Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Nov. 27, 2016 - No Agenda

02:55:42

881: Ant Wars

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Buffoon.
	A buffoon, I tell ya.
	Adam Curry.
	John C. Devorak.
	It's Sunday, November 27th, 2016.
	This is your award-winning Gitmo Nation Media Assassination Episode 881.
	This is no agenda.
	Feeling fuzzy under a cloud of mold dust and broadcasting live from the darkest corners of the internet.
	We're not on the list yet in the morning, everybody.
	I'm Adam Curry.
	And from northern Silicon Valley, where Plato's a woman who makes love with baseball MVP takes one for the team.
	I'm John C. Devorak.
	I love how Plato was into baseball back in the day.
	This is an unknown fact.
	Plato loved baseball.
	He was all over the game.
	All over it, I tell you.
	So it struck Friday morning, John, the mold, but the bad mold here, the one that puts me to sleep for 18 hours a day.
	What mold is this that we know?
	I don't know what a mold it is.
	Every year we have to listen to this.
	Why don't you just get a good heap of filter?
	I have it!
	I have everything.
	I've got ozone blasts and I've got everything.
	I can't stop it.
	It must be very susceptible to just a minute, minute Amount of, uh, mold.
	Yeah, I'm probably very, I'm probably very susceptible to that, yeah.
	Uh, so anyway, so, you know, this Friday, I pretty much was sleeping all day.
	I'm like, what's going on?
	It took me hours to figure it out.
	I'm like, oh, I know what's going on!
	It's the damn mold!
	Oh, crap.
	Mold?
	Yeah, yeah.
	Uh...
	So where do we start today?
	Well, first of all, this is...
	Oh, I'm sorry.
	No, I'm sorry.
	We do have a place to start.
	I'm sorry.
	My mistake.
	The following podcast contains news that is fake, unlike your anal leakage, which is real.
	Listener discretion is advised.
	All right.
	Back to that.
	I have a weather report because I like to bitch about this sort of thing.
	Yeah.
	This is from last night.
	And there's more rain moving out of the peninsula and the South Bay at this hour, all being pushed by a deep low up around Redding.
	And that means more showers through the early hours of Sunday morning.
	We'll have a complete forecast just ahead.
	So what is the actual weather?
	It's Sunday morning.
	I got up at 7.
	It's Sunday morning now.
	It's 9.
	It's Sunday morning.
	Sunday morning.
	Yeah.
	It's sunny.
	It's sunny.
	In fact, the sun's coming into the office blinding me.
	It's so sunny.
	Well, this is an outrage.
	This guy should be fired.
	He's not doing his job.
	He's taking the cues from the weather.
	He was actually the anchor.
	I just clipped it off.
	I know it's not going to be raining tomorrow morning.
	And indeed, it's not.
	And there's no rain clouds on the horizon either.
	Like, it's going to be raining in an hour or something.
	Like, no, nothing.
	Well, that's my only thing.
	I'm good for the show now.
	Well, great.
	Thank you.
	That's very helpful.
	I heard something.
	In fact, it was Obama or somebody going on about climate change, and they were saying, they now changed the whole meme to 99% of all scientists.
	Well, I have this clip, John.
	And I wasn't planning on rolling it out here, but it is a part of...
	The Ministry of Truthiness Division of our show notes.
	And since we're talking about fake news and you just brought in the weather report, I actually have two clips that seamlessly fold into that.
	Christiana Anumpur, who of course now works for CNN. She's a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.
	She was speaking at the CPJ, which is the Committee for Protecting Journalists.
	Committee or Commission?
	One of the two.
	Committee or Commission.
	And she was receiving an award.
	Do you know about this?
	What?
	It's the Benjamin Button Memorial Award.
	Benjamin Button?
	Oh, I'm sorry.
	The Burton Benjamin Memorial.
	Okay.
	So what is the Burton Benjamin Memorial Award?
	I have no idea.
	Really?
	Dodging bullets?
	I've never heard of it.
	Oh, yeah, exactly.
	We don't qualify for these kinds of, you know, fine awards.
	We'll never get an award, ever.
	So she was...
	No, I'm not going to happen.
	You got the podcasting award, I think.
	Oh, yeah.
	Oh, no, that's true.
	That's true.
	But not a journalistic award.
	So this is the...
	Peabody.
	We'll get a Peabody.
	Anyone can get a Peabody.
	Look at Richard Engel.
	Anyone can get that.
	I don't want one.
	So Christiane Anupur, she has an acceptance speech, you know, like a 15-20 minute speech.
	And I was able to pull a couple of things from this because she is speaking to the elite news media, the way they speak about everything.
	And she actually opened up with what she felt was the most important story that the journalists need to be covering, and that is, as you just touched on, it's climate change.
	Like many people watching where I was overseas, I admit that I, like them, was shocked by the exceptionally high bar put before one candidate and the exceptionally low bar put before another candidate.
	It also appeared that much of the press, much of the media, was tying itself in knots, trying to differentiate between balance, between objectivity, neutrality, and crucially, the truth.
	We cannot continue the old paradigm.
	We cannot, for instance, keep saying...
	Like it was over global warming, where 99.9% of the science, the empirical facts...
	What?
	Now, remember, she's winning a journalistic award, John.
	This is what makes it so great.
	Oh, yeah.
	Yeah.
	It's even crazier what she says.
	I'll listen to the whole thing.
	Let me get the whole bit here.
	Warming, where 99.9% of the science, the empirical facts, the evidence, is given equal play with the tiny minority of deniers.
	And by the way, that's not even true.
	She's a liar.
	That's correct.
	We pointed it out on a recent PBS show where they did not have anybody saying anything.
	It was just all one-sided.
	Right.
	Yeah, this is bullcrap.
	Well, also, the 99.9 with a very small bunch of dissenters, that's not true.
	There's a 30,000 group strong minimum.
	You already went over the 97 point whatever it is thing, which was bullcrap to be...
	I mean, you know, if these people wanted people, the skeptics, to take them seriously, why do they constantly lie about this?
	Well, I have had thoughts about this, and what you're hearing, and you'll hear in the next clip, I want to finish this one first, you'll hear it in the next clip, That the way journalists operate, when they read something, if they haven't even seen a video, if it's a viral video, but they read about it in the New York Times, that's the story, you see?
	They don't need to go and investigate what the New York Times apparently has already done.
	It'll become apparent in the other two clips here.
	Let me finish this one up.
	Let's just go back and hear that fine statistic, which is just not even true according to the official statement.
	The global warming, where 99.9% of science, the empirical facts, the evidence, is in equal play with the tiny minority of deniers.
	I learned a long, long time ago when I was covering the genocide.
	Now, this was actually very interesting, what she's about to say here.
	So if you really listen to what she says, she learned something a long, long time ago.
	Then she tells us what she learned, which kind of makes me think she was complicit.
	A long, long time ago, when I was covering the genocide and ethnic cleansing in Bosnia, never to equate victim and aggressor, never to create a false moral or factual equivalence.
	Because then, if you do, particularly in situations like that, You are party and accomplice to the most unspeakable crimes and consequences.
	Did she do something wrong?
	Is that what she's saying?
	That she was a partaker in atrocities?
	Man, that is a convoluted anecdote.
	Isn't it, though?
	You have to play it again, and I have to listen more carefully.
	Try it one more time.
	All right, here we go.
	You do, particularly in situations like that, you are party...
	Oh, I'm sorry.
	Let me roll it back a little more.
	Here we go.
	Never to create a false moral or factual equivalence.
	Because then, if you do, particularly in situations like that, you are party and accomplice to the most unspeakable crimes and consequences.
	So I believe in being truthful, not neutral.
	What do you think happened there?
	She did something bad.
	That's my takeaway from it.
	Yeah.
	Okay.
	Now let's listen to a little bit more from her.
	Now remember, this is a prestigious award, apparently.
	It looked like a big gala.
	Gala, gala, gala.
	I love them galas.
	Yeah, she had tons of jewels on.
	Jewels.
	Jewels.
	It looked high-end, let's put it that way.
	Now, okay, so again, this is from the Benjamin Button Award acceptance speech from Christiana Anampur.
	This is what I call the meme fest.
	And when you listen to this, You think, oh my goodness, these people, just as long as someone they trust has reported it, then that's a story and they take it from there.
	We have to accept.
	That we have had our lunch handed to us by the very same social media that we have so slavishly been devoted to.
	True.
	The winning candidate did a very savvy end run around us.
	Oh!
	Oh no!
	They, he bypassed the gatekeeper.
	Well, this will not stand!
	And used it to go straight to the people.
	This is not okay!
	Okay!
	Combined with the most incredible development ever, which is the tsunami of fake news.
	Hold on, I gotta play a jingle.
	The tsunami of fake news, John.
	It's not just a little fake news, it is a tsunami of fake news.
	news.
	Thank you, Greg Davies.
	Forgot to credit him on the last show with his ping-pong ball.
	Here we go.
	Combined with the most incredible development ever, which is the tsunami of fake news, a.k.a.
	lies.
	Somehow, people could not, would not recognize, fact-check, or disregard these lies.
	One of the main writers of these false news sites, these articles, these lies, says...
	Wait, who could that be?
	That people are getting dumber than just passing fake reports around without fact checking.
	And we now need to ask whether technology has finally outpaced our human ability to keep up.
	Yeah, why don't you read Ted Kaczynski's little manuscript?
	Facebook needs to step up.
	Step up?
	Advertisers need not to advertise on these obviously fake news sites, some of which they know are, but just they get lots of clicks, so they get lots of money.
	Complete misunderstanding of the business there.
	We'll roll that back for a second.
	She asserts that advertisers should not advertise on those fake news sites.
	Not only do they often know that they're fake news sites, but the clicks generate lots of money.
	No.
	No.
	Maybe for the sites who are hosting the ads, but not the advertisers themselves.
	They are hoping to sell products or other services.
	Did you hear that?
	It was very interesting.
	That was a good catch because I didn't hear it, but I think it was a leap of faith.
	It was one of those things where she says one thing that meant another.
	No, I think...
	Which makes her fake news propagator.
	Yeah, fake news!
	...on these obviously fake news sites, some of which they know are, but just they get lots of clicks, so they get lots of money.
	No.
	Wael Ghonim, who was one of the fathers of the Arab Spring so-called social media revolution, now says, quote, the same medium that so effectively transmits a howling message of change also appears to undermine the actual ability to make that change.
	Social media amplifies the human tendency to bind with one's own kind.
	It tends to reduce complex social challenges to mobilizing slogans that reverberate in echo chambers of the like-minded rather than engage in persuasion, in dialogue, and to reach for consensus.
	Thank you for deconstructing how social media works.
	Hate speech and untruths appear alongside good intentions and truths.
	Now the question is which is which?
	So I feel that right now we face an existential crisis, a real threat to the very relevance and usefulness of our profession.
	Now, more than ever, I genuinely believe that we need to recommit to real reporting across a real nation and a real world in which journalism and democracy are in mortal peril.
	You know what you need for that, Anupur?
	You need clicks and money, something the news business doesn't have.
	Including by foreign powers like Russia.
	Oh, there it is.
	Who pay to churn out and to place these false news articles and lies in many of our press.
	They hack into democratic systems.
	What is it with the word hack?
	That whenever someone says, you can set your clock on this.
	Whenever someone says hack, it's always, HACK! Hack.
	Hack.
	Listen.
	They hack into...
	Hack.
	Hack.
	Why is that?
	Have you noticed this?
	I like to say it.
	It's one of those words with that hard K. It's a catchy word.
	Hack.
	Yeah.
	These lies in many of our press.
	They hack into democratic systems, not just here as they're accused of, but also now allegedly in crucial democratic experiences that are going on in Germany and France and elsewhere in Europe.
	They're hacking the democratic experiences?
	This will not stand.
	What the hell is she saying?
	I don't know, but it's in my pants.
	Here's the last one, short clip.
	And this really wraps it up where you'll see that when the news elite get together, this is what they do.
	They just believe in their own...
	They have their own echo chamber.
	They really do.
	I've been to these meetings.
	It's absolutely a fact.
	I want you to talk about that after this clip.
	So here she is.
	Now, she is going to tie into the alt-right NPI conference where six people are going, hail Trump.
	Now, she has not seen the video.
	This is what makes it fascinating.
	This reporter who has not seen the video is going to tell you how atrocious this moment was based upon, really, her reading about it, I presume, in the New York Times or the Washington Post, something that she deems to be an authority.
	Have you read, you must all have read, about the Heil Victory meeting not far from the White House in Washington this weekend?
	We must be doing many, many stories about the dangerous right, the dangerous rise of the far right, not just here but also across Europe.
	And since when did neo-Nazism and anti-Semitism stop being a crucial litmus test in the United States?
	APPLAUSE So there you go.
	She says, I'm sure you read about this horrible atrocity.
	I'm sure you all read it, because she read it.
	She didn't see it.
	She didn't see it.
	Yeah, it's too much work to see it.
	I don't understand that.
	I know you're bringing it up as a point.
	I think it is a point.
	I don't understand why you just don't look at these damn videos.
	I don't understand.
	How hard can it be?
	You can do a search.
	It's not hard to find.
	By the way, I will say this.
	The way YouTube organizes stuff is crap.
	I mean, if you really want to find something you don't know how to do the search properly, you'll never find it.
	They don't do date order.
	They don't do newest to oldest.
	They don't do anything like that.
	You have to have a bunch of keywords in there that find this thing.
	But anyone who's a professional journalist should be able to do it.
	I don't know why they don't.
	If they saw that, somebody should have been in the audience who saw it and said, Hey, you know, there's no there there.
	Oh, yeah, that would have made me feel better.
	Tell me about these meetings, about these...
	You were saying that you've been there and this is all...
	This is really...
	This is the echo chamber.
	Any group of journalists and editors, there's like a built-in hierarchy.
	And it's like these meetings are always...
	It is an echo chamber, exactly.
	They're all very liberal.
	The whole operations are all liberal.
	And the hierarchy is what's interesting because it's like you have these...
	Especially in the bigger meetings.
	The editors and the managing and executive editors, editor-in-chief, those are the big three, in a newspaper.
	And they're all hanging out with each other and talking about the business and how we're going to go forward.
	And then you have the troops, which are all the journalists that work for a living.
	They're either called reporters or staff reporters or not too many correspondents, which are the...
	Agents.
	Agents of change, John.
	Agents.
	And they, these guys are all just all progressives, all of them, with very few exceptions.
	There's maybe one or two, and you see them, they're hanging, the guys who are the more conservative members of the media, which are very few.
	Show up and they all know each other.
	There's like all five of them in a group of 200.
	They all gather together.
	I don't know what we're going to do.
	It's terrible.
	And everyone's lockstep and they're just as good as you say.
	It's a feeding frenzy of what do we...
	And they all think they own the place.
	And they can't do crap.
	I mean, if you look at the last newsletter I sent out...
	Which was a good one.
	I liked it a lot.
	That was really good.
	With all the covers of the daily news and you have stuff...
	Trump is through because he criticized McCain.
	Trump is done because he did this.
	He'll never be president.
	My favorite.
	Trump is Hitler.
	My favorite.
	Yeah, the Trump is Hitler one was bound to be in there.
	But if you look at all...
	All these assertions that this is the problem that we had with David Brooks on the PBS show.
	The guy doesn't know what he does.
	They have no clue.
	They are so removed from society that they have no idea what they're talking about.
	This is a business, I say it all the time, this is a business that has so much insight that they didn't even see their own demise coming.
	They're great!
	This is a business where you sat in a meeting where the guy admitted a managing editor...
	No, no.
	I'll tell you the story.
	This was 1995 or 1996.
	We went to see the Tribune Company in Chicago and we sat there and they were like, well, we've got everything under cold control.
	We've got the Storify system, whatever that was called.
	What was the number that was like?
	Vignette.
	Vignette.
	Thank you.
	Yeah.
	Wow.
	Woo-hoo.
	We've got the vignette system.
	We're all good to see.
	But, you know, what's happening, as far as I understand your business, you make money mainly on classified ads.
	And have you seen this thing called Craigslist?
	We believe that they're going to eat your lunch there, so you've got to come up with other ways.
	Maybe starting your own Craigslist would be an idea, but okay, whatever you want to do, you've got to do something.
	And there was a...
	Have you seen this building?
	The Tribune Company has been around for over 100 years.
	No, there's that, but there's also the meeting we had in San Francisco with the Examiner Chronicle.
	Oh, with Hearst.
	And they admitted...
	The editor admitted that they had been offered Craig's List, the entire product.
	Oh, shit, yes, you're right.
	Once his name comes in, I can't remember the guy who runs it, but I don't remember his name.
	Craig.
	Craig.
	Craig Newmark.
	Craig.
	Craig Newmark walks in and says, look what I've done.
	Do you guys want it?
	We'll just split it or whatever.
	And they said, we don't want to do ads.
	We don't need you.
	That is the most, that is the classic.
	These are the people that are trying to tell us how to think.
	And what our opinion should be like.
	And that's the kind of decisions that they make.
	Well, you know what?
	Then I'll just fill out the A-block with more of this, since I think we're on a roll here.
	Let me give you the opinion of another elitist, Andrea Mitchell, who somehow is...
	Was she always a journalist?
	Where does she come from, actually?
	I'd have to look it up.
	You might want to look that up.
	Why don't you check the book of knowledge while we play this?
	This is her version and her take on the Hail Trump story.
	Supporters of Donald Trump's election and the alt-right movement gathered in Washington this weekend at the Reagan building, a government facility, to celebrate with a white supremacist speech and echoes of signature language from Nazi Germany.
	As uncovered by the Atlantic magazine, some members of the audience then jumped to their feet.
	You can see this with arms extended.
	And an Atlantic reporter at present says he heard some shouting Heil in German, not Hail, the translation in English.
