Matt, what are you doing to your podcast? Michael’s ludicrous and childish bravado (which he typically cannot shut up about) is news only in crazyworld. Wingman Justin does you no favors either; the pair of them act like clowns. The overall effect is Animal House without the humor.
This is pretty pathetic following the dialogues you had with Walter. I’m being cruel, but you are cheapening your brand by sponsoring the Michael Tracey Show.
Please stop. You can do better than pedophile and hairy-ass jokes. Reach for something higher.
What is supremely odd is that I remember Matt being highly uncomfortable with some of Walter's well-reasoned "hot takes" and kind of lecturing Walter on propriety and 'just the facts' at points. Now it's frat house humor. Weird.
A friend of mine knew Matt back in the Moscow days covering Russian cowboy-capitalism and I have the impression Matt could be as wild and unrestrained as the best of them.
But he’s also got a fine intuitive, even artistic sensibility which vibed well with Walter.
Tracey’s a great contrarian, which makes him interesting, but with an obnoxious personality and no self-awareness. I think it’s a bad pairing that indulges Matt’s worst instincts and will lose him listeners.
Because many of us paid for something we didn't sign up for and although we have unsubscribed are still paying until our year runs out. Hearing that our comments are annoying you is a small consolation so thanks.
9:30am ET Friday morning? How did this get its time slot->"I've got an idea! Let's have the podcast when only homeless people and senior citizens can watch it live!"
Why bother with the live podcast? Seriously, why not just record it and then edit out all of Michael Tracey's annoying interruptions? Oh, I see. Because there wouldn't be anything left to publish. Haha! Ollo gets in a good one!
Counting this one, there are only seven comments so far. And one is by Greg Collard. I never watch anymore but always check the comments to see if Matt is still limping along with the hygienically challenged Michael Tracey.
There seem to be less an less comments as this format continues. Most of them complaining about Tracey. Heck, last episode included a long segment about a disagreement Tracey had with another reporter and overshadowed an attempted assassination.
Here I was giving Michael Tracey props in my mind for modulating his combative and abrasive delivery, but, man! Disagree with him and he's nasty as all get-out! Matt's forbearance was saintly, but I wish to goodness he would find a co-host who knows how to do that like a civilized being.
I live in AL and am glad you started off with the Louisiana v Calais decision. That's the only story I paid any attention to this week, and I'm happy to give you some history, since you both seem unaware despite the SCOTUS decision being published on Wednesday morning. The dissent basically said 'we should not stop forcing certain Southern states to create race-based districts for blacks because of the history of discrimination in the South'. Despite Michael having not read Alito's opinion, he nails the major point - the 60s era discrimination ended decades ago even in the South where black turnout matches or in some cases exceeds that of white turnout. I'm 51 and have lived in Birmingham suburbs most of my life. I've worked at half white and half black workplaces for my entire career and and we're almost all sick to death of the non-stop focus on race, but it's election season. It used to come up every 4 years, but now it's every 2 years - race grievance season.
Please don't conflate our gerrymandering issues with other states. Since 1992, southern states have been forced to create districts specifically and intentionally drawn to favor a black candidate. Now we can gerrymander with partisan intentions just like every other state does. Our new map will go from 5 dark red, 1 dark blue, and 1 light blue to probably 5 dark red and 2 pink districts. Now that our state legislatures have regained their ability to gerrymander and a massive internal migration almost certainly favors GOP control of the House for decades starting in 2032, Dems and Indys want to ban or limit gerrymandering all over the country? Yeah, fuck that.
The history for those interested...
Southern states (plus AZ) have not been treated the same as others since the 60s when it comes to election laws. We were under a consent decree (I think) and were required to get pre-clearance from the DOJ in order change our election laws for example to require photo ID to vote. That's what the 2013 Shelby County (Alabama) v Holder decision was about. Black voter registration and turnout increased due to Obama being on the ballot, and it hasn't decreased since then. That was acknowledged and was the main reason Shelby Co won. How long do Southern states need to be punished for things done in the mid 20th century?
