Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Sept. 29, 2016 - No Agenda

03:01:40

864: Putin Popularity Poll

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Well, we didn't give it to him.
	Adam Curry, Chauncey Dvorak.
	It's Thursday, September 29th, 2016.
	This is your award-winning Gitmo Nation media assassination episode 864.
	This is no agenda.
	Protecting your mental hygiene from the mainstream mayhem and broadcasting live from the capital of the Drone Star State here in Austin Tejas from the Region 6 in the morning, everybody.
	I'm Adam Curry.
	And from northern Silicon Valley where Confucius say, girl with many men on string usually get into tangle.
	I'm John C. Dvorak.
	It's Crackball and Buzzkill.
	In the morning.
	Yeah, maybe you shouldn't do those.
	I had people tell me it was great.
	Can you fit it into the intro music, then, at least?
	Just try that.
	Just try to fit it into the intros.
	You need to read a little faster.
	Yeah, could you read a little faster, please?
	Uh, yeah.
	Hold on, John.
	We have breaking news, breaking news.
	It is, of course, show day.
	Oh, yeah, something's got to be going on.
	It's a bomb, man.
	Yeah, well, we have a train crash in New Jersey.
	A bad one, bad one.
	It's like in Rubicon.
	Yeah, New Jersey.
	A little bit.
	No, a train crashed into a station in Hoboken.
	How does that work?
	Well, interestingly enough, as you know, we have producers around the world.
	Many of them who are in interesting places.
	So this is an anonymous email that came in this morning.
	Well, I know it is, but it's anonymous.
	My dad is a conductor.
	I just spoke with him.
	Here's the theory floating around New Jersey Transit.
	And the theory is this crash was intentional and possibly terrorism.
	Oh, okay.
	Well, that's going to lighten things up this week.
	Here we go.
	Number one, the train could not have been going through the rail yard that fast, or a conductor, the tower, or a passenger would have been concerned and pulled the emergency brake.
	Also, the train would have probably derailed before the station because of all the switches.
	The train must have accelerated as it was pulling into the station.
	Point number two, Hoboken is one of the busiest stations in the state and is the only one that's guaranteed to have every track end.
	Guaranteed to have every track end.
	I'm not quite sure what that means.
	End?
	End.
	So it ends.
	Every track has one of those bumper things.
	So no matter which one you were on, it would end.
	So you can't go through the station.
	And you can't go wrong, I think is the point.
	All other major stations have tracks that go through the station.
	There you go.
	Even New York Penn only has three tracks that end.
	Point number three.
	It could not have been a medical emergency from the engineer.
	This one I knew.
	There's, of course, a dead man's switch.
	The engineer needs to press every 30 seconds to acknowledge he's alert and okay or the train stops.
	And number four.
	That train and time is heavy with commuters.
	If you wanted to do something and have a huge impact, that would be the place and time to do it.
	So he will give us more info as it comes along.
	But that is what the New Jersey Transit Authority and at least the conductors are thinking about what has been going on.
	Well, we're on top of the news this week.
	Hold on to me.
	We're on top of the news for you, everybody.
	There you go.
	I don't think anybody's carrying that right at this second.
	No, no one has that information.
	Of course not.
	No, no, of course not.
	All righty then.
	Everyone's all jacked up about the debates.
	I'm hoping that we have some more insight than that you've already gotten from the too many discussions about them.
	All slanted in one way or another.
	Do you want to ask me my impression?
	Do you want to talk first?
	I'm going to ask you your impression before I give you mine.
	Okay.
	My impression, first 20 minutes, Trump did very well.
	He had Hillary on the ropes.
	You could see it.
	And, well, actually, there were a couple of things I noticed.
	First of all, I believe that all that bullcrap about the podium and everything, that seemed to me to be really just a distraction for what really happened.
	And I thought this was kind of odd how it showed up.
	We had Hillary Clinton on the screen, right, wearing red, and Donald Trump on the screen left, wearing a blue tie.
	To me, we know left, blue, red, right.
	I just thought that was an interesting dynamic that showed up, and I don't know if that was intentional.
	Because they negotiate a lot of things about what colors they're going to wear.
	Certainly ties have always been a point of discussion.
	So I'm not quite sure if that was something that was intended to confuse people.
	I don't know.
	There was also the stuff behind the two of them that had hidden messages.
	Oh, there was a lot.
	Well, there was one thing that I know for sure Trump was doing that did not work, and I could see it in his face.
	He's like, it's not working.
	He kept drinking a little bit of water, and I could see him looking at Clinton going, does it bother you yet?
	Is your throat scratchy?
	Don't you want to cough?
	It could be.
	I think he was doing anything he could to get her to clear her throat.
	Of course, he had the sniffles.
	Yeah.
	Well, the sniffles thing was, well, let's get into that.
	I just want to finish my thought.
	Yeah, okay.
	To me, and Scott Adams has a different opinion of why he thinks Trump did everything he had to do, and according to Scott Adams, the persuasion technique, all he had to do was show that he's not crazy and he can keep his anger in check.
	Yeah.
	To me, I think the thing that really hit home from him, because of course, this is not going to sway any Hillary Clinton voter or any Donald Trump voter.
	Nothing will change those minds.
	He said, look, you've been around here for 30 years, and now all of a sudden you've got good ideas?
	I think that was good.
	He didn't pound that home enough.
	He could have kept doing that.
	Let me give you my quick impression.
	Here's what...
	By the way, final...
	If you want to talk about who won...
	Hillary Clinton definitely, even though content is not important, but she did win, I think, the debate for everyone.
	Oh, she kicked his ass.
	Yeah, totally.
	And the thing when she did her little, oh, and she did the little shimmy, and oh, that's so funny.
	She ridiculed him and knocked him off his game completely.
	And here's what bothers me.
	And you could say, well, I think Trump won.
	It doesn't really make as much difference...
	So as far as I'm concerned, I think you're right.
	Nobody's going to change their votes.
	They're just going to dig in and now they're getting more critical of the independent candidates, less so of Hillary.
	Here's what bothers me.
	Trump made, during the initial debates, during the primary debates...
	And he didn't do it once or twice.
	He did it a number of times, and I can almost still hear him saying it.
	Oh, I'm going to love to debate Hillary.
	I am going to wipe the stage with Hillary.
	I am going to kill Hillary up there.
	She doesn't have a prayer against me.
	He bragged and bragged and bragged how much he wanted to debate Hillary.
	And this is the...
	Performance he gives?
	I'm reminded of the wide receiver for the Oakland Raiders.
	This guy, Tim Brown.
	There's nothing like a sports analogy when you give it to me, John.
	Love that.
	Tim Brown's a wide receiver.
	He was one of the best receivers the Raiders have ever had.
	They finally get to a Super Bowl where he gets to play into a Super Bowl.
	He goes out there, and I think he makes one catch the whole game, but one time one of these cornerbacks is guarding him.
	He goes out there, he drops a ball, and the cornerback says, you've been waiting 20 years for this, and this is what you're showing us?
	Yeah, it was pretty much like that.
	I agree.
	That's what it was.
	It was Trump.
	Big talker about how he's going to wipe the stage with Hillary.
	And here's what he comes up with.
	He blows it.
	I was watching it with my daughter's boyfriend came over because he had a political science thing.
	I think I wanted to get some of my takes on this.
	The two of us are watching this together.
	And there's opportunities, especially the one where Hillary starts going off on law and order, where Trump could have come in if he was listening and called her out for the crime bill and all the other stuff.
	He wimpily says something about predators.
	She gave him softball after softball that he could hit out of the park.
	He hit nothing.
	No.
	He had a couple of things that did show up on alternative mainstream channels, like CNBC. The whole day after the debate, they were playing the clip of him talking about the Fed.
	I think he was right about that.
	Well, it's an old Ron Paul thing.
	It's not that new.
	No, it's not new.
	It's not new.
	That was just something I liked.
	But I agree with you.
	Was this a tactic?
	Was this some strategy?
	I don't know what's going on, but it was not good.
	It was not good.
	First 20 minutes.
	I'm like, okay, this is interesting.
	It was getting there.
	Even Tina and I are watching it.
	Tina's like, oh man, this is bad.
	He's not good.
	This is bad.
	He stunk.
	Yeah.
	And then he has the nerve to say that he won.
	Well, that's what you do.
	I mean, come on.
	He could have apologized for his performance.
	What's interesting, though, is the response from my UK friends.
	Oh, my gosh.
	They were like, no, no, no principle.
	He has no content.
	He doesn't know what he's doing.
	They're brainwashed over there.
	That's what I told my friends and I haven't heard from them.
	I may no longer have friends in the UK. You have friends.
	Actually saying, Donald Trump is a criminal.
	I said, now I know you've been brainwashed.
	Yeah, I know.
	Here's an example of Trump not listening.
	I want you to play this clip.
	This is Hillary's slam.
	She slams Trump on the stop and frisk thing.
	Listen to this carefully.
	Such a dire negative picture of Trump.
	Black communities in our country.
	You know, the vibrancy of the black church, the black businesses that employ so many people, the opportunities that so many families are working to provide for their kids.
	There's a lot that we should be proud of and we should be supporting and lifting up.
	But we do always have to make sure we keep people safe.
	There are the right ways of doing it, and then there are ways that are ineffective.
	Stop and frisk was found to be unconstitutional.
	And in part because it was ineffective.
	It did not do what it needed to do.
	Now, I believe in community policing.
	Right.
	As he goes on.
	Now, if he was listening...
	He would have called her out and got her off track by asking her a simple question or pointing out, she said, and I caught this immediately when she said it, she said stop and frisk was found unconstitutional partly because it was ineffective.
	Yeah.
	Now what does constitutionality have to do with effectiveness?
	Ever!
	Nothing.
	And I don't believe...
	Was it ruled unconstitutional?
	No.
	I don't think so.
	No, it was ruled unconstitutional by a lower court, but it never got very far.
	Right.
	And they had gotten to waste a lot of time on that.
	But when she said it was unconstitutional, partly because it was ineffective...
	Was he paying any attention to that?
	That's the dumbest thing she said.
	But you want to go through the whole debate and talk about things he should have done?
	Because to me, it's like, I can hear that anywhere.
	That would be the whole show.
	Yeah, I can hear that anywhere.
	I don't need that.
	But...
	Well, I pointed this particular one out because nobody noticed it.
	That's a very good...
	Well, it's not like the mainstream is going to pull that up and say, Hey, boy, what a gaff.
	No.
	No.
	You want to hear the best gaffe of the whole night?
	Of course.
	Of course.
	It's not really a gaffe that was on the debates.
	It's this one.
	It's the debate C-SPAN misspelling of Hillary.
	Play debate C-SPAN misspelled Hillary.
	My ears only glazed over three times.
	Nancy puts out unscientific time poll 62% think that Hillary won.
	NBC. New York NBC has this tweet.
	They misspelled Hillary's name on the debate 2016 ticket.
	They only used one L in her first name.
	Oh, that's made by cable.
	I thought that was funny.
	The other cable, the other one, I thought the C-SPAN, C-SPAN was the best.
	I mean, they're the absolute best.
	Is that what you watched the debate on, on C-SPAN? I watched it on, I switched around, and I can talk about that when I go through my notes.
	All right.
	I switched from one to the other to see how they were doing it differently.
	But C-SPAN, because they really interact with the public.
	They're the closest thing to the network on TV or the internet on TV. Yeah, they let people call in.
	Yeah, they call in and one guy went crazy.
	They had to cut him off because he was talking about Hillary's red dress being the devil or something.
	But they read these tweets, and this one, it just was so funny to listen, because we just watched the debate, and then this tweet comes in.
	This is their top tweet.
	I just thought it was hilarious.
	And finally, this tweet from Congressman Brendan Boyle, Democrat of Pennsylvania near Philadelphia.
	To all people of the world, I respectfully request you please not watch this debate.
	Please look away.
	Thank you.
	Now, that was not the best tweet, though.
	There was an even better tweet that was discussed the next day.
	Okay.
	Former Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean is standing by his controversial tweet about the source of Donald Trump sniffles throughout Monday night's debate.
	Dean tweeted Monday, quote, Notice Trump sniffing all the time?
	Coke user?
	Here he is speaking yesterday with MSNBC's Kate Snow.
	I love this.
	I'm suggesting we think about it, because here's the kids' interesting constellations.
	So he sniffs during the presentation, which is something that users do.
	He also has grandiosity, which is something that accompanies that problem.
	He has delusions.
	I'm not talking about being crazy, but for example, when he told everybody he was very smart not to pay taxes and then denied he said it after he said it in front of 100 million people, It's not that he's delusory about it, it's that he thinks somehow he's not going to get caught.
	That is delusional.
	He has trouble with pressured speech.
	He interrupted, as you pointed out, Hillary Clinton 29 times.
	He couldn't keep himself together.
	So, look, do I think at 70 years old he has a cocaine habit?
	Probably not.
	But...
	You know, it's something that I think it would be interesting to ask him and see if he ever had a problem with that.
	And now let's listen to the Morning Joes respond.
	What in the world?
	No.
	Mark Halpern, what in the world is going on there?
	We know, Howard, like Howard.
	What in the world is going on?
	A doctor?
	Diagnosing a coke problem because a guy was sniffing?
	I think the apology is in order.
	It's also just not necessary.
	And I'll just say, if a Trump surrogate said something like that...
	Well, at least they have some self-awareness.
	Now, Dean, Dean doubled down.
	I got one more.
	Dean doubled down on this.
	Did you want to say something?
	I just want to mention that Joe Trippi came on one of the Brit Hume's show, and he said that Dean should apologize, too.
	And so I thought that was pretty...
	Because he's the one who did...
	Joe Trippi's the guy who made Howard Dean.
	Oh, okay.
	Right, right.
	Now, Howard Dean is a medical doctor.
	He's high up in the DNC still, isn't he?
	I believe so.
	Yeah.
	And we know the Goldwater rule is you never, as a doctor, never do an analysis of someone and say, this is what's going on, because you can get sued for that later.
	And so Dean remains serious about his possibility.
	We'll have a listen.
	This is again on MSNBC.
	Guy just keeps on going.
	So look, do I think at 70 years old he has a cocaine habit?
	Probably not.
	Well, then that's enough, isn't it?
	They're really trying to spin this up.
	But...
	You know, it's something that I think it'd be interesting to ask him and see if he ever had a problem with that.
	As a physician and as a medical person yourself, you're suggesting that we ought to look at whether the Republican candidate for president has a cocaine habit.
	No, I don't think he has a cocaine habit.
	Not a habit, maybe just a little toot for the snoot once in a while.
	I don't make any diagnosis over the television.
	I don't.
	I think that's wrong.
	I think doctors shouldn't do it.
	Doctors have done it in the past, and they shouldn't do it.
	That's his lawyer talking.
	I just was struck by the sniffing and then by his behavior, which all sort of came together, these four symptoms.
	You know, do I think he has a cocaine habit?
	I think it's unlikely that you could mount a presidential campaign at 70 years old with a cocaine habit, but it was pretty striking.
	This is reminding me a lot, sir, of Rudy Giuliani a few weeks ago raising very, not similar, but different questions about medical history and your candidate, Hillary Clinton, to which your campaign responded, this is inappropriate, that we shouldn't be raising questions about Hillary Clinton with absolutely no substance or proof.
	You don't see the parallel?
	Well, Donald Trump has not only not made his tax returns public, he's also not made his medical history public in any meaningful way.
	Hillary Clinton has done that and has answered any question that Giuliani may want to raise.
	What if a Trump supporter has suggested that Hillary Clinton was using drugs last night?
	I suspect that she would have said no I'm not and here's my medical report that shows so.
	So you're saying Donald Trump should answer your question?
	I know.
	What I'm saying is I raised the question last night.
	I don't make diagnoses on the television.
	I think you can't do that.
	It was medically improper, and I don't think you should.
	But I don't think this is a ridiculous idea.
	Something funny was going on with Trump last night.
	Do I think it was cocaine?
	Probably not.
	You know, again, the sniffling, the grandiosity, the delusions, the pressured speech.
	You know, this guy's already proven himself to be unstable.
	The question is, why is he unstable?
	You're not going to delete the tweet, you don't regret it, and you don't apologize for it.
	Is that right?
	No, absolutely right.
	Okay.
	I like it.
	This is very good dirty tricks.
	Now, the better thing, when I saw this, I just saw the sniffling because he started right away with it.
	I saw it as an opportunity that he had another one that he blew, which was to pull out a handkerchief because he had issues.
	He has a cold.
	Or allergies or something like that.
	Or allergies, whatever.
	He should have pulled out a handkerchief.
	Just at the moment, Taylor, he was saying something that And done that.
	By the way, I loved his power move in the beginning where he shakes his hand and puts his other hand on her back.
	Oh, man.
	Power move.
	Yeah, well...
	Big power move.
	Power move.
	Hey, I thought that would...
	That's nutty.
	I like it.
	Perfect dirty trick.
	Howard Dean is still a jilted lover.
	And he's always been a really extreme A constrained progressive type lefty.
	Yeah.
	And he's pissed because he got kicked out of any chance of winning because of his stupid scream.
	So I think he's...
	This is probably personal.
	He's saying, you know, what the hell, man?
	Like, I got bumped off for a scream.
	You know, at least the idea he might be on the coke is worth kicking him out, isn't it?
	But this is not how it works with Donald Trump.
	He could actually rail up and do lines on the lectern and still probably would be in the race.
	I think he should have blew his nose during the debate maybe two or three times.
	Every once in a while he should have brought the handkerchief out.
	He has an excuse.
	He has the sniffles.
	Everybody noticed it.
	So he could have brought a handkerchief out and blew his nose just every so often, right after Hillary said something, he'd blow his nose.
	You know what he needs?
	He needs one of these foot switches like I have, and then you can sniffle all you want.
	What he needs is a joke writer.
	The guy's got no sense of humor in the clutch.
	He was a choke artist.
	Hello, choke artist.
	It seemed like he choked.
	I agree.
	Let me ask you a question.
	One of the many conspiracy theories swirling around, one which I actually like, is that Hillary had hand signals for Lester scratching her nose when she wanted Lester to come to him.