	Okay.
	NBC News was not present to independently confirm what happened.
	Jonathan, we've never seen anything like this in an election cycle.
	There has been plenty of white supremacist stuff out there.
	You track it all the time.
	But this is pretty noteworthy.
	It's not part of Donald Trump's transition or administration and creation.
	It's an independent support group.
	But let's just translate for people.
	When he says as Europeans, when he talks about Yep.
	My struggle.
	Yep.
	That's Mein Kampf.
	Okay.
	It's Mein Kampf.
	Gotcha.
	Of course.
	My struggle is Mein Kampf.
	Wow.
	That's a borderline clip of the day.
	I'll take that.
	I'll take a borderline.
	All right.
	So there's kind of a new beat that I'm trying to work on, and I need a lot of help from the producers because it's very time-intensive.
	What is happening with podcasts in particular is we have a lot of journalistic podcasts which are created by people who do real mainstream work or what they would consider real journalism.
	And they go on podcasts and they let down their guard and they start talking the way they really feel and the way they talk in the newsroom.
	And this gives us some of the best deconstruction moments, I feel, that we can get.
	Because then you hear their hubris, you hear their arrogance, you hear their elitism, and quite honestly, their globalist view of the world.
	So the time-intensive part of it is, of course, listening to all these shitty podcasts.
	And believe me, a lot of them are pretty crap.
	The New York Times has a podcast.
	Let me see what it's called here.
	Oh yeah.
	One of the worst.
	Yeah, it's called The Run-Up.
	The Run-Up.
	And this particular episode, I pulled a couple of quotes.
	This will give an example of what I'm trying to do.
	Some of it's good, some of it's okay, but if you really listen, it's quite disturbing to hear these people talk.
	So you have Maggie Haverman, and I guess she's a star reporter for the New York Times.
	Then you have Ross, what's his name, Stafford?
	What's his name, Stafford?
	Some opinion guy, opinion columnist?
	I don't know, but opinion columnist named Ross.
	Don't worry about it.
	It doesn't matter.
	It's a host, Michael.
	Okay.
	So what they're talking about is the visit Donald Trump brought to the New York Times.
	And they were all three in the room.
	And they also have clips.
	It's kind of meta-meta, because they're talking about when Trump was there.
	The whole event was recorded, so they play some clips of the event, what they're talking about.
	And, of course, we're meta on top of that, playing clips of them playing clips.
	So it may get a little confusing.
	I know!
	You did that wrong, man.
	This is how it goes.
	Alright, so Maggie Haberman talking about Trump and his general, just his demeanor.
	He came into our editorial board meeting many, many months ago and as a candidate, he repeatedly went on and on about how it was a great honor.
	So, I mean, I do think that there is, to the extent that Trump is easily defined by a lot of, many of them conflicting impulses, many of them dating back to, I think, decades ago.
	He is still the boy from Queens who looks at the Times as sort of the crown jewel and wants a level of respect.
	I don't think he would have been here if he didn't want that.
	And the meeting was at his request.
	Trump was actually quite calm considering the various states I've seen him in.
	This is not the first time I've been in a room with him.
	So, I have a comparison point.
	I mean, he started out a little bit defensive, I thought.
	His arms folded as he was sitting down.
	Tightly.
	Very tightly.
	Like the metaphor that came to mind was of an unhappy kid.
	Yeah.
	Sort of waiting for something really bad to happen.
	You hear this?
	I love these people.
	So that's what they thought.
	Oh, he looked like a little kid.
	Why didn't they say penchant child?
	That was such an issue when it was said about Obama.
	It appeared as a penchant child before us.
	Do you remember that?
	We dealt with it appropriately.
	Who was it?
	Was it Romney or someone who called Obama a penchant child?
	And everyone was like, racist, racist!
	Because that meant boy?
	Don't you remember that?
	Yeah.
	Vaguely.
	It was sort of getting ready to endure punishment, right?
	Right, right.
	Yes, right.
	He stole out the punishment.
	But he loosened up as time went on.
	He sort of got that off his chest, and then he talked about essentially the greatest hits of the primary and of the general election, and his rallies, and how he had captured the mood, and he just felt it with Michigan, and he had added a final stop, and he had heard word that Hillary Clinton thought she was going to lose Michigan, so that's how they did it.
	It was really fascinating.
	It was really fascinating.
	Do you know these kinds of people don't talk like this?
	It was really fascinating.
	It was just so awesome.
	Here we go with their back behind their scenes.
	Now, this was a little tidbit, which did not make it into the article about Trump.
	And I thought this was very newsworthy.
	But to your point, that's another impulse that was on display in this meeting, which is Trump is...
	I think I described him as sort of like the hair salon gossip during the campaign.
	I mean, there is this, you know, did you hear quality to him?
	And he said something about, you know, there was one thing that Obama is very afraid of.
	You know, I'm not going to say what it is.
	He wanted us to ask Obama himself.
	But I mean, this is really unheard of.
	And so just to further explain that episode, when Trump said...
	There's one thing Barack Obama told me that he's scared of and we should all be scared of, but I won't tell you.
	And then someone followed up and said, oh no, please tell us.
	And he said, no, you'll have to ask.
	Well, where's the journalism?
	I'm interested.
	What could it be?
	I don't know, scabies?
	I have no idea.
	I just found it peculiar that if a president-elect said that to me at the New York Times, it'd be like, okay, I'm going to go ask.
	I see no evidence of them asking.
	Of course not.
	It was actually, when you hear a little later clip I have, which I'll probably introduce in this segment because of where we're going, it's all explained.
	Okay.
	bit of the podcast that I found interesting as they are now like journalism students.
	They're so interested in each other and how they ask the question and, you know, how did you feel when you engaged and what was the feeling like when he didn't answer your question?
	It's really, it's creepy.
	Can I ask you when you, about the experience of asking the president elect Donald Trump a question, you had a chance in this meeting and I watched you.
	Oh, I watched you.
	Because I was kind of marveling.
	I was trying to think how long you would go, how you'd frame the question.
	Oh, you're marveling at what you were doing.
	I was marveling at your question style.
	You've already asked a question.
	I know, but I still was really interested in what you asked and how you were about to ask it.
	And it was essentially, can you get something as mammoth as an infrastructure project through this Republican congressman?
	And what did he say?
	What did you say, John?
	Nothing.
	Oh, I thought you said something.
	Did he answer your question?
	And, like, what's the overall feeling you got of the interaction?
	I mean, the feeling...
	Well, the interaction started with, you know, we were all identifying ourselves, and he said something to the...
	What feeling did you get?
	I know!
	How did you feel when you asked that question?
	If you were a tree, what kind of a tree would you be in this context?
	This is exactly what I wanted to hear you say.
	Yeah.
	Oh, my God.
	I think that again sort of confirms just the sense you have that Trump takes the New York Times seriously and takes our criticism, bipartisan criticism, since I'm obviously a conservative columnist, that he takes it to heart, not necessarily in positive ways.
	Because we're awesome.
	Judging by his Twitter feed, but it does matter to him.
	So there's that.
	In terms of the question, I mean, what I was trying to tease out, and he's obviously not going to get into this, is less the specific infrastructure bill question and more just this broad conflict of visions between Trumpism, As an economic philosophy and Paul Ryan's economic philosophy.
	Now notice that the word Trumpism is now a word they use internally.
	Which, I don't know, just...
	A good catch.
	You find that interesting that they're calling that that way.
	Let me see.
	Oh, okay.
	Now this, again, I don't think I saw this reported.
	This is about Steve Brannon.
	And, of course, the New York Times...
	Bannon, I'm sorry.
	The New York Times has a huge issue with the alt-right, obviously, because they're evil.
	They're Nazis.
	Heil Trump.
	They're doing stories the New York Times not doing.
	Right.
	And of course, it is impossible for the president-elect to reconcile Breitbart with his views on the alt-right.
	None of this makes sense.
	And this Bannon, this guy, I mean, he's no good.
	He's no good.
	There is a fairly complicated portrait of Steve Bannon that somebody can paint.
	Okay.
	There have been complaints about him, but there's, you know, I think from some past employees and so forth, but there's not a whole lot of hurt.
	Now listen, this is very interesting what she says here.
	There's not a whole lot of hard evidence or video or whatever of him.
	There's nothing!
	Like the old farts shaking my fist at the television.
	Yeah, I'll give you a second to shake it.
	Or video or whatever of him making anti-Semitic statements.
	A lot of this comes from these divorce filings from a long time ago.
	Oh, there you go.
	So, all this anti-Semitic stuff, there's no proof, she's saying.
	The New York Times is saying there's no proof.
	How come they don't write that?
	Because it doesn't fit the narrative.
	I've been watching Bannon's speeches.
	Yeah.
	I've seen one.
	And This guy is really, he's a financial guy, and I think, and I've been thinking, why does Trump even have him?
	Extremely intelligent, insightful Goldman Sachs guy who knows the ropes, and he knows what's going on with the economy.
	This is what this is about.
	It's got nothing to do with anti-Semitism or anything else.
	Go listen to some of his old speeches.
	He did a couple around 2011, 2012 that were pretty fascinating.
	Very good.
	No, there's nothing in there about race or anything.
	It's just about the economy.
	He's in there to be the go-to guy when the economy collapses, which it will do invariably during this Trump first term.
	It is fascinating to me that a couple of podcasters have to break it down to understand what he's doing in the White House as advisor.
	Whereas the New York Times can't seem to come up with that gem.
	I mean, his background is well known.
	Yes, Goldman Sachs.
	Yes, and when you listen to his speeches, especially the ones done around the 2012 timeframe, he does a lot of...
	Long exposition at the beginning about the economy, where it stands, where the trillions that we owe, how it's going to break down, how the bond market's going to go, when the bond market's going to collapse.
	But he talks about the bond market collapsing.
	He's about that.
	That's what he's about.
	He's not about, what do people think he's doing there?
	Well, they think he's infiltrating the alt-right propaganda machine of fake news into the Trump administration.
	Do you know how he made his money?
	Well, he made a lot of money being an investor in television shows.
	Yes, and which one in particular?
	Seinfeld.
	That's right.
	He has a big piece of that.
	I don't know if it's a big piece, but he has a piece that's making him a lot of money.
	And apparently at Gauls, everybody else has got a lesser piece of the action.
	Yeah, because no one wanted to touch the production.
	No one wanted to touch it.
	And he said, oh, and he was at Goldman Sachs, and he put together some kind of deal, and as a part of the deal, of course, his fee was he got a piece of the action on the back end, and that's where he's making his money.
	Beautiful.
	All right.
	Right Bart content, obviously.
	Wait for this.
	This is great.
	Wait a minute, what did she say?
	Breitbart content can be a different matter.
	So Trump basically equated Breitbart with the New York Times.
	This galls her to some degree, I believe.
	What?
	Yes, I think they don't like the equivalencies.
	No, but it gets better.
	So the top of the pyramid, supposedly, there's nothing that's like it.
	Nothing, nothing.
	By the way, just as an aside in this clip, I've been watching a lot of these kind of panel shows where they bring New York Times reporters.
	And the New York Times never used to send a lot of people.
	And the New York Times...
	I'd say 10 years ago were the Andrew Ross Sorkin types.
	My friend Markoff over in San Francisco would be one of these guys.
	And there's a bunch of other ones.
	And they're New York Times reporters.
	They come on.
	They wear the blue shirt.
	They're kind of just those regimental tie of some sort.
	They're very buttoned down.
	They have a certain kind of a look.
	They usually have the small little Himmler glasses.
	And they...
	Times reporters are slobs.
	Yeah, you're right.
	There was a woman on one of the shows and she's wearing like a black leather jacket and she was she was not even articulate.
	And she was from The New York Times.
	And I'm noticing that The New York Times and everybody else is retiring.
	Yeah.
	The New York Times who was taking the reporters who are taking over The New York Times are of a different style.
	And they're all Hillary.
	They're worse than the ones that you're listening to now.
	Well, I think this woman may be one of the new ones.
	It could be.
	And listen to this tidbit, which, again, I heard no reporting on and I think is quite bold.
	They cover things.
	They're a publication.
	Breitbart, first of all, is just a publication.
	And, you know, they cover stories like you cover stories.
	Now, they are certainly a much more conservative paper, to put it mildly, than the New York Times.
	But Breitbart really is a news organization that's become quite successful.
	And it's got readers, and it does cover subjects on the right, but it covers subjects on the left also.
	I mean, it's a pretty big thing.
	And he helped build it into a pretty successful news organization.
	So there was that.
	And then he said...
	So there was that.
	There was that.
	She can't stand it.
	Okay, so there was that.
	Like, somehow he thinks, Breitbart is like the New York Times organization.
	So there was that.
	And then he said, if I had any thought that Steve Bannon associated with the alt-right at all, and he specifically said that, I wouldn't hire him.
	I mean, Bannon said earlier this year that Breitbart is a platform for the alt-right movement.
	So whether Trump knows that specific fact, I doubt.
	But Trump is very, very good at sort of...
	Why didn't you bring it up at the meeting?
	Wait for it.
	...something and making it a reality, even if there are facts that go against it.
	And what I found so extraordinary about that moment was that he...
	It was this strangely mild-tempered effort at reconciliation where he said, if there's something about Steve Bannon that you discover that's somehow at odds with anything I'm saying, I want you to call me.
	I want you to tell me.
	No, I'll tell you what, I know him very well.
	I will say this, and I will say this, if I thought that strongly, if I thought that he was doing anything or had any ideas that were different than the ideas that you would think, I would ask him very politely to leave.
	But in the meantime...
	I think he's been treated very unfairly.
	It's very interesting because a lot of people are coming to his defense right now.
	And by the way, if you see something or get something where you feel that I'm wrong and you have some...
	I would love to hear it.
	You can call me.
	Arthur can call me.
	I would love to hear it.
	How about that?
	I didn't hear that offer.
	I didn't hear of this.
	This is great.
	What did they do?
	They just told us in this little podcast that Breitbart's...
	Bannon is a creep.
	Yeah.
	And he's like, he said he's alt-right or whatever, or the publication is.
	Why didn't they bring it up at the meeting?
	Or why don't they call him and tell him, hey, guess what?
	Yeah, alt-right.
	No good.
	That was what was so fascinating.
	I mean, given the severity of the topic and given the number of subjects that Breitbart has covered in the past and how they've covered it, it was a bit of a strange gesture.
	He's saying, tell me if you noticed something that I probably could have noticed myself if I went online and found it, and if you find it, send it to me.
	And he doesn't go online.
	But it's what...
	See, they're already talking themselves out of it.
	They're already talking like, well, you know, so he's saying, well, call me if there's something that I couldn't have found myself.
	No, he didn't say that.
	He said, if there's anything you feel is not in line with what I'm saying, Then, with regards to Steve Bannon, I think he kind of implied anybody, but okay, Bannon, then call me, and if he does something that is against what we stand for here, then we'll politely ask him to go.
	But no, instead of that, well, this is ridiculous, and then just top it off with this last clip.
	Yeah, it's what he does to sort of make you feel, and you described it on a previous podcast, you described the experience of interviewing him as very seductive.
	Do you remember that, Michael, when you said that?
	I think I did.
	Yeah, Michael doesn't really want to remember it.
	Yeah, you said it's a very seductive experience.
	Trump is very good at making you feel as if he's reaching out to you and bringing you in, and so that's what I took that gesture to mean.
	To me, that gesture was, you know what, I hear you, I'm with you, and I'm not foreclosing it, and this is a good-faith thing.
	I suspect that if somebody called him tomorrow with, like, five examples, I don't think it would actually change much.
	Why don't you give it a try?
	Wow.
	What arrogance.
	Thank you.
	What?
	Are you okay?
	That's what she said.
	Unbelievable.
	Unbelievable.
	Just unbelievable.
	It's smugness.
	There's a bunch of...
	I don't know.
	There's a million words.
	I need a list of words.
	Well, sanctimoniously smug is our...
	Sanctimoniously smug.
	Actually, someone gave me a term.
	Sanctimonious git.
	That's a Britishism.
	It's in the Urban Dictionary.
	A person or conglomerate of two persons who is so far up his or her own or their own collective arsehole, their own mother wants to run them down.
	The sanctimonious git takes pictures during a group holiday, then tries to charge for them, even though everyone else is sharing pictures.
	Okay.
	Maybe not.
	Okay, well, still a good phrase.
	Well, let's go to something.
	Let's go jump to it because there's a little explanation of the kind of lazy journalism we're talking about here.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	In this particular thing, and this is kind of an Ask Adam.
	Oh, okay.
	All right.
	The Oxford, I don't know if you know, but the Oxford Dictionary, the Oxford boys, the boys in the UK, they have decided on their phrase or word of the year.
	Yeah, I think I know what it is.
	Well, what do you think it is?
	Is it not post-truth?
	Nuts!
	Well, we talked about it the other day, but it's okay.
	Okay, well, I was going to do a quiz and give you a bunch of potential words.
	Post truth to me is not the motive.
	Question, do you think I read the internet?
	That I wouldn't stumble across this nugget of information?
	I was hoping.
	There's stuff I don't get every second of the day.
	I'm not that lewd to it.
	But let's play this because this is the explanation about post-truth.
	And in it, they discussed modern journalism and how they don't do any...
	What you just played is exemplified by the definition of Of post-truth.
	In the aftermath of media coverage of the US presidential election campaign and Britain's vote to quit the EU, the Oxford Dictionary's groups declared post-truth to be its international word of the year.
	Well, let's have a look at some of the other linguistic trends from 2016.
	A new world deserves a new word, post-truth.
	It's Oxford Dictionary's word of the year, and you'd better get used to it.
	It means relating to or denoting circumstances in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief.
	Basically, emotion beats truth.
	Here's an example.
	Unprecedented bombing.
