Kevin D. Williamson, Roving Correspondent for The National Review, joins Dave to discuss how and why he was fired from The Atlantic after a few days, the Left’s attack on Free Speech, which, if any, of President Trump’s policies Kevin approves, the future of the Republican Party and Conservatism, and much more.

Follow Kevin at http://www.nationalreview.com/author/kevin-d-williamson/

Please subscribe to Whiskey Politics on YouTube http://www.youtube.com/c/WhiskeyPolitics

Find us on: The Ricochet Network http://ricochet.com/series/whiskey-politics/

WhiskeyPolitics.net http://whiskeypolitics.net/

Facebook http://www.facebook.com/whiskeypoliticsblog

Dave on Twitter http://twitter.com/DavidSussman 

Shown on Americas Voice Television Network.

Subscribe to your favorite podcast application including TuneIn, http://tunein.com/podcasts/Political-News/Whiskey-Politics-p1123767/

Stitcher, https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/whiskey-politics

GooglePlay, https://play.google.com/music/listen#/ps/Ic2bnaem2cwo3pul3do22dypz6u

and iTunes https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/whiskey-politics/id1104427904 where your 5-star rating will be greatly appreciated!

Music: Ben Sounds. https://www.bensound.com/

Subscribe to Whiskey Politics in iTunes (and leave a 5-star review, please!), or by RSS feed. For all our podcasts in one place, subscribe to the Ricochet Audio Network Superfeed in iTunes or by RSS feed.

Podcast listeners: Now become a Ricochet member for only $2.50 a month! Join and see what you’ve been missing.

There are 55 comments.

  1. 1
  2. 2
  1. Inactive

    Kevin’s description of himself as a philosophically radical libertarian and a politically moderate conservative is so close to my own description of myself that it’s scary. Get out of my head, Kevin. 

    • #1
    • August 24, 2018 at 11:30 am
    • 4 likes
  2. Coolidge

    Maybe it’s just me but on every podcast he does, including Mad Dogs and Englishmen, I’m always of the feeling that at any time Williamson is going to turn to the other person (even if he likes him), call him a moron, tell him “never speak to me again” and walk away.

    To me, he’s that intimidating in tone.

    I like him, I like his sort of contrarian point of view on almost everything, but I’d be scared to say hello

    • #2
    • August 24, 2018 at 1:15 pm
    • 5 likes
  3. Thatcher

    It must be delightful to be Kevin Williamson and consider yourself so superior. How fortunate he is to have surrounded himself with other perfect people who have no personal failings. Sorry Dave, but this guy doesn’t impress me at all.

    • #3
    • August 24, 2018 at 1:49 pm
    • 3 likes
  4. Coolidge

    Jeff Hawkins (View Comment):
    I like him, I like his sort of contrarian point of view on almost everything, but I’d be scared to say hell

    I met him and chatted with him at the Ricochet live Mad Dogs & Englishmen event in DC. He couldn’t have been nicer or more approachable. He’s a really nice guy who happens to have a great brain. 

    • #4
    • August 24, 2018 at 2:15 pm
    • 8 likes
  5. Contributor

    Jeff Hawkins (View Comment):

    Maybe it’s just me but on every podcast he does, including Mad Dogs and Englishmen, I’m always of the feeling that at any time Williamson is going to turn to the other person (even if he likes him), call him a moron, tell him “never speak to me again” and walk away.

    To me, he’s that intimidating in tone.

    I like him, I like his sort of contrarian point of view on almost everything, but I’d be scared to say hello

    Scary whiskers!

     The WIRE: Your week in review - Personal Liberty®

    • #5
    • August 24, 2018 at 4:04 pm
    • 3 likes
  6. Member

    Kevin is a man of total integrity. I have long admired him, both as thinker and a writer. I can well understand why those who identify with Trump emotionally and politically find him repulsive. He is the absolute perfect foil for Trump and those who believe that the means are justified by the ends.

    • #6
    • August 24, 2018 at 4:09 pm
    • 3 likes
  7. Contributor

    Goldwaterwoman (View Comment):

    It must be delightful to be Kevin Williamson and consider yourself so superior. How fortunate he is to have surrounded himself with other perfect people who have no personal failings. Sorry Dave, but this guy doesn’t impress me at all.

