After Party with Emily Jashinsky - Media’s Immigrant Crime SILENCE, and Ceasefire Blame Game, with Glenn Greenwald and Katie Pavlich, Plus Nikki Glaser's Sad Admission

Episode Date: April 9, 2026

Emily Jashinsky begins with Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Glenn Greenwald, and an in-depth discussion on Iran, breaking down the confusion surrounding the ceasefire, the dispute over the Strait of Hormuz, President Trump’s frustration with NATO, a ridiculous CNBC clip about the war, and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer’s attempt to talk tough on war powers. Emily and Glenn also discuss Vogue's Anna Wintour’s cutting remark about Melania Trump and praise for Michelle Obama. Then Emily is joined by Katie Pavlich, Host of “Katie Pavlich Tonight” on NewsNation. The two discuss Katie’s departure from Fox News and a series of troubling headlines in the news involving illegal immigrants, crime, and why the media is choosing to ignore them. Emily rounds out the show with Nikki Glaser sparking debate after admitting she’s attracted to the idea of her partner being with other women, “The Cut” claiming the secret to a great marriage is having crushes on other people, and Emily offers her take on Tucker Carlson’s monologue about Trump and how Tucker’s forcing a reckoning on the right.   ZBiotics:Go to https://zbiotics.com/AFTERPARTY and use AFTERPARTY at checkout for 15% off any first time orders of ZBiotics probiotics.   Cowboy Colostrum: Get 25% Off Cowboy Colostrum with code AFTERPARTY at https://www.cowboycolostrum.com/AFTERPARTY   Unplugged: Switching is simple, Visit https://Unplugged.com/EMILY and order your UP phone today! Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Welcome to After Party, everyone, the show where we do the news a little bit later, a little bit lighter. Sometimes a combination, both. We're glad to have you here with us tonight. Glenn Greenwald is our guest. Also, my friend Katie Pavlach is going to stop by, and we have a lot to talk about. First, make sure to support our independent journalism where we have these combinations of guests. You won't find anywhere else by clicking subscribe on YouTube. Wherever you get your podcast, we appreciate it so much.

It really, really does. help. I'm very glad to have Glenn Greenwald Hill here. We'll bring him in in just one moment amidst the, quote, fragile ceasefire deal. That's what Vice President J.D. Vance referred to it as earlier today. Glenn is going to give us his reaction to that. Donald Trump is threatening to pull out of NATO. Did he lose this entire debate? Is this a taco? Not debate. Did he lose this entire geopolitical maneuver? Is it a taco? Is it a win? We're going to break it all down. You probably know Glenn's answer to that last question, but I'm also going to force him to talk about Kanye West and Anna Wintor. Why not? So Katie Pavich is also going to stop by to break down a slew of recent

cases that the media is just totally ignoring, involving tragedies that were voiced on the country by people who shouldn't be here. So we're going to tell you what the legacy media is not telling you. These stories are awful and very recent. And, And as we discuss, absolutely should be headline news around the country. You could easily have headline news of this day in and day out. But it's basically getting buried. So we'll break that down. First, though, we're going to bring Glenn in just one moment.

I want to start, though, by saying, if you are trying to focus like me being healthier this year, you have to start with some small shifts. We all know that. They can make a really big difference. That sounds counterintuitive, but it can mean like planning ahead so that you're living in the moment and you're not worried about getting that foggy, awful hangover the next morning after having a few drinks. A great trick is taking zbiotics pre-alcohol. I probably should have had some tonight. I just got back from an event because obviously I'm in high demand on the cocktail party circuit. People just can't stop saying, Emily, please come to. to our vents, drink our free booze. So, zbiotics is absolutely necessary. It's the world's first genetically engineered probiotic. It was created by PhD scientists to tackle those rough mornings. So very familiar to all of us. Alcohol creates a toxic byproduct in the gut, and that buildup actually causes rough days. Pre-alcohol, though, produces an enzyme to break it down. So if you make it your first drink, then drink responsibly. You'll feel your best tomorrow. You can

reclaim your mornings. And I won't lie, I was a bit on the fence about pre-alcohol initially. You have to remember to take it before you start drinking. Once you get used to it, it's not that hard. But if you're hanging out with some friends, you're having some wine, you want to keep the conversation going, so you keep the wine going. If you started with zibiotics, you gave it a shot. Trust me, it really is the real deal. It does help. So let's be real. usually a Friday night out means a Saturday morning in. But since I started incorporating pre-alcohol, let me tell you my glass of wine just doesn't disrupt my morning flow. Remember to head to zbiotics.com slash after party and use the code after party at checkout for 15% off. All right, let's bring in Glenn Greenwald,

the Pulitzer Prize winning journalist. You can find his work at greenwold.substack.com. Glenn, welcome. Where can I get a pill that I can take before talking to you that prevents a hangover? Well, you know, it's funny because as you were talking about that, I wanted to say, like, I did take zebiotics earlier today, which I always do because I'm in the after party and it gets really wild here. And it really helps like I used to talk to you and wake up with like a horrible hangover or not because of talking to you. And it really helped. So yeah, I understand that you might need one too. I can't help. help you though. I like that we both had the exact same joke concept ready to go in this scenario. I mean, as you were reading it, it emerged to me and then he took it first. And I was like, I'm still going to work around it. And I do think mine was better, but we can leave that for the audience

to decide. No, excellent and more deadpan. But we have some serious news to get to Glenn. Stop trying to distract me. The president of the United States obviously declared a ceasefire in the Iran war last night just before the deadline. And we were learning literally by the hour. It felt like today what that ceasefire actually meant, what it looked like. It's still relatively unclear. There was a 10-point plan that Iran put on the table. There's a 15-point plan. The U.S. put on the table, but now the administration is disputing some of the parts of the Iranian plan. And this is what we know about the Strait of Hormuz. Jonathan Carl earlier today talked to Donald Trump. This is F-17. We can put it on the screen. He said, quote, this morning, I asked President Trump if he's okay with the Iranians charging a toll for all ships that go through the Strait of Hormuz. He told me there may be a joint U.S. Iran venture to charge tolls.

Quote, we're thinking of doing it as a joint venture. It's a way of securing it, also securing it from lots of other people. Quote, it's a beautiful thing. And before I toss it back to you, Glenn, this has all culminated in another pitched conflict between Donald Trump. and NATO. Caroline Levitt briefed the press from the White House today. This is S4. Here's what we heard about NATO as the day went on. And on NATO, can you tell me, is the United States still considering withdrawing from NATO? Is that still a possibility? It's something the president has discussed, and I think it's something the president will be discussing in a couple of hours with Secretary General Ruta. And perhaps you'll hear directly from the president following that meeting later this afternoon. Thank you, everyone.

The very end saying that the president is going to discuss with Mark Ruta, the Secretary General of NATO, the possibility of the United States withdrawing from NATO. I would imagine, standard, that's probably going to be highly unlikely, but the president not happy. Caroline Levitt saying, quoting the president, they were tested and they failed. So Mark Ruta, after this meeting with Donald Trump, went on with Jake Tapper and said, quote, this was a meeting between friends because we like each other. I really admire his leadership. Ruta famously referred to Trump as daddy once. And then Trump had a very different reaction from Ruta. He said, all caps, NATO wasn't there when we needed them and they won't be there if we need them again. Remember Greenland, that big, poorly run piece of ice. President DJT. What the hell is going on, Glenn Greenwald?

Well, I think we have to start with the central event of today, which is the horrific massacre that Israel carried out in Beirut and other places throughout Lebanon. the Israelis claim as they always do, that they were targeting the terrorists, but whoever they were targeting ended up killing at least 250 people, including 82 children, 68 women, hundreds of people in Lebanon severely wounded, including all sorts of women. Beirut is a very densely populated city. It'd be like bombing New York, you know, in multiple places in Manhattan and then claiming, oh, we were just bombing the terrorists, but you kill hundreds of people. And that then led to Iran saying, well, what kind of ceasefires this? Iran is Lebanon is our ally. And then,

the question emerged, you know, does this ceasefire agreement actually include Lebanon? Was the United States and therefore Israel required to not attack Lebanon? And the Americans and the Iranians began claiming different things, but the country that mediated this agreement, and I think it's very important to keep in mind there are two agreements here. One is the long-term agreement. That's the 15-10-point plan that are the basis for the negotiations. But then there's an agreement for the ceasefire, which is much simpler, but still it is an agreement as to why the Iranians and the, the Americans are not going to be bombing each other and attacking each other as they've been doing for 38 days in this terrible war. And that agreement was mediated by the Pakistanis.

