Jimmy Dore Show - 20180323_0323_TJDS_PODCAST

All Episodes

Previous Next

March 23, 2018 - Jimmy Dore Show

01:12:48

20180323_0323_TJDS_PODCAST

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Get ready for an outstanding entertainment program.
	The Jimmy Door Show.
	Boy, that's Chuck Schumer on the phone again.
	Hello.
	Skip, skip, skip to my loo.
	Skip to my loo, my darling.
	Hi, Jimmy.
	Senator Chuck Schumer here.
	Ask me any question.
	Here's one.
	Don't you have more important things to attend to?
	Oh, I most certainly do, Mr. Door.
	And that is a very pertinent question that I'm very glad you asked of me.
	Thank you.
	What about the U.S. funding genocide in Yemen or lack of electricity in Puerto Rico or the people of Flint still drinking poison water?
	Oh, yes, Jimmy.
	You are so right.
	I agree that those are very important issues that must be addressed immediately, which is why I have proposed legislation to ban the scourge of open-door helicopter rides.
	Is that really a big problem?
	Oh, yes, Jimmy.
	Too many innocent Americans have died over the last 100 years or so of open-door helicopter rides.
	Do you have a number you can give us?
	Well, let's see.
	I'd have to check my figures.
	Hmm.
	Helicopter toys were invented by the Chinese in 400 BC, cut to last week.
	I'd say maybe 10 people, 15 tops, hard to say.
	We simply need more research on this issue, Jimmy, which is why I am at the forefront of eliminating this open-door helicopter crash epidemic.
	But what about gun control and Medicare for all?
	Wouldn't those save a lot of lives, Chuck?
	It's like I said in a recent interview, if I may be so bold.
	While doors off helicopter tours may have offered an Instagram-worthy experience, their current safety standards put passengers in insta danger.
	That's a very brave position to take.
	Thank you, Jimmy.
	Insta-danger.
	I wrote that part.
	In your face, out-of-control helicopter tour industry.
	We're going to take back the Senate.
	I can feel it.
	Okay, but you must have something else you're passionately working on now, right?
	I mean, something that affects the lives of Americans in a deep and meaningful way.
	You read my mind, Jimmy.
	I'm sure you've been following the Toys R Us story very closely, as have all Americans.
	Actually, huh?
	Exactly.
	I share your outrage.
	This little game of musical chairs has finally stopped for this iconic retailer.
	But they better not play games with consumers.
	They better not.
	So I plan to propose an amendment to the Constitution ordering Toys R Us to honor all its gift cards before it goes out of business.
	It shall be the cornerstone of my legacy.
	Yeah, Chuck, what about all the other important stuff we were talking about?
	Right, and I couldn't agree with you more.
	But as our founding fathers once said in my imagination, we must never act too quickly on being immediate about things that need prompt action.
	Okay, thanks.
	Before I go, can I just reiterate what a great American Robert Mueller is?
	I cannot stress that enough.
	We're with you on this, America.
	Fly in the buttermilk, shoe fly, shoe.
	There's a little red wagon painted blue.
	I lost my partner.
	What'll I do?
	I'll get another as pretty as you.
	And you can repeat that in Ohio and Illinois and Wisconsin.
	I'm dead.
	I'm dead.
	It's the Jimmy Door Show.
	The show for blackbeast.
	The kind of people that are.
	Comments maybe on tearing down our nation.
	It's the show that makes Anderson Cooper save.
	It's hard to talk to you, T-Wales.
	And now, here's a guy who sounds a lot like me.
	It's Jimmy Dore.
	Hey, everybody, welcome to this week's Jimmy Door show.
	We're going to see you Monday, March 26th in Austin, Texas.
	We still have tickets available also March 30th in Burbank, California.
	Tickets available for that show.
	See you there now.
	Let's get to the jokes before we get to the jokes, shall we?
	Hey, Ralph Peters left Fox News in a huff, citing his integrity.
	Wow, it's weird that Ralph Peters never noticed his place of employment until this week.
	You know what's weird to me is that the same people who called Edward Snowden a traitor for exposing illegal spying on Americans, those are the same people now leaving Facebook in an outrage because an app used the information you voluntarily gave them.
	That's called hypocrisy.
	Hey, did you hear in Illinois' congressional race, they actually, the Republicans chose a notorious white supremacist as a nominee.
	But I'm pretty confident the Democrats can find a suitable centripets Nazi to run against them.
	Hey, did you hear Jim Carrey's catching a lot of slat flack for his painting of Sarah Huckabee?
	Sarah Huckabee Sanders.
	What they didn't tell you about Jim Carrey's painting is that Sarah Huckabee Sanders was allegedly screaming, the laces were in.
	Ace Ventura pet detector.
	Some people will catch it.
	Yes.
	Boy, I wish, you know, it's funny.
	I wish John McCain cared about voter suppression in the United States half as much as he does about voter suppression in Russia.
	Anybody else?
	You know, I'm kind of depressed, but I think this International Day of Happiness hashtag is going to be a game changer.
	I'm relieved to hear that Mark Zuckerberg is going to be more cautious with our data when he sells it to a third party in the future.
	Anybody else?
	Hey, what's coming up on today's show?
	We're going to take a look at the Cambridge Analytica.
	And what aren't you being told in the establishment news about the Cambridge Analytica Facebook debacle?
	We're going to tell you that today, and the answer just may surprise you, will it?
	Yes, it will.
	In fact, I'm just going to go ahead and answer it today.
	It's going to surprise you.
	Also coming up, we have Oliver Stone is on the show today.
	Oliver Stone, who had a sit-down with Vladimir Putin, and that was aired on Showtime.
	Plus, he did the untold history of the United States.
	And we have him here today to talk all things, Russia, foreign wars, politics in the United States, and the media.
	We got phone calls today from Chris Christie, Chuck Schumer, and Vladimir Putin himself.
	Plus, a lot lot more.
	That's today on the Jimmy Dore Show.
	Welcome to the Jimmy Door Show.
	I'm here with Ron Placone.
	Howdy, howdy, Jimmy.
	New revelations about the Facebook and Cambridge Analytica.
	So I'm going to walk you through it.
	This is from Forbes magazine from November 2017.
	They already did a big article on Cambridge Analytica.
	Everybody knew what Cambridge Analytica was doing.
	In fact, Cambridge Analytica, they brag about it.
	The company which entered the U.S. political market in 2014, mining and analyzing data to target voters, says it's expanding its work.
	The company gathers huge amounts of data about people.
	One example Nick's gave was, what cereal you eat?
	Okay, so there we got that.
	The company ran over 4,000 campaigns for Donald Trump that in total captured a billion impressions or views.
	He also absolved himself of responsibility for the results, saying the data science can't make a fake candidate electable, even though having the right data and the right technology behind the campaign is critical.
	Now, we already talked about this.
	Cambridge Analytica bragging about helping Donald Trump sway voters through social media here in the United States.
	My whole point was, well, this was known last November.
	How come no one ever said treason?
	This is a foreign people meddling.
	How come they never say they're meddling in our elections?
	How can they blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
	And it's because they're not Russians.
	I love the CEO of Cambridge Analytica said the idea, because it took them over a year to set up all the algorithms, whatever the heck, all the stuff they needed to do to get to do this.
	It took them over a year of working to do this and millions of dollars.
	But Nick's did add the idea that Russia interfered in any substantive way was not credible.
	The idea that Russia hijacked this election is frankly ludicrous, the CEO of Cambridge Analytica said.
	That the Russians could replicate that level of technology and insight in just a matter of months is just nonsense.
	Now, did he make this statement before or after he saw Jesus arm wrestling Satan?
	This is from the whistleblower.
	So the guy, the whistleblower, the Guardian made a video.
