Check out Reason’s recent smear campaign on RFK Jr. by Liz Wolfe. Their primary donor is likely Charles Koch who RFK once said should be in prison. Shocker he was targeted by Reason and in my mind they are no different than legacy media. Look into Donor Trust the primary funder of this think tank.
Baseless slurs and transparent attempts at character assassination are the issue, not disagreements. If we had actual, intelligent criticism of politicians in our media, RFK Jr.’s candidacy might not be so necessary.
Every bullet point that she has is slight of hand simplification of a complex issue. We could just go down the line each one, Ive already covered reasons attempt at “correcting” him on vaccine safety trials which only proved RFK correct on the lack of pre licensing safety trials for vaccines. Her idiotic response “the FDA has to much testing.” All the testing in the world doesn’t matter when its corrupted by the pharma companies, a major part of RFK’s platform that was never discussed.
Wolfe also said RFK is anti Nuclear for ex. His position is that he doesn’t think the free market would sustain nuclear https://twitter.com/night__ryder/status/1679104267032961026/mediaViewer?currentTweet=1679104267032961026¤tTweetUser=night__ryder even if he’s wrong about nuclear, Reason should address the actual stance and try to debunk him. Of course Wolfe Didnt even attempt to. Wolfe just painted him as a crazed environmentalist. Which is also wrong RFK evolved his stance on carbon and realized that forcing carbon standards on the public is a scam.
Theres a difference between disagreeing and conducting a gotcha interview where you ignore and quickly move on when rebutted. Thats what reason did and it appears to be your tactic as well. You came saying “ O so no one can disagree with RFK Now?” No one is saying that, just you. Classic strawman.
Hah. How? How is it a strawman? They disagreed with him and questioned some of his past statements. Where's the strawman? So if I confront someone's stated political beliefs with other data then it's automatically some sort of vile attack?
What do you want, everyone to give him a softball interview where he knows all of the questions in advance?
Again, this is your statement and its a straw man... “if I confront someone's stated political beliefs with other data then it's automatically some sort of vile attack?”
A straw man is a logical fallacy that involves distorting an opposing position into an extreme version of itself and then arguing against that extreme version
I didn't ask you to define a strawman, I asked how is what I said a strawman? What makes you think it is appropriate to attempt to cancel someone over someone's misgivings about many of RFJ Jr's positions? I have many myself.
They could have given him more time to explain himself, I agree with that. However, I just don't see how my previous statements differ from reality or are some kind of strawman.
At the end of the day you just didn't like the way they conducted their interview, and you don't like what they said.
Then you go on to call Nick a bunch of names instead of even trying to point out a single thing that you think they got wrong in the interview, which I might even agree with you on if you bothered.
Yes I’m undecided too, but do realize if anyone’s character is to be addressed in this moment, it is the man in the WH, but that was somehow off limits.
I was pretty surprised to hear they were going after RFK, because my only other exposure had been through Robbie Soave on Rising who’s always seemed like a good egg, as libertarians go
Be interested to hear what he thinks about the RFK smear
These people complaining about Reason are literally as bad as the establishment dems, because if you disagree with their cult idol you're automatically a bad person/publication.
Could Reason have been a bit more delicate with that interview? Sure, but these people just want to cancel them.
Im mentioning the hit piece by Liz Wolfe. Its full of bad faith arguments and smears. Very poor form from reason no matter how you cut it and many people have debunked the video.
You make a good point. Cognitive dissonance affects all of us to varying degrees. We can notice it far better with other people than ourselves. Thanks for your comment Malahini.
I don’t watch Reason TV, I only read their publications in print or on their app. I have met Robbie and he is a stand up guy. I concur with your spot on take of the complainers. I’ve examined the thought process of people like the Reason haters. It goes something like this; Let’s say a scientist says there is no life on the Moon. It's environment can't support life as we know it. These people will immediately search for not just a contrarian point of view but the most absurd and crazy motive driven nonsense possible. If you don't agree with them it must be because you are not worthy of wearing the secret decoder ring of outlandish truths. Jimmy Dore/Nick G. I'm sure if given a choice Matt is gonna hang with Nick.
Robbie Suave is fine, but hes only a part time contributor so idk why you act like he directs reason. Nick Gillespie seems to have most influence there and is fat better example of Reason being a fake libertarian org. Hes pretty tame as far as libertarians go. I would call Reason a “Beltway Libertarian” tax haven for people like Charles Koch to send 501c nonprofit write offs to. They rarely ever stray to far from the mainstream, they still think covid vaccines were an overall success.
I love the Kochs because I love prosperity and liberty. I don't believe in the all-in, all-out philosophy on vaccines. I think it would be wise for someone like me, over 70, with no spleen and asthma. I believe childhood vaccines are a crime. So, if the Reason crowd are Beltway Libertarians, where do the real Libertarians get their fix? Maybe we should just keep reading Atlas over and over? I don't need perfect political or media alignment. Reason recently moved from Cali to the Beltway. I would rather have them there than Cali. They will try and move the needle more in my direction than most entities and that's good enough for me. I'm not going to sacrifice the good for the perfect.
I find RFK refreshing and brave considering his party affiliation but not worthy of adulation.
I am very favorable to RFK, and would vote for him if he and Trump were tied or close. One thing I’ve learned is never to throw away a vote, and more than that to choose the man for the times. Trump recognizes that we are a nation in decline, and it makes him angry enough to change it. It was his Announcement speech for 2024. That is his finger on the pulse. Does Bobby? I haven’t heard it yet. But voting for Bobby Kennedy’s son (the only real Democrat left).
Yep was paired with an interview they did with him where they spent a lot of time making it very clear they personally thought he was wrong about vaccines, but were not interested in hearing his reasons.
RFK Jr. is doing his own marginalizing- and has been doing it for quite a long time- with no assistance from Reason magazine required. I'd like to think otherwise, but there's entirely too much foot-in-mouth disease going on there for me to take Bobby Jr. seriously as a Presidential candidate.
The more controversial or unorthodox a position, the more important it is to watch how you say what you say- especially as a presidential candidate. I watched Republican Governor George Romney's presidential ambitions get deep-sixed in 1968, based on one unwise choice of words about his thoughts on the Vietnam issue. The prestige news media went after Romney like a pack of piranhas. Both the Democrats and the Republicans already have enough unscripted flights of unguarded rhetorical flourishes from RFK Jr. to Romney him out of the race, 10 times over.
The American Legacy Media is so presently so stuporous that approximately 100% of their focus on possible GOP nominees is either directed at Ron DeSantis or Donald Trump. Have they put any thought into considering who else might be throwing their hat into the ring there?
My current favorite for Republican nominee is Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin, anti-Woke grandstander, former Carlyle Group co-CEO, and all-around neo-Reaganite1980s revivalist (don't expect Virginia to legalize a commercial cannabis market on HIS watch, despite the fact that marijuana been legalized by the legislature.) Youngkin has The Look.
Youngkin also has plenty of his own money- $440 million. He has the Connections where he made that money, to both The Swamp and the RNC. No risk of outsider loose cannon independent opinions there- Youngkin can be counted on to stick with the mainstream of right-leaning Beltway Establishment opinion on everything from more aid for the Ukraine War, to the cynical fossil fuels status quo, to maintaining the surveillance state and ramping up the War on Drugs (just as the hard drug epidemic is burning itself out on its own, according to recent surveys of illicit drugs use among teenagers.) Take America Back To The Future Again!
And 90% the Trump-leaning Republicans out there will fall for Youngkin's empty suit like a sack of potatoes, as long as he keeps his focus on attacking the Democratic Party. Especially if his speeches have enough well-crafted applause lines. And, well, is there a Democratic Party candidate capable of meeting that challenge? Because it remains clear that politics American style continues to be a personality pageant, not about issues. It won't even matter if the economy stays strong in 2024, if Youngkin can sell himself hard enough.