    Personalities aside, our conservative divide is something I wished we could have spent much more time.

    One point I wanted to discuss, (but for time I needed to get to my last issue – free speech), is that many on the right view Trump as the only thing holding back the neo-Marxists from completely taking over our culture and institutions. Obviously, not everyone loves Trump the man (many do) but many appreciate that he stands up against the forces that many of us believe have been tearing apart our country for decades. Now their socialist spawn are starting to gain power in corporations, academia, and politics, and Trump is a liferaft many feel they can’t let go of. 

     

     

    • #7
    • August 24, 2018 at 4:16 pm
    • 6 likes
  8. Coolidge

    Dave Sussman (View Comment):

    Goldwaterwoman (View Comment):

    It must be delightful to be Kevin Williamson and consider yourself so superior. How fortunate he is to have surrounded himself with other perfect people who have no personal failings. Sorry Dave, but this guy doesn’t impress me at all.

    Personalities aside, our conservative divide is something I wished we could have spent much more time.

    One point I wanted to discuss, (but for time I needed to get to my last issue – free speech), is that many on the right view Trump as the only thing holding back the neo-Marxists from completely taking over our culture and institutions. Obviously, not everyone loves Trump the man (many do) but many appreciate that he stands up against the forces that many of us believe have been tearing apart our country for decades. Now their socialist spawn are starting to gain power in corporations, academia, and politics, and Trump is a liferaft many feel they can’t let go of.

    I’m guessing he’d view this as short sighted (perhaps the “only thing” aspect vs. legislative means etc) vs. the long arc of history. I think he, like John Podhoretz and other bristle at the “Flight 93 Election”/Prager’s “Second Civil War” theories as dramatic while acknowledging the Left has lurched into a harder push for central control.

    • #8
    • August 24, 2018 at 4:48 pm
    • 2 likes
  9. Coolidge

    Listening to Ricochet podcasts is often an exercise in disillusionment. For example, after her “audition” as an anti-Trump columnist for the New York Times, and how she responded to criticism, I can barely listen to Mona Charen any more — and I used to call myself a “Mona Charen conservative”.

    This time, I was shocked by how evasive Kevin Williamson was. Exactly what was he fired from The Atlantic for? It’s all vague generalities.

    Even more to the point, when they were talking about Trump’s character as a politician, Dave asked what promises the President has broken. Kevin went on a long digression. Dave eventually brought the discussion back to the question. Kevin changed the subject again, and Dave finally gave up, still without an answer to the question.

    • #9
    • August 24, 2018 at 5:00 pm
    • 5 likes
  10. Thatcher

    Dave Sussman (View Comment):
    Obviously, not everyone loves Trump the man (many do) but many appreciate that he stands up against the forces that many of us believe have been tearing apart our country for decades. Now their socialist spawn are starting to gain power in corporations, academia, and politics, and Trump is a liferaft many feel they can’t let go of. 

    Williamson was adept at sidestepping questions you had that could lead him where he didn’t want to go. Maybe I’m wrong, but I sensed your frustration.

    • #10
    • August 24, 2018 at 5:10 pm
    • 3 likes
  11. Coolidge

    Kevin lost a lot of credibility with the statement that “people that call themselves ‘Libertarians’ are socially conservative”. Either I misheard that or it is opposite day on planet Kevin.

    • #11
    • August 24, 2018 at 6:30 pm
    • 4 likes
  12. Member

     

    Taras (View Comment):
    Even more to the point, when they were talking about Trump’s character as a politician, Dave asked what promises the President has broken. Kevin went on a long digression.

    I think he said something like “I didn’t say he broke any promises.” Which more or less answers the question without a whole lot of digressing. The general point of the “digression” that followed was that we would be better off discussing policies than personalities, which is probably worth making.

    I don’t get out much but I can’t think of any Trump critic that accuses the President of breaking electoral promises. I’m not sure what the rhetorical term for asking a question like that is, but there’s gotta be one.

    • #12
    • August 24, 2018 at 7:02 pm
    • 3 likes
  13. Coolidge

    SParker (View Comment):

     

    Taras (View Comment):
    Even more to the point, when they were talking about Trump’s character as a politician, Dave asked what promises the President has broken. Kevin went on a long digression.

