Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Dec. 20, 2015 - No Agenda

02:51:22

783: Bernie and the Breach

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Usually I'm just spinning.
	Adam Curry, John C. Devorak.
	It's Sunday, December 20th, 2015 time once again for your Gitmo Nation media assassination.
	This is episode 783.
	This is No Agenda.
	Suffering from severe cingulomania and broadcasting live from the capital of the Drone Star State here in FEMA Region 6 in the morning, everybody.
	I'm Adam Curry.
	And from northern Silicon Valley where the California's effort just went by, I'm John C. Devorak.
	It's crackpot and buzzkill in Always happy when the Zephyr goes by.
	Yep.
	Hey, we have a new human resource in the family, John.
	Uh, you have mice?
	No.
	Void Zero and his partner, Iris, they have a new human resource.
	Steven, born on the morning of December 17th.
	Stephen with a V or a PH? No, it would have been Stephen if it was PH, obviously.
	Stephen with a V. Congratulations.
	The kid looks beautiful, kid.
	Unbelievable.
	Looks like a C-section kid.
	I haven't gotten the details yet.
	Use him to code early.
	No, no.
	It's that way he won't be so unhealthy looking when it gets older.
	I think his name is Stephen Ben Void Zero.
	I'm not sure.
	Stephen Penn?
	Ben.
	Ben.
	Oh, Ben.
	Oh, Ben.
	I get it.
	Ben.
	Stephen Penn's not a bad combination of names.
	No, but that's not his name.
	We're very happy for him.
	Yes.
	Well, you might well explain to the audience listening in who Void Zero actually is.
	Oh, I'm sorry.
	Yeah, we have our incredible staff and management here at The Best Podcast in the Universe consists of Eric, the shill, who does the preparation of the spreadsheet and the donations and the nightings and the rings, etc.
	And then we have Void Zero, who runs the entire network, the CDN, the streams, the everything.
	Yeah, we don't have like a producer.
	We have a guy who does the big heavy lifting.
	Very few, I don't know of any other podcasts that have that.
	They have what?
	A heavy lifter.
	No, most of them, I don't know.
	I think most of them go through some kind of hosting service or something.
	They go through Podbean or they use that other thing.
	Podtrack?
	No, PodTrack is not a service.
	Oh, they don't host as well?
	I don't think so.
	It matters not, my friend.
	No, it doesn't matter.
	Well, I mean, it does to us, but to most people, nobody cares.
	As long as we get our stuff out.
	Yes, yes, yes, the debate.
	Well, I was surprised to see that ABC did not pay the extra fee to request the overnight ratings.
	That doesn't happen very often.
	That you have an event and that you don't ask for the overnights.
	How come the Republicans are all on cable?
	All the debates have been on cable.
	I don't know.
	Why does the Democrats get network TV? I don't know.
	Because they put it on the worst time in the world.
	Well, it still gave them approximately, we think, about 8 million viewers.
	Not bad for a Saturday night on the network, kind of hidden away.
	Well, yeah, nobody watches TV on Saturday night.
	It used to be a tradition in the 50s and 60s.
	Except for, oh yeah.
	No, it was Friday nights in our house.
	Growing up.
	Friday nights.
	Friday nights we'd all stay home and watch TV together as a family.
	And how did that work out?
	It worked out just fine.
	Not really.
	Not really.
	Well, let's start off with, I got a clip that we might as well start off with, which is there was a pre-promotion for the debates, which was kind of a data breach.
	Oh, yeah, this was, hmm, just in time for a little bit of ratings or whatever the heck they were trying to accomplish with that.
	And Saunders pointed out something when he discussed this.
	He said that this has happened before, but no one ever made a big stink about it and sent out press releases.
	But Saunders, of course, didn't notice because you didn't have a debate the next day.
	So you wouldn't need to do that because this was all publicity for the debates.
	But let's play.
	Saunders has a very interesting explanation.
	None of this was brought out in any of the news stories that I read about it.
	I don't know, but he kind of discussed it in great detail.
	This will be what a clip would this be.
	Bernie and the Breach.
	The Clinton campaign called this a very egregious breach of data and ethics and said, quote, our data was stolen.
	Did they overstate this or were your staffers essentially stealing part of the Clinton playbook?
	All right, David, let me give you a little bit of background here.
	The DNC has hired vendors.
	On two occasions, there were breaches in information.
	Two months ago, our staff found information on our computers from the Clinton campaign.
	And when our staff has said, whoa, what's going on here?
	They went to the DNC quietly.
	They went to the vendor and said, hey, can you just see him saying that?
	Whoa, what's going on here?
	There's gambling going on here?
	Something is wrong.
	And that was quietly dealt with.
	None of that information was looked at.
	Our staff at that point did exactly the right thing.
	A few days ago, a similar incident happened.
	There was a breach because the DNC vendor screwed up.
	Information came.
	Hold on a second.
	Hold on.
	This is the one time where glitch would have been more appropriate as a word.
	As opposed to screwed up?
	Well, breach.
	Breach means that it's not like the data was pushing against the levy and it breached.
	No, it's a breach because someone broke into something.
	I'm just pointing out the words he's using.
	Well, he's implying that there wasn't anything anyone did overtly, just the data showed up on their side.
	When I'm listening to this, I'm listening to it from the perspective that somebody somewhere on either side of the campaign, on Bernie's side or on Clinton's side, which is more likely, is playing a dirty trick.
	I believe there is a connection between the vendor...
	And either Hillary or the Hillary campaign, there's some kind of friendly connection that I... Oh, yes.
	He, let's see, Stu Trevelyan, the CEO, worked for the 1992 Clinton-Gore War Room campaign.
	Hello.
	Setup.
	Setup.
	Yeah, this is a setup.
	Stinky, stinky setup.
	A dirty trick.
	Yeah, stinky, stinky, stinky setup.
	And what's her name, the dipshit head of the DNC? Debbie Wasserman Schultz.
	The hair with the phony baloney jerry curls.
	No, that's Jew hair.
	She's in on it.
	Yeah, of course, of course.
	That's why the ABC News camera was focused on her during most of this conversation.
	But when you have Bernie using the word breach, I think he's kind of letting it slip.
	Hold on a second.
	Something went on.
	Unless his words don't matter the way he speaks them.
	Well, he's Bernie.
	Things to go.
	A similar incident happened.
	There was a breach.
	Because the DNC vendor screwed up, information came to our campaign.
	In this case, our staff did the wrong thing.
	They looked at that information.
	As soon as we learned that they looked at that information, We fired that person.
	We are now doing an independent internal investigation to see who else was involved.
	Thirdly, what I have a real problem with, and as you mentioned, this is a problem.
	I recognize it is a problem.
	But what the DNC did, arbitrarily, without discussing it with us, is shut off our access to our own information, crippling our campaign.
	That is an egregious act.
	I'm glad that late last night that was resolved.
	Does it go first, second, third, fourthly?
	I have no idea.
	It hit me last night.
	First, he says secondly, thirdly, and then fourthly?
	When you get to nine, is it ninthly?
	That late last night, that was resolved.
	Fourthly, I look forward to working with Secretary Clinton for an investigation, an independent investigation, about all of the breaches that have occurred from day one in this campaign, because I am not convinced.
	Hold on.
	All of the breaches?
	From day one?
	From day one.
	Hmm.
	Hmm.
	And why is he shouting?
	Yeah.
	Why am I shouting?
	...that have occurred from day one in this campaign, because I am not convinced that information from our campaign may not have ended up in her campaign.
	Don't know that.
	But we need an independent investigation, and I hope Secretary Clinton will agree with me for the need of that.
	Last point.
	When we saw the breach two months ago, we didn't want to run into the media and make a big deal about it.
	And it bothers me very much that rather than working on this issue to resolve it, it has become many press releases from the Clinton campaign later.
	But Senator, you do mention the DNC, the vendor, but you said of your staff that they did the wrong thing.
	Absolutely.
	Does Secretary Clinton deserve an apology tonight?
	Yes, I apologize.
	Secretary Clinton, are you upset?
	That was funny.
	Yeah, thanks.
	I noticed he didn't apologize until he was kind of forced into it.
	Just instantly.
	Not only do I apologize to Secretary Clinton, and I hope we can work together on an independent investigation from day one, I want to apologize to my supporters.
	This is not the type of campaign that we run.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, there's a lot of info in that that he's given away.
	And I think the fact that the CEO of NGP Van, I guess is the name of the vendor, that he's a Clinton insider, Having worked in the Clinton-Gore war room campaign, come on.
	Why did they even accept...
	I guess it's DNC. I guess they have to accept it.
	The DNC does what...
	No, the DNC with Schultz and Clinton got together and Clinton said, you know, here's a good guy that can do this job.
	We'll just give to him the gig.
	And, you know, he can help the campaign while he's there.
	She goes, yeah, great!
	I got a...
	Sanders is a pain in the ass.
	I got a note from one of our producers who I think works for the Republican campaign in...
	Where is it?
	What's the 425 area code?
	425?
	Well, let's find out.
	I'm not too sure.
	Anyway, apparently there was a big conversation going on in...
	Well, maybe this is, let me see.
	Oh, Washington.
	Washington State.
	Okay.
	Makes sense.
	In Washington State, the Democrats have opted to ignore the results of the primary and select their delegates solely through the caucus process.
	They have a primary?
	I'm just reading what was sent to me.
	I don't know.
	I mean, if you're going to do the caucus, you don't have a primary.
	You just do the caucus.
	Well, they'll have opted to ignore the results of the primary.
	In other words, they're just wasting the taxpayers' money?
	This is one of your pet peeves, yes.
	So they're going to go through the caucus process.
	This is the Republicans or the Democrats?
	Democrats.
	But it's a Republican who's telling me this.
	Probably true.
	Because they're so trustworthy, you see.
	Well, they had up in Port Angeles as a big scandal.
	It's going to be part of Mimi's putting together a slate to get rid of the city council.
	And what's the scandal?
	The scandal is that the public voted to get rid of fluoride because it's going to be renewed.
	And they said the city council got the vote and said, we're going to keep it.
	Some corruption deal we can't figure out.
	It's like in Austin, I think it was Friday night, they voted in the legislation to require Uber to pay livery fees, to have background checks.
	The app might not even work at this point.
	Same thing.
	All kinds of agendas going on.
	Austin.
	The high-tech city of the future, everybody.
	Dump Uber.
	No Uber for you.
	No Uber for you.
	As I was watching this show, a couple of the comments about the Democratic debate on ABC last night from a television production standpoint.
	No national anthem?
	Do the Democrats hate the National Anthem?
	They hate America.
	They hate America?
	You know, the Republican debates always have some, you know...
	Well, you know my feelings on this.
	Yeah, it's ridiculous.
	I know.
	I know.
	But still...
	So I think that's great.
	I mean, why should they...
	Why are they wasting their time?
	We're going to hear the National Anthem, like, during this...
	Because football, you know, is now all playoff games, and so there's just wall-to-wall football.
	Every game they have to play the National Anthem.
	I mean, I don't see, personally, I'll say it again, I've said it before, I know it's boring.
	I don't see a basketball game or a football game or a baseball game, for that matter, being an element of the U.S. military or even the government.
	It is a game somebody's playing.
	So why are we playing the national anthem in front of it?
	I'm okay.
	I got it.
	Let's play the national anthem before everybody's late night talk shows.
	You know, I've...
	And here's Jimmy Kimmel, but first here's the national anthem.
	It's a...
	Look, it's a political thing.
	You'd expect it if, you know...
	I don't know.
	I don't really...
	Oh, hold on, hold on.
	Information, man.
	New shit has come to learn now.
	Steven was not delivered via C-section.
	Who was it?
	The new human resource.
	I just got new information.
	Oh, well, that's good.
	He was pushed out.
	It's better not to be delivered by a C-section.
	And he looks good, this kid.
	Well, he should look good.
	Doesn't look all funky and squeezed.
	I did not expect it.
	I didn't know until you just mentioned that they didn't play the national anthem.
	I find it awkward.
	I'm just...
	Talking from a television producer standpoint that I would have had the fight with you in the pre-production meeting.
	I think we should have done the national anthem.
	Yeah, you would have fought with me.
	I would have fought.
	I lectured you until you've given up.
	Second.
	Hillary's outfit was like a burlap sack.
	It was dreadful.
	And then they had that back shot?
	It was not good, no.
	And her hair looked good.
	Well, it was a helmet once again, and she's frosted it.
	So she had the frost thing going on, which I don't know.
	I don't think that's a good look for her.
	I think that she needs to still be a little more platinum-ish and not...
	You know, this kind of, it was grayish.
	Now that we're in this meeting, I agree with you.
	And I also think that a lot of the two shots that they did on this thing were, I thought, lame.
	And it wasn't flattering to Hillary to have her staring at Bernie with that kind of, you know, schoolmarm look.
	Well, also, who was the guy's name?
	The ABC? Yeah, who was that?
	No, no, no.
	I mean the interviewers.
	Oh, it was David Muir.
	So, David Muir needs to go home.
	He had zero control over Hillary Clinton.
	And it was embarrassing, and the faces, the grimaces he was making.
	But no, no, no, you must stop here!
	And she just doesn't give a crap, just steamrolled right through him.
	Oh yeah.
	Which I'm sure is exactly how she does policy meetings.
	Just shut up.
	I'm talking.
	Here's what I don't get.
	She actually, from a television production standpoint, but also...
	She was rude.
	She was rude.
	She was rude, but we couldn't call which shot to take.
	And the audio guys were freaking out, because really, what it results in is you don't understand what anyone's saying.
	And then, I've never had this happen in a live show like this.
	I was very disappointed.
	Welcome back tonight.
	As you can see, we have a packed audience here in New Hampshire, and we're going to continue.
	We've already had a spirited conversation.
	Now, this right here, there was already something very wrong.
	I've been to many live broadcasts.
	Back in the day, when they were in New York, I would go to the Grammys, when MTV still had...
	So, like me.
	And I'd go to the Grammys, and then, as we're in the commercial break, everyone, because it's a big industry thing, which I'm sure these debates are, there's a lot of industry people, and at their countdown to the end of the break, it's like, you must, everybody, you must, well, actually, they do it more like...
	We have 30 seconds left.
	30 seconds.
	Please, everyone, be seated.
	Please be seated.
	30 seconds left.
	And they have ushers going through the aisles quickly, quickly, quickly.
	Sit down, sit down, sit down, sit down, sit down, sit down.
	Nothing.
	They came back and everyone's still hanging out.
	They're drinking martinis.
	It looked like crap.
	And then, to add insult to injury.
	Here at the top of the broadcast, about ISIS, about concerns of terror here on the home front.
	And as we await Secretary Clinton backstage here, we're going to begin on the economy.
	Okay, so of course he wasn't backstage, but what he's saying is Secretary Clinton is backstage and she's not coming out.
	You want to turn to the American job?
	Yeah, I found that awkward.
	Well, hold on.
	Listen to the whole thing.
	...wages and raises in this country.
	And we believe Secretary Clinton will be coming around the corner any minute.
	But in the meantime, we want to start with this eye-opening number.
	And Senator Sanders, this question goes to you first.
	So they actually started the next question before Hillary was back on stage.
	In 1995, the median American household income was $52,600 in today's money.
	This year, it's $53,600.
	And then?
	Suddenly?
	That's 20 more years on the job with just a 2% raise.
	She's alive!
	She didn't quit!
	Sorry.
	Alright.
	The epitome of rudeness.
	What was she doing?
	What did she have to do that she couldn't come back?
	And more importantly, why did production allow it to start?
	Why didn't David Muir, who has been belittled by this woman the whole time, say, Excuse me!
	Let's all call for Hillary.
	Hillary!
	Whatever!
	Don't just start the debate up again.
	Very unprofessional.
	On all accounts.
	When I saw it, there was two things I noticed production-wise.
	One is that when they came back from...
	Or they did one of those interstitial...
	Yeah, Anderson and someone else talking.
	No, I'm talking about the things that the networks do nowadays to make it look like they're not running 40 commercials in a row.
	They do 20 commercials and they come and say, and here we are at the Democrats of Ace, we'll be right back after this.
	Right, right.
	And then they go right back to commercials.
	They did something like that and the stage was empty.
	Everybody was gone.
	Yes, yes, yes.
	Now, I don't remember the Republicans that, of course, you couldn't do with all these people, but the Republicans stayed their ground.
	They stood their ground.
	They stayed at the podiums.
	These three guys, three of them, they all left and they came back and then Hillary didn't show up.
	And then she comes wandering into a round of applause, making a grandstand, and then she says, sorry, which in a very wimpy way, Have you read anything this morning about the explanation for this?
	What was she up to?
	What she used last time, because she was not really late on the previous debate, but she said, oh, I'm sorry, it takes me a little bit longer to go to the restroom.
	She'd already used that one.
	I think she's backstage, and she's getting advice.