And the Prime Minister of Pakistan, when he announced the ceasefire explicitly said that the agreement is that for two weeks, as they work out a long-term agreement, Iran and its allies and the United States and its allies will cease attacking one another's and one another's allies. obviously for the United States, that means the Persian goal of tyrannies. But for Iran, it means Lebanon. And the Pakistani Prime Minister explicitly said that means Lebanon. And obviously the Israelis, you see Israeli supporters angry about this deal, they wanted to sabotage it. And so the first thing the IDF did, hours after the ceasefire was announced, is they went on a horrific slaughter all throughout Lebanon, one of the worst carried out in many years, which is saying

something. And the Iranians instantly said, we're not going to sit here and have a ceasefire deal when our allies in Lebanon are being massacred in this manner. And that's when they started reclosing the street. And then the whole question is, you know, are they going to, are we going to be in a worse position? Before the war, the street was totally open. Everybody could transit it for free.

And now Iran is saying they're going to charge for it, which would obviously be a victory for the Iranians. As far as NATO is concerned, I think what we're seeing here is that Trump is enraged with everybody. You know, last night he was talking about how CNN and Other people talking about the Iran deal and what he considers an inaccuracy, should be criminally investigated and even prosecuted. He's lashing out at the media.

He's lashing out at NATO countries because Trump started this war without them, didn't console with them. They never thought this war was a good idea. And now he's angry that on command they just didn't jump. The point of NATO is to defend the transatlantic alliance and the countries that compose NATO in a defensive manner. That's why the only time it was invoked was after September 11th for the United States. It was never invoked for, for Europe.

And a lot of European troops went and fought with the United States in Afghanistan and Iraq and died in those in those conflict. But you know, Trump is just blaming everybody else because he understands even though he's saying that he he doesn't see it that this is not a victory for the United States. At best, it's a kind of tie or a standstill. But the United States is supposed to be the greatest military power on earth. This is like a middle power at best that we've been choking and sanctioning. And Trump is embarrassed and enrage and looking for people to blame. he's lashing out at Europe for not going and helping him win this war. Well, why not lash out at Netanyahu to the point that you just made, Glenn?

That question perhaps sounds naive to some people, but there is reporting that Israel was caught off guard by Trump's decision to call off the destruction of an ancient civilization with, like, what, 90 minutes to go and start looking at this 10-point ceasefire plan that had been reported by drop site. Its existence had been reported by DropSight a while ago. It had been known to the public. We didn't know exactly what every step of the plan was. But apparently the reporting is that Israel was caught off guard by this. And now, on the other hand, one of the conditions that looked like was to end these proxy conflicts. Obviously, today, tragically proved that had not yet happened. If that was supposed to be a condition on the table, it was not yet being met. So is Trump in control of this? Or is Israel? in control of this? Or is, if we keep going in a meta sense, Trump in control of Israel, he just doesn't want to have them back away. I mean, this is the kind of big question, right? Is like who's in control of this relationship? And I think we have to be extremely skeptical.

I don't say just rejected of him, but be extremely skeptical of reporting that Trump did a ceasefire deal about consulting Netanyahu and getting his sign off or even that the Israelis attack Lebanon without Trump's knowledge or approval. Because so many times in the past, typically through Barack Ravid, who was an Israeli reporter at Axios and was in the IDF and their notorious signals units have 800. He has connections to both the Israeli and the American government.

And for a year and a half now, he's, or longer, he's been publishing these articles, going back to Biden. The U.S. and Israel out each other's throat. The Americans are infuriated with the Israelis. The Israelis want to do this, but the Americans don't want to do this. and every time it turns out to be false. And even when Israel went and attacked Iran last year in June

that the United States eventually joined for one night, Trump immediately came out, Mark Rubio came out and said, oh, we have nothing to do with this. We had no idea they were doing this is not our thing. And then when Trump received it to be accessed the next day, he said, I'm the one who engineered this. It was Netanyahu and I.

And even leading up to that bombing, we were constantly being told Trump wants to do a deal with Iran. Israel doesn't want to deal. They're angry at each other. they're diverging. And this was all kind of a ruse to lower the guard of the Iranians to make them think that Trump wasn't going to let Netanyahu attack. That's what the reporting was. And of course, the opposite happened. So, you know, I do think that Trump wants to get out of this war simply for political reasons. He understands it's a disaster for him politically, economically, even

militarily. But at the same time, for whatever reason, and we can talk about all the reasons why, clearly he is very, let's just put it as generally as possible, as generously as possible, he takes into very strong consideration the way he does for nobody else what Benjamin Netanyahu thinks and wants and typically ends up aligning with it. Yeah, and this is where I wanted to just kind of walk through a little bit of, from Netanyahu's perspective, he believes, and, you know, it's obviously not crazy to believe that if you are Israel with an actual nuclear Iran, not far away, that's an existential crisis. Iran believes that nuclear Israel already having nuclear weapons, we can get into all of that as well, but that's

an existential threat to them. They exist, the United States of America has nuclear weapons, a threat to them as well, potentially. But Netanyahu's perspective on this is that Iran poses an existential threat. I don't think that's entirely irrational. if they have nuclear weapons, which they do not right now have nuclear weapons and have offered, obviously, to get on an off ramp, the question is whether you trust them, etc. But Glenn, even by that ambition, I don't know that Netanyahu has made his country more safe throughout this process by, or that Donald Trump, by his own actions, have made Israel more safe, Americans more safe, by pushing this war, and then ending with potentially Iran in charge of the Strait of Hermuz, charging tolls,

that will allow it to reconstitute its missile supply from where it was before the war relatively quickly, drone supply from where it was before the war relatively quickly. You may disagree with some of what I laid out there, but I'm curious for your take. Well, to begin with, you know, Israel has been dependent on the United States for its security, for its financing, for its military, for pretty much everything, going back decades. And for a long time, pretty much since I've been born, there's been a bipartisan consensus that in the United States that you support Israel and you give it everything it wants. And politically, it was basically untenable to do anything else.

People had their careers destroyed if they tried to dissent. I cannot express, obviously polling data shows this in the most shocking way, but just as somebody who has covered this issue for more than 20 years, Israel, I've always been a harsh critic of Israel in the U.S.-Israeli relationship. the radical change in public opinion toward Israel and toward the U.S. relationship toward Israel is something that I honestly never expected to see in my lifetime. It was like even if you dream about something,

some cause that you believe in. You kind of dare to dream, but not so much that you're going to inevitably disappointed. It's like Lindsay Graham. It's unraveled so quickly. It's the inverse. You're the inverse Lindsay Graham. It's Lindsay Graham fantasizing about the Trump administration.

And he's getting everything he wants, like, in a way that he never thought was possible at the second Trump administration, which is a whole other bizarre issue that somehow he and Mark Levin and the neocons that Trump fouled to vanquish are the people who seem to be getting everything they want from this presidency. But so that's the first thing is this is a big danger for Israel. And it's not, you know, basically the only group left that likes Israel that thinks well of Israel are old conservatives, like conservatives, not even like over 30. conservatives over 50 or 60.

Like basically the people have been feeding on Fox News for three decades and getting their news about the world from Sean Hannity. That's it. Young conservatives hate Israel are done with it. The entire debt, you can't be a politician Democratic Party basically and take money from AIPAC. It's radioactive and poisonous. This is such a radical change and is replicating itself in every country.

I mean, all throughout Europe, same polling data in Latin America, in Africa. people are seeing what Israel is doing, whether they're right or wrong, or you can just set that aside. So that is a major security threat to Israel that the whole world is starting to really hate it. And then on top of that, you know, this question of nuclear weapons,

there are a lot of countries that have nuclear weapons, including countries that we're told are completely insane, like North Korea. And it was a big danger, supposedly, that Indian, Pakistan, we're going to get nuclear weapons because they have such, they hate each other almost as much as the Israelis

and Palestinians, but going back, you know, hundreds of years, And yet you see North Korea has ballistic. Well, as you said, North Korea also has ballistic missiles with a range that's further than Iran. They already have those, like the freak out over Diego Garcia. North Korea can already cover the whole globe. Exactly. So why don't we wake up petrified about North Korea?

It's because human beings, whatever you want to say about Iran, they're this apocalyptic doomsday cult. I see a lot more of that in other countries like Israel and the increasing United States. but even if they are where all as human beings were in doubt with this very strong will to live. And all of us are willing to sacrifice our lives in pursuit of a cause. Everybody who joins the military in the United States is basically saying, I'm willing to die to defend my country. You know, Patrick Henry, this was the ethos of the United States, give me liberty or give me death.

