The Press Box - A Democrat Switches Parties, Warren vs. Sanders, and ‘Bombshell’ | The Press Box

Episode Date: December 17, 2019

Bryan Curtis and David Shoemaker discuss the newest impeachment mini-drama (03:00), the Overworked Twitter Joke of the Week (24:30), another Spygate scandal for the Patriots (28:15), the film ‘Bombshell’ and the making of cable news-based content (44:30), and more. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

What's up, guys, and welcome to the Ringer Podcast Network. Binge Mode made its grand return earlier this month, and Mallory Rubin and Jason Concepcion are deep diving on the Star Wars franchise, covering every movie, the newly released Disney Plus series The Mandalorian, and fan favorite characters. You can check out new episodes every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday wherever you get your podcasts. And up on the site, we have more Mandalorian coverage written by Micah Peters, Alison Herman, and Ben Lindberg, as well as staff-wide surveys throughout the season.

You can check it all out on The Ringer.com. David, according to Sports Illustrated alum and athletic senior editor Mark Gottig, SI has laid off its copy staff. What I want to know is what misspellings do you expect to see an SI in the near future? Okay, we think we can all agree that the big loser here is Janice, it's in Kokupo. Uh, yeah, I have no, I mean, what, God, I mean, I mean, I the next, I mean, I don't even know

what the future holds for this magazine, but I assume at some point they refer to themselves as Spots Illustrated. Is that the right joke? What's the, I don't know,

who are the other big losers here? Well, there's that whole list of names that always gets misspelled in newspapers like Edgar Allan Poe. Oh, yeah. I don't know how much Edgar Allen Poe is going to figure into Maven content, but I can't see somebody

doing a really bad quote the Raven kind of bit. That gets the name of. Internal capitalizations, LeBron. Oh, internal capital. Yeah, someone who's worked on the desk a little bit. Chris is good for that one. Internal capitalizations are bad.

Apostrophes are really, really hard. Deerrin Fox, I can never figure out a search when I'm looking in like a bad search engine. What is my other, what do the things always have trouble searching for? You never know, well, I mean, people who go by their nicknames all the time is certainly going to be a problem.

But again, this is just like, I mean, I guess this is just as I'd becoming a blog. So we're just, we're all, sadly, I think a lot of people are just used to reading uncopywritten stuff. We're the TK, TK, TK of Media Podcasts. This is the Press Box, a part of the Ringer podcast network. Let's just hope they never write about Brian Curtis.

Hello, media consumers. You've got Brian Curtis and David Shoemaker here. Lots and lots to get to today. We'll talk about a. brand new, yes a new New England Patriots spying scandal. We'll talk about bombshell and the making of cable

news-based content. All that plus the overworked Twitter joke of the week. But David, we need to begin with the latest impeachment mini-drama. You and I both think of this whole thing, at least partially, as a made-for-TV sub-eran Sorkin miniseries. And the obvious

next story beat was for an impeachment skeptical Democrat to change parties. Here he is. His name is Jeff Van Drew of New Jersey. It represents a Republican leaning district. His party switch, which I believe is still alleged,

he has told his staff about it, but not come out yet as we record this. It has pissed off Democrats. And it's even pissed off some Republicans. The Republican running for Van Drew's seat in New Jersey called him a weasel, quote unquote. the Democrat running for the same seat called him a traitor. So David, I turn it over to you.

Jeff Van Drew, Weasel, or Trader? I was very excited to see the pejorative weasel emerge from 80s WWF television and make it into the modern political scene. Yeah, I mean, what's the question? Is he a weasel? It does seem like this is a total put on. Yes.

you know all politics are the term politics is used derisively in other parts of the world in other parts of culture for a very good reason I'm guessing that the five maybe six maybe seven staffers who have resigned

are if they're shocked by this move I would assume they're not too shocked that the person they're working for is the kind of person who would do this sort of thing but that's a big assumption on my part. I don't know. I mean, he met with the president and came out deciding to switch parties.

