Latest news with #PivotPodcast
Time of India
5 days ago
- Entertainment
- Time of India
'I don't like that': Travis Hunter's prenup decision with Leanna Lenee raise eyebrows as Channing Crowder and fans raise concerns
Travis Hunter and Leanna Lenee were dating for a couple of years.(Image via Travis Hunter/Instagram) Travis Hunter and his wife, Leanna Lenee, looked ecstatic as videos of their beautiful Tennessee wedding went viral last weekend. Both Travis Hunter and Leanna Lenee looked deeply in love with each other but fans have not been too kind to the couple. While many famous artists had advised Travis Hunter not to tie the knot with Leanna Lenee, there are some concerns about a prenup, and former NFL star Channing Crowder has weighed in on it. Channing Crowder spoke about Travis Hunter not signing a prenup before marrying Leanna Lenee and fans have similar concerns Ryan Clark, Channing, Fred on dealing with loss, clear air on Belichick Jordon Hudson & NBA Finals Recently, former NFL player Channing Crowder spoke about Travis Hunter's decision to not sign a prenup before he tied the knot with Leanna Lenee on the Pivot Podcast. Channing Crowder said, 'Information I've gained and the pictures I've seen, and I respect Travis all too much, when you say that you're about to say something mean about somebody. I heard there was no prenup, I don't like that, this man's about to be an MVP type candidate.' Channing Crowder added, 'I think he'll be an All-Pro Corner, I think he'll be a very good Receiver. We've heard the stories of the past, how when they were getting together how she called the man ugly. I don't like all that. I don't like it, I don't like those stories. I don't like those things coming out about a young man I respect.' Fans too have similar concerns about the recent Heisman Trophy winner. A fan took to X and posted, 'He is about to make way more money… the only thing the prenup would be able to stop her from touching is his signing bonus. Prenup or not.. everything he earns while married is half hers. That's the way it works and prenups dont stop that.' Another fan joked, 'Congrats on Leanna on signing a four years Fully guaranteed $23.325 millions contract', while a third fan posted, 'His career is cook. She'll have his head in knots and walk with half that.@DeionSanders should have coached him better.' Another fan wrote, 'makes since now why Deion and family didn't show. Deion said he wanted to do Travis prenup while playing at Jackson State, guess that didn't pan out.' Travis Hunter and his wife, Leanna Lenee, are staying away from all the controversies Both Travis Hunter and Leanna Lenee have remained unbothered about the controversies surrounding their beautiful wedding. While fans have continued to troll Leanna Lenee and called her a 'gold digger', Travis Hunter stood by her and even gifted her a brand new Mercedes-Benz AMG G35 at their wedding. Also Read: "She's playing the long game": Travis Hunter's wedding clip with wife Leanna Lenee sparks bizarre speculation among fans
Yahoo
6 days ago
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
Ryan Clark acknowledges coordination with Bill Belichick over editing of Pivot interview
The Pivot Podcast episode featuring an interview with Bill Belichick could be destined to serve as the basis for an episode of Pablo Torre Finds Out. After the extended Memorial Day weekend, which operates as a de facto hard reset for many media narratives and storylines, Channing Crowder of The Pivot Podcast issued a public apology for things he had said more than a week earlier about Belichick's 24-year-old girlfriend/publicist/handler/idea mill/creative muse Jordon Hudson. Which brought the story back to the front burner. Again. Among other things, Crowder had said Hudson "choreographed" the interview. After Crowder apologized, co-host Ryan Clark denied that the interview was "choreographed." While then explaining several things about the interview that sounded a lot like, you know, choreography. We published an article (it's available here) and posted a link on Twitter. Clark retweeted our link with this message: "Well Mike. It wasn't a pre-show meeting. Both Channing & Fred [Taylor] were on the same flight delayed from Miami. I was already in NY. So I was there first. As for serving the viewers we will not do that at the expense of people who volunteer to give us their time. We have had various reasons for edits, & exemptions. From contractual agreements, second thoughts, or just not liking how it felt. Moving slimy in the name of clicks is not worth the integrity of our show. Jordon was not contacted nor involved in any conversation about the timing in which what we documented could be released. That conversation took place between Bill & I." Clark's message ignores most of the points we made. Why was Hudson involved in a 90-minute meeting before the interview started? Why was what would have been the first EXCLUSIVE! sit-down with Belichick and Hudson not released? What does this mean, and how was it reflected in the interview process, or the editing? 'Jordon wanted to be represented in a certain way, wanted their relationship to be represented in a certain way. . . . And the conversations we had afterwards, before the show was released, what we'll show or what can we show about Bill speaking about her and the rest of our interview?' By insisting that Hudson had no control over the interview, Clark seems to be saying Belichick exercised extensive control over the interview. Clark also may have revealed that some sort of "contractual agreement" covered the Belichick interview. Then there's this comment: "As for serving the viewers we will not do that at the expense of people who volunteer to give us their time." At some level, that's fair. No one should expect an interviewer to try to attack the reputation of or destroy the relationship with the subject of the interview. But it's not normal for an interviewer (when the interviewer is an actual journalist) to coordinate with the subject of the interview before, during, or after the interview. It's also not normal for an interviewer to get approval from the subject of the interview as to the questions that will be asked and/or the answers that will be used, and those that will land on the cutting-room floor. Frankly, it feels as if Clark allowed himself to become part of Belichick's external P.R. team. Exercising journalistic freedom and integrity doesn't mean Clark should have "mov[ed] slimy in the name of clicks." However, at the other extreme resides the danger of moving slimy in the name of access. And friendship. And financial gain. And whatever else led to a one-on-one between Clark and Belichick that seemed every bit as choreographed as a lawyer conducting a scripted direct examination of a star witness — especially during the part where Clark seemingly aided and abetted the airing of Belichick's ongoing beef with CBS. In summary, there's something very strange about all of this. The more Crowder and Clark talk about it, the stranger it gets. There apparently were communications between Clark and Belichick, after the interview ended, regarding how it would be edited and presented. There could be a "contractual agreement" regarding the interview. There's definitely raw video of Clark interviewing Belichick and Hudson together. So, yes, this looks like a job for Pablo Torre Finds Out.
