Return to Transcripts main page

Smerconish

National Debate Over The Costs And Benefits Of Data Centers; Atlantic: Trump Plans Midterm Ads Touting His Record. Trump Order U.S. To Call Lake Ontario "Lake America"; Former NBA Players Challenge WNBA Eligibility Rules; Interview With "Inside The NBA" Analyst And Former NBA Player Charles Barkley. Aired 9-10a ET

Aired August 29, 2026 - 09:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:00:29]

MICHAEL SMERCONISH, CNN ANCHOR: Politicians say they love data, they just hate data centers I'm Michael Smerconish in the Philly burbs. Who would have guessed a couple of months ago that data centers would become such a hot political issue? And some of it is not even homegrown. As reported on Thursday, roughly 200 accounts on X stirring up opposition to data centers may have been generated by Chinese bot farms, but no matter the cause, the resistance, it's spread fast. Across the nation, town halls are packed with angry residents demanding to be heard. And politicians, they're getting the message.

As the New York Times put it earlier this week, data centers have become the unlikely fault lines in the broader fight over an AI revolution. Politicians are racing to tap into that backlash or inoculate themselves, as political strategists in both parties describe the issue as an unusually fast moving force. Polls show the public is loud and clear on how they feel about such centers, at least in their own backyards. For instance, Gallup says 71 percent of Americans don't want data centers nearby. Right here in Pennsylvania, Quinnipiac has voters 74-16 against.

That's about as uniform as opposition can get, and it crosses party lines. It's not just Democrats. Republicans alone, 64-25 against. So somewhat predictably, most politicians are now foursquare against them. Data centers were becoming a wedge issue, favoring Democrats, so Republicans who once welcomed them are doing it about face.

Not that Democrats can't turn as well, Pennsylvania's governor Josh Shapiro was once a champion. Last summer, at a summit attended by President Trump and other Republicans, he applauded corporations that built such centers but he's now come around. Just this week, on Tuesday, he signed an executive order that in essence empowers the state to block such facilities. And he couldn't have been clear as to where he now stands.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) GOV. JOSH SHAPIRO (D), PENNSYLVANIA: I will sign that executive order to put in place the nation's strictest guardrails on AI data centers. Guardrails that will hold these greedy developers accountable, that will stop bad projects, and put more power back into the hands of the local communities.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SMERCONISH: The one Notable politician who seems willing to go against the grain is a man who often plays the contrarian role. That would be Senator John Fetterman, who decries the political pandering and hyperbole over data centers and warns that China continues to fuel and benefit from our overreaction.

Meanwhile, the issue has generated so much anger that Jason Kelce is now channeling those feelings in a new commercial. Rather than describe it, let me show it to you.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JASON KELCE, FOOTBALL PLAYER: AI data centers waste millions of gallons of water. That's why liquid death and garage beer have decided to team up. We want your pee to cool these data centers.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We want your pee. Please give us your pee. Let's be on computers together.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SMERCONISH: Pretty coarse, right? The argument behind the anger, it goes like this, data centers strain power grids, they raise utility bills, they drain away local water, create noise pollution, and ultimately don't create many permanent jobs, maybe even take them away by promoting AI. On top of which, they say powerful developers are bullying communities, often procuring NDAs from local municipalities that leave the public in the dark, trying to force these centers on an unwilling public. The supporters of data centers, they have arguments, of course. They claim we need them to help the economy thrive and that they will pour tax revenue into school districts that badly need it, and that that parade of horribles listed by the opposition are either incorrect or greatly exaggerated.

They also note that foreign countries are hoping we fall back on development so that they can leap frog us. Certainly overseas competition is a concern. On Wednesday, I asked my audience which is worse, building data centers or losing to China, the AI race that they power. I was surprised by the result. By a vote of almost two to one, they were more worried about losing to China. And those bot farms, they're not new.

Not long ago, the New York Times ran an article showing how China, Russia and Iran are trying to manipulate the debate that we're having. The article showed an example of an AI generated propaganda that originated in China, but was designed to look like it came from an American source. You can see the caricature of a cigar smoking developer holding money bags as he exploits the average citizens. All of which makes data center developers, politically speaking, public enemy number one.

