The Mincing Rascals 6.3.26: Scott Pelley fired, Bears stadium saga, Mendoza running

When did the stair handrail become your new best friend? It's time to call Joint Relief Institute, fast, safe, FDA approved, covered by Medicare, 708888-000000. Today is Wednesday. It's June 3, 2026. Holy cow, it's already 241 in the afternoon. Hi, this is John Williams. This is the Mincing Rascals podcast, the podcast for people who care about Chicago. Listen for me weekdays on WGN Radio from 10 to 2. And listen for my podcast series on the Bill of Rights. We're calling it the 10 American Commandments. And you can find that at WGNRadio.com on the John Williams page. On our panel today, Eric Zohran Mamdani, former. Chicago Tribune columnist, publisher of the Picayune Sentinel on Substack, and Brandon Pope, the multimedia journalist and author of Brandon Pope's screening room. Steve Bertrand joins us, purveyor of the Steve Bertrand Travel Business and host of Steve Bertrand on Books podcast at wGNradio.com. You know Steve is a longtime journalist at WGN Radio. Okay, guys, so today we'll talk about kinks in the Trump armor. And the 60 Minutes, Scott Pelley's story. Reviews of the Obama Center are in. Brandon, you are there, right? Boy, are you like with the cool kids? You were already there? I was already there. I'll be going again tomorrow. Did you go to that presser today as well? I did not go to the presser today. No. It's beautiful, though. I'll set a time limit on Bear Stadium Talk as it crowds out discussions of other missed opportunities in Springfield last week. And I want to talk about the latest on the Broadview Six. I was actually going to open with the Broadview Six, but I'm going to call an audible here and ask you guys to consider the Scott Pelley firing over at CBS. Did Scott Pelley want to get fired? Do you think from 60 minutes? At a staff meeting, Pelley cut off the new executive producer of the news magazine show. saying that they're murdering the program. He said that this Nick Bilton guy and Bari Weiss had no or little qualifications for the jobs they have. So did Bilton have just cause to fire him? Did he have to fire him? And does 60 Minutes in CBS News need some sort of overall? The back and forth continue this week. Pellie said they wanted him to inject falsehoods in bias into a story. Bari Weiss responded by saying she wants everyone to work in a room of mutual respect. She wanted to find a way back with Pellie. She said we weren't able to do so. Then Scott Pelley said at no point did they try and find a way back. Steve, well, let's start with you today. As you've been well, this maybe is the closest to what you did for a living for 40 years here. So what was your reaction to this story? It's got to end. This is just, it's got to end. It's just ridiculous. And if Pelley's to be believed, and if I have to pick someone in the fight to believe, I think I'm going to go with Pellie over.

The people running 60 minutes now, they're asking him to inject untruths in the story. They're asking him to rush things. I think what's happening there is a shame. Did he want to get fired? I don't think you wanted to get fired. Did he expect to get fired? Probably. If you were Nick Bilton, would you have fired him? No, because you're just amplifying the conflict, right? I mean, what if you just swallow it and... lived to fight another day. I don't know. I don't think I would have fired him. Brandon, I was wondering to that. Like, who has, I thought you can't fire Scott Pelley. If you do that, then that'll play exactly into the case he's making. I feel like if you're Nick Bilton, you kind of had to fire Scott Pelley. I'm just, I'm jumping into like, just like, if I'm Nick Bilton. I'm hired on for this role. Scott Pele just called me unqualified in front of all these people and is undermining me and dressing me down in front of all these people. If all the leaks of the conversation are to be believed, and I know someone that was actually there for that conversation, I do believe all that to be true and fiery, I could, you speak to any, you know, someone that's your supervisor like that. Yeah, I think it can be a fireable offense. At the end of the day, that's right, that you are subordinate to the executive producer. Exactly. If I got fired every time I said WGN leadership was inaction. But you didn't. I mean. Right. At the end of the day, he... Or not even me, Brandon Johnson. If John got busted for all the times, he's ripping on G& management. Thank you, Steve. That's even worse now what you've suggested, because I'm still working there. Go ahead, Brandon. But if a new guy comes in as your boss and your first thing you say to him is like, you are not qualifier for the job you have, I... Like, right away, you put me on the defensive as a supervisor. And I got, I'm thinking ego gets involved, but it's like, I got to show this person, uh, who's boss. So I don't think Scott Pelly was trying to get fired, but I think he went into it, you know, something we call FU money. This man has money, access, resources. It's like, what's the worst you're going to do? Fire me? Yeah. All right. He felt empowered to stand up for his people. He put on, he understood the privilege he had. I think he knew that firing was a possibility, especially if you're going to come after someone's qualifications. It's been described as performative, that that thing was recorded, this initial meeting, and so Pelly was playing for the camera, if you will.

It was a private meeting. It was not supposed to be public. And I wonder whether they would have fired him if the recording of it hadn't gone public, if it hadn't been so frontal attack. You know, if I were CBS, I would have released a statement that said something like, we regret the tone, the content of Mr. Pelley's remarks. We understand that transitions can be unsettling and create anger and skepticism. And we wish he had chosen other words and maybe a different venue. But we continue to value. his work, we intend to prove to him and other members of the 60 Minutes team that the program will improve and thrive. Something I know, I know, boring. But, you know, corporate speak. Steve is exactly right. Steve is exactly right that all this did was call extra attention to what's been going on at CBS. And I think if they had taken the high road, yeah, it would have been hard. I would have had to swallow a lot because Pelley was pretty aggressive. But that's what I would have recommended if I were a crisis manager, which is like, you don't want to make this worse because next thing you know, they're going to get, I mean, Pelley's 68. He's, you know, a retirement age. And no tag days for him. He's probably got a lot of money, and he probably can get another job in American media. Leslie Stahl is 84. She's been on that program since the Earth cooled off. And Bill Whitaker is 74, another prominent correspondent. Those two could easily just, you know, resign in solidarity and really put a finger in the eye of the people who are running CBS into the ground, it looks like. Yeah. So I think this is a big mistake on their part, not to kind of ignore this. So imagine you, Leslie Stahl. You put in the career that you have there. You've built not just a reputation, but the show's reputation. Do you help now destroy it? by resigning and walking away, or do you try to weather it? I was wondering if that's what Pelly was doing like. In Pelley's mind, how does this help the show, because they're not going to fire built in just because you don't like them, so how does it help the show if you are... tearing him down on day one. I'm on Scott Pelly's side on this, but unless his intention was to get fired and, you know, be a symbol, I don't know how he thought him blowing up like that was going to help the program or his colleagues. I think probably, I mean, I don't know if that was his thought process. I think he was saying what needed to be said. I think he was maybe trying to put the inmates in charge of the asylum a little bit. I don't know. I mean, I'm glad he said what he said, I think. I'm glad we're talking about this. I'm glad that if the management was trying to put things in stories that were not true, that they're exposed for that and embarrassed by that and have to defend that. In the end, you know, I'm happy with what he did. I'm not happy that...

