Speaker 1: Ridiculous History is a production of I Heart Radio. Welcome
Speaker 1: back to the show Ridiculous Historians. Thank you, as always
Speaker 1: so much for tuning in. Quick housekeeping note, this is
Speaker 1: part two of a two part series, so if you
Speaker 1: have not had the opportunity to check out part one
Speaker 1: of our conversation with David Adams Cleveland, get the to
Speaker 1: your podcast platform of choice and check it out. I
Speaker 1: was gonna say a podcast, um, that's of thing, but
Speaker 1: it should be why not enjoyed? You know, I can't
Speaker 1: help but think about Frank Olsen, you know, in the
Speaker 1: mk ulture experiments, the CIA mind control project that ultimately
Speaker 1: resulted in his death, whether by misadventure, uh, suicide or
Speaker 1: you know, some sort of murderous plot. But he also
Speaker 1: plunged his death from a from a high window from
Speaker 1: a hotel, and it just kind of makes me think, like, obviously,
Speaker 1: you know, the KGB are known to be incredibly ruthless,
Speaker 1: it's almost legendary, But I mean the CIA is pretty
Speaker 1: ruthless too. I just wondered if there's any analogs that
Speaker 1: you see between the two countries and the two organizations. Well,
Speaker 1: the c I a UM had to do a lot
Speaker 1: of things that most of it's UH operatives didn't enjoy doing.
Speaker 1: Reading other people's bail was the joke that was always used, UH.
Speaker 1: But in fact, after the Second World War, we were
Speaker 1: up against a very aggressive Soviet Union and a very
Speaker 1: aggressive KGB UH who being just the latest and hopefully
Speaker 1: last example of the KGB trained cadres UH, and so
Speaker 1: the CIA was forced to do a lot of things
Speaker 1: that in retrospect it might have chosen not to do.
Speaker 1: On the other hand, there were rules and regulations that
Speaker 1: the CIA officers had to maintain, and by and large,
Speaker 1: they stuck pretty much UH to the protocols of their
Speaker 1: of their service, whereas the KGB operatives, UH, it was
Speaker 1: pretty much anything goes and they were experts at bumping
Speaker 1: off enemies UH, front, right and center. So I I
Speaker 1: think it's night and day the difference between them, even
Speaker 1: though the CIA had to adopt a lot of tough
Speaker 1: measures UH in a tough Cold War and and the aftermath, No,
Speaker 1: that makes sense. And I mean the mk Ultra situation
Speaker 1: I think was one of those where they you know,
Speaker 1: had UH certain individuals that were hired to be part
Speaker 1: of this program that we're sort of given carte blanche
Speaker 1: to do whatever they wanted and test you know, ariosolized
Speaker 1: LSD on civilians and and and the like and even
Speaker 1: their own you know, I'd like to further pursue, uh,
Speaker 1: something we set up at the very beginning of this
Speaker 1: conversation David, which is the the burden and the art
Speaker 1: of historical fiction. Now, this book is exhaustively research, which
Speaker 1: to me is tremendously compelling, and it does something that
Speaker 1: a lot of these stories, a lot of these stories
Speaker 1: missed the mark on Gods of deception humanizes what could
Speaker 1: have otherwise been uh reciting of and of timelines and events.
Speaker 1: But here in this story they or is a fascinating framework.
Speaker 1: You know, Um, if we weren't talking about Russia, I'd
Speaker 1: be more comfortable saying, uh, Matroshka dolls nested in the narrative.
Speaker 1: So when and I don't want to spoil this too much.
Speaker 1: I think people should experience this on their own. But
Speaker 1: our story kind of starts with a judge in his
Speaker 1: later years who is thinking back about his life, and
Speaker 1: he is Edward Dimmock. He has defended Alger Hiss during
Speaker 1: that Cold War trial and he's working on his memoirs
Speaker 1: and he's still haunted, and him being haunted by this
Speaker 1: leads to um him you know him, I don't want
Speaker 1: to say conscripting him, asking his grandson George Altman two
Speaker 1: help hidden understand the story the truth that occurs. And
Speaker 1: I'm wondering what inspired you to take that approach. That's
Speaker 1: one of the things that hooked me at the beginning. Well,
Speaker 1: it's just what you said, Ben. I thought it important
Speaker 1: as a novelist, as a fiction writer, to humanize the story.
