After Party with Emily Jashinsky - Megan Rapinoe's Horrible Take, Trump Torches NYT, and Media Distorts Savannah Guthrie’s Message, with Michele Tafoya and Tom Bevan

Episode Date: April 7, 2026

Emily Jashinsky is joined by Michele Tafoya, Republican candidate for Senate in Minnesota, four-time Emmy Award-winning broadcaster and former NFL sideline reporter to discuss why Tafoya has decided to run. They also discuss Minnesota’s troubles, a new protest on Easter Sunday outside the church Don Lemon stormed, Tim Walz’s radical “No Kings” message, and Megan Rapinoe ripping the IOC's new policy to protect women's sports. Then Emily is joined by Tom Bevan, Co-Founder & President of RealClearPolitics, to talk about President Trump’s news conference on Iran, his battle with the media, and what the Midterm tea leaves are saying. Emily rounds out the show with Savannah Guthrie’s powerful Easter message in the wake of her mother’s disappearance and how the media completely missed the mark in its coverage of her remarks. PreBorn: Help save a baby go to https://PreBorn.com/Emily or call 855-601-2229.   Unplugged: Switching is simple, Visit https://Unplugged.com/EMILY and order your UP phone today!   ZBiotics:Go to https://zbiotics.com/AFTERPARTY and use AFTERPARTY at checkout for 15% off any first time orders of ZBiotics probiotics.   Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Welcome back to After Party, everyone, the show for people who like their news, maybe a little bit lighter, maybe a little bit later. I'm still rolling with that tagline. We'll see how long it sticks for. Tonight we're going to be joined by Minnesota Senate candidate, Michelle Tafoya, and then Tom Bevan of Real Clear Politics. Make sure to support our independent journalism by clicking the subscribe button on YouTube. It helps us so much. Also, wherever you get your podcast, we appreciate it. We're going to start with Michelle in just one moment. And believe me, we have a lot to get to in Minnesota. I know you believe me. Probably don't need to convince you of that. Protesters were back at it.

They were there at City's Church in St. Paul, just in time for Easter, of course. The state just continues to be plagued with chaos and division, as many of you know. So there's a lot to get to with Michelle. Then Tom Bevin's going to join us to break down Donald Trump's major press conference today, including his brutal back and forth with the New York Times. And some big news about what he's planning to do with that deadline. tomorrow. The people of Iran are bracing for the attacks that Donald Trump is threatening. So just hours to go on that. And Tom is here to break it down. He's also a polling guru. So we are

going to get his take on some big new numbers showing that both Trump and the Democrats look like they're in trouble right now. How does that work? How are Trump and Democrats in trouble at the same time? Tom's going to explain. And finally, if you're just tuning in for the first time and you're thinking, wow, what a well-styled host, so in, so fashionable, do not get used to it. I was on the Megan Kelly Show today, and Megan and her wonderful team gave me a makeover. I'm always obviously incredibly beautiful. So today is just on another level. And I apologize to the listening audience that you're missing out on this, that you've been deprived of all of this. Finally, one announcement, uh, my brother's fiancee created this after party cup for me. Uh, and so now I have a

corona light in the after party cup. So shout out to her. I think it looks pretty cool. All right. That's enough of me. You're take a quick, quick, quick, quick break and be back with Michelle to FOIA in just one moment. But first, over the years, I have been clear about this. I am not just pro-birth. I'm pro-life. There's a big distinction between those two things. And being pro-life means standing with mothers not only before the baby is born, but long after. And that is exactly why I partner very proudly with pre-born. Now, pre-born doesn't just say babies. They make motherhood abundantly possible. They provide free ultrasounds and share the truth of the gospel with women in need. And then they stay. How cool is that? With real practical help,

including financial support for up to two years after the baby is born. That's incredible. That is what true Christ-centered compassion looks like, not just for the baby, but for the mother, too. And here's where you can make a difference. Just $28, just $28 provides a free life-saving ultrasound. One chance for a mother to see her baby. This is a real statistic. And when she does, she's twice as likely to choose life.

Preborn is trying to save $70,000. babies this year. That is a real tangible number. You can be a part of it. So don't just say your pro-life. Live it. Help save babies and support mothers today. Go to pre-born.com slash Emily or call 855-601-2-229. That's pre-born.com slash Emily. All right, I'm excited now to bring in Michelle Tafoya. She's a Republican candidate for Senate in Minnesota. Four-time Emmy Award-winning broadcaster, former NFL sideline reporter. Michelle, every time I've talked to you, I've been star-striott. So thank you for being here. I'm the one who's starstruck today because you are styled so beautifully. I wish that your audio-only audience could see you in that stunning green, the hair, the it's all just chef's kiss, as they say. Well, right back at you, Michelle. And I wanted to start just by asking why, you know, you have been, you've been doing TV for so long.

I feel like what you were doing was so fun and exciting. Now you're going into politics and politics is a mess. Republicans don't typically win statewide in Minnesota. There are so many challenges in front of you. So why do it? Why put yourself through this, Michelle? You know, the question about Minnesota, one of our most beloved senators is Senator Rudy Boschwitz, who was in the Senate when Reagan was in office.

So it's been a while. He is in my corner. and he really believes that I can win. So look, I got into it. Why? Because, yeah, I had a great career, Emily. There's no question. It was fun, the Olympics, the NBA, the NFL, all of it, golf.

It was great. Great. There was a point a long time ago where I really started thinking about serving and what I could do to serve the country that I love. And I guess I really got pushed over the edge when I saw how declining, how, how in decline Minnesota is, was, is. And that concludes everything for public education to crime, to all the chaos that you've been talking about, the fraud.

This stuff just made me think, I can't just sit here and look at this. I think that I have a platform that I can use, and I think I can win. And so, yeah, odds against us, no question, but we feel really good about where we are, and I know every candidate says that, but I think our metrics tell a good story.

It's also kind of a new time in politics, which is interesting in that campaigns are done differently. I mean, right now you're talking to me on a podcast, presumably from an easily accessible studio. You're not in a TV studio. You're not in New York. You're taking this message straight from your own studio onto independent platforms.

And I feel like having done what you've done for so long, you're very prepared for the new messaging environment because you understand the kind of normal person given your career. You've probably interacted with normal people every single day of your life will come up to you and say, oh, man, Michelle Tafoya. It gives you actually good preparation

for this media environment, I would imagine. It absolutely has. I mean, all of my entire career has. You get as many reps as I've had over the years, Emily, and you think, you know, it becomes almost second nature. But this is a new animal in that You know, we're talking about issues that affect people's lives. We're talking about fraud.