	They're telling her what to do.
	I think there's, definitely, she is very prone to this.
	She needs lots of advice, which I find distressing.
	I think it would be funny if she actually went to the control room and started complaining to the director.
	No, I don't think that's what she did, but I think it's funnier.
	But I wonder, I wonder, there's no reporting, and someone must know.
	Yeah, I'm sure she has six staffers all talking to her.
	You should do this, make sure you don't do that.
	Do this, do that, turn left, turn right.
	You know, don't smile more.
	It is also a total, it's a jack move is what it is.
	It's a jack move.
	Jack move.
	It was like a power move that's a douchebag move.
	Jack move.
	I never heard this phrase.
	Yeah, I'm learning it.
	What do you mean you're learning it?
	It's a millennial phrase.
	I'm learning these things.
	The millennials say jack move?
	Jack move, yeah.
	Jack move.
	It's a jack move.
	I gotta write this one down and ask the millennials.
	Ask the millennials. Ask the millennials.
	Okay.
	All right.
	Good.
	Jack move.
	So that was...
	It was a complete jack move.
	And then everything...
	It's just...
	I don't know.
	I found it distressing when she did that.
	It's almost as though she's...
	Besides, it insulted everybody.
	And it actually insulted the entire idea of a Democrat debate.
	Oh, and then she comes back going, Shari, and she said it in exactly the right demeanor, exactly the right cuteness in there, which really, the Hillary lovers just loved her that much.
	Oh, she's so cool.
	Oh, man.
	Hillary.
	Ha-ha.
	Ha-ha.
	Yeah.
	So they asked Hillary about her connection to big corporations.
	She's got some bullshit stories.
	By the way, there was a lot of bullshit in this thing from both sides.
	Play this.
	I have a clip here called Two Lies.
	I want you to identify the two lies.
	Short clip.
	Okay, two lies.
	Here we go.
	We now know that this couple had assembled an arsenal.
	They were not on law enforcement's radar.
	They were completely undetected.
	Well, they were on law enforcement's radar.
	And they weren't completely undetected.
	But it was in 2012.
	Yes!
	So as we approach another holiday, with the president again saying, late this week, no credible threat.
	Secretary Clinton, how confident should the American people be that there aren't others like that couple right now in the U.S. going undetected?
	And what would you do as president to find them?
	Well, first, the most important job of being president is obviously to keep our country safe and to keep the families of America safe.
	Drives me up the wall.
	Oh, I take it back.
	I take what I said back earlier.
	The California Zephyr just went by.
	That was another train.
	This one, I want to stop this show.
	This one had two private cars attached at the end.
	And one of them was like an observation car from like the 1920s or something.
	It's gorgeous.
	Observation car.
	Nice.
	Yeah.
	No, I put that into the clips.
	To piss me off.
	Yeah.
	Yes, I love it.
	Let's listen to it again.
	There aren't others like that couple right now in the U.S. going undetected.
	And what would you do as president to find them?
	Well, first, the most important job of being president is obviously to keep our country safe and to keep the families of America safe.
	Now, so the president...
	When he was at the Pentagon, said something similar, but I want to show that there's a very subtle distinction.
	The foremost job of the president, for those of you who are new, what the oath is of the president, the office of the president of the United States, is to protect and uphold the Constitution.
	It says nothing about the first order of business is to keep the American people safe.
	Now, here's the president, and he has put a twist on it, which leads me to believe I have to give him a pass, because he may have been listening.
	As president and commander-in-chief, my highest priority is the security of the American people.
	I think if you add commander-in-chief to it, then you're okay.
	Well, you're giving him the benefit of the doubt on that one.
	I'm pretty...
	I think your original stance, which I enjoy because it's exactly the same every time, is still correct.
	There was a PBS NewsHour.
	It wasn't a video piece, but on their...
	On their blog, they did a piece which titled, What Everyone's Getting Wrong About the President's Number One Job.
	And they explained the whole thing specifically, that the number one job is to protect and uphold the Constitution.
	So there are people thinking about it in the mainstream media, but still, no one seems to care about the actual oath.
	And I don't even think they're protecting the Constitution with all their attacks on the Second Amendment.
	No.
	Well, it's not just that.
	They have to uphold the Constitution.
	And they're not attacking the Second Amendment.
	They should.
	That's what I'm advocating for.
	Attack the Second Amendment.
	Don't attack feeble-minded people, people who have medical issues, mental issues, you know, because that's the slope you don't want to go down.
	Here's the, well, that's where they're going.
	Here's the one I thought was interesting.
	I didn't know this.
	Apparently, this is the movie's Trump for ISIS clip.
	Apparently, Apparently, ISIS is using Trump.
	They're making movies.
	Yeah.
	Using him to recruit.
	Yes.
	Together.
	You are not our adversary.
	You are our partner.
	And we also need to make sure that the really discriminatory messages that Trump is sending around the world don't fall on receptive ears.
	He is becoming ISIS's best recruiter.
	They are going to people showing videos of Donald Trump insulting Islam and Muslims in order to recruit more radical jihadists.
	So I want to explain why this is not in America's interest to react with this kind of fear and respond to this sort of bigotry.
	Secretary, thank you.
	Now, just while I'm on this, just for a second, move to the next clip, which is O'Malley who decides he's going to...
	Why are they giving Trump so much extra publicity?
	But here's O'Malley's bullcrap story.
	...to figure these things out, true to our American principles and values.
	You know, my friend Kashif, who is a doctor in Maryland...
	Back to this issue of our danger as a democracy of turning against ourselves.
	He was putting his 10- and 12-year-old boys to bed the other night.
	And he is a proud American Muslim.
	And one of his little boys said to him, Dad, what happens if Donald Trump wins and we have to move out of our homes?
	These are very, very real issues.
	Did he make that pledge?
	Like, if Trump becomes president, I'm leaving the country?
	Did you hear, by the way, he had the worst...
	No, don't get me started, because, you know, then it's just...
	Hey, newsflash from ABC. Hillary Clinton campaign doubles down after experts question claim about ISIS videos using Donald Trump.
	All right.
	Okay.
	I'm playing the clip, but it doesn't seem to have a voiceover.
	What is this?
	No one was available?
	No one was available.
	Somebody on standby.
	Hillary Clinton's communications director defended her candidate's claim that ISIS is using videos of Donald Trump to recruit members, but could not point to specific events of this happening in an interview on This Week with George Stephanopoulos today.
	Of course.
	Jen Palmieri said Clinton wasn't referring to a specific video during Saturday's debate when she said Trump's anti-Muslim rhetoric is making him ISIS's best recruiter, and that, quote, they're going to people showing videos of Donald Trump insulting Islam and Muslims in order to recruit more radical jihadists.
	Clinton offered no specific evidence of the claim.
	Quote, she's not referring to a specific video, but he is being used in social media by ISIS as propaganda.
	Oh.
	Well, that's not the same thing.
	Well, I got another clue.
	No.
	It's not.
	Not the same.
	She's a liar.
	Yeah.
	Let's get this clip out of the way.
	But I'm sure Rita Katz is getting the call right now.
	Yes.
	Yes, of course.
	Of course.
	I can make one.
	Yeah, we can make one.
	No problem.
	Yeah.
	Do you want a beheading in it as well?
	Rita Katz, of course, you should give a little background on her.
	Rita Katz, the Iraqi Jew who started the Sight Intelligence Group, has a bone to pick.
	She's partisan.
	And every single one of these great videos that appear are found by her group first.
	Yes.
	And, of course, they always refer to jihadist websites and dark web and links and Twitter accounts, which are never, ever, ever...
	Ever published.
	So when we say the word Rita Katz, that's what we mean.
	It's a trigger.
	It's a trigger word.
	Now, there's a trigger word in here, in this clip.
	I want you to identify it.
	See if you can identify the trigger word.
	And I was actually surprised that Hillary was so soft on encryption.
	But this is Hillary discussing the issue of making Apple, in particular, turn over their encryption.
	Identify the trigger word.
	But Apple CEO Tim Cook said removing encryption tools from our products altogether would only hurt law-abiding citizens who rely on us to protect their data.
	So would you force him to give law enforcement a key to encrypted technology by making it law?
	I would not want to go to that point.
	I would hope that given the extraordinary capacities that the tech community has and the legitimate needs and questions from law enforcement, that there could be a Manhattan-like project.
	Whoa!
	Something that would bring the government and the tech communities together to see they're not...
	I kind of miss that one.
	A Manhattan-like project?
	Like the nuclear bomb?
	Yeah.
	Yeah, that's what she said, but back it up.
	Yeah, I am going to back it up a little bit.
	That's a meme, but it's not the trigger words I'm hoping to identify.
	All right, well, I'll start it over and listen.
	...
	officials together, but Apple CEO Tim Cook said, removing encryption tools from our products altogether would only hurt law-abiding citizens who rely on us to protect their data.
	So would you force him to give law enforcement a key to encrypted technology by making it law?
	I would not want to go to that point.
	I would hope that given the extraordinary capacities that the tech community has and the legitimate needs and questions from law enforcement...
	You mean the great capacity the tech guys have?
	That there could be a Manhattan-like project, something that would bring the government and the tech communities together to see they're not adversaries.
	They've got to be partners.
	It doesn't do anybody any good.
	If terrorists can move toward encrypted communication that no law enforcement agency can break into before or after, there must be some way.
	I don't know enough about the technology, Martha, to be able to say what it is, but I have a lot of confidence in our tech The tech experts, which she usually calls the techno experts.
	Yeah, she's changed it to tech experts.
	I think we have...
	Okay, good.
	I'll play that on the end of show.
	Techno.
	Techno expert to me is a DJ. Yeah, that's what we have.
	We got techno.
	Would you like some techno?
	Old metal tonight.
	Well, you're the techno expert.
	But what has happened now is we've...
	We had Comey and we had Johnson.
	Certainly Comey is doing a reasonable job of, at least for his own layman terms, explaining why backdoors make no sense.
	It's meaningless unless you have the data at rest and the data in transit problem.
	So the data in transit problem, that's pretty much solved.
	We're going to talk about that later in our tech news segment.
	But the data...
	Actually, I think the data as stored, if it's stored in the cloud, they're not worried about it.
	They just want to get as much as they can, I guess.
	Blackmail!
	There's good stuff in there.
	You're going to get stock tips?
	Holy crap.
	You just had a...
	You know what?
	The mergers?
	M&A? You'd be all over it.
	You could win.
	Big.
	It was a fantastic deal.
	Insider trading all the way, even though it's not really, technically it's not insider trading.
	No, not for people who are working in government.
	If you think about it as what insider, I think technically means that you have access to it.
	Well, actually it is insider to get access to this information nobody else has.
	You can trade on it.
	Or if you pass the information on.
	That's exactly what you're looking for.
	So let's just get a couple of these more out of the way.
	I got...
	I learned something.
	I didn't realize what the latest thing they're going to do to try to screw up the Second Amendment and get gun...
	Gun stuff.
	Gun stuff.
	Well done, sir.
	Well played.
	Gun stuff.
	Gun stuff is this, and I didn't think about this just being a strategy, but it's so obviously a strategy, and this has got to have all the gun guys really shaking it.
	I mean, if you noticed, most of you probably didn't even notice what she's talking about, but she, play the gun immunity clip and you'll figure it out.
	I have voted not to give gun makers and sellers immunity.
	And I also know that, and I'm glad to see this, Senator Sanders has really moved in face of the facts about what we're confronting in our country.
	I know that he has said in the two previous debates that he wants to take on this immunity issue because we need to send a strong message to the gun manufacturers, to the sellers, to the gun lobby.
	And I would hope, Senator Sanders, that you would join the Democrats who are trying to close the Charleston loophole, that you would sponsor or co-sponsor legislation to remove the absolute immunity.
	We need to move on this consensus that exists in the country.
	It's no longer enough just to say the vast majority of Americans want common sense gun safety measures, including gun owners.
	We need, and only the three of us will do this.
	Nobody on the Republican side will even admit there's a problem.
	And in whatever way the three of us can, we need to move this agenda forward and begin to deal with the gun lobby and the intimidation that they present.
	Yeah, that's what they're...
	I see this everywhere now.
	This seems to be kind of the Obot's go-to.
	Yeah, it's a new thing.
	Yeah, if we make gun manufacturers liable for death...
	This is not a new idea, but it's a genius idea to kind of promote because they slip it in now because already the public's accepted the vaccine manufacturer's immunity.
	Yes.
	And I think we're getting a little annoyed by it, but this was, I think, mostly determined by the courts in the first place, which is if somebody buys a gun and then uses it to commit a crime, how is it the gun manufacturer's problem?
	Why do they get sued?
	I mean, that's what they want to do.
	Well, I'll tell you.
	They're equating it to tobacco companies and that they can be sued in certain situations, which has been very successful for some people.
	Yeah, I can see this.
	The only real analog of this smoking argument is if you buy a gun...
	And you accidentally shoot yourself.
	And you shoot yourself.
	And everybody who has a gun shoots themselves.
	Haven't there also been second-hand smoke lawsuits?
	I don't know how many of those have gotten very far.
	I'm not sure either.
	They'll try anything.
	It's okay.
	I'm just sad.
	I mean, just go for it.
	Look, when you see the poll...
	Actually, I have...
	Where was this?
	Yeah, here it is.
	This is The View.
	The View is freaking out about the most recent poll, although they're not...
	It's my beat, by the way.
	The View.
	Yes.
	Very good.
	So, what I understand...
	Do you wear your underwear and eat popcorn while you're watching The View?
	No.
	Do you have a costume or a uniform you wear, something that you routinely put on?
	Usually I'm just spinning in front of, not on the bike, but I'm spinning on my hoverboard in front of the TV.
	Just riding around, you know.
	And then when I hear something, oh, stop, stop, stop, I've got to record this.
	So I think it was on the previous episode of this podcast where we had the results in New York.
	New York, of all places.
	Where now I think it was 52% of Americans polled feel that there should be no ban on assault weapons because they're afraid of the government's inability to protect themselves.
	So that's not just more than ever, it is a majority according to the poll.
	So here's the views take.
	Gun violence has been making headlines on an almost daily basis this year.
	So tell me if this new poll surprises y'all.
	Right now, more Americans are against a ban on assault weapons than have been against it in the last 20 years.
	Here's the thing.
	Let's be thoughtful about this.
	What is the government supposed to protect you from?
	Sandy Hook didn't come from another country.
	That came right out of here.
	In Connecticut.
	Connecticut came out of here.
	Listen to Joy Behar.
	She's in the back, like, you know, in the church, in the black church.
	In Connecticut.
	What's it called?
	Call and response.
	Call and response.
	In Connecticut.
	North Dakota.
	North Dakota.
	No, I'm sorry.
	Colorado.
	We're out of here.
	There's so many.
	So many.
	Oklahoma.
	Timothy McVeigh.
	Timothy McVeigh had bombs.
	They came from...
	Timothy McVeigh and the guns and assault weapons.
	White people.
	Here, so what are we...
	What is the government supposed to do?
	Because it seems to me, you know, you want to ban people.
	You want to ban people from comment.
	You want to build a wall?
	How about an assault weapon wall?
	Let's build a wall about that!
	Yeah!
	Oh yeah, let's build a wall about that!
	Get out of my vagina!
	What?
	She's nuts!
	Well, yes, unfortunately.
	An assault weapon wall.
	Let's do that!
	Yeah, it's a great idea.
	That's just her attempt at being cynical or sarcastic, I guess.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Exactly.
	Well, it didn't work.
	No.
	Alright, onward.
	I got a couple more.
	I got the Pack of Lies clip, if you want to play that.
	Yeah, Clinton Pack of Lies?
	Yeah.
	Secretary Clinton, you two have ruled out a large U.S. combat force, yet you support sending in special operations forces to Syria and sending those 100 to 200 troops to Iraq to do exploitation kill raids.
	We've already lost one Delta Force member in a raid.
	It's looked very much to me like we're already in ground combat on frequent trips I've made there.
	So are you fooling Americans when you say, we're not putting American combat troops back into Syria or Iraq?
	No, not at all.
	That's pretty blatant.
	I love it.
	No, not at all.
	If you ask me a question of something, talk about my car.
	Well, now I believe...
	That, you know, we may be saying combat special forces, but it's possible that these are mercenaries, this is academy or some hired guys, and that way you can kind of skirt around the issue.
	No, those are Delta Force guys.
	True Delta Force?
	Yes.
	What we're facing with ISIS is especially complicated.
	It was a different situation in Afghanistan.
	We were attacked from Afghanistan.
	No, we weren't.
	Huh?
	What happened to Pakistan?
	What happened to Saudi Arabia?
	What happened to Iraq?
	What happened to Hamburg, Germany?
	Yeah, that's a very good question.
	In Afghanistan, we went after those who had attacked us.
	What's happening in Syria and Iraq is that because of the failures in the region, including the failure of the prior government in Baghdad, led by Malik.
