Welcome to WeeklyWilson.com, where author/film critic Connie (Corcoran) Wilson avoids totally losing her marbles in semi-retirement by writing about film (see the Chicago Film Festival reviews and SXSW), politics and books----her own books and those of other people. You'll also find her diverging frequently to share humorous (or not-so-humorous) anecdotes and concerns. Try it! You'll like it!
Among the notable folk that Connie has interviewed (partial list) are: David Morrell (3 times), William F. Nolan, Kurt Vonnegut, jr.; Joe Hill; Frederik Pohl; Anne Perry; Valerie Plame; Vanessa Redgrave; Michael Shannon;; Taylor Hackford; Jon Land and Liv Ullman. The interview subjects might be from the world of Hollywood or simply be much-read authors, but her interviews have run in newspapers for 61 years.
“Summer 2000: The X-Cetra Story” won the SXSW Jury Award for Best Documentary Feature at SXSW 2026. Directed by Ayden Mayeri, it’s the story of a quartet of childhood friends who made a record when they were junior high school age (11 to 13) and it surfaced as a hit on the website Rate Your Music 24 years later. Said Director Mayeri, “This album being discovered is the weirdest thing that has ever happened to me.
The X-Cetra Story (Photo by Dessie Jackson).
”WRITER/DIRECTOR
Director Ayden Mayeri, who has 58 IMDB credits, has appeared in such films as Paul Feig’s “Jackpot!”, “Mr.Throwback,” “Cora Bora Comedy,” “Spin Me Around,” and is the Writer/Director of this award-winning documentary. After the unexpected fame of their album Et-Cetra, (made in 2000), Mayeri decided to try to get the foursome together again, twenty-four years later. Ayden admitted “I really missed hanging out with them and being carefree. She likened their reunion in Santa Rosa as “Our version of Backstreet’s Back.”
Ayden Mayeri
Ayden admitted that she wanted to recapture the unself-conscious feeling of her pre-teen years. It is captured via extensive videotaping by one of the girl’s mothers from back when the girls were 11 to 13, in 2000. Kudos to Editor Phil Rosanova and Audrey Leach, who drew the task of blending copious amounts of film and to cinematographer Barry Rothbart. The musician mother Robin O’Brien who had ties to the German music provider Akim and produced the girls’ maiden vocal efforts deserves much credit for the album existing at all, also.
Now 36, Mayeri described the era to The Daily Texan as “a journey of me trying to fit in.” She said, “It’s just me and my friends, living our childhood dream, putting our vision out in the world… It was crazy because we made this album in the year 2000 when we were 10 to 12 years old … we were immediately very embarrassed about it. We were like, “Let’s never talk about that again. We’re in junior high. Everything’s embarrassing. (We) don’t want anyone to know we did that.”
CAST
X-Cetra cast
Following “Rolling Stone’s” writing an article on their X-Cetra album of the early 2000s, the quartet of old friends gather in Santa Rosa and even write some new music. The film became a thumbnail character sketch of each of the four girls: Jessica Hall, Janet Kariuki, Mary Washburn and Ayden herself. The intervening years for each girl are related in a way that makes us care about them, especially since we’ve seen them when they were adolescents perched on the verge of high school.
EDGE OF INNOCENCE
The universal truth for all girls that comes throughis that dating and boys and being “cool” will change the relationships between these girls that formed earlier. The self-consciousness of youth will sometimes inhibit even those who are obviously talented at a young age. One of the reasons Ayden gave for making the documentary was this: “I think my greatest dream is that people feel free to be creative for no reason and to really go back and tell their younger selves that they’re great … I really wanted to show what girlhood feels like, and that’s why I’m reading from my diaries, and we’re talking about some kind of messed up stuff, because that’s girlhood”
X-Cetra cast
It was clear early on that Ayden was innately talented. But, as a lyric sung in the documentary asks, “Did I make you feel embarrassed when I’m something to be cherished?” This film allowed the four fast friends of 2000 to revisit and recapture the exuberance of their youth, via X-Cetra.
Jessica, for instance, shares that boys of their class harassed her with the nickname “titless” for a long time, while Mary—the youngest at eleven—was excluded from the group as high school approached because the other three were two years older. Brushes with parental divorce, drugs, relationships gone wrong—all are included and fill in the picture of who these four girls are and who they were in 2000 before life intervened.
DOCUMENTARY RESONATES
X-Cetra cast
The documentary struck a chord with the audience, which voted it the winner of the Audience Award at SXSW 2026. It resonated with me, as I taught junior high school students for eighteen years. I remember my own daughter’s early friendships and creativity when exactly the same age as these girls in 2000. The line, “Are you gonna’ live in that moment for the rest of your life?” was a good one, highlighting that the lives of the foursome have moved in separate directions.
Thanks to the parents who both filmed and recorded the girls at a young age, we can see the arc of their lives from 2000 to 2026. I’m sure their reunion to celebrate the unexpected success of X-Cetra the album was a great one.
This SXSW documentary was a joy for the original members of X-Cetra and it is a joy for the audience.
Steve Carell and the cast of “Rooster,” as well a producers Bill Lawrence and Matt Tarses, spoke at SXSW in Austin on St. Patrick’s Day, March 17 at the J.W. Mariott in downtown Austin. With the producers and their star were castmates Danielle Deadwyler and Charly Clive, who play Dylan Shepherd and Katie, respectively.
The series revolves around Carell’s character of author Greg Russo, who has been summoned to his daughter’s college to help solve a crisis in her life, when her philandering husband, a University professor at the fictional Ludlow College (actually the University of the Pacific in exterior shots) creates a scandal by impregnating a student. That doesn’t do much for his marriage to Carell’s daughter Katie and soon Dad is summoned to help pour oil on troubled waters.
GREG RUSSO
Steve Carell onstage at SXSW on March 17, 2026.
Carell’s character Greg Russo is a successful genre author. Think of someone like Lee Child, the pen name for former television writer Jim Grant who wrote the Jack Reacher series alone until 2020 when he began writing them with his brother Andrew Child. In this fictionalized version of things, the character in the books is Rooster and Steve Carell’s arrival on his daughter Katie’s campus begins to cause some confusion, as his fans among the faculty and students begin to ascribe characteristics of the author’s main character to the author himself, Carell’s character is going to be pressed into service as a university lecturer and other adventures will occur. Written as ten 30-minute episodes, the series had the strongest opening for a comedy series n ten years for HBO and with the recent announcement of $21 million in tax credits for the series and its warm audience reception, chances are very good that it will make the cut and go beyond one season.
CHARLY CLIVE
Steve Carell with daughter Katie (Charly Clive) in “Rooster” on HBO Max.
British actress Charly Clive plays Katie, Carell’s daughter, and her British accent was a bit of a shock to those of us who have seen the first episodes, which she plays with an American accent. Charly starred in a British television series called “Pure” and is a 2014 graduate of the American Academy of Dramatic Art in New York City. This is her first big American role.
MOTIVATION
When asked about why he took the role, Carell joked, “It was mostly money, really.” He then went on to say, “It felt true. I have been experiencing a lot of these life moments with my own daughter. I like parts representative of all parts of life, just experiencing life as it comes.”
APPROACH TO THE CHARACTER
Danielle Deadwyler of “Rooster” cast onstage on March 17, 2026 at SXSW.
Carell said, “I didn’t want Greg to be a Walter Mitty type. He isn’t completely comfortable in that role. Greg didn’t strive to be famous. He just wanted to be a writer.. I think he is shy, but not an introvert. He is married to an impressive woman…I read the pilot and thought it was terrific. A lot of times, you don’t know if something feels authentic until you’re in the moment, but this was an instant feeling of ensemble.: He went on to say “It was very reminiscent of my experience on the office (for 7 years). That’s the sense I get with this.”
DANIELLE DEADWYLER
Steve Carell as Greg Russo and Danielle Deadwyler as Dylan Shepherd in HBO’s “Rooster.”
Danielle Deadwyler, who plays Dylan Shepherd in the piece said of her comic chops, “I don’t have a comedy background. I’m winging it, Baby.” While acknowledging that Carell and Deadwyler come from very different places, Carell added, “The fun is finding the common ground. We had the freedom to start looking for it. There’s so many different directions you cam tale thiss.” Credit for the expert casting was given to Allison Jones, (“Scrubs”) who selected the cast members.
BILL LAWRENCE
Steve Carell onstage at SXSW with the cast of HBO’s “Rooster.”
Producer Bill Lawrence, who has an impressive list of hit shows including “Ted Lasso,” “Scrubs,” “Bad Monkey” and “Shrinking,” referenced some advice he was given by Michael J. Fox on “Spin City,” having to do with timing. The anecdote had to do with NOT changing a scripted “People who need people” line, but milking it with expert comic timing. He and Carell described “Rooster” as “a little push of kindness is needed right now.”