    I think he said something like “I didn’t say he broke any promises.” Which more or less answers the question without a whole lot of digressing. The general point of the “digression” that followed was that we would be better off discussing policies than personalities, which is probably worth making.

    I don’t get out much but I can’t think of any Trump critic that accuses the President of breaking electoral promises. I’m not sure what the rhetorical term for asking a question like that is, but there’s gotta be one.

    No, that didn’t answer the question, because the question was, “Has Trump broken any promises?” Williamson’s response was an evasion, not an answer. It’s a good debater’s trick: if answering the question asked will hurt your argument, answer a different question. Thus, in the O.J. Simpson murder trial, the defense knew that its client was guilty as sin, so they changed the subject to whether or not a policeman used the “N-word“. 

     I think that, like most anti-Trumpers, Williamson’s self-esteem is wrapped up in opposing Trump. Like Mona Charen, he wants to join the cool kids — but he remains outside, looking in. 

     The implication Williamson was trying to evade is that Trump has more political integrity than, say, George HW Bush, who broke his “no new taxes“ pledge and even ridiculed people for having believed it (“read my hips“).

    • #13
    • August 24, 2018 at 9:17 pm
    • 3 likes
  14. Coolidge

    To understand him best, is to listen to him as one would of someone living alone on his remote island paradise.

    Met him on the first day of a post-election NRO cruise when we (that is with my superbly superior better half) sat down with him alone for that afternoon’s first drink. He is characteristically unique. We shared a couple of more on other days with him in the manner of a new friendship while on vacation.

    As a comparison, Andrew McCarthy was the gregarious one, without pretense and both serious and helpful the times we were with him.

    In my random Lido Deck encounter with Rob Long, somehow it was about what he wrote while aboard a trans-Pacific cargo ship that started the conversation. As you would expect, he was pleasant and unperturbed by my ignorance of everything else he had done.

    What we saw of Jonah and Lileks was their entertaining the lively late-night crowd by quipping each other on pop-culture trivia.

    Breitbart definitely had a larger-than-life presence, but he was there only a few days, so never met him.

    To close this parenthetical remark, VDH was the highlight of the cruise when he spent an afternoon while on the beach with my dearest and two of her vacationing girlfriends when the rest us where in the ship’s showroom listening to who knows what. They all fell in love with him, and I suspect that it was his best afternoon and made it worth his trip.

    So, among all these personalities Kevin Williamson does stand out, relevant, with a voice of his own.

    His intention does seem to be he wants to place himself on that higher plane above us, which doesn’t serve him well. Some are born with blinders, he was not. He has expressed great awareness. The blinders now in evidence were not thrust upon him but are of his own choice.

    • #14
    • August 24, 2018 at 11:40 pm
    • 4 likes
  15. Member

    JuliaBlaschke (View Comment):

    Jeff Hawkins (View Comment):
    I like him, I like his sort of contrarian point of view on almost everything, but I’d be scared to say hell

    I met him and chatted with him at the Ricochet live Mad Dogs & Englishmen event in DC. He couldn’t have been nicer or more approachable. He’s a really nice guy who happens to have a great brain.

    Great to know, Julia. Thanks.

    • #15
    • August 25, 2018 at 6:58 am
    • 1 like
  16. Coolidge

    SParker (View Comment):

     

    Taras (View Comment):
    Even more to the point, when they were talking about Trump’s character as a politician, Dave asked what promises the President has broken. Kevin went on a long digression.

    I think he said something like “I didn’t say he broke any promises.” Which more or less answers the question without a whole lot of digressing. The general point of the “digression” that followed was that we would be better off discussing policies than personalities, which is probably worth making.

    I don’t get out much but I can’t think of any Trump critic that accuses the President of breaking electoral promises. I’m not sure what the rhetorical term for asking a question like that is, but there’s gotta be one.

    Yes, Kevin was very clear in the first part of the interview about how in some ways the Trump presidency has been better than he expected it to be and in some ways worse. He articulated his views on that issue very clearly.

    I also thought he made a good point when he argued that many conservatives think all conservatives owe fealty to Trump and that one should never criticize Trump for anything he says or does.

    That’s not conservatism. That’s blind loyalty and conservatives should understand the difference.

     

    • #16
    • August 25, 2018 at 7:22 am
    • 5 likes
  17. Member

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    I also thought he made a good point when he argued that many conservatives think all conservatives owe fealty to Trump and that one should never criticize Trump for anything he says or does.