Speaker 1: It's enough to uh talk about Aldre Hiss and his
Speaker 1: possible crimes and the crime certainly of Stalin and the
Speaker 1: KGB which were which were manifest More interestingly, I think
Speaker 1: it was to look at the Aldre his case in
Speaker 1: terms of free generations of an American family, with the
Speaker 1: patriarch of the family, Judge Dimmock, who had who had
Speaker 1: defended Aldre Hiss uh in the day, and his writing
Speaker 1: his memoir, and he enlists his grandson George Alban who's
Speaker 1: a print ston astrophysicists, to help him finish the memoir
Speaker 1: and figure out what the truth is. And in fact,
Speaker 1: when the story opens, Um, it's right after nine eleven
Speaker 1: the year after nine eleven, the judge doesn't even know
Speaker 1: the new information that's come out on aldre Hiss. He
Speaker 1: doesn't know about the access to Soviet intelligence files or
Speaker 1: the Venona decrypts of Soviet cable traffic, which by two
Speaker 1: thousand had made it clear that aldre Hiss was a
Speaker 1: spy and more importantly, an agent of influence. So all
Speaker 1: of a sudden, Edward Dimmick learned this that in fact
Speaker 1: his client was indubitably guilty of the of the crimes
Speaker 1: that he was convicted for, and and a lot more.
Speaker 1: And I wanted to have show how that played out
Speaker 1: in three generations of the family. So you have the George,
Speaker 1: you have the Judge so Or and his three daughters
Speaker 1: and his grandchildren who are involved in going through the
Speaker 1: elements of the Algre His Spy case. And we see
Speaker 1: how each generation had reacted to the story. And we
Speaker 1: find out as the story evolves that the impact of
Speaker 1: the Algre His case did terrible damage in the family.
Speaker 1: It impacted the judge and his wife's marriage, UH, it
Speaker 1: impacted their their three children, one of them Um, the
Speaker 1: son who goes off to Korea. UH. And so I
Speaker 1: wanted to humanize it, and also there is in the
Speaker 1: book there are letters from Priscilla Hiss, there are people
Speaker 1: who have talked to algre His, So we do get
Speaker 1: a certain insight um into algre His and his family life,
Speaker 1: his his son, um and his wife. Why. I think
Speaker 1: by humanizing it, you make it not just clearer in
Speaker 1: terms of what the truth is, but also how the
Speaker 1: truth plays itself out over free generations of of an
Speaker 1: American family. Now, that's really interesting and it makes me
Speaker 1: wonder when you're writing a work like this that's based on,
Speaker 1: you know, real historical facts and also relatively recently uncovered
Speaker 1: details that kind of re contextualized one of those historical facts,
Speaker 1: how do you decide where the sort of new story
Speaker 1: that you're going to tell is where it comes from,
Speaker 1: which parts need to remain just like steadfast truth, and
Speaker 1: which parts can kind of meander a little bit to
Speaker 1: serve your narrative. Well, for the most part, I like
Speaker 1: to think that night percent of the facts in the
Speaker 1: book are accurate, and uh they have been. They've come
Speaker 1: out recently from the owner decrypts and the access to
Speaker 1: Soviet era files, So most of the history is accurate.
Speaker 1: Where I have as a novelist taken charge of of
Speaker 1: the narrative is when I've gone into the heads, say
Speaker 1: of Priscilla Hiss. Priscilla Hiss his letters um, and she
Speaker 1: talks about in her letters how difficult it was, although
Speaker 1: we don't know if she's really being truthful about this.
Speaker 1: That the fastest. One of the most fascinating things about
Speaker 1: the trial was that Whittwaker Chambers, who testified against Hiss,
Speaker 1: testified about his years of being involved with his family.
Speaker 1: They went on vacation together, they went bird watching together,
Speaker 1: they spied together, they did all this stuff. He took
Speaker 1: their documents and photographed them, brought them back in the morning,
Speaker 1: They had meals together. They were friends. Whittaker Chambers actually
Speaker 1: was was very fond of Aldre his and Priscilla his.
