"The FCC versus Late Night"

0:00now you can watch alley Vellchee five nights a week in prime time on MS now as he takes command of the 11th hour breaking news in the last hour the 11th hour with alley Vellchee weeknights at 11 PM Eastern on MS now. His FCC is threatening me, threatening our show, threatening our network ABC, our affiliates are local stations based on simple traditional editorial decisions, guest bookings, it would seem they don't like. And so Adam, consideration for our local stations, especially our ABC affiliates in Texas who would have to deal with this nonsense. My interview tomorrow with James Tallerika will not air on television. It will be posted on YouTube instead will not be on TV. Truly remarkable. Hi again everybody, it's now five o'clock in New York. You are not in a way back time machine. It will be posted on the last night. Another late night host

1:01informing the country that his interview with Texas Senate candidate James Tallerika will not be broadcast on television because of pressure from the FCC. In his opening monologue, Jimmy Kimmel spoke about how he, his show and even local affiliate stations were threatened by the agency forcing him to decide to preemptively pull his interview with Tallerika off the show. And he's going to be out and made the point that this doesn't make any sense. For the whole 20 plus of year of our show, in fact, I've been interviewing Americans who are running for office with no problem at all. Just like Letterman did, Leno did, Arsenio etc, etc. I've interviewed a lot of political candidates from Hillary Clinton to Ted Cruz to Donald Trump himself. I interviewed Donald Trump when he was a little bit more interested in the thing next to me. He seemed to have no problem with the idea of

2:01talk show host interviewing candidates. In fact, he was very eager to come back for another interview, which he did just before he became the nominee in 2016. But for some reason, and I can't seem to figure out what that reason is. Something has changed. Yeah, I wonder what that is too. In response to what I said this, quote, Jimmy Kimmel is playacting, as the often does, to create a false narrative about this administration's policies. Chairman Carr has not threatened him, regarding interviewing James Tallerick or any other candidate. Kimmel didn't explicitly say what the FCC's reasoning was, but we know the FCC took issue with Stephen Colbert interviewing James Tallerick back in February, because of a rule they put into fact at the beginning of this year. But if a broadcast station has an interview with the candidate, they need to provide equal time to all candidates running for that position. Just like Kimmel said, he would. Colbert put his interview with Tallerick Go online, where it drew a remarkable 85 million views across YouTube and social media. And in the immediate 24 hours after Colbert said the interview would not air on TV,

3:04Tallerick Go's campaign raised $2.5 million. So we'll be eagerly awaiting to see what happens after Jimmy Kimmel interviews. Tallerick Go. Tallerick Go's race against Republican Ken Paxton is giving Democrats hope that they can actually take back control. The Senate seat in Texas, and maybe even the Senate, the seat that hasn't had a Democratic senator in more than 30 years. The latest U.K. pole has Tallerick Go at five points, although MSNOW still classifies the race as a toss-up. The Democratic candidate spoke with my colleagues, Moon Sanders, Townsend earlier today, and had this to say about this Kimmel interview. If the broadcast is not air on television, would you essentially say that you'd been sick? Absolutely. I think it's the most dangerous form of cancel culture. People at the top, powerful politicians, powerful media executives, censoring what we watch, what we read, what we what we say, and that again should be a concern to everyone who believes in the first amendment and believes in the freedom of speech. So what do you think ABC should do?

4:07You think they should air it anyway? I'm still hopeful that we can have this interview on the air. What appears to be censorship by the Trump administration is where we begin to the hour with some of our favorite experts and friends. My colleague, co-host of the weeknight, Simone Sanders, Townsend is with us live from Dallas plus senior political analyst host of the Runaway Country podcast and author of the sub-stack, How the Hell, Alex Wagner is back with us. Simone, this is amazing that you're talking to him as this is all unfolding, a story that everyone's paying attention to. Tell me what else he said. Well, first of all, Nicole, thank you so much for having me for playing the sound. Obviously, when we booked this interview, we had no idea that Jimmy Kimmel was going to give the monologue he gave last night. James Celeriko said a couple of things. One, he underscored in this interview that he feels like he is still the underdog. He said that he found out about this information about what Jimmy Kimmel said only recently. It seems as though that the campaign found out around the same time that the rest of America found out.