In AL, the Democrats controlled the state legislature from Reconstruction until 2010. In the 80s some of our Congressmen and Senators changed parties from Dem to GOP (because of Reagan), and that continued. Southern Democrats were conservative, so there was a power struggle between them and the more progressive blacks who were Republicans in the 50s. The black candidate could not win against a white Democrat, and that's what the 1986 Gingles decision addressed. The decision required states to create black majority districts, and that's what we did starting in 1992 following the 1990 census. And then the Democrats didn't object much until white conservatives had all switched to the GOP. Although our new map for 2022 barely changed, the Dems sued and won. AL lost our SCOTUS case Allen v Milligan and were forced to create a new map for the 2024 election with 2 Dem districts instead of 1 (Alito discusses why our state lost the case in the Louisiana decision). The Dems also sued South Carolina and lost that case as well. The reason that Louisiana won is because creating districts specifically for racial reasons violates the 14th Amendment. Many are hoping we are going to enter a more race neutral era. Yeah, I doubt that.
Hey Michael, instead of being such a cock sure twit and talking over Matt to demand specific statutes in the moment, maybe you could open your mind and agree to explore Matt’s argument? FYI, here are a few relevant statutes under which Comey could be charged per his actions Matt enumerated:
I get the concern about tit for tat, BUT Comey’s Russiagate abuses are so egregious the demand prosecution, albeit by serious people not the vendetta police Trump has unleashed. By your standard serious crime should go unprosecuted because of a polarized response…sorry but that ship has sailed and prosecution would be a step towards accountability
I support Matt's efforts with a modest financial commitment, and I will continue to do so since I think Matt is one of the truly solid journalists out there, even if we might disagree on a few issues. But that is the point, in a way. A good journo gets the pertinent facts and reports them fairly and accurately, regardless of his own personal policy preferences. Matt does that.
And in his case, the line between facts and opinion are clear. He's an honest broker of the issues, and a person of good will and, importantly, good humor. To me, that counts for a lot.
If I were a Congressman or a Senator, I'd want Matt on my staff. (and I'm pretty confident, that's the last job he would want, haha)
I do agree, Michael rubs like sandpaper sometimes, and with a smugness that reads callousness frequently. So.....not a fan.
Not calling for Michael's ouster necessarily, but maybe Matt could put on someone else as well who is informed, thoughtful, interesting, fun, and is not so off-putting.
Matt, as children we would challenge each other to “swim in the deep end” and, in a sense, you do that every time you broadcast. You always have—and you make the rest of us see a bigger picture—this is why your listeners come back each week. I personally have learned many things from you.
I was sad when Walt left but hoped whoever replaced him might not interrupt so much. However, the interruptions lately have sounded more aggressive at times and less in context. No matter what, please keep being the calm sane journalist you’ve always been.
Matt Taibbi will be be the recipient of the first FIFA Journalism Prize, whose slogan is ‘Say Yes to Power!’ Reportedly, Taibbi was nominated by administration insider Steven Miller for his tireless support of Trump administration policy. The prize comes at a moment when Taibbi has tried to distance himself from Trump policies as they implode, causing much of his MAGA base to abandon him. Administration officials hope this will bring them back into the fold.
A leaked press White House press release reads as follows:
"While other journalists reserved judgement or even derided Trump Adminstration policy, one journalist stood tall, Matt Taibbi.
Recently, his dedication to the Trump Agenda was proven once again when he published a full throated condemnation of ‘The Media.' faithfully parroting Donald Trump's assertion that they were in part responsible for the assassination attempt against him.
Taibbi has also proven his mettle in the past by championing controversial Trump initiatives, such as DOGE and the use of the DOJ to pursue Trump’s adversaries. He notably enthusiastically published a White House press release that few self-respecting reporters would have touched, announcing that the DOJ had gone back decades to unearth an old Brazilian legal settlement in an effort to pursue charges against Trump critic Andrew Weissman.
