The Stephen A. Smith ShowFull Show Interview: Stephen A breaks down controversial book by Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson.
Stephen A. Smith is a New York Times Bestselling Author, Executive Producer, host of ESPN's First Take, and co-host of NBA Countdown.
What's up, everybody.
Welcome to this latest edition of The Steph and A Smith Show, coming at you as I love to do it the very least three times a week over the digital airways of YouTube and of course iHeartRadio. As always, I like to pause for a moment to thank my subscribers, my listeners, my followers for supporting the show.
Uh.
When you consider the fact that we've.
Had millions of downloads over iHeartRadio over the last few months, not to mention having an eclipsed one point twenty two million subscribers on YouTube, it's impossible for that to happen without your love and support for the show.
I can't thank you enough.
I appreciate it, and I'm sincerely grateful on behalf of myself and my staff. Keep the love coming, and I'm gonna keep on coming. Today's edition of The Stephen A. Smith Show will not include sports. It's somewhat of a special edition of The Stephen A. Smith Show because we're going to have on co authors of a book entitled Original Sin about President Joe Biden's his cognitive decline along with other things that occurred in the book. It's necessary to talk about this because obviously it's not just a New York Times, it's not just a bestseller, but it's also one of those situations that's the scuttle butt going on around the country outside the.
World of sports.
Of course, according to the book Original Sin, we had a president that didn't want to step away, whether it was due to pride, ego, the combination of both, along with other things. He didn't want to step away. He had people in a circle who did not want to step away. And according to this book, there was a genuine cover up that was taking place within the corridors of the most powerful house in a nation that our country, its democracy, one could easily argue, was being was on the verge of being compromised. And so when you take that into consideration, and you hear that, particularly when you hear President Trump being accused at every turn of being an existential threat to our democracy, and it turns out there were folks on the left who were willing to jeopardize our democracy, justifying it through their concerns about him an imminent administration or an impending administration, and they used that as an excuse to justify their actions. This book, obviously, as must read, it would explain why it's popular or it's already a bestseller.
Why the co authors Jake Tapper.
And Alex Thompson have been around the circuit promoting the book. It seems to be necessary intel for all of us to find out is it Does the book really tell us something we don't know?
Or does the book just highlight what we all knew?
But the Democratic Party worked a lead to make sure we didn't verbalize lest we.
Wanted to pay a price for it.
These all the things that I can't wait to talk to Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson about, and I'm about to do just that next right here on the Steven A.
Smith Show. Backward more in a minute.
All right, folks, I need you all to stop what you're doing and listen up. You know I love this time of year. Right the NBA playoffs are in full effect, and with all this action jumping off, the Stephen A. Smith's Show, wants to make sure you take advantage of it all.
That's why we partnered with Prize Picks, the best.
Place to win cash while watching sports. The app is really easy to use. Just pick more or less than a few player stats and you could win up to two thousand times your cash on a single lineup.
Best of all prospects.
Will give you fifty dollars when you play your first five dollar lineup.
Wanna lose?
You'll get fifty bucks per playing. Use promo code says and download the app now again. Download the app US code I say yes to get fifty dollars instantly.
After your first five dollar lineup. Priss picks. Hey, Hey, RNK your game.
The New York Knicks return to Madison Square Garden for Game five of the Eastern Conference Finals tomorrow night, as they attempt to stay alive, do five games at least, so I'll give you my picks for Thursday night's game.
Let's get to it.
First up, will Jalen Brunton score more or less than thirty and a half points? Yes, he will because he has to. Playing it simple is do a die you wanna break up? Elimination. Next up, we'll call Anthony town score more or less than twenty and a half points? Are assuming he's healthy enough because that knee hurt.
Okay, But if.
He's healthy enough and he's on the court, yes he will. Why because he has to. It's the elimination time. Next will the paces Tyres Halliburton score more or less than twenty two and a half points. I'm actually gonna say less with this. I think that Halliburton the brother's skilled. He can ball, he's not overrated all of this stuff. But I don't think this night is going to be his night. I can see him getting eighteen to twenty, you know, probably ten assist something like that, but more than twenty two and a half points.
You know, I think the Knicks gonna.
Take him out in this game, and I think that Halliburton and them just gonna save their energy for Game six in Indiana.
That's just me.
Finally, Well, Pascal Siakam score more or less than twenty and a half points. I think he's going to because I don't think the Knicks have an answer for him.
He can score from outside, he can go from.
Inside, he can post you up, he can play with his back to the basket, he can play face in the basket.
He's too diverse of.
A weapon for the New York Knicks to control, and the neutralized to that degree.
So I'm gonna go with more on this.
So let's recap more for Jaylen Brunton, more for Carl Anthony Towns, less for Tyreese Halliburton, and more for Pascal Siakam steven A Baby giving.
It to you. Okay, that's what I like to do.
So go to prizepects at and check out the steven A Smith Show Community play. Don't know if you know, but it's boosted at twenty five percent as you can now see.
Welcome back to the steven A. Smith Show. And now wait to talk to my next guest.
They are co authors of the book Original Sin, President Biden's Decline, It's cover up, and his disastrous choice to run again.
Please, Welcome to The stephen A. Smith Show.
CNN Lead Washington anchor Jake Tapper and Axios National political correspondent Alex Thompson Fellas.
Welcome to the show. Really really glad to have you both here.
First order of business, how would you describe this book tour that you guys have been on, the questions, the kind of tenor that people have been throwing in you guys directions because of this book. Jake, I'll start with you. How has it been for you thus far?
Well? I guess two. There's two different groups.
There's the people who are interested in the book, which is selling well, and the people who come to our book events and ask questions about what we tried to get to, the what we tried to understand when we started this book project, which is what happened. How did the Joe Biden we all saw on the debate stage in June twenty twenty four, how did that person show up? Because it wasn't just obviously we all saw him aging through the years, but a lot of people didn't know he was actually that bad.
So how did that happen? Who knew that it was that bad?
Who was responsible for concealing how bad it was? That group, I think has been very responsive to the book, and the reviews have been very positive from the New York Times, the LA Times, Washington Post. Then separately, I would say there is a group of people in the political sphere, on the left and on the right who have.
Tough questions about the book.
From the left, it's why are you covering this and not Donald Trump?
He's who you should be focusing on.
And from the right, it's we knew all this, why are you just telling us now?
It was a cover up in the media, was part of it.
So I would say there's two different kind of responses, and we're just taking it all in and we're glad that the book's getting a response.
Alex, what what has a long view most is has it been people asking why now, why you're not focusing on Trump?