	And this is the professor from Cambridge who invented an application on Facebook.
	So the setup that Facebook had, if you created an application, like a survey or even a game like Farmville, that was an application for Facebook.
	And if people used it, then because of the Facebook rules, the application maker could then access all the data and information of all your friends.
	So this was a big, they call it harvesting of information.
	So he's talking about the professor from Cambridge.
	What he offered us was way cheaper, way faster of quality.
	Way faster and of a quality that nothing matched.
	They had apps on Facebook that were given special permission to harvest data not from just the person who used the app or joined the app, but also it would then go into their entire friend network and pull out all of the friends' data as well.
	Things like status updates, likes, in some cases, private messages.
	We would only need to, you know, touch a couple hundred thousand people to expand into their entire social network, which would then scale us to, you know, most of America.
	And people had no idea that the data was being taken in this way.
	That's a big deal.
	And here's a little bit more about how it worked, right?
	So the Cambridge Analytica took the Facebook data and they then used it to identify targeted voter groups.
	And then they desired targeted messaging to influence their opinion.
	We would know what kinds of...
	So that's how we get...
	It's called advertising.
	That's called...
	Okay.
	I mean, the problem here is that they got your info and you didn't know it.
	And that's the big...
	People are actually more angry at Facebook, which they should be.
	Yeah.
	They should be angry at Facebook for allowing this to happen.
	That's the real...
	To me, that's the real culprit here.
	Oh, absolutely.
	Especially since a lot of people, myself included, when this first hit, like when people were first starting to talk about it, I thought, oh, well, I never got into any of those goofy games or any of those goofy acts.
	Doesn't matter if your friends did.
	Exactly.
	I was just like, so I'm okay.
	And then I read on and I was like, ooh, I know a lot of my friends did.
	And so they had access to me too.
	Yeah.
	So here we go.
	So, Jang, you would be susceptible to and where you're going to consume that.
	And then how many times do we need to touch you with that in order to change how you think about something?
	You know, it is a full service propaganda machine.
	Dr. Alexander Kogan maintains that everything he did was legal and he had a close working relationship with Facebook, which had granted him permission for his apps, which it sounds like, as far as I can tell, is true.
	Right.
	Yeah.
	As far as I can tell, is true.
	How else would you get permission to do that?
	How else would you have?
	What, did they hack Facebook?
	I don't think they hacked Facebook.
	Mm-mm.
	No one's, I haven't even heard anyone say that.
	Seems more likely that Facebook wanted them to have this.
	This is the headline from that story.
	The Guardian, the utterly horrifying.
	Ex-Facebook's insider says covert data harvesting was routine.
	So, that was that guy.
	That's the whistleblower.
	And hundreds of millions of Facebook users are likely to have had their private information.
	So, everybody.
	Right?
	So, everybody.
	There's only three.
	How many millions, hundreds of millions of Facebook users are in the United States?
	Anyway.
	Exploited the same people.
	Okay.
	Sandy Parakalas.
	That's that guy's name.
	That whistleblower.
	The platform operations manager on Facebook responsible for policing data breaches.
	He told The Guardian that he warned senior executives at Facebook that its lax approach to data protection risked a major breach.
	And they ignored him.
	And then he left.
	He quit the company.
	Now he's at Uber.
	So, now.
	Okay.
	So, now you know that's the story.
	So, that's the story.
	So, now you got that story.
	And now what's the other side of the story?
	So, the other side of the story is how come they never say meddled in the election?
	You never.
	They're not saying.
	They're still not saying that.
	They still won't say meddled in the election, colluded with a foreign national.
	They don't say that.
	Right.
	They don't say a foreign government or a foreign company working in collusion.
	I saw Rachel Maddow do an hour on this.
	She connected Cambridge Analytica to Russia.
	Why aren't they saying meddling?
	Why aren't they saying colluded?
	Interesting, right?
	Because it makes me think that the rest of the stuff they're saying about Russia meddling collusion is bullshit.
	All this comes around, of course, to Barack Obama.
	Huh?
	What?
	So, by the way, whatever just happened on Facebook has got to be a million times worse than what 13 Twitter trolls could do, could accomplish.
	One would assume, yeah.
	Access to millions and millions of people's information versus a rainbow Bernie meme.
	Yeah.
	I'm going to take the former.
	So, I might be burying the lead here because you know all the other parts probably already.
	Here's the new part that's actually an old part.
	part this cambridge analytica everybody knew this stuff last november so here is from time magazine friended how the obama campaign connected with young voters social networks are transforming the way campaigns are conducted and when was this written november 20th 2012.
	huh here we go here we go for a campaign dependent on big youth turnout this could have been a crisis what they're Talking about the crisis was that a lot of them didn't have telephones.
	So, how do, oh, there's a crisis.
	But the Obama team had a solution in place, a Facebook application that will transform the way campaigns are conducted in the future.
	And boy, did it.
	For supporters, the app appeared to be just another way to digitally connect to the campaign.
	But to the Windy City number crunchers, it was a game changer.
	I think this will wind up being the most groundbreaking piece of technology developed for this campaign, said Obama's campaign digital director.
	That's because more than 1 million Obama backers who signed up for the app gave the campaign permission to look at their Facebook friends lists.
	In an instant, the campaign had a way to see the hidden young voters.
	Uh-oh, sounds like Barack Obama's campaign pioneered this kind of thing, which, by the way, was totally legal.
	This is totally legal stuff that they're doing.
	Totally.
	And Facebook gave them the permission to do this.
	Roughly 85% of those without a listed phone number could be found in an uploaded friend list.
	So this is what this was about.
	They were trying to figure out how do we find those voters who don't have phones.
	And there you go.
	85% of those without a listed phone number could be found in the uploaded friends list.
	What's more, Facebook offered an idea, ideal way to reach them.
	People don't trust campaigns.
	They don't even trust media organizations.
	Who do they trust?
	They trust their friends.
	So then the campaign called this effort targeted sharing, the Obama campaign.
	And in those final weeks of the campaign, the team blitzed the supporters who had signed up for the app with requests to share specific online content with specific friends simply by clicking a button.
	More than 600,000 supporters followed through with more than 5 million contacts asking their friends to register a vote, give money, vote, or look at a video designed to change their mind.
	A geek squad in Chicago created models from vast data sets to find the best approaches for each potential voter.
	Wow, this is deep, deep, deep dive stuff.
	We are not just sending you a banner ad, explains Dan Wagner, the Obama campaign's 29-year-old head of analytics who helped oversee the project.
	We are giving you relevant information from your friends.
	So that's who invented this.
	It was the Obama campaign.
	Invented how to do this.
	We create an application.
	We then get access to all their friends.
	Bam, we got them.
	They were saying this is all legal.
	Facebook said it was okay.
	It was part of their things.
	It wasn't until they say sometime in 2014 that Facebook decided to stop giving applications all this access.
	But here is someone named Carol Davidson.
	She worked on the Obama data team also.
	She said, Facebook was surprised we were able to suck out the whole social graph, but they didn't stop us once they realized that's what we were doing.
	They came to the office in the days following election recruiting and were very candid that they allowed us to do things they wouldn't have allowed someone else to do because they were on our side.
	Sounds like they're colluding to overthrow the government or something.
	What is that?
	That's a private company colluding and cheating to help a presidential candidate.
	How come that, that's not, but that's not, that's okay.
	So that's the Obama administration getting special treatment from Facebook.
	Isn't that weird?
	Well, yeah, I mean, even in Mark Zuckerberg's explanation that he put out by his own admission in his own post that I'm looking at right now in 2013, a Cambridge University researcher, and he's saying that what the app could do, and they knew what the app could do.
