The Comedy Cellar: Live from the Table - Ukraine: Michael Tracey and Sean Patton

Episode Date: May 16, 2022

Michael Tracey is a journalist for Substack. Has written for the Wall Street Journal, NY Daily News, The Nation, The Spectator, and other publications. Sean Patton is a Comedy Cellar regular whose multiple TV appearances include Maron, Inside Amy Schumer, Fallon, Conan and many more. 

🎵 Okay, hit it then. This is Live from the Table, recorded at the world-famous Comedy Cellar in New York's Greenwich Village, coming at you on SiriusXM 99 Raw Dog. And on the Laugh Button Podcast Network, Dan Natterman here with Noam Dwarman,

host of the aforementioned world-famous Comedy Cellar. We also have Periel Ashenbrand. Periel is our producer. And over the course of time, has evolved into an on-air personality. And there's really no putting the genie back in the bottle at this point. So, welcome, Periel. We also have with us Sean Patton.

Sean Patton is a comedy cellar regular. He's a comedian. One of the best. Oh, Perriel. We also have with us Sean Patton. Sean Patton is a comedy seller, regular. He's a comedian. One of the best. Oh, thank you. He is here, I don't know. I'm here. Several nights a week at Performing Stand-Up. And we have with us also Michael Tracy.

Thank you. World-famous comedian. Well, Michael Tracy sounds like a showbiz name almost. Or it does. It could be. Like, Michael Tracy sounds like a showbiz name almost. Or it does. It could be. Hiding a Jewish name? Sorry. My parents never informed me that it was a showbiz.

It has that feel to it. John Stewart-ish. Yeah, but that is your real name. It is my real name, yes. Irish vintage. Irish vintage. Good, good. Everybody assumes I'm Jewish.

Well, why would they assume that? You don't necessarily look Jewish. Mannerisms, I guess. What do you mean look Jewish? My whole aura. Your aura, yeah, you have a Jew-y aura. I don't see it, but anyway, my Jew-dar perhaps is not, but it is good because you're not. Anyway, he's a journalist for Substack, has written for the Wall Street Journal, the New York Daily News,

The Nation, The Spectator, and other publications. We welcome Michael Tracy to the show, making his debut. Thank you very much. Happy to be here. On Live from the Table. Hope I can demonstrate my quick wit. You don't have to. Okay.

I'll awkwardly try. Before we get to his expertise, you want to talk about the week in comedy, Dan? Well, first of all, I want to just talk briefly to our dear friend, Sean Patton, who I believe has never done our podcast before. Actually, au contraire. I did it when it was actually at the actual table.

That's correct. We used to do it downstairs. I wish we'd go back downstairs. Now the pandemic's over. Why can't we go back downstairs? We can. We can. You have to make that call.

We have to get the video set up. Yeah, we have to get the video set up. I prefer it downstairs. It was me and Norman were the guests. It was a while back though. Just a couple Louisianans. Just a couple of southern... A couple of Cajuns.

Southern nutria boys. I've quit smoking weed, I know. I know. What a dumbass. I'm so stupid. What a dumb choice. All these extra hours of mental clarity that I have, I hate them, they suck. I mean, it's sad for me knowing that I will never again

watch all five Air Bud films back to back ever again. Yeah, I will never again make a tuna mac cake and eat it all by myself. Those days are gone for me. I will never again go to a party, notice how many people are wearing hats, and get weirded out by that, and just leave without saying anything to anyone.

The thing is, I can't smoke weed anymore. My brain has become like a jerk, like an older brother just picks on me all the time. So when I would get high, my brain would be like, seriously? You just smoked weed? Fine. Now guess who's going to be terrified of circles for the next four and a half hours. Sean, is there anything that you have

upcoming that's of significance you'd like to discuss? I shot my first ever special in February in New Orleans, and we just finished all the post of it all, and I'm hoping it comes out by August. I don't know. I don't know. We're shopping it around.

I know very little about it except that it's premiering this year. It's my first ever. So if you fail to sell it, will you put it on YouTube like so many people have and have done so with great success? We'll see because, I mean, the thing about YouTube is people think, you know, for every super successful – for the three or four people who've actually had mega hits on YouTube, there's dozens who have, you know, barely any movement at all. Yeah, YouTube is still YouTube.

It's still an algorithm. It's like Norman, speaking of someone who's massively successful on YouTube, he already had a huge YouTube following before he put his special on. People don't realize that. He didn't just put it out there and then 8 million people saw it. He already had, like like a pretty huge following. And I'm terrible. I'm terrible.

I'm God fucking awful at social media. What about, you know, because I was. I'm trying. I'm trying. I need to maybe get on that. Maybe I don't. People are having success with it. And if you say for every success story, there's several people that aren't successful.

But people are doing. It's like for every Mike Tyson is the only people out there who are not dying at 55 with brain damage. Yeah, yeah, yeah. But Instagram and TikTok people are putting up clips of their stand-up or putting up clips of other stuff. I'm trying. I'm getting better at it. But, like, yeah, people think nowadays, like, you just got to put it on YouTube and bam. It's like, no, there's still a lot involved.

Now, if I don't sell it to uh streaming service i will don't say that you're gonna sell it i will figure it out you're gonna sell it i'll figure it out i love this your advantage is that you're you know you're you have a certain status among comedians so at a minimum you'll get other comedians to to recommend your special if it's on youtube i assume that that Norman will say, you know, he'll tweet at her Instagram. Well, I think that they all will.

Do you have any famous friends that can help you out? Amy Schumer? I got you guys. Why can't people like your friends like Norm or something set it up so that when their video finishes, the next on the autoplay

goes directly to you? That's YouTube's in charge of that. That's the algorithm, yeah. That's YouTube's in charge of that. Well, you algorithm, yeah. That's YouTube's in charge of that. Well, you can set it up as a playlist. You have some control over that in some way, I think. I think maybe, but I mean, I also know that like, while it's awesome when you have friends who succeed

and when they want to do things for you, that's great, but everyone's kind of, it's become like every man for itself, every comedian for themselves, even the successful ones. You can definitely put a link at the end of it. Like, let's say, please, after this, why don't you watch my friend Sean Patton? And then they can have like 30. I mean, I think at the end of the day, you know, you don't want to most successful people at least had some helping hand along the way. I don't think.

Sure. I mean, I've had, you know, like Ari is a sweetheart and has done so much for me. And I really am thankful for him. And Norman's. I mean, like I'm thankful for him. And Norman's did so much. I mean, I've got friends who will help, but at a certain point, you've got to find a way to do it on your own. And it's hard, but we've got to make sure that we can.

I'll happily promote it if it aligns with every aspect of my political worldview. It doesn't challenge any of my presuppositions. Where are you from? New Jersey. A very pro-New Jersey set. I just want to say, Dan Hayes, when I say things like this,

because he's very insecure, but the truth is that you are one of the shortlist of comedians that I believe are actually gifted. Oh, well. Like, actually a gifted, natural, born, head and shoulders talent above many other comedians. You know, I've always felt that way about you. Well, I'm not insecure unless you're implying that I am not on that short list. Then I might be upset.

You can perform in French. That's impressive to me. He has that. So, no. And you're a guy who is just naturally talented and funny. It comes easy to you, like swimming. And maybe that works against you in a certain way because it's hard for you to become like a honer and a strategist

because you have so much that you can say, so many ideas. I remember when you first started The Cellar, it was like, do that set that I saw in Montreal. And then you went downstairs and did six other things. I was like, no, no, no, no. Yeah. I mean, thank you. That's very flattering.

And I mean that from the bottom of my heart. I absolutely mean it. Thank you. That means a galaxy coming from you, man. I mean, that's awesome. Thank you. But there is like, I wish I was better at, you know, I just entered the world of comedy at a weird time

when I put too much faith in management and representation and agents and people who said, we got this, and they didn't. I'm not blaming them entirely. There was a lot on me as well. Sounds a little anti-Semitic. It's anti-industry. I'll admit that.

What's your special called? Number one. Nice. Now, the word special, it used to be called a special because, like, HBO would have their specials where it wasn't a series. It would just be a one-off. A one-off. And so it was called a special. But now the word special has sort of taken on a different meaning.

Special just means basically any 45 minutes to one hour of comedy is a special. Right, right, right. If it's longer than 15 minutes. Because I've seen people putting out half-hour specials now. You know? And people say, like, I have a half-hour special coming out on Comedy Central. I'm like, great for you, but I remember when that was just called a half-hour. I think it was called a half-hour special.

