybody in the same way.

Right, right. As we pointed out because we played, I cut it for the McCabe thing because we did the McCabe thing. We actually played that audio on yesterday show and, and, and, and did all that. And then tour part, you know, of Pele and his producer who did another segment, you know, with the glowing accolades for McCabe and everything that they were promoting was false.

“And as we said, there's a complete lack of of curiosity and the journalists to find out what the truth is”

and that is their form of political acted. That's another part of their form of political activism. We just will treat some as credible where I look at it. If I'm an interviewer, you've got to prove it to me with the facts. And the facts were never there for Russia collusion.

Right. We're, and, and the hunter Biden laptop, yeah, they were there. And so this is not as some of the left is trying to portray this as well. You know, this is about the new executive producer and Barry Weiss not having the experience.

That's always, again, that's always to me the first argument that comes from people who wish to keep the status quo alive.

Right. So you had all this experiment or it's been all this experience. But you were absolutely biased within the experience means deadly and squat. Yep. We are right.

I radio. This morning's USDA Farm Report is brought to you by House Products. Tested, trusted, guaranteed since 1920 and update and clarifications associated with new world screwworm concerns. Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins Tuesday started with the latest. Just recently, Mexico reported eight new detections of new world screwworm late last week.

One of those that was detected was a five year old goat in Koawila. Approximately 25 miles from the US Mexico border. So this is the closest we've seen it to the US border. The Secretary added going forward ramped up communication efforts and continued education of USDA and federal plus stakeholder action plans for AWS prevention and response efforts.

That includes a new world screwworm fact sheet found at www.screwworm.gov.

I'm Rod Bay in reporting for the US Department of Agriculture in Washington, D.C.

This report brought to you by Senox fuels and loops. Get in touch with what I radio told free at 866. May be right I. Café in its best form with the new Cuba One Capsule Machine from Chibu. In every Cuba Capsule, Stex Spitzen Café from besonterin Anbaogebieten.

For espresso, coffee cream or coffee grinder of Knopfdruck. The new Cuba One überzeugt with premium design, compact bar cruiser and small one-sticks price up 1920 Euro. Thank innovative press brew technology with every tassel besonters aromatis with samt diga crema. And there are the Cuba Capsule Machine in Diner Chibu Fiali and of Chibu D.E. Meditian yoga jogging is not so exciting.

Really? I'm really excited about my story.

“Stoyer? How do you feel? The stoyer is really cool?”

Yes, I have a lot of experience with 1000 Euro. Do you have any connections? No, just like the Stoyer app. Wow! And that's simple. Of course, the macht fast all is automatic.

Absolutely, I feel like I'm so excited. Hold your money to go. Tie from a spannend with like the Stoyer. [music] Where were my radio?

He is there currently and I'm Gary McNamara. I just take a quick peek. Still the same California governor, Steve Hilton. 27.2, Bashara, 25.6. And again, I guess New York Times and Fox is best.

You know, got the most votes in the LA Mayor's race. So, Pratt and Bass in a runoff. She had 36.5. He had 29.5. So, we'll be interesting. But if you look at it overall, I mean, still there's uphill battle.

“But if you look at it, still momentum even in California?”

Yeah. For a Republican. [music] [music] You're listening to Red Eye Radio from the Red Leaf Packer Studios.

[music] We are Red Eye Radio. He is here currently and I'm Gary McNamara.

Say on the whole Scott Pellie thing, and it's amazing because there seems to be no self-awareness

from the liberal media at all. I mean, there's no self-awareness when you take the whole Scott Pellie thing and you look at the co-bear thing. There's no self-awareness about the business at all. And we've said this for the longest time and they don't even understand this. You know, we do this show here and everybody knows, you know, we haven't known.

But I remember the one time somebody called and said, "We love your show because you guys are unbiased." It's like, "Oh, we're not. We're completely biased." If we ever came out and said, "We're unbiased." You know, I would listen to me if I was marketing myself as being unbiased. Yeah.

Because nobody would buy it. Right. Because they know you got your biases.

“The only thing that we promise is you may not agree with our opinion.”

But we're not going to argue something that's based on an inaccuracy. Right. We're not going to take a story that's false and promote it in some way. We're also not going to give an opinion and we'll say this. We've said this many times before.

We're not afraid to say, "I don't know." And we don't care about being first with a story. Well, I'll relate that to this event. The pelling thing is separate from whether or not Barry Weiss will be successful long-term. Or the executive producer of 60 minutes will be successful long-term.

Their audience is roughly 55 to 60 percent left leaning the viewers.

Everybody knows that. Roughly 20 to 25 percent are right leaning. And the ratings had changed. They had dropped. There was a bit of a resurgence.