[09:05:02]

Brian O'Neill is one of the largest developers in Pennsylvania. He's been at it for decades, building all sorts of structures, residential and retail. His niche is repurposing old industrial sites. And now he's hoping to build some data centers in southeastern Pennsylvania. These are not small projects. He thinks big.

According to him, the total tab will be around 18 bil. But he's facing pushback from the public, from local communities, and from the top. When Governor Shapiro talks about fighting developers, Brian O'Neill is the one that he was referring to.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SHAPIRO: One developer is trying to bully his way into forcing data center projects through local opposition from the community and opposition from local elected officials. Instead of actually respecting those residents, of listening to them, of understanding their concerns, in trying to work with them, the developer instead is trying to sue his way into building those data centers. And in its place, he is creating a whole lot of chaos. And he's stoking a lot of fear and angst amongst the community, even though he has no realistic path to getting power to any of these sites anytime soon.

Here's something else he has no realistic path of getting, and that is my support. I'm a hell no on that project. I'm a hell no on many other projects across Pennsylvania, and they will not happen on my watch.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SMERCONISH: The developer Governor Shapiro was talking about joins me now. This is Brian O'Neill.

So, Brian, hell no, he says to you. What's your response?

BRIAN O'NEILL, REAL ESTATE DEVELOPER: Well, really what he's saying to the world is there needs to be rules around how you build data centers. And that's absolutely a fact. The good news is that every one of our data centers does not use electricity, is 100 percent (inaudible), does not create light pollution, does not use water, has been designed to address all the things that the government wants to see happening. And part of that he deserves credit for because we worked with several members of his team, which are extremely bright and business friendly, for over two years. And we work together to come up with a set of standards that make sense.

Unfortunately, the facts around our data centers and other data centers lag behind the press. And that's our job. We have to do a better job of communicating. Thank you, Michael, for having me here today. But I assure you no one's able to build a data center today that isn't 100 percent compliant.

We have enormous investments and we want to make sure that we're 100 percent compliant. And we applaud the governor for everything he's trying to do because we think it'll make it a better industry and we've been working with him for over two years now. So as much as, you know, the press would make it look like this is a tumultuous moment for our industry, it's actually a glorious moment because it's a time that we can focus in on brackets and rules to help us all understand what's right and what's wrong and do the right thing.

SMERCONISH: Do you see a hand of foreign manipulation as it relates to your projects or others as I described in the introduction today?

O'NEILL: Well, 100 percent, Michael. So the Chinese decide they're going to build 100 million square foot data center and they just build it. If anybody oppose it, they put them in jail. As we know, they're in a race to beat us. We're ahead right now with ChatGPT, OpenAI, Anthropic and other companies, but they're catching up fast.

And you know, this is a national security issue. This is personal data issue. This is a personal security issue. You think about the transformation of war in Ukraine and we're seeing in Iran, it's all being driven on data and it all runs through data centers. We're flying drones, we're not sending missiles as much.

And if we lose to the Chinese, we're all going to be speaking Chinese in 10 years. And you know, that's what --

SMERCONISH: Brian, respond to the -- respond to the criticism that the jobs you create are short term.

O'NEILL: So I'll give you three statistics. First of all, we are creating 26,000 construction jobs for four years, then almost 3,000 jobs across our building forever. And the jobs we create are for high school graduates and they pay $130,000 a year. That's particularly important to me because I never graduated high school. So I want to make sure that other people that weren't as fortunate as me but are in the same plight can get access to these great paying jobs.

And so thousands of jobs every year. And then the other thing is technology evolves. And if you look at Loudoun County, Virginia, the construction jobs never leave because they're always changing out chips, revising cooling systems, coming up with new technology and new ways to deliver faster, better compute power. And that needs a lot of electricians and sheet metal workers and plumbers and other people who are on those jobs forever. So this is a major job creator.

I give you --

[09:10:26]

SMERCONISH: Quick final question because I'm limited on time, you must respond to the Jason Kelce commercial. I thought it was gross. I mean, I get the attempt at humor, but, you know, I'm thinking anthrax post, September 11th. We don't want people mailing urine to data center developers. Your reaction to Kelce is what?