Let's get on. Do you want to talk about Chappelle? Let's talk about something else. What's Chappelle? Chappelle. Chappelle. For or against? So what did about Chappelle? Let's talk about something else. Chappelle. Chappelle. Chappelle. For or against? So what did the Chappelle thing make you think about, Dan?

Or anybody? I mean, not much of anything. I mean, like, people are making this as a pattern. Like, okay, first Chris Rock was hit, and then Chappelle was hit. And I think Howie Mandel said something. He tweeted something about this being the end of comedy or something. He's catastrophizing. I mean, Chappelle,

he's controversial. It's going to happen, but it's not going to happen again. I doubt it. I bet it'll never happen to him again. Did you hear what he said after he got attacked? No. What? It was a trans man? Yeah. I mean, he's a great genius, but even I could have come up with that. Have they speciously ascribed

any kind of ideological motivation to his attacker yet? Pure mental illness, I believe. The guy's like a mentally ill SoundCloud rapper, I believe. Oh, wow. I'm pretty sure it was like living on the streets. He apparently had a song

called Dave Chappelle that had nothing to do at all, no reference of Dave Chappelle at all. He named it that for the clickbait. We have, I mean, we have a lot of... Has the SoundCloud blown up? Yeah. Yeah, is he huge now?

Take note. Yeah, yeah, yeah. So two things. So actually, I've been getting a lot of calls from the press asking all kinds of questions like, are you having more security? Is this a trend? And blah, blah, blah.

And then I got a call today asking me if the famous comedians are walking around with bigger security details now, whatever it is. Which I didn't even want to answer. But I don't think it's a trend. I don't even think that it's related to the Chris Rock thing in any way. That was totally spontaneous. I do think it might be related to the general trend of violence in the face of people who feel aggrieved in some way. But now that I'm finding out the guy's mentally ill. Well, also, like.

Like, it has more to do with January 6th in a way than it does with Chris Rock's slap. And people, like, the Chris Rock's slap, people, like, the thing about the Chris Rock's slap is, let's all remember, it was Will Smith at the Oscar. It wasn't like a rando at a comedy club. It wasn't like a crazy right-wing person. Or left-wing person. Or left-wing person. It was a wingless bird. Yes, yes, yes.

There's always a tendency to draw connections between events that are disparate, but for narrative reasons, you want to have some kind of causal attachment to one another. When Chris Rock was struck at the Oscars... By Will Smith. By Will Smith. Yes, I used the passive voice. There were people saying, this could be the beginning of...

Because Will Smith was not punished for it, this will open the door. They were already expressing this notion that this is the beginning of, because Will Smith was not punished for it, this will open the door. They were already expressing this notion that this is the beginning of something. And you and I, you know, were speaking about it on the podcast then and didn't think that that was true. I still don't think it's true. I don't think it's true either.

I don't think... Every now and again, comics do get attacked. It's been going on for... You know, my father said something to me on his deathbed. I don't remember what the context was. After he sold you the watch? After he sold me the watch. And he says, you know, things are not always what they appear.

And for some reason, the way he said it, it always stayed with me. But it's really true. And so, for instance, just speaking of January 6th, remember this guy, was his name Sicknick, the cop? Yeah. They told us this cop was killed. He got hit by, first he was hit by a fire extinguisher. Then he was spared with a bear spray.

And, of course, it didn't seem hard to believe. Like, he was a cop. It was January 6th. And the next day he drops dead. And people were calling him a murderer. But sure enough, they did an autopsy and they found out, no, the guy died of natural causes or something. So there are these

coincidences, and you could go through a whole list of them, and it's just good to breathe and understand that two incidents, a trend, do not make. For years, every president elected in the year zero between 1840 and 1960, all died in office.

Oh, I believe that. Well, no, it's true. They did all die in office. That's meaningful. But everybody thought this was like the curse of Tecumseh because apparently, I think, William Henry Harris. Do you know about this? William Henry Harris. Like, I think he went to war against

Well, no, he died only a couple months into office because he contracted pneumonia or something. I think the legend was that he contracted it when he was delivering his inauguration. He wore a jacket. His mother told him to wear a jacket. But the curse was supposed to be like an Indian, American Indian curse, I think.

They said not every president will die in office every 20 years on the year that if they're elected in a zero year. Oh, like nineties. Okay. Yeah. So, uh, so, uh, Harrison 60 was Lincoln died.

80 was whoever that was. Reagan? No. But every, and so, and, and, and so when Reagan was elected, it was 1980 and people thought, well, he's going to die in office and he never did. So anyway, the point is a string of coincidence is a lot longer than than Chappelle Chris Rock. Yeah, these things happen. I but there is a trend. I mean, even the mentally ill thing, I mean, I tend to discount like this guy, Dylan Roof.

Unless the curse was only supposed to last until 1960. Dylan Roof was the crazy white guy who shot up a church in Charleston. Anyways, he is clearly mentally ill. On the other hand, it is fair to say that our mentally ill people, Americans, do different things than other mentally ill countries. So somehow they do take in the atmosphere and they are able to still reflect it in their own mentally ill kind of way, maybe. I don't know if you have something you wanted to say.

Well, Dylann Roof did have a manifesto where he laid out explicitly his views. I think he was trying to prophecy some sort of race war and he actually had a developed set of views that he expressed and how that intersected with his purported mental illness. You know, that's always sort of an ambiguous dynamic that it's hard to really calibrate how much of the motivation was his mental illness, how much of it was genuine political conviction. It's usually some kind of combination of the two that you can't really isolate into anything that's tangible. But in some ways, these acts of horrific violence, whether it's a mass murder or even just attacking somebody on stage, it is kind of an act of madness because it's not going to end up well for you.

You're going to face legal repercussions or maybe even be physically attacked back in retaliation. So it's kind of a mad act unto itself. The open question is how much do you situate that into the worldview that that person expresses? And it's not an easy question. And violence is woven into the DNA of the tapestry of America. Of humans.

Right, but you have access to guns here in a way that's pretty unusual. So you can be a racist like Dylann Roof and be mentally ill and then also have access to these firearms. Who is the guy who killed all those kids in Parkland? Was that what it was, the first grade classroom? I don't know his name. Parkland was the high school in Florida.

Sorry, not Parkland. In Connecticut, Newtown That was Adam Lanza He actually covered that shooting And went to The funerals of the Kids lying there Alex Jones said that's when Alex Jones Blew the roof off of her, it didn't really happen

I tended not to believe His statements about that when I physically saw The corpses of the children lying there No, they were all wax happen, right? Yeah. I tended not to believe his statements about that when I physically saw the corpses of the children lying. No, they were all wax dolls, right? Isn't that the thing? But that guy was mentally ill too, right? It's like, okay, so what? So you're mentally ill and you have access to these guns and you just killed...

And you're also capable of being a copycat even though you're mentally ill and having ideas put in your head based on things that you see, which you might not have thought of otherwise. But on the other hand, you are mentally ill. So, you know, it's complicated stuff. And what does mentally ill mean? Because Adam Lanza was competent enough that he could orchestrate this fairly elaborate plan to kill his mother, get the arms, enter the school at a particular time, and kill actually a large number of kids

and staff. So, you know, if he had some sort of developmental disorder that made him socially isolated, is that mentally ill in the same way that a schizophrenic is mentally ill where they're basically incapacitated and need to have constant care? I mean, it's a broad spectrum of ailments. I think that's a really important

distinction. So now the guy who attacked Chappelle, so there's a few things I didn't realize. So they say he carried a replica of a gun. It was a gun that was a knife. But what they didn't do a good job of saying was actually in his pocket and not opened. I thought at first that he wielded this weapon

at Dave, but that's apparently not the case. No. So I don't know if he got there at Dave, but that's apparently not the case. So, I don't know if he got there with the intention of truly hurting Dave. First, I thought it was like an attempted murder or something, but it seems less like it was.

Was it because of Dave's stance on trans? I don't believe so. No, I think Dave was just making a joke. Yeah, I think he definitely... When you watch the clip of him going, it was clearly in jest when he said it was a trans man. It was a moment of life. My mother did say to me, be careful,

but that's my mother. She also, years ago, told me not to play Dungeons and Dragons because she read that the kids were getting too into it and they started to act it out. Oh. I mean, also... I mean, also, you can look up... There's a clip of Pauly Shore getting attacked on stage like 15 years ago by like a redneck. I'm not sure where, but a big ass motherfucker, a cowboy had to actually walks up on stage like slowly and take the swing at him. It's like what you pointed out earlier.