Or has it been about the soul the quote unquote cover up.
That people have tried to surmise that you guys have been a part of.
Honestly, none of it really surprises me because I covered Joe Biden every day for four years. I was also covering stuff about his age back in twenty twenty one, and then especially starting aggressively in twenty twenty three. And I have to tell you, the no you know what about Trump chorus was twenty times louder.
I know it was for you too, when you know.
You were talking about these these issues back in twenty twenty three as well.
So that part doesn't bother me.
And you know, I do think there's a difference between what some on the right we're doing and listen to me, and I think they have I think they are right to feel frustrated with the mainstream media's coverage of the Biden age issue.
I mean I was frustrated by it too.
I think Jakes often gets unfairly lumped into that big bucket. But I would say that there's a difference between covering you know, his often gaps, the way he walked, the stumbles, versus what was going on behind the scenes to try to shield that Biden. That Biden we saw on that debate stage, they were trying to shield up from the public, from the Democratic Party, in some cases from their own staff. So, you know, I think the point is that whenever you do some like tough reporting, especially stuff on something that's the sensitive, you just got.
To be ready for the backlash. And that's fine.
Yeah, Jake, I got to ask you, when, when when you listen to things that that people have been saying about this book in terms of what do you believe the book has revealed that people didn't know? What do you I mean, you covering politics the way that you have for so many years, What was it about this book that really alarmed you specifically that really came out in a book that people didn't realize?
I think one of the things.
So first of all, we started writing the book before we even had a publisher, before we even had a proposal. We started reporting it and Alex and I were both very surprised to find out that so many people who had not been willing to talk candidly about Joe Biden after the election suddenly were And we interviewed more than two hundred people, almost all of them Democratic insiders. Almost all of the interviews were after the election. And what this revealed, what this reporting revealed, was that his problem, there were like two Joe Biden's. There was the one that presented fine, that was okay in the twenty twenty debates, that was okay day in day out, generally speaking, seemed old, but seemed like okay, maybe he could do the job. And then there was the functioning Joe Biden, the one that just lost his way, lost his train of thought, He couldn't come up with names of top Aids, had difficulty with dates like even just like years.
When did this happen?
And that non functioning Joe Biden, we found out through our reporting, showed up as far back as twenty fifteen when he was vice president.
After the death of his son bo One.
Top Aid said that it was watching, it was watching what happened to him. His psyche was like watching a water port on sand, and that Joe Biden would show up every now and then twenty seventeen, twenty eighteen, on the campaign trail twenty nineteen, twenty twenty. What we found out through our reporting is that the non functioning Joe Biden started really rearing his head much more behind the scenes in twenty twenty three twenty twenty four, when there was this aggressive campaign to limit his hours of work, to have him have teleprompters, even when he was behind the scenes doing a small forty person fifty person fundraiser, keeping him away from the cabinet, keeping him away from top Democrats in Congress. And the degree to which there was an actual narrative, there was an actual arc to his deterioration was fascinating and upsetting. And the degree to which people saw bits and pieces of it and nobody said anything, or very few people said it.
I think that was alarming.
And I do think, as Alex notes, the coverage of Joe Biden aging, stumbling, gaffs, et cetera.
I did some of that. Alex did some of it, most most media did.
Conservative media did more of it, and I'm not disparaging any of it, but that is different than the investigative journalism we did for this book, which reveals that it was much much worse than how it appeared in front of the cameras, and that suspicious is suspicions being confirmed is one way to term it, one way to describe it. But another way would be it's actually worse, worse than you think. It's not just he can't come up with the name of this random person, or he mistakes two different members of his cabinet. It's the middle of the day and he is having difficulty keeping a train of thought going in a private conversation.
So with that being said, and I'll go to you on this one, Alex, the impetus. I understand what you discovered upon what you decided to write the book, and you're interviewing people, you investigate, you get this new material, you say, wait a minute, Dan, this is a lot worse than we thought it was. But I'm talking about the initial part that made you say I want to write a book about this.
When did that moment arrive for you, guys? I'm interested in knowing that, Alex.
November sixth, the day after the presidential election, because in some ways this book is answering the question of how Trump was able to come back and what the Democratic Party did to allow it.
So literally, we.
Started this book on November sixth, without a book deal, without any interviews, without any words written, and we turn it in now because we felt it was important for people that are trying to understand how we as a country ended up back with Trump with a second Trump term, that this is a key part of the story. We felt that Joe Biden running for reelection and the Democratic Party going along with it, even though many of them knew better, was one of the central reasons why Donald Trump was able to come back.
Jake, when people look read this book, they watch you guys promoting this book. I haven't seen many hits coming in the direction of Alex but in fairness, I've seen issues coming your way.
And I want to and I say any interest of finness.
Because I want to make sure this is a podcast, is not national television. You don't have an eight minute segment, so I can say this. When I talked and dare I say applauded Megan Kelly and her conversation with you, It had nothing to do in the interest of fairness to you.
It had nothing to.
Do with how right or how wrong one side was or the other. My point was her articulate, Lady, how the right felt about this book about you in your role or lack thereof in the covering of the Body administration.
I applauded her for articulating what the.
Right was saying to your face, because we hear a whole bunch of people saying a bunch of stuff, but then they'll get in front of you and they won't articulate it, or they'll articulate it in such in a cervic fashion you don't even want to take them seriously because they're acting juvenile.
But I thought it was a heated.
Discussion, a very fruitful discussion between you and Megan Kelly, and that is what I was applading.
So I want to make sure that I emphasized that to you.
Having said that, I want to know, how do you feel about the attacks that have come your way in terms of seenior White House correspondent host on CNN been covering politics for decades.
How in God's.
Name did he not know these things prior to him writing this book? What do you say to people that have those kind of questions about you, Jake?
At this moment, it's all fair and look, I mean I didn't go on Megan Kelly show thinking I was going on Kelly Clarkson's show, right, I mean I knew what I was getting myself into. I knew she was going to ask tough questions, and that was no surprise. I knew that conservatives have questions. I think, in some way, some of it is specific to me. Some of it is more than I am just an avatar for the legacy media, and I think a lot of people on the right feel understandably, hey, we were aware of this years ago, and you didn't cover it.
You.
Belittled it, and that's not and now you want plaudits for coming forward after Joe Biden's already out of office.
And I completely understand that argument.
I think some of it is specific to me, mainly because of one interview I did with Laura Trump The Like a few weeks before the.
Twenty twenty election.