EPISODES
The team replicated a New England college in Los Angeles and Production designer Cabot McMullen, who has worked with Lawrence and Tarses for 30 years, was given credit for the authenticity of the college setting. The students, largely recruited from Stockton, California, were also credited with bringing energy to the piece. (“All the students brought a fantastic energy,” said Deadwyler.)
CONCLUSION
Those who watched the first episode will remember that old pro John McGinley as College Employee Walter Manes is often shirtless and Carell said that, in episode six, “I do some nudity.”
Scott MacArthur from “Breaking Bad,” playing a hockey coach with substance abuse issues opening a beer bottle on part of a helmet worn by one of his players was singled out for his creativity. “If you can create that kind of work environment, it shows up onscreen.”
Steven Spielberg was interviewed onstage at SXSW on Friday the 13th, 2026, in the sixth floor ballroom of the Hilton in Austin. His appearance was the first at SXSW since 2018, when he appeared at the Paramount in support of “Ready, Player, One.” This time, we can assume that his appearance was meant to coincide with the release of “Disclosure Day” in theaters on June 12th.
ORIGIN OF CREATIVITY
Spielberg remembered being taken to Disney films by his parents as a child. They thought taking young Steven to see “Fantasia” as a seven-year-old would be safe. He disagrees. “The least safe thing they could have done was to take me to see Fantasia when I was only about 7 years old. I had this kind of over-dose or over-abundance of imagination, so whenever I saw something I would extrapolate from that. There was this sequence called The Night on Fall Mountain and it just destroyed me. What I wanted to do with my impulse was— when something scares me— I want to create some sort of talisman to protect myself…That’s kind of how the whole thing started with me wanting to find some way to put it up somewhat to take it out of me and put it on something else.”
Since launching his career with 1975’s “Jaws” Spielberg has had 223 wins of various sorts out of 358 nominations and is synonymous with modern American cinema, whether as writer, director or producer. He and Francis Ford Coppola and George Lucas are the subjects of the recent best-seller “The Last Kings of Hollywood,” which I am currently reading. In his sixty minutes onstage, Spielberg, 79, reflected on his remarkable career and on some of the films that instantly summon the American cinema experience.
“E.T.”
Spielberg defined “E.T.” as a demarcation point in his career, making him want to have kids. He said, “I didn’t have much of a home life,” which later was explained more fully in his autobiographical film “The Fabelmans” (which Spielberg described as $40 billion of therapy that Apple and Dreamworks paid for”).
Of making “E.T.” Spielberg explained , “I loved those kids. I didn’t want them to go home.” He even acknowledged that Drew Barrymore never really went home, in the metaphorical sense, after starring in the film about an alien visitor.
He explained that, although it cost $10 million to shoot the film in chronological continuity, that was done so that the young actors and actresses would be saying goodbye to “E.T.,” the alien, in the final scene of the film, rather than the normal way of shooting pieces of the film out of context. He pointed out that this compounded the sadness of separation that all of the cast were feeling as the making of the movie came to a conclusion.
ALIEN MOVIES
With his disclosure that “E.T. made me want to have kids, Spielberg gave credit to wife Kate Capshaw and their 7 children and 6 grandchildren. Of his children, he said, “They keep me relevant and current.” He also absolutely crowed about the recent Obama comment about potential intelligent life beyond human life in the universe, saying, “This is so great for ‘Disclosure Day!’. That film comes out in June. Spielberg admitted that the recent New York Times series of articles on UFOs (now known as UAPs) “rekindled my interest in this subject matter.”
HISTORY
Spielberg onstage at SXSW on March 13, 2026.
Spielberg said that, “I’m drawn like a magnet to history. I just found so much richness in stories about the past.” He praised this year’s “Train Dreams” for covering an entire life over 75 years, since, “films move so fast.” He mentioned influences such as TikTok, and Instagram, while saying he is not on Instagram because of the “missing time dilemma.”
Question: “How do you do what you do?”
Spielberg’s answer was that he storyboards if there are a lot of special effects, but also noted that there were none on “Saving Private Ryan” or “Schindler’s List”. “I know the page count I need to cover. If you cast your film right, you get a person with a deep understanding of how film works.” He shared that he and Tom Cruise were both early arrivals on the set of “Minority Report” and said, “Your instincts and intuition are your best friends. I just need the cast to trust me” and advised would-be filmmakers to “learn from your heroes from before.”
SPIELBERG’S NIGHTMARES
A poster for the 1975 American film ‘Jaws’, directed by Steven Spielberg for Universal Studios. (Photo by Movie Poster Image Art/Getty Images)
Spielberg said, “Even the happy ones (movies) come from my nightmares.” He said the audience is the most important barometer for a film and admitted that the “Jaws” team “didn’t know what we had until the ‘Jaws’ premiere at the Medallion Theater in Dallas,” adding, “I have previewed all my films in Texas.”
His story of an audience member leaving the theater during “Jaws” to vomit, but then returning was a great, if amusing, tribute to his storytelling ability.
HUMILITY
Saying that his worst nightmare would be “not to get to do what I do” Spielberg expressed great admiration for David Lean’s “Lawrence of Arabia.” He and Martin Scorsese worked together to restore parts of the film that had been removed by studio heads saying, “You will never be as good as David Lean. It keeps me humble.” He described watching the film so many times that a silver object in the sand caught his attention and is still a mystery.
The acclaimed director also remarked, “I was riding high in 1978. My next movie ‘1941’ came out and I was humbled.” He also said, “Every film is different. Every film is a birth, a life, and a death. I don’t judge my accomplishments based on one film. I always fear that if I looked back too much I’d not move forward.”
FAVORITE PERFORMERS’ SCENES IN HIS FILMS
Spielberg mentioned scenes from “Amistad and Tom Hanks crying in the crater and Daniel Day Lewis as Abrahan Lincoln. Two shots. Four minutes. One cut to David Straithorn. The scene had to do with the need to pass the 13th amendment, which made slavery illegal. “I was in the other room crying. Daniel Day Lewis asked, ‘Where’s the skipper?’ Then he came back, put his arms around me and hugged me.”
UNDER-APPRECIATED SPIELBERG FILMS
One humorous anecdote that came from the question about his under-appreciated films was the story that, when he was single, he had a criteria for a second date. “I used to show girlfriends “A Guy Named Joe” (Spencer Tracy, Irene Dunne) or “Always”—Audrey Hepburn’s last film, Richard Dreyfuss, Holly Hunter. “It was the film I used to show girlfriends. Them and ‘Two for the Road.’ If they didn’t cray at the end, I wouldn’t go out with them again.’
MOVIES AS COMMUNITY
When asked about the community and communication that happen in a theater (“The real experience comes from gathering audiences tougher at movies or concerts.”) Spielberg remarked that “Theaters like IMAX have committed to you.” He was asked what he can do to preserve the movie-making experience as it has existed for decades, given streaming and the tremendous convenience of portable communication devices like the IPhone. His response was, “All I can do with Ambling Entertainment and my parent company is make movies that people want to see.”
He admitted that he remains current, saying, “I see it all because it’s kind of a rush to see them all. I see everything I possibly could see.” With A.I. turning 25 this year he remarked that he is still very integrated with the writing process and said “I haven’t used A.I. in any of my films. I am not for A.I. if it replaces a creative individual,” which brought a round of applause.
When asked what film of his he would suggest if aliens wanted to see a film that was about human history, Spielberg suggested “E.T.” rather than “Close Encounters of the Third Kind.” He also expressed great admiration for Frank Capra’s “It’s A Wonderful Life,” calling it “the kindest film I’ve ever seen” and vowed that his next film will be a Western that will “kick ass.”
Vince Gilligan and crew at SXSW panel onAlbuquerque Aftermath: From Breaking Bad to Pluribus with Rhea Seehorn, Vince Gilligan, and Key Creatives.(Photo by Paul Thanasack).
Gilligan, creator of “Breaking Bad,””Better Call Saul” and, now, “Pluribus” came to SXSW on Saturday, March 14th,with Rhea Seehorn (Pluribus’ Carol and Better Call Saul’s Kim) as well as composer Dave Porter, costume designer Jennifer Bryan, and producer Trina Siopy. The conversation explored the collaborative process, Albequerque’s role as the anchor city, and the close creative partnerships nurtured over more than a decade.
MEANING OF PLURIBUS
A lot of the questions seemed to revolve around, “What is Pluribus about?” It seems to be about an alien virus that threatens to take over the world as we knew it. Everyone is happy, but the inhabitants seem to almost have become as alike as drones in a bee hive…worker bees all. Happy little fellows. Everything is wonderful. Or is it? Carol seems to want to “save” the human race with all of its imperfections. Gilligan mentioned he had helped write that story when he writing for “The X-Files” (“The second best jjob I ever had.”)
