The Press Box - Trump and Ukraine; Bye Bye, De Blasio; and a New Buzz Bissinger Documentary | The Press Box

Episode Date: September 24, 2019

Bryan Curtis and David Shoemaker discuss the ongoing saga involving Donald Trump and Ukraine (03:00), the Overworked Twitter Joke of the Week (25:30), a 2020 election update (27:30), the latest twist in the Antonio Brown–Patriots breakup (34:15), the new documentary on Buzz Bissinger (43:15), and more. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Hey, it's Liz Kelly and welcome to the Ringer Podcast Network. As awards season continues to pick up through the fall, make sure you're subscribed to the Big Picture podcast with Sean Fennessey. He and Amanda Dobbins will cover everything you need to know about this fall's Oscar contenders, and Sean will be interviewing the industry's premier directors leading up to the awards. You can tune in and catch up on old episodes of The Big Picture on Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. David, the weekend's big story was a possible major scandal,

involving Donald Trump and Ukraine. What I want to know is, at what point did you realize it's called Ukraine and not the Ukraine? Now? Yeah, I was going to say two minutes before we went on air? Yeah. No, I've long known the correct name for said country, even though it's said incorrectly on just about every television network I ever watch. it's an interesting question though because there's a lot of that like usually usually it's the in our when we talk about these things you know it's a it's a word that that you don't say the

the thee and then someone comes over the top to correct you with the thee you know it's like someone's like it's like oh you went to Johns Hopkins it's like the Johns Hopkins University yeah it's like it's someone's like you have that people have to insist upon the the either that or it's just like the like your your dad is like wants to go to the Barnes and nobles or whatever, you know. I'm not sure which category. This is somehow the reverse of all that, although I guess that makes sense. It is sort of like an old-timey sort of usage to say the Ukraine, it turns out.

It was always the pendants from Ohio State, right? Who would go, the Ohio State University. And you thought it was just like a, you know, just one of those team things. And then you looked at them. It's like, oh, wait, it really is the Ohio State University. Oh, yeah. But not. But it's just Ukraine.

it's not it's not it's not there's not a trumpian the ukraine in front of it just you're gonna keep getting that wrong i hope everybody's prepared i want to i want to go ahead and i want to be one of those journalists who admits i didn't know this until a couple minutes before the podcast we're all supposed to seem knowing we're supposed to seem like we know everything and that we're you know we're kind of lecturing the uh the unenlightened humanity but i did not know this i look and thank god we looked it up and and by the way if there are any the ukrains in this podcast my apologies to everyone we are the media podcast of media podcast. This is the press box, a part of the Ringer podcast network.

Hello media consumers, Brian Curtis and David Shoemaker here. We've got a bunch of great stuff to get to today. We've got updates on the 2020 election, including hello to new Iowa frontrunner Elizabeth Warren and farewell to doomed mayor Bill de Blasio. We've got the latest twist in the Antonio Brown Media saga. An Australian journal gazes upon Donald Trump's incoherence and a new documentary about writer, extraordinary Buzz Bissinger. But David, I think we need to begin with Donald Trump and Ukraine. Last week, we talked about a secret whistleblower complaint that had been lodged against the president.

Now we know at least partially what the complaint contained because on July 25th, Trump pressed, and that is the verb of the week, by the way, pressed the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate any possible nefariousness involving the Ukrainian business dealings of Joe Biden's son, Hunter. Trump also referred Zelensky to his lawyer, Rudy Giuliani. And we know that part because Giuliani went on TV and admitted it. Here he is Friday with CNN's Chris Cuomo. Notice where Giuliani starts and where he ends up all in the span of a few seconds.

Did you ask the Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden? No, actually I didn't. I asked the Ukraine to investigate the allegations that there was interference in the election of 2016 by the Ukrainians for the benefit of Hillary Clinton, for which there already is a court finding. You never asked anything about Hunter Biden. You never asked anything about Joe Biden in his role with the prosecutor. The only thing I asked about Joe Biden is to get to the bottom of how it was that Lutsenko, who was appointed, dismissed the case against Anta. So you did ask Ukraine to look into Joe Biden? Of course I did. You just said you didn't. No, I didn't ask him to look into Joe Biden.

and they asked him to look at the allegations that related to my client, which tangentially involves Joe Biden in a massive bribery scheme, not unlike what he did in China. Rudy. You explained to me how the kid got $1.5 billion from China. I have no problem with you launching allegations. But just be careful about what you say. I asked you, did you ask you Ukraine to look at Joe Biden?

You said no. Then you went on to say that you did. Woo. Listener James Renwick notes that, it was an overworked Twitter joke to compare this to Jack Nicholson ordering the Code Red and a few good men. You're damn right, I order the Code Red. Yeah. Can we just take a moment before we get into what this story is actually about and appreciate Rudy Giuliani as television pundit?

Oh my gosh, please. Yeah, I mean, there was a piece in the New York Times by Annie Carney and Maggie Haberman. It's sort of hinted that he thinks he's doing this on purpose. like he when he goes on and delivers a totally bug nuts television performance, he thinks that that's the price to pay. He's going to look ridiculous on television. But the upside is that he can get these allegations out. He tells Carney and Haberman, I need a platform to get that out, meaning those allegations.

