The Majority Report with Sam Seder - 3632 - Attacking Kimmel; Corporate Money Machine in democratic Primaries w/ Luke Goldstein

Episode Date: April 28, 2026

It's News Day Tuesday on The Majority Report   On today's program:   Jimmy Kimmel tells a joke that hurts Donald Trump's feelings so badly that he once again has called for Kimmel's job. Melania Trump sends out her boy toy "senior adviser" to also call for Kimmel's job on various right-wing cable outlets. Kimmel responds with more jokes about the whole saga.   Luke Goldstein, investigative journalist at The Lever, joins the show to discuss his piece: "The New Democratic Machine — And the Billionaires Behind It".   In the Fun Half:   Karoline Leavitt wants the Dems to tone down their rhetoric in the wake of the White House correspondent dinner shooting. Zeteo releases a compilation of Donald Trump spewing hateful rhetoric towards Democrats.   More from Melania's boy toy as he shares what was going on inside the First Lady's mind during the attempted shooting at the WHCD.   A Fox News host is caught on a hot mic commenting on how lax the security was at the WHCD.   As Lindsey Graham proposes legislation to spend $400 million taxpayer dollars on Trump's ballroom, we look back to February when Trump promised the ballroom would not cost the people a dime.   Bill Maher pushes back on David Cross for acknowledging his daughters' trans friends.   All that and more.   To connect and organize with your local ICE rapid response team visit ICERRT.com The Congress switchboard number is [phone]. You can use this number to connect with either the U.S. Senate or the House of Representatives. Follow us on TikTok here: https://www.tiktok.com/@majorityreportfm Check us out on Twitch here: https://www.twitch.tv/themajorityreport Find our Rumble stream here: https://rumble.com/user/majorityreport Check out our alt YouTube channel here: https://www.youtube.com/majorityreportlive Gift a Majority Report subscription here: https://fans.fm/majority/gift Subscribe to the AMQuickie newsletter here: https://am-quickie.ghost.io/ Join the Majority Report Discord! https://majoritydiscord.com/ Get all your MR merch at our store: https://shop.majorityreportradio.com/ Get the free Majority Report App!: https://majority.fm/app Go to https://JustCoffee.coop and use coupon code majority to get 10% off your purchase Check out today's sponsors: NUTRAFOL: Get $10 off your first month's subscription + free shipping at Nutrafol.com when you use promo code TMR10 AURA FRAMES: Exclusive $25-off Carver Mat at https://on.auraframes.com/MAJORITY. Promo Code MAJORITY SUNSET LAKE CBD: Use coupon code "Left Is Best" for 20% off of your entire order at SunsetLakeCBD.com Follow the Majority Report crew on Twitter: @SamSeder @EmmaVigeland @MattLech On Instagram: @MrBryanVokey Check out Matt's show, Left Reckoning, on YouTube, and subscribe on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/leftreckoning Check out Matt Binder's YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/mattbinder Subscribe to Brandon's show The Discourse on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/ExpandTheDiscourse Check out Ava Raiza's music here! https://avaraiza.bandcamp.  

You are listening to a free version of the Majority Report. Support this show at join the Majority Report.com and get an extra hour of content daily. The Majority Report with Sam Cedar. It is Tuesday, April 28, 2006. My name is Sam Cedar. This is the five-time award-winning majority report. We are broadcasting live. steps from the industrially ravaged Gowanus Canal in the heartland of America, downtown Brooklyn, USA.

On the program today, Luke Goldstein, investigative journalist at the lever on the new Democratic money machine. Also on the program today, oil squeeze tightens, as Trump apparently dissatisfied with Iran's Strait of Hormuz's offer, UAE drops from OPEC, and the long Iran war is just getting started. Meanwhile, the FCC prepares a review of Disney's TV license and the latest push by Trump to get Jimmy Kimmel fired because of a joke. comedy not legal second circuit court rejects ICE's detention policy

this circuit split will send masked no bond detention to the Supreme Court meanwhile the wake of this soon to be international oil shock

Trump administration quashes two more wind farms by paying out tax dollars to them to not exist. Texas, Tala Rico, latest poll leads Cornyn and Paxton. Meanwhile, on the hill, Republicans in disarray as the House faces multiple legislative deadlines this week and have made no progress. In New York City, Mom Donnie notches another Tax the rich win as the New York City Speaker Menin and Governor Hockel agree to roll back a major hedge fund tax break. Speaking of which, special election today in New York City, if you're on the Upper West Side or Lindsay Boylan running for New York City Council.

Meanwhile, back in D.C. Trump's sycophants lining up. up to call for funding a ballroom. U.S. reportedly denying green cards over anti-Israel social media posts. Again, for free speech. And Nebraska, last Friday, was the first state to impose work requirements in order to boot people from their health care. This under the so-called big, so-called beautiful actual bill. this and more on today's majority report. Welcome, ladies and

gentlemen, it is Newsday, Tuesday. Newsday, Tuesday. Hi, I'm Emma Viglin. I'm the co-hosts of the majority report. That's correct. There it is. And there's that's the news for today. Bye.

We got a lot to get to. Luke Goldstein will be here. The story in the lever is pretty fascinating because one of the sort of like background stories is the increasing likelihood of the Democrats taking back the Senate. I just mentioned up top, you know, a poll out of Texas that shows Tala Rico up by four or five points. I think of both Paxton and Cornyn, more or less.

Democratic-leaning pollster. So, you know, take that with a grain of salt. but the idea that we're talking about a fairly legitimate poll where the Democratic nominee is four or five points up and we're talking before we get this major oil shock. I mean, obviously prices are up. Before all these other implications, there is no agenda that the Republicans have. It's pretty shocking. even in the most sort of optimistic of maps,

Democrats need to pick up four seats and hold all of theirs. Even in the most optimistic of maps, Texas is probably like eight on that list. Yeah. And on the oil shock piece, that's how that's coming soon, just because Trump can manipulate the market for this long, as long as there's, you know, there's actual supply concerns here. You know, we talked about how in 2024 Benjamin Netanyahu was meeting with Trump, and it seemed like he clearly was trying to hold off on giving Trump the ceasefire win until potentially he won the election. He wanted to hurt the Democrats politically for his own ends and for Israel's ends.

I think Iran kind of learned that lesson, and they're trying to punish Trump politically, and they know that they have the leverage to do so, even though they're taking a lot of short-term hits and, you know. infrastructural damage. Yeah. And I think they, I mean, even more broadly, outside of the election, although that's definitely going to, in the event that the Republicans blew both the House and the Senate, it's going to cause Trump a lot more problems. Iran realized they have leverage and they don't want to be bombed in the future willy-nilly like this.

