 Welcome to American Issues Take One. I'm Tim Apachele, your host. Today's title is Trump's CNN interview, Samo Trump. You know, Trump had his interview town hall meeting, whatever we want to call it, last week, and it received a lot of criticism. And why is that? Well, a lot of people felt that Donald Trump was solely responsible for trying to undermine a democratic election and solely responsible for the January 6th insurrection against our Capitol. And people think that he failed that time, but he's running again, and he won't fail the second time. Therefore, why give him a microphone, a stage, and any platform to advance his career desires? You know, before the CNN town hall, CNN had a viewership of 589,000. After that, that town hall meeting, they dropped down to 335,000. CNN now sits at fourth place behind Newsmax at 335,000. Newsmax is 357,000, and Fox is at 1.44 million. With us today, we have my co-host, Jay Fidel, and our special esteemed guest, Chuck Crumpton. Good morning, gentlemen. Morning, Tim. Morning, Chuck. Tim, Jay. Jay, PU, is the criticism well-founded that CNN gave Donald Trump, only Donald Trump, by the way, he's not the only candidate running for 2024 for the GOP ticket, but they only gave Donald Trump the stage and the microphone. Is the criticism well-founded or not? Absolutely, totally well-founded. I mean, they gave him a platform, literally. And they should be criticized mightily for that. I mean, even if you assume they don't tilt in favor of Trump, even if you assume they're trying to be balanced, that wasn't balanced. No way you could justify that. And frankly, I'm done with CNN. I don't trust them anymore. You know, you talk about some of these classical newscasters of years gone by. I'm afraid they don't have that. And if you looked at Anderson Cooper's defense of it a few days later, that was pretty lackluster also. So bottom line is this was terrible. It was terrible for the American people. It was terrible for the American people who are like cheap and buy into Trump's Michigan. But it was also a reflection of something awful that's going on in the country. It's about media that is driven by dollars and by the need to have eyeballs. Eyeballs equals money. That's what they were doing. And I will never forgive them for that because I believe that they probably converted people in favor of Trump, whether they intended it, which I believe they did or not. So the question for me, Tim, is larger than just this platform, this presentation, this extravaganza, this event on the media. It's what is going on here that the media should conduct itself this way. Any media, they should be roundly criticized. And the MSNBC is roundly criticizing them. Good for them. But there has to be some kind of reform on this. We're not getting a straight poop. How can we have a democracy with this? Good point. Let me go to Anderson Cooper and his kind of the defense of why CNN gave Donald Trump the stage. And if I remember the justice of it was we can't afford as Americans be it independent, GOP, not the mega GOP, but the GOP and Democrats cannot afford to put one's head in the sand and pretend like Donald Trump is not a force that could very well be the next president again. What about that criticism in lieu of what Anderson Cooper said to that statement? Very defensive. You know, the fact is they did it at a terrible effect and it reflected a terrible process. So, I mean, the whole notion of First Amendment, we have to reveal everything. We have to show this guy. You know, we have other problems in the country, especially in the Justice Department. But the fact is that he was impeached twice. We all know that he's been conducting criminal activities for his whole life. We ought to write him off. And yet our system allows him to run for office to become president. Our system allows him to have this platform with CNN and gone or votes along his base. He's a criminal man. How can we let a criminal up there as part of our political process into the power structure like that? So, I don't think too much of Anderson Cooper's defense. We should not let him on. You know, Tim, we should not be having this show. Chuck, we should not be talking about Trump. We swore off years ago and yet here we are again talking about Trump who defines the headlines, who defines the Republican Party, who defines politics in this country, who defines the image of the country to the world, who is crashing and burning everything around him. He is a monster, a destructor. He's really out of a bad novel. He's out of a bad reality show, as a matter of fact. So, I don't want to pay so much attention that I don't agree with Anderson Cooper. They shouldn't have done it, period. And he should not try to defend it. Of course, he was trying to defend it to protect CNN. And that's equally a lie. Okay. Thank you. Good points. Chuck, it said that the media, regardless of its CNN or Fox Entertainment or anyone of the ABCs, CBS or NBCs, they should report the news and not make it. Do you think this town hall meeting forum was CNN making the news? I think it was CNN going back to