We probably won't be watching 60 minutes anymore because I've been waiting for that piece on the prison in El Salvador. As soon as they find room, they're going to sneak that in, right? That did not. That did drop. That did drop. Oh, okay. They did drop that in. And with changes that were so minor that Sharon Alfonsi, who was the correspondent on that, was wondering why they had held it for a month. And that was another. big blunder by Bari Weiss. So she didn't look at that piece until the last minute. And then she pulled it for no reason clearly because when it ran a month later, it was basically the same piece. And it was just one of those things where you think like, this is rookie management here running this place that you can. You can do things like that. You can, you know, if you're worried about your correspondence, you need to get out a little bit ahead of them and try to work with them before the controversy blows up. They failed to do that. And here, they clearly failed to bring Pellie. Not I don't think they can bring him on board, but at least let him err his grievances in private rather than in a recorded meeting. You know, if he had gone and given a speech. somewhere and said this, then you can say, well, you know, that was really confrontational. But this was during a, this was during a staff meeting. Somebody was recording it. And, you know, his, his ostensibly private words were made public. Like I say, Yeah, they got grounds to fire him for sure. Whether they should have, under those circumstances, I don't think so. I've got mad respect for Scott Pelly. I always have. Just being the TV guy I am, I've always viewed Scott Pelly as just like one of the best broadcasters in the game. I don't think he ever should have lost his CBS Evening News anchor gig. I thought he was incredible. It may have been to some people a boring show, but I thought his delivery, the way he carried himself and gave us the stories, was just so throwback to a time that just really, you know, the Walter Cronkites of the world, his style, his poise, the way he goes about telling a story. It's never overreactionary. It's never inflammatory or sensational. It's always even-toned. You're making the case for why he got fired. That's the problem. I think we're talking about the wrong thing here, not about whether he should have been fired or wanted to be fired or expected to be fired. But I think we should be talking about the fact that this man of... you know, of great reputation is accusing his bosses of putting falsehoods or pushing to get falsehood in stories on CBS News. That's the story here. That's the crime. That's the thing that's happening in this country these days. That's what my listeners said. But when Eric and I were talking about it, we spent more time on the radio.

talking about the fact that the show is old and the format is old and how do you make it more sensational? The things I was teasing you about Brandon, but I mean, if you're Walter Cronkite, that's not selling on TikTok right now. That's not what people are diving into to watch on TV. It's weird. The statistics about 60 minutes are strong. It's revenue positive. It makes a lot of money. It's trending up. It has... It's the number one news show in America, but it is also, as has been described this week, a melting ice cube. It's getting smaller and smaller. I don't know what they're going to do about that. But so is the problem here that the show is old or old-fashioned, or is the problem here that it has been... skirting the truth in favor of the administration. The problem is an engineered problem from Bari Weiss, because you just referenced, and I know this for effect. 60 Minutes is doing better ratings-wise and on social than it has in a while. Yeah. The stories perform. The stories are and have been. They're unique. They're different. They're able to still grab the newsmakers and give you these sit-downs that no one else is getting. And what we're noticing, is that overall viewership of the evening news and other CBS products is down because people feel there's interference or there's some sort of tainting. If they feel that is the case with 60 minutes, I'm sure they will follow suit as well. But I don't think 60 minutes is... a melting ice cube. Sure, every traditional TV outlet has to find ways to adapt and find ways to make sure they are omnipedia and not just going for a TV audience. With the numbers as they are, it just feels like a made-up problem. You don't have to shake the vote too much here. The journalism is what sells. The stories are what sell and 60 minutes still carries when it comes to that. People are still sharing. Hey, it was really awesome sit down with R. Kelly. I think that's too generous. Linear TV is melting if 60 minutes is. It is. Oh, for sure. Got me there. Yeah, but that's part of a larger problem. That's not a 60 minutes problem. Well, it is a 60 minutes problem because they're on linear TV. They're omnipedia, sure. But I mean, that's a TV news magazine with 3 20-minute segments and then something at the end, right, Steve? Yeah, but if all of television, linear television, as you call it, is shrinking, I don't think that... sacrificing your brand is worth trying to resurrect the show or grow the ratings there. Keep in mind, too, this is the crowd that fired Stephen Colbert, right? I mean, so I don't know if ratings is a concern of theirs, right? He was doing pretty well. I think Eric and I should have talked more about that. That it wasn't that the format is old fashion. It was that...

Pelley is an example of CBS trying to go more conservative, Eric. Do you agree with that? Well, yeah, and they've given, first of all, their agreement to run interviews with politicians unedited, their agreement to allow people who they are going to interview, to choose the correspondent who interviews them. I mean, this is all playing into this big, bad media. meme is going out there which which undercuts their own authority after after a while people think well you know the politicians are picking the correspondence they want to interview them and uh we are bowing to the administration in various ways i mean the reason that they held that piece on the el salvador prison was because they didn't have the correspondent did not have a response from the administration the white house about it she had tried to get and they wouldn't comment And that's good enough for any newspaper story you ever read, which is like, hey, you know, you don't write a story and accuse someone or something or close a scandal and not ask them about it, not put in a request or comment. But if they say no comment, that doesn't mean that they get to hold the story. And that's essentially what Bari Weiss did on that story, which is administration didn't comment. So we're going to hold the story until we can get someone to comment on it. that is giving the power to the person who you're exposing, who you're writing about. Like, oh, well, I don't want you to run that story, so I'm not going to comment so you can't run the story. That's not journalism. And I don't know where Bari Weiss got off thinking that. I'm rehashing something that's, what, six months old now? It's germane. It's part of a continuing story, yeah. But it's like... There is a sense that Paramount CBS is becoming more of a tool of the administration. They're bowing and scraping to Trump, and viewers are picking up on that. I don't watch CBS Evening News anymore. I thought they were doing a nice job with John Dickerson as a co-anchor, who I think is one of the best journalists in America, and they let him go. I think he resigned, but he saw the writing on the wall. So, you know, I think the place is kind of a little bit of free fall. I guess the ratings are not good for CBS evening news. And they think that what going TikTok is going to help them. I'm not sure what the strategy is here. Well, that's my question. What is the end game here? Because if the strategy now is, do not upset the Trump administration capitulate to the Trump administration, that admin's on the way out. And it's more unpopular than ever. So. Are you real, like, by saddling yourself to, hey, we have to be sort of this, you know, hand-in-hand partner of the Trump administration, are you long-term hurting the CBS News brand? I think absolutely you are because it's a lame duck presidency right now. The, help me out you guys. I don't, I'm not very good with mergers and acquisitions, but CPS, CBS was just part of a big. merger. I was just going to bring this point up, but that deal is done. I understand that, but they curried favor with Trump to Trump. They fired whomever, Stephen Colbert, whatever, in order to get this acquisition through. Right. Yeah. Presumably. Yeah. They settled the lawsuit. But so the percentage of that whole conglomerate now.