O'NEILL: So I like Jason Kelce. I love his wife, and I think he's great for Philadelphia. I just think he had a supreme lapse of judgment in putting this commercial together and didn't think about the impact of somebody that is sick with a contagious disease sending a bottle of urine to an innocent employee and protect -- you know, potentially infecting a whole company. I think if he did --

SMERCONISH: Yes. That's --

O'NEILL: -- he wouldn't have made that commercial.

SMERCONISH: That's the reaction that I had as well.

O'NEILL: What is that?

SMERCONISH: Thank you, Brian O'Neill. We appreciate it very much.

O'NEILL: Yes.

SMERCONISH: And everybody at home hit me up on social media during the course of the program. I'll read some of your responses as the hour progresses.

A real Sophie's Choice. If you don't build, you risk falling behind in the AI race and implementation of cutting edge systems. And if you do, you risk water, soil, community. No roadmap for where we want to end up.

Bad News Bear, I get that's the way that it's presented. And like everybody else, it's like I don't want it in my backyard given what I've heard. But some of the data that he just offered, I think levels the playing surface and maybe we do need to learn more.

With regard to today's poll question, I want to say something. This one requires an explanation. I want to start by saying that I'm normally a trial junkie. As a lawyer, I gravitate toward high profile civil and criminal cases, but not the Lindsay Clancy trial. I find the subject matter too difficult to digest.

But of course, it's hard to miss this Massachusetts murder case that has so many spellbound. I have followed it at an arm's length. I think that's the way that I would say it. And the outlines are unavoidable and so damn Sad. Cora was five, Dawson was three, Callan, seven months.

Their mother killed them in the family's Duxbury home on January 2020 -- January 24, 2023. And that's not in dispute, right? The trial was never about the act. It's about the mind behind it, which is why the jury now has five choices instead of two. First degree murder requires premeditation, a decision thought on, however briefly, before it was carried out.

Mandatory life, no parole if that's the case. Secondary requires the intent to kill but not the forethought. Life with a shot at parole someday would be the punishment. Manslaughter requires neither. Only conduct so reckless that death followed 20 years at the outside.

There's also a straight acquittal and then a verdict that sits off that ladder entirely, not criminally responsible. It concedes that she did it. It asks something else. Did mental illness leave her unable to appreciate what she was doing was wrong or unable to stop herself? And either one of those is enough.

Here's the part that surprises many people. The commonwealth has to disprove that beyond a reasonable doubt. In other words, she never had to prove that she was insane. And it's no walk if that's the outcome. It's a locked psychiatric hospital.

Her lawyers say postpartum psychosis and a voice in her head. Prosecutors say a mother who no longer wanted to live and decided her children wouldn't either. Twelve people went home on Friday without an answer within 10 hours over two days and they'll come back on Monday.

I want to know what you think. Go to my website at smerconish.com this is today's poll question, would you find Lindsey Clancy guilty of murder? Results at the end of the hour.

Up ahead, President Trump will not be on the ballot this November, but he wants voters to act as though he is. Why the Republican midterm strategy may come down to one bet more Trump.

[09:14:16]

And have we wronged Canada? Why a former U.S. ambassador says we owe our neighbors to the north an apology? When you're voting on the poll question, please register for my newsletter. It's free, it's worthy. And you'll get the work of illustrators, including Eric Allie.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SMERCONISH: The midterm elections fast approaching. President Trump will not be on the ballot, but he wants voters to act as though he is. The Atlantic reporting that during a meeting over how to spend his Super PAC's roughly $400 million campaign war chest, Trump made his pitch, use part of the money to run ads promoting his own record. His advisers argued that his poor polling reflects in part that voters still do not know enough about his accomplishments.

And Trump's argument? Democrats will make the midterms a referendum on him anyway, so he may as well do it on his terms. Critics of the strategy, they argue the money should focus on individual candidates and local issues. There's the risk that the president nationalizes the election around his low approval ratings and voters dissatisfaction with the economy.

Here to talk about it, CNN Senior Political Commentator, Republican strategist, former Trump campaign adviser, David Urban.

