Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Dec. 1, 2016 - No Agenda

02:58:54

882: Fact Check False

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Stop fooling yourself.
	Adam Curry, John C. Devorak.
	It's Thursday, December 1st, 2016.
	This is your award-winning Gitmo Nation Media Assassination, Episode 882.
	This is No Agenda.
	Fighting mold like the bio-weapon it really is.
	And broadcasting live from the darkest corners of the internet here in downtown Austin, Tejas, Capodron, Star State.
	In the morning, everybody, I'm Adam Curry.
	And from northern Silicon Valley, where Plato say, woman who chopped cocaine with foot, toes the line.
	I'm John C. Dvorak.
	It's Craig Vaughn and Buzzkill.
	In the morning.
	Another fantastic Plato says.
	Plato is a genius.
	I didn't know there were big Coke users back there in the Roman era.
	You're putting me on.
	Yeah.
	But I finally figured out why...
	South American products.
	It took a while before we got a clue.
	This whole Plato Says thing is really good for you.
	I think what it does for you is it gives you the idea that you too have done some show prep.
	Hey, I got tons of show prep.
	My reaction to that is an ISO that I collected just for you.
	I just want you to know, I practiced that joke a couple times before.
	Yeah, it seemed a little...
	Here, play the laugh.
	Hold on, hold on, hold on.
	Now, of course, when I do that, I get punished.
	I can't hide my console.
	Hold on, go away.
	There we go.
	I'm sorry.
	ISO. Ah.
	I got it.
	I like that.
	Oh, shit.
	Stop.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	Where did that come from, that gem?
	That ISO came from one of the YouTubers that's staring at the camera, a black guy, who says, I've only got one thing to say for all you who didn't support my man, Trump.
	Oh, boy.
	Here we go.
	And then he goes into that laugh.
	Okay.
	Well, let's see, John.
	I have a lot.
	A lot of stuff came up.
	The laugh's a keeper.
	Yeah, the laugh is very good.
	It'll go into the ISO bin for sure.
	Okay.
	Where do we start, man?
	There was a lot happening in Europe, too.
	Lots of stuff happening.
	So I don't know if you had any particular thoughts for today.
	Well, I mean, there's all kinds of directions we can go.
	Mm-hmm.
	We can start with something light and move on.
	I mean, I've got a little Lindsey Graham followed by John McCain.
	Oh, always good, yeah.
	Those two guys came out in one of those sessions where there's nobody seated.
	Now, were they doing their five minutes each on the podium, or were they speaking from there?
	No, no, they were both doing it as long as you want, open speech, at their seats or wherever.
	It wasn't up front.
	Mm-hmm.
	And it was about trying to get...
	You'll get a little hint of it.
	I can't play all this stuff.
	I can't stand it.
	But just play...
	So I made him as short as I could just to get you a feeling for it.
	This is Lindsey Graham.
	What about terrorism?
	We're not talking about car wrecks.
	We're not talking about slip and falls.
	We're talking about something that nobody really thought of when they created the exception to foreign immunity.
	And that is an act of terror.
	So here's where Senator McCain and I come out.
	Oh, boy.
	We want 9-11 families and other people who may be victims of state-sponsored terrorism, the ability to take the perpetrator to court.
	What we don't want is our government or any other government sued for a discretionary planning function, an exercise of sovereignty in the normal course of business.
	He's talking there about drones.
	He goes on and on.
	This is an hour.
	Hour of him yakking.
	And then he throws it over to his buddy McCain, which is standing there.
	I got a little bit of him.
	And I'll explain.
	Sorry.
	That cannot mean that we would endorse legislation that would hold the government of a nation responsible for an act that was committed from that country.
	We know today as we speak, in Iraq...
	In Mosul, there are weapons factories.
	There are chemical weapons factories designed to attack different places in the world.
	Wait a minute.
	Now, if there's an attack from Mosul, and lives are lost, and of course the government of Iraq doesn't know anything about it...
	Is the government of Iraq, I would ask my friend, now liable, held responsible for the actions of terrorists within their country?
	No, you just blame your chemical weapons on Assad.
	Well, a couple of things.
	Besides that little tidbit about the weapons being manufactured in Mosul, some big factory there, and now they're going to attack from Mosul.
	This is a scam these two guys have put together because they're so deep in bed with the arms business and Saudi Arabia.
	Yeah.
	They're trying to get Saudi Arabia off the hook for that bill that was just passed 99 to 1.
	Yeah.
	With a little rider.
	They got this little little thing they want to add, a little amendment that says, well, you know, if these if you can't prove it's really about they're just adding a barrier to the 9-11 victims.
	They now have to, if this got passed, it's still being discussed, I suppose, as is yesterday.
	That means the 9-11 victims would have to prove that the government was involved in, you know, directly.
	It's bullcrap.
	These guys are douchebag.
	These guys are incredible.
	Yeah, they're anti-American, pretty much.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, that's horrible.
	Yeah.
	Horrible, horrible.
	Well, speaking of Iraq and Syria and Mosul and other things happening in the Middle East, we've always been at war with Eurasia.
	Here's the latest from Turkey.
	Turkey's president has announced the start of a military operation in Syria aimed at ousting Bashar al-Assad.
	Recep Erdogan said that ending the alleged atrocities by the country's leader is Turkey's only goal.
	We have no interest in Syrian land.
	We are there to stop state terror and to end the rule of cruel Assad.
	Well, Turkey has already intervened in Syria.
	In August, it focused on border areas, naming ISIL and Kurdish insurgents as its main target.
	We are determined to save Turkey from the terror of the PKK by working hand-in-hand with our security forces and our brothers in the region.
	Finishing the organization called Daesh in Syria, as well as disabling it in our country, is an obligation to our people.
	Operation Euphrates Shield is the first step to the completion of that duty.
	I love how it's called...
	So first of all, the fact that Turkey is now in there is bad news for everybody.
	We do not need another actor on the theater, in that particular theater.
	So now I have to stop you for a second.
	I have a jackhammer.
	I can tell.
	Can you hear it?
	Yeah.
	It's a jackhammer.
	This is...
	Right outside the window.
	President Trump is already fixing your infrastructure.
	Isn't that great, John?
	Hello?
	Yeah, there he goes again.
	I don't know how long this jackhammer is going to go on, but you're going to have to be aware.
	It's doable.
	It sounds like you're in a war zone.
	Put me down.
	Put me down.
	It sounds like you're in a war zone.
	Alright, so I love that it's called Operation Euphrates Shield.
	Really?
	That's something the Turks come up with?
	I don't think so.
	Isn't that one of our old things?
	Of course it's one of ours.
	We come up with all that stuff.
	It's very disappointing what's happening over there.
	Of course, we had an attack, a terrorist attack, which...
	Oh, I'm sorry, we're not calling it a terrorist attack?
	I don't know.
	It was a guy who came in from Somalia and then he drove his car into people, which, as we know, is exactly what was predicted, that ISIS is going to be looking for weak-minded people and, of course...
	We'll hear that this guy was on some form of drugs.
	Oh, yeah.
	That's got to come out.
	Here's a little back story on this Ohio State attacker.
	He was interviewed by the school newspaper, and we showed the picture of this individual, Abdul Razak Ali Artan, the 18-year-old Somali, permanent resident of the United States.
	There you see it.
	He says in this article that appeared not that long ago, I just transferred from Columbus State.
	We had prayer rooms like actual rooms where we could go to pray because we Muslims have to pray five times a day.
	Then he goes on and says this.
	He says, I wanted to pray in the open, but I was kind of scared with everything going on in the media.
	I'm a Muslim.
	It's not what the media portrays me to be.
	If people look at me, a Muslim praying, I don't know what they're going to think, what's going to happen, but I don't blame them.
	Not that long ago in the student newspaper at Ohio State University.
	So clearly he was very sensitive to being a Muslim and going out and praying in the open.
	Right.
	And that you're still in the same situation there.
	He's sensitive, saying, don't judge me that I'm a terrorist because I want to pray in the open or because I'm a Muslim.
	And then months later, he gets a knife in a car and he attacks people.
	Well, I find out a lot of motive there, but that's very chilling to be able to see the side by side.
	Gee, what could the motive be?
	Hmm.
	But this is odd.
	No one's calling it a terrorist attack.
	It's very, I don't know, at best a lone wolf.
	And I picked up this clip from...
	How can you do that?
	I mean, you either make lone wolf terrorist attacks an item.
	Yeah.
	You don't all of a sudden have lone wolf non-terrorist attacks by a Muslim that seems like it would be a terrorist since he's supposedly screaming...
	Ali Akbar?
	Ali Akbar.
	Ali Akbar.
	There's a...
	That could be bullcrap.
	There's a security expert, national security professional, in irregular warfare, which includes counterinsurgency and counterterrorism.
	And he is also a professor at the Institute of World Politics.
	This guy, what's his name?
	Sebastian Gorka.
	Have you ever heard of this guy?
	I don't think I've ever seen him.
	No, he's probably new.
	No, he's not.
	He's been around for a while.
	No, I mean new to the...
	New to the scene, I think so.
	So he consults for USSO, USSO comms joint special operations, instructor at the John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center for school in Fort Bragg, FBI's counterterrorism.
	So the guy seems real.
	What's interesting is Wikipedia page, I've never seen this, It says, this article is currently protected from editing until December 23rd, 2016.
	Huh.
	I've never seen that.
	Oh, it's an editing dispute.
	But I guess they lock it down.
	That's interesting.
	Anyway, he was on Fox, and here's what he had to say about lone wolves, and I liked it.
	I repeat it again and again and again.
	The phrase lone wolf is designed to make Americans stupid.
	It is designed to make you disconnect the dots.
	There is no such thing as the lone wolf.
	Whether it's the Tsarnaev brothers in Boston, whether it's Major Nidal Hassan, whether it's the individual who recently detonated devices in New York and New Jersey, or this attack potentially, these are all individuals linked together.
	How are they linked?
	They are linked by the connective tissue of jihadi ideology.
	These aren't people who sit in a basement Go online and suddenly become jihadis.
	That has never happened.
	They are all part of a global conspiracy that I like to call the global jihadi movement.
	Oh, there you go.
	Wow, that's a new one.
	That makes total sense.
	And all these words are always carefully crafted, such as comprehensive immigration reform.
	What does that even mean?
	It means that you're a Democrat.
	Yeah, that's exactly what it means.
	Oh, man.
	So, I found...
	Actually, people have totally understood what I was trying to do with my last request for getting professional journalists who appear on podcasts and let their guard down and talk about what they really feel and who they really are.
	Which is great.
	And, you know, I gotta tell you, I'm very, very happy that people immediately understood this.
	It does a couple of things.
	It also promotes podcasting, which is nice.
	Oh, there's a great podcast promotion on the last episode of CBS's Bull.
	The whole show was about podcasting.
	Oh, really?
	Yeah, but it was about some girl who was a douchebag podcaster...
	Doing a news show done, overproduced, they had, you know, this is not just any old podcast, it's obviously a podcast with a staff of 50, but she had...
	It had poisoned the jury pool for this murder that took place, and they had to deconstruct her and her podcast.
	25 million listeners, by the way.
	What podcast is this?
	That cracked me up.
	Oh, she's got 25 million listeners, this woman.
	Per day.
	It was like a serial...
	Kind of a podcast.
	Oh, that's great.
	And she did it herself.
	And she was a little arrogant little Janine Garofalo character.
	And she was like not putting up with a lot of stuff.
	And she ended up going to jail because she wouldn't turn over sources.
	It was very interesting.
	I gotta hear this.
	I need to hear this thing.
	That's cool.
	The last episode of Bull on CBS, if you go to cbs.com, they have episodes for viewing.
	But I didn't get any clips.
	There was one decent clip about There was some negative comment made about podcasting in general.
	I wanted to clip that, but I never did.
	So I got...
	Let me see.
	Ben, and thank you to all the producers who, of course, are on top of this and said he'd be timestamps.
	Some have actually cut some clips.
	Not everything's good.
	Shorter clips are important, people.
	It's interesting how people think that four-minute clips work, that we play four-minute clips.
	That pretty much doesn't happen.
	I don't think we've ever played a four-minute clip.
	Yeah, of course we have.
	We break them up.
	We'll break it into like three-minute clips and add an optional minute.
	Yeah, but you know what I'm saying.
	I know you like to play the John Kerry four-minute clip if you could, but I'd pitch and moan about it.
	I gave up on that.
	I promise you I'm not going to do that anymore.
	No, this is from the NPR Politics Podcast.
	And the NPR journalists are now discussing amongst themselves.
	Now remember, this is not the radio.
	This is the podcast.
	So they can talk...
	Can you stop before you start that clip?
	I just want to comment on this because you've done all these things and I have.
	I think there is...
	Because I actually think you're on to something.
	And I've always felt this way when I clip stuff from Europe.
	Where there's an American...
	In Europe, talking about stuff that he wouldn't say over here.
	Right.
	As though it's like, you know, it's like when you go to Europe, all of a sudden, the legalities have changed.
	But when you go on the regular radio, you have a sense that people, a lot of people are listening at the moment.
	Right.
	When you're on the podcast and you're just in somebody's basement or garage or even in a studio, you get the feeling that it's...
	It's just, I don't know what it is, but there's a different feeling about it that doesn't give you the sense that you're going to...
	I think it gives you some sort of a freedom.
	Exactly!
	The freedom comes from the idea that you can say much more, and I don't think there's any oversight.
	There may be some podcast master, but let me tell you.
	When you're the general manager of a radio station, you're listening to the radio station all day, and then you hear something you don't like or you do like.
	It happens more often than you don't.
	What do you do?
	You hotline.
	You hotline the studio.
	I don't want to hear you talk about that again.
	Don't ever do that.
	Stop doing that.
	That's how the program director or general manager works.
	But a podcast, they do tons of podcasts.
	No one has time to listen to all of them.
	I'm sure nobody is.
	I don't know if they have audience listening to them, but here is a little piece.
	This was like a 40-minute podcast.
	I picked out a minute.
	This is regarding Trump's tweet about illegal votes, which we may or may not want to talk about, but if you hadn't heard, Trump sent out a tweet saying,
	you know, I would have won the We're good to go.
	And I think it's very possible that there are some, I don't know if it's millions, but here was their take on the tweet and just listen to it.
	So the big story this past couple days has been Donald Trump's tweet storm Sunday morning.
	He claimed that millions of people voted illegally in this election and that without them he would have won the popular vote.
	At this point, Hillary Clinton leads in the popular vote by more than 2 million votes.
	The exact tweet that Trump sent, among many others, was, quote, In addition to winning the Electoral College in a landslide, I won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally.
	Fact check false?
	Can we just...
	Yes.
	Did you hear that?
	This is my favorite.
	This is what they're doing now.
	Fact check.
	Fact check, false.
	No, fact check, false.
	Fact check, false.
	How can you say that?
	You don't know that.
	How can you say that's false?
	It's just a vague, vague commentary.
	Fact check, false.
	Fact check, false.
	And also, you know, in some ways, he's not even, he's only half serious when he says it, so why would you even fact check that?
	It's like me, it's like, there's a woman who chop a cocaine with foot, toe of the line, is fact check, false.
	Fact check, false.
	Let's listen to the rest.
	The people who voted illegally.
	Fact check false?
	Can we just...
	Yes, definitely.
	I mean, like, there is...
	I can just see them walking around the NPR offices.
	Hey, fact check false!
	Fact check false!
	Fact check false!
	Jeez.
	Literally no evidence, certainly no evidence, that millions of people...
	Literally no evidence, certainly no evidence.
	Voted illegally.
	How do you wait?
	Hold on a second.
	How does that sentence work?
	Fact check false?
	Mm-hmm.
	No, it doesn't work because they're just presuming that it's crap.
	No one's done any investigation.
	Hillary Clinton leads in the popular vote by more than two million votes.
	The exact tweet that Trump sent, among many others, was...
	Stop, stop, stop.
	Do they bring up the fact that California counts for that entire two million?
	Would that be NPR if they did?
	Oh, no, you're right.
	In addition to winning the Electoral College in a landslide, I won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally.
	Fact check false?
	Yes, definitely.
	Maybe that's something that's in their office HR manual or something.
	Are they saying this constantly or half the time you're putting it in?
	No, I'm putting it in half the time.
	But I'm sure this is what they say all over the place.
	Yeah, fact check falls.
	No evidence, certainly no evidence that millions of people voted illegally.
	Yeah.
	And even my question is, like, what is Trump's rationale in tweeting a thing like this?
	He won.
	I don't think he likes the fact that his Electoral College win was not confirmed or was not driven by an overwhelming popular vote win.
	Most of the time, the Electoral College and the popular vote coincide, but we've had now five times when they haven't.
	And obviously he did not want to be one of them, and it is a little embarrassing to talk about your landslide and your mandate and your great, great message from the people when more people voted against you than voted for you.
	You see?
	That's how they think.
	They don't want to actually go out and try and find anything.
	No.
	Just fact-check false, and he's just nuts.
	You know, did anybody bother to, like, maybe call Kellyanne Conway and ask, you know, or anybody at the camp and ask, why did he say this?
	Is it because he's irked that he didn't win the popular vote?
	Well, Scott Adams wrote something insightful about this.
	He said that Trump had forced the mainstream media to go beyond the sale with his tweet.
	And I didn't quite understand what he was saying.
	But what he means is Trump didn't say there were illegal votes.
	He said there were millions, and the conversation immediately went to not whether there were any illegal aliens voting, but how many were voting.
	That, I think, is very interesting.
	Excellent job of that.
	Right?
	Right?
	When I saw the tweet, I just thought it was a throwaway.
	I'm not even sure he tweets much anymore.
	I'm not convinced of it.
	Well, okay, since you bring that up, hold on a second.
	There's all kinds of issues with Trump tweeting.
	And the mainstream media are beside themselves.
	With anger about this.
	And they keep saying, well, they're going to have to take his Twitter away.
	I love hearing that.
	Who's going to take the president's anything away?
	Who's they?
	Who's they who's going to do all that?
	Here is Andrea Mitchell with an old friend of the show, former Secretary of Defense William Cohen.