Like I'm willing to give my life for a cause. This doesn't make you a crazy person. But Iran has done nothing that suggests they're suicidal, that if they did have a nuclear weapon, they would attack Israel knowing that they would be, instantly obliterated as a civilization off of the planet. But that said, you know, last June, when Trump bombed Iran, he said, and it's still up on the White House website, that that bombing campaign, quote, totally and completely obliterated

Iran's nuclear program. And when a reporter said to him, hey, like, aren't you going to come back in six months and tell us we have to go to war with Iran again? Because they have a new nuclear program. He said, how dare you impugn the competence and courage of our pilots and you're spreading fake news? And yet here we are now in another major war being told that we have to go stop this nuclear program that right on the White House website says was totally and completely obliterated eight months ago, and which Tulsi Gabbard under oath said is a country that has never abandoned the 2003 Fodwa from the Supreme Leader

that they will not get a nuclear weapon. They want a nuclear energy program is the right of every country. The country that has a huge stockpile of nuclear weapons and a doctrine called the Samson option to use it against multiple countries that they feel that there exists, is threatened is Israel. To me, that's the scariest country with nuclear weapons. And even if everything you said is true that like Netanyahu rationally perceives Iranian nuclear program or the Iranian nuclear weapons, do we have threat to Israel, why are we going to war over that? Let Israel resolve that. That's what countries, you know, are supposed to do is they're supposed to learn to

live with their neighbors and fight if they can. But why are Israeli threats are always our wars? Well, and it goes further to your point about public opinion, I had to get your reaction to this interview. It was like a man on the street interview and a woman's response to Trump. Let's roll S6. It's giving war crime. You can't do that. We don't just annihilate people because we can and, you know, make a grab for the money and the oil. and that's what we've done in Venezuela

and that's what we're doing in Iran I mean spot the lie Glenn that was MS now it's giving war crime yeah I mean I know we're supposed to focus on like her use of this like Gen Z jargon or whatever which I think came from gay culture like all new trends come from either black culture

or gay culture I think this one came from gay culture not that I would know but I do have a couple of gay friends who claim that although they always want to claim credit for everything but everyone says that it doesn't mean that you have street credibility having gay friends gone it doesn't count i know but i just i do have a couple of i just i know a lot of people think i'm very homophobic so i just want to make clear when i know about gay culture it's because i have i do have a couple of friends who are telling me that not because i would know what otherwise but uh like i i think this woman is is a voter in marjorie taylor

green's district now marjorie taylor green's old district right that's what where they interviewed her and i i mean i mean this honestly like just from that 20 second clip i would vote for that woman for like high office, like Congress or some like big state office in Georgia. Because, and this is why I like Marjorie Taylor Green, because Marjorie Taylor Green always went around saying the people in her district are like this woman. They don't wake up wanting war. They don't wake up worried about Venezuela or Maduro or all these things Trump has

focused on are the Iranians. And I don't think that woman is on the left. I'd be willing to bet anything she's not. But she just has this like innate sense that it's wrong for the United States to just go around starting wars to steal people's oil and to start wars for any reason other than because countries attack us are about to. And I think that's why this war

has been so unpopular from the start. Not because people love Iran, but because we learned our lesson through all these wars we lived through. And that's why Trump was elected in the first place. This was his big appeal is we're not going to have any more of these wars. And I think there are a ton of people like that woman

who are using her common sense and her basic morality to understand why this is just totally wrong. Well, let's check in on A, the state of the fourth estate, and B, the state of Trump's opposition. So first we'll roll S-7. This is CNBC's coverage of the war. It's deadline that President Trump has set, APM, has threatened to destroy a civilization.

How does an investor process that? Is it a bigger upside risk or downside risk? What are you doing, Glenn? What did you do with your portfolio? up. It'd be like saying the Germans are building these concentration camps and they're incinerating millions of Jews.

Like what do you think that might have what kind of impact do you think might have on the Dow or the S&P? Like should investors be wary of this? Should they be excited by it? I mean, I don't know if she intended that. We all have our moments, especially live, like where we don't represent ourselves well,

but that is fucking sociopathic. And I mean, just like the what just, it's not even like, okay, you want to analyze a war like coldly, okay, and still say that, I still think it's pretty disturbing. But she explicitly said, she's like, hey, so there's this possibility of civilizational annihilation. That's what the president is threatening. We might have that overnight. How should investors think of this? Like, what should they do? Is there an upside?

And you say, where do you grow? Like, where do these people come from? How do they so disconnect from like the basic human rally that we just talked about that, that random voter in Georgia having. It felt like a scene out of Don't Look Up, the David Soroda Netflix movie where this is like exactly parodyed. It could be ripped from. I actually saw that tweet because I saw that video because Sarota tweeted it. And meanwhile, here's here's Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer, the opposition to Donald Trump with a robust, strongly worded response S6. All of this happens when one man, especially a man acting as unhinged as Donald Trump, has unchecked power to wage war. He backs himself into a corner with dangerous, escalating rhetoric.

The entire world holds its breath, wondering what's next going to come out of his mouth? And can he ever find a way out? A commander-in-chief who is truly in control would never have gotten into. to this colossal mess to begin with. That is exactly why I am announcing. I am announcing that today, the Senate will vote next week on the war powers resolution. Congress must reassert its authority,

especially at this dangerous moment. Oh, thank you, Chuck Schumer. Maybe you should have done that in Libya? You know, first of all, Emily, you know, you and I speak in part for a Libby. living. And I don't think I've ever been as halting or as incoherent in my statements extemporaneously as Chuck Schumer was there, even though he's reading a prepared script. Like, how do you just keep getting lost and being so inarticulate when you're literally reading

words that were written for you by some aid that you probably read twice or three times beforehand? And I do think it's a huge problem that we can talk about some other time that we're basically a government in a country run by very old people who are just, wearing down, who are just slower. But I also think, like, you have to go back to last year when Trump said that he wanted to have a deal, a diplomatic deal with Iran to avoid a war, Chuck Schumer came out and started mocking Trump. That's where that whole taco thing became popularized, not by Chuck Schumer, but at the time it was.

And Chuck Schumer was taunting and mocking Trump for resolving this dispute with Iran diplomatically because he is a lifelong Israel supporter and wanted a war with Iran and was daring Trump. And you see a lot of Democrats doing that now as well. Like Chris Murphy was saying, this is a pathetic deal that Trump got. You had a Democrat from Connecticut. He's supposed to be even like a liberal Democrat, left liberal.

And he's basically saying this deal is too favorable to Iran. I hope it doesn't get ratified. And I hope this doesn't get accepted. Meaning I want the war to continue. And it's so dangerous. If you're a Democrat who's been going around saying this war is, you know, an atrocity. It's extremely dangerous. Why would you then turn around and basically try and force Trump into re-

restarting the war by telling him that his deal is too favorable to Iran. And he's been humiliated. It's like they want this war to continue on some level. Yeah. It's, I mean, if you're Chuck Schumer, I'm sure you do want this war to continue on some level. Your entire record as a senator suggests, you're pretty upset. Is he, is your impression that you voted for the Iraq war? He voted for the Iraq war.

And by the way, for people who don't know, you mentioned Libya. And I, in congressional, I think this is such an overall fact, Emily. like it shocks me every time I remember it. It isn't that Obama went to war in Libya, obviously a country that hadn't attacked us, with out congressional approval. The House of Representatives at the time was controlled by the Republican Party.

It was John Boehner and a bunch of like, you know, increasingly right-wing members of the House. And they voted on whether this war should be authorized and they voted against it. They rejected authorization of military force for Libya. And Obama ignored it and went ahead and prosecuted the war anyway. Right.

Yes. And I just, I don't know. I find that. I find it insane sometimes that people don't get more like upset about that. And with the support of Democrats who are still running the party. Right, right. Although they were a minority. Like the authorization was rejected by Congress. And Obama just said, I don't care. I'm going to just continue this war anyway. And of course, it's destroyed Libya, created a gigantic migrant problem for Europe, brought slavery and ISIS to Libya, shattered it into a thousand pieces. And I think that's, I don't care. what Netanyahu and his allies in the U.S. like Chuck Schumer want for Iran. That's a good point. Glenn, before I let you go, I know you mentioned that you have a couple of gay friends. So I wanted to, I don't want to stereotype or anything.

I did want to get your response to Anna Wintor and Merrill Streep's new interview in Vogue ahead of the Devil Wears Prada sequel release, where Anna Wintor finally took a swipe at Melania Trump, who back in 2005 actually was on the cover of Vogue, an impressive feat, of course. This is what Wintour said. Quote, I don't think wearing a power suit to the office is in any way necessary. Think about the women that one admires. Mrs. Obama comes to mind whether she's wearing J.Crew or Duro Oluw or Matthew Blaise's Chanel. She always looks like herself.

I'm full of admiration for New York City's new first lady because she looks so cool and wears a lot of vintage, young and modern and also entirely herself. To be fair, Melania Trump also always looks like herself when she dresses. as Merrill Streep then took the opportunity to whine once again about Melania Trump's enigmatic. I don't care do you jacket from like 10 years ago? Glenn, why are we still having top fashion people compare Michelle Obama favorably to Melania Trump in the year of our Lord 2026? Yeah, I mean, I'm not gay, but I love to talk about Anna Winter and Merrill Street.