The platform requires them beating me over the head. He called his Ted-O-Tut with Chris Cuomo his, quote, best appearance on television. do we think Rudy Giuliani is is gaining yardage with this is pushing the ball down the field, pick your metaphor or do we think he's just being crazy? I mean, if you ask me as a very general proposition

if I thought Rudy Giuliani could go into one of these thinking no matter what happens, it's a positive I might be able to bite on that. It's really hard to imagine that what happened with Chris Cuomo was deliberate. I mean, that was planned out. But, you know, I mean, I'm sort of jumping ahead here,

but one of my biggest takeaways from this whole mess is that it's really starting to look like the Trump game, like get out of trouble, get out of jail-free game plan that we've joked about for, and in the past 100 controversies,

is really an existing game plan. I mean, it's a really formal, functional thing. And Rudy Giuliani acting the fool on some, you know, talk news show is kind of like a consistent bullet point in some of this game planning it would seem like. It does feel like we're going down a very predictable

track here. We don't even know the identity of the whistleblower nor does Donald Trump, but he's already described the whistleblower as partisan. You can feel the deep state part of this coming on. You can feel the, you know, he blames the deep state. Fox News

blames the deep state. The Democrats, David, will be gravely concerned about this. Mitt Romney is already gravely concerned about this. but then I'm sorry, but then nothing happens, right? I mean, I just feel like this, I feel like if I had to bet on this scandal becoming anything, I would short it right now, not because it's not serious and not because the Democrats shouldn't try to impeach Trump. But just, it just feels so familiar all these, all these moves, which I think is what you're saying. Yeah, this seems to be an enormously problematic abuse of power.

And I don't mean to belittle it at all. But one does wonder if this is, you know, if not just the Trump administration, but the kind of voting public is so weathered to these sort of exclamatory accusations about Trump that they were willing to let something like this slide, even when this is like, this is corruption 101, right? I mean, this is like the most baseline like, oh, okay, he did a thing that deserves to get him booted out of the White House. I like that corruption would be a college class. Did they teach Senate Baylor? No, it's Trump University. Oh, Trump University. Thank you. But, yeah, it's a, it does.

It does seem like it's going down a very traditional path. I think the only difference here is the way that, or not the only difference. Obviously, you can talk about matters of scale and of, you know, provable guilt and everything else. But I think on the, on the Democrat side, you see, you know, I mean, Adam Schiff can go out there and say this is the most, the most, you know, problematic thing, whatever that Trump's ever done. And it feels a little bit repetitive. But then you have like something, you have the Nancy Pelosi's of the party who, who have been doing such a, walking a fine line, dancing a fine line, if you will, about the, about the potential for impeachment proceedings that it really feels like they've all,

all of the people who are on the fence about impeachment have now kind of back themselves into a corner where they're being forced to say, if this is true, then yes, you know, we need to pursue impeachment. So maybe there's just a political, maybe there's just going to be a political, I mean, necessity to make for this to be a bigger deal than the things that have come before. I don't know. I don't know. The calendar sure does seem to be a big, you know, be playing a big role in Pelosi's, you know, line of thinking. Pelosi and Schiff had been very reluctant to go down impeachment road to this point. Pelosi's quote this week was, if the administration persists in blocking this whistleblower from disclosing to Congress a serious post. possible breach of constitutional duties by the president. They will be entering a grave new chapter of lawlessness, which will take us into a whole new stage of investigation. That's her sort of, I'm hinting an impeachment without saying the words impeachment. But I think I agree with you. And I think there's two things. One is, as you say, everybody is sort of saying, if this is true,

and then if we find out it is, or at least we get close, then they sort of have to follow through with what they said. I think this is the other kind of side door for the Democrats to go through here is if we can't get the whistleblower complaint, which Joseph McGuire, acting director of national intelligence is not willing to turn over. Or if we can't get the transcript of the call between President Trump and the Ukrainian president, then we don't have any choice. And there's no sign that either of those things are going to be forthcoming, by the way. The only way, the only way to proceed procedurally, if that's the word I'm looking for, is impeachment proceedings. That's it.

Because you're sort of saying, we need information here. We can't get any more information. There's no Mueller report we're waiting for coming down the line. So impeachment is one way to just sort of start the clock on that and try to get the documents we need, I guess. We do have to say that Trump said that they would consider releasing the transcript. And then immediately Mike Pompeo was on another channel saying then they're not going to do it. He loves teasing stuff like that. I don't know. I don't know why we wouldn't release the transcript than it never comes out. To take the the quote, the Pelosi quote that you read, I mean,

it's interesting that that, I mean, I don't know when that was. That must have been Friday or something that she released that statement because we're in a totally different world almost than when that was released because we're not just talking about the reluctance or the unwillingness of the White House to release a, to release a whistleblower complaint about which we know little or nothing. now the entire story seems to be out or a lot of the story. And we're not talking about one conversation with Ukraine, with the president of Ukraine, but eight or nine, you know, between Trump and the president that were, or Trump spokespeople that would, that were all pressing this, this, I mean, I'm reluctant to use the word cockamamie just because it's a funny word, but it's,

