Lovett or Leave It - A Slice of White (Only) Pizza

Episode Date: November 4, 2017

Indictments! Tax reform! DNC infighting! Jon is joined by comedians Max Silvestri and Rae Sanni and Crooked Media editor-in-chief Brian Beutler to break down an insane week. Plus Vanessa Grigoriadis talks about Betsy DeVos and the politics of consent, a dramatic reading of a very cool text chain, a few choice rants, and more.

Hey guys! Thank you for coming out to the late show at the Anthem. Very excited. I heard someone say my dog's name, Pundit. That's fantastic. Now, I see a lot of wonderful people wearing our various branded shirts. However, where is the person who wore the shirt with Paul Ryan? Oh, Ted Cruz. What is your name? Nicole. Guys, Nicole... Took a picture with a repeal-and-go-fuck-yourself shirt with Ted Cruz.

And I want all of you to think about how little you've done with the merch compared to what Nicole has done. So we have a great show for you tonight, but we wanted to kick it off with something a little bit different because it's a big show at the Anthem. On Monday, former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort was indicted on federal conspiracy and money laundering charges. I got to tell you, when they decided to build a theater here, I don't think that they imagined that some of the biggest cheers would be for federal indictments. But that's the world. Now, the Trump administration has been trying to downplay the role that Manafort played in the campaign. However, some hacked texts, some leaked texts between Manafort's daughters and some friends offered us some insight that

we otherwise wouldn't have had. Now, I want to be clear about something. We are going to talk about these texts. We are not denigrating the family of Paul Manafort. We are enjoying and appreciating their take on Paul Manafort. And I want to be clear that when we do this dramatic reading, we are laughing with the man of our daughters now here to read these wonderful text messages to play the role of friend will be a comedian a very funny writer for comedy central's the president show and co-host of the podcast miss andree please welcome Ray Sani.

Hi, Ray. How are you? Hi, I'm wonderful. How are you? Are you ready to do this dramatic reading? Yes, I'm really excited. I'm excited too. All right, let's kick it off. All right. Is Paul getting a bigger role? Seems like it. Is Paul getting a bigger role? Seems like it. You're surprised?

I told you, this was the game. You think Paul does anything in moderation? And, like, if Trump gets elected, guess who's gonna be chief of staff? Pfft. He would never accept. Too many skeletons in his closet? Too constrictive.

Paul is a lone wolf, has to go his own way, do what he wants, when he wants, how he wants. He doesn't have room for other people and their needs slash wants. Yeah, that sounds about right. He likes the challenge. That's why he's doing this. It's a game for him. He likes the challenge. That's why he's doing this. It's a game for him. He isn't being paid.

Man, I bet he's loving it. This is pure sport. He is a power-hungry egomaniac. Yes, he is loving it, conclusively. Him and Trump are perfect allies for this agenda. It's so weird he is my dad. Anyway, some time passes. And then Manafort's daughter returns to the topic. It's just weird. Like, my dad doesn't seem

that smart. Like, he is smart. But I know I'm smarter than him. I don't doubt that. He's a master manipulator, which seems pretty key. He is very manipulative. I did inherit this ability. But I don't exploit it like he does.

I know all his tactics. They aren't that brilliant, but they do work. But yes, you're right. You have a moral conscience, spelled incorrectly. Like, he just tells you the sky is green over and over, and eventually you're like, is it? I don't possess the ability to just lie like he does. Yeah, he works his term. It's confidence. When you say something unwaveringly, people start to believe it.

I mean, yeah, that got Trump where he is today. Yup. Perfect allies. Trump probably has more morals than my dad, which is really saying something, which is really just saying something about my dad. My dad is a psycho. And that is a dramatic reading. Get up for Ray Sani.

I want to welcome the rest of our panel to talk through the rest of the news. Guys, give it up for Ray. Ray, come slide next to me. Come slide next to Ray. the news. Guys, give it up for Ray. Ray, come slide next to me. Come slide next to Ray. Now, please welcome the editor-in-chief of Crooked.com, Brian Boitler. And he is a very funny comedian and a writer on Netflix, Big Mouth. Please welcome back to Love It or Leave It, Max Silvestri. That was a nice time. Max, how are you?

I'm great. You know, I flew in from Albany today, and someone was wearing a Friend of the Pod shirt on the flight. It wasn't that many people. It was a really small flight. It was only one of them. And also, I could tell before I even saw the shirt, they had noise-canceling headphones on and were kind of smugly laughing to something

that only they could hear. No, not in a mean way, but I was just like, you're listening to a podcast and you want to tell everybody about it. That's the vibe. You guys wear your hobbies on your clothes now. That's good. Brian, how are you?

I'm good, boss. How are you? I should say I'm the only friend of the pod with benefits. That's true. That's true. We do have a generous health care package. Yeah, Blue Cross Blue Shield, PPU. It's not fucking around, you know. Practice what you preach.

Ray, how are you? I'm quite well, thank you. It's very late. It's the late show. It is a late show. Let's keep it loose, you know. Pardon? We're going to keep it loose.

Oh, yeah. It's going to be late and loose. Okay. Let's get into it. What a week. We have a lot to get to, indictments and terrible tax proposals. But I wanted to start by talking about a story that broke in the last day or so, which is Donna Brazile wrote an op-ed in Politico titled Inside Hillary Clinton's Secret Takeover of the DNC.

So, Max, I want to talk to you about what's happening right now, which is a great deal of hissing. Yeah. Like we're at a book burning in 1934. And I keep telling them, these animals, that what they're doing is not just annoying, ha-ha annoying, but actually getting on my nerves. The problem is... You've lost control of them fully. I've lost control of them in this one specific way,

and God help them if I take it back. I actually gave a quote on the book jacket of that book and now I feel crazy about it. I read it in early galley and I was like, this is a blockbuster. I'm joking. I didn't give a quote. He didn't read the Donna Brazile book. They're not saying

ssss. They're saying Donna Brazile. Oh, that's right. I just think that we have a room full of Taylor Swift fans, is what it is. That's not a good thing. Well, I have to tell you, Donna Bra-sill made a list, and she is checking it twice. There was a... Is that right?