that we're talking about, this giant, how much is 60 minutes really there, right? So in the end, they can blow up 60 minutes. Who cares? They got the big mama in the backyard. Am I making any sense? Oh, what do you mean? They got the big mama in the back yard. Well, I mean, they've got such a big company now. And if the cost of it is just to lose the revenue from 60 minutes. That's not that big of a deal. So continue to suck up to Trump. You still go home with the biggest speech ball. Well, but could you say the opposite? Because 60 Minutes is such a small piece of this giant pie, let them do whatever they want. It's no big deal. It's just one of our tiny little properties and one of our giant empire, no? Except it is a respected news outlet. Yeah. Right. Less so now. So this is from Chris Silesa, who is actually writing, I think, for News Nation, is that where this was posted? This is on his substack, but he's a contributor to News Nation. Can't stand this guy. Well, then I'll read even more. Why don't you like Chris Silliza? Oh, I just think he's a heck. I'm not a fan of his work. Why then was there a rush to tout Pelley as a hero and built in and by extension, Bari Weiss, as the bad guys? He says, because I think as a whole, a lot of journalists mostly tied to legacy media, but also some in the independent space, are still clinging to the idea that the way things worked up to even five to ten years ago can still work today and in the future and they. can't. And that's maybe what you were bringing up too, Brandon. That is, I don't know what the fix would look like. So if the format is old-fashioned, I don't know what you're going to do. You're a TV show, right? I mean... And by old-fashioned, you mean truthful? Okay, I'm going to let you have that. But, I mean, really, none of us, I think, are... young enough or smart enough maybe to know how you get young people to be interested in a 30-minute TV newscaster, a 60-minute news magazine show that is of substance that does talk about important things in an informative and unbiased way. I try and do that on the radio all the time, and I don't know how well I'm doing it that. My audience is older. I mean, how do you do that? I think that's very difficult. This is a question that I wrestle with at the Picking and Sentinel, and I took a reader survey recently found that's like 90% of my readers are over 60. And I talked to my wife, like, how do I get younger people to read my, you know, subscribe to my substack? And it just, you know, she's just like, I am weird. We don't know how to do that. And I don't know, you know, this 60 minutes segments are 13 minutes long each.

And is that too long? Is that too much of an attention span ask for younger viewers? No. I don't know. Do you do more pop stars? Do you do more trend stories, fashion? Maybe you accept that the program is not for 20-year-olds. Right. How do you get 65-year-olds to watch Bugs Bunny? You don't. The show's not made for them. Well, you can make a living on people that are over the age of 60, too. It's like they got more money than the 20-year-olds anyway. I don't think you have to apologize for having 90% of your people over a certain age, 60, 70, whatever it is. If they're still people, they still vote, they still spend money on cars and groceries. So there's nothing wrong with that. But if your concern is, I'm not worried about making money on my audience. I'm worried about like democracy or America, news getting out to our kids and grandkids. That's the thing that torques me off. My kids and grandkids, well, my nieces and nephews, they're not real good news consumers, that they're too busy. I was busy when I was their age too, but. I found 60 minutes once in a while. 2020 was a popular TV show once upon a time. You'd be in touch. I think the key thing, you know, we wrestle with this question all the time in the TV industry. You know, the latest Nielsen report for the first time showed YouTube having the highest viewership over TV for the first time ever. And so you're seeing local stations and these networks like CBS. you know, experiment with streaming and a streaming model and what that looks like. Is that the solution for 60 minutes? I'd argue that if 60 minutes is looking to appeal to younger audiences, then... Part of it will have to be new era of journalists coming in, embracing this kind of blend of content creator and journalist that's emerging, and blending the two. Like, truly making sure that your social product and your online product is a part of your TV product, that it is all one and the same. This is all easier said than done, and it takes real strategy to build this. But I think the fair criticism of Bari Weiss is that... She doesn't have that experience doing this. She has no TV experience. She's trying to booth shows and lead into errors because she doesn't know how to booth a show. She has an inherent misunderstanding of what TV is, what visual journalism is, and you're always going to fail at that if you don't have the basics of that. And so... The leadership at the top, I think, has to change for 60 minutes or CBS itself to be able to adapt to the digital age in a way that I think NBC is doing really well. I think ABC is doing better at because they're understanding you have to get in the arena right now and adapt to these content creator journalists that's out there and go beyond just your TV linear product. You make good points, Brandon. But again, this is CBS. This is CBS. This is CBS.

Edward R. Murrow. This is Eric Severide. This is Walter Cronkite. This is Dan Rather. This is Scott Pelly. And the issue isn't that their audience is shrinking. The issue is that they were... telling the reporters to lie in their stories. Yeah, exactly. Well, I wish I knew to what degree that was happening. I don't doubt that, Steve. I mean, I can sense it myself. I'm angry at the network, too, to the degree I get angry at networks. But I don't watch the CBS Morning News since Gail King went up and Jeff Bezos's rocket ship. So I've been mad at them for a long time. I'm not kidding about that. I wonder if the same way social media was imagined to be way to support and promote linear broadcast television. We almost need to think of it as the opposite. Go ahead and do your 60 Minutes TV show, but the real value is going to be people watching a segment the next day online or sharing a segment that you did. Don't worry about the ratings on 60 Minutes. Worry about the footprint that it has afterwards. Does it go viral? And that's where the numbers and money will be. And maybe that's, because it still has to be a visual product, it still has to be reporting on something. I think people can watch for 13 minutes. I think people do. I would argue 60 minutes has been doing that. I think a lot of the more famous interviews we think of were 60 minutes interviews that went viral. I think if you looked at the top 25 performing like. broadcast news to social videos. I'd say the majority are probably 60 minutes pieces from Anderson Cooper from that one guy from Starz, I forget his name, he has a lot of sports pieces like on Caitlin Clark and folks like that. He did the Jalen Hertz interview. Like these are stories that crack. Yeah, they cover more like entertainment sports and things like that. But they're the ones that really are getting a lot of virality. If they can really tap into that and build momentum around that, I, I don't think they're as dead in the water as it may be made to be or as a Bari Weiss made it out to be when she came in. Had to laugh at what Frank Conniff posted. He said, soon, this is a tweet, I'm Scott Bale. I'm Kevin Sorbo. I'm Roseanne Barr. I'm Andrew Tate. Those stories plus James Woods tonight on 60 Minutes. That's nice. There's your future, y'all. All right. Maybe vanilla ice in there. I know. I'm Kid Rock. I'm Kid Rock. Lindholm roofing has appointments available now to provide you a complete roofing, siding, gutter, and tuck pointing inspection. Call 773-283-283-7675 or Lindholmroofing. Tell them that Lou sent you. Lindholm roofing, their family, has your family covered. Maybe we should just stay in that lane for just a minute since we're there, but do you guys sense that maybe there are some kinks in the armor? I mean, think about some of the things that have happened. And the last week, a judge has said that Trump can't put his name on the Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Center.