	Look what they've been doing to Eastern Aleppo.
	Hundreds of people were killed.
	Many have called it genocide.
	These children are too young to know what it really feels like to be safe.
	Pulling at your heartstrings rather than explaining a complex reality is what post-truth journalism seems to be about.
	Most journalists that work in the corporate media don't have any resources to do any kind of investigation, and in fact don't want to do any investigation.
	They'd rather echo the lies of politicians as if they were the truth, and this has got us into situations like Libya, like Iraq, like Afghanistan, and it's likely to get us even more engrossed in the quagmire that is Syria.
	We've destroyed countries based on lies.
	And they go on to say that the journalists...
	Who put this together?
	Who put this together?
	That was RT. Nice.
	I like it.
	The whole post...
	I didn't realize...
	I never interpreted post-truth as for mainstream journalism.
	Now it makes a lot more sense.
	Yes.
	And they went on...
	It's a long piece.
	They went on to discuss the fact that the journalists don't have the resources to do investigative reporting, and they don't really have the desire.
	And I think what you just played proves it.
	Yeah.
	They haven't even got the desire to call Trump up.
	When, you know, he comes in and they'll sit there, because that's where they're working.
	They're working out of the office, the big building in Manhattan.
	And they'll talk to him, and then afterwards they talk amongst themselves, like that little podcast, and talk about things they could do.
	Or they could have done, or they'd rather just make it up as they go along.
	And just, everybody wants to, my thing was, everybody wants to be a columnist.
	Well, you know what happens when journalists pursue the path of post-truth?
	They enter the era of post-profit is what's going to happen.
	It's not good.
	Hey, you sat there and dreamed that one up.
	Nah, chatroom gave it to me, I'll be honest.
	Oh, that shit, you stole it from the chatroom.
	I didn't steal it, they're producing for me.
	They're producing.
	Now, I do have another thing that's kind of an augment.
	Well, actually, there's part two of this.
	Let's play this just a little more.
	This is about the other meme.
	Okay.
	Another new concept that's being used to describe our new reality is filter bubble.
	You can become trapped in one by social media when algorithms selectively guess what information you'd like to see.
	But there are also way bigger bubbles than Facebook ones.
	Take the bubble.
	The majority of U.S. politicians, media outlets, and pollsters got themselves stuck in during the presidential election campaign.
	The idea of a Trump victory had got completely filtered out.
	Of course they all thought Clinton would win.
	Which Republican candidate has the best chance of winning the general election?
	Right now, Donald Trump.
	Clinton today is more likely to win.
	Hillary Clinton's going to win in a landslide.
	We could be talking landslide.
	Liberal media so upset, visibly upset, about Donald Trump's victory.
	You're awake, by the way.
	You're not having a terrible, terrible dream.
	Also, you're not dead and you haven't gone to hell.
	This is your life now.
	This is our election now.
	It's real.
	It's real.
	What if there was a place where the unthinkable didn't happen and life could continue for progressive Americans just as before?
	Now there is.
	Welcome to the bubble.
	The bubble is a planned community of like-minded free thinkers, and no one else.
	Well, not everyone got stuck in that bubble, and some of them got their own word, too.
	Yeah, that was good, that Saturday Night Live bubble.
	That was pretty funny.
	That was pretty funny.
	Well, along with this now, we now, of course, have proper not.
	You've probably seen this.
	Oh yeah.
	And by the way, before you go into this, because I don't have really any clips on it, maybe I have one.
	This is the Washington Post.
	They ran with this.
	And Marty Baron is the one who promoted.
	Marty Baron is the executive editor, I believe, of the Washington Post.
	And This is the most shameful thing.
	The Intercept, and there's a link in the show notes because I sent you the Intercept, did a takedown on this, but a bunch of other people did too, the Fortune magazine.
	This was a shameful, this was shameful fake news on the part of the Washington Post, which is just doing this to an extreme.
	These guys are killing themselves.
	This is Jeff Bezos.
	Yeah.
	Well, so the Washington Post did a long article about fake news, of course.
	And they had a blacklist.
	They had a blacklist.
	Well, the blacklist comes from PropOrNot.com, which stands for Propaganda or Not.
	And they have the list.
	Now, I'm a little insulted that we're not on the list, but okay.
	The people on the list are ridiculous.
	Yeah.
	Zero Hedge.
	Zero Hedge.
	How are they on the list?
	Corbett Report.
	You may not be your cup of tea, but not fake news.
	No, it's not fake news.
	Let's see.
	What else do we have?
	Ron Paul?
	Oh yeah, Ron Paul.
	Yeah, he's on the list.
	Breitbart's on the list.
	Well, what I found interesting is if you look at this website, then they have frequently asked questions, I guess it's under that.
	They have allies, you see.
	So they don't really say who they are, so we don't know who's behind this.
	But they have allies, and their allies are Snopes.
	Yeah.
	It says right here on the website.
	Yes, our allies are Snopes and Bellingcat.
	Okay.
	Well, you could not have more anti-Russian bloggers involved in your prop or not.
	This whole thing is, I think you're right, it's disgusting.
	The Post even linked the story to this.
	This is really, this is nothing.
	Domain name was just registered, pretty much.
	Yeah, like a few months ago.
	I mean, the Washington Post, obviously, I mean, that is the fake news operation.
	Not only that, but it's...
	I mean, this piece was fake news.
	It's McCarthyism, John.
	It's neo-McCarthyism.
	Well, a lot of people have said that.
	It's just a blacklist.
	I mean, blacklists are come and go, but it's ridiculous.
	These guys, but they should be ashamed of themselves.
	The Washington Post.
	And RT. RT is on the list.
	Of course.
	So it really is about anti-Russia.
	And this does have consequences, and it will have consequences, far-reaching consequences, for Trump and his announced plans.
	And the only guy who could tell us about that is, of course, Professor Steve Cohen.
	Professor Emeritus of...
	He should be on the list.
	I'm surprised he's not, actually.
	Here is what he believes the challenges will be that Trump will have with Russia.
	And one issue on which Trump was very different from Mrs.
	Clinton and from the whole foreign policy establishment was on our relationship with Russia.
	We now, this is me speaking, not Trump, Are in a Cold War much more dangerous than the 40-year Cold War that we thought had ended.
	There are three places where Russia and America could very easily suddenly be in a hot war.
	That's the Baltic regions, that's Ukraine, and that's Syria.
	Trump has said that he wants to do something about it to improve it.
	What he said is very fragmentary, but very different from what other people have said.
	He says he wants to work with President Putin.
	He said he thinks it would be great if Russia and the United States united to fight terrorism in Syria.
	He hasn't said anything about Ukraine.
	But these are pressing issues.
	If Trump were to move, and he shouldn't do this publicly, he should begin privately, but if he were to move toward a detente, as we used to call it, a reduction of conflict, In the relationship with Russia, and to open cooperation,
	let's say in Syria, he will find himself opposed by a fierce and powerful pro-Cold War coalition, Democratic and Republican, and including the media, here in the United States.
	He will have to fight very hard.
	The other side of that story is, is that foreign policy is the one area where an American president Can do things pretty much on his own.
	He doesn't need congressional support unless he wants a treaty.
	The question is, is Trump really gonna do it?
	And you might ask, is President Putin ready for this?
	I think he is.
	But whether Trump will now move, we'll see.
	Because remember what else happened, Sophie.
	It's very bad.
	On the one hand, it was good that there was a little discussion of Russia in our presidential campaigns.
	But the discussion was terrible.
	It was poisonous.
	The Clinton campaign indulged in neo-McCarthyism.
	They accused Trump, and anybody who thought Trump had a good idea about Russia policy, of being puppets of the Kremlin.
	This is beyond disgusting.
	We went through this many years ago in the United States.
	It damaged our country very badly.
	I don't know.
	The poison is in our political bloodstream.
	Will it go away with Trump's victory?
	I doubt it.
	Therefore, Trump needs supporters in this country who did not vote for him.
	So that's what you get when you...
	It's going to be very difficult.
	And it seems to me that the playbook has just been pulled back out, right down to the U-2s flying again.
	Have you followed this in the news?
	I mean, we know one crash.
	Remember we talked about it?
	Right.
	This started a while ago before, I mean, the U-2s flying around.
	Why the U-2s?
	I think for one reason and one reason only.
	It's the Dragon Lady.
	It's the new U-2.
	Then it's, I think it's just to give an image of the old Cold War.
	I mean, either that, or I did look to see if there was some big buy, if Lockheed needed to sell a whole bunch of them, because this is what the drones are supposed to do.
	They're supposed to provide this aerial support.
	But for some reason, we've got the U-2s flying again.
	And the only reason I can think is, you know, related to imagery.
	Ah, the U-2s are flying again.
	Yes, Russia.
	Ah, Cold War.
	Ah, bad.
	Now, my understanding is they're outfitting U2s with robots.
	Oh, we'll find out.
	Our guys will tell us.
	So you mean turn them into drones?
	Yeah, because they can go so high.
	Yeah, 70,000 feet.
	70,000, 80,000 feet.
	Yeah, it's crazy.
	You can't do that with just a drone.
	It does not enough.
	No, no.
	Then, this short little clip from Cohen.
	Very disturbing.
	He has an idea of what may be playing out before the new administration comes into the White House regarding Obama and What kind of deal they might make, and I think we should take this one serious.
	Obama and Putin and their advisors, because neither man proceeds without consultation with his military intelligence and political aides, and yes, there is a politics around Putin.
	He has a problem politically in Moscow.
	In a word, the ultra-nationalists are convinced I like that.
	He says it's not going to happen, but I don't know.
	Yeah.
	I didn't know.
	And I didn't know that Putin had some pressure going on regarding that.
	So that's what people think of Putin.
	You rarely hear these things.
	Rarely.
	You never hear them.
	No.
	And Cohen, they keep him off the air.
	Actually, oh, I have the YouTube clip here.
	This was on CNN. I'm telling you, something's going on with this.
	They got special access.
	This is supposed to be this top-secret spy plane.
	But no.
	CNN's in the cockpit.
	They got a lot of stock footage, too.
	They gave them the stock footage.
	A whole piece.
	Fighting ISIS in a space suit.
	We can only identify the pilot by his first name, Captain Steven, and by his call sign, Meathead.
	He's about to embark on a high-altitude reconnaissance mission in the U-2 spy plane.
	We were given rare access to the preparations, launch, and landing of one of these highly secretive missions that have a clear objective, one of the pilots tells me.
	With the U-2 we're able to get out there, find those guys, track them, get that information back to the fighter types, the bomber types, so that way when they go out there they've got the best intel, the best information about where they are, and then obviously do what needs to be done.
	The U-2 can fly extremely high, more than 70,000 feet, and get pictures and other information to forces on the ground very fast.
	It's a Cold War-era plane flying since the 1950s, but its cameras and sensors have been completely upgraded.
	With its many technological upgrades, the U2 Dragon Lady remains one of America's main assets in the information gathering effort against ISIS. But of course, intelligence gathering happens on many levels, and much of it happens through drones, like this Global Hawk, which patrols in the skies above Iraq and Syria almost every day.
	The information from these surveillance platforms is key to helping jets from the U.S.-led anti-ISIS coalition strike their targets in support of forces combating the group on the ground in places like Mosul and Iraq.
	But while the U-2 can soar higher than almost any other plane, it's pretty hard to land.
	We're in a chase car that speeds after the jet, helping to guide the pilot to the ground after an almost 10-hour mission.
	Peeling himself out of the cockpit, Captain Steven says he believes the U-2 is making a major impact.
	The things that we can do while we're up there, as well as how often we're up there, thanks to the maintenance guys, we are constantly up in the air providing that support for those who need the most.
	And the need for the U-2 services will remain in high demand.
	While ISIS may be losing ground, the group remains both deadly and elusive.
	To me, that sounded like a sales job.
	It didn't sound right.
	No, no.
	It was Brian the Gay Crusader who actually alerted me to that.
	He said, this is weird.
	This is a strange, strange goings-on.
	Yeah.
	Not quite sure.
	Yeah, it's a sale.
	There's too many crazy things to say in there, the things from the 50s, but now it's all upgraded.
	It's ready to sell.
	Yeah.
	You can buy one, too.
	I mean, it must be...
	Buy now while stocks last.
	That's what I thought.
	It was time.
	Yeah.
	Kind of what it sounds like.
	I mean, it sounds to me also, the report itself makes it sound like a useless piece of old gear.
	Is it Lockheed Jet Month?
	Are they doing their, like, Texas Truck Month?
	Open house?
	I'm not sure, maybe.
	Ah, there we go.
	When we're talking about Russia, we gotta talk about our girls.
	That's right, everybody.
	We have the best RT reporter on the case at the State Department.
	And she has a question specifically for John Kirby.
	This is the clip that I started to play the other day, and it was the wrong clip.
	You lost it, yeah.
	Yeah.
	All right.
	This is about the NATO buildup.
	So, more Russia.
	And, well, she gets the typical brush-off from Kirby, and Matt Lee actually came to her defense.
	Did you have a question?
	Yeah, go ahead.
	Yesterday you said Russia's deployment of missiles to its Kaliningrad region is destabilizing to European security.
	Do you think the largest buildup of NATO forces near the Russian border since the end of the Cold War and the deployment of the missile defense system which Russia sees as designed to contain Russia have in no way contributed to the environment in which Russia is deployed?
	So Russia is pointing to these things as contributing to its actions.
	Do you think those things have in no way contributed to the environment in which Russia is putting these missiles?
	NATO is a defensive alliance.
	It's always been a defensive alliance.
	It remains a defensive alliance.
	There's no reason why Russia should view NATO in any way, shape, or form as a threat.
	Now, if they do, they can speak to that, not maybe.
	Do you think the troop buildup near Russia and the defense system near Russia helped lower tensions with Russia?
	Again, NATO's a defensive alliance, always has been.
	There's no reason for anybody in Russia to feel threatened by NATO's military activities or preparations.
	And I will tell you, just in terms of recent months and years, there would have been no reason for NATO to advance and commit additional capabilities on the European continent to include American capabilities had it not been for Russia's move in Ukraine.
	It's Russia's fault.
	Always Russia's fault.
	So they did the build-up in Ukraine, and that's why we are defensively just putting all these missiles on Russia's border.
	Okay.
	And Matt Lee came to a rescue to some degree.
	I just want to go back to briefly done the missile defense in the Europe question.
	Yeah.
	And this is something that has actually gnawed at me for a year.
	Well, then I just can't wait to go.
	A year or so.
	Yeah, but it's not going to be a rambling thing.
	I just want to.
	If you guys.
	I love how he says that.
	Well, I'm not going to ramble like I usually do, but something has been bugging me for a year.
	All right.
	You can hear everyone in the press group going...
	Really, Matt Lee?
	When you guys sold this, it sold the whole idea of missile defense.
	It was always pointed, even the last administration, always pointed to Iran as the threat.
	And the Russians shouldn't worry about it.
	But if the Iran deal is such a huge success, as you say it is, Why is it still necessary?
	Because Iran continues to pursue ballistic missile capabilities.
	He's putting them in a great trap here.
	So wait a minute.
	If I understand the whole deal with Iran was they wouldn't have nuclear capability, who are these missiles for then?
	Because they're always for Iran, but we have the deal.
	Why do we need Iran?
	Well, because they're a-holes.
	You sure it's not for Russia?
	You guys got into the deal that the ballistic missile, you bragged about it at the time that you kept the ballistic missile.
	I think we bragged about anything, Matt.
	Oh, well, you said it was a success that you got the ballistic missile.
	I would say that's fact-sharing, bragging.
	I was just fact-sharing about my huge long schwang.
	Iran continues to pursue ballistic missile capabilities, and so we continue to believe in the value of missile defense.
	But they are still banned from doing ballistic missile activity, right?
	For eight years?
	Seven years now?
	It is certainly part of the deal, but we have to...
	Well, if the missile defense system that you want to put in Europe is aimed at only Iran, why would you not want to make it...
	Not necessary.
	And why wouldn't you have pushed harder to keep the ballistic missile restrictions in place?
	I'm not going to relitigate the deal.
	We continue to believe in the power of missile defense on the continent because Iran continues to pursue ballistic missile capabilities.
	Yeah, sure.
	We have an ISO of Kirby's brain during this question.
	So did anybody during this, after...
	The Russian girl made her commentary, and he went on about NATO being defensible, and he never did anything else.
	Did anyone bring up the Libya thing, which was a NATO-led coalition?
	It's defensible.
	Bomb the crap out of Libya and destabilize the area?
	That was NATO. I say John C. Dvorak for press corps, is what I say.
	Of course.
	Of course.
	How is that defensive?
	Was Libya attacking Italy?
	Well, they were attacking interests.
	Interests, John.
	They weren't?
	Yes, they were.
	Oh, yes, they were.
	Interests.
	United States and allied interests, namely the French who begged us to go in there and kill Gaddafi.
	That's what was going on.
	We did what we did.
	We did what we did.
	But I don't see that being defensive.
	No, it's not defensive.
	This is the last one I got while we're on NATO. This is Jens...
	What's his name?
	The NATO guy?
	Jens...
	Yeah, interesting little thoughts on NATO. NATO's sexy general says the time is right for Europe to boost defence spending.
	Jens Stoltenberg was speaking ahead of a meeting of EU foreign ministers in Brussels.
	The former Norwegian Premier said US President-elect Donald Trump was right to ask Europeans to do more.
	Oh really?
	The strong NATO is important for Europe, but it's also important for the United States.
	He also pointed out the importance of increased defence spending, that Europeans are stepping up their efforts to invest more in defence.
	And I absolutely agree with him.
	That has been the message from American leaders, US leaders for many years.
	And the good thing is that we now see that Europeans are actually investing more in defence.
	Trump called into question NATO's collective defence pact during his campaign.