	He's the guy that once recommended in the 70s when he was secretary of defense that we get earthquake machines and other types of weaponry.
	We've read that many times on the program.
	Yeah, something you'll never forget.
	No, I won't.
	And now here is Andrea and William Cohen talking about traditional media and Trump's tweeting.
	I think we have to be less concerned with tweets, chasing everyone as if it's some sort of revealed wisdom that's going out.
	It sort of raises questions about the media.
	Why are you chasing it?
	Why when a story comes out with a tweet which intuitively you know is not of significance and yet you spend an entire day analyzing it?
	So I think that the media has the responsibility to take tweets that are serious seriously and those that are irrelevant don't spend time chasing.
	Why is it our job and how can we assess what does he mean seriously on Twitter and what does he not mean?
	He's using social media.
	There are no news conferences.
	We have no access to him.
	The problem is that the media has become, the traditional media has become almost irrelevant because he is going directly.
	I agree with you on that.
	There's no filter.
	He's bypassing you and just putting out a tweet.
	So now you're left guessing what does he mean.
	I like how Andrea Mitchell just agreed.
	Yeah, yeah, that's right.
	Yeah, she just agreed.
	Yeah, we're useless.
	We're totally no good.
	We're useless.
	CNN, they had a whole panel that, you know, everyone's in the studio to talk about this.
	Angela Rye, we love Angela Rye.
	She always provides fabulous clips for us.
	Angela is, of course, the former Black Caucus congressional assistant, I believe.
	And, man, she is just not having the president tweetering.
	It may not be unusual, but it still doesn't make it constitutionally appropriate.
	That's exactly right.
	And I think that we have to start talking about this as this is our incoming commander-in-chief.
	This man should understand constitutional law.
	It's fine for him to say the Supreme...
	I think this was about the flag burning.
	And so, of course, this man...
	Oh, right.
	He made some comments.
	It should be...
	Take his citizenship away.
	Throw him out of the country.
	Exactly.
	Throw him in jail.
	Yeah.
	Now, that's a throwaway tweet.
	You know, that's something anyone can do.
	But no, they're taking it seriously.
	He doesn't understand the Constitution.
	Understand constitutional law.
	You know, because, of course, President Obama was a constitutional lawyer.
	It's time for him to say the Supreme Court ruled in Texas versus Johnson, and I don't agree with that.
	But I think it is curious.
	It's not what's in the 140 characters.
	It is the mindset behind what's in the 140 characters on Twitter.
	The reason we talk about this, Alice, over and over again is because it actually is legitimately scary to many of us who feel like we...
	I know, Anderson.
	It's actually legitimately scary to many of us.
	And you know what?
	I believe her.
	Talk about this, Alice, over and over again is because it actually is legitimately scary to many of us who feel like we...
	I know, Anderson, feelings.
	I'm sorry.
	But we feel...
	I guess you're not allowed to talk about your feelings anymore on CNN, so she disclaimed it there.
	Legitimately scary to many of us who feel like we...
	I know Anderson feelings.
	I'm sorry.
	There must be something.
	There was a memo.
	Yeah, a memo that says, hey, we're no longer talking about our feelings.
	It's only facts.
	Fact check fault.
	But we feel like we potentially elected a dictator.
	Someone who thinks he does not have to be accountable to constitutional law.
	He doesn't have to be accountable to the legislative branch.
	He thinks he could just come in and do some crazy stuff.
	When I first heard it.
	This is really what she believes.
	He can do whatever he wants.
	He doesn't have to listen to anybody.
	Come in and do some crazy stuff.
	He's a dictator.
	Crazy stuff.
	That's crazy.
	When I first heard that he was tweeting about something that was on this broadcast, a number of tweets, again, factually incorrect tweets last night, I kept thinking, doesn't he have a briefing book on ISIS to be reading last night at 10 o'clock?
	I love this.
	What is happening here is the entire image of what the President of America actually does is being destroyed.
	People believe that they sit there and the President's in the middle of the night pouring over his intelligence reports because he's off to save the world.
	Let's go back to Clinton getting blowjobs at his desk.
	There you go.
	That's a little more like the president of America.
	9 o'clock or 8 o'clock.
	He's turning away those briefers.
	You know that.
	There's been reports that he's not even receiving the briefers.
	There's a huge amount of information that for him to be absorbing now and thinking about, and the fact that he's watching shows, I appreciate he's watching the show.
	He doesn't have a Nielsen box, so it doesn't really help, but what is he doing?
	Yeah, but that was true during the campaign.
	But I get a person that campaigns.
	Well, I guess I would still say, even then, he should have probably been boning up on what's going on.
	Oh, he should be boning up on what's going on.
	It is concerning that he continues to do this, but in terms of the substance of what he said, I think the revoking the citizenship part is very concerning.
	To be fair to him, Democrats have supported...
	No, no, she actually says something very good here, I have to say.
	To be fair to him, Democrats have supported this.
	And even though it is constitutionally protected, there have been repeated attempts to have constitutional amendments.
	So if he supports that, that's actually...
	I don't support it.
	I disagree with it.
	But it's actually not really out of the mainstream.
	Oh, that was an interesting moment of clarity.
	Did they play one of the Hillary clip where she's all against Blake, Bernie, and all the rest of it?
	No.
	Everybody else played that clip.
	I don't know if anyone's watching, John.
	I really don't.
	No, you are watching CNN. That's it.
	That's it.
	You know, last night we were watching Dolly Parton's Christmas special.
	I love Dolly Parton.
	You've been boning up.
	I've been boning up.
	I love Dolly Parton.
	But man, the commercials, it was just one pharmaceutical after another.
	I mean, the people who watched that last night, besides Tina and I, they're dead.
	They didn't even put on Viagra or Boner Pill ads.
	It was just, oh, you got this, you got that, you messed up, you got arthritis, you got diarrhea, you got irritable bowel syndrome.
	Irritable bowel syndrome.
	The restless leg syndrome.
	That was my old time.
	I want to take a quick break from what you're up to and play, since you brought it up, it's like being in a court.
	You brought it up.
	I brought it up, yes.
	In a court of law, this will be used against me.
	The worst commercial ever, a one and a half minute op-op-devo commercial is absolutely a jaw dropper.
	For adults with advanced non-small cell lung cancer, previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy, including those with an abnormal ALK or EGFR gene who've tried an FDA-approved targeted therapy, this is big.
	A chance to live longer with Optivo Nivolumab.
	Optivo demonstrated longer life and is the most prescribed immunotherapy for these patients.
	Opdivo significantly increased the chance of living longer versus chemotherapy.
	Opdivo works with your immune system.
	Opdivo can cause your immune system to attack normal organs and tissues in your body and affect how they work.
	This may happen any time during or after treatment has ended and may become serious and lead to death.
	See your doctor right away if you experience new or worsening cough, chest pain, shortness of breath, diarrhea, severe stomach pain or tenderness, severe nausea or vomiting.
	Extreme fatigue, constipation, excessive thirst or urine, swollen ankles, loss of appetite, rash, itching, headache, confusion, hallucinations, muscle or joint pain, flushing or fever, as this may keep these problems from becoming more serious.
	These are not all the possible side effects of Updivo.
	Tell your doctor about all your medical conditions, including immune system problems, or if you've had an organ transplant or lung breathing or liver problems.
	A chance to live longer.
	Ask your doctor about Optivo.
	See OptivoTV.com for this and other indications.
	Bristol-Myers Whip thanks the patients, nurses, and physicians involved in Optivo clinical trials.
	Rest in peace.
	Now, they think that they say there's more.
	You've got to go to the website and see more contraindications.
	And on the screen, as they were reading the stuff, there was other stuff showing up on the screen of all this crap that can happen to even touch one of these pills.
	Now, this is for lung cancer?
	It's some sort of, some specific cancer.
	I thought they said lung cancer, didn't they?
	I think it's just, but it's not any old lung cancer.
	Let me just check.
	For adults with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.
	Oh, non-small cell lung.
	So the small cell lung cancer, that's what my mom had.
	It's like, goodbye.
	You have a chance if you have the non-small cell lung cancer.
	Yes.
	So these are the not necessarily written off to die in six months, people.
	But what is interesting is this topic of lung cancer came up on my favorite show, my beat, I went to Cuba last April, and it's interesting.
	I mean, they have a 100% literacy rate there, so everybody gets a free education.
	Everybody has top of the line medical care, so everyone's healthy.
	As a matter of fact, there's one thing that's interesting to me, because there's a vaccine that's being developed in Cuba to treat lung cancer.
	Hold on a second.
	Vaccines prevent.
	They don't treat.
	To treat lung cancer?
	And it's showing very promising results.
	So if Trump says we're going to cut ties with Cuba completely, our doctors will not be able to work.
	Our doctors won't be able to work with him.
	We'll die of lung cancer.
	Trump did it again!
	Wow.
	She sure doesn't know how the system works.
	No, she doesn't.
	Somebody's got a valuable lung cancer vaccine.
	It's getting out.
	There's nothing to do with Trump.
	Yeah, no, our doctors can't work with them then.
	I have more from the view later if you want to hear some crazy convoluted crap.
	Yes, I unfortunately do want to hear it, but it just makes me groan.
	Well, here is...
	Now, this was very interesting.
	And, you know, we have new reporters...
	In the White House press pool, this young lady, I had never seen her before.
	She's sitting front row.
	And there's a couple of young kids.
	Maybe it's just on, you know, Tuesdays or Mondays.
	I don't know.
	Question came up.
	White House, right?
	Yeah, White House.
	Yeah, with the Josh Earnest spokeshole.
	Extraordinaire.
	And the question comes up, hey, you know, so President Trump, elect Trump, whatever he said, she said, he did this deal with Carrier.
	And so, you know, this has been a thing he's been talking about in his campaign, and they're going to save a thousand jobs by somehow incentivizing Carrier or disincentivizing Carrier not to go to Mexico with one of their factories, multiple factories.
	So this comes up, and, you know, and of course the question is, how do you guys feel about it?
	You know, what's your vibe?
	His answer?
	It left my mouth ajar.
	Late yesterday, Carrier announced a deal with President-elect Donald Trump to keep close to a thousand jobs at an air conditioner plant in Indianapolis.
	I guess all of the details of the deal haven't been announced, but I was wondering, does the White House have any thoughts on kind of the strategy that has been employed to maybe lean on a private company to get them to keep jobs does the White House have any thoughts on kind of the strategy that Is that a strategy?
	By the way, I love how she sets that question up.
	Is that a strategy to lean on companies like they're the mob?
	Hey, listen, you better, you better.
	Is that really kind of brusque?
	Get them to keep jobs in the U.S. Is that a strategy that the White House approves of, that thinks it's a good thing to do?
	I guess I just want to talk on that.
	Well, you know, obviously we haven't seen the details of the announcement from the company, but, you know, obviously the early indications are that this is good news.
	Oh, what will he say, John?
	It's good news.
	It's good news.
	Do you think he can actually continue and close out the compliment?
	Yeah, yeah, of course he could.
	That's a really nice guy.
	Obviously, we'd welcome that good news.
	I know that the president-elect has indicated that he deserves credit for that announcement.
	And I guess what I would observe is that if he is successful in doing that 804 more times, then he will meet the record of manufacturing jobs that were created in the United States while President Obama was in office.
	There were 805,000 manufacturing jobs that weren't just protected or saved.
	You remember that?
	No, I don't remember, but this guy's a douche.
	Oh, no, it gets much worse.
	But this was after the election, after we had the big bailout, the stimulus, and the administration kept this running metric of how many jobs saved or created there were.
	You remember that?
	Yeah, I do remember that, of course.
	So saved or created.
	And now he's messing it all up.
	He's like, created, saved, just listen to this.
	Manufacturing jobs that weren't just protected or saved, but actually created while President Obama was not.
	Oh, what?
	President Obama has set a high standard.
	And President-elect Trump can meet that standard if this carrier deal is completed in the way that he expects that it will be.
	And if he does that 804 more times, then he will match the standard established by President Obama.
	At least when it comes to manufacturing jobs.
	The one difference would be that the President-elect is talking about protecting jobs.
	And the metric I'm using is actually creating jobs.
	If you go to protecting jobs, there are more than a million jobs in the industrial Midwest that were saved or created when President Obama made the decision to rescue the American auto industry.
	And the long-term benefits of that fateful decision that was not initially popular has...
	Yielded a substantial benefit for the entire country, but certainly for the industrial Midwest.
	Alright, so he's saying that the president didn't just protect, but created thousands, thousands, millions of jobs.
	Was Trump supposed to have done that already?
	Fact check, false.
	What's he implying?
	Well, he's implying that Trump, oh, right.
	Okay, well, if you do that 800 more times, then you're kind of close to our guy.
	However, I did want to point out that we were on top of this like crazy mofos, and I pulled out a clip that we played in episode 321, July 2011.
	The president himself in the very same briefing room talking about how many jobs were saved, And or created.
	Our biggest priority as an administration is getting the economy back on track and putting people back to work.
	Now, without relitigating the past, I'm absolutely convinced and the vast majority of economists are convinced.
	Don't you love that?
	The vast amount of economy.
	This is like the whole climate change thing.
	Yeah, 97.9%.
	Yeah, we didn't even notice that then.
	Litigating in the past, I am absolutely convinced, and the vast majority of economists are convinced, that the steps we took in the Recovery Act saved millions of people their jobs.
	Or created a whole bunch of jobs.
	A whole bunch.
	You remember that?
	Yeah, I do.
	A whole bunch of jobs.
	So shut up, Joss Earnest.
	That's just patently false.
	Fact-check false.
	Okay?
	False.
	Now, wait, I got to continue and then I'll be done.
	While we're on this, you know, you just said 97%.
	I like that a lot.
	Yeah.
	I just want to tell you, before you veer off a carrier, I do have a carrier clip.
	I want to finish that off.
	No, let's roll, let's roll, let's roll.
	And here's the reason for this clip is because it's a kind of a thing I want to ask you at the end.
	All right.
	So how did the deal get done?
	And is it unusual for a president-elect to do something like this?
	It is unusual.
	How many times have you seen people running for office, whether it's president, whether it's governor, senator, whatever it might be, and they say, we're going to keep your jobs here.
	And in the end, they really don't keep the jobs there.
	We don't know the specific details, or at least we don't know many of them, regarding why the Trump administration was able to convince Carrier to keep that plan Indiana.
	But if you read between the lines, it's pretty clear.
	That United Technologies, the parent of Carrier, which has about $6.5 billion in federal contracts, mostly with the Defense Department, didn't even want to start off the new administration, start off a relationship on the wrong foot.
	So that's part of this.
	A statement issued today by Carrier.
	They don't get into details, but they issue some platitudes in terms of how they're able to see things eye-to-eye with the Trump administration.
	The incoming Trump-Pence administration has emphasized to us its commitment to support the business community and create an improved...
	More competitive U.S. business climate.
	The incentives offered by the state were an important consideration.
	Those incentives, it's been reported by a couple of outlets to be about $700,000.
	Look, that's a drop in the bucket to a company like United Technologies.
	The bottom line is this, guys.
	You do not want to see a new administration starting and having an attitude about a particular company if you're the CEO of United Technologies.
	And that's why I think they ultimately said, let's make a deal to keep this plan open.
	Sorry, I was supposed to be asking Adam.
	I'm sorry.
	Now this seems to me, you have these giant corporations that own stuff like Carrier.
	United Technology is huge.
	They just make nothing but business with the government.
	You could strong arm all of them.
	Easily.
	Hey, do you guys want any contracts?
	The carrier company, Obama administration, who's supposed to be Labor Democrat, they could have easily done the same thing, but they didn't even bother.
	They're actually happy they're leaving.
	It's like one, I hate to say it, but one party, the Democrats, are so into the globalization, let's get them out of Indiana, fuck the people that work for them, move them to Mexico, and then we'll be good to go because it's all part of a bigger scheme.
	It's unbelievable.
	I was very distressed.
	I mean, as soon as I heard technology, it was a no-brainer.
	Just go to the CEO and make a call, this is Donald Trump.
	Hey, we want you to keep carrier.
	You know, you like those contracts, don't you?
	In fact, it is kind of like the mafia when they describe it that way.
	You like those contracts, those big government contracts.
	I don't see any reason you're moving the carrier plant.
	Yeah, why would you do that?
	Mm-hmm.
	Oh, yeah, you're right.
	Let me look into it.
	Yeah, we'll take care of that right away.
	Yeah, anyone could have done that.
	We could have done that.
	Yeah, anyone could have done it.
	That deal, that deal, yeah.
	I wanted to bring up 97% for a very specific reason.
	And that is, well, actually, going back in time here for a moment, if you look on the YouTubes and you want to find the sanctimoniously slug, smug, slug is also good.
	Sanctimoniously slug.
	That's a new one.
	I like it.
	John Oliver.
	He did this whole thing about climate change and how 97% of scientists believe in it.
	And it was with Bill Nye the Science Guy.
	I just wanted to play that short clip so we can refresh our memory on his stance on the 97%.
	The debate on climate change should not be whether or not it exists.
	It's what we should do about it.
	There is a mountain of research on this topic.
	Global temperatures are rising, heat waves are becoming more common, sea surface temperatures are also rising, glaciers are melting, and of course no climate report is complete without the obligatory photo of a polar bear balancing on a piece of ice.
	The only accurate way, a survey of thousands of scientific papers that took a position on climate change found that 97% endorsed the position that humans are causing global warming.
	What's interesting...
	Is that he actually factually states that it was a survey of thousands of scientists and that 97% of them had put something in their document.
	That's certainly not all scientists or all climate scientists, but he's very clear.
	97% is in.
	It's a mountain of evidence.
	Are you insane?
	97% people!
	97%!
	That's a number.
	You can't overcome that number.
	Stop fooling yourself.
	Until he came up with this little ditty the other day.
	98% of the people that took the courses, 98% approved the courses they thought they were terrific.
	Okay, first, there is something instantly fishy about 98%.
	The only things that have that level of unanimous approval are dictators, Pixar movies, and Neapolitan ice cream.