And all I can say about that is pardon me that our reporting suggested that the cognitive decline started years ago, twenty fifteen, twenty seventeen. We point out specific moments twenty nineteen on the campaign trail. He can't come up with the name of his closest longest serving aide, Mike Donald. I did not see that. I saw him aging, I saw him fumbling. I did not see cognitive decline. In October twenty twenty, Laura Trump did what she said aged well, what I said, age poorly. You and I are similar in some ways, Stephen, in the sense that we live our lives, we live our reporting on air.
Some of it ages well, some of the bit ages poorly.
I don't have to bring up Nick Siriani and Jalen Hurts for you to know that there are a lot of Eagles fans out there who have receipts about you, and look, you make the best judgment you can in the moment, and if you're wrong, you're wrong. And that's what happened with me and Laura Trump. I will say that I was more aggressive asking.
About a age.
I asked then Vice President Biden as vice president if he would pledge to be transparent about his health in September twenty twenty. I asked him about voters thinking he was too old. In October twenty twenty two, and there are other moments I can point to here and there, but as a general admission, I think that there are very few people in legacy media who, knowing what we know now having reported this book, who were as aggressive on this topic as we should have been could have been. And I'm certainly including myself in this. I'm not including Alex But that said, this also was a cover up.
This was the.
Biden family and a small circle of aids that we're not only trying to present Joe Biden in his best possible self with teleprompters and only scheduling events between ten and four. For the most part, they weren't only lying to the media. They weren't only lying to the public. They were lying to cabinet secretaries, they were lying to donors, they were lying to Democratic officials, they were lying to members of the White House staff who were kept away from him. So that said, right, the media, including me, we should take our lumps one hundred percent. But I do think there is a larger issue here, or at least a parallel issue here, of a White House that was hiding stuff from the American people that was deleterious to the American people.
The problem with that, and I agree with you, by the way, but the problem with that, Jake, is this, when we talk about it we allude to being dismissive in regards to concerns about Biden's cognitive health. They're not just looking at somebody like a Jake Tapper and saying, well, you know what, maybe he should have known because he's been covering the White House. You're considered an elite reporter. You do have connections. Nobody's a cue using you or being in the pockets or the body and administration or anything like that. I totally support you on that. But what I'm saying is I looked at Biden. I don't cover politics. Really, I looked at Biden. I said a year in advance, he ain't right. Something's not there. He's not gonna make it to the Democratic National Convention. The reason I bring something like that up is I totally understand the difference between noticing something with the human eye and being able to factually articulate that over the airwaves without finding yourself in trouble.
I do understand that, we all understand that.
The flip side to it, however, is people who said those things were getting excoriated by the likes of conventional media per se. Let some people say liberal media, whatever word they want to use. And that's where they look at somebody like yourself, Jake, and they say, whether it's Laura Trump or anybody else. It's one thing to not report on it more intensively and more extensively. It's another thing entirely to look at folks and to be dismissive of them because they had the temerity to point out something they believe you should have pointed out.
What do you say to that.
I don't disagree.
I with the exception of the Laara Trump interview almost five years ago, I didn't do that. Once it became you know, when you get new information, most sane, rational people absorb it, and if it goes against what they thought before, they changed their mind. And I began changing my mind about President Biden and his acuity. I'd say around twenty twenty three, which is according to our reporting. There are three moments, according to top aids and people close to Biden, where there really was a deterioration. First was twenty fifteen when he had the horrible death of the sun Bow. Then in twenty twenty three when his son Hunter, who has been battling addiction and having legal troubles, his plea deal fell through. And then in the summer of twenty twenty four when Hunter was tried and convicted on gun charges. And what's significant about it is not just that Hunter was having legal trouble, but that Hunter was voicing his belief that Republicans were trying to drive him into relapse as a former crack addict, and that Republicans were trying to get him to kill himself. And poor Joe Biden, and I do feel sympathy for him in this, having lost his wife and daughter in that car accident in nineteen seventy two, having lost bo in twenty fifteen, thought he was going to lose a third son, maybe to suicide, maybe to overdose, and that really had a horrible effect on him. So my only point is I get it that people in the mainstream media were dismissive even after the election of twenty twenty.
I don't think I was one of them.
And in fact, after her report comes out where the Special Council says, I can't try this guy. He's not prosecutable. I can't get a conviction to a jury. He'll present just like a what's what's the language, well meaning man with the poor memory. Yeah, well, maybe elderly man with the poor memory. I can't convict him. There were a lot of reporters that were, like, you know, calling for Robert her to be hung in the town square. I was not among them. I thought that seems perfectly logical to me. So yeah, I mean again it again. Some mood's personal. The things I have said and done that I regret. Some of it is things that I did not say or do, but I'm being accused of it, and a lot of it I think is very understandable resentment and having been proven correct, but having been dismissed at the time.
But I'm just here to say I didn't dismiss it at the time. I understand why people are mad about that.
I don't.
I mean, I didn't excoriate you. I thought you were right when you said it. I thought Bill Maher was right when he said it, and David Ignacious of the of the Washington Post was right when he said it. In Maureen Daoud, Now, you guys are commentators and I'm more of a traditional journalist. So I wasn't saying it like that. But I didn't disagree. I wasn't looking go on my show at the time. Maybe in retrospect I should have booked you. You know, that's something that we could we can talk about. But that said, I do think there's a difference between people who are commentators saying, look at what we're seeing, we see this, we see this, we see this, which you know I was running some of the same clips too, and the kind of investigative journalism that Alex and I did after the election to find out what was really going on, because it's it's far worse.
It's far worse than it even looked in front of the cameras.
You know, I do think that some people do make Jake into an avatar for the mainstream media. And what you said is right that the voters were ahead of where where elite media is. There's an old saying that Washington is the last to get the news. The voters were ahead of democratic elites. Democratic elites ignored them. Mainstream reporters also didn't cover it nearly as aggressively and to your point, some dismissively.
But I will say I.
Think Jake getting lumped in with the reporters that were hearing the Biden teams water just really isn't fair. I mean, while if he was part of some grand conspiracy. Why did he start booking me on his show when I was doing this aggressive reporting? And so you know, this book was Jake's idea, and I just think he is I think some of while he has acknowledged some of the commentary is in criticism is fair, I think some of it really isn't.
First of all, Jake is absolutely right there's a difference between being a you know, more of a traditional reporter and being a commentator, even though we were usually comment reporters before we became commentator.
As He's absolutely right.
So nobody's going to dispute that there. But I wanted to go to you, Alex in regards to this. I want to know what heat have you taken and what would you classify as fair or unfair to you as a co author for this book, based on your personal experiences, not just you witnessing what Jake's going through, but you yourself as well.