	Casting doubt over whether the US would step in and help those who are not meeting the 2% of GDP defence spending target.
	Current Commander-in-Chief Barack Obama has moved to reassure Europeans that Trump will honour the country's NATO commitments.
	The alliance was set up after the Second World War and has since become a cornerstone of the global security architecture.
	But currently only five countries meet NATO's own defence spending benchmarks.
	Ah, okay.
	Gee.
	Maybe Trump had a point.
	I got something for the Red Book, though.
	I know we can put it in there.
	All right, what?
	Yeah, with the NATO issues, with Europe starting its own army, they're still just trying to vote on the headquarters.
	Here in the Red Book, I can tell you right now, Europe, and it's kind of interesting in light of the SNL skit, Europe will receive Iron Dome to protect them from evil Russia.
	The same Iron Dome that apparently is in place in Israel.
	The same crappy Iron Dome that barely works, if it works at all, in Israel, that can barely protect one city?
	That Iron Dome?
	Sounds like a sales bonanza to me.
	You'd have to put one around each city.
	Yeah, maybe.
	It's going to be a tough sell.
	I don't think they're that stupid in Europe.
	I would like an entry in the book.
	That's it.
	I just wrote it down.
	Okay.
	And I put a smiley face next to it.
	Okay.
	I got one last clip before we take a break that still has something to do with this, because I just want to remind people that most of what we witness is historically, you know, it's not new.
	And there was a very interesting, and there's a quote within this little spiel.
	This is John Dickerson, the guy on CBS does Face the Nation.
	Who I like.
	He's a very calm guy.
	It seems to be pretty neutral.
	And when he does, he doesn't get...
	Obviously, he's not slanting things too much one way or the other.
	And he did a book.
	He's done a book recently.
	I don't know the name of it.
	But he was being interviewed on C-SPAN Book TV. Which he told me to listen to.
	So I did.
	And this is a very interesting...
	The clip is...
	They're talking about Andrew Jackson.
	And apparently there's a very...
	There's a lot of correlations between Andrew Jackson and Donald Trump.
	Yes, I've been reading these things too.
	Yeah, this is like a meme going around.
	I think Dickerson's got a lot to do with it because it's in this book of his.
	But there's one little gotcha in here, one little zinger in here that I thought was well worth repeating and listening to.
	Let's listen to this back and forth.
	Yeah, I still don't know what the clip is, though.
	With Clarence Page.
	It's with Clarence Page.
	It's called Jackson-Trump comparison.
	Gotcha.
	Reserve, or it's Washington lawmakers, or it's the mortgage-backed security hucksters.
	All are people whose bad decision-making savaged the lives of people who weren't a part of the initial decisions that were made.
	And so that, when I'm reading about Jackson and...
	His feeling about the National Bank, you really feel, it feels very, very, very modern in terms of the anger at people who are making economic decisions that are ruining your life.
	I thought he was writing Donald Trump speeches there, you know?
	The language keeps coming back in these different periods of time.
	But what does that say about the American character?
	Well, you know, it's funny you mention Donald Trump and Andrew Jackson.
	Andrew Jackson said, by their abuse they shall elect me.
	Which is, he was basically talking about the writers at the time.
	Much the same way that Donald Trump plays off of and uses the traditional media.
	As a foil and benefits from when the New York Times writes something negative about him, that helps him with his constituency.
	Now, there's some trickiness with the general electorate because there are some people who still trust with the New York Times rights who are in the electorate.
	Yeah, no kidding.
	By their abuse, they shall elect me, is what Jackson said.
	And it was the exact same situation.
	Because every time, and people kept saying it, oh, in fact, the post cover that was in the last newsletter at the bottom of all those pictures, the New York Post says, oh, he said that John McCain's not a patriot.
	He's done.
	He's done.
	Kiss him goodbye.
	Yeah.
	It was just everything that Trump did.
	It was the newspapers and some of the lies.
	It's almost like the 99% thing that we talked about earlier.
	Where you just come...
	Amonpour comes out and just lies.
	Lies that 99% of everybody believes in climate change.
	Or every scientist.
	But it's not true and it just makes people turn against you.
	The question I have is...
	When she says that, is that because she heard a number and thought it was high enough and she can just say this?
	Does she not have the moral fiber to repeat the bogative number to begin with?
	Or is she so delusional that it is deemed okay to exaggerate to make the point?
	The question is, is she exaggerating or sincerely thinks it's 99%?
	Yeah, because you're accusing her of lying.
	She is lying.
	Well, does lying need to have intent?
	Well, I mean, now you're acting like Comey.
	Well, I am up for the job, you know.
	No, I don't think so.
	I think a lie is a lie.
	If you repeat the lie and you sincerely believe it's true, it's still a lie.
	It doesn't become not a lie because you think it's true.
	I mean, yeah, it's fine that you're sincere.
	I mean, sincerity is not the question.
	Lying is.
	Hold on.
	Let me just take a look at the definition.
	Hmm.
	Uh...
	Here we go.
	False statement made with deliberate intent to deceive.
	Okay, well then your point's well taken.
	So she's not lying.
	So when you're a I think she's lying, by the way, no matter what.
	I think it was deliberate.
	Really?
	Okay, I'll take that, but then that goes right into my next question.
	Is she lying deliberately because once this has been agreed to, the science is in, it really doesn't matter what you say because it's just fact.
	To her, it is fact.
	There's no denying that.
	She believes that.
	She believes that it's crazy.
	By the definition, she's not lying.
	We need a definition.
	A definition that you just looked up, and I'm glad you did.
	She's not lying because she's not deliberate.
	Maybe she's...
	Okay.
	She's a lunatic.
	She's delusional.
	She's not lying.
	And the fact that she's not lying when she says 99% is worse.
	I'm in, John.
	She's not lying.
	She's just a lunatic.
	The science is in!
	And with that, I'd like to thank you for your courage and say in the morning to you, John C., where the C stands for Cold War Survivor, Dvorak.
	In the morning to you, Mr.
	Adam Curry.
	In the morning to all ships at sea, boots on the ground, feet in the air, subs in the water, all the dames and knights out there.
	In the morning to the chatroom, noagendastream.com.
	Good to see you all there.
	Thanks for the help.
	In the morning to Void Zero, Mountain Vortex, and of course, in the morning to our artists, especially Amather, A-M-A-T-H-E-R, Amather, who brought us the artwork for episode 880.
	That was...
	Promised to prosecute, and he brought us...
	Now, I wondered, because I saw this image in other places.
	Did he just grab this and not put Hillary's head on the turkey?
	Because we didn't check it.
	We just thought, oh, this doesn't...
	That was an easy fix.
	You can put Hillary's head on the turkey.
	I have a feeling he may have not done that himself.
	I'm not sure.
	Uh-oh.
	He has to be repulsed.
	Exactly.
	Because I saw someone else tweet the same image, like, well, did they grab that from us?
	Unlikely.
	Well, we'll do a search afterwards, and then we'll pull it.
	Pull it.
	Pull it.
	We'll pull it.
	You're not allowed to...
	You can repurpose stuff if you change it substantially, but generally speaking, we like original stuff, original ideas and original art.
	We do.
	That's what we want.
	I didn't think, because I looked at it and it was so kind of like, looked like it was something someone would do at the end of the show quickly.
	Hack job, no offense.
	But it was the way they typically come in when there's just a funny gag.
	And it related to everything we talked about in the show.
	Hillary getting the act.
	It was perfect art.
	There was nothing wrong with the art.
	The idea wise, it was dynamite.
	Maybe not.
	Who knows?
	Yeah.
	It's okay.
	We appreciate it.
	Noagendaartgenerator.com.
	I know everyone does their best, so it's okay.
	It's all appreciated.
	This is how it works in the value-for-value model.
	We have no advertising.
	Despite the deluge of emails and tweets, when I was looking for a pen on Thursday, and John started talking about his favorite pen, that's not a native ad.
	If we're getting money, where's the money?
	How's it a native ad if we're not getting any cash from Paper Mate?
	We didn't even get a free pen.
	So anyone who says that's a native ad can shove it.
	We have products that we like.
	I have a wine suggestion for today, but heaven forbid I give it out because it would be considered a native ad.
	So you don't want wine suggestions, you don't want pen suggestions, you don't want...
	Software suggestions?
	You don't want any suggestions whatsoever?
	Here's the sad part of it, John.
	Tell me who that was.
	I'm taking them off the mailing list.
	Oh, there's a lot of people.
	Okay, all of them should be...
	They shouldn't even listen to the show.
	So here...
	Here's the problem.
	People have been so mind-controlled with ads, and I have to say, if you look at Jimmy Kimmel's show, sometimes they have little bits, and Saturday Night Live is doing it, and they're funny, and they're ads, and they're funny ads.
	But the whole point of the No Agenda show is that when we say we like something, it's because we actually like it and we want to pass the knowledge on to you.
	In 9 out of 10 podcasts, you will hear people talking about how great certain services are.
	And they're being paid to say it in a very conversational way.
	I understand the confusion, but this is the No Agenda podcast.
	And I hope that you don't, I mean, you need to untrain yourself from thinking this.
	Well, maybe not.
	Maybe everyone should always be.
	Yeah, you know, it's almost impossible.
	I know that when we lost all these people overboard during this whole election cycle because we appear, because of the way we deconstruct stories, we appear to be pro-Trump.
	Yeah.
	And because it was just the way it was turning out because of the people doing the best work.
	of propagandizing the public.
	And so we end up deconstructing that the most.
	Trump, as you heard in that earlier New York Times clip, was bypassing the mechanisms and going straight to the public with a plea.
	And that was different.
	So there was nothing to deconstruct.
	You could just read his tweets.
	There's nothing there but tweets.
	So, it's just a shame, but I felt that a lot of the reasons that people stopped listening, and I can name names of people that were always contributing, they're always helping the show out, and now they've backed off a little bit, much the same way that Adam lost his pals the doctor and his wife.
	Yeah.
	That moved inside the bubble of the state of California.
	I had a guy who wrote me this nasty note saying that was, oh, you know, this bowl of crap, you know, what you're saying about the California thing.
	I'm going to say it again.
	I had to re-explain it to him, and he never wrote me back, which is that if you take California out of the equation insofar as this popular vote myth is concerned, just pull California.
	Take all their votes for Trump and Hillary away.
	Trump wins the country by a large margin, a popular vote.
	It's just...
	California, I put it in the newsletter, I showed it, it's like almost three plus million, I think, something about raises the number, because Trump couldn't get into the state to promote himself if he wanted to, because they were not allowing him.
	They, you know...
	It was terrible.
	She got like 70 plus percent of the vote in California, so then she wins all these numbers, which is why the Electoral College exists.
	Otherwise, why don't we just turn over the country to California and let them run everything into the ground like they've done here?
	Well, what I always say when people say, hey man, you know, this is exactly, and there's a lot of talk about this.
	I don't know if you saw Larry Lessig's post.
	I put the Larry Lessig thing, if you notice, a newsletter in there.
	It wasn't in the...
	I read the whole thing.
	Yeah, I read it.
	Larry Lessig comes out in the Washington Post, again the Washington Post, the same operation that has the fake news, The Washington Post, and he says that, well, the Electoral College should just put Hillary in.
	Who gives a crap what the public wants?
	That's what it said.
	What I thought was more interesting is...
	I have it here.
	Um...
	Only twice in our past has the Electoral College selected a president against the will of the people.
	Once in the 19th century and once on the cusp of the 21st.
	In 1824 it was Congress that decided the election for John Quincy Adams.
	Likewise in 1876 it was Congress that gave disputed Electoral College votes to Rutherford B. Hayes.
	And they say, or he says, I should say, In both cases...
	No, he's talking about Bush v.
	Gore.
	He says that the result violated what has become one of the most important principles governing our democracy.
	One person, one vote.
	Now, he incorrectly says our democracy because we're a republic.
	But, okay, you're a professor.
	What the fuck do I know?
	In both cases, the votes of some weighed much more heavily than the votes of others.
	Today, the vote of a citizen in Wyoming is four times as powerful as the vote of a citizen in Michigan.
	The vote of a citizen in Vermont is three times as powerful as a vote in Missouri.
	This denies Americans the fundamental value of a representative democracy.
	Again, we have a republic.
	Equal citizenship, yet nothing in our Constitution compels that result.
	Here it comes.
	Instead, if the electoral college is to control who becomes our president, we should take it seriously by understanding its purpose precisely.
	It is not meant to deny a reasonable judgment by the people.
	It is meant to be a circuit breaker, just in case the people go crazy.
	So, and then he closes out by saying, in this election, the people did not go crazy.
	The winner by far of the popular vote is the most qualified candidate for president in more than a generation.
	Like her or not, no elector could have a good faith reason to vote against her because of her qualifications.
	Choosing her is thus plainly within the bounds of a reasonable judgment by the people.
	And I assert that the Electoral College did their job by keeping the actual crazy person out.
	This is the part that is broken on Lessig's part.
	He's a knee-jerk liberal, and as far as he's concerned, nobody should be in the presidential office unless they're a Democrat.
	It's that simple.
	Right.
	And he's just looking for, he's grasping at straws, and this is the worst case scenario for him, and this is what he's writing.
	This is the, talking about a democratic system, or, and you're right, it's a republic, not a democracy.
	This, the circuit breaker is to keep California from just dominating everything.
	That is the ones who went nuts and made the popular vote go for her.
	Yes.
	Again, take California out of it, which is a nutty state.
	Take those votes away and she doesn't win.
	So how do you rationalize that?
	In other words, the whole country is wrong and California is the only state that's right?
	You're on to something, John.
	They should secede.
	I think they should.
	I'm all for it.
	Go, go, go.
	Anyway.
	It will never be allowed.
	There's too many ports.
	Anyway.
	There's a whole shoreline that would be lost.
	Can't do it.
	Alright, let's thank some people who support us.
	Ugh!
	Not just us.
	They support the work.
	They support the show.
	Producers!
	Execs!
	And they continue to support us, unlike the people who aren't listening at the moment.
	In fact, nobody's listening.
	It's the Thanksgiving Day weekend holiday.
	It's always a toughie, isn't it?
	And it's always a lot of work.
	The Thursday show is one thing, because we have to hustle, and I wound up pretty much not cooking at all.
	Tina did all the cooking.
	But then between the Thursday and the Sunday...
	You know, no one's working.
	Clips?
	You have to prepare a week ahead of time.
	It's a lot of work.
	Well, let's thank Lee Olivares from U.S., it says.
	That's all I got.
	Howdy, John and Adam.
	And he came in with $880.
	He's an 880 ligard.
	He'll still get his three credits.
	Howdy, John and Adam.
	I certainly hope that PayPal went through without a snag, but I clearly wouldn't be asking if I received a call out on the show 880.
	You didn't.
	I humbly request Black Knight status for Sunday's show as a result.
	Now, here's what happened.
	Here's the problem.
	Yeah, there's a problem.
	Black Knight is when we specifically screw up.
	Yeah.
	Not when PayPal screws up or you make a mistake or you fell asleep.
	We've even given PayPal, we've even done it on PayPal screw ups.
	No.
	No?
	Okay.
	I'm not in charge of Black.
	We have never, and I would say I have, we have never given a PayPal screw-up.
	It's got nothing to do with it.
	It's like when we drop the ball and you don't get knighted and it goes on and on and on and then you call us or get a hold of us like a month later and say, hey, you passed out my knighthood.
	I sent a special request in and here it is.
	And then we go, oh, geez, okay.
	But in this case...
	In this case, you don't get Black Knight.
	Because he came in after the cutoff.
	Yeah, you could have done it a day earlier.
	It's like the last minute.
	It doesn't pay off for this.
	But knighted you shall be.
	Sunday shows a result.
	With your blessings, this donation makes me proud.
	No agenda night.
	Accounting below.
	Please call me Sir Milkman of the Ones and Zeros.
	Oh, another dude named Ben.
	Dude named Ben, I'm sure, yeah.
	You both receive constant praise for sanity maintenance and in the socio-political bubble of Los Angeles.
	This insight you provide week in and week out is a huge comfort to us slaves.
	Very nice.
	I was planning to let my $4 a week sub ride into eventual knighthood, but I recently received two Curious omens that the time is now to share in the tremendous value I've been receiving on a show from the show twice weekly.
	Several shows ago, while driving around in Los Angeles, a giant 880 address sign for an office building appears to me at the same moment John says, show 880.
	The following show, Adam says 333, ding, as I pass a tremendous red digit.
	Red digits displaying 333.
	I could not ignore the signs any longer.
	Can I get a Trump job as a Manning?
	We've got to talk about that.
	And maybe a techno experts Hillary send off at the end of the show.
	Yeah, let me see if I got that.
	I'll play a little bit of it before I hit you with the karma, too.
	Jobs, jobs, jobs!
	And jobs.
	Let's vote for jobs!
	We've got to talk about that!
	And this group of young, you know, techno experts.
	Oh, yeah, we'll play that at the end of the show.
	Jobs, jobs, jobs!
	And jobs.
	Let's vote for jobs!
	You've got karma.
	All right.
	End of show.
	Haven't heard that one in a while.
	Cool.
	And this will be, he will be our executive producer.
	Oh, that's it, huh?
	It is a slow day because nobody's here and people are irked at us.
	Andrew Martin in Stanmore, New South Wales, Australia, came with $250.
	He'll be an associate executive producer for show 881.
	The hard part in donating is thinking of something intelligent to say to a couple of geniuses.
	That would be us.
	Two new words for you guys.
	When you walk into a crowd of people going in the opposite direction, there's an onventine.
	O-N-V-E-N-T-I-N-E. That's an onventine.
	When you're going into a crowd coming at your direction.
	Onventine.
	This can also help be used whenever an overwhelming flood is coming at you.