but, you know, this is like cockamamie Biden investigation. I mean, it does seem, it does seem like, I'm not sure that the number matters in some sort of like particularly deep way. I mean, I think it, you know, I think that it's fairly easy to imagine this just being a conspiracy theory be that Trump got in his bonnet and, you know, he just repeated it every time he got on the phone. But it does speak to the inability of the administration to do anything constructive, you know, or to do, I mean, to function in any kind of real way outside of this sort of. baseline corruption and and it's it's um i mean i don't know just i mean it just it this feels it's it seems almost like beside the point to to to kind of to break it down to little pieces but it does because it is this is corruption i mean this is a problem um but i think but i do but i but i anyway but to go back to your point i i think that um i think that you're right i mean i think

that there that we we know i mean so much of this information is leaked that that that uh it's going to be harder and harder for them to not, you know, to refuse to release this information because at some point they're just, you know, denying a thing that everybody knows. But then, you know, that does make the investigation a little bit more sure-footed, right? We know exactly what we're looking for. We just need to see it in print. Yeah, the unknown here, I think, is whether this, these pressuring the president in Ukraine was tied to the United States strange and still unexplained decision to suspend aid to the Ukraine, which happened quietly during. the summer and then was restored in the Trump administration. Last I checked does not have a theory of the case about why that had happened. Adam Schiffman, who as we mentioned earlier, said no explicit quid pro quo is necessary to betray your country, but that would certainly be an interesting fact to figure out and something that I have not seen reported yet. We should talk about a little bit, David, about Biden, because one thing team Biden is doing, and if you read in these kind of news stories, and they kind of come out right out and say it,

is that Biden is very, very worried about this becoming the but-her emails of 2020, where it's not a scandal, but it seems like something that Trump and his allies at Fox News can repeat over and over and over and muddy the waters enough that people go, oh, what's that thing about Biden in the Ukraine? Oh, Trump was corrupt with the Ukraine. Well, so was Biden. Let's call it a draw, which is essentially what happened to Hillary Clinton. And they've been sending explicit messages to the media saying, you are not behaving responsibly if every time you say this, you don't say, this was investigated and nothing came of this. This is not a, this is not a suspected impropriety.

This is no evidence of impropriety. Right. Robert Mackey and the Intercept had a good piece about this. Very, very long, very long. In the intercept? I can't imagine. Yeah. on this subject.

But I mean, the headline was reporters should stop helping Donald Trump spread lies about Joe Biden in Ukraine. And basically it says exactly what you said. But I think that this is another one of those times where the media is kind of caught flat foot in without the vocabulary maybe to deal with this. I mean, because it's not, this doesn't feel exactly

like a neat conspiracy theory. or at least it doesn't fit neatly into that definition, you know, because it is about real people doing real things and real repercussions and maybe it's just like the last little bit of it is up for argument or whatever else. But you're right. I mean, it does seem like if the point was just to make this, to turn this into the butter emails thing,

I mean, it feels like a success so far. I think that the, I mean, I think practically the only, the only kind of counter, the only argument against it, is the degree to which Trump does seem legitimately rattled by the whole thing, that he was not expected to be called out on this and that he continues to sort of, you know, I mean, he's not hiding from, he's speaking in the press and everything else, but it does seem like a little bit, I don't know, like, like he's intent on defending himself

when maybe just shrugging his shoulders would be, would be just as powerful. Well, I think what, I think what Biden is trying to do is trying to work different refs here. You know you're going to lose Fox News and the Federalist to Biden is corrupt in the Ukraine. But he's worried about losing the mainstream media, which Hillary feels she lost. She feels like they were working her emails hard because they were trying to do, and this is a familiar complaint about newspapers. They were trying to work both sides equally hard, even if there wasn't equal material on both sides to work hard. So Biden is saying New York Times and Washington Post, which by the way, have done stories about this, especially the New York Times, don't feel you have to lean into this because Donald Trump is saying you have to lean into this. You can say we've investigated it. We don't see anything there. And by the way, for those of it who don't know what this is about, Biden, when he was vice president, was pushing the Ukraine to fire what the U.S. thought was a corrupt prosecutor and used loan guarantees as the stick in that negotiation. The prosecutor was fired, but that prosecutor had been targeting a company that Hunter Biden, Joe Biden's son, was on the board of. That's what it is. And again, so, but he is just working different, he's working different referees to me. Yeah, I mean, I think to the specifics of the story that you just mentioned, I think that the biggest difficulty that Biden's going to have is that the story is not, and the story is just like a couple degrees too complicated for the average news consumer, right? I mean, it's, it's, it's, the point is that the person who you've never heard of,

who had a government position in Ukraine that got fired was actually not against Hunter Biden. I mean, it's one degree or two degrees too complicated. But I think as far as working the refsco, he's not just going to be working the Washington Post in the New York Times. I think the other thing you're seeing out there is that this has now become, I mean, maybe by necessity,

but the sort of main motivator in his campaign for the past day or two, right? I mean, he's just out there screaming at Donald Trump, yelling corruption. This is a thing, this is going to give him the platform to go toe to toe with the sitting president before, before the primary is over. And he's embracing it all. I mean, like I said, it's out of necessity, but he seems very eager for this fight. And I don't, do you think he secretly likes it? That was my next question for you. Yeah, I mean, I think he probably does. I think that this gives, this actually gives some purpose to his campaign that's not just like,

like, nagging other people's health care proposals. And I think that, it certainly gives him a chance to look like you can go toe to toe to with the president. I think that the flip side of it, I mean, the other half of that is like you really wish that this just seems like a, like a unforced error to like have your, for the party to have its number one, to have its frontrunner have family tied up in like the Ukrainian oil industry or whatever anyway in the first place, you know? I mean, it's like, I don't know that it's going to, I don't know that the actual, that the actual findings of guilt or innocence are going to be much less damning than like vice I mean then then then then