There was a... I know it is. There was a joint... There was an arrangement which described a joint fundraising agreement between the DNC, the Hillary Victory Fund, and Hillary for America. Basically, there's been a lot of sort of overwrought conversation about this controversy, but the basic problem here is that there was some kind of a side agreement that gave the Hillary campaign some advanced control over some pretty important staffing decisions inside of the DNC.

Now, obviously, there's two sides. There's the one hand, important that as Democrats, you know, we's two sides to this. On the one hand, it's important that as Democrats, you know, we figure out how to have an open and transparent process, but at the same time, we need to be careful and make sure we're accurate and honest and we're not causing unnecessary divides within ourselves because Donald Trump, of course, is going to exploit it, which is why he tweeted

with his perfect, you know, with his world-famous tact, Donna Brazile just stated the DNC rigged the system to illegally steal the primary from Bernie Sanders, suggesting that the Justice Department should investigate the real collusion. Brian Boiler, editor-in-chief of Cricket.com, where you can also buy many of the shirts you see today. Is this a big deal, or are we falling into the trap of rehashing the primary in a way that we shouldn't be doing? Well, okay, so I think that, you know, given the context that we're in, there's an election in Virginia. It's a bad time for Democrats to be having this argument just as a strategic matter. I think that there is, like, a small lesson and a big lesson.

The small lesson is, and like the Trump presidency proves this, right? Like the appearance of a conflict of interest can be almost as bad as a conflict of interest. And you at least have that here. And for the integrity of the party, you need to resolve it. And, you know, I don't think anyone, maybe some of you were here for the Pod Save America taping. Keith Ellison talked a bit about how he's not going to spend a lot of time dwelling on what happened in the past except to get that issue resolved. That's important.

I think the more sort of global, profound thing that's happening here is that you're seeing the growing clout of a progressive wing of a party where the party is now having to be responsive to progressives in a way that you don't normally see in democratic politics, but that mirrors what happens in Republican politics a lot, where the conservative wing of

that party, they get answered to by the party. And I don't know where that's going to lead. It could lead somewhere great. It could lead somewhere bad. It could probably lead to like a sort of a mix of both. But that's what I'm taking away from this. You know, I don't think that we're going to be talking about this on a lot of love it or leave it's going forward because it's not that big a deal. Probably not. But it does it does hint at some some big deal shifts happening in democratic politics. Max, what did you make of this? Are you surprised at all that we're still it seems I'm surprised that we are still kind of relitigating this Hillary BernieBernie divide a full year after the election. Yeah, this is maybe a dumb question, but like, is this the sort of thing that happens regularly

and only now because we're putting everything under a microscope? Is it now an issue? And I mean that as a genuine question, not as a rhetorical leading you guys to my point. Has this happened in the past where these kind of big party candidates have been like, look, it's going to be me, let's just move forward? I think that that has happened in the past where these kind of big party candidates have been like, look, it's going to be me, let's just move forward? I think that that has happened in the past. I think that people point to decisions made about chairs. I can't remember if it was from Clinton to Gork when Kerry won the nomination. But I think that the more important question is not,

oh, was this kind of a sort of whatever tilting happening in previous DNC staffing decisions? And God, even saying that, it's like, who gives a shit? But because... So deeply boring to talk about. It's crazy. But because the primary is so contentious and because there is a wing of this party that does feel ascendance and doesn't feel like it was listened to before, I do think in this case it's really important that we make clear that moving forward, especially because we lost, right? And one of the great claims was that this

was the electable wing, this was the practical wing that was ascended and that made the decision about the direction of the party, that making sure that it's clear that we won't have this happen again, that it will be transparent. The good news is I think that's what Keith Ellison was saying when he was on the show. I mean, I would add one thing. The DNC is the Democratic Party in a way where it's not super surprising that the people who work there are going to be supportive of the more establishment candidate. And you want to try to strike a balance as a party between overdoing that to where you fracture the party into a million pieces because people don't think that they're getting fairly represented. And what happened in the Republican Party, which is they completely lost control of who their nominee was going to be and how. And I don't think that they necessarily, like the Democratic Party necessarily got it right in 2016. And that in reforming, they want to try to find a middle ground between those two

situations so that they don't end up with an out of control situation 20 years down the line. so that they don't end up with an out of control situation 20 years down the line. I respect the serious conversation you guys are having about this. I just want a moment to celebrate Donna Brazile's petty. Because she is petty as shit. And as a person who likes to watch petty, I was actually really shocked that she did this. And then I'm like, why would she be this crazy? And then I remembered that her reputation was sullied because of the leaked emails and all this stuff. And I think it was just some petty, like, that Hillary shorty didn't defend me at all.

I'm about to go in. Because this is her only shot. So she went in. Now, I don't think it was useful, but it was funny. Brian. I would also like to say that I really appreciate she wrote, in quotes, first-person dialogue in the editorial and had such a fan fiction, retired cop writing himself as a hero.

And then I said, we don't do things like that around here because we're not dirty. It just felt so unnatural. I love totally unbelievable dialogue in autobiographies. It's also the interpretation of events. I sat there and I thought to myself, you love this country and what are you going to do to fight for it? And it was

at that moment I realized I had no choice but to act. It's that level. She realized things so often in that editorial. Just moment to moment realizing so much and then I knew. Also, Real Collusion is one of the only Kraftwerk albums that holds up from the 70s, I think. The Real Collusion was the most predictable Donald Trump tweet. You could feel that one being typed miles away. What was interesting is the tweet you just read was everybody had an adjective

except Donna Brazil. Right? There was crazy Bernie. Yeah. Right? But he said Donna Brazil. It's the only time he's addressed a black woman properly. That's true. That's true. Do you think it was purposeful or just lazy? No, I think

it's the moment you agree with him, you're a full person or something. It was lazy because we know from how John Kelly treats black women that the White House just does not give a fuck about disrespecting women of color. Speaking of fan fiction, it also feels like we have so many Donald Trump Twitter continuities to keep track of, that he's like, the FBI is going to get on this because that's their job. But earlier in the day, he wants to dissolve the Justice Department. So it just feels like it's like Time Cop. He's not consulting the show Bible is the problem. Oh, it's a mess.