This is some shit that's happened before. And Chappelle was in the... I'm with you. It's coincidence. Wrong place, wrong time. How big is the Hollywood Bowl? 10,000 people? I remember when Dimebag Darrell was shot and killed on stage. Remember that from Pantera?

From Pantera, yes. And I was, I think, only 15 or 16 at the time, but I remember a minor frenzy around, is this going to be the new normal for musicians? Are we going to have to radically change our security procedures? And I don't really recall a spate of subsequent random killings like that. So sometimes it's just, you know, in life,

there's just acts of violence that you can't explain. If John Lennon had been shot the day after Will Smith slapped Chris Rock, everybody would be like, oh, you think it's because of the slap? Anyway. Who did it? Are you allowed to say redneck because you're from the South? Please tell me redneck's not off the table.

I just heard homeless person apparently is wrong now. Yes, unhoused. Well, you're a champion of all those things. This is why I side with Thanos. I used the word killing today to describe what happens during an abortion. I think you said killing a baby. I didn't say killing. I said killing the fetus, and you got mad at the word killing,

and I'm like, okay, well, what word would you have me use? And she couldn't come up with one. No, I said that that's loaded language. Right. You're talking about abortion. I was kidding about redneck. Fine. I'm trying.

Okay, I get it. What word should I use? Abortion. Terminate. Terminate. I said terminate, but Dan thought terminate was worse. Okay, I get it. What word should I use? Abortion. Terminate? I said terminate, but Dan thought terminate was worse. That sounds worse to me. That sounds like Nazi Final Solution shit. Yeah.

It's very clinical. Terminated? Terminate the pregnancy, though, is kind of a standard term. Yes, that is a standard term. I've just been using the phrase recall. Abortion, it's a recall. They're being recalled to heaven. It terminates the pregnancy,

but it terminates... We're discussing at what month does it become alive? Whatever. The point is that I think people... Words do have connotations. I understand that. And words can sound harsh. But generally, when somebody brings these things up, they're trying

to derail you from the point you're trying to make. And that's why I object to it. It's just a way of preventing you from getting to the heart of the matter of what you want to talk about. That's always the time that you use it. Will you stop it? I would like to know what would be the alternative phrase for redneck. Oh, I have no idea. I have no idea.

Racist. She'd be happy with that. Good old boy. You could just do away with the fetus. Squelch it. Something. Well, Noam came up with a perfect solution. What was that?

The final solution? No, that you have the baby, but then you... Oh, don't start with that. She was comparing it to capital punishment, blah, blah, blah. I said, maybe we should just have the baby and put it in Life Without Parole. This sounds like a freshman dorm conversation. Lots of bong hits. That is exactly

what Perriella's like. As a matter of fact, I've had these conversations when I was a... You know what? That is so easy to just dismiss it like that but that's fine you guys can move on to ukraine she's doing a character that's not really hey i'm in favor of late night bong hit riddled philosophical discussions that go absolutely nowhere so you didn't happen to come to our um village underground debate on the russia uh

causation of the russia whether nat was responsible for Putin invading Ukraine. Did you come to that debate? I didn't. I was abroad at the time. I would have come. This was a debacle. Was it? Was it?

Because. Who were the participants again? I don't remember. Peter Beiner was hosting. Peter Beiner. Oh, right. Julia Yaffe. And some people, I don't know.

You would know their names because these are all people known in it. But I didn't know their names. Well, the involvement of Julia Yaffe doesn't make – not surprising. She was fine. No, look, she was great, but she's on one side of it. The problem was I've been very intrigued by this Mearsheimer realist argument. Whether you agree with it, don't agree with it, it deserves to be listened to and thought through.

Maybe it's partially true, whatever it is. It's reasonable. Yeah. So I commissioned this debate or whatever the word is. And they came back to me when it's like, Dave, with four people, none of whom believed in that argument. Two of whom said, well, we can do it. You know, we're just going to do it as an academic exercise. I said, well, that's never going to work.

No one's going to... So predictably, the debate turned into basically four people agreeing with one another, or if there was disagreement, it was just to how much worse Russia was. Right, right, right. But you

seem to be pretty convinced by this Mearsheimer argument in general that the United States or NATO are quite responsible for Putin invading Ukraine and that much of it was predictable in some way, correct? Well, first of all, I think Mearsheimer is persuasive, by and large. So you're going to have to tell listeners who don't know.

John Mearsheimer is a professor of international relations at the University of Chicago, a well-known figure in the field, often delves into controversies, but he has enough of a stature... His eyes just communicated to me, you know what he said about the Jews. Well, he did write with Stephenhen walt who's a professor at harvard a book on the israel lobby in 2007 which as you might imagine didn't go over well in some quarters but you know it was able and you know he was denounced and called every name in the book and you know but because of his pedigree and that of walt he was able to at least get a hearing for the argument whereas a lot of other people wouldn't.

And he's even discussed this in hindsight many years later and said that none of his colleagues would really come out and publicly defend him, even if they maybe privately agreed with some of the points that he was making. And basically, the idea was that just that pro-Israel lobby exists and influences American policy. And that was largely basically the same thing. I reread it recently, and I reread Dershowitz's very long rebuttal. Yeah, yeah.

I thought Dershowitz, whatever. But I don't want to call the guy anti-Semitic, but tell them about Russia. Go ahead. And so he also has this fairly distinct view in his field in American public life writ large on Russia and Ukraine and the role of NATO, you know, as it interacts between those two. And since the 2014 coup or change of government or putsch or revolution or whatever you want to call it, when the incumbent president, Yanukovych, was essentially ousted from power, had to flee, and this more pro-American government took power.

So you know that perry although there was a there was a i mean cool is a loaded word but there was a different leader in in ukraine he was elected leader and then he was chased out and replaced by the guy who was more friendly to the west yes and there was some evidence it was a phone call by newland um who's back in power now now in the State Department. Where the Americans seem to be discussing kind of the lineup of who would take over. There's no more evidence than

that that I've seen that we were involved. But go ahead. So this was just an important event in the minds of the people who feel that we caused this because from Putin's point of view it was like America's fucking around in the backyard getting rid of the

democratically elected people who are sympathetic to a relationship with Russia. And what would we do if this happened in Mexico? And what year is this? 2014. This is 2014. Anyway, so after that event which, you know, it's controversial as to whether you describe it as a coup or a revolution or whatnot,

but after that change of government, Mearsheimer was publicly saying that if the U.S. were to intensify its military involvement in Ukraine, this would eventually antagonize Russia to the point of provoking a larger conflict. And you can go find a column, an op-ed that Mearsheimer wrote in the New york times i believe in 2015 where he he the headline was something to the effect of don't arm ukraine because it's going to spiral out of control and this is regarded as an existential issue for we're leading down the primrose path and ukraine's right price and you know that was borne out really and because meersheimer's advice was not heeded over the course of the Obama, Trump and Biden administrations, the U.S. military and NATO more and more integrated with Ukraine basically turned Ukraine into a de facto outpost of the U.S. military where they're constantly holding exercises on Ukrainian territory. They're fostering what they call interoperability. So this seamless dynamic

between the U.S. military command and the Ukrainian command, which we're actually seeing now in effect over the course of the war with this intelligence sharing arrangement where it was just revealed last week through The New York Times reporting on these leaks that the American officials basically provided the intelligence that led to the sinking of this flagship Russian warship. And to help kill the Russian generals. And to kill generals, yeah. Which is crazy that the Times reported that and crazy that it was leaked.

Yeah. So basically, Mearsheimer's fundamental view is that the West and namely the U.S. is more to blame for the conflict in Ukraine than Putin. I don't know if I would necessarily distill it quite that crisply because Putin on his own agency decided to launch a preemptive invasion in February, which has to be kind of analyzed on its own terms. But in terms of the broader dynamics, which kind of led to this tinderbox situation where there's this kind of showdown between the West and Putin, clearly the U.S. actively sought to take a number of actions that they knew would aggravate Putin to the point that maybe he would take a rash action such as this. The current CIA director, William Burns, back when he was ambassador to Russia in 2008, wrote basically memos back to the State Department saying that Putin views this as a red line, right? Putin views expansion of NATO into Ukraine as a red line and will act accordingly.