Taibbi has also used his considerable talents in the past to mischaracterize issues ranging from Russiagate to alleged censorship at Twitter.
Furthermore, he went above and beyond by employing for several years a co-host positioned even to the right of Steve Bannon, who appeared as a special guest at MAGA events by night. Taibbi would never contradict his co-host, ensuring that the administration’s talking points were relayed in unadulterated form directly to his subscribers.
For these reasons and more, the White House is proud to support Taibbi as the first recipient of the first FIFA Journalism Prize."
Gzzuzz, I'm super tired of having to engage Tracy's apparent lack of self-awareness in order to hear from Matt.
From Matt at about 1:37; "Micheal you think a little much of yourself sometimes"...
No shit huh?
Matt, I think you need to course-correct here. Maybe ATW went as far as it could, maybe a change was due, but on the face of it, I get nothing out of listening to Tracy bloviate about his personal opinions, of which, I'm sorry, he lacks the chops to articulate and be taken seriously. You are platforming him, and it's not helping your cause; it's time to cut bait and try something else.
Matt, I respect your writing, but I can't listen to this crap anymore.
I subscribed last year but after Walter left, I made the decision to leave as well. Walter added so much to the show. Michael is not a good match for you. Sorry Matt !
Agghhh.
Matt, what are you doing to your podcast? Michael’s ludicrous and childish bravado (which he typically cannot shut up about) is news only in crazyworld. Wingman Justin does you no favors either; the pair of them act like clowns. The overall effect is Animal House without the humor.
This is pretty pathetic following the dialogues you had with Walter. I’m being cruel, but you are cheapening your brand by sponsoring the Michael Tracey Show.
Please stop. You can do better than pedophile and hairy-ass jokes. Reach for something higher.
What is supremely odd is that I remember Matt being highly uncomfortable with some of Walter's well-reasoned "hot takes" and kind of lecturing Walter on propriety and 'just the facts' at points. Now it's frat house humor. Weird.
A friend of mine knew Matt back in the Moscow days covering Russian cowboy-capitalism and I have the impression Matt could be as wild and unrestrained as the best of them.
But he’s also got a fine intuitive, even artistic sensibility which vibed well with Walter.
Tracey’s a great contrarian, which makes him interesting, but with an obnoxious personality and no self-awareness. I think it’s a bad pairing that indulges Matt’s worst instincts and will lose him listeners.
Yawn. No one cares. Has anyone published the viewership drop sice ATW?
I know I haven't watched since America This Week ended.
That's pretty significant
Because many of us paid for something we didn't sign up for and although we have unsubscribed are still paying until our year runs out. Hearing that our comments are annoying you is a small consolation so thanks.
What an ass you are.
With Michael Tracey? Why? I don’t watch the lives anymore either. I’m about to give up
9:30am ET Friday morning? How did this get its time slot->"I've got an idea! Let's have the podcast when only homeless people and senior citizens can watch it live!"
Why bother with the live podcast? Seriously, why not just record it and then edit out all of Michael Tracey's annoying interruptions? Oh, I see. Because there wouldn't be anything left to publish. Haha! Ollo gets in a good one!
Counting this one, there are only seven comments so far. And one is by Greg Collard. I never watch anymore but always check the comments to see if Matt is still limping along with the hygienically challenged Michael Tracey.
There seem to be less an less comments as this format continues. Most of them complaining about Tracey. Heck, last episode included a long segment about a disagreement Tracey had with another reporter and overshadowed an attempted assassination.
Here I was giving Michael Tracey props in my mind for modulating his combative and abrasive delivery, but, man! Disagree with him and he's nasty as all get-out! Matt's forbearance was saintly, but I wish to goodness he would find a co-host who knows how to do that like a civilized being.