This feels very much like something that would excite President Trump to happen on, you know, sort of in reference to this impeachment proceeding, but particularly sort of at his behest. And, you know, the rumors that he's going to endorse him in the next, in his next election. And Trump's going to be the endorser, that is. but yeah i mean this just sort of feels like it feels like a win for the president not just because uh of the vote counting but because of it just makes this whole thing more of a just silly spectacle which is what he what you know works on it works to his benefit yeah if you keep saying this is this is a put on this is a this is a holy partisan process that the democrats are just obsessed with

impeaching me, then Van Drew becomes this very useful figure because like every party switcher in the history of time, he can come out and say, hey, I was a Democrat. I was a loyal Democrat, but my party has just gone too far. Yeah. But this isn't Theodore Roosevelt or, you know, even Ronald Reagan. Or even Jeffords. Yeah. It certainly isn't a Strom Thurmond or Jim Jeffert situation where the party has slowly edged away from these core beliefs and I am the steady rock. he he he or he won this seat last year right i mean he won the seat in the middle of the trump presidency he won the seat where anyone uh on both where he was he was answering questions on the campaign trail about potential charges against the president um and you know he he's the

again couldn't probably not too much for surprise he's been in recent months on tucker Carlson's television program talking about how this is this is a bad idea for the Democrats to go down the path of impeachment um but this is not some but going back this is not some this is not some moral standard uh on his part this is a um this is what he's this is just a thing he's decided to stake his political future on which you know is we we we shouldn't be surprised shouldn't be surprised at this point and maybe I'm personally am blind to the appeal of it

because it does seem like just the worst decision that you could make to hit your wagon to Trump but and I'm not saying the alternative is just to be you know, virulently anti-Trump

I'm just saying as opposed to kind of finding a middle ground or you know following your morals but people keep doing it. People keep lining up to to you know to get Trump

his blessing and to believe that he's going to stick by them. So his calculation before was I can be a fairly conservative Democrat. I can vote against impeachment as a Democrat. I can then survive the Democratic primary because if I vote against impeachment, I'm almost certainly going to get primaried. Survive that. And then in this Republican-leaning district still win the general. Like that was his path before the party switch.

And I guess in terms of political expediency, he decided that was a little too complicated. And it was easier if he becomes a Republican, supports Trump and votes against the people, gets endorsed by Trump, as you say, which is rumored as part of this deal, wins the Republican primary. Because remember, now he's got to convince skeptical Republican primary voters that he is in fact a Republican. sure and then wins the general in a tight district so so that's how the calculation changed and i don't even think it's as big i mean listen i don't think it's as big a deal is i don't think it's impossible in new jersey to say i switch parties and and but you know i'm still the same guy you voted for and maybe you get an even bigger portion of the vote because of that i think that the the real difficulty is going to face is the the transformative moment in my political career or slash my

was that I was so, that I disagreed so much with just the decision that my colleagues were casting to proceed impeachment, I mean, to proceed with impeachment of the president, that a no vote didn't, wouldn't have been good enough. Only, only a showboating switch of parties would be good enough, right? I mean, I think that's, I mean, and so it's not just, he could switch parties and say, I mean, for another reason, on another day, and potentially, get more votes at the end. But I think this way he's he's immediately he's definitely not going to get a single, I mean, a single vote from anybody with a negative opinion of the president. And he's still going to suffer the, you know, on the Republican side, presumably from people that don't fully

trust him. So, you know, it's a really weird gambit. I think that what you said as far as the political calculation was probably correct, assuming there was not a hallelujah moment at some point along the way. But and I and I guess the, the, the, that calculation taken the next. step is that he, I mean, and maybe this is totally craven, maybe the, maybe the thought was you had that he, there's no way he would have won a Democratic primary if he was at all, uh, if he, if he had any lapse in anti-Trump sentiment, right? I mean, that that was going to be the harder election. So, I mean, I guess we'll see how the general goes, but I think that, that may speak more to our current end future political climate than what this guy's actually doing.

one great irony that you note is this guy who is a one-term House representative got elected in 2018 because of Donald Trump, because Donald Trump was so unpopular. New Jersey's second district, Trump won that district in 2016, 50 to 46. Before Van Drew's election, it was represented by a Republican Frank Lobiondo for 24 years before that. Van Drew won it fairly comfortably, but part of that fact was his GOP. opponent had a bunch of bad comments about race and was cut loose by the national party. But at least part of that, right, is the reason he's winning is because Donald Trump is incredibly unpopular. Yeah.