So it was well known for years that if the U.S. were to pursue this path by militarizing NATO, promising it, militarizing Ukraine rather, promising it that it would ascend to NATO, eventually that it would erupt NATO eventually, that it would erupt potentially and lead to something like we're seeing unfold today. So I think, you know, the broad thrust of Mearsheimer's analysis is probably accurate. And but he receives an enormous amount of consternation because he's accused of apologizing for Putin, right, or defending Russia, or not admitting that Russia is fundamentally evil and condemning him forcefully enough, etc. Isn't this the same argument when people say, you know, say, well, you don't go to a bad neighborhood, and they say, well, now you're

blaming the victim. It's not excusing the perpetrator, but explaining, you know, one of the causes. Yeah, I mean, I think there's something to that analogy, although I have, when I make kind of variations of this argument, or at least make points that are associated with this general worldview that's associated with Mearsheimer, one thing I'll get accused of is, you know, blaming the woman for wearing a short skirt if she's, you know, sexually assaulted or something. And I don't think you can really reduce these complex geopolitical dynamics into interpersonal interactions in a way that

really holds much water. But I'm just trying to highlight the difference between explaining why something happened and assigning blame. You can say that the United States had a role to play without taking any blame away from the Russians. Right. You could also do something as simple as just look at what Putin has said.

I mean, even this is now considered taboo to just sort of listen to his words without endorsing them or accepting that they're justification for the invasion. But if you look at what he said in his speech on February 24th when the invasion was launched, he devoted paragraphs to this issue of NATO expansion, exactly as Mearsheimer foresaw, and how he views that as justification for Russia to launch of in hock to Putin and had all these dodgy arrangements, supposedly. You know, that sort of dominated Trump's term in terms of the popular perception of him, at least by way of the media. But NATO actually expanded under Trump's presidency twice and Trump signed off on it. And that's the number one thing or one of the main things that Putin objected to. So Trump on a policy level didn't actually, you know, coddle up to Putin, whatever he might have said rhetorically.

And so, you know, it's gotten to this point where, you know, in 2021, the Biden administration signed a formal arrangement, a formal security arrangement with Ukraine that contained this assurance that Ukraine would be able to one day join NATO. And that was first birthed under George Bush in 2008. And Biden continued that into 2021. And at a certain point, Putin calculated, I guess, that he had to take this action. Again, it doesn't justify it. It doesn't excuse it. But it's helpful to at least explain it with some degree of impartiality so you can

understand why things have unfolded. What does it say about the current state of the media and all that that everybody is not fully aware of this point of view? Why are the news networks

they will not cover on their round tables. They don't have somebody like you making those arguments. You don't have to agree with it, but this is the others. It's a Pat Buchanan type view. They don't like Pat Buchanan. Because people are fucking stupid.

We got social media. We got distractions. Education has become less important. People are fucking stupid. Yeah. We got social media. We got distractions. Education has become less important. People are getting that. You look at look, man. I mean, I'm I'm in my I'm 43. I look back 20 years like people have gotten fucking stupider. Yeah.

The trend is stupid now. It's cool to be stupid. It's not it's not fun to be educated or well-versed in politics or even in language. You're dropping words just in this conversation that I'm like, man, I haven't heard people on the street say some of this in years. And it's not – they don't want you to pay attention. They don't want – Well, is it that sort of when people refer to the elite, it's sort of – Right, right.

You're alluding to this sort of revolt against the quote-unquote elite. Right, right, right. The guy that— I don't want to be an elitist and read the fucking article. We deserve whatever's coming. That's all I'm saying. Please don't reveal to the audience that I have my thesaurus open and I'm referring to— Well, there's cameras.

They can see. Okay. It is part—this is courage to me, so this might be silly, but is part of it. There's a subtle implication to this argument that Trump was kind of right to have wanted to bury the hatchet with the Russians when he came in. When he had the chance. And every time he made a move in that direction, every feint in that direction, everybody accused him of being Putin's puppet.

Well, that's a big component of it, because one of the ways in which liberals and leftists were radicalized under the Trump years was on the assumption that he was colluding with Putin, right? That he was somehow abetting the rise of who they regarded as their chief geopolitical foe, because Putin was more and more depicted during that period as this exporter of like white kind of right wing insurgent movement that popped up anywhere in Europe or in U.S., whether it was France with Le Pen or Brexit or Trump. And so in the popular liberal conception, Putin was enemy number one. Right. And that basically caused a major shift in how liberals and Democrats view the issue of Russia. Prior to Trump's term, you would be more likely to have advocacy for some sort of detente or an improvement of relations amongst liberals and Democrats. But once Trump became so intimately associated with who they view as this nefarious global scourge, then that

totally shifted. And so you see that kind of informing the consensus today around the war in Ukraine, right? Because of that radicalization, because there's been such an animosity built up toward Putin on the idea that he installed Trump illicitly into power through this Manchurian candidate scheme. Ariel believes all that, by the way. Go ahead. Okay. Well, we can get into that if you want.

But, you know, because that's the prevailing theory, it then forecloses any possibility that there could be, you know, negotiations with Putin or maybe even concessions made to him in order to avert war. And then on the other hand, you have Republicans who, you know, there's a tiny minority of Republicans who have a different view where, you know, that's more reminiscent of Papu Canada or something where they're not kind of just diehard anti-Russia zealots. But by and large, if you look at the Republican Party, for example, in Congress, they're totally gung-ho on antagonizing Putin to the hilt and arming Ukraine as much as possible and maybe even going

further with some kind of troop deployment or what have you. So you have this conversions of different sort of strains of ideology that have congealed into this totally intractable consensus. You know, I go on Tucker Carlson occasionally and make points that are similar. We don't like Tucker Carlson. Well, I know it's whatever your view of him. He does allow for an airing of opinions and perspectives that are evident virtually nowhere else in the media.

So that's why you don't see this perspective voiced. Number one, because people who are in the media have to be hyper conscious of their reputations among their peers and colleagues. Right. And if you're saying something that could be castigated as Russian disinformation or apologizing for Russia, that could have real cost for you professionally or socially. I'm fortunate where I'm in a position where I'm largely funded by my readers and such, so I'm not kind of always walking on eggshells, worried about who I'm going to offend if I make certain of these points. But by and large, the rest of the media is, and they don't want to, you know, subject themselves to that kind of controversy. So the right-wingers, to a large extent, it activates their, like, preternatural anti-Soviet memories, right?

So we had said on this show, and we were not pro-Trump, although I was much less anti-Trump than most people. Have we said it or have you said it? No, what's that? Have we said it or have you said it? I said on the show that at the time people were bringing this up like how else can you explain Trump's

Trump has to be controlled by Putin. How else can you explain his sympathy for Putin? And I said at the time well he takes every other Pat Buchanan position. Why wouldn't it be out of character for him not to take this Pat Buchanan position? And I remember saying but if you think the sanctions against like the Russians are never going to leave Crimea.

I remember. So so sanctions until the Russians leave Crimea are sanctions till the end of time and sanctions till the end of time is dangerous for the world. Remember, he says this is a dangerous situation. I might have. And it doesn't seem like we have any idea of how we expect this dangerous situation to end. And that just is not impressive to me as a geopolitical strategy. And people would accuse me of defending Trump. Well, just tell me how they're never leaving Russia. They're never leaving Crimea. You don't think the Russians are leaving Crimea, do you?

Because of some sanctions? No. Well, then what do we do? The thing with Trump is that people fixated so unwaveringly on his rhetoric and the things that he would blurt out or tweet on a daily basis. Right. And that informed how they perceived what he was doing. Yeah. And, you know, on occasion, it's true that he would say something like, you know, when he when he was first got into office, he did the Super Bowl halftime interview with Bill O'Reilly and Bill O'Reilly famously or infamously asked him, you know, is Putin a killer? And Trump sort of equivocated and said, you know, we don't kill people, Bill.

Yeah, you don't think we kill people. So that was taken to be a defense of Putin. Okay, fair enough. That statement was a departure from what most presidents would say about the leader of Russia. But on the other hand, if you look at the policy that the Trump administration actually implemented, it was much more hawkish on Russia than the Obama administration. Well, the problem was that he wasn't tweeting that out, though. Well, it's a matter of public perception. Like, if he's not putting that information out there and instead just they're letting him run fucking amok on a major social media platform, that's going to inform the opinion of everyone. Well, I mean, that information was out there, though, and he would occasionally talk about

it, but it didn't comport with this narrative of collusion and conspiracy that somehow binded Trump and Putin together. You know, if talking about Ukraine, one of the main grievances cited by Putin was that the U.S. and the West have been continuously arming Ukraine. And Obama refused to do that over the course of his term, despite pressure from Hillary Clinton and others to go ahead with that. Trump did it. Trump did it because Lindsey Graham and John McCain successfully lobbied him to start sending

the weapons into Ukraine. I think the difference is, if I could channel Trump, Trump is always looking for leverage for, this might be giving him too much credit, for some sort of deal that he wants to make. So he was more hawkish with Russia, but I believe with the intention of creating a softening them up so that he could make a deal with Russia to end the hostility. This is Kissinger view. Kissinger apparently went to speak to Trump in the Oval Office or maybe before. Kissinger viewed that Ukraine should be some sort of buffer state between... So everything we know about

Trump indicates that he likely would like to have settled this with Russia on some terms that were... Well, he didn't do it, though, actually. You know, Sergey Lavrov, who's the Russian foreign minister, gave an interview last month to Indian TV. How could he have done it with all the Russia scandal stuff going on?