	Yeah, it's got chocolate for the chocoholics, vanilla for the borings, and strawberry for the perverts.
	Exactly.
	Thank you, John Oliver.
	Very good.
	Sanctimoniously smug.
	There you go.
	Sanctimoniously smug.
	All right.
	There you go.
	The sanctimoniously smug.
	Debunked once again.
	With your numbers game, John Oliver.
	That's a very good one.
	That's a borderline clip of the day.
	I'll take a borderliner.
	All right.
	Glad you liked it.
	Are we done with this topic?
	Can I move to something else?
	Please.
	Well, let's go to this.
	The CENTCOM Senate had a report.
	Is this a report from Guy-Anne?
	Yeah.
	Yeah, she's been, uh, we've been tweeting.
	Have you seen it?
	I say hello, Guy-Anne.
	That's right, Guy-Anne, an RT star reporter who now tweets the best podcast in the universe.
	I don't know if you saw that.
	Did she tweet back?
	Yeah, and one of our producers tweeted, hey, you know, great job on the CENTCOM, this exact topic that you're about to bring up with these reports from her.
	And she said, yeah, you know, thanks.
	And, you know, of course, I tweeted her back.
	I said, you know, you even have your own jingle on the best podcast in the universe.
	And that's when she blocked me.
	You blocked you?
	No, I'm just kidding.
	I'm just kidding.
	It's always possible.
	By the way, before we get into your report, just quickly.
	Did you hear that Twitter has now verified the Muslim Brotherhood's account?
	And they still haven't verified you?
	No.
	The famous Adam Curry from the MTV days?
	That's right.
	I am unverified.
	I'm just a low-life loser.
	But they verified the Muslim Brotherhood?
	The Muslim Brotherhood is verified.
	Yes, sir.
	Yes, sir.
	Isn't that great?
	I'm going to have to look into this.
	I'm not taking this at face value.
	I'm saying that because I find it incredibly hard to believe that they would do such a thing.
	It's just encouraging terrorism.
	Yeah, I'll send you the link.
	I have multiple people reported on this.
	Okay, this CENTCOM report, this is very interesting.
	This is about the attack where the U.S. accidentally shot up a bunch of Syrian army, even though they're not even supposed to be in the country.
	The Americans aren't even supposed to be in the country.
	And they're But they shot up a bunch because of this possibility.
	So they shot this up.
	When you get to the basics of this report, especially in part two, it's like, who are we kidding?
	And I should probably...
	Well, I'll go back to another little angle on this, which is that both the United States and the Economist magazine has already done this.
	The United States and Great Britain.
	Great Britain has had hearings.
	Hearings on Russia today, accusing them, giving slanted reports.
	The only reason we get so much material from them is because of reports like this.
	Our top story.
	The U.S. Air Force says coalition planes accidentally targeted the Syrian army in the city of Der Ezzor.
	And strikes would have continued if not for a call from the Russian military.
	That's the result of an investigation into the incident which happened in September.
	The strikes were conducted under a good-faith belief that the strikes were targeting ISIL in accordance with the law of armed conflict.
	The U.S. CENTCOM investigator said he found there was no intent to target Syrian forces.
	He said the U.S. military believed they were targeting ISIL. He said it was an unintentional, regrettable error.
	The investigator also came to the conclusion that the U.S. forces have not violated laws of armed conflict.
	From the way CENTCOM presented this, prosecution seems very unlikely.
	We've seen this happen before when the Pentagon investigates a strike that went terribly wrong, like the bombing of the hospital in Kunduz, Afghanistan, decides it was unintentional and therefore not a crime.
	The U.S. airstrikes on September 17th in Deir Ezzor, Syria, killed over 60 members of the Syrian military.
	It reportedly allowed ISIL to make advances in the area.
	They then had to be pushed back.
	Other details came up during the CENTCOM investigators' briefing.
	The U.S. CENTCOM investigators said that the strikes would have lasted longer and would have killed more people had there been no hotline contact between Russia and the U.S. on Syria.
	That hotline was established as part of efforts to prevent an accidental clash between Russian and American forces.
	Now, call back to the beginning of the show, here's how a hotline works.
	When the general manager or program director hears something that they don't like, immediately they can call the studio, the red light lights up, then they tell you what to do or not to do.
	Immediate action, that's a hotline.
	Right.
	Yeah.
	Well...
	Let's listen to part two.
	Here's what I found striking in the CENTCOM investigators' report.
	There was an officially designated point of contact for the hotline.
	When Russia called to say that the coalition was hitting the wrong people, that hotline point of contact on the US side was unavailable for 27 minutes.
	This is, mind you, a hotline between two major military powers established to avoid accidents.
	You would think every second would count.
	What the CENTCOM investigation also revealed was that the U.S. military called Russia in advance to notify of airstrikes in the area, but gave the wrong location.
	The investigator said nine kilometers south of Derizor.
	According to the CENTCOM, this was the first time the U.S. had notified Russia of its airstrikes in Syria in advance.
	But as we now find out, the wrong location was given in that notification.
	Many errors were apparently made that night, on September 11th, and throughout the days leading up to the strikes.
	Russians, for some time now, have been asking the United States to give pre-planned coordinates of where they plan to strike.
	And unfortunately, the United States has turned them down each time.
	And in this case, they gave the wrong coordinates.
	And I'm a little concerned as to where they got the coordinates from.
	Because even though the report remains classified, I would suspect, and again, this is just my opinion...
	The classified portion of that report basically was telling them that the information came from someone from one of the various groups the United States has been supporting and took it at face value.
	And one of those groups clearly has it out against the government and may have purposely given those coordinates.
	However, it seems despite the miscommunication and lethal consequences, working with Russia is not on the Pentagon's mind.
	Will the United States consider cooperating with Russia to validate targets on the ground in the future?
	We have no plans at this point to cooperate with Russia in that way.
	Oh boy.
	So why did they do it once?
	I don't know.
	They got the hotline.
	So one time they give Russia the wrong court and say we're going to go bomb this place.
	But they've never done it before or after.
	The whole thing is very suspicious.
	Hmm.
	Yeah, and from what I understood from Guyanne's tweet is that the hotline was picked up, but nobody was able to connect it to CENTCOM for 27 minutes.
	So someone did pick up the phone, but they just couldn't get any further.
	Well, along with this, there's a bill that passed the House of Representatives and will now go to the Senate.
	And we've heard parts of this before.
	I had no idea it passed the House.
	Kind of stealthy.
	H.R. 5732.
	The act may be cited as the Caesar-Syria Civilian Protection Act of 2016, the CSCP. And I'll just give you the findings.
	This is a law that would pass our...
	Past our House of Representatives.
	Congress finds the following.
	Over 14 million Syrians have become refugees or internally displaced persons over the last five years.
	Number two.
	The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights has reported that since 2012, over 60,000 Syrians, including children, have died in Syrian prisons.
	The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights is one guy in an apartment in London.
	We've talked about this guy many times.
	Yeah, that bull crap.
	Yeah, he's the number two reason that Congress is coming up with this bill.
	That's their fact.
	And then the third one, in July 2014, the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives heard testimony from a former Syrian military photographer, alias Caesar, who fled Syria and smuggled out thousands of photos of tortured bodies.
	Remember this?
	We talked about it.
	I think you even had a clip.
	Yeah, we discussed it in great detail.
	And it was pretty, you know, it was like, well, you know, we don't know the guy's name.
	We have to keep it secret.
	You know, he testifies in the dark.
	Christ, with a bag over his head.
	Yeah, that's their number three reason.
	And then in June 16, 2015, hearing of the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives, United States Permanent Representative of the United Nations, Samantha Power, testified there are alarming and grave reports that the Assad regime has been turning chlorine into a chemical weapon.
	And on June 16, 2015, Secretary of State John Kerry stated that he was absolutely certain the Assad regime had used chlorine against his people, which has been debunked.
	It is a lie.
	It's been debunked and that other attack has been debunked by a million debunkers.
	Yes.
	So, this is a very large bill, and it's going to free up a lot of resources and money, ultimately, to knock Assad out of power.
	That's what they all want.
	They want him gone.
	McCain, Graham, those guys.
	So, I'm keeping my eye on this bill, and I hope Jen Briney does, too.
	She'll help us with that.
	Is it in Senate or House?
	It's going to the Senate now, but just past the House.
	Oh, it was a House bill?
	Okay.
	Yeah, just past the House.
	That looks like another one of those things that...
	Keeps her out of service for a long time.
	These long bologna bills that are just so long nobody can read them.
	Yeah.
	Well, that's a shame.
	Yeah, well, good report from Guyenne there.
	That's pretty good.
	But, you know, please remember...
	Sorry?
	Please remember, she works for state-sponsored television, so you've got to take it with a grain of salt.
	Oh, you mean like the BBC would have those guys, BBC? Yes.
	Or CBS News, that's one.
	That's not state-sponsored.
	It isn't?
	It looks like it.
	The CIA broadcasting system?
	I thought you were convinced that's state.
	Oh, man.
	You want to do some fake news?
	Well, before we do, since we're on the RT thing, I want to get a couple of things out of the way.
	Oh, please, please.
	Before we get to fake news, there is a...
	Let's play the RT. This is in the UK. This is the RT. They're having hearings now because RT is such a massive threat to modern democracy.
	Wait, in the UK they're having hearings about RT? Yes.
	Oh my goodness.
	Here's one of the hearings.
	Britain's relationship with Russia has been the focus of a Westminster Foreign Affairs Committee session.
	That comes just over a week after a report was presented to the UK Parliament which called for public figures with pro-Russian views to be singled out and to be discredited.
	Among those who spoke to the panel were representatives from RT and Russia's Sputnik News Agency.
	I'm very grateful for you coming.
	What would you describe as your values and your founding principles?
	Our role is to tell the news as we see it and often to give space to overlooked stories and alternative perspectives.
	I know that I and others who have appeared on RT, we have...
	The other day I was called by an American neocon think tanker a Trojan horse for the Kremlin.
	Or a Putin apologist, because I dare to appear on your show.
	I see that as an attack on freedom of speech.
	What interference, if any, would you get from Moscow or Moscow politicians?
	None.
	None.
	That may or may not be true.
	I can't believe they're having hearings about this.
	Oh yeah, yeah.
	And meanwhile, as in part two of this report, you find out that the EU has passed a rule.
	Do you recall...
	Okay, yeah.
	We went through the whole report?
	Is that what this is about?
	No, no, there's something else.
	A non-legislative resolution was also adopted by the EU Parliament last week.
	It puts Russia and ISIL on the same level.
	This is exactly the report that I read for us.
	Oh, okay, I'm sorry.
	...in terms of perceived informational threats.
	We spoke to Peter Tuscott, who was present at Tuesday's meeting about the inquiry.
	I know that this report they've been working on for almost a year and they've been gathering in evidence from various experts and their idea is to examine UK-Russian relations.
	I didn't agree with the resolution of the European Parliament.
	I think that it's very harmful to attack different branches of the media just because you disagree with them.
	I think one of the...
	The beauties of the West, if you like, is that we have a pluralism of media.
	People can watch whichever media they like, and they can judge whether to watch one media or another.
	And I don't think it's really for the European Parliament or anyone else to say that we don't like the media content of one particular television channel or radio channel, and therefore it should be banned or discouraged.
	We discussed this, and part of what the EU's resolution is, is...
	To fund journalists so that they're good.
	We talk about the licensing.
	Yeah, so they do the right thing.
	I think this now does fit into fake news.
	No, actually.
	What?
	No, no, no.
	No, it doesn't.
	You cut me off.
	Sorry.
	This is a four-parter.
	Oh, I'm sorry.
	I only saw two.
	And the reason that this is a four-parter is because of what you said during the discussion of England and having a hearing on RT. And then, of course, we had the other discussion, which was in the EU. Why is this all going on?
	So I caught Robert Gates on the morning show.
	Uh-huh.
	On CBS, where he was there for about 15 minutes.
	He was there for a long time.
	Director of FBI. And CIA, and Defense Department, and he was all over the place.
	And he ran Facebook for a while.
	No, you're thinking of Mueller.
	Oh, I'm sorry.
	Wrong guy.
	Robert Gates is the square-headed, white-haired CIA guy.
	Yeah, you're right.
	And he's worked for eight different presidents, and they brought him on because he's the guy who wrote the book behind the scenes in the early years of the Obama administration where he condemned Biden, if you remember.
	Yeah.
	Saying he was a bonehead and everything he said was wrong.
	Oh, yeah, I do remember this.
	Remember this?
	Yeah, sure.
	This was the book that poisoned Biden insofar as running for president.
	Okay.
	So he's a Hillary CIA stooge, from what I can tell.
	Gotcha.
	And this kind of proves it.
	Here he is.
	I got a two-parter here.
	This is him.
	First, this is...
	Gates walks back.
	With the election behind us, we continue our series, Issues That Matter, to explore the challenges facing our country.
	This morning we are looking at national security with former Defense Secretary Robert Gates.
	In September, Gates' voice serious concerns about Donald Trump and a Wall Street Journal opinion piece.
	He wrote, at least on national security, I believe Mr.
	Trump is beyond repair.
	Gates added he is unqualified and unfit to be commander-in-chief.
	Secretary Gates joins us now for his first interview since the election.
	Welcome.
	Thank you.
	So how do you see him now since we have seen and looked at him as president-elect?
	You know, I wrote that op-ed based on the statements that have been made in the campaign about our allies, about NATO, about nuclear weapons in Japan and Korea, about China, Russia, about our troops, about our generals.
	And I must say, I think that based on what I've seen since the election on these issues, I'm hoping I was wrong.
	And you know people that are talking to him as well.
	And I know a lot of the people that he's talking to.
	I've talked to a lot of them.
	And I've encouraged them to serve.
	It's critical for us, now, that he is president-elect, for him to be successful as president.
	So he walks back because he's embarrassed.
	Of course.
	And so this discussion goes on and on and on.
	Then it goes into a little bit about Russia.
	And I'm thinking, well, we have the Russians investigating RT. These guys are bad actors.
	We have bad news about them here.
	We have it in the EU. What might be going on here?
	Let's listen to this.
	We sent a message that we can be pushed around by Russia?
	I think that what has happened in Syria, what has happened in Ukraine, and the reactions, I think...
	Outside observers would say that the Russians have us on our back foot in terms of what to do about their behavior and their activities in these areas.
	What does that mean, the Russians have us on our back foot?
	Well, at a disadvantage.
	That they have seized the initiative, for example, in Syria.
	And so if there's an outside power that's...
	Calling the shots, if you will, in Syria right now.
	It's Russia, not us.
	And they're pushing in Europe as well.
	Pushing in Europe.
	You know, these stories about trying to bring about a coup in Montenegro.
	The activities pushing against the Baltic states, Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia, and so on.
	And the German intelligence chief said this morning that he's concerned they may try to tamper with German elections.
	Well, and then there's the whole internet cyber problem affecting our election.
	And perhaps the Brexit vote.
	Oh, you do more than just Plato says from show prep.
	I rescind.
	They're going to blame the Brexit vote on the Russians.
	Oh, it gets better.
	Now my follow-up clip.
	This is beautiful.
	I think...
	Well, we'll play the jingle in a minute.
	This is another, what am I calling it?
	Prestitute podcast.
	That's my new name.
	Prestitute podcast.
	NPR and NPR has Craig Tinberg of the Washington Post on the program.
	He is one of the authors of the article that kicked it all off about Russia's fake news.
	And in hindsight...
	What am I calling it?
	The European Union, the Parliament's resolution against RT and Sputnik seems conveniently coordinated with all this, doesn't it?
	Absolutely.
	I'm really enjoying the coordination.
	Now, this guy, who was a senior Washington Post journalist...
	He really just...
	The things that come out of his mouth.
	Describe what this propaganda campaign consisted of.
	So there's legions of botnets and...
	Hold on.
	Legions?
	Legions.
	I guess legions.
	Do you know how much a legion is?
	No.
	I looked it up.
	Three to six thousand in a garrison.
	That's a legion?
	Yeah, a legion.
	A legion's within a garrison?
	Yeah, I can give it to you exactly.
	Actually, I saved the page.
	A legion, the definition, from Old French, the Roman legion, 3,000 to 6,000 men.
	Let me see.
	I don't actually say if it's in a garrison, but a legion is 3,000 to 6,000 men.
	Okay.
	So that seems like that would be a lot of botnets if there's legions.
	But there may be a lot of...
	Well, that would mean a botnet itself could consist of a million computers.
	Yes.
	Yes.
	So legions of botnets...
	Is not...
	Is astronomical.
	Yeah.
	That would encompass the entire world.
	Describe what this propaganda campaign consisted of.
	So there's legions of botnets and paid human trolls that collect information and tweet it to one another and amplify it online.
	And that makes these stories that in many cases are false or misleading look much bigger than they are.
	Now, this is interesting.
	I have not heard this particular use of a botnet.
	What he's saying is that very much like algorithms in stock trading, that these botnets are actually, all of them have a Twitter account and they're amplifying messages by retweeting.
	I have no...
	So in other words, somebody has a, you know, I've seen these fake accounts.
	But he's saying that the botnets are really amplifying stories.
	Yeah, I've seen these fake accounts that are supposedly amplifying anything.
	They got seven followers.
	If that, if that.
	I don't know if it works.
	I think maybe you can get something to trend, but let's just listen to the story.
	He goes off the rails.
	They look much bigger than they are, and they're more likely to end up trending on Google News or end up in your Facebook feed.
	Botnets meaning networks of automated fake people, or what?
	Well, they're not fake people.
	They're essentially computer programs that you can program to sort of tweet back and forth to each other.
	What the researchers found were that there were these thousands and thousands of social media accounts that just basically amplified what one another was saying, and they did it essentially in a massive online course.
	Why would Russia want to do this?
	Well, like, I think we've seen a lot of evidence that the Russians had a stake in the election that just passed.
	They've been mad at Hillary Clinton since the protests in Russia in 2011.
	Which we instigated, I'm pretty sure.
	We instigated that through the State Department with NGOs.
	Yeah, that's when they clamped down on NGOs over there.