It does not hang together. It's like the prequels at this point. I don't want to dwell. I do think it was important to talk about it. I'm glad we talked to Keith Ellison about it. And he was, I think, rightfully talking about the importance of moving forward. But, you know, I think we cannot make this the biggest deal in the world. I think we cannot allow this to be something people use to delegitimize Hillary Clinton's victory in the primary and pretend as though this had some gigantic impact while recognizing, I think, two things. One, this shouldn't happen again, and that's just an easy thing to admit.

And two, I think in a larger way, it's not just about the details of a negotiation between two campaigns. And by the way, I was talking about this backstage, that what would Trump say if this came out about his campaign? He'd be like, they needed the money for me. What, was I going to get it for free? I was going to do something. I'm going to be the nominee. You're going to have a bunch of yokels there I've got to kick out? No, I'm going to put my people in there. That's what the money's for. That's what Trump, who didn't care about... It was a great deal. It was a good deal.

Yeah, like their family always talks like exploiting a loophole is the obvious thing to do. And he totally would have done that as well. Right. But anyway, the second point was only that I think that the fair part of this, which is that the problem around this lack of transparency and about this decision is a larger set of forces that led people in the left of the party

feeling as though they weren't respected, didn't have a seat at the table, that, oh, they weren't practical, they weren't electable. And, you know, here we are with no majority in either house. We've lost the governorships. We've lost the state houses and not to mention the White House, if you haven't noticed. And to say, well, how electable were you people? And also, if you're going to rig it, could you be better at it? Maybe win some elections. I think we should leave that there. When we come back. Okay, stop. I think we should leave that there. When we come back, OK Stop. Hey, don't go anywhere.

There's more of Love It or Leave It coming up. And we're back. Now for a segment called OK Stop. Here's how it works. We watch a clip, and as it goes, we pause to talk about it. I wanted to discuss the issue in this clip, which is Republican lawmakers have unveiled a rewrite of the tax code outlining a $1.5 trillion plan to give significant tax cuts to corporations and the wealthy. It eliminates the AMT, which is the alternative minimum tax, which largely hits the

wealthy. It didn't get rid of the carried interest loophole like they promised. It is paid for by getting rid of things like tax breaks for students, for people with medical bills, for people from places with high cost of living. It will likely cause a tax increase for as many as 8 million, if not more, Americans. Sarah Huckabee Sanders had a choice analogy for critics of the Republican plan. It was pretty phenomenal. Let's roll the clip. This story has been floating around the internet for a while, and it's important to keep in mind that the numbers are not exact, and I'm also not encouraging any drinking. Suppose that every day,

10 people, for our purposes, we'll say reporters, go out for beer, and the bill for all 10 comes to $100. Okay, stop. Okay, stop. What Sarah Huckabee Sanders just revealed is that the kind of reporters she hangs out with are the kind of people who drink shitty, bitter $10 IPA that tastes like soap. Okay, that's all. And also, she, like, admitted that they were her friends

because she said so-called reporters and like then goes out for beer with them. Well, if they're not reporters and you're drinking, they're your homies. Reporters paid their tab every night the way we pay our taxes. It would go something like this. The first four, the poorest, would pay nothing. Okay, stop. That's it.

So I want to stop right there. So she's trying to introduce, it's very smart, very smart analogy, right? Oh, the four people get their beers for free. Metaphor. They don't pay income taxes, but they pay payroll taxes

and sales taxes. Just wanted to flag that before we get into it. Well, even that is a useless analogy because taxes are an obligation. Eating at a restaurant is not. That's also true. That's also true.

I have an additional problem with the metaphor, which is that the thing about income taxes is that you pay them with money. Because the money that you make at your job is also money, right? So the metaphor really is... Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. I know, I'm blowing your mind. This is like galactic brain shit over here. But if the metaphor was that you have five reporters and one owned an enormous brewery and the second one owned a smaller brewery

and the other three had like a few six-packs in their fridge and then the brewery owners were like, hey, you guys aren't contributing enough beer to our beer outings? Like, those guys would just be assholes. But that's the right metaphor. Would pay $1. Also, wait, okay, stop.

Also, who is this? She didn't even say anything. Who are these needle dick reporters that go out with 10 people and they're like, you know what, we'll do 10 taps. You know what, actually, we're all going to put down a card for our first beer. Wouldn't the richest

person pay for the whole meal? Isn't that standard if you have a rich friend and he wants to hang out and pay people to be his friend? He like, pays for dinner. That's not unusual. So it's dumb. She's not only hanging out

with lame reporters, she's hanging out with people who don't pay for anything. Well, I think that's a fair point because if one of the reporters owns Tribune Media, he'll probably put down the company card and it will be good for everybody. Yeah, why is this on the Times? Why is this on Maggie Haberman?

We love... We're not... No, we're not doing that. Let's keep watching the clip. She's got access. It's cool. The seventh would pay $7. The eighth would pay $12. The ninth would pay $18.

The tenth, the richest, would pay $59. So that's what they decided to do. The ten reporters drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement until one day the bar owner threw them a curveball. She didn't even believe herself. Since you're all such good customers, he said, I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20. Okay, stop.

I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20 but I'm also going to, I don't know, take one of your car tires and I'm also going to take all the Band-Aids out of your house. And I'm also going to go to your driveway. I'm talking about infrastructure. And health care.

Each of the six was better off than before, and the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the bar, the reporters began... This is not responsive to what she was saying right now, but I think we ought to note that she's actually reading what is a, like, email forward chain thing. Yeah. Look, bitter old people send around to each other.