    That’s not conservatism. That’s blind loyalty and conservatives should understand the difference.

    If that was in fact his point (haven’t listened yet), he needs to open his eyes a bit wider because it’s a rather clear over-generalization. Case in point: we have some very pro-Trump people on this site and I can’t recall seeing that point made. There are ranges within those who are pro-Trump, but uniformly there is an acknowledgement that he is subject to criticism, just not at most times for most things.

    • #17
    • August 25, 2018 at 7:33 am
    • 1 like
  18. Member

    Oh, come on, there are people on Ricochet who say we should never criticize Trump. I shan’t mention any names but I am thinking of the person right now (it is not you).

    There are also Trump supporters outside of Ricochet who never ever criticize Trump, and I will mention his name: Dennis Prager. I caught much of his show on Friday, and the contempt he shows for conservatives who are not with Trump is palpable. He’d deny it. But it is nothing short of contempt.

    • #18
    • August 25, 2018 at 8:13 am
    • 2 likes
  19. Coolidge

    I didn’t find him in the least bit evasive. I thought he was very clear. He didn’t go into why he was fired from the Atlantic in great detail because most people who follow him and read and listen to National Review and other conservative outlets have already gone over that a hundred times. Frankly I think he is sick of talking about it.

    I also understand his point about pro-Trump people demanding fealty to Trump. Some of the comments on this podcast illustrate his point. All this bristling over Trump’s integrity. The promises may have been kept (although I have yet to see a wall or Mexico paying for it or a “big, beautiful healthcare plan to replace Obamacare), but some of the promises like his trade policy are ones I wish had never been implemented. His foreign policy “successes” have been wildly overstated and we have yet to see what they will yield, but his ham fisted approach cannot be compared to Reagan’s. To support Trump you not only have to overlook his vulgar, crass behavior, you also have to believe that he is carrying out some grand strategy of negotiation and I agree with Kevin that is highly unlikely.

    VDH believes Trump is some master negotiator. I sincerely hope he is and will gladly eat my words if that turns out to be true. 

    • #19
    • August 25, 2018 at 8:47 am
    • 5 likes
  20. Inactive

    Taras (View Comment):

    SParker (View Comment):

     

    Taras (View Comment):
    Even more to the point, when they were talking about Trump’s character as a politician, Dave asked what promises the President has broken. Kevin went on a long digression.

    I think he said something like “I didn’t say he broke any promises.” Which more or less answers the question without a whole lot of digressing. The general point of the “digression” that followed was that we would be better off discussing policies than personalities, which is probably worth making.

    I don’t get out much but I can’t think of any Trump critic that accuses the President of breaking electoral promises. I’m not sure what the rhetorical term for asking a question like that is, but there’s gotta be one.

    No, that didn’t answer the question, because the question was, “Has Trump broken any promises?” Williamson’s response was an evasion, not an answer. It’s a good debater’s trick: if answering the question asked will hurt your argument, answer a different question. Thus, in the O.J. Simpson murder trial, the defense knew that its client was guilty as sin, so they changed the subject to whether or not a policeman used the “N-word“.

    I think that, like most anti-Trumpers, Williamson’s self-esteem is wrapped up in opposing Trump. Like Mona Charen, he wants to join the cool kids — but he remains outside, looking in.

    The implication Williamson was trying to evade is that Trump has more political integrity than, say, George HW Bush, who broke his “no new taxes“ pledge and even ridiculed people for having believed it (“read my hips“).

    The question isn’t relevant to Williamson or his writing. It wasn’t a very good question imo. 

    • #20
    • August 25, 2018 at 9:16 am
    • 2 likes
  21. Thatcher

    JuliaBlaschke (View Comment):
    I didn’t find him in the least bit evasive. I thought he was very clear. He didn’t go into why he was fired from the Atlantic in great detail because most people who follow him and read and listen to National Review and other conservative outlets have already gone over that a hundred times. Frankly I think he is sick of talking about it.

    I was a little surprised it was brought up. It has been talked to death. Williamson has clearly moved on. And anyway, when you leave an employer for whatever reason, acting with some class is always best when looking at prospects for the next job.