	Yeah.
	Protests in Russia.
	Which, by the way, is exactly what the European Union just resolved to do.
	They're going to do the same thing.
	We've got to get all the NGOs out or fund our own NGOs.
	It's so transparent.
	Russians had a stake in the election that just passed.
	They've been mad at Hillary Clinton since the protests in Russia in 2011.
	They clearly seem to have a fondness for Donald Trump.
	And probably the most important reason is because we're a strategic competitor with Russia, and so undermining our democracy and our claims to having a clean democracy clearly were important goals to the Russians.
	Was that animosity towards Hillary Clinton and fondness for Donald Trump reflected in the kinds of stories that were being promoted through these channels?
	Yeah.
	The Hillary Clinton storylines about her being sick or dying or a criminal about to be arrested, all that sort of stuff got...
	Wait a minute.
	Okay, hold on.
	Stop.
	I know.
	I would say that this stuff about her...
	So, in other words, when we all witnessed her pretty much pass out.
	That was fake news.
	Having to leave the event that she wanted to go to so badly, which was the 9-11 memorial, and then getting to her limo and then a movie of her passing out on the curb and dragging her ass into the thing, losing her shoe.
	Fake.
	All fake.
	Fake.
	That was fake.
	Fake.
	All fake news.
	Just fake.
	What was the other one?
	He mentioned some other one in there.
	Well, there's a couple more coming up.
	Storylines about her being sick or dying.
	Sick or dying.
	Well, we're all dying.
	And sick?
	Yeah, she was definitely sick.
	Or a criminal about to be arrested.
	Well, hold on.
	What was that thing with Comey?
	The guy's the head of the FBI. He's the one who brought this up to the public.
	Fake news.
	Fake news.
	Are you questioning the Washington Post, son?
	I don't think so.
	All that sort of stuff got amplified.
	Stories about Donald Trump being a candidate who could bring peace and settle tensions with Russia also got amplified.
	Crazy!
	The amplified peace!
	Can you not do that, Russia?
	There's also lots of stuff that was just...
	You know, tension raising.
	There were reports of supposed international incidents, you know, a fake coup in Turkey.
	What?
	All that news about the Turkey thing was...
	Fake news!
	Fake news?
	Yeah, fake news, John.
	It's a fake coup.
	Is this guy insane?
	He's a lunatic.
	He's one of the guys who...
	Podcasts do this to you.
	He's not thinking straight.
	And he definitely has no editor for the garbage coming out of his piehole.
	But that really went too far.
	Incidents, you know, a fake coup in Turkey, the prospect that the U.S. was going to attack another country.
	That sort of stuff got echoed as well, in part just to raise the temperature of tensions during the election.
	Does the U.S. government have tools to detect or prevent this from happening?
	Oh, save or create.
	Seems like minimal use to find out after the election that this was all going on.
	I think it's safe to assume that the U.S. government does absolutely have tools to monitor this.
	It's not clear that they or anybody else have tools to stop it, though.
	They're the ones doing it!
	We invented it.
	We invented the internet.
	We invented propaganda.
	We invented propaganda in television.
	We invented all of this.
	We should just be pissed off that they're doing a better job.
	Anybody else have tools to stop it?
	I mean, how many times do you see someone say, oh, there was a great video on the Voice of America?
	Yeah, no.
	Just stop it, though.
	I mean, one of the things we deal with in the story is here Facebook and Google...
	have claimed that they can really crack down on fake news.
	They're kind of going to get off the sidelines on this issue.
	But it turns out it's hard because the news ecosystem is enormously complex and it's easily manipulated.
	And there's lots of reasons to manipulate it.
	If you have a certain political point of view, you can get a hearing in the internet that you couldn't get 20 or 30 years ago.
	During the campaign, American intelligence agencies said Russia was responsible for hacking the DNC emails.
	Now there's this.
	It sounds like there was a multi-pronged intelligence and misinformation effort by Russia to impact the US presidential election.
	Can we say whether it worked?
	I don't think there's any way to know if...
	He has vocal fry, too, by the way.
	Hey, whether it worked?
	I don't think there's any way to know if it worked in the sense that it determined the outcome of the election, though that thought alone, that we've been talking about it, is kind of remarkable.
	Look, there's no way to run a parallel election and take these factors out and see what happens.
	But let's remember, this was a very close vote, where just a few tens of thousands of votes in a few states ended up making the difference.
	Oh, yeah.
	I don't know.
	If you believe that the kind of information that crashes through all of our social media accounts affects how we think and potentially how we vote, I think you would conclude that this kind of stuff does matter.
	Well, there you go.
	That is the man who launched the article about the fake news.
	Now they're going to make news.
	Fake news.
	So that guy's whole report was like fake news.
	This guy is the expert.
	And, yeah, there's a couple more things to tie into this before we take a break.
	One is a note that I received, and I have a copy of it.
	This is a, let me just open this up.
	Several senators, I think it's seven of them.
	It's in the show notes if you want.
	822.noagendanotes.com.
	To the President, dear Mr.
	President, we believe there is additional information concerning the Russian government and the U.S. election that should be declassified and released to the public.
	We are conveying specifics through classified channels.
	Thank you for your attention to this important matter.
	Ron Wyden, Jack Reed, Mark Warner, Barbara Mikulski, Maisie Hirono, Angus King, and Martin Heinrich.
	So they have something else they want to pop open and let everybody know about it.
	I don't know what yet, but there's something a-brewin'.
	Yeah, good luck.
	And the president did an interview with Rolling Stone.
	Did you read this interview that he did with Jan Wenner?
	No.
	Oh, this is a must-read.
	Well, you have to know that Wenner, of course, is a huge obot.
	No kidding.
	I mean, Gwen Ifill just passed the torch for hagiographer of the year to Jan Wenner.
	There's a lot of things in here.
	What was interesting is that the interview took place the day, which was scheduled the day after the election when Trump won.
	Actually, I have a...
	I suppose it was scheduled that day so they could gloat over Hillary winning.
	In fact, let me read from the article.
	He says here, the last time I interviewed the president was in 2012.
	It was a lazy afternoon.
	I'd gone over a timeline.
	No, here it is.
	My final interview with the President of the White House had been scheduled for the day after the presidential election.
	I'd hoped to look back on what he had achieved over eight years and the issues that mattered the most to him and the readers of Rolling Stone.
	Here is advice for Hillary and about the road ahead.
	We're all in.
	And that's a journalist.
	He's going to talk about Hillary.
	He didn't even have questions about Trump.
	I'm sure.
	Hillary's going to win.
	I want to read a little bit more from this, but I'll go now to Laura Ingram, who's a conservative talk show radioist.
	It must have been Fox that she's on.
	And she highlights something from this interview.
	This president, for all of his kind of, you know, no drama Obama, comes out and in a very infantile manner blames cable news, and I'm surprised he didn't mention talk radio, my field, because that's what he usually does, Without any sense of personal responsibility.
	So they say Trump can be immature at times.
	What was that?
	And he goes over to Europe and he says, well, you know, I'm actually very popular.
	Look at the polls.
	Like, my policies are actually very popular.
	You just got shellacked.
	No, he got shellacked.
	No, no, no, no.
	But slam!
	But slam!
	So here is a piece, just a little excerpt, about America still being a progressive country.
	I think that nothing is determined but that the number of people who have a strong belief in a fair, just, equal, inclusive America is the majority and is growing.
	And part of the challenge, though, that we do have, and this is something that I've been chewing on for a while now, is that there's a cohort of working class white voters that voted for me in sizable numbers, but that we've had trouble getting to vote for Democrats in midterm elections.
	In this election, they turned out in huge numbers for Trump.
	And I think that part of it has to do with our inability, our failure to reach those voters effectively.
	Well, maybe the hope and change thing, and yes, we can, had something to do with it, because he didn't.
	Yes, we can, he did not.
	But there was no change whatsoever, except in their pockets.
	You can take that to the bank.
	.
	But, we've had trouble getting to vote for that.
	And by the way, just one more complaint.
	He ran as an anti-war candidate.
	Oh yeah.
	Does anybody figure out that maybe the American public is a little sick and tired of war?
	And Hillary is another war pro?
	Well, she's actually running as a pro-war candidate.
	Well, just so you know, part of the problem here is the inability, our failure, says the president, to reach those voters effectively.
	Part of it is Fox News in every bar and restaurant in big chunks of the country.
	I have never seen Fox News in any bar.
	No, it's ESPN or CNN. It's always ESPN or some football game.
	Or CNN, yeah, I know.
	Or CNN, like at the airports.
	Every airport has got CNN running.
	There's no Fox.
	So he says...
	Part of it is also Democrats not working at a grassroots level, being in there, showing up, making arguments.
	That part of the critique of the Democratic Party is accurate.
	We spend a lot of time focused on international policy and national policy, and less time being on the ground.
	No, you can be on the ground all you want.
	People are tired.
	They're tired of words.
	That's what he keeps saying throughout the entire interview.
	Because this is not simply an economic issue, it's a cultural issue.
	A communications issue.
	It is true that a lot of manufacturing has left or transformed itself because of automation.
	Really?
	Is that why Carrier was going down to Mexico?
	Because the automation down there is so much better?
	Mexican automation, baby.
	Let me write that down.
	Mexican automation.
	Those guys don't mess around.
	I got those pens.
	Oh, you got the InkJoy pen?
	Yeah, they're pretty good.
	I like it.
	It's pretty good.
	But during my presidency, we added manual...
	Okay, blah, blah, blah.
	Pretty much what he's doing, what he keeps saying...
	Maybe I'll just go to the end here and give you the payoff.
	He says throughout the whole article that that's what he's going to be concentrating on when he leaves the White House.
	He is...
	Let's see...
	I'm sorry, somehow my markings run away.
	But anyway, what he says is that he is going to be working on strategies for progressives of better communicating with the middle class and working America.
	And what I find fascinating about it, you really have to read the whole thing because it's really woven in throughout his entire interview here.
	Here it is.
	Well, the most important thing I'm focused on now is how we create a common set of facts.
	Yes, we need a common, we need a ministry of truthiness.
	How we create a common set of facts.
	That sounds kind of abstract.
	Another way of saying it is, how do we create a common story about where we are?
	The biggest challenge that I think we have right now in terms of this divide is that the country receives information from completely different sources.
	And it's getting worse.
	What?
	Wait for it.
	The whole movement away from curated journalism to Facebook pages, in which an article on climate change by a Nobel Peace Prize winning scientist looks pretty much as credible as an article written by a guy in his underwear in a basement, or worse!
	I don't know if it can get much worse than that.
	Well, maybe the 400 pound guy, I guess that's what you...
	Or something written by the Koch brothers!
	He said that?
	Yeah, he says it right there.
	Koch brothers!
	Yeah, the Koch brothers are blogging away on the Facebooks.
	People are no longer talking to each other.
	They're just occupying different spheres.
	And in an internet era where we still value a free press and we don't want censorship of the internet, that's a hard problem to solve.
	I think it's one that requires those who are controlling these media to think carefully about their responsibilities, licensing, and whether there are ways to create better conversation.
	It requires better civics education among our kids.
	Agree.
	So we can sort through what's true and what's not.
	It's going to require those of us who are interested in progressive causes figuring out how do we attract more eyeballs and make it more interesting and more entertaining and more persuasive.
	Well, first of all, I would suggest you hire the Curry-Dvorak Consulting Group because we can give you a couple of pointers.
	And this is what he says he's going to be focusing on.
	So all this noise about Trump TV network...
	President Obama is going to set up some kind of media initiative with, you know, common set of facts.
	It'll be like Media Matters.
	I mean, that's the Hillary Clinton front organization.
	Media Matters, which is just a propaganda tool.
	And so was he going to have another version of that?
	I mean, how many of those do we need?
	Well, it'll be the official one, you see.
	If sanctioned by President Obama.
	I think he's going to muscle out of the Clintons under a lot of these scams.
	Hillary Clinton does not need media matters anymore.
	So maybe Obama can take it over.
	The Clintons are done.
	They're done.
	Yeah, well, I would agree with that, except Nixon was done after he was kicked out of California and he lost the governorship.
	That's true.
	That's true.
	Well, with that, running a little behind, I'd like to thank you for your courage and say in the morning to you, John, say what the C stands for!
	Captivated by a guy and ch-ch-ch-ch-con, Dvorak!
	In the morning to you, Mr.
	Adam Curry.
	Also in the morning, all ships and sea boots on the ground, feet in the air, subs in the water, and all the dames and knights out there.
	In the morning to the chat room, knowledge in the stream.com.
	Good to have you all here.
	Aloha.
	And in the morning to Martin J.J., along with our other artists.
	Martin J.J. brought us the artwork for episode 881, The Ant Wars.
	And he did a nice piece.
	It was not on the blacklist yet.
	Which, of course, is about the...
	The blacklist of the Washington Post dream.
	Yeah, with that guy who thinks there was a fake coup in Turkey.
	Very nice.
	Noagentartgenerator.com is where you can put your submissions in.
	We look forward to seeing that right after the show, and we appreciate the work that all of our artists do.
	Thank you.
	And this being our value-for-value model, we'd like to thank our executive producers and associate executive producers in a separate segment right here at the beginning.
	So who do we have today, John?
	Well, we have a few people.
	We have two, three executive producers, for starters.
	Sir Wire of the Hidden Jewel.
	James Pyers in Escondido, California.
	33333.
	Thank you, John and Adam, for the best podcast in the universe.
	I donated because 828 is my lucky number, but mostly to thank you for your courage.
	I don't understand the connection between 828 and anything, but okay.
	This show keeps me thinking critically and laughing out loud.
	I'm kindly requesting two small favors.
	If you see this, no worries if you don't.
	One, but we see it.
	One, job karma for all, including me.
	Buffoonery jingle.
	Or any clips pronouncing buffoonery.
	Or Adam mocking the British folks saying buffoonery.
	Well, I can do a full combo, I think, of that.
	Let's try this.
	Yeah?
	Did you say anything else?
	No, he's done.
	He's good.
	Can I not suggest that, actually, this is about buffoonery.
	Buffoonery.
	And ultimately, buffoonery should not be met with the blunt instrument of a band, but with the classic British response of ridicule.
	Buffoonery, I say!
	Jobs, jobs, jobs, and jobs.
	Let's vote for jobs!
	You've got...
	Karma.
	All you have to do is ask.
	We do it.
	Chris Foster, Parts Unknown, 33333, somewhere in the USA. In the morning, John and Adam, please wish a Merry Christmas to my smoking hot wife and two human resources.
	No jiggle requests.
	But in the spirit of the season, please direct my karma to the anonymous and sub- $50 producers.
	There's many of them, and he's going to do that right now.
	Thanks, Chris.
	Very nice.
	That's very cool.
	All right, under-50s, here you go.
	You've got karma.
	Well-deserved.
	Well, well, well-deserved.
	And $301 for Russell of Bell Mead in the USA. You guys are killing it!
	I love this show, but it truly must continue media vehicle in my life.
	I look forward to my Monday drive to work just to start my new Agenda Week.
	I equate our show to my father's M.A.S.H., Which is the mash, the TV show.
	And Barney Miller.
	House karma and general karma would be much appreciated.
	It used to be Sir Russell of the Bell Mead.
	My move would make that title irrelevant.
	Can I change it to Sir Rhino DeMono?
	Rhino DeMono.
	Rhino DeMono.
	No problem.
	He looks like he submitted the appropriate paperwork.
	Yeah, we're cool with that.
	Here's your karma.
	House karma.
	You've got karma.
	Down to the associate executive producers, beginning with Gene, or Glenn, sorry, Glenn Tupper in Markham, Ontario.
	Just back off the mic, just a hair, John, you're a little over-modulating.
	He's in Markham, Ontario.
	I think so.
	241.38.
	The first but not last donation and request.
	And there's nothing there.
	He has no request.
	I'll give him some karma then.
	Wait a minute.
	Hold on.
	You've got karma.
	I have a feeling.
	Let me just make sure we don't have an email.
	Yeah, it might be.
	Let me see.
	Yeah.
	Hold on.
	Let me look too.
	Yeah, I got...
	Oh!
	Of course.
	Very long note.
	Oh.
	I can condense this.
	Ah, yes, this is important.
	Long ago, I was converted from being a Twit listener.
	I'm coming back.
	Regrettably, though, I'm still a cheap-ass douchebag.
	Unfortunately for you guys, I think many, a great many of your listeners are the same.
	Yeah, that's true.
	We never miss an episode.
	Hit people in the mouth at work and dinner parties, but never seem to part with a few bucks for those weekly words we crave so much.
	Well, he has now done this.
	Thank you.
	Yeah, without much thought, we consistently pay way too much for things that rarely benefit us.
	I have a few ideas on how you might be able to convert more of us from this category, but we'll leave that for another donation.
	Yes, I will definitely be a repeat donor.
	Seeing as I am a constant consumer of yours, it seems only fair.
	Sorry for taking so long to see the light.
	And you're not a consumer, you're a producer.
	Um...
	And last night in a heartfelt phone call, his, let me see, this is his buddy, ultimate, oh, his dad, Russ.
	Yeah, Russ Tupper.
	Yeah, okay.
	He's his ultimate hero.
	Yeah, he was diagnosed on the 14th with an aggressive form of prostate cancer that has metastasized And he will be undergoing chemotherapy this Friday.
	He's a wonderful grandfather, father, husband, and friend to many.
	He's definitely the backbone of our family and could sure as heck use some karma and warm thoughts for his treatment and recovery.
	But please do not play the F Cancer jingle as it's creepy as hell.
	But a karma shot is truly required.
	So yes, we will all be thinking of him for Friday.
	Yeah, F Cancer, that's for sure.
	Here you go.
	Here you go, Russ.
	You've got karma.
	I'm glad we found the note.
	Yeah, that was good.
	William Geiger in Austin, Texas.
	You know him?
	I don't know.
	Huh.
	You'd think you would.
	You live in the same town.
	Hi, John and Adam.
	I've been listening on and off for a few years now, and I've been listening constantly during the election cycle.
	I thought it was finally time to stop being a boner and become a donor.