	They said, given the way our platform worked at the time, this meant Kogan was able to access tens of millions of their friends' data.
	It's acknowledging that we knew this could access your friends' data.
	So in 2013, they totally knew what was up.
	They knew everything.
	In 2014, he's saying, oh, we wanted to prevent something like this from happening in the future.
	So wait, in a year, all of a sudden you wanted to prevent something you were just totally cool with in 2013.
	Like, oh, we wanted to prevent in 20 in 2014 to prevent abusive apps.
	We announced that we were changing the entire platform.
	So you knew what this was going to do in 2013.
	And then in 2014, all of a sudden you were like, oh, wait, we don't want this.
	This isn't what we wanted.
	Like, that doesn't add up at all because this isn't somebody that doesn't know much about technology and was born yesterday.
	This is a Silicon Valley billionaire.
	That's right.
	That's a good point.
	That's a great point, actually.
	So here is, let's listen to Carol.
	So he's not taking responsibility, which is what narcissistic megalomaniacs do.
	They never take responsibility.
	They never sincerely apologize.
	It's always someone else's fault.
	And that's what Mark Zuckerberg is.
	And this is revealing him for who he is.
	Yeah, I mean, this whole statement, and obviously we're not going to read the whole thing, but he basically just passes the buck, blames Cambridge, and doesn't actually apologize, which a lot of the articles have pointed out.
	Like you couldn't even just say, hey, sorry.
	And here he is.
	And it took five days for him to come up with this.
	And remember this about Mark Zuckerberg.
	He's not acting this way because he's in this circumstance.
	Circumstances don't create the man.
	They reveal him.
	So here is Carol Davidson, and she's going to talk about exactly what she did on the Obama administration campaign.
	The fact that you and I are friends, right?
	I see someone on the street and I meet them and I can be like, oh, my friend Kate, yeah, we're great friends, right?
	I apparently own that information because Kate wasn't there and I told someone that that was true, right?
	So Facebook, 2012 election, had the ability for people to opt in.
	The Obama campaign like rocked this, right?
	We got people to opt in.
	And the privacy policies at that time on Facebook were that if they opted in, they could tell us who all their friends were.
	Okay, so they told us who all their friends were.
	She's telling you how it works.
	There it is.
	She's showing you how it is.
	She talks about this in a TED Talk.
	Everyone knew that they could do this.
	This is very much how local campaigns work, right?
	People sit in a room.
	It's a really small thing.
	All of their biggest supporters sit around the table and they like circle the names of the people that they know and that they're going to outreach to and they figure out how to fill in the gaps of the people that they don't know.
	The Obama campaign just did this on a digital, digital level and a much larger level.
	But we were actually able to ingest the entire social network, social network of the U.S. That's on Facebook, which is the entire social network of the U.S. that is on Facebook.
	That's everybody in the United States that's on Facebook.
	They got them.
	Most people.
	Where this gets complicated is that freaks Facebook out, right?
	So they shut off the feature.
	Well, the Republicans never built an app to do that.
	So the data's out there.
	You can't take it back, right?
	So the Democrats have this information.
	So when they look at a voter file and someone comes to them, they can immediately be like, oh, here are all the other people that they know.
	And here are people that they can help us persuade because they're really good friends with this person.
	The Republicans do not have that information and will not get that information, right?
	Now, I'm a Democrat, so, you know, maybe I could argue that's a great thing.
	But really, it's not in the overall process, right?
	Really, it's not in the overall process.
	In the overall process, it's not good when a huge behemoth like Facebook is playing favorites in presidential elections with data and doing it clandestinely.
	So it's not like Facebook is Fox News and you know who they are.
	Facebook is pretending they're not doing anything.
	So there it is.
	Barack Obama.
	So whatever this is, Barack Obama mastered it.
	His campaign mastered this.
	Then, according to her, Facebook took that ability away to use applications to access friends' information.
	But according to Cambridge Analytica and that Kogan, the professor from Cambridge, he said, though, that they would let us do it.
	So maybe it'll take a court case to get the straight answer out of this.
	I'm guessing Facebook, my guess is that Facebook let them do it because they're money-grubbing oligarchs.
	You know, this is a random side note here, but I feel like this is just interesting based on what she was just saying.
	Remember that video from that technology summit that we played where Hillary Clinton says into a microphone that she inherited nothing from the Democratic Party?
	Oh my God.
	I got nothing except for all this data no one else had.
	That no one else had.
	Yes, I do remember that.
	That is amazing.
	That's called campaigning.
	And if you believe Robert Mueller, Robert Mueller is a proven liar who lied our country into a war.
	That's who Robert Mueller is.
	Lied to the FISA.
	Robert Mueller, not a friend.
	He's probably listening to me right now somehow.
	Through my Vizio TV.
	Thank you, Wikileaks, for letting us know.
	So isn't that amazing?
	So this is, again, but it's interesting.
	Watch.
	No one says collusion, colluding, meddling.
	So again, and then trying to pretend like this is some kind of new thing, and it's not new.
	This is already, they already got everybody in 2012.
	The whole country.
	Were you on Facebook in 2012?
	I was.
	They got me.
	This is a foreign power, too, right?
	They're foreign nationals.
	Yeah.
	Now, I don't know about Obama, but it sounds like he had an in-house team, but the Trump team went to...
	They bragged about having a perfect record in how many elections?
	30, 40 elections, something like that?
	70, maybe?
	Yeah, Arno's saying 70.
	So that guy was bragging about having a perfect record in all the campaigns they've worked on.
	So this wasn't just a Trump campaign.
	It's just amazing now that everyone's pretending like this is new information.
	But it wasn't a big deal when Obama did it.
	Not a big deal.
	Not a big deal.
	Now you see why Facebook should maybe be a public utility.
	Now you see like, now you see why it's important not to let a Silicon Valley narcissistic megalomaniac billionaire who stolen ideas from his friend to start Facebook, have him be the purveyor of what free speech should be.
	If you'd like to see us talk about this in a funny way, come to our live shows.
	We've got one March 26th, Monday night.
	That's in Austin, Texas, and March 30th in Burbank, California.
	We'll see you there.
	Wow, Chris Christie's on the phone.
	I wonder if he found a real job yet in this booming economy.
	Hey there, here's my recipe for the week.
	You got some broccoli lurking around your fucking house, right?
	You feel threatened, okay?
	I get it.
	What do you do?
	Well, first, do not panic.
	There were various methods you could employ to protect you and your loved ones.
	Second, surprise the broccoli by co-cocking it and smothering it with melted cheese whiz.
	Literally choked the fucking life out of that motherfucker.
	Surf Colts.
	That is quite a recipe for the week.
	Former Governor Chris Christie, is that weekly recipe a new addition to your duties as ABC contributor?
	Don't put the labels on me, conventional man.
	You're not your own man.
	I'm my own man, and you're seeing it now.
	It's to know me that I never was.
	I'm re-establishing my reputation as a maverick.
	Ask me how?
	That is if you got the ball, Spip Squeak.
	Okay, how?
	By defending Robert Mueller against Donald Trump.
	And why are you doing that?
	Look at the guy.
	Mueller's a youth icon.
	The youth of America love him because he's a threat to the president, which I don't approve of because a president is a sacred office, get it?
	Not really.
	If anything approaches sacred, maybe it should be the Bill of Rights or something.
	Oh, look who thinks he's a constitutional scholar.
	You think he's so big?
	Constitutional scholar, conventional man?
	Well, you ain't.
	As long as the kids off the FBI, the CIA, NSA, DHS, and all the other secret spy organizations that are fucking out of control.
	Heck, I'm with them.
	But what if young people turn against them?
	Children are our future, Jimmy.
	They're our only hope.
	And by hope, I mean Canon, father.