But meanwhile, within the context of those Senate races, and house races, there's some big, big donor tech money that is coming in in the side of these primaries and generally coming in within the establishment side. There's some minor crossover and some, I think, one or two house races. But this is relevant. Now, in a place like Texas, frankly, I am less sort of concerned with the big money coming in because Texas is so far down on the list. And the idea that I'm going to get a senator from Texas who is going to be a reliable progressive vote, I think is, you know, I think we're probably a couple cycles away from that. But when you start talking about like the potential in a place like Michigan or are you talking about a potential in a place like, even like Maine or other states or other.

house seats, particularly in this cycle, it becomes more relevant. We're going to be talking to Luke Goldstein about that. In the meantime, the FCC is at it again. We played a clip of Brendan Carr at CPAC, I guess about two or three weeks ago, where he was bragging. This is the head of the FCC. You remember the outrage that came from many quarters about the Biden administration saying to Twitter, hey, we would really appreciate it if you guys do a better job of moderating against posts that are putting out misinformation in the course of a public health emergency.

And you remember the outrage that was associated with that. Like, this is big brother. Meanwhile, we have the FCC chair at CPAC bragging about about pulling licenses, about getting new hosts of TV shows, about firing Stephen Colbert, about, you know, buying CBS, about buying TikTok, and so on and so on. Well, they're not done yet because apparently Jimmy Kimmel, and this was, was this at the White House? No, no. Oh, you know, they got rid of comics. Okay.

So this is a fake. Oh, yeah, this is his version of this. And when did he do this? I believe this was Monday. Okay, oh, he did this yesterday. Yeah, okay. Our first lady, Melania, is here. Look at, well, so beautiful.

Mrs. Trump, you have a glow like an expectant widow. That's good. That's a good joke. And to be fair, you know, it's funny because it's universal in the sense that so many of us are waiting for her to be a widow of natural causes, of course. Her second act. Right. You're looking forward to her second act. She's going to get out there. And look.

Live that life, girl. You know, we went through this. There was a lot of people who said the same thing about Joe Biden, that he was already dead. Now it was very heartless and cruel and mean. And they would say he's dead and he's falling off a bike or whatever it is. And, you know, comedy's legal again. Back then it wasn't. Now it is.

Sorry, I just have to make a correction. This was a joke he made last week ahead of the... Okay. Thank you. That's what I thought. So he's made this joke before, you know, any type of assassination attempt. Now, of course, there were other assassination attempts. People forget this.

Obama had something like 10, was it 10, at least 10 assassination attempts, plots foiled. But now comedy's legal. So you can make that joke unless, of course, you make it about Melania because here's Donald Trump. Wow. Jimmy Kimmel, who is in no way funny, as attested by his terrible television ratings, made a statement on a show that is really shocking. You showed a fake video of the first lady, Melania, and our son, Baron.

I didn't realize Barron. It's not a fake video. They just use B-roll from the State of the Union. I didn't even realize Barron was there. Like they were actually sitting in his studio. That wasn't the point. I think it was supposed to be at the course, listening to him speak, which they weren't and never would be.

And then he stated, our first lady, Melania is here. Stated. Look at Melania, so beautiful Mrs. Trump, you have a glow like an expected window. A day later, a lunatic tried to enter the ballroom of the White House Correspondence dinner, tried to enter the ballroom because they didn't enter the ballroom. It was on the floor upstairs. Loaded up with a shotgun, handgun, and many knives. He was there for very obvious and sinister reason.

I appreciate that so many people are incensed by Kimmel's despicable call to violence. And normally he would not be responsive to anything he said. But this is something Fabio on the pale. Jimmy Kimmel should be immediately fired by Disney and ABC. Thank you for your attention to this matter. President Donald J. Trump. Now, of course, not to be outdone. Melania has her own reps.

Someone else who has the glow of an expected... Spokesperson for the widow, right. I tried to compare this guy. We're on the, not on screen. Yeah, this guy's like the equivalent of what Tom Brady had to deal with with Giselle Buncheon, where this guy's just like spending a lot of time with Melania, waiting in the wings and going on television, defending her honor. He's crafting her message.

He's messmen. I'm so sorry. Yes. Me. Well, he responded last night. What does Melania think about? about is she buying it it's done it's over jimmy kimmel should be terminated from abc and i think abc needs to determine is this the type of person and violent rhetoric that it wants to affiliate

with think about it abc has been protecting jimmy kimmel now for a long time this isn't an isolated incident it's been going on and on and on and the problem as you're very well aware is that there are crazy people out there who are listening to this violent rhetoric, this terrible political-oriented, violent rhetoric, and they're turning it into action. So for the third time now, our president has had his life at risk. And it's because of this rhetoric. There's no doubt about it. It's almost become normalized. It's almost become normalized. People are laughing about this.

Well, it was a joke. I mean, I think that was probably why people were laughing because of the joke aspect of it. but here is Jimmy Kimmel let's hear him respond to this I mean incidentally if you if you're one of those people

who watched the very very rude and dirty and inappropriate Howard Stern with any type of regularity if you listen to it you would have heard Donald Trump on many times right

go ahead here's Jimmy Kimmel I greeted the day facing yet another Twitter vomit storm. And a call to fire me from our first lady, Melania Trump, saying I should be fired because of a joke I made. Again, five nights ago, it was a pretend roast. I said, our first lady, Melania is here. Look at her so beautiful. Mrs. Trump, you have a glow like an expectant widow, which obviously was a joke about their age difference. and the look of joy we see on her face every time they're together.

It was a very light roast joke about the fact that he's almost 80 and she's younger than I am. It was not by any stretch of the definition a call to assassination, and they know that. I've been very vocal for many years speaking out against gun violence in particular, but I understand that the First Lady had a stressful experience over the weekend, and probably every weekend is pretty stressful in that house. And also, I agree that hateful and violent rhetoric is something we should reject. I do. And I think a great place to start to dial that back would be to have a conversation with your husband about it.