	We have a lot of first-timers today.
	I enjoy that.
	Thank you for the fantastic coverage of the election.
	Thank you and you and all the producers who didn't drop their contributions.
	A lot of people bail out.
	We haven't heard from them.
	Keep up the amazing work.
	Can you have a shut-up slave?
	Yeah.
	Shut up, slave!
	Shut up, slave!
	There you go.
	A double shut-up.
	And last but not least, Sir Mark Wilson in Glasgow.
	$200.
	$200.
	He's in the UK there.
	The past few shows in particular have been outstanding, he writes.
	Thank you.
	Last month I asked for and received jobs karma, and it worked!
	Although the job is in London, so now I need flat finding karma.
	Finding somewhere down here is a horrendous process.
	Yes, I imagine.
	London, hope they gave you extra money.
	Sir Mark, Baron of Glasgow, soon to be in exile.
	Yeah.
	Alright, we'll give him a little karma there.
	You've got karma.
	Very nice.
	I did want to mention something regarding donations.
	Got a note from Adam DeMuy, who of course is Sir Adam, Knight of the Coke Empire.
	He said, hey, hey, I noticed on the last episode when John got the donation portion of the show, the $50 segment, he didn't call me out by my title, Sir Adam, Knight of the Coke Empire.
	He just said my name.
	I don't think he ever updated his spreadsheet to reflect the change a few shows back.
	I know Adam has updated his because I've talked to him about it on his show previous to Sunday.
	Could you see if John has me updated on his call-out sheet?
	Two things we need to talk about.
	We cannot track your titles.
	No, that process fell apart.
	It doesn't work.
	You have to put it in the note.
	Yes!
	So if you have an extended title and you want us to say it, you have to put it in the donation note.
	And I have to say, we're pretty good at remembering some of this stuff.
	Yeah, we remember most of them, but we don't remember everyone.
	Especially the long, convoluted ones.
	So it's not...
	I don't know where anyone got the impression that we have a database that does this.
	It doesn't.
	We don't have one.
	It's not possible.
	It's just not possible with the...
	It's too complicated.
	There's a whole bunch of technical reasons.
	And...
	We only read notes for executive producers and associate executive producers.
	People getting angry.
	Oh, you didn't read my note!
	I just need to reiterate, for brevity's sake, for time, so we're not doing eight-hour shows.
	Yeah, we should, might as well remind people.
	That's why I'm bringing it up.
	We used to read all the notes.
	First of all, we went through three processes.
	One, we used to read all the notes.
	You send in five bucks, you get a note read.
	Then we decided there's an anonymity problem, so we decided to cut it off $50.
	Right.
	And then we read all the notes and $50 up.
	Yeah.
	It was taking up, at some point, hours.
	Yeah.
	Like an hour of the show would be spent reading notes, and then it got worse as people decided, well, since I can get my note read at 50 bucks, I'll write a long note!
	And so there'd be pages and pages of screeds people would send us.
	No, okay, so that was the end of that.
	You can only blame yourselves, the people that caused this issue.
	So we cut it off at the producer level, so...
	$200 is what you want to know it read, we'll read it, but it's $200.
	Because otherwise, we do read notes, there's certain lovely notes, to put it that way, in the $50 arena and $100 whatever, but we don't make a practice of reading all of them.
	We do read the douchebag call-outs.
	We do call-outs, yes.
	I probably haven't mentioned this for probably years because most people think they just kind of got it just The new listeners don't know the details, but I think they kind of figured it out.
	Except a few that come in.
	I don't know why you didn't read my note.
	We can't.
	We just can't.
	You have no idea the amount of complaints we got.
	We were losing listeners because of the note reading.
	Whereas other models give you a tote bag or a coffee mug.
	We do mention everyone's name.
	You get your name mentioned and your title if you tell us what it is.
	We remember most of the Sirs because they're always coming in.
	I mean, Mark Tanner.
	Whittier.
	He's from Whittier.
	He's from Whittier.
	I even know where he's from.
	Whittier.
	I wake up in the middle of the night.
	I know where that guy's from.
	If I go to Whittier, I'm going to check him out.
	All right.
	Thank you very much, executive producers and associate executive producers.
	Highly appreciated.
	Of course, these are credits that you can use anywhere.
	The LinkedIn seems to be a good profile to put it to get jobs.
	And we really appreciate what you've done for us.
	We'll be thanking everybody else for about $50 in the second segment.
	And another show coming up on Sunday.
	Remember us at...
	Dvorak.org slash N-A. And of course, the one thing you can do that costs you nothing is propagate our formula.
	Our formula is this.
	We go out, we hit people in the mouth.
	Water. Order.
	Shut up, slave.
	Shut up, slave.
	Oh, I got a note for you.
	I got a note for you.
	Note.
	A note regarding the millennials in your life.
	Jesse and Buzzkill Jr.
	Okay.
	About, you know, keeping the gender of the child...
	Secret.
	Secret.
	Note from Producer Jay, hey, I'm behind on episodes due to my own two-week-old new human resource.
	That's why this note's coming a little late.
	Getting to 879, you start off about John's kid not finding out about the gender.
	Well, I'm 36 and not a millennial, but my wife and I announced we would be surprised, but kept the gender to ourselves.
	When you announce the gender, people ignore the registry and they just get you clothes.
	Way more clothes than you'd ever use, and although you can return them for more clothes as the baby grows, it's much better if you don't tell them what gender, because then you get all the big ticket stuff on your wish list.
	Wow.
	That's a tip.
	That is a tip.
	That is a tip from your No Agenda show, ladies and gentlemen.
	You know, I'm guessing they do know then, because those sorts of tips probably float around.
	I bet they know for sure.
	They're putting you on.
	They want daddy.
	Holy crap.
	Grandpa to JCD to get the big ticket item, the baby monitor.
	Yeah.
	Also, I mean, quite honestly, shouldn't they wait until the baby decides what gender it wants to be identified?
	Oh yeah, nowadays, yeah.
	Booja, booja, booja.
	I got a short clip.
	Here's another kind of question.
	One of these clips that makes you ask questions.
	This is the man with a gun at the Metreon.
	Oh, the Metron.
	Is that a movie theater?
	It's a big theater in San Francisco.
	A man is in custody accused of bringing a handgun into a San Francisco movie theater.
	Police ordered everyone out of the Metreon complex last night.
	A witness says the man waving the gun stayed seated while people ran for safety.
	Investigators say that the weapon was recovered.
	So he was sitting down and waving a gun?
	Yeah, in one of the movies.
	So they evacuate the entire building, all the theaters, and all the restaurants, and everything.
	Active shooter!
	Why?
	Why?
	To terrorize people.
	To terrorize people.
	Better be safe than sorry.
	There you go.
	Better be safe than sorry.
	To terrorize people.
	So after...
	Castro died.
	A lot of people were, you know, people for, people against.
	You know, the Cubans in Miami were celebrating.
	And as we know, Justin Trudeau, the prime...
	And this is special for our Scandinavian listeners up there.
	Hello, hello, Scandinavia.
	He pretty much said, no, I was a great guy.
	Now, mind you that his mom was hanging out with Castro.
	You see, there's pictures everywhere.
	Hubba hubba.
	And if you look, now she was kind of slutty.
	Everyone knows this.
	Promiscuous.
	She was a hottie.
	Yeah, and if you haven't looked at the photos, I have to say there is some kind of resemblance between Castro and Trudeau.
	Well, there's a resemblance between Pierre Trudeau, too.
	But Pierre Trudeau had a small head, and he looked exactly like Martin Short.
	Small heads are coming.
	Well, here's what one analyst said.
	Actually, I think he's a retired general or something.
	Lieutenant Colonel Ralph Peters, Fox News strategic analyst, joins me.
	Now, let's deal with the low-hanging fruit, first of all, because it's fun to deal with.
	I mean, these comments are just off the wall.
	I don't think there's anybody who's been more effusive in praise of this dictator than the Canadian Prime Minister Trudeau, whose father was also a Prime Minister who praised Fidel.
	Here's what he said.
	He called Fidel, while a controversial figure, both Mr.
	Castro's supporters and detractors recognized his tremendous dedication and love for the Cuban people who had a deep and lasting affection for El Comandante.
	I mean, love for the Cuban people as he was shooting them in the head?
	David Justin Trudeau has the intellectual heft of cotton candy.
	I really like that.
	The intellectual heft of cotton candy.
	Yeah.
	Hey, Scandinavia, we don't have the only guys who are shitty at the top, okay?
	And I was just going to say, doctors are now warning that thousands, thousands of doctors could leave Scandinavia and come to the United States because of federal tax changes, soon to be approved by Parliament, that will add on tens of thousands of dollars in new taxes for medical doctors.
	And they're all saying, screw it, we want to come into America.
	Well, get in line.
	They're more than welcome.
	I welcome them.
	I found it just an aside.
	There was one report about Fidel being a CIA operative in his early years.
	You may have heard that, right?
	Oh, yeah.
	Absolutely.
	So I was thinking that perhaps he still was all the way to the end because of all these assassination attempts.
	Everything failed.
	That all failed because he was either warned or the Bay of Pigs thing was just cancelled.
	Didn't they have the exploding cigar trick?
	Wasn't that one?
	Yeah, they had to try to blow him up with a cigar and all this other stuff.
	But none of these things worked, and then they finally gave up, and I guess when Reagan came along, they signed in a policy that you can't try to assassinate foreign leaders.
	And I'm thinking he probably was.
	I think he was right to the end, and he went to 90.
	They didn't expect that.
	I was just wondering if he was getting a check.
	Do they continue to pay you?
	Who knows?
	Well, anyway, just an aside.
	Yeah.
	Let's see.
	I have a couple of things.
	Yeah.
	Why don't we do this?
	This is just a brief one.
	You know, I think it was Trump who said, everybody, be on the lookout.
	We're going to pressure the Clinton Foundation.
	All you countries around the world were pressuring these guys, pressuring them, which is what I think should be done.
	But more interestingly, staying at home, Palm Springs, They have a big golf tournament, Palm Springs.
	Do you know what that is?
	Which one it is?
	I have no idea.
	So it's a big golf tournament, and it benefits a hospital.
	And in the past few years, they have brought the Clinton Foundation in as a part of this big golf tournament.
	Now, typically, when you bring someone big into the golf tournament, they bring money to raise money for the cause.
	This is a local Palm Springs TV station talking about the exact opposite of how the Clinton Foundation is involved and what it means to all of their local charities.
	In 2012, the Clinton Foundation teamed up with the healthcare company Humana to become the title sponsor for what used to be known as the Bob Hope Classic in La Quinta.
	But unlike most sponsorships, it was the golf tournament that gave money to the Clinton Foundation.
	That year, they received almost $300,000, while the tournament gave $1.8 million in total, and that included on average about $16,000 to 32 local charities and $1 million to Eisenhower Medical Center, the original benefactor of the Bob Hope Classic.
	In 2013, tax documents show the Clinton Foundation received $600,000 from the tournament while Eisenhower received no donation and 39 local charities received on average $15,000 apiece.
	In 2014, the Clinton Foundation received $1 million while 32 local charities received on average $15,000.
	In 2015, the final year Humana was involved, the Clinton Foundation received $700,000 from Desert Classic Charities, or 42 times the average donation offered to other local charities, 40 of which received on average $16,000.
	Tax documents for the 2016 tournament aren't available yet, and representatives for the Clinton Foundation and Desert Classic Charities couldn't say whether the foundation received any money.
	But we do know, over four years, the Clinton Foundation here in the desert received nearly $2.6 million, or 41 times the average amount other local charities received over that same time frame.
	Seems about right.
	It was a little...
	Mm-hmm.
	There's a report on RT, another reason to stop listening to RT on the Clinton Foundation.
	They've done a number of these exposés on the Clinton Foundation.
	But this was an interesting one because it shows how they were taking foreign money and then they decided to only take money from six countries.
	And then they went on the street and talked to a bunch of different people about it.
	And they all thought it was a scam, at least in Germany.
	Because it was about Germany financing Hillary's campaign with Clinton Foundation front money.
	At least that's the implication.
	From the German government prior to the presidential election.
	Following the story for us is RT's Caleb Maupen.
	The Clinton Foundation brings in hundreds of millions of dollars every year.
	It's part of the Clinton family's kind and charitable public image.
	But where does this money come from?
	A lot of the donations don't come from private citizens, but from governments.
	Lots of taxpaying citizens around the world, whether they personally approve of it or not, are financially tied in with Hillary Rodham Clinton.
	In 2015, the Foundation's financial ties to various human rights-violating and terrorism-linked regimes got negative publicity.
	The Foundation announced that it would only receive money from six trusted countries.
	Norway, Australia, Canada, the Netherlands, Britain, and Germany, acknowledged as its closest ally.
	It is...
	Very good to have a partner at the helm of Germany who is working with us to resolve a lot of the issues and solve the problems that we face together.
	The state-owned German Corporation for International Cooperation donated roughly $2.5 million to the charity.
	The German Federal Ministry for the Environment also donated millions.
	The money was designated for restoring forests in East Africa, among other things.
	But alongside concerns over the global environment, the German government also showed concerns about the result of the US election.
	The election campaign this year was a particular one, with some confrontations that were difficult to stomach.
	I, as many of you, watched the election results with trepidation.
	The money was for forest and recultivation projects in Kenya and in Ethiopia.
	I mean, this is a joke.
	Why should the money go around the world, from Germany to the US, just to arrive back in Africa then, you know?
	There are many German organizations who could do it better than the Hillary Clinton Foundation.
	The money was probably spent for the election campaign of Hillary Clinton.
	Oh, that's quite an accusation.
	Yeah.
	Oh, nice.
	I think he's accurate.
	He's right.
	What else would this be used for?
	Why does the German government give money to the Clinton Foundation to spend it in Africa when they have their own organizations to do the same thing?
	Well, because it's obviously not about helping people.
	It's about access and connections and, you know, scratching backs.
	Yeah.
	It's a scam.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	I had something about that.
	Hold on.
	What was the...
	Was it about Germany?
	Well, it doesn't matter.
	But I will stay in the EUs for a moment, if you don't mind.
	We've got a couple big stories going on.
	We have European Parliament presidency up for grabs.
	And the way that we have three presidents in the European Union, the President of Parliament, President of the Council, and the President of the Commission.
	I think I have that right.
	No, no, it's four.
	It's three.
	It's four.
	What's the fourth one?
	Oh, man, I had my...
	No, it's three, John.
	No.
	Four.
	There's four presidents.
	I think...
	Go on and I'll take my paperwork.
	Well, hold on.
	Let's...
	Okay, you take a look at the paper.
	I think it's three, but okay, maybe four.
	No, no, no, it's four.
	Okay.
	I guarantee it.
	Okay.
	Well, the Parliament presidency is up for grabs, and to remind you how it works, the candidates are voted on by the members of Parliament, not by the public of countries, no, by the members of Parliament, who themselves are elected.
	Okay.
	So it's kind of like Europe's own electoral college in a way, but typically there's a left and right grand coalition.
	You really can't tell the difference between the left and the right, but the socialist party is getting pissed off and they want in.
	The leader of the European Parliament socialist group Gianni Patella has thrown his hat into the ring to become the institution's next president.
	There could be an end to the Parliament's right-left grand coalition.
	The three presidencies of the three top European institutions cannot belong to the People's Party, he explains, and one of the three presidencies must belong to the socialists.
	On that basis, we'll verify the convergences and we'll cooperate with the...
	It must belong.
	Yeah, this is only fair, you see.
	This is how Europe works, John.
	It has to be fair.
	FACIS will verify the convergences and will cooperate with the one who agrees with us.
	The leader of the European People's Party wouldn't comment when approached by Euronews on Wednesday.
	Patella's announcement comes a week after incumbent Parliament President Social Democrat Martin Schulz said he won't run for re-election, a move that surprised the socialist group according to sources.
	MEPs are due to vote for his replacement in January.
	Yeah, you are correct.
	It is the European...
	Okay.
	I got him.
	I got him.
	President of the European Parliament, President of the European Council, President of the European Commission, which is a powerful one, and then the big one, which is Presidency of the Council of the EU. Yes, you're right.
	But that's not an individual.
	It's a position held by a national government, so it's not a person.
	So, for instance, I think it's Poland now.
	Poland gets the presidency, and then whoever they want, of course, usually it's the leader of the country.
	He becomes that for six months, I think?
	Yeah, I'll read the definition.
	The Council of the EU, where national ministers dictate EU legislation.
	In other words, the parliament doesn't have anything to do with legislation.
	They can't introduce legislation.
	It doesn't have a permanent single-person president.
	It's work is led by the country holding the council presidency, which rotates every six months.
	There you go.
	Damn, I know more about civics than the Europeans.
	Apparently.
	Anyway, go on.
	Alright, so in this backdrop, there's a lot of moving parts, and this was just a fabulous report.
	As we know, Europe has been saying they need their own army, they need headquarters, we need to coordinate, we can't trust NATO, we can't rely on them, and who knows when that crazy guy comes into office.
	It's the biggest defense funding and research plan in more than a decade.
	Now remember, biggest defense funding and research in more than a decade.
	I mean, how much do we spend on military shit in America?
	650 plus billion dollars a year.
	The European Union has unveiled proposals which reverse billions in cuts and send a message to the U.S. that the bloc wants to stand on its own two feet when paying for security.
	If the Europeans will manage to invest better on their defense, this is going to make also NATO stronger.
	This is the European Defense Minister.
	On their defense, this is going to make also NATO stronger.
	So there is no competition, no duplication.
	On the contrary, there is a joint work we're doing.
	Member states are all 28 fully on board on this.
	Oh, yeah, everyone's fully on board, which means they haven't had a vote yet and is kind of massaging it because everyone has to be on board in order for anything to work.
	The European Commission plans a 5 billion euro fund to let governments...
	Whoa!
	5 billion?
	Oh, man.
	Whoa.
	John, what can they buy with 5 million?
	5 billion.
	Nothing.
	They can get a couple planes, maybe.
	Well, that's just the start.
	They started off with this much.
	No, no, no.