We're talking about taxes. We're talking about health care. We're talking about the war in Iran. We're talking about all kinds of things. So, you know, I spent the last three and a half years doing a podcast of my own and really digging in deep to those issues with a lot of guests. And that was great, great exposure for me to talk to these people and to learn and to grow my wealth of knowledge.

But also just to, yeah, to master the message. messaging. There's a lot to this. And you said normal people, which I smiled at, because there are a lot of normal people in the world. And, you know, right now we tend to be very polarized. I think a state like Minnesota is really looking for someone who can speak to both sides. And I think that's what I bring. Yeah, that's interesting because I wanted to talk to you a little bit about some of the weirdos, the abnormal people who were gathered outside of City's Church in St. Paul for what else? Easter Sunday, Where else would they be on Easter Sunday? But outside of City's Church in St. Paul, which is, of course, where the protesters stormed as Don Lemon live streamed, the activism, whatever he called it, back that was February, I guess.

Man. So a protester named Emily Phillips was arrested yesterday and then released today after a judge who was appointed by Tim Walls dismissed the charges. So let's first take a look at what the scene was outside of City's Church. You can, as you can see it on the screen there, they're shouting obscenities. There are children nearby. It's nasty. Here was Emily Phillips leaving jail and giving what I could only, I couldn't help but be amused by this very self-serious speech, Michelle. Let's take a look at Emily Phillips.

I think, Trisha Poland and James Cook. You know, but nothing happens. I am out. The charge has been dismissed. Let's go. Oh, that's lovely. That's lovely. Well, your governor, Michelle, had this to say at the big no king's protest in St. Paul last week.

They have been radicalized, but it's only by kindness. Let's take a listen. They call us radicals. I see that the president said it's a bunch of radicals. You're damn right. We've been radicalized. Radicalized by compassion. Radicalized by decency.

Radicalized by due process. Radicalized by democracy. And radicalized to do all we can to oppose authoritarianism. Is Tim Walls radically decent and the protesters? Are they radically decent, Michelle? You know, when he talks about compassion and decency, I wonder what he thinks about, how does he justify all the. fraud that took place under his watch where every single

Minnesotan who is a taxpayer and lots of other Americans because a lot of this was federal taxes were robbed of their hard-earned cash because they thought that it should go to a leering center or you know the feeding our future which no one got fed where's the compassion in that where's the compassion in allowing girls sports to be, you know, have males playing and taking roster spots away from girls, taking scholarship opportunities away from girls. Where's the compassion? I know he's going to say the compassion is on behalf of the trans athlete. No one's saying that athlete can't compete. But as the IOC just said, we've got to compete in your division. We fought so long for Title IX.

And now they're just sort of putting it in a shredder. Where's the compassion there? Where's the compassion in defunding the police, which Minnesota was the, you know, the epicenter of during the George Floyd riots? Where was the compassion in letting a police precinct burn to the ground? Where was the compassion from this governor who didn't say a word for days during the George Floyd riots? And people's businesses got trashed. Where was that? I mean, I could go on and on. He likes to say that he's compassionate and civil and decent, I'm sorry. I don't see it. Well, yeah, well, a Walsa appointed judge was dismissing those charges against Emily Phillips. Now, they said they didn't have enough to make the charges stick. Emily Phillips stepped out onto a sidewalk in front of City's Church

and had gotten multiple notices for being too loud. All of the protesters had. But I think a lot of people would look at the scene outside of City's Church. A lot of Minnesotans would look at that and say there's nothing decent about that. There's nothing decent about defending it. It has to stop. And Michelle, I'm curious why, I mean, Fox News had this big report today from Osir Nomani. $250,000, a quarter of million dollars, was spent by some leftist groups to put up that massive no-king's protest last week that we just played a clip of Tim Wall speaking at. Why is Minnesota of all places? I mean, people around the country are scratching their heads about this. I'm sure people in rural Minnesota are scratching their heads about this.

Oh, they are. Why has Minnesota become a hotbed of chaos? You know, I think that that we, are Minnesota nice and sometimes compassionate at our own expense. And I think a lot of Minnesotans are waking up to this. Gad's sad. The professor calls it suicidal empathy, meaning you're such an empath that you would let anyone do anything and it might even end up harming you, but you're, you've got to be, you know, an empath. So look, I see it all around Greater Minnesota. People are angry. They don't feel represented. They don't feel like what you saw there at this No Kings Rally represented them. You know, you can trot out Bruce Springsteen. You can trot out the celebs. You can trot out all that money. And by the way, where it came from is a whole

another story. This is not organic. This is a produced, financed, a bit of activism that is really just not representative of the state of Minnesota. So November's going to be fascinating. And I genuinely believe people want to see change. That's why Tim Walls isn't running anymore. The Learing Center was kind of his undoing, right? That whole bit of video that was put out on the internet showing how much fraud there was and how easily it was, it was spotted. And then suddenly Tim Walz was like, you know, maybe I can't run. I'll step down. Yeah, that was remarkable. Yeah, that was remarkable. in it of itself, actually. So on that point, senators confirm cabinet secretaries. Now looking back at Operation Metro Surge, obviously, Christenome is no longer DHS secretary and it's Mark Wayne Mullen.

How do you look back at DHS's oversight of Operation Metro Surge? Because there were even some people on the right that were uncomfortable with what transpired in the state. How are you looking back at it now? Well, you know, I jumped into this Senate race right when all hell was breaking loose. You sure did. It was right then. And, you know, you find yourself in the middle of it right jumping into a Senate race. And these are the questions you're asked. And you've got to respond.

And I responded genuinely. And this is what I've said then, and I'll say it now. Two people did not have to die. Renee Good and Alex Pretty. And honestly, anyone who suffered a death of a friend or family member, knows how heartbreaking this is for those families. It's gutting. It's awful. And it didn't have to happen. Now, two things can be true at the same time. And I will say this, that your guy Tim Walls that you just showed there and our mayor Jacob Fry were also out there agitating people at the same time they

were preventing law enforcement, local law enforcement, the police department from assisting in any way, shape or form. The law enforcement could have been out there putting up barricades saying, you know, this is a nice operation. We're not helping with the actual operation, but we need to keep people back. We need to keep people safe. We need to keep the onlookers safe. The people who are being pursued need to keep them safe. And we need to keep the officers safe. I remember one of the conversations I had with a police officer who said, you know, we risk life and limb to go put someone a criminal, a dangerous criminal behind bars. And then they release them. And And now you're asking federal officers to come in and do the same thing, risk their life and limb to put these people back behind bars.

Where is the sense in this? So we had these two opposing forces that really made for the perfect storm, and it was not good. And anything that was wrong that needs to be adjudicated should be adjudicated. Another thing the Senate has voted on is tariffs. And I went back and looked, I think you did a whole interview episode of your show. on tariffs, like an expert, somebody who'd studied it really closely. And Minnesota obviously has a lot of ag, important relationships with Canada. And I mean, I'm from Wisconsin.