They would have hung him out to dry. That's another component of it. Actually, whatever intent Trump may have had to improve relations with Russia was basically undermined by this domestic political pressure where he had to constantly demonstrate that he was not collusively in some sort of arrangement with Putin. I want to read something to you. Go ahead. So I am interested in the Mearsheimer point of view, but it kind of reminds me of the Chris Rock thing.

Just because Mearsheimer said this and then Putin, six years later or eight years later did invade, doesn't mean Mearsheimer was right. Mearsheimer could have also been lucky. It was a long time between 2014 and 2022. But during the run-up to this, here's my question. I read somewhere, this is probably by a guy who you know his name. Is it Michael Kaufman?

Yeah, he's a Russia military analyst that was CNA, I think is the name of the think tank. So he wrote this before the invasion, so you respond to it, and then we'll talk about it. He says, Moscow has not only been asking for things that it knows it cannot attain,

this is talking about Putin's demands, that it knows it cannot attain, but it has been doing so in a manner that will ensure that it could not attain them. Serious negotiations are usually done behind closed doors by publicizing its demands and refusing to unbundle them in a way that might achieve compromise. And I'll add and wanting them in writing. Russia has made its diplomatic effort appear more performative than genuine. Do you think that's correct? Do you think that the die was already cast? I think there may be some truth to that. You know, Putin did put out that manifesto type statement on the history of Russia and Ukraine last summer, where he went deep into the weeds of the history, you know, back to the beginnings of

the Soviet Union and these, you know, longstanding ties between the countries that seem to provide something of an intellectual basis, at least by his lights for a subsequent invasion. Is it possibly already made up his mind that the trajectory of Ukraine, NATO or no NATO is they want to be a European nation. They're trading with Europe. They're taking on Europe. Things are, why would they want to be with us? There's only one way to settle this. And that probably assumed it would be like a week-long war. Put our foot down on that, it would be the end of it.

I don't know what he assumed about the tactical progression of the war. But it is possible that it was a foregone conclusion that he would have invaded. On the other hand, you'd think it would be the imperative of the American government, especially the State Department, which is led by the Secretary of State, the chief diplomat of the country, to do everything in their power to avert a war like this. And from the outset, once this whole situation was lurching toward a potential military kind of climax, Antony Blinken, the Secretary of State, said there was zero possibility, it was not going to be on the table, that the U.S. would revise its position on the NATO open door policy, meaning any country can theoretically try to get into NATO.

While simultaneously, he said that there was no realistic possibility that Ukraine would be joining NATO in the near future. So why were they so dead set on maintaining that so-called open door policy of NATO if they could have just put it in writing and at least had a maybe it was a long shot attempt but an attempt nonetheless at averting the war they didn't even bother trying to do that they didn't engage in any real diplomacy i mean and the thing about wanting the demand wanting the assurances in writing stem from putin and a lot of people including in the west uh believing with a lot of justification that when Gorbachev

was negotiating with the George H.W. Bush administration in the early 90s around the reunification of Germany, that he was given this verbal assurance of not one inch. So there's a book out about that now, which kind of disputes that or you read that? I'm sure that I didn't read it, but I Sarat's book. Yeah,

there's dispute over it, but the point is that whatever commitment might have been made, it wasn't put in writing. Hold on. So I would just say, and then let's move on to something else, that I understand why they can't put it in writing, just because he demands it. I mean, I would have thought that we can't just pull out of Afghanistan, you know,

when they tell us to go and leave everything like we did. But if you had a choice between revising the open-door policy of NATO or averting a war, wouldn't you prefer to avert the war? I would back-channel, like Kennedy did, say whatever I had to do, give assurances, whatever it is, but I would not allow the United States of America

to submit to the threats of a guy on the world stage. We're not doing anything wrong. We have every right to Ukraine has every right to their autonomy. If they want it, they want to be in NATO, whatever it is. He can't. It's a very dangerous precedent, I think, to publicly say, OK, yes, Mr. Putin, we'll put it in writing for you. If Putin was serious, that was his beef.

Then behind closed doors, I believe, and everything I know about deals, when both parties want to make a deal, they do. And I feel that's why this quote that I read to you rang true to me. You don't do that publicly if you really expect to get it. You do it quietly behind closed doors where Biden has the latitude. Remember Obama famously said, listen, after the election, tell Vladimir after the election, I'll have a lot more latitude to whatever that was about. Hot mic, yeah. You can't do it in public.

So I'm going to give Biden the credit for that. Well, we don't really have any evidence at all that they've engaged in any background. No, we don't. So why haven't they been doing that? That story hasn't been written yet. Henry Kissinger, who's almost 99 years old, appeared at an event this past weekend with the Financial Times. Dan, do your Kissinger. I don't do...

I'm not even passionate. But anyway, Kissinger appeared at this event, right? And he actually made an oblique, what seemed like an oblique criticism of the Biden administration for not engaging in really any kind of thoroughgoing diplomacy in the run-up to the war. Because Kissinger, apparently,

even though he's 99 and barely sentient, still is of the belief that the war could have been potentially averted if there was a different approach taken by the U.S. government. Are you saying that Kissinger is no longer lucid? I haven't noticed. I haven't seen him in a while. Well, he actually is surprisingly lucid for his age. I'm sort of joking around because he's so

incredibly old and looks like he could, he's like a decomposing corpse. I'm going to bring this up at the actual table tonight. What do you guys think about the Hoppin, was it the guy who wrote the theory? Mearsheimer. What do you guys think about Mearsheimer's article? Oh, conversation as usual.

Let's get into it. Bring up some academic articles. So don't get me wrong, I'm not saying they handled it right. I'm saying that I see why they didn't publicly submit to that demand. What they did behind closed doors might have been completely incompetent. So let's talk about... Well, first of all, Noam,

you mentioned that this was the subject of a debate here at the Comedy Cellar. We should mention, for those who don't know, that the Comedy Cellar, in addition to being a comedy club, Noam likes to have debates. Because Noam has three rooms here.

He's got the... No, four rooms. Four rooms. So there's plenty of room for other shit and experimental stuff that has nothing to do with comedy You should do one of these debates at the room in Vegas I'm assuming there weren't many laughs

During that debate No, that debate was not Probably not, but do you have plans for another debate? Yeah, I do What topics? We're going to do something with foreign I think it's Foreign Affairs Magazine I get foreign affairs and foreign policy confused But we're going to do something with them. Is it Foreign... I think it's Foreign Affairs Magazine. I get Foreign Affairs and Foreign Policy confused.

But we're going to do some stuff with them. Co-branding debates and stuff. I love the debates. The last one really kind of disappointed me because you want fireworks in a debate. You don't want four people who agree with you. If I was involved, I would have brought a whoopee cushion. And this guy, Max Blumenthal, is that his name?

Yeah. So apparently he was supposed to, apparently he's a controversial character. I never heard of him. But I didn't care that he was a controversial character. That would have been fun. Was he slated to participate in the first? He was slated, and then without me knowing about it,

he was... Well, if he was there, it would have been fiery. There would actually have been some difference of opinion had he been there. So it's unfortunate. Well, what topics do you have? I mean, yeah. Can we also do it?

Whether the Holocaust happened or not. No, you're not really going to do it. I wanted to. I know you actually wanted to do it. I wanted to do it. Why not between comedians? Why not let there be one with comedians debating? Yeah, we should.

Well, if the comedians are informed about a particular topic. Exactly. That's what I'm saying. Like, for example. Let people sign up. Yeah. You know, if you wanted the flank steak versus the strip steak, then the comedians. That or actual, like, you know, if you have comedians,

you're like, I would like to talk about the Henry Kissinger. Well, I'll ask you a question about comedy. Yeah. Is it true that female comedians, particularly of color, don't get a fair shake in the industry, in the clubs, in the club circuit? I mean, I don't think I can answer that because I'm not a black woman. I'm just not a black female comedian. I don't know.