I mean, I would say you noted that I haven't taken as much heat during the book toward and that's true, but that's also because I took a lot of heat in twenty twenty three and twenty twenty four whiles reporting this The White House basically said I was lying, said that my reporting was not true, you know, but they certainly trash talked me into my peers. It was definitely at times like a bit lonely, which again is sort of why I stand up for Jake here, because Jake had my back and thought my reporting was good, but not all reporters did. And I got, you know, the same as you did when you were talking about it, the amount of now do Trump?
What about Trump?
But I was just like, I'm talking to sources, They're saying this is true. So I think, you know, some of the heat and the hatred was backloaded, if that makes sense.
And Steven, if I could just add one thing, the what we're going through is it's we expected this. We as Hyman Roth says, and the Godfather, this is the business we've chosen. We knew that, you know, there would be attacks from the left and the right because of this book. Although I mean, I think what's rewarding for us is that the degree to which the book has kind of changed the conversation where it's now just accepted among the Washington elite. Biden gend to run for reelection. Biben was addled and you know, the idea that he could have been president until January twenty twenty nine is insane. That's rewarding. The people I feel sorry for are not me and Alex. We're fine. This is you know, we get to talk to Stephen A.
Smith.
I mean, this isn't such a bad life. People we feel bad for are Robert Hurr, who, after he did his report was smeared by the White House. Attorney General Garland was smeared by the White House. Her couldn't find a job. He's got a wife and kids. I mean, he has a job now, but it took a month and months and months. Wall Street General reporters Any Lensky and Schevon Hughes, who did a story in June twenty twenty four out behind the scenes, Biden is showing sign of slipping, and that was you know, we end And I wouldn't call it easier.
But it was after the election. It was easier to get.
People to talk than Annie and Chavon their experience in May and June of twenty twenty four, and Annie and Shabon were garreted by the White House, who accused them of taking the orders from Robert Murdoch. They had Democratic senators attacking their reporting on Twitter. It had to have been traumatic. That is the stuff that those are the people who the attacks. I feel really bad for Dean Phillips, a Democratic congressman trying to get Democratic governors to run against Joe Biden because he saw what you saw, except even worse behind the scenes. And none of the Democratic governors would do it. And I mean, what the world might look like if they had. And Dean Phillips ran and the Democratic part he basically declared him persona and on granda, and there was a big effort to keep him off of ballots. He had to sue in the Wisconsin Supreme Court just to get on the ballot. For this is the party that's pro democracy. And so I mean, those are the people that I feel really bad for.
And those are the people who are heroes in the book.
Jake, you'll appreciate this. I got more questions. Don't go anywhere, Alex, don't go anywhere. I got bills to pay as the Steven A.
Smith's show right here over the digital air YouTube and of course iHeartRadio will be back with more.
In a minute.
All right, everybody, listen up with all the big time sports action that's happening.
Each and every day. The Stephen A.
Smith Show wants to make sure you are taking advantage of it all. That's why we partnered with the Prize Picks, the best place to win cash while watching sports. The app is really easy to use. To make a lineup, all you have to do is pick more or less on a few player stats. Choose from any of your favorite players Jaylen Brunson, Tyrese Halliburns, and Anthony Edwards the.
Man himself all in the same entry. Then sit back and want The list is endless.
You can play Prize Pects in over forty states, including California and Texas. Best of all Prize Pects, We'll get your fifty dollars when you play your first five dollar lineup.
Wanna lose, You'll get fifty bucks.
Just use promo codeesas and download Prize Picks now again.
Download the app and use.
Code sas to get fifty dollars instantly after your first five dollar lineup Prize Picks run your game. Welcome back to The steph Nick Smith showd right here with Jake Tapper and of course Alex Thompson from Axios. Jake, let me get back to you on this question before I get into a more comprehensive look at the Democratic Party itself in the role of media plays and what.
Has been transpiring.
If you talk to people want to write about this book, they say, it's Jake Tapper trying to ingratiate himself with the MAGA community because they need that audience. That's what they want. He's smart to do that, but that's what he's trying to do. Talk people on the left in all likelihood who feel betrayed by the book because oh my lord, it's calling out the bottom administration and what was transpiring at that time. They say this book is a money grab. What do you say to people on either side of the aisle who make those accusations about you at this particular moment in time.
Now, our only agenda was to find out what happened. Our only agenda was to write this book. And look if somebody, if somebody on election day or the day after election day had announced, you know that Bob Wordward had announced he was going to write a book getting to the bottom of what had happened and behind the scenes, or if you know any other journalists whom I respect, were I would have gladly just waited and read it. But the truth of the matter is nobody was writing it. And Tony Morrison once said if somebody, if there's a book you want to read and no one's written it, you need to write it.
And I take that advice.
And I reached out to Alex kind of impulsively and just said, like, let's do this together because I admired his Biden connections, his Biden sources, I should say, not connections, and I had a feeling that as a team we could really do some good work. He also metabolistically is similar. We're similar, and you're you're part of this insane crew. Also, Stephen like.
Just like work work, work, work, work, work work.
So I mean, I had a feeling that we would we would work well together. And it's not about appealing to maga. I certainly you know, people say, why an't you covering Trump? I covered Trump two hours every day, five to seven on CNN, and Alex does the same for Axios. And I wouldn't say that our coverage is flattering. It's just it is what it is, critical analysis and news reporting. So that's not accurate in terms of the left. It's a money grab. I mean, that's not the case. It's not this is I don't I don't want to get into where my cunt money comes from. But I'm you know, CNN is my main job, and that's where my main source of being come by far.
Very few people write book to make money.
You write a book because you want to say something, you want to have a legacy, you want to uncover something, you have a message you want to get out there. I don't think people write books about Joe Biden to make money. We are gratified that people are buying this. But it's a good point, but I don't think. I mean, the idea that I would do this for money is It's just it's silly and not true.
I'm just pulling the Jake tab. I'm just asking the questions that people want to go. He where we are.
I got you, Alex, And this question is really for both of y'all. And I understand the position that y'all is, so if you can't answer it in this tricky I get it. But I'm throwing this out to both of y'all in a book you allude to essentially, because Boden and his days were ending like at four point thirty because it was tough for him to go to bed and you had other people.
Essentially running the country.
I think the number was five if I had read it correctly, I must ask, y'all what would have been worse people who were not elected to run this country basically circumventing our constitution and what have you and ultimately running the country or what we're looking at right now in y'all estimation, I'm talking about as reporters, as people that knowing the.