Because call off your dogs, Kimmel. K you bastard. I mean, they failed with this with the Charlie Kirk thing with him. And I always, like, he came out with, like, incredible earnesty, like, crying about it, saying how he didn't mean to say anything that would have been implied that he was cheering. on Charlie Kirk's death, like, this is a step in the right direction. They are not acting in good faith here. They are not. And I know he has corporate, you know, donors and overlords to answer to,

but there's nothing to apologize for. I would also say, it is quite clear to me, that Kimmel's like, I don't give an F. Yeah. Fire me. Well, he already survived. That's the thing. Is that like, he definitely has the attitude of like, hey, you know what? I emotionally got there last time.

And so now it's just like, this is all gravy. I think he's saved up enough? Probably. Probably. My guess is, yeah. I get the sense. He's probably okay. I wonder, I still can't think something about the senior advisor to Melania Trump.

What are they advising each other on hair products? I think that was good. I like the fact that I didn't realize that Melania Trump was younger than Jimmy Kimmel. Interesting. Well, that's, I mean, that's the thing. That's the good thing about this is that there's a lot of, like, it's also a moment, it's a teachable moment for people. That's my point. Yes.

So you're learning stuff. Yeah. In a minute, we're going to be talking to Luke Goldstein. Investigative journalist at the lever, he has written a piece on the new Democratic machine and the billionaires behind. it. We will talk to him about that in a minute. Everybody's got a can't miss fitness training

hack these days. I myself have started to like trying to have more protein around the house. And in part because Saul now is a 13 year old boy and he's like he's very into it. I'm not going to I'll stop talking about that.

Into protein? All right. That's good. He's training to kick your ass. He is. and there's a lot of like, you know, checking out. Look at the definition in my muscles type of situation. That's when you start to think about those things. That's true. It's true. It's also when you start to panic as a father.

But with that said, I used to feel that way about a lot of the hair care products, just a lot of hype. However, a couple years ago, Nutrafall was interested in endorsing this or endorsing, what is the one? Sponsoring. Sponsoring. Thank you. Sponsoring this program. And they sent us some product, but there was nobody who wanted to try at the time. And then a couple of years later, I started to feel like I'm thinning, maybe with my hair.

And I was like, you know, I'm going to try it. And within a couple of months, I started to feel, I started to see some, like, difference in my, particularly like shedding after the shower. And so now I'm all in. It is a real game plan for thinning hair. Neutral fall now offers hair growth supplements tailored to men at every age. And this has been a big change. And I really do actually feel like there's been a difference. The root cause of hair thinning change over time and your routine should too.

Neutral fall for men ages 18 to 49 to help improve their hair growth and achieve thicker, fuller hair in three to six months. And new Nutrefall for Men 50 plus, which is the first and only hair growth product. specifically formulated for men 50 plus. Like literally the first thing I do when I get out of shower is I dry my hair. I think most people do that. But then I look at the towel to see how I'm doing. And my shedding is significantly less.

That's the way I measure it. Neutralvall has all sorts of different ways of measuring that they clinically tested not just the ingredients, but the formulations. So it's literally they're testing their product. Adding NutraFal to your daily routine is easy. You order online, no prescription needed with automated deliveries and free shipping. We'll keep you on track.

Plus, with a NutraFal subscription, you can save up to 20% and get added perks to support your hair growth journey. Neutrophol is the number one dermatologist recommended hair growth supplement. It is trusted by over 1.5 million people, including myself. start Neutrefall today. Make the hat optional. Visit Nutrafall.com, enter promo code TMR10 for $10 off your first month's subscription and free shipping. Find out why Neutrafall is the best-selling hair growth supplement brand at Nutrafall.com, spelled N-U-T-R-A-F-O-L dot com, promo code T-M-R-10. T-M-R-10.

That's Nutifol.com, promo code T-M-R-1. We'll put the information in the podcast and YouTube description and at majority.fm. Also, we are now, I don't know how many days April has, 31, 30, 30. We are 12 days away from Mother's Day and you're panicked. What am I going to do? I didn't get a present. I didn't even realize that Mother's Day was in May, you're saying to yourself. Yeah.

Well, aside from growing up and figuring this stuff out, Brian. Yeah, what age did you learn this stuff? My mom's dead. My two. But maybe, maybe if you had had a little more attention to when Mother's Day was. What, whatever? Oh, man, dude. I knew when it was coming out of your mouth.

I knew Brian's mom was dead. We may need to cut that part out of the endorsement. But the point being, look. Sponsorship. Remember, it's called sponsorship. Sponsorship, whatever. All right. You want to restart?

Yeah. Okay. Hey, folks, Mother's Day is a prize. And you're looking to get a present. That's true. To save your mom's life. Matt, have you got your present yet? No.

You didn't even know it was in May. Like other people. Well, I have the great, I have a great gift for you. Before my mother passed, I got her this and she loved it. It honestly became her best friend. What is it? It's basically a way for her to see her kids and her grandkids whenever she wanted. And I'm talking about an aura frame, a digital frame, where you literally, and this is the beauty of this gift, if you're 10 days out now,

from Mother's Day and you're like, oh, shoot, I didn't get a gift. I'm screwed. This is it right now, folks. Because what you do, you order an aura frame from aura frame and from Mother's Day. You can preload pictures on it without ever seeing the box. So you send the gift directly to mom. She opens it up. She takes it out of the box.

She plugs it in. Super easy to connect. Anybody can do it. Even your parents. And already there's videos and photos of you, your sister, your brother, your spouse, your kids, your important other, whatever it is, your cousins all loaded on the frame. In Bryant's case, he got it for his dad and then put passive aggressive pictures of things that he knew. It upset his dad.

Me and Mom Donnie. Yeah, exactly. They really drive them crazy. You can make Mother's Day special with the aura frames. It's named number one by wirecutter. You can save on the gifts that moms love by visitingoraframes.com. For a limited time, listeners can get $25 off their best-selling Carver Matt Frame with Code Majority. That's A-U-R-A-Frames.com promo code majority.

Support the show by mentioning us at checkout. Terms and conditions apply. Check it out. You will love these. It's a great gift. I've given it many, many times. gave it to my my girlfriend's parents and they ended up buying one for all their kids. They loved it so much.

We'll put that link in the podcast and YouTube description. All right, quick break when we come back, Luke Goldstein investigative journalist over at the Lever on the new Democratic money machine. We are back. Sam Cedar, Emma Vigland, on the majority report. Joining us, Luke Goldstein, investigative journalists at the lever at a time where I know that for really the past year on this program, we've been talking about two things. One, ending the Trump administration or stopping them or slowing their role or fighting against them, in other words.