And now they do what's called linear ratings. Which means in every way that you can watch the show. This is how many viewers we have weekly. And the last measurement I was able to find. And again, it's not exact science.

But I do remember the number was 9.1 million weekly.

So again, you've got to keep in mind. It's on things like Paramount Plus. It's on streaming. It's on. And I don't know how soon it goes on streaming.

You know, I'm assuming it's maybe a week later. I don't know. But with all, you know, combined, linear all across the board on all platforms. 9.1. That's not a small audience.

What did they, what did they, one, and I forget may have been the New York Times. That's the number one rated news program. Doesn't really mean, I mean, Mr. Beast stomps them when it comes to the number of viewers. So let's, let's me clear about what you're saying. You're good at or best at.

So in today's world.

“And I think it, it's important to remember that.”

But the question is, you know, are they losing 40 million a year?

We don't, they could be. We're not aware of that. Just yet. But I don't think they are. No, I'm, I'm going to guess, sir.

I would guess they're still proud. I'm guessing they're making some money. Yeah. And, and then you've got Barry Wise come in that comes in at the head of CBS News. And then now, you know, she's as we've mentioned.

I said yesterday, it's like going from the stairs stepping machine at the gym to try and to climb Everest because it's such a huge monumental to turn that big Titanic around, you know, before it hits the iceberg and starts to fail completely. You know, it's, it's going to be, and I'm, I'm with her.

“I hope she can do this because I believe in true journalism.”

I've said it a million times that, and that may be hyper hyperbally.

But I've said it more than once that it, it's, it's a, it's a place of critical role in a free

society. And so if the new executive producer of 60 minutes, if it, it turns out the ratings drop. And, and you get into the, the, the breakdown of why the ratings drop, it may be because the majority, the majority of the audiences on the left and now they know that they've got it in their mind.

Barry Wise is in control. And they believe she's right wing, which she's not. And something they see something different. One thing that was said has been said about the new executive producer, one thing that he reported the least said about the show was because there was a complaint the other day.

I don't think it actually happened here in that meeting, but it was somewhere right before that meeting that infamous meeting now that basically got Scott peli fired and made so much news. Was that they were going to turn 60 minutes into 60, one minute segments and treat it like TikTok. And I kind of will have to, and I thought every segment would open like, hey guys, and it's

“not, but it's, you know, clearly not going to be that, but you have to recognize that the”

sensibility of your audience is changing in terms of how they consume media. And all the broadcast TV has to realize that. Some are rolling with the flow, some aren't late night TV. Jimmy Kimmel himself has said, look, people are streaming things. They're, you know, they're on their phone.

Late night TV is probably going to be gone in five years. He said it. And I don't know where 60 minutes lands or why, but it is separate from what happened here. We'll see. I, again, I hope that true journalism can survive and maybe it ends up being a big streaming

thing. And it is different, but it's real journalism. And that's what I hope for because I don't care where the fallout is. You and I have also been, this is where we get the people that said, well, you guys are on bias.

If the fallout is, it happens for somebody on the right because they did something wrong. It's on them if you've got the proof that they did that. If you can demonstrate that, not just say it, not live by omission like they did with Charlottesville, not make it up completely like they did with the Russian hoax and everything they've gone to Trump.

I mean, if you can show something, and it's happened to people on the right and they're going to fall out, well, that's on the person who committed those actions or who was responsible for that. But the point is, journalism could be on its, and I, I believe this were a while on its last leg because you don't have people.

You have very few people and it really comes down to Shalom Burger. Very wide, and that's I, you be, and a handful of others that want to do real journalism,

Well, but there, you know, their, their example, Shalom Burger is doing it in quite successful

from what I can tell on on on on YouTube and and and and acts and whatever. Again, it's, it's not just journalism, it's again, how you're broadcasting it, you know, what, you know, what is, what is the, the platform, right. And go back to the sense of building. And I was talking about it.

And whether, whether TV is antiquated or not. Right. And, you know, you look at, you know, 60 minutes and, you know, should 60 minutes be repeating, you know, consistently on, you know, any new show. Should they be consistently repeating or be on social media, as you said, that's one

thing they're looking at right now is to increase the audience.

“And I just, you know, and, but I think one of the things that that I think is so imperative”

that what the left doesn't understand is that the initial brand that they're selling is wrong. Yeah. It's if you're a country music station, we play country music and people turn it on and you're playing heavy metal. Yeah.

When you say, we are, we are a, we're a, we're a bunch of journalists that only care about the truth. And the bias is obvious. People don't buy before they even watch a new show. They don't buy it. Because they can tell instantaneously that you are not.

That that what you are selling or what you're actually doing is not what you're selling. Right. I get, I get frustrated with Fox News quite a bit because what I'm thinking is you're not explaining to the audience why, why it's wrong what they're doing, you're just saying what they're doing is wrong.