exactly what the media as a whole, including the so-called liberal media, did wrong between 2015 and 2020. They gave him control of the narrative. What a stupid thing to do. Here's a guy who has no allegiance to truth, no allegiance to reliability of sources, no allegiance to any of the so-called journalistic or ethical standards that public communications are supposed to be subject to. And they give him the microphone without limitation. What a dumb thing to do. So, I don't think, I agree with Jay. What do you think CNN learned as lessons when you dropped from 589,000 viewers down to 335,000 in a course of a week or so? Do you think they got the message or not? I think Confucius said quite wisely and more eloquently on Mandarin, but the vernacular translation is hard to see light when head in dark place. Okay. Heads in dark place. CNN is guilty of that. And so are a lot of the other ones. So why should we pick on CNN? I mean, what's, other than all the points that Jay raised, and they're all valid ones, is there a harm? Is there a harm in instances, making the news and Donald Trump into a reality star? If winning the competition of who can be the most blatantly unethical, stupid narrative-sacrificing journalistic entity has any value, if winning that competition is what's at stake, then yeah, CNN credit. Okay, prediction time. Does CNN get another shot at it in the future all by himself? That's the whole point of that episode, is to ingratiate themselves. I mean, yeah, they get ratings for a night. They knew that would be temporary and pleading. But if he wins, they want to have an avenue to be able to be part of that narrative that he will control just as he did for the four years during his presidency and even before and even after that. Okay. Well, you know, had we not had the town hall meeting, we wouldn't have learned some of the things that Donald Trump revealed on that night. And some of the stuff was jaw-dropping. And quite frankly, my jaw did drop. And let's just go down the list of a few things here. But remember, he said that Mike Pence should have overturned the election of the Electoral College. He stated that. He wouldn't leave that topic. He said that the Secretary of State of Georgia owed him the 11,780 votes because by large, the election was stolen from him. And he's owed those votes to prevail. I mean, this wasn't 2021 or 2020. This was last week. We'll go down the other things. He's been saying this same stuff for years. There was, show me something new in what he said to CNN. Well, I mean, okay, so that's my point. I mean, we'll go down the list of, I mean, some of these horrible things he did and said, but isn't this good for the American public to see that Donald Trump hasn't changed to hear his words as a candidate for 2024 as the next president of the United States? Isn't some value to that and didn't CNN- No, no, there's no value to that. And that's why- No, and tell us why, Jay. What he's doing is reality show. He's trying to get your attention. He'll stay bloody anything to get your attention. He wants to make outrageous comments. He keeps making outrageous comments. So on the one side, it looks like he's trying to vie for power and lying about it. On the other side, he's trying to get your attention. He's trying to be the headline every day and he's succeeding. This does remind me and remind all of us what happened in Germany in the 30s. By the time we hit 1933, there were no contenders other than Hitler. And he kept on doubling down even on outrageous lies. And so what he is doing, what Trump is doing, which is so much like Hitler, really, if you look at the book on it, is he's trying to say outrageous things. Yes, it's past the power, but it's also past the attention to being the exclusive voice, the exclusive narrative. And that's why it's not good for us. He doesn't really mean it anyway. I mean, a number of commentators that I watch anyway have made it clear that Trump is not into truth. He's into getting your attention. And I guess my point is you can't take him seriously. You can never ever take him seriously is always an agenda. And the agenda is not what it seems to be. So it's a quote, joke. Everything around him is a joke. Although it's a joke, isn't it beneficial for the independence of this nation, the GOP that are non-maga GOP, to see this joke that's on the stage? Isn't that beneficial for them to confirm that Trump is not going to be the one they vote for? Isn't there some benefit to that? Entertainment. My favorite part, I mean, there's a lot of favorite parts. My favorite part of that whole affair with CNN was where the interviewer got him to say that, what, during his time in office, he took one position. I guess it was about immigration. And now that he was not in office, he had changed his comment there on the stage with CNN to 180 different. And she said, how can you justify that? And he said, because I'm not in office. I'm not the president. I actually, I think that was on the dance. Here's the point. They laugh. It was a joke. They laugh, but they also loved him for it because he was entertaining