Greta Van Susteren: How a toga party helped her become an accidental anchor (â1on1 with Jon Evansâ podcast)
Greta Van Susteren: A toga party helped her become an accidental anchor By Jon Evans | February 19, 2021 at 5:29 AM EST - Updated February 24 at 8:36 PM
WASHINGTON, DC. (WECT) - Greta Van Susteren has spent more than 25 years working in television, hosting shows on CNN, Fox News, MSNBC and Voice of America. The on-camera career began while Van Susteren practiced law in Washington, DC, and the Wisconsin native always thought sheâd return to the legal profession full-time.
âIâm the accidental anchor, I never saw TV as a permanent job for me,â said Van Susteren, who is now Chief National Political Analyst for Gray TV, and host of
Russ Isabella/USA TODAY SportsStanford coach David Shaw talks about preparing for Arizona State and the Sun Devils improvement.
Thursday, Scott Van Pelt covers the news that Jameis Winston will not be charged after the sexual assault investigation and much more. Listen to the best highlights of the show below!
Stanford coach David Shaw dishes on Arizona State s improvement, preparing for the Pac-12 title game, what determines a successful season, the new CFB Playoff system and more. Listen
Patriots RB Shane Vereen shares his thoughts on his wrist injury, his role in the Patriots attack, the jelling of New England s offense and more. Listen
out there or was there actually leaks coming out of the new york office? if you go back and look at comey s decision making around the e-mail decision, one of the concerns comey had was going to get a warrant in new york which they thought they needed from a judge to look at the huma abedin, anthony weiner e-mails. they were afraid if they did that, it would leak and comey thought he had to own that decision. i do not have evidence that rudy guiliani was by any means in comey s head on anything like that or that was something comey was worried about. the new york office is notoriously a leak one. a few weeks ago after john dowd quit the team because he concluded the president wasn t listening to him, we quoted a legal expert named roger cossack who said that trump was looking for someone that had the silver bullet that was going to tell him what he wanted to hear. if you line that up with giuliani who says i know how to
visiting professor at pepperdine university law school out here and an espn legal analyst. and steve lopez, as if to prove my point, new york times this morning, gay couples cheer ruling on marriage from provincetown, massachusetts. so when the media described this ruling as a historic or a landmark ruling as opposed to controversial or divisive as in the case of the arizona immigration law, is there kind of a wink and a nod that we think this is generally a good thing? i don t think anybody knew what to expect with this decision. i didn t know what was going to happen. and i think that we re just responding to the reaction to it. this is a time i think when you want to hear from the victors. but there have been both sides represented. it s i think a good ruling. but this story will go on for years. clearly, more appeals to come. and roger cossack, regardless of what you think of the ruling, i think in 20 years gay marriage will be widely accepted because of the views of the yo
runs a restaurant that employs a lot of gay people. and there were boycotts. there were police in the streets because there were demonstrations. and i thought, you know, her politics are her politics. do you want to go after every person economically, hit them in their wallet because of their political views? i didn t think it was quite fair. roger cossack, do you agree with jill stewart that this is a subject in which it s very difficult for journalists to put their personal feelings aside? well, i do agree with that, but i do jill, i have to disagree with you. i thought the coverage of this story did underline the fact that this was a decision that overturned what the voters did. and i do agree with you that that is a big story. but i think that in writing this story you understand that proposition 8 was a proposition that was voted upon by the voters of california and now a judge has held that to be unconstitutional. that s how it got to the court. and yes, the story is that a