Acting Attorney General now says that he won't create a nearly $2 billion slush fund for the president that the president wants. And how embarrassing that so many performers decided not to perform at that great American state fair that they were going to have. The music series has been canceled. Think Millie Vanilli. Canceled again. I wonder if... Maybe there's a sort of larger narrative here. Well, I like to say I'm not comfortable talking about the president's kinks, first of all. I don't have a rim shot for you, Steve, so just keep talking. The phrase is chinks in the armor. I said kinks. Yeah. Thank you for the correction. No, it's okay. No kink shaming here. Do you have anything else to add to this observation of mine, Steve? Yeah, I'd like to hear what Eric says. Well, let me ask you this. I mean, start with the most serious of those things. The $2 billion slush fund, Eric. What's your thought about that? It was actually 1.776, right? I get it. 1796. Yeah, I see what he did there. It was absurd, and I credit. some Republican senators for getting up on their hind legs and saying they're not going to support that. And Trump had to back down. Still, as part of that weird settlement where Trump is essentially suing himself since he controls the Department of Justice and he was suing the Department of Justice, is this provision that he's not going to be audited for his tax returns, which is... As we said today, that's not been clarified. No, it has been clarified. They said today or yesterday that that is still part of the deal. It's still part of the deal. Pardon me. Wow. And it has to, I mean, that you can't have that. And I hope that they really smack this down when it gets back to court, which is the fact that you have these parties suing each other that are not adverse. And you're talking billions of dollars. And Trump, you know, yeah. Trump's tax returns were illegally released. And the person who did it is spending five years in federal prison. And Trump suffered no... obvious damage from that. He was released and he won the presidency. I don't know how he's going to claim that he suffered a dollar's worth of damage from that, let alone, what was he, was he 10 billion? Even if he did suffer some damage, it doesn't warrant a get-out-of-taxation-free card for the rest of his life. And that's what they, right? I mean, you can do now whatever you want with your federal taxes. So can your kids, so can your business. And we vow that we will never prosecute you. How could that be? I still think that the stain of this. So now it's like, oh, but thank goodness it didn't happen. But that almost doesn't matter to me. If there were a $2 billion fund, $1.776 and funds were dispersed to the J-Sixers, it would break my heart. But it wouldn't change the cost of coffee or the fact that I want to spend time with my family. My life would continue unabated. But I think that we should.

punish anybody responsible for it, the acting attorney general, the president, Republicans who didn't say enough soon enough. The fact that the president even wanted to do this, that Todd Blanche would stand up for this and try to defend it. The Darren LaHood here in Illinois didn't stand up and say, this is outrageous. I won't sign off on this. I think that stain stays on all of them. The very fact that you would put it out there is so outrageous that you couldn't get. It's like if you go into a bank with a gun and I don't know, the gun doesn't work or you chicken out, that would be a bad example. You still tried to pull this thing off. That's my thought about it. Mayor Daly used to say, why do we reward people who are bad shots? Why, if you shoot someone, do you get less time if the person survives? Yeah. I think that's kind of what you're saying. You see this damn breaking, you know, the Maga base is kind of shrinking right now. I think that could have been predicted. You're seeing people like Megyn Kelly, Tucker Carlson, all these major influencers for Trump in the past, Joe Rogan, express regret, embarrassment, even apologizing for their votes, right? And so I think it's very clear people's own personal ambitions and ego. reelection concerns in a in a tight economic outlook for the country are always going to take priority over this siop loyalty to one figure um and so i i think that the president trump is seeing the walls close in in that regard um he even made he made a comment where he said um that a president doesn't have much effect over uh federal over city issues and he can't really do much to change crime and all these other issues it's on local government and the white house quickly deleted that um but it was an admission it kind of a a bleak kind of looking trump psyche right now he's not fighting back on the polls usually he disputes every poll out there but now he's even the the i guess the the one positive poll that's a right leaning poll that they sent him it's not even looking good for him at this point he knows that he is in trouble politically. Has he lost Raspuson? Because that's the poll that always. Yeah, that's the most favorable. There's no poll out there that has anything positive for Trump on the economy. Well, there is, if you ask Republicans. The one he'll quote will be Republicans. So some of the polls, depending on the question. I ain't seen it. You know, we could look at it up right now, but is his favorability number among Republicans? Above or below 50%. I'll bet it's still above 50%, Brandon, among Republicans. Overall. I'm sure it is, although there may be some issues like the economy or the war that people, that even Republicans have left him on. I agree with that too. The war probably is unanimous. But, you know, the war is part of, you know, the.

It's part of inflation, and inflation is undeniable right now, and he's trying to cherry pick certain items that have gone down in price. I guess avocados have dropped in price. He had nine items in his basket and said... Food is cheaper under Donald Trump. It's just not, and this is something that Biden tried to do and fail, which is to tell people that things were better than that they should be feeling better than they do. Biden was saying, look, inflation has come way down. Well, the prices had spiked during COVID. And that was partly due to the, you know, inflation reduction act under Biden. They were trying to keep the economy going and they ended up overheating it and inflation went up. And so people were still hurting from that even though inflation was coming down. And so he keeps telling them, Biden was telling him, you should feel better about things. You should feel better. And that doesn't work. Because you may be able to fool people about certain esoteric issues, but when you're talking about the receipt at the grocery store or the numbers on the gas pump, those aren't lying to people. And they're saying the president is telling me something that I'm not feeling. And... And therefore, you know, he's gaslighting me and I don't trust him anymore. And I'm not, I'm not with him anymore. And I think that's what's, they're still trying to do that. They're still trying to say, like, America's the hottest country in the world. And we've destroyed Iran's military capability while when Iran is shooting at U.S. votes in the strait. It's like... This strategy is not going to work for him as long as prices are going to keep going up. As long as this war goes on, we're spending billions of dollars on this war that nobody asked for. and that he said a year ago wasn't even necessary. And I think that's where he's losing a lot of his MAGA base. I don't know how much the war is hurting him because I, and I really don't. I mean, I'm not disputed, disagreeing with Eric or Brandon, but I don't know how much Americans are paying attention to it right now. It's either in or out of a ceasefire. It's confusing with the Hezbollah and Beirut. It was going to be over in four or five days, I know, but. And U.S. soldiers aren't being injured or hurt or killed. That's helpful. And I just, I don't know if it's on anyone's front burner right now. Gas prices are, and people do link them. But it's a link. It's kind of a kink in the armor, if you will. That's true. Another kink, huh? Hey, producer Pete said this isn't the most important thing. This has just been handed to me at the operation desk of the mincing rascals. Kinks in the armor is a common variation of the idiom, chink in one's armor. It refers to a vulnerability, weak spot, or a flaw in someone's character strategy or argument that can be exploited. Here's the breakdown. It merges two popular expressions. The first is chink in the armor, referring to a literal...

