Mark Hemingway exposes America’s political class corruption, tracing the left’s weaponization of justice—like Trump’s prosecutions and abortion-clinic arrests—to a pattern of unchecked institutional abuse. He links 2020 election integrity failures (ballot harvesting, drop boxes) to systemic fraud risks, ignored by Democrats despite claims of legality. Media bias, from CNN’s partisan coverage to Facebook’s censorship of conservative voices like the Daily Wire, stems from woke culture replacing journalistic rigor, leaving dissenters labeled as "wrongthink." A conservative cultural renaissance may emerge, but only if grassroots and institutional efforts reclaim creative freedom from woke conformity. [Automatically generated summary]
Hey, everybody, it's Andrew Clavin with this week's interview with Mark Hemingway.
Mark, you probably know, is one of the most insightful commentators on the right.
He's a senior writer at Real Clear Investigations, where they do great work, and a senior editor at the Federalist, where they do great work.
And he's also a recipient, all kinds of things.
It just makes me feel bad, the things that he's won, the Phillips Foundation Gold Award Journalism Fellowship and other fellowships, you know, places where they don't let the rest of us in.
I wanted to talk to him because, as I've repeatedly said, we're witnessing a complete collapse of the elite left, but at the same time, that doesn't mean we're going to see a victory of the right.
It's a kind of weird, eerie moment of stillness where the center has collapsed and we're just waiting to see who's going to fill it.
And I'm wondering if he sees the path forward.
Mark, it's great to see you.
How you doing?
I'm doing all right.
Glad to be back.
Yeah, it's nice to have you back.
So I'm watching what's going on.
We're watching the exposure of not just Joe Biden's decay, but the dishonesty that we've seen that now obviously goes through the entire establishment.
You wrote a piece recently.
You've written a number of pieces I want to talk to you about, but one of them was called America's Corrupt Political Class Should Be Prosecuted, Not Trump.
Let's start there.
This seems obviously true, but is it realistic?
I mean, we're watching these guys hound Donald Trump.
It's such a gaslight moment.
Is there some way to respond to this without becoming our enemies?
Well, that is sort of the $64,000 political question right now.
I mean, we have to figure out what we can do to return things to some sort of like baseline of fairness.
And the question is, is whether we can do that without achieving some sort of ability for mutually assured destruction.
If we don't claim power and then start prosecuting people on the left for their abuses of power, then how are we going to stop them from doing, from continuing to engage in this law affair and all kinds of other horrible stuff that's been going on?
And to be clear, maybe the most insightful thing that's been said in politics, or maybe not insightful is the word, but resident is probably the better word that's been said in politics in the past, I don't know, 10 years is Trump's comment about how, you know, they're not after me.
They're after you.
I'm just in the way.
And if you look at how quickly we've gone from, you know, them trying to pretend that Trump was colluding with Russia to treasonously steal an election to arresting grandmas for protesting at abortion clinics, it's become apparently obvious that that is 100% true.
And similarly, we've seen something interesting in this election where a lot of people have really waken up to that, people that were resistant to Trump.
I mean, all kinds of people that did not like Trump still don't like him.
But the moment they were started filing all these lawsuits against him that were clearly maliciously intended and conceived, a lot of these people were suddenly on board the Trump train in terms of, I just don't have a choice but to vote for this guy because if I don't restore some sort of balance of power here, they're just going to keep tightening the ratchet until we're all being sent off to camps.
Well, right.
And I mean, he's, you know, he's got, obviously, he's a flawed personality.
He's flawed as a person and as a politician.
But a hero is a flawed guy who goes through the gauntlet and survives.
And what they've done to him would have destroyed a lesser man.
I mean, it really is amazing.
I sit there and I watch him and I think, like, yeah, I'll take that guy for my president.
He stands up to this.
But when I watch them prosecuting him for essentially filling in the wrong thing on his check And then have them say, oh, he would lock up his opponents in prison.
And, you know, he's a danger.
And as you say, arresting old ladies for protesting abortion and putting them in prison really for a life sentence.
And nobody commenting about this on the left, nobody saying maybe we've gone too far, anything like that.
When you write something and say America's corrupt political class should be prosecuted, should I take that literally?
Should I start to think to myself, these people should be prosecuted or do we have to go another way?
Well, I mean, I don't think, I don't think it's an either or question.
I mean, I think it's all of the above.
I mean, part of the problem that's been going on here is we have, in fact, been letting the corrupt political class get away with too much for too long.