	Huh?
	I won't play any more of that clip, but she's full of crap.
	Well, what to me was interesting is it seemed like for whatever reason, ABC also felt it was important to continuously focus on the homeland and security and Syria.
	And it was pretty much the same as as the Republican debate.
	But the discourse, of course, afterwards is, you know, they're not warmongers.
	No, not at all.
	They're so much better than everybody else.
	I don't see how they're not worse.
	But yeah, I do have to say there was one I thought funny moment.
	And it was Bernie Sanders after Clinton had gone into answering a series of questions about what about your corporate connections and all the rest of it.
	Oh, well, I've only got 3% of my money.
	But, you know, we all work together.
	And so they asked the exact same question to Bernie, who just went off on them.
	Thank you, Senator Sanders.
	I want to stay on this and ask you, how big a role does corporate America play in a healthy economy?
	And will corporate America love a President Sanders?
	No, I think they won't.
	Good line.
	It was the line of the show.
	Yeah, it was a good line.
	The CEOs of large multinationals may like Hillary.
	They ain't gonna like me.
	And Wall Street is gonna like me even less.
	And the reason for that...
	Are these idiots cheering that their 401ks are going to tank when Bernie Sanders is...
	They're just idiots cheering.
	I mean, seriously.
	It's like the Betty Boop audience.
	They ain't gonna like me, and Wall Street is gonna like me even less.
	And the reason for that...
	If we've got to deal with the elephant in the room, which is the greed, recklessness, and illegal behavior on Wall Street, when you have six financial institutions in this country that issue two-thirds of the credit cards and one-third of the mortgages, when three out of four of them are larger today than when we bailed them out because they are too big to fail, we've got to reestablish Glass-Steagall.
	We have got to break the large financial institutions up.
	So I don't think...
	I felt he missed an opportunity.
	Was it him or was it...
	Maybe it was O'Malley railing again on how we need a modernized version of Glass-Steagall, which we might want to point out was ripped apart by Hillary's husband.
	Which Bernie did point out in the debate.
	He did?
	I thought he alluded to it, but didn't say...
	No, no, he pointed the finger at Hillary's husband.
	Oh, really?
	Oh, okay.
	Having said that...
	I don't think I'm going to get a whole lot of campaign contributions from Wall Street.
	I don't have a super PAC. I don't want campaign contributions from corporate America.
	And let me be clear.
	Unless it's from the sugar lobby.
	While there are some great corporations creating jobs and trying to do the right thing.
	In my view.
	And I say this very seriously.
	Unlike all the other stuff you say, which was bullcrap.
	Greed.
	Yeah, I hate it when people do that.
	You know, let me be honest.
	The word frankly bothers me.
	Yeah, frankly, or let me be honest.
	Yeah, what, are you dishonest the rest of the time?
	You're frankly.
	You're talking frankly?
	You weren't frank before?
	I think so.
	And I say this very seriously.
	The greed of the billionaire class, the greed of Wall Street, is destroying this economy.
	And it's destroying the lives of millions of Americans.
	We need an economy that works for the middle class, not just a handful of billionaires.
	And I will fight and lead to make that happen.
	Senator, thank you.
	Well, that's where it gets the millenniums.
	Millenniums.
	Millennials.
	The millenniums.
	The millennial.
	I like millennium.
	I am a millennium.
	He gets them because they're all in debt.
	Their experience with the system has been negative, to say the least.
	No jobs, debt.
	It's just the worst.
	So they're all in with this guy.
	And they got Big Mike and all kinds of people coming out of the woodwork to support Bernie.
	And I saw this morning I'm just cruising through the Sunday shows.
	Everyone's complaining that Bernie doesn't get the amount of press he should be.
	The media's not focusing on him enough.
	Bullcrap.
	I know.
	Before Trump came along to Trump, everyone, he was getting all the press.
	Bernie, yeah, he was doing very well.
	I agree.
	I agree.
	But he hasn't said anything new, so what's the cover?
	I mean, Bernie's got, I mean, at least Trump, you have to give him credit as a natural in terms of the publicity angle.
	He's got new things to bring out the outrageous.
	Oh my God, what did he say now?
	Bernie has not done that and he could.
	Here is the latest Trump stand-up in which he responds to Vladimir Putin thinking Mr.
	Trump is an intelligent guy.
	Putin called him brilliant.
	Oh, brilliant.
	That's not good.
	Well, isn't this sort of nice?
	I love his mocking voice.
	He's very good at that.
	Putin called him brilliant.
	That's not good.
	Isn't it sort of nice if, like, countries are always fighting with maybe we get along and let them do, right?
	Right?
	I mean, look, you know, we're all tough guys, but wouldn't it be nice if, like, Russia and us could knock out an enemy together, not us bear the full cost sometimes, like...
	You know, we're always fighting, but I've had some guys say, oh, Russia.
	How about one of the people up in the city?
	I wouldn't talk to them.
	I wouldn't discuss anything.
	I wouldn't talk.
	What do they want to do?
	They want to have a World War III. Okay?
	World War III. For what?
	For what?
	And they have problems.
	We all have problems.
	Russia's got plenty of problems.
	But I'll tell you what, if Putin likes me and if he thinks I'm a good, smart person, which, I mean, I hope he believes it.
	I am.
	Actually, he's right.
	I am brilliant.
	You know that.
	But you know what?
	If he says something positive, that's a good thing.
	That's not a bad thing.
	They try and turn it around.
	And it's not to be turned around.
	This is good.
	This would be a great start.
	If you think about it, the money we spend on fighting everybody.
	Okay, well, he talks about what the media says.
	Here is a media report on this.
	And I believe this was from ABC. This is Trump complimented by Putin clip.
	In the meantime, on the Republican side tonight, Donald Trump back in the headlines this evening after his eye-opening response to Russian President Vladimir Putin, who is now praising Trump.
	Tonight, Trump returning the favor, but making headlines with what he said.
	ABC's David Wright on the Trump campaign.
	Today, a mutual admiration society for two political strongmen.
	After Vladimir Putin praised Donald Trump as, quote, undoubtedly a bright and talented person.
	When people call you brilliant, it's always good, especially when the person heads up Russia.
	Jeb Bush tweeted, a true freedom-loving conservative wouldn't be flattered by praise from a despot like Putin.
	Hashtag chaos candidate.
	At least he's a leader, you know, unlike what we have in this country.
	But again, he kills journalists that don't agree with him.
	Well, I think our country does plenty of killing also, Joe, so...
	There's a lot of stupidity going on in the world right now, Joe.
	That outraged the 2012 nominee, Mitt Romney, who tweeted, important distinction, thug Putin kills journalists and opponents.
	Our presidents kill terrorists and enemy combatants.
	But Dr.
	Ben Carson seems okay with all this.
	If somebody's going to pay you a compliment, you take it.
	Not a problem.
	And that seems to be how Trump sees it too.
	David Wright, ABC News.
	Now, the little slip in there that I thought was interesting in terms of propaganda, the guy that did the package said, described Trump and Putin as two political strongmen.
	How is Trump, he's not even in politics, he is running to get into politics.
	So how is he a political strongman?
	Who, Trump?
	Yeah.
	Oh, he's a political strongman by allowing everyone else to be political strongmen against him.
	Something like that.
	I don't know.
	There's no logic to it.
	Of course there's no logic.
	The whole thing is crazy.
	But it's great to watch.
	And not this debate, but everything around it is beautiful.
	Well, we're having fun.
	Well, there was a CBS did a poll.
	One of those where they have people in the studio and they ask them questions.
	It's a conversation.
	It was a Muslim focus group, CBS. But they brought in...
	Who's that right-wing poll guy?
	Luntz, I guess it is.
	Luntz.
	Frank Luntz.
	And I want to remind people, since we follow this guy...
	He's the one, after the first debate, when Trump was starting to make inroads after his announcement for president, and they had the absolute first debate, which was on Fox, where they attacked Trump and Megyn Kelly went after him, and it was a big deal.
	They had Luntz At the Luntz, or Luntz, whatever it is.
	Luntz, L-U-N-T-Z. Yeah, Luntz.
	They had Luntz at the end, and he had a bunch of people that were broad spectrum, and he made all sorts of conclusions.
	We have the clips that they're too hard to find, where he says, oh, everybody hated Trump.
	He's going to fall in the polls and probably drop out.
	Oh, yeah.
	According to Luntz's great, accurate analysis of the public.
	So this is where this guy's coming from.
	He's a stooge.
	Oh, he's a paid stooge.
	He will give you the results you desire.
	But I think he makes it.
	Fox obviously wanted him to go after Trump.
	But this was CBS. Well, there's another network.
	Yes, exactly.
	So this proves the theory.
	And there's been a couple of articles about this particular focus group where people who were in it, and you should never allow this to happen if you're doing focus groups, but okay, it should be NDA, you know, like a national security letter.
	People say, oh, no, they picked out all the pieces where I said this, I said that.
	And here is, there's a little kicker at the end, mainly the person speaking at the end of this 30-second clip.
	I actually did a call out to Muslim parents across the country to not watch the Republican debate in front of their children.
	This is, so this is a Muslimah, and she's sitting there and saying, you know, I said, hey, people, don't let your children watch the debates because of the hate, the Muslim hate.
	Because I knew that subjecting our children to hear the hateful stereotyping and the lumping of Muslims with terrorism in front of our children is actually something that psychologically impacts them.
	And show me some children who want to watch this crap.
	Unless Bernie Sanders is holding a lightsaber, they're not going to be interested.
	That's how deep this is for us.
	But don't you want the kids to know the challenges that they face?
	I don't want my children to be subjected to racism and the vilification of their faith.
	I will not allow Donald Trump to tell my kids how they should feel about being Muslim.
	How many of you are physically afraid because you're physically afraid?
	Now listen to this last guy.
	There has been an increase in hate crimes that has been reported through the Council on American Islamic Relations.
	Last lady, I mean, I'm sorry.
	These were CARE people, John.
	Yeah.
	I don't understand.
	When did CARE become a trusted source?
	Certainly after their sordid history of front grouping for terrorist organizations.
	Yeah.
	I don't know.
	These are the bonehead editors at these operations at CBS, in this case, and the other networks, too.
	All of them bring them on.
	There's other groups out there, Muslim groups, that are very middle-of-the-road, and it's probably conservative, too, that you could bring on, if you just looked around, just went down the phone book list, Googled it, But no, they keep bringing these care people on.
	That's all they bring on.
	And now they have Frank Luntz, who's just a, you know, I don't trust anything he says.
	Not after watching what he did with the Fox thing when it was obviously given the go-ahead, the go-after Trump, with all kinds of conclusions that never panned out.
	Well, it looks like he's through.
	Right.
	Something else odd happened in the political reporting industry, and it's always fun when it's the paper of record, the New York Times.
	I'll read here.
	A story published by New York Times late Thursday night caused some major media waves.
	The story, which was written by reporters Peter Baker and Gardner Harris, included a remarkable admission by Obama about his response to the recent terror attacks in Paris and San Bernardino, California.
	However, the entire passage containing Obama's admission, which was, here it is, So he had a private meeting with columnists.
	This is what you do when you need to get the propaganda machine rolling.
	In his meeting with the columnists, Mr.
	Obama indicated he did not see enough cable television to fully appreciate the anxiety after the attacks in Paris and San Bernardino and made clear that he plans to step up his public arguments.
	So the New York Times published that, but then erased it.
	They removed that entire paragraph from their story, at least on the online version, and they replaced it with something that did not at all reflect what the president apparently said.
	So let's just listen first to...
	Let's see.
	Listen, this is the allegation, I think.
	The New York Times says it was just trying to save space when it edited from an earlier story, a stunning admission by President Obama, that he essentially underestimated the public's reaction to recent ISIS terror attacks.
	This quote was in the original version of last night's Times story.
	Quote, in his meeting with the columnist, Mr.
	Obama indicated that he did not see enough cable television to fully appreciate the anxiety after the attacks in Paris and San Bernardino.
	That section was eliminated and replaced by two paragraphs that had more words than the original sentence, calling into question the Times' explanation about saving space.
	Okay.
	So the conspiracy theory websites went nuts.
	They used more space to save space.
	They went nuts.
	So the Times is lying, of course.
	But...
	I think, you know, I'm trying to think, really?
	Did he really say this?
	And then the New York Times removed it, and I'm the first guy to jump on any kind of mainstream media conspiracy.
	I think Charles Krauthammer actually had the correct analysis about what really happened.
	Well, look, on this story about the meeting with a journalist and him saying that this is all hyped up, You know, he didn't see it on cable.
	I think I wasn't there, but I think, of course I wasn't there.
	To me, he was being sarcastic.
	This is a way of dissing, of sort of showing condescension to the rabble out there.
	This is Obama essentially saying, well, you know, the reason people are upset about this is because it's been hyped on television and they are not as cool, intelligent, and foreseeing as I am.
	This is his usual professorial condescension.
	I believe that to be the right answer.
	I like it.
	Sounds totally believable.
	Because, of course, you never know the context of the written word.
	He could have referenced cable television.
	He could have been very sarcastic when he says, I don't watch a lot of that cable television.
	I'm sure that's exactly what he meant.
	That's why the New York Times had to retract it, because...
	It was misleading.
	And also, it's bad enough for him to say, oh, I'm out of touch.
	I haven't watched, which I don't think he said.
	But then they say, oh, you stupid morons getting all riled up by cable news, nut job, stupid, unintelligent.
	You're no elite like me.
	And that is actually more egregious.
	Yeah, it is.
	I think that is the analysis.
	I agree.
	It doesn't happen often.
	No, it does once in a while.
	And with that, I'd like to thank you for your courage and say in the morning to you, John C! Nick Devorak.
	In the morning, you, Mr.
	Adam Curry.
	In the morning, old boots on the ground, feet in the air.
	Subs in the water.
	And all the dames and knights out there.
	In the morning, everybody, in the chat room, noagendastream.com.
	In the morning to Nick the Rat.
	Once again, slamming it home with the artwork for episode 782.
	The title was Lumpy Lips.
	I've not got a call yet from the Dutch press about it.
	And, of course, the...
	The album art was a Jeb Bush with the big Coke bottle glasses.
	Fabulous.
	On vacation.
	Fabulous, fabulous.
	Yeah, we had some trouble with this one, and we might as well explain it, because we did have PewDiePie, who was digging pretty hard.
	I had a really good piece that we could have used, but we figured we could use it more as an evergreen.
	And the moment, you could not look at the George Bush with the Coke bottle glasses on.
	George, Jeb.
	I keep calling him George.
	Jeb Bush with the Coke bottle glasses on.
	And now I kind of laugh because it's just stupid looking.
	By the way, I think they've changed his prescription.
	I think they're making him wear a not such an outrageous prescription because I noticed in the last days his eyeballs weren't as big in the glasses.
	Okay.
	Because usually, I mean, I remember seeing where it's like, holy crap!
	The eyeballs were huge.
	They filled up the whole, you know, he must be blind.
	I'm looking at the size of the spreadsheet today, because that's how we determine how we're doing.
	That's our stats.
	Yeah, well, this is, again, we enter the holidays on Friday.
	I'm going to take the blame.
	I'm going to take the blame.
	Wait.
	Yeah, you might take the blame, but you don't know what you're taking the blame for.
	Low donations?
	How can you be responsible?
	Because I told you sloths were trending, and I think the sloth did us in.
	Oh.
	Oh.
	And besides, we can't do the sloth anymore.
	Why?
	Because I figured out why it was trending, and now we sound like shills.
	Alright, tell me.
	The brand new Disney movie Zootopia!
	Oh.
	I'm in Drew!
	This is Officer McQuorn.
	We got a 1031.
	I got damned!
	Officer Hawks!
	I am in pursuit!
	Woo!
	Woo!
	Unknowing shit.
	I need you to run a plate.
	Flash is the fastest guy in there.
	He can run the plate like that.
	Wait.
	They're all sloths?
	Everybody at the post office is a sloth.
	Oh, well that's an insult.
	Are you saying that because he's a sloth he can't be fast?
	Flash, flash, hundred yard dash.
	Okay, so.
	Well, that's kind of insulting to the Postal Service.
	Yeah.
	I think if I was them, I'd think this is Disney?
	That's Disney.
	Oh, they're not going to be getting their mail.
	They're going to be sorry.
	That's a mistake.
	I do have an alternate idea.
	By the way, so what you're saying is we're unknowing dupes, the worst kind.
	Yes, yes, we have to stop the sloth promotion.
	Unknowing dupes.
	I would like to switch.
	Oh, God.
	There's nothing cuter than baby hedgehogs.
	Hedgehogs are cute.
	Yeah.
	Okay, we'll do a hedgehog next time.
	Hedgehogs for the win.
	I thought you were going to apologize for the fact that because this is the Christmas season, which when it began, which it began right after our last show, people started heading out.