	Like a friend of mine made it up and sounds like a correct English to me.
	Okay.
	It could have been better read, whatever you said.
	When someone is out of their depth, flopping about, screwing it up, you can refer to that person as a pheasant.
	I guess it's a mix of intellectual poverty and a pheasant.
	What is the word?
	I'm not sure.
	It looks like the same word to me.
	I'm not sure.
	It's kind of like a douchebag, but a bit more clueless and more harmless.
	That guy was talking about the word having a global warming problem because the sun is expanding, comes to mind.
	You guys are absolutely nailing it for laughs.
	I'd like to hear the Curry version of he came, he saw he died, and the stop laughing, why are you laughing guy?
	That's not the Curry version.
	That's the seed man.
	I'll play both.
	So, I mean, that is the land of unconfirmed videos.
	We came, we saw, he died.
	We came, we saw, he died.
	You've got karma.
	Shut up.
	You know, the funny thing about that is that when I first heard it, and you told me it was a seed guy, I thought it was you.
	Really?
	Really.
	Yeah, because when you do that silly voice, that's what you sound like.
	That's not very good.
	I would say that is disturbing.
	Why?
	Did I sound like the Seed Man?
	Only in that one instance.
	Play it again.
	We came, we saw, we died!
	Yeah, I could do it, you're right.
	Yeah, you could do that.
	Or we could do it completely differently.
	Yeah?
	Yeah.
	We came, we saw, he died!
	That's good.
	Pretty good, huh?
	That devil's voice.
	That's the devil's voice.
	It's the devil's voice.
	Okay, we keep the devil.
	Yeah, that's good.
	That's actually my real voice.
	John Donovan.
	That's a...
	Okay.
	Curry has a new gizmo.
	Yeah, Rick R.K. Henley is next.
	Oh, R.K. Henley, right, in Memphis, Tennessee.
	233.33.
	That came in as just a check, one of those bank checks, no note.
	Okay, thank you.
	John Donovan, 222.22, and he sent an email.
	He's the Baron of Silicon Valley, so he's in the Bay Area somewhere.
	Belated Thanksgiving greetings.
	I'm grateful for you guys, the No Agenda family, and this safe space for media deconstruction.
	Please read the following and grant me and the rest of the No Agenda producer family some No Agenda karma with the jobs, jobs, jobs.
	And then little girl, yay.
	Okay.
	Here is 888 in quarters contribution.
	I apologize for not making the 880 show.
	Grumble, grumble PayPal, but hoping to help with the lead up to show number 888 with a 222 contribution, 888 times 25 cents.
	Any no agenda producer matching this 222, 888 quarters or 888 magic coins will be matched up to my limit.
	Right.
	If they contribute before show 888.
	I only ask for an associate executive producer on this if I get a matchup to show 888 or I'd like to be an 888 executive producer of No Agenda Nation steps up in matching my pledge.
	I hope this leads to some good value for value contributions.
	So people are like, if you give a 2-2-2, he will come in, Sir J.D., with the...
	He'll match that?
	Match it.
	Wow, okay.
	His limit is probably 8-8-8, which means he'll probably match it three times or maybe four.
	Very cool.
	Appreciate that.
	Nice.
	Yes, I got his jingles here.
	Jobs, jobs, jobs, and jobs.
	Let's vote for jobs!
	Yay!
	You've got karma.
	There we go.
	Karma dispensed.
	Onward to Christopher Gray, who's from Roscommon, Michigan, one of the club members, I believe, up there in Local One.
	$200.33 says, I got no note.
	And Dennis Van...
	Dennis...
	Van Den Drieschen.
	Not even close.
	Dennis Van...
	Dennis Van Den Drieschen.
	Van den Driesen.
	Yeah, you kind of just do the S's.
	Dennis van den Driesen.
	Dennis van den Driesen.
	Very good.
	Very good.
	200 bucks.
	He says he's in Amsterdam.
	He says, way overdue.
	Groeten uit Amsterdam to those running the best podcast in the entire universe from Amsterdam.
	I Amsterdam, he actually says.
	I Amsterdam.
	From I Amsterdam.
	What is that?
	Is that referring to some movement?
	Oh yeah, we're the interactive city.
	You know the big sign they have now?
	The I heart Amsterdam.
	It's I Amsterdam.
	I am Amsterdam.
	I'm Amsterdam.
	Someone got to pay a lot of money to come up with that.
	You're underwhelmed.
	I know.
	That's what they do.
	That's what they do.
	I think the I Love New York was invented by Milton Glaser in the 60s and people have been stealing from that idea forever.
	Yeah, they have.
	And that's it, right?
	That's our short list.
	I do have a PR mention here.
	Eric the Shill apparently is running in his real life.
	He runs a non-profit.
	Is this the NW Discovery Lab?
	Is that Northwestern?
	He's got a couple of these things.
	I guess so, yeah.
	Yeah.
	So he wrote us a note.
	He said, Backstory.
	We bought a bunch of entry-level DSLRs for a summer photography class for kids 7 and up.
	Soon after, we let them take the cameras out and about, and they took some great photos.
	We sent a bunch to get printed and matted, and we're offering them for sale to buy more gear in order to expand the program for kids' wedding in the wings.
	We are teaching these kids legitimate photography, not selfies or iPhone picture-taking.
	Well, I said that's good.
	We have partnered with local professional photographers to teach these kids various aspects of photography going forward.
	So you go to store.nwdiscoverylab.org.
	That's a mouthful.
	Does it have a link in the show notes?
	Yeah, it looks in the show notes.
	It looks pretty good, actually.
	It looks nice stuff.
	P.S. People can now buy JCD's grandkids' work.
	Oh, I couldn't read that.
	That's their unique selling proposition right there.
	Buy art made by John's grandkids.
	Woo!
	My goodness.
	Well, I'm sure it's, you know, you shoot a thousand pictures, there's always a winner in there.
	There's always something in there.
	It's the old spray and spray.
	There's two ways.
	I've always looked at you.
	I do a lot of, or still know a lot of professional photographers, and I like to shoot.
	But there's two...
	Typically types of guys.
	There's the one guy who shoots and shoots, goes crazy, shoots thousands and thousands of shots, and he goes over each one and picks the two that are gems.
	And then there's the other guy, which is the one that's very interesting.
	He's the guy who sets up a shot, shoots it once, nails it.
	That guy is like...
	Those are the guys.
	I ran into one of these guys.
	I ran into one of these guys, he's a very high-end photographer, and he shoots 8x10s.
	Oh, beautiful.
	8x10 negative.
	Hasselblad, the big bed.
	No, no, Hasselblad's a very small format compared to 8x10.
	Oh, this is inches.
	Oh, shit.
	8 inches by inches.
	Oh, my God, I was thinking centimeters.
	Yeah, oh, this is, yeah.
	And so he'll set up a shot.
	I did a shot for a book thing with this guy.
	You get the makeup people come in and they move you around and they do this.
	They powder you and they move the lights around.
	He takes a couple little Polaroids and then he puts the giant probably cost 20 bucks for one of these negatives.
	And the thing shoots it once he's done.
	Yeah.
	One shot.
	I know photographers like this.
	They're few and far between that do this.
	Yeah.
	Very far a few.
	Patricia Stur, she's a Dutch photographer.
	And I've worked with her several times.
	You know, like, set up, set up, make up, set up, Polaroid, and then click.
	Okay, done.
	Like, what?
	What?
	What happened to the spray and pray when everyone does?
	All right, everybody.
	Thank you so much for supporting your podcast.
	You are the producers.
	And that's why we gave these people an associate.
	Well, one executive producer.
	One executive producer.
	And we have four associate executive producers.
	Thank you so much for supporting us.
	We'll be thanking other people later on during the program.
	And remember, we have another show coming up on Thursday.
	Dvorak.org slash NA. Sitting in the car, driving back home with your family members.
	Why not propagate the formula?
	Our formula is this.
	We go out, we hit people in the mouth.
	I wanted to give you a little insight and a thought I had regarding...
	What no one seems to really know is who's going to be doing what within the Trump administration.
	So I rescind my Secretary of Defense pick to Mad Dog.
	He'll be the guy.
	What's his name again?
	Mad Dog Mattis.
	Mad Dog Mattis.
	That guy.
	So it seems like he's going to be the Secretary of Defense.
	And I got a little insight into Clapper's resignation.
	Actually, the New Yorker did a huge hit piece on Michael Flynn, calling him a nut job, which was pretty interesting.
	And of course, what happened was, Flynn was a guy who was out running around, boots on the ground, getting stuff done, changing the way the military does intelligence.
	The pencil pushers in D.C. didn't like that, and so they fired him.
	And guess who fired him?
	Clapper.
	So this is no coincidence.
	So he didn't want to be fired by a guy?
	No, of course not.
	No, Clapper gave him like nine months to get the heck out.
	So yeah, so Clapper is, maybe I should leave now.
	But I had a thought for Secretary of State, because we've had tons of names running around, floating around, even Mitt Romney, who actually might not even be such a bad pick, except he's such a dick, a douchebag.
	Yeah, he's a dick.
	But all of a sudden it hit me and it would mess with everybody's head.
	It would be great for our show and the media because we get, you know, to bring back lots of old fake news.
	Well, not really fake news, but you can see how the news works.
	Ready for my pick?
	As long as it's not Petraeus.
	Nope.
	Dan Quayle.
	No.
	I'm telling you, this is a genius pick.
	No, you're right.
	It would screw up everybody, but of all the guys, he's not going to...
	No.
	It's not even in the cards.
	Okay.
	Okay.
	I can put it in the red book if you want, but it's not going anywhere, that idea.
	It just struck me all of a sudden, and he's supportive of Trump.
	He's been doing a couple of Q&A sessions here and there.
	I know who you should pick.
	We're going to do this game.
	I got one.
	All right.
	Jeb Bush.
	Come on.
	No, no, no.
	Why not?
	I'll just tell you the reason why Dan Quayle would be...
	He went around the world for Bush.
	He did as many miles as Hillary Clinton.
	He was a part of all the deals.
	He's media-friendly, but unfriendly for himself.
	He comes across as an idiot, and media loves...
	He runs a huge company.
	Yeah, I was told by a friend of mine in D.C., Who will remain nameless but is highly connected.
	That he knows Quail.
	He says Quail is an extremely intelligent guy.
	I guess he just presents himself as a doofus.
	He's clumsy.
	But Cerberus, that's a big company that he's running.
	It's no joke.
	He's not going to quit that company to work for this.
	Go back into government.
	There's no way.
	I don't think Jeb would be it.
	Jeb would be no good.
	Petraeus is the guy that gets mentioned the most now.
	To me, not a great pick.
	Yeah, I can't.
	I don't like him.
	I agree.
	His codename is P4, by the way.
	Petraeus?
	Yeah.
	Everyone has an abbreviation.
	Yeah.
	And, you know, I'm getting all these text messages.
	Actually, it's more through Signal, so I don't know if you call it text message.
	And, you know, sometimes I'm like, what the hell?
	What the hell are they talking about?
	You know, so Trump is DJT. That's easy.
	Flynn is MF. MF? MF, yeah.
	MF. I couldn't figure out P4. Was it Petraeus?
	P4. Four-star general.
	Petraeus.
	P4. Yeah, you should take a look at what's going to...
	Well, here's an interesting look.
	He's a favorite insider for something, for sure.
	He was also kicked out by Clapper.
	Also kicked out by Clapper.
	Yeah, Clapper's a bad guy.
	Well, you don't have to deal with him.
	Although, you know, me and Petraeus, so far as our show is concerned, I just dislike his carrying on with his outfits.
	Yeah, it is a little over the top, isn't it?
	It's like, come on, you're not a General Lisa Mo in Chile.
	Get a clue.
	And that's where we got into another, we lost a bunch of other listeners during that little era because of these guys who won't recognize the fact that generals can design their own uniforms.
	We are the only podcast that's riding our listenership all the way to the bottom.
	They get all irked at.
	Oh, no, they can't.
	It's against the military rules.
	And then I show them the exact section of the military law where it says the generals can design their own uniforms.
	And then they quit the show.
	I know.
	It's pretty bad.
	Pretty bad.
	Supposed to do.
	Yeah.
	Here's a good one.
	This is like they're trying to soften Trump up a little bit.
	They got that mad dog Mattis guy in there.
	Trump is using some of his picks to change his positions.
	And again, instead of the left celebrating, oh, he's dropped that horrible idea and now he's going to do this.
	Instead of that, they don't do that.
	They go...
	Oh, he's a flip-flopper!
	Flip-flopper!
	And you don't, you know, the flip-flopping thing is what you used to demean somebody during an election, not after an election.
	During the debates and stuff, that's when you use the flip-flopper stuff.
	Yeah, what was the point of saying that now?
	It's like, it's stupid.
	But let's play Trump political picks and waterboarding.
	It was a very sharp Trump critic.
	Does it seem that Trump wants a team of perhaps dissenters around him, or at least not a bunch of yes-men?
	Yeah, and that's what's getting very interesting about this.
	Nikki Haley was somebody who was very critical about the Muslim ban, for example, and you would think she would have no place in a Trump administration, and neither would Romney.
	The fact that in the case of Haley, she's actually been nominated as a U.S. ambassador to the U.N., that suggests a change here.
	But I think it may be an even bigger one, is look what's going on with retired General James Mattis.
	When Donald Trump went to talk to the New York Times, he signaled real flexibility on a big issue, which is waterboarding, which critics, of course, call torture.
	And during the campaign, Donald Trump said he wanted to bring back waterboarding to get tough on terrorists.
	But he then told the New York Times a couple of days ago, I've talked to James Mattis about that, and he says it doesn't work.
	And so, basically, I've changed my position.
	Now, critics are going to say, wait a second, he's a flip-flopper, he's backpedaling, he said one thing in the campaign, now he might govern a different way.
	But there's another way to look at that, of course, Doug, and it's that the critics of Donald Trump, including the New York Times, said this was somebody who was unstable, you can't trust him, his temperament to be commander-in-chief.
	If he's someone willing to go behind closed doors with a retired general with the respect of James Mattis and say, you know what, you make a good point.
	I'm going to rethink this.
	It shows more flexibility and maybe a better temperament than his critics thought.
	Yeah, I often look at Trump as a pure negotiator in every relationship he has.
	He starts out with the hard line and is subject to give and take, depending on how the negotiation goes.
	It's been a transition that is keeping with Donald Trump's style, and one case in point there is Dr.
	Ben Carson's saga.
	Right.
	Yeah.
	Well, that shows a willingness to listen, I guess.
	I don't know what it shows.
	There is a problem, though.
	There's a problem.
	And the very interesting guy, I guess one of Trump's best friends, I think he's a hedge fund guy, young guy, I can't remember his name, but, you know, billionaire.
	And he was over in the UK, and he did this interview with BBC, and from that came the, from him, out of his mouth directly, it's in this report, I think it's in this report.
	He said, oh, we're so pro-gay that even Elton John's going to be performing.
	Yeah, but that wasn't true.
	What the left does in our society is they want to censor and make politically correct everything in the society.
	And the average person is sort of tired of that.
	And so I don't agree with that headline that you just said.
	I'm also a gay rights activist.
	You know, you can look it up.
	I've given to the American Unity Pact.
	I've given to the Human Rights Campaign.
	I'm for marriage.
	I know your record.
	I'm for marriage equality.
	And so, you know, and by the way, this will be the first American president in U.S. history that enters the White House with a pro-gay rights stance.
	Elton John is going to be doing our concert on the mall for the inauguration.
	That turned out to be a little premature.
	But, you know, this is what's interesting is which musician?
	Now, we already know there's no money in the music business anymore.
	But there really is none.
	Who's going to perform?
	Don't we always have a performance?
	Who will step up?
	Who's it going to be?
	Who performed at the inauguration in 2008 for Obama?
	Aretha Franklin performed?
	You sure?
	Yeah, I'm sure, I'm sure.
	It was she?
	Aretha Franklin sang.
	She sang live at the inauguration.
	It was, yeah.
	Hmm.
	Well, maybe beyond...
	What about 2012?
	Who did 2012?
	I don't know.
	It's beyond my B12 dosage.
	I don't remember.
	What you're saying is not that important.
	Well, it isn't.
	You get a couple garage bands.
	How about Green Day?
	Oh, wait.
	They hate Trump.
	Did you see them on the American Music Awards?
	Well, Green Day, that's a gay band.
	I mean, the guy's gay.
	Oh, but Billy Joe?
	Yeah.
	He's not gay.
	Are you kidding?
	Billy Joe is gay?
	No.
	Yeah, he's tremendously gay.
	No!
	Billy Joe gay.
	Yes!
	Oh, I'm sorry to disappoint you.
	Well...
	Yeah.
	He's gay?
	Oh, yeah.
	No.
	No, he doesn't say he's gay.
	Yeah.
	Hmm.
	He does say he's gay.
	No, in fact, he says he's no longer sure he's bisexual, so he's already edging away.
	Yeah, now he thinks he's gay.
	BJ is not gay.
	Okay, fine.
	I don't care.
	I've never met the guy.
	But on the American Music Awards, he changed the lyrics of the song and he started chanting, No Trump, KKK, no fascism in USA. No Trump, no KKK, no fascism in USA. But he probably won't be performing then.
	No.
	I don't think he'll be performing.
	Unless he wants to do that song.
	I did catch a piece of Pence, the true operator, the chief operating officer of the United States to come, elect, regarding the Hamilton fracas.
	And I like that.
	He's a cool customer, man.
	Let's play this for a second.
	It's not really special, but it just shows you how he speaks.
	We don't hear much from him.
	No, he's pretty even-keeled, that's for sure, yeah.
	Well, first off, my daughter and I and her cousins really enjoyed the show.
	Hamilton is just an incredible production.
	There is a little gotcha in here.
	I don't know if you'll catch it.