This episode was ruined by MT's many melt downs. I wanted to hear about the third topic and MT hogged the whole 2 hours. I hope Matt will 86 him.
They are both MT which confused me for a while..
I live in AL and am glad you started off with the Louisiana v Calais decision. That's the only story I paid any attention to this week, and I'm happy to give you some history, since you both seem unaware despite the SCOTUS decision being published on Wednesday morning. The dissent basically said 'we should not stop forcing certain Southern states to create race-based districts for blacks because of the history of discrimination in the South'. Despite Michael having not read Alito's opinion, he nails the major point - the 60s era discrimination ended decades ago even in the South where black turnout matches or in some cases exceeds that of white turnout. I'm 51 and have lived in Birmingham suburbs most of my life. I've worked at half white and half black workplaces for my entire career and and we're almost all sick to death of the non-stop focus on race, but it's election season. It used to come up every 4 years, but now it's every 2 years - race grievance season.
Please don't conflate our gerrymandering issues with other states. Since 1992, southern states have been forced to create districts specifically and intentionally drawn to favor a black candidate. Now we can gerrymander with partisan intentions just like every other state does. Our new map will go from 5 dark red, 1 dark blue, and 1 light blue to probably 5 dark red and 2 pink districts. Now that our state legislatures have regained their ability to gerrymander and a massive internal migration almost certainly favors GOP control of the House for decades starting in 2032, Dems and Indys want to ban or limit gerrymandering all over the country? Yeah, fuck that.
The history for those interested...
Southern states (plus AZ) have not been treated the same as others since the 60s when it comes to election laws. We were under a consent decree (I think) and were required to get pre-clearance from the DOJ in order change our election laws for example to require photo ID to vote. That's what the 2013 Shelby County (Alabama) v Holder decision was about. Black voter registration and turnout increased due to Obama being on the ballot, and it hasn't decreased since then. That was acknowledged and was the main reason Shelby Co won. How long do Southern states need to be punished for things done in the mid 20th century?
In AL, the Democrats controlled the state legislature from Reconstruction until 2010. In the 80s some of our Congressmen and Senators changed parties from Dem to GOP (because of Reagan), and that continued. Southern Democrats were conservative, so there was a power struggle between them and the more progressive blacks who were Republicans in the 50s. The black candidate could not win against a white Democrat, and that's what the 1986 Gingles decision addressed. The decision required states to create black majority districts, and that's what we did starting in 1992 following the 1990 census. And then the Democrats didn't object much until white conservatives had all switched to the GOP. Although our new map for 2022 barely changed, the Dems sued and won. AL lost our SCOTUS case Allen v Milligan and were forced to create a new map for the 2024 election with 2 Dem districts instead of 1 (Alito discusses why our state lost the case in the Louisiana decision). The Dems also sued South Carolina and lost that case as well. The reason that Louisiana won is because creating districts specifically for racial reasons violates the 14th Amendment. Many are hoping we are going to enter a more race neutral era. Yeah, I doubt that.
Yes, folks forget the history which is complicated & not easily transferable. You have done a good job
Hey Michael, instead of being such a cock sure twit and talking over Matt to demand specific statutes in the moment, maybe you could open your mind and agree to explore Matt’s argument? FYI, here are a few relevant statutes under which Comey could be charged per his actions Matt enumerated:
18 USC 1001- lying to Congress under oath
18 USC 1505 - Obstructing Congressional Investigation
18 USC 1621
18 USC 641 - theft of Government Property
18 USC 1924 - Unauthorized removal of government documents
18 USC 1905 - Disclosing sensitive investigatory information.
I get the concern about tit for tat, BUT Comey’s Russiagate abuses are so egregious the demand prosecution, albeit by serious people not the vendetta police Trump has unleashed. By your standard serious crime should go unprosecuted because of a polarized response…sorry but that ship has sailed and prosecution would be a step towards accountability
I support Matt's efforts with a modest financial commitment, and I will continue to do so since I think Matt is one of the truly solid journalists out there, even if we might disagree on a few issues. But that is the point, in a way. A good journo gets the pertinent facts and reports them fairly and accurately, regardless of his own personal policy preferences. Matt does that.