Or brown, you know, Indians and Pakistani, that kind of thing. Why don't you ask them? I'm sure they'll tell you. Well, no one doesn't trust their opinion. No. Do you have to ask a white guy that question? No, I'll tell you. So we were accused of this, and it got me looking at it.

And, of course, it's not true here. But then— No, the seller's very diverse. Yeah, but these things are written by people who have never been here. I'll tell you where it doesn't hurt is at the Tonight Show. Yeah. So Zarna, you know Zarna. Zarna Garg?

Zarna Garg. Now, she's a regular comedian down here, and she is destroying. I mean, she is lighting up the room, you know, and the audience loves her, and she gets a lot of spots. And yet, I see that she's actually not being used. By her choice or by the club owners? By the club owners, as far as I can tell. She's not being used.

But did you ask her if she's tried to get onto other clubs? I don't want to disclose too much. You're saying she's not being used. If I'm bringing it up, believe me, I wouldn't bring it up if I had reason to think otherwise. And I said to myself, you know what? Knowing when you have an act who destroys, and you see that they're not getting work at the other clubs

that normally someone who destroys on that level would be getting it no longer becomes tenable just to say this is just nonsense what's going on here is there something I don't think it's racism

but is there something people of such different walks of life can't appreciate? I don't know. Well, you know, of course, every club is different. Certainly some clubs might feel that women of color are not their ideal demographic for their audience. They might be racist or they might just feel like it's not good for business. But let's look up at the stand. Let's look at who's coming. Let's look at their lineup

and see if we can find evidence of what you're... He's in trouble now. Dan loves to really push it one step too far. Go ahead. Okay. Let's upset the stand.

Go ahead. Sean, you want to make a disclaimer because you worked there. Dan's words have nothing to do with yours. Well, it's also like I'm sure there are definitely. I know there are clubs out there that you look at their lineup sometimes and it's like, oh yeah, that's 16

white dudes in a row. And I know there are clubs that are the opposite. I know it's just different. Here's the main room. We have Aaron Berg, Karen Fee, and this is May 9th in the main room at the stand. Tonight, yeah. I'm witnessing drama transpire. Aaron Berg, Canadian, so there's diversity there. Karen Fee Tonight, yeah. I'm witnessing drama. Aronberg. Yeah.

Canadian. So there's diversity there. Karen Fian. She's a woman. Yeah. Sean Patton. A woman of color? Yeah.

Karen Fian is not a woman of color. She's Irish, I guess. Sean Patton, who's Cajun. Yeah, there you go. Cajun Irish. Ashley Heseltine, who is a white woman. Andrea Jin, who I am assuming is Asian. I don't know. Or married to an Asian guy.

I can't. The picture is very small. I had to enlarge the picture to get a true feeling for her ethnicity. Yes, she's Asian. I enlarged the picture. She's Asian.

How can you tell that? Go ahead. Drew Dunn. Drew Dunn. Alex Pavone, who looks somewhat Hispanic. Bobby Tamburo, I guess Italian.

Ari Shafir. Jew. Jew. Jew. Jack Frazzo and Justin Silver. So there's no women of color, but on May 10th, we have Ted Jones, white man. Andrew Ginsberg. Nico White, a black man. Chanel Ali, who is a black woman.

Emma Willman, who is a woman of bisexual. Not bisexual. I believe she's... I believe full-on homosexual. Full-on homosexual. Don't insult her. I mean... Also full-on homosexual?

I'd be hard-pressed to accuse them of shutting out women of color. I'm not accusing anybody. I'm asking you guys the question. Daphne May Tent in the indoors room. Daphne Springs is a woman of color. I'm not accusing anybody. But you're saying, is it more difficult?

Listen, this is a common accusation we hear in the industry. I have always been skeptical of it. And yet, now something has come across my experience that requires me to say, well, have you been, you know, I'm not saying it's true. It's like, well, it causes me to take a closer look. It's like, well, what's going on here? Well, number one, it could be true. I don't know the people that booked the stand, you know.

I didn't say the stand. You said the stand. Yeah, why did I get the stand in my head? Did you have to say the stand? I wasn't, you're way off. Yeah, I don't read the backstory of this stand tension. And also, but, you know, she's relatively new. I mean, sometimes it takes a little while for word to filter down.

Yeah, maybe. I mean, I know of the majority of the bookers I deal with, most of them seem pretty inclusive. Yeah. You know, like, I don't think, like, I don't, I don't, and I see a lot of, but also, that's a good point Dan's making. Like, it depends on what we're talking about here, because there are so many fucking comedians in this city.

And in this country now where sometimes it does just take a while for people to become aware. There's so much out there. And also killing almost isn't enough these days. It's crazy to say that, but it is. It's almost like you've got to consistently be so good at such a level for anyone to even pay attention. I think the clubs generally undervalue

killing. I think that's one of the advantages we have is that we're very simplistic that way and that the other clubs have complex deep visions of comedy and the arts and how it should be, whatever it is, and they cast their show in their own image and blah, blah, blah.

We don't really do that. I think we should come to a consensus on the question of whether women of color comedians have a hard time in the industry just as a group of white people and then just go tell them what we've determined. I think that would go over well. I have a question. I hope that they don't.

Well, I would also say that on the road, you know, it might be that the funny bone in, you know, whatever city might feel that their demographic would prefer one kind of person or another kind of person. And I don't think Zarna has much interest in going to the funny bone,

but forget about Zarna. Why? She's actually been touring around all the country now. Has she? Yeah. But in any case, it might be that a club owner in Cincinnati, wherever, might feel that their customers would be better served by... I think Zarna's doing very well on the road, actually.

She is. Yeah, yeah. Yeah, I'm sure she is. I was just wondering if... She's very universal, actually. Go ahead. Yeah, I think Yeah, yeah. Yeah, I'm sure she is. I was just wondering if you... She's very universal, actually. Go ahead. Yeah, I think so, too. I think that's part of the point, is that it doesn't matter what you are, right?

So you're saying you're skeptical about the... Well, there's always these types of... No, I'm not saying that at all. The Seinfeld will never go, he's too Jew-y. There's always some conservative guy in the office somewhere saying... No, I'm saying the opposite of that, Dan. My question is this. Do you know Mearsheimer?

Do I know him personally? Yeah. No, I don't. I've been trying to get my claws into him for a while now. I think he's been in high demand recently. He's probably somewhat discriminating. Noam really wants to talk to me.

But I know what Noam wants and what's good for the show is not necessarily the same. I think that he would be better for Noam's Sunday show. I'm going to do a Sunday show. With hot temps. So let me ask you this. How does it end?

Nuclear conflagration? Or like Planet of the Apes? Natural liberty on the beach? Speaking of Mearsheimer, we were more talking about his views about the lead up to the war. But now that the war has been underway for two plus months, he actually said something relatively chilling just a few days ago on PBS. And I think this is accurate, which is that the U.S. is now in this policy orientation where it's kind of committed itself just by force of momentum to kind of ineluctably escalating the war. Every week there's something new that comes out

that really crosses a new Rubicon in terms of the scope of American military involvement. Last week, it was these leaks from senior officials in the government that U.S. intelligence had been integral in killing the generals and sinking the warship. You had Biden going and proposing $33 billion to Congress to allocate for Ukraine, which could get us invested now for a much longer period.

Even just today, I don't know, I think might even be, as we were just talking now, Biden is signing into law a revival of the Lend-Lease was this program that Franklin Delano Roosevelt pioneered in 1941 to send materiel and armaments and least akin to the last world war you think it should at least prompt a more wide debate about the implications and what are we talking about here in terms of what we're committing ourselves to um but that debate really hasn't happened because there's such a huge stifling effect because if you articulate pretty much anything i articulate i don't i don't think I came across as particularly extreme or out of my mind, but if I were to say that in a public venue that's maybe less hospitable, I would automatically get maligned

as pro-Putin. It probably wouldn't surprise you that a lot of people online feel no compunction about telling me exactly that. Is Putin dying of cancer? I heard that he's dying of cancer. And is that the solution to the problem? I mean, I don't know. I don't have his cell phone number.

Well, but that Perrielle told me he was dying of cancer. I've heard that rumor. Actually, the CIA director was asked about that this Saturday and just kind of brushed off the question. How much of this is a one-person issue? If Putin is gone, does the war end? Or is there somebody behind him that's going to carry the torch or the baton? Maybe so. I mean, he's been in power for 22 years.