And the other is attempting to essentially wage a internecine war within Democrats where progressives, you know, make the most of this moment. And Luke has written a piece about a big money machine, essentially, that is sort of funding the other side of that fight. Luke, welcome to the program. Hey, yeah, thanks for having me on. So is there a name to this other than like a squid? It's really sort of like a constellation of democratic sort of establishment or new dem. I mean, you compared to the DLC, which was where Bill Clinton came out of.

And in much of the sort of neoliberal market-based liberal, originated at least in the modern era. Yeah, no, it is all, it's a little bit nebulous. We played around with what to call it to. We're calling it a network, you know. We have some tentacles imagery, you know, all of that. But, you know, it's really a methodical, political operation that is operating at least at a scale that is pretty unprecedented, according to a lot of people, you know, we spoke with for this piece. I think just to kind of, you know, take a step back here before we get into all the origins, you know. So this is, they're called majority Democrats in the bench. They're these kind of twin organizations. And they've been getting involved in Democratic primary races all across the country, this election cycle.

Probably most prominently right now is the Michigan, the Democratic primaries in the Michigan Senate for the Michigan Senate seat. They're backing Mallory McMorrow against Haley Stevens and Abdul Al-Said. They also were heavily involved in the Texas Senate primary back in February supporting James Tala Rico, whole host of other races. And they have this giant war chest. They have a massive huge amount of funding mostly from, you know, dark money and a small handful of billionaires connected to the tech and finance industry. And, you know, they also have this kind of centrist, you know, kind of moderate political

orientation. We can get into that more. what really has happened here, though, is they've been involved in a number of controversies. Kind of low level, you know, you'd have to be following these races pretty closely to pick up on them. But it keeps happening. And it's related to the fact that the staff for these PACs funded by these two groups happen to also be working as consultants for the campaigns that they're supporting. It's a very unusual relationship, and it just raises some campaign finance concerns. So for this piece, we tried to look into how this whole organization is really structured,

who is funding them, and this whole nesting doll of different PACs, LLCs, these kind of shadowy consultancies. And more or less what we discovered here is a very well, highly tuned political operation that has found loopholes to work much more closely with campaigns than really what we've seen in previous election cycles. Can you expand on what is legally permissible with this kind of coordination, with dark money, with super PACs? Because I think it's helpful for people to have a refresher about what independent expenditures actually constitute versus, say, when you donate directly to a campaign. Yeah, yeah. I mean, and it gets really, this gets tricky pretty quickly. Our campaign finance system right now, there's a lot of, like, norms and recommendations. then there's actually what the law is, right?

But the basic gist here is that after the Citizens United Supreme Court decision in 2010, we kind of have a dual-track system right now. If you're an actual campaign for a candidate running for office, you have a whole host of restrictions, contribution limits, and such. But if you're an outside spending vehicle, a super PAC, you can raise as much money as you want, and you can spend unlimited amounts on elections, on behalf of a candidate or against other candidates in that race.

The one rule here is that you just cannot directly coordinate with the campaigns. There has to be this kind of separation, right? And operatives pretty much, political operatives, since that decision, have tried to chip away even at that basic separation. And there's ways around it. Some of them have dealt out very recently. people might remember in the 2024 presidential race, for example, Elon Musk funded this America PAC, right? In the final months of that race, America PAC was hiring canvassers to do door knocking,

right? That's the kind of stuff you'd associate the campaign, you know, doing. That's what they would be spending their money on. How is America PAC? How do they determine what precincts to go to? How do they have the election data? It's very hard to imagine that was happening without some back and coordination with the Trump campaign, right? That was blessed by the Federal Elections Commission. There is another loophole where candidates can join together and create a joint fundraising committee. So similar, you're edging towards the Super PAC, but totally legitimate, it's just easier because one donor can cut a large check and that can be distributed to a bunch of different candidates rather than the donor doing it separately. In 2024, the Federal Elections Commission said a joint

fundraising committee can also include a Super PAC on that committee. So you can have even more collaboration, coordination, between the campaigns and the Super PAC. Majority Democrats and the bench do all of that. The thing that really kind of sets them apart is the way they've used consultants as these intermediaries between the outside pack and the campaign, which can be legitimate and sometimes isn't, you have to have a firewall for that consultant between their work for the pack and the campaign. And that's where things get really kind of tricky here. And I think there's a lot of still unanswered questions about how majority Democrats and bench work. Some of these consultants are very high powers like Liz Smith, who is, you know,

Pete Buttigieg alum and, you know, has been around for a while and a handful of sort of other household names. I think, I mean, for me, the real story here is because increasingly, there is no campaign finance rules, right? I mean, I mean, particularly in practice. Like there is no, the FEC, I mean, I'm sure they've done, they find some people. But it really seems, at least on a federal level. It's been completely, you know, sort of like detooth. But the real question for me is just sort of like,

identifying who the money is from and what the point of it is, right? Because it's really trying to establish like, what politics does this candidate represent? Why does this group of money think that if they give money to this candidate? And also those consultants who share this sort of dual role, which is like there's a story in the times about Trump getting the the ballroom cheap by giving the same contractor another contract at like four or five times the actual value of that contract. And I suspect, I don't know this, but I'm saying it would be very easy in this dynamic to have a consultant work for a campaign at like 30 cents on the dollar because,

when they're working for the pack, they're getting $1.50 on the dollar. You know what I mean? Like, there's a certain subsidizing that could go on. I don't know that it is. You'd have a better sense looking at the numbers. And all of that is like, you know, completely, this is my rate when I work on campaigns. This is my rate when I work for. But that network tells a story about the candidate that may be better than any other way of gleaning about that. candidate. Yeah, so that's absolutely right. I mean, that's absolutely right. I think part of what you're asking is about the broader political project at play here, which we can definitely get into. Your question about whether these consultant salaries are being subsidized was something we posed directly in our questions to majority Democrats on the bench. And they've told us that there's

a strict firewall for those consultants work for campaigns and packs and that there's no subsidy. I'm just going to lay this out here. One of the packs involved here, which is, it's called a hybrid pack, basically gets to operate as a super pack and can be a normal pack if they have separate accounts. Tell us the distinction between a super pack and an own pack. I mean, I know it's... So, yeah, yeah, a super pack, the super PAC side means the independent expenditure

arm. So that's, you get to spend as much as you want on a race as long as you're not coordinating with the campaign. So that, you know, that's what most people think of like when APAC spends tons of money on an ad for a race, right? That's where their independent expenditure are. But a hybrid pack can also do, so and in technical terms, that's called soft sum, i.e. spending. A pack can also have a hard side where they provide a certain amount of candidate services to a campaign, it just is capped and has to be disclosed the same way that a contribution is to a campaign, right? So it has to be pretty, pretty limited. What the bench's, what the bench's hybrid pack has done is if you go through FEC filings, as we did for all their different

entities, it lists the operating expenditures, like who's running the pack, okay? The entirety of that packs operating expenditures are going to this one consultant. consultancy called Precinct. And Precinct comes up throughout this whole network. All of the various, almost all of the consultants that we had correspondence with are operating from precinct emails and are clearly involved with that consultancy. There's no identifying information about this consultancy, very little. We dug into it. We found their Delaware incorporation records. And the authorizing signature, the guy who founded this consultancy, this guy named Seth London. Seth London is sort of the key to this whole operation.