And now Donald Trump has, if anything, been worse since the election. And now he's throwing his arms around Donald Trump and says, this is my path. You were my path to get into office because you were so unpopular. Now you are more unpopular, but you are my path to stay in office by wrapping my arms around you. it's a really it really honestly and i and whatever the calculation whatever the actual you know if there is really any kind of you know genuine change of heart or whatever it is here this did feel like a content gap that needed to be exploited like we know how we know how

the impeachment vote is going to go this week in the house of representatives minus a few people on the fence we think we know how the trial is going to go in the senate in january sure What's left is little surprises, little subplots like this, which will let everyone, we will all chase around for a few days. We will all milk for content. He will do another Tucker Carlson interview and there'll be all, his staff will quit and dramatically and primary opponents are already announcing themselves or what we'll give interviews. And that will just serve to bridge one part of a story we know how it's going to end to the other part. It just feels like filler. It feels like a chapter, you know, kind of marking time chapter in a drama.

Yeah, and I agree. And going back to what I said before, I think that this is exactly what the president wants, to make it to sort of make this feel like a political circus that we've seen before and not a truly significant moment in American political history. I mean, I wonder, I mean, there were stories today and yesterday about the Democratic. sort of making the case to potentially, you know, to like swing district Republicans and see if they get any Republican votes for the articles of impeachment. One wonders of President Trump, you know, if President Trump was auditioning for this role or

if this one fell into his lap. But this is clearly something that he is excited to do, I mean excited about and eager to do. And, you know, at the end of the day, this goes back to what I always say, which is never trusted dentist. elsewhere in ideological purity tests, segue. We've got a debate on Thursday. And this is the last chance, David, that non-insane news consumers

will probably pay attention to the Democrats before the holidays kick in. And we think about something other than politics. One very good piece and one very interesting table setter for Thursday was written by Jonathan Martin in the New York Times. And it's about Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. they famously have not criticized each other much during this primary at all. If anything, they feel like a semi-united block when they stand on the debate stage, right?

Them versus those wavering centrist. But as Martin notes, it's really hard to see either of them winning the nomination without getting a big share of each other's support. And he writes here, after decades of losing intra-party battles, this race may represent it progresses best chance to seize control from establishment-aligned Democrats. Yet that is unlikely to happen so long as Ms. Warren and Mr. Sanders are blocking each other from consolidating the left. Now, there's a couple of scenarios here. One is that either Sanders or Warren win big early on in the primaries and caucuses, right?

One of them wins both Iowa, New Hampshire, let's say. And the other kind of at that point has to make a calculation. You know what? If I want my ideals to win out in this primary, I should step aside. side. I should endorse the other one. I should something. Right. Right. The other is if, you know, Biden does do well on Super Tuesday, does do well with those super those primaries. And there's even, you know, sort of talk of some brokering something, right? Is there a, should, should we join forces on some kind of super progressive ticket?

Sort of like Bill Clinton picking Al Gore as his running mate. One person says, you know, that was the centrist version. right this would be for progressives. Harry Reid even tells Jonathan Martin, I am standing by and if I see an opportunity that I can broker some kind of deal, I'll try. What do you think is a realistic way that this comes out so that progressives aren't completely left outside the party when, and I say party, not in the political sense, but in like Fiesta sense, when this primary is over? this is a tough one this is another I mean this is another kind of piece of fallout

from the sort of downturn that the Warren campaign has hit because you know this this is I mean when she was the frontrunner

we weren't having this conversation anymore but this is a conversation that we were having at the very beginning of the primary season right I mean that these two seem to have some sort of implicit agreement they certainly seemed to be friendly and obviously share a lot of political ideals.