and it was stand up comedy is what it was. But, you know, that's what I'm concerned about. The truth was irrelevant. Laughing at something like that, laughing because he's a complete and total liar and hypocrite. And they're laughing. You know, we have a problem that goes beyond Trump. The other half that problem or more is the people listen to him. I think you raise a good point that our news anchors are trying to be more like John Stewart. I remember distinctly Rachel Maddow trying to pull it off while she is interviewing John Stewart. And he said, you know, you're not doing the nation of service by trying to be a comedian. He goes, that's my job. I get to say these things in the way I say them. But you are not a comedian and you shouldn't try to be when you have your show on. And the look on her face of disappointment that her idol John Stewart kind of chastiser right then and there on during her show. But it's true, Chuck. Is that the issue that our media personnel are trying to be humorous and entertaining and forget the hard follow up questions and just let them off the hook? As long as we get some laughs and comedic value out of it. Last laughs and sponsors. Don't forget the money. Don't forget the money. What do you think, Chuck? Yeah, no, I think Jay's right on. I mean, it's a total kiss up stance on their part. Show me one true investigative independent journalist out there now. There are people who are writing. Heather Cox Richardson is amazingly independent. Well read, well lettered historically based and nails it every single time. But she doesn't get any press attention, even though she speaks more truth in one daily blog than Trump has in his lifetime. But that's not what he does. Okay, so to quote Yogi Berra is a deja vu all over again that we're going to repeat the same media's travesty that we allow the circus to occur. And Donald Trump do all his lies and buffoonery becomes a second term president. I know I'm asking you to answer the impossible because we don't know. But I guess the question is really does CNN and other news agencies, do they change their mantra of entertainment versus news and the quest for real news? And the truth. Yeah, they do change their mantra. The dynamic is they get worse. They get worse. Chuck, you agree with Jay on that? Yeah, the quote that's applicable here comes from Mark Twain. To argue with a fool is idiocy because they will simply drag you down to their level and beat you with experience. Okay. They continue to subject themselves to that. I honestly don't think Maxwell Anderson Cooper would have done any better than Caitlyn Collins did because they give him control of the narrative. Once you've given it away, you don't get it back from a narcissist. Narcissists don't change their behavior. Tim, I want to ask Chuck some questions. It's not to win a discussion. They're not debating. I want to ask Tim some questions. You're a lawyer. You've been involved in interaction with people in contentions and controversies of your professional life. And I am sure that as you watch that, you thought for a second, I would have asked him a follow-up question. I would have disagreed with him. I would have shouted him down. I would not have given him the stage that way. Now, honestly, look in your heart. Look in your heart. And tell me, do you think you could have done that sitting across from Trump? Well, you've assumed, in fact, not an evidence, as we like to say, right? Which is one that I would watch Trump, which I don't, have not, for a number of years now. That one is unavoidable. If somebody puts him on a screen unexpectedly, he may be there for hopefully a short somebody. I can see Clockwork Orange. Clockwork Orange. They strapped Chuck in a chair, and they forced his eyes open and tie him down and make him watch Trump. Okay, let's assume that's the way it went. Well, the only question is whether the gag reflex or the vomit reflex is going to take over first. We're not getting any answer out of Chuck. What do you think we're getting, Jay? Let me ask another question. Well, no, I think any lawyer would look at that stuff and hear the colloquy and say, gee, I might have been able to do better. I'm not sure, but I would have asked him this and I would have asked him that, and I would not have been deflected the way he deflected Caitlyn. So, Query, Chuck, from what you know about this event, do you think you could have done better? And if so, how? Well, one of the things that I would have done is to set it up so that ChadGPT was doing an immediate instantaneous fact check and reportage on the closed caption portion of the screen below the screen as Trump spoke throughout the entire thing, so that we could see a dual narrative all the way through. Listen to that. Wow. Okay. Hey, Jay, before we came on with the show, before we came on the show to answer your question, Jay, I think any journalism 101 student could have done better as far as the ability to follow up on questions and not let Trump sweet talk his way out of it and go on to the next question. I think this is some pretty basic journalism stuff