System that we live in.
If you have a system in place, or if you have an administration in place where the person that we elected is not doing anything because they're essentially incapacitated, even though that's not what you guys said or what folks think we're dealing with in this day and age, which is better for the country. I'm talking about that in terms of bypassing the process or going through the process and having what some people at least half of America may not want, or nearly half of America may not want.
I mean, the way that you framed it, neither is ideal, which is why the Biden's decision to run for reelection was so reckless and risky given his age and the people around him, essentially making the country choose between some on that many considered an existential threat and you know, at some times like a maniac was how some people view him, and then a guy that clearly was not up to doing the.
Job for more years. It was uh. And the way that the Democratic Party.
Just went along with it and tell and the only reason they ever, like you know, became and pushed him out wasn't out of bravery.
It was out of self preservation.
And so you know, I do think though there are still tens of millions of Americans that would prefer Joe Biden at one hundred years old to what we are living in right now. And I think it's that's also part of the reason how they justified going along with this until it was too late. Alex talked to somebody before election day, and this is the one interview that's in the book that didn't happen after the book.
Where well, just tell them, tell him about the about the person.
Yeah, I mean, this person basically articulated what you said, which is that all Joe Biden had to do was win. Then he only had to occasionally show proof of life and the people around him would run the country. And their justification was when you first of all, you're you're not bringing back Trump. And when people vote for president, they're also voting for the people around them, and a lot of some people in the Biden world, that is how they justified keeping this going. I'm just saying it's crazy.
I mean, that was somebody who worked for the White House before the election, before Biden dropped out, saying like, it's no big deal, he just needs to show proof of life.
That was the term proof of life. I mean, that's that's so offensive. And Stephen, and I say this with you.
You've been on my show, We've talked about you possibly running for president. Yes, And like the idea that Biden thought only he could beat Trump and that he could be president for another four years. But both of those are not facts and they both seem odd to me. But the idea that he would deny the Democratic Party an opportunity to have a primary system that would produce among possible candidates, whether you or Gretchen Whitmer or Jos Shapiro or Gavin Newsom or whoever, that he would deny that to the party so that this small group of people, including him, and one cabinet secretary said to us that it was you know, at best, he was a senior member of a board that ran the country. Is it's anti democratic?
Really? I mean truly? And I am.
Surprised that more people who are thinking about running for president in twenty twenty eight. This is I'm not talking about you, so don't get mad, but that more are not talking about this.
I'm talking about the senators and governors that more are not talking about this.
You've been talking about this for a long time because it just seems like it's so obviously was what was a misdeed?
You know?
I would ask this question though, because to me, it almost seems like we're letting the Democratic Party off the hook by looking at Biden and a few of his cohorts and saying, Okay, it was them. I'm thinking about Kamala Harris. You go if you're if you're Biden, you knew he was deficient. You let him go on that debate stage. June twenty seventh, he exposes himself. Little more than three weeks later, he backs out of the race. There's no time for a primary, so as a result, you automatically elevate Kamala Harris as the vice president to be the Democratic nominee. He assists in that regard by giving her his immediate endorsement the same day. But this is the same Kamala Harris who couldn't even make it to Iowa in twenty twenty, that wasn't that popular as the vice president, and nobody thought could would if she had to endure a primary, would have come out as the Democratic nominee for the presidency of the United States of America. So I'm like, it just seems a bit odd that we can look at Biden and a few individuals and stop there, as opposed to looking at the entire apparatus that is the Democratic Party and saying there's a lot of hands that were in the mix in this ordeal. Am I wrong in feeling that way?
I mean, you can go back I roll the tape Democrat after Democrat saying he's as sharp as ever, he's in command, he's in control, he's sharp as ever, he's completely engaged, total confidence, And you are absolutely right.
This is not just about Joe Biden and his aides.
If you read you know, if people read the book, they will see story after story after story of Democratic senators and leaders seeing Biden behind closed doors privately having worries and then still publicly going out and.
Saying he's fine.
Democrats like to mock rightly, you know that Republican say one thing about Donald Trump privately and then go out and salute and say your leader publicly. Well, the Democrats are guilty of the exact same thing with Joe Biden.
So would that be, as said Jake, when on many many.
Occasions you've articulated the thoughts from the left saying they believe, they believe that Trump was an existential threat to our democracy, one could easily argue who's the greater threat him?
Who?
In this particular is this one a fair election? He won a popular vote, when the Electoral College orld, etcetera, et cetera, even though he didn't win a popular vote in twenty twenty. Is it him that's the biggest threat to our democracy? Or is it what the Democratic Party tried to pull off?
I don't know.
I certainly think that what the Democratic Party did in so many ways was undemocratic, small de democratic, in hiding his true condition, in trying to make sure that there wasn't any sort of competitive primary, even to the degree that they made They tried to devalue the New Hampshire primary in the Iowa caucuses and made South Carolina first, just because they thought it would be less embarrassing for Joe Biden. I mean, there's so many things that the Democratic Party did to try to boost this man who was who so many voters, including Democratic voters, had serious concerns about, in terms of the degree to which Trump is an actual existential threat to democracy, which is not anything I've ever said, but something that that Democrats say. I mean, I think he's certainly pushing norms. I think he's certainly, you know, testing limits. It's you know, my job is to cover what he does and leave the commentary like that to others, whether it's a Democratic senator or you know, a never Trump Republican. But I certainly think that what I certainly see a lot of irony in the sense that the or hypocrisy in the sense that the Party of Democracy was actually, in so many ways trying to prevent the voters from having an actual choice and having all of the facts about the man that they were entrusting with the most powerful job in the world.
And just for clarification purposes, just to our orders.
I want to make sure everybody knows I certainly wasn't accusing you of saying that Trump was an existential threat to democracy.
That was that was people doing. I just want to make sure that I was clearing that.
But in light of what you just in light of what you just articulated, Jake Tapper, how does may I mean when people look at mainstream media again, regardless of what the truth may be in your investigation talking over two hundred people finding out the things that you found out, Regardless of that, people are still going to look at you being attached to mainstream media and bringing in the question whether or not mainstream media because of what your book revealed about the Democratic Party and whether or not they're ever going to recover for an election, meaning the midterms in twenty twenty, meaning the election in twenty twenty eight. The believability fact that the fact of authenticity that some would surmise that the Democratic Party once had in a palm of enhance, particularly in comparison to Trump, has now gone.
By the wayside.
Do you believe, based on what your book has reported with Alex Thompson that the Democratic party have severe concerns about its.