But the sort of, you know, peace treaty like that is one that makes a whole lot of sense if either A, you are more committed to the political ideals than anything else, you know, and there's with no exception, which seems, which is, you know, if any politician is like that, it's probably one of these two. But, again, these are politicians. So we go to plan B, which is this is the sort of agreement. you make if you are a hundred percent sure you are going to be the winner between the two of them, right? And my guess is to get this far in any political career, both of them have to have

the confidence to think they're the one who's going to win. So when it comes to the point of somebody dropping out, I mean, I'm sure that both, I fully believe that both of them are, you know, true to their word and will fully support the other one as best they can. I just don't know that it's going to happen quickly enough to make a difference. And I'm not sure, and I find a little bit hard to imagine either of them, I mean, either of them willing to brokering a deal that would, that would, you know, it means stepping aside early in the process.

Maybe I'm crazy. But both of these people were, I mean, everybody remembers Bernie Sanders, you know, I mean, from four years ago and his, you know, in a lot of ways, triumphant campaign against Hillary Clinton, just not triumphant in the literal incense. But let's not forget to Elizabeth Warren,

who in a lot of ways is the, It was the ideological heir to the Obama era, the Obama administration and worked within it for some time. That she formally, like, stepped aside and allowed Hillary to run without her interference. So, I mean, these are both people who have a lot at stake here and have firm belief that they should have already been, I'm sure should already be at the top of the party. I don't know. It's going to be interesting to see what happens because I'm really, like I said, I have a hard time predicting what comes next for these two. Because one of them does need to move. I co-sign everything you said.

Here's the one little twist I'd put in there. Elizabeth Warren, as different as she is than almost every other Democrat in the Senate, she is a much more conventional politician than Bernie Sanders. Yeah. And Bernie, to me, has always been after something different than just winning the nomination. He definitely wants to win the nomination. But this field, it's just a crusade that's just different from the grubby realities of politics. That's what he's always telling us, right?

This is not about that. It's about something bigger. It's about something more idealistic. So for Bernie, even if he came up short in Iowa and New Hampshire, and it just clearly he wasn't going to win the nomination, for him to stand down would be pretty surprising to me. The other part of that, too, is that are we sure Bernie's support is that transferable to Elizabeth Warren?

You know, haven't we all been reading these things from Jacob and other places? that suggests that it's not. Now, maybe you just, you'd argue, she just needs a little bit of it, just enough to fend off a Biden or somebody like that because there's, you know, support's going to be split so many ways. But I don't know, man.

And like you said, it would have to be at such an early point to really make that case that I don't even know if it would, if it would be the differentiator or not. So, I mean, I guess is your, I mean, I agree with, I think, everything you said,

but I mean, would your argument be that if there were to, if someone were to stand down, it would be Elizabeth Sanders. It would be Elizabeth Warren because Bernie Sanders is basically on a moral or philosophical sort of kamikaze mission in this campaign. I just think it makes that kind of deal cutting makes more sense to Elizabeth Warren than it does Bernie Sanders. Just in just, just meant,

she can wrap her mind around it. it more easily than he can. And it's, again, that's not a value judgment. I just think she, like I said, I think she's a little bit more of a conventional politician. There's another scenario, by the way, outlining this article where what if they both stay in the race the whole time, okay? They go the whole distance.

And it is truly the, you know, National Journal, Aaron Sorkin-wet dream where we have a brokered convention. And they can say, look at all the delegates we have as essentially the two progressives in this race, then we we can somehow figure out who's going to be the nominee because we have more delegates than Biden or the centrist or whatever it is. Again, that's pretty far-fetched. But if we're talking about strange scenarios here, that's another one, I guess. Yeah. And in a lot of ways, I think that that would be sort of preferable end for all parties involved. I just think

the logistics to getting there and again the kind of game of chicken that they'd have to be playing that they both, that everybody, all parties would be on board with that. I just, I find it really hard to imagine that happening. It's a tough situation. Did we, I don't, do we talk last week about that

poll that said that, that poll of under 35 Democrat voters? Anyway, we were past, someone was passing around a poll on Twitter that said that some like ungodly number of voters under, Democratic voters under 35. I think 52% were were pro Sanders and then Warren

and Biden were sort of in the midteens load of mid teens Yeah somewhere in that range for sure I don't know what to make of that You know that is almost The best possible evidence you could point to for the kind of You know the young people don't vote