Youngkin, Republican nominee for president in 2024. That's my early line. If I'm right, you heard it here first.
As for the Democrats, the American Prestige Media are in pretty much total agreement that Joe Biden will be the 2024 nominee of the Democratic Party. An easy conclusion to assert- because, well, who else is there? If you're having trouble coming up with other names, then that's how thin the Democratic Party bench is right now.
Highly doubt Youngkin will run this cycle.. Hes practically obscure outside Va and he said hes not running multiple times. RFK has foot in mouth disease? Mmm sounds like you got a mainstream brainwashing yourself.
Youngkin is not at all obscure within the precincts of online Trump Republican media outlets, which is sufficient for the foundation of name/face recognition required to gain the momentum required to win the GOP nomination. Due to the preeminence of electronic media, we're in a very fast-moving age these days; I saw Arnold Schwarzenegger get elected as California governor two months after he announced. And that was two decades ago. I don't think Presidential candidacies can be run on three-month notice, but this era is made for the dark horse candidate who comes out of nowhere to win the whole thing. Provided that they have an ample supply of money to fuel a breakout candidacy, of course, which Youngkin does. (As for his denials about an interest in running, they're no less worthless than the demurrals of any other ambitious politician.)
And, no, I don't think I'm a victim of "media brainwashing" to realize that some rhetorical tropes are overused, hyperbolic, and incidentally easily manipulated out of context by political adversaries. Nobody has any business using "covid" and "targeted" in the same sentence, much less alluding to specific ethnic groups either (possibly) being targeted or (a small group with an ethnic affinity) (possibly) doing the targeting. In that respect, the pairs of named examples were particularly egregious, within a narrative frame upheld by nothing more than insinuation.
If RFK Jr. wants to do a teach-in on the historical example of apartheid-era South Africa and Israel collaborating on researching ethnically targeted bioweapons, he'll be presenting most Americans with an unacceptably steep learning curve; even if RFK Jr. devotes his entire campaign to addressing the subject, few of them will be up to speed on it by November 2024. And that information would still have nothing to do with the impacts of SARS-Cov-2 or the response by the Xi/CCP regime running the PRC, a nation that suffered some drastically adverse impacts from a virus that originated and spread from within their own borders. (One would think that an intentionally targeted virus would have at least been first released on a different continent.)
An American political campaign is not the trial of Socrates; it's worse. We know what happened to Socrates, but at least he was allowed an opportunity for his own defense summary before the court of opinion. RFK Jr. is not going to get that opportunity in a televised presidential debate.
Yes. But Marianne Williamson, who is quoted in the article, gets what he did wrong. Which is my point. No presidential candidate has the energy to waste on climbing down, clarifying, battling against misinterpretations, etc. over avoidable gaffes of their own making. And a handful of ill-spoken, imprecise words has a longevity in the public mind that far outweighs someone's best words, or even their most praiseworthy actions. From "clinging to guns and religion", to "basket of deplorables", to "fine people on both sides", soundbite gaffes have an enduring quality that's capable of overshadowing political careers. Smart political leaders need to keep their mouths shut. Or at least stay away from examples and metaphors prone to malfunctioning like a short circuit wiring trace. RFK Jr. already has too much of a record of those hyperbolic references and clouded inferences, in my non-brainwashed estimation.
Thanks for the clarifying thoughts even though I still disagree. RFK is doing nothing but long form interviews on topics with steep learning curves and people seem to be responding positively.
Sound bites didn’t work on Trump and it wont work on RFK. They are doing to RFK what they tried to do with Trump, ei. take his word out of context, and paint him as racist. If anything they emboldened Trump supporters and helped him win. They also dont have a clean sound bite on RFK , its a complicated video taken out of context, the public is probably hardly aware of it. The whole topic will be gone in wind of the news cycle by next week.
The debates are over for Biden anyway, his admin said they will not even debate Trump in 2024. All these comparisons are getting a bit convoluted, its more about the message than it is about electoral politics and with RFK. As per polling It seems about 30% of the electorate seem to like his message and thats more than you need to command power in the process as a alternative candidate.
Good luck with that Youngkin bet, a wild parlay at best.
"The whole topic will be gone in wind of the news cycle by next week."
RFK's political adversaries can re-introduce and highlight that record any time they find it most advantageous to do so. The vaccine debate is Drama, and the news media love that shit. Same with all third-rail "ethnic controversies"; nowadays, all the media- including the "prestige media"- need is an excuse to name-check any of those constituencies, and it's on.
I'd like long-form interviews- and ongoing debate forums- to be key to any political campaign. But I'd like C-Span to be the most popular news network, too, and the American audience simply refuses to go along with that.
RFK Jr. also has an inherent problem on covid and vaccine issues: he's a trial lawyer without a medical background, who hasn't let that stop him from being outspoken on medical topics. Far better to leave that debate to medical professionals willing and able to support his views on the subject. On his own, he's on shaky ground, and not the person to lead that charge without immediate and openly vocal support from physicians willing to back him up. Moreover, if RFK Jr.'s campaign takes on a primary aspect of "Mercola vs. the CDC", he's bitten off more than he can chew.
They can try bringing that up, its an overly complex issue with an unclear shakey sound bite. Its no “grab em by the pussy.” MSM has less lof an audience/ratings compared to even last cycle. We are really venturing into new territory in terms of who American audiences trust. Tucker Carlson and Joe Rogan have more sway than CNN and MSNBC.
As for the appeal that only doctors can talk about medicine, not only do I find the notion wrong headed, I find it amazing that after covid people like yourself still make general appeals to experts and science as if an impenetrable monolith of truth. Truly baffling.
I'm with you, Dan. "Reason" is dedicated to rationalizing the ongoing destruction of politics as a vehicle for maintaining fairness and decency in a capitalist country that is turning more fascist by the day not because of the MAGA crowd but because, as Sohrab Ahmari argues in his new book (coming August 17) "Tyranny, How Private Power Crushed American Liberty—and What to do About It," politics is dead in America. What passes for politics is a bunch of bought (not elected) officials behaving like clowns in a circus, I guess so as to add to the endless distractions our consuming society offers to keep truth (the yawning wealth gap, the homicides and homeless, the useless wars and the climate chaos) at bay.
The only thing blocking does is disable notifications since You keep trolling me with absolutely moronic shit. Back to pharma, Reason encouraged people to get the covid vax through the pandemic. This month they have a video arguing the pros and cons of future gov public/private partnership for pharma companies. Operation warpspeed is the least free market and libertarian thing in the history of medicine. Worked out great for Pfzier and Moderna though. Fake libertarians.
So pointing out the pros and the cons of a policy makes them bad libertarians?
Maybe not everyone is as rigid ideologically. Classical liberalism allows for far more freedom of thought than the tight box you trap yourself in while you chirp about libertarian purity.
So do you think the government funding something is always bad 100% of the time? I guess I'm not a "true" libertarian... Oh well.
The modern classical liberal and libertarian movements have been around a lot longer than you have. Maybe you should learn some humility instead of acting like RFK's attack dog. Who are you to lecture others on libertarian purity?
What's even remotely libertarian about RFK? lol. What possibly makes you think a libertarian magazine should automatically give good coverage of your cult idol?
The main thing that bothers me about Warp Speed is the liability shields.
Either way, stop expecting every libertarian to have uniform views. It only shows your ignorance.
Its Incredibly laughable to suggest that government/private partnership can work and that they a good thing, its even worse to suggest that and proudly call yourself a libertarian.
Reason exists as think tank, it desired goal is to influence policy and public opinion. Think tanks all have donors they are beholden to, its not a mystery how dc think tanks butter their bread. Reason didn’t like Ron Paul, and they dont particularly get along with the libertarian party.
I’m not a libertarian, never claimed to be one. You should educate yourself on what classical liberalism actually is because it has nothing to do with advocating for government/private vaccine rollouts that result in mass violations of civil liberties.