Biden's son has gotten rich investing in foreign countries that because of his dad's name is that disqualify as somebody pointed out this week is that disqualifying to be president because if it is I think I think it was Steve Mnuchin was on one of the Sunday shows and he said well you know you can't have people running around the world getting getting rich off the president you know the the the elected leader's name wait a minute That's Trump's kids. Trump also came out and said that of course, of course, Joe Biden knew about it because you always tell, because your son always tells his dad everything.

And that was his explicit defense against the, against the Trump Tower meeting accusations, that his son didn't tell him anything. I mean, it's, it is, I mean, it's not disqualifying. It's not at all. And I wouldn't make the case that it is. I mean, I think there's a lot of instances in which it would sure be beneficial to all parties to have someone, you know, to have Hunter Biden have that job, and I'm sure he's very good at it.

I guess what I'm trying to say is like the implications that they're trying to, what they're trying to kind of seed all over the electorate, that there's this sort of like vague, vague scent of corruption with the Biden family. I'm not sure that the finding of the Ukrainian government, one way or the other, is better or worse than just the actual, like, boring facts of the situation. I think that stench will still be there. I think that's right. I do think two things about Biden. One is that he's better, and this was noted a couple times this weekend, he's better when he's laying into Trump than when he's trying to deliver whatever message he's trying to

deliver on a daily basis. That is his best subject laying into Trump. And number two is that this is Biden's way of either explicitly or not explicitly or implicitly telling us all, these guys are afraid of me and they're more afraid of me than they are of the other candidates. They were willing to go to the president of Ukraine and do this, which is in that that shows something, right? I mean, that that does show now, whether that was just because Biden was the most obvious frontrunner that far out when this all started and all that stuff. But I think that it does in kind of an indirect way make Biden seem like the dangerous guy to Trump. Yeah, I mean, I do think that, I mean, obviously Trump has long been preoccupied with with the

Obama presidency, and I'm sure for a lot of reasons, you know, that we'll never know. He's particularly preoccupied with the notion of running against Joe Biden. I mean, he's always kind of been his target. And maybe you're right, because he's always been the most obvious candidate. So maybe it's that simple. I mean, this whole thing just seems, it's so bizarre that I start going into like trying to imagine the Trump galaxy brain of like, is he picking on Joe Biden because he explicitly does want to run against Joe Biden now? And now he's just drawing him out into public, you know and like it all seen it's all so crazy but i but i do think that he's i mean i do think that he's you know for whatever reason as a little obsession as a singular obsession with with

the with biden and um you know i mean it's this wouldn't be the first time that trump sort of uh rea oh try suddenly suddenly saw suddenly saw a crime or suddenly imagined a crime being committed by someone that he himself had been accused of right i mean this isn't the this wouldn't be the first time that I mean or even the 10th time. Yeah. So I mean and so there does seem to be a little bit of like you can start connecting a few of these dots. It's it feels like. I want to say something about

Volodomir Zelenskyy, president of Ukraine. This is the guy who was an actor in a TV show called Servant of the People where he played a high school teacher who became a viral superstar and then became president of Ukraine. And then this actor ran for and became president of Ukraine, based largely on the fame he had gained in the TV show.

So first of all, and I want you just listen to this little snippet from this report from May from Sky News, and tell me if this doesn't have anything in common with another media television-created superstar who might have become president of a major country. Belomier Zelensky arrived to his inauguration on foot. The crowds delighted with the man they've known for years as a comic touch on their TV screens. He stopped for selfies and high fives, jumping to kiss members of the public, true man of the people style stuff. The crowds chanting Zelensky as he took to the red carpet and strode with panache through the parliament. All the traditional trappings of office,

but an untraditional approach to politics, starting off with a rebuke to MPs. My election only proves that the citizens are tired of the experience politicians. who, over the past 28 years, created a country of opportunities, opportunities to steal, bribe, and loot. This is Trump. This is Ukrainian Trump. It's the same message. It's the same creation story. So if Trump is trying to get him to do something and do a favor,

Trump recognizes the type. It's incredible, is it not? Yeah. I mean, listen, if we're, I mean, I got to say, I would rather have, like, I would rather have, like, Kevin Klein after seeing Dave as our president than Donald Trump. Martin Sheen. It's hard. It's, yeah, I mean, I think that there's some other, I do think there's some better options out there. You couldn't see it on the video, but the president of Ukraine was doing the Lambo leap into the crowd as he arrived for his inauguration.

All right, David, time for us to leap into 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 the same. same time, send your nominees to at the press box pod where they are always gratefully received. This tweet came to us from the UK's Daily Express tabloid. Antarctica scientists find bizarre creature 3,500 meters under the ice. Quote, it's like nothing seen before. Okay? Say bizarre creature 3500 meters below the Antarctic ice.