	Well, there was one clip.
	I don't know if I have the clip.
	Yeah, I think I do.
	Hillary on crime.
	I think it's the...
	I think it's the Hillary on crime clip where she's giving her just her little spiel and then Lester, as if she didn't finish, she missed the talking point, gives her a cue.
	He kind of prompts her.
	He, like, leads the witness and gets her to say more.
	We cannot just say law and order.
	We have to say...
	We have to come forward with a plan that is going to divert people from the criminal justice system, deal with mandatory minimum sentences which have put too many people away for too long for doing too little.
	We need to have more second chance programs.
	I'm glad that We're ending private prisons in the federal system.
	I want to see them ended in the state system.
	You shouldn't have a profit motivation to fill prison cells with young Americans.
	So there are some positive ways we can work on this.
	And I believe strongly that common sense gun safety measures would assist us right now.
	And this is something Donald has supported along with the gun lobby right now.
	We've got too many military-style weapons on the streets.
	In a lot of places, our police are outgunned.
	We need comprehensive background checks, and we need to keep guns out of the hands of those who will do harm.
	And we finally— You should speed it up faster here at this point.
	I should have.
	That's not the clip, then.
	That was your production moment du jour.
	Well, hold on.
	Let's redeem ourselves.
	What was beautiful to witness is...
	Most of my clips are always after the debate.
	I love the analysis.
	That's what I love.
	How are people picking this up?
	Believe me, I listened to the debate, recorded the debate...
	There wasn't much to clip from the debate, per se.
	No, I know.
	I'm not saying that we did anything wrong, but it started, my favorite moment, when, so it's after the debate, and the press is all around the Hillary bus, and she's getting on the bus, and she comes back, and she butt-slams, she butt-slams Donald Trump.
	But listen to, this is CNN, I believe, listen to the media squealing with delight.
	...coming is, and that's what I'll do for the American people, and I am Looking forward to it.
	What about his stamina?
	What about his stamina?
	Anybody who complains about the microphone is not having a good night.
	Oh my goodness, a little zinger there at the end, right?
	We're talking about anybody who had microphone problems is having a real problem.
	As you know, this morning Donald Trump was complaining about microphone problems.
	They just love it.
	Oh, that's great!
	Whoa, you got butt slammed!
	They love that.
	Like, oh, we have a quote we can use.
	I have a few more things, unless you want to...
	You got some more that you want to...
	No, you keep going.
	I got a few things that are kind of interesting, but they're...
	Again, not during the debate again.
	I got the after the debate.
	I got Brit human cats going over some article that ran in the New York Times.
	This is just kind of back-ass analysis.
	Here's the thing that I found the most interesting from the debate.
	It was a clear set-up And I think it's very poorly prepared because things are already seemingly going wrong.
	Maybe it doesn't make any difference, but...
	And this is where Clinton really got under Trump's skin by saying, oh, well, you called this former Miss Universe contestant, you called her Miss Piggy, and she's fat, she had to lose weight, and, you know, oh, and she's now an American citizen, and she's voting for me.
	And you can see Trump was like, where did you get that from?
	That's what he said.
	What is this?
	Where did you get that from?
	Here's a...
	Just a quick post-debate clip from today's show.
	Alicia Machado says she was surprised to hear Hillary Clinton bring up her story on live national TV, but she is an enthusiastic Clinton supporter who is adding her voice to the list of women who have accused Donald Trump of sexist behavior over the years.
	Okay, so she was surprised, John.
	She was just watching the debate, and all of a sudden, oh my gosh, Hillary's talking about me!
	I had no idea!
	Okay, so, oh gee, that was just, and shame on you today's show, shame on you.
	Now, I'm trying in which order I should do this in.
	I'll do it in this order.
	So first, let's go to now.
	So now this Alicia Machado, and this is something that happened, I guess, in 80, you know, 97, right when Trump bought the Miss Universe pageant.
	And so Alicia is now going on all the shows, and her job is to confirm, of course, what Hillary Clinton said about her.
	Yes, this is probably a paid gig.
	I wish someone would ask her.
	Right.
	Well, it's probably a paid gig, but the thing is...
	She is no good.
	And she has a lot of problematic background.
	But here is Megyn Kelly, who puts her on the spot.
	And another thing, her English is mediocre.
	It's like she's better speaking English than I would be speaking Spanish, for sure.
	But that doesn't help her situation.
	So I think the Clinton campaign really threw this woman out there.
	I don't know if there'll be any backlash, but here is the start of what could become backlash.
	As a result of what he said to you, you...
	By the way, this is Megyn Kelly in her very concerned voice.
	And don't forget Megyn Kelly, if you remember the...
	I think it's in the newest leaner report.
	She's...
	Most people assume, and this came out of the WikiLeaks...
	That Meghan is a Hillary supporter.
	Well, she certainly helped Trump in this one.
	As a result of what he said to you, you developed an eating disorder, bulimia and anorexia.
	But you had said publicly at the time that you suffered from both of those eating disorders prior to the Miss Universe contest and really had come into...
	No, no, never, never, never...
	Okay, so just so you understand, one of the claims is because of Trump's attitude and how harsh she was in calling her Miss Piggy, she developed an eating disorder because of that.
	Oh yeah, she must have the, she got that far in one of these beauty pageant competitions, which are cutthroat, but she has such a weak will that that happened.
	Well, as it turns out, it's just not true.
	This is from Washington Post.
	Let me just tell you what I'm referring to, and then you respond.
	The Washington Post from May 16, 1997 reported this quote from you.
	I was anorexic and bulimic, but almost all of us are.
	When I was preparing for Miss Universe, it was an obsession for me to not gain weight.
	By the time I won, I was actually recovering, but the year leading to it, I didn't eat at all, and whatever I ate, I threw up.
	I weighed 116 pounds when I won.
	I was skeletal.
	So there is the same Alicia Mercado saying, before Trump was even involved, that she had this eating disorder.
	But that can't be true.
	So it sounds like, without diminishing anything that you went through after Trump, it does sound like you had an eating disorder prior to his comments and prior to winning.
	No?
	No, I'm sorry, but that was not true.
	Maybe in that moment, the company, Miss Universe, and in a specific, this person, They manipulate a lot of information about me.
	Oh, okay.
	I got it.
	I understand now.
	Of course.
	It's the Miss Universe who manipulated that and put that statement out.
	Because I know this person, and he's not a good person.
	That is the point.
	The point is, no more abuse for us.
	No more abuse for the girls.
	See, this is the talking point she was giving.
	You go out there and you say, no more abuse for the girls.
	You can become president.
	Everything's great.
	Screw Trump.
	She couldn't add lib out of anything.
	Don't look.
	The must be.
	Okay.
	Now, that was kind of the start.
	But then she went on a pooper show.
	And there is some history to this young lady.
	And the way I understand it is she was involved in some form of crime.
	She drove the getaway car.
	And this is in the show notes.
	She was a porn actress for a while.
	And Pooper tries to kind of get her to correct the record.
	And once again, this is not the person you want to do this.
	Let me ask you.
	And I believe in her.
	You said that the Trump campaign will try to discredit you.
	There are reports that Trump surrogates tonight have been referencing and pointing to on CNN and elsewhere about an incident in 1998 in Venezuela where you were accused of driving a getaway car from a murder scene.
	You were never charged with this.
	The judge in the case also said you threatened to kill him after he indicted your boyfriend for the attempted murder.
	I just want to give you a chance to address these reports that the Trump surrogates are talking about.
	He can say whatever he wants to say.
	I don't care.
	You know, I have my past, of course.
	Everybody has.
	Everybody has a past.
	And I'm not a saint girl, but that is not a point now.
	That moment in Venezuela, What was wrong was another speculation about my life, because I'm a really famous person in my country, because I'm an actress there.
	Actress.
	And in Mexico, too.
	And he can use whatever he wants to use.
	The point is, that happened 20 years ago.
	Oh, okay.
	Unlike what happened 20 years ago with Trump, and then I guess it's different.
	And I actually have...
	Here's another opportunity squandered.
	Because if they're going to bring the dredge up 20 years ago, that's the right timing for Hillary's commentary about the blacks being predators and super predators.
	And the crime bill.
	And just drop the ball again.
	Yeah.
	Well, this, of course, wasn't in the debate.
	I do have a little bit of...
	No, it wasn't.
	No, her...
	It wasn't in the debate.
	I understand what you're saying.
	But he was caught off guard.
	He had no idea what to do with that.
	I have audio from video from 1997.
	Trump is sitting there with Alicia Mercado.
	And you have to understand, when...
	So he bought the Miss Universe contest in 97.
	In 96, this was Miss Venezuela, and she was going to compete.
	And, you know, he said, look, you got to lose some weight, which...
	By the way is exactly what's happening in the beauty contest.
	We review the ridiculousness of these things once or twice a year.
	And now all of a sudden when the guy who's running it, who owns it, whose job is to make the women look great, now he's a dick.
	Before saying, hey, you've got to lose some weight.
	But if you listen to it, this is a press conference with Trump, with Alicia, with the trainer that he brought in for her, and the press.
	This stuff is terrific, but I like golf, I like tennis.
	When do you want to come here with me?
	I'll work out with her anytime she wants.
	What is your advice to Alicia?
	Well, I don't think Alicia needs much advice.
	I will say that last year, before I owned the Miss Universe contest, I went to the Miss Universe contest last year.
	It was in Las Vegas.
	And I felt that Alicia was one of the most beautiful women I've ever seen.
	It was incredible.
	And all of the folks that were here agreed with that.
	Alicia is like me and like a lot of other people.
	I love to eat.
	We all love to eat.
	Not all of us.
	Some of you are lucky.
	But we eat.
	We like to eat.
	And she had tremendous pressure put on her with the wind and everything else.
	Plus she was going from country to country, all foreign places.
	And there was a huge amount of pressure.
	And some people, when they have pressure, don't eat.
	And some people, when they have pressure, eat too much, like me, but like Alicia.
	And what she's going to do now is she's got one of the great trainers of the world and a very, very famous man in his own right.
	And he's been working with her for the last few days.
	And I think she's going to show up at that contest, actually being probably a little bit heavier than when she won it.
	A little heavier.
	But you think that's actually better.
	When she won it, she weighed about 118 pounds.
	Too light for her.
	And actually, from what I understand, a little bit heavier.
	But I will say, when she won the contest, I had never seen anybody more beautiful.
	So they're talking about weight, which, by the way, I never hear anyone bitching and moaning about, you know, boxing matches when we have weigh-in.
	Oh!
	It's fat shaming!
	Fat fighter, you!
	So, anyway, the whole thing is bull crap, but that's what No Agenda Show does, is to dive in and once in a while give you a little bit of background.
	But, oh my goodness.
	I'll give you a Borderline Clip of the Day for digging that one up.
	Oh, thank you.
	I appreciate that.
	I got a couple more.
	Borderline Clip of the Day.
	Let me see.
	That's a good dig.
	I admire that clip.
	And it kind of changes the perspective on the whole thing.
	And it's like, you know, again, maybe, you know, it's very much out of left field, the way she brought it in and then she twisted it, and Trump was flat-footed.
	Yeah, that was disappointing.
	I'm sure he was disappointed in himself.
	You know, I can't believe he's flat-footed the whole night.
	Well, I have a few more.
	Sean Penn was on Colbert.
	I saw Sean Penn on Colbert.
	I couldn't get a clip out of it, though.
	Oh, I got a clip out of it right off the bat.
	There's only one clip to get.
	I don't think there's a political debate going on, so I didn't watch it.
	It's a social debate.
	That's interesting, because it's hard to see who won it, and people are trying to figure out who scored political points.
	You think it's more social points?
	It's basically there are two options.
	Either you can decide to...
	Divorce yourself from loving your children and piss on a tree and show that you have the power to piss on a tree.
	Or you can go out and vote in a very big way for someone like Hillary Clinton, who then you can challenge and support, which is the only way that any kind of president can have any success, and you stick it out for four years.
	Or we can just masturbate our way into hell with...
	At this point, I'm thinking, okay, that's an option.
	And we'll just pile on.
	Now, go back to that option one more time, because that's very appealing.
	A guy who looks like the only blonde magician.
	If you're referring to Trump, I don't think Trump could actually masturbate his way to hell because his hand's too small.
	I'm not sure.
	But wait, there's more.
	Pile on.
	Proportional match.
	Oh.
	I understand.
	So yeah, let's just go in that direction.
	That was very classy.
	And again, of course, Colbert...
	By the way, Sean Penn still sounds like Spicoli, doesn't he?
	Yeah.
	Well, you could masturbate in hell, man.
	Hey, man!
	That'd be great!
	So, he's on CBS. That CBS is the CIA thing.
	Sean Penn's got some new thing that he read, which is a novel that he wrote under a pseudonym that he narrates.
	And it talks about him being in the CIA, according to Colbert, earlier in that interview.
	And, of course, that would make nothing but sense.
	And Sean Penn doesn't do TV. I've never seen him on one of these talk shows before, because he's kind of...
	Very seldom.
	Well, very, very seldom.
	He didn't even remember the last time he did one.
	Did I ever tell you the story when I flew to LA with Sean Penn?
	No.
	We're hoping for anecdotes on this show.
	Yes.
	This is back in the MTV days, probably 88, 89, and there was a fabulous, fabulous flight between New York and Los Angeles, and Los Angeles and New York, that's all it did, twice a day, called MGM Grand Air.
	Oh, yes.
	That was an interesting plane.
	MGM Grand Air was a 727 or 737?
	I want to say 27.
	No, no.
	It was a longer plane.
	It was either a 27.
	It was 27.
	And you could only, I think it was like 50 passengers.
	Of course, MTV paid for this because they needed to get me out there.
	It wasn't that much more expensive than a regular ticket, actually.
	It was all captain's chairs and then staterooms are like four or five staterooms where you could sit three people on each side.
	A table could come up so you could eat.
	The doors could close.
	Now, I've been in those ones before like a train, like a train.
	I've been in those ones before by myself.
	And it was fantastic.
	I had this, you know, because you can move the two benches together.
	You'd have a huge double bed.
	It was great.
	But this one time I'm in there with Sean Penn in the stateroom with his brother, the one who who died.
	And it's Sean Penn's mom.
	And it was weird.
	You know, first of all, his brother, what was his brother's name?
	I don't remember.
	He was drinking beer out of the can, taking his shirt off in the plane.
	Just bare chested there.
	The mom was just very quiet and it was really odd.
	I'm like, hey, how you doing?
	Hey, you're that guy from VH1, aren't you?
	I'm like, oh, Jesus.
	VH1. That must have been the greatest source of your life.
	Yeah, so I said, yeah, that's me.
	Hey, what was it like being married to Madonna, if you don't mind me asking?
	And he said, hell hath no fury.
	And then we pretty much just looked at each other for the rest of the flight.
	Very, very bizarre.
	So you never got into a conversation with him?
	No, you couldn't.
	His brother's walking around drunk.
	He's all in the corner, all kind of like quiet.
	I don't know how I got there.
	Well, anyway, I found the whole thing to be just classic CBS and its bias.
	Also, the way he goes out and interviews people, you could almost think that that could be agency-related work.
	Oh, you're talking about Sean Penn?
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	That was implied on the show.
	Yes.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, he's been all over the world.
	He's been here, he's been there.
	He's almost like he's met with Fidel Castro, hung out with Hugo Chavez.
	Yeah.
	And they actually...
	Colbert grilled him about this.
	What are you doing this for?
	Why are you going here?
	And he named a bunch of these things.
	He says, you know, his excuse was, you saw it.
	You know, I'm just a curious guy.
	Yeah, I'm just curious.
	Just wondering, hey.
	Just curious.
	Anybody else is curious.
	Yeah, just curious.
	By the way, the president was on a radio show.
	It was a Chicago radio show, I think.
	And he said something that really pissed me off because, you know, this idea, and you cannot convince people outside the United States, and most people inside the United States, that we do not have a two-party system.
	We have many other candidates.
	We have, you know, Stein, Johnson, we have my favorite, Vermin Supreme, everybody a free pony, he's independent.
	It is not just a two-party system.
	And I really don't like people saying, well, if you You vote for them.
	It's a vote wasted.
	Your vote don't count.
	It's no good.
	It might as well be voting for Trump.
	Actually, Obama came out and said that.
	He said...
	I have it here.
	I have the clip.
	Because I didn't make that clip.
	If you don't vote, that's a vote for Trump.
	If you vote for a third party candidate who's got no chance to win, that's a vote for Trump.
	Wow!
	Fuck you!
	That pisses me off!
	It's very bad.
	That's the president!
	That's a constitutional lawyer!
	It's very bad for him.
	And by the way, if you vote for a third party, it may be a vote for Hillary.
	No, this is also true.
	You're going to take that logic.
	There's no logic that says if you vote...
	So I'm voting for...
	If I vote for Jill Stein, that might be a vote for Trump in some existential world.
	But if I vote for Gary Johnson...
	Which is more likely that people are going to vote for Gary Johnson.
	That may be taking a vote away from Trump.
	It's bullcrap.
	It doesn't make any difference.
	Vote for who you think should be president.
	But it's also not okay.
	It's not okay.
	It's not true.
	No, it's not okay.
	The president should be not doing this stuff.
	Not doing that.
	He's a very poor, as a role model, he's a bad person.
	Yeah.
	That's being a bad person, what he did.
	Now, we got a couple of notes from producers of ours.
	One was very long.
	I'm so disappointed.
	You guys don't cover Gary Johnson.
	Other people are like, hey man, Johnson, he's saying all this good stuff.
	And my reply is, hey look, we do media deconstruction.
	When the media starts giving him airtime, which they're doing now, he said, we'll have it for you.
	Unfortunately...
	The guy is amazing.
	Chris Matthews set the trap for Donald Trump, if you'll recall.
	The trap was, hypothetically, if having an abortion was against the law, what has to happen?
	And Trump was dumb, and he jumped into the hypothetical, and he said, well, they'd have to be punished.
	So now it's like, hey, women get an abortion, you gotta be punished!