5:09But he's hopeful that in fact, ABC will decide to put their, the interview on television. I will say Nicole, there's two things. You know, lots of people have been comparing this. And as you rightly noted, like this has seemingly happened to Tell Arico before with Stephen Colbert. But the biggest difference between the Colbert interview and the Jimmy Kimmel interview is that if Colbert did the interview with every intention of putting it on television, and it was after that that they said we're not putting it on TV. ABC pre-entably made the decision. They obviously had some conversations where to get all the way up to Jimmy Kimmel to say it last night that they're not even going to take the chance by putting it on television. Now, after my interview with Tell Arico, the White House did get back to us. And they essentially said that the FCC is not doing anything. We don't care. Jimmy Kimmel is making it up. So maybe Tell Arico will be on television tonight. We don't know. We'll see. I mean, the White House is so triggered by this race. Trump can't stop. You know, he talks about Texas. It's like a noun and a verb and how ugly

6:11Kim Paxton is and how bad his clothes are. Why is this such a sore spot at this juncture? Look, I think first of all, Texas to Trump kind of feels like Georgia kind of felt to him, right? Georgia was a place way back in the day. You know, when I was a little young democratic strategist, we always talked about Georgia turning blue, Georgia being a purple state. But it wasn't until 2020 that that was realized. And I think being a little bit purple, I think it's still mostly red. Texas is now at the place where Georgia was in 2020, I believe. And I think Trump feels that. He knows that. And the way in which he continues to terrorize the people of Fulton County, because they did, you know, he didn't have the 11,000 plus votes that he wanted in order to win Georgia. I do believe that he has an eye on Texas with that in mind. Also, remember Donald Trump, he weighed in on this race. He is the reason that Kim Paxton, to be honest, is the nominee. I know now he likes to talk about Kim Paxton like, oh, he's a red head, his

7:11stepchild, and no offense to the red heads. But Kim Paxton, when Joe Biden was president, he was the Republican attorney general that was leading the charge on stopping many of the things that the Biden administration wanted to get done in the courts. Trump loved that. But now that he's seeing the tea leaves and the ramifications of his choice, now he's kind of like, okay, just do it for me. I don't know if it's going to get done. Yeah, I mean, Alex, there's so many pieces of this story that as Simone is talking, I'm thinking of just in my like Trump registrar, I mean, there's the Mamdami love fest where Tallerika has got Mamdami's youth and just winner energy. And then there's like the first wife piece, like Paxton is Simone is saying, like was around the first time he tried to steal, you know, victory from the jaws of the defeat. He just been handed by Joe Biden. There is such a lack of any affection, affinity, or enthusiasm for the Paxton campaign that literally Trump just insults him every time he talks about him. Well, yeah, I mean, he sees Paxton increasingly as a referendum on his own juice,

8:15right, which is why they're having them. They convinced the convention, air quotes on the word convention in Dallas. And he's trying to muscle Paxton, I guess, across the finish line because it's a referendum on Trump's decision making and power within the party. John Corning was for Republicans, a much stronger candidate, but Trump muscled him through because he didn't stoop down low enough to kiss the ring. And now you have a candidate. I don't know if you saw Ken Paxton at the convention and his speaking slot in a call. I hope you didn't because it was the least electric performance. I've seen it was very nearly acoustic. That's a guitar joke. I mean, the man was talking about tax credits for ozempic. He was stoking transphobia. And then he was saying the words Democratic Socialist, California and James Tallerico as many times together as possible, despite the fact that James Tallerico is neither a Democratic Socialist nor a Californian. The guy has no mojo. And that is why you see, and in addition to many other things, the polls are tied neck and

9:16neck. And some of them even have James Tallerico head. And by the way, on the one issue that Republicans in the state can agree on, which is the construction of new data centers and being now against it, Trump is completely on the opposite side of the fence. It is the issue that animates Texas conservatives. I spoke to them into the state a couple weeks ago. And for some unknown, ungodly reason, Trump is insistent on pushing them on advocating for them, knowing I assume that it's terrible politics for the very same guys he's trying to get across the finish line. I think this all manifests in the kinds of things that are being promised from the stage. I was watching that wacky Matt's game. Sister, I was not watching. So I didn't think much about that. I'm sure that you watched. I'm glad that you watched it for us. But some own, Tallerico made some news in responding. And he's very good about saying focus on Texas, but also responding to the national news cycles about that $5,000 check that Trump is going to

10:16distribute, which he, Laura, even Laura Angerham was like, why not do it now? And he had a terrible answer with that. Let me, let me, do you want to set that up for me and tell me what he said to you? Well, you know, honestly, I thought Tallerico head, the only answer, frankly, Democrats should have when they were asked about this because he hit the nail right on the head. Let's actually play the sound for folks and we'll talk on the other side. Do you view that as a bribe? Yes, and, and, you know, he said he will give every American $5,000 if Republicans have both chambers in Congress. They already have both chambers. They have the House and the Senate and the White House. So why do we have to wait till after the election? Again, I think people are sick and tired of politicians ignoring this affordability crisis, grandstanding on it instead of actually solving the problem, instead of lowering our costs and raising our pay in a real way. And so this just feels like an election election you're stunned. And people in Texas are drowning. People in Texas are