	You can see it on the freeways.
	Yeah.
	We would do some evergreen shows or some interviews or some old shows and just take two weeks off, like all media does.
	Everybody in the media, they're all, well, we'll be back in two weeks.
	We'll see you next year.
	It also makes our job a lot harder because everyone's running retrospect.
	Even the president did a top 10 of 2015 in his podcast today.
	Who cares?
	Top 10.
	Top ten what?
	Top ten of great things he's done, I guess, is kind of the idea.
	I'm great.
	Here's what I did for you, for the world.
	Well, we could do that.
	Yeah.
	So this begins a two-week period where just so little money comes in.
	Although it was kind of at least one guy, our Viscount, even though he doesn't...
	Push it to be a Viscount, but that's what he is.
	Sir Richard Bagwell came in with $1,234.56.
	One, two, three, four, five, six.
	Beautiful number.
	Beautiful number.
	Louisville, Kentucky.
	And he...
	He sent a check-in, which is probably the way to do it, and it says this is his fifth annual donation of 1234.56.
	That's right.
	Every year he does it.
	That's right.
	He does it every year.
	And he says all he wants is job karma.
	I've done this the past four years, and karma has been good to me.
	So good, I get to continue paying it forward.
	By supporting the best podcasts in the universe.
	Beautiful.
	Cheers, RS. Well, thank you very much.
	And Viscount, does he have a protectorate?
	He's never given, he doesn't, all he does is contribute this one donation a year of a very large amount, and he doesn't push anything.
	I'd give him Kentucky, personally, but he doesn't, he hasn't chosen, he's a freelancer.
	He doesn't want Rand Paul.
	He's a Ronin.
	Alright, here's your Jobs Karma.
	Thank you so much for your annual contribution.
	We appreciate this.
	Jobs, jobs, jobs, and jobs.
	Let's vote for jobs!
	You've got karma.
	And now to our regulars, we've got three associate executive producers.
	Joost.
	Joost, I got it!
	Joost Schipperheim.
	Very close.
	Schipperheim.
	Schipperheim.
	Schipper.
	I can't do that.
	Yeah, you can.
	It's like Yiddish.
	Schipperheim.
	He's in Eindhoven.
	250 bucks.
	And he says Schipperheim right there in the name.
	Schipperheim.
	I cannot do that.
	No.
	I think I've mentioned this, that in World War II, in order to see if, in the Netherlands, see if there were German...
	Spies or any other kind of spy that would make people, you know, kind of like the U.S. had Who Won the World Series.
	Yeah.
	If you didn't like baseball, you're a dead man.
	That's right.
	The Dutch version, I think this showed up in Soldier of Orange, the movie.
	If you've never seen it, that's a great movie to watch.
	The word is schafening.
	Schafening?
	There you go.
	You're fired.
	I mean, you're like really fired.
	Like, you spy!
	Schafening.
	Schafening.
	Well, I would go in as a mute.
	A good one.
	Another tip.
	Another wartime tip.
	It's from John C. DeVora.
	Riley Kimball in San Tan Valley in Arizona.
	2, 3, 4, 5, 6.
	Amazing shows lately.
	Oh my god!
	Thank you for your courage.
	Give me an I Love Bugs followed by Don't Raff with a touch of karma.
	Oh, he wants Don't Raff?
	Yeah.
	Okay.
	I Love Bugs.
	And then Raff.
	And we'll do some karma with that.
	I think we can handle that.
	Let me see.
	Yeah.
	I Love Bugs!
	Bugs!
	Don't Raff.
	Why are you laughing?
	Shut up.
	Tastes like poop.
	Shut up.
	You've got karma.
	Was it the Chinese foreign minister?
	It's Japanese.
	Japanese foreign minister, yes.
	Dame Joni.
	Hey!
	Don't say Joni Duffray!
	Duffray!
	$200.
	Merry Christmas and a Happy 2016, John and Adam.
	Love you guys, and thank you so much for watching the Idiot Box so I don't have to.
	You keep me sane.
	Request jingles.
	How about ISIS, ISIS, baby?
	Resist we much.
	Never gets old, she says.
	And Obama no, no, no.
	And throw in a holiday karma for you guys and all the producers.
	Love and kisses, Dame Joanie.
	So which Obama no, no, no, no, no, no are we thinking of?
	Probably one of the shorter ones.
	I think I have something here.
	Yeah, I got something we can try out.
	Ah!
	I see you.
	Follow them to the gates of hell!
	ISIS. I feel good!
	Oh, wait.
	That's another techno version.
	What is this?
	Nice.
	Damn.
	That's not the resist we much.
	I don't think so, but put it at the end of the show.
	Yeah, that's dynamite.
	Hold on.
	Rocks out.
	We'll have a whole techno show at the end.
	Okay, you know what?
	No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.
	But resist, we much.
	We must and we will much about that be committed.
	You've got karma.
	Shut up, Al.
	Never gets old.
	It doesn't, really.
	So that concludes our show.
	We're done.
	All right, pack it in.
	Now I have a...
	We do have a Thursday, just before the day before Christmas, a Christmas Eve show.
	Yeah.
	Very unusual for anyone in the media, working any sort of media, any sort of media.
	To do a show on Christmas Eve that's not pre-recorded.
	No.
	And ours will be live, and it'll be on Thursday.
	And it would be nice to have more help than we got today.
	We have very few donors.
	I think a total number is like, let me take a look for the ones over $50.
	Meanwhile, while you're looking that up.
	It's like, I get it up.
	It's 21 people.
	Wow.
	Out of the 15,000 people that get there.
	Hey, Merry Christmas!
	21 people.
	Promotional moment.
	The No Agenda Jingles app has been updated with 28 new jingles.
	Okay.
	That's good.
	Go check that out.
	Update, I guess, is what you want to do if you already had it.
	It's a pretty good little app.
	I like it because you can create your own sequence of jingles.
	Is it iPhone only?
	I think it is.
	I think it's iOS only.
	But it's nice because you can create your own sequence of jingles in a playlist.
	It's cool.
	And I think this is also the one where you can do a dub smash.
	Great for a doctor's office, by the way.
	What do you mean?
	Are you in the waiting room?
	Yeah, and then all of a sudden...
	Yeah.
	Or, like, uh...
	Hello, Mr.
	Cody is next.
	Mr.
	Cody is next.
	Go vaccines!
	It's like, uh...
	Apparently your doctor's office is in North Korea.
	Yes.
	Yes.
	I don't know the inside of a doctor's office, man.
	Or a hospital.
	Have you ever been to a doctor's office?
	Yes, of course I've been to a doctor's office.
	Well, it's possible.
	We thank our executive producer and our associate executive producers profusely today.
	Certainly on today where, man, nice to have a little evening out.
	These credits are real.
	I have to repeat that every single time because people keep using them and are astounded by the results they get, particularly if you put them on your LinkedIn.
	And if there's any ever question, we'll be very, very happy to vouch for your executive or associate executive producer status.
	Another show on Thursday.
	That is Christmas Eve.
	Please remember us this Christmas.
	And while you're hanging out with your entire family, remember to go out there and hit them in the mouth.
	Our formula is this.
	We go out, we hit people in the mouth.
	Order!
	Order!
	Shut up, slave!
	Shut up, slave!
	Yes, citizen, you may return to your harpsichord.
	Boom, boom.
	Uh...
	You saw all kinds of new or really old ones.
	Oh, just moving it around a little bit.
	I, uh...
	There was...
	I think I've mentioned many times it is so incredibly easy to do a little bit of promotion for the show on C-SPAN when they have the Washington Journal where they have guests.
	You can call in.
	You can call in on the Democrat line, Republican line, or the Independent line.
	And it's a great way to just throw in Best Podcast in the Universe, NoAgendaShow.com.
	There's a million different things you can do.
	A million.
	And I forget which, there was a congressman on the show and he was taking calls and this happened.
	Glenn called in from Salt Lake City, Utah.
	Glenn, good morning.
	Hi, good morning.
	My question is, since we're spending all this money, where are we getting the money from?
	And my second question is, if I can shit in your mouth.
	I apologize for that, Congressman.
	Don't take that kind of language here on the Washington Journal.
	We'll move on.
	Yeah, move on.
	Some asshole will go do that, but no one will come out and say, you know, no agenda show talked about this, blah, blah, blah.
	Right.
	I think that's my point.
	What should it be?
	I mean, that's a good one, though.
	Because what are you going to say?
	It depends on your definition of that's a good one.
	What are you going to say?
	Don't juvenile sense of humor.
	Yeah, that made my day.
	But I watch a lot of C-SPAN. When something like that comes along...
	Well, it definitely is a change of pace.
	I covet that.
	They come...
	Every once in a while, if that happens too often, because there's moments where they...
	I remember a few years back, they had...
	The moon landing guys, or was it a moon landing?
	No, it was truthers, and there was a slew of them calling in, because apparently they're so well organized that they can get their boys to call in, unlike us who can't get anybody to call in.
	But they had them all calling in, so they put a delay loop on it, and they took it off, I guess, so they wouldn't have that on there.
	I didn't like that.
	That's expensive, the digital delay stuff.
	Why?
	Oh, it's an expensive piece of kit.
	And you have to have a person...
	So the way C-SPAN works, there's a director, a technical director, maybe the Chiron is separate and audio is separate, but they don't have big...
	Big crews necessary to really vet the calls perfectly, number one, and to dump out.
	Dumping out is a skill.
	It's a skill if you do it right.
	It may even be a guild or something.
	I'm sure there's some kind of...
	Union for that.
	Union?
	Yeah, yeah.
	Maybe.
	I'll have to look into it again, but I always know that MTV, they were always pissed off when they had to start to do that eventually.
	It's about nine seconds, I think they had.
	And it's a complicated job.
	What are you going to pull out?
	Where are you going to hit the button?
	You've got to really be paying attention to.
	But you've got eight seconds to recover.
	Yeah.
	Anyway, it doesn't matter.
	I'm glad they don't have it because it makes it much more entertaining.
	Much more entertaining.
	Yes, depending on your definition of entertainment.
	Okay, here's some entertainment for y'all.
	I don't know.
	I never watched this program, but I watched it because the president was on Bear Grylls.
	Bear Grylls?
	Is this the nature guy?
	No, I don't even know what you're talking about.
	I'm completely...
	Really?
	I don't know.
	I've never heard of Bear Grylls.
	G-R-Y-L-L-S, I think?
	Bear Grylls?
	Yeah, he does...
	But Bear was this.
	Well, he's an adventurer.
	Oh, this is promoted on the History Channel.
	Yes, I think it was that.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, Obama took a week off and he's playing glaciers.
	Yes.
	Yes.
	This is great for the American economy, for our president to be...
	Now he's in Hawaii now, so...
	Yeah, he's on vacation while the world is melting down.
	But yeah, it's vacation.
	Stop.
	Yeah, so the president is out there.
	Where were they?
	They were out...
	I'll have to look up where they were, but listen to a little clip here.
	So this whole valley would have been filled with a glacier.
	I read somewhere that what you've done with your climate change plan is the most significant thing any single human being has ever done to protect the planet.
	Wow!
	Trump would hire this guy.
	This is worse than anything I've ever heard.
	This was really, really good.
	I like that.
	You have done more than any single human being ever in the universe of the world of the universe of ever anything to save the planet, protect all the people.
	Hell, hell!
	Is the most significant thing any single human being has ever done to protect the planet.
	Well, you know...
	And that's amazing.
	Because there are so many skeptics out there.
	Oh, yes.
	You know, were you always a convert, or did you take, how did you?
	He was in, so they were in Alaska, so I think this all was recorded during the president's Alaska trip.
	The only thing he didn't do, he didn't drink his own pee during this incredible trial.
	You know, I'm a big believer in science.
	Oh, yeah.
	Big believer in science.
	The science is in!
	When I started looking at the science, it was indisputable.
	When he started looking at the science, you know, as a Nobel Prize winner, I looked at the science and said, by God, this is indisputable, I think!
	It was indisputable.
	This must be one of the things that your girls, for example, are most proud of, that you're really making a mark on saving their future planet.
	Well, they may be proud of me, they don't necessarily admit it right now.
	Hail, hail, all hail, all hail.
	And of course, the president had a warning, obviously.
	It's quite a special moment when we come out of the forest, come over this rise, and bam, right in front of us is this huge, giant white face of the snout at the end of the glacier.
	And we just kind of had a moment of taking it in.
	I have a beef here.
	Why did the Brits call it a glacier and not a glacier?
	Because it's a glacier.
	And we just kind of had a moment of taking it in and him realizing this is why he's fought so hard for all he's doing to try and protect our planet.
	Is this guy an Australian?
	I believe so, yeah.
	Yeah, I believe so.
	For all he's doing to try and protect our planet.
	You know, most problems in the world, as tragic as they may be, are fixable.
	You know, you can reverse trends.
	This is one of those trends where if it starts accelerating too fast, then we can be too late.
	No!
	The science is in!
	Science!
	This must have connected nicely to a little speech that he included.
	This little ditty was included in the speech, which I suppose is connected to this idiotic show where he's wandering.
	By the way, they were all pro...
	I just say pro-glacier or anti-glacier.
	Glaciers are not healthy.
	They're not something you want coming down your neighborhood.
	You don't want them coming down the block.
	Anyway, here's Republicans that are outliers.
	Okay.
	Okay.
	Right now, the American Republican Party is the only major party that I can think of in the advanced world that I mean, it's an outlier.
	So my sense is this is something that may be an advantage in terms of short-term politics in a Republican primary.
	It's not something that is going to be a winner.
	Not going to be a winner.
	Not going to be a winner.
	And they're just doing it because that implication, very well done, very well spoken.
	What he implied is that the Republicans are liars.
	Mm-hmm.
	Because they...
	Just pandering to the base with their rhetoric.
	Yeah, they're just catering to the base with the bullcrap for the dummies who are Republicans.
	This is a very propagandistic commentary.
	I was repulsed by it, to be honest about it.
	You know, I'm always listening very carefully to the words the president uses because I believe that he's very careful...
	He's always going to be able to come back years later and say, this is exactly what I said.
	And you can see that if you listen to my words carefully, I was saying exactly this.
	Whereas, you know, he's good at that.
	I don't think we were doing...
	I was living in London, so we probably didn't have the opportunity to record so many clips in 2008 when Obama was running for the first time.
	Someone sent me this clip, which I'd forgotten about.
	Terrorism and nuclear weapons.
	Climate change and poverty.
	Genocide and disease.
	All of the candidates in this race share these goals.
	Yep.
	And you know what?
	He realizes his mistake and he smiles but doesn't correct it.
	All of the candidates in this race have good ideas.
	Yeah.
	He just glosses right over it.
	I think you've achieved your goal.
	We've got terrorism.
	We've got climate change.
	Terrorism and nuclear weapons.
	Nuclear weapons, yeah.
	And you have to play that clip again from the beginning.
	Now that everyone can understand what it is you're getting at.
	Terrorism and nuclear weapons.
	Climate change and poverty.
	Genocide and disease.
	All of the candidates in this race share these goals.
	Yeah.
	It's a gem.
	You might as well play the sheep in human clothing or whatever it is.
	Pigs.
	There's a couple I wanted to play.
	Let me play that one again.
	We can do the medley.
	A medley.
	Terrorism and nuclear weapons.
	Climate change and poverty, genocide and disease.
	All of the candidates in this race share these goals.
	Nah, I screwed up.
	Okay, let's do this another time.
	Do you use it at the end of the show?
	Okay.
	And then you can do the medley.
	That's a good one.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	Obama.
	End of show.
	I'll put it as a medley.
	Okay.
	Got it.
	That's the president's 2008 goals.
	Good work.
	Yeah.
	He's gotten a lot of income.
	Good man.
	He's right in line with what needs to be happening.
	One of our producers sent us a...
	I didn't think much of it.
	I listened to this clip when I was starting to take clips.
	That Trump...
	People have a visceral dislike of Trump because he's reminiscent of a character that was in Green Acres.
	Which one?
	The shyster.
	There's a shyster in Green Acres that was always coming around named Haney.
	And Haney would always sell something stupid.
	And so somebody on YouTube...
	This is all over YouTube, by the way.
	Somebody on YouTube showed Cruz...
	It's Ted Cruz.
	Ted Cruz giving a speech...
	And with Haney's voice over it, it didn't work that well.
	I didn't see that it didn't sound that much like Cruise.
	But then when I was editing the clips and I ran into the clip of the Haney voice, I said, you know, it sounds enough like Cruise to make a connection.
	You can tell me what you think.
	You looking for this?
	Just dropped by.
	I wondered if you made any decision about the wallpaper.
	This is your lucky day.
	I got some furniture that was just made for this place.
	He's a little too hickey.
	I think if you knocked the hickey part out, it would sound pretty much like him.
	I was just passing it through.
	Just an idea.