I actually thought it was... Literally straight off the internet. I thought it was a very frustrating word problem for SAT practice tests. Well, if you've got seven beers and three dollars, it's just like, all right, well, I don't know how fast that train's going in the opposite direction. Compare their savings. I only got a dollar out of the $20 savings, declared the sixth reporter, and she pointed to the tenth reporter. He got ten. Wait a minute, yelled the first four reporters in unison. We didn't get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor. Okay, stop. Again, I just love the implication here, which is that

these poor people with their free beers would have been fine till some rabble-rousing journalist told them about, I don't know, the tax cut? Also, you think of that, it's like, what we're not talking about is one person with 50 bucks and four people with no bucks. We're talking about, you know, eight people, some of whom maybe have enough for a beer, and one person who got a billion dollars for beer from their great-grandfather and who now thinks it's like, because they're smart. One additional thing, like we were kind of getting wrapped around the axle

trying to make sense of whether she actually believes any of this bullshit. This was before the tax bill was released. This was on Monday on indictment day. She found the longest, stupidest thing she could read from the podium to try to get through the entire press briefing without talking about the fact that the chief of staff,

or the campaign manager for the president she works for was indicted for being a criminal foreign agent. That's what's happening in this clip. I'm just happy that she's not doing the trying to tell bad jokes like her daddy thing.

Those jokes, man. I'm just very happy. They are such bad jokes. Yeah, it's like I'm very grateful that her nepotism didn't manifest that way. Yeah. Right. Right. The lawyers yelled at the 10th and made him feel bad.

So the next night, the 10th man didn't show up for drinks, and the 9th sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They no longer had enough money between them all to even cover half of the bill. And that ladies and gentlemen is how our tax system works. Okay. So it is not how our tax system works. And that I didn't even, it's funny. I didn't even make it to the end of that clip till now. That's just literally the plot of Atlas Truck. That's what that is.

That was the end of, well, I guess the guy with the $50 who really likes people to know he buys beer all the time for his friends, took his beer money and went home because he was frustrated with why the tax bill was covered. I hate it. In fairness, if I was paying $59 for beer for my deadbeat reporter friends,

I'd probably go galt and drink beer at home by myself. But also, like, this is such a long, long soliloquy about, like, how you don't give a shit about other people. You can just say it. It's totally fine. She's trying to say that American ideals is selfish capitalism to the max.

And just say that. You guys have been, like, marketing this individualistic nonsense idea for so long, and Trump speaks so plainly. I'm surprised she's trying to hide it, you know? Do we think she thought, like nailed it when she was done with that? I think it's revealing. I think it's

revealing because I do think it's close to kind of a sincere belief. Like, of course, we're going to cut taxes more for rich people than middle class people or poor people. They're who pay the most taxes as if that's necessary. As if you can't just, we're just not doing that part. We're just going to cut, like, they're going around selling it like a middle class tax cut, $1,000 for you, $1,000 for that. The loss to the government will be far more than what made up in services than that $1,000 that a typical person will receive, in part because they're going to cut vast amounts of taxes

and create a permanent aristocracy of people who don't have to pay money on their, don't have to pay a high enough rate on their investments and don't have to pay on their inheritances. But I think that this is sincere. Like, I think, I think that I don't think she knows. I don't think she's in on the joke. I think, you know what I mean? I think that, I don't know. What do you think? You don't think she buys this? Well, I mean, she was the one who was talking about, like, she just shifted to Chicago during the Las Vegas shooting issue. And I genuinely think she just thinks people of color are more violent. And I think she genuinely thinks that rich people are, like, rich because of some magical meritocracy that, you know,

that forgets that, you know, indentured servitude and slavery happened and then purposeful redlining. And have the fucking people in the West Wing inherited the money from their parents. Totally forgets that part. But you have to sell yourself the lie because if you reckon with the truth, then you have to admit that you aren't special and you don't deserve anything that you have. The reason I think this is sincere is that you'll notice there's no point in this extended metaphor where she says, and if we did it a different way, the amount of beer would just grow and everyone would have more beer, right? It's a morality play she's telling, that rich people are giving too much

and poor people are taking too much, and that's wrong. And that's the actual view in conservative politics. And the rest about economic growth or beer growth or whatever is just a smokescreen. She's actually telling the truth there. When we come back, I'm going to sit down with Vanessa Gregoriotis to talk about her book called Blurred Lines, and it's going to be a really interesting conversation. I'm really excited to talk to her. So we'll be right back. Don't go anywhere. This is Love It or Leave It, and there's more on the way. What up? I am very excited to talk to our next guest.

She has written a book called Blurred Lines, Rethinking Sex, Power, and Consent on Campus. I was really excited to talk to her about it because one question that we've gotten a lot is about what Betsy DeVos is doing on campus and the epidemic of sexual assault on campus and what this administration is doing and what policies we should be advocating and fighting for

and really sort of what's going on on campuses. And I felt like I didn't know enough about it. So I really was excited to talk to her. So please, please welcome Vanessa Gregoriotis. Woohoo! Thank you. Hi, Vanessa. Thank you so much for being here. So you've written this book, done this investigative reporting at colleges across the country. I think people hear this term, rape culture, and I think a lot of people pretend to know what it means, but really have no idea what it refers to, the scope of it. So when people say that there's a rape culture on college campuses,

beyond college campuses, what are they talking about? Well, I think what they're saying is a woman is perceived as always asking for it and never wanting it, which is a pretty screwed up position to be in. So, you know, it's part of this culture that tells guys they have to push and push and push, even if a girl says no, because, you know, there's always a yes behind the no. And then also tells girls that if they speak out, they're not going to be believed, because it's all about, like, well, why were you at that bar? And why did you send him those texts?

And what were you really wearing anyway? You know, so that victim blaming that kicks in right away. Yeah. You know, you've been doing this reporting. What did you find when you went to college campuses that have been grappling with how to handle accusations of sexual assault? I think there's been a lot of reporting that basically says the systems on college campuses let down victims

and they let down the accused. Right. So, you know, what's happening at college is a lot of people in America are having their early sexual experiences there, right? They're showing up. They've probably never had sex before, maybe with one partner, two partners, something like that.