11:19are struggling to survive in this economy. They need to re-election, bipartisan action. They don't need, you know, promises for after election day, especially when you already have the power to do it now if you truly care about affordability. I mean, why can't we get the checks now, Nicole? Why do we have to wait until November? Don't they have both houses now? It makes so much sense. And frankly, what he said about people in Texas, that could apply to folks in Nebraska where I'm from, that could apply to people in Ohio, that could apply to folks in Mississippi, right? People are struggling all over this country and for the president to a seemingly dangle a fake carrot of $5,000 when folks haven't got the last check that he promised them arbitrarily in his speech. I think it is just really, really toned up to the situation that folks are facing right across the country right now. And they're not oblivious to these things the president is saying. Yeah. And if you're, even if you're over there on Earth too, and think maybe, maybe unlike the

12:20tariff check you were promised and unlike the other three that you were promised and didn't get, maybe this one will be different. Laura Engren asked him, well, we're all talking about when I give out the check now, Republicans control the house and send it now. And you get an answer as like nonsensical as, you know, the dog ate my homework. I mean, it was, it was tariffs are wonderful and Democrats won't let us. I mean, Democrats don't control it. You can write the check out tomorrow. I mean, I, I, I wonder at this point, how much of this is also a question of how stupid will his voters let him make them look, Alex? Yeah, it's fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me, fool me three times, I'm going to vote for the Democrat. The idea that Trump is once again promising $1,000, $2,000, $5,000 checks. None of them, as Simone said, have come through. The only people get in paid are Natalie Harp and the Charlie's Angels that work outside of Trump in the Oval Office. Those are the people that are getting the $45,000 checks. We talked

13:21about this yesterday on your show. Everyone else, it's like Trump doesn't pay contractors. He doesn't pay people that do the hard work for him notoriously. And he's certainly not going to pay out the American public. And I would tell you Nicole, I think this is worse than just empty promises. I think the dangling of a fake carrot to use Simone's terminology makes people even angrier, because he's asserting in the same convention speech that affordability is a fantasy of the Democrats, and this is all Biden's economy, and he's made prices way, way lower. You know, if you are struggling to fill up your car to get to work, or you can't put hamburger meat on the table for dinner for the kids, that's the kind of stuff that really pisses you off. It is so divorced from the lived reality of Americans, and the fake promises of payouts if and when his party wins, I think that makes people even more incensed. I think it's worse than just empty. I think it actually incenses people. Yeah, and they've paid, it's actually the rising gas prices, the rising grocery prices, it's cost people more than that anyway, it doesn't

14:21get them ahead of anything. I want to come back to the Jimmy Kimmel of it all, because they always think that sort of censorship and suppression and retribution and attacks move them down the, you know, board and whatever game they're playing. But Jimmy Kimmel is now a very important figure in this fight for democracy, and let me show you his call to action last night. If you want to learn about a candidate for the Senate tomorrow, you will have to go to the Jimmy Kimmel live YouTube channel where you will see it in its entirety and thank goodness we have that, because in the America we live in right now, that is the best that we can do until November, of course. Make sure you register to vote by the way. So he did this thing that I really am like listening for everyone to do. He tied the fight to democracy to something that happened right now in a news cycle. You know, we've talked for 10 years, I feel like amongst ourselves, well, democracy is separate from what's happening in people's

15:22lives. No democracy is the only way that any of the problems in your actual life gets all, because if you can't vote for what you want or vote out what you no longer want, we don't live in a democracy. And I wonder what you think, Alex, of sort of the people who probably didn't plan on being on the front lines in this fight for our democracy. Well, and I would include ABC Disney in that. Remember, they paid Trump out $14 million after George Stepanopoulos used awkward wording. I'm not going to say it because I don't need to MS now. It doesn't need to get a lawsuit from the FCC. But, you know, and we're seen as kind of cow-towing to the pressure. They are now as of last month. ABC Disney is suing the FCC in court for First Amendment violations. And I will say that in and of itself is a much more aggressive posture on the part of these media institutions. And it's coming at a time when the former CEO of Disney, Bob Iger, and current Disney board member, Bob Iger, is literally in business with Jared Kushner to buy the LA Lakers. Like, there are a lot of extenuating circumstances and

16:24relationships that you might think would cause ABC Disney to take a more conciliatory track with this administration. They clearly believe they have a winning hand. Now, this decision not to air the Talarico interview, I leave that, you know, to I'm not sure what the deliberations are behind the scenes. But overall, ABC Disney has taken a much more combative stance. They learned from Jerome Powell. I think they're indicative of a much broader wave of resistance to Trump from corners that you previously would not have expected. Yeah, like previously even, you know, 10 weeks ago. And I do think some of it is having an approval rating, this dropping like a stone. He's at 30, 32%. And you've got an audience that if you put the interview over on YouTube might actually benefit Talarico more politically anyway. Some of them are so lucky that you're there and that you got this interview. Congratulations. And we're really grateful to you for taking the time to talk to us about it. Simone Sanders, Townsend, thank you. Thank you so much. Okay, so you can watch the entire interview that Simone did, but James Talarico. It airs of course during her broadcast tonight at 7pm