	A thought.
	I don't think that's why people dislike the cruise, though.
	I think it's his presentation.
	He's just creepy looking.
	And if you wanted to really take it to some level that's deep, I would say he reminds me of Joe McCarthy.
	He kind of looks like him.
	He kind of talks like him.
	And it's an old reference.
	Nobody remembers Joe McCarthy.
	Let's look at this from a media deconstruction standpoint.
	How can we use this to make Ted Cruz even look stupider?
	I think Green Acres is too old to do anything with it.
	Yes, I think it's a callback that's dated.
	I don't think that's a good way to go.
	Well, we'll work it out.
	We'll do a freebie.
	For the competition.
	Okay.
	Curry DeVore Consulting Company Media Consulting Group.
	Group.
	Group.
	And we will find some way to make crews worse.
	Yeah, I'm sure we can do a great job.
	Well, there's some other people in trouble.
	I'm going to start by, while you're taking it, I'm going to have a beer.
	Okay.
	Nice.
	Schlitz malt liquor, obviously.
	Amen.
	Fist bump.
	IMF chief Christine Lagarde says she will be appealing a decision by a French court that she stands trial for her role in the payment of 400 million euros to a French businessman.
	The case dates back to more than 20 years and will be heard at a Parisian court.
	The decision comes as a surprise to her legal team as France's top prosecutor had previously recommended that the case against IMF chief be dropped.
	The prosecutor said there was no case against Lagarde, but the judge has disregarded this.
	This decision was taken in disregard of the facts, of the documents of the trial record, and of the recommendations of the prosecution authority.
	It is therefore incomprehensible.
	The ruling concerns Bernard Tappé, who was compensated by the French government after selling his stake in the sports company Adidas to Credit Lyonnais in 1993.
	His case was referred to an arbitration panel by Lagarde, who was the French finance minister at the time.
	No, they're taking her out.
	Did you get this from the FOP news?
	That's Euro news.
	Wow.
	Yeah, sometimes they have really crappy production.
	K-F-O-P. K-F-O-P. And the fappy news, I think.
	Why do you think you may be onto something?
	Yeah, it's time to take her out.
	They've been trying.
	This has been going on for a long time.
	And now, finally, the French are the ones that are going to take her out.
	Yeah.
	Wonder what she did wrong.
	Oh, you didn't listen to the report?
	Well, I was too interested in the guy's voice.
	Oh, well, she...
	I know, no, no, no.
	I know what she did wrong, according to the report.
	She's involved in some scandal.
	Well, the scandal is not small.
	No, no.
	That's not what I'm saying.
	I'm asking what she did wrong.
	Oh.
	As far as the IMF. Oh, of course.
	I don't know.
	What I think...
	I think that she announced the Remnibi was going to be in the SDR basket before any of the reforms were ratified by the U.S. She's pressuring.
	That's what she's doing.
	She's pressuring the U.S. And this would be my deconstruction.
	Okay.
	I'm all in on the idea that when she did the Remnibi, I'll just call it the Chinese Yuan, because I can pronounce it.
	When she did that, I thought it was a little peculiar.
	And I think she's just pressuring.
	She's been doing this, and she extended the date until actually this month.
	Was it 2005 or 2010?
	It's been a while.
	The reforms, which would allow the U.S. to maintain our veto, but would put China into the basket, into the SDR basket, would put the number two on the list.
	And we're not going to ratify that.
	It's obvious.
	It would be going on for years.
	And I think she just pressured.
	It wasn't going to be two.
	It was going to be three.
	Euros too.
	Okay.
	Three then.
	But still, putting them in at all.
	Yeah.
	I think she pressured.
	I thought that was peculiar.
	And I don't think that she will be...
	I think she'll recover.
	She's smart.
	And she's a slimert.
	Slime ball.
	Slime dog.
	She's a weasel.
	She'll weasel her way out somehow.
	She'll do something.
	Because she loves the power too much.
	Look at that face.
	She's in Saint-Tropez all the time.
	Tanning.
	She looks like a baseball glove.
	Tanning.
	That's one way of putting it.
	Let me write that down.
	I have to remember that next time I see her.
	Do you know what Dvorak said?
	You look like a baseball glove.
	What's going on with you, lady?
	So we had this big omnibus bill.
	Yes, the one they slipped in CISA. Yes, they did.
	And nobody seems to...
	Oh, well...
	Where's the outrage?
	Where's the recalls?
	No one cares.
	You know why?
	They cared a year ago.
	Look at the timing of it.
	Who are the people that would be against this?
	Against the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act, which has now just become legislation and slipped into the omnibus bill.
	Who would be against that?
	What is the profile of this person?
	And what were they doing Friday and Saturday?
	What were they doing on Saturday?
	They were jacking off to Star Wars, man.
	No wonder no one paid attention to it.
	These guys are genius.
	Timing is everything.
	Oh, Star Wars.
	Now what I did find, and this was, you know, it was leaked, so I'm thinking that it must be an administration leak.
	That leak.
	The administration had a number of priorities and preferences for CISA, which I guess means they're going to start adding this or they have to put stuff in afterwards.
	But the framework is already there.
	And I'd like to read a few of them, if you don't mind.
	This comes from the White House, and it is a leaked document.
	This is the big one that you and I are interested in, John.
	The administration supports providing narrowly targeted liability protections to incentivize broader cybersecurity threat information sharing.
	That's interesting.
	Narrowly targeted liability protections to incentivize broader cybersecurity threat information sharing.
	That hurts my brain.
	Yeah, it's self-contradictory.
	Yeah.
	Here's the logic about encouraging a business to like...
	Well, incentivizing is the word.
	Incentivizing, let's say that.
	Yeah.
	Here's the funny thing about incentivizing the way I see it.
	This is, and you released liability issues.
	This is telling me, and I don't believe this is what I'm going to say, by the way, but it's what it says, or this is what the government believes, I think.
	This is how the government thinks.
	This is the administration.
	Valerie Jarrett.
	Let's just say Valerie Jarrett.
	The president.
	The real president.
	Because they know so little about business.
	They actually think that the only thing preventing any business, Apple or any of them, from just spilling everything on their customers, not giving a crap, and giving it all over to the government is because they might get sued.
	You know?
	And I think they're probably right.
	I don't think they're right in any way.
	There's no reason.
	There's not a...
	No.
	You don't think Facebook is chomping at the bit to share?
	Facebook is chomping at the bit to sell.
	Let me read the next line.
	This may help because I understand why they put this in here.
	So we have this administration supports providing narrowly targeted liability protections to incentivize broader cybersecurity threat information sharing.
	Appropriate liability protections should incentivize good cybersecurity practices and should not grant immunity.
	To a private company for failing to act on information it receives about the security of its networks.
	So what they're saying here is you better be sharing everything, because if you fail to share something about the security of your network, then you're in trouble.
	So oversharing is encouraged by this provision the way I read it.
	Such a provision would remove incentives for companies to protect their customers' personal information and may weaken cybersecurity writ large.
	Whoa.
	Did you drop your teeth?
	I dropped my mic.
	Yeah, it happens all the time.
	There is a danger that providing a good faith exception for a failure to act on information received could create a moral hazard and discourage companies from responding appropriately to cyber threat indicators they receive.
	So I think it's actually interesting the way they put this.
	We want to give them immunity, but don't give them immunity for when they screw up or maybe they pretend to screw up because then they'll be just liable as ever.
	Oh, that's interesting.
	They're saying, yeah, somebody in the meeting said, hey, wait a minute, what if these guys actually screw up?
	Yeah.
	And then they want to fall back on this provision saying, oh, there's no liability.
	We can't let them get away with that because these guys are boneheads.
	Let's move on.
	The DHS, do you like this?
	I think it's quite fun actually to do this.
	I don't know.
	Alright, it's your cybersecurity too, John.
	The administration supports authorizing new liability-protected sharing relationships only through the National Cybersecurity and Communication Integration Center, a civilian entity within the Department of Homeland Security.
	Additionally, the administration supports real-time sharing between the NCCIC and relevant federal agencies with appropriate privacy protections and has preliminarily deployed such a capability at DHS.
	Focusing real-time sharing through one center at DHS enhances situational awareness, facilitates robust privacy controls, and helps hackers to find a single source of all information.
	Oh, I'm sorry, I made that up myself.
	Then we go to defensive measures.
	The use of defensive measures without appropriate safeguards raises significant legal policy of diplomatic concerns and can have a direct...
	Deleterious impact.
	What does that mean, deleterious?
	Negative.
	Why don't they just say negative?
	They like this word better.
	So you can't keep using the same words over and over.
	Okay.
	Deleterious impact on information systems that undermine cybersecurity.
	Moreover, certain provisions may prevent the application of laws such as state common law tort remedies.
	So you can't just...
	Legislation should not create a backdoor exception by allowing, quote, defensive measures that access other computers without authorization.
	So companies can't go doing that on their own, is the way I read that.
	Privacy Scrub.
	Let me see.
	That's not necessarily interesting.
	The Cyber Threat Intelligence Integration Center.
	No, not in...
	Oh, the Einstein Authorization.
	Now, we've looked at this Einstein thing, and Einstein is pretty much a...
	It's a closed network that has email phishing filters and spam filters and DNS protection.
	Right.
	But I think because it's called Einstein, that they think this is the cat's meow or something.
	Einstein authorization.
	Hey, skidoo.
	Skidoo?
	Cat's meow.
	23 skidoo.
	Cat's meow.
	Wow.
	Well, that's probably what they're talking about.
	I'm telling you.
	The administration supports provisions that will improve the cybersecurity of federal networks and systems while protecting privacy and confidentiality, so the administration supports Einstein authorization language.
	Sunset.
	So they got all this ISIS brand name in the document?
	Oh, yeah.
	Wow.
	Yeah.
	Here, legislation should preserve the roles of appropriate agencies to maintain security for national security systems.
	The final bill should include language that exempts national security systems and information systems of the Department of Defense and the intelligence community.
	Oh.
	Okay.
	So they get to have their own stuff, I guess.
	Of course.
	Their own databases.
	Yeah.
	Government-deprived sharing language directing the government to develop procedures to enhance sharing efforts with non-federal entities should track current law and practice.
	If you want some sharing from the government, it's not going to happen.
	Notification requirement regarding misuse of data.
	Unnecessary prohibitions on intelligence activity.
	Language of both Title I and Title II of HR 1560 would improperly restrict appropriate intelligence activities that are necessary cybersecurity activities.
	For instance, a department CIO attempting to identify the origin or malware on the department system might run afoul of the restrictions.
	The final bill should not contain unnecessary restrictions on surveillance activities, or in the alternative, should properly restrict unrelated surveillance activity.
	Nothing in this title or the amendments made by this title shall be construed to create new authorization for an element of the intelligence community.
	But I think it's saying now everything's in one fine place, and if they need to do some surveillance, then they can probably dip into that, I think.
	And this is a lot of legalese stuff.
	Hmm.
	International reporting requirements.
	That's about it.
	I think the sharing is really, it's the main part.
	And they're really opening up.
	And so Hillary's tapping into that.
	She knows what's going on.
	And I think there's a lot of conversations that are being held.
	A lot.
	Interesting.
	Well, it's a done deal is the way I see it.
	It's totally a done deal.
	They're just going to add a few things.
	In the new session, I'm sure they'll do some kind of amendment or something.
	I'm waiting for Jen Briney to read that thing.
	No.
	She will.
	Well, that's a big one.
	It's a big one.
	I've been looking at the relevant sections, but it's going to take me until after Christmas to really get through it.
	I mean, it's a lot of pages.
	This is a big one.
	Alright, well, was that tech news?
	No, if you want.
	I do have some tech news if you want.
	Well, let's go to tech news for a minute.
	Okay, I wasn't quite ready.
	That should have been in tech news.
	Well, we can just pretend it was in tech news.
	Are you ready?
	Yeah.
	iPhone, my phone.
	The way I see it, the only good phone is a landline, and the phone should be made out of bakelite.
	That's right, everybody.
	Time once again for tech news.
	All the tech horny listen to this show to find out what's really going on in tech news.
	John C. DeMora.
	Tech news, tech news.
	Ow.
	I got nothing.
	I got some tech news.
	I figured.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Finally, a little bit of vindication over there on the Bloombergs.
	What exactly is the problem?
	What have they found?
	Like, that these driverless cars are involved in more accidents than...
	Now, this is a news report you may have seen that Google cars are involved in many, many accidents.
	One's driven by people.
	That's right, Betty.
	And what's causing it is that driverless cars follow the law, which the rest of us human drivers don't always do.
	So they drive very cautiously, and people don't expect that, and they're driving into the back of them.
	Go on the New Jersey Turnpike, and that will be an extreme...
	No.
	The back of them.
	Of course it's the car's fault.
	Of course it is.
	And they're driving into the back of them.
	Go on the New Jersey Turnpike, and that will be an extremely...
	Hey, screw you with your Jersey jokes, douchey.
	Case study on that.
	Okay, so does that mean that researchers, that they have to now think about pricing in, or I guess factoring in, breaking the law in these driverless cars?
	You know, that's the debate in all these labs.
	Should they make the cars behave more human, which means breaking the law to keep up with the rest of us scofflaws on the highway?
	It's a tough debate because, you know, once you let them break the rules a little bit, how far do you go?
	All of these crashes are the fault of the human drivers, not the robot cars.
	And they tend to be slow speed and no injury type crashes.
	Okay, so then how far?
	So what then?
	Just stop complaining.
	Listen to the report.
	The robot car.
	Yeah, it's a dumb, dumb idea.
	This actually sounds like a pretty big problem.
	I mean, a big problem before you get mass adoption.
	So if the researchers are going to try to factor in, you know, essentially breaking the law, how far are we away from that then?
	Well, you know, Google is talking about splitting off its driverless car unit into a standalone business.
	They want to have a ride for hire cars on the road before too long.
	So this needs to be figured out.
	California regulators this week came up with some very strict rules on how driverless cars should behave and that there should always be a human ready to take over the wheel.
	So I think there's a lot still to be worked out, Betty.
	But can it ever be really figured out, Keith?
	Oh, brother, who is this idiot Betty?
	She's on Bloomberg, but here's the answer to the question.
	Oh, yeah, I mean, we have some very smart programmers.
	Oh, smart programmers.
	They've already made the cars behave a little human-like at stop signs.
	When there's a four-way stop, the robot car will creep forward a little bit to let them know I'm going next.
	So there's a little bit of that already showing up, but there's much more that needs to be done.
	I have an idea.
	Here's an idea that President Curry would come up with.
	I'm going to ban all of these cars.
	Google can do research and they will pay for drivers to drive people around.
	They can do whatever experiments they want, but these people will be driving them around, and we'll have people working.
	This is a stupid idea.
	I'm not for it.
	People believe somehow when they're jerking off on their lightsabers.
	You're making a lot of references to jerking off in today's show.
	Well, maybe I've been jerking off a lot lately.
	Is this something?
	Is this a pro?
	Are you having personal difficulties with your feet?
	No, not at all.
	I have no personal difficulties.
	But if you want to...
	You are very...
	You have a certain way of presenting yourself.
	And when I see an anomaly, it stands out.
	I'm trying not to use F-words.
	I'm trying to use different things.
	But I think the visual of jerking off a lightsaber is the correct visual.
	Because people truly believe that this is going to happen in your lifetime.
	Not yours, not mine.
	They released it last week.
	Okay, fine.
	Drone, Amazon drone delivery is not going to happen.
	No, I agree with that.
	This self-driving car is not going to happen.
	Oh, it's absolutely going to happen.
	Not in our lifetime.
	It just won't.
	No, it will happen in our lifetime.
	Not going to happen.
	Yes.
	Oh, okay, fine.
	It's not going to happen.
	It's on a closed track, maybe in Berkeley, where you put them on rails.
	We need rails in the road to make it work so everyone can hook into the right rails.
	Human beings are very good robots, John.
	They're very, very good at driving.
	This is these cars.
	There's no intelligence in these things.
	Zero.
	This is not artificial intelligence.
	It doesn't have it.
	It can't take new information about a situation and make a decision.
	It all has to be...
	It's skip logic.
	But oh, the smart guy.
	You want some a-hole 25-year-old Google single white Asian developer because that's what they hire.
	You want that guy to be determining how you're...
	What is this with you?
	I'm sick and tired of the Google self-driving car.
	It ticked me off when the artist at the Oba dinner said, oh, this is going to solve all traffic problems.
	We have no other way to go.
	Bullcrap.
	Bullcrap.
	This is just a reaction to the artist at the O-Bot dinner.
	Not just that.
	It's a reaction.
	You are out of control.
	Really?
	Yeah.
	This is an irrational screed.
	This is a very rational screed.
	There is no evidence that this will work in any type of traffic scenario in the foreseeable future.
	Yeah, it works fine.
	No, it doesn't.
	You heard the report.