crack or gap in the suit of medieval armor that leaves a knight vulnerable. The second is working out the kinks, fixing small tight knots or flaws in a rope or project. So possible that kinks was not inappropriate. Steve, your witness. Let's go to, let's go with kinks because I think the third thing that they're not mentioning there is it's also in used in a different context, a slur. Right, and I think that's probably why we lean toward kinks more than the other word. Oh, you mean it's kinky as in kinky sex or something like that? No, as in referring to people from China or elsewhere. Oh, that would be C-H-I-N-K. I said K-I-N-K. Now we won't even say it, right? Oh, yeah, I know. Truly that. According to a new poll released today, this also from the Operation Desk by Marquette University, Steve. MAGA versus traditional Republicans. Within the Republican Party, favorability of the president is deeply tied to the Make America Great Again, the MAGA movement among MAGA-aligned Republicans, which is a subset. Trump's approval sits above 90% among non-Maga or more moderate Republicans. His approval is 36%. Boy, talk about Republican Democrat. This is Republican, Republican, if you will. It's 90% MAGA, and everybody else, however many that is. his approval falls significantly to around 36%. Does that poll show us what percentage of, I mean, they poll the number of Republicans, what percentage identified as MAGA and what percentage identified as tradition? I've always thought it was like 39% right, because that's what he always has. He's always got 39 or 40% of the vote or favorability. Does that sound right, Eric? That wouldn't be 39% of Republicans, though, because... It would be, that would be, that would be lower. Yeah. So a higher percentage than of Republicans, yeah, I don't know. I'm also interested in how many people, if the number of, the percentage of Republicans, people who consider themselves Republicans, has remained static or if it's dropped, right? So that's another thing to consider when you look at this number. He has 90% among the MAGA, but if the number of Republicans is dropped by. 10% or 15% that reduces that number two. The polling that I've seen suggests that people are more and more identifying as independence because, you know, polls are not great for Democrats either. True that. They're saying or proposing also. So I think you're seeing a broad swath of the public, that is, does not want to identify with either party that's sort of a pox on both their houses. I wonder what that'll mean to turn out in the midterm, Eric. That's a good question. I mean, I think there's motivation on both sides, either to continue the MAGA agenda or here's your one chance to at least flip one of the houses so that you have a check against everything that the president is doing. I would imagine Democrats might even be more motivated, but who knows if the approval numbers are bad for both parties, maybe people just shrug.

Well, I think it may come down to people voting against the other party rather than for their own party. So you may have a lot of Democrats who are not real happy with the direction to their party, but saying, well, we've got to put a check on Trump. And you may see a similar reaction among Republicans, although voting for Trump-back candidates is a bigger lift for independent voters. Say that again. Well, just that if you're an independent voter, you might be. You tend to be more wanting a check on the power of one party over the other. So he might say, well, I don't know which party I support, but I don't want the Republicans to have a house in the Senate and the White House still. Yeah, and the Supreme Court. You know, typically when the president, the second term president moves into his last two years, lame duck, that's when the other members of his party or her party fly free, right? They've got more independence to speak their mind. Right. I don't know if that's going to be the case here because. I mean, you know, it's not as if Donald Trump was going to go away after two years, right? I mean, I think he, unlike any other previous president, will try to stay in the ring and continue to pick candidates and endorse and put his thumb on the election scale. I don't know what you guys think about. Well, he did that in the four years in between his two terms, but he still had another term to come. Right. But I think now... I wonder if Republicans will be feeling free to go their own way or if they still will be under the cloud of the Trump endorsement. Well, the Senate did speak up in the case of the $1.776 billion fund, but I don't think loudly enough or quickly enough or publicly enough. Speaking of presidents, the Obama Presidential Center. has dropped on the south side. I'm reading from Michael Kimmelman, the architecture critics piece in the New York Times. Lee Bay wrote about it in the Sun Times. Papers around the world are writing about the Obama Center, which isn't officially open yet, but some people have had a chance to actually go in there, including journalists and photographers, and we're getting a look at it. And we've all seen the outside of it. And that's really what the architecture critics are writing a lot about. Lee Bay said that it reminds one. It's designed to remind somebody of four hands together reaching up to the sky. Here's how Michael Kimmelman writes about that in the New York Times. He said the Obama Center has dropped on Chicago South Side. Its signature building is a blocky granite-clad museum tower that the former president wanted to look like four upraised hands. Maybe it's me, but I don't see it. It's a boulder in a park. He refers to it as the Obama Lisk and calls it the tallest yet monument to presidential self-glorification. He says there's mixed messaging in the architecture and that it's cold and forbidding. Lee Bay said things like it's funereal, that it looks like it belongs in a cemetery. But that was his first view. Since then, he's changed his tone. He says that... While it looks like a monument in a park, it's a pretty good monument in a park. Brandon, you were both inside and outside it recently. Why don't you start? What's your view just from the outside of this building?

Yeah, the outside is absolutely magnificent. Upon visiting it, I just, when you think about the context of around the south side of Chicago, that area in particular, around Jackson Park, once those fences come down and the access is going to have for people, it's large, it's massive, it's got lots of park space, benches, picnic areas, it's going to be a place where people can literally just kick it. And that's something that you don't really see with a presidential library. So I'm very intrigued what it's going to mean for the makeup of the South Side. There's already lots of events and activations lined up and booked out as it's starting to become already a fabric of at least black culture on the South Side of Chicago. Gallas are already planned inside and things like that. And so, you know, as they start to do, movies in the park. and different like community outdoor things and festivals, I just wonder how it will last beyond just the initial excitement of it being there, right? Because obviously everyone's going to want to go those first months, maybe five, six months. When we fast forward in five years, is this going to be like something that's just sitting there, kind of like the Lyndon B. Johnson Library in Austin, Texas and like maybe a few people stop by every week or so? Or will it be something that? permanently people are always going to and it's always going to have some life i lean in the ladder because of the way it's designed it's a it's just a giant park space with playgrounds and lots of things for people to do so it it's really beautiful um and i think people are going to enjoy it i wonder if it's going to have the impact that some stadiums do in neighborhoods, and that is they don't develop the way people thought they were going to. You have all this money, all this promise. It looks great. It's going to be great. And five years from now, they ain't no new restaurants around there. And I wonder if, you know, the basketball rims are going to be bent and there's going to be weeds and people aren't going to be using it. There'll be vandalism and it'll be this great big building, but it's not going to be vibrant or beautiful for the long run. sunny side of the street there. I know. That's very cynical. I just... The only reason why, I'm pretty optimistic that's not going to happen. The restaurant they have inside of there is already garnering a lot of interest and reviews on the food itself. And there's already from people I've talked to... plans for people that already have franchises or businesses on other parts of the south side or downtown who are interested in some of the space around it to build um second locations third locations um and add some venues there because of all the traffic that's going to be in the area now the traffic itself is going to be a headache for those who are not used to being, they were being a high traffic area like that, right? There's going to be some growing pains and frustrations from residents, and you're definitely going to hear some stories about that, especially after it officially opens. But I think the business is going to be pretty prosperous for around the center itself. Okay, Stephen, Eric, talk about the architecture, though, just what do you think about that building, how it looks, how it's integrated into the neighborhood?