These are divas and icons. You know I just, like, am so obsessed with them. No, I mean, this is, we all basically have moved past, like, peak wokeism and worshipping Michelle Obama because she's a black woman and, like, all this language about how she navigates the world in our own, like, strength and occupies spaces and all that. But we, we. Emphas on the strength. Oh, yeah, she's very strong. She's a really strong woman. We all have that.

But there's a sector of kind of like the dunce faction that kind of like pays attention to politics, but like in the Hollywood celebrity way that doesn't do, hasn't moved past that, can't move past it. They don't really have the capacity to interpret the world in any other way. And so they're still stuck on like just nastily and gratuitously criticizing Melania Trump, even though, you know, whatever you say about Malanya Trump, she's extremely an extremely beautiful woman. I think she's conducted herself quite well under the circumstances, you know, as the first lady. I don't, even when I have the greatest animosity for trumpet, it never spills over to her. But this is like petty and pathetic and trivial, but it just shows like they're kind of, like the trivial

and how they're just, you know, permanently stuck there. No, I have to say, I think I really agree with that because if you're Winter, you're this ultra wealthy, cloistered, somebody who is really treated. I mean, the entire point of the devil works Prada is that she's constantly treated like royalty and is super insulated to the point where she can just command the next Harry Potter vote. Harry Potter book on a whim. Again, this is fictionalized. I'm not saying there's any real representation. That would be ridiculous.

But if you're in a position of that level of power, you're totally insulated in a way from like fashion, actual fashion, which isn't just clothing. but like the cultural fashion of the time. So you revert to where you are stuck and like where you were before you were totally that cloistered and that rich and that powerful. Yeah. I think you see this with political pundance as well, like the ones who came of age in like the late 80s, early 1919, years like the boomer ones where the idea was the Democratic Party was too far to the laugh with Michael Dukakis and Walter Mondale and needed Bill Clinton as moderate, you know, centrist to realign the Democratic Party with like the military industrial complex. and Wall Street, and they never moved beyond this,

this idea, though the Democratic Party is too far to the left, even though we're in a completely different framework, they don't evolve with it. But the other thing about Anna Winter, you know, obviously she's trying to convey that she has this sort of liberal policy, this liberal political ethos and sensibility. Aside from being completely coistered, the whole point of Anna Winter and the whole myth of Anna Winter,

and it was reflected in this film, was that she's incredibly abusive to her. It's like, Glenn. froze briefly. So workers, are my back? Yeah, you're back, Glenn. You were mid-rant about,

yeah, you're back. You're mid-rant about how Anna Wintour is abusive. Yeah, she's abusive to her worker. She's abusive to underlings. And this is obviously the antithesis of this liberal value and these liberal sensibility.

She's pretending that she represents and it just makes me sick. Oh, that's such a good point. We all love Anna Winter. She's a diva. Deva queen, but no, it's such a good point because the entire re-release of the entire sequel to Devil Wears Prada, celebrating her, the idea that she's doing this joint interview with the woman who's this fictional iteration that was meant to, I mean, if I were the author of this book, seeing Merrill Street and Anna Winter, like, buddy, buddy, would be somewhat offensive to the art that this is all based on.

Yeah, I mean, I guess if you're, the producers of this film and you want Meryl Streep to have to go promote it, having this kind of moment that we're now talking about and therefore talking about the film, I guess it's kind of clever. Did you know it's coming out in theaters soon? I didn't. Buy your ticket. You forced me to pay attention to this by telling me we might talk about it.

But, you know, I guess it's clever in that way. But yeah, like as art, which they constantly refer to themselves as, if it's supposed to be this searing indictment of the character and integrity of Anna Winter, then exactly. Why is the beloved actress who's playing her and showing her kind of dark and dead and soul now being so amiable with her? Yeah, I think that's a really good point as well. Everything that I say is a really good point. So there's no need to. So that was the first one since we started. I really wish there was zbiotics for Glenn Greenwald conversations. But unfortunately, here we are. Make sure that you follow Glenn on. Substack. It's so exciting that Glenn's on Substack. It's Greenwald.com. I've been loving it head on over there. Glenn, thank you so much. Always great to see you. Amali. Have a good evening.

You too. All right. We'll be back in just one moment. But first, it's spring. And if you're looking for real results, better gut health, glowing skin, stronger hair, steady energy. I always, we talk about the new year. For me, it's spring. Spring is like, it's the time of renewal. It's summer's coming up. So you can start with colostrum if any of those things are your goals. When your gut is balanced, everything else improves. And today's sponsor, Cowboy Colostrum, offers premium bovine colostrum sourced entirely from American grass-fed cows and made in the USA. Unlike many brands, it uses true first day whole colostrum. That's packed with bioactive. like immunoglobulins and growth factors, but don't worry, only the surplus colostrum is collected after calves are fully nourished. Always good to know that. Now, cowboy colostrum is unprocessed,

full fat, and protein rich for maximum nutrient density. And supporting your gut can boost immunity, reduce bloating, and improve skin, hair, nails, and energy levels. These are results that you can actually see and feel just in time for the summer, by the way. So it's easy to enjoy with natural flavors like chocolate, Madagascar, vanilla, macha, and strawberry, all made from real ingredients. My favorite is the strawberry. It's super, super easy to use. You just add a scoop to your coffee or smoothie, and you feel the difference all day long. So for limited time, our listeners get up to 25% off their entire order. Just head to cowboy colostrum.com slash afterparty. And use code after party at checkout. That's 25% off when you use code Emily at Cowboy Colostrum.

dot com slash after party. All right. I'm excited now to bring in Katie Pavlitch, who is, of course, the host of Katie Pavlich tonight. I had the chance to sit down with her earlier today. She's about to go live on news station right now. So she can't do the 9 p.m. hour because she's got the 10 p.m. hour to hold down over on News Nation.

But we had a very helpful discussion. Katie has covered immigration her entire career. She's from a border state. She's done a lot of reporting in that border state. and all over the country. So there's been just a flurry of tragedies, getting very little attention in the legacy media when it comes to American citizens being preyed upon,

victimized by people who shouldn't be here. 100% of these crimes are preventable. Let's go ahead, bring Katie in. Well, I'm very happy to be joined by my friend Katie Pavlach, host of Katie Pavlitch tonight, which airs on weekdays at 10 p.m. Eastern, weeknights, I should really say 10 p.m. Eastern over on News Nation. Katie, thanks for coming on. Hey, Emily. Thanks for having me. Great to see you. Can I just start by asking about the news show?

Sure. You're hosting your own show and News Nation is itself kind of an upstart competitor to the cable networks, one of what you were on for many, many years. What's it been like to kind of do you feel, what's it been like to be in this new kind of media climate at an upstart place like News Nation, your own show? Yeah, I mean, it's first of all, very exciting because it's in D.C. And as you know, and I've told this to you before, many times, it's working in D.C. is like dog years. One feels like seven.

But especially now with the second Trump administration, I feel like every day is historic in Washington. And the press is the first thing that writes the rough draft of American history. So being a part of that is always been really fun. But I feel like now when the news cycle runs so quickly in this town and there's so much happening every single day. But they wanted to be more focused and based in Washington. And News Nation gave me the opportunity to do that every single night on Capitol Hill,

talking about the biggest issues of the day, interviewing and talking to people who are making big decisions on behalf of not just the country, but things that affect the entire world. And so in terms of News Nation, you know, they started about five years ago. They are only growing. They have this, you know, mentality of it's kind of scrappy and fun to like get into this new thing. and we're building something exciting. And for me, I'm in a new position where I'm challenged every day

and this creative process to put together a show and to think about what people are interested in to tell stories from a different perspective. As you know, the media is full of lots of different people who have very similar viewpoints and perspectives on things. And so news stations seeing the opportunity to add me to their lineup as someone who has a different perspective, not just at the network, but also just generate in Washington.

and the New York, you know, with D.C. corridor, I thought was a really good thing for them to do and an interesting opportunity for me as well. Yeah, I love it. I mean, especially in primetime, a great example of your coverage that sets you apart as a journalist going back to the very beginning of your career when I was a baby. We both were babies. That's true. That's true. I did bring you to my college campus, though, to prove that I'm younger. That's true. You are younger. That's true. I will say on that. A student. Okay, anyway.

But Katie, going back to the beginning of your career, you've covered immigration. And I don't know if I've ever seen the national media less interested in covering immigration than right now. Obviously, there's a lot happening in these news cycles. But there's just been this tragic flurry of awful incidents involving illegal immigration. And this is one of the things I want to talk to you most about because I feel like it is getting very, very little coverage elsewhere. where let's start in your home state of Virginia, where this is, again, there are people in the media, national media, who live in Fairfax County, who live in Northern Virginia, you know this, Katie, but it's absolutely insane.