Speaker 1: And yet Priscilla Hiss writes at least letters that I
Speaker 1: used in the book, how difficult it was to be
Speaker 1: faced by Whittaker chambers uh testimony and the trial. And
Speaker 1: later in the book he wrote Witness where he talks
Speaker 1: about their life together as friends of the family and this,
Speaker 1: that and the next thing, and she says, gosh, so
Speaker 1: much of it was just like the kind of people
Speaker 1: we were I understood it, and yet he's lying. And
Speaker 1: that brings in the idea that I used in the
Speaker 1: Book of Parallel Universes, which is where our Princeton astrophysics
Speaker 1: UM guy George Altman is brought in. Because there's two
Speaker 1: worlds out there. There's the world where aldre Hiss is
Speaker 1: guilty in the the world where aldre Hiss is innocent,
Speaker 1: and the two worlds collide and they don't overlap. And
Speaker 1: how you figure out which is which, I think makes
Speaker 1: the narrative pretty interesting. And there's a there's another question
Speaker 1: on this note I'd like to I'd like to explore
Speaker 1: with you. Speaking of parallel worlds, David, you stand astride
Speaker 1: a few parallel worlds of your own. You are an
Speaker 1: art historian, UH extensively published art historian. I'm thinking in
Speaker 1: particular of a history of American Tonalism, which I believe
Speaker 1: has been published in three different additions at this point.
Speaker 1: How do you and I can I I can experience
Speaker 1: um your I can experience your love of art and
Speaker 1: history in in reading Gods of Deception, UM and Times. Betrayal,
Speaker 1: by the way, is next on my list. But what
Speaker 1: drew you to historical fiction? From the world of art history.
Speaker 1: Do you feel that those are um somehow separate or
Speaker 1: distinct pursuits or do they inform one another, and if so,
Speaker 1: in what ways they do inform each other? But at
Speaker 1: the same time, there's no way I could be working
Speaker 1: on an art history project and writing a work of
Speaker 1: fiction at the same time. They're very different muscles, very
Speaker 1: different kind of brains. I think. Starting with the art history,
Speaker 1: I like telling the stories about artists and bringing artists
Speaker 1: to life and bringing their works to life. I like
Speaker 1: that narrative context. And what I did, uh in the
Speaker 1: History of American Tonnalism, which is about American landscape painting
Speaker 1: from around eighteen eighty and nineteen twenty, was bring that
Speaker 1: whole world back to life and the great artists of
Speaker 1: that period that would be Georgianist and William McNeil Whistler,
Speaker 1: among others. Uh and uh this was largely forgotten talk
Speaker 1: about times betrayal, uh the title of a novel. These
Speaker 1: guys were forgotten about for about seventy years until I
Speaker 1: came along and kind of wrote the book on them
Speaker 1: and sort of brought that world back. So I liked
Speaker 1: getting justice for great artists. I liked the feeling that
Speaker 1: there is justice in this life and that these artists
Speaker 1: and their reputations can be revived for for future generations.
Speaker 1: At the same time, I find in writing fiction that
Speaker 1: my love of landscape painting in particular UH informs my writing,
Speaker 1: and that I like to feel that any given moment,
Speaker 1: any um, any chapter, any scene that's set in the book,
Speaker 1: that you can feel the quality of the light, the temperature,
Speaker 1: the humidity, the sea, and um, that those ephemeral atmospheric
Speaker 1: elements that are that one loves in great landscape paintings
Speaker 1: can inform the writing as well, getting the reader a
Speaker 1: feeling that they're there and that the sense of time
Speaker 1: and place is very real. I think that's a really
Speaker 1: good way of putting it. You know, I wanted to
Speaker 1: ask you. I'm a huge something Ben and I and
Speaker 1: and Max are all huge fans of art and art
Speaker 1: museums and you know, graphic novels and just there's so
Speaker 1: many ways that it can be used to tell amazing stories.