	Incredibly talented people.
	It was a real joy to be there.
	When we arrived, we heard a few boos and we heard some cheers.
	I nudged my kids and reminded them that's what freedom sounds like.
	But at the end, I did hear what was said from the stage.
	I can tell you, I wasn't offended by what was said.
	I'll leave to others whether that was the appropriate venue to say it.
	I do want to say that The basic element, the center of that message is one that I want to address and that is I know this is a very disappointing time for people that did not see their candidate win in this national election.
	I know this is a very time for some people and I just want to reassure people that what President-elect Donald Trump said On election night, he absolutely meant from the bottom of his heart.
	He is preparing to be the president of all of the people of the United States of America.
	And to watch him bringing together people of diverse views, bringing together people that differed with him strongly, seeing him talk to leaders around the world.
	I just want to reassure every American that in the days ahead, I'm very confident that they're going to see President-elect Donald Trump Be a president for all of the people.
	Now, wait for it.
	And we embrace that principle, and we're going to work hard to make that principle every day that we serve.
	And just to button Hamilton Gate up, do you want or expect an apology?
	Well, as I said, I would leave that to others, whether that was the appropriate venue for that.
	But, you know, I will tell you, Chris, if you haven't seen the show, go to see it.
	It is a Great, great show.
	And, you know, I'm a real history buff.
	And so my daughter and I and her cousins really enjoyed it.
	Now, why does he laugh at the end there?
	Is that because he's...
	He said, I'm a real history buff.
	We really enjoyed it.
	Is it because it's historically dumb or incorrect?
	That was my immediate thought.
	I don't know.
	That's a good question.
	It has to be.
	I mean, Chris Wallace is kind of an upper-class elite snoot.
	Yeah, but it's Pence who's laughing.
	Are you sure?
	Yeah, so Pence says, well, you know, I'm a real history buff, and my daughter and I really enjoyed it because it's...
	Are you sure it was him?
	You saw this as a video?
	Yeah, listen to it again.
	I would leave that to others, whether that was the appropriate venue for that.
	I will tell you, Chris, if you haven't seen the show, go to see it.
	It is a great, great show.
	I'm a real history buff, and so my daughter and I and her cousins really enjoyed it.
	I just wonder.
	To me, it was just like a little thing.
	That was a little annoying.
	Did he laugh because it was black people pretending to be white people?
	I mean, why was he laughing?
	I didn't like it.
	I don't know.
	I have no idea.
	I mean, maybe that's why...
	Because it's not what you would call...
	It's not history.
	It's an entertainment vehicle that has memes of the era, supposedly, put into song and sung and...
	But you know what I mean, right?
	It was just like...
	I don't know.
	I just didn't...
	I'm a history buff, and I saw that thing...
	Whoa!
	That was funny.
	I don't know.
	Well, he was magnanimous, I'd say, generally.
	Okay.
	They booed me.
	What are you going to do?
	At least they didn't take a shot at me in the theater, Mrs.
	Lincoln.
	Yeah.
	Made some reference like that.
	Oh, man.
	Well, this could be an Ask John, really.
	I played a clip on...
	Let me see if I still have that one handy.
	Yeah, I played a clip the other day from that professor, the author, who used the N-word on CNN and pretty much made Brooke Baldwin cry.
	Remember that?
	Yeah, of course.
	I'll just play that for a second.
	Just that one bit.
	Let's bring in CNN political commentator and Trump supporter Paris Denard.
	Also, Charles Kaiser is with us.
	He's a CNN.com contributor and the author of multiple books, including The Cost of Courage, the story of how one French family fought the Nazis during the Paris occupation.
	Gentlemen, welcome.
	Thank you.
	Charles, let me just begin with you.
	I mean, now that you're hearing, we're getting some of the information coming out of this New York Times meeting that Trump has disavowed this particular group.
	Is that enough for you?
	Well, I'm delighted that my Mr.
	Trump has visited my alma mater at the New York Times and said that he doesn't want to do this anymore, but I want to give him a little advice for the future if he does not want to stimulate the alt-right.
	First thing, he should never retweet someone with the name White Genocide who lists his address as Jew America.
	That's what he did in February.
	He should never ask his supporters again to give the Nazi salute, which he did at a rally in March.
	That's not a good idea.
	In July, I think it was a mistake to retweet...
	Wait, when did he say that?
	In March, he asked his supporters to raise and pledge their support to his candidacy and promised to vote for him.
	There's plenty of video behind that.
	And then, of course, in July, he retreated an image of his opponent with the six-pointed Jewish star on it.
	I thought that was a mistake.
	But we have bigger problems here.
	Also in July, you know, he selected as his vice president the most homophobic man in American public life, a person who believes that gay people actually do not have the right to exist.
	And then, you know, if you don't want to support the alt-right, don't choose, as a White House counselor, a man who uses the word nigger, whose wife says that he did not.
	So, that was the shot that was heard around the world, because a white man said nigger on TV. Woo!
	Okay.
	Here's the question for you, John.
	In the CNN guidelines, are you allowed to use the word nigger, or do you have to use N-word, or can certain people use it?
	What do you think the guidelines are?
	I think the guidelines would be, if you're black, you could use it.
	You think they actually have that written down?
	That's what I'd write.
	Well, this came to a head the other night with our overnight sensation, Don Lemon.
	And actually, Brolf was in on this.
	This was a huge argument about whether he can use that word or not.
	We should not sanitize that word by saying, this person called such and such the N-word.
	No, that person didn't call that person the N-word.
	That person called, Sonny, I know you're going to get upset, that person called you or that person a nigger.
	They didn't say the N-word.
	I can't believe, Don.
	As journalists, That you, as an African-American man, are going to use that word just so flippantly.
	Words matter, and you should know that.
	I do know that.
	I have said the entire time that I've been here, I don't think we should bastardize a word.
	I don't think it should be used freely in songs over and over again.
	We shouldn't use it at all.
	If you're using it in context of a story, and it is relevant, you should be able to say it.
	In fact, I encourage people to say it because I think...
	You're encouraging people to use a racial emphasis.
	Because you should hear the impact of the word.
	No, I'm not encouraging people to call people the N-word.
	I'm using it historically.
	If you are, if I'm a journalist, journalists are part of the record.
	It is our job to convey the truth and to tell people reality.
	It is also our job to realize that there are certain words that should not be used.
	It shouldn't be used if you're calling someone, to use our journalistic conscience, to make sure that we do not use words that are offensive.
	Come on, bros, get in there.
	It's just like you wouldn't get on air if you're an expletive.
	If you're using it to call someone a derogatory name, not if you're reporting a story.
	In the last two hours, I've interviewed Cornell Brooks, the president of the NAACP, Mark Morial, the president of the National Urban League.
	They both wish that word would not be uttered.
	Why do you have to use that word instead of saying the N-word?
	You don't have to use that word.
	I wish that word would not be uttered.
	I wish people would not call each other that word.
	But you're uttering it yourself!
	But I'm not calling someone the word!
	I'm a journalist!
	I'm supposed to use it!
	We're supposed to tell the truth!
	I mean, are you kidding me?
	We're not supposed to sanitize it!
	Oh my...
	Oh, wow.
	Poor Don.
	Clip of the day.
	Clip of the day.
	Ah, thank you.
	That's very kind.
	Clip of the day.
	Dynamite.
	Well, and he did say earlier in that, I don't think I had it in the clip, that CNN says you can use it if you use it in historical context.
	Well, that's good.
	Progressive.
	Yeah.
	Ahead of the game.
	Good to go.
	Nice.
	You need to get rid of the word, so what are you going to do?
	Yeah.
	Okay, let's go to...
	Well, I just have a couple things.
	Yep.
	Let me get my glasses on.
	I do feel that Don Lemon should put a trigger warning.
	Yeah, it probably should.
	It should have a big beep, beep, beep, beep.
	Well, just a trigger warning.
	The word Niger may be used in this show.
	Nigel Farage wants to be the ambassador of the United States.
	Trump wants him to be the ambassador.
	Yeah, of course they do.
	So let's listen to how this evolves on CNN. They have him on for God knows how long.
	This woman doesn't know what to do with him.
	You gotta keep him on!
	So she's asking stupid questions.
	Farage is just driving right over her.
	But this is Farage 1, and he talks a little bit about some of the things that we talked about on this show.
	In fact, our show is the only one who actually produced clips from the House of Commons, and you may be able to find one of them.
	The House of Commons, where they sat around, this was about six months ago, they sat around trying to ban Trump From coming to the UK, and they called him everything under the book, in the House of Commons, they called him a buffoon, a clown, an idiot.
	I have a little bit of that, if you want to hear it.
	Yeah, let's play a little bit of that.
	I think this is it.
	Britain is pretty good at roasting beef.
	Do you not think it's better that we just roast Trump?
	At that point, about 1.6 billion Muslims.
	Thank God they're on 1.6 billion Trumps.
	His policy to close borders is bonkers.
	Donald Trump is free to be a fool, but he's not free to be a dangerous fool in Britain.
	He is a wazzock.
	His words are not comical.
	His words are poisonous.
	Donald Trump is a buffoon.
	Buffoon?
	Buffoonery.
	And offensive.
	Nasty, abusive, racist tweets.
	Not a criminal, a buffoon.
	Bring him here.
	Let us have the opportunity to challenge him and let him go home with his tail between his legs.
	And ultimately, buffoonery should not be met with the blunt instrument of a bang, but with the classic British response of ridicule.
	Buffoon!
	A buffoon, I tell you!
	A buffoon!
	So they, this woman who's on CNN, the interviewer, she doesn't know this.
	Oh, boy.
	And she brings up some very interesting points in these two clips.
	But let's start with clip one.
	Well, here's the thing, and this is what critics say.
	Oh, this is CarolCNN.
	Facebook.com slash CarolCNN.
	Oh, cool.
	You actually met him.
	She's a moron.
	Yes, she is a moron.
	She's kind, though.
	She's not offensive in the morning.
	No, but you think she knows something.
	She always looks like she's going to cry.
	Well, Here's the thing, and this is what critics say.
	You actually met and talked with Mr.
	Trump before the British Prime Minister did.
	They say that's not a great message to be sending to Britain's Prime Minister.
	What do you think?
	Well, it's unfortunate, isn't it, that nearly the entire British government said derogatory things about Donald Trump and his team during the election campaign.
	So they're not getting off on a very good start.
	Whereas, you know, I said that whilst I didn't agree with every single thing that Mr Trump said, I felt his direction of travel was absolutely right.
	And I have to say that since November the 8th, I think the way that he is being magnanimous in victory and calling for unity, I think is really good news.
	Well, some say he's not being overly lovely, magnanimous, in reaching out to the British Prime Minister.
	He's called nine world leaders before he actually talked with the British Prime Minister.
	And it seems to some people that the relationship between Britain's Prime Minister and the President of the United States won't be as warm as it historically has been.
	Well, I think there are some fences that need to be mended, and that's because of the nature of the negative things that were said by senior conservative politicians in Britain about Donald Trump and his candidacy.
	And that's what I would like to do.
	I would like to try to act as a little bit of a middleman to try and mend some of this so that we can get on with some really important work.
	Now, she obviously doesn't know anything about that.
	About the buffoonery!
	About these...
	House of Commons actually having a meeting to ban his entry into the United States permanently.
	Yeah, as I remember.
	And calling him one name after another.
	She was clueless about that.
	You could tell because she asked the same question twice.
	And it was only in, it was January 21st of 2016.
	So not even a year ago.
	It wasn't that long ago.
	You remembered it.
	That's, I mean, hello.
	So here we go with the second part of this where he actually pretty much promotes himself.
	He wants to be the ambassador, and Trump wants him to be the ambassador, and he's got a rationale for this.
	And I think he'd be the only one who could do it because everybody else is on record as insulting him.
	It's up to the British government.
	So, you know, I would say to Downing Street that I'm here to help if you want me.
	Okay, on that note, you did write on Breitbart, quote, like a bolt from the blue, Trump tweeted out that I would do a great job as the UK's ambassador to Washington.
	Your prime minister did not exactly welcome the interference from an American politician, and the first minister of Wales said if you got that job, it would be like giving a child a chainsaw.
	So, was that the right thing to do on Mr.
	Trump's politics?
	Well, I wouldn't take the Prime Minister, I wouldn't take the First Minister of Wales very seriously in anything that he says.
	It's remarkable that people with that low level of ability can reach so high in politics.
	As far as the Prime Minister is concerned, look, I'm in a different political party and they tend to view things in a very tribal way.
	What I have heard are lots of voices in business.
	In the United Kingdom, saying, wouldn't this make sense?
	And actually, there is some historical precedent for it.
	You know, we go all the way back to Kennedy's time.
	You know, he definitely had a say in who the British ambassador was in those days.
	Who was slated to be the British ambassador?
	Currently?
	Huh?
	Yeah.
	You mean instead of Farage?
	Nobody yet.
	Okay.
	But there is, like the ambassador who sits in the embassy?
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	The ambassador sits in the embassy, gets a good salary, and a pension, and parties.
	Yeah, parties, of course.
	But the problem is the spy part.
	The embassies are always the spy headquarters.
	They're not going to allow him.
	Usually the British and the French and some of these high-end really party, like especially the American ambassador to France, for example, they don't tend to be spies.
	Yeah.
	But they're always harboring the spies in the embassy.
	Oh no, the embassy is filled with spies.
	That's what I'm saying.
	I'm not saying that's not true.
	They can't trust him with all the spy craft.
	I don't think they need to.
	He's just going to be boozing it up the whole time.
	I'm all for it.
	I'm all for Faraj boozing it up in D.C. I'm down.
	I'm down.
	That would be fantastic.
	Now, there is something that this program is uniquely qualified to discuss.
	You cannot really get this conversation or the remedy for this global issue that is taking place right under our feet.
	And I, of course, speak of the African ant supercolony poised to invade the planet.
	Oh.
	I have ants.
	Yes, you do.
	Have you not heard about this?
	You'd think I would have.
	Yes!
	This is the Lepesioda ant.
	A species of ant from the forests of Ethiopia, and they look poised to become a globally invasive species capable of spreading around the world, disrupting ecosystems, and becoming a pest for humans.
	What kind of ant?
	What's their sociology?
	Their ant sociology?
	Oh, yeah.
	Oh, my goodness.
	For example, I'll go over this.
	We've done this before.
	I'll do it again.
	The Argentinian ant, for example, which is the one that is...
	The one that has taken over California and trying to get into Oregon, but it's mostly California right now.
	I know I saw Argentina and the whole way up.
	It has a different social structure than most ants.
	And for example, if you're in a hive one and there's another ant colony across the street in a hive two.
	I have your answer.
	I have the sociology.
	I found it.
	Okay, well, let me finish this.
	Yes.
	If I'm part of Colony 1 and my colony gets wiped out, I am gladly accepted into Colony 2 as a fellow ant, as opposed to most ants, which will kill me.
	Damn.
	This ant business is serious.
	Oh, yeah.
	All right.
	The species Lepicioda cannesens...
	Which is showing signs it forms super colonies, which are colonies comprised of more than one nest.
	These supercolonies allow a single species of ant to spread out over a large territory, a key step to becoming an invasive species.
	This concerns a group of researchers from various institutions in America and Ethiopia who published a study on the ants this week in the journal Insectes Sociaux, which would be social insects.
	They observed one similar species of ant in the same genus, the Lepiseota, have invaded South Africa's Kruger National Park and another temporarily shut down Australia's Darwin port after the ants were discovered amongst the cargo.
	So they're on the loose.
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	Well, I would like to see what happens when this colony, the African colony, the Ethiopian ants, are they big?
	Are they small?
	What's the size?
	I'm seeing them here.
	They have just killed a termite, and they look to be about half the size of the termite.
	I would like to see them up against the Argentinian ant and see what happens if you put 20 of these ants and 20 Argentinian ants in the same room.
	See what happens.
	I would also like to see when one hive is near an Argentinian hive.
	And then we still have the fire ants, which are here and there, and they are pretty nasty, and they would kill everything.
	I don't know.
	I think it's a challenge to get inroads into the American ant hegemony.
	Yeah, because our aunts just don't want any old Ethiopian aunts just taking over.
	I wouldn't think.
	Unless the fear that I have.
	I'm sorry?
	The fear that I have.
	The fear.
	Ant-wise.
	Yeah.
	It's the limit of my knowledge.
	Okay.
	Well, there is something here about the Argentinian ant, which is perhaps the most famous example of the supercolony builder.
	Of course, we have the ant spread across roughly 2,500 miles of Western Europe, including parts of Spain, France, Italy, and Portugal.
	In the U.S., California is home to an Argentinian ant supercolony spanning more than 500 miles.
	That's because in their non-native habitats, they can thrive.
	Once in a region, the invasive ants drive out native ant populations, and through ant war, and though ant wars, man, ant wars may seem, this is, hey, this is at least a cartoon, but maybe a feature film.
	Ant wars, ant wars, you thought you'd seen all the problems in the world, and then came the ants.
	The Argentinian ants' assault on native California ant species has also led to declines in predators that fed on those native ants, such as the coastal horned lizard.
	Let me see...
	No, so there's nothing else.
	I wonder if they're just trying to get some money to study this ant.
	Well, maybe.
	Possible.
	Anyway, would you please keep an eye on that?
	Because you are the resident ant expert.
	Yeah, I will look into this.
	This is something that I'm concerned about already.
	Yeah, thank you.
	Okay.
	This is a clip that I had left over from Thursday.
	I don't know why it's here.
	I guess it was an idea to keep it in here.
	Here's the name of the clip.
	I don't know what it is.
	Trump press pool versus Obama.
	Oh, okay.
	I remember what it is.
	This is, you know, Trump, remember he dumped his press corps and it's horrible and he's not doing it right and he's not following...