GILLIGAN’S EXPLANATION of “PLURIBUS”
Vince Gilligan and Rhea Seehorn at SXSW 2026.
Or is Pluribus about something else? One questioner threw out the idea that the entire series is a metaphor for grief and depression. The answer we got on Saturday, March 14th from Gilligan, himself, referenced a conversation he had many years prior with Director Michael Mann.
Michael Mann asked Gilligan (who was then writing for “The X-Files”): ‘What are we really trying to say here? What’s the message? What’s the theme? What’s the this? What’s that? And he looked at me and I will never forget, he said, ‘We have to tell that story. We have to tell a story about characters and the things they do. They face interesting obstacles, unique obstacles, and the way they surmount them or don’t. That’s what we’re doing here. There’s nothing much more to it than that…It is for other people to tell us sometimes what our shows and movies are about.’”
RHEA’S RESPONSE
The Question: “How long did it take for you to understand what Pluribus was all about, Rhea?” brought this answer, “I’m still trying to figure it out. Here’s the thing. It’s really wonderful that I’m playing a character that doesn’t understand what’s going on. Therefore, I don’t have to. I don’t know.” Seehorn went on to say, “It’s about human nature, but it’s also about what it means to be human and redefining what the pursuit of happiness is. That’s the end-all and be-all. How do you define success and how do you define love and relationships?” After some praise of co-star Carolina Weaver’s acting as character (Zosia) Rhea added, “I don’t know. The answer is, I don’t know. I don’t know what the show is about, and I love it.”
She reminisced about all the press she did for “Breaking Bad’ and added, laughing, “What if it means, for God’s sake, just be more Sphinx-like and that I have to shut up! There’s a lot of other people figuring out what it means.”
TRUST
Vince Gilligan at SXSW. (Photo by Paul Thanasack.)
Seehorn added, “But there’s this thing that Vince does where he trusts the audience. I have to say, it also involves the key trust of the performers. And it isn’t that I don’t take direction. We try it a million different ways and I very much enjoy that process, but I trust his ideas. And one of the great gifts he’s given me is that he trusts mine. But when we trust the audience, he alleviates or rids me of the onus to make sure the audience knows exactly what I’m thinking. I just have to think the thoughts and make sure that I’m being true to the character. But I don’t have to telegraph these things, and it really frees me up to do a much more complex and nuanced performance, which a performer is not always allowed to do.”
RHEA ON “PLURIBUS’” POPULARITY:
“Of course we were all trying to make the best show we could, and it was a show that I would be a fan of and it was so awesomely weird. I have not been able to guess where I was going to go…It’s like, hopefully, obviously, we find an audience that gets it, but is it this very niche thing? Is this going to be a very unique sort of cultish thing? The broad conversation and broad audience reception blew me away. It isn’t that I didn’t expect this, but I am blown away by it really touching some kind of nerve in people to want to really talk about it… the popularity of it and its critical reception. For critics and fans to like the same show. You don’t always win that lottery and that’s been amazing.”’
ONE WOMAN SHOW?
Interviewer, Vince Gilligan, Rhea Seehorn at SXSW. (Photo by Paul Thanasack.)
Much of the show centers on Seehorn, sometimes solely on her, by herself. Rhea answered, “I only got just one at a time, which is always the way we do it, so it wasn’t like I saw the breadth of the whole thing and understood, ‘Oh, I’ll be doing an episode with almost no dialogue. Oh, I’ll be doing episodes almost by myself.” She added, “I’m not as excited about that, because, for me, it’s the same work as if there was dialogue. I’m still feeling out what is happening in the story. What’s the character thinking?..And there are days where I would read something that’s tomorrow’s and think, ‘Oh, today’s the day they find out that I am not very good or that I was not very good.”
SOUND & MUSIC
(From composer Dave Porter)
“All those years that we’ve been together, this was a mandate to be different and to make this show distinct from the others that we’ve done. So, to break all those rules, to take our creative process and really re-analyze al the lessons we learned, the ways that we use music. Coming out the other side gave us a freedom to do exactly that and to take all of our favorite lessons and really explore new territory…I think the most important role for the score is to be an assistant in storytelling. Whatever I can do, I’ll do, which includes making things more powerful and more emotional, but, at the same time, open to interpretation as much as possible to lead. To open those doors for everyone to have their own viewpoints is a gift that you don’t get to work on for so many shows.”
Dave Porter on the music: “You can feel the human touch. You can feel that. There’s no comparison between something that a computer can do or something sound-wise or performance wise…The orchestra is another thing we had never done before. So it was a learning experience for us to work on that. And part of that is mentioned is that before you go and spend large sums of money on recording, you do demo versions, which is a new experience for Vince…Everybody took a leap of faith with me to know that the power of orchestra, especially on a show like this, is going to be value added many times over and be progress. And for anyone who hasn’t had the experience going to the symphony or standing in front of an orchestra as composer and people playing the music you wrote. It is inspiring and a blessing that we get to do that.”
Downtown Austin during SXSW 2026.
Costume designer Jennifer Bryan went on at great lengths about how she came up with the clothes for the show (brown was the color) and talked at great length about the yellow jacket and ordering the yellow leather pelts from France and having the jacket made. I watch the show. I never noticed the yellow jacket, so make what you will of her remarks. For me, the rather lengthy analysis of “the Albuquerque jacket look” versus whatever look the show currently has was much like a novelist who inserts massive amounts of description when what you really want is dialogue and action. Essentially, the message seemed to be that the clothing is essentially for protection from the elements and the costume designer also had to give some thought to the specific action in a scene, such as when Carol has to lift Helen’s corpse into the car.
WHY ALBUQUERQUE AGAIN?
The answer to this question essentially came down to the clouds, the collaborative crew, and the expense.
CAROL’S LIKABILITY
The question was asked, “What’s the secret to have an audience root for an unlikable character?” Seehorn answered this with a feminist slant: “The term likable I think has gotten misused or overused concerning female characters, because how people have been defining what’s likable in a woman is very, very restrictive. I think it’s more important that a character be accessible in some way, especially if I am the conduit to take the audience’s hand and take them down this rabbit hole. And for me, behaving truthfully and honestly in a moment when people would say, ‘Wow! She’s really not polite when they (the aliens) bring her things.’ They killed my wife. My career is gone. I might die alone watching Golden Girls. I’m sorry I wasn’t chirpy…Also, I’m going to suppress my anger until eczema comes out all over my body? I very much enjoyed exploring that Carol’s anger over her wife was her entire way of even behaving halfway normal out in the world…She’s allowed to display the full spectrum of human behavior and now she’s being asked to suppress that? It was really fun trying to figure out what are her other tools. She’s just grasping at straws. I find her complex and difficult and challenging, but I find her honest and truthful and real..”
CAROL AND GRIEF
Downtown Austin during SXSW 2026.
Seehorn further commented on Carol’s loss of her wife and the grief and depression she felt. “No, I’ve never had an alien virus take over the planet. But as you do, as actors, what is something I can draw from? What kind of tool do you lose in those moments.? And, for any of us and most of us this happens through grief. Terrible grief. Getting up off the floor the next morning is heroic by itself. And so I just felt like, really, all bets are off. She’s allowed to be as upset and angry as anybody would be. I hope that ultimately that makes her accessible and watchable instead of likable….She’s holding nothing back.”
As part of my Birthday Tour (7/23), I purchased tickets to see “Megalopolis” (forthe second time) with Francis Ford Coppola in attendance. He was coming to the Chicago Theater in downtown Chicago. I was in town celebrating a big birthday, with tickets to see Caitlin Clark play on Sunday (probably injured and not playing—and neither is Angel Reese), tickets to a Cubs game on Tuesday, a trip to the Green Mill to hear live music on 7/23, and my second time plowing through “Megalopolis,” which I originally saw at the Last Picture House in Davenport, Iowa—a theater owned by filmmakers Scott Beck and Bryan Woods (“A Quiet Place,” “Heretic”).
I did not review “Megalopolis” when I saw it the first time, shortly after its release on September 27, 2024. It seemed to want to be a commentary on Trump 2.0 and the decline and fall of the Roman Empire came up as a good way to compare the two time periods. Beyond that, the film seemed primarily random bits, as did Coppola’s comments this night, when he appeared onstage to introduce the film and came back at the end to ostensibly take questions from the audience.
The director may deserve criticism for not preparing something more along the lines of “An Evening with Cary Grant,” which recapped that famous actor’s career. Of course, as I headed out to that one, the radio alerted us that Cary had just died of a heart attack (in Davenport, Iowa), so these strolls down memory lane with elderly actors and directors are always fraught with risk. I can’t really compare how Cary did, because I ended up trying to cheer my mother up because my father had just died in his eighties with an ill-timed celebrity outing to someone I had lauded as “still going strong in his eighties.” Francis Ford Coppola’s birth year is 1939, so draw your own conclusions.