I know how important for farmers being so close to Canada is and how that can change your business and the like. So do you have a sense, there have been some Republicans who've crossed over to vote with Democrats on the tariffs. Do you have a sense of what would be best for Minnesota? Do you trust the president's continued stewardship of the trade? relationships. What do you thinking about on that issue right now? Well, certainly the president and his work in trade has brought in trillions of dollars to the United States, and we are still

rebounding from the four years of just sky high inflation from the Biden administration. I don't want to overlook that because it can't be overlooked, because it's in the paperwork. It's fact, right? This is what we've had to come back from. I've talked to multiple farmers who really just want government to stay out of their. way and let them do what they need to do. At the same time, you know, look, we're talking corn, we're talking soybeans, we're talking sugar beet, and these things, some of people have benefited from some subsidies in the farm bill. So I would need to see exactly what the proposals are. I would need to look at the legislation very carefully before I decided how to go about doing this.

But some of the farmers are very patient, and they've said, look, this was sort of baked in, saw it coming, knew this might be a factor, so we prepared. Other farmers, maybe didn't. Look, no one works harder than farmers. No one. You know that, too, having been from Wisconsin. They are around the clock, year round. It's a constant game of catching up. So it's a very nuanced issue and one that I certainly would like all the facts in front of me before I deliver an answer on that. Yeah, entirely fair. You mentioned. the IOC earlier, and I wanted to get into that because speaking of why Minnesota finds itself in the crosshairs, we're actually just at the center. It's one issue to the next. It's just unbelievable.

It is. The Department of Justice just announced a lawsuit against Minnesota's Department of Education over Title IX violations, and this is a really strong lawsuit, just looking at it. The DOJ is suing the Minnesota Department of Education for, quote, requiring girls to compete against boys in athletic competitions that are designated exclusively for girls and allowing boys to invade intimate spaces designed exclusively for girls, such as multi-person locker rooms and bathrooms. The way that I wanted to, because you've been so outspoken on this, Michelle, and I'm curious now that you've been campaigning, gas prices are high, there is some discomfort over the tariffs, there's housing shortages that younger people are dealing with student debt, all of that.

Where does this factor in? It's such a common sense issue, but when pocketbook issues come into it. Those people weigh those. So what are you hearing? They do. But at the same time, whenever I bring that topic up and I say unapologetically, there should be no boys and girls sports. The place erupts because everyone's seen it. No girl dad wants this. No, no dad wants to see this for his kids. It's, it is a common sense issue. So this falls under that bucket of things like voter ID and men and women's sports and some of the simpler things that are really 80, 20, and I would say closer to 90, 10 issues. And this is a big one.

And, you know, I got to mention Megan Rapino, the former soccer player, whom I covered in the London Olympic Games back in 2012. And Michelle, we actually have a clip. We have this clip of Rapino that I want to get you to respond to it. You're going to love it. You've probably already seen it. But this is S4. Megan Rapino on a podcast just a couple of days ago.

So let's take a look. A really horrible rule that came out from the International Olympic Committee. They've announced a new policy that they're calling, I can't even believe they're calling that this, because it has nothing to do with protecting women. The protection of the female-bracketed women's category. We already know that biology, as much as we would, want it to be just nice and clean and tight and perfectly in one category, another.

It's not. We know that. So now what we're doing is subjecting everybody, all women, and all people who are identifying as women to this really invasive testing. That only to me just says, like, oh, so we're just trying to whittle it down to a certain type of woman. Is that what we're doing? Like, that's really the whole game here.

I mean, they're the ones who are. subjected all women to this, Michelle, I could go off, but you mentioned that you covered her. So you're probably not surprised by anyone. You know, it's gotten very disappointing, though, because in 2012 at the Olympic Games in London, she was, it seemed a little more pro-woman than she is now. Look, it's X, X, X, and X, Y are not the same. And this is not an invasive test. And by the way, you know what else they subject Olympic athletes to? Drug tests of various kinds. You know, you have to pee in a cup or whatever. because they don't want people having advantages from performance enhancing drugs.

This is like a cheek swab. That's not invasive. Do you know how many nasal up-the-nose COVID tests I had to take just to cover the NFL? I didn't even play in the NFL. I was covering it. I had to have three tests every week. This thing going up. Talk about invasive.

This is not, for her to say, you know, we want science to boil down to this very nice tight, clean package. Actually, it is very, very simple. And don't let perfect be the enemy of the good, Megan. We have seen, Ms. Rapino, many instances where women have been robbed of titles, whether it be swimming

or golf or boxing, and in the name of this inclusion, if you are a male and you test positive for being a male, then you should compete against males. And if you can't get as far

in that division as you like, tough noggies. Neither can a lot of people. That's the way the world works. Let the best of the women compete and let the best of the men compete. One quick example, and I'll finish with this. When I covered world championship swimming before the Olympics, there was this mixed medley relay where you got two men and two women to swim the various strokes. And it was very strategically organized by the teams because they thought, well, our best backstroker is a woman, But she would have to compete with their male backstroker. That leg might not help us.

So let's use her instead over here. It was all very strategic. Why? Because they're different skill sets and different skill levels. Period. The end, it is simple, Megan Rapino. It is. You know, this just occurred to me.

I hadn't planned to ask about this. But your experience speaks to what so many people on the right got frustrated with over the last 10 years, which was specifically that corporations, which conservatives had looked very warmly. upon these great American corporations turning to the insanity of, for example, boys and women's sports and saying that you're bigot if you don't support it, that you're a bad, like, going full ripino. In Minnesota, Minneapolis in particular, the Twin Cities have a ton of corporate headquarters.

That, I imagine, as a U.S. Senator, your experience kind of prepares you to push back on this cultural pressure from corporations. I'm sure you're prepared for that. I'm ready to go. And, you know, it's interesting because we have had some corporations leave us and go to greener pastures where it's a little bit more friendly to businesses. Minnesota has a pretty unfriendly business environment. And that's part of this problem.

We're losing some of the best minds, the best businesses, the best philanthropy out of Minnesota because of some of this stuff, whether it be the high taxes or, you know, just the environment in which to work. So, and you see a lot less expansion. We've got companies that are headquartered in Minnesota, and they're not expanding within their own state. They're saying it's just not friendly here. So we're going to go to South Dakota. We're going to take our expansion of Wisconsin or Iowa.