David, how much does the president care about the midterm elections? I've been dying to ask you this question. In other words, what's really going to change if they lose Republicans, the House, other than subpoena power now being in the hands of Democrats?

DAVID URBAN, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: He gets -- he'll get to argue with Hakeem Jeffries versus Mike Johnson. That's the -- I think that's the biggest part, right?

[09:20:00] I mean, Michael, your question is a fair one, right? Because I do believe that the president looks at the House. You've seen some of these interviews he's done where he says, look, structurally, you know, the president in power always loses. He seems almost resigned to the fact that it's going to happen.

And you know, I think he looks at the Democratic House as kind of feckless. He's faced them before, they've impeached him twice and, and he's gotten stronger. You know, his numbers have gone up each time he's been impeached and he's beaten them. So I think he views probably very little different changing. I would submit that's not correct because as you correctly point out, the subpoena power which they will be able to exert will be significantly different.

And I would suggest that the House Democrats will exercise very robust oversight, maybe not so much even on the administration, but on family members, friends of the administration, donors, and that will be truly, truly painful for those individuals.

SMERCONISH: From that Atlantic story, here's one of the graphs, "The solution Trump settled on, according to three people familiar with the meeting, was to lean into the Democratic strategy of focusing on himself. The president ordered a series of television advertisements about his own record that will serve as a backdrop to the hundreds of individual House and Senate contests." Is he playing right into Democrats hands by saying, OK, fine, make it about me?

URBAN: I mean, look, Michael, we've seen this before over and over again, right? Orange Man Bad is, you know, line number one in the Democratic playbook. You're going to have to present an alternative. Our own polling here, the latest polling that CNN has done, as my recollection is the end of July, Trump is at 38 percent.

But you know who's worse? Democrats. They're at 31 percent. You know who's even worse than that? Chuck Schumer at 12 percent.

So if it's a -- if it's truly, you know, a -- an election versus just a referendum on Donald Trump, if you compare and contrast, Democrats fare worse. And if you do point out some of the extreme positions held by the DSA.

Listen, Michael, on September 11th, I hope that every Democratic candidate in America who stood or who's campaigned with Hasan Piker is asked about his position on 9/11. Why don't you disavow? Why doesn't Abdul El-Sayed just completely disavow what Hassan Piker has said and campaign with him? I mean, truly horrific stuff about America deserving to be attacked on 9/11? I think you'll see a lot of that from the Trump campaign.

You'll see a lot about the tax cuts, no tax tips, and things that he has accomplished. And he's got to make the case forcefully and quickly.

SMERCONISH: I'm glad -- I'm glad that you referenced Democratic socialism because one of the lessons for me watching the primaries is how the Democratic socialists were significantly outspent and still won.

And it makes me ask, David Urban, this question, is money overrated in the midterms? In other words, we talk about Trump's war chest and the Republican advantage, but my sense is that the sentiment is already so baked in. What's the value of money in these midterm elections?

URBAN: Yes, you know, Michael, I always -- I always think of money. I mean, remember when Michael Bloomberg ran for president, he spent $500 million and he won like Northern Marianas, right? So if money were dispositive in politics, the wealthiest candidate would always win. And we know that's not the case.

Here's the reality, Michael, people understand their real life. They know what they experience. And so when a mom is coming home from Upper Darby or she's going home to her Upper -- home in Upper Darby, Pennsylvania and she's got 20 bucks in her pocket, she stops at Wawa to fill up her tank and get a hoagie for her kid, you know, that used to be something she could do. Now all of a sudden she takes out that $20 bill, looks at Andrew Jackson has got to make a decision on how much gas she puts in her tank or she can buy a sandwich for a kid.

You could spend as much advertising as you want. You can't change those people's feelings because they live it every day.

SMERCONISH: I think you're making my point.

David Urban, thank you so much. We appreciate it.

Back to everybody who's watching at home via social media, what's come in? Follow me on X, Facebook, YouTube.

Trump played his hand well and won the popular vote in 2024 against all odds. Yet we doubt that he cannot defeat a Democrat party that's in shambles right -- his voters come out for him. His voters -- you know, if he could, and obviously he can't, if he could run in 2028, again, it would be an impossible race to predict no matter what happens in the midterm. That's my point. Because he's got a unique constituency that will come out to vote for him.