NBC Sports
6 days ago
- Entertainment
- NBC Sports
Ryan Clark acknowledges coordination with Bill Belichick over editing of Pivot interview
The Pivot Podcast episode featuring an interview with Bill Belichick could be destined to serve as the basis for an episode of Pablo Torre Finds Out. After the extended Memorial Day weekend, which operates as a de facto hard reset for many media narratives and storylines, Channing Crowder of The Pivot Podcast issued a public apology for things he had said more than a week earlier about Belichick's 24-year-old girlfriend/publicist/handler/idea mill/creative muse Jordon Hudson. Which brought the story back to the front burner. Again. Among other things, Crowder had said Hudson 'choreographed' the interview. After Crowder apologized, co-host Ryan Clark denied that the interview was 'choreographed.' While then explaining several things about the interview that sounded a lot like, you know, choreography. We published an article (it's available here) and posted a link on Twitter. Clark retweeted our link with this message: 'Well Mike. It wasn't a pre-show meeting. Both Channing & Fred [Taylor] were on the same flight delayed from Miami. I was already in NY. So I was there first. As for serving the viewers we will not do that at the expense of people who volunteer to give us their time. We have had various reasons for edits, & exemptions. From contractual agreements, second thoughts, or just not liking how it felt. Moving slimy in the name of clicks is not worth the integrity of our show. Jordon was not contacted nor involved in any conversation about the timing in which what we documented could be released. That conversation took place between Bill & I.' Clark's message ignores most of the points we made. Why was Hudson involved in a 90-minute meeting before the interview started? Why was what would have been the first EXCLUSIVE! sit-down with Belichick and Hudson not released? What does this mean, and how was it reflected in the interview process, or the editing? 'Jordon wanted to be represented in a certain way, wanted their relationship to be represented in a certain way. . . . And the conversations we had afterwards, before the show was released, what we'll show or what can we show about Bill speaking about her and the rest of our interview?' By insisting that Hudson had no control over the interview, Clark seems to be saying Belichick exercised extensive control over the interview. Clark also may have revealed that some sort of 'contractual agreement' covered the Belichick interview. Then there's this comment: 'As for serving the viewers we will not do that at the expense of people who volunteer to give us their time.' At some level, that's fair. No one should expect an interviewer to try to attack the reputation of or destroy the relationship with the subject of the interview. But it's not normal for an interviewer (when the interviewer is an actual journalist) to coordinate with the subject of the interview before, during, or after the interview. It's also not normal for an interviewer to get approval from the subject of the interview as to the questions that will be asked and/or the answers that will be used, and those that will land on the cutting-room floor. Frankly, it feels as if Clark allowed himself to become part of Belichick's external P.R. team. Exercising journalistic freedom and integrity doesn't mean Clark should have 'mov[ed] slimy in the name of clicks.' However, at the other extreme resides the danger of moving slimy in the name of access. And friendship. And financial gain. And whatever else led to a one-on-one between Clark and Belichick that seemed every bit as choreographed as a lawyer conducting a scripted direct examination of a star witness — especially during the part where Clark seemingly aided and abetted the airing of Belichick's ongoing beef with CBS. In summary, there's something very strange about all of this. The more Crowder and Clark talk about it, the stranger it gets. There apparently were communications between Clark and Belichick, after the interview ended, regarding how it would be edited and presented. There could be a 'contractual agreement' regarding the interview. There's definitely raw video of Clark interviewing Belichick and Hudson together. So, yes, this looks like a job for Pablo Torre Finds Out.