Speaker 1: I am a fan of being able to walk into
Speaker 1: a gallery, look at a piece of art, and have
Speaker 1: it affected me viscerally. I think it's really interesting and
Speaker 1: and and and an important thing to have some historical
Speaker 1: context or to know a little bit about the artist
Speaker 1: who made it and maybe what inspired them. But I
Speaker 1: think ultimately it's not successful if it doesn't hit me
Speaker 1: in some way, and just by looking at it, can
Speaker 1: you kind of talk about that, like the sort of
Speaker 1: like viscerality of art and the way it affects you,
Speaker 1: just like cold versus having that context, and how those
Speaker 1: two things can coexist. I think that's right. I think
Speaker 1: that going into a gallery uh. And I've been involved
Speaker 1: in the art world one way or the other for
Speaker 1: many years. My son, Carter Cleveland is the founder of
Speaker 1: artsy dot net, which is the largest on site art
Speaker 1: site in the world now for buying and selling and
Speaker 1: studying and finding out about art. So we've been involved
Speaker 1: with art for a long time. And I'm a great
Speaker 1: believer that art really, uh enhances our life. Living with
Speaker 1: art enhances our life. That having art on the walls
Speaker 1: is important not just for the good effect it has
Speaker 1: on your own life, but because you're supporting artists living
Speaker 1: or dead, or or however it may be. And I
Speaker 1: agree with you that I think that one's reaction to
Speaker 1: art is fundamentally visceral. Uh. You either love it or
Speaker 1: you don't, and there's certain things that are gonna grab
Speaker 1: you or not. I think that having some background on
Speaker 1: the artists and some background on their time helps you
Speaker 1: in terms of your ability to see the world and
Speaker 1: the the or if you will have a narrative background
Speaker 1: that produced that are and that may eventually help you
Speaker 1: evolve certain ways to like different kinds of art from
Speaker 1: what you may be used to or what you're you're
Speaker 1: drawn to viscerally. But in the end, uh, it's really
Speaker 1: your eyeballs, bathing your eyeballs and the beauty of art
Speaker 1: that matters. And Uh, in the end, that's the great
Speaker 1: joy and the great pleasure to be had bathing your eyeballs. Yeah,
Speaker 1: this is going to recur on our show, sir. This
Speaker 1: is an know the time is flying away from us
Speaker 1: and I can only imagine how how strange it must
Speaker 1: be to have um to have works like Gods of
Speaker 1: Deception out in the world, which was published just in
Speaker 1: April of this year. Correct, Uh? Is that correct? So
Speaker 1: when you have you know, it must be similar to
Speaker 1: the experience of walking out of another universe into you know,
Speaker 1: or like seeing an amazing exhibition or seeing works of
Speaker 1: the old masters and then walking out into the world.
Speaker 1: And this inspires one of one of our last questions
Speaker 1: as we wrap up, what do what do we ideally
Speaker 1: want the readers and the audience to come away with
Speaker 1: from the experience of Gods of Deception? Do we what
Speaker 1: do we as readers take forward into the greater world? Well,
Speaker 1: I think that God's Deception, both as the historical novel
Speaker 1: and as a work of fiction, should make us aware
Speaker 1: of the dangers. Certainly that the Soviet Union once upon
Speaker 1: a time post along with the KGB, and I think
Speaker 1: uh speaking of going from one world to the next, uh,
Speaker 1: leaving the world of God's of Deception and then finding
Speaker 1: us right back in that same world with Putin's invasion
Speaker 1: of Ukraine. Because the title God's of Deception speaks to
Speaker 1: the mentality of many of the Soviet agents who and
Speaker 1: the KGB, who thought themselves in the forefront of history
Speaker 1: that they were going to revolutionize the world and they
Speaker 1: were going to become the heads of stay or they
Speaker 1: were gonna overturn uh countries by the power of their
Speaker 1: revolutionary ideas. So UH, for me, I have found that
Speaker 1: God's of Deception came out right during the Putin's invasion
Speaker 1: of the Ukraine, and Putin being a great admirer of
Speaker 1: Stalin and being trained by the KGB. His entire leadership
Speaker 1: circle are all x KGB agents. They know the ropes,
Speaker 1: they used, the same false flags, big lies, you name it,
Speaker 1: ultimately backed up by brutal force that Stalin was so
Speaker 1: adept at. So Putin is still there, and the ways
Speaker 1: of the Soviet Union are still there. And I think
Speaker 1: the only reason that I'm hopeful at this point in
Speaker 1: terms of Putin in the Ukraine is that we seem
Speaker 1: to evolve to the point where defensive warfare seems to
Speaker 1: be in the ascendency with smart weapons, and I think
Speaker 1: the Ukrainians are managing to put up a terrific fight
Speaker 1: against the Russians and against Putin, and hopefully with the
Speaker 1: ascendancy of defensive weapons, it's gonna make the Russian invasion
Speaker 1: increasingly more devastating for Putin and that in the end
Speaker 1: he will fail and hopefully his people will overthrow him.