Kinnard that we hear every four years or more often than that For it to be that significant in a difference. But, you know, I'm sure those are the kind of polls that campaigns are looking at and when these kind of, when the path forward is being considered. And that's, that is very surprising to me, you know, in a lot of different ways. But, and maybe that goes to your kind of ideological purity argument. I mean, it's, it will be interesting to see how this shakes out. It's a really, it's a really, you know, it's unfortunate that in a field this big, that's what we're watching right now. that we have to look at. But that is the

that is a sort of horse race commentary that I think is actually worth having right now. Well, that makes me feel better about that whole segment. All right, David, time for the overworked Twitter joke of the week. Where we celebrate a gag that was so obvious that all of media Twitter made it at exactly at the same time. Please send your nominees to

at the press box pod where they are always gratefully received. From the world of sports, David, Baltimore Ravens cornerback Marcus Peters was fined $14,000 for unsportsmanlike conduct for drinking a beer with fans to celebrate his win-sealing pass breakup against the bills. So says a tweet. It was an overworked Twitter joke to write. The fine was based off the approximate cost of a beer at an NFL stadium.

Thanks to Ryan Ganyan and Davy Rohan. I've had this in my file for a while and was waiting for a slow week. Here it is. In Canadian news, a man named Melvin Nyayaro ran a Toronto Marathon dressed as a banana. A full Chiquita banana suit. And what's more? Banana Man registered an impressive half marathon time of one hour and 15 minutes and 35 seconds. Which led to the overword Twitter joke, oh yeah, but what were his splits? Thanks to Greg Kelly.

And on Friday, former NBAer Kobe Bryant witnessed a major car act. accident. TMZ had the footage of Bryant staying at the scene of the accident and being a mensch. He was directing traffic sitting in the intersection, waving his arms, bringing cars through. It was an overwork Twitter joke to write. No surprise here. Kobe Bryant is great at telling people to clear out. Thanks to Ken. Bear it for that one. If you clown Kobe Bryant, very lightly, very subtly. Congrats. You made the overword Twitter joke of the week. For over 115 years, Orris has been making purely mechanical watches in Holstein, Switzerland. Staying true to a rich heritage, Orris is one of the few Swiss watch companies to remain independently owned and operated.

And because of this independence, Orris has the freedom to follow its own path. They're focused on bringing change for the better, which means making choices that are ecologically, socially, and financially responsible. That includes ocean conservation and recycled plastic partnerships. Of course, that's along with Orris's century-long and change commitment to making inventive, high-functioning Swiss-made watches that serve a real purpose, and at prices that make sense,

the best possible watch for the money, comprised of four themes, diving, aviation, motorsport, and culture. Orris watches are made for everyday wear. Oris is a longtime favorite of people who know watches because of what they represent. It's always a great time to buy a new watch, but the holiday season is even quite possibly

the most perfect opportunity to give someone with a suave, watch, check out O-R-I-S-D-C-H slash press box to find the oris watch that matches your style. That's O-R-I-S-C-H-not-com slash press box.