Nick Minock has reported, quote, so far, there have been four murder cases in Fairfax County this year. Three of the four suspected killers are illegal immigrants, including Abdul Dalo, who is charged with murdering Stephanie Minter, a single mother at a bus stop. Before that, Steve Descano's office dropped multiple felony charges against Jalot, even though police told Descano's office in writing that Jalow could kill someone. This week, Seven News, was

the first report that an illegal immigrant killed his three-month-old baby daughter, and another illegal immigrant killed a man by repeatedly stabbing him with a machete in Fairfax County. These stories are not in the national media at all. I mean, seriously, it was hard enough with the Sheridan Gorman

story, which basically got buried after the wires did their write-ups and there was the breaking news coverage. It basically disappeared. Am I crazy? Until they found a suspect. And when they sat and found it who the suspect was, that's exactly when they dropped the story, right? It was like, oh, an illegal alien from Venezuela who was led out of local jail after having a rap sheet, a mile long, who was led under the Biden administration. Watching the narrative of this just issue generally that I want to get to the specifics of the story, the horrific stories that you just talked about, we've gone from over the years, well, it doesn't matter because illegal aliens commit crimes at lesser rates than American citizens to essentially this local prosecutor in Fairfax County, making it a point

to specifically release illegal aliens who have committed crimes simply because they are here illegally. It's almost like a checkmark. Well, if they have this and they get a free pass on a lot of these issues. So they've gone from tolerating it and justifying it in some weird way, even though none of these crimes should be taking place at all because the people shouldn't be in the country, to then saying, well, we're actually going to give these people a pass because they're somehow being persecuted by the federal government through the enforcement of immigration laws that were passed by Congress. It's completely outrageous. There are real victims here.

People are being murdered, particularly women, which I find interesting, that the media who constantly focuses on that issue and narrative is right for them. aren't interested in talking about it now. We had a friend of Stephanie Mentor on the show a couple weeks ago, and she actually was in jail with Stephanie Minter because they were addicts and they were out of jail. They were getting their lives together. Stephanie was at this bus stop and was murdered in cold blood by this illegal alien.

And her friend was talking all about how, look, I understand, but you have to enforce the law or these things, they start happening and they continue to happen. and you put people in danger. And I just do not understand your logic from the media side, which is supposed to stand up for citizens against bad policy, ignoring these stories, but then in these sick, weird ways, dropping them when the suspect doesn't fit the right person who they want to highlight or somehow weirdly justifying the reason that it happened

and not showing any concern about it happening to someone else. I mean, having this happened multiple times in Fairfax County, is an absolute atrocity, but it's happening all over the country. And just in the lead up to where we are with this, we're seeing a lot of this happening because the people were let in over the course of the past four years

of the Biden administration. But I've been covering this, as you mentioned, I'm from Arizona, so I felt like I lived it for a long time in a border state and was warning early on when I came to D.C. and watching new policies, every state's going to become a border state.

Virginia is not technically a border state, and yet here we are, right? Georgia is not a border state, and yet you have Lake and Riley who was murdered there. Illinois, for example, is not considered a border state. And yet you have Mexican cartels running the streets of Chicago, making it uniquely dangerous. And so now you're seeing now the border is closed,

little coverage of how that happened, what's happening now to keep it closed, what kind of technology we're using to make sure that people aren't coming in and out. But now you're seeing this problem with the people who are here, who are criminals, who are not vetted, we are told over and over again by the federal government, these people were vetted.

We know who they are. Of course, they were never vetted. You can't vet them against a system that doesn't exist. And now you have story after story and some of them

that we don't even know about, quite frankly, because a lot of these jurisdictions and these blue cities don't calculate it properly. So they don't put in their statistics that this person was here in the country illegally.

They oftentimes will call Hispanics whites. So they're manipulating and cooking the books in a lot of places. The George Zimmerman classic. Yes. Or they'll say they're a Maryland man or a man from Maine or a man from Michigan. They don't talk about the fact

that they are here from a foreign country where when they came and the fact that most of the time they're here in the country illegally and not that they have a criminal record. So these are the way, just saw this with an Irish, an Irish guy. Yes, it doesn't matter where you're illegally. Right. You could be from anywhere. And there are people here from everywhere committing crimes and against innocent people and changing people's lives forever. And it doesn't seem like the media matters or media cares. And on our show, what we tried, what we've been doing with Ali Bradley, who's a border reporter, is we have her come on and do a full segment once a week about the worst

of the worst who's being arrested, what their mugshots, what their record is, what they're being arrested for now, where they're from. So Americans can see this is not just some innocent Maryland man. These are hardened criminals from all over the globe who've come into the country. and now the law is being forced, at least in a way that's possible. And we're showing people who they are because the media as a whole is trying to make this abstract issue. And it's actually very, very real. And one of the reasons they're probably not covering it is these early results of Abigail Spanberger's approval rating.

This is one by 15 points, the great hope of the Democratic Party's future. if you listen to some of the party's analysts. And her approval rating is actually lower than Glenn Yonkins, according to a New Washington Post poll. And she's doing poorly with black voters. She won by a much larger margin than Yonkin did. But in a poll last fall, the same poll last fall, he ended his term with 50% approval and 46% disapproval. Spanberger is 13 percentage points. lower than the average for Virginia governors. Her approval rating right now is at 47%, 46%

disapproval. That's margin of error type of stuff, Katie. So perhaps it's one of the reasons we aren't seeing as much coverage of this in the media. I mean, how much have you heard about this story out of Florida? This is graphic. This story out of Florida, incredibly graphic. And breaking, you know, within weeks of Sheridan Gorman, we can go ahead and roll the video. We're not going to play the full video. That's how graphic it is. This is out of Fort Myers, Florida. Horrifying, horrifying story. The suspect who was charged of murdering an innocent gas station clerk in Fort Myers, Florida by bludgeoning her to death with a hammer, is a Haitian illegal alien who was caught and released at the border by the Biden administration in 2022. An immigration judge

ordered Robert Joaquin deported from the U.S. later that year, but DHS says the Biden, Biden admin shielded him for deportation by granting him TPS temporary protected status, which expired in 2024, barely anywhere in the national media today. Katie, this happened just days ago. Again, a woman being bludgeon to death with a hammer on camera. So we can all see what happened there. And yet the media doesn't seem to be interested because their narrative of, you know, the intersectionality of oppression somehow. This man is from Haiti, so therefore he's oppressed, he's had a hard life. Maybe there's some kind of justification for this.

How dare we try to deport people like this before they go and commit these crimes? I mean, it's absolutely assinine. It makes absolutely no sense. And I've heard the argument, well, you can't, you know, there's so many illegal aliens into the country. You can't just assume that they're going to commit a crime. Well, a crime has already been committed when you come into the country illegally. first of all, you can argue whether it should be or what it shouldn't be, but we are a sovereign nation, and I've traveled to 30 plus countries all over the world, and you can't just walk

right in. In fact, border policies around the world are quite strict. And so this idea that we're just supposed to trust that people are good people, in a society, the way that you do that is through obeying the law. You have a same set of standards for everybody, no matter where you're from. And when you allow certain people to commit crimes for the sake of a narrative or an ideology or because you want to trust that they're good people, these types of things continue to happen. It's not about discrimination. It's not about race.

It's not about necessarily where you're from, although there is data to show that when people come from certain places, they have different cultural values than people in the United States do, and therefore certain crimes are committed at higher rates. But this idea that we just, A, let these people in, allow them to commit asylum fraud and then commit, crimes with very little attention in places like Virginia, Florida, luckily is a place where when you commit crimes like this, you go to jail for a very long time. And then allow them to

reoffend in this violent manner. It's just, it doesn't make sense to the average American. And it's dangerous. It's quite dangerous. And the role of the government is to protect their constituents from this type of danger. It's not to take their money or to control their lives, but to protect them from this type of danger. And the Biden administration put a Americans into very dangerous, vulnerable situations by importing millions of people and they have no idea who they are. They have no clue. Yeah, right. Even some minors who were supposed to be supervised when they were let into the country that the Biden administration lost track of. The Trump administration is obviously

trying to fix that problem as did the Biden administration when it became public in the New York Times. This was actually a great New York Times investigation when it came out several years ago. But it's not even just these violent crimes. I mean, in a period of about a couple of years. I think there were about 35 murder homicide cases with illegal aliens. I mean, that's compared to the number of people who should be in this country illegally. Insane. A hundred percent of those crimes were, yeah, 100 percent of that is preventable. So talk to those families. The same thing with DUIs, dozens. Identity fraud. Identity fraud, stealing people's banking information. This is where I was just going to go, Katie, because one of the things that people

rarely ever talk about is F9. We can put the Daily Caller headline up on the screen here. They had a new story just today. Exclusive illegal Pakistani trucker nabbed after allegedly killing American in head-on highway collision. We've seen more than one of these stories. I think they are sticking with a lot of people every time you hear them. Sean Duffy talks about this a lot. Obviously Transportation Secretary. These stories are insane. They're completely insane. So This is, according to ICE in March, a Pakistani national accused of killing a Maryland father of two in a horrific 2023 highway crash. This is according to information shared with the DCNF. Hussein was operating a tractor trailer when he allegedly drove in the opposite direction along a Pennsylvania highway and collided with another vehicle,

disregarding a wrong way sign and a one-way indicator sign. Hussein drove his big rig into I-83 south and accelerated to 44 miles per hour northbound on Southbound lane in October. where he killed a naturalized U.S. citizen named Andri Nunes, a father. And this is absent from the major media headlines. Well, Emily, so basic journalism is, okay, who, when, why, what, how? How do the, what are all the factors of this story? And you ask why, especially. And how did this happen?