And by the way, there's another constituency that wild horses couldn't stop from coming out to vote against him. So this is the intangible is whether it transfers when he's trying to energize the base. I don't know. We're going to find out.

Still to come, more social media reaction to today's program. Don't forget to go to the website at smerconish.com. I know it's so unsettling, but this is the question, would you find Lindsay Clancy guilty of murder? Yay or nay? Register for the newsletter while you're there.

[09:25:09]

Something else that I want you to watch. A former United States ambassador says America, President Trump has wronged Canada, and that we owe our neighbors to the north an apology. For what exactly? I asked him. You'll see it in just a moment. And then no transgender woman has ever played in the WNBA. So why are two former NBA players declaring for its draft? And why has one now been banned from Chicago Sky games? The protest putting the league's eligibility rules under scrutiny. Sir Charles Barkley will weigh in.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:30:00]

SMERCONISH: The trade fight between the United States and Canada escalated again this week. Last Saturday, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney walked away from trade talks after the Trump administration introduced new demands. Carney then announced matching tariffs on American goods, some as high as 50 percent. The White House says Canada has extracted a persistent average annual goods trade deficit of roughly 50 billion over the last decade, while refusing reciprocal access.

On Thursday, President Trump signed an executive order directing the federal government to rename Lake Ontario Lake America. The order does not control what Canada or international organizations call it.

Then Carney responded that the lake's name predates both countries, saying, Lake Ontario, then, now and always. It's the latest strain on a relationship already tested by tariffs and Trump's repeated talk of Canada becoming the 51st state.

I asked David L. Cohen, the former U.S. ambassador to Canada, what it will take to repair the relationship. He said we owe them an apology.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DAVID COHEN, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO CANADA: Still receive very warmly in Canada. And I -- and I apologize all the time. And I thank the Canadians and ask them to stick with us.

SMERCONISH: How do you -- I have to take a time out. But how do you -- how do you verbalize that? What are you apologizing for?

COHEN: I'm apologizing for the -- I'm apologizing for two things. I apologize for the aggressive and unjustified financial treatment of our current trade policies. And I apologize for the tone of the rhetoric that has been applied from the United States -- from certain quarters in the United States to Canada.

SMERCONISH: Yes, the aggressiveness of --

COHEN: Including --

SMERCONISH: I don't know who could dispute.

COHEN: -- including the so-called 51st state rhetoric.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SMERCONISH: It sounds like a poll question for Sunday. Here's some of your reaction to today's program so far. What do we have?

From Canada, Trump's midterms look pretty simple after all the noise, tariffs, threats and swinging. Yes. Did it actually make America better? We feel the fallout up here. Americans will decide whether the chaos was strategy or just chaos. Nice ballroom.

So, my SiriusXM radio program -- SiriusXM, the platform, reaches much of Canada. And when Ambassador Cohen was in studio with me this week, we went to the calls and pretty much took only Canadian callers, people who were voicing various degrees of unhappiness with the United States. Most of them just said they were hurt, you know?

And here's the observation that I -- that I make. I said this to Wolf Blitzer yesterday. Never in my life have I gone to bed worried about our northern border, right? I mean, they've been good neighbors. They've been good neighbors.

I want it fair. I want it fair. Trump leveled up NATO when it needed to be leveled up. I want it kept fair but the Canadians are good people.

More social media reaction. Here's another one. What do we have?

Guilty period. She knew what she was doing. Quit using mental illness as a cop out. Most people who have mental illness --

I got to say that, Shirley, if you had said that to me 10 years ago, I probably would have been like, hell yes, Shirley. You go girl. But the more that I've read, heard, learned about postpartum psychosis, I see it differently.

My heart breaks for everybody connected to that case. Everybody connected to that case. It is the poll question of the day today at Smerconish.com. I felt like I couldn't avoid it. The jury's out. I want to know what you're all thinking.

Would you -- would you find Lindsay Clancy guilty of murder? That's, you know, two first and second degree, two of the five choices that the jury has.