All right, Dave, in the notebook dump. We've got, what's this, a Patriot scandal? I can't believe it. I can't believe what I'm reading here. It happened last Monday at a press conference. Bengel's head coach, Zach Taylor, was asked by Bengals radio analyst Dave Lapham

about whether, quote, the Patriots had a videographer up in the Bengals press box area working with an advanced scout that was taping video of the Bengals sideline during the Cincinnati Cleveland game. Taylor replied that he was aware there was an incident and the NFL was investigating. Well, later that day, the Patriots responded with the statement that said the organization's production crew

had been filming a video for their team website. See, the Pat's website has a series called Do Your Job. and what they were doing was apparently highlighting an advanced scout, right? So the Patriots are set to play the Bengals this last Sunday. The previous Sunday, they are at a Bengals game, apparently doing a documentary on an advanced scout. Okay. This, of course, could be read as a pre-planned excuse because in 2015, ESPN, Seth Wickersham, and Don Van Nata reported on a piece on SpyGate and Deflategate, found that the Patriots had recorded 40 games between, 2000 and 2007, and their cameraman were given excuses if they got caught. Quote, the Patriots videographers were told to look like media members, to tape over their

team logos or turn their sweatshirts inside out, to wear credentials that said Patriots TV or craft productions. Videographers were also given excuses for what to tell NFL security if they asked what they were doing. Tell them you're filming the quarterbacks or the kickers or footage for a team show. Then on Sunday, David Fox's Jay Glazer released footage of Bengal security. interrogating the Patriots video crew. Let's listen to that.

The piece you're filming on your advance scout? Yeah. Yeah. Come on, guys. I don't see the advance scout in this footage. No, it's not. We were trying to get some field perspective. My bad.

Let's make the feel. I'm the anti- Why you would think you could take that? I didn't know. I didn't know. but I can delete this right here for you. That's real dialogue. That sounds like we're going to be talking about bombshell in a minute.

That sounds like the made-for-TV movie version of the Pat scandal. Why do they cast like a guy from Brooklyn as the head of Bengal security? I'm telling you, you can't take this footage. You can't take this footage of the sidelines. I don't know if it's up to us to ascertain the Patriots' guilt or innocence. But I'm just amazed at this, that this keeps happening. And this, again, it feels like, it feels like somewhere at some higher being said, look, the Patriots are kind of walking ungainfully toward a number two seed.

If they don't make the Super Bowl, they're going to be in the conversation right up till the Super Bowl, right? All that is resolved. We need some content here. We need something to happen that will give Splore. sports writers, something to yell about and be mad about, and look what arrives. So this is basically like, they're sitting, yeah, these higher beings are sitting there, and they're like, can we have Tom Brady switch parties? Oh, wait, this isn't politics, this is sports. What can we do to keep people talking? Dr. Manhattan is sitting somewhere going,

what can, what can the humans do to entertain me? I know, a Patriot spying scandal. Anyway, go ahead. I mean, this is a weird, this is a weird one. only because this 100% validates every claim against the Patriots that has ever come before it is clear beyond any rational doubt that they have been doing this

continuously for well over a decade that this is part of their weekly weekend and weekout M.O. Tell me anything and about the Patriots that's related to this. I will believe it. But also,

just this sort of monotony being the exact same charge or a very similar charge before again being something that was reported and and apparently continue the fact that they had the brazenness to continue doing it makes it almost seem insignificant I don't even know how to explain it I just heard it and I was like yep okay now we know let's get on to next Sunday is it like the trump scandal thing where there's a diminishing rate of return I think so it also is I mean but there's also the going back to the, going back to the flip side, to have been caught doing this, to have been called out doing this in print,

to have everyone theoretically know that this is what's going on, for them to be pulling out these tricks again, and against the Bengals of all, I mean, it makes it so clear that this is a regular thing, and one has to wonder how necessary this is to their ongoing success. It is also very Trumpy in the sense that when there's a Patriot scandal, America is activated in this very obvious way.

everybody knows what to do, right? Just like when we had the Ukraine call, you know, MSNBC knows what to do, Sean Hannity knows what to do, Maggie Haberman knows what to do, you could say the same thing about a Patriot scandal. Bill knows what to do. W.E.I knows what to do. You know, the Patriots hater knows, Adam Schaefter knows, everybody knows what their roles are here.