So you consolidate a lot of sway over that time period. We have to send one of our mentally ill to go tackle it. And Dylan Ruhle. It's like Zoolander. That's why you see a lot of politicians now, some more overtly than others, saying that the endgame of U.S. policy now has to be the removal of Putin. So effectively regime change. I mean, Lindsey Graham yesterday was on Fox saying we have to take Putin out. And, you know, this isn't just about aiding Ukraine and helping them win and giving them defensive armaments or something.

No, it's about, you know, striking at the heart of the Russian government. Well, didn't Lindsey Graham, a few weeks ago or maybe a month ago, Lindsey Graham said that Russians, one of you Russians, need to do the right thing the Russian government. He goes on kissing Trump's ass. A few weeks ago, or maybe a month ago, Lindsey Graham said to Russians, one of you Russians need to do the right thing and take out. No, yeah, he tweeted that. He's made some sort of analogy to ancient Greece. Do you think that could solve the problem, just the elimination of one man?

Is it a one-man issue here? Well, I mean, I think it's dangerous to be cavalier about regime change in Russia, which, as you might know, has the world's largest nuclear arsenal. So, you know, who does that fall into the hands of if there's a sudden rupture in the power structure in Russia? I mean, we were fortunate when the Soviet Union dissolved that it didn't all go completely

haywire, but that was kind of just an accident of history. Listen, it's quality over quantity with nukes. Everyone knows that, okay? And there's also always a possibility that someone more fervent than Putin takes power if he's not. So you're saying, like, if we take out Noam, somebody that likes Tsarna even more, I'd give him the power. Yes, perfect analogy.

I think if he's assassinated and it looked like we were involved in the assassination, that might lead to the Russians, you know, doubling down in some way. But if he were to die of natural causes, involved in assassination, that might lead to the Russians, you know, double downing and doubling down in some way. But if you were to die of natural causes, I think that would be good because the next guy could make some concessions without losing face. That would be. I mean, who knows? I just, you know, from an American standpoint, you know, when Biden gave that speech in Warsaw, Poland at the end of March and at the climax of the speech, he basically made his own call for regime change in Russia, saying Putin must be must go.

That was allowed to remain. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I mean, that was, you know, immediately, quote, unquote, walked back by these administration officials who do this good cop, bad cop routine where they say, oh, no, you know, Uncle Joe didn't mean that exactly. But Biden was really only just articulating what U.S. policy had been geared toward at that point, which is to facilitate regime change in Russia. That's the point of the sanctions, which are about crashing the economy. That was the point of continuously escalating the grade of weaponry that we're sending. So, you know, at first, you know, warplanes were a step too far. But then we figured out a way to do it.

We have heavy artillery, tanks, et cetera. I mean, we'd be happy with regime change, but we'd also be happy with just a stalemate in Russia. You know, but why should we be? I mean, does U.S. imposed regime change tend to work out particularly well, you know, given recent history? I mean, why should we be happy? I just have to interrupt. Go ahead. Is that a Fitbit you're wearing? That's a Fitbit, yeah. So the Fitbit, do you find it valuable?

Yeah. Seems to be working, Sean. $15,000 a day. Imagine if I didn't. You'd have to drag me up here. Okay, so Sean is going downstairs to do a set. All right, I'm going around the corner. I'm going to the stand.

I'm going to carry you down the stairs? No, no, I'll be all right. You're going to the stand? I know, right? I'm going to go tell. I'm going to carry you down the stairs? No, I'll be alright. You're going to the stand? I'm going to go tell them what you said. I'm going there and then I'm coming back. I'll be all over. I wish you hadn't started trouble with the stand. I defended the stand.

I said I don't see any evidence of wrongdoing. But nobody brought up the stand. I'm a buffer zone between you guys and the stand. Somehow the stand got in my head. I don't know how. Sean Patton, his new special, what's it called? Number One. Number One.

Number One. You know what? Keep it simple. These comics, they have these names for their specials. They put too much thought into it. I say, keep it easy. Special Number One. Number One, whatever you want to call it.

There's multitudes of reasons. The band Chicago named every album a number. Remember that? Chicago One, Chicago Two. Sure. And it didn't seem to hurt sales. The point of the batter is, very soon you can look forward to the special,

whether on streaming, whether on YouTube, wherever it's going to be, we'll let you know at the time. I'm sure it'll be worth seeing. Thank you so much for having me. Thank you so much for coming, Sean. Sean, I have to ask you honestly, did you enjoy the experience?

Yes, it was a learning experience. I like listening and learning about guys I don't know who are professors in the University of Chicago. I'm going to read on this guy now. Okay, good. Good stuff on YouTube, too. When I invite somebody on the show or when I ask Perry L to invite somebody on the show, I feel responsible for their well-being. I like learning, even though I'm not good at it. I like learning.

It's a hobby. You're good at it. I like learning. It's a hobby. You're good at it. I apologize if I bored you. No, no, no. Believe you me. I think you should be apologizing to Dan. Boredom's the exact opposite. More of inflated my sense of anxiety. But that's okay. Do some of your Ukraine jokes tonight.

Demonstrate what you've learned. This is only one of the two most important issues in the world right now. Born on the bayou. Sean Patton. Thank you've learned. This is only one of the two most important issues in the world right now. Born on the bayou, Sean Patton. Thank you very much for everyone. Noam, thanks for having me. Dan, thanks for having me. Thank you, Sean. Nice to meet you.

Did Led Zeppelin name its albums by numbers as well, with the exception of maybe one or two? Physical Graffiti. Coda. No, some of them. Some of them. Led Zeppelin, two or three. One and two and three and four, I think, were numbers.

But yeah, physical graffiti, Houses of the Holy, and Coda. Presence. Was Coda Led Zeppelin? Coda was afterwards. It was like after John Bonham died, I think. Coda. Yes. Presence and In Through the Outdoor.

In Through the Outdoor. That is correct. All of my love was on that album, as was Fool in the Rain. That sounds pornographic. So what we say right before, Sean Love, where are we headed, essentially? How it started, how it's going. It was sort of this farcical thing that happened

when Biden made that declaration during a formal speech in a foreign capital calling for regime change in Russia. Oh, yeah. How's regime change working out in recent history? Well, yeah, it was it was walked back. Not well. We should be happy if there's regime change in Russia. And I said, well, are you so sure about that? I mean, name me an example of U.S. imposed regime change anywhere in the world that has turned out well. And this would be orders of magnitude beyond anything the U.S. has ever attempted before. Well, I know Russia is not like Libya. I would say in response to that, that just as the analogies that were made to defend Afghanistan and Iraq were made to like Japan and Germany,

World War Two to defend regime change at the time, it's probably not fair to compare Russia to Afghanistan or Iraq in terms of what you could expect it to turn out. Russia is not a minority population ruling over a majority population. Russia is not Afghanistan. Russia has a culture which I think would be pretty stable within a certain, you know, plus or minus thing that most likely you don't know. You don't know. But but Putin's a bad dude. Well, sure. I mean, I think the burden has got to be on the people who are proposing that the U.S. attempt to facilitate regime change in the country with the world's largest nuclear arsenal, again, the onus is on you to at least give some tentative explanation as to why that sounds like a wise decision. Well, what I totally agree with you is that the stakes are much higher than they were in Iraq or Afghanistan. You're right.

Whoever is going to take over has the ability on his, if he feels like it, to destroy the world. So you'd like to reduce the odds of that. The devil you know is, in this situation, much safer than the devil you don't know. I get that. None of this sounds very promising. No.

Things work out. I think one ought to be extremely pessimistic about the state of things, because, you know, the thing with the U.S. policymaking apparatus everything in its power to essentially escalate short of a direct intervention. And there could easily be some incident where, you know, maybe Russia strikes a supply line into Poland or something, or there turns out to be special forces inside Ukraine. There have already been reported to be British special forces inside Ukraine, so maybe there are Americans as well that we don't know about yet maybe they get killed or abducted or something you know their uh world war one wasn't launched by countries who consciously set or leaders who consciously set themselves we want to start a world war it was just sort of this kind of uh rube goldberg machine where you know you end up in a spot that's kind of beyond your individual capacity control if uh my knowledge of world war one is

any good which is it's not. The Archbishop of Ferdinand. But I think everybody thought it would be, they were all sort of gung-ho to accomplish what needed to be accomplished, and they thought it would be over very quickly. Just like this. Well, yeah.