So this is something that I think businesses have already felt some of the pushback, Emily. I think that they feel like, you know, that the wokeness has come back to hurt them. and so some of them are already quietly sort of toning down that rhetoric within their companies. But it has to, it's got to stop. It's particularly when it comes to distinguishing between men and women. And that is not phobic of anyone. I don't care how you want to live your life. But when you then impose that in a category like women's sports,

you've got a whole other argument coming. And finally, last question, and this is one that you're going to get a lot, you've already gotten it a lot, which is abortion. I think you and I probably would have a respectful good faith disagreement on it. But I was curious to ask, which is totally fine, by the way. The president disagrees with probably many of his own voters and many conservative-aligned independence that he brought into the MAGA coalition. But just a question about how you think about where life begins, when life begins. begins, Michelle. Well, first of all, as a senator, this is no longer in the federal government's purview. This is a state's issue. And sadly, sadly, Minnesota's laws have become somewhat

barbaric. I am not a, you know, abortion on demand fan. I am not a person that thinks that you should abort a child after a certain point when that child is feasible outside of the womb. and we also, as much as Tim Walls tried to deny it in his debate with J.D. Vance, they have changed and massaged the law so that if there is a botched abortion and you've got a surviving infant, it used to be you had to care for that infant. That's not spelled out in the law anymore. I can't even believe that we've gotten to this point in Minnesota. So I'm certainly not aligned with that radical approach to the issue. I think, I think I align with Trump on this issue in that I don't like abortion, but I also believe in a woman's right to choose. I think it's between her and her morality and her doctor. And as a woman who went through horrible infertility issues and lost a number of babies along the way. And also I have that side of it. And I also adopted a baby girl from Bogota, Columbia.

when she was three months old. We, fortunately, my husband and I were blessed miraculously with a son, and then we adopted our baby girl. And I wish I could, I thank God every day that her mom had her and gave her life so that we could raise her as our daughter. It's one of the most amazing gifts I've ever seen. It's the most amazing gift. Both my kids are. And so I see life kind of ahead for my kids. And that's what really drives me into this political scene is I see what life could be like for them.

And it's not where it used to be, Emily. It's not, this Minnesota is not the Minnesota that people remember. And for my kids, I want to try to pull it back from the brink and bring some sensibility to this place. Bring some common sense back. Bring some, you know, Tim Walls likes to say, he's about decency, I beg to differ. I think a decent culture looks a lot different from the one that he's propagated here in Minnesota. So, yeah, I am against taxpayer-funded abortion, and I will happily vote for conservative judges.

But again, the issue is no longer under the Senate's purview. Thanks to a great decision at the Supreme Court. Right, right. That was, yeah, that has. It's interesting because the amount of abortions has gone up, but sending it back to states has been a big, big step in the right direction. So Michelle Tofoya, U.S. Senate candidate in Minnesota. What a pleasure to talk to you. Likewise.

Always great to see you. Thank you so much for the time. Oh, absolutely, Michelle. Have a great evening. You too. That was fantastic. So lucky to have Michelle on the show this evening. We're going to take a quick break and be right back with Tom Bevan of Real Clear Polar.

See you in a bit. Well, for years, legacy media, government, and big data companies coaxed us into surrendering our digital freedom, giving lip service, of course, to privacy while leaving digital backdoors wide open for their own purposes. Sometimes they're blatant in conveying the idea that encryption is only for criminals or that if you want privacy, you must have something to hide. Well, how did we get here? from cherishing our Fourth Amendment rights to giving them up so readily for convenience. We talk about this on the show all the time.

It was engineered. Powerful people discovered that with the right incentives, people willingly surrender their data. Who profits? The same government agencies, platforms, and media companies that want you exposed and compliant. Well, Unplugged set out to do something about it. The Up Phone by Unplugged is the smartphone designed to restore your rights. comes to blocking third-party trackers from shadowy data brokers, the upphone by Unplugged outshines every device on the market. There's even a battery disconnect switch, so off really means off.

All of this is independently verified and tested, so you can be confident in knowing your Upphone is the most private smartphone you can buy. Check out Upphone from Unplugged at Unplugged.com slash Emily. That's unplugged.com slash Emily. All right, everyone. We're back with more after party and back with more Tom Bevan. Why not? He's, of course, the co-founder and president of Real Clear Politics and the co-host of Real Clear Politics on the Megan Kelly channel over on Sirius XM 11. Tom, what's up? Hey, hey. How are we doing? Good. Did you know that you're one of the most popular guests on After Party? Is that right? I noticed Michelle Tofoil wasn't drinking, so I'm going to raise one

Hey, cheers. Did you not shame her by drinking in front of her? I did, you know, I give a Senate candidates some grace. You were trying to be respectful. I understand. Tom, when you run for Senate, which I'll fully support. You have my endorsement. Then I'll lay off. I will need to move to another state, which we're actually considering, but we still have a bunch of kids in school. And, you know, we've lived in Illinois for forever. And, you know, we live in a very liberal.

neighborhood, Evanston, Illinois, it's Jan Shikowsky's retiring. Daniel Biss is going to be our new congressperson. It's, you know, and the taxes are high, the weather's not good, but we really like our little neck of the woods. And we've got, you know, once you put down roots someplace, we've lived there for 22, 24 years. And so it's hard. But our last, our youngest is going to be a, he's a freshman in high school right now.

So we've been talking about, you know, when he's out of school or when he's in, college where we might relocate to but for the time being and and that might induce me to run for senate somewhere emily if we move to but i'm not running for senate in the state of illinois because uh you know it's just not going to happen no announcements yet um no no announcements yet i'm going to i'm going to listen i'm going to be a very purposeful carpet bagger uh no i'm just kidding i'm going to be florida i don't know that you know it takes a really odd, I don't want to say odd, but a certain kind of personality to run. And you just have Michelle Tooy on it. She's actually one of the most normal people. We interviewed her right after her

announcement. And I was, she's like super normie, which I really appreciated it. And I thought, why do you want to do this? Why do you want to subject yourself to it? That was my first question for her. Yeah. And, you know, she's, and I love that people that normies are still engaged and like going to throw their hat in the ring and do all this. But when you look at some of the folks, who run and win. And it's not a very, you know, I've covered politics now for 25 years. And it's not super glamorous.

I mean, sure, if you win and you get in the Senate, then things great. But like, if you're running for Senate, you know, and you got to drive around the state and go to these pancake breakfasts at 7 a.m. And shake hands. It's kind of, and then in between stops. You're on the phone begging for money.

I mean, it's really, it's it is kind of soul-sucking and bleak the way our system is kind of set up. So yeah, I don't know that I'm cut out for that, honestly. Well, we'll see. We'll see. Never say never. Tom, one thing I couldn't see you doing is giving a press conference like President Trump delivered this afternoon from the White House where he said, let's actually just roll this clip. This was probably the big headline from the press conference. It was a press conference of many headlines per usual.