	Good luck running for Proton Tit Warheads or the Ukraine front, you dumb beatniks, right?
	You once hoped Trump would appoint you Attorney General, the nation's highest law enforcement official.
	If you were Attorney General, how would you handle a serial bomber like the one that took place in Austin, Texas?
	That depends on who's getting blown up.
	So far, it looks mostly like black and Latino families.
	In that case, ain't shit, Canada.
	Next question.
	Why?
	I'm just following a weird strategy.
	Do you agree with the president that this country should execute drug dealers?
	As head of the committee on opioid addiction, I think that would be a step backwards.
	Well, that's a relief.
	It's good to learn that even you wouldn't take such an extreme.
	In the right direction.
	A step backwards into the good old days.
	And what happens when a bombing happens in a white neighborhood?
	Send in a fucking National Guard.
	And if that don't work, I'd suffocate him with a deadly blanket of cheese with his body temperature.
	He, he, he, he, he, he, he.
	I'm dying.
	Hey, hope you're enjoying today's show.
	Remember, we have a new thing, a new way if you can help support us.
	Well, you can become a premium member.
	You already know about that, and I'll tell you about it at the end of the show.
	But we started a Patreon, right?
	So because a lot of people feel more comfortable using Patreon than using PayPal or Amazon.
	So that's another way you can help support the show.
	We have a Patreon link.
	Just go to patreon.com slash Jimmy Dore, patreon.com slash jimmy door.
	Go there.
	You can become a patron of the Jimmy Door show.
	And you know what matters more now than ever because our show has really blown up and gotten way more popular since we've been going on YouTube.
	But we've gotten over a quarter million subscribers.
	And so things are really happening.
	And except YouTube pulled our funding out from underneath us, right?
	So they don't want independent news anymore.
	And YouTube's offering establishment news.
	They're actually offering for a fee.
	So they're funding independent news people like us.
	So that's why we're offering Patreon.
	That's why we're offering a premium.
	That's all these different ways.
	And plus, we have the t-shirts.
	We have all these different ways where you can help support the Jimmy Door show.
	So thanks for doing that.
	And if you're more comfortable with Patreon, use our Patreon link.
	If you're more comfortable using our PayPal, become a premium member.
	So there's lots of different ways to support the show.
	Thank you for doing that.
	Now, let's get on to the second half.
	Hi, everybody.
	Welcome to the Jimmy Door Show.
	We have special guests today.
	I'm sure you're familiar with the work of Oliver Stone.
	He's an Academy Award-winning writer, filmmaker.
	Movies include Midnight Express, Scarface, JFK, Nixon W, Snowden, and that's just touching the surface.
	He recently did an interview series with Vladimir Putin that aired on Showtime.
	And we're really pleased to have him today.
	Welcome, Oliver Stone.
	Thanks so much for being here.
	Thank you, Jimmy.
	It's a pleasure to be here.
	I admired you quite a lot recently for the things you've said.
	And it's outspoken and outspoken in the way you speak.
	Very much a character from Frank Capra movies.
	Well, you're very, it's very sweet of you to say that.
	I'm very flattered.
	I really appreciate it.
	You know, I'm just a dumb nightclub comedian who kind of sees through this propaganda, and I'm here to tell people about it.
	And I wanted to ask you, you know, the Democrats joined Trump recently in adding $80 billion to our Pentagon budget.
	They joined the Republicans in deregulating Wall Street again just now.
	They just did that.
	Chuck Schumer made that happen, which means that a crash will probably happen again even sooner.
	Now, do you blame Susan Sarandon?
	And what is a voter supposed to do?
	No, Susan Sarandon has been very good on this issue.
	She sees through it.
	She sees through it.
	I like what she's been saying.
	To the contrary, you have to find some heroes in this thing.
	You know, you can prognosticate a crash.
	I mean, I don't believe one is around the corner, but they certainly could happen.
	I do believe there are regulations in place.
	Things have changed since 2008.
	Whether they've changed enough, who knows?
	You're going to find it.
	I'm a little bit more modest on that because my father was in Wall Street for most of his life, you see.
	So I'm hopeful that we can survive it.
	But where do we put our money?
	Where does the government money go to?
	It doesn't go to, it goes out to bailing the big banks out.
	Yes, it did, but it also goes to the Pentagon.
	The Pentagon is a villain here, and it's a big villain.
	And it's been, I've always said we have two countries in my mind.
	One is America, the country we grew up in, and the other one's the Pentagon.
	The government and the Pentagon.
	They don't seem to work.
	They seem to work together, but they're an uneasy alliance.
	You know, what are people supposed to do?
	I mean, do you have any voting strategies that you imply or that you talk about?
	Because I caught a lot of heat here because I didn't want to vote for Democrats anymore who were pro-war and pro-Wall Street.
	And here they are.
	The Democrats are supposed to be resisting Trump, and they're going right along with his war at wars, and they're going right along with his deregulation of Wall Street.
	So do you have anything to say about that?
	What are your feelings about how people should be voting and the predicament we're in right now in the United States as voters?
	It's a very tough one.
	It's hard.
	It's hard.
	You have to get left of the Democrats because the Democrats have become center-right.
	So, you know, politically, I'm not a strategist, and I know people who do this thing 24 hours a day, and they're very good at it.
	I voted, as you perhaps, I've said it publicly already.
	I voted for Jill Stein.
	I just couldn't bring myself to vote for Clinton.
	You know, I don't like anything that Trump has done.
	Just don't like anything that Trump has done.
	But on the other hand, Clinton has not brought us any hope.
	So, you know, there are candidates I like, Sanders to some degree, although his foreign policy is woeful, what he said.
	And new people like Tulsi Gabbard.
	There's a whole bunch of younger Democrats coming up, and we have to have faith in them or a third party, which is, I wish we had a third party in this country.
	Like, I wish we had parliamentary politics like we have in Europe.
	We desperately need that.
	But very people, you know, they talk about Jill Stein as an evil villain here.
	But, you know, if you really look at the numbers mathematically, I read an analysis of this.
	Gary Johnson stole far more votes from Trump's cause than from Clinton's.
	So Gary Johnson as a libertarian party, who I like, I like him a lot, really was a third-party candidate, real damaging third-party candidate in this matter.
	Well, people gave Gary Johnson a hard time because he didn't know what Aleppo was or where it was.
	And I was like, well, if you don't know where Aleppo is, you can't bomb it.
	Very well said.
	You're funny.
	And I really appreciate your show.
	We need it.
	It's a fresh air show.
	It's sad that it has to come up through the internet.
	In the old days, I guess it'd be Mort Saul.
	You look a bit like Mort Saul.
	Oh, that's very nice of you to say.
	Again, it's very flattering.
	You know, the Democrats just nominated a billionaire for governor in Illinois.
	He spent $70 million in the primary campaign, which is more than Trump spent of his own money to get elected president.
	To me, that's a bad omen for not only our democracy, but for the Democratic Party for sure.
	What does that say to you?
	You know, Capra made movies about this way.
	It's always been corrupted.
	The political game, money, big power, millionaires.
	This goes way back in American history.
	You know, Roosevelt, you remember, was hated by the rich class, the Wall Street class.
	And what Roosevelt did was tremendous, tremendous amount of reform, but it was little compared to what a lot of people wanted to push him to do more.
	But even Roosevelt, look what happened.
	He comes out of it.
	He dies, unfortunately, at the wrong month of the war.
	He allows Truman into the vice presidency and Truman becomes president.
	And then from that moment on, the Democrats have basically, except for John F. Kennedy, have marched increasingly to the right.
	And Truman bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki and set a precedent.
	It cannot be undone.
	And then we peeled back the legislation, the New Deal legislation.
	Gradually, Ronald Reagan was the worst enemy of it.