This is all kind of his brainchild. He's a venture capitalist, Democratic Party operative within the Obama administration. He wrote this famous memo after the 2024 elections that kind of laid out the whole blueprint for what's been built here. And there's a lot of ideological undercurrents to it. So, you know, at that time, there's this whole debate in the part. party has have Democrats lose because they went, you know, too far left, or is it because there's sort of too wishy-washy beholden to corporate power?

Seth London, maybe unsurprisingly, kind of fell down on, you know, on the former, two left one, right? And he put out this vision for how are we going to, you know, get the soul of the party back, right? How are we going to get more moderate and more to the center? And he lays out, all these action knives. We're going to create these PACs to intervene in the Democratic primary. we're going to hire XYZ consultants, names them all out.

And, you know, this is really sort of final result here. A, I just want to say, I said this the other day, it would be great if the Democrats had this idea to do an autopsy after the election. And then you could actually look at the data, but that nobody thought of that. Nobody thought about doing that or about releasing it. The thing that I find fascinating about this, and I've come to understand over the course of like 20 some odd years following this stuff, is that there is a cohort of people who are political entrepreneurs. I don't know what else to say about this. Who's the relationship between their political ideology and money, I don't want to say that money wins out because I think their political ideology. ideology is completely consistent with that, with the idea of money winning out. But this sounds like a way of

like, how can we create, how can I go to the big businessman who are worried about stuff like Lena Kahn in this instance or something like that. I'm just using this as a shorthand. And Reed Hoffman, of course, involved in this. Yes, yes. As a Reid Hoffman sitting there's like, I'm fretting about the, the, the economic populism, really, I mean, you know, populism, like the return to the economics of the Democrats from, you know, the middle part of the 20th century, because I have a lot of concentrated wealth. I want more concentrated wealth. I want less government intervention in the market. And how can I deal with this? And then some smart entrepreneur, you know, entrepreneurial guy. like this guy says, oh, I have an idea. And I'm going to hire all of like, you know, the people who agree with that and who've worked on these campaigns. And Adam Gentleson just sent me his resume.

And we can do this. And then they set up a mechanism in which to let this money flow. And they look for candidates who they feel within the context of these primaries, they either recruit them or they help them because they know their interests are going to be served by these people. I mean, it's not, I don't know if there's any affiliation, but we just saw Janet Mills veto a bipartisan moratorium on data centers in Maine, which just bizarre, if you're running for, in a tight race for senator, it's just a bizarre thing to do. And then two days later, two months. million dollar ad buy drops attacking her opponent, Platner, from like the tech pros who would be

very much invested in AI. I mean, so we get a sense of what the dynamic is. I'm not saying that's associated with this, although I wouldn't be shocked if it was. Yeah, no, I mean, I think you're touching on something really important here, too, which is, along with just this procedural stuff about coordination between packs and outside. Like, what are the actual where the business ideological interests at play and such. And I think you're right that sometimes for these donors, they're in a certain industry that maybe happens to align with their ideological priors and such.

But there are certain instances, I think, where the mask slips a little bit more, right? And one of the best examples was, I think, what happened with Reid Hoffman on the campaign trail in 2024, right? And several of his companies and entities he was involved in were being scrutinized by the FTC. He's calling for the Democratic presidential can to oust, you know, said head of the agency that's, you know, looking over his shoulder and such. And I think the other part of this operation that's relevant here that we haven't discussed yet is Seth London has also been involved in the creation of the Searchlight Institute, which is more the policy arm of this whole group. They're not as involved in the elections day-to-day or the PACS side.

They're not legally allowed to. They're in D.C. And they're pumping out the policy proposals, which seem to play a big role, influencing the candidates who are then backed by the PACs that London has also helped create. And the Searchlight Institute's board include many of the same donors who are funding this whole operation. So there's Stephen Mandel and his wife Sue there. He's a hedge fund guy. He's heavily invested in the Taiwanese semiconductor manufacturing company, TSMC.

Someone else is Simone Cox, whose husband is on the board of Nvidia. And the Searchlight Institute has been very aggressively pushing a new policy paper related to data centers and I that's supposed to be the kind of, you know, the more moderate kind of triangulation approach opposed to a data center moratorium, you know, that Bernie Sanders and the more kind of progressive wing have been pushing for. It's a kind of, you know, tax as you go sort of method. Mallory McMorrow has put out a policy proposal on her campaign site that's pretty much identical to that as well. I think if you look at, you know, Mandel and the Cox's and, you know, their kind of involvement in the tech industry, these major suppliers to the data center

buildout, you know, I think you can, you kind of see where the business interests play in there as well. You know how I knew that that was happening in the background is I just happened to see a Madaglacius post promoting something to that effect. That's how I knew it must exist somewhere because you know. You also just mentioned Adam Gentleson. I think that's his searchlight. Yeah. And I mean, and so there's a this is a way for, them to put money and I mean this is this is part of that interracine fight that we're we're seeing right now um and it's playing out in ways I think that like nobody could fully anticipate because of in particular of how the Democrats are in play for taking over the Senate and when I look at

like the Senate potential, you know, pickups like Platner. And, I mean, you have, I mean, Tallinniko is up by a couple points, but that was sort of, but in Michigan, Alaska, they're Maine, like I said, but Nebraska and Iowa, they're playing in. Let's talk a little bit about Iowa. I mean, Iowa and Minnesota, it seems to me, we're seeing in Michigan, obviously as well. We're seeing them away in. Often it's with like sort of just

what the establishment Democrats are doing. I got the sense that they realized like Haley Stevens is a dud. And Chuck Schumer and Kristen Gillibrand really messed up. And so they rushed in to make sure that it wasn't going to be Abdul al-Said. Just give us a sense

of where they're playing. Yeah, yeah, right. I mean, the Michigan race, is, I think, the most prominent one. Mallory McMarrow, I think, really fits more or less to a T, the kind of candidate that this network is looking for, right? So she's in between the more moderate establishment-friendly candidate, Haley Stevens, and then you have Abdul Al-Assad, who's backed by Bernie Sanders, who's the left-wing candidate. Mallory McMarro's right in the middle, right? She's millennials, she's young. That's what this whole network is about. The one real criticism of the

establishment here is just the two old. It's not really an ideological thing. You know, we need fresh faces, you know, maybe some of the same ideas and such, but new face is on the scene. And that's Mallory. She's like, she's risen up through the Michigan State Senate very quickly, had a kind of viral speech, I think, in 2022, several years ago that was ranling against, you know, the kind of Republican demigodgery in the state and such.