So like, for instance, you know, we talk about, you know, whether or not Trump would prosecute his political enemies.
Well, this is already a question that's been asked and answered.
I mean, Hillary Clinton, what she did in terms of classified documents was, you know, orders of magnitude worse than what Donald Trump did with classified documents that the Justice Department is currently prosecuting him of.
It's, you know, what Biden did in several ways was worse.
And, you know, when Donald Trump was, you know, president, everyone was just appalled that he was, you know, leading chance of lock her up or whatever at rallies.
But the moment he became president, he came out and said, you know what, I'm not going to prosecute Hillary Clinton.
Why?
Because it's too divisive and I don't want to destroy the country.
And yet, look at what happened the moment that Trump was out of power again.
You know, Biden, a guy that's guilty of the, you know, the same crime as Trump's being prosecuted of and worse in lots of ways because his classified document scandals involve his time as a senator when he had no business taking classified documents anywhere, you know, was signaling loudly in the New York Times that he was upset that the Justice Department wasn't moving ahead with charges against Donald Trump.
So there's got to be some sort of prosecution, I think, so these people get the message.
They can't just go around using the Justice Department as their personal secret police to go out and get their political opposition.
Well, I guess it's not so secret police is what's really disturbing about it.
They're just brazenly doing this out in the light of day and no one's stopping them.
So we have to stop that.
On the other hand, I also think, though, that look, Republicans or conservatives, whatever coalition you want to call that is against all this, do make up roughly half the country, right?
And there's all kinds of things that can be done in terms of federal power at the state level that is not being exercised.
You're finally starting to see some attorney generals and states and other things wake up and start making issues.
Missouri AG suing the federal government over free speech issues is a great example.
Texas is AG has been doing some things.
But we need a lot, lot more energy at that level and a lot more energy even at the grassroots level that makes it so that liberals that are in control of institutions, whether it's the PTA or whether it's the Justice Department, know that they can't just run roughshod over everybody because they are doing things that half the country loudly objects to and then claiming that they're protecting democracy.
It's insane.
Especially when they've got the CIA running mind games on us with Hunter Biden's laptop and things like that.
And people, responsible journalists at Wall Street Journal and other places are saying they're going to do it again.
They're still working on what to do on the next election.
Oh, yeah.
I mean, and that's the other thing is, you know, the thing about the 2020 election and all of the election-related controversies to that, if you look at all the things that they did in 2020, I mean, the incredible, and sorry, leaving all the things that they did following Trump's election in 2016, the incredible gaslighting over Russia, all of the non-existent scandals, I mean, on and on and on and on.
And the effort that they had involved was just, you know, the Russiagate stuff involving the FBI, the CIA, you know, leaks to the press.
I mean, like it was so coordinated and so, you know, over the top in terms of, you know, what they did, the idea that they would, you know, collude the student stealing election in 2020 wasn't hard for people to believe.
You know, whether there was, you know, truth to the substance of those accusations is a separate question.
But the problem is, is they'd so gaslit the American public that they couldn't, they no longer had any ability to corral rumors or do any of the traditional functions that the press and the institutional leaders are supposed to do.
They had surrendered all of that power to tell people what to think, which is kind of necessary to some degree, I think.
But they no longer have any influence or a clout to be able to do that.
And so we're in this just wild west situation here where nobody knows what to believe.
And it's very destabilizing and it's very dangerous, frankly.
You know, I want to talk to you about the press in a second.
But before we get to that, because you and Molly wrote a book about the election, I was hiking on January 6th.
I was up in the mountains in California, got down to the bottom, and of course, looked at my phone, and my heart just dropped.
I thought, you know, right or wrong, good or bad, this is politically bad.
Elections Under Siege00:04:17
This is a political mess.
But when I talked to you after you wrote that book, you kind of felt like, you know, maybe Trump had a point, even though the point has never been brought into court.
Where do you stand on that now?
Where do you stand on that election and on January 6th?
Well, we were very careful in that book to never use the phrase stolen election.
And I don't believe that we can, you know, prove that there's anything such as a stolen election.
But there was a much larger big picture problem that occurred in that election and it's defining this election now, which is that we have gone from this situation here where elections were, to the extent that we have them in our republic, because we're not a direct democracy, elections were this thing where Americans all came together on a certain day.
To the extent that anyone voted, it was because they were self-interested and self-motivated in doing so.
And they would show up at a polling place.