17:29Eastern. It's a special edition of the weeknight life from Texas Alex six around our friend John Halman, who's late. Of course, we'll join the conversation on the other side. Also ahead for us, we'll meet another Democratic candidate for Congress looking to oust a vulnerable with public and congressmen who's lining up squarely behind Donald Trump and his 32% approval rating. So much so it is blaming wait us the media for the high cost of just about everything these days. Hmm, we'll put that to his Democratic opponent next. Plus, why long time former producers at the CBS news show 60 minutes are not holding back when it comes to the new mega friendly direction the show and the network are taking under Barry Weiss. We'll be joined by Harry Moses, who spent decades as a producer at 60 minutes. His new book Mattis Hell is a timely reminder of what made 60 minutes so iconic for so long. And what is it risk of being lost under the networks new management? Deadlin White House continues after quick break. Don't go anywhere today.

18:36Hey everybody, it's Rachel Maddo here. I wanted to tell you that more than a dozen of us from MSNL are going to be in Texas on Saturday, September 26th. I'm going to be there. Lauren Sodon will be there, so we'll Jen Socky. A whole bunch of us are all going to be there in Texas. Tickets started just over 30 bucks each and if you buy a ticket, you will get access to our new MSNL membership free for a year. Tickets for Texas are on sale now. You can learn more at ms.nail slash together. Hope to see you in Texas. How could this conversation get any better? We've been joined by Puck News, Senior Political Columnus, National Affairs, Analyst, John Halman, and Alex is still here. So you guys have spent a lot of time as when you were making the circus in sort of these late night circles and Trump is obsessed with them because of their impact and they have, you know, in some ways people are more open, right? To people they might not agree with when they're settling down at the end of the day to take in someone like Jimmy Kimmel or Steven Colbert.

19:37I want to come back to the first amendment of all of this and I want to read you a statement from FCC Commissioner Anagomas. She said this, Jimmy Kimmel's decision to keep his interview with a Senate candidate off the air shows just how far the Trump administration's campaign of censorship and control has gone. This is now the second time in a matter of months that a late night host has disclosed that they had to bury an interview because of FCC intimidation. And there's no way to know how many other editorial decisions across our country have quietly been shaped by the same pressure. No host, local affiliate or network, should have to weigh federal retaliation before booking a gas for newsworthy interview. Any attempt to pressure broadcasters into self-sensorship undermines both press freedom and the public's right to hear from candidates in their community seeking public office. We've been doing a lot on the voting rights stuff and and you know, Trump's efforts to do J get all the voting rolls is going zero for 23 but the conduct is ongoing. And sometimes we cover the first amendment stuff in the context of court

20:39room defeats for Trump. The five subpoenas for the New York Times reporters which were basically laughed at a court. But the the insidious nature of censorship has been somewhat effective at least in the statement or in the viewpoint of FCC Commissioner Anagomas. Well, if I mean look on Commissioner Gomez seems to have just in that statement seems to be giving the lie to the notion of what the way has his response to this was which we're not doing anything. There hasn't been any any pressure placed on on ABC and its affiliates and anybody related to Jimmy Kimmel. She sort of not she's not coming out directly and saying Brendan Cardiff this or that but she's basically by implication suggesting that the that the Kimmel people had every reason to do what they seem like they're about to do. Look, it is insidious in a couple of different ways. I mean, one of them is that it's causing this kind of disruption that as she said as matter of principle, you know, these these shows shouldn't be an impassage where they have to make decisions about booking on the basis of the kind of economic pressure that they feel from their affiliates.

21:40Federal retaliation. Right. The money, you know, the way that these these are these are shows where affiliate relations matter a ton, right? And it's the reason why Kimmel was able to survive. The last assault on Kimmel was because the affiliates eventually looked at the economics and said we're sticking with Kimmel, but they recognize how that that is the the place where the FCC has the most leverage is by putting pressure not just on ABC, not just on Jimmy Kimmel, but on on the people whose economics are all built around maintaining their license status. But I would say it's more it's insidious in another way in a call, which is, you know, and I've said this before on the show, but if you were to look at the course of the last 19 months, that's about how long we've been in Trump 2.0 and you were to add up. And you were to add up the number of minutes of topical, political programming created by all of the streaming platforms put together from all the Disney properties to Netflix, to Apple, to Amazon, all those places,