Future in light of the information that was revealed.
I mean, yeah, I mean you've come on my show and said that you're concerned about the Democratic Party.
I mean, I'm somebody who wants there to be two, if not.
More, fully functioning political parties where debates can be discussed and hashed out and it's on the level. And I mean I've seen you know. I didn't like what happened on January sixth, twenty twenty one. That was obviously very upsetting, very anti democratic, violently so. And I don't like what the Democrats did when it came to Joe Biden his limit, the limitations of his abilities. I do think that Democrats, obviously, their approval ratings are in the toilet, uh. And I think that one of the reasons they are is because Democrats just spent four years arguing that the border was fine, inflation was not a problem, and Joe Biden was up to the job. And I think that four years of that message was really harmful. I think there are other reasons too why Democrats have damaged themselves, not just Democrats, by the way, but institutions in general, the media, health organizations, universities, et cetera, having to do with the failure to acknowledge certain certain realities, whether it's having to do with riots after the George Floyd murder or having to do with COVID restrictions that you know, shutting down schools, uh and and on and on and on and on. I think there are a lot of reasons why there are crises in confidence in the news media, in Democratic Party, in institutions, and I think all that needs to be hashed out, acknowledged and discussed. I mean so, but in terms of the Democratic Party, it's tough to win elections if people don't have faith that you actually care about them or are listening to them. And I think the Biden deception is one of the reasons people have lost confidence.
And I'm also wondering about it along the lines of that answer, Jake, I'm bloging dot because I wrote down a couple of things. I'm talking you know, the reporting on Biden's auto pen usage.
I mean, people have brought that up.
I'm thinking about people questioning the pardons that he executed. I'm thinking about him approven hundreds of billions spent between November sixth and January twentieth before he departed office, people are wondering who ran the country. All of these things are questions that they had before, but now the book has.
Brought to a more illuminating light.
And was that the goal was that one of the goals you two had in writing this book that to highlight and really bring a focus of microscopic focus on some of the decisions that were made before he walked out of office in light of what we've learned.
I mean, we see this a developing story. This is the first draft and an ongoing story. I mean, if anything, we still have many more questions since we turned in the draft. And you know, I think the metaphor I uses you know, I think the Democratic Party just went through this tumultus four years and ended up, you know, more unpopular than they have been in decades. And I think our goal was to, you know, basically hold up a mirror and tell sort of as comprehensive a story. It's part of the reason why almost all of our sources are Democrats. We didn't rely on Republicans because Democrats, at least some of the honest ones, were doing a lot of soul searching after the election and so that was our goal.
Alex, answer me this, give me a round about number.
How many of those Democratic officials did you find to beyond.
We talked to over.
I would say, I would say the vast majority over at least over one hundred and fifty. I felt were much more candid than they were before, or they were finally felt free to.
Talk without fear of retribution.
Although I will say, Stephen and we never got somebody that said we should never have done this. I can't believe we did it. In retrospect. It was a mistake. How arrogant we were. I mean even you know, there was a top a to top boine House aid who acknowledged to me that this short ten fifteen minute interview I did with Joe Biden in October twenty twenty two he would not have been capable of doing in October twenty twenty three.
That admission was stunning to me. But it did not come.
With and we really made a mistake. We shouldn't have run him.
What an error. I can't believe we did it. It didn't come with that.
It came with you know, and but we thought that he would is the only one that could be Trump blah blah blah. So I think that most were telling the truth as much as they had come to terms with it themselves.
But I do wonder where they will be.
In a year, because, you know, I heard from one of the people that one of the Democrats I interviewed for the book, who gave me one of the most shocking revelations, And I checked in and how are you doing? And you know, they're they're upset, but they're not upset at us. They're not upset at the book. They're just upset that it happened. And now everybody has, everybody's talking about it. So I still think that there's there were I think they're still working through a lot, don't you.
Yeah, there's gradations of honesty.
Jake, you said in the Megan Kelly interview that the body of White House did not like you.
Why was that?
Yeah?
So, I mean, first of all, I don't think that there's been a White House that has ever liked me Bush, Obama's ahead Trump by you know, I mean, I don't they never they never have. But I think specifically they thought. I think I think specifically they really started to dislike me after my coverage in August twenty twenty one of the calamitous withdrawal from Afghanistan, which you know, I've written a book about Afghanistan. I've been to Afghanistan twice. It's a topic I care about a great deal.
I had done a two.
Hour documentary interviewing almost all the commanders who served there, and I knew a lot about the subject and was really shocked at how incredibly poorly the planning had been. An incredibly cavalier the President was with the decision. So I think that that's probably when they started to dislike me the most. And you know, but again, like I'm not, I'm not here to have any White House like me. The best I can hope for is they tolerate me, I you know, and the same with Alex. I assume that was also one of the reasons that that I was interested in booking Alex on my show and also teaming up with him, is because the way that the Biden White House treated him reminded me of the way that the Obama White House treated me, which was they respected what I did, but hated my guts.
You know, as I read, as I talk to you guys about this book, and I see the kind of things that are being said about you. One of the things that I had to ask is looking at you and looking back and what you said you apologized to Laura Trump. I'm wondering, did you ever feel compelled while researching this book? Is that I don't want to use the word apology. I want to ask instead, do you believe there's a level of fairness, that there's a level of contrition that you should feel when it comes to the whole magarite itself in terms of how they perceived whether it was CNN, MSNBC or anybody that wasn't a conservative network was covering them, and how the.
Perception was that the left was left off the hook.
How do you feel about it when people talk about it in that light in terms of whatever emotions emanate from you in regards to those kind of feelings from folks on the right.
It's a complicated question.
I mean.
The answer is that I understand and have been saying for a long time. I understood specific grievances that President Trump had with the media or with whatever I mean.
Back in the.
Early days of twenty seventeen, when BuzzFeed printed the Steel Down Caia, which was full of nonsensical, outlandish charges, I said on air, like I understand why. I mean, you can google it. I mean, people covered it at the time. But you know, I understand why he's frustrated. I would be too that I didn't think it was responsible to publish the Steele dossier. And you know, I can't say that I have a blemish free record on anything. I mean, I look back at Iraq and the weapons of mass destruction, and I was skeptical then, but I wish I had been more skeptical. I wish I had been more brave about it. But as a general rule, I mean, I don't I look at the way I covered, you know, the president. Some of the trials of the president, I thought were you know, I think it's I think it is problematic when people run for prosecutor and promise to go after a specific politician. And both Letitia James, the Attorney General of New York, and Alvin Bragg, the District Attorney New York, both of them did that, And that to me is problematic because you're not saying this is the offense and we need to bring justice to this perpetrator. You're saying, I'm going to go after him, and I think that there was a degree to which that was tolerated by the media ri at large. I mean I did note it at the time, but like and when Trump does the same thing when he's the president, so it's also a different degree. People perceive it as more problematic. If the question is, in general, do I think that there is a liberal bias to the media, The answer is yes sometimes. I mean sometimes I do think that there is an unfair bias. But I think there are all sorts of unfair biases. It depends on the reporter, the outlet, the time, the experience, the context. I think that there's a bias against people who.