	Then they buy some stuff and they say, oh, look, we don't have enough money.
	We need more money.
	We need the other category, which is the maintenance support.
	Together to buy new helicopters and planes and to release funding for research.
	All the member states are using their public resources to defense research separately.
	Private sector is using their limited resources separately.
	And that is the reason why we cannot develop equipments as much as there is a need.
	The Commission's proposing 500 million euros a year on innovation from 2017.
	A 90 million pilot plan is set to start next year, with 3.5 billion potentially allocated from 2021 to 2027.
	Amid falling spending on defence research, EU governments have increasingly relied on America.
	It's too early to tell if Brexit Britain could and would want to be involved in the new plan.
	Yeah.
	Okay.
	500 million a year.
	Great.
	I don't know what you guys are planning, but you're not going to get very far with that.
	They know it.
	They just don't want to shock their own public.
	But what's really going to bankrupt the EU is their new power play.
	It's called the power play.
	Do they say it like that?
	Yeah, power play.
	This is the mandate from the European Union on carbon emissions cuts and renewable energy uses, timelines, timeframes, and I'm going to say it's unobtainable, and this is probably one of the dumbest things they can do.
	The European Commission has unveiled its big power plan, cutting waste.
	By the way, it's...
	Power plan.
	It's very...
	I thought it says power...
	No, they call power play, but okay.
	It's like 2,000 pages or something.
	I haven't read it all.
	The European Commission has unveiled its big power plan.
	Cutting waste, better integrating renewables, and phasing out subsidies for coal-fired electricity generation are all part of it.
	The wind and solar energy producers will no longer have priority for selling to the grid in places where renewables already have a large share.
	Campaigners have been warning against that, claiming it risks slowing progress.
	The EU aims to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 40% compared to 1990 levels, and it wants renewables to make up at least 27% of the power mix by 2030.
	Regional centres are proposed to improve cooperation among grid operators, but all of this still needs to be approved by Member States and the European Parliament.
	The key in there is the regional centers who will help everyone work together.
	Hello!
	So they've got the banking union, they've got the banks under control, they've obviously got all the legislation under control, and now they've got the money under their control, and now your electricity.
	Who's the they?
	The European Union.
	But who?
	Who's the bad actors?
	Who are the elites?
	Can we name any of them?
	Well, it's these regional power coordination centers.
	And I don't know.
	There's not a lot.
	I have to read through the rest of the document to find out more.
	I always read that stuff.
	2,000 pages?
	Yeah.
	The Affordable Care Act was 2,000 pages.
	I don't mind.
	I don't mind.
	But I believe this is a very bad, very bad idea for Europe.
	They want to increase wind power?
	Okay.
	Increase the wind, please.
	You're going to need gas plants.
	And more gas plants means more Russian gas.
	So I don't see how this is a good idea.
	And we might as well go into our climate gate for a moment.
	Do we have a...
	Oh, there we go.
	To the gate, to the gate, to the climate gate.
	Alright, the climate gate is open once again.
	Today, we listen briefly to Thomas Friedman on the BBC talking about climate change.
	Here's a guy who came out of New York.
	When he's over there talking to them, he feels like he can say whatever he wants.
	Yep.
	So these forces will accelerate notwithstanding whoever is elected.
	Absolutely.
	You know, I have a friend, Rob Watson, a great environmental scientist, and Rob likes to say about Mother Nature, you know, whether Donald Trump accepts climate change or not, this I know, Mother Nature is just chemistry, biology, and physics.
	That's all she is.
	You can't talk her up, you can't talk her down, you can't say, Mother Nature, I think you're a hoax.
	She's going to do whatever chemistry, biology, and physics dictate, and Mother Nature always bats last.
	He's kind of contradicting himself.
	Mother Nature always bats last?
	Yeah, he says Mother Nature does physics and science and you can't talk her up, you can't talk her down.
	But apparently we can control her by pooping out.
	Apparently not if she bats last.
	That was a screw up.
	You know what?
	It's one of those things that you practiced early in the show, that little zinger you get me with.
	He's obviously had that line in waiting.
	He had to use it.
	Yes, yes, yes.
	And it didn't come out well.
	No.
	Mother Nature always bats last.
	Yeah.
	It's cute.
	Another NPR podcast prostitute with a professor from James Madison University, Travis Reeder.
	The United Nations says there will be two and a half billion more people on the planet by 2050.
	Each will likely create more carbon emissions, and scientists say those emissions could reach a dangerous tipping point by mid-century.
	Oh, stop, stop, stop.
	You know what?
	It was a trigger word.
	The tipping point was in 1980.
	The tipping point was in 1970.
	The tipping point was in 1990.
	The tipping point was in 2000.
	We're gone beyond the tipping point.
	We're before the tipping point.
	Now the tipping point has been moved up to 2050?
	Yep.
	Tipping point.
	Uh-oh.
	Ah!
	Oh, there we go.
	You ready?
	There we go.
	Population control.
	Travis Reeder is not a climate scientist.
	He's a philosopher with the Berman Institute of Bioethics at Johns Hopkins, and his arguments are moral.
	When we meet, he's in a tweedy jacket and sneakers, speaking to several dozen students at James Madison University.
	How old are you going to be in 2036?
	Are you thinking about having kids?
	How old are your kids going to be in 2036?
	Dangerous climate change will be happening by then, he says.
	And the world's poorest nations will suffer most, even though rich countries like the U.S. create far more carbon emissions per capita.
	So here's what's happening when I have a kid.
	I'm creating a being who's doing the much greater proportion of the contribution to the harm, and she's not going to suffer for it.
	The other kid is.
	And that seems unfair.
	What about that big climate deal in Paris?
	Reeder tells students it doesn't cut emissions nearly enough to avoid a catastrophic tipping point.
	But this might.
	He cites a study that finds reducing global fertility by just half a child per woman could have a huge impact if it happens soon.
	No full child for you.
	You can only have half a child.
	Talk to the Muslims.
	Ha!
	I love this.
	Can you believe this guy?
	Professor.
	This is the population control guys all over again from the 1970s.
	Yep.
	Same group of people.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Eugenics.
	Yeah, we're all going to die by the year 2000.
	That was common thinking in 1970 when Erdman came out with his book.
	The population bomb.
	It was a population bomb.
	Yep.
	So this folds in nicely to a conversation about birth control.
	Because, of course, it's population control.
	And we have...
	It's a very hot topic in the United States.
	It's always been that way.
	And I assert that while, yes, people who have certain beliefs...
	Could be religious or otherwise.
	They may be at the forefront of pro-life, not allowing abortions.
	But as far as I know, it is a constitutional question.
	It's not a religious question.
	I mean, the Supreme Court has ruled Roe v.
	Wade.
	It's a constitutional question.
	I'm asking you, really.
	When it comes to what is allowed in the United States, is it a religious question or a constitutional one?
	It's a question of the law.
	So constitutional.
	Well, here's the way it works.
	You're a member of a religion.
	You can follow your own religious precepts.
	It's not a problem.
	Right.
	I mean, so you don't have to have an abortion.
	Right.
	You're not forced to have an abortion.
	You can do whatever you want, or you can be like an agnostic, or you can be an atheist, and you can have all the abortions you want.
	This is your business.
	The problem is that religions get in other people's business, so if I'm a Catholic and I don't believe that you should ever have an abortion, I'll never have one.
	But there's got to be some...
	At some point, you've got to protect the people that believe otherwise.
	And so the law gets in the way.
	And so you say, well, you're saving the unborn children.
	It's an ethical thing, but there's no law.
	We're a nation of laws.
	What is the law that gets in the way?
	There used to be a law against having abortions.
	It was against the law to have an abortion.
	That's been overturned.
	It's gone.
	And the reason why it is a constitutional issue is about life.
	Because you can't kill somebody.
	You can't just go up and kill somebody.
	And the question is, can you kill them before they're born?
	I don't see any other issue than that.
	Yeah, sure.
	Yeah, assholes want to control women.
	No, that's not true.
	There's individual rights of the woman.
	The woman has a right to do what she wants according to the Constitution because it's in the Bill of Rights and everything else.
	Yeah, of course.
	So you have to go by what's the definition of when you give birth?
	There you go.
	That is the entire question.
	I don't know why you're getting all huffy and pissy at me.
	I'm not.
	I'm just wondering what your question is.
	Well, you start off with, is it a constitutional question or a religious question?
	It's both.
	That's the answer.
	It's interesting to hear you side with the ladies from The View.
	I don't understand what their beef is about people getting free birth control so they can control the population somewhat and not have to get abortions.
	I can understand abortion.
	Let me just say something.
	I love this.
	You set me up.
	You play the butt slam thing.
	I got your butt slam.
	Butt slam!
	It was painful to do it, too.
	Here's the confusion that goes on right in the beginning here.
	The birth control that companies like Hobby Lobby have rejected as being a part of their package to their employees based on their religious freedom, yet another...
	Constitutional right.
	This is why it's a problem.
	They are confused because we looked at this case very, very closely.
	The Hobby Lobby thing we got deep into, yes.
	And it's not about condoms or any other type of birth control.
	It is specifically about the IUD and other...
	Like Plan B, because of course, people say, oh, we believe that the child is already a child, and it's impregnated, so you can't kill it.
	Those are the ones they reject to.
	They don't reject to condoms or any other form, but that, of course, is not apparent to the women of the view.
	I don't understand what their beef is about people getting free birth control so they can control the population somewhat and not have to get abortions.
	I can understand abortion because people are religiously against something like that.
	I was raised a Catholic.
	We were told no.
	Okay, fine.
	That's your feeling, and I appreciate it, and I respect it.
	But birth control?
	That went out with which pope 150,000 years ago?
	Yeah.
	I don't understand why someone else's religion impacts me.
	I don't understand it.
	I don't mind that the law doesn't say you have to have an abortion.
	It doesn't force you to have an abortion.
	And when I do that, I'm not pointing at anybody in particular.
	I'm just saying it doesn't force you.
	But I don't like the idea that someone who doesn't know my life or my family's life can make a decision that if my child is raped...
	I don't have the right with her to say we are terminating this.
	I don't understand why that.
	I don't get that.
	Because the religious position...
	I understand.
	I understand religion.
	But if I don't subscribe to your religion, why am I being pushed into believing what you believe?
	I thought that was against the...
	I thought the amendment said you can't do that.
	There's no...
	You can't force...
	I think that's exactly what the amendment says.
	You can't do that!
	Amendment.
	I thought you said Amendment 6.
	No, I think that's what the amendment says.
	The amendment says you can't do.
	I know what amendment she's talking about.
	The only thing amendments say is what the federal government can't do.
	It never says what you as an individual can or can't do.
	I thought that was against the...
	I thought the amendment said you can't do that.
	There's no...
	You can't force anybody to be in any religion or believe in any way.
	I believe that you're the lawyer.
	I believe that that was settled on the basis of privacy.
	Am I right?
	Yes.
	The Supreme Court said a woman has the right to privacy.
	That's what that's about, right?
	To make...
	Privacy.
	That's what it is.
	Privacy.
	That's an amendment, I think.
	It's what the amendment says.
	You can't have privacy.
	That's what that's about, right?
	To make decisions over her...
	And make decisions on her own body.
	I don't understand why there is any conversation about that.
	I understand people who don't believe in it don't have one.
	It's like gay marriage.
	You don't believe in gay marriage, don't marry a gay person.
	I don't think it's always a religious issue.
	I don't think it's merely a religious issue.
	I think there are a lot of people that I know personally that are a-religious, either atheist or agnostic, that do have a problem with abortion.
	So I'm not necessarily going to think it's a religious issue.
	But with birth control, I want to hear about it.
	I have no idea why anybody would have a problem with birth control, other than maybe they feel that it interferes with God's will.
	I think some churches interferes with God's will.
	Are they talking to God now?
	Oh, they're talking to God now?
	Wow, that's quite an insult.
	Yeah, people talk to God.
	Get with it, Joy.
	And again, do your friends believe that you have the right to make a decision for your family?
	And the things that you feel are right?
	Or do they feel they should be able to come in and sit with you and say, well, you know, I don't think you should be doing it because we bitch about this when people do it online.
	Say, get out of my, you know, but don't put it up there.
	She almost said it.
	it she almost said it get out of get out of get out of my vagina get out of get out of get out of my vagina bam Mr.
	Fabulous, thank you.
	Love that one.
	Well, I learned something.
	I learned something.
	I didn't know.
	I always thought Joy Behar was Jewish.
	Yeah.
	Huh.
	Good catch.
	I mean, she acts like a Jewish.
	She seems to be a Jewish progressive.
	I've seen no people like that.
	They're all over Berkeley.
	Huh.
	She's a Catholic?
	Really?
	I guess.
	I wonder.
	Yeah.
	I guess.
	It just says that.
	I guess.
	Alright.
	Since you're going to talk about these liberals, this is a funny story about Ben Affleck.
	Have you heard this one?
	Probably not.
	Okay, Ben, there's a show on PBS called, I don't know what the name of it is, My Heritage or something.
	Oh, yeah, yeah.
	No, no.
	It's the British show...
	That is sponsored by the Mormons who do the, what is the?
	Yeah, genealogy.
	Yeah, what's the name of that big outfit?
	Ancestry.com.
	And so they have this show, and this is Professor Black Guy, who's really good at digging through ancestries.
	And so we had an issue.
	And these douchebags, this douchebag Affleck, you don't realize what a douchebag is until you listen to this clip.
	More emails from Sony have leaked.
	This time it's Ben Affleck in the crosshairs.
	The movie star was featured on the...
	Did she say Ben Affleck?
	She did.
	She said it.
	Ben Affleck.
	Ben Affleck.
	This time it's Ben Affleck in the crosshairs.
	The movie star was featured on the PBS show Finding Your Roots, which digs up interesting facts about the ancestry of famous people.
	When it was Affleck's turn, the show's researchers discovered that one of his ancestors was a slave owner.
	Ben wasn't having it.
	The leaked email show that Ben tried to get host Henry Louis Gates Jr.
	to remove the slave owner ancestry from his family tree.
	Gates complained to his boss that the removal would be against PBS rules and that at least four guests in the series have already revealed slave owner ancestors.
	But PBS, Henry Louis Gates in particular it appears, caved.
	They did reveal, however, that Ben Affleck had another relative who fought in the revolution.
	And oh, how proud Mr.
	Affleck was of that.
	This means he enlisted in the Revolutionary Army in 1776?
	That's right.
	Your sixth great grandfather volunteered to serve in the Patriot Army.
	Wow.
	Wow.
	He fought, Ben, in the American Revolution.
	Wow.
	Wow.
	That is incredible.
	Wow.
	Wow.
	Okay.
	Wow, that's just incredible.
	So he wouldn't put the slaveholder thing in it because it wouldn't work since he works in Hollywood.
	Right.
	But he doesn't mind going, wow, wow, wow, which he was saying.
	Oh my God, that's unbelievable.
	The kid was 11.
	Wow.
	He's a sixth grader.
	He's 11.
	He goes, hey, can I help?
	Yeah, you can wash these muskets.
	I mean, what does he do?
	He didn't fight.
	No.
	And if he did, he should be embarrassed about that.
	Because this is like the Coney 2000 or whatever that guy was.
	He's like a child soldier and he's proud of it.
	Yeah.
	It's a scandal.
	It is.
	Oh, man.
	Oh, okay.
	This is one before we take a break.
	You heard about the plane that crashed?
	With the soccer team on?
	Soccer team?
	That's a horrible story.
	Yeah, but it's a very odd story because, you know, me, I'm an airman.
	I hear about a crash.
	I go looking.
	I go listening.
	I go reading.
	There's no reports yet.
	I mean, all pilots read reports.
	Like, how'd these guys mess up?
	And so I actually was a pretty cool YouTube channel, which I've linked in the show notes.
	And what they do is they show a map of the aerodrome, and they show little moving planes for all of these incidents.
	It's not all horrible crashes, but all kinds of stuff, just incidents, incidents that happen.
	And they also have this.
	Now, the air traffic controller and the pilots are all speaking in Brazilian, or Portuguese, I guess it is.
	Portuguese.
	Portuguese.
	But the way they did it is on the screen you can read the translation along in real time as you're hearing their voices.
	And these guys were in some distress.
	But here's the report.
	Colombian authorities are looking into reports that the plane carrying Brazilian footballers that crashed near Medellin may have run out of fuel.
	Amid the process of recovering and identifying bodies and helping the bereaved, the investigation is getting underway.
	Experts from Brazil and the UK, where the plane was built, are helping Colombian authorities.
	Speaking from the airport at Medellin, where the flight was due to land, Brazil's ambassador to Colombia said, The families, as you can imagine, are in a very delicate situation.
	We tried to avoid them coming to Colombia so that they don't have to go through the additional stress.
	All but six of those on board, three footballers, a journalist and two crew members, died in the crash.
	The Chapecoense team had risen through the divisions and were about to play a South American final, the biggest match of their history.
	A leaked recording is said to reveal the pilot telling air traffic controllers the plane was running out of fuel and suffering electrical failure.
	Investigators returned to the wreckage on Wednesday.
	Soldiers had guarded the hillside crash site overnight.
	Most of the bodies are said to have been recovered and will be repatriated.
	So the story that keeps cropping up is leaked audio.
	Leaked audio.
	I don't know what you're talking about.
	These air traffic control transceivers are linked to the internet.
	They're online 24-7.
	People record them.
	It was very easy to go in and just leave one of my pilot forms.
	I need leaked.
	Oh, leaked, leaked.
	And here's what I discovered.
	This was just a bad day all around.
	It was bad weather.
	There was a lot of activity at the airport.
	And there were two planes that had an emergency.
	And the first one was already on its final approach.
	And the second one had declared an emergency and then declared priority.
	And because they said, we have a fuel issue.
	And the way I listened, the way I watched, I think the controller did a fantastic job.
	She really, really tried to get...
	Because, you know, there are people taking off, there's stuff coming in, they have to check the runway when someone's coming in to crash land.
	The coordination was all going very well.
	And then she's vectoring this plane...
	And then they come back on and they say, okay, we've now lost all electrical power.
	We have fuel issue now.