It's like nothing we've seen before. It was an overworked Twitter joke to write, has no one watched any movie? ever. Thanks to Andrew Swofford for that one. I believe that we're specifically talking about out the mountains of madness, right? This is a long tradition. Pretty amazing. I love this one because of how subtle it is. A tweet from busted coverage last week reports, SUV drives through Illinois mall. Cops have guys in custody. And there's a picture of the SUV having crashed through the mall. See if you get this one. It was an overall or Twitter joke to write, guess he was on a mission from God.

Anybody? Jim? For me and the Lord. We've got an understanding. We're on a mission from God. That's from Jack tweets life. And by the way, that's before our generation, Brian, David, and Jim. So no one should feel better about that if you didn't get it.

Just when you thought we'd had our last blackface scandal for a while, here comes another one. Time magazine had the photo of Canadian people. am Justin Trudeau in, I guess it's Brownface in 2001 at an Arabian Knights event. In an apology, Trudeau admitted he also wore blackface while singing

Deo in high school. Where do these people go to school, by the way? It was a very overworked Twitter joke to write Justin Trudeau will never get on SNL now. Thanks to Kyle's beard for that one. If you forged a link between two

separate racist calamities, congrats. You made the overword Twitter joke. of the week. All right, time for the notebook dump. And let's do some 2020 updates. David, first off, that sound you here is the sound of a media narrative changing because on Saturday we got the new edition of the Iowa poll known as the gold standard of first in the nation caucus polling. The poll found that Elizabeth Warren was leading for the first time with 22 percent, Biden in a statistical tie behind her with 20 percent, Bernie Sanders, 11 percent, Buda Judge 9%.

Quoting the Des Moines Register article here in addition to the 22% who say Warren is their first choice for president, 20% say she is their second choice and another 29% say they are actively considering her. I guess my question

is here and it's one we sort of got into a little bit last week, but how do we think she's going to wear the crown of front runner in this race? And do we think it's going to be as smooth as the last couple of months have been for her when she is essentially still the insurgent who is gaining on Biden and all the polls? I mean, like I said last time, I think that the way that she wears the crown is to pretend she doesn't have the crown. I mean,

or at least, I mean, and again, like I said before, I think that that practically she can still, I mean, that she is fighting an uphill battle, right? I mean, until she opens up an incredibly wide lead until, and maybe until, you know, I mean, maybe never, because she's always going to be running against Donald Trump, you know, she can, she can maintain her sort of underdog posture. But, you know, I don't, I mean that to say that she's, that she can't fight from on top and that, and that she shouldn't, you know, have some, you know, relish and some triumph. I think that, I think that her message is such that she has to acknowledge where, you know, the successes that she, that she, that she's able to, to have. but but but it'll be it will be interesting to see what she does i mean i um you know i think it's more interesting to to kind of see if if if like the biden campaign you know pivot's hard to you know if they if they can function as a you know from working from

behind um i think elizabeth warren will will march ahead as if nothing has changed until until you know she's kind of forced to do otherwise that would be my guess yeah i just think we're going to see every, I think you're going to see every, you saw, you know, a little bit of Buttigieg, and I think Harris will probably bring something for it. I just think she'll, she will get a lot of scrutiny, you know, and I think she's kind of escaped it a little bit because people have just kind of basically been focusing a lot of attention on Biden. And I think she's going to get a little bit of that. And again, I just, I'm fascinated to see how she holds up to that. It may be fine. And as you say, she may just refuse to acknowledge it, but I think she's going

to have some work cut out for her on responding to attacks from other candidates. And that's not something she can really ignore. Yeah, I think so too. I mean, I guess there's obviously the element of actual investigation into her record into her past and everything. And I get there's a feeling that we've kind of already uncovered all the stones or whatever else that or whatever the phrase is that between her her senatorial campaign that that, you know, gave us the contemptible Pocahontas moniker from Trump and the, and the recent, where was that piece about her? all the money that she's made. Right. Was that a Washington Post piece or something?

But that, you know, that, you know, those investigations have already, have already occurred and that there's probably nothing damning to come out. But, you know, there is, I guess there is that possibility. She will definitely, or somebody in her campaign will use the phrase, this is old news at some point. You're definitely right about that. A candidate not named as the first or second choice by even one person in the Iowa poll. Not one percent, one person was New York mayor, Bill. de Blasio, who dropped out on Friday. You and I talked about how Beto O'Rourke seemed more like a podcast than a presidential

campaign. De Blasio seemed more like a Morning Joe segment than a presidential campaign. And he, in fact, did go on Morning Joe on Friday. It went about like you'd expect, it's too early to endorse anyone. The structure of the debate suck. Blah, blah, blah. He was asked if he regretted being in Iowa on July 13th instead of in New York when the city had a blackout, listen to.

is answered to that. We talked about it right here. I mean, that blackout, our team did an amazing job. Our first responders, it was over in five hours. Not a single person got hurt. So I'm very proud of the city of New York. All the people work for the city of New York. They did exactly what they were trained to do. But of course, you're right to say, you know, you go out there, you never know what you're going to be confronted with. And chief executives have a different standard that we're held to, which is right. But the irony is, if you're talking about who would be president of the United States. I still believe there's a lot to be said for a chief executive, but it's actually really hard for a chief executive to have the time and also to be held to

a consistent standard with folks who don't have anything to run. That's just a reality. So I guess the point there is, is Amy Klobuchar doesn't have to deal with blackouts in Minnesota, but I do in New York City. So therefore, it's harder for me to run for president than it is for her. or something. Anyway, that was just something out there. I don't know if that's... I will say that.