Time is the risk. Don’t we all (secretly) know it?
Will Coppola talk about his other films? (A: No).
Francis Ford Coppola at the Chicago Theater on July 25, 2025.
Will Coppola seem on top of his topics? (Yes & No. He rambled, but so did the film.)
Is the film as bad as critics at the time said it was? (A: Again, yes & no. I have a feeling that, like “Heaven’s Gate,” it could well be viewed in a totally different light a decade from now.This one was eventually picked up for distribution by Lionsgate in May of 2025, but they have now dropped it as an offering, so getting to see it at all will become as difficult as seeing the original “Manchurian Candidate” was after the assassination of JFK or as seeing “Heaven’s Gate” became after it bankrupted the studio.)
When Francis Ford Coppola graced the stage, welcoming us to the theater, he said, “When the audience is willing to enter a door that they have not entered before, they may experience something they haven’t experienced before. I’ll see you again in a few hours.”
I had entered that door over a year ago during the 138 minute-film’s initial release. I was confused by the lack of a coherent story line then, and I had hoped to hear—at the very least—stories from the making of this, his latest film, a project that consumed him for decades. Eventually, Coppola—the director responsible for such iconic films as “The Godfather” series,”Apocalypse Now,” and “The Outsiders” had to sell part of his vineyard to raise the $140 million the film supposedly cost. Touring with it to a variety of cities (6, initially) is another way to offset his financial loss, since the film has only had a worldwide gross of $14 million, to date. The director is now suggesting he will recut the film to add even more dream sequences and other “weird” things. (Good luck with that.)
There is one point in the film where the lights come up and a “live” person comes out and has a brief discussion with its lead, Adam Driver as Cesar Catilina. That did not happen when I saw the film at the Last Picture House in Davenport, Iowa, but it apparently happens on the tour, as it happened in New Jersey and happened again in Chicago.
I was hoping against hope that Coppola would offer more behind-the-scenes stories from the shooting in Georgia and more personal anecdotes from a lifetime of revered films, but that didn’t happen. Part of it was the fault of the star of the evening, FFC, and part of it was the poor preparation to ask questions by the audience. I have read that Coppola’s original speech post film had 10 points, which he then reduced to 7 points. We made it through 5 points. They had to do with how our society deals with time, work and money, among other things, all somewhat random and disjointed. Along the way, he would introduce random information, such as the fact that both he and DJT attended the same New York Military Academy (New York Military Academy; Francis Ford Coppola played the tuba there.)
Factoid shared randomly: “Marlon Brando once told me that the secret for actors is, “You can’t care, or they’ll see it on your face.” Not sure I understand that bit of wisdom, but, then, not sure I understand most of “Megalopolis.” (Was hoping for further illumination on that very topic; did not happen.)
Random Factoid #2: “I’m alternately rich and then broke…I’d rather have one million friends than one million dollars.” Along with the concept of being “alternately rich and broke” came a story of giving his kids quasi credit cards, which came with rules for usage. Could not be used to make money. Could not be used to buy sex or love. Could not be used to purchase violence against another. Could not be used to buy gifts.
Random Factoid #3: “We are one human family–homo sapiens. We think we’re 300,000 years old. You are all my cousins.” He went on to proclaim us all geniuses, when compared to other species.
Question #1 from the audience revealed a problem with the way this was going to work—or not work. FFC had difficulty hearing the question(s) and the questioners did precious little forethought when struggling to gain the microphone to ask a question. A better method for selecting questioners could be found. (I’d recommend the SXSW method, myself).
The first questioner, a young man, did not really have much of a question for the legendary director. He just wanted to know if it was true that Marlon Brando, who had been urged to lose weight for his role in “Apocalypse Now,” when badgered to do so, instead went out in a canoe and ate a bunch of hamburgers. If that question makes no sense and seems like a waste of all of our time, you are right. FFC dismissed it as one he couldn’t hear and seemed irritated, at points, that so few women were managing to gain microphone time. (Again: get a better system).
Second question was slightly better: “What are you the most excited about right now?”
This brought forth reflections on family and life: “We will evolve so that we will live in a beautiful world. All I care about is the kids.” He went on an extended reverie about playing with his grandkids and great grandchildren and said that he felt much is learned from play and from playing with youth.
At one point the actress who played Vesta Sweetwater in the film (Grace VanderWaal) shared with us that she wrote the songs she sings while suspended from a swing, supposedly shilling (in the film) for millions to support her in her quest to remain virginal—although she is really 23 and not virginal. Grace sang two songs and my mind instantly flashed back to a poetry workshop I once went to in Washington, D.C., where an elderly Mickey Rooney sat in a fancy Robert Louis Stevenson chair while his wife sang. (And that was the entire program!) Mickey and I ended up in the same elevator at one point (his mistake) and he barely came up to my shoulder. And I am only 5′ 2.” Random factoid for you right there!)
Question #4 from Nate dealt with what lessons Coppola might have learned while making the film. The questioner had referred to this particular film as ” a passion project” and FFC said, “Every movie is a passion project. Take away the lesson that you don’t have to play by someone else’s rules.”
During the second of Vesta Sweetwater’s two songs, I left and walked around outside of our mezzanine section seats, because the leg room in R was less than on the most crowded plane I’ve ever been on. (Seats started at $65, but these, with an unobstructed view, were in the $80s. However, there was no mention of the potentially crippling lack of leg room.
We had now been sitting, watching the film, for over 2 hours (138 minutes) and there were also the introductory remarks and FFC’s comments as he rejoined us (“I even put on a tie”). [I think I would have been permanently crippled if I had remained in my seat much longer without getting up. We arrived at 6:30; it was over 4 hours later.
People were beginning to drift away from the marathon viewing now. FFC was not nearly done and shared more random factoids, always promising to circle back to another mentioned topic:
Random factoid: FFC wanted to be able to tap dance as a young boy. He was somewhat mistreated by fellow classmates and he always envisioned himself climbing atop the lunchroom table and tap dancing expertly. (Didn’t happen).
Random factoid: Francis Ford Coppola’s father was a classical musician and played First Flute in the NBC Symphony Orchestra, directed at the time by Arturo Toscanini. Music in films has come from the Coppola clan. This time it is courtesy of Osvaldo Golijov, with Mahai Malaimare, Jr. as cinematographer.
More random topics to follow in further posts.
I’m writing this from the road. My Birthday Extravaganza has not (yet) ended, and won’t until the month ends. A very nice African American lady at the DMV in Chicago told me to always celebrate your birthday for the entire month.
The Washington Post (Emily Davies) asked some prominent authorities in the field of television about the likelihood that the cancellation of Stephen Colbert’s Late Show was just based on financial considerations, as Paramount maintains. The experts aren’t buying it; neither should we. Forty-eight hours after Colbert called the $16 million payment to Trump by Paramount a bribe on his show, one designed to help facilitate the sale of CBS to Skydance, Colbert was fired, despite being #1.
“How often does the No. 1 guy get canceled? You can analyze this 100 different ways, but Colbert has the No. 1 show in late night and they’ve canceled him. If it walks like a duck, it’s a duck,” Rob Burnett said. “I don’t know the ins and outs of what’s going on up there, but I just don’t think if Stephen Colbert isn’t saying the things he’s saying that this happens.” Rob Burnett ran things at the Tonight Show for 19 years as David Letterman’s producer.
Burnett conceded that revenue is down in late night: At its peak, during Johnny Carson’s long stint as host, NBC’s time-slot champion “Tonight Show” drew 17 million viewers, according to Adweek, whereas Colbert’s top-rated “Late Show” has averaged about 2.5 million viewers this year. All the late-night shows now share digital excerpts online. That allows fans to consume an episode in pieces whenever they choose, and younger viewers choose to do that. But YouTube doesn’t offer nearly the same ad revenue as television. Still, the lock on late night viewers is no longer the pull it was for older generations. Viewers under 35 might not watch any of the late night hosts.
Merrill Markoe
Merrill Markoe
Merrill Markoe, who was the head writer on Letterman’s show during its early-1980s incarnation on NBC before he went on to launch “The Late Show” and moved to CBS in the 1990s, said she “had nightmares” after she heard the news about Colbert.
“CBS, Paramount, the merger, the buyout with Trump, all of it came tumbling down like dice and added up to me in a second,” she said. “It hit me in a very hard way. He was No. 1 in his time slot. And a talk show is one of the cheapest forms of entertainment there is.”