Still to come, Charles Barkley has a message for WNBA leaders after Enes Kanter Freedom's courtside confrontation. And as you might expect, he doesn't hold back. My conversation with him is just ahead. Be sure you're signing up for my newsletter. It's free and it's worthy at Smerconish.com.

By the way, I want to say this about Dolly Parton. She was like the last vestige of the monoculture. You know, something about which men, women, black, white, Asian, Latino, we all could unite, how she was able to do that. It's just really extraordinary and deserves to be saluted. That cartoon was drawn by Steve Breen. We'll be back in a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:38:44] SMERCONISH: The WNBA drawing more attention but less on the actual gameplay and more on the culture surrounding it. One recent flashpoint came after Indiana Fever guard Sophie Cunningham said that she opposes transgender women competing in women's sports. No transgender woman has ever played in the WNBA, but Cunningham's comments they set off a broader debate involving players and coaches, activists and fans.

Amid that debate, former NBA players Enes Kanter Freedom and Royce White said they now identify as women. They plan to enter the 2027 WNBA draft. Freedom said that his announcement was intended to challenge the league's eligibility rules.

Let's note that the WNBA's own rules say only women are eligible to play but the league has never publicly defined who that includes and has no published policy on transgender eligibility. Which brings me to last Sunday, when Freedom attended the Indiana Fever Chicago Sky game at Wintrust Arena. He sat courtside wearing a shirt that read, woman noun, adult human female.

Late in the third quarter, Sky guard Natasha Cloud confronted him. Security and several players moved between them. Freedom was ejected from the game and escorted away from the court area. The next day, sources around the league told CNN that Freedom and White are not eligible to play in the WNBA.

[09:40:00]

The sources characterized their declarations as publicity stunts intended to mock the league, and sow division. The WNBA has not issued a formal public ruling on their eligibility.

Freedom has since sent a letter to WNBA commissioner Cathy Engelbert requesting a review of his removal. He claims the league discriminated against his viewpoint and applied its rules selectively. This week, I asked NBA legend Sir Charles Barkley about Freedom's actions and the larger debate surrounding them.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHARLES BARKLEY, FORMER NBA PLAYER/ANALYST, "INSIDE THE NBA": First of all, I always support the gay community. I always support the transgender community. I got nothing but love and respect for gay people and transgender people. But under no circumstances do I think men should play against women. Zero.

I'm disappointed in Adam Silver and Cathy, the commissioner. First of all, you can't let stupid stuff go out to the internet, which is one of the worst things that will happen to the world. They should have come out two weeks ago before all this. Like, because people are looking for attention now just --

SMERCONISH: Including this guy?

BARKLEY: But he has a point, though. Because Cathy and Adam haven't said, hey, it's in the title, WNBA. We're not going to have transgender people in the WNBA, and we're not going to discuss it again. That's what Adam and Cathy should have done two or three weeks ago before they turn it over to the internet, and every fool, idiot, and jackass to have an opinion on.

Adam -- Adam should come out and Cathy, I like both of them a lot, women can -- there's no transgender people going to play in the WNBA. If you don't like it, kick rocks. We're not going -- and we're not going to discuss it anymore.

And Enes is trying to get attention because he -- listen, if he did all the operation things, no, we're not -- no, we're not doing that either. The WNBA is for women.

And listen, this is the last time we're going to discuss it. We're not going to turn it over to the fools on the internet. We're not going to turn it over to Congress and things like -- the WNBA is for women only, period. We're not going to discuss it again.

SMERCONISH: Why do you -- why do you think the WNBA has been slow to do what Charles Barkley is recommending? Do you think this is good for business? All this -- you don't -- you don't?

BARKLEY: No. No. I think -- I think the WNBA has had an awful year.

SMERCONISH: You do?

BARKLEY: I do.

SMERCONISH: Despite all the eyes now paying attention because of the controversy?

BARKLEY: I can't -- no. But when's the last time they got some good publicity?

SMERCONISH: Do, you know the old adage, though, Charles? There's no such thing as bad publicity.

BARKLEY: No. I don't think -- I don't think -- I don't think it works like that anymore, Michael.

SMERCONISH: You don't?

BARKLEY: I do not think it works like that. I love the WNBA. But we have -- when's the last time we -- between Sophie Cunningham who -- I can't believe people got mad at her for telling the truth. She said, no, I'm protecting girls. No, transvestites in the NBA.