So those early formative experiences have sexual assault in them. And we need to figure out how to, like, unwind that knot and put consensual in one place and non-consensual in the other. And the universities have been, like, taxed with this because of Title IX. You know, they need to keep their students safe. And they need to make sure that students aren't sexually assaulted. Because the logic is that somebody who's sexually assaulted is kind of, you know, robbed of their college

education because they may end up being super traumatized, they may have their grades are going to fall, they're not going to be able to concentrate, they might drop out, right? So the universities need to be in the center of this. And Obama really strengthened that position, and Betsy DeVos is just doesn't want anything to do with it you know so she is just basically saying look the campus courts have been kind of a mess but they're trying universities are trying it is a total myth that universities are not better at this like now than they were five years ago. There's no question that they're getting better all the time. We need to stay the course

and make them figure this out. But sexual assault can be really hard to prove. There's not a lot of evidence. It's difficult for anybody to figure it out. That's why the cops don't want to touch it. That's why district attorneys don't want anything to do with it, because it's like a political hot potato. Yeah. So what is Betsy DeVos doing to kind of undermine what happened during the Obama administration? I mean, first of

all, she's lowering the standard of proof, right, which has been a really big deal, because attorneys are super freaked out about there not being enough due process in these campus courts and that there was kind of this, the preponderance of the evidence standard approved. So 51%. As I just said, these cases can be really hard to figure out because you know what happens every single time. The guy says just what I was saying before. She wanted it. She was asking for it. I had consent. You know, and how the hell do you prove it from there? So getting to that 1% can be super difficult. So she now wants to raise that standard of proof. So like make it even harder for those victims to get justice. So that is actually a really big deal. You know, she's also said kind of crazy shit. Like, you know, it used to be that

the universities had to figure out these cases in 60 days, which was maybe a little fast. But now she's like, no, no, no, no, there's no fixed time frame here. So what does that mean? I'm a freshman. I finally, like, screw up my courage to go to the campus court, try to get justice, but the university doesn't have to do anything till like maybe after I graduated. Like that's super fucked up, you know? And she also introduced this kind of concept of mediation, which is hard because yeah, mediation might be good for kind of low level, like I grabbed your butt or there was really a miscommunication about consent or, you know, you're just a dog and you're not a sexual assaulter. Okay, let's, like, maybe do some mediation. But there's no way of knowing, like,

that that's not going to be used for violent rapes as well. So, yeah, I just don't think... I mean, she's shown herself to be pretty untrustworthy generally, so I don't think she should get the benefit of the doubt. One of the things you talk about in the book is even the difficulty of finding reliable statistics around campus sexual assault. And there was some controversy about,

which we meet with you in the New York Times, around the review of your book and whether or not it was accurate. But I think, you know, Gia Tolentino wrote a piece in The New Yorker about your book that got into just why this is such a hard conversation. And what she said is, there's no easy answers, there's no easy sentences. What do you think, you know, having gone into this world and tried to figure out what campuses are doing right, what they're doing wrong, what do you think people don't understand? Like, what makes, and also, what do you think some

campuses are doing right that people should know about? Well, I mean, I think that people need to understand like sexual assault does exist on a spectrum. And what we have to be honest about is not all of us have the same definition. Like a good amount of this country believes that if a woman didn't have a gun to her head, then she wasn't really assaulted, right? Because she should have just, you know, bounced. So like, right because she should have just you know bounced so like if we all believe that what trump did allegedly to those dozen women was sexual assault and not just groping and not like you know the physical manifestation of locker room talk and not no big deal he probably wouldn't be president but the fact is is that the country is pretty split on that as they are about everything, you know? So I think we need to get our definitions straight. I mean, what's going

on now with like Harvey Weinstein and basically any man who has any power in media of New York and like Hollywood is we're starting to learn that like there's really no end to the predators in our midst and we have to figure out like how to deal with this problem that we have in America like now's the moment yeah I mean how do you how do you relate what's happening on campus is there a connection between what's happening on campus and this roiling debate about campus sexual assault and this new attention on sexual misconduct, sexual harassment, sexual assault that we've seen in the wake of the Weinstein shit?

Well, I mean, first of all, I think it just shows that, like, we have to get this right right now or we're going to have a new generation of Harvey Weinsteins. Like, this, again, like, this is the time. The energy's here culturally. Like, just this, again, like, this is the time, the energy's here culturally, like, just, let's just, like, do it. You know, the other thing, the complicated part is, like, we are starting to understand that, like, a 22-year-old, you know, starlet who goes to meet him in a hotel

room and her entire life has been about meeting this guy and having him anoint her is in a super coercive situation. But we don't really accept coercion as like, I'll just put the tip in or like just a couple strokes or I can't feel anything with a condom on. Like that's all not supposedly coercive, right? So, you know, how do we shift our thinking so we start thinking about these things that we think like, oh, that guy's just a dick, but we start thinking like, okay, wait a second, now really, like what went down there was not okay, and that person deserves to also be ostracized. I just want to, one last question on this. You know, look, this is a really tough issue, and we've seen all these revelations in recent days. In your reporting, is there a place where you thought,

oh, these people have figured it out? This is a place where they've gotten the procedures right, they've gotten the accountability right, they understand the problem, they're doing something different, and other people should learn from it? Or what activists are doing that you thought was inspiring? Well, I think it's more like, you know, let's just look at the like, the structure of the campus

and specifically look at the real problem, which is, like, these cemented gender norms that we have that create the rape culture, right? Like, so where do those exist on a campus? Oh, my God, I think I have an idea. It's called a fraternity. Like, what the hell is going on? You know, like, how can we possibly say that a university is, like,

they're really trying to do everything that they can do. These campus courts are a serious problem, like, how can we possibly say that a university is like, they're really trying to do everything that they can do. These campus courts are a serious problem, though. You know, I mean, across America in 2014, there are like 20 million college students. Do you know how many cases, like, actually, you know, cases of sexual assault that were reported to those universities? It was like 6,000. So the campus courts are like a total sideshow. However, one in six American guys at college belongs to a fraternity, right? I'm not saying they're all bad, but a lot of them are. And, you know, we need to look at, like, Harvard is trying to co-educate. I mean, that's totally the right way to go. Like,

do we really think there's going to be sexual assault among those members or people going to their parties when there's like sisters living upstairs? Like, I don't know. Do you? You think that makes a difference? I do. Do you? You know, if you think that I understand the inner workings of fraternities, we haven't spent enough time together. Well, Vanessa, thank you so much for coming.