here. Remember I told you about the phenomenon in schoolyards all across Queens? It was called ranking. And part of ranking was interrupting the other guy, never letting him finish. And that's what happens in these Republican situations where you shout down the other person. And if Chuck was going to take a position like a first-year journalism student and ask important questions and have ChadGPT showing on the screen simultaneously for great fact-checking, Trump would have ranked him. He would have shouted him down. He would not have allowed the second question. He would have called him names. He would have kept his mouth and gear the whole time. And that's the problem in dealing with a pathological character like this. Great point. Excellent point. Hey, switching gears here a little bit in the microphone and you have the ability to turn it off. Well, I don't see CNN walking off the stage and saying, oh, if you're not going to answer the questions honestly, why conduct the interview or the town hall? But they could have, but I don't see that happening. You know, Chuck, that's a brilliant point because back in the campaign leading to, well, in 2016, Trump was making such an idiot of himself and he was going on and interrupting everyone. And there was discussion at that time, if you remember Tim, there was discussion about turning him off, about turning off his microphone. But nobody ever did, you know, first amendment, what have you. Didn't he walk off the stage on Leslie Stahl when she asked him some tough questions? Yep. And he just picked up and did his microphone off his lapel and moved on. Well, that's what Caitlin should have done. I'm sorry, this interview is over. He's not answering my question. That was my point. I mean, would that have been appropriate? I think it should have been, but is that too much money loss from all the sponsors and didn't get to play all their commercials during the hour and a half segment? It would have been a high wire act. I mean, she could have been the world's hero and she could have crashed her career all in the same moment. So you don't know how that would work. You don't know how that would have unfolded. One thing is if she left him there, walked off the stage and the microphone was not turned off, he would have really had a good time. He would have criticized her up and down. He would have criticized CNN and the press and everything. He would have gone to town, literally. And so the answer goes back to what Chuck's suggestion was, turn it off. It's electronic. Just flip the switch. When he's not supposed to be speaking, you can't hear him. Okay. Well, we did hear him. And I want to go to those at least three points he said on the town hall meeting that I think is good to remind ourselves of. Number one is he pretty much strongly implied that he would go back to a zero tolerance policy at the southern border, which is to say to take away children from their parents, children from parents, those parents seeking illegal asylum. So he more or less confirmed that. He also basically said that he would allow the debt structure to be compromised. If the GOP did not get what they wanted, then go ahead. Don't agree to extend the debt ceiling. That was pretty jaw-dropping. And then last but not least, he took the opportunity to go after E.G. and Carol again. And that was pretty deplorable as well. Your thoughts on those three points? Who? J.U., sorry. Oh, well, I want to go off the reservation for a minute. I'm going to talk about the Zambizi River. For the first time? Okay. You know, these were outrageous statements. And yet the media, which is so powerful, gave him the opportunity, didn't cut him off, didn't even question him. That's one thing. Two is they loaded the room with people who applauded, but wouldn't were told not to boo. That's really interesting. And three, and this is the largest problem of all, the people out there taken seriously. They don't take it as a joke. So we have a structural problem. This is going off the Zambizi now. We have a structural problem in this country. Classified rappers, by the way. Yes, exactly. We have a guy who is accentuating and encouraging us to be immoral. And point after point was immoral and destructive. You know, you want to not lift the debt field? Okay. Well, let's destroy the world. What do you think about that, guys? Yay for Trump. I mean, this is really stupid. And people buy it. And that, you know, there was an article recently about how, so 40% of Americans, maybe it was a higher percentage, cannot name the three branches of government. It was an article recently where they don't have enough teachers in the schools and kids are not getting an education and nobody is encouraging them to get an education. And for generations now, but especially recently, we have kids coming out of school who don't know which end is up about the country, about government. And for that matter, about morality, they get it all from social media, which is, you know, the kind of Elon Musk kind of mentality. And so, you know, what I did out of this, it takes multiple hands to clap on