The problem is you have this gentleman who did the interview who actually is a libertarian at heart and can look with a cynical eye at all causes even the "good ones" even habitat for humanity has loads of grift. But the res of reason is filled with people that are basically democrat progressives that are just one step shy of being on MSNBC same as krystal ball
I watched her piece, “ Why Are So Many Libertarians Suddenly Fond of RFK Jr.?.” That hardly a “hit piece.” They both have “takes” on vaccinations I do not remotely agree with. And? There are far larger issues I disagree with RFK on ….again, and? At the end of the day, we as Americans will have to make a decision. Its not rocket science.
Sounds like we are talking about two different things.
Im talking about a video called,”RFK Jr.s Long Con.” Even the title is an attack calling him a Con man. Like most hit pieces its full of straw men and ad hominem attacks. Many people in alt media have dissected it. I particularly like Kim Iverson’s https://youtu.be/B5V4NPAI5Qs
If you have something specific to talk about I’m all for but it sounds like you just want to be vague in your disagreement on what a hit piece is.
While it's tempting to dismiss Reason as a source based on that Liz Wolfe article, nothing is black and white. Since the scales fell from my eyes during Covid and I became a Recovering Liberal, I make a conscious effort not to judge something based on the source, but to look at the content. That's not to say that the source isn't a factor under consideration, just not 100%.
Even Donald Trump can be right sometimes. I cringe even writing that.
“Making a conscious effort not to judge something based on the source” I like that sentiment but its the complete opposite ideal of someone like Liz Wolfe.
Can somebody here please explain to me why RFK should be president - all I see over and over is everyone creaming themselves because he’s against vaccines. Cool.
Please tell me what this guy offers aside from this. Because I seriously can’t see it, and if he wasn’t bleeting about Covid and vaccines, the vast majority of comments here would be shitting on him because he’s a Kennedy.
Honestly you can say the same "what the fuck does he actually offer" & "why the fuck is he president" about every Oval Orifice inserted Yahoo in my lifetime.
I don't think RFK is a bigger dipshit than Joe The Wanderer or Don The Mean Tweeter or Barack The Well Spoken Sociopath or GW The Imaginary Pilot or Billy the Diddler or GHW The New World Orderer, etc., etc..
My question about any president always comes down to, "why did anyone vote for this asshole?"
No one ever answers that one.
I think that RFK would, at the very least, be a lot more fun than Joe "Empty Blather" Biden or Donald "I Tweets Mean Shit" Trump.
The idea that this is a sane country looking for sane leadership is a boat that sailed a few decades ago.
This is a red, white & blue asylum so, in the interests of Marat/Sade, maybe having one of the inmates run it wouldn't be such a bad idea.
I mean, I’ve read about him. I don’t agree with much of what he says.
I asked because so many people here seem to think he’s absolutely amazing because he has found a niche as far as narratives go, and it lines up with their views.
So I was curious if anyone else thinks he’s got policy ideas or something, anything, besides being against vaccines and against Biden.
If we are talking about third party candidates, then I think cornel west is someone who is worth listening to.
I personally like his postions on most things. I dont know what issues are important to you but I really think if you’re curious you should seek out and listen to him speak first hand and in long form interviews. Many journalists resort to smears in articles.
Hes fought his whole legal career against against crony capitalism and corporate government capture. He wants to reform : dismantle the many alphabet agencies, end foreign wars, hes anti censorship, pro environment while against using tyrannical carbon policies on the public.
"Hes fought his whole legal career against against crony capitalism and corporate government capture. He wants to reform : dismantle the many alphabet agencies, end foreign wars, hes anti censorship, pro environment while against using tyrannical carbon policies on the public."
Yeah, yeah, but what does he stand for?? I mean besides anti vaxx?
I am incapable of not having a very biased opinion on what is happening in ukraine. I have family members fighting, I am a Ukrainian.
Having that opinion does not make me a neocon. It makes me someone who wants my people to have their own state, and you’re damn right that I want them to have the best possible chance of maintaining that.
Because I want my family to live, and not have to hide underground for fear of getting blown up. I want my cousin who fought on the front line to survive the heart attack that he suffered while fighting for what he believes in. I want my younger cousins to have a future, like I do.
I’m very much aware that this throws me into neocon war mongering territory. But like most people who actually think, I can fully express that I am incapable of not having extreme bias.
Right, i also know Ukrainians like you. I also know that at least 20% of Ukraine is ethnic Russian. I also know that Ukraine has not allowed Russian to be taught in school. And Russian is not an official language anymore. I also know that the Maidan 'coup' was instigated by the US and executed by Nazis. I know that NATO wants to use Ukrainians as proxies in the eternal war with Russia. I know that some in power want to 'fight Russia to the last Ukrainian.' I know Zalensky has promised Ukraine to Blackrock. And i think i know that most Ukrainians are in the dark about their own dark history.
Good interview. However, I do take exception to something Matt says ... he is comparing the US news media of today with the Russian news media of the 90s, and he says "Nobody is being murdered in their doorway" here. Yoo hoo, Matt, what do you think they are doing to Julian Assange? Okay, so he wasn't murdered in his doorway, but the message was made loud and clear that NOBODY should do what he did in exposing truths the government doesn't want exposed. Ditto for Snowden, who would be prosecuted immediately under the espionage act were he to set foot on American soil.
Maybe not literally "murdered in their doorways" but close enough to get the message across to other journalists and whistle-blowers.
Well, and what about intelligence agency spying on journalists such as Sheryl Attkisson and James Rosenstein? I mean, those are the two examples that come to my mind quickly, but how many others are there? How many are being monitored and pressured to comply with establishment pressure?
I must say that an absolute prerequisite for a decent society, a humane society, a civil society, date I say a *liberal society* must be the complete abolishment of agencies like the CIA, FBI, NSA, and all the rest. We cannot go on like this, with these terrifying apparatuses able to control our lives and in complete anonymity.
As I recall, Anna Politkovskaya was murdered in the doorway of her apartment in 2006, long after Matt lived there. (We lived there then) But his point is still valid. Russia was well on its way to being a Mafia-style institution by then. I don’t see the US being there yet, but always a possibility.
I think the interview was great, regardless of the problems with Reason people may have. I think one of Matt’s superpowers is reaching across various political and ideological categories and bringing people together who might otherwise be compartmentalized media-wise.
I don’t watch or read Reason much, but if it appeals to people who want only a homogeneous political view, I don’t want it. I thought it a good interview.
And yes, they are trying to murder Assange, maybe not in his doorway literally, but slowly and painfully and cruelly. Message to journalists: don't do what he did.
I feel that any true reporter should preface any story/interview he/she does with a DEMAND for the release of Julian Assange. Matt Taibbi is ok, but essentially a sports/financial news reporter that, thru no fault of his own, got involved in much bigger things like government censorship and the Biden crime family. He is part of the solution, but small fry compared to Mr. Assange who is ROTTING IN A BRITISH JAIL IN SOLITARY RIGHT NOW.
Full agreement, although Snowden has been able speak out a bit more, while Assange has been basically tortured. Both are pillars, responsible for pulling back the curtain(s), and therefore vilified mercilessly.
For what it's worth, RFK Jr has gone on the record as saying he would pardon them both. For me, he gets my 'vote' on that alone....
Looking forward to hearing this, especially after Reason's recent smear campaign of RFK Jr by Liz Wolfe. Comedian/commentator Jimmy Dore did an excellent job of breaking down the piece as the propaganda it is.
Gotta agree. One would be hard-pressed to find a journalistic endeavor that is 100% on the level these days. I absolutely abhor the NYT but to say no good journalism is produced there simply isn’t true. The interview was excellent- both the questions and answers.