Speaker 1: And I think the Chinese will think twice about the
Speaker 1: possibility of invading Taiwan at this point, again seeing what's
Speaker 1: happened in the Ukraine. So the gut world of God's
Speaker 1: deception is still with us. There are still lessons to
Speaker 1: be learned. But at the same time, uh, I think um,
Speaker 1: from a literary standpoint, the humanity of this one American
Speaker 1: family and the trials that they went through, UM, through
Speaker 1: the altra his years and where they came out in
Speaker 1: the end is a hopeful uh one for the for
Speaker 1: the future. I gotta ask you really quickly a little
Speaker 1: bit of for a bit of a hot take. Do
Speaker 1: you think Putin bit off more than he can shoe?
Speaker 1: Do you think he knew what he was doing? Was
Speaker 1: it just sort of a power play that was ill
Speaker 1: informed or uh, it just seems like people are not
Speaker 1: behind him in his own government and things are just
Speaker 1: going horribly awry. Is he making a decision based on
Speaker 1: the past that no longer like he's sort of out
Speaker 1: of his element now? Like? What what do you think
Speaker 1: is going on with Putin? Now? I think Putin was
Speaker 1: absolutely devastated, surprised by what happened on the initial months
Speaker 1: of the invasion of Ukraine, how his forces were really
Speaker 1: just taken apart piece by piece. I think he was amazed,
Speaker 1: I thought he I think he probably thought, oh, this
Speaker 1: is just gonna be another great KGB operation. We're gonna
Speaker 1: run in there and we're gonna overthrow KiB and it
Speaker 1: will be over in a in in a few days.
Speaker 1: I think he was. He was mightily surprised. On the
Speaker 1: other hand, being a KGB guy, being the head of
Speaker 1: a totalitarian government. He's got no place to go, no
Speaker 1: place to hide. He cannot retire from the scene. He's
Speaker 1: got nothing that he can do except keep fighting in
Speaker 1: the Ukraine for the time being until something gives way,
Speaker 1: either his army, his military, or his intelligence service, or
Speaker 1: the people of Russia turn on him and throw him out. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it's uh. The situation is untenable, and I agree with
Speaker 1: you that there is a there is not a viable
Speaker 1: retreat option at this point. Perhaps emboldened by Um by
Speaker 1: the invasion of Crimea in this calculus that informed Putin
Speaker 1: based on the events of provided in his mind a
Speaker 1: rational expective for for an invasion, and let's be honest,
Speaker 1: speaking of hot takes Um a chance to realize the
Speaker 1: dream of creating a new Soviet hegemony. However, I'm looking
Speaker 1: for the right way to say this, David. The the
Speaker 1: thing that many characters in God's deception and the thing
Speaker 1: that Vladimir Putin himself is wrestling with now is the
Speaker 1: idea of perception in a bubble right, um, being being
Speaker 1: a tyrant, being a strong man. Uh. It's it's no
Speaker 1: secret that Putin is likely surrounded by syncophants and as
Speaker 1: a result, has a very different experience of reality right
Speaker 1: than most people outside of that bubble. Do you believe that? Um?
Speaker 1: What would be your insight on this idea? It's tossed
Speaker 1: around so often. Do you feel that um world leaders
Speaker 1: um from Putin to you know, the recently recently deposed
Speaker 1: Boris Johnson, prime minister over there in the UK. Um,
Speaker 1: do you believe that people in power may live in
Speaker 1: bubbles of reality? And if so, why how well? I
Speaker 1: think Putin is a special case because he's been living
Speaker 1: in a in your bubble of reality maybe most of
Speaker 1: his life. I mean, he grew up, he learned his uh,
Speaker 1: he learned all of his brutal tactics and ways as
Speaker 1: a KGB officer. And when Russia fell apart a part,
Speaker 1: he lost his job, he lost prestige, he lost all
Speaker 1: kinds of things, and uh, he has a vaunted sense
Speaker 1: of of Russian history. I mean, after all, Russian aggression
Speaker 1: goes back to Catherine the Great and before that, so
Speaker 1: it's not just the Soviet Union. Um. Russia has a
Speaker 1: history of of of expansion. But I think that Putin
Speaker 1: certainly in the last five years, has been up against
Speaker 1: the West and what he's seen is weakness that the
Speaker 1: West has rolled over to his aggression, whether it's in
Speaker 1: Georgia or Crimea. Uh, and he's been He's gotten away
Speaker 1: with it time and time again, because most people in
Speaker 1: the West just think, well, could wars over? People don't
Speaker 1: act like that anymore. But the fact of the matter
Speaker 1: is aggression, evil intent, megalomania. All of these terrible things
Speaker 1: can come back in different guises, and Putin certainly has
Speaker 1: them all. And uh, I think you know, he lives
Speaker 1: in a bubble, but he can get away with a
Speaker 1: lot of stuff. And the West is let him get
Speaker 1: away with it too long. So he took a gamble,
Speaker 1: and this time the gamble is not paying off at
Speaker 1: least easily. Let's let's hope that the Russian people will
Speaker 1: put him in his place and and get rid of it.