	And you can hear the co-pilot.
	I know it was first in command or if it was the pilot who was on the radio.
	And so, vectors, vectors, vectors!
	Because they only basically have their old school steam gauges, which work on some kind of backup power, I guess, because the pilot was also talking on the radio.
	So some power was working, but he drops off the radar.
	And she says, look, I can't see you on the radar, which means they did have a serious power failure.
	And she tries to vector them because she can't see them.
	She has no idea where they are.
	And she tries to vector them to the right place.
	She did make one small mistake.
	Because they were heading 360, which is due north.
	She said turn left 10 degrees to 010, which would be a right-hand turn.
	She corrected it later saying 350.
	And then after that, you didn't hear the aircraft anymore and it crashed.
	My conclusion, but I don't know why they're coming up with maybe because it's Medellin and maybe some, oh, they were taken out because they were winning.
	It's possible there was sabotage on the plane, but these pilots, they were really trying to get this turkey on the ground.
	Everyone did their job.
	A bad day.
	Yeah, it happens.
	Real wrecks do take place.
	Yeah, yeah.
	But you'll see this.
	I didn't notice anybody think it was a conspiracy.
	I thought that part about the leaked tapes was just trying to dramatize things.
	Yeah, but it's popping up everywhere.
	By the way, fake news.
	Uh-oh.
	Do we need a jingle?
	No, that was fake news.
	You yourself just pointed it out, that it was fake news.
	This was incredible fake news.
	Yeah, where was that?
	What was the bad actor?
	You read that.
	No, it's everywhere.
	It's everywhere.
	This was Euronews.
	They all say leaked tape?
	You go ahead and look.
	Just Google for the tape.
	It's all fake news, then.
	Mainstream outlets are all producing fake news.
	I don't know.
	I'm beating this to death, by the way.
	No, that's okay.
	I'm all with it.
	I'm going to keep doing it.
	Okay, we need to take a break.
	One of our producers sent us a very interesting note that I'd like to share.
	Now, of course, we can't.
	I don't want to mention who it is.
	Hey, Adam and John, I hope this note finds both of you well.
	It's been a bit crazy on the advertising world here.
	He works at an agency.
	I think a media buying agency, maybe.
	It's been a bit crazy on the advertising world here and wanted to fill you in on something that's been happening today at the media buying agency I work at.
	We have a number of our clients email and call us today about yanking ads off of Breitbart.
	While requests like these are common, we've never had the same site called out by multiple clients on the same day.
	My gut feeling is there's a concerted effort today by the mainstream media to cut off Breitbart's advertising.
	I haven't seen any definite evidence, but it's possible that it's there.
	And I want to say, yes, this is the guy who's behind Media Matters.
	He is very proud.
	We've talked about it.
	He's very proud that he took away all Glenn Beck's advertising.
	Remember that guy?
	Yeah.
	So they're targeting Breitbart's advertising and they will be successful.
	Yeah, that's the problem.
	They will be successful.
	Breitbart will suffer because it's being targeted.
	The right has done it.
	Both sides do this.
	It's not like just the left-wingers or right-wingers.
	Both sides do it.
	They find somebody they don't like and target them.
	They won't make their advertisers back off.
	The next thing you know, the guys are...
	The guys are suffering.
	And this is going to happen everywhere.
	Once people figure it out, they're going to do it to MSNBC, to CNN. I think they'll go all out.
	There will be a lot of it.
	But it'll start with alternative media first, for sure.
	And they're just going to systematically take it down.
	The beauty of our...
	Model is that you only give us what you think the show is worth.
	And maybe that's just some art.
	Or maybe it's some clips or jingle or something else you're good at.
	Or information.
	And, of course, financing.
	And we have lost a lot of people in the past year who think we were Trump's...
	Oh, jeez.
	The Reddit yesterday?
	I saw the No Agenda Reddit.
	Oh, man.
	I should read this to you.
	You should.
	Because I'm not going to...
	Wait.
	Did I lose you?
	No, I'm here.
	Yeah, you cut off for a second.
	Okay, hold on a second.
	This is the subreddit in the morning.
	Oh, there's a lot of them now, actually.
	Here's my favorite.
	Adam's refusal to take Pizzagate seriously is a huge red flag for me.
	I'm done donating to the show.
	Yes, John, I've actually donated.
	Around 200 bucks, but no more!
	Adam is acting very fishy about this whole topic.
	MTV video DJ boy toy probably who knows why he's trying so hard to discredit it.
	He acts like he's done research, but clearly he hasn't.
	All he talks about is the Instagram pics, as if that's all there is.
	Anyway, I'm wondering how much research he puts into his other theories.
	And there's a ton of these posts pretty much calling me out specifically for being complicit in covering up pedophilia.
	Thanks.
	I'm not donating.
	Well, you know what?
	Good.
	I'd rather be poor.
	Well, and he didn't sound like really much of a donor or producer.
	No, he said.
	Looking for an excuse not to donate.
	That's what you do.
	That's what you do.
	I'm going to show my support by donating to No Agenda.
	Imagine all the people who could do that.
	Oh yeah, that'd be fab.
	Yeah, on No Agenda.
	Well, let's thank a few people for contributing to show 8-2, and then maybe we'll talk about Pizzagate afterwards.
	Steven Hutto, our buddy, Sir Steven, in Denver, 120.20.
	Lon Baker, $100.
	And somewhere, again, parts unknown.
	Eric Grunewald.
	Okay, give it to me.
	Okay, first of all, it's an 8888.
	The Dutch name is 8888.
	Eric Groenewout from IJservontijn.
	He's in South Africa.
	Yes, and IJservontijn, you know, they speak Afrikaans, which is...
	Dutch.
	Like Dutch, yeah.
	Sir Patrick Koelbel in Tennessee.
	I know that much.
	Ralph Johnston.
	Oh, by the way, these are all 8888.
	They're follow-ups.
	And I want to...
	What does Koval say here?
	Oh, he wants some travel karma.
	We'll put that at the end.
	Sarah and I are headed to Peru for a very delayed official honeymoon.
	John, you would love the train we will be on from Cusco to Machu Picchu, and then he has a picture.
	I will do my best to get some foaming...
	Stop for a second.
	You're the one talking.
	Stop all you want.
	I'm stopping myself.
	A couple things.
	One, you have to have, if you're going to go to Machu Picchu, You have to have some locals that help you so you get through this.
	Where's Machu Picchu?
	It's in the mountains, in the Andes Mountains.
	It's up there.
	You're at 12,000-14,000 feet.
	Generally speaking, I don't really have too much trouble at that altitude, but you do want to take some altitude sickness pills.
	Or aspirin, I think, also works, doesn't it?
	Well, I don't use either.
	I mean, when I went to Peru, I took altitude sickness pills.
	It was fine.
	But the kicker, the real thing you want is the cocaine leaves.
	Yes.
	And they have them up there.
	There's always some guy with a bag of these things.
	Known as the dealer.
	It's usually an old fart with a bag of cocaine leaves.
	And here's the way I remember when I did it.
	I was like, you know, not young as the group that I was with.
	They were all in their 20s.
	And I'm the only one who partook.
	The guy says, you gotta, because I knew that they used this for altitude issues.
	And you can also have cocaine tea.
	It's all over the country.
	The cocaine team brings some bags back.
	Mm-hmm.
	It's coca leaves tea, and it's very tasty.
	But these leaves, you want to grab them, and what you do is, it's like a chewing tobacco kind of thing, you chew and chew until they kind of get moist, and you have a pocket of them in your cheek, you know, and you chew away until they moisten up, and you get some juice out of these things.
	And you want to always have a constant mouthful of these horrible leaves.
	It tastes like lawn clippings.
	Wait a minute, wait a minute.
	Have you tasted lawn clippings?
	You know, that's a good question.
	I don't think, maybe when I was a kid.
	Okay.
	They taste what you think lawn clippings would taste like, is the proper way of putting it.
	Got it.
	And so, but I'm there with all these people.
	We're going up and down these, we're in the mountains, and we're going to visit, we're in a little town, and we go from village, kind of walk to one village to another.
	It's up a hill.
	I'm having no trouble with the altitude.
	And other people...
	They're huffing and puffing.
	Not only huffing and puffing, but they're bent over huffing and puffing.
	What is it physically that the cocoa leaves do to you?
	I have no idea.
	I've never found a good explanation for it, but they're definitely good for being walking around in the mountains.
	And Machu Picchu is way up there.
	Were you really energetic?
	Were you like, hey, I'm going to walk in the mountains.
	No, but I felt normal.
	That's the difference.
	I'm walking around?
	If you take it at sea level, do you get high from it if you take it at sea level?
	No, even the tea doesn't do that.
	It used to be legal to sell the tea in the United States and they made it illegal for some stupid reason.
	Oh!
	But no, it's just a kind of a...
	It's not even a mild stimulator.
	You don't even know what it does.
	Can you see that juice?
	Sorry, I'm just getting the juice out of the way.
	But I would say that make sure you get it.
	Find some with the leaves.
	Or just buy some of the bags and get some of the bags of tea and take them with you and chew on that.
	But if you don't do that, which is the altitude sickness pill and the cocaine leaves, you will have a miserable time of it.
	We would like Sir Patrick Coble to report back on his cocaine extravaganza.
	Yeah.
	And I think there was something with the group I was with, I think they were so brainwashed by them.
	You know, oh, this is like cocaine.
	It's legal in Peru!
	Let's start with that premise.
	And it's good for you.
	That might be.
	Anyway, so have fun.
	It's a great, great trip.
	Take a lot of pictures.
	Onward with the 8888s.
	Ralph Johnson, also no known location.
	Joe Reynoso, 8888.
	Parts unknown.
	Dennis Priz...
	Priz...
	Priz...
	Prizklink.
	Prizklink?
	Prizklink?
	He's in Frankfurt?
	Yeah.
	And that's a little 8888.
	Well, I wish there's not too many.
	Anonymous Millennial comes in from Fort Walton Beach at 8833.
	Boob.
	Brian...
	What was that for?
	Listen again, then.
	Boob.
	Yeah.
	Oh, boob.
	Boob.
	Okay, Brian Rosa, he's the only one who got boob in.
	It was no Easter egg in the last newsletter, so I don't know where he got it, but Milton, New York.
	Johnny Culver, with the birthday of $51.99.
	Andre Schmidt, In Berlin, Deutschland.
	Is he a knight by now?
	He should be.
	Might be.
	I don't know.
	Anonymous in Milton, Ontario, Canada.
	Shane Rosdilsky.
	These are all $50 donors, name and location.
	In Saskatoon.
	Ben Dural in Malta, New York.
	David Middlebrook in parts unknown.
	Dean Kostanko in Jacksonville, Arkansas.
	Dennis Brown in Rhinelander, Wisconsin.
	That's it.
	We have a very short list.
	That is a short list.
	All right.
	I do have a couple additional things.
	Let me see.
	We have some make goods.
	Let me see.
	Pierre Managere?
	Managre?
	Managre.
	He says, douchebag call, I have to call out funny fuck as a douchebag.
	Douchebag!
	He hit his mother in the mouth and she's several episodes in Nice Work.
	I don't think that's really a valid douchebag call out.
	I'm not sure why that's confusing.
	Why is that even on the list?
	I don't know.
	But more importantly, for some reason it hasn't really been in the news until the Dolly Parton special.
	Parts of Tennessee are on fire.
	They got those fires out.
	Gatlinburg, I think.
	Yeah, I think that's it.
	Is it under control?
	Yeah, terrible fires.
	It's like the ones we had up here by Lake County.
	I'd like to make a suggestion that we hit them with a stick.
	It's already raining there.
	It rained on it.
	Oh, we don't have to do the rain stick?
	No.
	All right.
	Alright.
	Good.
	Because when I do it, it always works.
	Like borderline flooding, I don't think they need that.
	Oh, okay.
	Good, good.
	Because whenever we do it, it starts to rain like crazy in Austin, so I want to be careful with that thing.
	Oh, does it?
	Well, let's do it anyway, then.
	Okay.
	All right, everybody who needs rain.
	Perfect.
	Perfect.
	So these guys have a podcast, and they're lunatics, and they have all these jingles, and then they'll go off on the rain stick as though that does anything.
	Okay.
	I'm just waiting for the review.
	Blame it on whatever you want.
	We are the award-winning podcast in the news category.
	I'm just saying.
	Dvorak.org slash NA. Jobs, jobs, jobs, and jobs.
	Let's vote for jobs!
	Yay!
	You've got karma.
	There you go, everybody.
	And the short list today, we have John Culver turning 50.
	That's from his better half, who says happy birthday.
	Lorraine Radcliffe says happy birthday to her fab husband, Alan.
	He will be celebrating his birthday on December 3rd.
	Happy birthday from everybody here at the best podcast in the universe.
	It's your birthday.
	Not one, not two, but three title changes today, John, so we might as well play the jingle for them all.
	Come gather round douchebags, produce land slaves.
	As we all thank your brothers and sisters who gave.
	And some of them knights, some of them dames.
	For the titles now are changing.
	And we congratulate Joe Schwarzenbauer, who becomes surrounded by slaves.
	I think we have a lot of...
	Surrounded by slaves.
	That's a good one.
	When I saw it written out, I didn't get it.
	But when you said it...
	I know, isn't it great?
	Yeah, Sir Rounded by Slaves.
	And Sir Russell of Belmead now becomes Sir Rhino de Mono.
	And finally, she's very happy about it, Dame Beth Borazon becomes the Baroness of Baya, Arizona.
	Congratulations to all of you.
	And thank you, especially people who came in under $50 for your contributions.
	You might be on a subscription or...
	Just a night layaway plan.
	It's highly appreciated.
	Thank you.
	I found something out.
	I'm not the only one with the horrible allergies in Austin.
	I thought that was without discussion.
	I thought that was a foregone conclusion.
	But I'm not the only podcaster who has this.
	Oh!
	Austin's got a lot of podcasters.
	We have a very famous one.
	You have a number of Okay, which one are you referring to?
	You're talking about the Seed Man?
	Seed Man, that's right.
	Seed Man.
	How can you tell by his voice if he's got allergies or not?
	Have a listen.
	People that have never had allergies.
	And I didn't have allergies until I was 17.
	Are in hell.
	I was up all night coughing.
	I busted a rib.
	I got a big swole rib from coughing.
	And I can hardly breathe.
	And I'm not bitching.
	The nutraceuticals I take made me lose weight and get healthier.
	But I'm going to definitely get to the natural nutraceuticals I know.
	I'm going to deal with the mold.
	But I've been doing the local honey and bee pollen and stuff.
	And it just ain't working, man.
	This bowl doesn't have a honey.
	I'm leaving tomorrow morning.
	I mean, it's that bad.
	I am being driven from Austin.
	I may have to move headquarters, everything.
	Because now the damn allergies are 12 months out of the year.
	Everybody's basically sick.
	It's the biggest business is allergies.
	I don't know what is going on, but it's getting bad.
	Again, I'm just telling you, there's some stuff going down.
	It was like World War I nerve gas when I went outside my house.
	I got filters all over my house now, you name it.
	Is it the electricity?
	Is it the wireless they think might stir up your allergies as well?
	Let me tell you something.
	I'm ready to go get a farmhouse out in the middle of nowhere and run the damn thing off solar or run it off candles.
	I don't know, man, because let me tell you something.
	I ain't somebody that's into being sick.
	And I know when I feel like I've been run over by an 18-wheeler.
	I'm only here because it feels better than sitting in bed.
	I've had my ass stomped for.
	And it was preferable to this.
	I've had people put the boots to my guts and it feels better than this.
	This is like fire ants are dumped down my throat.
	My brain feels like it's about to explode.
	It's so painful.
	I'm like, is this a joke?
	This has been going on for a week, by the way.
	God almighty.
	This has been going on for a week.
	Intense torture.
	And I ain't the only one.
	I mean, a large part of my office is not even here.
	I talk to other offices locally.
	They go, yeah, half our office is gone.
	Everybody I talk to is sick.
	People have never been sick or sick.
	This isn't Kansas, folks.
	This isn't normal.
	There you go.
	Sounds like it's normal to me.
	We know what's going to happen.
	There's a new product line coming.
	No doubt about it.
	Oh, you think one of his organic things?
	Of course!
	Infowars allergy mist or something.
	Or allergy defense.
	Because he has to know that this has been going on year after.
	You've been there for three or four years, and every year you've got to hear the same damn story.
	So what, is it news to him somehow?
	He's in the same town.
	I'm done.
	Uh-oh.
	Attention all the resources.
	No entry.
	Second half of show.
	Uh-oh.
	Uh-oh.
	Second half of show!
	Oh, man.
	Bah.
	Antarctica.
	This is the place that everyone seems to be going today.
	Uh, Carrie went deep inside Antarctica.
	You know we have an Antarctica treaty?
	That no one shall go beyond the ridge.
	We don't want...
	Oh, this is...
	Now, I'm glad you brought this up, because it does bring in some crackpot theories.
	There's lots of them about Antarctica.
	Now, as you mentioned, it is a little screwy, if you ask me, unless it's just a lark.
	Well, I'm only going to be Secretary of State for a couple more months.
	I'm going to take a trip to Antarctica on the U.S. taxpayer's dime.
	Yeah, but you know who else went on this little trip?
	There's a lot of people who went.
	It sounds to me like there was some big meeting.
	Buzz Aldrin.
	And they had to airlift him out.
	He's on his way back because he got sick.
	Why the hell was 86-year-old Buzz Aldrin there?
	I have no idea.
	It doesn't make any sense.
	Well, of course it does.
	He's there to evaluate the Nazi flying saucers.
	We all know that deep under the Antarctic is where the original inhabitants of Earth have been staying, ready to come out and take over the world.
	I know you think I'm crazy.
	Penguins?
	No, no.
	There are several serious theories about there being an entire population.
	Yeah, I've seen these theories.
	And the bells there.
	That's where all the Nazis, that's where Hitler is.
	Yes!
	Yes, now you're talking, John.
	Exactly.
	But I have to say, this Antarctica, it really is so odd.
	Why do we have this treaty that we can't do anything in Antarctica?