And Assange. And Snowden. And Manning. And Paul Wellstone. And so many others, silenced and yes, murdered, by our own government. And JFK and RFK. And MLK and Malcolm. And the smears of decent people like Tulsi Gabbard, Jill Stein, RFK Junior, and yes, Mr. Taibbi himself, in order to shut them up and end conversation and the possibility for real change.
I cannot make demands on foreign governments, but as an American I feel obliged to make demands on my own government, which purports to act in my name.
Great interview! I totally forgot about this Nick Gillespie guy. I've recently been binging on "WKRP in Cincinnati" episodes on, ahem, YouTube, and I think those shows really punctuate where the corporate mediated American consciousness has devolved to in the last 4 decades, whether the subject is "Race" or whatever. Plus the jokes actually work, years later. Also, Walter Kirn and Matt's conversations about literary works are a fantastic new wrinkle to their "America This Week" show.
Matt, you and your wife, and Walter, would benefit from reading Dissolving Illusions: Disease, Vaccines and the Forgotten History by Dr. Suzanne Humphries and Roman Bystrianyk. No fiction there! Many a person, including medical professionals, have changed their position on the CDC's childhood schedule through that book. You can talk about it on your show! Universities are owned by big pharma, just as media and government are.
It's not an just an interview with Nick Gillespie, it's an interview with Nick Gillespie and The Jacket.™ Matt absolutely had to bring his sartorial A game.
Once Putin became president I noticed that new hires at the Washington Post were allowed extra column space to spread a lot of anti-russian opinion. Putin scared the shit out of the neocons and WAPO helped them turn him into a monster.
Ukrainian diplomat whistleblower: US Deep State / Democrat Party interference against Trump in 2016 elections -- 'Holy shit this is a bombshell interview.' – Jul 22
So I’m supposed to inform myself of basic facts, while the rest of the people in this comment section are free to say a bunch of drivel that consists of personal opinions that they believe are facts.
Sorry, but putin invaded my family’s homeland, under bullshit pretenses. I have family currently living in a war zone, so nah, I am not going to let that one go, Boris.
I’m not some American idiot. Thanks though for treating me like I am! Have an awesome day.
Ukrainian diplomat whistleblower: US Deep State / Democrat Party interference against Trump in 2016 elections -- 'Holy shit this is a bombshell interview.' – Jul 22
Ukrainian diplomat whistleblower: US Deep State / Democrat Party interference against Trump in 2016 elections -- 'Holy shit this is a bombshell interview.' – Jul 22
So long as Ukraine no longer exists, it’s fine. As long as he has access to the land that is crucial, the rest doesn’t matter.
This isn’t the first time Russia has tried to erase my people, it’s one of many. We aren’t Russians, no matter how much people repeat that we are. Our culture has survived since our land has existed. It will survive after this. Ukrainians are resilient survivors. They would rather all be dead than be under Russian rule.
Great interview, rich discussion. Your indication that the influx of identity politics to our national discourse may be laid at Hilary’s feet in 2016 (“if we break up the banks, will that end racism?”) is profound.
Thank you for the longer form interview. As a subscriber since your Rolling Stone days (I even subscribed to the magazine since I thought that was required to access your material) I am appreciative of the variety of ways to enjoy your content. Your rambling talks with Walter Kirn are a pleasure. Agree, Disagree, who cares? It is all interesting.
Er, Nick, master the art of shutting up when your guest is mid-way through developing his responses to your questions and you'll get much better answers--answers you, as a supposed interviewer, are currently preventing your audience from hearing.
Check out Reason’s recent smear campaign on RFK Jr. by Liz Wolfe. Their primary donor is likely Charles Koch who RFK once said should be in prison. Shocker he was targeted by Reason and in my mind they are no different than legacy media. Look into Donor Trust the primary funder of this think tank.
Exactly. An acclaimed magazine no more, putting it kindly.
So I guess people can't disagree with RFJ Jr now? lol. You guys are hilarious.
There's things I like about him, and things I don't. The same goes for virtually every single candidate running now.
Do they say good things about Biden? You should really do some self introspection here.
Baseless slurs and transparent attempts at character assassination are the issue, not disagreements. If we had actual, intelligent criticism of politicians in our media, RFK Jr.’s candidacy might not be so necessary.
Which "baseless slurs"?
Consult that Reason hit job and stop wasting everybody’s time. It’s one slur after another. Pure bile.
https://reason.com/video/2023/07/10/why-are-so-many-libertarians-suddenly-fond-of-rfk-jr/
I've seen it already. Name one "baseless slur" said in that video.
btw: there's also this: https://reason.com/2023/07/26/rfk-jr-libertarians-covid-vaccine-free-speech-democrats/
Every bullet point that she has is slight of hand simplification of a complex issue. We could just go down the line each one, Ive already covered reasons attempt at “correcting” him on vaccine safety trials which only proved RFK correct on the lack of pre licensing safety trials for vaccines. Her idiotic response “the FDA has to much testing.” All the testing in the world doesn’t matter when its corrupted by the pharma companies, a major part of RFK’s platform that was never discussed.
Wolfe also said RFK is anti Nuclear for ex. His position is that he doesn’t think the free market would sustain nuclear https://twitter.com/night__ryder/status/1679104267032961026/mediaViewer?currentTweet=1679104267032961026¤tTweetUser=night__ryder even if he’s wrong about nuclear, Reason should address the actual stance and try to debunk him. Of course Wolfe Didnt even attempt to. Wolfe just painted him as a crazed environmentalist. Which is also wrong RFK evolved his stance on carbon and realized that forcing carbon standards on the public is a scam.
Theres a difference between disagreeing and conducting a gotcha interview where you ignore and quickly move on when rebutted. Thats what reason did and it appears to be your tactic as well. You came saying “ O so no one can disagree with RFK Now?” No one is saying that, just you. Classic strawman.
Hah. How? How is it a strawman? They disagreed with him and questioned some of his past statements. Where's the strawman? So if I confront someone's stated political beliefs with other data then it's automatically some sort of vile attack?
What do you want, everyone to give him a softball interview where he knows all of the questions in advance?
Again, this is your statement and its a straw man... “if I confront someone's stated political beliefs with other data then it's automatically some sort of vile attack?”
This is a text book straw man.
How?
A straw man is a logical fallacy that involves distorting an opposing position into an extreme version of itself and then arguing against that extreme version
I didn't ask you to define a strawman, I asked how is what I said a strawman? What makes you think it is appropriate to attempt to cancel someone over someone's misgivings about many of RFJ Jr's positions? I have many myself.
They could have given him more time to explain himself, I agree with that. However, I just don't see how my previous statements differ from reality or are some kind of strawman.
At the end of the day you just didn't like the way they conducted their interview, and you don't like what they said.
Then you go on to call Nick a bunch of names instead of even trying to point out a single thing that you think they got wrong in the interview, which I might even agree with you on if you bothered.
Yes I’m undecided too, but do realize if anyone’s character is to be addressed in this moment, it is the man in the WH, but that was somehow off limits.
I mean, the front runner for team red is doing a damn good job of proving he has no character.
I was pretty surprised to hear they were going after RFK, because my only other exposure had been through Robbie Soave on Rising who’s always seemed like a good egg, as libertarians go
Be interested to hear what he thinks about the RFK smear
If you remember it was Robbie who exposed the Covington Catholic legacy media smear of the event. Ya that sounds like legacy media.
These people complaining about Reason are literally as bad as the establishment dems, because if you disagree with their cult idol you're automatically a bad person/publication.
Could Reason have been a bit more delicate with that interview? Sure, but these people just want to cancel them.
Im mentioning the hit piece by Liz Wolfe. Its full of bad faith arguments and smears. Very poor form from reason no matter how you cut it and many people have debunked the video.
Define hit piece.
Watch Liz Wolfe’s piece on RFK, thats exactly what a hit piece it is. Every point she has about him is a misinterpretation or bad faith argument.