He was in the White House briefing room. You notice when he's in there, he changes the lighting a little bit. It does look good, which is befitting because he understands television and cameras and lighting and the like. This is S7. We are up on a deadline that Donald Trump set for Iran. He said he's going to bomb them back into the Stone Ages that we're going to find out tomorrow. Iran is obviously even more on edge knowing that Donald Trump is threatening potentially civilian, infrastructure. We'll get into that in just a moment, but here's what he said at the presser.

Your messaging on the war has moved from the war is coming to an end to we're going to be bombing Iran to the Stone Ages. And we've heard a range of those sort of messages. So are you, so which is it? Are you winding this down? Are you escalating? I can't tell you. I don't know. I can't tell. It depends what they do. This is a critical period. I can tell you they're negotiating. We think in good faith. We're going to find out. We're giving them until tomorrow, 8 o'clock Eastern Time, and after that, they're going to have no bridges, they're going to have no power plants. Stone ages, yeah. Tom, he had an exchange with the New York Times that was really brutal, not by Trumpian standards, but by normal president-reporter standards, actually on this exact question of bombing infrastructure.

So let's go ahead and see this mashup of those exchanges. It was New York Times and CNN. This is S6. Deliberate attacks on civilian infrastructure violate the Geneva Convention of Conventions and international law. Who you with? I'm with the New York Times. Zolin from New York Times. Are you concerned?

Are you concerned? Is your circulation way down at the New York Times? Are you concerned that your threat to bomb power plants and bridges amount to no, no, no, I hope I don't have to do it. But if you think I'm going to allow them and powerful and, rich to have a nuclear weapon, you can tell your friends at the New York Times, not going to happen. Quiet, quiet, quiet. You no longer have credibility at the New York Times because the New York Times said, oh, Trump won't win the election and I won in a landslide up. CNN fake.

Are you willing to make a deal that does not include reopening the straight of war moves, or is that now a top priority. I would say it's a very big priority. But to close the straight, all you need is one terrorist that somehow has a truck loaded with because you can carry them in trucks, large trucks, a water mine, drop them in the water, and now you tell people that own chips that cost a billion dollars to, don't worry about the mine. Tom, normally I am, I find myself like on Trump's side when he's yelling at reporters. I think it hits very differently. And, times of war, but I can't tell if I'm just being somebody who lives and works in D.C. and has journalist brain. Maybe. I mean, it's, it's his favorite pastime. Speaking of from Illinois.

He's still, yeah, he, he, he still loves to mix it up with reporters and call him fake news. And that's part of his stick. And he's gotten a lot of mileage out of that. I do think the, you're going to commit war crimes attack, angle, whatever is a bit preposterous. I don't, you know, I saw, I think it was Chris Van Hollinger, one of the senators, like this illegal war of choice and Donald Trump's going to commit war crimes. That feels to me just over the top. I mean, look, Trump is executing this war and he's trying to make force these. guys to submit and and so he is threatening them and i i do think he will follow through on uh some of that

but but bombing some country's infrastructure is not that's not a war crime i mean he's not targeting civilians he's not doing you know he is trying to we were talking about uh carl canna now we're talking about, you know, World War II and what we did to force the Japanese to submit, you know? I mean, we dropped a nuclear bomb. We're obviously not going to go that far. But I do think Trump is serious about this. And it does put, I think the more interesting question was the first one, which was,

so are we winding down or are we revving up? And, you know, what are we doing here exactly? And, you know, his response is, I think from his point of view, exactly appropriate, well, it depends. They have a decision to make and based on how they decide is how we're going to, you know, react. So, but I just think this entire thing, whether you agree with the action, the military action or not, it's pretty clear that this is a, this is becoming more, the longer this goes on, the more this is becoming a, I don't want to say an albatross, but it is certainly a headwind that Republicans are now, you know, fighting against. Trump's approval rating is down to 40.9% on a real-clare politics average. That is the lowest it's been in his second term. On Iran, it's 39.

On the economy, it's 37. And on inflation, it's 33. And that's an average of the polls. That includes, you know, some of the more pro-Trump polls like Rasmussen that have him up closer to 50 and some of the, you know, other polls that have them a lot lower than that. And so, and it's been going, you know, it's been, it's been going down. It's been, he's been losing ground on this since he started on February 28th. And we're now, what, five weeks into it, almost six, probably into our sixth week now.

So, you know, he needs to get this, he needs to force a resolution here, which is what he's trying to do. But if the Iranians do not cooperate, you know, and, you know, there, there's another side to this. This thing could go on for another few weeks, months, and we're seven months away from the election, almost to the day. And right now, you know, it's, that's going to make it very, very difficult if he does not come up with some sort of resolution that is, that is favorable to, the administration. Right. And if we hadn't recovered our crew member, we'd lost more men and women and recovery efforts that can set the timetable back even longer and it can escalate. So every day, it could produce more potential trip wires. But what you were talking about kind of reminds me of,

like, I think why he's out there is because he's realized his poll numbers are trending in the wrong direction. And so now he's trying to get out in front of the cameras, pick fights with reporters. And the media then keeps taking, they just give him so much to work with and it's a cycle that we've been stuck in since 2015. I want to put this Vin Gupta doctor, he's an MSN, an MS now medical analyst who is now saying the president is, quote, exhibiting all the signs of dementia, says, erratic, can't finish sentences, often confused, a logical train of thought, word finding difficulties, developing and worsening gradually over the time, the president is exhibiting all the signs of dementia. Now, Tom, this version of Donald Trump, yes, he sent out a particularly

bananas tweet over the weekend, which today he explained by saying he said it so that people would pay attention to it. Again, people could probably tell I'm not a particular fan of that tweet or that truth social, but he obviously was acting what he thought was rationally. It wasn't as though this is like dementia riddled Joe Biden out there. And this is, This has been this cycle. It's the same thing every single time. He gets them every single time because they can't help themselves. And I feel like that's exactly what we're watching play out now.

Yeah, there was a there was a whole spate during his first term. There was a woman, Bandy Lee, I think her name was, who wrote a book about this. She was like psychoanalysing. All these folks were putting Trump on the couch metaphorically and, you know, psychoanalyzing him and talking about all these, you know, things that were driving him. And saying he had, you know, narcissistic personality disorder and all these things, right? So here we go again. And it's it's particularly rich given the fact that we just live through the four years of Joe Biden where the media and the Democrats were, you know, out there every day gaslighting the public saying, you know, Joe Biden is so sharp.

He does more before 9 a.m. than all of you people do an entire day. I can't even keep up with him. He's, you know, it's just it was preposterous, right? Meanwhile, Trump actually does by all accounts and by his social media habits, I mean, the guy hardly sleeps, it seems like. He's tweeting and posting and working at all hours. He reminds me of you. Well, not quite. I mean, no, but honestly, it is astonishing when you think about it.