22:41kinds of platform that that when Alex and I made the circus where we lived on Showtime, I think that the number of minutes in which Donald Trump's name was mentioned in a current context, not some historical thing politically, it's close to zero. And that is the most insidious part of this. The most insidious part of this is that all of those companies which would say if they were here, well, we're not in the news business, but all of them would love to have the traffic of the news business. And a lot of them were dipping their toes in the news business various ways at all of these places, HBO, at Showtime and all these places were kind of like edging into that in the last 19 months their attitude has been we are not going to be in that business right now. And that is not because there's not viewers there. They look at YouTube with enormous envy at the amount of traffic that YouTube is generating around political content. And then they look at that and they say, yeah, but Donald Trump's FTC could stop a merger that we want to do. Donald Trump's could go after is we do something with the spectrum could probably could get in our way in terms of something we want to do in Europe. The regulatory and then the litigation we could be directly

23:42soon. The regulation regulatory and litigation risk of talking about Donald Trump has kept all of those companies essentially out of the business of topical contemporary news commentary about directly about Donald Trump, not just, but not just that. Their attitude is basically like we don't want any part of this for now, at least until circumstances change. Well, let me guarantee that I never am in business with any streamer by saying this. I think history will judge the cowards for the cowards that they are. It's Wagner. And I think that when when you're just debating tax cuts and government-funded healthcare, okay, sure, sit it out. But when the very survival of our democracy is on the line, sitting it out seems like a really lame move for your brand. And you've got a president at 30%. You've got the capitulators coming in even more unpopular than the deeply unpopular president. And you've got the freedom to broadcast on the line. I mean, what is your sense of what it's going to take to sort of crack the spell of collective cowardice?

24:46I mean, look, Nicole, the reality is that these corporations want to make a lot of money. This is why there is bipartisan outrage directed at corporations and corporate profits because they do not have the interests of the public at heart. Now, there's always going to be tension there, but it is so asymmetrical at this point. Look at the Sherry Redstone paramount merger. I mean, she literally sold CVS news so that she could make money billions of dollars in a corporate merger. And that's the calculation that every single one of these organizations, which often have business well beyond broadcast and content and entertainment, that's the calculation they're making. And just like John, I mean, look it, we've been out there respectively pitching shows, may trying to make content. People don't want to touch politics. They look at what Brendan Carr said a year ago to Benny Johnson about Jimmy Kimmel. We can do this the hard way or we can do this to eat the easy way, but someone's got to take action on Jimmy Kimmel. That's this, that's like God, that's Mofioso language. And that is something

25:46that everybody in corporate America recognizes and hears echo every time someone suggests coverage that is political in nature and that would be uncomfortable at least for this administration. I mean, it is a state of affairs, but it's also the reality of how media is structured these days. I mean, it makes South Park so interesting to me. But literally just to read the press release, which is a portrait of heroism in our time. Because the brand of telling the truth, like I'm not talking about, you know, just political news content, but the brand of being against Trump or capable of laughing at his insanity is like what 70 to 75% of all Americans. And to me, the business calculation to miss out on something that 75% of Americans are interested in is insane. Yes, well, I will tell you, you know, this week's South Park renamed the show. South America. But the best part about that was the press release that they center out announcing it, which they said inspired by the bravery and patriotism of Apple and Google. We are changing the name of South

26:48Park to South America. We especially want to thank our parent company, Paramount, a Skydance capitulation. Yeah, no, Karris Swisher and Trude will be my hearst forever. I love it. And it's got Galo and Karris Swisher have been sort of posting about the little things you can do. My search engine is now duck duck go. Do you want to help me? I guess probably why I can't find anything. Alex Wider, thank you for spending some time with us today. John sticks around a little bit longer. When we come back, we continue to showcase the candidates, hoping to flip control of Congress. The Democrat running strong in a tight race against a Trump apologist in Wisconsin's third district is our next guest. Don't go anywhere. Ever since I was young, I've watched people working hard, chasing opportunity, making sacrifices, doing everything they can to build a better life. And now we're shining a light on what matters

27:48most. Our economy, our national identity, our democracy, our future. The stakes have never been higher. It's all on the line. I'm the line with Ombicia Menendez, weekdays at 12 p.m. Eastern on MS now. If the mainstream media actually reported Republican wins, this environment would not be like this at all. And let's be super clear. Donald Trump is on the ballot. I'm very proud to have him come back to the state of Wisconsin anytime he wants to come. He's wildly popular in my district. Someone saw that and is getting ready to drop him off there. That was Republican Congressman Derek Van Orden of Wisconsin, trying to assert that everything is great in his state and then blaming the media for the liberal reality that people all across the country and especially his constituents in Wisconsin are feeling today. Where Donald Trump's tariffs enabled by congressional Republicans have caused the average Wisconsin household an extra $2,179 this year. But according