	And that was a good trap, and he sprung one on Gary Johnson that just befuddled the guy.
	I like how he tried to handle it, but jeez, Louise!
	Who's your favorite foreign leader?
	Who's my favorite?
	Just name anywhere in the country, any one of the continents, any country.
	Name one foreign leader that you respect and look up to.
	Anybody.
	Mine was Shimon Peres.
	I'm talking about living.
	Go ahead.
	That was Well as the VP. You've got to do this anywhere, any continent.
	Canada, Mexico, Europe, over there, Asia, South America, Africa.
	Name a foreign leader that you respect.
	I guess I'm having an Aleppo moment in the former president of Mexico.
	But I'm giving you the whole world.
	I know, I know.
	Anybody in the world you like.
	Anybody.
	Pick any leader.
	The former president of Mexico.
	Which one?
	I'm having a brain.
	Name any box.
	Here it comes.
	Wait for it.
	What's your favorite foreign leader?
	Get him off the hook.
	Name a foreign leader you respect.
	He was terrific.
	Any foreign leader?
	Merkel.
	Okay, fine.
	Send you some.
	Can't argue with that.
	Merkle.
	Ha, ha.
	Wow.
	The most hated woman in Europe.
	I really respect her for letting a million migrants come in and fuck everything up.
	Sorry, I'm being...
	This was the trap that was done with the...
	The media loves doing this stuff because it's just making a fool out of somebody.
	You just need a little research to figure out how to do it.
	And he did a great...
	He was boom, boom, boom, boom, boom.
	Yeah, and then Matthews was badgering him, which he does.
	This is what my flight instructor used to do.
	You know, he'd be like, all right, what are you going to land if you do this right now?
	If this happens, what are you going to do?
	And it's very good training, but you need to have the training before you can go and do it in a real-life situation.
	So, I feel bad for Gary Johnson, but...
	And if you remember this, you read what newspapers do you read, and she froze.
	Mm-hmm.
	These are all, somebody pointed out on one of the right-wing talk shows on the radio that it appeared to them as if the, because the CIA we know is working on behalf of Hillary, that they had done a deconstruction of Donald Trump to find his trigger points.
	Mm-hmm.
	And everything Hillary did, the hot button, that's what she did with the Machado thing.
	She could throw these things in and he would freeze.
	And he did.
	He did.
	It worked.
	And by the way, for people who say, well, again, you just show the shit nobody's good at.
	We deconstruct.
	What would somebody be bitching at us?
	Because they feel that we should be covering how great Johnson is.
	No.
	We don't cover that.
	It's media deconstruction.
	A, he's not that great.
	He's stoned.
	I'll give you my opinion.
	I mean, if you want to just hear opinions, it's not an opinion.
	I mean, we do have a lot of opinions, true, but that's not what the goal of the show is.
	I mean, yeah, I have an opinion.
	I think Johnson's a stoner, and he's got to snap out of it.
	He's not showing well at all.
	He's to both these candidates.
	I feel bad about Jill Stein.
	She's probably the smartest woman running for president.
	And you know that she got arrested, and I knew this was going to happen.
	One of our producers told me that her plan was to get arrested, protesting out front.
	She got arrested last time.
	She got arrested in 2012.
	And I heard crickets.
	Nothing about that in the media.
	Nothing.
	Nothing.
	No, the media totally ignores both these candidates, except for democracy now.
	They did cover this.
	Well, I also like how...
	Well, never mind.
	Yeah, okay.
	Yeah, this just takes us off the track.
	Yeah.
	Gary Johnson is Gary Johnson.
	So what?
	I have an altremont.
	Good.
	This is a Democratic states representative...
	I forget which state this was, and I don't know her name.
	It doesn't really matter.
	But she is on stage riling up all the troops about Hillary.
	And of course, she kind of looks a little bit like Hillary, or at least she's trying to have the shorter hair and everything.
	I think a very typical Hillary supporter.
	And here's what she said.
	I want you to imagine on election night, she gives the keys to the White House.
	She will be a president that will be fair in judgment and believes in the American dream and will fight for human dignity.
	So let's get busy.
	Let's elect as we welcome 47th President of the United States of America.
	Hillary Clinton to be the 49th President of the United States of America.
	I don't know if you can hear that on the Skype.
	Yeah.
	First she says, let's elect Hillary Clinton, 47th President of the United States.
	And then she says, let's elect Hillary Clinton, 49th President of the United States.
	She would be the 45th, I believe.
	What an idiot.
	State's representative, I might want to point out.
	This group is just the worst.
	This is called Debate Media Gloating.
	This is MSNBC. I put the ratings in the last newsletter of what network got how many people.
	MSNBC did pretty much the worst.
	They didn't count C-SPAN. They didn't...
	It's not in the ratings.
	They don't do ratings on C-SPAN, so we don't know how many people watch there.
	But this was MSNBC's take on this, and then they make some prediction that just gratuitous slams is unbelievable at these places, and they just gratuitously slam Roger Ailes.
	Roger Ailes has not shown up in anything, but listen to their prediction.
	Okay.
	We're going to re-rack that.
	While we're having a moment, James Carville would like in.
	James, critique the job you just heard Kelly Ann Conway doing up against withering questioning from Chris Matthews.
	I thought I was back watching Crossfire when I was on that.
	But look, she talked a lot.
	She has a difficult job.
	One point I wanted to make is so much of the Trump persona and so much of what he talks about is winning and how he's a winner and everybody's a loser.
	And I think a lot of his supporters, like, take pride in the fact that he's such a winner.
	And he was anything but that tonight.
	And I wonder what the effect of this is going to be on the enthusiasm of his supporters that he actually, and he got beat by Hillary Clinton, who to a lot of his people is, you know, evil incarnate or is a weak person or something like that.
	And so this is kind of a unique thing where somebody whose whole branding is built around being a winner and he can win for the country really did, lost so bad tonight.
	Now, it's going to be curious to see how he carries that through.
	But I agree with Hugh.
	We've got two more debates to come.
	She's got to take each one of these things deadly serious.
	And, Nicole, I'll bet you tomorrow that Roger Ailes gets out that he didn't have very much to do with preparation.
	I'll just bet you that the word comes out from Rogers.
	I didn't have anything to do with this.
	Don't pin this on me.
	I wouldn't be surprised myself if that made its way into the media conversation.
	What are they talking about?
	I have no idea.
	Roger Ailes is going to come out and say he had nothing to do with it because of why.
	This is just these guys.
	I've never seen anything such a kind of a bubble that they live in.
	And they just obviously to this day, even though he doesn't even work at Fox anymore, they hate Roger Ailes because for all practical purposes he kicked MSNBC's butt down the toilet.
	Nobody listens to the network.
	And it's all because of him.
	So they hold such a grudge that they dream this sort of thing up?
	Wow.
	Yeah, I guess.
	Anyway, I just thought that was...
	I was amused.
	Now, there was one funny little thing, and I think, you know, as you had Colbert's thing, this Kimmel had this little bit.
	He didn't get that involved because he's with ABC and the way we see it.
	So he did just...
	And you know Kimmel's in Hollywood.
	He has to be a Hillary supporter.
	I'd be surprised if he wasn't.
	But he doesn't...
	Do what Colbert does, which is just slam Trump constantly.
	This is what his little bit was.
	It's hard to hear because of the people laughing so loud.
	But this is the drunk debate.
	...course of their 90-minute argument.
	And it went by very quickly.
	So we decided to slow them both down for a special...
	This is the first time we've ever done this special two-candidate edition of Drunk Debate.
	I have a feeling by the end of this evening I will be playing for everything that's ever happened.
	Why not?
	Why not?
	Yeah.
	Why not?
	I will say, the general consensus in my neighborhood was that Hillary had at least taken half a bar of Xanax.
	I wouldn't be surprised.
	Now, Xanax does nothing for me, so I can't say one way or the other.
	She had this crazy smile on her face.
	In fact, Nick, who was watching this with me, said the Joker smile.
	He said it without any prompting, and other people would call it the Joker smile because she looks like the Joker in that first Batman movie, Get a Load of Me, with that big smile and just kind of a crazy smile.
	She looked nuts.
	I found her semi-condescending throughout the debate.
	Sure.
	Alright.
	I don't think I have much more.
	I mean, the second debate is coming.
	Well, we don't have to go on and on.
	Let's see if I have anything that's...
	Well, let me see.
	Yeah, I do have a thing, kind of an offset, because again, let's get back to the CIA aspect.
	This was pre-debate.
	Erin Burnett was at the place, and she was talking to...
	To one of the women that's on CNN all the time.
	In the process, she goes and has a little chit-chat with Brennan, head of the CIA. Oh, he was just on hand?
	Just hanging out?
	She just casually saw him, I guess.
	Oh, hey!
	Hey, Director.
	Hey, can you want to sit down and talk?
	Hello, Director CIA. Let's have a chat.
	So they had a little chit-chat.
	And my favorite part of this is where Brennan says, well, you know, as part of the agency and this and that, we don't talk about politics.
	We don't get involved.
	However...
	But, yes, exactly.
	However, let me say something that's very funny.
	Do whatever he wanted, which is what any moderator should try to do, and he successfully set the stage that way.
	Foreign policy is going to come up.
	Earlier today, I actually sat down with the CIA director, John Brennan, and we talked about a whole lot of things about Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, but one of them was Vladimir Putin.
	And here's what he said, and I want to get your reaction on what you think this is going to play in the debate tonight.
	Here's the CIA director.
	Donald Trump has said plenty of positive things about Vladimir Putin again and again.
	Here are some.
	I think I'd get along very well with Vladimir Putin.
	Putin is a nicer person than I am.
	I like him because he called me a genius.
	If he says great things about me, I'm gonna say great things about him.
	What's your reaction when you hear that?
	Well, as the director of CIA, I don't involve myself in campaign politics.
	I will say, though, that when I look at Russia right now, we know that Mr.
	Putin has been very aggressive on the foreign policy front, but also very aggressive in the cyber realm.
	And we know that the Russians are very active in that area.
	They have done some things in the past years to try to affect certain elections in different countries.
	So I think we have to be very wary of what the Russians may be doing.
	I think we have to be very careful about believing some of the things that they say publicly or disavowing any types of activities that they may be engaged in.
	Russia is an adversary in a number of areas.
	And as the CIA director...
	And that's the word you'd use, adversary.
	Well, yes.
	When I look at what's going on in Syria right now, I am very, very annoyed and frustrated that the Russians have not been following through on their commitments to apply pressure on the Syrian regime to stop its horrific bombing of innocent men, women, and children in places like Aleppo.
	And Russia has said things publicly that I don't think they have followed through on privately.
	So there are a lot of things about Russia that I think this administration and next administration need to focus on because they're not trying to pursue these objectives as a way to enhance U.S. national security interests.
	What?
	So he called Russia an adversary.
	That's the word that he would use.
	Certainly not a word Donald Trump has used.
	And then he also, in our conversation, continued to say he did expect.
	That wouldn't be a surprise at all if something happened in October that would be very relevant and perhaps impactful to this election.
	Hold on.
	Let me ask you a question.
	How about this for a hypothesis?
	Because we've seen, and I have a few clips later on, of course, there's a lot of crap going on with Russia right now.
	I have a number of clips that are important.
	But do you think maybe within the realm of feasibility that you have these agencies, including the State Department, obviously CIA, anyone else who, according to the Lena Report, LenaReport.com, is pro-Hillary.
	Do you think that they may actually be ratcheting up The Russia narrative specifically to mess with Trump?
	Do you think it goes that far?
	It could be.
	I think it's a possibility.
	It's a weak spot, I think, because Trump has shown no signs of...
	Trump's not going to...
	If he got in, he wouldn't be playing the game that needs to be played, which makes Russia an adversary.
	Yeah, which sells weapons everywhere.
	Sells weapons and all the rest of it.
	I've got a clip, too, coming up in the next part of the show that I think is extremely critical, and I think you may have something similar.
	Yeah.
	But it's a possibility, and the CIA would be the ones doing it.
	I was watching...
	I mean, that goes very far.
	Yeah, let's start World War III to keep this guy out of office.
	It really kind of started, I mean, the real ratcheting up started when Trump started boasting about Putin thinking he was a fantastic guy.
	I think if you trace it back, it's kind of...
	There's two things in parallel.
	The other one, of course, is Snowden.
	No.
	Obviously.
	Yeah, that's just the support to say these things.
	Snowden.
	Now, the rest of this clip does have one, that nasty little piece of propaganda they keep putting in there.
	And it was, there's another clip that I didn't get.
	Let's get another 45 seconds.
	Let's just enjoy it.
	This is the bullcrap about Russia being behind the DNC hack.
	That would be very relevant and perhaps impactful to this election in terms of leaks by parties who want to influence the outcome.
	Well, we've already seen that.
	I mean, the administration has already said that they believe that the Russians are behind tapping into the DNC emails, etc.
	And so that doesn't surprise me.
	The fact that he says it is important because he is the CIA director.
	And then I think this evening that will be raised.
	Hillary Clinton is going to raise Donald Trump's bromance with Vladimir Putin.
	There's no doubt about it.
	Vladimir Putin has an 85% or 90% unpopularity rating in this country.
	So I think that's terra firma for her.
	Wait, we now have a poll for Putin's popularity?
	Putin's popularity poll!
	Who cares?
	Hey, how are you doing?
	Hi, I'm here.
	I just want to ask you a question.
	Actually, it goes something like this.
	It goes like this.
	Hello?
	Hi!
	Hi!
	Is this John Charles Dvorak in Northern California?
	Yeah.
	Hi, we have an important message for you.
	We really want you to help out with this year's election campaign.
	Is it okay if we ask you a few questions?
	Okay, alright.
	If it's fast.
	What do you think about Vladimir Putin?
	Good guy, bad guy, or indifferent?
	Who?
	Exactly.
	Exactly.
	Putin popularity poll.
	Give me a break.
	Putin popularity poll.
	It's right there.
	It's an impossible title.
	Well, with that, I would like to thank you for your courage and say in the morning to you, John C., where the C stands for Cyber Realm Dvorak.
	Well, in the morning to you, Mr.
	Adam Curry.
	Also in the morning to all ships and sea, boots on the ground, feet in the air, subs in the water, and all the dames and knights out there.
	In the morning to everybody in the chat room.
	Good to see you all in attendance at noagendastream.com.
	In the morning to Martin J.J. who brought us the album.
	Was it Martin J.J.? Hold on, let me make sure.
	I believe it was.
	Yes, Martin J.J. for the album Art for Episode 863, Quantum of Evidence.
	Simple.
	Why did my voice go up?
	Simple.
	Simple.
	I don't know.
	It's a simple, but beautiful.
	No agenda, no advertising, an outdoor sign.
	It's kind of a mind meld.
	It kind of messes with your head.
	It worked.
	It worked, and we love all the work that our artists do.
	You can always contribute.
	If you don't want to just go look at some cool stuff, go to noagendaartgenerator.com.
	And thank you again, Martin J.J. So we have four executive producers and a few associates today.
	Very good showing.
	Nicholas Nafpliotis in Waukegan, Illinois, $600.
	And Eric notes that he never sends a note.
	Oh.
	But he will be knighted today, even though he's been past his numbers for a while, but he's never requested a knighthood.
	Did you check to see if he had sent an email?
	Well, actually, I just took Eric's word for it.
	Maybe he did.
	No, I don't have anything.
	Well, let me take a look.
	I might have something.
	I hit the word soon.
	Oh, I don't have anything.
	Okay, let me get my keyboard.
	N-A-F-P. Wait, are you operating without a keyboard?
	P-L-I. N-A-F-P-L-I. Okay.
	I just have the keyboard I put on the floor.
	Oh.
	All right.
	Demetrius and Nicholas.
	We got two of them.
	Oh.
	We got one here.
	September 30th.
	Receipt number.
	Wait, this might be it.
	Thank you for everything and the spectacular work that you do.
	Your show is very appreciated, and I look forward to it twice weekly.
	Find below my accounting for knighthood.
	I would like to be known as Sir Nico.
	I do.
	Sir Nikos of the American Midwest.
	Sir Nikos with a K? Yeah.
	Of the America...
	What?
	American Midwest?
	American Midwest.
	Alright.
	Nice.
	You got it.
	I'm glad we...
	Wait a minute.
	Is he a knight or a baron?
	I was being lax.
	It's okay.
	Give him a karma because he doesn't request anything else.
	You've got karma.
	Elliot Serena comes in with $333.33 from Cobb, California.
	After reading the newspapers, I can be compelled to donate to your show because you show you two just how much I value gained from your show.
	I've been listening since I was...
	I've been listening since I was 13.
	Holy moly.
	Or 14.
	And I will say that this show has taught me to think critically about the bullshit that gets thrown my way.
	Hell yeah.
	I love how entertaining and informative this show is and the No Agenda community has come about because of you two.
	So this is me putting my money where my mouth is, and I'm proud to be a no-agenda show executive, associate executive producer.
	You'd be executive in this case.
	I'd also like the full Zika song for my dad, Scott Serena, and a job script.
	We'll put that at the end.
	Yeah.
	Well, I can play the short one here with the karma.
	Does anyone want a job karma?
	Jobs karma for my amazing girlfriend.
	Zika for his dad, Scott.
	And jobs karma for his amazing girlfriend.
	Also, give yourself some karma for everything you guys do for your listeners.
	Best wishes.
	Elliot, I hope one day to become a knight under the banner of Michael Pelsmacher, Baron of Lake County.
	Man.
	Zika, Zika, Zika, Zika, Zika.
	Yeah.
	Where's the money?
	1.9 billion dollars.
	Zika, Zika, Zika, Zika, Zika.
	Yeah.
	Where's the money?
	Small heads are coming.
	You're going to do it.
	You watch.
	We're going to have a problem here.
	Jobs, jobs, jobs, and jobs.
	Let's vote for jobs!
	Yeah!
	Up in Seattle, Washington, $333.33 from Matthew Eskridge.
	He says, I love the show.
	Can I hear Atlas Shrugged followed by a blood-curdling scream?
	He'd also like some getting well karma.
	It would be appreciated.
	Thanks.
	Not a problem, Matthew.
	Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand.
	Wow!
	You've got karma.
	Matthew Clay in Bloomington, Illinois.
	$333.33.
	I knew it was high time.
	I kicked in an EP when I took my family on vacation last month and they insisted on eating at a mac and cheese shop.
	Then when the host gave us the buzzer to wait for our meal, the number on it was, of course, 33.
	The universe spoke to me.
	If I can get a health karma for my dad who is recovering from a stroke, I'd really appreciate it.
	Thanks for the B-P-I-T-U. Keep up the good work.
	Yeah, of course.
	Here it is.
	Health karma for your dad, James.
	You've got karma.
	I mean, Matthew.
	No, I mean, yes, Matthew.
	Two Matthews.
	Okay, let's see what we got here.
	James Flesch becomes Associate Executive Producers in Cincinnati at 26654.
	And let's see what we got.
	If you can just read the beginning of the morning, Adam and John.
	Thanks for your hard work.
	Thanks for all your hard work and excellent election analysis.
	I'm requesting a de-douching for it has been far too long since I donated.
	You've been de-douched.
	And I would like to credit $66.54 of this donation to AY, who hit me in the mouth.
	Since it's money I owe him, but I think you guys could make better use of it.
	There you go.
	Welch on your friends and send it to us.
	He's only donated to the show once in as many years of listening.
	I'm requesting home-building karma for him and his wife.
	He'd like a no-no.
	Give me the rundown so I can find him, John.
	I'm requesting home-building karma for him and his wife.
	Jingles, I would like.
	No, no, no, Obama.
	No, no, no, Obama, Obama.
	No, no, no.
	I got one.
	Don't eat me, Hillary.
	Yeah.
	Chemtrails.
	As always, keep up the good work and thank you for your courage.
	P.S. Please put my smoking hot wife on the birthday list for her October 18th birthday.
	This is a cloudy crop.
	No, no, no, no.
	Don't let you guys break anything while you're here.
	No, no, no, no.
	I like this one so much.
	I told you that the civil rights of LGBT Americans is...
	Hold on a second.
	Ok, you know what, no no no no no no no no no no no No, no, no, no, no.
	You've got Carmen.
	I'll play the long one at the end again.
	Jason Wall comes in from Regina.
	Rhymes with Saskatchewan, Canada.
	23456, one of my favorite donations.
	Thank you both for the sanity.
	During my long drives down Highway 33, your shows are the perfect length for the Estevan round trip that would otherwise drive me mad or unconscious into a ditch.
	And no request for anything, apparently, but give him a little bit of karma.
	Okie dokie.
	You've got karma.
	Let me go on to Steve Fisher, who is in Missoula, Montana, and sent an email to me.
	And let me just take a quick look down the list.
	Steve Fisher's Sir Fish Knighthood Accounting.
	Okay, we got him down for the night.
	And he's got the night...
	Oh, okay, back, back, back.
	He's got the note separately.
	Night's Book Report.
	Hmm.
	As promised, my 232 to round out my knighthood was sent via PayPal, so let's get on with Sirfish.
	We got that.
	Two of these, he says, book report.
	Two of these are in the No Agenda Book Club, but deserve re-mention.
	One is not.
	Family of Secrets, he says it should be required.
	Yeah.
	Read his book report.
	Family of Secrets is a great book.
	The Man Who Knew Too Much Hired to Kill Oswald and Prevent the Assassination of JFK. It's just not another JFK retelling.
	Uh, It says it was buried in the description of how 33 is used to alert other Asian spooks and fellow travelers.
	That's in this book.
	Which book was the title of the book?
	This is The Man Who Knew Too Much.
	Wasn't there a movie about that too?
	Maybe.
	This book details the connections between Oswald, the CIA owners of the school book building, and Zapruder, who is assigned to be right there to film proof that the hit was successful.
	We might as well just tell everybody right now.
	Jackie Kennedy killed JFK. Well, there is a very interesting series that we'll talk about this on the show in more detail, but there's not much to talk about.
	But if you look at some of the films, you will see Jackie Kennedy bring her hand around and shoot him in the back of the head.
	Yeah, that's exactly what it is.
	And I'm not...
	That's not an exaggeration of the way it looks.
	If you have that bias in mind, it is exactly what it looks.
	Yeah, if you don't have the bias in mind, you won't see it.
	But if you have the bias in mind, you'll see it.
	And it explains a lot of the way things went, the way the bullet didn't go in the right way and all this rest of it.
	But...
	We'll talk about that more.
	It's a funny thing.
	It showed up in the...
	You and I have talked about this.
	We've talked about it a lot because somebody pointed it out to me and he's had some good examples and I showed at him and he said, yeah.
	Well, you know me.
	It's like, hey, here's a video of Bigfoot.
	He's real.
	I'm like, okay, yeah.
	So, it looks as though she casually had a little gun and shot him in the back of the head and then ditched the gun in the car, probably.
	And, I don't know.
	She had good reason to do this, by the way.
	Heads are exploding everywhere.
	Yeah, so what was the good reason?
	Well, apparently JFK's a douchebag screwing Marilyn Monroe amongst other women.
	That's right.
	You know, when Elena...
	What's her name?
	Elena...
	Who is the woman who cut off Elena Bobbitt?
	She cut off John Bobbitt's cock.
	Yeah.
	I mean, penis, I should say.
	I'm getting complaints.
	It's penis.
	And everyone's like, oh, she's great!
	Good work!
	Right.
	Anyway, the assassination was one thing to cover up something else.
	Buried in the description of how 33 is used to alert other agents, spooks, and fellow travelers that the event operation is sanctioned.
	There you go.
	We don't have that interpretation.
	No.
	For instance, Oswald would include a small 33 in the bottom of the corner of his Fair Play for Cuba brochures.
	Well, I like to see some evidence of that.
	Yeah.
	Number three, the third book is The Autobiography of Mark Twain.
	It's the one he recommends.
	Oh, that's the one I'd read.
	That sounds good.
	And he has a bunch of...
	He says it was dictated rather than him writing it, so listen to it on tapes.
	So he recommends that.
	And then he says, Sir Fish, out.
	Out.
	I'll give him a little bit of karma for that.
	Thank you very much for the book report.
	You've got karma.
	Yo, yo.
	Then we go to Jillian Romagoso.
	What do you think?
	Jillian Romagoso.
	Romagoso.
	200 bucks.
	She'll be an associate executive producer for show 865.
	864.
	864.
	Well, she could give money.
	865, too.
	I've been listening on and off since my senior year of high school.
	Nice.
	We're getting to the youth of America.
	Hell yeah.
	I knew it.
	Thanks to my dad.
	I started listening a couple of months ago for the first time in a few years.
	I didn't know how I've made it without your weekly doses of sanity.
	Thank you for all you do.
	I'd like a dedouching.
	Don't eat me, Hillary, and I like ants.
	And then she also sent a picture of her and Adam from the New Orleans Meetup over five years ago.
	At the time, I couldn't think of anything to say, so I just sat there eating my food and listening to everyone else, but it was fun hanging out.
	Well, we're glad to have you back.
	Back.
	Man overboard.
	Captured.
	Woman overboard.
	Yes, we've captured her.
	We're very, very happy.
	And yes, she'll be an associate executive producer.
	Thanks for coming back.
	Thanks for supporting the show.
	And let me see, de-douching first, right?
	You've been de-douched.
	Don't eat me, Hillary Clinton!
	I got ants.
	You've got karma.
	Again, happy to play the full song at the end of the show.
	I think I should do that.
	Dowie and Della.
	It's one of the better ones.
	Dowie and Della.
	Dowie and Della.
	Let me see.
	Dowie and Della.
	Dowie and Della.
	In Hollandse Radding.
	Hollandse Radding.
	Holland Sherradi.
	And it's Serdala, of course.
	Holland Sherradi.
	Nothing wrong with this show.
	Keep up the good work.
	Nice, terse, to the point comment from a Dutchman.
	And we need some karma for that.
	Terseness.
	You've got karma.
	Very tight.
	Move the show along.
	David M. in New Aberdeen, Great Britain, UK, 200.
	I apologize for the long absence from donating.
	I enjoy the show in its current format.
	I'm in the process of being made redundant from the oil and gas industry and entering into business for myself using my severance pay.
	I'd appreciate a de-douching and a karma jingle to help me along with the transition.
	Thank you, Dave M. You've been de-douched.
	You've got karma.
	Christian Castro in Chicago, Illinois.
	$200.
	He says, Ola, gents.
	Ola.
	Please apply this donation wedding gift to the knighthood for the Swedish fish.
	He hit me in the mouth years ago and I can't make it to his nuptials.
	Sadly, this is my first donation.
	Thank you for your service.
	Don't change.
	D-douche karma and see the juice, please.
	Okay.
	You've been de-douched.
	Oh my gosh!
	Can you see that juice?
	You've got karma.
	That's a good one.
	I forgot about that one.
	Can you see that juice?
	Mmm, nice.
	Yes, that would conclude our little group of Show 864 Executive and Associate Executive Producers, reminding everyone that we do have another show coming up shortly, and we will need continued support for that one, and that'll be next.
	And as always, these credits we do at the beginning of the show, associate executive producer and executive producer credits are actual credits.
	Use them anywhere they're accepted.
	They work very well on LinkedIn and other profile places because it gives you a little standing.
	And it is true, you have standing.
	As John said in another show coming up on Sunday, please remember us at...
	And we've got a lot of people coming back to the show.
	That's good.
	And they have all been out there propagating the formula.
	Our formula is this.
	We go out, we hit people in the mouth.
	Water! Water!
	Shut up, plane!
	Shut up, slave!
	I wanted to talk about something that...
	It's a longer clip, but we can interrupt it as much as we want.
	President Obama did a town hall yesterday.
	I think it was mainly about military...
	And he addressed the very first veto of his that was overridden.
	Now, just, you want to just explain to, probably to people in the United States as well, how that works with the veto and exactly what has to go down.
	Yeah, you have to have two-thirds of Congress, both.
	Well, hold on, let's step back.
	So, you can have the House of Representatives and the Senate can say, okay, we passed this bill, let's go to the President's desk.
	Okay, well, anyway, let's stop.
	I got it.
	I got it.
	And he doesn't like it.
	And so he just says, no, he won't sign it.
	And that's called a veto.
	There's other ways you can do it.
	Some call it a pocket veto.
	You just put it in the drawer.
	You never address the issue.
	And you hope it just goes away.
	But he vetoes.
	He says, no, because this was a bill to allow redress.
	And it's called the terrorist something.
	You might have the name to join.
	The terrorist state sponsors terrorist bill.
	And he says, Right.
	Both houses, and I have a couple of clips on it too, both houses said yes, no problem.
	And then the president said no.
	And of course, all the right-wingers go, oh, he's protecting Saudi Arabia.
	And I don't know why he vetoed it.
	Is he protecting Saudi Arabia?
	Well, recall that part of the threat from Saudi Arabia was, if you guys do that, we're going to get rid of all of our $750 billion worth of bonds.
	Yeah.
	They actually threatened that Initially, if we released the 28 pages, they didn't do anything.
	After the 28 pages of the document that was the report on the 9-11 attacks came out, there was 28 pages they kept away from the public.
	They released the 28 pages, as you recall.
	And just so we know, with the 28 pages that were omitted and classified and kept secret from the public of the 9-11 commission report, very specifically said...
	These guys were from Saudi Arabia, most of the terrorists, and they had definite connections to the Saudi Arabian government, although it's through middlemen, etc.
	So there's always, and you can always say, well, they weren't directly involved.
	It wasn't exactly that way, but And so that report, and the Saudis, when they said, if you release this, because they knew what it was, for some reason, they already saw it.
	I guess they got to see it, but the public didn't.
	The American public didn't get to see it, but the Saudis saw it.
	They said, no, you release this, we're going to sell all our bonds.
	They released it.
	The Saudis didn't sell all their bonds.
	That, I think, gave impetus for these bills, because it was like, these guys are bluffers.
	Because they're not going to sell the bonds.
	It's going to hurt them, or it's going to hurt anyone.
	They really can't do that.
	And by the way, it was Chuck Schumer, the big major Democrat, who was really leading the charge on this bill, and he said, hey, tough luck.
	We vetoed it because it's really important.
	Of course, for his constituents, it's very important.
	So, wait, no, they didn't veto it.
	The president vetoed it.
	The president vetoed it, and they overrode the veto, yes.
	And so they overrode the veto, and you can do that by having a huge majority, two-thirds of both houses, say no.
	No.
	They re-vote on it, and they get these big numbers, and they get huge numbers.
	In fact, the Senate, it was everyone in the Senate voted for the veto, except Harry Reid.
	It's the only holdout.
	Interesting.
	And I don't know why it was Harry Reid.
	On the other side, it was like 18 Republicans.
	He's a good soldier.
	He's a good soldier.
	I guess.
	Do you think that...
	Maybe part of the reason why we don't want to...
	Let's just say it goes to...
	This is now overridden, so now people can sue.
	And it's very similar to the Iran situation where...
	And there was a lawsuit.
	I don't know how that was possible.
	And, you know, people won portions of like a billion dollars that we had frozen of Iranian assets.
	And, of course, we gave the rest back with interest in cash and pallets of money and the dead of night.
	But...
	There was a lawsuit, and if this happens, and the president actually refers to this, you know, the last thing we want is we want subpoenas and paperwork, and well, maybe the last thing we want is to find out what actually happened.
	Maybe that's why we don't want this.
	That could be.
	Nobody has explained this.
	There was a very good back and forth, and I have most of it.
	Let's do that first before I get Obama's response in.
	Okay, well, this is kind of long, too.
	This is really important.
	I find this to be one of the most interesting things.
	Let's go to PBS NewsHour because they were very into this and they decided to do a big deal about it.
	So let's start with Veto.
	This is the first clip.
	It would be Veto 1.
	Now to the votes today on Capitol Hill to override for the first time the veto of a bill by President Obama.
	The issue, permitting lawsuits against governments that support terrorist acts inside the United States.
	One government in particular.
	The bill on reconsideration is passed.
	It was a rare show of unity.
	Senators voted 97 to 1 to override the president's veto, with Minority Leader Harry Reid the lone holdout.
	The bill permits families of 9-11 victims to sue Saudi Arabia over its alleged support of the 19 hijackers, most of whom were Saudis.
	How can anyone look at the families in the eye and tell them that they shouldn't have the opportunity to seek justice against a foreign government responsible for the death of their loved one?
	It's very simple.
	If the Saudis were culpable, they should be held accountable.
	If they had nothing to do with 9-11, they have nothing to fear.
	The attack left nearly 3,000 people dead, and the Saudis have long rejected any claim they were involved.
	Their foreign minister spoke this past July, after Congress released a long classified section of the official U.S. government report on the 9-11 attacks.
	The CIA director, the director of national intelligence, came out and said that there is no involvement of the Saudi government or Saudi officials in the events of 9-11.
	The Senate Intelligence Committee did its own investigation, came to the same conclusion, and so the matter is now finished.
	Oh, closed.
	Okay.
	It wouldn't be that bad if we hadn't, like, you know, attacked Iraq first, you know, like, oh, let's get into Iraq, and we do a little bit of Afghanistan, and we went out there and we just rubble-ized everything.
	Yeah.
	Except Saudi Arabia.
	That last guy was, except Saudi Arabia.
	Well, you never know.
	That guy was the spokeshole for Saudi Arabia.
	Ah, okay.
	That last guy.
	And he says, we didn't do anything.
	Amen.
	There's some logic here we have to deal with, and I think it's one of the things that we try to promote on the show, which is, where's the logic here?
	If everyone says Saudi Arabia had nothing to do with it, this guy says the CIA, everybody says nothing, nothing, nothing, we didn't do anything, we didn't do anything, then what are you worried about?
	So they're starting to make stuff up.
	Now, I hope that they get some more details on why we're so fearful of passing this little, I think you might be on to something, or it could be something else, which is there's more information that could come out that they're afraid of coming out.
	I do have a theory later.
	Okay, good.
	We'll get to that.
	Let's go to the second part of this.
	This is where Judy decides to, I think she introduces some people to discuss this.
	The Saudis strongly oppose this lawsuit bill.
	President Obama warned it could strain relations with Riyadh and spur retaliation against Americans elsewhere.
	Again, where's the logic here?
	They said there's no connection.
	The Saudis have got nothing to do with it.
	So how does this even make sense, what they're saying?
	The number one thing I've always heard, if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to be worried about.
	Exactly.
	Don't understand the problem, Saudi Arabia.
	...with Riyadh and spur retaliation against Americans elsewhere.
	In his veto message to Congress on Friday, the President said, the bill does not enhance the safety of Americans from terrorist attacks and undermines core U.S. interests.
	Defense Secretary Ash Carter also wrote to Congress predicting potentially devastating consequences for American troops abroad.
	But supporters largely dismiss those fears, and the House...
	I think my wrap-up with the president will make all of that clear.
	...joined the Senate this afternoon, overwhelmingly rejecting the president's veto.
	President Obama called the vote a mistake and warned that it sets a dangerous precedent.
	We get two views now.
	Jack Quinn is a lawyer representing more than 2,000 families who were impacted by the attacks on 9-11 and who are suing Saudi Arabia.
	He was also white.
	Wait, wait, wait.
	They're already suing Saudi Arabia?
	This guy?
	It's unclear.
	Yeah, no, he's already got this thing.
	He's one of the promoters of the bill.
	Oh, he's already suing them.
	Okay, I don't know.
	He's also White House counsel during the Bill Clinton administration.
	And Michael Mukasey.
	He was Attorney General of the United States during the George W. Bush administration.
	And we welcome both of you.
	Jack Quinn, let me start with you.
	Why do these families believe the government of Saudi Arabia should be subject to lawsuits?
	Well, they think that any government with respect to which there's credible evidence of governmental involvement in a terrorist attack should be held accountable in the United States.
	That is all JASTA does.
	It says...
	That's the name of the bill.
	I'm sorry, the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act says quite simply that if a government, sovereign government, aids and abets a terrorist attack inside the United States that causes death or injury in the United States, Then the courts of this country have jurisdiction over that government.