	They get bumped into because people ram them.
	Now, here's what my fear is.
	I have a more logical way of looking at it.
	I think that the problem would be like the problem...
	I kind of know a little bit about this, but I don't know any specific examples.
	But when you're inside of driving around a Tesla that you think is so cool...
	I don't think it's so cool.
	No, not you.
	I'm just referring to the universal you.
	Driving around a Tesla you think is so cool, you're in a box of deadly electricity.
	That one little thing can happen and you'd be just fried.
	I mean, yeah, you could burn to death in a car that catches on fire.
	That's true.
	But when you get hit with that kind of voltage, you can't get out.
	You're done.
	I think I'm trying to make a much larger point.
	No, no, let me continue.
	So with the little car, I'm afraid that somebody, because they're bumping into them a lot, apparently, according to that report, somebody bumps into the thing, it screws up the network or something, the car goes out of control, takes off like a rocket, and goes off a cliff.
	I mean, that could happen.
	You don't need all these crazy, you just don't need all of these examples.
	Every single scenario that any driver will witness on the road is going to be different every single time.
	It takes real intelligence to react to certain scenarios.
	The belief somehow that Google, of all people, Google, who are the skip logic geniuses, it takes them 2,000 servers just to determine what fucking ads you're going to get.
	How many servers is it going to take to determine what to do in a certain scenario?
	Is it going to talk to the cloud first?
	Is it going to have all this tech on board?
	How is it going to be updated?
	Will it know what to do?
	Will it be able to take new information, road conditions, everything?
	Intuition?
	No.
	People believe way too much in what technology can do.
	It's a bad idea and I'm against it.
	And just because I'm against it doesn't give you the right to say I'm off the rails.
	No, you're off the rails not about being against it.
	It's your presentation, which is in the form of a screed, and now it seems to be derived from an O-Bot dinner.
	That's what I'm talking about.
	Not about, yeah, you can be against it.
	Ford is against it.
	You go talk to any executive over there, and they'll give you a million reasons.
	Now, my problem is that you're all in with it.
	That's my problem.
	Ah!
	Ah!
	That's why you're ticking me off.
	I am all in.
	Why?
	Why?
	Why will this work?
	Why wouldn't it?
	No, no, no.
	So far we have no evidence it's going to work.
	They've got tons of evidence.
	They've got over a million miles of driving around these things, driving around California and Nevada.
	That's evidence.
	Yeah, but they drive 35 miles an hour and they get bumped into because they're not participating in the traffic system.
	They're their own entity.
	It's like having...
	What?
	That's why the system...
	I know you're not going to like this either.
	That's why the system's got to go.
	It has to be all...
	Thank you for proving my point.
	Thank you for proving my point.
	The system will only work if everybody is in self-driving cars.
	And that will only happen when we're dead.
	No.
	It'll happen sooner than you want to believe.
	Put a time frame on it.
	First they're going to have the cars mixing and matching with us.
	Then they're going to have these bump episodes.
	I'm writing out a check right now.
	I'm writing out a check.
	I'm writing out a check to John C. Dvorak.
	$10.
	Ten.
	Ten dollars.
	Okay, how many years?
	Ten.
	No, it will not be.
	Yes, ten years.
	Ten years, ten dollars.
	No.
	Ten years, ten dollars is fine.
	The whole country's not going to be running self-driving cars in ten years.
	What I'm going to say is that they're going to be legal and they're going to be all over the place and you can grab one and take it like an Uber.
	No.
	Not going to happen.
	Yeah, in ten years.
	No.
	Yes.
	Okay.
	That's the bet.
	You don't want to make the bet?
	Here's what I'll say.
	I'm going to finalize.
	I'm taking the bet.
	I'm going to finalize by saying, there is no evidence self-driving cars will be completely fully integrated within 10 years.
	Because there is no evidence of that.
	And I learned using this phrase from the best.
	Who?
	school.
	And why?
	What did I say?
	Were you talking about Obama?
	No, you said...
	I was just leaving that where it was, but if you want me to say it...
	Well...
	There is no evidence people will want to use the mouse.
	Oh, you're using the mouse thing?
	Yeah, I'm using the no evidence.
	No, I'm using the no...
	No, I'm using there is no evidence line, which is a great line.
	At the time, there was no evidence people wanted to use the mouse.
	No, there wasn't.
	Not in 1984, there wasn't.
	Exactly.
	Why would there be?
	But today...
	There's no evidence that it's going to be complete in 10 years.
	There's no evidence that people don't want self-driving cars?
	That's not true.
	I didn't say that.
	I said there's no evidence it's going to be fully integrated into traffic within 10 years.
	It's just not going to happen.
	It's an overestimation of what people think Google can do.
	Of course there's no evidence.
	Well, thank you.
	There you go.
	There's no evidence.
	Now you're making all my points for me.
	I have nothing to argue.
	You're a bigot.
	You're a self-driving car bigot.
	You hate self-driving cars and everyone who even thinks the idea is a possibility.
	That's hate speech.
	You are exhibiting it.
	I did not say the word hate.
	I did not say the word kill.
	You don't have to say the word hate.
	It's the hateful nature of what you said.
	Very hateful and hurtful.
	Yeah.
	Very hurtful.
	Yeah.
	I feel bad about what you said.
	You know what?
	I'm still waiting for the paperless office, John.
	That was going to happen, too.
	And that'll happen when we have the paperless toilet is when that will happen.
	My old comment is the following, and I still think it's funny.
	It used to be funnier 15, 20 years ago, but it was.
	If anyone had started to invest in the paper industry, when the word paperless office was invented, they'd be a multimillionaire.
	Exactly.
	Yeah.
	Exactly.
	I don't know what it's got to do with anything, but okay.
	All right, we're done.
	No, we're not done.
	That's what I call tech news.
	A major breach has officials worry that hackers have been able to spy on encrypted government information for possibly the last three years.
	Juniper Networks is a company that makes routers and computer network equipment, and And a lot of their equipment is used by the U.S. government.
	Everybody from the FBI, Treasury Department, Department of Defense.
	Yesterday they disclosed that there was a major, major breach of their systems.
	Somebody, three years ago it appears, changed the source code, unauthorized source code.
	And basically what this allowed was some sort of back door for hackers to be able to come in and out without leaving a trace.
	And being able to spy on encrypted communications.
	And so what we're talking about is, you know, government communications that's supposed to be secure, even private companies that are using VPN networks, the things that you and I use to log into our computers.
	All of that, these hackers would have been able to spy on for the last three years.
	Flaw was really only recently discovered, and now we have the FBI investigating.
	The Homeland Security Department is very, very concerned.
	Now they're trying to do an assessment to see how many government agencies, including some of the ones handling some more sensitive secrets in the U.S. government, have these networks, and whether or not there was some breach there.
	Some of their classified information, some of their top security information has been exposed by these hackers.
	Seeing as you've been, the Huawei routers has been your route, to coin a phrase.
	Let's talk about Juniper.
	Who makes these things?
	Are they made in China?
	They're Juniper Networks, an American company.
	The boxes are made here?
	The chips are made here?
	As far as I know, everything's made here.
	I mean, the chips could be made anywhere nowadays, but the chips wouldn't be the issue.
	Whoever changed the source code, I don't know what source code they're talking about.
	It's a poor report.
	I'm thinking there must be some kind of boot-level type stuff.
	Well, probably, yeah.
	I don't know.
	We need to find a real report on this.
	But there's a couple of mistakes they made in there anyway.
	One, if you have a VPN and you're going, it happens to be somewhere along the line, it falls through one of these routers, the information on a VPN is...
	Kind of triple secure.
	It has end-to-end encryption.
	Right, which ends...
	At least you'll know what computer someone's connecting to.
	If you have the VPN, you know the VPN endpoint.
	You're right.
	You probably don't have the encrypted information, but you have the endpoint, and that helps a lot.
	Yeah, it does help a little.
	So the part about the VPN is it shouldn't be in the report.
	I agree.
	CNN, what do you expect?
	What it is is just a backdoor.
	This sounds like U.S. government stuff, where you could take the streams that are going through this router and then you push them into another...
	You can duplicate them and send them to some NSA computers.
	This is NSA. This is NSA. I think you're right.
	And I think it's one of those internal agency things where one agency found out the other agency is doing something.
	Yeah.
	And I don't understand.
	It doesn't sound right.
	Well, it could also just be a story promoted by Cisco.
	Well, yeah, that's a good point.
	That would be my...
	I'd do that.
	Well, I'm bringing this up because we obviously don't have enough information, but this is the show where, not for the tech hornies, we'd love a dude's name, Ben, sysadmins.
	Let us know what you're seeing, what you're thinking.
	Yeah, somebody, one of our producers, one of our many producers, will dissect this for us with some great information and we'll read it right from their valuable hot note.
	But right now, with all of this, I think there's about $700 billion worth of technology contracts waiting to be filled.
	I think your Cisco ID is pretty valid.
	They fell into me.
	Juniper's always been a pain in the ass to Cisco.
	Because they're taking market share?
	Yeah.
	Well, that makes sense.
	I don't know what their sales pitch is.
	It's one of those Kleiner Perkins companies.
	Oh, really?
	It's been around since the 90s.
	They have some technology that's something the government likes, and I'm not sure what it is, but I've never, I don't know.
	Might as well put Huawei in.
	Alright, let's close it out.
	The only good phone's a landline, and the phone should be made out of Bakelite.
	Yo, yo, yo, yo.
	Before we, uh, sorry?
	Well, I was gonna say, but you have something to say before we, so when you say that, then I defer.
	I was just transitioning to something else.
	If you want to do something that's cool.
	I just wanted to put the people on the alert, a little Turk news.
	What kind of Turk news?
	Turk?
	You mean like Automania?
	Yeah, Automania.
	I like that.
	Automania.
	Automania.
	There's an Automania thing going on.
	You have an Ottoman Empire, and this creep, Erdogan, is getting on my nerves.
	Yeah, I heard about this, yeah.
	Okay, this is called the Ottoman hearth.
	Which is always pronounced the hearth for some reason by the reporters because it's covered overseas and they pronounce it hearth instead of hearth.
	And it seems to be like a brown shirts or something like that.
	This guy Erdogan, who's...
	Now, you have to remember that he's the president of Turkey.
	Traditionally, the president of Turkey is a bullshit job.
	It is not a job where you really have any power.
	It's mostly for show.
	Unless you have all the oil money from ISIS. Well, there's that, and it looks like Erdogan has been trying to give himself more power as this figurehead.
	Instead of being just a figurehead jerk, he wants to actually run the place.
	So there's this Ottoman hearth thing, which goes around beating people up.
	If you know your history and you know the brown shirts of Germany, whatever they were called, S-something-L, S-A, I think.
	Yes, SA. The SA. Play Ottoman Hirth, and this is kind of a backgrounder.
	Turkish opposition member of parliament Eren Erdem has reiterated his claims that Islamic State is producing sarin gas in Syria, but he's now being investigated for treason over the allegations.
	In the latest statement, the Member of Parliament said that the ISIL members obtained the chemicals necessary for the production of sarin, which was transported through Turkey.
	He also demanded that President Erdogan apologize.
	The MP wrote about a lynching campaign against him and his party ever since he shared the allegations in an interview with us.
	Eren Erdem complained that he received hundreds of death threats on social media after we aired the interview.
	Turkey-based journalist Meraf Savir attempted to meet with the group responsible for the harassment.
	The campaign against Eren Erdem is gaining momentum fast and also on social media.
	The Ottoman Earth is associated with the ruling AK party and is seen by many as the group that does the party's dirty work.
	They are known for harassing opposition political parties and newspapers.
	Now, we've reached out to several media outlets here in Istanbul to see if they will comment about the group.
	But many told us they're afraid to talk to us because we're Russian media and they're afraid of the backlash they may receive.
	One group, Bilgun, was willing to tell us about it.
	Ottoman Hearths is a new organization which in fact can be described as Erdogan's militia force.
	They have recently organized violent activities in various areas and have the support of the government, such as the attack on the Hurriyet newspaper.
	The attack on Hurriyet happened on the same day that the opposition Republican People's Party offices were vandalized by men identifying themselves as members of the Ottoman Hearths.
	Founded just five years ago, the movement, which wants to restore Islamic and Ottoman culture, already counts more than a million members.
	They claim to have a deep love for President Eldawan and are willing to resort to death threats and attacks on politicians or journalists who dare criticize the regime.
	Yeah.
	This isn't being covered by our media in any way.
	Well, we can't say anything bad about Turkey because they might play nice with us.
	They have plenty of other suitors.
	They're our fair-weather friend.
	This operation, they're all in with ISIS. We have to face that reality at some point.
	They're all in with the idea of a new Ottoman Empire headed up by this guy who should have no power.
	And they're provoking all this stuff.
	They want to kill all the Kurds.
	They want to pull an Armenia thing where they just kill everybody in some ethnic group or make their lives miserable and get rid of them.
	And this is not going to turn out well.
	Or tight relationship with Turkey.
	No.
	And there's a lawsuit right now.
	There's a lot of griping back and forth between Fethullah Gulen, who Erdogan once extradited now.
	That's the guy with all the charter schools and what I might categorize as some madrasas all over in Texas, a lot of them.
	The Harmony schools.
	So, yeah.
	I think he needs that.
	He needs to have his brown shirts.
	That's the only way he can stay empowered.
	I think the people in Turkey are not happy.
	Well, the people in cosmopolitan Turkey are not happy.
	That means the cities.
	Right.
	But the vast majority of people in Turkey live in mud huts out in the eastern part of the country.
	And they think he's great.
	And he's a good religious man.
	I mean, this is not going to work out.
	No.
	But I think the lack of reporting is obvious.
	We cannot be making Turkey look bad right now.
	We need them.
	Well, so we can use their airport.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, great.
	Before we thank the shortlist for today, are you...
	Now, you said something in the newsletter.
	Are you going to watch the Miss Universe tonight, or is it not being broadcast?
	It's being broadcast on Fox.
	Yes.
	So, yeah, I'll watch it.
	You want to call winners?
	Yes.
	I don't know what these girls look like.
	This is an international.
	Hold on.
	I can call winners here.
	Let me take my charge with all the countries of the world.
	Hold on.
	Hold on.
	Wait a minute.
	Oh, it's right here.
	I got it.
	My dart.
	Okay.
	Let me take the dart and throw it.
	Okay, it looks like Ukraine.
	Miss Ukraine.
	I think you may be off.
	She'll be in the top ten, for sure.
	I think it'll be Miss Spain.
	Why miss Spain?
	There's renewed confidence in Spain.
	The economy here is now growing.
	But the effects of the financial crisis are still being felt.
	And corruption scandals have damaged old political parties.
	So many will today vote for change.
	Chema is a teacher.
	He says his salary hasn't gone up in seven years.
	Monica and Carlos want a new government to tackle corruption and unemployment.
	But like many others, they still haven't decided who will get their vote.
	A lot of Spaniards are turning to a new Liberal Party called Citizens.
	Their leader, Alberto Rivera, is just 36.
	Many others will vote for 37-year-old Pablo Iglesias and his anti-austerity party Podemos.
	But the favorite to win the most votes is the current Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy.
	His conservative popular party claims credit for taking the economy from crisis to growth.
	I'm thinking it's going to be Spain because there's going to be a lot of uncertainty and strange news out of this election.
	We're both overlooking the obvious.
	Which is the story we did on Putin complimenting Trump.
	Oh, and this is a Trump show.
	It's a Trump show.
	Okay.
	And Putin comes out and says, Trump is great.
	So Trump's going to have Miss Russia win?
	That wouldn't surprise me.
	That's a good one.
	That's a good one.
	I like that.
	I like that.
	One thing, though, the bodies may not be the same.
	Well, of course, it's not the same thing.
	Runway model's not the same as Miss Universe.
	But there's new legislation in Paris, as we have the fashion show.
	This has been going on.
	How many decades...
	When I was a little kid, I was one year old, this was going on.
	But now it's legislation.
	Now there's a law.
	These days, you can be too skinny in Paris.
	Yeah.
	This is now banning excessively thin fashion models.
	Violators will be fined up to 75,000 euros or more than $81,000 and could even...
	Hey, hey, hey, hey, come here, eat this bagel quick!
	...and face jail time.
	The law will enforce regular weight checks.
	Models will be required to present a medical certificate showing that the body mass index complies with regulation before being allowed to work.
	I think I'm going to become a runway model inspector, John.
	I think this is my new vocation.
	Excuse me, we have to check your body fat here.
	Can I see your medical certification?
	Where did cellulite come from?
	That means all the shows will be needed.
	Well, wait, there's other countries who have this law as well.
	Well, Italy doesn't, I don't think.
	They wouldn't be so foolish.
	Nah, probably not.
	Probably not.
	Yeah, I know they've been talking about it.
	I've been hearing about it for decades, but now there's actual legislation and there will be checks.