	And he was very effective, Reagan, although he had a completely false, to me, false platform, false man.
	But he did a hell of a job.
	And America has not been the same since 1980.
	We covered this, by the way.
	You didn't mention it, but I just would like to mention that we did, my Professor Kuznick and I did a series for television called The Untold History of the United States.
	It was 12 hours long.
	It was on Showtime.
	And it was really a lot of work.
	But it went from 1890 to 2013.
	If you have a chance, please watch the Reagan chapter.
	It's terrific.
	Yeah, no, it's fantastic.
	And the stuff about Truman and Eisenhower.
	You know, Nchomsky says that the biggest terrorist program in the world is our drone program.
	And, you know, you exposed how, you know, I've gotten in discussions about this with people who consider themselves left.
	And they say that Truman should have dropped those bombs.
	And of course, he shouldn't have because the Japanese, as you point out, were begging.
	They were looking for a way out of that war.
	And we had cracked their codes.
	So we knew that.
	And Truman dropped that bomb anyway.
	So this kind of goes into this whole narrative that I see a lot on, you know, of us against them.
	The Muslims are bad.
	Everybody else's terrorists are bad, but when we do it, it's for freedom.
	No, I mean, you've gotten to the, you've gotten to the essence of it is America has always been exceptional, has lived in an exceptional zone and has the right to meddle, intervene in other countries, replace governments left and right.
	And more than 50 times now, every country in the world has felt our presence.
	And it's gotten heavier as we've gotten weaker.
	The irony is that is now as we have We've become so threatened by anything, you know, that Russia, China have been parlayed into this gigantic beast that we have is a threat to us.
	That's our national security strategy that just came out this year again.
	It repeated this issue about a rivalry with China and Russia, in addition to which North Korea, Iran are considered threats to us.
	So we've done a great job of building up threats to our country, and that has financed this military-industrialized economy that we have.
	This is a military garrison.
	That's what we have become.
	We have what people call a death economy.
	Right now, Trump just made an announcement he's going to start selling drones on a much bigger scale, which is basically just a robot, a killing robot machine, basically what they are.
	And so now he said, and he's boasting that that's going to help bring back America, so we're manufacturing them here in the United States.
	That's where we manufactured this economy of death.
	And, you know, I wanted to ask you about, just in general, if we could start off talking about, because you just interviewed Vladimir Putin, as we mentioned, and I want to go into some of the criticisms of your interview with him, because I thought they were really kind of crazy.
	But has Russia gate, can you just talk about Russia gate in general, what you think about it?
	And because what I think about it is that it's made détente with Russia almost impossible for Trump to do.
	And it's weird to see the left attacking Trump from the right, saying that he has to have a more muscular response to a nuclear power.
	That's a very superficial issue, and it's a lot of noise, and America is missing the point.
	You know, this morning or two days ago, they threw on a whole laundry list of issues against Russia, meddling in the election, poisoning an agent in Britain, undermining American democracy, so forth and so on.
	It's just all crap.
	There's nothing there.
	The biggest, you know, our election was not undermined by Russia.
	Our election was fiercely contested, as you pointed out many times.
	Mrs. Clinton made some major mistakes.
	But, you know, we must look, when we talk about meddling, look at the power of Israel to meddle in our election.
	Look at the AIPAC lobby in Washington, which has every senator and representative pretty much by the throat.
	Scary.
	They control them in the sense that they can't go in any way question our commitment to Israel.
	In addition to that, you have people like the Coach Brothers, Cox Brothers, or whatever you pronounce them, and people like Sheldon Adelson.
	These are the real interventions that occurred in our election, as well as the Republican machinery laid out by people like Tom DeLay to block, to suppress votes.
	This is the greatest damage to democracy, hardly Russia.
	They're a dent if they did it.
	And I don't even, you know, I don't, I asked Putin this question, and, you know, he did the right thing for his country.
	He's not going to say anything about it because he really isn't.
	It's an insulting question, considering that America has meddled in Russian elections endlessly.
	I mean, going back to 1996 with Yeltsin putting Yeltsin into power.
	And then again, we intervened to some degree in the 2012 Russian election.
	And most recently, we've insulted Russia by implying that they stuffed the ballot box this time around.
	And it's just nonsense.
	Putin was a definite popular favorite, partly because, largely because he pushed back against America and NATO, who were getting closer and closer to the throat of Russia.
	Let me remind you that this all started really in a bad way in 1999 with Mr. Clinton opening up the NATO, expanding NATO against the word that we had given to the Gorbachev people in 1989, 90.
	This is a very disastrous decision, followed by our withdrawal from the ABM treaty, our bombing of Serbia, trying to disintegrate the Yugoslav Republic, bounding Kosovo, attacking with bombs, was it 55 days, the capital of Serbia, Belgrade.
	I was there, I saw the damage.
	And then we continued, ABM treaty.
	We withdrew from the ABM Treaty in 2002.
	The list is long here.
	Ukraine, even in 2004, we were messing in Ukraine with the color revolutions that we put out there.
	We tried in Georgia.
	We tried it in Georgia.
	We tried it in, God, I forget the list of offenses we've done, but we take it right up to the Ukraine in 2014.
	We did the same thing again.
	And this time we pushed over a coup.
	Or as Obama said, we brokered a deal.
	And we continued to expand NATO, 13 countries all around Russia.
	We put ABMs around Russia.
	We have ABMs on the Pacific coast.
	In Korea, we put the new ABM system.
	I forgot the name of the Vegas, the Jagus system into Korea.
	And we're arming Japan to the teeth, contrary to their constitution.
	So we violated everything since World War II.
	We've never given up an inch of ground.
	We've circled Russia and we've circled China.
	We're giving a very strong message.
	They don't buy for one second that we're fighting North Korea in this thing.
	They know that this stuff is aimed at Russia and China.
	And so, I mean, you have to deal with each of these things because, you know, if you're President Putin, you have to understand his position in these matters, as you should for President Xi in China.
	And we don't even think about what other people think.
	We just think about what we think.
	That's the exceptionalism of our position.
	We're right.
	What we want counts.
	And we don't even hear through our media that we don't even hear what the other side is thinking.
	That's why I did the interviews to try to shed some light, at least bring to the American public some notion of what Mr. Putin is saying.
	So, and that was a great service you did, but then, of course, the media here in the United States, I was reading a review of your interview with Putin in Rolling Stone magazine, and it was very disappointing because as you just laid out, the aggressor has been the United States.
	After Reagan promised Gorbachev we wouldn't advance NATO.
	We have advanced NATO right up to their border.
	Now we're sending NATO troops.
	We're sending warships to the Baltics.
	Like you just said, we're pointing all these missiles at them.
	So we are really ramping up.
	And so I'm reading the Rolling Stone review of your interview with Putin.
	And I just want to read this little part to you and get your response to it.
	They said the title of the article was the top 10 WTF moments from Oliver Stone's interview with Vladimir Putin.
	And this was number eight, I think.
	It said in April 2016, the international community was briefly alarmed when a pair of Russian jets buzzed low an American destroyer, the USS Donald Cook, in the Baltic Sea, north of Russia.
	The show of aggression was a classic Cold War move, but a rare and alarming one in the modern age.
	The incident blew over after the ship turned around, but according to Putin, the Russian military was brought to the brink.
	In a chilling, casual tone, the president says that missiles could have been trained on the Donald Cook because our commanders have always been authorized to use any means for the defense of the Russian Federation.
	When Stone is taken aback by this, Putin replies, who is trying to provoke whom?
	Never mind that the destroyer was in international waters at the time.
	Now, we all know how ridiculous that reporting is by the Rolling Stone right there, as we just laid out the aggressive.
	What is our warship doing in the Baltic off the coast of Russia in the first place would be the first question.