	I think if you ask most people in the street, should that be the law, they'd be shocked that it's not.
	And for a long time, frankly, it was.
	The administration in which General McKay served, the Bush administration, went into court and said that the Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act would allow suits for terrorist attacks in the United States like 9-11.
	I found that to be interesting.
	The Foreign Sovereignty Immunity Act.
	I wish I had known that.
	I would have looked into that.
	Yeah, I needed to look into it too.
	But this guy, this guy on the other side of this debate, who is an ex-Bushy, is just...
	According to the back and forth that goes on, starts to just lie about this, the whole thing.
	And it's very distressing to listen to this guy because the guy says, he's going to do this, he's going to do that.
	And the other guy says, no, no, no, you can't.
	That's not true.
	The judge should know better.
	This guy is a judge now.
	This other guy comes on and he comes on right now in clip three.
	Michael Mukase, it sounds like a reasonable request that these families are making.
	Yes, it sounds reasonable, but if you look at it closely, it isn't.
	First of all, I don't think anybody disputes that the families deserve not only sympathy, but recompense and compensation to the extent that these losses can be compensated, and they can't.
	But this bill doesn't do it.
	It doesn't do it for at least two reasons.
	Number one, there have been not one, not two, not three, but at least four investigations by...
	National security officials in the United States by the CIA, the FBI, and the 9-11 Commission that found, directly concluded, that there was no Saudi government involvement or involvement by high Saudi officials in 9-11.
	That has been investigated.
	Ah, you notice that little nugget there?
	No highly ranked.
	Yeah, the guy calls him out on this.
	That has been investigated and reinvestigated.
	So there's simply no evidence there to show Saudi involvement.
	Again, stop, stop, stop.
	Again, so what's the problem?
	Exactly.
	So why the fuss?
	Okay, go on.
	I mean, you can ask me that for another hour.
	No, I've been asked quite a few times.
	I just want to point out to people that they're making a fuss, but they're...
	It's like, look, we didn't do anything.
	Let me just stop you right there.
	It's also counterintuitive that there would be, because Osama bin Laden, when he was listing his reasons for 9-11, said that the presence of U.S. troops in the Arabian Peninsula was a principal reason.
	They were there at the invitation of the United States.
	He was trying to overthrow the Saudi government.
	So what evidence?
	It's counterintuitive that they would participate.
	Wait a minute, that makes nothing but sense.
	If the Saudis were angry at the Yemens, and of course we are now there killing them, how can that make no sense that they didn't want to get stuff riled up and have stuff like this happen?
	Like Yemen.
	We're in Yemen, mission accomplished, isn't that what they wanted?
	Well, there's a number of just screwy things this guy says, and one of them is the idea that the Saudi government itself doesn't have elements within it, which is...
	I think one of the bases for this lawsuit, elements within the...
	You can see the elements of the guys who don't wear that black little thing on their headdress.
	They would like to see the Saudi government fall, so the whole thing was run by the Wahhabist clerics.
	I mean, there's elements in that government, for sure, that want to go that way, because the government's been encouraging this.
	But let that slide, but the other guy gets him on this.
	Jack Quinn, so what is the evidence that you're basing this on?
	Well, I want to start by saying what the judge just said is flatly untrue.
	Those investigations concluded no such thing.
	In fact, the 9-11 Commission report itself, in a very carefully constructed sentence, said although it had not found evidence of official Saudi government involvement, It conceded that it was likely that there was involvement in terms of people associated with the government and charities sponsored by the governments that had provided funds to the terrorist organization al-Qaeda that was behind the 9-11 attack.
	But why not sue those individuals or those charitable organizations rather than the government?
	They are sued, but the government is responsible because we allege there were officials of the government that participated in the provision of those finances to the hijackers.
	The story is, frankly, quite shocking.
	Now, that's actually in those 28 pages.
	Yes, it's very clear in those 28 pages.
	Shocking.
	And, you know, 9-11 commissioners, former Senator Bob Kerry, former Congressman Tim Romer, former Navy Secretary John Lehman, completely dispute what the judge just said about the import of the 9-11 commission report.
	But look...
	Whether I'm right or he's right, Congress has completely rejected this argument that the families should not have their day in court.
	It is now the law of the land.
	They will have their day in court, and as Senator Schumer said, if the Saudis are completely innocent of any responsibility here, they will do just fine.
	Uh-huh.
	Yeah.
	Nice.
	So this guy's...
	I'm loving this.
	We're 15 years after Nine Love, and finally we have some nice action going on.
	I like it.
	Yeah, what gets me is this character, this other guy, the judge, who was one of the attorney generals during the Bush administration.
	What is he protecting?
	His own reputation?
	Yeah, I think I know that too.
	Something's very, very wrong with this guy.
	But let's wrap this with the last clip.
	Mr.
	Mukasey, what about that point, that if the Saudis, if there's no, if it turns out that there is no proof that the Saudi government or anyone associated with the Saudi government was involved, why not let this go forward?
	A couple of reasons.
	First of all, I don't know whether you know this or not, but all a party has to do in order to have a lawsuit go forward is make allegations, claims in a complaint.
	If that survives a motion to dismiss and crafty lawyers can file a complaint that will survive a motion to dismiss, then they get into what's called discovery, meaning they can riffle through the files, in this case, of the Saudi government, Depose witnesses of the Saudi government.
	Make them disclose national secrets.
	There is no sovereign government in the world that would ever participate in an exercise like that.
	We certainly wouldn't.
	And it's inconceivable that the Saudis would.
	So what you're going to get is a situation where, essentially, they're blackmailed into writing a check.
	Other governments have indicated...
	That, by the way, is the American way.
	There's nothing wrong with that.
	This guy's got to counter this.
	What he just said was bullcrap.
	What part?
	The part about the state secrets and all the rest.
	Oh yeah, that's bullshit.
	Other governments have indicated that...
	Go ahead.
	I was just going to say let Mr.
	Quinn respond to that because I want to ask another question.
	That's entirely incorrect.
	The judge should know this, that a foreign government...
	Has an immunity to protect its state secrets and sensitive classified information.
	That is a fact.
	And what he describes as being able to bring a lawsuit by making allegations and going to court.
	That's the American system of justice.
	And that's the system of justice that's been denied to the 9-11 families.
	The Congress has now overwhelmingly said, these citizens deserve that justice.
	Michael Mukase, you and others who oppose this are concerned about the precedent.
	What is the dangerous precedent that you're concerned about?
	There have been parties in other countries who have tried to get at government officials and at soldiers in places as diverse as Belgium and Italy.
	Wow, diverse!
	What, Belgium is the new Timbuktu?
	Is that what it is?
	Yes!
	Very diverse.
	Like Belgium?
	Belgium?
	Government officials and at soldiers in places as diverse as Belgium and Italy.
	There was an attempt to get Secretary Rumsfeld charged in Belgium.
	There have been attempts to get U.S. soldiers charged in Italy.
	This is the sort of thing that sovereign immunity was meant to prevent.
	We are the most present nation in the world.
	We have more people in more countries in the world than anybody else.
	More soldiers, more diplomats, more intelligence gatherers.
	Every one of them is going to have a target on his back after this legislation, because people have been trying to curtail our activities by going after those people, and now they'll have a good excuse for doing it.
	What's the excuse?
	The notion that somehow they would simply go after the U.S. government is absurd.
	This isn't going to be tit-for-tat.
	It's going to be rat-a-tat-tat-tat-for-tat, and we're going to be on the long end of that.
	Just quickly, ten seconds of response.
	If a driver from the Saudi embassy runs you over on your way home tonight, you're allowed to sue that person.
	Why in heaven's name would American justice allow a lawsuit in that circumstance, but not to the families of 3,000 murdered Americans?
	All right.
	I think that's a very good setup for this little spiel the president threw out there yesterday during this town hall, which I found to be unbelievably poor in thought.
	He threw out things which could have other countries up in arms.
	And, well, I'd like to listen to this and dissect it with you.
	What this legislation did was it said...
	If a private citizen believes that, having been victimized by terrorism, that another country didn't do enough to stop one of its citizens, for example, in engaging in terrorism.
	That is not what the legislation says.
	That is not it at all.
	That is a distorted interpretation.
	It's just an outright lie.
	If they were somehow involved...
	What is going on with this?
	Well, this is a big deal to him, and we'll continue.
	To stop one of its citizens, for example.
	So he's saying...
	Just let me review.
	Instead of the allegation, which is they were directly involved with financing at minimum, he said if they didn't do their best to stop someone.
	So that's...
	He's reframing it.
	He's reframing it right off the bat.
	To stop one of its citizens, for example, in engaging in terrorism, then they can file a personal lawsuit, a private lawsuit in court.
	The problem with that is that if we eliminate this notion of sovereign immunity, then our men and women in uniform around the world could potentially start seeing ourselves subject to reciprocal laws.
	So if you have a situation where we're doing disaster relief in the Philippines or Haiti.
	Oh, yeah.
	This is my favorite.
	We're in Haiti.
	I guess you don't want that lawsuit from Haiti about how all the money got stolen and people are still crapping from illness and cholera, living in tents.
	And a traffic accident happens where, tragically, a citizen of that country is killed.
	That would be Samantha Power who did that?
	If they passed the same kind of legislation that we just passed, now potentially that family in that country could start suing the United States.
	They might say, we're going to take jurisdiction over that individual.
	And the concern that I've had has nothing to do with Saudi Arabia per se or my sympathy for 9-11 families.
	It has to do with me not wanting a situation in which we're suddenly exposed to liabilities For all the work that we're doing all around the world.
	You mean like killing brown people who live in sandy areas?
	This bill specifically refers to state-sponsored terrorism.
	And that will come up?
	That will come up?
	And suddenly finding ourselves subject to the private lawsuits in courts where we don't even know exactly whether they're on the up and up in some cases.
	Now, let's throw out the dumbest example we can think of.
	I'm concerned, and this is not just my concern.
	General Dunford, chairman of the Joint Chiefs, said this is a bad idea.
	Secretary of Defense said it was a bad idea.
	And then we found out some of the people who voted for it said, frankly, we didn't know what was in it.
	Oh!
	Oh, just like the Affordable Care Act.
	I thought it was just something cool.
	I wasn't paying attention.
	There was no debate of it.
	No debate?
	And it was basically a political vote.
	I understand that, but...
	A political vote?
	It was passed unanimously.
	How can it be political if both parties want it?
	That's odd.
	My job as Commander-in-Chief is to make sure that we're looking ahead at how this is going to impact our overall mission.
	Because what this also means is...
	Here, wait for this.
	This is my favorite.
	Hello!
	Hello, United States of Gitmo Nation East.
	Hello, United Kingdoms.
	This also means is, this time in Saudi Arabia, but let's say that there's a terrorist who comes here from Great Britain.
	Our closest ally, we do all kinds of work with them to prevent terrorism.
	But they've got some people, like they're radicals, who are living in our country.
	I mean, did he just say that?
	Did he just say, hey, Britain's got radicals living here.
	Does he realize that this is about state-sponsored?
	Yeah, if the UK was state-sponsoring terrorism, yes.
	He has an answer.
	But they're not.
	He has an answer for that.
	But I'm just saying...
	Theresa May should come out and say, hey, hey, hey, use someone else as an example, okay?
	Radicals.
	That was an insult, I agree.
	I mean, that's our closest ally, our special relationship.
	I don't think they're, this guy's okay.
	Yeah, it's not that much longer.
	We're almost done.
	But he does answer the state-sponsored thing.
	Do all kinds of work with him to prevent terrorism.
	But they've got some people like they're radicals who are living in our country, who may be British citizens.
	They come here, they carry out something.
	Now, under this legislation, somebody who had been harmed by that terrorist could sue the British government.
	And start asking for all kinds of documents and sending in a bunch of trial lawyers.
	Oh, yeah, see, we don't want that.
	And that's mainly because he doesn't want to be a part of any discovery of drone attacks or anything that happens.
	No one wants this.
	And by the way, last point I'd make, if we know that a country was helping a terrorist, then we call them a state sponsor of terrorism.
	Ha ha!
	And they don't have immunity.
	You can sue them anyway.
	But that's a judgment that we make based on the intelligence that we have, based on our military assessment.
	In this situation, we did not make such an assessment.
	In this situation, in this situation, we did not make an assessment that they're a state sponsor of terrorism.
	So if we don't call them that, then they aren't that.
	...make based on the intelligence that we have, based on our military assessment.
	In this situation, we did not make such an assessment that Saudi Arabia was a state sponsor of terrorism.
	This is taking that out of...
	Our military and our intelligence and the hands of our national security professionals and putting it into the courts.
	And that's a mistake.
	It's a mistake.
	That's right.
	Because we didn't call them state sponsors of terrorism.
	So it's bullcrap.
	You can't do it.
	They're not state sponsors of terrorism.
	This is the damnedest thing I've witnessed for a while.
	That was very odd.
	So what he's saying is...
	They don't want to lose control of who's the bad guys and who's the good guys.
	And we get to say that these are the good guys and nobody can sue them because for the moment they're the good guys.
	They're not state sponsors of terrorism, even though they might be.
	Hey, let me ask you a different question.
	This paranoia on his part is very disconcerting.
	So here's what I would do if I was Hayden.
	We're going to have a problem in the bond market, and I believe that is because of Deutsche Bank.
	You remember when the former New York banker said, The American banks won over the European banks.
	I think this is what he's referring to.
	And Angela Merkel came out and said, oh, you know, if Deutsche Bank goes belly up, we're not helping them.
	We're not bailing them out.
	That was not helpful.
	That's not helpful.
	So what if the bond market starts to go wacky?
	And we talked about this the other day, and you said the bond market really is one of the core pillars of our financial system.
	What if it starts to go wacky and then...
	You could always make the case, well, this, of course, is because Saudi Arabia and you guys got to stop that and it's hurting the financial system, even though you could trace it back to where it's coming from.
	That may be an angle to play.
	Well, I don't see what the point of it would be at his juncture in his...
	Well, how about the fact that...
	By the way, I think it's a good idea, and I think you could blame the Saudis if they dumped a few bonds, and the bond market is going to crash.
	I don't think there's a person that works the stock market professionally that won't say the same exact thing to you.
	It seems very simple to me.
	It seems to me that we know the Clinton Global Initiative had its last meeting because all the sponsors are pulling out.
	And where are they going?
	They're going to President Obama with my brother's keeper.
	It's going to be the new Clinton Foundation.
	I'm sure the Saudis want to be a part of that.
	They're not just going to say, oh, well, that was a good run we had with the Clintons.
	It's all over.
	No.
	We've seen President Obama hanging out with the Saudis.
	We've seen him bowing to the Saudis, if you remember that, to much degree.
	So maybe it's all about him, and he just wants to get the Saudi money for his foundation.
	Could be that, too.
	I see no reason.
	Oh, you know, if you want to take it to another level, this would be the reason that him and his crazy wife are stumping for Hillary, because if Hillary becomes president, that's the end of the Clinton Foundation as we know it.
	And that would be perfect for the Obama My Brother's Keeper Foundation.
	Yeah.
	That would be good.
	That would be good for him.
	Yeah.
	So they got to get Clinton to win.
	So they're out there because they're saying stuff because everyone, people are playing these old clips of Hillary slamming, butt slamming Obama.
	Butt slam!
	During the 2008 campaign and, you know, and then blaming her for a lot of stuff, you know, the pictures of him in the dish dash and all these other things.
	Right, right, right.
	But we have to ignore that because we have to get her in as president because that just benefits our foundation.
	We know how they operate.
	And he's staying in D.C. He's not moving to Chicago.
	No, no.
	He's going to run his foundation.
	It's going to be huge.
	It's going to be huge.
	He's going to be the next Bill Clinton, and so far it's just scarfing up.
	Only he'll be better.
	Much better.
	He's also Muslim, so there you have it.
	And we're there, ladies and gentlemen.
	This is a very interesting piece of audio.
	I'm just pivoting a little bit towards Russia and Syria, as we have lots of problems going on.
	This, of course, is a report from RT, which, you know, they actually have a report which references a report from a German reporter who sat down with one of the commanders of al-Nusra.
	Oh yes, I have the same clip.
	Now, al-Nusra, al-Nusra, they are the bad guys.
	They are the army of consequence.
	Of conquest, I'm sorry.
	The army of consequence.
	The army of consequence.
	Right now and down.
	Hey, we should start our own army.
	Yeah, we're the army of consequence.
	Yeah, the army of consequence.
	Uh...
	And, well, it was very interesting what he had to say.
	Remember, these are the guys that we're against.
	Everyone's cool except El Nusra.
	Everybody's good, but we don't like El Nusra.
	And, of course, El Nusra really are the bad guys.
	And here we go.
	Here we go.
	Hello?
	Jihadists fighting in Syria are dissatisfied with the alleged military assistance being provided to them by America and are demanding a greater supply of advanced U.S. weaponry.
	That's according to a commander from the al-Nusra Front Terror Group speaking in an interview with a German journalist.
	Yes, the U.S. supports the opposition, but not directly.
	They support the countries that back us.
	However, we are still not satisfied with this support.
	They should support us with advanced weapons.
	We were winning the fights thanks to Tau missiles.
	With these, we gained parity with the regime.
	We received tanks from Libya via Turkey and multiple rocket launching systems too.
	The regime's only advantage is tactical aircraft, rockets and rocket launchers.
	We captured some of the rocket launchers and received a lot from abroad.
	Thanks to the Tau missiles, we are able to keep the situation under control in many areas.
	According to the al-Nusra commander, the jihadists don't recognize a ceasefire in Syria and use it to regroup.
	He also told the German journalist that U.S. instructors have been teaching radicals how to use new equipment.
	We got the missiles directly.
	They were delivered to a certain group.
	When the road was closed and was encircled, we had officers from Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Israel and the U.S. here.
	Doing what?
	They were experts.
	Experts on how to use satellites, missiles, reconnaissance operations, and thermal observation cameras.
	Also American advisors?
	Yes, they were experts from many countries.
	Also American?
	Yes.
	There you go.