	He ditched him.
	He's not following protocol and tradition.
	It doesn't exist.
	Tradition and all that crap.
	Just remind everybody that the Obamas were not much better.
	In another rebuke to the press, Trump denied access to his meeting with the Japanese Prime Minister later in the week.
	There was a photo taken.
	It was a handout photo, which means it's basically a visual press release.
	Most major news outlets worked together and agreed not to show the photo as a form of protest.
	Can you believe that?
	I know we talked about that, I think, briefly, but it still bugs me.
	It does bug you.
	What is their job?
	To report the news.
	If all they've got is a photo, they run the photo, or they don't run the photo, but if they don't run the photo, that has to be an editorial decision.
	It's not done as a protest.
	If you said, editorially, I think this photo stinks, can we get anything else?
	No, we'll just write a little story.
	That's fine, but I'm not running it as a protest.
	That's not fine.
	And notice they coordinated it.
	We coordinated.
	A bunch of snivelers.
	Hey, one question I forgot.
	Do you think that the Ethiopian Anthony tastes good?
	I'm sure somebody knows.
	It would be crunchy, peppery?
	They're all peppery, I'm pretty sure.
	Okay, let's continue.
	That's why you didn't see it in the news coverage.
	These kinds of choices are made by news outlets in order to take a stand.
	We also heard from 15 different journalism advocacy groups this week, all urging the president-elect to not only provide a press pool, but also take other steps toward transparency.
	So let's talk about this rocky start, whether there's any reason to think it might get better.
	So Ben, we have seen some access this weekend.
	President-elect Trump greeting visitors to his golf resort.
	Do you think this is a positive sign, something we should actually be acknowledging and thanking him for?
	Or is this just the bare minimum acceptable standard for access to the president?
	Well, look, I think the expectation that he's going to make himself available to the press is a good one.
	And I hope that he does do that, especially after he becomes president.
	I think there may be some different standards for president-elects than president, but Ann would know that better than I would.
	But beyond that, you know, the fact is that...
	The press access for the last eight years has been quite terrible, and many members of the press have complained about this.
	I mean, the White House was releasing its own photos and tapes of events and not really allowing the press to cover it in the way that the press wanted to cover it for years.
	The DOJ was targeting people at the AP. I mean, there's been a lot of problems between the White House and the press, long predating Donald Trump.
	Do you see what I'm hearing here?
	This is, well, they're just saying, well, he's not following protocol because they want to get back to where they've already been shut out by Obama.
	Yeah, that's what he's saying.
	And I remember because they have that staff photographer.
	I remember that too.
	Obama's always bitching about the press.
	Yeah.
	That's not an excuse for Trump to not do the right thing here.
	The right thing.
	But it is worth putting in context.
	And is that true?
	The right thing is what protocol is, you know, tradition.
	The right thing.
	What we want!
	We're the press, dammit.
	Who do you think you are?
	You podcaster, you.
	How bad was it with the Obama administration versus, say, the Bush administration or the Clinton administration?
	Well, I don't think President Obama has a perfect record on this.
	Very often in meetings that he holds within the White House, conducting the Office of President, the White House will offer us a still photograph or put their own video on the whitehouse.gov website.
	The kind of meetings which traditionally with his predecessors, a press pool would always come in and get some video in person watching the president rather than be handed material.
	That's the new media age.
	We've given the tools of journalism, including Twitter, to the presidents and to the candidates.
	Now you see a theme there.
	They're starting to realize they're screwed.
	And they all think that they have handed Twitter.
	The press handed Twitter.
	No.
	No, no, no, no, no.
	No.
	You're watching the slow motion demise of the press.
	It's real slow motion.
	I don't know if the show will outlast the crash, but it's happening.
	Yeah, and it's been happening for a while.
	It actually began with television.
	If you really want to look at the numbers and you want to look at the ways things are going, during the Nixon administration, it was getting so bad that the media had to have these joint operating agreements on these various cities.
	It's what happened in San Francisco.
	It happened in Los Angeles.
	It happened in...
	Was that for advertising, you mean?
	For the advertising?
	Yeah, right.
	What they did was they're losing there.
	And this is before Craigslist.
	But they're doing this again, aren't they?
	These deals in markets.
	I think the deals are long done, and I think they're still...
	I don't know what the deals are doing today.
	But all I know is that they had these deals.
	They would do these deals.
	They'd take two press operations that were competing against each other and give them an advertising monopoly.
	Yep.
	And it would be the same newspaper, usually one in the afternoon and one in the evening.
	The evening papers all got, or I'm sorry, one in the morning and one in the afternoon.
	And the afternoon papers all died because of TV. And it was TV that was impinging.
	People were going to watch TV to get their news because the reports were easier to digest or they didn't want to read a lot.
	I don't know.
	I think a lot of it had to do with the designs and the way they were presenting the news.
	I look at old newspapers in the newspaper reading room once in a while and you get at Cal.
	You mean in your basement?
	No, in Cal.
	I do have a lot of stuff nowadays.
	I know it's online.
	But it's like they've been scrambling since the 70s, and it just keeps ratcheting down.
	It's just been accelerating, I think, a little bit because of the internet.
	And they're just oblivious to it, or they don't know what to do.
	By the way, I could solve this problem for them in 24 hours.
	It would be solved.
	It would be solved for everybody, but they're too chicken shit to do it.
	Okay.
	You ready?
	The fix is obvious.
	The only reason why advertising works on radio and television, just make it simple, but we'll add in the web.
	I mean, I'm sorry, newspapers.
	The only reason is because they have agreed to standards and organizations that oversee these standards known as circulation and ratings.
	But Nielsen doesn't actually know how many people are watching.
	They don't know if people are brain-dead in front of the TV. All the things you hear about podcasts, well, they downloaded it, but we don't know if you listen to it.
	No, you don't know.
	You don't know.
	I mean, with radio, you have some diary still.
	So people are apparently being honest, although a lot of people write in and listen to the No Agenda show.
	May not work very well for your overall ratings.
	Hit Z100. And if they would only agree, okay, this is a standards body, and we agree to this.
	Then it would be game over.
	As long as they can have an industry-wide support of whatever the metric is, it would work.
	But they're afraid to do it because they know then they really have to compete.
	That's why it's not happening.
	That is the answer.
	24 hours and I've got it done.
	What did you do?
	Well, I would just create a standards body until everyone...
	There is a standard rates and data.
	There's a bunch of standards bodies for newspaper advertising.
	No, I'm saying online.
	Online.
	There is no single standards body.
	Oh, I thought you said this is the way to save the newspapers.
	Yeah, by going online.
	I'm sorry, I didn't make it clear.
	If they're online with their little podcasts and their stories, and they have some form of actually accepted, agreed to metric that everyone's on board with, you could even call it hits.
	I don't give a shit what it is.
	It doesn't matter.
	Here's my take on what your take is.
	All right.
	It would accelerate their demise.
	Why do you have to give my plan away?
	Damn it.
	They would be toast overnight.
	Thank you.
	And most of these podcasts would be too.
	Yes.
	Unless they adopted our specific model.
	Which is, as you know, the value for value model.
	Imagine all the people who could do that.
	Oh yeah, that'd be fab.
	Yeah, on no agenda in the morning.
	Indeed.
	Indeed.
	Let's start off by thanking a few people who helped us produce this show.
	Yeah.
	It's one of our things.
	It's one of our things we do.
	We find people that help us and we mention them.
	And in this case...
	What a concept.
	What a concept.
	Baronet Donald Borowski of the Fire Bottles in Spokane Valley.
	$188.88.
	And he does have a note on the United Federation of Planet Stars.
	Ah, yes.
	We always have to break for that.
	Always stopping for that.
	What are you going to do?
	Nothing.
	These guys could blow us up out of the water.
	You got to do it.
	ITM John and Adam...
	Let me get some.
	I can put some behind this.
	ITM John and Adam because the sun's like going through and I'm reading both sides.
	Here are $100 plus a bunch of eights for the eight series.
	No agenda shows.
	Thanks for all the insightful post-election analysis.
	One last election item here in Washington State.
	Everyone's votes are posted.
	I didn't know this, by the way, even though I don't vote in Washington State.
	Everyone's votes are posted online by name, by the state.
	In high school civics class, I was taught that a secret ballot was one of the cornerstones of our country.
	of our government and that only dictatorships and banana republics made voting records public.
	Huh.
	You sell your vote in Washington state and No need to take a picture of your ballot.
	The state will provide proof of performance to the purchaser.
	Huh.
	I didn't know that.
	I didn't know that.
	I should know that.
	I didn't.
	W-A-6-O-M-I. Yeah, seven threes, kilo five, alpha, Charlie, Charlie.
	And anyway, that's always good to hear from the baronet.
	Yep.
	Ryan McConnell, $101.05.
	Ian.
	Trimble, $100.
	Jason Werner, $100.
	Scott Waldher, $88.
	He said he heard D.D. Dinah was triggered to donate.
	D.D. Dinah.
	We have a cover.
	It's a very good song.
	We discussed it on the show, didn't we?
	Yeah, we discussed how addictive it is.
	It took me months to get it out of my head.
	Love my Dinah.
	Sir Kevin McLaughlin, Locust, North Carolina, 8888.
	Those are the two.
	There you go.
	Is this it?
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	Maybe it'll trigger a whole bunch of other people, John.
	That's what I'm thinking.
	Maybe not.
	It might.
	It might.
	It's a catchy tune.
	Eric Hoff in Edmonton, Alberta, 8810.
	McLaughlin, by the way, you've got a birthday coming up.
	Joel Blazek in Reno, Nevada, birthday.
	8808.
	This is the boob donation.
	Oh, yeah.
	Hold on.
	We had a new boob.
	I had a new boob.
	Boob.
	Yeah.
	Ah.
	And the other boob discoverer from the newsletter was Sherry Laurie in Seaholm, Victoria, Australia, 808.
	She says she gots herself some boobs for her birthday on the 25th.
	Sir Robert Smiley, double nickels on the dime.
	Josh McDonald, double nickels on the dime.
	It's 55-10 to you.
	Thomas Lane, double nickels on the dime.
	Mercia, I think it's Mercia Stoica.
	I'm thinking.
	She's in Rome, I guess.
	No, RO is what?
	Romania.
	Constanta, Romania.
	Yeah, that's great.
	We got a Romanian now.
	Yeah.
	Send us intelligence.
	Ross Turpin in Troy, Kansas.
	50.
	These are all $50 donors.
	I'm going to name them and say where they're from if they're from anywhere.
	Peter Totes.
	Sir Peter Totes.
	Parts Unknown.
	Adam DeMoyne in Milton, Florida.
	Bryn Evans.
	Parts Unknown.
	Donald Napier.
	And that's Bryn's in Australia somewhere.
	Donald Napier in Oviedo, Florida.
	He gives us a lot.
	Chad Rich and you know where?
	Parts unknown.
	Marta Kallstrom, Portland, Oregon.
	And last but not least, this is a short list today.
	Because nobody's listing on Thanksgiving weekend.
	They're all driving or something.
	And Stephen Kirkpatrick in Langley, Washington.
	It's the other Langley.
	Yeah, the other Langley.
	All right, everybody.
	Thank you.
	Also, thank you, everyone, under $50, usually for reasons of anonymity, but a lot of people on the layaway plans for Knighthood, a lot of people just supporting us with what they can, and all of that is appreciated.
	But also, of course, the clips, the jingles, artwork, the ideas, chat room even, today.
	Yeah, doing good.
	Yeah, I think I set them straight, John, the chat room.
	I'm happy.
	Good.
	Yeah, and they're even complimenting your recorder playing today.
	I know it's not a recorder.
	What is it again?
	No, this is a recorder.
	Oh.
	I have recorded it.
	The other thing, which is the tone net, I'll show you the difference.
	Okay.
	The tonette actually has a sound that you can...
	I can play the tonette a little bit.
	The recorder, I don't know how anyone plays this thing.
	If you blow harder, it changes the note.
	Without changing any of the notes, someone's going to say, this guy's an idiot.
	Okay.
	I am an idiot.
	Possibly.
	I'm not going to do anything.
	I got the thing locked down, so there's no finger going to happen to listen.
	Oh, that hurts.
	That hurts.
	You can't play a single song on that?
	I mean, even I can play a song on the recorder or the Tonette.
	The Tonette I can probably play something, but this thing is going to be a little more difficult.
	I've got to get a little book on it.
	I don't know.
	I can barely get that.
	No, I think it is time, since you've obviously mastered the harmonica, it is time for the Tonette.
	Tonette.
	Tonette.
	Alright everybody, we've got another show coming up on Thursday.
	Remember us at Dvorak.org slash NA. And just in case anyone out there needs a little extra karma, you've got karma.
	We always got a little dose for you.
	And Joe Blazek celebrated on the 23rd.
	We say happy birthday to him.
	Sherry Laurie on the 25th.
	As Sir Kevin McLaughlin will be celebrating on the 31st.
	And Sir Robert Smiley turns 55 tomorrow.
	We congratulate all of you on behalf of the staff and management and the interns at the best podcast in the universe.
	And then we have one knight.
	He's not a black knight, but he is appreciated, nonetheless, of course.
	Lee Olivares, if you can...
	Ooh, be careful.
	Be careful, be careful.
	John, just get your sword now.
	Yeah, I put the thing down.
	Okay.
	Lee Olivares, please, sir, why don't you step on up.
	Come over here.
	Thank you very much for coming in with the big 880 today.
	That was highly appreciated.
	And you have now reached the pinnacle of no-agenda producership.
	And you are allowed to join the table of the dames and the knights.
	It's the round table.
	So for you, my friend, we have hookers and blow, red boys and chardonnay, sappho and spice, mangoes and filet mignon, samosau and chai, poutine and rye whiskey, garlic and broccoli, black hose and MD-2020, bad science and turkey breast, Sake and sushi, hookers and molly.
	We got hookah and blow, ass cream and bear fillings.
	We got hot pants and booze, geishas and sake, vodka, vanilla, bong, hits and bourbon.
	Ginger ale and gerbils.
	And of course, the mutton and mead here for you.
	Head on over to noagenternation.com slash rings.
	Give Eric all your info and tweet it out when it comes in.
	Um...
	I want to mention something just briefly, since America is pretty much seen worldwide as the most racist country.
	We invented slavery and all that.
	That's pretty much how it's taught in schools, I think.
	Yeah, that's the way it's taught in schools, even though it's all bullcrap, but okay.
	So, you know, the Black Pete thing in the Netherlands, which is...
	Ah, yes.
	It's my favorite topic.
	Yes.
	So, just shortly, briefly, we didn't even have Christmas when I was growing up in the Netherlands.
	There was no...
	Well, there was Christmas, but there was no Santa Claus and no presents.
	That was something...
	You went to Mass, to Christmas Mass.
	And I went.
	We used to go.
	It was fun.
	I thought the Catholics were suppressed in Holland.
	Yeah, not anymore.
	I mean, they had some kind of enlightenment something or other.
	Right.
	So what we've had for a long time is St.
	Nicholas, who comes on a steamboat from Spain, and he's got his black pizza with him.
	And the United Nations, some consultant from the United Nations, this woman who's been trying to get reparations for slave colonies, slave islands, mainly Suriname, Aruba.
	I would say mainly Suriname, really.
	She started causing trouble and saying, hey, this is racism, and of course we got worldwide accusations of blackface, which has nothing to do with it.
	It's not the culture.
	There's no blackface theater ever has been.
	And what What has been interesting in Dutch politics is there's a former television host.
	I think she used to do a book show.
	Smart gal.
	Very educated.
	Silphana Simons.
	She's originally from Suriname.
	I don't know if she was born there, but I guess she's second generation.
	And she formed a political party called the Think Party.
	Denk.
	D-E-N-K. The Think Party.
	And one of the main platforms she has is this racist Black Pete.
	And so she's been going through a very interesting transformation from someone who people thought was intellectual, interesting, usually like a Sunday afternoon type TV show, and she'd have a guest and talk about books, and she did some other stuff.
	Now she's turned into someone who the Dutch hate with a passion they hate her.
	They hate everything she stands for.
	Beside them, the majority, I would say.
	Not all, but the majority.
	Why are you doing this?
	Stop this.
	This is Black Pete.
	We're going to keep this.
	There's been all kinds of...
	It's gone through political systems.
	It's going to stay.
	It doesn't have to be outlawed.
	But she continues to say, I want to get into Parliament and I'm going to do something about this atrocity, this racism.
	What she is receiving, as one of the newspapers this morning, printed a lot of the emails that she's getting from Dutch constituents.
	Pretty much consistently, the Dutch call her a monkey.
	An ape, a monkey.
	And I'm blown away by this.
	Yeah?
	Yeah.
	I mean, I don't even think even racists in America go that far.
	Just consistently, every email, you stupid monkey, go back to Suriname.
	Yes, she's black, I'm sorry.
	Well, she's from Suriname, I should have mentioned.
	You gotta give us a little more information.
	Okay, I'm sorry.
	Yes, she's black.
	She's originally from Suriname.
	Yeah.
	So they're showing the signs of intense racism.
	Massive racism.
	That's funny.
	And the thing that was interesting to me is that the word is monkey, ape.
	They're always comparing her to...
	I mean, that's really racist.
	It's rude and racist.
	It's horrible.
	And to do that is insensitive, to say the least.
	And so they're just proving her point.
	She's going to end up proving the point that there's a racist country.
	Yeah, you're right.
	I hadn't even thought of it that way.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Well, they're fed up like all of Europe.
	Europe is fed up.
	They don't know what to do with themselves.
	People are freaking out.
	They're fed up.
	They're just fed up.
	I'm telling you, they're fed up.
	Well, let's listen.
	I was leading into, they're going to be even more fed up with this taking place.