	Spot checks.
	I like the check.
	Maybe it was only done just to start a new industry, a bureaucracy of model checking.
	Well, I think we should be in the front of the line, my good friend.
	I'm going to show my support by donating to no agenda.
	Imagine all the people who could do that.
	Oh yeah, that'd be fab.
	Yeah, on no agenda In the morning Well, we have very few people to thank, so we'll thank them all.
	At least a few.
	Dame Beth, Baronetis of Baja in Tucson, Arizona, 12206.
	And she says, Heil!
	Heil!
	Delated birthday greetings to my 17-year-old niece, Miss Elizabeth.
	No pics for Adam.
	She apparently was hit in the mouth during a combo birthday.
	Oh, nice.
	PCH road trip.
	Beautiful.
	Beautiful.
	And a drop top.
	She has a birthday, too, I guess, in December.
	Yes, she does.
	Is she on the list, too?
	Yep.
	Morris Consulting, 7777 from Lost Wages, Nevada.
	Christopher Tropp in Sturgis, Michigan, 7337, a palindrome.
	James Zuckel in Los Angeles, California, 6969.
	Eric Thornburg in Honolulu, Hawaii, 5555.
	Richard Biggs, In Fairview, Tennessee, Double Nickels on the Dime along with Dean Roker, Parts Unknown, 5510.
	Fabrice Shumi in Anaheim, California, Mile High Club, 5280.
	Mike Mirva in Youngstown, Ohio, another Mile High Club member, 5280.
	He's got a long thing here.
	This may be good.
	I've been listening since the beginning of the year.
	I'm here, a first-time donor.
	I like to donate to show 777, which is my second favorite aircraft next to the Boeing 717.
	I've never been on this one plane.
	I haven't flown on one either, no.
	I've never seen one.
	But I could not get any money together to make donations until now.
	I've been unemployed since July.
	I used to work for AirTran Airways, then got swallowed up by John's favorite airline, the Peanut Express Southwest.
	Do you like peanuts?
	Would you like two peanuts?
	No, no.
	It's peanuts or pretzels.
	Yes, but recently they have been very low on the pretzels.
	Explain again what we dislike about peanuts on the plane.
	Oh!
	Well, there's a number of things.
	I could go on with a couple of my pet peeves.
	First of all, I do not like it when, at the beginning of the flight, you hear...
	Ladies and gentlemen, because we have a passenger who is allergic, there will be no peanuts on the plane.
	No peanuts on the plane.
	Yeah, that actually has never happened to me.
	Oh, it has happened several times to me.
	Well, what I don't like is you got these guys.
	Because people are all staring forward, kind of like Putty in one of the Seinfeld episodes, just staring and blank, looking ahead.
	And they take the peanut thing and then they dump the peanuts in their hand.
	And then they make a fist.
	And then they shake, shake, shake the fist, and then they punch themselves kind of in the mouth, and not in a no-agenda way, but kind of in the mouth sideways, and maybe a peanut comes out, and they chew on it, and then they shake, shake, shake, and they do it again.
	They pop themselves in the face and get some peanuts out of the fistful of peanuts.
	I don't know, but I just find it so annoying to witness this.
	That's what I don't like about the peanuts.
	Yeah.
	I mean, you just want to say, what are you doing?
	Everybody is sitting and listening to the show now going, oh crap, everybody knows someone who does this.
	Everyone knows someone who does it.
	Shake, shake, shake, ooh!
	Shake, shake, shake, ooh!
	And then they have to wipe their hand.
	They wipe it on their pants, on their trousers.
	Yeah, they got goo and all kinds of salt on their hands.
	And then the worst part, here's something that really bugs me.
	Okay.
	So you get people, they got like a...
	I've seen this happen.
	I really get irked when I see this at dinner.
	Is this a screed or a rant?
	This would be a rant.
	Okay.
	Uh, screeds are usually fairly well-structured.
	Rants are just, you know, they're just, they're more active.
	Oh, thank you.
	Well, thank you for the compliment.
	Well, it wasn't a compliment.
	You said, I had a screed.
	It seems to me when I say well-structured, it means you were planning it.
	Now, okay, so you got the salt all over your hands, so you got a plate full of food, and so you kind of do this, and you rub your hands over the food!
	Ha!
	I know.
	Have you ever seen this?
	Yes, of course.
	Of course.
	What are you knocking all the dead skin and salt and who knows what's in your hands?
	And it's all falling on the food that you prepared for them to eat.
	And now it's contaminated with God knows what.
	And it's just like...
	So what do you do in a case like this?
	I call them out.
	Oh, I just stand up and fart in their face.
	I think that's what I'm sure you do.
	Okay, anyway, that's my little gripe about the peanuts.
	That's a gripe.
	Is that what you wanted me to talk about, that complaint?
	Yeah.
	Thank you.
	Brian Leslie in Bremerton, Washington, 5150.
	He says, Merry Christmas!
	And now we have $50 donors, and I'll read them in order.
	We're already there.
	Charles Brocchetti in Incheon, South Korea.
	And he says, Incheon's reclaimed, he says there's no fish in the streets and it's not flooded.
	Keep us up to speed on the fish in the streets.
	The South Korean fish.
	I will tell you, insofar as the mudflats are concerned today, and it's been raining.
	Do you want to do an official report?
	Yes, I'm going to do an official report.
	This is outrageous.
	Okay, hold on a second.
	I wasn't prepared for this.
	He's just padding the section.
	Yeah, padding the section.
	Because of what's happening in Greenland right now, the maps of the world will have to be redrawn.
	Hit it now!
	This is what would happen to San Francisco Bay.
	Now we go to the mudflats to see if we're drowning yet.
	John C. Dvorak, what do you see out of your window?
	Mud.
	This is the lowest the tide has been for, I think, any show we've ever done.
	There is, the mudflats are like, there's like hardly any water in there at all.
	It's as though the oceans have dropped a foot.
	That doesn't sound possible.
	What about the rising oceans?
	I don't know.
	Oh, it just mystifies me something's on the spot.
	We're up to date on global warming.
	Paul Roberson in Upper Tract, West Virginia.
	$50.
	These are all 50s.
	And he says, Merry Christmas again.
	Steve Winslow, Bristol, Avon, UK. Chris Moore in Indianapolis, Indiana.
	Diana Carruthers in Tumwater, Washington.
	Where they used to make a beer.
	Andrew Haverson in Gravenhurst.
	Gravenhurst, I think.
	It's in Canada.
	Michael Gase in Colorado Springs, Colorado.
	That's it!
	We're done.
	Dang.
	That was quick and easy.
	Dang.
	1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7.
	$50 donors.
	This is kind of low.
	We do have a few people that donated $25, which wishes a happy...
	Even that is kind of a small number.
	I was hoping to get some action for just a Merry Christmas.
	It's okay.
	We'll just plod on through.
	Yep.
	There will be something to discuss.
	There always is something going on.
	It's not all just retrospectives and year-end lists.
	Best of.
	Best of 2015.
	And I know how these work because nobody really works during these last two weeks of the year.
	They throw this crap together.
	If you critically watch these best ofs, you always pull a hair out of your hair and go, what?
	How did you leave out?
	And you have your own favorite best of that should be on the list.
	I spent probably about 20 minutes last night.
	I forget who had it.
	They had everybody who died in 2015.
	157 people.
	Celebrities?
	Yeah, not all celebrities in, you know, like movie actors or, you know, scientists.
	You know, people you would know in general, just about everybody.
	And it was quite a list.
	We lost a lot of good people.
	Huh.
	Yeah.
	Do you watch the whole thing?
	It was just a slideshow.
	I was just clicking through.
	Seeing a new ad with every click through.
	Do you know what's cool about those slideshows when you have ad blocker?
	Yeah, they don't work.
	No, they do work.
	Oh, okay.
	Maybe.
	It works like this.
	You go click, click, click, dead guy, dead guy, click, click, click.
	And then there's a blank page.
	Oh, that's the ad.
	It's a blank page doing it.
	You realize it's an ad.
	It's an ad, exactly.
	So you click again, and here comes more characters.
	Yeah, we don't take ads on this program, which is why we can speak in the way we do and have...
	And we can, like, for example, and this would have been a good lead-in for this segment, which I forgot about, but now that you mention it, we could, for example, talk about LifeLock.
	Really?
	And they're $100 million.
	That was very underreported.
	Oh, I don't know about this at all.
	They're having to pay their customers.
	Well, hold on.
	Let's put that into the C block after I do the birthdays and thank everybody.
	How's that sound?
	Okay, yes, we do.
	Sorry.
	We have another show coming up on Thursday.
	It'll be Christmas Eve.
	We're working.
	Your support is needed.
	Dvorak.org slash NK. And we start off with two belated birthdays.
	You heard her there in the donation segment.
	Dame Beth celebrated on December 2nd.
	We say happy birthday to her.
	And she also congratulates her niece, Miss Elizabeth, 17.
	No pictures, Adam.
	She celebrated on December 6th.
	Also, today, Trev Merkin says happy birthday to his son, Oscar.
	He will be 16.
	He turns 16 tomorrow.
	There you go.
	And, of course, we say happy birthday to Stephen Voizero, who turned zero on Thursday.
	Happy birthday from all your buddies here, and Merry Christmas from the best podcast in the universe.
	And we congratulate Sir Richard Bagwell, who becomes Viscount, even though he doesn't really care too much.
	Yeah, well, it's okay.
	Seem to care.
	It's okay.
	It's okay.
	Okay, he's still Viscount.
	Hey, tell me about...
	Did someone...
	Because I think the promise with LifeLock was if your identity gets stolen, then we promise to spend up to a million dollars on fixing it or something.
	Or they spend whatever.
	They have to...
	So apparently...
	I'm not going to say...
	I'm not absolutely sure what their model might be, the business model, which might be you just collect as much money as you can and then somebody gets their identity stolen, which seems unlikely to a person that would be so conscientious as to hire these guys to do this.
	So you probably won't get your identity stolen.
	You'd just be throwing money at the company.
	They have been fined or sued.
	There's like a class action and the government's going after them for like $100 million.
	They've got a $200 million company.
	It's not...
	Can't afford this.
	For not doing anything.
	The only article that showed up is I think Seeking Alpha may have had a thing because of the stock market.
	Right, right.
	But no, it's not covered because these guys are...
	Used by everyone because their main marketing technique was radio shows.
	You heard life-luck stories on Rush Limbaugh.
	I don't know if Michael Savage, but all the right-wing guys use them.
	Most of the podcasters have gone through a life-luck moment.
	Huh.
	Yeah, and they won't say anything.
	This is the reason that we have to do the show the way we do it.
	That's why people do have to support the show with, you know, as opposed to going to watch...
	Yeah, because no one will report on the things that are messed up with the advertisers.
	Yeah.
	Such as Archer Daniel Midlands and Burlington Northern and Boeing and Raytheon, and these are all advertisers.
	Not on podcasts, but, you know.
	Yeah.
	Hey, I noticed something that's been popping up in restaurants here in Austin.
	Austin's a great restaurant town.
	What are the little bean sprouts called?
	You know, just the little shoots with the little leaves on them that you put kind of as a garnish on top of stuff.
	Oh, yeah.
	What is that?
	That's passe around here, but it's not to...
	In Europe, we call it tauge, I think.
	It's just little green...
	I think it's called greens or something.
	Sprouts.
	It's called sprouts here.
	But not bean sprouts.
	The Chinese bean sprouts.
	These are the little green ones that you're talking about.
	Yeah.
	And now in two different eateries here in Austin, they present these.
	And there's a great little restaurant called Gardner on the east side.
	Farm to Table.
	And this is where I first picked it up.
	And these are fairly inexpensive places to eat.
	If you can get a reservation because they're small.
	And now, in that restaurant, and I forget the other one, they present this like, oh, and we have here, and the chef has made this, and blah, blah, blah.
	And on top, we have some nice microgreens.
	Microgreens?
	And they're all using this microgreens.
	Be on the lookout for this.
	Well, now I do mention it.
	A microgreen is a tiny vegetable green that is used both as a visual and flavor component of ingredients primary in the dining restaurants, fine dining restaurants.
	Fine dining chefs use microgreens to enhance the beauty, taste, and freshness of their dishes with these delicate textures.
	This is something I'm just talking through my hat.
	Mm-hmm.
	But, if I'm not mistaken, and they do sell these at the store, I think Monterey Foods here in the Berkeley area has these, you can buy them by the handful.
	I think, and I think the reason they're so popular, I believe them to be hydroponically, it's a hydroponic thing.
	And therefore you can call them...
	We can call them whatever you want.
	But you can grow them by the gross load because it's just, you know, there's no real nutrient.
	It's like cardboard.
	It's a green card.
	I'm just cranking this stuff out.
	I'm waiting for someone to say they're micro veggies.
	I would feel much better then.
	Micro veggies.
	I'd walk out.
	Here's related searches.
	Microgreen seeds, or you can do it yourself.
	List of microgreens.
	Hydroponic greens.
	That's what it is.
	How to grow microgreens.
	Growing microgreens.
	Microgreen seeds.
	Petite microgreens.
	Edible flowers.
	The same thing.
	Microgreens.
	I'm just going to call them microveggies from now on.
	You might as well, yeah.
	I said, take those back.
	I want micro-veggies.
	Okay, it looks like it's mostly amaranth and arugula.
	Oh.
	Some basil.
	You can grow micro-basil.
	All right.
	I don't know if I... This is a nonsense.
	This is a...
	What can we do to, like, jack up the price of the price?
	It's marketing.
	It's marketing.
	Yeah.
	I don't know if you're ready, but I think I'll try it anyway.
	That's right.
	Now entering second half of show.
	As you know, I do not...
	I'm never afraid to explore areas that could put me into great ridicule.
	Or great danger.
	Well, there's great danger, too.
	Um...
	And I have a feeling there may be something, and this is all just speculation and who knows, this flat earth concept that's been going on.
	Well, not again.
	Yeah, it's worth talking about.
	I... And there's two parts to what I want to say.
	So this really is...
	I'm just seeing it everywhere.
	People are sending me lots of information.
	Then there's a number of...
	Not so much that people can prove the Earth is flat, but there are a number of things that are tough to explain that prove the world is not flat.
	It's a sphere or something else.
	And what I'm disturbing...
	Something else?
	Hold on a second.
	You've introduced a new element here.
	Yeah.
	Oblique.
	A block, perhaps?
	Oblique.
	Okay.
	Yeah.
	This is actually...
	Neil deGrasse Tyson says it's oblique.
	He says that the world is a little fatter in the middle and we're kind of like a squashed sphere.
	That's what he says.
	But the thing that bothers me is, and I tried to look up the etymology, could not find it.
	I never really even considered any of this, or it was probably not even open if someone sent me an email about Flat Earth.
	But for the past couple of years, it's been this.
	Oops.
	You know that's coming.
	Neither one of those.
	It's neither one of those.
	No, it's this one.
	Nobody has a monopoly on what is a very hard problem.
	But I don't have much patience for anyone who denies that this challenge is real.
	We don't have time for a meeting of the Flat Earth Society.
	Now, this is, I think, the first time in my life I've ever heard that phrase.
	Is this a phrase that you are familiar with?
	It sounds familiar, but I don't...
	But who used this in recent memory?
	The Flat Earth Society?
	Well, saying we don't have time for a meeting of the Flat Earth Society.
	That whole phrase?
	I don't know about the whole phrase.
	But I've heard of Flat Earth Society.
	Right.
	I think it's...
	Why does it come up all of a sudden?
	In fact, Flat Earth people are...
	Maybe it's code.
	Well, I think it's triggering is what it is.
	I don't think Flat Earth people are necessarily against climate change.
	In fact, I've found a lot of evidence to the contrary.
	But here's two questions I have for you.
	Oh, that's an interesting way to go.
	Did you know that most Flat Earthers are all in on climate change?
	Ipso facto.
	Ipso facto?
	Yeah.
	That means the answer is obvious.
	Climate change is bullcrap just like the flat earth is.
	Okay.
	Well, the curvature problem is the one that interests me the most.
	Why are you doing that?
	Well, if you do the calculations, then because of the curvature of the Earth, you should not be able to see a lot of things.
	And the most prominent example that is used is a lighthouse.
	And if you look at the, you know, after six miles or so distance, you should not be able to see a 70-foot lighthouse because the curvature should drop it off more than 100 feet.
	And this is a mathematical problem that is being addressed, but no one seems to be able to explain exactly what's happening and why the rules, as we've been told, are not what we see.
	Well, there's a lot of anomalies, atmospheric anomalies.
	why you can see the lighthouse when you shouldn't be able to see it over the horizon.
	I mean, this is like those lights you saw in whatever the name of that town is.
	Marfa?
	Marfa.
	You know, that's some screwball anomaly, too.
	I mean, these things happen.