I really wanted to talk about this issue because I think it's really important. I guess I want one last thing. What do you think people that care about this issue that want to push back about Betsy DeVos, what do you think that they should be doing? Well, I mean, I think the first thing is this idea of just checking your own behavior.

I think that, I mean, this may be totally idealistic, but I think a lot of this workplace harassment stuff and these problems in college, like we just have to have a new standard, which is like you're into somebody before you like move in or do some Mark Halperin like weird shoulder move. Like you need to say, hey, are you into this? Okay. Like, hey, are you into this? Okay? Like, hey, are you into this? That's it. That's it. We're going to do that from now on. I think that's a really good idea.

I also think, you know, this, like, you know, I wouldn't go as far to say, like, believe women all the time. But believe women first. You know, there's no reason to not believe women first. Okay? And then, you know, I just think we have to keep doing what we're doing, which is sharing the stories. Because I talk to tons of guys on campuses, and the number one thing that changed their minds was having a girlfriend or a friend or anybody just give them the real deal like really be like this happened to me and this is how it made me feel and this is how it changed my life and you know empathy sympathy that's really what changes people's minds so we have to keep going

on this all right yeah guys give it up for vanessa gregoriotis we'll be right back with a game hey don't go anywhere there's more of love it or leave it coming up Guys, give it up for Vanessa Gregorianis. Thank you. We'll be right back with a game. Hey, don't go anywhere. There's more of Love It or Leave It coming up. And we're back. Guys, welcome back to our panel. Now for a game called A Better Way to Commit Crimes. This week we had the first round of indictments in Mueller's investigation.

We're going to play a game. You're Mueller. You're looking for clues. We have suspects. Each suspect will describe themselves, and you will have to guess which one is the colluder. Would anyone like to play? Hi, what's your name? Emily.

Emily, hi, how's it going? It's going great. I came all the way from Portland, Oregon, so I'm happy to be here. Holy crap. You know we're in Portland tomorrow. I'm just kidding. I'm not, we're not. How are you?

I'm fantastic. And you've been paying attention to the news? I have, sadly. Okay, I like your repeal-and-go-fuck-yourself T-shirt. Here's how it works. I am going to ask you to try to identify who is someone who has been indicted or who might be indicted based on the clues that each of our panelists is going to read.

So are you ready for your first clue? Yes. Your job will be to figure out who is George Papadopoulos. Ray, kick us off. Okay. I'm a white male. I am a Republican. I love wearing sunglasses and I gel my hair. I'm in a complicated relationship with the president. Sometimes he loves me. Other times he says he doesn't know me and he also calls me a liar even though he denies knowing me. Which hurts.

That's your first. Consider it. That could be George Papadopoulos. Brian, you're up. I am a white male. I am a Republican. I got close with a professor. Clue number two. Could be George Papadopoulos.

Max, you're up. I am a white male. I got involved with shady characters and got in some trouble at the airport. Under pressure from the feds, I folded like a card table. Which one? A, B, and C.

Unfortunately, you are incorrect. No! Ray read George Papadopoulos. Brian read Thurston Howell III from Gilligan's Island, who was friends with a professor. And who got in trouble at the airport? It was Henry Hill, the mobster-turned-FBI informant played by Ray Liotta in Goodfellas.

So you are over one. That's what we've come to, is all of those made sense. That's the world we're living in, but it's still wrong. I accept that. Wait, shout out to Henry Hill in Goodfellas. He grew up in my neighborhood that I grew up in, and he's the only terrible white man I rooted for. Speaking of, doesn't really speak of, your next question, which one

is Paul Manafort? Stopped at the airport. Ray, you're up. Okay, I am a white male. Okay. I am a white male. Together with another white man, I laundered money and did not report income I earned as an advisor to foreign nationals from 2008 to 2013. I did it partly for my family, but also because of my hunger for power. Think about it, Emily. Brian, you're up with clue number two.

I am a white male. I am from Connecticut. I was charged with 13 criminal counts, including buying and selling stolen goods. I lied about my communications with a hostile foreign power. Ooh, that could be Paul Manafort.

What is it? Max, you're up. I am a white male. I am from Connecticut. I accepted money from a foreign dictator. I was indicted on 12 counts, including conspiracy against the United States. Tough.

Was it someone who advised foreign nationals from 2008 to 2013? Was it someone from Connecticut? Or was it someone with 12 counts of conspiracy against the U.S.? Emily, you are Robert Mueller. Who is Paul Manafort? I need to Mueller it over. Emily.

How long have you been sitting on that one? Emily, thank you so much. You've lost the game. You've stalled enough with your wonderful banter. It's time for you to choose. Which one is Paul Manafort? C. N, B, F, A.

No, you were right. It was C. And just so you know, Ray was describing Walter White and Brian Boiler, editor-in-chief of Crooked, was talking about Benedict Arnold. Oh, my God.

So, could have gone either way. You are one and one. This one is for the whole indictment. This is so nerve-wracking. That's part of it. Yeah. Robert Mueller operates under tremendous pressure.

Your job will be to identify which of these three panelists is Mike Flynn, who has not been indicted yet, but let's be adults. Yes. Ray, please kick us off. Okay. I am a white male. My boss was an erratic billionaire who mistreated people

without regard for the law or common decency. With my silence, I remain complicit. Could be Mike Flynn. Could not be. Brian? I am a white male. I have served my country with distinction in the military, but I have spent a great deal of time with Russians, and some even say I sold out my country. Could be Mike Flynn, could be somebody else.

Max, you're up. I'm a white male. I've worked in national security and have said, lock her up to the crowds, but many believe I may be next to face the special counsel's attention. Some say I was too cozy with Putin. My son is terrible

at Twitter. Emily. I hear some A's, I hear some B's, I hear some C's, but only you can decide. Emily, you have to choose. I don't know if Mike Flynn even has a son, but I know that he's... See? You nailed it.

And just so you know, the boss with an erratic... The erratic... That was Smithers. Wait, is Smithers a white dude? I thought Smithers was like a gay man of color. I think he's a gay white. White people named their kids Waylon? I don't, you know, honestly, we'll get to the bottom of that, but I do think that. I really thought he was like a, you know, light-skinned black dude who loved.