You make a good point. Cognitive dissonance affects all of us to varying degrees. We can notice it far better with other people than ourselves. Thanks for your comment Malahini.
I don’t watch Reason TV, I only read their publications in print or on their app. I have met Robbie and he is a stand up guy. I concur with your spot on take of the complainers. I’ve examined the thought process of people like the Reason haters. It goes something like this; Let’s say a scientist says there is no life on the Moon. It's environment can't support life as we know it. These people will immediately search for not just a contrarian point of view but the most absurd and crazy motive driven nonsense possible. If you don't agree with them it must be because you are not worthy of wearing the secret decoder ring of outlandish truths. Jimmy Dore/Nick G. I'm sure if given a choice Matt is gonna hang with Nick.
Check out this defense RFK by Robbie Suave. Legacy media my ass.
https://reason.com/2023/07/26/rfk-jr-libertarians-covid-vaccine-free-speech-democrats/
Robbie Suave is fine, but hes only a part time contributor so idk why you act like he directs reason. Nick Gillespie seems to have most influence there and is fat better example of Reason being a fake libertarian org. Hes pretty tame as far as libertarians go. I would call Reason a “Beltway Libertarian” tax haven for people like Charles Koch to send 501c nonprofit write offs to. They rarely ever stray to far from the mainstream, they still think covid vaccines were an overall success.
I love the Kochs because I love prosperity and liberty. I don't believe in the all-in, all-out philosophy on vaccines. I think it would be wise for someone like me, over 70, with no spleen and asthma. I believe childhood vaccines are a crime. So, if the Reason crowd are Beltway Libertarians, where do the real Libertarians get their fix? Maybe we should just keep reading Atlas over and over? I don't need perfect political or media alignment. Reason recently moved from Cali to the Beltway. I would rather have them there than Cali. They will try and move the needle more in my direction than most entities and that's good enough for me. I'm not going to sacrifice the good for the perfect.
I find RFK refreshing and brave considering his party affiliation but not worthy of adulation.
David Nott is the big guy at Reason by the way.
Lol. "Muh Kochtopus". Muh "Beltway Libertarian". Who is name calling now? Was RFK Jr called a single name like this by anything on Reason's site?
Full disclosure: I love Nick. I don't have to agree with 100% of what he says 100% of the time though.
Looks like damage control for the giant fuckup, now that everyone now thinks that Reason is a crap magazine... I didn't know that previously.
I am very favorable to RFK, and would vote for him if he and Trump were tied or close. One thing I’ve learned is never to throw away a vote, and more than that to choose the man for the times. Trump recognizes that we are a nation in decline, and it makes him angry enough to change it. It was his Announcement speech for 2024. That is his finger on the pulse. Does Bobby? I haven’t heard it yet. But voting for Bobby Kennedy’s son (the only real Democrat left).
Yep was paired with an interview they did with him where they spent a lot of time making it very clear they personally thought he was wrong about vaccines, but were not interested in hearing his reasons.
Well they have their 'reason', don't they.
Best magazine ever.
RFK Jr. is doing his own marginalizing- and has been doing it for quite a long time- with no assistance from Reason magazine required. I'd like to think otherwise, but there's entirely too much foot-in-mouth disease going on there for me to take Bobby Jr. seriously as a Presidential candidate.
The more controversial or unorthodox a position, the more important it is to watch how you say what you say- especially as a presidential candidate. I watched Republican Governor George Romney's presidential ambitions get deep-sixed in 1968, based on one unwise choice of words about his thoughts on the Vietnam issue. The prestige news media went after Romney like a pack of piranhas. Both the Democrats and the Republicans already have enough unscripted flights of unguarded rhetorical flourishes from RFK Jr. to Romney him out of the race, 10 times over.
The American Legacy Media is so presently so stuporous that approximately 100% of their focus on possible GOP nominees is either directed at Ron DeSantis or Donald Trump. Have they put any thought into considering who else might be throwing their hat into the ring there?
My current favorite for Republican nominee is Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin, anti-Woke grandstander, former Carlyle Group co-CEO, and all-around neo-Reaganite1980s revivalist (don't expect Virginia to legalize a commercial cannabis market on HIS watch, despite the fact that marijuana been legalized by the legislature.) Youngkin has The Look.
Youngkin also has plenty of his own money- $440 million. He has the Connections where he made that money, to both The Swamp and the RNC. No risk of outsider loose cannon independent opinions there- Youngkin can be counted on to stick with the mainstream of right-leaning Beltway Establishment opinion on everything from more aid for the Ukraine War, to the cynical fossil fuels status quo, to maintaining the surveillance state and ramping up the War on Drugs (just as the hard drug epidemic is burning itself out on its own, according to recent surveys of illicit drugs use among teenagers.) Take America Back To The Future Again!
And 90% the Trump-leaning Republicans out there will fall for Youngkin's empty suit like a sack of potatoes, as long as he keeps his focus on attacking the Democratic Party. Especially if his speeches have enough well-crafted applause lines. And, well, is there a Democratic Party candidate capable of meeting that challenge? Because it remains clear that politics American style continues to be a personality pageant, not about issues. It won't even matter if the economy stays strong in 2024, if Youngkin can sell himself hard enough.
Youngkin, Republican nominee for president in 2024. That's my early line. If I'm right, you heard it here first.
As for the Democrats, the American Prestige Media are in pretty much total agreement that Joe Biden will be the 2024 nominee of the Democratic Party. An easy conclusion to assert- because, well, who else is there? If you're having trouble coming up with other names, then that's how thin the Democratic Party bench is right now.
I long for the day when actual policy is discussed, debated, and considered the most important reason to vote for someone.
Highly doubt Youngkin will run this cycle.. Hes practically obscure outside Va and he said hes not running multiple times. RFK has foot in mouth disease? Mmm sounds like you got a mainstream brainwashing yourself.
Youngkin is not at all obscure within the precincts of online Trump Republican media outlets, which is sufficient for the foundation of name/face recognition required to gain the momentum required to win the GOP nomination. Due to the preeminence of electronic media, we're in a very fast-moving age these days; I saw Arnold Schwarzenegger get elected as California governor two months after he announced. And that was two decades ago. I don't think Presidential candidacies can be run on three-month notice, but this era is made for the dark horse candidate who comes out of nowhere to win the whole thing. Provided that they have an ample supply of money to fuel a breakout candidacy, of course, which Youngkin does. (As for his denials about an interest in running, they're no less worthless than the demurrals of any other ambitious politician.)
And, no, I don't think I'm a victim of "media brainwashing" to realize that some rhetorical tropes are overused, hyperbolic, and incidentally easily manipulated out of context by political adversaries. Nobody has any business using "covid" and "targeted" in the same sentence, much less alluding to specific ethnic groups either (possibly) being targeted or (a small group with an ethnic affinity) (possibly) doing the targeting. In that respect, the pairs of named examples were particularly egregious, within a narrative frame upheld by nothing more than insinuation.
If RFK Jr. wants to do a teach-in on the historical example of apartheid-era South Africa and Israel collaborating on researching ethnically targeted bioweapons, he'll be presenting most Americans with an unacceptably steep learning curve; even if RFK Jr. devotes his entire campaign to addressing the subject, few of them will be up to speed on it by November 2024. And that information would still have nothing to do with the impacts of SARS-Cov-2 or the response by the Xi/CCP regime running the PRC, a nation that suffered some drastically adverse impacts from a virus that originated and spread from within their own borders. (One would think that an intentionally targeted virus would have at least been first released on a different continent.)
An American political campaign is not the trial of Socrates; it's worse. We know what happened to Socrates, but at least he was allowed an opportunity for his own defense summary before the court of opinion. RFK Jr. is not going to get that opportunity in a televised presidential debate.