As far as what’s next, Colbert still has many shows to produce at CBS before May. Daniel Kellison, another former Letterman producer, doubts he’ll make it. “I just hope he’s going to go all scorched-earth now. There’s no way he’s going to be on the air for nine months,” Kellison said. “He’s such a smart guy, and it would be really cool if he did a slow burn.”
It’s classic authoritarian behavior to forbid criticism, especially if the target is someone as thin-skinned as DJT. Our First Amendment freedoms are under attack and the Jimmys (Fallon and Kimmel) and other hosts (Jon Stewart, Seth Meyer, Bill Maher, Conan O’Brien, John Oliver) are being bullied into submission, just as our universities, our judges, our elected representatives in Congress and anyone whom DJT has a beef with is being bullied into submission.
How long before our First Amendment Freedom of Speech and of the Press and of the right to assembly are eroded? Our leaders of conscience of any party must stand up for the Constitution and the right of habeas corpus and all of our cherished American freedoms, before DJT and Steve Bannon and the boys completely destroy the freedoms our citizens have exercised and prized for 250 years.
Some suggest that Colbert ought to run against Lindsey Graham, since they are both from South Carolina. It would be a waste of a top-notch talent we sorely need at these moments of crisis.
Thank you for speaking truth to power, Stephen Colbert, and let’s hope that the venality of the nation’s biggest bully—out there for all to see—gives pause to some of the worst excesses of MAGA land.
From David Frum’s podcast entitled “The Wrecking of the FBI,” sub-titled “How President Donald Trump is destroying U.S. counter-intelligence from the inside, published in “The Atlantic” on July 16th comes a disturbing picture of the FBI in Trump 2.0. The interview lasted an hour (and can potentially be heard in its entirety on YouTube.) This is only a small segment, with editorial comments.
Frum was a speechwriter for George H Bush who coined the term “axis of evil” and a stalwart in the neo-Conservative movement from Reagan through McCain. In 2016, Frum announced that he was voting for Hillary Clinton and subsequently became one of the founding members of the No Labels movement and a Never Trumper. He is now an Editor at “The Atlantic” and also has a podcast.
Summarized below are some snippets from the interview with former FBI counter-intelligence officer Peter Strzok. As someone who has actually been inside the FBI offices in New York City (as part of a Book Expo America presentation for writers of crime fiction), the entire interview is informative and absolutely terrifying in its implications. It makes me even more convinced that those born when I was born (Baby Boomers) have gotten the best this country has to offer, whether that means weather, salaries, progress towards equality for all, leadership, or, as in this interview, a competent FBI protecting United States citizens.
The interview led off by admitting that the FBI of the past had some notable excesses, especially under J. Edgar Hoover, as when he pursued Martin Luther King or during the McCarthy Era hearings of the 50s. However, in the 70s, safeguards were put in place, which Frum enumerates. Whether any of those guidelines and rule changes are being adhered to by the current Trump 2.0 group, which seems to feel that no set of rules (including the Constitution) applies to them, is a relevant question. And one that the interview answers with a negative slant. These appointees who are spectacularly ill-suited for their job(s) need to be relieved of their positions, whether as Secretary of Defense or as the non-medical person causing measles to come back with a vengeance. (And there are many more…too many to list them all. In fact, during the interview, Strzok did discuss the “play acting” that people like Kristi Noem seem intent on displaying, dressing up in outfits and sharing all with social media—even if what is shared is inaccurate or an outright lie,)
You won’t sleep well at night if you listen to the entire interview…and this is only about 10% of the interview’s content.
Former FBI agent Peter Strzok.
Strzok: “All of those people you see having these different sorts of formal and informal pressure placed upon them to move them out of the way, either by resignation, retirement, firing whatever the case may be,” said Peter Strzok, former FBI counter-intelligence officer, currently involved in two lawsuits against the Department of Justice for unfair firing (much like the daughter of James Comey, Maurene Comey).
Strzok was interviewed by David Frum, the 65-year-old Editor of the “Atlantic” on July 16th on his podcast, and the news from behind-the-scenes on the current state of the Federal Bureau of Investigation is not encouraging. Strzok sketched an agency that has lost its experts and is promoting totally unqualified people into top positions, people who Strzok says are unqualified, lazy and have no idea what they are doing.
David Frum: This question from Frum made me laugh (and then it made me cry): “The special geniusof Kash Patel is he just doesn’t care. He has no regard for the FBI as an institution. No, I mean, if we say there’s a special Nobel Prize for Bobby Kennedy Jr. as maybe the worst Cabinet secretary, not just of this administration but of all time, the most inappropriate, the most “who shouldn’t have the job,” Kash Patel may not quite match a pro-polio secretary of Health and Human Services, but he’s an honorable mention, right?” (And let’s not forget Patel’s truly Crazy Eyes!) Trying to pick the most tragically unqualified among the Trump appointees is difficult, since 90% are so inept. (I had a few moments where I thought Marco Rubio might acquit himself with honor, but those moments passed.) We are now a kakistocracy.
Strzok responded: “And it’s not only malevolence and lack of care; it’s also lack of competence.” He went on to say, “Clearly Donald Trump is the motivating force and at the FBI, it’s Kash Patel and to a certain extent Dan Bongino who are motive force, but there are people around them who are taking care of the particulars or informing them of the particulars to be acted on. But for Kash, it’s not just a lack of caring; it’s an utter lack of knowledge.”
Oh, good. A Know-Nothing is calling the shots at the FBI.
How does that stack up with the mission to keep our country safe that the FBI faces?
Strzok: “There are not enough FBI agents and analysts and investigators to counter all the threats of terrorism, counterintelligence, white-collar crime, public corruption, gangs—all of it. You name it, there’s not enough. So it is very much, one, you’re having to prioritize which threats you do work, and it is essentially very much a zero-sum game. If you take people off of one topic, you’re putting them on another, but you’re losing somewhere else…Look—if we move these people to work immigration, you’ve got to understand we’re going to not be working on this or not be working on that, and your exposure and your threat in those areas, your call at the end of the day, but if you do this, this is the cost that you’re gonna have to pay in the way that trickles out down the line.”
Oh. Great, (she said sarcastically.) So, with Iran mad as a wet hen about our bombing of their nuclear facilities, the FBI is not fully staffed and not totally on alert for terrorist actions aimed at U.S. cities and U.S. citizens?
Trumpocracy: The Corruption of the American Republic book cover by David Frum
Frum soldiered on, asking the question we should all be asking about all of the agencies that DOGE and DJT have attacked and attempted to destroy. “What is the state of our counterintelligence facilities? There are a lot of reports that suggest there have been important resignations, that there are less qualified people running counter-terrorism. How does that look to you?”
Strzok: “Well, I think there is very much a greater vulnerability than there was prior to Kash Patel showing up…The people who arrive, traditionally, at the senior level of the organizations have gone through a variety of assignments, both in the field as an investigator, as well as at headquarters doing a variety of things to gain expertise, to run larger programs, to interact with the inter-agency community and to understand, say, you’re a counter-terrorism agent.”
As you can imagine, this former counter-intelligence agent thinks the current crop of agents is woefully under-prepared and, on top of that, they may be lazy. (That rumor has actually gained credence with Bongino, the former podcaster, complaining about how “hard” the job is.)
Strzok: “I don’t want to turn this into a gripe session about the senior management of the FBI—Dan Bongino goes on Fox News and he acts astonished that everything we face is a 10 out 10, like the nines out 10, we don’t even hear about. And says ‘I barely get home to see my wife and it’s like we’re divorced.’ Dude, what the hell do you think has been going on for the past 20, 30, 40 yearsby all the people at the FBI and you’ve been on the job for five minutes and you’re complaining?” (Italics Frum’s).
Strzok: “Yeah, and I think they’re fundamentally lazy, and I’m talking about Kash Patel and Dan Bongino. I think Kash Patel has spent the entirety of his life cozying up to political figures that he could hitch his wagon to, whether it’s Devin Nunes and then Donald Trump and otherwise selling God knows what on various podcasts, whether it’s, you know, things that are not of substantive value.”
Buttressing the basic argument that the current crop of agents may not be the most qualified or experienced is this further Strzok quote: “And so by the time it gets to the point where you’re on that senior staff advising the director and deputy director what to do, you’ve had probably 20 years of various experience learning this and doing this. Well, when you come in with purges, and you’re Patel and Bongino and trying to get rid of everybody so you can bring in (loyalist) people…The deputy director of the FBI traditionally has always been an agent—Dan Bongino is the first in memory who isn’t—who has a deep understanding of how the bureau works and an accomplished track record within that organization.”
BEE GONE book by Connie Wilson
So, who’s minding the FBI store?