You know, who are in poverty.
There is not enough coverage of poverty because because not that most reporters are rich or not, but just there isn't enough coverage of it, and that's a bias. I think sociologically there are biases. They're probably you know, they're probably percentage wise. Maybe journalists don't own guns as much as the average American populist does. I think there are all sorts of biases. But as a general note, do I think the media should be Do I understand why conservatives complain? I do sometimes not every time, but sometimes absolutely.
Alex Oompson showed up the White House Correspondent's dinner and basically you were awarded that night, and you took the liberty of talking to the media and basically saying that the media bear is so responsibility as to why the faith in the institution itself is at an.
All time low.
I want to know what role did the research of this book play in your willingness to go out front and say what you said, as opposed to you feeling this way long before the book came out.
Could you talk about it that a second.
I certainly felt that way before the book came out. I think reporters too often are defensive to criticism and blame the lack of trust on, you know, attacks from conservatives and liberals. That's part of it, from disinformation, But I often felt that there was not enough self reflection. Now the book definitely played a huge part, because it also made me realize how much I had also missed of this story even as I was aggressive on it, and I felt not only and then I also realized like not only had I missed, but like a lot of us missed, And I thought it felt even stranger to win an award for covering for my coverage of you know, the Biden Biden's decline when I knew all the reporting we had in this book, like I was winning an award for something that I felt that we fell short on. And so that was what gave me, gave me the courage even though I was pretty terrified to do it.
Are you guys mindful of the possibility that this book shines a light on what media overall as an institution hasn't been doing in terms of being up and on top of the information in real time as opposed to coming forward in the aftermath of everything that's transpired. In other words, this book came out after the election. There are people that have looked at Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson.
They say, we.
Appreciate the book, We appreciate the information in the book, but there we would have liked to have known this before the election. It would have been nice. That's not your fault, I get it. I'm not blaming y'all, but I'm just saying people would ask that question, and as a result, for the critics out there against the fourth the state, which is the media, for those out there who don't know, they would use this as fuel to point a more skeptical and cynical eye at the media moving forward, which feeds right into Trump's lines about fake news, fake news, fake news.
Have y'all thought about that at all? And if so, what kind of thoughts do you have? I'll go to you frustrate.
I mean, definitely, I definitely we've thought about it.
But the bottom line is this, and if people don't believe us, they don't believe us, And there really isn't much we can say, but metabolistically, as journalists, the way that Alex and I are wired is to break news as soon as we can before anybody else can do it. If we had known, if either one of us had known that Joe Biden did not recognize George Clooney at that LA fundraiser in June twenty twenty four, and that shocked Clooney to his core and shocked others in that circle who saw it, and that that was the reason why Clooney wrote the op ed He wrote after the debate, I mean I would have I would have given a finger to break that story, like at the like literally I would have given a finger to break that story at the time. That is such a big scoop, That is a huge story.
But Jake, do you respect the fact that there are people who would look at CNN, whether it's it's the entire network or it's the entire what they label as leftist media, and they would challenge that, they would say they don't believe that you would have done that.
What do you say to that.
I mean, it's there's nothing I can say except I would have. I mean, you know, look, there is a lot of mistrust in the media, in the legacy media. There's a reason for that. Some of it is our own fault, the legacy media. Some of it is the fault of political operators on the left and the right who don't want anybody to believe things that are being said negative.
About their side. Yeah, there are entire.
Institutions, they are biggest culprits.
And there are you.
Know, people whose job it is literally to so distrust in the media for whatever reason, whether left right center. You know that that is their job. There are entire industries around making sure that people do not believe.
Things that Alex or that I say on TV.
But that said, all I can control is my part of it, which is the part that owns up to when we don't cover something good enough, well enough, tries to get to the bottom of stories, tries to be fair as a fallible human being.
All I can do is that.
And I understand that there are people who are just never going to believe it. There are people who think that Fox News is too left wing and they turn on onn or Newsmax or whatever.
I mean.
That's why we live in a democracy with a choice of media outlets. All I can say is that I do try my hardest. Most journalists I know try their hardest to be fair and accurate. But there are also competing pressures getting a story out as soon as possible, breaking news, having people watch, having people read, having people click, and you know, the media makes mistakes and we are responsible for some of this distrust.
Alex, you heard what Jake just said. You're co author of this book. You showed up at the White House Correspondence then you said what you said. What kind of impact or better word would be reaction from your contemporaries have you received and do you anticipate receiving moving forward in.
Light of the of of of this book.
Uh?
Well, say you know, right after I made the speech at the dinner, Uh, Jake. Jake called me and was like basically gave me that you know at a boy, which I really appreciated.
Oh you great contemporaries. You know, some contemporaries didn't like it. Thought it was you know, it's it's uh sanctimonies. Yeah, sanctimonious. Yeah, so you know.
But honestly, it was like one of those things where and it's one of those things in life where I felt like I had to say, I'm thinking that people weren't gonna like it, just because I would have felt odd if I hadn't.
But you pointed the finger at yourself.
You didn't just say this is a room full of people who didn't cover this well enough.
You said none of us covered this well enough, which I think is it's just undeniably true.
Which is not to say that all these sources were there right for the pluck and and we were ignoring them.
They were not.
They would not talk to us until in this depth of candor, until after the election. But that's also not to say that it couldn't have been done. I mean, it's all a hypothetical now, but this was a calamity. It was playing out in front of everybody to see, and it's just hard to imagine that more could not have been done.
That's all, well, I totally I totally get that, and I think people feel that way. But because you guys are the co authors of this book, I think they're looking at both of you and they're saying instead of saying, is more we could have done this, saying is more you should? You guys could have done that. That's how they're doing this right now. You see what's going on out there. And so with that being said, Jake, one of the things we've all had to report on is that, particularly since the election, not necessarily with your show.
I don't know the number.
I don't have that in front of me, but across the broad of legacy media per se, the ratings have dipped and people have questioned whether or not the media is ever going to recover from some of the things that were not reported, some of the things that were.