And nothing just, nothing is a, full jobs program for sports writers like a Patriot scandal. That's what I guess that's what I'm amused by. We all, we all just snap into action. Well, and maybe my, I think a little bit of my lack of passion on the,

you know, sort of legalistic side is because I'm just sort of exhausted, but as soon as this story is floated, I'm exhausted by the conversation that I know verbatim what's about to happen, right? I mean, this whole, the whole back and forth is just sort of debilitating in a certain way.

But, yeah, I mean, if this had been, you know, if you spend a month overseas around another planet and you came back and you were like, and someone said this exact same thing happened and it was the Colts and they were kicked out of the NFL, you wouldn't be shocked by that ending of this story, right? That they had been like, that they had found that they had been recording the other team repeatedly for a decade despite warnings and punishments from the NFL. if this all came out at once and they were like, and the Colts franchise has been forced to shut down, that would almost seem like a reasonable penalty, right? Yeah.

I mean, but because it's the Patriots, because we've been here before, because we know that that is not going to be the end result, you know, you can almost just throw your hands up. If you have any funny Twitter jokes or strain pun headlines, send them to us. If you have any Patriots, take, send them to Bill. We're out.

That's it. Next topic. David, let's talk about bombshell. I saw two journalism movies. movies this weekend. I saw Richard Jewel and I saw Bob Shell. I'm all good with journalism movie. I want to I want I want I want to go back to Star Wars now. But let's talk about bombshell which is one I think is really pretty good way better than I thought it was. Whenever I see movies with people we know from real life played by actors, I immediately go, uh-oh,

I'm going to be in there for an hour and a half and I'm not going to believe this. You know, I'm just going to be looking and it's going to feel like a really bad. you know local satirical troop or something uh this one of course bombshell has charlie's therein playing mckelie and nicokegitman uh playing gretchen carlson john lithgo in some amazing makeup is roger ales all of fox news i want to ask you this to start off with are you interested in seeing a fox news movie at this point in the fox news as content saga No, I mean, but this is I guess kind of the right time of year for this to be coming around because this is the time of year where I see a bunch of movies on good faith from, as we've

discussed recently, good faith from smart movie viewers who see everything. Yeah, if somebody told me, if you told me this was a fantastic movie with fantastic performances and no matter what I thought I wouldn't regret seeing it, I'll go see it. It's funny, I was on the big picture today in an unprecedented ringer cross. Over event. And one thing I said there, which I'll repeat here, is the reason this movie is so watchable is because Charlize Theron is Megan Kelly. Oh, wow. To this, I mean, you've just seen the preview.

You know this a little bit. She looks exactly like her. She sounds exactly like her. I have not seen the movie, obviously, but I was looking around reading reviews online. And there's just one publicity photo with. Kidman and Margo Robbie and then it just like it's like Kidman Margo Robbie and wait that's not an actress right that's Megan Kelly like that's it's so even the photo is just sort of halting that is the feeling throughout the entire movie and I'm not talking about you know Christian Bale playing

Dick Cheney where you kind of get used to it and you're like oh that guy looks like Dick Cheney I'm talking about that you just think Megan Kelly is starring in her own life story and she actually posted I think on Instagram a picture of her son at the movie theater she took her son to see Frozen to do not take her son to see bombshell. And her son is staring at the bombshell poster. Like, mommy? That's mommy, right? Oh my God.

The other thing, so there's a couple of things about it. One, she looks like Megan Kelly. She talks like Megan Kelly. And the other thing about Charlie Starran and Manola Dargis noted this in her review in the Times, which I thought was very good, is that Megan Kelly is very self-contained and is very good at being, or was very good, I guess, to say now, at being a catchy cable news host without seeming like she was begging for you to like her or love her without being needy in that way. And Charlie Steron is exactly the same kind of actress. So she's able to get

across this quality of Megan Kellyness that's again, it's very hard to describe until you see the movie, but you're just like that, I just, I just thought that was her. You know, watching John Lithgow in gigantic makeup and heavy suit, whatever you want to call it. I could buy that as a plausible Roger Ailes. But the Kelly thing was amazing. You will also enjoy this, David, about the movie. They don't make a big deal out of Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, Geraldo, and all these other people from the Fox World, Fox News Universe.