I mean, my dad is 81. He turns 82 this year. And I love my dad. And he's actually in great shape physically and mentally. But, you know, by like one o'clock, he's like, I've got to take a nap. It's nap time. Tommy, he's not eating enough McDonald's. He's not eating enough McDonald's.

I know. And I'm like, how the hell does Trump do this? It's, it is a little crazy. But, but yeah, you're right. The Democrats fall for it. The media fall for it. And they somehow think it's like Wiley Coyote. They think they're going to get the roadrunner.

They never do. And they end up looking and sort of playing the, fool and which is why I fully expect if they win the house they will move to impeach him again. Yep. And we'll go, you know, it's like, it's like, you know, you watch like Jaws and then they make a sequel and it's not nearly as good. And then they make a third one and they make a, you know, it's like fast and furious nine or say, come on, really?

Are we still doing this guys? But they can't help themselves. They seriously, he drives them insane. And, you know, obviously he is, he is one of one. And the way that he operates is unlike any president we've ever seen the language he uses the, you know, all of it. But that doesn't mean he's, you know, insane or has dementia or we need to use 25th Amendment. So I think the Democrats have just, yeah, they've just fallen into the trap once again. Well, this is a perfect transition to Harry Enten, polling guru over at CNN, raising the issue of exactly how serious the popularity problem is for Democrats.

Now, everybody is expecting Democrats to have this advantage in the midterms. The numbers are showing that. I check the RCP averages today. Now, on the other hand, one average, the RCP average, where Democrats, aren't doing so hot is in overall, if you look at Republicans and Democrats, the Republican Party, even with a president who's not historically very popular, the Republican Party is still more popular than the Democratic Party. Tom, is that the favorability average? Am I thinking of that correctly? Yeah, that's the question pollsters ask. Do you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of the

Democratic Party, Republican Party? And they ask it about politics, you know, Donald Trump, J.D. Vance, Chuck Schumer, Hakeemper. And so we aggregate all that data. Now, they don't ask that question as often as they ask job approval. So it's not as robust a data set as the job approval rating average is. But nevertheless, I mean, the data is pretty clear. And this is the one silver lining for Republicans, but honestly, and this is kind of the paradox, right, which is. So Democrats are, when you look at those numbers, are exceedingly unpopular.

many ways their brand is as low as it's ever been. However, when they ask that generic ballot question, if the election were held today, who are you going to vote for, Democrat or Republicans? They lead by like six points in our average. So even though voters have a very low opinion of the Democratic Party writ large, when it comes time to pull the lever, they're saying they'd still prefer Democrats to Republicans. And that's, I think, and we've seen that. by the way, in a lot of these special elections. And I think that's a function of, you know, it's a sort of throw all the bums out. We don't like anybody. But guess what? The bums who are in charge right now are the Republicans. And they're the, so they're the ones if you have, if you are

disgruntled about the status, whether it's financial or cultural or whatever it is, there's only one party that you can really punish because they're the one party that controlled the House, Senate and the presidency. So that is ultimately going to be what voters decide on in November. And so even though the Democratic Party, again, historically low favorable ratings, they're still most likely going to take the House almost certainly and have an increasing chance of potentially taking the Senate. Yeah.

Let's talk about the Senate in just one moment. Because I have some questions for you on that. If you're watching CNN and Harry Enton comes on your screen with this news for Democrats, that should send a chill down the spine of folks over at the DSSC. They already know this. They've been dealing with these numbers for a long time. But here's what it looked like when Harrington took to the airwaves of CNN and delivered the news for Democrats with what we have here.

We're in month four. So we've got what do we have here? Like eight months? No, like less than seven months. Seven months. Yeah, seven months until Election Day, F8. This lead is historically low for Democrats at this point with the Republican president. Because take a look here, and I'm taking a look at the average of all the polls.

Dem generic congressional ballot lead at this point in the cycle with the Republican president. On average, there leads actually slightly less. It's five points. That's less than it was back in 2018 when it was eight points, and way less than it was during the 20606 cycle when it was 11 points. So yeah, Democrats are ahead, but they're only ahead by five with the first. president whose net approval rating is bordering on minus 20 to minus 30, depending on what polls you look at, you'd make the argument Democrats should be way ahead, and they're just only

sort of slightly ahead. I think five points is enough to take back the House. But in the Senate, five points is almost certainly not enough if you apply it to the Senate map. Why do I say that? Because let's just take a look. GOP would win the Senate with this map. Let's say Republicans only hold onto the states that Trump won by greater than 10 points.

That would, in fact, give them the Senate 51. to 49. Why? Because what you would see is you would see that the Democrats would flip North Carolina. They would flip Maine, but Republicans would hold on to Ohio. They'd hold on to Texas. And they'd hold on to Alaska because Donald Trump went all of those states by greater than 10 points. Okay, that's really interesting. And Tom, you've been doing this through all of those cycles. I want to get your take on it because I look at Ohio and think, you know, out, seven months from now, if, and this is a big if, the Iran war has gas prices where they are, maybe you have more American casualties, or maybe even just after another few months,

whatever it is. I look at Ohio. I look at North Carolina. I even look at Nebraska. Susan Collins is very resilient. Very, very resilient. It's early, so you can't take the polls too seriously. You have to have a heaping grain of salt in the Democratic primary as it goes on. But there definitely are some seats on the table that probably Republicans were feeling better about six months ago. Sure. No, I totally agree. And look, I think Harry's right to a degree, and part of this is the overall dynamic, right? Donald Trump, there used to be the sort of benchmark for presidential job approval was 50%. If you were under 50%, bad news. If you're over 50%, good news. Donald Trump broke that model. Okay. His first term, when he first took office in January of 2017, his approval rating was 44.3%. His disapproval rating was 44.2% in our average on January 27th. And it went down from there. He never had over 50% job approval rating his entire first term in office. And yet the 2020 election was pretty close. In 2018, yes, Democrats won 41 seats in the House, but Republicans picked up two seats in the Senate.

So, you know, it was a bit of a mixed bag there. So, you know, part of this is Donald Trump, and he's got, he's got a floor that has, you know, when he's at 45% job approval rating for Donald Trump is, is not terrible. In fact, it's probably pretty good. It's probably closer to than what we historically think of as a 50% mark. The other piece of that is that on the House side with the general. gerrymandering that's gone on. There just aren't that many seats at play, I think. Or you would have these huge swings, even if it's a relatively big Democratic night, it might only result in them picking up 15 or 20. They're not going to pick up 60 seats like Republicans did

in the 2014 midterms when Obama was, or was it 20, what was it? Yeah, no, 2010, 2010. Oh, 2010. So there are some structural things, but I think Harry overall is right. The other thing, too, is we had, we had, we had, on our show today, Henry Olson from the Ethnic and Public Policy Center. He writes column for The Washington Post. He's a big numbers guy. He's like a Sean trendy type.