	But consistently people are trying to make the measurements work based on the circumference of the earth and the drop that you should have in the curvature of the earth and the numbers just don't work out.
	Maybe the numbers are wrong.
	So the circumference of the Earth numbers are wrong?
	No, whatever numbers we're dealing with.
	These numbers are all pigeonhole numbers.
	I'm sure they're plugging these things down.
	It could be all bogus.
	Have you talked to an actual geologist?
	Who do you want?
	A geophysicist?
	Well, I'm bringing it up.
	You need to go to the university over there and talk to somebody.
	This is an insanity moment.
	A moment of insanity.
	It's not insanity.
	I'm just asking questions in second half of show where it belongs.
	Yes, well, I realize it's in the right part of the show.
	There's no doubt about that.
	But I'm hoping for more space aliens and flying saucer chit-chat as opposed to flat Earth chit-chat.
	I think it's more interesting.
	I think there's a lot of people who are questioning, a lot of smart people who are questioning this, and I think we have a lot of smart people who can provide us with more information.
	Okay.
	Okay, no, it's good.
	I'm glad you're talking about this and getting it off my chest.
	It's just a simple question.
	Why do none of the calculations of the curvature of the Earth work?
	Why do they not work?
	Now, the second part is...
	Have you ever seen the moon when it comes up over the horizon?
	I'm not going to play the game with you because I don't have the answer.
	I'm talking about the curvature of the earth.
	That's all I have a question about.
	I'm just trying to get some answers because I'd be the first to scoff at people, but I have some very serious mathematical questions, which I'm not good at.
	And you're just saying the numbers are screwy.
	That's not much of an argument.
	Well, I don't know.
	I don't have an argument.
	Because I think this is such a nonsense topic.
	Do you know that there is no plain, just single picture of the Earth from space?
	That these are all composites?
	That NASA's pictures, they admit it, they're all composites of the Earth.
	There does not exist a single picture like the one you always see.
	It is a composite made of many different, even from light data, it's made up.
	It is not a true picture of the Earth.
	NASA says we can't do that, we can't take the picture, it would never look good, so we make a composite which is therefore true.
	Yeah, because if you need a wide-angle lens, it would be very difficult.
	A wide-angle lens from the Moon?
	Yeah.
	Well, the moon picture, I don't know what the deal is with that, but it seems sketchy.
	It's just little things like that.
	All right.
	Is that it?
	Well...
	I have a suggestion.
	Yeah.
	Now entering second half of show...
	Leaving.
	Now leaving.
	Now leaving.
	You don't have an exiting.
	I don't have an exit.
	Well, I'm sorry you feel that way.
	Hey, there's some crap going down in Poland that I want to talk about before it's too late.
	Yeah.
	So first of all, here's the first report.
	Poland, the Polish are getting a little antsy about things, and you can understand kind of when, you know, your best...
	Your best ally who wants to put ICBMs and all kinds of weaponry in your country does not allow you to be in the visa waiver programs or polls are still not allowed.
	Yeah, they're irked about this.
	They should be irked about it.
	It's an outrage.
	We'll put some missiles in your backyard, but you can't get a visa waiver.
	You're not in the visa waiver program.
	But the Polish in general are a little bit disturbed about this new government which we need to speak about.
	For the second consecutive week, thousands of demonstrators have taken to the streets of Poland's cities to protest against a new conservative government.
	Since the Law and Justice Party won the elections in October, critics have accused the new regime of trying to neuter the constitutional court by replacing judges.
	The attack on the Constitutional Court could lead to a situation where there's no protection of democracy.
	Poland will be in danger of dictatorship by the majority, which is the simplest way to ordinary dictatorship.
	The Law and Justice Party controls the Houses of Parliament and the Presidency, leaving the Court as the only effective check on its power, say critics.
	Demonstrations, organised by a group called the Committee for the Defence of Democracy, took place in 20 cities.
	That last bit was a clue, the Committee for the Defense of Democracies.
	This seems to be connected to a rather large U.S. non-governmental organization, which is the Committee for, what is it called?
	What did I just say it was?
	Something about the, for democracies.
	Yeah, put it again.
	End again.
	Sorry, hold on.
	What was that called?
	Hold on.
	The Commission has effective check on its power, say critics.
	Demonstrations, organized by a group called the Committee for the Defense of Democracy, took place in 20 cities.
	Yeah, so it's the Defense of Democracies.
	And I just came in this morning, so I didn't have enough time to really go deep into the NGO part.
	But usually when you have...
	A government in a country that we have a little bit of issue with, when you get people in line, then, you know, the NGOs start to act up and they start to, you know, then we get all kinds of protests.
	What happened in Egypt?
	It's what we do.
	It's what we do.
	That's why the Russians kicked NGOs out.
	Exactly.
	Wisely.
	Now, the new government consists of Kaczynski.
	And this is, I'm sure, some relation somewhere to Ted.
	But these were the brothers, and the other brother, who was the president of Poland, you'll recall, he and an entire plane of Polish government officials and elites died in Russia.
	Yeah, they were murdered by the Russian government.
	They were murdered by the Russian government.
	Everybody knows this.
	So now we have the brother of the murdered Kaczynski, And he's making a lot of noise about the North Stream 2.
	Now, as we know, Russia has a very tight relationship with Germany.
	They already have the North Stream.
	A lot of gas flows directly into Germany.
	They are able to pump some of that.
	They reverse and they pump it out to Europe.
	But this new one, which is going to be, it completely bypasses Poland.
	Now, there's a pipeline that goes right through Poland, right into Germany, the Yamal pipeline.
	And, you know, it's, oh, well, that's okay.
	But, you know, of course, when the Russians see that U.S. interests are really racking up in Poland, they're going to go around it.
	So it goes around Poland under the North Sea.
	That was the gripe of the first Kaczynski.
	And now the new Kaczynski is bringing this up in the EU parliament, and he's making some very valid points that we need to keep our eye on.
	The Commission has assessed that if Nord Stream 2 were to be constructed, it would increase Europe's dependence.
	On one supplier and concentrate 80% of Russian gas imports on one route.
	It would also lead to a dominant position of Gazprom on the German market by increasing its share to over 60%.
	In my perspective, Nord Stream does not help diversification, nor would it reduce our energy dependency.
	But it is, of course, for the Commission to conclude its technical and legal assessment on whether or not it is in line with our conclusions today.
	Yeah, I think not.
	So...
	Keep your eye on the cozying relationship between Germany and Russia and how Poland is being kept at bay, being kept out of this.
	And from an EU perspective, it's not a nice thing that's being done.
	There's a direct pipe through Poland.
	But everything's going to be pumped through Germany now.
	And...
	That's interesting.
	Well, that makes up for your flat Earth stuff.
	Hmm.
	I haven't caught this at all, and I'm kind of annoyed by it.
	I don't know what to say now.
	I mean, it makes up for my flat earth stuff.
	Yeah, I mean, don't pay any attention to the man behind the curtain.
	I'm behind the curtain right now.
	Oh, okay.
	Do you think that we're behind the NGOs?
	Yeah, I think so.
	Or is it Russia?
	Has Nuland visited?
	That's what I have not, but I do not think she's been there recently.
	But you don't know.
	I mean, you just don't know.
	If it's F the EU, right, then F the EU, except for Germany.
	Germany's the only country that matters, really, from a geopolitical standpoint.
	So we'll see.
	We'll see.
	Everyone's trying to stop it.
	The Turkish pipeline is now, of course, because of the downing of the Russian jet.
	That's on hold.
	The South Stream through Hungary, Nabucco, is completely gone.
	We've seen that come and go in the show's lifetime.
	And now the North Stream, which people have died over, is now coming to fruition, and it's cutting a lot of people out.
	Ukraine is, of course, obviously no longer necessary.
	And it's going to be a big pipe.
	Which will give Germany, I think, as a...
	Maybe there's Tusk, actually, who was talking, not Kaczynski.
	I think there was Tusk.
	Yeah, he's in the EU. You know, it's going to give a stranglehold.
	It'll be a Russian-German stranglehold on Europe's gas supply.
	So, are we behind it?
	Maybe.
	But something's going on.
	It's hard to follow some of this stuff.
	Yeah.
	I know.
	I know.
	It boggles the mind.
	It's like, what?
	Now who's why?
	Are they trying to turn into a dictatorship in Poland?
	A monopoly.
	Oh, in Poland?
	I don't know.
	I think Poland is really just anti-US right now.
	And with some good reason.
	And what's the point of that?
	Of being anti-US? No, of us not allowing them to have visas.
	We've discussed this.
	Yeah, I know we have, but it's like...
	Do you want to hear the reasoning again?
	Yes.
	Is that the Jews in Congress don't like the Polish Jews, what they did in the Second World War.
	Fuck them.
	No visa for you.
	Oh, that's right.
	You did this before.
	I remember that.
	I think there may be something to that.
	Yes, there's a possibility.
	I know that even when I was younger, I lived in Chicago when I was a little kid.
	This element came up.
	Because in Chicago during that era, before it became the mix of cultures it is today, there was no Hispanics, for example.
	It was Jews, Polish, and blacks.
	right that was three main ethnic groups in chicago and they had their little enclaves and uh but you'd run into you know you it wasn't that the groups didn't mix and you run into this back then you you heard this at the polls during world war ii sold the jews out and it Which is not necessarily true.
	I don't think it's necessarily true either.
	And then there's been a grudge ever since.
	And I think, yeah, there's probably an element to that.
	Which is stupid.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Well, it's not going to get any better with the visa waiver program under attack.
	And that will be my final for today so we can get out on time.
	We have...
	Let me see.
	Oh!
	This is...
	Okay, I got two and a kicker.
	This will be good.
	Here we have a lot of talk.
	It was a big conversation, a big discussion about the visa waiver program, about changes that need to be made.
	And then Senator Grassley took the floor and talked about something that I guess I knew about, but of course I never really qualified.
	But he said some interesting things about another program that we have ignored as an entire country.
	An omnibus appropriation bill was filed to keep government operating for the remainder of this fiscal year.
	This bill includes a straight and clean extension of a program called the EB-5 Immigration Waiver Investor Program.
	This program has been plagued with fraud and abuse.
	But more importantly, it poses significant national security risk.
	Allegations suggesting the EB-5 program may be facilitating terrorist travel, economic espionage, money laundering and investment, fraud, Are too serious of warnings against this bill to ignore, yet they're being ignored.
	The omnibus bill then fails to include much needed reforms.
	The spending bill being considered by the House and Senate then is a major disappointment.
	I'm frustrated that despite the alarm bells and whistleblower warnings warning us in Congress about the EB-5 program, Republican and Democrat leadership in the House and Senate decided to simply extend the program without any changes.
	This was a missed opportunity to protect America.
	I'm pretty well versed in the immigration do's and don'ts.
	Certainly the don'ts in the United States.
	I had not heard of the EB-5 visa program.
	But you did some research.
	I did.
	I have it right here.
	This enables you to enter the United States under a visa, an EB-5 visa, if you adhere to the following.
	You will start a business in the United States in which you will invest a minimum of $500,000 and will create at least 10 jobs.
	That's all the requirements there are.
	And as I'm reading through the materials on this, I think we even discussed this a while back.
	I think it was like 40 Chinese people showed up, and they'd all put $500,000 into building some mall, and it was in East L.A. or some corner where nothing was going on.
	But here's a backdoor for you.
	All you need is $500,000, and then you say you're going to create...
	You don't have to have the 10...
	The employees created that point, but you have to promise that, and maybe there's some follow-through and checkup.
	This is a pretty gaping hole.
	That's not a lot of money to come in as a terrorist.
	Terrorist.
	My question is that why would you bother dropping $500,000 and just sneak in through the Mexican border or you can come in as a student or any of these things that are cheaper?
	It sounds like a waste of money.
	The logic of this eludes me.
	The logic of having to spend that much money to be a terrorist Well, there was a lot of...
	There was money laundering was mentioned.
	Espionage was mentioned.
	There's a lot of things that were mentioned.
	All this stuff, because he's like a paranoid freak, that guy Grassley.
	Yeah, well, there's that.
	I don't know.
	I'm not...
	No?
	I don't like this thing.
	It's like...
	But there's something else that we're doing.
	You can buy a citizenship for the United States or something for some money.
	Really?
	Yeah.
	Something.
	I was hearing about it.
	I know you can do it in Canada.
	I think you need a half million or a million or something, some amount of money to get a Canadian citizenship.
	Which seems pretty...
	In light of the recent visa conversation we've been having and about the vetting of people through social media, you will be very happy to hear this next clip, which will be my final one for the weekend, because you are right.
	And I know it feels good.
	We don't know who said no, but we've obtained exclusively, breaking here on Morning Joe for the first time, this 2011 memo from DHS Customs, basically outlining what everyone has lately been calling for, the review of social media, Facebook, etc., for people who are applicants for visas, basically.
	You see it up on the screen.
	The concern in that memo focused on terror threats.
	Fraud, crime, and national security, Joe.
	And it explicitly said national security is one of the reasons that you'd want to look at this.
	At this time, we have a source, a former senior DHS official, who said not only was this not done, but people in the customs offices had firewalls preventing them from even getting on these sites.
	So this was an attempt to do this.
	And this very memo that we've now obtained published for the first time went through layers of review, went up the line, a year of reviews, it would authorize this type of access, it would try to create this program, and it ultimately was not adopted.
	I want to tell you one more thing.
	Let me stop you there.
	You're telling us not only did the administration say no to this proposal to review social media accounts for national security purposes, But they actually enacted firewalls to prevent people from taking a look at an applicant's social media pages, Facebook pages, Twitter accounts?
	Well, we have sources that say those firewalls existed partly to keep people from goofing off on the job.
	Yeah, nails it!
	In the morning!
	Well, thank you.
	It's obvious.
	It was so obvious.
	It was great that we have an official source backing you up.
	That's great.
	Yeah, that is great.
	That was a good catch.
	You're listening to Morning Joe along with The View.
	Yeah, you know, I do it to offset.
	I'm surprised you haven't shot yourself.
	I do it to offset my flat earth research.
	Put the gun in a safe.
	Ah, you have so much faith in me.
	It's just touching.
	Have you ever listened to The Talk?
	Uh, yeah.
	Oh, that's not as good, I agree.
	And The Real, that's the one you should watch.
	Oh, no, no, no.
	I don't think so.
	Oh, yeah.
	I'm not gonna watch that, no.
	The Real.
	Well, tonight we know what you'll be watching.
	Well, yeah, I'm probably gonna tape it.
	Oh.
	Tape it, watch it later, maybe.
	Well, you know, the good thing is we'll at least have a winner that we can discuss.
	And it'll be a...
	It'll be a...
	Right, it'll be a...
	Geopolitical choice.
	Geopolitical winner.
	Yeah.
	And Russia's now at my target.
	I'm still calling Spain.
	Spain seems like a long shot.
	I can't think of anything else, though.
	Anyway, we'll be back on Thursday.
	Please remember us for this Christmas at Dvorak.org slash NA. Coming to you from the capital of the Drone Star State in downtown Austin, Texas.
	In the morning, everybody, I'm Adam Curry.
	And I'm John C. Dvorak up here in northern Silicon Valley where the mudflats are muddier than ever.
	We'll be back on Thursday right here on No Agenda.
	Yes, citizen, you may return to your harpsichord.
	Look it up, it's science.
	Glenn called in from Salt Lake City, Utah.
	Glenn, good morning.
	Hi, good morning.
	My question is, since we're spending all this money, where are we getting the money from?
	And my second question is, if I can shit in your mouth.
	Danger, Will Robinson.
	Danger, no Will Robinson.
	The government totally sucks, you motherfucker.
	The government totally sucks.
	Cause I'm a hero, flexible, hero, flexible man.
	Somebody give me an appletini.
	The government totally stops.
	The government totally stops.
	And you're right.
	We've got to get some jobs.
	I'm a two-jogged.
	I'm a two-jogged.
	We must, we must, and we will much about that be committed.
	Where can we march behind that?
	What the hell did he say?
	I don't know, but yes, we're with you.
	But resist, we must.
	We must, and we will much about that be committed.
	About that be committed. .
	But resist, we must.
	We must.
	And we will much.
	About that.
	Be committed.
	We have to figure out, all right, what do we just do?
	And you're right.
	We've got to get to the job.
	I'm a team job.
	But resist, we must.
	We must.
	And we will much.
	To resist, we must.
	We must.
	And we will much.
	But resist, we must.
	We must.
	And we will much.
	We're with you.
	Fear is freedom.
	Subjugation is liberation.
	Contradiction is truth.
	Those are the facts of this world.
	And you will all surrender to them.
	You pigs in human clothing.
	And wash your hands after touching any raw meat.
	Go someplace and shoot yourself!
	Now get out there and whoop Obama's behind.
	I'm Joe Biden and thank you for taking the time to listen.
	Bye.
	music The best podcast in the universe!

▲