Is Politico smearing RFK Jr. in this article? https://www.politico.com/news/2023/07/15/rfk-jr-covid-19-ethnically-targeted-00106478
Yes. But Marianne Williamson, who is quoted in the article, gets what he did wrong. Which is my point. No presidential candidate has the energy to waste on climbing down, clarifying, battling against misinterpretations, etc. over avoidable gaffes of their own making. And a handful of ill-spoken, imprecise words has a longevity in the public mind that far outweighs someone's best words, or even their most praiseworthy actions. From "clinging to guns and religion", to "basket of deplorables", to "fine people on both sides", soundbite gaffes have an enduring quality that's capable of overshadowing political careers. Smart political leaders need to keep their mouths shut. Or at least stay away from examples and metaphors prone to malfunctioning like a short circuit wiring trace. RFK Jr. already has too much of a record of those hyperbolic references and clouded inferences, in my non-brainwashed estimation.
Thanks for the clarifying thoughts even though I still disagree. RFK is doing nothing but long form interviews on topics with steep learning curves and people seem to be responding positively.
Sound bites didn’t work on Trump and it wont work on RFK. They are doing to RFK what they tried to do with Trump, ei. take his word out of context, and paint him as racist. If anything they emboldened Trump supporters and helped him win. They also dont have a clean sound bite on RFK , its a complicated video taken out of context, the public is probably hardly aware of it. The whole topic will be gone in wind of the news cycle by next week.
The debates are over for Biden anyway, his admin said they will not even debate Trump in 2024. All these comparisons are getting a bit convoluted, its more about the message than it is about electoral politics and with RFK. As per polling It seems about 30% of the electorate seem to like his message and thats more than you need to command power in the process as a alternative candidate.
Good luck with that Youngkin bet, a wild parlay at best.
"The whole topic will be gone in wind of the news cycle by next week."
RFK's political adversaries can re-introduce and highlight that record any time they find it most advantageous to do so. The vaccine debate is Drama, and the news media love that shit. Same with all third-rail "ethnic controversies"; nowadays, all the media- including the "prestige media"- need is an excuse to name-check any of those constituencies, and it's on.
I'd like long-form interviews- and ongoing debate forums- to be key to any political campaign. But I'd like C-Span to be the most popular news network, too, and the American audience simply refuses to go along with that.
RFK Jr. also has an inherent problem on covid and vaccine issues: he's a trial lawyer without a medical background, who hasn't let that stop him from being outspoken on medical topics. Far better to leave that debate to medical professionals willing and able to support his views on the subject. On his own, he's on shaky ground, and not the person to lead that charge without immediate and openly vocal support from physicians willing to back him up. Moreover, if RFK Jr.'s campaign takes on a primary aspect of "Mercola vs. the CDC", he's bitten off more than he can chew.
They can try bringing that up, its an overly complex issue with an unclear shakey sound bite. Its no “grab em by the pussy.” MSM has less lof an audience/ratings compared to even last cycle. We are really venturing into new territory in terms of who American audiences trust. Tucker Carlson and Joe Rogan have more sway than CNN and MSNBC.
As for the appeal that only doctors can talk about medicine, not only do I find the notion wrong headed, I find it amazing that after covid people like yourself still make general appeals to experts and science as if an impenetrable monolith of truth. Truly baffling.
I'm with you, Dan. "Reason" is dedicated to rationalizing the ongoing destruction of politics as a vehicle for maintaining fairness and decency in a capitalist country that is turning more fascist by the day not because of the MAGA crowd but because, as Sohrab Ahmari argues in his new book (coming August 17) "Tyranny, How Private Power Crushed American Liberty—and What to do About It," politics is dead in America. What passes for politics is a bunch of bought (not elected) officials behaving like clowns in a circus, I guess so as to add to the endless distractions our consuming society offers to keep truth (the yawning wealth gap, the homicides and homeless, the useless wars and the climate chaos) at bay.
I believe you are taking at Crony Capitalism. Reason seems to think it doesn’t exist when it comes to Pharma and other industries
How so? You're literally a liar.
https://reason.com/2023/04/19/fda-head-wants-better-regulation-of-what-government-considers-misinformation/
https://reason.com/2021/09/30/democrats-crony-capitalism-corporations-government-ezra-klein/
Edit: He blocked me lol.
The only thing blocking does is disable notifications since You keep trolling me with absolutely moronic shit. Back to pharma, Reason encouraged people to get the covid vax through the pandemic. This month they have a video arguing the pros and cons of future gov public/private partnership for pharma companies. Operation warpspeed is the least free market and libertarian thing in the history of medicine. Worked out great for Pfzier and Moderna though. Fake libertarians.
So pointing out the pros and the cons of a policy makes them bad libertarians?
Maybe not everyone is as rigid ideologically. Classical liberalism allows for far more freedom of thought than the tight box you trap yourself in while you chirp about libertarian purity.
So do you think the government funding something is always bad 100% of the time? I guess I'm not a "true" libertarian... Oh well.
The modern classical liberal and libertarian movements have been around a lot longer than you have. Maybe you should learn some humility instead of acting like RFK's attack dog. Who are you to lecture others on libertarian purity?
What's even remotely libertarian about RFK? lol. What possibly makes you think a libertarian magazine should automatically give good coverage of your cult idol?
The main thing that bothers me about Warp Speed is the liability shields.
Either way, stop expecting every libertarian to have uniform views. It only shows your ignorance.
Its Incredibly laughable to suggest that government/private partnership can work and that they a good thing, its even worse to suggest that and proudly call yourself a libertarian.
Reason exists as think tank, it desired goal is to influence policy and public opinion. Think tanks all have donors they are beholden to, its not a mystery how dc think tanks butter their bread. Reason didn’t like Ron Paul, and they dont particularly get along with the libertarian party.
I’m not a libertarian, never claimed to be one. You should educate yourself on what classical liberalism actually is because it has nothing to do with advocating for government/private vaccine rollouts that result in mass violations of civil liberties.
I mean that’s what happens in a glorified oligarchy.
And so many people wonder why the vast majority ignores politics.
The problem is you have this gentleman who did the interview who actually is a libertarian at heart and can look with a cynical eye at all causes even the "good ones" even habitat for humanity has loads of grift. But the res of reason is filled with people that are basically democrat progressives that are just one step shy of being on MSNBC same as krystal ball
JFC...I can't keep up!
If that was a “hit piece”, you and anyone else who thinks it is, needs to get out more.
So you watched the Liz Wolfe hit piece ?
I watched her piece, “ Why Are So Many Libertarians Suddenly Fond of RFK Jr.?.” That hardly a “hit piece.” They both have “takes” on vaccinations I do not remotely agree with. And? There are far larger issues I disagree with RFK on ….again, and? At the end of the day, we as Americans will have to make a decision. Its not rocket science.
Sounds like we are talking about two different things.
Im talking about a video called,”RFK Jr.s Long Con.” Even the title is an attack calling him a Con man. Like most hit pieces its full of straw men and ad hominem attacks. Many people in alt media have dissected it. I particularly like Kim Iverson’s https://youtu.be/B5V4NPAI5Qs
If you have something specific to talk about I’m all for but it sounds like you just want to be vague in your disagreement on what a hit piece is.
Threads like this make me long for the return of the Collapse Thread button.
While it's tempting to dismiss Reason as a source based on that Liz Wolfe article, nothing is black and white. Since the scales fell from my eyes during Covid and I became a Recovering Liberal, I make a conscious effort not to judge something based on the source, but to look at the content. That's not to say that the source isn't a factor under consideration, just not 100%.
Even Donald Trump can be right sometimes. I cringe even writing that.
“Making a conscious effort not to judge something based on the source” I like that sentiment but its the complete opposite ideal of someone like Liz Wolfe.
Absolutely. “What is RFK up to?”
Their primary donor.
I can edit with those three dots ...
Can somebody here please explain to me why RFK should be president - all I see over and over is everyone creaming themselves because he’s against vaccines. Cool.