Everyone would vote at the same time, roughly.
You would get, you know, and you would get the results in sort of a timely fashion.
Now we, because of the way that the Democrats have been pushing to relax election laws going back years, but that they just ramped it up to an unbelievable degree in 2020 using the pandemic as an excuse.
We now have an election season that starts nearly three months before the election.
And where all of a sudden it's not about self-interested or self-motivated voters showing up.
It's simply about how many ballots that you can harvest through ballot harvesting operations that go around the country and that are invested heavily in.
You have ballot drop boxes now.
You have the legalizing of party workers to go out and knock on people's doors and stand over their kitchen table, making sure they fill out their ballot in the correct fashion.
I mean, this is terrifying.
And that is not democracy.
And so I think what's happened is we've created the conditions for under elections where people have very, very good reasons not to trust results.
And we just saw this thing with the SAVE Act in Congress where no Democrats were voting for a law that would make it impossible for illegal immigrants to vote in elections, which does happen.
And the rate that we've been importing illegal immigrants is this should be an added concern.
I mean, the Democrats point to the fact that, well, this is already illegal, but there is no enforcement mechanism whatsoever to make sure that this doesn't happen as it stands now.
And there have been repeated problems with because Democrats have been so aggressive about automatically registering people where, you know, I can't remember there was a story a few years ago where like thousands of illegal immigrants were set ballots just by virtue of the fact that they had gotten driver's license, which is a whole other thing.
You question whether legal immigrants should be getting forms of ID like that.
So there are these problems here where our elections just aren't trustworthy in the views of a huge percentage of the public.
And that's a problem.
And Democrats are uninterested in addressing it.
Getting into credit card debt is easy, but getting out is hard because the system is set up so that you don't.
If you're struggling with credit cards, personal loans, collections, medical bills, you need to check out PDS.
debt.
PDS provides a service to match you with debt solutions tailored to your financial situation.
If you're making payments every month on your debt and your balances aren't going down, PDS has solutions for you.
Everyone with $10,000 or more in eligible debt qualifies and there is no minimum credit score required.
Bad and fair credit are accepted.
Save more while paying off your debt in a fraction of the time.
PDS debt strives to understand your specific scenario and can help provide alternative solutions to becoming debt-free.
Stop waiting, start saving.
Get a free debt analysis right now at pdsdebt.com slash clavin.
It only takes 30 seconds.
That's pdsdebt.com slash clavin today.
PDSdebt.com slash clavin, which is not spelled PDS, it's spelled K-L-A-V-A-N.
I mean, it is interesting that you just had these very dramatic elections in France and in England, and there was not a peep out of anybody about who won or lost because, you know, they show up.
You have to show your ID.
They have a very secure system and everybody knows it.
Corporate Media Shifts00:15:29
Everybody trusts it.
Yeah, mail-in ballots are completely illegal in France.
And the reason why they're illegal is there was mass fraud.
Right.
Right.
So let's talk about the press because this is, to me, I think it's a central issue.
Everybody says, oh, everybody blames the press, but the reason everybody blames the press is because they're to blame.
We just had this debate where Biden, it was obvious that Biden has a degenerative disease.
He has a disease that's getting worse and worse.
It will get worse and worse.
He's obviously not fit for what he's doing and what he has to do up ahead.
And so we know, we know that the entire press corps covered it up.
You know, like they say we were lied to, but the people knew, every single person in America knew, except the press corps and George Clooney.
So my question now is, we have a First Amendment, which I love dearly.
I hold it to my heart.
I believe in it extremely.
But somehow there's got to be a reform of this system, which has simply become the mouthpiece of power.
Is that possible?
Ha.
Well, whether it's possible is a separate question than necessarily what I think should be done.
You know, there's a number of things that need to be done, I think, here.
One is that we need to basically Bud Light the entire corporate media industry.
They, for whatever reason, have been getting away with murder forever.
And the thing about this is drives me crazy is it has spread from borderline communist news organizations to the broader media itself.
I mean, if you watch Stephen Colbert, I mean, how is this not a Democratic, the work of a Democratic super PAC?
And this is supposed to be a late night talk show.
I mean, I'm not sure there has ever been a media program in the history of America that is more despicable and destructive than The View.
And yet, you know, this is a staple of network television.
And then, you know, you get to the specifics of what's going on at the news operations at these big corporate legacy media operations like CNN or NBC News or whatever.
And, you know, it's just absolutely unbelievable.