And, you know, I think the distinction here more so, we're in this old moment, in the primary words, it's the progressive moderate lanes aren't quite as, you know, clear as they have been in, in previous areas. It's a little bit more about, you know, you know, age and, you know, some of the kind of background and political experience that those candidates bring. I think that's, I think, why it's drawn to right behind hour. You had Slotkin saying, like, it's not left or right. It's fight or flight. And so I think there is like a sort of like another overlay. But it is interesting. like the sort of like the McMurrow to Said is like it is more obscured that it has been in the past,

in part because those centrists are having to adopt a more progressive language, it seems to me. Yeah, yeah, right. I think that's kind of the way to put it. Some of it's about kind of, I think, defagging the more kind of left populist energy. By the way, just to be clear, they're all running on essentially versions of campaign finance report. I mean, Mallory and Marrow also says our campaign's not taking corporate pack money. That's a pretty common, you know, line at this point. And, you know, that was also one of the kind of pieces of this we were trying to penetrate with this story. It's actually, you know,

where's the money coming from that are backing these campaigns, not directly, but, you know, on the outside as independent expenditure vehicles. More broadly, the idea of corporate pack money is almost like a relic in some way because you have individuals who have so much money that they don't need to put it through a corporate, like... I mean, Reid Hoffman's outfit is backing her, I guess, right?

So, yeah, like, if it's not corporate PAC money, but it's just benevolent billionaire money, I guess it doesn't matter. Is that what that kind of implies? Yeah, it's kind of a relic from, you know, a previous era, you know, post-Cidents United. It's now a pretty common pledge when there wasn't a lot of, like,

People walking around with pocket change that, you know, could add up to tens of millions of dollars. Right. I just, on the political side, all it signals, though, is that these campaigns do recognize the popularity of doing some kind of campaign finance reform or giving the appearance that you're, you know, not bought and paid for, bought and paid for by various corporate interests. But, you know, of course, there are various, you know, kind of ways, ways around us. Well, I mean, you know, it's just a. amazing when you look at where we're at right now with dark money since the Citizens United

decision. I'm returned to this Brennan Center for Justice analysis a lot because in 2010, when the Citizens United decision came down, there was $6.7 million in dark money groups direct spending versus what we saw of $1.4 billion, $1.3 billion in 2024. It was a record. And it's completely coincided with also you see how there's this mass disillusion with both parties. There is really a lot less direct democracy than you would expect in our system, like including both parties, really rejecting a lot of popular proposals. I mean, of course, including like Israel funding and stuff like that, in favor of money. The money is breaking much more towards the independent expenditures and the money in terms of the policy outcomes increasingly as well. And, you know, I don't know how you can have, I guess, how you can build a coalition that's strong enough to defeat that.

But this is very much a creature of that dynamic. Yeah, absolutely. I mean, and, you know, just to be clear, I mean, the dark money phenomenon that was actually much larger on the Democratic side, even than it is on the Republican side. The way it goes is, I mean, Republicans have the giant whale donors, let's say, like the largest ones, right, who give the super PACs. Democrat side is a little bit more distributed, but they have all these additional dark money channels where we don't even know where the funding is coming. And that's true for this network. One of their main organs, primarily a lot of their funding is coming from a group called Our American Future, which we know nothing about, but the New York Times did a future piece on that, you know, they're playing a huge role in these midterms. So again, I may have cut you off.

They're playing big in Michigan. What other states, particularly in the context of Senate, are they playing significant? I mean, I think you mentioned like Minnesota in Iowa. And it's interesting because you watch these races. Flanagan, she seems to be outpolling the centrist candidate. Zach Walls is gaining ground. on the centrist candidate in Iowa.

I mean, it's there, it feels like they have a lot of headwinds. Yeah, I mean, I think there was a poll just out today too that I think Mallory McMorrow maybe, I mean, that's a really close race, but a little bit further behind them, you know, I think their, her team was probably hoping for. Yeah, I mean, yeah, so Josh Turek is the candidate that the bench is, is backing in, in Iowa. No, I mean, you know, I think you're right. I think we'll have to see how it shakes out.

There's still quite a bit of, you know, time here. But the pitch that these groups made for all these candidates that are in their network is we're going to, you know, basically give you access to the full suite of, you know, professional services that you need to run a campaign. You'll have access to, you know, our donor network and such. And these races are going to be a real kind of testing ground. I think one for this group's belief in, you know, their kind of ideological priorities, that that's where the center of this party is.

And also just mechanically in terms of, you know, will this operation help their candidates by really pushing the limits of campaign finance law? Or is it going to kind of blow back in their faces? That it's already become controversy in a handful of races. I'm not saying it's determinative, you know, at all. But I think there's a little bit of shadiness that's starting to stick to this network. Texas was the main area where that came into play. And in that way, just specifically the last part that you were making, Is it because of an ideological or just broadly generic money taint that is creating the controversy?

I mean, because there's two things here, right? Like there is, we're going to open up. We have this ideology. We want to spread it. And then also there are innovations, for lack of a better term, in terms of the way that they're staffing and loaning out consultants and whatnot. and there's also a measure of like the practices associated with these type of people. I mean, look, you know, if I'm a political entrepreneur, I'm always going to look to media buys more than, you know, organizing on the ground if my agenda is to make some cash because that's where

the money is for me. And, you know, my second job is also covering my ass from my failures of my friends. first job, even though it put money in my pocket. So those controversies, are they because of the taint of who's funding it? Or is it around like sort of the weirdness in the way that the staffing goes? Yeah. I mean, look, I think there's two dynamics here. So in the Texas one, it was a little bit more specifically about the role that Liz Smith played.