Strzok: “We are supporting in many ways Israeli efforts against Iran—that when it comes to a potential Iranian response, whether that’s through proxies, whether they have sleeper personnel here, whether they have visitors capable of coming into the United States, whether they have established capabilities out of the Iranian intersection or the mission to the UN. The people who know that, the people who are on the street who have that knowledge, one, at a senior level may be gone; two, at a street level, may have gotten pulled to go work elsewhere (and declined a reposting to Alabama, in Frum’s example).”
The expertise drain, either through re-settlement as a form of firing, or by actual firing of qualified agents (see the Maureen Comeystory this week) is hurting the FBI.
Strzok: “Part of what you do is, there’s a continuum of that sort of lesson as a baby investigator, as a probationary agent learning to understand what things are worth doing and what things are kind of spinning your wheels.”
But things are improving, right? We don’t have to lose sleep at night about the FBI being completely ineffectual?
Strzok: “And the problem is: If you don’t have that expertise, you are going to tend to flail. And if you’ve gotten rid of all the other people who can act as sort of wise consiglieres to tell you, Look, boss—it sounds bad, but this really is probably not what we should be focusing on. Let whoever run this out. Here are the things that you really need to focus on. Those people, those voices don’t exist anymore. And there’s only so much you can do to reach down and pluck somebody up—again, there are a lot of really great agents and analysts, but they just, they don’t have that benefit. You can’t suddenly bestow on somebody an extra five years of senior experience. You can’t do that.”
scales of justice
“All of those things are going on. And so when you say we’re going to take 30 percent of our workforce and move it over to rounding up immigrants, not even violent immigrants—we’re just going to round up immigrants so we can get our numbers up—those people come, not entirely, but one of the places they come from are all those folks who are doing it. So not only do you have,,, a brain drain, particularly at a senior level of people who are getting forced out because a lot of them, by the way, senior counterintelligence people happen to be involved with the investigation of Donald Trump allegedly maintaining illegally classified documents at his place at Mar-a-Lago but you have any number of people who were in some way, shape, or form looking at combating foreign influence in our elections.”
“And so whether it was 2016, whether it was things like the Hunter Biden laptop, perhaps it was whether or not the Chinese were or weren’t trying to influence our election, the people who had the expertise and knowledge to do that are getting forced out. Units are getting disbanded. In the case of foreign influence, there’s an entire task force that was disbanded with a corresponding set of folks at DOJ reportedly that were all reassigned somewhere else. And so you’ve got both expertise loss, and on the ground you’ve got investigative-manpower loss. And so those things, there’s no question in my mind that we are more vulnerable than we were.”
Has it ever occurred to you that Elon Musk, with his Starlink expertise, may well have “fixed” the vote for DJT in 2024? I’m sure it has. Certain irregularities were noted in some of the swing states. Investigation of this has been ongoing and a Substack writer has assembled the article below. If I could find the writer’s name, it would appear here. I filled in the blank for being on the receiving end of further articles, but the name of the actual investigator/writer was MIA, as far as I can tell. Maybe that is for purposes of safety. You either get credit or blame. If you’ve watched “Good Night and Good Luck” that showed recently on CNN, you know that speaking truth to power is the rule to protect our democracy.
Is the article below well-researched enough to be labeled as “truth?” You can be the judge of that. I’m not vouching for it or its writer, but I am sharing it, because it confirms the suspicions that many of us harbor about the 2024 presidential race.
Again, do your own further research and—if you find the name of this Substack writer—I’ll happily give full credit (or blame?) to that individual, but I was not quite ready to sign up for $55. I was ready to consider this individual’s thoughts on what may have happened. I still am. I’m not swearing on a stack of Bibles that this is the truth, but it certainly has a lot of food for thought.
So, chew on this.
****************
A Power Cord Becomes a Backdoor
In March 2021, Leonard Leo—the judicial kingmaker behind the modern conservative legal machine—sold a quiet Chicago company by the name of Tripp Lite for $1.65 billion. The buyer: Eaton Corporation, a global power infrastructure conglomerate that just happened to have a partnership with Peter Thiel’s Palantir.
To most, Tripp Lite was just a hardware brand—battery backups, surge protectors, power strips. But in America’s elections, Tripp Lite devices were something else entirely.
They are physically connected to ES&S central tabulators and Electionware servers, and Dominion tabulators and central servers across the country. And they aren’t dumb devices. They are smart UPS units—programmable, updatable, and capable of communicating directly with the election system via USB, serial port, or Ethernet.
ES&S systems, including central tabulators and Electionware servers, rely on Tripp Lite UPS devices. ES&S’s Electionware suite runs on Windows OS, which automatically trusts connected UPS hardware.
If Eaton pushed an update to those UPS units, it could have gained root-level access to the host tabulation environment—without ever modifying certified election software.
In Dominion’s Democracy Suite 5.17, the drivers for these UPS units are listed as “optional”—meaning they can be updated remotely without triggering certification requirements or oversight. Optional means unregulated. Unregulated means invisible. And invisible means perfect for infiltration
2024 VOTE
On Monday, an investigator’s storyfinally hit the news cycle: Pro V&V, one of only two federally accredited testing labs, approved sweeping last-minute updates to ES&S voting machines in the months leading up to the 2024 election—without independent testing, public disclosure, or full certification review.
These changes were labeled “de minimis”—a term meant for trivial tweaks. But they touched ballot scanners, altered reporting software, and modified audit files—yet were all rubber-stamped with no oversight.
That revelation is a shock to the public.
But for those who’ve been digging into the bizarre election data since November, this isn’t the headline—it’s the final piece to the puzzle. While Pro V&V was quietly updating equipment in plain sight, a parallel operation was unfolding behind the curtain—between tech giants and Donald Trump.
And it started with a long forgotten sale.
ELECTION FRAUD?
BallotProof: The Front-End for Scrubbing Democracy
Enter the ballot scrubbing platform BallotProof. Co-created by Ethan Shaotran, a longtime employee of Elon Musk and current DOGE employee, BallotProof was pitched as a transparency solution—an app to “verify” scanned ballot images and support election integrity.
With Palantir’s AI controlling the backend, and BallotProof cleaning the front, only one thing was missing: the signal to go live.
September 2024: Eaton and Musk Make It Official
Then came the final public breadcrumb: In September 2024, Eaton formally partnered with Elon Musk. The stated purpose? A vague, forward-looking collaboration focused on “grid resilience” and “next-generation communications.”
But buried in the partnership documents was this line:
“Exploring integration with Starlink’s emerging low-orbit DTC infrastructure for secure operational continuity.”
The Activation: Starlink Goes Direct-to-Cell
That signal came on October 30, 2024—just days before the election, Musk activated 265 brand new low Earth orbit (LEO) V2 Mini satellites, each equipped with Direct-to-Cell (DTC) technology capable of processing, routing, and manipulating real-time data, including voting data, through his satellite network.
DTC doesn’t require routers, towers, or a traditional SIM. It connects directly from satellite to any compatible device—including embedded modems in “air-gapped” voting systems, smart UPS units, or unsecured auxiliary hardware.
From that moment on: – Commands could be sent from orbit – Patch delivery became invisible to domestic monitors – Compromised devices could be triggered remotely
This groundbreaking project that should have taken two-plus years to build, was completed in just under ten months.
Elon Musk boasts endlessly about everything he’s launching, building, buying—or even just thinking about—whether it’s real or not. But he pulls off one of the largest and fastest technological feats in modern day history… and says nothing? One might think that was kind of… “weird.”
Lasers From Space
Elon Musk.
According to New York Times reporting, on October 5—just before Starlink’s DTC activation—Musk texted a confidant:
“I’m feeling more optimistic after tonight. Tomorrow we unleash the anomaly in the matrix.”
Then, an hour later:
“This isn’t something on the chessboard, so they’ll be quite surprised. ‘Lasers’ from space.”
This wasn’t a theory. It was a full-scale operation. A systemic digital occupation—clean, credentialed, and remote-controlled.
The Outcome
Data that makes no statistical sense. A clean sweep in all seven swing states. The fall of the Blue Wall. Eighty-eight counties flipped red—not one flipped blue. Every victory landed just under the threshold that would trigger an automatic recount. Donald Trump outperformed expectations in down-ballot races with margins never before seen—while Kamala Harris simultaneously underperformed in those exact same areas.
If one were to accept these results at face value—Donald Trump, a 34-count convicted felon, supposedly outperformed Ronald Reagan. According to the co-founder of the Election Truth Alliance:
“These anomalies didn’t happen nationwide. They didn’t even happen across all voting methods—this just doesn’t reflect human voting behavior.”
They were concentrated. Targeted. Specific to swing states and Texas—and specific to Election Day voting.
And the supposed explanation? “Her policies were unpopular.”
Let’s think this through logically. We’re supposed to believe that in all the battleground states, Democratic voters were so disillusioned by Vice President Harris’s platform that they voted blue down ballot—but flipped to Trump at the top of the ticket?