I mean, I think that's broadly right. And, you know. Let's ask one last question. I have to go play my gig at 9 o'clock. Okay. If you could install, in retrospect, one leader of the last 50 years as president of the United States to handle this situation in a way that you think you could have the most confidence in, who would that leader be? Last 50 years? Or you can go to any time frame.

You're talking about presidents? President. Okay. Although you can change the question to come up with anything interesting you want to say. Or comedy club owner. Who owns a stand? I think it's a...

Seems like a diplomatic fellow. It's a consortium. Okay. Maybe we can get them in like a brain trust and run U.S. foreign policy. You know, it's... I think there's a mystique around John F. Kennedy that

exaggerates his benevolence as a leader, because he was a hardcore Cold Warrior and he tried to, you know, run to the right, if you want to put it that way, or demonstrate that he was more hawkish than Nixon in 1960. That's how he got elected. But, you know, when push came to shove and the Cuban Missile Crisis happened,

he did negotiate this backdoor deal where, you know,.s agreed to take missiles out of turkey and then the crisis diffuses and that was pretty much the closest we got to worldwide nuclear annihilation prior to this current situation so that seems like a probably a superior approach not endorsing everything kennedy did and he was much too hawkish for my taste, you know, with the invasion of Cuba and all that. But at least on that narrow issue, he was willing to, you know, not just declare that Khrushchev was a genocidal maniac and a war criminal. And we were going to take him out of power and put him on trial and stuff, basically foreclosing any possibility of negotiations. And that's what Biden has done with Putin. I mean, when you go out in public and say that he's doing genocide and that we're going to try him in court and he can't

stay in power, how are you then going to transition into some kind of negotiation just to bring about an end to the hostility? You can't. And the U.S. must be party to those negotiations. I would just say it can't just be a bilateral thing between Ukraine and Russia. Would you agree that the public's perception during the Cuban Missile Crisis of what was actually going on was not actually what was going on? And with the public pronouncements that we see from the White House,

there may be more to the story than that. There may be. I would love to see evidence that there's more to the story. But, you know, there's been reporting in the Washington Post that, for example, Blinken had no communications with Lavrov, his counterpart in Russia, you know, for the first month or month and a half of the war. I mean, how could that be the case with the top diplomat of the country? It goes back to like, why was the water so, you know, poisoned? I'm messing up the metaphor. But why wasn't it that there couldn't be any kind of fulsome negotiations

between our countries at this point? Well, there's a lot of reasons for it, partially because, you know, the well was poisoned by the Russiagate stuff under Trump. And, you know, have a lot of hysteria coming out of, you know, these countries in Eastern Europe and the Baltics and such, some of which seems histrionic to me, maybe other aspects of it are well-founded, and that has a big influence on American policy vis-a-vis Europe. But whatever the reason, I mean, we're at a point now where we can't even get the leaders to have a conversation. Macron, the president of France, when he did try to go talk to Putin, he was roundly mocked for even attempting to broker some kind of diplomatic accord.

And, you know, we're even at the point now, and I actually said this on Tucker last week, but it strikes me that, you know, everybody is now celebrating that Germany is remilitarizing. I mean, as if that's like a positive historical omen. I don't know that that really should bring a smile to our faces. I think that indicates that we're going down a fairly dark path. I don't see any way to change that path now. Do you believe there are Ukrainian bioweapons

labs? American bioweapons labs in Ukraine. This is what Tucker Carlson irks me. He says this stuff and there's scant evidence of it. It could be true, but... Well, I first heard about the issue when Victoria Nuland, who you mentioned before, was testifying before the Senate

and said what she said. But we've heard since then, at least the party line, that they were trying to dispose of previous bioweapons stuff. I mean, I don't know. I mean, that's what the Pentagon says, but the Pentagon has, I'm sorry to break it to you, a long history of not being totally forthright Don't talk about my Pentagon.

All right, we have to go. We have to go. Okay, well. And then the anti-vax stuff bugs me, too. Michael Tracy, thank you. I'm totally vaxed, so you're all safe. The Alex Berenson stuff, that he goes back again and again

to Alex Berenson after Alex Berenson. And by the way, not that everything Alex Berenson said has ever been, is untrue, but if Alex Berenson had his way the way, not that everything Alex Berenson said has ever been is untrue. But if Alex Berenson had his way, nobody would be vaxxed. And this just doesn't fly. And the fact that Tucker doesn't react to the fact that Berenson hasn't just hasn't been right. It just bugs me about that guy.

But his show is interesting. I get he has people on like you that do. It's the only game in town. You don't have to defend him. I'm not defending everything he's ever done, but when a major TV host allows for some semblance of a diversity of views about a massively controversial issue.

No, sir, just be clear. I am not saying you shouldn't go on the show at all. And good for Tucker Carlson that he does that he's the only game in town to present certain views, which are basically blacklisted. There's no other way to put them. Not necessarily views that I agree with, but I find it interesting to hear them. And it sharpens both sides when they have to answer each other. Yeah. It truly does. Like this, even this thing that you're seeing it with abortion abortion now now that it's really look like it's

going to happen so many people are learning for the first time civics oh you mean when roe versus wade is if it's overruled that doesn't mean abortion is illegal probably like 50 of the country thought that that was going to mean abortion was illegal they're learning about the trimesters they're learning so much simply because they have to deal with the issue now. And I guess the last point, but the consensus on this issue is way more intractable than it ever was for Iraq. Well, I mean, Iraq, there was dissension around the decision to invade. You know, ultimately, the people who opposed the war were overridden. But you had, you know, protests.

You had some prominent Democrats speaking out about it, you had a handful of Republicans like a Rothwell or a Papu Cannon type. Yeah, you had people in pop culture who had an alternative view. While they were kind of ostracized in a way, at least they were able to air some dissenting opinion. Today, there's pretty much nothing.

I mean, you're lucky if you can get two minutes on one show. I brought up Sicknick, this cop. Another lesson that nobody's going to know about this, but we have to go, but you should Google it, is this, because it was a lesson to me early on, was Scott Ritter. So Scott Ritter was the weapons inspector. So just so you know, Scott Ritter was this guy. He had been early, during the first Gulf War, he had been this guy who was blowing the whistle on Saddam Hussein. And during the run-up to the second Gulf War, Scott Ritter, who was really a hero of the right up until then, said, listen, he has no weapons.

And they destroyed his character. They said he's taking money. I mean, they just obliterated this poor man. And turned out afterwards, he was actually just telling the truth. He was just saying it like he saw it. But they did everything they could to just slime him and ruin him and make him look like he was just a corrupt guy who would, you know, sold out his country to take money from Saddam Hussein. Just to give you a quick. And you have to bear things like that in mind.

Just a quick example. But Biden is signing this Lend-Lease Revival Bill today. Seems like a fairly momentous event, right? If we're going back to the scheme that we were using in World War II to fund the allies, maybe there should be a wider debate about whether that's appropriate today. You would think so. But the Senate passed the revival of Lend-Lease unanimously. So everybody from Bernie Sanders to Rand Paul to Ted Cruz toizabeth warren everybody they all affirmed this bill and only 10 members of the house voted against

it and they were all republicans doesn't that strike you as odd i mean why is there no debate on this subject it's crazy because you know goddamn well that if it was a republican president doing exactly the same thing sanders and warren and all of them would find their inner socialists or their inner anti. I don't know if they would. I mean, maybe. Oh, absolutely. Just not because it's right or wrong, because they would never take the side of the Republican president going to another, you know, making steps that could lead to another war. But anyway.

Either way, it's not a great situation. I have to believe that behind closed doors, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are much closer to your view than. I don't think so. I think they're true believers. Well, maybe. All right. Anyways, a pleasure to meet you. Maybe you'll come on the show again.

Yeah, I'd be happy to. And I hope you thought we weren't idiots. I would love to debate some pro-war stooges as well. I would like to get you included. Where can people read you? Substack? Yeah, mtracy.substack.com is the URL for where I

mainly publish. I publish elsewhere as you mentioned. Are you friends with Taibbi? Yeah. He's on this show. Oh, has he?

Okay, yeah, great. Yeah, he's, you know, he's phenomenal. What a great writer. Yeah, I'm not quite at his level in terms of subscribers yet

on Substack, but I think he's like 20 years older than me, so maybe I'll get there. Well, so are we. You can also follow me on Twitter. I put other stuff on there. Michael Tracy, thank you for joining us. Podcast at ComedySeller.com. Let us

know your thoughts. Slava Ukraini.