Not said, et cetera, et cetera. How mindful are you of that?
And are you fearful that things are going to get worse before they get better or is that not a concern of yours?
At all.
I think that the issue of declining ratings, which is an industry wide issue, not just news on TV. It's on radio, it's on websites, it's on newspapers and magazines, is a tectonic shift that bigger brains than mine are trying to figure out how to adapt to. People like you or Megan Kelly or others running your businesses in your way are definitely represent the present and future of media. I think the question is how do more traditional brands and people who do what Alex and I do, how do we fit into that space. I think that's more the issue. Certainly, you know, media news missteps doesn't help, But I think the issue is more people who are cutting chords, people who are on their phones, people who are watching streamers instead of netwinstead of broadcast television. I think that is more of the shift, and that is something that I'm very mindful of.
It's something that I'm mindful of.
When I write a book, I am mindful of the fact that I am competing not just with other authors, I am competing with words with friends, I am competing with Netflix. I am complete because I know that they're you know, probably like a core of the people reading the book or reading the book on their phones or iPads, and that's part of this shift. That is something that I'm mindful of and think about all the time with my team in terms of like, come on, guys, uh, we need better visuals or come on, guys, what's like what are we trying to say here? We need to grab attention, We need people to understand why this is important. And so I think it's more it's a larger it's a larger issue one that's confronting everybody that's presumably that's producing any sort of content, whether Amazon you know, streaming series, whether there it's a Reacher or PBS you know, Masterpiece theater or whatever. We're all trying to figure out how do we get to where people are on their streaming services at home and on their phones.
Got you listen? I know you guys got to go. I have to go as well. You promised me an hour. You gave me an hour. I could have talked to you about this book for another hour, and Jake, I could have talked to you for a lot longer than that about the whole industry in and of itself. But Loosten, thanks for your time. I really enjoyed the conversation. I appreciate y'all staying on board and answering all my questions.
Alex is a pleasure to meet you, Jake. I've seen before you. I have not other than watching.
To keep back on my show, Stephen, because I got some I'm coming.
I'm not running.
I got tough questions for you.
I'm not running.
I don't think so. I'm not running because I'm not running. Because I'm not running. That's why I'm not running. Okay, thanks a lot man, Take it easy, Jake Tapper, Alex Thompson authors co author's Original Sin. It's available wherever you buy your books. Thanks Gods, take care of yourself. Coming up, I'll give you my thoughts on what we just heard. That's next right here in the Stephennix Smith Show.
Don't go away. Welcome back to stephen Ate Smith Show.
We just heard from Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson, co authors of the book Original Sin. Now I want to take a moment to share my thoughts on the conversation. This isn't some gotcha moment. I'm trying to catch somebody in a litor whatever. I'm gonna ask the questions of people want to ask. I saw Jake Tappers and Alex Thompson's interview with Megan Kelly. Obviously, she leans heavily to the right, and she had her issues with Jake Tapper, which I thought were astutely and adroitly done by her.
Kudos to her. I'm a little bit different.
I'm more curious than anything else because this is a lane I'm venturing into, not a lane that I've lived in for decades.
And I thought that the.
Questions that needed to be asked were asked, and I thought that he answered them. I think there's a lot for Jake Tapper to be concerned about from the standpoint.
That he's a co author of this book, and there's a lot of cynics and critics out there.
Who believe that he had to have known more before the election, as opposed to learning all of this after the election.
He had an answer for that.
I think that legacy media as we know it to be is in a world of trouble because people believe that it has an agenda. He swears that's not the case, and that hasn't been the case. And had this been something that he was aware of prior to the election. You're damn right he would have reported it because it would have been good for him, It would have been good for the network, it would have been good for his career, it would have been good for the industry. Alex Thompson, we heard his speech at the White House Correspondence dinner from months ago, and he held the media accountable, talked about the media, included himself by the way, and how the media needed to do a better job. So what do we appeal from all of this. It's very very simple, do your damn job. That applies to me, That applies to Jake Tapper, that's applies to Alec Thompson, that applies to everybody in the media. It's not about friendship and it's not about making enemies. It's about getting as close to the facts as you can possibly get to and being honest, upfront and authentic as to where you stand and why with an audience. So even if they disagree with you, they at least know that you're true and authentic and as a result, you've expressed yourself. They can be cynical or critical about anything that you have to say, but if you're honest enough front and you stand on that and you're not taking sides, then you're good to go. However, having said all of that, there is no way to get around what I'm about to say when you consider this book Original Sin and what the members rather of the Body administration, along with other people in the political apparatus that is the Democratic Party, when you could take it to consideration, what several folks, if not many, were willing to do to conceal the cognitive decline that President Biden was enduring. Nobody comes out looking better than Donald Trump and the magar right.
Because the things that they were.
Saying, the things that they were accusing the left of the things that they were accusing legacy media of.
Whether it's true or not, they look right. They look like they were on point, and you know what that means. You can look at it in two ways.
You can look at it as a decline and the disintegration of our fourth estate, which is the media in this country. You can look at it that way, or you can look at it with a smile on your face like I am looking at it, which is this we got a two party system. Maybe it'll open the door for an independent party. Maybe, just maybe, if you're black. It doesn't automatically mean that you got a side with the Democratic Party all of a sudden. Now because there seems to have been corruption, we've accused.
It of being on the right, we now know.
Courtesy of this book, that it was on the left where you had a Democratic Party in a circumvent the democratic process in this country just to get their candidate in this side into office to keep them remaining in power. Since that is now a reality that has been articulated verbally and in a written word with this bestselling book Original Sin by Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson of Axios, because that's now a matter of record, we.
Get to look at things a little bit differently, and as.
A result, that skeptical eye expands, and we're able to look at the left and the right with the cynicism and the skepticism both may deserve, which means, in order to get our vote, both parties have to work for it. You don't get to take it, advantage it, and take for granted anybody anymore.
That in and of itself.
Can steer us to a better path for the United States of America moving forward, And if that's what ends up happening.
Even though the road to through that path was a bit rough. In the end, we'll all be better off for it.
That's what I walk away from this interview with Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson Field.
That's my perspective on it. Hopefully it'll be yours too. That's it for this edition of The Stephen A. Smith Show.
I got a Conference Finals game in the National Basketball Association. The cover of tonight with the wilk Blahim City done in the Minnesota Timberwolves. So I will be back with y'all in a couple of days. Until then, this is the one and only Stephen A.
Signing Off. Until then, Peace and love everybody. God bless you.