28:52to that guy, Congressman Van Orden, it's the mainstream media's fault for people in his state paying an average of $4.01 for a gallon of gas compared to $2.94 one year ago. But you heard him. He wants Donald Trump in his state visiting his district all the time, anytime. Maybe that'd be good for Congressman Van Orden because last night Van Orden was not in his district. No, he was in Dallas speaking at the Republican so-called midterm convention, which is pretty rich when you consider that Van Orden doesn't hold in person town hall meetings with his own constituents in his own state. Wisconsin's third district is the western part of the state. It's one of the races considered a prime pickup opportunity for Democrats that might help determine control of Congress. It is right now considered a toss-up. Joining us now is Congressman Van Orden's opponent, Democratic Congressional candidate Rebecca Cook. Thank you so much for being here. Thank you so much for having me. Do you think, would you like to see Donald Trump in this

29:54hotly-condisted district with that help you? He's been there. I mean, he's come to the district. Direct Van Orden campaign on his own platform or accomplishments because he has very few of them. He's brought in over 10 cabinet officials to my district. He brought in our K-Junior not to talk about the hospitals that we've seen close or rising health care costs, but to talk about moving milk to the top of the food pyramid. In that same week, he brought Donald Trump to the third congressional district to talk about the wins and things that they've done for farmers. When, in fact, farmers are struggling more than ever because of a visible tariffs impact on our soybeans and cranberry producers, the Warren Iran, which has increased input prices for diesel and fertilizer. And then the failure at expanding ACA tax credit premiums, which spokes many farmers rely on the ACA for their health care, seeing insurance premiums go up from $400 to $1,800 a month. When Trump came to Western Wisconsin, he talked more about building his

30:54fancy ballroom and his reflecting pool than what he was going to do to make people's lives better. And Direct Van Orden is a blackie. Is your campaign feeling like you have an opportunity to engage people who 20 months ago voted for Donald Trump and turn them into people who will vote for you? Absolutely. I mean, just this weekend, I was knocking doors in a rural community all-pixed and it's my first Waysian universe. So it's a lot of people that are independent. It's a lot of people that are Republicans. I talked to one independent who named the Warren Iran in particular about why he wasn't going to vote for Republicans in November and why he was frustrated. He has an then listed son and didn't feel like that sort of power was something that the president should be exercising and just feels like everything is too expensive because of this Warren Iran. I talked to one household, the woman answered and almost shut the door on me. She said, we're Republicans, but her husband said, wait, wait, wait. I mean, I ended up having a robust

31:57conversation about how people in DC are so corrupt and that it feels like, you know, people are going out and knocking their own doors, certainly. But like, people aren't showing up and talking about the issues that are keeping folks up at night. And I think that this administration and Derek Van Orden have sold people this bill of goods that it is no good. And people are really waking up to that. I think people are concerned about being able to go to the gas pump to the grocery store to have any sort of money left over after they pay their rent and mortgage, let alone go on a summer vacation as we're winding down from the summer. And that's, you know, people are just struggling out there. And when, you know, they're saying everything's bright and everything's good. Look at all these awesome things we've done. But folks don't feel that in their bones here. They don't feel that in their pocketbooks here. And when Republicans have the house, the Senate and the White House, there is only one group of people to blame for why people's costs are increasing. And that's the far right. And people like Derek Van Orden, who does the bidding of Donald Trump.

32:58You mentioned the corruption. Does that come up for people? I mean, are they taking in not just how economically stressful these times are in terms of cost rising. But at the same time, the price of gas, the price of groceries, the price of health care, the price of housing, are going up. Donald Trump is making everything gold and seems to be getting very rich as our kids. Right. Well, and so I believe in banning stock trading for members of Congress. I don't think that members of Congress should be operating off of insider information to further enrich themselves. And that goes for folks on both sides. I've taken the no corporate package. I don't want to be beholden to corporations. I want to be doing work for the people that sent me there, not for big tech or big pharma. And that's the opposite of Van Orden. He has taken the maximum contribution from Elon Musk, from SpaceX. This is well data centers are coming into our backyards. He's doing the bidding for those sorts of folks when I'm working to make sure that people can afford their health

33:59here, that people are able to go to the grocery store and get their basic needs met. And I think that that's people see that. And I'm really deeply frustrated and starting about the special interest play in our elections and the culture of corruption. Rebecca Cook will stay on top of your race. It is a toss up. Thank you for spending time with us today. Absolutely. Thanks for having me. There's some. Thank you. There's some breaking news we want to tell you about. On Donald Trump's Retribution campaign against his perceived political enemies is being spearheaded by his Department of Justice in Joe DeGeneva. He's a prosecutor who is brought in to lead the DOJ's far-fretched so-called Grand Conspiracy case based in South Florida has resigned his position we're learning today. DeGeneva telling the Associated Press quote, I did in fact resign, calling it a quote, honor and a privilege to serve Trump in the DOJ. He declined to comment on the circumstances of his departure. How many this is like the white whale, figuring out how to prosecute director John Brennan and others that they view as part of,