I think about this in terms of some of the reporting I did during the Trump years because, I mean, it's like it was almost overnight that like, you know, well-established media standards just disappeared.
I mean, it was crazy.
Every single story was anonymously sourced to the gills.
You know, I mean, I started, you know, I started out in the news business in the late 90s and I worked at a major daily.
And the things that they, that Politico and New York Times now do on a regular would have never been allowed.
You know, anonymous sources were to be used sparingly.
The editor had to know exactly who they were.
You know, and it was never, you know, enough to just go, it had to be like a massive story and extremely unusual circumstances for a story to be completely anonymously sourced.
And that's kind of like the norm now.
I mean, it is just absolutely crazy that that's the case.
So like just to give you like one example, like the typical shenanigan in the Trump era, there was this story that CNN ran with that Wikileaks had, when they leaked all those Democratic emails, in advance of it being publicly released, they had sent the Wikileaks info dump to Donald Trump Jr. like a week before they had been publicly released.
And this supposedly proved that Wikileaks, which is allegedly tied in with Russian hackers, was colluding with the Trump campaign.
And CNN just ran with a story.
And it turned out that once they looked at the date on the email, that Donald Trump Jr. was sent this information after they had been publicly released.
Somebody had just misread the date on the email.
But the crazy thing about this story was CNN almost certainly got this leak from Adam Schiff's office.
And what's crazy is someone from Adam Schiff's office just called up CNN and said, hey, here's the story.
CNN never saw the email before they ran the story.
Wow.
Which is just like, I mean, such irresponsible journalism.
If more than one person had looked at the email, they might have noticed that the date was wrong.
I remember talking to Ari Fleischer once, and Ari Fleischer was telling me about how years ago he worked on some, it was some congressional committee, and they wanted to leak something to the Wall Street Journal.
And the Wall Street Journal said, you know, we're not touching that story until you actually show us like the memo that's at the heart of the story.
And that was how the news business operated in the 90s.
They weren't just going to take a leak from someone on the hill or just that would have been totally unacceptable.
Yet that became sort of the standard operating procedure.
And so, yeah, I mean, there needs to be a lot more pressure in these news operations over very specific instances in terms of setting sort of official standards or that or need to like outline what are basic journalism standards and demand that they adhere to them because that's just simply not happening anymore.
And it's not only that, it's what was once considered offensive and unethical is now just the way that the news business operates.
And then finally, there's a whole other thing, you know, I probably could go into about what's being done to quelch alternative media.
You know, the smaller media or right-ling media have been absolutely crushed institutionally.
The Daily Wire is dealing with censorship efforts that are happening from the disinformation industrial complex.
Most people don't realize that media fact-checking is basically a censorship operation, which is a story I've written that's for the Daily Wire on their website.
I wrote a long story about this.
What happens is, if you're a Facebook-partnered fact-checking organization like PolitiFact and some of these other groups, which are known for having an extreme liberal bias that can easily be demonstrated, if you are PolitiFact and you say that something this Republican politician said, you know, is something that this conservative website said isn't true based on their own stupid opinion, that goes into the back end of Facebook and Facebook brags they quash 80% of the global internet traffic to that story.
That's Facebook's own public literature.
So, you know, and then post-January 6th, we just saw big tech collude across the board to just crush the reach and ability to get advertising, digital advertising to conservative websites and alternative media, things that are not establishment approved.
And until, you know, we get some sort of robust, I don't know, court decisions or even laws from Congress demanding that people be treated fairly and that some sort of culture of the First Amendment exists in this country.
We're going to have corporate media running and getting away with murder.
Shapiro was just on the Hill testifying about this really brilliantly as far as I was concerned.
And their attack on him was basically, but aren't you against gay marriage?
That was their response.
In other words, to take what many, many normal and especially religious people believe and demonize it to the point where it was justifiable to shut him down.
Oh, we need to be absolutely clear.
This has nothing to do with disinformation or conspiracy theories.
It is purely wrongthink.
That is exactly what it is.
They do not want certain ideas gaining purchase or at the very least, they want to pretend that commonly believed moral ideas are outsider ideas.
And they can do that by they think that they can do that by controlling the information environment.
Yeah, no, that's that's you know, that's exactly right.
But the thing that gets me about this, when I was a, I was a small town newspaperman and I was on a little box of an office.
And one of my colleagues was Adam Nagurney, who went on to become the chief political writer for the New York Times.
And that was all he wanted in life.