Speaker 1: Thank you so much for spending some time with us
Speaker 1: and talking about your book, which I look forward to
Speaker 1: reading and its entirety, and for all of this amazing
Speaker 1: perspective on everything from art to current politics and everything
Speaker 1: in between. It's been a real, real delight talking with you,
Speaker 1: Benn and Noel. Thank you so much. It's been fun
Speaker 1: for me as well. Oh wonderful. Thank you for classing
Speaker 1: up the show. David these this is uh. This conversation,
Speaker 1: Asnal said, has led us through so many fascinating parts
Speaker 1: of history, parts of art, parts of geopolitics, and I
Speaker 1: believe it's a conversation that is worth pursuing. Fellow ridiculous historians.
Speaker 1: You would like to learn more about the work of
Speaker 1: David Adams Cleveland, please check out the website David Adams
Speaker 1: Cleveland dot com. It's uh, it's where I started stalking
Speaker 1: you in the beginning, sir, and um, it's where I
Speaker 1: have learned already uh so much about about history. Again.
Speaker 1: I'm excited for Times Betrayal. I want to read it.
Speaker 1: I saw some of the reviews I said, I was
Speaker 1: again a fanboy too much, But uh, sir, thank you
Speaker 1: sincerely for your time. We're looking forward to hearing more
Speaker 1: about the next works. In the meanwhile, where's one of
Speaker 1: the best places for people to learn more about your works, current,
Speaker 1: past and perhaps future well, As you mentioned, probably the
Speaker 1: best starting place is my h is my author side,
Speaker 1: David Adams Cleveland dot com, and from there you go
Speaker 1: right to the books. There's articles certainly on my author
Speaker 1: side as well. I've probably done I think eight or
Speaker 1: nine articles around God's Deception, which gives you some background
Speaker 1: into the history of the algra his case, but also
Speaker 1: how I researched it, so you can find all that
Speaker 1: kind of good stuff there. And then I've written a
Speaker 1: bunch of articles about writing fictions, so for aspiring writers
Speaker 1: and historians there's some good thoughts there. So all are
Speaker 1: welcome and Uh, I'm delighted to be on your show
Speaker 1: and help out any way. I can thank you again,
Speaker 1: And in the meantime, listeners, if you have anything you
Speaker 1: want to ask us about or topics you want to
Speaker 1: see us cover, you can hit Ben or up. As
Speaker 1: individual human people on the Internet, I am on Instagram
Speaker 1: exclusively at how now Noel Brown, Ben Boland. Where can
Speaker 1: the find folks out in the internet world find you? Oh? No,
Speaker 1: thank you so much for asking Uh. In a burst
Speaker 1: of creativity, you can buy me on Instagram where I'm
Speaker 1: at ben Bowling b o w l I n uh.
Speaker 1: If you are more Twitter inclined, you can find me
Speaker 1: at ben Bowling hs W. The big win for people
Speaker 1: on Twitter is that there you can also find our
Speaker 1: very own super producer, Mr Max Williams. Yes, you can
Speaker 1: find me at Ahl Underscore Max Williams. That is my
Speaker 1: address on Twitter. Thanks as always to Max Williams. Thanks
Speaker 1: to our composer. We have a composer, Mr Alex Williams thinking.
Speaker 1: Thanks again to Mr David A. Cleveland. Uh noll. This
Speaker 1: this is one of those uh. This is one of
Speaker 1: those conversations that makes our collective day. I think it's true.
Speaker 1: It's one that's hard, hard to wrap up, but you
Speaker 1: gotta do it. People got stuff to do. It's Friday. Um,
Speaker 1: We'll see you next time, folks. For more podcasts from iHeartRadio,
Speaker 1: visit the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen
Speaker 1: to your favorite shows.