35:03I don't know what, the Grand Conspiracy two, three elections ago. Right. It's for Donald Trump. It's the way we'll for anybody who helps him. It's just a trip down a rabbit hole where if you go far enough down you end up getting stripped of your law license. Right? You know, this is, we know that Joe DeGeneva has not said anything as to why. It could be that at 81 years old he looked up and was like, this is more of a, this was a mistake for me to have taken this case because there is no there there. And this is just going to be a wood shipper that I'm fed into. If I don't end up with, in dining, John Brennan, in prosecuting him, I'm going to be in Donald Trump's crosshairs. Who needs that at the age of 81? And if I do try to actually prosecute him, I'm going to end up with a really julie audience, which is ultimately disbarred. I mean, even in 81, it's not a great thing to have as part of your record. It's not a great, he had Joe DeGeneva once had a relatively respectable career in law enforcement and in the legal realm, he doesn't need that stain to be the last thing that he's remembered for in public. So, you know, this is kind of a lose lose. You would like to think that he could have seen that coming a mile away, but I think he got,

36:07it feels like he got into this thing and looked up and said, there is no way that this is going to end well for me. And so I think what I will do now is, is, I didn't sense it. Do you guys have a sense that it's been more time with my family? Well, and the career federal prosecutor who left the office, because she didn't find facts to support a prosecution of director Brennan or in this grand conspiracy, was trusted enough to prosecute one of the people who threatened the life of Donald Trump. So this was a career prosecutor held in very good standing up until the point where she refused to participate in the grand conspiracy. Yes, and, you know, like I said, one of the reasons why Judge Jennerbott should have seen this coming a mile away. That was an early clue that that so you were being handed away an elephant of a case here that was going to end up not being good for you no matter what you did. But again, Godspeed to Judge Jennerbott, I think in the end, he has probably the cause of justice by deciding to step away. One of the things that's happening down here is that there, it's like a bank shot, right?

37:09They've got Judge Aileen Cannon, who they hoped to get in front of in that district that Fort Pierce District. And then they've got this very compliant office. There's a, the US attorney, I think, for the Southern District of Florida, someone who goes on MAGA friendly media and talks openly about the case. Caroline Levitt, bless her a little heart before she resigned, went to the podium and described the grand conspiracy as she saw it. It was like, it was like one of those Kerry Matheson apps at the bunch of red string tied here, there are and everywhere, no insult to Kerry Matheson. But this is something that is predicated on nonsense and things that John Durham and Bill Barr and others have plenty of time to look into and found nothing. I have this image now on my head of Kerry Matheson, and what have her peak manic episodes looking up at the Caroline Levitt conspiracy? Looking up and going, you guys are nuts. This is what I could do. Yeah, it's, you know, what's what's to say about it? Well, we've got two more years to ride this app. But I can say that it's his day is too wacky for dirt to do that. That's what I mean. I just mean to say, we'll be talking about it again in

38:11future if they continue to pursue it. But at this moment, I think we have to say is, you know, Joe, Joe, about his, without his, his left the chat has left the chat. I also will say third district of Wisconsin, most important thing to know about that is where LaCrosse was constant is. You know what's in LaCrosse was constant? The world's largest six pack of beer at the G. Highland, brewery. That's really, really, really. I wish I knew that going in. You're never one to not participate. Why don't you jump in with that? You're really important. Try to keep that seriously. You know, if they, if they keep, she's great though. She's great. She's great. I think feel pretty confident that she will, she would, if asked Guarantee that that that status of the world's biggest six pack will remain in LaCrosse as long as she's the high-reset. Well, however back we'll put it to her, when we come back, we will together be joined by longtime former 60 minutes producer, his new book, Mattis Howe, is an inside look at the iconic broadcast and what's at risk for the country of going away under the new mega-friendly leadership at CBS News. Don't go anymore. Whether we are ready or not, whether we are happy about it

39:19or not, a brand new era of 60 minutes is days away. The nearly 60-year national institution, national treasure, eroded in less than one year by the editorial interference of new leadership at CBS News. That's according to a growing group of veteran journalists and producers fired, they're speaking up. That now includes the show's longtime managing editor who says he refused to compromise his principles by jamming White House talking points into his reporting. Now a new book serves as a timely and necessary reminder of what the golden age of 60 minutes continues to teach us, that fearless and free journalism matters in a democracy. The book is called Mattis Howe, it's by Harry Moses, a longtime former producer at 60 minutes for nearly four decades. Harry writes this, quote, the unique appeal of 60 minutes did not become clear to me until I began producing stories that took me away from big cities. And I saw firsthand how the show was impacting average Americans. Quote, nobody stuck up for us. We were told time after time, quote, until you guys