I will say that it looks like it's too large for the neighborhood, that it does have that obamalisk is kind of a funny term. I've never heard that one. It does seem like it's a little tall for what it's supposed to be. And the letters on the outside that spell out the speech that he gave, you can't really read that as far as I can tell. So it's just kind of decorative letters and it's kind of a strange choice. My wife went. down that she was one of the journalists invited on the tour last week and she really liked it she was really impressed with it and another friend of mine is a retired tribute photographer went and he couldn't say more nice things about it so I'm gonna withhold judgment until I actually get inside I wonder about the I mean, it's the promise of a center like that, but also the threat, which is that it's going to gentrify the neighborhood. And the neighbors down there were fairly concerned that it was going to raise housing prices and price them out of that neighborhood if there is this spreading retail sector that would grow up around their restaurants and stores and so on. Or are people just going to go down there, like some stadiums, they go into the stadium, they come out of the stadium, they drive home. I don't know how that's going to work out. And I also don't, it's not a library, remember, it's a center because we don't really need libraries anymore, presidential libraries, because everything that Obama did has been digitized. So I don't know if there's like a historic, if the historical attraction is going to maintain. But again, I haven't been inside of it yet, so I'm going to withhold judgment. I've been to several presidential libraries, and I haven't gone because the papers are there. I mean, I don't have access to the papers. I go because there's a replica Oval Office that you might walk through or things like that. I mean, I've been to old George Bushes. I've been to Jimmy Carter's. I've been to Gerald Ford's. I just kind of, I think they're kind of fun to go through and get their view of their administration, which is usually glowing. Yeah, that's true. Barack Obama said that one of his favorite displays inside, and I don't know if you had a chance to see this, Brandon, how comprehensive you're... Tour was, but it's evidently there's going to be a display of the 10 letters that he got each night. Americans would write to the White House. He had a staff of people that would pour over the letters and then hand him 10 letters. reflecting what America was worried about or talking about to the president, and then Barack Obama would sit there and read them. I don't remember if he wrote responses, but isn't it wonderful, fantastic, given what's happening right now to think that the president would sit down and take the time to read 10 letters from average Americans somewhat randomly selected or appropriately selected by staff? Over the course of the week, that's 70.

you know, people who are in your brain, citizens. That's just, that's fantastic. It's West Wing stuff. It kind of is. And I hope it's as true as I'm making it sound, but that's the way it's been described. And I think we all knew that he did read letters each night if it was regular. And if it was 10 each night, that's the kind of commitment you wish your president would have. I don't know of any presidents that's taken the time to do that, though. Yeah, it's a pretty cool exhibit that they have there. I've been to a lot of libraries, like presidential libraries, museums and things like that. What I appreciate about this one from my tour of it, I didn't get to spend as much time as I needed there, but I got a good kind of run through. I love that it's not just a museum about Barack Obama's presidency. It's about the forces and historical events that also shaped his philosophy when it comes to his presidency. While also. reflecting on some of the grander things with the kind of Obama brand. There's a whole segment about democracy itself. There is a segment about the civil rights movement and the Voting Rights Act. All these things that kind of fit into the kind of Obama doctrine in a sense. And I think it's very interesting to see how people are going to embrace this because, like, I'm from the Obama generation. So my age group, we're locked in. Obama inspired us, right? Gen Z? they have been raised in a system where Trump was president twice, right? They went Trump, Biden, Trump, and that's what they remember the most. Will this museum kind of speak to? you know, the modern era and this younger movement and generation that Obama is seeking to speak to, I think that's going to be the big determination of like how successful this museum project is beyond just being a big Obama list on the south side of the city, you know. Well, to your point, like Eric said, it's not a library. Obama said it's all digitized or being digitized. You don't need to go there to look at it. You can look at it on your phone. So it's some of these other things, art among them. Yeah, a lot of great art. Yeah, yeah. And they have the Chicago Public Library branch there as well, which is really cool. Okay, let's do... A very brief sprint on the Bears Stadium and what the legislators in Springfield were not able to come up with, and that is a workable plan to ensure that the Bears get the kind of financial deal they want to stay in Illinois. I asked this to Eric on the radio. I also asked it to John Curran, who is the Senate Minority Leader, what would be more damaging to the political career of a state senator or representative? You're remembered as the guy who gave into the Bears.

gave them what they wanted, or you remembered is the guy who lost the bears and they went to Indiana. What would be more damaging to you politically? Eric, that's kind of the way we put it on the radio, right? Exactly how we put it in my view. And I'm thinking more of J.B. Pritzker, I don't know if any rank and file members of the General Assembly are going to be impacted in their races in any way by this. But J.B. Pritzker... If he, quote, loses the bears or if he, you know, caves into the billionaires, I think a smart move for him, if he's running for president, certainly, is not to cave into the billionaires, is to say, you know, we made them a pretty decent offer. They refused it. They've got the money. They could have done it. And we let them go to Indiana, and that's fine. I don't think people around the country care where the Chicago Bears play their home games. My sense is that most people in Illinois don't really care that much. much. Exclude that J.B.'s running for president. As a governor running for re-election, you don't think this matters to voters? You don't think that would be a campaign commercial for Darren Bailey or something like that? I don't think so. I don't think Darren Bailey's come out with a coherent statement about the stadium yet himself. He's not able to sit on the sidelines and wait for J.B. Pritzker to make a move and then say, oh, I would have done it differently. I don't think that's the way voters will react strongly to that. I think a smart move here is to hold firm and not cave into the bears and their demands. I don't think they want to go to Indiana because they would have come out and said so on Monday morning if they really wanted to go to Indiana. I don't think they do. I think they're looking at the joke. Well, they don't, but maybe their hand will be forced or at least the finances will be. Curran said. We can't offer what Indiana is offering. He said, best case scenario is the offer will always be better in Indiana. The question is, do they want to be in Illinois? If it was just about dollars and cents, they would go to Indiana, Steve. I think Indiana, they're playing Indiana. That's my sense, that Indiana's offer is really good, much better than they're getting in Arlington Heights. And so Tuesday, Monday morning would have been in time for them to say, hey, great, we're going to Indiana, see you later, Illinois. But they didn't. I think they're sitting around their conference table looking at each other going, oh, crud, now what? They didn't bail us out. Now we've got to make the hard decision. There needs to be leadership that's going to call all the parties together. Lock them up in a room like they used to do under Daily and under Harold Washington during the teacher strikes, shut the door and say, we're going to settle this tonight and get it settled. For God's sakes, just get it settled. I mean, let's get this over with. They're going to stay in Illinois. They're going to play in Arlington Heights. Give them what we need to give them to keep them there and make it happen. And then let's just make money off the site and watch football. I'm so tired of this Bayer Stadium saga. I'll add this. I'll just say this real quick. I think it is very clear at this point that if the bears don't pick Hammond, that Hammond was obviously a ploy. And so, you know, from the folks I've talked to in the legislature, they're frustrated with the way the bears have handled this. The folks I've talked to with the bears are frustrated with the legislators. And it just seems like this whole saga could have been avoided if some people did some things differently. Overall, I think it's going to be Arlington Heights.