I mean, my take away from that, from his, you know, kind of concession or whatever in Morning Joe is that was his, for all of that,

it was his best public appearance of his campaign. Admittedly low bar, but yes. I'm very low bar, but he does seem to sort of, he can fill up a small room,

but he gets really lost in a big one. I love that. That needs to be on the bumper sticker. De Blasia, 20-20, he could fill up a small room. That's great. And by the way,

Before we get out of this segment, you mentioned that Better Work felt like a podcast. He was on our boss Bill Simmons podcast. He did. He was. Last week. He was a podcast. And yeah, he was a podcast. And one really, and I thought that the one really salient point that we're kind of always dancing around is when do the numbers start dwindling. And I think it's a little bit of a two horse racey to spend a lot of time on. But he pretty explicitly said, you know, that's the number of people running for, you know, going to be winnowed down by the prize.

it's going to be winnowed down by the major primaries, you know? And I think that him saying that does sort of like plant the flag, like we probably shouldn't count on the pack getting too much smaller, you know, prior to obviously Iowa, New Hampshire and then even South Carolina. At which point it will get rapidly smaller. Let's talk a little bit about Antonio Brown. The wide receiver played his first game with the New England Patriots on September 15th. And after that Sports Illustrated released a story on Brown detailing,

numerous instances of him refusing to pay employees for various services and one incident of alleged sexual harassment. That incident which occurred in 2017 involved Brown approaching a woman he had hired to paint a mural in his home. Writer Robert Clemco writes, I was about, quotes are saying I was about 40% done on the second day and I'm on my knees painting the bottom and he walks up to me butt ass naked with a handcloth covering his penis and starts having a conversation with me. S.I also reported that two days after their initial story, Brown sent intimidating text to the woman that included pictures of her children. That is chilling. The text, which were sent to a group of five people, included the woman, also asked somebody named Eric B. to look up the woman's background history. Brown's lawyer, Darren Heitner, who was also included on the thread, but did not respond to any messages. Heitner tells SI he had not advised Brown to communicate with the woman. In the process of reporting the story, Robert, Clemcoe called Antonio Brown. He described their interaction in a tweet

this way. A man who sounded like A. B answered, I introduced myself. He hung up. In a text, I asked him if he would share proof of his claim that the woman had asked him for money. He replied F-O-H clown. So that's that.

Later that day, the Patriots released to Brown. It's kind of amazing that he played one game there at all, by the way. Then we got the semi- amusing slash disturbing part of this, which was the New England Patriots trying to avoid

questions about Brown, particularly Bill Belichick, their head coach did not deal well with this. On Friday, he walked out of a press conference after saying he would only answer football-related questions. And then on Sunday, after being asked by CBS's

Dana Jacobson about Brown, Belichick stared her down before leaving the interview. Let's listen to a little audio from that. I think I'd be remiss if I didn't ask what was the final straw with Antonio Brown? Yeah, we're focused on the Jets today. Thank you, coach. Must be seen in video too, truly appreciated.

Mm-hmm. A couple media notes for you, David. We'll leave the analysis to the boys over on the Ringer NFL show. But one is well done by Robert Clemco over at SI, who really pushed this story. We've talked about the trickiness on various episodes of her. these kinds of stories. He delivered a very locked down story that got the wheels in motion. I think the wheels are probably already in motion at the NFL investigating Antonio

Brown, but certainly got the wheels in motion to continue the story. The other thing is Belichick, which is, and a lot of people pointed this out on Twitter, but you're comfortable signing this guy, given everything that's gone on. You were comfortable, and let's say you didn't know about the sexual assault allegation. right? That came out after he'd sign with the Patriots, if my timeline is correct. But you were comfortable playing him after that allegation had come out. You were comfortable putting him on the field, but then you're never comfortable answering even a single question about it. If we just want to talk about, I mean, I hate to say a press critic word like lack of accountability, but if we want to

talk about lack of accountability, that's just incredible. How do you not answer a single question? it. Yeah. I mean, just didn't even, you just can't even mumble anything. We just, we, I will not talk about this guy that we signed, that we played after this allegation came to light, and then just, and then released. Oh, we won't talk about them at all. Yeah. I feel like the institutional feeling within the Patriots organization that everyone's out to get them certainly inform some of those decisions, right? I mean, the, the, the idea that that from which, when they were caught filming play. I mean, I don't even know what the, what the, what the, what the,

what the, what the, what the, what the, what the, what the, but, uh, but the feeling that,

that, that, you know, they're under greater scrutiny than everybody else certainly does, have something to do with the way that Belichick reacted. But you're right. I mean, it's, it's, it's sort of,

it's sort of wild that there's not even a, you know, there's not even a sort of pro forma explanation or, or at least, you know, an acknowledgement that this thing exists that this, that this happened, you know? I mean,

it's, The whole thing is just very strange. Tom, Tom Brady went on a radio show and just talked in like, oddball circles about the love he asked for his teammates in response to some questions about this. I mean,

I know they're focused on football. That'll be the answer. But like, I mean, it just really feels like, I don't know how you could, this could happen and just you'd be so utterly unprepared to say one word about it. Or maybe you're just prepared to say no words about it.