	Turkey's President Erdogan's wasted no time in reacting fiercely to what he sees as another snub to Turkey by the European Union, whose parliament voted on Thursday to suspend EU membership talks.
	He's threatened to rip up the migrant deal that could see Turkey again allowing tens of thousands of refugees to flood into the EU. When 50,000 immigrants reached the border town of Kapikul, you wailed.
	What would we do if Turkey opened the border gates, you wondered.
	Look here, if this goes any further, those border gates will be opened.
	You should know that.
	Neither I nor this nation cares about empty threats, he thundered.
	The European Parliament's vote is non-binding, but was intended to send Ankara a signal.
	Stop the post-coup mass arrests of suspects, opposition politicians and journalists, a reaction Parliament considers disproportionate.
	Turkey has by far the largest refugee population of people fleeing conflict or repression in Syria and has many from other conflict zones.
	But although safe, because there's little work and no prospects, most want to leave.
	I can't wait to see how this one unfolds.
	Well, one thing that I think is a subtle little, I don't know if this was a trial balloon or what, but play the smallpox clip.
	Oh boy, I can only guess what this is coming to.
	Police responded with rubber bullets and water cannon.
	Around 1,500 refugees rioted in Bulgaria's largest camp, leaving dozens of officers injured.
	Hundreds of protesters have been arrested.
	It comes after authorities moved to steal off the camp in the southern town of Harmanli.
	That followed reports of a skin disease outbreak among immigrants.
	European Parliament member Angel Jambaski this week warned of the health risks to the wider population.
	People of Harmanili want to live in safety.
	They don't want to be made ill by some sickness which was around 100 years ago, carried by some Afghan farmer.
	People do not want to meet these people at night.
	The Harmanili camp currently houses 3,000 refugees, many from Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan.
	The population of the town itself is only around 18,000, some of whom fear infection.
	According to the medical academy in the capital, Sofia, the migrants may be carrying viruses and diseases such as smallpox.
	Smallpox is described as an acute, contagious disease.
	Around a third of those who catch it die.
	You know, what's interesting about that, and this goes back to the very beginning of this program, when I was reading the Lisbon Treaty, which is the surrogate for the European Constitution, if you read that properly and you follow all the documents through to the protocols...
	If the police, because the death penalty is supposed to be not possible in the European Union.
	However, if you are running away from the police for any reason, they can shoot and kill you with validity, legally.
	But, more importantly, anyone with a contagious disease can be rounded up and put in jail throughout all of the EU. Sounds like a plan.
	Blue?
	She just said in that report, contagious disease.
	Uh-huh.
	Well, it would seem to be an expeditious way to invade Europe by inoculating people with smallpox and then putting them amongst a mass of immigrants.
	I hadn't even thought of that.
	Well, that's the first thing I thought of.
	Time for your shot.
	Oh, man, that's a good one.
	And then you send them in there, and then since nobody's been given a vaccine against smallpox since the 70s, I believe.
	I mean, I have one, but my kids don't.
	No.
	And nobody does.
	And so most of the people under the age of, I think, 55 or 60 are susceptible.
	And this stuff spreads like wildfire.
	So this could be a very interesting ploy to decimate or actually be worse than that.
	The Europeans with these immigrants coming in.
	And I'm going to ask this question.
	I ask it every time these reports come in.
	What the hell are these immigrants from Afghanistan doing?
	Yeah.
	Why does anybody leave in Afghanistan?
	It's not the situation that you have.
	I mean, Kandahar is beautiful this time of year.
	I don't understand why you'd leave.
	I'm very suspicious about these Afghanistanis.
	Syrians, yeah, it makes sense.
	The place is being rubbleized.
	But anyway, so yeah, the small pipes.
	This is not being reported, of course.
	No, I like it.
	I like it.
	I like the mass vaccination program.
	And by the way, this is something that was predicted.
	Everyone knew that, of course, when you have this kind of influx of newcomers, you can have this kind of shit happen.
	Yeah.
	It's going to get so bad.
	I have no idea.
	Well, maybe that's the real reason that the State Department has put a warning about people wanting to visit Europe, and we're going to play this.
	This is the holidays in Europe, not safe, part one.
	Intelligence agencies in Europe are saying that because of the continued threat of terror in Europe this year...
	Why do I hear a child's...
	Chime in this report.
	He's got a man on the street.
	Somebody's grinding away with a monkey.
	Oh, a monkey.
	Agencies in Europe are saying that because of the continued threat of terror in Europe, this year, Christmassy events are going to be more dangerous than ever.
	Earlier this week, French authorities foiled an ISIL-linked terror plot in Strasbourg, the French city that's home to one of the most famous Christmas markets in Europe.
	Police across Europe are on high alert.
	In Britain, domestic intelligence agency MI5 says the threat of international terrorism remains severe.
	Add to that the U.S. government's latest travel advice to its citizens.
	It tells Americans to exercise caution at holiday events and outdoor markets in Europe and cites credible information that ISIL and al-Qaeda continue to plan terrorist attacks on the continent, especially during the holiday season.
	In fact, according to State Department advice to its citizens, countries such as Morocco, Egypt, Western Sahara, Jordan and Bolivia are all safer than Europe.
	We're all going to die!
	Oh my.
	Yeah, very insulting.
	But just so you know, what I heard, because I saw the first, I saw this before it even went out.
	I saw this was happening, happening between shows.
	And the thinking is Germany, Christmas.
	Germany, Christmas.
	Germany, Christmas.
	Christmas market or Christmas.
	That's the chatter.
	Well, it could happen, but let's play part two.
	They finally went out on the street and asked a few people.
	There's RT, of course.
	And they love to go out in the street.
	It's always funny.
	Always.
	Can you name some countries that you think the U.S. thinks is safer to go on holiday to than here?
	Probably Australia.
	Yeah, I'd say Australia.
	That's all I can really think of.
	Maybe Japan?
	I can't think of anywhere that's safer than the U.K. than Europe.
	Switzerland.
	Canada.
	Canada?
	Australia?
	New Zealand?
	Scotland?
	Back it up, back it up.
	You missed the guy saying Canadia.
	Oh, hold on.
	Canadia?
	I gotta hear that again.
	Switzerland?
	Canada?
	Canada?
	Oh, fuck it.
	I'm giving you a mid-clip.
	A mid-clip of the day.
	Come on.
	Come on.
	That is weak.
	They left that in?
	They left that in?
	Come on.
	They left that in?
	Scandinavia.
	I mean, are they joking us?
	Are they jokesters?
	I don't think so.
	They don't seem to have much of a sense of humor.
	They've got a smirk usually, but that's about as far as it goes.
	That's fantastic.
	Good, good word.
	Anywhere that's safer than the UK and Europe.
	Switzerland. Canada. Canada.
	Australia.
	New Zealand.
	Scotland.
	Well, it's not a different country.
	Okay, well.
	Denmark.
	Denmark.
	I wonder if they were just reading, if the producer had a piece of paper to read one of these names.
	I don't know.
	Canadian.
	It looks pretty sincere.
	Okay, I'll show you the results.
	Peace out.
	U.S. travel warnings mapped out.
	Yellow is us and Europe, you know, we're on alert.
	Green is safer.
	So what's the green there?
	That would be Egypt.
	Do you find it surprising?
	Yeah.
	They have, like, all of Europe.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, I wasn't expecting that.
	But Sierra Leone, Morocco, all green.
	Yeah.
	Surprising.
	For like all of this part, like Africa and everything.
	Yeah, and like India.
	And South America, Argentina.
	Like, yes, it is surprising.
	I like that.
	Let me play this jingle.
	It goes along with the caliphate.
	Caliphate.
	The caliphate.
	That is why we've all died of caliphate.
	Love and light for Florence Henderson.
	Oh, yeah.
	Love and light.
	I was watching her on Dancing with the Stars.
	I liked her so much.
	Darn it.
	And Dancing with the Stars, it really showed that some people just have great legs their entire life.
	Yeah, you're right.
	Yeah.
	That's true.
	Like the keeper.
	Now, I've got a...
	I've got a clip that's just a little off the wall.
	It's got nothing to do with anything we're talking about so far.
	But I was kind of riveted by this.
	This was a show where they were interviewing all the NASCAR racers.
	The ones that win a lot.
	And they won the cup and whatever.
	They all consider themselves athletes.
	And I think in some ways they are.
	It's no different than a horse race.
	Jockey's an athlete too.
	But this one little thing that Brad Keselowski said, I just...
	And I don't think it's true for all athletes, but he seems to think it is.
	Now, who is he again?
	Brad Keselowski is a champion from a couple years ago in the NASCAR. He's a really good racer.
	He's not the best this year, but I say he's always in the top five.
	And he has this to say.
	Military tank.
	It's motivation.
	You know?
	I think, by the way, that to be a great athlete in the professional level, and this is a common theme in everything I do, that you need to spend money.
	And I mean spend a lot of money.
	What do you mean?
	It goes back to hunger.
	You need to be hungry to be a great hunter in the woods.
	And when you're hungry, when you are right at the edge of your limits, Financially, it drives you in what you do.
	I think that's why most athletes go broke.
	And nobody really talks about that.
	But when you spend a lot of money, it makes you really buckle down when you're performing.
	Huh.
	Yeah.
	About poverty.
	That's why this show is so damn good.
	You're right.
	We got no money.
	We're broke.
	Yeah.
	You know what?
	When you're hungry, that is how America used to work.
	You got to work your ass off or you're going to be damn hungry.
	That's the murk I grew up in.
	And he says that's why most athletes are broke, and a lot of them are.
	I mean, bad money management is part of the problem, but they do spend a lot.
	I mean, look at Floyd Mayweather Jr.
	Why would he have, like, five Lamborghinis in one of his rooms in his house?
	I mean, that's just spending money for no reason.
	It's an art collection, I guess, but still.
	And people like, you know, they spend money and so they have no money so they can perform better.
	It's his logic.
	I don't think that's true for all athletes by any means because there's a number of them that are very successful businessmen.
	But I just thought that was the strange...
	I've never heard that theory.
	Well, it kind of boils down to the power structure that everyone needs to have to do something that is, even if it's a surrogate activity, they need to do something that tells your DNA you're working hard for your survival.
	That's what his theory is, yes.
	Yeah, I think he's correct.
	Of course, I do have, if you read the name of the clip, it's Brad Kozlowski's Psycho, which is my opinion of the whole thing.
	You think it's Psycho, really?
	I do, yeah.
	Huh.
	Jimmy Johnson, for example, I don't know that...
	There's a lot of these guys, I don't see them all just going nuts and spending all their money, spending a lot of money so they're broke all the time, so they can perform well.
	I just don't see everyone doing that.
	There are a number of people that go that way, and it's obvious he's one of them.
	Yeah, I think it's not...
	It can happen to some people, sure.
	I think some people can motivate themselves.
	They don't need that sort of, you know, true starvation as motivation.
	Hmm.
	It helps, though.
	I think a lot of people have gotten over that hump.
	They don't need themselves in that position.
	I do.
	You seem to, yes.
	You're borderline of that guy.
	Well, I mean, like, you know, it's like Saturday night.
	I'm hanging out with Tina.
	I'm like, oh, man, I got to start working.
	I got to prep.
	And then I think to myself, I think, self, you like food, don't you?
	Yeah.
	Yeah, I have that.
	I think you're right.
	I think it's why this works.
	Because we have taken the vow of poverty on the show.
	Are you still with me, John?
	Yes, I'm still here.
	I'm just counting my money from paper, mate.
	Less than 10 minutes to go.
	Okay?
	All right.
	I got an odd one.
	Just an odd one.
	Just kind of a throwaway.
	But thanks to G who sent it to me.
	This is your public broadcasting system.
	This is from PRI. This is what they air on NPR. And this is from Science Friday.
	You know, Science Friday is a really big show.
	And you'd be thinking and talking about science.
	I'm always interested in science.
	I don't deny science.
	And this is the science I got.
	I'm learning now that you massage your kale, Molly.
	Is that what you do with kale?
	You massage it?
	That is definitely something you can do with your kale.
	So kale has two issues that I think make it hard to love it raw in a salad.
	One is that it's kind of tough, and the second that it can be very bitter.
	And to help with the toughness of kale, massaging it, actually running your fingers over it to help the leaves loosen up a little bit.
	You can use a rolling pin over a bag.
	It really helps tenderize the leaves.
	But what happens when you do that is it makes the flavor of kale a little bit more bitter.
	And that's because the flavor of kale really only happens when you start to damage the cells within it.
	Because then an enzyme interacts with a sulfur-containing compound to create a totally new compound that they wouldn't interact if the cells weren't damaged.
	But this new compound is very bitter.
	Is that a bag of kale?
	I do have a bag of kale.
	We worked really hard on figuring out how to get kale to taste less bitter.
	This one is massaged.
	Massaged kale.
	Massaged kale.
	Wow, it is much more bitter.
	And so one thing in the book was trying to figure out how to make kale less bitter, and we discovered that rinsing it after you massage it and create all this bitter flavor can lessen the bitterness of the kale.
	Why eat this crap?
	That's my question.
	That did not go answered.
	It's not food.
	It's not edible.
	I pulled an ISO from it, though.
	Rinsing it after you massage it can lessen the bitterness.
	Yeah.
	Yes, now it sounds lewd.
	Good work.
	Have more kale.
	You will obey.
	That's right, we will obey.
	I can get the last clip in here.
	All right, good.
	I'm out of time.
	This is the one that's really...
	Everybody's up in arms about this because these cheap...
	This is California again, leading the way.
	Great California.
	Netflix tax.
	Customers of video streaming services like Netflix may be subject to a new tax.
	At least a dozen Bay Area cities are considering a utility-type tax on residents who cut the cord on cable.
	Critics insist it's illegal to impose taxes on the Internet.
	But the city of Pasadena just passed one.
	Right now, it's on hold because of resident complaints.
	What is that all about?
	You tell me.
	Those guys are nuts.
	California, man.
	We're not getting enough money.
	Here's California logic.
	First of all, they want everyone to get an electric car or something, so now these cars get 60 miles to the gallon if the hybrids and the electric cars get 100.
	And so now all the gasoline taxes, all the pump taxes have dropped.
	The revenues have gone through the floor.
	Yeah.
	So they don't know what to, oh, this is like unintended consequences of their stupidity.
	More potholes.
	And so they, yeah, we got more potholes.
	And so what you end up with is say, well, let's, we have to tax the electric car.
	And just as is, you have an electric car, you're going to pay a tax on it.
	To make up for the fact that you're not buying gasoline, which was the reason to get the electric car in the first place, so you didn't burn gasoline.
	Yep.
	It's an endless series of idiotic constructs.
	Go on, sorry.
	It's the unintended consequences of technology.
	It is exactly what Professor Kaczynski wrote about.
	Unfolding before your very eyes.
	Because no one manages to work that in to the end of the show.
	I don't know how he does it.
	It's talent, my friend.
	Talent.
	All right, everybody.
	Thank you so much for tuning in.
	If you're on the live stream, it's always nice to have you there.
	No, I'm not going to do the ant song again today.
	I figure that if there's enough ant material, someone could come up with a new one.
	Got ants.
	I got ants.
	All righty.
	Good.
	I know what's coming up this week, but there's always something we can deconstruct for you, and we're happy to do it.
	Remember us at Dvorak.org slash NA, as we'll be back on Thursday for our regularly scheduled show.
	And I am coming to you from the Crackpot Condo in the skyscraper here in downtown Austin, Texas, the capital of the drone star state, FEMA Region 6, if you're looking for it on a governmental map.
	In the morning, everybody, I'm Adam Curry.
	And from northern Silicon Valley, where Plato say, man who rushes masturbation pulls a fast one.
	I'm John C. Dvorak.
	And we will be back on Thursday with another episode right here on No Agenda.
	Until then, adios mofos!
	I have this room of young, you know, techno experts.
	I'm a techno expert.
	I'm a techno expert.
	I'm a techno expert team.
	techno expert.
	I'm a techno expert.
	techno expert.
	I'm a techno expert team.
	I have this room of young, you know, techno experts.
	I have this room of young, you know, techno expert.
	Amen.
	I'm trying to discuss nuance while they paint us and our candidates with the broadest of hateful brushes.
	I mean, I can't imagine he has any friend.
	Well, he's fantastic.
	You tell me that two same-sex people who love each other getting married somehow threatens your marriage.
	I mean, if you're an applicated guy.
	I'm from the Democratic Party right now.
	We're now churches slash white power meetups.
	- It's moving to see if it was mine.
	- Wow! - People like to throw around the street.
	- Not to me.
	- A reasonable person who's much more controlled.
	- Wow! - If somebody can talk to you, there's to the staff and then the senior advisor to the Nazi, I mean, you know. - How many white people leave the Democratic Party?
	...whole-er-than-out churches slash white power meet-ups.
	I can't believe in the seat of his mind.
	Wow!
	Complicated, but he's anti-Semitic.
	He's in.
	I can't believe in the seat of his mind.
	Wow!
	Complicated guy.
	We don't need what?
	We don't need wine.
	I submit.
	I'm appointable.
	Wow!
	White people leave me.
	We don't, we don't, we don't, we don't, we don't, we don't.
	You're fine.
	Wow!
	I'm announcing you're anti-black, and he's in.
	Okay, hang on.
	It's pretty big.
	Why are you sitting here?
	You're fine.
	Wow!
	We don't need white.
	It's a big, well, it's pretty big.
	I'm saying you're slag.
	Rinsing it after you massage it can lessen the bitterness.
	Hey, hey, hey!
	You read that.
	Thank you.
	Google's mission, however, is to organize the world's information.
	Information.
	We absolutely cannot have any type of bias whatsoever.
	We absolutely cannot have any type of bias whatsoever.
	We absolutely cannot have any type of bias whatsoever.
	The best podcast in the universe!

▲