This happened because this person can't read English. This happened because this person doesn't understand road signs. And the idea that in America today, you can get a commercial driver's license to drive a multi-ton vehicle on the highway or the freeway at 80 miles an hour with your fellow citizens and not understand what the words stop or one-way mean is so outrageously mind-blowing.

It makes absolutely no sense. It is completely backwards. only conclusion you can come to is that there's corruption. And there's a lot of corruption. There's a lot of corruption with the government entities, like in California, for example, they've been issuing these commercial driver's licenses against federal law to people who cannot prove that they are American citizens and to people who either don't take the English test or who failed the English test and they hand it out anyway because then there's the driving schools that are benefiting from this. Hundreds of them. I believe that Sean Duffy has said they've stripped the

credentialing for hundreds of these schools so far that just pop up. And then there's the companies that are using illegal labor because they want to pay these truckers less money. Right. We had Marcus Coleman on our show a couple of times. He's a truck driver. And his daughter, Delilah Coleman, was hit by one of these illegal aliens driving with an illegal CDL in California. She's five years old. She was severely brain damaged.

She will have to live with her father for the rest of her life. She's lucky that she survived. He's been in Washington advocating. He went to the state of the union address. advocating for changes to this program because he understands what's wrong with it. And he also knows all about all the corruption at every single level with the local governments, with all the driving schools, the kind of people that they're hiring. And he said that they're paying people under the table in order to save money while putting

everybody at risk on the road. And this is not the only story. I mean, you mentioned the story in Florida. There was another one about a year ago where there was a driver from India who, Did a you turn and ended up killing Americans? I mean, this is happening all over. This is happening all the time. A family.

There was that story of the Amish family that was killed, I think, a month ago as a result of someone who is, again, on an illegal commercial driver's license. So again, this is preventable. And yet politicians are not willing to put a stop to it on the left, it seems, for the sake of satisfying all these entities that they won't admit are in the interest of making money illegally and illegal aliens, not in the interest of keeping Americans safe. It's so incoherent, as you point out, though, because the women are being harmed.

Obviously, women are being harmed. Naturalized citizens are being harmed, as we just mentioned, people who went through the process the correct way. So immigrants, basically, are being harmed as well. And on top of this, last thing I want to ask you about, Katie, the estimate is about 18% of truckers are foreign-born. I'm sure you remember this New York Times story from a few months back where they talked about a man who was the victim of Social Security. fraud. And they equated his suffering with the suffering of the man who was not supposed to be in this country who was committing the fraud, the migrant who was committing the fraud. And you look at all of these stories and you think there's a way to frame this. Even if you're, you know, Bernie Sanders

circa 2002 and you're still calling open borders a Koch brothers proposal. Exactly. I know. You can see all of these issues through that lens. If you have 18% of truckers on American roads, being immigrants that is obviously distorting what you pay American truck drivers who can speak the language, read the language proficiently. It is creating this supply that you get addicted to of cheap foreign labor that is abused and distorting the entire market. And again, all of these stories that we've just read off of the course of the last like 20 minutes, this could be headline news every single day. And rightfully so, but it's not. Well, there's, of course, Of course, the bigger issue of the political power that comes with this and the risk that the left has been willing to gamble with, with embracing this kind of, just, you know, basically saying there's no difference between a citizen and a person who comes here illegally, equating the two is the same.

They do that on purpose so that there's no difference, so that, you know, really we're all just the same and therefore, citizen doesn't really mean anything. and then of course blurring the line between illegal aliens and legal aliens, people who come here legally to this country who want to be American citizens. There's a political part of that, which is a bigger discussion. But in terms of what's happening with these stories, everything that we've talked about today, I have heard four years covering this topic. Well, what about the humane side of this issue?

We want to be humane to the people breaking the law. We want to be humane to illegal. immigration. Nothing is more humane than A, open borders, and then B, throwing out all the logical rules, like, I don't know, being able to read English when you're driving on the road, for the sake of people not getting murdered or killed when they're just going about their business as an American citizen in this country, is a complete, I would say failure, but I think that's too nice of a term because it's, I think it's being done on purpose because it's so preventable. And it'll It is a deliberate act that these politicians are putting Americans in danger for, and there are benefits to them, whether it's money, whether it's corruption, whether it's political power, whether it's their ideology of equating everyone. And we live in a global society and there's no such thing as real citizenship and especially American citizenship. We could never be exceptional in that way. It is horrific. And that's why this is an issue that people actually care about and vote on a lot, just because you're not seeing,

tens of thousands of people pouring over the border every day doesn't mean this issue isn't affecting people and people it's happening more than we know because it doesn't get reported at a whole lot and I guarantee you people know someone who's been affected by this issue and it's a touch point whether it's in your kids school whether it's in your healthcare system whether it's in fraud identity fraud whether you've been in an accident with someone who's here legally driving on the road whether your tax dollars are getting stripped from you to go pay for uh child care like in New York, for example, for illegally. That doesn't happen, Katie.

There's a cost to all of this for every single person who pays taxes in America. So that's why it's a big issue. And it's just completely inhumane to Americans to allow this to go on. You and I both know, Katie, that people who are here illegally or even people who are going through the legal process cannot access public benefits. That's never happened before ever, especially in California. Yeah, especially in California. Also just around the country, that's what those Medicaid reimbursements are.

Have you ever been in an emergency room in a sanctuary city? I mean, it's a wild place. It's a wild place. Look at the state budgets. Look at every state budget and look at how they categorize health care costs and the way that they increase taxes for the sake of health care after they just made themselves a sanctuary jurisdiction. And you know exactly where that money is going to.

Good point. Katie Pavage covers all of this in great detail. interviewing people who have knowledge of it, who are on the ground. Every time I asked you a question, you were like, well, we talked to this person and this person and this person. It was deep personal knowledge of it. That's why people should go watch Katie Pavlidge tonight on News Nation weekdays 10 p.m. Eastern. Katie, it was so great to have you. Thanks for coming on.

Great to be here. Thanks, Emily. Talk to you then. Well, for years, legacy media, government, and big data companies coaxed us into surrendering our We talk about this on the show all the time, giving lip service the whole way to privacy while leaving their digital backdoors wide open for their own purposes. Well, Unplugged set out to do something about it. The Up Phone by Unplugged is the smartphone designed to restore your rights. When it comes to blocking third-party trackers from shadowy data brokers, the Up Phone by Unplugged outshines every device on the market.

And you can see it actually on the phone that I have here. This is my Up Phone. You can see it right now. You just open up the, it's actually really cool. There's a privacy center right on the home screen. You open it up and it shows you how many trackers have been blocked so far that day. You have total privacy controls on the phone. And so you can just switch things on and off.

And one of the absolute coolest things about the up phone is that there's even a battery disconnect switch. It's physically on the phone. So off really means off. And all of this is independently verified and tested, so you can actually be confident in knowing your Upphone is the most private smartphone that you could possibly buy. So check out Upphone from Unplugged at Unplugged.com slash Emily. That's unplugged.com slash Emily. Hi, everyone. Well, before we close out the show for the night, I have a couple of more topics to go through.

We're going to start with Nikki Glazer and end on Tucker Carlson. That's the most after-party show conclusion that I could possibly think of. Now, I will say, I have always liked Nikki Glazer. I do find Nikki Glazer funny. I find her to be fairly clever. She's a great roaster. There's always open questions about who's actually writing jokes for the roasts. But I think Nikki Glazer performs pretty well off script, which is a good indication that she's talented on her own.

She went on call her daddy recently. And before we get to that, let's put up this page six headline because this is from April 8th. Nikki Glazer, quote, kind of likes it when boyfriend Chris Convey hooked up with other women. quote, it's just what I'm into. Let's watch this video of Nikki Glazer on Call Her Daddy talking about this. In a relationship, I don't really care if my boyfriend were to hook up. Okay, I read about that. Yeah, I like that.