SMERCONISH: That -- and that foul. That hard foul on her --

BARKLEY: It was dirty -- it was just a dirty play.

SMERCONISH: OK.

BARKLEY: But when's the last time you heard something positive about the WNBA? I can't even remember. And I'm a WNBA fan.

SMERCONISH: Right. BARKLEY: Like between this transgender, the hard dirty fouls, I'm like, yo, man. Because this was a great summer for them. They all got raises. They started making the money that they deserved. They expanded. They're going to increase games next season. But I can't remember the last time I heard something positive about the WNBA.

We're not in those times anymore. Because what's going to happen -- when's the NFL start, in two weeks?

SMERCONISH: Yes.

BARKLEY: Nobody's going to care about the WNBA.

SMERCONISH: Can I just say one other thing about that --

BARKLEY: Sure.

SMERCONISH: -- that hard foul with DiJonai?

BARKLEY: Yes.

SMERCONISH: So, I'm a very casual fan. OK?

BARKLEY: OK.

SMERCONISH: I'm not dialed in, although, I'm increasingly interested. But it seems to me that whenever the WNBA has a moment, it's a black and a white player.

I wanted to know the data as to whether there are more hard fouls when you've got black and white competition. I went looking for it. There was one peer reviewed study that I found, and then I spent way too much time going down a an A.I. rabbit hole.

But what I found was that it happens in the same rate you would expect it to.

BARKLEY: Yes.

SMERCONISH: In other words, there's not more black on white, white on black court violence.

BARKLEY: Yes.

SMERCONISH: Which tells me the media accentuates it. You give me a hard foul on Caitlin Clark --

BARKLEY: No. No. No, no, no. No, no, no, no. No, no, no, no --

SMERCONISH: We're going to roll it on a loop. On Fox they do.

BARKLEY: No, Michael, you're wrong -- no, you're wrong, though. The reason they made it black and white when that girl tweeted white privilege.

SMERCONISH: Yes. BARKLEY: That was stupid on her part.

SMERCONISH: Right.

BARKLEY: Like, that's why I said we can't turn our world over to the internet fools. And when she tweeted white privilege, that was 100 percent mistake. It was a dirty play, period. That would have been the end of it. But when you turn stuff, the internet, all the race hustlers start coming out.

[09:45:01]

We have a ton of race hustlers out there, white and black.

SMERCONISH: Yes, yes.

BARKLEY: Let me repeat that, white and black.

SMERCONISH: Yes.

BARKLEY: But we can't ever let them fools win. But when that young lady tweeted, white privilege, I said, oh --

SMERCONISH: But Charles, isn't this a tale as old as time? Like looking for Gerry Cooney to be the Great White Hope against Larry Holmes, or maybe against Mike Tyson, if I have my era straight? Or Bird and Magic Johnson. People like to see that sort of thing. And T.V. likes to accentuate it.

BARKLEY: Yes. Yes, but it was always positive with Larry and Magic. They're the two most important people in NBA history. You know, and I've said this before and I just said in the show the NBA was struggling before Magic and Bird. The average salary was $250,000, the average. Now, it's like 10 -- $12 million. All that started Magic and Bird.

Yes, with that racial undertones. But there was always respect. There's always respect. Those girls do not like Caitlin Clark or Sophie Cunningham.

SMERCONISH: Without regard for race? They just don't like them?

BARKLEY: I'm not going to get on here and call somebody a racist because I don't have any proof.

SMERCONISH: OK.

BARKLEY: Whether it's race, sexuality, or whatever, there's something going on there because most of the time when you see something, it has something to do with Caitlin or Sophie. I think those other women in the WNBA don't like them.

I think there's -- like I say, it's jealousy.

SMERCONISH: Right.

BARKLEY: I think it's a part of it.

SMERCONISH: Right.

BARKLEY: Race --

SMERCONISH: Yes.

BARKLEY: -- is a part of it, and sexuality is a part of it. Now, I don't know how much, but I'm comfortable saying they don't like Caitlin. I have no idea why. She's just a really good basketball player.