    • #21
    • August 25, 2018 at 9:29 am
    • 4 likes
  22. Thatcher

    Money quote of the interview, “Eisenhower anarchist.”

    • #22
    • August 25, 2018 at 9:38 am
    • 1 like
  23. Member

    Frankly, the person I found to be unimpressive was Dave Sussman. I think his questions were tendentious. He clearly doesn’t like it when one doesn’t show fealty to Trump. And his question about Trump’s promises was silly. One of the reasons I didn’t vote for him (I didn’t vote on the Presidential line), was, aside from his vulgar personality, his crazy promises. Imagine telling people that another sovereign state had to pay us for a wall! 

    Trump’s gotten better, in terms of policy, as Kevin said, thank the Lord. But his vulgarity is still in tack, and this is why a true conservative like me will never like him.

    • #23
    • August 25, 2018 at 10:36 am
    • 2 likes
  24. Coolidge

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    I also thought he made a good point when he argued that many conservatives think all conservatives owe fealty to Trump and that one should never criticize Trump for anything he says or does.

    That’s not conservatism. That’s blind loyalty and conservatives should understand the difference.

    If that was in fact his point (haven’t listened yet), he needs to open his eyes a bit wider because it’s a rather clear over-generalization. Case in point: we have some very pro-Trump people on this site and I can’t recall seeing that point made. There are ranges within those who are pro-Trump, but uniformly there is an acknowledgement that he is subject to criticism, just not at most times for most things.

    It seems like discussions regarding Trump often descend into arguments about whether someone is a Trump supporter or a Never Trumper. If someone criticizes Trump on a given issue, the person is labeled a Never Trumper and, therefore, the person’s arguments are to be dismissed as simply more whining by Never Trumpers.

    Maybe it has always been this way to some extent. For example, in April 2004 if someone criticized President George W. Bush’s handling of the Iraq War, one would likely be accused as being a closet supporter of Howard Dean or John Kerry. Then the argument would be made that even Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Harry Reid, Tom Daschle and John Edwards voted for the Iraq war. The critic might be accused of being a member of Code Pink or a supporter of Saddam Hussain’s rape rooms.

    In other words, maybe there has always been a tendency for supporters of a President to treat any criticism of the President as evidence of lack of commitment to Americanism or lack of patriotism if the president is a Republican, while being critical of a Democrat president is to risk being accused of racism or a supporter or ruthless corporate greed.

    Maybe there has always been a very limited ability of people to discuss the pros and cons of various Presidential actions in a dispassionate way. There is always the argument that doing so provides too many advantages to “the other side.”

    • #24
    • August 25, 2018 at 2:28 pm
    • 3 likes
  25. Member

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    I also thought he made a good point when he argued that many conservatives think all conservatives owe fealty to Trump and that one should never criticize Trump for anything he says or does.

    That’s not conservatism. That’s blind loyalty and conservatives should understand the difference.

    If that was in fact his point (haven’t listened yet), he needs to open his eyes a bit wider because it’s a rather clear over-generalization. Case in point: we have some very pro-Trump people on this site and I can’t recall seeing that point made. There are ranges within those who are pro-Trump, but uniformly there is an acknowledgement that he is subject to criticism, just not at most times for most things.

    It seems like discussions regarding Trump often descend into arguments about whether someone is a Trump supporter or a Never Trumper. If someone criticizes Trump on a given issue, the person is labeled a Never Trumper and, therefore, the person’s arguments are to be dismissed as simply more whining by Never Trumpers.

    Maybe it has always been this way to some extent. For example, in April 2004 if someone criticized President George W. Bush’s handling of the Iraq War, one would likely be accused as being a closet supporter of Howard Dean or John Kerry. Then the argument would be made that even Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Harry Reid, Tom Daschle and John Edwards voted for the Iraq war. The critic might be accused of being a member of Code Pink or a supporter of Saddam Hussain’s rape rooms.

    In other words, maybe there has always been a tendency for supporters of a President to treat any criticism of the President as either evidence of lack of commitment to “Americanism.” To be critical of Republican president is to be “unpatriotic.” To be critical of a Democrat president is to be “racist” or “a supporter or ruthless corporate greed.”

    Maybe there has always been a very limited ability of people to discuss the pros and cons of various Presidential actions in a dispassionate way. There is always the argument that doing so provides too many advantages to “the other side.”