	Why is that?
	Why?
	Why?
	Well, I have no idea.
	It doesn't make sense unless there's a bunch of oil underneath the place.
	I'm sure there's tons of oil.
	Or there's got to be some minerals in Antarctica.
	That's also something that's not allowed to be not allowed to be you can't do any oil you can't do anything there.
	No.
	Well, I don't know.
	Maybe it's just me.
	The environmental impact of all the fish, I guess, in the area.
	I don't know.
	Yeah, I thought it was suspicious.
	And I knew about all these...
	You see this on these different channels, on the History Channel and the AHA... You've seen the AHC channel, which is the Adolf Hitler channel.
	This is really an Adolf Hitler channel?
	It's A-H-C, yeah.
	Adolf Hitler channel.
	Okay.
	I'm sure.
	It just has Hitler stories.
	And...
	They have these kind of discussions on those channels.
	The History Channel is my all-time favorite because actually when it began it was about history.
	They had history stories and it very slowly became about Hitler.
	They just stuck with that.
	And then it became aliens.
	Flying saucers.
	They have an archive.
	There's a giant building filled with all kinds of files about flying saucers.
	Yeah, the Nazi flying saucers that are all in the...
	Well, they talk about that once in a while.
	The bell.
	It's called the bell.
	Oh, is that what it's called?
	Yeah.
	You don't even know that.
	That part I didn't know.
	People are going to be very disappointed to know that you don't know it's called the bell.
	Yeah, sure.
	I'm sorry.
	Yeah.
	There was an interesting article in the New Yorker, which I actually should have sent it to you to read, titled, Silicon Valley has an empathy vacuum.
	And I agree with this story.
	And maybe you are out there, you're in the milieu.
	Here it is.
	Silicon Valley seems to have lost a bit of its verve.
	Since the presidential election, the streets of San Francisco, spiritually part of the valley, feel less crowded.
	Coffee shop conversations are hush.
	Everything feels a little muted.
	An eerie quiet broken by chants of protesters.
	It even seems as if there are more parking spots.
	Technology leaders, their employees, and those who make up the entire technology ecosystem seem to have been shaken up and shocked by the election of Donald Trump.
	And...
	Essentially, the article pins the blame for Donald Trump's win on Silicon Valley, and furthermore asserts that the inhabitants and workers in Silicon Valley are starting to feel bad about it, because we didn't know the algorithm could make that happen.
	We didn't know.
	What?
	And I kind of like the premise that all of these, and of course, you know me, being a fan of Professor Theodore, all of these You know, these great ideas and concepts that Silicon Valley dreams out.
	Or like Uber.
	Let's give it an idea.
	Uber, Airbnb.
	They don't, you know, Silicon Valley doesn't give a crap about what that does to any other people except for their product.
	They don't care.
	They don't care about the hotel industry with Airbnb.
	They don't care about the transportation industry with Uber.
	No.
	And they have no empathy.
	No, that's the way Silicon Valley works.
	That's the only way it can work.
	You have to be that way.
	Mm-hmm.
	Yeah, very douchey.
	But you don't feel like there's any self-awareness of this?
	No, there's definitely none.
	None.
	Oh, then you're...
	I've always felt that way.
	And you know it, too.
	You also noticed.
	Well, I haven't been in San Francisco for a long time, so I don't really know if people are...
	There's an element of it in Austin.
	Hmm.
	This is the thing, as you bring this sort of thing up, this kind of bothers me, this little clip.
	Let's play this thing.
	This is the...
	They're talking about they got this new guy, the ex-Goldman Sachs character, and he's going to be the Secretary of Treasury, I guess.
	Play this tax cuts for upper class.
	Yeah, I'm glad you brought this up.
	Any reductions we have in upper income taxes will be offset by less deductions so that there will be no tax, absolute tax cut for the upper class.
	There will be a big tax cut for the middle class, but any tax cuts we have for the upper class will be offset by less deductions that pay for it.
	Now this became a big issue of debate, but what got me is the new common use of the word, instead of tax cuts for the wealthy, it's tax cuts for the upper class.
	Oh, good catch.
	This little switcheroo really got my attention.
	Good catch.
	And it's become the switcheroo that's really gotten to me because we don't really have an upper class technically, but maybe we do now.
	Maybe there is an upper class.
	Because the wealthy is not necessarily the upper class in any real class structure.
	In England, for example, much of the upper class is broke.
	Yeah, they're all a member of Lloyd's.
	They're all broke.
	Well, that and other bad investments.
	But most of the families are broke.
	They can't keep up their castles.
	Yeah, the castles are all falling down.
	Or they rent them out to people.
	But the upper class has all these other advantages.
	I was given a lecture about this by some British upper class guy.
	Who says, no, we're members of clubs you can't get into.
	We have all these amenities by being in the upper class.
	But most members of the upper class in today's world are broke.
	But now all of a sudden we have this so-called upper class in the United States, which is really being kind of a synonym for wealthy.
	I don't like it.
	I don't like the fact that it's being used as a word at all in the United States.
	Upper class.
	No, I agree.
	Yeah.
	Well, I think it's we use middle class.
	Yeah.
	Middle class.
	All you can use.
	You also say working class or the poor or the working.
	Actually, in Austin, we have something called the working poor.
	Yeah, the working poor is the most of the working.
	It's podcasters is what it is.
	Yes.
	The working poor.
	The working poor.
	But the upper class again, he uses it and then all the reporting that took place after this guy talked to this munchkin, I think is his name.
	Something like that.
	It's easier to pronounce it munchkin than the way it's pronounced.
	And he is introducing this and they're all picking up on it.
	Oh, the upper class, the upper class.
	It's not about the upper class.
	It's about the wealthy that we're dealing with here.
	That's why we want a wealth tax.
	We don't have an upper class.
	I find it extremely distressing.
	Well, we'll see.
	I mean, I really can't comment on anything.
	I want to see what happens.
	All I heard was, I was promised lower taxes.
	I'll be waiting for that.
	Could happen.
	Oh, man.
	Wouldn't that be nice?
	Oh, I picked up on...
	Because I'm pretty much not interested in this whole recount and Jill Stein.
	I'm like, crap.
	I don't care.
	But I discovered an interesting discrepancy that I wanted to highlight here.
	Jill is first on MSNBC. I think it's Larry O'Donnell.
	The purpose of the recount is not to help one candidate or to hurt the other.
	And in fact, we had identified three states when one of them did not have a declared winner.
	So it wasn't clear which way Michigan was going to go.
	And I always stated throughout the campaign that when I was asked whether I would stand up for a recount, if there were doubts about the reliability and the accuracy of the vote, I always said, yes, I would do that.
	This is something that the Green Party has done before, that Green candidates have led the way on other recounts in Ohio in 2004.
	And I always said that if there was doubt about the confidence in the vote, that yes, I would stand up and call for a recount.
	It's not about helping one candidate.
	This is about helping voters restore our confidence in a voting system at a time that voter confidence in our elections, our political system, our social institutions across the board, is kind of hitting rock bottom.
	And this is something really...
	It's positive that we the voters can do.
	And in fact, people are chiming in from across the country.
	Over 140,000 small donors contributing at an average of $45 a piece in order to make this possible.
	We're standing up to say we want to be sure that this voting system is working for all of us.
	Okay.
	Bullshit!
	And I'll tell you why.
	Once again, we have Little Prestitute Podcast.
	People always forget and forgetting, forgetting, forgetting on a podcast and no agenda producers are everywhere listening to you.
	This is from the podcast Abe Lincoln's Top Hat.
	And on Abe Lincoln's Top Hat is Green Party insider Robert Fitrakis.
	And, gee, he kind of let the cat out of the bag about what really went on behind the scenes.
	I love this.
	I was in on the inside of some of these decisions.
	First of all, Jill Stein had no inclination on Earth.
	It wasn't her idea.
	She was contacted, and you'll see some of this in news reports of this, you know.
	John Boniface, who worked as a Green attorney in 2004, winner of a Genius Award, who had been involved in elections.
	And again, Professor Hartman there at the University of Michigan and a variety of social scientists who were real obsessed with the numbers.
	And their target was Hillary Clinton.
	Jill Stein was Plan B. And when Jill Stein was approached, she wasn't overly, she hadn't really studied the problem in any depth.
	But there was a variety of people We're good to go.
	So, I mean, it took her a while to come around.
	It wasn't something she wanted to do, was looking forward.
	I mean, coming out of the campaign, right, at the end, she'd had pneumonia.
	It's on the record.
	You know, she'd been in the hospital.
	She wasn't looking for this fight.
	And to tell you the truth, I mean, there was a question of who, you know, who actually would give money to this, right?
	I mean, you know, a few of us that were involved with this were just as stunned as anybody about the money coming in.
	We knew we couldn't be enriched off it.
	We knew that it couldn't really go in to build the party.
	The only thing you could do is recount it.
	And I think after Jill looked at a variety of social science data from different groups of election integrity Activists and scholars, that's when she decided to do it.
	And again, she, I would say, was not the first choice, I think.
	And I know people had contacted Podesta and the DNC. I know people were reaching out repeatedly, the same group, to the Clinton campaign.
	So Jill was brought in, and I think at first reluctantly, And, you know, once she realized there was red flags, she was willing to proceed because we have a non-transparent vote.
	The United States, in my opinion, does not have a functioning democracy as long as they allow these private companies to secretly program the computers.
	Well, how about that?
	Quite a little bit different than the public story.
	Than her bullcrap story.
	Mm-hmm.
	So she wasn't even...
	So it was the Clintons who were always going to challenge this.
	Well, they tried to get the Clintons to do it.
	They wouldn't.
	Well, they lost, but, you know, I think they wanted to challenge it anyway.
	Well, I'm sure they got on board, but they didn't want to look like...
	Because it makes them look like douchebags.
	Right.
	It's better to let Stein do it.
	Yeah.
	Because they made a big stink about it.
	Oh, Trump's going to say it's bogus.
	And she didn't want to do it at all!
	Now we know what's going on.
	That's a good clip.
	I have two more.
	Do you have anything you want to hand us?
	I got a couple.
	I got the one, I think the only important one.
	I got some other stuff on here.
	It might be for Sunday.
	But I do want to play this one.
	This is the...
	Well, I got two shorties.
	I actually had three.
	By the way, before we continue, so we spoke there briefly about the voting machines that these are small companies.
	I'm thinking, when Romney shows up to grovel for Trump, which I thought was like, wow, okay, that meeting's taking place.
	Do you think he said, hey man...
	Aren't you happy that Bain Capital, who runs a couple of companies that do these voting machines, that we rig the vote for you?
	If that happened, it wouldn't actually completely surprise me.
	It wouldn't surprise me either.
	Why else would that guy go?
	I mean, you'd call him a douchebag, he made a public scene about it, then you go and suck up to him?
	Makes no sense.
	Nope.
	Unless, like, hey man, how'd you like that vote rigging I did?
	Always possible.
	Well, talking about that kind of hacking, let's play these two clips.
	This is about Rule 41.
	Don't condone Congress kicking cans down the road.
	This is one example of where, with a short delay, it would be possible to have hearings, at least one hearing, in both bodies so that the Congress could have a chance to debate a very significant change in our hacking policy.
	The Congress has not weighed, considered, amended, or acted like anything resembling an elected legislator on this issue.
	There have been some who have looked into the issue.
	But still, I call it Senate 101, is you have at least a hearing on a topic with enormous potential consequences for millions of Americans.
	That hadn't been done, despite a bipartisan bill being introduced in the House and Senate days after the changes were approved.
	Lawmakers and the public ought to know more.
	Yeah, backstory, John.
	You want to know more?
	Yeah, I do!
	Okay, this is, Wyden comes up, this is another empty body, with Wyden and the other guy on the other side is Cornyn, so Wyden puts his bill into play, and Cornyn says, without objection, no, I object.
	And then Cornyn actually says, oh, this is a douchebag, because I didn't look into it much.
	And then Corning comes out and kind of explains why there's no hearing.
	For some reason, I don't know why this is happening, but Wyden, I guess, just discovered that this was going on.
	It's a process rule in the criminal proceedings that you use to prosecute crimes.
	And it's Rule 41.
	And what Rule 41 will allow, after you listen to this next part of this, it will allow people to It's a different mechanism.
	It's like he said, hacking.
	You still have to get a warrant, but you can get a warrant, and now, instead of coming over to bust into your machine...
	They can just do it over the net.
	Ah, okay.
	And it also has something to do with, although I don't know what they're talking about in terms of this, we have to discuss this on the tech part of the show someday.
	It supposedly gets into busting through VPNs somehow, or busting through...
	And this is what they're calling this a hacking policy?
	Yes.
	What a lame-ass title.
	That's very lame.
	But they don't call it that in the bill.
	It's just what Wyden calls it.
	Okay.
	And so Wyden is trying to stall to the end of the day so they can put this thing off for some reason.
	I get the suspicion, because after I listened to Cornyn, I said, this guy's got no excuse to even be up there.
	Wyden.
	Uh-huh.
	Because...
	This has been in play for a very long time, but I guess it caught him with his pants down.
	And he said, what's going on?
	At the last minute, because it's not just going to go through.
	After being in play for three years.
	So let's listen to Cornish putting a stop to this.
	The fundamental problem with the requests that have been made today is that Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 41 has already been the subject of a lengthy three year process with a lot of thoughtful We're good to
	go.
	It's a pretty challenging process when you want to change a federal rule of criminal procedure.
	You have to get it approved by the Rules Advisory Committee.
	It's made up of judges, law professors, and practicing lawyers.
	Then it has to be approved by the Judicial Conference.
	And then, as in this case, they have to be endorsed by the United States Supreme Court, which this federal rule of criminal procedure 41 was on May the 1st, 2016.
	So if there is any basis for the claim that this is somehow a hacking of personal information without due process of law or without adequate consideration, I think the process by which the The Supreme Court has set up through the Rules Advisory Committee and through the Judicial Conference dispel any concerns that the objections that were raised here were not adequately considered.
	So it's really interpretation of Rule 41.
	No, I think it's Rule 41 itself.
	I just think Wyden had his...
	I'm going to have to call his office and find out what the deal is.
	Can you record that when you call?
	I'd love to hear what the process is like.
	If it's shit, we can always throw it out, but maybe it'll be interesting.
	Yeah, I'd have to ask to record it and they will say no.
	Oh, that's right.
	You have to ask permission.
	Yeah, it's not like calling those scammers in India.
	I have one more clip.
	We've got to go.
	It's time.
	Sorry.
	Okay.
	Well, I didn't hear the woman.
	The woman?
	Yeah, yelling 10 minutes.
	She's on her own break.
	She already quit.
	She's like, this show is so long.
	I have a report from Chinese News.
	It takes a second to zero in and understand what she's saying, but it isn't English.
	The U.S. missile destroyer Zumbold and high-tech destroyer of the British Royal Navy Duncan have turned into useless steam cans due to China.
	Can you hear what she said there?
	You said a couple of ships have turned into useless teacups?
	Tin cans.
	Oh, tin cans.
	Yeah, it's our destroyer and one from the UK have turned into useless tin cans.
	The US missile destroyer Zumbold and high-tech destroyer of the British Royal Navy Duncan have turned into useless tin cans due to China.
	Microchips made in China have put the vessels out of action.
	They had been installed on board.
	Before that, the newest U.S. destroyer had unexpectedly gone out of order while passing through the Panama Canal, and that had not been for the first time.
	First of all, there had been detected a leakage in propulsion.
	Then being in Florida, the ship faced technical problems yet again.
	The Duncan destroyer, which cost $1.2 billion, got into the same situation during NATO's maneuvers.
	As it turned out, the Chinese killer chips are to be blamed.
	The Chinese killer chips?
	What?
	Yes?
	Okay, that's what we're going to talk about on the next show.
	I thought you'd like that one.
	Stuff to dive into.
	And this is Chinese news saying, yeah, the Chinese killer chips are to blame.
	Okay.
	I'm liking it.
	Building our fabs, I'm sure.
	In China.
	Yes, sir.
	We knew this was going to happen.
	Why are we outsourcing anything that's got anything to do with the military to anyone in China?
	It doesn't make any sense.
	I don't know.
	It may be fake news.
	I don't know.
	At this point, I don't know.
	I'm guessing it's not fake news.
	But I'll say it's kind of your beat, so...
	You wouldn't mind.
	Have a look at it.
	All right, everybody.
	Thank you very much for tuning in.
	Those of you tuning in live at NoAgendaStream.com.
	Thank you.
	I thank the artists in advance for the art you're going to upload to NoAgendaArtGenerator.com.
	And we will return on Sunday, bringing you more deconstruction, your media world, which is ever-changing, from fake news to fact-check false.
	Fact-check false.
	Coming to you from the skyscraper here in the Curry Condo downtown Austin Tejas, FEMA Region 6 on the map if you're looking for it in the morning, everybody.
	I'm Adam Curry.
	And from northern Silicon Valley...
	Where Plato say, man who broadcasts used panty pornography airs dirty laundry.
	I'm John C. Dvorak.
	We'll be back on Sunday right here on No Agenda.
	Adios, mofos!
	Up next, fake weather.
	But first, let's preview some of the fake stories we're working on for tomorrow.
	Very afraid of, you know, I'm not going to say what it is.
	You go ask Obama.
	But I mean, he's really unheard of.
	And so just to further explain that episode, when Trump said one thing Barack Obama told me that he's scared of.
	He's scared of.
	Now they're gonna make news, fake news Get out of, get out of, get out of, my vagina Get out of, get out of, get out of, my vagina Neutrality Between objectivity.
	Between balance.
	And crucially, the truth.
	We cannot continue the old paradigm.
	We cannot, for instance, keep saying 99.9% of the science, the empirical facts, the evidence.
	Somehow, people could not, would not recognize, fact-check or disregard these lies.
	Neutrality.
	And crucially, the truth.
	99.9% of the science, the empirical facts, the evidence, neutrality, between objectivity, between balance, and crucially, the truth.
	Amen.
	Again, fist bump.
	Adios, mofo.
	The best podcast in the universe!

▲