	Now, he's just some dude in the desert, but still, we are clearly helping these guys out, and we're helping them train.
	I'd like to contrast that with, you know, they do these reports over and over on RT. That's why I prefaced it's RT, Russia Today, of course.
	And so here's another version of the same report.
	It may be a little more, I think they punched it up a little bit.
	Meanwhile, the media has found out that the Gulf states might soon openly provide the Syrian rebels with high-tech weapons to turn the tide against Assad.
	Wait a minute.
	Gulf states meaning Saudi Arabia?
	No, no.
	Gulf states would be Oman.
	Oman, Qatar. Bahrain, Dubai. United Arab Emirates.
	In particular, we are talking about portable air defense systems which launch surface-to-air missiles from the shoulder.
	The weapon is especially dangerous as it gives just one fighter the chance to shoot down a low-flying aircraft.
	Now, the policy of arming so-called moderate rebels has been blamed for delivering weapons straight into the hands of terrorists.
	And a German journalist spoke to an al-Nusra terrorist commander who receives weapons.
	He says that his forces receive heavy weapons from America-supported countries.
	The journalist also found out that al-Nusra terrorists are trained by foreign military experts.
	American experts, I should say, coming in from Langley.
	We had a word.
	Langley?
	I have said for years, because I knew it and everybody knows it in Syria, that one kilometer behind the borders, these weapons were taken by terrorist groups, by Al-Qaeda, by the Islamic State.
	This is well known.
	And if I deliver weapons to a so-called moderate group, In Syria, everybody knows that at the end the weapons will be in the hands of the terrorists.
	And I must also say that, and this commander told it too, that sometimes some radical Rebels just say to get weapons.
	Oh, now I'm murdered.
	I'm a member of the Free Syrian Army.
	They even changed the name of their group to get the weapons.
	This is a game that everybody knows.
	The Americans know that their weapons will, at the end, be in the hands of terrorists, and they know that.
	They know it clearly.
	What I couldn't find out is who this German guy works for.
	What outfit does he work for?
	Is he just an independent guy?
	I don't know.
	I'm feeling it's just an independent guy.
	But the second part of this, which is the weapons in Syria part 2, and one thing that's really interesting, and I will say this after we play this part, I think there's something that RT wants to say, but they just don't have the guts to say it, which I'll say after this part.
	And this one involves an extension of the report with our friend Gaia.
	Gaian.
	That's right, everybody.
	She's from Algeria, but...
	No, wait.
	Is she from Algeria?
	She works for Russia today, and she's hot.
	What?
	I think she's Armenian.
	Armenian, that's what I meant to say.
	Yeah, she's Armenian.
	RT's guy named Chichikhan asked the State Department if the U.S. is ready to prevent its allies from shipping weapons directly to Syria.
	Well, a Reuters article cites U.S. officials who believe that Gulf states may soon begin to arm Syrian rebels with anti-aircraft weapons, so-called MANPATs.
	One U.S. official was quoted as saying, the Saudis have always thought that the way to get the Russians to back off is what worked in Afghanistan 30 years ago, negating their air power by giving MANPATs to the Mujahideen, end quote.
	The Mujahideen of Afghanistan later, of course, turned into enemies of the United States and used their weapons in training against Americans.
	With that, my question at the State Department.
	About two weeks ago, U.S.-backed rebels drove U.S. Special Forces out of the town of Al Rai, shouting infidels, crusaders, dogs, pigs at them, their words.
	In light of the fact that some rebels are quite openly anti-American, are you worried that these men-pats could one day be used to shoot down US planes?
	So first of all, I'm not going to confirm what anonymous U.S. officials may or may not have said.
	We cannot dictate what other countries, and I'm not naming names, but may or may not decide to do in terms of supporting certain groups within Syria.
	So you're not trying to stop them from providing the rebels with MANPATs, with anti-aircraft weapons?
	I'm not saying that at all.
	Does the administration do anything to stop its allies from providing these powerful weapons to rebels in Syria?
	What we're engaged with, our allies, and frankly all of the members of the ISSG, which is, as we know, not necessarily all like-minded governments or nations, but they all share purportedly a common vision for the outcome that they want to see in Syria.
	Yeah, we want the pipeline from Qatar up to Turkey.
	That's the outcome we want.
	So what's happening with these shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles, we cannot come up with a way to keep the Russians out of this deal.
	We cannot actually send this type of weapon over there ourselves, because then it would be traced back to us.
	So we send these weapons over through the Arab Emirates and these other little countries that want to help.
	They just want to help.
	Just helping.
	And so they send the weapons, these anti-aircraft weapons, in through the back door.
	The weapons eventually, as was reported at the beginning of the report, these weapons eventually go to the terrorists because that's where everything ends up.
	We're supplying the terrorists and, of course, I don't know.
	Army of consequence.
	The army.
	Much of this has to do with us actually maybe being in control of ISIS and the rest of them.
	They end up stealing the weapons from the good guys.
	They're bull crap.
	I hate it when that happens.
	Now, they've got these little anti-aircraft missiles and they just start shooting down Russian planes that we can't do.
	We love to have a no-fly zone.
	Hillary talks about a no-fly.
	We want to keep the Russians out of the way because they're messing up our scheme.
	Yeah.
	So let's shoot them down, but oh, we didn't do it.
	We have nothing to do with it.
	I think the overall point that I like is it's always stuff we made.
	I mean, no matter how it got there, it's always stuff we made.
	So we ultimately win, and that follows into the next clip.
	We just don't want to get blamed.
	We don't want to personally be blamed for shooting down these Russian SUs and these other...
	Planes that are flying around because they're bombing these guys.
	And they take out a couple of them.
	And this is going to happen probably in the next month or two.
	A Russian plane is going to get shot out of the sky.
	Then another one.
	And the Russians are going to get bent out of shape.
	And we're going to go, we had nothing to do with it.
	It's those horrible rebels.
	They stole our stuff.
	And they trained on it somehow magically.
	And they know how to shoot down planes.
	And we didn't even send our stuff over there.
	It was sent in by these other guys.
	Yeah, bad.
	This also came from the State Department.
	Does anyone not see through this bullcrap?
	Well, it's worse because here's exactly what was said about what's going to happen to the Russians because, of course, it's all the Russians' fault.
	Extremist groups will continue to exploit the vacuums that are there in Syria to expand their operations, which will include, no question, attacks against Nice!
	That, to me, was an act of war, by saying that.
	What a douchebag.
	Was that Kirby or was that the other guy?
	No, it was Kirby.
	Yeah, total douchebag.
	Now, this brings us to, remember, it's our weapons, but we didn't give it to them.
	They're just these little, so we're not really responsible.
	We can't tell the Omanis what to do.
	However, when you look at the MH17, yet another interim report, this is my wheelhouse, another interim report came out from the Dutch Joint Investigation Team, led by the Netherlands, and again, not a final report, just an interim report, which pretty much...
	Just repeats what the previous interim report said.
	How long does this take?
	How long does this take?
	When did this...
	Here's what they've done.
	15 months.
	Here's what they've done.
	So now they're saying, okay, here's what we have proof.
	We have proof What it was, where it came from, and whose weapon it was.
	Here's Fox News with the typical US rundown.
	Well, this report is just confirming what so many people suspected, that this was a Russian-made B-UK missile system, and it was fired from inside Russian-backed eastern Ukraine.
	Now, this followed 15 months of meticulous and painstaking analysis around the crash site.
	Which included photographic evidence from Bellingcat, the blogger.
	As Dutch authorities collected thousands of pieces of fragments over an area hundreds of miles wide.
	I got a couple of photos from our military intelligence assets.
	And they say, look at the shrapnel.
	it's from the inside out is that that's not how a book apparently explodes right at the right moment and then the shrapnel is what brings everything down but you see this it's in the show notes you see this picture and the shrapnel is heading outward not inward i don't know anything about weapons but i'm just saying using these pieces they reconstructed the forward part of the Using detailed analysis, as well as audio recordings from the pilot's headsets and satellite imagery, they were able to confirm the type of weapon used and where it was fired from.
	Here's what the lead investigator told the media.
	All representatives from the states participating in the investigation...
	This is nice, because we have a Dutch man who has an ash problem.
	...endors the conclusion that the crash was caused by the detonation of a warhead in close proximity...
	Warhead?
	...to the aeroplane.
	The point is, this specific kind of Russian missile doesn't hit the aircraft.
	It detonates just next to it.
	And shrapnel from this kind of weapon was found in the bodies of the pilots.
	Oh.
	The report, however, doesn't seek to apportion blame, but other evidence has pointed towards Russia as the culprit, not least the fact that the missile was fired from an area controlled by pro-Russian groups, and one of these systems was photographed in the area at the time.
	Of course, Russia denies all of this, but an ongoing criminal investigation is underway to determine who was responsible.
	So this is what they came up with.
	They came up with, it was definitely a book, and they did that based on simulations and fragments removed from the pilots' bodies, apparently.
	It was definitely a Russian weapon system, which, of course, all weapons in Ukraine until we started coming in were all Russian.
	And it was fired from, not from Russia, but from Russian, you know, from the separatist area, which we know, of course, are pro-Russian.
	So it's no different from saying we're not responsible for what the terrorists do with our weapons, but when it comes to Russia, yeah, we're pretty sure you're responsible.
	Here's RT's take.
	Moscow has denounced us bias.
	I'm sorry, this is Euronews, which is even better, actually.
	Moscow has denounced as biased an investigation into the downed Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17. The Russian Foreign Office issued a statement saying it's disappointed by the fact that the situation with the Boeing crash investigation hasn't changed, and adding that the conclusions of the Dutch prosecutor's office confirm that the inquiry was biased and politically motivated.
	Almaz Ante, the Russian state-owned anti-aircraft missile manufacturer which made the buck used to shoot down the plane, said the findings presented by the Dutch team were based on a simulation of the crash, not reality.
	During today's presentation, real technical evidence was almost absent, a spokesman claimed.
	Certain questions were not touched upon, and we at Almaz Ante believe this isn't right.
	Dutch investigators, however, say the evidence that a Russian-made missile launched from a Ukrainian village held by pro-Russian rebels is strong, and their conclusion is unlikely to change.
	There you go.
	No, they haven't released the final report.
	They're never going to release the final report.
	There will be no final report.
	The book guys did a report on it and said that apparently the shrapnel from these missiles and the stuff that I guess is in there is mini dog biscuit shaped.
	Really?
	And there was no evidence of any of these holes looking like the common holes that you get from this thing.
	So there's that.
	The guy who says that the subway was coming out, he says the book will...
	The little dog biscuit thing should go in the fuselage and then come out the other side.
	So stuff coming out is not proof of much.
	But they have an argument to be made.
	They said they couldn't find the evidence of this particular type of part.
	This dog biscuit shaped item was not apparent anywhere.
	But the overall point I'm making remains...
	Yeah, well, the point is fine.
	The point is what it is.
	The Russians are bad actors.
	But I'll tell you, the Dutch are unhappy.
	Not the government.
	Dutch citizens.
	Like, this is bullcrap.
	Again, another interim report saying the same thing.
	How long does it take?
	They won't release the radar tracking.
	Because they cannot implicate Russia because the Netherlands does huge business with Russia.
	They will never do it.
	They store their oil, they store their gas, they have all the businesses.
	That's a political element, but what about the element that maybe Russia didn't do it?
	Well, now you're just talking crazy.
	Now you're just talking crazy talk, John.
	We all know Putin.
	You had the theory about the planes and the radar being turned.
	You had a very elaborate thesis about this being shot down by a Ukrainian jet.
	I can summarize that around the same period there were all kinds of GPS and transponder hacking going on.
	It was a confirmed part of a NATO war exercise and they were actually changing signatures of aircraft Changing their transponder codes.
	All kinds of things were happening.
	And my theory, which I'd have to go back and look at all my notes to give it to you perfectly, is they did have a Ukrainian jet, which did actually have the possibility to go up to this particular ceiling height and shoot the plane down.
	Although that is specifically refuted in this interim report.
	Not with evidence, but with hearsay.
	As in, well, we looked at the radar images and there was nothing to see.
	Can we see the radar images?
	No, no, you can't see that, please.
	Shut up, slave.
	Shut up.
	Shut up, slave.
	Woo!
	All right, now we have a report on, I think we're done with that.
	Yeah.
	By the way, I was listening to the C-SPAN one minute, the one minute reports.
	That they do.
	They let the Congress guys come up for one minute.
	They always go over.
	Yeah.
	Because I recorded a couple of these, and they're always at 120.
	That's interesting.
	I recorded one, too.
	That's interesting you did that.
	Okay, well, maybe you could record the same one I did, but here's the one I recorded.
	Okay.
	Well, actually, I did record, too.
	I got the one from Schaffetz, which I called their offices to get some clarification on this, and then I sent an email to the Can I ask you a question?
	So when you write the email and say, Hi, I'm John C. Dvorak from the No Agenda show?
	Kind of.
	Does that work?
	Well, you gotta say something.
	Did you get a response?
	No.
	Okay.
	Ah, it's those a-holes from that podcast.
	I've never had any trouble with any of the senators.
	They all have good staffs to respond, even though they always seem like they don't have enough people there.
	But these guys are just a bunch of douchebags, which makes me think that Chavez is one, too.
	But let's play.
	This is Chavez.
	I don't even have to play.
	He just calls for a...
	I guess they're going to indict...
	It calls for an indictment of contempt of Congress for their dude named Ben.
	Ah, that they gave immunity?
	That one?
	For what purpose does a gentleman from Utah seek recognition?
	Mr.
	Speaker, by the direction of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, I submit a privileged report.
	The clerk will report the title.
	Report to a company resolution recommending that the House of Representatives find Brian Pagliano in contempt of Congress for refusal to comply with a subpoena duly issued by the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
	Referred to the House calendar and ordered printed.
	That's the Stone Tear guy?
	Yes, Stone Tear.
	Stone Tear.
	Stone Tear, yeah.
	That's what it says.
	I know it's stone-tiered, S-T-O-N-E-T-E-R, but when you say it, it's stoned here.
	Now, and another headache for Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign.
	And again, over her email server.
	New allegations suggest Clinton's former IT specialist asked for advice in an online forum on deleting a VIP's address from emails.
	RT's Caleb Maupin took a closer look.
	If you hit a glitch with your computer, most of us know you just Google the answer.
	If you're still stuck, you check out the advice on the web forums.
	Well, it looks like one of Clinton's staffers was caught doing just that, hoping to Dr.
	Hillary Clinton's emails on Benghazi.
	And he's been called out on it.
	Mr.
	Mr. Combetta, do you intend to make an opening statement?
	On advice of counsel, I respectfully decline to answer and assert my Fifth Amendment privilege.
	That's Paul Combetti, computer expert and former member of Hillary Clinton's staff.
	It's claimed he uses the online moniker Stone Tear.
	Oh, that was a different guy.
	It's a different guy.
	That's not Pagliano.
	I think he just pronounced his name differently.
	No, he's the guy Cotton.
	He's a different guy.
	Oh, I should go back.
	Might be a different guy.
	Well, I think he also received immunity.
	That's Paul Combetti.
	Oh yeah, Combetti.
	You're right.
	He's a different guy.
	He's Stone Tear.
	I don't know who the other guy is.
	It's claimed he uses the online moniker Stone Tear.
	And on the Reddit internet forum, someone called Stone Tear wrote...
	Stone.
	Hello, all.
	I may be facing a very interesting situation where I need to strip out a VIP's email address from a bunch of archived email.
	Basically, they don't want the VIP's email address exposed to anyone.
	Does anyone have any experience with something like this, and or suggestions on how this might be accomplished?
	So is this very VIP being referred to, the Democratic presidential candidate, but then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton?
	Did you wipe the surface?
	What, like with a cloth or something?
	Well, no.
	I don't know how it works digitally at all.
	Things don't look so good for Paul.
	His registered email address was stoneteer at gmail.com.
	On the e-commerce site Etsy, user stoneteer contains the name Paul Combetta.
	And those Reddit posts are traced back to Rhode Island, where Paul was living, I respectfully decline to answer and assert my Fifth Amendment privilege.
	Congress wants answers, and if Paul doesn't agree to talk to the committee, he could get a subpoena.
	Congress is also asking Reddit to hand over all the posts from the mysterious Stone Tier.
	All right, yeah, I read those.
	Okay, so, does she have something to say about that?
	I do have the one clip that I picked up off of the one minutes.
	Which is the WWTF, which should be WTF clip.
	This was a representative from California, and he was allowed to talk for one minute.
	And if you can stomach listening to the whole thing, you don't have to, but you want to stomach listening to the whole thing, this is the one minute he provided.
	For what purpose does the gentleman from California seek recognition?
	Without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute.
	North Charleston, South Carolina, June 29, 2013.
	Maurice Lamarck Horry, 41 years old.
	Carlos Davis, 39.
	Theodore Waymeyers, Jr., 36.
	Waco, Texas, May 17, 2015.
	Jesus Delgado Rodriguez, 65 years old.
	Richard Vincent Kirshner, 47.
	Charles Wayne Russell, 46.
	Danielle Raymond...
	Boyette, 44.
	Wayne Lee Campbell, 43.
	What the hell is this?
	Are these birthdays?
	Are these birthdays?
	Not that I know of.
	Why is he giving birthdays to someone in Waco, Texas?
	He's from California.
	So do we need to listen to find out?
	Will there be a big reveal?
	No.
	Go near the end and play near the end.
	Yeah.
	Okay.
	This is very strange, John.
	Jackson Edens, 28 years old.
	New Orleans, Louisiana, August 10, 2014.
	Terrence McBride, 33.
	Jasmine Anderson, 16.
	For what purpose is a gentleman from Michigan seek recognition?
	What was that, gun deaths?
	He doesn't say.
	That's very strange.
	It just rattles off a bunch of names.
	That's very strange.
	I think it's birthdays.
	Maybe it's gun deaths.
	Sounds like birthdays.
	Whatever.
	It just starts saying names, dates of birth, and years old, and from all over the country, and then he ends the same thing and doesn't say a thing about it.
	Hmm.
	I got a one...
	I just picked this up the other day.