Not in early voting. Not by mail. With exception to Nevada, only on Election Day. And only after a certain threshold of ballots had been cast—where VP Harris’s numbers begin to diverge from her own party, and Trump’s suddenly begin to surge. As President Biden would say, “C’mon, man.”
Billionaires and Tech Giants Pulled Off the Crime of the Century
Why? There wasn’t just one reason—there were many.
Elon Musk himself hinted at the stakes: he faced the real possibility of a prison sentence if Trump lost. He launched his bid for Twitter—at $20 billion over market value—just 49 days after Putin invaded Ukraine. That alone should have raised every red flag. But when the ROI is $15 trillion in mineral rights tied to Ukraine losing the war and geopolitical deals Trump could green light, it wasn’t a loss—it was leverage.
Then there’s Peter Thiel and the so-called “broligarchs”—tech billionaires who worship at the altar of shower-avoidant blogger Curtis Yarvin. They casually joke about “humane genocide for non-producers” and have long viewed democracy as a nuisance—an obstacle to their vision of hypercapitalism and themselves as the permanent ruling elite.
Well, what is the elimination of Medicaid if not “humane genocide”—and does anyone really wonder why his 40-year-old protégé and political rookie, JD Vance, is Vice President? With this technology in place, if the third-term legislation were to pass, it would hand Vance a minimum of twelve years at the helm of Thiel’s regime.
And of course, Donald Trump himself: He spent a year telling his followers he didn’t need their votes—at one point stating,
“…in four years, you don’t have to vote again. We’ll have it fixed so good, you’re not gonna have to vote.”
Trump was facing eighty-eight felony indictments—he was desperate to avoid conviction and locked in a decades-long alliance with Vladimir Putin. An alliance that’s now impossible to ignore—look no further than his policy trail.
He froze aid to Ukraine and has threatened to place sanctions onthem, while planning to lift sanctions off Russia. He openly campaigned for anti-EU candidates, and sided with Russia in multiple key United Nations votes related to the Ukraine conflict.
[Comments on the interview above]
(*Note that Elon testifies that DJT did not seem concerned about 2 so-called “assassination attempts,” one of which supposedly hit his ear, which, miraculously, healed almost overnight leaving no trace of such an injury.) Elon’s assertions about illegals being bussed to swing states are unverified and have no basis in fact. Conversely, Musk’s antagonistic attitude towards people of color, a product of his South African heritage, is well-documented as is that of his father before him. The purpose of “no ID to vote, says Musk, is “obviously” to influence elections when there are other viable explanations, but identification to vote has never been something that Democrats oppose. Elon lays out which 6 states need to be targeted late in the interview and note the many “obviously” affirmations, which are not “obvious” at all.
His admission that Pete Buttigieg did a good job is to his credit, but contentions that billionaires are “for sure” more in the Democratic camp are debatable. The attack on the media as biased is, again, a GOP and Russian staple. Court comments are also part of the Communist playbook. Elon worries that “everything is on the side of the Dems” and denigrates Kamala Harris’s candidacy, saying that nobody voted for her. (Kamala was part of the elected ticket in 2020.)
Late-in-the-interview comments about not becoming a one-party elite ruling class are ironic; that is exactly what Elon’s infusion of cash was intended to create. The fact that Elon Musk denigrates Harris, (who was a woman of great achievement prior to her election as VP), is also telling. He puts her down continuously while ignoring the “marionette” nature of DJT’s public remarks. Many of Trump’s public statements make no sense at all lately, so comparing the remarks of the two candidates word-for-word as to eloquence would be interesting.
Musk claims that billionaires are terrified that their support for Harris’s candidacy might come out, which seems to be simply his view, again unsupported by fact. Epstein’s name comes up late in the interview, which is interesting considering how he later announced that Trump’s name would appear on the Lolita Express rolls and that he was involved, which has been previously reported. “If Trump wins, we can do some housecleaning and shed light on things. Adhere to freedom of speech within the bounds of the law” are remarks made late in the interview, which is also ironic, as there has been little effort to stay within the bounds of the law but extreme efforts to do the opposite. Elon notes that he fears a Harris win would put “X”—which he had recently bought and which he had semi-ruined—out of business. He mentions a lawsuit against “X” regarding hiring permanent residents or citizens. He mentions a lawsuit against Space X for trying to hire asylum seekers. He also mentions Stalin’s chief enforcer, who is mentioned in the recent documentary “Mr. Nobody Against Putin.” Elon admits that he fears a Democratic majority might shut his businesses down. Obviously, he decided to back the candidate who would shine on his pursuits.
Elon’s remarks about freedom and opportunity open the door to interpretation about the freedom and opportunity that he has bought for himself and his own pursuits. Talk about “improving the liberty of Americans” ignores his future role as the DOGEfather, firing people willy-nilly with chainsaw tactics.
Musk’s remarks about over-regulation have merit, but doing away with all regulatory agencies is folly. “There are so many different regulatory agencies and so many different regulations that we won’t be able to get anything done.” Some truth in those remarks, but let’s not forget that the developer of the Titan ignored regulations in pursuit of deep-see tourism to the wreck of the “Titanic” and we all know how that ended (good documentary about it streaming now.) He also touches on vaccination. “I don’t enjoy hurting other people. I have a hard time imagining, ‘Why would someone do that?'” (This from the man who literally ruined many careers with his DOGE antics.)
“There’s a small % of Americans who have anger management issues that cause them to hurt other people. If you don’t incarcerate them, they will hurt other people.” This leads Musk to talk about empathy for the victims, rather than the perpetrators. In examining anger management issues, Musk might have looked closer to home to the man he supported who has been on an 8-year-long crusade for retribution and is now exercising his power as president to “punish” all who defied him. (The law firm where Kamala Harris’s husband worked was one target, among many).
There is an interesting Tucker Carlson reference to Minneapolis as being a nice city “pre George Floyd.” This was before Vance Boelter (on left) began systematically trying to wipe out all elected Democrats in the city in pre-dawn raids. Musk further decries the deterioration of modern American cities, which Carlson terms “ubiquitous.” Musk says, “I’ve got to lead by being compassionate” and then goes on a Trump-designated stampede to literally ruin the careers and lives of many in the sights of DOGE. (Shakes head.) Musk’s axe-murderer example is pretty far out and leads Tucker to call this “anti-civilization.” Movement to de-criminalize crime is brought up and seems to point most notably to the MAGA crowd that attacked the Capitol on January 6th and were subsequently found guilty, sentenced and then pardoned wholesale with no real attempt to pardon in any kind of reasonable, sensible, logical manner (which also seems to be true of most DOGE initiatives.)
Near the end of the interview, Musk comments on Europe, saying that the birth rate is declining (Musk has14 kids by multiple women, one of whom is trans-gender and hates him) and that that needs to be addressed. He also rails against censorship in Europe. Those of us who reside in Austin are watching Musk’s assembling of a sort of harem of his offspring and their mothers, which isn’t going too well, so far. It is also designed to help with the housing shortage for new Tesla employees. He then begins talking about the decline of religion and the increasing secular nature of society. Work takes the place of religion, says Musk. (Someone please remind the GOP of the founding fathers wish that there be separation of church and state.) “For me, I’m culturally Christian but also went to a Hebrew pre-school. I didn’t fall for believing all of these religious stories. I try to understand as much as possible about reality. In physics you’re not supposed to believe everything absolutely. If your rocket is designed with physics in mind correctly it will get to orbit, or otherwise it will not.” (Lately, more “not” than “will”).
“We definitely went to the moon. How about Mars? It was a remarkable piece of technology for 1969 and it was an important ideological battle with Communism, because they couldn’t put a man on the moon and capitalism could.”
From the New York Times reporters Tony Romm and Ana Swanson on 5/29/2025, comes this introduction to a day that has seen its share of pronouncements that could significantly impact the U.S. economy, with a Maggie Shannon photo of ships in harbor waiting to unload: “A head-spinning series of court rulings over President Trump’s signature tariffs left Washington, Wall Street and much of the world trying to discern the future of U.S. trade policy on Thursday, including whether import taxes would fall meaningfully or if the administration would get the legal green light to upend the global trading system.
Less than 24 hours after the U.S. Court of International Trade blocked steep tariffs that Mr. Trump had imposed on trading partners using emergency powers, a separate court temporarily paused that decision, sowing even more chaos on a day filled with economic uncertainty.”
The CNN headline on my afternoon “breaking news” chyron was federal appeals court restores Trump’s ability to levy tariffs with “emergency powers.” Administrative stay by the Federal Appeals Court. (Apparently the original ruling was in response to suits brought by the Attorney Generals of various states and possibly the Democratic Governors, whom Illinois Governor Pritzker has been attempting to rally as a cohesive whole.)