Now, again, how many Texas voters know who Liz Smith is? Zero. I'm sure very little, right? But I think there's this general, the general sense that it wasn't so much Liz Smith, specifically. Jasmine Crockett criticized her potential affiliation with Tala Rico because she'd previously worked for, you know, Andrew Cuomo. And I think that's a little bit more of a name that people know. It was more about an influence from Washington and, you know, coastal areas on a Texas.

It becomes sort of like a subtextual narrative building. Right, right. And so this was in the final weeks, Jasmine Crockett sort of went after Liz Smith and Talleyco. And again, just to kind of demonstrate the slipperiness of this operation here, Liz Smith had been referred to as an advisor to Talleyco, the bench, the group that she is, she does work on behalf of as a spokesperson consultant for, they were back in Tala Rico. She claims that she wasn't involved in the campaign. She was just helping on the outside as part of the bench, which was.

is funding and backing Tauruco. So that's how there's, you get some, you know, wiggle room. You have more convenience here when there's this kind of distinction for these kind of political maneuvers on the campaign show. I just think more broadly, though, if you're someone like Tauro Rico, who, again, to some extent really was picking up more populist messaging, campaign finance and such, once you put yourself in that territory, you also, you know, have to kind of, you know, basically, you have to kind of live up to some of those principles. And I think it also opens you up to, you know, scrutiny. If you have this whole dark money network that's, you know, kind of supporting you

behind the scenes and, you know, giving you various kind of services supporting the campaign. Well, it's a fascinating piece. Luke Goldstein, we will link to it at majority.fm and in the podcast and YouTube descriptions. Luke Goldstein of Lever, thanks so much for your time today. I really appreciate it. Yep. Yeah, thanks for having me. Any time.

Thanks, Luke. All right, folks. We went a little longer with that, but it's fascinating because this is really sort of like looking under the hood of this dynamic that has been playing out. And it's becoming more relevant in many respects because of the opportunities that Democrats have to take the Senate. And I just think that it also is instructed for people to understand what. what the incentives are behind the politics that are frustrating to them. Like, why is there this entire infrastructure that exists that is pushing away the base's requests and demands or what they want the party to look like?

Like, because it's not, if we're just having a battle of ideas, right, then we know who wins the day. But this is the kind of, this is what we're up against. This is what we're up against. Yeah. The McMorrow thing, like, I still can't, like, I don't think that there has been a clip that has been more seared in my mind when she was talking about Medicare for All. It's, it's, it's, it is insane how that clip plays in my head whenever we're talking about any of this stuff. And even if she didn't, doesn't believe it and was just using it as a way to discredit Abdul al-Said, who's the Medicare for all guy, it shows a complete. lack of vision and a cynicism that is basically really, I would say, disqualifying from constituting yourself as a progressive or calling yourself as such. It was so cynical.

And, you know, she wasn't addressing Abdul, Al-Saheed at all in that. It was just her attacking, not just the idea of Medicare for all. We're like, you know, you know, like Obama will be like, you know, the country's not ready for that. Or we don't want to lose our private insurance or people, you know, are, you know, There's all sorts of like hemming and hawing you can do about why not Medicare for all that falls apart upon scrutiny. But it is contained in terms of like an assault on what would be an incredibly popular policy. But what she did was basically say like you don't want.

the government involved in that because you'll have people like Donald Trump in charge of it. And it's true, you don't want Donald Trump in charge of your government, but you could, you could deploy that argument against Medicare. Any government program. You could deploy that argument against Medicaid. In fact, they're kicking right now as a result of that big beautiful bill, millions of people off of Medicaid. Nebraska was just the one they instituted this on Friday.

You could make that argument about Social Security. You don't want, you know what Donald Trump in charge of your retirement? I mean, it was so cynical. And, you know, I think, I am not, you know, someone who, who, who, I think, like, as far as, like, you know, cynicism goes, like, I get it, but to take out a bedrock principle of not just progressivism, but I mean, that's the fundamental to the Democratic Party. I don't know what's more fundamental than Social Security and Medicare. It's also why I hate the anti-tax movement stuff that was really the only misstep that Chris Van Hollen has had.

And I know he has an explanation for it. You asked him about it. I wasn't here for that, unfortunately. But even, you know, whatever Katie, the hell Katie Porter is doing in that California governor's race, like, we should not be attacking taxation as a principal. We should not be attacking government as a principle and its foundational functions. It's, it shows a complete lack of vision and the exact lack of vision that blows to this moment. And this vision is, in fact, the one that Bill Clinton wrote into power on in the 90s. Yeah. This is the entire Bill Clinton D.L.C. sort of idea of, like, all this stuff that they tell us our so-called principles are actually hindrances for getting us getting into power and working out deals with, like, Tyson or Walmart or whoever.

Jordi, Ph.D., on the I.m., and then we'll go to the front half said. That said, I think both, uh, no, wait, uh, this story makes it more likely than McMorrow or Tala Rico are a new fetterment. Let me, let me just make this clear. It's, there is no possibility. of a new Fetterman, and I'll tell you why. There are always people who tack to the center once they get elected, particularly in states that go back and forth between, you know, Republican and Democratic senators. But Fetterman has lit his career on fire. Federman is not going to get reelected. And so...

There's something wrong with him. There's something wrong with him. I mean, Kristen Cinema also was one of these people. And you could see what she was doing from the very beginning. I mean, she's now a lobbyist for, like, was it crypto? Some AI data center project. After, I guess, having an affair with her bodyguard and also using her kind of government office to secure Taylor Swift tickets. Yeah.

Yeah. You know. Girl boss. Some people are very, very intent about their musical, you know, having the opportunity of musical. Oh, she got a great taste. I'm shocked. She's a Taylor Swift fan. And look, you could say, like, they may turn into a Lieberman or they may turn into a, you know.

Chris Coons. Well, Chris Coons was always there. He's coming from, like, you know, the business center of the world, essentially. But like, you know, some of like the, you know, a testery, you know, in some respects. although tester was somewhat popular. I mean, it is possible, but nobody's turning into a fetterment. You know, again, I can't get the, I cannot get that response to Medicare for all out of my mind more than any other clip I think I've seen.