this. When he makes those outrageous statements, talking about how he's going to destroy the world, he really does sound like Adolf. And he means it in terms of continuing, you know, the narrative that way. He will continue it. And if he's elected, you know, we have to find a way to get to Norway, maybe Sweden, maybe Finland. All right. I hope you're back on the shores from the Zambezi River. But is it May, Chuck? I'm going to throw out something else that Trump said. I want to like to get your reaction to it. And certainly the question was, do you want to see Ukraine win the war? And he could not and would not answer that question. Is that important to hear that, given the fact that most Americans do support Ukraine in this effort? No. I think I hope we've made it clear by this time that it is not a justification to allow Trump to repeat or even extend and expand on. I don't think we've heard that before though. I don't think we heard Trump out and out, basically refused to answer whether or not he wanted to see Ukraine prevail against Russia. I think that was a new, I think that was something new that we haven't seen. I mean, should we take note of that? And did CNN do some sort of, and I don't want to ask the question again, but some sort of service to let us hear answers we've never heard before? He still thinks Putin is a genius. So I don't think there's any question. Yeah, Putin helped him win the election in 2016. Absolutely. And we haven't really had enough that Bob Mueller did not do a good job. And, you know, as it is now surfacing, he was actively working with Putin to win that election. But here's the thing. You say he wouldn't commit to helping Ukraine. Well, it is so reminiscent of the time a reporter asked him before the 2020 election, will in fact, the 2016 and the 2020 election, will you accept the results? And he would not commit to accepting the results. We all should have, we all should have known then then. Yeah. Okay. Well, I think we've hit all the low points. I was going to say the high points, but there were no high points. We've hit all the low points of Trump's town hall meeting. So let's wrap it up and go to Jay to you for your final thoughts. At this time, I want to refer to two things that came up in the course of conversation. We do need to fact check on an instantaneous basis. Tuck's idea about using chat GBT is wonderful. That would be that would be just just lovely. And the other is turning off his mic. But we have to get the media straightened out on this because the media is driven by dollars. And is it any worse that CNN did this ridiculous presentation, this platform, this town meeting in New Hampshire, than what Fox has been doing? It's lying for dollars. It's giving Trump a platform for dollars. And this is very deep stuff. This is the heart of capitalism. And it is corrupting us. It reflects a huge corruption around the media and the news. And it's not limited to Fox. I wish I had time for more time. I'd ask you a question following up on that. But we're going to go to you, Chuck, and your final thoughts on the town hall meeting that Trump got. And probably, as you say and Jay say, he'll probably get another opportunity, but we'll see. Chuck, your final thoughts. Well, look, here's a guy who has never come within three million votes of winning the popular vote in any election ever. He's lost the last several election to give him control of the narrative for openly, blatantly destructive, irresponsible, anti-truth, anti-democratic, anti-humane purposes. It is to commit exactly those same acts by complicity. All right. I mean, I've heard that before that he can't get close to the popular vote. But what does it matter? As long as he can nail down the swing states of Ohio, Wisconsin, Arizona, in the Electoral College, isn't that all that matters? It will be. I mean, maybe that's why he's so outrageous because he knows the flavor of those swing states. And he doesn't care if he appeals to anyone else. He just has to nail down those swing states. Isn't that maybe the reason why he takes these extreme measures and positions? If the media role has any impact on those swing states, and if it is less than as an independent media, the risk of an adverse result again rises dramatically. So the more irresponsible the media is, the greater the risk that we'll have an irresponsible outcome. Great point. Irresponsible. Irresponsible. As Tim mentioned at the outset, irresponsible means something different now. In 2016, irresponsible meant that he could play some games and fool around and try to corrupt government. Now it means more like the end of the world. So this is really, really important. Yeah, we'll have to do another show on what dedicated to what monumental force it would take for the media to change its habitual habits of how they cover candidates, especially Donald Trump. So another show, another time. I'd like to thank my co-host Jay Fidel and our special esteemed guest, Chuck Crumpton, for joining us on American Issues Take One. I'm Tim Apachele, your host. Won't you join us next week? And until then, aloha.