And in his case, the line between facts and opinion are clear. He's an honest broker of the issues, and a person of good will and, importantly, good humor. To me, that counts for a lot.
If I were a Congressman or a Senator, I'd want Matt on my staff. (and I'm pretty confident, that's the last job he would want, haha)
I do agree, Michael rubs like sandpaper sometimes, and with a smugness that reads callousness frequently. So.....not a fan.
Not calling for Michael's ouster necessarily, but maybe Matt could put on someone else as well who is informed, thoughtful, interesting, fun, and is not so off-putting.
Matt, as children we would challenge each other to “swim in the deep end” and, in a sense, you do that every time you broadcast. You always have—and you make the rest of us see a bigger picture—this is why your listeners come back each week. I personally have learned many things from you.
I was sad when Walt left but hoped whoever replaced him might not interrupt so much. However, the interruptions lately have sounded more aggressive at times and less in context. No matter what, please keep being the calm sane journalist you’ve always been.
BREAKING NEWS
Matt Taibbi will be be the recipient of the first FIFA Journalism Prize, whose slogan is ‘Say Yes to Power!’ Reportedly, Taibbi was nominated by administration insider Steven Miller for his tireless support of Trump administration policy. The prize comes at a moment when Taibbi has tried to distance himself from Trump policies as they implode, causing much of his MAGA base to abandon him. Administration officials hope this will bring them back into the fold.
A leaked press White House press release reads as follows:
"While other journalists reserved judgement or even derided Trump Adminstration policy, one journalist stood tall, Matt Taibbi.
Recently, his dedication to the Trump Agenda was proven once again when he published a full throated condemnation of ‘The Media.' faithfully parroting Donald Trump's assertion that they were in part responsible for the assassination attempt against him.
Taibbi has also proven his mettle in the past by championing controversial Trump initiatives, such as DOGE and the use of the DOJ to pursue Trump’s adversaries. He notably enthusiastically published a White House press release that few self-respecting reporters would have touched, announcing that the DOJ had gone back decades to unearth an old Brazilian legal settlement in an effort to pursue charges against Trump critic Andrew Weissman.
Taibbi has also used his considerable talents in the past to mischaracterize issues ranging from Russiagate to alleged censorship at Twitter.
Furthermore, he went above and beyond by employing for several years a co-host positioned even to the right of Steve Bannon, who appeared as a special guest at MAGA events by night. Taibbi would never contradict his co-host, ensuring that the administration’s talking points were relayed in unadulterated form directly to his subscribers.
For these reasons and more, the White House is proud to support Taibbi as the first recipient of the first FIFA Journalism Prize."
As I have always said your long form editorial bitch takes here deserve a personal Substack page to show the way forward...
I think Sleepy Joe's autopen preemptively pardoned Fauci......which is scandalous.
Gzzuzz, I'm super tired of having to engage Tracy's apparent lack of self-awareness in order to hear from Matt.
From Matt at about 1:37; "Micheal you think a little much of yourself sometimes"...
No shit huh?
Matt, I think you need to course-correct here. Maybe ATW went as far as it could, maybe a change was due, but on the face of it, I get nothing out of listening to Tracy bloviate about his personal opinions, of which, I'm sorry, he lacks the chops to articulate and be taken seriously. You are platforming him, and it's not helping your cause; it's time to cut bait and try something else.
Matt, I respect your writing, but I can't listen to this crap anymore.
I subscribed last year but after Walter left, I made the decision to leave as well. Walter added so much to the show. Michael is not a good match for you. Sorry Matt !
The common sense Walter Kirn brought to the podcasts is sorely missed. I no longer listen and I will not renew.
Transcript of these would be appreciated!
Yea many do that & I like it..