But they're all in the movie, even for just like a scene. And it's somebody playing Bill O'Reilly who mostly has Bill O'Reilly's mannerisms or mostly looks like Sean Hannity. Uh-huh. And it's really, it's like a cameo. It's like watching the Muppets or something. You know, it's like, oh, there's that guy. That's kind of amazing. Uh-huh.

So that's another thing. I think the other thing about doing movies like this is, don't you feel we're in this, like, ripped from the headlines movie universe that feels a lot like when we were kids and movies like this would come out except they'd be on network TV. Oh yeah.

I mean, doesn't Richard Jule and this feel do you like movies that would have just run on like NBC on a Wednesday night when we were kids? And now we've somehow come to a place where they're either peak TV, quality TV

or their actual movies. Yeah, and with more and more movies coming to TV or coming to over-the-top networks, It's sort of shocking that these are the sorts of movies that end up in the theaters. But, yeah. Also, repeating myself from Big Picture, but reminder, and we have to remind ourselves with this on this podcast a lot of time, nobody watches Fox News or MSNBC or CNN, relatively speaking. It's a really tiny audience, but think how much ancillary stuff that has generated. A Gabe Sherman bestselling book.

Yeah. A billion news articles. a showtime series Another movie where Naomi Watts played Gretchen Carlson Which I'd already kind of forgotten That had that happened Was that the showtime series?

Is that same thing? I think so I'm getting all my Fox News Anyway Nobody watches it But here we are A big Christmas Oscar Beatty movie

directed by the director of Austin Powers All right It's time for David Schumaker Guess is a strain pun headline Ooh Okay Friday's headline

About the movie Richard Jule Was Jewel of Denial Jewel of denial. As usual, our listeners are funnier than we are. Michael Moynihan writes, the headline should have been Jewel Ayers.

E-R-R-S. Jewel. That's great. You know, we love simplicity here on the press box. Today's Strain Pond headline comes from David Reed. It's from The Guardian. It's not about politics in Britain. It's about wildlife. And I'll read you the subhead.

Thousands of penis fish appear on California beach. And if you dare, I have inserted a picture of the penis fish in the Google Doc. These are officially called fat innkeeper worms, but I don't want to get you down that track. Just think penis fish wash onto a beach. So get your euphemisms ready. And don't forget last week's big news from Great Britain. Okay.

what was the Guardian's strained pun headline? Last week's big news, okay, so This is kind of a two-parter here, but go ahead. Last week's big news was that the conservatives swept the parliamentary election. Yes. Correct? Correct. Dick

What on earth Could this be? Should I go through penis euphemisms and you stop me? There's so many this could be. Who was the name of that conservative leader? David. Oh, Boris Johnson?

Oh, Johnson. Oh, Johnson's sweep Pig Johnson Um Porous Johnson. Oh that's that's kind of funny. Uh,

uh, Johnson. Is it, is just a plan on his name? Oh, oh, um. Oh. When you win an election by a lot, you win a sweet. You, uh, landslide. Johnson landslide.

Oh my gosh. Is the penis fish headline. Johnson Landslide. Johnson Landslide. Somebody at the Guardians having a very good time. That's fantastic. Fantastic. He is David Shoemaker.

I'm Brian Curtis. Research by Chris Love Made a production magic by Jim Cunningham. We're back Thursday night, late night after the debate with more lukewarm takes about the media. See you then, David. See you later, Ryan. David? A man named David ran a Toronto Mirate. Dressed as a penis fish

A full Chiquita penis fish What do you think is a realistic Way that this comes out? Oh no Hey, I was a Weasel. It's true. I was a traitor.

It's true. I was a Geraldo So David, I turn it over to you. Should we join forces? Mommy? That's Mommy, right? Oh my God. I want to I want to go back to Star Wars now. And this is the last chance, David, the non-insane.

At the end of the day, this goes back to what I always say, which is never trusted dentist. Maybe I'm crazy. Well, that makes me feel better.