     

    You do have a point, HeavyWater. I do think it is more complex than this is several cases. But you are on to something. It has always bothered me that some people take the easy way out, by engaging in such simplicities, instead of thinking arguments through.

    • #25
    • August 25, 2018 at 2:48 pm
    • 1 like
  26. Member

    Dave Sussman (View Comment):

    Goldwaterwoman (View Comment):

    It must be delightful to be Kevin Williamson and consider yourself so superior. How fortunate he is to have surrounded himself with other perfect people who have no personal failings. Sorry Dave, but this guy doesn’t impress me at all.

    Personalities aside, our conservative divide is something I wished we could have spent much more time.

    One point I wanted to discuss, (but for time I needed to get to my last issue – free speech), is that many on the right view Trump as the only thing holding back the neo-Marxists from completely taking over our culture and institutions. Obviously, not everyone loves Trump the man (many do) but many appreciate that he stands up against the forces that many of us believe have been tearing apart our country for decades. Now their socialist spawn are starting to gain power in corporations, academia, and politics, and Trump is a liferaft many feel they can’t let go of.

     

     

    Well said. This country is being ruined by cultural Marxism, the Frankfurt School, centralization, Keynesianism, and the pro-statist media. Trump is an option, here, that’s all. Listen to the Rep Thomas Massey interview with Reason magazine and get back to me if you have better ideas. Same with Rep. Ken Buck on Full Measure News.

    • #26
    • August 26, 2018 at 8:18 am
    • 1 like
  27. Member

    Kevin Williamson is very good at getting into policy weeds, and he’s very realistic about how to make this country more libertarian. I can’t think of anyone else quite like him. Very good writer. “The End Is Near” is one of the best books I’ve ever read. 

    • #27
    • August 26, 2018 at 8:28 am
    • Like
  28. Member

    Taras (View Comment):
     I think that, like most anti-Trumpers, Williamson’s self-esteem is wrapped up in opposing Trump. Like Mona Charen, he wants to join the cool kids — but he remains outside, looking in. 

    Mona Charen et. al. have no idea what is really wrong with this country or they don’t really want to improve it. Kevin Williamson is not that type at all. I’d take Kevin Williamson as Supreme Dictator in a second. 

    • #28
    • August 26, 2018 at 8:33 am
    • Like
  29. Contributor

    Happy Sunday.

    Reading some comments, it doesn’t surprise me there are some who took exception to a couple of questions. Probably could have articulated better on my end, but the premise wouldn’t have changed.

    The divide we have on the Right DOES concern me. While some may consider my questioning tendentious, I consider these issues vital if we as Conservatives stand a chance of holding back the constant Leftist blitz and save our country from the cultural and economic Marxists who, based on recent polling are in the ascendency. Again, I look at long-game.

    I respect everyone’s opinion, especially those who differ from mine and thank you for your input.

    • #29
    • August 26, 2018 at 9:36 am
    • 5 likes
  30. Inactive

    Dave Sussman (View Comment):

    Happy Sunday.

    Reading some comments, it doesn’t surprise me there are some who took exception to a couple of questions. Probably could have articulated better on my end, but the premise wouldn’t have changed.

    The divide we have on the Right DOES concern me. While some may consider my questioning tendentious, I consider these issues vital if we as Conservatives stand a chance of holding back the constant Leftist blitz and save our country from the cultural and economic Marxists who, based on recent polling are in the ascendency. Again, I look at long-game.

    I respect everyone’s opinion, especially those who differ from mine and thank you for your input.

    My only criticism of your interview style is that when faced with someone who disagrees with you, you tend to ask leading questions. It’s very obvious what answer you want, and when someone like Kevin just refuses to play along it sort of grinds the interview to a halt. 

    I very much enjoy the interview style podcast, it’s so much more interesting than rank punditry, and I do enjoy WP even when I disagree with the guest. If I can make one suggestion it would be to try and learn from the likes of @peterrobinson (the best interviewer working today) and the even Joe Rogan: they both have a mindset that their subjects might know something they don’t and are after information more than “answers”. 

    That said I really did enjoy the podcast and I can’t wait for the next one. 

    • #30
    • August 26, 2018 at 9:44 am
    • 1 like
  1. 1
  2. 2