We need to talk about that. Okay. You call this the hot husband fetish. Yes. Which is essentially when you want your partner to have sexual experiences with other people outside of the relationship. Yeah. So when did this start for you, Nikki?

Let's go back. This started with my, my boyfriend, when I was. 29. Like, I would always ask him about, like, past hookups and girlfriends and how they got together. Like, I was, like, the beginning. Like, how did you guys first know you liked each other? Like, I love that, like, our legs were touching on our table and neither of us moved our leg or so, like, stuff like that. I'd be like, so, like, I don't know, it would make me, like, horny to, like, think about him doing that with other girls. And then it reached a point where he was out of stories. Like, he had gone through all of them. And I was like, and it's almost like he was

telling the same ones. And I was like, I know this one. So it wasn't as exciting anymore. but I was like, I think I need you to like get some more stories. You need new material, crass. Maybe it's my competitive nature. I was going to say. I want a guy who other girls want. Like, I like something that is like, you know, you want a handbag that other girls are like, oh my God, I'm dying to get that.

That's relatable. That is relatable. I feel like I want to be very clear that I know that this is not how many women feel and I'm not encouraging any other woman to do this. Or I think this is like the right way to run your relationship. I think, honestly, it probably is detrimental. I remember Dr. Drew telling me, like, after he heard me say that I don't mind, he was like, I need you look me in the eyes and repeat, I am enough.

I am enough. And I'm like, no, it's not about that. I'm like, maybe it is. Maybe I'm not enough. And I feel like he has to have more. But it's, it's, there's probably a sadness to it. But I just, it's just what I'm into and I can't help it. There we go.

So Nikki Glazer kind of did my job as the conservative podcaster in rebutting her own point, which is that I don't doubt what she's saying. is accurate, but it sounds like it's exceptional. And of course, everything has their exceptions. The exceptions prove the rules. And in this case, Nikki Glazer sounding wacky to the vast majority of women is proving the rule that it is totally unusual. She's also probably right. And Dr. Drew, who we're trying to get on the show, by the way, is probably right as well that it's rooted in some type of sadness.

But it's not just Nikki Glazer talking about this. Let's put F-16 up on the screen. This was a recent article, literally the day before the Glazer page 6 article came out right before this call her daddy episode. The headline is, The Secret to a Great Marriage crushes on other people. Now, Glazer wasn't talking about a marriage, of course, but she was talking about the Cut Magazine article is talking about how women find that having a crush on like a guy in the workplace who is not their husband will make them. Let's just say, we'll spice up their relationships for a lot of the reasons that Nikki Glazer just outlined about handbags. So the cut is prescribing this as, quote, the secret to a great marriage. Nikki Glazer is at least saying, this is probably very sad and stemming from insecurity and likely not a prescription for a happy relationship.

But the cut's just like, no, no, no. go ahead, feel comfortable crushing on other people in the workplace. It's fairly limited and narrow-knit's prescription. Still inappropriate, by the way, because it's going to get turned around on women. Just imagine. Just imagine someone sends this to their husband, and he's like, you know, I agree. Thank you for the permission slip for me to start flirting with every other person at the water cooler, or I guess the curing is probably the better stand-in for that these days. But the point is, there is a point. The point is the exception proves the rule about oxytocin in humans, especially in human women. This is biological. I'm going to read here from,

actually, this was a study out of China from 2020, but there's a lot of research on oxytocin. This is super interesting. I'm reading from the abstract here. Super interesting research. And they found, quote, here in a pre-registered double-blind study involving 160 subjects, we report that while both sexes valued faithful individuals more for short-term and long-term relationships, both single men and those in a relationship were more interested in having short-term relationships with previously unfaithful individuals than women. Oxytosin administration resulted in men rating the faces of unfaithful women is more attractive and likable, but in women rating those of unfaithful men is less attractive and also finding them less memorable, brutal.

Oxytocin also increased single men's interest in having short-term relationships with previously unfaithful women, whereas it increased single women's interests in having long-term relationships with faithful men, thus oxytocin released during courtship may first act to amplify sex-dependent priorities and attraction and mate choice before subsequently promoting romantic bonds. So it's not just oxytocin, oxytocin, we should add. There was a study out of a school in Florida not long ago also that postulated all kinds of biological factors that go into the human proclivity, apparent proclivity for monogamy, but certainly oxytocin has been theorized as an important part of that. And the reason I mentioned this is just that there's something

about postmodernism that has made us comfortable prescribing things like open relationships, polyamory, we talked about the Lindy West saga a million times. A lot of this is pitched by postmodern feminists who are doing the work of men for them, like cloaking it in feminist language. Like, it's incredible. And a lot of this is fading. But that's a trend we've seen for long over a decade now, really going back to the sexual revolution.

It's often the feminist camp that is telling women they will be liberated if they do X, Y, and Z. And this is not what Nikki Glazer said, to be fair, but it wouldn't surprise me at all. I'm sure with 10 minutes and Google, you could find a million examples of powerful women in high-profile positions saying that this is actually acceptable and perhaps even normal or good. And every man would probably agree. Like, maybe most men would probably agree with that if they're being ultimately honest, unmarried men, I should say people who haven't been in that kind of relationship or the natural male, the male in the wild would probably agree with this as a good way.

That might be the better way to put it. So it's another example of feminists prescribing something that is great for men and makes women not feel so good about themselves, not feel so secure, and that's for biological reasons. You also then run the risk of making women feel weird. for not enjoying things like polyamory or, again, encouraging people to have open relationships and the like. And of course, it's perfectly natural, but it makes women feel like reactionary and odd and weird,

like there's something wrong with them. Again, this is women who actually read the cut, but it runs that risk as well, not just doing the work of the men for them. and undermining women, but also then additionally making women feel extra uncomfortable with their own natural inclinations. All right, that's enough about Naked Glazer for now. Let's finish tonight on Tucker Carlson, who delivered a very interesting monologue. Maybe you love Tucker Carlson, maybe you hate Tucker Carlson. His monologue on Monday was really, I thought, a landmark.

And I wrote about it for unheard this afternoon, wanted to chat about it on the show today. And just go through a little bit of Tucker's argument. And then my argument, this sounded a little meta, about Tucker's argument. So when Donald Trump threatened now infamously, of course, to wipe out a, quote, entire civilization, people debated whether that was serious or it was a negotiating tactic. I think it was most likely a negotiating tactic. If I put myself back in that mindset, it was fair to see. say this was likely a negotiating tactic before that 8 p.m. deadline on Tuesday. But it doesn't matter

if it's maybe a negotiating tactic in the moment. Donald Trump wants that to be unclear. We went through this over and over again with the tariffs. That is his point. So the taco label isn't always appropriate because it's not so much that he's chickening out. He's intentionally pushing the limit to see what he can get away with and to confuse and muddy the water. It's very much the kiss and jarring madmen theory where you can't project one way or the other that you're serious or unsurious. Otherwise, it destroys the entire point of negotiating through the public and through the press. You want your enemy in this case, your opposition in this case, to believe that you're actually that crazy. Maybe you will just wipe an entire civilization off.

the map and never to be rebuilt is what Donald Trump said. So it's true that people are often being hysterical over taking Trump literally when in all likelihood you should take him figuratively. But in high-state cases, we don't have the luxury of saying, well, he's most likely being figurative, therefore it doesn't matter. We do have the luxury of saying, well, it seems like he's probably being figurative, therefore it doesn't matter as much as maybe it would if he didn't have a history of doing this. But that doesn't also give us a luxury of just saying, oh, the president of the United States made this really serious, dramatic threat. It's probably meaningless. So we're just going to act as though it's probably meaningless and sound like that

CNBC anchor in the clip we played earlier with Glenn, ask about the upside and the downside for the market on cable television. So Tucker made an argument on his show about the Easter message that Trump delivered. The quote, open the fucking straight Easter message. What did he say also? Like, praise to Allah. This was on Easter morning. Tucker criticized him for using the effort on

Easter morning. He said that Trump was, quote, threatening or was threatening to, quote, destroy civilian infrastructure in another country, which is to say commit a war crime, a moral crime against the people of the country whose welfare was one of the reasons we supposedly went into this war in the first place.

Marjor Tieler Green said something. similar. Carrie Prejean-Bowler said, quote, every single Christian should resign immediately from this administration or said she was calling on every single Christian to resign immediately from this administration. And I just, again, want to emphasize what I'm not doing right now is saying you have to think one way or the other. That's a big conversation. What I want to say is that Tucker is dealing another blow to the conservative consensus that developed during the Cold War. And in, I think, a really significant way, he's one of the most listened to people on the right. Do, does every normal conservative or normie Republican voter listen to Tucker Carlson?