I mean, I think with Belichick and that's, that's part of this. just don't. It's striking. And people have talked about trying to make the, you know, the distinction between you have the right not to answer a question. But when you stare down a reporter, give the what was called the death stare on Twitter to the reporter. That's somehow the line. I'm not sure I really see the difference between those two things. I mean, one is certainly more like, you know, weirder and more threatening than the other. But, but they're both unacceptable. They really are both

unacceptable. And you should absolutely have answers to the questions. And, you know, this is not the first time I've been down this road. It's not the first time any, by the way, any NFL team has been down this road. And, you know, anyway, it is strange. I have down here a topic on Australian gazes at Donald Trump. I don't know if you read this piece about Trump in the Guardian on Friday, David, by Lenore Taylor, who is the editor of the Guardian, Australia. With outside eyes, she brings up a great point. Taylor says, look, in Australia, we get all the nutty Trump news. We get the same stuff you do. I thought we knew everything. But she writes, watching a full Trump presidential Trump press conference while visiting the U.S. this week, I realized how much the reporting of Trump necessarily edits and parses his words to force it into sequential paragraphs or impose meaning where it is difficult to detect. Taylor was in New York City and she happened to watch a Trump press conference on TV. from the border crossing over there at Ote Mesa. She said, I'd understood the dilemma of normalizing Trump's ideas and policies,

the racism, misogyny, and demonization of the free press. But watching just one press conference from Ote Mesa helped me understand how the process of reporting about this president can mask and normalize his full and alarming incoherence. The sentences just don't add up to anything and are often sound like that Rudy Giuliani appearance on Chris Cuomo. And I guess, you know, again, you know, as I like to say on here, you're undefeated when you criticize the media for doing anything. Right. But have we collectively talked about the fact enough or have we been distracted from the fact that Trump often sounds Biden-esque or sub-Biden when he is trying to put a point together in public? And has that gotten, and of all the things the media has done an excellent job about and talk. talking about Trump, has that gotten enough attention?

Maybe not. I mean, maybe not. I mean, I think that it's a, I think that when he's sort of, if he's terribly incoherent at times, I think the times where he's more conventionally coherent, his rallies, we see a lot of those, generally talking to reporters, but not a lot. I mean, it does seem like there's enough to sort of pick on when he's being more, when he's on the more coherent side, that it doesn't seem necessary to, you know, to, to go in on the others, but it doesn't get a lot of coverage.

I mean, I guess if you're, it's, I think that, I don't know, maybe, maybe we've all spooked ourselves from from feeling like we're going down some like another Trump impeachment conspiracy hole or something to over, to spend too much time staring at his lack of verbal acuity. Yeah. And it may be that you, what you said, and I think this is probably a pretty familiar critique of Trump is there's just a lot of, there's a lot of red meat over on this side. So why would you, but I remember, you know, Gawker, RIP or or post Gawker talking a lot about this is why aren't we just talking about the fact that Trump has trouble completing sentences?

And if Biden's, you know, ability to string words together and, you know, follow the plot of American politics is in question. Why isn't Donald Trump's? And that seems like a, that seems like a fine question to me to ask. Yeah, I agree. And it's funny because, again, it's not that it hasn't been written here. But I just think it gets so little attention compared to some of the other things we talk about Trump. I want to talk to you about the movies, David. I went to the movies last night here in Southern California.

I bought a ticket. I bought some popcorn. And the guy at the counter says, just a heads up, you may be the only one in the theater. I was. The movie I went to see was a new documentary about Buzz Bissinger directed by Andrew Shea. It's called Buzz. It has gotten very little promotion. The theater guy told me he couldn't.

even get a poster for it. And my mother-in-law had noticed it in a single line in the newspaper. As far as I know, it got a little festival play, but that's about as much as I've seen about it. Buzz is not what I would call a great documentary. But if you're a fan of Buzz Bissinger joints like Friday Night Lights and the article that became shattered glass, and I know that you are, David, on both counts. Yeah. And are generally fascinated by Buzz Bissinger, the person. I would recommend checking this out because there is a lot of amazing material in it. we begin the movie with Bissinger writing not some amazing piece of journalism or one of his own books, but writing Caitlin Jenner's memoir. Because as he explains on screen, I needed the fucking money. And there are these amazing scenes of Bissinger and Jenner sitting there in Malibu. And Bissinger is reading the manuscript of this memoir he's written, ghost written.

and he will read aloud a really good, well-written, well-turned passage, and Jenner will edit him, saying, well, what if we played with that metaphor a little bit? You know, what if we, you know, what if we actually, you've written a nice sentence there, but what if we actually turn that 30 degrees and did something else with it? You can see on Bissinger's face the idea that, you know, this non-fiction, this is kind of amazing non-fiction writer is being edited by a celebrity is a pretty amazing, pretty amazing scene. Wow. Yeah, we hear, and again, he needs the money. We'll explain why in just a second. We hear from Graydon Carter and Bob Costas about Bissinger, the writer. But the movie is really about his life.