I don't think Chicago is going to happen, even though that's the narrative going on right now. And I think we're all just ready to get this over with. What do you all want to do? Go to Hammett if you got to, but just make a decision. What about Mayor Mendoza? I wonder what she will say about this. She's made it official, right? She said she was going to announce, but she wouldn't announce until, it wouldn't be official until she announced, even though she said she was going to run it wasn't official. And now it's official, right? Now it's official. Yeah, she put out a video Wednesday morning talking about her aspirations to run. She's going to be an interesting candidate. I think she's jumping out because she wants to get a little bit ahead of Alexei Junulius. the Secretary of State because I think they're going to be trying to occupy somewhat similar lane. And it's just interesting who's in it. I mean, I've always liked Suzanne Mendoza. I think I like her spirit. And I don't agree with her on every subject. Certainly, she's big into the school choice stuff that I'm opposed to. But I think she's saying a lot of the things about sort of. She's kind of law and order. She's a little bit like Valis in a way. Like she's stressing a lot of fiscal responsibility, a lot of law and order. She's very pro-police. But she doesn't come off like a Democrat name only the way Valis did. So she might end up doing quite well. We'll see. Who else is running against her? There's going to be a runoff. And who's going to finish one and two? We always thought Lori Lightfoot was going to be in the runoff for three years ago. Do you think Brandon Johnson will be in the runoff? Do you think Brandon will be one of the top two? It will, well, I'll answer that. I'm interested what other people have to say, but I think that if there are no other serious African-American candidates, then he will occupy that lane, and I think that he will be in the runoff, yes. I think it's interesting, Eric, that you say Gene Ulius and Mendoza are running in the same lane because they'll do so in very different ways, right? Mendoza is sort of the... The fiery candidate where Giannuius is a bit more, I don't know if reserved is the right word, but they certainly will be in that lane. He's careful. In different costumes. Yeah. It was funny. You know, he's funny when they release the license plates that are rejected each year and does things like that. But he's not as in your face as Mendoza can be. Overall, you know, it's not surprising that Susanna Mendoza ran. Like, you know, everyone said a pretty open secret at this point. I'm very curious, though. I do think Johnson makes a runoff with the current pool as it is. Whether folks like it or not, I mean, he does have a record that some people do like as far as the progressive left. He ran on fighting for labor rights. You could argue he's done that. He's increased youth jobs. He's brought crime down, homicides down. Whether you think he's the role and responsible for that, you can debate that. But the numbers are the numbers, and that's what mayors usually judged on. So I think he's going to be still formidable when a re-election. The question for me is going to be, will anybody on that more progressive far left flank actually challenge him?

like a Cam Buckner, for instance, who is a longtime ally of his. If that happens, then I raise some questions about Johnson's re-election chances. But overall, Chicago is Chicago when it's going to come down to South Side, West Side, Black and Brown voters, where are they going to lean? I have a tough time believing Susanna Mendoza, Alexei Junulius, or any of those candidates so far, like I Mike Quigley, are going to... peel enough of that support away from Brandon Johnson to be able to take him out of a runoff situation. Wait. I don't think he's going to be one of the, on the outside, looking into the top two because of his advantage that he has when it comes to black and brown and south and west side. Now, in a one v. one situation, we'll have to see, right? In the CTU ground game and things like that. But as it stands right now, without someone really... giving him a challenge from that left flank, I think he's a shoe win for the runoff itself. Well, let me say this about the CTO ground game. It may not be all that strong because they just ask their members for an increase in their union dues, and the members rejected that. And also the union's going to have to spend a lot of money or is going to want to spend a lot of money on the 21 school board races that we're going to be seeing in November. They may be... pretty much tapped out. They may not be able to put the kind of money into Johnson's campaign that they did last. I wonder how much they have to put in there, Eric. I mean, the point is, he's their guy. What more do they need to say? What money spent, you know, what would they say if they had all the money in the world to put on his campaign? It would be advertising. It would be, you know, mailers and people like that. Right. The general sort of political stuff that you get. But if they had to pick a candidate, they would pick him, right? If the teachers union endorsed a candidate, they would still endorse the incumbent, right? Yeah. I think you'd point out that Brandon Johnson's approval numbers are sort of in the 30s right now. And that's where Karen Bass, the mayor of Los Angeles, has been in the 30s. She's not a very popular mayor, but she has made the runoff in Los Angeles to run for mayor just on Tuesday night. And I think that, you know, I would say smart money would have to be at this point on Johnson being in a runoff. I agree. And I don't, you know, Junulius has, what do they say, $19 million? I'm like, confusing him with Raja. But he's got a ton of money behind him in his campaign. And I think Susanna Mendoza is going to have a lot of money in hers. She's going to be dogged, perhaps, by the same thing that dogged her campaign in 2019 when she was linked to Alderman Burke and to then Speaker Michael Madigan, that she was sort of seen as one of these party insiders. And those were not popular back then. I don't know if we're far enough away from the Madigan and Burke scandals. that that will harm her. I'm not sure how long the memory voters have for that or how much that's going to come into play. Well, I wonder if being state comptroller has the sort of...

impact that being the Secretary of State does. People know Alexi better than they know Susanna. And I think they have a favorable view of Alexi. And he has done it. He's been a very good Secretary of State. And he's been positioning himself for this higher office for a long time. If nobody asked, but I could see Brandon Johnson and Alexei Junulius in the final two if you had to vote. right now. Absolutely. Yeah. Yeah, I would say I'd predict. If I had to predict right now, that's what I'd predict. But I haven't even actually, I wouldn't even know who I'm going to vote for in that election. Well, you don't have to know yet, Eric. By the way, last time you went into the ballot box and what did you do? What did you do when you went into vote last time? I could not vote. I went to the ballot. I went to vote and I could not do it. I couldn't vote for either of me. But you did that intentionally, right? Like, it's not like you, as you were walking up thinking A or B or B, you knew you were going to vote for nobody, but you wanted to participate in the voting process. I did. I wanted to have my appearance at the polls marked down. Well, please, please tell me you didn't take a sticker. That's right. You don't get to have the sticker. Did you take a sticker? I can't remember if I took a sticker. I might have. Because not voting, going to the polls and not voting is a bit of a vote, isn't it? It's a statement. It's not a vote. I think I may have crossed out, voted, and said, made a statement today. So I was in Peru earlier this year, and that's one of the countries where voting is mandatory. and you're fined if you don't vote. And by the way, do we talk about this, that they closed the bars before and after the election? No. Did I tell you that? No. In Peru, yeah. It's not good when you're leading 50 people in a country and you can't get a beer. But so I'm wondering, Eric, if, you know, you get fined if you don't vote in Peru. Would your appearance satisfy... showing up at the polls right because you were there i think so i mean i i ran my ballot through the machine and the guy i remember the poll worker said it shows no vote for mayor i can't believe you went through all that i know that's a that's a commitment to the civic process most people don't vote and they care eric actually couldn't pick one but still determined that he was going to go participate in the process. Sir, you just submitted a spoiled ballot. I know that's what I wanted to do. Does that make me a good citizen or a bad citizen? It makes you a weird citizen is what it makes. I took quite a bit of heat for it, I have to say. Hey, guys, Pete just handed me this too. We have another piece of breaking information here. on the Mincing Rascals podcast, even though you are listening to this surely well after we recorded it. It says, Kelly Meyer from News Nation said President Trump is calling reporters to the Oval Office. That was about 40 minutes ago after we started. She then said President Trump is talking about the reflecting pool.