	Now, how would you respond to that criticism from the Rolling Stone?
	All that is fascinating, by the way, reminded me a lot of the Cuba missile crisis because of the closeness of it.
	But all that is based around the Crimean situation.
	And there again, Americans get a false picture.
	It's Russian aggression in Crimea.
	They never bothered to say that Russia already had 25,000 troops in Crimea under treaty, and that the instigation to join Russia, the referendum, was initiated by the Crimean parliament, which existed way before this crisis.
	The Crimean people spoke for themselves.
	And what tops the argument for me is that if you look at the whole situation, there was no violence there.
	The Ukrainian army, I think there were about 20,000 Ukrainian troops, said, go, go and you know, go in peace.
	They did not contest the Russian troops that were there because they know that the Ukrainians who live there are pro-Russian.
	They speak Russian.
	They are Russian.
	So, I mean, this whole thing has been blown up and misinterpreted and distorted for the American people.
	Crimea was the greatest transfer non-violently of sovereignty that we've seen in the modern era.
	What we had done in Kosovo, by comparison, was the same thing, except it was much bloodier.
	And I don't want to go too much detail because, but this was the Donald Cook incident is based around the fact that Russia had a major military base there, always has had, at the mouth of the Black Sea, and that's their sphere of interest.
	It has been that historically going back through the ages.
	So for the United States to start sending battleships with Tomahawk cruisers into the Black Sea is not a good idea.
	So I mean, how like I was surprised to see Rolling.
	I mean, I don't know.
	I guess I don't read Rolling Stone enough, but I was surprised at I usually read just Matt Taibbi and Rolling Stone, and he's always on point, usually.
	But this was kind of so are you used to that kind of reporting, that kind of BS, and that's why it doesn't throw you so much?
	No, I respect Taibi.
	Was that his assumption?
	No, that's not Matt.
	No, that's someone else.
	I respect Taibi.
	The American media, I hope you understand that.
	I have to have a pretty thick skin to survive.
	I mean, if I took everything personally, it's been hard for me to get, you know, ever since JFK, I guess, it's across the line.
	And, you know, my version of American history, which you can get in untold history of the United States, which is, I think, based on fact, there's not one fiction in that entire series.
	We had to double-check it with CBS lawyers, with Showtime lawyers.
	Believe me, we worked very hard on it.
	Check that series out.
	And that's my position on America, basically since 1890.
	But basically, take a look at what happens after World War II.
	We accelerate into this militant power.
	Nobody on earth has the weapons we have.
	And as you pointed out the other day, Russia's spending 112th approximately of what we spend on military.
	So, and China, about a third of what we spend on the military.
	So, where is all this expenditure going?
	Where is this money going?
	Is it going to private contractors?
	Is it going to troops?
	I mean, it's such a waste that we have.
	Let's go on to another point, which is significant.
	And we have to take into account President Putin's recent speech of Thursday, two weeks ago, when he got in front of the Congress there, sort of a state of the union speech.
	And he said, we, very quietly, not threateningly, he said, we're going to take care of the domestic economy.
	This is our needs.
	But he said, as to foreign, he mentioned that we are under threat from the United States and NATO.
	And he said, let them hear very clearly, listen to us.
	We have devised a whole new generation.
	Behind your backs, we have devised a whole new generation of nuclear warfare that is beyond what you think we have.
	And that was an amazing speech because the United States has, in fact, spent trillion dollars or something like this.
	Don't know the exact number on ABM missiles surrounding Russia, surrounding China.
	Those ABMs are useless now.
	If President Putin's weapons, what he's talking about, and he showed animations of them, he couldn't show the real thing.
	Why should he?
	If what he said was true, and I believe him, and I don't think he's a man who bluffs, we have no defense against these new Russian, the missiles and the underwater submarines.
	This ICBM, fastest ever, the cruise missile he's devised with nuclear engine.
	No one's had a nuclear engine.
	We've had nuclear warheads, but a nuclear engine this small and a cruise missile that can go on and on and on, almost practically for, I don't know what amount of time, and can circle, dip, dive, do it, is the most dangerous thing we've ever faced.
	We don't even see it coming.
	In other words, it's not in our interest at this point to think along those first strike mentality that we've had for so long.
	If you go back to first strike, that was the idea that we could circle Russia and our ABMs would kill off any retaliation if we hit them with the first strike.
	Okay, this is a big speech, and it was delivered very quietly, but seriously.
	And I think it is being, I imagine we have some intelligent people in this country in the Pentagon left who can see where this is going.
	Not only that did Putin say this, which nobody's taking into account, but he also said, you are going to, you know, now that I'm saying this, you Americans probably are going to do your utmost to spend more money and to try to outdo this, right?
	That'll be your next step.
	But let me tell you this.
	We're already working on the next step.
	Now, I've talked to a couple of scientists, and one of them has worked in the rocket business in Russia, and he told me some interesting.
	I don't want to share it with you right now, but obviously this thing points to space.
	America has been trying to won't sign a space treaty with Russia, will not, or China, will not sign it.
	So America's goals to people who should be our allies seem to be, we are out to regime change you or to destruct you.
	This is a message we give off constantly.
	We should be partners.
	Mr. Roosevelt, after World War II, he said, there is a grand alliance here between U.S., Russia, China, and Britain.
	This was his picture of the world if he'd lived.
	A grand alliance was the word.
	Why Russia was allowed to become our enemy in this phony Cold War that we fought in 1947 is one of the great tragedies of modern life.
	Everyone, I grew up under it, you did.
	We've all felt the fear of it.
	And now I feel more fear than when I was 15, 16 years old during the Cuban crisis.
	I'm more scared of this.
	I was reassured by Mr. Putin's speech.
	I'll tell you why.
	Because what he was saying is don't start something you can't finish.
	You're not going to win.
	That is actually what he was saying, that the world is going to go back to mad madness, this mad quality, mutual assured destruction.
	There is no way you're going to take out Russia on a first strike.
	We'll get you.
	I see these weapons.
	They're pretty impressive, hypersonic missiles, underwater submarines.
	That, by the way, an underwater submarine, just think about it, with a nuclear warhead.
	You need three of them.
	You need one in the Gulf, you need one in the Atlantic and one in the Pacific.
	You will have tsunamis so enormous coming onto the East Coast, West Coast, and the southern belly of the United States.
	Tsunamis across the Gulf of Mexico.
	Like, remember Thailand, but that kind of size, these are gigantic explosions.
	And all you need are three of them, three of these submarines to get through.
	And apparently, they're stealthy and they're nuclear powered.
	Nuclear engine.
	Think about it.
	I've never conceived of a nuclear engine, nor have you.
	No.
	You should think about this.
	So I have my co-host on the aggressive progressives says to me that he's not afraid of nuclear war or war with Russia like you are and like I am.
	He says because he thinks that the rich people won't allow this to happen, that the people who really control everything, the people with all the money, aren't going to allow that to happen.
	What do you say to that?
	The wonderful belief.
	I'd like to believe it.
	I mean, I did for many years.
	I thought, you know, the Pentagon is in control of this situation.
	But the politicians have seemed to be more hysterical than ever.
	Their hysterical reaction to the so-called Russian meddling, the reaction to Clinton's loss, the concept of violating NATO, all this has led me to believe that the military is either looking for more money from the government in order to build up its budgets and is ignoring the consequence or thinks that Russia is not strong enough to resist, which is possibility.
	And I think that's why Mr. Putin's speech is crucial.
	It sets a new balance.
	It says, we have more than you think.
	But you tell me.
	I mean, we can't, have you analyzed it?
	You looked at Dr. Strangelove.
	I looked at Dr. Strangelove with Mr. Putin, and I showed it to him.