And we were talking. He wrote an interesting piece on the fact that on the Hispanic vote and how that was a huge driver of Trump's success in 2024, but has really fallen back. we've seen now in the polling and also in the special elections and the elections in November that Hispanics have reverted back to sort of their pre-20204, you know, where Trump only lost him by five, now he's losing by 25. And that will have impacts across the political landscape, particularly in places like Texas, you know, places like Georgia, North Carolina to a certain degree. And in some of these in some of these house races as well.

So, you know, I think Democrats, while they are ahead in the generic ballot, they probably should be further ahead. And some of that is based on what we just talked about, their favorable ratings, not that great. And there's some structural issues there that are preventing them probably from being as high as they have been in the past. And Republicans can take a little bit of solace from that, but I still think it's shaping up to be a pretty rough go. for Republicans. I think at this point, if the election were held today, they'd be, they would keep the Senate, but it would be. It'd be a 51, 49 deal. I mean, they'd lose a couple of seats and barely hang on to a majority. So, and if this war continues and gas prices stay high, economic, you know, people are still feeling squeezed. It could easily go the other way. And if the bottom falls out,

they will lose in Ohio. They will lose in Alaska. Susan Collins may finally go down in Maine. Texas is probably still a bit of a stretch, but I don't know that they even need Texas to get to if they win those other other seats. Right. Yeah, good point. Although once we get past primary season, Democrats are going to have to start answering a whole lot more questions about what their immigration policy is, what their transports policy is. And as Roy Tachara would point out, they don't have great answers that are that are good enough to satisfy a lot of people. You disagree, Tom? I disagree. Gas prices? Well, no, just Trump hatred because this is a base, you know, midterms, a base election and Democrats are united in turning out. By the way, particularly at the Senate level, right, these are six-year terms.

Like two-thirds of their term is going to occur after Trump is gone. And yet they're all still running on, I'm fighting Trump. I'm fighting Trump. We're, you know, so they're getting away with just being unified against Trump without having to espouse policy positions or talk about stuff. They can just say Trump's bad. And that has been enough thus far in a lot of these special elections. So I think they're going to get away with that one more time. And meanwhile, the Republican Party, you know, you look at some of the, the enthusiasm numbers.

They're down 10, 12, 15 points in terms of their enthusiasms for turning out to vote. And the party is the party is split over the Iran war. I know most Republicans tell pollsters they support it, but certainly you can't, you can't discount the fact. that, you know, there's a portion of the mega base that includes, you know, voices like Megan and others that, you know, they're just not happy about it. And that's going to lead to apathy or frustration and people will stay home. And you combine those two things, totally unity on the Democratic side opposing Trump and some, you know, apathy and schisms in the Republican base. And that's a perfect storm of disaster for Republicans.

Yeah, I was going to ask my last question to you about that exactly. Tom, there's some polling, and you're well aware of this. You just referenced it that, well, it shows some people, this is the Newsweek article. We can throw the tear sheet up on the screen. Well, if you're MAGA, you self-identify as MAGA. You are generally hanging in there with Donald Trump. It's much more split among the average Republican voter. One of the things I'm hearing anecdotally, and I'm curious if we have

any evidence of this in the polls yet, even though it's just been about a month, is there's a patience threshold among Republican voters who do trust Trump. They like his foreign policy instincts. They thought maybe this was a two-week bombing run, two-week air campaign, and there's probably a point at which their patience wears thin. I don't know if you've been hearing that anecdotally. I've heard that anecdotally that people are willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. They loved that he said, no, new wars, but they trust because he executed Venezuelan a way they liked. He executed Midnight Hammer in a way that they liked. And they generally liked his first term foreign policy.

They're willing to give him a little leash on this. I don't know if it's too early to see that show up in the polling, though, Tom. No, we are seeing it in the polling. And I think that's exactly right. You know, Democrats were opposed to this from the beginning because it's Donald Trump. Right. And they're always going to be opposed, you know, no matter what. independence were, you know, underwater, meaning more disapproved than approved, and that has widened.

But certainly, Trump has lost some altitude, you know, a little bit with Republicans. And if you go look at our regular politics average, again, it's five or six weeks worth of data starting, you know, February 28th when the bombing started to now. And it's a pretty steady, slow, you know, decline in the approval rating and increase in the disapproval rating. and that's driven by independence, but also by Republicans. Look, Trump, when this first started, Trump said this would be four to six weeks. And I think for the, you know, hardcore MAGA, they're with him, ride or die, you know, whatever. But for the other folks who are Republicans and like Trump and voted for Trump but are skeptical of this, yes, they're willing to hang with him for four to six. weeks. If it goes beyond that, I think, and we're already seeing some slippage, if this goes

eight weeks, 10 weeks, 12 weeks, or beyond, I think you will start to see that number erode significantly. And that'll affect his overall job approval rating, probably push him under 40 for the first time. His all-time low in our average in his first term was in December of 2017. He was at 37.4%. So that is his all-time low. And that was right before they passed his tax. cut. And then he rebounded back into the 40s. So, you know, he's, he's getting down near there now. But I think if this goes on, you will see that number go into the 30s and maybe go reach a new low, which would be obviously not good news for Republicans. Fascinating. Well, Tom Bevin is the co-founder and president of Real Clear Politics. He's a co-host of Real Clear

Politics on Sirius XM, Channel 11, the Megan Kelly channel. Tom. Absolutely pleasure to have you back. Thank you for doing it. So good to be with you. Thanks, Emily. Cheers. Cheers. Well, since Tom just went out on a boozy note,

it's again a perfect transition, because if you are looking to make small shifts that make a huge difference, and maybe you're Tom Bevin, you should have popped Z biotics before you started drinking. It does make a big difference. It kind of sounds counterintuitive, right? But that means planning ahead.

And if you do think and you plan ahead before you lose your capacity to plan for anything, you can actually just live in the moment. You can chill. You can have a few drinks. It really does help. And if you take Zbiotics pre-alcohol, it's literally called pre-alcohol, so you can't forget. And it's better if you take it before you, again, lose your capacity to remember these things. If you take it before you start drinking, it's the world's first genetically engineered probiotic.

So it's created by PhD scientists to tackle those rough mornings. Alcohol creates a toxic byproduct in the gut and that buildup causes rough days. But pre-alcohol actually produces an enzyme to break it down. Helps your body break it down. You can make it your first drink. You can drink responsibly. And then you can even feel your best tomorrow the next day. How nice is that?