40:21came along. His former colleague fired veteran correspondent Scott Pelley writes in the forward that this is also a book about consequences. And that quote Moses believes as I do that the scales of justice tilt toward the powerful journalism is one of the weights that bring democracy closer to balance. Joining us at the table, it is truly an honor. Former 60 minutes producer, the author of Matt as hell, how 60 minutes took on the powerful and made television history. Harry Moses joins me in John Howe and thank you for being here. Thank you for having me. So I'm going to try to learn from you and try to be a journalist here and ask you what you're hearing today about what's going to happen on Sunday night at 60 minutes. Sure. What I'm hearing today is, this sounds like it's relatively unimportant to people who are just tuning in every Sunday and watch this, but they have no bank of pieces. What does that mean? What it means is that when you, let me take you back, you walked into a 60 minutes office when Mike Wallace and Morley,

41:24say for and rather was there and Don Hewitt was running it and there was a big blackboard. Actually, it was a whiteboard. And all of the stories that were done were, we're, Hewitt wrote them on the blackboard and there were, you know, at least 10, sometimes 13 or 14, and he could pick and choose. So, you know, to build a show that would not just cover the news and be what 60 minutes is, but also have a wonderful mix of pieces. That's part of the show. It's one of the reasons that people watched it. They may not have known it, but they watched it because the show was vastly entertaining in addition to being terrific journalism. They don't have that option now. Sad, but they brought these new people in after 60 minutes ahead of very successful year. And they brought in people who, you know, I've never met Nick built and who's the executive producer. So, I don't know, I only know about them when I read, but you cannot come in and run a show

42:30like this if you've never done it before or not even done anything very close to it. It's just not possible. And look, I do, I want the show to succeed. Of course I do, but succeed in the way that 60 minutes has always succeeded, you know, with straightforward journalism, no holds barred, you know, we're going to come at you if you're a bad guy. We'll give you, we'll, we'll, we'll talk to you. We'll give you a air time. I don't know whether that is going to happen again. I mean, I would, I would love to see it happen again, but I don't know. I think one of the, you know, the, the, the, it goes to the question of the bank, you know, you have in, in Barry Weiss in Nick building in all of this new leadership over there. People who have various accomplishments in their career have been, have been able to do things that have been real. But what they have not ever done before is what you're talking about, which is

43:32they've never been in newsrooms before. They've never been in, in place, they've done television news before. That would seem to me to be the kind of thing that is crippling on a bunch of different levels because, you know, I don't put television news above newspaper journalism or about magazine journalism or about books, but it is a very distinct set of skills that are required to make TV news journalism, especially at the highest level, do you get 60 minutes? Absolutely, absolutely. Absolutely. And I wish them well. I wish them very well. What do you think though? I mean, the journalists that, that you know, some of the journalists that, that, that right here in the forward have accused them of extraordinary, unprecedented levels of interference editorially. What does that mean at a place like 60 minutes? Well, what it, what it means is that it won't be 60 minutes. It's that simple. If you start telling people, take the, the Minneapolis story that they did when they were told at the last minute to find footage that proved the case for ICE. I think you don't do that. And, and Scott was pissed off about it as,

44:39as well as he shook Ben. He said they were 19 minutes from not making air. You, you can't do that. You can't do, you shouldn't do it at the last minute, but you shouldn't do it at all. And, and it's scary if this happens on a, on a regular basis. Without Scott though, what protects it? What protects it are certainly Leslie and, uh, stall and Bill Whitaker and John Worthheim know how the show works. What protects it also are the people that they've hired to the, the new correspondents that they've hired. They can always stand up and say to management, you can't do this with, but they're new guys on the block. I don't know whether they're going to do that. I hope that they will. Producers can also, but they, but traditionally, they don't have the same clout that the correspondents do or getting paid a lot more money. And it's their face in the air and their careers that people see. So if they don't stand up to power, uh, the show's going to go down the tubes. It's that simple.

45:47It's such an important, an important chapter. I'm sure when you set out to write it, you didn't know this would be the news environment in which the, I had no idea. I was so glad to hear and we're so glad to have your insights in your, well, thank you so much. Thank you so much. Thank you for being here. The book is Madness Hell. How 60 minutes took on the powerful and made television history. Don't Halman. Thank you so much for spending so much of the art. We should say you would have been here the whole hour. You guys stuck in traffic. My God. That's crazy. I'm going to remember in New York City, man. I'm going to teach you how to ride this subway. I feel like that's its own Netflix show. That's a true show. We get to get a man. That's a good dog track. Yeah. Great, great for us. We'll be right back. Thank you so much for letting us into your homes tonight. We are grateful. Saturday, September 26th, join MS now live in Texas for our biggest event yet with Rachel Maddo, Jen Saki, Michael Steele and more for a day of powerful conversations and timely insights in a crucial state for the midterms. The democracies heal and advance themselves by engaging everybody

46:53where they are. Plus exclusive community experiences MS now live together in Texas, September 26th. Get tickets today at ms.now slash together.