	I wanted him to react to it.
	You saw the madness of the two powers in 1962 or whatever it was, 62, where they're, you see, at that point in time, and go back in time, the United States had a first strike policy.
	When Eisenhower, although he condemned the military industrial complex, when he left office, actually did more than any president to build it up.
	And he built up this, you mentioned it the other day, this Psyops plan, basically to wipe out China and Russia at the same time.
	600 million people were targeted.
	That was the idea of the first strike, that if we hit Cuba, we're going to hit China and Russia at the same time.
	We're not going to hesitate.
	And our first strike ability, and we had it, by the way, the thinking in the Pentagon in 1960-62 area is very much the Curtis LeMay thinking.
	He's the guy who bombed the shit out of Japan before the atomic, and was in charge of the atomic bomb and the dropping of it.
	But he said very clearly that if we hit Russia now in 1960, 62, that we can beat them.
	If we don't, they're going to arm up and they're going to match us, which they did in the 1970s because they took a lesson away from that, the missile strike.
	Think about the first strike.
	Don't imagine the United States is not considering this possibility.
	Wow.
	That's scary and that's, yeah, that's horrible to think about.
	And, you know, if I can go ahead.
	On my Facebook page, I posted the 11-minute speech that Putin gave.
	It's a powerful speech.
	It's probably the most important speech of the year.
	And probably the people who are the most important, the man of the year bullshit that we do every year with all the stuff we talk about is all nonsense, Russian meddling.
	The men of the year are the Russian scientists who took this to the next stage.
	So what do you, I just want to touch back on this, the Russia gate thing.
	Now, to me, it's filled with modern-day McCarthyism.
	I didn't live through the first McCarthyism or McCarthy scare.
	I couldn't imagine that it happened again, but it's being pushed by the left right now, which is mind-boggling to me.
	So would you equate it with McCarthyism?
	I mean, they're doing it to Jeremy Corbyn even across the pond, and they're doing it.
	Now they're saying anybody who's progressive, so Jill Stein's a Putin puppet, and of course, Bernie Sanders was boosted by the Russians.
	So now, isn't this how it always works, that they use this commie-red scare to shut down the left?
	This is an old story, yes.
	If you remember, a lot of the people who were blacklisted, Dalton Trumbo among them, said that it's the left that sells you out, too.
	The left did not protect those people.
	They were scared.
	A lot of columnists, a lot of people, you know, I remember those years because my dad was very anti-Russian.
	He was a Republican conservative.
	He voted for Eisenhower.
	And we had friends who were liberal because my father was an intelligent man.
	And those people, even in our social world, had to kind of bow their heads.
	They had to tame down what they were saying.
	The concept of fighting for liberal ideas for the black civil rights.
	These kind of things were under threat.
	In other words, you know very well that they, the moment the black civil rights movement started up again in the 50s, 60s, they attributed communism as being behind it.
	Moscow, even Lyndon Johnson thought so.
	And during the Vietnam War, against their opposition to the Vietnam War, they thought it was communist inspired.
	So the left is, they've always divided the left in this country and the labor issues, everywhere.
	This is a tactic, and it works because the left folds.
	Hillary Clinton, of course, is part of the problem, but her husband was too, because he's the one who started the NATO expansion.
	But I think all this is minor compared to, I'm saying all this Russia gate crap.
	I mean, it's boring to me, but I'm sure they live on it on television and they sell it and sell it and sell it.
	But it's so detailed and nonsensical.
	The big issue is, if I was Putin, I don't give a shit what you guys in America are saying.
	I'm telling you this.
	If you come at us, we'll come back at you.
	And that's what counts in the world, power.
	And he left a pretty strong message.
	So let's drop all this junkie dialogue.
	And it's just, you're wasting time too, Jimmy.
	I mean, I love you when you're doing it, but God almighty, you're fighting a beast.
	You're not going to win it.
	You're finding the little details here and there.
	Think big.
	Okay, I will try to think big.
	Like Putin is thinking, because you have to.
	The United States is a threatening animal.
	And this is for China too.
	Now, the people who say, well, Russia would be just as bad, China just as bad.
	Well, I'd like to see proof of that.
	The United States has done a pretty bad job with other countries of telling them what to do.
	So how do you see all this ending up?
	Do you see this ending up in a particular way?
	Is it all going to go away once Trump gets out of office or will it ever stop?
	Well, what they're trying to do now is force Trump to take a strong position against Russia.
	They'll force him to say something awful and mean.
	It'll strike up some kind of another kind of race, another kind of insulting the country.
	I mean, Russia's used to it.
	But I don't think as long as they have the cards to play, which they do, They're going to much care whether it's Trump or Clinton attacking them.
	In other words, they're buttoned up.
	They're ready for it.
	And they were ready for war two, three years ago on the Ukraine issue.
	They have to be.
	What I liked about Putin, and I think he just doesn't play games.
	He doesn't bluff.
	Whereas Mr. Trump talks sound and fury, bombing North Korea to the end.
	You know, on North Korea, I mean, I don't think you know as an American citizen that China and Russia have offered a peace plan.
	You probably couldn't even outline that peace plan, but it's a very serious one.
	Forming an economic zone for North Korea that's very of lucrative interest to them to stay alive.
	The North Koreans would take that plan.
	It's the United States that keeps kind of cutting Russia down, cutting China down, and saying we have to go our way.
	It's our highway, and you're walking it.
	It doesn't work with North Korea.
	But I don't think our media is reporting any of this.
	No, our media is not reporting.
	You know, people ask me about the, my comedian friends ask me about the success of this show, and they say, what are you doing?
	And I say, well, all you have to do is tell the truth about Syria, and you're already the best newsman in America because you're not going to hear the truth about Syria anywhere in mainstream news media.
	So they leave me a big lane.
	So and that's why a guy like me has a show like this.
	So go ahead.
	You're very important, actually.
	You and Abby Martin and people like you who are the people like Glenn Greenwald, people like, you know, quite a few columnists here and there that are really seeing through the lies.
	Yeah, there's not enough of those voices.
	God bless Abby Martin, Lee Camp, Kyle Kalinsky, people like that really doing great work.
	So now, I don't see you on MSNBC much anymore.
	Why is that?
	I didn't even, I don't think we made it to NPR, except for one or two shows we never got on NPR after my Chavez documentaries, much less my untold history in the United States.
	But I really feel that that's a lot of people have seen that in America.
	It's still on Netflix.
	It was on Showtime.
	You know, it's really hard to get this.
	You know, my Putin interview should have been on main network.
	They just owe it to his importance in the world to put him on.
	Castro was cut out.
	The HBO threw me off with Castro.
	So I'm used to this, but my stuff does get out underground and gets seen.
	And the Putin interviews are important because Americans never hear his voice.
	So how do we fight back against the behemoths like Google?
	Because right now they're doing a thing called D-Ranking, and they're using algorithms to silence the left, voices like yours, voices like Alternet, Truth Dig, Truth Out, Common Dreams, shows like this.
	So how do we fight back against those behemoths like that?
	Do we have proof of that or is it paranoia?
	Say again.
	Do we have proof of them altering the logarithms that affect the visibility of the show?
	Yes, Chris Hedges has talked about how they're throttling all the places that his work appears.
	So I'm repeating what Chris Hedges has reported about how Google is doing this.
	Also, Kyle Kalinsky at Secular Talk has reported on this, how they have the numbers that so when they do that, they run the algorithm, they run the numbers about how if you put a word in, say like, you know, anti-imperialism, it won't go to the usual websites.
	It's supposed to.
	It won't go to alternate.
	It won't go.
	And so things come up, bupkiss, right?
	So that's what's happening right now.
	And Google's doing that.
	So if you're not comfortable speaking on it, that's fine.