Please tell me what this guy offers aside from this. Because I seriously can’t see it, and if he wasn’t bleeting about Covid and vaccines, the vast majority of comments here would be shitting on him because he’s a Kennedy.
Honestly you can say the same "what the fuck does he actually offer" & "why the fuck is he president" about every Oval Orifice inserted Yahoo in my lifetime.
I don't think RFK is a bigger dipshit than Joe The Wanderer or Don The Mean Tweeter or Barack The Well Spoken Sociopath or GW The Imaginary Pilot or Billy the Diddler or GHW The New World Orderer, etc., etc..
My question about any president always comes down to, "why did anyone vote for this asshole?"
No one ever answers that one.
I think that RFK would, at the very least, be a lot more fun than Joe "Empty Blather" Biden or Donald "I Tweets Mean Shit" Trump.
The idea that this is a sane country looking for sane leadership is a boat that sailed a few decades ago.
This is a red, white & blue asylum so, in the interests of Marat/Sade, maybe having one of the inmates run it wouldn't be such a bad idea.
But, then again, I no longer vote.
Lol red, white & blue asylum.
That’s a good one, I hope you don’t mind if I steal it.
You’re absolutely correct, btw.
You can steal anything you fancy.
Except, of course, my tired old heart, which is spoken for.
💕
It’s a great line. I’m definitely going to use it!
I would watch one of the 1000 podcasts hes been on and decide whether you think he can be president
I mean, I’ve read about him. I don’t agree with much of what he says.
I asked because so many people here seem to think he’s absolutely amazing because he has found a niche as far as narratives go, and it lines up with their views.
So I was curious if anyone else thinks he’s got policy ideas or something, anything, besides being against vaccines and against Biden.
If we are talking about third party candidates, then I think cornel west is someone who is worth listening to.
He said that as president, he would tell the truth. That would be a change for the better. Last president to consistently tell the truth....Carter?
Lol you are expecting a politician to tell the truth?
I personally like his postions on most things. I dont know what issues are important to you but I really think if you’re curious you should seek out and listen to him speak first hand and in long form interviews. Many journalists resort to smears in articles.
Hes fought his whole legal career against against crony capitalism and corporate government capture. He wants to reform : dismantle the many alphabet agencies, end foreign wars, hes anti censorship, pro environment while against using tyrannical carbon policies on the public.
So I looked up a form he responded to.
Most of his answers were the same ones I gave.
Too bad he doesn’t have a chance in hell.
"Hes fought his whole legal career against against crony capitalism and corporate government capture. He wants to reform : dismantle the many alphabet agencies, end foreign wars, hes anti censorship, pro environment while against using tyrannical carbon policies on the public."
Yeah, yeah, but what does he stand for?? I mean besides anti vaxx?
Really! Have you watched anything he says.. he makes AOC look like the neocon she is. Or are you one too??
Oh yes, I’m clearly a neo con. Why would you assume you know what my views are?
He is most certainly left. But anyone who actually believes in social services and universal healthcare doesn’t have a chance in hell.
Well, what do you think of the war in Ukraine? That is the real issue right now and divides the left from the neocons....
I am incapable of not having a very biased opinion on what is happening in ukraine. I have family members fighting, I am a Ukrainian.
Having that opinion does not make me a neocon. It makes me someone who wants my people to have their own state, and you’re damn right that I want them to have the best possible chance of maintaining that.
Because I want my family to live, and not have to hide underground for fear of getting blown up. I want my cousin who fought on the front line to survive the heart attack that he suffered while fighting for what he believes in. I want my younger cousins to have a future, like I do.
I’m very much aware that this throws me into neocon war mongering territory. But like most people who actually think, I can fully express that I am incapable of not having extreme bias.
Right, i also know Ukrainians like you. I also know that at least 20% of Ukraine is ethnic Russian. I also know that Ukraine has not allowed Russian to be taught in school. And Russian is not an official language anymore. I also know that the Maidan 'coup' was instigated by the US and executed by Nazis. I know that NATO wants to use Ukrainians as proxies in the eternal war with Russia. I know that some in power want to 'fight Russia to the last Ukrainian.' I know Zalensky has promised Ukraine to Blackrock. And i think i know that most Ukrainians are in the dark about their own dark history.
My thought exactly.
Good interview. However, I do take exception to something Matt says ... he is comparing the US news media of today with the Russian news media of the 90s, and he says "Nobody is being murdered in their doorway" here. Yoo hoo, Matt, what do you think they are doing to Julian Assange? Okay, so he wasn't murdered in his doorway, but the message was made loud and clear that NOBODY should do what he did in exposing truths the government doesn't want exposed. Ditto for Snowden, who would be prosecuted immediately under the espionage act were he to set foot on American soil.
Maybe not literally "murdered in their doorways" but close enough to get the message across to other journalists and whistle-blowers.
Seth Rich was murdered on a city sidewalk. Yes, it's happening here too. Look in the Clinton closet.
Yes. And no doubt MT knows this.
Well, and what about intelligence agency spying on journalists such as Sheryl Attkisson and James Rosenstein? I mean, those are the two examples that come to my mind quickly, but how many others are there? How many are being monitored and pressured to comply with establishment pressure?
I must say that an absolute prerequisite for a decent society, a humane society, a civil society, date I say a *liberal society* must be the complete abolishment of agencies like the CIA, FBI, NSA, and all the rest. We cannot go on like this, with these terrifying apparatuses able to control our lives and in complete anonymity.
As I recall, Anna Politkovskaya was murdered in the doorway of her apartment in 2006, long after Matt lived there. (We lived there then) But his point is still valid. Russia was well on its way to being a Mafia-style institution by then. I don’t see the US being there yet, but always a possibility.
Give us time.
I think the interview was great, regardless of the problems with Reason people may have. I think one of Matt’s superpowers is reaching across various political and ideological categories and bringing people together who might otherwise be compartmentalized media-wise.
I don’t watch or read Reason much, but if it appeals to people who want only a homogeneous political view, I don’t want it. I thought it a good interview.
Good idea.
Dems. are so SMUG!
Absolutely. Wouldn’t subscribe otherwise.
And yes, they are trying to murder Assange, maybe not in his doorway literally, but slowly and painfully and cruelly. Message to journalists: don't do what he did.
I feel that any true reporter should preface any story/interview he/she does with a DEMAND for the release of Julian Assange. Matt Taibbi is ok, but essentially a sports/financial news reporter that, thru no fault of his own, got involved in much bigger things like government censorship and the Biden crime family. He is part of the solution, but small fry compared to Mr. Assange who is ROTTING IN A BRITISH JAIL IN SOLITARY RIGHT NOW.
It's truly amazing/terrifying how the Assange saga gains near zero traction, even among journalists.
Don’t forget about Snowden- who, in my opinion is more venerable than Assange.
Full agreement, although Snowden has been able speak out a bit more, while Assange has been basically tortured. Both are pillars, responsible for pulling back the curtain(s), and therefore vilified mercilessly.
For what it's worth, RFK Jr has gone on the record as saying he would pardon them both. For me, he gets my 'vote' on that alone....
Please inform yourself !!! Matt Taibbi wrote sooo many articles about persecution of Assange !!!! Did you just learn how to read? How old are you?
Reminds me of the episode ‘The Pine Barrens’ yay Jersey
Finally, Reason does something worth spending time on! Thanks for the heads up!
Looking forward to hearing this, especially after Reason's recent smear campaign of RFK Jr by Liz Wolfe. Comedian/commentator Jimmy Dore did an excellent job of breaking down the piece as the propaganda it is.
It was one of the best interviews I’ve seen. I don’t care who interviewed him or what their angle is.
Gotta agree. One would be hard-pressed to find a journalistic endeavor that is 100% on the level these days. I absolutely abhor the NYT but to say no good journalism is produced there simply isn’t true. The interview was excellent- both the questions and answers.