You had a whole story for Waylon Smithers that none of us did. And just to close the loop, the white male who served his country but spent time with Russians and sold out his country, it was Soviet submarine captain Marco Alexandrov-Ramius from The Hunt for Red October. Emily from Portland. You're two out of three. We're going to give it to you. You've won

a better way to commit crimes. You've won the parachute gift card. Thanks to our panelists for playing. When we come back, the rant wheel. Don't go anywhere. This is Love It or Leave It, and there's more on the way. And we're back. Now for a segment called the rant wheel.

Here's how it works. We spin the wheel and rant about the topics where it lands. Today on the rant wheel we have go-go in-flight Wi-Fi, which just can't seem to fall off the wheel. We have tweets demanding comment from people. That's just something personal to me. We have John Kelly's lying. We have Paul Ryan's reading habit. That's care of Brian. This is going to be a niche one, but it's when directors of movies describe the reason they didn't put the monster in earlier as it's like Jaws. That's specific.

Quote, seeking treatment, end quote. I'm eager to hear that. That one's care of Max. Papa John's in the news this week. And audience suggestion. Let's spin the wheel. It has landed on John Kelly lying. Ray, this was something that you had suggested, something that you wanted to talk about. Yeah, I feel very passionately about that because we're just in a place where our chief of staff lies and we just gotta eat it and that's bullshit and like and the frustrating thing is that we know he's a liar he's demonstrated that he's a liar and then journalists and like people who read or consume news have to try to believe him on other stuff while we've accepted that on two occasions, at least publicly, he's lied.

And that's fucked up. It's very frustrating because he's presented as the adult in the room. And he's the person who's supposed to get everybody in order. And then it was such a bizarre turn because here he is, he's making faces. Oh, I'm so uncomfortable at this Charlottesville conference. I'm so uncomfortable at this UN speech. And he's like, well, if Trump gets to lie on black women, so do I.

And then he does. Then he lies on his black woman and then he lies about the fucking Civil War. Dude, there are books. So it's like, it's very frustrating that we're like existing in this state where people don't even pretend to be lying, to not be lying anymore, right? They're not even like spinning it, using words that can mean other things. People are straight up lying. And then we're not allowed to challenge it because they're generals and they've lost their

sons and then they get to lie again and then not apologize for it and then make up a whole other lie about history. They're alternating history or like creating a new history and we just have to eat it. It's bullshit.

Seconding all of that, Josh Green, who's a writer for Bloomberg, wrote a campaign biography of Steve Bannon, which is, it's a great book. It's like the only campaign book that will make you smarter. And he quotes liberal icon Ben Shapiro. Who does not like Steve Bannon, I don't think,

saying that Steve Bannon is an adherent to narrative truth as opposed to factual truth, which is why everything on Breitbart looks the way it does, because he's not actually concerned with empirical facts. He's concerned with what can mobilize people to reach a certain outcome down the line, right? John Kelly is Kelly is also inherent to narrative truth instead of factual truth. And his narrative truth is MAGA. He wants to go back to a time when Congresswomen, or women period, like Frederica Wilson, just did not pipe up and they knew their place. They were sacred.

And he can be confronted with the empirical fact that he's lying, but the narrative truth trumps that. And he will never admit that the empirical reality that he presented to the whole country was wrong, because the narrative truth is more important. He's just like Steve Bannon. I think it's... I think people did

give John Kelly the benefit of the doubt, in part because of his service, in part because he has given a lot for his country. He has served. His son did die in service to this country. He has been through something tragic and terrible, and Donald Trump did exploit that without asking him. But I think we can believe two things, which is this can be a person who has been through loss that we should respect, who does believe in service to his country, but at the same time is doing things that are unacceptable,

is lying, and deserves to be questioned for those lies, and deserves to be held accountable for what he's actually saying and doing, not what pundits in Washington had hoped he would be like, had hoped he would sound like, how they'd hoped he would behave. That's all. Let's spin it again. Let's spin it again. It has landed on quote, seeking treatment, end quote.

So as a male who's not a raper, I found it equally horrifying but also exhilarating the last few weeks to just like watch scumbags be sort of washed out of media and hollywood uh hopefully at an increasingly high rate um but it has also been this crazy shit show train wreck that's been fascinating to watch how various smart high-powered camps of people and lawyers try to manage the various crises as they come at this breakneck speed.

And it's like, as someone who both believes in addiction and mental health as, like, real things, this, like, immediate statement of, like, you know what? I'm going to seek treatment for this. As if it's just this idea of, like, I'm nipping it in the bud myself. So don't even bother calling. It's going to go to voicemail. But, like, I am in treatment. if it's just this idea of, like, I'm nipping it in the bud myself, so don't even bother calling. It's going to go to voicemail, but, like, I am in treatment, and it's crazy. We have meetings four times a day, and I'm in Switzerland, and I'm just, like,

handling it. It's, like, such an insult to, like, the fact that they committed a crime. I mean, you wouldn't seek treatment for, like, I know I keep cutting prostitutes' heads off, but, uh... But it's also... Guys, I'm I keep cutting prostitutes heads off, but I'm going to handle it. Guys, I'm on top of this. So rarely does someone's

self-discovery of a need for help coincide with a call from their publicist that buzzfeeds on the blower. They're like, this is so funny you're calling right now because I was just submitting the application for the treatment program. It's like, wow, kismet.

It's like, one, here's a PR tip. Don't have sexually assaulted people for a quarter century. That's like just my crisis management. Like, don't have done that. It's very deeply disturbing and the other part of it I just want to say is they're keeping statements from people that were

obviously very complicit or like one-eye-closed aware of stuff just being like, I'm deeply troubled and extremely distressed. Like the adverb as the thing that makes you, it's okay that you employed this person for 15 years because like, no, no, no, this is deeply upsetting. No, it's not just upsetting. Like I get it if it was upsetting, but it's, like, deeply upsetting. It's always like we obviously take this very seriously. Yeah, yeah. We modify our verbs to stress the strength of them in a way that shows that we're a responsible company and you should keep consuming our other products that are ad-supported.