	No, I was in Paris for actually they showed some of my films there, Fauham des Ginage, and I had the chance to meet with Quant.
	You ever heard of Quant?
	No.
	I think it's spelled Key Quant.
	Was it Q?
	Q W A N T Quant?
	Yes.
	Q U A N T. It's a French search engine, and they don't collect any data at all.
	And they promise you that you can use it.
	And it's a good search engine.
	But that seems to be an alternative to Google.
	Now it's a little late.
	They're late into the game.
	But if the French government supports it, which it can, it can grow.
	But we need to have search engines where they don't collect your data.
	It's a little late for me.
	They know who I am.
	But I feel sorry.
	My young kids, I mean, my youngest is now 22, but whatever she said on Facebook at whatever, 17, you know, maybe some future employer won't like what she said or thinks.
	It's a strange world we're going into.
	We've already reached it, I suppose.
	You know, when I did the Snowden movie, which I hope you saw in 2016.
	Yes.
	I mean, it's sort of that movie sort of shows a seal.
	It's come around us and it shows what the governments can do.
	You have to fight from inside.
	So, you know, there are.
	Go ahead.
	I'm sorry.
	There's always a resistance.
	And we know about that.
	Well, there's a pretend resistance happening right now that I'm pretty aware of.
	You can't resist Donald Trump by voting to give him.
	You know, isn't it crazy that the establishment says Donald Trump is this maniac who can't be allowed to have his finger on a nuclear button, and then they just voted to give him 80 billion more buttons.
	What does that tell you?
	It's ridiculous.
	It makes no sense.
	I wish Stanley Kubrick were alive.
	I wish I could come up with a movie that could show how ridiculous it is.
	Yeah.
	Now, there are some bright spots.
	For instance, Larry Krasner is the new DA in Philadelphia.
	Are you familiar with him?
	No.
	So he was a Black Lives Matter lawyer.
	He sued the police department many times in Philadelphia, and he won.
	And now he's the DA, and he is bent on ending mass incarceration.
	And so he just gave directives to he fired.
	First of all, he fired 31 DAs because they weren't on board with what he was doing.
	He's getting rid of cash bail because why is it rich people get to not have to sit in jail, but poor people have to sit there?
	So that's gone.
	He's telling people, his prosecutors, to ask for the lowest sentence instead of the maximum sentence.
	And that when you and when you ask for a sentence, you have to then tell the people how much that's going to cost to incarcerate that person.
	So if you want to put away somebody for three years, you have to go, this is going to cost us $120,000, and this is why it's worth it.
	So that's the kind of thing Larry Krasner's doing in Philadelphia.
	Yeah, that's a wonderful idea.
	Do you think, before I let you go, I'll ask you one last question.
	Do you think that they're going to allow Bernie Sanders to become president of the United States?
	I don't see why not.
	He is not that good on foreign issues.
	He seems to be, I mean, he said stupid things about Chavez as well as Russia and China.
	I think he's ignorant of this, and I'm surprised.
	But the president could actually affect our foreign policy.
	It seems the Pentagon and the State Department, as well as CIA intelligence agencies, have it locked up.
	I really mean it doesn't matter to a foreign country if Trump or Clinton is in office or whoever, even Sanders.
	I really don't think so.
	So Chuck Schumer, and I know I said that was my last question.
	This will be my last question.
	Chuck Schumer said that Trump should be careful when he's dealing with the intelligence community because if he messes with them, they have six ways this Sunday to mess with him back.
	To me, that's Chuck Schumer admitting that the intelligence community is running the presidency and not the other way around.
	Am I making too much out of that?
	No, you're not.
	I think that's very true.
	I think that there's obviously a consensual power, but it's the accumulation between CIA, Defense Department, and state that have a tremendous lock on this country, as well as media.
	Let's not look at, I mean, look at media.
	I mean, the power of this television campaign against Trump, as you said, MSNBC, CNN, they constantly rotating Russia.
	People don't care about it, but they don't.
	And they're looking for something.
	They will get something eventually.
	Maybe Trump needed loans from Russia, from a bank in Russia, because that's possible in business loan.
	But to suggest that all this craziness about it fundamentally changed the American election is so wizard of Oz to me.
	And it's sad that we're still thinking like that.
	We should really be thinking about how to make the world a more peaceful place.
	Our greatest partner in the world is actually Russia and China.
	They can be, even if China economically eclipses us, we have a huge role to play.
	There's a huge place for America, and we're a good country.
	We have good people.
	Our warlike side is not attractive.
	No.
	I saw the worst of it in Vietnam, and I saw how bad the military can be in terms of wasting money, artificializing situations and hyping them.
	And it was just the 50-year anniversary last weekend of the My Lai Massacre.
	I tried to make a movie about that in 2007.
	I failed.
	I came very close.
	When you say you failed, do you mean you couldn't get financing?
	Well, the financing fell apart.
	Actually, it was a few weeks before the crash.
	Oh, okay.
	You know, I got to be honest.
	I just started to read about it because it was the 50-year anniversary.
	I had to stop reading.
	I almost started crying.
	I can't imagine that that stuff happened.
	No, it's a very important story.
	And it's a deeper story than what you're even hearing because they'll always talk about that.
	But they've finally admitted that 500 villagers were killed in cold blood.
	But what they don't tell you is the CIA was very much a part of that operation, going into the village that day with the information they had.
	That information they gave to the army, which CIA ran that war, the information they gave to the army came from guess what?
	Torture.
	And the torture said these are, oh, there will only be communists in that village.
	That was not the case.
	Right.
	Well, they're children.
	They killed children.
	I don't know how communist you can be if you're eight years old, but apparently that's enough.
	Many men lost their minds, I tell you.
	Well, listen, again, thank you so much.
	It's been an honor and a privilege to have you here.
	You know, really, thanks for doing this and taking time out.
	And if you ever need a ride to the airport, I'll take you.
	Thank you, Jimmy.
	Uh-oh, that's my useful idiot phone.
	Could that be Vladimir Putin on the line?
	Jimmy Door, it is I, Vladimir Putin, on the line.
	Please, if you will congratulate myself on my great victory.
	Oh, yeah, yeah.
	You just won another presidential election.
	Congratulations.
	But you never had any real competition, right?
	Oh, on the contrary, it was pretty neck and neck for a while.
	I had serious challenge from old pawnbroker woman.
	Really?
	What was her name?
	Old Pawnbroker Woman.
	Try to pay attention.
	What were her qualifications?
	That she was mysteriously murdered with an axe.
	So how many votes did she get?
	What part of mysteriously murdered with axe do you not understand, Jimmy?
	Okay, quick question.
	Jimmy, why is Rob Reiner constantly insinuating I'm in a gay relationship with Donald Trump?
	What's the deal with that?
	Hey, you know there's a lot more to that phone call, but we don't have time in today's podcast.
	How do you hear the entire phone call?
	You got to become a premium member.
	Go to JimmyDoorComedy.com, sign up.
	It's the most affordable premium program in the business.
	Today's show was written.
	That's right.
	It was written by Ron Placone, Steph Samurano, Jim Earl, Mark Van Landuit, Frank Coniff.
	And a big thank you to our special guest, Oliver Stone, for sitting in with us.
	Great guy.
	Thanks for taking time.
	All the voices today performed by the one and the only the inimitable Mike McRae, who can be found at mikemcrae.com.
	We'll see you Monday, the 26th in Austin, Texas for a live Jimmy Door show and March 30th in Burbank, California for another live Jimmy Door show.
	See you then.
	That's it for this week.
	Until next week, this is Jimmy Dore saying you be the best you can be and I'll keep being me.
	Don't freak out.
	Do not do nothing.
	Do not not freak out.

▲