You can have your cake and eat it too. You can reclaim your mornings. Go ahead. Reclaim them. They're there for the take. Now, I'm not going to lie, I was actually a bit on the fence, as many of you may be, about pre-alcohol. It's this extra step. Does it actually work? But I have taken it several times, and it does. It does definitely help. You can have some wine with dinner. Give it a shot. You're not going to wake up quite as groggy.

Let's put it that way. You don't need me to describe it because you all know what that's like. So, let's be real. Usually a Friday night out means a Saturday morning spent canceling a workout class, But since I started incorporating pre-alcohol, my glass of wine, it does not disrupt my morning flow. So remember to head to zbiotics.com slash afterparty and use the code after party at checkout for 15% off. All right, we're going to close out the show tonight with a really sad but instructive case study in how the media so often botches stories. about faith. And this one is related to Savannah Guthrie. Now, Savannah Guthrie put out a almost haunting Easter message, an Easter video message. And what we're going to do is play the video. We're going to play a montage from the video, essentially. People had different opinions on this video.

Savannah Guthrie returned tearfully to work on the Today Show this morning, about three months after her mother, Nancy Guthrie, went missing. And it's been a long time in Arizona. So Savannah Guthrie came back and was holding down the fort at the Today Show this morning. She teared up, understandable. The night before she returned, she put out this Easter message that was controversial. People thought it was a little bit of an odd choice. But I think a lot of the people who felt that way and were weighing in on it got their cues as is understandable from some of the media coverage before they watched the video or maybe they didn't even even watch the full video to be honest so let's take a look at the video and I'll tell you a little bit about

how the media covered it we celebrate today the promise of a new life that never ends in death but standing here today I have to tell you There are moments in which that promise seems irretrievably far away. In my own season of trial, I have wondered. I have questioned whether Jesus really ever experienced this particular wound that I feel, this grievous and uniquely cruel injury of not knowing. On the cross he cried out, my God, my God, why have you forsaken me? That is the anguished cry of someone who does.

does not know the answers. In the grave, does his agony seem indefinite to him, that torment of uncertainty, the way indefinite pain can feel eternal? Perhaps he did know this feeling after all. Perhaps this is too dark a message to share on Easter morning. But I have long believed that we miss out on fully celebrating resurrection if we do not acknowledge the feelings of loss, pain,

and yes, death. It is the darkness that makes this morning's light so magnificent, so blindingly beautiful. It is all the brighter because it is so desperately needed. Well, amen. Savannah Guthrie knows that if her mother believed in Jesus, as we believe her mother did, that's something I should have mentioned before queuing up the clip. If you've been following the Nancy Guthrie story, we've heard over. over and over again about Nancy Guthrie's faith. And Savannah Guthrie, the light she was talking about,

the light of Easter that does make the darkness more bearable is that she hopefully will see her mother again. Now, Variety posted, this is F-12, they said, they posted an article, and in posting their coverage of this on X, I just want you to compare what they said, with what you just watched in full. So Variety writes, Savannah Guthrie says she's, quote, questioned whether Jesus really ever experienced this particular wound that I feel, unquote,

in an emotional Easter Sunday message. Quote, we celebrate today the promise of a new life that never ends in death. But standing here today, I have to tell you, there are moments in which that promise seems irretrievably far away, when life itself seems far harder than death, these moments of deep disappointment with God,

the feeling of utter abandonment, for most of us, there will come a time in our life when these feelings hold sway. Variety cuts it off there, knowing damn well that they just framed what happened for people on X who were just going to see that. Their headline, which should sum up, that's what headlines do, should sum up the meat of the story, their headline leaves out the entire second part of the video where Savannah Guthrie talks about the light making the light making the darkness bearable and just projects to everyone that after this enormous trauma, Savannah Guthrie is basically questioning her faith and has lost her faith. It's incredibly misleading because if anything, the video was

a vigorous embrace of her faith. And this was just a classic case study in the media willfully misleading their readers, doing a complete disservice to their readers, whether you are a militant atheist or not. If you saw that post, you came away with a completely different understanding of what Savannah Guthrie said. And now, millions of people around the country are following this case really closely. And the idea that it would nudge someone to question their faith and lose their faith, Savannah Guthrer was openly talking about it, making her question her faith and making her question whether God himself knew this particular pain, as she mentioned. And I think everybody knows that's fully, fully understandable. The message that variety left people left people with was

that faith was not enough, that Savannah Guthrie had decided there's, there's, they're, they're implying to their audience that this very high profile figure who suffered a very high profile, personal intimate trauma and still is, has decided the gospels are not enough. On Easter, so on Easter, variety takes that message and posts basically just the entire first half of the message that is the predicate for the second half of the message. Right? It's not like this one half was totally disconnected from the other half. She was building to a conclusion and they just took it away. They stopped the story right in the middle. Now, I said it was willful. It's hard to believe it wasn't. But actually, to steal man myself, there are just a lot of journalists who maybe thought the, I could see them believing the takeaway from that is Savannah Guthrie, question. quote, whether Jesus really ever experienced this particular wound and not realizing that what she went on to say undermined that because maybe they didn't think hard about it or maybe they

fully don't understand what Easter means to Christians. Hard to believe it's not willful because if you spend a minute thinking about it before you hit publish to people around the world, it's impossible to imagine you wouldn't come to the conclusion that the same thing second half was contingent on the first half. All of that is to say, this is just a good case study that's relatively representative of how you often see journalists struggle with faith. Very famously, Dean Bacay of the New York Times, who was the executive editor of the New York Times in 2016, when they completely missed the 2016 election. They were having a struggle session in the newsroom after Trump defeated Hillary Clinton, and he very famously, in the aftermath, where there was this

brief period of introspection, said, we don't get religion. And this was supposed to be the moment where the media paused, got better, improved, rebuilt trust with readers and listeners and viewers. But it never really stuck. There's probably a couple of people who are doing better. But industry-wide, there's a reason, it's not just religion, it's issues in general, that trust and media continues to plummet, record low, tied for a record low, when Gallup came out with its numbers last October. All these years afterwards, they still don't get religion, clearly and consistently. So, again, I know it's a little example, but this was literally on Easter with one of the most high-profile people in media, one of the most high-profile crime stories of the

decades so far. And it was an egregious misrepresentation. So I thought it was worth correcting the record on that and using it as a case study, a window into how these things get botched and distorted and make their way around the world with so little representation of what was actually said in huge cases, huge stories that get messed up like this. So I'll leave it there for this evening. Excited to be back on Wednesday with all of you 9 p.m. live. No problem if you catch up afterwards. Either way, just subscribe.

Please do subscribe on the YouTube channel. Subscribe wherever you get your podcast. It helps us do the show and stay independent. Thank you, thank you. We'll be back, like I said, on Wednesday with more. See you then.