And Assange. And Snowden. And Manning. And Paul Wellstone. And so many others, silenced and yes, murdered, by our own government. And JFK and RFK. And MLK and Malcolm. And the smears of decent people like Tulsi Gabbard, Jill Stein, RFK Junior, and yes, Mr. Taibbi himself, in order to shut them up and end conversation and the possibility for real change.
I cannot make demands on foreign governments, but as an American I feel obliged to make demands on my own government, which purports to act in my name.
So succinctly and correctly stated. Excellent and profound. This is the best comment I’ve read in a while.
Great interview! I totally forgot about this Nick Gillespie guy. I've recently been binging on "WKRP in Cincinnati" episodes on, ahem, YouTube, and I think those shows really punctuate where the corporate mediated American consciousness has devolved to in the last 4 decades, whether the subject is "Race" or whatever. Plus the jokes actually work, years later. Also, Walter Kirn and Matt's conversations about literary works are a fantastic new wrinkle to their "America This Week" show.
Matt, you and your wife, and Walter, would benefit from reading Dissolving Illusions: Disease, Vaccines and the Forgotten History by Dr. Suzanne Humphries and Roman Bystrianyk. No fiction there! Many a person, including medical professionals, have changed their position on the CDC's childhood schedule through that book. You can talk about it on your show! Universities are owned by big pharma, just as media and government are.
Such an excellent read!
What a dope track suit!
Waiting for the left to say that wearing an adidas track suit proves that he really is a Russian sympathizer.
MSNBC:
“Matt Taibbi goes full Gopnik!”
😂
It's not an just an interview with Nick Gillespie, it's an interview with Nick Gillespie and The Jacket.™ Matt absolutely had to bring his sartorial A game.
Taibbi: Mind of a champion chess player and moral philosopher and the dress sense of a Romanian loan shark.
BUT
Wtf ! Track suit critique 🤗🤗🤗
You’re either busting balls or you like nearly all democrats In judging people by their looks which makes you a Flaming Asshole!💋
Oh I’m most certainly a flaming asshole. However, might I recommend as a rebuttal, the Lewis brothers’ analysis: https://www.americanpurpose.com/events/do-left-and-right-tell-the-whole-story-ft-verlan-and-hyrum-lewis/
There’s also a possibility that Matt like many got a free sweat suit and some 💰for his adidas endorsement! I’d have chosen solid black
Once Putin became president I noticed that new hires at the Washington Post were allowed extra column space to spread a lot of anti-russian opinion. Putin scared the shit out of the neocons and WAPO helped them turn him into a monster.
Biden's corruption led to Ukraine's destruction: former Kiev diplomat (Grayzone – Jul 13 (?) )
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgj3p2jIVtI
Ukrainian diplomat whistleblower: US Deep State / Democrat Party interference against Trump in 2016 elections -- 'Holy shit this is a bombshell interview.' – Jul 22
https://substack.com/inbox/post/135369565
Wait…
So putin is not a monster?
Is that what you’re saying?
Putin is the greatest president Russia ever had -- intelligent, thoughtful, well educated, deeply humane Russian patriot who knows and loves Europe.
Putin despises fascist US -- he named US -- an Empire of Lies.
I’m hoping that this is sarcasm.
Unfortunately for the Russians, they don’t seem to have leaders who aren’t borderline sociopaths or sociopaths.
The US lies. Russia lies. China lies. The Uk? Liars. Even the swiss who pride themselves on neutrality, lie.
Humans lie.
Before blabbering about Putin and Russia -- inform yourself about basic facts.
Interesting.
So I’m supposed to inform myself of basic facts, while the rest of the people in this comment section are free to say a bunch of drivel that consists of personal opinions that they believe are facts.
Sorry, but putin invaded my family’s homeland, under bullshit pretenses. I have family currently living in a war zone, so nah, I am not going to let that one go, Boris.
I’m not some American idiot. Thanks though for treating me like I am! Have an awesome day.
Biden's corruption led to Ukraine's destruction: former Kiev diplomat (Grayzone – Jul 13 (?) )
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgj3p2jIVtI
Ukrainian diplomat whistleblower: US Deep State / Democrat Party interference against Trump in 2016 elections -- 'Holy shit this is a bombshell interview.' – Jul 22
https://substack.com/inbox/post/135369565
https://twitter.com/RealScottRitter/status/1682035223159250945?s=20
Sergej Lavrov on Scott Ritter’s videos
A Scott Ritter Investigation:
Agent Zelensky - Part 1 -- July 11, 2023
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLeBb6hPUC8
• https://rumble.com/v2zs3r0-a-scott-ritter-investigation-agent-zelensky-part-1.html
https://youtu.be/HLeBb6hPUC8
Agent Zelensky – Part 2 -- July 17, 2023
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hq-Jab4DUhA
• https://rumble.com/v30nd8w-a-scott-ritter-investigation-agent-zelensky-part-2.html
Col. Douglas Macgregor | PBD Podcast | Ep. 283 - The Truth About The Russian & Ukrainian War (7/22)
https://substack.com/inbox/post/135368556
'Unfortunately for the Russians, they don’t seem to have leaders who aren’t borderline sociopaths or sociopaths.'
Um...ours aren't?
Biden's corruption led to Ukraine's destruction: former Kiev diplomat (Grayzone – Jul 13 (?) )
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgj3p2jIVtI
Ukrainian diplomat whistleblower: US Deep State / Democrat Party interference against Trump in 2016 elections -- 'Holy shit this is a bombshell interview.' – Jul 22
https://substack.com/inbox/post/135369565
https://substack.com/inbox/post/135389039
Col. Douglas Macgregor | PBD Podcast | Ep. 283 - The Truth About The Russian & Ukrainian War (7/22)
https://substack.com/inbox/post/135368556
Sometimes I am shocked by Putin's liberalism. Recently he said it would be OK if Ukraine let Poland annex western Ukraine.
As a Ukrainian, I’m not surprised.
So long as Ukraine no longer exists, it’s fine. As long as he has access to the land that is crucial, the rest doesn’t matter.
This isn’t the first time Russia has tried to erase my people, it’s one of many. We aren’t Russians, no matter how much people repeat that we are. Our culture has survived since our land has existed. It will survive after this. Ukrainians are resilient survivors. They would rather all be dead than be under Russian rule.
I don’t support the Russian invasion, but obviously some Ukranians do. There was a civil war there in 2014.
Did you read my comment about how I am Ukrainian? I’m not unaware of what has been going on.
https://twitter.com/RealScottRitter/status/1682035223159250945?s=20
Sergej Lavrov on Scott Ritter’s videos
A Scott Ritter Investigation:
Agent Zelensky - Part 1 -- July 11, 2023
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLeBb6hPUC8
• https://rumble.com/v2zs3r0-a-scott-ritter-investigation-agent-zelensky-part-1.html
https://youtu.be/HLeBb6hPUC8
Agent Zelensky – Part 2 -- July 17, 2023
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hq-Jab4DUhA
• https://rumble.com/v30nd8w-a-scott-ritter-investigation-agent-zelensky-part-2.html
To me there is no greater compliment than being followed by a diverse set of citizens who care about truth.
There is nothing better than a man becoming wildly successful at the peak of his career. We are thrilled for you 💨💋
Great interview, rich discussion. Your indication that the influx of identity politics to our national discourse may be laid at Hilary’s feet in 2016 (“if we break up the banks, will that end racism?”) is profound.
Thank you for the longer form interview. As a subscriber since your Rolling Stone days (I even subscribed to the magazine since I thought that was required to access your material) I am appreciative of the variety of ways to enjoy your content. Your rambling talks with Walter Kirn are a pleasure. Agree, Disagree, who cares? It is all interesting.
Er, Nick, master the art of shutting up when your guest is mid-way through developing his responses to your questions and you'll get much better answers--answers you, as a supposed interviewer, are currently preventing your audience from hearing.