AZ Attorney General Kristin Mayes
The Democratic Arizona Attorney General Kristin Mayes said the first court “invalidated all of the tariffs, which are really taxes on our families. They have the capacity to crush small businesses.” Kristin was a Republican who won by only 280 votes as a Democrat. She is only the third “out” lesbian office-holder as Attorney General and changed parties from Republican to Democratic in 2019, because of Donald J. Trump. Her office indicted 18 people in connection with the attempt to install an illegal slate of presidential electors and, therefore, overturn the election of Joseph Biden in 2020.
The White House is saying “they have a work-around,” a remark delivered by Peter Navarro, whom Elon Musk denounced as “as dumb as a box of rocks.” (* Be sure to catch Elon’s Farewell Press Conference on TV tomorrow, 5/30/2025.) Said Ms. Mayes: “For the first time ever, the attorney generals of America agree with Rand Paul, who says the power rests with Congress.”
Arizona’s Attorney General said: “I believe the United States Supreme Court agrees with the rule of law and that they’re gonna’ say, ‘Look. Wait a second. This is a vast expansion of presidential powers that goes far beyond what Congress delegated to the executive branch. I think we’re going to win at the end of the day. We’re hearing, especially from our small businesses that they are having trouble ordering things like coffee from Mexico for a coffee shop. We have small businesses who don’t know how extensive the costs are going to be once the imports make it through L.A. ports. I think we’re very worried about people in Arizona and other states to gain access. This is not good for our economy; it has the potential to wreck our small businesses.”
I was hopeful that the few Republicans who seem to retain a brain and a heart would seize upon the first ruling to say (to DJT), “Well, the court says you don’t have the power to arbitrarily set tariffs, so we have to stand by that.”
Senator John Kennedy of Louisiana
Right now, Senator John Kennedy of the Republican Judiciary Committee is speaking and is saying, “The only good tariff is a dead tariff.” Speaking from Madisonville, Louisiana: “If these tariffs lead to higher prices that’s gonna’ create a political problem for us in the mid-terms.” He is saying Trump represented hope versus Harris’s hurt but has just noted that the White House goes from zero to “screw everyone” in short order.
Kennedy, who was first elected in 2017, is considering the backlash from the voting public. He is saying, “We gave that authority (to enact tariffs) to the President, for better or worse.” He says he doesn’t feel that Trump has exceeded his authority. He is being asked about the “big beautiful bill” to which he said, It’s not as beautiful as it can be.” He is now endorsing tax cuts. $4.3 trillion increase in the national debt is being mentioned as bad, a very negative effect of DJT’s budget.
Senator John Kennedy of Louisiana.
“I want to cut spending until we run out of votes. I want to renew the tax cuts.” (John Kennedy on Trump’s tax bill.)
Trump posted a screed attacking the courts, which, of course, is detrimental. Timothy M. Reif and Leonard Leo are now in Trump’s sights and he is requesting that the Supreme Court weigh in.
Peter Navarro: “The tariffs remain in place. The courts have told us, ‘Go do it another way.’ Even if we lose, we will do it another way.” Ironically, Trump’s trade advisor commented on the lack of trust in “rogue judges,” despite the fact that Trump appointed the judge in question.
Brandon Gill (R, Texas) is the youngest Republican member of Congress at age 30.
Congressman Brandon Gill (R, Texas) immediately began talking about usurping the President’s authority, calling it “a huge problem. I don’t agree with the ruling. I agree with the President. The American public can see that we have a large problem with large trade deficits and Trump is taking action to alleviate that problem. Just a few months ago the Senate took up the question of whether the President had the authority to institute tariffs and they said he did.” (This was alluded to by LouisianaSenator John Kennedy in previous statements on CNN .) Congressman Gill also endorsed codifying the DOGE cuts that Elon Musk made, including eliminating NPR.
“It’s chaos now in the courts,” said the CNN commentator on Anderson Cooper’s 5 p.m. (CDT) program.
Nancy Gertner, Senior Lecturer at Harvard Law School, said Trump cannot keep his mouth shut. “It’s quite clear what is going on here. He wants to control Harvard and the institutions that could be the source of opposition to him. It’s an over-reach for what he is trying to do.” 149 suits have been launched against DJT in his time in office for his overreach, versus 6 for “W” and 8 for Obama in 8 years of their presidencies. John E. Jones III, President of Dickinson College, said “Trump is a lawyer’s nightmare because he can’t stop talking. His own words will give the lie to his stated objections. They turn out to be pretext for what he wants to do.”
It looks, to those of us without legal degrees (on the outside, looking in), as though the MAGA administration is shopping for courts that DJT may have stacked. If he doesn’t like the decision by one court, he moves to another and counts on delay. (Trump has a lengthy history of launching lawsuits and has recently been suing CBS over a “Sixty Minutes” interview with Kamala Harris and has been involved in a dispute with ABC—which ponied up—over a remark on George Stephanopoulus’ Sunday morning talk show.)
Sir Keir Starmer, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.
One of the judges Trump blasted, Leonard Leo, has a long history of trying to shift the court to the right in his many years on the bench. The declaration of an emergency is the problem with the way the tariffs were enacted, says Justin Wolfers, Professor of Economics and Public Policy at the University of Michigan. “The right thing for any country to do now is to sit on their hands,” rather than negotiate, said Wolfers, noting that the bottom line is that being publicly humiliated the way Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer of Britain was during his recent visit, is not a very appealing prospect for the leader of any country.
Putting a malignant narcissist who has a well-known reputation for dishonesty and corruption in office is turning out to be a not-very-good decision for the welfare of the United States economy, which seems to be in limbo at the moment.
“Am I the sucker? For as long as I can remember I thought that the United States stood for democratic values and individual liberty. These were supposed to be the guiding lights of American foreign policy, even if the principles might not always be absolute or the path to them always direct. Critics of the U.S., both external and internal, insisted that this was a delusion at best, and more likely simply a lie. Yet for most of the post-World War II era these ideas served the U.S. very well. To put it bluntly, Thanks to them, we won the Cold War.
OR SO I THOUGHT.
But obviously President Trump and those who have Trump’s ear think differently. He never had much interest in the “suckers and losers” (his words about the American soldiers who died in France) who bought all that stuff about defending democracy. Trump, like Vice-President J.D. Vance and others in his orbit, prefers a hard-nosed realpolitik. If Ukraine shares its wealth, we might help in its defense. Or we might not.
JUSTIFICATIONS
Trump justifies this by calling Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky, a dictator and saying Ukraine started it all anyway—making mincemeat of the truth and decades of U.S. foreign policy goals in a single tweet. The idea that Russia is not to blame for the Ukraine war is not original to Trump. University of Chicago political scientist John J. Mearsheimer has been saying that for over a decade, starting with the paper titled “Why the Ukraine Crisis is the West’s Fault.” The “realists” like Mearsheimer urge us to drop talk of freedom and principles and see the world as just the sum of the great powers’ spheres of influence.
THE GREAT POWERS
This is how Vladimir Putin and China’s Xi Jinping see the world. They would like nothing more than to sit down with Trump and carve up the globe—taking a nibble of Latvia, tightening the noose around Taiwan. (*If you were paying attention during the Oscars last night, the Latvian team that collected their Oscar for “Flow” referenced the fighting already going on on one of their borders, which the world does not hear about.)
Jan. 6 siege of the Capitol
Each bargain might make sense to a deal-maker like Trump. But eventually losing our principles will mean losing our influence. And, in the end, it will be the U.S. that looks like the sucker at the table.”
POST SCRIPT
Later, within the magazine he manages, we learn from Charles P. Pierce (“Esquire”) that Trump specifically fired the lawyers charged with resisting illegal presidential orders. Nor was it reassuring when Hegseth explained that the JAGs had been fired to stop them from being “roadblocks to anything that happens.” Paul McLeary in “Politico” said that the former Fox News host promotes a swaggering “warrior ethos” that rejects the Geneva Convention(s).
Trump’s purge, said Tom Nichols in “The Atlantic” is “the next step in his pursuit of total power. After capturing the intelligence services, the Justice Department, and the FBI, the Pentagon is the last piece he needs to establish the foundations for authoritarian control of the U.S. government. With his generals in charge, Trump can start building a military that is loyal to him and not to the Constitution. And the Black general that Trump recently fired, Gen. Charles Q. Brown, Jr., was replaced by a man he met while on a trip to Iraq, three-star general Dan “Razin” Caine. a white retired three-star general (retired and has to be brought back from retirement) who met Trump while wearing a red MAGA hat and said, “I think you’re great, Sir. I’ll kill for you, Sir.”
And if he wouldn’t, there are always the recently-released-from-prison Proud Boys.