Julia Manchester then says President Trump is in the Oval Office touting the completion of the reflecting pool as well as the repair of a number of fountains around Washington, D.C. And then there's a picture of him. Our pool is bigger than skyscrapers. So they've stood in a graphic, the reflecting pool up. And when you do that, it's taller than the Empire State Building. Trump said that's where Martin Luther King made his great speech with a million people. Guess what the next thing is he said. As many as it were at my inauguration. He said, I had the same amount of people. They said he had a million people and I had 250,000, and I had 25,000 people, but I had more people than Martin Luther King. Trump attacked Kaitlan Collins because she was evidently in the room. CNN, he said, is a very corrupt organization with a corrupt reporter standing right there, never smiles. Young, beautiful woman, never smiles. I never see a smile on her face. I see her standing with such hatred in her eyes. Colin says just, go ahead, Eric. Women love to be told to smile. I don't know what your problem with it. Susan Collins. Why doesn't a reporter say, what are you talking about, Mr. President? You know, when he's saying these things like you make stories up, when is a reporter going to say, what's your example, Mr. President? Yeah. If you know, I'm serious. To this day, the press corps fails on that because they want to get their question in. You've been saying things like, you're a terrible reporter. You're a terrible reporter. I wish one of them would say. And you're a terrible president. Can we wish to answer my question, please? But of course, they don't say that because their news organization would fire them or they couldn't get back into the White House. Okay, so then after the president says that Susan Collins doesn't smile enough, she says, just to clarify, is the $1.8 billion Department of Justice fund dead or is it on hold? Trump said, I'd have to ask the lawyers, I don't know. People like you have abused our people. Colin says, but Republicans, and then Trump said, be quiet. At least he didn't say be quiet, piggy. That's weird, but that's right there, right there. It has the same import. You should be ashamed of yourself. You used to be conservative from Alabama. CNN does such false reporting, but now they have new ownership, so maybe it'll straighten it out. It's hard to straighten garbage out. I'd like to have heard her say, Mr. President, I'm not going to be quiet. My job is to ask you questions. Here's my question. Yeah. Well, in effect, she did that, Steve. Did she continue to press your question or did she take it? Yeah, I don't know. I just read you what I had. It's not about her. It's about in general. I just kind of... Well, that's why I think they always don't do that because whatever the insult is that he hurls at them, they take it because it should not be about them. But any follow-up, anytime he says they've got the worst economy in the world, you know, I wish they would push him for specifics or for citations. Well, I want him to name the insane asylum. Just once, say, Mr. President, you keep saying the insane asylums from Mexico. Which ones? We want to go see who you're talking about, that they unleashed all of these crazy people. That question has never been asked. We ask you guys sometimes at the end of the podcast to give us a green light, a yellow light, or a red light.

We got this from one of our listeners listening in Green Bay, Wisconsin last week. Hey, guys, the History Channel's World War II series with Tom Hanks is well done and comprehensive, not just focused on the U.S. perspective. It's a green light for me. My major complaint is the lengthy and frequent commercials, however. You go from an intense blitzkrieg attack to a Wagovi jingle. Very unsettling. I purchased the most recent episode on Prime just to avoid the jarring interruptions. Any recommendation from you, Steve? Mine's always going to be the same. I'm sorry. It's going to be a book author you've interviewed. Melanie Benjamin Netanyahu, who has written a book called The Windsor Affair. So it's about, obviously, the king who abdicated. I've lost her name now, Wallace Simpson, who he married. But it's told by between Wallace Simpson and then Queen Elizabeth, who became the Queen Mum, and paints her as a pretty political character. She's a Chicago author, lives in an old town, and it's up at wgenerator.com right now. It's a fun read. How about you guys? Is that fiction, Steve, or nonfiction? It is. She writes historical fiction, usually with women as the center point of it. She wrote the Swans of Fifth Avenue a few years ago and several others. Mrs. Tom Thumb, actually, which was a really cool look. Huh. I'll recommend Chrissy Jim Himes rant. From the pretenders, she, if you just Google her, you'll see what she said about people with phones at concerts and museums. She said, what is it with you people? Why do you have to record things rather than watch them? Who's going to watch your video or look at your picture? Maybe not even you. And she said, you have no idea how annoying it is for those of us that are on stage. And she said, imagine you are trying to go to sleep at night and there's a mosquito buzzing around your ear and it's key. keeping you awake. That's what it is like to us. And we see all of you people with your phones. And she just goes on, I thought, a pretty interesting, like two-page diatribe. It was funny, but it was also pretty good. I think she has to deal with it. What's the difference between that and holding a lighter up like you did back in the day? Calling for an encore or whatever. People weren't complaining about that. Yeah, but they didn't hold the lighter up the whole time. Yeah, it is true. You take pictures of things that you end up missing in real life. When we talked about it on the radio, Steve, we also talked about how when you go to the Louvre and you go to see the Mona Lisa, people don't go see the Mona Lisa. They go to take a video or picture of the Mona Lisa, and there's a cue, and now they move you through. You get to walk by, take your picture, and you move on. That's what you do now. It's smaller than you think, John. It totally is, but you can look at it online. There's no reason to take a picture of the Mona Lisa. You already know what the Mona Lisa looks like. So you take a picture of you in front of the Mona Lisa. And that's what people do. They don't look at it. They put their back to the Mona Lisa. They take a picture of them at the Mona Lisa, and then they move on. Nobody looks at the painting anymore. This is a crabby old men of episode two.

I got to stop the end that way. I am going to recommend a podcast series called The History of the United States and 100 Objects. And it is done by our friend Roman Mars, who is the proprietor of 99% Invisible. If you Google 99% Invisible, which is Roman's podcast and look for the episodes, the history of the United States and 100 Objects, just started listening to it. Roman is always brilliant, and this is going to be fun. How about you, Brandon? Anything you're liking these days? You know, I just got out of seeing a screening of Masters of the Universe, the adaptation of that classic 80s he-man cartoon. And look, it's a little before my generation, but... Wow, did I have a great time with it. It embraces all that 80s campiness and all the things that made the He Man cartoons what they were, the positive messages about, you know, the positive view of masculinity and that being strong is more than just about physical appearance and having muscles, but how you treat others and kindness. We need more of that. So I definitely say check out Masters of the Universe. Very fun, cheesy, campy, 80s, good time. It wasn't campy when you were living through it. Is this in theaters yet? It's in theaters Friday. And it's not animated. What does it look like? This is live action. This is live action. A lot of CGII, obviously. Jared Leto as Skeletor. Is it funny in places, Brandon? hilarious, maybe too hilarious in places. It's very, very comedic. You're going to have a good time, no doubt. Just don't think too hard about it, right? It's, it's, who wants a dramatic Masters of the Universe movie? I don't. It's, it's wacky. It's hilarious. It's very colorful and fun. It's Brandon Pope. Steve Bertrand was on the panel today, too. Eric Zohran Mamdani was as well. I'm John Williams. We are produced by Ben Anderson and Pete Zimmerman, and we'll drop another podcast on you next week. And feel free to email John Williams at wGNradio.com. If you've got a comment, a suggestion, a criticism. We've been getting some of those. So feel free to send them to John Williams at WGNRadio.com. And we'll make a point of sharing more of those at the end of the pod. All right, fellas. Nice to talk to you all. Thanks, guys. Send them to John. See you next week. Yeah. We don't have, I guess we could say mincing rascals, send it to Mincing Rascals at WGN. We don't have an inbox. We don't have that. We don't have that. I got to go. See you. All right. See you. See you. See you guys. See you guys. Take care.

Subscribe to the Mincing Rascals podcast on iTunes or the Google Play Music Store. You can now also follow us on Spotify, or you can keep listening online at wgnradio.com.