No. Is he somebody that unifies the conservative movement right now? No. He doesn't control the mind of, you know, your average conservative. But he has a big enough audience on the right that when you come out and make an argument as emphatically as he's made this one, it's going to trickle into the discourse and into the ideological bloodstream, so to speak. And also it's being echoed by other people who are disillusioned or in the camp of folks that are disillusioned with Donald Trump. So it's worth just pausing and trying to understand actually what is being said,

not a caricature of what is being said or a perverted version of what is being said, but the actual argument. And then people can disagree from there. But I think this is really significant because this is an explicitly Christian denouncement of the foundation that the American conservative, the American conservative movement, arguably the Western conservative movement,

has been built on since the end of World War II. And it asks Christians to reevaluate some of their most basic, most reflective, assumptions about politics in a nuclear world. And I'm scrolling through the article as we talk here just to kind of follow along. But during the Cold War, in the aftermath of the Cold War, in the aftermath of World War II, the Cold War begins in a state of rational paranoia. That's an oxymoron, right? But it's actually probably the best description for the first, you know, first decade, first two decades. We're still in the first century of,

nuclear weapons existing, shrinking the globe to the point where everyone shares borders with countries that have nuclear weapons, in essence. You could make the same argument about ballistic missiles as well, but particularly with nuclear weapons, which come bearing the threat of total annihilation. So World War II ends, nuclear weapons have been used. The world comes together. Western countries come together, the globe comes together more broadly, and decides on things like the UN Declaration of Human Rights, decide on different, the laws of war had been, obviously there was legal buildup to what we have right now before World War II, but certainly we came to more agreements after the horrors of both World War I and World War II. argues that like the UN Declaration of Human Rights is interestingly explicitly Christian. It's something that couldn't exist outside of the Christian tradition. This is a controversial theory. I just have to recommend everybody read Dominion in order to see that argument. It's a long

book, but it's really well worth the read. You can listen to it on audiobook. You can also just put Tom's name and the word debate into YouTube and watch his debates with people who disagree with him on that topic. I find it very persuasive. I find his theory to be very persuasive. But the way to think about this is if the moral frameworks that the West built after World War II were rooted in Christianity, Christian universalist values about protecting the weak. This is how Holland would describe it. This is how Tucker has described it. Protecting the weak and preventing that Nietzschean, Hitlerian, raw power politics, the Ubermensch, who acts on power, the will to power, because nothing else matters. There is no other moral infrastructure in Nietzsche declares

God is dead and says that what comes in next is just power, that Christianity was a slave religion, a popular criticism that's been leveled against Christianity for a very long time. And Tucker Carlson was saying, no, we don't believe that. We stopped, we all agreed not to think this way after World War II. We all agreed this is not what we wanted to do after World War II because it leads down some really scary roads when nuclear weapons exist. But of course, because of this rational paranoia in the new nuclear age where you had people hiding under their desks in classrooms, schoolchildren,

hiding under the desk in classrooms. Again, rational paranoia. You have no idea what the Soviet Union is going to do. Soviet Union has no idea what we're going to do. The Japanese certainly were not prepared for what ended the two nuclear weapons that ended that conflict in the Pacific. So the proxy wars spring up and were justified on these grounds. Cuba is a very good example of this. rational paranoia. It's a rational paranoia about what might happen if a country 90 miles off the coast of Florida has missiles that are on the ground that close, has surveillance bases in Cuba. If the Soviets had a real foothold in Cuba, which arguably they did, that's a disaster potentially for American civilians because you have no idea what the Soviet Union.

Union is going to do. The Soviet Union would say the same thing about this was the Cuban missile crisis, laid up to the Cuban Missile Crisis, and Turkey and the like. This is a rational paranoia. And so all of these proxy wars were justified on those grounds that actually we are protecting our weak and our vulnerable. And so we need to use our strength, protect the weak and the vulnerable from the Soviets. And you saw often that, for example, support for the Contras would be cloaked in the language of sometimes human rights or opposition to Cuba. The blockade, constantly the blockade, which obviously you can argue in the long run, many people argue is good for Cuban civilians because it will liberate them from communism. That's the popular

argument on the right. But what is that also talking about? Liberating the people of Cuba. This is the language, once again, of human rights. And so both of those things are happening at the same time. Some of it is entirely sincere. Some of it is often a pretext, as I would argue was the case in Iran in the 53 coup. You could say that's a little bit about oil, a little bit about the Soviet Union. It was definitely a combination of both. But this is genuinely very interesting because Tucker isn't making his argument from the liberation theology perspective, the people who you rallied around Oscar Romero or were fighting with the Sandinistas or supporting the Sandinistas. And it's not from the anti-American left either. His critics will just call him flatly

anti-American for sharing this argument. I don't think it's remotely fair if you listen to everything that Tucker says to peg him as somebody who is just categorically anti-American. What he doing is in a way arguing that Christianity should be severed or that Christians should divorce from the Cold War consensus that said these Cold War proxy conflicts very much in places like Iran where we say it is a you know destroying bridges or wiping out civilizations or whatever Lindsey Graham's bluster is that vacillates between saying, we're going to bomb them back to the Stone Age or we're going to help the Iranian people liberate themselves, just like American conservatives have long talked about Castro.

Tucker is questioning that. That has been the basis. That's the center. That's like the Overton window of centrist Republicans, centrist Democrats. Also, I would just argue the mainstream conservative movement for a very, long time. And whether, you know, people who find themselves in that camp would go back and reevaluate a lot of these decisions during the Cold War. I mean, I would, frankly, knowing what we know now, which of course we didn't know at the time, there's the famous example of Richard Nixon

ordering the CIA to make the Chilean economy scream. Those were his words in a secret memo. It caused a huge uproar when it was disclosed in the 1970s. Nixon did that in secret. The difference between Nixon and Trump, as Trump is openly saying things, paraphrasing him, of course, but like, make the Cuban economy scream, make the Iranian economy scream just today. Secretary of War Pete Hegeseth said we had the ability. We were locked and loaded to grind their economy to an absolute halt. That is different and interesting. And Trump is forcing this conversation to the surface by being as transparent and sort of raw as he is. Now, I just also wanted to put this post up on the screen from Eugenie Bastille.

I don't speak French, sorry, probably butchered that name, who said, there is a rift that will deepen in the coming years between the Christian conservative right and the Nietzschean-Pagan Promethean right, the latter hating the former for its supposed weakness and then adds in parentheses understanding little about Christianity preferring Captain America to St. Thomas Aquinas. I'd quibble with that a little bit. The Captain America part versus the Aquinas part. But we don't need to get into all of that. I just think that's generally a good point. What we're seeing is Carlson drifting away from Hegsseth, drifting away from Trump. And the daylight right now between Hegsef and Trump is that Hegsafe is,

creeping closer towards Trump's position, but also still kind of clinging to this ideological framing of you grinding another country's economy to the halt being something that is in the interest of the Iranian people and humanity and the world overall, which is a consistent position, of course, if you're Pete Hegeseth, it's just this is the daylight between Hegseh and Tucker Carlson. Tucker Carlson says that's bullshit, basically, is what he's. is the point that he's making. So I think this is much more interesting than people are giving it credit for. And part of what's frustrating is that because people are so polarized over individual figures and we're having these conversations on online casinos, basically, meaning X, social media, where you're incentivized to be extreme and to condemn or endorse is very often no incentive to do anything in between. we're not even really able to have this conversation and to figure out what's happening before we move on to the next rage cycle.

So I thought it might be helpful to just kind of pause and give some of my thoughts on what I see unfolding from that monologue, which was very, very compelling. People on the left were commending it. I saw like Podbro, John Favro saying it was worth watching and then people, lips getting mad at him for doing that. But I think it was a landmark moment, whether you think Tucker's irrelevant or you disagree with him, you hate him, you think he's anything. American. He was articulating an argument that is gaining seam and momentum regardless. And I think some of that is because the democratization of information, it's harder to keep, you know, what Nixon said, secret for long in this day and age. Trump is very much a character of this day and age. So he understands that you would have a hard time keeping it secret if you tried and that there's,

you know, the medium is kind of a mental. to the type of politics that he does. So anyway, I'll start rambling or stop rambling for now. Imagine if I was just getting started. That would be rough. But as a reminder, you can email me, Emily at devilmaycaremedia.com. Your questions for happy hour. That's our podcast-only edition of the show.

It is available in all podcast feeds, totally free. You can send me your questions, Emily at devilmaycaremedia.com. Looking forward to reading all of those tomorrow. I record in the afternoon. So get them in before then if you want them answered on this week's show. Otherwise, we will be back here with more after party. Next week, 9 p.m. Eastern, Monday and Wednesday. See you then, everyone.