As he's writing Jenner's book, he's on this journey of self-discovery of his own. As he's written before, he enjoys wearing women's clothes, which he says gives him a sexual rush. He's been experimenting with S&M. We see video evidence of this in the movie. We hear from Bissinger's wife, who's trying to figure out what their marriage is now like. she says, and this is a quote, Buzz is a complete narcissist unless his kids are involved.

She wonders if Buzz is a happy place as being oninistic. Buzz says, maybe I want to fuck myself. That is his summation of his sexuality. Yeah. And I want to stress this because this all sounds like, whoa, the material is not quite shaped into a totally

satisfying documentary. And maybe that's by necessity because as Bissinger admits in the doc, he himself is a little unresolved. He's trying to figure out his happiness. He's trying to figure out his place. And by the end of the movie, his marriage is over, but he still seems like he's trying, he's on this journey. But there is a just a ton of fascinating material here. So check out Buzz if you can find it anywhere. And the one thing I'll leave you with David is I love seeing, I love hearing about what writers use as tricks to psych themselves up when they're, you know, alone and about to starting a reporting assignment.

I'm sure you have your tricks. I have mine, which I will never share because who would, who could actually care. But one thing Bissinger says is whenever he's about ready to do an assignment, he says, Showtime. That's his thing. It's almost like a Batman villain, you know, like a, like a Joel Schumacher Batman villain. Showtime. And you see him doing this in the movies.

Like he's ascending the stairs at Jenner's house. and he says, showtime. Like, I'm about to, I'm about to become a reporter. And, you know, having experienced him mostly just through reading his stuff, I've never spoken to him, that is exactly what I would think Buzz Bessoncher would be like. Because he is such a performer on the page. And if anything in this doc to me was kind of unsatisfying, it looked like he was performing for the camera a little bit rather than just doing interviews.

But it was just, anyway, I just thought that was. funny. Showtime. And that could be the Buzz Bissinger story sometime. It will be rewritten or re-recorded. And I think that should be the title. One more note for you before we do headlines. You know the streaming player Roku. Yeah.

According to Market Watch's Tommy Kilgore, their stock fell 19% on Friday. And nearly 25% last week on news that Comcast is going to give you a free player if you buy Internet service. Kilgore of MarketWatch writes on Friday, pivotal research. analyst Jeff Woldersack, I think I'm saying that right, sent a note to clients titled Is Roku Broku? Now, without knowing who Pivotal Research Analyst Jeff Voldersak is, do you think he had been saving that line for a long time?

Is Roku Broku? Oh my gosh, that takes so much work. Do I think he's been sent? Is that the last thing? Yeah, let me ask it this way. How long has Jeff Voldersack of pivotal research been sitting on that line? Oh, God. I assume for a few years.

Yeah. It was picked up by MarketWatch, the Hollywood Report of New York Post, Street Insider, Business, Forbes, Fidelity.com and The Motley Fool. So mission accomplished Jeff Voldersack. I looked him up. He has been brought in as an expert quote on subjects like HBO, Netflix, and Sirius XM. Anyway, thanks to Ev Jr. for pointing that out. is Roku Broku.

One of the, I don't know. It's not even really a strain pun. It's just kind of nothing. All right, David. It's time for David Chewmaker, guess this is a strain pun headline. I'm here, David's size,

but really loves this feature. Friday's headline was, Alas, poor Couric. John Fogd sent this one in. It's also from the Guardian, from their Friday news briefing, which was written by Alison Rourke. The briefing this last week included

the news of 16-year-old old environmental activist Greta Thunberg would address a rally at the United Nations Climate Summit in New York. You can put aside David all the details about the location and even the summit itself, but I need a headline about Greta Thunberg and her, you know, Menchy campaign more generally. Okay. What was the Guardian's strained pun headline? It's just about Greta Thunberg. It could be about any of her minchiness general. Minchiness.

Is it climate? Is that what I'm more using here? No. Environment green. Greta. More like, more like, I'm really dancing around the word here. more like, you know, happy effects on society. Positive effects.

I have no idea. I can tell that Chris just saw this. What if Greta is a stand-in... Oh, for better? Or... Greta days ahead? Yeah. I was going to say, a stand-in for greater.

Oh, Greta things to come? Great... Yeah, we're getting there. We're about to put David out of his misery. What is it? I have no idea. For the Greta good. For the Greta good. Simple yet tough.

It is. Simple yet tough. Yeah. It is. For the Greta good. Thank you, the Guardian for that one. He is David Shoemaker. I'm Brian Curtis. Research by Chris Almeida. Production Magic by Jim Cunningham. Yeah. We're back Friday, bright and early with more lukewarm takes about the media. See you then, David. See you later, man.

David Oh yeah I went to the movies last night Here in Southern California I bought a ticket I bought some popcorn And the guy at the counter says We're about to put David out of his misery

Blah blah blah Where was that? Guess he was on a mission from God I mean this is a problem Must be seen in video Too truly appreciated Just a heads up I'm about to become a Batman villain

Was that a I need the fucking money. I just, it's incredible, is it not? Yeah. I mean, listen, and we think he secretly likes it. That was my next question for you. Yeah, I think, I mean, I think he probably does. And that seems like a fine question to me to ask. Yeah, I agree. Bug Nuts.