Let's spin it again. It has landed on tweets that demand comment. Again, this one is also niche. Over the course of the past two days, after this Donna Brazil story broke, the number of people tweeting at me and John and Tommy to say, you guys probably aren't even going to talk about this. You haven't

tweeted about it. Typical. We're not all fucking senators. You don't need repressed releases from all of us. The fuck? It's like everybody has to be a senator now. Everybody has to have a prepared statement. Everybody has to be on message. Like, I do like when

entertainment sites will put a tweet about a statement like, Leonardo DiCaprio breaks silence over turtle that got sick on his vacation, as if people were like, this is crazy how he's being silent

about a weird story about Lucas Haas that came out or whatever. Breaks his silence. What I find is like, so I'm a misandrist as part of my brand or something. A reluctant heterosexual, if you will. But there's this thing that happens. if you will. But there's this thing that happens like every time there's like a black feminist issue or like a feminist

issue or a race issue it's like can't wait for at race Sonny to come and it's like man I wasn't planning on being black today. I was having a good time. I was watching Real Housewives of Dallas. It's much better this season.

And then like somebody summons you to do emotional or, like, you know, social justice labor for them, and it fucking sucks. Tweet about what we want when we want. Yeah. So if I'm tweeting about hoes, don't ask me about racial policy.

Let's spin it again. It has landed on Papa John's. I have seen a lot of shit laid at Colin Kaepernick's feet, but the declining sale of shitty pizza was one of the most surprising. And I also love Pizza Hut being like, our sales are fucking fine.

Maybe your product is garbage. But then again, white billionaires acting aggrieved because of black football players kneeling is sort of very on trend. I mean, of all the things. Yeah, I mean, look, people just stopped buying our pizza because of this movement for racial justice. And honestly, I know what I would choose. yeah also like if black people were gonna boycott a restaurant because of their political views it would be chick-fil-a first um but it's like really crazy uh you know because it's not just that he

blamed it on nfl protests but also papa john had been like very vocally pro-Trump way before that there was this like mass, you know, attention or focus on the part of Donald Trump. So his sales weren't declining for like three weeks. I mean, this means that he'd been losing money and like, you know, good favor for a long time and to suddenly be like, oh, it's the Negro's fault. It's like, look at you. Like, you're the person who's in the party of personal responsibility. And at the first opportunity you get, it's black people's knees that are the fault of your, like, sales.

That's bullshit. Let's spin it again. Yeah. It has landed on Paul Ryan's reading habit, something suggested by one Brian Boitler. Take it away. So for like nine years, Paul Ryan has cultivated this relationship with the commentariat

in national politics of being an earnest Boy Scout wonk. He just looks at the numbers. He just does policy. He doesn't have an ideological bone in his body, right? And so people in my position have been kind of at pains to say that's, no, actually, you're just kind of full of shit, right? Like, Paul Ryan says, I am just trying to save Medicare. And we say, no, you actually just want seniors to like hand over their retirement savings to Aetna. And the commentariat says, oh, yes, it's a very serious wonk. He's a very serious wonk. And then he puts out a budget and the numbers don't add up. And he's just gonna just strip money from all these programs for poor people. And he's just, people

ask him about that. He's like, you know what, I'm just a numbers guy. I can't comment on this or that or the other thing. And we say, no, you're just lying, and your budget is about screwing over poor people in the commentary. It says, oh, look, very serious, serious wonk. Then Donald Trump becomes president, and he suddenly decides, you know what? I'm just not going to comment on anything at all, and I'm going to be a serious wonk character, right? Then two weeks ago, he goes to the Al Smith dinner, and he's doing his stand-up set, and he's terrible at jokes, but the one joke that lands is the one where he says, you know, I just love in the Trump era waking up every morning and firing up Twitter so I can see what I'm going to have to pretend I didn't read when reporters asked me. It's funny because it's true, but he went on stage and he admitted, like, I lie constantly to reporters all the time and get away with it. And then this week,

Paul Manafort gets indicted again as a criminal foreign agent. Big news. Paul Ryan says, haven't had time to read the indictment. And he gets away with it. And on the one hand, it's fucked. And reporters ought to do a better job of figuring out how to get him to answer the questions about things that he's admitted he's read. On the other hand, I also have to say, respect. I mean, nine years of this. Nine years. He's both a wonk who's never read a thing. That's a tough thing to pull off. Let's spin it one more time. It has landed on audience... Oh, that Northam on endorsement is some fucking bullshit.

So basically, Northam is in this... By the way, if any of you are in D.C. or from Virginia, you better fucking do your part to make sure that Northam wins, to make sure that we win up and down that ticket because that race is incredibly important and we have to shut down the kind of politics that Ed Gillespie is practicing.

So there's been this conversation around sanctuary cities and Northam took a position that I don't agree with and he kind of conceded to this debate a little bit in the final days of this race. But otherwise, he's run a good campaign against Ed Gillespie, whose campaign has been, well, he's run a camp, he's been more focused on the issues certainly than Ed Gillespie, who's campaigned on fucking Confederate monuments and MS-13 and scaring the shit out of people and exciting racial grievance. And so there is a time for a debate about whether

or not to endorse somebody, but it is not in the final days before an election when, if Ed Gillespie wins, it sends a signal to every other Republican around the country that when you're behind, when your message isn't working, when your economic policies don't resonate with people, when you have nothing to offer, when you're a shady fucking lobbyist who worked for Enron, don't worry. Don't worry. We've got the monuments well. We've got the MS-13 well. We can play this racial game and it'll work and it'll be a victory for the kind of politics that Trump practiced. So the idea that a group is going to unendorse Northam in the final moments to make a point,

I think is the wrong thing to do. You can disagree with someone and say so without trying to hurt their campaign when the race is so fucking important. And that's a good reminder that if you can do what you can to help Northam in Virginia and to help that whole ballot, that up and down the ballot in Virginia, you should do your part. Go to flippable.org to do your part.

And I think we've got to leave it there. Guys, give it up for Ray Sani, Max Silvestri, Brian Boyler, Vanessa Gregoriotis. Thank you for coming out to The Late Show. Have a good night. This is cool. coming out to the late show. Have a good night.