	No, no, it's good.
	I got a one minute from...
	How can this woman still be in Congress?
	Sheila Jackson Lee.
	Oh, she's a horrible person.
	Didn't we vote her out?
	Texas.
	Texas.
	What are you doing, Texas?
	This woman is a moron.
	Please listen to her minute.
	As important as this Congress begins to deal with the confusion of the continued resolution, that it be noted.
	That we have not addressed the question of gun violence, ending gun violence, closing the loophole that is so important in a background check that allows people to get guns because they get it without the background check being completed.
	Or in the issue of terrorism, that those who are on the terror watch list have random access to buying guns.
	Simple legislation that could be passed.
	I think it is crucial in America that we do so.
	Because the violence has many roots.
	Housing, healthcare, poverty.
	But certainly, it has the tool.
	And that is guns.
	That is automatic weapons.
	Like AK-47s and others.
	More sophisticated.
	America has a right to the Second Amendment, but the people of America have a right to safety.
	And the prevention of gun violence in their community.
	Automatic weapons.
	I'm so tired of these a-holes.
	Semi-automatic.
	Automatic weapons are banned.
	And now the AK-47, the one we buy here, is automatic?
	No, it's pretty much semi-automatic.
	Of course, there are the ones that are switchable, but how does this woman do this?
	It's just wrong.
	She just goes off on anything.
	She's crazy.
	We need to vote her out.
	I don't know what's going on.
	It's crazy.
	She must be a great, fantastic campaigner.
	I have no idea what...
	After our break, we'll talk about what she mentioned at the top there, which is, you know, the couple things happened.
	We have a continuing resolution, which enables the government to continue until December 9th.
	So we put that in.
	A lot of things happened with that, which I want to talk about.
	The number one thing, though, I looked at that whole document.
	And it's only about salaries of the government, except for the amendments.
	Do you know how much the Congress and Senate receive for salaries for themselves and their staff and their offices?
	I know they get quite a bit.
	On an annual basis?
	No, I know it's because somehow they worked in the staff.
	Yeah.
	It's quite a bit.
	It's $1.2 billion.
	That's for all of Congress.
	And the Senate.
	And the Senate.
	That's a lot of money, John.
	Yeah.
	$1.2 billion.
	Yeah.
	And that's what this whole thing is about.
	It's about their salary.
	It's the budget for their salary, I should say.
	Yeah, that would be what they want.
	That's the most important thing to them.
	Whatever happened to, you know, you just come in from your city, you do your thing for your state, you go back home.
	This is careerism to the max.
	A billion dollars.
	Hey, we could use some of that.
	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.
	And indeed, we do have some people to thank, including at the top, $150 from Des Plaines, Illinois, Demetrios Nephliotis.
	Is that the brother?
	Must be.
	Yeah, must be.
	I guess.
	Yeah, I think it's...
	Where's the other...
	He's in Waukegan.
	Nicholas.
	Yeah, Nicholas is in Waukegan.
	And then Demetrios.
	I got a couple of Greeks.
	Oh, cool.
	He's in Des Plaines.
	Todd, and hello.
	Hello.
	Hello, my friend.
	Okay, Adele.
	Todd Rathkamp in Rippon, Wisconsin, $101.01.
	Hylia Deocerin.
	Hold on, this is a birthday.
	It doesn't seem to be on the list.
	Happy birthday, belated birthday to me and fellow Virgo Adam.
	Okay, so it's Hylia, Eosaran, and Hylia's birthday is...
	See, 36 on Labor Day.
	Okay, 36.
	All right, got it.
	Okay.
	Um...
	Anastasia Peroff in Mississauga, Ontario.
	$100.
	I got a little note here.
	Oh, he needs to know what to do.
	You got to keep track of these things.
	Move on, man.
	No notes.
	We got to go.
	Brian Mickey in San Francisco, California.
	$100.
	Anonymous in Ontario.
	Ontario, Oregon?
	Is that right?
	That's what it says.
	100.
	James Camillo.
	Camillo.
	Eastlake, Ohio.
	Sergeant Cal in North Lake or Northville, Michigan.
	Galer...
	Guilherme.
	I think it's Guilherme.
	He's in Sao Paulo, Brazil.
	99.99.
	We love the Brazilians.
	We do.
	By the way, that's probably pronounced differently because the Brazilians' names are not pronounced the way they're Spanish.
	No, it's Portuguese.
	Yes, Portuguese.
	Robert Wood in Saginaw, Michigan, 8640.
	Eddie S in San...
	Saginaw.
	Oh, no, I'm sorry.
	San Jacinto.
	San Jacinto.
	It's California.
	You should know this.
	I know.
	I know these names.
	Kevin, and that's 80-09.
	Meanwhile, the boob donations come in.
	With Kevin Booth in San Diego, California.
	Cut the boob.
	And he's got a call out for his friend Howard Gray in the mouth a few times over the year, but he didn't.
	But meanwhile, of course...
	Okay, there's something screwy about this.
	He wants to call out Eddie S. He wants to call out Eddie S., who just donated 809, so he can't do the call-out.
	Can't do a douchebag if he just donated.
	Eddie S. Yeah, he beat you to it.
	Beat you to it, Kevin.
	That's right, he's above you on the list.
	That's why he did 8009, so he would be first on the list.
	Genius, genius, fighting amongst each other on the donation segment.
	Beautiful.
	Sam Leung and Sir Sam in Toronto, Ontario, 80-08.
	That's another boob.
	Howard Gray, 80-08.
	And at El Cajon, California, Howard Gray.
	And he also has a...
	Another call-out?
	Wait!
	He calls out Kevin Booth, but Kevin Booth just donated!
	Boop, boop, boop, boop, boop.
	No.
	What's going on with you guys?
	Yeah, what's up with that?
	Fighting.
	No call-out.
	Fighting.
	Stephen Cogswell, and that's pretty funny.
	That is good.
	Stephen Cogswell in Rusagonis, New Brunswick, Canada.
	I think.
	777-7777.
	Carlos Graub...
	Man, I'm having nothing but trouble today.
	Graubix.
	Graubix in Mechanicsville, Virginia.
	7734.
	Sir John Martinez in Gilroy, California.
	Huge hugs.
	Richard Adams in Orem, Utah, 65.
	John May.
	It's his birthday today.
	And it's his birthday.
	John May, $62 from Scottsdale, Arizona.
	Louis Pipkin in Tallahassee, Florida, 61, 13.
	Luke Rayner in London, UK, 58, 55.
	Craig Fryzak in Loveland, Colorado, 57.
	Josh McDonald.
	5510.
	Double nickels on the dime.
	Alexander Hocopian in Houston, Texas.
	5510.
	Christopher Schubrother.
	I think it's Schleipfer.
	Schleipfer probably.
	I think it's just a bunch of messy characters here.
	Schleipfer.
	Schleipfer something.
	He's in Fungin, Czechoslovakia.
	Switzerland.
	Switzerland.
	Fungin.
	Switzerland.
	Sir Kevin Payne in Richmond, Virginia, $54.32.
	Mark Tierenauer in Midlothian, Virginia, $53.
	Sir Vasquez in Denver, Colorado, $53.
	Arline Stewart, New York City, $52.52.
	Eric Hochul in Berlin, Deutschland, $52.
	I do want to point out Arline says, Happy Birthday, Adam, from Mistress Stewart.
	Mistress Stewart.
	Richard Warfield Jr., $51.50.
	Ryan, he's in parts unknown.
	Ryan Kiefer, as in Kiefer, in Raleigh, North Carolina, $51.50.
	The following people are $50 donors in name and location.
	Aiki Kitagawa in San Francisco.
	Sir Eric Wilka in Auburn, Alabama.
	Who says that he's using his credit card cashback rewards for this donation.
	Nice.
	That's a good idea.
	Yes, it is.
	Anonymous, Milton, Ontario.
	Matthew Durney in Fredericksburg, Virginia.
	Chris Nash in Hollister, California.
	Shad Rich in You Know What?
	Parts Unknown.
	Bryn Evans, Parts Unknown.
	Donald Napier in Oviedo, Florida, 50.
	David Oliver in Calistoga, California.
	He's got a note there.
	Joshua Willis in San Francisco, California.
	Robert Hausner in Marmora, Ontario.
	Sir Mike DeCock in Chandler, Arizona.
	Sir Andrew Haverson in Gravenhurst, Ontario.
	I like this.
	A lot of Canadians.
	Marcus Muller, I'm guessing, in Deutschland.
	Because it's got characters again.
	Derek Neese in Alpharetta, Georgia.
	Ross Turpin in Troy, Kansas.
	Sir Peter Totes in...
	I thought he was in England, but it says U.S. Sir Gerald Nabonnet in Union, South Carolina.
	David Clark in Spartanburg, South Carolina.
	Alex Bill Maher.
	Bill Maher.
	Bill Maher.
	And he's in Deutschland.
	Tirol, Deutschland.
	Joseph, playing Joseph in Coeur d'Alene, Idaho.
	Anthony Clements in Trim.
	That's Ireland, yeah.
	Steve Chipman in San Rafael, California.
	Just playing Glenn, parts unknown.
	David Middlebrook, parts unknown.
	Ben Dural in Malta.
	And that concludes our group of well-wishers.
	Yes.
	A good group it is, I'd say.
	A lot of 50s today.
	Sometimes we don't have...
	We got like a slew of them.
	Thank them profusely.
	Yes.
	Yeah, this is beautiful.
	And because of this, we don't have any title changes.
	We do have a couple of nights.
	Again, I'm looking for a jingle for title changes.
	We got lucky today.
	We don't have any, but I would like you to think of that.
	And I would also like to thank everyone who came in under $50, usually for reasons of anonymity.
	It's highly appreciated.
	People do lots of stuff to produce this show.
	As producers, we get jingles, clips, stories, artwork, and finances.
	You're doing your best.
	You're doing your job.
	We really appreciate it.
	Another show...
	The interrupt.
	I think it's extremely difficult, and I would like to see somebody try it, to do a jingle for a title update, because I can't think of it.
	It could just be a sound effect.
	It could be a sound effect.
	We have our sword for the night.
	Just maybe a sound effect, maybe not a jingle per se.
	Perfect!
	You'll be doing it.
	Dvorak.org slash N-A. A little bit of karma for those who need it.
	Jobs, jobs, jobs, and jobs.
	Let's vote for jobs!
	You've got karma.
	You've got karma.
	It's your birthday, birthday.
	I'm no one champion.
	And today we say happy birthday.
	Actually, James Flesch says happy birthday to his hot-smokin' wife, his smokin' hot wife, October 18th, when she celebrates.
	Sir Raleigh Wordsmith says happy birthday to his wife, Marie Kasteen, celebrating on the 5th of October.
	Steve Cogswell will be 48 on the 1st.
	Richard Adams turning 65 today.
	Craig Fryzek, 57 on September 30th.
	Sir Vasquez celebrated yesterday.
	And his brother will be celebrating today.
	Happy birthday.
	And finally, Hylia Desor...
	Desor...
	Deoceron.
	There we go.
	Turn 36 on Labor Day.
	Happy birthday from all your buddies here at the best podcast in the universe.
	Bam!
	Almost got tired of that.
	It was good.
	Thank you.
	Then we have two nights, so I got my blade.
	Hello?
	You got three?
	What?
	No, I've got one blade.
	Here it comes.
	Oh, you got one blade.
	Perfect.
	All right, we need Steve Fisher up here on the podium next to Lectron, along with Nicholas Nafpliotis.
	Gentlemen, thank you.
	You are about to join the roundtable of the No Agenda Knights and Dames.
	It's for those of you who have supported the program over your lifetime in the amount of $1,000 or more.
	And I'm very happy to now pronounce the KV Sir Fish and Sir Nikos of the American Wild West.
	We'll be right back.
	Head on over to noagentonation.com slash rings and give Eric your stats.
	And we'll correct it to the Midwest.
	What did I say?
	You said Wild West.
	You know what?
	It's a stupid autocorrect.
	No.
	Sometimes it clicks on in the Safari browser and you have to be careful because it'll change names and I can't seem to turn it off.
	Anyway.
	Thank you.
	Hey, with all of this stuff going on, something happened, which we need to bring to our attention because I, of course, looked into this.
	And it was, I think it's completely, this is flown under the radar and obviously done purposely.
	And it involves your Fourth Amendment rights, if you're in the United States of America.
	And I looked around.
	I could only find one news report on this, and it was from Fox News.
	We'll play that, and then we can just, if you want to, walk through a little bit of this Supreme Court ruling, which is something I don't think we've ever discussed a Supreme Court ruling before.
	On the show.
	Certainly not one we hadn't heard of.
	This is Supreme Court ruling number 1219.
	The Supreme Court has quietly approved new rules that could give access to all your digital information.
	Fox News chief legal correspondent Shannon Bream is here to explain.
	Good evening, Shannon.
	Good to see you, Britt.
	Well, the Justice Department could soon have these sweeping new powers to hack into the phones and computers of millions of Americans.
	As Britt said, even if they're not accused of doing anything wrong, that is, unless Congress puts a stop to it.
	The power stems from a federal rule change that the administration has been pushing for over the last couple of years, and one that's now been approved by the U.S. Supreme Court.
	So, without ever hearing a case or controversy on the topic— The nation's highest court has given Justice Department prosecutors the ability to go to any single federal magistrate and get a warrant that could allow the government to break into secure systems, search, copy and transmit private files and do this anywhere in the world.
	The administration says it's a necessary change because of the ability of suspects to anonymize their locations.
	Well, Oregon Democrat Senator Ron Wyden says the plan would give the FBI authority to secretly probe into hundreds of thousands of computers that belong to innocent third parties and even crime victims.
	Speaking out against the move, Google said this, quote, it invariably expands the scope of law enforcement searches, weakens the Fourth Amendment's particularity and notice requirements, and opens the door to potentially unreasonable searches and seizures.
	Only Congress can put the brakes on the plan, but lawmakers would have to act swiftly in the midst of an election year and potentially into a lame duck session.
	The rule changes go into effect December 1st if Congress doesn't put a stop to them.
	And there is bipartisan pushback from a growing coalition of senators.
	Democrat Patrick Leahy and Republican Mike Lee, they're leading the charge.
	They've officially asked Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Chuck Grassley to hold a hearing.
	Brits, no word tonight on whether Grassley plans to do so.
	Lee's office says they're still waiting to hear back.
	In the meantime, Wyden says he is going to introduce legislation and try to get it done before that deadline.
	Now, I'm a little surprised to hear that the Supreme Court just kind of did this.
	Now, you mentioned that there was no case filed, right?
	So what is this power the Supreme Court was exercising with no case before it?
	Right.
	Well, the federal judiciary has different rules committees, and they propose changes along the way.
	It's something that the administration, through the Justice Department, has been pushing for.
	So all these recommendations then bubble to the Supreme Court, which has now approved these amendments, so only Congress can stop it.
	So this is a power the court has always had, and it's just we don't hear about it right now.
	Right.
	It's something that's done very quietly, and that's why these senators are getting together to sound the alarm, because they say it'll be over before anybody has a chance to object.
	This is kind of our speciality here on the best podcast in the universe.
	I'd like to read a few of these sections from this Supreme Court ruling, which are supposed to only change procedure, not change anything else.
	And this is from the amendment rule.
	The Supreme Court has proposed an amendment to Rule 41.
	This is the search and seizure rule.
	A magistrate judge with authority in any district where activities related to a crime may have occurred has authority to issue a warrant to use remote access to search electronic media and to seize or copy electronically stored information located within or outside that district if...
	The district where the media or information is located has been concealed through technological means.
	That could be Tor.
	You're using Tor.
	Well, you're hiding it.
	Or, in an investigation of violation, the media are protected computers that have been damaged without authorization and are located in five or more districts.
	This would happen if you are part of a botnet accidentally.
	Then you have more than five locations.
	It's on your computer.
	So the Supreme Court is now saying that's when a warrant can be written by any magistrate in any district.
	Furthermore, for a warrant to use remote access to search electronic storage media and seize or copy electronically stored information, the officer must make reasonable efforts to serve a copy of the warrant on the person whose property was searched or whose information was seized or copied.
	Service may be accomplished by any means, including electronic means, reasonably calculated to reach that person.
	I guess you can tweet him.
	Hey, at Adam Curry, we're looking at your stuff.
	I find this very troubling.
	Hmm.
	Well, we know that they're doing this anyway, at least the NSA is.
	But they're not necessarily just downloading everything you've got.
	What is the point of this?
	Well, they can...
	I mean, we know the FBI has always liked this kind of thing because, oh, God, we have to go through a rigmarole.
	We don't want to do that.
	Well, listen, this is a little subsection here.
	A warrant to use remote access is allowed within or outside the district in an investigation of a violation of law code.
	If the media to be searched are protected computers that have been damaged without authorization.
	So if the computer has been damaged.
	Zafting.
	Yeah, good question.
	And they are located in many districts.
	Criminal activity, such as the creation and control of botnets, it says it right here, may target multiple computers in several districts.
	In investigations of this nature, the amendment would eliminate the burden of attempting to secure multiple warrants in numerous districts and allow a single judge to oversee the investigation.
	Mm-hmm.
	So this could be just anti-spam.
	They're doing us all a favor.
	As used in this rule, the terms protected computer and damage have meaning.
	Oh, I should have looked that up in 18 U.S.C. I should look that up for you, which I'll do.
	But I find this very troubling.
	It's the Supreme Court.
	I guess they can do whatever they want.
	Pretty much, yeah.
	Damn.
	But this doesn't seem like something anybody on the Supreme Court...
	You know, I think there's an issue here that has been under-discussed, which is the actual knowledge base of today's judiciary, especially any given judge at any given place.
	And I would say the Supreme Court really must suffer from this.
	Do they even know anything about...
	These computers, how they work?
	Probably not.
	I would think not.
	No.
	No, they just hear, oh, this is good.
	If we have a botnet, then we should go in and be able to scan through everyone's computer and get whatever we want.
	Yeah.
	And by tweeting them, saying, hey, we're doing this.
	Yeah.
	Not a written, no, it could just be email.
	Hey, man.