And he was, you know, a left-winger and he was, we didn't know this then, although I suspected it, but he was a gay guy.
You know, he was a total left-wing.
But he used to just hammer me if I slanted to the left.
If I slanted liberal in a story, he would come and yell at me about it.
And his boss, who was also a liberal, would come and yell at me about it.
And they wanted me to just report the facts.
Clearly, something in the culture changed to make it possible for the guys on the floor to write like that.
In other words, it can't just be that kids are coming into the news business and saying, oh, I'm going to bring my left-wing stupidity into the news business.
Someone has to be letting them do that.
So where is the change exactly in the news business?
Is it taking place because all these 25-year-old credentialed kids are coming in and think that they know more about Hamas than Netanyahu does?
Or is it the corporate structure?
Well, it's a lot of things.
But actually, the best person that's on this topic is Batya Unger Sargon, who's written a book called Bad News that is just absolutely terrific.
And she makes the point that the biggest problem with media bias isn't necessarily right or left.
It's about class.
And it's totally true.
When I started out in the news business in the 1990s, I'm just old enough to have caught the tail end of this, where I remember one of my very first editors was a guy who'd been in the New York Times for decades and was the Washington Bureau chief for Harper's and had all this experience.
He'd never gone to college.
He started out at the New York Times as a 16-year-old whose sole job was running scores from the track in Long Island to the sports desk.
And he grew up in this environment.
And at the time, that was like a not uncommon career trajectory.
I mean, it was kind of, you know, the ink-stained wretches.
These are blue-collar jobs, you know, for the most part.
You know, these were tradesmen in a certain way.
And don't get me wrong, you know, there were a lot of them who were very intelligent.
You report on the news, you read a daily newspaper every day, and you're going to be a pretty educated person.
But these were people that weren't bringing all of this cultural baggage to their job.
I mean, they saw the job for what it was, which was communicate information to people and get paid for it or whatever.
And then they even had some sort of sense of civic responsibility attached.
And then there's a whole, you go back two centuries, going to how the class divide and journalism kind of emerged.
But I would really peg it specifically to sort of Watergate.
I mean, for instance, journalism as an academic program, and I say this as someone who has a journalism degree, journalism degrees were very few and far between.
And then all of a sudden Watergate comes along and the two hippest guys in the country are these two guys that need the Washington Post that brought down a sitting president.
And so all of a sudden you have journalism programs in the hotbed of American leftism, universities popping up like toadstools.
And it immediately became a much more sort of ideological profession.
And then on top of that, the collapse of journalism, I think, in terms of financial in the last 20 or 25 years has made it so that it's kind of a luxury profession.
There's not a lot of money and there's not a lot of jobs available.
So Bacha Unga Sargon makes this point.
It's like, if you get a barely paid or unpaid internship, the New York Times or the Washington Post, you know what the cost of living in those cities are?
Some kid who grew up in a trailer park can't take that internship.
And so consequently, if you go into the Washington Post newsroom, you go from situations where major newspaper editors that I knew starting out who didn't even have college degrees, now everyone has an, you know, at the Washington Post newsroom has an MFA and creative nonfiction or some such BS from Columbia.
And that's kind of where we've ended up with this.
It really is a class and cultural divide.
You know, you mentioned Colbert and the culture.
And you're one of the few.
We were not the only ones, but you and I were among the few people who struck back against the right when they started to demonize Taylor Swift.
Is there any chance?
We're in this moment.
If you haven't noticed, we're in this moment where there are no good movies, there are no good television shows, there are no good books, there's no really good music.
We are in a cultural lull like none I have ever seen in my entire lifetime, where there's almost nothing good happening in the culture because wokeness has essentially poisoned the well and killed it.
It's a moment when the right could rise and actually create a new culture on the ashes of the old.
Is there any chance of that happening or are we too dumb to do it?
Well, I think that that has happened.
Let me put it this way.
You know, my entire adult life, I've been hearing from corners of the right, well, we need to get involved in the culture.
I think that that is happening.
I'm not optimistic yet about the right becoming a force in that department.
I will say that there is more energy being directed to that in a serious way from both a grassroots level and an institutional level than at any point in time since I started out 25 years ago.
And I'm very encouraged by that.
I'm very encouraged by, say, what the Daily Wire has done to get into film and children's programming and other things like that.
I mean, I think that is, in fact, the future.
And what's more, because of wokeness and because of like a lot of what's going on, I think that the field is actually open to alternatives in a way that it previously hasn't.