You're saying what they're doing and you're saying that it's wrong. No, I would say that in, in general, there's the, the ton of news out there on the right and the left that don't explain things like that how many times do I come, do I come in here and I'm screaming in our pre-show meeting going, but you're not telling me what's going on. Exactly.

What's, you know, what, what's going on? Right. Why is this happening? Right. Don't just tell me it's happening.

Why is it happening? Right.

I always have, I'll read a new story and have more questions.

And when I, before I started, that should never be the case. That should never, and it seems to be more the case than not these days. And, and, and, and it's frustrating because I can listen to Fox News on the radio. When you're listening to it on the radio, it's a different than a TV presentation. And if, especially if you're on the go, because, you know, you're trying to keep your knees at eight

and four, you know, drive safely and think and text and all of that while you're listening to it. But it, it's, it's, it's, and that's when I notice it the most. Because with wait a minute, you're not giving me everything I need for the, now I probably already know more than, you know, what, what they're saying about any particular story.

“But whether I do or not is not the point it's whether I believe they're delivering it and their presentation is doing justice for the audience.”

Because again, that's part of journalism. Don't just say it's wrong. Say why. Well, I think one of the perfect examples when the Supreme Court makes a decision. Yeah. And nobody explains the legal part of it, which is something that I focus on all the time. Yeah. And say, well, this is why it passed. Right.

You know, we, we, we can look at the, you know, the Dodds decision on abortion. Right. That a lot of abortion. Yeah. Right. How dare they make law? They did. They didn't. They were saying, just the opposite. They've just not our place to make law.

And, and it's amazing how many people I taught, which means the news organizations aren't explaining to people what it's actually about.

But then they don't want to. Well, because if you do, if you do it makes sense, if you explain to people like when Democrats say, get rid of the Senate, right. And you explain why you shouldn't get rid of the Senate. People go, oh, that's right. Oh, you're right. If New Hampshire, if doesn't feel their represented, why should they be in the union. Right. And when you, when you explain the bicameral legislature to people, they understand that they go, okay. I understand why there's two. Well, that's that scotist blog.

Amy, how this is why we give her so much credit, credibility and credit. She explains, she explains it when she writes about it. And, and she's highly underused with all due respect, it's goes by.

“I think she would again, you know, in 60 minutes.”

She would be great. Well, because if you're talking about it, you know, what happens inevitably, though, when you have like a roundtable, it starts to become a debate. Well, I disagree. Well, hold on a second. If you're talking in terms of doing the reporting and explaining things, then you can say, well, I would add to that that this or my take on this is this.

You know, it's, it's not journalism and journalism is the reason it plays a key role, a critical role in a free society is so that every day.

Because most people don't sit around and listen to talk radio or do talk radio or write blogs that scotist blog or things like that, they've got lives and unlike us.

“And they, at the end of their day, they're, you know, they're either going to be curious or not. And if they are, you should be able to have a presentation that explains things and does a good job at plain Englishing everything for them.”

Because as we've mentioned, the Constitution is not hard to understand. The, the, our founders made sure that it is not. It is something everybody can understand curiosity has to be of, of the person. We are right, I radio. Coming up more with Gary McNamara and Eric Carley, it's right, I radio.

“We are running radio. He's our Carley and I'm Gary McNamara.”

Say yeah, there seems to be no self awareness, whether it's the whole peli thing or, you know, even co bear because that was just an amazing.

There was almost like a sense of entitlement that you're just supposed to be given a job and once a job is held by somebody on the left. Even in the entertainment division, they're entitled to that job and I thought that's why you have the left thing. It's so mean with CBS said, when CBS came out and said, hey, here's why co bear is gone and it was a very blunt message here's a decision. We were losing 40 million.

“We're now making 15 million. The difference, 55 million, that's why we made the decision to end the co bear show.”

And if story, everybody under how do you debate that? You've got to come up right out and say, well, because nobody challenged once CBS came out with the numbers, nobody challenged it. Right, at that point, that was gone. Even in the beginning, well, he must be making a profit or, you know, it's just ridiculous as to what's going on or they just want to get rid of the left wing.

But when you put it that way, we were losing 40 million. Now we're making 15 million. Yeah, 55 million the difference. Yeah, but, but you don't own the show. We don't care.

Doesn't matter. We don't care. Well, we're we're we're we're in the positive territory now by the swing of 55 million bucks a year. It's it's nighttime Byron Allen provides the content pays us money. We don't need to sell it. Yeah, we instantaneously have a difference of 55 million. Maybe we'll do something in the future. But yeah, hey, it's great now. All right.

[Music] This is rid of radio on Westwood One.