Yahoo
24-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Biden family's narcissism 'severely f-----' the country, says liberal NYU professor
NYU professor and liberal podcast host Scott Galloway criticized the Biden family this week, saying its "narcissism" has hurt the country. During a recent episode of his "Pivot" podcast that he co-hosts with journalist Kara Swisher, the pundit argued that the way former President Biden botched the 2024 election for the Democratic Party will be his "legacy." Speaking of how Biden ensured former Vice President Kamala Harris would be his replacement on the campaign trail last year, he said, "The reality is she was not a strong candidate and President Biden and his family's narcissism have severely f----- this country. Severely. And that is his legacy." New Book Reveals Biden's Inner Circle Worried About His Age Years Before Botched Debate Performance Galloway began his point by stating that the party should have had a primary following Biden withdrawing from the race so that the best possible candidate could have beaten then-GOP candidate Donald Trump. "I was Saturday afternoon quarterbacking," he said. "I said have a mini 'Shark Tank'-like primary with the best eight candidates – go from two debates with eight, then to four, then to two. It would have dominated the media cycle." Read On The Fox News App Galloway added that Harris was "not a great candidate," though he praised her efforts in trying to replace her boss. "I think she did a good job given the hand she was dealt with, but this is a candidate who didn't make it to Iowa four years earlier, which says to me America didn't think of her as a great candidate." Jake Tapper Declares Biden White House Lied About 'Cheap Fakes' After Cnn Peddled Narrative In 2024 In 2024, Galloway recorded a video for Democrats voting from abroad. In January 2025, he posted an article on Medium with the title "How to Survive the Next Four Years." The former president has been criticized by his own party in the months following the election for not dropping out of the race soon enough and leaving room for a Democratic primary. Former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., argued days after the election that "had the president gotten out sooner, there may have been other candidates in the race." She added, "The anticipation was that, if the president were to step aside, there would be an open primary." Former Harris surrogate and DNC fundraiser, Lindy Li, also grilled Biden for endorsing Harris immediately after dropping out, saying the move headed off a primary. "I actually think President Biden, you know, the whole endorsing her thirty minutes after he dropped out, I think that was a big f-you to the party," she said several days after Trump's victory. Click Here For More Coverage Of Media And Culture Other Democratic figures have said Biden compounded this problem by demanding that Harris stay in lockstep with his presidential agenda. According to a recent book written by journalists Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes, the former president "would say publicly that Harris should do what she must to win. But privately, including in conversations with her, he repeated an admonition: Let there be no daylight between us." During the podcast, Galloway added that Biden's insistence on Harris running, and her subsequent loss will be how he's remembered. "I will get s--- for this because people are correctly feeling empathy for him, but his legacy, in my view, has been ruined by this," he said. Reps for Biden did not immediately reply to Fox News Digital's request for article source: Biden family's narcissism 'severely f-----' the country, says liberal NYU professor
Fox News
24-05-2025
- Politics
- Fox News
Biden family's narcissism 'severely f-----' the country, says liberal NYU professor
NYU professor and liberal podcast host Scott Galloway criticized the Biden family this week, saying its "narcissism" has hurt the country. During a recent episode of his "Pivot" podcast that he co-hosts with journalist Kara Swisher, the pundit argued that the way former President Biden botched the 2024 election for the Democratic Party will be his "legacy." Speaking of how Biden ensured former Vice President Kamala Harris would be his replacement on the campaign trail last year, he said, "The reality is she was not a strong candidate and President Biden and his family's narcissism have severely f----- this country. Severely. And that is his legacy." Galloway began his point by stating that the party should have had a primary following Biden withdrawing from the race so that the best possible candidate could have beaten then-GOP candidate Donald Trump. "I was Saturday afternoon quarterbacking," he said. "I said have a mini 'Shark Tank'-like primary with the best eight candidates – go from two debates with eight, then to four, then to two. It would have dominated the media cycle." Galloway added that Harris was "not a great candidate," though he praised her efforts in trying to replace her boss. "I think she did a good job given the hand she was dealt with, but this is a candidate who didn't make it to Iowa four years earlier, which says to me America didn't think of her as a great candidate." In 2024, Galloway recorded a video for Democrats voting from abroad. In January 2025, he posted an article on Medium with the title "How to Survive the Next Four Years." The former president has been criticized by his own party in the months following the election for not dropping out of the race soon enough and leaving room for a Democratic primary. Former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., argued days after the election that "had the president gotten out sooner, there may have been other candidates in the race." She added, "The anticipation was that, if the president were to step aside, there would be an open primary." Former Harris surrogate and DNC fundraiser, Lindy Li, also grilled Biden for endorsing Harris immediately after dropping out, saying the move headed off a primary. "I actually think President Biden, you know, the whole endorsing her thirty minutes after he dropped out, I think that was a big f-you to the party," she said several days after Trump's victory. Other Democratic figures have said Biden compounded this problem by demanding that Harris stay in lockstep with his presidential agenda. According to a recent book written by journalists Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes, the former president "would say publicly that Harris should do what she must to win. But privately, including in conversations with her, he repeated an admonition: Let there be no daylight between us." During the podcast, Galloway added that Biden's insistence on Harris running, and her subsequent loss will be how he's remembered. "I will get s--- for this because people are correctly feeling empathy for him, but his legacy, in my view, has been ruined by this," he said. Reps for Biden did not immediately reply to Fox News Digital's request for comment.