But I also think that there's this problem of sort of ennui that is sort of like setting in in terms of how people respond to popular culture.
I mean, you've written elegantly on this about the situation here where a lot of the appeal of storytelling is it appeals to sort of base instincts of human nature about moral distinctions and things like that.
And wokeness completely obliterates all those distinctions.
And I don't know how many times I've been watching some sort of Netflix show or something like that.
And it's like, why on earth do I care about any of these characters?
The people writing it don't understand anything about what makes for a good hero's journey or any of that Joseph Campbell stuff or anything that has traditionally guided entertainment.
And similarly, I have kind of defended Taylor Swift.
I've also been fairly critical of her, partly because it's frustrating to me.
What happened when Taylor Swift blew up last year as this dominant cultural force?
What drove me crazy about it was you were reading these stories in the New York Times and New Yorker that were treating Taylor Swift like she was the second coming of Bob Dylan or Leonard Cohen or something.
Like she was this profoundly serious artist that we had to take, you know, we had to take very seriously for what she was saying.
And look, you know, pop stars have their place.
And look, in a world where Megan the stallion exists, I'm not going to get upset about Taylor Swift's cultural message too much, although I do think that in terms of feminism and some other things, there's some critical things to be said.
But I think that people need to wake up and realize why are we in a culture right now that is not producing more Bob Dylan's and Leonard Cohen's or David Bowie's or Mick Jaggers or whatever it is, like people that are really profoundly interesting on an individual level and can express that artistically.
People that don't just fit some sort of like cookie cutter mold about being a blonde, attractive female who can string together a 145 chord progression.
We've got to get to a situation where there are really provocative writers.
And the publishing industry might be like worse than almost any industry in this regard.
Go to the new fiction release at Barnes Noble and just count how many authors on that table or on that shelf are men.
Always Great Talking00:02:46
Well, I know.
And I have to tell you, I still am getting editors' notes saying, well, you can't use the word crippled.
And I still have to write back and say, no, no, I will use it because I'm the person writing it and my name is on the book.
And it's amazing that you have to fight those fights because, you know, I can't even explain.
I can't even explain to people why I won't compromise on it.
They cannot understand, you know, couldn't you just give here and give there?
I keep saying, no, I wouldn't do that any more than I would do it in Germany in the 30s or in the Soviet Union.
I'm just not going to compromise with them at all.
But I don't think, I think I'm almost alone in this.
I mean, it's yeah, well, and the other thing that's amazing to me is how fast this happened.
Yeah.
Like we all remember this.
Like, you know, a typical episode of 30 Rock could not be aired today.
And that shows, what, 10, 12 years old or something like that?
I mean, this happened so fast.
Everybody remembers a time and it wasn't this bad, and yet they're all just willingly going along with it.
You know, I really do think that there is a market where people are just going to, you know, say, you know, no more.
You know, I mean, comedy, for instance, I do think that there's a real sort of backlash in comedy against this.
And part of the reason why comedy has become a big force, I think, in the last, you know, five or 10 years is because it's now kind of exists outside the mainstream anymore.
You know, mainstream studios are not making typical, you know, raunchy comedy films or whatever like they used to because they're afraid to make offensive jokes.
So now all of a sudden you have this subterranean world where a podcast where comedians go on there and they're actually creatively free and they're doing a lot of interesting stuff because they're not being imposed upon.
And I think that that points the way.
Sooner or later, there's going to be some sort of cultural breakout from one of these subterranean cultural pockets that we've created.
Yeah, no, it is a weird thing that conservatives are the counterculture.
So I think we're having a hard time getting used to it, basically.
Mark, it's great to see you and I really appreciate it.
It's really interesting talking to you.
I hope this is a better moment.
I hope this is the beginning of a better moment.
It's certainly a moment where you feel that there's opportunities and space for us to move in a new way, which would be exciting.
Where can people find your stuff?
Ah, realclearinvestigations.com or realclearpolitics.com, as well as thefederalists.com.
I'm active at both places and Twitter as well.
You can just go ahead and find me.
Well, it's great to see you.
And I hope you'll come back and we'll talk again.
Anytime.
Always great talking to Mark Hemingway.
Always great talking to anybody on the right who's thinking deeply and importantly about both the press and the culture because that's where it all is going to happen.
That is where the future is.
And we have got to be working at that definitely where we will be working on that on Friday on the Andrew Clavin Show.