Same thing with Sophie. She's a good player, but I think it has something to do with sexuality, race and jealousy. I think it's all three of them. I don't know how you break up the percentages.

SMERCONISH: Provocative?

BARKLEY: Provocative.

SMERCONISH: Yes.

BARKLEY: Let me tell you something. I have great respect for Carrie (ph) but there is some -- there's something going on with those women, period. Like I say -- and I do. And like I say, we can split it up. They're either jealous, sexuality, or race.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SMERCONISH: Can I say something about Charles before we do social media? Earlier in the program, noting the passing of Dolly Parton, I said, like the last vestige of the monoculture, like the days when Mash signed off and two-thirds of the country watched in real time, then went to work the next day and talked to all their coworkers and neighbors about what they'd seen. And I said that Dolly Parton represented the monoculture because we all loved her for different reasons. We all loved her.

I feel the same way about Charles. He is such a unifying force. And my radio audience, everybody, you know, they disagree with him, but he's a gentleman. But everybody buys into that guy. Everybody wanted him to run for office.

OK, social media reaction. Thank you for that. This is from the world of X.

No, I would not find her guilty of murder or guilty of manslaughter. I would give her as many years in a suitable mental facility.

Debra, relative to Lindsay Clancy, and this is not to give her a hall pass, but I can't imagine -- I can't imagine what it feels like to be in her skin for any second of any day. In moments of lucidity, I guess, I'm tipping my hand when I say, in moments of lucidity, and having to deal with what she's done.

And I'm not saying that should -- that should end it. But nothing -- that nothing that comes out of this trial, nothing that comes out of this trial is going to compare to the torture that I would imagine she already faces.

You still have time to vote on today's poll question at Smerconish.com. Would you find Lindsay Clancy guilty of murder?

When you're there voting, register for the newsletter. It's free. It's worthy. You'll love it. Among the features editorial cartoonists like this from Rob Rogers.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:53:24]

SMERCONISH: Well, I had no idea what to expect with this one, 28,364 voted as of a few moments ago. Would you find Lindsay Clancy guilty of murder?

Fifty-three percent say, yes. Forty -- remember, it takes them all, right? It takes them all. Unanimous verdict is what's necessary. And the burden is on the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Fifty-three percent say, yes. Forty-seven percent say, no.

I think -- I think that there -- you could read those tea leaves. Perhaps, it's not scientific. It's just interesting. And see which way this may end up. We'll find out early this week, perhaps.

More social media reaction. What else do we have to today's program? Follow me on X and go to my Facebook page, YouTube, all that stuff.

Liquid Death commercial was disgusting. Now, all I can think of is urine when I see Liquid Death. What horrible marketing.

I thought so, too. Listen, I'm a Jason Kelce fan, yes, for all that he did for the Philadelphia Eagles, but because he's a gifted communicator. Well, not there. OK. Not when he's urinating. OK.

How can I make my argument about how skilled he is when you're showing that? Come on, take that off the screen.

Jason Kelce delivered -- I'm a fan of the spoken word. He delivered one of the greatest speeches ever. This is going to sound nutty. I put what he did at the Eagles' victory parade when he was in Mummers regalia, look it up, up there with, you know, we're going to fight on the beaches and we'll never surrender.

Honestly, I was so blown away. But to use that gift that he has in such a coarse and disgusting way -- now, I'm going to make a serious point about this.

[09:55:06]

Why not? There's a group at Princeton, we've had them on this program, and they track -- and they track threats of political violence on a local level. Like, you know, somebody who's serving on the school board or the township supervisor, commissioner, councilman, et cetera, et cetera. And all of those numbers are off the chart because, you know, there are people among us who can't behave properly.

And when I saw that commercial, you know, my first instinct was maybe to chuckle. And then I thought, nah, it's actually gross. And I worry -- you know, I worry about people who are out there trying to do business.

Maybe they're developers trying to do business who are going to be the recipients of that joke, that spoof. And that's gross. That's just gross. So, it was a miss on his part in this instance.

If you missed any of today's program, remember this, you can always listen anywhere you get your podcasts. Thank you for watching. I am off for the Labor Day holiday next weekend, so I'll see you in two weeks.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)