And I'm talking about, you know, we watch a lot of like horrible clips like that we don't put on hair. This is the one that's seared into my brain. Also, yeah, Jordy Pachy, the story makes it more likely that McMorough or Tala Rico are a new fetterman. I think it's very one McMorro there's still a primary to be had here so we still have a say and who's going to be the nominee here and I want to just say Haley Stevens everybody that's trying to get her to drop out they are just disgusting anti-feminist garbage that want to see women fail. Yeah she's yeah Haley Stevens really just stick it out through through the end but Talley Rico like yeah okay there's a fear there we've already said that he's probably not going to govern as one of them if he gets elected as one of the more progressive. of Democrats, but he's running on an anti-billionaire thing.

Like, I think I think that matters. I think how he's run is very different than some other campaigns in redder states. And the fact that he's, all of his ads are about, it's the billionaires that are ripping you off. It's not the immigrants. It's not trans people. And he does it with this kind of, you know, dorky Christian kindness stuff. Like, that's, I think, fundamentally different than how other Democrats in these situations

have run in the past. So I'm more, I'm more optimistic about Tala Rico, maybe even than you. I mean, look, I think we get a Democrat from Texas, it is a positive. I mean, even with Federman, it's like, okay, do we want Dr. Oz in there instead? Right. No, I don't. And even then, it's like, okay, he's going to be replaced by Summer Lee then, because we didn't give Oz the benefit of incumbency, even if you act like they're the same.

So, like, people being, this whole meme of like, we got to avoid ever cast in a ballot for a future veteran. It's like, yeah, we should be very, you know, vigilant on questions, like particularly with Palestine. But, I mean, I still think people are a little bit too precious about it. It's going to be really interesting to see what happens. Who ends up getting Federman's seat? And somebody just said, like, well, he's going to switch to a Republican. He's going to run there.

Good luck. Good luck. Because unless he gets 100% of, like, Republican support, he's done. He's cooked. He's cooked. 28 is going to be a tough environment. The argument would be, you know, Federman or Con or Lamb, and the reality is such that at this point, Fetterman has been an incredible annoyance, and he may be even more problematic if the Democrats take the Senate.

And he is the determinate vote. Then it's a real problem. But as it stands now, we got to wait and see who ends. up with that seat when Federman has to run for re-election because if that seat moves to the left in the final analysis you may not be able to point to any legislation that Federman was able to kill me hasn't done outside of being incredibly annoying and sort of uh he hasn't really done any damage as of yet it seems to me um there's potentially could yeah um so we'll see But it's going to be interesting.

But yes, Nicola says, I think it's a mistake to leave the stroke out aspect of Fetermint. Without a doubt, I'm sorry. Yeah. There's just no way. This guy is, you know. Is mentally competent? Well, he's not even acting in his best interest as a, like, I can understand tacking to the center if you're in Pennsylvania and walking some type of line. But this dude lit his career on fire.

He is done. D-O-N-E. I'm glad you said Summerlee, and I know we'll go into the fun half, but, you know, did you saw that Bob Casey is already with like over two years until 2028 says he's running for that Federman seat and his primarying him. Oh, is Connor Lamb also saying that too? Connor Lamb's at least flirted with it, but Casey has essentially officially declared that he's going to run again. And I would love for us to upgrade.

So I know Summerlee, maybe that's not what she wants to do, but the, I think Pennsylvania Democrats are probably worried statewide if they don't have some Western PA representation to win races in the state. And she would be great on that front as long as the Democratic money machine doesn't get in her way. We'll see. We'll see. We've got plenty of time to be talking about 28. Yeah. Folks, just a reminder to your support that makes this show possible.

You can become a member by going to join the Majority Report.com. When you do, you only get the free show free of commercials. You also get the fun. half, which is coming up next, where you'll be able to IAM us on the IAM machine. We also occasionally take phone calls. Took a caller to yesterday, right? Yes, we did. Also, just coffee.coop, fair trade coffee, hot chocolate.

Use your coupon code. Majority, get 10% off of a co-op coffee. They have so many different great blends and single origins, and they're a co-op in Madison, Wisconsin, and it's great coffee and you get a coupon code majority 10% off. Matt, what's happening in the Matt Lecky and Media universe? Yeah, I got a new episode of Left Reckoning coming up right after the show today at about 230 where we go back into Russell Brand's moment with Pierce Morgan.

It's biblical meltdown as I call it. Also, we do talk about, it looks like I froze if you just want to reactivate and deactivate that. But we talk to, we talk about Bill Marr, talking with your buddy David Cross, about Zora Mamdani and sort of lecturing him deactivate and reactivate. And yeah, so that's coming up at 2.30. Well, I talked with Dr. Salman Khan, who is back from Gaza as an infectious disease doctor, and we talk about the conditions there and the ongoing genocide. So check that out. Patreon.com, just left reckoning. See you in the fun half.

three months from now, six months from now, nine months from now. And I don't think it's going to be the same as it looks like in six months from now. And I don't know if it's necessarily going to be better six months from now than it is three months from now. But I think around 18 months out, we're going to look back and go like, wow. What? What is that going on? It's nuts. Wait a second.

Hold on for, hold on for a second. Emma, welcome to the program. Hey. Unpacked. Matt. Who? Fun. What is up, everyone? Fun.

No, me, Key. You did it. Fun pack. Let's go Brandon. Let's go Brandon. Fun app. Bradley, you want to say hello? Sorry to disappoint.

Everyone, I'm just a random guy. It's all the boys today. Fundamentally false. No, I'm sorry. Women's... Stop talking for a second. Let me finish. Where is this coming from, dude?

But dude, you want to smoke his... Seven-Aid? Yes. Yes? I think it is you Who is you No sound Every single

Fricking day What's on your mind We can discuss free markets And we can discuss capitalism I'm gonna go to life Libertarians They're so stupid though Common sense says of course

Gobbled Egook We fucking nailed him So what's 79 plus 21 Challenge met I'm positively quivering I believe 96 I want to say 857 21035

501 501 1⁄ 38s 9-11 for a single. $3,400, $1,900. $6.5, $4, $3 trillion sold. It's a zero-sum game. Actually, you're making think less.

But let me stay this. Poop. You call it satire. Sam goes to satire. On top of it all, my favorite part about you is just like every day, all day, like everything you do. Without a doubt. Hey, buddy, we've seen you. The week being weeded out, obviously.

Yeah. Sun's out. Just don't like the entertainment. ideas anyway. I have a question. Who cares? Our chat is enabled folks. I love it. I do love that. Got to jump. I gotta be quick. I get a jump. I'm a losing. And the guy's being a dick. So screw him. Sent to a gulaw? Outrage. Like, what is wrong with you? Love you. Bye. Love you. Bye-bye.