	Another couple things that just reminds people.
	A couple things.
	Keep that piece of tape on the camera.
	Yeah.
	Shut your machine down at night.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	Yeah.
	Encrypt a hard disk.
	I don't know if that really would...
	Well, that could be deemed damaged.
	Oh, it's damaged, so we now are allowed to go decrypt it.
	Hmm.
	Generally speaking, I think if you run the download through the console of an encrypted disk, you just take the unencrypted data right from the user himself, herself.
	I think the encryption of a hard disk is not...
	I think it's only valuable if somebody steals the hard disk.
	All of it's moot, though.
	I'm just pointing out what's going on.
	And only Fox?
	One report?
	Hmm.
	I don't think anyone can report on this very well.
	No.
	Well, no, I agree.
	Because I think our audience, our producers understand the implications.
	Yeah.
	A couple of Euroland news bits.
	Did I want to get in there?
	Did you hear what they were accused of?
	Yeah, nothing.
	Tweeting.
	Tweeting and maintaining a facebag page.
	Spain's interior minister said we've simultaneously dismantled a network which was spreading.
	Oh, we dismantled the network.
	It was perfectly integrated into the ISIL structure producing terrorist propaganda, for example video material, which due to its cruelty aims to create a state of permanent insecurity.
	Ah.
	Arrests also took place in Brussels, Vorpital in Germany and Spain's African enclave of Malia.
	There's Belgium again, troublemakers.
	The EU's anti-terror chief praised the operation.
	The security service and the law enforcement agencies are sharing much more information.
	Much more, yes, we're sharing.
	And it's impressive.
	Very good, we're sharing, we get social with them, and then we go and get them.
	To see the number of plots which have been formed in recent weeks, the number of people who have been arrested.
	Spanish police say they've taken part in the arrests of 143 suspected terrorists since last year, 30 of which took place in other countries.
	The latest detentions reportedly included four Spaniards and one Moroccan national.
	Okay, so now we have something to report.
	We got them!
	We got them!
	The damn Facebookers!
	Meanwhile, we have this deal with Turkey.
	Not we, but the Eurolands has a deal with Turkey to send back migrants under certain circumstances, mainly from Greece and from Italy.
	This was put in place, what, six months ago now, I think?
	It's been about six months?
	It's been a while.
	How many migrants do you think they've moved?
	I don't know, half dozen, dozen?
	Fifty?
	It's not quite that bad.
	A flagship EU policy to relocate migrants from Greece and Italy appears to have flopped, but the European Commission is sticking to its...
	Flopped.
	...guns.
	EU leaders last September agreed to move 160,000 migrants from those two countries within two years.
	Good work!
	And I love this guy who's the EU Minister of Migration.
	And he's going to...
	I don't know, these guys think they're all in charge and run the world.
	Despite the low numbers, the EU's executive arm insists there'll be no change in policy.
	We have to boost relocation.
	Relocation must work and I want to be very clear on that.
	We haven't made any concession and we haven't stepped back from our basic principles on this policy.
	The EU has also agreed a migration deal with the Turkish government.
	Under the pact, migrants who cross by sea from Turkey to enter Greece will be deported back there if they don't apply for asylum or if their claim is rejected.
	Okay, so there's the...
	You mentioned this guy sounds like he runs the world.
	This is a classic bureaucrat.
	This is the world we're going to be stuck with if we don't divorce ourselves from the New World Order.
	Exactly.
	We're well on our way.
	We're already signing the admission forms.
	Finally, Jen Stoltenberg, who of course is the NATO guy, he weighed in The debate about the EU army, which we should not call an EU army, which we promised.
	We were promised there would never ever be an EU army.
	We promise you it's not going to happen.
	No, we call it EU defense.
	There is no contradiction between strong European defense and strong Atlantic cooperation within NATO. Actually, strong Europe makes NATO stronger.
	What we need is a Europe which provides capabilities in complementarity with NATO, and it is important to avoid duplication.
	Okay, it's all good to go.
	EU defense, not army.
	Defense.
	That'll be fun.
	Well, I got something on the new school shooting, which is one of the things that's been interrupting.
	But I want to do this story, which is the two guys.
	Remember those two boneheads walking down the street?
	Who picked up the bag in New York?
	Picked up the bag and threw out the bomb.
	They had pictures of the bag.
	That bag, by the way, is gorgeous.
	What kind of bag was it?
	It was like some...
	Print bag.
	It had a print of a lion's head on it.
	It was just a good looking bag.
	Now that's exactly the bag I would choose if I wanted to have a nondescript bomb laying around New York.
	I'd put like a beautiful print bag.
	Hermes, I think it was.
	It looked like something, it didn't look cheap, and it looked like something, if you went to the gym a lot, you'd want to use this bag.
	But let's play these two guys in New York City, the intro, and then the follow-up.
	Oh, I'm sorry.
	I missed that one.
	Here we go.
	Muhammad Rahami, the father of the accused bomber, tells ABC News...
	Oh wait, stop, stop, stop.
	That's not the intro, I don't think.
	It's a bomber, new fact, man in flannel.
	No, no, no.
	Those two guys in New York City.
	Oh, that's what I thought.
	You said intro.
	I'm sorry.
	Muhammad Rahami, the father of the accused bomber.
	Now do I have them all wrong?
	You did it again.
	Okay, it's those two guys in New York City.
	Yeah.
	Okay, I think I got it now.
	Sorry.
	...by saying they know the two mystery men now, releasing this new surveillance image of them just today at the site of a bomb that did not detonate.
	They took the pressure cooker out of the bag and then walked off with the bag.
	The police have been asking the men to come forward for a week now, but they now say those men have left the country and they know where they went.
	Here's ABC's chief investigative correspondent, Brian Ross.
	FBI agents tonight say they used hotel registration cards to identify these two men, employees of an Egyptian airline visiting New York from Cairo.
	But authorities still have not solved the week-long mystery of what they were up to when they apparently stumbled upon the piece of luggage with a pressure cooker bomb, walking off of the bag and leaving the bomb behind.
	They are witnesses.
	There are no criminal charges.
	They're not in any jeopardy of being arrested.
	But now authorities are arranging to question them.
	To determine if they are tied to the bomb attacks in any way or just sidewalk scavengers.
	Ooh, okay.
	Well, they're just sidewalk scavengers.
	Sidewalk scavengers, yes sir.
	But as he continued with this report, which is the second part, which is New York City Bomber New Fact, this dad of the bomber...
	It's kind of a pest, I think, because he kind of blew...
	He said before that this kid was working for the FBI. Right.
	And that was not played up much.
	But this second little episode here, apparently, if you listen to this, the FBI guy he was working with showed up When the guy was being hauled into the ambulance, and just listen to this and I'll explain what the scene looked like.
	Mohammed Rahami, the father of the accused bomber, tells ABC News he has no idea who they are.
	I never see him alive.
	The father also says he's convinced his 28-year-old son Ahmad acted alone, changing the locks on his bedroom door in the months before.
	And after, nobody can go.
	One time, my grandson, he went to his home, and he's screaming and kicked him out back.
	He's a little four years old.
	What do you think?
	I'd say he did something wrong.
	The father also told ABC News that one of the FBI agents present when his son was captured last week, the man in the red check shirt, is the same agent who two years earlier had investigated his son as a possible terrorist and concluded...
	without interviewing Ahmad in person, That he was no terror threat.
	Wait a minute.
	What was that at the end?
	Yes.
	Hold on, let me listen to that again.
	Sure.
	Let me roll back just a bit more.
	Wow.
	Hold on.
	Hold on.
	The man in the red check shirt is the same agent...
	Ah, shit.
	I want to get more of this.
	I almost need to play the whole clip.
	That's good, man.
	Hold on.
	What do you think?
	He did something wrong.
	The father also told ABC News that one of the FBI agents present when his son was captured last week, the man in the red check shirt, is the same agent who two years earlier had investigated his son as a possible terrorist and concluded, without interviewing Ahmad in person, that he was no terror threat.
	Wow!
	Yeah.
	Buh!
	Bend over.
	Bend over.
	Well, that tells us something.
	Yes, it puts us back on the six-week cycle kind of thing.
	Two-year cycle, yeah.
	This guy was standing there.
	The guy was on a stretcher, the bomber.
	And he was looking forward.
	This guy shows up with his red check shirt, shows up and stands there.
	The bomber looks at him and they make eye contact as some sort of like, for a long time, as though there's some messaging going on, but it wasn't like the guys going, giving them hand signals.
	And then they throw him into the ambulance.
	I thought it was very peculiar.
	I'll say...
	My goodness.
	This is the dad again.
	This dad.
	They've got to stop interviewing him or they're going to blow everything.
	He and Anthony Weiner may sign a suicide pact together.
	I don't know.
	It's not going to be good.
	As we're running a little short on time, I'd like to do one little bit here.
	It's tech news, but I'm not going to do the tech news jingle.
	I just want to make a prediction.
	And the prediction is, when you listen to your favorite tech horny podcast, here's what it will sound like this week.
	Elon Musk is going to take us to Mars!
	He's going to bus!
	Elon!
	Elon!
	Oh, Elon!
	As Elon Musk announced his Kickstarter, because that's what the guy does.
	Another damn Kickstarter.
	The guy's just doing Kickstarters to fund his crazy ideas, and everybody lines up.
	Everyone lines up.
	Here he is, his Kickstarter for Mars.
	And if we get the cost of moving to Mars to be roughly equivalent to a median house price in the U.S., which is around $200,000, Then I think the probability of establishing a self-seating civilization is very high.
	I think it would almost certainly occur.
	Not everyone would want to go.
	In fact, I think a relatively small number of people from Earth would want to go.
	But enough would want to go and who could afford the trope.
	That's right.
	He's pitching.
	Hey, do you have a $200,000 house?
	You can go to Mars.
	This guy.
	Wow.
	This guy's out of control.
	As soon as he wants to die on Mars, like I said...
	Can't start soon enough.
	Get started.
	Get started already.
	We'll send you there now.
	I just have the new school shooting thing I think we need to get out of the way.
	Okay.
	Which was not blown out of proportion like it could have been.
	And I think what's weird about the new school shooting is this...
	You know, again, drugs seem to be some issue here.
	Psychotropic drugs.
	And this kid, piece of information here will be at the end.
	It was unknown to me.
	Move that patient towards the helicopter.
	Cell phones in the pockets of frightened parents across this small town started burning up at 1.45 p.m.
	just before the end of classes.
	What's that?
	There were Samsung phones.
	When he said, somebody pointed this out, this is a little interruption, but when they mentioned cell phones burning up, and then they mentioned, they said they had something about a Samsung washing machine exploding.
	Yeah, I heard about that.
	Somebody pointed out that, hey, you're dealing with ABC owned by Disney, the largest shareholder, Steve Jobs' wife, Apple, associates Samsung and phones with blowing up.
	Including their washing machines now blow up.
	Yeah, blow it like they blow up.
	Yeah, let's go.
	This small town started burning up at 1.45 p.m.
	just before the end of classes for the day at Townville Elementary.
	We did have a report of a third patient.
	Police say a local teenager armed with a handgun appeared at a playground behind the school and started shooting at teachers and children.
	I think there were some students out on the recess area and the shooting may have occurred there and the teacher got the students in the classroom.
	A young boy was shot in the leg, another boy in the foot.
	A teacher trying to keep the kids safe was shot in the shoulder.
	One of the children had to be flown to a hospital in Greenville, South Carolina.
	Police got here fast.
	In seven minutes they had the teen in custody.
	Snipers went to the roof to clear the building while this all too familiar scene of moving children by school bus to a nearby church played out.
	Parents couldn't get to their children fast enough.
	About two miles from the school, another crime scene.
	Police say it's the father of the shooter, 46-year-old Jeffrey Osborne, and he's been shot dead.
	Police say the son was homeschooled, and they're not sure yet why he targeted the elementary school.
	School is canceled for the rest of the week.
	I hadn't heard any of that either.
	Damn, so he killed his dad?
	Yeah, he's homeschooled.
	Oh, man.
	There you go.
	Homeschooling crazy.
	Just crazy children.
	You're making crazy kids.
	Yeah, the kid was obviously on some drug.
	Oh, man.
	Well, I need to do something uplifting to play us out, then, because this is too depressing.
	Okay.
	I got a fake commercial, and I thought it was funny.
	Oh.
	Why, you don't want to hear it?
	No, I do, absolutely.
	Absolutely.
	If you don't like it, you tell me stop and I'll stop.
	Are you feeling sad and overwhelmed by the state of the world?
	Do you also like drawing attention to yourself with the least amount of effort possible?
	Then we have the app for you.
	Introducing TP, the Thoughts and Prayers app.
	Awesome.
	How does it work?
	Just download it to your phone.
	Then once a tragic event occurs somewhere in the world, TP will post thoughts and prayers on your behalf for all of your friends and family to see.
	Cool.
	There's been a mass stabbing in New York and my thoughts and prayers were automatically posted.
	I feel like a better person and I didn't have to do anything.
	And you'll never have to again.
	Forget about cumbersome donations or boring policy changes.
	With TP, screaming into the void has never been easier or better for your ego.
	Now, it seems like everyone is sharing their thoughts and prayers, but I want to show that mine are more important.
	How can we do that?
	You can sign up for TP Premium at $39.99 a month.
	For the price of a mere 5,200 Pokecoins, TP Premium will shoot your posts to the top of social media feeds and post your thoughts and prayers first, before anyone else's.
	Wow, I can't wait for the next school shooting.
	And neither can we, because TP Premium also gives each of your posts an automatic 1,000 likes.
	Finally, a way to help that also helps me.
	Hey, there was a bombing in Turkey, but TP didn't post for me.
	What happened?
	Stuff like that happens all the time in those countries.
	We want to pay attention to important civilized places.
	Plus, you and your friends don't even know where Turkey is.
	No, I don't.
	Thoughts and Prayers app.
	When you want people to know that you care.
	Now on the App Store and Android Google Play.
	Hey, you know, I was listening to that thing, and that's not a bad idea.
	How about what we could make the Love and Light app instead of Thoughts and Prayers?
	I think Love and Light is better than Thoughts and Prayers.
	Well, maybe.
	We have to think about it.
	We need some app developers.
	Oh, boy, that was fun.
	All right.
	Well, we're off.
	We're off until Sunday.
	Yeah, Sunday, Sunday.
	Sunday, fun day.
	That's right, everybody.
	Hey, yo, yo, yo, yo.
	Oh, and on Sunday we have to talk about what I'm going to talk about at the radio forum, the Newhouse Radio Forum in New York next week.
	Oh, you're going to New York to talk at a forum?
	Yeah, with the CEO of NPR, you know, the chief marketing officer from iHeart.
	I mean, it's going to be mainstream and then me Thursday after the show.
	Today?
	No, no, no.
	Next week.
	Next week.
	Okay.
	Start thinking about it was my thing.
	So you're going to give a talk?
	I'm on a panel.
	Well, I have to have my zingers to do my go podcasting bit.
	Yeah.
	Mic drop.
	All right, everybody.
	Thank you very much.
	Thank you for your support.
	Remember, we have another show coming up on Sunday.
	Dvorak.org slash NA. Until then, coming to you from the crackpot condo here in the skyscraper downtown Austin, Texas.
	If you're looking forward, it's FEMA Region 6.
	In the morning, everybody, I'm Adam Curry.
	And from northern Silicon Valley, where I should finish with the Confucius say, but I'm not going to.
	I'm John C. Dvorak.
	We will be back on Sunday right here on No Agenda.
	Adios, mofos!
	This is a rowdy cry.
	No, no, no, no.
	I don't want you guys to break anything while you're here.
	No, no, no, no.
	I told you that the civil rights of LGBT Americans is...
	yeah hold on a second okay you know what now yeah now Hey!
	Listen, you're in my house.
	You're not going to get a good response from me by interrupting me like this.
	I'm sorry.
	I'm sorry.
	No, no, no, no, no.
	Shame on you.
	You shouldn't be doing this.
	You can either stay and be quiet, or we'll have to take you out.
	Alright, can we have this person removed, please?
	I'm just gonna wait until we get this done.
	Okay, where was I? As a general rule, I am just fine with a few hecklers.
	But not when I'm up in the house.
	My attitude is that if you're eating the actual hors d'oeuvres, you know what I'm saying?
	We are.
	There would be an examination of me and the wellness as if we are and what we've done.
	And based on that.
	Well, climate change.
	I think I think the world is getting warmer.
	I think that it's man cause.
	I think that it's man cause.
	Should we take the long-term view when it comes to global warming?
	And the long-term view is that in billions of years, the sun is going to actually grow and encompass the earth, right?
	So global warming is in our future.
	I think I could stand up there for the whole today and not say anything.
	It's going to emerge as a leader.
	And what is a lot about it?
	What is a lap ball?
	May I have your attention, please?
	Oh, Zika.
	Oh, Zika.
	Zika, Zika, Zika, Zika.
	A little baby with a little bitty head.
	With a baby with a small head.
	They're going to have to make a little head.
	You watch.
	Zika, Zika, Zika, Zika, Zika.
	Yeah.
	Where's the money?
	1.9 billion dollars.
	Zika, Zika, Zika, Zika, Zika.
	Yeah.
	Where's the money?
	Let's have it now.
	Zika, Zika, Zika, Zika, Zika.
	Yeah.
	Where's the money?
	Small heads are coming.
	You're going to do it.
	You watch.
	We're going to have a problem here.
	I got ants.
	I got ants.
	I don't know if you had ants.
	We had ant invasion.
	I was thinking if you desiccated a big pile of ants and then ground them to a powder like a fine grind of black pepper, we were having dinner and I got an ant somehow in the meal and I ate it.
	These things are peppery.
	I got ants.
	I got ants.
	And then you see, you find all the ones that are roaming around you.
	Although I backed them off by doing the burning trick.
	Just torch them.
	And you leave them there.
	The only ant, there are occasional moments where there's an ant that you do not torch, and that's an ant that's carrying one of the dead ants back.
	I got ants.
	Ants.
	Ants.
	Amen.
	Fist bump.
	The best podcast in the universe!

▲