So you put out your interview with him and because he...

I don't know why he freaked out like he did, but he accused you of weaponizing it simply for putting out clips from it and putting out the interview in full.

And during the interview, you mentioned to him how you would love to not be the only person in conversation with progressive proxy warriors that they should actually debate and engage in discussions with progressive who don't support the proxy or new crane.

And how does he respond when you mention me and Max Blumenthal? He accuses Max, like reflexively, he says that Max Blumenthal is in the pay of Putin.

Max Blumenthal, these people are Putin. Now this guy is really in the pay of Putin.

I just disagree. No, Max Blumenthal, I really...

Which is a smear, it's a blatant lie and he should retract it, but just know how quickly he goes to saying that he doesn't even think before lodging such an explosive allegation that somebody...

Who doesn't like because of his opinions and whatever Max said about Joe on Twitter must be in the pay of Putin.

It's such a throwback to the McCarthy era, but this time those promulgating it are self-identified progressives and someone like Joe Sirencioni who's done a lot of admirable work in his life, fighting nuclear proliferation and fighting the very kind of militarism that I think he's now been enlisted to promote.

And so the reaction you got all the hateful messages you got and the insults, I mean that's just what unfortunately we've been reduced to, especially in the last six years, but it goes back more napping the Russia Gate era.

When anybody who descents from the party line on whether or not Trump is a Russian asset, whether or not Russia launched this massive interference campaign that brainwashed millions of Americans into not voting for Hillary, whether or not it's wise to be using Ukraine as a proxy against Russia, anybody who descents from the party line on all this stuff.

And there's no attempt to engage in serious discussion. There's just this doubling down on name calling and smears and acting out when you simply commit the act of posting an interview as you do with Joe Sirencioni.

Yeah, I mean, Bronco, I want to ask you as someone who witnesses that is not involved party as it were. And also someone who writes for what is probably the flagship progressive left magazine that there is how you feel about how this conversation has been evolving on the left.

Because I got to say personally, I was surprised to see Joe's take on the CPC letter as someone who I've had on the show before and whose progressive work on nuclear nonproliferation, I really value I was surprised to see someone who's I consider in the left camp being so antagonistic to the letter.

Obviously Matt does was for the letter before he was against it. I mean, what's the conversation like in the left media space from your perspective.

I mean, I'll just like, first of all, that we are Jacob and I've been accused of both getting money from Putin and from the CIA over the years. We take it from both sides. I mean, as Aaron said, I think it's emblematic of this really alarming political climate that's erupted since the wars, really jingoistic climate that reminds me very much it reminds me of the McCarthy era for sure reminds me of the post 9 11 political climate where to try and explain what may have caused the September 11.

What the US role in contributing to the rise of anti American terrorism, you know, you'd be accused of being terrorists yourself or pro terrorists or you're justifying an apologizing for it.

So I think it's a really alarming climate. And you know, I actually recently wrote this piece. I spent a bit of time reading through the media coverage of the Cuban missile crisis, which I know people realize we just went through 60th anniversary.

I mean, at the same exact time that Joe Biden is talking about how we're close to to Armageddon, then we have been in decades that that was the exact time that the world was close to Armageddon back in the 1960s.

And I saw a lot of stuff that I wasn't surprised by a lot of the same arguments that people were making now about if you choose diplomacy over military escalation, you're an appeaser, the other side, the fanatics, they can't be trusted, they can't be reasoned with.

They just want to dominate the other side, some and so forth. All that stuff was there. But what surprised me actually was that in the 1960s.

And I remember this was the height of the Cold War. This was a few years out from the McCarthy era. And even so, there was a lot more space in October 1962 to talk about diplomacy.

...